County Commissioner Smith had sought clarifications from attorney for developer
It took more detailed explanations from the attorney representing the development team, but the Sarasota County commissioners finally gave unanimous approval to amendments to an agreement for what is being called one of the county’s largest affordable housing projects.
The agreement involves the 113.81-acre site located at 2501 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Way in Sarasota, which once was in county ownership.
As it turned out, instead of slowing down the completion of the affordable units planned, the team wants to construct them sooner, attorney William Merrill III, of the Sarasota firm Icard Merrill, explained to the board members during their regular meeting on April 8.
“It’s far more cost-effective,” Merrill pointed out, “to build all the affordable units at once.” The goal he added, is to have them completed in four years. They will be built along with the market-rate units, Merrill said.
“I am absolutely thrilled about this project,” Commissioner Teresa Mast told Merrill. “You can’t build [the units] fast enough right now.”
Once the developer has the permits in hand, Merrill said, the plan is to begin construction immediately.
Commissioner Mark Smith had expressed concern that the documents included in the agenda packet for the meeting indicated that construction of the affordable dwellings would be spread out over a longer timeline.
“We had an agreement on how we’re going to let these folks develop the property,” he pointed out during the staff presentation, “and affordable housing is incredibly important. Yet, we’re putting it on the back burner.”
Originally slated for a regional park, the site later became the focus of county Invitations to Negotiate for an initiative that would entail not only affordable housing but also a pharmacy and a grocery store, with the latter seen as a means of dealing with the neighboring area’s status as a “food desert.”
During the April 8 discussion, Smith also questioned one proposed amendment’s language calling for the commercial space on the site to be reduced from 4.5 acres to 3 acres.
Yet another concern he raised regarded gates within the development. “I just don’t like the visual on that,” he said. “I’m not sure if we’re protecting the affordable housing folks from the other folks, or if it’s the other way around.”
On that issue, Merrill explained that the gates will be closed “only from dusk to dawn” to keep vehicles out of the affordable housing area, in the southwest quadrant of the site, and out of two of the market-rate areas, where cottages are planned.
“We don’t have gates on the outside access points,” Merrill continued, referring to the site. Two main roads will provide ingress and egress to the development, he continued: Tuttle Avenue, which runs north and south, and Myrtle Street, which runs east and west. Myrtle is the property boundary on the north.
“We want to make sure all the units” — especially the affordable ones, Merrill stressed — “have total access internally, all the way to the commercial parcels, as well and the amenities.”
When Smith sought assurance that gates will not separate the affordable dwellings from the market-rate units, Merrill responded, “No.”
Commissioner Mast said she wanted to address the gates, as well.
She spent some time driving around the affected area, she said, during which time she noticed gates and fences around a number of neighborhoods, especially in the city of Sarasota, whose jurisdiction includes much of the Newtown community where the project is planned.
The gating, Mast continued, “allows for some deterrent, to vehicles “and, shall we say, illegal activity that sometimes occurs. … It allows for more safety, especially for families, when it’s dark,” she added.
“That is correct,” Merrill replied. “Our real concern was the security issue. That’s the whole reason for this.”
Again, he emphasized that the gates would be locked only from dusk to dawn.
Merrill represents the owner of the property, TLV RE SFR III-MF VII Sarasota Owner LLC, which has a Tampa address. The name associated with the limited liability company, as shown in Florida Division of Corporations records, is Luke A. Thomas, who, The Sarasota News Leader learned, is a real estate broker with Third Lake Associates LLC. However, Capitol Corporate Services Inc. of Tallahassee is listed as the registered agent.
The land formally was transferred from the county to TLV RE SFR III-MF VII Sarasota Owner LLC in September 2024, Sarasota County Property Appraiser Bill Furst’s website shows. The limited liability company paid $4.1 million for it.
On March 29, 2022, the County Commission seated at that time approved the sale of the land to Midtown SRQ, whose principal was Sarasota resident Eldon E. Johnson. He is the developer of a residential community on the former Rolling Green Golf Club property on Tuttle Avenue, north of the Dr. Marting Luther King Jr. Way project site.
Florida Division of Corporations records no longer list Midtown SRQ as an active company.
A document in the April 8 County Commission agenda packet named Thomas as the authorized representative of the developer. A county staff memo also included in the packet says that the current ownership company “transitioned from Gracewater.”
An airing of concerns
Following the presentation to the board about the proposed amendments to the agreement with the developer — which Matt Osterhoudt, director of the county’s Planning and Development Services Department handled — Commissioner Smith said, “I quite frankly am not in favor of what’s being proposed.”
Smith added that he disliked the idea of delaying the affordable housing construction by “basically a year-and-a-half and up to four years down the line.”
Further, he told Osterhoudt, he objected to the gates.
Perhaps attorney Merrill could help him understand the reasoning behind the changes, Smith continued. “I’m going to need some serious convincing.”
Then Commissioner Tom Knight asked Osterhoudt to explain another section of changes, which appeared to eliminate the need for reporting requirements and monitoring in regard to the construction of the affordable housing units. It appeared to him, Knight said, that that section applied to how quickly the affordable units would be constructed. “Am I wrong on that?”
Osterhoudt showed the board members a slide as he explained that the change deals with the timing of the construction of the affordable units.
At that point, Osterhoudt suggested that Merrill come forward to address the board members’ concerns.
First, turning to Smith’s questions, Merrill explained that, in regard to the reduction in the commercial space, “When we started, we didn’t have any idea as to how much room would be necessary. We’re limited to 20,000 square feet total.” After completing the design, Merrill added, the project team found that the commercial space easily would fit in 3.15 acres.
Originally, he continued, the commercial part of the site plan was to encompass 4.5 acres. Thus, he said, the extra acreage would be used for the residential area. “It works out better for parking and everything else.”
As for the affordable housing timeline change, Merrill stressed, “This is not delaying it; it’s moving it forward. This is going to be the largest, private affordable housing [development] delivered in the county, I think — ever. It’s 370 affordable units.”
The original agreement, he pointed out, called for those units to be built over 12 years. … Now it’s all going to be done in four years, maximum. We think it’ll be done sooner.”
Nonetheless, Merrill added, the requested amendment will allow the affordable housing to be constructed concurrently with the market-rate units. Project team members had talked with county staff, including administrative staff, Merrill said, about expediting the construction “as much as possible.”
In regard to Knight’s concern about the monitoring, Merrill explained that the proposed change relates to the platting of the housing units. “It’s not eliminating the monitoring; the monitoring’s still all there. We just didn’t want to have it hold up the platting process in that initial phase [of construction].”
Then Merrill pointed out that the team has a “master infrastructure plan for the whole project,” across the nearly 114-acre site. “That’s all being processed now, along with the first phase,” which includes the 370 affordable housing units, plus 240 or 245 market-rate units, he said.
“This is shoving everything forward,” Merrill emphasized again.
“I hope that was compelling,” Merrill told the commissioners.
“It was almost there,” Smith responded, smiling. Looking back at the construction timeline amendment, he added, referring to the plan to build the affordable and market-rate units at the same time, “I’m just not reading this as concurrent.”
Merrill put a copy of that section on the overhead projector to show Smith details of the amendment as he explained them.
Commissioner Ron Cutsinger ended up making the motion to approve the amendments to the contract, as proposed, and Commissioner Mast seconded the motion.
“I’ve been involved in this one from the beginning,” Cutsinger pointed out, referring to the Invitation to Negotiate process. “I’m very, very happy to see [this] move forward faster.”
Before the vote, Commissioner Smith did remind his colleagues of a concern he raised before the board members seated in February 2024 voted to rezone the site for the development.
“This is right next to … Newtown Estates,” Smith pointed out, referring to a county park, and that “does need some … serious upgrading. So I hope this will inspire the board to look into this [issue], as well.”
The motion passed 5-0.