Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Take5 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners reject mediated settlement for disputed Take 5 rezoning after repeated neighborhood opposition
Summary
After months of hearings and a FLUDRA process, the Sarasota County Commission unanimously denied a proposed mediated settlement that would have advanced a contested Take 5 oil-change rezone; residents repeatedly told the board the use is incompatible with the neighborhood.
Sarasota County commissioners unanimously denied a proposed mediated settlement on April 8 that would have allowed a contested Take 5 oil-change facility to proceed through a revised rezoning process.
The property in question sits at U.S. 41 and Habitat Boulevard near Willow Bend and Oscar Scherer State Park. Residents and neighborhood organizations told the board the parcel is residentially oriented and incompatible with an automotive oil-change business; planning staff and the planning commission previously recommended denial.
Why it matters: the Take 5 applicant used Florida’s FLUDRA (Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act) process to seek a mediated settlement after county denial. The mediated settlement would have resulted in a revised binding development concept plan and a new public rezoning review; opponents said the changes were cosmetic and would not address the commission’s prior reasons for denial.
Neighbors: ‘lipstick on an oily pig’ and safety concerns Multiple speakers from Willow Bend told commissioners the proposed settlement merely added landscaping, a wall and signage but did not fix the incompatibility the county cited when it voted to deny the rezoning previously. Sandra Sosinski said the applicant had “put lipstick on the same oily pig,” and neighbors cited traffic, environmental concerns given proximity to the South Creek watershed and Oscar Scherer State Park, and safety at an uncontrolled intersection.
Board action and legal background The county attorney’s office explained that FLUDRA requires the county to participate in mediation and to have staff able to recommend a settlement to the board; if the board rejects a mediated settlement the applicant can either return to FLUDRA for a hearing or file suit in circuit court alleging denial was unreasonable or an unfair burden. The board voted, 5–0, to deny the proposed settlement agreement.
What commissioners said Commissioners who had previously denied the rezoning said little had changed in the mediated plan. Commissioner Knight said he saw “nothing to materially change” the earlier board decision. Commissioner Kutsinger again voiced opposition for reasons he stated in earlier hearings. Several commissioners noted the applicants retain the right to return through FLUDRA or to pursue court remedies.
Next steps Because the applicant may return to FLUDRA or file a circuit court challenge, the county attorney said staff will advise the board on procedural next steps if either path is pursued. The board’s denial preserves the commission’s prior finding that the rezoning was incompatible with the surrounding residential and environmental land uses.
