Planning Commission approves 2458SP Venice Retail Center, cites drainage review and CMU compliance

The City of Venice Planning Commission on a unanimous 7-0 vote approved site development plan petition 2458SP for the Venice Retail Center, a proposed two-building commercial development at 401 and 405 Serrano Way in the Portofino CMU (Community Mixed Use) district.

Planner Britney Smith presented the application and staff analysis, saying the parcels total approximately 2.36 acres in the Laurel Road neighborhood with a future land-use designation of Mixed Use Corridor and zoning of Laurel East. Smith said the application, received Nov. 11, 2024, proposes two multi‑suite retail buildings with medical/dental and quick‑service restaurant uses and associated parking and site improvements. “The proposed project is a nonresidential use, which is intended to be complementary to the neighborhood residential,” Smith said.

Smith told commissioners staff found the project consistent with applicable comprehensive plan strategies and determined a floor‑area ratio of 0.19 complies with the maximum nonresidential intensity for the site. She said the technical review committee judged the plan compliant with CMU standards for setbacks, height, parking, lot coverage, lighting and landscaping, and that an alternative parking plan is on file because the applicant provided 103 parking spaces where 92 were required under their interpretation of the CMU standards.

During public comment, Sue Perry, a member of the Toscana Isles board whose community abuts the site, raised stormwater concerns and said residents had already flooded during recent hurricanes: “I didn't notice anything about where the water's gonna go for Swiftmud. That's something we are very, very concerned about in Toscana Isles.”

Agent Joe Pellerin of Kimley‑Horn and Associates responded that the project ties into an existing stormwater system: “We actually have a Swiftmud permit in hand as well that confirms our impervious area is lower than the allowable, and it'll be directed to that apartment pond that is centrally located just north of our site,” Pellerin said, referring to a stub‑out in the adjacent master development and a permitted connection to the north.

Commissioners asked technical questions about signage, parking dimensions and building layouts. One commissioner asked whether backlit signage was permitted; Smith answered that electrically backlit signs are permissible in the CMU and that the CMU does not include an hours‑of‑operation restriction for sign illumination. A discrepancy in engineering sheets about parking stall width was resolved in the hearing: commissioners were told the CMU minimum parking width is 9 feet, and the applicant’s site plan lists 9 feet as the minimum.

The commission moved to approve the petition “based on review of the application materials, the staff report and testimony provided during the public hearing,” and the motion carried unanimously with seven yes votes (Chair Snyder; Vice Chair Wilson; Commissioners Hale, Sherberg, McKeon, Young and Jasper).

The approved plan calls for Building 1 (east building) at approximately 12,000 square feet and Building 2 (west) at approximately 7,900 square feet. Staff noted a signed letter of acknowledgment on file authorizing improvements outside the project boundary where some site elements will be constructed and maintained by the applicant. Smith also reported no concurrency or mobility capacity concerns after review of a traffic impact analysis.

The commission did not place additional conditions beyond those identified in staff's SAF report; the plan will move forward under the City's normal permitting process.

Clarifying details recorded in the hearing include the application receipt date (Nov. 11, 2024), parcel addresses (401 and 405 Serrano Way), site area (approximately 2.36 acres), FAR (0.19), building sizes (about 12,000 and 7,900 sq ft), parking provided (103) versus parking requirement discussed (92), and the applicant-reported possession of a Swiftmud permit and a permitted connection to the north stormwater pond.

Votes at a glance

- Site development plan petition 2458SP (Venice Retail Center), applicant/owner: Ashton Gray Real Estate / Laurel Road Development LLC; motion to approve found consistent with the comprehensive plan and land development code — outcome: approved, vote 7–0.