Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Staff requires resubmittal for 1899 Fruitville Road multifamily and future retail project

GRC (City of Sarasota Development Review) · May 6, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Planners requested corrections to site labeling, affordable‑housing recording, gallery dimensions, loading configuration and multiple utility and traffic details for a proposed multifamily development at 1899 Fruitville Road; staff said a quick‑claim deed for a city utility easement and a right‑of‑way dedication will be required before permits.

Developers seeking approval for a multifamily building with future ground‑floor retail at 1899 Fruitville Road were told on May 6 to address several code and technical items before receiving site‑plan approval.

Representatives Emily Griffiths and Kelsey Shai of Kimley‑Horn presented a second resubmittal and asked for partial sign‑off. Rebecca Webster, certified planner, itemized outstanding code compliance needs: update the site data table to name Fruitville Road and Osprey Avenue as primary streets; clarify courtyard hours and public access (for example, whether the cart courtyard will be gated); and provide a draft affordable‑housing agreement that must be recorded in the official records of Sarasota County for at least 30 years prior to final site‑plan approval.

Webster also asked applicants to label attainable housing units on the plans to confirm compliance with the city’s attainable‑housing definition and to provide gallery dimensions and opening calculations to meet the zoning table (minimum 10‑foot gallery width, 12‑foot clear height in first‑story walkway space and facade opening requirements). She asked that the loading zone be reconfigured so each off‑street loading space is accessible directly from a street or alley without crossing another loading space.

Utility and engineering reviewers raised additional technical requirements: place fire hydrants and backflow devices inside easements on private property rather than in sidewalks; provide plan/profile views that align with civil drawings; verify proposed reuse of existing wastewater laterals with video inspection; and correct a civil print error that had appeared to show a building encroachment into Fruitville Road right‑of‑way.

Transportation staff required updated survey dimensions, detectable warning surfaces at driveways, a marked turnaround area on the garage top floor, and clear bicycle storage spacing consistent with city standards. Planning staff said the existing city utility easement must be vacated before issuance of a building permit via a quitclaim deed placed on a city commission consent agenda and recorded in county official records.

Webster closed by saying the application will require a resubmittal; no formal vote or commission action was taken at the meeting.