Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Mixed Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DRC hears "entrepreneurial housing" Live/Work proposal for Gillespie Park; staff requests facade, parking and utility clarifications
Summary
Applicant described a mixed‑use live/work project intended to pair ground‑floor business space with upstairs residences; planning staff requested clarifications on frontage, facades, parking access, and administrative adjustment materials, while utilities, fire and transportation raised standard technical and safety conditions.
Dave Gajes, the project applicant coordinator, described the Gillespie Live/Work proposal as an "entrepreneurial housing" mixed‑use project where "the 1st Floor acts as an office space for somebody who could potentially own their business" and emphasized the design provides on‑site parking and workspace for small business owners.
Rebecca Webster, certified planner, walked the committee through a long list of zoning items the applicant must address: whether townhome units will be platted or held in common ownership, roof plans for buildings containing detached garages and units, confirmation of frontage type and glazing percentages under table 6‑1004, a request to dimension habitable space depth to meet the 20‑foot minimum on primary street frontages, and relocation or masking of garage parking behind liner buildings to meet section 7206 standards. Webster also noted an administrative adjustment request to reduce the required parallel facade from 70% to about 66.4% is under staff review.
Utilities staff requested detailed plan coordination for irrigation meters, backflow devices and the proposed water main connections, and City Engineering asked for signed and sealed surveys and utility/paving coordination to verify no conflicts. Sarasota County Fire asked that fire department connections (FDCs) and hydrants be clearly shown on the master utility plan, requested post‑indicator valves to isolate sprinkler risers and said hydrants must be located within 100 feet of each FDC.
Transportation staff emphasized required documentation for any technical deviations and advised the project is on a high‑injury corridor, which will shape mitigation requirements. The city arborist listed tree‑protection and planting requirements (canopy heights, native species targets, and tree protection area mapping) and said tree permits are required for removals or relocations.
Staff did not approve the site plan at DRC and said comments and the administrative adjustment will be reviewed further; the applicant was advised to coordinate offline with reviewers and neighborhood representatives before resubmitting.
Next steps: applicant to provide revised drawings (roof and facade plans, utility coordination), technical deviation documentation demonstrating equal or better walkability if claimed, and responses to arborist and fire department requirements.
