Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Udc topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners advance select UDC amendments but decline Siesta Key density change after public outcry
Summary
After a lengthy staff presentation and public testimony, the board authorized processing of three county-initiated Unified Development Code amendments and selected citizen proposals, but elected not to advance a controversial Siesta Key amendment that residents and condo councils said would increase hotel density and traffic.
Sarasota County planning staff presented the Cycle 9 Unified Development Code (UDC) amendment package at the March 3 meeting; commissioners then weighed public testimony and policy trade-offs before deciding which amendments to process.
James Zerman, zoning administrator, summarized staff recommendations for the Cycle 9 window: three county-initiated amendments recommended for further processing (modifications related to MP zoning permitting for covered and uncovered boat slips tied to major work permits, a definition for "luxury car storage" establishments, and updates to the county's master tree list) and one privately initiated amendment (procedural changes to binding-plan modification review) that staff recommended advancing. Commissioners asked staff to take extra time to review six recommendations submitted by the Economic Development Corporation (EDC) and authorized staff to return with more detailed analysis in 30 to 60 days.
Public commenters voiced strong opposition to a separate privately initiated Siesta Key UDC amendment that would have altered density or intensity restrictions for transient accommodations in parts of the island. "Moving this forward will subject the county to further litigation," said Dr. Neil Schleifer representing the Siesta Key condominium council, citing traffic, emergency-access and precedent concerns. Robert Sachs of Protect Siesta Key warned that carving out a portion of the island to relax density protections would remove safeguards enjoyed elsewhere on the Barrier Islands and could create safety and evacuation hazards for nearby residents.
Commissioners debated each citizen amendment item-by-item. After board discussion, members voted to authorize staff to process the three county-initiated amendments and the privately initiated binding-plans modification item referenced by staff, while not moving forward with the citizen proposals that would have relaxed density limits in the Siesta Key overlay. The chair summarized the result as: county-initiated items 1–3 to proceed, select citizen items to proceed for further review, and other citizen requests (including the Siesta Key density change) denied at this time.
The board also approved a 30–60 day timeline to review the six EDC-suggested items and instructed staff to return with analysis. No final land-use rezoning occurred at the meeting; the vote authorized processing and further review to bring amendments through the public-review pipeline (technical review, planning commission, then back to the board).
