Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission vests 398 residential units for Hollywood Beach Resort amid preservation concerns
Summary
The Hollywood City Commission voted 6–1 on June 17 to recognize 398 vested residential units at the Hollywood Beach Resort site at 101 N. Ocean Drive. Supporters said the action clears a legal hurdle to redevelopment; opponents warned the decision could enable demolition and urged preservation safeguards.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Hollywood City Commission voted 6–1 on June 17 to vest the residential entitlement for 398 units at the Hollywood Beach Resort, a step the city and the property's owners say is needed to move long‑stalled redevelopment forward.
City staff, led by Andrea Winget, director of development services, told the commission that their review of more than 2,000 pages of historical records and prior resolutions supports recognizing a residential use and a unit count of 398 on the property at 101 North Ocean Drive. "We are asking you to vest the residential use only," Winget said, adding that vesting does not automatically allow building outside current zoning limits.
The vote followed more than an hour of public comment and questioning from commissioners. Anne Ralston, who identified herself during public comment, urged care and historic preservation: "This is an historical building, built in 1924. What scares me is that it will get torn down and something will go that's got nothing to do with anything historically," she said.
Representatives for the current owner told the commission they relied on city zoning letters while assembling financing. Attorney Keith Polikoff said the owner received zoning correspondence during negotiation and closing and used that documentation to pursue financing. "We relied on that when we closed with the various banks," Polikoff said.
Commission discussion centered on three related questions: (1) whether the historical record supports the higher unit count; (2) whether the property had been abandoned or otherwise lost any nonconforming rights; and (3) what vesting would mean for future design, unit sizes and height. Commissioner Schuham said she supported vesting a residential use but was uneasy about fixing a specific, large unit number before design work: "It feels like we're putting the cart before the horse by giving 398 units before we even know what is going to happen here," she said.
Vice Mayor Calari argued the action would unblock redevelopment on a site many described as an eyesore. Commissioner Biederman said the longer the building remains deteriorated, the harder it becomes to preserve historical elements. After debate, the motion to approve the vesting resolution passed on a roll call vote, 6–1.
The formal vesting does not grant immediate building permits. City staff and the owners said platting must still occur, and any future redevelopment will be reviewed under current zoning and development standards; unit sizes, minimum dwelling standards, parking, and height restrictions would be applied at the time of a redevelopment application. Winget and counsel said a subsequent "bonus overlay" and design review will be considered to incentivize historic preservation and hotel quality in any final plan.
Next steps: the owner anticipates filing a plat (the owner’s counsel said the plat will record the 398 units) and then returning to the commission and planning processes with specific design, parking and development proposals. The commission asked staff to continue work on an overlay that could grant limited incentives if preservation and design criteria are met.

