Venice Council approves revised Vestera/GCCF PUD settlement after lengthy hearing

The Venice City Council voted 5–2 on March 10 to approve a revised mediated settlement that modifies the GCCF planned unit development (PUD), a motion that follows extended testimony from legal representatives, planners, residents and the special magistrate. Vice Mayor Jim Bolt moved to approve the agreement; council approved it after deliberations that focused on compatibility, disclosure and potential litigation costs.

Mark Bentley, the special magistrate selected under the Florida Land Use and Environmental Dispute Resolution Act, told council the remaining legal issue was compatibility and encouraged adoption of a compromise to avoid prolonged litigation. “I would encourage city council to adopt the proposed settlement, which provides a reasonable compromise and balances the petitioners’ development expectations with the city’s goal of protecting the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the city Of Venice,” Bentley said. Senior planner Nicole Tremblay presented the settlement’s technical changes, saying the proposal increases the PUD’s maximum density from about 4.3 to 4.97 units per acre (roughly 1,300 to 1,607 units) while limiting 360 units to a 17.46‑acre parcel designated for assisted living, multifamily, medical office and memory care and setting assisted‑living heights at up to 55 feet.

Residents and neighborhood representatives urged the council to reject the agreement, citing traffic, density and compatibility concerns. “Allowing a heightened density increase would fundamentally change the character of the community,” read a letter excerpt read aloud by Councilmember Smith during public comment. Opponents said the change would introduce hundreds of additional car trips and alter neighborhood scale, while supporters—including some residents—said assisted‑living and medical uses meet an urgent local need and that public disclosures about the PUD had been made.

Applicant representatives said the revised settlement withdraws several prior requests and narrows the package. “We have compromised…we’re now requesting fewer dwelling units,” attorney Jeffrey Boone told council, and the developer said it would withdraw pending height‑exception filings if the settlement is approved. City planning staff and the planning director explained that the PUD must keep required open space and that density should be viewed across the entire PUD rather than in isolated pockets. The council discussion weighed those procedural and substantive clarifications before the vote. The settlement was approved 5–2; the council recorded no further immediate procedural steps other than implementation of the terms agreed by the parties.