Denial of changes recommended for CityPointe
A nuance may become a negative for a downtown Sarasota condominium project.
Sarasota City planners last week recommended to the city commission that a number of proposed changes to the CityPointe development be denied.
The 6.5-acre project was originally proposed and approved by city officials in 2005 as a 342-unit condo with 88,500 square feet of retail space north of Boulevard of the Arts between Cocoanut and Florida avenues.
At the time, it was to be a young-professional highlight of the city’s vibrant downtown core. The developers agreed to hold 20 percent of the units within a $175,000-$250,000 price range to attract and keep downtown workers.
That was then. Now:
"Due to the current recession, economy, uncertainties of lending and buyers, we’re seeking opportunities to market [this to different types of occupants]," said attorney Stephen Rees Sr., representing Boulevard Investment Group LLC and Cocoanut Investment Group LLC, owners of the property.
There would be no change to the number of units, size of retail space or basic footprint of the buildings. However, the market for the units would change from young professional to, well, other.
The developers requested that new uses allowed for the project be housekeeping, catering and some medical services, either as a part of the rental agreement or "a la carte," as Rees put it.
Another change sought would allow the rental of units rather than outright ownership.
As Rees summed it up, the request before the planning commission and city commission entails leasing the units, leasing the units with a provision to include personal care services, and leasing the units with other services. He also offered a host of other service uses not allowed for the project, such as dormitories, nursing homes, group homes or sororities.
The city planning staff recommended denial of the proposed changes. Senior Planner Harvey Hoglund said he questioned whether the project would be offering some semblance of a continuing care residential living facility.
A slew of neighbors echoed the call for the denial; more than 200 petitions were presented to the planning commission opposing the "nuance" change.
Rees seemed surprised when one challenger to the project pointed out that a website indicated that an adult living care facility was being offered and sold on the site. Rees said a prior contract had been proffered for such use, but it never was penned.
"... the property is clearly different now than what was presented then," Hoglund concluded.
The planners agreed, voting 4-1 to recommend against the changes. Chair Robert Lindsey offered the lone dissent, stating that what was proposed was no different than what was provided in any condominium complex in the city – housekeeping, food, medical care and other services.
The matter will come before the city commission for further review next month.