Zoom Workshop on Siesta Key Hotel set for Dec. 2

Graphics supplied by Lourdes Ramirez

Update on this story from the Sarasota News Leader - the plan calls for a text amendment that would apply more generally to properties fitting certain criteria:

Kompothecras and his project team are seeking an amendment to county Future Land Use Policy 2.9.1. It would allow “lands located south of Stickney Point Road which are zoned CG [Commercial General] and CI [Commercial Intensive] (the ‘South Bridge Area’ under the Siesta Key Community Plan) … [to] be redeveloped to contain transient accommodations which exceed the density restrictions of the zoning regulations existing as of that date without violating this policy.”

“Potential erosion of our Iconic Siesta Key lifestyle continues” - Siesta Key Condominium Council. 

Regarding the hotel proposed for Siesta Key at Stickney Point Road, the newly formed Siesta Key Coalition is circulating its concerns. A Public Workshop will be held on December 2 - see info below:

1. The Siesta Key Hotel proposes to QUADRUPLE transient hotel unit density, 8 times single family zoning density, on 1.17 acres.

2. This Hotel and Parking Garage would be built off Stickney Point Road, the major Hurricane Evacuation Route for SK. An increase in traffic and density could endanger resident and visitor egress during a crisis.

3. The developer proposal states, “There are no grand trees, wetlands or other environmental features on the Hotel Parcel.” In fact, on both Old Stickney Point and Peacock Roads, the proposed hotel borders one end of Sabal Lake, which is brackish, tidal, and connected to the intracoastal, as confirmed by county engineers. Sabal Lake borders numerous properties on Peacock Road and Sabal Drive. Although originally part of the area’s stormwater management, it is a naturalized lake, full of mangroves, which by ordinance should have County protection, and numerous birds, fish and wildlife. One end of the lake is a bird rookery for various heron.

Sura Kochman, who led the fight against Benderson's oversized Siesta Promenade, wrote below.

From: Sura Kochman skbaystate@aol.com

Subject: New hotel, just over the south bridge

Dear All,

Since traffic and congestion was such a concern of ours regarding Siesta Promenade, I am sharing with you the following information regarding the new hotel proposed by 1-800- ask Gary (Gary Kompothecras). It is provided by a newly formed group, SK Coalition which intends to address major concerns regarding several new proposed high rise developments for Siesta Key.  

Sura

All - for those interested, Genesis Planning, the consultant for Dr. Gary K's proposed 120-room, 7-story hotel near Stickney Point/Old Stickney Point has been scheduled via a Zoom presentation on December 2nd.  See info below.  

SK Coalition will be joining and monitoring this presentation as well.  Those of you near the subject property, were you properly notified by mail?  In addition to publishing in a local paper in advance, the developer is required to notice by mail all neighboring property owners within a 750 ft radius ten days in advance of Dec 2nd.

Obviously, we all have concerns about this hotel's special exception request for 83 feet height above the base flood elevation (instead of the 35 ft current restriction) and requested text amendments to quadruple the density per acre of transient accommodations from what is in the current barrier island codes and policies.  Equally important, we wish to convey to Sarasota Planning staff and elected Commissioners that they first "step back" from considering these coming hotel applications on a one-off basis:

Our 1999 Siesta Key Community Plan, which was a foundational document, leading to the protections of the Siesta Key Overlay District, is more relevant and applicable today than it was then. The need to protect our barrier island from adverse consequences of "intensity and density" was thoughtfully considered and input from our community was respected. Please honor its vision and its inherent will of those that call SK their home.  If not willing to consider the wishes of the residents of SK, at least consider the implications to Sarasota County's valuable economic asset, this barrier island.  

• Why no comprehensive study of the impact on traffic congestion and safety, both pedestrian and vehicular, on these large-scale, high-rise hotels (inclusive of the hotel in final consideration in the Promenade already across one of our two major island access points)? 
• What precedents are being set by one-off granting of major exceptions for high-rise and intense hotels to go on the other 44 acres of commercial property on SK?  
• What is the impact to our public and private beaches of bringing all these transient guests? How will will they access the beaches safely?  
• We already have an unresolved, growing conflict between privately beach owners (90% of our SK beaches) at the public access points...what happens when hundreds of transient hotel guests exacerbate this dilemma and the private condo association owners all step in to restrict beachgoers from putting up their umbrellas and chairs?  
• Will mainland County taxpayers find their access to crowded public beach become  further limited? This was the largest concern cited by residents of Sarasota County in the recently publicized quality of life survey reference in last week's Sarasota News Leader:...Access Points to Barrier Islands.

We are not anti-development.  We are pro-economic growth for SK and Sarasota County.  But not when it comes with more adverse consequences and dangerous precedents that will open the floodgates of taller and more intense development... death by a thousand cuts.  Our leadership needs to step back and see the big picture.

Here's the Zoom information for the Neighborhood Workshop:

Neighborhood Workshop Siesta Key Hotel and Parking Garage

Date:12/02/2020 6:00 PM - 7:00 PM  

Zoom link

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84742112223?pwd=bFNIQ1NpMXJhbm1NK3NUZ2s4S0NyZz09

Phone in 312-626-6799 Use meeting ID 879 7887 1482  Password 951062

Contact: Robert Medred, Genesis Planning, 941-255-2313

Siesta Key Hotel and Parking Garage_12.2.2020

Please spread this info, so people can attend via Zoom or phone. Mailing notices have not yet been received. The link at the very bottom is to plans filed with Sarasota County, including changes to the UDC and SKOD that would be precedent-setting and affect everyone throughout the County. Note Wednesday Dec. 2 date, scheduled with little notice, during a busy holiday season and rising pandemic.

Siesta Key Association site

UDPDATE: Urgent action item from Sura Kochman regarding Siesta Promenade Hearing

From Sura Kochman:

FDOT has confirmed that there will be a hearing on 12/11. I have learned that 200-ish people e mailed Mr. Purvis and requested that the hearing take place. Thank you all so much. Parking is limited at the Siesta Key Chapel, so you may wish to car-pool.

The public hearing will be held from 5:30 p.m. to 7 p.m., Wednesday, December 11, 2019 at the Siesta Key Chapel, 4615 Gleason Avenue, Sarasota, FL 34242. The formal hearing begins at 6:00 p.m. FDOT will hold this hearing to give interested people the opportunity to review displays and talk one-on-one with staff. This public hearing will only address the transfer of jurisdiction of the roadways. If you wish to speak, please arrive prior to 6 p.m. and register as a speaker at the check-in table.

NOTE: It should be understood that FDOT has NO AUTHORITY, to override the Siesta Promenade application directly. What we can bring out, is the deficiencies in how the traffic is to be handled, per what was stated in the Siesta Promenade hearings, the Kimley Horn engineering reports, and the County transportation reports.

===

Dear All, 

This is an urgent, time sensitive matter! Action must be taken by December 3 – next Tuesday!

As many of you know, there is an agreement being worked on between FDOT & Sarasota County to transfer responsibility for Stickney Point and the roadways described in the attached notice in today’s paper, from FDOT to the County.

The Florida Department of Transportation has indicated that there are

 “…growing safety and operational concerns related to the intersection of US41 and SR 72.  The department has a responsibility to provide a safe and efficient roadway for our residents and the thousands upon thousands of visitors and tourists that come to our great state each year.”  This quote is from a letter dated 7/25/16, from Keith Slater, FDOT, Traffic Services Program Engineer.

It has been stated that should the road swap take place, that FDOT would have the opportunity to “weigh in”, but the ultimate decision would be the County’s.

FDOT’s  requirements are intrinsic to the evaluation of what is, or could occur in this 1 mile section of roadway.  Decisions made here will affect public safety and the economy of Siesta Key and surrounding areas. The responsibility for Stickney Point belongs under the jurisdiction of FDOT from US41 completely across the bridge and ending at SR 758.

FDOT’s oversight of this segment of SR72 (Stickney) should not be relinquished. 

PLEASE immediately email Kyle.Purvis@dot.state.fl.us and indicate that a hearing must be convened on December 11, 2019 and that you are interested in attending. 

This is our only opportunity to voice our concerns that FDOT, an independent agency, should be the controlling voice as to what is feasible traffic-wise on the Stickney Point approach to Siesta Key and on the key.

Sura

Write to Kyle.Purvis@dot.state.fl.us 

Board challenged on Benderson Promenade approval

Courtesy of the Sarasota News Leader

Subscribe to the SNL

Judge in Siesta Promenade case orders Sarasota County to ‘show cause’ as to why she should not overturn County Commission approval of project

April 25, 2019 by Rachel Brown Hackney, Editor & Publisher

McHugh’s order latest action in lawsuit filed in early January

A graphic shows how Benderson Development has planned the transition of building height in Siesta Promenade. Image courtesy Sarasota County

With an amended lawsuit having been filed in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court on April 12, Circuit Judge Andrea McHugh has issued a Show Cause order to Sarasota County, giving it 30 days to explain why she should not overturn the County Commission’s December 2018 approval of the Siesta Promenade project.

McHugh filed the order on April 17.

“Having reviewed the Amended Petition, the court file, the record, and the applicable case law,” she wrote, “the Court finds that the Amended Petition demonstrates a preliminary basis for relief, for which a show cause order should be issued.”

In the meantime, a representative acting on behalf of Benderson Development — the company behind the Siesta Promenade project — appeared before the county’s Development Review Coordination (DRC) committee on April 18 to discuss plans for clearing the approximately 24-acre site where the mixed-use project is planned. Siesta Promenade has been approved to consist of 414 condominiums/apartments, a 130-room hotel, 133,000 square feet of retail space and 7,000 square feet of office space. The development is slated for the northwest corner of the intersection of U.S. 41 and Stickney Point Road, next to the Pine Shores Estates neighborhood.

The demolition materials say the anticipated start date for the clearing is 2019, with completion expected in 2020. The total affected acres, it adds, are approximately 22.35.

Formally, the lawsuit that Pine Shores Estates resident Sura Kochman initially filed against the county on Jan. 11 is a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. It challenges the commission’s approval of Siesta Promenade on a number of issues.

A graphic shows the access points for Siesta Promenade, which the development team acknowledged will lead to more traffic flowing through Pine Shores Estates. Image courtesy Sarasota County

Among those, Kochman points to the fact that the County Commission allowed staff to consolidate into one public hearing the four applications Benderson Development had submitted for Siesta Promenade. In a routine County Commission public hearing, a speaker is allowed 5 minutes to address facets of a proposal. However, as Kochman’s attorney, Ralf Brookes of Cape Coral, wrote in the petition, the time was reduced to 3 minutes for a speaker to cover all four Siesta Promenade applications.

The number of cards people submitted to talk about Siesta Promenade during the Dec. 12, 2018 public hearing in downtown Sarasota prompted then-County Commission Chair Nancy Detert to ask if the audience members were agreeable to the time cut from 5 to 3 minutes. The majority responded that they were. Sixty-nine speakers ended up making remarks, with only 10 of them — by count of The Sarasota News Leader — in favor of Siesta Promenade.

Another major point of the lawsuit is that “even though the approval of this development would significantly impact traffic patterns and safety, the traffic study [undertaken for the project] did not even include an analysis of the impacts on traffic levels and safety of a proposed new traffic light between US 41 and the Siesta Key Bridge.”

An aerial map shows part of Pine Shores Estates next to the Siesta Promenade site. Image from Google Maps

Benderson’s traffic consultant, Kimley-Horn and Associates of Sarasota, proposed that a signal be installed at the intersection of Stickney Point Road and Avenue B and C.

The petition adds, “[T]he [County Commission] did not have the legal authority to authorize this new traffic light as it requires a transaction involving the FDOT [Florida Department of Transportation] not yet completed.”

County staff has been working for about a year-and-a-half on a “road swap” of River Road to FDOT, in exchange for the county’s assuming responsibility for Stickney Point Road west of U.S. 41, as well as other roads on Siesta Key. The county’s goal has been to speed up improvements that have been sought on River Road for decades. As a state road, River Road will have a higher priority for widening and other changes, county staff has noted.

Kochman’s petition added, “Without the new traffic light, Siesta Promenade as proposed would never have been approved because of its severe impact on neighborhoods to the north and west that would face huge increases in project-specific traffic attempting to return in the directions from whence they came.”

Because of the speakers’ time limitation during the public hearing, the petition points out, Kochman’s remarks were “cut short during her presentation and these impacts were never fully considered and warrant reversal or remand for additional time to present this expert opinion testimony and evidence.”

A transcript and two intervenors

People stand at the rear of the County Commission Chambers on Dec. 12, 2018, trying to spot places to sit. Rachel Hackney photo

The original motion attorney Brookes filed on Kochman’s behalf did not provide citations to the transcript of the December 2018 County Commission hearing. The transcript finally was filed on Feb. 25. It totals 322 pages.

On April 3, Judge McHugh granted Kochman’s Motion for Leave to Amend Petition, so the new document could provide an appendix and transcript “conforming to the Rules of Appellate Procedure …”

Additionally, Judge McHugh issued an order on Feb. 27 to allow Benderson Development and Siesta 41 Associates LLP — a Benderson affiliate — to intervene in the case. McHugh wrote that she had been advised that neither Kochman nor Sarasota County objected to the request from Sarasota attorney Robert K. Lincoln, who is representing Benderson and Siesta 41 Associates in the lawsuit.

Earlier, McHugh had chastised Lincoln for filing motions opposing various actions in the case without his clients having been approved as intervenors.

Lincoln finally filed his Motion to Intervene on Feb. 22.

The demolition plans

A county graphic shows the zoning of properties around the Siesta Promenade site in advance of the Dec. 12, 2018 meeting. Image courtesy Sarasota County

The county DRC meeting agenda for April 18 noted that WRA Engineering of University Park would be appearing on behalf of Benderson Development and Siesta 41 Associates to talk with staff about the plans to clear the Siesta Promenade site. The DRC agenda pointed out that the “future development [would be] consistent with the Rezone and Special Exception” the County Commission approved in December 2018.

Most of the property slated for the development was zoned for 9 dwelling units per acre, as a mobile home park stood there for many years. Benderson won approval of a Critical Area Plan (CAP) designation, so the number of dwelling units could be up to 25 per acre. The total for which it received approval is 479, as the 130 rooms in the hotel officially count as half units, for a total of 65.

Siesta Promenade is planned for the site of a former mobile home park at the intersection of U.S. 41 and Stickney Point Road. Filephoto

DRC discussions allow county staff members with subject matter expertise to voice any comments they may have about a permit application, to ensure that the resulting development does conform to the plans the County Commission has approved.

Altogether, the materials say, 7.10 acres of impervious area would be removed, including 195 trees. The majority of those trees would be palms and pines, one sheet of the document notes.

Most of the information in the materials focuses on the stormwater pollution prevention plan WRA Engineering has developed in accordance with the required Florida Department of Environmental Protection permit for “Stormwater Discharge from Large and Small Construction Activities.” That document points out that the “receiving waters” would be Roberts Bay.

Subscribe to the SNL

Community sues to halt Siesta Promenade

Courtesy of the Sarasota News Leader

Subscribe to the SNL

Lawsuit filed to try to halt construction of Siesta Promenade at U.S. 41/Stickney Point Road intersection

January 17, 2019 by Rachel Brown Hackney, Editor & Publisher

Siesta resident seeking contributions to pay for litigation

This is the binding development concept plan for Siesta Promenade approved by the county Planning Commission and the County Commission. Image courtesy Sarasota County

A petition filed in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court on Jan. 11 argues that the December 2018 decision of the Sarasota County Commission to allow the construction of the Siesta Promenade mixed-use project was unlawful for a multitude of reasons.

James P. Wallace, a Siesta Key resident since 1964, told members of the Siesta Key Association (SKA) during their regular meeting on Jan. 10 that he was angered by the series of commission votes on Dec. 12, 2018 that figuratively paved the way for the project to proceed.

Only then-Chair Nancy Detert voted against all but one of the motions following a public hearing that lasted approximately seven hours. Commissioner Charles Hines joined her in opposing the motion to rezone most of the 24-acre site in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of U.S. 41 and Stickney Point Road. The only motion Detert voted in favor of allows street vacations of portions of Crestwood Avenue and Brentwood Avenue; the vacation was designed to facilitate the site plan and traffic flow around the property.

Benderson Development plans to construct 414 apartments/condominiums, a 130-room hotel that will stand 80 feet tall, 133,000 square feet of retail space and 7,000 square feet of office space.

Wallace acknowledged to his fellow SKA members on Jan. 10 that he did not get involved in the fight against Siesta Promenade until shortly before the Dec. 12 public hearing. “My wife kept telling me I needed to worry about this thing,” he said, but he was busy with major projects for his work.

(When he testified during the Siesta Promenade public hearing, Wallace told the commissioners he is a systems engineer.)

“The more I got involved,” he said during the SKA meeting, “the madder I got, frankly. … This [commission decision], I think, [is] a really serious problem.”

Wallace added of the lawsuit, “We need to win this. We absolutely need to win it.” He said he would “try [his] best to stop this project by any legal means possible.”

An aerial map shows part of Pine Shores Estates next to the Siesta Promenade site. Image from Google Maps

The complaint has a single plaintiff: Sura Kochman, a resident of the Pine Shores Estates community, which would be the immediate neighbor of Siesta Promenade. Kochman had been a leader of opponents of the project, as it was designed. Her ownership of a home in Pine Shores gives her “standing” in the Petition for Writ of Certiorari, as the legal document explains: “As a direct and proximate result of the [County Commission’s] approval, including the Project’s higher density, [Kochman] will be adversely affected by increased traffic, increased height, increased density and increased intensity and use of the [property].”

Benderson Development also won County Commission approval of a Critical Area Plan (CAP) designation for Siesta Promenade, which allowed the company density as high as 25 units per acre, instead of the 13 units per acre provided for under county regulations for districts zoned Commercial General.

Along with the 80-foot-tall hotel, Benderson plans one condominium/apartment tower that would stand 65 feet high, as well as 40-foot-tall residential buildings. The latter would be closest to Pine Shores residents.

During the Dec. 12 hearing, Commissioner Hines talked of the potential discomfort of Pine Shores residents coming out of their homes to get their morning newspapers and looking up at balconies in that 65-foot-high residential structure in Siesta Promenade.

Many of the speakers during the hearing also stressed that traffic at the U.S. 41/Stickney Point Road intersection already is terrible during the height of tourist season, as people try to reach Siesta Public Beach via Stickney Point Road. Sarasota County Sheriff’s Office personnel wrote $166 tickets early this year to drivers who created gridlock at the intersection as they tried to make it through the traffic signals to reach Stickney Point Road.

Additionally, a number of those who testified talked of worries that, with Siesta Promenade on the northwest corner of the intersection — generating even more vehicle trips every day — emergency personnel will encounter long delays reaching people suffering medical emergencies or responding to major structural fires on Siesta Key.

Traffic is at a standstill on April 3, 2018 at the intersection of Stickney Point Road and U.S. 41, where the proposed Siesta Promenade would be built. Contributed photo

The emergency vehicle response issue is one that Wallace focused on during his SKA remarks.

“How could it be that the board would sit there and hear so many excellent legal as well as traffic analyses [and arguments related to planning issues] and just vote to approve [Siesta Promenade]?” he asked.

As he and his wife have lived on Siesta Key for decades, Wallace continued, they have “a pretty good feel for the ramifications of treating [the Siesta Promenade] corner … like any other corner on [U.S.] 41.” Yet, Wallace pointed out, that intersection, “is clearly the primary entrance” to Crescent Beach on Siesta Key.

Crescent Beach is south of Siesta Beach Park.

The attorney handling the complaint is Ralf Brookes of Cape Coral.

The petition indicates that Sarasota attorney Robert Lincoln is representing Benderson Development. The Sarasota News Leader did not get a response from Lincoln to its request for a comment.

The policy of the Office of the County Attorney is not to comment on litigation that is underway, county staff has explained on several occasions to the News Leader.

Paying for the litigation

James P. Wallace addresses Siesta Key Association members on Jan. 10. Rachel Hackney photo

Wallace further pointed out to the SKA members that he has been working to raise money to cover the expense of the lawsuit. The estimate he had received, he said, was $75,000.

Both SKA Vice President Catherine Luckner and the Siesta Key Condominium Council (SKCC) already have sent out email blasts to inform members of their organizations about the legal challenge.

In their Jan. 11 notice, the Condominium Council leaders pointed out that they had opposed Siesta Promenade by sending letters to the County Commission, speaking at the county Planning Commission hearing on the proposal, which was conducted on Nov. 15, 2018, and addressing the County Commission on Dec. 12. “These actions were taken on the belief that the vast majority of the Condo Membership were against the development,” the notice says.

Both Luckner, during the Jan. 10 SKA meeting, and the Condominium Council leadership have explained that if anyone desires to provide financial support for the lawsuit, the person may send a check to the Sarasota law firm of Bentley & Bruning, with the notation that the money is for the Siesta Promenade lawsuit. Wallace explained on Jan. 10 that Bentley & Bruning will compile all the funds in a trust account.

The firm’s address is 783 S. Orange Ave., Suite 300, Sarasota, 34236.

Any money not spent, Wallace stressed, will be returned on a pro-rata basis.

Facets of the complaint

Among the arguments in the petition is that the County Commission did not allow members of the public sufficient time to provide testimony during the public hearing as they addressed facets of Benderson’s proposal. “This was an extremely complex set of four different applications that experts for the opposition opined did not meet requirements of the [county’s] Land Development Code,” the complaint says. Nevertheless, the speakers “were cut off” after only 3 minutes into their presentations “(for all 4 applications together!),” the petition says.

Typically, the County Commission allows 5 minutes per person during a public hearing. However, after then-Chair Detert reported that 90 speaker cards had been turned in before the start of the Siesta Promenade hearing, she asked the audience members whether they would be willing to shorten their statements to 3 minutes each. The majority of them agreed to that, as indicated by a show of hands.

Brookes cites two opinions of the Florida Second District Court of Appeal and one of the Third District Court of Appeal in arguing that more time should have been allowed for the speakers.

A graphic shows how Benderson Development has planned the transition of building height in Siesta Promenade. Image courtesy Sarasota County

For Siesta Promenade, Benderson was seeking not only the rezoning and the Critical Area Plan designation but also a Special Exception for inclusion of the hotel on the site and the approval of the street vacation.

“The denial of a meaningful opportunity to be heard and present expert opinion evidence … violates fundamental procedural due process,” the complaint says.

On another point, the petition contends that county staff and the commission failed to adhere to a county ordinance specifying how a Critical Area Plan (CAP) application should be handled. Brian Lichterman of Sarasota, a consultant who worked for decades as a county planner before opening his own firm, was among those who pointed out to the commissioners that county regulations required their approval of the boundary of the CAP as an initial step in the process. Yet, the CAP approval did not take place until after the Dec. 12, 2018 public hearing had concluded.

Further, the complaint argues that the County Commission did not consider how Siesta Promenade could lead to restricted access to Siesta Key.

The petition also contends that Benderson Development did not provide “any competent substantial evidence” that the project “was compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.” The term “competent substantial evidence” is used in reference to local government hearings that are conducted like trials. An applicant must demonstrate that he or she will be in compliance with all of the affected local government’s land development regulations.

The complaint points out that traffic from Siesta Promenade will travel the roads in “surrounding residential neighborhoods,” which is a violation of a Future Land Use policy in the county’s Comprehensive Plan.

A table in a county staff report offers these details about anticipated traffic generation related to Siesta Promenade. Image courtesy Sarasota County

Additionally, the complaint argues that the County Commission ignored “uncontested testimony and evidence” that the installation of a new traffic signal at the intersection of Stickney Point Road and Avenue B and C “will have a negative effect on emergency access to Siesta Key.”

Benderson Development’s traffic consultant on the project — Kimley-Horn and Associates of Sarasota — recommended the traffic signal as a means of dealing with the thousands of extra vehicle trips anticipated on a daily basis in the area of U.S. 41 and Stickney Point Road after Siesta Promenade has been completed.

These are among the arguments outlined in the Petition for Writ of Certiorari. Image courtesy Sarasota County Clerk of the Circuit Court and County Comptroller

CategoriesBeaches, Construction, Emergency services, Finance, Legal issues, Neighborhoods, Nonprofit News, Parks and Recreation, Public Safety, Sarasota County, Siesta Key, tourism

Subscribe to the SNL

Siesta Promenade: Citizens take legal action

Dear All,

A very concerned and motivated resident of Siesta Key has been pursuing an avenue through which the approval of the Siesta Promenade application by the Board of County Commissioners could be overturned.

This resident has, on his own, raised funds which enabled Attorney Ralf Brookes to be  engaged to handle this case with the pro bono assistance of Morgan Bentley.  As most of you may know, Morgan laid the groundwork for an appeal by sending letters to County Attorney Alan Roddy, pointing out the many procedural and other errors that were taking place. To see these letters, please visit the website:

https://blockbendersonsiestaprom.home.blog/updates/ 

A Petition for a Writ of Certiorari was filed on Friday, 1/11/19 with the 12th Circuit Court of Appeal. 

 

A plaintiff with unquestionable standing and affected status was needed. I was asked, and did agree, to be the plaintiff, as I live within 20' of the Benderson property.

This Writ of Certiorari is a request for an order of the court to quash and remand the decision for failure to afford procedural due process and failure to comply with essential requirements of law.  A link to the Writ will be made available on the website mentioned above, under the "Updates" tab once amendments are finalized.   

To continue go forward with this legal action, we will need additional funding. Morgan Bentley is providing an Attorney Trust account for all donations, without any charge. Having an Attorney Trust account provides a guarantee that all funds will be used correctly and also, returned, pro rata, should they not be fully utilized.

This case is winnable!  Our goal is to ensure that development of the land located at the Stickney Point Road/US-41 intersection is developed in a compatible manner with the surrounding residential neighborhoods and retail establishments. It should not be detrimental to their quality of life, health, safety and welfare, nor cause undue hardship for anyone wishing to access Siesta Key.

Link to the mission statement for this legal action

Your support is crucial and can be accomplished with a check made out to the following:

Bentley & Bruning, P.A

Re: Siesta Promenade Trust Account

783 South Orange Ave, Suite 300

Sarasota FL 34236

Thank you,

Sura Kochman

Pine Shores Neighborhood Alliance

Seidman: Citizens speak on Siesta Promenade ... but nobody’s listening

With approval of the controversial project, once again residents’ concerns take a back seat to development interests.

Carrie Seidman, Herald Tribune


Before last week’s County Commission hearing on the proposed Siesta Promenade project by Benderson Development, Sura Kochman was feeling hopeful.

For almost two years, using the tools she’d developed over a decade of chairing a New Jersey planning board, she’d spent “almost every waking moment” gathering research, talking with officials, building alliances and working to disseminate information about the mixed-use plan for the 24-acre site near U.S. 41 and Stickney Point Road, neighboring her Pine Shores home. Now it was time for Kochman — and dozens of other residents who also saw the mix of hotel, retail and residential development as incompatible with the surrounding area — to share their concerns before commissioners took a vote last Wednesday.

“I truly felt in my gut that, with the mountain of evidence we had gathered and the testimony of eight organizations representing thousands of people’s voices, that the commissioners would listen and understand the issues regarding this very unique area,” said Kochman, who formed the Pine Shores Neighborhood Alliance to advocate for reducing the project’s height and density.

Siesta Promenade site at US 41 and Stickney Point

Others, aware of the commission’s history of siding with developers, were more cynical. A chorus of voices chimed in on the group’s Facebook page: Don’t even bother going. You’re wasting your time. They’re going to approve it anyway.

Kochman responded with all the fervor and optimism of a high school cheerleader.

“I said, ’Don’t give up, you have to make your voices heard, give it your all!” she recalled earlier this week, sounding a little defeatist herself after commissioners approved the project. “But they were proven right. So maybe people shouldn’t bother anymore. Because they hear our voices, but they don’t hear us.”

Commissioners listened to almost 90 residents, just eight of whom spoke in favor of the project. Speakers said it was incompatible with a comprehensive plan that calls for “walkability” and reducing negative impacts on surrounding residential areas. They pointed to conflicts with elements of the newly-passed uniform development code. They noted flaws in the traffic studies that were conducted and expressed fears of a gridlock that would be not only a hassle but a danger and, in the event of an emergency, potentially life-threatening.

But after nearly five hours of testimony, the vote (4-1) was swift and unequivocal. Benderson’s request for a rezone and a hotel exception was granted, without modification.

“The fact that they totally ignored us and didn’t make one change, it’s very discouraging, very disheartening,” said Kochman, who was born and raised in Sarasota. “The whole process is just so disingenuous. Did they already know when they walked into the meeting that the whole thing was for naught? Was the fix in?”

When I asked her exactly what she meant by that, Kochman didn’t pull any punches.

Sarasota County Commission: In bed with the developers?

“Any rational person would have seen that this application should not have been approved in its proposed form,” she said dismissively. “So the only answer, I assume, would be to go to sarasotavotes.com and see where the (commissioners’) campaign contributions have come from. You hate to think our commissioners can be bought off, but there’s no other way to look at this. That’s the only reason I can think of.”

Kochman has a lot of company. In my year-long tenure as a columnist, this is the refrain I hear more than any other: Local government is in bed with the developers and it’s ruining Sarasota.

I’ve heard it from the grassroots advocacy group STOP, fighting to change the “administrative approval” process that grants the city the right to green light downtown development projects without citizen input.

I’ve heard it from people living on S. Palm Avenue , who formed SHOUT over concerns about safety hazards from construction debris and practices on new developments and who have encountered resistance in trying to get the city to take proactive measures to protect residents, their pets and their vehicles.

I’ve heard it from homeowners in Venice, objecting to the placement of a new hospital in an area the comprehensive plan intended to be residential, and one that lacks the infrastructural capacity to handle increased traffic and emergency vehicles.

I’ve heard it from those fighting the city’s plan to lease the pavilion on Lido Key to private investors for development of a restaurant and additional amenities that would decidedly change the ambiance of Sarasota’s most laid-back, family friendly public beach.

And I’ve heard it from “Reopen Beach Road” advocates who objected to the county’s ceding a once-public thoroughfare to private property owners, allowing for increased density on their buildable land. (Even though an amendment calling on the county to regain ownership and reopen the road passed in the recent midterms, it is already facing pushback — leading to the conclusion that even if you win, you’re not done fighting.)

Almost daily I get mail from readers complaining about everything from traffic congestion to red tide, flooding to impassable sidewalks — all of which they blame on uncontrolled development and injudicious planning. They write to inform me of meetings and public forums and petitions and ask if I can help rally the troops. Many say they are reluctant crusaders.

“I moved here to retire, I didn’t plan on becoming an activist,” one told me recently. “But I can’t stand to see what they are doing to this paradise.”

But when the fattest wallet can buy the loudest voice, even a substantial citizen chorus is like background noise. And how long will residents continue to protest if they know it’s pointless?

“I guess that’s why so many people in Sarasota just live in their little bubbles,” Kochman said. “Go out to dinner, see a show, come back home and don’t get involved. It’s discouraging people from wanting to get involved because they think ... to what end? There is a total disregard here for the voices of the citizenry.”

For more on the projects Seidman alludes to, see This Could Be You.

Contact columnist Carrie Seidman at 941-361-4834 or carrie.seidman@heraldtribune.com. Follow her on Twitter @CarrieSeidman and Facebook at facebook.com/cseidman