Planning Board Wants to Slow Down 'Fast-Track'

Since being seated in May, the new city commission has said making Sarasota a more pro-development city is priority No. 1.

Commissioners have eliminated , city manager Robert Bartolotta has started holding developer open houses, and in August the commission voted to "fast-track" a zoning text amendment that would side with developers when there is a conflict in the city’s zoning code.

On Wednesday the Sarasota Planning Board told the commission it needs to slow down the fast-track. The board voted 4-1 to recommend to commissioners that they should reject the measure and go through the normal process of development and staff review.

The proposed "fast-track" zoning text amendment reads, “In case of any conflict in limitations, restriction or standards applying or interpreted to apply to an individual use of property or a structure, provisions shall be applied in a manner most favorable to the property owner or applicant.”

Currently, if one zoning code said a setback must be 100 feet and another says 150 feet, the city must enforce the 150-foot code. If the proposed text amendment passes, the city would automatically say the developer could have a 100-foot setback.

Deputy City Attorney Mike Connolly said that when the commission first discussed the proposed change in August it sounded like it would pass the legal muster, but once he read it, the words took another meaning.

He said he overlooked the phrase, “or interpreted to apply.”

“I must acknowledge, when I saw it in writing, I had different opinion of it than when I heard it,” Connolly said.

He advised the planning board that the way the ordinance is currently written, it leaves open the possibility of litigation. Connolly said city attorney Robert Fournier would advise the commission the same way.

Susan Chapman, planning board chair, agrees. “I didn’t think there was any problem with it until I saw it on paper. That’s where we get into the issue of staff analysis,” she said.  “When you understand what’s going on, you recognize that this is a major change in the way legal decisions are made.”

That fact, Chapman said, is reason for the city to put the brakes on the issue and run it through the normal process instead of the fast-track. She said the text amendment does not define "conflict."

There is a difference between, "conflicts of laws vs. conflicts of opinion," she said. "Doesn’t this actually add ambiguity rather than cut ambiguity?"

The board said there are no specific facts that show the move is necessary. It wanted proof that Sarasota is a "no" city, rather then just a perception. Board members also wanted evidence the shows the ordinance is necessary, such as a previous example where two zoning codes were in conflict.

Connolly said in his 10 years he could not think of any.

Chris Gallagher, the lone "no" vote on the board, said the fact that there are little-to-no cases of this "conflict" occurring, shows that it would not hurt to pass the measure. He said the change is symbolic, to show developers that Sarasota is open for business.

“This is a small piece of the picture,” Gallagher said. “Like the action to [limit] impact fees, those two impact fees that were taken off the books will not have a huge impact; but it’s all of these things together that begin to build [the reputation] that [the commissioners] are really getting serious about doing things in the city of Sarasota.”

Board member Morton Siegel said approving the measure "as-is" would open up the city to litigation, which would only eat up staff time and city resources.

“It’s a tilted standard that creates a preponderance that could affect the code in more than just this way,” he said. “This is an example of passing legislature that can open up a can of worms.”

City commissioners are scheduled to discuss the zoning text amendment during an October regular city commission meeting.