Understanding the Feeling of Being Crowded

The sensation of feeling crowded in the City of Venice may stem from the rapid pace of land development and a lack of corresponding infrastructure expansion. Here’s a closer look at the contributing factors:

City of Venice

Increased Development Activity

In Northeast Venice, vacant land is currently being developed at an accelerated pace. While the zoning initially allowed for low residential density (0-5 units/acre), most developments were approved at densities ranging from 1.0 to under 3 units/acre. Although this lower density helped manage potential overcrowding and ensured that traffic flow remained manageable, the cumulative effect of ongoing development may now be creating a perception of reduced open space and increased human activity.

In recent years, the City of Venice has seen a significant increase in multiunit residential developments, with City Council approvals granting zoning for 6-18 units per acre without corresponding road infrastructure improvements. Height exceptions have also been authorized by the Council, further contributing to population density. For example, the Vistera development along Laurel Road, originally planned for fewer than 4 units per acre, has been increased to 5 units per acre due to height exceptions approved by the Council.

Zoning and Development Density Rules

An Overview of Regulations for Single Family and Multifamily Development

Single Family Development Zoning

Developers are entitled to zoning regulations that allow for single-family developments with a density ranging from 1 to 5 units per acre. This zoning provides a framework for residential construction in areas designated for lower-density housing, ensuring consistency with the intended character and infrastructure capacity of such neighborhoods.

Multifamily Development Zoning

For more dense development projects, a developer may request approval from the Council to rezone an area for multifamily development. Upon approval, the Council has the authority to permit a maximum density of up to 18 units per acre. This increase in density accommodates the growing demand for housing options that suit varied needs and lifestyles while utilizing land more efficiently.

Height Restrictions

In areas zoned for multifamily development, height limitations are generally capped at three stories. However, developers can request exceptions to these height restrictions. Such requests are subject to the approval of the Council, and a majority vote is required to grant the exception. If approved, height exceptions can facilitate architectural flexibility and maximize space usage, though they may also influence the overall density of the development.

Impact of Additional Requests

When developers request both higher zoning density and height exceptions, these changes collectively increase the density of the development. Increased density can offer benefits such as enhanced housing supply and economic efficiency but must be balanced with considerations for infrastructure, community impact, and sustainability.

Conclusion

Zoning and density regulations play a crucial role in shaping the development landscape by balancing growth, community needs, and environmental considerations. While developers have the right to pursue single-family zoning, multifamily zoning and height exceptions require Council approval, ensuring that changes align with broader urban planning goals.

Changing Landscape

The rapid transformation of open, vacant land into residential developments fundamentally alters the character of the surrounding environment. The reduction of green, undeveloped spaces can evoke feelings of confinement or crowding, especially for those accustomed to a more open and rural aesthetic.

Strain on Infrastructure

Laurel Road serves as a significant access route in Northeast Venice, and its current state reflects growing strain. Designated as a Level of Service (LOS) D—a measure of road safety and capacity—it was recently downgraded to an LOS F as its capacity was exceeded due to increasing traffic. The fact that this road is also a key hurricane evacuation route intensifies its importance and the urgency for its planned expansion later this year. However, until this expansion is completed, residents may experience congestion and a heightened sense of crowding on and around this route.

Sarasota County

Zoning and Development Decisions

Recent Actions and Impacts

Introduction

The County Commissioners have recently adopted a more restrictive approach toward zoning requests in certain areas, particularly in the Venice region. Their decisions reflect concerns about the ability of infrastructure to handle increased population density, as well as the broader intent behind conservation subdivision policies.

Zoning Denials in the Venice Area

The Commissioners have consistently denied requests for increased zoning density in the Venice area, citing inadequate infrastructure to support the proposed developments. Their stance has been reinforced by parallel decisions from the County Planning Commissioners, suggesting a unified approach to managing growth in the region.

Denial of Development South of Border Road

A recent example of this new policy direction was the denial of a request to expand density in conservation subdivisions within the Rural Heritage/Estate RMA located south of Border Road. Both the Planning Commission and the County Commissioners rejected the proposal, with the Planning Commission voting 4-3 to deny and the County Commissioners voting unanimously at 5-0.

Development in conservation subdivisions is permissible under specific conditions:

• Clustering of housing units
• Creation of permanently protected open space
• Enhancement of the interconnected network of conservation lands and open spaces

However, staff reported that the five subdivisions already approved for increased density in the Rural Heritage/Estate RMA have largely failed to align with the goals of the Conservation Subdivision policies. None of these subdivisions have contributed external open space connections that bolster the overall County network of conservation lands, and most resemble conventional or clustered residential developments rather than true conservation-oriented projects.

Key Decisions and Next Steps

The decision to deny the proposed development south of Border Road underscores the Commissioners’ commitment to maintaining the integrity of conservation policies and addressing infrastructure challenges. Following the unanimous denial, the County Commissioners have tasked staff with reviewing the language that permitted the development of the current five subdivisions. This review may lead to adjustments that better enforce the original intent of conservation subdivision policies.

Conclusion

The County Commissioners’ recent actions reflect a deliberate shift toward restrictive zoning in areas where infrastructure and conservation concerns prevail. By denying developments that fail to meet conservation criteria or adequately contribute to the County’s network of protected lands, the Commissioners strive to safeguard both the environment and the quality of life for current residents

Proposed Hotel Project

Overview

The proposed hotel project on Laurel Road has undergone significant planning and revisions as it navigates through local governmental approval. Located at the intersection of Twin Laurel Blvd and Laurel Road, the project has sparked discussions centered around zoning changes, infrastructure concerns, and community impact.

New Plan Approval

The Planning Commission recently approved a new plan for the project by a narrow 4-3 vote. This approval includes changing the zoning designation of 11.12 acres of property from Moderate Density Residential to Commercial Highway Interchange. The revised plan permits the construction of a single 65-foot hotel, addressing some of the concerns raised in previous deliberations. Notably, the three Planning Commissioners residing in Venicevoted against the approval, highlighting a division in local community perspectives.

Original Plan Rejection

The original petition submitted by the developers proposed the construction of two 65-foot hotels on the same property. The County Commissioners unanimously denied this proposal with a 5-0 vote, citing the lack of infrastructure to support such developments as a key reason for the rejection. Despite the denial, the County Commissioners allowed the petitioners to reapply with a revised plan.

Potential Future Implications

While the revised plan only seeks approval for a single hotel, members of the Planning Commission have raised concerns about potential future developments. If the zoning change is approved by the County Commissioners during a subsequent hearing, the developers may have the legal latitude to construct a second hotel on the same property without requiring additional approval from the Commissioners. This possibility underscores the ongoing debate about long-term impacts on zoning and infrastructure.

Conclusion

The proposed hotel project on Laurel Road exemplifies the complexities of urban planning, balancing the interests of development, infrastructure capacity, and community sentiment. As it moves through the channels of approval, further discussions and hearings will likely shape the future of this initiative.

DiPiazza Village

The Sarasota County Commissioners unanimously denieda comprehensive plan amendment for the property located north of E. Venice Avenue and west of N. Jackson Road in Venice. The requested change was to reclassify the land use from Low-Density Residential to Office/Multi-Family Residential, and the vote was 5-0.

The proposed project included rezoning the land to RMF-3/PUD, which would allow for the construction of three apartment buildings with a total of 73 units, a clubhouse, and a pool on the 5-acre site. However, the Commissioners denied the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which automatically resulted in the rejection of the rezoning application.

The decision was based on two key concerns. First, the plan did not include provisions for affordable housing. Second, the existing infrastructure was deemed insufficient to handle the additional traffic the development would generate. Notably, E. Venice Avenue is not included in the current 5-year Capital Improvement Plan for road widening, making it unable to support the projected increase in traffic.

Manasota Beach Road Extension and Keyway Road Removal

Manasota Beach Road Extension

Project Overview

The Manasota Beach Road Extension is a significant infrastructure project aimed at improving connectivity in Sarasota County. The extension encompasses programming, design, permitting, and construction activities to enhance the region’s transportation capabilities.

Partnership

This project is undertaken as a Public-Private Partnership between the Economic Stimulus Working Group and Sarasota County, emphasizing collaborative efforts to achieve economic and infrastructural growth.

Location

The extension will span approximately one-half mile east of SR776 to the City of North Port limits, strategically connecting key areas and facilitating smoother transit.

Estimated Cost

The total cost for the project is estimated at $15 million, reflecting the comprehensive scope of work required for its completion.

Purpose and Goals

The primary aim of the project is to establish a connector between Manasota Beach Road (east) and Manasota Beach Road (west). This infrastructure extension is strategically planned to align with the opening of a new high school, scheduled for August 2026. The goal is to complete the connector in time to accommodate the increased traffic and provide seamless accessibility to the high school.

Board Approval

The Sarasota County Board has demonstrated strong support for the connector project, approving it unanimously with a 5-0 vote. This consensus highlights the importance of the development and its anticipated positive impact on the local community.

Keyway Road Removal

Plan and Decision

The project also includes the removal of Keyway Road from the Thoroughfare Plan due to several logistical and environmental challenges. This decision was approved unanimously by the Board with another 5-0 vote.

Reasons for Removal

The removal of Keyway Road is attributed to several factors. Firstly, the right-of-way is obstructed by FPL transmission lines, and relocating these lines would be prohibitively expensive. Secondly, its removal helps minimize ecological disruption to sensitive wetland areas. Thirdly, constructing a costly bridge to accommodate the road was deemed impractical. Lastly, the extension of Keyway Road was not scheduled until 2045, which made its immediate removal more feasible.

Estimated Cost

The removal process and associated tasks are estimated to cost approximately $45 million.

Conclusion

The Manasota Beach Road Connector project, paired with the prudent removal of Keyway Road from the Thoroughfare Plan, underscores Sarasota County’s commitment to sustainable development and addressing community needs. The unanimous Board approval further cements the significance of these initiatives in shaping the region’s future. The Commissioners continue to work with public private partnerships to quickly strengthen the infrastructure at an affordable cost.

Feeling overcrowded?

Local cities and counties face significant challenges when developers increase density through zoning changes or height exceptions without corresponding infrastructure improvements. Overcrowded public spaces, strained utilities, inadequate transportation systems, and reduced access to public services are common consequences. To mitigate these issues, comprehensive planning that aligns housing expansion with infrastructure development is essential. Public-private partnerships can finance critical upgrades, and community involvement can ensure local needs are addressed. Such measures are vital to fostering sustainable, equitable, and high-quality living for all residents.