An idea with a view: the Sands Point redevelopment dilemma

Bob Goodman is stuck.

Goodman has owned a unit at Sands Point, a condominium community located behind the gates of the Longboat Key Club, for about 30 years. He has an idea he says could benefit all of his fellow condo owners.

His vision? Construct eight 4,000-square-foot penthouses atop Sands Point, then use the revenue from the sales to fund improvements to the property’s existing condo units, such as adding balconies and upgrading the property to better withstand hurricanes.

“We could bring this up to date,” said Goodman, standing outside of his condo, overlooking the convergence of New Pass and the Gulf of Mexico. “And we’re not hurting anyone.”

Goodman, who served on the condo board for nearly 20 years, noted that buildings surrounding Sands Point are stories taller than his condo building.

His dilemma? The town’s zoning rules.

Planning, Zoning and Building Director Alaina Ray said Sands Point is considered a “nonconforming” property. That means, under the current zoning code, any improvements  must be completed within the property’s existing shell.

This nonconforming distinction means no additions can be constructed above the property’s current height, and penthouses would do just that. It also means that, if Sands Point were to be torn down and redeveloped, the building would only be permitted to be built back to the property’s current height, plus flood elevation.

So, in the case of a complete rebuild, Sands Point unit owners would not be permitted to increase the square footage or ceiling heights of the condos without also decreasing the property’s density. This rule would apply regardless of whether the rebuild is voluntary, meaning planned redevelopment, or involuntary because of disaster.

What makes Sands Point nonconforming? The building was constructed with 10 units per acre before the town changed that standard to six units per acre.

The property, along with many others, became nonconforming with the passage of the town’s 1984 comprehensive plan. In his 2002 book “From Calusas to Condominiums: A Pictorial History of Longboat Key," author Ralph B. Hunter describes how some commissioners at the time were aiming to address what they considered “rampant over-development and increasing density, i.e. units per acre.”

“After many open and emotional meetings, density was controlled by prohibiting any increase of density on the Key without a public vote,” Hunter wrote. “It also increased set-backs from roads and canals so that approximately 60 percent of the Key became nonconforming overnight.”

Though there is no exact determination of how many nonconforming properties exist on the Key today, Ray estimates that 35-40% of the island’s units are nonconforming.

Goodman understands that his request to add eight units to Sands Point would require a density referendum, which he knows comes with its own challenges given the town’s recent history regarding such votes. Before the high-profile Colony Beach & Tennis Resort vote, Key voters in 2016 denied allowing a property owner to convert a single unit of the Harbour Square office building to residential use.

Still, it’s a venture Goodman would be willing to formally propose to his fellow condo owners if the Town Commission amends the zoning code to allow for the developmental flexibility his idea requires without fundamentally changing the character of the Key.

“I think a compromise could be reached,” Goodman said.

For more than two years, the Town Commission has been discussing how best to give nonconforming properties a means to become conforming under the zoning code. Ray explained many properties on the Key are “reaching the end of their functional lifespan,” and the term “nonconforming” carries a stigma among developers, investors, banks and insurance companies.

In May, commissioners tabled an ordinance regarding planned-unit developments, or PUDs, which are designed to encourage redevelopment of properties through a voluntary zoning process, citing a need for further examination and discourse.

At a June workshop meeting, commissioners sought to reset their objectives in taking on the nonconforming issue.

Mayor Terry Gans surmised the challenge the situation presents.

“I think viewing the real needs for some kind of intelligent redevelopment in the next 20 to 40 years is difficult when you view it through the eyes of those of us that are here today,” Gans said.

Jim Brown advised against continuing to use the term “PUD” because he believes it sends a message to potential developers that the town is willing to be more flexible with height, density and use than it actually is.

The commissioner also argued that remedying a property’s nonconforming status should come at some expense to the town, not just the property owner, because the town created the stigma with its 1984 legislation.

“It seems to me the town has an obligation to fix this,” Brown said. “I think it’s the fair thing to do.”

George Spoll mentioned that owners of properties that are currently conforming should also be considered in the local legislation because some will desire to modernize by increasing ceiling heights and adding in-unit laundry facilities, which require additional square footage.

Randy Clair said commissioners need to be presented with more precise statistics and data regarding the number and extent of nonconforming properties on the Key before making a decision on legislation.

“We desperately need accurate information,” Clair said.

Town staff will draft an ordinance based on the commission’s June discussion to present to the Town Commission in the fall.

Spoll expressed an attitude toward the ultimate solution shared by his colleagues.

“Keep it as simple as possible,” Spoll said.

The downzoning

Town staffers and consultants have been busy rewriting development standards for the past two years, because dozens of properties don’t conform to current regulations. In 1984, a Town Commission bent on controlling growth down-zoned the entire island to six units per acre or less, leaving properties with higher density unable to redevelop at their current level.

Wash, rinse, spin

When it comes to proposed standards for planned-unit developments on Longboat Key, one big factor that comes up when talking to planners and builders is laundry.

Yes, laundry.

Right now, if an older condominium without in-unit laundry rooms wanted to redevelop, it couldn’t increase the size of those units, unless it went down in density. The only solution: carve out space in bedrooms, kitchens or bathrooms for washers and dryers.

PUDs allow more flexible design standards — constrained by open space, height and other restrictions — to pave the way for larger units. Also, they don’t have a density cap, meaning a condo could add more units to pay for redevelopment.

Of course, that developer would still have to go through the referendum process to ask voters for the chance to request more units.