Residents speak out on Gulfstream development

City staff hauled extra seats into Room 112 at City Hall on Monday because the crowd inside had expanded beyond the space’s original capacity for a meeting regarding a traffic study that has been the subject of controversy.

The gathering of more than 30 — originally expected to total around six people — was representative of the growing concern surrounding a proposed bayfront development’s impact on surrounding intersections. Lending validity to that concern, the city announced at the meeting that the project would be re-examined over the next four weeks.

Vue Sarasota Bay is a condominium and hotel project under development at the corner of U.S. 41 and Gulfstream Avenue. The Kolter group, the project’s developer, has waited for final approval from the city while staff consider whether a city-commissioned traffic study meets the standards outlined in the zoning code and comprehensive plan.

At first, the objecting party was largely limited to occupants of the nearby Tower Residences at the Ritz-Carlton, Sarasota, who first raised concerns about the study in late October. That’s changed over the past two months as members of neighborhood associations from Bird Key, Golden Gate Point, Laurel Park and Arlington Park showed up for Monday’s meeting. In addition, the Coalition of City Neighborhood Associations voted unanimously to encourage the city to revisit the study at its meeting Saturday.

The major contention from the Tower Residences is that the study did not measure the development’s impact on adjacent streets or provide a satisfactory plan for managing internal traffic. In particular, the intersection of U.S. 41 and Ritz-Carlton Drive — which was not studied because it is not signalized — would see significant backups, representatives at Monday’s meeting asserted.

“Ritz-Carlton and Watergate drives are really just private drives that have public access,” said Tower Residences Condo Association President Charles Thomson. “They weren't designed to have heavy traffic, and they will with this development.”

Citizens also criticized other aspects of the traffic study. Richard Rubin, a resident of the Tower Residences, said the study — conducted in May and adjusted to account for peak traffic — was not reflective of in-season conditions.

“We have to get beyond statistics,” Rubin said. “We have to look at real situations.”

For some, Monday’s meeting was an opportunity to voice complaints about the current status of U.S. 41 and Gulfstream or the Kolter project itself. Many were frustrated about the prospect of a high-density project in what they believe is already a badly congested area, and said Kolter should pay to mitigate traffic issues.

According to City Engineer Alex DavisShaw, traffic studies are designed so that developers pay to cover the additional traffic they add to nearby streets, not to fix existing problems. She said the city is working toward getting roundabouts in place along U.S. 41 at Gulfstream and Fruitville Road, though construction on those is at least three years away.

Other residents wanted to see an effort to make the area more pedestrian-friendly. City Manager Tom Barwin said he would ask consulting firm Kimley-Horn, which conducted the traffic study, to supplement the updated report with a portion on how to address pedestrian issues in the area, too.

For some, though, the issue lied with the project. Golden Gate Point resident Cathy Antunes said she thought the proposed design failed to create a more walkable neighborhood. She encouraged the city and the Kolter Group to come up with a more creative plan for the property.

“It should be a superior pedestrian experience, as well as a superior automobile experience,” Antunes said.

Tim Litchet, the city’s director of Neighborhood and Development Services, said the city would take a micro and macro look at addressing issues related to the project and the Gulfstream/U.S. 41 intersection. He said timing was an issue, but there could be interim solutions in place before the big picture is fully addressed.

“We're going to make sure all the legal standards are met for the traffic issue,” Litchet said. “In addition to that, we're going to attempt to develop whatever commonsense solutions we can.”

The city agreed that the traffic study should be revised with a more thorough capacity study, and Kimley-Horn said the additional portion could be completed within four weeks. Fournier said it could take a week to nail down precise instructions for Kimley-Horn so it meets the city’s legal requirement for the study is met.

Some attendees said they were seeking an indication that the project would not be approved without further review from residents. Based on the response from Barwin and other city staff, they said they were encouraged.

“The city seems to have assured us that they will not proceed without involving us in the conversation,” Rubin said. “We welcome their attempts to go back to the drawing board again.”

Contact David Conway at [email protected]