Residents fight to preserve Fruitville Road Park

As the city moves forward with the potential sale of 7.7 acres of parkland to Benderson Property Development, residents surrounding the park are determined to keep the property as it is.

Fruitville Road Park, located at the northeast corner of Fruitville and Beneva roads, is part of an 11-acre package the city agreed to sell to Benderson in 2012. If the sale is finalized, Benderson would develop a retail shopping center on the property. As part of the sale agreement, the Planning Board and City Commission have to consider a Vacation of Parks petition before the transaction can be completed.

At a May 15 Parks, Recreation and Environmental Protection Board meeting, the group discussed city staff’s draft of that petition. According to the city code, one of three requirements must be met for the Planning Board to recommend vacation of a park:

The public park has not been used as a park, or any prior use as a park has been abandoned.

The public park is of no benefit to the city and the public.

The closing or discontinuing of the public park is in the best interest of the city and public.

Staff concluded that the first two requirements were not met. The area is still frequently used, the report states, with the Sarasota County Circus Trail providing an option for runners and cyclists in the area. The report also notes that the land provides green space “in a very automobile-oriented, urban environment.”

For the third point, however, the report states that sale of the park would allow for increased revenue to the city. David Smith, the city’s general manager of Neighborhood and Development Services, said rough estimates of building department revenue from construction were between $185,000 and $222,000, with ad valorem tax revenue projected at $47,592 to $57,110 annually. Smith said the numbers were probably on the high end, but that any income represented an increase in revenue. The sale itself would also generate $1.45 million for the city.

“Revenue generation at the site would be a benefit to the city considering the current economic climate,” Smith said.

The parks board and residents in attendance both bristled at the assertion that the increased revenue represented the “best interest” of the public. Parks board member Shawn Pierson said other factors should be taken into consideration when considering the best interest — including possible expenses.

For the Benderson development to gain approval, about $8 million in improvements needs to be made to the intersection of Fruitville and Beneva; the city would need to cover $5.5 million.

Fellow board member Elmer Berkel echoed those sentiments, and questioned the precedent that would be set if the city determined revenue was more beneficial than parkland.

“Payne Park — we could increase the tax base by making that an apartment complex or shopping center or condo,” Berkel said. “If the only factor is revenue, I guess I get kind of scared for the other parks in the city.”

Ten people spoke against the proposed sale at the meeting, mostly residents of the nearby Fairway Oaks, Glen Oaks Estates, Glen Oaks Manor and Oakwood Manor communities. They lamented the lack of green space in the area, the sprawl created by adding a third shopping center to that stretch of Beneva and the additional traffic congestion at an already busy intersection.

“I want to state unequivocally that we are vehemently opposed to the sale,” Fairway Oaks resident Joyce Burnham said. “It won’t negatively impact our property — it will be disastrous.”

Smith said he would take the comments made at last week’s meeting into consideration when finalizing the petition, and that the public hearing regarding the park vacation was still likely four to five months away.

Until a decision is made, residents surrounding the park say they will continue to fight against the development.

“We don’t need another shopping center,” Glen Oaks Manor resident Edith Kaplan said. “We need more parks and recreation.”

Code Criteria
According to the city code, one of three requirements must be met for the Planning Board to recommend vacation of a park:

• The public park has not been used as a park, or any prior use as a park has been abandoned.

• The public park is of no benefit to the city and the public.

• The closing or discontinuing of the public park is to the best interest of the city and public.

Contact David Conway at [email protected]