Sarasota — The Development Review Committee reviewed a new submittal for The Miramar, a multi‑building redevelopment at 65 South Palm Avenue, and provided extensive code, streetscape and utility comments. Staff tied several preliminary conditions to the historic Miramar structures and told the applicant a resubmittal will be required.

Project representatives said the site will include approximately 70 residential units and about 38,000 square feet of commercial space. Rebecca Webster, a certified planner with development services, told the applicants to reflect split zoning and split future land use on the site data table under ordinances 25‑5566 and 25‑5566 (as cited in the review). She asked the team to show building coverage calculations above the podium level, dimension elevator overruns and architectural features at roof level, and demonstrate that façades on primary streets meet the required glazing and frontage standards.

Webster also explained preliminary conditions tied to the historic Miramar: after the city issues a certificate of occupancy for the historic structures, the applicant must apply for a local historic designation; for 10 years after the historic Miramar receives a CO or TCO, nonresidential space on the second floor of the historic building must be rented at a rate not to exceed 50% of the average per‑square‑foot rental rate of first‑floor nonresidential space; and any proceeds from transfer of development rights must be donated to a nonprofit dedicated to historic preservation or used to restore/maintain a designated historic building. Staff said the development on the site will not be eligible to receive development rights from the Miramar sending site.

Utilities reviewers provided detailed technical requirements, asking the applicant to show existing mains, gate valves and air release valves, to relocate a proposed master meter outside of the sidewalk area within a city utility easement, and to use cut‑in connections rather than simple taps in some locations. Engineering reviewers asked that driveway aprons be built to city standards, called out a potential planter encroachment into the right of way, and requested stormwater outflow locations and positive drainage at raised crosswalks.

Transportation staff asked that Palm Avenue and adjoining local streets conform to the Engineering Design Criteria Manual (EDCM) cross sections and streetscape elements, including minimum sidewalk widths, amenity strips, reoriented ADA ramps, and a turn study for vehicle access. Transportation also noted coordination with adjacent redevelopment projects and requested a transportation demand‑management plan before certificate of occupancy based on trip generation.

Jackie Hartley, the city arborist, asked the applicant to justify any tree removals and to document alternatives (arborist reports, resistographs, or other testing) before removal permits would be considered. Building and fire reviewers reiterated Florida Building Code requirements for fire service access elevator lobbies, fire command rooms and separations between construction types.

Staff told the applicant that comments are extensive and that a resubmittal will be required for further review; no final approvals or votes were taken at the DRC meeting.

Provenance: Rebecca Webster enumerated split‑zoning and Miramar‑specific conditions (00:31:44). Utility and transportation reviewers provided technical requirements and EDCM references (00:38:26 to 00:51:57).