Condo project up for final review
If you go:
What: Key West City
Commission
When:
6 p.m.
Tuesday
Where: Old City Hall, 510
Greene St.
BY TIMOTHY O'HARA
Citizen Staff
KEY
WEST — A proposed 25-unit posh condo complex is either the worst project
or the best project for the Key West Bight, depending on who is talking.
At issue is the sunset, skyline of the bight and the fate of one of the
last open waterfront lots in
Key West.
Also at issue is what is
the historic character of the Key West Bight. Is the bight a quaint
neighborhood of small wooden Conch homes and boarding houses or is it
old fishery buildings, dry docks and other aging industrial buildings
that line the water?
No project since the
Reach hotel has endured more scrutiny and felt the brunt of more public
criticism. Both the developers and project opponents have fueled
residents' passions and rallied their troops to many city and
neighborhood meetings. It's hard for a resident to go to any city coffee
shop, party or other community gathering without hearing the name of the
project, Watermark.
Opponents, who include
former County Commissioner Shirley Freeman and local author and activist
Barbara Bowers, have packed Old City Hall during Planning Board and
Historical Architectural Review Commission meetings to tell city
officials that the buildings are better suited for mainland Florida and
are too big and out of scale with the surrounding community. Supporters
say the buildings would be a welcome successor to the old trailers of
the former Jabour's motorcourt and the abutting cement buildings that
currently occupy the land.
The project will go
before the City Commission on Tuesday night for final approval. However,
the project will mostly likely be sorted out in court, because whichever
side loses Tuesday will likely appeal. The local civic activist group
Last Stand has agreed to pay some of the legal bills residents incur
while fighting the project.
Most recently, Bob
Goldman, bight resident and an attorney, filed a series of legal
challenges. He filed a petition challenging the city's HARC staff's
authority to approve a recent modification to the project. A judge
ordered that the city prove the staff has the authority.
He also filed a complaint
challenging the vested rights the city granted the developers for
transient rentals on the property. On Friday, a New York-based attorney
firm enlisted by Goldman sent a letter to the city to keep the City
Commission from voting on the project until all of the legal issues are
resolved in court.
"We just want the city to
do what is legal," Goldman said. "The project exceeds the scope of the
law."
City Attorney Bob
Tischenkel and Senior City Planner Ty Symroski have filed the paperwork
that spells out the city's response to the legal challenges and reasons
for supporting a project, which developers have scaled back in recent
months. The city planning staff is recommending approval of the project.
"Dating back to the
settlement agreement and carrying back to HARC and the Planning Board,
there have been several disputes about the meaning of city regulations.
These disputes persist," Tischenkel said in a memo in Tuesday's agenda
packet. "The developer has scaled back the development three times: Once
in terms of the number of units and commercial space to be placed on the
site in the wake of the original settlement agreement approval and twice
in terms of physical and unit reductions during the developmental
approval process. At times, the developer has suggested that its
'concessions' are the standard by which its application should be
received and governed. For their part, the objecting neighbors have
engrafted their personal desires for the project onto the language of
the development regulations, in an effort to turn that language
unyielding."
The battle begins
The developers plan to
build two-bedroom, two-bathroom condominiums. The complex will feature a
day spa and other amenities that give guests a "decadent" and
"luxurious" experience, according to a Watermark sales brochure. Buyers
have already reserved all of the units, company spokeswoman Bobbi
Holland said. The average price of the units is $2 million, with the
price ranging from $1.5 to $3 million.
The Jabour's family had
been fighting the city for years over the right to develop the former
trailer park and campground. In the fall of 2003, the City Commission
approved a settlement that allowed developers to place 101 units on the
waterfront property abutting the Schooner Wharf Bar. Two groups of
neighbors sued and the state Department of Community Affairs were
opposed to the number of units that would be placed there.
The developers and the
city reduced the number of units to 32 on site and allowed them to
transfer 48 to another location. The Jabour family sold the property to
the Caroline Street Partners, a local development subsidiary of the
statewide development conglomerate Cortex Companies. Caroline Street
Partners was started by a group of former and current Key West
residents, Everett Atwell Jr., Ralph Sanchez, Tim Koenig and Derek
Parker.
The developers reduced
the number of units, but the size of the units increased. Developers
brought the project to HARC, which approved the project. Bight residents
remained opposed to the project, because they felt it was still too
massive in scale, too tall and out of character with the rest of the
neighborhood.
Neighbors have continued
to zealously fight the project. They say the project also violates city
rules that limit new buildings to 2 1/2 stories tall and the condos
exceed city rules on floor area ratios. City officials say that it may
violate floor area ratios, but the ratios have never been applied to
residential projects.
The developers reduced
the size of the project again in February. They removed a penthouse from
the top of one of the buildings, lowered the roof lines of two buildings
and reduced the total number of condos to 25.
"We have bent over
backwards and have done more than any other developer would have done to
do the right thing in the process," Atwell said. "We think we have
satisfied everyone in the city. The people who are still fighting this
are completely unreasonable."
The group brought the
project before the city's Planning Board and it was approved by a 3-2
vote. Both sides packed Old City Hall with their supporters and public
comment went on for hours.
After the Planning Board
meeting, city Historic Preservation Planner Diane Silvia reviewed the
project and approved revisions, without sending it back to the HARC
board.
The change did not
appease some residents, who say the project is still too big and out of
character with the neighborhood. Opponents of the project wanted the
city to bring The project back before the HARC board. Three bight
residents, Sam Hochman, Jerry Spencer and Joe Hall, filed appeals of
Silvia's decision.
Goldman then filed a
series of legal paperwork questioning Silvia's authority to approve the
project. City Attorney Bob Tischenkel said her authority is spelled out
"page 55 of HARC guidelines" and is in her city job description, he
said.
tohara@keysnews.com |
