After several hours of testimony and technical debate, the Planning Commission voted 5‑1 to recommend approval of a General Development Plan to reestablish Manatee Cottage East as a large residential treatment facility (up to 90 beds) or as an assisted‑living facility consistent with historical site use and with updated stipulations the county will require.

Applicant representatives and The Crossings, the organization that operates the site, described long‑standing service operations. Attorney Mark Barnaby and operator Jim Rouches told the commission the site has provided care or residential treatment uses since the 1980s and that the current request clarifies and resolves inconsistencies between older approvals and current LDC definitions. The applicant submitted a GDP that mirrors the existing developed buildings and asks the county to confirm the historical uses so operations can continue under clear zoning authority.

Planning staff said the request raised technical questions because a 1997 zoning ordinance included language that is unclear as to which activities were permitted, and subsequent revisions to the Land Development Code added a collector‑road requirement for residential treatment facilities. Staff noted that the property is accessed from 24th Street East (not a collector) and that applicants requested a specific approval to waive that collector‑road standard. Staff also reported a recent code‑enforcement history tied to temporary vacancy and site cleanup and said the applicant must meet a series of stipulations and administrative requirements before final approvals.

Public testimony was extensive and polarized. More than 30 people addressed the commission. Neighbors described past problems at the site when it was vacant and cited observations of trespass, drug activity and traffic on the dead‑end neighborhood street; they asked for strong buffering and site security. At the same time, a large number of recovery program alumni, volunteers and veterans testified in favor of maintaining the facility’s operations, saying the operator provides treatment, housing, job skills and veteran services, and urged the commission to approve the reestablishment to avoid displacing current residents and interrupting ongoing treatment. Deputy Director of Public Safety James Crutchfield provided a call‑for‑service summary showing fluctuating EMS and MSO incidents across recent years and an increase in 2024; staff said those data would be considered in final conditions and that medical and safety staffing patterns are part of operator protocols.

Commission deliberations centered on whether the historical approvals, code changes and a period of vacancy required the commission to deny reestablishment or to allow the applicant to correct inconsistencies and operate under a clarified ordinance. Commissioners voted to recommend approval with conditions; staff will require the applicant to meet administrative stipulations (fence, noise/light controls, specified security and parking/staffing information) and to submit documentation such as AHCA/NFPA compliance for assisted‑living operations before a final county action. The planning commission’s recommendation will go to the County Commission for final adoption.