Coming soon in south Sarasota, Sarasota, FL
Sarasota Bath and Racquet Club
2170 Robinhood Street, Sarasota
This is not a conversion of the old club. The club was demolished and this is new construction on cleared land, which changes which Florida statute stands behind your purchase. Three official records give three different unit counts, and after four years of permit no certificate of occupancy has issued. The whole record is below.
- Address
- 2170 Robinhood Street
- Scale
- Four storeys, seven buildings
- Units
- 108, 161 or 256
- Tax rate
- 14.8815 mills
At a glance
Bath and Racquet fast facts
Every figure below is read from the county clerk's recorded instruments, the county appraiser's parcel record and certified rate table, the city permit file retrieved in full, the federal flood and claim records, or the county's hazard layers, with a control behind each result. Where two official records disagree we print both rather than choosing, and here they disagree about the unit count, the building count and the flood map.
- Record address
- 2170 Robinhood Street, Sarasota, FL 34231
- Filed as
- Sarasota Bath and Racquet Club, a Condo
- What it actually is
- New construction on cleared land, not a conversion
- The old club
- Two storeys, demolished in autumn 2023
- Storeys and buildings
- Four storeys, seven buildings on the permit
- Unit count
- 108, 161 or 256, depending which record
- Declaration recorded
- Yes, in early 2023, plus five amendments
- Certificate of occupancy
- None issued, after four years of permit
- Declared build cost
- About $60m across the whole project
- Inspections logged
- About 470, the longest log in this series
- Tax rate
- 14.8815 mills, the plain city code
- Ground elevation
- About 23 to 26.7 feet, the highest we have measured
- Mapped flood zone
- None, in either the federal or the county layer
- Evacuation level
- D, a category four zone, 26 foot surge
- Units sold to date
- None. Every folio is still sponsor held
- Pricing, dues and reserves
- Not published yet
Not published yet
Location: see 2170 Robinhood Street on the map. Figures carry the dates shown and are subject to change.
Who is building this, and what was here
The club is gone, and the document that proves it is the one nobody finds
Start with the correction, because the mistake is an expensive one. The old racquet club was not converted. It was demolished. A city demolition permit describes one building of two storeys and about 38,300 square feet, plus the pavement, the tennis courts and the pool, and the city recorded that work complete in autumn 2023. The master permit calls the work new commercial construction, and the assessment roll carries no improvement value and no year built on a single folio here.
Here is the part that should worry anyone who researches Florida property themselves. That demolition permit is returned by neither the address search nor the parcel search on the city's permit system. Only a search by owner name returns it, along with six other permits the first two miss entirely. A page built on the obvious search would have had no primary evidence the club came down.
The legal consequence runs the opposite way from what a conversion would have given you. Florida's conversion rules would have owed existing tenants notice and a right of first refusal, an engineer's report stating the remaining useful life of the roof, structure, plumbing, electrical and elevators, and a converter's reserve account or warranty election. None of that is owed here. What you get instead is the new construction warranty regime, which is the better deal on a building nobody has lived in.
Then the unit count, the most important unresolved number here. The state's recorded roll says 108, the county assessment roll carries 161 unit folios, and the city's master construction permit says 256. The state's figure is the count at the original declaration and has never been updated, despite five recorded amendments since. The gap between the roll and the permit is 95 units that are not condominium folios, and there is no second condominium filing at this address to explain them.
The permit does not even agree with itself. Its attainable housing condition is arithmetic on a market rate count of exactly 220, which plus its 33 attainable units gives 253, not the 256 printed on the face of the same document. A companion staging permit filed weeks apart says eight buildings where the master permit says seven. Small numbers, but this is the city disagreeing with the city.
On the structure of the scheme, the roll proves something this series has only inferred. Three parcels here are defined not by a footprint but by elevation, held as air rights running from roughly 19.9 feet up to roughly 36.2 feet. Those are the commercial and private club components, held by two affiliate companies carved out of the developer in spring 2025. Above the condominium association there is a recorded master property owners association too. Whose budget pays for what, and who votes, is in the text of those instruments, which we did not retrieve page by page.
Two things about the developer that a buyer should simply know. The developer and the general contractor publish the same street address and the same suite number, character for character, so the builder is owner affiliated rather than arm's length. And the developer appears at four different addresses across the state filing, the permits and the assessor's record, two of which pair one city's name with another city's postcode. Neither is unusual. Both are worth confirming in writing.
One last search trap, and it is a new one. The city's own development file names this project with an ampersand and the clerk's index spells the word out. Search the ampersand form and you get zero results; spelled out it returns five recorded declarations and the whole amendment chain. The club's previous operator is indexed under four different renderings of its own name.
Take these four to the sales office: the confirmed unit count; what the ninety-five non condominium units on the permit actually are; the cost sharing and control terms between the master association, the condominium association and the two commercial parcels; and the expected date of the first certificate of occupancy.
What this actually costs
The plain city rate, and a cap that is worth everything on one parcel and nothing on 161
The rate here is ordinary, which on this stretch of coast is worth saying out loud. Every folio here sits in the plain City of Sarasota code at 14.8815 mills, the code that covers about 26,900 parcels countywide. That is nearly two full mills below the downtown improvement district and more than a mill below the bayfront peninsula code. There is no community development district anywhere in this county.
A small correction to a figure this series has published before. The county's certified table counts twelve authorities in this code, but there are thirteen separate levy lines on the bill and they sum to exactly 14.8815. The largest is the city's own operating levy, then the school district's required local effort.
Now the number that will confuse anyone who looks this site up today. All 161 unit folios are assessed at exactly $85,000 each, every one classified vacant, with no improvement value and no year built. A nearly finished four storey development is carried on the roll as land. That is the assessment date artefact this series has met at five separate new buildings, and it corrects once the units exist. Budget from what a unit sells for, not from the roll.
Across the whole site the ad valorem arithmetic comes out around $294,000 a year, but there is a trap inside that number. The parent land parcel still carries about $3.7 million of land value for the whole nine and a half acres while the unit folios and the affiliate parcels carry a further $16 million between them, so a naive sum double counts the land. That is the roll's arithmetic, not an appraisal.
On the ten per cent cap that limits how fast a non homesteaded assessment can rise, this site produced the cleanest demonstration we have seen that the cap has to be tested rather than assumed. On the 161 unit folios it is worth exactly nothing, because every one is flat year over year and there is no rise to defer. On the parent parcel it deferred about $296,400 of value last year, roughly $4,400 of tax, and this year it is worth nothing there either. One site, one roll, one owner, two opposite answers.
Homestead does almost nothing at this price level but is still worth claiming. In this code the exemption saves a flat $591.70 a year at any assessed value at or above $75,000, and not one folio here carries a homestead flag today. The assessment growth cap that travels with it is the part worth having over a decade, not the dollars.
The practical version: the rate is ordinary and computable today, the current roll tells you nothing about your future bill, and the association budget is the real unknown. Non ad valorem assessments in this county sit behind a tax collector that blocks automated retrieval, so every figure above is the ad valorem bill only.
The compliance clock
Recorded, unlike most of this series, and the safety clock has not started
Since the Surfside collapse Florida has built a hard timetable around structural inspection and reserve funding, and every condominium sits somewhere on it. This one is unusual in this series because it is on the timetable rather than waiting to join it.
The declaration is recorded, and we verified it in both directions. The state's recorded roll carries a recording date in early 2023, the clerk's index returns five recorded declaration instruments, and the tax roll shows the signature predicted for a recorded but unbuilt condominium: unit folios all vacant, all identically valued, beside a zero value common element folio. One oddity we report rather than resolve: the base instrument those amendments all cite does not itself come back from the clerk's party index under any spelling we tried.
On the milestone inspection, the rule most people quote has been repealed and the answer here is simple. Current law sets the first milestone inspection at thirty years from the certificate of occupancy, then every ten years, with twenty-five available only where the local enforcement agency determines that local conditions, including proximity to salt water, require it. The familiar three mile test was repealed in 2022. No certificate has issued here, so the clock has not started and no date can honestly be published. The city has not adopted the twenty-five year trigger, and this site is four miles from salt water.
The structural integrity reserve study runs on the same clock and is not yet owed. The obligation attaches to buildings of three storeys or more by the end of the thirtieth year measured from the certificate of occupancy, and a developer is expressly excused from completing one before the first unit is conveyed. No unit has been conveyed here and no certificate has issued. Whether one has been commissioned voluntarily is not a recorded fact and could not be established. Expect the developer's own reserve position and the turnover budget to be the only reserve documents available to you before turnover.
On timing, the record supports an observation and not a date. The master permit was applied for in autumn 2022 and took about ten months in review, and the first inspection was not requested until seventeen and a half months after issue. The log now runs about 470 rows, the longest in this series. That is roughly forty-eight and a half months from application with no occupancy, against local benchmarks of 35.5 through 59.6 months from application all the way to occupancy. Four of those five have already passed here without reaching the finish line, and a mechanical final failed within days of this research being run.
On statutory thresholds you are in a strong position whichever unit count is right. At anything above twenty-five units all three attach: the developer must file with the state, you are owed a prospectus before you can be held to a contract, and the association must maintain a website and post its budget, contracts, insurance and inspection reports. All three competing figures clear that comfortably. Ask for the number in writing anyway.
The turnover finding is the same everywhere and is consistently misunderstood. At turnover the developer must deliver audited financial records, a turnover inspection report and studies covering roof, structure, plumbing, electrical, waterproofing, windows, elevators, heating and cooling, the pool and the drainage. Nothing in any of it requires the developer to put money into the reserve. There is a master association above the condominium association here as well, so ask separately what its reserve position is.
Here is what a buyer cannot see today. No certificate of occupancy, no budget with real operating figures for a building nobody has lived in, no reserve study, no association under owner control, no cost sharing terms with the two commercial parcels, and no resale evidence of any kind, because not one unit has ever been sold here. The prospectus will be the binding disclosure and it is the developer's own account of its own project.
What to demand in writing before your rescission period closes: the confirmed unit count; the expected certificate of occupancy date against a permit expiring in spring 2027; the prospectus and every condominium document including the recorded amendments; the proposed budget with its reserve schedule and the master association's assessment on top; the cost sharing and voting terms with the commercial and club parcels; and the delay provisions of your contract. Your deposit's first ten per cent sits in escrow, and above that the statute lets the developer spend it on construction.
Get notified when the first certificate of occupancy issues and pricing lands
Four years into the permit, neither has happened yet.
The area
High ground, no mapped flood zone at all, and a storm nobody talks about
The hazard finding here is the strangest this series has produced, and it warns about method as much as risk. Seven points across the site were queried against the federal flood hazard layer and against the county's own layer, and both returned nothing at every point. Buffer out to 150 metres and both return ten polygons each, with base flood elevations around 20 to 21 feet. Two independently published products carry the same hole, centred here.
That inverts a rule this series has relied on. The county's flood service is usually clipped to the hazard area, so an empty answer normally means low risk. Here that is not true: within eight hundred metres the same layer returns well over a hundred explicit low risk polygons. Empty here means empty. The parcel's mapped flood zone could not be established and we will not infer one.
What the permitting authority did is the one administrative signal available. The city left the flood zone field blank on the master permit, required no finished floor certificate at either stage, and recorded no minimum finished floor elevation. That is a determination by a local official, not a federal mapping.
The physical reason is probably the ground itself. Lidar across seven points runs about 23 to 26.7 feet, a spread of under four feet, and that is the highest ground measured anywhere in this series. Compare about 16.3 feet downtown and about 4.2 feet on the bayfront peninsula. Two different lidar collections cover this one parcel, so do not read the fall across the site as ground truth without allowing for the seam.
Evacuation is a category this series has not seen. Level D, a category four zone, modelled for a 26 foot surge, at all seven points including the parcel corners. Every other Sarasota address in this series sits in level A or C. Level D is the last ordered out, and it is not the coastal high hazard area, which in Florida is statutorily the category one surge zone. No velocity zone or wave action line exists within eight hundred metres.
The postcode claim record here tells a different story from the coastal pages, and the difference is the point. This postcode has recorded about 700 federal flood insurance claims and roughly $24.6 million paid across the life of the programme, with 309 claims and about $21.8 million in 2024 alone, which is 88.7 per cent of every dollar ever paid. That is a neighbourhood figure, not a parcel figure.
Inside that year the damaging storm is not one of the two everybody names. August 2024 produced 52 claims and about $3.21 million here, while the October storm that actually made landfall in this county produced 62 claims and about $818,000, so August out paid October by nearly four to one. September still dominates at 193 claims and about $17.8 million. August 2024 was a rainfall event from a storm that came ashore hundreds of miles north. This is a rainfall and creek postcode, not a surge postcode.
On schools the site returns a set that appears nowhere else in this series. A wholly different elementary, middle and high school combination from the downtown addresses, with all three layers returning exactly one boundary at the parcel centroid. Confirm with the district before you contract, because boundaries move.
One last thing worth knowing about this site. Thirty-three of the homes here are held attainable for thirty years from the certificate of occupancy under a recorded covenant with the city, at two income thresholds, with no two of them adjacent, and the covenant provides club memberships to the residents of those homes. That is not in any brochure and it is a governance question worth asking about.
What you need to know
Buying pre-construction with someone on your side
Representation costs you nothing and the timing is the catch: in a pre-construction sales gallery your agent generally has to be with you or named at your very first contact for the registration to stand. Sort it out before you call.
The case for it here is specific. Not one of the 161 unit folios has been conveyed to anyone in the three and a half years since the declaration recorded. No third party owners, no homestead flags, no recorded sales, and so no resale comparable at this address at all. Everything you learn will come from the developer or from the record, and someone should be reading the record on your side of the table.
Know what the statute gives you. On a developer sale you are entitled to the prospectus and the condominium documents, and you have a rescission right measured in days from the later of signing or delivery of those documents. That window is the most valuable thing you have and it closes quickly. Have someone read the declaration, all five recorded amendments, the budget and the reserve schedule inside that window, together with the master covenants that already bind this land.
There is one more thing worth confirming here that would not occur to most buyers. Until the state notifies a developer that its filing is proper, a developer may not close on a contract and a purchaser's contract is voidable before closing. The state's record shows this filing approved but carrying a secondary status flag, and what that flag means for closing could not be established. Ask which entity signs your contract, because three affiliated companies own parts of this site.
On deposits the protection is narrower than most buyers assume. The first ten per cent is held in escrow. Above ten per cent the statute permits the developer to use the money for construction once work has begun, which it plainly has here. We did not search Florida regulatory enforcement records or civil dockets for any builder, developer, contractor or land-holding entity, so read the absence of any such note as unchecked, not clean. Get an independent inspection of your unit before closing, use the one year window afterwards, and read the limited warranty before you sign.
Subdiview is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Sarasota Springs, any homebuilder, any developer of Bath and Racquet, the City of Sarasota, or Sarasota County. The developer is identified here because it is the owner of record in the county property records and the developer of record in the state condominium filing, which is a statement of fact and not a representation of any relationship. Community names and marks are the property of their respective owners and are used for identification only. Subdiview is operated by a real estate broker licensed in Illinois. We are not your agent, we do not represent you, and we perform no real estate brokerage services in this state. No one at Subdiview is licensed in this state. If you join an interest list, your information is referred to a real estate professional licensed in the state where the property is located, who will contact you directly. We are compensated by that professional's brokerage, not by you. Pricing, plans, inventory, district, tax, flood and approval details on this page carry the dates shown, are as published, proposed or reported rather than committed, and are subject to change without notice.
Questions and answers
Bath and Racquet FAQ
Is Bath and Racquet a conversion of the old club?
No, and this is the most important thing on the page, because a lot of people assume it is. The old club building was two storeys, it was demolished under a city permit, and the work was recorded complete in autumn 2023. The master permit calls the work new commercial construction, and the assessment roll carries no improvement value and no year built anywhere on the site. Three independent records agree. That matters legally: Florida's conversion rules, which would have owed you a tenant notice, a right of first refusal, an engineer's report on remaining useful life, and a converter's reserve or warranty election, do not apply here at all. You get the new construction warranty regime instead, which runs roughly three years on the structure and one year on mechanical work.
How many units are there?
Three official records give three different answers and we are not going to pick one for you. The state's recorded condominium roll says 108, which is the count at the original declaration and has never been updated despite five recorded amendments since. The county assessment roll carries 161 unit folios today. The city's master construction permit says 256 across the whole mixed use project. The gap between 161 and 256 is 95 units that are not condominium folios, and no second condominium filing exists at this address, so what those 95 are could not be established. Nothing legally turns on the disagreement, because every one of those figures clears every statutory threshold, but ask for the number in writing.
Is it finished?
Not yet, and the timeline is the thing to watch. The master permit was applied for in autumn 2022, took about ten months in review, and the first inspection was not requested for another seventeen and a half months after it issued. The log now runs about 470 rows, with plumbing and mechanical finals passing in September 2026 and an electrical final still outstanding. No certificate of occupancy has issued. That is about forty-eight and a half months from application, against local benchmarks running 35.5 to 59.6 months from application all the way to occupancy. The permit expires in spring 2027, and we are not going to publish a completion date.
What is the flood situation?
Unusual, and the honest answer is that nobody has mapped it. Seven points across the site were queried against the federal flood hazard layer and against the county's own layer, and both returned nothing at every point. That is not the usual silent all clear: buffer out to 150 metres and both layers return ten polygons each, with base flood elevations around 20 to 21 feet. Two independently published products carry the same hole here. So the parcel's mapped flood zone could not be established and we will not infer one. What we can say is that the building official left the flood zone field blank, required no finished floor certificate and recorded no minimum finished floor elevation. Ground runs about 23 to 26.7 feet, the highest we have measured anywhere in this series.
What are the taxes and what is the evacuation risk?
Taxes are the plain city code at 14.8815 mills. The county's own table calls that twelve authorities but there are thirteen separate levy lines on it, so we quote thirteen. There is no community development district and no downtown surcharge here, and per parcel non ad valorem assessments could not be retrieved, so no figure is asserted. On evacuation the answer is a first for this series: level D, a category four zone modelled for a 26 foot surge, at all seven points. Level D is the last ordered out and it is not the coastal high hazard area, which in Florida is statutorily the category one zone.
What should I be most careful about here?
Three things. First, the developer and the general contractor publish the same street address and the same suite number, so this is an owner affiliated builder rather than an arm's length one, which is worth knowing before you rely on the contractor as a second set of eyes. Second, not one of the 161 unit folios has been conveyed to anyone in the three and a half years since the declaration recorded, so there is no resale evidence of any kind at this address yet. Third, a search trap: the city's own development file names the project with an ampersand and the clerk's index spells it out, so the ampersand form returns zero results while the spelled out form returns five recorded declarations.
Be first in line
Get on the Bath and Racquet interest list
We will connect you with a real estate professional licensed in Florida who represents you rather than the seller, who can register you before your first contact with the sales gallery, and who will get you the answers this page could not: the confirmed unit count, which entity signs your contract, the expected certificate of occupancy date, the prospectus and recorded amendments, the budget and reserve schedule, the cost sharing terms with the commercial and club parcels, and pricing as soon as it exists.
It costs nothing, creates no brokerage relationship by itself, and does not obligate you to anything.