Six88

Start with the ownership, because the state and the county do not agree. The developer of record on the state condominium filing does not own this site and did not finish this building. A recorded deed in the spring of 2024 moved the property to a different company, and that company is the owner on the tax roll, the owner on the city permit and the declarant on the recorded declaration. Three primary records agree with each other and disagree with the register.

Two unrelated records then line up in a way that is hard to ignore. The city's inspection log on this building has a gap of about 490 days, from the middle of 2023 to late in 2024, with nothing recorded at all. That gap matches the ownership handover week for week. Neither record explains the other; they simply agree, and a buyer is entitled to ask what happened in those sixteen months.

The site itself has a history nobody would guess from looking at the street. This is the only new building on this peninsula that did not replace an existing condominium. Three two storey houses came down here in 2004 and the lot sat vacant for twenty-two years. There is no termination of a condominium anywhere in the record because there was never a condominium here to terminate. Every other recent tower on this street bought out between twenty-seven and fifty households to exist.

The entitlement has a third party in it that appears nowhere else. The governing site plan is filed under a different street number from the building, is reachable only by searching the parcel rather than the address, and names a Massachusetts company as owner or contract purchaser in 2021, an entity distinct from both the state developer and the current recorded owner. And a non-residential variance was granted and recorded in late 2025, mid construction, thirty-two months after the permit issued. What it authorised is not in the record we could reach.

The city's own permit file does not describe one building consistently. Two permits are live on this parcel at once and they disagree on the two numbers a buyer would care about. The original master permit describes nine storeys and about 39,275 square feet. A later permit, still open, describes eight storeys and about 53,962 square feet. Both are official city records and neither supersedes the other on its face. A difference of nearly fifteen thousand square feet is not a clerical rounding, and in a ten unit building it is the difference between the floor plan you were shown and something else. Worth noting alongside it: the administrative review track on this project ran about nine and a half months and was signed off two days before the permit issued, which is a sequence that reads as a deadline being met rather than a question being answered.

Two record warnings worth carrying into any Florida search you run yourself. The state gives the developer a mailing address that does not exist, missing a single directional from the street name; it is the fifth impossible state address we have found in this county. And the clerk indexes the parties here across six different renderings, including two outright typos in the index itself. A single search on the obvious spelling misses instruments that exist.

One thing not to misread, which cost us a false start. The state's recorded roll does not list this condominium, and that is a publication lag rather than a status. The newest recording date anywhere in that statewide file is three weeks older than this declaration. The clerk has it. The state will catch up.

Take these four to the sales office: which entity will sign your contract and give your warranty, since three records name different companies; what the late-2025 variance authorised; the full condominium documents and budget, which at this size nobody is required to publish; and the date the full certificate of occupancy is expected.

Representation costs you nothing and the timing is the catch: in a developer 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 the disclosure gap, and it is not a small one. At ten units you are owed no prospectus, and this association will never be required to publish its budget, its contracts, its insurance or its inspection reports. Everything a larger building must give you, here you must ask for. Ask before your rescission period closes, because after that the leverage is gone.

Know what the statute still gives you. On a developer sale you are entitled to the condominium documents, and you have a rescission right measured in days from the later of signing or delivery of those documents. Here the declaration and the plat are already recorded, so there is no reason to wait for them. Have someone read the declaration, the budget and the reserve schedule inside that window.

Two clocks started when the declaration recorded, and one has not. The structural integrity reserve study runs on a ten year cycle from the creation of the condominium, which happened this autumn, and turnover has a hard backstop seven years from recording. The milestone inspection clock has NOT started, because it runs from the full certificate of occupancy and only a temporary one exists. On current law that first inspection falls thirty years after the full certificate issues. The twenty-five year trigger requires a local determination that no jurisdiction in this county has made, and the familiar three mile test was repealed in 2022.

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 the specific unit before closing even though the building is substantially finished, use the one year window afterwards, and read the limited warranty before you sign.

Subdiview is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Six88, any homebuilder, any developer of Six88, 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 declarant on the recorded declaration, 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.