Rollins presses pause on request for faculty apartments
The controversial project, which would have provided accessible housing to faculty and staff near the liberal arts campus, drew criticism from neighbors
Feb. 28, 2024
By Beth Kassab
Rollins College withdrew its request to build faculty apartments a few blocks from Park Avenue after an outcry from neighbors and concerns from commissioners that the building wouldn’t fit in the neighborhood.
“College leadership has talked with each commissioner over the past several weeks, seeking input and feedback on accommodations while striving to preserve the integrity of the project,” Rollins administrators said in a statement. “This project remains a strategic priority of the college. We will take time to explore our options and come back with a project that benefits the College and the City’s Central Business District.”
President Grant Cornwell has said the college needs to be able to offer attainable housing to recruit younger faculty because housing prices in Winter Park are often $1 million or more.
Workforce housing and affordable housing are often thrown around as priorities of the City Commission, particularly in the context of expanding the city’s Community Redevelopment Agency.
But the Rollins project quickly became a target for neighbors to shoot down, asserting the building would decrease their property values.
In January, Rollins attempted to appease some of those concerns by lowering the number of proposed units from 48 to 39 and reducing the size and length of the building along Welbourne Avenue.
The proposal was for a three-story 72,933-square-foot building with 104 parking spaces, which meets code requirements, according to a memorandum from city staff.
A number of residents of the Douglas Grand condominium building said they feared their own units will drop in value because of Rollins’ planned framed construction with what they called too few architectural details to emulate the Spanish-Mediterranean style the main campus is known for.
“Please consider whether or not you would purchase a $1 million residence across the street from what would be at best an average maintained, subsidized apartment complex,” read one email to commissioners from a resident.
“It is the appearance of the rental facility that makes it even more distasteful,” read another.
“Not to sound snotty, but this is the type of apartment better suited for cities like Fern Park or Casselberry,” a resident wrote.
In it’s statement, Rollins did not say when it expected to try again to seek approval for the project, but signaled it would do so eventually.
“We remain committed to ongoing dialogue with commissioners as we continue to refine the proposal,” the statement said. “We are grateful to the many Winter Park residents and community members who have shown support for this initiative aimed at addressing the college’s workforce housing needs.”
WinterParkVoiceEditor@gmail.com
“Not to sound snotty, but….”
That sounds pretty snotty.
Douglas Grand is 4 stories and a large building I find quite unattractive. If you built a two story house next to a one story ranch you have little to complain about. The revised plan met all requirements. No reason not to approve. It is very much in line with Douglas Grand and would fit perfectly and you would have great neighbors with Rollins professors.
I am stumped as to why people would oppose this. 28 existing apartments on 3/4s of an acre of land are to be replaced by 11 more on 1.8 acres of land. Hello? The density argument is a joke. NIMBY’s are in control of WP.
The Voice keeps an exaggerated focus on the “neighbor’s” opposition to this project. Actually, citizen blow back was widespread and came from residents throughout the city. Why? Because city taxpayers were being asked to subsidize the Rollins housing project despite Rollins being a very wealthy non-profit. At the same time Rollins was planning to remove the project from the tax rolls, Rollins was also asking to be excused from following CRA and city comp plan provisions. And, the initial version of the project would have brought back high density multi-family apartments (R-4) at 25 units per acre. No upper income limit was going to be put in place for prospective tenants, so the project met no accepted definition of workforce or affordable housing under state or city law. It would have been nothing more than a geographically desirable dormitory for Rollins staff and employees. Great deal for Rollins- but a really crummy deal for residents.
Truth be told, look at the most recent construction on the Rollins campus itself. It’s out of scale, cheaply constructed, lacks detail, finesse, and charm. It’s like they looked at what happened to Oviedo and decided to nuke their own campus. Don’t trust Rollins to do the “right” thing! They are CHEAP! Look at the Sutton Place South condo/dorm. The fading paint and moldy looking facade with no landscaping. It looks like **the projects.**.
Gotta say, comments from Beth and Pierre are difficult to dispute. Glad to hear that Rollins has paused their quest to gain approval.
Good, the West Side of Winter Park has been gentrified and changed enough and we don’t like it.