BRADENTON BEACH – Commissioners unanimously approved the Drift-In’s major development application on April 8 subject to conditions recommended by attorney Robert Lincoln and previously supported by the city’s Planning and Zoning Board.
The conditions include filing a “unity of title” document that joins the 120-122 Bridge St. properties into a single property and completing a final easement agreement and legal description to be brought back to the commission for final approval and execution.
Lincoln said the Drift-In will continue to operate under its temporary use permit, issued on March 20, pending final resolution of those conditions.
“We are very excited to have this process completed and proud we were able to do it in the way the city and the government felt like it needed to be done,” Drift-In owner Derek Williams said after the meeting. “We were never intending to cut a corner and in the end it all worked out exactly as we laid it out on Oct. 14.”
The bar’s tiki hut project had been approved by former City Building Official Darin Cushing but was placed on hold when City Attorney Ricinda Perry said at a Jan. 16 city commission meeting that the permit approval should not have been issued based on factors that included the city-owned easements on the property as well as the size of the new tiki structure. She said the project should be classified as a major development and must undergo the hearing process.
The Bradenton Beach Planning and Zoning Board recommended city commission approval the major development application on April 2.
The April 8 hearing was a quasi-judicial hearing on the major development application. The hearing on the modification of the easement was not quasi-judicial, but the discussions were to be held at the same time, with separate commission votes on each, Lincoln said.
Commissioners were canvassed to disclose whether or not they had any communications outside of the meetings about the major development applications and they each confirmed they had not.
Lincoln outlined the rules at the beginning of the meeting: “A quasi-judicial decision has to be based on competent substantial evidence and at the end of the hearing can either vote to approve the applications with conditions or deny it. If you deny, you have to identify the specific reasons for the denial,” he said. “The easement is a separate vote. The proposal is to change two existing easements that are in favor of the city and replace them with a single easement.”
City Planner Luis Serna said based on his review he recommended approval of the major development pending three conditions recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board.
Serna said he reviewed the criteria for a major development plan as it relates to Sect. 410.7 of the city’s Land Development Code.
“Based on our review of the major development, our finding is that the development does comply with the criteria, and we are recommending approval of this,” Serna said. “The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of this unanimously subject to three conditions. One in reference to the sidewalk easement, two, is the requirement for unity of title and three, that future development will be consistent with the proposed master plan. So we’re recommending in favor of the major development subject to these three conditions.”
Lincoln explained the unity of title issue.
“The building lot and the tiki share parking and other facilities; likewise, the electrical and plumbing and other services for the functions of the tiki lot are being provided by connections into the building lot,” Lincoln said. “They’re interdependent. A unity of title that would join the two properties together is appropriate, because they’re going to act as one property. You can’t sell them apart and still have them operate in the future.”
Commissioner Scott Bear expressed concern that the tiki could be considered an accessory use to the primary building use.
“Our opinion is it’s not an accessory use, it’s part of the primary use and the unity of title will combine the properties,” Serna said. “It’s a continuation of the use, we’re calling it an expansion of the primary use.”
Mayor John Chappie expressed concern about the width of the proposed sidewalk easements.
“It looks like a good project. When we talk about the easement I have some questions about what’s being proposed,” Chappie said. “I have a little concern with the width of the easement on the west end. Historically there’s been room for a bench and bicycle racks and landscaping. In looking at the proposal I’d like to see a little more. One of the other concerns I have is the easement along the front is pretty narrow and I’m concerned about foot traffic on the sidewalk. It’s 4 feet wide; I think it’s important we keep that kind of a clear area. I just want to make sure people are safe.”
“The city has a sidewalk easement or will with the easement swap. Based on the drawings, the easement right now doesn’t run on the sidewalk in front of the building,” Lincoln said. “It will after the swap. In a congested area, there’s not a lot of room to put signage in the easement area so it might be that as a condition you could suggest signs indicated no loitering or obstructing the sidewalk mounted on the building.”
“The building has never looked better,” Chappie added. “I drove by (the April 3 grand opening based on the temporary use permit) and I smiled and I was thinking, ‘We’re back.’ ”
“April 3 was a special day for the Drift-In,” Williams said following the April 8 meeting. “That was an amazing day. We’ve gotten such great response from everybody that’s come in.”
Applicant’s presentation
Attorney Scott Rudacille, representing Drift-In (1715 Ventures LLC owners Derek and Helena Williams), spoke to the commission. Saying he was satisfied with Serna’s assessment of the major development application, he focused on the easement discussion.
“It’s been talked about already. The existing easement covers about 17 feet into the parking lot and where the existing tiki is as well as a little piece on the corner. It doesn’t cover the frontage on Bridge Street and it doesn’t cover the sidewalk that wraps around Church (Street),” Rudacille said. “So what we had proposed, and recognizing that the Bridge Street commercial district is intended for zero lot line development – if you look at the businesses up and down Bridge that’s what it is – what we had proposed was to replace the two existing easements with a continuous easement which would cover all of the city sidewalk as well as the landscaping that exists there. On the west side, the easement that’s proposed there is wider than the sidewalk area, because in that area, the sidewalk goes up into the property.”
He said an existing area for landscaping between the sidewalk and the road may be an appropriate area for a bench or bike rack.
“We’d like to clear up the easement issue,” Rudacille said. “We’re respectfully requesting your approval of these two items.”
Where the sidewalk abuts the building, the easement would go up to the face of the building and on the west side and on Church Street, the easement would track the sidewalk, he said.
“Part of the reason there’s a condition of site planning is to ensure that the easement gets finalized,” Lincoln said. “Today we’re approving the concept of how we’re going to do this, and the legal description will be drafted. We’ll bring back the formal easement as a consent item.”
Both public hearings were then closed, and two separate motions were made for the major development plan with conditions, and modifications of the easements.
A motion to approve the major development plan subject to three conditions was unanimously approved.
A second motion to direct staff and the applicant to work together to develop a final easement agreement and legal description to bring back to the commission for final approval and execution was also unanimously approved.
Related coverage:
Drift-In reopening brings joy to many
