Over the years, my appreciation of mangroves has grown as I more fully understand their critical importance.
If you’re an angler, the significance of mangroves is evident. Intertwined with the twisted roots, there’s a web of life that’s inextricably bound to the snook, redfish, trout, flounder, grouper and a plethora of other gamefish that you seek.
Even if you don’t fish or spend time on the water, it’s important to realize that mangroves are a critical source of the seafood you enjoy. They are also essential habitat to the seabirds you might enjoy as a bird watcher and they provide sustenance for manatees, dolphins, sea turtles and innumerable other species.
Mangroves also protect and sustain a vibrant economy in ways that might not be apparent. The general public is just beginning to appreciate how mangroves provide protection against powerful hurricanes and rising sea level. With all that mangroves provide us and our quality of life, it would seem they would be revered and protected at all costs. Unfortunately, just the opposite seems to be the case.
In a previous column, I wrote about numerous large, mature mangroves that had been cut, were denuded of leaves, and appeared dead along the shoreline of Sarasota Bay where Medallion Homes was and still is developing Aqua by the Bay. This large-scale mixed-use project spans roughly 523 acres, with proposals for thousands of residential units and tens of thousands of square feet of commercial space, situated along more than two miles of Sarasota Bay shoreline.
In December 2022, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection issued a proposed consent order that fined Long Bar Pointe LLLP and Medallion Homes developer Carlos Beruff’s companies $8,500 for illegal mangrove trimming at the development. Was that simply the cost of doing business?
Inspections conducted on June 17 and Aug. 25 of that year found those mangroves had more than 25% of their foliage cut, trimmings were not properly disposed of and photo documentation of the work was not provided as required.
Now Beruff is requesting a permit that environmentalists, fishermen and residents of nearby Cortez fear may one day doom this old-growth mangrove forest.
This is the public notice posted by the Army Corps of Engineers. – Submitted
Perhaps no one appreciates the potential harm such a project might create more than Cortez resident Paul Dryfoos.
Paul recently sent me an email that said, “As a resident of Cortez, vice president of the Cortez Village Historical Society and lifetime member of FISH (Florida Institute for Saltwater Heritage), I am extremely concerned about Long Bar Pointe LLC’s application for approval to infill three acres of wetlands and build a huge 10-foot seawall directly adjacent to one of our last remaining old-growth mangrove forests in the Sarasota Bay watershed.
This project would compromise the immediate ecosystem that enables Cortez to survive as a working fishing community. Cortez villagers and friends have invested significant time, energy and resources over the past 40+ years securing, restoring and enhancing the Cortez FISH Preserve – 98 acres of environmentally sensitive land encompassing an old-growth mangrove forest. Now we see an adjacent old-growth mangrove forest threatened by development.
“The Corps should deny the permit pending assurances that the project can be modified to avoid harming our precious wetlands. Clearly, the proposed buildings could be moved several dozens or hundreds of feet inland on the more than 400-acre site. Therefore, the developer bears the burden under federal law of proving that a less damaging alternative is not available. The law requires a less damaging alternative if one is available.
“Cortez’s identity and economy are deeply tied to the health of the Sarasota Bay estuary, and the mangroves are the critical barrier protecting that system. The proposed seawall and infill threaten to destroy acres of these vital wetlands, which serve as nurseries for fish and shellfish, buffer our shoreline from storms, and define the unique character of our community. Losing them means losing the very resource base that supports Cortez’s culture and livelihood,” Dryfoos wrote.
The Suncoast Waterkeeper organization, of which I am a member, also tells an important side of the story in its July newsletter, in an article titled “Last Remaining Old-Growth Wetlands Threatened by Permit Application.” The article can be found at suncoastwaterkeeper.org/july_2026_newsletter.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is accepting public comments on this permit application (SAJ-2015-015030) through Aug. 7. I can’t overstate the importance of commenting on this proposal to readers who value our marine habitat.
Public comment can be submitted by visiting this website and scrolling down, or to the next page, to the Long Bar Pointe LLLP project item, as seen below.
MANATEE COUNTY – On July 17, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jacksonville District issued a public notice regarding an application to construct a gabion wall along the Long Bar Point/Sarasota Bay shoreline as part of the Aqua/ Sea Spray development formerly known as Long Bar Pointe and Aqua by the Bay.
Aqua is located along El Conquistador Parkway in unincorporated Manatee County. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The federal agency seeks public comment on the proposed gabion wall and Friday, Aug. 7, is the submission deadline. Public comment can be submitted at the Army Corps website (scroll down to Long Bar Pointe item).
The partially completed, partially occupied, multi-phase development is located along the El Conquistador Parkway in unincorporated Manatee County.
According to Wikipedia, “A gabion wall is a retaining or erosion-control structure made of wire mesh cages (baskets) filled with rock, stone, or other rubble.”
This diagram illustrates the elevations of the proposed gabion wall.
The Army Corps public notice lists Carlos Beruff and Peter Logan as the applicants. The public notice lists Long Bar Pointe LLLP and CARGOR Partners VIII as the applicant companies.
According to the public notice, “The applicant is requesting a DA (Department of the Army) permit to develop a 169.44-acre site in Manatee County, Florida. To facilitate this development, the applicant seeks authorization to discharge fill material [into] 3.07 acres of wetland systems, which includes 2.76 acres of freshwater wetlands and 0.31 acres of man-made agricultural conveyances.”
Regarding the development as a whole, the public notice says, “The design consists of approximately 2,468 residential units, including a mix of multistory townhomes and high-rise condominiums, along with 200,000 square feet of commercial space. Supporting infrastructure includes internal roadways, parking facilities, a dog park and a stormwater management system (wet detention ponds).”
Many Aqua condos and townhomes are now occupied. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Regarding the proposed gabion wall, the public notice says, “To minimize environmental encroachment and protect sensitive historic properties, the project would construct an 8- to 10-foot-high gabion wall along the waterward boundary of the development. This permanent vertical barrier reduces the required fill grading slope by 25 to 50 feet and, combined with a 50-foot permanent buffer zone.”
CORTEZ CONCERNS
On July 26, Cortez Village Historical Society (CVHS) Vice President Paul Dryfoos sent an email to Suncoast Waterkeeper representatives that said, “We in Cortez are concerned about the Long Bar Pointe application to the Army Corps of Engineers for a development that would entail filling over three acres of wetlands and constructing an 8- to 10-foot-high gabion wall along the waterway boundary. We note that Suncoast Waterkeeper has advocated against this type of encroachment in the past.”
More Aqua homes will be built along the Sarasota Bay shoreline. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“From the Cortez perspective, this type of project directly impacts the immediate ecosystem that enables Cortez to survive as a working fishing community. Cortez villagers and friends have invested so much time, energy and resources securing the FISH (Florida Institute for Saltwater Heritage) Preserve. Now we see an adjacent critical wetland threatened by development and the permissive regulatory climate in Florida and Manatee County,” Dryfoos wrote.
“Public comment ends Aug. 7. We want to quickly mobilize our Cortez community and others, and we ask for your help in developing brief comments that can seed our community’s response. Our goal would be to mobilize several hundred comments through the CVHS and FISH member lists and Cortez-oriented Facebook groups to address the impacts of the proposed activity, as well as requesting a public hearing,” Dryfoos’ email said.
MCCLASH CONCERNS
On July 23, Bradenton Times Publisher Joe McClash, a former Manatee County commissioner, sent a 12-page document to Army Corps Jacksonville District Senior Project Manager Edgar Garcia.
In his Page 1 executive summary, McClash wrote, “These comments oppose issuance of the requested individual permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. The present record does not establish compliance with the mandatory U.S. EPA guidelines, does not support the Corps’ preliminary conclusions concerning indirect effects, historic properties, endangered species, mitigation or the public interest and contains material inconsistencies that prevent a reasoned decision.”
This wetland impacts map was previoujsly provided to the Southwest Florida Water Management District with Aqua’s major modification permit application. – Submitted
“The proposed non-water-dependent residential and commercial development – approximately 2,468 dwelling units and 200,000 square feet of commercial space – would place fill in 3.07 acres of aquatic resources and would construct an 8- to 10-foot-high gabion wall immediately landward of high-functioning tidal mangrove wetlands and National Register-eligible archaeological sites,” McClash wrote.
“The development’s purpose can plainly be achieved on uplands and through less damaging configurations. The applicant therefore bears the burden of rebutting the federal presumption that practicable, less environmentally damaging alternatives are available,” the summary says.
“The Corps should deny the permit unless and until the applicant supplies a complete alternatives analysis, reconciles contradictory descriptions of the wetland buffer and stormwater system, evaluates direct, indirect, secondary and cumulative effects on the entire connected wetland-estuarine system, provides a defensible mitigation plan using the federal watershed approach, completes required ESA, EFH and NHPA consultation and demonstrates that the project is not contrary to the public interest. The Corps should prepare an environmental impact statement or, at minimum, a full environmental assessment supported by independent technical review, and should conduct a public hearing,” McClash said in his executive summary.
MANATEE COUNTY – The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) is levying an $8,500 penalty for the improper mangrove trimming and debris re- moval activities that occurred along the Aqua development shoreline in 2022.
Located between Sarasota Bay and the El Conquistador Parkway in unincorporated Manatee County, the Aqua property (formerly known as Long Bar Pointe) being developed by Medallion Home includes hundreds of single-family and multi-family residential units currently being built during the initial construction phase.
On Dec. 22, FDEP Southwest District Director Kelley Boatwright sent an electronic letter and proposed consent order to Long Bar Pointe LLLP and Medallion Home representative Rob Bosarge. The letter was also sent to Medallion Home President and CEO Carlos Beruff, Medallion Home Manager of Land Development Chris Chavez, FDEP Environmental Specialist Derrick Hudson, FDEP Secretary Shawn Hamilton and Gov. Ron DeSantis.
The letter requested that Long Bar Pointe review, sign and return the proposed consent order by Jan. 3 if in agreement with the proposed terms, or to contact FDEP immediately if not in agreement.
The consent order proposes a settlement between FDEP and Long Bar Pointe LLP. The order notes FDEP personnel inspected the Aqua mangroves on June 17 and Aug. 25 and improper trimming and removal activities were conducted in violation of the mitigation bank permit and general mangrove permit Long Bar Pointe was previously issued in accordance with Florida’s Mangrove Trimming and Preservation Act. Coastline Tree Service performed the mangrove trimming and debris removal activities in question.
According to the consent order, FDEP found the following violations occurred:
• Respondent did not properly remove and dispose of all mangrove trimmings over 3 feet long or over 3 inches in diameter.
• Respondent did not evenly distribute the remaining trimmings.
• Respondent reduced a portion of mangrove foliage more than the authorized amount of 25% annually on the waterward extent of the mangrove fringe.
• Respondent did not provide adequate pre- and post-photo documentation of the trimming event.
Taken in August, this photo shows the diameters of some of the mangrove trees and branches cut. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
The consent order seeks an $8,500 penalty settlement that includes $1,000 for costs and expenses incurred during the investigation and the preparation of the consent order, $3,000 for reducing the mangrove heights by more than 25%, $3,000 for debris removal violations and $1,500 for improper documentation of the trimming activities. The check payment is to include a notation referencing the Water Quality Assurance Trust Fund.
The consent order includes an additional daily fine of $1,000 for each day Long Bar Pointe fails to comply with the consent order requirements. If FDEP is forced to file a lawsuit to recover the stipulated penalties, the agency can seek civil penalties greater than the $8,500 stipulated in the order.
Aqua response
On behalf of Long Bar Pointe, Chavez sent Hudson a Jan. 4 email that said, “Carlos Beruff is currently in Asia and is 12 hours ahead. We have emailed him so that he is aware of
the consent order. We cannot sign, or communicate that we are not in agreement, until he reviews.”
Chavez informed Hudson that Bosarge no longer works for Medallion Home and all future correspondence should be sent to Andy Kern.
When contacted on Jan. 6, FDEP Public Information Specialist Brian Humphreys said, “DEP has been in contact with staff at Aqua by the Bay. It is our understanding they are reviewing our consent order and we anticipate having their response soon.”
Suncoast Waterkeeper response
FDEP’s investigations were initially prompted by citizen complaints the agency received in early 2022 – with additional correspondence and photographs later received from the Suncoast Waterkeeper organization.
In August, the Suncoast Waterkeeper board sent a letter to FDEP officials that was critical of the agency’s initial inspection efforts and the lack of penalties imposed. That letter also expressed concerns about the significant amount of mangrove debris that had not been properly removed.
Taken in August, the photo reveals some of the trimming debris left behind. – Rusty Chinnis | Sun
Regarding the consent order, Suncoast Waterkeeper board member Rusty Chinnis said, “This would not have happened if we had not pounded it. They cut more of the mangroves than they were allowed to cut. FDEP initially reviewed the mangrove cuttings, said everything was fine and gave them a pass.”
Despite past criticisms, Chinnis, The Sun’s outdoors columnist, praised the FDEP staff members’ recent efforts.
“I think the people at FDEP care and they do a good job. They’re underfunded and I don’t think the powers that be are giving them the authority to do what they need to do. When Rick Scott was governor, he basically eviscerated it and allowed the developers to police themselves. We see where that got us,” Chinnis said.
“If done properly, mangrove trimming can create views while still protecting the mangroves, but that’s not being done. The enforcement is weak and $8,500 is the cost of doing business,” he said.
The FDEP graphic highlights some of Florida’s mangrove trimming regulations. – FDEP | Submitted
Regarding mangrove trimming in general, Chinnis said, “We have documented to FDEP the fact that people have been cited for mangrove violations and were not given any penalties; and a couple years later, the same people are caught again because there were no repercussions.”
To local fishers, the importance of mangroves is evident. Intertwined with the twisted roots, there’s a web of life that’s inextricably bound to the snook, redfish, trout, flounder, grouper and a plethora of other gamefish that they seek. What can be less apparent to those that make a living elsewhere is the importance of mangroves as a critical source of food and protection for fish and people.
These ancient coastal forests provide an abundance of food for manatees, dolphins and sea turtles as well as sustenance and nesting areas for critically endangered seabirds. All these links in the chain of life provide the ineffable sense of beauty and wonder that continue to attract people to this region. They also protect and sustain a vibrant economy in ways that might not be as apparent.
What’s less well understood, and just beginning to be appreciated, is the protection mangroves provide against powerful hurricanes and rising waters that longtime residents have seen firsthand. With all that mangroves provide for us and our quality of life, it would seem they would be revered and protected at all costs.
Unfortunately, just the opposite seems to be the case.
When local fishing guides began to question me about what they considered extensive mangrove trimming along the Sarasota Bay shoreline, I went to investigate. What
I observed shocked and angered me. That was April 4 of this year, and I flew a drone and walked the shoreline to document what I witnessed. There were numerous large mature mangroves that had been cut, were denuded of leaves and appeared dead. There also was a large amount of cut debris in the water, including branches that were of greater diameter and longer than allowed under Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) guidelines.
When I reached out to FDEP in April to file a complaint, I was informed that Karen Willey, a local environmental advocate and business owner, had filed a protest two months earlier in February 2022. When I questioned Willey, she said she had been reading the Washington Post and had seen an ad for Aqua by the Bay that featured an image looking west with an unobstructed view of Sarasota Bay she had never seen before.
When I called FDEP to inquire why no actions had been taken, the response I received indicated that they had sent a letter to the permit holder about the complaint and had not heard back from them. They also stated that they couldn’t get on the property to inspect without permission from the property owner. After raising the issue with Florida state Rep. Will Robinson, Sen. Jim Boyd and the Manatee County Commission, an inspection was done which claimed that the conditions of the permit had been met.
Astonished, I sent an email challenging the FDEP inspection report with images showing my concerns.
At her request, I sent GPS-tagged images to Hannah Westervelt, FDEP Compliance Assurance Manager, and received a reply indicating that inspectors were being sent back to the site to investigate.
Subsequently, Westervelt contacted me to say that two inspections were conducted that confirmed our concerns. The permit holder was given until Aug. 12 to reply to the letter and we are currently waiting for the response.
It’s unfortunate and ill-advised that state regulators are not performing their duty in a timely manner to protect the citizens and businesses of Florida, present and future. But it wouldn’t be fair to lay the blame only with the FDEP. People I have spoken to who deal with state regulators on a regular basis fault prior Gov. Rick Scott with eviscerating the FDEP and spawning a mass exodus of the brightest and most committed regulators.
The people I spoke to at the agency, including Westervelt, were responsive to my questions and concerns and ultimately addressed the issue. My guess is the agency is struggling with a limited budget and staff. That’s where we the voters come in. It’s incumbent on the citizens of Florida and Manatee County to elect officials with a proven record of protecting our most important and vulnerable resources.
How this is resolved is still to be seen, but rest assured that groups like Suncoast Waterkeeper will make sure it doesn’t become just a cost of doing business for the developer. I don’t have a crystal ball but I’m guessing that future developers, builders and your children and grandchildren will judge us for the decisions we make and actions we take.
MANATEE COUNTY – The mangroves on the Aqua property along Sarasota Bay were recently trimmed in compliance with state-issued permits, but the trimming notification process was not fully compliant, according to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP).
“As you will read in this report, the mangroves appeared to be healthy and trimmed within the permit limits – i.e. mangrove height is greater than 12 feet, trimming did not result in more than 25% of the foliage being removed and trimming did not induce tree mortality,” FDEP Press Secretary Alexandra Kuchta said in a May 17 email to The Sun regarding the department’s investigation of mangrove trimming at the property. “However, no pre- or post-photographs or pre- or post-trimming notifications were provided to the department, which are required by the mangrove trimming plan. DEP has requested this information from the company so we can complete our regulatory review,” Kuchta’s email stated.
Medallion Home is currently developing the Aqua property owned by Long Bar Pointe LLLP. The property is located in unincorporated Manatee County between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay. Formerly known as Long Bar Pointe and Aqua by the Bay, the development currently taking place includes numerous single-family homes and multi-unit residential buildings.
The recent inspections of the mangrove trimming on the Aqua property were prompted by two complaints FDEP received in February and another complaint received in April.
FDEP report
On May 16 Hanna Westervelt, Southwest District Environmental Manager for FDEP’s Compliance Assurance Program, sent a cover letter and a copy of the FDEP inspection report to Medallion Home representative Rob Bosarge.
“Dear Mr. Bosarge, The Florida Department of Environmental Protection received complaints regarding possible activities on your property located on El Conquistador Parkway,” the letter stated. “On April 26 and May 3, department personnel conducted inspections of the above-referenced facility. Within 30 days of receipt of this letter, please provide the requested information regarding notification of trimming activity further described in the Recommendations for Corrective Actions section of the attached inspection report. Please be advised that any future noncompliance of the permit requirements may be subject to penalties under Chapter 403.9332, F.S. (Florida Statutes).”
According to the FDEP inspection report, the Aqua mangroves were approximately 20 feet tall before they were recently trimmed and are now 15-16 feet tall after being trimmed.
According to FDEP, the trimmed mangroves are now approximately 16 feet tall. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The report states the annual trimming activity conducted at the Aqua property this year was the third of four anticipated trimming events. The report notes the expected trimmed height was 20 feet in 2021 and 16 feet in 2022.
The report notes mangroves can be reduced in height by no more than 25% of the foliage each year, the trimming cannot result in the mortality of any mangroves and subsequent annual trimming height reductions depend on the remaining foliage. This could lead to a greater time span between trimmings. The report states the mangroves were measured with a telescoping pole and the report includes photos of a pole being used to measure the trimmed mangroves.
A telescoping pole was used to measure the recently-trimmed mangroves on the Aqua property. – FDEP | Submitted
The report states all trimmings over 3 feet long or over 3 inches in diameter were to be removed by hand, properly disposed of and all reasonable efforts should have been made to remove as much trimmed material as possible.
“Photographs will be taken and submitted to the department 14 days prior to each trimming and again within 14 days following the trimming activity, and a joint site visit with (FDEP) department staff within 30 days following each trimming event,” the report said.
The report notes those notification processes were not fully complied with.
“Unauthorized trimming activity was not evident at time of the inspections,” it said. “However, no pre- or post- photographs, pre-trimming notification or post-trimming notification was provided to the department.”
Recommendations in the report to bring the mangrove trimming into compliance include the property owner providing pre- and post-trim photos within 30 days and, at the next trimming event, photographs are provided to FDEP 14 days before and after trimming takes place. A site visit with FDEP staff also is required to be scheduled within 30 days of any mangrove trimming maintenance.
Attorney Edward Vogler II represented Aqua developer Carlos Beruff during the Aqua/Long Bar Pointe permitting process and continues to represent Beruff and the Aqua development team.
When contacted by The Sun on April 22, before the FDEP inspections occurred, Vogler said, “All the work done in connection with mangrove trimming is done by certified mangrove trimming experts under the supervision of environmental consultants. All work is done pursuant to proper permits. We welcome the investigation and I think it will be confirmed that everything was done properly.”
BRADENTON – Manatee County commissioners have deleted a 2017 development stipulation that gave the commission and the public the ability to review the Aqua by the Bay development plans after the first 750 residential units are built.
During the county commission’s Thursday, Feb. 6 land use meeting, commissioners voted 6-1 in favor of granting a request from developer Carlos Beruff and county staff to delete Stipulation A.17 from the stipulations included in the General Development Plan unanimously approved by county commissioners on Oct. 3, 2017.
No longer in effect, the stipulation said, “Subsequent residential dwelling units, upon completion of the first 750 residential dwelling units, shall require further approval by the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing prior to, or as part of, preliminary site plan approval, in increments of 750 units or more.”
Commissioner Steve Jonsson made the motion to delete the stipulation and commissioners Vanessa Baugh, Reggie Bellamy, Betsy Benac, Misty Servia and Priscilla Trace supported his motion.
County Commissioner Steve Jonsson made the motion to delete Stipulation A.17. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Commissioner Carol Whitmore cast the only opposition vote after asking the commission to continue the public hearing to a later date to amend and clarify the stipulation rather than delete it.
Formerly known as Long Bar Pointe, Aqua by the Bay is now being developed on a 529-acre property between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay in unincorporated Manatee County.
Developer’s request
Attorney Ed Vogler represented Beruff and Aqua by the Bay at Thursday’s hearing. He noted the general development plan was unanimously approved by county commissioners in 2017 and later withstood a legal challenge from project opponents.
The 2017 approvals allow 2,894 residential units, including up to 16 high-rise condominium buildings between 76 and 95 feet tall. The approvals also allow 78,000 square feet of commercial space.
Vogler said deleting the stipulation would not change the approved land uses, the density or intensity of the project, the building heights or the building locations.
Vogler said the stipulation was confusing for the developers and for county staff because of the words “upon completion” that could be interpreted to mean the developers need 750 county-issued certificates of occupancy before additional preliminary site plans could be approved.
Vogler noted the county staff report submitted prior to the meeting expressed similar concerns and stated staff supported removing the stipulation.
Vogler said 1,112 residential are already in various stages of permitting and permitting review with county staff.
“The Aqua by the Bay project is going forward. It’s under development,” he said.
Commissioners’ questions
Whitmore asked Vogler who wrote the stipulation.
“I think it was a collaborative effort,” Vogler said.
It was later noted during public comment that Servia proposed similar but more detailed stipulation language in the Sept. 15, 2017 letter she submitted to county staff. At that time, before she was a commissioner. Servia represented Beruff and Aqua by the Bay while employed by King Engineering Associates.
Whitmore noted the developers have the right to build 2,894 residential units with or without the stipulation.
County Commissioner Carol Whitmore cast the only vote opposing the deletion of Stipulation A.17. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“My intent when I approved this was that you would come back and submit another preliminary site plan to us,” Whitmore said of the vote for approval she cast in 2017.
“It wasn’t that you weren’t going to be able to get it approved, because you were, but to appease us as a board, to make sure everything was on the up and up – to oversee this a little tighter because of the environmental concerns that a lot of people have along Sarasota Bay,” Whitmore said.
Whitmore said the commission approval would not have been unanimous without the stipulation.
“Would you agree that all the stipulations, including number 17, got you the 7-0 vote?” Whitmore asked Vogler.
“Ultimately, yes. There were two commissioners that talked about A.17,” Vogler responded.
In 2017, then-commissioners Robin DiSabatino and Charles Smith shared Whitmore’s concerns about the lack of specific details contained in the general development plan.
Servia and Bellamy were not commissioners when the general development plan was approved.
Benac asked Vogler if the stipulation was added to comply with county code.
“There is no code requirement. To be brutally frank and honest, we were listening to comments made by commissioners and we were trying to fashion something that provided comfort and support at the time,” Vogler said.
“Your counsel warned you at the time,” Vogler said of the limited authority the stipulation provided the commission to review plans submitted for additional development phases beyond the first 750 residential units.
Benac said the stipulation seemed like a good idea at the time but it gives people false hope that there’s still an opportunity to stop the project after the first 750 residential units are built.
Commissioner Vanessa Baugh said she didn’t understand why the stipulation was included in the first place and Jonsson expressed similar sentiments.
Staff comments
Manatee County Principal Planner Stephanie Moreland said staff and the applicant were both requesting commission approval to delete the stipulation.
Manatee County Principal Planner Stephanie Moreland agreed the stipulation should be removed. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“The stipulation is unclear and it’s not working under the procedures that we are familiar with. I’ve never seen one that says upon completion a project must return to the board. Currently, there are 446 units issued, 316 units are under review and staff has had a pre-application meeting for 350 to 353 units. If we’re waiting for the structures to be completed and then come back with a preliminary site plan we’re too late in the process,” Moreland said.
Public input
Public input given during Thursday’s meeting did not sway the commission majority’s final decision.
Speaking on behalf of several Cortez residents, former County Commissioner Jane von Hahmann mentioned the lack of specific details contained in the general development plan that allows for up to 16 high-rise condominium buildings.
“We didn’t have a visual. We had a general development plan and that bothered commissioners. It certainly bothered the public because we had no way of knowing where, other than in the yellow area or in the orange area, these buildings were going to be allowed to be placed,” von Hahmann said regarding the 2017 approvals.
Von Hahmann referenced the concerns Commissioner Charles Smith expressed in 2017 about approving a multi-phase development project that developers said could take decades to complete.
“He couldn’t see himself approving something that was 20 to 30 years out. He expressed concern that the board is responsible for approving buildings over 35 feet, but the number of buildings is uncertain,” von Hahmann said.
“We’ve never seen any of the preliminary site plans that have been approved. If staff has anything that can show what’s already being laid out, maybe there’s a comfort level from us that we walk away from the stipulation,” von Hahmann said.
No preliminary site plans were presented at Thursday’s meeting.
“If the stipulation is providing grief because it’s not specific enough, we would ask that you go back to the drawing board and make it more specific,” von Hahmann concluded.
“The bay is very vulnerable. I think it’s very important that we maintain any kind of examination process on a big project like this,” Sarasota Bay Estuary Program member Jim Eliason said.
“Go back to the drawing board. The public does want to keep an eye on this,” county resident Dan Young said when urging the commission to revise the stipulation instead of eliminating it.
Former Manatee County resident Barbara Angelucci read aloud comments prepared by her friend Shannon Larsen, who could not attend Thursday’s meeting, and she shared her own thoughts too.
Former Manatee County resident Barbara Angelucci expressed the views she shares with her friend, Shannon Larsen. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
“A stipulation is something specified to or agreed upon in common – an agreement between opposing parties during the course of legal proceedings, legally binding and part of the record. Manatee County Zoning Ordinance PDR/PDMU 15-10 was duly adopted by the board of county commissioners on Oct. 3, 2017. This ordinance contained a number of stipulations that were promised, agreed upon and signed by Manatee County officials. Now, some 29 months later, the applicant would break their agreement, break their promise and break their binding contract with the commissioners and the citizens of Manatee County through their concentrated efforts to delete this stipulation,” Angelucci said.
“If Stipulation 17.A is allowed to be deleted, this breach of promise will set a course of action that provides this applicant and any other applicant the freedom of determination to delete additional stipulations that they themselves agreed to and promised,” Angelucci said.
“A promise is a promise, especially when it was made after hours and hours of deliberate and difficult decisions with input from the applicant, the applicant’s attorneys, the Manatee Board of County Commissioners and the citizens of Manatee County who should be able to trust their commissioners to uphold their promises and agreements and not fold to the demands of wealthy developers,” Angelucci said.
Former County Commissioner Joe McClash said, “Just for the record, we’re not getting notices as a public when things are coming through like site plans. I know the county has abilities to do that and this is one of those commitments I thought was made at the hearings – that we would be notified as height plans come in. Either that or we have to check every single week to see if the county’s received a site plan, which isn’t right.”
In response to McClash, Public Hearing Section Manager Margaret Tusing said Aqua by the Bay site plans are not available at the county website but can be obtained by making a public records request.
This new building is the first to be built on the Aqua by the Bay property. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
BRADENTON – On Thursday, Feb. 6, Manatee County Commissioners will discuss Aqua by the Bay developer Carlos Beruff’s request to delete a development stipulation included in the initial development approvals he received from the county commission in 2017.
Thursday’s land use meeting will begin at 9 a.m. and take place in the Honorable Patricia M. Glass chambers on the first floor of the county administration building at 1112 Manatee Ave. W. in downtown Bradenton.
The Aqua by the Bay zoning ordinance amendment request discussion is expected to take place soon after the meeting begins. Public input will be allowed, and Cortez resident and former County Commissioner Jane von Hahmann is among those planning to voice opposition to the developer’s request.
“I believe it is in our best interest to be present at that meeting and make it known that this stipulation was our insurance policy, if you will, that we would know what we were getting in these buildings, especially the visual impact, water shoreline vista impact and overall compatibility with surrounding area,” von Hahmann wrote in an recent email she distributed encouraging others to express their views at the upcoming meeting.
“This is a stipulation which allowed us to see, after development begins, the physical building size and the number of units each building will have, and they want it removed,” von Hahmann wrote.
A large, centralized, clubhouse-like building now stands near the southeast end of the Aqua by the Bay property, between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay. Large concrete pipes are scattered about that end of the property that will contain the first phase of residential units to be built.
Excavation work is also taking place at the northwest end of the property, near the pasture where several cows currently live.
These cows now share space with dump trucks and other construction vehicles. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Stipulation language
Approved by county commissioners on Oct. 3, 2017, the zoning ordinance Beruff seeks to amend includes stipulation A.17, which reads as follows: “Subsequent residential dwelling units, upon completion of the first 750 residential dwelling units, shall require further approval by the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing prior to, or as part of, Preliminary Site Plan approval, in increments of 750 units or more. Any approval shall be in conformance with Stipulation A.16.”
Commissioners were provided with a county staff report prior to Thursday’s meeting.
“Staff finds the language in Stipulation A.17 to be unclear and problematic relative to timing as to when the project is required to return to the Board of County Commissioners. Staff believes the timing of ‘completion’ is too late in the development process for the Board of County Commissioner’s review of a site plan,” the staff report says.
“Currently, a preliminary/final site plan has been issued for 446 residential units. 316 residential units are pending Preliminary/Final Site Plan approval. A pre-application meeting was held for another 350-353 residential units,” the staff report says.
“In addition to the complexity of the timeline, the applicant has identified an additional concern with the last sentence of stipulation A.17 which reads; “… Any approval shall be in conformance with Stipulation A.16,” the staff report says.
Workers are onsite installing the infrastructure components for the phase one residential units. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Regarding stipulation A.16, the accompanying project narrative says, “Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant shall submit a hurricane evacuation and disaster plan to the Public Safety Department’s Emergency Management Division.
“Approval of hurricane evacuation/disaster plans and review of site plans for compliance with those plans has historically been administrative. Requiring public hearings for this purpose is an undue burden for both the applicant and staff. This is contrary to the streamlining direction of the board with the 2019 code amendments,” the project narrative says.
The staff report says, “Staff concurs that the deletion of stipulation A.17 would remove the apparent ambiguities existing during the review and processing of the preliminary and final site plans for the already approved 2,894 residential units. The requirement for a Hurricane Evacuation and Disaster Plan previously referenced in stipulation A.17 would remain applicable to the residential units as stated in the existing Stipulation A.16,” the staff report says.
“In accordance with Manatee County Comprehensive Plan, policy 2.1.2.7, deletion of stipulation A.17 does not affect development patterns, types of land uses, transition between land uses, natural features, or approved development in the area. There is no proposal to increase or decrease the gross or net residential density of the project. Staff finds the request to be consistent with applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the Manatee County Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends approval,” the staff report concludes.
Commissioner’s past involvement
County Commissioner Misty Servia will be asked to support amending a development plan she helped present to the county in 2017, while working at King Engineering Associates and representing Beruff’s development interests. This was before she was elected to the county commission in 2018.
County Commissioner Misty Servia previously represented Carlos Beruff’s Aqua by the Bay development interests. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
On Sept. 15, 2017, Servia sent Manatee County Planning Section Manager Nicole Knapp a letter on King Engineering Associates letterhead on behalf of Beruff’s Long Bar Pointe LLLP and Cargor Partners VIII LLCs.
Servia’s letter pertained to four stipulations to be discussed at the Oct. 3, 2017 meeting – the meeting at which the county commission approved the proposed development plans.
Servia’s letter noted the developers were offering a new stipulation, known then as stipulation A.18, which stated the developer’s willingness to come back to the commission for additional approvals for subsequent development phases.
That proposed stipulation contained language that is similar to the language approved as stipulation A.17 in the adopted zoning ordinance the county commission adopted on Oct. 3, 2017.
“The Aqua by the Bay project is approved in phases, with Phase I consisting of 750 residential units and 78,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses. Phases II and III shall each consist of 750 residential units, and Phase IV shall consist of the remaining approved residential units. Phases II, III, IV shall require further approval of the Board of County Commissioners at a public hearing prior to, or as part of, preliminary site plan approval,” Servia’s letter said, regarding proposed stipulation A.18.
TALLAHASSEE – It’s official: Gov. Ron DeSantis has retracted Aqua by the Bay developer Carlos Beruff’s recent appointment to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC).
On Friday, Jan. 18, DeSantis retracted 46 appointments that departing Gov. Rick Scott made on Jan. 4 and Jan. 7, and Beruff’s FWC appointment was among those retracted.
The retracted appointments apply only to those whose appointments require confirmation by the Florida Senate, and it’s still possible that Beruff could be reappointed. DeSantis also retracted Joshua Kellum’s FWC appointment.
FWC commissioners serve five-year terms and enact rules and regulations regarding the state’s fish and wildlife resources.
On Friday, DeSantis sent a letter to Florida Senate President Bill Galvano informing him of his decision.
“I agree many of these individuals are outstanding citizens who are experts in their respected fields. I thank these individuals for their willingness to serve our state. They will be afforded every consideration as my office re-opens the application process to fill these critical appointment vacancies,” DeSantis’ letter said.
DeSantis also retracted Mark Goodson’s appointment to the State College of Florida, Manatee-Sarasota District Board of Trustees.
Additional retractions of Scott appointments include appointees to the Board of Governors to the State University System, the Board of Medicine, the Board of Veterinary Medicine, the Construction Industry Licensing Board, the Florida Citrus Commission, the Florida Real Estate Commission, the Florida Transportation Commission and more.
Beruff opposition
In late 2017, Manatee County Commissioners approved the Aqua by the Bay development plans that call for the construction of up to 16 95-foot-tall condo buildings, an unspecified number of buildings between 36 and 75 feet tall and a total of 2,894 residential units.
The approved development plans also include 78,000 square feet of commercial space and a man-made crystal lagoon, and there are references to private docks. The proposed 20-year construction project is to take place on a large piece of vacant land located between Sarasota Bay and the El Conquistador Parkway in Manatee County.
As of this afternoon, more than 7,700 people had signed a Change.org petition opposing Beruff’s FWC appointment.
“The appointment of a developer with a track record of putting profit over protection of the environment is unconscionable,” according to the petition, created by Naples resident Michelle Eddleman McCormick.
Anna Maria City Commissioner Carol Carter is among those who signed the petition.
Some who opposed Beruff’s appointment cited the Aqua by the Bay development.
“I believe that this is a conflict of interest seeing as he is attempting to destroy our shoreline to build the Aqua by the Bay development,” Shaun Reilly wrote when signing the petition.
“He has and is destroying wildlife nurseries around Florida, i.e. Aqua by the Bay,” Robert Kinney wrote when signing the petition.
“This man is not an environmentalist and conservationist who cares about wildlife. Please replace him with someone who has a track record of protecting Florida’s natural resources, our water, wetlands, rural areas and wildlife,” Pat Lindsey wrote.
“Talk about a fox guarding the hen house,” Tammy Johnson wrote.
BRADENTON – Aqua by the Bay developer Carlos Beruff has successfully intervened in a lawsuit against Manatee County that challenges the county commission’s recent approval of his development plans.
Beruff’s attorney, Ed Vogler, will join the Manatee County Attorney’s office in the defense of the lawsuit.
Judge Lon Arend granted the motion to intervene on Nov. 13, recusing himself from the case two days later. Judge Gilbert Smith Jr. was assigned the case, which will be heard in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court in Bradenton.
On Nov. 2, attorney Ralf Brookes filed the lawsuit on behalf of the following petitioners: Suncoast Waterkeeper and its director, Joe McClash; Cortez charter captain Kathe Fannon and her daughter, Katie Scarlett Tupin; Longboat Key resident Larry Grossman and Legends Bay residents Beverly Hill, Arlene Dukaukas and Lenka Sukova. The lawsuit named Manatee County as the respondent.
The petitioners are seeking a court order that would either quash the development approval or remand it back to county commissioners for further review. The request is based on the grounds that county commissioners failed to provide procedural due process regarding public input at the Oct. 3 commission meeting at which the general development plan and rezoning requests were approved. The petitioners’ request is also based on the grounds that the commission and the county failed to apply the correct law and comply with the essential requirements of law contained in the Manatee County Land Development Code (LDC), and the commission’s approval is not supported by competent substantial evidence of compliance with all LDC requirements.
“Land owner disputes each issue of material fact and legal conclusion raised by the petitioners. Land owner requests entry of an order which grants leave to intervene in the case as a full party respondent with the right to plead as to all matters without being subordinate to the main action,” says the motion to intervene that Vogler field on Nov. 8.
The approved development plans call for 16 95-foot tall condominium buildings and a yet-to-be determined number of buildings between 36 and 75 feet tall. Slated for construction between El Conquistador Parkway and Sarasota Bay in Manatee County, the project is approved for a total of 2,894 residential units and 78,000 square feet of commercial space. The approved plans include a man-made Crystal Lagoon, and reference private docks.
Beruff’s attorneys and the County Attorney’s Office have not yet filed their legal responses to the petitioners’ complaint. As of Monday, Nov. 20, no court dates had been scheduled.
BRADENTON – The battle over the Aqua by the Bay development is not over.
On Thursday, Nov. 2, attorney Ralf Brookes filed a legal challenge to the project approval that Manatee County Commissioners granted in October.
“Petitioners file this Petition for Writ of Certiorari pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure to quash a decision of the Manatee County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) made on Oct. 3 approving a rezoning and general development plan for a large development project known as Aqua, in the geographic area commonly known as Longbar Point in western Manatee County,” the petition for writ begins.
The petition names Manatee County as the respondent in regard to Aqua by the Bay. This means Aqua by the Bay attorneys could request to intervene in the legal action and join the county attorney’s office in defense of the claims made and actions sought.
Brookes filed the writ on behalf of Suncoast Waterkeeper and its director, Joe McClash; Cortez charter captain Kathe Fannon and her daughter, Katie Scarlett Tupin; Longboat Key resident Larry Grossman and Legends Bay residents Beverly Hill, Arlene Dukaukas and Lenka Sukova.
The commission’s Oct. 3 meeting was a continuation of the Aug. 16 and Aug. 23 meetings that resulted in developer Carlos Beruff and his attorney, Ed Vogler, offering to remove the 145-foot tall buildings from their plans. Still facing an anticipated vote of denial on Aug. 23, the developers requested more time to address commission concerns about a man-made estuary enhancement area and retaining wall and the natural buffer between the development and the mangrove shoreline. The developers also were asked to provide more details on the locations of the proposed 95-foot tall buildings.
Public comment was concluded and closed on Aug. 23, and it was stated and advertised there would be no public comment when the meeting continued on Oct. 3.
When the Oct. 3 meeting began, it was announced that public comment would be allowed if significant changes were made to the general development plan. The developers then offered to remove the man-made estuary. They also offered to come back to the commission for additional approval for each 750 residential units built after the initial 750 units.
“The Oct. 3 meeting was noticed and advertised for no public comment. The original general development plan submitted was changed during a three-hour break in the meeting and a new general development plan was created. Petitioners were not given a reasonable opportunity to personally review, and have their experts review, the amended, revised general development plan before the BOCC reconvened and voted to the approve the new general development plan on the same day. The hearing should have been continued, re-noticed and advertised to allow public comment,” the petition says.
“Because no public comment was expressly stated in the public notice, many either did not attend or have experts attend, the Oct. 3 hearing. Those interested, affected persons, including petitioners, who did attend were denied a meaningful opportunity to even see, much less review, the amended, revised site plan and stipulations created during a three-hour recess,” the petition states.
The petition claims the approval of building heights over 35 feet did not meet the essential requirements of law, and there was no substantial evidence supporting the height limits granted. It also claims the approved general development plan lacked required details.
“Wherefore, petitioners request an order from this court quashing or remanding the decision below on the grounds that the board 1) failed to provide procedural due process; 2) failed to apply the correct law and comply with the essential requirements of law contained in the Manatee County Land Development Code; 3) the approval is not supported by competent substantial evidence of compliance with all LDC requirements,” the petition concludes.
MANATEE COUNTY – The Manatee County Commission’s approval of Carlos Beruff’s revised Aqua by the Bay development plans produced outrage, disappointment, disbelief and relief.
After county commissioners approved the development plans on Oct. 3, county resident Glen Gibellina said, “Sold down the river unanimously, 7-0. Unbelievable. All that for absolutely nothing.”
Former County Commissioner Joe McClash expressed mixed emotions.
“It moved in the right direction today. The greatest win is we don’t have the threat to the environment like we did before we started the day. That’s a big concession,” he said.
His comment pertained to the elimination of a proposed man-made estuary that would have run the length of the property, between the coastal mangroves and the development.
McClash took additional solace from the environmental concessions the developers have been forced to make since 2013, when they reluctantly removed a proposed marina and navigation channel from their plans and then lost two court cases trying to get them back.
“We shouldn’t have had to go through this for four-plus years, but it shows this community’s persistence and willingness to step up and say this is not acceptable. The commissioners heard the community, and they adjusted their positions based on the facts and emotional appeals we brought to them. Without sending a signal that this wasn’t going to fly, we wouldn’t have got Mr. Beruff to change his mind about the environmental destruction that was going to take place,” McClash said.
“We still have upland habitats that should be protected, and there’s an eagle nesting on the site that they still haven’t identified on their plans. These buildings are going to look so massive along El Conquistador Parkway. We’ve worked for years to maintain Manatee County’s unique character. The Island cities have been able to do it with their 35-foot height restrictions, and we were trying to do the same in Manatee County. Unfortunately, we lost a little bit of Manatee County today,” McClash said.
He acknowledged the commission probably established a legal precedent for the 95-foot buildings when it approved similarly tall buildings for the nearby Lake Flores development.
When asked about a legal challenge to the commission’s decision, McClash said, “There’s issues that could be challenged. The question is whether it’s worth challenging those issues.”
Cortez concerns
Like McClash, Cortez resident Jane von Hahmann served on the county commission that in 2004 approved the original and less intense residential development plans for a project once known as Long Bar Pointe.
Regarding the Oct. 3 meeting, she said in an e-mail, “I was very upset with the process. They allowed the applicant to submit a plan different than the one previously submitted and reviewed. They advertised a meeting that would not allow public comment, and then after allowing the changes, they opened public comment. I believe there are challengeable actions. In a quasi-judicial proceeding, all parties were not provided due process.
“I am very glad for the removal of the wall and estuary enhancement area canal. I am glad the shoreline ecosystem will remain fully enacted. I see that as a major victory. However, the canal was part of the wetland mitigation plan, and we didn’t hear how those impacts will be mitigated in the new plan.
“The height and sheer number of buildings over 35 feet tall along the bay and El Conquistador Parkway concerns me. I am disappointed the commission didn’t see it as important to meet the intent of the land development code and require a preliminary site plan showing the locations of all buildings over 35 feet. I think the only way we the public will be heard is at the ballot box. We need to elect people willing to represent the people and not the developers who fund their campaigns,” she said.
Cortez resident and Swordfish Grill General Manager Bob Slicker said, “I appreciated the opportunity to speak out at the commission meetings. I’m proud they took the giant ditch and wall out of the plan, I’m grateful the buildings are not going to be 145 feet tall. Short of a new comp plan, I can’t see much more we could’ve done other than buying the property and using it as a preserve.”
Cortez charter captain Kathe Fannon is upset about the building heights, but finds some positives in the final outcome.
“Had the public not been as involved as we were, that marina would be built. The project would already be built and that ditch would be there. You can’t blame (County Commissioner) Carol Whitmore for this. It’s true what she says, ‘If you deny this, Carlos will take us to court and get everything he wants.’ ”
BRADENTON – Late Tuesday afternoon, Manatee County Commissioners voted 7-0 in favor of approving the revised Aqua by the Bay general development plans.
The approved preliminary plans no longer include the controversial man-made estuary enhancement area and retaining wall that would have stood between the coastal mangroves and the development.
Stipulations added during Tuesday’s meeting also require the developers to come back to the commission for additional site plan approval after the first 750 residential units are built, and after each additional 750-unit threshold is completed during the anticipated 20-year development process.
The approved plans still allow for 16 95-foot condo buildings and an unspecified number of buildings between 36 and 75 feet tall, depending on the real estate market over the 20-year construction period. The development is approved for 2,894 residential units and 78,000 square feet of commercial space. The plans also include a swimming pool-like Crystal Lagoon that is the size of a small lake and features artificial beaches.
Initial reaction
As he left the Manatee County Administration Building, developer Carlos Beruff said he was pleased with the decision. He said he was glad the initial stage of the planning process that dates back to 2013 was over. In 2013, he reluctantly removed a proposed marina and navigation channel from his previous plans.
After Tuesday’s meeting, Glen Gibellina said he felt like he and the rest of the county residents had been “sold down the river” by the Manatee County Commission.
Former county commissioner and project opponent Joe McClash said he was pleased that the estuary area and wall were removed. He said he appreciated the developers and the county commissioners responding to the citizens’ environmental concerns about those aspects of the plan.
McClash said he was still disappointed with the building heights, but he acknowledged that was probably a forgone conclusion after the neighboring Lake Flores project was approved for similarly tall buildings. McClash also has remaining concerns about the wetland impacts now that the estuary canal mitigation area has been removed.
When asked if he anticipated a legal challenge to the commission’s decision, he said he and others would have to determine if that is a fight worth fighting in court given the concessions the developers have made.
County Commissioner Carol Whitmore said the developers’ concessions made it possible for her to support the project. Joe Hendricks | Sun
Before casting her vote, Commissioner Carol Whitmore said she could support the project because the proposed 145-foot tall buildings were removed at the previous meeting and the estuary and retaining wall also were being removed. She said these concessions alleviated her primary concerns about preserving the integrity of the adjacent fishing habitat in Sarasota Bay known as “The Kitchen.”
Commissioner Charles Smith said he would support the project based on the concessions made and the evidence presented during the multi-meeting public hearing process.
Commission Chair Betsy Benac praised county residents and others for the information and expertise they provided during the several opportunities they were given to provide public input in recent months.
The commission collectively acknowledged their decision was not going to sit well with everybody, but that the developers have the right to develop their property in some fashion and it would be unrealistic for the public to expect the property to remain undeveloped unless the county purchased it.
Procedural debate
Beruff and his attorney, Ed Vogler, offered to remove the estuary enhancement area from the plans soon after the meeting began Tuesday morning. Commissioners and county staff then had to determine if the proposed revisions were significant enough to warrant the meeting being continued to a later date.
Several concerned citizens expressed their continued opposition during Tuesday’s meeting. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
The commission expressed a desire to finish the process that day, and a willingness to stay for as long as it took. Before lunch, the meeting was recessed until 3 p.m. to give the developers time to revise their plans and the attorneys from both sides time to work out the details.
During public comment Tuesday afternoon, several residents expressed opposition to a commission vote taking place that day and they requested the meeting be continued to a later date so they could further study the revisions proposed that morning.
BRADENTON – Carlos Beruff’s Aqua by the Bay development plans were on the verge of collapsing Wednesday evening when Manatee County Commissioner Carol Whitmore suggested the vote be delayed and the meeting be continued until Sept. 29.
Commissioner Robin DiSabatino opposed the continuance.
Sensing Beruff did not have the votes to get his project approved, and not wanting his most recent multi-year development efforts to die unrealized, Whitmore convinced Commissioner Vanessa Baugh to withdraw her motion to approve the project, which Commissioner Steve Jonsson had seconded.
Beruff and his attorney, Ed Vogler, accepted Whitmore’s suggestion at approximately 6:30 p.m., after eight hours of discussion than included four hours of public input.
Before the continuation vote took place, DiSabatino and commissioners Charles Smith and Priscilla Whisenant Trace said they could not support the project as proposed.
Trace, who comes from a farming family, said she could not support the development’s potential impact on the coastal mangroves or the estuary canal’s 13-foot retaining wall between the mangroves and the landward development.
“This is a very precious area. We cannot make a mistake with it,” Trace said.
Manatee County Commissioner Carol Whitmore proposes the project review be continued. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Whitmore said she shared Trace’s concerns and her primary concern was preserving the nearby fishing grounds known as “The Kitchen.”
When asked earlier why he needed the estuary canal and retaining wall, Beruff said the wall would contain fill-dirt that would be used to elevate the entire property above flood grade, which would eliminate the need for buildings or single-family homes to be built on stilts.
Carlos Beruff makes concessions in hopes of salvaging his development plans. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Beruff also agreed to Whitmore’s request to eliminate any plan language pertaining to the previously proposed 145-foot tall buildings, and to not seek approval for approval for any buildings taller than 95 feet. Beruff also agreed to prohibit motorized vessels in the artificial estuary canal and Vogler promised to put in writing a promise to protect two Native American archaeological sites located on the property. These concessions will be further codified on Sept. 29.
With the 145-foot buildings removed, the general development plan now calls for a maximum of 16 95-foot tall buildings and an unspecified number buildings up to 75 feet tall as part of the requested 2,384 multi-family residential units Beruff hopes to build between Sarasota Bay and El Conquistador Parkway in unincorporated Manatee County.
While project opponent Andy Mele spoke during public input, former County Commissioner Joe McClash and Cortez charter Captain Kathe Fannon brought into the commission chambers a conference table-sized, three-dimensional model that illustrated the estimated locations of at least 83 buildings 75 feet or taller. Several commissioners and citizens praised the $25 model and said it provided more details than the developers had.
At meeting’s end, DiSabatino said she still had no clear idea how many buildings would be built and where they would be located.
Smith said he could support the project if approved in phases, but not all at one time because there was still too much uncertainty. He noted that once the commission approves the general development plan, the development process is out of the commission’s hands and solely in the hands of the developers and county staff.
The developers are also proposing 78,000 square feet of commercial space, a man-made Crystal Lagoon water feature, 30 acres of man-made beach shoreline, and they may seek state permits for private docks.
Wednesday’s meeting was a continuation of the Aug. 16 meeting. When it began, Whitmore and DiSabatino questioned whether the meeting should even take place because commissioners did not receive copies of an updated staff report until early Tuesday evening. In contrast to the staff report provided for last week’s meeting, this week’s staff report once again recommended project approval.
BRADENTON – Some county residents feel the Aqua by the Bay developers’ ever-changing plans are creating an elusive and moving target for county commissioners to rule on.
The Manatee County Commission will continue its review of the Aqua by the Bay general development plan and rezoning requests on Wednesday Aug. 23. The meeting will begin at 9 a.m., and another large turnout is expected.
During the Wednesday, Aug. 16 meeting that lasted more than eight hours, developer Carlos Beruff’s attorney, Ed Vogler, said his client was willing to remove from the plans, for now, four proposed 145-foot tall condominium buildings. Vogler said the developers and the commission could address those buildings as a separate request at a later date.
Vogler also said Beruff and his team would commit to a non-variable 50-foot wetlands buffer, instead of the variable wetlands buffer they presented at the Manatee County Planning Commission on Aug. 10.
The developers have still not presented the commission and the pubic with a diagram that indicates how many buildings over the allowed 35-foot height limit they are proposing, or where those buildings would be located.
County Commissioner Robin DiSabatino asked the developers to provide more specific information about traffic impacts, the proposed estuary enhancement retaining wall, the type of businesses that would be included in the proposed 78,000 feet of commercial space and whether the proposed 2,894 residential units would be owned and/or occupied by single families, seasonal residents, renters or vacation rental guests.
During public comment, Florida Institute for Saltwater Heritage board member and former county commissioner Jane von Hahmann said, “Wow, this is such a moving target. This is incomplete. It’s really hard to know and understand because basically we walked into a new design today, which is very frustrating to me.”
She also cited the land development code and said the developers have still not met its requirements.
“They’ve provided you with architectural drawings, but they haven’t provided you with relationships for all of the buildings on the property. And now that they’ve removed the 145s, I’m not sure how many additional buildings will be needed.”
Sierra Club representative Andy Mele also referenced a moving target. He held up a large poster board illustration that represented the skyline view he said would be the view from Sarasota Bay. He also held up a poster board that represented his estimate as to where all of the buildings over 35 feet would be located.
Native concerns
Native American Bobby Billie raised concerns he had not heard addressed yet: Native American burial grounds located on the Aqua by the Bay property.
Native American Bobby Billie, of the Miccosukee Simanolee Nation of Regional people, says that Native American burial grounds are located on the Aqua by the Bay property. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Representing the Miccosukee Simanolee Nation of Regional people, Billie said development in Florida is disturbing ancient burial grounds.
“There’s two burial sites here,” he said of the Aqua by the Bay property.
He also addressed the need to protect the environment and the animals and birds that occupy it for future generations of humans to enjoy.
“They only protect their own interests,” he said of developers.
Surprise speaker
At one pointing during the meeting, Vogler told the commission he’d subpoenaed someone to testify. This turned out to be former county Environmental Planning Section Manager Joel Christian. Christian supported the project as a county employee, but resigned in June after he was clocked going 80 mph on Manatee Avenue in Holmes Beach, and then arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence, possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia. Speaking as a civilian, Christian reiterated his previous support for the project.
During the meeting recess that followed, Christian was seen smiling and chatting with Alec Hoffner, Beruff’s contracted environmental expert.
BRADENTON – Manatee County Planning Commissioners and county staff reversed their previous positions and now recommend denial of Carlos Beruff’s Aqua by the Bay development.
On Thursday, Aug. 10, planning commissioners voted 3-1 in support of Matt Bower’s motion recommending the County Commission deny the general development plan and rezoning requests on Wednesday, Aug. 16.
The recommended denial is based on concerns about 145-foot buildings and the project overall not being consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan and land development code (LDC).
Planning Commissioners Al Horrigan Jr. and Tim Rhoades supported Bower’s motion. John De Lesline opposed it, but also expressed concerns about building heights.
Rhoades again chaired the discussion after chair Bill Conerly recused himself because he works for the firm that provided the traffic study. Commissioners Mike Rahn and Paul Rutledge missed the meeting.
In April, planning commissioners reviewed the project based on an inaccurate staff report that listed one 145-foot building and one 75-foot high-rise. By a 3-2 vote, they recommended approval, but it was then learned the developers were proposing four 145-foot residential buildings, up to 12, 95-foot residential buildings and an unspecified number of residential buildings between 35 and 75 feet tall.
Rhoades said he changed his vote because of the 145-foot buildings.
Bower maintained his previous opposition and cited concerns about building heights, the man-made estuary and retaining wall and the developers’ self-imposed inability to create a constant 50-foot wide buffer zone from the landward edge of the coastal wetlands. The developers want a variable buffer zone that averages 50 feet along the two-mile shoreline, but could be as narrow as 15 feet in places.
“I still can’t come to grips with how staff can say those scenarios are compatible with this area when it’s clearly not,” Bower said.
Horrigan voiced concerns about building heights, wetland buffering and the lingering possibility of a navigation channel for a marina or boat basin.
Staff support fades
Stephanie Moreland, the county’s principal planner, said staff had supported the project, but that support evaporated later in the week when an updated staff report recommending denial appeared on the county website. The staff recommendation cited inconsistency with the comp plan and LDC.
Florida Institute for Saltwater Heritage (FISH) board member and former County Commissioner Jane von Hahmann distributed an e-mail Saturday afternoon that said, “While we were out this morning rallying at 75th Street West and Cortez Road, it appears staff released their new report for Wednesday’s County Commission meeting. This is a big one.”
Public opposition remains
During Thursday’s meeting, von Hahmann, a Cortez resident, quoted LDC language that says an applicant requesting building heights over 35 feet shall, at public hearing, provide a conceptual architectural drawing, elevations and planned views that show the buildings and their locations. That has not happened.
Andy Mele presented an enlarged, modified version of the building location sketches the developers used to obtain Southwest Florida Water Management District permits. One showed only the 145-foot buildings and one showed only the 95-foot buildings. Mele’s combined rendition showed all the estimated buildings in excess of the 35-feet needed to accommodate the requested 2,384 multi-family units.
Dr. Randy Edwards expressed concerns about buffering, tidal flow, water stagnation and mangrove degradation. Echoing O.J. Simpson’s lawyer, Johnnie Cochran, Edwards said, “If it doesn’t comply, you must deny.”
Holmes Beach resident Barbara Hines said the additional traffic would negatively impact Anna Maria Island residents’ ability to get on and off the Island.
Vogler’s views
Beruff’s attorney, Ed Vogler, touted the development as “unique and special” and restated claims about no dredging through mangroves or seagrass and no impact on water quality, coastal mangroves, seagrass, submerged lands or fishing.
He objected to Mele’s use of the sketches and noted the nearby Lake Flores development was approved for 95-foot buildings and IMG was approved for an 84-foot building.
“We want to be treated fairly,” Vogler said.
Bower noted the Lake Flores and IMG buildings would be to closer Cortez Road than they would to Sarasota Bay.
Vogler also expressed appreciation for the county staff support that soon disappeared.
Privacy choicesWe use Google Analytics to understand readership and improve the website. Analytics cookies are optional and can be accepted or declined.Privacy Policy
