Skip to main content

Tag: paid parking lots

City reduces sidewalk requirement for parking lots

City reduces sidewalk requirement for parking lots

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News.

BRADENTON BEACH – City commissioners approved a request last week to remove one of the requirements for two paid parking lots owned by developer Shawn Kaleta.

Sam Negrin, manager of Beach to Bay Investments Inc., a Kaleta-owned entity, spoke to commissioners at a Sept. 5 meeting about a sidewalk installation stipulation at the 102 Third St. N. and 206 Bay Drive N. parking lots.

“I’d like to apologize for how this whole situation has gone down from the start,” Negrin said. “We took the lots back over and we’re back on track and I’ve been working daily with Darin (city building official Darin Cushing) to get the parking lots up to the standards that you’re requiring making sure we’re meeting all your regulations.”

He then addressed the sidewalk stipulation that had been put in place in March by the commission.

“Essentially what’s being requested is these two very small patches of sidewalk at the ends of the two properties, abutting up against Third Street North,” Negrin said. “From my talks with Darin and his talks with the police chief, it seems the general consensus is these sidewalks might not be the greatest set of ideas, for a couple of reasons.”

Negrin said that Kaleta plans to build homes on the lots and that permits will be submitted within a couple of months.

“The permit packages are being worked on at this point,” Negrin said. “Within several months they will no longer be operating as parking lots. The point of this is to walk through this with you and see if it’s something you want us to rush into place for our deadline next week. It’s something that we can do. We’re just questioning whether that’s something you’re looking to have done.”

“You’re saying you’re going to build in a couple months? December?,” Commissioner Ralph Cole asked Negrin.

“No it’s a much longer process,” Negrin said. “We’ve had these plans in the works, they’re now out of the design phase. And we’re working on the permit packets to submit to Darin. He should see the permit submissions within the next couple months.”

Once the plans are submitted and approved, the temporary use permits on those lots will end, according to the stipulations that were put in place for approval in March.

“They serve their purpose for just a short couple months,” Negrin said. “We could start laying the sidewalks tomorrow, that’s not really the issue. The issue is does the city really want to have them?”

“My only concern is we’re getting ready to redo our entire stormwater system and I’d hate to see spot sidewalks all over the city that we’re probably going to wind up ripping out because we’re going to put pipe,” Bradenton Beach Police Chief and Interim Public Works Director John Cosby said. “We have lengthy conversations about mid-block swales to divert the stormwater that is coming. So until we know where we’re actually going to put our stormwater system, that may change the thought that the sidewalk needs to be at the pavement or it needs to be put further back in the right of way. I think there needs to be a little more thought on this.”

City commissioners voted unanimously to remove the sidewalk stipulation for temporary use permits for paid parking at lots on 102 Third St. N. and 206 Bay Drive N.

Parking lot shutdown short lived

Parking lot shutdown short lived

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News, Featured.

BRADENTON BEACH – Less than 24 hours after the Aug. 9 city closure of Shawn Kaleta’s four paid parking lots, the lots were reopened following the intervention of Kaleta’s attorney, Louis Najmy.

The paid parking lots at 101 Bridge St., 206 Bay Drive N., 207 Church Ave. and 102 Third St. N. were granted temporary use permits by the city commission subject to multiple stipulations, including the submission of a professionally drawn site plan to the city building official for approval.

Building Official Darin Cushing said most of those stipulations had not been fulfilled, and on Aug. 1, he sent Kaleta a letter that stated his intent to barricade the parking lots on Aug. 9 with a permanent closure deadline of Sept. 6 and revocation of the temporary use permit, if all the stipulations for city approval had not been satisfied by that time.

On Aug. 9, with police vehicles onsite, barriers were placed at the parking lot entrances, and the payment kiosks and signs were covered, but by Aug. 10 the parking lots were back in business.

Mayor John Chappie told The Sun on Aug. 10 that the barriers were not removed by city staff and that the process is currently in abatement, meaning temporarily suspended.

After a meeting on Monday morning among city officials to discuss how to proceed, Chappie said the issue remains “under review” by the city.

BUILDING OFFICIAL WEIGHS IN

“The applicants sent me some site plans via email earlier this week, but they are not satisfactory to meet the after-the-fact stipulations and requirements that were set forth by the commission,” Cushing wrote in an Aug. 9 email to The Sun. “They started to put in some of the landscaping around the Bridge Street lot, but again, they need to submit a site plan showing the landscaping and other items that were stipulated, get it approved and then do the work, in order to get final approval of the temporary use permits.

“I gave them until today to get that done. Though they keep assuring me that they are scrambling to get this done, it’s too little, too late at this point,” Cushing wrote in the email. “So yes, I will be shutting the lots down by close of business today. In the letter that was sent to the property owner, I also gave them until Friday, Sept. 6 to have everything completed and approved or we will then revoke the temporary use permits, and the signs, parking stops and everything related to the parking lots will have to be removed.”

“Darin (Cushing) is doing a great job and he has my support,” Chappie said.

KALETA’S ATTORNEY RESPONDS

“This was much ado about nothing. It was resolved in less than five hours,” Najmy wrote in an Aug. 10 text to The Sun, blaming the issue on “a miscommunication between departments at the city.”

Najmy said the process of closing the parking lots requires due process through the city’s code enforcement department.

“Actions to block access and possession and business operations require due process,” Najmy wrote. “We all want this. Totalitarian regimes outside of the U.S. don’t require due process but the U.S. and State of Florida do.”

Chappie said the city commission does have the right to revoke the temporary use permits. They were granted on Feb. 15 for 101 Bridge St. and on March 21 for the other three lots.

“Maybe the city had a different property than my client’s properties to close off, but the city certainly had no ability, nor as they told me any desire, to do this and after talking with the city leaders they confirmed the goal to continue working together to get these much-needed improvements and operations in place that Mr. Kaleta is generously investing for the entire city’s benefit,” Najmy wrote. “Although Mr. Kaleta suffered some financial loss from this error yesterday, he is contemplating working it out with the city, once again to the city’s benefit. He appreciated their cooperation so far on this matter.”

Kaleta’s parking lots have been up and running with parking rates of $15 an hour since February, illegally, according to the city.

“The actual permits have never been approved and are currently sitting in an under-review status,” Cushing wrote in the Aug. 1 letter to Kaleta. “Furthermore, the parking lots have all been in operation since February of this year, technically illegally, as they have never been approved by the Planning and Zoning Department.”

Cushing wrote that the applications for the temporary use permits were submitted after the fact, as the paid parking lots were all created and put into operation prior to any application being made to the department.

Najmy wrote that Kaleta plans to satisfy the outstanding stipulations as soon as possible.

“They respect the city’s desire and need for this. It will be done ASAP now that we have control back. It will be done right this time,” he wrote. “These stipulations require the outlay of money and, once again, Shawn is the only one willing to do that for the benefit of the improvement to the city but yet he gets attacked for doing so. It’s the classic case of the negative spirits biting the hand that feeds them.”

Easy Parking Group’s Josh LaRose contracted with Kaleta in January to run the parking enforcement and operations of the lots. On July 12, Kaleta terminated the contract with LaRose and on July 18, LaRose filed a lawsuit against Kaleta and Beach to Bay Investments Inc. claiming fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and breach of agreement.

Commissioners deny paid parking lot

Commissioners deny paid parking lot

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News, Featured.

BRADENTON BEACH – City commissioners denied an application for a temporary use paid parking lot at 2509 Gulf Drive N. at their April 4 meeting.

The application, which stated the property was in an R-2 (residential) zone, was submitted by Rick Munroe, of Sarasota-based Palm Parking, on behalf of property owner Mark Toomey for a 19-space paid parking facility.

“We feel we’re providing a service for short-term accommodations,” Munroe said. “We’re asking for a 24-hour operation.”

“We have nothing that has been presented by FDOT (Florida Department of Transportation), FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection), SWFWMD (South Florida Water Management District)” – the state agencies that conduct review processes on such proposals, Mayor John Chappie said.

According to building official Darin Cushing, a site plan was not presented with the application.

“We need more documentation, a parking plan,” Cushing said. “We need a better idea of what the full plan is.”

Toomey said the site plan had been submitted with the application.

“I delivered the site plan myself. I don’t know how that piece of paper didn’t arrive. There’s two site plans on there,” Toomey said.

Toomey said he attempted to have a home built on that property four years ago and it was denied by the commission.

“The option is to have an additional 19 spaces here,” Toomey said. “Coquina Beach is full every day. We’re giving people an additional option. If I could have a permanent permit, I would do so. If that doesn’t work, I’ll have to sell it to one of the developers on the island.”

A copy of the site plan was then presented to commissioners at the meeting.

“I’m not sure how it wasn’t included in the package,” Cushing said. “I don’t know if we can consider it (the application) without the other agencies.”

“There’s a procedural component to offer the applicant the opportunity to continue this to the next commission meeting so the commission can review the site plan,” City Attorney Ricinda Perry said. “The site plan for whatever reason didn’t make it into the packet, they’re entitled to have that reviewed by the commission. The proper step is to ask if they would like to continue this to the next meeting so the commission can receive and review the site plan or are they prepared to move forward and allow the commission to make their decision tonight?”

At that point, Toomey stated the property was in C-2 (commercial) zone, despite the application indicating it was in an R-2 (residential) zone.

“On your application, it clearly says R-2,” Chappie said. “What is your decision? Do you want us to proceed with the process here? Or have the opportunity to come back so we have a full packet?”

“You have the full packet,” Toomey said. “The site plan magically disappeared out of the application so I don’t think in two or four weeks you’re going to change your mind.”

“We’re not here to argue, we want to be sure it’s a clean presentation and have a key component of your application,” Chappie said.

“I don’t think we’ll be submitting any further paperwork with regard to the parking,” Toomey said.

Cushing characterized the site plan as a diagram showing spaces as they fit into the lot, without showing dimensions. He said the document did not show emergency vehicular access, ingress and egress, or a drainage plan. There was one handicapped-accessible parking spot shown.

Several people spoke during the public comment session of the meeting.

“We need a moratorium on paid parking because you’re going to set a precedent and wind up in litigation. If you give it to George you have to give it to John, and so on and so forth,” Bradenton Beach property owner Bob Bolus said, also asking the city to govern parking fees.

“I think it’s clear the applicant doesn’t have his ducks in a row until those other agencies are approached,” John Lutz said.

“There was a public comment stating the city is inviting litigation by issuing temporary use permits,” Perry said. “This does not invite litigation. Every single application is considered on an individual basis on the characteristics of the surrounding properties, the testimony from the public, the location. Everything is a specific decision. There is no precedent set approving one location and denying another.”

She also noted there is a Florida statute that preempts the ability of cities to regulate what anyone can charge for parking.

“You will have to make the decision based on testimony you received today,” Perry advised the commission.

“We don’t have information from FDEP, FDOT or SWFWMD,” Chappie said. “The site plan doesn’t provide adequate information to make a clear judgment.”

The applicant left the chambers prior to the commission vote in which commissioners Jan Vosburgh, Marilyn Maro and Deborah Scaccianoce along with Mayor Chappie unanimously voted to deny the application.

Bradenton Beach logo

Temporary paid parking vendors hired

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News.

BRADENTON BEACH – City commissioners considered four temporary use parking permits at the March 21 commission meeting and after much discussion, approved three with stipulations, denying one.

Permit applications were submitted by developer Shawn Kaleta for temporary parking lots at 102 Third St. N., 207 Church Ave. and 206 Bay Drive N.

Businessman Joshua LaRose submitted a temporary use permit application for the parking lot at 109 Third St. N., which is owned by local restaurateur Ed Chiles.

Commissioners discussed each application individually with the parking lot discussion taking more than two hours for the property at 102 Third St. N., as it is in a designated R-3 residential zone.

“Each application will be addressed individually to protect the existing areas,” Mayor John Chappie said.

Evelyn Stob, a neighbor of the Third Street property, spoke in opposition to the application for a parking lot 102 Third St. N.

“Why are we allowing anyone and everyone to purchase a piece of property, demolish what it is and then say, ‘I need to make it temporary parking because I don’t know what I’m going to do with this lot,’ ” Stob said. “Now my residence is turning into a giant parking lot. It was purchased under R-3 zoning. I feel you have the right to say no.”

“In a way, you’re increasing heavily the traffic that’s going to be going through that neighborhood,” Commissioner Ralph Cole said. “We’ve got four or five of these and we’re changing the whole look. It’s not my vision of Bradenton Beach.”

“A temporary use may be just a little bit outside of what was anticipated in the zoning, but you do have criteria on what must be met. It can’t be obnoxious to the neighborhood. It can’t create a public health/safety/welfare issue,” City Attorney Ricinda Perry said.

Referring to the city’s Land Development Code (LDC), City Attorney Ricinda Perry said, “I believe parking is contemplated for special permit uses because it talks about coffee shops, restaurants, cocktail lounges, retail shops and services and other similar accessory use, well parking is absolutely an accessory to a shop so I believe you can say parking could be contemplated as a special permit use here. You as a legislative body can say that’s not what that means, but then you have to explain why.”

“If we don’t think we have an allowable use, we have to build a case,” Chappie said. “We have to go by the LDC.”

Perry said the commission may add stipulations that will protect the health, safety and welfare of the public.

“The longer the day goes on, that’s all I can see now is parking lots. This is a beautiful place. Do we want parking lots all over the place?” Commissioner Jan Vosburgh asked, voicing concern that if a temporary use permit is approved for one year, the applicant may then ask for an extension.

Sam Negrin, who represented applicant Kaleta, spoke to the commission to alleviate those concerns and said the parking lot will be temporary.

“The properties were bought with the intention of building,” Negrin said. “This is a way to generate revenue in the meantime.”

A motion to approve the temporary use parking permit for 102 Third St. N. for temporary paid parking was passed unanimously with stipulations that include a limit to the number of motor vehicles to be approved by the building official, with no trailers, RVs, campers, buses, overnight parking or tailgating. The property owner will be required to submit a building permit application or land development approval request within eight months of approval of the temporary use permit and a requirement that insurance must be carried by the property owner.

The temporary use permit is valid one year from March 21 or upon the issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs sooner. Landscape buffering is planned along Third Street North via a landscape plan to be approved by the building official, and a privacy fence is planned along the east and west property lines. The installation of a sidewalk is also planned. A site plan is to be submitted to the building official.

The temporary use permit for paid parking was approved unanimously for 207 Church Ave. with similar stipulations for 102 Third St. N., including landscape buffering along Church Avenue and a privacy fence to be installed along the north and south property lines. The applicant may combine parking with 206 Bay Drive N. for purposes of parking, ingress and egress.

The temporary use permit application for 206 Bay Drive N. was approved unanimously with similar stipulations to 102 Third St. N. Hours of paid parking shall be from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m.

An application for temporary paid parking at 205 First St. N. was withdrawn by Negrin.

The application by Joshua LaRose for a temporary use permit for paid parking at a parking lot owned by Ed Chiles at 109 Third St. N. was denied unanimously by the commission after LaRose indicated that the parking lot may become permanent.

Chappie noted that the lot is in the emergency evacuation route for the south end of Bradenton Beach.

Bradenton Beach logo

Commissioners consider more paid parking lots

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Bradenton Beach, Community News.

BRADENTON BEACH – Following their approval to draft a contract with Beach to Bay Investments Inc. for a paid parking lot across from the Public Works Department, commissioners postponed a decision on March 7 on a second set of bids for paid parking in multiple city lots.

Request for Proposal (RFP) 2024-04 went out for bid to provide paid parking in areas that included all of Bridge Street, an after-hours parking lot to the east and west side of the police department, the city hall parking lot, the area around the pickleball court on Highland Avenue (with free passes to pickleball players), the shared parking lot with Silver Resorts at First Street North, Gulfside parking spaces near the Anna Maria Island Moose Lodge and future options at the Tingley Library, if the building is raised to create parking.

“On Bridge Street, the majority of people parking are employees there and shoppers can’t get a space,” City Attorney Ricinda Perry said. “The parking near the Moose, those are prime beach spots.”

Perry said two bids were received.

“SP Municipal Services offered a 65/35 split to the city,” Perry said. “The city would receive 65% of net revenue. They haven’t told me costs.”

The second bidder, Beach to Bay Investments Inc., offered three choices. Developer Shawn Kaleta, president of Beach to Bay, is a principal in the recently-approved Bridge Street hotel resort project.

“They recognize they will be having the hotel up and operating with valet service, they would utilize their valet system to get people parked,” Perry said, adding they would provide shuttle and trash services.

Beach to Bay offered three options to the city. All of the options included the bidder taking on all improvement costs.

1) A lump sum payment of $100k per year;

2) An annual payment of $50,000 with 25% of profits;

3) A 50/50 split.

Beach to Bay asked for a 15-year lease term.

“That’s a lot to look at,” Commissioner Ralph Cole said. “I’d like to see more public input.”

Cole said he would like to know more of the operational costs.

“The costs of improvement are the responsibility of Beach to Bay, but will that be part of the profit costs?” Cole asked.

“My understanding is they’re eating that cost up front, but that needs to be fleshed out,” Perry said.

Cole said he would have a difficult time making such a big decision without additional thought and information.

“I think we’re all in agreement to postpone this to flesh out some things,” Mayor John Chappie said.

Commissioner Marilyn Maro, who telephoned into the meeting, spoke in favor of holding a work meeting.

“It’s such a big issue it needs its own one-agenda meeting,” Cole said.

“We will hold the selection of the bidder under 2024-04 in advance and to be considered in a work meeting to be scheduled by the city clerk,” Perry read as a motion.

The motion passed unanimously.

“We are under a cone of silence so the bidders may not communicate or lobby in any way shape or form,” Perry reminded commissioners at the conclusion of the meeting.