BRADENTON BEACH – A planning and zoning board public hearing to consider a major development plan for the Bungalow Beach Resort property at 2000 and 2104 Gulf Drive will be held Wednesday, Jan. 7, at 1 p.m. at Bradenton Beach City Hall.
The proposed major development plan consists of a 15-guest room hotel with two habitable stories over parking, and an outdoor pool area.
The planning and zoning board is a recommending body to the Bradenton Beach City Commission. The city commission will hold a public hearing on the matter on Thursday, Feb. 5, at 6 p.m.
The meetings will be held in the Katie Pierola Commission Chambers at 107 Gulf Drive N.
Historical timeline
The property, owned by Gayle Luper and known as Bungalow Beach Resort, has been the subject of quasi-judicial hearings and a lawsuit filed against the city.
During Hurricane Helene, the older, original waterfront cottages at Bungalow Beach Resort were destroyed and subsequently condemned.
On March 14, Luper opened a portion of the razed parcel lot where the cottages once stood and began charging a resort fee of $50 per car to park and use the adjacent beach area. Code Enforcement Officer Evan Harbus told Luper all parking in that lot must cease, as it was in violation of city code.
Luper maintained that despite the bungalows being destroyed by the 2024 hurricane, the resort’s other two parcels were continually operational and she was entitled to sell resort passes that include parking, as she had done prior to the hurricanes.
Luper said she was advised by the city that she must file a parking permit to continue to charge a resort fee for parking, but she said City Planner Luis Serna advised her that a permit was not necessary.
On April 17, the city commission voted to require Luper to obtain a temporary use permit for parking, with a series of restrictions attached. The restrictions included no overnight parking and no parking past 9 p.m.
Luper filed a lawsuit against the city on April 25. The city then filed a request for dismissal of the lawsuit. That case remains open, according to the Manatee County Clerk of Court website.
On July 29, the attorneys representing Luper Enterprises and the city presented their opposing arguments regarding the commission’s decision to ban resort fee-based parking at the Bungalow Beach Resort. Special Master Marisa Powers presided over the quai-judicial hearing and later ruled she did not have jurisdiction to override the city’s decision.
HOLMES BEACH – City commissioner Dan Diggins suggested implementing paid parking within a quarter mile of the city-controlled public beach access points located at numerous street ends throughout the city.
Diggins proposed the pursuit of paid beach parking as a non-agenda item during the commissioners’ comments given at the end of the Aug. 26 Holmes Beach City Commission meeting.
Commissioner Dan Diggins asked his fellow commissioners to consider paid beach parking. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Mayor Judy Titsworth and commissioners Steve Oelfke, Terry Schaefer and Carol Soustek said paid parking might be inevitable someday, and it might warrant further discussion now, but they don’t support paid parking at this time. Commissioner Carol Whitmore was more adamant and said she’d fight any city efforts to implement paid beach parking.
When proposing paid parking and requesting future commission discussion, Diggins acknowledged he’s not a parking expert and he doesn’t have any logistics or specifics worked out. It’s simply an idea he’d like to pursue.
“I’ve been giving this a lot of thought and I talked to staff, I talked to the mayor, I talked to some of the county folks about this,” he said.
Regarding the currently free parking areas designated at the city’s street-end beach access points, Diggins said, “Where all the ropes and bollards are, those would be paid parking, with an exception for residents.”
Diggins referenced the 42-page Island-wide Urban Land Institute (ULI) study completed in 2015. The ULI study was never used to any significant degree by any of the three Island cities, which each contributed more than $30,000 to help cover the $125,000 cost of the contracted study that offered a never-implemented “Vision for Anna Maria Island’s Future.”
“One of the recommendations said free parking is not a right,” Diggins said. “I’m just wondering if it’s time for us to revisit our paid parking policy at some point in the future and develop some type of plan for paid beach parking. I think it might be time to do that. The county would have to do it and the other cities would have to do it at the same time. I want to know what you guys think. I think it’s a way to raise revenue because we know revenue sources are drying up.”
Manatee County owns and controls Manatee Beach and the beach parking lot in Holmes Beach. The county also owns and controls Coquina Beach and Cortez Beach and their parking lots in Bradenton Beach.
Diggins said he talked to representatives of a couple of companies that provide paid parking systems and he was told the automated payment technology exists and the automated systems can also help motorists find available parking spaces without having to drive around looking for an open space.
“If you want to go to the beach, you have to pay for it,” Diggins said.
Commission feedback
Whitmore, a former county commissioner, said, “I 100% don’t support it. I didn’t support it when I was at the county.”
Whitmore said there’s not much left in life that people can enjoy for free anymore, especially the elderly and those who don’t have a lot of money.
“I don’t think that we should do that to our citizens. We have so many more important things to do than charge poor people for more stuff,” she said.
Commissioner Carol Whitmore adamantly opposes paid beach parking. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Oelfke agreed with much of what Whitmore said.
“I think we want to try avoid that as long as possible, but I think it might be inevitable at some point,” he said, noting he’d want the county to take the lead on paid beach parking.
“I do like the idea of looking for additional revenue sources. I would support increasing parking fines,” he added.
“I’m not for it,” Soustek said, noting the city “worked long and hard” on its current parking provisions.
The city’s current parking provisions include designated free parking spaces at the street-end beach access points and those areas are marked with ropes and bollards and small white, green and black markers that feature an encircled letter “P,” or parking bumpers designated with an encircled “P.”
The encircled “P” markers on the 52nd Street beach access parking bumpers mean public parking is allowed, and is currently free. – Joe Hendricks | SunBeach parking is allowed in areas where encircled “P” markers are placed on wooden bollards. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Red and white signs designate the nearby city rights of way further from the beach access points where streetside parking is restricted to residents between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., with city-issued stickers used to identify residents’ vehicles.
Several designated Holmes Beach streets allow resident-only parking during the day.
“You’re never going to have enough parking out here. I don’t care what you do,” Soustek said.
“Until it’s an issue we have to look at, I would prefer not to,” she added, noting that she doesn’t mind discussing it further.
Schaefer said, “I’ve never been a proponent of paid parking. If it ever comes to pass, I can’t imagine charging our residents to park within our city.”
Schaefer noted the city had to previously defend itself from the previous county commission’s desire to build a multi-level parking garage at the county-owned Manatee Beach. Schaefer said he favors leaving the current parking provisions in place until it’s necessary to get in unison with what the county and the other two Island cities do in terms of paid parking.
Titsworth said the city did some preliminary research on paid parking when the since-discarded county parking garage was still in play, but she hopes paid beach parking doesn’t happen while she’s mayor.
“It’s inevitable. I hope inevitable happens when I’m not in this chair,” she said, adding that many residents live on the other side of the bridge now because they were priced out.
“The fact that they get to come back here and park for free and enjoy the beaches is good. Whether it’s now or later, that’s entirely up to this board,” she said, adding that she hopes it can stay free “for a little bit longer.”
Free beach parking is available at the 52nd Street beach access in Holmes Beach. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Regarding the search for additional revenues, Titsworth said convincing the Legislature to provide the Island cities with a larger share of the significant tourist development tax revenues generated on the Island is a more immediate concern than paid parking revenues.
After hearing what the mayor and other commissioners had to say, Diggins said it would likely take a year or two, or longer, to come up with a workable paid parking plan that includes the county and the other two cities and now is the time to start working on it.
“We could have a workshop on this,” Soustek said. “Be prepared to have this chamber filled. Bring them in and explain why you want to discuss it, because you feel the inevitability of it.”
“It’s worked in a lot of beach communities,” Diggins said.
Whitmore again noted some people, including those who live on the mainland, can’t afford to pay for parking when visiting the Island beaches.
“Those are the people that really need our beaches,” she said.
Oelfke and Schaefer supported discussing paid parking with county officials to get a feel for where they currently stand on the issue. Titsworth said she would ask county staff to add a paid parking discussion to the agenda for the joint Holmes Beach/Manatee County meeting to be held at the county administrative building in downtown Bradenton on Wednesday, Sept. 3 at 1:30 p.m. That meeting will be livestreamed at the county website.
“Don’t we have more important things to talk about?” Whitmore lamented.
Diggins noted the county plans to charge boaters to use the boat ramps to be built at the county-owned Cortez Marina when that county facility is constructed on the property formerly occupied by the Seafood Shack and Annie’s Bait and Tackle before the county bought the property in December. There’s also been some informal public discussion about possibly charging boaters to use the other county boat ramps as well.
“People who use the service have to pay for it; and to me, paid beach parking fits in that category,” Diggins said. “We don’t have to implement it, but we can gather information to see what we don’t know.”
ANNA MARIA – There may soon be a new paid public parking lot in Anna Maria for beachgoers and other visitors.
On Aug. 14, the Anna Maria Planning and Zoning Board voted 5-0 in favor of recommending city commission approval for a paid parking lot at 9806 Gulf Drive at the corner of Gulf Drive and Magnolia Avenue. City commissioners will next consider the proposal.
The proposed paid parking lot area is highlighted in red in this diagram. – City of Anna Maria | Submitted
Easy Parking Group owner/operator Josh LaRose presented the site plan approval request to the P&Z board on behalf of the property owner, JRHAMI LLC. The Florida Division of Corporations lists Bradenton resident Jerry Robert Hynton as the LLC’s registered agent and manager. Hynton is a pediatric dentist in Bradenton.
Easy Parking Group owner Josh LaRose represented the property owner at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
LaRose’s Sarasota-based company currently operates at least one similar paid parking lot in Anna Maria and has operated similar parking lots in Bradenton Beach. LaRose also operated the now-defunct Old Town Tram shuttle service in Bradenton Beach that was partially funded by the Community Redevelopment Agency.
If approved, paid parking lot users would enter and exist along Magnolia Avenue. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Included in the planning board meeting packet was a memo written by City Planner Ashley Austin. According to the memo, the site plan proposes 22 paid parking spaces in the shell-covered parking lot, including one designated accessible parking space.
LaRose said the parking lot is currently blocked off to the public but some of the existing parking spaces are used by Ginny’s and Jane E’s Café & Gift Shop employees who work across the street. He said parking spaces would still be provided for those employees during daytime hours and the remaining spaces would be open to the public. Ginny’s and Jane E’s closes daily at 3 p.m.
The paid parking lot would be located at 9806 Gulf Drive. – Joe Hendricks | Su
Austin’s memo notes the paid parking lot will provide additional public parking for beachgoers and those visiting the restaurants, retail shops and other businesses in that area.
The site plan proposes one payment kiosk and six parking management signs that feature QR codes that allow for parking payments made using a cell phone. Parking lot patrons will enter and exit the parking lot along Magnolia Avenue.
During the Aug. 14 meeting, Austin said parking lots are a permitted use in the city’s Residential/Office/Retail (ROR) zoning designation but the proposed use requires a city commission-approved site plan.
The site plan includes city-required landscape buffering along the western edge of the property and additional non-required landscape buffering along the southern edge of the parking lot property.
At the request of neighboring property owner Bob Dwyer, with LaRose in agreement, the non-required southern landscape buffering will be removed from the site plan because it would block a long-used secondary entry point to Dwyer’s residential properties at 109 and 113 Magnolia Ave.
When asked, LaRose said the parking rate would likely be in the $5- to $7-dollar-per-hour range and possibly $30 for an entire day, with potential increases during holidays.
Regarding enforcement, LaRose said the parking lot would be privately enforced by Easy Parking Group employees who use written warnings to educate violators and the booting or towing of vehicles when repeat or flagrant parking violations occur.
BRADENTON BEACH – The city of Bradenton Beach is asking for a dismissal of an April 25 lawsuit filed against the city by Bungalow Beach Resort owner Gayle Luper.
Attorney Robert Lincoln is representing the city and he filed the motion to dismiss on May 21.
In his motion, Lincoln stated: “Luper improperly seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to attack a quasi-judicial action and decision of the city commission approving her application for a temporary use permit to allow parking on her demolished resort property subject to conditions. Luper attacks both the city commission’s process and decision following its April 17 hearing. Luper alleges the city commission violated her due process rights and violated her parking rights.”
The motion states: “Luper’s sole remedy for attacking the city commission’s quasi-judicial decision is a petition for writ of certiorari (pursuant to state statute). This court may not grant either declaratory or injunctive relief and therefore must dismiss counts I and II with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
According to the Florida Bar Association, “A petition for writ of certiorari is generally used to review quasi-judicial orders of county, municipal or state agencies that cannot be appealed to the district courts of appeal under the Administrative Procedure Act.”
In his motion, Lincoln stated: “The city commission must, and did, conduct a hearing to consider Luper’s application for a temporary use permit for the razed parcels. The city commission was required to, and did, apply the standards set forth (in the city’s land development code) to Luper’s application and the facts shown at the hearing. Defendant, city of Bradenton Beach, requests the court enter an order dismissing counts I and II and the entire action, with prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”
Hearing and Luper’s lawsuit
The lawsuit complaint filed by Tampa-based Attorney John A. Anthony on April 25 names Luper Enterprises, Inc. and Coastal Sound Investments LLC as the plaintiffs and the city of Bradenton Beach as the defendant.
Luper’s lawsuit stemmed from a decision by the Bradenton Beach City Commission at an April 17 quasi-judicial public hearing to deny the use of the currently vacant resort property at 2000 Gulf Drive N. for paid parking using a resort pass.
Commissioners questioned the resort pass request for the beachfront bungalows that were destroyed during Hurricane Helene.
During the public hearing, Luper and her attorney, Stephanie Anthony, maintained that as a working resort, a resort pass, which includes parking and access to a private area of the beach, was appropriate because other Luper-owned properties affiliated with the multi-property resort remained operational following the hurricanes.
After a nearly 2.5-hour quasi-judicial hearing in which City Planner Luis Serna recommended denial of the application, city commissioners denied the paid public parking lot application but allowed a temporary use permit for Luper, resort guests and employees to use the lot no later than 9 p.m.
The city commission placed the following restrictions on the property:
Parking at the razed parcels (the lot where the bungalows were) is permitted for a period of one year or 30 days from the issuance of a building permit;
Parking at the razed parcels is limited to 17 parking spaces, per the city-issued Transient Public Lodging Establishment license;
No trailers, recreational vehicles, campers or buses are allowed to park at the razed parcels, and no tailgating, overnight parking or paid parking shall be conducted;
Only employees, agents or registered guests of the resort are allowed to park at the razed parcels;
Parking at the razed parcels is limited to 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. enforced by a towing service secured by Luper.
Dispute timeline
Hurricane Helene destroyed many of 14 original Bungalow Beach cottages. The buildings were condemned and by Feb. 1 the razed parcels had been cleared of the demolition debris.
“At this time, Ms. Luper advised the city of her plan to reopen the razed parcels to continue parking in the manner that had been conducted by the resort for over 25 years,” Luper’s complaint states. “Ms. Luper was then advised by the city that she must file a parking permit in order to continue to charge a resort fee for parking.”
The Bradenton Beach City Commission denied Gayle Luper’s request to use her resort property for paid public parking. – Joe Hendricks | Sun
Luper applied online for the permit on Feb. 3 and said she spoke to Serna on Feb. 4 about the proposed plan to reopen the razed parcel for resort-fee parking to the public. She said Serna advised her that he saw no issues with the plan.
“The resort consists of three separate but interconnected areas. The razed parcels acquired in 1999, the duplex parcel (2103 Ave. C) acquired in 1999 and the single-family parcel (2108 Gulf Drive N.), acquired and incorporated into the resort in 2024.”
According to the complaint, the razed parcels have continuously supplied parking, including overflow parking, for operations at all the resort properties.
On March 14, a portion of the parking lot was reopened for parking at the rate of $50 per-car, per-day for 29 parking spaces.
“After parking approximately 14 cars on the morning of March 14, Evan Harbus, in his capacity with the Code Enforcement Division of the city, directed that all parking at the razed parcels cease immediately,” the lawsuit complaint states. “The city’s officials advised that any vehicles violating these instructions would be towed, including vehicles owned by the plaintiffs, vehicles of resort employees, its construction or maintenance-related crews, previous and potential guests and the paying public.”
On March 16, Luper submitted an application for temporary parking.
“The resort, properly permitted to conduct a defined and legitimate business, has never ceased operating even for a day and has continuously charged a resort fee of $50-$59, which included parking,” the complaint states. “The resort charging a resort fee to the public for parking and amenity use is a consistent and well-founded practice employed by several similar resorts in the region, frequently known as a ‘resort pass.’”
BRADENTON BEACH – Due to audio difficulties at the April 3 city commission meeting, a Special Emergency City Commission meeting was held on April 8 to place into the record items previously discussed.
One of the topics that was revisited was a discussion of the former Pines Trailer Park parking lot at 201 First St. N. That parking lot was converted to paid public parking in January by the Pines owners.
Commissioners discussed the conversion and its non-conformity with the city’s Land Development Code, its historical use as a parking lot and whether the commercial lot created an increase in density and intensity as compared to its former use, and came to a consensus to invite parking lot owner Shawn Kaleta to speak at the next city commission meeting.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry had been asked by the commission to research the parking lot. She said the lot is zoned C-1 commercial, is within the overlay of Bridge Street and is part of the CRA district.
“This is important because it is the most intensive commercial area within the city of Bradenton Beach and the city commission has articulated over the course of the past couple years that they would encourage alternative parking options for parking within the CRA district and specifically within the C-1 zoning,” she said.
Perry said it is unclear as to whether standalone or commercial parking is allowed without a principal use or whether it can be an accessory use on its own. Prohibited uses are multi-level parking structures or facilities.
“When you look at the property issue you will see there is no building on the site, therefore it does not meet the definition of a parking facility or parking structure as a prohibited use under C-1,” she said.
Permitted uses in the zoning district include institutional, public, semi-public, libraries, community centers, public parks, playgrounds and recreational facilities. Additionally, Perry said planned development, professional offices, residential as well as retail stores and sales offices and service establishments as well as special permit uses may be allowed.
Perry raised the question as to whether or not there would be some type of non-conforming use which can be allowed by the city.
“That is going to have to be an interpretation by the commission,” she said. “I will say the commission looked at recreation uses previously and determined that parking can be associated with a recreational use and parking was permitted as standalone parking lots around the CRA district as temporary use permits.”
Perry showed a 1977 historical aerial photo of the parking lot which appeared to show vehicles parked on the site, and she also referenced a 1971 photo from the Florida Department of Transportation.
“The commission did agree that there was some form of parking, at least, going back to 1971,” Perry said. “The question then becomes whether or not the use itself has been enlarged, expanded, increased or intensified as of 2016. That increase would not be permitted, it’s an expansion of that use so you would have to compare that to what would have been allowed.”
The ordinance for the C-1 district was effective on March 9, 2016, Perry said. Any use prior to that date is a grandfathered, non-conforming use.
“If you can establish that there was a use on a property that exists and has not been abandoned, the city cannot interfere with that use if it meets the definition of a non-conforming use,” Perry said. “Often you hear interchangeably that a non-conforming use is a grandfathered right.”
Perry said it rests with the commission and code enforcement to determine if paid parking constitutes an enlargement, increase, expansion or intensity in use.
“I think it’s a logical conclusion the commercial is a higher density, higher intensity in uses. I think a paid parking lot is more intense than a non-paid parking lot that is specifically designated for one thing,” Mayor John Chappie. “I think we all want to try to get more information.”
“It’s also been brought to my attention that the Pines residents got parking passes to park in that lot when they moved there, so if they were given parking passes by Mr. Kaleta’s organization when they bought the trailer so they could park in that lot, they are agreeing that that parking lot is a Pines resident parking lot,” Commissioner Deborah Scaccianoce said.
Scaccianoce also questioned whether the current paid parking lot meets the city’s requirements for ADA compliance, width of lanes and ingress and egress.
“It’s being changed to invite the general public in, which to me, creates a whole different issue of rules and regulations,” Chappie said. “Others had to submit plans to meet the standards that are in our land development regulations.”
The commission had decided by consensus at the April 3 meeting to invite the property owner – Kaleta or a representative – to attend the next commission meeting.
“The consensus was by changing it to paid parking, we’re telling him that’s an increase,” Commissioner Scott Bear said. “We can’t do that without them first having their say.”
“If you’re going to make this kind of decision that impacts somebody’s property rights that you should invite that individual to attend that meeting so that their opinion can be heard,” Perry said.
The next city commission meeting is scheduled for Thursday, April 17 at noon in the Katie Pierola Commission Chambers, 107 Gulf Drive N.
BRADENTON BEACH – One of four paid parking lots owned by Shawn Kaleta was brought into compliance by the city’s Sept. 9 deadline for adherence to several requirements.
The applicants opted to close the remaining three lots at 102 Third St. N., 206 Bay Drive N. and 207 Church Ave.
Seven months after the city commission conditionally approved a one-year temporary use permit for paid parking at 101 Bridge St., all requirements there have been met, according to city Building Official Darin Cushing.
City commissioners voted unanimously on Sept. 5 to remove the sidewalk installation stipulation for the temporary use permits at Kaleta’s paid parking lots on Third Street and Bay Drive.
Sam Negrin, manager of Beach to Bay Investments Inc., a Kaleta-owned entity, told commissioners at the Sept. 5 meeting that Kaleta plans to build homes on the lots and said permits will be submitted within a couple of months.
“The permit packages are being worked on at this point,” Negrin said.
“The applicants for the temporary use parking lot permits came to last Thursday’s commission meeting to ask for a modification of their stipulations, essentially to not install sidewalks on the Third Street and Bay Drive lots as was originally stipulated,” Cushing wrote in a Sept. 11 email to The Sun. “The commission agreed, and that stipulation was removed.”
But on Sept. 9, Cushing said the applicants emailed city staff informing them that they now intended to terminate the operation of paid parking lots at those lots as well as the Church Avenue lot.
The parking lot stipulations from the Feb. 15 commission approval of the Bridge Street parking lot include no entrance or exit from Bridge Street, the installation of directional arrows, landscaping less than 3 feet high, a sidewalk north of Third Street South to hook into the corner sidewalk on Gulf Drive, trolley benches and a slab, and black and white signage, in addition to review and approval of the site plan by the building official. The one-year temporary use permit runs through Feb. 15, 2025.
In an Aug. 1 letter to Kaleta, Cushing wrote that he intended to barricade the lots on Aug. 9 with a permanent closure deadline of Sept. 6 if all the stipulations had not been met. The deadline was extended to Sept. 9 to allow for the repair of a leaking artesian well at 101 Bridge St.
The parking lots were barricaded by the city on Aug. 9, but reopened the following day after intervention by Kaleta’s Bradenton attorney, Louis Najmy.
BRADENTON BEACH – City building official Darin Cushing has given an extension of time to developer Shawn Kaleta to complete all city commission-required stipulations for temporary use permits for four paid parking lots.
The city has received and approved the site plans for the temporary use permits and has given Kaleta until Monday, Sept. 9 to complete the rest of the items stipulated by the commission, according to Cushing.
A professionally-designed site plan was a key component for the multiple conditions that had been put in place by the city commission before granting temporary use permits for the paid parking lots; 101 Bridge St. was approved on Feb. 15 and 206 Bay Drive N., 207 Church Ave. and 102 Third St. N. gained approval on March 21.
The extension of the deadline was granted in part due to a leaking artesian well at the Bridge Street site that is in the process of being capped.
“The well capping is still ongoing. I’m not sure how much more they have to do, but I do know the well turned out to be over 300 feet deep, and the entire length has to be filled with concrete, which cannot all be done in one day,” Cushing wrote The Sun. “We are monitoring the progress, as are SWFWMD and Manatee County.”
In an Aug. 1 letter to Kaleta, Cushing had written he intended to barricade the lots on Aug. 9 with a permanent closure deadline of Sept. 6 if all the stipulations had not been met.
“To date, very few, if any of these stipulations have been met, first and foremost, the presentation of professionally designed site plans in order to demonstrate that all of the other stipulations are being adhered to,” he wrote.
The parking lots were barricaded by the city on Aug. 9, but reopened the following day after intervention by Kaleta’s attorney, Louis Najmy.
The parking lot stipulations for commission approval at 101 Bridge St. include no entrance or exit from Bridge Street, installation of directional arrows, installation of landscaping less than 3 feet high, sidewalk installation north of Third Street South to hook into the corner sidewalk on Gulf Drive, installation of trolley benches and slab, installation of black and white signage and review of the site plan by the building official. The one-year temporary use permit runs through Feb. 15, 2025.
Some of the stipulations for 206 Bay Drive N., 102 Third St. N. and 207 Church Ave. included the building owner submitting a building permit application or land development approval request within eight months of the temporary use permit approval and limiting the parking of cars, with the number of parking spaces to be approved by the building official on a site plan.
BRADENTON BEACH – Following Shawn Kaleta’s termination of Easy Parking Group’s (EPG) contract to manage a Bridge Street parking lot, EPG owner Josh LaRose has filed a lawsuit against Kaleta and Beach to Bay Investments Inc. seeking damages in excess of $50,000.
The lawsuit, filed in the 12th Judicial Circuit Court on July 18, claims fraudulent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and breach of agreement. The summons was served on the registered agent for Beach to Bay Investments, attorney Louis Najmy, on July 25. He has 20 days from then to respond on behalf of Kaleta, the president of Beach to Bay Investments. Kaleta is the only principal listed for the LLC on the Florida Division of Corporations website.
LaRose entered into the agreement on Jan. 12 with Beach to Bay Investments to provide management and operation services in exchange for a percentage of the net revenues generated by Kaleta’s parking lots, after agreed improvements and startup costs were repaid by Kaleta and basic operating expenses deducted from the gross revenues.
The initial term of the agreement was one year, with termination permitted without cause after the first six months with 30 days written notice.
On June 11, LaRose received a letter from Beach to Bay Investments Manager Sam Negrin terminating the agreement effective July 12, six months from the contract’s inception.
Negrin wrote The Sun in a text message on July 28 that EPG owes money to Beach to Bay.
“We are surprised they sued in response to our letter seeking payment,” he wrote. “We look forward to resolving the issues and recovering the funds owed to us.”
BREACH OF AGREEMENT CLAIM
The letter to LaRose states in part, “All meter equipment, signage, parking equipment and other equipment installed on the parking lots must be removed by July 26, 2024 or they will become the property of Beach to Bay Investments Inc.”
The suit claims that immediately after sending the notice of termination, and prior to July 12, Beach to Bay and/or Kaleta entered the parking lots and removed EPG’s parking app signs, installing new signs with instructions for making payment using a payment app, QR code or Text to Pay system with payments sent directly to Kaleta or his affiliate. Replacement parking meters also were installed and tape was placed over EPG parking meters, according to the complaint.
“The agreement prohibits Beach to Bay from terminating the services prior to July 12, 2024 and also prohibits the removal of parking meters and payment signage installed by EPG,” according to the complaint.
FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION CLAIM
The lawsuit alleges that Kaleta falsely represented that he, or Beach to Bay, owned or controlled all the properties on which EPG provided parking management and operation services.
“Shortly after entering into the agreement, Kaleta, the president of Beach to Bay, tore down various structures on three additional properties immediately adjacent to 219 Gulf Drive S. (the property identified in the agreement), namely 101 Bridge St., 105 Bridge St. and 106 Third St. S., and asked EPG to expand its parking management and operation services onto the newly empty land. Kaleta did not tell EPG that the adjacent properties were legally separate and distinct from 219 Gulf Drive S., with different municipal addresses and owners, but rather represented that they were part and parcel of 219 Gulf Drive,” the complaint states.
“EPG does not know if the actual legal property owners are even aware that their properties were used as private parking lots or if they received any portion of the resulting revenues,” according to the complaint.
EPG asked the court to order Kaleta to immediately identify the owners of each of the properties where EPG provided or agreed to provide parking management and operation services, identify the revenues, if any, received by each property owner from the operation as parking lots and indemnify EPG from any actions brought by the owners of the properties.
EPG also provided parking management and operation services for Bradenton Beach properties at 206 Church Ave., 207 Church Ave., 102 Third St. N. and 202 First St. N.
The Manatee County Property Appraiser’s office website lists the owner of 206 Church Ave. as D&C Properties of Tampa LLC, with Maria Trim and Mark Dexter of Tampa as principals.
“While all of the properties but one (219 Gulf Drive S.) are owned by LLCs that are effectively owned, at least in part, and/or managed by Mr. Kaleta, Easy Parking Group provided its services under the impression that all of the properties were owned exclusively by Mr. Kaleta and/or Beach to Bay Investments Inc.,” LaRose’s Sarasota-based attorney, Bailey Lowther, wrote in a July 27 email to The Sun. “Accordingly, all of the parking revenues from the various lots paid by EPG were deposited into the same bank account, presumably belonging to Beach to Bay. If Beach to Bay failed to distribute those revenues properly, i.e. to the LLCs that owned the parking lot properties, EPG potentially faces claims from those LLCs.”
If one or more of those LLCs has members other than Kaleta, Lowther said it raises potential questions that include whether or not all the members of the LLC knew and consented to the property being used as a parking lot, and whether the LLC members received their fair share of the revenues.
“Depending on the ownership and operating agreement of each particular LLC, if the answer to any one of the questions is ‘no,’ my client could very well be sued by one or more of the LLC property owners,” she wrote.
Beach to Bay’s Negrin disputes the claim that Kaleta was using properties he wasn’t entitled to use.
“He is either the owner or agent of all of the properties,” Negrin told The Sun on July 27.
“With respect to 219 Gulf Drive S., which is owned by AMI Plaza LLC, Mr. Kaleta told my client, and the agreement specifically states, that property was owned by Beach to Bay Investments Inc.,” Lowther wrote. “Also, all of the questions above, and my concerns about the potential liability of my client, are applicable to the owner/landlord of 219 Gulf Drive S.”
According to the Florida Division of Corporations website, the owner of AMI Plaza LLC is Firkins Nissan. Registered agent William Saba confirmed in a July 27 telephone interview with The Sun that Kaleta leases the property from him.
“We have a written lease agreement,” Saba said. “Shawn is entitled to use the property.”
UNJUST ENRICHMENT CLAIM
“EPG, in providing its parking management and operation services, including but not limited to undertaking and incurring inception and start-up activities and costs, to Beach to Bay and Kaleta, conferred benefits on Beach to Bay and Kaleta,” according to the lawsuit complaint. “The reception and retention of the benefits conferred by EPG by Beach to Bay and Kaleta is inequitable unless Beach to Bay and Kaleta are required to pay EPG for the value of the benefits.”
Manatee County commissioners are on a roll when it comes to disappointing their constituents.
Despite overwhelming protests from the community, commissioners have approved $2.9 million for three pre-design criteria packages for three parking garages, one at Manatee Beach in Holmes Beach.
Even Commissioner George Kruse, whom Island residents were starting to rally around, voted in favor of the budget amendment.
Commissioners’ intent with these packages is to seek a public-private partnership agreement for a private developer and builder to come in with a bid package to build and run these parking facilities. The reason a private company or investor would do such a thing, as was said on the county commission dais on May 14, is so they can profit from the paid parking facility.
There goes Commissioner Kevin Van Ostenbridge’s supposed reason for going around Holmes Beach officials to build the parking garage at the beach, which was to give more people access to the beach. Instead, by this plan, only those willing to pay for the privilege of parking on Anna Maria Island will have access to the beach.
Van Ostenbridge already stated that he has no intention of seeking a reduced or free rate for Manatee County residents. Now he and the other five members of the county commission are actively spending tax dollars to build a revenue stream for the developers – and possible campaign contributors – they select at the expense of taxpayers and Manatee County residents.
Holmes Beach Mayor Judy Titsworth is the only Anna Maria Island mayor who has taken a stand against paid parking and doesn’t allow it in her city. Holmes Beach has the only free and truly accessible beach access left on Anna Maria Island and county commissioners have gone all the way to the state Legislature and Gov. Ron DeSantis to make sure that it’s closed to only those willing to pay a premium to access the sand.
With the current slate of county commissioners, this is your tax dollars at work, something voters should remember at the ballot box in the Aug. 20 Republican primary, where many of our local elections are decided, and in the Nov. 5 general election.
BRADENTON BEACH – City commissioners denied a temporary use application for a paid parking lot next to the Gulf Drive Café at an April 4 commission meeting.
The application for 900 Gulf Drive N. was submitted by applicant Joshua LaRose on behalf of property owner Wendy Kokolis.
Julian Botero represented the applicant at the commission meeting.
“We’re looking for paid beach parking, 27 spots on the south end of Gulf Drive Café at the white fenced-in lot,” Botero said. “This is a C-2 (commercial) zone, similar to everything else going on on the Island.”
Botero noted that the parking area would give visitors direct access to the beach.
“We got an application for a paid parking lot,” City Building Official Darin Cushing said. “This is again a case of where it got started before it was requested. We told them to halt construction, we had to have a permit.”
Mayor John Chappie cited a number of his concerns about the application.
The property is seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line, he said.
“Several state agencies need to chime in on this after-the-fact application. This is something we’re cracking down on,” Chappie said. “These are the problems you run into when you do something without asking and it creates problems with the city.”
The applicant requested that hours of operation for the parking lot be approved for 6 a.m. to 2 p.m. and that it could be used as additional parking for the Gulf Drive Café.
“None of this jives. It makes me wonder what’s going on here,” Chappie said.
Chappie expressed concerns about the health, safety and welfare of the public in a high-density, high-traffic area.
“This is two blocks from the Cortez Road intersection, one of the busiest on the Island and the busiest in Bradenton Beach,” he said. “It’s high density with condos to the south. I’m concerned about that and the traffic.”
Chappie said there are no crosswalks in the immediate area, which has high pedestrian activity.
“I don’t see how the negative impact can be mitigated,” Chappie said, also taking issue with the proposed hours of operation and the potential for lights on the beach to disorient sea turtles during nesting season, which begins May 1.
Cushing said that the application for the parking lot would require approval from multiple agencies prior to the city considering approval.
“You’re under an FDEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection) permit for an addition to the restaurant, this would require this as well,” he said. “There’s no way we can say yes. There’s the FDEP sea turtle division. SWFWMD (the Southwest Florida Water Management District) would also have to get involved. There are state agencies that have required permits before we can even take a look at this.”
PUBLIC OPPOSITION
During public comment, several people spoke in opposition to the application to which Botero replied, “We feel precedent has been set, such as the parking lot at the Beach House, which is the same dis tance from the Cortez Bridge intersection. We could change the time of operations,” he said. “City lights were attracting turtles. All the other lots that have been approved have been in residential areas. Ours is not.”
“When you’re dealing with a temporary use permit every application stands alone,” Chappie said, adding that not all applications for temporary parking have been approved, and those that were have come with stipulations to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community.
City Attorney Ricinda Perry said Bradenton Beach Police Chief John Cosby objected to the parking lot and said it would cause excessive vehicular traffic in the area.
“The chief specifically objected to turning on a southbound lane from a parking lot because it will likely back up traffic,” Perry said. “To travel in the northbound lane will require a vehicle to travel across three lanes of traffic and that is very dangerous, especially without traffic control devices.”
Perry added that without an FDOT study and without support of FDOT, the proposed parking would create a dangerous situation.
“People need to stop doing things before they come to the city, period, it’s not going to be tolerated. We have rules and regulations and we treat everybody the same according to our land development regulations and our comprehensive plan and it creates problems, and creates a tremendous cost to the taxpayers when things happen the way they should not happen,” Chappie said.
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 – Rather than partnering with an outside vendor as planned, commissioners are now considering city-managed paid parking lots throughout Bradenton Beach.
The city had put out a Request for Proposals (RFP) on Feb. 9 to “Provide the City with a complete parking management and enforcement system that is capable of handling the current parking environment at six (6) municipal locations, a public street, and a future 7th site.”
Two bidders – Beach to Bay Investments and SP Municipal Parking – submitted proposals to the city by the Feb. 29 due date.
Representatives from both entities laid out their cases for approval at a March 19 city commission work meeting. A decision was deferred to the March 21 commission meeting where a choice between the two was expected to be made.
Instead, neither one of them was chosen. On March 21, Mayor John Chappie recommended having the city oversee paid parking without a vendor.
“The more I looked over two really impressive applications – each with a lot of plusses – I thought why have that third person? We’re talking about 75 parking spaces. I’m recommending we deny both of these and look at doing it in-house,” Chappie said.
The 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.
“This is a big commitment to make, and once we do it, it’s done,” Commissioner Ralph Cole said. “There are a lot of unknowns and that’s what bothers me.”
“I think we should keep it in-house with the ability to go back and revisit the proposals,” Commissioner Deborah Scaccianoce said.
During the public comment session, Shawn Kaleta, president of Beach to Bay Investments, addressed the commission.
“It’s an option for the city to review the idea to manage it – wise decision. However, while the RFPs are already in, select one if you don’t come up with a solution,” Kaleta said. “You’ve already done the RFP so maybe selecting which one works now so you don’t have to go through that process and take that time up at a later date. But obviously, it’s your property. If it’s best to manage it internally or try it, if it doesn’t work, then you have the RFP you can go back to on whatever terms you negotiate today. I think the big thing is liability… (cities) are not in the business of operating parking lots, they’re in the business of operating a city.”
“I respect the council’s decision,” said Will Gloor, regional manager for SP Municipal Services, offering consulting services if requested.
“The city needs to give a timeline to go back to the vendors,” Commissioner Jan Vosburgh said. “I think we’d be biting off more than we can chew.”
Chappie said he is leaning toward rejecting the bids.
“I’m leaning toward a clean slate,” Chappie said. “We may decide we don’t want to do it.”
City Attorney Ricinda Perry asked the board if the city had the funds available to prepare the lots in question for paid parking or whether this would come under the purview of the Community Redevelopment Agency.
“I think it’s the CRA,” Chappie said.
A motion was read to reject all bids submitted under RFP 2023-24 to direct the mayor to investigate and present a plan for municipal paid parking within 90 days to the CRA.
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.
BRADENTON BEACH – City commissioners approved a bid from Beach to Bay Investments Inc. on March 7 to improve a city parking lot and begin charging for parking.
Request for Proposal 2024-03 pertains to the parking lot between Church and Highland avenues directly across from the city’s Public Works department.
“It is our public works parking lot, it is largely unfinished and was in need of someone to come up with a design,” City Attorney Ricinda Perry said. “We received one bid that came in.”
Developer Shawn Kaleta is president of Beach to Bay Investments Inc.
Perry, Public Works Director Tom Woodard and City Treasurer Shayne Thompson evaluated the bid favorably based on background and experience, references, business plan, financials, bid details and project timeline.
Police Chief John Cosby participated in the evaluation by telephone.
“They came up with 21 standard spots, two ADA and 10 golf cart spots,” Perry said. “My understanding is if the city blesses the plan, they are prepared within a month’s time to get the construction completed on the site for paid parking.”
Three options were presented by the bidder for commission consideration, all with parking lot improvements to be made at the bidder’s cost.
1) A payment to the city of $48,000 per year;
2) A $24,000 lump sum payment annually to the city and 25% of the proceeds from the paid parking;
3) A 50/50 split of parking proceeds.
Perry said she, Woodard, Thompson and Cosby were leaning toward the second option, as it will provide guaranteed income to the city.
“We like that blended model, but this is all in your court to do anything you want,” Perry said.
Beach to Bay Investments asked for a lease term of 15 years and will provide insurance and indemnification, Perry said.
“The city needs flexibility, being committed for 15 years with no out is something that needs to be looked at by the city,” Perry said.
Sam Negrin, who represents Beach to Bay, spoke at the meeting.
“We own the property next door, the Bradenton Beach Marina,” Negrin said. “Part of our proposal was we’d like to offer nighttime security, 24/7 security to this parking lot as well.”
Negrin said the bidder is flexible as to terms.
“That 15 years, we might want to look at more of a trial period, less than 15, that’s for sure,” Mayor John Chappie said. “We’d like to look at a cap on what we charge per hour.”
Pricing would change during the time of the year, Negrin said.
“I think there needs to be a shorter term so we can make adjustments along the way, if need be,” Commissioner Ralph Cole said.
Cole questioned the ability of the city to track revenue and Perry said the city would have the right to audit.
Commissioner Jan Vosburgh asked what the parking rates would be and Negrin said that was open to discussion with the city.
“That’s something we could certainly put a cap on,” Negrin said. “I don’t know what we’re going to charge there yet. The lot across from Beach House charges $5-$10 an hour, so I think it will be somewhere in that range.”
Cole said he would like to know what the hourly charges are in order to make a determination as to which plan to accept.
“I like what I’m hearing so far,” Chappie said. “The security, the nighttime cameras, that’s big.”
Commissioners discussed the three revenue options as well as proposed lease terms and an exit plan for the city.
“I do take into consideration we’re getting the parking lot redone and that’s worth a nice chunk of money,” Chappie said. “I’m sure in the negotiation we’ll have a figure they’d like to recoup if we decide to part ways.”
The commission agreed to a five-year lease with options to renew twice at five years each.
Cole said he was in favor of the 50/50 split option.
“I’m fine with the 50/50 split,” Chappie said.
“If you charge $5 that’s $500 for eight hours – that’s good money,” Cole said.
Vosburgh agreed to the 50/50 split.
A fully negotiated contract will be presented at the next commission meeting, Perry said.
“A motion to accept the recommendation to evaluate Beach to Bay as the number one bidder for RFP 2024-03 public parking and to select Beach to Bay for parking services under RFP 2024-03 and to direct the city attorney to prepare a contract with Beach to Bay,” was read by Perry and was approved unanimously by commissioners.
Commissioner Marilyn Maro telephoned into the meeting.
BRADENTON BEACH – If approved by the city commission on Feb. 15, paid parking will cover much of the footprint of a future 106-room hotel/restaurant/retail complex for the next year.
A temporary use application dated Jan. 29 was submitted for city commission approval by developer Shawn Kaleta to allow paid parking lots at 101 and 105 Bridge St., 219 Gulf Drive S. and 106 Third St. from Feb. 1, 2024 through Feb. 1, 2025.
The agenda item is listed under new business for the upcoming city commission meeting on Thursday, Feb. 15 at noon at the Katie Pierola Commission Chambers, 107 Gulf Drive N.
A rendering of the proposed parking submitted to commissioners shows approximately 90 parking spaces.
A pay-by-plate parking lot on 219 Gulf Drive S. opened recently, with posted parking rates of $15 per hour. The property, along with 101 and 105 Bridge St., is zoned commercial C-2. 106 Third Street South is zoned commercial C-1.
On Dec. 7, Kaleta and hotel co-applicant, former Bradenton Beach commissioner Jake Spooner, received city commission approval for the hotel, which will include a 60-seat restaurant, 5,396 square feet of retail space and 154 on-site parking spaces.
The hotel property is situated on 1.61 acres and located at 101, 105 and 117 Bridge St. and 106, 108, 110 and 112 Third St. S.
On Dec. 11, demolition began on the building at 219 Gulf Drive S., the location of the former Joe’s Eats N Sweets. On Jan. 13, 101 Bridge St., formerly the Freckled Fin, was demolished. The building on 105 Bridge St., formerly the site of the Magnolia Inn, was demolished on Jan. 26.
Bradenton Beach permit technician Annabre Veal said on Dec. 27 that a demolition permit application for the Fudge Factory at 117 Bridge St. had been submitted but was missing some information at that time.
