Skip to main content

Tag: Shawn Kaleta

City imposes deadline to close parking lots

City imposes deadline to close parking lots

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

BRADENTON BEACH – With city-imposed closure deadlines looming, time is running out at Shawn Kaleta’s four paid parking lots.

City commissioners put multiple conditions in place before granting temporary use permits for the paid parking lots; 101 Bridge St. was approved with stipulations on Feb. 15 and 206 Bay Drive N., 207 Church Ave. and 102 Third St. N. gained approval, also with stipulations, on March 21.

Most of the agreed-upon conditions remain unfulfilled, according to City Building Official Darin Cushing. In an Aug. 1 letter to Kaleta, Cushing said he intends to barricade the lots on Aug. 9 with a permanent closure deadline of Sept. 6 if all the stipulations have not been met.

Cushing’s letter reads in part: “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.”

Cushing noted in his letter that the commission approved the applications for temporary use permits contingent on administrative site plan approval by the building official.

“The actual permits have never been approved and are currently sitting in an ‘under review’ status,” he wrote. “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 these 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.

Cushing closed the letter with: “We have no choice but to close the parking lots for use, until such time that we receive the required documentation, and all of the above-mentioned stipulations have been met. We will be barricading the entries and covering the pay kiosks and signs on Friday, Aug. 9, 2024. If by Friday, Sept. 6, 2024, we have not received 100% compliance with the stipulations for approval, we will revoke the applications, and all of the modifications that have been made on these parcels will have to be removed.”

Sam Negrin, manager of Kaleta’s Beach to Bay Investments Inc., responded on Aug. 2 to The Sun’s request for comment by text: “Our new parking management company, Island Parking, has taken over as of July 12th and has been working diligently to get the city’s requests completed. We look forward to meeting all of their requirements to remain operating.”

STIPULATIONS FOR APPROVAL

All the temporary use permits for the four lots were granted for one year. Stipulations included a review of a professionally-prepared site plan by the building official, active insurance to be carried by the property owner and production of a business tax receipt to the city clerk. The plans to be submitted to the building department are required to include requested parking spaces, golf cart parking dimensions, ADA compliance and adequate ingress and egress.

The parking lot stipulations for approval at 101 Bridge St. included no entrance or exit from Bridge Street, directional arrows, landscaping less than 3 feet high, sidewalk installation north of Third Street South to hook into the corner sidewalk on Gulf Drive, trolley benches and slab, black and white signage and review of site plan by building official. The one-year temporary use permit runs through Feb. 15, 2025.

There currently remains a driveway leading onto Bridge Street from the parking lot, the sidewalk and slab have not been installed and there are no directional arrows. A leaking artesian well is in the process of being capped.

Some of the stipulations for 206 Bay Drive N., 102 Third St. N. and 207 Church Ave. include the building owner submitting a building permit application or land development approval request within eight months of the temporary use permit approval, permits that will expire on March 21, 2025, and a limit on the number of parking spaces to be approved by the building official on a site plan.

A sidewalk is to be installed along Church Avenue with details to be approved by the building official for the Church Avenue lot, along with landscape buffering and the installation of a privacy fence along the northern and southern property lines. A sidewalk is to be installed along Third Street North along with landscape buffering for the 102 Third St. N. lot.

LaRose sues Kaleta over parking contract termination

LaRose sues Kaleta over parking contract termination

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

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.”

Commission terminates parking talks with Kaleta

Commission terminates parking talks with Kaleta

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

BRADENTON BEACH – City commissioners voted unanimously on July 18 to terminate parking lot management agreement discussions with Beach to Bay Investments Inc. for a paid parking lot between Church and Highland Avenues.

Beach to Bay, with Shawn Kaleta as president, was the sole bidder in the city’s Request for Proposal 2024-03 to improve the city parking lot and begin charging for parking. The lot is located directly across from the city’s Public Works department.

At the beginning of the July 18 city commission meeting, Mayor John Chappie showed a PowerPoint presentation with pictures he had taken of the 101 Bridge St. lot showing flooding caused by a leaking artesian well.

The Bridge Street parking lot is owned by Kaleta and was approved for temporary use by the city in February, subject to stipulations that have not been met, Chappie said.

“I would like to start out with some things. In my reviewing of the information and from past meetings and documentation and materials that have been provided, I continue to have concerns with the proposed agreement,” Chappie said.

Chappie read from the proposed parking lot management agreement.

“In starting with the parking lot management agreement itself in particular it states, ‘whereas the parties hereto being of like mind and intent believe that the provision of quality, attractive, landscaped and paid parking facilities will advance their common goal,’ ” he read. “I don’t believe we are of like mind or intent and I say that after going through and looking at the four previously approved temporary use parking that have been made by the city of Bradenton Beach.”

Chappie was referring to parking lots at 102 Third St., 206 Bay Drive, 207 Church St., and 101 Bridge St.

“All four of these temporary use permits that have been previously approved are operating right now but none of the properties have followed through with or completed the required stipulations,” Chappie said.

He concluded his presentation with pictures of the flooding at the Bridge Street parking lot caused by a leaking artesian well.

“Again, the pictures clearly show they haven’t followed through at any of the places with the stipulations and guidelines we put forward in making that approval,” Chappie said. “All these properties are owned by the same corporation or individual. I’m not satisfied at all with the management of the properties. On this basis, I’ve come to the conclusion I don’t see how we can possibly go through with this agreement with someone who I don’t consider to be qualified from past experiences.”

Chappie also noted a discussion from a previous meeting about a cap on parking rates at the public works lot.

“I listened to the tape again and Sam (Sam Negrin of Beach to Bay) did make a statement which I took to offer up about the cost that would be charged per hour,” Chappie said. “I think Jan (Commissioner Jan Vosburgh) mentioned it and Ralph (Commissioner Ralph Cole) mentioned it as well that Sam stated that the $5-$10 range that Beach House is charging, somewhere in that range would be fair.”

NO SITE PLAN, NO DEAL

Chappie said that Building Official Darin Cushing had not received a requested site plan for the parking lot.

“The normal everyday operations of public works and the police department are a top priority. With the drawing we did have I know it would negatively impact the operations of public works and PD to some degree as well,” he said. “These are the reasons I don’t feel comfortable with the management choice, I was okay with it at first, but looking back at the examples of their operations in the city, I don’t think we should enter into an agreement for the cell lot.”

Commissioner Ralph Cole, who moved to terminate discussions with Beach to Bay, agreed with Chappie.

“I have to agree with you about the other parking lots and the fact that the same company hasn’t done what they said they were going to do,” Cole said. “What’s to prevent them from putting food trucks in other parking lots?“

A food truck has been parked at the Bridge Street lot for about the past week.

“We still don’t have a site plan, so we really don’t know what we’re looking at in a permanent way and I’m really not comfortable with the pricing,” Commissioner Deborah Scaccianoce said.

Vosburgh said she’s always felt uncomfortable about approving the agreement.

During public comment, Ingrid McClellan, vice chair of the Scenic WAVES committee, spoke.

“I had a concern with the parking lot on Gulf Drive. That’s on the Bradenton Beach Scenic Highway and that does not look scenic at all,” she said.

In response to a question from Scaccianoce as to whether the commission could terminate the discussion, City Attorney Ricinda Perry advised the commissioners.

“Under the RFP process, it puts the city in a position of we have to negotiate in good faith, so then the question becomes has the city negotiated in good faith up to this point? Part of negotiations is the city doing its homework and making sure whatever it is purchasing and contracting for, it meets your expectations,” she said.

Perry commented on the photo of the flooded lot on Bridge Street.

“I would note that the image before you that is not after a rain, that is an existing concern that the city has put in writing and asked to have that remediated a number of times,” she said. “The artesian well has not been fixed and water continues to go down the public streets. Also, you can see the overgrowth, the haphazard poles, the lack of appropriate ground cover and there were other stipulations that have not been met.”

She said she and the mayor have had discussions about other uses that are coming onto the site.

“When you see that your expectations are not being met, on not one thing, not two, not three, but more than four, it does raise the question can they meet your expectations? One of the CRA goals is to beautify the district and, as Ingrid said, this certainly is not scenic. This is not beautification that meets the expectations of this board.”

“With (the city’s) appropriate due diligence and that there has not been appropriate follow through with site plans, and with the existing parking lots, I believe that we have negotiated in good faith,” she said. “I believe that you’re in a position now where you could essentially terminate negotiations that have failed and you could articulate what those reasons are.”

She said the three reasons are that expectations have not been met, the requirements of a site plan and the requirements established and articulated by the building official have not been met, and commissioners do not feel that they could come to terms with the amount charged.

“I feel very comfortable that the city is in a good position to terminate the negotiations based off the discussion today,” Perry said.

Kaleta and Negrin were not at the meeting and did not respond to requests for comment by The Sun.

City threatens shutdown of Bridge Street parking lot

City threatens shutdown of Bridge Street parking lot

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

BRADENTON BEACH – A city-threatened shutdown of the paid parking lot at 101 Bridge St. prompted its management to begin to fix one long-standing issue, but due to non-compliance with other city requirements, a temporary closure of the lot may still be imminent, according to the city’s building official.

The property, owned by developer Shawn Kaleta, has been operational since earning commission approval in February for temporary use as a paid parking lot. That approval by the commission was conditional on stipulations, including the submission of a site plan, that have not been fulfilled, according to city officials.

“I gave them until last Friday, July 12 to get things tightened up, or we would barricade off the lot and not allow it to be used for parking until there was progress being made to rectify these issues,” Bradenton Beach Building Official Darin Cushing wrote in a July 15 email to The Sun. “The representative immediately responded and began working toward resolution and has been in daily contact with myself and the code enforcement officer, therefore we did not shut them down.”

On July 8, Cushing sent Kaleta’s representative, Sam Negrin, the following email:

“The Temporary Use Parking Lot is getting out of hand, yet again. If several issues are not addressed ASAP, we will be forced to barricade and close off the parking lot until they are addressed.

“First and foremost, the artesian well onsite is once again leaking and spreading water all over the lot, and down the street toward the Bay. It needs to be PERMANENTLY capped off immediately, not just temporarily.

“Electronic pay station kiosks have recently been added without any permitting. We were supposed to have been provided with a final site plan for the entire lot months ago as a condition of the temporary use that was approved in February.

“Again, we need a true site plan, prepared by a civil engineer, showing all of the dimensions, number and location of parking spaces, location of the added slabs, location of the pay kiosks and other signage, ingress and egress (traffic circulation), the post and rope that was installed, and anything else that has been added or modified since the lot(s) were vacant. A hand or computer-generated ‘sketch’ won’t cut it, we need a site plan.

“This parking lot has been in operation for five months now, during which time we have had to continually address the well issue. We’ve also asked multiple times for a site plan to be prepared and turned in for the temporary use permit file.

“Please make these things happen. If they have not, by close of business on Friday (7/12/24) of this week, the lot will be shut down, and the area barricaded permanently, and the temporary use permit revoked. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.”

“After I sent them the email, they did contract with someone to cap the artesian well. It’s been leaking for a long time,” Cushing said on July 16. “I still don’t have a site plan and there are other issues that haven’t been taken care of. I still may be shutting it down temporarily in the next few days until these things are done.”

Cushing said the artesian well is next to Florida Power and Light equipment and the repairs to the well need to be coordinated with the power company.

“That well needs to be dug deep,” he said.

UNMET STIPULATIONS

On Feb. 15, the city commission voted unanimously to approve the one-year temporary use permit for paid parking at the lot which encompasses 101 Bridge St., 105 Bridge St., 219 Gulf Drive S., and 106 Third St. S. with the following conditions:

• No ingress or egress from Bridge Street;

• Parking layout in accordance with the city’s land development code for parking drive aisle, parking bumpers and directional arrows;

• Turtle-friendly lighting at the lot management’s discretion;

• Landscaping buffering around the perimeter;

• Installation of a sidewalk on the north side of Third Street to Gulf Drive and Bridge Street at the corner of Gulf Drive to the boundaries of the Daiquiri Deck property;

• Installation of a concrete slab for trolley benches;

• CRA black and white signage; and

• ADA requirements by state and federal law for any parking spaces with a detailed site plan to the satisfaction of the building official.

In addition to the site plan not having been produced to the city, there currently exists ingress and egress from the lot to and from Bridge Street, landscape buffering has not been installed, no directional arrows are in place and the required sidewalks and concrete slab have not been installed.

Despite a statement made by Negrin at the February meeting that there would be no overnight parking at the lot, a food truck has been parked there for at least the past week.

Neither Negrin nor Kaleta responded to The Sun’s request for comment.

CHANGE IN MANAGEMENT

The parking lot was, up until the past week, managed by Easy Parking Group of Sarasota before the contract was terminated by Kaleta and new kiosks were put in place.

The new kiosks, which now say “Island Parking” show a parking rate of $15 per hour.

Josh LaRose, owner of Easy Parking Group, declined to comment on details of the termination.

“We did not do anything to default the contract with Shawn,” LaRose wrote in a July 16 email to The Sun.

LaRose wrote he was not responsible for the maintenance of the parking lot.

“My contract states that I’m only responsible for parking management, collecting payment and enforcement, which is what my company does,” he wrote.

During the February commission meeting, Negrin had stated that LaRose would hold the insurance on the property. With LaRose no longer affiliated with the management of the parking lot, it’s unclear who, if anyone, is carrying insurance.

CANCELED TAX SALE

A tax deed sale for past due property taxes on 101 Bridge St. was scheduled for Sept. 19 and according to the www.manatee.realforeclose.com website, the sale was canceled and the property was redeemed.

The assessed value of the property was listed at $1,086,406 and the opening bid for the tax sale was listed as $67,512.85 with 205 Sycamore LLC as the listed property owner. The manager of that LLC is Shawn Kaleta and the registered agent is Najmy Thompson, a Bradenton-based law firm.

Editorial: Signed palm tree agreement better late than never

Written by Sun staff on . Posted in Editorial, Opinion.

The now-signed maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement for the flawed Bridge Street coconut palm tree planting project lists April 1 as the project commencement date, which fittingly coincides with April Fool’s Day.

But Mayor John Chappie and the city’s witness, City Clerk Terri Sanclemente, didn’t sign and fully execute the agreement until May 28 – nearly two months after the listed commencement date.

On May 15, City Attorney Ricinda Perry told The Sun a “signed agreement” existed but a copy couldn’t be provided until Sanclemente returned from vacation on May 28. Local developer and project partner Shawn Kaleta might have signed the agreement on behalf of his Beach to Bay Construction Limited Liability Corporation in mid-May, as Perry’s emails indicate, but the agreement wasn’t legally enforceable until Chappie and Sanclemente signed it.

We appreciate Sanclemente promptly providing a copy of the fully executed agreement upon her return. We thank her for acknowledging that she and Chappie signed the agreement that day and for providing additional project-related documents and answers to our questions. Sanclemente did her job, while others associated with the project failed miserably.

Of the 70 coconut palms planted on and around Bridge Street, one already fell on a Bridge Street sidewalk and 22 others were removed from Gulf Drive South and replanted elsewhere along Bridge Street because FDOT doesn’t allow coconut palms and their falling coconuts and palm fronds along state-owned roads. Bradenton Beach leaders apparently don’t share similar safety concerns about city-owned Bridge Street.

During the month-long gap between the plantings and the mayor’s signature, would the city have been solely responsible for any palm tree-related deaths, injuries or property damage that occurred before the agreement became legally binding?

The Perry-drafted agreement includes indemnification language designed to protect the city from project-related lawsuits. An indemnification clause doesn’t prevent the city from being named in a lawsuit. It simply means the city can try to recoup its lawsuit-related losses from Kaleta and his roster of attorneys. That’s a risky proposition for a city financially desperate enough to sign over control of city-owned assets in exchange for shared project costs.

Perry and her elected accomplices are taking liberties with taxpayer assets that might get them removed by shareholders if they sat on a private sector board of directors. A misguided tree-planting project isn’t the worst sin a local government can commit, but the city attorney shouldn’t be leading the lackadaisical mayor and commissioners by their noses in her efforts to broker questionable public-private partnerships.

This fiasco prompted some Sun readers to call for Perry’s termination and Chappie’s resignation. Neither of those scenarios are likely, but maybe the light shined on this botched affair will cause all involved to think twice before pursuing another partnership with Team Kaleta.

City releases signed coconut palms agreement

City releases signed coconut palms agreement

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

BRADENTON BEACH – The fully signed agreement between the city and developer Shawn Kaleta for the maintenance of the coconut palm trees on and around Bridge Street was signed by Mayor John Chappie on May 28 and placed into the public record that day.

That comes more than a month after the trees were planted the week of April 24 in a public-private partnership between the city and Kaleta.

On May 29, City Clerk Terri Sanclemente provided The Sun with a copy of the agreement signed by Chappie, Kaleta – as Beach to Bay Construction LLC manager – and Sanclemente as witness. The Sun made multiple requests for the document beginning on May 6.

The maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement in a public-private partnership between the City of Bradenton Beach and Kaleta, through his LLC, designates responsibility for the tree maintenance to Kaleta and indemnifies the city in the event of injury or damage from the trees.

Public-private partnerships between cities and developers are unique to Bradenton Beach among the three Anna Maria Island cities.

Both Mayor Dan Murphy of Anna Maria and Mayor Judy Titsworth of Holmes Beach responded to The Sun’s email asking if either city had partnered with a private entity for city projects.

“If you define a public-private partnership as a “capital improvement project with the city getting dollar funding from a developer” the answer is no, we have had none that I can recall during my tenure of 10 years as mayor. I don’t think we’ve ever had a developer give us any money for a project,” Murphy wrote.

Titsworth wrote, “We have not, to my recollection.”

The partnership with Kaleta for the palm trees’ maintenance and indemnification was approved unanimously on April 3 by the Bradenton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA).

At that meeting, City Attorney Ricinda Perry assured CRA members that the agreement would be signed by Kaleta prior to the trees being planted.

CRA member Jan Vosburgh expressed concern about the trees’ safety and maintenance.

“I believe everything the city does should be as maintenance-free as possible,” Vosburgh said. “It sounds to me like we’re making a nightmare for the city and the businesses.”

Ultimately, following assurances by Perry that a signed agreement would be in place, Vosburgh voted to approve the agreement, making it a unanimous vote.

In addition to Chappie and Vosburgh, Deborah Scaccianoce, Marilyn Maro, Ed Chiles and Chair Ralph Cole make up the CRA.

OUT OF ORDER

It is unclear when Kaleta signed the agreement.

The city clerk provided The Sun a copy of the receipt for the April 10 $10,000 payment from Kaleta, but based on correspondence between City Attorney Ricinda Perry and Kaleta’s attorneys, it does not appear that he signed the agreement prior to the planting of the palm trees the week of April 24.

On April 25, Kaleta attorney Sean Kelly sent an email to Perry that said, “Shawn asked me to finalize this agreement for the coconut palms on Bridge Street. Will you please send me the Exhibit A site plan and the dollar amount for the CRA’s contribution? Then I can update the document and have Shawn sign. Thanks!”

On May 9, Perry sent an email to Kelly copied to Kaleta that said, “Good morning. It took me a bit to find a way to document in a ‘site plan’ the palms and to make sure we knew exactly where Miguel was planting everything. I ended up flying my drone and then inserting stars where palms are located with a description for areas that have multiple palms at or near an address.” “Miguel” refers to Miguel Mancera, the owner of M&F Lawn Care, Inc., the company that planted the palm trees, who has not yet been paid for his work (see story, page 9).

On May 14, Kaleta attorney, Rainier Altiere, sent Perry an email that said, “Here is the completed maintenance agreement. The only thing missing is the start date. Please provide me with that and let me know if this is OK for us to have Shawn sign.”

On May 15, Perry sent Kaleta, Kelly and Altiere an email that referenced an unnamed limited liability corporation (LLC) Kaleta intended to use as the CRA’s project partner and the party responsible for maintaining the coconut palms for the next 30 years.

“This corp (corporation) named in the document was set up at the end of last month. Is it just a ‘shell company’ with no assets or insurance to cover the harm/damage caused by a falling coconut? At a minimum, the company will need an insurance policy naming the city that actually covers damage caused by the coconuts. I can’t just have a piece of open (missing word) with no actual protection for the public. Ideas?” Perry wrote.

On May 15, The Sun emailed Perry requesting a copy of the fully signed and fully executed agreement. In her May 15 response, Perry wrote, “There is a signed agreement. The clerk is out of the office and can provide further documents upon her return.”

On May 29, Perry sent an email to Sanclemente and Chappie that addressed the date Sanclemente and Chappie signed the agreement.

“Contracts have counterpart signatures that most always have differing dates – hence the reason contracts ALWAYS state an effective date. The effective date controls contracts. In this instance, I always stated that the effective date would be when the date trees were being delivered. The city did not pick nor write the date but found the effective date to be acceptable and within the approval of the CRA. Standard contract law. Feel free to forward to anyone needing legal contract law information,” Perry wrote.

The effective date of the agreement is April 1, which is two days before its approval by the CRA at its April 3 meeting. The city did not respond to The Sun’s request for an explanation of the earlier effective date.

“The city of Bradenton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) has approved a CRA beautification project on Bridge Street to be installed at a cost not to exceed forty thousand and no/dollars ($40,000) to be paid for by the CRA and ten thousand and no/dollars ($10,000) to be paid for by the Sponsor (Kaleta). All trees installed in this beautification project shall be maintained at the sole cost of Sponsor,” the agreement states.

The agreement will be in place for 30 years with options to renew every 10 years.

According to the signed agreement, “Sponsor shall at its sole cost and expense maintain the permitted installation in good condition. The city makes no warranties or representation of any kind regarding the suitability of this public property/right-of-way location for the proposed installation.”

The signed agreement includes indemnification language that states, “As consideration for use of the city’s public property to install coconut palm trees, the Sponsor (Kaleta) shall at all times, at its expense, hold harmless and indemnify the city, its officers, employees, agents, elected and appointed officials, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, demands, liens, liabilities, penalties, fines, fees, judgments, losses and damages whether or not a lawsuit is filed, including, but not limited to claims for damage to property or bodily or personal injuries, including death.”

The indemnification language also states that Kaleta is responsible for any costs, expenses and attorney fees associated with a claim or lawsuit associated with the coconut palm trees.

According to the Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute, “To indemnify, also known as indemnity or indemnification, means compensating a person for damages or losses they have incurred or will incur related to a specified accident, incident or event. Typically, parties make a written agreement in which one party promises to indemnify the other party for future specified losses.”

On May 31, The Sun received a copy of Kaleta’s proof of insurance with $1 million in liability per occurrence for personal injury, $5,000 for medical expenses per person, $100,000 damage to rented premises and $2 million general aggregate coverage. The policy expires on Sept. 9.

The insured is listed as Beach to Bay Investments, 102 48th St., Holmes Beach and the producer of the policy is Gulf Insurance, LLC, 301 Manatee Ave. in Holmes Beach.

The Sun has requested an updated site plan since the location of some of the trees has changed due to their FDOT-mandated May 24 removal from Gulf Drive South, a state road.

As of May 31, that site plan has not been received.

According to the maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement Exhibit B, Kaleta’s company is responsible for: “Removing fronds, fruit, seedpods and fruit stalks carefully without damaging the trunk or fronds that are to be retained. All coconut fruit must be removed once it produces on the tree.”

The guidelines continue, “Pruning will be required a minimum of two times a year on municipal property and rights-of-way to manage the hazards of falling coconuts and fronds and to minimize the risk to persons and property within the fall zone.”

People on the Anna Maria Island Sun Facebook page had plenty of comments about the palm trees and the agreement.

Wendy Holcomb wrote, “Not a good idea EVER to put coconut trees where pedestrians walk and vehicles drive.”

Richard Becker wrote, “All this over a palm tree. It’s not about the palm tree, it’s about the politics.”

“Indemnify means to ‘make right again’ not ‘protect,’ so if the city lost a case, Team K would have to pay them back, the settlement ck (check) has to come from the defendant,” Susan Paxton wrote.

According to recent city Scenic WAVES committee meeting agendas, the CRA board did not request a preliminary project review from the city commission-appointed committee

The Scenic WAVES committee acts as the commission’s advisory board on proposed landscaping and beautification projects.

Related coverage:

Editorial: Signed palm tree agreement better late than never

Palm tree landscaper awaiting payment from city

Editorial: Palm trees and other shady endeavors

FDOT: Wrong trees, wrong place

Expert outlines optimum coconut palm maintenance

Signed palm tree agreement remains elusive

 

Editorial: Palm trees and other shady endeavors

Written by Sun staff on . Posted in Editorial, Opinion.

Someone once posed the question: “If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?”

The Sun poses a similar question: If the city attorney says there’s a signed agreement for the ill-fated Bridge Street palm tree planting project but nobody has seen it, does the agreement really exist?

In early April, the Bradenton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) that includes the mayor and city commissioners approved planting 80 coconut palm trees along Bridge Street. According to City Attorney Ricinda Perry, the CRA was to contribute $40,000 toward the project and developer Shawn Kaleta and/or one of his LLCs would kick in another $10,000.

Perry told the CRA members there would be a signed maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement in place before the trees were planted. The trees were planted in late April with no signed agreement in place.

A couple of weeks ago, one of the new palms toppled onto a Bridge Street sidewalk and had to be replanted.

Last week, FDOT told the city to remove the new palms planted in the Gulf Drive-Bridge Street roundabout.

Gulf Drive is a state road and FDOT doesn’t allow coconut palms to be planted along state-owned roads because they limit visibility and contain large falling objects like coconuts and palm fronds.

You’d think someone with the city or the city’s often-contracted landscaper would have known about this pesky little state rule – or at least checked to see if there was such a pesky little state rule. But that kind of foresight doesn’t mesh with the city’s “You can do it right when you do it over” approach to project management.

So now we know that coconut palms aren’t cool along a state road but they’re still OK standing alongside the highly-traveled, highly-populated city-owned Bridge Street.

To date, Perry and the city have not provided The Sun with a copy of the signed agreement, despite the multiple public records requests made during a two-week period. Perry told us we had to wait until the city clerk returns from her vacation on May 28 before we can see the elusive signed document.

The Florida Public Records Act says the city has to promptly acknowledge public records requests, respond in good faith and make “reasonable efforts” to figure out who has the requested document and where it’s stashed. City officials who break the state law can be fined $500 or removed from office if they try really hard to hide or withhold the requested document.

Perry and Mayor John Chappie were copied on our multiple and still ongoing requests for a signed agreement. Perry gave us an incomplete and unsigned draft version of the agreement that didn’t mention the project partner’s name. She also sent us some emails that showed us how hard she tried to collaborate with Team Kaleta’s lawyers to make this deal happen.

According to the unsigned version of the agreement, Team Kaleta is supposed to maintain the palm trees at their expense for the next 30 years. The unsigned agreement doesn’t specifically mention coconuts or palm fronds and it doesn’t specifically require Team Kaleta to pluck those pesky buggers from the trees before they drop on some unlucky person’s head, child or 1962 Corvette.

The unsigned agreement does however require Team Kaleta to comply with reference Exhibit A – a blank space that calls for a yet-to-be-seen site plan that shows specifically where each new tree was planted – and Exhibit B: “Guidelines for the Management of Coconut Palms.”

The “Guidelines” inform us that coconut palms can grow to be over 100 feet tall, may live 100 years and “regularly shed coconuts and large fronds, which may expose people and property to injury and damage.”

The all-knowing ‘Guidelines” also say, “To minimize this risk, coconuts and fronds must be regularly removed prior to their fall. In certain instances, coconut palms may possess structural defects that increase the risk of failure of a portion or all of the palm.”

Thank you, wise city leaders. What could go wrong?

The “Guidelines” say any coconut palms that show serious defects, conditions or weather damage must be removed (by Team Kaleta) within 14 days of being told to do so. Given that one tree already toppled onto a Bridge Street sidewalk on a sunny day, what’s the over/under on how many palms are going down during our upcoming “more active than usual” hurricane season?

In the absence of the signed agreement, it appears the first tree likely fell before the agreement was signed and dated by Chappie and Team Kaleta. If that first falling tree injured a person, place or thing with no signed agreement yet in place, who would have been liable – the city, Kaleta or both?

The unsigned agreement is also supposed to indemnify (lawyer-speak for “protect”) the city and the CRA against any future liabilities and lawsuits associated with the troublesome palm trees. If someone or something gets clocked by a falling tree, frond or coconut, that unfortunate soul gets to do battle with Team Kaleta’s army of lawyers, while the city sits on the sideline screaming, “Leave us alone, we’re indemnified!”

Mayor Chappie frequently laments the negative impacts that super-sized short-term vacation rental homes, aka “party houses,” have on Bradenton Beach’s residential neighborhoods, but he’s OK taking project money from the Island’s biggest developer of “party houses.”

Instead of sharpening their pencils and wisely managing CRA and city funds for future projects, the mayor and city commissioners are taking the lazy and easy way out by enabling Perry to pursue funding partnerships with Team Kaleta.

In the past year or so, Perry proposed the CRA or city partner with Team Kaleta to improve the city-owned parking lot near the Team Kaleta-owned marina. She also suggested the city partner with Team Kaleta for a Team Kaleta-controlled mooring field near the pier.

In early April – the same day she proposed the ill-advised, poorly-executed palm tree project – Perry proposed the CRA partner with Team Kaleta to install a waterfront pedestrian path that runs from Team Kaleta’s marina, past Team Kaleta’s mobile home park and ends at the city-owned pier.

Who is Perry working for? The city or Team Kaleta? When proposing these public-private partnerships, she sings the praises of a developer good-hearted enough to help fund CRA and city projects, but what she, the mayor and the city commission are really doing is selling the city down the Intracoastal Waterway.

Somehow, the sister cities of Anna Maria and Holmes Beach manage to fund their capital projects without financial aid from Team Kaleta. And in both those cities, the city attorneys focus on the basics – providing legal advice and legal services to their respective city leaders and city staff.

In most cities, a city attorney’s sole job is to dispense legal knowledge. City attorneys don’t usually serve as de facto city managers, project managers and project initiators. But in Perry’s defense, she’s just filling the leadership void created by Bradenton Beach’s weak mayor form of city government, and the weak mayor and weak commission gladly let her do it.

With the threat of state-imposed consolidation looming over the three AMI cities, there’s chatter in local political circles that Chappie wants to serve as the Island-wide mayor if that happens. That leadership scenario might scare some folks, but Island Mayor Chappie and Island Attorney Perry could then partner with Team Kaleta to plant coconut palms and other seeds of dissent throughout the rest of the consolidation fiefdom.

Signed palm tree agreement remains elusive

Signed palm tree agreement remains elusive

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

BRADENTON BEACH – A newly-planted coconut palm tree that fell over on Bridge Street last week has raised questions about whether the city obtained a signed indemnification agreement prior to planting it and 79 other trees.

At the April 3 Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) meeting, members unanimously approved the installation of 80 coconut palm trees along Bridge Street in a city partnership with developer Shawn Kaleta.

The approval was based on assurances by City Attorney Ricinda Perry that a maintenance, indemnification and hold harmless agreement with Kaleta would be in place prior to planting the trees, with Kaleta taking re­sponsibility for tree maintenance and indemnifying the city against liability for any damage caused by the trees.

The palm trees were planted the week of April 24. On May 15, a Facebook post showed that one tree had fallen over from unknown reasons, causing no known dam­age. Bridge Street workers have reported seeing people picking coconuts from the newly-planted trees.

As of May 19, after multiple Sunshine Law requests to the city from The Sun, no signed and fully executed agreement had been produced by the city. That docu­ment is a public record and subject to the Florida Sunshine Law.

In the absence of a signed con­tract between the city and Kaleta, liability for damage that could be caused by the trees is in question.

Signed palm tree agreement remains elusive
A newly-planted coconut palm tree on Bridge Street that fell on May 15 and was subsequently replanted is being supported by string tied to a piece of metal. – Leslie Lake | Sun

A May 15 Facebook post shows one of the new palms near 120 Bridge St. laying on the ground, apparently having been uprooted. By May 17, the fallen tree had been replanted and was being supported by a string tied to a metal stake.

AGREEMENT ELUSIVE

On April 25, One of Kaleta’s attorneys, Sean Kelly, sent Perry and Kaleta an email that said, “Shawn asked me to finalize this agreement for the coconut palms on Bridge Street. Will you please send me the Exhibit A site plan and the dollar amount for the CRA’s contribution? Then I can update the document and have Shawn sign.”

This email exchange occurred the same week the trees were being planted.

On May 6, The Sun emailed the city clerk asking for a copy of the agreement between the city and Shawn Kaleta (or his business entity) showing the maintenance and indemnification agreement for the newly-planted palms on Bridge Street. The email was sent to city clerk Terri Sanclemente, Perry and Mayor John Chappie. No response was received.

On May 7, a Sun reporter went to city hall to obtain a copy of the contract and was told by the city clerk that it was not there and she had been told it was still being worked on. Another email was sent to Perry that day requesting a copy of the agreement and no response was received.

On May 9, Perry sent an email to Kaleta and attorney Sean Kelly that said, “It took me a bit to find a way to document in a ‘site plan’ the palms and to make sure we knew exactly where Miguel was planting everything.” Kelly responded that day to Perry in an email that said, “Do you have the dollar amounts to insert for contributions from the city and from Shawn?”

Perry wrote that the CRA was contributing $40,000 toward the tree planting project and Kaleta was to contribute $10,000.

On May 14, another Kaleta attorney, Rainier Altiere sent Perry an email that said, “Here is the completed maintenance agreement. The only thing missing is the start date. Please provide me with that and let me know if this is OK for us to have Shawn sign.”

On May 15, Perry sent Kaleta, Kelly and Altiere an email in which she wrote, “This corp (corpora­tion) named in the document was set up at the end of last month. Is it just a ‘shell company’ with no assets or insurance to cover the harm/damage caused by a falling coconut? At a minimum, the company will need an insur­ance policy naming the city that actually covers damage caused by the coconuts. I can’t just have a piece of open (missing word) with no actual protection for the public. Ideas?”

A May 15 email request to the city clerk for a copy of the signed agreement received an “out of of­fice” reply. The same day, The Sun emailed Perry requesting a copy of the signed and fully executed agreement.

Sanclemente, Chappie and Police Chief/Interim Public Works Direc­tor John Cosby were among those copied on The Sun’s email request.

In her response, Perry wrote, “I’ll see if the deputy clerks can access the signed agreement. If not, we’ll have to wait until Terri gets back.”

Perry did, however, provide a copy of a blank draft version of the agreement, which did not identify the other party involved with the project and did not include any details regarding the cost of the project or the manner in which the material, installation and mainte­nance costs would be shared. The agreement is for 30 years. She also provided copies of some of the emails referenced in this story.

When asked by The Sun that day for a signed and fully executed copy of the agreement, Perry wrote, “There is a signed agree­ment. The clerk is out of the office and can provide further docu­ments upon her return.”

On May 17, a Sun reporter attempt­ed to obtain the document in person from the city clerk’s office and was told the contract was not there. That day, The Sun emailed Perry, Kaleta and Kelly asking Kaleta or Kelly to provide The Sun and/or Perry a copy of the signed agreement. As of May 20, The Sun had not received a response to that request.

The email exchanges indicate there was no signed agreement in place when the trees were planted in late April. As of May 20, the city and Perry had not provided any documents that confirmed that a signed and fully executed agree­ment existed that day.

In order for the agreement to be fully executed it must be signed and dated by Chappie, who was out of town for the Governor’s Hurricane Conference taking place in Palm Beach County May 12-17, according to the clerk’s office.

(Sun reporter Joe Hendricks contributed to this story)

Related coverage:

Irrigation system to be installed on Bridge Street

Eighty new coconut palms line Bridge Street

 

Eighty new coconut palms line Bridge Street

Eighty new coconut palms line Bridge Street

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

BRADENTON BEACH – Eighty new coconut palms have been delivered and are being planted along Bridge Street.

“This will be a big improvement,” Mayor John Chappie said on April 25. “Many of the existing trees needed to be replaced.”

At an April 3 Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) meeting, the board approved a city partnership with developer Shawn Kaleta in which he will accept responsibility for the maintenance of the trees and donate $10,000 toward the $50,000 cost of the palms and white river rock. The balance will be paid from CRA funds.

Eighty new coconut palms line Bridge Street
With a newly-planted palm in the foreground, workers continued planting in the roundabout. – Leslie Lake | Sun

The 50 large and 30 small coconut palms were harvested in Miami and were delivered to Bradenton Beach on April 23. Planting along Bridge Street and the roundabout intersection on Gulf Drive began shortly after.

At the April 3 meeting, concerns had been raised among CRA members about damage from falling coconuts.

“Liability does concern me,” Chappie said. “But I think it would enhance the Key West-old Island feel on Anna Maria Island.”

Those concerns were alleviated by City Attorney Ricinda Perry, who assured CRA members that Kaleta, through one of his business entities, would sign a contract ensuring the responsibility of tree maintenance and indemnifying the city against liability for damage caused by falling fruit.

“There would be no cost to the city for maintenance of the trees as Mr. Kaleta wants the coconuts, likely for his restaurants,” Chappie said.

According to the University of Florida/IFAS Extension Service website, “Coconuts can grow up to 15 inches long and 12 inches wide, composed of a thick fibrous husk surrounding a spherical nut with a hard, brittle, hairy shell… The coconut palm starts fruiting 6-10 years after the seed germinates and reaches full production at 15-20 years of age. The tree continues to fruit until it is about 80 years old, with an annual production of 50-200 fruits per tree, depending on cultivar and climate. The fruits require about a year to develop and are generally produced regularly throughout the year.”

Marina bar remains closed

Marina bar remains closed

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Business, Restaurants | Bars.

BRADENTON BEACH – After city officials put a halt to what they said was the unpermitted operation of a new bar at the Bradenton Beach Marina in March, building official Darin Cushing said the proper approval process is now underway.

On March 25, the Marina Facebook page announced the opening of the bar, serving beer and wine.

Cushing said he saw the post and on March 26 issued a cease and desist order, which was posted in the bar area.

“The basis of the cease and desist order was that there was a bar built out in that section of the marina,” Cushing said. “And we said no, don’t work on it, don’t stock it.”

The Bradenton Beach Marina, 402 Church St. is owned by developer Shawn Kaleta.

“I have a fully open door, anytime somebody has an idea for a project and says we’d like to get it going, ask us, ‘What do we need to do? What do we need for permitting? What do we need for drawings?’ Come talk to me ahead of time. Do it that way, then you apply and get approval and then you do the work,” Cushing said.

Since the March 26 order, he said plans and an application to build the bar have been received by his office.

“I met down there with the design professional and one of the fire marshals was there and we discussed what they needed,” Cushing said on April 18. “Yesterday I did my first initial review of the plans and the fire department did their initial review. And we both kicked it back and sent some comments back to the design professional.”

Cushing said he signed off on the marina’s application for a full liquor license.

“They do have a beer and wine license for the marina as a whole and they’re kind of saying that’s all we’re doing right now,” Cushing said. “I did sign the application for the liquor license yesterday or the day before. That’s in the hands of the state. We have to sign it, the health department has to sign it and one other entity before it goes up to the state.”

Bunny & Pirates holding grand finale Saturday

Bunny & Pirates holding grand finale Saturday

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Business, Restaurants | Bars.

CORTEZ – After seven years in business as a pub, market and live music venue, Bunny & Pirates Bazaar is closing and will be having a grand finale celebration on Saturday, April 6.

Beginning at 3 p.m., the farewell event will feature live music, food trucks, raffle prizes and a silent auction at 12404 Cortez Road W.

Bunny & Pirates business owners Elizabeth Shore and Jeffrey O’Connell announced the unexpected closing on Facebook on March 16 after lease negotiations stopped with building owner Shawn Kaleta.

The pair opened Bunny & Pirates in 2017 as a coastal store selling new and vintage items, snacks and craft beer. The following year they launched the pub and live music.

In a press release to news outlets, Shore wrote in part: “Announcing that we have been forced to close the venue has been among the most difficult things we have ever endured. We evolved the beer garden over time with the grassroots help of friends and family. Everyone pitched in, and we transformed our outdoor space with many helping hands. There is something special about being part of helping one another. We brought people together around common human needs – a place of belonging and friendship.”

Shore wrote that customers became part of their extended friends and family.

“It’s obvious from the reaction of our community over the last couple of weeks since we announced our sudden closing how much our familiar vibe resonated with so many people,” she wrote. “We became a destination for friends to meet; there is heart and soul in what we created. Our brand developed over time because of the love of our friends and customers.”

Shore characterized Cortez as a sleepy Florida town when Bunny & Pirates first opened.

“Our salty, humble place lets people of all backgrounds let their hair down, grab a music shaker, and enjoy life without pretense. Its absence will be a terrible loss,” Shore wrote. “Yes, change, growth and business are essential, but so are the riches of our history, family values and helping our neighbors.”

Shore wrote that old Florida history is being erased.

“You can’t buy the love and respect that Bunny & Pirates has in our community,” she wrote.

Over the years the pair has managed to overcome numerous business challenges.

“We made it through Hurricane Irma, which delayed our opening, the long red tide in 2018, our first year in business, the 2020 COVID shutdowns during our second anniversary, the resulting 2021 supply chain crisis, the 2022 great resignation, and the 2023 rising inflation prices.”

Bunny & Pirates will close permanently in mid-April, according to Shore.

Bunny & Pirates Bazaar to close soon

Bunny & Pirates Bazaar to close soon

Written by Leslie Lake on . Posted in Business, Retail.

CORTEZ – The closing of Bunny & Pirates Bazaar is imminent, but not by the choice of owners Elizabeth Shore and Jeffrey O’Connell.

The news of the closing was announced by the two business owners on Facebook on March 16, two days after a notice to vacate was posted on the outer door of the bar and music venue.

“Dearest Friends – It is with heavy yet hopeful hearts we announce that Bunny & Pirates is closing. We decided last year it was time to move on and also to find someone with a passion for music and community to pick up where we left off,” the post read. “Unfortunately, we were not given the opportunity to sell our soulful creation and beloved brand – instead we have been aggressively and cruelly pushed out on short notice without options in the middle of season.”

The building at 12404 Cortez Road W. is owned by Jewfish Landings LLC with developer Shawn Kaleta as manager.

Shore told The Sun by telephone on March 17 that they had been considering selling the business and had spoken to the owner of the property about it but communications suddenly stopped during lease negotiations.

“I feel so naïve because I thought we would be able to work this out,” Shore said.

“We worked so hard to build something special and I’m heartbroken,” Shore told The Sun. “The outpouring of love on social media is a testament to what we’ve built here in the last seven years.”

“We know this comes as much as a surprise to you as it does to us,” the Facebook post continued. “We never imagined not being given the opportunity to find a path forward in Cortez where our magical musical creative space would live on.”

Shore said the venue will continue to be open for a short time and did not have a specific date for its final closing.

“We still have a few shows planned, so there’s a little time,” she said. “We will be having a going away party, but I don’t have a date yet.”

More than 180 comments were posted on Facebook in support of Shore and O’Connell and the uniqueness of the space which consisted of a pub and wine bar, a deli and market and live music in the beer garden out back.

Gord Hunter wrote: “Very sorry to hear this. Our band Northern Exposure has a ton of fond memories playing there. And the open mic helped us build to where we are today. Heartfelt thanks to you both and best wishes.”

“Breaks our hearts as y’all truly represent the Cortezian spirit,” wrote Mick Green.

“You guys were our hidden gem! Bringing unique music to the area that was so different from everywhere else around here! The beer garden was secluded, quaint and personable,” Sharon Chandler wrote.

“We’re losing a lot of old Florida,” Shore said. “The comfortable atmosphere here is what people loved.”

An email request for comment to Bradenton-based Attorney George Najmy, the registered agent for Jewfish Landings LLC, was not responded to by press time.

Commissioners approve paid parking lot

Commissioners approve paid parking lot

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

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.

Bridge Street hotel project approved unanimously

Bridge Street hotel project approved unanimously

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

BRADENTON BEACH – The proposed hotel/restaurant/retail project on Bridge Street is a go, with 106 rooms, a 60-seat restaurant, 5,396 square feet of retail space and 154 on-site parking spaces.

At the end of a four-hour city commission public hearing on Thursday night in which revisions to parking and hotel design were presented, commissioners voted unanimously to approve the project.

Following a Nov. 13 recommendation by the city Planning and Zoning Board, the Dec. 7 hearing was the second public hearing at which commissioners considered three items: A major development consisting of a resort hotel, restaurant, retail space and parking; recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Board; and the second reading of Ordinance 23-552 establishing a Planned Development Overlay District.

“I want to tell the commission that this is a dream of mine,” co-applicant Shawn Kaleta said at the hearing. “We care deeply about the Island. This will be an aesthetically pleasing high-end luxury resort.”

Kaleta and his co-applicant, Jacob Spooner, were represented by attorney Stephen Thompson of Najmy Thompson, architect Shaun Luttrell, planner Susan Swift and traffic engineer Jay Calhoun. Spooner is a Bradenton Beach City Commissioner and recused himself from the hearings.

DESIGN CHANGES

At their first public hearing on Nov. 16, commissioners expressed concern about the design of the hotel, specifically a lack of balconies and covered pedestrian areas, along with a shortage of parking. The applicants’ team came prepared on Dec. 7 with a number of changes to the design.

“At the last hearing your comments were heard loud and clear,” Luttrell said.

Luttrell’s new plans consisted of the addition of an 8-foot covered walkway, bike racks, balconies and additional on-site parking with 38 dedicated spots for a lift system. The parking lift elevates a vehicle hydraulically on a platform, creating space for another vehicle to park underneath. Valets will park vehicles on the lifts.

“With the lift system, this brings us up to 154 spots, which is 10% above what is required,” Luttrell said. The previous parking plan had 99 designated parking spaces.

In a Dec. 5 email to City Planner Luis Serna from Luttrell, the following stipulations were proposed by the applicants in response to commission concerns from the Nov. 16 hearing:

• “Gulf Drive Setback – We will abide by the 15-foot building from the property line along Gulf Drive setback in lieu of the previously proposed 10-foot and 20-foot staggered building setbacks;

• Bridge Street Pedestrian Experience – Feedback was well received and we will pursue a covered walkway at the ground level to allow a more pedestrian-friendly experience, free from the elements. This will still allow pedestrians along Bridge Street to utilize the private property of the hotel to access the shops along Bridge Street;

• Bridge Street Activity/Engagement – Again, feedback from the commissioners was impactful. Accordingly, we will pursue a series of balconies at all guest suites to improve the social interaction between the hotel rooms and Bridge Street.”

Commissioner Jan Vosburgh asked about the timeline for the project.

“The sooner the better,” Kaleta said. “I have my demo crews mobilized.”

Demolition on Joe’s Eats and Sweets on Gulf Drive began on Monday.

PROJECT SIZE CONCERNS

Commissioner Ralph Cole expressed concern about the Land Development Code and city Comprehensive Plan that state that 18 units per acre are allowable. The 106-unit hotel will be on 1.61 acres. He also expressed concern and questioned whether the rooftop pool area would boost the building into four stories, in excess of the allowable three stories.

“I want to approve this, but I want to make sure I’m not changing the face of Bradenton Beach,” Cole said.

Swift and city staff addressed Cole’s concerns.

“I think the confusion is because the city’s code uses many terms for different kinds of units in the Bridge Street overlay,” Swift said. “Your code is challenging. It specifically says commercial uses, allowable uses – this is on Bridge Street – equal hotel, motel, bar, restaurant, retail etc. So I think what’s causing the confusion of the 18 units per acre, that is not the right measure. That talks about timesharing, Airbnb, those kinds of units which are more residentially designed so that is why they used 18 units per acre. This is a hotel, an integrated building, not with separate entrances. They’re not residential units that are being used for renting.”

As commercial buildings are measured by floor area ratio, Swift said the hotel project is well within those guidelines.

Building official Steve Gilbert cited the Florida Building Code, which confirmed that a rooftop-level pool deck is not considered a fourth story.

Kaleta said that he owns 12 lots on the property that could be built with 10 units each with a total of 240 bedrooms.

“That is substantial density,” Kaleta said. “We have eliminated roughly 150 units (with the hotel).”

“We understand what could be there,” Mayor John Chappie said.

Bridge Street hotel project approved unanimously
Hotel project co-applicant Shawn Kaleta addresses
the city commission at the Dec. 7 hearing on his
hotel/restaurant/retail project. – Leslie Lake | Sun

While there was no public comment session during the second hearing, Bob Bolus, a Bradenton Beach property owner who has been a vocal opponent of the hotel, stood up during the meeting and told commissioners the hotel is a mistake.

Chappie told Bolus he was out of order and two police officers stepped forward. Bolus left the meeting without further incident.

“This is going to court,” Bolus said following the hearing, adding that he plans to file a lawsuit to stop the project.

Prior to the commission vote, Thompson addressed commissioners.

“We’re going to meet all of your parking requirements,” he said. “You have a rare opportunity for a quality project on Bradenton Beach.”

Thompson urged the commission to make a decision.

“We need an answer. We need a decision,” he said.

Kaleta also addressed the commission prior to the vote.

“I’m here to get an answer,” he said. “I have to make a business decision in a timely manner. We’re coming into season and I have to remove one building. I can’t do that until there is a commission approval or denial.”

Bridge Street hotel project approved unanimously
Demolition on the former Joe’s Eats and Sweets building began Dec. 11. – Leslie Lake | Sun

Commissioners Cole, Vosburgh and Chappie, along with Commissioner Marilyn Maro voted unanimously to approve the project. Maro, who has been absent with excuse from the commission meetings since January, voted by telephone.

One stipulation of approval is that applicants will split 50/50 any cost associated with any litigation the city may incur related to the approval of the project. Also, the city would be held harmless for any damage caused by the lifts in the parking garage.

The commission also adopted two recommended stipulations for the Planning and Zoning Board – the hotel will have blackout curtains and educational information about sea turtles and the prevention of ambient lighting from rooms facing the beach, and the applicants shall provide an easement to the trash receptacles serving the Daiquiri Deck property at 107 Bridge St. and grant an easement for the use of the hotel’s dumpsters.

P&Z unanimously recommends approval of hotel project

P&Z recommends approval of hotel project

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

BRADENTON BEACH – It’s all in the hands of city commission­ers now.

Following a unanimous recom­mendation for approval from the city Planning and Zoning Board, the future of a 106-room hotel/restaurant/retail project on Bridge Street and Gulf Drive will be decided by the city commis­sion.

The application for the yet-unnamed Bridge Street hotel project includes the hotel, a 60-seat restaurant, 2,485 square feet of retail and 99 on-site parking spaces. Property owners Shawn Kaleta, a local developer, and Jacob Spooner, business owner and Bradenton Beach city commissioner, made the applica­tion on Dec. 2, 2022.

After a 6.5-hour public hearing on Nov. 13, P&Z board members John Burns, Fred Bartizal, Ken McDonough, Dan Morhaus and Bill Morrow voted in favor of two separate motions, with conditions attached to their approval. One motion approved the establish­ment of a Planned Development Overlay District in the C-1 and C-2 district and the second approved the Major Development Plan Application.

The following conditions were recommended for both motions:

  • City commission approval of the major development plan/site plan accompanying the application;
  • Development of the property shall be consistent with the major develop­ment plan;
  • Consensus by the commission that the use of the hotel top deck is limited to hotel staff and guests and will not offer food or beverage service;
  • Consensus by the commission that live entertainment, food and beverages would only be allowed or permitted through a special event permit, approved by the city commission;
  • Guest drop-off, check-in and check-out shall be accommodated within the first level of the parking garage;
  • Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the building official that the loading area can accommodate deliveries from a semi-trailer in order to receive a building permit;
  • Applicant cannot use any parking spaces wholly or partially on public rights of way to meet parking require­ments;
  • To the extent that the applicant cannot accommodate or seeks to reduce the number of parking spaces, the applicant shall use the special use permit process;
  • The applicant shall provide landscap­ing and physical barriers to the existing landscape easement along Gulf Drive.

City staff had also recommended that the hotel be furnished with blackout cur­tains and educational materials about the protection of sea turtles and prevention of lighting from rooms facing the beach and that the applicants provide an easement for access to the trash receptacles at Daiquiri Deck at 107 Bridge St.

Density vs. Floor area ratio

A disagreement between land use experts on allowable criteria – density versus floor area ratio – for the hotel was put to rest from the city’s perspective by City Planner Luis Serna.

Misty Servia, former Manatee County commissioner and a certified land use planner with 34 years of experience, said on Nov. 1 that the city’s comprehensive plan limits hotel density to just 18 units per acre.

Servia read from the City’s Comprehen­sive Plan.

“This policy states that hotel/motel/transient units are limited to 18 units per gross acre,” Servia said. “That’s very important because that’s also transcribed in your zoning and Land Development Code. The Comp Plan cannot be modified with the PUD zoning, and your comp plan limits the density to 18 hotel units per acre.”

The proposed 106-room project on 1.61 acres is clearly inconsistent with the comprehensive plan, she said.

“The number of units should be decreased to 28 hotel rooms,” Servia said.

Susan Swift, AICE certified planner, representing the project applicants, disputed Servia’s claim that 18 units per acre applies to hotels.

“That density is meant for residential,” Swift said. “We don’t use units per acre, we use Floor Area Ratio for commercial use.”

Serna said that because the hotel is commercial, the floor area ratio standard applies.

“It is my opinion that the application as proposed is within the PD (planned development) guidelines of the code and the comp plan specifically with regard to density,” Serna said. “As a PD, they can request more density.”

Serna noted the city has taken that position with other planned developments approved recently.

“There’s language in the comp plan that states a hotel is commercial and therefore is subject to floor area ratio rather than density,” Serna said. “Based on that, it’s our opinion they can proceed with the requested density as part of the PD.”

Morhaus questioned the guidelines in the comprehensive plan that allow for just 18 units per acre.

“They can vary setbacks as part of a planned development and density is part of that,” Serna said. “They amend or present their own standards of develop­ment and that’s what the PD drawings are for. It’ll be to approve this specific plan of development. That’s within the bounds of the comp plan and the code.”

Applicant rebuttal

The applicants were represented by Bradenton land use attorney Stephen Thompson of the Najmy-Thompson law firm, architect Shaun Luttrell, traffic engineer Jay Calhoun and Swift.

Luttrell presented a Nov. 9 memo­randum summarizing the applicant’s response to planning and zoning concerns and questions from the Nov. 1 meeting.

In that memorandum, Luttrell proposed that 17 parking spaces along Third Street be counted toward the off-street parking tabulation, offered free public parking in nine of the 17 parking spots with direct access from Third Street and offered that the applicant open the hotel parking lot to the public as paid valet parking.

In the parking tabulation, there were 140 parking spaces required for the hotel, open-air restaurant, putt-putt golf and retail. Applicants requested a 29.1% parking exception, lowering the number of provided spots to 99. Luttrell also said that in an attempt to limit the number of hotel guests with cars, a credit voucher toward local retail will be provided to those who use rideshare services or taxi to and from the airport.

Board members expressed concerns about parking, particularly the use of public spaces on Third Street and hotel check-in spaces on Bridge Street, noise from the rooftop deck, traffic and delivery and garbage truck clearances.

A public hearing in front of the city commission on the hotel project is scheduled on Thursday, Dec. 7 at 6 p.m. at the Katie Pierola Commission Chambers, 107 Gulf Drive.

Related coverage:
Commissioners review hotel project

Bridge Street hotel prompts public opposition