BRADENTON — Several City of Bradenton residents await the anticipated second hearings for three application requests by the Westminster Communities of Florida to be scheduled before the Bradenton City Council. The transmittal of a requested Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment related to the city’s Coastal High Hazard Areas already received unanimous support from the council in February.
During a Feb. 12 City Council meeting, the applicant—Westminster Communities of Florida—presented their application proposals to the Bradenton City Council for a long-term expansion and redevelopment project for the Westminster Point Pleasant location in downtown Bradenton positioned along the Manatee River near the mouth of Wares Creek.
Westminster Point Pleasant is a retirement community that has provided independent and assisted living residency and skilled nursing facilities for the past 50 years. The site comprises 13 parcels totaling approximately 16 acres located on the peninsula north of Manatee Avenue West and east of 15th Street West.
Submitted applications for the project include a future land use map amendment request to change the property’s current designation from High-Density Residental to an Urban Central Business District designation, a rezoning request from General Urban Open and General Urban Restricted to Urban Center (T5) which would increase the allowable density, and a comprehensive text amendment that would allow for increased density within Coastal High Hazard Areas (CHHA).
Each of the items' first readings were taken up during the February council meeting, with only the CHHA comp plan amendment scheduled for a vote.
The term 'coastal high hazard area' has two definitions: one used in Florida’s building code and for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and the other for comprehensive planning as defined in Florida Statute, Sec. 163.3178.
Statutory provisions for local comprehensive planning include that regulations concerning mitigation for CHHA and the implementation of development and/or redevelopment policies within these areas shall be at the discretion of local governments.
Westminster's Point Pleasant lies within a CHHA designation.
Currently, the City of Bradenton’s Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Element, Objective 1.5.2 “Hurricane Evacuation Zone” states that the city “shall deny” requests for density increases for properties within the CHHA.
If adopted, the amendment requested by Westminster would allow the city to consider application requests for increased residential density on parcels located in CHHA if certain standards are met. Provisions of the change would also allow a project to allocate allowable density within the project site’s boundaries—including from the upland portion of the project—to its adjacent coastal high-hazard areas.
Westminster’s application for a zoning change and density increase means that as a CHHA property, the comprehensive plan rules would need to be changed for the applications to move forward.
However, even though Westminster was the applicant seeking revisions to the CHHA policies, such changes to comprehensive planning rules cannot be applied to independent parcels. Instead, any approved and adopted changes would apply to all parcels within the CHHA designation under the city’s jurisdiction.
A staff report attached to the Feb. 12 meeting agenda included analysis of the request.
The staff report's concluding paragraphs read, “Staff has been and remains concerned about the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and the potential increase in density in Coastal High Hazard Areas. The primary issue is that, while the amendment was proposed with a particular property in mind, changes to the governing policies regarding the CHHA potentially impact 28% of the City’s jurisdiction.
“In response to these concerns, staff has proposed changes to the amendments in order to maintain consistency with the Plan and State Statutes. A requirement for a development agreement is proposed to ensure that the City Council will have the opportunity to review each project for consistency with Statutes, the City’s Comprehensive Plan, and basic public safety issues.”
A staff-produced map included in the report displayed the areas within the city's jurisdiction that were designated CHHA.
Development agreements for projects within CHHA "shall include, at a minimum, a binding conceptual site plan and any required mitigation plan for hurricane evacuation.”
Some council members said the added requirement that all such agreements receive council approval aided in their support of the measure.
Public Comment
While all three of Westminster's application requests were scheduled for their first hearings on Feb. 12, only the comp plan text amendment was voted upon. When the items return for second hearings, the rezone and land use map requests will be voted on.
Despite the council taking no action related to the rezoning and land use designation items, citizens approached the podium one after another to address their council members both for and against Westminster’s application requests.
Several residents of the nearby Point Pleasant neighborhood and the River Oaks Condo community implored the council to deny all applications related to Westminster’s proposed expansion project.
The residents shared numerous concerns, including increased density achieved through the construction of higher buildings, construction noise and disruption that could extend ten years or more, increased traffic on already overcrowded residential roadways, and insufficient wastewater infrastructure.
A nearly equal number of citizens spoke in favor of Westminster’s expansion project—many of those were residents of Westminster's Point Pleasant.
The Westminster residents spoke of how efficient and capable the facility staff is in responding to weather emergencies and undertaking successful evacuations in the past.
Many who spoke in support also argued that Westminster needs upgrades not only for improved living conditions but also to build new facilities to current codes that would be more resilient to hurricanes.
The written public comments attached to the meeting showed a similar split between citizens who supported and those who opposed the proposed project.
Because neither the rezone nor density increase were before the council for a vote that day, none of the council members commented specifically on either of those items. Those deliberations will be held when the items return for their second hearings.
However, some limited public comments were specific to the comp plan text amendment request.
Former Bradenton City Administrator Carl Callahan addressed the council in support of the CHHA text amendment.
Callahan began by clarifying that his comments were speaking broadly to the proposed changes, as they would apply to all CHHA within the city, not specifically to Westminster’s application or proposed expansion.
“As your previous city administrator, CRA director, and part-time interim planning director,” said Callahan, “I do know for a fact that some very good developments were hamstrung by the current CHHA amendment.”
Callahan said that he would like to see the regulations changed.
“There are very few, very large parcels left in the city,” he added. “We are an infill development… and to be able to develop on that entire parcel the way this proposed amendment would allow, that would be very positive for the future.”
However, Glen Compton, Chairman of the environmental nonprofit organization ManaSota 88, disagreed. Compton addressed the council, requesting they deny the transmittal.
“Developments should conform to comprehensive plan,” Compton said. “Comprehensive plans should not be changed to conform to a development.”
Compton added, “Increasing the density in a coastal high hazard area is never a good idea. But not only would this allow for the increase, but it would also allow for the transfer of density from within uplands to the coastal high hazard area, so it’s a double-whammy.”
“No matter how you look at it,” said Compton. “Putting a senior assisted living facility in a coastal high hazard area is not a good idea. It wasn’t a good idea 50 years ago, and it’s not a good idea today.”
The Vote
Having heard the applicant and staff presentations and the public comments, the council deliberated.
Councilwoman Lisa Moore opened the deliberations by pointing out that a significant portion of the city’s CHHA falls within her Ward 4.
“In light of the damages we sustained with the storms,” explained Moore, “While I appreciate the comments from the gentleman from ManaSota 88 about whether or not it is responsible to rebuild in a coastal high hazard, it is my opinion as a resident who lives in one of these areas, I want to be able to rebuild those areas. And I want to do it responsibly.”
Moore reminded members that statutes specifically provide local governments with flexibility in adopting rules for CHHAs.
“It’s not a blank check,” she added. “It is a high standard.”
Though she didn’t speak to her position on the additional requests of the applicant, Moore did highlight the number of residents who shared concerns about the redevelopment plan for the Westminster location and encouraged the applicant to make a good-faith effort to meet with the residents to hear and address those concerns in more detail before the rezone returns for its second hearing.
Some council comments—including from Mayor Gene Brown—suggested that should the Westminster project move forward, an opportunity for public-private partnerships might be identified that could aid in the city’s ongoing efforts toward needed wastewater infrastructure upgrades in the area.
Touching on that point, Moore expressed some reservations that the city should be mindful about the pace of development and how that aligns with the pace at which infrastructure improvements can be completed.
Councilwoman Jayne Kocher suggested that public-private partnerships can support such infrastructure improvements happening “faster and cheaper.”
Councilwoman Pam Coachman sought clarification from the city attorney that approval to transmit would still need to return before the council for adoption. The attorney confirmed the process, and Coachman made the motion to approve.
Coachman then reminded the residents who came to speak on the additional two application items that those would also be returning to the council for approval in the future. She said that she hoped Westminster and the neighboring residents could find a way to come together to address some of the concerns before thanking the citizens for their participation and encouraging them to “stay engaged in the process.”
Councilwoman Marianne Barnebey shared similar gratitude for the residents who provided public comment and who did so respectfully.
Concerning the comp plan amendment, Barnebey called the decision “not easy” and acknowledged how difficult change can be to a long-established community. Speaking to the need for the redevelopment, however, Barnebey added, “But, if you don’t change at certain times, you die.”
Councilman Josh Cramer echoed Barnebey’s sentiments concerning the importance of revitalization for the future of the city.
The vote to transmit the text amendment Ordinance carried 5-0.
On Friday, March 28, Westminster held the recommended community meeting with neighboring residents of Westminster's Point Pleasant.
Once the state has completed its comp plan text amendment review, and should it have no objections to the proposed changes, the item will return to the council for adoption.
As of Friday, an adoption hearing date had not yet been announced. It is anticipated that, sometime in the coming weeks, each of the three items will return to the council together for consideration of approvals.
To replay the meeting item presentations, discussion, and public comment related to the Westminster application requests, click the Feb. 12, 2025, Bradenton City Council meeting video below.
2 comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.
iambillsanders
Saw this coming with the campaign donations last November
Sunday, March 30 Report this
David Daniels
Make no mistake, this is a major change that would spur a wild-west of new development in all of these CHHA areas. Councilman Cramer and Kocher and Mayor Brown are engaging in typical Orwellian misleading speech to claim this is the only way the city can re-build. There is nothing to prevent re-building under current zoning. This allows huge increases in density - which translates to huge increases in traffic and infrastructure demands. It is telling that the pro-development speakers are all residents of Westminster Shame on Brown and the council for saying this INCREASE in density will help them fix the city's dismal sewage/wastewater system. They have let the system rot while millions of gallons of raw sewage has been dumped in local waters and now they are claiming that letting developers take over 28% of the city is the answer. Bullsh#t! City voters need to remember this vote. We are watching you Josh Cramer! We are watching all of you on the Council. Mr. Compton is right, comprehensive plans should not be changed to conform with development. If this is approved - it will further deteriorate the quality of life for the entire area. A vote for this amendment is THE OPPOSITE of what this community said loud and clear in the Manatee County Commission election last August. If this is approved - voters need to send the same message to the City Council.
Sunday, March 30 Report this