Embassy Suites Owner Hires Second Law Firm, Asks for Reconsideration on Splash Park

The overbearing arachnids of the ARDID family of Miami, owners of the too-big, too-tall St. Augustine Beach EMBASSY SUITES, have hired a new law firm and asked Judge R. Lee Smith to reconsider his decision denying EMBASSY SUITES' appeal of the City of St. Augustine Beach's reasoned and documented decision denying approval for a splash park that was not in the development order.

KEY BEACH NORTH LLC has gone from being represented by Florida's nastiest cutthroat corporate law firm, with the smallest commitment to pro bono work (AKERMAN) to adding Florida's oldest corporate law firm (BEDELL) to the signature block.

Here's the vapid story by St. Augustine Record "Development" beat reporter, Sheriff DAVID SHOAR loving reporter STUART KORFHAGE, which took up the lower 1/3 of Saturday's St. Augustine Record:


Embassy Suites developer challenges ruling on splash park By Stuart Korfhage
Posted May 10, 2019 at 7:14 PM
Updated May 10, 2019 at 7:14 PM
St. Augustine Record

The developer of the St. Augustine Beach Embassy Suites is appealing the court ruling that prevents the hotel from adding a “splash playground” on the beachfront property near its pool.

A motion filed Thursday by attorney Tom Ingram, on behalf of Key Beach North LLC, says the Circuit Court was in error in its April 25 ruling that upheld the St. Augustine Beach Commission’s decision to deny the playground.

Key Beach argues in the motion the Beach Commission did not rule specifically that the proposed splash park directly violated the city’s land code.

The motion says: “Key Beach respectfully submits that the Court may have overlooked critical differences between the purported ‘Final Order’ and the actual findings of the City Commission. Because the Court’s Order relies exclusively on findings not actually made by the City Commission and on adopted criteria that the City Commission did not apply, Key Beach respectfully requests a rehearing.”

Circuit Judge R. Lee Smith, in his summary on April 25, stated: “The court finds that there exists substantial competent evidence supporting the written findings that ‘there was evidence of adverse visual impact on the surrounding environment’ and ‘the proposed structure and usage was incompatible with surrounding uses.’”

The Key Beach motion argues that the Beach Commission didn’t quite do that. It says the Commission only decided the addition of the splash park would cause “visual impact” and not “adverse” impact. Any building, the motion says, will cause visual impact.

It also says the Commission found only that the uses of the splash park structure were incompatible with the surrounding uses, “thus did not find that the proposed structure was incompatible with surrounding uses.”

While their are some mixed views, the majority of community comments about the addition of the splash park have been negative.

“Even people who like the hotel — they remember what it was like before — even those folks are like, ‘This is a bad idea,’” attorney Jeremiah Mulligan, who is representing St. Augustine Beach, told The Record when the original ruling was issued last month.

“This one last component pushes it over the edge for a lot of people. I think folks who do look at it as a nice hotel are also going to be happy that it’s not going to have a splash park hanging out the back.”

Some residents are already upset about the height of the hotel itself. The splash park proposal just exacerbated the animosity. The splash park equipment would be more than 28 feet at its highest point, but it would be built on elevated land. From sea level, it would be more than 40 feet tall, said Jane West, St. Augustine Beach planning board chair.