- April 26, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Hotel developers are seeking to remove a proposed public sidewalk to the beach after Volusia County declined the additional access.
The sidewalk was part of Ormond Beach Holdings LLC's plans for a new 137-room, five-story hotel at 251 S. Atlantic Ave., which the Ormond Beach City Commission approved in January 2023. According to a city staff report, the development originally included a sidewalk at the Seminole Avenue beach approach, and though city staff believed the county was supportive of the idea, city staff became aware last August that the county didn't want to accept the maintenance and liability of the sidewalk.
On Thursday, March 14, the Ormond Beach Planning Board unanimously recommended approval for the removal of the sidewalk from the plans.
"I don't know why we would want a sidewalk there when you have a road bed ramp that is 20 feet wide," Planning Board GG Galloway said. "I would much rather be walking down a road bed than a sidewalk that — by the time I got to the end of the sidewalk — may or may to have stair steps to get me down to the beach."
An Oct. 16, 2023, email from county staff to the city stated that the county already provided public access to the beach with the Seminole Avenue beach approach, and, that the hotel developers could deed it or provide an easement to the county if they wanted to. But, the county would not maintain it, and suggested that the city or the hotel developers could do so instead.
Ormond Beach Holdings LLC told city staff that they are willing to build the sidewalk — but would not have proposed it in the first place if they knew they would be required to maintain it and provide liability insurance, according to the city staff report.
The Planning Board inquired what the cost of maintaining the sidewalk would be. City Planning Director Steven Spraker said that he didn't have an exact cost at the time of the meeting, "there certainly is a cost."
"There's also an unintended consequence, because the city doesn't maintain beach access," Spraker said. "... That is a function of the county, so now you are assuming a county function, and that may lead to other assumptions or other demands in the future."
City Attorney Randy Hayes said it was a multilayered issue due to maintenance, jurisdiction and liability concerns.
"I can tell you on past experience that the county staff has always been very sensitive to liability issues when it comes to sidewalks and we've had some cross jurisdictional issues on liability matters," Hayes said. "There never seems to be an easy resolution of those issues."
It's a policy question for the City Commission to determine, Hayes said.
Rob Merrell, the attorney representing the developers, said the developers were still willing to build the sidewalk, but that he didn't feel it was appropriate for a private entity to maintain and be liable for a public access.
"We wanted to do this," Merrell said. "We thought it was a good gesture. The county was saying they wanted it and the city wanted it."
Galloway said he didn't believe the city should accept liability for an access that would traditionally fall under the county's jurisdiction.
"That's just poor taxes, to me, in the long run and to our citizens," Galloway said.
The amendment is tentatively scheduled to be heard by the City Commission at its April 16 meeting.
