City approves Cask and Ale plans

At a City Commission hearing Tuesday regarding plans for a Main Street bar, a strange thing happened: More members of the audience spoke in favor of the proposal than in opposition.

Plans to bring the St. Petersburg cocktail lounge and tapas restaurant Cask and Ale to Sarasota got approval from city staff and the Planning Board in May, but the public input at that point was decidedly one-sided.

As the business sought permission to use a liquor license at 1548 Main St., the city received letters from more than 30 downtown residents urging staff or Planning Board members to deny the request. At the Planning Board meeting, seven of the 10 public speakers were opposed to the proposal.

The resident feedback ultimately led the City Commission to set a second public hearing regarding Cask and Ale. It’s unclear what impact the public commentary had, but on Tuesday, the commission voted 4-1 to allow the major conditional use needed for Cask and Ale to open.

During the hearing, age repeatedly served as the dividing line between supporters and opponents. Proponents saw the upscale bar as an draw for younger people, while the older-skewing group of downtown residents said the confluence of nightlife establishments is a drag on quality of life.

“We don’t just want to be a retirement community — we want young professionals.” — Liz Alpert

Geraldine Collato, 37, moved to Sarasota in 2012. She went to City Hall for the first time Tuesday, motivated to speak in support of Cask and Ale after learning of the hearing from her boyfriend, who works as a bartender.

She said she understood some of the concern from downtown residents, pointing to bars such as Smokin’ Joes and Ivory Lounge as the source of many issues they raised. Having visited Cask and Ale’s St. Petersburg location, she saw the proposal as a refreshing alternative. A business offering specialty cocktails priced between $10 and $15 is less likely to create a loud and disorderly environment downtown, she said.

“I think there is a way to co-exist in this town,” Collato said. “They can’t ignore the fact there are young adults here craving places like this.”

Cask and Ale owner Jeff Catherell said most of the opposition to his plans came from the over-40 crowd. He agreed to a series of conditions tied to the approval regulating noise, the transfer of the liquor license and the hours of food service.

He said many of the opponents were objecting to the general proliferation of businesses serving alcohol on Main Street. He pointed to large restaurants and bars such as Tequila Cantina, Red Clasico and Evie’s on Main — all of which use an “SRX” liquor license for restaurants, because they have 150 seats and make at least 51% of their revenue from food sales.

Regardless of how the city treats applicants such as Cask and Ale seeking to use a “4COP” liquor license for nightclub use, larger businesses can still find a way to fill the demand for nightlife attractions. If Cask and Ale were denied, Catherell said Evie’s could move in and knock down the wall between the two sites.

“You can’t stop any SRX place from coming into downtown Sarasota,” Catherell said. “It’s state law — if they meet all those requirements, they’re going to open no matter who wants it or not.”

Before the vote, multiple commissioners specifically commented on the bar’s appeal to millennials.

“We don’t just want to be a retirement community — we want young professionals,” Commissioner Liz Alpert said. “That’s what we say all the time, that we want to find a way for people to stay here.”

Vice Mayor Shelli Freeland Eddie visited the St. Petersburg Cask and Ale, which led her to believe the business would appeal to a younger crowd without pronounced negative side effects.

“It was crowded,” Eddie said. “There were young professionals there, doing what they would be doing at a nightclub on the weekend. It was a civil environment; everything was contained inside.”

Major Malfunctions

Commissioner Susan Chapman, who cast the lone dissenting vote, said her opposition was rooted in questions of enforcement.

The city manager has the power to revoke a major conditional use if a business is not consistent with the terms of the approval. To date, the city has not withdrawn such an approval for any business.

“The experience is there is no adequate enforcement mechanism for any of these major conditional uses,” Chapman said.

Ivory Lounge is frequently cited as an example in cases like these. Originally pitched as a wine bar and jazz lounge, the business quickly transformed into a bona fide nightclub.

“The experience is there is no adequate enforcement.” — Susan Chapman

This has caused some downtown residents to view new proposals with skepticism — but it’s also changed the way businesses apply for major conditional uses.

The proffers Catherell attached to his approval were designed to give the city more oversight and prevent a new owner from using the liquor license while changing the concept of the bar.

Commissioners who voted to approve Cask and Ale said enforcement was an important topic for the city to focus on going forward. At a future commission meeting, City Manager Tom Barwin plans to discuss strategies for ensuring bars are adhering to the proper regulations, including the possible establishment of an annual review of the city’s liquor licenses.

Ultimately, the majority of the commission indicated an interest in having a broader conversation regarding downtown bars — but they thought Cask and Ale shouldn’t be held up in the process.

“There’s no excuse for no enforcement,” Alpert said. “We’re the commissioners of the city, so it’s up to us to make sure that happens.”