Pot-Nets residents battle Paradise Grill expansion

Pot-Nets Bayside residents say they are property owners and should have been given mailed notice of Paradise Grill’s application to expand its liquor license to include a 19,000-square-foot patio.

The residents say because Paradise Grill failed to notify them, the application should be denied.

Alcoholic Beverage Control Commissioner John Cordrey promised to rule soon on the notification issue. In the meantime, he said Paradise Grill is not allowed to allow alcohol to leave the licensed premises, so guests cannot legally take alcohol outside onto the already built, but unlicensed patio.

State law requires establishments seeking a liquor license to give mailed notice to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the premises. Paradise Grill’s attorneys argued that mobile home owners, like those in Pot-Nets Bayside, must have a lease for at least five years to be considered real property owners. The restaurant’s attorneys said because the Pot-Nets Bayside homeowners lease their property and do not own it, the restaurant is not required to notify them by mail.

Pot-Nets Bayside Home Owner’s Association President Michael Eisenhauer said residents of the mobile home park have 12-year leases that are automatically renewed unless terminated by the tenant or the landlord. Eisenhauer said residents of Pot-Nets pay property and other taxes.

The Grill’s attorneys say the Pot-Nets residents are residents, but not real property owners: the real property taxes are paid by the landowner, Tunnell Companies. The attorneys argued residents in the area received notice of the Grill’s plans through local newspapers and attended the May 11 protest hearing.

In his answering brief, Eisenhauer said the number of people attending was due to notices sent to signers of the petition protesting Paradise Grill’s application and by word of mouth. He said if Paradise Grill had followed the law and provided notice to all the property owners, there may not have been enough room to accommodate everyone.

In his brief, Eisenhauer said on two occasions in November and December, Paradise Grill owner Al Tortella asked to speak to the Bayside Home Owners Association’s Board of Directors. At those meetings, Eisenhauer said, Tortella gave updates on Paradise Grill and spoke about the problems residents were having with the restaurant.

Eisenhauer said Tortella at no time mentioned anything about the planned expansion of the premises. He said residents protesting Paradise Grill’s plans are bothered most that the restaurant does not appear concerned about excessive noise, and the safety and security of the community.

Cordrey said Paradise Grill is currently approved for 2,800 square feet. Eisenhauer said originally the restaurant was much smaller, but that Tortella wanted to model Paradise Grill on Seacrets in Ocean City, Md. The addition would include a stage and a raw bar and bar, with 24 seats each.

Tortella did not respond for comment.

Residents from Pot-Nets Bayside and the Peninsula across Indian River Bay from Paradise Grill protested the plan, primarily on the grounds that the restaurant is already too noisy. In August, Paradise Grill was cited for excessive noise by the state Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission.

At the May 11 ABCC hearing, protestors said they had not been properly notified of Paradise Grill’s intentions. Cordrey agreed property owners must be notified, but allowed Paradise Grill’s attorneys to file briefs in their defense.

Paradise Grill sent letters to seven land owners within 1,000 feet, a list they said was provided by Sussex County. The restaurant’s attorneys say it is the past precedent of the ABCC to grant applications without notice to lessees.

In his response brief, Eisenhauer disputes that the list was provided by county officials. He said Paradise Grill did not ask county officials for a list of property owners, and if they had, they would have received a list of current Pot-Nets leaseholders.

“But for reasons not yet disclosed, he did not want to notify those most interested in any expansion or intrusion by the Paradise Grill into the residents’ right to quiet enjoyment of their property,” Eisenhauer said.

If Cordrey rules in favor of Paradise Grill, the hearing on the restaurant’s application will continue. If Cordrey rules in favor of the protesters, Paradise Grill’s application will be denied, but it will be allowed to refile.