By a vote of 4-1 the Fort Myers Beach Town Council voted not to advance Estero Island Beach Club’s new building proposal to a 2nd public hearing which kills the project. Council member Karen Woodson was the lone yes vote.
EIBC was proposing a new 10-story building to replace 2 buildings that were 2 stories and 3 stories respectively before Hurricane Ian destroyed them both. The EIBC team was pushing a view corridor to the beach as the public benefit to offset the additional height. EIBC was asking for a 117 foot building and 75 units that were 713 square feet in size. EIBC is a time-share with between 2,200 and 2,300 owners.
The original buildings had a total of 62,000 square feet with 45,205 square feet of living space. The new building was proposed at 105,621 square feet with 53,475 square feet of living space. The EIBC team stated that nearly 70% of the additional square fottage was needed for stairs and walkways.
Vice Mayor Jim Atterholt said the public benefit EIBC was proposing was not enough for him to vote yes on a 10-story building. Mayor Dan Allers did not believe what was presented to the Town Council Monday was actually what the LPA approved last month (n a 5-2 vote). The Mayor was never onboard with the size of this project and was vocal that it could have been presented with a much smaller footprint. He also questioned whether the unit sizes needed to be as big as they were which, if smaller, could have reduced the overall size of the building.
The meeting took a weird turn Monday when the Town Council allowed a presentation from Interior Designer Anthony Ashford, who is also an EIBC owner. Ashford claims he pitched a building design to the EIBC Board of Directors that was much smaller in size. And, he says that the EIBC HOA Board ignored his proposal. Ashford says it would have cost owners a lot less and been only 4 stories tall. EIBC’s attorney was then given a chance to cross-examine Ashford while the Town Council and a packed town hall stood by watching what looked more like an episode of Judge Judy. This is the building Ashford pitched following public comment from EIBC board member Dave Wadd who opposed the project.
If the 10-story building was approved, it would have been the tallest building built on Fort Myers Beach since incorporation back in 1995. The number one reason Fort Myers Beach incorporated was to prevent future development of high rise buildings.
The Town Council is working through the tough process of how much additional height should be granted to developers after a devastating Hurricane destroyed so many structures and the cost to rebuild is so much more expensive than it was back in the 90’s. They are also trying to determine what constitutes public benefit in return for anything granted to a developer above and beyond what’s allowed by right.
EIBC was not asking for more density but the height of the new building certainly attracted some negative comments from residents on the island. During their first visit to the LPA, the EIBC team presented an unflattering looking building that LPA members felt was too close to Estero Boulevard. They were sent back to the drawing board and came forward with the 10-story building backed away from Estero and they eliminated two sidewalk cuts on Estero. They simply couldn’t sell it to this Town Council.
The new building was expected to cost an estimated $34 million to build. Insurance would not come close to covering the cost so owners were expected to be hit with assessments if the building was approved.
What’s next for EIBC and their 2200 plus owners? They could decide to go back to the drawing board and come up with another plan or they could take a vote and decide to sell the property.
Dependable, Accurate, Investigative Journalism take time. To support our work, become a BTR Monthly Member HERE.
Love that the FMB citizens want to live like Mayberry, see how long your podunk town lasts without additional revenue coming in! It is 2024, not the 50’s, 60’s, or 70’s, as much as you folks want it to be! You will end up losing millions in revenue, costing your town, but go ahead live in the past and keep wishing for the good old days! LOL!
Dave Peterson you are spot on – I COULDN’T AGREE MORE. The town council and LPA have no idea what they are doing. They’ve shot down Arches, EIBC, and now I just heard Red Coconut projects. Also – what is happening with Times Square??? Times Square – no firm plans, no firm designs, no ideas – nothing is happening. It’s been 2 years since Ian and all I hear is the locals want to stick to 3 stories. With all the hurricanes, can we please re-access this very short-sighted view of the beach? Everyone I know is no longer coming to FMB. They have all moved on to Destin, Clearwater, Sarasota, etc. They are not coming back due to all the infighting on this island and lack of any new projects on the horizon. You need to stop thinking like it’s 1950.
Good, let them go there.
As a resident of FMB, I agree with Steve. Let them go else where. We don’t want to be like Clearwater or Sarasota. The Town was incorporated to protect the RESIDENTS from over development. Progress will come, but it needs to be well thought out and deliberate. Well done is better than “fast”.
Mind your own business. Us “LOCALS” could care a less what you out of towners think. Go somewhere else and anyone who doesn’t like it here can go somewhere else too. We don’t need any of you. Our island has survived and prospered for decades in our own special way so move on J Medin. We don’t want you round here with your negative attitude and stupid comments.
Agree with the mayor that the square feet numbers don’t add up. Crunching the numbers, each proposed unit was to be 190 sq. ft. bigger. That’s a big ADA bathroom! And almost HALF of the proposed total square feet was non living-space. Inefficient design, and/or extra amenities snuck in.
In any event, how many of the 2200 current owners will want to ante up for a new building? Have they even been asked? Why not find out, and design a smaller building with fewer units representing the number of owners that want to keep their shares. Or will we end up giving the developer hundreds of timeshare units to sell at a profit?
The islands people and the city council will never see any progress on this island. It will take 10+ years before people will actually come and visit in any numbers, that’s if it happens. Too many people don’t want to see progress. They would rather have the island look like a desert town. Than to have a vibrant town.
Do you live here Dave? Your comments are naive and foolish. Don’t worry about us islanders. We and our island will be just fine so just move on.
Well said Frankie! More of us Islanders need to speak up. Thank you.
Public benefits as an offering?
How about public benefits as a requirement.
Most of the public benefits offered are profitable revenue streams for the developers. Restaurants, a ferry to bring people from the s end to your resort, coffee shops, etc. These developers are laughing thinking they can sell a revenue stream which is beneficial to them as a public benefit for the town. Let’s hope our council aren’t that naive that they would believe a revenue generating restaurant is a public benefit that will warrant an additional 2 floors or whatever. Please don’t be naive council. Don’t let these slick developers who are experts at selling and negotiating sell you on a revenue generating stream for them is a public benefit for the town.
Wow… they really should have worked with the plan proposed by the EIBC owner. And I reeeally don’t understand how in the world the LPA, staff or any Council member could support the denied building plan. EIBC owners…YOU are not “unwanted”, but a monolith is.
I applaud the decision and hope EIBC comes back with a building design that meets the requirements. It is sad that many of the owners see the ‘no’ vote as a message that they are unwelcome. I don’t see that as being the case. Also, I really didn’t understand Karen’s vote which I took as being driven by the fact that the 10 story design was influenced by staff/LPA input. Two wrongs don’t make a right…….
Karen needs to go for more than one reason.
A prime example of good governing.