Despite being rejected by the LPA earlier this week, Seagate CEO Matt Price is taking his proposal to redevelop the Red Coconut Property to the Town Council Monday. Here’s why…
After hours of back-and-forth with Price, that included many questions about Seagate’s 12-page Development Agreement, the LPA voted to deny his request by a vote of 4-2 to redevelop the 10-acre former Red Coconut property that was destroyed by Hurricane Ian over 2 years ago.
Despite questions about Beach Club memberships, a pedestrian walkover, flip-flopping on whether units could be rented, landscaping and other issues, in the end the denial was based on the ask for 17 stories and what Seagate was offering up as public benefit in return for that height. LPA Chair Anita Cereceda told Price, “I don’t believe you’ve met the balance of public benefit to height.”
The LPA was also not impressed with Segate’s proposal for a park on the beach side of their property. They called it more of a roundabout to drop off condo guests than a park for the community.
LPA members did admit they are not even sure how much public benefit should be on the table from any developer. Or, how much height should be given to a developer based on whatever the public benefit criteria turns out to be. The LPA will hold a special meeting next week to try to rank public benefit and make a recommendation to the Town Council. We’ve also started an online poll to see what you think public benefit is HERE.
That special meeting won’t matter to Seagate. They are moving full speed ahead with this current plan, taking it to the Town Council for a vote on Monday. Price said on multiple occasions that, “The Town Council needs to decide and give direction. Our project compared to any other has more public benefit. I’d like to know where the council is on this.” That’s going to be a hard argument to sell to Council.
Some in the community would argue that, despite the ambiguity about public benefit, everyone knows where both the Town Council and LPA are on future development. They agreed on multiple occasions to stick to their Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code. Those documents allow developers to go up about 3 stories over flood or they could submit a Commercial Planned Development and ask for more than the code allows. Just because they ask, does not mean they’ll get. That’s where the public benefit comes in and that’s where the ambiguity of the public benefit has been stunting a proposed project. The 10-story Estero Island Beach Club was rejected by the Town Council last week for the same reason. And, just to make things more confusing, EIBC was rejected by the Town Council after the LPA approved the project, highlighting the challenges town officials are having with new development. At 10 stories EIBC would have been the tallest building constructed since the town incorporated.
There are also some in the Fort Myers Beach community that have argued that it’s not the town’s responsibility to allow additional height because a developer paid millions of dollars for a piece of property. In the case of Seagate the price tag for the 10 acres was $52 million.
On the flip-side, some developers are saying if the town doesn’t ease up, get with the post-Ian times and allow for higher buildings they will leave Fort Myers Beach and properties will sit vacant for years, if not decades. So far, that argument has not worked with a majority of either the LPA or the Town Council. What those developers may not be picking up on either is that there’s a contingent of beach residents who are OK with a few wide open spaces. The main reason Fort Myers Beach incorporated in 1995 was to stop tall buildings from being built. So far, decision-makers are holding firm to that theory.
The biggest challenge both the LPA and the Town Council will face when they try to rank public benefit is how subjective it is. One person could argue that a restaurant on the south end is a public benefit while another argues that a profit-making business is not a public benefit.
The current Seagate proposal includes 2 buildings that could be 17 stories high, a total of 137 condo units, 4 single family homes, 3 parks, a restaurant open to the public, a 240 foot view corridor on the beach side of the property, a private pedestrian walkover and a private beach club with availability of local paid memberships.
Local journalism is hard work. If you appreciate the most in-depth reporting on Fort Myers Beach, please support what we do HERE by Venmo, Zell or PayPal. Thank you.
They provide no public benefit. A public benefit is not something that creates a revenue stream for the developer. Margaritaville is a great example. They gave up property, provided public restrooms, opened up their amenities to the public and gave the residents a 25% discount. That should be a minimum for any new development.
I’m sorry but a campground for the homeless are you out you mind. Think about our neighborhood that is near there. Let’s bring down our home values. Carter who every you are maybe you need a campground and fountain for the homeless in your neighborhood.
Don’t be a hater
I believe that the developers should conform to the existing codes. They can easily build 3 story living quarters and leave the bottom story for residential parking. On the gulf side of Estero Blvd build-out a park with hurricane resistant restaurants and small businesses that are open to the public. It is clear that if the developers keep pushing the envelope with regard to the code, the vacant properties will remain vacant until the 2030s.
Ahhhh, let’s be clear people-
These Developers paid major $$$, and “”expect”” to maximize every $ spent !!
They have all swooped in – see the “opportunity” – within our devastation !
Again, this is a very small Island, traffic is a major concern, Public Benefit ? –
will throw in whatever seems to stick but, not be a bargaining chip !!!
Developers overpaid – to get in !
It’s their problem … not ours !
Agree. Not our problem to help them make profits.
They over spent. Too bad. Make it work within code. No one told them or twisted their arms to buy it and the Town would cave to their demands.
I am amazed that there has been no comment on the increased traffic that these large hotels/condos would bring on to our small, single road island home. Doesn’t anyone remember sitting in traffic trying to travel from Santini Plaza to the bridge at the north end before these new proposals are developed? Or from the bridge back home mid island? More development more traffic, not too difficult to figure out.
I think, honestly, how could it get any worse? Whether there are condos or empty spaces, Fort Myers Beach will have tons of traffic. It’s been that way for at least 50 years.
If Margaritaville can comply to 4 stories then so can builders especially one that is 10 acres.
A campground and water fountain for the homeless would be nice use for the property
Seagate can develop the property in keeping with what they can do by right. This proposal is just seeking to maximize their profits. If by right they could build a 3 story over BFE, a 17 story building ver BFE and assuming that BFE amount to 2 stories, then they want 12 more stories or a 400% FOUR HUNDRED increase in height!!!
As for the size of the units, the intensity of this design will also increase by 200%? 300%? Our infrastructure was maxed before Ian!
Finally traffic flow would affect the neighborhoods in the area!
We do NOT want this tower monstrosity in our neighborhood.
I agree, but don’t you think this is just a ploy on their part, asking on purpose for something ridiculous in height, only just to sneak in the back door with an eight-story building? That’s a big difference from 17, but that’s also twice the size of Margaritaville. Honestly, I think they should hold the line in four stories max
To buy land on an island that has existing height restrictions of 40 feet and then ask for 17 stories is just ignoring the wish of the residents and the town. To leave that land undeveloped rather then going back to the drawing board… that doesn’t sound like a winner for the developer either. With 10 acres there are many options for less then 17 stories. If they so much cared about the residents of Fort Myers Beach, the proposal would have been around or below 8 stories to begin with.
Seagate has 10 acres that once was a small village onto itself. Surely they can be more creative than yet another high-rise. Apparently new owners want 4 beds ,4 bath. Build a village of single houses, duplexes ,etc where everyone can have a small yard , a front door out to the world of pickle ball etc. A town square with a Pier Peddler, ice-cream , fishing store. Who wants be stuck on yet another 17 th floor. High rises are so commonplace in SWF. Be unique. Build a village and they will come
I like the way you think.
My thought exactly. Love this idea. Seagate has built some great mixed communities
I agree….traffic is a major problem on the island. We do not need a 17 story monstrosity on the north end of the island. Our infrastructure is very delicate (as seen by Hurricane Ian). If it is to be built, stick to the regulations given to Margaritaville. Sorry if Seagate paid too much for the 10 acres…that is not our problem. Seagate can build mixed communities. And don’t let them come back with a “compromise” of 8 stories, which may be their plan. What was good enough for Margaritaville is good enough for Seagate. I agree with Mary Louise.
What do these developers not understand?
The residents do not want these monstrosity of buildings on the island. Most of the tourists don’t want these. The infrastructure cannot handle the huge developments.
NO NO NO keep to code and build within the limits.
It is not the towns responsibility to change code so they make huge profits period.The developers knew code before purchasing. Stick to code and make it work.
Agree!
TOTALLY agree!
Just because there is an undeveloped piece of land doesn’t mean you have to build a structure on it, especially 2 seventeen story structures.
The town council needs to start approving these things so they can fill up these empty lots. All I need for public benefit is a beach bar restaurant I can visit. Get building!
And all I need for a public benefit is open spaces.
They are not proposing a public beach bar.
Stay with the current F.A.R. allotment. With 10 acres, they can spread it out and build three stories + 1 for parking. If they want ‘public benefit,’ then 30+% of the beach should be for public use. So, if I eat at their public restaurant, I can’t use the walk-over to see the beach? That is not a benefit to the public.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is a zoning technique that controls a building’s bulk by comparing its mass to the square footage of its lot.