Seagate’s plan to redevelop the 52-acre former Red Coconut property with 5 buildings, including two 17-story structures could now be delayed as a court challenge to the town’s approval of the process has officially been filed.
Dan and Jane Riddle, Michael Dagnese, Constance Spataro, Evert and Sussane Jelsma, Mary Tuttle, Paul and Gail Jasionowski and Nathaniel Gorham are listed as petitioners on the filing. They all live within 500 feet of the proposed Seagate project.
In April, following a recommendation to deny from the LPA, and by a 3-2 vote, the Fort Myers Beach Town Council approved the Seagate project. Mayor Dan Allers and Councilman Scott Safford voted no. At the second of two public hearings on the project, the majority of public comment from the community was in opposition, with by far the number one objection being the height of the buildings. Fort Myers Beach was incorporated in the mid-90’s because Lee County was approving tall buildings and residents, at that time, wanted to put a stop to it.
Following the vote to approve, a community group called Protect FMB was formed with a goal of raising $100,000 to pay the law firm of Hahn and Loeser to fight the town for approving the project. According to their Facebook page $35,000 has been raised so far and another $10,000 is needed by March 15th to keep the fight going. Seagate is not a party in the filing. It’s the neighbors against the town.
The Seagate plan includes two condo towers that could be as high as 17 stories. They are asking for buildings that are over 200 feet higher (235 feet total) than what’s allowed by right. The plan includes 137 condo units, 4 single family homes, 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.
In their filing, the neighbors argue that the Fort Myers Beach Town Council’s approval of Seagate’s development agreement application was not supported by competent substantial evidence, that the application departed from the essential requirements of the law and it deprived residents who opposed the project due process. In essence what they are saying is the Town Council did not follow the rules set forth in their own Land Development Code.
One of the arguments from the neighbors was the claim by Seagate that the Red Coconut property was in an area that included other tall structures. From the filing: “The Red Coconut property is not so surrounded by tall buildings…that the height regulations in this chapter [30 feet above base flood elevation] would be unreasonable. All the buildings that are “contiguous to” (or across the street from) the Red Coconut Property are, at most, two stories above base flood elevation. The nearest high-rise development, Caper Beach Club, a pair of 12 story condominium towers, is located approximately half a mile from the Red Coconut Property. The other referenced high-rise, Ocean Harbor Condominiums, is approximately 1.4 miles to the South. The absurdity of Seagate’s requested height deviation is further demonstrated by its own project rendering, which depicts two massive condominium towers (both 255 feet tall) that tower over the Fort Myers Beach horizon. The Town and Seagate either (at best) misread and misunderstood this condition precedent, but more likely, intentionally ignored the requirement Seagate must meet to seek relief as to building height.”
In another part of the filing the neighbors object to the amount of public benefit the town received for approving such a big and tall development. Both LPA and Town Council members admit the Land Development Code is vague when it comes to public benefit and public benefit is subjective. One member of the LPA may think a view to the beach is most important while a member of the Town Council may think a park is the top priority. There is no system that states if you give the town X, you will get 5 more stories of height in return. It’s all subjective bargaining between the developer and whoever happens to be on council at the time.
Here are the original 10 public benefits Seagate said it was providing to the town. Some may have been modified during back-and-forth negotiations with the town.
1) Two view corridors to the Gulf of Mexico from Estero Boulevard;
2) 1 view corridor to Matanzas Pass Preserve;
3) Enhancements to existing private beach access;
4) Incorporating new public beach access with a gulf side public park;
5) A new public park adjacent to Matanzas Pass Preserve;
6) A new public park adjacent to the bay side of Estero Boulevard;
7) A new public linear park interconnecting Estero and Donora Boulevards through the Property;
8) Establishing the first portion of an east/west local street from Donora Boulevard to Lovers Lane;
9) Enhancing the street frontage of Estero Boulevard;
10) Parking in excess of LDC requirements for the multi-family structure and single family units.
The filing also took a shot at Vice Mayor Jim Atterholt for considering the comments of former Red Coconut owner Fran Meyer who spoke out in favor of Seagate’s proposal and said the development would result in less density than her RV park. The filing referred to Myers’ testimony as unqualified. From the filing: “There is no competent, substantial evidence in the record to support Ms. Myers’ density claims. Indeed, Ms. Myers’ claim that the density under Seagate’s proposal would be “one-third” less than the Red Coconut RV Park that existed pre-Hurricane Ian is mathematically improbable. The maximum density on the Red Coconut Property was “27 RV/mobile homes per acre.” LDC Section 34-692(3)(a)(8). Seagate’s proposed redevelopment would reduce that number to 15 dwelling units per acre (55% of the “27 RV/mobile homes per acre” pre-existing density limit).”
The filing also took a swipe at Council member John King for mentioning LPA member Jim Dunlap discussing the additional financial stability the new project would bring to the beach. The neighbors say King’s bias deprived them of due process and his decision to support Seagate was not based on competent substantial evidence. From the filing: “Council Member King’s prejudgment of Seagate’s Proposed Development Agreement was not based on any competent, substantial evidence, but rather unsubstantiated opinions and speculation regarding the Town’s “financial sustainability” and the economic benefits that Seagate’s project could bring.”
Prior to the Town Council voting to approve the project, Town Attorney Nancy Stuparich said the council was on solid legal ground if they decided to approve the project. The town will have to respond to the filing when the court issues an Order to Show Cause. At that point we will know what the deadline is for the town to respond.
We reached out to Seagate CEO Matt Price by email for comment on the filing. He said on the advice of his attorney there would be no comment at this time. Price has said that from approval date of the ordinance final design phase will take up to a year. He said the Beach Club on the Gulf side would be built first and act as a sales center for the condo units. He said with 2 towers being built it enables Seagate to move forward without as many pre-sales of the condo units if there was only one tower. If the Margaritaville court challenge is any indication, Price’s projected time-frame will most likely face delays.
If you would like a copy of the 60-page filing send an e-mail to edryan@beachtalkradio.com.
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.
Seagate is a big no for me as well, My vote would be a nice KOA. (nobody would like that either)
We spent years traveling around the coastline of Florida before deciding to purchase on FMB. All because of the low key “vibe”. High rise development is a choice, not “inevitable”.
That choice was made when we split with the County. If we choose to go a different direction, change the town planning process first, then go forward.
Don’t approve something contrary to the town’s charter, just because it feels right today – – .
And in order to make a change like that, there has to be consensus.
Yep
Ditto!
These comments are something else.. They’re rooted in a lot of truth, but the time to keep FMB an old school beach town is gone. Very sad, I’m still having trouble moving on, two and half years later.. At least the trash school, somehow branded as the “best in Lee County”, will slowly die as a result of this nonsense after the storm. Young, working, beach minded families don’t have a chance to be there any longer. I feel it will eventually erode the actual community, and just turn into another wealthy SWFL snowbird paradise.
Once you screw it up, there’s no going back.
What IS the problem with just following the Comprehensive Plan ?
Developers KNEW this .. but, choose to ignore, capitalize and take advantage of the unfortunate circumstances this Island suffered.
Margaritaville should speak volumes.
Laws are on the books – these are NOT threats – these decisions only beg for lawsuits !
It is wrong to do that to the people who are so close and been there for so long!!!! The council members need to be eradicated get rid of them and I hope people vote better next time.
Just one question …what benefit does this offer to FMB…please don’t say lower taxes…that is crap!…not going to happen..
Concerning Seagate CEO Matt Price….. He said on the advice of council there would be no comment at this time. Either a Freudian slip or he meant, counsel. Hard to tell which.
He is a salesman, nothing more..not looking out for FMB
I have read the comments on this thread, and thank you to those who support us as homeowners and residents. We are not against progress but let it progress fit physically and esthetically AND according to the Comprehensive Plan that was established for the island!
We land owners in our neighborhood (I say land because we ALL lost our homes and are rebuidling) are in a similar situation. PLEASE READ!
Collectively, we have attended two LPA meetings and a seven-hour council meeting to voice our valid and legal concerns over this rezoning and proposed CPD change to allow a Food Truck Park on the corner of CHAPEL AND COTTAGE AVE.
As neighbors and property owners, we have researched the project and rezoning request, including current laws, ordinances, comprehensive plan policies, and challenges. We have provided the LPA and Council with evidence, statistics, and expert in-person presentations.
For a project of this size to negatively impact our neighborhood community, having to comply with approx 30 conditions and 6 deviations, and adding no financial impact to the island and its rebuilding, we hoped Council would realize that this proposal and zoning change request is not in compliance.
It completely violates codes, ordinances, policies, and goals set by the Comprehensive Plan and more.
It is black and white.
We find it frustrating that collectively as property owners must prepare information and research, hire experts, and attend multiple meetings with the LPA and council when it is clearly and unequivocally in violation.
This fact alone should have stopped this whole process.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – Building Structure and Business Opportunities of Comprehensive Plan in the CIVIC COMPLEX of Island.
It directly states, “The Town shall protect residential neighborhoods from intrusive commercial activities.”
Indeed, is there any more to be said?
“The Town shall protect residential neighborhoods from intrusive commercial activities.” It is written and approved in the Comprehensive plan.
Even with changes to the initial proposal, our concerns continue to lie in:
Zoning request violates Comprehensive Plan, Ordinances, and Policies
Zoning request violates Commercial Development and Zoning Policies
Project request violates Laws, Ordinances, and Codes for Uses and Structures For Commercial Purposes
Project’s financial impact will be devastating to property owners and FMB
LPA Meetings and Outcome
Our concerns and objections also include:
Odor nuisance
Garbage nuisance
Parking nuisance
Trespassing nuisance
Lighting nuisance
Traffic nuisance
Pest nuisance
Public nuisance
Safety Issues: sewage, grease traps, water run-off
Even with a 4 – 3 vote from the LPA , these comments were made by members of the LPA:
“Inconsistent with goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood and its commercial intrusion into the neighborhood.” – LPA Member January 9th meeting
“It is the wrong place,” “There are too many issues.” – LPA Member January 9th meeting
“Inappropriate site to relieve the Applicant’s cash flow.” – LPA Member January 9th meeting
And finally…
“We are not bringing Times Square into the neighborhood.” – Applicant.
Yes, in fact, you are.
Parking, food, music, alcohol, showers, bathrooms, and refuse containers. Yes, you are creating a public Times Square into a neighborhood.
My husband and I own the property that abuts this project. DIRECTLY. Our plans to rebuild are in the finalization process to be approved. Our next-door neighbors, who are directly abut this project, have begun building. Our neighbors across from the project have also started building.
Our streets (cottage-chapel) cannot handle the traffic and congestion. It is not rocket science, it is fact. The beach access on Cottage does not have parking. The Beach access on Mango does have 4-5 spots and a parking lot. If you research, beach access points on the island have on average 2-5 parking spots this project will create close to 45 parking spots.
We just want everyone who reads this to try and understand our points and our rights as residents and property owners who have been on the island for decades, one of us owning multiple lots for over 50 years!
We are not against reasonable development, but vehemently against the proposed options, however, mostly the zoning change. The actions of this Council during their limited time as members, in changing this zoning, affect our neighborhood forever.
My heart goes out to you and your neighbors—- you have said it all and it’s difficult to understand how it could even happen in the first place. I’m afraid the only thing that seems apparent to me is that greed is the motivation and I pray that reason will prevail. God bless you all
Let’s see if I have this right
We follow the process
We elect the council
We follow the procedures
Then if a small minority does not like the outcome they file a lawsuit by collecting funds from anybody around the country to:
Takes up our towns limited resources $$$$$
Just delays the inevitable
Slows down much needed redevelopment
Penalizes the existing businesses who have been struggling to stay in business
Most of us watched the same process with margaritaville
This will be the new norm
The beautiful food truck park once approved has already threatened to do the same
We now have a third step added to our process. If you can’t win step one or step two then step three is to sue the town council. 🤦♂️
What a shame
I left out one important step by the opposition
Threats and intimidation
Hahaha. Threats and intimidation, that’s funny as it didn’t occur, nor do any sherif reports exist depicting this ever occurred. But keep spreading lies Tom if that makes you feel better.
There were threats, they are documented.
Where is the proof?
Hey! Arent you the guy that stirred up all the boardwalk drama?
You left out another important step. Following the comprehensive plan of FMB. (How convenient)
You really should get your facts straight Tom! So, easy to agree with these developments when they aren’t in your backyard!
Tom has his facts straight.
Beautiful, and food truck court do not belong in the same sentence. Would you want that scene within 500 feet of your home?
I don’t hear you volunteering to put this “beautiful food truck park” in your back yard, Tom.
What exactly is the factual basis for your “threats and intimidation” comment? Please expound.
You are not alone Tom. I agree it is time to move on. There are many like us but we don’t speak up because we get threatened and belittled.
I doubt that many of the negative posters live in the neighborhood or will be looking at a 255′ high, block long concrete wall. And would bet that even fewer were here for incorporation. I know that it is not 1975 but progress doesn’t mean that we have to renounce the desire for a lowrise part of the Beach. And Fran Myers trying to testify that the Red Coconut was way more dense than this project is just ludicrous. Most renters on the bay side of Estero lived in park model trailers and spent months here in the winter
I bet most negative posters don’t even live in Florida.
I have been saying this all along. Most of these keyboard warriors are not owners and don’t live here yet they are the loudest ones on the forum so it gives the impression that the majority of FMB owners want these things and that is not the truth. I think people that post should have to identify their connection but that would never happen. Let’s not forget we have a mayor with the loudest megaphone that is a renter and yet he gets to vote on what we have to live with.
Ray Murphy was also a renter. Was he a better mayor?? Did you have civics class in high school???
For some reason you and Holly (who doesn’t even live in Florida) always defend renters. AND no one is talking about Ray except you. I said our CURRENT mayor is a renter and he gets to vote on what we have to live with and that is the truth. We have owners who can’t vote so they have no voice because this is not their primary home.
This is why we will never have nice things! I will sue you if I’m mad. Margaritaville 2.0!
Everyone’s talking about the vibe – we should post it on the town sign – Nobody’s Happy! Oh wait, the sign is gone also. Two and a half years and we still can’t understand old FMB is gone and we need to move on.
Progress moving at a turtle’s pace (with great lighting)!
I agree. Time to move forward. It is a shame that if you have a different opinion you get threatened.
I’m not sure why condos will destroy a family neighborhood. How many homes are rentals? I walked that neighborhood hood for ten years. I met people renting many times before I got to shell mound.Red coconut had huge pine trees lots of activities including noise, one murder,some times dumped their charcoal or trash over the fence onto my property. mound. I loved estero before hurricane. We can’t go back. Hundreds of homes destroyed. Many home owners will never be able to afford to return . Seagate condos will increase property values. I would love to see pictures of views of what home owners are loseing. Construction and lack of parking and homes will continue to create traffic congestion for many years
Most of of will have died before estero is rebuilt.
Oh please stop fighting and suing and lets move forward. What happened at Red coconut during the storm was heartbreaking. Please can we move forward toward something Beautiful. I know change is hard for people but it is part of life. Lets just all be Positive and work toward progress. We need more people wanting to move here than move away with all the debri and devastation. Please don’t keep fighting!! lets lock arms and move forward toward making Fort Myers Beach a desirable place to live again …Please be kind to one another, We need to look forward so we can stop looking back at all the pain and look forward to a bright and beautiful Future here on FMB. Thank you for all the hard work and decisions our City Servants do!
we wouldnt have to fight or sue if the project more closely resembled the original village plan that was proposed by RC years ago
Here we go again another Margaritaville.why can’t we just get on with it??? I hope you all have deep pockets.
We do!
This is dumb. Just more people trying to stop the rebuild and revitalization of the island which is sorely needed. Old people that can’t handle progress. Get over it. It’s not 1975
I honestly just have to laugh at this naive comment!! Bahahaha!
Old you say? I say; “strive to get there”.
Writ of Certiorari? Ask the Audubon how well that worked against the Town? And I would doubt these petitioners have as deep of pockets as the Audubon. A complete waste of everyone’s money and time.
Many have deeper pockets than you think, you just don’t it. I’d be more concerned with the town’s pockets as the town is operating on a bridge loan, with interest. How’s your busted up bridge?
I’ve got a bridge to sell ya!
Excellent article. Thank you! Key quote: “There is no system that states if you give the town X, you will get 5 more stories of height in return. It’s all subjective bargaining between the developer and whoever happens to be on council at the time. “
The cost of this lawsuit should be paid by Woodson, Atterholt and King, since they are the three that voted for it. Those 3 have lost the vision of this town, and will hopefully be voted out at the end of their term.
Keep dreaming, it might snow in FMB too.
There was frost here 2 years ago, so you never know!😉
No frost on beach
Frost at my house which is on the beach!
A few of the TC who voted for this project apparently just did not care that the town incorporated for that reason and think they know what is better than the people they represent.
Once again the Town Council has chosen not to abide by the Comprehensive Plan. Sounds all to familiar with the Town Council’s recent 1st hearing approval of a Food Truck Park/Paid Parking Lot in the heart of the island directly next to a residential neighborhood!! Unquestionably intrusive!!! One of the investors in this Food Truck Park used to be on the LPA! Think there might be some bias here??! This area is known as the Boulevard and is suppose to only allow businesses such as a florist, barber shop, small restaurant, etc., … not this! Karen Woodson, TC states in her bio, “her main focus is making a difference for our residents.” What? She approved this Seagate development and also the intrusive Food Truck Park at the 1st TC hearing! Actions speak louder than words! The Comprehensive Plan and FLUM are basically worthless because the LPA and Town Council picks and chooses what rules they wish to follow. The sheer disregard for the Town’s Comp plan rules, supporting commercial intrusion into our neighborhoods and blatant disrespect being shown to residents and their investments has to stop! ProtectFMB you have my full support!
Link to Food Truck Park/Paid Parking Lot project below with lots of opposition also:
https://beachtalkradionews.com/food-truck-park-one-vote-away-from-reality/
Agree!
I’m 100% behind development that is permitted in FMB Comprehensive plan.
#protect FMB for residents and guests .
Let the Sun shine and Nature beautify FMB –
We need large Condo development as much as we need street lights on the side streets – NOT AT ALL!
Stop the Stupidity
#protect FMB
Great comment, Marty.
AGREED! I wonder how many of these people commenting are property owners on the island?
This is an excellent and objective synopsis of the 63 page filing. Well done BTR.
The Seagate approval will destroy the Shell Mound Neighborhood the only true family neighborhood on the island.
All of the neighborhood house’s are 1 or 2 story houses about 20 feet in height, the town approved a deveoplment right in this neighborhood the height of the 6 towers are up to 255 ft tall, which will the highest building on the island and west coast of flordia.
The towns own land comp plan has a detailed blueprint of what the town vision for this neighborhood, a quaint village of small beatiful townhouses at 2 story each.
The Vice Mayor said the hurricane changed everything so he voted to approve , but if the hurricane didn’t happen he would not of approved this development.
But no changes were ever made or voted on to change the land comp plan which was approved in 1995 as part of the founding of the town.
The town’s people back in the early 1990’s were so mad that the country approved a high rise called Diamond Head Resort , that the island resident’s voted to approve a separate town and government to stop any building higher than 2 floors in height , or of next to a tall building you could build 70% of that height.
This code was voted and approved by the town’s resident’s in 1997 and has not been changed.
The town council did not follow the land comp plan.