The 2nd reading for the Segate/Red Coconut proposal has been pulled from the Town Council’s Monday agenda. For the second time the town is rescheduling Segate’s public hearing. In fact, the town is now going to hold two more public hearings for the project.
The town originally moved the second public hearing from October 28th to this coming Monday after it was discovered it was not properly noticed for the November 4th Town Council meeting. The new plan was to hold that second public hearing this coming Monday, November 18th. At the October 28th meeting the project was approved by a vote of 4-1 with Mayor Allers dissenting stating the proposal did not fit in with the vision of the town’s Comprehensive Plan.
The town has now received inquiries as to whether the first public meeting (on October 28th) was properly noticed. According to Mayor Dan Allers the Seagate proposal is the first Development Agreement the town is considering and despite the town attorney and Segate attorney both agreeing that the public hearings were properly noticed, out of an abundance of caution, they will hold 2 more public hearings in December.
Florida State statute 166.041 requires “proposed ordinances be read by title, or in full, on at least 2 separate days and shall, at least 10 days prior to adoption, be noticed once in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality.” Fort Myers Beach uses the Fort Myers News-Press to notice their public hearings. It’s unclear specifically why the town might be worried enough about the public noticing to be holding two more public hearings other than this is the first Development Agreement the town has ever considered and they want residents to see they are being overly transparent.
Seagate CEO Matt Price told Beach Talk Radio News that obviously this is a bit of a setback. “From the start we said we were going to do this the right way. I made that promise to the community. This is the right thing to do.”
In October the LPA recommend the Town Council reject the project in a 4-2 vote with Chair Anita Cereceda stating the public benefit offered was not enough for the height being asked for.
The first public hearing will be Monday, December 2nd and the second public hearing will be on December 16th.
Seagate purchased the 10-acre Red Coconut property in 2023 for $52 million and plan to build two 17-story condo towers, 4 single-family homes, a beach club, a restaurant and several parks.
There’s a contingent of Fort Myers Beach residents and visitors who believe the Town Council is selling out the town by approving taller buildings, which was the main reason the town incorporated in 1995. On the flip side there’s a group of people who believe if these projects are not approved, and construction doesn’t get moving, developers will not invest in Fort Myers Beach and these lots will sit empty for years to come. With these two additional public hearings about the project there will be plenty of time for both sides to prepare their 3 minutes of public comment and attend one or both meetings.
Dependable, Accurate, Investigative Journalism take time. To support our work, become a BTR Monthly Member HERE.
The Town should send a survey to the full time residents to get a true determination of the people most affected before any development not compliant with the comp plan and LDC.
Why is it still on towns agenda on the website for Monday.?
Have you attended/watched previous TC meetings? There are routinely items that are “pulled” from the agenda for varying reasons.
Yes Holly I watch them all.
This one is too important not to be pulled without letting citizens know. Many of us have taken off work or made special arrangements to be there. It will be a crowded dispute when it is heard.
I have gotten confirmation from council it was officially pulled about an hour ago.
Please be less condescending in your posts.
Zoning intensity and scale impacts the entire community character and the infrastructure needs required. I don’t think the Beach needs to be worried about empty lots- demand is present and all commercial CPD’s and developments take a long-time and the more complicated the ask- the longer the developer can expect to be reviewed. There should be some wiggle room for higher/smaller footprints and better design- but the change the scale and urbanize- not so sure it is needed at all.
I’m not against development, but believe 17 stories is too much. The fact that TC didn’t even challenge Seagate for a compromise is what upsets me! TC seems willing to accommodate the developer because the high buildings are on the bay side, but they seem to forget that this is more impactful to the adjacent neighborhoods.
The “public benefits” are a joke when asking for the extreme height: maybe a restaurant if it’s profitable to the developer; view corridors – part of which may be impacted by raising the pool and part of it being a view of vegetation on the bay side; a small park – or will it end up being a roundabout for their beach club; maybe a restroom trailer (will HOA pay for it’s upkeep in perpetuity?); last minute “relationship” with the FMB Art Association; a path around the outside of the development; the ability for a few residents to buy membership to their private beach club; and can’t forget the highly anticipated water fountain!!
How do these equate to 17 stories? Where is the compromise to bring the give and take in line? Why aren’t TC members trying to get the best deal for residents?
Great comments! (From another resident and owner.)
I for one love the empty lots with a clear view of the water and sky. As long as any building is within the town’s comp plan they should be allowed with no public benefit baloney.
The BTR survey of 900 respondents were over 70% full or part time residents. Statistically this is a strong survey with 77% stating they want restricted height. You will not get a better survey than that. The actual “silent majority” is voting 7 – 1 AGAINST height over ten stories. Folks who are in favor of Seagate who think they have a mandate are completely on the wrong side of the actual resident sentiment. Karen Woodson stated that because of the election there was somehow a clear mandate for Seagate. This is demonstrably FALSE. In fact, if the vote on Seagate had been two weeks earlier there would most definitely been an outcome where Greg Scasny would have won a seat on council
Those of us paying property taxes have a personal and financial investment in FMB. It has been our family’s permanent but now temporary home since 1982. Our voices should be heard and counted.
BRING IT ON, developers!!!!! I am a taxpayer on this beach and I am CERTAINLY NOT opposed to the building of towers, high rises, multi million dollar home, etc., because they will be built to code…Wake up, people ~ you can’t get back the nostalgia that Ian initially swept away, so, if these developers want to come in and fill these empty spaces, and take away the “ghost town” look, then SO BE IT!!
I, for one, am SICK of driving past COUNTLESS empty lots, with broken down chain link fences! As long as you people fight the developers, these sights will be the new normal on this beach! 🤬
You people who claim you will lose your “views” should remember that, those “views” were “made possible” due to the vengeance of Ian!!!!! Or, would you rather have a “view” of travel trailers, motor homes and WEEDS??!
The Gulf of Mexico is still a draw, to many vacationers and, we should all be grateful for that! Many of you were opposed to Margaritaville as well ~ but, 🤔 hmmm ~ seems to me, they have kept this island alive!!!
This beach will always be a thing of beauty ~ however, these huge empty lots need NOT be constant reminders of the past!
Are you a full time resident, or a taxpayer because you own a rental or commercial property?
Greg Scasny, a political newcomer, got over 1000 votes in the recent election and very nearly unseated an incumbent. Greg’s message: rein in the developers. I think Greg’s vote total is tantamount to a petition signed by about 1/3 of the town’s registered voters.
Any person who pays property taxes on the island should have a say.
Respectfully disagree. You can be a taxpayer who doesn’t live on the Island, but an investor with no concern for the full time residents.
The silent majority verse the vocal minority
Prove it. Send me a list of these Majority. These are made up people, there is no “silent majority”. It’s just a term used to make your argument sound like a majority of people support it, but you have exactly 0 data to support that. It’s 100% BS
This is BS, just like Karen’s recent statement about the election outcome supporting Seagate and John’s pathetic reference to the vote counts when the town was incorporated. Those two are for development at any cost and have little regard for public opinion or the impact on neighboring communities. John doesn’t answer a single email and Karen’s responses are condescending at best.
Long-time Windward Passage time share family. Height restrictions were created for a reason. If one is approved… more will be approved.
FMB will always be a draw, just because it’s FMB. Developers are not going to run away. Some developers will even turn a profit if they build to code instead of building a monstrosity. Imagine that.
Totally agree!!! Build, that’s fine, just build to code.
Seagate will be taller than Diamond Head, which is ludicrous since the town was incorporated to prevent these high rise buildings. Margaritaville was kept at a lower height and so should the rest of these new builds. People will come to the beach regardless as you all can see.
The same statute also has the following language:
“a. The local governing body shall hold two advertised public hearings on the proposed ordinance. At least one hearing shall be held after 5 p.m. on a weekday, unless the local governing body, by a majority plus one vote, elects to conduct that hearing at another time of day. The first public hearing shall be held at least 7 days after the day that the first advertisement is published. The second hearing shall be held at least 10 days after the first hearing and shall be advertised at least 5 days prior to the public hearing.”
I hit send too soon – the above section is relevant when:
“2. In cases in which the proposed ordinance changes the actual list of permitted, conditional, or prohibited uses within a zoning category, or changes the actual zoning map designation of a parcel or parcels of land involving 10 contiguous acres or more, the governing body shall provide for public notice and hearings as follows:”
I believe that Seagate is just under 10 acres.
Islanders United will be there on December 2nd showing a strong voice of dissent.
We have over 500 signatures on a petition to stop the towers. Signers are all from Residents, local area or “friends” of FMB that do not want to see the island become towers of cement.
We are aware that buildings need to be higher, most starting at 15 feet above BFE.
To add 17 stories on top is ust ludicrous. There is no public benefit worth 17 floors x 2.
Just my opinion. I am a resident and we want to keep the “Vibe” of what was intended when we incorporated.
Please let us all know how we can sign the petition!
Yes, please let us know how we can sign?
I sent you the link.
It is also on Facebook with with Islanders United.
I answered awhile ago with the link however I think it was removed from the responses.
Not on Facebook but want to sign. Hopefully Ed will post the link.
Curious, what does group feel is a fair or realistic height? Obviously compromises need to be reached so I’m curious. Thank You
Three over 1; nothing bigger than Margaritaville
John, When FMB became a town it was due to Lee County approving Diamond Head. The residents at that time did not want anymore high rises. When the Town was created the Comp Plan was designed to only have 3 floors over parking with no additional density. Most residents still want FMB to develop to the current code. The developers can build to code, it’s just going to take them a little longer to realize their ROI.
I think to be truly relevant, those signatures should have only been Town be voters. BTR has 129,000 people and a poll with only 500 would be irrelevant because of the number of potential respondents, and I also believe most visitors just want the restaurants and hotels rebuilt so they can come back to play in our sandbox. A petition with only registered voters is what should have developed if this was going to actually impact a Council decision, but I would bet there aren’t enough residents engaged or willing to sign.
I agree. If not a separate petition, registered voters who sign should be clearly highlighted. I would bet that many are both engaged and willing. I’ve often said that people making comments here and on FB should use full names and resident voter status
While voters are important so are property owners that may not be currently living on the Island due to current circumstances. They should be heard as it will affect their investment and ability to be on the Island.
I disagree! I have owned a home on FMB for over 15 years and I pay property taxes. Although I may not be a full time resident and unable to vote, I should be heard. I will be affected by the outcome of new developments as equally as everyone else on the island.
I don’t disagree, but the opinion of a resident, a non resident property owner, a business owner, a FM local, and a tourist all have different weights and should be identified separately to provide any true value.