Marco Island Yacht Club returns to drawing board

  • Email
  • Discuss
  • Share »
  • Print
  • A
  • A
  • A

Supersized. That was the charge Marco Island Planning Board Chair James Riviere leveled against the Marco Island Yacht Club’s proposed docks at Friday’s meeting.

But he had the same thing to say about city staff concerns surrounding the proposal, which failed 3-2 after a morning of conversation and deliberation. Boardmembers David Caruso and Bill Patterson were absent.

The proposal went before the planning board for a second time seeking a variance to allow two docks to extend into the Marco River past the 20-foot maximum, one at 390 feet and the other at 333 feet. The new facilities would add 40 boat slips for use by the Marco Island Yacht Club and the Marco Island Marina Association.

Since it was presented to the planning board Aug. 10, the proposal was adjusted to shift the two docks to the southeast, 20 to 25 feet away from the mouth of the Chestnut Waterway. However, the changes did not address one of the largest concerns voiced by the planning board and city staff in August: that the docks are just too big.

Rather, yacht club Vice Chair Rudi Landwaard and engineer Joe Cunningham chose to focus on the reasons that the docks would not be too cumbersome, presenting the board with boat traffic models and simulations of how much nearby residents’ views would be affected.

In the end, the deciding factor once again was the length of the docks.

“I wasn’t inclined until today to support this,” boardmember Vincent Magee said. “But I’m still going to stick with the staff recommendation. If you could bring this down just a little bit, I could get behind it.”

City planner Bryan Milk advised the board that the docks might put too much strain on the area’s manatee population, and that the facilities would be too imposing a presence on both the Marco River and the Chestnut Waterway.

However, staff did not state to what extent the project should be scaled back, though Magee requested direction on how much is too much.

Fellow boardmember Monte Lazarus, who voted in favor of approving the variance, said the concerns about size were not based in logic or science, but on gut feelings.

Magee suggested that shaving 30 or 40 feet off the longer of the two docks would be enough to satisfy his concerns.

In an interview after the meeting, Landwaard said he is not sure yet whether the plan can be reduced that much and still meet the yacht club’s goals.

“I did studies on this, and in the first seven years it will not make money for the club,” Landwaard said. “If you have to cut it back more, it’s gonna take even longer.”

The proposal is slated to go before the planning board again Oct. 5.

  • Email
  • Discuss
  • Share »
  • Print

Related Stories

Comments » 3

sunnycity writes:

Bryan Milk is The city planner...didn't they hire anyone when the last guy left??? Lackluster would be a complement to Milk. Anyhow, I agree the dock proposal is just to big...unless they want to donate a mil or so then I say anything goes....right???

karenglaub writes:

Who are the proposed boat slips/docks supposed to serve? We do not need to draw more people from off the island here for their convenience so they have a
place to dock their boat. We have enough congestion on that part of our island now, and during season it is gridlock. This is our main artery on and off the
island. What about this proposal makes it in our city's interest to do? The yacht club wants to use our navigable waters in that cove area where the general public comes to fish and play, for their monetary gain. We should not support that.

stephanie writes:

There is plenty of room for the requested dock extension. If installed as requested it will not hamper access to the beach area next to the bridge.
The view shoudn't be an issue either. We are an island and a boating comunitee and should accept boats as part of the view.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Features