Marco Island midtown plaza rezoning application goes to city staff

An application to rezone Marco’s Island Plaza retail shopping center and three other properties has been received by the city. A completed application is the first step toward approval.

The project is located at the corner of Collier Boulevard and Bald Eagle Drive.

Hendricks Commercial Properties of Beloit, Wisc., asked the city to consider a planned unit development (PUD) combining the Island Plaza, Progressive Auto’s car condo and car wash, Xpress Mart and the Bargain Basket.

Joining the properties into one planned unit is necessary to meet the 5-acre minimum for PUDs. The combined properties total approximately 6.6 acres.

Three sides of the property surrounding the proposed PUD are commercial, and the Smokehouse Bay Club condominiums borders the fourth. An alley separates the condominiums from the requested rezone area.

The property currently is used as a shopping center, an auto-self storage and car wash, a convenience store with gas pumps and a second-hand retail store. All are located in the Town Center-Mixed Use District and zoned C-4, general commercial.

In the PUD request, proposed uses are the same with the addition of self storage. Indoor air-conditioned storage is requested for floors four and five of Progressive Auto’s car condo, 720 Bald Eagle Drive.

Indoor sales and service of new and used automobiles and motorcycles; a hotel/motel not to exceed 26 units per acre; and indoor recreation uses, including an indoor gun range, are listed as permitted uses within the PUD.

Interconnecting the properties can achieve a 15-percent reduction in the amount of required parking, said Joe Irvin in December. Irvin was Marco Island’s zoning administrator at the time and is the now the city’s interim community affairs director.

Irvin said the proposed PUD includes parking behind the Bargain Basket and Progressive Auto, other proposed alleyway parking, and possible angled street parking on Bald Eagle Drive.

Part of the proposed plan includes a one-way alley with angled parking, running between the shopping center and the car condo and exiting into the backstreet. Between the Xpress Mart and the Bargain Basket, a connector and one-way exit will move traffic into the same backstreet area.

A traffic impact study by Tribilcock Consulting Solutions concluded there would be no new traffic associated with the project if no additional uses were planned in the PUD. It found surrounding roads were within the accepted level of service standards.

The study did not recommend changes, improvements or additions to turn lanes into the property.

The application specifically addressed adding self storage to the car condo. It responded to a recent pushback from C-5 zoned businesses that felt self storage only should be allowed where it was originally permitted by city ordinance.

“Gone are the days when self storage should be limited to industrial or ‘heavy commercial’ zoning districts,” authors of the application reasoned. “Competition should never be a viable consideration for allowing or not allowing a commercial use. That should always be left to the free market system to decide.”

In considering the impact the PUD will have on neighboring properties, the application suggested that property values would improve.

“The proposed PUD will have a positive effect on adjacent land values through landscaping, parking, and facade improvements.”

Those improvements include sidewalks and bicycle facilities, on-site and public right-of-way landscaping, and “architectural enhancements” to the Island Plaza retail shopping center.

After the city confirms the application is complete, notification of public hearings before Marco Island’s Planning Board and City Council will be issued.

Council will have the final say on approval of the application.

© 2014 All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 11

ajm3s writes:

"In the PUD request, proposed uses are the same with the addition of self storage. Indoor air-conditioned storage is requested for floors four and five of Progressive Auto’s car condo, 720 Bald Eagle Drive."

I believe this an end around by the Progressive Auto to be granted air conditioned use when it was turned down 7-0 per the argument brought forth by council representing C5 owners.

Pay attention folks, this is another PUD about to be granted under the false auspices of competition.

"Competition should never be a viable consideration for allowing or not allowing a commercial use. That should always be left to the free market system to decide"

I'm a free market guy but this sounds like trying gain a one over the C5 property owners through a PUD zoning change to change conditional use.

Legal council can you please weight in on this matter? And I do not mean city legal council.

Planning Board pay attention!

jsl writes:

Please correct your misreporting.

The PUD application DOES propose all uses permitted under Marco Island Commercial zoning C-1 through C-4 as of January 1, 2013, PLUS it seeks to ADD to the following uses not currently permitted within the lands to be included in the PUD: (i) indoor storage uses anywhere within the PUD, (ii) indoor gun range uses anywhere in the PUD, (iii) new and used automobile and motorcycle sales and services anywhere in the PUD, etc., all of which uses are currently occurring at 720 Bald Eagle Drive in violation of City Code. See, pages 9 and 10 of the proposed PUD.

Mr. Irving, you owe the public an answer the following question:

If it is your opinion that the type of motorcycle sales and services being conducted by Vanquish V8 Motorcycles at 720 Bald Eagle Dirve (which entity has a NHTSA license to manufacture motorcycles and issue VIN #s on the motorcycles that it reports to the federal government that it manufactures at 720 Bald Eagle Drive and who's local customers/purchasers can confirm) is not manufacturing and is currently permitted in C-4 as you improperly concluded on January 13, 2014, why then does the PUD application ask for the right to conduct these above-described activities IN ADDITION to all uses permitted under Marco Island Commercial zoning C-1 through C-4 as of January 1, 2013.

This entire thing SMELLS! The PUD is being used an attempt to buy foreignness from the City from folks who have not and do not play by the rules as the rest of us. Shame on Mr. Irving!

jsl writes:

See the following link on what was reported on January 28:

According to article, "Mr.Irvin concluded no permit was necessary because no manufacturing existed; and thus, the property had not violated zoning code."

Mr. Irving, if the current uses are ok and do not violate zoning code, why then, in the PUD request, does the applicant ask permission from the City to have New and Used Automobile and Motorcycle Sales and Services, indoor gun range uses, etc.

Shame on you Mr. irving!

lauralbi1 writes:

I am surprised that the blogs thus far have
glossed over the following:
" a hotel/motel not to exceed 26 units per acre". How can this use be included and also make a statement that no increase in traffic or parking will occur ??

Someone needs to review the Deed Restrictions for this property. This is getting out of hand. I have to believe that guns are not allowed in the Deed Restrictions.

Also, the name of our new Planner is Joe Irvin, not Irving.
Ed Issler

jsl writes:

On the issue of corruption….click on

(the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration website listing names of federally licensed motorcycle manufactures in the US)

and type Marco Island as the "City" search code. Takes all but a few minutes to see what is really going on here.

Any surprise as to what you'll find Mr. Irving? No, because you and others in the City already knew that Mr. Kelly and Vanquish is and has been manufacturing motorcycles at 720 Bald Eagle Drive in clear violation of the City Code and under federal permits manufacturing when you made your "findings" in January.

Shame on you Mr. Irving!

TruthfulCitizen writes:

It's amazing to me that people are able to bash other people behind faceless, nameless posts. The Kelly's have voluntarily permitted two complete inspections of their facility, during both of those site visits nothing they are doing was considered a code violation, isn't that enough??? Why are they being targeted?? The have a beautiful facility that provides excellent service at fair prices. They have been on this island for over 20 years and continually give back to this community. The Kelly family donates to and supports every major charity and organization on Marco. It is not right that the owner of a business is able to use the city as a tool to harass the owner of another business, look at what is happening in the restaraunt industry on Marco right now. City councilors do not need to being walking through businesses on Marco and directing staff on what to do. The council should promote business and help business owners to grow and prosper, services of all kinds are needed on this island. I truly hope the council sees the growth potential of Rose Marina and helps them to prosper and approves the land development code changes they need. Lets stop fighting and start becoming more profitable.

TruthfulCitizen writes:

Better Business Bureau??? Any business can answer a few yes or no questions and submit a fee for $600.00 to be a member with an A+ rating. The BBB is just a fee generating machine! Continue to do your research and go to and look for "The best ratings money can buy" or you can google that title. You will be shocked! $600.00 for a trophy and a gold sticker for your door, that's ALL it is....

TruthfulCitizen writes:

WOW!! Obviously you have a real personal issue with Kelly. I personally don't care what goes on inside a beautiful air conditioned building. As far as BBB reviews, maybe if Kelly paid the $600.00 fee to join the BBB the reviews would disappear. Maybe you should get a hobby and some friends and stop focusing on "Kelly"....

WizeOlMarco writes:

What seems overlooked, the storage building ownership is organized as a condominium, approximately 60 different owners control the over 100 individual legal interests. One must assume the goal is for the PUD application to codify the manner in which the property is being used. If correct, other than to meet a PUD standard why drag the adjacent landowners into this fray? Bargain Basket, to fix a parking shortage (despite the PUD allowing a reduction in required parking) by adding angle parking along Bald Eagle in the public right of way...hey Bargain Basket, there is a vacant commercial zoned lot for sale adjacent your north property line. The CVS anchored shopping center, what do they get by collaborating in this scheme? Not sure. PUD projects are usually based on a planned demolition of what exists to make way for a new project. Unless the different parties can explain their motivation and plans for being part of the application the City Council should reject the PUD for not being timely, i.e. not related to a planned project.

Konfuzius writes:

in response to Fegelein:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

"Many friends joined you??????"

Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler under your command SS General Fegelein? The last posse concomitants?
98 years old guys?

CopWatch writes:

I just looked at all the bios. Yikes!

Monkeys have also been observed to do the exact same gesture when they feel they are in a threatening situation.

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.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.