Marco Island Planning Board opts for more time to consider Marco Island Marriott 2001 PUD amendments

Marco Island Marriott’s General Manager Rick Medwedeff explains a second proposal for amending the hotel’s 2001 PUD during Friday’s Planning Board meeting. The Collier Boulevard hotel’s owners are seeking to build a third tower while adding parking on its eastside property on Collier Boulevard. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

Marco Island Marriott’s General Manager Rick Medwedeff explains a second proposal for amending the hotel’s 2001 PUD during Friday’s Planning Board meeting. The Collier Boulevard hotel’s owners are seeking to build a third tower while adding parking on its eastside property on Collier Boulevard. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

Marco Island Marriott’s General Manager Rick Medwedeff explains a second proposal for amending the hotel’s 2001 PUD during Friday’s Planning Board meeting. The Collier Boulevard hotel’s owners are seeking to build a third tower while adding parking on its eastside property on Collier Boulevard. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

Marco Island Marriott’s General Manager Rick Medwedeff explains a second proposal for amending the hotel’s 2001 PUD during Friday’s Planning Board meeting. The Collier Boulevard hotel’s owners are seeking to build a third tower while adding parking on its eastside property on Collier Boulevard. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

A second proposal to amend the Marco Island Marriott’s 2001 PUD draws a standing-room-only crowd during Friday’s Planning Board Meeting. More than 20 residents spoke for or against the proposal. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

A second proposal to amend the Marco Island Marriott’s 2001 PUD draws a standing-room-only crowd during Friday’s Planning Board Meeting. More than 20 residents spoke for or against the proposal. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

Marco Island Marriott’s General Manager Rick Medwedeff, left, takes time during a break to talk with Dale Bernhardt, a resident whose property abuts the north end of the hotel’s parking area on the east side of Collier Boulevard. The two attended a Planning Board public hearing Friday on amending the hotel’s 2011 PUD agreement. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

Marco Island Marriott’s General Manager Rick Medwedeff, left, takes time during a break to talk with Dale Bernhardt, a resident whose property abuts the north end of the hotel’s parking area on the east side of Collier Boulevard. The two attended a Planning Board public hearing Friday on amending the hotel’s 2011 PUD agreement. Cheryl Ferrara/Eagle Correspondent

An artist's rendering of addition to the Marco Island Marriott. Submitted

An artist's rendering of addition to the Marco Island Marriott. Submitted

Before a standing-room-only crowd, Friday’s Planning Board public hearing was the longest in recent memory.

What started with hopes of resolving the question of amending Marco Island Marriott’s 2001 PUD ended by moving any solution to March 21.

The Marriott is seeking a height increase for a third tower on the west side of Collier Boulevard to modernize and upgrade the hotel, adding 84 rooms and a new restaurant. In addition, the request seeks changes to an eastside parking property to provide for those improvements.

Chairman Monte Lazarus asked board members to verify that their decisions would be based on the evidence and non-prejudicial, a step not usually taken at Planning Board hearings.

But it was a lack of information, not a preponderance of evidence, that stymied the board and pushed the issue to a later date.

Marriott’s General Manager Rick Medwedeff presented the board with a second plan for recreating the hotel’s parking property. The new plan was based on conversations with abutting neighbors and an effort to resolve conflicts, he said.

It nixed a parking garage in favor of four elevated tennis courts over covered parking. The new plan was recommended to the board by city staff. The elevated tennis courts were approved in the 2001 PUD, although residents said the provision was added to the original PUD without public input.

The new plan is made possible by reconfiguring 1,243 parking spaces. The option uses interconnection credits through the amended PUD, eliminates 30 spaces set aside for community parking, increases the number of compact car spots, reduces landscaping and mid-parking islands, and adds tandem valet parking.

Board member Frank Mulligan questioned whether the calculation for the number of spaces met the city’s Land Development Code even with the interconnection credit. He also asked why 109 parking spots were currently being used for beach furniture storage.

Medwedeff said 1,243 spaces would meet the needs of the hotel even after adding 84 rooms and a new restaurant.

“We have temporary trailers that would go away except the storage of beach furniture would have to stay,” he told the board.

Mulligan asked why a 20-foot high central plant had to be placed on the eastside property. Board member Irv Povlow called the plant humongous.

Medwedeff defending the decision, telling the board the central plant was the same height as the cooling tower originally placed on the eastside property. The plant also would be placed closer to the road and outside the line of sight for abutting neighbors, he said.

Board member Bill Trotter questioned the accuracy of height measurements for the proposed gulf-side tower. Although the new plan measured the height from the flood elevation, Trotter worried comparison measurements were made from ground level.

Reductions in setbacks and landscape buffers also concerned the board.

In public comment, neighbors complained about the hotel’s lack of rodent control, a promise of 12-ft. high parking lot lights that ended up much taller, noise and lights from the proposed elevated tennis courts, and numerous safety and quality of life issues.

Those supporting the hotel expansion pointed to the prosperity a modernized, luxury level hotel could bring to the community including increased tourism and business revenue in the summer months.

Board members felt too many questions were left unanswered in the second proposal.

They asked staff to return with more information on required parking calculations, light fixture heights, adjacent building height comparisons, buffer and setback requirements, safety and crosswalk issues, and plans to address abutters’ complaints.

The board also asked staff to consider what issues would arise if the Marriott’s construction and replacement of Smokehouse Bridge on Collier Boulevard should take place simultaneously.

During a break in the meeting, parking lot abutter Dale Bernhardt opined on the new proposal.

“I like proposal two better,” he said. “I would still like to see them honor the (original) PUD with no elevation on the east side.”

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

  • Discuss
  • Print

Related Topics

Comments » 27

SmallTownAdvocate writes:

It is time the Planning Board review the Marriott Proposal in its simplest terms: it is an expansion beyond the original agreement of 2001 but more importantly beyond a very liberal contract that addressed future expansion to allow for maximizing the number of hotel rooms.

But today, Mr. Medwedeff says that he is confined by this contract and needs to be able to address and compete in the marketplace.

Well folks, the contract was a deal to allow the residential portion, the Madeira to rise to 196' or 216' depending on how you wish to measure "official" height. No matter how it is framed, the PUD allowed for the Madeira to built above the height standards of the previous zoning (prior to conversion to PUD) of residential tourist.

The remaining portion, the resort portion (Marriott facility) was to NOT build above 100'. It was to limit the expansion of accessory use, (spas, restaurants, bars, meeting rooms, exhibit halls, retail shops etc) which is only limited by parking, setbacks and height.

And the rationale given by Mr. Medwedeff, to better compete against a backdrop: "a competitive model set", where the local competitors have no more than 450 hotel rooms and the national competitive set includes hotels with rooms that exceed 1000 and in cities with populations above 1 million.

The competitive set, as listed by Mr. Medwedeff is not constrained by land, in fact, most are located on much larger tracts of land or in metropolitan areas with much different height and setbacks due to the proliferation of high rises and the creation of canyons typically found in densely populated cities.

I believe Mr. Medwedeff wants to bury the competition and dupe the residents that it is their interests. Well, even Joey's Pizza claimed that 90% of his business is with residents which he relies on off-season.

This island is to serve residents NOT a market plan for global expansion.

Is is about INTENSITY NOT DENSITY! And taking a "small tropical island" and using its charm for its market gain beyond the competitive set of hotels on this island!

ajm3s writes:

This is the Marriott's answer to parking he currently uses for storage:

“We have temporary trailers that would go away except the storage of beach furniture would have to stay,” Mr. Medwedeff told the board.

"Medwedeff said 1,243 spaces would meet the needs of the hotel even after adding 84 rooms and a new restaurant."

And may I add: gaming room, exhibit hall, ballroom, meeting rooms, (2) bars and prefunction space.

This is how the Marriott is currently managing parking and going forward will still use for beach chair storage?

So we can expect better management of parking space or is it storage space?

This is your good neighbor! Money talks and parking space is used for storage of beach chairs located across the street from the beach.

Folks this speaks volumes today....and you want more for tomorrow.

If you think we have a parking problem, all I can say the Marriott has a storage problem as well....is it worth the unsubstantiated dollars the Marriott saves each resident on this island or contributes?

I wish we could post a photo of the 109 slot parking lot used for storage!!

Somehow it did not make it on either "town hall" presentations by Mr. Medwedeff, to confirm the need to expand!

Konfuzius writes:

It is a political subject. Since the MICA survey is public the people of Marco Island have the right and the duty to decide what they want.
It is referendum time. Nothing else.

ajm3s writes:

in response to Konfuzius:

It is a political subject. Since the MICA survey is public the people of Marco Island have the right and the duty to decide what they want.
It is referendum time. Nothing else.

K:

I do not believe the council would ever bring this to a referendum because this is primarily a land use issue. The council would have to really get into the details to really understand what is going on.

This island will be constantly pressured to take the commercial route to maximize revenue just as the Marriott is exceeding the zoning limits it essentially agreed in 2001 to maximize revenue....but it is in a community that officially claims in the Comprehensive Plan (amended 2009) goal:

“To enhance Marco Island’s quality of life, environmental quality, and tropical small town and resort character by managing growth and assuring a stable residential community with sufficient businesses to serve the needs of residents and visitors.”

I believe the Marriott is NOT a cordial host given the alternate plan it provided the Planning Board. It essentially created a "valet parking" zone to double park, which is quite a feat to cram as many cars so it could expand the meeting rooms beyond the limits of height and perhaps setback allowances on the west side.

For me it is clear the Marriott will NOT allow any encumbrances on its beach, and wants to put as much crap on the east side including a second and larger central plant under the guise of reducing the "carbon footprint". Well the "carbon footprint" can be placed on the west side as well, but I believe it would impede the view of its patrons or god forbid impact the amount of meeting space.

The Marriott will use the east side for everything that is NOT desirable for its patrons but assumes the neighborhood will not notice.

Ask yourself, why is the Marriott (including Chrystal Shores Timeshare) the hotel that is always asking for more than allowed in current zoning?

Because it can...an no one will challenge their record of being a mediocre neighbor and promises broken!

And contracts that are to be broken, opps I meant amended.

The alternative proposal was a demonstration of the Marriott's anti-neighborly posture. When pushed the ugly Marriott will present itself and ask for parking credits as well.

Marriott a nice neighbor? I do NOT think so.

ed34145 writes:

There was an agreement which was a promise to the citizens of Marco Island...to ALL the citizens, not just those in the immediate vicinity. While sometimes things do change and need to be re evaluated, the only thing that has changed since the agreement is the Marriott's greed. The agreement (promise) should be enforced.

CopWatch writes:

Memo to Lazarus:
Medwedeff, The Marripot and Mass Mutual are no longer considered forthcoming and reliable aspects of OUR island. They and their money hungry minions must go by any means necessary. I urge all residents of OUR island to boycott all shops, bars and restaurants associated with these connivers.

MrBreeze writes:

MICA Said it best. The PUD and the Deed Restrictions have been written. Time to tell the Marriott live with the deal you dealt yourself.
Just because they want more revenue that is not any reason to even hear the proposal.

The planning Commission should not even hear any proposal that does not comply with the PUD agreement already in place.

WMissow writes:

Stick to the PUD agreement of 2001!!!!

Nothing more!

marco97 writes:

This is a done deal, it does not matter what the people of Marco want the Marriott will get more rooms and parking.
We have enough hotel rooms on this Island and the businesses that depend on the tourists are doing just fine.

CopWatch writes:

"Though people have taken to the streets from Egypt, to Ukraine, to Venezuela to Thailand, many have wondered whether Americans would ever resist the increasing encroachments on their freedom. I think they've begun."

Konfuzius writes:

in response to ajm3s:

K:

I do not believe the council would ever bring this to a referendum because this is primarily a land use issue. The council would have to really get into the details to really understand what is going on.

This island will be constantly pressured to take the commercial route to maximize revenue just as the Marriott is exceeding the zoning limits it essentially agreed in 2001 to maximize revenue....but it is in a community that officially claims in the Comprehensive Plan (amended 2009) goal:

“To enhance Marco Island’s quality of life, environmental quality, and tropical small town and resort character by managing growth and assuring a stable residential community with sufficient businesses to serve the needs of residents and visitors.”

I believe the Marriott is NOT a cordial host given the alternate plan it provided the Planning Board. It essentially created a "valet parking" zone to double park, which is quite a feat to cram as many cars so it could expand the meeting rooms beyond the limits of height and perhaps setback allowances on the west side.

For me it is clear the Marriott will NOT allow any encumbrances on its beach, and wants to put as much crap on the east side including a second and larger central plant under the guise of reducing the "carbon footprint". Well the "carbon footprint" can be placed on the west side as well, but I believe it would impede the view of its patrons or god forbid impact the amount of meeting space.

The Marriott will use the east side for everything that is NOT desirable for its patrons but assumes the neighborhood will not notice.

Ask yourself, why is the Marriott (including Chrystal Shores Timeshare) the hotel that is always asking for more than allowed in current zoning?

Because it can...an no one will challenge their record of being a mediocre neighbor and promises broken!

And contracts that are to be broken, opps I meant amended.

The alternative proposal was a demonstration of the Marriott's anti-neighborly posture. When pushed the ugly Marriott will present itself and ask for parking credits as well.

Marriott a nice neighbor? I do NOT think so.

ajm3s

" The council would have to really get into the details to really understand what is going on."

In my opinion this council is hopeless overcharged to understand the dimension of this project and the consequences for Marco Island.
You see their decisions in the case ROSE mariner. Their decision is not in the favor of the people of Marco Island. The Marriott/MassMutual case is a case for the people. That is democracy.

“To enhance Marco Island’s quality of life, environmental quality, and tropical small town and resort character by managing growth and assuring a stable residential community with sufficient businesses to serve the needs of residents and visitors.”

The problem with this goal is it is to abstract for the present personal configuration of our city councilor. A goal like this needs intellectual capacity and rationalists not existed by our city councilor and our planing board. So simple is that. Last words of Jesus:
Forgive them for they know not what they do!

"Ask yourself, why is the Marriott (including Chrystal Shores Timeshare) the hotel that is always asking for more than allowed in current zoning?"

Money, money is the rich mans word!!!!!!

"Marriott a nice neighbor? I do NOT think so."

I am agree. Enough is enough. But just a referendum can stop it. Our City Councilor and OUR planning board have no glue what's going on.
So simple is that.

MrBreeze writes:

I believe this is far from a "done deal". If the pressure ramps up from a legal standpoint then action will take place. MICA has said its position, the PUD and Deed Restrictions speak loud and clear. This is why they want to change the PUD. They know MICA has the power to stop it.

MICA will say "NO" to a PUD amendment from the 2001 PUD. Plain and simple.

Konfuzius writes:

in response to MrBreeze:

I believe this is far from a "done deal". If the pressure ramps up from a legal standpoint then action will take place. MICA has said its position, the PUD and Deed Restrictions speak loud and clear. This is why they want to change the PUD. They know MICA has the power to stop it.

MICA will say "NO" to a PUD amendment from the 2001 PUD. Plain and simple.

Mr. Breeze, maybe I am wrong. But in the moment I hear nothing from MICA officials or city officials. Neither city council or planning board.
The MICA member have spoken with a big majority against the Marriott/MassMutual expansion.
But what is the standpoint of City council member, planning board and MICA board?
Do we hear something I miss?

lauralbi1 writes:

Very encouraging. Good to see that the Planning Board wants all the information
Ed Issler

Konfuzius writes:

in response to lauralbi1:

Very encouraging. Good to see that the Planning Board wants all the information
Ed Issler

Eddi,

I do not believe that they vote in your favor.
They got the MICA survey message.

lauralbi1 writes:

Kon____: You are grasping at straws. Even Ruth has the information that will tell you that 50% of MICA members are not voters (nor full time residents) on Marco island. They join MICA to go to the Residents Beach. Their home addresses are on file at MICA. Please go check for yourself.
So, at best, we are talking about 1,600 voters, less than 10% of registered voters on the Island. The Planning Board and Council know these percentages. I am confident that they will vote what is in the best interest of MARCO ISLAND, not a few people that want this Island to be a retirement community. Let's wait and see. I am perfectly happy to do so !!!
Ed Issler

CopWatch writes:

I repeat:
Medwedeff, The Marripot and Mass Mutual are no longer considered forthcoming and reliable aspects of OUR island. They and their money hungry minions must go by any means necessary. I urge all residents of OUR island to boycott all shops, bars and restaurants associated with these connivers.

CopWatch writes:

Crooks and Liars -
Austin, Texas halts fee waivers to developer of J. W. Marriott. The con artists tried to bilk the TAXPAYERS of Austin out of $3,800,000.00. Next sucker please have your city prepare to bend over.

1Paradiselost writes:

The question MICA asked was....

"Would you support City Council granting an amendment to the Marriott Resort’s PUD, which could allow a structure on the east side of Collier Boulevard and/or grant increased height on the west side of Collier Boulevard"?

YES: 28.2 percent. NO: 62.1 percent. Undecided: 9.7 percent

"2011 Would you support City Council granting an amendment to the Marriott Resort’s PUD, which would allow construction of a building on the east side of Collier Boulevard, across from the present hotel"?

YES: 27 percent. NO: 64 percent. Undecided: 9 percent.

"MICA’s membership survey, with approximately 3,200 responses, DID NOT support amending the Marriott Resort’s PUD".

Not the 1,600 Mister Ed stated above.

First I would like to thank MICA for conducting the poll above. It gives the residents and our city officials some basis for the mood of the people who live here & pay taxes in our community.

I do not know Ruth, however its is unfair for someone who is STILL unhappy with the results of the poll to express anger!

WHEN THEY DO a survey/polls for statewide and national elections. Less than 1/10th of 1% of the electorate are polled. When the elections are completed the results are generally within 2% +/- of the actual outcome.

In the MICA poll above as Ed points out "IN ANOTHER BLOG below". 25% of the registered voters were polled...

Looking how national polls are conducted and the MICA poll, It would be safe to say that the voters on Marco Island overwhelmingly DO NOT support any amendment to the 2001 agreement between the people/city of Marco Island and the Marriott.

"The original agreement of 2001 was clear and specific that no additional parking or other elevated structures other than tennis courts were permitted on the east side of Collier Boulevard. It also limited the height of the building on the west side to 100 feet".

Some living here care about the island we call home. Others would destroy the vision of the the Mackle Brothers just to make a buck!

http://www.marconews.com/news/2014/fe...

Konfuzius writes:

Eddi, Eddi,

I am pretty sure that the big majority of Marco Island is not in favor of Marriott Island and Eddi Issler's family business inside the Marriott "ALL-under-one-roof-concept"!
Since you did you asbestos self-contamination test you have a leak of reality.
The truth is - Marco Islander want keep Marco Island as Marco Island means as PARADISE!!!!
Now you start to try to confuse the people again. Same strategy you preferred by the STRP project in the name of MMM (Marco Island Mafia Member. You ignore the election of Kiester, Forch and Pop-off. That was a pro sewer election. But Pop-off turned to a snitch. That's all. If he stayed straight he promised in his campaign STRP will never hit Marco Island.
The same now with the Marriott/MassMutual expansion plan. Some people like you have nothing else than $$$eyes and believe in a $crooge McDuck solution.
If city council or the planning board support this concept another political tsunami will hit Marco Island.
Ask your friends: Waldi, Gibbon and Recker. They don't listen to the people. They are history. We - the people - watch Batte and Brown.
MICA member send a message.
If you are under asbestos influence ignore!
If you are smart listen to the people and make a right decision.
Best for us all: REFERENDUM TIME!!!!!!!!

Konfuzius writes:

Sorry Eddi,

I was wrong;
"Now you start to try to confuse the people again. Same strategy you preferred by the STRP project in the name of MMM (Marco Island Mafia Member. You ignore the election of Kiester, Forch and Pop-off. That was a pro sewer election. But Pop-off turned to a snitch. That's all. If he stayed straight he promised in his campaign STRP will never hit Marco Island. "

That was a against sewer election. Not a pro!
Senior moments.

SmallTownAdvocate writes:

Here is one of the hotels (The Westin Diplomat):

http://www.diplomatresort.com/#

Mr. Medwedeff included in his competitive set in a recent rebuttal to my LTE "Scale Matters in a Small Town":

http://www.marcoislandflorida.com/art...

This is one of several hotels he listed under the heading "JW Marco Island Resort Future Competitive Set". It serves as a model as to the need to expand the facilities on Marco Island.

I wish to draw your attention to the fact that it has 998 hotels rooms with very little land area similar to the Marriott Marco expansion plan.

Note: the location and size of the parking garage to serve this facility. An eight level parking garage across the street. Not a parking lot as offered in plan B.1 by Mr. Medwedeff. Granted the conference area is 2.5X larger than the Marco expansion.

Folks, this is NOT the direction I wish for Collier Blvd, yet Mr. Medwedeff hopes to compete and emulate such a facility. Compare 810 rooms vs 998 rooms on a limited lot.

The other hotels he lists under the same competitive set are located on land that exceeds 100 acres, two are on plots of 300 and 600 acres.

I recommend you Google the aerial views. A picture is worth a thousand letter comment.

Alfred Marchand
Small Town Advocate

SmallTownAdvocate writes:

Here is a street view of the Diplomat with overhead pedestrian walkway.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/The...

In the lower right hand corner you can rotate to get a panoramic view while on Rt 1A1.

MrBreeze writes:

Alfred, Great stuff! Keep the information coming as this is the only way to get this out in the open.

Again, the Deed Restrictions is what we need to stand by and the PUD agreement are the basis of Law. The Citizens of Marco Island need not to get their "eye off the ball" of this. In the courts MICA would prevail as the Documents Speak Loudly. If that were not true this would have been approved but Marriott realizes this is a hurdle and will try to minimize their impact of the full project to Marco Island buy having these presentions to soften the blow.

Again, We need to stand by the 2001 PUD agreement and the Deltona Deed Restrictions.

26yearsonmarco writes:

As I have said before, if a $50M profit is not good enough for Mass Mutual, then sell it, move on, and don't let the door hit you in the rear end on the way out.

This is a tourist destination, period.

SmallTownAdvocate writes:

in response to 26yearsonmarco:

As I have said before, if a $50M profit is not good enough for Mass Mutual, then sell it, move on, and don't let the door hit you in the rear end on the way out.

This is a tourist destination, period.

The money is HUGGGGGGGGGGGGH! For the Marriott, that is why the Chamber of Commerce, Realtors Association of Marco Island, Restaurant Association and MIA.

They all love the benefits of raising money!!!!!

I love the benefits of maintaining a small town atmosphere located at the end of Rt 951. It will provide a benefit of escalating land and home value beyond our dreams and increasing taxable valuations of residential properties that overshadow the hotel and restaurant tax benefits.

Why?

They are coming and East Naples (the town you traverse when you get off Exit 101 on I75) to go to Marco Island will boom in growth. In years going forward the traffic on 951 will increase dramatically, just look at the lane expansions and additional arterial roads. Note: the current commercial and residential growth and gated communities.

Then pay attention to the change in traffic as you find your way to Marco, width change from 5 lines to three lanes and after the Rt 41 intersection and Manatee Road intersection the narrowing to two lanes.....

You are now entering a more tranquil environment as you pass Rookery Bay reserve....that is the lure to Marco...then the apex of the bridge....the tranquil (on a relative basis) as compared to Naples. This will become more apparent as the years go by...

Therefore it is imperative to now take a stand and protect this jewel to distinguish itself from hustle and bustle off island. To clearly create a clear distinction of small tropical town.

And if we can create a Midtown District with lower height restrictions we can begin to create a more tranquil Collier Blvd perhaps never meeting the ambiance of Naples 5th Avenue commercial district with a three story height limit.

It is all in the perception of space but requires a commitment to serious and I mean serious growth management!!!!!!!!

No smoke and mirrors, and no testimonials needed from the C of C, Realtors, Restaurants or MIA.

Konfuzius writes:

in response to SmallTownAdvocate:

The money is HUGGGGGGGGGGGGH! For the Marriott, that is why the Chamber of Commerce, Realtors Association of Marco Island, Restaurant Association and MIA.

They all love the benefits of raising money!!!!!

I love the benefits of maintaining a small town atmosphere located at the end of Rt 951. It will provide a benefit of escalating land and home value beyond our dreams and increasing taxable valuations of residential properties that overshadow the hotel and restaurant tax benefits.

Why?

They are coming and East Naples (the town you traverse when you get off Exit 101 on I75) to go to Marco Island will boom in growth. In years going forward the traffic on 951 will increase dramatically, just look at the lane expansions and additional arterial roads. Note: the current commercial and residential growth and gated communities.

Then pay attention to the change in traffic as you find your way to Marco, width change from 5 lines to three lanes and after the Rt 41 intersection and Manatee Road intersection the narrowing to two lanes.....

You are now entering a more tranquil environment as you pass Rookery Bay reserve....that is the lure to Marco...then the apex of the bridge....the tranquil (on a relative basis) as compared to Naples. This will become more apparent as the years go by...

Therefore it is imperative to now take a stand and protect this jewel to distinguish itself from hustle and bustle off island. To clearly create a clear distinction of small tropical town.

And if we can create a Midtown District with lower height restrictions we can begin to create a more tranquil Collier Blvd perhaps never meeting the ambiance of Naples 5th Avenue commercial district with a three story height limit.

It is all in the perception of space but requires a commitment to serious and I mean serious growth management!!!!!!!!

No smoke and mirrors, and no testimonials needed from the C of C, Realtors, Restaurants or MIA.

It is a political subject. Nothing else.
Let the people vote. Referendum time.
Why is City Council and Planning board together with Marriott/MassMutual so afraid about that.
They are scared by the out-coming of a Referendum.

And Eddi Issler too.

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.

Features