Comments by ajm3s

Written on Common ground: Planning Board begins quest to find more public parking:

in response to lauralbi1:

Dear ajm: You need to take your concerns and your talents and get on another bandwagon. The Marriott is not, and does not, create parking issues for Marco Island. Every day many, many Islanders park on Marriott property and use Marriott property, illegally. Certainly you do not want the Marriott to open parking for other businesses, do you ??
Your blog above makes your whole stance on the Marriott watered down. In fact Marriott hosts many, many, charitable and paid for events each year and is able to accommodate all the cars in attendance. In fact, as you very well know, most of the year the Marriott does not even need their parking allotment. Whatever is decided about parking will only be applicable maybe 20-30 nights per year, when Florida groups attend and drive in instead of flying in. You do not know the first thing about the Marriott operation, so do not come across like you do.
Please get a life.
Ed Issler

Mister Ed:

Let me be more diplomatic in my response. Responsible businesses DO NOT require additional parking space outside of its own facilities if properly managed and planned for growth.

As a point of reference, there is a WalMart just outside Marco Island on Rt 951. Does Walmart require double parking, valet parking, allowed parking credits by Collier County, use of it parking facility for storage of excess inventory, a loading dock that requires privacy fencing, or a cement pad on Collier Blvd for turning radius? I could go on on on and on.

During peak season does Walmart require (in your own words) "maybe 20-30 nights per year, when Florida groups attend and drive in instead of flying in" any parking outside of its parking lot or crammed in necessitating valet parking.

Or is illegal use so prevalent that the Marriott cannot manage its own lot. Even Walmart has folks illegally using its lot as a used car sales lot or perhaps they allow for public use due to its large capacity to serve its patrons and employees?

I know there are folks that may hate Walmart on a host of issues but parking management is not one. And the Marriott is a first class corporation? Really? I believe Walmart has more class and competence!

Written on Common ground: Planning Board begins quest to find more public parking:

in response to lauralbi1:

Dear ajm: You need to take your concerns and your talents and get on another bandwagon. The Marriott is not, and does not, create parking issues for Marco Island. Every day many, many Islanders park on Marriott property and use Marriott property, illegally. Certainly you do not want the Marriott to open parking for other businesses, do you ??
Your blog above makes your whole stance on the Marriott watered down. In fact Marriott hosts many, many, charitable and paid for events each year and is able to accommodate all the cars in attendance. In fact, as you very well know, most of the year the Marriott does not even need their parking allotment. Whatever is decided about parking will only be applicable maybe 20-30 nights per year, when Florida groups attend and drive in instead of flying in. You do not know the first thing about the Marriott operation, so do not come across like you do.
Please get a life.
Ed Issler

Now you sound like a talking horse!

LOL

Written on Common ground: Planning Board begins quest to find more public parking:

in response to harrisbill239#279036:

First - it's not City Hall's job to "provide" or "make" parking for the businesses. It's the businesses responsibility to provide their own parking; if they don't have enough parking, they should be forced to downsize until they reach the required number of parking spaces. However, if the city wants to jump into this fray, let them purchase vacant lots and construct parking garages, pay for them with bonds, and charge for parking. By the way, the charges for parking would have to be sufficient to pay for the garages. And the businesses that need these parking garages should have to pay up front for the garages. Then the monies collected for the parking fees would be used for upkeep and maintenance of the garages. And, our City Attorney, instead of just saying there's no way out, you MUST grandfather the inept decisions of the past - should instead be finding and offering a legal way around the issue. Since the parking issue has become a nuisance and safety of life issue, there must be a legal remedy available. We just need to find someone who is interested enough to identify those solutions.

Bill:

I am still trying to get a grasp on public policy, but I would be cautious to the city purchasing vacant lots and constructing parking garages that would benefit the commercial district.

If the city expands its use of creating PUD's for redevelopment, the city should request parking garages be incorporated as in the Esplanade PUD. However the problem they create: the parking requirements set forth in the PUD still fall short relative to commercial use. The benefit of the PUD arrangement is parking cost now becomes the developers cost and management responsibility and NOT the taxpayer.

Although I am open to a discussion, one common feature of a PUD as written under current Marco Planning review has been to reduce parking requirements due to "common use" allowance.

Just look at the Marriott PUD and now the final amendment proposal...all reducing the parking allotment... where the Marriott is now taking advantage of not requiring ~64 parking slots due to credits.

Amazingly, the amendments keep going in the wrong direction...and land planning going forward is directed towards reducing parking slots.

I have little confidence the City of Marco Island could manage parking garages given the management of parking ordinances in the last 14 years under cityhood especially as related to commercial use.

Written on Audit Advisory Committee: Deadline close for Marco Island to complete financial certificate application:

“Legal settlements are large this year, so we have to watch this,” Polanco said.

Given the tone of the petitions before the Planning Board and those expected to move forward, I would expect more legal action, especially in light of the Island Plaza PUD to include Progressive Auto with an amendment to allow air conditioned storage space when it was rejected as a new conditional use just last year, 7-0 when C5 zoned storage owners directly challenged Progressive.

It will be an interesting year as PUD's are fired off and become and alternative to reconfigure this island! And pay close attention to the reduced parking requirements relative to standard zoning due to "common use".

"I have not yet begun to fight" or is it park?

http://www.history.navy.mil/trivia/tr...

LOL

Written on Letter to the Editor: Changing Marco Island forever:

There is hope on this island!

Thank you!

Written on Letter to the Editor: Big problems with big business:

"We, the residents put a new City Council in place during the last election. We did this on the promise that the needs of the residents would take precedence in all matters. Lets hope that the council takes this into consideration in the decision making process."

Thank you Tony!

And for those who ran as group....Mr. Honecker, Mr. Sacher, Mr. Pettricca (endorsed by MIPO)....I simply remind them to act as representative of residents.

To Mr. Honecker I recall your pleas before prior councils to some homes being misused as vacation rentals with parking in swales, front yards (i.e exceeding parking availability) and loud noise...well I believe the Marriott Plan is analogous, especially as it relates to parties on the beach...just ask Eagle Nest patrons...especially those that have time shares in the summer months...and I believe Marriott patrons are parking along landscaping islands when parking slots are filled.

Reminder: land use applies to the Marriott as well as vacation home rentals.

Or should we simply accept Marriott's 100% valet parking as a solution when there are not enough standard parking slots?

Or is the Marriott coming up with a new plan when the original Marriott PUD allowed for expansion to 100' height on east side and no elevated structures on west side. The Marriott 2001 PUD got it right, why change it now? Or yeah, market needs!

I have a new slogan: RESIDENTIAL NEEDS!

Written on Letter to the Editor: Expansion insight:

Citizens are paying attention....and they have options that are quite real.

And I hope the Planning Board can make decisions that will impact residents 1,5 and 10 years going forward. And to that end Dr. Trotter and Ms. Roman were questioning the plans relative to long term impact.

I just do not understand why the Board in toto does not see the increase traffic related and parking problems associated with the Marriott expansion.

I find it interesting the traffic consultant had to acknowledge the impact of delivery making a left hand upon existing on Collier Blvd. I only wish they could have conducted a serious review of traffic impact which includes PEAK traffic flow analysis. We do it for water and sewer use...

But if we go back to the Marriott original salvo to sell its expansion proposal...we are NOT a convention center like Orlando or Tampa!

Folks, it not about being negative, its about insisting higher quality from our businesses as it applies to land use, and to stop this incessant need to cram and cram more stuff on the same footprint! If they want more buy more land!

Written on Common ground: Planning Board begins quest to find more public parking:

in response to CopWatch:

Let's see..
Your family grows and you move to a larger home.

Your business grows, so you cut down all the trees on other folks property and urge your clients to park on private land.

Need more parking - MOVE!!!!

Quit wasting taxpayer money and violating others property rights.

It is time the city recognize its liberal policies have created this problem....and the Marriott is about to continue to exacerbate this problem by over use of designated parking to allow for more expanded accessory use (more restaurant and bar space, more conference and convention space and more suites...which all require more parking space...and interestingly the Marriott is going to use common use to pack more cars on less parking space.

Time to stop the amendments which simply extend and allow more parking on the same size lot or expanding into ROW or fire lanes.

There is a simple solution, STOP catering to business requests to allow more congested parking instead of the more costly approach of buying/leasing land for expanded use.

Past City policies have eroded the quality of life on this island and the Planning Board better WAKE UP!

It is getting pathetically obvious and the grandfather clause has set it in stone!

God help us all!

Written on Letter to the Editor: Environmental impact:

in response to lauralbi1:

Sorry, parking has been resolved without added elevation on the east side of Collier.
Ed Issler

Ed:

I can understand your belief that the Marriott has "resolved" the parking issue without added elevation.

Why I disagree? If you review the original parking arrangement vs the new proposal, I simply ask: Is this a better plan, or simply a plan to cram as many cars as possible on a single lot. To do so the Marriott maximized the number of compact car slots, eliminated public parking for beach access, utilized a "credit" to reduce the required amount by ~64 spaces and eliminated and reduced landscape buffer/barriers.

I ask the council and yourself, the Marriott will not reduce the size of the conference facility to match the parking availability to existing code requirements, and as a result the city will suffer and Collier Blvd will become a new left hand turn for trucks exiting the loading area.

But you are correct, the Marriott has "resolved" the issue, and clearly demonstrates the liberal and generous parking credits provided in the PUD of 2001 by extending reductions in required parking due to common use. I believe the amended PUD request will be reviewed in a new light given the parking issues that plague this island especially commercial parking regulations, including those occasionally seen at the Esplanade (a PUD) with swale parking.

I believe parking requirements have been amended over time to be very generous to the business community. However, since the Marriott still insists on a higher elevation for the conference center, the Marriott PUD is now under critical review, including parking specifications going forward.

It is a parking density issue and everyone knows that parking on the east side was beyond the designated zones! Quite a plan while asking Marriott employees to find other means to get to work as to not impinge on parking space.

Written on East Naples, Golden Gate fire districts take merger plans to the public:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Written on East Naples, Golden Gate fire districts take merger plans to the public:

Trolling? Is that a method of fishing?

On another note: is millage a true measure of government efficiency? Or more related to total land and improvement valuations relative to cost of city operations?

For the simple one on the island, high land and improvement valuations as is typical on Marco Island may not be as prevalent in East Naples. Or consider Isles of Capri prior fire cost relative to the number of homes it services which resulted in a higher millage...but interestingly the residents of Isles of Capri voted for a dedicated fire station on their island regardless of a much smaller population and land/improvement valuation base.

I wish some elected officials could begin to truly understand government efficiency in its totality, as in total cost of services....to which millage as a metric falls miserably short.

How many poorer communities have much higher tax burdens as reflected in millage due to the fixed costs associated with providing fire/police and administrative services. Are they less efficient or merely a reflection of the makeup of the city with burdens that are imposed on a given valuation.

Or is Mr. Waldack now commenting under LEHonig? I expect better analysis from a CEO of sorts.

Or am I trolling?

LOL

Written on Letter to the Editor: Environmental impact:

in response to mrz333:

As previously quoted from another post "I do not work there and have no financial interest in the Marriott, itself. My wife does have a shop there (for 21 years)."

Sir: I don't think all will believe that you do not have a vested interest in the Marriott expansion which I do not judge as right or wrong.

Regardless, there is a point which Ms. Paape makes! Since the city has not chimed in about the 'overall and complete' environmental impact this is tantamount to giving tacit approval to the expansion.

A poker player would call that a 'tell' to let you know what cards the City holds and intends to play. To know the 'tells' is really compete.

READ! READ! READ! READ!

The City of Marco Island's current leadership is about to make "A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE" to the nature of this Island that will set it upon an irreversible path of commercial development.

On the new MARCO ISLAND what will undoubtedly reign as supreme will be the interests of BUSINESS without any concern of cohabitation and the needs of RESIDENTS or their investment here on the island.

Don't we all see that this is really the ISSUE AT HAND!

I read many of these posts and I'm concerned about the lack of focus among the residents to realize what the issue truly is. They seem to want to put on paper any and all petty beefs they have.

WHAT THEY ARE TRULY AFRAID OF IS THE LOSS OF CONTROL OF THEIR WELL DESERVED LITTLE PIECE OF PARADISE!

CORPORATE Marriott, on the other hand, understands EXACTLY what it wants and that intends to get it any way it can despite the facade of community concern which is merely a ruse.

So, PEOPLE, do yourself an extreme injustice and keep focusing on MINUTIA and not the real matter before us. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE MARRIOTT AND OTHER BUSINESSES WANT!!!! While you're blah blah blah-ing, before you know it you will wake up one morning on MARRIOTT ISLAND!

If you, as the majority of residents, really want this you're about to get it!

If you, as the majority of residents DON'T WANT AND WILL NOT ACCEPT THIS FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE GET IT TOGETHER AS A GROUP WITH FOCUSED INTENT OR GET OUT OF THE WAY AND STOP COMPLAINING!

I believe the LTE's and the emails going to council and the planning board from residents is about to come to fruition.

Bear in mind the businesses and MIA are supporting the Marriott but I believe the residents acting singly or as an unorganized group are sending emails to council and the planning board.

The biggest issue is parking and the current allowance given for specific accessory uses. The Marriott has developed over the last 40 years to provide and expand to now include a host of accessory uses: retail shops, hair styling and spa, restaurants, bars, gaming room, meeting rooms, conference rooms and ballrooms.

All on a very constricted footprint and expansion plan that is woefully inadequate, more so than the most recent PUD development, the Esplanade which still requires swale parking for certain events.

The Marriott is able to disguise its land deficiency by requesting employees use public transportation and allow valet to double park as well as parking outside allocated parking slots.

Folks, this is a land use problem about to become the city's problem when the business's at large request more public parking, including parking garages...and guess who could be possibly paying for such improvements?

We know some restaurants want to remove vegetation to park in the swales as well as along a back service road and the city provided the permit! Quite a deal.

But the Marriott deal will have the most degrading impact on public lands and roads especially given its use of Veterans Park for additional parking and Collier Blvd as a turning radius requiring a cement pad to replace asphalt.

Is it starting to sink in...the Marriott does NOT have enough land to expand beyond the additional hotel rooms....unless you want to amend the existing PUD and embark on a degradation of a small tropical island town.

Written on Marco Island Planning Board narrows objections to Marriott PUD amendment:

in response to marco826:

Headed for a positive resolution for the Marriott.....Guaranteed......They don't lose these battles. Too big a force on Marco. Some minor conceded issues and Council will approve....like it or not. People will picket of course but to no avail.

Didn't the Marriott lose the 2010 Marriott PUD amendment to build a 138,000 ft2 conference center on the east side of Collier.

http://www.marconews.com/news/2010/ju...

And note, I commented at the time and supported the expansion! It is amazing the position I agreed with given my current stand.

It is amazing what one can learn in such a small amount of time. I cannot change a comment I made in 2010, however, I can confidently say, I am better informed having reviewed all the documents given the constraints on this island.

Resolution: The Marriott is NOT a good neighbor when it promotes limited parking going forward and used public property (i.e. Veterans Park) to address overflow parking needs.

I can only hope the majority of Planning Board members will vote this proposal down and request the Marriott adhere to the original PUD agreement given its few restrictions.

In my world even the original Marriott PUD is not sufficient to reduce congestion on this island. I hope this discussion is an eye opener for PUD's yet to be considered including the Island Plaza PUD and what I believe will be the eventual Rose Marina PUD.

Planning Board reviews need to be more discerning and not make evaluations based on longevity of property owners!

Written on Replace or repair? Wording for Mackle Park's community center referendum still uncertain:

in response to OutWithTheOldies:

I swear ever time I scroll down on one of these articles I'm floored with people's willingness to simply repeat and regurgitate the uneducated opinion of others. The existing community center was built in 1987, 27 years ago. It's current asphalt shingle roof is 18 years old (8 years past the expected average during of an typical shingle roof).
Since it's construction, there have been at least 7 major revisions to Florida Building codes along with huge changes in Hurricane safety requirements and Handicap accessibility requirements.
In it's current state the building is beyond maximum capacity for events and programs, prevents portions of our population from accessing it depending on their physical limitations, and would require a MAJOR overhaul to bring it anywhere near reasonable standards for a city facility- yet some folks on this site blindly suggest 'repairs' versus 'replacement'? Get a clue and stop offering an opinion based on things you obviously don't care enough about to research a bit. It's the knee jerk response people initiate that makes projects like this so incredibly painful to get done.

If Medicare and Social Security had gone to a referendum, I wonder how many of you would be able to live on Marco Island instead of the cold as heck middle of no where Ohio while paying through the nostrils for commercial health insurance.

Uneducated? Really, on Marco Island?

Given your analysis, I take every home built before a given year or roof that has not been replaced under standard manufacturers recommendation require demolition? (10 years for a roof given your math?). Or door seals replaced, or maintained? Or air conditioning ducts cleaned and sealed? Or addressing the lack of violations issued from city Fire department for exceeding seating capacity unless of course they never exceed capacity? Or do we confuse indoor capacity in light of planned outdoor activities?

I guess I am one of the dumb ones who see the problem as a city that cannot distinguish the capacity of a janitor vs a city facilities manager which I believe Marco does NOT have, at least as evidenced by the lack of maintenance of facilities.

Or should we go to the Marriott, they are petitioning the Planning Board for more meeting space.

Lets be real, a Community Center on the grounds of a major playground, soccer field, basket ball, shuffle and bocce courts is a recipe for disrepair.

Maybe we should just have a dugout!

LOL

Written on Marco Island Planning Board narrows objections to Marriott PUD amendment:

I hope the questioning by the Planning Board was sincere, for they exposed the existing PUD as very generous in its relaxing of setbacks, parking standards relative to standards established for facilities under typical zoning.

PUD's by design are very generous relative to existing zoning, however, the amended PUD as requested by the Marriott is a further degradation of bulk (i.e. parking) standards to the point it will simply exacerbate problems going forward.

As to the height exemption to go an additional 25' above the existing PUD, this is simply a need to pack more rooms and space to further impact and degrade parking. 25' in additional height is for a gaming room floor and suites. When asked by the board if the Marriott considered meeting the 100' height restriction, Mr. Medwedeff claims it would not be feasible for economic reasons. I recommend the board call his bluff and force the Marriott to conform to the ever increasing need to address parking!

Even the Esplanade (a PUD) is short of space for certain events as evidenced by swale parking.

I ask the Planning Board to readdress the calculations the city has made in the past for parking, if not, it will lead to more inconvenience for all parties.

Height and parking are related! The original ordinance 01-14 (Marriott PUD of 2001) was passed to allow future expansion to 1100 parking spaces and 810 rooms and to not exceed 100' in height, as shown in Table 4.4(b).

If the Marriott wishes to amend beyond the terms of the original PUD, I recommend the board reevaluate parking allotment. Under typical parking assessment based on use (i.e spa, restaurant, bar, retail stores) the Marriott would require more than 1900 parking slots.

Now that is quite a disparity of parking standards! And you ask why we have a parking problem on Marco Island...because we have given relaxed parking standards in the past and promoted "common use" to reduce parking requirements which I believe is part of the problem. Unless the city truly change "common use" assessment parking will continue to be a problem in the future.

Time for the Planning Board to make a U-turn on parking standards, otherwise freight will be making a U-turn on Collier as depicted in the latest recommended trailer truck route exiting the Marriott loading docks.

Written on Letter to the Editor: To City Council, Planning Board members:

"I feel that this project will go forward with or without a change to the current PUD"

I believe you are correct.

I would simply ask the Planning Board to consider the option of simply adhering to the existing PUD agreement of 2001. It offers immense latitude for the Marriott to update, renovate and expand as long as they do not exceed 100' for redeveloped facilities.

I would also suggest that the they do NOT allow the expansion of utility buildings within the parking areas on the east side of Collier. It is simply a poor design approach to limit that which most residents on Marco recognize on this island overall; parking is an issue. Why exacerbate the problem by reducing the size of existing parking space with utility buildings. Even the Marriott recommends its workers use public transportation rather than it its own parking facilities.

Although, the Marriott has been using its parking facilities for modular buildings and continuous staging operations since 2008; just take a look at the parking area near the tennis courts.

Simply an example of poor plant and facilities management!

And the city wants to encourage the Marriott to expand beyond the current PUD agreement of 2001 for revenue?

Simply a menu for continued problems including the Madeira complaining of their entrance used as a drop-off zone for beach access.

Nice neighbors?

Written on Letter to the Editor: Agree, disagree:

in response to Seawaller:

I for one could care less what the Mackle Brothers did or did not envision for this island. What I am most concerned with is the continuing applications for variances, LDC code amendments and conditional use allowances as well as the apparent disregard for PUD agreements (which in and of themselves represent changes to existing rules). Rules for development were put into place to protect those who invested in the island for what it was, as well as provide a roadmap for what it will be.

This incessant effort to change these rules to accommodate individual aspirations should be met with disdain by the stewarts of our island.

If we are to continually change the rules to allow whatever comes along, then why not just get rid of them and allow the ensuing free for all to transpire? At least then we can count on one rule to be upheld: that there are no rules. We can then plan our exit from what was once an Island Paradise.

Thank you!

I just hope there are more residents that agree and perhaps send a quick email to council at:

council@marcocitycouncil.com

to stop this never ending "need" to amend zoning or creating PUD's to circumvent standard zoning designations to meet "market conditions" for a single market as in the anticipated case of the Rose Marina, or for the creation of a residential tower (Madeira) as in the Marriott PUD of 2001 above the height limits of the original and prior RT zoning.

And today, the Marriott now wants to amend the PUD to now allow additional height beyond that agreed in the establishment of the PUD.

And last year the GM of the Madeira complained to the Planning Board that people were using the entrance to the Madeira as a drop off zone for beach goers using the public access path alongside its property.

And now, the Marroitt is proposing a more confined parking scenario as an option to squeeze as many cars on to its parking lot.

Simply unbelievable! And we are accused by Marriott supporters that we are using scare tactics!

The truth will set you free and the presentations that I shall call shenanigans of the Marriott will simply go on when all the Marriott has to do is simply adhere to the agreement of the PUD of 2001 which clearly allows expansion capability just not as much as Mr. Medwedeff wants today.

Written on Marco Island business accused of motorcycle manufacturing, code violation:

in response to Konfuzius:

Can you imagine if all he neighbors of Steve Jobs, Walt Disney, HP, Dell and 100 others great American companies had some complaints about garage working?

100's of American dreams will never realized!

But I understand your thinking. It is now a question of principles. Like the putt-putt facility.

OK! The case is under investigation of our outstanding MIPD. We will see what happened.
But now I understand!

The operative word is "complaint", especially by neighbor...and all the innovators you list did not impact their neighbors to illicit a complaint.

And to expect a city to review every commercial operation on an annual basis is costly, however, when a complaint is lodged it should NOT be dismissed casually, nor should the city assume they are the best authority or most informed to such an assessment.

A vigilant public and good legal counsel by plaintiff occasionally trumps city review.

So, to your comment "100% of American dreams will never be realized" is by example false because innovators are disruptors to existing markets or how things are done.

Written on Back to the Drawing Board: Marco Island's Rose Marina reduces requests in new site plan:

in response to harrisbill239#279036:

While it is a compromise and an improvement over the original plans, the citizens should be wary. The plans for the water side still include going up to 60 feet to the mid point of the roof. This means that the peak could be as high as 75 feet (or even higher)- the same as the height restriction across the street, in the C4 zone. And, since it's already been divulged that the C4 properties across the street have already (since 2004, I believe) been included as part of the "marina", there's really nothing to stop Rose Marina from building over there at a later date. All these businesses follow the same tactics (Marriott, Rose Marina, the CVS/Beals PUD; even the Community Center. They keep putting out proposals, gauging the responses, then cutting back to what they think they can get by with, until they get what they want. Be very careful and wary, taxpayers! Pretty soon, the businesses will own and control all of Marco.

You raise a good point, C4 zoning allows 75 feet height.....So watch out abutting neighbors a 60' building in C5 is currently NOT allowed and should NOT be allowed....and do not fall victim that the property on the other side will not or ever be built to its limits.....

The rise of the titans will never stop...at a minimum the C5 height limit should not be amended!!!!!!!

But the risk is a 75' building across the street in C4 zoning which I believe will happen regardless of what the Rose Marina promises today.....

Just look at the Marriott for evidence on promises.

Written on Letter to the Editor: Trees in Old Marco:

in response to mrz333:

Swales are part of Marco Island's PUD with the South Florida Water Management District and are a required part of being granted the PUD permit. Those swales, I believe, lie within easements which must be maintained by individual lot owners. Because of these easements the permitted use of swales is limited to drainage not parking. Those swales are an integral part of flood management. The ability to manage flood waters increases the value of Marco Island properties and enhances flood safety on the Island in general.

I guess our island leaders haven't figured this out yet just like some residents and restaurant owners haven't.

We need 3 things. A "NO PARKING IN SWALES 24/7" SIGN at the entrances to the island, a clearly stated no parking ordinance and parking tickets for those who ignore it.

Business should not try to 'annex' public land for their purposes and residents should be respectful of a community infrastructure.

Pithy! But I believe the residents including those that host parties at their homes would find it a bit confining since there is NOT a significant parking problem in single family zones, who occasionally use swale parking when hosting parties.

However, I agree wholeheartedly with your comment "Business should not try to 'annex' public land for their purposes and residents should be respectful of a community infrastructure".

Written on Letter to the Editor: Proposed marina expansion:

Height matters! The city and Rose Marina need to evaluate alternatives within the construct of existing ordinances. It pains me when businesses do NOT have enough imagination to meet market needs given the land they own and the relative non-confining zoning requirements on this island.

This incessant need for variances, LDC code amendments, conditional use allowances is now entering a new stage of hyperactivity.

The Rose Marina and Marriott plans all share the same feature....inability to use existing land within the island's ordinances.

Simply amazing, given that there are over 2000 vacant single family lots on this island, yet the Marriott and Rose Marina will claim the need for more height. The city will salivate at the revenue stream Yet I believe the Rose Marina and Marriott will be back in years to follow that its expansion plans are still not enough...why? there are over 2000 vacant single family lots available in a community with boating and tourist attractions.

2000 vacant lots offer more tax revenue potential than an additional 25ft and 350 parking spaces at the Marriott.

I submit, 2000 new homes will have more of an economic impact than the Marriott expansion and Rose Marina! I predict the Rose Marina will run out of space on Bald Eagle in the next 10 years even considering the current expansion plans, while a vacant marina near Goodland Bridge remains undeveloped and the Marriott will ALWAYS push the envelop.

Why so many vacant lots in residential districts? Perhaps we should divert city efforts from the Midtown District to a Single Family Residential District Plan. The Single Family Residential District Plan exits, it has since 1964, yet is not promoted as is Collier Blvd through a series of redevelopments in the past 20 years.

If the CofC, MIA, Restaurant and Realtor Association had any sense of total revenue, they would promote home ownership NOT expansion of convention business.

Written on Marco Island business accused of motorcycle manufacturing, code violation:

in response to Konfuzius:

What I can really not understand is the fact this company works their over years. Maybe 5 - 7 years!!!! It was never a problem. I saw by car wash police bikes and cars in front of the shop.
Maybe they tuned the bikes up.
Suddenly - I will say over night - it is a major problem. Why?
Is it a problem that Marriott used parking space as storage facility? Is it a problem that nobody takes care about anything on Marco Island?
The bike company paid taxes and created jobs. And it is an attraction for Marco Island on top.
Or is the owner a bad guy? Is somebody hurt? Was it to noisy???????
I guess not.
So - where and what or who is the problem?

It takes a complaint, in this case it was started when Progressive Auto, a storage facility, requested a change in conditional use for a C4 property to allow air conditioned space. C5 property owners complained about such a change based on impacted land valuations.

As a result of the challenge to Mr. Kelley request, investigative efforts by C5 property owners brought forth information that we are now reviewing publicly. Also consider the changing nature of a business over time to fill the space and increase revenue by tenants.

Classic change in use over time or lack of oversight until a complaint is filed.

And to those that dismiss this as not being classified as a manufacturing operation, I simply point to the description the motorcycle operators provided when applying for incorporation.

For a start its SIC is identified as a manufacturer.

Written on Marco Island business accused of motorcycle manufacturing, code violation:

in response to Konfuzius:

What I can really not understand is the fact this company works their over years. Maybe 5 - 7 years!!!! It was never a problem. I saw by car wash police bikes and cars in front of the shop.
Maybe they tuned the bikes up.
Suddenly - I will say over night - it is a major problem. Why?
Is it a problem that Marriott used parking space as storage facility? Is it a problem that nobody takes care about anything on Marco Island?
The bike company paid taxes and created jobs. And it is an attraction for Marco Island on top.
Or is the owner a bad guy? Is somebody hurt? Was it to noisy???????
I guess not.
So - where and what or who is the problem?

It has nothing to do with someone being a good or bad guy, or how much he/she contributes to the community, or whether they provide a service that is beneficial to the community..... it is a direct violation of city zoning and codes.

Should we disregard violations because they do no harm? Ask the other C5 storage owners and ask them if Mr. Kelley is providing services that are to be in C5 zones only or some conditional use variant.

Perhaps the city will be able to find some verbiage in some ordinance to provide ambiguity, but zoning is pretty straight forward in most cases, that is why variances are flying around as well as PUD applications....to hopefully change the landscape where normal zoning is perceived as an impediment to commerce.

Written on Marco Island business accused of motorcycle manufacturing, code violation:

in response to harrisbill239#279036:

I propose that the conglomeration of Lewis/Rizzi/Helms pay all the costs of these baseless accusations. And, that the City not do any further investigations and inspections until and unless the conglomeration can provide fully documented evidence of wrongdoing - not just suspicions and accusations. There must be a statute, ordinance or resolution, that calls for penalties for filing false claims such as this.

I suggest you read the documents that were presented to the city...harassment is a strong word to ascribe to Rizzo et al. in support of their position that Kelley is operating a manufacturing facility.

Which is identified with a federal SIC designation as a manufacturer, not distributor.

I strongly believe you have misinterpreted the information you may have garnered in your search for the truth. Bear in mind, investigative work to support a legal challenge/position, may uncovered related information that may place a burden on some city officials to officiate in an unbiased capacity, as I believe was the case with Mr. Milk. However, one thing I believe that is certain, Mr. Kelley is operating a custom bike shop... a manufacturing facility. What I cannot understand is how city officials did not make the same conclusion given the tooling that clearly supports such an operation and further supported and advertized on their own website.

Or will this poor professional effort continue through Code Enforcement review?

Written on Marco Island business accused of motorcycle manufacturing, code violation:

Folks, pay attention to the upcoming application for Island Plaza PUD, which included Progressive Auto as well as the commercial stores in the current plaza.

The inclusion of Progressive in the PUD offers two benefits, if passed, one of which would allow Progressive to have air conditioned storage on floors 4 and 5 to circumvent the 7-0 ruling against conditional use variance to allow air conditioned storage in a C4 zone.

I believe playing by the rules is to negotiate a new rule on Marco Island to which most have been very successful....and may I add as to why we have a parking problem in some commercial/restaurant areas.

Written on Marco Island Councilor Honig holds Town Hall meeting:

in response to WizeOlMarco:

"...He tried to calm fears the project would be approved before residents could make their objections known.

“The attorney for Rose Marina has a good reputation. The marina will work with neighbors, and he won’t let this come to a big fight. I don’t believe there will be a giant war, but there will be compromises.”..."

There will be compromise.

Are the zonings rules not clear? They are. Compromise is the art of a deal, but what trade does a marina development offer the residents? Services at the going market rates. Was the marina designed to fit into the existing zoning? Based on the proposal submitted, logic says no. Or, to maximize the economic possibility? Logic says, understandably yes. And now, a possible PUD?

So residents, what do you want in trade? That is the message for the representatives, one who seems already committed to a trade.

Thank You. The same could play out for the Marriott expansion beyond the terms of the PUD. In fact, at the Planning Board meeting earlier this month, the city attorney advised that the board could vote on either of two proposals or a combination of the two. Which leads one to believe even the city has dismissed the original PUD agreement as the current plan going forward.

It is simply amazing!

Written on Planning Board calls special meeting to study Marco Island's parking problems:

"In other business, Irvin confirmed that no density transfers were being requested in the Island Plaza PUD. The board is scheduled to hear the PUD request at a later date."

The Island Plaza PUD, on face value, looks like an tactic for Progressive Auto to allow air conditioned space for its facility. To circumvent the C4 vs C5 zoning conditional use.

Bear in mind, the Planning Board rejected the conditional use amendment by a 7-0 vote last year....So a PUD is a nice little development to assist Progressive to gain an advantage...

Also, pay attention, but I believe the PUD will grant parking "credits" vs traditional zoning requirements....

And you ask why we have a parking problem at the Esplanade as well!

Folks, the C of C and the Restaurant Association are supporting precedents that are NOT in the best interest of maintaining high quality of life issues, and are diminishing the allure of this island. And the Realtor Association will go along to get along! Why poison the well which I believe will lead to diminishing returns? Perhaps they can make it up in volume?

A recipe for discount pricing!

Written on Planning Board calls special meeting to study Marco Island's parking problems:

“The problem has increased,” said board member Charlette Roman after a drive through the alleyway behind Joey’s Pizza & Pasta House and other restaurants. “I was shocked that I could barely get through the alley.”

Roman described dumpsters rolled into the roadway and haphazard parking. On one side of the alley, vehicles were parked next to single-family homes. Some homeowners had constructed fences to keep vehicles off their property.

“Buffers looked inadequate,” Roman said. “Changes in our code over time have created serious safety problems.”

Thank you Ms. Roman, please initiate the real discussion of parking especially restaurants and commercial areas. Please consider pay close attention to buffers that afford adjacent residents a level of separation.

This applies to the Marriott as well!

And Marco Island will grow but poor planning is not a situation that can be tolerated, nor the cries from the CofC, Restaurant Association and Real Estate lobbies to confuse the issue based on a false premise of meeting market needs.

Written on Old Marco's controversial trees will be removed:

Folks! We have a parking problem on Marco Island and the restaurants, including the Marriott are about to plead "market needs" to defend their encroachment on residents given the ineffective planning and ill conceived ordinances that define parking requirements.

No matter how you wish to address growth on this island with "parking credits" for PUD's, parking is the key to understanding the impact....it is not a good outlook given the direction the Planning Board has reviewed restaurant parking in the past....it is filled with more leniency towards business to minimize cost.

In the end it will actually result in the demise of the business community, as patrons do not want to be inconvenienced due to limited parking issues...and only then will the planners of Marco truly understand the consequences of parking ordinances with inadequate requirements based on seats or square footage.

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott expansion goes with Mackle Brother’s vision:

in response to 26yearsonmarco:

The decision by Mass Mutual to build the Madiera on property for future expansion of business should be the end of the story.

Bingo!

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott expansion goes with Mackle Brother’s vision:

in response to lauralbi1:

Okay Bloggers: Just for argument, let us say that Marriott complies with the 2001 PUD. Will we no longer see negative blogs with regard to the Marriott?? A simple parking solution http://www.stackparker.com/ can take care of any additional parking requirements without violating the 2001 PUD.
Wish you all the best of luck and a HAPPY DAY IN MARCO
Ed Issler

Negative blogs? I like the 2001 agreement to limit height which was based on neighborhood input and the Marriott's goal to develop a parcel to heights that exceeded prior RT zoning (Resort Tourist)and sell the property as a residential condominium (Madeira).

To garner such a deal it created a PUD to define the parameters that would NOT be violated.

I believe it is the Marriott that is negative! It wants to renege and actually expand beyond the few limits clearly stated in the agreement.

But the saddest thing is the Marriott's poor use and current design of parking assets in light of overall parking issues and beach access on this island. To request a credit (reduction of 64 parking slots) and maximize the percentage of slots for compact cars. Do most JW Marriott guests arrive in compact cars?

The Marriott simply wants to supersize with a large coke and fries!

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott and Marco:

in response to captnjimbo:

Why do the folks insist that Marriott is building a convention center for trade shows when they continually claim they are merely expanding their meeting space to they can either do more than one meeting at a time or do larger meetings? Why is that? If it is not getting out with all of the meetings they have held then perhaps it is time to Advertise their position on Fox News! This Marriott is a class act and benefits this community. Their business meetings which are mostly self contained pale in comparison to what happens in the residential community in season. This three month frenzy with crowds and congestion is nuts...but nobody complains about that. I don't get it...but it is still my last word on the subject.

It really doesn't matter what you call the expanded facility, but the size rivals other hotels in much larger markets such as Ft. Lauderdale etc.

What matters is the parking. Consider the Marriott requests that its employees use public transportation suggesting a lack of parking space. Then consider the change to all valet parking which again offers a hint that there will be no parking for its employees.

We all agree there is a parking problem, yet the Marriott wises to forgo the original agreement 0f 2001 which allows for and addresses future expansion to a maximum of 810 hotel rooms as well as expanding/remodeling the meeting space to no higher than 100'.

The proposal now before the Planning Board will further exacerbate the parking problem and I submit that the Marriott does not care. Why do I make such a claim?

Take a northerly walk past the existing tennis courts and look behind the privacy chain link fence and behold the containers, "temporary" modular structures and associated maintenance equipment as well as extensive storage of beach chairs.

If you want a better picture just take an aerial look with Google maps. And if you want an historical perspective simply go to:

http://www.collierappraiser.com/

Click tab on left "SEARCH DATABASE"
Then click "I ACCEPT"
then click "Parcel ID" under "Search Property by"
Enter "57645280005" then "Search"
Then click "Aerial"

Below the photo parcel "Open a GIS Window with More Features." Click to open new window with more viewing options.

By scrolling the aerial years you can see the transformation from a parking area in 2009 to 2013. Quite a transformation.

And the latest alternative parking option offered by the Marriott is to request reducing parking slots through credits because of "Interconnection Deduction of 5%" or 64 slots.

And this will alleviate parking issues on Marco Island????? Especially at the public access points near the Marriott. The GM of the Madeira (part of PUD) complained last year of drop offs by visitors on Collier directly across from the Marriott storage lot.

We have a parking problem! And is planned to get worst.

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott expansion goes with Mackle Brother’s vision:

Now, I ask: At what point is the business/resort expansion to be held? Is the Marriott compromise of 2001 NOT a viable agreement?

Are the 6000 homesites that were eliminated in the mid 70's as a result of a ruling by the Army Corps of engineers a major alteration to the plan...to the point the beach properties were sold at a major discount and the availability of the beach for the community drastically altered?

Sorry, Mr. Coleman the Mackle brothers envisioned a residential community “that provided for 10,839 home sites”……as well land devoted to churches, supermarkets, schools etc that are associated with long term residency NOT expansion of tourism to the demise of its residents.

And to fast forward today to which ALL parking problems on this island are the result of inadequate land planning associated primarily with commercial activities.

And let us NOT forget, why would the Marriott actually develop and sell the northernmost lot for the Madeira, residential use?

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott and Marco:

in response to ajm3s:

excellent post! So can I count on your support for the expansion under the terms and agreement of 2001?

Or are we fortunate to have a Marriott that uses its southernmost parking area as a staging area and overflow storage of furniture on an island where the restaurant community is complaining that there is not enough parking?

Even Joey Pizza is complaining that he has to remove vegetation along the rear access road for parking. What there is not enough parking? Something is amiss?

Is the restaurant parking formula inadequate? Even Marriott's Parking Plan B.1 requests a credit to eliminate approx. 60 places?

And we ask ourselves why Marco has a parking problem while the Marriott mismanages its land assets!!!!!!!!!!!

Correction: Northernmost parking area (adjacent to the tennis courts)

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott and Marco:

in response to Nowhining:

"Marco was developed as a tranquil resort island. It was never intended to be a convention center. Marriott wanting to expand to accommodate conventions does not trump residents’ desires for a tranquil island."

Please get informed. The Marriott is not wanting to build a convention center. The Marriott is asking to expand their current meeting facilities to be able to compete with other HOTELS in the area for large scale meeting business. NOT CONVENTIONS.

Additionally, were you around when Deltona Corporation released their Annual Report in 1964? I QUOTE:

"Rather than being aimed primarily at retirees, it (Marco Island) is designed for a complete range of resort and leisure living - hotels, motels, apartments and extensive areas for homes. The company expects that as the community grows, its business and commercial life will expand too, and younger working families will comprise a sizable part of the population. However, it is expected that most of Marco Island's growth will derive from tourist activities and from the demand for second homes for vacation, weekend and other leisure use."

Growth is inevitable. Change is inevitable.

We should consider ourselves fortunate to live in such a place that attracts so many visitors. If you do not want to live around visitors, maybe an island designed for a "complete range of resort and leisure living" was not a good choice for you.

excellent post! So can I count on your support for the expansion under the terms and agreement of 2001?

Or are we fortunate to have a Marriott that uses its southernmost parking area as a staging area and overflow storage of furniture on an island where the restaurant community is complaining that there is not enough parking?

Even Joey Pizza is complaining that he has to remove vegetation along the rear access road for parking. What there is not enough parking? Something is amiss?

Is the restaurant parking formula inadequate? Even Marriott's Parking Plan B.1 requests a credit to eliminate approx. 60 places?

And we ask ourselves why Marco has a parking problem while the Marriott mismanages its land assets!!!!!!!!!!!

Written on Wind turbines may kill hurricanes, researchers suggest:

in response to MIOCENE1:

Keep in mind that Charles Krauthammer is a Conservative; so all things, including science and economics must neatly dovetail with his Conservative (Reagan type) upbringing.

This is how he reasons:
If it is decided that global warming is man made through the emission of Carbon; then we will have to reduce carbon emissions.

-But reducing carbon emission will mean slower economic growth and interfere with free enterprise.
Therefore man made global warming through the emission of carbon must be a myth.

Here is another way Conservatives like C.K reason:
Global scientific research confirms that Evolution is fact; not theory.
But the Bible says Creationism is true.
Therefore Evolution must be just theory.

Men raised like Hannity and Limbaugh also fall into this subjectivity trap; misleading not only themselves but their audiences as well.

So one cannot take Charles Krauthammer seriously; since the man is quite limited with respect to objectivity. In other words; Krauthammer's mind is in a cage; he just doesn't know it.

MIOCENE (PAREIDOLIA)

I do not understand why liberal vs conservative is of significance especially as it applies to Mr Krauthammer; after all he traveled the breadth of political ideology having left the medical profession to serve as a contributor:

"He began contributing articles about politics to The New Republic and in 1980 served as a speech writer to vice president Walter Mondale.[1] In January 1981, Krauthammer joined The New Republic as both a writer and editor"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_...

"So one cannot take Charles Krauthammer seriously; since the man is quite limited with respect to objectivity. In other words; Krauthammer's mind is in a cage; he just doesn't know it."

I respectfully disagree as to whom is in the cage.

Written on Wind turbines may kill hurricanes, researchers suggest:

"The proposal _ published in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change"

Quite a new journal, and here is a great blurb about its debut:

http://peacelegacy.org/articles/what-...

Written on Wind turbines may kill hurricanes, researchers suggest:

Stop this madness of climate warming propaganda. To keep it short I will simply direct your attention to an overall scientific perspective (of professional skepticism):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinion...

Bear in mind this is an opinion piece but with an eye to critical review.

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott and Marco:

in response to Konfuzius:

And ajm3s! He has the right ideas too.

Appreciate the endorsement, but my mother says I am not old enough to run.

LOL

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott and Marco:

Correction: 3 newly ELECTED council members!

Written on Letter to the Editor: Marriott and Marco:

The only option to hold the Marriott to the original compromise of 2001 is for the folks to email their position to council.

I believe the only way to convince council there is a sizable contingent of folks that wish the Marriott be held to the terms of the 2001 agreement is to specifically ask the council to vote accordingly.

That was the compromise agreed by abutters and the Marriott in 2001.

If the council does not see a rush of emails voicing this message I believe two recently elected council members will vote for the new plans. I guess they will redefine the meaning of controlled growth since what is considered controlled growth in 2001 is NOT the same as controlled growth in 2014.

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

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.

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

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!

Written on Marco Council approves zoning change for Rose Marina:

The city is about to embark on punching through height limits, here at the Marina and yet to be seen Marriott expansion plan, still in development.

Folks, this is a city that has ordinances and a land development code to protect property owners of the impact of height as well as host of related intensity issues....

I bring both areas in this discussion to raise a point, all amendments request exceeding height limits. Any realtor will tell you if you can go higher its cheaper than buying or using vacant lot to expand.

I believe this process is broken and the results are about as confusing to the residents of this island as well as to the direction we are heading. Did the Comprehensive plan consider the negative impact of "canyonization"?

I guess we will have to look up to see the future of Marco Island while we blot out the sunsets.

We need more Kelly Linmans on the council and planning board to cope with "De Facto Zoning changes"!

Written on Neighbors unhappy with Rose Marina's plans for expansion:

The city is about to embark on punching through height limits, here at the Marina and yet to be seen Marriott expansion plan, still in development.

Folks, this is a city that has a comprehensive plan to protect height restrictions as well as host of intensity issues....and a Midtown District that wants to infil vacant lots.

I bring both areas in this discussion to raise a point, why infil when all amendments request exceeding height limits. Any realtor will tell you if you can go higher its cheaper than using an adjacent lot to expand.

I believe this process is broken and the results are about as confusing to the residents of this island as to the direction we are heading.

I guess we will have to look up to see the future of Marco Island while we blot out the sunsets.

Written on Letter to the Editor: Wake up and be heard:

I am siding with mrs333, and request the Planning Board and Council hold the Marriott to the terms of the PUD. Period.

I disagree "to a binding promise that Marriott/Mass Mutual will not exceed 125 feet height."

The terms are NOT to exceed 100'!

Written on Property owners' forum: MIPO hears from Marriott's Medwedeff and new city manager:

From Mr. Medwedeff:

“We are open to new ideas. We are efforting on an alternate plan,” he said. “I’m not ready to share it, but there are other options we are considering.”

Stay tuned: It will be interesting to see how he will cram nearly 300 parking spaces on the beach side. I believe it is a fair conclusion the tennis courts are coming out which will provide about 90 additional parking spaces on the east side. So now where to place the others.

I believe the Marriott will offer a new forlorn plan to include parking at the ground level but will require additional height...I believe the Marriott will request a height to 150'. Simply exceeding the 100' height restriction, the 117' presented at the first "town meeting", and the 125" at the second "town meeting". The more time that passes the higher this project gets.

But this is pure speculation on my part.

And all this because Mr. Medwedeff did not offer any information to MIPO as indicated in the article:

"One fascinating tidbit of information in Medwedeff’s proposal was the revelation that the Marriott is also considering alternatives to the plan brought forth in those 10 previous meetings."

Oh well more misinformation and rumors to follow, including mine. I think Mr. Medwedeff loves stoking us misinformed miscreants.

And remember IT IS NOT A CONVENTION CENTER?

Written on Letter to the Editor: Against Marriott expansion:

in response to mrz333:

Marco residents need to establish an identity for their island. Since development began a hotel was meant to service a residential community not dominate it. As an island we have only so much to offer in the way of infrastructure and space.

We residents are being squeezed off our island by the belief that large corporations have a greater right to prosper here than the residents.

My suggestion to the Marriott is to make the best of what you already have or find someplace else to develop. Perhaps they should investigate placing their convention center off island where the can develop and grow without hurting the community at large. You do, after all, have the resources to create whatever you wish.

Our leadership lacks the creativity to come up with solutions and the resolve to establish an identity for a tiny island. Our residents have invested, in many cases, a lifetime of work and savings with the promise that existing rules would be adhered to not constantly modified to fit the needs of a large corporation. The Marriott has only one goal and that is profit and that goal is contrary to the well being of our residents.

Let's get it over with! Change the name to Marriott Island and let's all sell out and rent a room!!!

"Our leadership lacks the creativity to come up with solutions and the resolve to establish an identity for a tiny island. Our residents have invested, in many cases, a lifetime of work and savings with the promise that existing rules would be adhered to not constantly modified to fit the needs of a large corporation. The Marriott has only one goal and that is profit and that goal is contrary to the well being of our residents."

Excellent! I suggest you attend the Planning Board meeting, Friday @ 9 am. They do not generally get a crowd, but in this case the folks will need to show their faces or send an e-mail to the Planning Board members via the City Staff Liaison:

Joe Irvin
Interim Community Affairs Director, 239-389-3990
email: jirvin@cityofmarcoisland.com

Written on Letter to the Editor: Scale matters in a small tropical town:

in response to tikihut2206:

guess u have the money to afford taxes on Marco..but some of us would like to see lower taxes..if I live next to Marriott and don't care...why should you..do you live on South Collier...

For the record, the Marriott located on 400 Collier Blvd S is situated on two lots that are valued at 73.4MM of which the city and county collects $830,757

The equivalent of about 120 new single family homes. Now which do you think contributes more to this island for the benefit of funding the city government? Homes or hotels?

For the month of January there were 11 new permits issued for single family homes alone.

The bulk of tax revenue on Marco Island is from condo and single family homeowners.

How's that for tax revenue! The hidden jewel that the Marriott wants to exploit by building a larger facility on a plot of land that quite honestly is only about 17 acres and 10 acres of parking across the street.

Perhaps the Marriott could consider scaling down and meld into a small tropical setting, like the Hilton and Marco Beach resort just south on Collier.

We all know the feeling when guests wear out their welcome and become too demanding and want more. I think its time the Marriott abide by the land codes and special consideration it received when the city reclassified the lots as a Planned Unit Development to include the Madeira to build above the height limits established for residential tourist zoning.

Folks, the way it works, if you do not like the zoning simply get a few neighbors and create a PUD with a whole set of new regulations, except in the Marco Beach Resort PUD they gave more height to the Madeira and stipulated the Marriott would not exceed 100' for any redevelopment. And 13 years later they wan to renege.

On another note:

If you review the list of hotels that compete (i.e existing competitive set) with the Marriott per Mr. Medwedeff, the total number of rooms do not exceed 475 rooms.

Marco Island Marriott Resort Existing Competitive Set:

Sanibel Harbor Marriott: 383 rooms 45,000 ft2 of meeting space

Naples Waldorf Astoria: 474 rooms 49,000 ft2 of meeting space

Hyatt Coconut Point: 454 rooms, 38,261 ft2 of meeting space

Are we seeing the 800# gorilla or is it 810 room gorilla!

Features