Planning Board Recommends Approval of Controversial Rose Marina Project

After a lengthy and at times contentious special meeting, the Marco Island Planning Board recommended approval of redevelopment plans for Marco River Marina, commonly known as Rose Marina. The proposal will now advance to the City Council for final consideration.

The project includes a new 200-seat waterfront restaurant, increased marina activity, a dedicated bus-loading lane, a widened roadway, relocated waste facilities, additional outdoor boat storage and provisions allowing as many as four large commercial vessels at the marina at one time.

Nearby residents strongly opposed the proposal, warning that it would increase traffic, noise, parking pressure and commercial activity near established residential neighborhoods.

The board considered three related applications: a site development plan amendment, several variances from City development standards and a conditional use permit for outdoor boat-rack storage.

The site development plan passed 5-2. Jason Bailey, Nanette Finkle, Geoff Fahringer, Joan Janssen and W. Mike Hogan voted yes. Vice Chair Hayden Dublois and Bradley Henson voted no.

The variances passed 4-3. Finkle, Fahringer, Janssen and Hogan voted yes. Dublois, Henson and Bailey voted no.

The conditional use permit passed 6-1. Bailey, Dublois, Finkle, Fahringer, Janssen and Hogan voted yes. Henson cast the only opposing vote.

New Bus Plan Raises Parking Questions

Much of the meeting focused on a revised parking plan that relies partly on buses to transport passengers who would otherwise require parking spaces at the marina.

Director of Community Affairs Daniel Smith said the City’s Land Development Code allows the board to consider alternative methods of meeting parking requirements. Under the plan, buses would enter through an established lane, load or unload passengers and leave without remaining on the property.

The marina agreed to limit the number of buses on-site to three at one time. It also agreed to a maximum of four large commercial vessels, with two permitted in the submerged land lease area and two in the Magnolia Basin area.

The applicant argued that buses could reduce traffic by replacing numerous individual vehicles. Residents countered that the plan would bring buses weighing as much as 80,000 pounds onto an already congested section of Bald Eagle Drive while allowing the marina to accommodate more passengers without providing the parking spaces that would otherwise be required.

Residents Say Original Meeting Did Not Reveal Full Scope

Henson questioned whether the marina should be required to hold another neighborhood information meeting, commonly called a NIM. He said the meeting held months earlier did not reveal the full scope of the project now before the board, including the use of buses and multiple large cruise ships.

Henson also noted that nearly 100 pages of revised material had been uploaded shortly before the hearing. He said his main concern was not whether board members could review the documents, but whether the public had been given a meaningful opportunity to understand and respond to the changes.

Assistant City Attorney David Tolces said the original neighborhood information meeting satisfied the City’s requirements. He also said that, in his legal opinion, the Planning Board did not have authority under the code to require another NIM and that the revised application was substantially similar to the earlier proposal, with additional clarification.

Dublois also opposed sending the proposal back, saying it could create an endless cycle in which every revision prompted another neighborhood meeting. Bailey then suggested that they continue with the hearing, saying the board had sufficient information to hold a thoughtful discussion and make a recommendation.

Henson later voted against the site development plan, saying the public deserved a proper neighborhood information meeting where the full project and all proposed uses of the property could be clearly presented and understood.

Overnight Cruise-Ship Disclosure Changes Discussion

One of the meeting’s most significant moments came when Henson asked whether large cruise vessels might remain at the marina overnight.

The applicant initially said overnight stays had not been part of normal operations, although vessels may occasionally have remained because of weather. When pressed about future plans, representatives acknowledged that a cruise operator had asked about making overnight stays part of its operations.

Bailey reacted strongly.

“I mean, you just threw a grenade in the room, talking about overnight cruise ships,” he said.

Bailey said the disclosure substantially changed his view of the proposal. He distinguished daytime visits from overnight stays, which could raise additional concerns involving utilities, waste disposal, lighting, noise and marina operations.

Henson said the disclosure reinforced his concern that the board and the public did not understand the full scope of the marina’s plans.

Bailey then said the possibility of overnight stays was leading him toward voting against the proposal. Although the applicant initially resisted an outright prohibition, representatives later agreed to the condition, saying they would rather accept it than risk having the proposal rejected.

Under the added condition, no debarkation vessel may remain overnight unless weather prevents it from leaving safely.

Residents Warn of Traffic, Noise and a Growing Commercial Port

Residents said the combined redevelopment could fundamentally change daily life near the north end of the island.

Their concerns included traffic congestion from buses, restaurant patrons and other customers converging on Bald Eagle Drive; insufficient parking for restaurant customers, charter passengers, captains and crews leaving vehicles for multiday trips; overflow parking on nearby residential streets and swales; noise, lighting, trash and activity generated by a 200-seat restaurant and expanded vessel operations; fumes from idling cruise ships and noise from cruise-ship generators; the possibility that passenger and vessel limits would be difficult for the City to monitor or enforce; commercial operations moving closer to homes along Magnolia Court; and the cumulative effect of approving individual components without clearly understanding the marina’s ultimate plans.

Several speakers said they felt residents had been “duped” because the proposal before the board was substantially different from what had been presented during the neighborhood information meeting. One resident said the project was no longer simply a marina expansion but the development of a commercial port.

Residents also objected to the visual effect of the outdoor boat-storage area. City staff had recommended screening as high as 16 feet because some stored boats could reach approximately that height. The board instead approved an 8-foot fence with landscaping, which nearby residents said could obstruct water and marina views.

With all three applications receiving favorable recommendations, the proposal now moves to the City Council, which will decide whether to approve the project and what conditions should govern its effects on neighborhood traffic, parking, noise, commercial activity and views.