Planning Board recommends council consider lifting a density cap for Marco Lakes parcel to spur redevelopment

The City of Marco Island Planning Board voted to forward a proposed amendment to the Land Development Code to City Council, recommending that a string of Marco Highlands parcels be allowed a maximum of 26 hotel units per acre rather than the overlay's existing 16‑unit cap. Chair Bailey said the motion to recommend approval passed by roll call and will now move to Council for final action.

Sherry Kurz, growth‑management staff, read the ordinance title into the record and said staff finds the amendment consistent with the City's comprehensive plan and that allowing 26 units on the combined 1.07‑acre parcel supports the city’s redevelopment goals. "Staff's recommendation is that the planning board forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council for the proposed amendments outlined in this staff report," Kurz said.

Applicant counsel Zach Lombardo and planner Charlie Thomas argued the change corrects an anomalous density limitation that was carried over in code conversion and that, under the proposal, the hotel rooms would be added within the existing building footprint rather than expanding the building envelope. "We're not asking to be removed from the height limit," Lombardo said, adding that the request is narrowly tailored to the subject property.

Thomas presented traffic and parking estimates that the applicant says demonstrate a lower peak‑hour trip generation for a hotel conversion than for the prior restaurant use: "If you take the existing 20‑room restaurant and 2,600 square feet of commercial space, your PM peak is 33.53 trips; if it's 28 hotel rooms, it's 16.8 trips," he said.

Several board members raised concerns about the precedent and safeguards. Member Brad (surname not specified on the record) asked what the city receives in return for surrendering the current density cap; Member Henson said he would support the recommendation because he trusts the applicant but urged Council to study the broader overlay area. "I make this yes vote because I trust Mr. Patel is going to do exactly what he said he was going to do," Henson said during roll call.

The board's recommendation does not approve any site‑development plan; future development will still require an SDP and must meet parking, landscaping, setback and other code requirements. The Planning Board instructed staff to correct the ordinance title as noted during the hearing before the item moves to City Council.