An east-facing rendering shows the proposed expansion of DiamondHead Beach Resort on Fort Myers Beach. The project would increase the resort from 121 to 178 hotel rooms.
MHK Architecture
The owners of DiamondHead Beach Resort on Fort Myers Beach have plans to add new hotel rooms, commercial space and parking on the property, which sits in the town’s commercial district near Times Square.
Resort representatives said the project is needed to stay “relevant and competitive” with lodging-industry growth on the island.
“To meet the increased levels of demand for hospitality accommodations on the island, we’re requesting additional rooms at DiamondHead that will also include enhanced amenities and service levels,” resort General Manager Neil Hopgood said.
But the town’s Local Planning Agency on Sept. 8 voted 6-0 against recommending the project. In making the decision, panel members cited a planned tower that would block views of nearby residents and the project’s lack of public benefits. LPA member James Dunlap was absent.
The Fort Myers Beach Local Planning Agency voted 6-0 on Sept. 8 against recommending a proposed expansion of DiamondHead Beach Resort. The Town Council will have the final say on the project.
Fort Myers Beach government
DiamondHead representatives plan to revise the plans based on the LPA’s feedback. Fort Myers Beach Town Council has the final say on whether the development can proceed at a future meeting.
The project on DiamondHead’s property at 1999 and 2000 Estero Blvd. requires rezoning part of the 3.45-acre property from Downtown to a Commercial Planned Development.
The property already includes a 121-unit hotel, restaurants, recreational areas and parking that have been in place since 1998, DiamondHead representatives told the LPA.
The CPD would allow DiamondHead to add 57 units, bringing the total to 178 rooms. The construction would include 33 units added to an existing building that DiamondHead representatives said were already approved when the resort was initially constructed.
It also would allow DiamondHead to build a separate, 24-unit seaward tower.
A rendering shows the proposed DiamondHead Beach Resort expansion from the beach. Fort Myers Beach’s Local Planning Agency voted 6-0 against recommending the project Sept. 8
MHK Architecture
The expansion would, in part, allow the resort to sell rooms to tour bus companies during peak season in an attempt to minimize congestion, Hopgood said.
Plans also call for 8,300 square feet of commercial space, a new pool and rooftop amenity, and expanded parking with 164 spaces.
Fort Myers Beach staff initially recommended against the proposal but changed its stance to approval after the developers agreed to drop plans to build on adjacent Environmentally Critical-zoned property.
LPA Chair Anita Cereceda made the motion to recommend denial, citing in part the new seaward structure proposed by the developers.
“I don’t necessarily have an objection to the units added to the existing building,” she said. “I have an objection to that seaward structure.”
The LPA also found that the expansion plan didn’t offer enough public benefits.
A rendering shows a proposed new pool deck at DiamondHead Beach Resort on Fort Myers Beach. The resort’s expansion plans include 57 additional hotel rooms, commercial space, expanded parking and new amenities.
MHK Architecture
But Cereceda added that the LPA was forced to make a subjective decision because “public benefits” are not well defined in the town’s planning documents.
Cereceda described public benefits as “perpetual in nature and dedicated solely to the public.”
That might include restrooms, for instance, but she argued it would not include amenities, such as a restaurant.
DiamondHead representatives argued that the resort and its expansion would provide sufficient public benefits. Those include its restaurants, restrooms, beach access, increased ad valorem tax revenue and community services, such as opening the resort to residents displaced by storms and supporting local events.
Fort Myers Beach residents who live near the property also complained that the development would block views and lower their property values.