Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Dean Street topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bonita Springs council denies rezoning for Dean Street development after public opposition
Summary
The Bonita Springs City Council voted 4-3 to deny a second-reading rezoning that would have allowed an RPD of up to 42 units at 11035–11125 Dean Street after extensive public comment on density, traffic and drainage.
The Bonita Springs City Council voted 4-3 to deny a rezoning at second reading that would have allowed a residential planned development (RPD) of up to 42 dwelling units on about 4.6 acres at 11035–11125 Dean Street.
The vote came after a full public-comment period in which neighbors raised repeated concerns about density, traffic, parking overflow, drainage and impacts on the character of the neighborhood. Council members who voted to deny said they were responding to neighborhood input.
City staff and the applicant said the current proposal reflected concessions made during a mediation under the Florida Land Use Environmental Dispute Resolution Act. The applicant reduced the proposed units from 48 to 42, increased building separation from 10 to 15 feet, revised the parking layout, added a sidewalk along Matheson Avenue and relocated an amenity center further into the site with restrictions on racket sports intended to reduce noise. Staff noted the case had been advertised in accordance with Florida statutes and that signs that initially had a discrepancy were corrected.
Noel Davies, attorney for the applicant Sagamore 955 RDF LLC, told the council the parties reached a mediated settlement and that the changes were memorialized in a legally enforceable settlement agreement. City staff explained the mediation process is nonbinding and that mediation outcomes were presented to the council as a formal settlement to be adopted or rejected.
Dozens of residents spoke against the rezoning. Speakers — several of whom live on or near Dean Street and Matheson Avenue — characterized the proposal as too dense for the neighborhood, said local infrastructure and roads could not support additional vehicles, and predicted overflow parking onto nearby streets and increased hazards for pedestrians and schoolchildren who walk in the area. Speakers also questioned whether the development would actually provide affordable housing for local workers and asked that the unit count be reduced further.
A motion to deny the rezoning passed after a roll-call vote. The final tally to deny was 4 in favor, 3 opposed. The council recorded the vote as a denial of the rezoning request; the settlement agreement the applicant offered therefore was not adopted.
The mayor and council did not direct staff to bring an amended proposal back at that meeting. The applicant left the meeting after the vote and council moved on to the next agenda item.
