Naples council adopts revised design review handbook after heated debate

Naples City Council narrowly approved a revised Design Review Board handbook on a 4-3 vote Thursday after more than an hour of public comment and council debate over the document’s scope and enforceability.

The handbook, described by Planning Director Eric Martin as a full update to guidance last revised in 2004, won final approval despite objections from residents and several council members that it reduces mandatory language and weakens the DRB’s ability to require compatible design. Council members who voted for the handbook said it brings badly needed clarity and modern standards for designers and applicants.

The handbook replaces an outdated guide and moves technical design criteria into the city code, Martin told the council. “This is an all-new proposal,” he said, noting the document went through workshops with the design community and multiple design review board meetings. After council requested edits in December, Martin said the design review board accepted those revisions in January.

But neighborhood representatives pushed back at the hearing. Renee Lewin, speaking for the Sancerre condominium association, told council members the handbook removes requirements that previously helped protect view corridors, site analysis and compatibility. “The DRB version 2 is not a resident- or neighbor-friendly document,” Lewin said, criticizing changes that replace “shall” and “must” with the softer “should.”

Design Review Board Chairman Ruby responded that the handbook is intended as a guide for design standards and not to supplant code or technical review. “We think that, just as a set of design standards, it’s a living document,” Ruby said, urging approval and further refinement later as resiliency planning and process changes emerge.

Council members divided over whether to delay. Councilwoman Beth Petronoff said the changes weaken DRB powers and urged tabling the item until the state’s Senate Bill 250 (SB 250) implications and board processes could be reconciled. “I think we lose our teeth if we move to this optional handbook,” she said.

Councilman Ray Christman and others argued the long revision process — which spanned more than three years and included line-by-line council review — justified moving forward. Christman said the handbook “gives people submitting proposals to DRB updated and better guidance” and said freezing the handbook indefinitely would be “kicking the can down the road.”

City Attorney Matthew McConnell told council members he would review the final published copy for any legal conflicts before the handbook is implemented, and the council added a direction that the city attorney do a final look. The council voted 4-3 to approve the handbook; the affirmative votes were Council Members Christman, Barton, Kramer and Peneman. Council Members Petronoff, Vice Mayor Hutchison and Mayor Heitman voted no.

Council members and residents repeatedly asked that the handbook be revised further to address resilience standards, require 3D models for visibility analyses and clarify appeal rights. Several participants suggested a separate, citywide review of board processes and a resilience strategy should accompany future handbook amendments.

The council’s final vote authorizes implementation of the handbook text, with design professionals and staff to follow up on format, graphics and future amendments. The council also asked that, before wide publication, the city attorney perform a page-by-page review for legal consistency.

The handbook adoption ends a multiyear effort to modernize design guidance for applicants and the DRB, but it also sets up follow-on work: clarifying how design criteria relate to code, adding resilience considerations, and refining procedures for public engagement and appeals.