Bonita Springs approves annexation, comp‑plan amendment and rezoning for large Seagate development

Bonita Springs officials on a January evening voted to annex unincorporated tracts into city limits and to adopt related land‑use and zoning changes to allow a large Seagate‑led mixed‑use project.

At a second reading the council approved three separate ordinances tied to the same proposal: an annexation ordinance (Ordinance No. 26‑01) covering approximately 89.5 acres, a comprehensive‑plan amendment and text changes affecting roughly 204 acres, and a rezoning to a Mixed‑Use Plan Development that caps residential development at 299 dwelling units and allocates about 100,000 square feet for commercial uses. Mike Feagon, community development, told the council the state had accepted the transmitted comp‑plan changes and outlined the process for final adoption.

The applicant’s team presented a consolidated overview and highlighted several post‑transmittal changes. Neil Montgomery, speaking for the applicant team, told the council that “as of January 9, Seagate owns all the property.” Alexis Crespo of RVI Planning said the project team lowered the minimum density floor from 1.4 units per acre to 1.0 units per acre to allow flexibility in site planning; she said the proposal still preserves 299 units as the absolute cap and that the change would permit fewer units if lot sizes or open‑space commitments increase. “If we maintain a minimum density of 1.4 units per acre … we will have to build at least 286 units,” Crespo said; lowering the minimum allows the applicant to avoid returning for a future land‑use text amendment should they favor larger lots.

Crespo also described commercial phasing and traffic commitments designed to assure the community that neighborhood‑serving commerce will follow residential build‑out. The development order, she said, will require the full 7.3 acres of commercial tracts to be advanced and will require the issuance of a shell building permit for up to 50,000 square feet by the time a building permit is issued for the project’s 75th residential unit. On traffic signalization, Crespo said the developer will “fully pay the cost of the signal” and will apply for and construct the signal subject to Lee County’s permit, and that those obligations will be memorialized in a signalization agreement attached to the first development order.

Council members asked detailed questions about timing and enforceability. Council members pressed for a clear trigger and timeline for initial work on the Kiel Canal cleanup; the applicant agreed to add language tying initial cleanup to site certification of the first phase, and staff explained ongoing maintenance would be handled by the homeowners association. Transportation consultant Yuri Baikow said the applicant will raise signal and intersection safety issues with the Lee County DOT during the development‑order and permitting process.

A resident, Denise Nystrom, testified during public comment in support of the project, saying she preferred lower density housing in the corridor but nonetheless supported the planned development as a way to address local traffic and land‑use needs.

Council votes followed separate motions for each ordinance as staff recommended. The annexation ordinance carried unanimously (Mayor Mike Gibson and council members Fitzpatrick, Deputy Mayor Purdon, Carr, Follick, Bogues and Quarry recorded aye votes). The comprehensive‑plan amendment passed 5–2 on roll call after discussion of environmental designations and traffic capacity. The rezoning to MPD with the applicant’s conditions, including the canal cleanup tied to phase certification and the revised signalization commitment, passed on roll call.

What happens next: with annexation, comp‑plan and rezoning adopted, the project moves to the city development‑order process, where site design, engineering, and the timelines for phasing, certification and permits will be reviewed and enforced by staff. Council and staff emphasized they expect separate development orders and permit milestones to secure the commercial phasing and canal cleanup commitments the council requested.

Votes at a glance: Annexation (Ordinance No. 26‑01): approved, roll call unanimous. Comprehensive Plan Amendment (item b): approved, roll call 5–2. Rezoning to MPD (item c): approved, roll call majority.