Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors and board press developers on massing, parking and accessibility at Coconut Point Waypoint workshop
Summary
Simon/Waypoint’s proposed Coconut Point Waypoint residences drew extensive board and public critique on building massing, parking strategy, long walks between units and the garage, and traffic; applicants agreed to revisit circulation, unit/parking ratios and massing and to provide additional studies.
Simon and Waypoint Residential presented preliminary designs for the Coconut Point Waypoint residences at a Feb. 20 workshop, prompting sustained questioning from board members and residents about scale, parking and how the project will function for older residents.
Scott Richardson (Simon) introduced the team; Charlie Krebs (Bowman) and Lily Marine (MSA Architects) presented site plans and architectural concepts showing a mixed‑use, multi‑story building footprint that would replace the old movie theater and much of the adjacent surface parking.
Developers said the current schematic reduces impervious surface, increases green space and retains a large parking garage that would share surface parking with retail on the ground level and reserve upper garage levels for residents. Chris Moore (Waypoint) said the team is proposing about 1.75 parking spaces per unit (shared surface parking plus garage), noting a need for a parking study to justify any reduction from the village standard of two spaces per unit plus 10%.
Board members and public commenters focused on several recurring concerns:
- Massing and view corridors: some board members said the taller 4‑ and 5‑story elements create a long, tall backdrop that should be stepped or reversed so the taller massing is away from Coconut Point’s pedestrian edge.
- Parking and circulation: critics warned that locating the parking deck away from many units will create long walking distances (hundreds of feet) that would be impractical for older residents and for residents carrying groceries; they urged more convenient parking (including underground or wrapped parking) and additional elevator access points.
- Emergency and service access: board members asked how ambulances and fire apparatus would access portions of the building and requested assurance that egress and staging areas would meet code requirements.
- Shared parking with retail: the developer said the surface and first garage level would be shared with retail and that a gated access would limit upper‑level garage access to residents. The team said a more detailed traffic and parking analysis will follow.
Public commenters—representing neighborhood groups and individual residents—urged lower density, protection of Coconut Point character, and reconsideration of parking and garage placement. Terry Flanagan (Engage Estero) asked that the board hold the project to Coconut Point’s design and height patterns.
Developers acknowledged the concerns and agreed to revisit the design, circulation and parking strategy; staff emphasized that this was a workshop and not a formal application hearing and flagged outstanding LDC concerns (height deviations, parking ratios, massing). The board asked the applicant to return with revised massing studies, pedestrian connections (breezeways or elevated connections) and a traffic/parking study before formal review.
