Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Commercial Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Design board grants final approval to dual‑branded hotel on Goodlet Frank Road with conditions
Summary
The board approved final design for a dual‑branded hotel at 870 Goodlet Frank Road (petition 26‑DRB‑8), endorsing a 290‑room building with two levels of parking, a third‑floor amenity level and a landscaped linear park; approval included staff and board conditions on signage, landscaping, wall treatments and screening of back‑of‑house areas.
Get email alerts on the Commercial Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Naples Design Review Board voted to approve the final design for a dual‑branded hotel at 870 Goodlet Frank Road (petition 26‑DRB‑8), a multi‑story project that includes two parking levels, a third‑floor amenity level and six guest floors totaling about 290 rooms.
Mark (speaker 17) of MHK Architecture presented the project’s layout, which provides 290 parking spaces, a third‑floor amenity level with restaurant and pool deck and a raised pool area stepped down from guest spaces to reduce noise impacts. "We petitioned FDOT to have a turn in...we're providing 290 transient lodging units, and we are providing 290 parking spaces," Mark said during his presentation.
Christian (speaker 11), the landscape architect, outlined a plant palette that retains mature mahogany trees, adds canopy trees and uses multi‑layered hedges to screen headlights and service areas. Board members praised the linear park but pressed the applicant to address a large white wall at the eastern entrance and to refine treatments for blank service walls. Several board members recommended adding material or landscape detail to break up the massing and asked the applicant to coordinate final wall treatments with staff.
Staff recommended standard conditions: submission of a uniform signage package consistent with the Commons PD, landscape compliance certification before final inspection and several site‑specific conditions suggested during the hearing (wall treatment at the eastern entrance, consideration of a continuous walkway through the linear park and extending pavers to include two ADA parking spaces at the front). The applicant agreed to work with staff on those details.
The board approved the resolution with staff and board conditions by roll call (the motion passed with one member voting "No" and one member absent). The approval is conditioned on the applicant satisfying the listed signage, landscape and wall‑treatment items before permits and inspections proceed.
