Approved and pre-construction in Coquina Sands, Naples, FL
Harbour House
1624 Gulf Shore Boulevard North, Coquina Sands
Fourteen homes where 21 were allowed, in three low buildings on the bay side of the boulevard. It is bayfront rather than beachfront, and at least one outlet has printed otherwise. The whole record is below.
- Address
- 1624 Gulf Shore Blvd N
- Size
- 14 homes, three buildings
- Water
- Bay, not Gulf
- Tax rate
- 9.0201 mills
At a glance
Harbour House fast facts
Every figure below is read from the city's own design review record, the county parcel service and the current tax roll joined folio by folio with three neighbouring parcels run as calibration, the state coastal line layers downloaded as full geometry and measured corner to segment rather than tested as polygons, the federal flood records queried by whole parcel and then controlled against a buffer, or the federal claim file pulled on its successor endpoint and cross-checked against the old one. Where a layer returns nothing we say whether that is a real answer or a hole in the data, because on this parcel it is both, in different places.
- Record address
- 1624 Gulf Shore Boulevard North, Naples, FL 34102
- The city spells it
- Harbor House, in its own design review record
- Which water
- Bayfront, not beachfront. The beach opposite is city park
- Size
- 14 homes in three buildings, two habitable storeys over garages
- What stood here
- Naples Harbour Club, a 1960s cooperative of 20 homes
- Still standing?
- No. The roll values $17,760 of improvements on $20.7m of land
- Approval
- Final design review granted with conditions, March 2026
- Construction permit
- Not established. No public route to the permit file here
- Density
- 14 homes where 21 were allowed, about 10 per acre against a ceiling of 15
- Tax rate
- 9.0201 mills, and no non ad valorem assessment at all
- Community development district
- None here, though this county has 33
- Coastal control line
- Landward of it by about 289 feet. No state permit burden
- Coastal building zone
- Inside it, about 1,151 feet seaward of the zone line
- Flood
- One zone across the whole parcel, base flood elevation ten feet
- Prices, plans and a recorded declaration
- Not published yet
Not published yet
Location: see 1624 Gulf Shore Boulevard North on the map. Get notified when prices and plans are released. Figures carry the dates shown and are subject to change.
Who is behind it, and what was here
A cooperative from the 1960s, a spelling the city does not share, and fourteen homes where 21 were allowed
Start with the correction that matters most, because it is in print elsewhere and it is wrong. This is not a beachfront site. It is a bayfront site on the east side of Gulf Shore Boulevard North, and the land between the boulevard and the Gulf opposite is city park. At least one outlet has described the parcel as beachfront and the description is spreading.
The name is not settled either, which is worth knowing before you search. The developer and every trade outlet write Harbour House. The City of Naples writes Harbor House in its own design review petition record. The state condominium file carries a third form. We print all of them, because a buyer searching any one deserves the same facts.
What stood here has a legal form that matters more than it sounds. The Naples Harbour Club was a 1960s midcentury modern residential cooperative of 20 homes, not a condominium. It was damaged by Hurricane Ian in 2022, reported vacant by late 2025, and the site sold in mid 2025 for $17.5 million. Because it was a cooperative there is no prior declaration, no prior association and no prior reserve history to inherit.
It is gone, and the evidence is the tax roll rather than a permit. The current roll carries $17,760 of improvements against $20.7 million of land, and the parcel has moved to the county's cleared land classification. A standing twenty home building cannot be worth $17,760. A comparable cleared redevelopment site two blocks south carries the same code and a near identical residual.
One methodological trap we fell into and are recording so nobody repeats it. This county publishes building footprint layers by vintage year, and the footprints on this parcel are identical across 2021 through 2025. The layer is carried forward rather than re-flown, so it cannot detect a demolition and must never be used as evidence of one. The roll can. The footprint layer cannot.
On the sponsor, the record corrects a reasonable assumption. The tax roll mails to Las Vegas, not to Naples. What is local is the builder and the architect, both Naples firms. One outlet described the buyer as a Southwest Florida group and another named the Nevada entity; the roll settles it. We could not verify ownership against a recorded deed, because the clerk's index here has no public query route, so read ownership as per county records rather than per deed.
The approval itself is real and recent, and its conditions are worth reading. Final design review was granted unanimously with conditions in March 2026, following a preliminary approval in late 2025. The conditions include a landscape architect's certification before final inspections, full screening of pool equipment on the north side of the third building, signage to code, and consideration of root barriers along the north line.
The neighbours were heard and what they raised is a useful preview of life here. Objections on record concerned docks, seawall elevation, stormwater and privacy, and one neighbour reported vibration from earlier seawall removal work. None of that stopped the approval. All of it tells you what the construction period and the waterfront edge of this site will actually involve.
And here is the fact we did not expect to be able to write about a Gulf Shore Boulevard developer. The site was already entitled for 21 units and the district allows 15 to the acre. Fourteen homes on about an acre and a third is roughly 10 to the acre, so this sponsor is building about a third fewer homes than it is allowed to. The planning designation is high density residential explicitly capped at low rise, which is what produces three small buildings instead of one tower.
Take these four to the sales office: whether the construction permit has issued and when work starts, since you cannot look it up; the design review conditions and how each is being met; what the dock and boat slip arrangement actually is, given what the neighbours raised; and what a reservation commits you to before a declaration exists.
What this will actually cost
A clean tax position, and a district rate nobody publishes
The headline is favourable and unusually simple for a coastal Florida address. The total on the current roll is 9.0201 mills across county, school, municipal and one small residual line, and there is no non ad valorem assessment of any kind on this parcel. The roll's non ad valorem total is empty. On the current land value that is about $187,000 a year of ad valorem across the whole site.
The district question has to be asked county by county, and this series has learned that the hard way. This county does have community development districts, 33 of them, and this parcel is in none. That is a different statement from the county a hundred miles north, which has none at all, and from the one in between, which has exactly one. We no longer carry that claim across a county line.
Fire is the other line worth naming, because elsewhere in this series it is the largest surprise on the bill. Fire service here is the city's own, not an independent district with its own levy. At a parcel in another county in this series an independent fire district took about seventeen per cent of the whole tax bill. Nothing like that applies here.
There is one local district, and we had to derive its rate rather than read it. The parcel sits inside a bay taxing district, which is an ad valorem levy rather than an assessment. No published rate table for it could be found, so we isolated it from the difference between this taxing area's municipal column and the rest of the city's, and it comes out at roughly 0.0125 mills. That is a couple of hundred dollars a year at current value. Treat that one number as derived rather than published.
One figure you may be quoted that does not describe this parcel. The city's reported general fund millage for the year is about 1.23, while the roll's municipal column for this parcel reads 1.30. The roll's figure evidently bundles more than the general fund, so the lower number is not this property's city rate. Use the roll.
On homestead, a correction this series now carries everywhere. The combined exemption is $51,411, and it is identical in every Florida county because the structure is set by state law and constitution rather than chosen locally. Anyone presenting it to you as a local advantage is mistaken. It does not apply to this parcel today in any case, which is company held and carries no exemption.
And a warning about the roll itself, which is the current one rather than the final one. The values above are from a preliminary roll. Until it certifies, treat every dollar figure on this page as provisional. Once the building exists and each home gets its own folio, the bill that matters is that home's assessment at this rate, not the land figure.
The practical version: the rate is low for a coastal address, there is genuinely nothing layered on top, and the only unknown is a district levy so small it will not change your decision. Ask for a real tax bill on a real home once one exists rather than working from millage alone.
The compliance clock
What a buyer can and cannot see, and one rule that will never apply here
Almost everything Florida gives a condominium buyer attaches to a condominium that legally exists. This one does not yet, and the honest version of that is a list.
Here is what you cannot see, because it has not been created. No recorded declaration, so no unit boundaries, no percentage interests and no restrictions to read. No budget, no reserve schedule and no insurance position, because there is no association to hold them. No recorded sale to price against, because no home has ever been conveyed. And because the previous building was a cooperative rather than a condominium, there is no prior set of any of those to look at either.
You also cannot see the permit file, and this jurisdiction is a new kind of closed. The city's permit portal responds to an anonymous request but sits behind a captcha, and the county clerk's records index is the same. It is not login walled and it is not broken. It is gated, which is a fourth distinct pattern this series has catalogued. The construction record and the eventual certificate of occupancy are public records. You simply cannot look them up. Ask in writing.
We also could not confirm the state's own file, which is new this year. The state condominium division's project level lookup has been retired and every legacy path now redirects, so the filing that carries the name Harbour House, a Condominium cannot be confirmed to exist, to name that developer, or to state any unit count. Unverified rather than disproved, and that distinction is the honest one.
Now the rule that will never apply here, which is genuinely good news. Florida's milestone inspection regime counts habitable storeys rather than units, and the threshold is three. This building is two habitable storeys over garages, and the planning ceiling on this site is two habitable storeys, so it falls below the threshold on any reading. This is not one of the arguable three storey over parking cases elsewhere in this series. It is a clean no.
The reserve study is a different rule and you should still ask about it. A structural integrity reserve study falls due within ten years of a condominium's creation, and this condominium has not been created, so the clock has not started. Whether one will be commissioned voluntarily is a fair question. At fourteen owners every line in that study is divided fourteen ways.
Turnover is the same story one step further out. Control of the association passes from the developer to the owners on thresholds tied to how many homes have been conveyed, and none have. The developer will control the association through construction, the first budget and the first reserve decisions. On a bayfront site with a seawall and docks, those first decisions are not trivial.
What to ask for in writing at this stage: the construction permit and the expected start; the draft declaration, budget and reserve schedule as soon as they exist; how the seawall and docks will be maintained and funded; what a reservation commits you to and how your deposit is held; and the expected turnover date.
The area
One flood zone on the parcel, seven within 300 metres, and ground below the design flood
The flood answer here is single valued, and we proved that rather than assuming it. A whole parcel query against the federal layer returns exactly one zone across the entire property, a coastal floodplain designation with a base flood elevation of ten feet. On the last barrier island parcel in this series the same query returned five zones where a centre point returned one.
The control is what makes that worth printing. Re-running the identical layers against a 300 metre buffer returned seven distinct zone and elevation combinations, including velocity zones at eleven, twelve and fourteen feet. Seven within 300 metres, exactly one on the parcel. The single zone result is real.
Two independent checks agree, which is rare enough to say out loud. The city publishes its own flood layer from an earlier study, and it returns the same zone and the same ten foot elevation at this parcel. The zone and the elevation did not change across the map revision that became effective in early 2024. The panel and its effective date were confirmed twice, on the national layer and the county's own.
The wave action line is close but does not reach the property. It runs about 126 feet away at its nearest approach, around the bay inlet to the south west, and the parcel lies inland of it. The county's line layer and the city's agree on that distance to the foot. We measured it from full geometry, because the county's version of that layer carries no attributes at all and a point test against a line means nothing.
The ground is the fact that explains the building's shape. A five point transect across the parcel runs from 4.2 feet at the bay edge to 7.0 feet at the high point, about 5.5 feet at the centre. Against a base flood elevation of ten feet, natural grade sits roughly three to six feet below the design flood across the whole site. That is why the homes are two habitable storeys over garages and the ground floor is not living space.
On evacuation we are going to give you nothing, and we would rather do that than be wrong. The county's evacuation layer returns the same answer at every point tested countywide including inland ones, which makes it uninformative here, and the city's own layer returns nothing at all at this parcel, which is a hole rather than a no. There is no usable evacuation fact for this address. Ask the city.
The postcode claim record is dominated by one month, and the shape differs from its neighbours. This postcode has recorded about 3,181 federal flood insurance claims and roughly $340.4 million paid across the life of the programme. September 2022 alone accounts for 81.3 per cent of every dollar ever paid and 64.2 per cent of every claim, while calendar 2022 accounts for 81.6 and 64.9 per cent. Those are different measures and we keep them separate deliberately. The month and year figures are almost identical here because essentially the whole year's loss fell in one month.
Two later storms show an instructive inversion. The October 2024 storm accounts for about 12.5 per cent of lifetime dollars and 12.8 per cent of claims. The 2017 storm produced nearly nine per cent of all claims ever filed but only about 2.6 per cent of the dollars, so it generated three times the later storm's share of claims at a fifth of the money. Claim counts and claim severity are not the same signal. Since then the record is nearly empty: one claim in 2025 paying nothing, and none recorded through the data freeze in 2026.
On schools the address returns a clean single answer at every level. Lake Park Elementary, Gulfview Middle and Naples High, each returning one boundary at the point with no overlap. Confirm with the district before you contract, because boundaries move.
What you need to know
Buying pre-construction with someone on your side
Representation costs you nothing and the timing is the catch: in a developer sales gallery your agent generally has to be with you or named at your very first contact for the registration to stand. Sort it out before you call.
The case for it here is that fourteen is a very small denominator. Every decision this association ever makes, every reserve line, every insurance renewal and every seawall and dock repair will be shared between fourteen owners. On a bayfront site with a seawall the neighbours are already watching, that is not abstract. Ask what the developer projects those costs to be, and on what basis.
Know what the statute gives you once documents exist. On a developer sale you are entitled to the prospectus and the condominium documents, and you have a rescission right measured in days from the later of signing or delivery of those documents. At this stage that window has not opened, because the declaration has not recorded. Ask how a reservation converts to a contract and what happens to your money in between.
On deposits the protection is narrower than most buyers assume. The first ten per cent is held in escrow. Above ten per cent the statute permits the developer to use the money for construction once work has begun, and here we have no primary evidence that work has begun at all. We did not search Florida regulatory enforcement records or civil dockets for any builder, developer, contractor or land-holding entity, so read the absence of any such note as unchecked, not clean. Get an independent inspection before closing whenever that comes, use the warranty window, and read the limited warranty before you sign.
Subdiview is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by 1624 Gulf Shore, any homebuilder, any developer of Harbour House, the City of Naples, or Collier County. The developer is identified here because it is the owner of record in the county property records, which is a statement of fact and not a representation of any relationship. Community names and marks are the property of their respective owners and are used for identification only. Subdiview is operated by a real estate broker licensed in Illinois. We are not your agent, we do not represent you, and we perform no real estate brokerage services in this state. No one at Subdiview is licensed in this state. If you join an interest list, your information is referred to a real estate professional licensed in the state where the property is located, who will contact you directly. We are compensated by that professional's brokerage, not by you. Pricing, plans, inventory, district, tax, flood and approval details on this page carry the dates shown, are as published, proposed or reported rather than committed, and are subject to change without notice.
Questions and answers
Harbour House FAQ
Is Harbour House on the beach?
No, and this is the single most important correction on the page. It is a bayfront parcel on the east side of Gulf Shore Boulevard North, fronting the bay and the Intracoastal. The land across the road, between the boulevard and the Gulf, is city-owned park. At least one outlet has printed that the site is 1.36 acres of beachfront, and that error is now being repeated elsewhere. The confusion is understandable, because Gulf Shore Boulevard sounds like a beach address and part of it is, but this parcel is not. Everything about the project confirms it: the boat slips, the dock lounge, and the neighbour objections about seawall elevation all belong to a bay parcel. If you are buying here for direct beach frontage, buy somewhere else. If you are buying here for the bay, the boat and a very short walk to a public beach, the address is exactly what it looks like.
What are the coastal rules here?
Better than we expected, and we tested it the hard way. Both the state coastal construction control line and the coastal building zone line are published as line geometry rather than polygons, so a point or polygon test returns zero for the wrong reason. We downloaded both lines in full, projected them to a local metric frame and measured from every parcel corner to every line segment. The parcel sits about 289 feet landward of the coastal construction control line, which means there is no permanent state coastal permit burden on future structural work, pools, decks or a rebuild. That matters, because at a Gulf front building a few miles north in this series every one of those things needs a state permit forever. What does apply is the coastal building zone: this parcel sits inside it, about 1,151 feet seaward of the zone line, which carries the enhanced structural and wind provisions of the state building code. The two distances sum to 1,440 feet against the statutory 1,500 foot offset between the lines, which is how we know the measurement is sound rather than lucky.
What stood here before?
The Naples Harbour Club, a 1960s midcentury modern residential cooperative of 20 homes. Note the word cooperative: it was not a condominium, which is why there is no prior declaration to inherit, no prior association and no prior reserve history. It was damaged by Hurricane Ian in 2022, was reported vacant by late 2025, and the site sold in mid 2025 for $17.5 million. Is the building still there? No, and the evidence is the tax roll rather than a permit. The 2026 preliminary roll carries $17,760 of improvements against $20.7 million of land, and a standing 20 unit building cannot be worth $17,760. A cleared redevelopment site two blocks south carries the same use code and a near identical residual. We could not obtain a demolition permit or date from any public record, so we do not print one.
How big is it, and is that unusual?
Fourteen homes in three buildings of six, four and four, two habitable storeys over garages. What is unusual is the restraint. The site was already entitled for 21 units and the zoning district allows 15 units to the acre; 14 homes on about 1.36 acres is roughly 10 to the acre, so the sponsor is building about a third fewer homes than it could. The planning designation explains the shape: this is a high density residential future land use that is explicitly capped at low rise. High density and low rise together is what produces 14 large homes in three small buildings instead of one tower. It also settles a question most buyers never think to ask, because at two habitable storeys this building falls below Florida's milestone inspection threshold on any reading. That threshold counts habitable storeys rather than units, and two over parking is not one of the arguable three storey over parking cases.
What does it cost to own here, beyond the price?
The tax position is unusually clean for a coastal Florida address. The total on the 2026 preliminary roll is 9.0201 mills, made up of county, school, municipal and one small residual line, and there is no non ad valorem assessment of any kind on this parcel. That is worth saying plainly because this county does have community development districts, 33 of them, and this parcel is in none. Fire service is the city's rather than an independent district with its own levy, which is the opposite of a Lee County parcel elsewhere in this series where the fire district alone took about seventeen per cent of the bill. The only local district beyond the standard stack is a bay taxing district, and it is an ad valorem levy rather than an assessment. We could not find a published rate table for it, so we derived it arithmetically from the difference between this taxing area and the rest of the city, and it comes out at roughly 0.0125 mills, which is a couple of hundred dollars a year on the current land value. Treat that one figure as derived rather than published.
What should I be most careful about here?
Four things. First, nothing about the condominium exists yet as a legal object: no recorded declaration, no budget, no reserve schedule, no association and no recorded sale. Second, you cannot check this building's permit file. This city's permit portal is gated behind a captcha and the county clerk's index is the same, which is a fourth distinct access pattern this series has now catalogued and the least useful one for a buyer. Third, the approval carried conditions worth reading, including a landscape certification before final inspections and full screening of pool equipment on the north side, and the neighbour objections on record concerned docks, seawall elevation, stormwater and privacy. Fourth, ownership: the tax roll, the state filing and the sale announcement all name the same entity, but we could not verify it against a recorded deed because the clerk's index has no public query route, so treat ownership as per county records rather than per deed.
Be first in line
Get on the Harbour House interest list
We will connect you with a real estate professional licensed in Florida who represents you rather than the seller, who can register you before your first contact with the sales office, and who will get you what this page could not: whether the construction permit has issued and when work starts, the dock and boat slip arrangement, the design review conditions and how they are being met, the declaration and budget as soon as they exist, and prices and plans when they are released.
It costs nothing, creates no brokerage relationship by itself, and does not obligate you to anything.