Loading...
Ex-parte - Saunders 02/28/2017 Ex parte Items - Commissioner Burt L. Saunders COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA 02/28/2017 ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS (no items require Ex Parte) BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 8.A. ***This item to be heard at 1:00 p.m.*** This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Recommendation to approve a Resolution of the Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida,for a Variance from Section 4.02.03.A, Table 4 of the Land Development Code to reduce the minimum rear yard accessory structure setback line from 20 feet to 6.55 feet for a swimming pool,spa, pool deck and stairs on a waterfront lot within the Residential Single-Family (RSF-3)zoning district on property located at 342 Trade Winds Avenue, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida [VA-PL20160001181]. NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM X1 SEE FILE ,k1Vleetings ,Correspondence Xe-mails ❑Calls No_ calls, emailslsor letters;rread Coupn[t�y stafff report in meeting packet. /�,�j 7- out �iM $Qfr 1.4/ ,7 tfsbG6s CMI," ote4, 04:).Nl/ ;4 cooevi GM �j `�'�/s. Astor of ANA. CONSENT AGENDA (no items require Ex Parte) SUMMARY AGENDA 17.E. *** This item is being continued to the March 14, 2017 BCC meeting.*** This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. Should a hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. Recommendation to approve Petition VAC- PL20160003293, to disclaim, renounce and vacate the County and the public interest in a portion of the 10-foot drainage easement and vacate a portion of the 10-foot utility easement located along the rear border of Lot 50, The Lodgings of Wyndemere, Section One, as recorded in Plat Book 13, Page 8 of the public records of Collier County, Florida, located in Section 19, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. X NO DISCLOSURE FOR THIS ITEM SEE FILE [Meetings ❑Correspondence He-mails !Calls SUMMARY AGENDA NONE 8.A.b CO er County STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ZONING DIVISION-ZONING SERVICES SECTION HEARING DATE: JANUARY 19,2017 SUBJECT: PETITION VA-PL20160001181, 342 TRADE WINDS AVENUE ea PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: v Owner: Roxanne Stone-Jeske Agent: Matthew L. Jones,Esquire Nancy D. Koeper Law Offices of Marc L. Shapiro,PA R 342 Trade Winds Avenue 720 Goodlette Road North,Suite 304 Naples,FL 34103 Naples, FL 34102 ch REOUESTED ACTION: N as To have the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an application for a Variance from Section 4.02.03.A, Table 4 of the Land Development Code (LDC) to reduce the minimum rear yard accessory structure setback line from 20 feet to 6.55 feet for a swimming pool, spa, pool deck, and stairs on a waterfront lot within the Residential Single-family(RSF-3)zoning district. c a GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: co The subject property is located on Lot 11, Block M, of the Conners Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit 2 subdivision, on the south side of Trade Winds Avenue, approximately 1000 feet west of Vanderbilt Drive in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County,Florida. (See location map on the next page.) ca PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The purpose of the petition is to request a reduction from LDC Section 4.02.03.A.,Table 4,stating that the minimum swimming pool and/or screen enclosure accessory setback for waterfront lots is 20 feet when the swimming pool deck exceeds 4 feet in height above the top of the seawall. The seawall on this property is 3.31 feet with a pool deck that is 9.9 feet. Thus,the pool deck is 6.59 feet above the seawall,which is 2.59 feet greater than what is permitted by the LDC. The applicant states that the pool and deck plans submitted to Collier County contained the pool deck elevation of 9.67 feet. The County issued a pool permit, PRBD2016010076701, with a rear accessory setback of 10 feet versus the required 20 feet. The applicant built the swimming pool, spa, and pool deck utilizing the 10-foot accessory setback requirements erroneously provided on the building permit rather than the required 20-foot accessory setback requirement. The pool deck encroaches 9.85 feet into the 20- foot setback and the stairs encroach 3.45 feet. VA-PL20160001181,342 Trade Winds Variance Page 1 of 7 Packet Pg.186 8 .b 111111191 MI ®1111111 @CH 'V €'11101111111Mumainummum _.-------,,„,,,, __„--r---r-„,,.,:.,-,....„,...iu ,,.„,„,,,,,,,,,...,,..e . €:, -----.mr., . e , 3LI :1 c• op ® cm alin • ® 0 0 ® p fl p m • fl fl> 0 •Q o lz m0. e g ii gel .„1011 ,,,,, us si . ® .. an :En 10 Wp 1E3 ° ` a ° - c 0_1- 1 EA ®® . mo 0 _la 0E3 ® . oii It gilkroi ...1 El el wpm . MRI COwy la rol . „, 0 re 0 CO ri2 113 181 112iffa V i 111 e-- > pi gi II 0 wila- 0 T"' ,.• Ce ri a lea it WI I- I- N l cc L -a CD 41 ..0 En Z O Q. 4 0 7+ 03 v a cII lja mgaa)apuen ,m a. a j a) c f c ,..-...,- ,. _ CD ico, i .. U -�� `rli f Shore DR ' r. ou ae v I. o U Packet Pg. 187 8 ITRADE WINDS AVE. \ r-- 760'CIO 760.07'(C) -.. ; —41—,.— o---— 79.0r —.1.-11.-- M ——• •--�'--— 1 FP.PkNAIL IN WART. 'O• 1I i CI?T MILE,0,06'W. PD.NAIL E06E OF PVMT IN PVMT O 1 &ONG. / N. GONG. C 1401.66 Q 12 R.G. 1 WVNI 5Se.0410"W 75.00'(R) 75.01'(G) fe:rtil FA7 2i'... Cl WM a MR�15 0.5 ., 2'S ++�� SII , 0.031V.,O.OI'W, I I 4 c'v 51U4 OUT N ill I O ci i to alI Ss V e R 765 v V 24.0' �^ 765' '.'..o R Rf t 4,C' O " p oo 8.05• 454" cac set N e4 `� +O in 9 0' d 'V � H 342 TRADE WIMPS AVE. L O C K M C.@,g. NOUSE (under cnns6.) N Ftr4. FLOOR ELEV.. +-10.4 � Q;14 N inw 0 2U. „_ • c 2,05' Sti crt ' a' ap N 15414; .0' r 4.354) x o o.e m .65' et2 c Ce us 3.46 ft y RAWALL 5»' 19:86 ft a a16i1 w: ?31 1 768' ETAINix6 WALL ALUM.FENCE ' ` t.3c•WIDE CONC. 4FAWALL. LAP -\ T1.14. as as Q 1 5B6'0a'i0^w 75.00. 12) 7501 OA) �� 9E7 PR1t.L140LE • in `; fN'I4P OF CONC.46AWALl. It NAVE ELEV. +05.32 v W A T E R W A •r Accessory setback required by LDC 20ft Accessory setback shown on Building Permit •io ft Additional encroachment by stairway 3.45 ft VA-PL20160001181,342 Trade Winds Variance Page 3 of 7 Packet Pg. 188 $ .b l 0 39.1' 4'i I6A -- ALUM. FENCEc.e 774. sari S �" "der Io55+ WALL GAP —N1, *`1a4' 75.00'( ) 75.0/ SMO ,ET PRI L.t.kbl.E 0 •6 1N TOP OF CAC. 5EAWALL KAVD ELEV. + 03.32 d According to the survey, the applicant built the stairs 3.45 feet into the erroneously provided 10-footas c setback. Per LDC 4.02.01.D.7 stairways shall not protrude over 3 feet into a required front, side, or rear co 7- yard of a single-family dwelling; the stairs were approved,at the 3.45-foot encroachment. Please note that > the building permits,for both the home(PRBD20150617253)and the pool,were permitted with inclusion c of the stairs—as depicted on the survey. Overall,the applicant requests to reduce the setback from 20 feet to 6.55 feet. m 15 is L This petition was originally scheduled to be heard by the Collier County Hearing Examiner on October 27, i' 2016. Because of increased public concern, in accordance with Section 2-87 of the Code of Laws and N Ordinances,this matter is being heard by the CCPC for a recommendation to the Board. N SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: c a) ca SUBJECT PARCEL: Lot with a home under construction,zoned RSF-3 , t 0 North: Trade Winds Avenue ROW,across which is a single-family home,zoned RSF-3 cu East: Single-family home,zoned RSF-3 a: South: Canal off Vanderbilt Lagoon,across which is a single-family home,zoned RSF-3 03 West: Single-family home,zoned RSF-3 N c .. � w E foti -Co : ',. esit r , ,,,i, zi- r. RS 5t iti4tohmilf. Ilt .,I ,.ik aha: MIP Me •ii' IL:: + t ' ; '° as i 1 1 dir l VA-PL20160001181,342 Trade Winds Variance Page 4 of 7 Packet Pg. 189 .A:b. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN(GMP)CONSISTENCY: The subject property is located in the Urban Residential Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed Use District land use classification on the County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The purpose of this subdistrict is to provide for higher densities in an area with fewer natural resource constraints and where existing and planned facilities are concentrated.The GMP does not address individual variance requests;the Plan deals with the larger issue of the actual use. ANALYSIS: The decision to grant a variance is based on the criteria in LDC Section 9.04.03. Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions and offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing,which are peculiar to the location,size and characteristics of the land,structure,or building involved? TC) Yes. Per the applicant, the pool shell, retaining wall, and stairs are constructed. The applicant commenced construction under building permit, PRBD2015092870601, with an incorrectly .E_- permitted rear accessory pool setback of 10 feet versus the required 20 feet. The applicant used the incorrectly cited rear accessory 10-foot pool setback for the swimming pool,spa,and pool deck. The a stairs off the pool deck do encroach 3.45 feet into the erroneously provided 10-foot setback;however, they were also permitted with the swimming pool, spa,and pool deck. 12 CO b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property,which are the subject of the Variance request? cc Yes. The applicant applied and received a pool permit from the County citing an incorrect rear accessory pool setback. The applicant utilized the erroneously approved setbacks unaware of any violations.Due to this error,the subject structure is currently encroaching 6.55 feet;more specifically, the pool, spa,and pool deck encroach 9.85 feet, resulting in a 10.15 rear yard setback,and the stairs encroach 13.45 feet,resulting in a 6.55-foot setback. a c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue co hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? w c Yes. Per the applicant,the pool is already constructed and to abide by the required accessory 20-foot E setback would require the applicant to remove the existing pool, redesign, and replace it at an estimated expense of$50,000. The applicant relied on the erroneously issued pool permit with a 10- foot rear accessory setback in constructing the existing pool structure and stairs. d. Will the Variance,if granted,be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure and which promote standards of health, safety, and welfare? No. A reasonable use of the land does not necessarily include a pool; however, the applicant relied upon the County-issued permit. Reconstruction of the pool to correct setbacks would create a severe economic hardship. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands,buildings,or structures in the same zoning district? VA-PL20160001181,342 Trade Winds Variance Page 5 of 7 Packet Pg. 190 8.A.b Yes.The applicant will be able to retain a decreased accessory rear yard setback for a pool deck that exceeds 4 feet in height above the seawall. However, it should be noted that the applicant relied on the County-issued permit which cited, incorrectly, the accessory rear swimming pool and/or screen enclosure setback. 1. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood,or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? Staff has received objections to the requested Variance (attached) which state that the reduced rear setback would impact neighboring views, and set a precedent for future variances, among other objections. However, because a reduction in pool deck height of 2.59 feet would permit the pool to legally comply with the 10-foot setback,and signatures of no objection from property owners within the most impacted area were received,and because the setback was the result of a County error,staff is of the opinion that the variance will be in harmony with the neighborhood to the greatest extent possible. R •c co g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves,lakes,golf courses,etc.? Yes. The applicant states that variations in seawall height in this location do not create a uniform height for all houses and therefore create different pool deck height requirements over 4 feet of the co seawall. N h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? N Approval of this Variance will not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management c Plan. N COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE REVIEW: a The County Attorney Office has reviewed the staff report on December 30,2016. Se, RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission recommend approval of Petition VA-PL- 20160001181, 342 Trade Winds Avenue Variance,to the Board,with the following condition: • Upon demolition or destruction of 50 percent or more of the structure's assessed value, this Variance will be void and any new structure shall meet setback requirements at the time of issuance of a building permit. VA-PL20160001181,342 Trade Winds Variance Page 6 of 7 Packet Pg.191 1" AI PREPARED BY: 41IP /a1 -029-f4 FRED4 SCHL,AICP,PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE ZONING DIVISION REVIEWED BY: / 12._2,9- 16RAYMO V.BELLOWS,ZONING MANAGER DATE 1 ii ZONING IVISION c rL co i - 3 -I1 c MIKE BOSI,AICP,DIRECTOR DATE ZONING DIVISION d Ia co L APPROVED BY: �.. CO ::-- 7"2141r.-(i CV a JAMES FRENCH,DEPUTY DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE c GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT a' N / ,/�11 A. _ I /c A -7 J re DAVID S. WILKISON,DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT co... u) c E m t Tentatively scheduled for the February 14,2017 BCC Meeting. ISw Q VA-PL20160001181,342 Trade Winds Variance Packet Pg. 192 8A,b RESOLUTION 17 - A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA-PL20160001181, FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 4.02.03.A, TABLE 4 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM REAR YARD ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK LINE FROM 20 FEET TO 6.55 FEET FOR A SWIMMING POOL, SPA, POOL DECK AND STAIRS ON A WATERFRONT LOT WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL a SINGLE-FAMILY (RSF-3) ZONING DISTRICT ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 342 TRADE WINDS AVENUE, HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. 'a CD WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and N WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (LDC) (Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of Zoning Appeals has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a variance ce from Section 4.02.03.A, Table 4 of the Land Development Code to reduce the minimum rear yard accessory structure setback line from 20 feet to 6.55 feet for a swimming pool, spa, pool `f) deck and stairs on a waterfront lot, as shown on the attached Exhibit "A", in the Residential Single-Family (RSF-3) Zoning District for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 9.04.00 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated area of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that: [16-CPS-01573/1298624/1140 Rev. 12/20/16 Petition no. VA-PL20160001 181 /342 Tradewinds Ave. Packet Pg.193 8.A,b Petition Number VA-PL20160001181, filed by Jason Jenks of Jenks Builders, Inc. on behalf of Roxanne Stone-Jeske and Nancy D. Koeper, with respect to the property hereinafter described as: Lot 11, Block M, CONNERS VANDERBILT BEACH ESTATES, Unit 2, according to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 17, Public Records of Collier County, Florida. Folio No. 27585200007 be and the same hereby is approved for a variance from Section 4.02.03.A, Table 4 of the Land Development Code to reduce the minimum rear yard accessory structure setback line from 20 feet to 6.55 feet for a swimming pool, spa, pool deck and stairs on a waterfront lot, as shown on the attached Exhibit ""A", in the zoning district wherein said property is located. c BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded in the minutes of this Board. u, c This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote this day of a . 2017. M t0 N ATTEST: BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS c3, DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA (1.) t 0 0. By: By: , Deputy Clerk , Chairman N a) E Approved as to form and legality: Scott A. Stone LA t. �)/c Assistant County Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A—Conceptual Site Plan 176-CPS-01573/1298624/1.140 Rev. 12/20/16 Petition no. VA-PL20160001181 /342 Tradewinds Ave. 2 Packet Pg. 194 8.A.b / '\ BOUNDARY SURVEY OF LOT 11.BLOCK'M',UNIT N0.2,CONNER'S VANDERBILT BEACH ESTATES,AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3 PAGE 17,OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS,RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. TBro. hN 8a 2554-PIM 3667" I2I5' (R) 1215.12'(M) o I O.tvM.,KAVP ELEV.602.88 m to.4A t IN ,►-• -`"\ /VMTCLrwA'c �/ TRADE WINDS AVE, \ �, ,— 760'00 760.07'(C) -.\t ty _ ........—.......—.µ.....--....—4---+—- - -� _'79.01' I 30.0' — /D.ha HAhI IN PVMT ` r CUT•Rd-6,0.06'W PD NAIL 5IUJ'7 •p' 006E OF PNMT. ' IN?VW.CO- 0 M O c O o 12''R.C p,'- �J WV 111 588'04'10'W 75.00'(R) 74.OI'(G) O.PN n 4 Fi0.4,5"11EA.... GWgg001''N. W. NO ill 0WM 4..Msm. 07R499.721.,0.29EA I ..I 1XFX LOS ci ^ WEl RI N t^ d C 2 u-I t4 '� 765' T765' O a 24.0' m m 14A' b CLC u V' Ct ur 0 1- 65' �, N m t C4 9 0' C') rn Ito .n !V ;542 TRADF WINDS 4VE. Ts BLOCK M C.B.S. NOOSE (under conci..) w 4) PIN. FLOOR ELEV. #10.4 N ;� C MI L.6 131 a it U) NOTE: 206' ='r PER CONTRACTOR,POOL/PAT10 2'05 5 o r- IS.O' • p, STEMWALI. IS AT yh I— d ELEV x09.9 4.35'6 09' ) .65' N m RS I \ ' l7 N Z., SET D040400a •' IN TOP OF GONG.SEAWALL -� 59 7' 4'14164 C NAVD ELEV+03.31 765' I :01 OEU114043 Wa_L r- ALUM,FENCE y o e.4 4TAI S -r �� unet w st I�in 135'WIDE CONG. SEAWALL GAP T '.14, �yf I j wal + 56B'04'IO"W 75.00'(Rl 75.011(M) v Q Z., I SET PRILLI}OLE u' INTOP OF GONG.SEAWALL U' NAVD ELEV. +03.32 vi W ATER W AY • SCALE:1"A20' g-5 •s5 061 025 C010•52 VACANT/NAVD ElEV4 wau.:PrirANiHui tmoma BEARINGS BASED ON:t tun i1NDS Ave.A$066`04'IO'W,PET.RECAP PIAT r �°• or+tl�Twr ELEVATIONS BASED ON:NAvO 1988(Mtt6.ON FL ONE.COL 29 1084 OEM) DATE ORDER FIELD BOOK" REVISIONS sM-sri#e ROM a LOCATED IN F1.000 ZONE:AE NO') ,-10.16 `06160(5 COLO'52 FOUNDATION/E.EWLERT.sy,E..ewn/� i' a.wao PER F.I.R,M. DATED:5-16-2o12 ,Y021G 0189N 1216008 C010.82 9TEAAtJAI..L ELEV N° C i.;,7£ SvrMrs CERTIFICATE T7:4CCeY-'AD, AUNT r rw..ar 0'-00) Nal 1;::7„, 0* oo-w r/MM qry r�te)-wIL A 1T-nµ0-1x80) 'F°'°°0 o.d 1:,,1" -ed.y m.0'rndw VALI) -4[AS95E9 rida Wool ot proh.i-n°!lard 3 .1,,,iT}J•r/O'.'. � 33:FL C ..1lGriAtm 0*I+4.Vat0 Cod..Pwruonl to Saco.n 472.027.#l..rd. Woodoni• at .41 forth co StohAn.1 harm. .Wier Loot h 1. .x°' lora Yirtli L11909SED OMNI SURVEYS, INC. !vatictlitLE ^( i) „Dw1.1 �� � oche o. Ow col.. S WI w Lunn MEttlt c.M900900 of �Tonup of oc liy.do at.o o,r.y .W-WA7724 VALVE LB 6504” .1'1.4 .L.,,,.--w+s `s a°H3 /J(/�y/ j// - COrTC0_ . �, /J4/4f TEL. ')239) 939-3888 �--u'rm[w Yrtr:.T.F[ � FAX `239) 939-7101 ' -G'"`y'"3*, Seo t Leman'.•.PS 4560 TILTON COURT FORT LEVERS. FL 33)07 Arr —''''-rel Florid° 0.9IYtrotion No. 4920 _ Packet Pg. 195 8;A,b 0 J J W r AA'80—:11FR ©NYA r) a NMI w+in - 1.. 0 -0w R 17 C 4 h11:1 .Rf ^0^ N _Z I..�_ •N 1111 ^ O C L. W L. M 4 10 w tp cu -o 3 ^ N r L n O v �>W —i CO 62 misswIN a . F- P. 1L t,4 a CI ,o ® —as ccNi oo o . 1 X IN1o.' Q n i8 I 1:11 O N �_ d ,..-...........4 Cr) Q, f2 LN . 1 N ) E L. • N � o O - LN � I - 1112 III Fi .42 > : N N m so "1 4 tCft in ai m aaIn c � lis U l O a) aL.-+ j H mz z O o 4- 4-- 1- 0 O O L L U CU CU CU Q) = Packet Pg. 196 8.A.b Collier County Growth Management I am writing to you about Petition NO. VA-PL20160001181. Codes and easements are in effect for a reason. 30 years ago Homes in Vanderbilt Beach were single story, Back walls of the Houses were 30' away from the Sea wall and at Ground Elevation. The area has progressed from Single story,to 2 stories, now 3 stories ( Max Height allowed)to rear set back to side set back. Home builders are building homes so big they are not allowing but 10'for a pool and deck.This is their choice to do so, now I see decks and pools trying to exceed the current set back. In this instance the pool and deck have already been constructed. I can understand if the deck exceded the set back by a little due to a miscalculation by the survey. But this is a gross error and not a minor setback violation 13.5'. But let's not overlook the height violation also.According to code the deck and pool cannot be over 4' above the seawall. This wall is 2' over the code , and with the water bowl pedestals over 3' above the code. I do not expect the home owner to know these codes and had trust in their Architect and General contractor's. M There were at least 2 permits pulled to address this code. N A permit was needed to build this house. The architect and General Contractor of record should have had the elevations on the signed and sealed plans submitted to the county.The architect and General 'N contractor has the responsibility to know the building codes. Q d A site plan, signed and sealed had to be submitted to the county with setbacks and elevations to the county. Whom ever did these plans has the responsibility to know the codes. A permit was needed to build the pool. The pool contractor had to submit signed and sealed plans to R the county with elevations and setback dimensions. The pool contractor has the responsibility to know a the building codes. I see many new homes going up in our area with every new home pushing the envelope to the max. I feel we cannot allow these violations to be approved. If so everyone will be attempting to seek a variance to do the same. Steve Emens Homeowner 331 Lagoon Ave Naples Florida 34108 Packet Pg. 197 8.A.b ReischlFred From: BeasleyRachel Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 10:42 AM To: ReischlFred Cc: BellowsRay Subject: FW: 342 Tradewinds Variance FYI Original Message From: George Marks [mailto:GMarks@kramermarks.comj Sent: Wednesday,October 19, 2016 7:11 PM To: BeasleyRachel Cc: Steve Emens Subject: Re: 342 Tradewinds Variance Rachel, Thank you for sending all of this information. I have spoken to a land use attorney concerning the "Precendent setting" issue of mine. As I feared, Florida law has allowed "precedence"as a basis of future variances. m I will review the plans with you tomorrow at 3:30 in person just as a double check, but based on what I heard from the L attorney we have no choice but to oppose the variance on the basis that one can not create their own hardship(by installing the pool improperly) as a basis of a variance.Additionally, since such a variance would be a basis for future CN1 variances, it regrettably does not give us an option if we wish to prevent future similar variances. See you tomorrow. Thank you, a George E. Marks,AIA Kramer+Marks Architects co 27 S. Main Street N Ambler, PA 19002 c E 215-654-7722 off 215-870/5543 cell >On Oct 19, 2016, at 2:00 PM, BeasleyRachel<RachelBeasley@colliergov.net>wrote: >Good afternoon George, > Per our conversation, I attach the Staff Report and the site plan. > > Best, > Rachel Beasley > Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request,do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 1 Packet Pg. 198 8.A.b ><STAFF REPORT 342 Tradewinds Ave.docx><Site Plan 342 TRADEWINDS >AVE_SITE_8-22-16.pdf> m 0 c os .L N C d co L M N t0 N d C 0) y t 0 0. 0 cc tC N .. C C) E U 4- � QW 2 Packet Pg. 199 Arthur "Buzz" Victor 312 Lagoon Avenue Naples,FL 34108 • buzz.victoregmail.com October 23,2016 Ms.Rachel Beasley,Planner Zoning Division Collier County,Growth Management 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,FL 34108 as V c as RE: Zoning Petition No.VA-PL20160001181,342 Tradewinds Ave. i`v Dear Ms.Beasley ca I am in receipt of the information sent to me as a nearby property owner regarding the above referenced zoning matter. Unfortunately,I am unable to personally attend the hearing,and therefore must register ch my opposition to the variance via this letter. cNo N It has been eleven years since I built my home on Lagoon Avenue,but I remember the process very well. There were any number of design features that I would have liked to construct,but I found myself . constrained by the applicable codes and their restrictions. Those limitations were imposed for the good of the community as a whole. a a While,in the present circumstance,it is a shame that construction has proceeded to a point where it is costly to remove it,and that the infractions were missed by the controlling authority. This,however,is no reason to simply waive requirements with which the balance of the neighborhood has had to comply. I d hope that the Board hearing the case will require compliance with the code. That is the proper decision. ca Sincerely, B v Arthur"Buzz"Victor Packet Pg.200 8.A.b Letter of Petition in FAVOR of 342 Tradewinds Variance October 2016 Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners We, the undersigned neighbors of 342 Tradewinds within the "impacted area" respectfully submit that we have NO issue with the pool variance being requested by 342 Tradewinci 5 [yent4e N.a.p es H1ortc a . The new home under construction will raise the home values in -47 our area, which is what any homeowner would welcome, and we do not contest the pool variance being requested. We are NOT an agreement with Mr. Marks and Mr. Evens in their position regarding the view or the style of the home and therefore submit that you approve the requested variance from 342 Tradewinds by Ms Jeske and Ms Koeper Respectfully, Signature, 4 Address 3( fre Atha)L Gtl d 11C1711 , 0. Ce ► ! 7 /l' ior / er/v, BIZ 411PLIM yabvitti ezadilad s )% 3 a+ --/./e4Je Ct'i'14°3, Av€ bb'ic ,t1 �4q � ewrn9°1_ IyYC. u 367 G.ila°6 pv a Canned- .y CamSca Packet Pg.201 8.A.b Cristina R. Marks George E. Marks 319 Lagoon Ave. Naples, FL 34708 October 20, 2016 Ms. Rachel Beasley, Planner Zoning Division Collier County,Growth Management Department 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34108 RE: Zoning Petition No VA-PL20160001181, 342 Tradewinds Ave. U Ms. Beasley, Thank you for taking the time on Thursday,October 20th to meet with me and review the Variance application for the petition noted above. After some thought and evaluation and conversations with other affected neighbors,we have no choice but to OPPOSE the request for variance for the sole purpose of defending the integrity of the existing"View corridor" which would be negatively impacted by the approval/granting of this variance by Collier County. .. ca We oppose this variance as it will impinge on the view corridor that currently exists and will encourage future violations by potentially creating an actual hardship for adjacent property owners. The violation -a as of the required setbacks by 13.45 feet horizontally and 2.36 feet vertically is a GROSS violation of the a zoning ordinance. The applicant has NO BASIS FOR A HARDSHIP and this violation does not qualify as a diminimus violation by definition of law. -t a The required setbacks in the RSF-3 zoning district as per Collier County Land Development Code(LDC), cc Section 4.02.03.A Table 4 states that the minimum setback for an accessory use(swimming pool in this case) when the elevation of the pool deck exceeds 4'-O" above the seawall shall be 20'-0". The current placement of this pool encroaches on this allowable setback by 13.45 feet which places the pool deck (2) within 6.55 feet from the seawall when 20'-0" is required. I have reviewed with you the Staff report and analysis in great detail and disagree with your assessment as noted below: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing,which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land,structure or building involved? The evaluation of any zoning or building application is predicated on the review of the site PRIOR to the construction of any permitted construction. No certificate of occupancy has been granted for this property,therefore the evaluation of this request for variance should be as if the building did not exist. Collier county failed to uphold the zoning code in their approval of the building permit and plans, however,every building application contains verbiage that puts the responsibility to comply with all building and zoning codes on the architects, engineers, contractors and property owners. A county created situation is not a basis for a variance. Mistakes happen all the time and the county should be upholding their responsibility to enforce the correction of the violation. It is clear that NO SPECIAL CONDITIONS exist as a basis for this variance. Packet Pg. 202 8.A.b b. Are there special conditions and circumstances,which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property,which are the subject of the Variance request? The applicant, in this case the builder and/or their architect/engineer, built the structure in question in gross violation of the existing zoning code which they are required to follow regardless of the Collier County approval process. This is a self-created violation of the zoning code and the county should NOT be supporting this violation and request for variance. c. Will the literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? This application does NOT meet the definition standard of"Hardship"as defined by Zoning law and Collier County is remiss in their duties and responsibilities in supporting such an 0 application. As a matter of law,the cost of$50,000 is not an acceptable basis for a hardship and cca should not be considered as a basis for the granting of a zoning variance. The fact that the as applicant relied on the erroneously issued pool permit is not a material basis for a hardship or Ts the granting of this variance. c d. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum Variance that will make possible the reasonable o use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health,safety and ~ welfare? N CO N No comment a) e. Will granting the variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these a zoning regulations to other lands,buildings or structures in the same zoning district? u) t 0 Yes-The granting of this variance will absolutely grant a special privilege on this applicant not a currently available to other properties within this district. This GROSS violation of the zoning code will create a hardship for adjacent property owners whose visual corridor is diminished by f0 both the horizontal impingement of 13.45 feet and vertical violation of 2.36 feet and may co become a basis for future zoning variance applications. This pool could have been created in the a) same location of the same size, with a correction of the stair location and width within the s zoning standards thereby eliminating the need for this variance. as Qr f. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code and not be injurious to the neighborhood,or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare? This condition is NOT IN HARMONY with the intent of the zoning code and is a gross impingement on the vision corridor that the zoning code is intended to protect. Additionally, the granting of a zoning variance should NEVER be for the purpose of"legitimizing" a gross violation of the zoning code as stated in the Staff report. This is true of any avoidable error whether created by the owner,general contractor,architect, engineer or in this case Collier County. This pool is currently under construction and a certificate of occupancy has not been issued for this property and now is the time to correct this violation. No certificate of occupancy should be issued by the county until this is corrected. Packet Pg.203 8.A.b g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves,lakes,golf courses,etc.? There are NO natural or man-made conditions negatively affecting this applicant. The staff's consideration of the applicant's argument that the variance in seawall heights is a legitimate consideration is seriously flawed. The applicant's seawall height is the highest level allowed by FEMA and is a standard set by Collier county. The variance in seawall heights is not a consideration in this instance as the applicant is already relying on the highest wall allowable and is still in violation of the Zoning ordinance. The current condition already exceeds the maximum allowable seawall height by 2.36 feet and would only be worse if a lower seawall existed,which is not the case in this instance. h. Will granting of this Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? a> The staff's contention that the granting of this variance will not violate the Growth Management plan which is based on the zoning ordinance as a basis of the plan is negligent in the staff's assessment. Granting of this variance will be a GROSS violation of the zoning ordinance which is a key basis of the growth management plan. In summary,the granting of this variance should be denied on the following basis: N CN t0 1. No legal hardship exists for this applicant to rely on as a basis of this variance and the variance must be denied on this legal basis. If the county makes the argument that they ate, created a hardship for the applicant,which would be legally flawed, the county would be as self-serving in thereby granting a variance to correct their error. `i) 2. The pool design could have been constructed AND CAN STILL BE CONSTRUCTED in the o.current location with the exact same dimensions within the zoning ordinance by building the pool 2.36 feet lower and a variance would not be required. It would be negligent for the county to grant this variance when a viable solution was and is available to the applicant and in the county without creating a hardship. 3. There were no existing special conditions or circumstances that would contribute to a m hardship and thereby the variance should be denied. 4. The fact that the applicant states that it will cost$50,000 is not material to the c.)a consideration of this variance by law and the granting of this variance would confer Q permanent damage to the visual corridor of the neighborhood that the zoning ordinance exists to protect. 5. The granting of this variance will confer special privilege on this applicant not available to other property owners and would create/necessitate future hardships for adjacent property owners. A variance is not intended to provide special privilege on any property owner in violation of the zoning ordinance. Packet Pg.204 8.A.b Finally,should the county decide to act irresponsibly and approve this variance, we will file an appeal within the allowable appeal period and reserve our right to seek all legal options against Collier County for damages. Additionally,we will request that no further construction occur on the violating area of the property and we will seek an injunction to the issuing of a Certificate of Occupancy by the county until such appeal is heard and resolved. Please feel free to reach out to me or our attorney should you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter prior to the zoning hearing. Respectf, y submitted, George E. Mar s,AIA c 215-870-5543 cell 215-654-7722 office N N tG N O Q. a) cL f6 a) t ca Packet Pg.205 8.A.b ReischlFred From: Vincent Fantegrossi <vfantegrossi@aol.com> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2016 11:40 AM To: 'George Marks'; vanderbiltbeach54@yahoo.com; ReischlFred; BellowsRay Cc: 'Steve Emens'; 'Buzz Victor'; 'Gail Fantegrossi'; gbraddon@rochester.rr.com; grv3751 @aol.com;jpwood99@aol.com Subject: RE: 342 Tradewinds Zoning Variance opposition assistance-Vanderbilt Beach Residents Assoc Good Morning Mr. Reischl and Mr. Bellows, I am writing to echo Mr. Marks'concerns about the possibility of a variance being issued in the Tradewinds matter. I am most concerned about precedents being set. The entire Vanderbilt Beach area is in transition. It is clear that older, smaller housing inventory will be steadily replaced in the coming years through tear-downs and new construction. We all have abided by our zoning rules and it is important that those rules and regulations are not weakened by allowing m unwarranted variances. My limited experience with the county inspection and regulation process has always been c positive and I have been impressed with the attention to detail the county gives to all projects. I am confident that when .2 given full deliberation,everyone will agree that the rules in place were established with good reason and should not be taken lightly or disregarded. Thank you for your consideration, a ca Vincent V. Fantegrossi i= 254 Lagoon Ave. Naples, FL 34108 co Mobile:617-680-1125 w C a) 0 a ca w N w C d E cv w w 1 Packet Pg. 206 8.A.c Co r .ty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www,colliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 G- ' �Y ' 'ya }n.#a J5 f6 a1 �X` at) ,i..4l' .s - ',..,,., Vilirirt3.,'OX:4,;i' . -f :-p s^f.i itri$1.:gtaptilf,AVILiatr) i tt4,,,,•`t4emii,,,t, � s dd K „,c! ,,,„, �� i 4' s �f'• a 4. �,-r1'3,. f p `. F PROJECT NUMBER To be completed by staff PROJECT NAME DATE PROCESSED Z (..)�""''��""�'��" �, c I APPLICAN C t ONTACT INFORMATION cr. a as Name of Applicant(s): Roxanne B. Stone Jeske& Clancy .Koeper, as Joint Tenants with Full Rights -a of Survivorship Address: 531 Turtle Hatch_]ane City: Naples State:Florida ZIP: 34143 a> Telephone: N/A Cell:239-450-1930(N. Koeper)Fax: N/A cya H E-Mail Address: nycgirl1459©aol.com el N W N Name of Agent: Marc L.Shapiro,Esquire(See Attached Affidavit of Authorization) c 0 Firm: Marc L. Shapiro,P.A. 3 Address: 720 Goodlette Road North,Suite 304City: Naples State: Florida ZIP: 341Q2 a o. vs Telephone:239-649-8050 Cell: Fax:NIA c E-Mail Address: mionese.attorneyshapiro.com a' c) ca r a rBE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. 6/4/2014 Page 1 of 6 Packet Pg.207 8.A.c r Coun4 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 wwrw.coNiergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 v i_ 39Pi=lTvz .§: a „s "-� '* -raj A rye'. 43 k{ ' '•' Provide-a-detailed iegal'descriptiion of the property covered by the appllcatioini'(if space is —� inadequate,attach on separate page) Property I.D.Number: 975R,900007 Section/Township/Range: 29 / 48 / 25 Subdivision: Connor's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit: 2 Lot: 11 Block: M Metes&Bounds Description:Lot 11, Block M,Connor's Vanderbilt Beach Total Acreage: 21 Est,?tes Unit 2, cco ding to the plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 17,Public Records of v x�aaress,beniera�rLoocation of Subject Property: 342 Trade Winds Avenue, NaplesNanderbift Beach c ca Estates R N ). hr :,,,w-',-, cA7lACE4T ZONING AN LAND 3E Zoning Land Use '°'a N RSF-3 _ t S RSF-3 Residential it Residential E RSF-3 Residential N W RSF-3 Residential N c Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property: ° 1-113 o Front: 30' Corner Lot: Yes [] No W a a Side: 7.5' Waterfront Lot: Yes ® Noa 0 c Rear: 25' CD E .c ca a Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners. Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising sign(s)immediately. 6/4/2014 Page 2 of 6 Packet Pg.208 8.A.c wiroPCoIauty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.coliiergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 4SS0(IATI o a Complet.&the..following for all-registered Association(s)that could be affected-by this-petition, Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner's website at http:/jwww.coliiergov.net/Index.aspx?page-774. Name of Homeowner Association: Nnt Applicable Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: -47 Name of Homeowner Association: Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: ca L. ca Name of Homeowner Association: w, Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: Name of Homeowner Association: :3 Mailing Address: City: State: ZiP: M Name of Homeowner Association: cNI Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: C••1 0 [ ,„49V,„ NATURE i3P PETITION ,, ; U a. On a separate sheet,attached to the application,please provide the following: 1. A detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers,i.e.reduce front setback from 25 ft.to 18 ft.; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (Include Q building permit number(s) if possible);why encroachment is necessary;how existing encroachment came to be;etc. 2. For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of site alterations, including any dredging and filling. 3. Pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to approve or deny a variance petition by the criteria(a-h)listed below. Please address the following criteria: a) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land,structure,or building involved. 6/4/2014 Page 3 of 6 Packet Pg.209 8.A.c Co r Cou/.ty COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.coliiiergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 b) Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. c) Will a literal Interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. d) Will the variance, If granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land,building or structure and which promote standards of health,safety or welfare. e) Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that Is denied N by these zoning regulations to other lands,buildings,or structures in the same zoning district. f) Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code,and not be injurious to the neighborhood,or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. g) Are therenaturalconditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves,lakes,golf course,etc. h) Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? N 4. Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official m interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? 7.0 Yes J No If yes,please provide copies. a w ca 6/4/2014 Page 4 of 6 Packet Pg. 210 8.A.c ..G... Cor County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www.cotliergov.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at time of application submittal. At time of submittal,the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the application packet. Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below with cover sheets attached to each section. Incomplete submittals will not be accepted. 44g y( y, ,; 1 I - x ki ) Y A ,— --.-ir }Y ', if k'C, 4 7)t,, �' k ,< ectoREl tS b F0. Ew x s � � " 6 �..i -AT; '•< -4-1)1,N, Completed Application(download current form from County website) Q ❑ ■ c co Pre-Application Meeting Notes 1 ❑ ❑ 'R Project Narrative a 0 ❑ ? Completed Addressing Checklist 1 0 ❑ 'a Conceptual Site Plan 24"x 36"and one 8)4"x 11"copy131 ` _ Survey of property showing the encroachment(measured in feet) 2 0 _ Affidavit of Authorization,signed and notarized 2 0 ❑ '0a Deeds/Legal's 3 ❑❑ 0❑ F Location map 1 Current aerial photographs(available from Property Appraiser)with CV project boundary and,if vegetated,FLUCFCS Codes with legend 5 ❑ ❑ N included on aerial Historical Surveyor waiver request 1 ❑ Elo Environmental Data Requirements or exemption justification 3 ❑ ❑ as Once the first set of review comments are posted,provide the assigned _ planner the Property Owner Advisory Letter and Certification 1 ❑ 0 a ca Electronic copy of all documents and plans :: *Please advise;The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all 1 0 ❑ cu d materials to be submitted electronically in PDF format. E t as ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: Q * Following the completion of the review process by County review staff,the applicant shall submit all materials electronically to the designated project manager. • Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required. 6/4/2014 Page 5 of 6 Packet Pg. 211 8.A.c Co,r. r County COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT ..� GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES,FLORIDA 34104 www,colliergay.net (239)252-2400 FAX:(239)252-6358 Planners:indicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following reviewers: ❑ &ayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment: ❑ Environmental Review:See Pre-Application__ -Executive•Director ❑ Addressing:Annis Moxam Meeting Sign-In Sheet ❑ Graphics:Mariam Ocheltree ❑ City of Naples;Robin Singer,Planning Director r-1ComprehensivePlanning:See Pre-Application r❑-t Historical Review MeetingSign•In Sheet ❑ Immokalee Water/Sewer District: ❑ Conservancy of SWFL:Nichole Ryan ❑ ! Parks and Recreation:Vicky Ahmad ❑ County Attorney's Office:Heidi Ashton-Cicko ❑ Transportation Pathways:Stacey Revay ❑ Emergency Management:Dan Summers;and/or ❑J School District(Residential Components):Amy EMS:Artie Bay Heartlock Engineering:Alison Bradford co 1 ❑ Other: ❑ Transportation Planning:John Podczerwinsky 'C ❑ Utilities Engineering:Kris Vanlengen >c6E., isi' mac. r 'w d ❑ Pre-Application Meeting:$500.00 ❑ Variance Petition: M o Residential-$2,000.00 co o Non-Residential-$5,000.00 N c o 5th and Subsequent Review-20%of original fee ❑ Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner:$925.00 ❑ After The Fact Zoning/Land Use Petitions:2x the normal petition fee a ❑ Listed Species Survey(if EIS is not required):$1,000.00 co All checks payable to:Board of County Commissioners The completed application,all required submittal materials,and the permit fee shall be submitted to: Growth Management Division/P)anning and Regulation ATTN:Business Center 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples,FL 34104 /S/:Marc I . Shapiro December 16,2016 Applicant Signature Date Marr.I Shapiro Printed Name 6/4/2014 Page 6 of 6 Packet Pg.212 8.A.c NATURE OF PETITION I. (BACKGROUND) As part of the construction of a single-family residence,the Applicants'general contractor, Jenks Builders, Inc., submitted plans, including various elevations, for a building permit and approval of a swimming pool and swimming pool deck located behind the subject property.' The plans were approved and a swimming pool permit was issued. After completion of the work and after numerous inspections by County building officials, a neighbor contacted code enforcement and alleged that the height of the swimming pool deck I above the adjacent seawall was violative of the LDC. Specifically,the current LDC mandates that a swimming pool deck be no more than 4' above an adjacent seawall. The seawall in question is at 3.31' NAVD. Four feet above this height would 7.31" NAVD. However, in its current a configuration, the swimming pool deck is at 9.67' NAVD and thus, the swimming pool deck is M N 2.33' higher than allowed by code. LDC Section 4.02,03 A, Table 4 provides that in instances where the swimming pool deck is more than 4' above an adjacent seawall, the rear setback be a � v minimum of 20'. Thus,the Applicanta are requesting a variance to decrease the rear setback form a. 20'to 6.55'. E II. co (LDC Section 9.04.03,Subsections D,E,F and H Criteria for the Granting of Variances) 9.04.03 D The variance if granted will be the absolute bear minimum required to effectuate the project. The variance will make possible the reasonable use of the land and structures located 'Given the property's side setback dimensions,the swimming pool deck stem wall and swimming pool shell had to be constructed and in place prior to the construction of the house foundation. Page 1 of 2 Packet Pg.213 8.A.c thereon. There will be no violation of standards regarding health, safety or welfare to any neighbors,adjacent properties and/or the public at large. 9.04.03 E There will be no special privilege conferred upon to the Applicant should the variance be granted. An examination of the surrounding properties indicates other properties with similar configurations. Additionally,the only alternative available to the Applicants is to remove and reconstruct the swimming pool deck and swimming pool stem wall. Given the interplay of the swimming pool stem wall,swimming pool deck and the foundation of the residence,this would be a very delicate project and would cost a minimum of $50,000.00. Such a situation would have a significant hardship on the Applicants and would constitute economic waste. > Importantly, the situation the Applicants find themselves in is not of their making but rather,is the result of an innocent mistake made by county building officials. The swimming pool and swinuning pool deck were repeatedly and properly permitted and approved as were all pilings N and piling caps on which the swimming pool deck is built. 9.04.03 F If granted the variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC.No neighbors and/or their property will be injured. Although there has been a complaint by property owners across the canal and several house to the West,no harm will befall them. Their line-of- site is already obstructed by serval very large pool cages and any objections to the granting of the instant variance is simply not accurate and is disingenuous.Attached hereto is a letter duly signed by seven separate neighbors (on both sides of the canal) noting their respective non-objection to the Applicants' variance petition. 9.04.03 H The granting of the variance will not be inconsistent with the County's Growth Management Plan. Page 2 of 2 Packet Pg.214 1 The Law Offices of 8.A.c MARC L.SHAPIRO _t M „L# Shapiro, RA.. NATALIE STAROSCHAK v SEAN WHALEY /� 720 ITOODLETTE FRANK ROAD NORTH,Suns 304•NAPLES,FLORIDA 34102 NAPLES:(239)649-8050•FORT MYERS:(239)418-0010 Fax:(239)649-8057 W W W.ATTORNEYSHAPIRO.COM December 16,2016 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL TO fredreischl®colliergov.net -Mr:Fred-Reischl,AICP Principal Planner Collier County Growth Management Department 2885 Horseshoe Drive South Naples,Florida 34014 Re: Variance Application PL20160001181 Connor's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit 2,Block M,Lot 11 342 Trade Winds Avenue Dear Mr.Reischl: The following information and/or comments are provided in response relative to Ms. Rachel Beasley's August 8, 2016 Insufficiency Letter (hereinafter referred to as the "Letter"), (,) Pursuant to the directive set forth at the end of the Letter,the information herein is responsive to the various Staff comments. The various responses and are set forth in the same order as denoted in the Letter. For your ease of use and reference,I have excerpted each departmental comment as set forth in the Letter. Q REJECTED REVIEW: GRAPHICS- GIS REVIEW REVIEWED BY: JESSICA HUCKEBA CORREC"IION COMMENT 1: Incorrect parcel number,should be 27585200007. The Initial Variance Petition Application(hereinafter referred to as the "Initial Petition") contained an incorrect Parcel Identification Number in the Property Information section.This has been corrected in the First Amended Variance Petition Application(hereinafter referred to as the "Amended Petition")which has been provided herewith. CORRECTION COMMENT 2: This should be RSF-3 for N,S,E and W. The Initial Petition juxtaposed the Zoning and Land Use designations as set forth in the Packet Pg.215 Page 1 of 1 8 x M1 ' .. {<. is kt{ Ii s ' 54 1 �, d A t ( t h r !i ikx5 , t ' 1 i] Y � .nf r, J! �� .5{A •fit•4:: y tea ,or V. 1.') ..: MI c: .{ o .3 CU N a -a ea ch N I N ' t O a 0.... t�1 co i 0 a a 1co } 4) i N 1 s caz Q i r t } i i 1 t } i i i i i , : hitp://maps.collierappraiser.ctm/webmap/output2/Collier_2016_sde0312444 406320.jpg 6/15/2016 Packet Pg.216 8.A.c Mr.Fred Reischl,AICP December 16,2016 Page 2 of 5 Adjacent Zoning and Land Use section. The juxtaposition has been corrected in the Amended Petition which has been provided herewith. CORRECTION COMMENT 3: — - ----- This-is-the STRAP number,should be metes and bounds description. The STRAP number has been deleted and the full legal description of the property is set forth in Property Information section of the Amended Petition. CORRECTION COMMENT 4: Map should be legible; also the site location is too far East.Parcel boundary should be outlined. A revised site map taken from the Collier County Property Appraiser's website is provided herewith. The revised map sets forth the parcel boundaries. CORRECTION COMMENT 5: Block should be M. 0 d The Amended Petition has been corrected to provide the correct Block designation M N REJECTED REVIEW: ZONING REVIEW N REVIEWED BY: RACHEL BEASLEY c CORRECTION COMMENT 1: Correct minimum yard setbacks for subject property:non-waterfront side yarda. setback is 7.5 feet and rear is 25 feet.Please note 2 things: 1.front yard is correct and 2.the rear is not 20 feet--this is because the 20 applies,in this case,to accessory E swimmingpool decks that exceed 4 feet in height above top of seawall. The Amended Petition now sets forth the correct setbacks. CORRECTION COMMENT 2: Please be consistent in measurement, more specifically 10ths of a foot. For example,in the Narrative of the Petition,you switch from decimal measurement to feet and inches. All measurements in the Amended Petition and the Narrative has been corrected to reflect measurement in decimals. Packet Pg.217 8.A.c Mr. Fred Reischl,AICP December 16,2016 Page 3 of 5 CORRECTION COMMENT 3: As noted in County Attorney notes,please note that this is a variance from the required rear Yard setback of 20.feet for accessory pool decks that exceed 4 feet in height above top of seawall. Thus,keep in the description the narrative describing the height difference between the permissible 4 feet above seawall which makes the setback 20 feet rather than the 10 feet. Thus,you are requesting a rear yard setback from the 20 feet to x-feet. ----- --- --- A revised Narrative has been provided herewith to indicate that the variance requested is in fact for a reduction in the rear-yard setback as opposed to a height variance for the pool deck. CORRECTION COMMENT 4: What is the measurement for the pool deck stairs to,the seawall?What is width of the stairs?If the stairs are wider than 3 feet than you must request the rear yard setback from d the stairs and not the deck itself. CO The measurement from the outboard wall of the pool deck stairs to the seawall is 6.55'The stirs are 3.5'in width and thus it is understood that the requested rear yard setback must necessarily c commence at the outboard wall of the pool deck stairs. REJECTED REVIEW: COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW REVIEWED BY: SCOTT STONE tD CORRECTION COMMENT 1: The Property Appraiser lists the owners as "Roxanne B.Stone-Jeske and Nancy D.Koeper, as joint tenants," so please update the"Applicant Contact Information"section of thece application accordingly. Q.The Applicant Contact Section of the Amended Petition now states that the owners are Roxanne B.Stone-Jeske and Nancy D.Koeper,as Joint Tenants with Full Rights of Survivorship. E CORRECTION COMMENT 2: Please also provide an Affidavit of Authorization from owner Roxanne B.Stone-Jeske,or other signed written evidence that she agrees/consents to this petition. Affidavits of Authorization from both Ms. Stone-Jeske and Ms. Koeper are provided herewith. CORRECTION COMMENT 3: Your application indicates the minimum side yard setback is 7'.However,according to LDC Section 4.02.01 A,Table 2.1,the minimum side yard setback is 10' for waterfront lots in the RSF-3 zoning district. Please have staff correct me if I'm wrong.Otherwise,please revise your application with the correct minimum setback requirement. Staff has indicated that the correct side yard setback is in fact 7.5'. Packet Pg. 218 8.A.c Mr. Fred Reischl,AICP December 16,2016 Page 4 of 5 CORRECTION COMMENT 4: In your Project Narrative, under#3 please provide more detailed responses to criteria (d),(e),(f),and(h). A more detailed Project Narrative regarding the criteria for the granting of variances as set _ _.______.___forth_.in_LDC_9.04.03, Subsections D,E,F and H is provided herewith. CORRECTION COMMENT 5: As discussed at your pre-app,you are seeking a variance from LDC Section 4.02.03 A, Table 4 to reduce the minimum rear yard accessory structure setback line from 20 feet to 10 feet for a pool that exceeds 4 feet in height above the top of the seawall.However,your project narrative incorrectly indicates that you are seeking a variance for the pool height. Please revise your narrative to correctly and clearly indicate that you are seeking a 117 variance from the setback require NOT the height requirement. As noted in the Respose to Ms.Beasley's Correction Comment 3 above,a revised Narrative has been provided herewith to indicate that the variance requested is in fact for a reduction in the N rear-yard setback as opposed to a height variance for the pool deck.: CORRECTION COMMENT 6: Please provide a cleaner,more legible site plan that clearly labels the seawall,and shows the exact measurement from the pool to the seawall, A more legible site plan with the seawall labeled and the exact measurement from the N pool to the seawall will be provided under separate cover. g 0 CORRECTION COMMENT 7: Please confirm with staff whether the rear setback should be measured from the pool deck,or the stairs(as indicated on your site plan).Please also depict and label the 20CTS - foot rear setback line to demonstrate where the pool would have to be located in order to meet the minimum setback Staff has confirmed that the rear setback must be measured form the outboard wall of the pool deck stairs:A revised site plan to provided under separate cover, will depict where the pool would have to located in order to meet the minimum setback requirement. CORRECTION COMMENT 8: The Warranty Deed you provided is not the most recent deed for this property.Please provide a copy of the most recent deed that accurately shows the current owners of the property. A warranty deed dated December 10, 2015 reflecting that the owners of the property are Roxanne B. Stone-Jeske and Nancy D. Koeper, as Joint Tenants with Full Rights of Survivorship is provided herewith, The Warranty Deed was recorded on December 22,2015 as Instrument Packet Pg. 219 8.A.c Mr.Fred Reischl,AICP December 16,2016 Page 5 of 5 Number 5209385 at Official Records Book 5226, Page 989, et seq., of the Public Records of Collier County,Florida. CORRECTION COMMENT 9: Please provide a copy of the building permit/permit number for the pool:— -- -.. A true and correct photocopy of the building permit for the pool is provided herewith. CORRECTION COMMENT 10: Additional comments may follow receipt of next resubmittal. No additional response by the Applicants is required at this time. REJECTED REVIEW: ADDRESSING-GIS REVIEW 0 REVIEWED BY: ANNIS MOXAM CORRECTION COMMENT 1: On Conceptual Site Plan-The legal description is incomplete.The Block is M and N Subdivision is Conner's Vanderbilt Bch Estates Unit 2. A revised sit plan is provided herewith. The site plan includes a full legal description *774 CORRECTION COMMENT 2: a On Application-Property Information-the Parcel ID number is incorrect(it has one ca u zero too many).Metes and Bounds Description-What's provided,that's the Strap Number. The Amended petition includes the correct Parcel Identification Number and additionally,contains a full legal description of the property. I believe the foregoing adequately answers the various concerns of the Insufficiency Letter. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any other question or concerns you may have. Very truly yours, Matthew L.Jones Packet Pg. 220 I [ B.A.c • I AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) -1)(-•Z 0 t bOb wit t t I, 1 ( Ca 4v,(2.../ Ko ep e (print name), as 0 %J'3 P. C I (title,If applicable)of (company, Iffate' licable),swear or affirm under oath,that I am the(choose o e)owner applicant(—'contract purchaser and that: 1. I have full authority to ecure the approval(s) requested and to Impose covvnants and restrictions on the referenced prope ‘, as a result of any action approved by the Coun in accordance with this ___---application-and-the-La d Development Code; ------ ._ .____ 2. All answers to the que tions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter attached hereto and m-de a part of this application are honest and true; s 3. I have authorized the taff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours for the purpose of inve.tigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that 4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subJei✓t to the conditions and restrictions Imp ed b the approvecactlon. 5. We/I authorize'T - L.,..� Cottle-fa- ,g lk--•prt. .-•S-wPI� ac as our/my representative in any matters lig this petitionIncluding 1 though 2 above. `Notes: t t .w t-- . i o.,.. ,, G • if the applicant is a corporation, en It is usually executed by the corp.pres.or v.pre. . • If the applicant is a Limited Lia.illy Company(L.L.C.) or Limited Company(L.C.), then the documents should typically be signed by the Comp.ny's"Managing Member." i v, • if the applicant Is a partnership, en typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership, c • If the applicant is a limited part ership, then the general partner must sign and bei identified as the 'Sgeneral 3 partner"of the named partnersht.. P m • If the applicant is a trust, then th,'y must Include the trustee's name and the words"a4 trustee". rs • In each Instance, first determin: the applicant's status, e.g., Individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then it use the appropriate format for the t ownership. N ca CNAI Under penalties of perjury, I de, are that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that c the facts stated In-lk-are_true. o .' 4!nature _IF_deff I::...)t i Date w c m E t w STATE OF FLORIDA Q COUNTY OF COLLIER 6 Th;�r.regoing instrum nt,�+ sw•rn to(o affirmed)and subscribed before me on L , ../94.246‘41 by . ,,^ , _� . 0 ,.4,/' -- -.'., i (name of person providin ` ath or affirmation), as who Is personally known toilor c,who has produ 41111. (type of Identification)as identific. ion. 111,(..„ iir, , STAMP/SEAL .. lgnature of Notary Public • BifCTNDAA JaK8 " My co8rmiN sloN#aF o33 995b ,.4,-,0,..4: EXPIRES:July 0,2017 _ re ,,. Bonded TTevhbteyP"8;o� CP\08-COA-00115\155 REV 3/24/14 4( Packet Pg.221 8.A.c - t AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR PETITION NUMBERS(S) 'P Lr Z 01 t�O Com®)I 1 1, r'-'-N,0 (\A.r,^,p3,one 1 •A e.- (print name), as 0 V..).4"N 42 C (title,if applicable)of (company,If a piicable),swear or affirm under oath,that I am the(choose ane)ownerpplicantrjcontract purchaser and that 1, I have full authority to secure the approval(s)requested and to impose cotenants and restrictions on the referenced prope y as a result of any action approved by the Courkty in accordance with this ___._.application andthe L- d Deveiopment Code; .., .. _ . . .,... 2. Ail answers to the ow stions in this application and any sketches, data or Other supplementary matter attached hereto and i ade a part of this application ars honest and true; during normal workinghours 3. I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property u g for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application;and that 4. The property will b; transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subj4ct to the conditions and restrictions imp ed • the approved, ction. 5. We/I authorize _ L. t r .EA a.c- L •_ F ac(t es our/my representative In any matters/�reeg. ga i g this petition including 1 rough 2 above. t I _ . L5/ .Z. L . 4$L.K t p.ro I � *Notes: +I.-fl'.4 4,. L . — s i C • if the applicant is a corption, hen it is usually executed by the carp.pres.or V.pr s. 1. as • If the applicant is a Limited Lia eiiity Company(L,L.C.) or Limited Company(L.C.), hen the documents should > typically be signed by the Com•any`s"Managing Member." N • If the applicant Is a partnership, then typically a partner can sign on behalf of the partnership. c • If the applicant is a limited pa nership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general 3 partner"of the named partners ip. a) • If the applicant is a trust,then t ey must Include the trustee's name and the words "ds trustee". a • in each Instance, first determi the applicant's status, e.g., individual, corporate, rust, partnership, and then t-- use the appropriate format for t rat ownership. 01 el CO • • Under penalties of perjury, I dclare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that c the facts tated In it are tr e. 14 o r,, 8�'l 07410 . al Signatu • Date w asESTATE OF FLORIDA f a COUNTY OF COLLIER The for oing Instrument wa orn to(or affirmed)and subscribed before me o . .�96't e)by /4",;'_4.,/&y. ,, ,(66e5 ,.1 (name f-p rson providi a ath or a,'- •ation), as who is personally known t me oywho has produced (type of identification)as identification. /� STAMP/SEAL // ignature of Notary Public ,: — r,� st�o�Art.�ics � .1,::,:: MY cotiom. l0N t F 0349 r+,; EXPIRES;July 0,2017 . . t. 6oadad 11113 Waxy ------------- } CP\O$.COA-00215\155 REV 3/24/14 Packet Pg.222 if [ 8.A.c l ' BOUNDARY SURVEY OF LOT 11,BLOCK"M°,UNIT No.2,CONNER'S VANDERBILT BEACH ESTATES,AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3,PAGE 17,OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS,RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD. ir TBMr MO PD.PK N Ik DISL"PSU Ur” 1215' (R) 1215.I2'CM) o au,w.,NADP SLEV.+02.88 O Pe.NAIL IN PPMf. Dr.NRLE (TRADE WINDS AVE, t —--�v—-----r-- v--— _ �- 760'rx) 760,07'(C) ---..N: 11.1I 77.O1• M 4 t to M.PK NAIL IN PVMT. I o eo:o% > • EDCr£OF PVh1T. CUT•NOL£,0.06'W I PRk4tL SIIA!'f O - IM PYML CUT- a ezi o ROLE Q. tri c o T ppWV to 558'04'Io"W 75.00'(R) 75.0I'(E) DFN I • y .9R FIRE 4"P6011-.. • $ a� C WM 4 . f„ PSM 9g742'. II Q FIR p.52.5,0.29'P. J 6.0314,0,07 W. N 1.0 4'FY STUB-nut f m 41 m RI ccaa C UJ z sx- rI oK765' 4.0' 765` p 2mtk.o' ?CI • a 8,05ol a5ro N CD �O " •i - _ar 9.0' a d Ra it,. 042 TRAPE WIMPS AVE. BLOCK M C.5.5 NOUSE (under ccnsL.) • or)E11,1. FLOOR ELEV. 4-10.4 n W ((44 m N tV 10 N NOTE 206' `^ c J o PER CONTRACTORSPOOL/PATIO 2.09' :6' a .� STEMWALL IS AT CP11`4 154` - V ELEV. +Q9.9 43646' x •.65`6, as Q CS 12 i0 SET DRILL 61OLE N C E INBP$' Or 6oN6.4E6WALL U NM R.N.+0331 76S'-1 MS RETAINING WALL 99.7• r ALUM.FHIIE c.p.5;3TA! S V 11 rundcr Gansu, "fir its 03 I.35'WIPE CORG.SEAWALL LAP o 1.14' w r-r4 I Q ,i- .1 568°04'10"W 75.00'(8) 75.01'PA) o^ 9ET DRi{4006E °in \.IN TOP aL(41C.5EAWALL u' NAVP ELEV. +0.3.32 rn W A -r E R W A Y P c aart DC It9A{7L POINT EASED ON:V TEAVE WINDS AVE.ASS DI'i0'VSI,PER emd4NREGINA PRAT 4.5•15 0815025 5010-52 VAOGNT/AlAVD EL&VS P;aai. F> �7 0,cgA: SATE. ORDER FIELD BOOK REVISIONS NareaunR ELEVATIONS BASED ON:NAVD 1988(0616.0N Cl.DNR COL 29 1884 OSA "4- .T#;s°1N Ro-f' LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONE:AS(ID') 5-19-I5 0516015 C010.52 FOUNDATION/ELBIcam " PER F.I.R.M. DATED:4.162012 120210 0189 N 1215008 0010.521 9T$6AWALS. ELEV NOTES 4,4'`' rc up'NWo CERTIFICATE MFR i'O[R:D fApry N� r hare./ <4,107 that t1w ohm. that..£ car ty 1 Panel & ea°min forth'by a tt�lmmf.-dkat ONLY '14 o r� ProlaaACa i taw �• FT•tia• 6LT0 w. ONLY 'uarvaywa b Cx*&10 472.22•, FL 4d ot.. Uw Purrn rt b It h x 472027,FloridafbrWITH OMNI SURVEYS, INC, .DFVVli_CITFJdENf s"4"'•f''°'"* ° t a N A .47 for. Whir plc Par€-PURR;VR1tfY fh.EMFM harsh, 4nvh.tl and b wild y wRh *if WEN NETYlt PryrAatOaU i twl d Ut u�daraf0q L•`tV nct�a SEAL 1411*i>•WWE>r rF - NcNtrn of n1 3°r tread.. i en..cum4+vncn. LB 6584"' t' f ss-$M 5TD.515 ) arca..Rr;utD b c.7'4. T_a>F[ 1/44/ /7ilaTEL (239) 439-36fi6 w�.�p�NQp�p�u'°r"EZ FAX (,239) 939-7181 'oaq+ase' ` 4388 TILTON COURT FORT MYERS. FL 33907 _�)P 4E_¢U'ANT.PrPOw5R) F ofaklo Raq�la•J'ati.n No. 4020... ��Q"' ,......1 Packet Pg.223 B.A.d P MM i&f tZ4i Public Notices NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE OF INTENT TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION Notice is hereby given that on Tuesday, February 28, 2017, in the Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room,Third Floor, Collier Government Center,3299 Tamiami Trail East,Naples FL., the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) will consider the enactment of a County Resolution. The meeting will commence at 9:00 A.M.The title of the proposed Resolution is as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 4.02.03.A, TABLE 4 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM REAR YARD ACCESSORY STRUCTURE SETBACK LINE FROM 20 FEET TO 6.55 FEET FOR A SWIMMING POOL,SPA,POOL DECK AND STAIRS ON A WATERFRONT LOT WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY (RSF-3) ZONING DISTRICT ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 342 TRADE WINDS m AVENUE, IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 48 SOUTH, RANGE 25 c EAST,COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA.[VA-PL20160001181] ca 'L A copy of the proposed Resolution is on file with the Clerk to the > Board and is available for inspection. All interested parties are N invited to attend and be heard. -a N = co NOTE: All persons wishing to speak on any agenda item must T register with the County manager prior to presentation of a the agenda item to be addressed. Individual speakers will be -a ✓ limited to 3 minutes on any item. The selection of any individual as t< to speak on behalf of an organization or group is encouraged. I— „ If recognized by the Chairman, a spokesperson for a group or a organization may be allotted 10 minutes to speak on an item. co cc 01 Persons wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the Board agenda packets must submit said material a minimum ce) 0 of 3 weeks prior to the respective public hearing. In any case, N written materials intended to be considered by the Board shall ca NJ be submitted to the appropriate County staff a minimum of 0 zi seven days prior to the public hearing. All materials used in Z presentations before the Board will become a permanent part m of the record. 'a a a H Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Board a) will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and Q al therefore, may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the ' proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and -a Z - evidence upon which the appeal is based. ro If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation aa) in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please },,: contact the Collier County Facilities Management Division, aai located at 3335 Tamiami Trail East,Suite 101, Naples,FL 34112- a) 5356, (239) 252-8380, at least two days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices for the hearing impaired are available u in the Board of County Commissioners Office. ca r BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Q COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA PENNY TAYLOR,CHAIRMAN DWIGHT E.BROCK,CLERK By: Martha Vergara,Deputy Clerk (SEAL) February 10,2017 No. 1481737 Packet Pg. 224