Agenda 12/16/2008 Item #16A16
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
Page 1 of 17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Discussion on allowable uses in the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict within the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan, and the Mir Mar pun.
OBJECTIVE:
For the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) to discuss the allowable uses in the Randall
Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict and the Mir Mar PUD, then provide staff direction as deemed
appropriate. Options are provided on pages four and five.
CONSIDERATIONS:
On November 18, 2008, the BCC heard a public petition (agenda item 68.) by Jose Armando
and Maria Cabrera regarding allowable uses in the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict
within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP), and the Mir Mar PUD that is located in
that subdistrict. The petitioners expressed interest in adding clothing/shoe store, made reference
to martial arts studio as well, asked how to go about expanding the uses in the Subdistrict, and
inquired about the discrepancy between the number of uses (13) listed in the Mir Mar PUD and
the number of uses (16) stated in the zoning verification letter dated April 18, 2008. After some
discussion about the process necessary to allow additional commercial uses, the BCC directed
staff to return with more information.
"~ ~.
In response to the discrepancy in number of uses, staff notes that the Mir Mar PUD lists thirteen
principal uses (1-13) but some numbered uses actually consist of more than one use, thus staff
derived a higher number of uses permitted. For example, #10 in the Mir Mar PUD reads:
"Repair Shops - Radio, TV, Small Appliances and Shoes." Since shoe repair is unrelated to the
other repair uses, it was considered a separate use by staff.
In response to the necessary procedures to expand commercial uses in the Subdistrict, it is
relevant to know the background of the subdistrict and the two PUDs approved therein.
......,.
Backl!:round
In 1986, the :!:5-acre Randall Boulevard Center PUD was approved - for thirteen principal uses -
in accordance with a provision in the 1983 Comprehensive Plan for convenience commercial
uses in the "Vested Area I" designation [Golden Gate Estates] (see attached). The provision
included criteria that read, in part: "its uses are considered the lowest level order of goods and
services such as convenience stores and gas stations" and "the service area is generally
considered as the surrounding area within a radius of two miles." Later, in explaining the five
types of commercial allowed the 1983 Plan stated: "The second commercial use identified by
this Plan is convenience commercial as described in the Vested Area. These uses are intended to
supply the resident with required everyday goods and services at a local level." Finally, in
describing uses allowed in the Community Nodes provision, the Plan states: "The permitted uses
may include some ConveniencelNeighborhood goods as well as the sale of wearing apparel,
appliances and other general retail commercial goods and professional activities."
Agenda Item No. 16A 16
December 16, 2008
Page 2 of 17
In 1989, the present comprehensive plan aIkIa Growth Management Plan (GMP) was adopted; it
included a policy providing for the preparation and adoption of a master plan for the Golden
Gate area.
In 1991, the GGAMP was adopted. It established the Randall Boulevard Commercial District
applicable only to the site of the Randall Boulevard Center PUD. The criteria from the 1983
Plan were not adopted as there was no reason to do so; this new District allowed only the same
specific list of thirteen uses as contained in that PUD thus that PUD remained consistent with the
comprehensive plan. A new provision, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict, was established in the
GGAMP to allow for additional commercial zoning and development in Golden Gate Estates.
In 1998, a small scale GMP amendment was adopted to expand the District by 2.38 acres and a
companion rezone petition was approved establishing the Mir Mar PUD on that 2.38-acre parcel.
The permitted uses in the Mir Mar POO were the same as those specifically listed in the
subdistrict, except "branch banks" were included with "professional offices" (the subdistrict
allowed professional offices - apparently, the BCC at that time determined a bank is a
professional office use).
Subsequently, GMP amendments have been approved to: add a specific buffer requirement;
delete child care center use; change the name from a District to a Subdistrict; and, add the legal
description of all parcels within the Subdistrict.
Ordinance No. 82-2, the 1982 zoning ordinance, was in effect at the time the 1983
comprehensive plan was adopted, when the Randall Boulevard Center PUD was approved, and
when the GGAMP was adopted. "Shopping center" was listed as a permitted principal use in the
C-2 through C-5 zoning districts and was defined as: "A retail sales facility consisting of five (5)
or more retail outlets or having a gross floor area of more than 25,000 square feet, whichever
shall apply; exclusive of supermarkets." In the C-2 zoning district, a shopping center was limited
to a maximum of 25,000 square feet. A shopping center was only allowed to contain the uses
listed in the zoning district in which it was located. For example, in the C-3 zoning district, a
shopping center could only contain uses allowed in the C-3 zoning district; C-4 and C-5 uses
would not be allowed. Likewise, in the Randall Boulevard Center PUD (and Mir Mar PUD), a
shopping center could only contain the uses permitted in that PUD.
Though the definition of shopping center is different in the Land Development Code (LDC) than
in the 1982 zoning ordinance, it still is a structure of a certain size containing a certain number of
establishments within; the LDC does not list shopping center as a use within zoning districts.
Shopping center is defined in the LDC as: "A group of unified commercial establishments built
on a site which is planned, developed, owned or managed as an operating unit and related in its
location, size, and type of shops to the trade area that the unit serves. It consists of eight or more
retail business or service establishments containing a minimum total of 20,000 square feet of
floor area. No more than 20 percent of a shopping center's floor area can be composed of
restaurants without providing additional parking for the area over 20 percent. A marina, hotel, or
motel with accessory retail shops is not considered a shopping center."
In the 1982 zoning ordinance, the lowest intensity zoning district allowing a clothing store was
,." the C-3 zoning district (permitted in the C-2 zoning district in today's LDC). That use was not
consistent with the convenience commercial provision in the 1983 Plan under which the Randall
2
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
Page 3 of 17
Boulevard Center PUD was approved. Similarly, it is staff's position today that a clothing store
is not consistent with the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, nor is it allowed in either
of the PUDs. A clothing store does not meet the original GMP provision intent - it is not a
convenience commercial use - and it is not one of the uses specifically listed in the Subdistrict
and PUD.
In addition to the reference to martial arts studio at the November 18 BCC hearing, there was a
public petition (item 6A.) on the January 15,2008 agenda by Mr. Jorge Trincado regarding the
allowance of this use in the Mir Mar PUD. At that time, the BCC took no action. Subsequently,
staff and Commissioner Coletta met with Mr. Trincado, at which time various options were
discussed, including seeking another location. Staff believes that Mr. Trincado sought another
location; he has not pursued any of the regulatory options.
In the 1982 zoning ordinance, the lowest intensity zoning district allowing a martial arts studio
was the C-3 zoning district, and this may have required a provisional (now conditional) use
(permitted in the C-3 zoning district in today's LDC), That use was not consistent with the
convenience commercial provision in the 1983 Plan. Similarly, it is staffs position today that a
martial arts studio is not consistent with the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, nor is it
allowed in either of the PUDs. A martial arts studio does not meet the original GMP provision
intent - it is not a convenience commercial use - and it is not one of the uses specifically listed in
the Subdistrict and PUD.
Below is a chart identifying the uses allowed in the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict
and the two PUDs located therein.
Randall Blvd. Commercial Randall Blvd. Center PUD Mir Mar pun (1998)
Snbdistriet (1991) 11986)
1 automobile service station automobile service stations automobile service station
without repairs
2 barber and beauty shops barber and beauty shops barber and beauty shops
3 child care centers. child care centers child ca re centers
4 convenience stores convenience stores convenience stores
5 drug store5 drug stores drug stores
6 food market5 food markets food markets
1 hardware stores hardware stores hardware stores
8 laundries - self service only laundries - self service only laundries - self service only
'9 post offices and professional post offices and post offices, and professional
offices professional offices offices (incfuding branch banks)
10 repair shops - radio, TV, small repair shops - radio, TV, repair shops - radio, TV, small
appliances and shoes small appliances and shoes appliances and shoes
11 restaurants, including fast food restaurants - not including restaurants, including fast food
restaurants but not drive-in drive-ins restaurants, but not drive-in
. restaurants restaurants
12 shopping center shopping center - not to shopping center
exceed 25,000 square feet
13 veterinary clinics with no veterinary clinics - no veterinary clinics with no outside
outside kenneling outside kenneling kenneling
. Child care center use deleted from the Subdistrict in 2003
3
Agenda Item No. 16A 16
December 16, 2008
Page 4 of 17
Present
It is unique, and generally undesirable, to have such a specific listing of allowable uses in the
GMP as exists in the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict; the above history explains how
this came about, dating back to 1983. The process to expand the allowable uses in the
Subdistrict is to amend it via a GMP amendment Conceivably, the uses from the C-I through
C-3 zoning districts could be allowed, similar to the Neighborhood Center Subdistrict in the
GGAMP. Typically, the property owner would initiate such an amendment, but the BCC could
direct staff to initiate it for the benefit of the owner (at taxpayer expense). Subsequent to a GMP
amendment, the Mir Mar PUD would need to be amended to expand the list of permitted uses.
To determine whether an individual use is allowed, a request for an Official Interpretation may
be filed. Also, a zoning verification letter may be requested. Both are appealable to the Board of
Zoning Appeals.
The Zoning Director is the only authorized official to interpret the CoIJier County Land
Development Code (LDC) which includes the official zoning map. (The Comprehensive
Planning Director is charged with interpreting the Growth Management Plan.) An Official
interpretation of the LDC is governed by subsection 1O.02.02.F. and can be described as a
process whereby an eligible applicant presents a specific set of facts, in writing, relative to a
specific property and asks the Zoning Director to render an official opinion (interpretation) of the
LDC regulations applicable to that stated set of facts. The Zoning Director renders the opinion
to the applicant in writing; public notice of the letter is published in a local newspaper and notice
is mailed to surrounding property owners. There is a 30-day appeal process available to affected
parties (see subsection 1O.02.02.F. of the LDC). An appeal of the Zoning Director's
interpretation can be made to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) provided an application for
appeal is received within 30-days of the last notice date. If the opinion is not appealed, the
Zoning Director's decision stands unless and until the LDC is amended. There is a limit to the
number of questions an applicant can ask in one request (See subsection 1O.02.02.F. of the
LDC, attached.)
A zoning verification letter is a service the Zoning Department provides whereby an applicant
can get written confirmation of the zoning regulations or zoning status of a property in effect at
the time of the request In summary, it is a restatement of the verifiable facts pursuant to the
zoning designation of a property as governed by the LDC. In preparing a zoning verification
letter, Zoning staff may consult Comprehensive Planning staff when needed. Since a zoning
verification letter constitutes a determination of an administrative official, it may be appealed to
the BZA, within 30 days of that administrative decision, pursuant to Section 250-58 of the Code
of Laws and Ordinances (see administrative appeal application, attached). In response to such a
request earlier this year, asking if a retail family clothing store would be a permitted use in the
Mir Mar PUD, a zoning verification letter was issued on April 18, 2008, advising that use would
not be permitted (attached). That "administrative determination" was not appealed.
Bee Options
1. BCC could direct staff to re-issue the April 18, 2008 zoning verification letter (see attached
draft letter, dated December 16, 2008). The applicant would then have another opportunity
to file an Appeal of that staff determination to the BZA.
2. BCC could direct staff to initiate a GMP amendment (to add one or more uses). If
4
Agenda Item No. 16A 16
December 16, 2008
Page 5 of 17
successful, the applicant would then need to submit a subsequent PUD amendment petition.
3. BCC could take no action. The applicant would then have four options:
a. Request a second zoning verification letter, and then submit an Appeal of that staff
determination to the BZA.
b. Submit a Request for Official Interpretation, and then submit an Appeal of the staff
detennination to the BZA.
c. Submit a GMP amendment petition (to add one or more uses) and, if successful, submit a
subsequent POD amendment petition.
d. Take no further action on the use at this location.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This executive summary has been reviewed and approved for legal sufficiency by the county
attorney's office. This item is not quasi-judicial and as such, it does not require ex parte
disclosure. A majority vote of the Board is necessary to take action.--HFAC
FISCAL IMPACT:
To research this issue, prepare a draft modified zoning verification letter, and write and review
this Executive Summary, cost approximately $1 ,200, based upon staff time expended.
There are no fiscal impacts to Collier County for the first and third options above. The fiscal
impact for option two above could vary widely (due to variability in proportionate share oflegal
ad costs), but one ballpark estimate would be $7,500. In effect, the $16,700 application fee
would be waived and staff, rather than the applicant/owner, would prepare the text amendment
and compile/generate the necessary supporting data and analysis; and, County (taxpayer) funds
would pay for: the proportionate share of legal advertising costs (total legal ad costs for the GMP
amendment cycle is about $30,000, which is divided among the petitioners in the given
amendment cycle), and the cost to have a notice of public hearing sign posted on the property,
and the cost to advertise for, and secure a facility for, the required neighborhood infonnation
meeting. Additionally, though staff does not believe there would be any statutory compliance
issues upon adoption of the GMP amendment, should such arise, the County would bear full cost
of defending the amendment and/or negotiating for settlement and implementing the settlement
agreement (itselflikely to be a GMP amendment).
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT:
There is no Growth Management Plan impact in discussing this issue and considering the options
noted herein. Any subsequent public hearing petition (GMP amendment, Appeal of an Official
Interpretation, Appeal of an Administrative decision - Zoning Verification Letter) would be
reviewed for consistency with the GMP by the BCC at the time the petition is heard.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board take no action (option #3, above).
PREPARED BY: David Weeks, AICP, Planning Manager, Comprehensive Planning Dept.
5
Item Number:
Item Summary:
Meeting Date:
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Item No. 16A 16
December 16, 2008
Page 6 of 17
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
16A16
Recommendation that Board of County Commissioners approves Option 3 and takes no
action on Public Petitioner's request to change allowable uses in the Randall Boulevard
Commercial Subdistrict within the Golden Gate Area Master Plan and the Mir Mar PUD.
12/1612008 9:00:00 AM
Prepared By
David Weeks, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Chief Planner
Date
Comprehensive Planning
12/2120084:00:09 PM
Approved By
Heidi F. Ashton
County Attorney
Assistant County Attorney
County Attorney Office
Date
1213120089:26 AM
Approved By
Susan Istenes, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Zoning & Land Development Director
Date
Approved 8y
Zoning & Land Development Review
12131200812:31 PM
Judy Puig
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Operations Analyst
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
Date
Approved 8y
1213/2008 1 :29 PM
Randall J. Cohen
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Comprehensive Planning Department
Director
Date
Comprehensive Planning
1213120083:07 PM
Approved By
Joseph K. Schmitt
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Community Development &
Environmental Services Adminstrator
Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
12/3/20088:23 PM
Approved By
OMB Coordinator
Administrative Services
Applications Analyst
Information Technology
Date
1214120088:58 AM
Approved By
Mark Isackson
County Manager's Office
Budget Analyst
Office of Management & Budget
Date
1214/200810:25 AM
Approved By
James V. Mudd
Board of County
Commissioners
County Manager
Date
County Manager's Office
12/61200811 :38 AM
file://C:\AgendaTest\Export\ 118-December%20 16,%202008\16.%20CONSENT%20AGE...
12/1 0/2008
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
Page 7 of 17
DRAFT
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review
December 16, 2008
Mr. Mario Castenada
2730 Oil Well Road
Naples, FL 34120
Re: Zoning Verification Letter ZL TR-2008-AR 13025, regarding uses permitted in the
Mir-Mar Planned Unit Development, located at the intersection of Immokalee Road and
Randall Boulevard, Folio number 37744040001, in Section 27 Township 48 South,
Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida
Dear Mr. Castenada:
In your application dated March II, 2008, you ask if a retail family clothing store would
be a permitted use in the Mir-Mar Planned Unit Development. The subject property is
zoned PUD (Mir-Mar, Ordinance No. 98-72) and is the site of a multi-unit commercial
development, La Hispana # 2, approved by Site Development Plan SDP 99-116.
The Mir-Mar PUD identifies only sixteen permitted uses. Fifteen of these identify
specific commercial businesses (thirteen listed uses with multiple uses listed under
section 3.3 A.9 and 3.3A.lO). The sixteenth use (# 12 on the list of permitted uses) is
noted as "shopping center." This term is not further described or defined in the PUD
document, although Section 2.3 of the PUD document notes that the property can support
20,000 square feet of "commercial shopping center uses." The County's addressing
record for the property identifies the following businesses as occupying units in the
development (not all of which are necessarily currently operating): a grocery store, a
pizza parlor, a real estate office, office, a florist, an express shipping business, a truck
parts and tire store, a "business center," and a beautylbarber shop.
The uses identified by the PUD, as described above, reflect exactly those identified in the
Collier County Growth Management Plan's Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP),
Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict, except for "branch banks;" apparently, that
use was viewed as a professional office use at the time ofrezoning approval. Any use
approved by the Zoning Director as compatible with the provisions and/or intent of the
PUD must also be consistent with the provisions and/or intent of the GGAMP; the
Zoning Director has the authority to interpret the provisions of the LDC, but not the
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
Page 8 of 17
Growth Management Plan (GMP). Authority to interpret the GMP lies with the Director
of the Comprehensive Planning Department.
The Comprehensive Planning Manager in the Comprehensive Planning Department has
made the determination that only those uses specifically identified in the GGAMP
Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict are consistent with the provisions and/or
intent of the GMP based on the following explanation. "This subdistrict was adopted in
the original GGAMP in 1991 as well as the neighborhood center subdistict. It was
deliberate to list very specific uses in this subdistrict rather than list a use range, as was
done in the neighborhood center subdistrict in the GGAMP (allows uses similar to the C-
1 tbru C-3 zoning districts. The Randall Boulevard Center PUD was approved in 1986;
when the Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict was established in the GGAMP, it
simply included the very same specific list of uses allowed in that PUD. The Mir-Mar
PUD was approved in 1998, along with a companion petition to amend the GGAMP
Future Land Use Map to expand the Subdistrict to include the Mir Mar site. Permitted
uses in the Mir Mar PUD were/are the same as in the adjacent Randall Boulevard Center
PUD, except that there is no 25,000 square feet cap on the shopping center (no such cap
exists in the subdistrict); fast food restaurant is specifically listed (this use is allowed in
the subdistrict); and, branch banks are listed (the subdistrict allows professional offices-
apparently, the BCC at that time determined a bank is a professional office). Though we
may find it undesirable today to have such a narrow listing in the GMP, I believe we must
interpret it as was intended when adopted; the alternative is to amend the Subdistrict.
The property owner could initiate such an amendment, or the BCC could direct it (at
taxpayer expense); the same would be true for the necessary subsequent PUD
amendment. I do not anticipate that the Comprehensive Planning staff would take issue
with an amendment to broaden the use list into a range comparable to neighborhood
centers; however, that final detennination would have to be made upon official review of
an amendment application.
Approval of any other uses, including a family clothing store, would therefore not be
allowed. Any uses other than those specifically identified by the GGAMPIPUD, which
were issued Zoning Certificates allowing them to operate on the property prior to the
Comprehensive Planning Manager's detennination, will be allowed to remain until such
time as the business ceases to operate, at which time the use will be discontinued and no
Zoning approval will be given to operate a similar business unless the GMP, and PUD,
are amended to allow the use.
Please be advised that the infonnation presented in this verification letter is based on the
Collier County Land Development Code and/or Growth Management Plan in effect as of
this date. It is possible that subsequent amendment(s) to either of these documents could
affect the validity of this verification letter. It is also possible that development of the
subject property could be affected by other issues not addressed in this letter, such as, but
not limited to, concurrency related to the provision of adequate public facilities,
environmental impact, and other requirements of the Collier County Land Development
Code or related ordinances. The determination made in this letter is appealable within 30
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
Page 9 of 17
days of the date of this letter pursuant to the Collier County Codes of Laws and
Ordinances, Sec. No. 250-58, by filing the appropriate application and fee.
Should you require further information please do not hesitate to call me at (239) 252-
2464.
Sincerely,
Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Director
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review
cc. Ross Gochenaur, Site Plan Review Manager
David Weeks, AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
(i)
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
2800 NORTH HORSESH~RtIlEof 17
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL
Section 250-58
Sec. 250-58. Appeal from decision of administrative official.
(a) Appeals to a board of zoning appeals or the governing body, as the case may be, may be
taken by any person aggrieved or by any officer, department, board, or bureau of the governing
body or bodies in the area affected by the decision, determination or requirement made by the
administrative official. Such appeals shall be taken within 30 days by filing with the administrative
official a written notice specifying the grounds thereof. The administrative official shall forthwith
transmit to the board all papers, documents, and maps constituting the record of the action from
which an appeal is taken.
Due public notice of the hearing on the appeal shall be given. Upon the hearing, any party may
appear in person or by attorney. A decision shall be reached by the appellate body within 30 days
of the hearing; otherwise, the action appealed from shall be deemed affirmed
An affected property owner is defined as an owner of property located within 300 feet of the
property lines of the land for which the interpretation is effective
An aggrieved or affected party is defined as any person or group of persons which will suffer an
adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the Collier County Growth Management
Plan, Land Development Code, or Building Code(s). The alleged adverse interest may be shared
in common with other members of the community at large, but shall exceed in degree the general
interest in community good shared by all persons.
A request for appeal shall be filed in writing. Such request shall state the basis for the appeal and
shall include any pertinent information, exhibits and other backup information in support of the
appeal. In accordance with Resolution No. 2007-160, the fee for the application and processing of
an appeal is $1,000.00 and shall be paid by the applicant at the time the request is submitted.
The Board of Zoning Appeals shall hold an advertised public hearing on the appeal and shall
consider the administrative decision and any public testimony in light of the growth management
plan, the future land use map, the Land Development Code or the official zoning atlas. The Board
of Zoning Appeals shall adopt the County official's administrative decision, with or without
modifications or conditions, or reject the administrative decision. The Board of Zoning Appeals
shall not be authorized to modify or reject the County official's administrative decision unless such
Board finds that the decision is not supported by substantial competent evidence or that the
decision is contrary to the growth management plan, the future land use map, the Land
Development Code or the official zoning atlas.
ReQuests for Aooeal of Administrative Decision should be addressed to:
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review
Attn: Intake Planner
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, Florida 34104
(i)
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
2800 NORTH HORSESH~l\IEof 17
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104
(239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION OF
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICIAL
Section 250-58
PETITION NO (AR)
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT NUMBER
DATE PROCESSED
ASSIGNED PLANNER
To he completed hy staff
APPLICANT INFORMATION
NAME OF OWNER
ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
TELEPHONE # CELL # FAX #
E-MAIL ADDRESS
NAME OF AGENT/APPLICANT
FIRM
ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
TELEPHONE # CELL # FAX #
E-MAIL ADDRESS
REQUEST DETAIL
Appeal of Application No. AR-
(Please reference the application number that is being appealed)
Attach a statement for the basis of the appeal including any pertinent information,
exhibits and other backup information in support of the appeal.
Submit required application fee in the amount of $1000.00 made payable to the
Board of County Commissioners.
Agerd,~ llelll No, 16A 16
lD1tc~er16, 2008
Paoo 12 of 17
{:.o-f f (0...
B. Vested Area
. .,,,
1 . VESTED AREA I ,','
Vested Area I designate lands which are already subdivided into
rural residential lots (2.25 acres as an average). Vested
Areas I essentially consists of the Golden Gate Estates Subdivision.
By the Plan recognizing the area in this way, it is identified as
a large area of potential population growth located in a portion of
the County which is generally far removed from supportive servlces
and facilities. Its expansion. in terms of additional lands will
be discouraged.
In recognition of the existence of Vested Area I it is also
recognized that it will require certain non-residential uses.
Such uses shall include essential services as defined by the most
recent Collier County Zoning Ordinance including, but not limited
to:
a. Golf courses. parks. playgrounds, nature preserves, wildlife
sanctuaries and other similar recreation and open space uses;
b. Community facilities such as churches, cemeteries. schools,
rest homes, hospitals. fire and police stations;
c. Utility and communication facilities;
d. Convenience commercial land uses provided the following cri-
teria are met;
(1) Direct access is by a road classified as a collector or
arterial;
(2) The size of the parcel is no smaller than 2.25 acres and
no larger than 5.0 acres.
(3) It does not promote strip commercialization;
(4) Its uses are considered the lowest level order of goods
and services such as convenience stores and gas stations;
(5) The service area is generally considered as the surround-
ing area within a radius of two miles; which means
the site is no closer than four (4) miles to the nearest
commercially zoned site as measured as a straight line
distance from any existing commercial site and the site
proposed for commercial development.
(6) It is found to be compatible with the surrounding land
uses; and.
(7) The site is adequately buffered from surrounding residen-
tial areas.
Rev.4
Rev.S
16
.
Agenda Item No, 16A 16
December 16, 2008
Page 13 of 17
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
Community Development and Environmental Services Division
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review
2800 North Horseshoe Drive' Naples, Florida 34104
Department of Zoning and Land Development Review
April 18, 2008
Mr. Mario Castenada
2730 Oil Well Road
Naples, FL 34120
Re: Zoning Verification Letter ZLTR-2008-AR 13025, regarding uses permitted in the
Mir-Mar Planned Unit Development, located at the intersection ofImmokalee Road and
Randall Boulevard, Folio number 37744040001, in Section 27 Township 48 South,
Range 27 East, Collier County, Florida
Dear Mr Castenada:
In your application dated March II, 2008, you ask if a retail family clothing store would
be a permitted use in the Mir-Mar Planned Unit Development. The subject property is
zoned PUD (Mir-Mar, Ordinance 98-72) and is the site of a multi-unit commercial
development, La Hispana # 2, approved by Site Development Plan SDP 99-116.
The Mir-Mar POO identifies only sixteen permitted uses. Fifteen of these identifY
specific commercial businesses, The Sixteenth use (# 12 on the list of permitted uses) is
"shopping center." This term is not further described or defined in the PUD document,
although Section 2,3 of the PUD document notes that the property can support 20,000
square feet of "commercial shopping center uses." The Addressing Record for the
property identifies the following businesses as occupying units in the development (not
all of which are necessarily currently operating): a grocery store, a pizza parlor, a real
estate office, office, a florist, an express shipping business, a truck parts and tire store, a
"business center," and a beautylbarber shop,
The uses identified by the PUD, as described above, reflect exactly those identified in the
Collier County Growth Management Plan's Golden Gate Area Master Plan (GGAMP),
Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict. Any use approved by the Zoning Director as
compatible with the provisions and/or intent of the PUD must also be compatible with the
provisions and/or intent of the GGAMP; the Zoning Director has the authority to interpret
the provisions of the LCD, but not the Growth Management Plan (GMP),
The Growth Management Plan Manager has made the determination that only those uses
specifically identified in the GGAMP Randall Boulevard Commercial Subdistrict are
c
o
(~~
.
c
u
"
<
y
Phone (239) 252-2400
Fax (239) 252-6968 or (239) 252-2913
www.colliergov.nct
Agenda Item No, 16A 16
December 16, 2008
Page 14 of 17
compatible with the provisions and/or intent of the GMP. Approval of any other uses,
including a family clothing store, would therefore not be allowed. Any uses other than
those specifically identified by the GGAMPIPUD, which were issued Zoning Certificates
allowing them to operate on the property prior to the GMP Manager's determination, will
be allowed to remain until such time as the business ceases to operate, at which time the
use will be discontinued and no Zoning approval will be given to operate a similar
business unless the GMP, and PUD, are amended to allow the use or the use is otherwise
deemed to be allowed by the Board of County Commissioners.
Please be advised that the information presented in this verification letter is based on the
Collier County Land Development Code and/or Growth Management Plan in effect as of
this date. It is possible that subsequent amendment(s) to either of these documents could
affect the validity of this verification letter. It is also possible that development of the
subject property could be affected by other issues not addressed in this letter, such as, but
not limited to, concurrency related to the provision of adequate public facilities,
environmental impact, and other requirements ofthe Collier County Land Development
Code or related ordinances,
Should you require further information please do not hesitate to call me at (239) 213-
2911.
,~~~
v /"
Ross Gochenaur, Planning Manager
Department of Zoning & Land Development Review
cc: Correspondence file
Susan M. Istenes, AICP, Zoning Director
David Weeks, Growth Management Manager
Mir Mar PUD Short File
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
Agenda Item No, 16A 16
December 16, 2008
Page 15 of 17
1
.1,
b. Site plans, other' development permits or certifi
violation of prohibition of this section are de ed to be invalid, and
confir r vest any development right or pro Hy interest on the own
ated development.
1
F. Requests for Interpretations,
1. Initiation, An interpretation may be requested by any affected person, resident, developer,
land owner, government agency or department, or any person having a contractual interest in
land in Collier County,
2. Procedures,
a. Submission of request for interpretation, Requests for interpretation must be submit-
ted to the County Manager or his designee or chief building official ("officials") in a
form established by him, Each request must identify the specific land development
code or building code citation to be interpreted, Each request for interpretation must
be accompanied by the appropriate fee as set forth in the fee resolution adopted by
the board of county commissioners, Under no circumstances may the request for
interpretation contain more than three issues or questions, It must not contain a
single question with more than three sub-issues or questions. If it is determined by
the appropriate official that the request for interpretation contains more than three
issues, the applicant will be required to submit a separate request accompanied by
the applicable fees,
b. Determination of compteteness. After receipt of a request for interpretation, the
appropriate official must determine whether the request is complete, If the appropri-
ate official determines that the request is not complete, he must serve a written notice
on the applicant specifying the deficiencies. The appropriate official will take no
further action on the request for interpretation until the deficiencies are remedied.
I. Notification of affected property owner. Where a site spec~ic interpretation
has been requested by a party other than the affected property owner, Collier
County shall notify the property owner that an interpretation has been
requested concerning their property,
c. Rendering of interpretation. After the request for interpretation has been determined
complete, the County Manager or his designee or chief building official, whichever
is applicable, shall review and evaluate the request in light of the growth management
plan, the future land use map, the Code and/or the official zoning atlas, and building
code related matters, whichever is applicable, and render an interpretation. The
County Manager or his designee and the chief building official may consult with the
county attorney and other county departments before rendering an interpretation.
Prior to the release to the applicant of any interpretation, the interpretation shall be
reviewed by the county attorney for legal form and sufficiency. I nterpretations made
pursuant to this section shall be rendered within 45 days of issuancs of a
determination of completeness made pursuant to section 10.02.02 F.2.b. above.
3.
Form. The interpretation shall be in writing and shall be sent to the applicant by certified mail
return receipt requested.
Supp, No, 2
LDC10:20
Agenda Item No. 16A16
December 16, 2008
Page 16 of 17
APPLICATION, REVIEW, AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES
10.02.02 FA. 10.02,02 F.5,
4. Official record. The County Manager or his designee shall maintain an official record of all
interpretations rendered by either the County Manager or his designee or chief building
official, which shall be available for public inspection during normal business hours.
a. Notice of Interpretation. The County Manager or his designee shall provide public
notification upon the issuance of an interpretation. For general interpretations of the
building code, Growth Management Plan or Land Development Code, notice of the
interpretation and appeal time-frame shall be advertised in a newspaper of general
circulation in the County. For interpretations affecting a specific parcel of land, notice
of the interpretation and appeal time-frame shall be advertised in a newspaper of
gensral circulation, and mail notice of the interpretation shall be sent to all property
owners within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the interpretation is
effective,
b. Effective time limits of an interpretation. An interpretation rendered by the County
Manager or his designee or the building official, as the case may be, shall remain in
effect until the appropriate Code section is amended to clarify the applicable provision
or provisions which warranted the interpretation. or until such time as the interpre-
tation is adopted, modified, or rejected as a result of an appeal to the board of zoning
appeals andfor the building board of adjustments and appeals, by the applicant or
other individual or entity identified in section 10.02,02 F,1. above. From the time the
interpretation is rendered and the time the appropriate Code section is amended, or
in the case of an appeal, until such time as the board of zoning appeals and/or
building board of adjustments and appeals has rendered its finding, no further
request for interpretation regarding the same issue shall be permitted.
5. Appeal to board of zoning appeals or building board of adjustments and appeals.
a.
Within 30 days after receipt by the applicant or affected property owner of a written
interpretation sent by certified mail return receipt requested by the County Manager
or his designee or chief building official, or within 30 days of publication of public
notice of interpretation, the applicant, affected property owner, or aggrieved or
adversely affected party may appeal the interpretation to the building board of
adjustments and appeals for matters relating to building and technical codes as
shown in division 1,18 or to the board of zoning appeals for all other matters in this
Code. For the purposes of this section, an affected property owner is defined as an
owner of property located within 300 feet of the property lines of the land for which the
interpretation is effective. An aggrieved or affected party is defined as any person or
group of persons which will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or
furthered by the Collier County Growth Management Plan, Land Development Code,
or building Code(s), The alleged adverse interest may be shared in common with
other members of the community at large, but shall exceed in degree the general
interest in community good shared by all persons,
b.
A request for appeal shall be filed in writing. Such request shall state the basis for the
appeal and shall include any pertinent information, exhibits and other backup
infonnation in support of the appeal. A fee for the application and processing of an
appeal shall be established at a rate set by the Board of County Commissioners from
time to time and shall be charged to and paid by the applicant. The board of zoning
Supp, No, 4
LDC10;21
1 0.02.02 F.5.
Agenda Item No, 16A 16
December 16, 2008
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Page 17 of 17
10.0203 A 1
appeals or the building board of adjustments and appeals, whichever is applicable,
shall hold an advertised public hearing on the appeal and shall consider the
interpretation of the County Manager or his designee or chief building official,
whichever is applicable, and public testimony in light of the growth management plan,
the future land use map, the Code or the official zoning atlas, or building code related
matters, whichever is applicable. The board of zoning appeals or the building board
of adjustments and appeals, whichever is applicable, shall adopt the County Manager
or his designee's or chief buiiding official's interpretation, whichever is applicable, w~h
or without modifications or conditions, or reject his interpretation. Ths board of zoning
appeals or the building board of adjustments and appeals, whichever is applicable,
shall not be authorized to modify or reject the County Manager or his designee's or
chief building official's interpretation unless such board finds that the determination is
not supported by substantial competent evidence or that the interpretation is contrary
to the growth management plan. the future land use map. the Code or the official
zoning atias, or buiiding code, whichever is applicable.
c.
Time limitations on appeals. Any appeal that has not been acted upon by the
applicant within 6 months of the applicant filing the appeal will be determined to be
withdrawn and cancelled unless extended by the BCC. Further review and action on
the appeal will require a new application subject to the then current code.
Purpose.
(
G. Transportation impact statem
1.
a. The p rpose of this section is to outline the minimum require nts for the review of
and equlrements for the submittal of a transportation im ct statement which is
re ired to be submitted as part of a development order pplication. Transportation
i pact statements will:
Comply with the existing Transportation I act Statement (TIS) guidelines
and procedures in resolution 2003-410 may be amended from time to
time.
(Ord. No. 04-72, 3.2; Ord. No. 05-27, ~ 3,TT; Ord. No. 06-07, ~ 3.S' rd. No. 06-63, ~ 3.PP)
A.
Supp, No,4
al Requirements for Site Development Plans
Purpose. The intent of this section is t ensure compliance with the app priate land
development regulations prior to the Is ance of a building permit. This se ion is further
intended to ensure that the proposed velopment complies with fundame I planning and
design principles such as: consisten with the county's growth manageme plan; the layout,
arrangement of buildings, archit ural design and open spaces; the nfiguration of the
traffic circulation system, includ' g driveways, traffic calming devices parking areas and
emergency access; the availa llity and capacity of drainage and utility acilities; and, overall (
compatibility with adjace development within the jurisdiction f Collier County and
consideration of natural re ources and proposed impacts thereon,
LDC10:22