Agenda 12/16/2008 Item #17C
Agenda item No, 17C
December 16. 2008
Page 1 of 30
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PUDA-2008-AR-13494 Kite Kings Lake, LLC, represented by D. Wayne Arnold,
AlCP, of Q, Grady Minor and Associates, P.A. and Richard D, Yovanovich, Esq., of
Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Yovanovich and Koester, is requesting a PUD
Amendment to modify the permitted commercial uses within the Kings Lake PUD
(Ordinance No, 82-52). The 9.63-acre subject property is located at 4890 Davis
Boulevard, in Section 7, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida
OBJECTIVE:
To have the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) consider an amendment to
Ordinance No. 82-52, the King's Lake Planned Unit Development (PUD), to modify and
identifY the uses in the commercial tract of the PUD by Standard Industrial Classification
(SIC) code number; and to make celtain that the project is in hannony with the applicable
County codes and regulations in order to maintain the community's interests.
CONSIDERATIONS:
On July 13, 1982, the BCC approved Ordinance No. 82-52 for the King's Lake PUD,
which as described in the approved ordinance established a mixed-use development
comprised of "low-density single-family, medium-density multifamily and high-density
multifamily dwelling units along with a commercial shopping center, neighborhood parks
and lakes." The 9,63-acre commercial tract, identified as Block S in the approved PUD
document, pelmitted 13 principal uses by-right; and six additional uses, subject to
majority approval of the Planning Commission, As is the case with PUDs from this era,
none of the uses in the PUD document is referenced by way of a SIC code, thereby
creating ambiguity regarding its permissibility for both prospective tenants of the
shopping center and County staff at the time of permitting.
The applicant is now proposing to amend Ordinance No. 82-52 to revise and expand the
number of permitted uses and identify each of them by SIC code, As all of the originally
approved uses were within the Commercial Professional and General Office (C-l)
through the General Commercial (C-4) zoning districts. the uscs proposed by the
applicant are also consistent with the C-I to C-4 range, The proposed changes to the
ordinance are shovm in strike-through and underline [onnat in the attached ordinance. No
other changes to the approved ordinance or to the PUD Master Plan arc being requested.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The rezoning action. in and of itselt; will have no fiscal impact on Collier County, There
is no guarantee that the project, at build out. will maximize its authOlized level of
development; however, if the PUD is approved, a p01tion of the existing land will be
developed and the new development will result in an impact on Collier County public
facilities.
PUDA 2008-AR,13494
Aaenda item Ho. 17C
-Decemb;;r 16, 2008
Page 2 of 30
The County collects all applicable impact fees before the issuance of building permits to
help offset the impacts of each new development on its public facilities. These impaet
fees are used to fund projects identified in the Growth Management Plan's (GMP)
Capita] Improvement Element (CIE) as needed to maintain adopted Levels of Service
(LOS) for pub]ie facilities. Additionally, in order to meet the requirements of Section
] O,02.07(C) of the Land Deve]opment Code, 50 percent of the estimated Transportation
Impact Fees associated with the project are required to be paid simultaneous]y with the
approval of each final local development order. Other fees collected before the issuance
of a building permit include building permit review fees and utility fees associated with
connecting to the County's water and sewer system.
It should be noted that the inclusion of impact fees and collected taxes are for
informational purposes only, and they are not included in the criteria used by stafT and the
Planning Commission to analyze this petition.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is located within the Urban
designated area (Urban - Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict) as
identified on the countywide Future Land Use Map of the GMP. The subject site does not
qualify for commercial uses under this designation. However, the King's Lake PUD was
approved on July 13, 1982 by Ordinance No, 82-52 and developed prior to the adoption
of the GMP in 1989, During the implementation of the zoning re-evaluation program in
the early 1990s, this commercial tract was deemed "improved property" and its zoning
was found consistent with the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) via Policies 5,9. and
Policy 5.1, which states that "for such commercially-zoned properties, zoning changes
will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower-intensity than the
existing zoning district; and provided the overall intensity of commercial land uses
allowed by the existiug zoning district... is not exceeded in the new zoning district." The
existing listed commercial uses of the Kings Lake PUD fall within the C-I through C-4
use range, as described in the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC), and in
staffs opinion, do not exceed the overall intensity allowed in the existing PUD.
Policy 5.4 of the FLUE also states: "New developments shall be compatible with, and
complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the LDC." Comprehensive
Planning leaves this determination to Zoning and Land Development Review staff as part
of their review of the petition in its entirety. However, stafTwould note that in reviewing
the appropriateness of the requested uses/densities on the subject site, the compatibility
analysis might include a review of both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby
properties as to allowed use intensities and densities, development standards (building
heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc,). building mass, building location and
orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and location, traffic
generation/attraction, etc.
PUDA 2008,AR-13494
2
Agenda Item No. 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 3 of 30
Based upon the above analysis of proposed uses in relation to FLUE Policy 5.1,
Comprehensive Planning staff finds the proposed PUD amendment consistent with the
FLUE.
Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed this project and
has determined that the proposed additional commercial uses and change to reference SIC
codes would not pose a net increase in the site generated traffic on the roadway network,
as the lIE Land Use Code (LUe) would remain LUC 820 (shopping center) for both the
existing and the proposed uses, with no change in square footage, Therefore, this petition
can be deemed to be consistent with the applicable policies of the Transportation
Element.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT:
Affordable housing is not affected by this application.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:
Environmental Services staff has reviewed this amendment request and has determined
that there are no environmental issues associated with it, as all environmental concerns
were addressed at the time of the original rezone.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION:
This petition was not heard by the EAC as no Environmental Impact Statement was
required for the proposed amendment.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPe) RECOMMENDATION:
The CCPC heard this petition at their November 6, 2008 meeting, and voted unanimously
(9-0) to forward this petition to the BCC with a recommendation of approvaL Two letters
of objection regarding some of the proposed uses were received from the community.
Such controversial uses were check-cashing businesses, pawn shops, hotels or motels,
convenience stores with gas stations, video rental shops providing adult movies and the
like. However, at the CCPC hearing these contentious uses were removed by the
applicant to the satisfaction of the public. Because the itcm also received a unanimous
recommendation of approval. it is being placed on the BCe's Summary Agenda.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS:
This is an amendment to the existing Kings Lake PUD, which proposes to amend the
PUD to broaden and deline by SIC Code each of the pern1itled uses. This proposed
amendment is quasi-judicial in nature. As such the burden falls upon the applicant for the
amendment to prove that the proposal is consistent with all of the criteria set forth below,
The burden then shifts to thc BCC, should it consider denial, that such denial is not
PUDA 2008,AR,13494
3
''-genda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 4 of 30
arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable. This would be accomplished by finding that
the amendment does not meet one or more of the listed criteria.
Criteria for PUD Rezones
Ask yourself the following questions, The answers assist you in making a determination
for approval or not.
I, Consider: The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development
proposed in relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas,
traffic and access, drainage, sewer, water. and other utilities.
2. Is there an adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of
agreements, contract, or other instruments or for amendments in those
proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be
made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities
that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense? Findings and
recommendations of this Ope sha/I be made only afier consultation with the
County Attorney.
3. Consider: Confonnity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and
policies of the Growth Management Plan,
4. Consider: The internal and external compatihility of proposed uses, which
conditions may include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions
on design, and bufTering and screening requirements.
5. Is there an adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed
to serve the development?
6. Consider: The timing or sequence of development (as proposed) for the
purpose of assuring the adequacy of available improvements and facilities,
both public and private.
7. Consider: The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to
accommodate expansion,
8. Consider: Confomlity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications
of such regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such
modifications are justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least
equivalent to literal application of such reguiations,
9. Will the proposed change be consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies
and future land use map and the elements of the Growth Management Plan?
PUDA 200B-AR,13494
4
I\genda Item No. 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 5 of 30
10, Will the proposed PUD Rezone be appropriate considering the existing land
use pattern?
] 1. Would the requested PUD Rezone result in the possible creation of an isolated
district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts?
] 2. Consider: Whether existing district boundaries are illogically drawn In
relation to existing conditions on the property proposed for change,
13, Consider: Whether changed or changing conditions make the passage of the
proposed amendment necessary.
]4. Will the proposed change advcrsely intluence living conditions In the
neighborhood?
15. Will the proposed change create or excessively increase traffic congestion or
create types of traffic deemed incompatible with surrounding land uses,
because of peak volumes or projected types of vehicular traffic, including
activity during construction phases of the developmcnt, or othe/wise affect
public safety?
] 6, Will the proposed change crcate a drainage problem?
] 7. Will the proposed change seriously rcduce light and air to adjacent areas?
] 8. Will the proposed change adversely affect property values in the adjacent
area?
19. Will the proposed change be a deterrent to the improvement or development
of adjacent property in accordance with existing regulations"
20, Consider: Whether the proposed change will constitute a grant of special
privilege to an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare,
2]. Are there substantial reasons why the propeliy cannot ("reasonably") be used
in accordance with existing zoning? (a "core" question" ,)
22, Is the change suggested out of scale with thc needs of the neighborhood or the
county?
23. Considcr: Whcther it is impossible to find other adequate sites in the county
I"r the proposed use in districts already pennitting such use,
24, Consider: The physical characteristics of the propeliy and the degree of site
alteration which would be required to make the property usable for any of the
range of potential uses under the proposed zoning classification.
PUDA 2008,AR,13494
5
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16. 2008
Page 6 of 30
25. Consider: The impact of development resulting from the proposed PUD
rezone on the availability of adequate public facilities and services consistent
with the levels of service adopted in the Collier County Growth Management
Plan and as defined and implemented through the Collier County Adequate
Public Facilities Ordinance [Code ch.I06, article II], as amended,
26. Are there other factors, standards, or criteria relating to the PUD rezone
request that the Board of County Commissioners shall deem important in the
protection of the public health. safety, and welfare?
The BCC must base its decision upon the competent, substantial evidence presented by
the written materials supplied to it, including but not limited to the Staff Report,
Executive Summary, maps, studies, letters from interested persons and the oral testimony
presented at the Board of County Commissioners hearing as these materials relate to
these criteria. Furthermore. this matter is quasi-judicial and requires a supermajority vote,
-STW
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approve PUDA-2008-
AR-13494.
PREPARED BY:
John-David Moss, AlCP. Principal Planner
Department of Zoning & Land Development Review
PUDA 2008-AR,13494
6
Item Number:
Item Summary:
Meeting Date:
Page 1 of2
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 7 of 30
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
17C
This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by
Commission members. PUDA-2008-AR-13494, Kite Kings Lake, LLC, represented by D.
Wayne Arnold, AICP of Q. Grady Minor and Associates, P.A., is requesting a PUD
Amendment to modify the permitted commercial uses within the Kings Lake PUD (Ordinance
No. 82-52): The subject property is located at 4890 DavIs Boulevard, in Section 7, Township
50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, FloridaCTS
12/16/200890000 AM
Prepa red By
John~David Moss
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Senior Planner
Date
Zoning & Land Development
9/22/20089:34:20 AM
Approved By
Judy Puig
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Operations Analyst
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
Date
12/3/20089:53 AM
Approved By
Ray Bellows
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Chief Planner
Date
Zoning & Land Development Review
12/3/200810:10 AM
Appnl\'ed By
Steven Williams
Attorney's Office
Assistant County Attorney
Attorney's Office
Date
12/3/200810:34 AM
Approved By
Susan Istenes, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Zoning & Land Development Director
Date
Zoning & Land Development Review
12/3/200812:34 PM
Appro\'ed By
Joseph K. Schmitt
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Community Development &
Environmental Services Adminstrator
Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
12/4120082:35 PM
Approved By
OMS Coordinator
Administrative Services
Applications Analyst
Date
information Technology
12/4/20084:25 PM
Approved By
Mark Isackson
County Manager's Office
Budget Analyst
Office of Management & Budget
Date
12/5/200811 :10 AM
Approved By
J'-1r:1CS V. Mudd
Board of County
r-~..~~.. I\,._____~
....,.........y ,.":,,,,<>~:::.,
~dte
file:IIC:\AgendaTest\Export\ 118-December%20 16,%202008\ 17,%20SUMMAR Y%20AG... 12/10/2008
------,----", "-..'-r'-----
Page 2 of 2
Agenda item ~Jo. 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 8 of 30
Commissioners
County Manager's Office
1217120086:56 PM
tile://C:\AQendaTest\ExP0l1\ 118-Decelllber%,20 16.%202008\ 1 7,%20SUMMAR Y%20AG.., 12/1 0/2008
AGE~~ ~J.>z1~~
Page 9 of 30
Co~v County
- '-.--
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
HEARING DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2008
SUBJECT: PETITION NO: PUDA-2008-AR-13494, KING'S LAKE PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT:
Owner:
Kite King's Lake, LLC
30 South Meridian Street, Suite 1100
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Agents:
Mr. Wayne Arnold, AICP
Q. Grady Minor & Associates, P.A.
3800 Via del Rey
Bonita Springs, FL 34134
Richard D. Yovanovich, Esquire,
Goodlette, Coleman, Johnson, Y ovanovich
and Koester, P A.
4001 Tamiami Trail, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
REOUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is requesting that the Collier COlU1ty Planning Commission (CCPC) consider an
application to amend Ordinance No. 82-52, the King's Lake Planned Unit Development (PUD), to
modiJY the permitted uses in the PUD's commercial tract, and to identify these uses by their
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code number.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject PUD, consisting of:1:3 I I acres, is located on the south side of Davis Boulevard (SR
84), approximately one mile east of Airport-Pulling Road (CR 31), in Section 7, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (see location map on foHowing page).
King's LaKe PUDA.2008-AR.13494
November 6, 2008 cepe
Page 1 of6
-'--'T------
UOOO
,,-OM
~O_
NO
o -0
Z(O~
Ea;~
2...0 co
-~o..
ro "
'OQ)
,,0
Q)Q)
",0
<(
~ I ~(i .~F tjtL1 <
g!; \Q:0> ,,50::\ -------r------ 1- 86
<!; I ITI\Jf UTTfum 1\;: - H ~
.; ~Is ! ~'JIIIIIH..'IIII* ~ , 1 ~
, "'~-'"Dz ,I /.&~~I, .' ",,.J\i;f ,1~ 2
.- ~,."",/!:". "JF~ ~ '." "',"'" 'Y / I,' I
r-~o-"" !8>?Nll~ : ,,,,P' ." .,;(.j f- C)
I<. J I~: Pm./" ; ... 'c. .JIIJIT7')""
- .~.... ~p ;:; :.t1TLL~(A" 11. ~ Z
;:: ~ I' > ~~flQl1}. i ~ \'0; 01 Z
go" ",eo?: ;;\, . < ~ 71' '. T
"e )R;h~' " "r;",;, A it. t": 1= f- "0'- 0
.......'~ ~~l~RH,1I ~~:TI7 r(~ N
I '.'I~ -r ,.'..',,~-r:::/,('@ .~r
.
'Illi
,
I 1.1. ! H I I 1 I 1 ~v
~I
a "
~!U
=.,~ I -.
_ "C"
I'
,!
--...."""
.
CIll~_'1O
~..~ IIi
.! ' .
", i I
, !
16.
R ~~ h
". I
!
,-
::ro'tll;lNO~t~W1 f&
1-, ![
i~ i
!.' .
i"
- "
*1
~
d:
<f
'"
0
'"
N
,
'"
0
:>
D.
"
~I
~I
a..
<(
2
1 Z
i 0
\ -
I-
<(
()
0
--'
Agenda lIem No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 11 of 30
PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
On July 13, 1982, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved Ordinance No. 82-52 for
the King's Lake PUD, which as described in the approved ordinance (see Appendix 3), established
a mixed-use development comprised of "low-density single-family, medium-density multifamily
and high-density multifamily dwelling units along with a commercial shopping center,
neighborhood parks and lakes." As noted in Section 6 of the approved PUD document, the 9.63-
acre commercial tract, identified as Block S, permitted 13 principal uses by-right; and six
additional uses, subject to majority approval of the Planning Commission. As is the case with
PUDs from this era, none of the uses in the PUD document is referenced by way of an SIC code,
thereby creating ambiguity for prospective tenants of the shopping center and even County staff at
the time of permitting.
The applicant is now proposing to amend Ordinance No. 82-52 to revise and expand the number of
permitted uses and identify each of them by SIC code. As all of the originally approved uses were
within the Commercial Professional and General Office (C-1) through the General Commercial
(C-4) zoning districts, the uses proposed by the applicant are also consistent with the C-l to C-4
range. The proposed changes to the ordinance are shown in strike-through and underline format in
the attached ordinance. No other changes to the approved ordinance or to the PUD Master Plan are
being requested.
AERIAL VIEW
King's Lake PUDA-200B-AR-13494
November 6, 2008 cepe
Page 2 of6
Agenda Item No. 17C
December '16, 2008
Page 12 of 30
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North:
East:
South:
West:
Davis Boulevard, then single-family homes of the Foxfire PUD
Single-family homes of the King's Lake PUD
Multi-family and single-family homes of the King's Lake PUD
FDOT maintenance yard, zoned Agricultural (A)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is located within t.~e Urban designated
area (Urban - Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict) as identified on the
cOWltywide Future Land Use Map of the GMP. The subject site does not qualify for commercial
uses under this designation. However, the King's Lake PUD was approved on July 13, 1982 by
Ordinance No. 82-52 and developed prior to the adoption of the GMP in 1989. During the
implementation of the wning re-evaluation program in the early I 990s, this commercial tract was
deemed "improved property" and its zoning was found consistent with the Future Land Use
Element (FLUE) via Policies 5,9. and Policy 5.1, which states that "for such commercially-zoned
properties, zoning changes will be allowed provided the new zoning district is the same or a lower-
intcnsity than the existing zoning district; and provided the overall intensity of commercial land
uses allowed by the existing zoning district... is not exceeded in the new zoning district." The
existing listed commercial uses of the Kings Lake PUD fall within the C-l through C-4 use range,
as described in the Collier COWlty Land Development Code (LDC), and in staffs opinion, do not
exceed the overall intensity allowed in the existing PUD.
Policy 5.4 of the FLUE also states: "New developments shall be compatible with, and
complementary to, the surrounding land uses, as set forth in the LDC." Comprehensive Planning
leaves this detemlination to Zoning and Land Development Review staff as part of their review of
the petition in its entirety. However, staff would note that in reviewing the appropriateness of the
requested uses/densities on the subject site, the compatibility analysis might include a review of
both the subject proposal and surrounding or nearby properties as to allowed use intensities and
densities, development standards (building heights, setbacks, landscape buffers, etc.), building
mass, building location and orientation, architectural features, amount and type of open space and
location, traffic generation/attraction, etc.
Based upon the above analysis of proposed uses in relation to FLUE Policy 5.1, Comprehensive
Planning staff finds the proposed PUD amendment consistent with the FLUE.
Transportation Element: Transportation Planning staff has reviewed this project and has
determined that the proposed additional commercial uses and change to refcrence SIC codcs would
not pose a net increase in the site generated traffic on the roadway network, as the lTE Land Use
Code (LUC) would remain LUC 820 (shopping center) for both the existing and the proposed uses,
with no change in square footage. Therefore, this petition can be deemed to be consistent with the
applicable policies of the Transportation Element.
ANALYSIS:
Staff has completed a comprehensive evaluation of this land use petition based on the Land
King's Lake PUDA-2DD8,AR,13494
November 6. 2008 cepe
Page 3 of6
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 13 0130
Development Code (LDC) criteria upon which a recommendation must be based, specifically
noted in Subsections 10.02.13.B.5. and 10.03.05.H, which establish factual bases to support a
recommendation. The CCPC uses these same criteria as the basis for their recommendation to the
BCC, who in turn use the criteria to support their action on the rezoning request. These evaluations
are completed as separate documents, and have been attached to the staff report as Appendix I and
2. In addition to these documents, staff offers the following analysis:
Environmental Review: Environmental Services staff has determined that there are no
environmental issues associated with this application since all environmental concerns were
addressed at the time of the original rezone.
Transportation Review: Since the proposed petition will not result in additional site generated
trips, the Transportation Planning Staff recommends approval.
Utilities Review: Any portions of this project to be developed would be required to comply with
Ordinance No. 2007-60 and, therefore, subject to the conditions associated with a Water and Sewer
Availability Letter from the Collier County Public Utilities Division at the time of Site
Development Plan (SDP). However, no new public utility issues are associated with this PUDA.
Emergency Management Review: Since the proposed amendment does not affect the number of
approved dwelling units in the PUD, there would be no adverse impacts on the evacuation and
sheltering requirements for the County.
Zoning Review: The subject petition proposes to revise and expand the number of permitted uses
while identifying each of these uses by SIC code. All of the uses originally approved with the PUD
were within the C- I through the C-4 zoning districts, and all of the proposed uses also fall within
this range.
NEIGHBORHOOD INFORMATION MEETING (NIM):
(Synopsis provided by Michele McGonagle, CDES Administrative Secretary)
The agent and applicant duly noticed and held the required NIM at 5:30 PM on September 15,
2008, at the Collier County Government Center. Present were approximately 17 residents, the
applicants, their agents, two representatives from a potential fitness center tenant, and county staff.
The applicant's agent, Wayne Arnold, explained that the property is an approximately ten acre
parcel zoned for commercial uses, and that the PUD amendment is needed to clarify the C-l
through C-4 uses. !-Ie explained that the applicant wanted to lease the space previously used by the
Dollar Store to a fitness company called Retrofitness. Mr. Arnold stated that because of the
unspecific language in the existing PUD documents, the applicant was directed by county staff to
pursue an amendment to clarify what specific uses were allowed within the commercial area of the
PUD. !-Ie also stated that the intent of the amendment was not (0 increase the shopping center's
intensity.
Residents questioned who would be paying for the PUD amendment. It was explained that Kite
Realty, the owner of the property, would pay for it. There was also a questioned posed about
"rhether the parking requirements 'would be changed by the aInend.'TIent. The agent explained that
King's Lake PUDA-2008,AR-13494
November 6, 2008 cepe
Page 4 of 6
n'n'_,_'_~_____'__
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 14 of 30
because this is a shopping center, the parking requirements would remain the same. When asked if
there would be any exterior renovations done to the property, the applicant stated that landscaping
was the only thing that might change on the outside.
The meeting concluded at approximately 6:00 PM.
As of the writing of this report, staff has received no letters of objection from the community.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) forward Petition PUDA-
2008-AR-13494 to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) with a recommendation of
approval.
APPENDICES:
1. Rezone Findings
2. PUD Findings
3. Ordinance No. 82-52
King's lake PUOA.2008-AR.13494
November 6. 2008 eepe
Page 5 of6
PREPARED BY:
tlo~
JOHN~0SS' AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
REVIEWED BY:
1L- 7 L,dJ:
~ HEIDI ASHTON-C1CKO
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
~ Q ;1!1---
RA YM ND V. BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
~~.~
SUS"AN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
APPROVED BY:
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 15 of 30
IbiD h f
DATE'
10 I/o 108
DATE
10(9(0'6
DATE
10 h loR
DATE
~:4~
%i.TE
Tentatively scheduled for the December 16, 2008 Board of County Commissioners Meeting.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
~1clf~
King's Lake PU DA-2008-AR-13494
November 6, 2008 CCPC
Page 6 of 6
i\~0-0'?
DATE
r
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COlLlERGOV.NET
6968
(i)
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Paqe 16 of 30
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE'DRIVE
NAPLES. FLORIDA 34104
(239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-
PETITION NO (AR)
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT NUMBER
DATE PROCESSED
ASSIGNED PLANNER
To be completed by staff
NAME OF APPLICANT (S) KITE KING'S LAKE LLC.
ADDRESS 30 S, MERIDIAN ST., SUITE 1100 CITY INDIANAPOLIS STATE IN ZIP 46204-3565
TELEPHONE # 317-809-6960 CELL # FAX # 317-577-5605
E-MAIL ADDRESS:ESTRICKLAND@KITEREALTY.COM
NAME OF AGENT D, WAYNE ARNOLD. AICP - Q, GRADY MINOR AND ASSOCIATES, PA
ADDRESS 3800 VIA DEL REY CITY BONITA SPRINGS STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34134
TELEPHONE # 239-947-1144 CELL # FAX # 239-947-0375
E-MAIL ADDRESS: WARNOLD@GRADYMINORCOM
NAME OF AGENT RICHARD D. YOVANOVICH. ESQ, - GOODLETTE. COLEMAN. JOHNSON.
YOVANOVICH AND KOESTER. PA
ADDRESS 4001 TAMIAMI TRAIL. SUITE 300 CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34103
TELEPHONE # 239-435,3535 CELL #
E-MAIL ADDRESS:RYOVANOVICH@GCJLAW.COM
FAX # 239-435-1218
BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF
ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE
REGULATIONS.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezon~ 01/1&107, fe" 2/12/08
Page 17 of
Complete 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://www.collieraov.net/lndex.aspx?paCle=774
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: Kinos lake Homeowners Association
MAILING ADDRESS 2296 Roval lane CITY Naples
STATE Fl ZIP 34112
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION:
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
i~jl~(tft~""'._
.. ..!Kl'.;iJli'!W . .., ,~ ",,:',.,. ~'", ",- . '."'~""";-'"'c''''' ',.>< . <>."'>~'_.' "P" , . .,d,"""",-'.',;.. " .P...flY"~
a, If the property js owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the
entjrety, tenancy jn common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an
ownership interest as well as the percentage of such jnterest. (Use
addjtional sheets if necessary).
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
b.
If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and
stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
i.
i
I
1
,
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/1 X/07, rev 2/12/08
"-'l-""'A..'-~'-
c. If the p,roperty is jn the nam~ of a TRUSTEE, Ijst the benefiti.~~~~~
trust with the percentage of Interest. Page 18 of 30
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
d. If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
list the name of the general and/or Iimjted partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
Kite KinG's Lake. LLC 100%
30 S. Meridian St.. Suite 1100. Indianapolis. IN 46204-3565
e. If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an indjvidual or
jndjvjduals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, Ijst the names of
the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders,
benefjcjaries, or partners.
Name and Address
Percentage of Ownership
Date of Contract:
f. If any contjngency clause or contract terms jnvolve additional partjes,
list all indjviduals or officers, if a corporatjon, partnership, or trust.
Name and Address
g. Date subject property ~acauired - June 2003 Dleased Term of
lease yrs,fmos.
If, Petitioner has optjon to buy, indicate the following:
Date of optjon:
Date option terminates: , or
Anticipated closing date
h. Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase
occur subsequent to the date of applicatjon, but prior to the date of the
final public hearjng, it is the responsjbjlity of the applicant, or agent on
hjs behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 0]/18/07, rev 2/] 2/08
Detailed lel!al description of the property covered bv the application: (If space is inadequate,
attach on separate page.) If request involves change to more than one zoning district,
include separate legal description for property involved jn each district. Applicant shall
submit four (4) copies of a recent survey (completed wjthin the last six months,
maximum 1" to 400' scale) if required to do so at the pre-application meeting.
NOTE: The applicant is responsible for supplying the correct legal description. If
questions arise concerning the legal description, an engineer's certification or sealed
survey may be required.
Sect jon/Township/Range 7 / 50S / 26E
Lot: Block: Subdivision: Kinos Lake
Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #: 52853280009
Metes & Bounds Description:
Size of property:
ft. X
ft. = Total Sq. Ft.
Acres 9.63:t
Address/l!enerallocation of subiect property: 4890 Davis Boulevard, located on the south side of Davis
Boulevard just west of Kings Lake Boulevard
PUD Distrjct (LDC 2.03.06): [gJ Residential D Communjty Faciljties
[gJ Commercjal D Industrjal
Zoning
Land use
N PUD
S PUD
E PUD
W A. PUD. RSF-3. RSF-4
Residential. Foxfire PUD
Residential. Kinos Lake PUD
Residential. Kinos Lake PUD
FDOT maintenance vard, Winter Park PUD. Residential
Does the owner of the subject property own property contiguous to the subject
property? If so, give complete legal description of entire contiguous property. (If
space is inadequate, attach on separate page). NO
Section/Township/Range / /
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Plat Book Page #: Property I.D. #:
Metes & Bounds Description:
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07, rev 2/12/08
".. T ",---------
8
Page 20 of 30
This application is requesting a rezone from the PUD zoning district(s) to the PUD zoning
district(s).
Present Use of the Property: Commercial shopping center
Proposed Use (or range of uses) of the property: Commercial shopping center
Original PUD Name: Kinos Lake Ordinance No.: 82-52
11"~i'''~FE\t_Jl}:j{:ON;,c '~"'~~~~
::~,j~ '" L,..~:;?f,.,!:~o,kbh'H' ".j :,)JC,;t:,~,.,.,~.<:,: :.'i;J.....,'..',-s,,"RlI.!:,/ "" ,}{F~,~;~_. "S. ;if,;" !~' .,;,}~
Pursuant to Section 10.02.13 of the Collier County Land Development Code, staff's
analysis and recommendation to the Planning Commission, and the Planning
Commission's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners shall be based
upon consideration of the applicable criteria noted below. Provide a narrative statement
describing the rezone request with specific reference to the crjteria noted below.
Include any backup materials and documentation in support of the request,
PUD Rezone Considerations (LDC Section 10.02.13.B)
1. The suitability of the area for the type and pattern of development proposed in
relation to physical characteristics of the land, surrounding areas, traffic and
access, drainage, sewer, water, and other utilities.
The proposed amendment is limited to the existino commercial tract of the
Kinos Lake PUD. The commercial shoppino center has been operatino for nearlv
20 vears. The amendment will update the permitted uses bv identifvino then bv
SIC Code. and the owner wishes to add health c1ub/ovm as a permitted use.
The location is suitable for commercial development. compatible with
surroundino land uses. and has appropriate infrastructure to support the
commercial ones.
2. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed
agreements, contract, or other instruments, or for amendments in those
proposed, particularly as they may relate to arrangements or provisions to be
made for the continuing operation and maintenance of such areas and facilities
that are not to be provided or maintained at public expense. Findjngs and
recommendations of this type shall be made only after consultatjon with the
county attorney.
The applicant is the owner of the commercial tract and is leoallv authorized to
proDose amendments affectino onlv property under their unified control within
the Kinos Lake PUD.
3. Conformity of the proposed PUD with the goals, objectives and policies of the
growth management plan. (This is to include identifying what Sub-district, policy
or other provision allows the requested uses/density, and fully
explaining/addressing all criteria or conditions of that Sub-district, policy or other
provision.)
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rc/.one 0 1/] 8/07, rev 2/12/()8
The sub'ect ro ert is located within the vested Kin sLake PI1 .ndfjl/@ ~~
Lake PUD was oriqinally approved in 1974. to the adoption 0 t Eb:Pi~ser;l30
Collier County Growth Manaqement Plan. The commercial tract has been
previously developed as the Kings Lake Square Shoppinq Center. The Kinqs
Lake PUD is presently located with the Urban District. Urban Residential
Subdistrict of the Collier County Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan. The existinq commercial component of the Kinqs Lake PUD has been
determined to be consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan by Policy as
"improved property". The property is identified as "improved" on FLUE Map 11.
Zoninq consistent by Policies 5.9. 5.10. 5.11 and 5.12.
Policy 5.9 indicates that properties which were considered "improved
properties" under the former zoninq re-evaluation proqram shall be deemed
consistent with the Growth Manaqement Plan.
4, The internal and external compatibility of proposed uses, which conditions may
include restrictions on location of improvements, restrictions on design, and
buffering and screening requirements.
The orooosed amendment will have no imoact on internal or external
compatibility. The proposed amendment to the oermitted uses wjthin the
commercial tract of the PUD is meant to add more specificity than presently
exists by citinq SIC Code qroup numbers. consistent with current PUD
standards. Further. the applicant oroooses to specify that a fitness center. SIC
number 7911. is consistent and comoatible with the uses commonlv found in a
shoppinq center.
5. The adequacy of usable open space areas in existence and as proposed to serve
the development.
The Kinqs Lake PUD includes usable open spaces includinq oarks and lakes.
The orooosed amendment has no imoact on this rezone consideration.
6. The tjming or sequence of development for the purpose of assuring the adequacy
of available improvements and facilities, both public and private.
All necessary infrastructure improvements are in olace to serve the commercial
tract of the PUD. The proposed amendment has no impact on this rezone
consideration.
7. The ability of the subject property and of surrounding areas to accommodate
expansion.
8. Conformity with PUD regulations, or as to desirable modifications of such
regulations in the particular case, based on determination that such modjfications
of justified as meeting public purposes to a degree at least equivalent to literal
application of such regulations.
Deed Restrictions: The County is legally precluded from enforcing deed restrictions,
however, many communities have adopted such restrictions. You may wish to contact
the civic or property owners association in the area for which this use is being
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/18/07, rev 2/12/08
.'--,
requested in order to ascertain whether or not the request is affected ~9&)/PftIt.\',qldl9....:I~,C8
. . crecemb'~' I tr,'76.J
restnctlOns. Page 22 of 30
Previous land use petitions on the subiect propertv: To your knowledge, has a public
hearing been held on this property within the last year? 0 Yes [8J No
If so, what was the nature of that hearing?
NOTICE:
This appljcation will be considered "open" when the determination of "sufficiency"
has been made and the application is assigned a petjtion processing number. The
application will be considered "closed" when the petjtioner withdraws the
application through written notice or ceases to supplv necessary information to
continue processinq or otherwise actjvelv pursue the rezoninq for a period of six
(6) months, An application deemed "closed" will not receive further processing and
an application "closed" through inactivity shall be deemed withdrawn. An
application deemed "closed" may be re-opened by submitting a new applicatjon,
repayment of all application fees and granting of a determination of "suffjciency".
Further review of the project will be subject to the then current code. (LDC Section
10.03.0S.Q.)
Application For Puhlic Hearing For PUD Rezone 01/1 R/07. rev 2/12/0R
Agenda Item No, 17C
^ ~ 8
o
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED
BELOW W/COVER SHEITS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION.
NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
#OF
COPIES REQUIRED
1 Additional set if located in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle
Redevelo ment Area)
Co ies of detailed descri tion of wh amendment is necessa
Completed Application with list of Permitted Uses; Development
Standards Table; List of proposed deviations from the LDC (if any); List
of Developer Commitments and Statement of Compliance narrative
(download a lication from website for current form)
Pre-a lication meetin notes
PUD Conce tual Master Site Plan 24" x 36" and One 8 y," x 11" co
Revised Conce tual Master Site Plan 24" x 36"and One 8 Yz" x 11" co
Original PUD document/ordinance and Master Plan 24" x 36" - ONLY IF
AMENDING THE PUD
Revised PUD a lication with chan es crossed thru & underlined
Revised PUD application w/amended Title page w/ord #'5. LDC
10.02.13.A.2
Justification/Rationale for the Deviations (must be on a separate sheet
within the application material; please DO NOT include it in the PUD
documents)
Deeds/Legal's & Survey (if boundary of original PUD is amended)
List identifying Owner & all parties of corporation
Owner / Affidavit signed & notarized
Covenant of Unified Control
Completed Addressing checklist
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
24
2
2
2
2
2
NOT
REQUIRE
x
,
,
,
,
i
I
I
I
I
,
,
,
,
[ZI
[ZI
o
[ZI
[ZI
~
[ZI
[ZI
o
o
o
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and digital/electronic copy of EIS
or exem tion 'ustification
Historical Surveyor waiver request
Utility Provisions Statement w/sketches
Architectural rendering of proposed structures
Survey, signed & sealed
Traffic Impact Statement (TIS) or waiver (with applicable fees)
Recent Aerial Photograph (with habitat areas defined) min scaled
1"-400'
Electronic copy of all documents in Word format and plans (CDRom or
Diskette)
If located in RFMU (Rural Frinoe Mixed Use) Receivino Land Areas
Applicant must contact Mr. Gerry J. Lacavera. State of Florida Division of Forestry @ 239-690-3500 for
information regarding "Wildfire Mitigation & Prev ntion Plan", LDC Section 2.03,08A2.a.(b)i.c.
.~r ~
---~--~--- - - -- --
AppricantjAgent Sign ture
r-
--....
9/~3 Inf{
______~~--~~l
Date
Application For Public Hearing For PUD Rezone OIllS/07, rev 2/12/08
4
4
4
4
4
7
5
o
o
o
o
[ZI
[ZI
o
[ZI
[ZI
[ZI
[ZI
[ZI
o
o
[ZI
o
-1'
,1\;)enda Item th 17C
December 16, 2008
Pa;)e 24 of 30
ORDINANCE NO,08
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 82-52, WHICH
ESTABLISHED THE KING'S LAKE PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD) TO MODIFY THE PERMITTED
COMMERCIAL USES WITHIN THE KINGS LAKE POO, FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4890 DAVIS BOULEVARD, IN
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 50 SOUTH, RANGE 26 EAST,
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, CONSISTING OF 9,63
ACRES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, D, Wayne Arnold of Q, Grady Minor & Associates, representing Kite
King's Lake LLC, petitioned the Board of County Commissioners to change the zoning
classification of the herein described real property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
SECTION ONE:
The zoning classification of the herein described real property located in Scction 7,
Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier COWlty, Florida, is amended to modify the permitted
commercial LL~es within the Kings Lake P,JD (Ordinance No, 81,51) in accordance with the
POO Document, attached hereto as Exhibit "A," which is incorporated herein and by reference
made part hereof.
SECTION TWO:
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vok of the Board of County
Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this _ day of
,1008.
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 25 of 30
ATTEST:
DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK
BOARD OF CpUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
, Deputy Clerk
TOM HENNING, CHAIRMAN
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
Irt- 7.WJ~
Steven T, Williams s~.)
Assistant County Attorney
Exhibit A: Commercial Use List
CPIOS,CPS,OOB00VJrd.STW
2
. ......---.1'--".---..-----..
Agenda Item No. 1lC
December 16, 2008
Page 26 of 30
SECTION 6
BLOCK S: COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER
6.1. PURPOSE
The purpose of tbis Section is to set fortb tbe plan and regulations for tbe area
designated as Block S - Commercial Sbopping Center, on tbe Master Plan of
Development, Exbibit "D".
6.2. USES PERMIlTED
No building or structure, or part tbereof, shall be erected, altered or used, or land
or watcr uscd, in whole or in part, for other tban the following:
A. PRlNCIPAL USES:
8jReslauranls no drh'~ ins.
(21GocktaiI IOllnges-aml-retilil-package sules ofliqllors lll1d-e111eJcbeveragcs,ne
Elri-vO-iHf;'SU6:ie*to tbc'j}f~v+&iBfl5-Bf Section 5. J 0, of RGfel'eHee-NBc--l~
f.')Retail shops rind stores, Retail shops and'stores may inelooc incidental
j'JrDcessing and repair acti'.'ities, provide-4--#ley- are aeccsser-y-and
sllbordinate-te--t11e~fetail sales use, and pl'O'iided,tbat all st01'age,
proc-essing and repairof--nwrehaooise OCC:ll'S '.'.'itlliB the--pril1Gi,ml
bWkli11g,
f41Fiu!lflGiill-Instil uti~
(*refessioflal,~iness, fiHftRGiffi,uttJilies onices and :;el\'ices,
(6)Medicall1r1ices Gnd clinic::--f'",r-lltlfHflH&
(-fjArt aREl-phetegraI3hi€-studi~)s and galleries,
f&1Ba113eHlnEl-heauty-stJHps,
f9)&he€-I'OpailCSfle)*'
(.J.()')baUHdl'y,.aHd, . dry c1{)antRg~pidmp~tablishmcnts 'lfld.-ti,,14~1'\'i0e
IooHdrfD&
(+HReteil-eaker-iBSc
(-~n:ai1el'tllg,ntil!incry, gaHBDllh11temttelHtllB-ret>atr.
(,-1
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 27 of 30
~)Ma5eHln5.
ill Amusement and recreation services: Groups 79 I 1 (dance studios.
schools and halls); 7991 (fitness facilities): 7997 (membershiJLg)Olis
and recreation clubs - indoor only); and 7999 (general amusement aqd
recreation services), limited to gvmnastics, karatc/judo instruction.
sporting f.!oods rental. and yoga instruction only.
(2) Apparel and a((cessorv stores: Groups 5611 - 5699.
(3) Auto supply stores: Graun 5531, including marine supply. excludes boat
sales and no on-site repair or outdoor storage
(4) Boat Dealers: Graill,-),~2L,Illarine SllJllily only (excludes boat sales)
(5) Building materials, hardware, and ~arden supply: Groul1s 5231-5261
(excluding lumber yards),
(6) Business s~.l:yices: GI'OUP~ 7311. 7313, 7322 - 7338, 7361 (except dav
labor business). 7371 -, 7379, 73 81 (detective and private investig,rrrQ.l~
onlv) 7382 -7384 (detective a!1d I1rivatc invc~;tigatorG onl',').
(D-.I2i'120sitorv and non-denositorv institutions: Groups 6021- 6099.
(8) Eating places (Group 5812) and .drinktflE...Jllaces (Group 5813 only
cocktail lounges in coniunction with a restaurant)
(9) Educational services: Groups 8231 (libraries).
(10) Food stores: Groups 5411 (no fuel pumps shall be permitted). 542L
5431 (excent roadside sales) and 5499.
(11) General merchandise stores: Groups 5311 (department stores) - 5399
(miscellaneous general merchandise), excluding warehouse clubs and
discount retail superstores.
(12) Health services: Gro@L801] - 8049.8071 - 8092 and 8099,
(Ul Holding and other ,il}vcgm"mLQffis:s:s~QJmlJl~J5J 12c.GZ2(L
(]4) Home furniture. 1i.1n1ishings and cquirnnent stores: Groups 57]2 - 5734,
5735 (no adult oriented stores of any kind), 5736,
(15) Insurance carri,-,s~ilgi'[l1~.bXQk~LS, ilnd servjc.e~: Qr(l1ll2~,6}] Lc..Q399,
641.L
6,2
- -.-,--....-
Agenda item No. 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 28 of 30
(]6) Legal services: (}rollP 81 1 I (cxcepLbails bondsmen and probation
offices).
(17) Membership organizations: Groups 861], 8621, 864 ] (excluding social
clubs).
(18) Miscellaneous repair: Groups 7622 . 7631.
(19) Miscellaneous retail: Groups 59]2 (drug stores); 5921 (liquor stores);
5932 (used.1nerchandise) no pawn or consigmnent shops-antiques
stores only; 5941 - 594.2;5992 . 5999 except auction rooms and
monument, gravestone, sa1cs barn and lo,l}1bstone sales).
(20) Museums and art galleries (GrollD 8412),
(2]) Personal services (GrouD 7212 drv-cleaning and laundry pickup stations
only) Groups 72]7.72]9- 7251. 7291. 7299 includinl.! only car title
and tag service, clothing/costume rcntLSonlp"t.IT...jJhotol.!l'aDhy.
depi1ato.rv salon. tanning salon and tllxedo rental).
(22) Professional office~,Jeseareh. and management consulting servIces
(Groups 8711 - 8721. 8732,JiDJ, 8741.08748).
(23) Pl!1:>l]e administration (Groups 9] II - 9222 (exeepleo1ll1 rooms and
holding cells). 9224, 9661 ).
(24) Real estate agents anclmanagersJ.QrouJ),~ 6512, (552),
ill) Sehoo]s and colleges: Groups 8243. 8?44. 8249 (only. ,\"a] estate.
bank!ng,and restaurant oJ)cration schools), and 8299 (only tutoring, ;'l11,
charm. cOQI~illJL9i.cJiCJIh..dranl? modeling, public speaking. langu~
and reading schools.)
(26) Securitv and commodity dealers (Groups 621] - 62891
(27) Travel agcneies{<JtQlIQ1n4t
(28) Veterinarv services (Group 0742 for I}Ql1~~L1().Ld PQ1~ only and without
ilnY.Qy\ornight boarding or outside keJ1Jlc~t
(29) Video ta~rental (Group 7811,110 adu]t,oriented stores of any kind),
00) Anv other commercial use or l)rofcssional~er"ice ",11;eh is comparable
il))lature with the foregoing uses, as determined by the BOSlLcLQf Z9J1ing
Am2"''lL~,
6-3
Agenda Item No, 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 29 of 30
B. ACCESSORY USES:
(1) Accessory uses and structlll'es customarily associates ,associated with the
ttSeS-penniHed principal uses and structures ffi-tHiG distrjet.~.
(2)Sidewalk sales: OuJdoor seasonal sales shall be permitted.
Co The proflerty mfl';' se aGed for the following if~{}ve&.ay-&-majoritl' of the
Coastal I.rea Platming Commission:
(I) Tral'lsieflt lodgil'lg facilities with a miaimulR of leWent). (20) d\vellillg
nnit&
(2) Schools and eolleges
(3) Private slabs, sabjeet to the provisions of8eetion 5.10, of Reference No.
h
(1) Motioa picture tilealms alld Ji':e :hcutros J1&.OOcve-ins
(5) Commereial and private parking lots and parking garages
(6) Serl'iee Station
6.3. REGULATIONS
63.1. MINIMUM LOT AREA: NONE
63.2. MINIMUM LOT WIDTH: NONE
6,33. MINIMUM YARDS:
A, FrontYard..25 Feet.
B, Side Yard - None or a minimum of 5 leet with no cul-de-sacs or
dead ends.
C. Rear Yard -, 20 Feet.
63.4. MINIMUM FLOOR AREA: 1,000 sqllare feet per building on the ground
floor.
6.3,5, MAXIMUM HEIGHT: 30 feet (measured from finished grade of lot 01'
from the minimum base flood elevation requircd
6~4
- -'-',"
/-\genG3 Item No. 17C
December 16, 2008
Page 30 of 30
by l100d elevation ordinance) tlnless approved
h;;;her 13)' COllstal .A.rea Planning,GeH'mlission.,
G.1. MINIMUM OFF 8TREET P:\.I{lgNG;
Off stl'ect,paffiing-shaJl oonfonTI to,Alticlc VIII"Off Street-Parbng Regulatiol13,
e~enSGNo. 1.
G.~. OFF-STREET LOADING AND UNLOADING SPACES:
All uscs other than transicnt lodging facilities shall be provided with one off-street
loading space for each 5,000 square feet, or fraction thercof, of principal building
11001' area.
&.{), PLAN /\.PPRfWAh
Plans fGl~ the--oov"IBflIRent of all OI'-j3aJ't of B1ock-S-shaU-be-ftj3pl'Bvoo-ey-t,he
Geastal ,"rea Planning Commission for architoctBFal-aj'lflCaraRee, sibns, ligl,tiR!5;
parking and landscapinr;.
6-)