Agenda 12/02/2008 Item # 7C
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 1 of 192
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ADA-2008-AR-13731 Monte Carlo Club Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Quin
L. Kurth of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc., requesting an appeal to the Board of Zoning
Appeals of a decision of the Collier County Planning Commission in Resolution No. 08-03
denying Petition BD-2006-AR-9061.
OBJECTIVE: The petitioner has filed an appeal to the decision of the Collier County Planning
Commission (CCPC) pursuant to their denial of the petitioner's boat dock extension application
which occurred at a properly noticed public hearing on August 7, 2008. The Collier County
Land Development Code (LDC) requires that, upon hearing of a requested appeal, the Board of
Zoning Adjustment and Appeals (BZA) shall affIrm, affIrm with conditions, reverse or reverse
with conditions the action of the Planning Commission.
CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioners have filed a timely appeal pursuant to Section 8.03.03 of
the LDC, which states, in part, that, as to any land development petition or application upon
which the Planning Commission takes fmal action, an aggrieved petitioner, applicant or
aggrieved party may appeal such final action to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA). The BZA
may affirm, affirm with conditions, reverse or reverse with conditions the action of the Planning
Commission. (Please note that the language containing this provision was inadvertently omitted
during the recodification process resulting in the current LDC Ordinance No. 04-41, and has
been reinserted during the current LDC amendment cycle. Final approval of this amendment is
anticipated to occur on or about October 30, 2008.) Pursuant to section 8.03.03, the applicants
are appealing the CCPC's denial of their request for a 15-foot boat dock extension over the
maximum 20-foot protrusion limit as provided in Section 5.03.06 of the Land Development
Code to allow a 35-foot boat dock facility accommodating 20 additional boat slips for property
described as Lots I and 2, Block B of Baker-Carroll Point Unit 2 Subdivision in Section 29,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (part of the Monte Carlo Club
Condominium). The petitioners brought forward a petition for a boat dock extension to the
CCPC, who has final approving authority for boat dock extensions. The applicants requested a
15-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways
greater than 100 feet in width, to allow the expansion of a multi-slip docking facility protruding a
total of 35 feet into a waterway that is 189 feet wide at the most restrictive point. The requested
protrusion would allow construction of 20 additional boat slips for a multi-family development.
The facility was proposed to protrude a total of 35 feet into a waterway which is 189 feet wide.
The CCPC staff report and the minutes of the meeting are attached as exhibits to this executive
summary.
During the hearing, Chairman Strain made a comment (page 32 of the CCPC meeting minutes)
that the applicant could apply for a building permit with the Building Department without the
Planning Commission's review, and could potentially apply for more slips than were requested
with the boat dock extension petition as long as they didn't protrude further than 20 feet into the
waterway. The comment was made to the public speaker, who responded that more vessels in
conjunction with a dock protruding less than 20 feet would be preferable to the 20 additional
slips protruding 35 feet.
.-
j
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 2 of 192
A. Reasons for denial
There was a motion made for denial by Commissioner Kolflat, seconded by
Commissioner Caron. Each Commissioner in favor of the motion then supplied his or
her reasons for denial, and Commissioners not in favor of the motion stated so, as
follows:
1. Commissioner Kolflat's reasons for denial were based on failure to meet primary
criteria one and two and secondary criterion four.
2. Commissioner Schiffer's reason for denial was that there is no reason to not build the
county required 20-foot dock.
3. Commissioner Midney recommended denial because of failure to meet primary
criterion two and secondary criterion one.
4. Commissioner Caron voted for denial based on failure to meet primary criterion two
and secondary criteria one and two. In addition, she noted that there is no reason for
the extension past the required 20 feet.
5. Chairman Strain voted in favor of the motion for denial based on failure to meet
primary criteria two and three and secondary criterion one.
6. Commissioner Adelstein was in favor of the motion based on failure to meet primary
criteria one and two.
7. Commissioner Murray, Commissioner Vigliotti and Commissioner Wolfley voted
against the motion, in favor of the project.
The motion of denial carried at 6-3.
B. Appellant's claims
Below are the Appellant's appeal points noted in their appeal submittal followed by staff's
comments and analysis.
1. Regarding testimony provided at the CCPC hearing
The appellant claims the testimony given by Lew Sclunidt was not based on his
personal knowledge, and there is no evidence in the record that the people who
did the research and provided information to Mr. Schmidt were qualified to do so.
Mr. Sclunidt testified that the draft limitation of three feet does not apply when
the vessel is in operation, and that the boat moored on a thirty five foot dock
would be forty feet in length. The appellant does not consider Mr. Schmidt's
testimony competent and substantial evidence on which to base a decision by the
CCPC.
Staff response: Staff concurs with the appellant's assessment of Mr. Schmidt's
testimony. At any time, the vessel moored at the dock facility would be limited
to a three foot draft as regulated by the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan.
The maximum protrusion for the dock facility would be thirty five feet, including
the entire vessel.
2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 3 of 192
2. Regarding LDC sections S.03.06.C and S.03.06.B
The appellant argues that section S.06.03.C of the LDC is to establish the
maximum size of dock facility that can be constructed as of right, with no CCPC
review, and that the purpose of the section is not to restrict the size of dock
facility or vessel. The appellant further argues that the CCPC must evaluate the
criteria outlined in LDC section S.03.06.H to approve, approve with conditions or
deny a petition, and no other criteria or method of rendering a decision should be
used.
Staff response: Staff concurs substantially with the appellant's assertions
regarding the purpose and intent of the LDC section cited, and the need of the
CCPC to evaluate the criteria to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
petition. Presumably, the appellant refers to section S.03.06.C and E, which
describes provisions for protrusion allowed along with required setbacks, riparian
rights and other development standards. Section S.03.06.E states, "Additional
protrusion of a dock into any waterway beyond the limits established in
subsection S.03.06.E of this code may be considered appropriate under certain
circumstances. In order for the Planning Commission to approve the boat dock
extension request, it must be determined that at least 4 out of the 5 primary
criteria and 4 out of the 6 secondary criteria, have been met." Section 2.6.21.3 of
the previous Collier County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 91-102, as
amended, states in part that, "the Collier County Planning Commission, at a duly
advertised public hearing, shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny, a dock
facility extension based on the criteria below." This language fails to appear in the
current LDC. Section Five: Conflict and Severability, of the current Collier
County Land Development Code, Ordinance No. 04-41, states in part that, "...in
the event that any provisions of the adopted recodified LDC should result in the
unintended consequences of an unresolved conflict with the provisions of the
previously adopted LDC, as amended, the prior provisions will be considered to
apply." It has been determined that the omission of this language is the result of
an inadvertent error in the compilation of the current LDC and that the provisions
of Section Five cited above therefore apply. There are no provisions in the code
to limit the length of a vessel, or to limit the maximum protrusion that can be
granted by a boat dock extension petition.
3. That the CCPC did not limit its review to the LDC criteria
The appellant states that the CCPC must evaluate the petition according to the
LDC criteria and no other criteria not included in the LDC. The appellant further
alleges that if the criteria outlined in LDC section S.03.06.H are not used to
determine whether a dock facility meets the code requirements for an extension in
protrusion, the applicant will have no way of knowing whether they have satisfied
the criteria with the proposed petition.
3
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 4 of 192
Staff response: Staff concurs with the appellant's assertion that the CCPC did
not limit its review to the LDC criteria and iliat ilie CCPC should have limited its
review to iliese criteria. Staff further concurs that iliese criteria were intended to
make clear to the applicant what ilie applicant would need to do in order to
determine that his project met the requirements and intent of ilie LDC. Staff
review determined that ilie subject petition as requested met all of ilie five
primary criteria and all of ilie six (applicable) criteria, and ilierefore recommended
approval. The petition was denied at ilie CCPC hearing by a vote of 6-3.
4. That members of the CCPC interjected a new criterion
The appellant asserts that a new criterion was used to determine that ilie petition
did not meet the requirement for an extension, iliat ilie CCPC felt a petitioner
must prove a need or a hardship to be granted an extension, and that in ilieir
opinion ilie LDC limits boat dock facilities to a maximum 20 feet extension.
Staff response: Staff concurs substantially wiili ilie appellant's assertion that a
new criterion was arbitrarily intetjected; specifically, that ilie applicant needs to
prove a hardship exists in order to be granted an extension. There are no
requirements in the code that a hardship situation must be evaluated in order to
determine wheilier a boat dock extension should be granted. Evidence of the
existence of a hardship not created by ilie property owner is a consideration
typically associated with a Variance Petition and not a boat dock extension
petition. Further, iliere is no provision in the code that limits ilie length of any
vessel, or that limits ilie maximum protrusion that can be granted by a boat dock
extension petition.
5. That a majority ofthe CCPC failed to base its decision on the LDC criteria
The appellant states iliat a majority CCPC failed to apply the LDC criteria as a
basis for denial, asserting that six of the CCPC members found that the project
met the required number of primary and secondary criteria, but that three of these
members voted nonetheless for denial, resulting in denial of the petition.
Staff response: Staff concurs with the appellant's assertion that a ml\iority of the
CCPC failed to apply ilie LDC criteria as a basis for denial.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: There is no Growth Management
Plan impact. It is anticipated that approval or denial of iliis appeal will not affect ilie Growth
Management Plan.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Board sitting as ilie Board of Zoning Appeals hears
appeals of final action taken by the Planning Commission in accordance with the LDC, Florida
Statutes and Chapter 67-1246, Laws of Florida, as amended.
4
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 5 of 192
Section 5.03.06.H of the LDC outlines the criteria to be considered by staff and the CCPC for a
boat dock extension petition, as follows:
1. Primary Criteria:
a. Whether the number of dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed is appropriate in relation to
the waterfront length, location, upland land use, and zoning of the subject property.
Consideration should be made of property on unbridged barrier islands, where vessels are the
primary means of transportation to and from the property. (The number should be appropriate;
typical, single-family use should be no more than two (2) slips; typical multi-family use should
be one (1) slip per dwelling unit; in the case of unbridged barrier island docks, additional slips
may be appropriate.)
b. Whether the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the general length,
type, and draft as that described in the petitioner's application is unable to launch or moor at
mean low tide (ML T). (The petitioner's application and survey should establish that the water
depth is too shallow to allow launching and mooring of the vessel(s) described without an
extension.)
c. Whether the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on navigation within an
adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The facility should not intrude into any marked
or charted navigable channel thus impeding vessel traffic in the channel.)
d. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than twenty-five (25) percent of the
width of the waterway, and whether a minimum of fifty (50) percent of the waterway width
between dock facilities on either side of the waterway is maintained for navigability. (The
facility should maintain the required percentages.)
e. Whether the proposed location and design of the dock facility is such that the facility would
not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. (The facility should not interfere with the use of
legally permitted neighboring docks.)
2. Secondary criteria:
a. Whether there are special conditions, not involving water depth, related to the subject
property or waterway, which justify the proposed dimensions and location of the proposed dock
facility. (There must be at least one (I) special condition related to the property; these may
include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass
beds.)
b. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the vessel for
loading and/or unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area not
directly related to these functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area.)
5
I
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 6 of 192
c. For single-family dock facilities, whether the length of the vessel, or vessels in combination,
described by the petitioner exceeds fifty (50) percent of the subject property's linear waterfront
footage. (The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained.)
d. Whether the proposed facility would have a major impact on the waterfront view of
neighboring waterfront property owners. (The facility should not have a major impact on the
view of a neighboring property owner.)
e. Whether seagrass beds are located within 200 feet of the proposed dock facility. (If seagrass
beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06.H.2. of this LDC must be demonstrated.)
f. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection requirements of
subsection 5.03.06.E.II. of this LDC. (If applicable, compliance with section 5.03.06.E.Il. must
be demonstrated.)
Based upon its review of the record of the CCPC hearing, and the testimony and other materials
presented as part of the hearing on the appeal, the BZA may affIrm, affIrm with conditions,
reverse or reverse with conditions the action of the CCPC. In reviewing this item, the BZA must
determine whether the decision of the Planning Commission is supported by substantial
competent evidence and whether the decision is consistent with the Land Development Code and
Growth Management Plan. -HFAC
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPe) RECOMMENDATION: The
CCPC does not hear appeal requests; that is only a function of the Board of Zoning Adjustment
and Appeals.
RECOMMENDATION: It is staff's opinion that the boat dock extension petition meets the
required minimum criteria for approval as set forth in the CCPC staff report, attached to this
appeal application. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board of Zoning Adjustment and
Appeals overturn the Planning Commission's denial ofBD-2006-AR-9061 thereby granting the
boat dock extension petition. When an appeal is filed for applications upon which the CCPC has
the final decision making authority, the Collier County Land Development Code requires that the
BZA shaH affIrm, affirm with conditions, reverse or reverse with conditions the action of the
Planning Commission.
PREPARED BY: Ashley Caserta, Senior Planner, Zoning and Land Development Review
6
Item Number:
Item Summary:
Meeting Date:
Page 1 of2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 7 of 192
COLLIER COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
7C
This item requires that ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission Members. Should a
hearing be held on this item, all participants are required to be sworn in. ADA-2008-AR-
13731 (AC) Monte Carlo Club Condominium Association, Inc., represented by Quin L. Kurth
of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc., requesting an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals of
a decision of the Collier County Planning Commission in Resolution No. 08-03 denying
Petition BD-2006-AR-9061 that requested a 15-foot boat dock extension over the maximum
20-foot protrusion limit as provided in Section 5.03.06 of the Land Development Code to
allow a 35-foot boat dock facility accommodating 20 additional boat slips for property
described as Lots 1 and 2, Block B of Baker-Carroll Point Unit 2 Subdivision in Section 29,
Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (part of the Monte Carlo Club
Condominium).
12/2/20089:00:00 AM
Prepared By
Ashley Caserta
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Planner
Date
Approved By
Zoning & Land Development Review
11/4/20082:42:07 PM
Ross Gochenaur
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Planning Manager
Date
Approved By
Zoning & Land Development Review
11/7/200811:10AM
Judy Puig
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Operations Analyst
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
Date
Approved By
11/7/20082:30 PM
Susan Istenes, AICP
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Zoning & Land Development Director
Date
Approved By
Zoning & Land Development Review
11/11/20084:34 PM
Joseph K. Schmitt
Community Development &
Environmental Services
Community Development &
Environmental Services Adminstrator
Date
Community Development &
Environmental Services Admin.
11/16/20067:04 PM
Approved By
Heidi F. Ashton
County Attorney
Assistant County Attorney
Date
County Attorney Office
11/17/20089:31 AM
Approved By
file:/IC:\AgendaTest\Export\117-December''10202,%202008\07.%20BOARD%200F%20Z... 11/25/2008
Page 2 of2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 8 of 192
OMS Coordinator
OMS Coordinator
Date
County Manager's Office
Office of Management & Budget
11/18/20087:41 AM
Approved By
John A. Yonkosky
Director of the Office of Management
Date
County Manager's Office
Office of Management & Budget
11/18/20087:25 PM
Approved By
leo E. Ochs, Jr.
Board of County
Commissioners
Deputy County Manager
Date
County Manager's Office
11/19/20089:58 AM
file://C:\AgendaTest\Export\117-December"/o202,%202008\07.%20BOARD%200F%20Z... 11/25/2008
OCON
....00>
.O~
-.-N.......
_ 0
"0>
- W Q)
2..0 CJ)
;E'"
-0 '" a.
c:"
Q)'"
0,0
-<
w
~
z
~
<
w
~
z
~
<
w
~
z
~
<
w
~
z
~
<
c..
Z
illS!
!::!<
"'''
o
~
>
z
o
5
I
w
~
z
~ eO
< "
-, q ."
>eCJ
, ~~
" to
" '101'" ..
ffi Q O. ~i ....
w ffiZ
00 .
3 Z~
m '"
o
[1!i[1
GlJ\.J
0'
"O_ICO
(..a)
HS>J'O''' N'V:lmO
.
!llo
'" "
0'
..
~
!
I" ~'~I ~
uvo~ t'l..,"nd-l~Od>lIV ~
!IP
~
;; i
is ::JI
u i
~<j~
tj ~f
~ !
i ~~
1 ,<
~il;i" on "
,Ie"
"
'I
!
=
'Ii
~:;
;;,,,
i~
i1lt1Jl
(,,'s'nl
1,,"'''''1
~ ~ '!l
II'
!
~i
.
"
,
,
,
,
!
.II
,j
GULF
OF
"l,:;i,~
z
o
o
o
~
"
"
ffi
"
w
o
z
<
>
15':,-
~
S~!li
.00
0....
<(
I'l ~
\ol
"
'" CJ
'd.
Z
-
Z
0
> N
J"I'o'JSO! .ON /
-
z-
it
,I
"'
!
, !!
'! "
,.
,. "
!!
,.
"::1-
.,'
~Je
"1
~i
OOdOVD"
::!UJ1oooo.."oor
/""^"lno.
i1'~ .... ~N~~
"'
;~
'6
I".'s'nl "V~l ,""""'0'1
~a~
MEXICO
M
>-
M
'";
0:
'"
'"
o
o
'1
'"
D
'"
..
Z
o
f-
f-
ill
"-
=
a..
<(
~
2
z
o
I-
<(
o
o
...J
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
(i)
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
2800 NORTH HORSESH8~5j)R',~f 192
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6968
c
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 wilhin 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 Ihe 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 alias. 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 10 modify or reject the County official's administrative decision unless such
Board finds that the decision is not supported by substantial competent evidence or thai the
decision is contrary to Ihe growth management plan, the future land use map, the land
Development Code or the official zoning alias.
Reauests for Appeal of Administrative Decision should be addressed to:
(
Department of Zoning and land Development Review
Alln: Intake Planner
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, Florida 34104
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OFZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COlllERGOV.NET
(i)
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 11 of 192
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252.2400 FAX (239) 252.6968
\
ADA-200S.AR-13731
MONTE CARLO CLUB
CONDOMINIUM ASSOC.
PROJECT: 2006010084
DATE: 9/9/0S DUE: 9/23/08
: ;R~,il.fG:~lti~-ilili'1":':;.-~ ',,';1';' . ~~ '.
. ".,,,,,;,~lfi.,"",...,,.,,.m-.~'1M~.r:!.~ ~;"\.",~ , .~....... ",..". , .
PETITION NO (AR)
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT NUMBER
DATE PROCESSED
ASSIGNED PLANNER
NAME OF OWNER MONTE CARLO CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.
ADDRESS PO BOX 7622 CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34104
TELEPHONE # CELL # FAX #
E-MAIL ADDRESS
NAME OF AGENT/APPLICANT QUIN L. KURTH
FIRM TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC.
ADDRESS 3584 EXCHANGE AVENUE CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34104
TELEPHONE # 239-643-0166 CELL # 239-825-6831 FAX # 239-643-6632
E-MAIL ADDRESSQKURTH@TURRELL-ASSOCIATES.COM
RECE,\VEO
Sf?\) 8 2008
ZONING DEPARTMENT
Appeal of Application No. AR.9061
(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 $1,000.00 made payable to the
Board of County Commissioners.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 12 of 192
(
Basis of Appeal
Monte Carlo Club Condominium AssociatiDn, Inc. ("Petitioner") filed a petition for a
boat dock facility extension with Collier County. The petition is Petition BD-2006-AR-
9061 ("Petition"). The Petition requested a fifteen feet (15') extension. Pursuant to
section 5.03.06 (H) of the Land Development Code ("LDC"), the Petitioner has the
right to a boat dock facility extending out twenty feet (20'). A copy of the current boat
dock facility provisiDns are attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
In November, 1991, the measuring point for a boat dock facility was revised to be the
more restrictive of the property line or in this case the seawall. In this case, the
seawall is located ten feet (10') landward of the property line.
The Petitioner has fourteen existing boat docks. The existing boat docks were
permitted in 1988. In 1988, the measuring point for a boat dDCk facility was the
property line. The existing boat docks extend twenty feet (20') past the property line,
Therefore, the existing boat docks did not require an extension.
The current request is for a 15 ft extension to allow a total protrusion of 35 ft to include
the dock and moored vessel.
A copy of the Petition and the CDunty Staff Report to the Collier County Planning
Commission ("CCPC") are attached hereto as Exhibit "B",
Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. filed the Petition on behalf of the Petitioner. The
Petition and all supporting documents show that the current boat dock extension
criteria have been met.
County Staff reviewed the Petition and supporting documents. County Staff issued its
staff report to the CCPC and determined that the boat dock extension requested by
the Petitioner meets the current criteria.
The Petition was heard by the CCPC on August 7, 2008. A copy of the transcript of
the CCPC hearing is attached hereto as Exhibit "C".
Quin Kurtz with Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc, provided expert testimony that the
criteria were met. Ashley Castera, a Senior Planner with the Collier County
Department of Zoning & Land Review provided expert testimony that the criteria were
met. In addition, the CCPC was provided a copy of the Petition and all supporting
documents and the County Staff Report. There was no expert testimony at the CCPC
hearing contradicting the testimony of Quin Kurth or Ashley Castera. There was no
written evidence contradicting the Petition or supporting documents.
There was lay testimony from one resident, Mr. Lew Schmidt. Mr. Schmidt objected to
the Petition. Mr. Schmidt's testimony did not contradict the testimony of the experts.
Mr. Schmidt testified as follows:
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 13 of 192
We're not so much concerned about how far the dock goes out in the water, it's
what size boat can be put on a 35-foot dock (Transcript Page 30)
Mr. Schmidt was concerned about the boat draft. The Petition extension contained a
three foot boat draft limitation which is the draft limitation allowed under County
regulations. On page 31 Df the Transcript, Mr. Schmidt testified that a boat with a
three foot draft does not really have a three foot draft when it is in operation. Please
see Mr. Kurth's testimony on page 38 of the Transcript confirming that the three foot
boat draft limitation applies to a draft when the boat is in operation.
Mr. Schmidt also testified that the boat on a thirty five foot dock would be forty feet in
length. Mr. Schmidt did not accurately reflect the request. The request was for a thirty
foot dock with a total protrusion, including the boat of thirty five feet.
When asked by Planning Commissioner Murray where he got his information, Mr.
Schmidt said he was relying on research that some of our board members have done.
Mr. Schmidt did not testify based upon his personal knowledge. There is no evidence
in the .record that the people WhD did the research are qualified to do the research.
(See Transcript page 32).
Mr. Schmidt's testimony is not competent substantial evidence on which the CCPC
. can base it's decision. .
The boat dock extension criteria are set forth in Section 5.03.06 (H) of. the LDC. This
section 'permits a boat dock facility to extend out further than the permitted distance of
twenty feet (20') if four of the five primary criteria are met and four of the six secondary
criteria are met.
At the CCPC hearing, some members of the CCPC asked the County Attorney if they
could turn down a boat dock extension even though the Petitioner satisfies the boat
dock extension criteria. The County Attorney advised that the CCPC could turn down
the boat dock extension even through the criteria were satisfied.
The boat dock extension was denied by the CCPC on a vote of 6-3, The motion to
deny the Petition did not include any reason for the denial. However, each Planning
Commissioner explained their reason for denying the Petition.
Commissioner Schiffer stated that he felt there is no need to extend beyond the
distance of twenty feet. He interprets the LDC to limit boat dock extensions to twenty
feet unless there is a hardship. He did not find that any of the boat dock criteria were
not satisfied.
Commissioner Midney found that one of the primary criteria was not met and one of
the secondary criteria was not met.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 14 of 192
i
\
Commissioner Caron found that one of the primary criteria was not met and one of the
secondary criteria was not met. She also said there was no need for an extension.
Commissioner Strain found that two of the primary were not satisfied and one of the
secondary criteria was not met.
Commissioner Kolflat found that two of the primary criteria were not met and Dne of
the secondary criteria was not met.
Commissioner Adelstein found that two of the primary criteria were not met.
Commissioners Vigliotti, Murray and Wolfley did not support the motion to deny the
Petition and supported the Petition.
The purpose of Section 5.03.06 (c) of the LDC is to establish the maximum size Df the
boat dock facility that can be constructed as a matter of right. The purpose of this
section is not to Dutlaw larger boat docking facilities. It simply provides the maximum
distance a boat dock facility may extend out into the water without further County
approval. The criteria set forth in section 5.03.06 (11) of the LDC are to be analyzed
to determine if a larger boat dock facility can be accommodated.
The current boat dock facility criteria were originaffy established by COllier County
Ordinance No. 02-03. A copy of Collier County Ordinance No. 02-03 is attached
hereto as Exhibit "on. The Dock Facility provisions are found on pages 28-35 of the
Ordinance.
In the County Staff summary for the dock facility criteria that was presented to the
Board of County Commissioners prior to the adoption of Collier County Ordinance No.
02-03, states:
Questions have been raised regarding how many of the dock facility
extension criteria must be met in order for the Planning Commission to
approve an extension. The criteria have been separated into five
primary and six secondary criteria. with a requirement that at least four
of the primary and four of the secondary be met in order to approve the
petition. Questions have also been raised regarding the water depth at
the site and its relationship to the vessel(s) intended to use the dock.
The language has been revised in order to clarify this relationship.
Language of all other criteria has been revised as well in an attempt to
clarify what objective standards of approval for each criterion need to be
met. The two criteria dealing with the impact of the proposed dock on
the view of nearby property owners, the most subjective of the criteria,
have been reduced to one, with the emphasis shifted to the view of
abutting property owners.
A copy of the County Staff Summary is attached hereto as Exhibit "E".
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 15 of 192
\
The clear purpose of the Ordinance revisions was to clarify objective standards that
must be met in order for a boat dock extension to be approved.
Section 2.6.21.3 of Ordinance No. 2002-03 provides in part:
The Planning Commission shall base its decision for approval, approval
with conditions, or denial, on an evaluation of the following primary and
secondary criteria: (Emphasis supplied).
The above provisions make it clear that the Planning Commission must evaluate the
criteria and make its decision based upon those criteria and no other criteria.
The Criteria set forth in Collier CDunty Ordinance No. 2002-03 have remained
essentially the same and are in effect tDday.
The current LDC requirements provide in part:
Dock Facility extension. Additional protrusion of a dock facility into any
waterway beyond the limits established in subsection 5.03.06 E. of this
Code may be considered appropriate under certain circumstances, In
or~er for the Planning Commission to approve the boat dock extension .
request, it must be determined that at least 4 of the 5 primary criteria,
and at least 4 of the 6 secondary criteria, have been met. These criteria
are as follows:
The last sentence in the above quoted provision was added back into the LDC by
Collier County Ordinance No. 06-63 to correct a recodification error. The Staff repDrt
to the BCC prior to the adoption of Collier County Ordinance No. 06-63 states:
Reason: The language provides a necessary tool in evaluating criteria
submitted for a boat dock extension, which will assist staff and the
Planning Commissioners in determininq approval or denial of boat dock
petitions.
Fiscal & Operational Impacts: Reinserting this language back into the
code will assist the Planning Commissioners, staff and the general public
with the Section of the code that addresses how the primary and
secDndary criteria, as stated in the LDC, is evaluated when either
recDmmending approval or denial of a boat dock extension. (Emphasis
supplied).
A copy of the County Staff report is attached hereto as Exhibit "F".
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 16 of 192
Clearly, the CCPC is limited to the review of the enumerated criteria and not permitted
to review the Petition based upon other criteria. This review applies both to approval
or denial of a Petition.
It is a basic tenet of Jaw that a property owner must be able to determine whether they
meet the enumerated criteria in order for a regulation or ordinance to be valid. The
Planning Commission did not limit its review to the lOC Criteria. On all previous boat
dock petitions extension, the CCPC approved petitions that satisfied four out of five of
the primary criteria and four out of six of the secondary criteria. This is the first petition
that the CCPC did not apply the criteria as a basis for denial. Under the CCPC's new
interpretation of the LOC, a petitioner will not know if it has satisfied the criteria. In
fact, a petitioner can satisfy all of the primary and secondary criteria and still be
denied. If the CCPC's interpretation of the LOC is upheld, there is no longer any
objective criteria to determine if a boat dock extension should be approved. The law
does not allow for governing bodies to make arbitrary decisions.
The existing LOC provisions clearly provide that a property owner can get an
extension if four out of five of the primary criteria are satisfied and four of the six
secondary criteria are satisfied.
Planning Commissioners Schiffer, Caron, Midney, Vigliotti, Murray and Wolfley found
that at least four out of five of the primary criteria were satisfied. Likewise, Planning
Commissioners Schiffer, Caron, Midney, Murray, Vigliotti and Wolfley found that at
least four of the six secondary criteria were met.
Based upon the Planning Commissioners Schiffer, Caron and Midney expressed
reasons for denial, their votes should have been for approval of the boat dock
extension under the LOC criteria. Planning Commissioners Caron and Schiffer
interjected a new criterion. That new criteria is that a Petitioner must prDve a need for
an extension and that in their Dpinion the LOC limits boat dock facilities to a maximum
twenty feet (20') extension. No where in the LOC does it state that a Petitioner must
prove a need for an extension. In addition, nD where in the LOC does it limit boat dock
extensions to a maximum of twenty feet (20').
The Petitioner requests that the Board of Zoning Appeals overturn the CCPC denial of
Petition BO-2006-AR-9061 on the basis that there is no competent substantial
evidence to support its denial and on the basis that the decision was based upon an
error of law. The Petitioner further requests that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve
Boat Dock Extension Petition BO-2006-AR-9061.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 17 of 192
Goodlelte, Coleman, JDhnson, Yovanovich & Koester, PA
By: ~C)~
Richard D. Yovanovich
Florida Bar No. 0782599
GOODLETIE, COLEMAN, JOHNSON,
YOVANOVICH & KOESTER, PA
4001 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 300
Naples, FL 34103
239-435-3535 Phone
239-435-1218 Facsimile
EXHIBIT "A"
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 18 of 192
SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
5 03 05 B. 503.06 C 4.
B. The caretaker's residence shall be an accessory use and shall be fcr the exclusive use of the
property owner, tenant, or designated employee operaUng or maintaining the principal structure.
C. Off.street parking shall be as required for a slngle.famlly residence in accordance with section
4.04.00,
D,. Any other requirement which the County Manager or designee determines necessary and appropriate
to mitigate adverse Impacta of such use In the district.
5.03.06 Dock FacUlties
A. Generally. Docks and the like are primarily Intended to adequately secure moored vessels and
provide safe access for routine maintenance and use, while minimally Impacting navigation wllhln any
adjacent navigable channel, the use of the waterway, the use of neighboring docks, the native marine
habitat, manatees, and the view of the waterway by Ihe neighboring property owners.
B. Allowable uSes. The following uses ~ay be permitted on waterfront property:
1. Individual or multiple private docks.
2. Mooring pilings.
3. D,wits or lifts.
4. Boathouses,
5. Boat 11ft canopies.
C. Measurement of dock protrUSions and extensions.
I, Measurement Is made from the most restrictive .of the following' property line, bulkhead line,
shoretine, seawall, rip-rap line, conlrol elevaJlan contour, or mean high water line (MHWL).
2. On manmade waterways less than 100 feet in width, where the actual waterway has receded
from the platted waterfront property line, the County Manager or Designee may approve an
administrative variance allowing measurement of the protrusion from the existing MHWL,
provided that
a. A signed, sealed survey no more than sixty (60) days old is provided showing the
localion of the MHWL on either side of the waterway at the site, as well as any dock
facilities on the subject property and the property directly across the waterway; and
b. At least fifty (50) percent of the true walerway width, as depicted by the survey, Is
maintained for navigability,
3.
On manmade canals sixty (60) feel or less in width, which are not reinforced by a vertical
seawall or bulkhead, atleest thirty-three (33) percent of the true waterway width, as depfctad
by the survey, must be maintained tor navlgeblllty.
4.
The allowable protrusion of the facility Into the waterway shall be based on the percentages
described In subsection 5.03.06(E)(2) of this LDG as applied to the true waterway width, as
depicted by the survey, and not the platted canal width,
Supp. No. 4
LDG5:l1
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 19 of 192
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
5,03.06 0,
O. Determination as principal or accessory use.
1; 03.06 E.8
1. On un bridged barrier islands, a boat dock shall be considered a permitted principal use;
however, a dock shall not, In any way, constitute a use or structure which permits, requires,
and/or provides for any aocessory uses and/or structures.
2. Boathouses and dock facilities proposed on residentially zoned properties, as defined in
section 2,02.02 of this LOC, shall be considered an accessory use or structure.
3, Any covered strueture erected on a private boat dock shall be considered an accessory'
use, and shall also be required to be approved through ll1e procedures and ortteria of
subsec1lons 5.03.06(8) and 503.06(F) of this LOC.
E. Standards for dock facflltles. The following criteria apply 10 dock facilities and boathouses. will1 the
excepllon of dock facUllles and boalhouses on manmade lakes and other manmade bodies of water
under private control.
1. For lots on a canal or waterway that Is 100 feet or greater In width, no boathouse or dock
facility/boat combination shall protrude more than twenty (20) feet into ll1e waterway (i,e, the
total protrusion of the dock faclllty plus the tolal protrusion of the moored vessal).
2. For lols on a canal or watelWay that Is less than 100 feel in width, dock facUities may occupy
no more than twenty-flve(25) percent of the width of the waterway or 'protrude greater than
twenty (20) feet Into the waterway, whichever is less.
3. On manmade canals sixty (60) feet or less in width, which are not reinforced by a vertical
seawall or bulkhead, dock facilities may protrude up to thirty-three (33) peroent of the width
of the walerway, provided that the procedures outlined In section 5.0S.06(C) are followed.
4. For lots on unbrldged barrier islands located within slate aquatic preserves, protrusion limits,
setbacks, and deck area shall be determined by the applloable Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) regulations In effect at the time of permit application, and the
protrusion limits above shall not apply. All required DEP permits for a dock facHlty must be
obtained p<ior to the IssuanCE! of a Collier County building permit for Ihe facility.
5. Ail dock facilities on lols with water frontage of sixty (60) feet or greater shall have a side
setback requirement of fifteen (15) leet, except as provided in subsections 5.03.06(E) or
5.03.06(F) of this LOC or as exempted below,
6. All dock facllflies, except boathouses, on lots with less than sixty (60) feet of water frontage
shall have a side setback requirement of seven and one-half (7.5) feel.
7. All dock faolllties. except boathouses, on lots at the end or side end of a canal or waterway
shall have a side setback requirement of seven and one.half (7.5) feet as measured from the
side lot line or riparian line, whichever is approprtate.
8.
Riparian lines for lols at the end or side end of a waterway wllh a regular shoreline shall be
estabiished by a line extending from the corner or an and lot and side end lot into the
waterway bisecting equldlstantty the angie created by the two (2) Intersecting tots.
(
.~
Supp. No. 4
LDC5,12
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 20 of 192.
(
5,03,06 E 9.
9.
SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
5.03.06 F.7.
Riparian lines for all other lots shall be established by generaliy accepted methods, taking
Into consideration the configuration of the shoreline, and allowing for the equitable
apportionment of riparian rights. Such methods include, but are not limited to, lines drawn
perpendicular to the shoreline for regular (linear) shorelines, or lines drawn perpendicular to
the centerline (thread) of the watelWay, perpendicular to the line of deep water (line of
navigability or edge of navigable channel), as appropriate, for irregular shorelines.
10. All dock facilities, regardless of length andlor protrusion. shall have reflectors and house
numbers, no less than four (4) Inches In height, Installed at the outermost end on bo1h sides.
For multi-tamily developments, the house number requirement is waived.
11. Multi-slip docking facilities with ten (10) or more slips will be reviewed for consistency with
the Manatee Protection Plan ("MPP") adopted by the BCC and approved by the DEP. If the
location of lhe proposed development Is consistent with the MPP, .then the developer shall
submit a "Manatee Awareness and Proteclion Plan,' which shall address, bul not be limited
10, the following categories:
a. Education and pUblic awareness.
b. Posting and maintaining manatee awareness signs.
12. Infomatlon on the type and destination of boat traffic that will be generated from the facility,
13. Monitoring and maintenance of water quality to comply with state standards.
14. Marking of navigational ohannels, as may be required.
F. Standards for boathouses. Boathouses. Including any roofed structure built on a dock, shall be
reviewed by the Planning Commission according to the following criteria, all of which must be melln
order for the Planning Commission 10 approve the request:
1. MInimum side setback requirement: Rfteen (15) feet.
2. Maximum protrusion Inlo waterway: Twenty-five (25) parcent of canal width or twenty (20)
feel, whichever Is less. The roof alone may overhang no more than three (3) feet inlo Ihe
waterway beyond the maximum protrusion and/or side setbacks.
3, Maximum height: Fifteen (15) leet as measured from the top of the seawall or bank,
whichever Is more restrictive, to the peak or highest elevation of the roof.
4. Maximum number 01 boathouses Dr covered structures per site: One (1).
5. All boathouses and covered structures shall be completely open on all four (4) sides_
6. Roofing material and roof color shall be the same a. materials and colors used on the
principal structure or may be of a palm frond "chickee" style. A single-family dwelling unit
must be constructed on the subject lot prior to, or simultaneously with, the construction of any
boathouse or covered dock structure.
"
[
7.
The boathouse or covered structure must be so located as to minimize the Impact on the
view of the adjacent neighbors 10 the greatest exlenl practical.
Supp, No, 4
LDC5:13
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 21 of 192
COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
50306 G
G. Standards for boat 11ft canopies.
5.03.06 H.l.
1.
Boat 11ft canopIes shall be permitted over an existing boat lilt attached to a dock legaliy
permitted, by the requisite local, state and federal agencies, if the foliowlng criteria are mel.
. (
Canopy covers shall not extend more than 27 Inches beyond the width of the boallifl
on each side,
The length of the boat 11ft canopy shall not exceed 3{reet.
,/
The height ot the boat 1If! canopy shall not exceed 12 feet. measured from the
highest point or the canopy to the height of the dock walkway.
a.
b.
c.
d.
The sides of tha canoPY:l:.ver shall remain open on all sides, except that a drop
curtain, not to exceed 18 Inches shall be permitted on the sides,
e.
Boat 11ft oanoples shall meel the requirements of Awnings and Canopies in the
Florida Building Code.
f.
Canopy cover material shall be limited to beige, or mid-range shades of blue or
green.
g.
No boallift canopies shall be permitted at sites that contain etther a boathouse or a
covered structure.
2. Lots with frontage on canals shall be permitted a maximum ot 0;)6 boatlift canopy per site.
Lots with frontage on bays shall be permllted a maxImum of 2 boatllft ca.noples per site.
3. If an applicant wishes to construct a boat 11ft canopy lhat does not meel the standards of
subsection 5.03.06 G. above, then a petition for a boat 11ft canopy deviation may be made
to the Planning Commission which shall review a sufficient petition application and either
approve or deny the request. .
Dock facility extension. Additional pr!llruslon of a dock lacllity Into any waterway beyond the limits
established In subsecllon 5.03.06 {. ot this Code may be considered appropriate under certain
circumstances. In order for the PI~ng C~mlsslon 10 approve the boW'dock e~nslon request, It
must be determined that at least 4 of the 5 primary criteria, and at least 4 of the 6 secondary criteria,
have been met. These criteria are as follows:
H.
1. Primary CrIteria:
a.
Whether Ihe number of dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed Is appropriate in
relation to the waterfront lenglh, location, upland land use, and zoning of the subject
property. Consideration should be made of property on unbridged barrier Islands,
where vessels are the primary means of transportation to and from the property. (The
number should be appropriate; typical, single-family use should be no more than two
(2) snps; typical multi-family use shouid be one (1) slip per dwelling unit; in the case
of unbridged barrier Island docks. additional slips may be appropriate).
b.
Whether the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the
general length, type, and draft as that described In the petitioner's application Is
Supp.No.4
lDC5:14
503.06 H.1.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 22 of 192
SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
S 03.06 H.2.
unable to launch or moor al mean low tide (ML T). (The pelltioners appllcallon and
survey should establish that the water depth Is too shallow to allow launching and
mooring of the vessel(s) described without an extension).
c.
Whether Ihe proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on navigation within
an adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The facility should not intrude
inlo any marked or charted navigable channel thus impeding vessel traffic In the
channel).
d.
Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than twenty-five (25) percent
of the width of the waterway, and whether a minimum of fifty (50) percent of the
waterway width batween dock faciiities on either side of the waterway Is maintained
for navigablllly. (The facllily should maintain Ihe requ~ed percentagas).
Whether the proposed iocation and design of the dock facility Is such that the facility
would not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. (The facility should nol
Interfere with the use of legally permitted neighboring docks).
2, Secondary criteria:
e.
a. . Whether there are special conditions, not involving water depth, related to the subJect
properly or waterway, which justify the proposed dimensions and location of the
proposed dock faclmy. (There must be at leasl one (1) special condition related to the
property; these may include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configura-
lion, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds).
b. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the
vessel lor loading and/or unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of
excessive deck area not d]rectly related to these luncllons. (The facility should not
use excessive deck area).
. c. For single-family dock facilities, whether the length of the vessel, or vesseis in
combination, described by the petitioner exceeds fifty (SO) percent of the subject
property's linear waterfront footage. (The applicable maximum percentage should be
maintained) .
/
e.
f.
g.
d.
Whether the proposed facility would have a major Impact on the walarfront view of
neighboring waterfront property owners. (The facility should not have a major impact
on Ihe view of a neighboring property owner).
Whelher seagrass beds are located within 200 feet 01 the proposed dock facility, (If
seagrass beds are present, compliance with subsection S.03.06(H)(2). of this LDC
must be demonstrated).
Whether the proposed dock facility Is subject to the manatee protection requirements
of subsection S.03.06(E)(lt) 01 this LDC. (If applicable, compliance with section
S.03.06(E)(11) must be demonstraled).
If deemed necessary based upon review of the above crileria, Ihe Planning
Commission may Impose such conditions upon Ihe approval of an extension request
lha! ]t deems necessary io accomplish the purposes of Ihls Code and 10 protect the
Supp.No.4
LDC5:1S
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 23 of 192
COLUEA COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
5.03.06 H.2.
5.03.06 J 3.
safety and welfare of the public. Such conditions may Include, but shall not be limited
10, greater side setback(s), and provision of IIght(s), additional reflectors, or
reflectors larger than lour (4) Inches.
I. Procedures for approval of docks, dock facilities, and boathouses,
1. Procedures for the issuance of permits for docks, dock facilities, and boathouses are
provided In Chapter 10 of this LDC,
2. All dock facilities are subiec\ to, and shall comply with, all federal and stale requirements and
permits, Including, bul not limited, to the requIrements and permfis of the DEP, the U.S, Army
Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
3. Nonresidential dock facUlties shall be subject to all of the provisions of section 5.03.06 of this
LDC, with the exception that protrusions for nonresldentisl dock facllllles beyond the
specified limits shall be determined administratively by the County Manager or designee at
the time of site development plan review, based on an evaluallon of the criteria In subsection
5.03.06(G) of this lDC.
J. . Protection of saagrass beds. Seagrass or seagrass beds wfihln 200 feet of any proposed docks,
dock facilities, or boathouses shall be protected through the following standards:
1. Where new docking facilities or boat dock extensions are proposed. the location and
presence of seagrass or seagrass beds wfihin 200 feet of any proposed dock faclllly shall be
Idenlffled on an aerial photograph having a scale of one (1) Inch to 200 feet when available
from the County, or a scale of one (1) Inch to 400 feet when such photographs are not'
available from the County. The 10cal1on of seagrass beds shali be verllled by the County
Manager or designee prior to issuance of any project approval or permit.
2. All proposed dock facilities shall be located end aligned to stay at least ten (10) feet from any
existing seagrass beds, except where a continuous bed of seagrasses exists off the shore of
the property and adjacent to the property, and to mlnimlze negative Impacts to seagrasses
and other native shoreline, emergent and submerged vegetation, and hard bottom ccmmu-
nlties.
3. Where a continuous bed of seagrasses exists off the shore of the property and adjacent to
the property, the applicant shall be allowed 10 build a dock across the seagrass beds, or a
docking facility within ten (10) feet of seagrass beds, Such docking facilities shall comply
with the following conditions:
a.
The dock shall be at a height of at least three and one-half (3.5) feet NGVD.
b.
The terminal platform area of the dock shall not exceed 160 square feet.
c.
The access dock shall not exceed a width of four (4) feel.
d.
The access dock and terminal platfonn shall be sited to impact the smallest area of
seagrass beds possible.
supp. No.4
lDC5:16
5 D4 02 B.8.
The petilioner shall be required to demonstrate how negative impacts to seagrass beds and
other na~ve shoreline vegetaUon and hard bollom communities have been minimized prior
to any project approval or permit issuance.
(Ord. No. 06.63, !i 3.CC)
5.03.06 J.4
..._._ .e
. ,-","-'."'"
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 24 of 192
SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
4.
.___" .~.__~..___u_.._.._~.._.__..
. ..- ~......
~_,w._____
..........~...".._'''.
-... ~
._- ~~..
~--~_.~.-..- ~ -
'""'5:04.00 TEMPORARY USES AND STRUCTURES
5.04.01 Generally (To Be Provided)
A.
B.
Inlerim Agricultural Uses
II the intent of this section to permit certain Interim agricultural uses on a temporary basfs which
retai ~Iand in fls open, undeveloped character.
1. N land authorizad as an interim agricultural use to be us or used for agrlcultural uses
, or a ~vitias shall be rezoned to, converted to. or us for any nonagricultural use or
develo"~ent for at least ten (10) years after any new learing of such land.
2. The inclus~{'f bUildings and structures. other an wells, structures for conservation
and drainage p)~eotion, and unpaved roads, is IcUy prohibited.
3. The interim agrlcul I use of l.he premlses'ch In sny way attracts or Invites access and
use of the general pu~' ,or the use of suc ' remises for any commercial activity other than.
that expressly permitted Ithln the zo.nln Istrlct, Is strictly prohibited.
The procedures for approval of an int \lm agri ftural use are set fortl1 in Chapter 10. The following
criteria apply to all interim agricultural'tJ e .
1.
Interim agricultural uses may be e Ittad In any zoning district, except the rural agricultural
dlstrlc~ for only the following ag cultura ctlvlties: pasturing, field crops, horticulture, fruit and
nut produc~on, forestry. bee aping, aqu ulture, and mariculture.
2.
The grant of the Interim a rioultural use sh I( be In harmony with the general Intent and
purpose of this Code, wll ot be Injurious 10 the tl~ghborhood or to adjoining properties, and
shall not be othelWlte etrimenlallo the public we) reo
Compliance with all ements of the GMP.
Compliance with "I environmental regulations as Identifi in this Code or other County
regulations and g6Ucles,
Ingress and egts to property and proposed structures thereon l.h particular reference to
automotiva a tl pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow andbSlrOI' and access In
case of fire r catastrophe.
Off-slreot ,arklng and loading areas, where required, wilh particular attenll
subeectl n 5 Immediately above and economic, noise, glare, or odor effec
agric~tural use on adjoIning properties generally In the district.
Refls'e and service areas, with particular reference to the lIems in subsections 5 a
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Utillfles, with reference to locallons, availability, and compatibility.
Supp. NO.4
LDC5:16.1
EXHIBIT ''B''
Agenda Item No. 7C
AGE1mAAl~~~08
Page 25 of 192
\
. Com-r Cou.nty
-- ~~ . -
STAFF REPORT
ADA.2008-AR-13731
MONTE CARLO CLU8
CONDDMINIUM ASSDC.
PROJECT: 2006010084
DATE: 9/9/08 DUE: 9/23/08
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
HEARING DATE: AUGUST 7, 2008
SUBJECT:
PETITION BD-2006-AR-9061
AGENT/APPLICANT:
Agent:
Jeff Rogers
Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.
3584 Exchange Avenue
Naples, FL 34104
Owner:
Monte Carlo Club Condominium Association, Inc.
P.O. Box 7622
Naples, FL 34101
REOUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner is requesting a IS-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted
protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width, which will allow
expansion of a multi-slip boat docking facility. The completed facility will protrude a total
of 3S feet into a waterway which is 189 feet wide at the most restrictive point. The
requested protrusion will apply to the new construction of 20 additional boat slips for a
multi-family development.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located at 10684 Gulf Shore Drive, further described as Baker-
Carroll Point Subdivision, Unit 2, Block B, Lots I and 2, as recorded in Plat Book 8, Page
62, Monte Carlo Club Condominium, Section 29, TOWllship 48 South, Range 2S East,
Collier County Florida. (See Location Map on following page).
1
UCON'
,-DO>
.O~
ON-
2NO
E'~ CO
",,,,N
_-0'"
~EO>
"0"''''
CWo.
",'"
0>0
<l:
(
i
~
~ a.
~ <(
\';l :2
~ 0
III
Z
-
Z
0
> N
w
~
z
'"
< ~
w
~ ~
a. ~
z <
z wQ
~ !::'<
0>0
9
w
~
~
w
"
z
<
'"
~;i~
I-~
rx:
I~~. .il
..a.. ' ,
It>'" .
GIlLf 0' ,,~"i),~o.'
~ i
....
. "',',
3Y-l'lII,,ltlII. /
~
,..
--
II II
~"' =
II
I~ r~K
llt'-m "WIIl._
I"! .
MEXICO
(
.'
rO' .
o
(
'-'
III
'"
Z
~
,..
....
w
"-
=
a.
<(
:2
z
. 0
I-
<(
()
o
.....I
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 200S
Page 27 of 192
PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The purpose of the project is to add 20 additional boat slips to a 54-unit multi-family
development where 14 boat slips exist. The facility will protrude a total of 35 feet into
Vanderbilt Lagoon which is 189 feet wide at the closest point, and consist of 10 additional
finger piers that are 35 feet long and four feet wide to facilitate the mooring of 20 additional
boats. The 14 existing slips were built in accordance with Collier COWlty Building Permit
No. 88-3222.
LAND USE & ZONING:
Existing: Multi-family development, zoned RMF-16
SurroWlding: North - Existing Vanderbilt Yacht & Racquet Club zoned RMF-16
South - Existing Vanderbilt Beachcomber Condo zoned RT- VBRTO
East - Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway
West - Gulf Shore Drive right-of-way
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION:
Environmental Se;i~es staff has reviewed this petition ~d h~no objection tathe gr~thig ...
ofthisrequest.i'Section 5.03 .06.E.I I (Manatee Protection) of the Collier COUnty Land'
Development Code (LDC) is applicable to all multi-slip docking facilities with ten (IO) or
more slips. The proposed facility consists of 34 boat slips and is therefore subject to the
provisions of this section.
STAFF COMMENTS:
The Collier COWlty Planning Commission (CCPC) shall approve, approve with conditions,
or deny, a dock facility extension request based on the following criteria. In order for the
ccpe to approve this request, it must be determined that at least four of the five primary
criteria and four of the six secondary criteria have been met.
Staff has reviewed this petition in accordance with Section 5.03.06 and finds the following:
Primary Criteria
1. Whether the number of dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed is
appropriate in relation to the waterfront length, location, upland land use and
zoning of the subject property. Consideration should be made of property on
unbridged barrier islands, where vessels are the primary means of
transportation to and from the property. (The number should be appropriate;
typical single-family use should be no more than two (2) slips; typical multi-
family use should be one (1) slip per dwelling unit; in the case of un bridged
barrier island docks, additional slips may be appropriate).
Criterion met. The site currently consists of 14 boat slips and 20 new boat slips are
proposed for a total of34 boat slips. The subject property is zoned RMF-16 and 54
2
;,.
;;.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2. 2008
Page 28 of 192
multi-family residential units exist on site. The number of existing and proposed.
boat slips in conjunction with the munber of multi-family residential units is ("
appropriate in relation to the 712-foot waterfront length of the property and is in
compliance with the provisions of the Manatee Protection Plan.
(
Stariding on the seawall of the subject site looking north at the existing boat slips.
,~ "..". ,"."'"..-,.-'-'.,..-.."....".
Standing on the seawall of the subject site looking south at the location of the
proposed boat slips and the seawall that "'Taps around the property to the west.
3
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 200S
Page 29 of 192
2. Whether the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the
general length, type and draft as that described in the petitioner's application
is unable to launch or moor at mean low tide (MLT). The petitioner's
application and survey should establish that the water depth is too shallow to
allow launching and mooring of the vessel(s) described without an extension).
Criterion met. According to the survey submitted by the petitioner, the water depth
at the site is too shallow to accommodate the 20 additional vessels with a maximum
length of 35 feet as described in the petitioner's application at mean low tide. The
site will be dredged to help accommodate the mooring of the vessels and minimize
theprotrusion into the waterway.
Standing on the seawall of the subject site looking across Vanderbilt Lagoon at
approximately the most restrictive point.
3. Whether the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on
navigation within an adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The
facility should not intrude into any marked or charted navigable channel thus
impeding vessel traffic in the channel).
Criterion met. According to the drawing and information submitted by the
petitioner, the site has been approved by the state to dredge, minimizing the
protrusion into the waterway. The waterway width measures 189 feet and the
channel is not marked. The Monte Carlo Club has an existing Department of
Environmental Protection sovereign submerged land lease that permits structures
out to 40 feet, which determined this distance does not impact navigation within the
waterway. Therefore, the facility will not have an adverse impact on navigation.
4
"'...'
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 30 of 192
(
Siandfug on the seawall of the subject site' where it wraps around the property to the
west and looking to the south. (
4. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes DO more tban 25 percent of the
width of the waterway, and whether a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway
width between dock facilities on either side is maintained for navigability. (The
facility should maintain the required percentages).
Criterion met. According to the infonnation provided by the petitioner, the
waterway is 189 feet wide at the closest point as measured by aerial photography.
The proposed facility will occupy about 19 percent of the waterway width, and
according to the petitioner the existing dock across the waterway to the east
protrudes about 16 percent, leaving about 65 percent open for navigability.
5. Whether the proposed location aDd design of the dock facility is such that the
facility would not interfere with the use of ueighboriug docks. (The facility
should not interfere with the use of legally permitted neighboring docks).
Criterion met. According to the drawings submitted by the petitioner, the proposed
facility wilJ not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. The subject property
has existing docks to the north of the proposed docks and the 25-foot setback from
the south riparian line is such that the proposed facility will not interfere with the
use of the docks located to the south on the Vanderbilt Beachcomber Condominium
site.
(
I
I
I
1
5
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 31 of 192
.~" ,...
,:~ . $~dmg on the seawall of the subject site lookingwestatthc? adjacent fii1)peJti,'
Standing on the seawall of the subject site looking at the adjacent docks to the south.
6
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 32 of 192
Secondary Criteria
1. Whether there are special conditions, not involving water depth, related to the ('
subject property or waterway, which justifY the proposed dimensions and
location of the proposed dock facility. (There must be at least one (1) special
condition related to the property; these may include type of shoreline
reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds).
Criterion met. An existing seawall skirts the shoreline with oyster debris seaward of
the seawall which could cause damage to moored vessels. State pennits have been
obtained to dredge which will minimize the protrusion into the waterway.
2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the
vessel for loading/unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of
excessive deck area not directly rela~ed to these functions. (The facility should
not use excessin deck area).
Criterion met. As shown on the drawings submitted by the petitioner, the deck area
is not excessive. A 4-foot-wide finger pier is proposed to accommodate a boat slip
on each side, which will allow reasonable, safe access to the vessels for
loading/unloading and routine maintenance without the use of excessive decking,
.3: For single-family dock facilities, whether the length of the vessel; or vessels in
combination, described by the petitioner exceeds 50 percent of the subject.
property's linear waterfront footage, (The applicable maximum percentage C
should be maintained).
Not applicable to this multi-family facility.
4. Whether the proposed facility would have a major impact on the waterfront
view of neighboring property owners. (The facility should not have a major
impact on the view of a neighboring property owner).
Criterion met. As previously stated, there are existing docks on the subject property
to the north of the proposed docks. The property line for the subject site is
approximately 10 feet seaward of the seawall. Because of the 25-foot setback from
the south riparian line and the location of the development to the south, the
proposed docks will not have a major impact on the waterfront view of neighboring
property owners.
5. Whether seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. (If
seagrass beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06(1). Of this LDC
must be demonstrated).
Criterion met. According to the applicant, there are no known seagrass beds within
200 feet oftbe proposed dock facility.
7
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 33 of 192
(
6. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection
requirements of subsection 5.03.06.E.ll of this Code. (If applicable,
compliance with section 5.03.06.E.ll must be demonstrated).
Criterion met. The proposed facility consists of 20 new boat slips and 14 existing
boat slips and is therefore subject to the provisions of subsection 5.03.06.E.1 i. A
Site Development Plan Insubstantial Change (SDPI-2008-AR-12222) has been
submitted and reviewed by the Environmental Services Department and has
demonstrated compliance with manatee construction standards.
Staff analysis indicates that the request meets all of the five primary criteria and all of the
six (applicable) secondary criteria.
APPEAL OF BOAT DOCK EXTENSION TO BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS:
As to any boat dock extension petition upon which the CCPC takes action, an aggrieved
petitioner or adversely affected property owner may appeal such final action to the Board of
Zoning Appeals. Such appeal shall be filed with the Community Development &
Environmental Services Administrator within 30 days of the action by the CCPC. In the
event that the petition has been approved by the CCPC, the applicant shall be advised that
he/she proceeds with construction at his/her own risk during this 30-day period.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
\.
Based on the above findings, staff recommends that the ccpe approve Petition BD-2006-
AR-9061 subject to following stipulations:
1. Corresponding permits, or letters of exemption, from the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection shall be
provided to Collier County prior to the issuance of a building pennit;
2. Reflectors and dock numbers of no less than four (4) inches in height must be
installed at the outennost end on both sides of all docks or mooring pilings,
whichever protrudes the furthest into the waterway, in accordance with the
provisions of Ordinance 07-62 prior to the issuance of a Certificate of
Completion;
3 At least one (1) "Manatee Area" sign must be posted in a conspicuous manner
as close as possible to the furthest protrusion of the dock into the waterway,
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion;
4. All prohibited exotic species, as such tenn may now or hereinafter be
established in the LDC, must be removed from the subject property prior to
issuance of the required Certificate of Completion and the property must be
maintained free from aU prohibited exotic species in perpetuity;
5. A Site Development Plan Insubstantial Change shall be submitted and approved
prior to the issuance of the building permits for the proposed docks.
8
.,' .
PREPARED BY:
~~ ~~ ~
ASHL~Y CASERTA, SENIOR PLANNER
DEPARTMENT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
RE~BY
J A- (J{( )
ill ~~ /--{t.IOI ASHI1JIV- (I [kG
ASSIST ANT COUNTY A TIORNEY
NAUR, PLANNING MANAGER
NT OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
REVIEWED BY:
EPH K. SCHMITT, ADMINISTRATOR
MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
Petition Number: BD-2006-AR-9061
Staff Report for meeting of CCPC on August 7, 2008.
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION:
MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 34 of 192
l/ll IbY
DATE
(
=1-1 f-:rIDf
DATE
~1r8
DAT
7/;~/08
DATE
'.:l-.
:?;.
'~1i~!'<-".
(
7/t7~6'
DATE/
DATE
9
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 35 of 192
AGENDA
Revised n
~
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M., THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2008, IN THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY
GOVERNMENT CENTER. 330 I T AML"'-Ml TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA:
NOTE: INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY
ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN
ORGANIZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10
MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MATERIALS INCLUDED
IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM
OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE,
WRITTEN MATERIALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE CCPC SHALL
BE SUBMITTED TO THE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF
SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN
PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF
THE RECORD AND WILL BE A V AILABLE FOR PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD
OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE CCPC WILL
NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAINING THERETO, AND.
THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBA TIM RECORD OF THE
PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY
3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA
4. PLANNING COMMISSiON ABSENCES
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 27, 2008, REGULAR MEETING
6. BCC REPORT- RECAPS-Not Available at this time
7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
A. Petition: BD-2008-AR-I2802, Vanderbilt Surf Colony Recreational and Maiutenance Assnciation, Inc.,
represented by Miles Scofield of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc, requesting a is-foot boat dock extension
over the maximum 20.foot protrusion limit as provided in section 5.03.06 of the LDC to allow a multi-slip
dock facility reaching a maximum of 35 feet into the waterway. Applicant is proposing to remove two
existing finger docks and build 12 new docks with a total of 16 slips. Subject property is located in Section
20, Township 48 and Range 25, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Ashley Caserta)
B. Petition: PUDZ-2006-AR-I0875. Q. Grady Minor, representing KRG 951 and 41, .LLC, is requesting a
PUD Rezone from the Agricultural (A), Commercial Convenience (C-2), General Commercial (C-4) and
Artesa Pointe PUD zoning districts, to the Commercial Planned Unit Development (CPUD) zoning district
for the Tamiami Crossing CPUD, which would allow a maximum of 235,000 square feet of commercial
uses. The :t25.45 acre property is located in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida. (Coordinator: John-David Moss)
1
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 36 of 192
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
(
!A. ::',Petltion, BD:2006-AR-9061.'Monte Carlo Club Condominium Association, represented by Turrell and~",.
.(I.ss<?"iate$, Inc., requesting a 15-foot boat dock extension from the 20 feet allowed (0 authorize a 35-foot
b6afdock facility that will accommodate 20 additional boat slips for property located at 10684 Gulf Shore
Drive, Baker-Carroll Point Subdivision, Unit 2 Block B, Lots I and 2, Monte Carlo Club
Condominium, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. (CoDrdinator:
Ashley Caserta)
B. Petition, CU-2007-AR-12419, ABC Liquors Ine., represented by Heidi K Williams, AICP of Q Grady
Minor and Associates, P.A., is requesting a Conditional Use of the Commerciallnterrnediate (C-3) Zoning
District with a Special Treatment (ST) Overlay to increase the maximum allowable square-fDotage of
personal services, video rental, or retail uses (excluding drug stores, 5912) from 5,000 square-feet of gross
floor area to 12,000 square-feet of gross floor area in the principal structure. The subject property. consisting
of approximately 1.79+ acres of land, is located in the northeastern quadrant of the CR9S1 and .US41
intersection, in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida (Coordinator: John-
David Moss)
C. Petition: CU-2008-AR-13060, Naples Baptist Church, Inc. represented by Laura Dejohn, AICP, of Johnson
Engineering, Inc., requests a Conditional Use in the Mobile Home Overlay within the Agricultural zoning
district (A-MHO) pursuant to 2.03.01.A.1.c.7 of the Land Development Code (LDC). The 4.96 acre A-
MHO ?.oned site is proposed to permit a Church with a maximum of 12,000 square feet of floor area. The
subject property is located at 2140 Moulder Drive, Section 30, Township 48 South, Range 27 East, Collier
County, Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach)
D. Petition: RZ-2007-AR-12044. Immokalee LLC, represented by Shaun Mularkey, AICP, of Coastal. ('
Engineering Consultants, Inc., is requesting a rezone from the Estates (E) Zoning District to the Residential
Multi-family-I6 (RMF-I6) Zoning District to pennit a multi-family development on 9.33% acres with a
maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre for property located at the southwest corner of the intersection of
Immokalee Road (CR-846) and School Road, in Section 9, Township 47 South, Range 29 East, in the
unincorporated Immokalee area of Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem)
E. Petition: RZ-2007-AR-12394, Ernest N. Freeman, Jr. of Freeman and Freeman, Inc., requests a Rezone
from the Mobile Home zoning district to the Village ResideDtial zoning district for the residence at 428
and 432 13th Street East. The .38 acre lots (each lot is .19 acres) site is proposed to build a single family
home to be used for affordable housing. The property is located at 428 and 432 13th Street East, Section 3,
Township 47 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Melissa Zone) WITHDRAWN
10. OLD BUSINESS
II. N'EW BUSINESS
12. PUBLIC COMMENTITEM
13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA
14. ADJOURN
817/08 cepe Agc:nda!RB/sp
2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 37 of 192
CCPC RESOLUTION 08-
(
A RESOLUTION OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER BD-2006-
AR-906l FOR A FIFTEEN FOOT BOAT DOCK EXTENSION
OVER THE MAXIMUM TWENTY FOOT LIMIT PROVIDED
IN SECTION 5.03.06.E.l OF THE COLLIER COUN1Y LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW A BOAT DOCK
FACILITY TO PROTRUDE THIRTY-FIVE FEET ON
PROPERTY HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED IN COLLIER
COUNTY, FLORIDA.
WHEREAS, the Legislatur~ of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has
conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and
such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and
WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (LDC)
(Ordinance 2004-041, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular
geographic divisions of the County, among which are provisions for granting extensions for boat
docks; and
WHEREAS, the Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC), being duly appointed,
has held a properly noticed public hearing and considered the advisability of a is-foot boat dock
extension from the 20-foot length otherwise allowed by Section 5.03.06.E.I of the Collier
County Land Development Code to authorize a boat dock facility that will protrude 35 feet into a
waterway and accommodate 20 additional boat slips in a RMF-16 Zoning District for the
property hereinafter described; and
WHEREAS, the CCPC has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and
arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by LDC Section 5.03.06
of the Collier County Land Development Code; and
WHEREAS, the CCPC has given all interested parties the opportunity to be heard, and
considered all matters presented.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING
COM:MISSION OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
Page 1 of3
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 38 of 192
Petition Number BD-2006-AR-9061, filed on behalf of Monte Carlo Club Condominium
(
Association, Inc. by Turrell & Associates, for the property hereinafter described as:
Lots I and 2, Block B, of the Baker-Carrol Point Unit 2 Subdivision,
as described in Plat Book 8, Page 62, of the Public Records of Collier
County, Florida (part of the Monte Carlo Club Condominium)
be, and the same is hereby approved for, a IS-foot boat dock extension from the 20- foot
protrusion allowed by Section 5.03.06.E.I of the Collier County Land Development Code to
authorize a boat dock facility that will protrude 35 feet into a waterway and accommodate 20
additional boat slips in the RMF-16 Zoning District wherein said property is located, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Corresponding permits, or letters of exemption, from the U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers and
the Florida Department of Environmental Protection shall be provided to Collier County
prior to the issuance of a building pennit.
2. Reflectors and dock numbers of no less than four (4) inches in height shall be installed at the (
outennost end on both sides of all docks or mooring pilings, whichever protrudes the furthest
into the waterway, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Completion.
3. At least one (1) "Manatee Area" sign shall be posted in a conspicuous manner as close as
possible to the furthest protrusion ofthe dock into the waterway, prior to the issuance of a
Certificate of Completion.
4. All prohibited exotic species, as such term may now or hereinafter be established in the LDC,
shall be removed from the subject property prior to issuance of the required Certificate of
Completion and the property must be maintained free from all prohibited exotic species in
perpetuity.
5. A Site Improvement Plan shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of the
building pennits for the proposed docks.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be recorded m the minutes of this
Commission and filed with the County Clerk's Office.
This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote.
Page 2 of3
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 39 of 192
Done this
day of
.2008.
\
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COLLIER COUNTY. FLORIDA
MARK P. STRAIN, Chairman
ATIEST:
Joseph K. Schmitt
Community Development and Environmental
Services Administrator
Approved as to Form and Legal Sufficiency:
(;i9
Heidi AsIrton-Cicko
Assistant County Attorney
Page 3 of3
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET
(i)
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
2800 NORTH HORSESHOET:fill~~ of 192
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968
.~..
DOCK FACILITY EXTENSION / BOATHOUSE PETITION
PETITION NO (AR)
PROJECT NAME
PROJECT NUMBER
DATE PROCESSED
ASSIGNED PLANNER
REV: 3
BD_2006-AR-9061
MONTE CARLO CLUB
CONDOMINUM ASSOC
Project: 200601008~UE' 5/14/08
Date: 4130108 .
ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF
THIS PETITION IS FOR (check one):
!:8J DOCK EXTENSION 0 BOATHOUSE
APPLICANT INFORMATION
NAME OF APPLlCANT(S) MONTE CARLO CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
ADDRESS P.O. BOX 7622 CITY NAPLES STATE FL ZIP 34101
TELEPHONE # CELL # FAX #
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
NAME OF AGENT JEFF ROGERS
FIRM TURRELL. HALL & ASSOCIATES. INC.
ADDRESS 3584 EXCHANGE AVE. CITY NAPLES STATE FLORIDA ZIP 34104
TELEPHONE # (239) 643-0166 CELL # (239)825.3034 FAX # (239) 643-6632
E-MAIL ADDRESS:JEFF/!i)TURRELL-ASSOCAITES.COM
BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF
ACCORDINGLY AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS.
PAGE 2 of 9
@)..i:~:'::\'!,;; <i":: ..' :
,- ','" ,....:',...,..-".
:.",-.-.
~RQ~~gfY~oq~iic&l\&
" "'.'
.' ,.~,
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
. .....p.aiJ~ :~roj 192
Address of Subject Property
SedionjT ownship /R a nge
10684 Gulfshore Drive Naoles. FL 34108
29
I 48 S / 25 E Property 1.0.#: 22870240007
Unit-L Lot(s) 1 & 2 Bloek(s ~
Subdivision: Baker.Carroll Point
Current Zoning and Land use of Subject Property: RMF-16
. .~t);jACENTtONfNGii.NDt4't'JbO:sE'. .'. .
. ...'''', .,.~' . ,,,' "';" - " ..... ".,.':....,._" .. ,,,..,' :.".'. ""."",'. - " . t".
. ,
"',
Zoning
Land Use
N RMF-16
S RT-VBRTO
E RSF-3
W RMF-16
Vanderbilt Yacht & Racquet Club
Vanderbilt Beachcomber Condo
Vanderbilt Laaoon
Vanderbilt Shores Condo
.... ,.
: \.D....i:/'''..1l'6+J' .",.i;":,ii\'piii>,~;" "..!iF': ".
.: "',J:,~",~lE~,.!'!:N,\i?f".'JJ:'~,~I;~'i: ....
.' ~
Narrative description of project (indicate extent of work, new dock, replacement, addition to
existing facility, any other pertinent information):
The Droposed plan is to construct 10 fin",er docks with optional boatlifts to facilitate 20 sliDS
with vessels up to 35 feet in len9th. The total Rroposed overwater structure is approximatelv
'640 sauare feet that will be constructed out of pressure treated wood and the doek Diles will
be driven in plaee and wrapped with pvc. Work will be done bv barae. The dock will onlv
protrude a distance aaproximately 35 feet from the Mean Hiah Water (MHWl line into a
waterwav that is approximatelv 189 feet wide from MHW to MHW, Dredain", is
proposed/reauired in order to provide safe moorina of vessels. The proposed dred",e consist
of approximatelv 1.500 cubic vards to a depth of -4.0 Mean Low Water.
Accompanying this application must be 1) a signed, sealed survey depicting mean high water
(MHW) and mean low water (MLW), and relevant water depths measured at no less than 5-foot
increments; 2) a chart, drown to scale, of the waterway at the site, depicting the waterway width,
the proximity of the proposed facility to any adjacent navigabie channel, the proximity of the
proposed facility to docks, if any, on the odiaeent lots, and the unobstructed waterway between
the proposed facility and the opposite bank or any dock facility on the opposite bank; and 3) a
site plan to scale showing dimensions and location of existing and proposed dock structures, as
well as CI cross section showing the facility in relation to MHW /MLW and shoreline (bank, seawall
or rip-rap revetment).
PAGE 3 of 9
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 42 of 192
SITE INFORMATION
Width of waterway: I 89 ft.; measurement from 0 plat
l:8J other (specify) Aerial Photo
Total property water' frontage: 712 ft.
o survey 0 visual estimate
Setbacks: provided 15 & 25
ft. required _IL-ft.
Total protrusion of proposed facility into water 35 ft.
Number and length of vessels to use facility: I. 34 Vessels Ul> to 35 ft. in lenGth (20 Drooosed
slios and 14 existina)
list any additional dock facilities in close proximity to the subject property and indicate the total
protrusion into the waterway of each:
Adiacent docks to the north orotrude aooroximately 35 feet into the waterway. docks ta the
east Drotrude aooroximately 30 feet into the waterway and docks to the south orotrude
aooroxlmately 32 feet into the waterway.
The following criteria, (pursuant to Section 5.03.06 of the land Development Code) shall be used
as a guide by stoff in determining Its recommendation to the Collier County Planning Commission
(CcPq, and by the CCPC in its decision to approve or deny a particular Dock Extension request.
In order for the CCPC to approve the request, it must be determined that at least 4 of the 5
primary criteria, and at least 4 of the 6 secondary criteria, must be met. Please provide a
narrative response to the listed criteria and/or questions. Attach additional pages if necessary.
PRIMARY CRITERIA
1. Whether or not the number of dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed is appropriate in
relation to the waterfront length, location, upland land use and zoning of the subject property;
consideration should be made of property on unbridged barrier islands, where vessels are the
primary means of transportation to and from the property. ((The number should be appropriate;
typical, single-family use should be no more than two slips; typical multi-family use should be one
slip per dwelling unit; in the case of unbridged barrier island docks, additional slips may be
appropriate})
Th la d cilit consists of 4 residential units an 14 xistin boa sli s. The a 'ca
owns aooroximately 712 linear feet of shoreline and is orooosina to construct 10 additional
finaer docks with 20 slios. The orooased number of slios is aoorooriate in relation to the
shoreline frontaae and uoland units. We are reauestina 15 additional feet from the allowed
20 feet.
PAGE 4 of 9
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 43 of 192
2. Whether or not the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the
general length, type, and draft as that described in the petitioner's application is unable to
launch or moor at mean low tide (MlD. ((The petitioner's application and survey should show that
the water depth is too shallow to allow launch and mooring of the vessel (s) described without an
extension))
The existina water deDfhs are Insufficient to moor the proposed vessels at the subied
propertY. We have received State and Federal to dredae to -4.0 MlW In Drder tD moor the
vessels closer tD the shoreline and minimize the DrDtruslon into the waterway.
3. Whether or not the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on navigation
within an adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. ((The facility should not intrude into any
marked or charted navigable channel thus impeding vessel traffic in the channel))
The Monte Carlo Condominium has an exlstina DEP IState) sovereian submeraed lands lease
that Dermits strudures and vessels out to 40 feet. The State has determined this distance does
not imDact navlaation within the waterwav.
4. Whether or not the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 percent of the width
of the waterway, and whether or not a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway width between
dock facilities on either side of the waterway is maintained for navigability. ((The facility should
maintain the required percentages)).
The DrDDosed docks will protrude a distance Df 35 feet intD a waterwav that is 189 feet wide.
The proDosed docks will protrude 18.5% and the docks across the waterway to the east
Drotrude 15.9% leavina 65.6% the width of the waterway available fDr naviaation. The
proposed prDtruslon is no more than 25 Dercent of the width of the waterway. therefDre.
leavina more than 50 Dercent of the navlaable waterwav ODen.
5. Whether or not the proposed location and design of the dock facility is such that the
facility would not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. ((The facility should not interfere
with the use of legally pennitted neighboring docks))
The aroaosed additional slips will meet the reauired setbacks and have been desianed in
order to prevent any Dotentlal interference with nelahborln<l docks.
SECONDARY CRITERIA
1 . Whether or not there are special conditions, not involving water depth, related to the
subject property or waterway, which justify the proposed dimensions and location of the
proposed dock facility. ((There must be at least one speciol condition related to the property;
these may include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or
seagrass beds })
The prevlDuslv permitted docks are perpendicular to the shDreline, We are orDDOsin<l tD
construct additional docks within the deslan of the oriainal permiHed docks. Dredging is
arDDosed in order to allow the bDals to moor safelv at low waler.
PAGE 5 of 9
Agenda Item No. 7C
2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe, access to tl9El1ellSeH&l: 2008
loading/unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area nof'lllle~ff 192
related to these functions. ((The facility should not use excessive deck area))
".
The ..roDosed dock has finaer piers Ihat are 4 feet wide in order to allow proper access to the
vessels. The deck area has been minimized to the fullesl extent possible.
3. For single-family dock facilities, whether or not the length of the vessel. or vessels in
combination, described by the petitioner exceeds 50 percent of the subject property's linear
waterfront footage. ({The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained))
N/A
4. Whether or not the proposed facility would have 0 major impact on the waterfront view
of neighboring waterfront property owners. ((The facility should not hove a major impact on the
view of either property owner.))
R.esidents of the Monte Carlo Condominium Club Assodalion will be the only residents
affected bv the proposed dock. It is not foreseen thai neiahborina waterfront properlv
owners' view will not be altered by fhe expansion of fhe exist;na dock svstem.
5. Whether or not seagrass beds ore located within 200 feet of the proposed dock facility.
[(If seagrass beds ore present. compliance with subsection 5.03.06.1 of this code must .be
demonstrated))
The Collier Countv Seaarass Protection Plan Was reviewed for fhe location of known seaarass
beds. To our knowledae, Ihere are no known seaarass beds within 20o..feet of fhe proposed
dock facilify.
6. Whether or not the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection
requirements of subsection 5.03.06.E.l1 of this code. ([If applicable, compliance with Section
5.03.06.E.1I must be demonstrated))
The proDosed facilitv meefs the Marina Sitina Criteria with a Preferred Rankin9' Water depfhs
are areater fhan 4 feet Mean Low Waler IMLW). No ;mpacts fa anv native marine habitaf is
belna proposed alona with a manatee mortality of less than 20% within a five mile radius of
the praDo sed proiect sile. With this rankina and the overall owned shoreline fhe proposed
dock des;an meets the necessarv criteria for approval.
PAGE 6 of 9
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 45 of 192
I HERE8Y ATTEST THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS APPLICATION IS TRUE AND
ACCURATE TO THE 8EST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, IN ADDITION TO APPROVAL OF THIS DOCK EXTENSION, A
8UILDING PERMIT IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION.
I UNDERSTAND THAT IF THIS DOCK EXTENSION PETITION IS APPROVED BY THE COLLIER
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, AN AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNER MAY FILE AN
APPEAL WITHIN 14 DAYS OF THE HEARING. IF I PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION DURING
THIS TIME, I DO SO AT MY OWN RISK.
PAGE? of 9
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 46 of 192
BOAT DOCK FACILITY EXTENSION
(BD) APPLICATION
SUBMllT AL CHECKLIST
THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT
ORDER LISTED BELOW WjCOVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION.
NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
REQUIREMENTS #OF NOT
COPIES SUBMllTED REQUIRED
Completed Application 15
Owner/Agent Affidavits, sianed & notarized 1
Addressing Checklist 1
Conceptual Site Plan illustrating the following: 15
a. The lot and dimensions where proposed docking
facility is to be located. .
b. All yard setbacks
c. Required setbacks for the dock facility
d. The total number and configuration of the proposed
facilities, etc. (include all dimensions to scale).
e. The water depth where the proposed dock facility is
to be located and the distance to the navigate
channel.
(Water depth at mean low tide should be shown at
approximately every five (5) feet of length for the total
length of the proposed facility.
f. Illustrate the land contour of the property on which
the dock facility is proposed.
g. The dock facility should be illustrated from an aerial
view, as well as side view.
Fee: $1,500.00
Check shall be made payable to Board of County Commissioners
As the authorized agentJapplicant for this petition, I attest that all of the information
indicated on this checklist is included in this submittal package. I understand that
failure to include all necessary submittal information may result in the delay of
processing this petition.
~Rif
Applican gent Signature
~bsj~
Da(e
PAGE B of 9
CON
00'>
o~
~
.0
'r--
Qi"-
.0'"
EO)
",<1l
U"-
'"
o
. ~ ~~}g\~~"W~~~~t a9~]'
-" ",'" 'r"7..l:,~';'~' ,~"~:l.1rt,(I":W""F.:','''.'l
: ;.- _~.H ~I r I""! i i'; ! f
.' .... , \ J ~]' I I (
i i I .' , ~ i Ii: l I :!
I. ~ 5ilQlw~ ~ I ! ! \ I I : i
.,1....; ...1 .>'.., ,~Q\~ \ _i__.~_,_,,! .-i-'i--I'--
i %' :1;;:;:' :.z:, ~j j I . ,ill I z:
j J:: t:i : i: ~ i i.'; i l
J ~ 5:' '~;..,I ~1 _1 i. j i.if I,': i
'S;.,' l;' .;;;:.., ; , I 'Ii :
;. .~~.:-j_..-1..i '~'-'l' ?~"W~+~) .;!r' ~L. t'. AI
, , ) Z, .' I 'l!:i :z:: z:..., Z:,.z:: :1::1 !!db
: I it' i IJj","ii.': .4','
i . i.,q; I i.!:g:fi'iiet '~,
; I ,8" I I-""~i..liill.' ~'
i.Uhi;;r':T-.i..+::i '"1,,-[,,- '1'__ -11."",-'1,:' ~
I, I' f=.
i Iii I' ! 'Ii
11,'1: i II I,' 'i' 'I
,,_, .,Lj.___L.Y~~1 . _t. ! ,: ~J.. ~.~~,_.:
l;~~~~hiii:,~!'J ' !
! !! 'g;;., !!~ i
~._:l-Lni
~I:
,,~
ww
~~
~o
~g:,
$0
:;0
rt
'"
Cl
"'"
a:
(!'\
y
,J
~J1,
IlL
o
UJ
F
1/
'~
F
lA,' I
\Ni
l
i
/
(
I ~
I j
.~. \----~--r~-
/Pl-_L~ -+-"-*.~
--) ~ J
o kf=t=i ~
I " I .
I
~
,.,
!-
,....?:,
,,~,
ww,
~~
"'0
z;~,
~
~
~
<
z
P \04:!t1 Munl" C,'iI> CI~OWGSISUlIMlTTAl,.'M0N'>e.~FIN_6 dwg
".
.
~\
>-
Ul
'"
,
\
,
".
,..1:"
,,~,
wu.J;
<i!~
~~
~~
,-
t?'" .
t-
Z
,=
::J.
{)
o
[t.
Ill: i
l\!.~ ,
~'-I
d
.J
f"I.J'
~j
('\.
..!'
Ii
,,'"
=>UJ
.J",,,,
<.100
0:[;;
.J"M
"'''.J
<i.J~
<.I=> .
wC)~
,.......
z~..
~~~
w
~~,
Z-4!Vei>U1
"fok~i
3::
.J
-(
~
l1J
<(
t
,~
"'$
~~
:J
o
~J
>-
-'
Z
o
U)
~uj
oU)
a.'"
",Z
",0
a.i=
(.')L>
~~,
I:f-
_U)
;j;Z
",0
wL>
CI.",
"'0
ou.
U.o
Ww
",0
"z
U)W
"I-
z~
~5
"z
"'w
0",
W"
..U)
:;JWCl
f-IZ
Of-"
Z 0
~~
r-..:c:i
ON
{oO>
~.,.
~:-
~~
w
Ltjg
8t:
f-C>
-Z
!;(O
-' ..J
^ ^
V V
. ~
~
2 .
~
. W
~ I- ~
. ~ Z
m . ~
< ;:;
c
m
Z ~ ~ ~
0 ..
.
. ,;, c I
. 0 0
. .
z
~
0
>-
>- ~ ~ ~
c ~ ~
>- z
0 0
~ ~ ~ f'
0 w 0
. ~ ?- m W
. < Q w
0 0 0
CO
J
.J
()
0 ll.
.J <(
~ 2:
z
<{ 0
I-
() <(
0
0
ill ...J
f-
Z
0
~
o o.o~~
,s.13 ::;;~
'3 ;i; ~
"~_ 'l;
U':lo;$;G:"
.sUliC
.;;l~ Ifii
u -~
O~lii'
'" Z
(I') 0 . \0
"'~
<:'i"g;J:
o'i:l &l 6l'l;
...-~ ~6\'
- u--:;a
~.~ 1l~
::E 1l ~
"~
['-< '"
;l;
~.
~8
!l
j
i
I"""~ ~
~
\
I
/
(
MHW1,S'
MANGROVE
FRINGE
\
..J
~ ',' Ii!
\:\ ""
\;:\ ! j /',i,i /
li\ll/i,:,.
RIPARIAN L1N~\~a I,
;i! \ l:,~;t\;. ~ ,.:
!,\.I'vf.N
"','.\, ',"t':\
"".~n
jii'\~~" '.
~;~';'(;(;:~
EXISTING A' '11
SUBMERGED LAND ~\' ,
LEASE AREA 1 ,.e~ 1
(0 R 2654 PGS. lil d ~
2668.2677) I'H;)b'
(8873 SQ FT +.) 0V~ I,
~~~ \:
.,l$t "
\~~~ \ \ '
. , ';'"
-, y~
"'~ .!
!
EXISTING SliP COUNT 14
MONTE CARLO CLUB
10684 GULF SHORE DR.
NAPLES, FL 34108
Agenda Item No. 7C
SJ........'-'IL.t......, :, :33::
N Page 48 of 192
J<\\ik~
W ~~irE
S
I
";i" -.0 ;., ('
'\ \1 ' "
\ i
i
t
! J ) r
/ ,- i /
50
I'
100
,
SC(LE IN ITer
200
I
i
J
(
,
,
,
,
I
.5
..j
.
.I
i
,
,
,
I \
J
I /1
) /1>
'I
'., '( f l ill
\ ,,' '1\
//UtrtfiFi ,'.
MLW , , ,
VEGETATloV, '. :11
uN!?;)) ;1.1 /
1 ~ i i{1 I
.' J, I V'
, "I
( 1\ ' 'I
' \\'1'
\~,X
\p:
\ ,
\ \
\ ,
'. \
\ ,,, \
';\\ \
\ ,\ \,
II \ ~ \ "
Ili\ \'.
\ ~ \ \
III '
/' r.3 J
i 1_ I
~ ! l ;
r i! .,'
I Ii,
: !ii!
;'/li
':,1//
//'<5"
j'/
/?/'
.!
"
'j" "
i
i
I
/ ;
VAJIIDERBILT
(LAGOON f
, I
. ,
. !
,\SEAWALL
MLW.G5' \
..//~<-~;~' ..,'
;;..- /",. . I 1'-'-1
,--(.'."/-ti", "i1.v'
U" ,
hi\./
//l; \
~ Turrell & Associates, Inc.
, ... ,~C~: Marine & EnvirorunenlaJ Consulting
... ~ExChangeAve.sulteB. Napies,FLJ411l4.J7J2
Email: nma@turrell-rsssociales.com Pb01X: (239) 643.(1166 Fax: (239) 643.6632
1/
;'
NOTES: 1 \ I,
<> THI:SE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES:ONl Y AND ARE NOT
I~ENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION .USE. ;' , ; ~
<> )"lL DATUM SHOWN HEREO~IS REFERENCED TO MLW!
<.> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX, 712lF. OF SHORELINE.
<> EXt5TINGOVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPRQX 1,145 SQ. FT.
<> WlDTH OF WA TERWA Y AT NARROWEST POINT: APPROX 189' (MHW TO MHVvi
<> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHVVL: 35 FT.
<> TIDAL DATUM: MlW=-O.S' NGVD. MHW=+1.5' NGVD
<> SURVEY COURTESY OF ~ COURT GREGORY SURVEYING ~ SURVEY DATED:
10-28-04
MONTE CARLO CLUB
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Dr<SIClNEO T_fT
ORAWN JMl
lOATE 11-Q5-o4
jJOB NO (l.420
1" ~ 100"
REVISION TAB NAME
SHEET
SCALE
20f9
01:1-26-05
07-11..(17
SECTION- 29
TOWNSHIP- 46 S ~NGE~ 25 E
EXISTING
SLIPS
'4
SLIP COUNT
LENGTH
35'
Agenda Item No. 7C
oer L,
BOAT LIFTS OPTIONAL FOR ALL SLIPS N Page 49 of 192
W.E
S
(EXISTING AND PROPOSED)
'OSED ADDITIONAL
LENGTH
"-... 35'
34 TOTAL SLIPS
O. 50
~
100
,
SCALE IN FEET
200
I
EXISTING LEASE AREA:
PROPOSED LEASE ADDITION
TOTAL LEASE AREA
8,873 sa FT
16.076 sa FT
24,949 sa FT
RIPARIAN L1NE\
32'
r 16'
Jf
!
PROPOSED
ADDITIONAL
LEASE AREA
(335 SO.FT. t)
.
SEAWALL
EXISTING
J SUBMERGED LAND
~ LEASE AREA
(O.R..2654 PGS.
2668'2677)
(8873 SQ. FT. +-)
LEGEND
. "CAUTION MANATEE AREA " SIGN
.I.. "MANATEE BASICS FOR BOATERS.~ SIGN
189'
I
I
VANDERBILT [
LAGOON 1'\.
MLW/f\
VEGETATION~!
LINE I!
1/
If
!:
~
MONTE CARLO CLUB
1D684 GULF SHORE DR.
NAPLES, FL 34108
TYPICAL 35' X 4'
FIXED FINGER
A
(
MANGROVE
FRINGE
,
I
,
,
,
. ,I PROPOSED
i "- ADDITIONAL
" LEAS E AREA
'/ (16,076 SQ.FT. t)
/
-'
\
/ I? \."..,.-
(/::;'''I!?I, ~
<0 ...,'" 25'
j
NOTES:
<> THESE DRAVI/INGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT
INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.
<:::. All DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MlW.
<> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 712 LF. OF SHORELINE
<-> EXJSTJNG QVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 1,145 SQ. FT.
<> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 1,640 SQ. FT.
oC> TOTAL QVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 2,785 sa, FT.
<> WIDTH OF WATERWAY AT NARROWEST POINT: APPROX 169- (MHWTO MH\N)
<:> TOTAl PROTRUSION FROM MHVVl: 35 FT.
<> TIDAL DATUM: MlW=-0.5' NGVD, MHW=+1.5' NOVO,
<> SURVEY COURTESY OF" COURT GREGORY SURVEYING" SURVEY DATED:
10-28-04
f
'I\';:,._~~..'. . Turrell & Associates, I~c.
IF -- .. ~. .~ Marme & EnYl11lnrnental Consulting
i ~4E>:changeAve.SuiteB. Naples,FLJ41(]4.1732
I Emaft: lUna@tmrell-assliCiales.com Pbooe: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632
DESIGNED T,T.T. R'=VISION TAB NAME:
MONTE CARLO CLUB DRAWN JMl l:H9.(l5 SHEET 30HI
"'''' 11-05.04 07.11.07 SCAUO 1-.100'
PROPOSED DESIGN Joe NO. "'''
SECTION-29 TOWNSHIP~48S RANGE-:i:SE
N
~dr:~
W ..'~€.}.E
1tt~~~
S
; ., I ! i 0; "_ '..... __,,~ _" "r' .r '/..' _'~
,>\, i i ii;' ~.,' <:0 C" r\ 5",- 100 .1
'" I' /IF " \1 : ' 'I', '
RIPARIAN lJJ~\ Ii (!j///\\ \ I"~ '\ S<\ALE IN/En
111~r' j/_'/\ II ( ! i , "
~)\l', ~!(:3i;' ) /i ! J/ ) I f .r
,l;/,...",~ LI / //'! r \ j ~~
/,1/1,.\ ~::::;:--;// / f ) (,1'''-
1-1 !l~,;\..r r" I . Ii'
\1\1 \~ ~ (( i i ! i: r'
',; .,-,,() \ I I , ! i , \
i!~t. J ' ) {( i fl' .>
:>~: l,.--J j.. \ il
" .:;0.;11\:-'-_/ ,// , {I 'I, '.
~), r ,:)~\~..--,'--"~ I \ \
" ,"1\ '\ '<'\,'\
! -... \, \
" ~\ J /\ \ I
~.. /(y/ J .5 I) \ 1
'~I~'7, (' (( i I
.\~p '\' VA~},fRafLT(! ( )1' .
"@( LAG90N \ i ;
'\';';''''i \ \ \ ,I.
'.W'~ \ '-.~) fir:"
'. W \ ]'/'\ \ ( !
I ,~_/;!') \ ~_\ I I ( Il.l
.Ii"'!, \ \ \ \ \ \.,
\\'~'\ \ , I' , ,I~
1...~.'."f\,''''.~.''.f.\ \ \ ( ( ( ( (l1('j
'1. \.~\~ I I \ \ \ \ ; \
\ v~ \ ~ \1) i)11 "
:'-l:;~\ \ )]i!!tI/
'.', l.:....~;\ \ \ / ," I I II
"\+,j:~\ ) ) ; I (I jl~
iL,' ," ; fa~' I.. \ \ '"I
I ' I qill
xfa / ) 1\ \, .5, \ \~\ '"',
11/'.! ~:.I ( '" 1. \ \,"
..~l9.Ji':1 \ "" \ \ '.'
I J .., ". I.i ) I ", ,',
! '/-i'," r \ \ ""
,1//1/5-/' / /: \ \
~~dI7/;) , Ii'.
.', :///1 / ,'! \
""I "f'""f. / f
J":;:~;(j! I I i '\
rC1??9 / (I '\
MLW .05' _"<1;:~~;;p /"'''''- I I '
/<~t~;:~~~~?5:" / \,
\, /" "",'/'-3~1;.:P"'~ / I,.!
///:7j\/'::>""''' (.--:: /
.... /{" / / ~ '>!! /' NOTES:
~. ('/r~ f/l};"25' (<, THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT
\~\\J ' l INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.
.Ii I() I I \' <:> All DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MlW.
Iii J / ,<,:>APPUCANT OWNS APPROX. 712 LF OF SHORELINE.
! 1 ,I \, <> EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 1,145 SQ, FT.
<::> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUC'fURE: APPRQX 1,640 SQ. FT.
<:> TOTAL QVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 2.78$ SQ. FT.
o VVlDTH OF \!\/ATERWAY AT NARRQVv'EST POIN'f: APPROX 189' {MHWTO MHVVj
<:> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MH\M.: 35 FT,
<::::- TIDAL DATUM: MlW=-Q,S' NGVD, MHW=+1.5' NGVD.
<:> SURVEY COURTESY OF "COURT GREGORY SURVEYING" SURVEY DATED:
10-28-04
BOAT LIFTS OPTIONAL FOR ALL SLIPS
(EXISTING AND PROPOSED)
\
)
I
MONTE CARLO CLUB
10684 GULF SHORE DR.
NAPLES, Fl 34108
PROPERTY
LINE
n
~,~T~,;:J&~n:~~~t~~s~~~g
, ) . 35!4ExchangeAve.SulteB. Nap]es,FLl4104-J7J2
F..,il: tun>@i"",U.~soci'"S.COOl Phon< (239) 643.0166 Fax: (239) 643.6632
MONTE CARLO CLUB
DESIGNE.D T_lT
""'- 'Me
DAT. 11.05-04
JOB NO O~20
PROJECT BATHYMETRY
SECTION- 29 TOWNSHIP~ 4a s RAN(;;E. 25 e
I,:>m I 7r.
December 2, 2008
Page 50 of 192
200
I
REVISION .T"8 NAME
09.26.05 SHeET <lOF9
01.11.07 SCALE "': mer
\
Aoenda Item No. 7C
ecember 2, 008
..'~ Page 51 of 192
w.i@ . E
": ~
S
o 50
~
100
I
SCALE IN FEET
200
I
RIPARIAN LINE
.>>-< PROPOSED
< \;:,.~c,;. DREDGE
'.\ '>.~'.'r-". AREA
"~"\-->">'
,~"y ,
\'" "<".\
''\li''''''\'<' "'.
.. ~., '.,
"........';.:;;;).:,~....
.'-.1\"-..',. .'--"....
1Jf'<<'
.', ,~,..' '.... ~
........."
1'-. ~,'. \. ,"",
'.... \<>~.,
..: '.''''
.'..,";. .....1
.. ::"-"\'~. ....
} ',,,:\
(t ...."
'$J::~'<'1'
/I-~'~':>:;'
( .'
,', "'\-'
>,,:.'V'
Y""/
,,'l"-~<-'>;.'''
.'. '\'-?'~'" '.'/
MLW-O.5' . '.' '0~"'/"
~,~c;.yX.,.,...,..>
'::i.0~-'-'-',,/-,
..,.._v,-:t';:--...,.".:\:'v.
.>~.--'(": ,.... "" . - '. '~.,,,
) ".\~.><~ ',>/''''''
/ / ,. ',' ,)'"
j / "J'i'11' '( /
..../(~-1 '-l
/-v~ q-v 25'
'(
!
I
SPOIL CONTAINMENT
APPROX: 125 CU YDS~
CAPACITY
'"
MONTE CARLO CLUB
10684 GULF SHORE DR.
NAPLES, Fl 34108
C.:.:l PROPOSED DREDGE TO -4.0 MLW: 1.500 CU yas
I
\
f
/
[ / MLW -OS'
IX
i :1.
I!
I"
If
J
-4.0' MLW CONTOUR
NOTES:
<> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMiTTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT
INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.
<> All DATUM SHOWN HEREON IS REFERENCED TO MlW.
<> APPLICANT OWNS APPROX. 712 L.F. OF SHORELINE.
<> EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 1,145 sa. FT.
<::> PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 1.640 SQ. FT.
<:> TOTAL oveRWATER STRUCTURE: APPROX 2,785 SQ. FT.
<:> WiDTH OF WATERWAY AT NARRO'NEST POINT; APPROX 189' {MHWTO MHW]
<.> TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHVVI.: 35 FT.
<.::- TIDAL DATUM: MLW=.O.5' NGVD. MHW="'1.5' NGVD.
<:> DREDGE VOLUME TO .4.D FT. M1.W: APPROX. 1,500 cu, YDS,
<> SURVEY COURTESY OF" COURT GREGORY SURVeYING" SURVEY DATED:
10-28-04
~Turrell & Associates, Inc.
! c'; :c"'.' Marine & Environmental Consulting
, 3SS4E,chanseAve.SoiteB. Naples,FL34104.3732
",.1: 1llIla@",""I.sssocia",-oom Ph,ne: (239) 643.0166 Fox: (239) 643.6632
OESIGNED T./.T. REVISION TAl:! NAME
MONTE CARLO CLUB DRAWN "ML 09,26.05 SHEET 50F9
DATE 11-05.04 07.11.07 SCALE 1~"" 10C'
PROPOSED DREDGE AREA JOB NO. 0420
SECTION- 29 TOWNSHIP. "8 S RANGIS- ~5 e
Aqenda Item No. 7C
)"')) ~ Turrell & Associates, Inc.
... ..'- Manne & Environmental Consulting
~ Exchange A,,- Suile B. Naples, FLJ4J04.JiJl
frnail: tuna@tunell-asso::iates.tom Plume: (239) 643-G166 Fax: (239) 643.6632
MONTE CARLO CLUB
PROPOSED DESIGN AERIAL
ORAV'JN 'ML 03.2G--05 SHE;;r 6OF9
:).\TE 1 'Q~().1 [17 ~ -,01 SCALF. " ~ 1CD
JOB NO "on
SEC'TION.:;~
TOWNSHIP. ~!} ';;
RANGE- :,'; ~
t-
I
~J\
W Vr.,fV.t E
s
25 50
I .
SCALE IN fEET
1'.71
Agenda Item No. 7C
uecemoer ,L
Page 53 of 192
Ii~
100
I
'*
TYPICAL EXISTING
FINGER PIER AND
LIfT
MONTE CARLO CLue
1D684 GULF SHQREOR.
NAPLES, FL 341Ga
,
I
,
.
.....l'
I
I
I
.
I
g OYSTER DEBRIS
VANDERBILT
LAGOON
DIVE TRANSECTS
/
/
I
I
/ I?//,
/ ~1
/ "'4A;
/ (/IV,s-
MLW -0.5:'.' /
SUBMERGED RESOURCES
OEs.oGN5:D TTT.
ORAVVN JMI.
DATE 11-05-04
Joe NO 0420
REVISION TAB NAME
~TurreIl & Associates, Inc.
I . '. ~'C~ Maline & Environmental Consulting
3584 Exchange Ave. Suj~ B. Naple~ FLJ4104.37J2
mil, Ona@tuneO",.,,;,,"..eoin PhoDe (239) 64)-0166 Fox, (239) 643-6632
MONTE CARLO CLUB
05.02-0.5
O~26.OS
07.11.(17
SHEET
SCALE
70f9
1"",50'
SECTION-29
TOWNSHtP-4BS RANGE-25E
o N
r-- 0>
~
o -
Z 0
'/E ....~
2Q)Q.l
- CJ)
ro ro
'0 a..
c
<l>
Ol
<(
{'oJ
>-
'"
Ii
<D il'
'"
-'
<:
<>
<n
'"
o
'"
,,'"
""
d~~
o,,~
;;"';;
:;:u.-,
(,)5~
w(!)'"
!Z;g~
o~o.
~~~
.... ;:
o :r ti
z "w
& 12 ~
<: ;;: '"
'" ,,>-
~ ~ ~
>- ~. :>
....J ,...:ll. ~ yjU)
Z LL d ,.... 0 ~
g ~ d~t:C5 >-~
w ~ui~~da: B>::
~ o~~~{Ii& o.oo~
CL I- -I ..'-x lrl <( 0::
n: O~XO~,:..: >ll"l:::;
~ l.l.IOOO::N-Z ~'--.rn
C9 ~:r~c..XO - X>-
Z W"',-o.~Oa.. <O~Q:;
_ a::u. O::I-t+ 0
t: WO'<t:WQ..fJ) II&~
_ lL 'W D::: 0.. W~ $"<( lU
~u.i~u..e:::~~s:..:r:~$
,tI.l -1~Ut.UOc:!:E:>'"
:r~!:2C'\1I- ::;>o:::crS .....J...
CCZz:;::g,,~~~~~g
oQ53><g:t;;u:Z::=E"to
u..1-e::O ::)1- Z U
uUw a:;U) cr 0:: .:(0. ~;
0:':' CLo:::WI- O:::lC:!"'<tLL.
<:(0: r a.. 1IJ ~(J) >- u. 0 '0
V) tii z ,<( ~ ~ IX ~ 2: JI 0 >-
~z3:if)s:a::~e::Q~I-U)
ZOOZe:::W!iW(/')....JUJl.l./
;;Ur$:W>::>iI-:::'):2~1-
~ cnO>O>~o::..::>a::
~~~I-OOffi~b~a5
Ou..~~0m>I.La:::'->t)
../UJ Cl <( U ZOO 0 0. <( w >-
VlcnuJO::if=o......JJ:-lO{:lW
~UJO-lc..~o~b~;1o>..,.
_:cz..JCl..xo:o Oowt:ro
61-~-C:(<;(UJa.I-~l-,-a:::::;lcO
_ "z ^ 1> ^ " r- Q U::>(\j
Z v _ v v v v 000 COO ~
....
~
&
f:?
!!,
-'
l-
t}
'"
1
I
I
I
I
I
~
'J
"'
d
~
:?j
I
,
I
,t-.~
.
. "
~ :z
II
II
II
II
II
II
It:;-
1['5
d(;
~a
~Ei
"if
II
II
II
w
.
~ " w
~ ~ ~
o
~
I
:l
~ !
~
g
I
j
,I
o:!;
>0 .
"-f-W
:r;:}-~
f-O-'
~"'S:
fZ~~
...J-'W
-w>
"-"'0
:Jioa:l
<(oq:
Q.:2'D
<0"':
0:0:0
5:u.f-
5 2 ::;
.
,.
w
,~
o _
N -
. "
o 0
;
:: :4 ~ ~ ~
.... .., 0 ! Z
o
;:
o
w
.
o
~
~ ~ w ~
(I) <( ... m
~ :51~ Q
"'
'"
I III ~
I I '. I 0
I I:~i ~
J ::~1 ~
:.'ill1; ~"''''''.~~..f\ @
,"ili ,..;."i:i:l:";~w.','.' 0:::
/ II 0: ~
I II :<"1 fZ
I II\'~'! Q
III,>:V
I I" lfi
.,..~, ~
, "~'" .,.-.- ~ .J UJ
',h -.:.k ",...'.~ g.
III )iJ
II"~...Y' Q
II ,..~<..I
II' ',,<..
II ' "". '-,.1
. , . '-..
, ",', ", w
~~ ..~.?-iit"-'" ,..,u,,~~ g;
.tIOo;\.': ~~!'!:! ~l;g;.. ~~.;:.I -J
I ' '- '. ,- U)
I :':'<V') ~
I I' ","
I /
I
I
I
,
u g*~
,.s"'~~
"~ _:z
~o;1:;~
+-,U-l:::l
C1:S-(.;L,~
"_ g ~r l;i
u a-a1.1.
~fi2!
~.~~~
cl;dJJ ~ ~
___ o:d ~ G;'
_ ou-<:::J
30.> ~ ll.'"
. ~ 0
~8
f-'::E J3ii:
,..
co
J
..J
()
o
..J
~
<(
()
W
I-
Z
o
~
~I
<(
,
/
/
~f(';';~7~~)~)
ip ~~~~;i~;'~Ei,e'!
(f) " .~> : :~'.:~~ .:~::~. ','~>'<
N
OJ
~
_'0
"'"'
~"'
Cll~CO
::::Eg>
~~o..
Co>
.--
!::2w
crt;
:l!z
"-w
crw
~e
.J
rr:
1Il~
:Ow
-'0:=
oo~
gD5~
0:",..>
,,-''''
U:::;J vf
w"w
...."..>
z=o.
o:gc(
"'_z
\!i:!llj
!H) i!l
"11. ill,
( 1: ill
Iii i ,;1,
i Ii jii
""",,1
I! ijJli
: Ij! q 11
\! J i ~: lJ
I \ \ j i ~ J 1
:'IJ::p
:11'111
".. I'
il! il!
Iii ill
Ii< Iii!
! q lin
i., IIj"
rli 1! j
! r: ill 'I
'il jil,
I" III"
: Ii :: I
:1; 1!1'1
1.1 f
; jl I1q
I i I'll
-;;. lilli,'1
.;;:t r'j 1'-
~ ill 11'11
ill t, '11
~ \ ; tl'i;
:;; I 'Ii Iii
-l Ii: I
- i, 'If
~ iHli
VJ~I'lliil:
: :, ~ i \
~ i i !' 1_
'j' pI I'
i!llj1,
: 1\ iH!
ill i'!11
id ;!, f
il! :1'1'1
l,i"j\'I'
Ii! \i i
;fiifl!
'r'll I
Ii];!!!,
Jf!i::/j
a:: ill!'!l!
~~ 111':111
i ~ I- \ Iii i: !
~:I: 1 H ~ !I!I \
~~~ iii':!11
~ Q J: : iil i:!,
W~:r:J \Il ':u
::Jooo~~ fil!i!'!'1
~ z l"d
>- ~ :. ,.
~~~-"
z
o
~
>
w
-'
w
C!)
z
;::
VJ
~
/"
....
z
.... w
~ ~
w i1i~
cr "'~",
" "0
~ ""0
" z'"
>- ~o
'i: Ztt:
o ~~
~ 5~
~ Un::
o. ",w
0: 0"
=> ",w
o. w'"
" 1-,0
~ wz
t: ~~
:Eu.i~~
lrtf.lwo
~~Q;~
C:::Of-c
ii~~~
"Jg~:)
:~~o..
"'ow
~6~;
~Uii:f-
c?~~~
ol.Ll.l......J
oo:::~
'. w UJ Ui.
~t3g~~t5
!-tWi:i:I:'a:
~ 0 ~ 0 C <:(
~~
u.<
<I;;
Ow
cr~
~-
"->5
crz
wo
~o
~~
z-
UJ>-
S~
;;:L1i
~~
<iz
'-'w
-:;:
15",
i1:~
crlz
wo
~'-'
-0
"'....
Oz
z-
WI;;
I-w
iiJ",
. .
t ..
.
w
.
~
w
~
~
.
.
1 - .
dS
- . .
z '9 :;: ~
Q ... ~ :;
$ ~ ~ ~
~
.
.
r!.
I
.
z
~
..
<;
" .
..... ..J ~ <"I
: ~ d ~
.
"
z
o
o , ~
~~~~~
:3 ~ "" 0 iii
o 0 0 -,
z
g
'-'
w
VJ
....
Z
W
:;;
;>;
g~
o
'-'
..J
5
0..
VJ
..J
..
'-'
0:
~
l1)
J
...J
o
o
...J
~
<(
o
W
I-
Z
o
~
C?
a:l
Z
o
I-'
()
LU
(/)
'!>l'1'1~
g-a .... ~
~=~S;
....:9 '":t"S;'
lZl 0 ...... ~
<l.)Uli~
1;j "iil If ~
.u'5 *"Uo.
oaz
00 1:3 . ~
000.0=:._
.-...~ ..g9
~ = ='......
-~"" ":~
"-"0 ~ 0-
_c1?3 <~
0> ~
Q)~ ~ .h
,.,. u ~
... <l1~
t-< ~
.~~
-:.~!!
.A'~l
" "
~' &
.
B
-.;,;
jj
~'d
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 56 of 192
AFFIDAVIT
Well, "flu 'M9vtlt::nc4. C'kb h'~being first duly sworn, depose and say
that well are/am the owner!. of the property described herein and which is the suJ<iect
matter of the proposed hearing; that all the answers to the questions in this application,
including the disclosure of interest infoIIlllllion, all- sketches, data, and other
supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true
to the best of our/my knowledge and belief. Well understand that the infonnation
requested on this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this
form, whether computer generated or City printed shU:: .:.~~ be altered. Public hearings
will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required
infonnation has been submitted.
I
\
,
As property ownerwelI further authorize 'lVt(fU'LL. -t f/rS'oc. rue.
to act as our/my representauvt: in any matters regardi
y Owner
P' ed Name of Property Owner
rk.
rf1E5
r./t-I)
The r:::e~trument was acknowledged before me this /; day of ?:Jb!:e..r.
20@ b ,?c:.. ;?-~L( r ;I- , ....no is personally known to me or has
producjfna" ckca" as identification.
/yer LrC!. .
Sta1eOf~/Je~~~
County 0 r ~
(Seal)
,
'-
Application FOl' [)cck F~ljty f.xt.cusu.
~
.-
';~f!
, N ot!UY tic
~7/a a '\51;/?f!j
. led, Typed or Stamped Name of Notary
My Commission Exp. Oct. 31, 1!Illl!r
cPO/o
002E L3r~3S~, dH ~H8S'OI soo~ va l~O
'--"'-0 - -s,----.-.---- -- -.---
A w.&.... A VA_
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Paqe 57 of 192
. ~ I' S . I ' --
I !'[IF]:)', 1JJ;;'.\t1T.MP\'l or, T'1T] "";., r ' ,,'
1) C' , "
I\J',J\):~ UJ URl'lij(.\j'j,)\~ j5.'. .," - " - .
__ _ -,~~---~-:'--- - - __ ..~1t_~~;'~\-. ~'\"~~~<"~i~-:
Home
Contact Us
E-FllIng Services
Document Searehes
Forms
Help
Pr!1.vj.QII.',9.!'-!.i'lt NJlJlLQ!1.,!"Illl
BJlIY.mTQ!J~_t
;-.-... -"-",,-_..,,-- .--.-..---.'.'-.-.'--'--.--'1
;
_...0_.._. ... ...' __ ...._,_.._._,.__,.___..,______,J
No Events
No Name History
[.":~~Ent!lYill!alm,S!ta~'~iJ
...-------------.----..::. ""::"".:- "".. '~-
Detail by Entity Name
Florida Non Profit Corporation
MONTE CARLO CLUB ASSOCIATION, INC.
Filing Information
Document Number N22811
FEI Number 650004038
Date Flied 1010211987
Stale FL
Status ACTIVE
Principal Address
10684 GULFSHORE DR
NAPLES Fl3410B US
Changed 02121/1997
Mailing Address
PO BOX 7622
.NAPLESFL34101 US
Changed 04/2911999
Registered Agent Name & Address
MCFATTER, GlEB M
GLEB M. MCFATTER, PA
3150 SAFE HARBOR DR.
NAPLES FL34117
Name Changed: 04/29/1999
Address Changed: 02117/2003
Officer/Director Detail
Name & Address
UlePD
PRECOURT, GEORGE A
29 LAUREL TER
MANCHESTER CT 06040
TilleSD
HARRISON, PAMELA
10686 GULFSHORE DR.. 105-A
NAPLES Fl3410B
TltleVD
MORIARITY, JACK
http://www .sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFLL&in<L doc _ number=N228 I I &in... 7!l 0/2008
.
10684 GULF SHORE DR, 103-,0.,
NAPLES FL 341 08
/ Tille VO
SABBAGE, DEREK
65 HARBOUR SQ 2602
TORONTO CA 53214
TilleTD
SPANGNOLA, LAWRENCE
PO BOX 770
AMSTERDAM NY 1201-0770
Annual Reports
..........0'" '" VJ. J...
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 58 of 192
Report Year Filed Date
2006 0510312006
2007 04/25/2007
2008 05/0512008
Document Images
.ojiLO?YlQQa.=_8NN.l)_AL_8j;.I?_QRIlr;'''''CiMi~jrn~l!~'ll~~..&~@~.iiio,n
~2a_OQZ=-_A.NN."'I.\L8.;;E'QRI '~jil~,M.\~iitiJlIJ!i.1i1i~dto,m'1ali"i'l"~
.Q?lQ;L@J!.!l-=-.AN_NUA.L..R!;:;f'_QRI.(,iik.";'viill!rim~p.gliiii~~~~A
02/02!20.1l.ii.:=ANNLJ!'.LREE'.OBI 1;~>MI~~iii!iii!!ili~~liill,~1
O.2L1l.4@Q1=-ANNVALRI;f'QBIlf~4.~it!~~lli~U~ibl~;i:\0f
Q2l17YlPo~.:-:.ANN.l)AL_RI;E'QE.I 1~'1.~~~wA~~JidiWi\i\1tmilJi,;t!i.:ii"]
Q;l114@Q2.:-:ANNUA.L8_!;:;PQ81&i~lh;i.~~~.iI.9.~lii~!ll1~\\i':@iD
Q1!Jl.2@O.L., ANNliA.L. E.!;:;.E'_Q81 {~",;;NJ,~iM~i!i?i1e'Uji!illl1ft1i!lil1Ilt\.,.ii';;~
0fl!16@QQ:::ANNV!'.L .81;P'QRll,j;ifi<',iiMj~!Ifi~.€i!R\!I1~~:if..:a
O4/29i.199.9 - .6N.NU8L_R_EP01U thiiJi.\l~$!g~1mI?,l;i.~'fWm~""i'i"J
03194/191m.:::.ANNI)..AI...REPQ81 f~~j;Jji!'}(!.~ltt~!ill!9~Jill:i1:iat;:;il.k~
Qm1/1~97 :::,t,.NNJ1ALBEE'Q8.I I'2$,,;';"iMi~j.ll1!!lWi!.lj.@QE'.1l!rm~l;~~
Q2I19/1996 :::-_6i'iNJ.I.6LB!;:;PO.Rl f';;~'l:.'fj'ltJ~miJ'g~lill~Qfj;fa.I:ill~t<<i,;',~~
O.1/Wi9.!ll? - .8NJ)iU6l.RJ;1'-,>m h;;~t~~Ml!!J!tJriJaaajr!;t;l!i1!l\f.Qun;tt;q;:lli.iJ
Note: This is not officiai record. See documents if queslion or conflict. I
Previous on List Next on List Return To List
._-----'---------~_._-
No Events No Name History h;;:,',S!!!iJi~~~:li;i,~~;;;i",J
--
Hor'nl! Contact us Document Searches E-Fillng Services Forms Help
Copyright and PriYBCY Pollcies
Copyright <e- 2007 State of Florida, Department of State.
http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inCL doc _number=N228 I 1 &in... 7/1 0/2008
el(23/ZB6G )4:34
239&43&968 co..LIER eN ZllNlOO
~d~2fi~fiJ No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 59 of 192
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
- ...'
Please completethc followl.ngAND FAX pJUS~572#) OR SUBMIT l]V PERSON TO THE
ADDRESSING SECTION. FORM MUST BE SIGNED BY ADDRESSING PERSONNEL P[(101l TO PIlE-
APPlJCATIONMEETING. Not.1I items will apply to evOl)' project.. Items in bGld IyJle arc requir:ed.
I. LepI description of subjl:ct JlI:lllla1Y or properties (copy of ltngthy dcscrlprir> may bo OItaclrerf)
. - :fb v,J, l..p J~ / ("t:>
~ec. .:1" . TV/' t1f S . ,,1fIt/~ :zs-e
2. Folio (Property W) 1l1lJD~r(.) of above (attftclt la. ",. as~ with, Ittgm,wcrlplioTl ifmorc tkm Olll!)
GoSSSOOOOO~ '
3. Street address or Iddresses (as applicable. if ar,.eady =ignecf)
MnP1".et: c.lHt..tD CLue. f'Al"tJlp,..,,tV/v/YJ 1K~~7'1"',..J
p.l!). ~X ~':l'), NItPLe$, 1'( 7.'I/() I
4. toe.lroll mil', showing ciact location o~projectfsite in relation. 10 neare.t public r.oad right-of-way (attach)
5. Copy of S\lrVey (NEEDED ONLY FOR UNPLA TIED PROPERTIES)
6. I'ropoied projeet name (i/applil:ablc)
/",,,PTe- crri1-t.o o..c.t:.5
7. Proposed Slreet names (ifappfiJ:oble)
l. Site Development PI"" Nllmber (FOR EXISTING PR.OffiCTS/SlTES ONLY)
sx>P .
9. Pedt;C11 Ty~ - (Complete a sepazate A.ddressing Checklist for each Pemion Type)
DSDP (Site lJeIIelopment Plan)
DSDP A (SDP Anr..ndlllCllt)
[J SOP) (3DP rnsuh5lantial Oumge)
~ SIl' (Site ltnprovemmt P1:m)
SlPI (S11'1 IllS\lbsWnisI Change)
SNR (Street Name Cbange)
.0 VegetationlExotic (Veg. Removal Permits)
8 Land Us. Petition (Variance, Conditional Use,
Boat Dock: Exl., Rezone:, PUD t'CZOtle, eIC.)
o 01her - Describe:
o PPL (plans & Plat Review)
B fSP (prelimiury Subdivlsfon Plat)
FP (Final Plat)
o l1.A (Lot Line Adjustment)
o BL (BI2$ting Pcm1it)
8 ROW (Right-of-Way Fermit)
EXP (Excavation Pemtit)
o VRSFP (Veg.Removal & Site Fill Pcnnit)
o IDR (Transfer ofDcveloptnont Rights)
J.I).13>i,\3'~ ,:,,:.d("VC:!opm.ent names l"'''?Osed for, or .~';'c~L'y "l';;earin~ in" ~.'mdrnninium docll1D<:nt. (if
appIicaole; indicate whether propcsed or existing)
11, Please Check Ont:: 0 Chet:ldist is to be FIXed aack
12. AppJiesntN..... tJ; JI,J t... )!/J~7J
13. SiB'l"ture on Addressing Checklist doe;s nol cons!'
further rev",w by the Addressing Scetion.
FOR STAFF USE ONLV
Primary NtlJtlb<:r \ S 1+-114-'"
Address N111Ilhcr
Address Number
Ad<b:ess NU1'nbcr
o PCTSOtll1lly Picked Up IAf,
phoDe :J3"f.t"fJ~6/Tu .J3'7-"1f3.-~,,1~
~cct and/or Slrtot Name approval 8Ild is subject to
TtJueCL rf ff5SqC~..,TeS~ J..?-'C.
Approved by jJ~ ~Q.m Dale tJI- 24- 0 G,
;--.'
BD-2006-AR-9061
PROJECT #2006010084
DATE: l/3110G
JOYCE ERNST
()OON W,"
",00>
.O~
ON- e i . -'<( ~
Z .0
NO . . '" ~ ..
E03tD r.. ~~~ :0= ~~ffi
~ "" ...ti.};!!O~ZS:N
..ffi~Q) I ~ f -J C <0> lt1
" . :0: L.I. ... .... Z (Q
-EO> " 11i?5,~.~iii~
"'<D'" , ,
-0,,0- , , , . f q, i:"-'
c: <D . ::0 r 0:Z ~
1;,0 , , , ! i t! .. 9 => ~ w f
.- , , ..~~rO 131
<( , . , . ~R !!.\IU~~
. , HjJHI;1
,
. , ,
, ,
, ~ & ~id!"u~ .
" . d ~ i
.
,; , ~ :
~Q;P . ~ , ,
~ , ~ n ~ I'
, ,~, .1
. , , , -, I
I ' . . , ~ q,
" . , .w,
i , . ; <:( , , , I, I
, i : V ~
. ~ :1'
. .
, . . " I
, ~ ~ ~
.. > ,
, , , liS
,o. , I ! ~
~ e e ~
= ~j , ql
. .
I
!
~
.
"
~iL !;~
-j -> -
~J ;:.
OJ
0
~ u
LO W ~
> I>
W ,
> 8
!
r-....
-----
---
,
"
~
:.~t~ ~i~~~i ~~! i~
......~.=-<:;... ~~:; ~:
't,:O:'</'i.:.....~~: k
';';l~~..\;':;= :-o{"";: ::
,';'~~f J:~ ~::r.~ ~:
.:I~ .~~- :~~!: r
..~~n"~<.:: ::.:~::: :
.:'"!L '::g': ::;~:r :
o~:~. .:!-"~ ~:~1~: :
.0... ~~. =~::;: :
-----~~--
t
:
- J
~
s: f =,.::~!l~:::t~1l
,
i 11a~;
.
0:..........
....J
eEe:~
i\i'l~i'l'-,
.iii
--.-,
I!HI
dim
.
. _H.....A...~
EXHIBIT "C"
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 61 of 192
August 7, 2008
TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE
COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Naples, Florida
August 7, 2008
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning
Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted
business herein, met on this date at 8:30 a.m. in REGULAR SESSION
in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida,
with the following members present:
CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain
Lindy Adelstein
Donna Reed-Caron
Tor Kolflat
Paul Midney
Bob Murray
Brad Schiffer
Robert Vigliotti
David J. Wolfley
ALSO PRESENT:
Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney
Joseph Schmitt, CDES Administrator
Ray Bellows, Zoning & Land Development Review
Thomas Eastman, Dir. Real Property, CCSD
....
Page 1
ADA-2008-AR-13731
MONTE CARLO CLUB
CONDOMINIUM ASSOC.
PROJECT: 2006010084
DATE: 9/9/08 DUE: 9/23/08
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 62 of 192
/
I
AGENDA
Revised II
COLLLER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MEET AT 8:30 A.M.. TI-ltJRSDAY, AUGUST 7, 2008. IN THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDINO, COUNTY
GOVERNMENTCE?TER, J30t TAMIAMJ TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA:
~ INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS WILL BE LIMITED TO 5 MINUTES ON ANY
ITEM. INDIVIDUALS SELECTED TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF AN
ORGANJZATION OR GROUP ARE ENCOURAGED AND MAY BE ALLOTTED 10
MINUTES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM IF SO RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
PERSONS WISHING TO HAVE WRITTEN OR GRAPHIC MA TERJALS INCLUDED
IN THE CCPC AGENDA PACKETS MUST SUBMIT SAID MATERIAL A MINIMUM
OF 10 DAYS PRIOR TO THE RESPECTIVE PUBLIC HEARING. IN ANY CASE,
WRITTEN MATERlALS INTENDED TO BE CONSIDERED BY TIlE CCPC SHALL
BE SUBMITTED TO TIlE APPROPRIATE COUNTY STAFF A MINIMUM OF
SEVEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING. ALL MATERIAL USED IN
PRESENTATIONS BEFORE THE CCPC WILL BECOME A PERMANENT PART OF
. THE RECORD AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOI( PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD
Of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IF APPLICABLE.
ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THE cepc WILL
NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS PERTAJNING THERETO, AND
THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THA T'A VERBA TIM RECORD OF THE
PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED.
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGlANCE
2. ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY
3. ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA
4. PLANNl'NG COMMISSrON ABSENCES
5. APPRO V AL OF MINUTES - JUl,"J; 27, 2008. REGULAR MEETING
6. BCC REPORT. RECAPS - Not Available.t this 'ime
7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
A. Petition: BD~200!5'~AR-12802, Vanderbilt SurfCorony Recreational aDd Maintenance Assoc:.iaticnt 11lc:.~
represenled by Miles Scofield of Turrell. HaJJ and Associates, Inc, requesting a IS-fool bOal dock extension
over the maximwn 20-fool protrusion limi, as provided in section 5.03.06 of the LDC to allow a multi-,lip
dock facUlty reaching a maximum of 35 feel into the waterwuy. Applicant is proposing to "'move Iwo
existing finger docks and build 12 new docks with a tOUlI of 16 slips. Subject propert}' is located in Section
20. Township 41 and Range 25, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Ashley Caserta)
B. Petition: PUDZ-2006-AR-J0875 Q. Grady Minor, representing KRG 951 and 41, LLC, is requesting a
PUD Rezone from the Agriculwal (A), Commercial Convenience (C-2), General Commercial (C-4) and
Anesa Pointe POO zooi.og districts, to lhe Commercial Planned Ullir Development (CPUD) zoning district
for the Tamrami Crossing CPUD. which would aHow a maximum of 23.5,000 square feet of commercial
uses. The ;!:25.45 acre property is located in Section 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County,
Florida. (Coordinator: John-David Moss)
1
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 63 of 192
9. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Petition: BO-2G06.AR-9061. Monte Carlo Club Condominium A5Socialio... represented by TllJTell and
Associates, Inc., reqnesting a 15-foot boat dock extension from the 20 feet allowed to authorizt a 35-loot
boat dock facilily that will accommodate 20 additional boat slips for property located at 10684 ColrShor.
Drive, Baker-C.rroU Polnl Subdivision, Unit 2 Block B, Lots 1 and 2, Monte Carlo Club
Condominium, in Section 29. Township 48 South, Range 25 Eas~ CoWe, COUllly. Florida. (Coordinator.
Ashley Caserta)
B. Petilion: CU-2001-AR.124 19. ABC Liquors Ine.. represented by Heidi K Williams. ArC? ofQ Grady
Minor and Associates, P.A., is requesting a Condilio.al Use of the Commercial Intennediate (C-3) Zoning
District with a Special Treatment (ST) O..rlay to increase the maximum allowable square. footage of
personal services, v,deo rental. or retail uses (excluding drug stores, 5912) from 5,000 square.feef of gross
floo, area 10 12.000 square-feet of gross floor area in file principal stnlCl1JTe. The subject property, consisting
of approxima.ely 1.79+ acres of land, is located in Ibe northeastern quadranl of The CR951 and US41
intersection, in Seclion 3, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Comer County, Florida. (Coordinator: John.
David Moss)
C. Petition, CU-2008-AR. 1 3060, Naples Bapti.t Cbureb, loe. represented by Laura DeJohn. AICP, of Johnson
Engineering, Inc., requests a Conditional Use in the Mobile Home Overlay within the Agricultural zoning
district (A.MHO) pursuanlto 2.03.01.A.l.c.7 of the Land Oe.elopmeo' Code (LDC). The 4.96 acre A.
MHO zoned site is proposed to permit a Church with. a maximum of 12,000 square feet of ne)Qt area. The
subject property is located at 2140 Moulder Drive, Seclion 30, Township 48 South. Range 27 East, Collier
County, Florida. (Coordinator: Nancy Gundlach)
D. Peti,ion: RZ.2001-AR-12044. lmmokalee LLC, represented by Shau" Mularkey. AICP, of Coastal
Engineering Consultants, Inc., is requesting a rezone from the Estates (E) Zoning District to the Residential
Multl-family-16 (RMF-16) Zoning District '0 pennit a multHamily developmeo' OD 9.33.. acre, with a
maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre for property located a1 tbe southwest corner DC the interstctiDD of
Immokalee Road (CR-846) and Sehool Road, in Section 9, Township 47 Sonth. Range 29 East. in the
unincorpora.ed lmmol:.alee ..ea or Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Kay Deselem)
E. Petitto": RZ.2007-AR~ 12394, Ern~t N. FrICeman, Jr. of Freeman and Freeman, Inc., requests a Rezone
from the Mobile Home ~C}ninc district to the Village Residenthd zoning district for the residence at 428
aod 432 !Jth Street East. The .38 acre lots (each lot is .19 a=) site i. proposed 10 build a single family
home to be used for affordable housing. The property is located at 428 a.d 432 13tb Street Ea.t, Section 3,
Township 41 South, Range 29 East, Collier County, Florida. (Coordinator: Melissa Zone) WITHDRAWN
10. OLD BUSINESS
II. NEW BUSINESS
12. PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM
13. DISCUSSION OF ADDENDA
14. ADJOURN
aJ1/0s cepc Ag.c-ndaIRBlsp
2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 64 of 192
/- .
August 7,2008
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Good morning, everyone, Welcome to
the August 7th meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission,
If you'll please rise for Pledge of Allegiance.
(Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.)
. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If! pause sometimes before the pledge
starts, it's so Brad -- we're not pledging Brad's back. He has to walk
over to the side first. So I just thought I'd let you know.
Item #2 '
ROLL CALL BY SECRETARY
Roll call by the secretary, please.
COMMrSSIONER CARON: Mr. KolDat?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Midney?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Ms. Caron is here.
Mr. Strain?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Adelstein?
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Murray?
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Mr. Vigliotti?
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: And Mr. Wolfley?
COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Here.
COMMISSIONER CARON: 100 percent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Great, thank you.
Page 2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 65 of 192
August 7,2008
Item #3
ADDENDA TO THE AGENDA
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Addenda to the agenda. For everybody
in the audience who is here for Item 9(C), it's the Naples Baptist
Church, Inc. on 2140 Moulder Drive. That petition is being requested
to be continued to August 21st. So if you're here for that one today, it
will not be heard today, it will be heard on August 21 st.
The other item on the agenda -- or that's not on the agenda but for
discussion is our next meeting is August 13th. J need to know if we
have a quorum, And it would be in the evening starting at 5:05 in
these chambers. It was a continuation from the last LDC meeting.
Our packet for that should have been either submitted -- we already
have our packet and staff was going to let us know what items in the
packet we're going to hear that evening. I haven't seen that
information yet. But we do already -- the mess of the materials has
already been distributed. .
Ray?
MR. BELLOWS; I can have Catherine send that to you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Would you, please.
And you might want to caution her not to send us or bring any
more changes to the packet based on last meeting, If she has a
change, that item gets pulled and it goes for a IS.day notice.
So we just need to make -- keep aware of that as we set the --
MR. BELLOWS: Yeah, we're going to stick to the IS-day time
limit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Item #4
Page 3
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 66 of 192
./
August 7, 2008
PLANNING COMMISSION ABSENCES
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: As far as the planning commission, does
anybody here know they will not make it that evening?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: (Indicating).
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: I won't.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Midney and Mr. Adelstein.
Okay, with that, we have a quorum. Thank you.
Is there a motion to approve the agenda with the exception that
we will continue 9(C) to 8/21?
COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: So moved.
COMMISSIONER MURRA Y:So moved.
. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Wolf1ey made the motion, Mr.
Murray seconded.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signifY by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye.
COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I'd like to caution staff, on that
particular item this board needs to have the missing paperwork well in
advance of the item being heard so we can review it ourselves. So,
you know, let's not wait till the day before, two days before, and we
Page 4
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 67 of 192
August 7, 2008
need to have it in a timely manner. Thank you.
Item #5
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 27, 2008, REGULAR
MEETING
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Approval of minutes. June 27th, regular
meeting. Has everybody reviewed those? Are there any comments?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, is there a motion to
approve?
COMMISSIONER VIGLlOTTI: So moved.
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Vigliotti made the motion, Mr.
Adelstein seconded.
All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye.
COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
All opposed?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 9-0.
Item #6
Page 5
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2. 2008
Page 68 of 192
August 7, 2008
BCC REPORTS - RECAPS
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: BCC report, not available at this time.
Item #7
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Chairman's report. r have something
but I'll wait till new business to introduce it.
Item #8A
PETITION: BD-2008-AR-12802, VANDERBILT SURF COLONY
RECREATIONAL AND MAINTENANCE ASSOCIA nON, INC.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Consent agenda items. We have two of
them. First one is Vanderbilt Surf Colony Recreational and
Maintenance Association.
Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes. That petition, on A, I believe
that I mentioned to Ashley at our last meeting when we did not hear
this on consent that it was stated in the hearing that dock number one
would not need an extension, it is 20 feet. If it got the 25 feet, it
would be out into the channel.
So I think that was what Mr. Scofield had stated on the record.
And so the consent needs to be changed so that its items -- boat docks
two through seven get the five-foot extension.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, 1 thought that was the reason that
we ended up continuing the decision on this one is to get that issue
resolved. Has it been resolved from staffs perspective?
MR. WRlGHT: Commissioners, good morning, Jeff Wright for
Page 6
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 69 of 192
August 7, 2008
the record, Assistant County Attorney.
I did review the record after hearing this concern. And going
back to the record, it's very clear that Commissioner Caron expressed
a concern about the length of that particular dock, at the entrance.
And I have a passage from the record I'd like to read that's going to
lead me to the conclusion that I have.
CHAIRMAN STRAlN: Sure, go right ahead.
MR. WRIGHT: Okay. This is -- as part of the motion to
approve, Commissioner Caron said, I'm most concerned about the
length of the docks with the boats in the throat there, There's barely
100 feet and their neighborhoods to the south have only 20 feet.
There's no reason that the boats in the throat couldn't be limited to 20
feet. .
And the motion maker, Commissioner Vigliotti, said, but they
fall within that 25 percent, correct?
And Chairman Strain said, right.
And Commissioner Caron responded, they do fall within that 25
percent, yes. .
And that's in the transcript. And after that discussion the
commission moved on to discussion of seawall and draft.
So based on my review, even though there was a discussion,
when I looked at the application, the statements, exhibits and
discussion on the record and the motion to approve the application
without a stipulation with respect to slip number one, my conclusion is
that slip number one did get a five-foot extension like the rest of them.
COMMISSIONER CARON: I believe --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Excuse me, I believe that if you
had looked at the discussion portion, it was Mr. Scofield who said that
that dock was only going to be 20 feet.
MR. WRIGHT: I know exactly where you're talking about. It's
on Page 18 of the transcript. And in that exchange Commissioner
Page 7
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 70 of 192
August 7, 2008
Murray said, the last boat there, before you get out into the area there
on the east, what size boat do you anticipate having there?
And Mr. Scofield said, that would be a maximum of a 20-foot
boat overall length. So somebody with an 18- foot boat with an
outboard or somewhere in there, that is the dock that's pretty much
restricted to what they can have there. There are some owners with
small boats.
And Commissioner Murray responded, and if they extend out
past that red line that you had on that other drawing, which was a
25-foot line, does that mean that they're in violation?
And Mr. Scofield said, yes, that's correct.
So that was the one exchange that I think may have led to the
confusion that there may have been a limitation on that.
. COMMISSIONER CARON: I don't think there was any
confusion, I think it was pretty clear that Mr. Scofield said that that
dock could only get to 20 feet.
MR. WRlGHT: And that's --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Klatzkow?
COMMISSIONER CARON: And that I don't think it needed to
be part of the motion.
MR. KLA TZKOW: I just think what Mr. Wright's getting is
clarification of the record. If you want to make amotion here and
now that the intent ofthe planning commission was to exclude this
dock from the variance, I think we're done.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, before we could go that far, now
we're changing an issue that -- we're not changing, we're clarifying an
MR. KLATZKOW: Clarifying.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- issue that may be in conflict with
what the applicant believes. And the applicant's not here today. Is
that a right thing to do?
Oh, they are. Okay. 1 didn't see Rocky. Because I'd certainly
Page 8
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 71 of 192
August 7, 2008
like to make sure that we're not going against something we
previously didn't clarify to a manner that we don't need to have it
reheard again, is all I'm trying to clarifY.
Ms. Caron, and Mr. Schiffer.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Right. And I'm glad to see Mr.
Scofield here as well because I'm not trying to put words in his mouth.
It was a discussion that we had. And you can clearly see by his
drawing that it would not be possible to extend that dock out without
bringing it out into the channel. It's sitting there at 20 feet right now.
And that's what he stated on the record that it would have to be,
because of where it's located. So, you know, I don't see any -- and I'd
certainly like to hear from him.
CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Well, I don'thave a problem with that.
Mr. Scofield, could you address the issue, please?
Yeah, you'll have to be sworn in, I'm sorry.
(Speaker was duly sworn.)
MR. SCOFIELD: Okay, I've been talking with Jeff a lot about
this. And when you look at the numbers there -- I think the whole
thing in this discussion is that boats do not extend out into the
Vanderbilt Waterway. If you want to put that in the resolution, I think
that's fine.
I think it -- it was approved by this commission. All these first
seven docks have a 20 -- have a five-foot extension.
Does it work out there mathematically? Probably not. When you
field adjust things, I don't want a boat sticking out 20 feet, three inches
and be in violation and not extend into Vanderbilt Waterway. So I.
think you can take care of this if you say boats cannot extend into
Vanderbilt Waterway, and leave the resolution passed as is, and just as
an addition.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Adding that as a stipulation is
more -- works for me. My issue is not having the boats extend out
into the channel.
Page 9
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 72 of 192
~
August 7, 2008
MR, SCOFIELD: That's fine.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Klatzkow, do we need a motion to
do that or is the clarification on record today to the decision that was
made at the last meeting or the meeting on which this was discussed
enough? .
MR. KLATZKOW: Let's have a motion on it.
CHAIRMAN STRAlN: Okay. So we have a consent agenda
item, Vanderbilt Surf Colony Recreational Maintenance. There's been
an additional agreed-to stipulation by the applicant that the docks will
not extend out into the Vanderbilt WatelWay.
Is there a motion to recommend approval for that?
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So moved.
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray, seconded by
Commissioner Adelstein.
Is there any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Hearing none, all those in favor, signify
by saying aye.
COMM1SSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye.
COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY; Aye.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
All those opposed?
(No response.)
COMMISSIONER CARON: Motion caH\es 9-0. Thank you.
Page 10
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 73 of 192
August 7,2008
MR. KLA TZKOW: Mr. Chairman, do you want this brought
back again or not?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: No, no, please, spare us.
Item #8B
PETITION: PUDZ-2006-AR-I0875. TAMIAMI CROSSING CPUD
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Next consent agenda item is the
Tamiami Crossings CPUD. In the discussion that we had there was a
concern over one of the items that we had stipulated involving the
request for the deviation involving the parking. Staff had originally
included the deviationonly for the master plan Exhibit A that was
originally submitted. When the alternati've master plan came in, staff
wanted to limit the deviation to just the original master plan and not
have it apply to both. .
If! recall correctly, the applicant said it really should apply to
. both and entered testimony to that effect.
I believe that the staff then agreed to that. And I'd have to double
check to be sure. And then there was some errors in the way the
references to the paragraphs in that same deviation were listed. Some
were E.] .2 or D .1.3, and they should have all been consistent wi th the
document.
We had made a motion to clean up the 50 percent language and
then to fix those errors. Apparently at the time we made that motion
staff thought they were clear on what we meant by that. But in trying
to write it up, as you can see by a memo in the file, it isn't clear. And
they're looking for clarification.
I believe what I just reiterated is the clarification, but I certainly
can stand to be corrected if someone remembers it differently. I'm just
going by what minor notes 1 made that day.
Does anybody else have any comment on it?
Page II
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 74 of 192
/
August 7, 2008
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, then I think what the
clarification is from my understanding by cleaning up the 50 percent
language means that it isn't subject to just the individual master plan, it
would be subject to both of them, and that was the clarification that
was needed.
With that in mind, ifthere's no other comment, then I'd like to
have a motion to accept the item on the consent.
Mr. Klatzkow?
MR. KLA TZKO W: Mr. Bellows, is staff clear now as to what
the planning commission wants on this?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes, I believe so.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Is there a motion to recommend
approval for this on the consent agenda?
COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: So moved.
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: So moved.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray, seconded by
. Commissioner Adelstein.
Discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: All in favor, signify by saying aye.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye.
COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY; Aye.
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Aye.
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Aye.
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: Aye.
COMMISSIONER MlDNEY: Aye.
COMMlSSIONER KOLFLA T: Aye.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye.
Anybody opposed?
(No response.)
Page 12
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 75 of 192
August 7, 2008
COMMISSIONER CARON: Motion carries 9-0.
Cherie', r bet I'm talking too fast already, huh? This
housekeeping stuff, J try to get through it, YOll know. Thank you.
Okay, let's move into the regular items on the agenda.
Item #9A
PETITION: BD-2006-AR-9061, MONTE CARLO CLUB
CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The first one is advertised public
hearing, is 9(A). And it's Petition BD-2006-AR-906l, the Monte
Carlo Club Condominium Association, which is up on Gulf Shore
Drive at Baker-Carroll Point Subdivision. Dock extension.
Al! those wishing to testify on behaIf of this petition, please rise
to be sworn in by the court reporter.
. Anybody intends to speak on this, please rise so the court
reporter can swear you in.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Are there disclosures on the part ofthe
planning commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have --like all of us, I think we've
received e-mails, they came in our packet. But I did talk to Mr.
Scofield resolving (sic) a question about, I think, the surveyors. And
I'm sure it will-- I'll have the question back up here again today.
So other than that, we'll move forward with presentation by the
applicant.
MR. KURTH: Good morning. For the record, Quin Kurth,
Turrell & Associates, representing the Monte Carlo Club.
IfI may, I'd like to pass out some exhibits.
This morning we're requesting a I 5-foot extension from the
Page 13
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 76 of 192
August 7, 2008
allowed 20 feet for a total protrusion of 3 5 feet from the mean water
high [ine, which is located on the seawall. This extension is needed to
facilitate the mooring of20 additional vessels, for a total 0[34 vessels.
We do meet the Manatee Protection Plan, marina siting criteria,
and we have a moderate ranking, which allows 10 slips per 100 feet of
shoreline. That allows us 70 total vessels. However, as mentioned
before, we are only proposing 34.
We do not exceed 25 percent of the width of the waterway. We
meet setbacks. The remaining navigable channel is 140 feet wide
versus the 60~foot navigable channel under Bluebill Bridge, as you
can see on the exhibit. Therefore, we're not proposing to impact
navigation.
We have received state and federal permits to dredge in order to
reduce our total protrusion. We are and do wish to include a
three-foot draft restriction as requested in the Manatee Protection Plan.
. The wet slips are only to be utilized by Monte Carlo residents.
And I believe that's it, unless you have any questions.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Well, why don't we start with the
questions.
Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: The existing 14 docks, what's the
length of those?
MR. KURTH: Those are 30 feet. There is a sovereign
submerged land lease via the state that is out 40 feet. And jfl may, I'd
like to describe that a little bit. Right now the submerged land lease
boundary is still at 40 feet; however, the state likes a five-foot
clearance just for, you know, to prevent any future compliance issues.
COMMISSIONER CARON: It looks like according to the
permit that you have for those 14 docks that it's 10 feet out and then __
MR. KURTH: It does vary. Forty is the average.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Well, the line that's sitting here--
MR. KURTH: Are you talking about the submerged land lease
Page 14
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 77 of 192
August 7, 2008
boundary or the protrusion?
CO:MMISSIONER CARON: No, the boundary is 10 feet from
your seawall.
MR. KURTH: That is the property line.
COMMISSIONER CARON: And those docks extend beyond
that property line 20 feet --
MR. KURTH: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARON: -- for a total of30 feet.
MR. KURTH: Okay.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's the existing docks you're talking
about?
COMMISSIONER CARON: That's the existing docks.
MR. KURTH: Correct, the existing dock, and were originally
permitted through the county, correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, while we're on that same
question, in the same line with Ms. Caron's question then, if you have
-- 10 feet of these docks exist on your own property, then; is that what
you're saying?
MR. KURTH: Correct. That's what the survey shows.
CHAIRMAJ.'\I STRAIN: Okay: So then you're got 20 feet for
what should be on the waterway --
MR. KURTH: Though in reality --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- then you want five more feet on top
of that. So you're looking at a five-foot extension beyond the point of
where a property line is measured from, but it's 15 feet beyond the
seawall because you moved the seawall 10 feet in on the property that
-- do you know why that would -- why would anybody give up 10 feet
of their property --
MR. KURTH: I don't know.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- on that waterfront?
MR. KURTH: I couldn't tell you.
Page 15
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 78 of 192
August 7,2008
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's pretty odd,
COMMISSIONER CARON: It's an old development.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Any other questions on -- from
the applicant at this time?
,(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: r might have a couple, so hang on a
second. I think my questions will be of staff.
Are you intending to install boat Ii fis here?
MR. KURTH: They are optional, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Yeah, my questions will be of
staff. Thank you,
Hearing no -- oh, Mr. --
COMMISSIONER CARON: Lifts and covers, it says.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Kolflat?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Yes, section three criteria,
which is some of the secondary criteria three, indicates that the length
of the vessel or vessels along the docks should not exceed 50 percent
of the linear waterfront frontage. And this looks to me like it does
exceed that.
MR. KURTH: Correct. And I believe that is pertinent to
single-family homes, not multi-family.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: But if it's applicable to
single-family, what differs it from being applicable to multiple
family? I mean, isn't the object to keep a little openness there and not
to close everything in?
MR. KURTH: Well, single-family you're allowed two vessels.
Multi-family it's depending on the state, federal or local criteria. I
mean, you have so many more units.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Another question I had was can
they release or rent these slips, the people that own them?
MR. KURTH: The slips may be rented. However, they will be
only utilized by residents of Monte Carlo.
Page] 6
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 79 of 192
August 7,2008
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: And they're the only ones that
can rent it then?
MR. KURTH: Yes, sir.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Thank you.
The other thing was, looking at your dredging drawing you're
bringing the dredging all the way up to the seawall. And it goes down
to minus four as far as the depth of it.
MR. KURTH: Correct. Actually, the dredging -- it does start
from the seawall, it goes down at a two-to-one slope to four feet, so it's
not a straight four-foot dredge next to the seawall.
But yes, we are dredging to the seawall as close as we can to
prevent any further protrusion.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: .But if you dredge there,
wouldn't you be able to draw the boats all the way up to' the seawall?
MR. KURTH: Not necessarily. I believe we can with what
we're doing now. That has been proposed in order to prevent any
structural damage to the existing seawall.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: See, I don't see the justification
of extending the pier when you could dredge it and you're going to
dredge it up and draw the boats up to the seawall. Then you still
would be within the 20-foot extension that is permitted.
MR. KURTH: Iff may, I'd like to present a cross-section
drawing.
As Mr. KoWat had described, the dredging does start from the
seawall. In order to prevent any structural damage to the seawall or
have to replace that seawall -- and if I may start from there, in most
cases if you replace a seawall most times people just put another
seawall in front of that, which would actually increase the protrusion.
So what we're doing is we're taking the dredging of a two-to-one
slope and going to four feet. As you can see there's just a couple feet,
maybe a few feet, I can measure it if you'd like, between the vessel
and the seawall now. I don't think it would be that appropriate to put
Page 17
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 80 of 192
August 7, 2008
it right on the seawall just to prevent any damage to the vessel or the
seawall, so --
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: But you can see from the bow
of the boat that's the shallowest draft on the boat and therefore it could
go pull up toward the seawall.
MR. KURTH: Correct. Ifwe dredge four feet aJJ the way to the
seawall, yes, you may be able to pull in a couple more feet. But like I
said, you don't want to put the bow of the boat on the seawall itself,
just with waves and wind.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: That's the only questions I had,
Mark.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Besides saying that J agree with
Mr. Kolflat, I had another question here with regard to these are an
older -- this is an older condominium and it's a rea] three-story
building, as opposed to what we consider t11fee-story buildings now.
If you do lifts and boat covers on these, will you be blocking the
view of those on the first floor, or is the slope -- I mean, I know that __
but it does slope upward slightly.
MR. KURTH: That's a good question. It really depends on the
boat, on how high they put the boat on the lift. Nonnal1y I would say
no, you're looking at a three-foot increase in rise with the vessel. I
don't think it's personally going to make that big of a difference.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Donna, in the ordinance for
boat lift, it would be 12 and a half feet from the top of the seawall,
which would be the first story.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, that's why my question.
MR. KURTH: I'm sorry, say that again, please?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: In the ordinance for the canopy,
it can't be higher than 12 and a half feet measured from the top of the
Page 18
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 81 of 192
August 7, 2008
seawall, which would totally block out the first floor.
MK KURTH: Correct. And I was speaking specifically towards
boatlifts, I'm sorry.
For the canopy, yes, that may cause an issue. And if you'd :ike,
we can get a motion to exclude boat houses.
CHAIRMAN STRArN: Mr. Kolf1at?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: I still have concerns about the
density or the magnitude of boats in this area.
OUf primary criteria number one says whether the number of
dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed is appropriate in relation to
the waterfront length location upland use and zoning of the property.
Well, looking at this petition, every part of that waterfront
lineage is -- with a boat in it. In other words, it uses up 100 percent of
the space. .
MR. KURTH: Yes, sir..
COMM1SSIONER KOLFLA T: So there leaves no latitude for
what is appropriate. I mean, if it's going to -- you can block out the
. whole waterfront with boats, what's the purpose of this first criteria?
MK KURTH: IfI might respond to your question, per the
Manatee Protection Plan, like I said, we're allowed 70 vessels, We're
only proposing 34. With the multi-family residence, I believe there's
98 units. With that we're trying to get as much as we can. We have
dredged to prevent the total protrusion.
Also, ifI might add, with the state agency, we have completed a
proprietary deed of conservation easement, which states that we're not
allowed to propose any additional docks.
COMMISSrONER KOLFLA T: Well, but this application will
have 34 boat slips and there are 54 residential units there that
subscribe to that. That's 60 percent of the residential units would have
boats, supposedly. Now that compares to the rest of the Collier
County which has 25,000 registered boats and say a population of
350,000 to six percent.
Page 19
Agenda Item No. 7C .
December 2. 2008
Page 82 of 192
/"" -
August 7. 2008
Tn other words, there's a substantial difference there between the
density of boats in the living area, this area, than there is for the whole
county. And that concerns me as far as this waterway becoming so
congested that both from the observation impacts to other neighbors
and other people in the area plus the usage of the water becomes a
problem,
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is that a -- did you have a question there
or just making a statement?
COMMISSION ER KOLFLA T: No, I think I made a statement.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. I just wanted to make sure we
weren't expecting a response.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: I'd welcome a response, but it
was a statement.
MR. KURTH: And I agree. I think Vanderbilt Lagoon has'got
lots of boats. I don't -- as a consultant, it's tough for me, because I
don't see too much more going on in Vanderbilt Lagoon.
Fortunately for my applicant they do have 712 linear feet of
shoreline, they do meet the Manatee Protection Plan. And as tough as
the environmental permitting is with state and federal agencies, you go
for as much as YOll can.
CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Any other questions of the applicant at
this time?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, we'll hear from staff now.
MR. KURTH: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MS. CASERTA: Good morning. Ashley Caserta with the
Department of Zoning.
I've received five letters from neighboring property owners.
Have you received them?
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Three.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Two came in yesterday in the e-mail.
Page 20
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 83 of 192
August 7, 2008
MS. CASERTA: According to staffreview, they meet all of the
criteria that are applicable.
And I'd like to answer any questions that you have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Questions of staff?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I do, Mark.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Mr. Schiffer.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Are the prior docks permitted?
MS. CASERTA: The existing docks?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Right.
MS. CASERTA: Yes, they were approved by buHding permit.
That was before the requirement for planning commission approval.
And I've got a copy of that.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And did they get an extension
permit or --
MS. CASERTA: It wasn't required at that time. It was done by
bulJding permits, so they were approved out to 30 feet.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And Ashley, the requirement
. for the code is 20 feet, correct?
MS. CASERTA: Yes.
COMMISSIONER SClllFFER: So everybody is expecting to
have a 20-foot dock.
MS. CASERTA: Right.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Why do you think we should
give them the 10 feet, this additional dock, just because we can or --
and the concern I have is the criteria, is that, you know, back in 2006
when we added that to the LDC, prior to that it was just a staff method
of coming up with what's an acceptable dock.
And again, to my fellow commissioners, this was the problem
expressed, that once we put it in in 2006, the appearance is that it's a
score card, we just check it off, correct?
MS. CASERTA: Well, staffs job is to evaluate the petition
according to the criteria and recommend approval or not.
Page 21
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 84 of 192
/
August 7, 2008
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And the way you do that is with
a scoring method of, you know, five of these and four of those,
correct, of the criteria? Unfortunately it's been dragged into the code.
But the impression is that we don't have to give them the thing. I
mean, the code reqllires 20 feet. If there's a circumstance where they
need to go further, then I think we can use that criteria to do it.
The scoring part of it I think's a disaster. And I expressed it in
2006 and we're having a problem today.
But anyway, is there any reason why they shouldn't have the
code required 20 feet?
MS. CASERTA: Well, it's -- staff doesn't have an opinion on
whether or not they should get an extension. I think __
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows.
The projects that come in before us, the property owners have the
right to request further extension for. the boats that they feel they need
and for the water depth available.
It meets the criteria. Ashley's correctly noted that this petition is
consistent. If the planning commission has other opinions of the
consistency, please express them and we'll have the vote reflect that.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But with the addition of the
criteria as part of our mandate that we have to now keep score too, is
the intent that we solely just run through the criteria, and if we agree
with it and then we add up the score at the end then they're allowed it
if we -- criteria, is that what we should be doing today?
Jeff?
MR. KLA TZKOW: This isn't scoring. You review the criteria.
If there's something about this criteria that you find particularly
onerous to give it, then you say no.
If they meet all ofthe criteria, then they're entitled to it. If they
do not meet all the criteria, they are not entitled to it. We don't keep
score. It's not like it's 5-2 here or 4-3 there.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. But here it says it must
Page 22
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 85 of 192
August 7, 2008
~
be determined that at least four of the five.
MR. KLATZKOW: Right, but it's at least. But you can say
because of criteria one we don't believe we should grant this.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. So we can -- all right.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron -- I'm sorry, go ahead, Brad.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Actually, one of the criteria--
let's just kind of run through to make sure. You stated that it needs
this because there is that oyster bed area. It meets the criteria because
the water's too shallow up against it. But then in that same paragraph
you're noting that they're removing it. So do you agree that criteria
two is still met?
MS. CASERTA: Which one are you talking about?
. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Criteria two.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Primary or secondary, Brad?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, let me -- it's a primary.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: It would be on Page 4.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Some of these are like, they're
just -- I mean, I really think we have to look at this section again.
But do you agree with number two, that it's met? Because what
you're stating is that it's too shallow because of the oyster bed, and
then the end of that paragraph you're citing how they're removing the
oyster bed. So don't you think it's not met?
MS. CASERTA: Well, I think. it has to do with the maximum
length of35 feet as described in the petitioner's application as well. A
35-foot boat would never fit in a 20-foot protrusion.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. So the hardship here is
to try to get 35-foot boats. Okay, I'm done.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, actually I was just going to
follow up with that, because they have a dredge permit so that negates
first criteria number two.
Page 23
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 86 of 192
August 7, 2008
It also does the same for secondary criteria one and criteria
number two on secondary. I mean, if the docks are only 20 feet in
length, the same thing would apply, they would still have reasonable
safe access.
So, I mean, I think we're not looking at what's being proposed, I
think we're checking off. And so I guess it's definitely up to us to look
and say that these criteria are not being met and there is no need for
. this. They have docks right now, that there's no reason they can't
extend the docks that they have right now. I mean, extend them
around, not out.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is there -- did you want to ask -- are you
asking that as a question of -- a statement? Do you want a response to
it from anybody?
. COMMISSIONER CARON: Well, I think Ashley has just said
she's, you know -- .
MS. CASERTA: The one thing that I can say is in primary
criteria number two, it reads whether the water depth at the proposed
site is so shallow that a vessel of the general length, type and draft as
described in the petitioner's application.
So I have to take into consideration what they are proposing and
not have an opinion on what should be there.
COMMISSIONER CARON: And I would just say that that
might be true if there were no docks here at all. They have ]4 docks
with boats currently there that seem to be doing just fine. So there
isn't a water depth problem.
I f the goal is just to bring bigger boats into the backwaters and
into the lagoon, then I guess we should cite that as criteria, but I don't
know that that's the point of the criteria.
CHAIRMA1\J STR..A.IN: Anybody else?
Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Just to follow up with Donna
too is that he stated that the draft's going to be three feet. The section
Page 24
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 87 of 192
August 7, 2008
he showed us, they're going to dredge it to four. So the 35 feet has
nothing to do with the boat they want to bring in, unless they want to
bring in a large length boat.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The only thing on that, I know from
experience, that you've got to dredge at least a foot deeper than what
you're trying to moor.
I'm not trying to defend it or say it's right, I'm just telling you
why they may have gone to four. lfthey're going to go to three-foot
draft then they have to go to four feet to --
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I understand that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay.
Any other questions? Mr. Murray?
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: No, a statement. I'm not taking
issue necessarily, but just to say under criteria number two 1 read that
as well, but I saw it as the dredging was not to reverse the issue or not
to -- I don't see it as negating'it, as was mentioned. I see it to help
accommodate, and there's a safety issue, you're dealing with
equipment. . A vessel too close to the walJ is not a good condition. So
I didn't see it as absolutely negating it. So I don't take the same
position.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: I think, Mr. Murray, what's
happened here is because the seawall has not been used for dockage
right along, it's built up with oyster beds, and so that's the reason that
they need to dredge. It's not that there's not enough depth there, they
have to get them out of there in order to -- or they'd be extending out
even further.
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: And I understand that. Just
briefly a dialogue. I -- in relation to that, I wondered if this were
approved after all is said and done and the docks are in there and even
the lifts, I wonder how they would dredge the next time when all those
beds flU in again. So that was going through my mind.
...J
Page 25
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 88 of 192
/ .
August 7, 2008
But I think this is an interesting conversation.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Midney and then Mr, Schiffer.
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Yeah, just a comment. I noticed
that one of the letters of objections talked about the congestion of the
waterway and especially Wiggins Pass. And somebody that uses the
park, I notice quite a bit of erosion along the banks because of just the
heavy, constant traffic of boats going in and out. It doesn't seem as
though this is the best idea, But according to the criteria we have
here, that's irrelevant.
CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Hence the problem with what
we did in 2006, I might add.
But Ray, what is the reason we have a requirement for a 20-foot
dock? I mean, the problem I have with these boat docks is I assume
that the county says you can have a 20-foot dock. If in fact you have a
water situation -- and we've done this before, there's been shallows
and we've had to let these docks go out to get to the water where they
could actually get a lift under it, we've gone along with that.
But there is a requirement to 20 feet. The reason we give them
the extension is because they can't even get the 20-footer, so we let
them go out far enough to get 20 feet in deep enough water. But why
do we have a 20-foot requirement?
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows.
I've been with the county 20 years and it's been a 20-foot
standard since that time. It was before I came here.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay. And we just live with 20
feet then. That's what the law says you can have is a 20-foot dock,
unless you have a depth problem. Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions of staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ashley, I have one. Manatee Protection
Plan. The area that this particular facility is in on the Manatee
Page 26
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 89 of 192
August 7, 2008
Protection Plan, Page 74, shows that it has adequate depth. And then
we get into areas going through Turkey Bay that does not have
adequate depth in Turkey Bay.
Do you know what that means in regards to the maximum depth
then that would be allowed typically for docks along here?
MS. CASERTA: I can explain it as I understand it. But I had a
conversation over e-mail with Quin and Susan Mason from
Envirorunental Services yesterday. And as I understand it, that's why
. they're being restricted to the three-foot draft is because of water depth
that's going out into the open waters.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. But does the determination of
the Manatee Protection Plan on the number of boats you're allowed to
have, is it based on the adequate depth of the immediate area you're in,
or is it based on the'depth that you need to get to in order to utilize
your boat to the purpose intended, which is to the Gulf?
Because those two different areas have absolutely different -- for
use of --lack of a better word, scoring within the Manatee Protection
Plan. And I'm just wondering how one affects the other.
MS. CASERTA: Ifit's okay with you, I'll refer to-
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure.
MS. CASERTA: -- Susan Mason, she's a little more
know ledgeab Ie.
MS. MASON: Good morning. For the record, Susan Mason
with Engineering and Envirorunental Services Department.
The Manatee Protection Plan does require an evaluation of the
water depth, adequate water depth from the property out to open
water, whether it be some dredged navigable waterway or the Gulf.
And that is part of the evaluation.
This site does meet the standard of moderate, and -- because it
doesn't have adequate water depth all the way out. But it does not -- it
also does not have a problem with manatee use. And the way that's
judged is the number of manatee deaths in that area.
Page 27
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 90 of 192
August 7,2008
And then also there's no impact to either mangroves or sea grass
beds, any kind of marine habitat. So that's how they earned a
moderate ranking, So what they've requested is well under what
they're allowed. Moderate rankings allow 10 slips per 100 feet of
shoreline. So I think they're allowed up to 71 boats -- 712 feet of
shoreline is what they have.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, Ms. Mason.
Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah. Susan, didn't the county just
get money from the federal government to look at water quality here
in Vanderbilt Lagoon because of an overabundance of boats and poor
water quality caused from both boating and runoff and probably
multiple things? There obviously is no sea grass around here __
MS. MASON: Not in this immediate area. .
COMMISSIONER CARON: -- because of the water quality.
MS. MASON: I don't know about any federal grants that may
have been done, That section is now a different division and I'm not __
it used to be in my department, I was able to sort of hear about things
that were going on, And I really don't know. r don't know if anyone
else here does.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark, I have a question.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Let's see if we can get a response. Did
you have a response to that question?
MR. KURTH: Yeah, I think I might be able to answer your
question.
Ifl recall correctly, 1 believe that water quality was requested in
order to pennits -- to dredge the chmmel from Vanderbilt Lagoon out
to Wiggins Pass to four feet. I know we have a survey from I think it's
'04 -- go ahead.
COMMISSIONER CARON: It's actually two different things.
We actually got some additional funding to study water quality in the
lagoon itself, having nothing to do with dredge penn its for the pass
Page 28
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 91 of 192
August 7,2008
itself.
MR. KURTH: Okay, I thought that -. okay.
COMMISSIONER CARON: It's two different.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Susan, my point's quick, To
correct the math is that we have 712 feet of shoreline, so the answer is
not 71, it's seven. One per 100.
MS. MASON: No, it's 10 per 100 feet at moderate. It's one per
1 00 with ..,-
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Oh, okay, then I sit corrected.
MS. MASON: -- restrict -- I canlt think of the opposite of the
. preferred,
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: If it was one per 100, I think it would
have not gotten quite this fat today. With everybody that's been
looking at this, it would have been pulled back a long time ago,
Anybody else have any questions of staff?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Are there any public speakers, Ray?
MR. BELLOWS: Yes, we have three registered speakers. The
first is Carol Wright, to be followed by Lew Schmidt.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, And when you come up to
speak, please identifY yourself and five minutes to speak, please.
MS. WRIGHT: Carol Wright. And I'm going to relinquish my
speaking time to Mr. Lew Schmidt.
CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Thank you.
MR. SCHMIDT: Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Lew
Schmidt. I live at 405 Pine Avenue in the Vanderbilt Beach area. I
live on a finger street.
I am also a member of the Vanderbilt Beach Residents
Association board.
There are a few of us in the area at this time of year.
Unfortunately we don't have all of our board members here to come to
.c.
Page 29
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 92 of 192
,
August 7, 2008
you with a decision by the board. But I am here on behalf of myself
and the board mem bers that are here to express our concerns about a
trend that we seem to be seeing in the Vanderbilt Beach area. And the
trend is to bigger docks and bigger boats.
And this is an example of the trend.
We're not so much concerned about how far the dock goes out in
the water, it's what size boat can you put on a 35-foot dock. And I
think you all well know that a 35-foot dock can handle a 40-foot boat
or more, depending upon where it's at and where it's configured.
A 35 to 40-foot boat has a beam of 12 feet or more of width at
the widest point. It has an operating draft of three- and- a-half to four
feet. And I put emphasis on operating draft. The draft, the three-foot
draft that you're seeing is a dry draft. A wet draft with fuel and water
on board puts that boat further in the water.
You also have a concern about.the depth from the waterline to
the bottom of the prop. The depth you're looking at is to the lowest
point in the hull. Props often are lower than the hull depth. And that's
particularly true of these new go fast boats that have 750 to
900-horsepower on the back of them. And you couldput one of those
on these docks.
The problem is the channel. As you know, Water Turkey Bay is
very restricted, It is narrow. It is posted as having three foot at mean
low tide. But Florida Fish and Wildlife within the last year actually
measured that and found that it was only 22 to 27 inches deep, not
three feet.
How do these big boats get up and down the channel? They have
to hold themselves to the center of the channel and they must play the
tide. And that's okay except what do little boats do that share this
waterway witb these big boats? They have to avoid them. They nm a
chance of being pushed out of the channel, they run a chance of being
grounded. And it's all to accommodate boats that were never intended
to be taken care of in our community.
Page 30
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2. 2008
Page 93 of 192
August 7, 2008
The reason for the 20- foot doC< restriction is to control the size
of the boats. You can get a 20 or 25-foot boat on a 20-foot dock, and
you will hold your draft to two, two-and-a-halffeet, which works in
that watef\.Vay. But the deeper draft does not.
And we would ask you to consider what -- the dangers to
navigation through that narrow channel, narrow and shallow channel.
Could it be dredged? It could. Is it realistically (sic) to think that
that channel can be dredged to more than three foot? I don't think so.
Water Turkey Bay is very shallow in a very large body of water.
Any channel you dig through there is going to silt in very rapidly and
you're going to have the same or worse problem than what we have at
. Wiggins Pass trying to maintain that channel.
We would urge you to hold the line on the current LDC permit of
a maximum of a 20-foot boat dock length. That would give us .
comfort.
And in the meantime, from this time on, we would urge you to
support a study of that watef\.Vay to determine how many boats can
share that waterway and what is the maximum size of the boats that
can use that water safely, navigate it safely.
And I thank you for your consideration and I'd be glad to answer
any questions you may have.
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I have one.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr, Kolflat, then Mr. Murray.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Yes, are you -- you mentioned
35-foot boats would be docked here, could be docked at these piers.
Are you aware that the state land lease agreement that they have
allows them to put a 40-foot boat in there if they want?
MR. SCHMIDT: That's the point, yes, they probably could.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: So really we're talking about the
possibility of 40-foot long boats there rather than 35-foot long boats.
MR. SCHMIDT: Exactly. And in fact, in the illustration, the
illustration showed the boat going to the end of ~he dock. But as a
Page 3 1
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 94 of 192
August 7, 2008
matter off act, the boat will extend out into the waterway an additional
five feet, give or take, to alJow for the engines and the hull itself.
Thank you, that's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray?
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Good morning, sir.
MR. SCHMIDT: Good morning.
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I understand your enthusiasm.
But you've said quite strongly that the reason that the dock is 20 feet is
in order to restrict the size of the boat. You heard that staff was
unable to say that with the certainty that you did.
How is it that you know that, sir?
MR. SCHMIDT: I'm relying upon some research that some of
our board members have done, and couldn't be here. I think you know
Bruce Burkhard and Susan Snyder. Neither of them could be here.
And they are both very good researchers. And I get the impression
from them that this is the reason for that length.
And it makes good sense to me and I think you should stick to __
I would urge you to sustain that length until you can look into it more
and make a study --
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Well, I appreciate that. Ijust--
you said it with such certitude that I just wondered if you knew
something that they didn't know. Thank you.
MR. SCHMIDT: No, sir, I don't.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Any other questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sir, I have one. The crux of your
comments seem to be on the size of the boat, thus related to the depth.
They have a right .- they're here today only for one reason: For
an extension. Basically the extension is five feet more than what
comparable locations are like in that area. They don't have to be here
if they were only to go to 20 feel.
If they were to go to 20 feet, they could put in 70 boats. They
Page 32
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 95 of 192
August 7, 2008
could do that by going down to the building department and getting a
building permit. Is that more preferable to your organization than 34
boats -- or actually, how many, there's nine or so many in place, the
additional boats they're asking here today, is it more important for you
to stop those additional boats to the number that they're talking about
because of their length versus allowing 70 to go in unrestricted?
MR. SCHMIDT: I will first answer your question directly, and
then I would like to expand upon it.
Our residents and members of the board have no objection to the
20- foot dock. Weare concerned about the allowance under the
Manatee Protection Act. But you have to be reasonable about this.
. They can have 10 in 100 feet. But if you put 10 slips within 100 feet,
the slips can only be 10 feet wide. Then you have to have pilings in
there, and then there is no walkway to get from the shore to the boat.
You can't practically put that many boats in that space.
They might be able to get more than the 34 that they're asking
for, but it certainly is not going to go to 70; they're prohibited by
common sense and facts of measurement. They just won't fit.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, but if they were not to receive the
extension today and they came back with an application and just got
as many boats as they could fit in there, whether it be 50, 40, 60,
whatever, that is more preferable to your organization than the
extension that they're asking for today?
MR. SCHMIDT: I have to say that is correct. We're very
concerned about the large boats and trying to share the waterway with
very large boats.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you.
MR. SCHMIDT: Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Under new business in this meeting, I
have a letter from The Conservancy in a response to an issue that]
brought up to them a month ago or two months ago involving loading
capacity on waterways.
Page 33
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2. 2008
Page 96 of 192
August 7, 2008
They've agreed there is a problem. They would like to see
something done and would help in any kind of study that's initiated.
And I would hope that your organization, as well as Turrell &
Associates and all the others, would want to participate in such a
program so that we can have a count as to what the waterways can
hold.
And under new business I was going to discuss that possibility
today.
MR. SCHMIDT: I think we would absolutely support that
endeavor and we would participate.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark? And it's --
CHAlRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead, Mr. Schiffer.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- it's kind of what you were
saying. Ashley, isn't the most they could have is 54? They can only
have one per unit, correct?
MS. CASERTA: Yes. Well, that's under the extension criterion.
I would have to get back to you as far as how many they could
actually have without an extension.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And Mark, the 10 per 100, isn't
that for a commercial establishment?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I thought it was for a multi-family
docking facility but -- or multi-slip docking facility. But I don't know
if it differentiates, to be honest with you.
MS. CASERTA: I'm sorry, r missed the question.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: The question is the 10 per 100,
that's for a commercial facility, or--
MS. CASERTA: That's Manatee Protection Plan.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Right. For commercial, right?
MR. KURTH: That's for all the above.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: But there's 54 residential here,
correct?
Page 34
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 97 of 192
August 7,2008
MS. CASERTA: Yes.
COMMISSrONER SCHIFFER: So if they left it only -- okay, so
there would be 54 at the most at 20 feet. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Vigliotti?
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Ashley, the gentleman just got
up and spoke and he's concerned about 40-foot boats. Can we put a
40-foot boat? What is the largest that can go in that?
MS. CASERTA: That's what I wanted to put on the record. The
extension is for 35 feet, and that's for the dock facility including boat.
So nothing could protrude further than that 35-foot mark. That's the
edge of the boat, the motor, whatever is back there cannot protrude.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Ashley,how do we monitor that
those boats do not protrude?
CHAIRMAN STRArN: Ashley, before you answer, since I have
a lot of involvement with an issue like this, the DEP does the
monitoring. They send inspectors out on a routine basis. They inspect
very carefully. Not only do they inspect the length of the boats, they
inspect every inch, lineal foot of every piece of wood that's placed out
there and added at any time in the future.
So -- and I know that for a fact because I'm dealing with some
issues in that regard already. They've been very I think overly
conscientious sometimes, but maybe that's to the good,
COMMISSIONER CARON: And Mr. Strain, they've been out
there monitoring. And once they're done with this monitoring that
you're going through now, when will they be back again to monitor?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Next month. They come out every
month.
COMMISSIONER CARON: They're going to come out
monthly?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: They have been doing that for 10 years.
They've come out --
Page 35
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 98 of 192
August 7, 2008
COMMISSIONER CARON: Geez, it will be interesting to find
out how often they come in Vanderbilt Lagoon. I guarantee it's not
monthly, it's not yearly --
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: From what I see in that aerial, I would
hope they don't come out in Vanderbilt Lagoon too often, because
some of those houses on the right side seem to have issues already that
show up on the aerial that, I don't know, I would think maybe it's a
good thing they don't.
But anyway, go ahead, Mr. Schiffer.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Yeah, this points out that when
the county established the 20-foot regulation -- and Commissioner
Murray, you know, the fact that Ray doesn't remember it doesn't mean
that it's not a good number, it means that it happened before Ray got
here. That means that they really intended to have 20-foot boats,
because it does limit the size of the boat.
The extensions that we've favored in the past is where obviously
the person couldn't get the boat up close to his house and we had to
take that 20-foot boat and move it further out. So the extension was
not to allow bigger boats, it was to allow that person the right, if it
didn't violate our criteria, to have his 20-foot boat further out than 20
feet.
MR. BELLOWS: For the record, Ray Bellows.
I can put on the record that the LDC does not restrict boat size.
So the boat dock extensions can and have been in the past used to
allow for larger boats. There's nothing in the LDC that says the boat
has to be 20 feet.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Let's get through this hearing.
But after this hearing, Mark, let's have a conversation about boat
docks.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we're going to have a -- under
new business [ have an issue involving this. And we need to get this
one going forward.
Page 36
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 99 of 192
,,' ',~,
August 7, 2008
Mr, Kolflat, then Ms. Caron again.
COMM1SSIONER KOLFLA T: Yeah, I'd like to ask the attorney
a question. As I understand it, they have a land lease agreement with
the state here that allows them 40 feet as far as a boat they could dock
there. Does the county ordinance negate that right that they have from
the state?
MR. KLA TZKOW: I wouldn't say it negates it, but we have a
20-foot limitation. We can be more restrictive.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: But we are limiting to 20 feet?
MR. KLA TZKOW: We limit to 20 feet unless they get an
extension, which requires this board to approve it.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: And that would limit the boat
extension length to 35 feet.
MR. KLATZKOW: Yes, that's what we're asking for here
anyway.
COMJv.HSSIONER KOLFLAT: Even though the state allows
them to go to 40 feet if they wish.
MR. KLA TZKOW: We can be more restrictive.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Okay.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Yeah, I just wanted to reiterate that
most of the extensions that we have given have been for individual
homeowners as well. It's very difficult to get these dredge permits. So
for somebody with a water depth problem, individual residential home
site would be very difficult. So the most cost effective way to go
about it is to extend out as long as it doesn't interrupt the channel.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, any other questions before we go
to the next public speaker?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ray, would you call the next public
speaker.
MR. BELLOWS: Joe Connolly.
Page 37
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 100 of 192
August 7, 2008
MR. COJ\i'NOLL Y: Mr. Schmidt covered everything that I
would say. I yield.
CHAIRMAN STRAlN: Mr. Connolly re -- yeah, isn't going to __
MR. BELLOWS: He has--
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Withdrawn.
MR. BELLOWS: Withdrawn his request.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you, sir.
Anybody else? Ray, that's it?
MR. BELLOWS: That's it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The applicant, you have an opportunity
to say any closing comments, if you'd like.
MR. KURTH: Thank you, and I'll be very brief.
I just made a list in response to the public comments. Thirty-five
protrusion includes the boat and the dock. This is what we're
requesting today. This is goi.ng to be the total protrusions allowed, 35
feet.
The submerged land lease is at 40 feet. It actually varies from 37
to 40 feet, and this is to prevent future compliance issues with the
state. As Mark knows and I know, with three other projects in the
immediate area compliance with DEP is not fun. It's nothing you
want to get involved with.
Today is 35 feet protrusion, that's what we're asking for.
We do have a three-foot draft and that is to the bottom of the
boat. If compliance were to go out there and check, it's three feet to
the bottom of the boat, whether it's full of gas or it's empty.
Ultimately we meet the criteria. I think we could request 40-foot
boats today, but we're not. We have a lot of room in between the 25
percent width of waterway. We do meet the setbacks.
If 54 is the upland units, then yes, 54 vessels would be the max
we could have, jf that's the number of upland units.
And I believe that's it.
As far as the submerged resources, the oysters along the seawall,
Page 38
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 101 of 192
August 7, 2008
it's just oyster debris, they're not live oysters. 1 have done --
completed a submerged resource survey and I have a drawing, if you
would like to see it.
That's it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Thank you. Any other questions?
Mr. Kolflat?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: I don't have a question, I'd like
to have a motion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we have to close the public
hearing first.
Hearing no other questions; we'll do that. Public hearing -- we'll
close the public hearing and now we'll entertain a motion.
Mr. Kolflat?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Based on my judgment, I do not
believe this petition meets primary criteria one nor primary criteria
two, nor secondary criteria three, nor secondary criteria four, nor in
concert with some ofthe opinions rendered by the neighbors here at
this public hearing. Therefore, I move that we recommend to the
county commission denial of this petition.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Second.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, motion has been made by Mr.
Kolflat, seconded by Ms. Caron. The motion needs discussion.
Mr. Kolflat, you're citing primary criteria one and two.
MR. KLA TZKOW: This doesn't go to the Board of County
Commissioners, this is your vote.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That was going to be another item I was
going to ask.
It ends here, Mr. Kolflat. So when we get done we'll amend your
motion to recommend either approval or denial. And it's this board
that makes the decision. It only goes to the BCC upon appeal.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: I'm sorry, I misspoke.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right. But knowing that the appeal has
Page 39
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2. 2008
Page 102 of 192
August 7, 2008
occurred in the past, one thing the Board of County Commissioners
has asked, and you did this, is for us to state specifically why we are
denying it. And you got into those issues, and 1 want to make sure
they're real clear, so that if there is an appeal to the Bee, they
understand why this board took that position.
Primary criteria one is the number of boat dock or facilities or
boats such proposed is appropriate in relation to the waterfront length,
location, upland use and zoning of the subject property.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: r do not believe it's appropriate.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Primary two is talking about the
water depth. And 1 think this was the one where they're dredging so
the water depth is not an issue; is that where you're --
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: That's correct. The water is
being dredged to begin with, so regardless of what boats they put in
there they will have the depth necessary to use a 20-foot dock.
. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Then YOLl got into your secondary
criteria, and I believe the numbers you cited are? Can you say those
again?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Well, it says the length of
vessels or vessels -- vessel or vessels does not exceed 50 percent of the
linear waterfront frontage.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: That's number three, right?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Yes. And this does exceed 50
percent.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But Mr. Kolflat, it very clearly says --
and I'd rather we catch this concern now rather than have the Bee
point it out to us -- it says for single-family dock facilities. It doesn't
say for this application.
So do you have another secondary criteria that you're concerned
with? Because I don't know if that one realJy applies like you may
believe it does.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Well, I think it applies, but I'll
Page 40
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 103 of 192
August 7, 2008
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: But no, well, then I'd like to understand
your reasoning, because it says for single-family dock facilities. And
I'm not criticizing you, I want to make sure we send the message that's
consistent and clear based on the language in front of us.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Well, I think the rationale for
that is for open space, some open space when you have boats along
the waterfront there. And therefore, the open space should still prevail
and would be extended whether the upland use is single-family or
whether it's marina or whatever it is.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. And it's your motion, so if you
want to leave that one in there, that's fine. Is there another one in
secondary criteria?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Secondary four.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, the proposed facility would have
a major impact on the waterfront view. of neighboring property
owners.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: I think that's been brought up by
some -- the testimony today by the public speakers that neighbors
would have to look at this, and plus the traffic of the waterways.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Anything else, Mr. Kolflat, on
the primary criteria?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: No.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And Jeff, this is to you. You
know, our 2006 where we've added the wording about the criteria,
that's really only to approve it. I mean, do we need -- how do we
disapprove a thing? Can we focus on one of the criteria and --
MR. KLA TZKOW: I think. Chairman Strain's approach is the
proper approach, that if you're going to be voting in the negative that
you state your reasons for the record why you're voting in the negative
and then take your vote.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And the scoring system to
Page 4 ]
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 104 of 192
August 7, 2008
approve conversely is the scoring system to disapprove?
MR. KLATZKOW: You know, I don't really view this as a
scoring system.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well, it's in there, 1 mean, it's--
MR. KLATZKOW: It's criteria that you're looking -- certain
criteria. And from what I've heard from this planning commission's
discussions is that you view the general rule in this county is 20 feet,
then you want to see if there's a reason why you're not giving 20 feet
here, such as lack of adequate depth of water.
So now you're giving the reasons why you think they should not
vary from the 20-foot mandatory requirement.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: All right, we'll save it for new
business.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Vigliotti?
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes. I will not be voting with
the motion maker. I think we're here to decide whether this petition
meets all the criteria required, We make the rules, we tell the
petitioner what they must or must not do. They went through Army
Corps, they went through DEP. In my opinion they've met all the
criteria need be,
Whether we like it or not or we think it's a great idea or not really
doesn't factor in, in my opinion. I don't want to go off on tangents, as
1 said last time. I think we need to stick to what is presented to us, and
I will not be voting with the motion maker.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron, did you have something else
you wanted to say?
COMMISSIONER CARON: No, I'm fine right now.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, there's a motion made and it's
been seconded. Needs a little bit of cleanup.
The primary reasons that the motion maker has stipulated are
numbers one and wo and the secondary are three and four. And in the
motion, he indicated recommend approval of the BCe. He needs to
Page 42
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 105 of 192
August 7,2008
change the motion to I'm assuming recommend denial? Is that what
you're saying, Mr. Kolt1at?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Is the second--
MR. KLATZKOW: Not recommenddeniaJ, to deny.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Deny, I'm sorry. Yeah, to deny,
COMMISSIONER CARON: To deny.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: And does the second concur?
COMMISSIONER CARON: I do agree with the motion with the
exception of secondary criteria number three. I would include
secondary criteria one and two as being more appropriate than three.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, the motion is for primary one and
two, secondary three and four. So we either yote for the motion or we
amend the motion or we have a new motion if there's any corrections
needed. .
So I think if the second isn't going to yote for the motion and
feels the criteria needs to change, we need to get that on the table.
COMMISSIONER CARON: I'll askthe motion maker ifhe
were willing to change his motion.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Change his motion to what?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Change the criteria stated in your
motion.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: I recommended primary criteria
one and two, secondary three and four.
COMMISSIONER CARON: Agreed with one and two on
primary. Three only applies to single-family residences, so it can't be
used on this multi-slip facility.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Well, I'll withdraw that one.
COMMISSIONER CARON: So we probably should be looking
at one, two and four, if you want to use four.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: I would agree with that, as
amending the motion.
Page 43
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 106 of 192
August 7, 2008
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, So now the motion is for
primary one and two, secondary one, two and four? And does the
second agree to that?
COMMISSIONER CARON: (Indicating.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Motion made and seconded for
primary one and two, secondary one, two and four.
Any further discussion?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I have some discussion, It's very short.
I looked at these criteria, and when Mr. Klatzkow said something at
the beginning of the meeting, it changed my position. I thought that if
they met four out of six of the primary, then it was a given they had --
there was no way we could turn it down. But r think what you said in
the beginning of the meeting, that we can turn down for not meeting
anyone of the criteria.
MR. KLATZKOW: Right. If you have a substantial reason to
turn it down, you should turn it down.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. However, in reading the actual
language of the code, I cannot concur with the motion maker's
reasoning on primary one and secondary two and four. So based on
that, I cannot support the motion as it's stated.
Now, there is going to be a discussion under new business as to a
loading of waterways. This is before that. Obviously this doesn't fall
under any new criteria. So if that helps,
But right now I can't support the motion maker, but only because
they picked the wrong criteria that 1 feel isn't consistent with the
reasoning of the code. So with that said, Mr. Midney?
COMMISSIONER MlDNEY: Yeah, I'm also agreeing with you,
I don't agree with all of his criteria, but I'm definitely agreeing with
primary criteria two. Is it possible that we might have a new motion
to deny based on different criteria?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, we could if the first motion fails,
Page 44
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 107 of 192
August 7, 2008
yes.
Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And this is again something we
did in --
MR. KLA TZKOW: You guys, if you want, you could just make
a motion to deny, then each of you give the various reasons why
you're denying it.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Well, that would be much better, if the
motion maker would accept that.
Mr. Kolt1at?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Yes.
CHAIRMANSTRAfN: Would you accept just making a motion
to deny? The second then would confirm that, and then as we vote we.
can state our reasons why we agree or disagree with you.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Certainly.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. So you're making a motion to
deny?
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron, do you second it?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Yes.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: The reason I stipulated that was
that we were instructed at our last meeting that if we were to make a
motion of this nature, it would be helpful to, whether it was the
County Commissioner or anyone else, to state exactly what we are
basing our motion on.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right, I understand, sir --
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: In the past we haven't always
done that.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Right, and we've still got to do that. But
Mr. Klatzkow gave us a really good way to handle it, because we each
have different reasons.
Now during the motion, either affirming your position, we can
Page 45
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 108 of 192
August 7,2008
state what primary and secondary criteria we're concerned with.
So there's been a motion made and seconded to deny. r think
we've had a lot of discussion, so now I'm going to ask starting with
Mr. Kolilat, working our way across for a vote yea or nay. And if it's
a support of Mr. Kolflat's motion to deny, then 1 need you to state your
primary and secondary reasons, if any.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Mark, can 1 say something?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Sure.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And this is to Jeff. .
Jeff, we have criteria to approve a boat dock, and it lists things
like, you know, the number that -- things like that. But the reason is
we have a requirement for 20-feet docks in Collier County. So isn't
. the first test is, is there a need to extend this dock past the requirement
of 20 feet?
Why do we -- 1 mean, it's going to be embarrassing to go through
and come up with the criteria to approve, using it as a criteria to deny,
Now I realize in the appeal they're going to go up beiore the
commission and say look, we met all the criteria, why didn't they
approve us. But that's not -- you know, we've messed the code up
with this, but the code is to criteria to approve. And some of them are
just, you know, adding up the numbers and stuff, it has nothing to do
with really criteria.
So can't we just deny this on the fact that there's no need for an
extension?
MR. KLATZKOW: I think that can be one of your reasons, yes.
But I do think you should, if you believe they are not consistent with
either the primary or the secondary, also state those as well.
CHAIRl\r1AN STRAIN: And Brad, I think individually we can
make our own minds up on how to say we want to deny it or not. I'm
not going to go along with your reasoning at all, so I'm going to still
say what I'm going to say.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'hat's okay, Mark. But the
Page 46
-- ~""^"'-"~- ,,--,_.",,_, .",....,..,.'~, ,_o."."~_;"~'"'"'' _,',
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 109 of 192
August 7, 2008
point is that making the commission go through the criteria I don't
think is fair. I think, you know, we have a requirement of 20 feet. A
lot of people in the county honor that and build 20-foot docks. This
isn't fair to them to just not let that be the criteria.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: You don't have to list criteria. No one
has to do that.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Okay, good.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: The BCC asked us to be clear why we
vote for denial. I'm just trying to make sure we're as clear as possible.
If you feel there's a better way to do it, then by all means in a minute
or two when you get to vote, express yourself the way you want to.
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Fire away.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Ka1flat, your reasons for denial.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLA T: Do you want the criteria?
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Whatever you'd like, sir.
COMMISSIONER KOLFLAT: Criteria primary one and two,
secondary four.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Schiffer?
COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: I'm going to vote to deny.
There's no reason to not build the county required 20-foot dock.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Midney?
COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Deny because of primary criteria
two and secondary criteria one.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ms. Caron?
COMMISSIONER CARON: Deny based on primary criteria
two and secondary criteria one and two.
Additionally, I think there is just no reason why the extension --
why there is a need for an extension past the required 20 feet.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, I'm going to recommend -- I'm
going to vote for support of the motion for denial for primary reasons
two and three and secondary reason one.
Mr. Adelstein?
Page 47
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 110 of 192
August 7, 2008
COMMISSIONER ADELSTEIN: I'm going to do it on primary
one and two.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Adelstein recommended denial as
well -- or, yeah, support of the motion for denial.
Mr. Murray?
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: I'm going to vote to approve, not
the motion, but approve the project.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: So you would be against the motion,
COMMISSIONER MURRAY: That's correct.
CHAIRMAN STRAm: Mr. Vigliotti?
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: I am also against the motion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay. Mr. Wolfley?
COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY; I am against the motion.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, motion carries 6-3. Thank you
all.
And I think we have -- Cherie', how are you holding out?
THE COURT REPORTER: Fine, thank you.
Item #9B
PETITION: CU-2007-AR-12419. ABC LIQUORS INC.
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, with that said, we will go on to
the next case, Petition CU-2007-AR-12419. It's a conditional use for
ABC Liquors on the comer of951 and U.S. 41.
All those wishing to speak on behalf of this petition, please rise
to be sworn in by the court reporter.
(Speakers were duly sworn.)
CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, are there testimony -- T'm sorry,
disclosures on the part of the planning commission?
COMMISSIONER VIGLIOTTI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN STRAfN: Mr. Vigliotti?
Page 48
A No. 7C
;e2' 008
~ p.,. 111 92
'I C'....J \.
. -.~I
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 91-1 _
AS AMENDED, THE COLLffiR COUNTY LAN
DEVELOPMENT CODE, WlDCH INCLUDES T ~+ ~..
COMPREHENSIVE REGULATIONS FOR THE "!tIWll"\;
UNINCORPORATED AREA OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA,
BY PROVIDING FOR: SECTION ONE, RECITALS; SECTION
TWO, FINDINGS OF FACT: SECTION THREE, ADOmON OF
AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, MORE
SPCIFlCALLY AMENDING THE FOLLOWING: ARTICLE 2,
ZONING, DIVISION 2.1. GENERAL; DIVISION 2.2. ZONING
DISTRICTS, PERMIlTED USES, CONDITIONAL USES,
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS INCLUDING THE ADOPTION OF
THE IMMOKALEE NON-CONFORMING MOBILE HOME
PARK OVERLAY DISTRICT, THE ADOmON OF THE
ACTIVITY CENTER # 9 OVERLAY DISTRICT, AND THE
ADOPTION ON INTERIM ZONING CONTROLS IN THE
RESIDENTIAL TOURIST (RT) ZONING DISTRICT LOCATED
IN THE VANDERBILT BEACH AREA, AND AMENDMENTS TO
THE GOLDEN GATE PARKWAY PROFESSIONAL OFFICE
COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT, IMMOKALEE
OVERLAY DISTRICT, SANTA BARBARA COMMERCIAL
OVERLAY DISTRICT AND BA YSHORE DRIVE MIXED USE
OVERLAY DISTRICT; DIVISION 2.3. OFF-STREET PARKING
AND LOADING; DIVISION 2.5. SIGNS; DIVISION 2.6
SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS; DIVISION 2.7.
ZONING ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES; ARTICLE 3,
DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS, DIVISION 3.2,'
SUBDIVISIONS; DIVISION 3.3 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS;..
DIVISION 3.5, EXCAVATION; DIVISION 3.6, WEu;:g ~
CONSTRUCTION; DIVISION 3.16 GROUNDWATE&;i'! ~
PROTECTION; ARTICLE 6. DEFINITIONS, DIVISION6.$~ z "TI
DEFINITIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THiil~ <Xl r=
DEFINITIONS FOR THE TERMS FRONT YARD, RlGHT-O~":;
WAY AND TRACT; SECTION FOUR; READOPTION OF LANp!!O: ~ m
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS, MORJg~.. 0
SPECIFICALLY READOmNG THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE ~ CJ1
ZONING DIVISION 2.2, ZONING DISTRICTS, PERMIlTEit'" .....
USES, CONDITIONAL USES, DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS;
AND DIVISION 2.7, ZONING ADMINISTRATION AND
PROCEDURES; SECTION FIVE, ADOmON OF AMENDED
ZONING ATLAS MAP; SECTION SIX, REPLACEMENT OF
APPENDIX C ENTITLED FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT
REQUIRED CERTIFICATIONS WITH A REVISED EXHIBIT C;
SECTION SEVEN, CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY; SECTION
EIGHT, INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND
DEVELOPMENT CODE; AND SECTION NINE, EFFECTIVE
DATE.
EXHIBIT "D"
ORDINANCE NO. 02- ~
WHEREAS. on October 30, 1991, the Collier County Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No. 91-102. the Collier County Land Development Code (hereinafter WC) . which has been
subsequently amended; and
WHEREAS. the LDC may not be amended more than two times in each calendar year pursuant to
Section 1.l9.l., LDC; and
Words sB<li:el€ thl'BUgR are deleted. words underlined are added.
I
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 112 of 192
WHEREAS, this is the fml amendment to !he LDC, Ordinance 91-102, for the calendar year 2001;
and
WHEREAS, on Marcb 18, 1997, tbe Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolution 97-177
establishing local requirements and procedures for amending tbe LDC; and
WHEREAS, all requirements of Resolution 97-177 bave been met; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, in a manner prescribed by law, did hold
advenised public hearings on December 19. 2001 and January 9. 2002, and did take action concerning these
amendments to !he LDC; and
WHEREAS, the subject amendments to the LDC are hereby delennined by this Board to be
consistent with and to implement the Collier County Growtb Management Plan as required by Subsections
163.3194 (1) and 163.3202 (I), Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, all applicable subslantive and procedural requirements of the law have been met.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County,
Florida, that:
SECI10N ONE:
RECITALS
The foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated by reference herein as if fully set forth.
SECTION TWO:
FINDINGS OF FACT
of fact:
The Board of County Conunissioners of Collier County. Florida. hereby makes the following findings
l. Collier Counly. pursuant to Sec. 163.3161. ~ !!:!j., Fla. Stat.. the Florida Local Government
Camp,rehensive Planning and Land Development Regulations Act (hereinafler the "Act"), is required to prepare
and adopt a Comprehensive Plan.
2. After adoption of !he Comprehensive Plan, the Act and in particular Sec. 163-3202(1). Fla.
Stat., mandates that Collier County adoptiand development regulations that are consistent with and implement
the adopted comprehensive plan.
3. Sec. 163.3201. Fla. Stat.. provides that it is the intent of the Act that the adoption and
enforeement by Collier County of land developmenl regulations for the total unincorporated area shall be based
on; be related 10, and be a means of implementation for, the adopted Comprehensive Plan as required by the Act.
4. Sec. 163.3l94(1)(b), Fla. Stat., requires that all land development regulations enacted or
amended by Collier County be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Pian, or element or portion thereof,
and any land development regulations existing at the time of adoption which are not consistent with the adopted
Comprehensive Plan, or eiement or portion !hereof, shall be amended so as to be consistent.
5. Sec. 163.3202(3), FIa. Stat., slates that the Act shall be construed to encourage the use of
innovative land development regulations.
6. On January 10. 1989. Collier County adopted the Collier County Growth Management Plan
(hereinafter the "Growth Management Plan" or "OMplt) as its Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the requirements
of Sec. 1634.3161l!SYJ. Fla. Stat., and Rule 9J-5, F.A.C.
7. Sec. l63.3194(1)(a), Fla. Stat., mandates that after a Comprehensive Plan. or element or
portion thereof, has been adopted in conformity with the Act, all development undertaken by. and all actions
taken in regard to development orders by, governmental agencies in regard to land covered by such
Comprehensive Plan or element or portion thereof shaH be consistent with such Comprehensive Plan or element
or portion thereof.
Words SH"lidt Ihrali'l. are deleted, words underlined are added.
2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 113 of 192
8. Pu~uant to Sec. 163.3194(3)(a), Fla. Stat., a development ordet or land development
regulation shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan if the land uses, densities or intensities, in the
Comprehensive Plan and if it meets all other critetla enumerated by the local govemment.
9. Section 163.3194(3)(b). PIa. Stat., requires that a development approved or undertaken by a
local guvemment shall be con,;stent with the Comprehensive Plan if the land uses, densities or intensities,
capacity or size, timing, and other aspects of development are compatible with, and further the objectives,
policies, land uses. densities or intensities in the Comprehensive Plan and if it meets all other criteria enumerated
by the local government.
10. On October 30, 1991. Collier County adopted the Collier County land Development Code,
which became effective on November 13, 1991 and may be amended twice annually.
1 \. Collier County finds that the land Development Code is intended and necessary to preserve
and enhance the present advantages that exist in Collier County; encourage the most appropriate use of land.
water and resou",es, consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal effectively with
future problems that may result from the use and development of land within the lotal unincorporated are of
Collier County and it Is inlended that this land Development Code preserve, promote. protecl, and improve the
public health, safety, cnmfort. good order, appearance, convenience, and genero! welfare of Collier County;
prevent the overcrowding of land and avoid tbe undue concentration of population; facilitate the adequate and
efficient provision of transportation. water, sewerage schools, parks. recreational facilities, housing, and other
requirements and services, conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources within the jurisdiction of
Collier County; and protect human. environmental, social, and economic resources; and maintain through orderly
growth and development, the character and stability of present and future land uses and development in Collier
County.
12: It is the intent of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County 10 implement the
Land Development Code in accordance with the provisions of the Collier County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter
125, Fla. Stat.. and Chapter 163, Fla. Stat., and through these amendments to the Code.
SECTION THREE: ADOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
SUBSECTION 3.A. AMENDMENTS TO GENERAL DIVISION
Division 2.1., Genero!. of Ordinance 91-102, as amended, the Collier County land
Development Code, is hereby wnended 10 read as follows:
Sec. :U.IS. Prohibited uses Bnd strodures.
*
.
*
*
*
*
.
*
*
*
*
6. In anv zoninll district. where the list of permitted and conditional uses
contains the phrase "anv other use which is comosrable in nature with the
forel!Oin2' uses and is consistent with the oennilled uses and nuroose and
intent s:t5lt"'ment of the district" or any similar ohrase which nrovides for a
use which is not clearlv defined or described in the Hst of oermltted and
conditional uses. which reouires the discretion of the planninl! services
director or other staff, as to whether or not it is permitted in the district.
then the determination of whether or not that use is pemtitted in the district
shall be made thmUl~h the process outlined in division 1.6. intemretations.
of this code.
SUBSECTION 3.B.
AMENDMENTS TO ZONING DISTRICTS, PERMITTED USES,
CONDITIONAL USES, DIMENSIONAL STANDARD DIVISION
Division 2.2., Zoning Districts. Pennitted Uses, Conditional Uses. Dimensional Standards, of
Ordinance 91-102. as amended, the Collier County land Development Code, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
Words 9W~81( tkr8tigh are deleted. words underlined are added.
3
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 114 of 192
DIVISION 2.2. ZONING DISTRICTS, PERMITTED USES, CONDITIONAL USES,
DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS
. . . . . * . . . . .
See. 2.2.2. Rural agricultural district (A).
. * . . * . . . . . .
2.2.2.2.1. Pennilted uses.
* . . * . . . . . . .
9. Essential services. as set foIth in section 2.6.9.1.
2.2.2.3. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional
uses in the rural agricultural district (A). subject to the standards and procedures
established in division 2.7.4.
* * * . * * * . * * *
26. Essential services. as set forth in section 2.6.9 2
See. 2.2.3. Estates district (E).
* . * * * * * * * * *
2.2.3.2.1. Permitted uses.
* * * * * * . * * * *
3. Essential services. as set forth in section 2,6.9.1.
2.2.3.3.
Conditional uses. The following uses are pennissible as conditional uses in the
estates district (E), subject to the standards and procedures established in division
2.7.4:
* * * * * * * * * * *
7. Extraction or earthmining. and related processing and production not incidental
to the development of the property subject to the following crherian.
a. Th~ (lite mtt.at be a 81UXiftll:lfB. af 29 tt6!'e5 in Jizc. The site area shall
not exceed 20 acres.
8. Essential services. as set forth in section 2.6.9.2.
See. 2.2.12. Commercial professiooaiand 2eneral omce district (C.I) aM ...mmereial
pr8fe09i""altrall,,itlanai IIist".1 (C ),T).
2.2.12.1.
Purpose and intent. Th.e C 1 eemmef6ialluefessisRal dismet is iate.ftsea ia permit
taese Y5eB whieh minlffl:i2e I'edesuiaa ami "!eweular Htifis. The pPe Jisieas sf die
C 1 sis.riet are ifite.n.eie~ t8 apply t8 Biea5 laeat.ed aajaeeat 16 higk flays ami arterial
reads.. Landsesl!'iag, eefttreJlea iagtreS5 &Be egRBB, and ether re.smettBft5 are
iateBEle.a te miRimi~e fre~l:IeRt iftgfe3S and egress la the higtY.:ay fl:em aSHuiBg
uses. The C 1 dismel is aesigseel ta he eempatiele ...ilk all FeSiaefui&l Haas, as i.'leU
as fesieleatial Hses laeeted aleag arterials. The C 1(1" eafRfftereia:l
pf6fe~5i8f1al/kBBsifie8itl aistpjet is hneaaea ta &J3ply la ~ese Elfeas that Bfe
1ftU1&!tieftal ana laestes. l3e1.veeR ~as afhighar MS lel,"JeF iftteRSil5'" de",'elepffieftt.
The Hses iR !kis aistriet are effi.S!S!, 18'\ iHfeftsit) seF..iee \:l.!Je&, aREI Hlftilea
FeSiElsRtial \UieS that meet tke biteRt sf ~e C 1fT eemmereiHl
)9fafessieRaI.1ransitisRM distriet. Thess ltf8S8 ideRtiHe~ !;is lflutsirieftaJ (C J,'f) saall
Be {Hither Rat.es. aft the effieiaI z8aiag aUas. The eemmereiaJ I'rafessisaal elistfiat
sad tRe eemmereiej prefessienal/tf"Bflsiti8RaI aistFiet lire eeA.!Jist.eal witH the
Words lMf'Ueh tRrekllk are deleted. words urtdcrlined arc added.
4
Agenda Item No, 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 115 of 192
lea.aeBal ealerWl .fer eemmereial ed. the geals. eBjeeli. es Ed paIisies as
ideRtlHed in the NttHe laBS liSS 81eHleR! eftl=te Callier Cetlftt) gm;/tIt HUl&&g8ftleRt
"JaR. The R'lafliffittffi seftsity permi5sisle i8 me eemmereial pPefeooieBsl aistriet
Wlfl lke eeffifflerehll prafe!iSi6RallifltAsll:ieasl distriet shall he BB jJrs' 'iaes fer
h.r.ie. The C liT za.jeg diol,iet. 'vll... .IUi..d Ie meet !lie jftt.At ef Ill. elite.
tlRa iRtil1 e6RuHeFeial stiefii!:itFiet prs\isieRS ef~Re future IttftBl:ISe eh~81eftt sftke
.amp"'..A.iv. growth meA.gelllllAt plaA, shell eAI)' he applies eA. Ii.... ta e.f".
ilS tnH\liilieRall:lli~ !:lAd .,. ill Ret Be plI!flniuet! 113 eJlfll:lRtl tldjaeeHt 16 elher
eSffimereill1 zeaiag BetalfteS "ra esasisteaey 1,.\ ilk the ames Bftd iftfill eeRl.J11ereiel
sl:I.l3aistFiet I'rs"/iaieR5.
The C-l commercial orofessional and ~eneraJ office district is intended to allow a
concentration of office type buiJdin2s and land uses that are most comnatible with.
and located near. residential areas. Most C-I commercial orofessional and 2eneral
office districts ure contiguous to or when within u PUD will be plnced in close
oroximitv to residential anms. l.lnolhcrcfoTc scrve us a transition,,1 zoninl! district
between residential areas and hie:her intensity commercial zonine: districts. The
tvoes of office uses oermitted are those that do not have hiah traffic volumes
throue:hout the day. which extend into the evenin2 hours. Thev will have mornin2
and evenin~ short~term -peak conditions. The market SUDDOn for these office uses
should be those with a locaHzed basis of market SUDDort as onoased to office
functions reQuirin2 inter-jurisdictional and re~ional market SUDDort. Because
office functions have sie:nlficant emDlovment characteristics. which are
compounded when ae:e:ree:ations occur. certain oersonal service uses shall be
oennitted. to Drovide a convenience to office-based emoJovment. Such
convenience commercial uses shan be made an inte~ral part of an office buildin2
as oODOsed to the sine:ular use of a buildinll. Housinll may also be a comoonent of
this district as orovided for through conditional use approval.
2.2.12.4.3.
* .. * * *
Minimum yard requiremt!nts.
*
*
.
.
.
*
I. Front yard. 25 feet. .r .Re half of lho hoUSing height .. me.."red fre...
eaeh eJUerier \'/811, J. hlehe. er is ~eatel'.
2. Side yard. 15 feet. OAe kalf of the ..ildiAg height as ........"'s {fa'" e.oh
eJ[:tel'"ler '::adl witi:l a ffiiRlfmun af IS feet. '
3. Rear yard. 15 feet, er eRe half ef the lluildjAg heigkt as "'...Uf.S ff<J...
eaek eJl.tet4er wall, v:hieaever is IRe greater.
*
*
*
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
*
Sec.2.2.13. Commercial eonvenienc. dlstriet (C.2).
2.2.13.1. Purpose and intent. The purpose ond intent of the commercial convenience district (e-
2) is to provide lands where commercial establishments may be located to provide the small seal.
shopping llnd personal needs of the surrounding residentiallllnd uses within convenient travel
distance exceDt to the extent that offic. uses canied fOlward from the C-l district will expllnd the
traditional nei,hborhood size However the intent of this district is that retail and service uses bv
of a nature that can be economicallv supported bv the immediate residential environs. Therefore.
the uses should allow for iloods and services that households ~auire on a daily basis. as ODJ>OSed
to those l!'Oods and services that households seek for the most favorable economic Drice and
therefore require much lamer trade areas. It is intended that the C-2 district implements the
Collier County growth management plan within those areas designated agri~ulturallrural; estates
neighborhood center district of the Golden Gate Master Plan; the neighborhood center district of
tbe lmmokaJee Master Plan; and the urban mixed use district of the future land use element
permitted in accordance with the locational criteria for commercial and the goals, objectives and
policies as identified in the future land use element of the Collier County growth management
plan. The maximum density pennissible in the commercial convenience district and the urban
mixed use land use designation shall be guided, in part, by the density rating system contained in
the future land use element of the Collier County growth management plan. The maximum
density permissible or permitted in a district shall not exceed the denSity permissible under the
density rating system.
Words lIlrtlell IoBrskllfl are deleted. words underlined Bce added.
5
2.213.4.3.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 116 of 192
*
.
*
.
*
.
.
.
*
*
.
Minimum yard reqlliremellts,
I. Fron! yard. 25 feet.. Sf 8Re half af the Building height aa measured frsm
eaeh emerier I:all. :,'aieke' er is W:ie gEeater,
2. Side yard. ~ 08e half sf the BuiJliing heigkt as measured fram eaeh
eJHerier ",'all .:ita a miaiffium sf 15 feel
3. Rear yard. i5 feet.. ar 88e half sf tke Buileiiftg height as m8asuFed fralfl
sash extemaI J. aU. ';/hiehe\'er is Hla gsater.
4. Any yard abutting a residential parcel. A minimum of ~ 25 feet.
*
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
2.2.14.1.
Sec.2.2.14. Commercial intermediate district (C.3).
2.2.14.4.3.
Purpose and intent. The purpose and intent of the commercial intermediate district
(C~3) is to provide for a wider variety of goods and services intended ffi fm: areas
that have exoected to receive a higher degree of automobile traffic. The tvoe and
variety of 200ds and services are those that provide an ODDOrrunitv for comparison.
shoDoimr and have a trade area consisting of several nei~hborhood& and are
Dreferablv located at the intersection of two arterial level streets. Most activity
centers meet this standard. This l3istfiet is iRt8ft~fi ta ee eefBl'aeble .....ith
l'esiaefttial ar-e8:3 BNtI is HBt bnBRtled Ie J:leuRit whelesaURg, Sf aetivities it,'J;tieh
FeEl\:life Bl:1tsiae stsl'age sf mereaaluiisa us efll;lipmeRl. This district is also
intended to allow all of the uses Dermined in the C~ 1 and C-2 zonin2 districts
typicallv aE!e-re~ated in olanned shoDn.ne centers. This district is nor intended to
permit wholesaJinf! tvee of uses or land uses that have associated with (hem the
need for outdoor storal!C of eauipment and merchandise, A mixed.use Droiect
containine a residential comoonent is oennitted in this district subiect to the
criteria established herein, The C-3 district is permitted in accordance with the
locational criteria for commercial and the goals. objectives lind poHcies as
identified in the future land use element of the Collier County growth management
plan, The maximum density permissible in the commercia! intermediate district
and the urban mixed ose land use designation shan be guided, in part. by the
density rating system contained in the future land use eJement of the Collier
County growth management plan. The maximum density permissible or permitted
in a district shall not exceed the densily permissible under the density rating
system,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
*
Minimum yard requirements.
I. Front yard. 25 feet or one-half of the building height as measured from
Ilrade eeeR eKteRer 'I. all. whichever is the greater.
2. Side yard. One-half of the building height as measured from~....a
entsFisr '..all, with a minimum of J5 feet.
3. Rear yard. 15 feet or one-half of the height of the building as measured
from ~eaeR enteRS! '::aU, whichever is the greater.
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
2.2.15.1.
See. 2.2.15. General commercial district (C-4).
Purpose and inrent. The plffflBse &Aa intern sf the geR!f8.J eSRUftereial Bistriet (C
~) is fa eBfteenEHte 8sffiffiereial de" 'elepffle..8t at the interseatie8s Bf Bftsaal 'Saal
en the eeHftt~..S majer FeilS net',vBAE .:, here lHffie ilBf'aelS eaR FeaElily he
aeeemfftsBatea, t6 averS: skip. ana Elissrgani2eEl paUsms sf eemmeFeial
Words stPuek IhrSi:lgR are deleled, words underlined are added.
6
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 117 of 192
as"/elepmeftl, and Ie sreats 2SAmleRlial eeRtefS ".vitl'lin Callie.r CB\lft~ where
a68Hfl6reial ile':elepmeRt Be l3esafit frem praKiR\~ te e$elr eemmeftlial eeBtm.
The Ileneral commercial district is intended fO olavicle for those {vues of land uses
that attract Inrl:!c sC2menls of the DODulation at lhe same time by vinue of scale.
cou'Dled with the ewe of activitv. The pumose and intent of tbe C-4 district is to
provide the ooportunitv for the most diverse tVDes of commercial activities
deliverinG! ,,:oods and services includin2 entertainment and recreational attractions.
at a lar2er scale then the C~ 1 throueh C-3 districts. As such. all of the uses
permitted in the C-l throuah C-3 districts are also oermitted in the C-4 district. The
outside stora2:e of merchandise and eouiDment is orohibited. exccot to the extent
that it is associated with the commercial activity conducted on site such as bUI nol
limited to automobile sales. marine vessels. and the renting: and leasing: of
equipment. Activitv centers are suitable locations for the uses oermitted bv the C-
4 district because most activity centers are located at the intersection of arterial
ronds: therefore the uses in the C-4 district can most be sustained bv the
transponation network of maior roads. The C 4 sislli.t will anew a ~fD'" ffIl\gB ef
eSffiJfleFeial uses '.'/jth appfElpriate stansa<<ia te eRSIMe aee~t:lale landseaping, and
~afferiRg ef allja.ent lans ase5. The C-4 district is pennitted in accordance with
the iocational criteria for commercial and the goals. objectives and policies llS
identified in the future land use element of the Collier County growth management
plao. The maximum density permissible or pennitted in a district shall not exceed
the density permissible under the density rating system.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
.
.
.
2.2.15.4.3. Minimum yard requirements.
I. Front yard. 25 feet or one-half of the height ofthe building llS measured'
from "ade eae. .!tleAer wall. whichever is the greater. Structures 50 feet
in height or greater shall maintain a minimum of a 25 foot front yard
setback and shall be required to provide an additional one foot of sethack
for eacb foot of building height in excess of 50 feet.
2. Side yard. 15 feet or aGne-half of the building height llS mellSured from
~ade. eaeh eKterier /Vall.
3. Rear yard. 15 feet or one-half of the building height lls measured from
~rade elieh eJuerief wall, whichever is greater. '
.
*
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
2.2.15.4.4
Maximum height. +00- lifeet.
.
*
*
*
*
.
*
.
*
.
.
Sec. :U.lSll2. Heavy commercial district (C-S).
2.2.15'12.1. Purpose and inlenL In addition to the uses provided in the C-4 zoning district. the
heavy commercial district (e-5) allows a range of more intensive commercial uses and services
which are ilenerallv those uses that lend to utilize outdoor "oace in the conduct of the business.
The C-5 district permits heavy commercial services such as fuU~service automotive repair, and
establishments primarily' engaged in construction and specialized trade activities such as
contractor offices, plumbing, heating and air conditioning services, and similar uses !I:m1
typicallv have a need to store construction associated equipment and supplies within an enclosed
structure or have showrooms displavin2 the building- material for which they soecialize. Outdoor
storage yards are pennitted with the requirement that such yards are completely enclosed or
opaquely screened. The C-S district is pennitted in accordance with the locational criteria for
commercial and tbe goals, objectives and policies as identified in the future land use element of
the Collier County growth management plan. Th.E. 818niffttlffi aensitj J3ennissible ia the bea. 'l
eemmereial antllfie ufl:lB:f~ m.ift.ed t1se lafttl tiS! aesigaaEien 5sal.ll3e gHidali. iR part, B} the fleBsity
_fig Sj5tem esot&laea ia the ItitHre lar.s use Blemeat sf tHe Callier CauRt) pe-r.V""..a mane.gem8at
plan. 'llls R'lanifnHffl rjeB5ity fle_ssjel! ar pefffi.ittea ia a distriet BllaH RB! eftseea t-h8 ae8sity
peflllissihle uElder the sessit) f8LiRg system.
*
*
*
*
.
*
*
.
*
.
*
Words str~elE dU81:tgh IU'C deleted, words und~rlined are added.
7
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 118 of 192
2.2.15112.4.3. Minimum yard requirements.
1. Front yard. 25 feet.
2. Side yard. ~ ORe he:lf Bf the InlilWRg heigfit 8S RleB5tffe~ wam eaeh
euteAer ~'il1J '!:ith a fBiniaUiRl af IS feet.
3. Rear yard. IS feet. DRe half ef fhe hei1Eling heigkt 85 meastlcea &em Baek
entene! '1:al1.
*
*
*
*
*
*
.
.
*
*
*
See. 2.2.20.
Planned unit development district (PUD).
.
.
.
.
*
*
.
.
.
.
*
2.2.20.3.11. Streets, drives, parking and service areas. Streets, drives. parking and service
areas shaH provide safe and convenient access to dweJJing units and project
facilities, and for service and emergency vehicles and shall be otherwise consis~e:
with the Collier County Functional Classification and Future Roadwav PI~s. _
mav be amended from time to timet:. Ml.l streets shall Ret Be 98 Iala But as te
BflSStiFage 81il'siae traffie Ie 1:fa"lers.e tae de. eJef:jm.er1t eft miRe! streets, Ref eesl::lpy
m.ere tflaa is Fe"lliiEea Ie pfe. iae seeess 85 isd:ieateEl. Har ereB.te1:l8Seeessary
fragmeataHBR ef [he develepmflH[ iete small blealE5, Rer shall !i.Streets shall be laid
out and-ffl' conslrUcled so as IlQ! to require excessive cuts or fills or to interfere
with desirable drainage in or adj~cent to the district. **..
*
.
.
.
*
.
*
.
.
*
*
2.2.20.3.13. Special requirements for industrial pianned unit developments. Industrial PUDs
are intended to implement the industrial under criteria subdisfrict as provided for in
the urban designated areas on the fUlUre land use map. The bouodaries of the
proposed PUD must be transitional. therefore. requiring uses along the perimeter to
be compatible with nonindustrial uses. The project must have direct access to an
arterial, Q!' caUeelO! level street or hieher desi,nation roadway, with an internal
circulatio'n system that prohibits industrial traffic from traveling through
predominately residential areas. ****
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
*
See. 2.2.26. Golden Gate Parkway Professlona' Office Commercia. Overlay District
(GGPPOCO): special conditions for the properties abulling Golden Gate
Parkway east of Santa Barbara Boulevard as referenced In the Golden Gale
Parkway Professional Office Comme...ial District Map (Map 2) of the
Golden Gate Area Master Plan.
*
.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
2.2.26.3.5.
Access. Access to projects shall be provided exclusively via Golden Oate Parkway
and shall be limited to one per 450 feet commencing at the center line of Santa
Barbara Boulevard but shall nonetheless comDlv with the Access Control Policv
(Res. 01~247) in niece at the time of devclooment.
.
.
*
*
*
*
*
.
.
*
*
See. 2.2.28.
Immokalee Overlay Districts.
.
*
.
*
*
.
.
*
.
.
.
2.2.28.4.3.1. Access points for future commercial development shaJI be limited to a maximum.
one per 150 feet of street frontage. Properties with less than the required street
frontage, shall be encouraged. and mav be reauired as a condition of site
develonmem DiaD annrovsl. to utilize shared access points with adjoining
commercia! development.
Words Slrl:lalllltre4gfl arc deleted. words underlined arc added.
8
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 119 of 192
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. * *
2.2.28.8.9.1. Yard requirements.
*
See. %.%.%9.
22.29.1.
2.2.29.2.
%.2 29 3.
Maximum yard requirements.
1. Front yard. SeYeR-or I~en feet exceut in the event of an awnin2. arcade or
colonnade which may extend uo to seven (7) feet into the reauired vard.
2. Side yard. Zero in the event a wan is contieuous to another wan Oil an
adiacent oroncrtV. otherwise ten feet.
Minimum yard requirements.
1. Rear yard. ~ ffive feel.
.
.
.
.
.
*
*
.
*
*
*
NOD ConrormiD2 Mobile Home Park Overlav Subdistrict: Establishmenl of
soecial conditions for these oronerties which bv virtue of actions orecedinl! the
adootion of Ordinance No. 91-102. on October 30. 1991 were deemed to be
nonconfonnimz as a result of inconsistencies with the land develoDment code. and
are located within the Immokalee Urban Boundarv as dCDicted on the lmmokalee
Area Master Plan.
PurrJose and intent: The ouroose of these nrovisions is to recoenize that there are
nonconfonnine: m()bile home Darks in the lmmokalee Urban Area. to orovide
incentives to u02rade these Darks white reauirin2 the elimination of substandard
units. and to allow nark owners to take advantage ofaltemative deveJooment
standards in order to cause some lIoli!radinlZ of conditions that would nonnallv be
reauired of confonnimz mobile home narks. Travel trailers. reqardless ofthe
SQuare foota2e. are not ocnnitted as 8 oennanent habitable structure.
Required site imDrovement Dlan oDo/ication: All nonconfonninil mobile home
develoomentsloarks th.1 oredate Ordinance No. 91-102.lhe land develooment
code. shall be reauired 10 submil. sile imorovemenl ol.n (SIP) within twelve (12)
months ofadcotion cflhis .mendment.
The site imorovemcnt Dlan (SIP) master Dlan shall illustrate the way existine
buildings are laid out and the infrasttucture (i.e. utilities. streets. drainalZe.
landscaoinu: Darkin!:! and the like) to serve those buildings. The number and
location ofbuildine:s shall be reviewed for consistency with code reauirements (i.e.
setbacks. soace between buildine:s. density. and the like). Similarly. the SIP shall
serve to Drovide a basis for obtaining: aOOTova) of reauired infrastructure
imDrovements such as those referenced herein. The aooroved SIP showine al1 of
the above shaH become the official record acknowledl!inl! the leli!al use of tbe
oroncrtv. Failure to initiate this nrocess will result in a code violation in which the
Dronertv owner will be reouired to immediately remove all mobile homes which
have not received a buildinsz cennit and al1 mobile homes deemed to be unsafe and
unfit for human habitation. and otherwise contrarY to the county's housinl!: code
unless othenvise nrohibited bv state law.
Pre-aDD/ication meetine reouirements:
Prior to makine an aoolication to submit an SIP. the orooertv owner and/or allent is
reauired to have a Dre-aoolication meetin2 with Comer County olannine: staff.
Coordinatinll this nrocess will be the resoonsibilitv of the asshmed olanner who
will establish a date for the meetine and wilJ advise other review staff to attend the
meetinll. The owner of the omDertv or ae:ent renresentimr the owner shall brine: to
the meetine a survey DJot Dlan showinq the location of an buildinlls and structures.
and nreferablv a draft olan showine: the nronosed layout of buildines and
infrastrUcture imorovements. The 8D'Dlicant shall consult with the Immokalee Fire
Denartment and the Immokalee Sewer and Water District Drior to the ore.
Words !lash lBrB\lgh are deleted. words underlined arc added.
9
2.2.29.4.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 120 of 192
aonlicalion meetin~ Within 90 daYS after the Dre~B.DDlicatian meetina. the
owner/silent shall submit the SIP aooHcation and sUDoortine documents. Failure to
submit a formal SIP shall cause a citation to be issued to the oronertv which may
culminate in the reauirement to remove all buiJdinlZs and structures as Drovided
above unless otherwise orohibhed bv Slate law.
SIP submission reauirements. DreoarariOlr sta,rdards QfuJ notes:
1. An aDoJication for an SIP on a form crenated bv CoUier County shall be
sismcd bv the owner or a2'ent of the orooertv owner in the form of an
affidavit as indicated on the BDoJication form.
2. A survey plan showing all buildinlIs and structures their uses and the
actual size of the structures.
3. A site improvement Dlan showin2'the prooosed location of all buildin2's.
and aU reauired infrastructure. drawn to scale on a 24" x 36" sheet(s)
i11ustratin2' the followine information:
8. Park name address and ohone number of al!ent preoarlnl!: the Dlan
and address and phone number of (he Dmnertv owner.
b. Folio number(s) of Drooertv and total site area.
c. Zonin~ designation and land use on subiect and adiacent
oropertv.
d. North arrow. scale and date.
e. Landscapinl!. nronosed and existing.
f. ParkinS! soaces.
2. Setbacks and seace between buildine measurements.
h. Location and arrangement of in2J'ess/eeress ooints.
L Tvne of surface of all access roadways leading to the Dark. and
within the nark.
i. Location of all structures in the Dark (units. office. accessory
buildine. etc.)
k. Location of dumoster or trash container enclosure.
I. Location and heie:ht of walls and/or fences.
m. Where aoplicable. dimensions of Jots. width of internal streets and
desirpt cross-section of streets and drainasm improvements.
4. Plans do not have to be sil!ned and sealed bv a orofessional en2ineer.
however. olans must be orepared bv a gerson havinJl knowlede:e of draftine
skills and basic enl!ineerine construction standard! which mnv include a
Daraorofessional associated with a orofessional en1!ineerinl!. architectural.
landscaoe architectural firm or licensed contractor.
S. Prior to approval of the SIP the county buildinsr insoector will identifv all
mohlJe homes not meetifill minimum housinR code standards and minimum
floor area reauirements for mobile homes as defined in this code. Those
mobile home units that cannot be rehabilitated shaH be removed within
twelve (12) months of the aDoroval of the SIP unless omhibited bv law and
shall be so indicated on the SIP.
Words slfllel< l:I-.flltlgh are deleted. words underlined are added.
10
2.2.29.5.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 121 of 192
6. Mobile bome units meetinll the housin2 code and as defined in this code
may renlace the units removed.' nrovided the rCDlacement units do not
exceed the maximum number of units allowed on the oril!inal SIP.
7. The number of units anproved on the SIP will be aIJowed to remain. excet't
for those identified substandard units which must be removed in
accordance with lhe timeframes referred to in subsection 2.2.29.4.5 so lonl!
as the reauirements of the ncomved SW are imolemented and a buildinl!
permit has been obtained for each unir.
8. A rhlht~of~wav oermit shall be reauired. This oennit shall be obtained
prior to BOJ'roval of the SIP. A CODY of same sban be submitted to the
asshmed olanner.
Improvement standards:
I. Roads and drainaee:
Private roads leadinsz to and serving the mobile bome park or mobile bome
lots musl be improved and maintained. and shall consist of a dust free
surface with a minimum width of 20 feet. The dust free surface mav
consist of 82'e:re28te malerialtreated with oil-based material that will bind
the 81l,re2Bte material into a form of macadam mod finish. A drainaee
ditch CDDable of ""orin~ the first one inch of rainfall shall be incorporated
into the ri2hl-of-wav desi2nwcross section. exclusive of the reauired 20 feet
Drainae:e shall be directed to a DubHe road via the orivate road and/or
easement conveyance. unless it can be croved that the on-site oercolation
rates exceed the on-site retention requirement.
2. Landscaoine:
Landseaoe imorovcments shall be shown on the SIP. either senararelv or
collectively on the same !!heet as the site olan. Existine: trees may be
credited Durmant to subsection 2.4.4.14. of this code.
8. The 'Clan shall be nrenared bv a landsca~ architect landscanc
desie:ner or landscaoe contractor or o8Tl\Pcofessional associated
with such a firm and havine: knowled2e of Florida olaol material
and olanrimr reauirements. Landscaoe clans do not need to be
shmed and sealed when orenated by a licensed landscaoe
architect.
b. Landscaoio2 requirements are as follows:
i. A lO~foot wide landscaoe buffer. with one'sin21e hedeerow
and trees soaeed 30 feet on center alom! Drooertv lines
abumo!!: a ri2ht~of-wav.
H. Trees spaced 50 feet on center alom! internal boundarv lines.
Hi. Pennitted trees include live oak. sYcamore. red In8nle. and
sweet t!um. Under electrical transmission Hnes simDson
steDner. ma2Ilolia. east Pal atka hollv. and dahoon bollv trees
arc permitted.
iv. Fixed irrie-ation systems which shall include two irri2ation
bubblers. ner tree.
3. Fire protection standards:
Where a public water line is available. a hydrant will be reouired to serve
the nark, Should water line Dressure be inadeauate. arran2emenrs shaH be
Words .51:1t1l!lllkr8t1g!' are dclclCU. words underlined arc Ilddcd.
II
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 122 of 192
made to seck ~DDroVal of the Irnmokalee Fire Denartment to confirm that
suoplemental fire aQp8.ratus is adeauate for fire nrotection.
4. Trash disnosat:
A dumnster or enclosure for individual containers is reauired in accordance
with section 2.6.15 of this code. No dUffiosler shall be teeKled closer than
IS feet from any DubHe street.
5. Dimensional standards:
a. Mobile home nark overlav subdistrict setbacks shall be as follows.
["lerier roads:
i. Front yard - 10 feet
ii. Side yard - 5 feel
iiL Rear yard - g feet
iv. Cluster/no lot lines- minimum ~pace between structures-IO
feel.
b. From all DubHe road frontaees
Minimum set back- 20 feet
c. Minimum floor area for renlacement units- 320 sauare feet.
d. Minimum lot area:'
i. 2400 SQuare feet (sinilJe wide units)
ii. 3500 soUare feet (double wide units)
e. Minimum lot width:
i. 3S feet (sinelc wide unils)
ii. 45 feet (double wide units)
6. Implementation time frame:
The site im900vement plan shall be implemented and Dark improvements
shall be made in accordance with the followinfZ timeline commencin{! from
the date of SIP approval.
Number of units/oroiect
10 or less
111025
26 to 50
more than 50
Lenl!th of Time
I g months
30 months
42 months
54 months
Proiects aooroved with an imolementation timeline in excess of 18 months
must be comnleted as a ohased develQoment as identified beJow.
Project Imolementation
Timetine
/LQ[
Phases
Phase Tirnelines
J 8 months
30 months
1
.f
J
18 months
18 months - first Dhase
30 months - second Dhase
J 8 months - first Dhase.
30 months - second Dbase.
42 months - third nhase
IB months - first phase.
30 months - second Dbase.
42 months - third Dhase.
54 months - fourth Dhase
42 months
54 months
1
Words Slfltlllt Iltrsl:tglt arc deleted. words underlined are added.
12
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 123 of 192
Building permits must be obtained for eacb unit when relocated and
reolaced within an aDnroved park otherwise the code enforcement action
will oroceed except as otherwise provided Dllrsuant"to section 2.2.29.4.5.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Sec.2.2.32. Santa Barbara Commercial Overlay District (SBCO).
2.2.32.3.2.
. . .
Permitted uses.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
..
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
<. A~t".","ile parkil.g (752t).
f.~ Barber shops (7241 ).
gJ. Beauty shops (7231).
h.g. Business services (groups 7311, 7313, 7322-7338. 7361-7379, 7384).
;,h. Child day care services (8351).
r.b Depository institutions (groups 6011-6099).
1<,1 Eating places (5812 except contract feeding, dinner theaters, food
service(institutionaI). industrial feeding).
1.1>, Educational services (8211-8244, 8299)..
m.!, Food slores (groups 5411 except supermarkets, 5421-5499).
"'!!b Funeral service and crematories (7261).
e.!h General merchandise slores (5311-5399).
p.o. Group care facilities (category I and II, except for homeless shelters); care
units. except for homeless shelters; nursing homesi assisted living facilities
pursuant to F.S. 9400.402 F.S. and ch. 58A-5 F.A.C.; and continuing care
retirement communities pursuant to F.S. 9 651 and ch. 4-193 F.A.C.; all
subject to section 2.6.26. '
fj;!h Hardware stores (5251).
r.!!. Offices for engineering, architectural, and surveying services (groups 0781,
8711-8713).
"'I, Health services (8011-8049. 8082).
t.J!, Home furniture. furnishing and equipment stores (groups 5713-5719, 5731-
5736).
HJ.. Individual and family social services (8322 activity centers, elderly or
handicapped; adult day care centers; and. day care centers, adult and
handicapped only.)
"'l!. Insurance carriers, agents and brokers (groups 6311-6399, 6411).
W,y", Legal services (8111).
Words Slf"we!; lhrOygn are deleted, words underlined are added.
"
2.2.32.3.6.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 124 of 192
,...~ Management and public relations services (groups 8741-8743, 8748).
Y dl. Membership organizations (8611-8699).
r;.y,. MisceJlaneous repair services. except aircraft. business and office machines,
large appliances. and white good such as refrigerators and washing
machines (7629-7631).
"",b Miscellaneous retail services (5912,5942-5961,5992-5999).
bb.aa. Museums and art galleries (8412).
....J2l1. Nondepository credit institutions (groups 6111-6163).
d<I.cc. Paint. glass and wallpaper stores (5231).
-WI. Personal services (groups 7212. 7215. 7221-7251, 7291).
ff.ee. Photographic sludios (7221).
~ Public administrntion (groups 9111-9199, 9229. 9311, 9411-9451. 9511-
9532,9611-9661).
bb.gg, Real estate (groups 6521-6541).
;;,blh Retail nurseries. lawn and 'garden supply stores (5261).
.lld!. Security and commodity brokers, dealer, exchanges and services (groups
6211-6289). .
Id<..ii Shoe repair shops and shoeshine parlors (7251).
JI.kk. Social services. not elsewhere classified (8399).
mmJi United States Postal Service (4311 except major distribution center).
ftft..mm... Veterinary services (groups 0742 veterinarian's office only, 0752 dog
grooming and pedigree record services only. aU excluding outdoor
kenneling).
OO.l!!b Videotape rental (7841 ).
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Access. Access via a rear oronertv rhlhI-of-wav shall be reauired. if available in
lieu of direct access to Santa Barbara Boulevard. -".fee:!! 3haU he Iift.he,a 15 aile
fteeeS3 r>ei:nt f>l.f l'ffljoct. Abutting projects shall be reauired are ene.el:u'agea to
share access.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
See. 2.2.33. Bayshore Drive Mixed Use Overlay District.
2.2.33.16
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
*
Signs. As required by division 2.5 unless specified below:
*
*
.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
8.
Prooerties that are located in the waterfront subdistrict (W) and are located
adiacent to the Haldeman Creek Brid2"e are allowed one pol~ sism not to
exceed 65 square feet in area The Dole si~ns shall not be internally lit.
Pole shms shall be architecturallv comoatible with the buildin2 it ;~~~s
Words swueJ€ !hrugh are deleted. words underlined are added.
14
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 125 of 192
.
.
*
*
.
*
*
*
.
.
.
2.2.33.22.3. Conditional uses. The followin2 uses are ocrmitted as conditional uses in this
subdistrict for lots that are adiacent to the waterfront.
I. Bed and breakfastlod.in. facilities subiect to Ihe followin. requirements:
a. A site development olan DUl'5Uant to division 3.3.
b. Minimum number of ~UCS( rooms or suites is two with a maximum
number of six. Guest occupancy is limited to a maximum Slav of 30
days. The minimum size of bedrooms for 2Uest occuoancv shalt be
100 square feet.
c. No cookine: facilities shall be allowed in 2Uest rooms.
d. Scontu1e toilet facilities for the exclusive use of IlUcsts must be
Drovided. At least one bathroom for each two 21Iestrooms shall be
orovided.
e. All automobile oarkin, areas shall be orovided on~site based upon a
minimum of two !i!paces Dlus one space for each two bedrooms. All
other anolicable orovisions of this code relative to oarkimz facilities
shalll\PDIY.
f. One si~n with a maximum Sill" area of four square feet containin2
only the name of the omori.cloT or name of the residence. Sien
Jetterinll shall be limited to two inches in heie:ht and shall not' be
illuminated.
2. An on-site mana,er is reouired.
h. The facility shall cornDlv with all business license. certifications.
and health laws of Collier COUDty and the State of Florida.
2.2.33.22.;.~
Minimum Jot width:
Single.family: SO reet
Two-family: SO feet
Townhouses 25 reet
Multi.family 100 feet
2.2.33.22*-~R-I yard requirements. The following yard requirements shall apply and are in relation to the
platted property boundaries.
Front Yard At* Mm. Side Yard Mm. Rear
Yard
One (single) 10 fee' dwelling 7'/2 feet unless IS feet
family abutting commercial
units property, then 5 feet
Two family )0 feet 5 feet unless abut~ )5 feel
dwelling units ting single family
unit. then 7.5 feet
Townhouse 10 feet o feet when abutting 15 feel
anolher townhouse. if
not then the same
standards as a two
familv dwelline: unit
Multiple family 10 feel 5 feet unless abutting 15 feet
(three or more) single family unit.
dweJling units then 7.5 feet
Words slnl.ek tk'lll:lgh are deleted, words underlined are added.
15
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 126 of 192
"Shall be ten feet from the property line to the building footprint.
2.2,33.22,~ Minimumflcar area: 750 square feet per unit.
2.2.33.22-:6:L Maximum height of struclures: (Measuredfrom Federal Emergency Manage
mell' Agellcy (FEMA) to bui/dillg eave)
l. Principal structures. Three habitable floors or a measure of 40
feet.
2. Accessory structures. 15 feet except for screen enclosures, which
may be the same height as tbe principal structure but in no event
greater than 35 feel.
2.2.33.22.'f.l!. Minimum off-street parking.
1, Minimum off-street parking is one space per dwelling unit.
2. There shall be no visible parking area from the frontage road.
2.2.33.22.8,2, On street parking requirements. (Reserved.)
2.2.33.22.9.lQ. Building placemen. and design. Buildings and ,their elements shall adhere to
the following: (See BMUD figure 4):
1. Buildings shall be divided using articulation and/or modulation at
leasl every 80 feet. Facade modulation is stepping back or
extending forward a portion of the facade at least six feet
measured perpendicular to the front facade for cEleh interval.
Articulation includes porches, balconies, bay windows and/or
covered entries.
2. The primary residence shall be oriented to the street. Orientation
is achieved by the provision of a front facade including an entry
door that faces the street.
3. On corner lots, both street facades of a building shall have
complementary details; in particular. building materials and color,
rcoflints and !lhapes, window proportions and spacing, and door
placement.
4. All mechanical equipment must be screened with a three-foot high
hedge spaced lhree feet on center or an opaque fence or wall at
any height 10 completely screen the mechanical equipment.
5. Stem wall construction is required, no monolithic construction is
allowed.
2.2.33.22.-H};..LLElevation. Buildings shall adhere to the following elevation requirements:
I. The first habitable floor at the street facade may not be greater
than one
foot over the minimum first floor elevation designated in the
National Flood Insurance Program by Ihe Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). A maximum of 40 percent of the
first habitable floor may be greater lhan one foot over the FEMA~
designated minimum first floor elevation.
2. Open stilt -type construction is not permitted. On fronl yards, the
facade area bejow the first floor must be treated with a s.olid
Words S1rk:.lell lflfeugh lire dcleled. words underlined are added.
16
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 127 of 192
facade or lattice which is consistent with the architectural style of
the building.
3. The garage floor shall not exceed 24 inches above the elevation of
the righl..of-way from which it is ClCL"eSsed.
2.2.33.22.+-kil..Front porches. Fronl porches lbat adhere to the following standards may
encroach seven feet into tbe front yard setback, wilh an
additional three-fool encroachment allowable for entry stairs.
I. Front porches must cover a minimum of 40 percent of the
horizontal length of Ihe fronl yard facade of the primary
residence.
2. Front porch design and material shall he consistent with the
architectural design and construction material of the primary
residence.
3. Front porches shall not be air-conditioned nor enclosed with glassl
screen, or other material.
4. Second-story porches are encouraged, but no enclosed room is
permitted above the front porch.
2.2.33.22.-ftll. Garages and driveways.
1. The rear setback may he reduced to ten feet if a front-access
garage is constructed on the re~ of the residence.
2. Garage doors shall have a maximum width of 16 feet.
3. Only one driveway is allowed per 50 linear feet of front property
line. The driveway shall have a maximum widlh of 18 feet in
the right-of-way area.
4. Other than the permitted driveway,lhe froill yard may not be
paved or otherwise used to accommodate parking.
5. Garages shall be recessed a minimum of three feet behind the
front facade of the primary residence.
6. No carports are permitted.
2.2.33.22.~~. Accessory units. An accessory uo1t is a separate structure located at the rear
of the property and related to the primary residence for uses which
include, but are not limited to: library studio, workshop, playroom, or
guest quarters. Ownership of an accessory unh shall not be transferred
independenlly of the primary residence.
The following regulations regarding accessory units apply:
1. Only one accessory unit is penniued per principal stnlcture.
2. The maximum area of an accessory unit is 550 square feet, limited
to one habitable floor.
3. The accessory unit may be above a garage or may be connected to
the primary residence by an enclosed breezeway or corridor not to
exceed eight feet in width.
4. The maximum height of a structure containing a guest unit over a
garage is limited to 18 feet, measured from the lovel of graded lot
Words SkutlIllkra"lgh are deleted. words ~ are added.
11
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 128 of 192
to the eave, and with a maximum overall building beigbt of 24
reet to the top of the roof. A structure containing only a guest unit
is limited to one story and ten feet, measured from the FEMA first
habitllble floor height requirement to the eave, with a maximum
overall building heigbt of 16 feet to the top of the roof.
5. For purposes of calculating density, an accessory unit will count
as one-half a dwelJing unit.
2.2.33.22.-l+.l.2.Density. Maximum ]2 units per acre, or as consistent with the future land use
element of the growth management plan.
2.2.33.22.-!5,~ Fencing standards.
Fencing forwaro of the primary facade of Ihe structure is permilled subject to
the following condjtions:
1. The fence does not exceed four fect in height.
2. The' fence is not opaque but provides an open view.
3. Chain link fence is prohibited.
4. The fence material shall be wood. vinyl, or iron.
5. A masonry wall is permitted and shall not exceed three feet in height.
6. Fencing and walls must arcbiteclUrally complement the primary
structure as determined by the CRA stllff and the planning services
depanment director,
*
*
*
*
.
*
.
.
*
.
*
2.2.33,23.2 Conditional uses. The: folJowinJ! uses are nermitted as conditional uses in this
subdistrict.
I. Bed. and breakfast Jod~ine- facilities subiect to the following
requirements:
a. A site development Dlan' Dursuant to division 3.3.
b. Minimum number of Ruest rooms or suites is two with a
maximum of six. Guest occunancv is limited to a maximum stay
of 30 days. The minimum size of bedroom.~ for Ruest occuoancv
shall be 100 sauare feet.
c. No cookinl! facilities shall be allowed in llUest rooms.
d. Seoarate toilet facilities for the exclusive use of 2Ue.Qls must be
orovided. At least one bathroom for each two 2uest rooms shall be
provided.
e. All automobile oarkinl! areas shall be provided on.site based on a
minimum of two SD3Ces plus one snace for each two bedrooms.
All other 800licable orovisions of this code relative to Darkin2
facilities shall 8oolv.
f. One sian with a maximum silln area of four SQuare feet.
containing onlv the name of the oroonctor or name of the
residence. Sign letmon!! shall be limited to two inches in heil!ht
and shall not be illuminated.
e. An on-site mana2cr is reouired.
h. The facilitv shall comolv with all business license certifications
and health laws of Collier County and lhe Stale of Florida.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
.
.
Word& 51rlteli lhrsl:IgA are deleted, w<lrds underlined are added.
18
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 129 of 192
See. 2.2.35. Actlvitv Center #9 Zonln. Overlav District: Establishment of snecial
conditions for the orooerties and n2hts..of.WBV located within the activity center
#9 as identified on the Collier Countv Mixed Use and Interchan.e Activity
Center Mac.
2.2.35.1. PUrDost! and intent: The put;pOse of this desi'P'atlon is to create an enhanced
entrvwav into the NaDles urban area throue-h Qooronriate. unified design elements
and standards. The irnolementation of which will result in an attractive. t10sitive
imae:e as outlined in the vision ~tatement of the Activitv Center #9 lnrerchanl!c
Master Plan.
2.2.35 2. AODlicabilitv: These re~'Ulations aoolv to the foIlowintl oroocrties within
Activitv Center #9 as identified in the [nterchanfle Master Plan Land Use MaD:
1. All buildin2S and oroiects that are subiect to the reouirements of division
2.8 of tbis code.
2. Non-residential land uses abuttine: any DubHe street excent industrial
buildin@s internal to industrial pun zoned proiect that are located no less
than 200 feet from the DubHe street.
2.2.35.3. BuUdinS! and Dro;ect desi~n standards. AU build.Des and oroiecLS within
Activity Center #9 shall be developed or redeveloDed in accordance with one or
more of the desilln themes defined in the Activitv Center #9 Tnterchanlle Master
Plan, The desilln themes shaH be incomorated into architecture Jandsc3ne.
shmae-e and ~atewav features and roadway Uehtin2.
2.2.35.3.1. All buiJdin2S shall meet the architectural and site dosieD reauirements set forth in
. division 2.8.. Ofihis code excent as set forth below. .
2.2.35.3.2.. Architectural style. Buildinlls within the Activitv Center #9 shall be limited to
three comolementarv character themes: EveI:2Iades. Rural and Old Florida. as
defined in the Vision Statement of the Activitv Center #9 Interchamre Master
f!;w.
2.2.35.3.3. General reauirements. In addition to the reauirements of division 2.8. buiJdine:s
shall have features that characterize the area character themes. These elements
include:
1. PrimarY facade treatme.nt. All nrimarv facades of a buildine: shall feature
one or more of the followinll desie:n elements listed below:
a. Porch
b. Portico
c. Elevated first floor or elevated entrv.
d. Anv other treatment which the plannin~ services director
determines to tenresent the character themes of this overlav
~
2. Roof treatment:
a. Buildinfls with gross floor areas of less than 10.000 square feet
shall have pitched roofs. Pitched roofs shan have a minimum of
4112 sJooe.
b. Buildine:s with gross floor areas of 10.000 SQuare feet or lZreater
shall have one or more of the followin2 roof treatments:
i, Pitched roof with a minimum s.1one of4/12.
ii. Flat roof wirh mansard ede:e treatment.
Hi. Flat roof with a combination of Diached and mansard roof
elements that extend alonl! a minimum of 50 percent of the
Iemnh of any nrimarv facade. and a minimum of 30
oercent of the attached facades as measured from the
connection Doint.
c. Industrial use buildinas shall have one or more of the followinl!
roof treatments:
Words stru~ll [hreugh are deleted. words underlined are added.
19
2.2.35.4.
2.2.35.4.1.
2.2 35.4.2.
2.2.35.5.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2. 2008
Page 130 of 192
i. Pitched roof with a minimum slone of 3/12
ii. Flat roof with mansard ede treatment.
Hi. Flat roof with a combination of oitched and mansard roof
elements that extend alont! a minimum of 30 oerce"L or the
Jen2th of any orimarv facade. and 20 nefee"! of the
attached facades as measured from the connection naint.
d. Roof material shall be tile or melal.
e} Roof overhan.s shall be deen. no less than Ihree feet beyood the
8UDnortin~ walts.
f) To create articulation. roofs shall include a minimum of one of the
followin2.architecruraJ elements:
i. Clearstorv windows.
ii. Cuoolas.
Hi. Dormers.
iv. Any other treatment which the clannintl services director
detennine.~ to represent the character themes of this
overlay district.
lAndscaoinf! and buffering. As reauired in division 2.4.. of this code. exceDt as
set forth below.
ADDlicabilitv. In addition to the reouirements set fortb in division 2.4.. the
reouirements for landsca9in2' Dursuant to subsection 2.8.3.7. shall aoplv to all
develooment aDDrovals within Activitv Center #9. re2ardless of the 1:!TOSS
buildinl! area.
Landscaoe buffers adjacent to road rifhts of wav, In addition to the'
reouirements for a Tvne D buffer. the followine- reauirements shall l.\oolv'
A. Landscaoe buffers adiacent to Comer Boulevard. S.R. 84. (Davis
Boulevard and Beck Boulevard) and within 400 linear feet of I~ 75 rhlht~
of-way line:
1. Shall measure a minimum of 25 feet in width:
2. The reauired number of trees shall be suwlemented by an
additionsl oalm tree nlantinl! in the amount of 25%.
3. Undulatin2 beds of ornamental 2rasses and I or 2TOund cover beds
shall be incoroorated for at least 30% of the reQuired buffer strip
area.
4. All reouired trees shall be a minimum of 12 feet in hehlht.
S. Where industrial land uses abut I~7S. an 8 foot hillh unified.
oaaaue. masonrY wall is reeuiTed. Landscace buffers shall be
vlaeed alone: the street side of said wall. The wall shaH be located
at the edee of the landscape buffer farthest from the vroDenv line.
B. Landsc30e buffers adiacent to all other DubHe streets:
). Shall measure a minimum of 15 feet in width.
2. Undulating beds of ornamental e:rasses and ~round cover beds
shall be ;ncoroorated for a least 25% of the reouired buffer strip
area.
3 All required trees shaH be a minimum of ) 2 feet in heillhL.
C. Landscaoe buffers. sie:nasrc and lillhtinfl fixtures in residential areas shall
feature a unified deshm at naint of in~ssleuress.
Liphtinp and si,maRe. Lil!"htin~ fixtures and si~naRe within the Activitv Center
#9 shall be desilmed to comolement the architectural themes of this overlay
district Lillhtin2' shall also be subiect to the reauirements Dursuant to section
2.8.3 2.. reRardless of the llross building
Words stnteh. tl1r8ltg~ are delcled, words underlined 3re added.
20
See. 2.2.36.
2.2.36.1.
2.2.36.2.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 131 of 192
lWllb
- -
~ ,"
ACTIVITY CENTER 1/9 OVERLAY DISTRICT
MAP 2.2.35.-1
Ettablishment of interim de.elooment eootrols (moratorium) for the
Vanderbilt Beach residential tourist (RT\ zonin2 district.
PurODse and intent. The purpose and intent of the interim develovrnent controls
(moratorium) for the residential tourist (RT) zonjnw districts in the Vanderbilt
RP.~~h area is to restrict most development and redeveJooment to allow the
county plannin il deoartment to conduct an assessment of the area and determine
apnronriate develonment standards for the area bv way of establishing: an overlay
district.
The Vanderbilt Beach area is uniaue in that it is situated on a narrow snit of land
Ivine: to the to the cast of the Gulf of Mexico and to the west of the Vanderbilt
Laroon. It is served bv a narrow two~lane roadwa.v known as Oulfshore Drive.
Presently. hotel. motel. multinle-family and other uses are oerrnitted with
maximum heilzhts of ten stories not to exceed 100 feet. Setbacks are a function
of the heieht of a structure.
The area has been exoeriencine- redevelooment oressure due to its proximity to
the water. Redevelooment 01000581s have been ~Jlanned to maximize the use of
the available land bv utilizinif maximum develQDment standards on small lots
that were orie:inaHv Dlatted in the J950's. Without an overlay district that would
establish less intense deveJooment standards the area would redeveloD with ten
storY buildinsu on small lots on each side of the narrow Gulfshore Drive creating'
a canyon-like effect. exacerbatine alreadv existin, traffic comrestion and further
reducine view corridors and. 1i2ht and air movement between the Gulf of Mex:ico
and the Vanderbilt Laeoon.
Duration. For a Defiod not to exceed one (1) year from the date of the adontion
of this amendment to the land deveJoDment code. the issuance of anY
Words SiNai, tilrlH:lgk are deleled. words underlined are added.
21
AmY",.
c..........
""='..:
~ -
-
;g
... ::ii
-
-- ~
'-::.=~
....
---.,
-..,..--
t=J_.,...
....c__
F"li
;p
2.2.36.3.
2.2.36.4.
3.2.36.5,
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 132 of 192
develooment orders for certain land uses as set forth in subge.ction 2.2.364 of
this code is orohibited.
GeoIlra"hic SCOOt of the Vanderbilt Beach resUknriaJ tourist l.On.ine district area
assessment. The 2COJ!I'30hic scone of the assessment area shall be as follows:
Alllaods desienated residential tourist CRn in the Vanderbilt Beach area which
are more specificallv described as an area lvine cast of the Gulf of Mexico. south
of BtuebiIJ A venue tOll"cther with its westerly extension to the Gulf of Mexico.
west ofYanderbilt La.oon and north ofYande,bilt Beach Road.
Prohibited "SUo The issuance of any develooment order that would allow the
fonow!"!! uses is herebv prohibited for a maximum one-vear oefied while the
Vanderbilt Beach residential tourist zooiDi!' district area assessment is bein~
conducted.
1. Permitted uses.
a. Hotels and motels.
b. Multi-familv dwelline:s.
c. Familv care facilities.
d. Timeshare facilities.
e. Townhouses.
2. Uses acceSSOry to Dcrmirtcd uses.
a. Uses and structures that are accessory and incidental to the uses
oermitted ~ of ri2ht in the RT zonin2 district subiect to the.
exemDtions set fonh in subsection 2.2.36.5. of this code.
b. Shoos. oeBonal service establishments. eatinl1 or drinking-
eslablishments. dancing and sra2ed entertainment facilities. and
meet)"@: rooms and auditoriums when sllch uses are an inte2ral part
of a hotel or motel and to be used bv the Datrons of the hotel/moleL
c. Recreational facilities that serve as an intcllral Dart of a permitted use
deshmat~d on a site development Dlao or oreIiminarv subdivision
Diat that has been orcviouslv reviewed and ~pprovcd and involves
ihe use of II structure which may include. but are not limited to.
clubhouse. community center buildine-. and tenniS facilities,
3. Conditional uses.
a. Churches and other olaces of worshio.
b. Marinas.
c. GrOUD care facilities (cate2orv I and In: care units: nursine:
homes: assisted Jiving: facilities DUrsUS"t to ~ 400.402 F.S. and ch.
5BA-S. F.A.C.: and continuine: care retirement communities
pursuant to 6 651 F.S. and ch. 4-193 F.A.C.
d. Private clubs.
e. Yacht clubs.
f. Permitted uses not to exceed] 25 feet in heie-ht.
4. Variances fOf anv of the uses listed above or any existim~: use in the
Vanderbilt Beach residential tourist zoning- district subiect to the
exemotions set forth in subsection 2.2.36.5. of this code.
ExemDtions. The followinll are exemot from the orovisions of these interim
development controls (moratorium).
I. All building ncrmits for the items listed in suboaru:raphs 2 3.4.and 5
hereof nnd the items listed in subsection 2.2.36.6 hereof.
2. Residential and other uses in the VanderbiJt Beach residential tourist
(RT) zonine district assessment area for which completed aoclicadons for
rezonin2s. conditional uses. variances. subdivision 8cofovals. site
Words stflielE thrSligfl are deleted, words underlined arc added.
22
2.2,36.6.
2.2.36.7
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 133 of 192
develonment Dlan ~pDrovals or DIalS were filed with or anDroved bv
Collier County prior to the acloDtio" date of this amendment. For
DUmOseS of subsection 2.2.36.5.2. hereof the rem "completed
BDDticntlOn" shall mean anv aonHcation which hat:; been deemed sufficient
bv Dlannine: services staff and has been assie:ned an 8Dolication reauest
number.
3. Anv develonment order reauired bv the Comer County code enforcement
board or deemed necessary bv the code enforcement department director.
or his or her desismee. to abate any violation or alleaed violation of this
land deveJoDment code.
4. Uses and stnIctures. such as but not limited to. pool enclosureg. chickees..
swimminll oools. cabanas. boat docks and other minor accessory
structures not exceedin~ 35 feet in heii!hl.
S. Noncommercial boat launcbin~ facilities.
Continuation of exislimr uses. The restrictions on uses in the study area durine-
the assessment shaH not affect or limit the continuation of existine- uses and
include: (I) those uses for which all required ocrmits have been issued: (2)
routine reoair or maintenance of an existine- structure or remodeline: of such
existinll structure that does not result in any structural additions or modifications
such as an increase in heieht or buildinl! foom"nt or an increase in density or
in.eositv. or (3) the reoJac'ement or repair of an existinv use/structure occasioned
bv casuat(v loss or damse-e such as fire. flood. stonn event. wind. earthauake.
bombin2s terrorist acts and.he like. In the case of such casualty toss or losses.
such strocture(s) may be repaired or rebuilt in accordance with the buildback
requirements of Ordinance Number 98-62. as it may be amended or sunerseded.
Mao. The followina maD denicts the Vanderbilt Beach residential tourist zooin!!
district assessment area subiect to these interim-develonment controls
(mo~torium).
Words suus" thretigk are deleted. words underlined are added.
2J
N
w+.
s
SC..U:;,
,
,
'"
,
Agenda Item N
Decembe 2 o. 7C
p r ,2008
age 134 of 192
,
.......
,I,
:-=.
........-
.......
1
.... .
.&
."
1
.. ".
[jH
.......
1000
,
-.
(l'No_I.....~..
II.1,1>MO.~
MaD No. 2.23.5-1
WOrds!llcltel[H-r
. eltgll are deleted
24 . words underlined
are added.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 135 of 192
SUBSECTION 3.C. AMENDMENTS TO OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING
DIVISION
Division 2,3.. Off-street Parking and Loading Ordinance 91-102. as amended. the
Collier County Land Development Code. is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 2.3.4.
2.3.4.5.
2.3:4.11.
2.3. 4.12.2
Sec. 2.3.5.
DIVISION 2.3. OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING
*
.
*
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
*
Off.Street vehicular facilities: design standards.
.
.
*
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
Access. Be arranged for convenient and safe access of pedestrians and vehicles. ,
Access via a rear ofOoertv riaht~of-wav shall be reouired if available in Heu of
direct access.
Locational requirements_
1. All ~ off.street parking facilities shall he located on the same lot they
serve, on a contiguous lot under the same ownership that is zoned for use as a
parking lot. or shall be approved under t~e provisions of section 2.3.4.11.2..
helow.
.
*
*
.
*
*
..
.
*
.
*
Minimum space size. Each parking space shall he a minimum of nine feet by 18
feet in size or 16 feet in depth measured from lheaisle width to the face of the
wheel Stop excent in the case of oaraJlcl narkine where the dimension of the
scace shall be 9 feet bv"23 feet for snaees runnimf narallerto the driveway which
affords acce.~s to said spaces. As an alternative. 9 feet bv 18 feet SDaces may be
used in which case there must be 8 6 foot marked clear rone "mace in front of or
in back of every snace. See Exhibit "A" for typical off-street park.ing design. All
parking spaces for the eKclusive use of compact vehicles indicated on un
approved site development plan. and any subsequent amendments thereto, shall
be counted as standard parking spaces.
*
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
Automobile parkin\! In conjunction with residential structures.
All automobile oarking- or storasze of automobiles in connection with residential
structures which are located on oroperty which is dcshmated as Mixed Use
Urban Residential on the Future Land Use MaD and which are zoned or used for
residential uses. shall occur on 8Decificallv desismed surfaces in a snecificallv
desit:mated area of the lot u90n which the residential structure is located. The
carkinS! and/or stor3l!e of automobiles in connection with the residential dweUinll
units they are ancillarv and accessory to shalt be rel!ulared as follows:
1.
S;n~le family dwellin~ units: Unless otherwhlc parked or stored in an
enclosed structure. the oarkiDlr or stonDi? of automobiles in connection
with simde familY' dweJIin2 units shan be limited to stabilized oervious or
imoerviouslv treated surface area..~ of the lot soecificaUv desiened for the
oarkin2' of automobiles which may nOl conmrise an area I!reater than
forty (40) percent of anv required front yard. which nonetheless may not
serve to limit a driveway 10 a width less than twenty (20) feet. All ['larked
Words stRiate lkl'Bl:lgk are dcleted. words underlined art! added.
25
2.3.5.1.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 136 of 192
2.
automobiles shall utilize anI v the deshmated nervious or imoervious
surface areas.
Two {ami/v dweUinf! units:Unless otherwise narked or stored in an
enclosed structure the parkinll or starine of automobiles in connection
with a two familv structure shall be limited to pervious or impervjously
trented areas of the lot which may not comorise an area ,neater than fift)'
(501 % of any required front yard exceol that this shall not serve to limit
a driveway width to less than 20 feet and a drivewl:l'v may be orovided on
each side of the two familv structure.
MultiDle family (i.€!. 3 or more) dwelline units: Unless otherwise nark.ed
or stored in an enclosed structure. the Oarkinll or storin2 of automobHes in
connection with multi Die family dwelJini! units shaH be limited to
oervious or imoerviousJv trealed surface areas of the lot desismated. for
the narldne: and starin!! of 8momobiles. Pervious or imocJVioulsy treated
surface areas desil!nated for the oalkin!! of automobiles shall not exceed a
ratio of 2 5 automobile.c; per dwelline: unit in the event all oarkine: SDaces
are not located within an enclosed structure or any combination of aDen
air and enclosed structure.
Where multiole familv structures consist of simrle familv attached (i.e.
row houses) dwelline: units each with its own driveway to a common
accesswav. DubHe or orivate street. all oarkin!! of automobiles shall be
limited to the driveway and or llaral!e combination.
Automobiles oBrked and/or stored in connection with residential dweUini
units as described above shall be owned by the occuoants of the dwellin,v
unit or units unless the vehicle is owned bv a firm. comoration or entity
for which a dwellin2 unit occupant is emoloved. This crm....ision shall not
be construed to aoplv to automobile vehicles owned bv oersons Dr
business finns at the site for social or business ourooses.
No other portion of 8 front yard may be used to Dark or store automobiles
includinl! that ponton of the ri2ht-of-wav nol directlv 3 Dart of the
desi2nuted driveway or desilmaled oarkine: areas.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Non~conforminp situations. Nonconforminrr situations that were
otherwise lawful prior to the effective date of this section of the
ordinance shall comoly with this ordinance or anv subs.ecuent amendment
to this ordinance within 90 days of its effective date.
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
SUBSECTION 3.D. AMENDMENTS TO SIGNS DIVISION
Division 2.5., Signs, of Ordinance 9 I ~ 102, as amended, the Collier County Land
Development Code, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 2.5.5. Pennltted signs.
.
2.5.5.1.1.
.
DIVISION 2.5. SIGNS
.
*
.
.
.
*
*
.
.
*
Development standards.
* * lie * * * * * * * *
2. Minimum setback. AU signs within residential zoned districts and as
applicable to residentially designated portions of pun zoned properties
shall not be located closer than ten feet from the propeny line, unless
otherwise noted below or a provided for in section 2.1.13 as determined
bv the county for safety and ooerdtion.
.
*
.
*
*
.
*
.
.
*
Words slrlisll lkretlgh are deleted. words und~Jincd arc udded.
2fi
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 137 of 192
SUBSECTION 3.E.
AMENDMENTS TO SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT
REGULA nONS DIVISION
Division 2.6., Supplemental District Regulations. of Ordinance 91-102, os amended, the
Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby amended to read as follows:
DIVISION 2.6. SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
See. :U.n.
Fences.
*
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
*
*
.
2.6.11.4.2.
Walls and fences reouired contiguous or QDD?sitc residentiaJlv zoned districts.
Whenever a non-residential deveJQoment lies contiiruous to or oooosite a
residentially zoned district. said non-residential develonment sball orovide a
masonry wall or orcfabricated concrete wall/fence. If located on a conti~uous
oroocrtv. the walllfence shall be a minimum of six feet and a maximum of eiRht
feet in hei.ht and shall be located a minimum of six feel from the residentially
zoned district, If on n oro-penv oDoosite a residential Iv zoned district hut fronting
on a local street. or the orooerties are separated bv a olatted allev the wall/fence
shall be located a minimum of three feet from lhe rear of the ril!ht-of~wav
landscape buffer line and shall be four feel in hei.ht. On oroperties which front
on more than one street. a six foot hil!h wall/fence shall be reouired 810n2 the
street which is aanosite the primary inflre5S and em'eSS DOlfit of the oroiect along
the street front8f!C which is adiacent to the rear of the proiect
At. tbe aoolicants' reauest. the alannifi2 services director may determine that a
masonry wall/fence is not warranted. n3rticuJarly where the local street lies
contie:uou:; to the rear of a residence or some other Dhvsical seoaration exif:ts
between the residential devctonnlent and the non presidential develcDmenl. or for
other 200d cause includinll the existence of a wall on an adiacent residential
development. The anDHcant shall demonstrate that the intent of this section can
be effectivelv accomolished without constructinll a wan. bv &ubmittin2 for the
3Dproval an alternative deshm. and a descriDtive narrative throm!h the
administrative variance orocess set forth in subsection 2.6.11.5.7. of this code.
The olannine: senrices director will review the submitted documents for
consistency with the intent of this section and if the administrative variance is
approved the fact of the aooraval and basis for it shan be stated in the site
devclooment olan aoorovaJ letter.
Vee:etative olantin2s shall be located external to the waJVfence such that SO
Dercont of the wall/fence is screened within one year of the installation of said
vegetative material. An irrilZstion system shan be installed to insure the
continued viability of the vegetative screen.
These rellUlations shall not be construed to reouire a masonrY wall/fence for
commercial develoomcQt frontin~ on an merial or collector roadway where the
oODosite side of such roadway is zoned residential or to be otherwise
inconsistenr with the provisions of section 2.8.2 of this code.
A wall/fence shall be constructed foJlowin~ site alan anDrovaJ but Drior to any
vertical constmcrion or any other tVDe of imnrovement resulting from the
issuance of a buildiml oennit. Soecial circumstances may warrant constructinl1
the wan/fence in ohases dependinf!" upon the location of effected residential areas
and after venical construction commences.
*
*
.
*
.
*
*
*
*
.
.
2.6.11.5.7.
When determined to be beneficial to the health, safety. and welfare of the public,
the Eie"eJepmeftt plannimz services director may waiYe aDDrove an administrative
Words strl:lele iliTSlIgk are delelCd, words lIooerlined arc added,
27
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 138 of 192
variance-from height limitations of fences and walls in all districts omvided that
al least one health safer v. or welfare standard oeculiar to the Dronenv is
identified. and that such Booroval does not set an unwanted Drecedent bv
addressinl!: a eeneric Drohlem more Dronerlv corrected bv an amendment to this
~.
.
*
.
.
*
.
.
*
*
.
.
See. 2.6.21. Dock facilities.
2.6.21.1. lfleli\'istial Sf ffitlltiple I'ri. ate deelts? iftelusiag msefing pilings, da',lf15, lifw Rnd
th.e liti:e are ptC!uinea ta aec';! the fesideft16 ha\'iflg ';. at:erffeftt pfeflefl~' 85
dessfihea ift divisieft e.], deHaitisft5, pfs''i.eled. they ae flet premise mere tflBtl.
the FeSJ3eeuve distanees speeiBea ia seelisfls 2.6.21.2, and 2.C;.21.3, fer sueh.
':/atefV.~y. DeeIts Elfiet the lilu! are pFimarily iR~ulea tB adefltlateJy seel:lfe
RlBBfeS \'$5,815 1:lfI8 preo:ide safe aeee&19 BY HBers fer FeUkne mWfttsaan.ee ana use
while EfliaifBaU)' impaetisg the Bsvigseility aftae ".'l.'8lew:&y. the Bath-! HlariA!
haeitst. manatees, and tlle tiS! BRa viei"" afme ::&tefV.ay BY st:l1'f6t:1Rdiftg l'fepeFty
e\, RefS. Pe.rmhtea seeJl faeility pEetfUsieft!i B9 ::el1 as emeflsieR sf sealE faeilities
Me ffie~tifea fEeffl the fJrepeFty litle, BUUtfteaEl lifte, skBreHae, sea",'l.!QU. HI'! raj:J
liRe. ef mean high ';.aler lifte, :Jhieae:er is meN RslPieti'.e. QR Hftln=iageel barrier
ishuuls, a he61 EiselE. shall he eeft5ideres a pefffiil:leEI priasiJ!l&J liS!; he Ne :ef. a
deelE. shaY Bet, ift liB,' way, eSS5Hlul8 8. ase sr stmettiFe '.\'bieb permits, FefltiiFe5.
aftli<er pre ,iaes fer aft:; aeeS3S9F)' 1:1985 8BfI ef SINehues. asatneaS8S Bft8 deelt
faeiliae5 prepeses eft fe5i8e.ltiaUy aBBes pf'9l'erties B5 deBned jft seetie8 2.1.1 af
this Cede. shall he eSRsiaerea an aeees5e~ use Be slfUetHIe., Baatflsysea shall ae
fet!t:lired to Be 81'I'(e\'88 thrsugh the preeeehue Blul erhed! jR se'ansa :lJi.21.3
MS 2.6.21.1. (6 asaitisR, ey ee.lerea StNSlUfe eleeted 8ft a I1ri":ate beat deek
shall al5e he eSHsiaerea 88 aeee5SBP)' use. ami shalf al5e he IeCJuifea 1e ee
appravea tfl.reagh tRe pISeeSH:feS &as aRteria sf llf;sliea 2.fi.21.3. BRei. 2.".21.1. ef
tlli,Ced.. .
2.6.21.1.2. PIeR fesieieRtiaJ de alE (aeilities ahaIl he suBjeet te aU the pl'6\"isiaRs af seetjaR
2.13.2 I. Bf the eese, \...ith tha 8neeptiea dUll plelnisi€lR5 fer ReR reaidential aeeIl
fa.i1ilie, .e,'e.a ilie sp.eijjea lim;'" .Ilall.. d.'el'flli..a .dffiinisa-eti\'.ly.y tll.
pJasftiag sef.:iees streeter at the dme sf sit:e lie :elepffteftt plsfl revis.,. Basset 6ft
aa eYBluatieR efm.e eflteria in sestieR 2.6.21.3. sf the Cede.
2.fi.21.2. Det!cfaeilif) .l!Ij..i. elllanl5 and. Uf?ieli~l5. The lallai.iRg eAteRa apply te lieelt
faeilities aHa l:IealRSHses. v:hh the enseptis8 sf ~eal seele. faeiliaea eft RlalUBade
lalEes !Hut ether msnmade Baaies Br..-/ater uRser pri'.ate BaBkel.
2.6,21.2. t. Per lets 6ft a ./ate! iI/B) that is IfIQ feet Br greater in ":lidtA:. BB BBMheuse. deek
faeilitylbeat eemeiaatise shall f'fBlnIde mare ililUl 29 feet iftte the.. 8tep.. ay (i.e.
the laud ffBtAisisfl. sf t86 seall faeility plus the teta1l'retmsise sf the fflBerea
vessel). ,II. EiBelE &1tteasisa ia aeeersB:ftee .....illi BeetisR 2.~.2l.3, ffitl) he ~nt-efJ...te
8118\. a pretrusise af a..efe tft/ifl 29 feet.
2.(i,21.2.2. Fer leta 68 a .r, ataR, Bj thM is leBs.ban. 100 feet in wiath, daBh fatliliaea ma)'
eeel;JI3i AS mere tJian 25 pereeat af the v. iaiR af the 'J.'atet"i':&)' Sf' Pfstfuile greater
than 29 f.e~t iSla the ..ateF\..B). ..malleys! is lesser. A deek enteRsielt iB
aeeefe.anee ',vitli seerieR 2.fi.21.3. fB8:)' Be gf8fltea te aHe'\, a pretrnsies af mere
thaR 29 feet, Inn at He time aRaB SHea e1lteRsie8 aUe t. fBBi'e tAIlA 23 pereeat ef
tRe ','.'steF\\ ay '''iElth te be eeeufliea.
2.!'i.21.2.3. .\U seek faeilities eft. lots '::ith ....ater frefltag:e. af 69 feet af greater skull as.6 s
siae sethad: feE!Mileme8t Elf IS feet, 8neept 85 pl'6..ieleEl in seedeR 2.13.21.2.1.1 sr
a::; eUffiflfea bale'/:. All seelE faeilities (efleept heathstisea) 88 lets l/itllless t:AaA.
69 feet ef water frestage shall as\ e a siife se!l1aaJ[ .PeE!uir681eBt sf Be, eR anEl eRe
naif feet. All seel, faeilities (e:lteepl he81hel::lse~) 88 IBIS at the aBd Sf side ena ef
Words slrueh Ihrettgh arc deleted. words underlined arc addod.
2K
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 139 of 192
a wateR"lay naviag ..g\llar (HReer) ",1 ater frefttage shall hwle a sias S8R:Jaek
reijl:llfefHeAt Bf seveR ami eRe half feet Wi m.eaMl..fea fteftl the. Bide let lifte er
riplttian liRe, whiehe/er is lipprepriate.
2.~.21.2.~.t. RipariaR liRes (see 8i 'iaieH fi.J. aeHftitiefts. riparian liRe) fer lets at the anti ar
side S8ft ae Ii i":ater....8y .\'1111 H regtthtr !i.hsnJine are estal:lliseed 13,)' a Hae
eJuen8lag frBfB the serRel-sf an eRa lei ana MEie eRa let 18te Ihe ....aunv.sy
hiseetiBg eql:liaistastl:i !8e angle aleatea BY the 1"';8 iaterseeting la~ Esse H1fkieit
A). Rip8fian Jiaes fer a:l1eOler lets shaull! he estatdiskea BY geaemUy Ileeepted
metassa, taking iRte esosideraHBa the eaftHguPBtiBft af the aRerelifte, ass
allS':liag fer the: 8Eluitahle BppeftiSameRt sf riparian BgftiS. Eueh metfiads
ieehule, Inll are flet limited te, Bees Bffll.j1.'ft peFpeRaieuJar Ie the shereliae fer
regl::llitf (lineiti) lihareJiftel:i. Bf JiRea drawB IH~Fj3eRaietJlttr te the ase.tuliae (thread.)
af the .\'ater::~. ae ~e~eftaietJl8f le tAe liRe ef seep ~'B.ter (liRe af ftB\'igaeiHty
Sf eege af BB'.igal:lle ehaftReI), 85 aflf'repriate. fer iFEeguJ8f' sRsreliAes.
2.6.21,2,1, All de,k facililies, regorElleso ef IMlglh/l'rel",.io., .holl ha\. rea..toES .1ll1
RBuse BklmhefS :fel:l.C iREhes 9alJRl::IfB site iBstaUed Bt the ButenfiBst esd, eft Betk
sides. Fer ffttdUfamily d8. elapmeat5. tfle hSl::Ise RlimBer feElHiremeftt is wabea.
2.6.21.25. ,\11 deel< faoililies are subjeot Ie, ""Ii shllll oellll'l)' wilb, all IodeFaI 9lld otete
reljHiFemeR~ and peffflils. iaeJaeliRg hat Ret limited 1e tae FeEjl:lireffieRW an.a
permits af the AaABa flepar-..ftleBt Bf ea-;ileRmeRlBl preteetien. tfle U.s. J.:ffft:y
CSFflS sf BRgiaeem. 8.8~ the U.S. Eo"ifsnm.eRI:aI Pfefeetiea .......gaRsy.
2.'.2J.2.~. ~n. '6teeJi8N (}f aeag."Y:1:55 8~, ~'here Be'!;: aeeJEieg laeilities are f)f6psseri af Beat
seel~ enteRsieas, the IseatisR BRd preseRee sf seagP655 sr s.e&gPa5s beds U'/ithia
2gQ feet sf 1Hl)' prepssed seek faeHity sk&ll Be iEieatiitsa 8ft 8ft aerial pftst8gapR
REWing a se&le sf afte iasR te 299 feet ';:heR &".~la81e Heffl tRe eeeRly. af B seale
sf SHe iash ts 100 feet v:aeR sueR pB.Bte~h5 are Hat s'/ailele fr8m the eSl:lBty.
Thele.aliea ef seagfa" bed, ..1ll1 b. verified b)' a ,ite "i.it by !be sit.
ae'lelepmeat revie\': direeter ar Ris sesigaee prier te issl:Ianee Bf an) pfejeet
appFe','a:I-ar permit.
2.';.21.2.6.1 f~lJ ~f8p8Se8 EiaelE faeilities shall he leeated BftS aligfle8 fe 5t8) at leafit tea feet
ffe.t:ft-ttft)' enisting seagl'a!ili tled.!i, ensept '^ kele a eeft~fttlet:15 Bed of SBtlgfB911eli
exists aff the SABre af the prsp!fty Bfld adjaeeftt le the prspeFf)'. ami t8 miaiffiize
ftegati.\'e impasts t6 seagfWlses liRE! elher Rati\'e saBrsliRe. emer-gsftt aRS
sl::lemef'gea ',eg;el::6tiel'1 afts 88ft! eellae, eSHUfHlfthie6.
2.6.21.2_~.2 'l.'heFe a eestiRI::I8US Bed af seagF8:!Ises exists off the share af the prepeFl:,' It8d
adjaoeat Ie tb. preperty tho "l'pli.ant ..all be .lIev'eEl to b~ild a deelt a.re.. tII.
seagrasses. Sf a elaesn:g fseiIit)' -;:ithi.!l teA feel af s&agr85ses. Sueh eleelsRg
faoililies shall eemp!y with IRe feUe",i.g .Dftditio.o:
I. Th. d.elt oRon e. At . height ef alleest 35 Ioet NG\'D,
2. The tenrU'uy fllatfePfft sf tlie Eieel~ SHall Hat e1leee~ 1~9 sflU&:re feet.
3. The aeeeS!:i Eiaek shall fist BUSBes a r,.':iath af re~r feet.
~. The aseess dealt BAd tenn!f\BI platfeFffi shaH 136 siled t8 impact the
slRaJle.st area af sBagras5es pessiBle.
2.~.21.2.IS,J. TRB petitiefter shell Be Fe'lYifled te aemBftstftte he';; ft~atj'le if'ft!'llet:s ts
seagFasses &AS ather Rati-. e 3herelias tegetaf:isa &Ad hard t1ettem eSflUBtlniae3
liB', e BeeR minimiiZeEl flFier Ie MY prejeet ltflpf'S. al er permit iS51:1BRee.
2.6.21.3. Dssk}aeiliFj e.ffenaf8N, };sa1h6ufJe I!stabJiahmettt e. ilcl ia. Aadilisaal
leftgthfpmtrliSiea BeyeRs saislesI3e.eti.e flistaflees speeified. iR seetica 2.€i.2J.2.1
8862.6.21.2.2 fer deah faailitiei!i; RRd eU B~alhetl.ae5, regardless sf tRe enteRt ef
tRe pretfwieR hue tRe \.ater..ay €IF tAe ..idtflsf the water ..6). !iRallleElkfire
Words wulil. !brl:ll:lg;k are deleted. words und~rlin~ are added.
2~
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 140 of 192
)'tlsIie Reties ans a. as&riag B j' the C::ellier CaHB~Y PlanBiRg CSBlIfllssiaB. A:5 te
Bfty Beat seek eltt8ftSlSa peatieR \:Ipsa "':Disk the planRiBg esfil:l'f'Ussies. talEsa
aetieft.luif5I:1Hftl Ie seetisB S.2.11. Bf this Cede. &fl aggrieved J3etitisner Bf
Bsv!FSely aA"eeted f3Fepeft) S"XRer !flay ap13ea.l Sliea Heal aedsH Ie tke bean. af
~eRi8.g a.ppeH:l::i. elleel't that sHeR Itppea!liRIlIl Be alea ',lith the as-.elapffteftt
seFvieeli Elireeler ::hlli" 11 dS)ti sf the Ehlle. af the $j,ltll aetisR br the plaAftiAg
et>>Hmi::i.!ii~ft. Th~ i:ltllIIH t3f ~l.iftiftg appeltlti nut} u.tTifm, IiftirRJ ',dtk. t!8RSilitlRli.
reverse, Bf re'/erGe ',i'ilk eBHSilieft5 the aedaR aflhe f11anfting 8BRifRissieR. Rueh
IlJIl'etil :ihtdl he .HIes with tRe eSRlftumity de. stellman! and eR\'lrSftmental
ser\'iees saRHaistAlter. Bf hili ss9igsee ana shaH he BBliees fer heafiRg ..ilk die
asaRI af l8Riag appeals pUfSuanl Ie the preeesures ana 8f1pIieabl.e fee sel fefta ift
seelietl I .€.~ sf this Cese. The planftiag eemmissiea shftll has! iro deeisie" faf
&fJPfe\'aJ., appfEl'ffll with eSRsiaeR6., Sf aeRial, en the fellaNiftg ef:iteria:
2.ti.21.3.1. '.'1.q:.ethef ae Rat die fttifRusr af aealE faeiliaes Sf slips te he leeatea eft the 51:!bjeet
prepePl:) is BppRlf:lriate ift feIstieR te the leftgdt sf v:aterffBftt f:lrspeEt} s'/BUable
fer the leeatieft af Ifte prepssea seek faeilit:.ies.
2.6.21.3.2. "'herlter Bf Ret tae ::ater ~eplb where tae f:lFepesea desk (aeility i5 te he leeateEl
is sl:Iffieieat te aile": fer Bafe m.eeRRg sf tRe ',essel, therehy aeeessitatiag the
ent8nsisR rSlJ.uest.
2.'.21,2.3. "'hethe! Sf Ret l:he J3fa~esea aself iaeilil) BREI !Reefeel \'essel(s) in eemBiaatieR
may eave an aaVel'SB impa€t te a8.tglttisft .vithia 8:8 aEljassal a8viglisle ehaRBe!.'
2.~.21.J.1. ",l/hemer Bf Rat. fer JafS S8 a '.vBtBf\1'/Bj' that is gtlester than 100 feet la ':Adtk, the
lH"sps!:ied elaell faeili~j eee1:lpies mare than 2$ ,S1'68Rt sf the .:idlh af the
?!8EeP::a). ef, fer eeathsHses 8ftl)', prstrudes g1'ester than 29 feet, and whetker ar
flet a fftiaiRUiffi af 59 }3'ereeat af the \', iSlt sf the ':/Bterllay is malRletaea La sraer
18 eR5tUe reSS8f1Bhle '!/l:lteR...ay ft8!;igBBilit),.
2,fi.21.3,S Weether ae 86t there !He speeial eal\siaefts related te the subjeet pFepeFf) sr
wtlteu:aj ..hiehjti5tif) [he prepesed simeesisas aRS lealltiaB sf the s~sjl!!el
Efeel<, .
2,6.21.3.". ,x/kether Sf RBt me pfspesed seelt is sf fftiaifftal. dimeasieR9 Reeess8F}' i8 SMEle tel
sseEjtiatel:}' seeti.re the mSSf'eEt :essel J/hile poo\'iaiHg Feassftsl:lie seee3S te the
Beat faf FatiMa! IHBiR1eR8ftee, .vidtBtit the liSS sf eneessi':e deeJ[ area.
2.6,21.3.7. "'nether aF Rat the pfSpS!iea stroehlrB is af RHftiRUl:l aimeftsisfts ta mieimiroe the
impaet afilie 'lie':} sf the ..8lePV. 8) BY stif'l'61:1ftsiag pr:speft} e .-:'8819.
2.fi.21.3,8. \llkether Sf Bel the prepesea . easel is 1ft eJ(E!eS5 sf SG "sreeRt sf the leagth. sf the
'.;iltar HeRtage tH:leh that the M:lditisB aC a EleelE struetYFe ':lilI i.n8fease the iRlflaet
eft. Sf' .negati :el) ifRpaet the.. ie"ll sf the ',vsteEway b) 5tiffel::lRdiag pf'8pefE'Y
...........,
2.6.21.3.9, '.VRelh~r sr Bet the prel'6gea 1868tis8 &Bet desigR af the see]&' :e55el esmhiRstieft
is sueh that it may infriRge 1:Ifl8n the use sf aeigh~8fiftg pFspafties., iaeJtidiftg Em)'
8nisang EiselE StrHetliFeS.
2.6.21.3.19. RegatEiiag 5ni5tiag l3efttBle 8Pgafliams 1ft die ':ieiftity af the pmpsGed eJEteRllisa,
(a) "'hether af flet seagl'BSses ate laested '::ithiR 200 feet sf the prsJ3Baea
sael:; &tiS
(6) V'hether SF net the prepesed desk is !luejeet ts tRe milnatee llf8teetLsft
requipemeats af this Cade (seetieR, 2.6.22),
2.6.2 LJ.11.
If eleemed aeeessiUY Bases UPS" re\ ie N sf the sBs'/e ePiteria, Ie! planRiAg
eemmissiea EBB)' imp sse Sl:IeB eSftsrJ.s8S Hpsn the appre :itl sf lU1 !Ji.tensie.n
re.Ell:lest it seems as fteeessar~ Is ll.eesmpUsh the pl:l.I'pSS6S sf this Cede and
Words ~F&ttgh arc deleted, words underlined are added,
3CJ
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 141 of 192
prelest tile safatyand .lJeJI8fe af the putdie. gliah eeflEiiaeR5 mar iaehul&, aut
shall Bet 138 1imi~a .a, greater side sethaell(li), pre :iliiaa ef lightfB), aElditiS881
FefleetBfs, Sf FeReetefS 1ft,!er WitS faar makes. aRB preh.ihitiftg aT fJeFBlitang
meePiag eft tke 8lilSide ef the seek faeility.
2.'.21.1. SeafhalCfe r'efWtJ ~1I1C1116. la aElditien t6 tHe aateria ia seelie" 2.~.21.3. the
felle,..ieg .rh.Ao 88011 .pply to heatheHsc"
2.6.21.1.1. ~fhdft\tlfft aiIJe sethaelE l"eltUifefReat: IS feet.
2.fS.21.1.2. MB:lE.iffitlfR I'Ruf1isisft iate '::aleFW!lY: 23 ~efee8[ sf e&flal v.lidth aF 2Q feet,
'NAieha', Sf is less.
2.6.2l.4.3. MlllI;IfI.1R 8oigl1t: IS feet 85 m.......tI f"'lli!e~ or sea.vall or BlUlk 'J:hieltev.r is
RlBES reSkieti':e.
2.8.21.1.1. MfHLifBURl RHm6er afBBath.StiSe5 per she: 9a8.
Z.e.21.1.a. fJls8stRsHse StfUetHFeS 51=101188 eempletely epea 8ft all feur sides.
2.fi.21.1.fi. Resfiftg mKun:.i.al aREI. mer eBler shalll:le the same as mllterials ul'ld eelers HSe6 6ft
the I3Flfieiflal stfl;:lEtHFe Sf mal ee Elf a paba fFefta "ehieltee" style.
2.6.21.1. Individual or multinle orivate docks. includin!! moon"!! cHing'S. davits. lifts and
the like are oermitted 10 serve waterfront orooertv as de.<;cribed in division 6.3
definitions. crovided such docks do not orotrude more than the respective
allowable distances specified in subsections 2.6.21.2. and 2.6.21.3. oetbis code
for such waterway or waterbodv. Docks and the like are primarilv intended to
adequatelv secure moored vessels and orovide safe access for routine
maintenance and use while minimallv imoactin2 navigation within any adiacent
navigable channel. the use of the waterway. the use of neiJhborinll docks. the
native marine habitat manatees. arid the view of the waterway bv the
neie:hborioe propeny owners..
2.6.21.1.1. Permitted dock facHitv Drotrusions as well as extensions of dock facilities arc
measured from the orooertv line. bulkhead Hne. shoreline. seawall. rio~rap line.
control elevation contour. or mean hillh water lMHW) line. whichever is most
restrictive. with the foUowinlZ exception: on manmade waterwaYS less than 100
feet in width. where the actual waterway has receded from the olatted waterfront
nrooertv line. the olannine services director may 8oorove an administrative
variance allowinl! measurement of the oretrusion from the existinl! MHW line.
orovided that: 1) a signed. sealed survey no more than sixty (60) days old is
orovided showinl:!: the location of the MHW line on either side of the waterway at
the site as well as any dock facilities on the subiect DrODertv and the oronertv
directly across the waterwav and. 2) at least 50 Defee"t of the true waterway
width as deoicted bv the survey is maintained for navi2'sbilitv with the followine-
execution: 00 manmade canals 60 feet or less in width which are not reinforced
by a vertical seawall or bulkhead. at least 33 percent of the true waterwa.y width
must be maintained for navi~abmty. The allowable nrotrusion of the facility into
the waterway shall be based on the oerccnta2es described in subsection
2.6.21.2.2. of this code as aoolicd to the true waterway width shown on tbe
survey and not the olaned canal width.
2.6.2l.1.2. On unbridl!ed barrier islands. a boat dock shall be considered a oermitred
orincioat use: however. a dock shall not. in any way. constitute a use or structure
which permits. requires. and/or nrovides for any accessory uses and or structures,
Boathouses and dock facilities orooosed on residentiallv zoned orooenies as
defined in section 2. J. J4. of this code. shall be considered an accessory use or
structure. Boathouses shall be required to be aODroved throU2b the nrocedure and
Words 5I.fl:le]t tkr6l:1gk are deleted, word; underlined are added.
31
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 142 of 192
criteria in subsections 2.6.21.3 and 2.6.21.4 Tn addition. any covered structure
erected on a orivate boat dock shall also be considered an acceSSQrv use. and
shall also be required to be aooroved lhroU2h the procedures and criteria of
suhsections 2.6.21.3. and 2.6.21.4. of this code
2.6.21.1 3. Non.residential dock facilities shall be subiect to all of the orovisions of section
2.6.21 of the code. with the exceotion that Dfotrusions for non-residential dock
facilities bevond the soecified limits shall be determined administrativelv bv the
Dlanninll services director at the time of site develooment olan review. based on
an evaluation of tbe criteria in subsection 2.6.2 J .3. of this code.
2.6.21,2. Dock facilitv reauirements and restrictions. The following criteria seDlv to dock
facilities and boathouses. wiLh the exccolion of dock fucilities and boUlhouses on
man made lakes and other manmade bodies of water under nrivate control.
2.6.21.2.1. For lots on a canal or waterwaY that is 100 feet or 2reater in width no boathouse.
dock facilitvlboat combination shall orotrude more th1tn 20 feet into the
waterway (j.e. the total orotrusion of the dock facility DIns the total orotrnsion of
the moored vessel). A dock extension in accordance with subsection 2.6.21.3. of
this code may be granted to allow a orotrusion of more than 20 feet.
2.6.21.2.2. For lots on a canal or wateI"'\V8V that is less than 100 feet in width. dock facilities
mav occuov no more than 33 oercent of the width of the waterway or orotrude
1!reater than 20 feet into the waterway. whichever is lesser. A dock exten.\;ion in
accordance with subsection 2.6.21.3. of this code maybe ImlfIted to allow a
Drotrusion of more than 20 feel. but at no rime shall such an extension be I!ranted
to allow a ororrusion into more than 25 percent of the waterwav width.
2.62 J .2.3 For lots on unbrid2'ed barrier islands located within sate aouatic oreserves.
orotrusion limits. setbacks. and deck area shall be determined bv the aODlicable
Florida Deoartment of Environmental Protection (DEP) reeulations in effect at
the time of Dermit 3oolication. and the Drotrusion limits above shall not aoolv'
however. all reouired DE? oermits for the dock. facilitv must be obtained orior to
the issuance of a Collier Countv buildinv permit for the facility. >
2.6.21.2.4. All dock facilitie.o; on lots with water frontage of 60 feet or ~ater shaH have a
side setback reouirement of 15 feet. except as Drovided in subsections 2.6.21.2 or
2 6.21.4 of Ihis code or ns exempted below. All dock facilities (except
boathouses) on lots with less than 60 feet of water front82e shall have a side
setback reauirement of7 1/2 feet. All dock facilities. (exc~DI bQathouses) on lots
at the end or side end ora canal or waterway shall have a side setback
reouirement of 7 1/2 feet as measured from the side lot line or "oarian line.
whichever is ap9roDriate.
2.6.21.2.4.1. Ricana" lines (see division 6.3. definitions. noarian line). for lots at the end or
side end of a waterway with a re~ular shoreline. are established bv a Hne
extendin2 from the corner of an end Jot and side end lot into the waterwav
bisectlnl! eauidistantlv the anf!Je created bv the two intersectin210ts (see Exhibit
At Rioadan lines for all other lots should be established bv eenernlly acccDled
methods takin2 into consideration the cootie-uration of the shoreline. and
allowine- for the eouitable acoortionment of Monrian ri2hts. Such methods
include. bur are not limited to. lines drawn oernendicular to the shoreline for
ree:ular (linear) shorelines. or lines drawn pernendicular to the centerline (thread)
of the Wl!te1W3V oeroendicular to the line of deeD water (line of navhrabiJitv or
ed2e of naYiwable channen. as aODrooriate. for irre2ular shorelines.
2621 25 All dock facilities. regardless of lene:thlorotrusion. shall have reflectors and
house numbers. no less than four inches in hei.lZht installed at the outennost end
on both sides. For muhifamilv develooments the house number reouirement is
waived.
Worns 5H"wel: IRrsl:lgh are deleted, words underlined are added.
32
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 143 of 192
2.6.2 \.2.6. All dock facilities are subiect to. and shall comnlv with. all federal and state
requirements and permits. includine but not limited to the reauirements and
permits of the Florida Deosrtment of Environmental Protection. the U.S. Armv
Coms of En2ineers. and the U.S. Environmental Protection AllenCy
2.6.21.2.7. Protection ofseQprass beds. Where new dockintz. facilities or boat dock
extensions are DmDOsed. the location and presence of seS2J'BSS or sea2rBSS beds
within 200 feet of any nrooosed dock facility shall be identified on an aerial
ohoto.,aph havin. a scale of one inch to 200 feet when available from the
county. or a scale of onc inch to 400 feet when such nhotom:'8phs are not
available from the countv. The location of seaerass beds shall be verified by a
site visit bv the site development review director. or his desil!nee Drier to
issuance of any omieel aDoroval or permit.
2.6.21.2.7.1. All nrooosed dock facilities shaH be located and alismed to stav at least ten feet
from anv existinl!' Se.a2TBSS beds. except where a continuous bed ofseaarasses
exists off the shore of the orooertv and adiacent to the orooertv. 811d to minimize
ne,:al:iye imDac:ts to seae:rasses and other native shoreline. emere:ent and
submereed veli!ctation and hard bottom communities.
2.6.21.2.7.2. Where a continuous bed of seallrasses exislS off the shore of the omnenv and
adiacent to the nrooertv. the 800licant shall be allowed to build a dock across the
sea~rass beds. or a dockinQ: facilitv within ten feet of sesJrBss beds. Such
dockin2' facilities shall complY with the following- conditions:
1. The dock shall be at a hei.ht of at le"l 3.5 feel NGVD.
2. The terminal Dlatform area of the dock shall not exceed J 60
souare feet.
3. The access dock shall not exceed a width of four feet.
4. The access dock and terminal platform shall he sited to imoact the
smallest area of sea~rass beds ol?ssible.
2.6.21.2.7.3. The oetitioner shall be reauired 10 demonstrate how nes:ative imo8cts to sea~nass
beds and other native shoreline vee:etation and hard bottom communities have
been minimized Drior to any oroiect aporoval or DeTroit issuance.
2.6.21.3. Dock facility extension. Additional orotrusion of a dock facilitv into any
waterway beyond the limits established in subsection 2.6.2J.2 of this code may
be considered 8norooriate under certain circumstances. The Collier County
Planoin!! Commission. at a dulv advertised DUbHc hearin~. shall 8D9rove.
aoorove with conditions. or denv. a dock facility extension reQuest based on the
criteria below. Advertisement of such hearinl! shall consist of 1) Dublication of
a notice of the hearioe: in a newspaper of ~enerat circulation in the county at least
15 days in advance of the hearintr: 2) Dostine: of a si2'n by the develooment
services director in full view of the public on the subiect Drooertv: and. 3)
notification bv the development services director of all owners of oropertv within
500 feet of the subiect orooortv. As to anv boat dock extensioD netitio" UDOn
which the olannin2' commission takes action, Dursuant to subsectioD 5.2.11 of
this code. an Bl!e:rieved Detitioner or adversely affected orooertv owner maY
appeal such final action to (he board ofzonimz aODeals. The board afzoning
aODeals may affinn affirm with condirions. reverse or reverse with condilions
the sellon of the olannin~ commission. Such anneal shall be fiJed with the
communi tv deyelooment and environmental services division and shall be
noticed for hearine bv (he board of zooiD!! aoneals oursuant 10 the orocedures
and ~pDlicable fee set forth in subsection 1.6.6 of this code. The olanninl!
commission shall base its decision for aODroval aoproval with conditions. or
denial. on an evaluation of Ihe followinl! orimarv and secondary criteria. The
BooHcation for a boat dock extension shall include the followine: 1) a siened.
sealed survey denictine mean hie:h water. mean low water. and relevant water
Words s{rlls!; thrsllgh are deleted. words underlined are added.
33
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 144 of 192
deDths measured at no less than 5-fOOl increments: and 2) a chart drawn to scale
or the waterway at the site. denictin2' the: waterway width the oroximit~ of the
Droooscd facilitv to BOV Bdiacentnavhrable channel. the Droximitv of the
oronosed facilitv 10 docks. if any. on the ad.seem Jots. and the unobst~cted
warerwuv between the Deoeosed facilitv and the oCDOsite bank. or any dock
facilitv on the oPJ'OSite bank, In order for the 0lannin2 com;is~io~ ;0 ~o~ve
the reauest it must be determined that at least four (4) crih five (5) D '0
criteria and at least four (4) cfahe six (6) secondarY criteria. have been mer.
These criteria are as follows:
2,6.21.3.1.1.
2.6.21.3. J. Primarv criteria:
2.6.21.3,1.2,
2.6.21.3.1.3.
2.6.21.3.1.4,
2.6.21.3,l.S.
2,6.21.3.2.
2.6.21.3,2,1.
2.6,21.3,2.2.
2.6.21.3.2.3.
Whether or nor the number of dock facilities and/or boat slips orooosed is
aonronriate in relation to the waterfront len2th location. unland land ~ a:d
zoniml of the subiect OfOoertV: consideration should be made of DroDel v o.
unbrid.ed barrier islands. where vessels are the orimarv means of tr;;;;~~~~ation
to and from the orooenv. IThe number should be sDDronriste' tVDi~;}~ . le-
familv use should be no more than two sJins: twics! multi-familv use ~hould be
one SliD net' dwelling- unit: in the case of unbridlled banier island docks.
additional sHos mav be aoorooriate).
Whether or not the water deoth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of
the llcnerallemrth t\lDe. and draft as that described in the oetitioiler's ao;lication
is unable 10 launchorrnoor at mean Jow tide (MLTl. (rhe netitioner's
apnlication and survey should show chat the water depth is too shallow to allow
launch and moorin2 of the vessel (s) described without an extension).
Whether or not the Droeosed dock facilitv may have an adverse imeact on
navilzation within an adiacent marked or charted navieable channel. (The facility
should not intrude into any marked or charted navieable channel Ihm: imnedine-
vessel traffic in (he channel).
Whether or not the DroOOSed dock facUitv Drotrndes no more than 25 Defee"! of
the width of the waterway. and whether or not a minimum of 50 oercent of the
waterway width between dock faciUties on either'side of the waterway is
maintained for navilzabilitv. (The facility should maintain the reouired
oercentalles),
Whether or not the DTODOSed location and desi2n of the dock facility is such that
,he facilitv would not interfere with the use of nei.hhorin. docks.lThe ~acilitv
should not interfere with the use of lelmllv oermitted neie-hborios! docks .
Secondary criteria:
Whether or not there are sDecial conditions. not inyolvinn water d::~nrelated to
the subiect oronettv or waterway which iustifv the 91'Ooosed dim i sand
location of the nrooosed dock facilitv. (There mugt be at least onc sDeci~1
condition relaled to 'he DropertV: these may include [vue of shoreline
reinforcement. shoreline confhmration. man2rove 2rowth. or sea2rass beds)
Whether the Dcocosed dock facility would allow reasonable. safe access to the
vessel for JoadinnlunJoadine. and routine maintenance. without the use of
excessive deck area not directly related 10 these functions. (The faciJilv should
not use excessive deck area),
For sin,le-famifv dock facilities whether or not the leneth of the vessel. or
vessels in combination. described bv the Dctitioner exceeds 50 nercenl of the
subiect oronertv's linear waterfront foorae-c. (The annJicnble maximum
oercenI<ll!e should he maintained).
Words &lFUeb. tftf5t1gh arc deleted. words underlined are added.
34
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 145 of 192
2.6.21.3.2.4. Whether or nollhe prooosed facilitv would have a major imoacl on the
waterfront view of nei2hborinl! waterfront nronertv owners. (The facilitv should
not have a maior impact on the view of either nei~hbor)
2.6.21.3.2.5. Whether or not sea.rass beds are located wilhin 200 feet of the orooosed dock
facilitv. (Ifseae:rass beds are DreSen! comoliance with subsection 2.6.21.2.6. of
this code must be demonstrated),
2.6.21.3.2.6. Whether or not the ocooosed dock facility is subiect to the manatee orotection
co(jluirements of subsection 2.6.22. of this code. (If apolicable. comoliance with
seclion 2.6.22 must be demonslratedl.
2.6.21.3.3. If deemed necessary based unDo review of the above criteria the olannin2
commission may imoose such conditions uno" the aDomval of an extension
reQuesr it deems necessarv to accomplish the pumoses of this code and orotect
the safety and welfare of the DubHe, Such conditions may include. but shan not
be limited to. 2'feater side setback(s). and orovision of lieht{s). additional
reflectors. or reflectors lamer than four inches.
2.6.21.4. Boathouse reouirements: Boathouses. includin~ any roofed structure built on a
dock. shall be reviewed by the planniDll commisslon usin1! the same procedures
and 8,Dolic:able criteria described in subsection 2.6.21.3 of rhis code: however. the
criteria in subsection 2.6.21.3. of this code shall aODlv onlv to simultaneous
ap.plication for both a dock extension and a boathouse. In cases where the
boathouse is to be constructed on an existim!. lC2allv nermitted. dock. these
criteria shall not aoolv since the dock itself is alreadv in eomoliance with the
code. In aU cases. the followine additional criteria shall aoplv to boathouses
and all of these criteria must be met in order for the olaunin!! commission to
aomove the request:
2.6.214 1. Minimum side setback requirement: 15 feet.
2.6.21.4.2. Maximum protrusion into waterwaY: 25 Deree"t of canal width or 20 feet.
whichever is less: the roof alone may overhang no more than 3 feet into the
waterway beyond the maximum orotrusion and/or side setbacks.
2.6.21.4.3. Maximum hei!!ht: IS feel as measured from too of seawall or bank. whichever is
more restrictive. to the oeak or hi2hest elevation of the roof.
2.6.21.4.4, Maximum number of boathouses or covered structures ner site: 1.
26.21 45. All boathouses and covered structures shall be completelv ODen on all four sides,
2.6.21.4.6. Roofimr material and roof color shall be the same as materials and colors used on
the orinoiDs. slrUcture or maY be of a onlm frond "cbick.ee" stvle' Ii sim;t1e.familv
dwelling- unit must be constructed on the subiect lot orior to. or simultaneouslv
with. the construction of any boathouse or covered dock strUcture.
See. 2.6.33 T.mporary use permits.
*
*
*
.
*
*
.
.
.
.
.
2.6.33.3.
T~orary construction and development permits. During the construction of
any developmenl for which at least a preliminary development order has been
granted, as required below, the develope.r may request a temporary use permit for
the below~listed activities. The temporary use permit shall be granted initially for
a period not to exceed 24 months in duration and may be renewed annually based
upon demonstration of need and payment of fee. A request for renewal shall be
submitted to the planning services director in wriling 30 days prior to the
expiration of the temporary use permit. Temporary construction and
development permits shall be alJowed for the following uses:
Words Slfl:lell. Ittnsl:Igk are deleted, wQrds underlined are added.
)5
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 146 of 192
I. Temporary offices to be used for construction, and administrative
functions within the deveJopment.
2. Temporary administrative offices to be used in conjunction with a bona
fide agricultural use in the agricultural zoning district when located in the
area designated agricultural on the future land use mnp of the future land
use element of the Collier County growlh management plan.
.l. Temoorarv classrooms on the site for existinll nonorofit ore:anizations.
used to continue existin2 classroom activities. and in coniunction with an
aooroved develonment order: oennits for such classrooms will be issued
in coniunction with an aooroved site imorovement clan,
3r ~ On-site storage of equipment and construction materials for use on the
development site only.
4r ~ On-site mobile home used as a temporary office or storage facility for
persons engaged in the development of the site.
~ ~ On-site mobile radio and television equipment and antennae.
6, L On-site mobile home for the use of a watchman or caretaker only.
+-: ~ On-site temporary use of structures and equipment for the building of
roads, public utilities. and government projects.
&. 2.: Off-site temporary parking on property which is located co~tiguous to the
subject development, or would be contiguous except for a roadway that is
not designated as a colleclor or arterial in the traffic circulation element
of the growth management plan, with the written authorization of the
property owner. .
9r ill Other on-site uses similar to tbe foregoing uses and determined by the
planning services director to meet the intent of section 2.6.33.2.
.
*
.
.
*
*
*
*.
.
*
*
I. purposes of enhanced light andlor sound; or
2. The event:
(a) is attended by 25 or more people and is organized by or at
the direction of the Owner; and
(b) is of a nature not commonly associated with the day-to-
day use of the beach by the general public.
*
.
*
.
*
.
*
.
.
.
.
See. 2.6.38. Access management plans.
2.6.38.1.
Purpose and intent. This section pertains to transportation access within mixed~
use aclivity centers as designated on the Future Land Use Map of rhe Growth
Management Plan. .<\8 aeeeS5 fR8flsgemsnt pla:a exists fur eeeR mineS. use
aeli :it)' Benter ( see .A~flf1eRdjJ[ V).The l'ul'flese sf the azee&s manageft'lent plans is
16 eeRtIet the Rumser, leearieR aRa t"} pe €lf saaell5 paints [8 tke reas. .\'8)' ( H5Hally
arterials analer eelleeters ) 8FeUaa .. hiea Baeh mixes HSt eeti. it) eeater is
leeates, S8 thallhe 8c,befs8 imp-eets te safar), 6SflSeil) BRa sfl'effitiAg eenditiens
af the read.. a) Ii ...ill be ffliftimized, ^ hile previdieg adequate &eBBS!) te laelie
pl'spefties '. ithia the mined liS! aed. it) eeHler. The location and type of f.ttttH:e
access ( existine and future) points (86VI iflgFesstegras5 ) shall be ts based upon
the Collier County Access ManagemeRt QQn!rQl Policy (Resahnisft ~Je. 92 112
jeRes. 01.247) as may be amended existing and future land use conditions, aAEI
with the objective ef to minimize Rtiaiati2:iag the number of access points to the
roadway network. FtltHre assess paiAtll are sl:IBjeel t8 shange as reaa
impfB'leffieB~5 B:fe ]'daftRea ana designed, sa:sefl l:l138R Fead e8flseit) aaa &a~
eSRliiaeP8.tisRS. This section restricfs the location and type of ingress I i!.!!fI egress
Words IHNat! tnretlgh are deleled. words underlined are added.
36
2.'.38.3.
2.6.38.4.
2.6.38.4.1.
2.6.38.4.3,
2.6.38.1.1.
SUBSECTION 3. F.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 147 of 192
points and median openings; restricts the loc.tion of tr.ffic sign.ls; identifies
areas appropriate for shared access and interconnection; and otherwise regulates
transponation access. all within mixed~use activity centers, Access to all
properties Rat lea8ted 'A'HeiR a .ft'liJf.ed kiSS aeti. it)' eeater is controlled by the
access m.ftoge_ftt~ policy ( Resolution No, ~ !lJ..:M1. and as may
be amended ). the Collier County Construction Standards. for work within rights-
of-way ( Ordinance 93-64 and .s may be .mended ). and .ny other applicable
regulations.
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
*
.
....e6855 ma:ragems:Jt fJHlIt mapa. TheA! are 21 aeeess managemeat ~IBR JBElf'S eM
Wf eaeh mined. 1i56 aeti':i~y senter and eRe fer the fH~fI! Beti"..i~y seater at taB
i.l.rGeelieft af '/..de..i1t Beoeh Rond (C.R. 862) ...d "'UpOIl Read (CoR, 31 ).
The fHaI' aepiets: mines \ise aeti\'ity eeBler eal:tflliaAes~ emistiflg zaniag 8:istl'ieta
aad teelr hsuBdaries; ffiajer de' elepfMAt. iag-tess/egress l'ei1\lS ana type ( full Sf
f8strietes aeeess). restrietbe fHeai8fi5t meaian Bl3eaiftgs, H':&f:ie sigftals aad
siBe",/all,s: ElJ3pre'/ed aut lIBlnlilt ing:re5S/ egte55 ~eint6 Me type~ futtft'e and
pstefttial ",eeieR e~eftin:g ffisdif1eatisllsj j:lsteRtia:l trame sigaal laeatiaftB;
J:lBtefltial leaarieRs feF shafea aeeess aF intereSflReeasn, enisting iagresstegt'ess
paiftt5 te be ffi.6mtere.a fer passisls ffisaifteflMBl'I5; and ateet' rele'/8:8t Elata, These
FB.iIfJs are faliaS in /..-ppesBix. V tagether 'nitk 1H1 eJEplaeBt1en sf \Be .Rtap legeft6
BRa at3tatieas.
*
.
.
.
.
*
.
*
.
*
.
Regulations,
Future development orders within mixed-use activity centers can only be
approved if access location(s) and type(~) comply with these aerieted 8ft thoe
aeeess fflBaagelB6flt I'lan maps, eJl.eept as pr8\'ided jll seetisB 2,€.38,3.1.~
Collier County Access Control Policv and the Comer County Construction
Standards for work within the ril!'ht~of~wav and any other re2'ulations as may be
amended.
*
.
*
.
.
*
*
*
.
.
*
During development or redevelopment of commercial lots, shared access or
interconnection shall be encouraged and may be reauired as a condition of site
develQoment clan aODrovaJ.
TeR min.es use BBti'd1:) eeftter5 eeataia 8ft iateFSeeesa idea.tiAe.d 8ft die Future
Tmffi.....I>)'. M"" Ye.r 2Q\S (Tfllflie Ci....I.lioR EI.meat).s tho sbe of pessi.l.
nlUn=e graEle Sel'afatlBB. TRelle ftltwFe grase Septlf8.H88B fftaj R!5ult ift aeees5BfY
eftBflges lEI the leeBtief\ RBd tYf3e af e.eeeS5 psifttfi and meailHl &peRings. The tea
,'\eth'ity CeatefS Me FauBEl 8n ffi&p f1UffieeL'S 1,2,7. &,13, H, U. 17, aRd 18.
*
.
.
.
.
*
*
*
*
*
*
AMENDMENTS TO ZONING ADMlNISTRA nON AND
PROCEDURES DIVISION
the Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby ame.ded as follows:
Division 2.7. Zoning Administration and Procedures of Ordinance 91 ~ I 02, as amended,
DMSION 2.7 ZONING ADMINSlTRATION AND PROCEDURES
Sec. 2.7.2. Amendment procedures.
2.7.2.4.
Planning commission hearing and report to the board of county commissioners,
Words Slrttelt !hrstlgh are deleled, words underlined are added,
37
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 148 of192
I, Time limits. Hearings by the planning commission on applications for
rezoning of land oftaIIl!W: be held at least 24 times a year, For
applications nol involving the rezoning of land, but which involve
amendments to these zoning regulations, the planning commission shall
hold its public hearings twice per calendar year. J. loe eaoe ef IItl
emcrge.c), ~ amendments to lhese zoning regulations may be made
more often than twice during the calendar year if the additional
amendment ~ receives the approval of a ~rnajority VOle of the
board of county commissioners. Unless a longer time is mutually agreed
upon by the pJanning commissioners, the planning commission shaH file
its recommendations for either type of amendmeut with the board of
county commissioners within 45 days after the public hearing before the
planning commission has been closed.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
See. 2.7.3. Planned unit development (PUD) proeedures.
2.7,3.3,
2,7.3.4.
*
.
*
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
Effect of planned unit developmenr zoning, If approved by the counly board of
commiss.ioners. the master plan for development and aU other .information and
materials formally submitted with the petition shall be considered and adopted as
an amendment to the zoning code. and shall become the standards for
development for the subject PUD. Thenceforth, the development in the area
delineated as the pun district on the official zoning atlas shaU proceed only in
accordance with the adopted development regulations and the PUD masler plan
for said PUD district. excent that aDoroval and adoDtion of a PUO ordinance or
pun master Dlan does not act to authorize or vest the location desilln c~pacity~
or routing of traffic for anv access point dcoicted on or described in. such
ordinance or olano
Time Jimitsforapproved PUD master plans. In the event that a PUD master
plan is given approval, and the landowner(s) shall:
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
3. Infrastructure imnrovements shan be located on site and shall constitute
infrastructure that makes Dossible vertical construction consistent with
oermitted land uses. Acceleration lanes. eotN road access and the like do not
count towards meetin2 the reauired levels of infrastructure imorovements as
required above.
.
*
*
.
*
*
*
.
*
.
*
2.7,3.5.6. Minor changes not otherwise provided for. II shall he understood that. while a
pun is required 1O describe and provide for infrastructure, intended land use types.
approximate acreages of internal development tracts. !Y.!.d compatibility with
adjacent jand uses. minor changes may become necessary during the subdivision or
site development plan review processes.
The Ele\'elepmeAt olanninl: services director shall also be authorized to allow minor
changes to the PUD master plan during its subdivision improvements plan or site
development plan process to acconunodate topography, vegetation and other site
conditions not identified or accounted for during its original submittal and review
and when said changes have been determined to be compatible with adjacent Jand
uses, have no impacts external to the site, eJCisting or proposed. and is otherwise
consistent with the provisions of this code and the growth management plan. Such
changes shall incJude::
Words 5lftleli Wn aLlgh are deleted. words underlined are added.
J8
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 149 of 192
1. Internal realignment of rights-of-waY$, ether !haft includin. a relocation
of access points 10 the PUD itself, where no water management facility.
conservation/preservation areas, or required easements are affected or
olherwise provided for.
*
*
.
*
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
SUBSECTION 3.G.
AMENDMENTS TO SUBDMSIONS DMSION
Division 3.2., Subdivisions, of Ordinance 91-102. as amended of the Collier County
Land Development Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
DMSION 3.2 SUBDIVISIONS
.
*
.
.
*
*
.
.
'.
.
*
See. 3.:%.6.
Subdivision re.iew procedures.
*
.
.
*
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
3.2.6.3.4.
Recordation of final subdivision plat,
I. General. No building pennits for habitable structures shall b. issued prior
to approval by the board of county commissioners and recordation of the
final subdivision plat.
2, Posting of subdivision peiformance security. Approval of the final
subdivision plat shall not entitle the final subdivision plat to be recorded
unless the required improvements have been completed by or for' the
applicant and accepted by the county, or the required subdivision
performance security for the construction of the required improvements,
both on-site and off-site, has been posted by the applicant, in a format
approved by the county attorney, and approved and accepted by the board.
of county commissioners or the community development and
environmental services administrator. or his designee, on behalf of the
board. Once the form of a subdivision performance security has been
approved und accepted alternate securilies. in a format approved by the
county attorney.. may be approved by the community development and
environmental administrator. or his designee, on behalf of the board.
3. Recordation procedure. After approval of the final subdivision plat by the
board of county commissioners, but prior to the development services
director's recording of the final suhdivision plat with the clerk of the
circuit court, all of the following shall occur:
a. The applicant shall obtain all of the signatures on the original plat
cover sheet(s) that are associatod with the applicant's obligations or
that are otherwise required (tog-ether with any seoarate opinion of title
or title certification. and anY separate mOn231lee'S consent(s)).
h. The applicant shall submit the original final subdivision plat. and anv
separate consents. or ooinjons or certifications of title. to the
development services director after obtaining the signatures required
above. The development services director shall obtain all county
related signatures required on the final subdivision pial
c. Simultaneously with the submission of the fuIly executed final
subdivision plat to the development services director, the applicant
shall also submit in accordance with & 177,041. F.S., at no ex.pense to
the county, either a title opinion aT eertifieate from a Jicensed attorney
authorized to practice in the State of Florida comolvine: with the
Words ~FeYgft arc ddcl.OO. words underlined are added.
39
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 150 of 192
,
standards for such ooinions as thev may be nromuhr8ted from time tq
lime or a rille certification. as weB as any reauired documents
supporting w..title information. and any such related documents as
mav he rcmlircd hv (he office of the Cotlnlv auorney.
The effective date of the '"PPDlliftg title information must be no more
than 30 days prior to the submission of the final subdivision plat to
the development services director and must contain all of the
following:
(I) A legal description of~the lands being platted;
(2) A slalement Ihat Ihe anomey is licensed to practice in the State of
Florida and that the attorney has examined title to the subject real
property. if a title opinion is being provided;
(3) Identification of the exacl name of-MlY llle person who is the
record owner of the subject real property and a specific citation to
the official records hook and page, wbere ~liIe-record legal
. owner obtained title to the ,ubject real property. The auppaftiftg
tille information shall have attached thereto a copy of said
instrument{s) of conveyance;
(4). Identification of liens. encumbrances, easements,' or matters
shown or that should be shown as exclusions to coverage on a title
insurance policy. As mav be If-applicable, the auppal'ling title
information shall include h.... aliaah.d in a n.atly bound fashion,
and make citation to the recording information of, all referenced
liens, encumbrances, easements, or exclusions. The sl:1l'peFtiftg
title information shall have attached thereto a copy of any such
instruments.
4. Payment of recording and copy fees. The recording and copy fees
specified in this section must be verified as correct and paid by the
applicant. Upon verification and paymenl. the development services
director shall record rhe final subdivision plat with tbe clerk of the circuit
court in tbe official records of Collier County. Florida, and then proceed
to produce three copies and one mylar of the recorded final subdivision
plat and accompanying documents which are required for the clerk of the
circuit court
5. Recording of other documents. If any dedications, grants, conveyances,
easements, consents (includinll! mortlZag-ee consents), reservations,
covenants, or other like instruments are to be recorded simultaneously
with the final subdivision plat, appropriate fees and original
documentation must be provided to the development services director for
processing and recordimz by the clerk of court prior to. or simultaneouslv
with. the recording of the final subdivision plat.
6. Additional copies. If the applicant or its professional surveyor or engineer
of record wishes to obtain additional copies or mylars of the recorded
document(s) at the time of recording. arrangements shall be made through
the develel'ffieRt enJzineerinl! services director and coordinated with the
transponation services ctivision prior to recording and payment of fees.
7. Completion of' improvements. The required improvements shall be
completed prior to recordation of the final subdivision plat unless the
applicant shall file with the county a subdivision performance security in
a manner and form prescribed in this di vision to assure the installation of
the required improvements.
8. Supporting ~title information. Within 60 days of recordation of the
final subdivision plat in the official records of Collier County, Florida,
Words ~~ an: deleted. words underlined are added.
40
3.2.6.4.3.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 151 of 192
the applicant, at no expense to the county, shall submit to the
development services director eillier a title .piRieft or e.nlileele hem a
lieeftses attemey Ill:ltBBrii!eB Ie PfQe~ee ia the Elate sf Fle1ida as final
supponing ~title information in order 10 induce the Collier County
board of county commissioners to conduct finaJ acceptance of Ihe
subdivision improvemenls us required by this division. The final
supporting title information must meet all of .he requirements of 3.c..
above. excent as to effective date. Recolor and aooroval of the "280" titie
infonnatlon is ~ a condition precedent to acceptance of subdivision
improvements.
The effecti ve dete of Ihe supponing ::mm:.title information must~
tkeBagh the sate sf reeenitl."8B sf the HRal s'lihw":isien plat &BEl fRtist.JU,
minimum. cover the ulIap" between the time the effective date of the
information reauired bv 3.e.. above when submitted and the date and
time of recordiIH! of the final olat. and additionally such title infonnation
must identify and orovide eODies of any recorded documentation-eefflitffi
the fell.wing'
8. A legal 8eaeriptisn af the hwds v:hieh. weFe plaKed;
e. .\ statement that the sHeffler is lieeftSea te ,Neaee ift the 8~le af
Placida B8d that the aUelee) Bas eJiB:Bliaea title t6 ille 568jeet feW
p.ep.rll tllt.egh the dote the B".I seMi ,i.iBR plet 'A'as reeerded, .
if 1:1. title epiRien is pre. hies;
e. . lEIeBtiHBaaea Bf the ~[aet flame ef thf. pefS8B Sf eaHt)" .. Be is ~e
peeeTa e....fler ef the suejeet pFBpefty ans a speeifie eiratie8 te the
efaeial reeartls healL: Mil page..here the reesEa legal 6"1.ner
.etal.ed title t. the plaited laRds. Thi. SUppBfliftg title
iafeFffletisR' sholl hays ottaehed theiets a espy sf said inst:ru:RleRtB
sf esn','syanee;
d. JEie.atifieatisft of the holders of any estates, liens, encumbrances or
easements whieh ha"e not properly included or ioined in lhe
dedication or consents on (he final subdivision plali
e. laeBafisatiea sf HeRS. eaBUm8l'Bflees. eMeRleats. Sf mattel'S
SR8\','R Sf t8.st sh.eulEI ee shs.....a flfi !Jf.eIHsiefts te eavemge eft EI. title
ift.ti...... p.tier, If ap~li.Qele, the 5ftppefliftg titla iftfefftllltiBft
sfttil..fia\ e auaeheel ift a neatly SatlRS nshiefl. tlft.f! !Bsh.e ai16tiea le
the reesreiftg iRfarffistiaft, sf aU r.efareneea HeM., BeeHIflh':fBRees.
easemeats, Bf eneIHsiefl.5. The supporting ~title information
mustsflull have attached thereto a copy of any _~
instruments not oreviouslv provided in connection with fJfEwieas
submittals for the final olat"s recordicQ'.
9. After approval for recording by Ihe board, but prior 10 recordation of Ihe
final subdivision plat, the development services administrator may
approve of minor or insubstantial changes to tbe final plat.
*
.
*
.
.
.
*
.
*
.
.
Observation oj construction. The applicant shall have the professional engineer
or engineer's reprel:tentative make periodic site vil:iits at intervals appropriate to
the various stages of required improvement construction to observe the
contractor's compliance with the approved plans and specifications. At the time
of preliminary acceptance, the applicant's professional engineer shall submit a
completion certificate for those required improvements completed. ~
eomoletion certificate shaH be based on information Drovided bv the Droiect
survevor and the enQ'ineer's own observations. The comDletion certificate shall
not be based on "information orovided bv the contractor". Any discrepancy
Words 51:!: !ish llnellgh are deleted. words underlined are added.
41
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 152 of 192
shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the Ele','elapfMftl cn~inecrin2' services
director prior to preliminary acceptance of the improvements.
* * III * * * * * * * *
3,2.6.4.5.
Construction inspections by the MveltJ.pmel'll enflineerin~ services direc/or.
Upon approval of the improvement plans by the ae.lelepmeat eneineerioe:
services director, the applicant"s profes.sional engineer of record shall be
provided with a list of standard inspections which require the presence of the
se';elapffieRI enlZineerinl'J services director. Notification of all required
inspections shall be contained in the approval Jetter for the development. Based
on the scheduling and progress of construction, the applicant shall be responsible
to noeify the e1e'.elapll.cnl eneineerin2 services director prior to the time these
inspections are required. At least 48 hours' notice shall be provided to the
ae\'e1sl'ffient eni!ioeerin2 services director to allow scheduling of an inspection.
Verbal confirmation of inspection time or a request for rescheduling will be
made by the aelJelepm8ftt ene:ineerimr services director on each notification
made.
All reauired insnections as noted in the Collier Countv Utilities Standards and
Procedures Ordinance 97-17. Section 9.4.2 shall require notice to the ene'ineerine:
services director. Also. the en~ineerjne: services director shall be notified at the
followin~ stalles of construction: orior to any 'Pavin~ or concrete work associated
with roads or sidewalks.
From time to time, the de. elapment eneineerinl! services director shaH inspect the
progress of construction. Should special inspections be required they ,shall be
coordinated through the applicanL .
The foregoing notwithstanding. rouline spot inspections by the dovels,,,,..1
ene:ineerine- services director may be camed out without notice on all construction
to ensure compliance with the approved improvement plans. During the on-site
inspection process, if the ae\ elepmeAt enl!ineerine- services director finds
construction in progress which does not comply with the procedures, policies and
requirements contained in thfs division or the approved improvement plans. he
shall have the full authority to issue a stop work order for the portion of the work
not in compliance. If a stop work order is issued, it shall remain in fun effect with
respect to the defective work until such time as the documented discrepancies
have been corrected to the full satisfaction of the eie-:elepffieftl en{!'ineerin~
services director.
. . . . . * * . . * .
3.2.6.5.3 Procedures for acceptance of required improvements.
* * . * . * . . . * .
2. Completion certificate, record improvement plans and supportive
documents.
. . . * * * . * . * *
c. AU record drawing data for water and sewer faciHties pursuant to the
provisions of Section 10.4 of the Collier County Ord.inat.co He. 88
il6; Utilities Standards and Procedures Ordinance No. 97-17. as
amended.
. . . . . . . . . . .
See. 3.2.8. Improvement plans.
. . . . . . . . . . .
Words alrllal. IhfBligh are deleted. words untlerlined are added.
42
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 153 of 192
3.2.8.3.1. Access to public roads. The street system of a subdivision approved pursuant to
thi, division shall be connected to a public road. which is state or county
maintained, with adequale capacity as defined by the growth management plan to
accept the traffic volumes generated by the proposed development. Unless
topography, or a compliance with Ihe County's Access 1I....g.....9t Control
Policy (Resolution ~ as mav be amended. or LDC Seclion
3.2,8.4.1 prohibits it, the number of access points to public roads shall ensure
that there are no more than 4,000 average daily trips (ADT) per access point
(existing or future). The lelal-maximum number of access points required by this
section shall be six. Proposed developments accessing public roads shall be
subject to the requirements of the Collier County Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance. The connection of any property 10 a public or private road shall he
carried out in conformance with Collier County Ordinance No. 82-9l, as
amended.
3.2.8.3.2. Alleys. Alleys may be provided in industrial. commercial and residential
subdivisions, Alleys may he for one-way or two-way traffic. Alleys for one-way
traffic only shall have the appropriate directional andinstruction signage
installed. Alleys shall be utilized for secondary access unless otherwise orovided
in this code.
* * * * * * . * * * *
3.2.8.3.25. Water system, central. A complete water distribution and transmission system ill
include orevision for scoarate potable .and reuse water lines. and interim water
treatment or interim waler treatment and supply facilities, if required, shalJ be
. provided or employed by .the applicant, al no cost to Collier County for all
subdivisions and developments. Reuse water line.~. pumps. and other
apnurtcnances will not be maintained bv Collier County. Countv DOtable water
wiJ1 not be permitted for irri~ation unless other sources of sUDDlementaJ water
are not oermitted or available. therefore the develoncr will need to omvide
irri2ation water from a source until such time that reuse water may be available.
All facilities shall be constructed in accordance with federal, state and local
regulations. When required, the water distribution and transmission facilities
shall be conveyed to Collier County, or the Collier County Water-Sewer District
or other dependent district where appropriate. upon completion of construction
pursuant 10 County Ordinance [No.] 88-76 [Code ch. 134, art. I\JJ. as amended.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.2.8.3.26.
Storm water management. Anv structure with an outside wall
which is closer than 10 feet from a side property line shan install nrooerlv sized
( minimum 24 saDare inch cross~section) euUers and downsDouts to direct storm
water awaY from neie:hborinl! orooerties and toward front and/or rear swales or
retention/detention areas.
In-wound oercolation tvue retention systems such as rock trenches.
exfiltration trenches or beds. infiltrator tvoe sYStems. 2allerv tV?e sYStems. etc..
shall not be used to achieve water aualitv retention for residential subdivisions.
Rear yard onen retentjon svsterns shall likewise not be deshmed to achieve water
qualitv retention on proiects submitted after January 1. 2002. AU retention
systems for oroiects desil!ned after January 1. 2002 shall be on common pronertv
owned and maintained bv a homeowners' association or similarentitv.
3.2.8.4, I
* * * * * * * * * * *
Access. Access to lots within a subdi vision shall be designed to accomplish
access to the lots by use of local streets. Access to residential lols shall be in
accordance with Ordinance !iQ.. 82-91 [superseded by ordinance found in Code
ch. 110, art. II], M\e seliR!)' right sf \":6)' construction standards handbook for
work wirhin the nllblic ril!bt.of way Ordinance No. 93-63, as mav be amended.
tun allalI In 88 boa "lh.Ml JQ iI!' rUM istefSuHng fi&lIt sf l~ liAea 8ft Isaal ta
18S81 etful iftterueliaRB, JQQ feu fer IsuI leI ft 1R6l 8slluler itJUuestiSABj &I.a
Words SI~tlf:llll.\Fel:tgh are deleted, words underlin~d are added.
4J
3.2.8.4.3.
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 154 of 192
IRQ "Ii fNlIl ill.IUII.ill!. "Ihl Hi..as IiI U !.L. aU elhu 8k'UU of ki81ur
elooaHbati!oo. beaal Ill! 1IIliB.1lI uYutn 8111.81 un uti!.u U! flujl!ll uIJutBPB
ohall \Ja l...L.iHltln. ae 1(10 jut &~&P" (tll ril~f! I B818 ).
Delete Figure I
Laeal er miner "treet f8ft.ftteti6ft!t te Mfedal 3[reels Jhall he a fuiflil'l'I,Uffl sf 669
feelopoll (See n~ure 2 oela..)
Delete Figure 2
ba:a1. 61 .mt.n.6r ~~Uee.tu street ~61d~CGti.fi..J. t'6 1lI'te1'iai 3tKof3 Hlft) 'he JJe fat
opall if the ,tlcel eooneeli.. pre,i~., fer righl telo' .nly (Sec Pigere 2 oele..)
Delete Figure 3
tfs.j8r uJ11111ef !tiel' 88RftUti8R8 18 UliuiAl ."!1I8 shall hi a MiaiHduflsf 1.319
r... ~ IWt '11.1""11 UBi-daR"" fir .Ben fllJieluui&l UJIlIlOll ill ~8Birefl alSJ1.1 a Iii aJer
8sl1eSf8c Bf W1aflll swell, h sRall Be JUS hies h~ A.AlM If a R\a~a.j 1.88898
IBla. l'hB HInt ,eis. sf B1!8888 18 the Rl8fI!,inal usus nul fraR.i. hlllifUetisR
sf ullulIi!lf Ufuto: &ful'!! IIlUilll.llHUt! shall hi a ffti.nia.uII, efJJQ feu fUIIl
il .unlting !light. ef as !iou, Intermittent access poinrs to the marginal access
road shall be a minimum of 660 feet apart. Access poinls to the marginal acccss
roads shall be provided with appropriate turn lanes, signalization or other
necessary traffic control measures, Wh~n double-frontage lots are created
adjacent to a collector or arterial street and a local street, they shall front on the
local street, whIch shall provide access to said lot. Access 10 the lot shall nol he
provided by means of the major collector or arterial street. In such cases, the lot
shall be buffered as required herein, Access management regulations as required
by the Growth Management Act, when implemented, shall supersede this section
where applicable. Where access locations are not consistent with the county's
Access Management policy. a separate access capacity analysis shaU be required
to identify capacity impacts and appropriate mitigation.
In the case of commercial or industrial subdivisions which contain Of include
parcels which are separated by common parking area or other common area,
sometimes referred to as "outparcels", "anchor store parcels", Of "fee simple
footprint parcels", or an integrated phased development as defined in anicIe 6,
access shall be created through an internal access provision documented on the
final subdivision plat. Internal access provisions shown on the final subdivision
plat shall include by way of example. bue not limited to, cross-covenants, cross.
easements. dedicated access tracts. or the like, and shall clearly and specifically
identify the dominant and servient estates involved, and the scope Wld duration
of such internal access provision. Thill pre, i5ies shall he aeeeptBele ta the
CeffiffiUfth) De':elepft1.8ftt aRa Eft'/ir8Rmeatal SeE". iees Di/isieB. :\EimiBistP6tef
aHa the 68t:lflty Snaffle} lltut satisf:~ the z8fti8g felluife1fteRts fer the zBBing
diskier in l.hieh.the 5tietii\'isieR is Jeealeci.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Blocks. The length, widlh and shape of blocks shall be dClermined with due
regard to:
l. Zoning requirements as to lot size and dimensions.
2. Need for convenient access, circulation, control and safety or vehicular and
pedestrian Iraffic.
3. Limitations and opportunities of topography, including all natural and
preserved features identified.
Where special topographical conditions exist, hlock lengths greater than 660 feet
flI1lJ'"shall be approved by the Community Development and Environmental
Services Administraror pursuant to section 3.2.7.2. Traffic calming devices. as
approved hy the Neighborhood Tlaffic Management Program, shall be provided
Words strite)! lIudugh are deleled. words underlined are added.
44
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 155 of 192
in block lengths greater than 660 feet. Reeolllll1eodetl s~aeing &f Ir8flie eolmi,,&
tie','jee3 b 189 feet I9f peAler bB6e6. 6n. site ~eme~ that Wae5tilfl.&;eS 81'eldting
spees greeter that. the p83tea speed. '
,
.
,
,
,
*
,
,
,
,
.
3.2.8.4,16.5. Street right of way widrh. The minimum right-of-way widths to be utilized shall
be as follows and, where applicable, shall be clarified by !he cross sections
contained In appendix B, and will be directly related to lraffic volume as
indicated in the definition of each street continued herein and where applicable
clarified by the cross sections comained in appendix B. Private street righl-of-
way widths and design may be determined on a case-by-case basis in accordance
with section 3.2,7,2.
Street Type
All Streets
Cul-de~sac
Local
Minor collector
Minor collector
(divided)
Major collector or
Minor Arterial *
RIW Widrh'
LAn. Widrh
lanes
2
2
2
2
Number of
(f.et)
10
10
11:ll
11-12
11:ll
(feer)
60
60
lMlB.Q
A:l ""4ttired fer ..IOOKh. ana
ltunllin.-:.s .8.Q:1.QQ
sa reql:lj..~.d as determined for
median and turn lanes
2
Note: Any rural cross sections approved may require expanded righr-of-way
widths for additional shoulder and swale facilities. Design to he approved on a
case-by-case basis.
'If an alley is utilized, Ihe right.of-way width may be reduced upon approval of
the CemRWRity De':eleplflBftt aad M-;iFElftmentaI TransDortation Services
Administrator.
Sec.3.2.9. Final subdivision plat.
3.2.9.2.12.
* * * *' * * '" * * * '"
Certification and approvals. The plat shall contain. excect as otherwis.e allowed
~ on the first page (unless othetwise apofoved bv the en~ineerin2 services
director and office of the county attorney prior to submittal) the following
certifications and approvals, acknowledged if required by law, all being in
suhstantiallv the fonn set forth in appendix C to this code. The geometric layout
and configuration of the property to be piatted shall not be shown on lhe page(s)
containing the certifications. approvals and other textual dala associated with the
plat when practical.
I , Dedications. The purpose of all dedicated or reserved areas shown 0;' the
plat shall be defined in the dedication on the plat. All areas dedicated for
use by the residents of the subdivision shall be so designated and all areas
dedicated for public use, such as parks. rights-of-way, easements for
drainage and conservation purposes and any other area, however
designated, shall be dedicated by the owner of the land at the time the plat
is recorded. Such dedication and the responsibility for their maintenance
shall require a separate acceptance by resolution of the board of county
commissioners. No dedications items shall be included in the general note
for the plat.
2. Mortgagee's consent and approval. Identification of all mortgages and
appropriate recording information together with all mortgagccttt consents
and approvals of the dedication shall be required on all plats where
mortgages encumber the land to he platted. The signature(s) of the
mortgagee or mortgagees, as the case may be, mUSt be witnessed and the
execution must be acknowledged in the same manner as deeds are
required to be witnessed and acknowledged. In case the mortgagee is a
Words !ltRJell thl'6ugh are deleted. words underlined are added.
4S
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 156 of 192
corporation. the consent and approval shall be signed on behalf of the
corporation by the president, vice-president or chief executive officer.-A!
the Qoolicant's DDtion. mortllllRee's consents do not have to be included
on the olat to be recorded. so lone' as they are Drovidcd as fullv executed
and acknowledlled scoarate instruments alone- with the Dial submittal.
3. Certification of surveyor. The plat shall contain the signature, registration
number and official seal of tbe laod surveyor, certifying that the plat =
oreoaredis a fepRseRta.aSft sf the laRd. sl:H-;eJ'ea under his responsible
direction and supervision and that [be survey data compiled and shown on
the plat complies with all of the requirements of F.s. ch. 177.hI:LI. as
amended, Slid thili dh isisl\. The CC11ification shaH also state that
permanent reference monuments. "P.R.M., II have been set in compliance
with F.S, ch. 177,hI:LI. as amended, and this division, llJld that P.C.P.s
and lot comers will be set under the direction and supervision of the
surveyor o;;itkin {VI e I'fteRths &iter esmpladsft Drior to final acccotance of
required improvements, Upon installation of the P.C.P.s, the surveyor
must submit to the development services director written certification that
the instailation work has been properly completed. When required
improvements have been completed prior to the recording of a plat, the
certification shall state the P.C.P.s and lot comers have been set in
compliance wirh the laws of the State of Florida and ordinances of Collier
County. When plats are recorded and improvements are to be
accomplished under perfonnancc security posted as provided for by this
division, the required improvements and performance' guarantee shall
include P.C.P.li.
4. Signature block for board of county commissioners and clerk of circuit
c:ourt. The plat shall contain the approval and signature block for the
board of county commissioners and the acknowledgement and signature
block of the clerk of circuit court.
5. Signature block for county attorney. The plat shall contain the approval
and signature block for the county attorney. .
6. Evidence Ceo tijiMN8R of title. A title certification or ooinio" of title
comnlvin. with & 177.041. F.S.. muSlsMll be submitted with the plat.
The evidence of title Drovided musl eeFtifiealis8 sha:ll sta~ or describe:
(1) that the lands as described and shown on the pial are in the nume, und
record title is held by the person, persons or organiz.ation executing the
dedication, (2) that all taxes due and onvabJe at the lime of final Dlat
recordin. have been paid on said lands, (3) all mortgages on the land and
indicate the official record book and page nnmher of each mortgage. The
evidence of title eeftiHeatieR sh.all be an epinieR by an aUefftey at lLYN
lie...ea i. Fle,i.a, or ether ..till a~pre\'ea .na., Eg. ! 177.911~
the aoolicant.s discretion. be included on the first ual'!e of the DIal. so .lon~
as the information required bv Section 177.041. F.S.. and this oaral!raDh
is clearlv stated. an effective date is orovided. and the statement is
properlv sil!ned.
7. Instrument prepared by. The name, street and mailing address of the
natural person who prepared the plat shaH be shown on each sheet. The
name and address shall be in statement form consisting of the words,
"This instrumenr was prepared by (name), (address)."
.
.
*
.
.
*
.
*
.
.
*
SUBSECTION 3. H. AMENDMENTS TO 3.3 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS DIVISION
Division 3.3., Site Development Plans of Ordinance 91.102, as amended, the
Collier County Land Development Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
Words: sk'l:!eh Ikrallgh are deleled, words underlined are added.
46
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 157 of 192
DIVISION 3.3 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Se..3.3.5. Site development and site Improvement plan standards.
3.3.5.2.
3,3.5.5.7.
3.3.5.8
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Development compliance with all appropriate zoning regulations sod the growth
managemenl plan. The ingress and egress 10 the proposed development and its
improvements, vehicular and pedestrian safety, separation of vehicular traffic
from pedestrian sod other traffic, traffic flow and conlro~ traffic calming
devices, provision of services and servicing ofutili.ties and refuse collection, and
access in the case of fire or catastrophe, or other emergency.
NotwithstandinQ: the reauirement to comoJv with the forcl!oin2orovisions. the
depiction on a PUD master Dlan or descriotion of access or location of access
points in 11 PUD ordinance. does not authorize or vest access to the maior road
SYStem. The location. desim. caoacitv. or routine of traffic for any snecific
access DDinl will be detennined by. and must comolvwitb. the retrolations for
site develooment in effect at the time of site develonmcmt Dlan annroval.
Comulelian af Sile Develaomenl Plans. Unon comoletion of the infrastructure
imOfovements associated with a site deveJooment clan.. and Drior to the issuance
of a certificate of OCCUDancv. the emrineer shall orovide a comoletion certificate
as to the imowvements. toszether will all aDoticabJe items referenced in Section
J.2.6.5.3 of this code. Uoon a satisfactorv inSDcction of the imorovements. a
certificate of occuoancv may then be issued. .
Site imDrovemenl DIal! comDletion. Uno" comoletion ofthereouircd
imorovements associated with a site imDrovement nlan. and crior to the issuance
of a certificate of occuoancy. the enmneer shall Drovide a comDletion certificate
as to the imorovements to2cther with all aoolicable items referenced in Section
3.2.6.5.3 ofthis code. Unon a satisfactoTV insoection oflho imDfOvemcnts. a
certificate of occuoancv may then be issued.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
See.3.3.7. Site development plan review (SDP) procedures.
3.3.7.1.2.9. Infrast114cture improvements plans.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Q. Off~site access. roadway elevation. buildine and other ohvsical features a
minimum of 200 feet from the DroOcrtv unless otherwise determined necessarY or
feasible bv the Dlannine: services or transoortation olannine: director.
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.3.7.1.9.12 Site imDrovemem Dlan comDletion. UnoD cOMDletion of the reauired
imnrovements associated with a site imDrovernent nlan. and Drior to the issuance
of a certificate of occunancv. the enmneer shall Drovide a comoletion certificate
as to the imnrovements. together with all anpIicablc items referenced in
subsection 3.2.6.5.3 ofthis code. UDO" a satisfactorY insnection of the
imorovements. a certificate of occunancv mav then be issued
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
SUBSECTION 3.1. AMENDMENTS TO EXCA V A nONS DIVISION
Words MUle thra'llgh arc deleted, words underlined are added.
47
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 158 of 192
Division 3.5. Excavations of Ordinance 91-102, as amended. the Collier
County Land Development Code, is hereby amended to read as follows:
DIVISION 3.5 EXCAVATIONS
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
See. 3.5.9. Fees.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.5.9.3.
RsaJ ilflpsst.fes. If 8HBM'ated lft.bAa! is ta he rems"/ed Rem the suejeat
preJJeR)', Hf'prepftate Feaa imp.et Mes iR BSSSManS! with OHibumee }le. Rj SS
[Cede eft. 71, &Ft. VII ],86 8\11lseedetl. Sf amended, skall Be paid pRerlS the
iSB1.i8Ilse sf a pSFJBit muter this db:isisft. .~.. site speeifis tFBffi.e imp. StelefflBa.t
may 88 fBllliired Ie detemtiae the lane mile impae&s ana the eppfepPiate fas in
aeeerelanee ,":itk 9A1itulBee [~1e. J Hi SS [ Cede ell. 71, &::r"~ \'R l. BB Sll8eeeElea
SF am.eaded. 'l.JpSfl esmpleMS1\ erag site rSfR8\aI efm.atllfiat, the EtfB8URt efB:fi~'
ifftPast fees paid -r:ill be eredited M IRe rnt\in!i she ds\'slepRlsnt eetivisl!lli ifl
aeeel'd8flse ",i.'ilk ~j3Healtle igNBmBat(s) v:hieh mBy he agree4l:1PBft l!y t:he
...AI; ...~ tHO Elo...ol.~.r ( ~..~...y .'.''Bot ).
Road damafre reDair fee. The road damalZe reoair fee attributable to the haulim!
of excavated fill material across county roads is $0.047 (4.7 cents) Oct cubic vard
of excavated fill material. The fee is to be oaid vearlv. The first vear~8 fee is to be
estimated bv the community develonment and environmental services division
based on information submitted bv the 8onlicant. Subseauent vearlv fees will be
based on the orevious vear's total excavation that aDDears on the annual status
reDort 1 sec. 3.5.8.2.1.2.aI3\.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
SUBSECTION 3.J. AMENDMENTS TO WELL CONSTRUCTION DIVISION
Division 3.6, Wen Construction.ofOrdinance 91-102. as ameoded. the
Collier County Land Development Code~ is hereby amended to read as follows:
DIVISION 3.6
WELL CONSTRUCTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Sec. 3.6.5. Construction, repair and abandonment staadards.
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.6.5.10.
Wellhead 'Orotection. All nennanent wells in CoJlier Countv must be double
cased for the too 6.5 feet. The outer casin!! must extend 5 feet below orimnal
(naturan .,.de and 18 inches .bDve Drilrinal.,.de.
The outer casinSl must have a diameter 4 inches larger (at a minimum) than the
well casimz. The well casine must extend to a minimum of 24 inches above
oril1'inal rzrade (6 inches above the outer casine.1.
The SDace between the two cas1ne:s must be lZt'outed with a Dortland cement
lZI'OUt.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Words ~1I'U.ak ~_e1tgh 800 dclelcd, words underlined are added.
48
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 159 of 192
SUBSECfION 3.K. AMENDMENTS TO GROUNDWATER PROTECfION DIVISION
Division 3.16, Groundwater Protection, of Ordinance 91-1 02, as amended, the
Collier County Land Development Code, is hereby ameoded to read as follows:
DIVISION 3.16
GROUNDWATER PROTECfJON
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.'
.
.
.
Sec. 3.16.4. Regulated Development.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.16.4.1.2.1.1. In zones W-l, W-2, W.3 !OO W-4 ollll G',VP, future solid waste disposal
facilities are prohibited ia taB aes8flae sf a welUield esaditisnalWle pePRIit. In
the GWP zone future solid waste disDosa) facilities are Drohibited in the absence
of a wetlficld conditional use'Dennit.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.16.4.1.4.1.1. In zones W-l, W-2 and W-3, future solid waste transfer stations are prohibited,
ia the &brims! efa wellfield 8sRd.itisftal1:lse per-mit.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.1 6,4.1.6.1.2. In zones W-l, W-2 and W-3, future solid waste storage collection and recycling
. facilities that will handle hazardous products and hazardous wastes shall be
prohibited, ia iii. ollsoaoo ora .".ellflelEl o.Jlsilioaal uso po""il.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
3.16.4.3.3.1.1. All future land dispooal systems for application of domestic wastewater
treatment plant effluent shall be constructed and permitted in accordance with
applicable state law and regulations, and comply with the state-mandated
setbacks and buffers as adopted in the Florid Administrative Code and as
incorporated by referen~ in section 3.16.2.6 hereof: and must meet the hie:h
Icvel disinfection standards as found in 40 CPR. Dart 135.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.16.4.5,1.1.5. In zones W-I, W.2, and W-3, land application of domestic residual shall comply
with the foHowing criteria:
A. Metal concentrations sf eOOmtllfft. sepper, lea!i, Rielu!l1 ana SiBS shaH not
exceed the thresholds set forth in Rule H ~-640, Florida Administrative
Code. as may be amended. Fer refefeflSe parpeses enl;,-. tile aJ3J1lieal31a
metal eeResflRtisR5 fer thuse metals at the effeeti~le gate eftltis di\ iaieH
[N........e.r 18,1991]...... fellow.:
J.k'a[s
MC/K.c 9" Weight
CoEl...i....
Capper
LooEl
~fiol'ol
ZiBB
39
999
1,909
199
1,809
B. The total rate of domestic residuals applied to land sball not exceed the
niuogen uptake of the vegetation upon which the residuals are being
applied. and shall be consistent with Collier County Ordinance No, 87-79
[Code ch. 54, art. VI, as may be amended or superseded, and chapter ++
Words BtNellllu8Ygk are deleted. words wtderlined are added.
49
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 160 of 192
~-640. Florida Administrative Code, and 40 CFR parts 256 and 257. and
as may be superseded.
C. If domestic residuals are applied to a site that is receiving reclaimed
water, the nitrogen uptake calculation shall include tbe combined effect
of nitrogen loading from both domestic residuaJs and reclaimed water
applied to the site as provided in Rule .j..;t 62.640, Florida Administrative
Code.
D. Land 8Dolication of domestic residuals is Drohibited in the absence of a
well field conditional use oenDit.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3.16.4.11.1.1.1.
In zones W*l and W-2, future netrolcum exoloration or nroduction
facilities. and expansion of existing petroleum exploration or production
facilities shall be prohibited.
3.lfi.l.11.1.1.2.
lH !CeRes ','I,' 1 8mI "',r 2, fu.tuFe peweleum anti pFewetisa feeilities and the
esatlotle8 eperati8R lWEi use sf 8xisaag leg&l nBRessfal'Miftg pelfaletlIR
8nplaratien and. I'OOSYeUeR Hailiaes shall h8 allen:ed purwRRt te the
s'::neFJe,eraler BhlBining B 88ftifieata ta speNt! inesFperaling the
foll..:iRg ..Rditi.RS aR<Illl. pfO',;si.Ro .f ...Ii.RS 3.1fi.1.I1.1.1.4 and
,.slieRo ).lfi.l.II.J.1.S ho_f;
.
...
ImpteR\sRtBti81l sf a detailed
eeafttj' mangef, desel'ihhtg:
eeRtaiRM8B.t pl8ft BfJl'fe lea B} tR8
1. A pFimary BREI seesftd.ary esfttai.nmeat system desigHsd 18 eRSI:iFe
IlIat any dio.IIlH'g. .r ...idORt.1 r.l.... .f III. pOI,.I......
~ea-elel:lffi "reaKst, arilliJlg fluid, aF fel'fRstisR r:ateFB is Het
Eliseharged aT aeeidefttally released 18 an eft &:ite aF efr site
stSFRl,.'&ter managBlReat system, \':etlaftEl, aF suFfee, wate15 aF
g>eeRd at....f Ill. slate.. ".lin.d iR F.g, ek. Ill). Sa..nd...y
eeRtainmeftt shan Illest the felle\":lag eFiteRa:
a. CS8tEHflRI8ftt stmetlifeS spaR te raiJlmIJ aT ethef'lris8 8a&jeet te
iRHiI..tien II)' v:al.r. shsll II. d.oigned t. del... at I.oat 1S9
"Breent aCtke tetal ,\'S]1:lffiB eellis tliaehapge erreleaal!l. BRa
B. CSRtaiflm8ftt swetlifes "lmieh EIfel impeftBsahle te l'Biftfall aT
iftHhrtiieH 8 , 'EMn. sflaIl he deaigftea te detaia t 19 pSrBe1tt ef
the tetat":el1:1Fft8 sethe diseharge aF caleMe.
2. Emergess)' 8elleeB8ft deyieell that hw's af ",ill Be employes ts
sfiSlffe that an)' siseRafge af aesidlale! re!8EI:58 sf t:he p8treleHm,
peh'a!8\tftl fJfedHe~ drilJillg ABi" Sf fSl'HUWBB ., MaRl de Bet
disshm:ge Ie aft 8ft site aF sf[ site stsFHl'",'&t:er l'ftBfl9g8mBHt SY!lt891,
\7etla:nd. SF aurfaas ",i'alen aF gf6l11tw..llteFs aitae state; &REI
J, The maiftten&Rse that v/iIl Be pre-ides fer tka pAma!)' lI:Rd
SSeeft.dllfY eefttei.nmsat B)'steMs and. Bffi8Fgensy ealleetisB de\'iees
Ie eRgYfe th.at &R~' 8lSshaFg8 Sf aseidefttal Feleaee is eeRtai8ed 6ft
site fer prepsf eiispesal ift aeseFdanee '"/itft applieahle state BRe
f-ederallwN,
8, UpeR diseever)' sf B. diseh8fge aF aeeidental release Ie a I'BFdeus
s1U':fase, implsmBntaaell sf a elepaftmeftt appRP:ed af detailed
eSHtiagenB)' plan. ",,"hisk aeseRBea:
1. AetisRs Ie Be tekm iii)" ~e s""'R${epeFataf m tits e lent sf a
disBlisf-ge. aeeiasstef release, af failyre is any 8aMa4nmeet sr
Words Ilfuelr dtf81:1gh are deleted, words underlined are added,
50
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 161 of 192
eRleFgeft~' aslleetisR SYBeRt Fe.ElBiJlful mufer this sesHeR, whieh
.hall i.. Iud.!
8. fiN. "speRSe st.aps Ie BSBel Md pfaltihit the Eliseh&rge aF
auifl.efttal release af the petmleum praauet. fletrelel:lRl,
sRllifig iuid, SF femlBUBft '!}fller,
B. Remedial aeaaHs eSRflist8Rt ....ith. applieable state 8fWi federal
la'on; 1108
e. Preper disf!9saleftae pek'eleum prastlst.
2. .BmergeRey telepkBR8 RI:lItH1SfS 8f:
a. Leea} BRa state nsp8Rse BRita; Bfui
b. O"'-.'fler/el'eNtsr's desigHateti emergeRs)' re8J'Bnse pSfS8RRel.
3. CampHane! u:ith the EII'plieaele state BfHl f'eElsrallegul&tisfts
3.16.1.11.1.l.3,
In i!8R8a '1\' 3, \" 1 &BEl C'.\CP, tke BJ'8mHBR and 1168 Bf futuH and
ElKistiftg peweleYIR enpleFMisft II:BS }JFeSuetie8 &lenities ere Rat regulates
HABer tRis divisisB, Busa,' as pFtl./itiea in seedeR J,la.4.11.1.1.1 Me
...ti." 3.16,1.l1.I,U h.r.oF.
3. J 6.4.1 1.1.1.4-1..
In zones '}f 1, \V 2, W~3 and W-4, the siting of future petroleum
exploration and production facilities is prohibited in the absence of a
wellfield conditional use permit.
3.16.4.1 \.\.a.;!.
In zone OWP, future petroleum product exploration shall be prohibited
from directional drilling thiough any potable water aquifer within the
vertical projcction of the map boundaries of the wellfield risk
management special treatment overlay zones.
SUBSECTION 3.L. AMENDMENTS TO DEFINITIONS DIVISION
Division 6.3. Definitions of Ordinance 91-102, as amended of the Collier County
Land Development Code, is hereby amended as follows:
DIVISION 6.3. DEFINITIONS
Alley: The public approved private way which affords ."Iy a '....d8l'3. ...... .f .ccess to
abutting properties. Nut whish is Hat blten.Eiea far geneFal tra.ms eiRu.latiaa.
Lot coverage: The Dart or nercenta2e of the lot occunied bv orinciDal and accesSOry buildines
and structures.
Princil'Jll! bui/din~: Anv buildine: or Dart of a buildinll in which the nrincioal function or activitv
for which the land is zoned is conducted shall be deemed to be the orincio.l buildin. and
includes any structure having: a roof imnerviou5 to weather. irresoect1ve of whether or not in a
sine:le or multiole buildinll confillUration in which orincioal uses are conducted as distinct from
subordinate uses as defined under accessory uses and structures.
Right-of-way: A strip or arc. ofland, public or private, occupied or intended to be occupied by a
streetj crosswalk. railroad, electric transmission Hne. oil or gas pipoHne, stonn drainage facility,
water main, sanitary or storm sewer main, or for similar special use. The usage of the term
"right-of-way" fOT land planing pwposes sh.1I mean that every right-of-way, whether puhlic or
private, hereafter established and shown on a plat is to be separate and distinct from the lots or
parcels adjoining such right-of-way and not included within the dimensions or areas of such lots
Words SWill. tl!.f8~ are deleted. words underlined are added.
51
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 162 of 192
or parcels. Unless otherwise e~Dresllv stated. a dedication of ri2bt-of~W8V on a Dlat reflects an
intention of the dedicator{s) to dedicate such ri2ht-oC-wlv or tract as a fee simo!" interest in
land. subiect to anv casementls} Slated on the clat or otherwise of record. (See division 3.2,)
Tract: An area of land. DubHe oronv..e. occuoied or intended to be occunied. bvor for a lawful
oumose. includin2 a street. CfOlSWal1c. railroad. electric transmission line. oil or us Dinelinc.
storm draina2ewav. water main. anitarv or stann sewer main. canal. landseaue buffer or for
similar use. The temt "tract It when used for land nlattine- Dumoses. means an area seoarate and
distinct from olattcd lots or Darcel, and not included within the dimensions or areas of such lots
or narcels. Unless otherwise exnresslv stated. the dedioadlM (jf a tract on a nlat reflects an
intention of the dcdicator{sl to dedicate such tract as a fee limnl" interest in land. subiect 10 anv
easementfs) stated on the olat ar otherwise afrecord. (See division 3.2.)
Yard,front: The required open space extending across the entire width of the lot berween the
front building line and street right-of-way line, Where double-frontage lots exis~ the required
front yard shall be provided on hoth street. except as otherwise provided for herein.
Where comer lots or record existed prior to Ihe date of adoption of Collier County Ordinance
No. 82-2 [January 5, 1982J, which lots do not meet minimum lot width or area requirements
established in this Code; (1) only one full depth front yard shall he required. (2) all other front
yards shall be not less than 50 percent of the otherwise required front yard depth exclusive of
any right-of-way, or right-of-way easement except that in the E estates district this depth may
not be less than 15 feet exclusive of any right-of.way or right...ofwway easement and the full
depth front yard shall he located along the shorter lot line along the street.
In the case of shoulder lots which conform to the minimum lot width and area requirements of
the zoning district, the required front yard adjacent to the longest street may be reduced by five
feet providing that in no case may this yard be less than 25 feet.
In the case of through lots. unless the prevailing front yard pattern on the adjoining Jots
indicates otherwise, a full depth front yard shall be provided on all frontages. Where one of the
front yards that would normally be required on a through lot is not in keeping with the
prevailing yard pattern, the development services director may waive the requirement for the
normal front yard and substitute'therefore a special yard requirement which shaH not exceed the
average of the yards provided 00 adjacent lots.
Denth ora reouired front YOur shan be measured &0 that the vard established is a striD of the
minimum width reouired bv the district re2Ulations with its inner edlle parallel to the front lot
line. In the cases of irrc2Ularlv shaoed lots includinll culs-de.sac. the death may be measured at
rilzh. amrles to a straia:ht line ioinimr the foremost noints of the side lot line. orovided the deoth
at anv Doint is never less than the minimum len2th of a standard Darking: mace as established
within section 2.3.4. of this code.
However. in the Golden Gate Estates Subdivision. unimDTOved aerimeter and bisectimz access
easements. or imDroved access easements servim! three or fewer IDts of record. shall not
constitute a front Yard for the DurnaSe of establishimr buildinll setback lines.
Where lots in residential districts comDrisimz 40 Doreent or more of the fronta2c on one side of a
s.treet between intersectine streets are dcveloDed with structures havin2 an aVCl'3llc front vard
with a variation of not more than six feet no buildine thereafter erected shall Droicct beyond the
averae:e line so established. This orovision annnes in all residential zonina districts and to an
residentiallv dcsim8ted areas.
*
.
*
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
SECfJON FOUR: READOPTION OF AMENDMENTS TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
Words !tRIll! threll!" arc deleted, words wulerlined are added.
S2
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 163 of 192
Division 2.2.. Zoning Districts, Pennitted Uses, Conditional Uses, Dimensional Standards and
Division 2.7, Zoning Administration and Procedures of Ordinance 91-102, as amended, the Collier
County Land Development Code are hereby readopted to read as follows:
2.2.20.3.7.
Dedication of the public facilities and development of prescribed amenities.
Public Facility Dedication. The board of county commissioners may, as a
condition of approval and adoplion of! IRe PUD rezoning and in ac<:ordance
with th approved master plan of development, require that suitable areas for
streets, public rights~of~way, schools, parks, and other public facilities be set
aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. Where impact fees are levied
for one or more reouired eeI'!aiil public facilities, the market value of the land set
aside for the public purpose !!!!i:.sh&Il be credited towards such impact feesJQ
the extent authorized bv the County's Consolidated Imoact Fee Ordinance. Said
credit shan be based on a negotiated amount no greater than the market value of
the set aside land prior to the rezoning action. as determined by an accredited
appraiser from a list approved by Collier County. Said appraisal shall be
submitted to the county attorneys office and the real property office within 90
days of the date of approval of the rezone, or as otherwise extended in writing by
~ the Gcounty manal!'cr. $0 as to establish the amount of any impact fee
credits resulting from said dedication. Failure to provide said appraisal within
this time frame shall automaticaJ1v authorize the county to detennine the market
value of the set aside property. Impact fee credits shall only be effective after
recordation ofthe document conveying the dedicated property to Collier County.
Where the tenn Collier County is used in this section, it shall be construed to
include the Cullier County Water and Sewer District or other agency or
dependent district orea1lier County Government.
land set aside and/or to be improved as committed in the PUD document, or
master plan. as the case may be. shaH be deeded or dedicated to Collier County
within 90 days of receipt ofnalitieation by the county that the property is needed
for certain pending public improvements or as otherwise approved by the board
of county commissioners during the PUD rezoning approval process. In any case.
however. the county shal1 take title to the set aside propeny, at the latest, by a
date certain established during, and conditioned on, the approval of the PUD
zoning. At no cost to the County. +!he land set aside and/or to be improved shall
be made free and clear of all liens, encumbrances and improvements, at-4fte
tie. eleJ'er's seIe enp8Ase. except as otherwise approved by the board. Failure to
convey the deed or complete the dedication within the appropriate time frame
noted above may result in a recommendation to the board &f for consideration of
rezoning the subject parcel from its curren.t PUD zoning district to an appropriate
zoning district and may resull in a violation of this Code pursuant to subsection
1.9.2.
Should said dedication of land also include agreed upon improvements. said
improvements shall be completed and accepted by the Collier County Board of
Commissioners at the development phase which has infrastructure improvements
available to the parcel orland upon which said improvements are to be made, or
at a specified time provided for within the PUD document.
*
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
*
.
2.7.2.8.1.
Dedication of public facilities and development o/prescribed amenities.
Public Facility Dedication. The board of county commissioners may, as a
condition of approval and adoption of the rezoning required that suitable
areas for streets, public rights-of~way. schools, parks. and other public
facilities be set aside, improved, and/or dedicated for public use. Where
impact fees are levied for certain one or more such public facilities, the
market value of the land set aside for such public facilities the public
Words ~ are deleted, words underlined are added,
53
Agenda Item No 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 164 of 192
/"
purpose may .hall be credited towards impact fees to the extent authorized
by the County's Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, S.id credit shall be
based on a negotiated amount not greater than the market value of the set
aside land prior to the rezoning action, as detennined by an accredited
appraiser from a list approved by Collier County, Said appraisal shall be
submitted to the county attorney's ollice sod the real property ollice within
90 days of the date of approval of the rezone, or as othelWise extended in
writing by Collier County, so as to eslablish tbe amount of any impact fee
credits resulting from said dedication. Failure to provide said appraisal
within this 90 day time frame shall automatically authorize the county to
determine thc market value oflhe property, Impact fee credits shall only be
effective after recordation of the conveyance document conveying the
dedicated property to Collier County. Where the tenn Collier County is
used in this section, it shall be construed to include the Co1lier County
Water and Sewer District or other agency or dependant district oreaJ1ier
County Govenunent.
Land set aside and/or to be improved as committed as part of the rezoning
approval sball he deeded or dedicated to Collier County within 90 days of
receipt of notifi'cation by the county that tbe property is needed for certain
pending public improvements or as otherwise approved by the board of
county commissioners during the rezoning approval process. In any case,
however, the county shall take title to the set aside property. at the latest, by
a date certain established during. and condition on, the approval of the
rezoning action. At no costs to the county, lhe land set aside and/or to be
improved shall be made free and clear of all liens, encumbrances and
improvements, at the developer's sole expense, except as otherwise
approved by the board. Failure to deed the land or complete the dedication
within the 90 day appropriate time frame noted above inay result in a
recommendation to the board of for consideration of rezoning the subject
parcel from its current zoning district to an appropriate .zoning district and
may in a violation oflhia Code pursuant to subsection 1.9.2.
Should lhededication ofland also include agreed upon improvements, said
improvements shall he completed and accepted by Collier County Board of
Commissioners at the development phase which has infrastructure
improvements available to the parcel of land upon which said improvements
are to be made, or at a specified time provided for within the ordinance
approving the rezone.
SECTION FIVE: ADOPTION OF AMENDED ZONING ATLAS MAP
The amended zoning atlas map numbered 9634N attached as Exhibit A is hereby adopted and
made a part of the Collier County Land Development Code.
SECTION SIX:
REPLACEMENT OF APPENDIX C ENTITLED F1NAL SUBDIVISION
PLAT REQUIRED CERTIFICATIONS WITH A REVISED APPENDIX
C OF THE SAME TITLE
Appendix C, a form entitled Final Subdivision Plat Required Certifications, is hereby replaced
with a revised Appendix C which reads as follows;
APPENDIX C
Words siNell tl-_llHgh are deleted, words underlined are added.
54
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 165 of 192
FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT, REQUIRED CERTIFlCA TIONS.Mm
SUGGESTED TEXT AND FORMATS FOR OTHER REOUlRED
INFORMATION
(SEE LDC DMSION 3.% for aDDlieable. s...elr.. Drovislon.l
The following text laRgU8g. and fonnat ate intended i. '....ORt.d as a guide fm:
t& preparers of tho.e platting materials reauired to whia. ",HI be submiued to reviewin.
authorities. includine the project review services department, utilities division, county
health department, county attorney and the board of county commissioners. Adherence
to this fonnat and text fet=et-wilJ substantially expedite ~8ek divisisft'a review.
Substantial fllleviation in substance or form from !his ~,uggested I...guag. ~and
format may result in delay or disapproval of the submitted Dial.
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
State of Florida )
) SS
. County of Collier )
lHo-The undersiened hereby certifictl! that 11I0 prop_i.n .fthi. plat was hagee
8ft a "QHfUiw)' SUR'S)'. sf taB prepsft-) :fHade DrcDared by me or under my supervision as
prevhlea iR CR81'ter ~1 G 1'7 Bt Fleriea l~dmifiistf&tive Cede. aaa in Chapter 172, WaRda
Elamtn" and that the deoicted survey data complies with all of the requirements of
Chapter 177, Part l. Florida Statutes. Permanent referenc.e monuments will be set prior
to the recording of this plat and permanent control points and lot comers will be set
wHhfR twe FReRika SAM the eSl'flI'latiBR Drior to final acceotance of required
improvert:lents.
lSimature)
(Printed Name)
Florida Professional Land Surveyor No,
Date
COUNTY COMMISSION AFPROV AL
State of Florida )
) SS
County of Collier )
This plat approved for recording in a regular open meoting by the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier Couuty, Florida, this day of . W
20 , A.D., provided that the plat is filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court ofCoItier County, Florida.
Words 9R1ielE dve..gh are deleted, words lmderlincd arc added.
55
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 166 of 192
,
Clerk
<;hainnan. Board of County Commissioners
Collier County, Florida
FILING RECORD
I hereby certify that this plat has beon examined by me and that it complies in
fonn with the requirements, of Chapter 177, Florida Statutes, I further certify that said
plat was filed for record al (a.m. or p,m.) this day of , +9
20 . A.D. and duly recorded in Plat Book Pagels) , inclusive, of the
Public Records of Collier County, Florida.
I~
. Clerk
ENGINEERING REVIEW SERVICES
This Plat approved by the Engineering Review Services
Community Development Division of Collier County, Florida Ihis
,+920 ,A.D.
Section of the
day of
Engineering Review Services ~ {ABaser Director
Collier County, Florida
COUNTY AITORNEY
This Plat approved by the Collier County Attorney this
,+9 20 ,A.D.
day of
I eom. eo_ .--,
Words .hUel~ tNeWgA are deleted. words underlined are added.
56
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 167 of 192
DEDICATIONS
State of Florida )
) ss
County of Collier )
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that
owner of lands described hereon, have caused this plat entitled
subdivision) to he made and do hereby ...i.ale the folle',,,ing:
(owner(s)), the
(name of
A. Dedl..te to Collier Countv or the Dublic:
1. The frhr:hts..of-wavs for deoicted streets, roads. or imrrcss & cfrress
easementsl as shown hereon ta the perpel...1 ... af the plllllie for the
oumose Geaeee". inlHess & Cl!Tess and any other purposes shown.
.l:. {anv tracts or easements intended to be conveyed to the DubHe for such
Dumoses as tbev may be reauired. i.e.. canal rhmts..of-wav/easements.
draina2c or stonnwater mana2ernent easements. etc.}
B,
To Collier County Water-Sewer District for anY other auoJicable entity: i.e..
Immokalee Water-Sewer District. etdl:
.L an water and sewer utility facilities constructed within this platt~ area,
upon acceptance of the improvements required by the applicable land
development regulations.
;l~ To Collier County Water-Sewer District (or any other applicable entity:
i.e.. Immokalee Water-Sewer District, etc.) all Catiflty.uti.lit~. BasemeRts,
indicated (C. e .R). with Ite rsspea&ihilit)' fer R1.Mnteaanae.
1. Ta 1'1.';.. Pow.r 8ft. Lighl C."",...y (or any alhar applie..l. eRlity) ...EI
United Telephene CeRlJlany (ar an)' 8ther 8)lplie..le enlill'), tltoir
sueeeSS6f5, assigns B:lut s1il1siaiaries. a eaa Bnel>>si\'8 uti1i~' easement
(V.E.) as inaieated an the plat fer tke J!~e8e sf eanstroetis:Rt
install.tieR, HlaiateR8Ree and epSF8tisB ef elestns HIe tel8flaef:lB
feeilities.
~. Te MY IOtheRlZea CalHl.~' iHnehiseel e&81e TV "rBv/ieer. its saeeeSSBf8,
8ssigfls and 9tmsidi8:l'iBS, a R8R enelush'e 1itili~' easement ED.E.) as
iadiealse 8a the plat fer the pwpase sf ee89tr1:letietl, !ftstllllatian,
mainteRfm.ee and ep8faQ9fi Bf sable tele~:isie8 sePT.-iess, Jlfinidea fta SliM
eeBstmetien, installatiBR, maintenanee ana eper&tiea sf Baele televisioa
seF"iee shall interfere \.,it:R the [aeilitias ana seF/ieea eePtariaa Pewer &.
Light (ar ....y .!her 8)lpli8..le oMity) lUId United Tel8)lh8ne 08"",an)' (or
&BY ether app1ieaele BHtityj. In tae eveRt tAe fi=anemsee, its SllseeSSBfS,
assig;as ami sUBsiGiaABS SEl:Jflaj:B tke faeiIities Elf Mather pYblie utilit)', the
tf8f:l6kisee. its suseeS5aFS ana ass.igRs shall Be selelr reSflElRsiele faf said
Elamages.
~ Dedicate to the !insert aDDrooriate entity name(s)l IhomelomDcrtvnot owners'
association. or to anY other lawfullv existine: entity which must have the Dower
or authority to ocrform the obligation to maintain bein2 dedicated. alone with the
reaoonsibiJitv for such maintenance l:
1. Private road rirzbts of way!;"
Words !lwsl( thrallsh are deleted, words underlined are added,
57
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 168 of 192
b. draina2e or stonnwater manalle111ent easements.
J... landscaoe butTer easements.
.1:. lake maintenance easements.
,l. access eaRements.
~ or anv other similar easement or tract intended to be dedicated for a set
oumose( s)
lSuch tracts or casmentli: must sReH--be dedicated to a Hbomeowner's
A;!SSOCiation or to any other lawfully existin. enlity which has or would haye :
the time of final Dlat recordin2 the DOwer or authority 10 nerfonn the obli2"atio
to maintain. along with the responsibility for such maintenance,!
~ DF8iRsge 8&11eRlsRte shall he deEli*,ated ~B a llaMes J1.1\ef'e ~A..sseeiatieH
,'Vith Ute R1sp8Jl8ilrilit)" faf maiRtSftllRB&, BRa 16 Callier CBt:lft~ ',dill HS
fsspensihilit)' fer fftSiRteune8.
!t Te FleRd. Pe";:er 8!ulligh.t, United TelepkBR8 Sef'V'ie8l!J, &Rtf ~ essle...iaisR
I!rs"ider. the ahared!:lS! sftHet R (Read....~.Traet) as .!lIhS?lI 8ft d1.. plat as a
HiiIi.) 88:98!11BHt fer lfte P'UPSS8 efiBBtallaHSft 8ftd. fftaHt.lenanee eftheir
Fes~esti'fe faeilhiea. I!Fe . ided antis. hy 90eh Htilii)' pr:e";ideF5 shall he
sklsjeet la 8ftEl Bet iflB8ftsist:!IRI \":ith kiSs by Callier C9HRtj' af the Callier
CetlAt}' '\teler Ee .ver 9islAet as a C.U.E.
D,
A n~n-exclu~jve nu~i!~ utilitv easement (P:U.E.) to all lic~sed. ?r rr:hised
Dubhe or onvate utIlIties as shown on thiS DIn for oobhc utilltv D_OSes.
includim! construction. installation. maintenance. and ooeration of their
resnective facilities. includim! cable television services. nrovided that such uses
be subiect to. and not inconsistent with. the use by the collier county water~sewer
district. In the event a cable comoany dam8Ilel the facilities of another DubHe
utilitv it will be solelv resnonsible for said damailes.
Reserve to the fstate aoorooriate owner entitv{s) name(s) l:
E,
l... {anv tracts intended for uFuture Develoomenl" or beine: retained for
other stated meci fic DUrnoses.l
IBE SURE TO PROVIDE A SEPARATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR EACH
OWNERl
I WITNESSES:
, BY:
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
t lAlI dedications and conaents ~&helH>e executed sod acknowledged in
accordance with the applicable sections of Chapters 689 sod 692 of the Florida Statutes.,
1
WANER AND RELEASE NOTE:
On . of -H> 20 ( llbe owncrWL executing the ll<lcdication,
.@Lthe holders of SppAf8Rt record title lor other soecified intercsts1. expressly waived
and released lhe Count)' from any ~)aims of vested rights and equitable estoppel
pertaining to the issuance of a Certificate of Public Facility Adequacy in accordance
with Collier County. Oraiflansl!I ~r8. 93 &2.
Words "Nel. thrSllg1l. are dele[cd, words underlined. are added.
58
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 169 of 192
TITLE CIlR::rIl'lC/.TlON
State efFlefi411 t
t SS
C."RI)' .f Cellier i
I. (name) . a did)' liesR6eet Misfile)' iR the State efFleFida. de hereby eeRi~'
1:kat [8.8>':8 BKamiaee title t8 all aflke JlfBpeFtJ. eBsefihed h.ereiR, BREI BlISB tiUe is '..eatea
in (w.\<fler) . The SlfETeftt _as fia-:, seea paid Ma theprepeR)' is ff'88 sf
eneUffthl'BRSeS, eue.t a IReftgt.ge in :f8","er sf tmsFtalllee) rBeaRied is O.R.. Beak
, Pag. , .fth. Puhlie a..aMs .fC.lli.r CsUftl)', F1arida.
NAMJ;;
FbORIP,'. B/oR NUMBIlR
{PLEASE NOTE: AT THE APPLICANT'S DISCRETION. MORTGAGEE'S
CONSENTS AND Ar.KNOWTRnGMENTS IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE
FOLLOWING FORM MAY BE PROVIDED AS A SEPARATE INSTRUMENT AS
SET FORTH IN 6 177.081 12\. P,S.. ADDITIONAL RECORDING FEES MAY BE
REOUIRED IF SUCH SEPARATE CONSENTS ARE PROVIDED.l
MORTGAGEE'S CONSENT
STATE OF FLORIDA )
)
COUNTY OF COLLIER )
(mortgagee), authorized to transact business in the Stale of
Florida, hereby certifies that it is the holder of a mortgage upon the herein described
property as recorded on O.R. Book , Page of Ihe Public Records of
Collier County, and does hereby join in and consent to the dedication of the property by
the owner, and agrees that its mortgage shall be subordinated to the dedications shown
hereon.
NAME
~.
TITLE
Words 8~U1b shtaligh. arc deleted. words underlin!ld au: added.
59
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 170 of 192
CLAIl dedications and consents m.!!l oMIl be executed and acknowledged in
accordance with the applicable sections of Chapters 689 and 692 of the Florida StalUtes.~
1
mE SURE TO PROVIDE A SEPARATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR EACH
MORTGAGEl
SECTION SEVEN: CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY
~n the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County and other
applicable law. Ihe more restriclive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of the Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
sepamte. distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion,
SECTION EIGHT: INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE
Tbe provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the Land Development
Code of Collier County. Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or relettered to
accomplish such. and the word Ilordinance" may be changed to "section". "article", or any other
appropriate word.
SECTION NINE: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall become effective npon filing with the Department of State.
PASSED AND DUL Y ADOPTED by the Board nf County Commissioners of Collier County.
Florida. this 'I'd: day of IJr.c ,.-.,.. . 2002.
,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
:w,~~
J~N.COLE1TA, AIRMAN
""""~~;';';':"""
" ~I'J'l-""'..:J e'l,..
: .::$~::;"'..".""~'~;'"
..,....-..~.l.t::..
"N'-D.",!,'''' '.;"
..~ ~jl,~..~ :;-7,
..' """.J~ ,_
::~ ~ -~' ),.."~\.,~; ,
rz
., ..... .~;'.EIR . CLERK Att..t . to CllIt.......
"-i'''lI3r,c. "lIIIltft .11.
ved'A. To Form And Legal Sufficiency
This ordlnonce filed with the
S~ of Stote'. Office the
L of ~ ......
and ackNwlfdgement of that
fIIJJ::~~ thl.~ day
of By y."~""~f' .
o.u",""CltrW.
/
H:\ LDCCYCLE 1-2001\LDCORDCYCLE 1.2001
Words eln181c lllFEUlgh are deleted. wards undedined arc added.
60
A
.
""" ~ ; .,
" rl,
f ~q ,:
:l; (1""Ir.l) 0lIV^)~1tr!I'f1O:l if~l~ 0-
2:
, .' s "
, L ~ ~ ~ 0
,
, p ~~
,
I , H~~
,
, ,
, i_ ..
, , ~ ip ~
,
, , I ~. ~
, , . r
, ,
,
, !
, ,
,
, ,
, , ~
I . .h
I s
. ~ 0'"
::> 'g
g D,-
. I !~
D, 3 }!
I ~
;
, i
.
.
.
~
u
W
Q.
~
~
w
w
<
<.>
"
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
!
"
<
~
""t
J-..
~
l'<l
,
:l:
><
III
. l
0"
il
...... SO_.._ lIl.rlot"
II.... 10.,..___ ......,~
.-"...-.........
II"M ~""lll<f .......
N.,......_lot-.l&..l
fa'-1I .......u
.-
w__
,
:
.
.
.
,.
:5
or
!l'
o
w
Z
w
~
<
w
i"
.J
f Q .,,,,,,,,,
i
t"I
/('
I
~i
i
'..
l:.
.:1
:,.
.
~
-0(
.,,"
. ................,
.sll:;J~nor.) :)'!6olOao~JO MI ~!JOtl1!1.l fw/lOu6!.lIp a:>mo. -<luno:)
100:)(I,O 81n IIJO ,don Al11JQOqt)Jd IDD!6010'OI(:!JV/~IJ011iI!l-l .I,U.
----------~3HlO---------"NINOZ 'N01511\3<1 15'1'1
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 172 of 192
STATE OF FLORIDA)
COUNTY OF COLLIER)
I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the
Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby
certify that the foregoing is a true copy of:
ORDINANCE NO. 2002-03
Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on
the 9TH day of January, 2002, during Special Session.
WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of
County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 17th day
of January, 2002.
", ,,' .~.:;:;~;.~ " '.
.... ,t:J"v..'.~...,.)" YL"
. ,'-;.' "~". .
. '.' -"""'''' -', .
:!.i t::-\I ') ~_ ~
,).. /,:,,(..' .~ . ;:: ; ,
'I--; ~:.. ,',' :..~ ". . '_ _
DWIGHT E. BROCK . ... ' _ <""'/" :;.; :
. : I" {.... r ~. . ,_ . _ ,. 't. . (;, :-
Clerk of Courts and C::).erlt~'--<i ..:.:~ .
Ex-officio to Board of:.) .............0.,...
County commissioners ./~.}'oa. I.'~~~...'
-....."..,..
~~d#-.. ./
By: Ellie Hoffman,
Deputy Clerk
EXHIBIT ''E''
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 173 of 192
ORIGIN: Commuuity Development & Environmeutal S.ervlees Division
AUTHOR: Ross Gochenaur, Planner II
DEPARTMENT: Planning Services
ADA-2008-AR-13731
MONTE CARLO CLUB
CONDOMINIUM ASSOC.
PROJECT: 2006010084
DATE: 9{9{OS DUE: 9{23{08
LDC PAGES: LDC2:192.1 - 2.192.2.3
IDC SECTION: 2.6.21 Dock facilities
CHANGE: 1.) Add a provision allowing administrative approval of more liberal waterway width
measurements for detennining dock protrusion distance on platted waterways less than 100 feet
wide where the mean high water line has receded from the property line; 2) Revise dock facility
extension criteria; 3) Revise the section dealing with boathouses to clarify the relationship
between a boathouse and its associated dock facility, and identify which criteria (dock extension
and boathouse, or boathouse alone) apply under what circumstances; 4) Exempt docks on
unbridged barrier islands in State Aquatic Preserves from protrusion limits, provided that DEP
pennits are obtained prior to construction. In addition to these major changes, a nwnber of minor
"housekeeping" changes have been made throughout the section, including the insertion of an
exhibit inadvertently omitted from this section during an earlier amendment cycle.
REASON: 1.) Accretion on narrow waterways not reinforced by seawalls sometimes results in a
true waterway width of less than that indicated on a plat, and the code requires that platted
waterway width be used whenever available, This change would allow affected property owners
to measure their protrusion distance from the mean high water line, rather than the property line
(the most restrictive point) once certain requirements for approval have been met. 2.) Questions
have been raised regarding how many of the dock facility extension criteria must be met in order
for the Pliuming Commission to approve an extension. The criteria have been separated into five
primary and six secondary criteria, with a requirement that at least four of the primary and four of
the secondary be met in order to approve the petition, Questions have also been raised regarding
the water depth at the site and its relationship to the vessel( s) intended to use the dock. The
language has been revised in order to clarify this relationship. Language of all other criteria has
been revised as well in an attempt to clarify what objective standards of approval for each
criterion need to be met. The two criteria dealing with the impact of the proposed dock on the
view of nearby property owners, the most subjective of the criteria, have been reduced to one,
with the emphasis shifted to the view of abutting property owners. 3.) Combining dock
extensions and boathouses in the same section has causes some confusion over their relationship.
The language has been revised to discriminate between simultaneous applications for dock
extensions with boathouses, and applications for the addition of a boathouse or covered strUctuIe
alone to an existing dock. 4) Docks on unbridged barrier islands are currently allowed as
pennitted principal uses in recognition that docks are a necessity where the o!lly practical means
of access to th.e property is by boat. On such islands as Keewaydin, the nature of the shoreline,
with very shallow water and mangrove growth, makes a boat dock extension necessary in
virtually every case. Since a viable dock is a prerequisite for development of the property, these
extensions have always been approved. For barrier islands, including Keewaydin, located in
State Aquatic Preserves, DEP permitting regulations apply which are in all ways more restrictive
that those in the LDC. DEP permits, as applicable, are required as a condition of approval for all
Lf3
Agenda Item NO.7C
December 2, 2008
Page 174 of 192
boat dock extension petitions. Since DEP permit requirements already include safeguards
addressing all main issues of concern to the County, it would seem reasonable to eliminate the
extension petition requirement for docks in these locations where DEP approval is required.
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACfS: The change involving measurement of waterway
width would require an administrative variance application to allow staff to evaluate the request.
The fee for this application is $400. Clarification of dock extension criteria would reduce the
grounds for appeal of Planning Commission decisions as well as the possibility of subsequent
litigation. The elimination of boat dock extension petitions for unbridged barrier islands in State
Aquatic Preserves would eliminate a source of revenue ($1000 petition fee), but would also
eliminate staff hours spent processing these petitions and time taken by the cepc to hear them.
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: LDC Section 2.6.22 (Manatee protection)
Sec. 2.6.21. Dock facilities.
2....21.1. bElI'cidual or Hluldple prh'ate E1ocE, lBeluEliag HloorlRg' piIiBgs, E1avits, liftlillud
tile like.are permltteEl to ser':e the resllleam lImug wllteFfroRt prol'l!f'ty llS deserlbed la
IliviliioR ...3, defiaitions, pro"lldeEl tIley so BOt protruse more th&B the respeeti'l'e E1istaaees
specifics io sectioos 2.ti.21.2, &BEl 2.6.21.3, fer sueh WllWrwllY. Doek5 &Bd the like Bre
primllrily IlIleadeEl to llEle'l ulltely seeure moored ,'essels llllEl Jlrovidc saf.e lIecess by users
for routine mlllatenanee llad Rse ',,'hile mmimlllly ImpaetiDg the all,'igllilllity of the
wlIterway, the ulltke mitriBe hobltllt, maaatees,lIl1s tile use llas vie';\' of tile waterwllY by
sllFroualliag property owuers. PermUtes doek facility protrusloas as ',veil as extmsloR of
dock facilities are measured from the prepeny Ime, bullilleali line, shoreliae, seawall, rip
rap liae, or mCllIl higH water liRe, wHiehe~'er Is more restrictive. OR uBhriilged Barner
Islaass, a boat doelr SHall be eenslsered a permUtes priacipal ase; Howe'!er, II sack shall
&&t, in aay WilY, CORstitute 1111. . . " IIndlor proYielcs fer
Bay aeeessory uscs IIBS or structures. Boathouses aBli lioel. facilities jlrolloseel OD
resldeRtlBlly :/lOB cd properties as flenaed la seetloB 2.1.4 of this Code, SHall be eOBsiacrell
BIl accessory use or structllre. BOllthouses shall he requlreli to be IIJlpro'les tilr(juj;h the
proeedure alld criteria iB seetioa 2.~.21.3 IlBd2.li.21.1.1R asdltioB, IIBY eo./eredstruetllre
erected OB IIllri'/ate bOllt aoek SHaD also be eoasldcred liB aecessory use, ans SHall also be
re'luired to be approves througH the proeedures and criteria of seelioa 2.ti.21.3. liDS
2.6.21.1. of tHis Code.
2.6.21.1.2. NOR resiseBaaldoel. facilities sllllll be subject to all tHe provisions of seelioa
2.6.21. of the e9fl~ with tile exeeptloa that protrllsioBs fer BOB resisentlaldoel, faeilities
b eyoBd tHe speelfles limits shall be setermmes adm.inistratkely by tile pl&BaiBg s mices
11
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 175 of 192
dlreeteF 8tthe time srslte de\~e19pBle8tplaB FLWiew, "HeEl 8& 8B evaladsB aftae eriteria
1ft seetleD ],6.31.3. afthe Cede.
],(;.:11.3. >>eekfaeility ,'equireme1lf6lllfd reWietielf5. TIle fallewiBg eritePia appl)' to deek
faeiJitill5 aDd he8thallses, with the exeeptleD afhat liael. faeilitles e8 BlaBmade Hiles ed
ether IRemade bedies of water lIBder printe eeBtFeI.
3.6.21.::1.1. Fer lots aD II wateF'l'l'il)' taat Is 100 feet or gl'ellter m width; BO Boathouse doek
fae!lit3'lIloat eombIs8tieD shall ,rotrude more tkaa 30 feet IDtO the w8tefWllY (I.e. the total
pratnl!lioa of the dack f8elli"" plas the tetal protFusIeB lIC tae meered vesseij. A doel.
e:fteRsieB m lIeeerdeee wia seetioD 3.6.::n.3. mllY be gFflDted to &110'1'1' II ,FetrllsIoD ef more
tlt8D 30 feet,
3,6.21.2.3. Fer lets OD 8 wllterw~' thllt is less tl111B 100 feet la wIdth, 1I0el. flleilities mar
eeeBpy DO mori! the 2S peFeeRt of tile wIdth af tile waterway or pFetnlde grllBter thllD 30
feet IDto tile w8terwllY, whlese~'er is lesser. }. doel. exteDsioD m aeeal'daDce witll seetloB
3.&.21.3. may be gFaBted to allow a protrusiOB of more tile 20 feet, But lit BO time saall
suea ew:tl1llsioD allow mare tIIaD 2S pereeDt of the waterw~' wIdth 16 lie oeeupIed.
2.6.21.2.3. ....11 deelt faeililies es lots with water froDtage of 80 feet or greater shall aan a .
side sethael. requiremeRt of IS feet, exeept liS provided iD seetlon 3.6,21.2. (.1 or B5
eelllflted lIelow. f.1I doelt faeilities (exee,t hoathousll5) OD lots with less tlllID 6G feet of
wllter frostage shall hlln II side setllaelt requiremeat of seveD aad oae h&lffeet. I.U doek
r~elllties (exeept bOllthouses) OD lots at tile eDd or side eRd of II 'II'l1terway hll,isg regulllr
(llsellr) water frostage shalIB~'e II side setllaek reqBircmcat af SIl'\'eD aDd oae Balf feet as
measured from the side lat liRe or ripBrie liRe, whieheYer is Rflproprillte.
2.(;.21.2.3.1. R!pllriaa lines (~ee dMsloD 6.3, defiDitioDs, ripllriaa Iiae) fer lots at tile eBd or
side eDd af a watenny with II regular SBOri!liae are estaBlished Br a liRe eIteRdiBg frulD
tile eorRer af liB end lot BDd side eRd lot iDtO tile waterway BlseetiBg equidistaatly the fHlgle
ereated by the twu lsterse~g 19ts (see ExhiBit ....). RlpaFilla lines fer all otllel lots sl1auld
be established hy geReral1y aeeepted methods, takiDg mto eOBsideratioa the eUDfigurlltioB
of tae skerelinB; aDd allowing for the eqBitable RflportioDmeRt of ripariaD rights. Snh
methods melli!i.e, hut BFe Dot Iimlwd to, UDes dnm'D perpeDdieillar to the shoreliae fur
re~lar (JiBesI') shorelines, ar IiBes drllwa perpeBEliealar to the eeDterliBe (thread) of the
wlltefWll3', or jlerpeDdieBlar to the IiDe flf deep wllter (lIue ofB~'lgabll~' or ellge of
Rw..igallle ehanBel), as IIpproprIllte, far Irregalar Sllfll'elia9S,
2.6.21.2.1. ".11 do ell faeilities, regardless af leagth!protF1l5ioB, shall aave reAeetaFs aad
souse BumBers feUI' Jaekes mlDimulB sliie iastalled lit tile outerlBost ead aa hoth sidcs. Far
maltif-amil3' de\'elopRleDts, the Bouse DURlBer requiremeBt is waived. '
2.6.21.2.5, Alldoel. faellities are sUBjeet to, Ilad shall eORlply 'll'itll, all fi!deral aDd state
requ.iremeBts aDd permits, melading hut sat limited to the requiremeDts ed permits of the
Florida departmeat of eD"irosmeBtal proteetloD, the U.S. ".1'1113' Corps ofEDgiseers, IInd
the U.S. ED'..lroDRleBtlll ProteetioB !.geuey.
!j.s
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2. 2008
Page 176 of 192
2.',11.2.6. .DlYJteetifHf o/' :veegrtB61Jeds. Where Ilew doeliiBg: faeilltieli are pFopased or !laat
desk ate.sioRs, tlte ]eeati8R Hi presesee af .seagFa86 SF seRfFass heds vtitlliB 299 feet of
Btlr proposed daek flleillty shall tie idelltlfiell Oil a8 aerial photograph hlMBg a seale sf ORe
lBelt to 299 feet whea av-ailallle frolB tke COlHlty, or a seale of oae !IIek to 199 feet whea sueh
photegraphs are Rot IWBilaIlle from the e08a103', The laelKiaR afseagFass heds shall be
verified Ily It site visit by the site developlBeat review direetor or hill desigaee prior to
issuaaee of liB:!' pr9;jeet approval or peFfBit..
2.6.21:2.6.1 AJI proposed doek faeilities shllllhe loeated lIad aligaed to sta)' at least tea feet
from Bay ellisHDg seagrass Ileds, eX09llt wilere a eOB.t!lluo8s tied afsellgrflsses mots offtke
shore of the property llBd adjlleeat ta the prepllFty, ed te mmimift ael:Rtive Impllets to
sell~sses aad otker Bathe shoreliBe, emergeat llBd suhmerged '.'egetatioa andllllrd
batt8Bt ea 9lJJ111B kies.
3.6.21.2.6.2 Where a eontinHBHS lied of seagAlsses eBsts ofrtke shore of the prope~' aad
adjaeeBt to the property tke appHeaat shall he allowed to llaillla doal. aeross the
seagrasses, or a doel<iBg faeilil3' '}I'ithm teR feet of seagrasses. Saeh doebing faeilltieli skall
eomply with t-he following eORditions:
1. Tae dssk saal! be at a height sf at least 3.3 feet ~lGVD.
2. The terminal'!3latfGffil aflhe dssl, shall Bet e)(seea 160 sElHare foot.
3. The aeseos oosk shall net lmeeeS a \".id!l1. sreear foet.
1. The aeee05 aesk lll3a teFERiaaJ platferm sllall Be sitea ta ifBfJGet the smallest area of
seagrasses possiBle.
2.6.:U.2.6.3. The petitioner shall be rell.uired to demonstrate how neglltive illlJlaets ts
seagrll5ses aad otller nawle slloreline ':egetation llBII hard bottom eommunitios hll'l'e Ilees
miRimliled prior to aBY pre-jeet llf3llroyal or permit HsuaBee.
2.6.:11.3. J}aek}acilityl$lensi6/1; lJeat.'j8U5e eslRhlishlflellt G/'itel-M. :\dditioBal
len~l'otrusion heyond said respeeti-ie distauees speeilied in seetioo 2,6.21.2.1 and
1.6.21.2.2 for doel. faeilitiesl aad all boatllouses, regardless af the ex-toot of the )lrotrusian
inte the waterway ar the width sf the waterway, shall rell.ulre pHblie notiee and a hearing
Ily the Collier COHnty Plilftning Commissian. f.s to oy Boat IIsel. extoosioa petition upon
whiell tile )lIaoning comm!llsion tal.es a~urs8ant to seetian a.2.n of this Celie, aD
aggrievell petitioner ar adversely afH!eted )lF9peri3' oV/ner mar appeal Slleh Hnalaetian to
the Ilollrll ohaning appeals, except that sHek llf3peal sk&lllle HIed with the d6':elopmeut
seniees directar wit-hin 11 days of the Elate af tile final action by the Illauniug eOIBHI!llsioa.
TIle Ilaard of zonmg appeals may affirm, afilrm witk eODditioBs, reverse, or re':erse witk
eORditioBS the aetian oftke )llanning eomusian. SHeil appeal sllalllle filed with tlie
eommu.ai~' de'lelopmBllt aad envirel\meatltl sen'iees administrator, or his desigBee aad
shall be notieed fer hearing with the lisaI'd of zOBing appeals pursuaut to the proeedures
Lf6
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 177 of 192
ed ap,llieele fee set foFth)1l seetioB lol,., ohilis Code. Tile II_BiBg eOIR",llIllio8 shall
hflSe its deeisioB fOF approval, allprovall'litll eOBdiUoBS; or deBi.l, OR dle followillg eriteria:
1.(j,21.:U. ~lIedler or Bot dle BumBer of doek faeiUaes or slips to he located all tile s81ljeet
pf'operty is oppFtlllFifie iB relatioB to tile lellgtk ofwaterfroBt pf'OPeAf &Vanable fer tile
10eaHOII octile proposed doel. faeiUties.
2.'.::U.3.2. Wl1etber or Bot tl1e water deptll wJiere the pFOposed doek faeili~' is to lJe loeated
is suJlieiOBt to allow fer safe mooriBg of tile yessel, thereBY BeeeSllltatillg tile e:l<teBsloB
FelJaest.
2.6.:21.3.3. Whetller or 80t tile proposed doel. faeility and moored "eGsel(~ iB e8mIJiBatioB
IBllY have &II HYene impaet to Bll'ligatiOB witlllB aJi adjaeeut lllWigallle eIIanBeL
2.'.21.3.1. W.etller or 1I0t, for lets all a waterway tIIatis greater tIIaB 11111 feet in width, tile
proposed doek faeiUty oeeapies more tIt.1I 25 percent of the widtll of tile waterwllY, or, for
Boathouses ollly, protrudes grelltel' thlln ]11 fee~ and whether OF 80t a miBimum of 511
peFOeDt of tile ,,,,illtll of tile waterway is mailltallled in order to OBSRre FOlIsoBaBle waterwll-)'
nlWigahility.
2.lI.21.3.S. "lIether or BOt tIIere are special c08ditiOBS related to tile subjeet property or
waterway whiek JRStify tile pFOposed dlmeosioBS a8dlocatio8 of tile sulljeet do~
2.6.21.3.6. Whether or not tile proposed doel. Is of minimal dimensions neeessary in order
to adequllte!y secure tile moored vosselll'l1lle pFovidiBg Feasonele aoeellS to tile boat.f6i'
1'0utiBe maiuteuanee, v,itllollt the use of eKeesnI.'e deel. llrea.
2.6.21.3.':'. Wl1et.aer or oot tile prop9sed str-uetuFe is of minimal dlmeDslons to minimilile tile
Impaet of tile view of tile waterway BY saFFoundiBg property owners.
2.6.21.3.8. '<jljThether or uot the pl'oposed "fe5sel is 111 ene5S of SII pel'eeot of tlie Iengtk af tile
water frontage sHeh that tile addlllo1l of a doek str\leture willlaerease the impaet ea sr
Begati'I'Cl)' imflaet the "flew of tile waterway BY surrouuiling property 9W1Iers.
2.&.21.3.9. Whether 81' not tile prop8sed leaalion and design of tile dodi/vessel eombiuati8B
is suell tIIat it may iBfFinge \ljlon the use of BeigilBoriBg properties, l11elaBfBg Bny emtl11g
doel. stl'uetl1res.
2.&.21.3.111. Regarding exlstiBg BOBthie ergauisms in tile \'ieini~' oft-ke proposed elCteBsioB.
(8) ',''bether or net seagrosses are leeGtea WitbiR 200 feet oflhe jlt'spesea Elaok; me
(b) Whe!fier sr !let tllo proposed lloek is sllb-jeet to !fie manatee p:roleet.ieR
reEfllireme!lIG eftbis Celle (seetis!l2,6.22).
Li7
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 178 of 192
2.(i"n.3.11.lldeemed Reeessary Ilased lII'OR !'ll'\'ill'l'l' Or tile allo,'-e eritw. the pl-_wIRg
eo--I-si8ll may impale IBeh eSBditi8BS apeD tlte ap,F8val of 8B e:lteasioB :request it
deems as Beeessarr to accomplish the puposes fir this Code BRd proteet the safe"" aad
welflln or tile pBBlic. Such caRdiao.s may iReludllt hut shall Bot he limited to, greater side
setll.ekfs)' pFoviaioR or Iigktfs), additioRal refleetors, or rellcetoF!i larger thaa four inclles,
.md prakiIJitiRg or permittiBg 1B00riBg OB tile outside ortlle doek faellity.
2.6.21.4. B9/lth811t1e I'ef/NirlHfte1lts: IB additio. te the eriteria is seetlOR 2.6.21..., the
fellow.lag eFitcria allall apply te hoatllouses:
2.6.21.1.1. MioimlllB side setSaell reljuiremeBtr IS feet.
2.6.21.4.2. !\fai_HI pretnlsioB late watenvay: 25 perellBt of caRRI ",ldtS or 211 feet,
whlekever 15 Il!lIs.
2,6.21.4.:1. MtIximuHI llelgktl 1S feet as &IeaslIFed from top of sea'fl'1lI1 or llaRk ",kiekll'\'er H
1B8Fe resmetive.
2.6.21.4.4. IJ.1anmalB Ramber ofllaatSauses per site: ODe.
2.6.31.4.5. All ho&tkoase stF1letures sllalllle eORljlletely opeR OB all fellr sides.
2.li.21.4.li. ROOHR!; material aDd reof eolor shall be tile slIHle IlIl materials aDd eolors lIsed
aD the priReiplll structure or Bia)' Ile of a palm fraDd "ehiellee" strle.
(Ord. No. 92-73, ~ 2; Ord. No, 93-37, !i 3; Ord. No. 94-58, !i 3,10-21-94; Ord, No, 95-58, !i 3,
. 11-1-95; Ord. No. 96-21, ~ 3; Ord. No, 97-26,!i 3.D, 6-4-97; Ord. No. 99-46, !i 3.D, 6-16-99;
Ord. No. 00-8, !i 3.F, 1-25-00; Ord. No, 00-43, !i 3.F, 6-14-00; Ord. No. 00-92,!i 3.D, 12-13-00)
Code references-Coastal zone protection, ~ 22-286 et seq.; waterways, ch. 146.
2.6.21.1. Individual or multiple private docks. including mooring oilings. davits. lifts and the like
are oennitted to serve waterfront propertY as described in Division 6.3 Definitions. provided such
docks do not protrude more than the respective allowable distances specified in subsections
2.6.21.2. and 2.6.21.3. of this code for such waterwav or waterbody. Docks and the like are
primarilv intended to adeouatelv secure moored vessels and provide safe access for routine
maintenance and use while minimallv impacting navigation 'within any adjacent navigable
channel. the use of the waterwav. the use ofneicllboring docks. the native marine habitat.
manatees. and the view of the waterwav bv the neighboring properlY owners..
2.6.21.1.1, Permitted dock facilitv protrusions as well as extensions of dock facilities are
measured from the property line. bulkhead line. shoreline. seawall. rip-rap line. control elevation
contour. or Mean High Water fMHW) line. whichever is most restrictive. with the following
excention: on manmade waterways less than 100 feet in width. where the actual watetwav has
L(<J
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 179 of 192
receded from the DIatled waterfront prouertv line. the Planninf! Services Director may aoprove an
AdmiDistratiye Variance allowinlZ measurement of the orotrnsion from the existing- MHW line.
orovided that: 1) a sil!tl.ed. sealed survey no more than sixty (60) dayS old is orovided showing
the location of the :MHW line on either side of the waterway at the site as well as anvdock
facilities on the subiect nrooertv and the oropertv directlv across the waterway. and. 2) at least 50
percent of the true waterway width as de,picted by the survey is maintained for navigability. with
the followinlZ exception: on manmade canals 60 feet or less in width. which are not reinforced by
a vertical seawall or bulkhead. at least 33 Dercent of the true waterway width must be maintained
for navigability, The allowable protrusion of the facility into the waterway shall be based on the
DercentalZes described in subsection 2.6.21.2.2. of this code as aooHed to the true waterway width
shown on the survey and not the platted canal width.
2.6.21.1.2. On unbridll'ed barrier islands. a boat dock shall be considered a oennitted princiual
use; however. a dock shall not. in any way. constitute a use or structure which oermits. reQuires.
and/or urovides for anY accessory uses and or structures. Boathouses and dock facilities pronosed
on residentially zoned Drooerties as defined in section 2.1.4 of this code. shall be considered an
accessory use or structure. Boathouses shall be reqllired to be a~roved throulZh tbe procedure
and criteria in subsections 2.6,2 1.3 and 2.6.21.4. In addition. any covered structure erected on a
vrivate boat dock shall also be considered an accessorY use. and shall also be reauired to be
aouroved through the orocedures and criteria of subsections 2.6.21.3, arid 2,6.21.4. of this code,
2.6.21. 1.3. Non-residential dock facilities shall be subiect to all ofilie orovisions of section
2.6.21 of the code. with the excention that protrusions for non-residential dock facilities beyond
the soecified limits shall be determined administratively by the olanninf! services director at the
time of site development olan review. based on an evaluation ofthe criteria in subsection
2.6.21.3. of this code,
2.6.2 I .2. Dock (acilitv requirements and restrictions. The foIlowing criteria aouly to dock
facilities and boathouses. with the exception of dock facilities and boathouses on manmade lakes
and other manmade bodies of water under private control.
2.6.21.2.1. For lots on a canal or waterway that is 100 feet or greater in width. no boathouse.
dock faciIitylboat combination shall protrude more than 20 feet into the waterway (i.e. the total
protrusion ofthe dock facility ulus the rotal protrusion of the moored vessel), A dock extension
in accordance with subsection 2,6.21.3. of this code may be granted to allow a orotrusion of more
than 20 feet.
2,6,21.2.2. For lots on a canal or waterway that is less than 100 feet in width. dock facilities may
OCCUoY no more than 25 percent ofthe width of the waterway or urotrude greater than 20 feet into
the waterwav. whichever is Jesser. with the following exception: on manmade canals 60 feet or
less in width. which are not reinforced by a vertical seawall or bulkhead. dock facilities may
protrude up to 33 uercent of the width of the waterway. Drovided that the procedures outlined in
Section 2.6.21.1.1. are observed. A dock extension in accordance with subsection 2.6.21.3, of
this code mav be granted to allow a protrusion of more than 20 feet. but at no time shall such an
extension be granted to allow a urotrusion into more than 25 uercent of the wateIWay width.
c;r
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
. Page 180 of 192
2.6.21.2.3. For lots on unbnde:ed barrier islands located within State Aauatic Preserves.
orotrusion limits. setbacks. and deck area shall be det"nn;ned bv the apolicable Florida
Department of Environmental Protection lDEP) rel!ll1ations in effect at the time of Denmt
a1JDlication. and the orotrusion limits above shall not aDolv: however. all required DEP oennits
for the dock facilitv must be obtained orior to the issuance of a Collier Countv buildinlZ oennit
for the facilitv.
2,6.21.2.4. All dock fadlities on lots with water frontalZe of60 feet or !!Teater shall have a side
setback reauirement oilS feet. exceot as llrovided in subsections 2.6,21.2 or 2.6.21.4 of this code
or as exemoted below, All dock facilities (exoeot boathouses) on lots with less than 60 feet of
water frontal!e shall have a side setback reauirement of 7 1/2 feet. All dock facilities (exceot
boathouses) on lots at the end or side end of a canal or waterway shall have: a side setback
rl::Quirement of 7 J!2 feet as measured from the: side lot line: or riparian line. whichever is
aODrooriate.
2.6.21.2.4.1. RiDarian line:s (SI::C Division 6.3. Definitions. Tioarian line). for lots at the end or
side end of a waterwav with a rel!ll1ar shoreline:. arc: established bv a line ext<mdinlZ from the
. corner of an end lot and side end lot into the waterway bisectinlZ eauidistantlv the anlZle cre:ated
bv the two intersecting lots (see Exhibit A). Riparian lines for an other lots should be l'Stablished
bv lZenerally acccoted lUe:thods. taking into consideration the configuration of the shoreline. and
allowinlZ for the eauitable aooortionment of nDarian rilZhts. Such methods include. but are not.
limited to. lines drawn perpendicular to the shoreline: for reeular (Jim:ar) shorelines. or lines
drawn Deroendicular to the centerline (thread) of the waterway. oeroendicular to the line of deep
water (line ofnavil!abilitv or edlZe: afnavilZable channel). as appropriate. for irreeular shorelines.
2.6.21.2.5, All dock facilities. relZardless oflenlrthlDrotrusion. shall have reflectors and house
numbers. no less than four inches in heilZht. installed at the outemiost end. on both sides. For
multifamily developments. the house nwnber requirement is waived.
2,6.21.2.6. All dock facilities are subiect to. and shall complvwith. all federal and state
reQuirements and pennits. includinlZ but rnotllimited to the reauirements and Dennits of the
Florida deoartment of environmental protection. the U.S. Army Coms ofEncineers. and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
-
2.6,21.2.7. Protection of sea;zrass beds, Where new dockin&! facilities or boat dock extensions are
prooosed. the location and presence of seal!Tass or semrrass beds within 200 feet of any proposed
dock facility shall be identified on an aerial photolZTaph having a scale of one inch to 200 feet
when available from the countv. or a scale of one inch to 400 feet when such DhotolZl'aphs are not
available from the county, The location of sealZl'ass beds shall be verified by a site visit bv the site
development review director. or his desiwee. Dnor to issuance of anv Dreieel approval or oermit.
2,6.21.2.7, I, All proposed dock facilities shall be located and aligned to stavat least ten feet from
any existinlZ sealZTass beds. except where a continuous bed ofseagrassl'S exists off the shore of
the property and adi acent to the property. and to minimize nelZative impacts to seae:rasses and
other native shoreline. emerlZent and submerged vel!etation and hard bottom communities,
sv
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 181 of 192
2.6.21.2.7.2. Where a continuous bed of seal!1'llSses exists off the shore of the Dl'Ollertv and
adjacent to the prooertv. the llDDIicant shall be allowed to build a dook across the seae:rass beds.
or a dockin!! facility within ten fee! of seagrass beds. Such dockin!! facilities shall comoly with
the following conditions:
I. The dock shall be at a height of a! leall! 3.5 feetNGVD.
2. The terminal platform area of the dock shall not exceed 160 square feet.
3. The access dock shall not exceed a width of four feet.
4. The access dock and terminal Dlatform shall be sited to impact the smallest area of
seall:rass beds Dossible.
2,6.21.2.7.3. The petitioner shall be required to demonstrate how nelZatiye impacts to seamss
beds and other native shoreline velZetation and hard bottom conununities have been minimized
Drior to any Droiect aP9roval or Dermit issuance.
2.6.21.3. Dock facility extension, Additional orotrusion of a dock facility into any waterway
beyond the limits established in subsection 2.6.21.2 of this code may be considered apDropriate
under certain circumstances. The collier county Dlannin!! commission. at a dulv advertised
public hearim:. shall aporove. aD9rove with conditions, or deny. a dock facility extension reauest
based on the criteria below. Advertisement of such hearin!! shall consist of. I) publication of a
notice of the bearing in a newspaoer of !!eneral circulation in the county at least IS dayS in
advance of the hearing; 2) posting of a sign bv the development services director in full view of
the oublic on the subiect property: and. 3) notification bv the development services director of all
owners of oropertv within 500 feet of the subject propertY. As to any boat dock extension
petition upon which the planning commission tllkes action. pursuant to subsection 5.2.1 I of this
code. an al!!ITi.eved petitioner or adversely affected property owner may apPeal such final action
to the board of zoning apveals. The board ofzonin~ avpeals may affirm. affirm with conditions.
reverse. or reverse with conditions the action ofthe planning commission. Such appeal shall be
filed with the community develooment and environmental services division and shall be noticed
for hearing bv the board of zoning appeals pursuant to the procedures and applicable fee set forth
in subsection 1.6.6 of this code, The plarming commission shall base its decision for atlPTOval.
approval with conditions. or denial. on an evaluation of the followingprimarv and secondary
criteria. The apolication for a boat dock extension shall include the following: l) a siened,
sealed survey depicting mean high water. mean low water. and relevant water deoths measured at
no 'less than 5-foot increments: and 2) a chart. drawn to scale. of the waterway at the site,
depicting the wateIWavwidth. the proximity oithe proposed facility to anY adiacent navigable
channel. the proximity of the proposed facility to docks. if anv. on the adjacent lots. and the
unobstructed waterway between the proposed facility and the opposite bank or any dock facility
on the opposite bank. In order for the planning commission to approve the reauest., it must be
determined that at least four (4) of the five (5) primary criteria. and at least four (4) ofthe six (6)
secondary criteria. have been met. These criteria are as follows:
S:-/
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 182 of 192
2.6,21.3.1. Primary criteria.
2.6.21.3.1.1. Whether or not the number of dock facilities and/or boat SMS prooosed is
anpromiate in relation to the waterfront lemrth. location. upland land use and zoning of the
subiect propertY: consideration should be made of prollertv on unbridl!ed barrier islands. where
vessels are the primary means oftranstlortation to and from the prOllertv. ((The number should
be II1llJ['(l1lriate: t\1picaJ. sinll:le-family use should be no more than two slips: typical multi-familv
use should be one slip per dwelling unit: in the case ofunbridlZed barrier island docks. additional
slips may be appropriate))
2.6.21.3.1.2. Whether or not the water dePth at the prooosed site is so shallow that a yessel of
the lZenera1lenlrth. type. and draft as that described in the oetitioner's apolication is unable to
launch or moor at mean low tide (MLT). ((The petitioner's ll1lolication and survev should show
that the water deoth is too shallow to allow launch and moorinlZ ofthe vessel (s) described
without an extension))
2.6.21.3.1.3. Whether or not the orooosed dock facility may have an adyerse impact on
nayil!lltion within an adiacent marked or charted navilZable channel. ((The facility should not
intrude into any marked or charted navilZllble cluumel thus impeding vessel traffic in the
channel))
2.6.21.3. I .4. Whether or not the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 oercent of the
width of the waterway. and whether or not a minimum of 50'percent of the wateIWav width
between dock facilities on either side of the waterwav is maintained for navilZabilitv, ((The
facility should maintain the reauired oercentalZes))
2.6,21.3.1.5. Whether or not the oroposed location and design of the dock facility is such that the
facility would not interfere with the use of neighborinlZ docks. ((The facility should not interfere
with the use oflegally oermitted neie:hborine: docks))
2.6.21.3.2. Secondary criteria
2.6.2 I .3.2.1. Whether or not there are special conditions. not involving water depth. related to
the subiect properlY or waterway. which iustifv the proposed dimensions and location of the
proposed dock facility, ((There must lie at least one soecial condition related to the properlY:
these may include type of shoreline reinforcement. shoreline confil!U1'ation. mangrove growth. or
sea~ass beds))
2.6.21.3 ,2.2, Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable. safe. access to the
vessel for loadimdunloading and routine maintenance. without the use of excessive deck area not
directly related to these functions. ((The facility should not use excessive deck area))
2.6.21.3.2.3. For single-family dock facilities. whether or not the length of the vessel. or vessels
in combination. described bv the petitioner exceeds 50 percent ofthe subiect property's linear
waterfront footage. (( The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained))
J;;:l..
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 183 of 192
2.6.21.3 .2.4. Wh~th.". or not the proposed facility would haye a maior impact on the waterfront
view of neilZhborinll: waterfront property owners. ((The facility should not have a maior impact
on the view of either neie:hbor))
2,6.21.3.2.5. Whether or not sealmlSs beds are located within 200 feet of the proposed dock
facility. ((If sealrrass beds are present. compliance with subsection 2.6.21.2.6. of this code must
be demonstrated))
2.6.21.3.2.6. Whether or not the proposed dock facility is subiect to the manatee protection .
reauirements of subsection 2.6.22. of this code. ((If apulicable. comuliance with section 2.6,22
must be demonstrated))
2.6.21.3.3. If deemed necessary based upon review of the above criteria. the planning
commission mav impose such conditions uoon the aooroyal of an extension reauest it deems
necessary to accomplish the purooses ofthis code and orotect the safety and welfare of the
public, Such conditions maY include. but shall not be limited to. lZreater side sethack(s). and
provision of lie:ht(s). additional reflectors. or reflectors larger than f(jur inches.
2.6.21.4. Boathouse reauirements: Boathouses. including anY roofed structure built on a dock.
shall be reyiewed by the planning commission using the same procedures and aptllicable criteria
described in subsection 2.6.21.3 of this code: however. the criteria in subsection 2.6.21.3. of this
code shall anplv only to simultaneous application for both a dock extension and a boathouse. In
cases where the boathouse is to be constructed on an existing, legally permitted. dock. these
criteria shall not apolv since the dock itselfis already in comoliance with the code. In all cases.
the following additional criteria shall apply to boathouses. and all of these criteria must be met
in order for the planning: commission to approye the request:
2.6.21.4.1. Minimum side setback requirement: IS feet,
2.6.21.4.2, Maximum orotrusion into waterway: 25 oercent of canal width or 20 feet. whichever
is less: the roof alone mav overhanl/: no more than 3 feet into the waterway beyond the maximum
protrusion and/or side setbacks.
2.6.21.4.3. Maximum height: 15 feet as..measured from toP of seawall or bank. whichever is
more restrictive,. to the peak or highest elevation of the roof.
2,6.21.4.4, Maximum number of boathouses or covered structures per site: I,
2.6.21.4.5, All boathouses and covered structures shall be completely open on all four sides.
2.6,21.4.6. Roofing material and roof color shall be the same as materials and colors used on the
principal structure or may be of a palm frond "chickee" style: a sinl/:le-family dwelline: unit must
be constructed on the subiect lot prior to. or simultaneously with. the construction of any
boathouse or covered dock structure.
b5
'"
Lot
Lor 2
~
0'
Typical
I
Lot 3 50'
9
60'
or
Mare
less
Than
60'
Lot 4
100' Woterway
IS'
15'
15'
15'
f~~ ~ -~t
7')(5' -:',s,/;~/ i "\.",\~ 7,5'
> I .
/ ',s, I '\ ~ ,
/ I "
.oL ",' I ,
/ ;;0' iJ'. 7.5' J 7.5' "
Exhibit A
Typical Setback Requirements for Dock Facilities
R.L.-Riporion line
bV
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 184 of 192
Lot 8
Lot 7
.Lot 6
Lot 5
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 185 of 192
ORIGIN: Community Development & Environmental Services Division
AUTHOR: Ross Gocbenaur
DEPARTMENT: Planning Services
LDC PAGE(S): LDC2:206-207
LDC SECTION: 2.6.33.3. Temporary construction and development permits
CHANGE: Allow temporary classrooms for existing non-profit entities In
conjunction with approved development order
REASON: Non-profit organizations, which conduct classroom activities,
occasionally have need of temporary classroom facilities to continue these activities
during the construction or renovation of permanent facilities. This amendment
would allow such a use in conjunction with an,approved development order until
such time as permanent facilities have been completed or the development order
expkes.
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: Allowing such a nse would result in
additional temporary use permit fees
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS: None
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None
Amend the LDC as follows:
2.6.33.3. Temporary construction and development permits. During the construction
of any development for which at i!'ast a preliminary development order has been
granted, as required below, the developer may request a temporary use permit for
the below-listed aetivlties. The temporary use permit shall be granted initially for a
period not to exceed 24 months in duration and may be renewed annually based
upon demonstration of need and payment of fee. A request for renewal shall be
submitted to the planning services director in writing 30 days prior to the expiration
of the temporary use permit. Temporary construetion and development permits
shall be allowed for the following uses:
1.
Temporary offices to be used for construction, and administrative functions
within the development.
~
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 186 of 192
2. Temporary administrative offices to be used in conjunction with a bona fide
agricultural use in the agricultural zoning district when located in the area
designated agricultural on the future land use map oithe future land use element
of the Collier County growth management plan.
J." Temporary classrooms on the site of existing nonorofit Orl!.~ni7ations. used to
continue existing classroom activities. and in coniunction with an allllroved
develooment order. such classrooms will be issued in coniunction with an
approved Site Improvement Plan.
~ 4. On-site storage of equipment and construction materials for use on the
development site ouly.
+. 5. On-site mobile home used as a temporary office or storage facility for persons
engaged in the development of the site.
~
~ 6. On-site mobile radio and television equipment and antennae.
&.- 7. On-site mobile home for the use of a watchman or caretaker only,
+, 8. On-site temporary use of structures and equipment for the building of roads,
public utilities, and government projects.
-s, 2, Off-site temporary parlcing on property which is located contiguous to the subject
development, or would be contiguous except for a roadway that is not designated
as a collector or arterial in the traffic circulation element of the growth
management plan, with the written authorization of the property owner.
9,. 10. Other on-site uses similar to the foregoing uses and determined by the planning
services director to meet the intent of section 2.6.33.2.
Sf,
EXHIBIT ''F''
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
, P~ge 187 of 192
Text underlined lEi new text to e added.
TsKt 1JtRkstRFQUB~ is GY'l'sAt t8l~ tEl be f:leloh1'
Bold text indicates a deflnMt term
LDC Amendment Reauest
ORIGIN: Community Development and Environmental Services
AUTHOR: Joyce Ernst, Senior Planner
DEPARTMENT: Zoning and Land Development Review
ADA-2008-AR-13731
MONTE CARLO CLUB
CONDOMINIUM ASSOC,
PROJECT: 2006010084
DATE: 9/9/08 DUE: 9/23/08
AMENDMENT CYCLE: Cycle I, 2006
LDC PAGE: 5:12
LDC SECTION(S): LDC section 5.03,06.0
CHANGE: To add language omitted during the re-codification process.
REASON: The language provides a necessary tool in evaluating criteria submitted for a boat
dock extension, which will assist staff and the Planning Commissioners in detennining approval
or denial of boat dock petitions. .
FISCAL & OPERATIONAL IMPACTS: Reinserting this language back into the code will
assist the Planning Commissioners, staff and the general public with the Section of the code that
addresses how the primary and secondary criteria, as stated in the LDC, is evaluated when either
recommending approval or denial of a boat dock extension,
RELATED CODES OR REGULATIONS:
Section 5.03,06
. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN IMPACT: None
OTHER NOTESIVERSION DATE:
February 17, 2006
Amend the LDC as follows:
Section 5.03.06 Dock Facilities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
G. Dock facility extension. Addition protrusion of a dock facliity into any waterway
beyond the limits established in subsection 5,03,06(E) of this Code may be
considered appropriate under certain circumstances, In order for the Plannina
Commission to aODrove the boat dock extension reeuest. it must be determined
that at least four of the five orimarv criteria. and at least four of the six secondary
criteria. have been met. These criteria are as follows:
223
1:\LDC_Amendments\LOC Cycle 1 ~ 2006\New Amendments\5.03.06 G dock extension 031706 JE.doc
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 188 of 192
Text underlined is: new text to be added
T 81ft strlketkFeugk i6 &IcIFfBAt \eJQ te be aelated.
Bofd text jndicates a defined term
Primary Criteria:
a. Whether the number of dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed is
appropriate in relation to the waterfront length, location, upland land use,
and zoning of the subject property. Consideration should be made of
property on unbridged barrier islands, where vessels are the primary
means of transportation to and from the property. (The number should be
appropriate; typical, slngle-famiiy use should be no more than two (2)
slips; typical multi-family use should be one (1) slip per dwelling unit; in
the case of unbridged barrier island docks, additional slips may be
appropriate ).
b, Whether the water dep!h at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel
of the general length, type, and draft as that described in the petitioner's
application is unable to launch or moor at mean low tide (ML T). (The
petitioner's application and survey should establish that the water depth is
too shallow to allow launching and mooring of the vessel(s) described
without an elctension).
c. Whether the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on
navigation within an adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The
facility should not intrude into any marked .or charted navigable channel
thus impeding vessel traffic in the channel).
d. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than twenty-five
(25) percent of the width of the waterway, and whether a minimum of fifty
(50) percent of the waterway width between dock facilities on either side
of !he waterway is maintained for navigability. (The faCility should
maintain the required percentages).
e. Whether the proposed location and design of the dock facility is such
!hat the faCility would not interfere with the use of neighboring docks.
(The facility should not interfere wi!h the use af legally permitted
neighboring docks).
2. Secondary criteria:
a. Whe!her there are special conditions, not involving water depth, related to
the subject property or waterway, which justify the proposed dimensions
and location of the proposed dock facility. (There must be at least one
(1) special condition related to the property; these may include type of
shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or
seagrass beds).
\,
1.
b. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access
to the vessel for loading and/or unloading and routine maintenance,
without the use of excessive deck area not directly related to these
functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area).
c. For single-family dock facilities, whether the length of the vessel, or
vessels in combination, described by the petitioner exceeds fifty (50)
percent of the subject property's linear waterfront footage. (The
applicable maximum percentage should be maintained).
d. Whether the proposed facility would have a major impact on the
224
1:\LDC_Amendments'lDC Cyde 1- 2006\Ne.w Amendments\5.03.06 G dock extension 031706 JE.doc
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Text undoriined is new text Fo'Blt~~~ of 192
Text SlfiliSU:ilF8Wgt' is &IlIFFeAt tel( t9 Be sslsleel_
Bold lext Indicates a defined term
waterfront view of neighboring waterfront property owners. (The facility
should not have a major impact on the view of a neighboring property
owner).
e. Whether seagrass beds are located within 200 feet of the proposed dock
facility. (If sea grass beds are present, compliance with subsection
5.03.06(H)(2). of this LDC must be demonstrated).
1. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection
requirements of subsection 5,03,Q6(E)(11) of this LDC. (If applicable,
compliance with section 5.03.06(E)(11) must be demonstrated).
3. If deemed necessary based upon review of the above criteria, the Planning
Commission may impose such conditions upon the approval of an extension
request that it deems necessary to accomplish the purposes of this Code and to
protect the safety and welfare of the public, Such conditions may include, but
shall not be limited to, greater side setback(s), and provision of Iight{s),
additional reflectors. or reflectors larger than four (4) inches.
225
1:\LDC_Aman<lments\LOC Cyde 1 - 2006\New Amendments\5.03.06 G doCk extension 031706 JE.doc
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Text underlined is new lext ~'lfI,'1.JdI,g. of 192
rem cmkelhRilolgh is GWR'Iil'Rt taut Ie be Ballles'.
Bold texllndfcales a defined term
This page intentionally left blank.
226
1:\lOC_Amendments\LDC Cycle 1 .. 2006\New Amendments\5.03.06 G dock "xtansion 031706 JE,doc
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 191 of 192
Toni Biordi and Charlie DiGangi
PO Box 770633
Naples, Florida 34107
239-597-1966
Seprember15,2006
Ashley Caserta
Collier County Planning Services
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Phone: (239) 403-2400
Re: Project Number 2006010084
My wife and I are residents at Monre Carlo, the subject property, and we are opposed to the.
construction of additional boat docks requesred by this permit application.
Since 1992, when we purchased this property, and more recently, since 1999, when we began
living here on a year-round basis, we have watched the health of Vanderbilt Lagoon and the surrounding
waters decline. The fish that were once seen jumping in the Lagoon are no longer present, the number
of pelicans that once fed in the Lagoon has declined and manatee sightings, once a frequent occurrence,
are now a thing of the past. There is a struggling patch of mangroves, located at the wesrern end of the
south-facing seawall that will be further encroached upon by the presence of boat docks. Over. the years
we have seen a significant increase in the amount of boat traffic in the Lagoon, and we cannot help but
believe that this has had a negative impact.
We understand that a boat docks petition was denied at the Dunes development locared to the
North of this property. We believe that one reason for the denial was that the application failed to meet
the "public interest" test. The subject property is very private and the boat docks applied for will not be
available to the public; therefore, no public inrerest will be served by the construction of additional boat
docks at the Monte Carlo.
Thank you for your attention to my comments on this application.
~
RECEIVED
SEP 1 [) 200S
ZONING DEPARTMENT
Agenda Item No. 7C
December 2, 2008
Page 192 of 192
BCC HEARING DATE: 12/2/08
AR# 13731
Monte Carlo Club Condominium Association Appeal
/fJ/2t
Due for Review: <<>>
Planner: AC;jt
Manage. ~.. q-.'~! rlIl-k
Director:'b'Wl1 - all $~
1'O\~1 'MalACc~ \OV[d 'v-
Operations Analyst :lOj~ ()Spu:iz;d :..rttu '
Administrator: ,I" '2>r ().f ~
s~ J ;VI-- ~
~r~
vs~