Loading...
HEX Final Decision 2022-14HEX NO. 2022-14 HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DATE OF HEARING. March 10, 2022 PETTTInN Petition No. BDE-PL20200000220 - Request to approve a boat dock extension that adds 38.25 square feet of terminal dock area for a second boatlift to an existing dock facility that protrudes 19 feet beyond the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for a total protrusion of 39 feet into a waterway that is 144f feet wide, for the benefit of property described as Lot 578, Isles of Capri No. 3, also known as 404 Cristobal Street in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION. The Petitioner is seeking to add an additional 38.25 square feet of terminal dock area to the east side of an existing dock facility for a second boatlift to accommodate an additional 18- foot vessel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. Approval with conditions. FINDINGS. 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87(4) of the Collier County of Ordinances, Sec. 8.10.00 of the Land Development Code, and Chapter 9 of the County Administrative Code. 2. The public hearing for this Petition was properly noticed and conducted in accordance with all County and state requirements. 3. The public hearing was conducted electronically and in -person in accordance with Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04. 4. The Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative executed the Hybrid Virtual Quasi -Judicial Public Hearing Waiver related to conducting the public hearing electronically and in -person. 5. The County Staff presented the Petition followed by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative, public comment and then rebuttal by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative. There were no objections at the public hearing. Letters of support were received from adjacent landowners at 408 and 406 Cristobal Street. Page 1 of 6 6. The County's Land Development Section 5.03.06.H. lists the criteria for dock facility extensions. The Hearing Examiner may approve, approve with conditions, or deny a boat dock extension request if it is determined that at least four (4) of the five (5) primary criteria, and at least four (4) of the six (6) secondary criteria have been met.' 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 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.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The subject property is located within an RSF-3 Zoning District and supports a single-family dwelling for which the LDC allows two boat slips. The proposed project consists of expanding the existing facility by adding an additional 38.25 square feet of terminal dock area to accommodate a second boatlift. 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.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The petitioner is not seeking any additional protrusion. This matter was addressed as part of the original Boat Dock Extension, BDE-PL20110000644. 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.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The proposed dock facility does not protrude into any marked or charted navigable channel and will not impede any vessel traffic. 4. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 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.) 'The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized. Page 2 of 6 The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS NOT BEEN MET. The waterway width at the subject location is 144f feet; therefore, the existing, previously approved, 39 foot dockfacility accounts for 27.08% of the waterway s width. It has been demonstrated that there will be 88 feet between the subject dock facility and that on the opposite shore, thus over 50% of the waterway width is open for navigation. 5. 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.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The proposed additional boatlift will not interfere with neighboring docks and satisfies required side setback requirements; additionally, it is within the agreed established riparian line. Secondary Criteria: 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 special condition related to the property; these may include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. This project constitutes an addition to an existing boat docking facility that was allowed pursuant to CCPC Resolution No. 12-08, adopted on September 6, 2012. The subject location is located at the end of a canal for which any other design would cause issues for neighboring properties. 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 related to these functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. There is no excessive deck area within the proposed dock design which is influenced by environmental concerns; specifically, a seagrass bed. The terminal platform area is less than the allowable 160 square feet, and the access walkway is limited to 4 feet in width. 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 should be maintained.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS NOT BEEN MET. The proposed dock facility has been designed to moor a 30 foot vessel and an 18 foot flats type boat, the combined total being 48 feet. The total shoreline at this Page 3 of 6 location is 85± feet; therefore, the vessels will exceed 50 percent of the linear water frontage. 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.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The subject dock facility is located entirely within the required side setbacks and satisfies an existing riparian agreement. As designed, no new impacts to neighboring property views of the waterway will result. 5. Whether seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. (If seagrass beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06.J of the LDC must be demonstrated.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The submerged resources survey provided revealed the presence of a seagrass species called Paddle grass (Halophila decipiens). The paddle grass is located approximately 4 feet southeast of the proposed dock and boatlift addition and will not be impacted. The paddle grass runs as a continuous bed into the submerged properties east and south of the subject docking facility. The Paddle grass location meets the description referenced in LDC (5.03.06 J.2): All proposed dock facilities shall be located and aligned to stay at least 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 minimize negative impacts to seagrasses and other native shoreline, emergent and submerged vegetation, and hard bottom communities. The docking facility has been designed to minimize impacts to the existing seagrass. The installation of the dock and boatlift will be closer than 10 feet from the seagrass beds subject to the conditions listed below. 6. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection requirements of subsection 5.03.06(E)(11) of this Code. (If applicable, compliance with section 5.03.06(E)(11) must be demonstrated.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion is NOT APPLICABLE. he provisions of the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan do not apply to single-family dock facilities except for those within the seawalled basin of Port of the Islands; the subject property is not located within Port of the Islands. ANALYSIS. Based on a review of the record including the Petition, application, exhibits, the County's staff report, and hearing comments and testimony from the Petitioner and/or the Petitioner's representative(s), County staff and any given by the public, the Hearing Examiner finds that there is enough competent, substantial evidence as applied to the criteria set forth in Section 5.03.06.H Page 4 of 6 of the Land Development Code to approve Petition. The Petition meets 4 out of 5 of the primary criteria and 4 out of 6 secondary criteria with one of the criteria found not to be applicable. DECISION. The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number BDE-PL20200000220, filed by Ronald and Denise Helsel, with respect to the property described as 404 Cristobal Street, further described as Lot 578, Isles of Capri No. 3, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, for the following: • To approve a boat dock extension that adds 38.25 square feet of terminal dock area for a second boatlift, to an existing dock facility that protrudes 19 feet beyond the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for a total protrusion of 39 feet into a waterway that is 144± feet wide. Said changes are fully described in the Survey attached as Exhibit "A" and the Site and Dock Plans attached as Exhibit `B" and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below. ATTACHMENTS. Exhibit A - Survey Exhibit B - Site & Dock Plans LEGAL DESCRIPTION. 404 Cristobal Street, further described as Lot 578, Isles of Capri No. 3, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida CONDITIONS. 1. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. 2. The Environmental Planning Staff has found that the installation of the dock and boatlift will be closer than 10 feet from the seagrass beds. Therefore, in accordance with LDC 5.03.06 J.3 the following design criteria are required: a. The dock shall be at least 2.2 feet NAVD. b. The terminal platform area of the dock shall not exceed 160 square feet. c. The access dock shall not exceed a width of 4 feet. d. The access dock and terminal platform shall be sited to impact the smallest area of seagrass beds possible. DISCLAIMER. Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency Page 5 of 6 and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. APPEALS. This decision becomes effective on the date it is rendered. An appeal of this decision shall be done in accordance with applicable ordinances, codes and law. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS: SEE CLERK OF COURT, MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USES, AND BOAT DOCK EXTENSIONS SHALL BE NOTED ON THE ZONING MAP FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES. Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP Hearing Examiner Page 6 of 6 EXHIBIT "A" SKETCH OF BOUNDARY SURVEY SUPMEYM073 FAVWWAdfeeer T MQ�kdela• Pkdeza,obameLac 4WCrb1"8&eef + cmvwLdm~.. 1AW N*"FL 3#113 PMet OBa &ACH Ef%cft0eb:0W&W2 Fbad Zorn AEBFE B'NAV.D. 1M raonerr�xawaramlrwrAarawnasaawr. j Leant DeeelbO W Ae FtsnfaAMd LW5MfSLWOFC,4MNaA ban.pe�ma BENCHMARK .de, wde,Frr�araFemn�ead IAND SERVICES, INC. °ieCR°0°n79O/Q'°" FbNe IN7.e 6 a BaAnrd Tee 2SOM14M L.B.faw ...r,Esdn.3lr bwbbu.00m BEARAW SHOWN HEREONARE BASED UPONANASSLA ED BEARING OF DUE EAST FOR THE CENTOWNE OF SOUTH SO CR/STOBAL STREETANDARE USEDONLY L-f=SOUH v P. S00 3R00'M. TOFACMATEANGULARCLOSURE . L-2-WEST 100'P. s 89 smr w 100.2e1M LOWEST 85'P S 8rW58' W 84.89'M. L-4=EAST B5'P. S 8r58'11' E "?W M. LOT S86 CRISTOBAL STREET (IMMOVED)BawW(P) g to A - - 355O7P. 354.9T M. B.fL - — - - - — - — - --J1�—�---1�-- -- i `Z C FND. PV( /ASf7GILT�� FND. ow + NAO.ORP. .g — --_ NA20P.I. $C a aoLUlev ■cawv I � .� I somaw- FW.'Sr f. . _ T L-4 !.R NO LD. ors181 't t 11.or 21Y 2 avm + � aWALK wAIW r Fuma 14 apt iri Si+� ONE SrORY 4 4 /IB4 a� N I:v y LMW N law Q �®aW WWaY Ise wear a WJA I %J FND.4W' L 2 CONIC Mov. BLo LBOW . { r F O y FNv PK 9 B�Bar ADD DK 11L6D. LBT1Oli 1NSEAWALL i- 4 11 BOfMWYLPR emmmmff IAwpmmmow 9x i f0.O D=AVDf"QN VAM aaarJOHNSONBAY(P) RAY VARIES sraaasiarwwsi®noneneocwrwnava�muwvnwwr+aa n�i,w �cwrr�es,�orwr p mlermraeue�dwa�orun�aa�o®aeveev®wrwowarrrBMe PrWffWrAMNfi87: 1YKA 30'IL i gmnerwm/wwarrtw n.wmoao®rtswremmrwnaru�rmsmwa aeaerwaWsmorncv 1. flL+NWASPROVU% 70 ?WSLF11@Rf ARLINLAE9 uearMmoaMeovariMwmaeMr !®iC-dVWABPIPOYIDrDTO iNEBCWVBYI7RBY�Of. ROIYAII O�'�� �E MaawowawmvsviaolMuafaianneaaoeeweeMwsewreMeiarerua�m Mau lOasrmnwr� o_ is ao nwaMu.rra.w,wrlo Mrr�m�.wnaerea�nuruw &WAME rANAWASN"P1WlNM+N "WARVI"M orMMOMnwurne.ownReoaoM�ew��n�aam��emsfw�ewrwereree atr�e SWAQI�VTWASNOTPROI�Te71iF81/RVEYUR aunMMamtauiat _ _ rww�erewf¢e.®fauserncsmraenwmnem / smfA d4rharenodamnbed M<rrwo�aeirnsorvMseueu,mrewroMMeoewrarrauam /'s'�l'�i' &Mr aeMswwaernlarnereeewun�enr wnawrMourmemMowew.vMano+Mra pgoerywonrrY n�d+rmydxGan parSferdrdod r�wo�ary w r ire ri�wna.rw� wnMe enmemtof PrmetbopPrL7mpiu'&LfT.MFAC AgNwm fb aim.MnONin,ru'O7mo`snwvmronraawwewniwner�ewam�awnmanmmroia.nrwom� section/T2O?7,FkrLdsSbOAft aornasalaenve wsua�anweaf�eeronew naMnwasen�MerroM/MenaafMva1�Mmarr rrefmrwnavnwmen�MM/roefMM,a ..nar�,rorrrare'wommmwnF�oM�srw000mewaMrnwAeoronMvmeeae O/l/i�t0I0 iP1O"=&V lle N9W eam 7a1NTlOgwtlMMIBiOMAI.NeIDIMrMAVa /rl •.••..--.-M714YE/H BARMD V ww ww s nteue � e w°±re'"e�r wi �orawmor PSM NLx 49fB8YebdiorNe eww/nauna�r u waavmvweww Maa awwvwaaMm .. ._ .-�. ar�va�mr pane ,aeamrunmMMaar nv neaMw v< unnrnooc aw��au w wwrwtwo rye awwv,�nceaueMruw rr Mwar,w o nmweew w u ®vMMaa�r ra uarwao�avuaarr rww aMMaianMeeeMaaaon a iMeoM DQ auwrMr ar 0 on�rrw esnsMa O aMsamawwmr �--`- �� rO.r ® NIL ggfipllf M wonvwv ' era OwQIMYI'anrw . LP A Ma Ia11w1lO/ # ur�sr aue awsaeruortw�.oM as eeaew ■ ewawnraraa+ aonaowv ®'� f mesur �auo as nMM.vt..eMM+w aovouMr Ree IOIfv�VliOaMMw♦ rIY IpIp111IeBOIMIw RgM1�OMaPI � OaWelwl wAwra�paa � e1M/MMl1wMw1WI nAII wArlwt ws�� 1,1OAYMIIII �r l l 10r P���1[�� ONOYI EXHIBIT "B" STATE OF FLORIDA CITY TAMPA Vi,--�FT.MYERS� A 0 P D• Q KEY WEST °r COLLIER COUNTY SITE ADDRESS: <> 404 CRISTOBAL ST <> LATITUDE: N 21 NAPLES, FL 34113 <> LONGITUDE: W 8, NOTES: <> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURP( AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION l VICINITY MAP COUNTY AERIAL DESIGNED: NP 1, Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. H E 1— S E L � O C K DRAWN D: RMJ 2 Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATEJOB NO.: D: 20012 4. _ 4. 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732 LOCATION MAP SHEET NO.: 01 OF04 15. Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 SECTION-32 TOWNSHIP- 51 S RANGE- 26 E N O N I PROPERTY LINE 1 EXISTING COVERED OAT LIFT & DOCK RIPARIAN LINE I 7S PROPERTY LINE EXTENSION NOTES: • THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. • ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW • SURVEY COURTESY OF: "BENCHMARK LAND SURVEYORS" • SURVEY DATED: 01-11-20 • APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF): 84.99 • EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 613 • WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX): 144 • TIDAL DATUM: •• MHW (NAND)= +0.34' MLW NAND = -1.70' Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. `^ DESIGNED: IN, jrvc HE L S E L O �J �` DRAWNBY .17 2. Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATED: 20 12 4. JOB NO.: 20012 4. IF 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 EXISTING CONDITIONS SHEETNO.: 02OF04 5. Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 SECTION-32 TOWNSHIP— 51S RANGE-26E 17A I PROPERTY LINE EXTENSION I 15' EXISTING COVERED BOAT LIFT EXISTING WOOD DOCK PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED WOOD DOCK ADDITION .T k s g ro .20 S111A : 9N FEET RIPARIAN / LINE SETBACK PROPOSED BOAT LIFT RIPARIAN LINE NOTES: • THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE. • ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW • SURVEY COURTESY OF: "BENCHMARK LAND SURVEYORS" • SURVEY DATED: 01.11-20 • APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF): 64.99 • EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 613 • WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX): 144 • TIDAL DATUM: •• MHW (NAVD)= +0.3W • MLW (NAVD)= -1.70' • PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 36 • TOTAL OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 36 • TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL: 39 DESIGNED: NP I1 Tuffell, Hall & Associates, Inc. F � F � O C .` DRAWN D: RMJ 2 Marine & Environmental Consulting C C r` CREATED: 2001222 3. JOB NO.: 20012 14. 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 PROPOSED DOCK & LIFT SHEET NO.: 03OF04 5. _ _ Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 SECTION-32 TOWNSHIP- 51 S RANGE- 26 E ow —� — 10-20% COVERAGE 0 TYP.TRANSECT _ jrN ,, a 20 40 SO SC?1LE 9N 9 EET OUTTYPICAL DIVE TRANSECT ® PADDLEGARSS - Halophila decipiens 746 SF GLOW DESIGNED: NIP 1. Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. H E L S E L C> O C K CREATED RMJ 2 Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATED: 20 12 4. JOB NO.: 20012 4. 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 SUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY SHEET NO. 040F04 5. Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 SECTION- 32 TOWNSHIP- 51 S RANGE- 26 E GO gle Maps Waterway Width MHWL Measure distance Total distance: 144.61 ft (44.08 m) Imagery ©2022 U.S. Geological Survey, Map data ©2022 50 ft Go gle Maps _L11s r �A AlP t7,4 "4 oil x qu.'bun meow iiMM T a Measure distance Total distance: 88.40 ft (26.94 m) �s - Ri ' Y •� l• 952 ;Auj. - A Imagery ©2022 U.S. Geological Survey, Map data ©2022 50 ft 1 i