HEX Agenda 09/22/2022Collier County Hearing Examiner Page 1 Printed 9/15/2022
COLLIER COUNTY
Collier County Hearing Examiner
AGENDA
Growth Management Department
Conference Rooms 609/610
2800 Horseshoe Drive North
Naples, FL 34104
September 22, 2022
9: 00 AM
Andrew W. J. Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Note: Individual speakers will be limited to 5 minutes unless otherwise waived by the Hearing
Examiner. Persons Wishing to have written or graphic materials included in the hearing report
packets must have that material submitted to County staff at
Andrew.Youngblood@CollierCountyFL.gov 10 days prior to the Hearing. All materials used
during presentation at the hearing will become a permanent part of the record.
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of the Hearing Examiner will need a record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto, and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to
be based. Decisions of the Hearing Examiner are final unless appealed to the Board of County
Commissioners.
Hearing Procedures will provide for presentation by the Applicant, presentation by staff, public
comment and applicant rebuttal. The Hearing Examiner will render a decision within 30 days.
Persons wishing to receive a copy of the decision by mail may supply County staff with their name,
address, and a stamped, self-addressed envelope for that purpose. Persons wishing to receive an
electronic copy of the decision may supply their email address.
September 2022
Collier County Hearing Examiner Page 2 Printed 9/15/2022
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Review of Agenda
3. Advertised Public Hearing
A. Petition No. VA-PL20220004370 - Mill Run Circle - A request for approval of a variance
from Section 4.5.h of Ordinance 88-25 for the Sleepy Hollow Planned Unit Development to
reduce the west side yard setback from 10 feet to 6.89 feet; to reduce the east side yard
setback from 10 feet to 7.72 feet; and to reduce the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 8.13
feet for a screened pool enclosure. The property (Folio 29505007602) is located at 7138 Mill
Run Circle in Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Section 2 of unincorporated Collier
County, Florida, and consists of ±0.24 acres. [Coordinator: Eric Ortman, Principal Planner]
Commission District 2
B. Petition No. BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Connors Ave - Request for a 25-foot boat dock
extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than
100 feet in width, to allow construction of a boat docking facility protruding a total of 45
feet into a waterway that is 268± feet wide, pursuant to LDC Section 5.03.06. The subject
property is located at 260 Conners Avenue and is further described as Lot 14, Block R,
Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No. 3, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25
East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior Planner] Commission
District 2
4. Other Business
5. Public Comments
6. Adjourn
09/22/2022
COLLIER COUNTY
Collier County Hearing Examiner
Item Number: 3.A
Item Summary: Petition No. VA-PL20220004370 - Mill Run Circle - A request for approval of a
variance from Section 4.5.h of Ordinance 88-25 for the Sleepy Hollow Planned Unit Development to
reduce the west side yard setback from 10 feet to 6.89 feet; to reduce the east side yard setback from 10
feet to 7.72 feet; and to reduce the rear yard setback from 10 feet to 8.13 feet for a screened pool
enclosure. The property (Folio 29505007602) is located at 7138 Mill Run Circle in Township 49 South,
Range 25 East, Section 2 of unincorporated Collier County, Florida, and consists of ±0.24 acres.
[Coordinator: Eric Ortman, Principal Planner] Commission District 2
Meeting Date: 09/22/2022
Prepared by:
Title: – Zoning
Name: Rachel Hansen
08/23/2022 4:34 PM
Submitted by:
Title: Zoning Director – Zoning
Name: Mike Bosi
08/23/2022 4:34 PM
Approved By:
Review:
Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Kenneth Kovensky Review Item Completed 08/23/2022 4:58 PM
Zoning Mike Bosi Division Director Completed 08/24/2022 9:20 AM
Hearing Examiner (GMD Approvers) Diane Lynch Review Item Completed 09/01/2022 5:54 PM
Zoning James Sabo Review Item Skipped 08/31/2022 1:47 PM
Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 09/08/2022 9:56 AM
Zoning Mike Bosi Review Item Completed 09/08/2022 10:04 AM
Hearing Examiner Andrew Dickman Meeting Pending 09/22/2022 9:00 AM
3.A
Packet Pg. 3
VA-PL20220004370 (7138 Mil Run Circle)
- 1 -
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
FROM: GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SECTION
HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 22, 2022
SUBJECT: VA-PL-20220004370, 7138 MILL RUN CIRCLE,
SCREENED POOL ENCLOSURE
______________________________________________________________________________
PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT:
Owner/ Applicant: Agent:
Jeffrey Chew Smith Revocable Trust Sandra Smith
7138 Mill Run Circle 7138 Mill Run Circle
Naples, FL 34109 Naples, FL 34109
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests a variance from Section 4.5.h of Ord. No. 88-25, the Sleepy Hollow
Planned Unit Development (PUD), to reduce the west side yard setback from 10 feet to 6.89 feet;
to reduce the east side yard setback from 10 feet to 7.72 feet; and to reduce the rear yard setback
from 10 feet to 8.13 feet for a screened pool enclosure (Attachment 1).
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is at 7138 Mill Run Circle in the Sleepy Hollow PUD approximately 325 feet
southeast of the intersection of Mill Run Circle with Deerfield Circle and Manchester Circle. The
main entrance to the Sleepy Hollow PUD is at the intersection of Wellington Drive and Orange
Blossom Road which is approximately two-thirds of a mile west of the intersection of Orange
Blossom Road and Airport Road. The subject property (folio #29505007602) is identified as The
Crossings, Mill Run Lot 103 in Section 2, Township 49 South, Range 25 East consisting of ±0.24
acres in unincorporated Collier County, Florida (See location map on page 2).
3.A.a
Packet Pg. 4 Attachment: Staff Report VA-PL20220004370 7138 Mill Run Circle (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
VA-PL20220004370 (7138 Mil Run Circle)
- 2 -
3.A.aPacket Pg. 5Attachment: Staff Report VA-PL20220004370 7138 Mill Run Circle (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle
VA-PL20220004370 (7138 Mil Run Circle)
- 3 -
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The petitioner bought the home in March 2018 (Attachment 2). At the time of purchase the home
contained a lanai screen cage in disrepair. When the petitioner sought a building permit to have
the cage replaced in a like for like manner, she was denied as the existing cage encroached into
the setback at three different points. The petitioner seeks a variance to be able to replace the
existing cage with a new cage, like for like.
Plat Book 15 Page 14
3.A.a
Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: Staff Report VA-PL20220004370 7138 Mill Run Circle (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
VA-PL20220004370 (7138 Mil Run Circle)
- 4 -
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North: Single-family residences in the Sleepy Hollow PUD.
East: Newly created Palisades RPUD (Ord. 22-20), currently undeveloped; and RSF-1 District.
South: Single-family residences in the Sleepy Hollow PUD.
West: Single-family residences in the Sleepy Hollow PUD.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
The subject property has an Urban Mixed-Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict land use
classification on the County’s Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Future Land Use Element
(FLUE) of the Growth Management Plan (GMP). This land use category is designed to
accommodate residential uses including single family, multi-family, duplexes, and mobile homes.
The applicant seeks a setback variance for a pool cage which is a permitted accessory use in the
Sleepy Hollow PUD. The Growth Management Plan (GMP) focuses on the actual uses of land and
does not address individual variance requests related to land use therefore, staff concludes that the
proposed use is consistent with the Future Land Use Element.
Subject Parcel
tion
Palisades RPUD
3.A.a
Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: Staff Report VA-PL20220004370 7138 Mill Run Circle (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
VA-PL20220004370 (7138 Mil Run Circle)
- 5 -
STAFF ANALYSIS:
The decision to grant a variance is based on the criteria in LDC Section 9.04.03. Staff has analyzed
this petition relative to these criteria and offers the following responses:
a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the
location, size, and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved?
The existing pool enclosure spans the width of the back of the house. The property is pie
shaped with the rear having a lesser width than the front. Given this shape, the property was
not of sufficient width to the build the enclosure to the dimensions that it was built. The next
criterion – b - supports that the enclosure was built without a permit thereby avoiding the
width limitation.
b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of
the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which are the
subject of the variance request?
Yes, the applicant purchased the property in 2018. The pool and enclosure were built and
installed years before the petitioner bought the property. As detailed below, the screen
enclosure appears to have been built without a permit by a previous owner.
1. The building permit (#89-4885) (Attachment 3) for the original home was issued to the then
owner, Victor Mader. The permit contains zero reference to a pool.
2. A file separate from the permit (#89-4885(2)) (Attachment 4) for a proposed home contains
multiple mentions of a pool. A site plan on page two includes a pool. However, the site plan
contains no measurement for the east side setback; the west side setback figure has been
crossed out with a new number written in. A floor plan on page four includes a pool with a
note saying, “pool and spa specs by others”. There are no measurements indicating the
location of the pool with respect to the property boundaries.
3. A property card (Attachment 5) from the County Appraiser’s Office with a date of August
27, 1990 indicates the presence of a pool.
4. The current owner, the Jeffrey Chew Smith Revocable Trust, purchased the property on
March 1, 2018
c. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of the LDC work unnecessary and undue
hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant?
Yes, currently there is a pool and pool enclosure on the petitioner’s property. A literal
interpretation of the LDC would prevent the applicant from replacing the cage. The setback
issue came to light when the current homeowner applied for a building permit on July 23,
2021 (PRBD20210628472); the permit was denied as the enclosure encroached into
multiple setbacks.
d. Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of
health, safety, and welfare?
3.A.a
Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: Staff Report VA-PL20220004370 7138 Mill Run Circle (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
VA-PL20220004370 (7138 Mil Run Circle)
- 6 -
Yes, the variance, if granted, would allow for the replacement of the existing cage in the
exact same location as where the original cage currently is.
e. Will granting the variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by
these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning
district?
LDC § 9.04.02 allows relief through the variance process for any dimensional development
standard. By definition, a variance bestows dimensional relief from the land development
code regulations specific to a site. Other properties facing a similar hardship would be
entitled to make a similar request and would be conferred equal consideration on a case-by-
case basis. However, there should be no assumption that a variance of similar magnitude
would be granted.
f. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the
Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare?
Yes, granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the
Land Development Code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise
detrimental to the public welfare.
g. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals
and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf courses, etc.?
No natural or physically induced conditions have been observed that will serve to ameliorate
the goals and objectives of the LDC.
h. Will granting the variance be consistent with the GMP?
The Growth Management Plan (GMP) does not address individual variance requests related
to dimensions. Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the
GMP with respect to density, intensity, compatibility, access/connectivity, or other
applicable land use provisions except for permitting an encroachment of an accessory
structure into the west and east side yards and the rear side yard.
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION:
The EAC does not normally hear variance petitions. Since the subject variance doesn’t impact any
preserve area, the EAC did not hear this petition.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Collier County Hearing Examiner approve variance petition
VA-PL-20220004370, to reduce the west side yard setback from 10 feet to 6.89 feet; to reduce the
east side yard setback from 10 feet to 7.72 feet; and to reduce the rear yard setback from 10 feet to
8.13 feet for a screen pool enclosure at 7138 Mill Run Circle.
3.A.a
Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Staff Report VA-PL20220004370 7138 Mill Run Circle (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
VA-PL20220004370 (7138 Mil Run Circle)
- 7 -
The applicant supplied letters of no objection (Attachment 8) from each of the utility companies
that are within the public utility easement at the rear of the property. Staff recommended to the
applicant that she has official easement releases recorded with the County to maintain a clean title.
Attachments:
1. Surveys
2. Warranty Deed
3. Building Permit 89-4885
4. Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885(2)
5. Property Card
6. Applicant’s Support Documents
7. Public Notice Signs
8. Letters of No Objection from Utility Companies
3.A.a
Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Staff Report VA-PL20220004370 7138 Mill Run Circle (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Attachment 1 Surveys
#1 Shows East and West Side Yard Encroachments
#2 Shows Rear Yard Encroachment into Public Utility Easement
3.A.b
Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Attachment 1 Survey (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.bPacket Pg. 12Attachment: Attachment 1 Survey (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)West Side Yard EncroachmentEast Side YardEncroachment
Survey showing rear yard encroachment.
(This is a snipet of actual survey which is protected and cannot be manipulated into this attachment.)
3.A.b
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Attachment 1 Survey (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)Rear
Encroachment
Survey showing rear yard encroachment.
(This is a snipet of actual survey which is protected and cannot be manipulated into this attachment.)
3.A.b
Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Attachment 1 Survey (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Attachment 2 Warranty Deed
3.A.c
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Attachment 2 Warranty Deed (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Prepared without the benefit of
opinion or title examination:
Kevin R. Lottes, Esq.
9132 Shada Place, Suite 207
Naples, FL 34108
File Number:
Consideration
Parcel ID:
20 I 8-30094
s74s,930.00
2950s007602
Warranty Deed
This Indenture made tt is / day of March, 2018 between Dino C. Lauricella and
Denise L. Lauricella, husbana anO wife, *hore post office address is 6670 Huntington Lakes
Circle, #102, Naples, FL 34119, Grantor*, and Jeffrey Chew Smith, as Trustee of the Jeffrey
Chew Smith Revocable Trust dated November 30, 2015, whose post office address is 7138
Mill Run Circle, Naples, FL 34109, Granteet,
Witnesseth, that said Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars
($10.00), and other good and valuable considerations to said Grantor in hand paid by said
Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to the said
Grantee, and Grantee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and
being in Collier County, Florida:
Lot 103, The Crossings, Mill Run, according to the map or plat
thereof as recorded in Plat Book 15, Page 39, Public Records of
Collier County, Florida.
Full power and authority are hereby conferred upon the Grantee, either to protect, to conserve
and to sell, or to lease, to encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property
described herein, it being the intent to vest in Grantee, property as authorized and contemplated
by Section 689.073, Florida Statutes. Nothing herein is intended to cause the trust described
above to be construed as a land trust.
TOGETHER WITH all tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging
or in anywise appertaining.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same in fee simple forever.
GRANTOR fully warrants title to said land and will defend the same against the lawfulclaims of all persons whomsoever; except that this deed is subject to the followTng:
1 ' Real property taxes and assessments for the current and subsequent years;
2.
authority;
zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental
3.A.c
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Attachment 2 Warranty Deed (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3. Outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; and
4. Restrictions, reservations and easements common to the subdivision.
*"Grantor" and "Grantee" are used for singular or plural, as context requires.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto set Grantor 's hand and seal the day
and year first above
C
se L.
C(
Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence:
(as to both Grantors)
Witness #l - Signature
/4'..-' Z c-rtr,
Witness #1 - Printed Name
STATE OF F/o
COUNTY OF Oa// '^,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
Dino C. Lauricella and Denise L. Lauricella, who I I
have produced
-_/a
DL
Witness #2 - Signature
Witness #2 -Printed Name
this 'Z I day of February,20l8, by
are personally known to me or lJ 1
as identification.
D"n,se /4 flilJL
----.-i
(Seal)
Notary Public Signature
Notary Public Printed Name
My commission expires:lllruBonddd
i
EXPlnEgt
3.A.c
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: Attachment 2 Warranty Deed (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Attachment 3 - Original Building Permit 89-4885
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 :
3.A.d
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Attachment 3 Building Permit 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Attachment 4 – Proposed Construction Plans (89-4885-2)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.ePacket Pg. 42Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)No Pool
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.e
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Attachment 4 Proposed Construction Plans 89-4885 (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Attachment 5 Property Card
3.A.f
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Attachment 5 Property Card (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.fPacket Pg. 53Attachment: Attachment 5 Property Card (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.fPacket Pg. 54Attachment: Attachment 5 Property Card (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Attachment 6
Applicant’s Support Documents
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
cr?ift,Cownty
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
PROJECT NUMBER
PROJECT NAME
DATE PROCESSED
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
1239) 2s2-2400 FAX: (.2391 2s2-63s8
VARIANCE PETITION APPLICATION
Variance from Setbacks Required for a Particular Zoning District
LDC section 9.04.00 & Code of Laws section 2-83 - 2-90
Chapter 3 i. of the Administrative Code
Name of Property Owner(s):,]?,€r,-., Cher,. S.ni*h .,q--rl'ie Grrl .9ni+h
Name of Applicant if different than owner:
Address:ity:lVcobs state: Ft , zrp: €alrlog
APPLICANT CONTACT INFORMAT!ON
.c
Telephone:70 eAzk3 Fax:
E-MailAddress:.q".,4"4 O ur r-rQ , Orq
qJ
Name of Agent
Firm:
Address:City:State: ZlP:. _
Telephone Cell:Fax
E-MailAddress
BE AWARE THAT COLL!ER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY AND
EI.ISURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS.
4/27/2018 Page 1 of 6
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
County
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DR]VE
NAPLES, FLORTDA 34104
(2391 252-2400 FAX: (239) 2s2-63s8
PROPERTY INFORMAT!ON
Provide a detailed legal description of the property covered by the application: (lf space is
inadequate, attach on separate page)
Property l.D. Number: &Q 5 05OO 16m Section/Township/Range: d /99 / J.t
Subdivision' fine Crosst ncr Unit: _tot: tO? Block:U
Metes & Bounds Description:Total Acreage: _
Address/ General Location of Subject Property : 7l*)B 0)il I B,rt Air, l.hobs l= |
v €+rcq
ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE
Zoning Land Use
N \})b 'V,e<l A on*; ^.1stuDQi <;d o nfi aI
E })O Rosiok nlt a-Q
W Drl9 ?e:;d.o-n+ie o
Minimum Yard Requirements for Subject Property:
Front: gQ€f Corner Lot: Yes
Side: lOff, Waterfront Lot: Yes
Rear: to{t.
ruoE
ruo EI
Chapter 8 of the Administrative Code requires that the applicant must remove their public
hearing advertising sign(s) after final action is taken by the Board of County Commissioners.
Based on the Board's final action on this item, please remove all public hearing advertising
sign(s) immediately.
4127l2ot8 Page 2 of 6
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
v Coun w
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34LO4
(2391 252-2400 FAX: (239) 2s2-63s9
ASSOCTATTONS
Complete the following for all registered Association(s) that could be affected by this petition.
Provide additional sheets if necessary. lnformation can be found on the Board of County
Commissioner's website at http://www.colliergov.net/lndex.aspx?page=774.
Name of Homeowner Association
Mailing Address: 'l City State:ZIP,,
hoqd mirlron *f com
Name of Homeowner Associati on:
Mailing Address:City State: ZIP: _
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:City State: ZIP: _
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:City State: ZIP: _
Name of Homeowner Association:
Mailing Address:City State: ZlPz _
H
On a separate sheet, attached to the application, please provide the following:
1. A detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the
amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25 ft. to 18 ft.;
when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include
building permit number(s) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment
came to be; etc.
2. For projects a uthorized u nder LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of site a lterations,
including any dredging and filling.
3. pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the Hearing
Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to approve or deny a
variance petition by the criteria (a-h) listed below. Please address the following criteria:
a) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the location, size
and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved'
4127lz0t8 Page 3 of 6
NATURE OF PETITIONa-
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTM ENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34L04
(2391 2s2-2400 FAX: (239) 2s2-53s8
b) Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the
applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the
variance request.
c) Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue
hardship on the applicant or create practicaldifficulties on the applicant.
d) Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use
of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safety or welfare.
e) Willgranting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied
by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district.
f) Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not
be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
g) Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and
objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc.
h) Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan?
4. Official lnterpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there been an official
interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year?
! ves X ruo lf yes, please provide copies.
4127l2ot8 Page 4 of 6
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34TO4
(2391 2s2-2400 FAX: (239) 2s2-63s8
,a
+(.
Pre-Application Meeting and Final Submittal Requirement Checklist for:
Variance
Chapter 3 J. of the Administrative Code
The following Submittal Requirement Checklist is to be utilized during the Pre-Application Meeting and at
time of application submittal. At time of submittal, the checklist is to be completed and submitted with the
application packet, Please provide the submittal items in the exact order listed below with cover sheets
attached to each section. tncomplete submittals wilt not be accepted.
REqUIREMENTS FOR REVIEW # oF coPrEs REqUIRED NOT
REQUIRED
Completed Application (download current form from County website)n
Pre-Application Meeting Notes 1_
Project Narrative n
Completed Addressing Checklist 1_
Property Ownership Disclosure Form t
Conceptual Site Plan 24" x36" and one 8%" x 11" copy tr
Survey of property showing the encroachment (measured in feet)2
Affidavit of Aqlhorizatiol, signed and notarized 2
Deeds/Lega l's 3
Location map L
Current aerial photographs (available from Property Appraiser) with
project boundary and, ifvegetated, FLUCFCS Codes with legend
included on aerial
5 u
Historical Survey or waiver request L
Environmental Data Requirements or exemption justification 3
Once the first set of review comments ore posted, provide the assigned
planner the Property Owner Advisory Letter and Certification 1
Electronic copy of all documents and plans
*Please advise: The Office of the Hearing Examiner requires all
materials to be submitted electronically In PDF format.
t
ADDITTONAL REqUIREMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS:
. Following the completion of the review process by County review staff, the applicant shall submit all
materials electronically to the designated project manager'
. Please contact the project manager to confirm the number of additional copies required.
41271201.8
Page 5 of 6
r/-
ltltt
p1
ax
I I
ltl
Ll
lrl
lr'l
ttlt
tr
g
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
ev Qounty
COLL!ER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTM ENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34LO4
(239l. 2s2-2400 FAX: (239) 2s2-6358
Planners: lndicate if the petition needs to be routed to the following reviewers:
Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment
Executive Director tr Historical Review
City of Naples: Robin Singer, Planning Director I mmokalee Water/Sewer District
E Conservancy of SWFL: Nichole Ryan Parks and Recreation: David Berra
Emergency Management: Dan Summers; and/or
EMS; Artie Bay
School District (Residential Components): Amy
Lockh ea rt
D Other
FEE REQUIREMENTS
r
tr
!
7
Pre-Application Meeting: S500.00
Variance Petition:
o Residential-52,000.00
o Non-Residential-SS,OOO.OO
o 5th and Subsequent Review- 2O% of original fee
Estimated Legal Advertising Fee for the Office of the Hearing Examiner: Sf,fZS.OO
After The Fact Zoning/Land Use Petitions: 2x the normal petition fee
Listed Species Survey (if EIS is not required): S1,000.00
#z,l>t
Fire Code Plans Review Fees are collected ot the time of opplication submission ond those fees ore setforth by the
Authority hoving jurisdiction. The Land Development Code requires Neighborhood Notificotion mailers for
Applicotions headed to heoring, ond this fee is collected prior to hearing.
As the authorized agent/applicant 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.
The completed application, all required submittal materials, and the permit fee shall be submitted to:
Growth Management Department
Zoning Division
ATTN: Business Center
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
App licant S n ature
Printed Name
All checks poyoble to: Board of County Commissioners
4127120L8
,th Date
Page 6 of 6
tr
tr
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Nature of Petition
Replace exiting lanai screen cage
7138 Mill Run Circle
Naples, Florida 34109
I purchased this property in March 2018 with an existing lanai screen cage that was in need of
replacement. The project is to replace the cage exactly as it exist and in the same location. Existing
encroachments were the results of the previous owners and have been addressed by the various
entities. lt is my understand that the prior owners did not obtain a permit for this structure and that is
why I am seeking a permit and a variance.
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.gPacket Pg. 66Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)East Side YardEncroachmentWest Side Yard Encroachment
Survey showing rear yard encroachment.
(This is a snipet of actual survey which is protected and cannot be manipulated into this attachment.)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)Rear
Encroachment
Survey showing rear yard encroachment.
(This is a snipet of actual survey which is protected and cannot be manipulated into this attachment.)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Prepared without the benefit of
opinion or title examination:
Kevin R. Lottes, Esq.
9132 Shada Place, Suite 207
Naples, FL 34108
File Number:
Consideration
Parcel ID:
20 I 8-30094
s74s,930.00
2950s007602
Warranty Deed
This Indenture made tt is / day of March, 2018 between Dino C. Lauricella and
Denise L. Lauricella, husbana anO wife, *hore post office address is 6670 Huntington Lakes
Circle, #102, Naples, FL 34119, Grantor*, and Jeffrey Chew Smith, as Trustee of the Jeffrey
Chew Smith Revocable Trust dated November 30, 2015, whose post office address is 7138
Mill Run Circle, Naples, FL 34109, Granteet,
Witnesseth, that said Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars
($10.00), and other good and valuable considerations to said Grantor in hand paid by said
Grantee, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained and sold to the said
Grantee, and Grantee's heirs and assigns forever, the following described land, situate, lying and
being in Collier County, Florida:
Lot 103, The Crossings, Mill Run, according to the map or plat
thereof as recorded in Plat Book 15, Page 39, Public Records of
Collier County, Florida.
Full power and authority are hereby conferred upon the Grantee, either to protect, to conserve
and to sell, or to lease, to encumber, or otherwise to manage and dispose of the real property
described herein, it being the intent to vest in Grantee, property as authorized and contemplated
by Section 689.073, Florida Statutes. Nothing herein is intended to cause the trust described
above to be construed as a land trust.
TOGETHER WITH all tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging
or in anywise appertaining.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the same in fee simple forever.
GRANTOR fully warrants title to said land and will defend the same against the lawfulclaims of all persons whomsoever; except that this deed is subject to the followTng:
1 ' Real property taxes and assessments for the current and subsequent years;
2.
authority;
zoning, building code and other use restrictions imposed by governmental
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3. Outstanding oil, gas and mineral interests of record, if any; and
4. Restrictions, reservations and easements common to the subdivision.
*"Grantor" and "Grantee" are used for singular or plural, as context requires.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Grantor has hereunto set Grantor 's hand and seal the day
and year first above
C
se L.
C(
Signed, sealed and delivered in our presence:
(as to both Grantors)
Witness #l - Signature
/4'..-' Z c-rtr,
Witness #1 - Printed Name
STATE OF F/o
COUNTY OF Oa// '^,
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
Dino C. Lauricella and Denise L. Lauricella, who I I
have produced
-_/a
DL
Witness #2 - Signature
Witness #2 -Printed Name
this 'Z I day of February,20l8, by
are personally known to me or lJ 1
as identification.
D"n,se /4 flilJL
----.-i
(Seal)
Notary Public Signature
Notary Public Printed Name
My commission expires:lllruBonddd
i
EXPlnEgt
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
-[^c,&E;Y Count3t
Growth Management Department
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and email to GMD-Addressing@colliercountyfl.gov or submit in person to the Addressing Section
attheaddresslistedbelow.ThisformmustbesignedbyAddressingpersonnel priortothepre-applicationmeeting.pleaseallow
3 business days for processing.
Not all items will apply to every project. ltems in bold are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE PROVIDED. Forms older than 6
months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section.
PETITION TYPE (lndicate type below. Complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type).
! BL (Blasting Permit) E SDp (Site Devetopment plan)
E BD (Boat Dock Extension) E SOpn (SDp Amendment)
E Carnival/Circus Permit E SOpt (lnsubstantial Change to SDp)
E CU (Conditional Use Permit) f]Stp (Site lmprovement plan)
E eXp (Excavation Permit) E Stet (tnsubstantial Change to Slp)
E FP (Final Plat) E Srun (Street Name Change)
E t-t-R (Lot Line Adjustment) f] sNc (street Name change - Unplatted)
E PNC (Project Name Change) ! fOn (Transfer of Development Rights)
E ppt (plans & Plat Review) AVA (Variance)
E eSe (ereliminary Subdivision Plat) f]Vnp (Vegetation Removal permit)
E puo Rezone f]vnsrp (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill permit)
lnZ (Standard Rezone) nOfHen
LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
CROSSINGS THE, MILL RUN LOT 103
FOLIO (Property lD) Number(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
29s05007602
STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned)
7138 MILL RUN CIR
o LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-of-way
o SURVEY (copy - only needed for unplatted properties)
CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable)
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only)
sDP---orARor Pt* Zo-zZooO *31 D
Addressi ng Checklist (Rev 12/ 20211 Page 1 of 2
Operations & Regulatory Management Division o 2800 North Horseshoe Drive r Naples, FL 34104 c 239-252-2400
www.colliercountyfl.qov
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Qovmty
Growth Management Department
Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application, indicate whether
proposed or existlng)
Please Return Approved Checklist By: IEmail @Personally picked up
Applicant Name: Sandra Corry Smith
Phone: (410) 570-2343 Email: sandra@wpa.org
Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by
the Operations Division.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Folio Number Z15c5cc1 Qc Z
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
-il.** rn-,t/cL.*G- t1-zz-Approved by:
Updated by:
Date:
Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR A NEW FORM SUBMITTED.
Addressing Checklist (Rev 1212021)Page 2 of 2
Operations & Regulatory Management Division o 2800 North Horseshoe Drive o Naples, FL 34104 c 239-252-2400
www.colliercountvfl .qov
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Collier County Property Appraiser
Property Summary
Site
Address*DisclaimerParcel No 29505007602
JEFFREY CHEW SMITH REV TRUST
7138 MILL RUN CIRCLE
City NAPLES
7138 MtLL
RUN CIR Site City NAPLES Site Zone*Note
State FL
Township
49
341 09
Zlp 34109
Acres *Estimated
o.24
Name / Address
Map No.
4AOZ
Strap No. Section
255600 1034A02 2
Range
25
Legal CROSSINGS THE, MILL RUN LOT 103
Millage Area o 133
Sub./Condo 256600 - CROSSINGS THE, MILL RUN
Use Code o 1 - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
Latest Sales History
(Not all Sales are listed due to Confidentiality)
Date Book-Page Amount
o3/o1/18 5482-3095 $ 746,000
03/13/09 4438-3440 $ 445,000
08/16/04 3626-1280 $ 460,000
02/11/98 2388-398 $ 293,000
09/12/94 1984-494 $ O
02/01/89 1419-1312 $ O
o2/o1/89 1419-1 31 0 $ 69,900
Millage Rates O *Calculations
School Other Total
4.889 6.0293 10.9183
2021 Certified Tax Roll
(Subject to Change)
Land Value $ 109,544
(+) tmproved Value $ 388,45G
1=1 Market Value $ 49g,O0O
1=; Assessed Vatue $ 4gg,OOO
1=1 School Taxable Vatue $ 4gg,000
1=; Taxable Value $ 4gg,000
!f all Values shown above equal 0 this parcel was created after the
FinalTax Roll
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
er County
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
lvww.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34LO4
1239l, 2s2-2400 FAX: (239) 2s2-63s8
PROPERTY OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM
This is a required form with all land use petitions, except for Appeals and Zoning Verification
Letters.
Should any changes of ownership or changes in contracts for purchase occur subsequent to the
date of application, but prior to the date of the final public hearing, it is the responsibility of the
applicant, or agent on his behalf, to submit a supplemental disclosure of interest form.
Please complete the following, use additional sheets if necessary.
a. lf the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL. tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in
common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the
percenta of such interest
b. lf the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the
percent e of stock owned each
lf the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the
percent of interest
7
Name and Address % of Ownership
Name and Address % of Ownership
% of OwnershiName and Address
i I
716 6 ctr,a
I
Created 9/2 Page 1 of 3
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
r Coun w
COTLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORTDA 34LO4
(2391 2s2-2400 FAX: (2391 2s2-53s8
d. lf the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the
general andf or limited rtners:
e lf there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation,
Trustee, or a Partnership, list the names of the contract purchasers below, including the
officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or rtners
Date of Contract:
lf any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or
officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust:
Name and Address
g Date subject property acquired
! teased: Term of lease years /months
lf, Petitioner has option to buy, indicate the following:
f
Name and Address % of Ownership
Name and Address % of Ownership
Created 9/28/20t7 Page 2 of 3
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)Sandra you need to add the date the property was acquired (from
deed, 3/1/18 we can't do it for you.
r Coun ty
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEM ENT DEPARTM ENT
www.colliergov.net
28OO NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34LO4
(239!' 2s2-2400 FAX: (239) 2s2-63s8
7-7-A2
Date
Date option terminates: _, or
Anticipated closing date:
AFFIRM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP INFORMATION
Any petition required to have Property Ownership Disclosure, will not be accepted without this form.
Requirements for petition types are located on the associated application form. Any change in ownership whether
individually or with a Trustee, Company or other interest-holding party, must be disclosed to Collier County
immediately if such change occurs prior to the petition's final public hearing.
As the authorized agent/applicant 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.
The completed application, all required submittal materials, and fees shall be submitted to:
Growth Management Department
ATTN: Business Center
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
.E"^O- &.- W
Agent/Owner Signature
SroAo^, S^i$4r
Agent/Owner Name (please print)
Created 9/28/2017 Page 3 of 3
L.-,
Date of option:
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
AFFIDAVIT OF AUTHORIZATION
FOR PETIT|ON NUMBERS(S) PLfffffffffff
(print name), as TEs (title, if
applicable) of JEFFREY CHEW SMITH REV TRUST
under oath, that I am the (choose one)applicant [-_lcontract purch
ny, lf applicable), swear or affirm
asernand that:
1. I have full authority to secure the approval(s) requested and to impose covenants and restrictions on
the referenced property as a result of any action approved by the County in accordance with this
application and the Land Development Code;2. All answers to the questions in this application and any sketches, data or other supplementary matter
attached hereto and made a part of this application are honest and true;3. I have authorized the staff of Collier County to enter upon the property during normal working hours
for the purpose of investigating and evaluating the request made through this application; and that4. The property will be transferred, conveyed, sold or subdivided subject to the conditions and
restrictions imposed by the approved qction
We/l authorize (,e\C
(compa
tr to act as our/my representative
in any matters regarding this petition including 1 through 2 above.
Wofes:. lf the applicant is a corporation, then it is usually executed by the corp. pres. or v. pres.. lf the applicant is a Limited Liability Company (L.L.C.) or Limited Company (L.C.), then the documents shoutd
typically be signed by the Company's "Managing Member.". lf the applicant is a parinership, then typically a paftner can sign on behalf of the partnership.t lf the applicant is a limited partnership, then the general partner must sign and be identified as the "general
partner" of the named paftnership.. lf the applicant rs a frust, then they must include the trustee's name and the words "as trLtstee".. ln each instance, first determine the applicant's stafus, e.g., individual, corporate, trust, partnership, and then
use the appropriate format for that ownership.
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing Affidavit of Authorization and that
the facts stated in it are true.
a-aa -&J
Sign Date
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
gin ment was acknowleged before me by means of nce or flonline notarization this
zo-ry by (printed name of owner or
Such person(s)Public must check applicable box:
fl Rru personally known to me
!(Hrt produced a current drivers license
fl Has produced
Notary Signature:
cP\08-coA-001 l5\155
REV 3/4/2020
HOLLY CHERNOFF
MY CoMMTSSTON I GG 27 1311
EXPIRES: January 1,2023
Eonded Thru Pubfic Undenxrlters
as identification
I,Snnr.hr Co... (*+r
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)PL20220004370
1
VelascoJessica
From:OrtmanEric
Sent:Friday, June 17, 2022 2:33 PM
To:VelascoJessica
Subject:RE: PL20220004370 - 7138 MILL RUN CIR (VA)
Jessica,
Yes, please waive the pre-app requirement. I have met with her; the project is straightforward, a full variance for
encroachment of a screened enclosure.
Respectfully,
Eric
Collier County Growth Management Department
Principal Planner, Zoning Division
2800 North Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Direct line: (239) 252-1032
Eric.Ortman@colliercountyfl.gov
Visit our Webiste at: WWW.COLLIERCOUNTYFL.GOV
Tell us how we are doing by taking our Zoning Division Survey at http://bit.ly/CollierZoning.
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a
public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
Information contained in this email is subject to verification by the Zoning Manager and/or Planning Director; if this
information is being used as a basis for the purchase/lease of a property or as a guide for the design of a project, it is
recommended that a Zoning Verification Letter or Zoning Certificate Application is submitted to zoning services.
Applications for a Zoning Verification Letter can be found
here: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/home/showdocument?id=69624
Zoning Certificate applications can be found here: https://www.colliercountyfl.gov/your-government/divisions-f-
r/operations-regulatory-management/zoning-or-land-use-application/zoning-other-land-use-applications .
From: VelascoJessica <Jessica.Velasco@colliercountyfl.gov>
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 1:36 PM
To: OrtmanEric <Eric.Ortman@colliercountyfl.gov>
Subject: PL20220004370 - 7138 MILL RUN CIR (VA)
Hi Eric,
I am working with Sandra on her Variance for 7138 MILL RUN CIR (VA) for her screen enclosure. Applicant is requesting a
pre app meeting waiver as she has had one on one’s with staff and knows what to submit. Are you ok with waiving the
pre app requirement?
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
2
Respectfully,
Jessica Velasco
Client Services, Project Coordinator
Operations and Regulatory Management Division
“We’re committed to your success!”
Jessica.velasco@colliercountyfl.gov
2800 N. Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
Telephone (239) 252-2584
Visit our website at: www.colliercountyfl.gov
NOTE: Email Address Has Changed
2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples Florida 34104
Client Services: 239.252.1036 Phone: 239.252.2584
How are we doing?
The Operations & Regulatory Management Division wants to hear from you! Please take our online SURVEY.
We appreciate your feedback!
Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a
public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing.
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Nature of Petition Questions (from application).
1. A detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is
proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front
setback from 25 ft. to 18 ft.; when property owner purchased property; when existing
principal structure was built (include building permit number(s) if possible); why
encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to be; etc.
The petitioner bought the home in March 2018. At the time of purchase the home contained a lanai
screen cage in disrepair. When the petitioner sought a building permit to have the cage replaced in
a like for like manner, she was denied as the existing cage encroaches into the setback at three
different points. The three encroachments are east side yard (reduce from 10’ to 7.72’); west side
yard (reduce from 10’ to 6.89); and rear yard (reduce from 10’ to 8.13’).
2. For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide a detailed description of
site alterations, including any dredging and filling.
There will be no site alternations; project is a like-for-like replacement of a screen closure. There
will be no dredging or filling.
3. Pursuant to LDC section 9.04.00, staff shall be guided in their recommendation to the
Hearing Examiner, and the Hearing Examiner shall be guided in the determination to
approve or deny a variance petition by the criteria (a-h) listed below. Please address
the following criteria:
a) Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar to the
location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved?
The existing pool enclosure spans the width of the back of the house. The property is pie
shaped with the rear having a lesser width than the front. Given this shape, the property was
not of sufficient width to the build the enclosure to the dimensions that it was built without
encroaching into the setbacks. Research of the records leads staff to believe that the
enclosure was built without a permit by a former owner.
b) Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action
of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the
subject of the variance request.
Yes, the applicant purchased the property in 2018. The pool and screen enclosure were built and
installed years before the petitioner bought the property.
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
c) Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary
and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the
applicant?
Yes, currently there is a pool and pool enclosure on the petitioner’s property. A literal
interpretation of the LDC would prevent the applicant from replacing the cag; and would require
building a smaller screen enclosure which would require removal of part of the concrete slab
which may lead to removing the entire slab and starting from zero.
d) Will the variance, if granted, be the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of
health, safety or welfare.
Yes, the variance, if granted, would allow for the replacement of the existing cage in the exact
same location as where the original cage currently is.
e) Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege
that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in
the same zoning district.
LDC § 9.04.02 allows relief through the variance process for any dimensional development
standard. By definition, a variance bestows dimensional relief from the land development code
regulations specific to a site. Other properties facing a similar hardship would be entitled to make
a similar request and would be conferred equal consideration on a case-by-case basis. However,
there should be no assumption that a variance of similar magnitude would be granted.
f) Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning
code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the
public welfare.
Yes, granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Land
Development Code and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the
public welfare.
g) Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the
goals and objectives of the regulation such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course,
etc.
No natural or physically induced conditions have been observed that will serve to ameliorate the
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
goals and objectives of the LDC.
h) Will granting the variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan?
The Growth Management Plan (GMP) does not address individual variance requests related to
dimensions. Approval of this variance will not affect or change the requirements of the GMP with
respect to density, intensity, compatibility, access/connectivity, or other applicable land use
provisions with the exception of permitting an encroachment of an accessory structure into the
front yard facing 7th Street.
4. Official Interpretations or Zoning Verifications: To your knowledge, has there
been an official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within
the last year?
No
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.gPacket Pg. 83Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
1
ID GIS_FLN_NUM FOLIOADDRESSTYPE NAME1 NAME2 NAME6
1 236480009 00236480009UDIXON ET AL, PEARLIN 6785 YARBERRY LN NAPLES, FL 34109---7821
2 237000006 00237000006UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---0
3 237040008 00237040008UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD STE 100 SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---0
4 237080000 00237080000UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD STE 100 SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---0
5 237280004 00237280004UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD STE 100 SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---0
6 238440306 00238440306UNAPLES GULFSHORE CONGREGATIONJEHOVAH'S WITNESSES INC NAPLES, FL 34109---7821
7 238447008 00238447008UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---0
8 25118020041 25118020041ULB ORANGE BLOSSOM LLC 2210 VANDERBILT BCH RD #1300 NAPLES, FL 34109---0
9 25118020083 25118020083ULB ORANGE BLOSSOM LLC 2210 VANDERBILT BCH RD #1300 NAPLES, FL 34109---0
10 25118020300 25118020300UFINLEY, STEPHEN C & CAROL M 5 IVY LANE VILLANOVA, PA 19085---0
11 25118020326 25118020326ULB ORANGE BLOSSOM LLC 2210 VANDERBILT BCH RD #1300 NAPLES, FL 34109---0
12 29505000104 29505000104UCOMMUNITY ASSOC FOR MILL RUNCOLLIER CTY INC NAPLES, FL 34109---0
13 29505002005 29505002005UCOMM ASSOC FOR STONEGATE ANDMILL RUN COLLIER CTY INC, THE NAPLES, FL 34103---8901
14 29505004650 29505004650UMAZZEI, DON J & MARILYN S 9706 SOUTH PARK CIRCLE FAIRFAX, VA 22039---0
15 29505004702 29505004702UKINNEAR, ROBIN ANTHONY MARIE E KINNEAR NAPLES, FL 34109---7214
16 29505004757 29505004757ULOERZEL, PETER J ANGELA K BRAUN-LOERZEL NAPLES, FL 34109---0
17 29505004809 29505004809UDOUGHERTY, CHARLES & PATRICIA188 S BENJAMIN DR WEST CHESTER, PA 19382---1934
18 29505004854 29505004854USPROWLS, BRADLEY & GABRIELLA 7109 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7218
19 29505004906 29505004906UGESDORF, ROBERT S & SHERI L SHERI L GESDORF TRUST NAPLES, FL 34109---7218
20 29505004951 29505004951UKAHLE, KAREN A 7133 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---0
21 29505005002 29505005002UKOVACS, RICHARD & JULIA 7141 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7218
22 29505005057 29505005057UREILLY REVOCABLE TRUST 7149 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7218
23 29505005109 29505005109UJOHNSON, A MICHAEL & CELINE S 7157 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7218
24 29505005154 29505005154UKORN, JASON H & SANDRA S 7165 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7218
25 29505005206 29505005206UMILLER, JAMES A STACY A BYERS NAPLES, FL 34109---7222
26 29505005251 29505005251UPOPPENWIMER, LINDA S B ANNE BURHANS NAPLES, FL 34109---7222
27 29505005303 29505005303UCARROLL, ROBERT E & NICOLE M 2009 DEERFIELD CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34109---0
28 29505005358 29505005358UVAN DER HEYDEN, TERRY R BRENDA K VAN DER HEYDEN NAPLES, FL 34109---7222
29 29505005400 29505005400UCARROLL, RAYMOND E PATRICIA M CARROLL NAPLES, FL 34109---7222
30 29505005455 29505005455UTANGHE, BRYAN M & KAROLINA 2003 DEERFIELD CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34109---0
31 29505005507 29505005507UDUZICK REVOCABLE TRUST 2001 DEERFIELD CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---0
32 29505005552 29505005552UGLAMYAN, RUBEN G & ANI M 7193 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7219
33 29505006700 29505006700UTOMSIC, LAWRENCE W 7186 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---0
34 29505006755 29505006755UWESSELS, ALBERT H & PHILIPPA 1919 MANCHESTER CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---0
35 29505006807 29505006807URUBENS, ARTHUR J JOHNSON, REBECCA L NAPLES, FL 34109---0
36 29505006852 29505006852UCASOLA, ROBERT & JUDITH 58366 OVERSEAS HWY MARATHON, FL 33050---0
37 29505007259 29505007259UCAVALIERE, MICHAEL & MEAGHAN 1912 MANCHESTER CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---0
38 29505007301 29505007301UKENEFICK, PETER EMMETT RUTH DOLORES KENEFICK EDINA, MN 55439---0
39 29505007356 29505007356UTHERESA A GARLOCK REV TRUST 1916 MANCHESTER CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7221
40 29505007408 29505007408U6001 TAYLOR LLC 6001 TAYLOR RD NAPLES, FL 34109---0
41 29505007453 29505007453UTHOMAS TR, JERRY W JERRY THOMAS TRUST NAPLES, FL 34109---0
42 29505007505 29505007505UW SCOTT ECKELS REV TRUST KAREN A KIRKPATRICK REV TRUSTNAPLES, FL 34109---0
43 29505007550 29505007550UPHYLLIS ANN FINNEGAN TRUST 7150 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7215
44 29505007602 29505007602UJEFFREY CHEW SMITH REV TRUST7138 MILL RUN CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34109---0
45 29505007657 29505007657URACKE, JOSEPH C 7126 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7215
46 29505007709 29505007709ULATERRA, JOSEPH & KRISTINE 7114 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7215
47 29505007754 29505007754UCLEELAND, BYRON T & KATHLEEN T7102 MILL RUN CIR NAPLES, FL 34109---7215
48 29505007806 29505007806USPARS, DARLENE J 7088 MILL RUN CIRCLE NAPLES, FL 34109---0
49 29505007851 29505007851UJOHNSON TR, JACK V & GINA JACK VICTOR JOHNSON TRUST PRAIRIE VIEW, IL 60069---2002
50 29505007903 29505007903UGATCHELL, DAVID D & JULIE N 1011 W 103 STREET KANSAS CITY, MO 64114---0
Notice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data
to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.
POList_500 22.xls
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
7138 MILL RUN CIR (VA)
Petition Type: Variance
Petition No.: PL20220004370
Planner Name: Eric Ortman
Phone: (239) 252-1032
Hearing Examiner:
Date: 09/22/2022
Time: 09:00 AM
Location: GMD Conference Room 609/610
2800 N. Horseshoe Dr, Naples, FL 34104
This is to advise you of an upcoming public hearing
because you may have interest in the proceedings,
or you own property located near the vicinity of the
following property.
For more information, or to register to participate
remotely:
https://bit.ly/Public_Hearings
*Remote participation is provided as a courtesy and
is at the user’s risk. The County is not responsible
for technical issues.
For difficulties registering please call Thomas Clarke
at (239) 252-2526 or email to
Thomas.Clarke@CollierCountyFL.Gov.
Meeting information: Individual speakers may be
limited to five (5) minutes on any item. Persons
wishing to have written or graphic materials included
in the agenda packets must submit materials a
minimum of ten (10) days prior to the respective
public hearing, to the county staff member noted
above. All material used in presentations before the
Hearing Examiner will become a permanent part of
the record.
As to any petition upon which the Hearing Examiner
takes action, an aggrieved petitioner may appeal
such final action. Such appeal shall be filed per
Section 2-88 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances within 30 days of the decision by the
Hearing Examiner. An aggrieved non-party may
appeal a decision by the Hearing Examiner to the
Circuit Court of Collier County within 30 days of the
decision. In the event that the petition has been
approved by the Hearing Examiner, the applicant
shall be advised that he/she proceeds with
construction at his/her own risk during this 30-day
period. Any construction work completed ahead of
the approval authorization shall be at their own risk.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any
accommodation in order to participate in this
proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the
provision of certain assistance. Please contact the
Zoning Division, located at 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr,
Naples, FL 34104, (239) 252-2400, at least two (2)
days prior to the meeting. Assisted listening devices
for the hearing impaired are available upon request.
This petition and other pertinent information related
to this petition is kept on file and may be reviewed at
the Growth Management Department building
located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive, Naples,
Florida 34104.
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Hearing Examiner to consider the following:
PETITION NO. VA-PL20220004370 – A REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE FROM
SECTION 4.5.h OF ORDINANCE 88-25 FOR THE SLEEPY HOLLOW PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT TO REDUCE THE WEST SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 6.89
FEET; TO REDUCE THE EAST SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 7.72 FEET; AND
TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 8.13 FEET FOR A SCREENED
POOL ENCLOSURE. THE PROPERTY (FOLIO 29505007602) IS LOCATED AT 7138 MILL RUN
CIRCLE IN TOWNSHIP 49 SOUTH, RANGE 25 EAST, SECTION 2 OF UNINCORPORATED
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AND CONSISTS OF ±0.24 ACRES.
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
MillRunCI
RMillRunCI
RWellin g t onDROrange Bl ossom DR
MillRunCI
RYarberry LNFairfaxCIR
AnthonyCT
Arbour Walk CIR
New
Haven
CIR!I
ProjectLocation
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 87
Building Permit #89-4885
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Proposed Construction Plans #89-4885(2)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.gPacket Pg. 112Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.g
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Attachment 6 Applicants Support Documents (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Attachment 7
Public Notice and Advertising
3.A.h
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Variance (VA) 7138 Mill Run Circle Petition No. PL-20220004370 HEX: September 22, 2022 – 9 A.M. Growth Management Building 2800 Horseshoe Dr. N., Naples, FL. 34104 Planner: Eric Ortman 239-252-1032 3.A.hPacket Pg. 123Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.hPacket Pg. 124Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.hPacket Pg. 125Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.hPacket Pg. 126Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
MillRunCI
RMillRunCI
RWellin g t onDROrange Bl ossom DR
MillRunCI
RYarberry LNFairfaxCIR
AnthonyCT
Arbour Walk CIR
New
Haven
CIR!I
ProjectLocation
3.A.h
Packet Pg. 127
1ID GIS_FLN_NUM FOLIOADDRESSTYPENAME1 NAME2NAME3NAME4NAME5LEGAL1LEGAL2LEGAL3LEGAL4SECTIONTOWNSHIPRANGEBLOCKBLDGLOTUNITNAME61 23648000900236480009UDIXON ET AL, PEARLIN 6785 YARBERRY LN2 49 25 N1/2 OF N1/2 OF NW1/4OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4 LESS E 30FT24925006NAPLES, FL 34109---78212 23700000600237000006UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD SUITE 1002 49 25 N1/2 OF S1/2 OF NW1/4OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4 LESS E30FTFOR R/W OR 257 PG 729, LESSW100FT OF E275FT OF S133FT...24925017SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---03 23704000800237040008UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD STE 1002 49 25 W1/2 OF N1/2 OF N1/2OF SW1/4 OF SW1/4 OF SE1/41.56 AC OR 735 PG 138224925018SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---04 23708000000237080000UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD STE 1002 49 25 S1/2 OF N1/2 OF SW1/4OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4, LESS E30FT R/W249250181SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---05 23728000400237280004UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD STE 1002 49 25 S1/2 OF S1/2 OF NW1/4OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4, LESS E30FT ROW249250220SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---06 23844030600238440306UNAPLES GULFSHORE CONGREGATIONJEHOVAH'S WITNESSES INC6755 YARBERRY LN2 49 25 S 202.70FT OF N1/2 OFNW1/4 OF SW1/4 OF SE1/4 LESSE 30FT24925054NAPLES, FL 34109---78217 23844700800238447008UYARBERRY PARTNERS LLC 259 TURNPIKE RD SUITE 1002 49 25 THAT PORTION OF N1/2OF S1/2 OF NW1/4 OF SW1/4 OFSE1/4 DESC AS: WEST 100FT OFEAST 275FT OF S133FT TOGETHER24925067SOUTHBOROUGH, MA 01772---08 2511802004125118020041ULB ORANGE BLOSSOM LLC 2210 VANDERBILT BCH RD #1300CAMBRIDGE PARK AT ORANGEBLOSSOM TRACT OS224925TOS21NAPLES, FL 34109---09 2511802008325118020083ULB ORANGE BLOSSOM LLC 2210 VANDERBILT BCH RD #1300CAMBRIDGE PARK AT ORANGEBLOSSOM TRACT P124925TRP11NAPLES, FL 34109---010 2511802030025118020300UFINLEY, STEPHEN C & CAROL M 5 IVY LANECAMBRIDGE PARK AT ORANGEBLOSSOM LOT 102492510VILLANOVA, PA 19085---011 2511802032625118020326ULB ORANGE BLOSSOM LLC 2210 VANDERBILT BCH RD #1300CAMBRIDGE PARK AT ORANGEBLOSSOM LOT 112492511NAPLES, FL 34109---012 2950500010429505000104UCOMMUNITY ASSOC FOR MILL RUNCOLLIER CTY INC% ABILITY MANAGEMENT6736 LONE OAK BLVDCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUN;WELLINGTON DRIVE, MILL RUNCIRCLE, FAIRFAX CIRCLE, MAN-CHESTER CIRCLE, DEERFIELD24925ROAD1NAPLES, FL 34109---013 2950500200529505002005UCOMM ASSOC FOR STONEGATE ANDMILL RUN COLLIER CTY INC, THE% SW PROPERTY MANAGEMENT CORP1044 CASTELLO DRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNTRACT D24925D1NAPLES, FL 34103---890114 2950500465029505004650UMAZZEI, DON J & MARILYN S 9706 SOUTH PARK CIRCLECROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 442492544FAIRFAX, VA 22039---015 2950500470229505004702UKINNEAR, ROBIN ANTHONY MARIE E KINNEAR7073 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 45 OR 1979 PG 5902492545NAPLES, FL 34109---721416 2950500475729505004757ULOERZEL, PETER J ANGELA K BRAUN-LOERZEL7085 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 46 OR 1807 PG 6712492546NAPLES, FL 34109---017 2950500480929505004809UDOUGHERTY, CHARLES & PATRICIA188 S BENJAMIN DRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 472492547WEST CHESTER, PA 19382---193418 2950500485429505004854USPROWLS, BRADLEY & GABRIELLA7109 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 48 OR 1643 PG 15902492548NAPLES, FL 34109---721819 2950500490629505004906UGESDORF, ROBERT S & SHERI L SHERI L GESDORF TRUST7121 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 492492549NAPLES, FL 34109---721820 2950500495129505004951UKAHLE, KAREN A 7133 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 502492550NAPLES, FL 34109---021 2950500500229505005002UKOVACS, RICHARD & JULIA 7141 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 512492551NAPLES, FL 34109---721822 2950500505729505005057UREILLY REVOCABLE TRUST 7149 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUN LOT 522492552NAPLES, FL 34109---721823 2950500510929505005109UJOHNSON, A MICHAEL & CELINE S 7157 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 532492553NAPLES, FL 34109---721824 2950500515429505005154UKORN, JASON H & SANDRA S 7165 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 542492554NAPLES, FL 34109---721825 2950500520629505005206UMILLER, JAMES A STACY A BYERS2006 DEERFIELD CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 552492555NAPLES, FL 34109---722226 2950500525129505005251UPOPPENWIMER, LINDA S B ANNE BURHANS2008 DEERFIELD CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 562492556NAPLES, FL 34109---722227 2950500530329505005303UCARROLL, ROBERT E & NICOLE M 2009 DEERFIELD CIRCLECROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 57 OR 1859 PG 8652492557NAPLES, FL 34109---028 2950500535829505005358UVAN DER HEYDEN, TERRY R BRENDA K VAN DER HEYDEN2007 DEERFIELD CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 58 OR 1415 PG 22362492558NAPLES, FL 34109---722229 2950500540029505005400UCARROLL, RAYMOND E PATRICIA M CARROLL2005 DEERFIELD CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 592492559NAPLES, FL 34109---722230 2950500545529505005455UTANGHE, BRYAN M & KAROLINA 2003 DEERFIELD CIRCLECROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 602492560NAPLES, FL 34109---031 2950500550729505005507UDUZICK REVOCABLE TRUST 2001 DEERFIELD CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUN LOT 612492561NAPLES, FL 34109---032 2950500555229505005552UGLAMYAN, RUBEN G & ANI M 7193 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 62 OR 1896 PG 19032492562NAPLES, FL 34109---721933 2950500670029505006700UTOMSIC, LAWRENCE W 7186 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUN LOT 852492585NAPLES, FL 34109---034 2950500675529505006755UWESSELS, ALBERT H & PHILIPPA 1919 MANCHESTER CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 862492586NAPLES, FL 34109---035 2950500680729505006807URUBENS, ARTHUR J JOHNSON, REBECCA L1917 MANCHESTER CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 872492587NAPLES, FL 34109---036 2950500685229505006852UCASOLA, ROBERT & JUDITH 58366 OVERSEAS HWYCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 882492588MARATHON, FL 33050---037 2950500725929505007259UCAVALIERE, MICHAEL & MEAGHAN1912 MANCHESTER CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 962492596NAPLES, FL 34109---038 2950500730129505007301UKENEFICK, PETER EMMETT RUTH DOLORES KENEFICK6809 DAKOTA TRAILCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 972492597EDINA, MN 55439---039 2950500735629505007356UTHERESA A GARLOCK REV TRUST 1916 MANCHESTER CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 982492598NAPLES, FL 34109---722140 2950500740829505007408U6001 TAYLOR LLC 6001 TAYLOR RDCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 99 OR 1693 PG 17962492599NAPLES, FL 34109---041 2950500745329505007453UTHOMAS TR, JERRY W JERRY THOMAS TRUSTUTD 08/22/081920 MANCHESTER CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 100 OR 1967 PG 222124925100NAPLES, FL 34109---042 2950500750529505007505UW SCOTT ECKELS REV TRUSTKAREN A KIRKPATRICK REV TRUST7158 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10124925101NAPLES, FL 34109---043 2950500755029505007550UPHYLLIS ANN FINNEGAN TRUST 7150 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10224925102NAPLES, FL 34109---721544 2950500760229505007602UJEFFREY CHEW SMITH REV TRUST7138 MILL RUN CIRCLECROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10324925103NAPLES, FL 34109---045 2950500765729505007657URACKE, JOSEPH C 7126 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10424925104NAPLES, FL 34109---721546 2950500770929505007709ULATERRA, JOSEPH & KRISTINE 7114 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10524925105NAPLES, FL 34109---721547 2950500775429505007754UCLEELAND, BYRON T & KATHLEEN T7102 MILL RUN CIRCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10624925106NAPLES, FL 34109---721548 2950500780629505007806USPARS, DARLENE J 7088 MILL RUN CIRCLECROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10724925107NAPLES, FL 34109---049 2950500785129505007851UJOHNSON TR, JACK V & GINA JACK VICTOR JOHNSON TRUSTGINA MARIE JOHNSON TRUSTUTD 10/26/06 BOTH16460 W KINGSTON CTCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 108 OR 1994 PG 174024925108PRAIRIE VIEW, IL 60069---200250 2950500790329505007903UGATCHELL, DAVID D & JULIE N 1011 W 103 STREETCROSSINGS THE, MILL RUNLOT 10924925109KANSAS CITY, MO 64114---0Notice: This data belongs to the Collier County Property Appraiser's Office (CCPA). Therefore, the recipient agrees not to represent this data to anyone as other than CCPA provided data. The recipient may not transfer this data to others without consent from the CCPA.POList_500.xls3.A.hPacket Pg. 128Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run
3.A.hPacket Pg. 129Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run
3.A.hPacket Pg. 130Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run
3.A.hPacket Pg. 131Attachment: Attachment 7 Public Notices and Advertising [Revision 1] (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run
Attachment 8
Letters of No Objection from Utility Companies
3.A.i
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Attachment 8 Letters of No Objection from Utility Companies (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Septmember 29, 2021
ATTN: Leo Salvatori
Re: PUE Encroachment Notice / No Objection Letter Request
This is to inform you Comcast has no objection to this proposed encroachment / partial vacate of the
easement on the basis that the proposed remains as is provided in the site plan and placement print
provided to Comcast. Comcast does not agree to any future encroachment of any other structures into
the easement.
The release is restricted to the following description: Lot 103, The Crossings Mill Run, according to
the map or plat thereof recorded in Plat Book15, Page 39 of the Public Records of Collier County,
Florida, bearing Property IdentificationNumber 29505007602.
Regards,
Paul Brown
Manager, Construction SWFL
(941) 914–7844
brown_paul@comcast.com
3.A.i
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Attachment 8 Letters of No Objection from Utility Companies (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.i
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Attachment 8 Letters of No Objection from Utility Companies (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
3.A.iPacket Pg. 135Attachment: Attachment 8 Letters of No Objection from Utility Companies (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
Stephen A. Hancock 7088 Mill Run Circle Naples, FL 34109 ◘ 404-408-7314
October 6, 2021
Deb Swinderman
Ability Management, Inc
6736 Lone Oak Blvd
Naples, FL 34109
Re: Jeffrey Smith
7138 Mill Run Circle
Deb,
As President of Mill Run Homeowners Association, I do not have any problem with the replacement of the screen
enclosure, at the referenced address, that encroaches on the County public utility easement, so long as the County
agrees and is willing to issue the proper permits, etc.
Regards,
Stephen Hancock
President, Mill Run Homeowners Association
3.A.i
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Attachment 8 Letters of No Objection from Utility Companies (23144 : PL20220004370 Mill Run Circle Variance)
09/22/2022
COLLIER COUNTY
Collier County Hearing Examiner
Item Number: 3.B
Item Summary: Petition No. BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Connors Ave - Request for a 25-foot
boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than 100
feet in width, to allow construction of a boat docking facility protruding a total of 45 feet into a waterway
that is 268± feet wide, pursuant to LDC Section 5.03.06. The subject property is located at 260 Conners
Avenue and is further described as Lot 14, Block R, Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No. 3, in
Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. [Coordinator: John Kelly, Senior
Planner] Commission District 2
Meeting Date: 09/22/2022
Prepared by:
Title: Planner – Zoning
Name: John Kelly
08/31/2022 10:00 PM
Submitted by:
Title: Zoning Director – Zoning
Name: Mike Bosi
08/31/2022 10:00 PM
Approved By:
Review:
Growth Management Operations & Regulatory Management Kenneth Kovensky Review Item Completed 09/01/2022 3:09 AM
Hearing Examiner (GMD Approvers) Diane Lynch Review Item Completed 09/02/2022 11:28 AM
Zoning Ray Bellows Review Item Completed 09/08/2022 10:10 AM
Zoning Mike Bosi Division Director Completed 09/08/2022 10:46 AM
Hearing Examiner Andrew Dickman Meeting Pending 09/22/2022 9:00 AM
3.B
Packet Pg. 137
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 1 of 7
September 9, 2022
STAFF REPORT
TO: COLLIER COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER
FROM: ZONING DIVISION – ZONING SERVICES SECTION
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 22, 2022
SUBJECT: BDE-PL20220001299, 260 CONNERS AVENUE - MCKIBBEN DOCK
_________________________________________________________________________
PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT: AGENT:
Douglas G. and Christine E. McKibben Jeff Rogers
260 Conners Ave. Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.
Naples, FL 34108 3584 Exchange Ave.
Naples, FL 34104
REQUESTED ACTION:
The petitioner requests a 25-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of
20 feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width, to allow construction of a boat docking facility
protruding a total of 45 feet into a waterway that is 268± feet wide, pursuant to LDC Section
5.03.06.
GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION:
The subject property is located at 260 Conners Avenue, further described as Lot 14, Block R,
Conner’s Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No. 3, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East.
Collier County, Florida. (See location map on the following page)
PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:
The subject property is located within a Single-Family-3 (RSF-3) Zoning District, comprises 0.22
acres with 80± feet of water frontage, and has been improved with a single-family residence. It is
the desire of the owner/applicant to remove and replace the existing boat docking facility with a
larger dock facility designed to accommodate a single 40-foot vessel. The proposed dock is of a
shore perpendicular design that was greatly influenced by the applicant’s previously denied
petition for a Boat Dock Extension for a dock of shore parallel design; see Attachment B – HEX
No. 2021-64. The vessel size has decreased, no crossing of riparian lines is required for
ingress/egress, and the required 15-foot side/riparian setbacks will be maintained.
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 2 of 7
September 9, 2022
3.B.aPacket Pg. 139Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 3 of 7
September 9, 2022
SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING:
North: Conners Avenue (Right-of-Way) then Single-family dwelling, Residential Single-
Family-3 District (RSF-3)
East: Single-family dwelling, Residential Single-Family-3 District (RSF-3)
South: Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway
West: Single-family dwelling, Residential Single-Family-3 District (RSF-3)
Aerial – Collier County GIS
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION:
Environmental Planning Staff has reviewed this petition and has no objection to the granting of
this request. The proposed dock is to be constructed waterward of the existing seawall shoreline.
The proposed dock will not impact native shoreline vegetation. A submerged resources survey
provided by the applicant found no submerged resources in the area 200 feet beyond the proposed
docking facility. The Submerged Resource Survey exhibit sheet 5 of 7 provides an aerial with a
note stating that no seagrasses were observed within 200 feet of the proposed docking facility.
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 4 of 7
September 9, 2022
This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council Board (EAC) review, because
this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in
Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances.
STAFF ANALYSIS:
In accordance with LDC Section 5.03.06.H., the Collier County Hearing Examiner shall approve,
approve with conditions, or deny a dock facility extension request based on certain criteria. In
order for the Hearing Examiner to approve this request, at least four of the five primary criteria
and four of the six secondary criteria must be 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.)
Criterion met. 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
boat docking facility comprises a single boat slip designed to accommodate a 40-foot LOA
vessel. A shore perpendicular design is being used to both satisfy side/riparian setback
requirements and to eliminate any interference issues to vessel ingress/egress of
neighboring dock facilities.
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 the survey
should establish that the water depth is too shallow to allow launching and mooring
of the vessel(s) described without an extension.)
Criteria not met. The applicant’s agent states: “The reason for this BDE request is due to
the applicant’s vessel size and the two adjacent existing docks. The applicant-owned
shoreline length is 80-feet and with 30-feet being within setbacks the best design option in
order to accommodate the applicant’s vessel and avoid ingress/egressing over the riparian
lines is to push the dock further out into the waterway. The two adjacent properties have
existing docks which limited the proposed dock design due to a lack of space to safely
navigate the vessel between the docks for a more parallel mooring design. A design like
that for this subject property was already presented to the HEX and was denied therefore a
new dock design is now being proposed. As proposed the dock provides safe access to the
slip as well as maintains the required 15-foot setbacks [sic] avoids having to navigate over
shared riparian lines but does extend out past the allowed 20-feet. Additionally, the
proposed design will not interfere with the adjacent properties nor their access to their
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 5 of 7
September 9, 2022
shoreline or subject docks/slips.” Zoning staff doesn’t disagree and finds this criterion has
not been satisfied.
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. The applicant’s agent states: “The proposed docking facility design does
have the dock extending out further into the subject waterway than any of the other adjacent
docks. However, the subject waterway width does allow for the dock to extend out as
proposed and still be within the allowed 25% width of the waterway. The newly proposed
design is consistent with at least one other recently approved BDE located at 300 Oak Ave
which just like that now existing docking facility does not impact navigation as the subject
waterway is not a marked channel.” Staff concurs and further offers that there are no
marked channels within this area of Vanderbilt Lagoon and the overall width of the
waterway is approximately 268 feet across from the proposed facility. The referenced BDE
was presented as PL20190002922, HEX No. 2020-17, for which a duly advertised public
hearing was conducted on September 24, 2020; See Attachment C. Said project involved a
shore perpendicular dock protruding 44 feet into a 750-foot wide waterway.
Aerial – Collier County GIS
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.)
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 6 of 7
September 9, 2022
Criterion met. The approximate waterway width is 268-feet wide. The proposed dock
protrusion is 45 feet from the MHWL which is 16.79 percent of the width of the waterway;
greater than 50-percent of the waterway remains open for navigation.
5. Whether the proposed location and design of the dock facility are 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.)
Criterion met. The applicant’s agent states, in part: “The proposed docking facility is
within the Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway which services a very large boating community.
Both neighboring properties have docking facilities which will not be impacted by this
proposed dock design now being perpendicular to the shoreline which does not require the
vessel to cross over the shared riparian line... The proposed dock design does push the
dock’s overall protrusion out past most of the other docks on the subject waterway but it is
within the allowed buildable area and the subject waterway accommodates the overall dock
protrusion.” Staff concurs and notes that the nearest portion of the dock facility to the west
uses a shore perpendicular design and that to the east is a U-shaped dock facility for which
the vessel would enter from east to west; there will be no interference to the use of either
facility.
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 special condition related to the
property; these may include the type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline
configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds.)
Criterion met. The applicant states: “The subject property special conditions that have
been factored in the overall proposed dock layout are the existing width of waterway,
adjacent docking facilities, and the applicant-owned shoreline length.
As for the subject property’s shoreline length of 80-feet and the required side yard setbacks
of 15-feet there is not sufficient backing distances for the vessel with a shore parallel
mooring like the existing dock facility. The typically [sic] design criteria for backing
distance is length and half of the vessel size utilizing the slip therefore we would need to
provide 63-feet. With the two adjacent properties both having existing docking facilities
the shore parallel design was not an option for this property. The property to the west is
owned by the applicant but is a grandfathered structure which they would rather not remove
and even if they did the setback of 15-feet for both the subject dock and adjacent dock
would still not provide sufficient backing distances. That option was considered when
determining [sic] the newly proposed dock design.
Based on that, the only other option for this property is to protrude further than the allowed
20-feet due to the subject property being located on an open waterway which can
accommodate a dock extending out 67-feet from the MHWL as that is the 25% line. As
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 7 of 7
September 9, 2022
proposed today the dock still does not extend out to the allowed 25% line nor is it necessary
to as you can see per the proposed dock layout the new design extends out 45-feet from the
property line (most restrictive) and approximately 43-feet from the MHWL. The entire
waterway is open to navigation and therefore the proposed extension request will not
interfere with the everyday normal navigation boaters currently experience on the subject
waterway.”
Zoning staff does not necessarily agree with the applicant’s analysis; however, does accept
that the boat dock facility to the west of the subject property is nonconforming as by all
appearances it encroaches well into the presently required 15-foot side/riparian setback.
Staff is unable to determine when the neighboring dock first appeared in its present
configuration and is therefore compelled to find that said dock represents a unique special
condition. Staff concurs that the neighboring dock facilities must be taken into account
when looking at the waterway as a whole and further concurs that the actual length of
owned shoreline factors into the proposed boat dock facility design; therefore, this criterion
has been satisfied.
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.)
Criterion met. The applicant states: “The proposed docking facility has been minimized
and still provides deck area for routine maintenance, safe access as well as recreational
activities like fishing plus storage of kayaks and/or paddleboards. The total over-water
square footage is 678 square feet. There are two 4-foot side finger docks on either side of
the proposed boat lift with a deck area that is within the 20-foot protrusion limit that offers
recreational access to the waterway as well as provides [sic] additional area for storage on
the dock that should not be considered excessive as it is within the allowed 20-foot
protrusion measurement.
As designed this dock is still consistent with at least one other existing docking facility
within the Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway that has been approved for a BDE which is located
at 300 Oak Ave.” Zoning staff concurs with the applicant and therefore finds this criterion
to have been satisfied.
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.)
Criterion met. The subject property has 80 feet of water frontage and the proposed vessel
to be docked at this location is 40 feet long; the vessel size does not exceed the 50-percent
threshold.
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 8 of 7
September 9, 2022
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. The applicant’s agent states: “There is an existing dock and boat lift already
onsite therefore, no new impacts to the neighboring property views of the waterway will
result from the proposed project. Additionally, your view by riparian rights is within the
property’s riparian area extending out to the middle of the waterway.” Staff is of the
opinion that only the view within one’s riparian area can be protected and then only to the
extent that it does not restrict a neighboring property from their exercising their full use of
waterfront property. To that end, staff finds that the proposed dock has been minimized
beyond the 20-foot protrusion mark thereby minimizing the potential view impact.
5. Whether seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. (If seagrass
beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06(I) of the LDC must be
demonstrated.)
Criterion met. There are no seagrass beds present on the property nor the neighboring
properties within 200-feet of the existing dock structure.
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.)
Criterion is not applicable. The proposed project is for a single-family residential boat
dock facility. Section 5.03.06.E.11, Manatee Protection Plan, is not applicable for this boat
dock proposal.
Staff analysis finds this request complies with four of the five primary criteria and five of the six
secondary criteria with the sixth criterion being not applicable. Staff is aware of opposition to this
project which will be compiled and made part of Attachment E.
CONCURRENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS:
There are no known concurrent land use petitions.
APPEAL OF BOAT DOCK EXTENSION TO BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:
As to any boat dock extension petition upon which the Hearing Examiner takes action, an
aggrieved petitioner may appeal such final action. Such appeal shall be filed per Section 2-88 of
the Collier County Code of Ordinances within 30 days of the Decision by the Hearing Examiner.
An aggrieved non-party may appeal a decision of the Hearing Examiner to the Circuit Court of
Collier County within 30 days of the decision. In the event that the petition has been approved by
the Hearing Examiner, the applicant shall be advised that he/she proceeds with construction at
his/her own risk during this 30-day period. Any construction work completed ahead of the approval
authorization shall be at their own risk.
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
BDE-PL20220001299 – 260 Conners Ave Page 9 of 7
September 9, 2022
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the above findings, staff recommends that the Hearing Examiner approve Petition
BDE-PL20220001299 in accordance with the “Proposed Dock” plan provided within
Attachment A.
Attachments:
A. Proposed Dock Plans
B. HEX NO. 2021-64, 260 Conners Ave
C. HEX NO. 2020-17, 300 Oak Ave
D. Public Hearing Sign Posting
E. Applicant’s Backup, including Application
F. Correspondence – Letters of Objection
3.B.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Staff Report 09092022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
STATE OF FLORIDACOUNTY AERIAL VICINITY MAPSTATE OF FLORIDACOUNTY AERIAL VICINITY MAPNOTES:<> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SUBJECTPROPERTYSUBJECTPROPERTY<> LATITUDE:N 26.267351<> LONGITUDE:W -81.821027SITE ADDRESS:<> 260 CONNERS AVENAPLES, FL 34108Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg LOCATION MAP 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVELOCATION MAP48-------------------01 OF 07COLLIER COUNTYCOLLIER COUNTYGULF OF MEXICOGULF OF MEXICO8588288641MARCOISLANDEVERGLADESCITY9329846NAPLES90908399483783784129292983983992887846951862I-758486431856850846890896NESWKEY WESTTAMPAFT.MYERSMIAMINAPLESSUBJECTPROPERTY3.B.bPacket Pg. 147Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Dock Plans (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
NESW0153060SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg EXISTING CONDITIONS 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEEXISTING CONDITIONS48-------------------02 OF 07·SURVEY COURTESY OF:··SURVEY DATED:·THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOTINTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.·ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW·APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF):·EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX):·TIDAL DATUM:··MHW (NAVD)=··MLW (NAVD)=NOTES:"COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, INC."05-22-21-1.31'+0.30'80'481268'80'122'122'80'CONNERS AVERIPARIAN LINERIPARIANLINERIPARIANSETBACKLINEPROPERTYBOUNDARY15'15'SITE ADDRESS:,260 CONNERS AVENAPLESFL3410822'16'3.B.bPacket Pg. 148Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Dock Plans (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
NESW051020SCALE IN FEETSITE ADDRESS:,260 CONNERS AVENAPLESFL34108Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg PROPOSED DOCK 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEPROPOSED DOCK48-------------------03 OF 07RIPARIANLINERIPARIANLINEEXISTINGSEAWALLPROPERTYBOUNDARYAA04·SURVEY COURTESY OF:··SURVEY DATED:·THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOTINTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.·ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW·APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF):·EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX):·TIDAL DATUM:··MHW (NAVD)=··MLW (NAVD)=NOTES:·PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·TOTAL OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM PROPERTY LINE:·TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:"COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, INC."05-22-21-1.31'+0.30'80'481268'67867845'RIPARIANLINERIPARIANLINE15'15'PROPOSEDDOCKPROPOSED8-POST LIFTRIPARIANLINESETBACKRIPARIANLINESETBACK40'4'4'16'18'41'18'20'27'
45'
44'44'3.B.bPacket Pg. 149Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Dock Plans (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
x -3.7
'X -2
.2
'03510SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg CROSS SECTION AA 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVECROSS SECTION AA48-------------------04 OF 0745' TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM PROPERTY LINEN.T.E. 10'18' BOAT LIFT8-POSTEXISTINGSEAWALLPROPOSEDDOCKALL PILES TO BEWRAPPED FROM 12"ABOVE MHWL TO 6"BELOW SUBSTRATEMHW = +0.30' (NAVD 88)MLW = -1.31' (NAVD 88)PROPERTYLINE3.B.bPacket Pg. 150Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Dock Plans (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
NESW0204080SCALE IN FEETSITE ADDRESS:,260 CONNERS AVENAPLESFL34108Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg SUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVESUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY48-------------------05 OF 07PROPERTYBOUNDARYTYPICAL DIVE TRANSECTNO SEAGRASSES WEREOBSERVED GROWINGWITHIN 200FT OF THEPROPOSED PROJECT200'200'TRANSECT LINE(10' APART)10'3.B.bPacket Pg. 151Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Dock Plans (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
NOTE: THE DIMENSIONS SHOWNARE APPROXIMATE AND ARETAKEN FROM THE AERIAL IMAGE.NESW050100200SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg ADJACENT DOCKS 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ05-25-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEADJACENT DOCKS48-------------------06 OF 07PROPERTYBOUNDARY23'24'
23'
23'
23'
24'
45'
23'
23'
23'
20'
19'
20'18'22'CONNERS AVE3.B.bPacket Pg. 152Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Dock Plans (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
NOTE: THE DIMENSIONS SHOWNARE APPROXIMATE AND ARETAKEN FROM THE AERIAL IMAGE.NESW0100200400SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg WIDTH OF WATERWAY 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEWIDTH OF WATERWAY48-------------------07 OF 07PROPERTYBOUNDARY638'CONNERS AVE268'3.B.bPacket Pg. 153Attachment: Attachment A - Proposed Dock Plans (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
Page 1 of 6
HEX NO. 2021-64
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
November 12, 2021
PETITION.
PETITION NO. BDE - PL20210001835 260 Conners Ave McKibben Dock - Request for a
14-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for
waterways greater than 100 feet in width, to allow construction of a boat docking facility
protruding a total of 34 feet into a waterway that is 268± feet wide, pursuant to LDC Section
5.03.06. The subject property is located at 260 Conners Avenue and is further described as
Lot 14, Block R, Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No. 3, in Section 29, Township 48
South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The petitioner requests to remove and replace the existing boat docking facility with a larger dock
facility designed to accommodate a single 45-foot vessel. The new dock will protrude 34 feet from
the property line, the most restrictive point, into a waterway that is 268± feet wide at this location;
therefore, the proposed dock will occupy approximately 14 percent of the width of the waterway.
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
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
Page 2 of 6
representative. There were several neighbors that made objections to the Petition at the public
hearing, including neighboring property owners, and numerous letters objecting to the Petition
were submitted prior to the public hearing. The petitioner owns the abutting residential home,
including the existing dock facility, located at 246 Connors Avenue, directly west of the subject
property.
6. The County’s Land Development Code 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.1
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 unbridge d barrier island
docks, additional slips may be appropriate.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET. 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 boat
docking facility comprises a single boat slip designed to accommodate a 45-foot vessel.
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
NOT BEEN MET. The applicant’s agent states: The reason for this BDE request is due
to the applicant’s vessel size and the two adjacent existing docks. The applicant owned
shoreline length is 80-feet and with 30-feet being within setbacks the only dock design
option in order to accommodate the applicant’s vessels is to push the dock further out into
the waterway. The two adjacent properties have existing docks which limited the proposed
dock design due to lack of space to safe navigate the vessel between the docks for a more
parallel mooring design. As proposed the dock provides safe access to the slip as well as
maintains the required 15-foot setbacks and the overall dock protrusion has been fully
minimized. Additionally, the proposed design will not interfere with the adjacent properties
nor their access to their shoreline or subject docks/slips.”
1 The Hearing Examiner’s findings are italicized.
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
Page 3 of 6
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. There are no marked channels within this area of Vanderbilt Lagoon and the
overall width of the waterway is approximately 268 feet across from the proposed facility.
As proposed, navigation within the subject waterway will not be impacted.
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 mainta in the
required percentages.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET. The approximate waterway width is 268-feet wide. The proposed dock
protrusion is 34 feet from the MHWL which is under 15 percent of the width of the
waterway.
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
NOT BEEN MET. The existing dock facility satisfies the required side yard/riparian line
setbacks of 15-feet for dock facilities on lots of 60-feet or more in width. Neighboring
properties have the same setback requirements, therefore, there should be 30-feet between
dock facilities which is consistent for the area. The new dock will maintain these setbacks
and should have no greater impact. However, the size and configuration of the proposed
dock facility for a 45-foot vessel is excessive. The size of the vessel apparently drives the
desire for mooring at an angle to the seawall rather than perpendicular or parallel. The
proposed dock would protrude more than any other dock on this waterway, more than 10
feet past the neighboring docks.
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 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
NOT BEEN MET.
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
Page 4 of 6
The applicant states: “The subject property special conditions that have been factored in
the overall proposed dock layout are the existing width of waterway, applicant owned
shoreline length and the adjacent docking facilities. As for the subject property’s shoreline
length of 80-feet does not provide sufficient backing distances for a shore parallel mooring
like the existing docking facility. The typical design criteria for backing distance are length
and half of the vessel size utilizing the slip therefore we would need to provide 67.5 feet.
With the two adjacent properties both having existing docking facilities the shore parallel
design was not an option for this property. Based off that the only other option for this
property is to protrude further than the allowed 20 feet due to the subject property being
located on an open waterway. This allowed us to push the dock out further and still remain
within 25% width of the waterway as well as not to interfere with other vessel’s navigation
on the subject waterway.”
The neighboring dock facilities must be considered when looking at the waterway as a
whole and furthermore that the actual length of owned shoreline factors into the proposed
boat dock facility design. The only reason for this petition is because the petitioner wants
to moor their very large vessel at their residence rather than at a marina more appropriate
for this large vessel. Owning a large vessel cannot be considered a “special condition.”
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
NOT BEEN MET.
The applicant states: “The proposed docking facility design provides reasonable and safe
access to the boat as well as provides the additional square footage needed for routine
maintenance on the boat, recreational activities on the dock like fishing, kayaking, or
paddle boarding. As designed this dock is still consistent with other docking facilities
within the Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway but can protrude further out into this section of
waterway as the property is on one of the larger bays within the Lagoon.”
The decking is excessive even for a 45-foot vessel. The size of the vessel and the mooring
configuration appears to drive a large dock facility. Absent the mooring space, the dock
facility dimensions would be 50 x 34.
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 subject property has 80 feet of water frontage and the proposed
vessel to be docked at this location is 45 feet long. The vessels size exceeds the 50 percent
limitation.
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
Page 5 of 6
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
NOT BEEN MET. The petitioner owns the home directly to the west so logically no
objection would be from that home. The home directly to the east will be impacted by the
larger docking facility and 45-foot vessel.
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. There are no seagrass beds present on the property nor the neighboring
properties within 200-feet of the existing dock structure.
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. The proposed project is for a single-family residential boat dock
facility. Section 5.03.06.E.11, Manatee Protection Plan, is not applicable for this boat dock
proposal.
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
of the Land Development Code to not approve the Petition. The Petition meets 3 out of 5 of the
primary criteria and 2 out of 6 secondary criteria (one secondary is not applicable in this case).
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby DENIES Petition Number BDE-PL20210001835, filed by Jeff
Rogers of Turrell, Hall & Associates representing Douglas G. and Christine E. McKibben, with
respect to the property described as 260 Conners Avenue, further described as Lot 14, Block R,
Conner’s Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No. 3, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East.
Collier County, Florida, for the following:
• A 14-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for
waterways greater than 100 feet in width, to allow construction of a boat docking facility
protruding a total of 34 feet into a waterway that is 268± feet wide.
Said changes are fully described in the proposed Dock Plans and Map of Specific Purpose Survey
attached as Exhibit "A" and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below.
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A – Dock Plans and Map of Specific Purpose Survey
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
260 Conners Avenue, further described as Lot 14, Block R, Conner’s Vanderbilt Beach Estates
Unit No. 3, in Section 29, Township 48 South, Range 25 East. Collier County, Florida
CONDITIONS.
Petition is denied.
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
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
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 ConnersDecember 10, 2021
EXHIBIT “A”
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :EXHIBIT "A"
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :
3.B.c
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Attachment B - HEX DECISION 2021-64 Petition No. BDE-PL20210001835 11-12-21 (23224 :
HEX NO. 2020-17
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
September 24, 2020
PETITION.
PETITION NO. BDE-PL20190002922 — Marc and Virginia Sarazin request a 24 foot boat
dock extension over the maximum 20 foot limit allowed in Section 5.03.06 of the Collier
County Land Development Code,for a total protrusion of 44 feet,to accommodate a docking
facility with two boat slips including two boat lifts for one vessel and two jet skis, for the
benefit of property described as Lot 13,Block 1,of Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates,Unit.
No. 2, also described as 300 Oak Avenue, in Section 32, Township 48 South, Range 25 East,
Collier County,Florida.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approval with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The public hearing for this Petition was properly noticed and conducted in accordance with all
County and state requirements.
2. The public hearing was conducted electronically and in-person in accordance with
Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04.
3. 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.
4. The Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative presented the Petition, followed by County
staff and then public comment.
5. The east neighbor abutting the property supports the application but the west neighbor abutting
the property does not support the application. Others in the neighborhood object to the
application and one supports the application.
6. The applicant's representative presented evidence that the applicant has or intends to purchase
a vessel requiring the size boat lift requested.
7. The total deck area appears to be more than is necessary for the new vessel and jet skis, i.e.,
the decking on either side of both slips ranges between 5 to 8 feet, and the overly large deck
area between the jet ski slip and sea wall is unnecessarily large. As a result,the total deck area
is overly extensive for a dock area "primarily intended to adequately secure moored vessels
Page 1 of 4
3.B.d
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
and provide safe access for routine maintenance and use." LDC Sec. 5.03.06(A) - Dock
Facilities.
8. LDC Sec. 5.03.06(H) requires that it must be determined that the boat dock extension "must
meet] ... at least 4 of the 5 primary criteria, and at least 4 of the 6 secondary criteria...]."
9. County planning staff have determined that the application meets the minimum primary and
secondary criteria.
10. The applicant's representative testified that it is not safe to moor the applicant's new boat
parallel to the seawall,thus the need for the dock extension.
11. Secondary criteria (b) states "[w]hether 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).
12. Secondary criteria (f) allows "[i]f deemed necessary based upon review of the above criteria,
the [Hearing Examiner] 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."
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 sufficient competent, substantial evidence as applied to the criteria set forth in Section 5.03.06
Dock Facilities") of the Land Development Code to approve Petition.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number BDE-PL20190002922, filed by Jeff
Rogers of Turrell,Hall and Associates, Inc. representing Marc Daniel and Virginia Marie Sarazin,
with respect to the property described as 300 Oak Avenue, Lot 13, Block 1 of the Conner's
Vanderbilt Beach Estates, Unit No. 2, in Section 32, Township 48 South, Range 23 East, Collier
County, Florida for the following:
A 24-foot boat dock extension, over the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet allowed
by Section 5.03.06 of the Land Development Code for waterways greater than 100 feet in
width, for a total protrusion of 44 feet to accommodate a docking facility with two boat
slips including two boat lifts for one vessel and two jet skis for the benefit of the subject
property.
Said changes are fully described in the Proposed Site Plan attached as Exhibit "A" and are subject
to the condition(s) set forth below.
Page 2 of 4
3.B.d
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A—Proposed Site Plan
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
300 Oak Avenue, Lot 13, Block 1 of the Conner's Vanderbilt Beach Estates, Unit No.2, in Section
32, Township 48 South, Range 23 East, Collier County, Florida.
CONDITIONS.
1. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development.
2. Due to the excessive deck area,the deck width shall be no wider than 5 feet on sides accessing
the two boat lifts. In other words, center access shall be reduced from 8 feet to 5 feet, and east
access shall be reduced from 6 feet to 5 feet.
3. Due to excessive deck area, the entire deck area between the sea wall and the two jet skis lift
shall be reduced from 11 feet to 5 feet. The west boat lift access (for the jet skis) shall be
reduced from 31 feet to 25 feet in length.
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
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.
APPEAL OF BOAT DOCK EXTENSION TO BOARD_OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.
As to any boat dock extension petition upon which the Hearing Examiner takes action, an
aggrieved petitioner, or adversely affected property owner, may appeal such final action to the
Board of County Commissioners. Such appeal shall be filed with the Growth Management
Department Administrator within 30 days of the Decision by the Hearing Examiner. In the event
that the petition has been approved by the Hearing Examiner, the applicant shall be advised that
he/she proceeds with construction at his/her own risk during this 30-day period. Any construction
work completed ahead of the approval shall be at their own risk.
Page 3 of 4
3.B.d
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
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.
i9e. .,,,',1c_.-------
October 23, 2020
Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 4 of 4
3.B.d
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
1 i 1 WNNt... WGO0ZJJ3- QCZ coWzoN
n wmw
o
a W
1,7)
vO a o N Wrn
U
oo
a
Y
0
0 ,,U. J
W d ZV-X 0)
wcsi40 °wj0
m Ocn a oaQ
topCV W LLI
2 Na CV CO (/)cn CQNCOCLG
z D° Z Z •
o
S
LLI Ur U O_
W Za
HN0
n
I . Q
a2
It Z z
co
O O o
a U_ I- D g ° dU
Q 1.
r w O V V 0 0 Q111 V o II
Qz
wco
Y w
J w z QJZ —
rThi—
rx
IL O A Q a
V
AOQ a
0 OZ W c N
W a W 2 Z
y
II
E n O H Q1-1- MWIllvzvo1
y ° MC-)L) ,—
0 Q 4' w 12
j• (
1 uo a
v.
QL w g zo
in fjJ • V O
Iii illtflar,44;''' 1-
fir. e<
eZJ, r7 w - FOFXICO 2 D o a"i
G
FH z
ww
am
7
O
n a
W
019133.00 sarazin seawall-300 oak avenue\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\19133-BDE.dwg LOCATION 8/25/20203.B.dPacket Pg. 173Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
wlik• 4 s,A. i 111, •-Z NQwoeILZZNZVr'-1 w 5 . .;%' c. O W tea'^J-i Nc.T Va S wa avzwiw¢a¢,,a Q d1,4 II.74-404470. W X ak" 011eir Guiwz aw .2iwm rc cooN
O ozS 0ZO ai ry n a n F
t W aiO }.. I N}wwNwaNOx¢ arc O
c'l Ni
zarAn83 ¢a p
ro
i '
Y62,g 0
e +
i .l °2Xooss o m w i F
F`
j
aiFIIzd
wOWwS y
Lou)
a r.a.
1Ua126' - -
0s -1-1\
i Ink
z Q0 :
Z Y CC
r PP- Q0wmZo
I. cow ..i. ZJU waV
a "aJ
ib oCtcn x Z •
1111 0 .
r N , ..1.1 LU
131
126' A
111410
C...) z M N
ILJ U =
v
S H Z a v 0,c U ri ,
11.
1
aJZ WIlpal
pQ
liP d Q 23 'z .-.
L. o
U w ¢ 1
m aoN1.... 4.
volippt 010 u)
i I M O
i y
it- '
4'j
1 . 10, i w
p:\19133.00 sarazin seawall-300 oak avenue\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\19133-BDE.dwg EX AERIAL 8/25/20203.B.dPacket Pg. 174Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
N O m NzLAOFNWa °w rW^^1Z W W I VwkJrn.. 0 Z W w o mf' ZP. Q d a= uaa KZaaadkNwib. L4u1XQmal° +"' w= o N. s_ W U) 1ksP0bJ!-i O OHyLL
n a W OPIP.0 j ¢Q O 1 a N91QQrcowFOOw0of0KOwU>Z
v"
w> f ago n
o.
yyW3>y=-F'M2 O. ¢
m
o
0
Q OM a_o o
mW2aXM o
F 3¢q1 ¢w F a.w °
z , U
2 . . . • • • • . . . y a w m W
W o o Om N
Q Z (n Er) XH
d0 ' 44'C
co U
OZ .
g
W I
41'
QUZ a.
o p W 1 m J W
vDJ ,2 F a_ ~
C d a
38'LOA aZ `
W
N0 .,x a
Li O :
V a
w0 d
1 41' Z 0 ty .En
Ill
11'
17' I 13' L
12.5' v rn
uJ
J
b.1 N NiN0csiCyme
Ailik Er) aH I--
N w Vj c = .moo
X Y J Y o ,0OM1xU c U nV
W w w0
T N o >
20'
0 2 r
En o z ;52
CB
Z ZW xo
Q Z
aZ a Mo
H
1
W
p:\19133.00 sarazin seawall-300 oak avenue\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\19133-BDE.dwq PROP DOCK 8/25/20203.B.dPacket Pg. 175Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
1. I I W1 _NNW0ZirliQ ; V NaMImo, co
wQV b2 s
NdJnmoM
U _I CC a
o720aw
O Z 0
U Q 1 3o_FWn <
a = w
Nzno 'A 3 ° mFU
11)
U N
Q
3Zl
w Oz
d Y —
z w O
aco zC° o ,
EL U z
CC Z •
2 Y O
w NHc0- Y O U
z o o Qw500VJg
0
CL
v m0oF
u
LL5m I)w
I
w p ID
ww2cn
o z daj
O JQOOJ M
Uj C p c
Cal U vM
un 5
3. z
y o
r
NY FcrrCr1 pW .7c
r---I " M
0ce c C
J
a n.
1 ZI Z 1, 00
O _ M O
M M V
O N
h dI II 1
r I I
p:)19133.00 sarazin seawall-300 oak avenue\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\19133-BDE.dwq SECTION(DOCK)8/25/20203.B.dPacket Pg. 176Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
r WNNWYUwC-j\Y:LICII ".a aV1-y R, d5I0H2prc1Wo
i• o
IL 4 I JJ
11 u
a s
J WOOD v m o rNi
iN .¢
rr: n Cr 1— 2 a2Po Z
t ' . - .,cn0u_ a o
WOW 2
a -
ok
r. O N N 1g1N w
e o rnQ ZO 1 'i,
WW — a
11E—Y1zO a
ilt i
1 risf-' . 0 I-
lk! T 0 0 .
200' co
1 o' -- Q w •
U
tor ilillil ililliliillli O
1 ,,....
I I I I ( I I I 1 ' I 1 I I 1 ' I I I I I W
N pII
P I
1): •
co
1111
I I I I I ( I II I I ( I I '`,
r.
k Fewa•MN iN
IQ
MUcn
Q o z
am ter
W
iir •
Oil
1
i w
0:\19133.00 sarazin seawall-300 oak avenue\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY119133-BDE.dwa SUBMERGED 8/25/20203.B.dPacket Pg. 177Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
rigor*.woi • 1s'111k ;s .j trii r- f Dv'i .- c.,z. x 11111138' j 111111
Z
g, : 0
ll4' `
36 Wn
r
w l
35' 014/111,
38' 0 a
x;c 4 i 0 '.
z f
Z
peo.• eri.I4,i..2s'N
l' 'k, 44' i
i ,:,.,J1
4.;
II lit
rmimmi
0
i 0 Gz.^1.
dm g a
1 4' 6 ` p ,d,c
iii ..
I' I 21
L.T.ccs
u r
i 24 i. 00
1
Y
till; A\
yCy
4
G4=a
u:\19133.00 sarazin seawall-300 oak avenue\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\19133-BDE.dwn ADJACENT 8/25/20203.B.dPacket Pg. 178Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
re -I T_ 1 4 } +_ l *1 Li)2 1 h_,I, R r t •i y,1., W1- lif rq-i.A-. tt41 • ' 'P.,1_.::rat. 7A4ilt._ up 4. .46r1'4 ilth 1 ilAytir:jouri. • •-• 1.----1 ' Me ;.. 7 !011ild.1 1111I4. 4t 44e--* 0s®®s® °
0.
4-- nilli ow
17
mow l P
0 .
teA .
r
0 ':
LJJ
vy+
f'-;. !
p
a T 7 Zba
11tiIIINp
r
t.rr I
LL
Pm. . / in
4j * !i
P f .q-- (I)
4
Y
40 0.q "A. t CI-) 00 , a
C7:1 C.) en
lO4 O = w uec
E
d
a
4— r M O
b 4cir . .7
r
rWIL'
t •
r * /` W
0:\19133.00 sarazin seawall-300 oak avenue\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\19133-BDE.dwo WOW 8/25/20203.B.dPacket Pg. 179Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners
SIIIIIIvr
SKETCH OF BOUNDARY SURVEY SURVEY 71
Property Address: C 4l,dTa ReodZone lARlnnsBon:
XO OIakA num
Afae(MMYend NPS'ea Mails 3 adr Community Renew:lT0087
Naples,FL 34102 newt 018E Suffix H
E71irJMa Dale:06'1&IO12
Rood Zone: AE BFE:11.0'NAV.D.188EA00CetilidT
o:
M611i1YWYR9.YQY TN08LRYEY.MER
LseND•so68on M Furnished a•u OF SYRII7 AWN sr
BENCHMARK Lot13, L Connor*"y tndBeathNOW&UNE810Z80c01d"b m P'".°" ,°& •0480 001'20!8 WI
LAND SERVICES, INC. InPltBoot3,PeBs(L)17,d8aAbicRecods&CrakeComy,Fixate.
0A7D MAW Y
ot,ne/xte es
1807J.8 C.Oc1lArreld TN 2908e1-077D
mom newncrHr a54,3O/I
Naple•F7oLfda 9110E Fax 2311081-1181
LB.e7502 ormKbEdnrMandlrnkw.com
L-1=N 88'2440"E 75'P.&75.00'M.BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE
S 88 04'f0'W 75'P.&75 00'M.
BASED UPONA PLATTED BEARING OF
L-2 5887440'W FOR THE,SOUTH
L-3=N 01 35'20'W 30.00'P.&M. OF OAK AVE
L-4=S882440'W 155.1TP.
S 88 25.17'W 155.28'M.
YARD MINIMUMS:
FRONT=30'
SIDE=7.5'
REAR=25'FROM FACE OF SEWALL
ACCESSORY=10'FROM FACE OF SEAWALL
RED DASHED UNES)
OAK AVENUE
L
IMPROVED)B0'WIDE ROAD SET PK
N.40.LB7802
ELEV=2.75'
7
SETPK A
TBMN2—___._
FWD.PK N.80.L137802 ®
NALL NO LD. FLEV=3.16' C.?,
o CUL-DE-SACRADIUSPOINTTWO! 1 375.00'P.&375.2TIIL Bit
FAQ se- L-1 86T sovrh PND.Sf'
LR.NOLR CFO LRLBi502a NORTHEAST
or
LR.NOLD.
Q'I Q
9s 0t>rVG OWE ®
CORNER OF
LOT 13 LOT9
CP.:* BLOCK
IIIIIIIIII' • • ' e,
art .
3 G'lj
e
2 STORY BLDG. s 1 `$ yL
i
BLOCK! ••• • 1'
r.t BLOCK!
c I I.
n
ear 01U co
91.
MT
MC—."- A 10
FENCE
En0EMEIL-7, 1
I aceW.
roOI. '' '
SET PK
T ',
dd-7 Fir ,ors PM HAD.LB7502
R&D.L87802 tt"i>t a
IN SEAWALL - I' /V SEAWALL
1LGT .,--wvo0.-.. i3` : ice`
oa1cFar N r r
sue. O N
WATERWAY(P.)
SINNL0NIC11AOVR000 011aM10 IN11ILNTICNeNMEa11YnElOC MIAYII11O1a0IMMc,c 0c,0T POSITS OF INTEREST: 1Inch=30'IL
r a.4En• mrwn000N0/n.ww=sloTewvwmn.Aa 1.REAR POOL TIES ARE 70 ThE'FACE OF
asnEmmapmINON1arrruaONCNNUnewrACONIN IOINNI AJONaNrEiNONN=N FINNICNNINs
SEAWALL
GRAPHIC SCALE
IMOMTrM/MIIOI CrIO01 q•OITOOV 011Y MIIMO11/I•MaaMTIOMEI M.TYRE VD MIM1111 Mn1NMO
NOVIDOILIVIV 0 15 30
NIIIINI10 EuseommorarnCTOreaso IY1/1r
WDEOE?M000401ll OaEIYININI•LY OANI O1fOYiOMYOTNIOMITR OLY11•ICCO 000001
010111
l IMM1lTIMI000/N INNIONaO INVINAZn atV..PGIEIEYINNTINI/EIIOEEMO1fSOEININV'
MEYI/OTmENi1M CNEEA.tI A/YOIM.01M'I NINNOMINAINNTIO I1•IITMOMI•IT.
NNINNINISA°'Irlw NIFI"DIONiNu01mn MOFIAo°
A
E00NNIONONATlwlaa hereby ow*that A Survey of She nelson described property we
l lwnaeliTml•1001 YnEIEIS A00000IN wINN01.wnsEaan nelpy enH/ dire d mete the PAnen In To r* I SdnOa f.
l NIY00010011MYY1•a R000000NOIN0OOOINSIDNN11OE 01Ae 1U000TLIEN T M•E1 NI.OTOTEfIIN 07 direction
nwrYmM000MNI rarwea rwnaa•murrAans0•INOPMl ONNANI EnNmsua IS per Chapter 5J-17.0518.0 2 FAC.,pursuant to se:Non 472027•
TEA 011OavTOO MIINTIINIONIOIOTI••YOIIYTTWMOIMOANNORI11,1rYI111OY10111I1OVI1MnaICOMIT
Fb41e 8e*t
T./V/MNipMYITY OFMINIVEClOO100VIEON1 TO MYRO0AAE110111MIAM MLImNamEIINIPVIVIM Y
M
I
RaI , IEEIEINVAE.IONOIN.A N11 Le 0,211 /i0a
SARNO
ANTINNICINNAmAliosaER
IL uonnvw•
0'
ran PrOb.Mal•13aa0)u•aIdMDp0er PSM No.6348 Stead Ronde
NOV GNU M M. Y 11.1101E I.T. IONIOITNIONICY
OI/L m...,..IM 1T. YNOIviMYYV IrEO.OIIO
01NIIEMYIVT
RO!rowan)YMY11lT IaIM
ON ONANN0 "
IIDAaE.O
M1Y'T
INO IPIIDtEar01AT11M Nlnrla' p eYNYWTOM AIM1rMLL11M 10YAaII•aIIT1II11arivMYarTIAL/wI.a1TIlswl=I,oNIeR "R Llor O RrmNN0000 - ANN
BO.MIILISRC•IY
14110
CNN M III MNIOTIN.
IIYT
MYY'f
OO'Yln IMIITr • LA as
ININNONL TQs IOIYIvi #
WINN!
YF.
B01•NOW nu:01wurenrumeI•I.MIYTT.
FF. IvIONCOT O IOVI
INN, MC (0 sY
6000101111 01AY01aMNSA•OVI CROOMOO• ® '
aC f OVONY
SA •ONONN
A.....IGNl01 Aar.RYawencoe TL TM mormaums W ONOO•IOLema COWM11I AeNOIARVOIa• '1 YOIEAYIIOYMI ACM N.1/Ilr
MVNCD nNel ILININN IAA TOPOPIIE NINON'
3.B.d
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Attachment C - HEX Final Decision 2020-17 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
3.B.ePacket Pg. 181Attachment: Attachment D - Sign Posted 09062022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
3.B.ePacket Pg. 182Attachment: Attachment D - Sign Posted 09062022 (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724
ADDRESSING CHECKLIST
Please complete the following and email to GMD_Addressing@colliergov.net or fax to the Operations Division
at 239-252-5724 or submit in person to the Addressing Section at the above address. Form must be signed by
Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting, please allow 3 days for processing.
Not all items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. FOLIO NUMBERS MUST BE
PROVIDED. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Section.
PETITION TYPE (Indicate type below, complete a separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition type)
BL (Blasting Permit)
BD (Boat Dock Extension)
Carnival/Circus Permit
CU (Conditional Use)
EXP (Excavation Permit)
FP (Final Plat
LLA (Lot Line Adjustment)
PNC (Project Name Change)
PPL (Plans & Plat Review)
PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat)
PUD Rezone
RZ (Standard Rezone)
SDP (Site Development Plan)
SDPA (SDP Amendment)
SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SDP)
SIP (Site Im provement Plan)
SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP)
SNR (Street Name Change)
SNC (Street Name Change – Unplatted)
TDR (Transfer of Development Rights)
VA (Variance)
VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit)
VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permit)
OTHER
LEGAL DESCRIPT ION of subject property or properties (copy of lengthy description may be attached)
FOLIO (Property ID) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associate with, legal description if more than one)
STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned)
PROPOSED STREET NAMES (if applicable)
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sites only)
LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exact location of project/site in relation to nearest public road right-
of-way
PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
SDP - or AR or PL #
SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties)
CURRENT PROJECT NAME (if applicable)
Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 1 of 2
T48, R25, S29
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenuen
CONNER'S VANDERBILT BCH EST UNIT 3 BLK R LOT 14
27630560003
260 Conners Ave, Naples, FL 34108
COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
www.colliergov.net
2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE
NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104
(239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-5724
Please Return Approved Checklist By: Email Personally picked up
Applicant Name:
Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name
approval and is subject to further review by the Operations Division.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Folio Number
Approved by: Date:
Updated by: Date:
IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE
UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED
Fax
Email/Fax:Phone:
Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents (if application;
indicate whether proposed or existing)
Rev. 6/9/2017 Page 2 of 2
27630560003
2/17/2022
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenuen
Douglas and Christine McKibben/Agent- Jeff Rogers
239-643-0166 jeff@thanaples.com
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
Narrative Description: The proposed Boat Dock Extension request is to construct a new single-
family docking facility with one boatlift located at 260 Conners Ave in Vanderbilt Beach Estates.
The subject waterway is considered Vanderbilt Lagoon with direct access to the Gulf of Mexico
through Wiggin Pass. The subject property has an existing dock which accommodates the
applicant’s current vessel approximately 32-feet LOA Grady White. The subject shoreline
consists of a concrete seawall with the platted property line being located just on the landward
side of the seawall cap which is the most restrictive point. The applicant was proposing to
purchase a 45-foot LOA vessel which will not work in the existing docks configuration and due
to the recent BDE denial, he has now changed his order to purchase the 40-foot LOA vessel.
The proposed dock’s overall design has been revised based on the HEX denial comments as
well as voiced public concerns and to be consistent with a previously approved BDE located at
300 Oak Ave which is also within the Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway. The design consists of a
dock that is perpendicular to the shoreline extending out 45-feet from the platted property line
in order to accommodate a 40-foot LOA vessel, which is 3-feet smaller than the previously
ordered vessel. The BDE request is for a 25-foot extension from the allowed 20-feet into a
waterway that is approximately 268-feet wide which is about 17% width of the subject
waterway. The subject waterway is an unmarked waterway and completely open for
navigation therefore there will not be any impacts to navigation within the area. Additionally,
the dock will be within the required side yard setbacks of 15*feet and with the newly proposed
design will not interfere nor require the vessel to cross over the shared riparian lines when
ingress/egressing the proposed boatlift. Also, with the new design the overall proposed
decking square footage is less than previously proposed by 244 square feet. The proposed
decking will provide safe access to the vessel, area for routine maintenance, recreational
activities like fishing, and storage of kayaks/paddleboards on the 18’X20’ deck area along the
western side of the dock. This decking area is within the allowed 20-foot protrusion and
therefore should not be considered excessive especially since the two finger piers are only 4-foot
wide which is just wide enough for access.
Finally, there are other single-family docks within the subject waterway that allow the mooring
of “large” vessels as the previous proposed vessel was considered one of which is directly
across the waterway being a 41-foot LOA vessel and a 38-foot LOA vessel located at 300 Oak
Ave. These larger sized vessels are common these days and with outboards they can raise and
lower their motors in order to transverse at lower tides through areas like Water Turkey Bay
which use tide restrictive prior to being recently maintenance dredged.
There are no impacts to any submerged resources by the proposed project.
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
PRIMARY CRITERIA
The following criteria, pursuant to LDC section 5.03.06, shall be used as a guide by staff in
determining its recommendation to the Office of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing
Examiner will utilize the following criteria as a guide in the decision to approve or deny a
particular Dock Extension request. In order for the Hearing Examiner 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. On separate sheets, please provide a narrative response
to the listed criteria and/or questions.
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.)
The subject property is zoned for a single-family residential unit which warrants no
more than 2 slips per the CC-LDC. The proposed docking facility consists of
installing one boatlift which will accommodate a 40-foot LOA vessel. The proposed
dock will extend out 45-feet from the platted property line which is 25-feet of
protrusion past from the allowed 20-feet. Additionally, the proposed dock will
provide 15-foot setbacks from both riparian lines and therefore will not interfere
with the adjacent properties as the vessel ingress/egress the proposed boatlift.
Criterion Met
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 (MLT). (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 reason for this BDE request is due to the applicant’s vessel size and the two
adjacent existing docks. The applicant owned shoreline length is 80-feet and with
30-feet being within setbacks the best design option in order to accommodate the
applicant’s vessel and avoid ingress/egressing over the riparian lines is to push the
dock further out into the waterway. The two adjacent properties have existing
docks which limited the proposed dock design due to lack of space to safely navigate
the vessel between the docks for a more parallel mooring design. A design like that
for this subject property was already presented to the HEX and was denied
therefore a new dock design is now being proposed. As proposed the dock provides
safe access to the slip as well as maintains the required 15-foot setbacks avoids
having to navigate over shared riparian lines but does extend out past the allowed
20-feet. Additionally, the proposed design will not interfere with the adjacent
properties nor their access to their shoreline or subject docks/slips.
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
Criterion Not Met
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 proposed docking facility design does have the dock extending out further into
the subject waterway than any of the other adjacent docks. However, the subject
waterway width does allow for the dock to extend out as proposed and still be within
the allowed 25% width of waterway. The newly proposed design is consistent with
at least one other recently approved BDE located at 300 Oak Ave which just like
that now existing docking facility does not impact navigation as the subject
waterway is not a marked channel.
Criterion Met
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 approximate waterway width is 268-feet wide. The proposed dock protrusion is
45-feet which is under 17% width of the waterway.
Criterion Met
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 permitted neighboring docks.)
The proposed docking facility is within the Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway which
services is a very large boating community. Both neighboring properties have
docking facilities which will not be impacted with this proposed dock design now
being perpendicular to the shoreline which does not require the vessel to cross over
the shared riparian line. As proposed the subject dock will be within the allowed
buildable area by providing the required side yard setbacks and therefore the views
into the subject waterway by the adjacent property owners will not be impacted nor
their access to their docks.
The proposed dock design does push the dock’s overall protrusion out past most of
the other docks on the subject waterway but is within the allowed buildable area
and the subject waterway accommodates the overall dock protrusion.
Criterion Met
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
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 special condition related to the property; these may
include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or
seagrass beds.)
The subject property special conditions that have factored in the overall proposed dock
layout are the existing width of waterway, adjacent docking facilities, and applicant
owned shoreline length.
As for the subject property’s shoreline length of 80-feet and the required side yard
setbacks of 15-feet there is not sufficient backing distances for the vessel with a shore
parallel mooring like the existing docking facility. The typically design criteria for
backing distance is length and half of the vessel size utilizing the slip therefore we would
need to provide 63-feet. With the two adjacent properties both having existing docking
facilities the shore parallel design was not an option for this property. The property to
the west is owned by the applicant but is a grandfathered structure which they would
rather not remove and even if they did the setback of 15-feet for both the subject dock
and adjacent dock would still not provide sufficient backing distances. That option was
considered when determine the newly proposed dock design.
Based off that the only other option for this property is to protrude further than the
allowed 20-feet due to the subject property being located on an open waterway which
can accommodate a dock extending out 67-feet from the MHWL as that is the 25% line.
As proposed today the dock still does not extend out to the allowed 25% line nor is it
necessary to as you can see per the proposed dock layout the new design extends out 45-
feet from the property line (most restrictive) and approximately 43-feet from the
MHWL. The entire waterway is open to navigation and therefore the proposed
extension request will not interfere with the everyday normal navigation boaters
currently experience on the subject waterway.
Criterion Met
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 proposed docking facility has been minimized and still provide deck area for
routine maintenance, safe access as well as recreational activities like fishing plus
storage of kayaks and/or paddleboards. The total over-water square footage is 678
square feet. There are two 4-foot side finger docks on either side of the proposed boatlift
with a deck area that is within the 20-foot protrusion limit that offers recreational
access to the waterway as well as provide additional area for storage on the dock that
should not be considered excessive as it is within the allowed 20-foot protrusion
measurement.
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
As designed this dock is still consistent with at least one other existing docking facility
within the Vanderbilt Lagoon waterway that has been approved for a BDE which is
located at 300 Oak Ave.
Criterion Met
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.)
The proposed vessels size to be kept on-site is 40-feet long. Based on the vessels length
the applicant will not exceed the allowed 50% of the subject property’s linear shoreline.
Criterion Met.
4. Whether or not 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 either property owner.)
There is an existing dock and boatlift already onsite therefore, no new impacts to the
neighboring property views of the waterway will result from the proposed project.
Additionally, your view by riparian rights is within the property’s riparian area
extending out to the middle of the subject waterway.
Criterion Met
5. Whether or not seagrass beds are located within 200 feet of the proposed dock facility. (If
seagrass beds are present, compliance with LDC subsection 5.03.06 I must be demonstrated.)
There are no seagrass beds present on the property nor the neighboring properties
within 200’ of the existing dock structure.
Criterion Met
6. Whether or not the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection requirements
of LDC subsection 5.03.06 E.11. (If applicable, compliance with subsection 5.03.06.E.11
must be demonstrated.)
The proposed work is a single-family dock facility and therefore not subject to Manatee
Protection Requirements.
N/A
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
STATE OF FLORIDACOUNTY AERIAL VICINITY MAPSTATE OF FLORIDACOUNTY AERIAL VICINITY MAPNOTES:<> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SUBJECTPROPERTYSUBJECTPROPERTY<> LATITUDE:N 26.267351<> LONGITUDE:W -81.821027SITE ADDRESS:<> 260 CONNERS AVENAPLES, FL 34108Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg LOCATION MAP 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVELOCATION MAP48-------------------01 OF 07COLLIER COUNTYCOLLIER COUNTYGULF OF MEXICOGULF OF MEXICO8588288641MARCOISLANDEVERGLADESCITY9329846NAPLES90908399483783784129292983983992887846951862I-758486431856850846890896NESWKEY WESTTAMPAFT.MYERSMIAMINAPLESSUBJECTPROPERTY3.B.fPacket Pg. 202Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 :
NESW0153060SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg EXISTING CONDITIONS 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEEXISTING CONDITIONS48-------------------02 OF 07·SURVEY COURTESY OF:··SURVEY DATED:·THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOTINTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.·ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW·APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF):·EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX):·TIDAL DATUM:··MHW (NAVD)=··MLW (NAVD)=NOTES:"COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, INC."05-22-21-1.31'+0.30'80'481268'80'122'122'80'CONNERS AVERIPARIAN LINERIPARIANLINERIPARIANSETBACKLINEPROPERTYBOUNDARY15'15'SITE ADDRESS:,260 CONNERS AVENAPLESFL3410822'16'3.B.fPacket Pg. 203Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 :
NESW051020SCALE IN FEETSITE ADDRESS:,260 CONNERS AVENAPLESFL34108Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg PROPOSED DOCK 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEPROPOSED DOCK48-------------------03 OF 07RIPARIANLINERIPARIANLINEEXISTINGSEAWALLPROPERTYBOUNDARYAA04·SURVEY COURTESY OF:··SURVEY DATED:·THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOTINTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.·ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW·APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF):·EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX):·TIDAL DATUM:··MHW (NAVD)=··MLW (NAVD)=NOTES:·PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·TOTAL OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF):·TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM PROPERTY LINE:·TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM MHWL:"COURT GREGORY SURVEYING, INC."05-22-21-1.31'+0.30'80'481268'67867845'RIPARIANLINERIPARIANLINE15'15'PROPOSEDDOCKPROPOSED8-POST LIFTRIPARIANLINESETBACKRIPARIANLINESETBACK40'4'4'16'18'41'18'20'27'
45'
44'44'3.B.fPacket Pg. 204Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 :
x -3.7
'X -2
.2
'03510SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg CROSS SECTION AA 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVECROSS SECTION AA48-------------------04 OF 0745' TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM PROPERTY LINEN.T.E. 10'18' BOAT LIFT8-POSTEXISTINGSEAWALLPROPOSEDDOCKALL PILES TO BEWRAPPED FROM 12"ABOVE MHWL TO 6"BELOW SUBSTRATEMHW = +0.30' (NAVD 88)MLW = -1.31' (NAVD 88)PROPERTYLINE3.B.fPacket Pg. 205Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 :
NESW0204080SCALE IN FEETSITE ADDRESS:,260 CONNERS AVENAPLESFL34108Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg SUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVESUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY48-------------------05 OF 07PROPERTYBOUNDARYTYPICAL DIVE TRANSECTNO SEAGRASSES WEREOBSERVED GROWINGWITHIN 200FT OF THEPROPOSED PROJECT200'200'TRANSECT LINE(10' APART)10'3.B.fPacket Pg. 206Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 :
NOTE: THE DIMENSIONS SHOWNARE APPROXIMATE AND ARETAKEN FROM THE AERIAL IMAGE.NESW050100200SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg ADJACENT DOCKS 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ05-25-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEADJACENT DOCKS48-------------------06 OF 07PROPERTYBOUNDARY23'24'
23'
23'
23'
24'
45'
23'
23'
23'
20'
19'
20'18'22'CONNERS AVE3.B.fPacket Pg. 207Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 :
NOTE: THE DIMENSIONS SHOWNARE APPROXIMATE AND ARETAKEN FROM THE AERIAL IMAGE.NESW0100200400SCALE IN FEETTurrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.Email: tuna@thanaples.com3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732Marine & Environmental ConsultingPhone: (239) 643-0166Fax: (239) 643-6632REV#:CREATED:DRAWN BY:JOB NO.:SECTION-TOWNSHIP-RANGE-DESIGNED:p:\21081.00 mckibben-260 conners ave\CAD\PERMIT-COUNTY\21081-BDE.dwg WIDTH OF WATERWAY 8/22/2022THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.SE1.2.3.4.5.REV BY:DATE:CHK BY:CHANGED:SHEET NO.:RY NO. 5875JRRMJ08-22-2221081-2925260 CONNERS AVEWIDTH OF WATERWAY48-------------------07 OF 07PROPERTYBOUNDARY638'CONNERS AVE268'3.B.fPacket Pg. 208Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 :
06/11/20213.B.fPacket Pg. 209Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
MCKIBBEN DOCK
260 CONNERS AVE
NAPLES, FL 34108
SUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY
AUGUST 2, 2021
PREPARED BY:
TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES, INC
3584 EXCHANGE AVENUE, STE B
NAPLES, FL 34104
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
McKibben Dock
Submerged Resource Survey
August 2021
2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The McKibben dock and associated residence is located at 260 Conners Ave and can be further
identified by parcel #27630560003. The property is bound to the east and west by single family
residences, to the north by Conners Ave, and to the south by Vanderbilt Lagoon. The property is
located at Section 29, Township 48S, and Range 25E. The landward portion of the property
currently contains a single-family residence with an existing docking facility for one boat.
Turrell, Hall & Associates was contracted to provide environmental permitting services pertaining
to the proposed docking facility, which requires the completion of a Submerged Resource Survey
(SRS). This report will provide planning and assistance to both the owner(s) and government
agencies reviewing the proposed project.
The SRS survey was conducted on August 2, 2021. Sea surface conditions consisted of clear skies,
light winds out of the southeast, and an air temperature of 88° F at the time of the survey. The tide
was a high tide upon arrival to the site, high tide at the project site occurred at 8:54 A.M. (2.1 ft.)
and low tide had occurred following our arrival onsite at 4:24 P.M. (0.4 ft.). The water temperature
was 86° F.
2.0 OBJECTIVE
The objective of the submerged resource survey was to identify and locate any existing submerged
resources within 200’ of the proposed project. The survey provided onsite environmental
information to help determine if the proposed project would impact any existing submerged
resources and if so would assist in reconfiguring the proposed dock in order to minimize any
impacts. The general scope of work performed at the site is summarized below.
• Turrell, Hall & Associates personnel conducted a site visit to verify the location of any
submerged resources within 200-feet.
• Turrell, Hall & Associates personnel identified submerged resources at the site (or the lack
there of), estimated the percent coverage, and delineated the approximate limits of any
submerged resources observed.
• Turrell, Hall & Associates personnel delineated limits via a handheld GPS (Garmin Model
76csx).
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
McKibben Dock
Submerged Resource Survey
August 2021
3
3.0 METHODOLOGY
Turrell, Hall & Associates biologists intentionally designed the methodology of the Submerged
Resource Survey to cover the entire property shoreline for the proposed dock and boat-lift
installation. The components for this survey included:
● Review of aerial photography of survey area
● Establish survey transects lines overlaid onto aerials
● Physically swim transects, GPS locate limits of submerged resources, and determine
approximate percent of coverage
● Document and photograph all findings
The survey area was evaluated systematically by following the established transects, spaced
approximately 10-feet apart as shown on the attached exhibit. The existing surrounding docks on
the canal provided reference points for easily identifiable land markers such as dock pilings which
assisted in maintaining position within each transect.
4.0 RESULTS
The substrate found within the surveyed area consists of 1 distinct classification: silt muck with
minimal shell debris, which was observed throughout the entire surveyed area. The shoreline
consists of a concrete seawall with an existing docking facility. The existing dock and surrounding
docking facilities all support a variety of fish as well as sessile and motile invertebrates such as
barnacles and mud crabs. Some of the existing dock piles carried historic fragments or remains of
oysters, but no live individuals were observed. Algae was observed covering parts of the
submerged portions of the piles and seawall panels but was not observed in the underlying
substrate. The majority of the project site was devoid of vegetative growth, presumably because
of the low water quality which also reduces penetration of the water column by sunlight. A list of
observed species can be seen below in Table 1.
Table 1 – Observed fish species
Common Name Scientific Name
Striped Mullet Mugil cephalus
Sheepshead Archosargus probatocephalus
Crevalle Jack Caranx hippos
Gray Snapper Lutjanus grisens
Barnacle Amphibalanus spp.
Mud Crab Panopius herbstii
Snook Centropomus undecimalis
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
McKibben Dock
Submerged Resource Survey
August 2021
4
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
The submerged resource survey conducted at the project site yielded few findings at best.
Barnacles, mud crabs, and historic indicators of oysters could be seen on the seawall panel and on
the dock pilings. The dock area does provide additional cover and habitat for fish and other marine
life to utilize. Seagrasses were not observed anywhere near the project site. All fish species were
observed swimming in and around the dock and subject shoreline.
Negative impacts to submerged resources are not expected with the proposed project.
EXISTING DOCK EXISTING DOCK AND WATERWAY
Typical Bottom Sediment
Existing Seawall
3.B.f
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Attachment E - Applicant's Backup, Application and Supporting Documents (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
BDE-PL20220001299
Attachment F – Public Correspondence
Collier County GIS
Subject Property / Petitioner: 260 Conners Ave
Letters of Objection:
151 Conners Ave - Myhelic
274 Conners Ave - Kisch
281 Conners Ave - Hoberg
316 Conners Ave - Landis
418 Conners Ave - Allen
434 Conners Ave - Granata
450 Conners Ave - Grigsby
132 Egret Ave - Vilks
254 Flamingo Ave - Ferris
324 Seabee Ave - Rosmonowski
375 Seabee Ave - Gonnering
395 Seabee Ave - Kravitz
427 Seabee Ave – Dunn G & Dunn S
---
362 Emerald Bay Cir (not within photographed area) - Clenney
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: Sue Myhelic <sue@suemyhelic.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2022 5:06 PM
To: KellyJohn
Cc: Evie Kisch; Sue Myhelic
Subject: Proposed 44 foot dock 260 Conners Avenue PL 2022000-1299
Attachments: DOC922.PDF
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
To All Parties:
As a resident located at 151 Conners Avenue, I reside right down the street from the owner of the
above captioned property. It has come to my attention that the owner of this lovely home wants a
variance from the normal allowed boat dock extensions. And the variance he wants, 44 feet vertically
extended into the canal and to hold a 42 foot boat, is going to do nothing to help the future of anyone
who purchases a home on the water. Apparently, this owner was denied a 45 degree dock a few
months ago, going out 34 feet. Now he wants a larger dock with massive consequences to
neighbors. Here are my objections:
I have attached an overview of the home and I have added the dock in the picture as it would look if
allowed .As you can see, it protrudes extensively, and will greatly inhibit the view from the neighbor to
the East. The sunsets that were enjoyed from their Lani would be gone, and in place a huge 42-foot
boat, with a height of at least 15 feet would be the last vision they would have at night. I am sure the
next several homes to the East would also have a view that was much less than what they had before.
Nothing that anyone bargained for when purchasing a home on the water in Vanderbilt, Naples.
The other issue is precedent. To the best of my knowledge, I do not know of any other dock in the
Vanderbilt Lagoon that is of that size protruding into the water. The other canal homes could never get
that variance simply because of the size of the canal they are located on. In this case, yes, this owner
and all the other owners on the south side of Conners Avenue enjoy a premium view with the vast
largeness of the waterway, but does that mean an owner can simply demand something that will not be
a benefit to all? And, as I contend, a detriment everyone in the surrounding Vanderbilt area.
As we all know, once a variance is granted, more and more crop up for other matters. Undoubtedly, in
the future, if granted, this will only prove to be a stumbling block to other unreasonable requests. As a
Vanderbilt owner and a boater, I have enjoyed living here and using the waterways, which presently
look conformant throughout. With this new addition, I respectfully suggest that it will look not only out
of place but become the eyesore of the neighborhood. By the way, I did a Collier Appraiser research of
the drone photos of all the streets in Vanderbilt. I could not find ONE that protruded into any of the
bays that have the availability of such an intrusion.
My last comment is VALUE. If anyone who lives to the East of the subject property tries to sell their
home with this infringement on view, it would only be reasonable to expect that the value of the
property would certainly be diminished. Stands to reason unfortunately.
SO I ASK - WHY SHOULD THIS BE THE FIRST?????????
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
Thank you for listening, and if you need, I am always available. My contact information is listed below.
Please, let’s keep Vanderbilt the beautiful waterway it is now. Any adjustment on someone’s whims
would be unfair to all.
Sue Myhelic
Founder/Owner
Gulf Breeze Real Estate
239-216-6444
sue@suemyhelic.com
www.suemyhelic.com
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: Evie Kisch <bobandeviekisch@aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 6:44 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: Revised Version #PL20220001299
Attachments: NEW BOAT DOC.pdf
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
This is the revised version since we discovered the aerial dimensions were incorrect
on our dock (274 Conners) showing it at 24 ft from the seawall which is incorrect as in fact it is 20 ft
Consequently, his dock would be extending 25 ft further out than our dock.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
Robert & Evelyn Kisch
274 Conners Ave
Naples, Fl 34108
August 22, 2022
Dear Andrew Dickman:
This letter is my second formal objection to the proposed Boat Dock Extension Petition.
This is pertaining to #PL20220001299- at 260 Conners Avenue, which I understand
Douglas McKibbon is requesting a 44 ft dock and 42 ft boat to run perpendicular to the
sea wall.
First of all, we can not believe in his initial effort he was requesting a 34 ft dock
extension (#PL20210001835 at 260 Conners Ave.) which was denied. Now he is
asking for a 44 ft dock and 42 ft boat.This is a complete waste of time and expense.
.
As a resident next door, East of 260 Conners Ave, we are directly affected by this
request for dock extension. What would Doug McKibbon do if this request was
turned around, we are sure he would not approve a 44 ft dock and boat or
wall in his face. Our view would be completely destroyed.
His dock would be extending 25 ft further out than our dock, making us look into
25 ft of boat and dock, instead of the water and views of our sunsets. Going out 90
degrees would be just as destructive or worse than 45 degrees as he tried for and was
denied before..
Even though Mr. McKibbon owns 260 Conners, and the adjoining home and lot on
Conners, we are sure he would never infringe on his own property as destroying views
definitely affects value and enjoyment.
We bought this home 22 yrs ago for enjoying water views, boating and investment.
Our view would be gone and our waterways could cause more boater accidents
and property damage due to irregular sized docks.
If Collier County allows one property owner to extend his dock others will follow suit
causing a domino effect of problems for those who lose their views and may not be able
to afford to extend docks built to be kept in code. For safety purposes and visual
aesthetic purposes, this would be a mess..
Respectfully,
Robert & Evelyn Kisch
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: STEVE HOBERG <stevehoberg@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 7:44 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: Boat Dock Extension Proposed PL 2022000-1299
Attachments: Boat Dock Extension PL20222221299.pdf
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
John,
Please see attached document for the above referenced variance.
Thank You,
Steve Hoberg
Sent from Mail for Windows
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
RE: PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE
260 Conners Ave (BD)
Boat Dock Extension Proposed PL 2022000-1299
John Kelly (john.kelly@colliercountyfl.gov)
I am located across the street at 281 Conners Avenue. I am against the variance to include a new 45-foot
dock vertically extended into the canal. I was at the last meeting for the variance of a dock at the same
address. It seems this design is much more intrusive than the last one. Blocks more view and extends
more into the canal. This could not happen in most of the canals as to the sizes of the canals. If this
happens could set a precedence for other such designs and could ruin our community on the canal. A
dock of this size would also accommodate a very large boat which would be accessible only at high tides
and also might get stuck in shallow waterways so it seems not to be practical. There is also the large
amount of decking or surface area which will need to be cleaned. It is my experience in living here most
people will have their landscapers blow loose debris off decks and docks into the canal waters.
Dock extensions and covered docks are sometimes very ugly, and ruin views up and down the canal
even if they are further down from the extension or cover. This also might cause resale of some
properties to be devalued. So, I am against this proposed variance.
Steve Hoberg
281 Conners Ave
Naples, FL
.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: Jennifer Landis <jkplandis@comcast.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2022 11:17 AM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: PL 20220001299
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use extreme caution
when opening attachments or clicking links.
Good morning John, I am writing to you regarding the proposed variance at 260 Conners Ave. that is under review
44 foot extension. I reside at 316 Connors Ave, 2 properties to the east of this proposed variance. I have resided in
this home for 3 years now and my father before me for eight years prior to that. The biggest attribute to my home
is its unobstructed view of the waterway to the west and the large open waterway. I am including two photos of
my view for you to visualize what a large protruding dock with boat would block my view as well as the
surrounding neighbors views. I myself have a 32 foot boat that I have to park parallel to my dock because of the
restriction of building a dock further out but I would not want to narrow our canal or waterways to obstruct any of
my neighbors views even if I were allowed.
Thank you for your consideration of Vanderbilt bay and our future.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Landis
316 Conners Ave
Sent from my iPhone
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
Jennifer Landis Designs LLC
239-564-8275
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: Greg Allen <greg@15xparking.com>
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2022 2:16 PM
To: KellyJohn
Cc: njdakota; janetallen831; Greg Allen
Subject: Objection to Petition Number BDE-PL20220001299
Attachments: Fedex Label.pdf; Objection to Relief for 260 Conners Avenue Relief.pdf
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Dear Mr. Kelly,
Please accept the attached letter as my formal objection to the granting of the Petitioners
requested relief on Petition # BDE-PL20220001299 for 260 Conners Avenue, Naples.
Original letter being sent via federal express (see attached fedex label).
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Regards,
Terrence Allen
418 Conners Avenue
Naples, FL 34108
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
1
Terrence and Janet Allen
418 Conners Avenue
Naples, FL 34108
September 11, 2022
Sent via overnight via Federal Express and via email:
John.Kelly@collierCountyFL.GOV
Mr. John Kelly, Planner
Collier County
Growth Management and Community Development Department
Office of the Hearing Examiner
2800 North Horseshoe Dr.,
Naples, FL 34104
Re: Public Comment on Petition for Boat Dock Extension
Petition Number: BDE-PL20220001299
Petitioner: Mr. Douglas McKibben
Subject Property: 260 Conners Avenue, Lot 14, Block R – Conner’s
Vanderbilt Beach Estates Unit No 3 In Section 29, Township 48 South,
Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida
Dear Mr. Kelly:
Please accept this letter in lieu of a formal appearance regarding the above
referenced matter and allow it to serve as my objection to the granting of the
relief requested by Mr. Douglas G. McKibben (“Petitioner”), for the reasons set
forth below, which I ask that you incorporate into the record in the event a
judicial appeal becomes necessary. My wife and I will be travelling out of the
Country on the scheduled hearing date of September 22, 2022, or else we would
have appeared in person to voice the below noted objections to the Petitioners
request for relief from the zoning ordinances of Collier County. This letter is being
submitted in compliance with the requirements of Collier County, namely at least
ten (10) days before the scheduled hearing, and as such should become part of
the permanent record of the subject application.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
2
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
1. Petitioner owns a single-family residence located at 260 Conners Avenue,
Naples Florida. Petitioner has a boat dock that protrudes in the channel
approximately twenty feet (20’) as permitted by ordinance.
2. Petitioner seeks relief to construct a dock that will protrude into the water
channel by a total of forty-five (45) feet, which is twenty-five (25) feet
greater than permitted by ordinance, LDC Section 5.03.06.
3. Petitioner seeks the requested relief so that a large boat dock can be built
to accommodate a large vessel.
4. Myself and my wife have resided at 418 Conners Avenue for the past
twenty-two (22) years and we object to the granting of the relief sought by
Petitioner for the reasons set forth herein.
REASONS WHY THE HEARING EXAMINER SHOULD NOT GRANT T HE REQUESTED
RELIEF
1. Petitioner is seeking relief from a self -created hardship to the detriment of
the environment and the community as follows:
a. Granting Petitioners relief for the self-created will cause harm to the
environment by creating additional shading of water which can have
a detrimental impact to an essential fish habitat;
b. Granting Petitioners relief for the self-created hardship will create a
hardship for neighbors who presently are in compliance with all
zoning ordinances. If Petitioner relief is granted, my view and that of
the neighbors view will be permanently obstructed from the
protrusion of a dock forty-five (45 feet) into the channel, which could
also result in a devaluation of my property and the neighboring
properties, and as a result diminish the beautiful viewscape of the
canals, channel, and sunsets that are presently enjoyed by myself
and the neighbors.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
3
c. Granting Petitioners relief for the self-created hardship will set a
poor precedence in the neighborhood and allow other property
owners to seek similar relief.
d. Granting Petitioners relief for the self-created hardship will create a
boating safety hazard for other boaters in the canal and channel.
e. The Petitioner presently has a boat dock that extends twenty (20)
feet into the channel and modifications to the Petitioners present
dock can be made without the requested relief that will allow
Petitioner to meet his objective.
For the reasons set forth herein, as an interested person residing just a few
houses away, I respectfully request you consider the above reasons for objecting
to the granting of the relief requested by Petitioner and on the above basis and
any other pertinent matters as set forth on the record, that you deny the subject
petition for relief. Failure to strictly adhere to the zoning ordinances and granting
relief for the self-created hardship matter can be considered arbitrary,
unreasonable, and capricious.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Very truly yours,
Terrence and Janet Allen
Terrence and Janet Allen
418 Conners Avenue
Naples, FL 34108
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue
From: pgranata2551@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2022 3:51 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: Object to dock extension
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Hello,
I live on Conners Avenue and wanted to let you know that the proposed variance of dock extension for
260 Conners shouldn’t be permitted. Every dock is now at the same proportion in relation to the water.
Big boats come through. If this sticks far out as planned- it will be more difficult to pass through and
more unsightly.
Pamela Granata
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: Kristi Grigsby <grigsbykristi@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2022 12:39 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: Proposed Variance at 260 Conners Avenue; Number PL 20220001299
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Dear Mr. Kelly:
RE: Variance Number PL 20220001299; 260 Conners Avenue
This email is to express my opposition to the proposed variance at 260 Conners Avenue, currently
under review for a 44 ft. dock extension.
As a nearly 20-year resident of the Conners neighborhood, the current regulations are plenty sufficient
to enjoy the beautiful waterways in our area, without impeding on the openness for all to enjoy. I do not
support this proposed variance, nor setting precedence for the many variance requests that will
inevitably follow.
Thank you for including my objection in the decision-making process.
Kristi Grigsby
450 Conners Avenue
grigsbykristi@gmail.com
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: Cindy Vilks <cindoo7779@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 2:11 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: PL2022000-1299 proposed 44’ dock at 260 Connors Ave, Naples
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
To: Andrew Dickman, Hearing Examiner
From: Cindy and Steve Vilks, homeowners
132 Egret Ave.
Naples,FL 34108
Regarding: PL2022000-1299
Thank you for accepting our correspondence in the above matter. We reside one canal away from this
proposed boat structure. We agree with others who wish to see this variance denied for each of the
many reasons you’ve likely heard expressed.
Our biggest concern is from the threat this poses to the safe water navigation of the area. In each of the
past few years, we have noticed an uptick in unsafe boating around the Vanderbilt Beach canals (this
Connors/Seabee canal in particular). Excessive Speed and close proximity to property are no loner rare
occasions, as I’m sure you’ve heard from the various law enforcement agencies that patrol these
waters. We have no doubt that added boat traffic from the One Naples project will exacerbate this
ongoing issue. FWC and Collier County Sheriff patrols have been stepped up, and we certainly
appreciate that.
I’m asking you, if you haven’t already, to speak to these agencies and ask their opinion of this type
of variance. My opinion is that allowing these large, perpendicular boat structures will potentially set in
place a precedent for an even more dangerous waterway safety scenario. Please deny this request for
variance.
Respectfully,
Cindy and Steve Vilks
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: HENRY FERRIS <hdfvmd@comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 8:18 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: McKibbon variance application #PL20210001835
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Dear Mr. Kelly,
Here we are again writing in opposition to a rich guy's request of the Collier
County Planning board to indulge his vanity at the expense of his neighbors and
the Collier County community in general.
I am referring to petition # PL2022000-1299 at Conners Avenue whereby
Douglas McKibbon wants to construct a 44ft dock extending perpendicular to his
property. He feels this is necessary to accommodate his 42 ft boat and his own
convenience in accessing it.
It has been brought to my attention that other residents in the Connors area who
may be equally or more wealthy than Mr McKibbon wouldn't dream of clogging
up the Connors canal with their large yachts and oversized docks and have
made accommodation for their boats in marinas designed to park such craft. And
they are aghast that this vainglorious man would request such a variance.
Of course, Mr McKibbon has disregarded the affect his building will have on his
immediate neighbors who will have to stare at this unsightly piece of construction
instead of the lovely expanse of waterway that is the Connors canal. Nor has he
considered the hazards to their safety it will present as it impedes his neighbors'
ingress to and egress from their docks.
In addition Mr McKibbon seeks a variance regardless of the affect this imposing
dock will have on the manatees and dolphins and other marine life that swim and
feed in our canals. Their survival is already in jeopardy yet Mr McKibbon
apparently denies responsibility and cares little about his role in their stress and
ultimate demise.
Mr McKibbon bought his property knowing full well the permissible limits to dock
sizes in the canal. That he chose to buy a bigger boat was fine but his neighbors
and the wildlife of the Connors' canal should not be made to suffer for his self
indulgence and convenience.
Thank you.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
Sincerely,
Deborah and Henry Ferris
254 Flamingo Ave.
Naples, Fl 34108
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: JEANE ROSMONOWSKI <rozpjmr@comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 5:01 PM
To: KellyJohn
Cc: bobandeviekisch@aol.com; Pat Rosmonowski; Bill Gonnering; Cindy Vilks
Subject: PL2022000-1299 proposed 44' dock at 260 Conners Ave.
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
To: Andrew Dickman, Hearing Examiner
From: Patrick & Jean Rosmonowski
324 Seabee Avenue
Naples
Re: PL2022000-1299 proposed 44' dock at 260 Conners Ave.
Dear Mr. Dickman,
We are writing in regards to the proposed 44' dock being considered for 260 Conners
Ave. We live directly across the canal from 260 Conners at 324 Seabee Ave. We also
attended the recent meeting (Fall 2021) for the proposed 34' dock that was requested
for 260 Conners. That request was denied by the attorney overseeing the review due to
many objections at that time (ours included). This proposal is now 44', a full additional
10' in length and also extending into the canal perpendicular instead of the first
designed 45 degree angle dock.
The proposed dock will extend an ADDITIONAL 24' beyond all the other docks built in
the area that have been designed in accordance with current County regulations (20'
max), ours included. Once a project like this is approved, there's nothing to prevent
other homes from requesting similar variances and there will be no stopping the de-
valuation of our beautiful waterway.
As we all are aware, the Conners canal is the widest, most sought after, attractive area
in the Vanderbilt area. It is a prime traffic area for local boats, fishermen and visitors
(rental boats) for sight-seeing, fishing, house viewing and relaxing. This occurs all day
long and well into the evening hours. Many of the local fishermen travel close to the
docks at night and cast their lines close to the dock and into the darkness. Having a
dock that extends an additional 24' out from the norm is a not only a major safety
hazard, but a disruption to the beauty of our area. This could affect home values and
resale in the future and be an eyesore in comparison to all the other homes that have
maintained the beauty of the area and honored the rules and regulations of the County
that were put in place for very important reasons.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
In addition, the development of One Naples (south of our homes) over the next few
years will be adding approximately 22 boating slips with a marina and commercial dock,
which will greatly increase the boat traffic in the area; causing additional concerns.
This proposal was rejected last Fall for a smaller version (34'). WHY WOULD THE
COUNTY EVEN CONSIDER A LARGER VERSION?
On a side note, the waters of Turkey Bay and Wiggins Pass continue to fill in and need
to be dredged more and more often. It will become increasingly difficult for a 42' boat
with a large draft to utilize those waters to travel to the Gulf.
Please, we implore you to help us protect the beauty and attractiveness of our area,
home values and safety of boaters. This project would not being any value but serve to
destroy what we all have fought to protect.
Respectfully,
Pat and Jean Rosmonowski
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: Brittany Amerine <brittany@ipcnaples.com>
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2022 11:14 AM
To: KellyJohn
Cc: Bill Gonnering
Subject: Per Bill Gonnering: Letter of Formal Complaint for BOE-PL2022000/295-260
Conner Avenue
Attachments: Seabee Dock Letter - 9-12-22.pdf
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Per Bill Gonnering:
Good Morning John:
Attached please find a copy of a Letter of Formal Complaint for the Boat Dock Extension Petition #BOE-
PL2022000/295-260 Conner Avenue. Should you have any questions, please contact Bill at 239-572-
4500. Thank you.
Kind regards,
Brittany Amerine
Licensed Administrative Assistant
Investment Properties Corporation of Naples
3838 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 402
Naples, Florida 34103-3586
tel 239.261.3400 x174
fax 239.261.7579
brittany@ipcnaples.com
www.ipcnaples.com
Licensed Real Estate Broker
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email transmission (and/or the attachments accompanying it) may contain privileged
and confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, disclosure, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please promptly notify the sender
by reply email and destroy the original message. Thank you.
LIABILITY DISCLAIMER: Buyers, Sellers, Landlords and Tenants must all conduct proper due-diligence when buying,
selling or leasing commercial property. Due diligence should include, but not be limited to, matters involving
zoning, permitting, environmental and all other regulatory matters, plus financial underwriting of participating parties
including research associated with bankruptcy, foreclosure and financial capability. Neither IPC nor its employees, agents
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
or staff perform appraisals or provide services of an appraiser. Additionally, parties should obtain tax and legal
advice. IPC does not represent or warrant these matters nor is it responsible for the statements of third parties.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
William & Patricia Gonnering
375 Seabee Ave.
Naples, FL 34108
September 12, 2022
John Kelly
2800 N Horseshoe Drive
Naples, FL 34104
john.kelly@colliercountyfl.gov
Dear John,
This letter is a formal objection to the Boat Dock Extension Petition #BOE‐PL2022000/295 – 260
Conner Avenue.
As a resident of Vanderbilt Beach for over 24 years, I am very concerned about the Conners/ Seabee
canal esthetics, property values, and boat launching and docking ability on our canal. Most of the
docks on our waterway have an East/West entrance and exit. See attached photo. If the 24’ dock
extension rule is allowed, it will create the following problems:
1) If my neighbor extended his dock 24’ out from present dock, I would not be able to get my boat
in my slip. My dock, which was refinished April 2021 at a cost of $35,000 will be considered
obsolete and will have to be reconfigured. Like most owners, I have to enter my dock from the
East side and it is already a tight fit. When I reconstructed the dock, I put the entrance on an
angle to help ease the already cumbersome burden of parking.
2) Last year, November 2021, the owner of 260 Conners Avenue filed a petition to extend his dock
14’ out from previous dock to 34’ into the canal. This year he wants to extend out to 44’. Is
there some way to solve this annual hassle?
3) Safety / If one dock is extended into the water way and the others, what would keep boats, jet
skis, kayaks and paddle boards from running into the extended dock, especially at night. The
owner of 260 Connors Avenue does not keep his boat there for the summer which means just
the dock would be extended out. I also fish the light at night and have seen boats run through
at 20‐25 miles per hour.
4) If Collier County allows one property owner extend his dock, many others will follow suit
causing a domino effect of problems for those who do not want to or cannot afford to extend
their dock.
5) If each owner decided to extend their dock 24’ on each side of the canal, it would make the
wake area 44’ less total. The waterway is already crowded with many boaters, kayak and
paddleboarders, and wildlife such as dolphin and manatee. We would not only be disrupting
our homes but our endangered wildlife as well.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
6) If one dock is extended in a waterway and the other not extended, what would keep boats from
running into the extended dock in day or night? Irregular sized docks would create traffic
problems and property damage beyond what we already face.
7) The esthetic look of the canal will be changed by the inconsistent sizes of the docks. Most of
the docks have a uniform size and look.
8) The Conners/Seabee canal has always been considered premium property values based on the
extra large width of the canal. Changing this dynamic may have a negative impact on property
values.
I have included a photo below to show you just how much this would impact my current property as
well as my friends and neighbor’s homes. I invite you to come to my home and take a boat ride with
me. I’d like to show you how difficult it is to park a boat in the current capacity and decipher how an
additional 14’ would make my boat dock obsolete.
Sincerely,
William V. Gonnering
375 Seabee Ave
Naples, FL 34108
239‐572‐4500
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: gregory dunn <gdunn5000@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 10:13 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: 260 Conners Ave. Boat Dock Extension
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
John,
My name is Greg Dunn and I live at 427 Seabee Ave. We are across the canal from the proposed boat
dock extension. This extension would ruin the view down the canal and would cause anyone close by
problems docking their boats. It sets a terrible precedent for the Conners area. If it is ok for them can
the house next to me do the same? It would be much nicer for the homes on the canal if they would
look for a more creative way to handle that large of a boat.
Greg Dunn
Sent from my iPad
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: sheri Dunn <art4walls@comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 4:17 PM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: Boat dock extension 260 Connors
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
Mr. John Kelly,
I am writing this to strongly oppose the dock extension for 260 Connors in Naples.
This is terrible idea. What an awful precedent this would set. We want to keep our canals open and
beautiful for all.
Thank you for considering my opinion.
Sheri Dunn
427 Seabee Ave.
Naples, FL 34108
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
From: ROGER CLENNEY <clenney@comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2022 10:44 AM
To: KellyJohn
Subject: PL20220001299
Attachments: conners3.rtf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
EXTERNAL EMAIL: This email is from an external source. Confirm this is a trusted sender and use
extreme caution when opening attachments or clicking links.
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)
I am writing this letter because I am vehemently opposed to
PL20220001299.
Having owned property in Naples for the last forty years, I am very
concerned that the selfishness of one person may be allowed to ruin
the beautiful waterway that is accessible from Conners Avenue. This
not only would be a blight on our shore, but would also create a
significant danger to boaters. It would bring a real problem for boats
coming into dock in the evening hours. If this one atrocity is allowed, it
will be only a matter time before there are other gigantic docks
protruding into the waterway.
We have enjoyed boating and the beautiful sunset for many years.
With irregular oversized boats and boat docks, not only would our
sunset views be definately eliminated, but the ability of neighbors to
maneuver their boats safely would be dangerous: an accident waiting
to happen. We can't allow the desire of one to deprive so many
others of their rights as property owners.
I implore you to oppose PL20220001299.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Clenney
3.B.g
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Attachment F - Public Correspondence (23224 : PL20220001299 BDE 260 Conners Avenue McKibben)