HEX Final Decision 2023-37 HEX NO. 2023-37
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
November 9,2023
PETITION.
Petition No. BDE-PL20230006177 - 220 Barefoot Beach Blvd — Request for a 31-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
51 feet into a waterway that is 290±feet wide.The subject property is located at 220 Barefoot
Beach Boulevard and is further described as Lot 1,Bayfront Gardens,in Section 6,Township
48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The petitioner desires to replace an existing dock that was severely damaged by Hurricane Ian with
one designed to accommodate a single boatlift for a 30-foot vessel and a kayak float.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approved with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87(4) of the
Collier County of Ordinances, Sec. 8.10.00 of the Land Development Code, and Chapter 9 of
the County Administrative Code.
2. The public hearing for this Petition was properly noticed and conducted in accordance with all
County and state requirements.
3. The public hearing was conducted electronically and in-person in accordance with
Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04.
4. The Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative executed the Hybrid Virtual Quasi-Judicial
Public Hearing Waiver related to conducting the public hearing electronically and in-person.
5. The County Staff presented the Petition followed by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's
representative, public comment and then rebuttal by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's
representative. There were no objections made at the public hearing.
6. The County's Land Development Section 5.03.06.H. lists the criteria for dock facility
extensions. The Hearing Examiner may approve,approve with conditions, or deny a boat dock
Page 1 of 5
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 unbridged 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 improved with a single-family residence within a
residential component of a PUD. The proposed dock facility comprises a single boatlift for
a 30-foot vessel and a kayak float.
2. Whether the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the general
length,type and draft as that described in the petitioner's application is unable to launch or
moor at mean low tide (MLT). (The petitioner's application and survey should establish
that the water depth is too shallow to allow launching and mooring of the vessel(s)
described without an extension.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET. The boat dock extension is necessary to accommodate the owners' vessel
because the natural mangrove shoreline and the existing water depths are too shallow to
moor the vessel at Mean Low Tide.
3. Whether the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on navigation within an
adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The facility should not intrude into any
marked or charted navigable channel thus impeding vessel traffic in the channel.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET. The proposed dock facility does not intrude into any marked or charted
navigable channel and is near the terminus end of the bay with little navigation other than
for neighboring properties.
4. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 percent of the width of the
waterway, and whether a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway width between dock
facilities on either side is maintained for navigability. (The facility should maintain the
required percentages.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET The subject waterway is 290 feet wide at the narrowest point, and the
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 5
proposed protrusion is 51 feet or 18 percent of the waterway. The distance between the
subject and the nearest dock facility on an opposite shore is 207 feet; therefore,71.38
percent of the waterway remains open for navigation at the narrowest point.
5. Whether the proposed location and design of the dock facility is such that the facility would
not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. (The facility should not interfere with the
use of legally permitted neighboring docks.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET The proposed dock facility will exceed the required side/riparian setback of
15 feet by providing 51 feet to the north and 60 feet to the south riparian lines; said dock
has been designed not to interfere with neighboring dock facilities.
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
BEEN MET The subject shoreline is natural, not hardened, and supports a mangrove
fringe. Florida Statutes permit minimal trimming; however, the dock protrusion permits
the preservation of the majority of the mangrove fringe.
2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the vessel for
loading/unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area not
directly related to these functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET The proposed docking facility has been minimized to the fullest extent
possible and still provides sufficient deck area for routine maintenance, safe access, and
recreational activities like fishing and kayak access. The total over-water square footage
is 543 square feet.
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
BEEN MET. The subject property has 137 feet of water frontage, and the dock facility has
been designed for mooring a single 30-foot vessel in addition to kayaks. For the purposes
of this section, the proposed vessel will account for 21.9 percent of the property's
waterfront.
Page 3 of 5
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
BEEN MET. The property to the north is a multi family boat dock facility and the land's
contour changes to the south. The existing mangrove fringe obstructs the view of little
hickory bay from the first floor of residences; therefore, the proposed dock facility will not
have a major impact on the view of neighboring properties.
5. Whether seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. (If seagrass beds
are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06.J of the LDC must be demonstrated.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS
BEEN MET The submerged resources survey indicates no seagrass beds exist within 200
feet of the proposed dock. No seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility.
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 provisions of the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan do
not apply to single-family dock facilities except for those within the seawalled basin of Port
of the Islands; the subject property is not located within Port of the Islands.
ANALYSIS_
Based on a review of the record including the Petition, application, exhibits, the County's staff
report, and hearing comments and testimony from the Petitioner and/or the Petitioner's
representative(s), County staff and any given by the public, the Hearing Examiner finds that there
is enough competent, substantial evidence as applied to the criteria set forth in Section 5.03.06.H
of the Land Development Code to approve Petition. The Petition meets 5 out of 5 of the primary
criteria and 5 out of 6 secondary criteria,with one criterion being not applicable.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number BD-PL20230006177, filed by Jeff
Rogers of Turrell, Hall & Associates representing Craig Fenneman and the Craig E. Fenneman
Revocable Trust, with respect to the property described as 72 Southport Cove and is legally
described as Lot 1, Bayfront Gardens, in Section 06, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier
County, Florida, for the following:
• A 31-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for
waterways greater than 100 feet in width to allow a boat docking facility protruding a total
of 51 feet into a waterway that is 290±feet wide, for the benefit of the subject property.
Page 4 of 5
Said changes are fully described in the Proposed Dock and Related Plans attached as Exhibit "A"
and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below.
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A—Proposed Dock and Related Plans
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
72 Southport Cove and is legally described as Lot 1, Bayfront Gardens, in Section 06, Township
48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida
CONDITIONS.
All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development.
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.
,fre
December 1, 2023
Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT "A"
•
p '
ij y i to
u)
Z
I Ill
J Et
c `, / " £ N
um
1 MY11rrA . Q ��} •�• lb —
{irr•M r 1 •
R i4.
} . . , I I�
'Ai ,.. 0
.. ., ...,, i .
_, ..._ I'd 01 st ....1 1-.. :
jr:-IN if Z ,�.0 rn h+q
V • • • 0
00„.
n
� ; 1n
U na
0
J
m
0 cc
111 II f- op F
iw �a i CVN Q
/ afDO M
va r }Z olri W Q r' _ O
_ o N I
rn;1 Z
3 CO uj z
J
ocn s F- pr
H
ap�w} 11• o UCO a I--L - D go Z � O r
__IZ.. Q War'i
II 0 N Y LL H
H
J W 00
WLL ¢ W o
z
0 � z N
0 wpLLa Qz0
Mw � � w G^ �
CQI- 0 � ,� �� �^Y
QCO z 0 Q czj`va S
W V i m Lcn
WNQ G�L11Z O a
gCO
� v % v o = r' w
N K— V)
♦ C� o 7
ycz,
am" c�W i
=oZf ad.., a
S N•K .= c
c. aoo Ai.
i�i..
U O
ka �`'jj► 111 ° t
z a
no en
'1-�FZ E '� X1 (1 _ ufn i
Q
Lt()KL5�
IL 1.11
3
00 C g
In K
0
E
w
p120069 naples dock120069.19 naples dock-200 harelnnt bnach1CADIPFRMIT.000NTV120069.19 ODC.dos LOCA7 ION MAP 9120002i
Ir �. w
10
. Z ' w
't'rsi
EIEHj
'\./ i O r ,
co
c`s mw y a
/\ Y
0�" T \ t Z
0 W ` il" "**e- v- s 0
o O \ a
o Z
0
LLJ w p 0 s ..6 F
Ur a Z ti fig,;, 0
HN Nil - am � BN N
W .— J 1S
w §I \ .\lc IIII I *
.---:---•\111 ,_ . CO
c3 W O - :: r` Y `s
w
Y > ctw U
❑ Q O a ? O
4 m Z '
m O ¢ m O s
v
v, OD
Q w Z r
A °WDLL O 0 P.
� �
g� x
Z WFw
>
WZ % Qa
Z p \ mtn -� Et
z ' _
CKWr
I O /
CO
CO Z w � �2 � �� -- O
m ---- \\\\., ' '
'/ N
U G M p
v0vN� Z /1- qP
�F001 w „ d V A m
F 2.,
ilk Ul Ill
n
A I Z X `" .-a. g)N.
QF - Wa
LL
2,310u9ig ;fig, 1 u
k wffimz° ai-z °1 , C„)
3 Jg G
itk Z • • • • • • • /4\ n
LD
020060°aplos dock129069.19 treptus duck•220 barofoot boachlCAD\PERMIT-COUN1 N20069.I9-9DE.dwg EXISTINC DOCK 9@012020
Ce 1IL
N >- 1 a o ' 1
k r- C e>:OZ.- : ':' . ' . " " 4 cc
Pt
;•., ..•.'eXc.-',',..''-.) Ri :,., —: 0 _juL_____:,,°< : :
,„ .
:.
z, •
a.\ IaZ =
vi Q' \ Ijo x
p Q \ 06 W :- Nnavi O
II
r o U O Y \ }
ch
m d 1 = 6R l0
o W/ I
\\ 1 F i 'ira .
_ / p �p \ i N12ryl W
W / 0 \ RI` N
0_ - ,,, ,,,,t. „ilk ,a
O s ... a_ < <
. ri'X 7 V'P 0 } 0
Ce < -J \ t'
....‘ V.:12 \ () ,
71\
ti° Wo
m o
® , \..
J 0 O
14
XZ W U..�x woc W a\ • -I��\ \ ,.-
\\ \\\\ ik ' Z
m z m
\ o {V o
W ZI �� V 7 I— N
J O \ 3 M
} Z' y- o : N $ `i
ce W / 1 1_ ° v o a.
v �Z W Q 7f
Wa d
J a� i gg Mr n ! !-1
- x : cW 6i
W a C n a w�I r�-a cQj d
0 L O i AV ak2 agrc �EL
o.
w u W Lil a6W .gam f w a
g Eg a rl 7 it\r•ct
CL II
:M m 11
W U W y}ouziw.c aN �' u
\ I-, cu Z
o Q a a w�iW�ua�a- ��° a-
z w�� a � o g
a.
\ 000 O J n<DKz&_ 3 °a S
/ O .i �l'kJ,lai �a egFt
/' Ham?<in' d u� aH�
\ Z 2
IC W
p:120009 napinx dnrk{70069.19 napinc dock-220 barefoot baach1CADIPERMIT-COUNTY170069.19-FIDE,dwi PLIDT.IMCD DOCK 912012027
N ,
E w
N
N
111
II I 5 Q
1t,Li
J o �' '
,}� I— IC7 —- I
fIT O c , N
m — �=
NI 1s I � Id.
rr.1 Irl I wgo cn
I m 0 H z
0 51 ; 5
o _N i H w m ., ,. ,;. „ o
CI
2
• �� I , 1�-__w W 2 ---
$ I aQ � O � aa z
g II I J , mw
Qum ,,, � 5 P
II 6 89w W
4 XL W
� I , >
z HCa
0
if
U
Q .
a Wv W z
An 0
J. , , ---- �- 0 r
W
9II; Q o uy
Z
Q I o o CO
o to Y ° z
II 1 -/t` }a. LLJ U
0 U) U m
—
LT_ 8 0 •`" -1- ---
a O N 63
II N
CU N r+
/ `—.. " a
N
crs
U Y 4.. m
O =Cel ad W c.-
•
Go � ' c LT-1 > 2.
`I"WZ • e
1 I n ac UO
LLI a. •
, M O
1 N
F
stf —� --
F
n.120009 nanlea dnck120069.19 moles dock 220 barefoot beochlCA01NLRAII r-COuN 1 Y29069,19.ROF.dwo CROSS SECTION AA 9120I2023
.
CO W
N
Q ~ W
cn — F- w a
= F— ' ., (A C7 U- d m
J
C. CI'Ily I-
C.! m
j y
a0N �
_' / wz0ct w z Nz� � � 0, r
•
77
/ / a
ilit U
Q
/ / / 7 ail./ z T 0i W o s V
/ / / / / '
/ .,/ / / / / / i J L
":1.1\\::.....::,.../::***:::11""1/1...::::"::".:.'-' ct o
wo Leij
'1.1....7.7.,:". ):'/ , / / / a a) 0W
Lt
/ , ` Q m
/ ,... , \ 'ipplaroot u)
Lc} M
l ` Q m U by N
r r.y fv.
Q • . e 1 S Q C7 .
,, • ` 00r F; WZ .Od r n ai
- yQd I 2is
co co
w/
I
` / /' O Q / o �
(---:-.4.1 —j.-----ii...."110,. '44 , 4 -_
. .r
`rl p oCO
' fD4 ;
Ir
z
ct'�1 c 1t. 1\
�:
N
*. .0' ' ......- „ f '1e
p:120069 nnp!n,dnrk120069.19 narVna dnrk-270 barer rim boarlICArno F RMIT.COUNTY120069.19 BUE.dwy SUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY 9/20/2023
' ; y-
Ln
ll . % ^
/ cc
itit , . .
loi.
;pp.,
•
' �. Off, s
t _` K
•
cn
�' a (.0
Z
Q
Z i `u
)r^ ` ea 8l W
•44 '..S.
i 1
CO
_ _
,..,
±. . t
1 U
_iw
tiik ----/,,„
m w 0 f
-, --c < y ,
<r i \ .\ owa
ws •' 1 � w. + !S O Q f
z wo
s:‘.. ...„„
� � .40;6,,
OD y �
• ,
slit
•
' ,—
• � = , ' w0-'/ F— ',_ 41 >_ ,.^ , S e
•
Pr- 1" tr. ir , , ,
. . i , ,_ __ct,i,.,., ,,
02
•
144
b a
1 \ j �"� r Q a� Ilrjle •
t vJ 5. �y 0.
ryj —Jbh ‘.
s �
^ 5 a • • Q
W
K �
'I ,: ..� l z = z JCT
p.420009 aaples doekt2OCC9./9,on'es deck-220 harelool heachiCADIPERMIT-COUNTri10069.19 8DEdwy ADJACLNT DOCKS 0(20(2023
6. 1
czt
Of
• .. g Z
/// / '�-- ;-.-i illoils J• • y • 1 J ' �- it
o 3t '' .j....•.......„•••'..." ..."7 •
l s, 0
1
._r1M < u, !-
ilk,
v t �I
�
p1. Ii z
ra
.- i = � w � g
to
U
"0 tt ?Al u N
r 0
Art \ cc J
Y m
\\ o
W •
I
\Ilk \ } r N01
Q i
.b \\ t W
''."� \ U tt rY1 Q
, . o 1 '
h;:,(if ,i X O O LL i
l ;•
CLW F' Ci
O t O =
\ .. $ � 11l wo W 2 1l a. z
\\ 1t o Q r
\ `� am m
�' • - /
\\ W N z
\ -�� H N
1 2 Q- Q U
\\ itQfr � 5 •
W W a
o
'.IAS kit 1 k Z = � '
;�s '► i / 0 opj u m
= O — c
W v.qs 2
r Rt:J - , ✓ 01 O ZW Havo
`` ; !' �PGN/_
1110.-. �! R WW 1
... 4 4,1- . ' i , 41- 1- Wo
-- ° � a
w
n 120069 naplus dockl200o9.19 notes duck 710 o.ilefoot bcac111CAD1PERA11LCOUR TY120009.19 0DF.ewgl WIDTH OF WATERWAY 91700073