HEX Final Decision 2024-24HEX NO. 2024-24
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
April 259 2024
PETITION.
Petition No. VA-PL20230018286 —Request for a variance from Land Development Code
Section 4.02.01 A, Table 2.1, to reduce the required front setback from 25.0 feet to 15.0 feet
on the East property line for the proposed single-family residential structure in the
Residential-Single-Family-4 (RSF-4) zoning distri Rct located at 185 6th Street, Naples, FL
34113, also known as Trail Acres Unit 2 Block 2 Lot 22, in Section 32, Township 50 South,
Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the minimum front yard setback from 25.0 feet to
15.0 feet on the East property line, for a proposed single-family residence in the Residential-
Single-Family-4 (RSF4) zoning district.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approval with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87(2) of the
Collier County %J 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 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 for this item at the public hearing.
5. The County's Land Development Section 9.04.03 lists the criteria for variances. The Hearing
Examiner having the same authority as the Board of Zoning Appeals may grant, deny, or
Page 1 of 5
modify any request for a variance from the regulations or restrictions of the Collier County
,and Development Code. I
1. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location,
size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved?
The I ecor d evidence and testimony fi°om the public hearing I°eflects that there al"e special
conditions and circumstances. The property is designed to accommodate a cul-de-sac
which was not developed. Thus, the property line recedes into the properly by 10 feet,
reducing the buildable area of the lot. The recessed f •ont also creates a front yard which
is a minimum of 35 feet from the right-of-tivay compared to the neighbors tivhich have a
minimum of 25 feet off °ont yard f tom the right-of-lvay.
2. 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?
The record evidence and testimony f°om the public hearing reflects that the special
conditions relating to the shape of the property are pre-existing conditions that result in
this requested variance. The subject property oivner believes a variance will help mitigate
t1�e unnecessary challenges brought by the irregular shape of the subject property and the
easements encumbering the lot. The property's easements and 10 foot recession are pre-
existing conditions relative to the property and do not result fi°om the applicant's action.
3. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and
undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that a literal
interpretation of the code creates unnecessary, undue hardship and practical cliff curves
for the applicant. The f •ont of the property ivas designed to accommodate a future planned
cul-de-sac. The design resulted in the property having a front properly line that is still
recessed by 10', henceforth lawivn as the "cut-out. " Instead of being developed into a cul-
de-sac, 6th St has been extended to provide roadivay access to the properties zoned Rural
Agricultural (A) north of the subject property. The property oivner has researched
solutions to mitigate the impact of the cut-out, such as adjusting the property line or
vacating the easement, which were not deemed feasible solutions at this time. In addition
to the 10' cut-out, the property is encumbered by ttivo easements. One 5' Utility Easement
on the west rear yard and one 10' Drainage Easement on the north side yard Both side
yards have Florida Power and Light (FPL) power lines running through the yard
4. 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?
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 5
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that granting of the
requested variance will not have adverse impact to health, safeo, and welfare. The
proposed variance is the minimum possible to make reasonable use of the land and
promote conformity within the surrounding neighborhood.
S. 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?
The record evidence crud testimony from the public hearing reflects that the variance does
not grant an allowable use, ilMich is denied by the LDC to other lands, buildings, or
structures in the same zoning district. The proposed structure will have the same
approximate 'front yard" area as neighboring residences, which may ouhineigh the
negative impacts, if any, of granting the variance.
6. Will granting the Variance be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this Land
Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to
the public welfare?
The recor°d evidence crud testimony f •om the public hearing reflects that the gr°crating of the
variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of the Land Development
Code and will not harm public safety, health, and welfare.
7. 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.?
The record evidence crud testimony fi°om the public hecrrr.'ng reflects that the subject
property is a vacant lot with no natural obstructions.
8. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the GMP?
The record evidence and testimony,fi•om the public hearing r°effects that the variance is
consistent with t1�e GI UYI Management Plan") arId approval of this Tsar fiance Weill
riot affect or change the requirements of the GMP with respect to density, intensity,
compatibility, access/connectivity, or any other applicable provisions.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY.
The subject property is in the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict (UC) land use classification on the
County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM). This land use category is designed to provide transitional
densities between the Conservation designated area (primarily located to the south of the
Subdistrict) and the remainder of the Urban designated area (primarily located to the north of the
Subdistrict). As stated, the applicant seeks a Variance for a proposed principal residential structure
for a single-family dwelling unit, which is an authorized land use. The Growth Management Plan
(GMP) does not address individual variance requests related to land use.
Page 3 of 5
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 9.04.03 of
the Land Development Code to approve the Petition.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition No. VA-PL20230018286, filed by Troy
Burcky, with respect to the property legally described as a 0.27-acre parcel, known as Parcel ID
# 77261480007, at 185 6th Street, Naples, FL 34113, also known as Trail Acres Unit 2 Block 2
Lot 22, in Section 32, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, for the
following:
• A variance from Section 4.02.O1.A. Table 2.1 of the
Code to reduce the minimum front yard setback fror
property line, for a proposed single-family residence
(RSF-4) zoning district.
Collier County Land Development
i 25.0 feet to 15.0 feet on the East
in the Residential-Single-Family4
Said changes are fully described in the Zoning Map attached as Exhibit "A", the Conceptual Site
?Ian attached as Exhibit "B", and the Boundary Survey attached as Exhibit "C", and are subject to
the condition(s) set forth below.
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A —Zoning Map
Exhibit B —Conceptual Site all
Exhibit C — Boundary Survey
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
The subject property is a � 0.27-acre parcel, known as Parcel ID # 77261480007, at 185 6th Street,
Naples, FL 34113, also known as Trail Acres Unit 2 Block 2 Lot 22, in Section 32, Township 50
South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
CONDITIONS.
1. 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 fi•om a state or federal agency
Page 4 of 5
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,
May 15, 2024
Date
Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 5
«A»
SITE LOCATION MAP
N N
Ntz
ON, gh ' v ti
O � �\
N O\
_ cf)
® N N N 04
N O co
N
um
/ Mgt M
N
N
N
Z
/ O
/ F W F
F' N O G'
oil
�
F-
`
emsre�r
■
4�z n U
y 0(N
OJQ zO Fn
W H w o0000^ oa �yJtiQ4 W > o
ti 4 p q ro o0 00� o ¢Wa¢Jq W U I
x �� tjcNv
ttttyyyy
i 4 w w Liti
y iu wggEW2W�p
~ uFLt73 e ry ry 'ngzi 61
FQ x
a W y WK 2W¢gy� �
Y y W S o 00 00 o a2y2WV
o a Win be v FW
W a -. �-
m mo mo o, AW2Oy)'ri N
2 40 y yy 22 y ro a¢WNp2w2 o
N 2 yyti=�Q� a
2 C N P) v Cm �� 2OWti WW .U.� J�
~ / 0i, llQ�lV� 4 4 4 ti < Q
2 � p9.00 ok, 0 W¢ j a w
o /. ga
a J
0 W
4~ Yq G�OS��is'i pp 00 b(�O� ,��E• 200 qUQ
j��qp g95 A�0 �UW> c�
4iww m S90 w¢�ti a
qqa¢ �t
(! ZE!
IZ ro3A6fy a,rn
W
hu VA � � cl
j2Wq¢�
•ro Jti Day kla
� hW yyck q a
°<E fob �i44�
,BS OrE' 66660p x ~ ti a o o H
�w % OA OOOA6• bP� >° O p .. tiLo N
�o ln, 535A A,,0�t�J § J� o Uqq?^
O40 W
4 � N�:o ✓ UU+ �y p�2 � yYpq.�
���~O� C�?]
Wj o��'i a 2Z=xW '• U
�� � la)
•.Ur�Uy }
s 3m
w
W :Ss'9\P w o ow.
O mw rwwE
hV F=oaQ¢
pp 0rzx'o
�>WOZO
r
= 0.5� i''" o��
N owzw
3^a
P� Wno� A00�(Mwz�wx
�W�i lV� 0.39 OAiO WonLiwSz
Y mi 9, 10.`�Pl ory n�9 rZ�arw�
ryk
� 6 �Maw, MMMM
U
tie
N WU o o p
4 �\ OI:] NpatOp <r
0 ry J4, y NM K
> X M tia \ a-• ti u Oq ¢ nt�nnm,� SJ
h-y O� ZjZ2 V)J NN QLL
�-2 J �0 O ¢ W ti 00 W Vj
y0 \ WUi�r2 vim NM
mZ
\ O hN
20 aN 2¢ dQO�o ZV)
N O
4 jU W4 �ZMMIco mF
�O Wa M NNN NZ
rnm
g� o� WJ aaaaaa
O k4 <�p �to
maw q2 l0 Y_
WX
C.�
V IX2 I
�Jv b� N mp�2¢
�d S,cAx° o w rm- cx)
iJ � za �m ]0 W
zw 0 ¢
� o ti x
p ¢ 2 2 �WN¢a U
b tY
Wp0p
2z� �~F~
wa pi� zQp0p� N..qN
RT
¢tiU4., yu !�N"pQ.
y wWJ
J3� J y� Ow�NA
rU ?� 2 .. J z QPC tj %Z 2p Fin �� N
'w 1<4
tiR w A W �W�i. N�=hy a �� r-zoo°�
v7 ¢U 914
iiqy� �i U A a E' A "' UO~q:� p VW pFN h� -�
D La g W K Ox leqO y� WWQ Y w w¢°Y4 �z �0j w¢ z
U ¢� �FF�p42 u F=+U m
W 20 W 4 WwjWI� aWa bW N OW�tiq W tiQ SUN V) Z
4`1O >ao W2 uii Q
a2 ri)�2 .-7 Oy444 .a } 2O OOp
z z
OJ
C/Z Cox t $ e O' m G'i 2 4 d