HEX Final Decision #2025-15HEX NO. 2025-15
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
May 22, 2025
PETITION.
Petition No. VA-PL20240011209 - 19 Capri Boulevard -Request for a variance from Land
Development Code Section 5.03.06.E.6 to reduce the minimum side yard riparian setback
from 15 feet to 0 feet on the north side for a proposed dock facility on a lot with 70 feet of
water frontage, located within a Residential Single-Family4 (RSF4) zoning district, at 19
Capri Boulevard and further described as Lot 46, Isles of Capri No. 1, in Section 32,
Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
To have the Collier County Hearing Examiner (HEX) consider a variance request to
CONCURRENT LAND USE APPLICATION.
Companion Petition No. BD-PL20240007613 to allow the subject dock facility to protrude 110
feet into a waterway that is 1,138± feet wide.
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 Code 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 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 public speakers at the hearing.
Page 1 of 5
5. The Countys 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
modify any request for a variance from the regulations or restrictions of the Collier County
Land 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 record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the applicant's
expert stated that "The parcel on which this project is located has several circumstances
which make it unusual and difficult to build a dock within the usual confines of Chapter
5.03.06 of Collier County's LDC. The distance between the MHWL and the MLW alone
exceeds the usual 20 foot protrusion that the LDC allows, which requires any dock
reconfiguration at the site first to be approved through a BDE. However, because the depth
contours meander at the site, reducing the proposed protrusion is accomplished by
encroaching on the side setback, coincidentally, this location (as proposed) coincides with
the area that would pose the least amount of seagrass impacts. " County staff concurred.
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 this variance request?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the applicant's
expert stated that "Please see the response to the previous criteria. Non -conducive depths
and seagrasses, and neighboring docks make dock construction at this site difficult.
Further, denial of this setback variance petition would trigger the need for a larger
protrusion `ask' in the companion BDE petition. " County staff concurred.
3. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary
"JULd undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the applicant's
expert stated that "Yes. The denial of the variance for this property would complicate and
limit the buildability of the lot, particularly in comparison to the neighboring lots. " County
staff concurred.
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?
The record evidence and testimony fi°om the public hearing reflects that the applicant's
expert stated that "The applicant is proposing to only utilize the space within their• riparian
ea and is pi a variance from only one common ripari rran line. Additionally, the
adjacent neighbor to this riparian line has already agreed to and signed a no -objection
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 5
letter for the proposed project design. It is therefore our opinion that a side setback
variance of 0 feet is reasonable for the circumstances. " County staff concurred
5. 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 and testimony from the public hearing reflects that, by definition, a
variance bestows some dimensional relief from the zoning regulations specific to a site.
LDC Section 9.04.02 allows relief through the variance process for any dimensional
development standard.. As such, 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.
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 record evidence and testimony ji°om the public hearing reflects that the applicant's
expert stated, "The dockfacility code as outlined in Chapter 5.03.06A. states that: `Docks
crud the like are primarily intended to adequately secure moored vessels and provide safe
access for• routine maintenance and use, while minimally impacting navigation within any
adjacent navigable channel, the use of the waterway, the use of neighboring docks, the
native marine habitat, manatees, and the view ofthe waterway by the neighbor•ingproperty
owners. ' The dock design, as proposed, has been specifically designed to abide by
regulations for docks within the Rookery Bay aquatic preserve that are near seagrasses.
Alteration in any wary would likely cause more seagrass impacts. Additionally, as
previously mentioned, moving the dock anywhere within the site's riparian area would
require additional protrusion to attain adequate navigational depths for the applicant's
vessel. Therefore, considering that the project as proposed is consistent with the general
area's uses and other docks in the vicinity, and that the directly affected neighbor has
already signed a no -objection letter regarding the project, we do not believe any other
detrimental effects will be created by the project. And our opinion is that the proposed dock
is in harmony with the intent and purpose of the zoning code. " County staff concurred.
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 and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the applicant's
expert stated, "The area which the proposed str°trctures lvorrld cover per this var•iar�ce
petition consists of the surface waters of a tidally connected waterway. As mentioned
above, the project has been specifically designed to abide by all applicable state, federal,
and county codes (with the exception only to protrusion and one side setback) for the
location. The existing dock also does not abide by the county's current protrusion or
setback codes and has been grandfathered regarding the state's aquatic preserve dock
Page 3 of 5
construction regulations. The proposed dock would be more in compliance with the staters
environmental regulations than the existing structure. " County staff concurred.
8. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP)?
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing r°effects that yes, approval of
tWs Variance will not affect or change the requirements of the GMP concerning density,
intensity, compatibility, access/connectivity, or any other applicable provisions.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY.
This property is located within the Urban Coastal Fringe Subdistrict of the Urban Mixed -Use
District of the County's Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE)
of the GMP. The GMP does not address individual Variance requests but deals with the larger
issue of the actual use. The existing single-family use is consistent with the FLUM of the GMP.
The requested variance does not impact this property's consistency with the County's GMP,
ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION.
The EAC does not typically hear variance petitions. Since the subject Variance doesn't impact any
preserve area, the EAC did not hear this petition.
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 this Petition.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition No. VA-PL20240011209, filed by Nick
Pearson, representing the owner/applicant Daniel Ambrogi, with respect to the property legally
described as located at located at 19 Capri Boulevard, also known as Lot 46, Isles of Capri No. 1,
in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, for the following:
• A Variance request from Land Development Code (U)C) Section 5.03.06.E.6 to reduce
the minimum side yard riparian setback from 15 feet to 0 feet on the north side for a
proposed dock facility on a lot with 70 feet of water frontage.
Said changes are fiilly described in the Proposed Dock Plans attached as Exhibit "A" and the
Specific Purpose Survey attached as Exhibit "B", and are subject to the condition(s) set forth
below.
Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A — Proposed Dock Plans
Exhibit B —Specific Purpose Survey
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
The subject property is located at 19 Capri Boulevard, also known as Lot 46, Isles of Capri No. 1,
in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
CONDITIONS.
1. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement
of the development.
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,
June 18, 2025
Date
Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 5
«A»
a
0
J
LL
O
Q
F-
O
U
W
J
J
U
tIG
W
d
O
a
M
°°>M dv
m LL p � `�t
� Q � n °' �
J � W U n. `t N °Q
M
UU M � N � Z tNfi Z �s
iri
�. � W
ui �
o � w � ��
Z v � z ¢ � Fz
� � �
° � ° � � a g°
W
Z Z
��
�Z
W�
ao
�Z
OQ�
�QO
F
�O�
� �
❑�Z
LiwO�
OW�Oz�au.
,,, b d;
��
.s
.. z o
rr �
0 o S
U
0 °-
� �
�z
0
o�
��
m°
a
Marino CmeJtl ngr'4CC3• Anbrogi, ig Carl BI �d�A01C OU NT YiCollicr valaroa tdv�g LOCATION MAP
1
e
cx �1y b
W :AB 03NO3HO I 9S0Z-6Z :'ON 80f I SZ/9VZ 31tlO I V/N 3W3S
l8 :AB WVaO BMP'lIY4a3d OA18 IadVO U :°JNIMVaa
!)NIddVW ONV VNIAMuns
W
N
W
Q O
=o
H LL
N z
�O
a0
V
ZW
0
V
m
Z
O
V
N
O
a
O_
M
N
ld 'STWVN 'om31f109 lddVJ 61
lb13 `11H3W'4 N313d
SS3a0OV 311S / NOd OaHVd3Nd
O ¢p Iw==O ip,l-i�n
O m� 6MF' F- F' W,Wi F-ri
�V �OW00QoLA
zn O cwnO0M X p"
=LL O LL;-�O
o5UW
QZ y'Ap00
lz
KW~mLLQo o O Y-
0 Lnj%wV-1
Q �U pZ 0wInZ0
l9 z v1w>, F-Q ZUZo�Q
y CA z
JQM V �n�VwFJ W
3OmWLLwoW0F'M
UOV QN ry K W U 5 e 1 ,D
in,0LL 0=ww W.n-,1~ LL WO�Ia—
ca
QZ 3 ?ZW w`t¢Q0 LL0�0F n
00 w LL�w �lW7uii-n� 0zz
�++ 00pcc
r Q= p G w in N Vl a. Z
O� i^ ZOO W Q,C4 w JLO �0 Q0
J0 �tnM Zp'__u en>j
yQ W U i Y V 1 0 W N J? w
ZO ti QOaQ O0UJ VO Zcc z
�EnWZ
1�Qf
D Z W W F- W 4a/1 J '-1 W W=
a¢pU O w s5H, w iwP
tIOZ O ��2 aZ<OQ Q .UFM00
LL U _
O J d Q N Z lD O w? 3 Z OLL =O Z x
�y LD
Ln W Zm V zO>� 0 Q Z{y~.�Z_a
'_ 0 Q Ow Z W UO W i Z W§ W p w O
�z WGa EtCn0 G�tD W�f^�Q��
pJ f' / 1 J r? {Qn °u Q °U Z L W r p N O Q w
122
T� p06
o
ar
O a�
Q W
w
O
z0
Uz
i
�o
a
>ozo 5
F_ o n ry
�Q° r4l
C+ r oq
a�00 ° OW
0 z
uo°9 a
asa ydy1Ww Q>Q
z V
o3m0 °
�o W
7L£L UN NUIlVLIHUHlIIV dU dlVJIdIldzfJ
9909=909 (199) :3NOHd3131
77IN 13 'HOV3H AVdl30
31V llNn '8891 0130NV1 0221
:)NI `:)uvnDd wgjL
W9 OaWd3W
o �
Fi z LL
H
o
w
w 0 w
0 '&
s o z
sN W s q4
Z O 2
OQ ° 2K uri
Gw z �S W�
3 g www
2 z 3c 0 tt
wa€
R z c ?t�o0o=izati;�a
gmz-
3F2zgmHp
z
zt8rWn
aiz
UH5o0°z
�
F
a �
aa>�'J oon xx w 0a3LLa
¢uuw °izzon ¢MEEP
�O
O O
J En
N N O
n N dt
f6CN
n a D o
w»viuwp
j Ow Qa4 m�l:
LL WO�Zyri�
,0u'C r`aoze
a=w Fm Howv
wr>ux��
x°�Wr�z�
G mo
ra0�vwi�OQ
Z Tiwa Z a000o0
O mrwzm
F u�noZa�mm�
F ac>3ri�2r2iwm
w =Oz�m 0
O N 6 u
F (__ 0 o o uF a
O y ¢Q ZG
Z ac O O
O 0 xu O v Q
a = z o = M o a a
Q 0 0 r �° E
O o = a ? Cz o F z z O n a
n O z 0 w W O �rc z o
u� zz0 ° o
~ 'L Oam
u � K o
(7 C «
a 0 0 o z ° o z 39 a Wt
z a z z ^`^ o D
a w o �$ o W z z w
t; mzo GW �" as
m z ° ww=�02LL > Q
O N W 7 z 00 fy^$
pwp � ��'u70 zY jQ � 9,
O 0 oW O �00m ��O°C l9 7 6
z P, omv� ¢ o o z m
U' 0 O La a Z O Z oOpo 2O x� R Z d B
z Z 2r C tg0C wwo 0z OZa O
f o z o 3 r t6 z W ° r
O V ruf 7O tfN O� C
ac � LL ac, owc r FF'90 Mri ou t L N
Ou m F zz u t9 m 000 OMUUQ� W ¢,�¢s E
CV uZ 0w0 zVIa¢mm 0w ¢°w N
cu ' uZOa dl =fawc00y g< o2�x
oC z tQ ¢¢ p W O wz¢ ?O waw >xwx O w m %0
n m �O:)z c� rZ`2 Zi zQ 71-- mZY u1
0 0� OaeO a¢ j Wa N OO Hr UW W j0 N
F Or O ow � uO O y W z W NW w Coq
z 0 Q O <O
i "� oin Fzox
a o>aZ°z aazW�=Sf 3� >a m
wO z?ga "m O' ocs OK 5;6 lJw m°w3Q
O N N a� o W OW Oa. WN E o w°
o wn,tjI-`.W3dZ�Rwot;go -ooOz c°i
LLOQ FFm mO wV a'nO wmQ r= E zJ d�� �C
o�03�NLLLLo<gx2°ZdwW� o4�°xa
N
w moc 3� w 0
d mw� O>�Q W° Z35;n<m �wF�° c
ri�oo'^z�mgzo iOZS0O ?€W0Z •0
'^ �°cu?imtFz=rdo W 0m -xzEO wZ>x
a Wm<:.Na 33p m3 uo �"m rO Gim-aF¢�m11-- O
w=ZZ Qzm OWrOuh ZZaa OCMx_ 5V M46 a
6 WozFQOWO=O�5029 = 3'^�Z��z c
u in W, ZDM03woz aOi¢V-uwo Hjw N
W >+ztu¢>¢az=�oyzo�u_�WLLp>p�c°.oligo3wFo¢ 0
>oxox0 °r wi x-z ow=a� xOW o=
�urvro v�oZ5x:)tnrnW0rmx Vm3 r t
3
m
0
d
71
O
M
N
co
Ilya
lLlf AB 03N�3H� USH-4Z ON BOf 9Z/9Z/Z:31V4 ,SZ=v� :31o'JS
l8 AB NMViid 6FW'lINH3d 4A18 R:JdV0 61 ONMVNO
9NIddvw ONV 7NIA3AUnS
N
N
J
Q
H
N
z
O
b
N
O
x
v
0
w
J
m
w
Lu
3
w
w
w
c
la-
N
N
H
ry
h
N
z
N
h
O
on
00
J
m
00
�
"i
I/1
I/1
LOX
C
H
N
M
�!
U)
tz
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
wlp =
w J r M
W K O
m
V O LL -
Z=O'
w In 1.1
w W
z -
O~per
V U
LL J V O
Oulu O
=1 z N
a W
M
N
U)
W
Ln
ld 'S31dVN '08VA31nou RidV3 61
lbl3 `IldHlW •4 2Jlild
SS32f40V 311S / aOd 03HVd3Hd
,00'OL M„L£,LO,IOS
3
(s�Nrav3a do srsva)
,00'OL 3„L£,LO, LON
-3
O �
a a
(d) AVM dO lHJIZi ,09
(_d) AVMHJIH SId=P:JS 't/'N'd_
(18Vn3lno8 Iad O
3NI1831N90
a a
7LFL UN NUIlVLIUUHlIIV dU d1VJ13112idJ
9909-908 (199) :3NOHd3131
777�� ld 'HOV38 AV21130
ZIV llNn 'LIi131 0130NV1 OZZI
DNI `DIlbClDbil2l31
:AG o3avd3ad CC
1
1
11
11
4-)
1
1
.ntf
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
1
11
1
1
- N
M
J d
rti 98z. _
M„L£,LO.TOS
N
N