The URL can be used to link to this page

HEX Final Decision #2025-33HEX NO. 2025-33 HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DATE OF HEARING. August 14, 2025 PETITION. Petition No. VA-PL20240005662 — 6745 Harwich Court -Request for a Variance from Section 3.6.A of the Bretonne Park Planned Unit Development (PUD), Ordinance No. 87-15, as amended, to reduce the RI Residential minimum yard requirement for accessory use rear yards from 5 feet to 2 feet to allow for the expansion of an existing pool deck and screen enclosure for a single -family -detached dwelling at 6745 Harwich Court, AKA: Lot 25, Block M, Embassy Woods Golf and Country Club at Bretonne Park subdivision, Phase One, in Section 5, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION. To have the Collier County Hearing Examiner (HEX) to consider a variance from the 5-foot rear yard setback for accessory structures, including pools, for single-family dwelling units located within development tract R4 of the Bretonne Park Planned Unit Development (PUD), as per Ordinance 87-15, as amended, to allow for the expansion of an existing screen pool enclosure to be located 2 feet from the western (rear) property line. 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. One letter of objection to this Petition was received from Susan Capozzola of 1549 Keiuidge Place with concerns regarding flood control and infiinging on the preserve that Page 1 of 5 was added in the backup documents following the hearing. Two letters of no objection to this Petition were received from neighboring property owner John Carey of 6738 Harwich Ct and neighboring property owner Aldo Guarino of 6746 Harwich Ct. 5. The County's and 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 crud testimony ji°om the public hearing reflects that yes, the applicant argues that no persons or property will be affected by the requested variance, given that the property located directly behind the subject property is undeveloped and rwithin a U.R.O.S. easement. 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 yes, the existing pool and cage were constructed before the current ownership of the property. The applicant argues that the rear of the pool was built in an unsafe and unconventional manner. It was further stated that neither the previous nor the current homeowners have had any use for the extremely narrow back end of the pool deck, as it can only be used as an unsafe walkway. County staff have no reason to challenge this assertion and therefore concurred. 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 Lite applicant? The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that yes, the applicant contends that an additional 3 feet are necessary to construct a pool cage in such a fashion as to render the rear pool deck safe and usable. Couny) staff have no reason to challenge this assertion and therefore 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•onz the public hearing reflects that yes, the applicant stated that, "If granted, variance will be the minimum that tivill make possible reasonable use of land. It will leave the back deck with a total of 8 feet, which gives a safe and ample lwalkivay, as well as a decent recreational space for homeowners, without interfering with 1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized. Page 2 of 5 or affecting any other• person or properly. "County staff have no reason to challenge this assertion and therefore 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 fi°om 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 fi°om the public hearing reflects that yes, the applicant„ stated that, "Granting the variance will be in harmony with the intent andpurpose pose of the LDC, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, as we are only making the request for accessory use. Proper codes and guidelines will be used to ensure proper completion of the project. 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 yes, the applicant stated that, "This deck extension will create a more contemporary appearance, that will enhance the look, not only for the property but also the community, cis the new deck will have a modern presence, wrath the panoramic screen enclosure and updated landscape. " County staff further finds that the parcel to the rear of the subject propero3 is undeveloped, and existing vegetation inhibits the view of the screen enclosure from nearby properties. 8. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP)? The record evidence and testimony°om the public hearing reflects that yes, approval of this Variance will not affect or change the requirements of the GA�IP �-With respect to densit��, intensity, compatibility, access/connectivity, or any other applicable provisions. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY. The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the subject propert�� is located �-Within the Urban Residential Subdistrr.'ct of the Urban Mixed -Use District on the CozrnlJ�'s Future Land Use Nlap (FL UM of the Future Land Use Element (FLUE) of the GNIP. The GMP Page 3 of 5 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 have any impact on this property's consistency with the County's GMP. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION. The record evidence and testimony frrom the public hearing reflects that the EAC does not normally hear variance petitions. Though not codified, County staff have treated UROS easements as preserves dating back to 2007. The setbackfor accessory structures from a preserve is ten feet. Since the property was originally developed in 1991, including the pool and screen enclosure, Environmental staff szrpports the variance request and notes that EA is not required since UROS are not codified as preserves. 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-PL20240005662, filed by the applicant Francis J. Flynn, Jr. as Trustee, of the Susan L Flynn Revocable Trust, with respect to the property legally described as located at 6745 Harwich Court, located at the southwest corner of Glen Eagle Boulevard West and Harwich Court, and further described as Lot 25, Block M, Embassy Woods Golf and Country Club at Bretonne Park subdivision, Phase One, in Section 5, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, for the following: • A Variance from the 5-foot rear yard setback for accessory structures, including pools, for single-family dwelling units located wn development tract R-1 of the Bretonne Park Planned Unit Development (PUD), as per Ordinance 87-15, as amended, to allow for the expansion of an existing screen pool enclosure to be located 2 feet from the western (rear) property line. Said changes are fully described in the Proposed Site Plan attached as Exhibit "A", the Sketch of Survey attached as Exhibit "B", and the Ordinance 01-32, Amendment to Bretonne Park PUD attached as Exhibit "C", and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below. ATTACHMENTS. Exhibit A —Proposed Site Plan Exhibit B —Sketch of Survey Exhibit C — Ordinance 01-32, Amendment to Bretonne Park PUD Page 4 of 5 LEGAL DESCRIPTION. The subject property is located at 6745 Harwich Court, located at the southwest corner of Glen Eagle Boulevard West and Harwich Court, and further described as Lot 25, Block M, Embassy Woods Golf and Country Club at Bretonne Park subdivision, Phase One, in Section 5, 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 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, August 27, 2025 Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP Hearing Examiner Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT "A" ZCOO-Otc "1is] dVN KOZAMSO IOHNNSS01£: N"I3JNtld 31VQ a N GNI111RUNVA51 EZ ISIPU 3'IFIVJOA33 NNA73'I NV5f15 O O ❑VR Tkl.Lj%OKold ill)13ONVAIIOS MIr£'"13'S IOL9 l31VVN1:)3fONd rw 'JTI 5113(1"Itilfl 3,\LLV,\ONNI .LS3.1\II.LIIOS 1Nf1O0 IIJIA1Utlt1 ShLV �3'IVOS O � IR U pp0 ru Z Ow N� / 0U Zp O. / U \\ rl tit s b N t` N 70o t / 04�1 1V � N �Z � 0 !r oQ 0 c) m m S m (nL m m o m O O J wp O On O � o N � N � N Z � N J m m d � U U U LANVDTTEC_. 0 S U R V E Y l N G a,�icl PROPERTY ADDRESS: 6745 Harwich Court Naples, FL 34104 Survey has been prepared for: Francls Flynn and Susan Flynn On your behalf, and as a requirement for your transaction, this document has been coordinated with us by the firm shown below. landtec Surveying, Inc. is a private firm and remains entirely responsible for this document's content. Sheet 1 of 2 (Sketch of Survey)_ See Sheet 2 of 2 for Legal Description, Certifications, Property and other Survey related data. SURVEY IS NOT COMPLETE_ WITHOUT ALL SHEETS BEARING REFERENCE. _ SCALE:1 "=30' SPLI I/2A rRpy �I MCA P �27q J.� 5' 2'C01'C, CENTER LINE OF HARWICH COURT AS S 14°0000 W ALL BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON REFERENCED THERETO, EI48 BEN BO ASS� WOppS 9LEVARD W (Fl Vol 0D'cw f w LpD) 7 rROAD}yAD _ (l " 1 I / hi pP tVAY �R NACT n• C.U, ++vr S76° pC, CDRIrA� P• 4aE S� f�2'JRor! 9p• �' (P¢ ROD , Ian f. (PER P(Ar1 MJ LS 01 SAP COVERED BjaA711° �.;;... CV, ff,E_12VP g$cd 7g5 ' 17 b 10r2q BjoCK'h," PozleT 32.sD \ 10.97' aCu,QV% F "fr !/2°I,Qp , 6y ; 4S ROD;tXAP h 1' 7274 770Ir �REEMfDJ + i.� BRICK ti 4'n 4ry c� cuRVE TA>3LE crcRD tfNGT11 cnoRo BEARNG LENGTIi KADIUS DELTA C I M 39,27' 25.00 1 90`CO'00' 35.3G' S31700'00'E C2(P) 327,18' 2G5.40 70'38W 3CG.85' 549°19'COVl U(M) 30G.80 549' 18'42'W foU++lD S/8' ilRCA� D luEci� pD oxv / T5 PCIDlT v OF / cueATue,: FND, t1AIL / 4 D15C NO ID 0,0G' E ON UNE� tlFA I�4( P � POI If of CURVA"URE �FNO. NAIL 4 OIJC NO ID CP AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH (MAY NOT SHOW LATEST IMPROVEMENTS) (NOT -TO -SCALE) Platted Easements, Notable or Adverse Conditions tit nplatted easements also listed if provided by client): IF APPLICABLE, RECIPIENTS OF THIS SURVEY SHOULD REVIEW THE POSITION OF ANY FENCE LINES SHOWN HEREON AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE BOUNDARY LINE .10' U.E. ALONG NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SUBJECT LOT, 511. ALONG SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SUBJECT LOT, • BRICK DRIVEWAY AND BRICK WALK EXTEND THROUGH THE EASTERLY EASEMENT, • P.P. PAD, SCREENED CONCRETE AND AIC PAD EXTENDS THROUGH THE SOUTHERLY EASEMENT, This survey has been issued by the following Landfec Surveying office: 700 West Hillsboro BoulevardSuite , 4-100 Deerfield Beach, FL 33441 Office: (561) 367-3587 Fax: (561) 465-3145 www.Landtecsurvey.com Elevations, if shown: Revisions: Benchmark: B534 Instrument: SPECTRA SP60 Benchmark Elev.: 9.99' Benchmark Datum: N.A.V.D.88 Elevations on Drawing are in: N.G.V.D29 N.A.V.D.88■ Job Nr.171453SW I Date of Field Work: 05106/2023 Drawn L,A1�D'T�'C S U R V E Y I N G LICENSED BUSPJESS No. 8507 Sheet 2 of 2 (Survey Related Data) - See Sheet 1 of 2 for Sketch of Survey, SURVEY IS NOT COMPLETE WITHOUT ALL SHEETS OF SURVEY: PURPOSE OF SURVEY (SEE GENERAL NOTES BELOM: EM BOUNDARY ❑ CONSTRUCTION ❑ CONDOMINIUM Purchase/Refinance ❑ ALTA/NSPS ❑ TOPOGRAPHIC ❑ SPECIAL PURPOSE LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. 25, BLOCK M, OF EMBASSY WOODS GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB AT BRETONNE PARK, PHASE ONE, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 17, AT PAGE 47 THROUGH 49, INCLUSIVE, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 6745 HARWICH COURT NAPLES, FL 34104 INVOICE NUMBER: 171453-SW DATE OF FIELD WORK: 05/06/2023 CLIENT FILE: 441441 CERTIFIED TO: BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC OLD REPUBLIC NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY FRANCIS FLYNN AND SUSAN FLYNN FLOOD ZONE: AE FLOOD MAP: 12021C PANEL: 0413 SUFFIX: H PANEL DATE: 05/16/2012 BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OR DEPTH: 10FT NAVD 1988 COMMUNITY NUMBER: 120067 BENCHMARK:B534 ELEVATION: 9.99 FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION: 12.95 NAVD 1988 ATTED EASEMENTS, NOTABLE OR ADVERSE CONDITIONS (UNPLATTED EASEMENTS ALSO LISTED IF PROVIDED BY CLIENT): APPLICABLE, RECIPIENTS OF THIS SURVEY SHOULD REVIEW THE POSITION OF ANY FENCE LINES SHOWN HEREON AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE )UNDARY LINE. - 10' U.E. ALONG NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SUBJECT LOT. - 5' U.E. ALONG SOUTHERLY AND WESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF SUBJECT LOT. - BRICK DRIVEWAY AND BRICK WALK EXTEND THROUGH THE EASTERLY EASEMENT. - P.P. PAD, SCREENED CONCRETE AND A/C PAD EXTENDS THROUGH THE SOUTHERLY EASEMENT, AOR AL=ARC LENGTH ar,=ELECTRCUETtR P=PLAT oTR=OILARIER �=UTILfIY POLE ®=WELL BOUNDARY GO=ClFAAOUT F.FE=Fl165HEDROOREIFV. PC=FOhTC4CLR1'E R=PADPIS l�f=LIGHTPOIE i =CENTERLINE � =HANDICAP PARKING SPACE BUILDING �_�� FIR=FOUADIRON ROD PCC=PO.VfOF CChFCU�A CUflYe RNG=RA4GE CAA'=CAD_ETVRSER FN=FOIAD.UL PH=POOL WTER SEC =SECTCN =CATCH BASIN I[ =PARTY WALL EASEMENT ------ CF=CALCUTATEDFR04FEW FhD=FOUAO PI= PONT OPINTERSECTON TR=TE-PI�M RISER*a =FIREHYDRANT ®=AlRCONOITIONER=SEC.QTRCORNER CHNNLINK FENCE —�—�— CH=CHORDDSTMC'e 6FF=GARAGEF PEP PCB=PONTOFBEGMNG TAP=100SMIP Mt. =CONCRcTE pXOR POC=POINIOFCODUENCBIW UE• UTILITY EMELIENT ® =MANHOLE ®=SEPTIC LID WOOD FENCE—��--��— CR=CHGMTEOFROURECORD L=LEGN-DESCRPTAN PP=POOLPUIIP uP=unuttPDIE N =WATERVALVE X=ELEV.SHOT SECTION CORNER PLASTIC FENCE DE=DRA'NAGEEASEUENT AI=MUSURED PRC=PQ.1iTOFTEVMMCUR,1E WU=WATERMETER EL ORFMzELEVAT0 (W.zCIP MFFAncANF PT=M4TOFTANGE4Cf WV=WATERVALVH OWhI =WATER METER OVERHEAD CABLE 1. THIS SURVEY IS BASED UPON RECORD INFORMATION PROVIDED 8Y CLIENT, NO SPECIFIC SEARCH OF THE PUBLIC RECORD HAS BEEN MADE BY THIS OFFICE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, 2 AS INDICATED ABOVE, UNDER 'PURPOSE OF SURVEY', IF THIS SURVEY HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR A PURCHASE OR REFINANCE, ITS SCOPE IS LIMITED TO THE DETERMINATION OF TIRE DEFICIENCIES, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR USE IN DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. RECIPIENTS hIUST CONTACT OUR OFFICE FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO SUCH USE. LANDTEC SURVEYING ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILRIES FOR ERRORS RESULTING FROM FAILURE TO ADHERE TO THIS CUUSE. a ANY FENCES SHOWN HEREON ARE ILLUSTRATIVE OF THEIR GENERAL POSITION ONLY. FENCE TIES SHOWN ARE TO GENERAL CENTERUNE OF FENCE, THIS OFFICE WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM THE REMOVAL OF, OR CHANGES MADE TO, ANY FENCES UNLESS WE HAVE PROVIDED A SURVEY SPECIFICALLY LOCATING SAID FENCES FOR SUCH PURPOSES. DETERMINATION OF FENCE POSITIONS SHOULD BE BASED SOLELY 04 THEIR PHYSICAL RELATIONSHIP TO THE MONUMENTED BOUNDARY LINES. 4, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATIONS MAY HAVE BEEN EXAGGERATED TO MORE CLEARLY ILLUSTRATE MEASURED RELATIONSHIPS • DIMENSIONS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED POSITIONS, 5. UNDERGROUND IMPROVEMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN LOCATED EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY SHOWN. 8. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED UPON NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATU4I (NAV.D.1929) OR NORTH AMERK AIN VERTICAL. DATUM (NAV.D, INN) AS SHOWN ON SHEET 1, 1. ALL BOUNDARY AND CONTROL DIMENSIONSSHOWN AREFIELDMEASUREDANDCORRESPONDTORECORDINFORMATIONUNLESSSPECIFICALLYNOTEDOTHERWISE. 8, ANY CORNERS SHOWN AS =SET' HAVE EITHER BEEN SET ON THE DATE OF FIELD WORK, OR WILL BE SET WITHIN 2 BUSINESS WEEKS OF SAID DATE AND ARE IDENTIFIED WITH A CAP MARKED LS (LICENSED SURVEYOR) A7274. II HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY MEETS THE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE AS OUTLINED IN CRAMER SJ-1 7,051 & 5.14 T052 OF IPRINTING INSTRUCTIONS: THE FLORIDA ADAIINISTRATNE CODE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND THAT THE ELECTRONIC WHEN PRINTING THIS PDF IN ADOBE, SELECT 'ACTUAL SIZE=TO ENSURE CORRECT SCALING, DO NOT USE =FR'. SIGNATURE AND SEAL HEREON MEETS PROCEDURES AS SET FORTH IN CHAPTER 5117.082, PURSUANT TO SECTION 412025, ROR DA STATUTES. r- Digitally signed - by Pablo Alvarez �� Date: 2023.05.08 7*384*26-04'00' S U R V E Y I N G DATE, 05/08/2023 ff Ar o PABLO ALYAREZ •PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR AND MAPPER FLORDA REGISTRATION N0. T274 (NOT VALID W9THOUT THE SIGNATURE AND ORIGINAL RAISED SEAL OR THE ELECTRONICSEAL OF "W THE FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR AND MAPPER SHOWN ABOVE) LICENSED BUSINESS No. 8507 ORDINANCENO.O1- 32 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 8745, AS AMENDED, THE BRETONNE PARK PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BY AMENDING SUBSECTION 3.6, MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS; AND BY PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on April 7, 1987, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Number 87-15, which established the Bretonne Park Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, on August 23, 1988, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Number 88-67, which amended Ordinance Number 87-15, the Bretonne Park Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, on February 28, 1989, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Number 8940 to correct scriveners errors appearing in Ordinance 88-67; and WHEREAS, on December 8, 1998, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Number 98412, which amended Ordinance Number 88-67, the Bretonne Park Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, on February 8, 2000, the Board of County Commissioners approved Ordinance Number 2000-09, which amended Ordinance Number 88-67, the Bretonne Park Planned Unit Development; and WHEREAS, Kevin Higginson of Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., representing Transeastem Properties, Inc., petitioned the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, to amend Ordinance 87-15, as amended. r5n-m r- m -- C. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD N C®UNTY W COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: �C; x CD w C2 r SECTION ONE: AMENDMENTS TO MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS SUCTION OF ORDINANCE NO, 8745, AS AMENDED Subsection 3.6, Minimum Yard Requirements, of Ordinance 8745, as amended is hereby amended to read as follows: 3.6 MINI]MLJM YARD REQUIREMENTS A. Single family attached and detached, estate homes, and patio homes: Front Yard: 20 feet Words underlined are added; words e�e�L '.�;�aBl� are deleted -1- C. Side Yard: 5 feet Rear Yard: 15 feet Accessory Use Rear Yard: 5 feet Zero lot -line residences: Front Yard: 20 feet Side Yard: 0 to 10 feet, on the zero lot line side an overhang not to exceed 30 inches shall be allowed. Rear Yard, 15 feet Accessory Use Rear Yard: 5 feet Villas, Townhouses and Multi -family Condominiums: Front Yard: 20 feet Side Yard: 10 feet for two story, 15 feet for three story Rear Yard: 20 feet (12 feet for Tract J where abuttinr a lake tract and 17 feet from a golf course tract SECTION TWO: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this / Z�= day of , 2001. • i ��1�1�1► BY: �'f TEST: °b:1W1C1.HT,9'11kbCK, CLERK too ' ' A�sE� lK ��q�CAiroan's 's }fin#cikr't. e►tlty. ;t0 �,i,7t1�4 ?,l4�l�� r.it Appioved`as to Form and Legal Sufficiency, Marjo M. Student Assistant County Attorney g/®dmin/AR431 yRB/ts CARTER, Ph.D., CHAIRMAN '�+is ordinonce filed with the Sec�rtory of ate's pfflce the LLCC__ dcr and acknowledgement of ttwt filing received this mayr day of B wutr Words underlined are added; words e� �'r �,�a� are deleted -2- STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. HROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoingtrue copy of: ORDINANCE N0. 2001-32 Which was adopted by the Board of County the 12th day of June, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of County Commissioners of Collier County, A June, 2001. N r rn o �' 0�4 Cmmissioo4P 00 ocon w :0> 00 - the Hoard am or, Florida, this 14th day BROCK .; •,, Clerk of Courts and •e']:pZk 111 ' ' Ex-officio to Board:'Iof =;Y County Commissioners 'x B Teri Michaels,iis '�"'�44 Deputy Clerk :. ... '44 N r't •