HEX Final Decision #2025-49HEX NO. 2025-49
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
December 11, 2025
PETITION.
Petition No. SV-PL20250004411 — 5102 Tamiami Trail E, Sabal Bay -Request for a variance
from the Land Development Code Section 5.06.04.F.5. which allows for one menu sign with
a maximum height of 6 feet, measured from the drive-thru lane grade adjacent to the sign,
and permits a maximum area of 64 square feet per drive-thru lane, with a limit of two signs
per parcel, to instead allow an additional menu board for a total of two sings in one drive-
thru lane at 5102 Tamiami Trail E, Sabal Bay Commercial Plat Phase Four, Tract M, Section
19, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
This is a request for a Sign Variance from Land Development Code Section 5.06.04.F.5 to allow
an additional menu sign in one drive-thru lane, enabling a total of two menu boards located within
Sabal Bay (PUD), Ordinance 05-59, as amended.
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 public hearing was conducted in the following manner: 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 at the
public hearing.
Page 1 of 5
5. The Countys Land Development Sections 5.06.08.13.1 lists the criteria for sign 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 using the following standard:I
1. That special conditions and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the land,
structure, or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures, or
buildings in the same district.
The record evidence and testimony fi°on2 the public hearing reflects that County staff has
recognized that the challenges faced by the landowner are due to circumstances specific
to the property and not caused by the landowner. The conditions unique to Culver's
property create a physical obstacle that prevents the addition of a double drive -through
lane, as the parking lot and drive -through layout do not permit it. This situation does not
apply to other properties in the same district, and the requested variance would not alter
the area's essential character. Allowing hvo menu boards, order takers, and pickup
windows tiOthin a single lane would improve operational efficiency, handle increased
customer demand, and shorten service times, while making the drive-thru experience more
pleasing.
2. That literal interpretation of the sign code's provisions would deprive the applicant
of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district. It would
cause unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant.
The record evidence and testimony f °om the public hearing reflects that the applicant
stated that a strict interpretation of the sign code would unfairly restrict their rights
compared to other properties in the same zoning district, resulting in unnecessary
hardship. They assert that denying their requestfor dual menu boards and a tandem double
drive-thru lane at their Culver's location lvould hinder efficiency and customer
satisfaction, particularly during busy times. Unlike other fast food chains like Chick f l-A,
which have site layouts conducive to conventional double drive-thrus, Culver's
configuration limits their options. The requested adjustments aiin to improve service
efficiency and reduce customer wait times. County staff agreed.
3. That the special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land,
structureI or building do not result from the actions of the applicant.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the applicant
stated that the special conditions and circumstances peculiar• to tl2e land, structure, or
building do not result f •om the applicant's actions. Some restaurants with limited space,
such as Culver's, ivhich feature a tandem drive -through that includes hvo menu boards
can increase capacity without expanding the drive-through's physical footprint. Couno)
staff concurred.
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 5
4. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special
privilege that is denied by this sign code to other lands, structures, or buildings in the
same zoning district.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the applicant
stated that the requested variance will not grant any special privileges that are unavailable
to others in the same zoning district. Approving the request aligns with Culver's brand
standard and national branding efforts. Denying the request would impose unnecessary
hardship on the landowner•. Alloiving hvo menu boards in a single lane will help manage
queue lengths, optimize staffing, improve operational efficiency, and enhance customer
experience. County staff concurred.
5. The variance granted is the minimum relief that will make possible the reasonable
use of the land, building, or structure.
The record evidence and testimony fi'om the public hearing reflects that the applicant is
seeking a variance for an additional menu board at Culver's to improve drive4hru
operations. This variance request represents the minirnum relief necessary and the
reasonable use of the property to increase efficiency and allow two cans to be served
simultaneously, improving overall throughput. Additionally, it aims to reduce wait times
and enhance staff performance. County staff concurred.
6. That the granting of the variance will be consistent with the general intent and
purpose of the Collier County Sign Code and the Growth Management Plan and will
not be injurious to adjacent properties or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
The record evidence and testimony fi°om the public hear•ing reflects that the requested
variance aligns with the Collier Coumy Sign Code and Growth Management Plan,
ensuring it won't negatively affect neighboring properties or public welfare. It represents
a minor adjustment that supports effective communication while maintaining safety and
efficiency. The variance will not hinder community) health or property rights, and it won't
obstruct light or arirq access for nearby properties. Additionally, it is expected to improve
operational efficiency and reduce wait times at the drive-thru lane, benefiting the
community) overall.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY:
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the subject property is
located in the Sabcrl Bay Mixed Plam�ed Unit Developed (MPUD) south side of Tamiami Trail
East Road of the Future Land Use Map (FL UAV of the GMP. The GMP does not address individual
Variance requests but focuses on the larger issue of the actual use. The Sabal Bay MPUD is
consistent lvith the FL UM.
Based upon the above analysis, County staff concluded that the proposed use for the subject site
is consistent 1-vith the Futine Land Use Element, although the Var°icmce request is not specifically
addressed.
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 5.06.08.B.1
of the Land Development Code to approve the sign variance Petition.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition No. SV-PL20250004411, filed by the
agent/applicant Lora Trent, representing the applicant/owner Naples Sunset Dreams LLC, with
respect to the property described as the subject 1.09-acre parcel located at 5102 Tamiami Trail
East, within the Sabal Bay Planned Unit Development, and is also described as Sabal Bay
Commercial Plat Phase Four Tract M. in Section 19, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida, for the following:
• A Sign Variance from Land Development Code Section 5.06.04.F.5 to allow an additional
menu sign in one drive-tbru lane, enabling a total of two menu boards located within Sabal
Bay (PUD), Ordinance 05-59, as amended.
Said changes are fully described. in the Sign Plan attached as Exhibit "A" and are subject to the
condition(s) set forth below.
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A —Sign Plan
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
The subject 1.09-acre parcel is located at 5102 Tamiami Trail East, within the Sabal Bay Planned
Unit Development, and is also described as Sabal Bay Commercial Plat Phase Four Tract M, in
Section 19, Township 50 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
CONDITIONS.
• All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained.
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.
Page 4 of 5
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.
December 22, 2025
Date
Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 5
«A»
086L-£b9 18091 (3
Y54Z-Z98 Umy) BLS£S IM'oeS npaulPJd
£0859 OW 'plall6uudS gaaigS jageM ObS
•gS Aauir a)l '3 SZ8t4 •ouI 'wagsAS 6ulsl4:)ueJA ranlrp
NJIS al3IJ9NRldS
3
a�
U)
LL
0
Q.,
G
o_
CV
L6
N
N
a
TOOT
lnotokvi
advoe nN3W/HJnO%dHl 3nRia ,Mw.� i,.p,:V"
'Z)NI'W31SAS JNISIHJN"=I %d3AinD .,ss� .x a.hVa
i
Fn
f y Er A
% vK
h 5
6 g'
fi V
- �N3
C a
_ i_z
Its u
Ip
r�
•
C
QDa