HEX Final Decision #2025-52HEX NO. 2025-52
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
December 11, 2025
PETITION.
Petition No. CU-PL20250000338 - 4075 Pine Ridge Rd -Request for approval of a
Conditional Use for Sarah' Investments, LLC to allow for coin operated amusement devices
(SIC 7993), to be known as 777 Arcade, consisting of video vending machines, pursuant to
subsection 2.03.03.C.1.c.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code, located at 4075
Pine Ridge Road, Units 6 and 7, in Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 26 East, Collier
County, Florida.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The petitioner seeks approval of a Conditional Use for Sarabi Investments, LLC to allow for coin
operated amusement devices (SIC 7993), to be known as 777 Arcade, consisting of video vending
machines, pursuant to subsection 2.03.03.C.1.c.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code
(LDC).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approval with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87(3) 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 applicant conducted avirtual-only NIM meeting held via Zoom on June 30, 2025, at 6:00
pm. An in -person NIM meeting with Zoom option was held on July 1, 2025, at 6:00 pm at the
Golden Gate Community Center, 4701 Golden Gate Parkway, Naples, FL 34116. No members
of the public were present or participating remotely at both meetings, and therefore no
recording or transcript was available.
Page 1 of 7
5. 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 three public speakers
from the adjacent neighborhood at the public hearing in opposition to this Petition. Their
primary contention is that the (existing) business is a gambling operation that is not appropriate
for these commercial center and a nuisance to the residents in the neighborhood.
6. The requested conditional use business has been operating for several months and is the subject
of a code enforcement matter. The applicant aims to resolve this issue by obtaining conditional
use approval for coin -operated amusement devices (SIC 7993). The Hearing Examiner has no
authority to approve a gambling operation, as defined by state law, at this location, or
potentially at any location within Collier County. The Hearing Examiner is limited in this
decision to the consideration of coin operated amusement devices (SIC 7993).
7. Florida Statutes defines an "amusement game or machine" to mean:
... a game or machine operated only for the bona fide entertainment of the
general public which a person activates by inserting or using currency or a
coin, card, coupon, slug, token, or similar device, and, by the application of
skill, with no material element of chance inherent in the game or machine,
the person playing or operating the game or machine controls the outcome
of the game. The term does not include:
l . Any game or machine that uses mechanical slot reels, video depictions of
slot machine reels or symbols, or video simulations or video representations
of any other casino game, including, but not limited to, any banked or
banking card game, poker, bingo, pull -tab, lotto, roulette, or craps.
2. A game in which the player does not control the outcome of the game
through skill or a game where the outcome is determined by factors not
visible, known, or predictable to the player.
3. A video poker game or any other game or machine that may be
construed as a gambling device under the laws of this state.
4. Any game or device defined as a gambling device in 15 U.S.C. s. 1171,
unless excluded under 15 U.S.C. s. 1178.
Sec. 546.10(3)(a), F1a.Stat.
8. The County Code Sec. 2-87(3) directs the Hearing Examiner to review this conditional use
petition by the LDC Section 10.008.D criteria. The Hearing Examiner shall determine that the
conditional use is permissible in the applicable zoning district, and shall make a decision of
approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the conditional use. The Hearing Examiner's
decision of approval or approval with conditions shall find that the granting of the conditional
use will not adversely affect the public interest and will not adversely affect the uses of
neighboring properties in the same district; all specific requirements for the individual
Page 2 of 7
Conditional Use will be met; and satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the
following matters, where applicable:I
1. Section 2.03.03.C.1.c.5, of the LDC permits conditional uses in the Commercial
Intermediate District (G3) zoning district.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the requested use
for coin operated amusement devices (SIC 7993) is allowed as a conditional use in the
Commercial Intermediate District (C-3) zoning district, subject to the standards and
procedures established in section 10.08.00, conditional uses procedures, of the LDC.
2. Consistency with the LDC and the Growth Management Plan (GMP).
The r°ecor°d evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that this request is
consistent with the GMP, and with the conditions proposed by staff, this project will be in
compliance with the applicable provisions of the LDC.
3. Ingress and egress to the property and proposed structures, particularly toward
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and
access in case of fire or catastrophe.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the existing
shopping center has two ingress/egress points — one off Pine Ridge Road and the other on
Neffs Way. Neffs Way also connects to Collier Boulevard via internal circulation. This
project proposes no change to the means of existing ingress/egress.
4. The effect the Conditional Use would have on neighboring properties in relation to
noise, glare, economic or odor effects.
The record evidence and testimony fi°om the public hear°ing reflects that the proposed
conditional use V1�ill be entirely internal to the existing Shoppes at 951 and is then°efore not
anticipated to have an impact on noise, glare, economic impact, or odor. See condition
below that requires the applicant to ensure that no patrons loiter outside of the
establishment.
5. Compatibility with adjacent properties and other properties in the district.
The record evidence and testimony fi°om the public hearing reflects that the existing
Shoppes at 951 development leas approved for �2�, 980 SF of commercial development.
"lie existing uses in other units are a mix of permitted G3 uses, including a florist, a
bakery, insurance offices, a medical office, a veterinary clinic, multiple salons, and a
restaurant. The addition of the proposed video arcade Will have no anticipated impact on
the site's overall compatibility with the surrounding area, as there are no proposed
changes to the existing development or buffers.
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 3 of 7
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY.
Future Land Use Element (FLUE):
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the property
acres, and Units 6 and 7 are hw of 16 total units in the shopping center, per the most recent site
development plan approvals (SDP12002-AR-2413). The property is zoned C-3 and is within the
Estates Mixed Use District, Neighborhood Center Subdistrict, cis identified on the Urban Golden
Gate Estates Sub -Element Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Golden Gate Area Master Plan
(GGAMP). The proposed use is not listed as a prohibited use within the Subdistrict. The proposed
Conditional Use is consistent with the Future Land Use Designation of the Future Land Use
Element. The policies of the Future Land Use Element of the GMP have been reviewed and applied
to this proposal. Staff find that the Conditional Use, if approved, will be consistent ivith the GNIP
and the Subdistrict.
Stormwater Review:
The record evidence and testimony f °om the pztblic hearing reflects that the proposed conditional
use expansion request is not anticipated to create drainage problems or adverse stormwater
management impacts to surrounding properties. Any proposed changes to buildings) or to site
impervious coverage will require approval through the environmental resource permitting (ERP)
process with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and the Site Development
Plan process to ensure consistency with the Collier County LDC. Additionally, the same Best
Management Practices, Erosion Control Measures, and Pollution Prevention Plan associated with
the currentpermitted operation will continue to be used for the proposed expansion.
Landscape Review:
The record evidence and testimony f •om the public hearing r•eflects that the buffer•s labeled on the
Master Concept Plan are consistent with the LDC.
Utility Review:
The r°ecord evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the project lies within the
regional potable �-Hater service area and the Golden Gate wastewater service area of the Collier
County Water• -Sewer District (CCWSD). Water services are available via existing infrastructure
within the adjacent right-of-way. Sufficient water treatment capacity is available. A water main is
available along White Boulevard There is adequate water treatment capacity to serve the project.
The project will be served by a private septic system as connections to CCWSD services are not
readily available. Any improvements to the CCWSD's water or ivasteivater systems necessary to
provide sufficient capacio) to serve the project ivill be the responsibility of the owner/developer
and will be conveyed to the CCKTSD at no cost to the County at the time of utilities acceptance.
This petition has been reviewed by county staff responsible for the jurisdictional elements of the
GMP as part of the rezoning process, and staff have concluded that the developer has provided
appropriate commitments to minimize impacts to the Level of Service (LOS).
Page 4 of 7
Environmental Review:
The record evidence and testimony fi om the public hearing reflects that Environmental Sei°vices
staff have reviewed the Conditional Use petition to address environmental concerns. The property
is devoid of native vegetation; the existing trees onsite do not meet the native vegetation
preservation requirements of LDC Section 3.05.07.A, and as such, no preservation of native
vegetation is required
This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council (EAC) revie�-n, as it did not meet
the EAC's scope of land developinent project reviews, as identified in Section 2.1193 of the Collier
County Codes of Laws and Ordinances. Environmental Services staff recommend approval of the
proposed petition.
Conservation and Coastal Management Element (COME):
The recor°d evidence and testimony from the public heap°ing reflects that Environmental �°eview
staff have found this project to be consistent with the Conservation & Coastal Management
Element (CCME). The project site is 2.51 acres. The property does not contain native vegetation;
no preservation is required.
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, 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 10.08.00.1) of the Land Development Code to approve
this Petition, and that approval of this petition with conditions will not adversely impact the public.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition No. CU-PL20250000338, filed by the agent
Patrick Vanasse, AICP, of The Neighborhood Company, representing the owner/applicant
Kenneth Baldridge, Manager, of Baldridge Pinegate, LLC, and the contract purchaser Abdallah
Mustafa, Manager, of Sarabi Investments, LLC, with respect to the property legally described as
located at 4075 Pine Ridge Road, Units 6 and 7, in Section 15, Township 49 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County, Florida, for the following:
• A Conditional Use for Sarabi Investments, LLC to allow for coin operated amusement
devices (SIC 7993), to be known as 777 Arcade, consisting of video vending machines,
pursuant to subsection 2.03.03.C. Le.5 of the Collier County Land Development Code.
Said changes are fully described in The Shoppes of Nine Fifty One -Site Plan - Markup, prepared
by The Neighborhood Company attached as Exhibit "A" and are subject to the conditions) set
forth below.
Page 5 of 7
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A — The Shoppes of Nine Fifty One - Site Plan - Markup, prepared by The Neighborhood
Company
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
The subject property is located at 4075 Pine Ridge Road, Units 6 and 7, in Section 15, Township
49 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
CONDITIONS.
1. The conditional use shall be limited to what is depicted on "The Shoppes of Nine Fifty One
- Site Plan - Markup," prepared by The Neighborhood Company,
2. There shall be zero loitering outside of the applicant's business at any time.
3. The applicant shall take measures to enhance the exterior appearance of the business,
ensuring it aligns more closely with the aesthetic of the other suites in the shopping center
and does not resemble a gambling establishment.
4. The applicant shall display a notice at the entrance at all times stating that it is approved
for coin operated amusement devices (SIC 7993) only.
5. The applicant shall not violate any county, state or federal law regarding gambling,
including but not limited to the "Family Amusement Games Act" (Sec. 546.10, Fla.Stat).
6. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development.
7. The Hearing Examiner reserves jurisdiction to modify this decision, at a duly noticed
public hearing, should the County Planning Department determine that the applicant is in
violation of this decision.
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 6 of 7
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.
January 9, 2026
Date
Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 7 of 7
A,
W;ll*wAllmLm
n
41
wr-iu WV n.K V° b crrN= , Pa ns K'W r ME Its SNO1S1AM
ISMM M°S9sbM� M5�
NJ1IG� nNI2J2MMJI�I�r1/0�iI�11�121
RQI1V V Il
ON9o8 H1HON - 093 OVOU 31VIS - t93 OVOH A1Nt100
4
a
W.
m
ON{IOti HAMS - 993 OYOU 31Y1S - t9B OVOU A1Ni10J
NY7d 3113
9i ioaay — 93 Vu(i sa•{a•Isg also uap{oo
AL" =WM =0 nr� u:o rs>s
MIN tR mmw -Hw rr n b3+io ca -
cxzrn cn:ss: araraa
i'.(.: i
tip
pF�}! °lit
1 r li kkE ra§a pill
tslaii ai. ---
44,11,
[fit
J
C flily
ii7 s�Da,
�_
s-
_
sue`
i�
IND