HEX Final Decision #2026-12 HEX NO. 2026-12
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING. INSTR 6795050 OR 6561 PG 2818
RECORDED 3/10/2026 11:04 AM PAGES 8
February 26, 2026. CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND COMPTROLLER
COLLIER COUNTY FLORIDA
REC$69.50
PETITION.
PETITION NO. SV-PL20250003185 —Panda Express -Immokalee Rd. & Founders - Request for
a variance from the Land Development Code Section 5.06.04.F.2.a, which allows for Outparcels
to have one additional 60 square foot wall sign facing the shopping center, in addition to any wall
signs permitted by the code, provided that this sign does not face a public right-of-way, to not
exceed two total wall signs. The applicant is seeking a third wall sign, 6 feet by 6 feet, at 8955
Founder Square Drive, Founders Square Tract G, Section 26, Township 48 South, Range 26 East,
Collier County,Florida. (226-2/8)
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
The applicant is seeking a variance for one additional wall sign for a total of three wall signs.
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 Hearing Examiner disclosed having reviewed the record for the petition and having no
ex parte communications.
6. The County's Land Development Sections 5.06.08.B.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
a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land,
structure or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands,structures
or buildings in the same district.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the landowner is
facing challenges that are specific to their property, rather than due to their own actions.
It's important to note that granting the variance won't significantly change the essential
character of the area in the same district. The property has two sides with public frontage:
one along Immokalee Road and the other along Founders Place. The building has two
customer facing sides: the main entrance is aligned with the primary entry drive and
storefront (Sign SI), while the secondary side faces the drive-thru (Signs S2 and S3). Due
to limitations concerning site access, traffic flow design, and visibility from Immokalee
Road, vehicles coming from the secondary frontage have difficulty seeing the primary wall
sign (S1). This creates a unique visibility challenge that isn't encountered by many other
properties in the district, which typically have either a single frontage or a more favorable
building orientation.
b. That literal interpretation of the provisions of the sign code would deprive the
applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district
and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that a strict
interpretation of these regulations would cause unnecessary hardships on petitioner's
operation. Section 5.06.00 of the LDC limits wall signage to one sign per tenant frontage
facing a public right-of-way or parking area.A strict interpretation of this provision would
allow only the primary wall sign (S1), depriving the applicant of adequate visibility on both
frontages despite the building's dual orientation. Other properties enjoy similar benefits
through better building orientation or approved multi-sign variances. Denial of additional
signs would impair customer wayfinding for vehicles entering from the drive-thru side,
leading to missed turns, last-second lane changes, and confusion, thereby impacting safety
and operational efficiency.
c. That the special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land,
structure or building do not result from the actions of the applicant.
1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 5
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the special
conditions and circumstances peculiar to the land, structure, or building do not result from
the applicant's actions. The site's two-sided frontage configuration, setback requirements,
access points, and internal circulation patterns are dictated by county-approved
development plans and roadway alignments. The building's dual-orientation layout was
established to meet site design criteria,parking accessibility, and drive-thru functionality.
These factors are outside the applicant's control, and the need for multiple wall signs is a
direct result of the property's layout rather than a self-imposed hardship.
d. 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 requested
variance will not grant any special privileges that are unavailable to others in the same
zoning district. Approving the request aligns with several businesses within MPUD, and
other commercial districts have successfully obtained variances or alternative signage
approvals,particularly when multiple public frontages are present or site layouts obstruct
visibility. Granting this variance does not confer a competitive edge; rather, it ensures
fairness for multi frontage developments by allowing similar visibility and aligning with
the Sign Code's purpose of providing safe and effective business identification for all
properties.
e. That the Variance granted is the minimum relief that will make possible the
reasonable use of the land, building or structure. SV-PL20250003185—8955
Founder's Square Dr Page 7 of 7 January 8,2025
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the applicant is
requesting a variance for an additional supplemental wall sign (S3) to enhance visibility
from customers traveling east or west. This request is carefully crafted to avoid sign clutter
while providing essential visibility, ensuring that the relief sought is the minimum
necessary for the effective use of the property. The goal is to maintain clear and safe
communication for customers.
f. 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 from the public hearing reflects that the requested
variance is consistent with the Collier County Sign Code and the Growth Management
Plan, ensuring that it will not have a negative impact on neighboring properties or the
public welfare. This minor adjustment facilitates effective communication while upholding
safety and efficiency standards. It does not impede community health or property rights,
nor does it obstruct light or air access for adjacent properties. The variance aims to
enhance safe and efficient vehicular traffic, maintain property values through attractive
Page 3 of 5
signage, and minimize excessive sign clutter while still allowing for clear business
identification.
The additional wall signs will improve wayfinding for traffic on dual frontages and help
reduce unsafe maneuvers, all while conforming to architectural compatibility standards.
They are not expected to create visual blight or detrimentally affect surrounding
properties. Granting this variance will further the objectives of the Sign Code and align
with the Growth Management Plan's emphasis on fostering safe, efficient, and well-
designed commercial development.
County staff found that the subject Variance request satisfies established criteria and is
consistent with the general intent and purpose of the LDC and GMP.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the subject property is
located in the Baumgarten Mixed Plan Unit Development (MPUD) Zoning District on the
Southeast corner of Immokalee Road and Collier Boulevard in proximity to the Activity Center
Subdistrict of the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the GMP. The GMP does not address
individual Variance requests but focuses on the larger issue of the actual use. The Baumgarten
MPUD is consistent with the FLUM.
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- PL20250003185, filed by Gina
Penney, representing the owner/applicant CFT NV Development, LLC, with respect to the
property described as Founder's Square Tract G, in Section 26, Township 48 South, Range 26
East, Collier County, Florida.
• The applicant requests a Sign Variance from Land Development Code 5.06.04.F.2.a, to
allow one additional wall sign on the secondary frontage, resulting in a total of three signs
within the Baumgarten Mixed Planned Unit Development (MPUD) under Ordinance 19-
11, as amended.
Said changes are fully described in the Site Sign Plan attached as Exhibit "A" and are subject to
the condition(s) set forth below.
Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A - Site Sign Plan
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
8955 Founder's Square Dr., within the Baumgarten MPUD, and is also described as Founder's
Square Tract G, in Section 26, Township 48 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida.
CONDITIONS.
• 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.
X9--.1-4.------
March 9, 2026
Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 5
EXHIBIT "A"
Y
Igg
qhtiilii
��S/ N,�yJ ' I1HliuI
I1IHllhIti'
'bi W m w t,, 1. w Ilh F D oI
9
�, omic
Omovowo
to
It "iccic2.-pa?oo
II vao��O�av
5i
� � — O y
S � 1 i u
is r X_F9 y `m 111 j
1F1 N j
I 1 ( 01D N
t 4 Et )c E ,
?Ii1 ` _:m°"D
W UNNNm U3
m»>CNpO 69_y-
I —-- _ a000�I J�
774•
--1 — E--- EMI __
t4 ______
I 1 j•Vag.• L4ING>:/.1,
R
I
1 _ ;i •• - -
l 3
W
j 1 - trx-t-r------ ll I sMI
I. ', ti%6 . '... .A /7 . F
i
le
I ' —
—..—..—..—..—..-..-_-..-..-..-..__J..J
„9-,SLZ
0
23'-3" v V ^'• a
-o m 0
Lt o0
o
o LL
_
Cn a
CO ro
CO Z
a
o
SS • N� I N
N- N
Y
H I , o.:.
r- 7 Ji m
,. till `^
_IL
I�
_1 -
Iii,
111 ,�
laili
tau
LJ 111M_
V -
F.
C NI SIP
& 1
7 ' if a
II
j i ' 1
_ J - III - .
� ji C
, . Ai O
o m
�� as
30
• J1Iii > ?
I W r
ro
�' 173
m y
W ° LL
a m
m 00 d m
rn a
• =E r
m n m
I a m
1 .ro ^o
Z3.;
"All
r N3
R
VW