Resolution 1992-191
RESOImIOIf 92-191
A RESOLUTIOII GRAJlTIJfG 'l'RZ APPEAL OF THE GROW1'H
PLAlCIfIJfG DIRECTOR'S u~,,~NATIOII ON THE
COIlPATIBILITY n\;~rt.lOlf APPLICATION NUMBER
CEX-002-tnf FOR PROI-t.kd LOCATED WEST OF
VANDERBILT DRIYJ: (CR-901), AT THE NORTHEAST
COlUttR OF EAST LAXEVIEW DRIVE AIfD NINTH STREET
IJf SEC'l'ION 5, TOWIfSHIP 48 SOOTH, RANGE 25
EAST, COLLIER COUIlTY, FLORIDA.
....~e<IAS, Articl. VIII, Section 1 (f) of the Constitution of
norida conf.n on counti_ broad orcIinanc.__kin<) pow.r when not
incon81atent with q.nera1 or 8P8Cial law: and
....K~, Chapter 125.01, Florida Statut.s, conf.n on all
~.L1_ in norida q_ral poIMn of qov.rnaent, inclucUnq the
OJ:'d1Dance-..aJtinq power and the power to plan and requlat. the use
of land and vater: and
....~..!U, Chapter 163, Part II Plorida Statutes, requires
local qov.rnaente to adopt a ~L.benaive plan and Chapter 9J-5,
norid.. Adalnistrativ. ,......, ~liltbea the criteria for adopting
.. co.prahenaiv. plan: and
..uO(!AS, on January 10, 1989, Colli.r County adopted the
Collier County Growth Kanaqe.ent Plan as ite Callprebensive Plan
pursuant to the requir_nte Chapter 163, Part II Florida
Stablbte, also known aa the Local Gov.rnaent Callprehensive
Planninq and Land o.v.10p118nt Regulation Act of 1985 and Chapter
9J-5, Plorida ad.lnlstrativ. ,......, also known aa the Minimum
criteria for Revi_ of Local Governaent Coaprehensiv. Plans and
Detemination of Callplianee: and
WHEREAS, Policy 3.1.1t of the Future Land Use El...nt of the
Growth Kanaq_nt Plan provi~ for a Zonin<) Reevaluation Program
1nc1uc1inq provisions for Ex.-ptions, Compatibility Exceptions and
Vested R1qhta Deterainations: and
WHEREAS, the County adopted the Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance
Jru1Iber 90-23 on Karch 21, 1990 to ilapl...nt Policy 3.1.K of the
Futur. Land U_ Ele_nt of the Growth Manaq...nt Plan: and
G a __17/ R- If
!'lARCH 30~ 1992
~..._.a8, the Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance provide. for
applications to pn_rve the existinq inconsi.tent zoninq in
certain .ituations pursuant to section 2.4 (Ex.-ptions), section
10 (eo.p&tibility Exception), and Section 11 (Deteraination of
Vested Jt1qhts): and
....n.~, the OVJI8n of the benin described real property,
CI1ristian F. Powell and Beverly Jean Powell, have subaitted an
application for CoIIpatibility Exception (CEX-002-tnf) pursuant to
8ectlon 10 of the Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance: and
....~-ru, basecS upon the criteria for qr&ntinq Coapatibility
zxc.ptions contained in Section 10.6.1 of the Zoning Reevaluation
0rcIJ.nance, the Growth Planninq Dinctor'. deteraination wa. to
.s.ny that application: and
......IAS, the OVJI8n of the benin described real property
fUecI an appeal of the Director'. deteraination to the Board of
OAu.ty co.a1..ionen, a. prov1c1ecl for in section 10.5 of the
Zcm1nq ""'a1uation Ordinance, and
....wJlAS, on Karch 30, 1992 the Board of County eo.ai..ionen
considered the application for Appeal of the Growth Planninq
Dinctor'. c1etemination on tbe Coapatibility Exception
application, the Growth Planninq Dinctor'. r~tion, and
the record _de befon the Board of County eo.ai..ioner. at said
bearinq .
1IOIf, TBERBrOU, the Board of County Co.ai.sionsr. of Collier
COW.t.y, Florida hereby -.Jtea tbe followinq PincUnqa of Fact and
Conclusions of Lav:
Pindlnag of Pael:
1. The unblprovecl real property which i. the subject of
this appeal is owned by Chri.tian P. Powell and Beverly Jean
Powell.
y~ R- B
MARCH 30, 1992
2. Tbe subject property i. leqa11y described as Lot 6,
Block 26, Bonita Shorea Unit 3, aC::C:Ordinq to the plat thereof, as
~.ow~~ in Plat Book 3, Page 80 of the Public Record. of Collier
cow,ty, norida. Tbe property contains .30 acres.
3. The subject property i. located West of Vanderbilt Drive
at the .ortbeast corner of East Lakevi_ Drive and Ninth Street.
It is c1eaiqnatecl Urban Residential on the Future Land Use Map.
Tbe lIIlXiaua density peraitted on the subject property by the
Density Ilating Sy.~ contained in the Future Land U_ Element is
16 units per acre. Tbe site is within the Traffic Conge.tion
Area resultinq in tbe subtraction of 1 unit per acre yieldinq a
cons1atent (ba_) density of 3 units per acre. Utilidnq the
conversion of eo.aercial provision in the Future Land U_ Element,
the property could be consistently zoned to p8rl1it up to 16 units
per acre.
4. The ex1stinq zoninq of tbe subject property i. C-3,
C Ic1al Inter.ec1iate, wicb perllits a variety of co.aercial
aau within structures at a aaxiaua heiqht of 50 feet and with
setbacks of 25 feet front, 15 feat .ide and 15 feet rear.
5. The C-3 zoninq di.trict i. inconsistent with the Growth
Kanag_nt Plan because it doe. not coaply with the locational
criteria contained in the Future Land Use El_nt.
6. The applicant subaittecl to the county on August 20, 1990
an application for co.patibility Exception (CEX-002-1fN) as
prov1c1ecl for in Section 10, Coapatibility Exceptions, of the
Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance.
7. The Growth Planning Director's deterllination for said
application, issuecl on october 15, 1991 and effective on
october 26, 1991, wa. for approval subject to a rezone to the
C-1/T zoninq district based upon the criteria established in
Section 10.6.1 of the Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance.
8. The applicant filed with the county on october 28, 1991
an Appeal of the Growth Planninq Director's determination of
----.
MARCH 30, 1992
6pplOW.l Abject to a rezone to the C-1/T zoninq district for the
o:.opatibillty Exception application a. provided for in Section
10.5 of the Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance.
9. An Ex-.ption application a. provided for in Section
2.4.5 of the Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance was subaittecl and
~ec1 .. the BUJ:)ject p.........rty does not ..et the criteria
conta1necl in Subsections 2.4.5.1 or 2.4.5.2 of the Zoning
Ru..luation Ordinance.
10. Within 300 feet to the north of the subject property are
c1fte1oped c..,_rcial UNS on lanc1s zoned C-3, co-rcial
Intul:ir:11ate.
11. Within 300 feet to the east of the BUJ:)ject property are
two undeveloped lots zoned C-3, CO-rcial Inte~iate and
subject; to the Zoninq Reevaluation Pl:ogr_, an office/retail
ba1141nq on land zoned C-3, and, across Vanderbilt Drive in Lee
o.uuty, is laneS partially developed with a residential
.u1t1-faa11y project.
12. Within 300 feet to the south of tbe subject property is
andeYeloped land zoned RSP-3, Re.idential Sinqle Paa1ly, ancS a
golf course and undeveloped pro~rty zoned POD, Planned Unit
o.velClpMnt (Audubon Country Club).
13. Within 300 feat to the vest of the BUJ:)ject property,
across East Lakevi_ Drive, is land partially developed with
s1nqle f_ily ho.e. zoned RSP-4.
14. Tbe BUJ:)ject property is IIOre or Ie.. rectanqular in
shape and contains .30 acrea. Tbe frontage widths are
approxi.-tely 100 feet (on .inth Street) and approxi..tely 140
f_t (on East Lakevi_ Drive).
15. Tbe property has no unusual topographic features.
16. Then are no identified areas of envirOJlMntal
sensitivity on site.
17. Tbe existinq zoninq district boundary is logically drawn
in nlation to existinq concIition. on the subject property.
/"""\
-
.
MARCH 30, 1992
11. o.ve14r__nt peraittecl und.r a consist.nt zoning district
(1SP-3) would not g.nerate exoessiv. noise, qlar., odor or traffic
f,,-ct.s upon the nearby sarrounc1inq _s.
19. O'V.1....__nt in the nearby surroundinq ar.a will g.n.rate
... ..slve noi_, eJ'lare, odor or traffic iJlpacts upon develClplllent
peraittecl on the Rbject property under a consistent zoninq
district (RSP-3).
20. o.v.10p118nt peraittecl under the existing zoninq district
(C-3) would eJ'enerate excessiv. noi_, eJ'lar., odor or traffic
f,,-cta upon the nearby nnounctinq ana.
21. o.v.1ClpMnt in the nearby surroundinq area will not
~te ex~.sive noi_, eJ'lare, odor or traffic iJlpacts upon
deYelopMllt: peraittecl on the subject property under the existing
&oninq district (C-3).
22. o.v.lo.._nt peraittecl under the C-3 zoninq district,
with _ and beiqht restrictions, would not q.n.rat. .xc.ssive
noise, eJ'lare, odor or traffic b!pects upon the nearby surrounding
area .
23. o.v.l~.t in the nearby aurrouncIinq ar.a will not
9enerate excaaaiv. noi.., eJ'lare, odor, or traffic iJlpacts upon
c1evelClpMnt peraittecl on the subject property under the C-3 zoning
district with _ and heigbt reatrictions.
24. o.ve1ClpMnt of the subject site at a consistent density
of 3 units per acr. would yield a total of 1 cSv.llinq unit.
utilizinq the ITJ: TriD Geftllration Manual fiqur. of 10 trips per
day per sinqle faaily cSv.lling unit, 1 sinqle faaily home would
9enerate 10 trips per day.
25. utilizinq an acceptable standard of 10,000 square feet
of _rcial develClpMnt (floor area) per acre, the aubject site
could be developed und.r the .xiatinq (C-3) zoning district with a
3,000 square f..t structur.. Utilizinq the lTE TriD Generation
Manual fi9Ur. of approxi..tely 70 trips per day per 1,000 square
feet of floor area, a 3,000 square feet qenera1 retail use could
MARCH 30, 1992
venerate 210 trips psr day. A CJ.....ral retail u_ is
E.apn"l1tetive of the asea peraittecl in the C-3 district. SOlIe
peza1ttec1 _ have a lov.r, and __ higher, trip generation rate
than a q_ral ntail _.
26. Utiliainq an acceptable standard of 10,000 square feet
of tl Troisi devel..~_nt (floor area) per acre, the subject site
could be developed under tbe n.co-ncIed (C-l/T) zoninq district
with a 3,000 square feet structure. utilizinq the ITE ~
Caftaration Manual fiqun of applClox!-.tely 25 trips per day per
1,000 square feet of floor area, a 3,000 square feet general
office _ could qenerate 75 trips per day. A qeneral office use
is repruentetive of tbe uses peraittecl in the C-1/T district.
27. East Lakevi_ Drive and Ninth street are both local
roacIvays with 2 undivided paved lanes. The.e road. are classified
.. local roadways, therefon, there are no established Levels of
service (LOS). The property will have access to Vanderbilt Drive
(via .1nth street) wicb is a collector road with an ac10ptecl Level
of service .D. and a current 1990 operational Level of Service
.C". It is a 2 lane undlvic1ecl roadway and is to be 4 laned in the
twt..u.e but this 4 laninq is not within the five (5) year plan.
28. The scale and character of developll8nt peraitted under a
consistent aoninq district (RSP-3) is a sinqle faaily cSvelling at
. _vt"'DI beight of 35 feat.
29. The scale and character of developll8nt existinq and
peza1ttecl within the nearby aurrounc1inq area includes single
faa1ly clvellinq., a fire stetion site, a two story structure
containinq a dental office with reaidence upstairs, and two
one-at:ory retail plazas.
30. The scale and character of develop..nt peraitted under
tile existinq aoninq cUstrict (C-3) is an office, ntail or
institutional _ vithin a structure at a ..xbnDI beight of 50
feet.
Ot?~(? '- F
31. 'I'be scale and c:baracter of c1eYelopll8nt peraittecl und.r
the C-3 zoninq district with u.. and h.ight r.strictions is an
Office, l1aitecl nteil 01' institutionsl ~ with a .tructur. at a
_..4_ be1qht of 35 feet.
32. 'l'bere is no particular need identifiecl for ac1clitional
c rcial uses in the auu.....lC1inq neighborhood.
33. 'I'be averaqe of the intensity or density of those uses in
the MUby aurrounc1inq area of tbe subject property is the
~ity of davelop_nt peraittecl in the existinq (C-3) zoning
district with ~ and beiqbt restrictions.
t!one1u.lona af Law
B..ec1 upon the aIloYe P1nc11nqa of Pact, the Board of County
co.aissionen N".S the followinq Conclusions of Law:
'I'be Growth Plannlnq Director's c1eteraination of d.nial for
the eo.patibility Exception application mmber CEX-002-JfJf i. not
.........rt.lcS by BUbetantial coapetent avid.nce in that:
'!'be appellant has cSeIIonstratecl by substantial coapetent
&vidence that tbe profeasionel office land use would be
in- ......tibl. with the land WIea and potential land WIB. identified
in P1nc1inqs of Pact 110.-13. set forth abov., takinq into account
the followinq:
1. Tbe subject property i. not .liqib1. for a co.patibility
Deteraination Ex.-ption pursuant to Section 2.4 of the zoning
JleeYaluation Ordinance as the property doe. not ~ the criteria
contained in SUbsections 2.4.5.1 and 2.4.5.2 of the Zoning
a.evaluation Ordinance.
2. Tbe land ~ patterns, d.nsiti.. and intsnsitiea allowed
under zoning district. consi.tent with the Growth Management Plan
(RSP-3) on the subject property are not compatible with those
existinq on property within the nearby su=ounc1ing area of the
subject property.
/7,.
- "
f1
J-1
MARCH 30, 1992
3. The land _ patterns, densitie. and intensities allowed
under the ex1stinq zoninq district (C-3) on the subject property
are not COIIpatible with those existinq on property within the
nearby surroundinq ana of the subject property.
4. The land _ patterns, densities and intensities allowed
ancSer the C-l/T zoninq district on the subject property are not
COIIpatibl. with tbo.. existinq on property within the nearby
nn......dinq area of the subject pl'o",rty.
5. The land _ patterns, densitie. and intensities allowed
ancSer the C-3 zoninq district with u.e and height restrictions on
the subject property are COIIpatible with those existinq on
101.~rty within the nearby surroundinq area of the subject
property .
6. The existinq zoninq district boundaries are logically
c1ravn in nlation to existinq conditions on the subject property.
7. A consistent zoninq district (RSP-3) on the subject
pl'~..Li will not aclve~ly illpact the nearby .urrounclinq area.
8. A consistent zoninq district (RSF-3) on the subject
property will be adve~ly illpactecl by the nearby surrouncUng
ana.
9. The existinq zoninq district (C-3) on the subject
pr~rty will adve~ly illpact the nearby surrounclinq area.
10. The existinq zoning district (C-3) on the Subject
property will not be adve~ly 1IIpacted by the nearby su=ounding
area .
11. The C-l/T zoninq district on the subject property will
not adve~ly illpact the nearby su=ouncUnq area.
12. The C-l/T zoning district on the subject property will
be advenely illpactecl by the nearby su=ounding area.
13. The C-3 zoninq di.trict with use and height restrictions
on the subject property will not adversely ilapact the nearby
surroundinq area.
MARCH 30, 1992.
14. Tbe C-3 zoninq district with use and height restrictions
CD tM subject pr0p6k tot will not be advenely illp&ctecI by the
nearby B1In'OUnc1inq area.
15. A consistent zoninq district (RSP-3) will not onate or
.K"..slvely 1ncnaae traffic congestion or othervi.. affect public
safety .
16. Tbe existinq zoninq district (C-3) will not create or
exceaaively 1ncrea_ traffic conqestion or othervi_ affect public
..fety .
17. Tbe C-l/'l' zoninq district will not create or excessively
~ traffic conqeetion or othervi_ affect public safety.
18. The C-3 zoninq district with use and height restrictions
rill not create or e~sive1y 1ncna_ traffic conqestion or
otherwise affect public safety.
19. Tbe lcvel of existinq traffic would not have an adverse
bpact on a cons1atent zoninq district (RSP-3).
20. Tbe lcvel of existinq traffic would not have an adverse
~~~ on the existinq zoninq district (C-3).
21. The lcvel of existinq traffic would not have an adverse
bpact on tbe C-l/'l' zoninq district.
22. The 1cvel of existinq traffic would not have an adverse
iJlpact on the C-3 zoninq district with ~ and height
restrictions .
23. A consistent zoninq district (RSP-3) will be out of
scale or out of character with tbe existinq land ~s and neecIB of
tbe nearby Surrounding neiqbborboocS.
24. The existinq zoninq district (C-3) will be out of scale
or out of character with the existinq land uses and needs of the
~ aurrounc1inq neighborboocS.
25. The C-l/'l' zoninq district will be out of scale or out of
character with the existing land ~s and needs of the nearby
B1In'OUnc1inq neiqbborhoocS.
~
t7
~
, .... ~.. .J J, ... __ _ ^_
26. Tbe C-3 zoninq district with _ and heiqht
ratrlctions will not be out Of scale or out of character with the
a.latiftq land _ and neecIs of the nearby surroundinq
ne~.
27. Tbe C-3 zoninq district with u_ and height re.trictions
c10etI not neu" tbe averaqe of the intensity or density of those
UHlI in the nearby surroundinq area of the subj ect property as
1deftt1tiecl in P1nc11nq , 33.
Cra~ af ea.na~iblllbr EYeaM.ion ADrNtal
1IOIf, '.f~OJtJl, lIB rr RESOLVED by the Board of County
o f..ioners of COllier COunty, Plorida, in public hearinq, duly
constituted and as-..bled on this, the 30th day of Karch, 1992,
thats
Tbe Appeal of the Growth Planninq Director'. c1eteraination,
Vb1cb vas approval subject to a nzone to the C-1/'l' zoninq
district, for the CoIIpatibiUty Exception appUcation IlUllber
CEX-002-n for the herein described real property, subaitted by
CI1ristian P. Powell and Beverly Jean Powell i. granted subject to
the followinq IWtations and concIitions:
1. The zoninq of tbe subject property shall re-.in C-3 but
only the followtnq principal _, as Usted in the Land
DeYel~ Code (Ordinance '91-102), are paraittecl:
a. All parsittecl _ of the C-1/T, Ccmaercial
Profe.sional/Transitional District except Care Unit.,
Nursing H~., JIuBeuJIB and Art Gallerie., and
Ifon-clepository creclit Institutions.
b. All concIitional _s of the C-l/T Ccmaercial
Prof..sional/TranBitional District except Increased
Buildinq Height, MiXed Residential and COIDIDercial Uses,
and Depository Institutions
"'"'
MARCH 30~ 1992
c. Appan1 and Acce.sory .ton. (5611 - apparel accessory
etona, bat .tore., and tie .hops only: 5632 -
exc1uc1inq fur apparel -.de to custoJl order, fur shops,
and furriers, 5641, 5699)
d. Bus1neas service. (1311, 1313, 1322-1338, 7361-7319,
1384, 1389 except auctionearinq service, field
varebouainq, bottle labeling, packaginq and labeling,
ealvaqinq of claJlaqecl _rchandi_, scrap steel cutting
anet .littinq)
e. Pood Storea (5421 - flab ..rketa and _afood ..rltet.
only, 5431, 5441, 5451 - excluding ice cre.. .tore, 5461
and 5499)
f. General Merchancli_ Stona (5331)
q. Health Services (8011-8049 and 8082)
b. ~ Furniture, Pllrnisb1nq. anet Equip-.nt Store. (5114,
5119, 5135 and 5136)
1. Miacell--. Repair service. (7629 and 7631)
j. Miacell--. Retail (5932 - antique stores, antique
furniture, antique qlaaavare, antique heme-furnishings,
and antique objects of art only, 5942: 5943, 5944 _
excludinq javalry, precioas stone. and precioas .etals:
incluc1inq cu.toJI ..de: 5945 - cer..ics supplies, craft
kits and supplie., and hobby shops only: 5946: 5947:
5949: 5992: 5993: anet 5999 - excluc1inq ice dealers and
pet shops)
k. Paint, Glaa. and Wallpaper Store. (5231)
1. Personal services (7212, 7221, 7231, 7241 and 7291)
a. Veterinary Service. (0742 excludinq outeide kenneling)
n. Any other interaecUate ~rcial use which is
coaparable in nature with the foreqoinq use..
";;Att..~
"' ....... ..-
0'. .._,
. '.-~
. ":. J
-=: '"L"..
"':' ':...' 'I J :n
\~. " ~ .. '. '=t.. ': (:>J
.\J. "f ""
~ ",. ." . .....~
:" ~~.~~PORMAJfD
,i. . . If\l!'rZ; CY:
..,.
MARCH 30, 1992
2. All conditional use. Usted in the C-3 district of the
Land Devel.:>r_llt Code an peraissible as conditional uses, subject
to the Btenc1arc1a and procedure. ..tabU shed in Division 2.7.4 of
the LaneS o.velOpll8nt Code.
3. All buildinq. are U.itecl to a ..xisua height of 35
feet.
4. This Resolution, wbich constitutes an approval of the
eo.patibUity Exception application I1UIIber CEX-002-JfJf (with the
&on1nq to main C-3) subject to the liaitations and conditions
contained berein, sball apply to the land and is therefore
transferable troa owner to owner of the land subject to thi.
~.1.
5. Anyth1nq in the Zoninq Reevaluation Ordinance to the
contrary notvithatenclinq, the approval of this Appeal ..y be
reYOkecI upon a showinq by the County of peril to the public
health, eafety or qenera1 _lfare of the residents of Collier
County unknown a~ the t.lae of approval.
Tbis Resolution adopted after action, ..cond and ..jority
vote favorinq .-.
~;&_1"
BOARD OP cotl..n COMMISSIONERS
~~ER- COUlOn, 1'LOJlIDA
\r~~~
Michael J -l 'fOl~~irman
-r3<1#L/
.,. ..,j)R"
'. II J;
. . t".
..', €~. ,..
',... .
. ,
~... I~' . ->14tJt7'z JfI fA e
IIerj M. Student
~istant County Attorney
US/CZX-002-JfJf/A
,
........
~
rl