The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 05/26/2009 Item #17L Agenda Item No. 17l May 26, 2009 Page 1 of 36 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY V A-2008-AR-13977 Tim Chess of McDonalds USA, LLC, represented by Jeffrey Satfield of CPH Engineers, Inc., is requesting a Variance from the landscape requirements of Land Development Code Subsection 4.06.02, Buffer Requirements, in the General Commercial (C-4) and Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTMUD-MXD), to allow a modification of the required 7.5-foot wide buffer on the western side of the property; and to reduced buffer widths on the property's northern side from 15 feet to ten feet, the eastern side from 7.5 feet to five feet, and the southern side from 10 feet to five feet. The 0.86-acre subject property is located at 2886 Tamiami Trail East, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. OBJECTIVE: To have the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) consider the above-referenced Variance petition and render a decision pursuant to Section 9.04.04 of the Land Development Code (LDC) in order to ensure that the project is in harmony with all applicable codes and regulations and that the community's interests are maintained. CONSIDERA TIONS: The petitioner is requesting the following four Variances from the Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 4.06.02, BL![(er Requirements, to: 1. Reduce the minimum 15-foot Type "D" buffer width to 1 O-feet on the property's northern boundary; 2. Reduce the minimum 7.5-100t Type "A" buffer width on the eastern side to 5-feet; 3. Reduce the minimum 10- foot Type "D" buffer w'idth on the southern side to 5- feet; and 4. Modify the minimum 7.5-foot wide Type "A" buffer requirement on the western side of the property by providing five, I O-foot wide landscape islands. -, The existing McDonald's restaurant owner has had a lease with Gulf Gate Plaza for the subject property since 1973. On June 10, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved a Final Plat (FP-2008-AR-12928) submitted by the applicant to create an outparcel for the property within the shopping center. The objective of this re-plat was to allow the fast-food chain to build a new restaurant on the created outparcel under its own site development plan (SDP), as Gulf Gate Plaza, being one parcel, would have otherwise had to come in under the samc SDP, thereby triggering the need for the entire shopping center to be brought up to current LDC standards in terms of building architecture, parking lot islands, transitional screening, buffers, et cetera. Although during the re-plat the new outparcel's size was maximized to the greatest extent possible-from a 0.84-acre lease limit area to a 0.86-acre outparcel-the applicant's site is still not able to meet LDC requirements for 7.5-foot wide Type A landscape buffers V A-2008-AR-13977 April 2, 2009 1 item r~o. 17L fvlav 26, 2009 Page 2 of 36 between separately platted commercial tracts, as required pursuant to Table 2.4, footnote three, of LDC Subsection 4.06.02.CA, Table of Bl~rrer Requirements by Land U<,'e Class(fication. Nor is it able to provide the required 1 5-foot wide buffer along its US-41 right-of-way, pursuant to Subsection 4.06,02,CA, Alternative D, consisting of trees spaced a minimum of 30 feet on center, underplanted with a 36-inch double hedgerow of shrubbery spaced three feet on center. As shown on the site plan, entitled "McDonald's Site Dimension Plan," prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., and dated December 2008, as revised through February 11, 2009, the new 3,827 square-foot restaurant building would be situated parallel to US-4l. Access to the site would be afforded via one access point on US-4 l, and two points along the southern boundary of the site (one of which would be egress only). Along the site's US- 41 frontage the applicants propose to provide a total of 15 feet of buffer width in two separate locations: lO feet of width would be located immediately adjacent to US 4 l, and an additional five feet of width would be located in a landscape island running the length of the entire drive-through aisle on the front side of the building, to further screen queuing vehicles from view of US 41 (see Exhibit A to the resolution), The purpose of providing these two buffer yards is to allow the applicants to achieve the intent of a Type B buffer, a further requirement of LDC Section 5,05.08, Architectural and Site Design Standards, which prohibits drive-throughs adjacent to roadways unless Type B buffer plantings are provided within the requisite buffer width. In order to meet the intent of a l5-foot wide buffer yard, the applicants anlended their previously approved parking deviation (APR-2008-AR-13978) to allow for a further parking reduction of 8 spaces. (Staff was amenable to this reduction due to the abundance of existing parking spaces within Gulf Gate Plaza, and the shared parking agreement the applicant has with the plaza's owner.) By doing so, the applicants could eliminate spaces previously proposed on the southern side of the building, thereby creating sufficient space to shift the building's footprint southward, As depicted on the Master Plan, where no buffer was previously required along the outparcel's western boundary, five landscape islands are proposed instead of the required 7.5-foot wide linear buffer. By virtue of this design, parking spaces could be retained along this boundary while still allowing planting areas of various sizes for the LDC- required plant materials. Finally, along the perimeter of the site's southern and eastern boundaries, five-foot wide buffers would be provided instead of the required 7,5-foot width. A landscape area would also sUlTound the base of the building in order to provide the required foundation plantings. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Variance petition would have no fiscal impact on Collier County. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: Approval of this Variance would not affect or change the requirements of the GMP. VA-200R-AR-13977 April 2, 2009 2 Agenda Item I\~o. 17l May 26, 2009 PaJe 3 of 36 AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT: Approval of this Variance would have no affordable housing impact. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no environmental issues associated with this Variance. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC did not review this petition as they do not normally hear Variance petitions. COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard petition VA-2008-AR-13977 on April 2, 2009, and believing that approving the Variance would not be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare, voted unanimously (9-0) to forward this petition to the BZA with a recommendation of approval, subj ect to the following conditions: I. The Variances approved are strictly limited to the landscape buffer width requirements as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan (Exhibit A), entitled, "Site Dimension Plan, prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., dated December 2008, as revised through February 11, 2009; and as further depicted in tbe landscape plan, entitled "McDonald's, Naples, Collier County, Florida" dated April 1, 2009 (Exhibit A-I), as further restricted below. 2. The five-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the northern, US-4I property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the IS-foot wide buffer requirement; 3. The 2.5-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the eastern property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 7.5- f(wt \vide buffer requirement; 4. The 5-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the southern property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 10-foot wide buffer requirement; 5. The 7.5-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the western propeliy boundat)', as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit /\) to allo'vv five) 10- foot minimum width landscape buffers. VA-2008-AR-13977 April 2. 2009 3 !\gerlda Item r~o. 17L f',1ay 26 2009 Page 4 of 36 6. All the plant materials required by the LDC for screening and buffering shall be accommodated to the extent feasible in the modified and/or reduced width buffers' respective areas, in locations to be approved by the County Landscape Architect. 7. Irrespective of that shown on the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, the proposed use shall be required to comply with the Architectural and Site Design Standards of LDC Section 5.05.08 and all other applicable regulations at the time of site development plan (SDP) review and approval. Because this decision was unanimous, and no letters of objection were received from the community, this item is being placed on the summary agenda. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner is requesting a Variance from the setback requirement with respect to landscape buffer widths. The granting of such Variances is permitted under LDC Section 9.04,02. The attached staff report and recommendations of the Planning Commission are advisory only and are not binding on you. Decisions regarding Variances are quasi- judicial, and all testimony given must be under oath. Petitioners have the burden to prove that the proposed Variance is consistent with all the criteria set forth below, and you may question the petitioners or staff to assure yourself that the necessary criteria have been satisfied, Should you consider denying the Variance, to assure that your decision is not later found to be arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable; the denial must be based upon competent, substantial evidence that the proposal does not meet one or more of the listed criteria below. Approval of this request requires three affirmative votes of the Board. Tn granting any Variance, the BZA may prescribe appropriate conditions and safeguards in conformity with the zoning code, including, but not limited to, reasonable time limits within which action for which the Valiance is required shall be begun or completed, or both, Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the tem1S under which the Variance is granted, would be deemed a violation of the zoning code. -STW Criteria for Variances 1. There are special conditions and circumstances eXlstmg which are peculiar to the location, size, and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. 2. There are special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant, such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the Variance request. 3. A literal interpretation of the provisions of the LDC work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. 4. The Variance, if granted, will be the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure and which promote standards of health, safety, or welfare. 5. Granting the Variance requested will not confer on the petitioner any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. V A-2008-AR-13977 April 2, 2009 4 [\genda Item No. ilL fvlay 26, 20CJ9 Page 5 of 36 6. Granting the Variance will be in harmony with the intent and purpose of the LDC, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 7. There are natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulation, such as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. 8. Granting the Variance will be consistent with the OMP. The proposed Resolution was prepared by the County Attorney's Office and is sufficient for Board action. -JAK RECOMMENDA TION: Staff recommends that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve Petition V A-2008-AR- 13977, subject to the conditions of approval that have been incorporated into the attached resolution. PREPARED BY: John-David Moss, AICP, Principal Planner Department of Zoning and Land Development Review VA-2008-AR-] 3977 April 2, 2009 5 Item Number: Item Summary: Meeting Date: Page 1 of 2 Agenda item No. i7l rv1ay 26, 2009 Page 6 of 36 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 17L This Item has been continued from the April 28 2009 BCC meeting. This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2008-AR-13977 Tim Chess of McDonalds USA, LLC. represented by Jeffrey Satfield of CPH Engineers, Inc. is requesting a Variance from the landscape requirements of Land Development Code Subsection 4.06.02, Buffer Requirements, In the General Commercial (C- 4\ and Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTMUD-MXD) to allow a modification of the reqUired 7.5-foot wide buffer on the western side of the property and to reduced buffer widths on the propertys northern side from 15 feet to ten feet. the eastern side from 7.5 feet tc five feet. and the southern side from 10 feet to five feet. The 0 86-acre subject property is located at 2886 Tamiami Trail East. in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (CTS) 5/26/200990000 AI",' Prepared By John-David Moss Community Development & Environmental Services Senior Planner Date Zoning & Land Development 4/4/2009 12:56:29 PM Chief Planner Date Approved By Ray Bellows Community Development & Environmental Services Zoning & Land Development Review 4/6/2009 1 :54 PM Approved By Judy Puig Community Development & Environmental Services Operations Anali'st Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. Date 4/7/2009 12:18 PM Approved By Steven Williams Attorney's Office Assistant County Attorney Attome)"s Office Date 4/13/2009 1 :35 PM Approved By Jeff Kiatzkow County Attorney County Attorney County Attorney Office Date 4/1512009 10:37 AM Approved By Randy Greenwald County rw~anagerls Office Management/Budget Analyst Date Office of Mar.agement & Budget 4117/2009 2:06 PM Approved By Joseph K. Schmitt Community Development & Environmental Services Community Development & Environmental Services Adminstrator Date Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. 51121200910:58 AM Approved By Susan !stenes, AICP Zoning & Land Development Director Date file://C:\AQ:endaTest\ExDOJi\ 130-Mav%2026.%202009\ 17.%20SlJMMA R YOIc.20AGENOA \___ 5/20/2009 Page 2 of2 Agenda Item ~~o. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 7 of 36 Community Development & Environmenta! Services Zonir:g & Land Development Review 5/19120098:30 AM Approved By OMS Coordinator OM8 Coordinator Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 5/191200910:54 AM Approved By Mark Isackson Budget Analyst Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 51191200912:10 PM Approved B)' Leo E. Ochs, Jr. Board of County Commissioners Deputy County Manager Date County Manager's Office 5/1912009 2:50 PM file://C:\Ag:endaTest\ExnOli\ 130-Mav<%202().%202009\ 17.%20S1 JMMA R Y%20A(JFNDA \u .'112.012.009 Agenda Item No. 17L ^GENDMn~f~.r\tH9,.~009 Page 8 of 36 - ','h",.-c"f",.:N"O.. f -rt":~?, ,. -_~( Ctilffer COUi1.ty ':,':: t:-1.~:-~;(: - _-~:5""~"J:.'" : :"/;i;,:,;-;Jfrt;': J, Z.:..:. ~"'--'';'~~~~;:.:r.:.:_'_:: '::~'ir;-","~:"<_:~ :t~l~:",;:. <:.:J STAFF REPORT TO: COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: MARCH 19,2009 SUBJECT: VA-2008-AR-13977, McDONALD'S GULF GATE PLAZA VARIANCE PROPERTY OWNER/APPLICANT/AGENT: Owner: ShaulRik1nan.~1anager Gulfgate Plaza, LLC South 500 Dixie Highway Hallanda1e Beach, FL 33009 Agent: Jeffrey Satfield, P.E. CPH Engineers, Inc. 2216 Altamont Avenue Fort Myers, FL 33901 Applicant: Tim Chess McDonlad's USA, LLC 10150 Highland Manor Drive, Suite 470 Tampa, FL 33610 REQUESTED ACTION: To have the Collier County PlaIming Commission (CCPC) consider four (4) Variances from the Land Development Code (LDe) Subsection 4.06.02, B/.f[fer Requirements, to: 1. Reduce the minimum 15-foot Type "D" bLlffer width to ] O-feet on the property's northern boundary; 2. Reduce the minimum 7,5-foot Type "A" buffer width on the eastern side to 5-feet; 3. Reduce the minin1l1111 10-foot Type <;D" buffer width on the southern side to 5-feet; and 4. Modify the minimum 7.5-foot \,,'ide Type "A" buffer requirement on the western side of ihe properiy by providing Ii \Ie, 10-1'001 wide landscape islands. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The O.86-acre subject property is located at 2886 Tamiami Trail East (US-41), approximately 300 feet west ofihe Bayshorc Drivc/Shadci\vlawn Drive intersection, in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida (,'ce locatio!1 map on thefollowingpagc). VA-2008-AR-IJ977 Page 1 ....JJ)(Q r-OM 'r"O'-i- .N 0 o 'en Z~(l) E>:::n (l)Cil(1j =;2:0.. (1j "0 (j) en <C .'0: , , <::l'O l,' :') ....r.- Cf),c:: r:::: I- ~ n::. I I ,~ ~5 2::2 CO , ,"1 1 <::'>- "'<r :S~ ~z Ow O:;i -<Ow r..J VjW - 2: I- o I to I Ll.. IIIIIII1 2 Q:; 3'iIliO N),~.Vl'\WOV'HS J,\lllO I JllOHSI.V8 " ,,; 0: ,,; 0: o >< ~ I o ::l ::J a. ,2: I- o I ..... " I o .. '.) C) , ' (D::!: I I u..o 2;:) ~1~8E ~ << <, '" w ~ ::::> (.l ~= ~OJ JON / - -. ~ ~ ~. ~ g :;e ~y~ I' " i , ~~ t::\i'l ' OIO~ Wi,O! J-JJt"D3 t:' I ,.....: I ~Il.a fI ~ ':~~i ~ \ G ~!igT, ;:;.-:: -- . "":J' [_.~c~~--'p ~ (') ~~!:! 0"fCM"1 &P.o..t~~1oO ~.- ~rig~ j 0 _;J~' . ~ ~~;;.,.....""J! ;'=:..\- ,~U - ~ ~ ~~- ..W L~ II ~-J -00- ~ n.: g~ 0 zo- ~~ ~g '1 !i({~~ I cr", 1,'''''':11 ~, V g w- I ~~e:' +-''--1 I . i 0 ~ to / ~ ': o~ ~ <, I~~ g: 3 B~ ~ i ,c:: l i. l ~J~ ~ >~ ~~ ~~ L ~ . ~ ;K "o"~.,->0,,~ ~p. :<.~~ ~~i~~:-oU h~\i~ i ~e~g~- ,;:s:'~I-~"'_,~,,~ ~"' r-j../,' Br. II, ~fi t"-'I ~~ ~ ~ -~D u.os (l~l~~~:ri~l:}dlh - J~T 1 j I"' __ ~~; 1 1j ~ '-c, :_ g J ryrf" :S) ~~~r d ~'f:'/] 5~~ /;;.-, . il 'J i~' . I' !~i!)~ ~~ ~~ ~~'Ij~d~.~'> :~.' ',;.:;"""" :~}~. lJ I i1 : goo ,j ;,I , '_ ~g "f. ~ft ~ I!l ! = d~ " ' _ J / ~'i}~ ~ ;l- \ ~"I i~,,, ~,~~ I~I ~ i ~ ~ " h ~"c. Hp" ~I- I ! c I . // ~ WW,lri.Ll"a> I I 1 ^ '\\ ell:"r lIe..J ~."'....... r--.. /'0- ...', I \-... "~.,..-.LI--. ~' ( - 1~'Jr 0'1'--'~\i<\;J1EJJlJ::3J ' ->.J' .v ~ 'i-~-J ,LI~ I \ ""..J ~ II lJDj1' 0 ?1~. ;;;-~:::--r2 r \J o---"'r.\-J:1~-", . ''''"''~ .,," """~,"'Y"'Y'" "'j\ 'rlJl~ - (\ r~7~?r?=-~~! T I ~i :; \..5 I ~~~ ~- A Ii r;;J1_.J? ~ > \., . _-=--=~".,,' 1Ialll) \1 \. (,1 ., (2, C. -.J./ -.d---------'" J I -~ ,.r<;r. , C)ilU ~ '--4 -. -o).J " (~.J_______--.-J ,......, \ (,1 _.. r- -r I ~j~. ~~9' ~.J or 1~;-d;J~ \;5// ~ ~ :! I ~ U'I'::. ~.l.---- ~- 1!! r, I. --~.- '-1!~~/-/----- ../ ~/ ~~~ ~ ~,~ ~ ~~ < ij o " c' ~ 13 ~ ~ 1\ > 'i " J , 0'1", J g~ ~ ~Iil; C I;';' ~ .> <.~ ~ 0.. <( 2: c.9 z z o N ..... ..... 0) M , ~ <{ , co o C> N , <{ > ~zl ~1 -i t-, wi eLl i 0.. <( ~ z o !- <( o o ..-JI I _J(J) ~ r---OM ~O\"j,.,.- NO -0 (0..- ....N C >. ill Q)roO) ==:2:ro ro 0.. ~ Qj 0) <( II , f ;1 ;" , J ill- !h~ I ~ J . UIl ii : r 1 d~n !IiJl1H 1'"- "! I r '," I!f " - [l~ F 0(.. " i t ~~ t' ~ .i. 1 . I 't t '1,1,' I ,Ii J- , ."" If; t'" I i'~ BI If !," ~ ," rE ~ . B , ! i~ f i; i'i I,! 11 i ! ~ 1 '.'1 I .. <S. , I -(! ' o! ! i'I' I ll< ~!! II " 1 , Z r I ,of · ,'t , 'it" ! - ~ il f!' II j, i;! I'; II Ii i I . II I III '\ %11 .I.. r,' ~l ' ~ 11 I ill 1 h P. :'!!! ii I! }, ;;1 i ~ II. !li t, ",11 ,t l!l !! :.j 1 ! Ii l' ~'Y 11 !; HI II,!. ~l i ! I; I ! ,~ ..t HI ~., ~(l'l~. :!" -H !l ~ ~ tv ~ · d ,~ Hi ..~ ~;: i~:l H ; [~~ l; ~ ~ ~f f ~ I' ,I IIi !~ ,I lt~l !! I.!' .. , lit ; I i' !l ;t! ji H ri:! i! ! hI H : ~ If II r ..... ...... !' ~:':: :' """'......e' -~..- ""',t..o.o..........,...""'...r.;:lIJ r.WJ~1 \7 ocr~!Jt .ft,v.>(" VOIlI01J 'wmo;" ti3n'O~ &:"'1 I'! '" lS>r.l "'f1U IlWIl'IVl &&&Z ,\1 b!_.t 's.PIBUOa:>>W d " :TI> '''' Z ',o.qt""~'" ~ ~ ? s>>r f'fPf'~~ l' 41:: 1.1'-.:,) NVld rjQlSN31~la 31lS " hll!;'o :';;j~. " l~ll;i t! 'i . !Ii ~ E 'I :or ~jt~n~iJ.''ii~~;at .p! ,~ l [hi~f.!mit'~':l~,1Il ~~: g z ~ hiil~pr~f;~,,~..f.".~~..:iU h- Q ! H,JH ~1'ill~W&I:!m !1~ ~ ~ ~ !\IMi!Vj'll.,lh:'ltt H," ~ ~ i ?lii*I!!;i~JllFmlid !~ ~ g I iih!I'ii!~l!l!,h!!li'i Iii 8 ~ ~ I,Hh~l!j;li1!h,,'I.,!i, I hi ~ u t ;\ffli~~1t'li "=-1~!-C1..il ~tJ ~ Z ~ ~hr.I:~.t~~cr H~~r~~i:;ih ~H z 5 j' 'I!i ~j;lf.'f'!I"ti>WI h ;: ~ , hi~E~r'!~~~: ~,.laHr~h !if ij '~~fiin~~:~nln~H~~~H: :!~ ~ B!!'1imIUilW!1!I!, '; Ii'! 3 =:~i.thl~~;hrh~Hr:hdt i f i ','f ,; ~ .~ p ~ h ~! ' .-/ ',_.'[ j ... ri ~ ! ~ J ! TO c ~p H r ~ i ;\ ....., -- 0.. !Urtl' I, !U w. ~ . i l..;r.j t:!n t:.n= f.......j;'\ ~! ! i ; H P , ~:> :'~! , . . ,I I: C ! ~ t ! ! ! I' ~1il fi 111E I I ~I~i j,1 ~, : uc:;' !.1 ~.a t.l;"~-:r U~.: ~I HIL ' ~ ~ ~ ~ f~ t ~ I, l!~ ~ i ii ~ ~ ~11i,", ~ tl ~ ~ ! ~ a ~ ~ ~ 1'Y. ~ -Ii ~. I, ~ ;~1I .. n ~ " b e U !I ~ ~ IW 11 if!! ~ tiil t Iii ~ ~' ~z~ ;. i ~ ' . . !" ;j!P ,1,.1 '!l1t ~~~H i II H~H 1: ,E! ", H~ n~ If H. ~ ~; ~ ".! IH' ,;f! . ~ t t i~~h I.." ~ :. ~ ~i~!H l ! ~ ~. t'," , ~ "' ,. ~ tJ hHi tx" >}( ..I..~ ~'\"/'>..'\"...... .....- J...,'< \- 0<-~ // -i! :-.,'\" ~f ,~ ,to c::)-~ ",v. ...)" J...,' !/ 0;0 O' .;:;:. 0> <cO o ;...: J...,V" c::) II It II r'l i! j I : 11 }!'r f if fill ! '! <llf : ;t ~ir! ~~ :~ fil'i' ~~.;H~ ~t ;il!H! ,I .. -'!I'" Jm!Hf~! ;~~i~~;!!~~ I Ii , . Z 2 !! ~ g ~~ ..~~~ i ~ ~i i i i ~ e e ~;~ ~ ; ~ ~ ; ! ~l:!r ~ ~ :. ; t- o ,,~,~~ 1 ~ ; : ~ ~ i~~;~ ; : ~ ~ :l ~ ~~~~~ r f ~ ~ ~ eo ~ ~hi f t [ t ~ x i;'~~ ~~t~ u . ~i ~:. f ! I i t [~ z ,t 1, ~ ~ ~ i b g h ;1 d ; Q "f! ~ I. ! ,~ ~ I > I " 1" t ~. ~! ~ t, 1 ! : rt i g ! , I i ~ ! ~ i ~, i g, . ! ~l! . t; i ~II I " I i ~I r ! f I ~ 00 D 0 ~~ 3 ~ . ~I~!:~; ~ tr gr;~;~~d t!n to ! A'j't w. 1'1 d, I ~ : ': ~ 1 I o AU;! ~ r:.' it 1'. .-.. II 5d~d~ ~i .1;~~; ~ t ;~~~H! -ir' .. ,;s~ \~. i 0.",1'11.1" '11.".- .j' z 1!.p,.H-iqP'l"1 ',i ~!HhH!!!h!nnnnn I' I ~H ~~Hff i [Ul T,00~i ~ ~ ~ t~De lltlltle D U .ld U , i i II tH I . ; ~ i i.j!i j ~ ~ ! ~ ! ~I~ I S ~.Ifi -W' ~ It!! ~I~~:: " [ , ~ ( ct j1 :;~l! :1 ;~l!~1. ~~jl l" ."' lal!l~~ L~ c ~... ,g ~.~ ti~ ~: .!'J ~~ 2 <'~ ;: o <i " ~ r. ~ ~ o x c:;: :I:"J..- ~~~ ~"" ~: ~ f{ U~! Q ~~ c~ ~~ ri <8 ) t,,~ wi:" ~"~ g~~ ~go -,;>:~ "'-JRa:: ~:t~ ;;p~ <:J t{ 9 H ~~ 'I ~~ ~. b g ~~ f1 iJ H g8 ~i ~ t, ~~1 I!. ~11 ,. p J, '-' o\! ;'<;ii ~~ ~~ ,~ u" c;3 G~ Ol, '..j~ ~ o :; <;1 8 i ~~~ ?:i2 ~U o!i~ 2f'~ <1 A.Jen:::la Item ~~o. i7L May 26. 2009 Page 11 of 36 PURPOSE/DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: The existing McDonald's restaurant oVl'ller has had a lease vvith Gulf Gate Plaza for the subject propeliy since 1973. On June 10, 2008, the Board of County Conunissioners (BCe) approved a Final Plat (fP-2008-AR-12928) submitted by the applicant to create an outparcel for the property within the shopping center. The objective of the re-plat was to allow the fast-food chain to build a new restaurant on the created outparcel under its OVv'J1 site development plan (SDP), as the shopping center, being one p8rcel, would lmve otherwise had to come in under the same SDP, thereby triggering the need for the entire Gulf Gate Plaza to be brought up to current LDC standards to the greatest extent feasible in terms of building architecture, parking lot islands; transitional screening, buffers, et cetera. Although during the re-plat the ne\", outparcel' s size v,,ras maximized to the greatest extent possible-from a 0.84-acre lease limit area to a O.86-acre outparcel-the applicant's site is still not able to meet County requirements for 7.5-foot \vide Type A landscape buffers between separately platted commercial tracts, as required pursuant to Table 2.4.. footnote three, of LDC Subsection 4.06.02.CA, Table of El!rfer Requirements by Land U~'e Classification. Nor is it able to provide the required 15-foot wide buffer along its US-41 right-of-\vay, pursuant to Subsection 4.06.02.CA, AI/emotive D, consisting of trees spaced a minimum of 30 feet on center, underplanted with a 36-inch double heclgerO\", of shrubbery spaced tlu'ee feet on center. According to LDC Section 9.04.02, T)pes (~fVarial1ces Authorized, a Variance may be requested for any dimensional development standard, including the dimensional aspects oflandscaping and buffering requirements. As such, the applicant is proposing to rebuild the existing restaurant, which would require Variances from the dimensional area of the required 15- foot Type "D" buffer v.lidth to 10-feet along the propelty's nOlihern boundary with US-41; to reduce the minimum 7.5- foot Type "A" buffer width on the eastern property side to 5-feet; to reduce the minimum 10-foot Type "D" buffer width on the southem side to 5-feet; and to modify the minimum 7.5-foot wide Type ";...." buffer requirement 011 tl1e western side of the property to provide five, 10-foot wide (minimum) parking lot islands instead of one continuous butfer to acconullodate Type "A" buffer material. All of the plant materials that would normally be required by LDC-compliant buffers would be planted within these modified buffer areas to the extent feasible, which the County Landscape architect has determined to be almost, if not, 100 percent. As shown on the site plan, entitled "McDonald's Site Dimension Plan," prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., and dated December 2008, as revised tlu'ough february 11, 2009, the ne\v 3,827 square-foot restamant building \vould be situated parallel to US-41. Access to the site \vould be afforded via one access point on LJS-4], and two points along the southern boundary of the site (one of which would be egress only). Fourteen diagonal parking spaces would be provided along the site's USA 1 frontage; ] 5 perpendicular spaces would be located along its western boundary; and three handicap spaces would be located on the southwestern side of the building, at its front entrance. Normally 33 parking spaces would be required by the LDC for a restaurant of this size, hov'I'ever, the applicant applied for and \vas gnlllted an administrative parking reduction (APR- 2008-AR-13978) on December 24, 2008, based on the large size of the existing parking area \vithin Gulf Gate Plaza, which was deemed adequate to address any potential parking shortfall; and the applicm1fs desire to maximize the landscaping on the site to the greatest extent feasible as part of the redevelopment of the restaurant site. VI\-2008-AE-[ J':J77 F'age 2 Agenda Item No. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 12of36 As depicted on the Master Plan, where no buffer was previously required along the outparcel's \vestern boundary, five landscape islands arc now proposed instead of the required 7.5-foot wide linear butTer. By virtue of this design, 15 existing parking spaces could be retained along this boundary while still allowing planting areas of various sizes for the LDC-required plant materials. A long the perimeter of the site' s southern and eastern boundaries, five-foot \vide buffers would be provided instead of the required 7.5-foot \'\'idth; and adjoining the US-41 right- of-way, a buffer 10 feet in width is proposed instead of the required] 5-foot width. A landscape area would also surround the base of the building in order to provide the required foundation plantings. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: North: East: South: West: US-41 right-of-way, then a commercial use; zoned C-4. Gulf Gate Plaza parking lot; zoned C-4 and GTMUD-MXD Gulf Gate Plaza parking lot; zoned C-4 and GTMUD-MXD Gulf Gate Plaza parking lot, then Mobil station; zoned C-4 and GTMUD-MXD AERIAL VIEW GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: Future Land Use Element (FLUE): The subject property is designated Urban Mixed Use District, Urban Residential Subdistrict on the Future Land Use Map of the GMP. Properties \'\'ithil1 this designation are meant to accommodate a variety of residential and non-residential uses. The site is also located in the Bayshol'e/Gatevv'ay Triangle Redevelopment Overlay, the PUlvose of which is to encourage the revitalization of the 13ayshore/Gatc\vay Triangle Redevelopment Area. The Gtv1P does not address individual Variance requests but focuses on the larger issue of the actual use, The proposed commercial use on the site is consistent with the Urban Residential Subdistrict and is, therefore, deemed consistent with the GMP. V A-2008-AI{-139i7 Page 3 Agenda Item No. i7L May 26, 2009 Page 13 of 36 ANAL YSIS: Section 9.04.01 of the LDC gives the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) the authority to grant variances. The CCPC is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Subsection 9.04.03 A. through H., in bold font below, as general guidelines to assist in making a recommendation of approv81 or denial. Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions, and offers the follOiving: a. Are thcre special conditions and circumstances cxisting, which are peculial' to the location, she and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? Yes. The existing McDonald's restaurant has been in operation at this location in Gulf Gate Plaza since 1973. Because the entire shopping center was platted as one parcel, the applicants are unable to redevelop the restaurant without involving the owner and the rest of the shopping center tenants. Desiring to modernize their restaurant even though the rest of the center is either unwilling or unable to do likewise, the applicant re-platted the site as a separate outparcel in June of 2008, However, according to the applicant, constraints posed \vhile attempting to align the boundaries of the new outparcel with the existing conditions of the plaza made it difficult to acquire the complete area needed to achieve the minimum buffer widths required by the LDC between separately platted tracts and along arterial roadways. b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relativc to the property, which is the sub,icet of the Varianee request? Yes, there are pre-existing conditions that do not result fi'om the action of the applicant. The prOpclty was originally plattcd QS pm1 of the Gulf Gate Plaza shopping center. As such, in spite of being sihlated in the Bayshore/Gateway Triangle Redevelopment Area, the applicant is unable to redevelop the site and bring it up to current LDC standards unless the rest of the shopping center is similarly redeveloped. As previously noted, the owner of the shopping center \vas either unwilling or unable to afford to upgrade the entire site, so the applicants attempted to resolve their dilemma by severing the restaurant site from the rest of the shopping center parccl tlu'ough the rc-plat process, which then triggered the LDC requirement for buffers bet\veen separately platted tracts. UnfOltunately, because of the shopping center's existing parking lot design, the owner was unwilling to expand the limits of the ne\-v]y created outparcel beyond 0.86 acres to allow the applicants to provide the required buffer widths. As such, the applicant was forced to seek the proposed Variances. c. \ViII a literal interpretation of the pr-ovisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties for the applicant? Yes. A literal interpretation of the LDC provisions would create a practical difficulty for the applicants by prcvcnting their ability to redevelop their site, which is proposed for the franchise's smallest restaurant floor plan. It should also be noted that the restaurant is situated in the Bayshorc!Gateway lrianglc redevelopment area, whose sole purpose is 10 revitalize this area of the county, \' A.200S-AR-13977 Page 4 Agenda Item No. i7L May 26, 2009 Page 14 of 36 d. Will the Variances, if granted, be the minimum Variances that l'l'ilI make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure and which promote standards of health, safef)' and wclfare? Yes. The Variance requested would be the minimum to make possible the reasonable use of the outparcel site, which the applicant has occupied since 1973. The proposed 3,827 square-foot building is one of the applicant's smallest prototypes and, in fact, is a 500 square-foot reduction compared to the existing building, therehy allO\\'ing the new building (unlike the old one) to be planted with foundation plantings. Additionally, the proposal would close an existing access point to US-41 in the nOltheast comer of the site, ,,,hich would be paltially replaced by a landscape island; and install new landscaped parking lot islands where none presently exist along the site's western boundary. As a result of these changes, the overall impervious area of the site would be reduced by 4,925 square-feet (or from 79.8 percent of the site to 66.6 percent of the site). Compared to these conditions on the site, all of the proposed changes would enhance the standards of health, safety and welfare. e. \Vill granting the Var'iances confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or str-uctures in the same zoning district? No. A Variance by definition confers some dimensional relief from the zoning regulations specific to a site. HO\vever, as previously noted, LOC Section 9.04.02 provides relief through the Variance process for any dimensional development standard, including the dimensional aspects of landscaping and buffering requirements. As such, other prope11ies facing a similar hardship \"auld be entitled to make a similar Variance request and \vould he conferred equal consideration. Furthermore, as noted, the site is located within an almost 40-year old shopping center, which poses inherent difficulties for redevelopment in temlS of meeting CUlTent LOC development criteria. 6. 'Vill granting the Variances be in harmony with thc general intent and purpose of this Land Dcvelopment Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise dctrimcntal to the public welfare'! Yes. LDC Subsection 4,06.01.A.2, Bl{ffering and Screening, states that the purpose and intent of landscape buffering and screening is to, among other things: . Reduce the potential incompatibility of adjacent land uscs; . Maintain open space; . Enhance community identity; . Improve the aesthetic appearance of development; . Provide physical and psychological benefits to persons through landscaping by reducing noise and glare; . Screen and butfer the harsher visual aspects of urban development; . Improve environmental quality by reducing and reversing air, noise, heat and chemicnl pollution... and the creation of shade and microclimate; and VA-1008-AI\ -13977 Page 5 P\genda Item No. i7l May 26, 2009 Page 15 of 36 . Reduce heat gain in or on buildings and paved areas through the filtering capacity of trees and vegetation. As the LDC-required plant materials would still be provided, albeit in butfer areas that have either had their dimensions modified (as along the western boundary) or reduced in width (as along the remaining boundaries), the proposed Variance would be harmonious \"lith these objectives. g. 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.? Yes, there are physically induced conditions that would ameliorate the goals and objectives of this regulation. The site is located in an existing shopping center that, at present, has no screening and buffering separating the subject property from the other tenants. Therefore, the addition of buffers, even ones with reduced/modified \\'idths, as proposed with this application v.'Ould only enhance both the overall aesthetics and the environmental quality of the shopping center. h. Will granting the Variances be consistent with the Growth Management Plan (GMP)? Approval of tIus Variance petition would not have any affect on the GMP. The proposed use is the same as the existing use, and is permitted within the land use designation of the GMP in \;vhich it is located. As noted in the GMP consistency portion of this report, the project is also located within the Bayshore/Gatev-.'ay Triangle Redevelopment Area. Approval of this Variance request would enable the redevelopment of the site, 'which is consistent with this GMP overlay district. ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: Thc EAC does not normally bear Variance petitions and did not hear this one. RECOMMENDA TJON: Stair recommends that the CCPC forward Petition V A-2008-AR-13977 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following conditions: ]. The Variances approved are strictly limited to the landscape buffer width requirements as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan, entitled "Site Dimension Plan," prepared by CRH Engineers, lnc., dated February 11, 2009, as further restricted below. 2. The five-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the northern, US-41 property boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction ofthc 15-foot yvide buffer requirement; 3. The 2.5-foot buffer wiclth Variance granted is limited to the eastern property boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to aUo\\' a reduction of the 7.5- foot wide buffer requirement; VA-200S-AR-13977 Page G Agenda Item No. i7L May 26, 2009 Page 16 of 36 4. The 5-1'oot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the southern prop cIty boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 10- foot wide buffer requirement; 5. The 7.5-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the western property boundary, as depicted in the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, to allow five, 10-foot minimum width lanclscape buffers. 6. All the plant materials required by the LDC for screening ancl buffering shall be accommodated to the extent feasible in the modified and/or reduced width buffers' respective areas, in locations to be approved by the County Landscape Architect. 7. Irrespective of that shown on the "Site Dimension Plan" included as Exhibit A, the proposed use shall be required to comply with the Architectural and Site Design Standards of LDC Section 5.05.08 and all other applicable regulations at the time of site development plan (SDP) review and approval. VJ\-2008-AR-13977 Page 7 PREPARED BY: /.''i,:', ',',J_', 17 ... r/' 1\ .~/ r ,'/- ..L., n.--,j Ir'\ ',./ "- i ,/,' <^,-- JOHN-DAVID MOSS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER c' DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: /...~; ! ....] ~-~J; / /~,. ,?,.? /1) /J C:, :;1' ~_:-".,_ ./ ~--''.,/,..t,.(C l_/ ~-,. j(-".....~---- RA YMo. D V. BELLOWS. ZONING MANAGER DEI' AR TMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPIvlENT REVIEW A^-^-~ ~Y\ , \ S+Q/~ t/SUSAN MURRAY-ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW n I . (Ii i\h.v-.- " 7. l_J.J -~J_~ ___ STEVE WILLIAMS ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: t,gsnda Item No. ill May 26, 2009 Page 17 of 36 / . ..'/ f._"'~-- ,i_2< .'? DATE! ! / : __, f I j /2/0 ? IDA TE 3/3/d7 'DA tE 3''-{'09. DATE /f.../ ///~ ~. / J /' t;_P-'~ _~./~.4....,j.~"V'"",~c4.,~.'f' .......5 / 5/ j 9' J,oS~PH K. SCHMITT, l\DMfNISTRA TOR ,-- , ' DATE CO~frMUNJTY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION I / , , I, \ _L_,_______~ MARK P. STRAIN, CHAIRMAN Tentatively scheduled for the April 28,2009 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. V..\,~(108-AR,13l)77 I'age 8 -I f I ' "I ,'., ! DATE Agenda item No. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 18 of 36 - e......" r~ CoiL-ie-r County - ~~ - SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF REPORT TO: COLLlER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LANTI DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION DATE: APRIL 2, 2009 RE: VA-2008-AR-13977, McDONALD'S GULF GATE PLAZA This item was originally scheduled for the Collier County Planning Commission's (CCPC) March 19, 2009 public hearing. However, after the publication of the staff report and three days before the hearing, the applicants' concurrently submitted site development plan (SDP) for the project was rejected by Architectural Review staff due to the location of the restaurant's drive-through lane in front of the building (i.e. along its US 41 frontage), which is prohibited by Land Development Code (LDC) Subsection 5.05.08.E.5., Drive-Through Facilities Standards, unless vegetation required by a Type B buffer is installed "within the required buffer width required for the project." Because the applicants were requesting a Variance of five feet from the required 15-foot Type D buffer along US 41, it was staff's opinion that they were automatically precluded from pursuing this design alternative. Nevertheless, in an attempt to have the CCPC resolve the dilemma by granting a Variance from this requirement at the hearing, the applicants raised the issue on the floor before the planning commissioners. However, because the CCPC could not legally render a decision on a Variance request that was not included as part of the application before them, the applicants instead requested a two-week continuance in order to have time to evaluate alternative site designs. The applicants' consultants met with staff to create a mutually acceptable site design. With their new plan, the applicants are still requesting the same four Variances as proposed at the March 19 hearing. However, instead of providing only ten feet of buffer width along the site's US 41 frontage, the applicants now propose to provide a total of 15 feet of buffer width in two separate locations: 10 feet of width that would be located immediately adjacent to US 41, and an additional five feet of width in a landscape island running the length of the entire drive-through ai'sle on the front side of the building, to further screen queuing vehicles from view of US 41 (see Exhibit A to the resolution). It is staff's opinion that this solution would allow the applicants to successfully achieve the intent of the Type B buffer requirement of LDC Subsection 5.0S.08.E.5. (In addition to the Type B bufter plantings within the requisite buffer width required for the project, Subsection S.OS.08.E.S also requires a "permanent, covered porte-cochere or similar /\genja Item ~,Jo, 17L rv'1ay 26, 2009 Page 19 Jf 36 structure" to be installed along the length of the drive-through, with the roof covering the service windows. At the time of SDP, this secondary criterion will also be satisfied by the applicant's provision of a standing seam metal awning in this location.) In order to accommodate the new five-foot wide buffer, the applicants amended their previously approved parking deviation (APR-2008-AR-13978), which permitted a reduction of only one space from the 33 required parking spaces, to allow for a further nominal reduction (which is yet to be determined). By doing so, they could eliminate the spaces proposed for handicap parking on the southern side of the building (and relocate them elsewhere), thereby creating sufficient space to shift the building's footprint southward. As a result of this alteration, additional area along the northern side of the building could then be opened up for the new five-foot wide buffer area between the proposed drive-through lane and the ten-foot US 41 buffer. Staff is amenable to this further reduction in parking due to the abundance of existing parking spaces within Gulf Gate Plaza, and the shared parking agreement the applicant has with the plaza's owner. As the outcome of this new design would result in full compliance with LDC Subsection S.OS.08.E.s., the applicants are requesting that the CCPC consider the same four (4) Variances from the LDC Subsection 4.06.02, Buffer Requirements, to: 1. Reduce the minimum IS-foot Type "D" buffer width to 10-feet on the property's northern boundary; 2. Reduce the minimum 7.5-foot Type "A" buffer width on the eastern side to S-feet; 3. Reduce the minimum 10-foot Type "D" buffer width on the southern side to 5-feet; and 4. Modify the minimum 7.5-foot ",ride Type "A" buffer requirement on the western side of the property by providing five, 1 O-foot wide landscape islands. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE REVIEW: The County Attorney's office has reviewed and approved this staff report, as shown in the email attached to this staff report. RECOMMENDATION: The Department of Zoning and Land Development Review staff's previous recommendation remains the sanle, as noted in the original staff report dated March 19, 2009. Therefore, staff recommends that the CCPC forward V A-2008-AR-13977 to the Board of Zoning Appeals with a recommendation of approval, subject to stipulations contained in the Exhibit B, "Conditions of Approval," dated March 3, 2009, which are attached to the resolution. 2 VA-2008-AR-13977, MCDONALD'S AT GULFGATE PLAZA l\genda Item No. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 20 of 36 PREP ARED BY: qf{,.-\c;:.e.d-r.-- 3hr/()j JOHNtBA VID MOSS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DATE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW REVIEWED BY: 3 - 2..4-0~ RA YM D BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DA TE DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVlEW ,d;. ~ V1rv\. , 5tx.~ ;<.. / t..'i , ()~ SUBAN M. ISTENES, Alep, DIRECTOR I DAT DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVED BY: MARK P. STRAIN, CH.AJRMA.N DATE Tentatively scheduled for the April 28, 2009 Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting VA-2008-AR-13977, MCDONALD 'SAT GULFGATE PLAZA /\genda Item No. 17L May 26. 2009 Page 21 of 36 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DEPT, OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW WWW.COlLIERGOV.NET (i) 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252-2400 FAX (239) 252-6968 V ARIANCE PETITION APPLlCA nON (VARIANCE FROM SETBACK(s) REQUIRED FOR A P ARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT} PETITION NO (AR) PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER DATE PROCESSED ASSIGNED PLANNER To be completed hy st{{ff Above 10 be compleled by staff L__ APPLICANT/AGENT INFORMATION NAME OF APPLICANT(S) MCDm~ALD'S USA, LLC- TIM CHESS ADDRESS 10150 HIGHLAND MANOR DRIVE, SUITE 470, TAMPA, FL TELEPHONE # 772.486,4190 CELL # E-MAIL ADDRESS:TIM.CHESS@US.MCD.COM 33610 FAX # 772,679.0130 NAME OF AGENT CPH ENGINEERS, INC. ADDRESS 2216 AlTAMONT AVENUE, FORT MYERS, Fl 33901 TELEPHONE # 239.332.5499 CELL # E-MAIL ADDRESS:ALOPEZ@CPHENGtt-lEERS.COM FAX # 239.332.2955 L_ ... PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Legal Description of Subject Property: Section/Township/Range 11 /50S/25E Property 1.0.#: portion of 61834840006 Subdivision: Naples Grove & Truck Co's Little Farm No, 2 Unil Metes & Bounds Description: Acreage: 0.846 Address of Subject Property (If different from Pelitioner's address), Lol: portion of 37 Block: r BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. II GG.,UU..ID,..E. YOURSELF ACCOR..D.I,N, GlY "AND E, ,NS..UR. E THAT .YO..U..,, A, RE ',N COMP.l.IA. NCE, Wi..-.I H.. THESE ~. _ _ .., R~~UlA nONS. '_ . Collier ('(lUlll)' ^pplic<l\ion 2008 Agenda Item No. ill May 26, 2009 Page 22 of 36 [ -- ASSOCIA nONS - .. -~~.. .=. -~--- - -] Complete the following for all registered Association(s) thai could be affecled by this petition. Provide additional sheets if necessary. Information can be found on the Board of County Commissioner's website at http://www.collieroov.net/lndex.aspx?poge=77 4 NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: NONE MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY ST A TE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY ST A TE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIA TlON: MAILING ADDRESS CITY ST ATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY ST ATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY ST ATE ZIP ADJACENT ZONING AND LAND USE Zoning Land Use N R.O.W S (-4, GTMUD-MXD E (-4, GTMUD-MXD W C-4, GTMUD-MXD U.S.41 Mixed use dev., Gulf Gate PIOl:a Shopping Center Vacant lot Mixed use de v., Gulf Gale Plow Shopping Center Minimum Yard Requiremenls for Subjecl Property: Front: Side: Corner Lot: Yes 0 Yes D No [8J No [8J Waterfront Lot: Rear: BE ADVISED THAT SECTION 10.03.05.B.3 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES AN APPLICANT TO REMOVE THEIR PUBLIC HEARING SIGN (5) AFTER FINAL ACTION IS TAKEN BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. BASED ON THE BOARD'S FINAL ACTION ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE REMOVE ALL PUBLIC -- HEARING ADVERTISING SIGN(S) IMMEDIATELY. Collier Coullty Applic~tjoll 2008 2 Agenda Item I~o. i7L May 26, 2809 Page 23 of 36 NATURE OF PETITION Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed; the amount of encroachment proposed using numbers, i.e. reduce front setback from 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was buif1 (include building permit number (5) if possible); why encroachment is necessary; how existing encroachment came to bej etc. Far projects authorized under lDC Section 9.04.02, provide detailed description of site alterations, including any dredging and filling. Please note that staff and the Collier County Planning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the Boord of zoning Appeals, and that the Boord of zon1ng oppeals sl1all be guided in its determinotion to approve or deny a variance petition by the below listed crlterio (1-8). (Pleose address these cdteria using oddltional pages if necessary,) 1, Are there special conditions and circumstances existing which are peculiar 10 the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure, or building involved. This parcel (a lease within the Gvll Gate Plaza Development), while recently having been expanded from 0.84 acres to 0.86 acres is still comlrolned by it's limited size and shape, The lot size has been maximized through negotiations with the Plaza owners and McDonald's Is proposing 10 utilize one of the smallest bvildings avaHable to redevelop this property, As such, the propos~d development meets most of the reqvirements outlined within the Collier County Development Code. However, the proposed developmenl does not meet tile required parking spaces [33 required, 32 proposed) and/or the minimum landscape buffer deptfl, 2. Are there special conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicant such os pre. existing conditions relative to the property which is the subject of the variance request. The existing McDonald's restaurant is on 0 parcel very limited in size u"d does not meet the County's new development standards In numerous areas. M.cDonald's, desiring to redevelop this restcwront, has negotioted to increase the lease lot/parcel to 0.846 acres to allow the proposed development to occomadote most of the minimium Collier County code requirements. However, the minimum parking and/or landscape buffer widtl1 can not be met. In addition, the parcel con not be enlarged ony h,rther without negatively impacting the existing plcza. The parcel is further constrained by the need to match up with the existing conditions surrounding tfle property (Ihe existing Gulf Gate Plaza Development), The below table summarizes the existing, required, ond proposed conditions of the redevelopment. In particular, please note that the development proposes to increase tfle existing conditions, tile total open space, total ol1-siTe plantings, and bvilding plonter areas to meet the intent of the code. Collier County Applieill;Oll 20llR 3 Ex isting Required Agenda Item No. 17L May 26, 2009 PaQe 24 of 36 Providea landscape Buffers North 10 15' 7.5' 10' East South none 7.5' 10' landscape Islands every 4 spaces 5' West none none 10' 5' Open space 2,879,80 SF. (7%) Building Planters 662.86 SF. No specific requirements for sites under 5 acres 710 SF. 8,912.38 SF, (24%) 2,229.28 SF. 3. Will a literal interpretation of the provisions of this zoning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant or create practical difficulties on the applicant. Yes 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 or welfare. Yes 5. Will granting the variance requested confer on the petitioner any special privilege that Is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures In the same zoning district. No 6. Will granting the variance be in harmony with the intent and purpose of this zoning code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public weifore. Yes 7. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions that ameliorate the goals and objectives of the regulotion such os naturol preserves, lokes, golf course, etc. The proposed redevelopment project will increase the porcels total open space, number of trees/plonts, building planter areo ond provide substanliallmprovements to the building elevation. R. Will granting the variance be consistent with tne growth management plan. Yes 9. OfFicial Interpretations or Zoning Verifkations: To your knowledge, has there been on official interpretation or zoning verification rendered on this property within the last year? [gj Yes 0 No If so, please provide copies. CDllier County Application 2008 4 Agenda Item No. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 25 of 36 AFFIDA VII' I, Shaul Rikman, Manager of Gulf Gate Plaza, LLC. being fIrst duly sworn, depose and say that well am/are the owners of the property described herein and which is the subject matter of the proposed hearing; that all the llnswers to the questions in this application, including the disclosure of interest information, all sketches, data and other supplementary matter attached to and made a part of this application, are honest and true to the best of our knowledge and belief. I understand that the information requested 011 this application must be complete and accurate and that the content of this form, whether computer generated or County printed shall be altered. Public hearings will not be advertised until this application is deemed complete, and all required information has been submitted, As the manager for the property owner, I further authorize CPH ENGINEERS, INC., to act as Gulf Gate Plaza, LLC's representative in any matters regarding this Petition. OWNER: Gulf G", PI'~IOdda Hm;t~bilitY 00 By: / ~~f//i?& T"" Monag" State of Florida County of ()~ w#J ~.i~. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this'~ day of December, 2008, by ~ha!ll Rikmall. ~o is personally known to tn:..,or has produCC~d _j____-: ' as identification. . 1 , "I I, /..-, ," ,..-....- . {.-- .,'\ /\ 1/ ~ Signature O1'Notary Public Notary Stamp ~~, \\1111 I IHI/1111. ~" ....1oN PEAl'll ~III. ~" '[;)1-'r;........';..4l. ~ ~ ~ ,<\~\SSION s,:-. '14' ~ ~ . r;)..... \ 2" "-,0 '. ~ ~ ~"~{J ~~~ v, c?Oa ~ a. ~ = :~~ w~~:. ~*: ..~. :*E ~ '5 ". MOD 423670 ! ?J ~ ~ r ..1J ~.~ ~~ ~ ~ .'1'. ~d((\N"",~. CJ * ~'lr ..tPvtl~\JI#"';" <<,,~ "'~ "Ou,o......... O~ -~ II.. <.Jill"> ".,.':':t. r."...... . '11;,1;i,; 11,11\\\'\' VA.2008.AIl.13977 REV: 1. MCDONAI DS AT GULF GATE PLAZA PROJECT: 2007040011 DATE: 11/18/011 Agenda Item No. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 26 of 36 DUE: 12/4/08 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT Community Development and Environmental Services Division Department of Zoning and Land Development Review 2800 North Horseshoe Drive' Naples, Florida 341 04 Department of Zoning and Land Development Review ~ 'i'g1 (0; 'S;l i"i' r.:,~)':l~! C\ I~ &J~: J; ;"Z;::"" I~J July 18,2008 Mr, Albert Lopez CPR Engineers, Inc. 2211 Peck Street, Suite 300 Fort Myers, Florida 33901 t\-1.:l..C( ~OO Re: Zoning Verification Letter ZLTR-2008-AR-13492, regarding property located at 28 S6 Tamiami Trail East, aka Gulf Gate Plaza, Folio number 6] 834840006, in Section 11 Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida Dear Mr. Lopez: In your letter dated May 1, 2008 you ask for written confirmation that your actions in remodeling the McDonald's site will not affect Gulf Gate Plaza, and that the Plaza will not be subject to any similar requirements ~? bring it up to cun-ent Code as well. purs~ant to Scctton 4.02.00 Site Design Stand~rds of the Collier County Land Development Code. The property has a zomng designation of General Commercial District-Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Overlay District-Mixed Use Sub-district (C-4-GTMUD-MXD) and a Final Plat (FP-200S-AR-12928) has been preliminarily approved to split the McDonald's parcel from the Gulf Gate Plaza site. You state that the McDonald's will be remodeled and brought up to cun'ent Code to the greatest extent possible after the replat receives final approval from the Board of County Commissioners. Preliminary discussion with county staff showed that the newly created McDonald's site will go through the Site Development Plan (SOP) process in order to be redeveloped. The SOP process or the Platting process will not require the Gulf Gate Plaza site to come into compliance with cunent County codes. Please be advised that the information presented in this verification letter is based on the Collier County Land Development Code andlor Growth Management Plan in effect as of this date. It is possible that subsequent amendment(s) to either of these documents could affect the validity ofthis verification letter. It is also possible that development of the subject property (1v1cDonald's:Restimrant) could be affected by other issues not addressed inthis Jetter, such as, but not ~ip:tited to, concurrency related to the provision o~ adequate public facilities, environmeptal impact, and other requirements of the Collier County Land Development Code or related ordinances. c o I~ .. .. c <l .. .. L .l' ~ '_llo- Phone (239) 403-2400 Fax (Z3Q) 643-6968 or (239) 213-2913 www,colljcrgov.ncl Agenda Item i-Jo. 17l fJ1ay 26, 2009 Page 27 of 36 Should you require further infotmation please do not hesitate to call me at (239) 252- 2942. Researched and prepared by: ~JJ 0--------- Ashle Caserta, Senior Planner Department of Zoning & Land Development Review oss Go enaur, Planning Manager Depa.rt.. ent of Zoning & Land Development Review Cc: ZLTR-2008-AR-13268 (correspondence file) VA.2008.AR-13977 ReV: 1 MCDO~AlDS AT GULF GATE PLAZA pHOlECT: 2007040011 DAn: !.l/18/08 DUE: 12/4/08 2211 Peck Street, Suite 300 Fort MyCIS, Plorida 33901 Phone: 239.332.5499 Fax: 239.332.2955 www.cphcnginee1.8.com November 10, 2008 Ms. Susan Istenes Director of Zoning Collier County Government Dept. of Zoning & Land Development Review 2800 North Horseshoe Drive Naples, Florida 34104 Re: McDonald's Gulf Gate Plaza Variance Petition Dear Ms. Istenes: On behalf of McDonald's USA, LLC, CPH Engineers, Inc. hereby submits this variance application for your consideration on the above referenced project. This parcel (a lease within the Gulf Gate Plaza Development), while recently having been expanded from 0.84 acres to 0.86 acres is still constrained by it's limited size and shape. The lot size has been maximized through negotiations with the Plaza owners and McDonald's is proposing to utilize one of the smallest buildings available to redevelop this property. As such, the proposed development meets most of the requirements outlined within the Collier County Development Code. However, the proposed development does not meet the required parking spaces (33 required, 32 proposed) and/or the minimum landscape buffer depth, We look forward to your review of the project and your input, and please do not hesitate to contact us if you require any additional information. Respectfully Submitted, jl~M-e/-.~) (]e~~y ~ffield, P.E.t CPESC (J.- Senior Vice President/Branch Manager Engitleers . Surveyors' Architects (AA2GOOO926) . PIatmers . Latrdscapc Architects' Etlvirml/mmtal ScifmHsts . ConstnlCtioll Matlagcmetlt . DcsiglVBuild COlliER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DEPT. OF ZONING &. LAhlD DEVElOPMENT REVIEW WWW_COlllERGOV.NET 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FlORIDA 34104 (239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968 L\genda Item No. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 29 of 36 VARIANCE PETITION VA-2008-AR-13977 REV: 1 MCDONA LOS AT GU LF GA TE PLAZA PROJECT: 2007040011 DATE: 11/18/08 DUE: 12/4/08 [ - o Dimensional PRE.APPLlCA TION MEETING NOTES * &. SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST D.'.'2/di [n;" 'J;. / /.. VV ; A'';~7d Pla,n." :/)) f;Gc's j Project Name: IlA C [ylJLi2-td .r V C../l ~W1 uz..... _ Project AddrjLocafion: ;2- 8- glw __J!;/rV\~ (~ 'jh-u, ( 8 gf-~ Applicant Name: Phone: Owner Name: 019 -r-t ~4'y.,Q.Q-{ I Current Zonfng:-L_:___Lf-___ ;vJ.- -f; I Iv( U'D ,- Pv'L~1 :r 5 r/v1"\ ~iAJ 'YiA.1jpvrj- Phone: firm: IVr1G Owner Address: Meeting Attendees: (attach Sign In Sheet) NOTES: PI~R SSS\ \"l G - t.n 1 l'\lJ M DE:..~ "'5 \::(~) ~_ BI. f)\ Lj~\ M C~ ,C IV' ,,-<.A t' .,j-s \(iL-t/ 'Vr\ tI~ ,- - '. ,~ L~b C--- 'U/I---U r ~ rfR~(~ r(\~~~; p \ 'N CO\,{I'Rl\S\\NE; Co La ~ ~ " ~ ffi/tVJ /''iJ.1!f.//14V(/rY\trJr i 04'(./ [r <Lfl\>1j L . tlv. 1 V..v ,( J1W\,1 +- ji M11\. hi J' " tl ) ~ f i:,Au 11 /)~ ~'l/J1/yltf eAtY\ U~4---'-./d (,.j) '-f/~ VO'01 ,,'';v1'' Gt, o If telephor!e pre-application meeting is held, direct the petilioner to coordinate with Unda concerning the requirement for the petitioner to send the notice letter to the surrounding properly owners or to give them thet informaticn thaI Linde: typical!y provides them I \ ~ , " - ,., I n:. J-vtY-J r ' 1 VARIANCE PErITlON (VA) APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST A;)enda Item No. 17L Mel ":rg Page "3_D - f 36 THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLfCATlON PACKET rN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W /COVER SHEETS A TT ACHED "0 EACH SECTION. NOTE: INCOMPLETE SUMBITTAlS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. # OF NOT REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED Completed Application (download from website for current form) 15 _X Pre-Application meeting notes 15 X Completed Addressing Checklist, Signed by Addressing Department 1 X Conceptual Site Plan 24" x 36" and one 8 '12 " x 1 1" copy 15 Y Survey of property showing the encroachment (measured in feet) 1 Y Owner/Agent Affidavit signed & notarized 1 ~y Deeds/Legal's 2 :;;:.- Location map 1 ~X Aerial photographs (taken within the previous 12 months min. scaled 5 1"=200'), showing FWCCS Codes, Legend, and prolect boundary ---- X- - Electronic copy of all documents ond plans (CORaM or Diskelle) 1 Historical Surveyor waiver request 1 .><' Environmental Impact Stalement (EIS) and digital/electronic copy of EIS or exemption justification 3 Within 30 days after receipt of the first review comment letter, 1 .X - provide Property Owner Advisory letter and CertIfication -- -----~ - -- Projeg. Narrative 15 X ~ Send copy of review package to Robin Singer, Planning Director, City of Napfes ... 295 Riverside Circle, Naples, FL 34102 IDfu .-PSI. Pre-application Fee $500.00 (Applications submitted 9 months or more after the date of the last pre-app meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre-application meeting will bo required.) Review Fees: o $2000.00 Residential H $5000.00 Non-Residential j1After- The-Fact Zoning/Land Use Petitions 2x the norma' petition fee 760.00 Estimoted legal Advertising Fee. CCPC Meeting $363.00 Estimated Legal Advertising Fee. BCC Meeting , (over- or under-payment will be I'econclled upon receipt of Invoice from Naples Daily News), o $2500.00 EIS Review OTHER REQUJREMENTS: o 0___ D Agent/Owner Signature 1"\__ a..... vau: 2 '0Z ~i= w w ~.~ o i eJ) I .S I ~ OJ c...., Q) ~ ,~ ~' 8 = . ... r.JJ .... ~ r~' Z r'~ ~ Ie. Zl ,~ !~ sa I I r1l'\ i ~ vu '~ I ~ , ,~ I :E l'~ ,:--~ < .' z I c-' l- . ~... ~ '~r ' ....~~~ ~ Q) .) (tl c:::: w - I- l: ~ Q) o E c. ~ 'i Q) t: > . (1) > o g, " ... t: .!!:! c = ....J 0 oa- u m @) r:: ~ .- 0 g E N "'0 .... . >: o c - "C s:: C dl - E -0 - .- ... o .. D.. ~ (!) (tl c -0 . '1J ~ <( o - 2: '0 "'t1 2: -; J., c .0 I e ,.. -0 r.... -> M N ~ '1 !JJ ("II z If) Z N 4: i..: -.I (!) Q". ..!l .0 E UJ ::> 7" Z (!) (!) _ l: III 0 III ..c <( 0- III III w 0:: C .0 <( ...J :;;: :E I W 0:: W c::l :E ;:) z ..- .S '- c.. (lJ III o I I I I r . I ~ \ ~ . ~ Ol i___ ;;; ~ N o Ln "- co Agenda Item No. 17l May 26, 2009 Page 32 of 36 RESOLUTION 09- A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER V A- 200S-AR-13977, FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SUBSECTION 4.06.02 LOCATED IN SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 50 soum, RANGE 25 EAST IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida in Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all cotmties in Florida the power to establish. coordinate and enforce zoning and such business regulations as are necessary for the protection of the public; and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code (LDC) (Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of the County, among which is the granting ofyariances; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Appeals, being the duly elected constituted Board of the area hereby affected, has held a public bearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided, and has considered the advisability of a variance from the landscape requirements of Land Development Code Subsection 4.06.02 by reducing the minimum IS-fOOL Type "DO. buffer width to 10 feet on the property's northern boundary~ by reducing the minimum 7.5-foot Type "An buffer width on the eastern side to 5 feet; by reducing the minimum 10-foot Type "'D" buffer width on the southern side to 5 feet; and by modifying the minimum. 7.5-foot wide Type "An buffer requirement on the western side of the property by proving five separate 10-foot wide landscape islands in the General Commercial (C-4) and Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTMUD-MXD) zoning districts for the property located at 2886 Tamiami Trail East in Section 11, Township 50 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. and has found as a matter of fact that satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable matters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 4.06.02 of said Land Development Code of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be beard by this Board in public meeting assembled. and the Board having considered all matters presented. Page] of2 j J\genda itern ~~o. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 33 of 36 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY The Board of Zoning Appeals of Collier County, Florida, that: The Petition V A-2008-AR-13977 filed by Albert Lopez ofCPH Engineers, Inc. representing McDonalds USA, LLC, with respect to the subject property, be and the same hereby is approved for a variance from the landscape requirements of Land Development Code Subsection 4.06.02 by reducing the minimum 15-foot Type ''0'' buffer width to 10 feet on the property's northern boundary; by reducing the rninimmn 7.5-foot Type "A" buffer width on the eastern side to 5 feet; by reducing the minimum 10-foot Type "D" buffer width on the southern side to 5 feet; and by modifying the minimum 7.5-foot wide Type "Au buffer requirement on the western side of the property by proving five separate 100foot wide landscape islands all of which is located in the General Commercial (C-4) and Gateway Triangle Mixed Use Subdistrict (GTMUD-MXD) wning districts. BE ITFURTIfER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Nwnber V A-2008- AR-13977 be recorded in the minutes of this Board. This Resolution adopted after motion, second and majority vote, this day of ,2009. ATTEST: DWIGHT E, BROCK, Cleric BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: , Deputy Clerk By; DONNA FIALA. Chairman Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams .51""w Assistant County Attorney If-I'I-6''( Exhibits Attached: A: Master Plan B: Conctitions PoO.......o .., _.') ... .....0.......- VI.... J ~ J h ~. J ~: ~! h l~ ~dt ::~i .J l'.~ fGlh Jr~il3 j - l-J ~ - ::r _. 0" _. ..... > ~i '" ~ Agenda Item No. 17L '.. J ;:::,~ 09 ,/ Page 34 0 36 , sm DNENSION PLAN ..... __..,. ELF .,.... '" .... -~ .... ..." f-.:II)' Qft- 'Oe~. :InloW MII~ ~llD 1.... "'-_._- MCDoNlllCl"S. me: TAMlAM~ lRAIL EAST COLU!It COUN'ft'. P'L0ItlQA. !;llllgi! ~ II l!! I !!It i ~III ~ !Iill i ! U II ~ ! ; ilj 2 !j!~ IiI" II! J ~ ~ I ~ " ~ II!i m;, . ' g' : ~ i i~II'! ! ;' "'~ "'''i !HI ~ lHi i! I j II I' i"1 !; I! ! :'., :..., I ! r I "! 11.. Ii.' I I 'i 1IEI' ~ '1""1 '"., Ini Ifll ! : 'I' ~,.n! II ....I ! I ,:~ . I I ", [ -'f ~I, "';1 i'l ! i,' 1;1 III! I. ~ , S' "II 1 ! , il ' . ' ! I II I II . ' AI""'~:'~"::'''\.II.' '" -I (J') :.0 r_;~:'/") r-O_ .N 0 o -L() Z~CV) i:: >. <ll (DCO:J) ==2~ CO ;2 (D :J) <C -. ~ .- ... ~ ~ ~ , ~ -4?~ .'J./ I w C>- o( U ~"' >-~ ~:Si u..'~~ c<", 2DI- :s~~ ~:EO wOw llUD: "'Su5 ~~ii1 C zt--tr UJ <l/lQ: ~ b~~ [~ir,;fu~io I '" ;:: -' ... "- - .... .0 <f) In ., lY '" (Y t;J HI Z ~ ~ "-' l:l !...J _1 () I,'J :z: .J j -q '-I lY I.') VI ::J 8 3: z o f ~ -~ ::l U' en ~ ~ Z lV. 0 -oJ. P} Ul rc l1: >- ): CC ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r: fl W -l {) to .q 0 It II ~ U. 7 () L 0 U) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ OC IY ~l C.l ~ ~~ L ~ ...J (.) lTl ~l In ~ z '" II :J .li ~ r.. IJ U 1..1) @GO I..J ~ ) ....~ Ul ~ ~ oc ill "' U. " '" 0 '" '" V> " r iil V 0 z , -<: ... " I1l <f) "- w D W rr 5 ~~~~ ~ D Z III 'j LLI j ~ ~D"I ~. ~ t; t;i 3 ~~~ lJ'l, ~- ~ ~'I 0 / u) '-<- '..J "<f t- I (/ ! ~ ::> D '" _J 11 co '"0 I I I 01 01 ~II. I '~I;I I 01 U: ,.-----.- ~ Cf'Jj =0 1:1 C1J I :l c Igl 01;' 0,", f'\ ! ~I ...., 1<: ~1!1 .~! ,Agenda Item No. 17L May 26, 2009 Page 36 of 36 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL V A.2008-AR-13977 April 4, 2009 Staff recommends that the CCPC forward Petition V A-2008-AR-I3977 to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) with a recommendation of approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Variances approved are strictly limited to the landscape buffer width requirements as depicted on the applicant's conceptual site plan (Exhibit A), entitled, "Site Dimension Plan, prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., dated December 2008, as revised through February 11, 2009; and as further depicted in the landscape plan, entitled "McDonald's, Naples, Collier County, Florida" dated April 1, 2009 (Exhibit A-I), as further restricted below. 2. The five-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the northern, US-41 property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the IS-foot wide buffer requirement; 3. The 2.5-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the eastern property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 7.S-foot wide buffer requirement; 4. The 5-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the southern property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow a reduction of the 10- foot wide buffer requirement; 5. The 7.5-foot buffer width Variance granted is limited to the western property boundary, as depicted in the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, to allow five, 10-foot minimum width landscape buffers. 6. All the plant materials required by the LDC for screening and buffering shall be accommodated to the extent feasible in the modified and/or reduced width buffers' respective areas, in locations to be approved by the County Landscape Architect. 7. Irrespective of that shown on the conceptual site plan included as Exhibit A, the proposed use shall be required to comply with the Architectural and Site Design Standards of LDC Section 5.05.08 and all other applicable regulations at the time of site development plan (SDP) review and approval. EXHIBIT B