The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 03/11/2008 Item #17A Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 1 of 31 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY V A-2007-AR-12629, Sara De La Rosa is requesting an after-the-fact Variance of 2.3 feet to permit the encroachment of a single-family dwelling into the required 30-foot front yard setback area of the Residential Single Family (RSF-3) Zoning District. The 0.36-acre subject property is located at 1201 Camellia Avenue, Lot 24, Block C ofthe Immokalee Highland Subdivision, in Section 33, Township 46, Range 29, of 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. CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner is requesting an after-the-fact Variance of 2.3 feet from the minimum 30- foot front yard setback requirement for the Residential Single Family (RSF-3) Zoning District standards of Section 4.02,0 1.A. Table 2.1, Minimum Yard Requirements (Setbach) for Base Zoning Districts, of the Land Development Code (LDC), to permit the completion of a single-family home whose concrete slab foundation was laid 27,7 feet from the front yard property boundary, Because the approximately 0.36-acre subject parcel occupies the southwestern quadrant of the 11 th Street North and Camellia A venue intersection, thereby abutting two roadways, it is considered by the LDC to have two front yards instead of one, When the builder applied for a building permit, the appropriate 30-foot setbacks for each front yard were identified and noted on the permit; and on July 2, 2007, Permit No. 2006091450 was issued to the petitioner. However, when the foundation was poured, the front yard setback abutting 11th Street North was not only misaligned, but only provided a 28,28-foot setback at its northernmost point and a 27,7-foot setback at its southernmost point. This error was not discovered until the spot survey, conducted on October 9, 2007 (see Exhibit A to the Resolution), was submitted and subsequently denied by the Building Review and Permitting staff for failing to meet setback requirements. Consequently, the applicant's only options were to either raze the structure, which was then at the tie-beam stage, or apply for an after-the-fact Variance of 2,3 feet to address the 27.7-foot setback, the greater of the two offending setback encroachments. FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this Variance petition would have no fiscal impact on Collier County. Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 2 of 31 GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) IMPACT: Approval of this Variance would not affect or change the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT: Approval of this Variance would have no affordable housing impact. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES: There are no enviromnental 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, COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (CCPC) RECOMMENDATION: The CCPC heard petition VA-2007-AR-12629 on February 21,2008, 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. Because this decision was unanimous, and only letters of support have been received from the community, this item is being placed on the summary agenda. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The petitioner is requesting an after-the-fact Variance to the setback requirement with respect to a single-family dwelling, The granting of such a Variance 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. In granting any Variance, the Board of Zoning Appeals 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 Variance is required shall be begun or completed, or both. Violation of such conditions and safeguards, when made a part of the terms under which the Variance is granted, would be deemed a violation of the zoning code. Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 3 of 31 Criteria for Variances I. There are special conditions and circumstances existing 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. 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 GMP, The proposed Resolution was prepared by the County Attorney's Office and is sufficient for Board action. -JAK RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve Petition V A-2007-AR-12629. PREPARED BY: John-David Moss, AICP, Principal Planner Department of Zoning and Land Development Review Item Number: Item Summary: Meeting Date: Page 1 of2 Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 4 of 31 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 17A This item requires that all participants be sworn in and ex parte disclosure be provided by Commission members. VA-2007-AR~12629, Sara De La Rosa is requesting an after-the~fact Variance of 2.3 feet to permit the encroachment of a single-family dwelling into the required 3D-foot front yard setback area of the Residential Single Family (RSF~3) Zoning District. The 0.36-acre subject property IS located at 1201 Camellia Avenue, Lot 24, Block C of the Immokalee Highland Subdivision, in Section 33, Township 46, Range 29, of Collier County, Florida 3/11/200890000 AM Prepared By John~David Moss Community Development & Environmental Services Senior Planner Date Zoning & Land Development 2/21/200810:54:37 AM Approved By Ray Bellows Community Development & Environmental Services Chief Planner Date Approved By Zoning & Land Development Review 2/21/200811:26AM Judy Puig Community Development & Environmental Services Operations Analyst Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. Date Approved By 2/22/2008 8:39 AM Susan Murray, AICP Community Development & Environmental Services Zoning & Land Development Director Date Approved By Zoning & Land Development Review 2/27/20084:10 PM Jeff Klatzkow County Attorney Assistant County Attorney Date County Attorney Office 2/27/20084:20 PM Approved By Joseph K. Schmitt Community Development & Environmental Services Community Development & Environmental Services Adminstrator Date Community Development & Environmental Services Admin. 2/27/20088:07 PM Approved By OMS Coordinator Administrative Services Applications Analyst Date Information Technology 2/28/2008 11 :37 AM Approved By file:/IC:\AgendaTest\Export\ 1 02-March%20 11, %202008\17,%20SUMMAR Y%20AGENDA... 3/5/2008 Page 2 of2 Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 5 of 31 Mark Isackson Budget Analyst Date County Manager's Office Office of Management & Budget 2/28/20083:30 PM Approved By James V. Mudd County Manager Date Board of County Commissioners County Manager's Office 3/3/20083:37 PM file://C:IAgendaTestIExportll 02-March%20 J 1, %202008117,%20SUMMAR Y%20AGENDA... 3/5/2008 A.!le,nda Item No. 17A AGENDDiII<t'Elimt9~08 Page 6 of 31 Co~r County -- STAFF REPORT COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 21, 2008 SUBJECT: PETITION: VA-2007-AR-12629 CAMELLIA AVENUE VARIANCE PROPERTY OWNER/AGENT: OWNER/AGENT: Sara De La Rosa, 615 Clifton Street Immokalee, FL 34142 REOUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting an after-the-fact Variance of2.3 feet from the minimum30-foot front yard setback requirement for the Residential Single Family (RSF-3) Zoning District, pursuant to Section 4.02,OLA. Table 2,1, Minimum Yard Requirements (Setbacks) for Base Zoning Distiicts, of the Land Development Code (LDC), to permit the completion of a single-family home whose concrete slab foundation was laid 27,7 feet from the front yard property boundary. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: The approximately 0.36-acre subject parcel is located at 1201 Camellia Avenue, Lot 24, Block C of the Immokalee Highland Subdivision, in Section 33, Township 46, Range 29, of Collier County, Florida (see location map on the following page). PURPOSEIDESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The subject property occupies the southwestern quadrant of thc II th Street North and Camellia A vcnue intersection in ImIDokalee. Because the property abuts two roadways, it is considered by the LDC to have two front yards instead of one. When the builder applied for a building permit, -1, '<(CO'- ,,-OM ~O~ .N 0 ~"":.I'- ~Q) E-Q) Q) t3 CU -~Cl. -ro ro:;;: ~ ii! Q) <( a.a Noun:') I I~I I r- m ..- I ~I I I ~ HUlON 13:n11S KiN]!. z II I 0 II " w- 0 ~< :I: Q <0 .,0 ~ , '3 0 ::e u. . r ::e \ QW~ . ::::l ~il ~ 0: <0 ~ ~' l- I Q. > 5 , > !:!: d c:: ;! f I- ~ c: !-- HUlON 1:3SUJ.S 1-I1N3fl313 E~~= W :.- e ~ - @ 0 - ~ Z ~ l:: ~ 51 < @ < . ~ --- 0 0 0 < ~ IJ -< . 133U1S V1OIO"lD 0 - 3 < C'l , I", 0 a . . ;;; - a I I ~ ~ W < ~ O:'y 0 , e I" @) ~ . - - ~ < _ J.33UJ.S VUl3SNIOd -~ - - -~ - :1Io~ -~ - - ::E~ y.::, ;:~ , 0 OSO:::: 6~l:lS "V":) ~ - - l'l'I:l!:OlJI;Il / - "E- --- :/ . ~ " ~ 0 " " " ...z ~ *" 00 w- . '" ',," " Co W "'0 "/ ..~ 2 . ~ ...I. V 2 " ~ <C Y ~. i' ~. X " . m ~ " Z m . " ::!" , . > - ./ 6<:: .~rs ./ , ~ m ~ . . , ~ " ~f 0 0 . - . . . . " m " ~ " 1/" ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ . 0 o! " v--" ( ~I '----- /, 0 " ~ ~ r ) 0 , " I I '\ ,-\ Q.. e::( ~ " Z Z o N '" N '" N ~ ri:. ..: , '" o o N .;; > '" Z o I- ;:: W 0. Q.. e::( ~ z o l- e::( () o ....J CO~ " OM "' 0,- ~ 0 ~ NO f.3 ~ IU 'I.... ,.; CO '" I'l" ~ \5~ ~~~ ...- Q) Cll ~~ Vi IlJ!o.l ~ ..c en :::l - l5~ Y)::; :::!IJ ~ c; is ~ ~ ~6:: g:Q~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~: l:!~~~~ ~~p~ :;; .. ~~!~~~ ~~ -Q ~ @ i!je"l ~~~ ~ ~, ~ ~~~:~~ !~ ill~ ;il~ ;sU~~lh; 1: ~ ~!il~~~~ ~~~~jj}~~ ~ ~ Q Q~2~~ 2 ~ ~;~~~~~~~~~~i\~ 8 ~~ ~~~ ~~~Hl:1 ~ ~ !:! ~~~~Q~-llg~~~~I. ~ ~~illl"~~Q" S ~ ~ ~~~".i!~~1;8~~!~~~"I~Gi~~~:h~~~ ~., ~ ~1i1ll~~~1I~~~~Q~ :s~~~~~~~~ '~i~~ ~ ~ n;inn~I~~i~H:!;~hihn~ U ~ (R.GZ,OfJ.IJllS} :fJ~~'!..!O SlSt'Fl, .J.Nllll!lAFJ (t'U! (JL/ll ,(9) ~.Jffl.J& >fJIIII.lIU1N " &:;~ ~~e iil~~ ~~ .. ~~g ~ ~-<'ctl i:: ~~~ ~ ~:t:15~ \'j ~~. CI:l I- t.i ~ il~"~ - ~" ~ tj~~ - ,,~ ~ ~ g~I'.,' ~~:.:: ~~~~ g~~g ..lr.uvvJ fro. \ ;r.or,OOJJOS (If ~ If) oo'S91 \ ~ " " 0'11( . , ,. . .}. o ~ ~ :d : ~;; " .~~..., ... tlt:::- tI',p.. JlII'III ~I,: ~ u"" "" .. ,., ~ ~ O' !il~ .- .. ~~ ~ fln~ a (jJ.H'.SO.oG o'ot 115:1.:''f..1 . Og',UJ . . . lit ~ II) tJO'9PI :1 :.:](118 I:fJ:lI'7 -=<~ " . ~ ... ~ e .. 0 iii~ ~ CL':Z.q.... <0" -oW O1Q::O:J N<.....C ~>~ .....Wg::,.., ,,>N~ <f<"'" ,..,~t~ 8wW'. ')l:i:a~ <tc(D:::< >U~O '" '" " ~ ~ ,Q:l. ~'t Ll~ CO ~tI} li:l~ In .~ ~C')t\J (':I ~... ltl ~ -.:; 10 ~~ ~ ~ ~ 't ! ~ 'It R;l <::> ~t:;j _ 0 0 ~ 'It ~to:I t-- l::!~tl) "" ~!=\ 0 ~~-..;; ~~~ Q.;o..i~~ o~ ", '4 ii! ~ '- ~>ol ~ ~o'--.. ::'<~ ~ t.:I.;; >< ~~ lei ~ ~ ~ rJ"? ~Q,. '" ~ <:l ~ '" c " ~ ~ ~ o i ~~ .~ ~ ~~ . .~ I~~ I; ~. .~ i~~ h IG ,,~ :1 " '. " ~ ~ 2 ~+~ ~iln n~~~ ~,~., ~i~~! "~I~ ~;~ ~ ~il!( ~ ~~~~'" iihi 'Hf l~i~~ ~Y.i..)o.~ ...t;~"'~ .~.h . ,.'~o~ l! ~b!6i:! ~~;;~.~ '~.~~ ~~m! i s ~ n.~ n l:: ~ ~ "l'" '" . g d .. ~ ~ ~ ~ tOt Yl ~ ~ . ~. . ~. ~~ 'I ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ 3 5 f ~~ 'f lZ \ ~ @. i i .J~~~lJI ~I~;~i I ~iM~ ..~i~~ ~I ~h!!~M~ ,~~i ~ u. b~~ ! ~ ~ ~ . ~ hn~h~~i~h~mnhmn~dmmnm~mmmdi'hnh~~~~hm ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ ~ !oJ ~ i ~ ~ 0: ~ ~ ~ n ~ o '" '" ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~j"~Q~~tl~~~~~Egt:~~~~;?j..~:.>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:i~:~~~~~~~~~~t;~~~--~~~~~ ~ e t }tiS 0 ~ ~ " . ~ falON) 9h ""/'I ..{G) /':"0 061>\1 .< 1 I I 'it I . . I ~ l!. I~ ... V ~ I ;1 I or,'" ----i- (.?).tll,"'~..q9 (I " sr,JN:i.I " ~ ~ . . , ~ Agenda Item No. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 9 of 31 the appropriate 30-foot setbacks for each front yard were identified and noted on the permit; and on July 2, 2007, Permit No, 2006091450 was issued (see Exhibit A) to the petitioner. However, when the foundation was poured, the front yard setback abutting 11 tli Street North was not only misaligned, but only provided a 28.28-foot setback at its northernmost point and a 27.7-foot setback at its southernmost point. This error was not discovered until the spot survey, conducted on October 9, 2007 (see survey on the preceding page), was submitted and subsequently denied by the Building Review and Pelmitting staff for failing to meet setback requirements. Consequently, the applicant's only options were to either raze t1le stmcture, which was then at the tie-beam stage, or apply for an after-the-fact Variance of 2.3 feet to address the 27.7-foot setback, the greater of the two offending setback encroachments. SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: NOI.th: West: South: East: Vacant land, zoned RSF-3 Single-family residence, zoned RSF-3 Single-family residence, zoned RSF-3 Cemetery, zoned Residential Multi-Family (RMF-6) and ST/W-4 Aerial Map GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN (GMP) CONSISTENCY: The subject propelty is located within the Urban Designation, Urban-Mixed-Use DistIict, Low Residential Subdistrict of the Immokalee Area Master Plan of the Growth Management Plan (GMP), This land use category is described as follows: . -4- Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 10 0131 Low Residential Subdistrict "The purpose of tlns designation is to provide a Subdistrict for low-density residential development. Residential dwellings shall be limited to single-family structures and duplexes, Multi-family dwellings shall be permitted provided they are within a Planned Unit Development. Mobile home dcvelopments shall be permitted only in the fmm of mobile home subdivisions or parks and as mobile home overlays as defined in the Land Development Code. A density less than or equal to four (4) dwelling units per gross acre is permitted," The GMP does not address individual Variance requests, but deals with the larger issue of the actual use, As previously noted, the petitioner seeks an 2,3-foot Variance from the front ym'd setback requirement for a single-family home that is located within a single-family home neighborhood. As single-family homes are an authorized use in this land use designation, the subject use is consistent with the Future Lm1d Use Map of the Immokalee Area Master Plan of the GMP, ANALYSIS: Section 9,04,01 of the Land Devclopment Code gives the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) 1he authority to grant Vm'iances, The Collier County Planning Commission (CCPC) is advisory to the BZA and utilizes the provisions of Section 9,04,03 A. through I-L (in bold font below), as general guidelines to assist in making their recommendation of approval 01' denial. Staff has analyzed this petition relative to these provisions m1d offers the following responses: a. Are there special conditions and circumstances existing, which are peculiar to the location, size and characteristics of the land, structure or building involved? No. The subject sitc is a conforming lot of rccord and the proposed dwelling could have been constructed to meet all required setbacks. However, the lot is located at the intersection of two roads and, consequently, has two front yards instead of one. As previously stated, the dwelling is now 2,3 feet short of the required 30-foot front yard setback along its 11th Street frontage, as required pursuant to Section 4,02,01.A. Table 2 of the LDC, As shown in the table below, all other minimum setback requirements have been met or exceeded. It should also be noted that had the subject property not been a corner lot, the required setback along this boundary would have only been seven and a half feet. Minimum Yard Requirements of die RMF-3 Zoning District per Section 4.02.01.A. Table 2,1 of the LDC vs. Provided ./~; i: Minimum Reg'uired' 30 feet iC,-,.:;,;,;:-;- _-;';?:~,~,,1',- 7.5 feet 25 feet 41.31 feet (on Camellia Avenue) 2&.2& feet and 27.7 feet (on North 11'" Street) &,69 feet 46,52 feet ,5, Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 11 of 31 b. Are there special conditions and circumstances, which do not result from the action of the applicant such as pre-existing conditions relative to the property, which are the subject of the Variance request? No, There are no other special circumstances aside from the fact that, as previously stated, the petitioner's builder erred when surveying the structure's foundation, Because of this miscalculation, the eastern portion of the house now encroaches into the II'ont yard setback area 2.3 feet at its maximum intlUsion, tapering down to 1.72 feet at its least intrusive point. c. Will a literal interpl'etation of the provisions 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 would create practical diff1culties for the applicant. Rectifying the 2.3-foot encroachment of the RSF-3 Zoning District's required 3D-foot front yard setback would force a cOlTesponding reduction in the width of the rooms on the eastern side of the home. According to the applicant, the two affected rooms would have to have thcir in widths reduced to ~uch an extent as to render one of them, a bathroom, practically unusable, d. Will the Variancc, 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 and welfare? According to the petitioner, the 2.3-foot Variance is the minimum necessary to allow a reasonable use of the rooms on the affected side of the house. However, if the Variance were not approved, the petitioner would still have reasonable use of the land, Approval of the Variance would not have a detl'imental impact upon the standards of health, safety and welfare, As evidenced by the photo on page seven, if the Variance were approved, the stlUcture, at minimum, would still be set back a safe 27,7 feet from the roadway, and would, therefore, not create any sight distance issues for motorists traveling on 1 I Iii Street North or Camellia Avenue. e. Will granting the Variance confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by these zoning regulations to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district? Yes. A Variance by definition confers some dimensional relief from the zoning regulations specific to a site, The granting of this Variance would allow the house to have one of its front yards set back a minimum of 27.7 feet, which is 2.3 feet less than the 30-foot minimum front yard setback .rcquirement of the RSF-3 Zoning District, Although no similar Variances have bcen granted in the immediate vicinity of this neighborhood, it should be noted that, because the preponderance of these homes were constlUcted in the 1960-70s (before the establishment of current setback standards), not all of the corner lot homes in the neighborhood meet the 30-foot sctback for their secondary front yard. For instance, the propelty abutting the subject property's southern boundary, constructed in 1978, has a setback cquivalent to the one being requested. Although County records do not contain the actual setback dimensions, the reduced sctback ofthis house is demonstrated by ,6 - Agenda Item No. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 12 of 31 the photograph below, which shows the house's eave in the background (indicated by the red arrow) protruding beyond the applicant's setback line, VieIV of lI,e reduced setback along 11" Street North, as seen from Camellia Avellue; and lite abutting sotltlz(!rn neighbor's protrudillg eave. f, Will gl'anting tile Variance be in hal'mony with the general intent and purpose of this Land Development Code, and not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the pnblic welfare? Yes. The proposed Variance would allow the applicant to complete the construction of a single-family home, which, as mentioned in the GMP p0l1ion of this report, would be compatible with neighboring uses. Approval of this Variance would not have an injUTious . effect upon the neighborhood, nor would it be detrimental to the public welfare. As previously noted, IDe reduced setback would not create any sight distance issues on 11th Street North or Camellia Avenue, Moreover, as seen in the photo above, IDe Variance would not be a significant departure from the established setbacks and would be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the RSF-3 Zoning District. 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. As shown on the survey plat on page three, the subject property is a corner lot and the area of the lot for which the Variance is being requested abuts 11th Street N011h, a 60-foot wide roadway, As such, there is a considerable separation between the fayade of the house requiring the Variance and the most affected property to the east, which is a cemetery, Therefore, the reduced setback being requested would have a negligible impact on the .7. Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 13 of 31 subject property's most affected neighbor. h. Will granting the Variance be consistent with the Growth Management Plan? As already stated in the GMP Consistency portion of this report, the proposed single-family use is consistent with the Immokalee Area Master Plan of the GMP, and approval of this Variance petition would have no impact on the GMP, ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL (EAC) RECOMMENDATION: The EAC does not normally hear Variance petitions, and did not hear this Variallce, RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Collier County Planning Commission forward Petition VA-2007-AR- ]2629 to the BZA with a recommendation of approval of the 2.3-foot setback Variance for the front yard adjacent to 11th Street North, as depicted in the survey plat dated October 9, 2007 (Exhibit A of the Resolution). ,8 - Agenda Item No. 17 A March 11 , 2008 Page 14 of 31 PREPARED BY: c:; r:i-' v. n-- JOH -DAVID MOSS, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Ilz-I..:i/ t)~ DATE' , REVIEWED BY: RIGHT ANT COUNTY ATTORNEY \/2-Ci (D'i! DAi'E / /~~ /0 F: DATE I RAY ND V, BELLOWS, ZONING MANAGER DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW J~''Pl '~.P /SUSAN M. ISTENES, AICP, DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW '/0-."116 j DATE APPROVED BY: 1>2 / I It}-r DATE I .r C MUNITY DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION MARK p, STRAIN, CHAIRMAN DATE Tentatively scheduled for the March 11,2008 Board of County Commissioners' Meeting, ,9, COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Agenda Item No. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 15 of 31 PERMIT PERMIT #: ISSUED: MASTF.R I: 2006091450 07-02-07 f3.Y..: f~ARIARODRIGUEZ 2006091450 COAff: 06-1758 PER~IT TYPE: bk2 APPVED OATe: 09-15-06 VALID #: APPROV.l\L DATE: 450 ]]-27-06 JOB ADDRESS: 1201 CAMELLIA AVE JOB DeSCRIPTION: CBS S/F DET. 1 STY 200 Ni?S W/SHUTTERS J03 PHONE: SUBDIVISION ~: 923 - Immokalee Hiahlands Q.h9_~ c: FLOOD MAP: 0150 ZONF;..:.. 0 ELEVATION: ".9.!e10J1..:. 0008051242280006 SECTION-TO'tmSHIP-RANGE 33 46 29 !eSCJ:..=.?4 OWNER INFORMAT:ON: CONTRACTOR JNFORMA~ION: DE LA ROSA, SARA 615 CLIfTON ST IMMOKALEE, FLlScO 341422906 CERTIFICATE !: PHONE: FCC COD~=. CONSTRUCTION ,JOB VALUE: 101 - RISINGLE c:()DE: 101 I 330,000.00 ,AMILY DETACHED 'faTAL SQF?_~~ 3, 040 SETBACKS FRONT: .sEWER: I MM CONTACT f'A.ME: CONT ACT PHONE: 30,00 REAR: SEPTIC N SARA DEL,~ROSA 12391503-5919 7.50 LEFT: WATER: IMM 30.CO RIGHT: - WELL 7.50 N Per Collier County Ordinance No. 2002.01, as it may be amended, all \york must comply with all applicable laws, codes, Ol'dinances, and any additional sti[>ulations or conditiolls ofthfs permit. This permit e:'\pires if IVork authorized by the permit is not commenced within six (6) months fi'om the date of issuance ofrhe permit. Additionul fees for failing to obtain permits prior to the commencement of construction may be imposed. PeI'l11ittee{s) further understands that any contractor that may be employed IllUst be a Iicl."nsed contractor and that the structure must not be used or occupied until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. NOTICE: PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS PRODUCTS OR THE DEMOLITION OF A STRUCTURE, FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS REQUIRE THE PERMITTEE (EITHER THE OWNER OR CONTRAcrOR) TO SUBMIT A NOTICE OF THE INTENDED WORK TO THE ST ATE DEP ARTMENT OF ENVIIWNMENTAL PROTECTION (DEP). FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT DEP AT (239) 332-6975, In addition to the conditions of this permit, there mal' be additional I'cstrictions applicable to this propcl'ty that lIlay be found in the public I'econls of this county, and there may be additional permits I'equh'ed from other governmental cntities such as watef' rnanagemeut districts, state agencies, 01' federal agcncies, WARNING TO OWNER: YOUR FAILURE TO RECORD A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT MAY RESULT IN YOUR PA YING TWICE FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO YOUR PROPERTY. IF YOU INTEND TO OBTAIN FINANCING, CONSULT WITH YOUR LENDER OR AN ATTORNEY BEFORE RECORDING YOUR NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT. Exhibit A Feb tl 08 to:51a Agenda Iti\n;>~o. 17A Marth 11, 2008 Page 16 of 31 4, g.{) g To Whom1t May Concern: It is to my understanding that Mrs, Sara DeLaRosa is in the process of going through a vlli"iance petition located at 1201 Camellia Ave, Immokalee, FL. This letter is to certify and confinn that /.t.I:, IJ. JhA.rt>Y! h tifi , have no objection with Sara DeLaRosa continuing jth the building of her house at its present location and that it will not effective me or my property in any way. Sincerely, ".0 --J /7 77e1~ / :vJ""--V xfju0A7~ #~/'J<la~ Feb 11 08 10: 51a Agenda ItEjOll t'io. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 17 of 31 /) 9, /) (lI cx.- LJ (, ~ To Whom It May Concern: It is to my understunding that Mrs, Saw DeLaRosa is in the process of going through a variance petition located at 120 I Camellia Ave, Icnmokalee, FL. This letter is to certify and contirm that I .~;,o I~\ -/- A f1.tt J.1eff1GIIJeL , have 110 objection with Sara DeLaRosa continuing with the building of her house at its prescnt location and that it will not effectivc me or my property in any way, Sincerely, lJy~ di~;3- J4c-U:Z- cf--Ger?42~ ! Feb 11 08 10: 51a Agenda It'jlfO 4)0. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 18 of 31 To Whom It May Concern: ~- !j-{)g It is to my understanding that Mrs, Sara DeLaRosa is ill the proccss of going through a variance petition located at 1201 Camellia Ave, Immokalee, FL. l11is letter is to celtify and confinu that I &c.,'( R . oJ- ~'ftL livwe.J1 , have no objection with Sara DeLaRosa continuing with the buildi g of hcr house at its present location and that it will not cffective me or my property in any way, Sinccrely, ~ ~c/kd(,. -----~"_.".._._- COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET (i) Agenda Item No. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 19 of 31 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 403-2400 FAX (239) 643-6968 VARIANCE'PETITIONAPPlICA TIC>,N"" J-"_ . " . . ", _ i'.:-- . ,,:>:i .0:'7".~ .,..'.'.::.::,,;-'" ',_ (VARIANCE FROM SETBACK(.) REQUIRED. FOR APARTICUl:ARZ9NING Di~TRICl1..,?!::.. PETITION NO (AR) PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER DATE PROCESSED ASSIGNED PLANNER VA-2007-AR-12629 REV: 1 CAMELlA AVE VARIANCE PROJECT: 2007110004 DATE: 1216107 DUE: 12120107 Abave to be compleled by stoff . APPLICANT I AGENTINFORMA TION NAME OF APPtlCANT(S) ~Cl ("(1. De Let.. QO'SR ADDRESS (~or CarYletlitA Ave. CITy~rsTATE TELEPHONE #;)Y1 1J6'1. 7'11:5: CELL # ;),30 '503 ~ 5C1 /CI FAX # E-MAIL ADDRESS:50..\Cl-cldcUV501(!8)./o..hoc.C C'I'l, ,-,"-:-'- H.-- ZIP 34: / '+ :;z ,;).31 -/c57- 7'11~ I I I I ! NAME OF AGENT ADDRESS TELEPHONE # E-MAIL ADDRESS: ~ Llt')!e.- (.Ie, a.bolli2..- CITY STATE FAX # ZIP CELL # BE AWARE THAT COLLIER COUNTY HAS LOBBYIST REGULATIONS. GUIDE YOURSELF ACCORDINGL Y AND ENSURE THAT YOU ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REGULATIONS. Variance Application rev. \2/23/04 Agenda Item No, 17A March 11, 2008 Page 20 of 31 I:., -- J', ", "';':' t;'ASSOClATIONS, '~, ,'," ',' """ ,';'c': ',., . -.-... .-'. ,.-.-.-. ",-':',"'''"-':';';-'1:::" .".,,"'1 Complete the Following For all Association(s) affiliated with this petition. Provide additional sheets iF necessary. NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDR.ESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF MASTER ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDR.ESS CITY STATE ZIP NAME OF CtVIC ASSOCIATION: MAILING ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP DESCRIPTION""';;;" ~y:,,- . ,'.' .r"'" , . . :'.:<L;J~:-- I PROPERTY Legal Description of Subject Property: SeotionjTown.hip{Range 41(; 1~J22 Propelty LD.#: Subdivi.iomJ mm Dka.le..e- ~"CJ..h I o..nd Unit Metes & Bounds Description: SId-Ii ~~ !?tJOD& Lot: d'-f Blook: c... Acreage /00 .\( /4 f.p :' ( () I 3(p J\C.f-€:~")' , Address of Subject Property (If different from Petitioner', address): Variance Application rev. 12123/04 '.: ,~ .' " ';A.DJAe::':Nfz9NIii!~'A~D:,Ii~"'DUSF; ':,~"i", Agenda Item No, 17 A ..:.,..PA9~'~f~T,~,l. Zoning N~ S~ E~(P W~ Land Use \, '-J M_ 0.. I'\..-r I[' €? ~d .e Y'- -\- ~ oJ ~~A~:~~~\ Minimum Yard Reouirements for Subiect ProDerlv: p..'D Front: J Side: Lf (5D If 7.5 Rear: '7.6 Corner Lot: Waterfront Lot: Yes Yes ElF o No 0 No g/" . "IIIATUREi:,OF"P.ETIT,Q",:., ':1 , Provide a detailed explanation of the request including what structures are existing and what is proposed: the amount of en<roochment proposed using numbers, I.e. reduce front setback from 25' to 18'; when property owner purchased property; when existing principal structure was built (include building permit number (s) if possiblell why en<roachmentls necessary; how existing encroachment came to be:, etc, For projects authorized under LDC Section 9.04.02, provide detailed description of site ollerations, including ony dredging and filling. _We- 0 ~ ask} e. (DUL:{-C In CffY/s-fnA (~fe.' f11.f (-bu i1 d a He. f/ Cr51111fy f/J"J) J irY-.ko.d of +17e ) 01 i)~ ~ ~ ;Jr'i)J' hvY}1 flU dD reef re9fD'rfl.d. Please nole that staff and the Collier County Planning Commission shall be guided in their recommendation to the Boord of zoning Appeals, and that the Board of zoning appeals shall be guided In Its determlnotion to approve or deny a variance petillon by the below listed criteria (l-S). (Please address these criteria using additional pages if necessary.) Variance Application rev. 12123/04 , Agenda Item No. 17 A M\lrch 11, 2008 1'. Are there special eondltians ond circumstances existing whlch are pec:u\lor to the loeatlon, sl:te onfl'age 22 of 31 charo<lerlstics of the lond, structure, or bullding involved. ~e.s, 6fl.a tAd '411\.0. hlfvc:tJ. LA b4 I 10/VI n e.{)fn€.-f IDf- heLL 1-1- 2, Are there spedal conditions and circumstances which do not result from the action of the applicont ,uch as pre-exls11ng conditions relallv<> to the property which is the sublect of the varionce re,.\l e~, A+-+\I\l' -t:i fYW_ it IA)(.l S 'J;;.(U-ifQ,LfJ!.d d wa ')' ~ ',:5" . ~3.Qd_()E,r-i\.J ~f-ba{k. rr-A 'H_p~ lI.1f.. buL~.. +e-..L h.lS\l.U.~~\ If SlJ...YV^fLl LUO') of+ DII:J.. ' ~t ~~i n'Jt- ~ ~. ll12l fhe. ;"1 '~"'i'f, bel(' I w- [OCr,e J r.e-,-.L +- ___€ }he. I:?e.ru 5 Se. 3. Will 0 literal interpretation of the provision, of thi, :toning code work unnecessary and undue hardship on the appll<emt or create procticol difficulties on the applieant. Ie. Well! fhe. . 4. Will the vorlance, if granted, be the minImum variance that will make possible the reasQnable use of the IClnd, building or ,tructure and which promote standard, of health, ,afety or welfare. ye.S! ~.er aJA,Se.. Of +/Je u)a~ +hP. houc..e.. was deSi!)iJPrl , +hIS fJ)()?td ape... 't/~ ~ms ~ her. (. m-P_ .ft:;o ./-,ima I (uld __r4.~-!_!..d.kt:. _ (Y.n LI,....P-Me.... 5, Will granting th.. vorlance requ..sted confer on the petlllaner any special privilege that is denied by these :toning regulations to ath..r lands, buildings, or structure, in the same :toning district. do" ~cu.A.se Ih-e. of her how;v 5' on -J.he 6ame.. road :5ce.m~'-Iv bR -e,lIeil C laser -h> +he !,il.f., ...tha.n f7'lJ frio fA ''If.. WOfi!rl he, VarianceAppHcation rev. 12/23/04 Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 23 of 31 6. Will granting tlte variance be in harmony with the Intent and purpose af this zanlns code, and not be Inlurlous to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare, --t:h~ 3~o.n-j,'r;a of fhf' va~/tJ. nt'/- l1.JilJ /JDf be /17) (J P-J V7A -=j .J -h> cu-y me" i f1 (] 17 Y U'Jfl Y 7. Are there natural conditions or physically induced conditions Ihat ameliorate the goals and objectives of Ihe regulation su"" as natural preserves, lakes, golf course, etc. /Jo. 8. Will granting the variance be consistent with the growth management plan. ~e5 BE ADVISED THAT SECTION 10.03.05.8.3 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIRES AN APPLICANT TO REMOVE THEIR PUBLIC HEARING SIGN (S) 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(SlIMMEDJA TEL Y. Variance Application rev. 12/23/04 Agenda Item No, 17 A March 11, 2008 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE Page 24 of 31 DEPT. OF ZONING & LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 WWW.COLLlERGOV.NET (i) (239) 403.2400 FAX (239) 643.6968 !t. VA.2007.AR-12629 REV: 1 CAMELlA AVE VARIANCE VARIANCE PETITION PROJECT: 2007110004 DATE: 1216107 DUE: 12120/07 .N Dimensional PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES * & SUBMITT At CHECKLIST Date: /bh.S/01Time: 2.,; 3 0 Assigned Planner, \1:0 ~f5 proiectN~me,1 C().~~ ~ VCA.-rl~~ L'[)v/JA-~J0 Prolect Addr/Location: I)""() / ~ Co. ~. Applicant Name: ~ ~ J.a- 6p-- Phone: 5""0:3 - ,rl f '1 Firm: ^1! a...- Current Zoning, l!...{,f' -3 ~ ,j L t (l.. fZe>.ftII.- Phone: SO 3 ~ 57('1 Owner Name: Owner Address: Meeting Attendees: (aHach Sign In Sheet) NOTES: f"'t~ : ~ 4..., _J,J~ ~W~(b{. : IY1t IlO ~- fV~ U? i<:...::In di ern L.J\-N.o 1)e:."J6WPME::NTCoD5(t...IX) /D.63.65 c6oFV~~OS u ~.~o ( () ~ . If telephone pre-application meeting is held, direct the petitioner to coordinate with Undo concerning the requirement for the petitioner to send the notice letter to 1I1e surrounding property owners or to give them that information that Linda typically provides them 1 .. ..".-.....,.-"'.~<"...,..,.,~"""""'~ur<'''''....'"'.,.., ,.,. .,' -.'.'. J,c;'.',."",;'.." B~'{~~~r1Jf,o/.fff?~:~;R}~~JP~~X:;;:~S~::;1.}2-)'I!1:s:/~~:~~~;;.,~:?,'~.;':;:,;;.::~t'~'~"r:..\~,,:-:~';':,;_c:~ ;'~".~ ,,<,;?),:~~, ""/>" ''''''i',' ....',.... .... ,.... AgendaltemNo. 17A 2800 NORTH HORSESlWSUl'tl\@08 NAPLES, FLORIDA 341 cf.flge 25 of 31 COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT ADDRESSING DEPARTMENT ADDRESSING CHECKLIST J Please complete the following and fax to the Addressing Department at 239-659-5724 or submit In person to the Addressing Department at the above address.. Form must be signed by Addressing personnel prior to pre-application meeting. Not all Items will apply to every project. Items in bold type are required. Forms older than 6 months will require additional review and approval by the Addressing Department. PETITION iYPE (check petition type below, complete 8 separate Addressing Checklist for each Petition Type) o BL (Blasting Permit) o BD (Boat Dock Extension) o CU (ConditiDnal Use) o EX? (Excavation Pennlt) o FP (Final Plat o LLA (Lot Une Adjustment) o PNC (project Name Change) o PPL (Plans & Plat Review) o PSP (Preliminary Subdivision Plat) o PUD Rez.one o RZ (standard Rez.one) DSDP (SlIe Development Plan) o SOPA (SOP Amendment) o SDPI (Insubstantial Change to SOP) o SfP (SlIe Improvement Plan) o SIPI (Insubstantial Change to SIP) o SNR (Street Name Change) o SNC (Street Name Change - Unplatted) o TOR (Transfer of Development Rights) o VA (Variance) o VRP (Vegetation Removal Permit) o VRSFP (Vegetation Removal & Site Fill Permtt) o OTHER LEGAL DESCRIPTION of subject property or properties (copy of l13ngthy d13sCtiption may be att8ch13d) l\G,- ?....g - ~ 'WI MOkM EF: \-\IGl-\LF\Nl\."'\ \ 5LCQk.. C!... ,L./')T '?'~ FOLIO (Property 10) NUMBER(s) of above (attach to, or associat13 with, I13gal description ifmore than one) STREET ADDRESS or ADDRESSES (as applicable, if already assigned) LOCATION MAP must be attached showing exac:llocation of projecllslle in relation to nearest public road l'i9ht-of-way SURVEY (copy - needed only for unplatted properties) PROPOSED PROJECT NAME (if applicable) PROPOSED STREET NAMES (lfappficable) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NUMBER (for existing projects/sifes only) SOP orAR# Page 1 of2 Agenda Item No, 17A March 11, 2008 ~ ,'-"c. _+") V ARIANCIi PETITION (VA) APPLICATION SUBMITTAl CHECKLIST THIS COMPLETED CHECKLIST IS TO BE SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION PACKET IN THE EXACT ORDER LISTED BELOW W {COVER SHEETS ATTACHED TO EACH SECTION, NOTEI INCOMPLETE SUMBITTALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. #OF NOT REQUIREMENTS COPIES REQUIRED REQUIRED , Comoleted Aoollcotion (download from webslle for current forml 15 )( / , Pre-APDlteation meetlna notes 15 'J< ComDleted AddresslnD Checklist, Sloned bv Addressina DeoClrtment I 'X Concentuc.l S1le pIon .. .. I 15 ~ X ./ Survey of propertY showina the enclOClc:hment (measured in fllet) !!- 1 , Owner/Agent AffidavIt signed & notorlzed 1 'V ,/ Deeds/LegClI's 2 V Lo~ation mop 1 y. Aerial photographs (taken within the previous 12 months mln, scoled 5 v.. 1"=200'), showing FLUCCS Codes, Legend, and proiect boundary Electrontc copy of 011 dowments and plans ICD~OM or Dlske1te) 1 X. Historical SlIrvev or waiver reellest 1 .- X environmental Impact Stotement (EIS) and dlgltolj electronic copy of 'i EIS or exemption 11Istlflcatlon 3 -- Within 30 davs offer recelct of the first revIew comment letter. 1 y.., provIde ProDerty Owner Advisory Letter and Certlfleotion .( ",- ,/ \/ FEES: Ik'J Pre-application Fee $500.00 (Appllcotions submlHecI 9 months or more after the date of the last ~-app meeting shall not be credited towards application fees and a new pre-applicatlon meeting will be re'luired.) Rl/view Fees: $2000.00 Residential $50\>0.00 Non-Re,ldenllol After-The-Fact Zoning/Land Use Petftlons 2x the normal petition fee $760.00 Estlmoted Legal Advertising Fee - CCPC Meeting $363.00 e.tlmated Legol Advertising Fee - BCC Meeting (any over- or under-payment will be reconciled upon receIpt of InvoIce from Noples Dolly News). o $2500.00 EIS Review OTHER REQUIREMENTS: o o o Agent/Owner Signature Date 2 <0:00 W ,,-0 :J:- 'IU ~O s::; .N 0 Z~ qs:, E:;; Q) " N\ ~ - ~ -ro .gJz ~ w c ~ Q) :f Q < L, .... ~ ~ W I liP ~ ~ = ~ ~ ~ & ,=.. ~ 1= ~ ~ ~ 1:/j ~ ~ ~ r.I'J. :J .~ 1 ............ w :E c( z ti Ul .., o g; " M C"I ~ '1' ~ ~ Z M < to: .... Ql a.. ..Q Q E w ::l Z Z ~ Ql _ c ~ 0 < .c La.. - C 1lI E Q. o 1i Qi c ~ .; Q 0 E' ] :! ,g "0 oll u QI~ .: en C 0 o E N "t:J w- .> o tI - "t:J C C 1lI .c E 0 1: .- a in Q. III ell ~ Q "t:J ~ , III III o - :E 0- "t:J ~ os; tlJ ~ . s:: ..c o ..., m lII:t :E ;:) z w Z o ::r a.. ti <:3'-!!\ ~ ,11~ ~ I>J t\J \.I) ~ I- a.. w Q Z Q:E !!!~ >i! i5 >- I- Z :J o U w :E <( z g "" , '7 lG J~ . ~ \J ~~ ~ 1\t y '" ~ ~ ~ ~ if! OJ -c ~ 'S; Ii! (\ d ~tG \"'fj " o "0 t.:i llJ :c (J) !; z l.!) "' u; ~ ~ " " ,. S o . I Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 28 of 31 ADDRESSING CHECKLIST - Page 2 Project or development names proposed for, or already appearing in, condominium documents Of application; indicate whether proposed Of existing) Please ChecK One: 0 Checklist is to be Faxed back Iil:t'PelSonally PicKed Up APPLICANT NAME: ~ ~ /!J... ~<1--.. PHONE: rJ.?R - ~ D-:5- ~ /q FAX: Signature on Addressing Checklist does not constitute Project and/or Street Name approval and is subject to further review by the Addressing Department. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Primary Number \ '0 14- ~ GJ.\-- Acldress Number \ O'-\- 3~ 7 AddresS Number Address Number _G~ Updated by: Date: \0 ~?:~-o7 Date: IF OLDER THAN 6 MONTHS, FORM MUST BE UPDATED OR NEW FORM SUBMITTED Page 2of2 RESOLUTION- 08,_ A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO PETITION NUMBER VA.2007-AR-12629, FOR AN AFTER.THE-FACT 2.3 FOOT VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE ENCROACHMENT OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING INTO THE REQUIRED 30,FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1201 CAMELLIA AVENUE HEREINAFTER DESCRffiED IN COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida III Chapter 125, Florida Statutes, has conferred on all counties in Florida the power to establish, coordinate and enforce zoning and such bmdness regulauons as are necessary for the protection of the publicj and WHEREAS, the County pursuant thereto has adopted a Land Development Code CLDC) (Ordinance No. 2004-41, as amended) which establishes regulations for the zoning of particular geographic divisions of [he County, among which is the granting of variances; and WHEREAS, the Collier County Board of Zoning Appeals has held a public hearing after notice as in said regulations made and provided,. and has considered the advisability of an after- tJlc-fact 2.3 foot variance to permit the encroachment of a single-family dwelling into the required 3D-foot front yard setback, as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in the RSF-3 Zoning District for the property hereinafter described, and has found as a matter of fact tlmt satisfactory provision and arrangement have been made concerning all applicable malters required by said regulations and in accordance with Section 9,04,00 of the Zoning Regulations of said Land Development Code for the unincorporated <lrea of Collier County; and WHEREAS, all interested parties have been given opportunity to be heard by this Board in public meeting assembled, and the Board having considered all matters presented. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA that TIle Petition Number VA-2007~AR-12629 filed by Sam De La Rosa with respect to the propelty hereinafter described as: Lot 24, Block C, Immokalee Highlands Subdivision, according to tbe plat thereof in Plat Book 7, Page], Public Records of Collier CountYl Florida Folio No. 51242280006 be and the same hereby is approved for an after-the-fact 2,3 foot variance to pennit the encroachment of a single-family dwelling into the required 30-foot front yant setback, as shown on the attached plot plan, Exhibit "A", in the zoning district wherein said properly is located, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution relating to Petition Number VA., 2007~AR-12629 be recorded ill the minutes of this Board. Agenda Item No. 17A March 11, 2008 Page 29 of 31 This Resolution adopted after motion. second and majority vote this _ day of ,2008. ATTEST: DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK BOARD OF WNING APPEALS COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: By: TOM HENNING, CHAIRMAN , Deputy Clerk App ved as to f nn and ga f i 1 ' J effre Chief Agenda Item No. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 30 of 31 : ANCHOR r rlieF: nOlI , ~ '" <:l " 11:I-II",,!{. " ~S' al... -;i': ...-- <;' '- . ~ .. 'g "'.. lh~ .. 8.89 " l'1 ~ :! ... " .... ~ o\l S '" " ~ ~ ~~ ~ " Exhibit A ~80YE lXSCRlSt:O PROP~rr IS TRUE r. AS RECCNTl r STJR~}fD WOER MY 'IS SUR lif:y MEns THE UlNfUUU rECHNlCAl. SStONAL SlJR1rf'"n:;ws AND MAPP&S IN )E PURSUANT ro secTION 472-027 or THE FOUNDATION SURVEY SCALE 1 n = 30' Agenda Item No. 17 A March 11, 2008 Page 31 of 31 CAJ/BlJJA AYENUB (60' IVII") /B.O p.l.YE,!{m J 2/.0 PARKII"AY /00,84 (R I: J/) ~ :1 ... " ~~ .. Ill" 'ite ..... 28,0 ~ !"" ~ ~ i" l'l~ . ~~ .. " .. !' ~ ~~ .. i-I! t;;-...:.. .. ~ ~ j ., ~ oil loo ~ ~ " S ; ~I~ ~ .. '" :3 '" ~ 0; te 0:; ~ ... .. <:l .. .. " %7,70 ~ lil ~ .. .. " .. 8.0 CONC. SUB FOUNDATION IF.F. EL. '8.B%'1 ~ .. ... LOT U BLOCK C '\ <>', ,. ~. --~-------~ 7.0' U.S. .. ~S' oj~ ~'" 80.0 /00.866 (R .. II) ~ Lor 13 eLOCK C ~ .- .. . , . . .r n , ,'_ ' ..,'ii" /." v . , CEct, ,ON~ PR~ NO SU((v<J1)R," U~PPER cot77f7CA.1F No &121 ST.o1PE' or.':t~/O'" 'THE SUR\oFl" SHO'MV HeREON IS NOT VAI.ID m1HOUr THE SIGNA-Tr.IE ORIGINAL RAISED SEAt. OF A FLORIDA. SURVF:YrR ANO MAPPtR .