HEX Final Decision #2026-17HEX NO. 2026-17
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
DATE OF HEARING.
March 13, 2026
PETITION.
Petition No. BD-PL20250005725 - The petitioner requests an approval of a 12-foot boat dock
extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet allowed by Section 5.03.06.E.1 of
the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) for waterways 100 feet or greater in width, to
allow a new boat docking facility protruding a total of 32 feet into a waterway that is 120 feet
wide, pursuant to LDC Section 5.03.06.H.
GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION.
A request for a 12-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet
allowed for a new boat docking facility protruding a total of 32 feet into a waterway that is 120
feet wide.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
Approval with conditions.
FINDINGS.
1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87(4) of the
Collier County Code of Ordinances, Sec. 8.10.00 of the Land Development Code, and Chapter
9 of the County Administrative Code.
2. The public hearing for this Petition was properly noticed and conducted in accordance with all
County and state requirements.
3. The public hearing was conducted electronically and in -person in accordance with
Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04.
4. The public hearing was conducted in the following manner: the County Staff presented the
Petition followed by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative, public comment and then
rebuttal by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative. There were no public comments at
the public hearing.
5. The Hearing Examiner disclosed having reviewed the Petition record and having no ex parte
communications.
Page 1 of 6
6. In accordance with LDC Section 5.03.06.H., the Collier County Hearing Examiner shall
approve, approve with conditions, or deny a dock facility extension request based on certain
criteria. In order for the Hearing Examiner to approve this request, at least four of the five
primary criteria and four of the six secondary criteria must be met.I
Primary Criteria:
1. Whether the number of dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed is appropriate
in relation to the waterfront length, location, upland land use and zoning of the
subject property. Consideration should be made of property on unbridged barrier
islands, where vessels are the primary means of transportation to and from the
property. (The number should be appropriate; typical single-family use should be
no more than two slips; typical multi -family use should be one slip per dwelling
unit; in the case of unbridged barrier island docks, additional slips may be
appropriate.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that this criterion
is met. The subject property is located within the residential development area of a
Planned Unit Development (PUD). Section 2.03.B.1 specifically calls out private boat
docks as a permitted accessory use to single-family dwellings; however, no
development criteria are provided, therefore, we default to the LDC. LDC Section
5. 03.06.H. La states that the typical number of slips for single-family use should be no
more than two. The proposed docking facility consists of installing one boatlift to
accommodate a 30 foot LOA vessel and a second platform boatlift for 2 Personal
Watercraft (PWCs).
2. Whether the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the
general length, type, and draft as that described in the petitioner's application is
unable to launch or moor at mean low tide (MLT). (The petitioner's application
and survey should establish that the water depth is too shallow to allow launching
and mooring of the vessel(s) described without an extension.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that this criterion
is met. The applicant's agent stated: "The proposed docking facility is necessary due
to the existing on -site water depth conditions, which are shallow due to the rip -rap
shoreline design. The depths are sufficient just outside the allowed 20 foot protrusion
line, which is what is driving the proposed dock design. The overall proposed dock
protrusion is consistent with the existing dock's protrusion, just with a different layout
to provide better overall access to the proposed slip, ensuring access to the slip at all
tide levels. " Zoning staff concurred.
3. Whether the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on navigation
within an adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The facility should not
intrude into any marked or charted navigable channel thus impeding vessel traffic
in the channel.)
'The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized.
Page 2 of 6
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is
met. The applicant's agent stated: "The proposed docking facility protrusion
is consistent with the existing dock on -site and other docks along the subject and
adjacent waterways. As proposed, the dock and boatlifts will not create new impacts
on navigation within the subject waterway, nor will it alter the existing ingress/
egress to both adjacent neighboring docks. The subject waterway is unmarked;
therefore, the entire waterway provides safe navigation between the docking
facilities and the adjacent shoreline. It is our opinion, as proposed, that there are
no new impacts to existing navigation, as there are other more restrictive points all
passing vessels must navigate along the subject waterway south. " Zoning staff
concurred.
4. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 percent of the
width of the waterway and whether a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway
width between dock facilities on either side is maintained for navigability. (The
facility should maintain the required percentages.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is
met. The applicant's agent stated: "The approximate waterway width is 120 feet from
MHWL to MHWL. The proposed dock protrusion is 32 feet from the most restrictive
point, that being the property line on the north end of the property. As proposed, the
dock will only protrude 30 feet from the MHWL; therefore, it will be just under the
allowed 25% width of the waterway. " Zoning staff concurred.
5. Whether the proposed location and design of the dock facility is such that the
facility would not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. (The facility should
not interfere with the use of legally permitted neighboring docks.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is met.
The applicant's agent stated.• "The proposed docking facility design is
consistent with the existing docking facility and other neighboring docks on this
waterway. As proposed, the dock will be within the allowed buildable area by providing
the required setbacks, and therefore, as proposed, there will not be any new impacts
nor interference to either adjacent docking facility. " Zoning staff concurred.
Secondary Criteria:
1. Whether there are special conditions not involving water depth, related to the
subject property or waterway, that justify the proposed dimensions and location
of the proposed dock facility. (There must be at least one special condition related
to the property; these may include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline
configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is
met. The applicant's agent stated: "The subject property shoreline consists of a steep
rip -rap shoreline that extends out below the MHWL, which then requires the dock and
Page 3 of 6
associated slips to extend out past. Additionally, with two adjacent docking facilities,
a more parallel dock/slip layout would result in tough ingress/egress conditions for
any proposed boat slip closer to the shoreline; therefore, a BDE is the best option. "
Zoning staff concurred.
2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the
vessel for loading/unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive
deck area not directly related to these functions. (The facility should not use
excessive deck area.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is
met. The applicant's agent stated: "The proposed docking facility has been
designed to provide sufficient deck area for routine maintenance, safe access, as well
as recreational activities. The deck area on the north and western side of the dock could
be considered excessive; however, the overall open deck area is necessary to still
provide sufficient area for safe access to the PWCs and other recreational activities
for access down to the water with kayaks and/or paddleboards. " Staff concurred.
3. For single-family dock facilities, whether the length of the vessel or vessels in
combination described by the petitioner exceeds 50 percent of the subject
property's linear waterfront footage. (The applicable maximum percentage
should be maintained.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is
met. The subject property has 89 feet of water/canal frontage, and the proposed dock
facility has been designed to moor a single 30 foot vessel and two 12 foot PWCs to be
moored side -by -side. Staff typically counts only one PWC when stored side by side;
watercraft will occupy 42 feet (30' + 12 ) or 47.19% of said waterfrontage.
4. Whether the proposed facility would have a major impact on the waterfront view
of neighboring property owners. (The facility should not have a major impact on
the view of a neighboring property owner.)
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is
met. The applicant's agent stated: "The existing on -site conditions consist of a dock
with a boatlift, which are all proposed to be replaced upon approval, but in a slightly
different configuration. Additionally, as proposed, the dock has been designed to be
constructed within the designated side yard setbacks and is consistent with the other
existing boat docks along the subject waterway. Based on this and the fact that this is
a boating community, it's our opinion that there are no new impacts to either adjacent
property owners' current view. " Zoning staff concurred.
5. Whether seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. (If seagrass
beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06.J of the LDC must be
demonstrated.)
Page 4 of 6
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is
met. There are no seagrass beds present on the property or the neighboring
properties within 200 feet of the existing dock structure.
6. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection
requirements of subsection 5.03.06(E)(11) of this Code. (If applicable, compliance
with section 5.03.06(E)(11) must be demonstrated.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects this criterion is not
applicable. The provisions of the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan do not apply
to single-family dock facilities except for those within the seawalled basin of Port of
the Islands; the subject property is not located within Port of the Islands.
ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION.
The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects the Environmental Planning
Staff finds this project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council Board (EAC) review
because this project did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified
in Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances.
ANALYSIS.
The Hearing Examiner concludes that there is enough competent, substantial evidence based on
the review of the record that includes the Petition, application, exhibits, the County's staff report,
and comments and testimony from the Petitioner and/or their representative(s), County staff and
anyone from the public, to approve the Petition for the boat dock. The boat dock petition meets
four of the five primary criteria and five of the six secondary criteria with one criterion being not
applicable. The criteria are set forth in Section 5.03.06.H of the Land Development Code.
DECISION.
The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number BD-PL20250005725, filed by Jeff
Rogers of Turrell, Hall & associates, Inc., representing the owner/applicant Tim and Maria Myers,
with respect to the property described as located at 1817 Gordon River Lane, further described as
Lot 8, Nature Pointe, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 20, Pages 20
through 22, inclusive, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, in Section 35, Township 49
South, Range 25 East., Collier County, Florida, for the following:
• To allow a 12-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet
allowed by Section 5.03.06.E.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) for
waterways 100 feet or greater in width, to allow a new boat docking facility protruding a
total of 32 feet into a waterway that is 120 feet wide, pursuant to LDC Section 5.03.06.H.
Page 5 of 6
Said changes are fully described in the Proposed Dock and Site Plan attached as Exhibit "A" and
the Map of Specific Purpose Survey attached as Exhibit "B", and are subject to the condition(s)
set forth below.
ATTACHMENTS.
Exhibit A — Proposed Dock and Site Plan
Exhibit B — Map of Specific Purpose Survey
LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
The subject property is located at 1817 Gordon River Lane, further described as Lot 8, Nature
Pointe, according to the map or plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 20, Pages 20 through 22,
inclusive, Public Records of Collier County, Florida, in Section 35, Township 49 South, Range 25
East. Collier County, Florida.
CONDITIONS.
• All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the
development.
DISCLAIMER.
Pursuant to Section 125.022(5) F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any
way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency
and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant
fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or
undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law.
APPEALS.
This decision becomes effective on the date it is rendered. An appeal of this decision shall be done
in accordance with applicable ordinances, codes and law.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS: SEE CLERK OF COURT, MINUTES
AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR
VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USES, AND BOAT DOCK EXTENSIONS SHALL BE
NOTED ON THE ZONING MAP FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES.
March 27, 2026
Date
Page 6 of 6
Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP
Hearing Examiner
EXHIBIT "A"
STATE OF FLORIDA
o TAMPA
FT.MYER
APL S N
e
rQ PDT
CITY KEY WEST °
COLLIER COUNTY
SITE ADDRESS:
<> 1817 GORDON RIVER LN <> LATITUDE: N 2E
NAPLES, FL 34104 <> LONGITUDE: W -8
NOTES:
<> THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURP(
AND ARE NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION l
VICINITY MAP
COUNTY AERIAL
Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc.
1 817 GORDON RIVER
L N
DESIGNED:
JR
1.
RMJ
07-16-25
JR
SHEETS 3-7
DRAWN BY:
RMJ
3=
--
Marine & Environmental Consulting
CREATED:
03-27-25
-
JOB NO.:
24030
14.
3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL 34104-3732
LOCATION MAP
SHEET NO.:
01 OF 10
11.1
1
1
1-
Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632
RYNO. 5875
SECTION-35
TOWNSHIP-49S RANGE-25E
M
4164
dW
Qt
'14A '• a \' ! �� �•-' ... 7• • �•�
a
• •• f �. 1 .� lap • '
0 joy
i
RIPARIAN
LINE
RIPARIAN
SETBACK
LINE
17' —�
15'
N
NEW BOAT
I LIFT
E-7
PILE COUNT
TYPE
SIZE
QUANTITY
WOOD PILE
10"
32
WOOD PILE
12"
8
PILES IN WATER IMPACTS = 19 SF (QTY:31)
NOTES:
• THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT
INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.
• ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW
• SURVEY COURTESY OF: "COURT GREGORY"
• SURVEY DATED: 04-26,24
• APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF): 89,
• EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 858
• WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX): 120'
• TIDAL DATUM:
•• MHW (NAVD)= +0.38'
• MLW (NAVD)=-11.70'
• • PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 821
• TOTAL OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 821
• TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM PROPERTY LINE: 32'
NEW FIXED STAIRS
DOCK DOWN
AA
06
28'
4' zo
NV
rn
16'
BB
12'
e..,
77��t
0 5 10 20
&AZZ 9N 9=EET
RIPARIAN
LINE
15' y
NEW BOAT%
LIFT
MHWL = +0.38'
NAVD88
uv uv uv uv 5' uv uv uv uv uv
07 SITE ADDRESS:
1817 GORDON RIVER L
EXISTING APPROXIMATE ACCESS LOCATION TO NAPLES, FL 34104
RIPRAP LINE UP WITH SCREEN DOOR 4
'ev
DESIGNED: JR . RMJ 08-13-25 c"JR `REVISED DOCK
Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 1817 GORDON RIVER L N DRAWN BY RMJ 2
RIV Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATED: 03-27-25 3.
JOB NO.: 24030 4.
IF 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 PROPOSED DOCK- DIMENSIONS SHEET NO.: 04OF10 5.
Email:tana@thanaples.cOm Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239)643-6632 RYNO. 5875 SECTION-35 TOWNSHIP-49S RANGE-25E
RIPARIAN
NOTES:
• THESE DRAWINGS ARE FOR PERMITTING PURPOSES ONLY AND ARE NOT
INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION USE.
• ALL WATER DEPTHS AND DREDGE ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO MLW
• SURVEY COURTESY OF: "COURT GREGORY"
• SURVEY DATED: 04-26.24
• • APPLICANT OWNED SHORELINE (APPX LF): 89,
• EXISTING OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 858
• WIDTH OF WATERWAY, MHW TO MHW (APPX): 120'
• TIDAL DATUM:
•• MHW (NAVD)= -0.38'
•• MLW (NAVD)= -1.70'
• PROPOSED OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 821
• TOTAL OVERWATER STRUCTURE (APPX SF): 821
• TOTAL PROTRUSION FROM PROPERTY LINE: 32'
NEW FIXED STAIRS
DOCK DOWN
rr��S
6 L
0 40 20
SCALE 9N>=f�7
RIPARIAN
LINE
RIF ARIANIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII7 1w
SETBACK x X
LINE v
x
x X
N
CJ
XN
c;1 N IN
W X
rn
Krn
NEW BOAT
LIFT
NEW BOAT x x
LIFT ® _ —
x
MHWL = +0.38'
— — — ——NAVD88
J oU ou ov ou wi rwr
SITE ADDRESS:
1817 GORDON RIVER LN
EXISTING APPROXIMATE ACCESS LOCATION TO NAPLES, FL 34104
RIPRAP LINE UP WITH SCREEN DOOR
CHK BY
CNANGE
DESIGNED: JR 1EV« RMJ 08-13-25 JR REVISED DOCK
Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 181 7 G O R D O N R I V E R L N DRAWN BY RMJ 2
Marine &Environmental Consulting CREATED: 03-27-25 3.
JOB NO.: 24030 4.
IF 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 PROPOSED DOCK- DEPTHS SHEET NO.: 05OF10 5.
Email:tana@thanaples.cOm Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239)643-6632 1 RYNO. 5875 SECTION-35 TOWNSHIP-49S RANGE-25E
A
0
M
q
0
Z
PROPOSED
DOCK
32'
27' FROM MHWL
12' BOATLIFT
NEW DECKED
OVER BOAT LIFT
PROPOSED
DOCK
MHW = +0.38' NAVD 88
MLW = -1.70' NAVD 88
0 3 g +o
sexI lz 9N "rEE7
PROPERTY LINE
EXISTING
RIPRAP
BRICK
WALL
EXISTING
UPLAND
PATIO
Turrell, Hall &Associates, Inc. DESIGNED JR 1E RMJ 08f13-25 IF cADDEDPWC
1817 GORDON RIVER LN CRAWNBV RMJ 2.
Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATED: 03-27-25 3.
JOB NO.: 24030 4.
3584ExchangeAve. Naples, FL34104-3732 CROSS SECTION AA SHEET NO.: 06OF10 15.1 1 1 1-
Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax:(239)643-6632 RVNO.5875 SECTION-35 TOWNSHIP-49S RANGE- 25E
PROPOSED
DOCK
MHW = +0.38' N88
T-
MLW = -1.70' NAVD 88-
- 30' FROM MHWL
12' BOATLIFT
Turrell, Hall & Associates, Inc. 1817 G O R D O N R I V E R L N
Marine & Environmental Consulting
3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 CROSS SECTION BB
Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 RV No.5875 ,RESEoIIIINIIIII III PERM-IRGPIRPoSES—IRoIII NCI R,EROEOIII IIISTRUC,IoRUSE.
JR
0 3 g +o
sexI lz 9N "rEE7
PROPOSED
DOCK
PROPOSED
STAIRS
EXISTING
UPLAND
PATIO
BRICK
WALL
EXISTING /\/\
RIPRAP
ADDED VESSEL
31EE1 ND.: 157OF 10 5.
SECTION-35 TOWNSHIP-49S RANGE- 25E
w
C
M
m
0
0
m
c
n
m
N
C
A
G
m
N
N
T
II
NO SEAGRASSES WERE
OBSERVED GROWING WITHIN 200
FT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
ft O
O
N
1
0 20 440 8so
SCPtCE 9N ?�FE7
TYPICAL DIVE TRANSECT
Z
J
Turrell, Hall &Associates, Inc. DESIGNED: JR
1817 GORDON RIVER LN DRAWN RMJ 2.
Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATED: 03-27-25 3.
JOB NO.: 24030 4.
IF 3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 SUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY SHEET 080F10 5.
Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 RV RO RR]5 SECTION- 35 TOWNSHIP- 49 S RANGE- 25 E
n
'o
IWO
C.)N N N
N
O �l CJ . A
Now
o y ego 3aa
SC?ttE 9N SEE?
30' —1 C— —
PROPOSED
FIXED DOCK PARCELS PROVIDED BY COLLIER .
32' COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER
•L
18' PROPERTY BOUNDARY
25'=
22' I
1 N
VIC "WOW401
25 A ; �•
26'
26' _� 4
27' '
NOTE:
THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE
AND ARE TAKEN FROM THE AERIAL IMAGE.
7 DESIGNED: JR 'rvz H
Turrell, Hall &Associates, Inc. 181 7 G O R D O N RIVER L N DRAWN D: RMJ 2
Marine & Environmental Consulting CREATED: 2403025 3.
JOB NO.: 24030 4.
3584 Exchange Ave. Naples, FL34104-3732 ADJACENT DOCK SHEET NO.: 09OF10 5.
Email: tuna@thanaples.com Phone: (239) 643-0166 Fax: (239) 643-6632 RYNO. 5875 SECTION-35 TOWNSHIP- 49S RANGE-25E
EXHIBIT "B"
ITS AND UTILITIES NOT
"ART OF THIS SURVEY.
4TION FURNISHED BY CLIENT.
SHOWN ARE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE (MOST RESTRICTIVE)
CURVE TABLE
3TH RADIUS I DELTA I CHORD DIR HOR
5.52 175.00 8°2125" S05°0354"W 1 25.50
LOT 7
379° 4
128.62'1
103.23'(M)
z
WENTS NOT SHOWN)
Z C-4
LOT 1YU.E.a
w00(0
kINS 0.23 ACRES OF SIDEWALK
EASEMENT
I —
MORE OR LESS EASEMENT "A°
10' U.E.
EASEMENT°B"
N88°37'25"W
100.00' (M)
1489°06'35-W
125.00'(P)
LOT 9
FD DH
IN WALK
(NO ID #)
H
z
w W
I
r.
I�
Z w
Q .- I
— 111 W
� V
LUUj
I
�P o'W ui
;tea
N_
�vv�o
,
0 W
pp 04
OV
G7
ZFD
Z^ j
OK
IN
j O C7
I(NO ID#)
I
of O -
w wm0
gal I CO m
N.
0
z FLU
oww
CO 0
NOTES:
13HE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED
ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF OUTRIGGER LANE
AS SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 20 PAGE 21
OF COLLIER COUNTY, BEING NORTH 00° 53' 25" EAST.
2.IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN
ARE NOT A PART OF THIS SURVEY.
3.SAID DESCRIBED LAND IS SUBJECT TO ALL SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, ZONING AND
RIGHTS -OF- WAY OF RECORD.
4.DATE OF FIELD SURVEY APRIL 26, 2024,
57HIS SURVEY MAP IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE
AND RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR
AND MAPPER. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO SURVEY MAPS
OR REPORTS BY OTHER THAN THE SIGNING PARTY OR
PARTIES IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT
OF THE SIGNING PARTY OR PARTIES.
6.SUBSURFACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WERE
NOT EXAMINED AS A PART OF THIS SURVEY. NO STATEMENT
IS MADE CONCERNING THE EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND
OR OVERHEAD CONTAINERS, UTILITIES OR FACILITIES THAT
MAY AFFECT THE USE OR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY
TELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED ON N.A.V.D. DATUM OF 1988.
DESCRIPTION OF BENCHMARK IS AS FOLLOWS:SPKND 6004 IN
CONCRETE WALK AT RES #'S 1791/1817 ELEV. = 5.06'
8.SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SITUATED IN FLOOD ZONE " "AS
INDICATED ON FEMA FLOOD ZONE MAP PANEL NO
DATED: BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED AT N/A
9.NO TITLE OPINION OR ABSTRACT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
HAS BEEN PROVIDED. ALL INFORMATION HAS BEEN SUPPLIED
BY THE CLIENT. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THERE ARE DEEDS,
EASEMENTS, OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS (RECORDED OR
UNRECORDED) WHICH MAY AFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
NO SEARCH OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS HAS BEEN MADE BY THE
SURVEYOR.
10. THE LAND DESCRIPTION SHOWN HEREON IS BASED UPON THE
INSTRUMENT OF RECORD.
11. THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY IS TO SHOW THE EXISTING
SHORELINE CONDITIONS AND DEPTHS WITH RESPECT TO THE
PLATTED PROPERTY LINES.
REVISIONS
LEGEND
0 = FOUND (") IRON ROD ( SURVEYOR ID #) (FIR)
t� = SET 1/2" IRON ROD (PSM #6004)(SIRC)
= SET 4" X 4" CONCRETE MONUMENT (PSM #6004)(SCM)
= FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT (SURVEYOR ID #)(FCM)
11$�= BENCHMARK (FOUND OR SET) RAN= RIGHT OF WAY(R.O.W.)
0 = FOUND NAIL OR PK NAIL AND DISC ( SURVEYOR ID #) (FPKN)
Q = SET PK NAIL AND DISC (PSM #6004) (SPKN&D) FD. = FOUND
FN&TT = FOUND NAIL AND TIN TAB BM = BENCHMARK
MAP OF
SPECIFIC PURPOSE SURVEY
LOT 8
OF
NATURE POINTE
AS RECORDED IN
PLAT BOOK 20 PAGE(S) 20-22
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
1817 GORDON RIVER LANE
CERTIFY TO:
TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES
CERTIFICATION:
I CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY WAS MADE UNDER MY
DIRECTION AND THAT IT MEETS THE STANDARDS OF
PRACTICE SET FORTH BY THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYORS AND MAPPERS IN CHAPTER 5J-17,
FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, PURSUANT TO SECTION
472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES.
NOT A CERTIFICATION OF TITLE, ZONING, EASEMENTS OR
FREEDOM OF ENCUMBRANCES.
SIGNED -
Digitally signed by
Court Gregory
DIN: cn=Court Gregory,
o=Court Gregory
Surveying Inc, ou,
email=cgs6004@comca
st.net, c=US
Date: 2024.05.06
12:16:51-04'00'
COURT H. GREGORY PSM #6004
DATE 05/05/2024
DATE OF FIELD SURVEY 04-26-2024
LB #7112
NOTE: IMPROVEMENTS AND UTILITIES NOT
SHOWN ARE NOT A PART OF THIS SURVEY.
BOUNDARY INFORMATION FURNISHED BY CLI
DOCK DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE FROM THE P
CURVE TABLE
CURVE
LENGTH
RADIUS
DELTA
C 1
25.52
175.00
8021'25"
W I
N �
� M
o ~
0 0000
z
LOT 7
S 7g 036,40,,E
28.62, (1-
S7g37,46„ E
103.23, (M)
(IMPROVEMENTS NOT SHOWN)
LOT 8 10' U.
(CONTAINS 0.23 ACRES OF SIDEV
EASED
LAND MORE OR LESS) EASEME
10' U.E.
EASEMENT "B"
NOTES:
17HE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED
ON THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF OUTRIGGER LANE
AS SHOWN IN PLAT BOOK 20 PAGE 21
OF COLLIER COUNTY, BEING NORTH 00° 53' 25" EAST.
2.IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE SHOWN
ARE NOT PART OF THIS SURVEY.
3.SAID DESCRIBED LAND IS SUBJECT TO ALL SUBDIVISION
REGULATIONS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, ZONING AND
RIGHTS -OF- WAY OF RECORD.
4.DATE OF FIELD SURVEY APRIL 26, 2024.
57HIS SURVEY MAP IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURE
AND RAISED SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR
AND MAPPER. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO SURVEY MAPS
OR REPORTS BY OTHER THAN THE SIGNING PARTY OR
PARTIES IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT WRITTEN CONSENT
OF THE SIGNING PARTY OR PARTIES.
6.SUBSURFACE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WERE
NOT EXAMINED AS A PART OF THIS SURVEY. NO STATEMENT
IS MADE CONCERNING THE EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND
OR OVERHEAD CONTAINERS, UTILITIES OR FACILITIES THAT
MAY AFFECT THE USE OR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY
7.ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE BASED ON N.A.V.D. DATUM OF 1988.
DESCRIPTION OF BENCHMARK IS AS FOLLOWS:SPKND 6004 IN
CONCRETE WALK AT RES #'S 1791/1817 ELEV. = 5.06'
8.SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SITUATED IN FLOOD ZONE " " AS
INDICATED ON FEMA FLOOD ZONE MAP PANEL NO
DATED: BASE ELEVATION DETERMINED AT N/A
9.NO TITLE OPINION OR ABSTRACT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
HAS BEEN PROVIDED. ALL INFORMATION HAS BEEN SUPPLIED
BY THE CLIENT. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THERE ARE DEEDS,
EASEMENTS, OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS (RECORDED OR
UNRECORDED) WHICH MAY AFFECT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
NO SEARCH OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS HAS BEEN MADE BY THE
SURVEYOR,
10. THE LAND DESCRIPTION SHOWN HEREON IS BASED UPON THE
INSTRUMENT OF RECORD.
11. THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY IS TO SHOW THE EXISTING
SHORELINE CONDITIONS AND DEPTHS WITH RESPECT TO THE
PLATTED PROPERTY LINES.
REVISIONS
LEGEND
0 = FOUND (") IRON ROD ( SURVEYOR ID #) (FIR)
= SET 1/2" IRON ROD (PSM #6004)(SIRC)
= SET 4" X 4" CONCRETE MONUMENT (PSM #6004)(SCM)
= FOUND CONCRETE MONUMENT (SURVEYOR ID #)(FCM)
-$�= BENCHMARK (FOUND OR SET) R/W = RIGHT OF WAY(R.O.W.)
0 = FOUND NAIL OR PK NAIL AND DISC ( SURVEYOR ID #) (FPKN)
Q = SET PK NAIL AND DISC (PSM #6004) (SPKN&D) FD. = FOUND
FN&TT = FOUND NAIL AND TIN TAB BM = BENCHMARK
MAP OF
SPECIFIC PURPOSE SURVEY
LOT 8
OF
NATURE POINTE
AS RECORDED IN
PLAT BOOK 20 PAGE(S) 20-22
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
1817 GORDON RIVER LANE
CERTIFY TO:
TURRELL, HALL & ASSOCIATES
CERTIFICATION:
I CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY WAS MADE UNDER MY
DIRECTION AND THAT IT MEETS THE STANDARDS OF
PRACTICE SET FORTH BY THE BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYORS AND MAPPERS IN CHAPTER 5J-17,
FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, PURSUANT TO SECTION
472.027, FLORIDA STATUTES.
NOT A CERTIFICATION OF TITLE, ZONING, EASEMENTS OR
FREEDOM OF ENCUMBRANCES.
Digitally signed by
Court Gregory
DN:cn=Court
Gregory, o=Court
Gregory Surveying
Inc, ou
email=cgs6004@co
mcast.net, c=US
Date: 2024.05.06
SIGNED__ 12717716-04'00'
COURT H. GREGORY PSM #6004
DATE 05/05/2024
DATE OF FIELD SURVEY 04-26-2024