Book 134 . Page Agenda Item 12-a
Meeting of 6/2/10
RESOLUTION 10-12690
A RESOLUTION DETERMINING VARIANCE PETITION 10-VO4 FROM SECTION 56-91(b)(3) OF
THE CODE OF ORDINANCES,. CITY OF NAPLES, TO ALLOW A GUEST UNIT ON A LOT LESS
THAN 30,000 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE WHICH DOES NOT CONTAIN 175 PERCENT OF THE
REQUIRED MINIMUM LOT SIZE FOR THE R1-15 ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH IT IS
LOCATED AND EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE SIZE FOR A GUEST UNIT OF 450 SQUARE
FEET BY APPROXIMATELY 350 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT 1500 MUREX DRIVE, MORE
FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Section 56-91(b) (3)a. of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Naples allows guest units in the R1-15 zoning district by
conditional use approval, on properties which contain 175 percent
of the required minimum lot size for this particular zoning
district; and
WHEREAS, Section 56-91(b) (3)h. of the Code of Ordinances of the City of
Naples allows guest units in the R1-15 zoning district by
conditional use approval limited to 450 square feet; and
WHEREAS,
Frank and Martha Ibarra are the owners of the property and have
filed this petition; and
WHEREAS, the petitioners have requested a variance from Section 5691(b)(3) to allow a guest unit on a lot less than 30,000 square
feet in size which does not contain 175 percent of the required
minimum lot size for the R1-15 zoning district in which it is
located and exceeds the maximum allowable size for a guest unit
of 450 square feet by approximately 350 square feet, located at
1500 Murex Drive; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Advisory Board, following an advertised public
hearing, considered public input, the recommendation of the
staff, and the standards and guidelines of Subsection 46-37,
"Variances," and recommended by a vote of 5 to 1 that Variance
Petition 10-VO4 be granted, finding that the criteria have been
met; and
WHEREAS,
after considering the recommendation of the Planning Advisory
Board and after providing the petitioner, staff and the public an
opportunity to present testimony and evidence, the City Council
finds that the criteria set forth in Section 46-37 of the Code of
Ordinances for variances, namely:
"(c) Variance criteria.
(1) General.
a. If, upon consideration of the variance criteria
set out in this subsection and (c)(2) below, it
is determined that the case for approving a
variance clearly outweighs the case for denial,
the variance may be approved, providing that:
The
1.
variance
not
does
permit
the
establishment or enlargement of any use
or structure devoted to a use which is
Book 134 . Page91)"
Resolution 10-12690
Page
2
not permitted in the district in which
the variance is requested.
2. The variance will be consistent with the
comprehensive plan.
(2) Specific.
a. Prior to approving, approving with conditions, or
denying a variance, city council shall consider
and determine, based upon substantial competent
evidence, the following criteria:
Whether the plight of the applicant is
1.
due to unique circumstances not created
by the applicant, an agent of the
applicant or a predecessor in title of
the applicant.
Whether special conditions or
2.
circumstances exist which are peculiar to
the land or structure involved, and which
are not applicable to other lands or
structures in the same neighborhood or
district.
Whether the failure to grant the variance
3.
would result in unnecessary and undue
hardship to the property.
4.
Whether the failure to grant the variance
would deprive the owner of the reasonable
use of the property.
Whether the variance will promote, or
5.
will not be inimical to, the health,
safety and welfare of the community.
6.
Whether the variance will be otherwise
consistent with and in harmony with the
general intent and purpose of the land
development code.
Whether the variance is the most
7.
practical or logical solution to the need
for relaxation of the literal
requirements of the land development
code.
8.
Whether the variance will be injurious to
the surrounding neighborhood or adjacent
properties.",
have not been met and that the petition should be denied;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That Variance Petition 10-VO4 is hereby denied from Section 5691(b)(3) to allow a guest unit on a lot less than 30,000 square
feet in size which does not contain 175 percent of the required
minimum lot size for the R1-15 zoning district in which it is
located and exceeds the maximum allowable size for a guest unit
of 450 square feet by approximately 350 square feet, located at
1500 Murex Drive, more fully described as,
Lot 4 of Block D of that certain subdivision known as
Coquina Sands, Unit 2, As recorded in Plat Book 3,
Book 134-
Resolution 10-12690
Page
Pagd
3
Page 54 of the Public Records of Collier County,
Florida.
Section 2. That the denial of this variance pursuant to Section 46-37 of
the Land Development Code is based on the size of the unit and
lot not meeting requirements.
Section 3.
This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
PASSED IN OPEN AND REGULAR SESSION OF THE CITY---a7dUN9IL
FLORIDA, THIS 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2010.
6F- THE
CITY OF NAPLES,
Btal Barnett-r- Mayor
Attest:
tara A. Norman, City Clerk
m:\REF\couNcIL\REs\2olo\lo-12690
Date filed with City Clerk: Approved as to orm and legality:
Robert D. Pritt, City Attorney