Item Q06 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: September 17, 2013 Division: Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes No X Staff Contact Person: Christine Hurley, 289-2517
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing to adopt an ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners amending the future land use map of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan from
Residential Medium (RM) to Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) for property located at 98175 Overseas Highway,
Mile Marker 98, Key Largo, Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Rock Harbor Estates, PB3/P187 of the Public Records of
Monroe County, Florida,having real estate number 00519750-000000 (Legislative Proceeding).
ITEM BACKGOUND: The applicant presently owns a veterinary clinic/animal hospital business in an existing
two story masonry 3,695 square foot building located at 98175 Overseas Highway, Key Largo. The subject
property currently has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Residential Medium (RM) and a Land Use
District designation of Improved Subdivision (IS). The current regulations pertaining to permitted uses do not
allow a commercial retail use. The applicant is requesting to amend the FLUM designation for the existing
commercial use from Residential Medium (RM) to Mixed Use/Commercial (MC). The proposed FLUM
amendment, together with the associated LUD amendment(IS to SC)will eliminate the nonconformity of the use.
On July 2, 2013, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO)issued its Objections, Recommendations,
and Comments (ORC) report. The ORC report stated that "the amendment is inconsistent with Policy 101.4.20 of
the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan which states, in part "In order to implement the Florida Keys Carrying
Capacity Study,Monroe County shall promote the reduction of overall county density and intensity."
In response to the ORC Report, the County coordinated with DEO to clarify that the amendment application was
submitted to Monroe County on July 3, 2012. Policy 101.4.20 was adopted by the BOCC on September 21, 2012
(Ordinance 028-2012) and found in compliance by DEO on November 20, 2012. Policy 101.4.20 states it applies
only to applications received after the effective date of the ordinance; therefore the discouragement policy does not
apply to this amendment. After discussions with DEO, an email was received on July 10, 2013 which stated that if,
in the adoption phase, data is included that indicates the application was received prior to the adoption of Policy
101.4.20,then DEO will not render a non-compliance finding.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT COMMISSION ACTION: Monroe County Resolution No. 127-2012, approved on
April 18, 2012, allows an applicant to apply for a LUD and/or FLUM designations that would eliminate the
nonconforming use created with the adoption of the existing designations and not create an adverse effect on the
community,provided the existing use existed lawfully in 1992 and 1997.
On September 21, 2012, the BOCC adopted Ordinance 028-2012 amending the Comprehensive Plan to include
Policy 101.4.20 discouraging private applications for FLUM changes which increase allowable density/intensity.
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution No.133-2013 on April 18, 2013to transmit
the proposed FLUM amendment to the State Land Planning Agency.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval
TOTAL COST: N/A INDIRECT COST: N/A BUDGETED: Yes No N/A
COST TO COUNTY: N/A SOURCE OF FUNDS: N/A
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No N/A AMOUNT PER MONTH: N/A Year
APPROVED BY: County Attorney x OMB/Purchasing Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM#
1 u
3
4
F
5
6
7 ORDINANCE - 2013
8
9
10
11 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
12 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF
13 THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM
14 RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RNI) TO MIXED USE/COMMERCIAL (MC)
15 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 98175 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, MILE
16 MARKER 98, KEY LARGO, LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 4, ROCK HARBOR
17 ESTATES, PB3/P187 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MONROE
18 COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING REAL ESTATE NUMBER 00519750-
19 000000; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE
20 REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE
21 TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY;
22 PROVIDING FOR THE FILING WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE
23 AND FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
25
26 WHEREAS, an application was filed by Renaissance Farms of the Keys LLC on July 31, 2012,
27 to amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation from Residential Medium (RM) to Mixed
28 Use/Commercial (MC) for property legally described as Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Rock Harbor Estates,
29 PB3/P187 of the Public Records of Monroe County, Florida, having real estate number 00519750-
30 000000; and
31
32 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee considered the proposed
33 amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 30''day of October, 2012; and
34
35 WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 28t' day of November, 2012, the
36 Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of considering the
37 transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency, for review and comment, a proposed amendment to
38 the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and
39
40 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Planning Commission made the following findings:
41
42 1. The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the community character of the
43 surrounding area;
44
45 2. The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the Comprehensive Plan
46 adopted Level of Service (LOS);
47
48 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Goals, Objectives and Policies
49 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan;
50
51 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys Plan;
52
53 5. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida
54 Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statute (F.S.); and
55
56 6. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (F.S.).
57
58 WHEREAS, at a special meeting held on the 18th day of April, 2013, the Monroe County
59 Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing and approved Resolution No. 133-2013 to
60 transmit the proposed amendment to the State Land Planning Agency; and
61
62 WHEREAS, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment to amend the Future Land Use
63 Map was reviewed by the State Land Planning Agency which issued an Objections,
64 Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on July 2, 2013. The ORC report stated that"the
65 amendment is inconsistent with Policy 101.4.20 of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan which
66 states, in part "In order to implement the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study, Monroe County
67 shall promote the reduction of overall county density and intensity."; and
68
69 WHEREAS, this private amendment application was submitted to Monroe County on July 3,
70 2012. Policy 101.4.20 was adopted by the BOCC on September 21,2012 (Ordinance 028-2012) and
71 found in compliance by DEO on November 20, 2012 (the effective date of the amendment,therefore
72 the discouragement policy does not apply to this amendment; and
73
74 WHEREAS, the State Land Planning Agency stated that if, in the adoption phase, data is
75 included that indicates the application was received prior to the adoption of Policy 101.4.20, then
76 FDEO will not render a non-compliance finding.
77
78 WHEREAS, the County has provided the data with the staff report that indicates the
79 application was received prior to the effective date of Policy 101.4.20.
80
81
82 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
83 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA:
84
85 Section 1. The Future Land Use Map of the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan is
86 amended as follows:
87
88 The property legally described as Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Rock Harbor Estates,
89 PB3/P187 of the Public Records of Monroe County, Florida, having real estate
90 number 00519750-000000 is changed from Residential Medium (RM) to Mixed
2
91 Use/Commercial (MC) as shown on Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated
92 herein.
93
94 Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or
95 provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall
96 not be affected by such validity.
97
98 Section 3. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
99 conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
100
101 Section 4. Transmittal. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Director of Planning to
102 the State Land Planning Agency pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida
103 Statutes.
104
105 Section 5. Filing and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the
106 Secretary of the State of Florida but shall not become effective until a notice is
107 issued by the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission
108 finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and
109 challenge periods have expired.
110
111 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida,
112 at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of September, 2013.
113
114 Mayor George Neugent
115 Mayor Pro Tem Heather Carruthers
116 Commissioner David Rice
117 Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
118 Commissioner Danny Kolhage
119
120 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA
121 BY
122 Mayor George Neugent
123
124 (SEAL)
125 ATTEST: Amy Heavilin, Clerk
126
127 Deputy Clerk
128
129 ®PPPova TY TO FO ATTO Map'' M
130 ...
Date: _ -
3
2
O�
O
�L
OJ O
9ll
0
s�
to
FsT9ll �QS PJ�
The Monroe County Future Land Use Map is amended
as indicated above.
Future Land Use Map Amendment of one parcel from Residential
Medium (RM)to Mixed Use/Commercial (MC):
RE Number: 00519750-000000
.uiN VA.W
2 � � �111119JJJlll�!���
3 9
4
5 MEMORANDUM
6 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
7 We strive to be caring,professional and fair
8
9 To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
10
11 Through: Christine Hurley, Director, Growth Management Division
12 Mayte Santamaria, Assistant Director, Planning and Environmental Resources
13
14 From: Mitchell N. Harvey, AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager
15
16 Date: August 26, 2013
17
18 Subject: A REQUEST BY RENAISSANCE FARMS OF THE FLORIDA KEYS LLC TO
19 AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE MONROE COUNTY
20 YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM
21 (RM) TO MIXED USE/ COMMERCIAL (MC) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED
22 AT 98175 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, MILE MARKER 98, KEY LARGO
23
24 Meeting: September 17, 2013
25
26 L REQUEST
27
28 On July 31, 2012, Renaissance Farms of Florida Keys LLC submitted and application requesting to
29 amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
30 from Residential Medium (RM) to Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) for property located at 98175
31 Overseas Highway, Key Largo, having real estate number 00519750-000000.
32
W! 4 y
t
I
ti
r �
33 .
File #2012-111 Page 1 of 13
34 II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
35
36 The property was within a RU-1 district (Single-Family Residential) and BU-2 district (Medium
37 Business) prior to 1986, when the property was re-designated IS (Improved Subdivision). It is
38 unknown as to precisely when the designation was amended from RU-1 to BU-2; however,
39 according to information within the building permit application, the property was BU-2 when the
40 building was converted to a dance studio in 1977. After 1986, all subsequent permits indicate that
41 the building was being utilized for commercial retail use. Since the zoning district changed from
42 BU-2 to IS, the existing commercial use became a nonconforming use within an IS district.
43
44 The applicant presently owns a veterinary clinic/animal hospital business in an existing two story
45 masonry 3,695 square foot building located at 98175 Overseas Highway, Key Largo. The subject
46 property currently has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Residential Medium (RM)
47 and a Land Use District designation of Improved Subdivision (IS). The current regulations
48 pertaining to permitted uses do not allow a commercial retail use. The applicant is requesting to
49 amend the FLUM designation for the existing commercial use from Residential Medium (RM) to
50 Mixed Use/Commercial (MC). The proposed FLUM amendment, together with the associated LUD
51 amendment(IS to SC)will eliminate the nonconformity to the use.
52
53 Monroe County Resolution No. 127-2012, approved on April 18, 2012, allows an applicant to apply
54 for a LUD and/or FLUM designations that would eliminate the nonconforming use created with the
55 adoption of the existing designations and not create an adverse effect on the community. The
56 property owner must provide satisfactory evidence that the existing use on the site also existed
57 lawfully in 1992 and was deemed nonconforming by final adoption of the LUD map and/or the
58 existing use on the site existing lawfully in 1997 and was deemed nonconforming by final adoption
59 of the FLUM to be exempt from the FLUM amendment application fee.
60
61 On June 1, 2012, Monroe County Planning staff prepared an addendum to a Letter of Understanding,
62 issued on April 27, 2010, which determined that the existing use existed lawfully in 1992 and was
63 deemed nonconforming by the final adoption of the LUD map. Staff has also determined that the
64 existing use existed lawfully in 1997 and was deemed nonconforming by the final adoption of the
65 FLUM. Staff concluded that he proposed FLUM category of MC and proposed LUD designations of
66 MU or SC would eliminate the nonconformity of use.
67
68 Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.20.1 states: Monroe County shall develop a series of Community
69 Master Plans. These "CommuniKeys Plans" implement a vision that was developed by the local
70 community. In 2006, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners adopted Policy
71 101.20.2(5) which incorporated the Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys Plan into the Monroe County
72 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Action Item 1.3.2 states: Revise the FL UM and Land Use District Maps
73 to resolve non-conformities in the planning area where appropriate. The proposed FLUM and
74 associated LUD amendment implements this Action Item of the adopted Key Largo CommuniKeys
75 Plan.
76
77 On October 30, 2012, the Monroe County Development Review Committee considered the proposed
78 amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting.
79
80
File #2012-111 Page 2 of 13
81 On November 28, 2012, the Monroe County Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval
82 of the proposed amendment to the Board of County Commissioners.
83
84 On April 18, 2013, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution
85 No.133-2013 to transmit the proposed FLUM amendment to the State Land Planning Agency.
86
87 ORC Report and Response
88
89 On July 2, 2013, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity submitted its Objections,
90 Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) report. The ORC report stated that "the amendment is
91 inconsistent with Policy 101.4.20 of the Monroe County comprehensive Plan which states, in part "In
92 order to implement the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study, Monroe County shall promote the
93 reduction of overall county density and intensity."
94
95 In response to the ORC Report, the County coordinated with DEO to clarify that the amendment
96 application was submitted to Monroe County on July 3, 2012. Policy 101.4.20 was adopted by the
97 BOCC on September 21, 2012 (Ordinance 028-2012) and found in compliance by DEO on November
98 20, 2012. Policy 101.4.20 states it applies only to applications received after the effective date of the
99 ordinance; therefore the discouragement policy does not apply to this amendment. After discussions
100 with DEO, an email was received on July 10, 2013 which stated that if, in the adoption phase, data is
101 included that indicates the application was received prior to the adoption of Policy 101.4.20,then DEO
102 will not render a non-compliance finding.
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
File #2012-111 Page 3 of 13
129 III.AMENDMENT REVIEW
130
131 DENSITY AND INTENSITY ANALYSIS (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 101.4.21)
132
Existing FLUM Type Adopted Standards Development potential
based upon density
Residential 1 du/lot 2 units
Allocated Density/Acre
RM Residential N/A N/A
FLUM Max Net/Buildable Acre
Transient 0 rooms/spaces 0 rooms/spaces
Total site: 0.31 acres Allocated Density/Acre
0.24 net acres
2 lots Transient N/A N/A
Max Net/Buildable Acre
Nonresidential 0 FAR 0 sf
Maximum Intensity
Proposed FLUM Type Adopted Standards Development potential
based upon density
Residential 1-6 du/ac 1 unit
Allocated Density/Acre
Mixed Use/ Residential
Commercial Max Net/Buildable Acre 2-18 du/ac 0-4 units
FLUM Transient
Total
Allocated Density/Acre
0. 4 5-15 rooms/spaces 1-4 rooms/spaces
3�:'l. aracresTransient2-6
2 lots n acres Max Net 10-25 rooms/spaces Acre msspaces room/spaces
Non Residential 0.10-0.45 FAR 1,350—6,076 sf
Maximum Intensity
133
134 Net Change: Residential (Allocated): -1 unit
135 Residential (Max Net): +4 units
136 Transient(Allocated): +4 rooms/spaces*
137 Transient(Max Net): +6 rooms/spaces*
138 Non Residential: +6,076 square feet
139
140
141 The above table provides an approximation of the development potential for residential,transient
142 and commercial development. Section 130-156 of the Land Development Code states: "The
143 density and intensity provisions set out in this section are intended to be applied cumulatively so
144 that no development shall exceed the total density limits of this article. For example, if a
145 development includes both residential and commercial development, the total gross amount of
File #2012-111 Page 4 of 13
146 development shall not exceed the cumulative permitted intensity of the parcel proposed for
147 development."
148
149 There are no existing residential uses within the subject property. Any new residential use must
150 compete in the Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) permit process. An existing affordable
151 residential use may also be transferred to the subject property from a sender site that is located
152 within the Upper Keys subarea.
153
154 *Monroe County does not award ROGO allocations for the development of NEW transient
155 residential units (e.g., hotel & motel rooms), pursuant to Policy 101.2.6. For the development of
156 transient units in unincorporated Monroe County, existing transient units must be transferred
157 from the same ROGO subarea to a parcel designated as Tier III or Tier III-A which does not
158 propose the clearing of any portion of an upland native habitat patch of one acre or greater in
159 area.
160
161 COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA
162
163 A. Existing Vegetation/Habitat: Developed land
164 B. Existing Tier Designation: III
165 C. Number of Listed Endangered or Threatened Species: None
166 D. Existing Use: Commercial
167 E. Community Character of Immediate Vicinity: Adjacent land uses consist of vacant land
168 to the north, residential uses to the south and east, with commercial uses and U.S. 1 right-
169 of-way to the west.
170
171 The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the community character of the
172 surrounding area.
173
174
175 CONCURRENCY ANALYSIS (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY 101.1.1)
176
177 Traffic Circulation(Comprehensive Plan Policy 301.1.1)
178
179 The subject property is located on the northbound side of U.S. 1 at MM 98 in Key Largo. The
180 2012 URS Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study for Monroe County indicated a Level of
181 Service (LOS) of A within the road segment of MM 91.5 to MM 99.5. U.S 1 is required to
182 maintain an LOS of"C" in order to support development.
183
184 The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact Traffic LOS.
185
186 Potable Water(Comprehensive Plan Policy 701.1.1)
187
188 In March 2008, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) approved the FKAA's
189 modification of WUP 13-00005-5-W for a 20-year allocation from the Biscayne and Floridian
190 Aquifers. The WUP provides an annual allocation of 8,751 Million Gallons (MG) or 23.98
191 MGD and a maximum monthly allocation of 809 MG with a limited annual withdrawal from the
File #2012-111 Page 5 of 13
192 Biscayne Aquifer of 6,492 MG or 17.79 MGD and an average dry season (December 1"-April
193 30'`) of 17.0 MGD.
194
195 The Residential LOS is 66.5 gallons/capita/day. The Non-Residential LOS is 0.35 gallons
196 /sq.ft./day. The overall level of service for potable water is 132 gallons per capita/per/day.
197
198 Maximum Residential: 4 DU X 2.24 (people per household) = 8; 8 X 66.5 gallons per capita per
199 day= 532 gallons per day
200
201 Maximum Non-Residential: 0.35 X 6,076 sq.ft.=2,126.6 gallons per day
202
203 TOTAL: 532 +2,126.6=2,658.6 gallons/day
204
205 The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the potable water LOS.
206
207 Solid Waste (Comprehensive Plan Policy 801.1.1)
208
209 Comprehensive Plan Policy 801.1.1 establishes the level of service for solid waste as 5.44 pounds
210 per capita per day or 12.2 pounds per day per equivalent residential unit (ERU) and establishes a
211 haul out capacity of 95,000 tons per year or 42,668 ERUs. The Comprehensive plan requires
212 sufficient capacity be available at a solid waste disposal site to accommodate all existing and
213 approved development for a period of three years from the projected date of completion of the
214 proposed development of use. Monroe County has a solid waste haul out contract with Waste
215 Management LLC, which authorizes the use of in-state facilities through September 20, 2016,
216 thereby providing the County with approximately three years of guaranteed capacity.
217
218 Maximum Residential = 4 DUs X 2.24 (people per household) = 8; 8 X 5.44 pounds per capita
219 per day=43 pounds per day
220
221 The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the solid waste LOS.
222
223 Sani1ga Sewer(Comprehensive Plan Policy 901.1.1
224
225 The subject property is presently connected to the Key Largo Wastewater Treatment District
226 central sewer system. The level of service (LOS) for residential and nonresidential flow is 145
227 gallons per day per equivalent dwelling units (Exhibit 3-8 Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan
228 2000).
229
230 Maximum Residential=4 X 145 =580 gallons per day
231
232 The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the wastewater LOS.
233
234 Drainage (Comprehensive Plan Policy 1001.1.1)
235
236 All projects shall be designed so that the discharges will meet Florida State Water Quality Standards as set
237 forth in Chapters 17-25 and 17-302,EA.C,incorporated herein by reference. In addition,all projects shall
238 include an additional 501/o of the water quality treatment specified below, which shall be calculated by
File #2012-111 Page 6 of 13
239 multiplying the volumes obtained in Section(a)by a factor of 1.5 ,Retention/Detention Criteria(SFWMD
240 Water Quality Criteria 3.2.2.2):
241
242 a) Retention and/or detention in the overall system, including swales, lakes, canals,
243 greenways, etc., shall be provided for one of the three following criteria or
244 equivalent combinations thereof:
245
246 (1) Wet detention volume shall be provided for the first inch of runoff from the
247 developed project,or the total runoff of 2.5 inches times the percentage of
248 imperviousness,whichever is greater.
249
250 (2) Dry detention volume shall be provided equal to 75 percent of the above
251 amount computed for wet detention.
252
253 (3) Retention volume shall be provided equal to 50 percent of the above
254 amounts computed for wet detention.
255
256 b) Infill residential development within improved residential areas or subdivisions
257 existing prior to the adoption of this comprehensive plan must ensure that its post-
25 8 development stormwater run-off will not contribute pollutants which will cause the
259 runoff from the entire improved area or subdivision to degrade receiving water
260 bodies and their water quality as stated above.
261
262 c) New Development and Redevelopment projects which are exempt from the South
263 Florida Water Management District permitting process shall also meet the
264 requirements of Chapter 40-4 and 40E-40,F.A.C.
265
266 The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the Drainage LOS.
267
268 Recreation and Open Space (Comprehensive Plan Policy 1201.1.11
269
270 The County has adopted an overall level of service, pursuant to Comprehensive Plan Policy
271 1201.1.1, for resourced-based and activity-based recreation and open space of 0.82 acres of per
272 1,000 persons (functional population). If development occurs at 4 residential dwelling units and
273 2.24 per capita, there would be an additional 8 people located on this property. The increase
274 would require 0.003 acres of recreation.
275
276 The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact Parks and Recreation/Open
277 Space LOS.
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
File #2012-111 Page 7 of 13
287 IV. CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN,
288 THE KEY LARGO COMMUNIKEYS PLAN,PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING DEVELOPMENT;
289 AND CHAPTER 163,FLORIDA STATUTES
290
291 A. The proposed amendment is generally consistent with the following Goals, Objectives and
292 Policies of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, it furthers:
293
294 Goal 101: Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life, ensure the
295 safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources.
296
297 Policy 101.112: Monroe County shall adopt level of service (LOS) standards for the following public
298 facility types required by Chapter 9J-5, EA.C: roads, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage,potable waxer,
299 parks and recreation, and paratransit. The LOS standards are established in the following sections of the
300 Comprehensive Plan:
301
302 1. The LOS for roads is established in Traffic and Circulation Policy 301.1.1;
303
304 2. The LOS for potable water is established in Potable Water Policy 701.1.1;
305
306 3. The LOS for solid waste is established in Solid Waste Policy 801.1.1;
307
308 4. The LOS for sanitary sewer is established in Sanitary Sewer Policy 901.1.1;
309
310 5. The LOS for drainage is established in Drainage Policy 1001.1.1;and
311
312 6. The LOS for parks and recreation is established in Recreation and Open Space Policy
313 1201.1.1
314
315 Objective 101.4: Monroe County shall regulate future development and redevelopment to
316 maintain the character of the community and protect the natural resources by providing for the
317 compatible distribution of land uses consistent with the designations shown on the Future Land
318 Use Map.
319
320 Policy 101.4.5:The principal purpose of the Mixed Use/Commercial land use category is to provide for the
321 establishment of commercial zoning districts where various types of commercial retail and office may be
322 permitted at intensities which are consistent with the community character and the natural environment.
323
324 Objective 101.8: Monroe County shall eliminate or reduce the frequency of uses which are inconsistent
325 with the applicable provisions of the land development regulations and the Future Land Use Map, and
326 structures which are inconsistent with applicable codes and land development regulations.
327
328 Objective 101.11: Monroe County shall implement measures to direct future growth away from
329 environmentally sensitive land and towards established development areas served by existing public
330 facilities.
331
332 Objective 101.20: Monroe County shall address local community needs while balancing the needs of all
333 Monroe County communities. These efforts shall focus on the human crafted environment and shall be
334 undertaken through the Livable CommuniKeys Planning Program.
File #2012-111 Page 8 of 13
335
336 Policy 101.20.2:The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as
337 a part of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community
338 Master Plans have been completed in accordance with the principles outlined in this section and adopted by
339 the Board of County Commissioners:
340
341 5. The Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan is incorporated by reference into the 2010
342 Comprehensive Plan. The term Strategies in the Master Plan is equivalent to the term Objectives in the
343 Comprehensive Plan and the term Action Item is equivalent to the term Policy, the meanings and
344 requirements for implementation are synonymous.
345
346 B. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Key Largo Livable
347 CommuniKeys Plan Action Item:
348
349 Action Item 1.3.2: Revise the FLUM and Land Use District Maps to resolve nonconformities in
350 the planning area where appropriate.
351
352 C. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida
353 Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes.
354
355 For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that plan
356 with the principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles,the principles
357 shall be construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied in isolation
358 from the other provisions.
359
360 (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that
361 local government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical
362 state concern designation.
363 (b) Protecting shoreline and marine resources, including mangroves, coral reef formations,
364 seagrass beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat.
365 (c) Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native
366 tropical vegetation (for example, hardwood hammocks and pinelands), dune ridges and
367 beaches, wildlife, and their habitat.
368 (d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound
369 economic development.
370 (e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida
371 Keys.
372 (f) Enhancing natural scenic resources, promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural
373 environment, and ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character
374 of the Florida Keys.
375 (g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys.
376 (h) Protecting the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and
377 proposed major public investments, including:
378
379 1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities;
380 2. Sewage collection,treatment, and disposal facilities;
381 3. Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities;
382 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities;
File #2012-111 Page 9 of 13
383 5. Transportation facilities;
384 6. Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries;
385 7. State parks, recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned
386 properties;
387 8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and
388 9. Other utilities, as appropriate.
389
390 (i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation,
391 maintenance, and replacement of stormwater management facilities; central sewage
392 collection; treatment and disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and
393 maintenance of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems.
394 0) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and
395 operation of wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss.
396 381.0065(4)(1) and 403.086(10), as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by
397 central wastewater treatment facilities through permit allocation systems.
398 (k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the
399 Florida Keys.
400 (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida
401 Keys.
402 (m)Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of
403 a natural or manmade disaster and for a postdisaster reconstruction plan.
404 (n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and
405 maintaining the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
406
407 Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7) Florida Statutes, the proposed amendment is consistent with the
408 Principles for Guiding Development as a whole and is not inconsistent with any Principle.
409
410 D. The proposed amendment is generally consistent with Part II of Chapter 163, Florida
411 Statutes (F.S.). Specifically,the amendment furthers:
412
413 163.3161(4), F.S. —It is the intent of this act that local governments have the ability to preserve
414 and enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and
415 resources, consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal
416 effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land within
417 their jurisdictions. Through the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units
418 of local government can preserve, promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety,
419 comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and
420 general welfare; facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water,
421 sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing, and other requirements and
422 services; and conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources within their
423 jurisdictions
424
425 163.3161(6), F.S. - It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans shall have the
426 legal status set out in this act and that no public or private development shall be permitted
427 except in conformity with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof, prepared
428 and adopted in conformity with this act.
429
File #2012-111 Page 10 of 13
430 163.3177(1), F.S. - The comprehensive plan shall provide the principles, guidelines, standards,
431 and strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental,
432 and fiscal development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the
433 plan and its elements. These principles and strategies shall guide future decisions in a
434 consistent manner and shall contain programs and activities to ensure comprehensive plans
435 are implemented. The sections of the comprehensive plan containing the principles and
436 strategies, generally provided as goals, objectives, and policies, shall describe how the local
437 government's programs, activities, and land development regulations will be initiated,
438 modified, or continued to implement the comprehensive plan in a consistent manner. It is not
439 the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations in the
440 comprehensive plan but rather to require identification of those programs, activities, and land
441 development regulations that will be part of the strategy for implementing the comprehensive
442 plan and the principles that describe how the programs, activities, and land development
443 regulations will be carried out. The plan shall establish meaningful and predictable standards
444 for the use and development of land and provide meaningful guidelines for the content of
445 more detailed land development and use regulations.
446
447 163.3177(6)(a)2., F.S. - The future land use plan and plan amendments shall be based upon
448 surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as applicable, including:
449 a. The amount of land required to accommodate anticipated growth.
450 b. The projected permanent and seasonal population of the area.
451 c. The character of undeveloped land.
452 d. The availability of water supplies,public facilities, and services.
453 e. The need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of
454 nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community.
455 f. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations.
456 g. The compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and
457 consistent with s. 333.02.
458 h. The discouragement of urban sprawl.
459 i. The need for job creation, capital investment, and economic development that will
460 strengthen and diversify the community's economy.
461 j. The need to modify land uses and development patterns within antiquated subdivisions.
462
463 163.3177(6)(a)8., F.S. - Future land use map amendments shall be based upon the following
464 analyses:
465 a. An analysis of the availability of facilities and services.
466 b. An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed use considering the
467 character of the undeveloped land, soils, topography, natural resources, and historic
468 resources on site.
469 c. An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed to achieve the goals and requirements
470 of this section.
471
472 163.3194(1)(b), F.S. — All land development regulations enacted or amended shall be
473 consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and any land
474 development regulations existing at the time of adoption which are not consistent with the
475 adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall be amended so as to be
476 consistent. If a local government allows an existing land development regulation which is
477 inconsistent with the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion
File #2012-111 Page 11 of 13
478 thereof, to remain in effect, the local government shall adopt a schedule for bringing the land
479 development regulation into conformity with the provisions of the most recently adopted
480 comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof. During the interim period when the
481 provisions of the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof,
482 and the land development regulations are inconsistent, the provisions of the most recently
483 adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall govern any action taken in
484 regard to an application for a development order.
485
486 163.3194(3)(a), F.S. —A development order or land development regulation shall be consistent
487 with the comprehensive plan if the land uses, densities or intensities, and other aspects of
488 development permitted by such order or regulation are compatible with and further the
489 objectives, policies, land uses, and densities or intensities in the comprehensive plan and if it
490 meets all other criteria enumerated by the local government.
491
492 163.3201, F.S. — It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans or elements
493 thereof shall be implemented, in part, by the adoption and enforcement of appropriate local
494 regulations on the development of lands and waters within an area. It is the intent of this act
495 that the adoption and enforcement by a governing body of regulations for the development of
496 land or the adoption and enforcement by a governing body of a land development code for an
497 area shall be based on, be related to, and be a means of implementation for an adopted
498 comprehensive plan as required by this act
499
500 VI. PROCESS
501
502 Comprehensive Plan Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the
503 Planning Commission, the Director of Planning, or the owner or other person having a contractual
504 interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning shall review
505 and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the Development Review
506 Committee and the Planning Commission.
507
508 The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall
509 review the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning &
510 Environmental Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the
511 public hearing. The Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the
512 Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the
513 transmittal of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, and considers the staff report, staff
514 recommendation, and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may or may not
515 recommend transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency. The amendment is transmitted to the
516 State Land Planning Agency, which then reviews the proposal and issues an Objections,
517 Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report. Upon receipt of the ORC report, the County has
518 180 days to adopt the amendments, adopt the amendments with changes or not adopt the amendment
519
520 V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
521
522 Staff recommends approval.
523
524
525
File #2012-111 Page 12 of 13
526 VII. EXHIBITS
527
528 1. Application dated July 31, 2012
529 2. June 1, 2012 Addendum to a Letter of Understanding Issued on April 27, 2010 concerning a
530 proposed veterinary clinic/animal hospital, to be located within an existing building at 1300 Almay
531 Street, Key Largo
532 3. Monroe County Resolution No. 127-2012
533 4. Proposed FLUM Map
534 5. Monroe County Resolution No. 133-2013
535 6. FDEO ORC Letter Dated 7/2/13
536 7. FEDO Email Dated 1/10/13
537
File #2012-111 Page 13 of 13
Exhibit 1
REQUEST FOR A LAND USE DISTRICTin
AMXNDhW4T APPLICATION RECEIVES}
JUL - 3 2012
MONROE CO.PLANNING DEPT
MONROE COUNTY
&112MRGIIGMIMAL RESOURCES DEPAIRTMENT
An appl1cadon must be deemed complete and in compliance with the Monroe County CO&by the Staff
prior to the item being Wheduleil for review
Amendment to Land Un Map District(Residential)Application Fee:$4.131.00
Amendment to Land Use District Map(Non-Residential)Application Fee:$4,929.00
In addition to the above application fees,the followingfees aLw gply to each application:
Advertising Costs:$245.00
Summding Propezty Owner Notification:$3.00 for each pro ownerrequired to be noticed
Technology Fee:$20.00
Dates / 2 / l
Month Day Year
Property Ownw. Agent(if applicable):
Name i� R N
® y
Mailing e Maift Ad
3Q!�L— 1•1.4L— 27010
Daytim Phom Dayd=Phone
i •to
Legal Descr*lon of
(If in metes and bounds,allach legal description on separate sheet)
iil �
Block a®�iit ?.o -O o®®®® '�
.. t f 3
Real Emte ME)Ntunber Aftar&ft Key Nmficr
T '3
Street A e narker
Pap I of
Last Revised: April 2009
REQUEST FOR A LAND USE UD)
AMENDMZNT APPLICATION
Cun*nt Land Use District D tiou(s): j kA
Proposed Land Use s);
Current Future Land Use Map s):
Tier Designation(s) 3
Total Lana Area Affected In acres: 3 R `1
Existing Use of the Property(If the property is developed,pleme describe the existing use of the property,
including the er type of any residentialunits the t and of any develop t):
6 ,
In accordance with Sec. 102-158, the BOCC may consider the adoption of an ordinance g the
proposed change based on one or more of sia factom Please describe how one or more of the following
factors shall be met(attach additional sheets if necessary):
I) Changed ProlOctiOnS(e.g.,regarding public service needs)from those on which the lext or boundary
was based-
2) Changed assumptions(e°g.,rdemographic trends):
3) Data errors,including errors in mapping,vegetative types and natural features described in volume
I of the plan:
4) Now issues:
Page 2 of 4
Last Revised; April 2009
REQUEST FOR A LAND USE DISTRICT(LUD)MAP
AKENDMEW APPLICATION
Recognition of a need for additional d or comprehensiveness:
6 Date upda
In no event shall an amendment be approved which will result in an adverse communitychange of the
planning area in which the proposed development is locaft& Plow describe how the map amendment
would not resuk in an adverse community change(attach additional sheeft R ):
Has a previous Land Use District Map amendment applicadon been submitted for this site within the pan
two ye ? Yes Date:
No
Ali of the following must be submitted in order to have a complete application submittal:
(Please check as you attach each required item to the application)
fff Complete Land Use District Map amendment application(unaltemd and unbound);and
Correct fee(check or money order to Monme County Plimning&Environmental Resources);and
Proof of owners (i,e.Warranty Deed);and
Current Property Record Card(s)from the Monroe County Pro Appraiser;and
Location map from MOOM County Property Appraiser;and
Copy of current Land Use District Map(please requesit from the Planning&Environmental Resources
Department prior to application submittal);and
Copy of current Future Land Use Map(please request from the Planning&Environmental Resoumm
Departrnent prior to application submittal};and
300 foot radius map from Monroe County Property Appraiser Office
List of surrounding property owners from 300 foot radius map
Photo ph(s)of site from adjacent roadway(s);and.
Page 3 of 4
Last Revised: Aprit 2009
REQUEST FOR A LAND USE DISTRICT(LUD)MAP
AMENDhMT APPLICATION
Signed and Seated Boundary Su veY,prepared by a Florida registered surveyor—sixteen(16)sets(at
a i�survey should include elevations;Iocation and dimensions of an existing structures,paved
areas and utility structures;all bodies of water on the site and adjacent to the site;total acreage marked with
land use district;and total acreage shown with vegetative habitat);and
Typed name and address mailing labels of all properly owner within a 300 foot radius of the
PrOPOO(two M sets} This list should be compiled from the ccurent tax rolls of the Monroe County
Property Appraiser. In the event that a condominium development is within the 300 foot radius,each unit
owner must be included
If applicable,the following most be submitted in order to have a eomplete application submittal:
N Agent Authorization Letter(note:authorintion is needed fiom all owner(s)of the subject
property)
Any other Monroe County documents including betters of Understanding pertaining to the proposed
Land Use District Map amendment
If deemed necessary to complete a ihil rovkw of the application,the Planning&Environmental Resommes
Depulment reserves the right to regnegt additional information.
I certify+that I am familiar with the information contained in this application,and that to the best of my knowledge
such information is true,complete and accurate.
Sign,sture of Applicant: C PLWlp—
Date:
Sworn before me this�-day of91,
ir�B186 B.taPltttl /�Q/
(VWCOMMMONMOOM otary Pub c
E1QaI M AM A Z0f 4 14 My Commission Expires
ewmemot"80, 1-1
Please send or deliver the complete application package to:
Monroe County Planning&Environmental Resouron Department
Marathon Government Center
2795 Overseas Highway,Suite 400
Marathon,FL 33050.
Pap 4of4
[Act Revised: April 2809
Exhibit 2
County of Monroe
Growth Management Division
Planning EnvironMIntal Resources Bo r{d of County Commissioners
peoartment Mayor David Rice,Dist 4
2798 Overseas Highway,Suite 410 "' Mayor Pro Tem Kim Wigington,Dist 1
Marathon,FL 33050 Heather Carruthers,Dist 3
Voice: (305)289-2500 George Neugent,Dist 2
FAX: (305)289-2536 Sylvia J.Murphy,Dist 5
We strive to be caring,professional and fair
June 1,2012
John Kocol
PO Box 491
Islamorada,FL 33036
SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING ISSUED ON APRIL
27, 2010 CONCERNING A PROPOSED VETERINARY CLINIC/ANIMAL
HOSPITAL, TO BE LOCATED WITHIN AN EXISTING BUILDING AT
1300 ALMAY STREET, KEY LARGO, MILE MARKER 98.1, HAVING
REAL ESTATE NUMBER 00519750.000000
Mr. Kocol,
Pursuant to §110-3 of the Monroe County Code (MCC), this document shall constitute a Letter
of Understanding (LOU). On February 1, 2010, a Pre-Application Conference regarding the
above-referenced property was held at the office of the Monroe County Planning &
Environmental Resources Department on Key Largo. Attendees of the meeting included John
Kocol (hereafter referred to as "the Applicant")and Joseph Haberman,Principal Planner, Steven
Biel, Senior Planner&Barbara Bauman,Planner(hereafter referred to as"Staffl.
The Board of County Commissioners passed and adopted Resolution #127-2012 on April 18,
2012. This resolution, adopted after the issuance of the letter of understanding on April 27,
2010, amended the Planning & Environmental Resources Department's fee schedule. Of
relevance to your property and the development thereon, the amended fee schedule included the
following new provision:
There shall be no application or other fees, except advertising and noticing fees, for
property owners who apply for a map amendment to the official [Land Use District
(LUD)] map and/or the official [Future Land Use Map (FLUM)], if the property owner
can provide satisfactory evidence that a currently existing use on the site that also existed
lawfully in 1992 was deemed nonconforming by final adoption of the LUD map and/or a
currently existing use on the site that also existed lawfully on the site in 1997 was
deemed nonconforming by final adoption of the FLUM. To qualify for the fee
exemption, the applicant must apply for a LUD and/or FLUM designation(s) that would
Addendum to April 27,2010 Letter of Understanding(File#2010-008) Page I of 4
eliminate the non-conforming use created with adoption of the existing designation(s)
and not create an adverse impact to the community. Prior to submittal of a map
amendment application, the applicant must provide the evidence supporting the change
and application for a fee exemption with the proposed LUD map/FLUM designations to
the Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department as part of an
application for a Letter of Understanding. Following a review, the Director of Planning
&Environmental Resources shall determine if the information and evidence is sufficient,
and whether the proposed LUD map and/or FLUM designations are acceptable for the fee
waiver, and approve or deny the fee exemption request. This fee waiver Letter of
Understanding shall not obligate the staff to recommend approval or denial of the
proposed LUD or PLUM Category.
You have requested that the Senior Director of Planning&Environmental Resources render such
a decision in relation to the subject property and allow you to submit FLUM and LUD
amendment applications without the required application fees.
The property has a FLUM designation of Residential Medium (RM), a LUD designation of
Improved Subdivision(IS),and a tier designation of Tier 3.
You have requested a FLUM designation of Mixed Use / Commercial (MC) and a LUD
designation of either Suburban Commercial(SC)or Mixed Use(MU).
The property was within a RU-1 district(Single-Family Residential) and BU-2 district(Medium
Business) prior to 1986 when the property was re-designated IS. It is unknown as to precisely
when the designation was amended from RU-1 to BU-2; however according to information
within a building permit application, the property was BU-2 when the building was converted to
a"dance studio"in 1977.
Regarding the development and use of the existing building on the property:
In 1972, Building Permit#27471 was issued for the construction of a 774 SF one-story,
single-family residence (18' x 43')on Lot I. Although for a smaller residential structure,
this was the original building permit for the building.
In 1977, Building Permit#C2714 was issued for a building addition. Although a change
of use was not expressly noted, the proposed construction stated the building would be
used as a "dance studio". A continued residential use was not indicated. The building
plans are somewhat unclear, but it appears the building addition was a 976 SF second
story addition(46'6"x 21')located over the existing 774 SF ground level building(18' x
43'). In 1980, Building Permit #C7436 was issued to enclose stairs and overhang
resulting in an unspecified amount of new floor area.
In 1985, Building Permit #C16923 was issued for a 1,000 SF elevated building addition
(40' x 25')that extended the building onto Lot 12.
Addendum to Apa127,2010 Letter of Understanding(File#20I0-008) Page 2 of 4
In 1986, Building Permit #C19066 was issued to enclose the lower level of the addition
approved under Building Permit#C16923,thus resulting in 1,000 SF of additional square
footage.
All subsequent permits indicate that the building was being utilized for commercial retail
use.
The current regulations pertaining to permitted uses in the IS district do not allow a 3,695 SF
commercial retail building. Furthermore, Policy 101.4.3 of the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan, which describes permitted uses in the RM FLUM category, does not state
that commercial retail uses are allowed. Therefore, the existing commercial retail use is
nonconforming to the current provisions of the Monroe County Code and Comprehensive Plan.
However, as the 3,695 SF building and its commercial retail use were approved and permitted
prior to 1986, the existing use is considered a lawful nonconforming use.
Resolution #127-2012 requires the property owner to provide satisfactory evidence that the
existing use on the site also existed lawfully in 1992 and was deemed nonconforming by final
adoption of the LUD map and/or the existing use on the site existed lawfully in 1997 and was
deemed nonconforming by final adoption of the FLUM. Following a review, Staff has
determined that the existing use existed lawfully in 1992 and was deemed nonconforming by the
final adoption of the LUD map. Staff has also determined that the existing use existed lawf Wy
in 1997 and was deemed nonconforming by the final adoption of the FLUM.
Resolution 9127-2012 requires the applicant to apply for a LUD and/or FLUM designation(s)
that would eliminate the non-conforming use created with adoption of the existing designation(s)
and not create an adverse impact to the community. Following a review, Staff has determined
that the proposed FLUM category of MC and proposed LUD designations of SC or MU would
eliminate the nonconformity to use. Therefore, the proposed designations are acceptable;
however prior to application submittal, you must decide on whether to pursue an amendment to
SC or MU. Staff cannot make this decision. In addition, please be aware that Staff is not
obligated to recommend approval of the proposed LUD or FLUM designations. Staff is required
to review the application on its merit and determine upon a full review that there shall not be an
adverse impact to the community and is consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan and Monroe County Code.
In conclusion, Staff has determined that your proposal qualifies for fee exemptions to the
"Comprehensive Plan,Future Land Use Map(FLUM)Amendment" of$5,531.00 and the"Land
Use District Map, Amendment—Nonresidential" fee of$4,929.00. You may submit a FLUM
amendment and/or LUD amendment application without the submittal of the aforementioned
application fees. However,you are responsible for all other requirements, including the fees for
advertising ($245.00 per application) and noticing ($3.00 per each surrounding property per
application).
In addition, please note that you are eligible for these fee waivers so long as such waivers are
permitted by the fee schedule. If the fee schedule is amended to remove such a provision in the
Addenduun to April 27,2010 Letter of Understanding(File#2010-008) Page 3 of 4
future, you may not be eligible to submit the application without such required application fees
afterwards.
Pursuant to MCC §110-3, you are entitled to rely upon the representations set forth in this letter
as accurate under the regulations currently in effect. This letter does not provide any vesting to
the existing regulations. If the Monroe County Code or Comprehensive Plan is amended, the
project will be required to be consistent with all regulations and policies at the time of
development approval. The Department acknowledges that all items required as a part of the
application for development approval may not have been addressed at the meeting, and
consequently reserves the right for additional comment.
You may appeal decisions made in this letter. The appeal must be filed with the County
Administrator, 1100 Simonton Street, Gato Building, Key West, FL 33040, within thirty (30)
calendar days from the date of this letter. In addition,please submit a copy of your application to
Planning Commission Coordinator, Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources
Department, 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 410, Marathon, FL 33050.
We trust that this information is of assistance. If you have any questions regarding the contents
of this letter, or if we may further assist you with your project, please feel free to contact our
Marathon office at(305)289-2500.
Sincerely yo
Mayte San aria,
Assistant Director of Planning
for
Townsley Schwab,
Senior Director of Planning&Environmental Resources
CC: Joseph Haberman, Planning&Development Review Manager
Michael Roberts, Senior Administrator of Environmental Resources
Addendum to April 27,2010 Letter of Understanding(File#2010-008) Page 4 of 4
County of Monroe
Growth Management Division
Planning&Eovtronmentsd Resouro Board of County!CommWlonera
Deoatcmmt Mayor Sylvia I Murphy,Dist 5
2798 Overseas Highway,Suite 410 y'ti Mayor Pro Tem Heather Carruthers,Dist 3
Marathon,FL 33054 Mario Di Gennaro,Dist.4
Voice: (305)299-2500 George Neugerd,Dist 2
FAX: (305)289.2536 Kim Wigington,Dist I
We strive to be caring,professiond and fair
April 27,2010
John Kocol
PO Box 491
Islamorada,FL 33036
SUBJECT: LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING CONCERNING A PROPOSED
VETERINARY CLINICIANIMAL HOSPITAL,TO BE LOCATED
WITHIN AN EXISTING BUILDING AT 1300 ALMAY STREET,KEY
LARGO,MILE MARKER 98.1.,HAVING REAL ESTATE NUMBER
00519750.000000
Mr.Kocol,
Pursuant to §110-3 of the Monroe County Code(MCC), this document shall constitute a Letter
of Understanding (LOU). On February 1, 2010, a Pre-Application Conference regarding the
above-referenced property was held at the office of the Monroe County Planning &
Environmental Resources Department on Key Largo. Attendees of the meeting included John
Kocol(hereafter referred to as"the Applicant")and Joseph Haberman,Principal Planner,Steven
Biel,Senior Planner&Barbara Bauman,Planner(hereafter referred to as"Staff').
in addition, to further discuss the proposal,on March 15,2010,a second meeting was held at the
office of the Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department in Marathon.
Attendees of the meeting included John Kocol and Joseph Haberman.
Materials presented for review included:
(a) Pre-Application Conference Request Form;
(b) Existing Site Plan by Keys Engineering Inc.,dated March 10,2010;
(c) Proposed Site Plan by Keys Engineering Inc.,dated March 10,2010;
(d) Site Plan by the Applicant;
(e) Monroe County Property Record Cards; and
(f) Monroe County Land Use District Map and Future Land Use Map
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 1 of 13
I. APPLICANT PROPOSAL
The Applicant is proposing to convert the first floor of an existing two-story commercial retail
building into a veterinary clinic/animal hospital. The veterinary clinic/animal hospital would be
located entirely within the first story of the building,which currently provides space for a dance
school/martial arts center. The second story would not be modified and would continue to
provide space for the dance school/martial arts center or a similar business in the future. In
addition, the Applicant is proposing to establish a fenced area for convalescing and otherwise
temporarily boarded animals at the animal hospital, to establish a new off-street parking area
and to improve the site as determined necessary by the County.
As stated in the application, the veterinary clinic/animal hospital would be open normal
business hours: 8:00am to 5:00pm, Monday through Saturday. However, it would open
intermittently at other times to provide emergency services to patients.
t.
w
4
Subject Property(outlined In blue)(2009)
u. SUBJECT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
1. The property's address is 1300 Almay Street on Key Largo. However, most of its frontage
is located along US 1,between Almay Street and Grand Street.
2. The property consists of one parcel of land. Real Estate number(RE)00519750.000000 is
legally described as Block 4, Lots 1 and 12, Rock Harbor Estates subdivision (PB3-187),
Key Largo.
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 2 of 13
3. According to Monroe County's GIS database, in total, the property consists of
approximately 13,217 W (0.30 acres) of land area Therefore, all calculations included in
this letter are based on these records. A sealed boundary survey indicating total land area
may be required at the time of application submittal for any development approval of any
additional floor area If the amount of upland area provided on the sealed boundary survey
differs,then calculations provided in this letter are subject to change.
4. According to the Monroe County Property Appraiser's records, RE 00519750.000000 is
currently being assessed under the property classification(PC)code of 17(office buildings).
IIL RELEVANT PRIOR COUNTY ACTIONS
1. According to the Monroe County Property Appraiser's records, the existing two-story
building was built in 1972 and consists of 3,695 W of floor area.
In 1972,Permit 2747I was issued for the construction of a 774 ft2 one-story,single-family
residence (18' x 43') on Lot 1. Although for a smaller residential structure, this was the
original building permit for the building. In 1977,Permit C2714 was issued for a building
addition. Although a change of use was not expressly noted, the proposers construction
stared the building would be used as a"dance studio". A continued residential use was not
indicated. The building plans are somewhat unclear, but it appears the building addition
was a 976 W second story addition (46'6" x 2I') located over the existing 774 ft' ground
level building(18' x 43 ). In 1980,Permit C7436 was issued to enclose stairs and overhang
resulting in an unspecified amount of new floor area.
In 1985, Permit C16923 was issued for a 1,000 ft2 elevated buildiag addition (40' x 25')
that extended the building onto Lot 12. In 1986,Permit CI9066 was issued to enclose the
lower level of the addition approved under C16923,thus resulting in 1,000 ft2 of additional
square footage.
2. Staff located building permits for the subject property dating back to 1972. Permit 27471,
issued in 1977, states that the building was to be utilized by a residential use at that time.
However, the next building permit on file, Permit C27I4, issued in 1977, states that the
building was to be utilized by a commercial retail use (dance studio) at that time. All
subsequent permits indicate that the building was being utilized for commercial retail,many
specifically referring to a dance studio.
3. On March 7, 1986,the Board of County Commissioners approved a flood variance to allow
the construction of an enclosure below the 100-year flood elevation under the existing
building(resulting in the issuance of Permit C 19066).
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Anunal Hospital.Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 3 of 13
IV.REVIEW OF PROPOSAL
The following land development regulations directly affect the proposal; however, there are
other land development regulations not referred to nor described in this letter which may
govern future development as well:
1. The property has a Land Use District designation of Improved Subdivision (IS), a Future
Land Use Map (FLUM)designation of Residential Medium(RM)and a tier designation of
Tier 3.
2. References within the building permits files on file indicate that the property was within a
RU-1 district (Single-Family Residential) and BU-2 district (Medium Business) prior to
1986 when the property was re-designated IS. It is unknown as to precisely when the
designation was amended from RU-1 to BU 2; however according to the building permit
application, the property was BU-2 when the building was converted to a"dance studio"in
1977.
3. The veterinary clinic/animal hospital would be located within the first story of the building.
The second story would continue to provide space for the dance school/martial arts center.
Regarding use, Staff has determined that the existing dance schoollmartial arts center and
the proposed animal hospital would be classified as commercial retail uses. Although
neither are traditional commercial retail businesses, the Land Development Code defines
commercial retail as a use that sells goods or services at retail.
Depending on trip generation,commercial retail uses are classified as low,medium or high-
intensity. A-traffic impact analysis has not been submitted which would indicate whether or
not the proposed change in business to an animal hospital would affect the site's currently
approved intensity. Based on traffic impact analyses for similar developments, Staff
anticipates that both the existing and proposed commercial retail uses generate less than 100
average daily trips per 1,000 ft' of floor area and thereby would be elassifed as low or
medium-intensity. However to ensure that there is not a prohibited increase in intensity,a
comparative level 1 traffic impact analysis will be required prior to Staff conclusively
stating such.
4. The commercial retail use of the existing dance schooVmartial arts center was rendered a
nonconforming use following the re-zoning of the property from BU-2 to IS in 1986 and the
assignment of the FLUM future land use category of RM in 1997.
In the Monroe County Land Development Code, the current regulations pertaining to
permitted uses in the IS district do not allow a 3,695 ft2 commercial retail building.
Furthermore, Policy 101.4.2 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive PIan,which
pertains to permitted uses in the RM future land use category, does not state that
commercial retail uses are permitted. Therefore, the existing commercial retail use is
nonconforming to the current Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan.
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 4 of 13
However, as the 3,695 ft building and its commercial retail use were approved and
permitted prior to 1986, the existing use is considered a lawful nonconforming use and
Policy 101.4.3 provides some protection to such lawful uses. Specifically, Policy 101.4.3
states a nonresidential use that was listed as a permitted use in the land development
regulations that were in effect immediately prior to the institution of the Comprehensive
Plan, and that lawfully existed on such lands on January 4, 1996 may develop, redevelop,
reestablish and/or substantially improve provided that the use is limited in intensity, floor
area, density and to the type of use that existed on January 4, 1996 or limited to what the
pre-2010 land development regulations allowed. In addition to being lawfully established
prior to 1986, the existing type of use(commercial retail) and the existing amount of non-
residential floor area(3,695 ft1)were in existence in 1996.
The existing intensity of the site could not be determined in the absence of a traffic impact
report. Furthermore, without knowing the intensity, Staff could not determine the existing
density(the floor area ratios are 0.35 for low-intensity, 0.25 for medium-intensity and 0.15
for high-intensity commercial retail uses).
5. In accordance with Policy 101.4.3,a commercial retail use(with businesses associated with
this type of use) and the building's floor area may be redeveloped, reestablished and/or
substantially improved with a major conditional use permit, subject to the standards and
procedures set forth in the Land Development Code. In the event that reestablishment or
substantial improvement is carried out, although the building is over 2,500 ft, in area and
could be classified as high intensity following the submittal of a traffic impact report stating
such, the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan currently provided for in Policy 101.4.3,
shall take precedent over the requirements for an existing nonconforming commercial retail
use in the IS District, currently provided for in MCC §130-94(c)(1), which restricts
buildings to 2,500 ft2 and low/medium intensity.
Conditional uses are those uses which are generally compatible with the other land uses
permitted, but require individual review of their location, design and configuration and the
imposition of conditions in order to ensure the appropriateness of the use at a particular
location. Minor conditional use permit applications are granted or denied by the Planning
Director in accordance with MCC §110-69 and major conditional use permit applications
are granted or denied by the Planning Commission at a public hearing in accordance with
MCC§110-70.
Concerning the Applicant's proposal, a major conditional use permit shall not be required
for the change in business and moderate building/site improvements as these improvements
would not meet the intent of terms redevelopment, reestablishment or substantial
improvement as used in Policy 101.4.3.
6. Policy 101.4.3 allows redevelopment limited to intensity, floor area, density and to the type
of use as that existed prior to its redevelopment. The policy does not protect the existing
configuration of development on a particular site and does not protect existing
nonconformities other than intensity,density and type of use. Furthermore, it does not state
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Anunal Hospital,Key Lugo,Letter of Understanding Page 5 of 13
or otherwise provide that a development may be reestablished or substantially improved
without coming into compliance with the current comprehensive plan policies, land
development regulations and/or building codes.
As the site was lawfully developed prior to adoption of the current regulations, it would be
difficult to bring the site into full compliance the land development regulations,especially
those relating to bulk regulations and off-street parking, in the event of reestablishment or
substantially improvement. Staff requests that the site come into compliance to the greatest
extent practical with all applicable comprehensive plan policies, Key Largo Livable
CommuniKeys policies and land development regulations as improvements are carried out.
7. Building permits are required for interior renovations to the commercial building,site work
and new signage. As both the proposed veterinary cliniclanimal hospital and existing dance
school/martial arts center are commercial retail uses, Staff shall consider the occupation of
the first floor by the veterinary clinic/artimal hospital a change in business, not a change in
use. Changes in businesses do not require a building permit or other approval from the
Growth Management Division. However, as stated a previously, a traffic impact report
must be submitted to provided the existing and proposed intensity to determine if the
change in business would result in a higher intensity. Increasing changes in intensity do
require building permit approval (however, in this case a building permit to increase
intensity would be denied per Policy 101.4.3).
8. It has been determined that the conunercial retail use and the existing building's floor area
were lawfully-established and therefore the use and existing floor area are lawfully
nonconforming. However, expansion of the existing commercial retail use is prohibited
unless the subject property's land use district designation and PLUM category are amended
to designations that allow commercial retail uses of this size and intensity or the text
relating to the permitted uses in the IS district and RM FLUM category amended.
9. According to the proposed site plan, the proposed fenced area would be an unenclosed area
located behind the existing building in the northeastern corner of the subject property. This
secured space would serve as a supervised area for exercising animals. This type of
structure is considered an accessory structure and not a component of the principal
structure. As defined in MCC §101-1, accessory means a use or structure that is
subordinate to and serves a principal use or structure; is subordinate in area, extent and
purpose to the principal use or structure served; contributes to the comfort, convenience or
necessity of occupants of the principal use or structure served;and is located on the same lot
or on contiguous lots under the same ownership and in the same land use district as the
principal use or structure. Accessory structures are permitted as-of-right in the IS district.
Therefore, a fence may be constructed and would not constitute. an expansion of the
nonconforming use.
I0. The Non-Residential Rate of Growth Ordinance (NROGO) shall not apply to the
redevelopment, rehabilitation or replacement of any lawfully-established, nonresidential
floor area which does not increase the amount of non-residential floor area greater than that
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 6 of 13
which existed on the site prior to the redevelopment, rehabilitation or replacement.
Therefore, owners of land containing non-residential floor area shall be entitled to one
square foot for each such square foot lawfully-established. Administrative Interpretation
03-108 provides the criteria to be used by Staff to determine whether or not non-residential
floor area was lawfully-established.
Non-residential floor area is the sum of the gross floor area for a non-residential building or
structure as defined in MCC §101-1, any areas used for the provision of food and beverage
services and seating whether covered or uncovered,and all covered,unenclosed areas.
Following a review of the building permits on file, as well as the documentation within the
applications, Staff has determined that all of the non-residential floor area within the
existing 3,695 ft'building was lawfully-established. The accumulation of all the floor area
approved in Permits 27471 (774 ft2),C2714(976 W),C7436(unknown),C16923 (1,000 ft2)
and C19066(1,000 ft2) is 3,750 ft2. However,as the plans for new floor area did not show
existing portions of the building in some of the permit applications, Staff could not
determine if there was some overlap. Therefore, unless scaled floor plans are submitted,
drawn by a licensed architect or engineer, showing 3,750 ft2 or a higher figure, Staff is
utilizing the lesser figure of 3,695 W provided by the Monroe County Property Appraiser.
If the Applicant submits floor plans, Staff will have to compare such plants to the plans in
the building permit files to ensure their accuracy.
11. In the IS district,there is a required open space ratio of 0.20. Therefore,at least 20 percent
of the site must remain open space.
!2. In the IS District, the required non-shoreline setbacks for commercial uses are as follows:
Front yard—25'; Rear yard— 20% and Side yard — 10'/IS' (where 10' is required for one
side and 15'is the minimum combined total of both sides).
The property is a triple frontage, corner lot. The site has front yard requirements of 25'
along the right-of-way of US 1 to the northwest, Almay Street to the northeast and Grand
Street to the southwest In addition, there is a side yard setback of 10' along the property
line to the southeast.
According to the existing site plan, the existing building is partially located 2' into the
required 25' setback along Almay Street. As the building was legally established, it is
considered a lawfully nonconforming structure. In addition, a concrete walkway and off-
street parking is located within the required 25' setbacks along US 1, Almay Street and
Grand Street. As these structures were legally established, they are considered lawfully
nonconforming structures.
The change in business would not affect the building's existing footprint. However, the
modified off-street parking area and new loading zone would be located in the front yard
setbacks along all three rights-of-way. The new dumpster would be located in the front yard
setback along Grand Street and side yard setback.
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding page 7 of 13
At the pre-application conference, Staff informed the Applicant that the proposed
modifications to the parking area may require a variance to the setbacks requirements as
aerial photography suggested that parking had never existed in the front yard setback along
US 1. However, following the conference,Staff reviewed the approved site plans on file.
The most recent approved site plan, filed with Permit C16923, shows the parking area 6'
from the property line adjacent to US 1, 6' from the property line adjacent to Grand Street
and 3' from the property line adjacent to Almay Street. The revised, proposed site plan
shows a reconfigured parking area that is 5' from the property line adjacent to US 1,8' from
the property line adjacent to Grand Street and 5' from the property line adjacent to Ahmay
Street.
Staff supports the new reconfigured parking area as it would bring the nonconforming
parking area into compliance with several parking lot requirements such as clear site
triangles, proper aisle widths, correct parking space dimensions and better access and
handicap accessibility, as well as provide a compliant loading zone. If a 6' setback can be
provided along US 1, Staff shall not require a setback variance for the parking area
improvements. If only 5' can be provided, a setback variance would be required as the
nonconformity would be expanded; however in our recommendation on such a variance
application to the planning commission, Staff shall strongly consider the fact that the site
will be brought into compliance with several access and parking related regulations by
approving the setback variance.
The C16923 site plan does not show the location of a dumpster. Therefore, the proposed
dumpster must be relocated to an area outside of the required setbacks, unless a setback
variance is granted.
13. A stornwater management plan shall be required as a part of any application for the
proposed off-street parking areas. This plan shall detail pre and post development water
flow and storage on site with supporting calculations.
14. The development is subject to the following off-street parking requirements:
263 W.,
Commercial Retail 3 spacm/1000 W 3,695 W t t smces
The redevelopment requires i 1 off-street parking spaces. The proposed site plan shows 12
spaces. As only 11 spaces are required,Staff requests that the Applicant remove the"end"
parallel space adjacent to the US 1 property line near Almay Street as this unnecessary
space may interfere with access to and from the site. Further,the removal of this space and
its replacement with landscaping would bring the site further into compliance with the
setback requirements (as outlined previously) and bufferyard requirements (to be outlined
later).
Proposed Veterinary CliniOAninW Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 8 of 13
All regular parking spaces, with the exception of parallel,must be at least 8.5 feet in width
by 18 feet in length and all handicap-accessible parking spaces must be at least 12 feet in
width with an access aisle of 5 feet in width. Parallel spaces must be 8.5 feet in width by 25
feet in length.
If there are I to 25 total parking spaces in a lot,one(1) accessible parking space, 12 feet in
width,is required. Such a space shall be designed and marked for the exclusive use of those
individuals•who have been issued either a disabled parking permit or license plate. In
addition, a 5-foot parking access aisle must be part of an accessible route to the building
entrance. The access aisle shall be striped diagonally to designate it as a no-parking zone.
Curb ramps must be located outside of the disabled parking spaces and access aisles.
I5. All nonresidential uses with 2,500 ftz to 49,999 ft2 of floor area are required to have one(1)
loading and unloading space,measuring 11 feet by 55 feet. Loadingfunloading spaces shall
be located entirely on the same lot as the principal use they serve.These spaces shall not be
located on any public right-of-way,parking spaces or parking aisle and shall be as close to
the building served as possible.
The Applicant inquired about whether or not the required loadinglunloading space length
requirement could be reduced from 55' to 45' as the veterinary clinic/animal hospital and
dance school/marital arts center do not require any deliveries to be made by a semi-tractor
trailer or other large vehicle. There is currently no approved loadinglunloading space on the
site at all. Further, the existing vehicle maneuverability guidelines could only allow a 55'
loading/unloading space, with proper room to reverse, at the expense of finther
encroachment into the required setback(s) and/or reduced of parking. Therefore, Staff shall
allow the reduction as the introduction of an 11' by 45' loading/unloading space would be
bring the site into compliance to the greatest extent practical.
16. Since the parking area shall be required to contain six or more parking spaces and is within
a IS District, a class"A"landscaping standard will be required. This standard is explained,
with accompanying graphics, in MCC §114-100. Although there is vegetation on the site,
there appears to not be any parking lot landscaping. Further,the modification of the parking
area will result in the removal of existing vegetation. Staff requests that the Applicant bring
the site into compliance with this regulation to the greatest extent practical.
17. No structure or land which abuts US 1 shall be developed, used or occupied unless a scenic
corridor or bufferyard is provided. In the IS District, the required major street bufferyard is
a class"D"bufferyard. The minimum class"D"bufferyard is 20' in width. Widths of 25',
30' and 35' are also optional with reduced planting requirements.
The site is nonconforming to both the minimum width and planting requirements. As
previously stated,if a 6' setback can be provided along US 1, a setback variance shall not
be required and if only 5' can be provided, a setback variance would be required. In either
event,Staff requests that the Applicant bring the site into compliance with this regulation to
the greatest extent practical. However, if a setback variance is requested, the Applicant
Proposed Veterinary Cliaic/Aairnat Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 9 of 13
shall also have to request a variance to the bufferyard requirements (as the nonconformity
relating to bufferyard minimum width would be expanded). As a note, the two types of
variance requests may be filed on the same application as they are related.
18. Mitigation will be required for qualifying native vegetation removed for development. The
number, species and sizes of plants to be mitigated shall be identified in an existing
conditions report prepared and submitted by the applicant and approved by the county
biologist.
19. There are existing access drives into the site from Almay and Grand Street. The existing
drives may be nonconforming to clear site triangles for vehicles entering the side roads from
US 1 and distance requirements for access drives from US 1. However, Staff supports the
modification to the access points as shown on the proposed site plan as the one-way traffic
pattern through the site would result in safer vehicle maneuverability. However, Staff
requests that upon implementation of the proposed site plan, signage be installed that
clearly directs motorists entering and exiting site.
V. OTHER ISSUES CONCERNING THE PROPOSAL
1. The Applicant inquired about the possibility of amending the land use district and FLUM
designations of the subject property from IS and RM, respectively, to designations that
would permit the existing use and thereby render it conforming.
As set forth in the Land Development Code, the purpose of an amendment is not intended
to relieve particular hardships, nor to confer special privileges or rights on any person, nor
to permit a change in community character, as analyzed in the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan, but only to make necessary adjustments in light of changed
conditions. Amendments may be proposed by a person having a contractual interest in
property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning shall review
and process amendment applications as they are received and pass them on to the
Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission for recommendation and
final approval by the BOCC.
The BOCC may consider the adoption of an ordinance enacting the proposed change based
on one(1) or more of the following factors: (i)Changed projections(e.g.,regarding public
service needs) from those on which the text or boundary was based; (H) Changed
assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends); (iii) Data errors, including errors in
mapping, vegetative types and natural features described in the comprehensive plan; (iv)
New issues; (v) Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; or (vi)
Data updates. However, in no event shall an amendment be approved which will result in
an adverse community change of the planning area in which the proposed development is
located.
In an analysis of community needs, the Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys Plan states:
"existing uses.on parcels that were previously down-zoned are generally non-conforming.
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page 10 of 13
It is appropriate to re-evaluate these parcels and uses on a case-by-case basis and restore the
commercial status where appropriate". This analysis is substantiated by Action Item 1.3.2
which directs Staff to "revise the FLUM and Land Use District maps to resolve conflicts
and inconsistencies the planning area where appropriate."
However, it should be noted that this language does not guarantee that any map
amendments shall be granted as each application must be reviewed on a case-by-case basis
and the BOCC makes the final decision on the matter. Further, although Staff discussed
the amendment process with the Applicant at the conference,the Department of Planning&
Environmental Resources will not provide any recommendation of approval or denial until
an application for an amendment is submitted and reviewed by Staff.
2. The Applicant inquired about whether or not the site plan would be in compliance with
regulations relating to the Suburban Commercial(SC)district. As the site is designated IS
at this time, it would inappropriate for Staff to comment on whether or not the site would be
in compliance with the regulations pertaining to other land use districts. Such comments
could be deemed to be an endorsement of a map amendment.
3. The Applicant inquired about ground-mounted and wall-mounted signage. Specifically,the
Applicant inquired whether or not a variance would be required to advertise the veterinary
clinic/animal hospital.
In the IS district, a nonresidential developed parcel of land shall be allowed one ground-
mounted sign, but limited to 32 fts in area per face and eight feet in height. In addition,
ground-mounted signage is required to be located at least 5' from any property line. Wall-
mounted signage is also permitted, but shall be limited to a total of 32 W. Staff has
determined that a variance to the sign regulations shall only be required if the Applicant
requests signage of greater square footage than that allowed or a deviation from the height,
setback or other construction requirements.
The Applicant inquired whether or not variances could be granted administratively. There
are no administrative variances to the sign regulations. All applications are decided upon
by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. The Applicant also inquired about
whether or not Staff would recommend approval of such an application. Although Staff
discussed the variance process with the Applicant at the conference, the Department of
Planning&Environmental Resources will not provide any recommendation of approval or
denial until an application for a variance is submitted and reviewed by Staff.
The Applicant inquired about whether or not his facility would qualify for the additional
signage permitted for"Hospitals or other emergency facilities" in MCC §142-4(1)(c). In
addition to any other signage allowed under the Land Development Code,hospitals or other
emergency medical facilities, excluding individual medical offices, shall be allowed one
additional illuminated ground-or wall-mounted sign not to exceed 32 R2 per face to identify
each emergency entrance. Although considered a commercial retail use, the veterinary
clinic/animal hospital would qualify and serve as emergency facility. As there is one-way
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,letter of Understanding Page 11 of 13
traffic through the site,Staff shall allow one additional illuminated ground or wall-mounted
sign not to exceed 32 W per face to identify the emergency entrance. Although there are
two drives,it is only necessary to designate one drive as an emergency entrance.
The Applicant also inquired about whether or not his facility would qualify for the
additional signage permitted in MCC §142-4(3)(a)(5) which states that a school, church,
day-care center or other similar use shall be allowed to add an additional 64 ft2 or 32 fl per
face of signage to the ground-mounted or wall-motmted sign for the exclusive use of a
changeable copy sign. Although named a dance school,the dance school is a commercial
retail use and not a school use as defined in the Monroe County Code. Therefore, this
additional signage is not permitted
The Applicant inquired as to which of the building's frontages is considered the front. The
US 1 frontage would be considered the front.
4. The proposed veterinary clinic/animal animal hospital would introduce animals to the site
which could result in more noise than the existing businesses. Although increase noise is
not prohibited, in respect to the residential neighboring properties, noise should be
mitigated and the noise ordinance must be observed. The Applicant submitted a noise
abatement strategy that should mitigate noise acceptably. Further, although not required,
Staff suggests that the Applicant install buffering vegetation in the setback between the
existing building and the neighboring residential properties.
5. Prior to the issuance of any building permit, proposed development shall be found in
compliance by the Monroe County Building Department,the Monroe County Public Works
Division and the Monroe County Office of the Fire Marshal. Staff recommends that the
Applicant coordinate with these offices prior to application submittal.
6. All development shall be required to meet all standards and construction requirements of
the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA). The site must be brought into compliance with
ADA parking and building access requirements upon approval of a new site plan.
Pursuant to MCC §110-3,you are entitled to rely upon the representations set forth in this letter
as accurate under the regulations currently in effect. This letter does not provide any vesting to
the existing regulations. If the Monroe County Code or Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan are
amended,the project will be required to be consistent with all regulations and policies at the time
of development approval. The Department acknowledges that all items required as a part of the
application for development approval may not have been addressed at the meeting, and
consequently reserves the right for additional comment.
You may appeal decisions made in this letter. The appeal must be filed with the County
Administrator, 1100 Simonton Street, Gato Building, Key West, FL 33040, within thirty (30)
calendar days from the date of this letter. In addition, please submit a copy of your application to
Planning Commission Coordinator, Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources
Department,2798 Overseas Highway,Suite 410,Marathon,FL 33050.
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key largo,Letter of Understanding Page 12 of 13
We trust that this information is of assistance. If you have any questions regarding the contents
Of this letter, e t we may fi500.rassist you with your,project, please feel free to contact our
Marathon office at(305)289-2500.
Sincerely your
Townsley S ,
Senior Director Planning&Environmental Resources
Proposed Veterinary Clinic/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,better of Understanding Page 13 of 13
Exhibit
MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA
MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION NO. 127 -2012
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 169-2011, THE
PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE; TO GENERALIZE THE
TITLE OF THE FEE FOR APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS
OF TIME AUTHORIZED BY STATE LEGISLATION; TO
EXEMPT MAP AMENDMENT FEES FOR PROPERTY
OWNERS WHO APPLY TO AMEND THEIR PROPERTIES'
LAND USE DISTRICT AND/OR FUTURE LAND USE MAP
DESIGNATIONS TO DESIGNATIONS THAT WOULD
ELIMINATE NONCONFORMITIES TO USES THAT WERE
CREATED WHEN THE PROPERTIES WERE REZONED BY
THE COUNTY IN 1992 AND/OR PROVIDED A FUTURE
LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION IN 1997 UNDER CERTAIN
CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR A FEE FOR A LETTER OF
UNDERSTANDING FOR MAP AMENDMENT FEE
WAIVERS;AND TO REPEAL ANY OTHER FEE SCHEDULES
INCONSISTENT HEREWITH.
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners wishes to
provide the citizens of the County with the best possible service in the most cost effective
and reasonable manner; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds that it would be in the best interests of the general
public to charge the true cost for such services, thereby placing the burden of such costs
directly upon those parties deriving the benefit from such services; and
WHEREAS, the updated fee schedule prepared by the Growth Management
Director for providing these services includes the estimated direct costs and reasonable
indirect costs associated with the review and processing of planning and development
approval applications and site plans, on-site biological reviews, administrative appeals,
preparation of official documentation verifying existing development rights and other
processes and services; and
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 1 of 7
WHEREAS, the Board has discussed the need to adjust the fee schedule to
compensate the county for resources needed in excess of the fee estimates included in the
base fees; and
WHEREAS, applicants for development review should pay the cost of the
review,rather than those funds coming from other sources; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners wishes to amend fees to
compensate for resources expended in applications for private development approvals;
and
WHEREAS, The Florida State Legislature is considering legislation which
allows for extensions of time for some development orders for which the fee is currently
$250.00,based on previous Senate and House bills; and
WHEREAS, in 1992, a revised series of zoning maps was approved(also known
as the Land Use District(LUD)maps) for all areas of the unincorporated county. These
maps depicted boundary determinations carried out between 1986 and 1988, depicted
parcel lines and were drawn at a more usable scale. Although signed in 1988,the LUD's
did not receive final approval until 1992. The Monroe County Land Development
Regulations, portions of which are adopted by Rule 28-20.021, F.A.C., and portions of
which are approved by the Department of Community Affairs in Chapter 9J-14, F.A.C.,
were amended effective August 12, 1992. The Land Use District Map was revised to
reflect the changes in this rule. The LUD maps remain the official zoning maps of
Monroe County; and
WHEREAS, in 1993, Monroe County adopted a set of Future Land Use Maps
(FLUM) pursuant to a joint stipulated settlement agreement and Sec. 163.3184 Florida
Statutes. The Ordinance #016-1993 memorialized the approval. This map series was
dated 1997. The 1997 FLUM remains the official future land use maps of Monroe
County; and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the LUD maps and FLUM, the County has
discovered that several parcels with existing, lawful uses were assigned land use district
and future land use categories that deemed those uses nonconforming. In these instances,
the County created nonconformities to use without studying of the existing uses and the
impact of deeming those uses nonconforming. A remedy to existing property owners
would be to allow those property owners to apply for map amendments to designations
that would eliminate the nonconformities created by the County and not by the property
owner without the payment of a fee;and
WHEREAS, the County wishes to clarify that fees will be changed to private
applicants for traffic studies required or requested for not only map amendments,but for
text amendments submitted by private applicants; and
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, the Board heard testimony and evidence presented as to the
appropriate fee schedule during a public hearing on April 18,2012;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMNIISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA:
Section 1.
Pursuant to Section 102-19(9),the following schedule of fees to be charged by the
Growth Management Division for its services, including but not limited to the
filing of land development permit applications, land development approvals, land
development orders, and appeal applications, and requests for technical services
or official letters attesting to development rights recognized by the County shall
be implemented:
Administrative Appeals........................................................$1,500.00
Administrative Relief.......................................................$1,011.00
Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Permit.................................$1,264.00
Appeal ROGO or NROGO to BOCC.................................... $816.00
BeneficialUse............................................................... $4,490.00
Biological Site Visit(per visit)............................................$280.00
Biologist Fee(Miscellaneous-per hour)..................................$60.00
Boundary Determination................................................... $1,201.00
Comprehensive Plan,Text Amendment..................................$5,531.00
Comprehensive Plan,Future Land Use Map(FLUM)Amendment. $5,531.00
Conditional Use,Major,New/Amendment..............................$10,014.00
Conditional Use,Minor,New/Amendment............................ $8,484.00
Conditional Use,Minor,Transfer Development Rights(TDR)........$1,239.00
Conditional Use,Minor,Transfer Nonresidential Floor Area(TRE)$1,944.00
Conditional Use,Minor,Transfer ROGO Exemption(TRE)..........$1,740.00
Conditional Use,Minor/Major,Minor Deviation...................... $1,768.00
Conditional Use,Minor/Major,Major Deviation....................... $3,500.00
Conditional Use,Minor/Major,Time Extension....................... $986.00
Department of Administrative Hearings(DOAH)Appeals............$816.00
Development Agreement...................................................$12,900.00
Development of Regional Impact(DRl)................................. $28,876.00
Dock Length Variance......................................................$1,026.00
Front Yard Setback Waiver,Administrative............................$1,248.00
Front Yard Setback Waiver,Planning Commission....................$1,608.00
Grant of Conservation Easement..........................................$269.00
Habitat Evaluation Index(per hour)......................................$60.00
Home Occupation Special Use Permit................................... $498.00
Inclusionary Housing Exemption.........................................$900.00
Land Development Code,Text Amendment........................... $5,041.00
Land Use District Map,Amendment—Nonresidential................. $4,929.00
Land Use District Map,Amendment—Residential.......................$4,131.00
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 3 of 7
Letter of Current Site Conditions..........................................$936.00
Letter of Development Rights Determination...........................$2,209.00
Letter of ROGO Exemption................................................$215.00
Letter of Understanding for LUD Map/FLUM Fee waiver ...........$250.00
NROGO Application.......................................................$774.00
Planning Fee(Miscellaneous-per hour)...................................$50.00
Parking Agreement..........................................................$1,013.00
Planning Site Visit..........................................................$129.00
Platting, 5 lots or less.......................................................$4,017.00
Platting,6 lots or more......................................................$4,613.00
Pre-application with Letter of Understanding...........................$689.00
Pre-application with No Letter of Understanding..................... $296.00
Public Assembly Permit....................................................$149.00
Dog in Restaurant Permit...................................................$150.00
Research,permits and records(per hour)................................$50.00
Road Abandonment.........................................................$1,533.00
ROGO Application.........................................................$748.00
ROGO Lot/Parcel Dedication Letter.....................................$236.00
Legislative Time Extension for Development Orders/Permits....... $250.00
Special Certificate of Appropriateness....................................$200.00
Tier Map Amendment—Other than IS/URM Platted Lot............. $4,131.00
Tier Map Amendment IS/URM Platted Lot Only.................... $1,600.00
Vacation Rental Permit(Initial)............................................$493.00
Vacation Rental(Renewal)................................................$100.00
Vacation Rental Manager License........................................$106.00
Variance,Planning Commission, Signage...............................$1,076.00
Variance,Planning Commission,Other than Signage..................$1,608.00
Variance,Administrative...................................................$1,248.00
Vested Rights Determination..............................................
$2,248.00
Wetlands Delineation (per hour).......................................... $60.00
Growth Management applications may be subject to the following additional fees,
requirements or applicability:
1. For any application that requires a public hearing(s) and/or surrounding
property owner notification, advertising and/or notice fees; $245 for
newspaper advertisement and$3 per property owner notice.
2. There shall be no application or other fees, except advertising and noticing
fees, for affordable housing projects, except that all applicable fees shall be
charged for applications for all development approvals required for any
development under Sec. 130-161.1 of the Monroe County Code and for
applications for variances to setback, landscaping and/or off-street parking
regulations associated with an affordable housing development.
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 4 of 7
3. There shall be no application fees, except advertising and noticing fees, for
property owners who apply for a map amendment to the official LUD map
and/or the official FLUM, if the property owner can provide satisfactory
evidence that a currently existing use on the site that also existed lawfully in
1992 was deemed nonconforming by final adoption of the LUD map and/or a
currently existing use on the site that also existed lawfully on the site in 1997
was deemed nonconforming by final adoption of the FLUM. To qualify for
the fee exemption, the applicant must apply for a LUD and/or FLUM
designation(s) that would eliminate the non-conforming use created with
adoption of the existing designation(s)and not create an adverse impact to the
community. Prior to submittal of a map amendment application,the applicant
must provide the evidence supporting the change and application for a fee
exemption with the proposed LUD map/FLUM designations to the Monroe
County Planning & Environmental Resources Department as part of an
application for a Letter of Understanding. Following a review,the Director of
Planning & Environmental Resources shall determine if the information and
evidence is sufficient, and whether the proposed LUD map and/or FLUM
designations are acceptable for the fee waiver, and approve or deny the fee
exemption request. This fee waiver Letter of Understanding shall not obligate
the staff to recommend approval or denial of the proposed LUD or FLUM
Category.
4. Hearing fees: applicant shall pay half the cost of the hourly rate, travel and
expenses of any hearing officer. The County is currently charged$144.00 per
hour by Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH). If the fee charged
to the County is increased, the charge will change proportionately. An
estimated amount of one-half of the hearing officer costs as determined by the
County Attorney shall be deposited by the applicant along with the application
fee, and shall be returned to the applicant if unused.
5. Base fees listed above include a minimum of (when applicable) two internal
staff meetings with applicants; one Development Review Committee meeting,
one Planning Commission public hearing; and one Board of County
Commission public hearing. If this minimum number of meetings/hearings is
exceeded, the following fees shall be charged and paid prior to the private
development application proceeding through public hearings:
a. Additional internal staff meeting with applicant $500.00
b. Additional Development Review Committee public hearing$600.00
c. Additional Planning Commission public hearing $700.00
d. Additional Board of County Commissioners public hearing$850.00
The Director of Growth Management or designee shall assure these additional
fees are paid prior to hearing scheduling. These fees apply to all applications
filed after September 15,2010.
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 5 of 7
6. Applicants for Administrative Appeal, who prevail based on County error, as
found by the Planning Commission, shall have the entire application fee
refunded.
7. Concerning the application fees to amend the tier maps, the lesser application
fee of $1,600.00 is only available for applications to amend the tier
designation of a single URM or IS platted lot. It may not be used to amend
the designation of more than one parcel.
8. Applicants for any processes listed above that are required to provide
transportation studies related to their development impacts shall be required to
deposit a fee of$5,000 into an escrow account to cover the cost of experts
hired by the Growth Management Division to review the transportation and
other related studies submitted by the applicant as part of the development
review process or any text amendment submitted by a private applicant. Any
unused funds deposited by the applicant will be returned upon permit
approval. Monroe County shall obtain an estimate from the consultant they
intend to hire to review the transportation study for accuracy and methodology
and if the cost for the review on behalf of Monroe County is higher than the
$5000, applicant shall remit the estimated amount. Any unused funds
deposited by the applicant will be returned upon permit approval.
Section 2.
Any other fees schedules or provisions of the Monroe County Code inconsistent herewith
are hereby repealed.
Section 3.
The Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to forward one (1) certified copy of this
Resolution to the Division of Growth Management.
(REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK)
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 6 of 7
}
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida at a regular meeting held on the 18thday of April ,2012.
Mayor David Rice Yes
Mayor Pro Tem Kim Wigmgton Yes
Commissioner Heather Carruthers Yes
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy Yes
Commissioner George Neugent Yes
OUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
. B
14 F
Clerk Mayor David Rice
OR
'C�4M1)r. M♦M6
Cn tY
Cl )`
1V
Cr A
C✓ MONR E p UNTY ATTORNEY
1 R VED A5 TO F
Q -(
UJ
Date.
—j N _
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 7 of 7
/9u 4
ppy
.rr (
i
iptr��3 (r'tl f
rl !�
✓q � / rll%� "r s s
MA
bE(' I�I'.:I�ICIV*x
rw 'v
i
r
Exhibit 5
MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
RESOLUTION NO. 1 33-2013
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TRANSMITTING TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING
AGENCY AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF THE
MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM
RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RM) TO MIXED USE/COMMERCIAL (MC) FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 98175 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY,KEY LARGO,LOTS
1 & 2, BLOCK 4, ROCK HARBOR ESTATES, PB3/P187 OF THE PUBLIC
RECORDS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING REAL ESTATE
NUMBER 00519750-000000.
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners conducted a public
hearing for the purpose of considering the transmittal to the Florida Land Planning Agency and
Reviewing Agencies as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(c), Florida Statutes for review and
comment of a proposed amendment to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan as
described above; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission and the Monroe County Board
of County Commissioners support the requested text amendment;
NOW THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA:
Section 1: The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the recommendation of
the Planning Commission to transmit the draft ordinance for adoption of the
proposed future land use map amendment.
Section 2. The Monroe County staff is given authority to prepare and submit the required
transmittal letter and supporting documents for the proposed amendment in
accordance with the requirements of Section 163.3184(4),Florida Statutes.
Section 4. The Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to forward a certified copy of this
resolution to the Director of Planning.
P. 1 of 2
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida,at a regular meeting held on the 18th day of April, 2013.
Mayor George Neugent Yes
Mayor Pro Tem Heather Carruthers Yes
Commissioner David Rice Yes
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy Yes
Commissioner Danny Kolhage Yes
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FL RIDA
BY �. (�•t�w
� 5
Mayor George Neugent
(SEAL)
ATTEST-. Amy Heavilin, Clerk
Deputy Clerk
N
N
_ =C rri
MONROE O
APPR yEq TYATTORNEY
S TO•FORM r'3
Date;
P.2 of 2
I
2
3
4
5
6
7 ORDINANCE - 2013
8
9
10
11 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
12 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP OF
13 THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM
14 RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RM) TO MIXED USE/COMMERCIAL (MC)
15 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 98175 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, KEY
16 LARGO, LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 4, ROCK HARBOR ESTATES, PB3/P187
17 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
18 HAVING REAL ESTATE NUMBER 00519750400000; PROVIDING FOR
19 SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT
20 PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE TRANSMITTAL TO THE
21 STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY; PROVIDING FOR THE FILING
22 WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
23 -
24
25 WHEREAS,an application was filed by Renaissance Farms of the Keys LLC on July 31,2012,
26 to amend the Future Land Use Map(FLUM)designation from Residential Medium(RM)to Mixed
27 Use/Commercial(MC) for property legally described as Lots 1 &2, Block 4, Rock Harbor Estates,
28 PB3/P 187 of the Public Records of Monroe County,Florida,having real estate number 00519750-
29 000000;and
30
31 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee considered the proposed
32 amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 30'"day of October,2012; and
33
34 WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 28 h day of November, 2012, the
35 Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of considering the
36 transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency, for review and comment, a proposed amendment to
37 the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan;and
38
39 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Planning Commission made the following findings:
40
41 1. The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the community character of the
42 surrounding area;
43
44 2. The proposed FLUM is not anticipated to adversely impact the Comprehensive Plan
45 adopted Level of Service(LOS);
46
47 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Goals, Objectives and Policies
48 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan;
49
50 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys Plan;
51
52 5. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida
53 Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7),Florida Statute(F.S.);and
54
55 6. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part II of Chapter 163,Florida Statutes(F.S.).
56
57 WHEREAS,at a special meeting held on 18 day of April, 2013,the Monroe County Board of
58 County Commissioners held a public hearing to consider the transmittal of the proposed
59 amendment; and
60
61 WHEREAS, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment to amend Future Land Use Map
62 was reviewed by the State Land Planning Agency which issued an Objections,Recommendations,
63 and Comments (ORC) Report on with no comments or issues relative to this
64 amendment;
65
66 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
67 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA:
68
69 Section 1. The Future Land Use Map of the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan is
70 amended as follows:
71
72 The property legally described as Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Rock Harbor Estates,
73 PB3/P187 of the Public Records of Monroe County, Florida, having real estate
74 number 00519750-000000 is changed from Residential Medium (RM)to Mixed
75 Use/Commercial (MC)as shown on Exhibit 1, attached hereto and incorporated
76 herein.
77
78 Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or
79 provision of this ordinance is held invalid,the remainder of this ordinance shall
80 not be affected by such validity.
81
82 Section 3. Reveal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
83 conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
84
85 Section 4. Transmittal. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Director of Planning to
86 the State Land Planning Agency pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida
87 Statutes.
88
89
90
z
1'
91 Section 5. Filing and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the
92 secretary of the State of Florida but shall not become effective until a notice is
93 issued by the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission
94 finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163,Florida Statutes.
95
96 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,Florida,
97 at a regular meeting held on the day of ,2013.
98
99 Mayor George Neugent
100 Mayor Pro Tern Heather Carruthers
101 Commissioner David Rice
102 Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
103 Commissioner Danny Kolhage
104
105 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA
106 BY
107 Mayor George Neugent
108
109 (SEAL)
110 ATTEST:Amy Heavilin,Clerk
111
112 Deputy Clerk
113 MONA
114 AP Ro EOT N ' �RNEY
115 Date:
k
{
Exhibit 1 to Ordinance# -2013
0
�o
i
00519750 0000
r
9f.
r,
i
{
0
The Monroe County Future Land Use Map is amended
as indicated above.
N
Proposal: Future Land Use change of one parcel from
Residential Medium (RM)to MixedUse/Commercial (MC):
RE Number: 00519750-000000
Exhibit 6
Rick Scott
Jesse Panuccio
GOVERNOR
4" )
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
FLORIDA D E -/
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY
July 2, 2013
The Honourable George Neegent
Mayor, Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
25 Ships Way
Big Pine Key, Florida 33043
Dear Mayor Nuegent:
The Department of Economic Opportunity has completed its review of the proposed
comprehensive plan amendment for Monroe County (Amendment No. 13-2 ACSC), which was
received and determined complete on May 3, 2013. We have reviewed the proposed
amendment in accordance with the state coordinated review process set forth in Sections
163.3184(2) and (4), Florida Statutes (F.S.),for compliance with Chapter 163, Part Il, F.S.
Review comments received by the Department from the appropriate reviewing agencies are
also enclosed.
..-.
The attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report outlines our
fin
dings concerning the amendment. We have identified three objections and have included
recommendations regarding measures that can be taken to address the objections.
The County should act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt the
proposed amendment. Also, please note that Section 163.3184(4)(e)1, F.S., provides that if the
second public hearing is not held and the amendment adopted within 180 days of your receipt
of the Department of Economic Opportunity report,the amendment shall be deemed
withdrawn unless extended by agreement with notice to the Department of Economic
Opportunity and any affected party that provided comment on the amendment. For your
assistance, we have enclosed the procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the
comprehensive plan amendment.
Florida Department of l'sconomic Oppotcunity Clidwell Building IUi E Madison Screet 'rallahassee,Fi,32399
866.E+LA.3345 850.245.7105 850.921.3223 Fax
www tloridaiob�c or; www.twncr co—m/Fl Dl'O www.Eaccbook.cuni/N1,l)h'O
Mayor George Neugent
July 2, 2013
Page 2of2
If you have any questions related to this review, please contact Robin Branda at (850)
717-8495, or by email at Robin.Branda@deo.myflorida.com,
Sincerely,
Q6
William B. Killin worth
Director, Division of Community Development
WBK/rsb
Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report
Procedures for Adoption
Agency Comments
cc: Christine Hurley, Growth Management Director
Mr.James F. Murley, Executive Director,South Florida Regional Planning Council
OBJECTIONS,RECOMMENDATIONS, AND COMMENTS REPORT
FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
(DEO NO. 13-2, ACSC)
L Consistency with Chapter 163, Part II, and Chapter 380, Part 1
Objection 1: Amendment 134-2013 represents a 49.40 acre site located within Tier III on Stock
Island within the Military Installation Area of Influence. Monroe County has proposed a land
use change for a combination of 18 lots from Industrial to Mixed Use Commercial. If adopted,
the intensity of development of a maximum of 1,291,118 square feet of retail would remain the
same while the density could increase from the present allowance of 49 residential dwelling units
to a proposed density of 481 transient rooms/spaces, according to the data and analysis submitted
with the proposal. Approximately 80% of the site is located within the 65 to 69 noise contour
with about 20% being in the 70 to 74 contour of the 2007 Noise Study conducted by the Naval
Air Station—Key West(NAS-KW) (Figure 4-3).
In a letter regarding this amendment, the NAS-KW requested that transient and residential uses
not be allowed in areas located within the 65 Day-Night Average Sound Level(DNL) and higher
(as proposed in the amendment), and strongly objects to residential and transient uses in the 70 to
74 DNL.
Further, in the May 2,2011 "Department of Defense Instruction"manual with regard to its Air
Installation Compatibility Use Zones (AICUZ), the following notes occur with regard to
transient and residential development within noise zones:
a. Although local conditions regarding the need for housing may require residential uses in
these zones, residential use is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in
DNL 70-74. The absence of viable alternative development options should be
determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to local approvals
indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be met if
development were prohibited in these zones. Existing residential development is
considered a pre-existing,non-conforming land use.
b. Where the community determines that these uses must be allowed, measures to achieve
outdoor to indoor Noise Level Reduction(NLR) of at least 25 decibels (dB) in DNL 65-
69 and 30 dB in DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into building codes and be
considered in individual approvals; for transient housing, an NLR of at least 35 dB
should be incorporated in DNL 75-79.
c. Normal permanent construction can be expected to provide an NLR of 20 dB, thus the
reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10, or 15 dB over standard construction and
normally assume mechanical ventilation, upgraded sound transmission class ratings in
windows and doors, and closed windows year round. Additional consideration should be
given to modifying NLR levels based on peak noise levels or vibrations.
d. NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems. However,building location, site
planning, design, and use of berm and barriers can help mitigate outdoor noise exposure
particularly from ground level sources. Measures that reduce noise at a site should be
used wherever practical in preference to measures that only protect interior spaces.
The County has not demonstrated that there are no viable alternative development options and
that there is a need for the proposed increase in development density at this site.
Additionally, the NAS-KW states that the Navy is utilizing the 2007 AICUZ and that the more
recent Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)noise contours are in draft form and therefore not
acceptable at this time. The recent EIS study depicts the parcel as being within a lower noise
contour, one in which the transient development would be acceptable with
landscaped berm on the outside of the property. noise attenuation and
For the reasons cited above, the Department objects to the proposal because the change will
exacerbate the incompatibility issues that already exist. The proposed change is also inconsistent
with the Principles for Guiding Development that require that proposed amendments must be
consistent with protection of the value of public investments in the Florida Keys,including
Naval Air Station- Key West.
Authority: Section 163.3175(1), 163.3177(1)(t)2; 163.3177(4); 163.3177(6)(a)f; and
380.0552(7)(a) and(h)4., Florida Statutes (F.S).
Recommendation:
The Department of Economic Opportunity recommends that the County coordinate with the
NAS-KW in addressing the issues of noise contour compatibility. The noise concerns should be
addressed and mitigation measures to modify noise impacts may be developed through
coordination among the two government entities. Data and analysis should be submitted
indicating that there are no viable alternative development options and that there is a need for the
proposed increase in development density at this site.
Alternatively, the County may wish to delete the 481 rooms/spaces from the amendment and
retain/create a Commercial or Industrial designation. The applicant may consider delaying
adoption of the proposed amendment until the 2012 EIS DNL Map is adopted by the military,
and provide noise attenuation and outside landscaped berms, as requested by the Department of
the Navy.
Objection 2: Amendment 132-2013 represents a 0.34 acre site located in Key Largo and
proposes a change from Residential Medium(RM) to Mixed Use/Commercial (MC). The site is
located in a suburban area and has a Tier III designation. The data and analysis submitted with
amendment indicates that, if adopted, the land use change could increase densities and intensities
of development by a total of four maximum net dwelling units, five allocated transient
rooms/spaces, six maximum net transient rooms/spaces, and 6,678 square feet of non-residential
development.
Amendment 133-2013 represents a 0.31 acre site located in a suburban and commercial area of
Key Largo and is within a Tier III designation. According to the data and analysis submitted
with the proposal, the site is presently partially developed with a commercial establishment. The
County seeks to change the land use designation from R.M to MC. If the change is adopted,
densities and intensities of development could increase by a total of four maximum net dwelling
units, four transient allocated rooms/spaces, and six transient net rooms/spaces, and 6,067 square
feet of non-residential uses.
Amendments 132-2013 and 133-2013 are inconsistent with Policy 101.4.20 of the Monroe
County Comprehensive plan which states, in part, "In order to implement the Florida Keys
Carrying Capacity Study, Monroe County shall promote the reduction of overall County density
and intensity..." Moreover, the FLUM amendments have not included the needs analysis
required by the comprehensive plan in response to the Administration Commission's Work
Tasks as outlined in the Commission's 30-day Report (28-20.140(5)(a)9.,Florida Administrative
Code. Both the policy and Work Plan were designed to discourage increases in density and
intensity of development relative to hurricane evacuation and wildlife preservation. The
proposed increase in residential density on these sites only serve to exacerbate the hurricane
evacuation clearance time and increases the subsequent exposure to takings claims.
Authority: Section 163.3177(4); 380.0552(7) (a),F.S., and Chapter 28-20.140(5)(a)9, Florida
Administrative Code(F.A.C.)
Recommendation:
The County should not adopt the amendments as submitted. In order to reduce the densities of
development on the proposed FLUM,the County should change the residential land uses to
Commercial designations instead of the MC proposals,thereby disallowing further density
increases.
SUBMITTAL OF ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
FOR STATE COORDINATED REVIEW
Section 163.3184(4),Florida Statutes
May 2011
NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: Please submit three complete copies of all
comprehensive plan materials, of which one complete paper copy and two complete electronic
copies on CD ROM in Portable Document Format(PDF)to the Department of Economic
Opportunity and one copy to each entity below that provided timely comments to the local
government:the appropriate Regional Planning Council;Water Management District;
Department of Transportation; Department of Environmental Protection; Department of State;
the appropriate county(municipal amendments only);the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (county plan
amendments only);and the Department of Education (amendments relating to public schools);
and for certain local governments,the appropriate military installation and any other local
government or governmental agency that has filed a written request.
SUBMITTAL LETTER:Please include the following information in the cover letter transmitting the
adopted amendment:
Department of Economic Opportunity identification number for adopted amendment
package;
Summary description of the adoption package, including any amendments proposed but
not adopted;
Ordinance number and adoption date;
Certification that the adopted amendment(s) has been submitted to all parties that
provided timely comments to the local government;
Name,title, address,telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of local government
contact;
Letter signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local
government.
ADOPTION AMENDMENT PACKAGE: Please include the following information in the
amendment package:
Effective:tune 2, 2011 (I)pdared March 11, 2013) 1
In the case of text amendments, changes should be shown in strike-through/underline
format;
In the case of future land use map amendment, an adopted future land use map,in
color format,clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation, and its
adopted designation;
A copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate.
Note: If the local government is relying on previously submitted data and analysis, no additional
data and analysis is required;
Copy of executed ordinance adopting the comprehensive plan amendment(s);
Suggested effective date language for the adoption ordinance for state coordinated review:
The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged,
shall be the date the Department of Economic Opportunity posts a notice of intent
determing that this amendment is in compliance. If timely challenged, or if the state
land planning agency issues a notice of intent determining that this amendment is not in
compliance,this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning
agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted
amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or
land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has
become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration
Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a
resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the
Department of Economic Opportunity.
List of additional changes made in the adopted amendment that the Department of
Economic Opportunity did not previously review;
List of findings of the local governing body,if any,that were not included in the ordinance
and which provided the basis of the adoption or determination not to adopt the proposed
amendment;
Statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewed
by the Department of Economic Opportunity to the ORC report from the Department of
Economic Opportunity.
effective:!une 2.,2011. (Updated March 11,2013)
" DEPART141ENT OF THE NAVY
' NAVAL.AIR SCATION
PO BOX BOO1
xEYwesrrL mot
11000
Ser NO2/ 396
31 May 13
Mr. Ray Eubanks, Administrator
Plan Review and Processing
Florida Department of Economic Opportunity
107 E. Madison Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399
SUBJECT: MONROE COUNTY 13-2ACSC COMMENTS FOR PROPOSED
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ,AMENDME 4T
This letter is prepared in response to proposed Amendment 13-1
to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
Naval Air Station Key West is in objection to Resolution 133-
2013, transmitting an, ordinance amending the Future Land Use Map
from Industrial (I) to Mixed Use/Commercial. (MC) for 18 parcels
located on South Stock Island. Our comments to the Monroe County
Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) are forwarded as enclosure
(1) , and address our concerns.
Specifically, Naval Air Station Key West requests that
transient and residential uses not be allowed in areas located
within 65 DNL and higher, as proposed in the amendment. We look
forward to working with Monroe County and the Florida Department of
Economic Opportunity on this mission-critical issue.
If you have any questions or require additional information,
please contact my Business Manager, Mr. Ronald Demes. He can be
reached at (305) 293-2488 or via e-mail: ron.demes@navy.mil, or
Community Planning and Liaison Officer, Ms. Ashley Monnier at (305)
293-2633 or via e-mail: ashley.monnieranavv.mil.
Sincerely,
P. A. FERE
Capt -zn, U.S. Navy
Commanding Officer
Enclosure: 1. NASKW Comments Special Meeting 4-18-13
2. May 6, 2013 DEO Memorandum
Copy to: Rebecca Jetton, Administrator Areas of Critical State
Concern
Christine Hurley, Director, Monroe County Growth
management Division
Naval Air Station Key West Comments
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
Special Meeting April 18,2013
Agenda Item B.3.
A public hearing to consider a resolution to transmit to the State Land Planning
Agency a proposed ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
amending the Future Land Use Map from Industrial (1)to Mixed Use/Commercial(MC)for
18 parcels on Stock Island,having real estate numbers 00123660-000000, 00123720-
000400,00123760-000200,00123720-000100,00123720-000200,00123730-000100,
00 123 740-000000, 00123770-000000,00127290-000000, 00127380-000000,00I27250-
000000, 00127280-000000,00123600-OW 100,00123600-000102,00123600-000101,
00123590-000000, 00123570-000000,and 00123540-000000, located on South Stock
Island.
Naval Air Station Key West (NASKW) has reviewed the proposed Future Land Use Map
amendment modifying 18 parcels on Stock Island from Industrial to ]Mixed Use/Commercial.
Issues that have been discussed on record at Development Review Committee and Planning
Commission meetings are summarized as follows, and remain to be critical issues for your
consideration at this transmittal hearing;
(1.)The Navy uses the 2007 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones(AICUZ)noise contours
as the basis for this analysis. The proposed Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) noise
contours are draft; not yet accepted, and therefore should not be used as a basis for
analysis.
(2.) The Navy interprets residential and transient residential use proposals within high noise
zones to be incompatible development, based on the 2007 AICUZ,Table 6-2 Suggested
Land Compatibility in Noise Zones (Exhibit 6 of the BOCC transmittal package).
Specifically, Housing Units and Transient lodging within the 65 DNS, are respectively
Iisted as not being compatible(Nl=No with Exceptions).The superscript of 1 stages:
a: iilthough local conditions regarding the need for housing may require residential use in
these Zones, residential use is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in
70-74. The absence of viable alternative development options should be determined and
an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to local approvals indkating that a
demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be met f development
were prohibited in these Zones.
b. Inhere the community determines that these uses must be allowed, measures to achieve
and outdoor to indoor Noise Level Reduction(NLR)of at least 25 dB in DNL 65-69 and
NLR of 30 dB in DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into building codes and be in
individual approvals; for transient housing,a NLR of at least 3S dB should be
incorporated in DNL 75-79.
c. Normal permanent construction can be expected to provide a NLR of 20 dB, thus the
reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10, or 15 dB over standard construction
and normally assume mechanical ventilation, upgraded Sound Transmission Class (STC)
ratings in windows and doors and closed windows year round. Additionaf consideration
should be given to modifying NLR levels based on peak noise levels or vibrations.
Enclosure (1)
d NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems. However, building location and
site planning, design and use of berms and barriers can help mitigate outdoor noise
exposure NLR particularly from ground level sources. Measures that reduce noise at a
site should be used wherever practical in preference to measures than only protect
interior spaces.
(3.)Chapter 380.0552 (7) of the Florida Statutes requires any arnendments to Florida Keys
area comprehensive plans to be consistent with the principles for guiding development,
inclusive of provisions for protecting the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and
amortized life of existing and proposed major investments, including Key West Naval
Air Station and other military facilities.It is the position of NASKW that the Future Land
Use Map amendment, as proposed, is not consistent with this provision.
(4.)Chapter 163.3177 (6) (a) 2. of the Florida Statutes provides that future land use plan
amendments shall be based upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, as
applicable, including the compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate
to military installations. It is the position of NASKW that the Future Land Use Map
amendment,as proposed, does not include adequate provisions regarding compatibility of
uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations.
NASKW requests that transient and residential use entitlements not be allowed within areas
located in 65 DNL or higher. It is also important to consider the noise impacts for exterior uses,
as well as the impracticality of noise attenuation for uses, such as vessels. NASKW looks
forward to continuing this dialogue to resolve this extremely important issue, critical to mission
sustainability.
2 Enclosure (1)
opPICE OF THE COMMISSIONER THE CAPITOL
(850)617-7700 400 SOUTH MONROE STREET
TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 32399-0800
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
COMMISSIONER ADAM H. PUTNAM
May 31,2013
VIA EMAIL(santamaria-mayte@monroecounty-fl.gov) VIA EMAIL(DCPExternalAgencyComments@dca.state.fl.us)
Monroe County Growth Management Division Florida Department of Economic Opportunity
Attn: Mayte Santamaria State Land Planning Agency
2798 Overseas Highway Suite#400 Attn: Ray Eubanks
Marathon,Florida 33050 2555 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee,Florida 32311
Re: DACS Docket#—20130502-235
Monroe County Resolution 132-2013, 133-2013
Submission dated April 6,2013
Dear Ms.Santamaria:
The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services(the "Department") received the above-
referenced proposed comprehensive plan amendment on May 2,2013 and has reviewed it pursuant to
the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes to address any potential adverse impacts to important
state resources or facilities related to agricultural,aquacultural,or forestry resources in Florida if the
proposed amendment(s)are adopted. Based on our review of your county's submission,the
Department has no comment on the proposal.
If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 850-410-2287.
Sincerely,
�W_
Reid Cunningham
Senior Management Analyst
Office of Policy and Budget
cc: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity
(SLPA#: Monroe County 13-2 ACSC)
i-800-HELPFLA �a. www.FreshFromFlorida.com
'ffi"AV
Florida Department of Transportation
RICK SCOTr 1000 NW 111 Avenue ANA ']'H MASAI),P.E.
GOVERNOR Miami, Florida 33172-5800 SECRETARY
May 28, 2013
Ray Eubanks, Plan Processing Administrator
Department of Economic Opportunity
Community Planning and Development
107 East Madison Street
Caldwell Building, MSC 160
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
Subject: Comments for the Proposed Comprehensive Phan Amendment,
Monroe County#13-2ACSC
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
The Florida Department of Transportation, District Six, completed a review of the
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Monroe County #13-2ACSC. The
District has reviewed the amendment package per Chapter 163 Florida Statutes and
has found no impacts to transportation resources and facilities of.state importance.
Please contact Ken Jeffries at 305-470-5445 if you have any questions
concerning our response.
Sincerely,
it
Phil Steinmiller
District Planning Manager
Cc: Harold Desdunes, PE, Florida Department of Transportation, District 6
Aileen Boucle, AlCP, Florida Department of Transportation, District 6
Mayte Santamaria, Monroe County
www.dot.state.fl.us
South
Florida
Regional
Planning
Council
MEMORANDUM
AGENDA ITEM#19LD
DATE: JUNE 3,2013
TO: COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: STAFF
SUBJECT: LOCAL GOVERNMENT C0hIl'gEI-1ENSIVE PLAN PROPOSED AND ADOPTED
AMENDMENT CONSENT AGENDA
Pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, Council review of amendments to local government
comprehensive plans is limited to 1)adverse effects on regional resources and facilities identified in the
Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida (SRPP) and 2) extrajurisdictional impacts that would be
inconsistent with the comprehensive plan of any affected local government within the Region.
A written report containing an evaluation of these impacts,pursuant to Section 163.3184,Florida Statutes,
is to be provided to the local government and the State Land Planning Agency within 30 calendar days of
receipt of the amendment
Staff analysis confirms that the proposed and/or adopted amendments identified in the Table below are
generally consistent with and supportive of the Goals and Policies of the SRPP.Attached are the separate
amendment review forms that will be sent to the local government and Stage Land Planning Agemy.
Exhibit A, attached,is a general location map of those amendments listed below that includes a Future
Land Use Map amendment.
Miami-Dade 3RCaunty v N/A 1 N/A April 2,2013 12-0
Monroe Coin N A
#113-2ACSC / 2 N/A April 18,2M3 5-0
Parkland March 4,
#13-1ESR N/A N/A 3 Consistent March 6,2013 3-0
Recommendation
Find the proposed and adopted plan amendments from the local governments of Miami-Dade County,
Monroe County and Parkland generally consistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South
Florida. Approve this report for transmittal to the local governments with a copy to the State Land
Planning Agency.
3440 Hollywood Boulevard, Suits 140,Hollywood,Florida 33021
Broward(954)985-4416,State(800)985-4416
FAX(954)985-4417,e-mail:sfadmin@sfrpc.com,website:www.sfrpc.com
Exhibit A.
Fixture Land Use p Amendments
for the June 3,2013 Counefl Meeting
ng
General Location Map
X
� i r
� l�rak9
�J,Y
8
P
ff
r
P'
d
r
r
7
M
I
a
1
w
d
I
I.
Attachment 2
FLORIDA REGIONAL COUNCILS ASSOCIATION
LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW FORM M
South Florida Regional Planning Council Agenda Item and Date: M-D;June 3,2013.
Local Government Amendment Number: Monroe County proposed#13-2ACSC.
Date Comments due to State Land Planning Agency; June 2,2013.
Date Mailed to Local Government and State Land Planning Agency: Prior to June 2,2013,with final Council
Action on June 3,2013.
Pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, Council review of amendments to local government comprehensive
plans is limited to adverse effects on regional resources and facilities identified in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan for
South Florida (SRPP) and extraprisdktional impacts that would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan of any
affected local government within the region. A written report containing an evaluation of these impacts,pursuant to
Section 163.3184,Florida Statutes,is to be provided to the local government and the sty land planning agency within
30 calendar days of receipt of the amendment:
DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT
The proposed amendment package contains three amendments to the County's Future Land Use Map
described below.
County Amendment Resolution 132-2013(Riviera Village,Key Largo)
This map amendment would change approximately 0.34 acres (three parcels) of land from Residential
Medium to Mixed Use/Commercial,at 10498 Overseas Highway,near Mile Marker 105 in Key Largo. The
property is developed land with a Tier III designation,no endangered or threatened species,and home to a
960-square foot pet boarding and grooming business dating as far back as 1992. No residential uses are
within the subject property. Adjacent land uses consist of vacant to the north,residential to the south and
east, and commercial to the west. The intent of the amendment is to eliminate the nonconformity to the
existing use.
County Amendment Resolution 133-2M3(Rock Harbor Estates,Key Largo)
This map amendment would change an approximately 0.97-acre parcel from Residential Medium to Mixed
Use/Commercial located at 98175 Overseas Highway,near Mile Marker 98, in Key Largo. The property is
developed land with a Tier III designation,no endangered or threatened species,and home to a veterinary
clinic/animal hospital in an existing two-story 3,695-square foot building. The property has been used as
retail and commercial dating back as far as 1977. No residential uses are within the subject properly.
Adjacent land uses consist of a day care center to the south,residential to the north and west, and.U.S. 1
right-of-way to the east. The intent of the amendment is to eliminate the nonconformity to the existing use.
County Amendment Resolution 134-2013(South Stock Island)
This map amendment would change the land use designations for 18 parcels of land(total of 51.5 acres)from
Industrial to Mixed Use/Commercial located near Mile Marker 5 on.South Stock Island. All the properties
are developed land with a Tier III designation and no endangered or threatened species. The surrounding
areas include a mix of uses from commercial, office, industrial, service and repair, storage, warehouse,
restaurants, residential, public utility, commercial fishing and recreation. The proposed cumulative
development potential would be 49 residential units, 481 transient units, or 1.3 million square feet of non-
residential use. The change would not affect residential or non-residential uses but allow for transient units.
Upon inquiry,County staff informed that any transient units would have to be purchased from the existing
pool of transient units from other areas of the Keys.
In late 2012, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance 032-2012, amending
the Comprehensive Plan to assign Maritime industries (MI)Zoning District to the Mixed Use/Commercial
Future Land Use Map category, including provisions to preserve and promote working waterfront uses. If
the proposed change were adopted,all properties would be subject to said provisions,such as maintairsing a
minimum of 35% of the upland area for waterfront and water dependent uses and limiting residential units
to commercial apartments or employee housing.
Council staff has not identified adverse effects to regional resources and facilities or extra urisdictional
impacts that would result from the map amendments.
'L ADVERSE EFFECTS TO SIGNIFICANT REGIONAL RESOURCES AND FACILITIES IDENTIFIED
IN THE STRATEGIC REGIONAL POLICY PLAN.
Not Applicable.
Z. EXTRAJURISDICTIONAL IMPACTS INCONSISTENT WITH ANY COMPREHENSIVE PLANS OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WMM THE REGION.
Not Applicable.
Exhibit 7
From: Santamaria-Mayte
Sent: Wednesday,July 10, 2013 2:05 PM
: Harvey-Mitch! Hurley-Christine
Subject: F : comp plan ORC
I
From: Jetton, Rebecca [mailto:Rebecca.Jetton@deo.myflorida.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 2:03 PM
To: Santamaria-Mayte
Cc: Branda, Robin S
Subject: comp plan ORC
f�."IfNwk Mre°Iy'$;:i,!!
Wffll-ii n:�ga;il°r s her th'� t.wo ob1ectk,)ll�,s for 132 20',93 a,In,J ,93320',1.3 Ifii IQ Largo, �,Aie N aflse° ,J
fSbject on, bs4,sef ,.l onii h, :''° 0'r .04."a°re I#I IC"sid4."#It.Isi10 P,Jeni°ritlp",Ps,
1 V°lNif' 14."v1ewl#Yg the pmpv"k,ses ,J wllls"!n&inl .°#Its W:p P'JkJ n(")# any ll,J g thatthe fi�.°;o II"�I�S��4�,�� ���.°P,� ml����;��Il%.ad(,)r'1�.l,a�.lhal IY"ffa0f abhll II
w::,Pr`::." Nf."°celve�,;J L"y tV,P:°couniity p,NRSI fio the PJalte of:
d,i,e M(,)nroe 0,uinty poNcy t.o a af.liscoI.ImI',e d�.°';9e�� pth Illa"111t",
in,mu disc ,a.:6°rslon,with, you Os"'gsiln'fitlg tVbl'hai Issue we 61otef,J tI"lat If, IN°I ma af,Jopt„ on, pVlm,ls4':�, (,,,;)u`iR fl I#YiP,„ku6 ,4� d,I,e f,Jalta,
wf::P wlii not 0 s"'#Ids",!1 of fil Ifll#ifll,„
1�b'VaIIP"fk f6("'e)l.i
Rebecca Jetton
(850)717-8494
(850)766-7822 (cell)
This email communication may contain confidential information protected from disclosure b privacy laws and is intended for the use o
y p y p y f the individual��
named above.If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,this is notice to you that any dissemination,distribution or copying of this
communication or any attachment to it may be a violation of federal and state privacy laws.If you have received this email in error,please notify the sender
immediately by return email and delete this message.Please note that Florida has a broad public records law,and that all correspondence to me via email
may be subject to disclosure.Under Florida law email addresses are public records.
1