Item Q07 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: September 17 , 2013 Division: Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes No X_ Department: Planning & Environmental Resources
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 Land Use District (Zoning) Map of the Monroe County Land
Development Code, from Improved Subdivision (IS) to Suburban Commercial (SC) 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 (Quasi-judicial 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 LUD designation for the existing commercial use from Improved subdivision (IS) to Suburban
Commercial (SC). The proposed LUD amendment, together with the associated FLUM amendment(RM
to MC)will eliminate the nonconformity of the use. The LUD amendment becomes effective contingent
upon the approval of the associated FLUM amendment from Residential Medium (RM) to Mixed Use
/Commercial (MC).
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.
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#
2
3
4
5
6
7 ORDINANCE - 2013
8
9 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
10 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE LAND USE DISTRICT (ZONING) MAP
11 OF THE MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, FROM
12 IMPROVED SUBDIVISION (IS) TO SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL (SC) FOR
13 PROPERTY LOCATED AT 98175 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, MILE MARKER
14 98, KEY LARGO, LOTS 1 & 2, BLOCK 4, ROCK HARBOR ESTATES,
15 PB3/P187 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
16 HAVING REAL ESTATE NUMBER 00519750-000000; PROVIDING FOR
17 SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;
18 PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY OF STATE;
19 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY OFFICIAL
20 LAND USE DISTRICT MAP; PROVIDING FOR A CONTINGENCY;
21 PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
22
23 ------
24
25 WHEREAS, the property owner, Renaissance Farms of the Keys LLC, filed an application on July
26 31, 2012,to amend the Land Use (Zoning)District Map designation from Improved Subdivision(IS)
27 to Suburban Commercial (SC); and
28
29 WHEREAS, the subject property is located at 98175 Overseas Highway, Mile Marker 98, and is
30 legally described as Lots 1 & 2, Block 4, Rock Harbor Estates, PB3/P187 of the Public Records of
31 Monroe County, Florida, having real estate number 00519750-000000; and
32
33 WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on October 30, 2012, the Monroe County
34 Development Review Committee reviewed this ordinance and recommended approval to the
35 Board of County Commissioners in Resolution#DRC 24-12; and
36
37 WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled public hearing held on November 28, 2012, the Monroe
38 County Planning Commission reviewed this ordinance and recommended approval to the Board of
39 County Commissioners in Resolution#P51-12; and
40
41 WHEREAS, based upon the evidence presented and documentation submitted, the Board makes
42 the following Findings of Fact:
43
44 1. In 1986, as part of a county-wide rezoning, the land use district designation of the subject
45 property was amended to Improved Subdivision(IS).
46
47 2. With the 1997 adoption of the Future Land Use Map, the subject property was given a
48 designation of Residential Medium(RM).
49
50 3. MCC Sec. 102-158 states that map amendments are not intended to relieve particular
51 hardships, nor to confer special privileges or rights on any person, nor to permit a change in
52 community character, as analyzed in the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, but
53 only to make necessary adjustments in light of changed conditions.
54
55 4. MCC Sec. 102-158(d)(5)(b) provides the following factors for consideration, one or more or
56 which must be met for a map amendment:
57
58 a. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those on which the
59 text or boundary was based; and/or
60 b. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends); and/or
61 c. Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features
62 described in volume I of the plan; and/or
63 d. New issues; and/or
64 e. Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; and/or
65 f. Data updates; and/or
66 g. For FLUM changes, the principles for guiding development as defined in the
67 Florida Statutes relating to changes to the comprehensive plan.
68
69 5. Map amendments to the Monroe County Land Use District Map shall not be inconsistent with
70 the provisions and intent of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan.
71
72 6. Map amendments to the Monroe County Land Use District Map shall not be inconsistent with
73 the Principles for Guiding Development in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern.
74
75 and
76
77 WHEREAS, based upon the information and documentation submitted, the Board of County
78 Commissioners makes the following Conclusions of Law:
79
80 1. The proposed map amendment is consistent with the provisions of the Monroe County Code:
81
82 a. The existing use of the property is consistent with the purpose of the Suburban Commercial
83 (SC)district, as set forth in §130-43 of the Monroe County Code; and
84 b. The existing use of the property is permitted as a permitted use in the Suburban
85 Commercial (SC) district, as set forth in §130-93 of the Monroe County Code; and
86 c. As required by §102-158 of the Monroe County Code, the proposed map amendment shall
87 not relieve particular hardships, nor confer special privileges or rights on any person, nor
88 permit a change in community character, as analyzed in the Monroe County Year 2010
89 Comprehensive Plan; and
90 d. The proposed map amendment meets one of the factors set forth in §102-158(d)(5)(b) of
91 the Monroe County Code: 1) Data errors; The subject property was constructed as a
92 commercial use within the BU-2 zoning district that was in effect at the time of
93 construction. A nonconforming use was created with the adoption of the FLUM and when
2
94 the subject property was rezoned by the County from BU to IS. Amending the LUD Map
95 designation from IS to SC for the subject property will eliminate the nonconforming use.
96
97 and
98
99 2. The proposed map amendment is consistent with the provisions and intent of the Monroe
100 County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan:
101
102 a. The existing use of the property is consistent with the purpose of the Mixed/Use
103 Commercial (MC) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation, as set forth in Policy
104 101.4.5; and
105 b. The Suburban Commercial (SC) district designation corresponds to the Future Land Use
106 Map (FLUM) designation of Mixed/Use Commercial (MC), as set forth in Policy 101.4.21.
107
108 and
109
110 3. The proposed map amendment is not inconsistent with the Principles for Guiding Development
ill for the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern.
112
113 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
114 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA:
115
116 Section 1. Findings
117
118 The Board specifically adopts the findings of fact and conclusions of law stated above.
119
120 Section 2. Property Designation
121
122 The previously described property, which is currently designated as Improved Subdivision (IS)
123 shall be designated Suburban Commercial (SC) as shown on the attached map, which is hereby
124 incorporated by reference and attached as Exhibit 1.
125
126 Section 3. Amendment of Land Use District May
127
128 The Official Land Use District Map of Monroe County shall be amended as delineated in Section 2
129 above.
130
131 Section 4. Severability.
132
133 If any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence or provision of this ordinance shall be
134 adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect,
135 impair, invalidate, or nullify the remainder of this ordinance, but the effect thereof shall be
136 confined to the section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence, or provision immediately
137 involved in the controversy in which such judgment or decree shall be rendered.
138
139
140
3
141 Section 5. Conflicting Provisions.
142 In the case of direct conflict between any provision of this ordinance and a portion or provision of
143 any appropriate federal, state, or county law, rule code or regulation, the more restrictive shall
144 apply.
145
146 Section 6. Transmittal.
147
148 This ordinance shall be transmitted to the Florida State Land Planning Agency as required by F.S.
149 Sec. 380.05 (6), F.S. Sec. 380.0552(9) and F.S. Sec. 380.07.
150
151 Section 7. Filing.
152
153 This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of the State of Florida but shall not
154 become effective until the contingency in Section 8 is satisfied and a final approval is issued
155 according to F.S. 380.05(6) or F.S. 380.07 by the Florida State Land Planning Agency or
156 Administration Commission approving the ordinance, and if the ordinance is challenged, until the
157 challenge to the ordinance is resolved.
158
159 Section 8. Contingency
160
161 This ordinance is contingent upon the adoption and transmittal of the ordinance amending the
162 Future Land Use Map designation of the subject property from Residential Medium (RM) to
163 Mixed Use/Commerical (MC) and the approval of the change by the State Land Planning Agency
164 pursuant to Chapters 163 and 380 of the Florida Statutes.
165
166 Section 9. Effective Date.
167
168 This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law and stated above.
169
170 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida at
171 a regular meeting held on the 17th day of September, 2013.
172
173 Mayor George Neugent
174 Mayor Pro Tem Heather Carruthers
175 Commissioner Danny Kolhage
176 Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
177 Commissioner David Rice
178
179 MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
180
181 Attest: Amy Heavilin, Clerk
182
183
184 By By
185 Deputy Clerk Mayor George Neugent
186
187 ACNRO ErCCO 0 NTY ATTORNEY
APPF`s VrD AS TO FOR
Date: 18 .. °
4
Exhibiti -2013
*,•. „ OJT. 00
O
Isto SC
�.
0051 0-000060\
tt C9
� 4, ` •b
P
t 'b
The Monroe County Land Use District Map is amended
as indicated above.
Land Use District change of one parcel of land in Key Largo having Real Estate Number 00519750-000000
from Improved Subdivision(IS)to Suburban Commercial(SC) N
2
3
4 MEMORANDUM
5 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
6 We strive to be caring,professional and fair
7
8 To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
9
10 Through: Christine Hurley, Director, Growth Management Division
11 Mayte Santamaria, Assistant Director, Planning and Environmental Resources
12
13 From: Mitchell N. Harvey, AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager
14
15 Date: August 22, 2013
16
17 Subject: A REQUEST BY RENAISSANCE FARMS OF THE FLORIDA KEYS LLC TO
18 AMEND THE LAND USE DISTRICT MAP OF THE MONROE COUNTY
19 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FROM IMPROVED SUBDISIVION (IS) TO
20 SURBURBAN COMMERCIAL (SC) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 98175
21 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, MILE MARKER 98, KEY LARGO
22
23 Meeting: September 17,2012
24
25 I REQUEST
26
27 The applicant is requesting to amend the Land Use District (LUD) designation for the existing
28 commercial use from Improved Subdivision (IS) to Suburban Commercial (SC) for property
29 located at 98175 Overseas Highway, Key Largo, having real estate number 00519750-000000.
30
31
32
33
File#2012-110 Page 1 of 10
1 II BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2
3 A. Size of Site: 0.31 acres
4 B. Land Use District: IS
5 C. FLUM Designation: RM
6 D. Tier Designation: III
7 E. Flood Zone: X
8 F. Existing Use: Commercial
9 G. Existing Vegetation/Habitat: Developed land
10 H. Community Character of Immediate Vicinity: Adjacent land use consists of IS
11 district uses.
12
13 Location: Key Largo, MM 98
14 Address: 98175 Overseas Highway, Key Largo, FL
15 Legal Description: Lots 1-2, Block 4, Rock Harbor Estates, PB2/P80 of the Public
16 Records of Monroe County, Florida
17 Real Estate Number: 00519750-000000
18 Applicant: Renaissance Farms of the Florida Keys LLC
19
20
21 III RELEVANT PRIOR COUNTY ACTIONS
22
23 The property was within a RU-1 district (Single-Family Residential) and BU-2 district
24 (Medium Business) prior to 1986, when the property was re-designated IS (Improved
25 Subdivision). It is unknown as to precisely when the designation was amended from RU-1 to
26 BU-2; however, according to information within the building permit application, the property
27 was BU-2 when the building was converted to a dance studio in 1977. After 1986, all
28 subsequent permits indicate that the building was being utilized for commercial retail use.
29 Because the zoning district changed from BU-2 to IS, the existing commercial use became a
30 nonconforming use within an IS district.
31
32 The applicant presently owns a veterinary clinic/animal hospital business in an existing two
33 story masonry 3,695 square foot building located at 98175 Overseas Highway, Key Largo. The
34 subject property currently has a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation of Residential
35 Medium (RM) and a Land Use District designation of Improved Subdivision (IS). The current
36 regulations pertaining to permitted uses do not allow a 3,695 square foot commercial building.
37 However, as the building and commercial retail use were approved and permitted prior to
38 1986,the existing use is considered a lawful nonconforming use.
39
40 Monroe County Resolution No. 127-2012, approved on April 18, 2012, allows the applicant to
41 apply for a LUD and/or FLUM designations that would eliminate the nonconforming use
42 created with the adoption of the existing designations and not create an adverse effect on the
43 community. The property owner must provide satisfactory evidence that the existing use on the
44 site also existed lawfully in 1992 and was deemed nonconforming by final adoption of the
45 LUD map and/or the existing use on the site existing lawfully in 1997 and was deemed
46 nonconforming by final adoption of the FLUM to be exempt from the FLUM amendment
47 application fee.
48
File#2012-110 Page 2 of 10
1 On June 1, 2012, Monroe County Planning staff prepared an addendum to a Letter of
2 Understanding, issued on April 27, 2010, which determined that the existing use existed
3 lawfully in 1992 and was deemed nonconforming by the final adoption of the LUD map. Staff
4 has also determined that the existing use existed lawfully in 1997 and was deemed
5 nonconforming by the final adoption of the FLUM. Staff concluded that he proposed FLUM
6 category of MC and proposed LUD designations of MU or SC would eliminate the
7 nonconformity of use.
8
9 Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.20.1 states: Monroe County shall develop a series of
10 Community Master Plans. These "CommuniKeys Plans" implement a vision that was
11 developed by the local community. In 2006, the Monroe County Board of County
12 Commissioners adopted Policy 101.20.2(5) which incorporated the Key Largo Livable
13 CommuniKeys Plan into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Action Item 1.3.2
14 states: Revise the FLUM and Land Use District Maps to resolve non-conformities in the
15 planning area where appropriate. The proposed FLUM and associated LUP amendment
16 implements this Action Item of the adopted Key Largo CommuniKeys Plan.
17
18 On October 30, 2012, the Monroe County Development Review Committee considered the
19 proposed amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting.
20
21 On November 28, 2012, the Monroe County Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend
22 approval of the proposed amendment to the Board of County Commissioners.
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
File#2012-110 Page 3 of 10
1 IV REVIEW OF APPLICATION
2
3 A. DENSITYAND INTENSHYANALYSIS
4
Development potential
Existing LUD Type Adopted Standards based upon allocated
densi!y
Residential I du/lot 2 units
Improved Allocated Density/Acre
Subdivision Residential N/A N/A
(IS) Max Net/Buildable Acre
Transient 0 rooms/spaces 0 rooms/spaces
ite rota��:i 0 31
Allocated Density/Acre
, s : .
acres Transient N/A N/A
11.24 net aciiii es Max Net/Buildable Acre
2 lots Nonresidential 0 sf 0 sf
Maximum Intensity
Development potential
Proposed LUD Type Adopted Standards based upon allocated
density
Residential 3 0
Allocated Density/Acre
Suburban Residential 6 1
Commercial Max Net/Buildable Acre
(SC) Transient 10 3
Allocated Density/Acre
Total site: 031 Transient 15 3
acres Max Net/Buildable Acre
01.24, net acres Non Residential
2 lo,ts Low Intensity 0.35 4,726 sf
Medium Intensity 0.25 3,375 sf
Hilgh Intel I zilill 1 0.15 2,025 sf
5
6 Net Change: Residential (Allocated): -2 units
7 Residential (Max Net): +1 unit
8 Transient(Allocated): +3 rooms/spaces*
9 Transient(Max Net): +3 rooms/spaces*
10 Non Residential: +4,726 square feet
11
12
13 The above table provides an approximation of the development potential for residential,
14 transient and commercial development. Section 130-156 of the Land Development Code
15 states: "The density and intensity provisions set out in this section are intended to be
16 applied cumulatively so that no development shall exceed the total density limits of this
File#2012-110 Page 4 of 10
I article. For example, if a development includes both residential and commercial
2 development, the total gross amount of development shall not exceed the cumulated
3 permitted intensity of the parcel proposed for development."
4
5 There are no existing residential uses within the subject property. Any new residential use
6 must follow the Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) permit process. An existing affordable
7 residential use may also be transferred to the subject property from a sender site that is
8 located within the Upper Keys subarea.
9
10 *Monroe County does not award ROGO allocations for the development of NEW transient
11 residential units (e.g., hotel & motel rooms), pursuant to Policy 101.2.6. For the
12 development of transient units in unincorporated Monroe County, existing transient units
13 must be transferred from the same ROGO subarea to a parcel designated as Tier III or Tier
14 III-A which does not propose the clearing of any portion of an upland native habitat patch
15 of one acre or greater in area.
16
17
18 B. EFFECTS ON PUBLIC FACILITIES
19
20 Traffic Circulation(Comprehensive Plan Policy 301.1.1)
21
22 The subject property is located on the northbound side of U.S. 1 at MM 98 in Key Largo.
23 The 2011 URS Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study for Monroe County indicated a Level
24 of Service (LOS) of A within the road segment of MM 91.5 to MM 99.5. U.S 1 is required
25 to maintain an LOS of"C"in order to support development.
26
27 The proposed LUD is not anticipated to adversely impact Traffic LOS.
28
29 Potable Water(Comprehensive Plan Policy 701.1.1)
30
31 In March 2008, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) approved the
32 FKAA's modification of WUP 13-00005-5-W for a 20-year allocation from the Biscayne
33 and Floridian Aquifers. The WUP provides an annual allocation of 8,751 Million Gallons
34 (MG) or 23.98 MGD and a maximum monthly allocation of 809 MG with a limited annual
35 withdrawal from the Biscayne Aquifer of 6,492 MG or 17.79 MGD and an average dry
36 season(December I"-April 30'`) of 17.0 MGD.
37
38 The Residential LOS is 66.5 gallons/capita/day. The Non-Residential LOS is 0.35 gallons
39 /sq.ft./day. The overall level of service for potable water is 132 gallons per capita/per/day.
40
41 Maximum Residential: 1 DU X 2.24 (people per household) = 2; 2 X 66.5 gallons per
42 capita per day= 133 gallons per day
43
44 Maximum Non-Residential: 0.35 X 4,726 sq.ft.= 1,654 gallons per day
45
46 TOTAL: 133 + 1654 = 1,787 gallons/day
47
48 The proposed LUD is not anticipated to adversely impact the potable water LOS.
File#2012-110 Page 5 of 10
1
2 Solid Waste (Comprehensive Plan Policy 801.1.1)
3
4 Comprehensive Plan Policy 801.1.1 establishes the level of service for solid waste as 5.44
5 pounds per capita per day or 12.2 pounds per day per equivalent residential unit (ERU) and
6 establishes a haul out capacity of 95,000 tons per year or 42,668 ERUs. The Comprehensive
7 plan requires sufficient capacity be available at a solid waste disposal site to accommodate all
8 existing and approved development for a period of three years from the projected date of
9 completion of the proposed development of use. Monroe County has a solid waste haul out
10 contract with Waste Management LLC, which authorizes the use of in-state facilities
11 through September 20, 2016, thereby providing the County with approximately four years
12 of guaranteed capacity.
13
14 Maximum Residential = 1 DU X 2.24 (people per household) = 2; 2 X 5.44 pounds per
15 capita per day= 10 pounds per day
16
17 The proposed LUD is not anticipated to adversely impact the solid waste LOS.
18
19 Sanitary Sewer(Comprehensive Plan Policy 901.1.1
20
21 The subject property is presently connected to the Key Largo Wastewater Treatment
22 District central sewer system. The level of service (LOS) for residential and nonresidential
23 flow is 145 gallons per day per equivalent dwelling units (Exhibit 3-8 Sanitary Wastewater
24 Master Plan 2000).
25
26 Maximum Residential = 1 X 145 = 145 gallons per day
27
28 The proposed LUD is not anticipated to adversely impact the wastewater LOS.
29
30
31 Drainage Comprehensive Plan Policy 1001.1.1)
32
33 All projects shall be designed so that the discharges will meet Florida State Water Quality Standards
34 as set forth in Chapters 17-25 and 17-302, F.A.C, incorporated herein by reference. In addition, all
35 projects shall include an additional 50%of the water quality treatment specified below,which shall be
36 calculated by multiplying the volumes obtained in Section(a)by a factor of 1.5 ,Retention/Detention
37 Criteria(SFVVMD Water Quality Criteria 3.2.2.2):
38
39 a) Retention and/or detention in the overall system, including swales, lakes,
40 canals, greenways, etc., shall be provided for one of the three following
41 criteria or equivalent combinations thereof:
42
43 (1) Wet detention volume shall be provided for the first inch of runoff
44 from the developed project,or the total runoff of 2.5 inches times the
45 percentage of imperviousness,whichever is greater.
46
47 (2) Dry detention volume shall be provided equal to 75 percent of the
48 above amount computed for wet detention.
File#2012-110 Page 6 of 10
1
2 (3) Retention volume shall be provided equal to 50 percent of the above
3 amounts computed for wet detention.
4
5 b) hifill residential development within improved residential areas or
6 subdivisions existing prior to the adoption of this comprehensive plan must
7 ensure that its post-development stormwater run-off will not contribute
8 pollutants which will cause the runoff from the entire improved area or
9 subdivision to degrade receiving water bodies and their water quality as
10 stated above.
11
12 c) New Development and Redevelopment projects which are exempt from the
13 South Florida Waxer Management District permitting process shall also meet
14 the requirements of Chapter 40-4 and 40E-40,F.A.C.
15
16 The proposed LUD is not anticipated to adversely impact the Stormwater LOS.
17
18 Recreation and Open Space (Comprehensive Plan Policy 1201.1.0
19
20 The County has adopted an overall level of service, pursuant to Comprehensive Plan Policy
21 1201.1.1, for resourced-based and activity-based recreation and open space of 0.82 acres of
22 per 1,000 persons (functional population). If development occurs at 1 residential dwelling
23 units and 2.24 per capita, there would be an additional 2 people located on this property.
24
25 The proposed LUD is not anticipated to adversely impact Parks and Recreation/Open
26 Space LOS.
27
28
29 C. CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WITH THE PROVISIONS AND
30 INTENT OF THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
31
32 The proposed amendment is generally consistent with the following Goals, Objectives
33 and Policies of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, it
34 furthers:
35
36 Goal 101: Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life,
37 ensure the safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources.
38
39 Policy 101.112: Monroe County shall adopt level of service (LOS) standards for the following
40 public facility types required by Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C: roads, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage,
41 potable water, parks and recreation, and paratransit. The LOS standards are established in the
42 following sections of the Comprehensive Plan:
43
44 1. The LOS for roads is established in Traffic and Circulation Policy 301.1.1;
45
46 2. The LOS for potable water is established in Potable Water Policy 701.1.1;
47
48 3. The LOS for solid waste is established in Solid Waste Policy 801.1.1;
File#2012-110 Page 7 of 10
1
2 4. The LOS for sanitary sewer is established in Sanitary Sewer Policy 901.1.1;
3
4 5. The LOS for drainage is established in Drainage Policy 1001.1.1;and
5
6 6. The LOS for parks and recreation is established in Recreation and Open Space
7 Policy 1201.1.1
8
9 Objective 101.4: Monroe County shall regulate future development and redevelopment to
10 maintain the character of the community and protect the natural resources by providing for
11 the compatible distribution of land uses consistent with the designations shown on the
12 Future Land Use Map.
13
14 Policy 101.4.5:The principal purpose of the Mixed Use/Commercial land use category is to provide
15 for the establishment of commercial zoning districts where various types of commercial retail and
16 office may be permitted at intensities which are consistent with the community character and the
17 natural environment
18
19 Objective 101.8: Monroe County shall eliminate or reduce the frequency of uses which are
20 inconsistent with the applicable provisions of the land development regulations and the Future Land
21 Use Map, and structures which are inconsistent with applicable codes and land development
22 regulations.
23
24 Objective 101.11: Monroe County shall implement measures to direct future growth away from
25 environmentally sensitive land and towards established development areas served by existing public
26 facilities.
27
28 Objective 101.20:Monroe County shall address local community needs while balancing the needs of
29 all Monroe County communities. These efforts shall focus on the human crafted environment and
30 shall be undertaken through the Livable CommuniKeys Planning Program.
31
32 Policy 101.20.2: The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2010 Comprehensive
33 Plan as a part of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following
34 Community Master Plans have been completed in accordance with the principles outlined in this
35 section and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners:
36
37 5. The Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan is incorporated by reference into the 2010
38 Comprehensive Plan. The term Strategies in the Master Plan is equivalent to the term Objectives in
39 the Comprehensive Plan and the term Action Item is equivalent to the term Policy;the meanings and
40 requirements for implementation are synonymous.
41
42
43 D. CONSISTENCY WITH THE KEY LARGO LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS PLAN
44
45 The proposed LUD is consistent with the following Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys
46 Plan Action Item:
47
File#2012-110 Page 8 of 10
I Action Item 1.3.2: Revise the FLUM and Land Use District Maps to resolve
2 nonconformities in the planning area where appropriate.
3
4
5 E. CONSISTENCY OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WITH THE PROVISIONS AND
6 INTENT OF THE MONROE COUNTY CODE, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE:
7
8 In accordance with MCC§ 102-158(d)(5), the BOCC may consider the adoption of an
9 ordinance enacting the proposed change based on one or more of the following factors:
10
11 1. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs)from those on which the text
12 of boundary was based;
13 NA
14
15 2. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends);
16 NA
17
18 3. Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features
19 described in Volume I of the plan;
20
21 The subject property was constructed as a commercial use within a BU commercial zoning
22 districted that was in effect at the time of construction. A nonconforming use was created
23 with the adoption of the FLUM and when the subject property was rezoned by the County
24 from BU to IS. Amending the LUD Map designation from IS to SC for the subject property
25 will eliminate the nonconforming use.
26
27 4.New issues;
28 NA
29
30 5. Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; or
31 NA
32
33 6. Data updates.
34 NA
35
36
37 F. IMPACT ON COMMUNITY CHARACTER:
38
39 The subject property is presently located along the US 1 right-of way and is an existing
40 commercial use It is not anticipated that the future development of the site will impact the
41 existing character of the adjacent area.
42
43 Section 130-43, Monroe County code states: The purpose of the SC district is to establish
44 areas for commercial uses designed and intended primarily to serve the needs of the
45 immediate planning area in which they are located. This district should be established at
46 locations convenient and accessible to residential areas without use of U.S. 1.
47 The proposed LUD is consistent with the purpose of the SC district.
File#2012-110 Page 9 of 10
1 V RECOMMENDATION
2
3 Staff recommends that the LUD Map be amended from IS to SC for the subject property,
4 contingent upon the adoption, and following the effective date, of the concurrent FLUM
5 amendment from RM to MC.
6
7
8 VI EXHIBITS
9
10 1. June 1, 2012 Addendum to a Letter of Understanding Issued on April 27, 2010
11 concerning a proposed veterinary clinic/animal hospital, to be located within an existing
12 building at 1300 Almay Street, Key Largo
13 2. Monroe County Resolution 127-2012
14 3. Proposed LUD Map
15
File#2012-110 Page 10 of 10
Exhibit 1
County of Monroe
Growth Management Division
Plannige&Environmental Resources Board of County Commissioner
ptQartrnent 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"Staff').
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 1 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 1. 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 April 27,2010 Letter of Understanding(File#2010-008) 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 lawfully
in 1997 and was deemed nonconforming by the final adoption of the FLUM.
Resolution #127-2012 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
Addendum 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 Aprd 27,2010 Letter of Understanding(File#2010-008) Page 4 of 4
County of Monroe
Growth Management Division
Planning& aX1rmm atat Resources Board of County Commissioners
Deuartmeat Mayor Sylvia J.Murphy,Dist 5
2798 Oversew Highway,Suite 410 ='M1 Maya Pro Tern HeatherCarruthen,Dist 3
Marathon,FL 33050 Mario Di Gennaro,Dist,4
Voice: (305)299-2500 George Neugent,Dist 2
FAX: (305)289-2536 Kim Wigington,Dist 1
We striae to be caring,professional and fair
April 27,2010
John Kocol
PO Box 491
Islamorada,FL 33036
SUBHCT: LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING 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"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) Pro-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/AninW Hospital,Key Largo,Letter of Understanding Page I of 13
L 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 clinicianimal 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 fitture. 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.
u
Subject Property(outlined In blue)(2009)
R. SUBJECT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
1. The property's address is 1300 Alrnay 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/Aaimal 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 ft' (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 fie of floor area.
In 1972,Permit 27471 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 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 W second story addition (46'6" x 21') 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 building addition (40' x 25')
that extended the building onto Lot 12. In 1986,Permit C19066 was issued to enclose the
lower level of the addition approved under C16923, thus resulting in I,000 ft2 of additional
square footage.
2. Staff located building permits for the subject property dating back to I972. 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 C2714, 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/Animal Hospital,Key Largo,better 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 school/martial arts center and
the proposed animal hospital would be classified as commercial retail uses. Although
neither are traditional commercial retail businesses, the band 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 trade 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 ft2 of floor area and thereby would be elassified 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 schooVmardal 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 W 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 Cinic/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 W)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 ft1 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 ft1 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 ClinidAnimal Hospital,Key Largo,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 clinic/animal 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/animal 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).
S. It has been determined that the commercial 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.
10. 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 ft2),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 ft2 provided by the Monroe County Property Appraiser.
If the Applicant submits floor plans, Staff will have to compare such plans 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.
12. In the IS District, the required non-shoreline setbacks for commercial uses are as follows:
Front yard—25'; Rear yard— 20'; and Side yard — IOV15' (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 i 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/Anirnal 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 C 16923, 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' fronn
the property line adjacent to Grand Street and 5' from the property line adjacent to Almay
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 stormwater 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:
W.t+
�0}
=. —-1 2 M -V-A
Commercial Retail 3 aces/1 Q00 3,695 W 11 spsces
The redevelopment requires 11 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 ClinidAnhnal 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 R2 to 49,999 W of floor area are required to have one(1)
loading and unloading space,measuring 11 feet by 55 feet. Loading/unloading 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 loading/unloading 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 loading/unloading space on the
site at all. Further, the existing vehicle maneuverability guidelines could only allow a 55'
loadingtunloading space, with proper room to reverse, at the expense of ftuther
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' loadinglunloading 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 Clinic/Animal 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 buffery rd 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 genera.Uy 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 its 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 fe. 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 §I42-4(l)(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 f'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 ftZ 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 ft2 per
face of signage to the ground-mounted or wall-mounted 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 I 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, or if we may further assist you with your proje
Marathon office at(305)289-2500. ct, please feel free to contact our
Sincerely your
TownsIey S ,
Senior Director Planning&Environmental Resources
Proposed Veterinary,ClinicMmimal Hospital,Key Largo,Latter 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 April18,2012;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA:
S_
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.
S_
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 Wigington yes
Commissioner Heather Carruthers yes
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy yes
Commissioner George Neugent yes
OUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
23 l
L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
0% By
�' � Clerk ,�.
Mayor David Rice
CM
R
nl. M tMb
W
,CQR-
W�y \�
C✓ C'15 MONR R ED A5 TO ATTORNEY
O UNTY
p 4 _
— Date:
_J
Planning&Environmental Resources Department Fee Schedule
Page 7 of 7
0 y �/rr✓ r� i � �� � ly�ii/j� //
r �
Y ,
1 i 111� r
a r
r
r
f i
.............
��'"'��f��Ilr(✓f� r�Vl�r "� //��r) I iC I v O �c'a m „ :;Z
"imam
lm ����, X A nb �I �P""'i�l�N/ N r � lY��'%/ kV N '� •C.a .� � 4 �sW. 91111 POW�N.� tl
01
��Snd m a
��
��
�'^^„,
I
k �qIV, a d� � °n� p
� Y �R�Illllllllllllllllllpuuu �i,
i
i o
mr�i r
J r/I t�JrJ (11 r rl%
i J
r'✓�'/ ;' °� r/' I rrr �� //