Item A8BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: May 23, 2008Division: Growth MgMement
Bulk Item: Yes _ No X Department:
Staff Contact: Lisa Tennyson
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing to consider transmittal of a resolution to the
Department of Community Affairs proposing an amendment the 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive
Plan that would allow density calculation on the basis of gross density of the parcel, instead of the net,
buildable area as currently calculated.
ITEM BACKGROUND: Currently the open space requirement is deducted from the area of the
parcel before calculating density. This amendment would use the area of the entire parcel to calculate
the number of residential units allowed. The development allowed using this type of calculation would
still require applicable buffer, setback, and open space requirements, although variances are allowed to
those standards.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: The BOCC passed this resolution at its meeting of
February 20, 2008, however, DCA requested that all comprehensive plan amendments be heard and
transmitted for the 02-2008 submission at one meeting. Therefore, this item is being heard again with
other plan transmittal resolutions. On February 15, 2006, the Board at a regular meeting, upon motion
made by Commissioner Nelson and Seconded by Commissioner Rice, unanimously approved
Resolution No. 094-2006, which among other things resolved "that the Monroe County Planning
Department present to the Monroe County Planning Commission for public hearing at the soonest
opportunity a proposed ordinance amending the County's land development regulations and any
necessary Comprehensive Plan amendments authorizing (1) allowable density for affordable housing
projects to be calculated on a `gross' acreage or parcel sq. footage basis (versus, for example,
calculation on a `net' of "open space" or other similar basis) ....";
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval
TOTAL COST: NIA BUDGETED: Yes No
COST TO COUNTY:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No x AMOUNT PER MONTH Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty X OMB/Purchasing Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #
Revised 11/06
BOCC TRANSMITTAL RESOLUTION
Naval Air Station Key West
Comments
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
May 23, 2008 Meeting
Agenda Item 8
Presented by
NAS Key West
May 23, 2W /�_
j� ,
Item 8 is an amendment to Policy 101.42.1 of Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
Policy 101A.21
Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards for the future
land use categories, which are shown on the Future Land Use Map and described 8in
Policies 101.41.1 — 101.4.7. However, the Maximum Net Density for development or
redevelopment parcels where the residential component constitutes affordable workforce
or employee housing, as such housing may be defined by any local, state or federal law or
regulations, shall calculated based upon the gross acreage or total square footage of a()
parcel(s) developed as or redeveloped into such housing uses though applicable open
space setback and buffering requirements shall be adhered to except where a variance
exception or conditional use otherwise available under the Comprehensive Plan or
Monroe County Code has been granted: 19J-5.0060)(OM1.
Aeenda Item 8 Comments
I am Gail Kenson, Community Planner for Naval Air Station Key West (NAS Key West).
Mr. Ron Denies, Executive Director of NAS Key West and the military ex-officio
member of the Planning Commission presented our comments on this proposal at the
January 5, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and the February 20, 2008 BOCC
meeting. In the interest of time, I will briefly outline the Navy's concerns with the
proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. The handout provided to you will more fully
describe our position.
I would like to make it clear that we are concerned with the properties located in the 1977
and 2007 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) footprint (but are especially
concerned with the 2007 footprint as it reflects the most current data which should be
used for planning purposes). If this comprehensive plan amendment was modified to
exclude properties located in noise contours CNR 2 and CNR 3 of the 1977 AICUZ and
more appropriately the 65 DNL and higher noise contours of the 2007 AICUZ Update as
well as the Accident Potential Zones, we would not object to the amendment. As written,
the proposed amendment could adversely affect the operations and mission capability of
NAS Key West's Boca Chica Air Field due to the increased residential densities within
the 1977 and 2007 AICUZ footprints.
The goal of the Navy, as the military representative to local government, is to work with
Monroe County to protect military installations from the encroachment of incompatible
uses, ensure the public's health, safety and welfare, and to protect and preserve existing
military operations. The Navy is not opposed to compatible development, especially the
development of affordable housing. The issue is one of compatible uses adjacent or
proximate to military installations and the future of the installations. If the encroachment
creates a severe enough impact on the operations of the military installation, it may be
required to change or significantly limit its operations and mission capability.
The Principles for Guiding Development, Chapter 380.0552 (7), Florida Statutes (FS)
outline the objectives to be met by local government. Two of these principles require
local government "to ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens
May 23, 2N8 2
through sound economic development" and to protect "the value, efficiency, cost-
effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments
including: ... Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities." The impacts of
encroachment onto to NAS Key West which would reduce the mission capability could
have significant negative economic impacts on Monroe County. Additionally, to support
military installations and their positive economic impact on local communities and the
state, the Florida Legislature amended Chapter 163.3715, FS. The intent of the amended
legislation is:
• to protect the military installations in the State from incompatible development;
• to protect the public investment in military installations;
• to ensure the military installations are able to carry out their operations and
missions; and
• to ensure the economic vitality of the community is not adversely affected by a
reduction in a military installation's operations and sustainability due to
encroachment of incompatible development.
Enterprise Florida commissioned a study prepared by the Haas Center for Business
Research and Economic Development at the University of West Florida. The study,
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, dated January 2008 describes the
positive economic benefits that the Navy and other military organizations have on
Monroe County. This positive economic impact to Monroe County exceeds $635 million
in today's dollars. Briefly the data states:
Defense Spending ($ Millions)
Procurement $ 35.1
Salaries 78.3
Pensions & Transfers 34.9
Total Defense Spending $148.3
Average Earning Per Military Job $73,400
County Economic Impact' (2005)
$592.3 Million
Employment
8,319 Jobs
Sales Activity
$311.9 Million
Consumption
$33.9 Million
Capital Investments
$48.5 Million
County Economic Impact' (2007 Projected) $635.1 Million
County Economic Impact' (2010 Projected) $645.9 Million
1. For the purposes of this information, County Economic Impact refers to the
Gross Product which is the sum of money values of all final goods and services
produced in the economy and sold on organized markets during a specified
period of time.
Source: Florida Defense Factbook January 2008, page 44, prepared by Haas Center
for Business Research and Economic Development.
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, Volume 2, January
2008, Table 30, page 104, prepared by Haas Center for Business Research
and Economic Development.
slay 23, 2008 3
Principle (1) requires local government "to protect the public health, safety, and welfare
of the citizens of the Florida Keys..." It could be argued that the County would be
remiss, in terms of public health, safety and welfare, if they knowingly permitted housing,
specifically, affordable housing within the higher noise level areas, contrary to their
adopted regulations. It could also be argued that it is discriminatory to relegate
affordable housing to those areas which have public health, safety and welfare concerns,
such as areas with high noise levels, high volumes of vehicular traffic, etc. The term the
Navy (U. S. Government) uses regarding this type of development is contrary to the
principles of "Environmental Justice" (as defined by U.S. EPA).
The proposed amendment is not consistent with Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) which requires
local governments with military installations to update or amend their comprehensive
plan to include criteria and address compatibility of adjacent or closely proximate lands
with existing military installations in their future land use element by June 30, 2006. The
County has not adopted the required plan amendments. NAS Key West would welcome
the opportunity to assist Monroe County to meet this statutory requirement to the benefit
of Monroe County, its residents, and military organizations.
The Data and Analysis (DA) for the proposed amendment is inadequate and in our
opinion does not meet the minimum statutory requirement of Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) FS.
The DA does not address the number or location of the parcels that will benefit, the
potential number of additional units that might be provided, how additional ROGO
allocations will be provided to accommodate increased densities, impacts on
infrastructure such as potable water and wastewater, the anticipated population growth,
hurricane evacuation, and most importantly the compatibility of uses in close proximity
to NAS Key West or other military installations. The DA lacks analysis of potential
economic impacts to the community (loss of jobs, revenue, etc.) as a result of the County
continuing to permit the encroachment of incompatible development and uses that
negatively impact the ability of NAS Key West to continue its current operations. Much
of the data referred to in the proposed ordinance is found in the Monroe County 2010
Comprehensive Plan Technical Document and is 15 to 20 years old and out of date.
Again, the Navy is not opposed to the development of affordable housing or providing
incentives to increase the development of affordable housing in Monroe County that is
compatible with military operations. It is estimated that 75 percent of active duty
military personnel and civilians employed by the military in Monroe County, rent or own
homes in the local markets. The goal of the Navy and other military organizations is to
work cooperatively with Monroe County to protect military installations from the
encroachment of incompatible uses; ensure affordable housing is located in such areas
that protect the public health, safety, and welfare; to protect the military installations
from incompatible development; to protect the public investment in military installations;
to ensure the military installations are able to carry out their operations and missions;
and to ensure the economic vitality of the community is not adversely affected by a
reduction in a military installation's operations and sustainability due to encroachment of
incompatible development.
May 23, zoos 4
We believe that the County's obligation to provide affordable housing is not outweighed
by the obligation to protect the County's economic well being, protect public investments
or the obligation to protect public health, safety and welfare; hence the properties within
the AICUZ footprint should be excluded. As an alternative we would suggest that any
areas which pose encroachment challenges to an adjacent or nearby military installation
be regulated by an overlay district. An overlay district could provide regulations that
would permit compatible development and ensure the military installation's operations
sustainability would not be negatively impacted.
Approval of this amendment would make a bad situation worse.
This concludes my presentation. As I stated previously, we are providing the
Commission with our detailed comments in the form of a handout. If you have any
questions, I would be happy to answer them.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on behalf of Naval Air Station Key West.
May 23, 2M 5
Detailed Navy Comments — May 23, 2008
We question why this proposed amendment is required recognizing that Monroe County
has already adopted a number of Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies as
well as Land Development Regulations (LDRs) that provide significant incentives for the
preservation and development of affordable housing. These provisions include, but are
not limited to, density bonuses, the use of Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs), and
the transfer of ROGO allocations from one parcel to another. The Monroe County 2010
Comprehensive Plan Technical Document, which is heavily referenced in the proposed
ordinance, provides an abundance of strategies which may be more effective than density
increases in the AICUZ. These strategies were developed over 15 years ago and have not
been implemented. Additionally, much of the data cited in the ordinance is outdated and
not longer accurate.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment proposes an increase in the overall
density county -wide. This issue has not been addressed. It is our contention that the staff
did not provide DCA with the required Data and Analysis (DA) of the impact of the
increase in the overall density potential with the amendment, including the estimated
increase in numbers of dwellings and population. This analysis/backup information is
required to be part of the (DA) for every comprehensive plan and Land Development
Regulation (LDR) amendment. Such an analysis should include an inventory of vacant
parcels that would be large enough to benefit from an increase in density and in locations
where affordable housing would be logical (i.e. dry parcels near employment centers)
outside of the AICUZ footprint.
We believe the proposed amendment is generally inconsistent with various sections of
Chapter 163 FS, Chapter 380.0552 FS, 9J-5 FAC, and the Monroe County 2010
Comprehensive Plan.
Chapter 163.3175(1) FS - The proposed comprehensive plan amendment is inconsistent
with chapter 163.3175(1) F.S. which states that the Florida Legislature finds that
incompatible development of land close to a military installation can adversely affect the
ability of the installation to carry out its mission and can threaten public health, safety
and welfare. Approval of this ordinance would not be consistent with this statute. There
are properties affected by this amendment that are within Noise Zone 2 (CNR 2) and
Noise Zone 3 (CNR 3) of the 1977 AICUZ Study and Noise Zones 2 and 3 (65 — 79 DNL)
of the 2007 AICUZ Update and as such poses a risk to the public health, safety, and
welfare of the residents and poses an adverse impact on NAS Key West's ability to carry
out its mission. The County is currently operating under the ordinance they adopted to
address the 1977 AICUZ Study. The County has not yet adopted the recommendations
of the 2007 AICUZ Update that was forwarded to the County in May 2007. This statute
also recognizes the positive economic impact military installations have on a local
economy and further "finds it desirable for the local governments in the state to cooperate
with military installations to encourage compatible land use, help prevent incompatible
encroachment, and facilitate the continued presence of major military installations in this
state." The ordinance could adversely affect the operations of Naval Air Station (NAS)
May 23, 2M 6
Key West's Boca Chica Air Field due to the increased residential (transient, non -transient,
and live -aboard) densities that will be permitted to locate within the 1977 AICUZ noise
contours and 2007 AICUZ footprint. In addition to AICUZ-related incompatibility issues,
urban development creates other encroachment issues that may, for example, interfere
with radio frequencies or impact non -aviation training missions.
Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) F.S. states in part; "...The future land use plan shall be based
upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, including the amount of land required
to accommodate anticipated growth; the projected population of the area; the character of
undeveloped land; the availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services; the
need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of
nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community; the
compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military
installations; ..." The Data and Analysis (DA) for the proposed amendments does not
adequately address or support an increase in population growth (US Census Bureau data
indicates a six percent decline in population for Monroe County between 2000 and 2006),
hurricane evacuation, concurrency issues (potable water, highway capacity, etc.), the
housing needs associated with the such growth, the need for redevelopment, the
elimination of non -conforming uses which are inconsistent with community character,
and most importantly the compatibility of uses in close proximity to NAS Key West.
The DA does not address the potentially negative economic impacts to the community
(loss of jobs, revenue, etc.) should the Navy or other military organization be required to
reduce their mission capability because of the continued encroachment of incompatible
uses granted permits by Monroe County. Much of the data referred to in the proposed
ordinance is found in the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan Technical Document
and is 15 to 20 years old and out of date and no longer accurate.
Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) F.S. further states: `"The future land use plan element shall
include criteria to be used to achieve the compatibility of adjacent or closely proximate
lands with military installations." The ordinance does not propose any criteria to achieve
compatibility for those properties located in the Noise Zones 2 and 3 in the 2007 AICUZ
Study Update. Residential uses are discouraged in the 65 DNL (day night average sound
level) to 69 DNL and strongly discouraged in the 70 — 74 DNL noise contours.
Additionally, it is recommended that all properties (residential and commercial) in the 60
DNL to 64 DNL noise contours have a Real Estate Fair Disclosure Statement recorded in
the Monroe County Public Records, similar to those required by the Escambia County
Land Development Code. The Disclosure should notify property owners and occupants:
1) which noise level contour the property is located; and 2) require appropriate site design
and the use of sound attenuation construction methods to reduce the noise impact on uses
within 60 DNL and higher noise contours for both Key West International Airport and
NAS Key West Boca Chica Air Field. The disclosure should also note that these sound
attenuation measures do not mitigate outdoor noise. Outdoor living is a part of the
Florida Keys lifestyle and will be greatly affected by noise. In addition to or in lieu of
the Disclosure Statement the following options could be used to provide notice to
property owners: 1) include AICUZ information (similar to affordable housing deed
May 23,208
7
restrictions) on the Monroe County Property Appraiser's Record Card for affected
parcels; 2) include AICUZ noise contours on the GIS maps on the Monroe County
Property Appraiser's website (Virginia Beach, Virginia provides this type of service at
htta://www.vbgov.com/e-aov/emaoaing/access/cetMao.aso); or the Monroe County BOCC
could adopt a resolution similar to BOCC Resolution 67-1979 identifying subdivisions
within the AICUZ noise contours and record the resolution in the Monroe County Public
Records.
Upon reviewing 380.0552 Florida Statutes, the Monroe County Area of Critical State
Concern (ACSC) Principles for Guiding Development, we understand the County's
obligations under the Principles are: "To ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida
Keys and its citizens through sound economic development"; To protect the historical
heritage of the Florida Keys ; "To protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and
amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments, including: Naval Air
Station Key West'; "To make available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the
population of the Florida Keys'; "To provide adequate alternatives for the protection of
public safety and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a post -
disaster reconstruction plan'; and "To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the
citizens of the Florida Keys and maintain the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource."
We believe that the County's obligation to provide affordable housing is not outweighed
by its obligation to protect public health, safety and welfare; to enhance the quality of life;
to protect the County's economic well being; or protect pubic investments; hence the
properties within the AICUZ footprint should be excluded. We understand, based on Mr.
Coleman's comments to the Board of County Commissioners in his January 23, 2008
staff report, that the proposed amendment must be reviewed against the Principles for
Guiding Development "as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied
in isolation from the other provisions." We maintain that the proposed comprehensive
plan amendment when reviewed for consistency with the Principles for Guiding
Development as a whole is not consistent with the intent of the Principles as a whole and
more specifically those provisions identified above.
The proposed amendment does not appear to be consistent with Section 380.0552,
Florida Statutes, Principles for Guiding Development, specifically Principle (d) which
states "To ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through
sound economic development."
Enterprise Florida commissioned a study prepared by the Haas Center for Business
Research and Economic Development at the University of West Florida. The study,
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, dated January 2008 describes the
positive economic benefits the Navy and other military organizations have on Monroe
County. This positive economic impact to Monroe County exceeds $635 million in
today's dollars. Briefly the data states:
Defense Spending ($ Millions)
Procurement $ 35.1
Salaries 78.3
May 23, 2008
8
Pensions & Transfers 34.9
Total Defense Spending $148.3
Average Earning Per Military Job $73,400
County Economic Impact' (2005)
$592.3 Million
Employment
8,319 Jobs
Sales Activity
$311.9 Million
Consumption
$33.9 Million
Capital Investments
$48.5 Million
County Economic Impact' (2007 Projected) $635.1 Million
County Economic Impact' (2010 Projected) $645.9 Million
1. For the purposes of this information, County Economic Impact refers to the
Gross Product which is the sum of money values of all final goods and services
produced in the economy and sold on organized markets during a specified
period of time.
Source: Florida Defense Facibook January 2008, page 44, prepared by Haas Center
for Business Research and Economic Development.
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, Volume 2, January
2008, Table 30, page 104, prepared by Haas Center for Business Research
and Economic Development.
Principle (g) states "To protect the historical heritage of the Florida Keys." There are
numerous military installations and sites throughout the Florida Keys. The US military
has had a presence in the Key West and the Florida Keys dating back to 1823 when a
Naval Base was first established to counteract piracy. The US military and the Navy,
specifically, are an intrinsic part of Monroe County's history. It is not uncommon for
military personnel to retire and become a permanent part of the Florida Keys after being
stationed in the Florida Keys.
Principle (h)(4) states: "To protect the values, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and
amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments including:... Naval Air
Station Key West and other military installations." The proposed significant increase in
residential densities within the Noise Zones 2 and 3 as depicted in the 1977 AICUZ
footprint and the 2007 AICUZ footprint is an encroachment into military operations and
as such may increase the cost of operation or may negatively impact the mission
capability of NAS Key West. There are other encroachment challenges created by
increased residential densities adjacent military installations in Monroe County that may
pose additional public health, safety and welfare concerns. (See attached Encroachment
Challenges Synopsis, page 12)
Principle (k) states: "To provide adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety
and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a postdisaster
reconstruction plan." The impacts on the potential increase in densities, population and
vehicles was on hurricane evacuation was not considered in the DA. Development in the
county has an effect on hurricane evacuation which impacts all of the jurisdictions in
Monroe County and could affect the development potential of the other jurisdictions.
This hurricane evacuation issue warrants being addressed as part of the required DA.
May 23, 2008
9
Principle (1) states: "To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the
Florida Keys and maintain the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource." If the
proposed amendment becomes effective, the local government will be permitting
increased residential densities in a high noise area and will be creating public health,
safety, and welfare concerns. Measures to achieve an outdoor to indoor noise level
reduction through sound attenuating construction methods may be an effective method to
reduce noise levels in the 64 DNL and lower. It will not, however, eliminate outdoor
noise problems. Outdoor living is a part of the Florida Keys lifestyle and will be greatly
affected by noise. This is further supported by Chapter 163.3175(1) F.S. as cited above.
Chapter 9J5-006(3)(c)2 FAC requires amendments to the future land use element to
provide for compatibility of adjacent uses. Chapter 9J-5.003(23) defines "compatibility"
as "a condition in which land uses or conditions can coexist in relative proximity to each
other in a stable fashion over time such that no use or condition is unduly negatively
impacted directly or indirectly by another use or condition." The proposed amendment
creates a compatibility issue for both the residential uses and military installation. These
uses negatively impact each other. The proposed amendment does not enhance the
quality of life or ensure the safety of residents and visitors due to compatibility issues.
The ordinance has been revised, referencing several comprehensive plan objectives and
policies. Comprehensive Plan Policy 601.1.12 which states `By January 4, 1997, Monroe
County shall adopt Land Development Regulations which may include density bonuses,
impact fee waiver programs, and other possible regulations to encourage affordable
housing." Monroe County does have existing LDRs which create density bonuses for
affordable housing.
Objective 601.2 states "Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to encourage housing
of various types, sizes and price ranges to meet the demands of current and future
residents." Monroe County has several LDRs which already implement this objective.
Objective 601.6 states `By January 4, 1998, Monroe County shall formulate housing
implementation programs corresponding to each of the specific objectives defined within
this element, including: 1. the expansion of public information assistance; 2. incentive
programs, to be implemented in conjunction with the Permit Allocation System, to
promote the development of affordable and elderly housing; and 3. the elimination of
substandard housing." It is unclear how the proposed comprehensive plan amendment
implements the above objective given the programs and regulations ah-eady in place.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment would promote an increase in population
living in the high noise areas or accident potential areas, as well as creating other types of
encroachment concern. It could be argued that the County would he remiss, in terms of
public health, safety and welfare, if they knowingly permitted housing, specifically,
affordable housing within the higher noise level areas, contrary to their adopted
regulations. It could also be argued that it is discriminatory to relegate affordable
housing to those areas which have public health, safety and welfare concerns, such as
areas with high noise levels, high volumes of vehicular traffic, etc. The term the Navy (U.
Wr 23, zoos 10
S. Government) uses regarding this type of development is contrary to the principles of
"Environmental Justice" (as defined by U.S. EPA). We believe that the County's
obligation to provide affordable housing is not outweighed by the obligation to protect
the County's economic well being, protect public investments or the obligation to protect
public health, safety and welfare; hence the properties within the AICUZ footprint should
be excluded. As an alternative we would suggest that any areas which pose
encroachment challenges to an adjacent or nearby military installation be regulated by an
overlay district. An overlay district could provide regulations that would permit
compatible development and ensure the military installation's operations sustainability
would not be negatively impacted.
Approval of this amendment would make a bad situation worse with incompatible
development within the latest AICUZ footprint.
May 23, zoos
11
ENCROACHMENT CHALLENGES SYNOPSIS
The types of encroachment sources, described and defined below are drawn from various
studies and reports of Navy and non -Navy actions that have occurred which have had an
impact on training and test activities. Although not all encompassing, these potential
sources of encroachment need to be examined to determine if they exist at an installation,
range, military training routes (MTR), special use airspace (SUA)or operation areas
(OPAREA). Once a potential challenge is identified, it should be analyzed to determine
the potential impacts and constraints imposed.
Urban Development (population growth) — As communities grow toward the
boundaries of installations, ranges, OPAREAs, and beneath MTRs and SUAs, land use
development could become incompatible with the Navy's mission. Incompatible
development can seriously compromise the quality of the Navy's training and test mission
requirements. Urban development may not surmount to an immediate threat, but
continued incompatible development could present a long-range threat to the mission.
Urban development may also damage habitat needed for wildlife to survive, making the
installation or range the only available habitat in the area.
Airborne noise - The central issue of airborne noise is the impact, or perceived impact,
on people, animals (both wild and domestic), structures, and land use.
Competition for air space, land, and sea space - The Navy owns, controls, or uses
resources, that need to be available to accomplish testing and training missions. These
resources must be of sufficient size and quality to provide effective training and testing.
Public pressure to share or relinquish some of these resources may inhibit the Navy from
accomplishing its training and test objectives, or inhibit anti-terrorism/force protection
programs.
Competition for scarce resources (oil, gas, minerals, potable and irrigated water, and
ocean access) - Community pressure to gain access to valuable resources located on land
or sea that Navy owns or controls may affect Navy's ability to use this land or water for
training or test objectives.
Threatened and Endangered Species — Restrictions for the purpose of protecting
threatened or endangered species can reduce the value of an installation, range, or
OPAREA for testing and training by limiting the types of permissible activities in terms
of composition, magnitude, or timing.
Maritime issues (Marine Mammals, Endangered Species, Fish Habitats, Coral Reefs,
Coastal Zones, Sanctuaries, and other marine protected areas) -- Regulatory or permit
requirements protecting ocean resources cumulatively affects the Navy's ability to
conduct training exercises or testing in the marine environment.
May 23, zoos
12
Ordnance - Unexploded Ordnance (UXO)/Munitions -- Application of various
environmental laws to munitions training, demolition, disposal, or testing activities could
have severe and adverse impacts on readiness.
Safety Arcs and footprints (Explosive Safety Quantity Distance (ESQD) Arcs,
Surface Danger Zones, Weapons Safety Footprint Areas) - Land adjacent to
installations and range safety zones, including land within the installation or range, may
not be suitable for certain types of land use or economic development purposes.
Frequency Spectrum - The competition for available frequency spectrum may lead to a
reduction in available spectrum for training and developmental/operational testing
activities. The lack of spectrum may decrease the effectiveness of exercises by restricting
the number of war -fighting systems that can participate. As the potential for residential
and commercial encroachment increases, so does the risk of increased RF emitters and
receivers, which could result in Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) problems between
Navy systems and public or commercial systems.
Air Quality - Impacts to training and test missions in non -attainment areas, and
conformance with individual State Implementation Plans (SIPS), may restrict existing
mission requirements or preclude execution of new missions, as well as deployment and
use of new weapon platforms.
Water Quality - Discharge permit requirements and timelines and/or prohibited or
restricted access to wetlands and/or their buffer zones can restrict existing mission
training, preclude or restrict integration of new technology/weapons systems into existing
missions and training or preclude future growth and execution of new missions in
amphibious, riverine, estuarine and other salt and fresh water related missions.
Interpretation of Historical/Environmental regulations - Regulatory or permit
requirements may affect training and testing activities. Other non -Navy actions may
affect Navy's current regulatory or permit requirements under these regulations.
Interagency Coordination (e.g., Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS), and State equivalents) - Navy often uses land controlled by another
Federal or State agency. The types of allowable uses and restrictions are often the result
of negotiations between the parties or subject to the other Federal agency's policies and
regulations. These restrictive uses can limit training and testing activities.
Legislative initiatives that restrict training or testing activities - Congress may enact
legislation that directly or indirectly limits the Navy's flexibility to conduct training or
testing activities.
May 23'2M 13
RESOLUTION NO. -2008
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TRANSMITTING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AN ORDINANCE AMENDING MONROE
COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES
GOVERNING MAXIMUM DENSITIES FOR AFFORDABLE AND
WORKFORCE HOUSING; RESCINDING RESOLUTION 060-2008
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on May 23, 2008,
for the purposes of considering the transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs,
for review and comment, a proposed amendment to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners makes the following findings of fact:
1. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 8, 2008,
and made recommendations to the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners regarding the ordinance subject to transmittal to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs.
2. The proposed ordinance adopting changes to the Monroe County Year
2010 Comprehensive Plan will promote the County's efforts to provide affordable
and workforce housing for all residents of the Florida Keys.
NOW BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the
recommendation of the Planning Commission to amend the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan.
Section 2. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby transmit the proposed
amendment to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review and comment in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 163.3184 and 380.0552, Florida Statutes.
Section 3. The Monroe County staff is given the authority to prepare and submit the
required transmittal letter and supporting documents for the proposed amendment in accordance
with the requirement of 9J-11.0006 of the Florida Administrative Code.
Section 4. The Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to forward a copy of this
resolution to the Director of Planning and Environmental Resources.
Section 5. Resolution 060-2008 dated February 20, 2008, transmitting such a
proposed comprehensive plan amendment, upon which no action was taken, is hereby rescinded.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a special meeting held on the 23rd day of May, A.D., 2008.
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Mayor Pro Tern Mario Di Gennaro
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Dixie Spehar _
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY _
CHARLES "SONNY" McCOY, MAYOR
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK MO R ovCOUNTY e nO Ey FMl
Date:
DEPUTY CLERK
County Attorney
2
BOCC ORDINANCE
May 23, 2008
ORDINANCE NO. -2008
AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS CONCERNING GROSS ACREAGE DENSITY
CALCULATIONS FOR AFFORDABLE, EMPLOYEE AND WORKFORCE
HOUSING; AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN TO ALLOW MAXIMUM NET DENSITY CALCULATIONS FOR
AFFORDABLE, EMPLOYEE, AND WORKFORCE HOUSING TO BE
CALCULATED ON A GROSS ACREAGE BASIS WHILE RETAINING OPEN
SPACE, SETBACK AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY AND THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS;
PROVIDING FOR THE TRANSMITTAL TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (the "Board")
has considered the comments of the public, recommendations of the Planning Commission,
County staff and the Workforce Housing Task Force and its counsel, the Board's direct
responsibility to the act diligently to provide affordable housing opportunities pursuant to
the authority and power granted to it by the Legislature in s. 125.01055, F.S.; and
WHEREAS, the Board makes the following Findings of Fact and cites the
following technical data and analysis from the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive
Plan ("Comp Plan") as support for proposed amendment to the Comp Plan as proposed
herein:
1. The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Technical Document Housing Element 7.0 (p. 7-24) projected the number of
housing units needed for resident households of Monroe County by 2002
according to various income groups as 7,093 dwelling units for "Very Low"
income households, 5,320 dwelling units for "Low" income households, and
an additional 5,528 dwelling units needed for "Moderate" income
households; and
2. The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Technical Document Housing Element 7.0 (p. 7-33) also states that the
"public sector can provide for a variety of densities which can increase the
flexibility of the private sector to provide affordable housing in more
situations"; and
3. The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Technical Document Housing Element 7.0 (p. 7-32) also states that "[c]urrent
conditions and projected demands in Monroe County make it appropriate to
explore innovative means such as planned unit developments and cluster
construction configuration to maximize utilization of scarce land resources in
Monroe County"; and
4. The Board at a regular meeting held on February 15, 2006,
upon motion made by Commissioner Nelson and Seconded by Commissioner
Rice, unanimously approved Resolution No. 094-2006, which among other
things resolved "that the Monroe County Planning Department present to the
Monroe County Planning Commission for public hearing at the soonest
opportunity a proposed ordinance amending the County's land development
regulations and any necessary Comprehensive Plan amendments authorizing
(1) allowable density for affordable housing projects to be calculated on a
`gross' acreage or parcel sq. footage basis (versus, for example, calculation
on a `net' of "open space" or other similar basis) ...."; and
5. The Monroe County, Florida, Affordable Housing Needs
Assessment, authored by The Metropolitan Center at Florida International
University (2007), provides additional recent data and analysis corroborating
the information set forth in the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive
Plan Technical Document Housing Element 7.0 and supporting the proposed
comprehensive plan amendment (a copy of the Assessment is being provided
to the Department of Community Affairs with the submittal of this proposed
amendment).
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Technical
Document Housing Element 7.0 confirms that "[1]and prices in Monroe County represent a
higher proportion of total development costs than in any other part of Florida" (p. 7-33); and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Technical
Document Housing Element 7.0 also states that "[1]ocal ordinances should be adopted which
ease land development requirements and construction regulations to reduce the cost of
affordable housing development" and that "[d]ensity relaxation" should be included as an
incentive to provide for affordable housing projects (p. 7-29); and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Technical
Document Housing Element 7.0 directs consideration of housing strategy guidelines,
including providing "[a] variety of residential densities" in order "to encourage the private
sector to construct a variety of housing unit types" (p. 7-36); and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policy 601.1.12
directs the County to "adopt Land Development Regulations which may include density
bonuses, impact fee waiver programs, and other possible regulations to encourage affordable
housing"; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Objective 601.2
directs the County to "adopt programs and policies to encourage housing of various types,
sizes and price ranges to meet the demands of current and future residents"; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Objective 601.6
directs the County to "formulate housing implementation programs corresponding to each of
the specific objectives defined within this element, including "incentive programs, to be
E
implemented in conjunction with the Permit Allocation System, to promote the development
of affordable and elderly housing"; and
fact:
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners makes the following findings of
1. A lack of sufficient affordable housing opportunities for the
local workforce creates serious risks to the local economy. Moreover,
increasingly burdensome housing costs and short supply places undue
pressure on elderly, working poor and disabled persons.
2. There is limited land area suitable for residential development
remaining in the County.
3. There is an ongoing dramatic exodus of working families and
other community members from our County with a corresponding decrease in
population and the transformation of traditionally available housing stock
into seasonal second homes making these dwelling units no longer available
for rental by present and future full-time local residents.
4. Permitting the calculation of the maximum number affordable,
employee and workforce housing units based upon gross acreage or the total
square footage of a given parcel or group of parcels will likely lead to the
creation of more affordable housing.
5. This proposed amendment to Policy 101.4.21 will complement
the 2010 Comprehensive Plan's existing housing provisions by providing
incentives for private and public sector housing creation and/or preservation
by maximizing housing uses of appropriate sites.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT:
[Amendments are presented in stfi ethrr,ugh to indicate deletions and underline to indicate
additions to text. All other words, characters, and language of the comprehensive plan remain un-
amended.]
Section 1. The following language is adopted as an amendment to the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan to replace in its entirety the current Policy 101.4.21,
except that the table labeled "Future Land Use Densities and Intensities" that is now part of
Policy 101.4.21 shall not be changed by this amendment:
Policy 101.4.21
Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards
for the future land use categories, which are shown on the Future Land Use
Map and described in Policies 101.4.1 - 101.4.17. However, the Maximum
Net Density for development or redevelol2ment parcels where the residential
component constitutes affordable workforce or employee housing, as such
housing may be defined by any local, state or federal law or regulation, shall
3
be calculated based upon the gross_acregge or total square footage_of parcel(s)
developed or redeveloped into such housing uses.
Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or provision
of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not affected by such
validity.
Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance
are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
Section 4. This ordinance shall be transmitted to the Secretary of State and by the
Planning Department to the Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Chapter 163,
Florida Statutes.
Section 5. This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe
County, Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 201h day of February, A.D., 2008.
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Mayor Pro Tern Mario Di Gennaro
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Dixie Spehar
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
M.
CHARLES "SONNY" McCOY, MAYOR
(SEAL)
MONAM COMY ATTORNEY
APPRO 0 AS .0 M
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
Date:
DEPUTY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
County Attorney
4
STAFF MEMO
TO: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Lisa Tennyson, Affordable Housing Coordinato
THROUGH: Reggie Paros, Division Director of Housing and Community Development
DATE: May 9, 2008
SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal Meeting: Proposed Gross Density
Text Amendment
MEETING DATE: May 23, 2008
1. Summary
This proposed text amendment will simplify density calculations for parcels to be developed or
redeveloped as affordable, workforce or employee housing. With this amendment, maximum
allowable density shall be calculated on the gross acreage or total square footage of a parcel,
without first subtracting the land area required for open space, setbacks and buffer areas. This
amendment does not preclude the requirements for open space, setbacks, and buffer areas; they
will still apply.
The proposed amendment will permit a modest increase in the number of affordable housing
units that can be built on a parcel, helping us to address our housing needs, incentivizing
affordable development and enhancing its financial feasibility, and in the case of county -owned
parcels for affordable housing development, maximizing the county's significant investment.
2. Background
In February 2006, BOCC adopted Resolution 094-2006 directing this change in density
calculation for affordabletworkforce housing development. In November 2007, the Development
Review Committee heard and approved the proposed ordinance. In January 2008, the Planning
Commission heard and approved the proposed ordinance.
On February 20, 2008, the BOCC heard this proposed ordinance. Much discussion related to
the language in the proposed ordinance that specifically indicated that projects incorporating a
gross acreage calculation may also be entitled to seek variances and to ensure an understanding
that a project with a gross acreage calculation did not necessarily preclude that project from also
On February 20, 2008, the BOCC heard this proposed ordinance. The Growth Management
Division proposed a slightly modified version of the ordinance (presented as "Option Two")
deleting language that referred to any specific occupancy requirements for housing on school
district sites, as these are addressed by statute. The ordinance with this modification (Option
Two) was approved unanimously, and is the version presented for the May 23, 2008 transmittal
meeting.
3. Staff Recommendation
Approval.
Naval Air Station Key West
Comments
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
May 23, 2008 Meeting
Agenda Item 8
Presented by
NAS Key West
May 23, 2M f� U ]
Item 8 is an amendment to Policy 101.42.1 of Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
Policy 101.4.21
Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards for the future
land use categories, which are shown on the Future Land Use Map and described 8in
Policies 101.41.1 — 101.4.7. However, the Maximum Net Density for development or
redevelopment parcels where the residential component constitutes affordable, workforce
or employee housing as such housing may be defined by any local, state or federal law or
regulations shall calculated based upon the gross acreage or total square footage of a()
parcels) developed as or redeveloped into such housing uses, though applicable oven
space setback and buffering requirements shall be adhered to, except where a variance,
exception or conditional use otherwise available under the Comprehensive Plan or
Monroe County Code has been granted: 19J-5.0060)(OM1.
Aeenda Item 8 Comments
I am Gail Kenson, Community Planner for Naval Air Station Key West (NAS Key West).
Mr. Ron Denies, Executive Director of NAS Key West and the military ex-officio
member of the Planning Commission presented our comments on this proposal at the
January 5, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and the February 20, 2008 BOCC
meeting. In the interest of time, I will briefly outline the Navy's concerns with the
proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. The handout provided to you will more fully
describe our position.
I would like to make it clear that we are concerned with the properties located in the 1977
and 2007 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) footprint (but are especially
concerned with the 2007 footprint as it reflects the most current data which should be
used for planning purposes). If this comprehensive plan amendment was modified to
exclude properties located in noise contours CNR 2 and CNR 3 of the 1977 AICUZ and
more appropriately the 65 DNL and higher noise contours of the 2007 AICUZ Update as
well as the Accident Potential Zones, we would not object to the amendment. As written,
the proposed amendment could adversely affect the operations and mission capability of
NAS Key West's Boca Chica Air Field due to the increased residential densities within
the 1977 and 2007 AICUZ footprints.
The goal of the Navy, as the military representative to local government, is to work with
Monroe County to protect military installations from the encroachment of incompatible
uses, ensure the public's health, safety and welfare, and to protect and preserve existing
military operations. The Navy is not opposed to compatible development, especially the
development of affordable housing. The issue is one of compatible uses adjacent or
proximate to military installations and the future of the installations. If the encroachment
creates a severe enough impact on the operations of the military installation, it may be
required to change or significantly limit its operations and mission capability.
The Principles for Guiding Development, Chapter 380.0552 (7), Florida Statutes (FS)
outline the objectives to be met by local government. Two of these principles require
local government "to ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens
May 23, 2N8 2
through sound economic development" and to protect "the value, efficiency, cost-
effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments
including: ... Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities." The impacts of
encroachment onto to NAS Key West which would reduce the mission capability could
have significant negative economic impacts on Monroe County. Additionally, to support
military installations and their positive economic impact on local communities and the
state, the Florida Legislature amended Chapter 163.3715, FS. The intent of the amended
legislation is:
• to protect the military installations in the State from incompatible development;
• to protect the public investment in military installations;
• to ensure the military installations are able to carry out their operations and
missions; and
• to ensure the economic vitality of the community is not adversely affected by a
reduction in a military installation's operations and sustainability due to
encroachment of incompatible development.
Enterprise Florida commissioned a study prepared by the Haas Center for Business
Research and Economic Development at the University of West Florida. The study,
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, dated January 2008 describes the
positive economic benefits that the Navy and other military organizations have on
Monroe County. This positive economic impact to Monroe County exceeds $635 million
in today's dollars. Briefly the data states:
Defense Spending ($ Millions)
Procurement $ 35.1
Salaries 78.3
Pensions & Transfers 34.9
Total Defense Spending $148.3
Average Earning Per Military Job $73,400
County Economic Impact' (2005)
$592.3 Million
Employment
8,319 Jobs
Sales Activity
$311.9 Million
Consumption
$33.9 Million
Capital Investments
$48.5 Million
County Economic Impact' (2007 Projected) $635.1 Million
County Economic Impact' (2010 Projected) $645.9 Million
1. For the purposes of this information, County Economic Impact refers to the
Gross Product which is the sum of money values of all final goods and services
produced in the economy and sold on organized markets during a specified
period of time.
source: Florida Defense Factbook January 2008, page 44, prepared by Haas Center
for Business Research and Economic Development.
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, Volume 2, January
2008, Table 30, page 104, prepared by Haas Center for Business Research
and Economic Development.
rtay 23, 20M 3
Principle (1) requires local government "to protect the public health, safety, and welfare
of the citizens of the Florida Keys..." It could be argued that the County would be
remiss, in terms of public health, safety and welfare, if they knowingly permitted housing,
specifically, affordable housing within the higher noise level areas, contrary to their
adopted regulations. It could also be argued that it is discriminatory to relegate
affordable housing to those areas which have public health, safety and welfare concerns,
such as areas with high noise levels, high volumes of vehicular traffic, etc. The term the
Navy (U. S. Government) uses regarding this type of development is contrary to the
principles of "Environmental Justice" (as defined by U.S. EPA).
The proposed amendment is not consistent with Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) which requires
local governments with military installations to update or amend their comprehensive
plan to include criteria and address compatibility of adjacent or closely proximate lands
with existing military installations in their future land use element by June 30, 2006. The
County has not adopted the required plan amendments. NAS Key West would welcome
the opportunity to assist Monroe County to meet this statutory requirement to the benefit
of Monroe County, its residents, and military organizations.
The Data and Analysis (DA) for the proposed amendment is inadequate and in our
opinion does not meet the minimum statutory requirement of Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) FS.
The DA does not address the number or location of the parcels that will benefit, the
potential number of additional units that might be provided, how additional ROGO
allocations will be provided to accommodate increased densities, impacts on
infrastructure such as potable water and wastewater, the anticipated population growth,
hurricane evacuation, and most importantly the compatibility of uses in close proximity
to NAS Key West or other military installations. The DA lacks analysis of potential
economic impacts to the community (loss of jobs, revenue, etc.) as a result of the County
continuing to permit the encroachment of incompatible development and uses that
negatively impact the ability of NAS Key West to continue its current operations. Much
of the data referred to in the proposed ordinance is found in the Monroe County 2010
Comprehensive Plan Technical Document and is 15 to 20 years old and out of date.
Again, the Navy is not opposed to the development of affordable housing or providing
incentives to increase the development of affordable housing in Monroe County that is
compatible with military operations. It is estimated that 75 percent of active duty
military personnel and civilians employed by the military in Monroe County, rent or own
homes in the local markets. The goal of the Navy and other military organizations is to
work cooperatively with Monroe County to protect military installations from the
encroachment of incompatible uses; ensure affordable housing is located in such areas
that protect the public health, safety, and welfare; to protect the military installations
from incompatible development; to protect the public investment in military installations;
to ensure the military installations are able to carry out their operations and missions;
and to ensure the economic vitality of the community is not adversely affected by a
reduction in a military installation's operations and sustainability due to encroachment of
incompatible development.
May 23, zoos 4
We believe that the County's obligation to provide affordable housing is not outweighed
by the obligation to protect the County's economic well being, protect public investments
or the obligation to protect public health, safety and welfare; hence the properties within
the AICUZ footprint should be excluded. As an alternative we would suggest that any
areas which pose encroachment challenges to an adjacent or nearby military installation
be regulated by an overlay district. An overlay district could provide regulations that
would permit compatible development and ensure the military installation's operations
sustainability would not be negatively impacted.
Approval of this amendment would make a bad situation worse.
This concludes my presentation. As I stated previously, we are providing the
Commission with our detailed comments in the form of a handout. If you have any
questions, I would be happy to answer them.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on behalf of Naval Air Station Key West.
May 23, zoos 5
Detailed Navy Comments — May 23, 2008
We question why this proposed amendment is required recognizing that Monroe County
has already adopted a number of Comprehensive Plan Goals, Objectives, and Policies as
well as Land Development Regulations (LDRs) that provide significant incentives for the
preservation and development of affordable housing. These provisions include, but are
not limited to, density bonuses, the use of Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs), and
the transfer of ROGO allocations from one parcel to another. The Monroe County 2010
Comprehensive Plan Technical Document, which is heavily referenced in the proposed
ordinance, provides an abundance of strategies which may be more effective than density
increases in the AICUZ. These strategies were developed over 15 years ago and have not
been implemented. Additionally, much of the data cited in the ordinance is outdated and
not longer accurate.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment proposes an increase in the overall
density county -wide. This issue has not been addressed. It is our contention that the staff
did not provide DCA with the required Data and Analysis (DA) of the impact of the
increase in the overall density potential with the amendment, including the estimated
increase in numbers of dwellings and population. This analysis/backup information is
required to be part of the (DA) for every comprehensive plan and Land Development
Regulation (LDR) amendment. Such an analysis should include an inventory of vacant
parcels that would be large enough to benefit from an increase in density and in locations
where affordable housing would be logical (i.e. dry parcels near employment centers)
outside of the AICUZ footprint.
We believe the proposed amendment is generally inconsistent with various sections of
Chapter 163 FS, Chapter 380.0552 FS, 9J-5 FAC, and the Monroe County 2010
Comprehensive Plan.
Chapter 163.3175(1) FS - The proposed comprehensive plan amendment is inconsistent
with chapter 163.3175(1) F.S. which states that the Florida Legislature finds that
incompatible development of land close to a military installation can adversely affect the
ability of the installation to carry out its mission and can threaten public health, safety
and welfare. Approval of this ordinance would not be consistent with this statute. There
are properties affected by this amendment that are within Noise Zone 2 (CNR 2) and
Noise Zone 3 (CNR 3) of the 1977 AICUZ Study and Noise Zones 2 and 3 (65 — 79 DNL)
of the 2007 AICUZ Update and as such poses a risk to the public health, safety, and
welfare of the residents and poses an adverse impact on NAS Key West's ability to carry
out its mission. The County is currently operating under the ordinance they adopted to
address the 1977 AICUZ Study. The County has not yet adopted the recommendations
of the 2007 AICUZ Update that was forwarded to the County in May 2007. This statute
also recognizes the positive economic impact military installations have on a local
economy and further "finds it desirable for the local governments in the state to cooperate
with military installations to encourage compatible land use, help prevent incompatible
encroachment, and facilitate the continued presence of major military installations in this
state." The ordinance could adversely affect the operations of Naval Air Station (NAS)
May 23, zoos 6
Key West's Boca Chica Air Field due to the increased residential (transient, non -transient,
and live-aboardl densities that will be permitted to locate within the 1977 AICUZ noise
contours and 2007 AICUZ footprint. In addition to AICUZ-related incompatibility issues,
urban development creates other encroachment issues that may, for example, interfere
with radio frequencies or impact non -aviation training missions.
Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) F.S. states in part; "...The future land use plan shall be based
upon surveys, studies, and data regarding the area, including the amount of land required
to accommodate anticipated growth; the projected population of the area; the character of
undeveloped land; the availability of water supplies, public facilities, and services; the
need for redevelopment, including the renewal of blighted areas and the elimination of
nonconforming uses which are inconsistent with the character of the community; the
compatibility of uses on lands adjacent to or closely proximate to military
installations; ..." The Data and Analysis (DA) for the proposed amendments does not
adequately address or support an increase in population growth (US Census Bureau data
indicates a six percent decline in population for Monroe County between 2000 and 2006),
hurricane evacuation, concurrency issues (potable water, highway capacity, etc.), the
housing needs associated with the such growth, the need for redevelopment, the
elimination of non -conforming uses which are inconsistent with community character,
and most importantly the compatibility of uses in close proximity to NAS Key West.
The DA does not address the potentially negative economic impacts to the community
(loss of jobs, revenue, etc.) should the Navy or other military organization be required to
reduce their mission capability because of the continued encroachment of incompatible
uses granted permits by Monroe County. Much of the data referred to in the proposed
ordinance is found in the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan Technical Document
and is 15 to 20 years old and out of date and no longer accurate.
Chapter 163.3177(6)(a) F.S. further states: "The future land use plan element shall
include criteria to be used to achieve the compatibility of adjacent or closely proximate
lands with military installations." The ordinance does not propose any criteria to achieve
compatibility for those properties located in the Noise Zones 2 and 3 in the 2007 AICUZ
Study Update. Residential uses are discouraged in the 65 DNL (day night average sound
level) to 69 DNL and strongly discouraged in the 70 — 74 DNL noise contours.
Additionally, it is recommended that all properties (residential and commercial) in the 60
DNL to 64 DNL noise contours have a Real Estate Fair Disclosure Statement recorded in
the Monroe County Public Records, similar to those required by the Escambia County
Land Development Code. The Disclosure should notify property owners and occupants:
1) which noise level contour the property is located; and 2) require appropriate site design
and the use of sound attenuation construction methods to reduce the noise impact on uses
within 60 DNL and higher noise contours for both Key West International Airport and
NAS Key West Boca Chica Air Field. The disclosure should also note that these sound
attenuation measures do not mitigate outdoor noise. Outdoor living is a part of the
Florida Keys lifestyle and will be greatly affected by noise. In addition to or in lieu of
the Disclosure Statement the following options could be used to provide notice to
property owners: 1) include AICUZ information (similar to affordable housing deed
May 23, zoos 7
restrictions) on the Monroe County Property Appraiser's Record Card for affected
parcels; 2) include AICUZ noise contours on the GIS maps on the Monroe County
Property Appraiser's website (Virginia Beach, Virginia provides this type of service at
http://www.vbqov.com/e-gov/emapping/access/getMap.asp); or the Monroe County BOCC
could adopt a resolution similar to BOCC Resolution 67-1979 identifying subdivisions
within the AICUZ noise contours and record the resolution in the Monroe County Public
Records.
Upon reviewing 380.0552 Florida Statutes, the Monroe County Area of Critical State
Concern (ACSC) Principles for Guiding Development, we understand the County's
obligations under the Principles are: "To ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida
Keys and its citizens through sound economic development"; To protect the historical
heritage of the Florida Keys ; "To protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and
amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments, including: Naval Air
Station Key West'; "To make available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the
population of the Florida Keys"; "To provide adequate alternatives for the protection of
public safety and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a post -
disaster reconstruction plan'; and "To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the
citizens of the Florida Keys and maintain the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource."
We believe that the County's obligation to provide affordable housing is not outweighed
by its obligation to protect public health, safety and welfare; to enhance the quality of life;
to protect the County's economic well being; or protect pubic investments; hence the
properties within the AICUZ footprint should be excluded. We understand, based on Mr.
Coleman's comments to the Board of County Commissioners in his January 23, 2008
staff report, that the proposed amendment must be reviewed against the Principles for
Guiding Development "as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied
in isolation from the other provisions." We maintain that the proposed comprehensive
plan amendment when reviewed for consistency with the Principles for Guiding
Development as a whole is not consistent with the intent of the Principles as a whole and
more specifically those provisions identified above.
The proposed amendment does not appear to be consistent with Section 380.0552,
Florida Statutes, Principles for Guiding Development, specifically Principle (d) which
states "To ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through
sound economic development."
Enterprise Florida commissioned a study prepared by the Haas Center for Business
Research and Economic Development at the University of West Florida. The study,
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, dated January 2008 describes the
positive economic benefits the Navy and other military organizations have on Monroe
County. This positive economic impact to Monroe County exceeds $635 million in
today's dollars. Briefly the data states:
Defense Spending ($ Millions)
Procurement $ 35.1
Salaries 78.3
May 23, Zoos 8
Pensions & Transfers 34.9
Total Defense Spending $148.3
Average Earning Per Military Job $73,400
County Economic Impact' (2005)
$592.3 Million
Employment
8,319 Jobs
Sales Activity
$311.9 Million
Consumption
$33.9 Million
Capital Investments
$48.5 Million
County Economic Impact' (2007 Projected) $635.1 Million
County Economic Impact' (2010 Projected) $645.9 Million
1. For the purposes of this information, County Economic Impact refers to the
Gross Product which is the sum of money values of all final goods and services
produced in the economy and sold on organized markets during a specified
period of time.
Source: Florida Defense Facto k, January 2008, page 44, prepared by Haas Center
for Business Research and Economic Development.
Florida Defense Industry Economic Impact Analysis, Volume 2, January
2008, Table 30, page 104, prepared by Haas Center for Business Research
and Economic Development.
Principle (g) states "To protect the historical heritage of the Florida Keys." There are
numerous military installations and sites throughout the Florida Keys. The US military
has had a presence in the Key West and the Florida Keys dating back to 1823 when a
Naval Base was first established to counteract piracy. The US military and the Navy,
specifically, are an intrinsic part of Monroe County's history. It is not uncommon for
military personnel to retire and become a permanent part of the Florida Keys after being
stationed in the Florida Keys.
Principle (h)(4) states: "To protect the values, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and
amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments including:... Naval Air
Station Key West and other military installations." The proposed significant increase in
residential densities within the Noise Zones 2 and 3 as depicted in the 1977 AICUZ
footprint and the 2007 AICUZ footprint is an encroachment into military operations and
as such may increase the cost of operation or may negatively impact the mission
capability of NAS Key West. There are other encroachment challenges created by
increased residential densities adjacent military installations in Monroe County that may
pose additional public health, safety and welfare concerns. (See attached Encroachment
Challenges Synopsis, page 12)
Principle (k) states: "To provide adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety
and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a postdisaster
reconstruction plan." The impacts on the potential increase in densities, population and
vehicles was on hurricane evacuation was not considered in the DA. Development in the
county has an effect on hurricane evacuation which impacts all of the jurisdictions in
Monroe County and could affect the development potential of the other jurisdictions.
This hurricane evacuation issue warrants being addressed as part of the required DA.
May za, zoos 9
Principle (1) states: "To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the
Florida Keys and maintain the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource." If the
proposed amendment becomes effective, the local government will be permitting
increased residential densities in a high noise area and will be creating public health,
safety, and welfare concerns. Measures to achieve an outdoor to indoor noise level
reduction through sound attenuating construction methods may be an effective method to
reduce noise levels in the 64 DNL and lower. It will not, however, eliminate outdoor
noise problems. Outdoor living is a part of the Florida Keys lifestyle and will be greatly
affected by noise. This is further supported by Chapter 163.3175(1) F.S. as cited above.
Chapter 9J5-006(3)(c)2 FAC requires amendments to the future land use element to
provide for compatibility of adjacent uses. Chapter 9J-5.003(23) defines "compatibility"
as "a condition in which land uses or conditions can coexist in relative proximity to each
other in a stable fashion over time such that no use or condition is unduly negatively
impacted directly or indirectly by another use or condition." The proposed amendment
creates a compatibility issue for both the residential uses and military installation. These
uses negatively impact each other. The proposed amendment does not enhance the
quality of life or ensure the safety of residents and visitors due to compatibility issues.
The ordinance has been revised, referencing several comprehensive plan objectives and
policies. Comprehensive Plan Policy 601.1.12 which states `By January 4, 1997, Monroe
County shall adopt Land Development Regulations which may include density bonuses,
impact fee waiver programs, and other possible regulations to encourage affordable
housing." Monroe County does have existing LDRs which create density bonuses for
affordable housing.
Objective 601.2 states "Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to encourage housing
of various types, sizes and price ranges to meet the demands of current and future
residents." Monroe County has several LDRs which already implement this objective.
Objective 601.6 states `By January 4, 1998, Monroe County shall formulate housing
implementation programs corresponding to each of the specific objectives defined within
this element, including: 1. the expansion of public information assistance; 2. incentive
programs, to be implemented in conjunction with the Permit Allocation System, to
promote the development of affordable and elderly housing; and 3. the elimination of
substandard housing." It is unclear how the proposed comprehensive plan amendment
implements the above objective given the programs and regulations already in place.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment would promote an increase in population
living in the high noise areas or accident potential areas, as well as creating other types of
encroachment concern. It could be argued that the County would be remiss, in terms of
public health, safety and welfare, if they knowingly permitted housing, specifically,
affordable housing within the higher noise level areas, contrary to their adopted
regulations. It could also be argued that it is discriminatory to relegate affordable
housing to those areas which have public health, safety and welfare concerns, such as
areas with high noise levels, high volumes of vehicular traffic, etc. The term the Navy (U.
May 23, zoos 10
S. Government) uses regarding this type of development is contrary to the principles of
"Environmental Justice" (as defined by U.S. EPA). We believe that the County's
obligation to provide affordable housing is not outweighed by the obligation to protect
the County's economic well being, protect public investments or the obligation to protect
public health, safety and welfare; hence the properties within the AICUZ footprint should
be excluded. As an alternative we would suggest that any areas which pose
encroachment challenges to an adjacent or nearby military installation be regulated by an
overlay district. An overlay district could provide regulations that would permit
compatible development and ensure the military installation's operations sustainability
would not be negatively impacted.
Approval of this amendment would make a bad situation worse with incompatible
development within the latest AICUZ footprint.
May 23, 2008
11
ENCROACHMENT CHALLENGES SYNOPSIS
The types of encroachment sources, described and defined below are drawn from various
studies and reports of Navy and non -Navy actions that have occurred which have had an
impact on training and test activities. Although not all encompassing, these potential
sources of encroachment need to be examined to determine if they exist at an installation,
range, military training routes (MTR), special use airspace (SUA)or operation areas
(OPAREA). Once a potential challenge is identified, it should be analyzed to determine
the potential impacts and constraints imposed.
Urban Development (population growth) — As communities grow toward the
boundaries of installations, ranges, OPAREAs, and beneath MTRs and SUAs, land use
development could become incompatible with the Navy's mission. Incompatible
development can seriously compromise the quality of the Navy's training and test mission
requirements. Urban development may not surmount to an immediate threat, but
continued incompatible development could present a long-range threat to the mission.
Urban development may also damage habitat needed for wildlife to survive, making the
installation or range the only available habitat in the area.
Airborne noise - The central issue of airborne noise is the impact, or perceived impact,
on people, animals (both wild and domestic), structures, and land use.
Competition for air space, land, and sea space - The Navy owns, controls, or uses
resources, that need to be available to accomplish testing and training missions. These
resources must be of sufficient size and quality to provide effective training and testing.
Public pressure to share or relinquish some of these resources may inhibit the Navy from
accomplishing its training and test objectives, or inhibit anti-terrorism/force protection
programs.
Competition for scarce resources (oil, gas, minerals, potable and irrigated water, and
ocean access) - Community pressure to gain access to valuable resources located on land
or sea that Navy owns or controls may affect Navy's ability to use this land or water for
training or test objectives.
Threatened and Endangered Species — Restrictions for the purpose of protecting
threatened or endangered species can reduce the value of an installation, range, or
OPAREA for testing and training by limiting the types of permissible activities in terms
of composition, magnitude, or timing.
Maritime issues (Marine Mammals, Endangered Species, Fish Habitats, Coral Reefs,
Coastal Zones, Sanctuaries, and other marine protected areas) -- Regulatory or permit
requirements protecting ocean resources cumulatively affects the Navy's ability to
conduct training exercises or testing in the marine environment.
May 23, 2M 12
Ordnance - Unexploded Ordnance (UXO)/Munitions -- Application of various
environmental laws to munitions training, demolition, disposal, or testing activities could
have severe and adverse impacts on readiness.
Safety Arcs and footprints (Explosive Safety Quantity Distance (ESQD) Arcs,
Surface Danger Zones, Weapons Safety Footprint Areas) - Land adjacent to
installations and range safety zones, including land within the installation or range, may
not be suitable for certain types of land use or economic development purposes.
Frequency Spectrum - The competition for available frequency spectrum may lead to a
reduction in available spectrum for training and developmental/operational testing
activities. The lack of spectrum may decrease the effectiveness of exercises by restricting
the number of war -fighting systems that can participate. As the potential for residential
and commercial encroachment increases, so does the risk of increased RF emitters and
receivers, which could result in Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) problems between
Navy systems and public or commercial systems.
Air Quality - Impacts to training and test missions in non -attainment areas, and
conformance with individual State Implementation Plans (SIPS), may restrict existing
mission requirements or preclude execution of new missions, as well as deployment and
use of new weapon platforms.
Water Quality - Discharge permit requirements and timelines and/or prohibited or
restricted access to wetlands and/or their buffer zones can restrict existing mission
training, preclude or restrict integration of new technology/weapons systems into existing
missions and training or preclude future growth and execution of new missions in
amphibious, riverine, estuarine and other salt and fresh water related missions.
Interpretation of Historical/Environmental regulations - Regulatory or permit
requirements may affect training and testing activities. Other non -Navy actions may
affect Navy's current regulatory or permit requirements under these regulations.
Interagency Coordination (e.g., Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS), and State equivalents) - Navy often uses land controlled by another
Federal or State agency. The types of allowable uses and restrictions are often the result
of negotiations between the parties or subject to the other Federal agency's policies and
regulations. These restrictive uses can limit training and testing activities.
Legislative initiatives that restrict training or testing activities - Congress may enact
legislation that directly or indirectly limits the Navy's flexibility to conduct training or
testing activities.
May 23, 2M 13