Resolution 347-2002
County Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 347 -2002
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, EVIDENCING THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF A
RECOMMENDED BENEFICIAL USE DETERMINATION PROMULGATED BY
THE SPECIAL MASTER, IN RE: THE APPLICATION OF CHARLES J. AND
D. MICHAEL POSTEN
WHEREAS, on January 4, 1996, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
became effective; and
WHEREAS, the application of CHARLES AND MICHAEL POSTEN for determination of
beneficial use was heard by Special Master John J. Wolfe on December 18, 2000; now
therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and recommendations of the Special Master
as set forth in the Proposed Denial of Beneficial Use are APPROVED and the application of
CHARLES AND MICHAEL POSTEN is accordingly DENIED.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at
a regular meeting of the Board held on the 21st day of August, 2002.
-c_.Mayor McCoy
41C~.:~"M4Ypr Pro Tern Spehar
l~d/~;~:f~~r!i~,~$~oner Nelson
t';.~:~. / C-;.,.....\'\\' /iif...,., M'$S~"o....ner Neugent
liS < ~." ':~ \~i$sioner Jimenez
\\;..." . ~'li.~5::. '1~,~-, .
~{;; / :t,,;:~<"^- \<--,
>;,,-... ,\'~;it:..~.'"'I.. '(
~,O(>~~~; <,,_.,. /_,_:",
~~:p~y L.KOLHAGE, Clerk
~-~
epu~ lerk
yes
yes
yes
yeR
yes
jdresbu
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
OA
By .'1
M~o~ChairPfrson 1'.,,)
C> C ~
:z:)> '"'->
;:0 c-, ::t:: C/)
or-:;a:- rT1
"":x: - < "
n. ''',., I
Cl '"' :
$x"~- ur
APPROVED AS -. ";;'" M "
A LEGAL' C 3::
B ~
DATER9.E~ i ~ ~~ i~
-r"J
-
r-
",
o
-r"J
o
;:0
:::rJ
"-I
C)
a
:::0
o
t" ' -
Ol&J\.JEj)
COfc)-
BENEFICIAL USE
MONROE COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER
~n Re: Charles J. Posten and D. Michael Posten~"
...
-Beneficial Use Application
/
PROPOSED
DENIAL OF BENEFICIAL USE
The above entitled matter was heard at a duly-advertised and regularly scheduled, public
hearing on December 18,2000, before John J. Wolfe, designated Beneficial Use Special Master.
Andrew Tobin represented Charles and Michael Posten (the "Applicants"). Assistant County
Attorney Karen Cabanas, Director of Planning, Marlene Conaway, Assistant to the Planning
Director, Julie Thomson, and Biologist, Ralph Gouldy, represented Monroe County.
ISSUE
Whether the Applicants have been denied all reasonable economic use of their property due
to the fact that the property is located in two different zoning districts thus preventing certain uses
in the portion of the Property located in the NA zoning district, and whether the Applicants are
entitled to relief under Policies contained in Objective 101.18.5 of the Plan and Section 9.5-173 of
the Code. Specifically, the Applicants are concerned that the NA district would prevent them from
constructing a dock or similar accessory use on the portion of the Lot zoned NA.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1, The property of the\pplicant subject to this Hearing is an unimproved lot located on
Buccaneer Point, Key Largo, and is zoned Improved Subdivision - Native Area District (IS-NA).
The Application originally involved three lots as indicated below, but two of them have since been
sold and are no longer part of this Application.
2. The Applicant purchased Lots 21 & 39, Block 3 and Lot 24, Block 4, Buccaneer Point,
RE # 00496131-008300 & 00496131-011800 & 00496131-006500 & 00496131-011800, on April
26, 1996, but lots 21 and 24 have since been sold leaving only Lot 39, Block 3 as the subject of this
Hearing (the "Lot"),
3. The developer of the subdivision entered into a Consent Order with the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (the "Consent Order"), which includes a provision that
provides the property owners a right of access through the mangroves for purposes of constructing
certain accessory uses, and the County has permitted docks for some residences similarly situated.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
4. The Improved Subdivision designation of the Lot allows one single family residential
dwelling on the Lot, and the Native Area designation on a portion of the Lot does not deprive the
Applicants of any uses contemplated by the Consent Order.
5. The Applicants have not been deprived of all reasonable economic use of the Lots by the
fact that the Lot is located in two different zoning districts. The Applicants may apply for an
allocation under the County's Rate of Growth Ordinance and participate in the permitting process
and apply for permits for all uses contemplated by the Consent Order.
PROPOSED DETERMINATION
WHEREFORE, I recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that a final beneficial
use determination be entered denying Applicants' beneficial use applications.
DONE AND ORDERED this 25th day of June, 2001. /
'\, / 1 1~' d
. / :/. '//)
, ).J / /-f; ;- / (
John 1. 'Wolf~'
SpeciallMaster