06/20/2007 Agreement
DANNYL. KOLHAGE
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
DATE:
June 22, 2007
TO:
Suzanne A. Hutton
County Attorney
FROM:
Kathy Peters
Executive Assistant
Pamela G. Hanc~
Deputy Clerk
ATTN:
At the June 20, 2007, Board of County Commissioner's meeting the Board granted
approval and authorized execution of a Settlement Agreement in the Bert 1. Harris Act claim of
Lloyd A. Good, Jr. for two parcels of property he owns located on SugarloafKey, Florida.
Enclosed is are two copies of the above-mentioned for your handling. Should you have
any questions please do not hesitate to contact this office
cc: Growth Management
Filev"
AGREEMENT TO DISMISS HARRIS ACT CLAIM
This Agreement is made by Lloyd A. GoO~ereinafter Good)
County (hereinafter County) on the ~date of ,~/L7} .
and Monroe
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, on November 5, 2003 Good through counsel filed a claim against
County pursuant to the Bert J. Harris, Jr. Private Property Protection Act Florida
Statutes 720.01 et. seq (hereinafter Harris Act); and
WHE:REAS, Good's Harris Act claim alleged that County's development regulations
imposed an inordinate burden on Good's property described as Tracts A and B revised
plat of Sugarloaf Shores Section F recorded in the Public Records of County in Plat Book
6 at pag!: 9; and
WHEREAS, in order to resolve the filed Harris Act claim and alleviate the alleged
inordinate burden of County's development regulations as applied to Good's above
property, Good and the planning and legal staff of County after almost one year of
meetings and discussions arrived at a major conditional use plan to be presented to the
County's Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on May 11,2005 the Planning Commission of County after an extensive
public hearing unanimously adopted Resolution No. P24-05 a copy of which is attached
hereto made a part hereof and marked Exhibit "A"; and
WHI8:REAS, a copy of the site plan for the three phase development plan approved by
the Planning Commission by Exhibit "A" is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a
part hereof; and
WHI8:REAS, from on or about May II, 2005 to January 2006 Good at great cost
prepared complete plans and specifications for the 5,000 square feet of commercial space
and the six affordable employee apartments to be erected on Exhibit "B" as part of Phase
I; and
WHEREAS, a building permit application for the above commercial office building
with six employee affordable housing units along with complete plans and specification
were filed; and
WHEREAS, ROGO allocations and NRGO allocations for said development where
finally awarded by March 22, 2006; and
WHEREAS, because the express terms of Exhibit "A" required that no building
permit for any phase could be issued until all ROGO and NROGO awards were obtained,
it became necessary for Good to have prepared complete plans and specifications for the
five single family detached market rate houses known as "Commercial Apartments"
called for in Phase I by Exhibits A & B; and
WHE.REAS, on March I, 2007 Good filed said plans for five commercial apartments
with County's Building Department which preliminarily approved said plans and
specifications; and
WHEREAS, Good must now obtain the necessary RaGa allocations for all five
commen:ial apartments before any permit can be issued for Phase I, but without the five
bonus points provided for affordable employee housing under Code Section 9.5-
I 22.3(a)(6) attached hereto and made a part hereof and marked Exhibit "C", it is highly
improbable Good will be able to receive sufficient RaGa points to be able to obtain the
necessary RaGa allocation for all five market rate houses in the foreseeable future; and
WH.EREAS, from the beginning of the efforts to resolve the filed Harris Act claim
Good and his legal counsel continually informed County planning and legal staffs that
unless five RaGa bonus points for each affordable employee housing unit were allocated
to each market rate commercial apartment the proposed development of Section F would
be economically unfeasible; and
WHEREAS, previous staff accepted this interpretation; and
WHEREAS, awarding points to an affordable unit does not advance its standing in
RaGa calculations, and awarding points to a market rate unit which enables affordable
housing to be built advances the public interest and welfare of citizens of Monroe
County; and
WHEREAS, the five points awarded for an affordable dwelling unit is intended to
increase the supply of affordable housing: and
WHICREAS, notwithstanding past negotiations and history, County staff has now
raised doubts as to whether or not the five bonus points for affordable employee housing
are available for the "commercial apartments" in order to advance their standing in the
current RaGa system; and
WHEREAS, without the receipt of said bonus points Good has advised County's
legal staff that no affordable employee housing would be built for this project and the
negotiations to resolve the Harris Act claim would terminate in failure; and
WHEREAS, because of the expense incurred by Good and the three and one half
years of effort by Good and County staff on this development plan together with the need
for affordable employee housing in Monroe County Good and County wish to complete
the structures set out on Exhibit B and resolve the Harris Act claim; and
WHEREAS, the County is auathorized by F.S. 125.01055 to adopt measures which
increase the supply of affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, the interpretation of Monroe County Code Section 9.5-122 as set forth
in this agreement is consistent with F. S. 125.01055 and F.S. 380.0552(7)0);
NOW THEREFORE the parties hereto intending to be legally bound do on behalf of
themselves, their heirs, successors, and assigns, agree as follows.
1. Good and County stipulate and agree that Code Section 9.5-122.3 (a) 6 shall be
interpret,ed for the purpose of this three phase development only, to require the award of
five points for each affordable unit to be erected in each phase of Exhibit B as a bonus
toward the "Commercial Apartments" proposed for development in said phase and more
particularly:
(a) Phase I for Tract B shall receive a total of thirty additional RaGa points to be
awarded at five per each ofthe six employee affordable units for the five
commercial apartments currently before the Building Department.
(b) Phase II shall receive five RaGa points for each affordable employee unit
e:rected thereon to be awarded equally between the five "commercial apartments"
c:alled for in Exhibit B.
(c) Phase III shall receive five RaGa points for each affordable employee unit
erected therein to be awarded equally between the four "commercial apartments"
called for in Exhibit B.
2. Not withstanding the fact that Exhibit "B" calls for ten affordable employee units in
each of Phase II and III Good shall have the right to amend Exhibit "A" upon application
to and approval by the County's Planning Commission to reduce the number below 1 0 to
a number that shall never be less than six for each subsequent Phase.
3. All [,)urteen commercial apartments in all phases shall be restricted by Deed to require
a continuity of ownership in the five thousand square feet of commercial office space
erected in the Phase in which each is located. The percentage of such ownership shall be
determined by Good but shall not be less than sixty percent divided equally between the
commercial apartment owners in each phase and more than forty percent for Good. The
percent for each commercial apartment:
(a) Phase I lots one and two fifteen percent each or thirty percent, lots three, four and
five ten percent each or thirty percent totaling sixty percent and Good forty
percent.
(b) Phase II lot fourteen sixteen percent, lots thirteen, twelve, eleven and ten eleven
percent each for sixty percent and Good forty percent.
(c) Phase III lots nine, eight, seven and six fifteen percent each for sixty percent and
Good forty percent.
4. Good agrees that no certificate of occupancy for any commercial apartment erected in
any phase shall be issued until certificates of occupancy have been issued for all
employee affordable units built in said phase.
5. Good agrees to place in the official records of County prior to the issuance of any
certificate of occupancy is issued employee affordable housing deed restrictions in
accordance with County code in effect for each said affordable employee unit created in
any phase.
6. Good shall at the time all permits are issued for Phase I withdraw, dismiss and
otherwise settle the Harris Act claim for the entire property Tracts A and B revised plat of
SugarloafShores Section F recorded in the Public Records of County in Plat Book 6 at
page 9, with no liability to County and each party shall bear their own expenses including
attomey"s fees with regard to said Harris Act claim. This dismissal shall be binding on
the heirs, assigns and successors in interest to Good.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this agreement.
t,,[ c;:' t 77-0 .g~'
Date
~w a/J--n-~
Lloyd A'iOd' Jr.
Witness, lY'J<:" ~ ~'0
Pri""'~: Le I+<J'C
Witness )
d!'i~~ e: ROI'l1'llcl ~ t::FttcK-.
#>.>4~~J~-
.<Zc0L-= .......J?<l"
1,".''/ r-~. ,,'fU -?l. "
II',,> ( ~:. .., ~. ~
! !~,..< 'l"',.\. i\...
IC.;; hi~
MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
C~4~
Mayor, Mario DiGennaro
MONROE COUNTY ATTORNEY
APPROVED ASrt~
ltUAA'L.. flA "
SUSAN M. G SL.EV (J
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
Date (j1 -...:J C)- I) '7
:r
D t:::I
:z: ;;..'"
:::oC"')~
C) ~
p,r- _:
A",
C)- [-_
,;~~~ ("") .
;:iC"",~'-
-"1
)> iTi
~
=
.....
C-
c::
::z:
N
N
"'1:>
~
~
-
0\
.."
r:=
,"'1
r:~J
';j
(-::)
'r,)
;";
.__~l
'. )
':"'::)
;0
o
05n0/2007 08: 20
3057453389
SUGARLOAF LODGE
F'AGE 07
j
.
DoaIl 15411153 09/115/2005 11 : 17A1'l
FUR & Re,oor_cl tn Orf.icJ.al R.C:Dl"'d. of
MONROE COUNTY DANNY L. KOLHAGE
Doc. 1541&153
&k. 2151 PI. 1511
.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P24-0S
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY A,..'ING COMMISSION
API'ROVING THE REQUEST OF LLOYD A. G~l~. FOR A MAJOR
CONDITIONAL USE TO BUILD A MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL AND
.RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 15,000 SQ. FT. OF OFFICE
SPACE, 26 EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS, AND 14 COMMERCIAL
APARTMENTS. THE PROJECT WILL BE BUILT IN THREE PHASES ON A
PROPERTY CONSISTING OF TRACTS A AND B SITUATED BETWEEN US
HIGHWAY I AND CYPRESS ROAD ON SUGARLOAF KEY, AT
APPROXIMATE MILE MARKER 16.5. THE REAL ESTATE NUMBERS ARE
00166976,011300, AND 00166976.011400.
WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on May \1, 2005, the Monroe County
Planning CClmmission conducted a public hearing on the request filed by Lloyd A. (rood Jr. for a
major conditional use to build a three phased development consisting of 15.000 square feet of
office space, 26 employee housing units, and 14 commercial apartments; and
WHEREAS. The project's site includes two disturbed upland parcels on the Oceanside
of the Lower SugarloafKey, at approximate MM 16.5. It is legally described as Tracts A and B,
Rev Plat of Amd Plat of Sugarloaf Shores Sec F . Monroe County, Florida. The Real Estate
numbers arc~ 00166976.0 \1300; and 00166976.0\1400; and
WHEREAS, the property is located in the Sub Urban Commercial (SC) land use district
and the Future Land Use Map designation is Mixed Use Commercial (MC); and .
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission was presented with the following evidence,
which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said hearing:
--:....'.
;~). Site Plan signed and sealed by Thoma); E. Pope. P.A. Architect, Sheet SI, dated 4/25/05
and revised on 5/9/05; and
2. LiLndscape Plan, Attachment All. by BDSA, dated 4/27/2005; and
3. Floor Plans, Sheet Al and A2, dated 11/11/04; and
4. Elevation Plan, Sheet A4, dated 11/11/04; and
5. Elevation Plan, Sheet AS, dated 12/23/04; and
6. Drainage Plan. Sheet C-I, by PE & D, Inc., signed and sealed, dated 03/04/05; and
7, Boundary Survey signed and sealed by Frederick H. Hildebrandt, Engineer, Planner,
Surveyor, dated 10/25/04; and
8. The Staff Report prepared by Aref Joulani, Senior Administrator of Development
RI~view and Design and Andrew Trivette, Biologist, dated 04/21/2005; and
9. The sworn testimony of the Growth Management Staff; and
10. The advice of John Wolfe, Planning Commission Counsel; and
II. TI1e sworn testimony of Lloyd A. Good Jr., the apmicant and Sandra Walters, the agent.
12. The sworn testimony of the public. .
"Bf-'\.'~,~ IJ
j~
1'24-(\5
Page 1 of4
05/j0/2007 08:20
3057453389
5UGARLOAF LODGE
PAGE 08
Doc:ll 11541553
Bka 2151 p.. 1512
WHJ~REAS, the Planning Commission has made the following Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law based on the evidence presented; At
I. Based on the application, this new development is not ~ or NROGO exempt. Therefore,
we find tl)at the proposed 15,000 Sq. Ft. office requires NROGO allocation, and that 26
affordable housing RaGa allocations shall be obtained for the employee housing in addition
to the 14 market rate ROGa allocations that is needed for the commercial apartments.
2. Based on the application, Tract B will stage the first phase of this three (3) phased
development and the applicant will apply for two (2) NROGO allocations of 2,500 Sq. Ft.
each yea.r. The applicant has requested a time extension from the usual two (2) years before
the conditional use expires. Staffhas recommended that the applicant be given a total offive
(5) years to complete the project. Therefore, we conclude that the applicant shall be granted a
total of five (5) years from the date of the issuance of the first building permit before the
conditional use becomes null and void to allow the completion of the project in a timely
manner.
3. Based on the Revised Site Plan, clear site triangles are not provided. Therefore, we conclude
that the site plan shall be revised to include site triangles for all the street intersections
including Southpoint and US Highway 1, Southpoint and Cypress Road Southpoint and the
new inte:mal drives.
4. Based (Ill testimony received at the public hearing, the community is concemed about
potential traffic congestion at the intersection of Southpoint Road and US Highway 1 after
the proposed development is complete.
5. Based on the application, a storm water management plan has been provided with the
submittlld plans. The plan must be reviewed and approved by the Monroe County Engineer
or the South Florida Water Management District to determine compliance with Section 9.5-
293.
6. Based on the application, the project will use an on-site sewage treatment plant. Therefore,
we find that the project shall require Environmental Health Permit and approval of the
Department of Health and/or the Department of Environmental Protection to determine
compliance with Section 9.5-294.
7. Based on the application, Monroe County Fire Marshal has been contacted to review the
project. Therefore we conclude that conceptual approval of the project by the Fire Marshal's
Office is needed to determine compliance with Section 9.5-69.
8. Based o,n the application, Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) has been contacted for
review of the site plan. Therefore, compliance with Section 9.5-69 cannot be determined until
the project has been reviewed and approved by FKAA.
P24.U5
Page 2 0 f 4
05/30/2007 08:20
3057453389
5UGARLOAF LODGE
PAGE 09
.
Doell 1541853
Bkll 2151 P.- 1513
9. Based on the application, Keys Energy Services (KEYS) has been contacted for review of the
site plan. Therefore, compliance with Section 9.5-69 _ot be determined until the project
has been reviewed and approved by Keys Energy Se~
10. Based on the application, th\=se parcelt are not exempt from the current requirement for
parcels considered habitat by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The applicant has already
started coordination with that agency. Therefore, we conclude that all pl"oper permits from
US Fish and Wildlife Service shall be acquired prior to ~ubmittal of a building permit
application.
WHltREAS, based on the condition #3 set forth in the staff report dated 04/21/2005, a
revised site plan has been submitted which includes site triangles for all the street intersections
including Southpoint and US Highway I, Southpoint and Cypress Road Southpoint and the new
internal drives. Therefore, we conclude that condition #3 set forth in the staff report for issuance
of a resolution has been met.
NOW THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law, support its decision to APPROVE the major conditional use application submitted by
Lloyd A. Go,od Jr. to build a three phased development consisting of 15,000 square feet of office
space, 26 employee housing units, and 14 commercial apartments on a property legally described
as Tracts A and B, Rev Plat of Amd Plat of Sugarloaf Shores Sec F , Monroe County, Florida,
with the following conditions:
1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each phase of the project, the applicant shall
acquire the necessary ROGO and NROGO allocations for that phase.
2. The appliicant shall be granted additional time before the conditional use expires. Therefore,
all the required certificates of occupancy shall be acquired within five (5) years from the date
of issuan,:e of the first building permit or the conditional use shall become null and void. An.
extensio111 of time may be granted only by the Planning Commission for a period of not to
exceed one (1) year and only within the original period of validity.
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, approval of the surface water management plan by the
County Engineer or South Florida Water Management District shall be provided.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Florida Department of Health and/or the
Departmc:nt of Environmental Protection as appropriate shaU approve the proposed
Wastewalter Treatment Plan.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Monroe County Fire Marshal shall approve a Fire
Protection Plan for this development.
6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a complete set of plans must be reviewed and
approved by FKAA.
P24-05
Page 3 0 f 4
05/j0/2007 08:20
3057453389
SUGARLOAF LODGE
PAGE 10
Doc:ll lS41B53
8k~ 21S1 PIW 1514
\
7. The Keys Energy Services (KEYS) shall determine load requirement based on the review of
a co~phlte set of plans and approval shall be receiv~.n. 'or to the issuance of a building
permIt. ..
8. A letter of coordination from US Fisft and Wildlife Service shall be acquired prior to a
submittal of building permit application.
9. The applicant has committed to investigate the possibility and feasibility of creating a right-
turn lane on Southpoint Road within nine (9) months from thr: issuance of this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of Monroe County, Florida, 'at a
regular meeting held on the 11th dayofMay 2005.
Chair Lynn C. Mapes
Vice Chair Denise Werling
Commissioner Julio Margalli
Commissioner James Cameron
Commissioner Randy Wall
~
YES
YES
YES
YES
PLANNING CO
ION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
(I.
C. Mapes, Chair
Signed this gTII day of
-
vto.~e-
,2005
BY
IlONROE COUNTy
OFFICIAL RECOIlus
P14"05
Page 4 of 4
'05/30/2007 08: 20
SUGARLOAF LODGE
('e"tr~~""'" .-... I-......~.----
PAGE 11
............
0
o )-J -'i) -c;> '" !!~
~1:l f 7' '"
r
~;r. v
(I.
~~ t:l t:::l .
'f"~ ~,
i~ 8 ~' 19
'.
1:
" -1
~; f' r I r
" ~J ? d ~ (
P3r' .-- ~ ~ I
, t f ~ I f
lI'I3 ~;, II.
e. ~ I
~ J) I II
11 t~
\) !9
r: f. '"' I .
-c -'I
':>,,1- ,. . f
C" "~ , ,
F' L ,
<tl I) " I '
, '
~ ;~ " ' '
~ " '--_M~------4 III f-j
11 " ;:=.:=:.~'-~_"':~'
- , .
ir ,
fr '" '" , I. .,.
,
, II , .
1
.
--
2 tJ .' .
~. : ---~---~ B
Jt i: ;
I: I", i !9
I' I' t
... ' ,
, ,
'* '
,_ _____1
~l .__ A_~'_"''''''
:' ~ l-llll ,
~ I I
!9
I ! : I : s
: : I
I ;;;, -.-.;:;..-.=...-~
f, r- ______J
I I : ..
!!! H
,It !-!
, '
. I r--_....
$) . ~-_.-'_._~ r ._L,;..-: --:..;::-:-.=.=:
~_____J_h~__'1 ,------ ---i
: Ii: ~ :
, _ .. l
I , II' , I !9
: :. : "--rt--u"
, d, " J .
, 11 I
L___________J!~~_~_____ _lln_
05}36/2007 08:20
3057453389
SUGARLOAF LODGE
MONROE COUNTY CODE SECTION EXCERPTS
Section 9.5-122.3 Evaluation Criteria
(a) Evaluation are to be applied cumulatively
except where otherwise specified.
(6 )
Affordable housing.
intended to increase
housing
The following points are
the supply of affordable
Point assignment
+ 5
Criteria
An application which proposes
a dwelling unit which meets the
definition of affordable housing
and restricts the dwelling unit
to a household with a gross
annual income limit as defined
in Section 9.5-4(A-5)
Exhibit "B"
PAGE 12
05/30/2007 08:20
SUGAPLOAF LODGE
(e.-irV'T'll'-..l.""'" ,..., I ~~ .- -"-
PAGE 11
.---"
.....,."...
I
I
0~J "'0 -C~ '" i!~
'"
f r '"
;Jl1:l '"
r
$;r. v '" . '"
(\
~~ r;:f tj
T'~ ~,
I/'
""t 8 ~ 19
'.
~.( ~
'" -J
.t~ p ~ I r
" ? d "%
P3(' ".... 4J I t-
O' l f ~ I f
~ -I II.
t: ~
lJ) , Je. II
13 ~.
\) !~
~ 'if J" "
-!., ~
,:l"L- V" . f
C" .....,
F' tfl pi
<'> ~ ~ !~ f-j
11 -
~~ .
ff '" '" I. -t
II .
I 1
,.
--
.2 tJ .' ,.,
, 8
~ i: I
I !9
I : I. I ,
I' · I t
- ' ,
: tItf :
,-- -----.
~ ~I :' nil";~'1H' I ,
I I
!ii
! dt' s
: : I
f I .:.:;. - .-..:;..-..::..-:~
i~-- ,--n--1 ~ !1!"H
-, I~ f... I
'l: · I
I . '~ ~__J
.,p .:-- --.-"!lr -'",,- -=-.:.:!
.
:---m'------'I,m---ill--ni
I I I
: I :Ii ~ I
I - "
: . :l: ' I !~ EXHIBIT
, I '-rf----"1I
_____jl~~~_~_____ _ll___J . I e,
,