Item P2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: September 17, 2008 Division: Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes - No -1L Department:Planning & Environmental Resources
Staff Contact: Andrew O. Trivette
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing to consider a resolution supporting the proposed
amendment to Policy 102.8.5 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan to facilitate
central wastewater service to No Name Key.
ITEM BACKGROUND: On July 22, 2008, the Development Review Committee reviewed the
proposed text amendment and recommended approval. The Planning Commission met on July 23,
2008 and heard the proposed amendment at a public hearing. The Planning Commission duly
considered public comments and staff report, and passed a resolution (P28-08) to the BOCC
recommending adoption.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: May 21, 2008 - BOCC approved central sanitary
wastewater service to the property owners of No Name Key through inclusion of the area in the Lower
Keys Regional Service Area wastewater treatment and collection system.
June 18, 2008 - BOCC directed staff to amend Section 9.5-258 Coastal Barrier Resources System
Overlay District of the Monroe County Code to eliminate the prohibition of the establishment of
central wastewater treatment collection systems and utilities for No Name Key.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: N/ A
TOTAL COST: N/A BUDGETED: Yes - No -
COST TO COUNTY: SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes - No - AMOUNT PER MONTH - Year
-
APPROVED BY: County Atty ~ OMB/Purchasing _Risk Management _
DOCUMENT A TION: Included X Not Required_
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #
Revised Il106
RESOLUTION NO. -2008
A RESOLUTION OF THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED
AMENDMENT TO POLICY 102.8.5 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN TO FACILITATE CENTRAL WASTEWATER SERVICE
TO NO NAME KEY.
WHEREAS~ the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the
Coastal BalTier Resources System (CBRS) to restrict the federally subsidized
development of coastal barrier areas [16 U.S.C. 3504(a)(1)]; and
WHEREAS~ Monroe County has 22 designated units of the CBRS identified by
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and
WHEREAS~ Objective 102.8 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
states: "Monroe County shall take actions to discourage private development in areas
designated as units of the Coastal Barrier Resources System [9J-5.006(3)(b)4]"; and
WHEREAS~ Policy 102.8.5 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
states: "Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Monroe County shall initiate efforts
to discourage the extension of facilities and services provided by the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority and private providers of electricity and telephone services to CBRS
units"; and
WHEREAS~ on December 18, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners
adopted Ordinance No. 043-2001, creating Section 9.5-258 of the Monroe County Code
which established a Coastal Barrier Resources System Overlay District, the purpose of
which is to implement the policies of the comprehensive plan by prohibiting the
extension and expansion of specific types of public utilities to or through lands
designated as a unit of the Coastal Barrier Resources System; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida, Monroe County has
been mandated by the State of Florida to provide a centralized sewer system by 2010 as a
means of improving near shore water quality within the Florida Keys, and
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2008, the Growth Management Staff was directed by
the Board of County Commissioners to amend the comprehensive plan and land
development regulations to reword the prohibition on utilities such that the focus and
priority be placed on wastewater treatment first and any discussion of electric or any
other utility, other than those required to efficiently support a central wastewater
collection system, be deferred until the wastewater goal is accomplished; and
WHEREAS~ the Development Review Committee on July 22, 2008 reviewed the
legal authority and the proposed text; and
Page I of2
Reviewer:
WHEREAS~ during a regular meeting held on July 23, 2008, the Monroe County
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed text and recommended
approval of the proposed text.
NO\Y THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1: The BOCC confinns its continued support for the proposed comprehensive
plan amendment which will facilitate the provision of central wastewater services to No
Name Key which currently includes developed areas within the Coastal Barrier
Resources System.
Section 2: The BOCC instructs the Growth Management Division Director to proceed
with the Planning Commission recommended amendment to the comprehensive plan in
January 2009 as a part of the 09-01 comprehensive plan amendment package which will
require a public hearing prior to transmission.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Board of County
Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, held on the 1 ih day of September, 2008.
Mayor Mario DiGennaro -
Mayor Pro Tem Charles "Sonny" McCoy -
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy -
Commissioner George Neugent -
Conunissioner Dixie M. Spehar -
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Mayor Mario DiGennaro
(SEAL)
A ITEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
By:_
l'
BY
~ ATTORNEY' fleE
DATE ~ 3/~OO?
v ,.
Page 20[2
Reviewer:
ORDINANCE NO. -2008
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING POLICY 102.8.5 OF THE MONROE
COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ALLOW THE
PROVISION OF CENTRAL WASTEWATER SERVICE AND SUPPORT
UTILITIES TO DEVELOPED PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE
COAST AL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES
INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE BOARD
TO FORWARD A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS; PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE INCORPORATION INTO
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the Coastal
Barrier Resources System (CBRS) to restrict the federally subsidized development of coastal
barrier areas (see 16 U.S.C 3504(a)(l)); and
WHEREAS, Monroe County has 22 designated units of the CBRS identified by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; and
WHEREAS, Objective 102.8 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan states:
"Monroe County shall take actions to discourage private development in areas designated as units
of the Coastal Barrier Resources System [9J-5.006(3)(b)4]"; and
WHEREAS, Policy 102.8.5 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan states:
"Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Monroe County shall initiate efforts to discourage
the extension of facilities and services provided by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and
private providers of electricity and telephone services to CBRS units"; and
WHEREAS, on December 18, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No. 043-2001, creating Section 9.5-258 of the Monroe County Code which established
a Coastal Barrier Resources System Overlay District, the purpose of which is to implement the
policies of the comprehensive plan by prohibiting the extension and expansion of specific types
of public utilities to or through lands designated as a unit of the Coastal Barrier Resources
System; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida, Monroe County has been
mandated by the State of Florida to provide a centralized sewer system by 20 I 0 as a means of
improving near shore water quality within the Florida Keys, and
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2008, the Growth Management Staff was directed by the Board
of County Commissioners to amend the comprehensive plan and land development ref,'1llations to
reword the prohibition on utilities such that the focus and priority be placed on wastewater
treatment first and any discussion of electric or any other utility, other than those required to
efficiently support a central wastewater collection system, be deferred until the wastewater goal is
accomplished; and
Page lof3 Initials ~-,-_.
W:'GROWTH MANAGEMENT\BOCC\GMD Agenda Items\20080917\CRS Camp Plan Amend\Draft
Wastewater GOP Ordinance (Amended).doc
\VHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on July 23, 2008, the Monroe County
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed text, and recommended
approval of the proposed text; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Conmllssioners held a public hearing
to consider the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the stale land planning agency on
January 21,2009; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Monroe County Board of County Comnllssioners that
the following amendment to the Comprehensive Plan be adopted and sent to the state land
planning agency for approval;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Policy 102.8.5 of the Monroe County Year 20 1 0 Comprehensive Plan is
hereby amended to include the following:
Momoe County shall initiate efforts to discourage the extension of facilities and services
provided by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and private providers of electricity and
telephone service to undeveloped CBRS units, excluding central sanitary wastewater service and
those utilities required to provide central sanitary wastewater collection and treatment.
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 be affected by such
validity.
Section 3. All ordinances or pans of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are
hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
Section 4. TIllS ordinance shall be transmitted by the Pla1ll1ing Department to the
Department of Community Affairs to determine the consistency of this ordinance with the Florida
Statutes.
(REMAINDER OF PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK)
Page 2 of3 Initials -
P:\Word\Growth Management\Ordinances\CBRS LDR and Comp Plan\Draft Wastewater GOP Ordinance
(Amended) (2).doc
Section 5. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of
Florida, but shall not become effective until a notice is issued by the Department of Community
Affairs or Administrative Commission approving the ordinance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners ofMomoe County,
Florida at a meeting held on the __day of ,200_
Mayor Mario DiGelmaro --
Mayor Pro Tem Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Conunissioner Sylvia Murphy
COl1UTllSsioner George Neugent
Commissioner Dixie Spehar
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
Mayor Mario DiGennaro
(SEAL)
A TIEST: DANNY KOLHAGE, CLERK.
DEPUTY CLERK. MONROE COUNTY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
SUSAN M. GRIMS
Assistant County Attorney
Date: .~9k~ L ~L~~
Page 3 of3 Initials -
P:\Word\Growth Management\Ordinances\CBRS LDR and Comp Plan\Draft Wastewater GOP Ordinance
(Amended) (2).doc
.\- \:,4)
y
J6
ORDINANCE NO.-2008
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING POLICY 102.8.5 OF THE MONROE
COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO .ALLOW THE
PROVISION OF CENTRAL WASTEWATER SERVICE AND SUPPORT
UTILITIES TO DEVELOPED PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN THE
COASTAL BARRIER REOURCES SYSTEM; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERIBILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES
INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; DIRECTING THE CLERK OF THE.BOARD
TO FORWARD A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS ORDINANCE TO THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE INCORPORATION INTO
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
WHEREAS,the Coastal Barrier Resources Act(CBRA) of 1982 established the Coastal
Barrier Resources System (CBRS) to restrict the federally subsidized development of coastal
barrier areas and specifically prohibited the `"construction Or, purchase .of any structure,
� 7J�.
" 16 U SC 3504(a)(1)in-said-areas;'and
- f•
WHEREAS, Monroe County has-1.-- 22 designated units of the CBRS which identified
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can be found listed"in Table .'" of the r,r oe Cou �,
Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Tcchnical,,Documentand illustrated on the Existing Land Use
l iraof the-Go ipi iiensive,i ari l.ii1•�{Jy 1�1.i and
z L Y 1 1
WHEREAS, Objective 102 8 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan states:
�
"Monroe County shall take actions"to-'�,iscourage}private development in areas designated as units
of the Coastal.Barrier Resources System[9J-5 006(3)(b)4]"; and
WHEREAS, Policy 102 8.5 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan states:
"Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Monroe.County shall initiate efforts to discourage
the extension of facilities and services provided by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and
private,providers of electricity andtelephone services to CBRS units";and
Insurance Program by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, indicates there arc five
WHEREAS, `on December 18, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No. 043-2001,creating Section 9.5-258 of the Monroe County Code which established
a Coastal Barrier Resources System Overlay District, the purpose of which is to implement the
policies of the comprehensive plan by prohibiting the extension and expansion of specific types
of public utilities to or through lands designated as a unit of the Coastal Barrier Resources
System; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida, Monroe County has been
mandated by the State of Florida to provide a centralized sewer system by 2010 as a means of
improving near shore water qualitywithin the Florida Keys,and
Page 1 of 3 Initials
C:\Documents and Settings\druckemiller-lisa\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKA9\Draft
Wastewater GOP Ordinance(Amended).doc
•
WHEREAS,on June 18,2008,the Growth Management Staff was directed by the Board
of County Commissioners to amend the comprehensive plan and land development regulations to
reword the prohibition on utilities such that the focus and priority be placed on wastewater
treatment first and any discussion of electric or any other utility, other than those required to
efficiently support a central wastewater collection system,be deferred until the wastewater goal is
accomplished;and
WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on July 23, ,2008, the Monroe County
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed`'text, and recommended
approval of the proposed text; and
WHEREAS,the Monroe County Board'of County Commissioners held a public hearing
to consider the transmittal of the proposed amendment,to the state land;;:planning agency on
January 21,2009; and
WHEREAS,it is the desire of the Monroe County Board:of County Commissioners that
the following amendment to the.Comprehensive Plan be^:,adopted and sent to the state land
planning agency for a
P g enc g Y approval;
PP � -
1 ,
NOW. 'f H HREFORE, BE It ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,TLORIDA:
4 4 A
� y
Section 1. Policy`102.8.5. of the:MonroeCounty Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan is
Y hereby amended to include the following
Monroe County shall initiate efforts to discourage the extension of facilities and services
provided by the Florida Keys ct Aquedu ,r.Authority and private providers of electricity and
telephone service to undeveloped propel within CBRS units., excluding—c-cntra:l—sanitary-
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 be affected by such
validity.
Section 3.� _ Aft 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 by the Planning Department to the
Department of Community Affairs to determine the consistency of this ordinance with the Florida
Statutes.
Section 5. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of
Florida, but shall not become effective until a notice is issued by the Department of Community
Affairs or Administrative Commission approving the ordinance.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida at a regular meeting held on the day of ,A.D.,2008.
Page 2 of 3 Initials
•
C:\Docuanents and Settings\druckemiller-lisa\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKA9\Draft
Wastewater GOP Ordinance(Amended).doc .
Mayor Mario Di Gennaro
Mayor Pro Tern Charles"Sonny McCoy
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Dixie Spehar
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA
BY
Mayor Mario Di Gennaro
k•
(SEAL)
r ,
ATTEST: DANNY KOHLAGE,CLERK
rE �
} }i
ULPU I Y CLERK..-
•
•
t '
< y
c -
`1^ L
is
Page 3 of 3 Initials
C:\Documents and Settings\druckemiller-lisa\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKA9\Draft
Wastewater GOP Ordinance(Amended).doc
,~ -~
, 'w.:, ".'
,/ ':'11I,'2"-.\
~"~' ---;,-~
\ ' . ' : ,'- .
" 'UY
't, , ,~
~::..--.- - ,
1 ~~-/
-.....~'~.,
'-'
2 MEMORANDUM
3 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
4 We strive to be caring, professional and fair
5
6 To: Monroe County Board of County Commission
7
8 From: Mitch Harvey, Comprehensive Plan Manager
9
10 Through: Townsley Schwab, Acting Director of Planning & Environmental Resources
11
12 Date: August 29,2008
13
14 Subject: Request for an Amendment to Policy 102,8.5 of the Monroe County Year 2010
15 Comprehensive Plan
16
17 Meeting: September 17,2008
18
19 I REQUEST
20
21 In response to direction by the Board of County Commissioner on June 18, 2008, the Growth
22 Management Division is requesting to amend the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive
23 Plan to allow the provision of wastewater service to properties located within the Coastal
24 Barrier Resources System Overlay District together with the provision of those utilities
25 required to provide sanitary wastewater collection and treatment.. This will give Monroe
26 County the ability to more closely comply with the State requirement to provide centralized
27 sewer services throughout the Florida Keys by July 1,2010.
28
29 Policy 102.8.5 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan is proposed to be
30 amended to include the following:
31
32 Monroe County shall initiate efforts to discourage the extension of facilities and services
33 provided by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and private providers of electricity and
34 telephone service to CBRS units-;-, excluding sanitary wastewater service and those utilities
35 required to provide sanitary wastewater collection and treatment.
36
37 II PROCESS
38
39 Amendments to the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan may be
40 proposed by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), the Planning Commission or the
41 Director of Planning. The Director of Planning shall review and process amendments and
42 pass them on to the Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission for
43 recommendation and final approval by the BOCC.
44
Page 1 of7 Reviewed by _
W:\GROWTH MANAGEMENT\BOCC\GMD Agenda Items\20080917\CRS Comp Plan Amend\Wastewater GOP - HOCC
Staff Report.doc
1 The Planning Commission and the BOCC shall each hold at least one public hearing on a
2 proposed amendment. The Planning Commission shall review the amendment, the reports
3 and recommendations of the Department of Planning & Environmental Resources and the
4 Development Review Committee, and the testimony given at the public hearing, and shall
5 submit its recommendations and [mdings to the BOCC. The BOCC shall consider the staff
6 report, recommendation, and testimony given at the public hearings and may either deny the
7 application or adopt or not adopt a resolution transmitting the proposed amendment to the
8 DCA. Amendments are then reviewed by the Florida Department of Community Affairs and
9 returned to the County with objections, rejections and comments to be considered prior to
10 adoption of the ordinance. Then, an adoption hearing is scheduled for the BOCC.
11
12 III RELEV ANT PRIOR COUNTY ACTIONS
13
14 June 2000 - BOCC approved the Monroe County Wastewater Management Plan;
15 December 19,2001 - BOCC approved Ordinance 043-2001 amending the Monroe County Land
16 Development Regulations to include Section 9.5-258, thereby establishing the Coastal Barrier
17 Resources System Overlay;
18 April 16, 2008 - BOCC approved the expansion of the SumerlandlCudjoe/Sugarloaf Regional
19 Wastewater System to cover design for Big Pine Key and Lower SugarloafKey;
20 May 21, 2008 - BOCC approved central sanitary wastewater service to the property owners of
21 No Name Key through inclusion of the area in the Lower Keys Regional Service Area
22 wastewater treatment and collection system.
23 June 18, 2008 - BOCC discussed an item to direct staff to amend Section 9.5-258 Coastal
24 Barrier Resources System Overlay District of the Monroe County Code to eliminate the
25 prohibition of the establishment of central wastewater treatment collection systems and utilities
26 for no Name Key. Following public discussion, the BOCC approved a motion that the
27 prohibition of utilities is reworded such that the focus and priority be placed on wastewater first
28 and any discussion of electric or any other utility is deferred until the wastewater goal is
29 accomplished. The Board directed staff to amend the Land Development Regulations and the
30 Comprehensive Plan.
31 June 18, 2008 - BOCC approved a resolution to remove the developed residential area the
32 unrecorded plat on the east end of No Name Key, otherwise originally known as "Islands End"
33 from the Coastal Barrier Resource System.
34 July 22, 2008 - Development Review Committee held a meeting, received comments from the
35 public, and recommended approval to the Planning Commission.
36 July 23, 2008 - The Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing, received
37 comments from the public, and recommended approval to the BOCC.
38
39 IV REVIEW OF APPLICATION
40
41 A. Consistency of the proposed amendment with the provisions and intent of the Monroe
42 County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan:
43
44 Existing Policy 102.8.5 discourages the extension of utilities within the Coastal Barrier
45 Resources System Overlay District. The proposed amendment to the Monroe County
46 Land Development Regulations clarifies the intent of Monroe County to provide
Page 2 of7 Reviewed by _
W:\GROWTH MANAGEMENT\BoCaGMD Agenda Items\200809I 7\CRS Comp Plan Amend\Wastewater GOP - BOCC
Staff Report.doc
1 centralized wastewater service throughout the unincorporated area by July 1, 2010 as
2 mandated by the Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida. An amendment to Section 9.5-258(b)
3 of the Monroe County Code is being considered concurrently with the proposed
4 amendment. to the Comprehensive Plan.
5
6 B. Consistency of the proposed amendment with the provisions and intent of Chapter 9.5 of
7 the Monroe County, Land Development Regulations:
8
9 In accordance with MCC Sec. 9.5-511(d)(5)b., the BOCC may consider the adoption of
10 an ordinance enacting the proposed change based on one (1) or more of the following
11 factors:
12
13 1. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those on which the
14 text or boundary was based:
15
16 None.
17
18 ii. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends):
19
20 None.
21
22 iii. Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features
23 described in Volume 1 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan:
24
25 None.
26
27 iv. New issues;
28
29 In order to improve near shore water quality, the State of Florida requires the
30 provision of centralized wastewater service to eliminate sewage disposal surface
31 water discharges within Monroe County by the July 1,2010 (Chapter 99-395, Section
32 6, Laws of Florida). On June 18, 2008, the BOCC directed staff to amend the
33 Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations to allow wastewater service
34 within the Coastal Barrier Resources System Overlay District. An amendment to
35 Policy 102.8.5 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan is concurrently
36 being considered to allow wastewater service within the Coastal Barrier Resources
37 System Overlay District, together with the provision of those utilities required to
38 provide sanitary wastewater collection and treatment. Provision of wastewater service
39 within the coastal areas of Monroe County will further the mandate of the State to
40 improve near shore water quality through the elimination of sewage disposal surface
41 water discharges.
42
43 v. Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness:
44
Page 3 of7 Reviewed by _
W:\GROWTH MANAGEMENT\BOCC\GMD Agenda Items\20080917\CRS Comp Plan Amend\ Wastewater GOP - BOCC
Staff Report. doc
1 The proposed amendment clarifies the necessity to provide centralized wastewater
2 service within Monroe County, which includes the Coastal Barrier Resources System
3 Overlay District.
4
5 vi. Data updates:
6
7 None.
8
9 C. Consistency with the Principles for Guiding Development in the Florida Keys Area of
10 Critical State Concern:
11
12 All land development regulations enacted, amended or rescinded within a area of critical
13 state concern must be consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development, Section
14 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes. The proposed GOP amendment promotes and furthers the
15 following Principles in Section 380.0552(7):
16
17 1. To strengthen local government capabilities for managing land use and
18 development so that local government is able to achieve these
19 objectives without the continuation of the area of critical state concern
20 designation.
21
22 The proposed amendment strengthens Monroe County's ability to
23 provide centralized wastewater service to existing and future land uses
24 within the unincorporated area. Growth controls presently in place, such
25 as the Residential Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) and Non-
26 residential Rate of Growth Ordinance (NROGO), effectively moderates
27 how much new development will occur within Monroe County.
28
29 One focus of the Area of Critical State Concern program was
30 environmental protection. The associated ACSC work program
31 supports the efforts by Monroe County to improve near shore water
32 quality by developing and implementing centralized wastewater and
33 storm water management plans.
34
35 11. To protect shoreline and marine resources including mangroves, coral
36 reef formations, seagrass beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their
37 habitat.
38
39 The provision of centralized wastewater service will improve near shore
40 water quality, enhancing the Florida Key's unique shoreline marine
41 habitats which include mangroves, coral reefs, and seagrass beds,
42
43 111. To ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens
44 through sound economic development.
45
Page 40f7 Reviewed by _
W:\GRoWfH MANAGEMENT\BOCC\GMD Agenda Items\20080917\CRS Comp Plan Amend\ Wastewater GOP - BOCC
Staff Report.doc
1 Centralized wastewater service is an essential component of residential
2 and nonresidential development, reducing the incidence of near shore
3 water pollution that affects the well-being of both Florida Keys citizens
4 and its tourist visitors who are an essential supporter of the local
5 economy. Eco-Tourism has long been an economic driver within
6 Monroe County and the Florida Keys. Maintaining the health of near
7 shore habitat is consequently a high priority to the Florida Keys and its
8 citizens.
9
10 IV. To limit the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water
11 throughout the Florida Keys.
12
13 The provision of centralized wastewater service will improve near shore
14 water quality through the elimination of septic hot spots and the use of
15 uncontrolled individual septic systems whose contaminants leach into
16 the adjacent near shore waters.
17
18 v. To protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life
19 of existing and proposed major public investments, including sewage
20 collection and disposal facilities.
21
22 The proposed amendment will give the Florida Keys Aqueduct
23 Authority the ability to design, construct, and maintain centralized
24 wastewater service throughout the Monroe County unincorporated area.
25 Economies of scale are extremely important to public utilities in our
26 current budgetary environment. Limitations on the expansion of
27 wastewater services are prohibiting economies of scale. Allowing
28 additional users to access the proposed centralized wastewater system
29 will promote lower user fees. The present Coastal Barrier Resource
30 System Overlay District limits our ability to do this.
31
32 Vi. To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the
33 Florida Keys and maintain the Florida Keys as a unique Florida
34 Resource.
35
36 The maintenance of near shore water quality is an essential element of
37 the Florida Keys. Pollution of the Keys' aquatic habitat can result in the
38 permanent degradation and destruction of the Florida Keys' unique
39 marine resources. Near shore water pollution has resulted in the
40 periodic closing of public beaches and promotes algae growth that
41 destroys coral reefs that are unique to the Florida Keys. Implementation
42 of a County-wide centralized wastewater system will significantly
43 reduce the level of near shore pollution resulting from individual septic
44 systems through protecting public health, safety and welfare as well as
45 our most important resource.
46
Page 50f7 Reviewed by _
W:\GROWTH MANAGEMENT\BOCC\GMD Agenda Items\20080917\CRS Comp Plan Amend\Wastewater GOP - BOCC
Staff Report. doc
1 D. Impact on Community Character:
2
3 The proposed amendment will allow existing and future land uses located within Coastal
4 Barrier Resources System Overlay to be served by centralized wastewater service, to
5 promote, improve and protect near shore water quality. Monroe County presently
6 maintains several unique land use controls, such as the Tier System, Rate of Growth
7 Ordinance (RaGa), Nonresidential Rate of Growth Ordinance (NROGO), and the
8 Incidental Take Permit (ITP, 6/9/96). It is anticipated that the proposed amendment will
9 not affect the rate of new growth in Monroe County. However, the proposed amendment
10 will insure that as growth proceeds within the context of these regulations, centralized
11 wastewater service will be available concurrent with the impact of existing land uses and
12 new development. No changes in land use density, intensity or community character is
13 anticipated as a result of the proposed amendment. This amendment will result in the
14 enhancement of near shore water quality, which will in turn promote a more sustainable
15 shoreline and near shore aquatic environment.
16
17
18 V FINDINGS OF FACT
19
20 1. The Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the Coastal Barrier
21 Resources System (CBRS) to restrict the federally subsidized development of coastal barrier
22 areas and specifically prohibited the "construction or purchase of any structure,
23 appurtenance, facility, or related infrastructure" 16 U.S.C. 3504(a)(1) in said areas.
24
25 2. Monroe County has 15 designated units of the CBRS which can be found listed in Table
26 3.21 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Technical Document and
27 illustrated on the Existing Land Use Maps of the Comprehensive Plan Map Atlas.
28
29 3. Objective 102.8 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan states: "Monroe
30 County shall take actions to discourage private development in areas designated as units of
31 the Coastal Barrier Resources System.
32
33 4. Policy 102.8.5 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan states: "Upon adoption
34 of the Comprehensive Plan, Monroe County shall initiate efforts to discourage the extension
35 of facilities and services provided by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and private
36 providers of electricity and telephone services to CBRS units".
37
38 5. Current Flood Insurance Rate Maps published for the National Flood Insurance Program
39 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, indicate there are five developed residential
40 areas (with five structures or less per acre) and one commercial area that fall within the
41 CBRS designation; and
42
43 6. On December 18,2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance No. 043-
44 2001, creating Section 9.5-258 of the Monroe County Code which established a Coastal
45 Barrier Resources System Overlay District, the purpose of which is to implement the policies
46 of the comprehensive plan by prohibiting the extension and expansion of specific types of
Page 6 of7 Reviewed by _
W:\GROWTH MANAGEMENT\BOCC\GMD Agenda Items\20080917\CRS Comp Plan Amend\Wastewater Gap - BOCC
Staff Report.doc
1 public utilities to or through lands designated as a unit of the Coaster Barrier Resources
2 System.
3
4 7. Pursuant to Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida, Monroe County has been mandated by the
5 State of Florida to provide a centralized sewer system by July 1, 2010 as a means of
6 improving near shore water quality within the Florida Keys.
7
8 8. On June 18, 2008, the Growth Management Staff was directed by the Board of County
9 Commissioners to amend the comprehensive plan and land development regulations to
10 reword the prohibition on utilities such that the focus and priority be placed on wastewater
11 first and any discussion of electric or any other utility be deferred until the wastewater goal is
12 accomplished.
13
14 VI CONCLUSIONS OF LA W
15
16 1. The proposed amendment will not affect the existing or future land use character of
17 Monroe County.
18
19 2. The proposed amendment IS internally consistent with the Monroe County
20 Comprehensive Plan.
21
22 3. The proposed amendment will allow a more comprehensive implementation of a
23 centralized wastewater service system throughout the unincorporated area of Monroe
24 County as required by Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida.
25
26 VII RECOMMENDATION
27
28 Staff recommends approval.
29
30 VIII A TT ACHMENTS
31
32 1. Letter Dated 7/7/08 from Alicia Roemmele- Putney
33 2. Monroe County Code and Comprehensive Plan Citations
34 3. Ordinance No. 43-2001
35 4. Coastal Barrier Resources Act
36 5. Coastal Barrier Resources Act Reauthorization
37 6. Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida
38 7. Resolution No. 179.2008
39 8. CBRS No Name Key Unit FL-50 Map
40
41
42
43
44
Page 70f7 Reviewed by _
W:\GROWTH MANAGEMEN1\BOCC\GMD Agenda Items\20080917\CRS Comp Plan Amend\Wastewater GOP - BOCC
Staff Report. doc
. ~ e e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.P28-08
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING A REQUEST OF THE MONROE
COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO AMEND THE MONROE
COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY AMENDING
POLICY 102.8.5 TO ALLOW THE PROVISION OF CENTRAL
WASTEWATER SERVICE TO DEVELOPED PROPERTIES
LOCATED WITHIN THE COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES
SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the
Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) to restrict the federally subsidized
development of coastal barrier areas [16 U.S. C. 3504( a)( 1)]; and
WHEREAS, Monroe County has 22 designated units of the CBRS identified by
the U.s. Fish and Wildlife Service; and
WHEREAS, Objective 102.8 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
states: "Monroe County shall take actions to discourage private development in areas
designated as units of the Coastal Barrier Resources System [9J-5.006(3)(b)4]"; and
WHEREAS, Policy 102.8.5 of Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
states: "Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Monroe County shall initiate efforts
to discourage the extension of facilities and services provided by the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority and private providers of electricity and telephone services to CBRS
units"; and
WHEREAS, on December 18, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners
adopted Ordinance No. 043-2001, creating Section 9.5-258 of the Monroe County Code
which established a Coastal Barrier Resources System Overlay District, the purpose of
which is to implement the policies of the comprehensive plan by prohibiting the
extension and expansion of specific types of public utilities to or through lands
designated as a unit of the Coastal Barrier Resources System; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Chapter 99-395, Laws of Florida, Monroe County has
been mandated by the State of Florida to provide a centralized sewer system by 2010 as a
means of improving near shore water quality within the Florida Keys, and
WHEREAS, on June 18, 2008, the Growth Management Staff was directed by
the Board of County Commissioners to amend the comprehensive plan and land
development regulations to reword the prohibition on utilities such that the focus and
priority be placed on wastewater treatment first and any discussion of electric or any
Page I of2 Initials ~.
W:\Planning\Working Folders\Harvey-Mitch\Wastewater\Draft Wastewater GOP - PC RESO
(Amended).doc
.. e -
other utility, other than those required to efficiently support a central wastewater
collection system, be deferred until the wastewater goal is accomplished; and
WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee on July 22,.2008 reviewed the
legal authority and the proposed text; and
WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on July 23,2008, the Monroe County
Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed text and recommended
approval of the proposed text.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
Monroe County, Florida, that the findings of fact support its decision to recommend
APPROVAL to the Board of County Commissioners of the amendment to the text of the
Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 102.8.5 to include the following:
Monroe County shall initiate efforts to discourage the extension of facilities and services
provided by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and private providers of electricity and
telephone service to undeveloped CBRS units;.. excluding central sanitary wastewater
service and those utilities required to provide central sanitary wastewater collection and
treatment.
PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Planning Commission of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 23rd day of July 2008.
Chair Wall Yes
Vice-Chair Cameron Yes
Commissioner Hale Yes
Commissioner Marston Yes
Commissioner Windle Yes
, FLORIDA
BY
Date:
Page 2 of2 Initials W
W:\Planning\Working Folders\Harvey-Mitch\Wastewater\Draft Wastewater Gap - PC RESO
(Amended).doc
The Solar Community of No Name Key
1934 No Name Drive
No Name Key, Florida 33043
---------------------------------
06/18/2008
BOCC Regular Meeting
Marathon, Florida
Agenda Item M-~: "Approval to direct staff to amend Section 9.5-268 Coastal Barrier
Resources System Overlay District of the Monroe County Code to eliminate the prohibition of the
establishment of central wastewater treatment collection systems and utilities for No Name Key in
accordance with previously approved BOCC direction to include No Name Key within the central
sanitary wastewater system plan for the Lower Keys Regional Service Area.
Dear Mayor DiGennaro and Fellow Board of County Commissioners:
The Solar Community of No Name Key, formerly known as the No Name Key Property Owners
Against Commercial Power, was founded in 1995 in response to efforts to extend commercial
electricity to No Name Key. Our current membership, which is listed below, represents 15 of the 43
homes on No Name Key. Some of the remaining households remain neutral on the issue.
We fought, along side of Monroe County, with all parties expending an incredible amount of time,
energy and money to keep No Name Key from loosing what makes it distinct from every other island
in the Florida Keys. Below is an overview of the Electrification of No Name Key battle from 1996 to
2003.
Three of you, Mayor Pro Tern McCoy, Commissioner George Neugent and Commissioner Spehar,
helped in our efforts to have the existing regulations and policies upheld. Monroe County's has
maintained a consistent position on the issue of extending commercial power to No Name Key since
1996 and we thank you.
Our core beliefs and the County's historical position is eloquently stated in portions of the Planning
Commission Resolution P17-99 Conclusions of Law:
"All of the Appellants [Taxpayers for the Electrification of No Name Key] moved to No Name
Key with the knowledge that commercially provided electricity was not available. These
property owners have the ability to move elsewhere in the FlorickJ. Keys in order to have such
a service provided to them. In contrast, other No Name Key property owners moved to the
island expressly because of the lifestyle that is offered to them there, including the fact that
the character of the island is unique, in part due to the lack of C01TI1'1JerciaI power and is a
special enclave in the FlorickJ. Keys that provides a unique quality of life than must be
nurtured, protected and prolonged."
There is no justification for linking the issue of sewage to electrification in lirht of the fact the
STEP /STEG small diameter sewer system will work on No Name Key without involvinr Kevs Energy.
It is also the most cost effective of all the ~p.m!;_
We ask you please to oppose this agenda item and to continue in your ongoing commitment to
"protect and nurture our special enclave of solar homes on No Name Key". [PC Resolution P 17-99]
Thank you for you help and interest in this matter.
f.ci
Sincerely,
Alicia Roemmele-Putney, President
Carol C. Barber, Vice-President
Elizabeth Harlacher, Secretary
Fraklin Atwell, Treasurer
The Electrification of No Name Kev Battle from 1()()6 to 200~: A Brief History
On AulrnSt 2. 1()()6 County Administrator James Roberts advised Dale Finigin, City Electric
Systems, that the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan has policies that are clearly not in
support of an extension of electric service to No Name Key. [See attached Finigan-Roberts.pdf]
In a M~ 1..~. 1()()8 Letter of Understanding from Tim McGarry, Director of Planning to Taxpayers for
the Electrification of No Name Key, Inc., he stated that Monroe County "cannot support a project to
extend commercial power to No Name Key because it would be inconsistent with Monroe County's
Year 2010 Plan and both Chapters 380 and 163 of the Florida Statues." [See attached "LOU
McGarry. pdf]
This decision was appealed to the Planning Commission where every conceivable argument
imaginable was brought forward and heard by the Planning Commission during two lengthy quasi-
judicial hearings in 1998 and 1999. The Applicants stated they had raccoons entering their homes,
could not keep ice cream, were exposed to dengue fever, could not sell their homes, were lied to by the
Realtors, had to run generators and store fuel and old batteries -- all of which are bad for the
environment. The appeal was denied. [See attached Admin Appeal. pdf]
The Phmning Commission, on Febrllal"V ~. I()QQ. upheld the plRnning Director's interpretation of
the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Major points in the Commission's Conclusions of Law were: that
the appellants failed to meet the required burden of proof, that No Name Key has always been
provided special protection under the County's Comp Plans (plural), and that allowing commercial
electricity would be inconsistent with the overall goals, objectives and policies of the Year 2010 Plan.
Moreover all of the reasons the appellants gave regarding potential negative environmental impacts
and potential health and safety concerns are a direct result of the appellant's choice for generated
power rather than solar power. All of the appellants moved to No Name Key with the knowledge
commercial electricity was not available. Appellants could move anywhere else in the Florida Keys to
have commercial power, whereas those who have successfully adapted to solar living have no such
choice.
After the Planning Commission's denial of the Administrative Appeal by Taxpayers for the
Electrification of No Name Key, Inc., the plRnning Department paid for two Photovoltaic experts to
come down from Central Florida and host a two-day seminar on Big Pine Key that offered free
technical assistance on how to utilize solar power effectively, on-site advice and information on
grants. Only one member of Taxpayers for the Electrification, Inc. of No Name Key bothered to attend
the workshops.
Instead of appeAling the plRnning Commission's denial to OOAH, the Taxpayers for the Electrification
of No Name Key, Inc. filed a Complaint Rgl'in~ Monroe County and City Electric Systems of Key West
in the Circuit Court of the 16th Judicial Circuit on JulV 2. 1()()Q. [Case Number: CAK990000819]
The plaintiff represented 12 homes on No Name Key.
-2-
As a means of settling the pending suit, Plaintiffs once again sought relief through a Comprehensive
Plan amendment to allow electrification of No Name Key. This time, on December 21. lQQQ,
Planning Director Marlene Conaway determined "there are simply too many policies in the [Year
2010] Comprehensive Plan which would be in conflict with an amendment of this nature." [See
attached Conaway-Amend. pdt]
In a second attempt to settle the pending suit, Plaintiffs proposed a Settlement Agreement that would
have allowed the extension of commercial power to No Name Key. On AprillQ. 2001 the BOCC
unanimously rejected the proposed settlement agreement. Motion was made by Commissioner
Williams, seconded by Commissioner Spehar, and supported by Commissioners Nelson, Nugent and
McCoy. Also on April 19, 2001, motion was made by Commissioner Spehar and seconded by
Commissioner Williams "directing staff to bring back to the Board for approval the creation of a
zoning overlay district designation of otT-grid encompassing all properties within the
boundaries of No Name Key; and also, to address or change the other issues that clearly caused
confusion today." This is the exact legislation:onroe Cou;tv Code Section Q.!>-268 Coastal Barrier
Resources System Overlay District of the Mo oe County: ou are being asked to "mend with this
agenda item.
By the time Judge Richard Payne granted Summary Judgment in favor of the Defendants on Julv 16.
2002. over ninety-seven (97) entries bad been made on the docket. On An~l1st lQ. 2002.
Taxpayers for the Electrification of No Name Key, Inc. appealed Judge Payne's ruling to the Third
District Court of Appeals. After nearly a year of inaction, the Taxpayers for the Electrification of No
Name Key, Inc. requested voluntary dismissal of their suit, which the court recognized on June 2.:1.
2003.
Ilte Solar Connnnnitv of No Nanle Key- M......1vorMhip l.i_- Jnn... 2008
1. Atwell, Frank & Kimi;
213 7 Bahia Shores Road;
No Name Key; 872-3495
arknarf@cs.com
arknarf@bellsouth.net
2. Barber, Rob & Chris
1934 No Name Drive
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-1401
ffuowherla1 bellsouth.net
3. Brouillette, Jason
1843 Bahia Shores Road
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-0283
Troa91a1aoLcom
4. Brouillette, Wayne & Christie
2107 Bahia Shores Road, NNK
328 Kings Crest Lane
Pelham, AL 35124
wbroula1uab.edu
-3-
5. Daniels, Faye & Garrison, Stuart
20 Spanish Channel Drive
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-0589
6. Douville, Hallett & Linda
32340 Cat Lane
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-2055
DouvilleiaJ,bellsouth.net
7. Dry, Larry & Wanda
1868 No Name Drive
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-1953
drdrvtniaJ,aoLcom
wonding(a),aol.com
8. Gato, Jeannette
1909 Bahia Shores Road
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 864-0945
Jfgato@msn.com
9. Harlacher, Tony & Liz
1921 Bahia Shores Road
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-0644
(570) 424-737
twoturtlestandl@bellsouth.com
10. Press, Michael & Ann
Spanish Channel Drive
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-7550
(321) 213-2654
michaelpress@hotmail.com
11. Putney, Mick & Alicia
2150 No Name Drive
No Name Key, FL
(305) 872-8888
micalnnk@aoLcom
12. Scanlon, Bob & Jan
1845 No Name Drive
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-8845
thescanlonsiaJ,hotmail.com
-4-
13. Wernsen, Hans & Corry
1910 No Name Drive
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-3141
hamericor@ao!.com
14. Witter, Tom & Susan
2046 Bahia Shores Road
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 515-2082
(607) 967-8028
SHW42(@,ao!.com
15. Zeman, Larry
1933 Bahia Shores Road
No Name Key, FL 33043
(305) 872-1173
Attachments:
. August 2, 1996 Letter to Mr. Dale Finigin, Director of Engineering, Utility Board of Key West from Monroe
County Administrator James Roberts stating the adopted Monroe County 2010 Plan as adopted has policies
which are not in support of the extension of electrical service to No Name Key
. . May 13, 1998 Letter of Understanding for the Electrification of No Name Key to Mr. Frank Greeman from
Monroe County Planning Director Timothy McGarry, 7 pages.
. . June II, 1999 Letter of Denial of the Administrative Appeal by the No Name Key Taxpayers for Electricity to
Mr. Frank Greeman from Mrs. Judith Chambers, 2 pages. The eight (8) page Planning Commission Resolution
No. P17-99 is a part of this document, 10 pages.
. December 21, 1999 Letter to Mr. Frank Greenman from the Monroe County Planning Director Marlene
. Conaway stating the Planning Department cannot support or recommend a text amendment to the 20 I 0
Comprehensive Plan to allow electrification of No Name Key, 2 pages.
.Composite Attachment: Twenty-three (23) letters in opposition to Agenda Item M-3. Ten (10) are from No
Name Key homeowners and represent eight (8) households. Twelve (12) are from Keys-wide homeowners.
And, one (I) is from a Keys-wide organi711tion, Florida Keys Green Living and Energy Education (GLEE).
-5-
.,,--- ._'-'--~'--""--'~--~
- ,
County of Monroe
Dl....J_n_ ~ - ......a1""-.~ -
:rl!Il_HlPwa) ........_DilI. )
_4llO ........T_ao..,"-DilI.2
...-._ lmo C_llJI" ~"""'IIIhlIy...1
Y_(lG3)~ ^- . . f......... Gis. 4
PAX, (lOS)2IN5l6 I"-:.-~ ...., ICIf ..... DilL 5
CERTIFIED MAlL RECEIPT /I Z 200 004 171
December 21, 1999
,
Mr. FtIIIlk Oreoalmon, &q.
o-lUIlIMAmz
StoO Owneao Hiahway
Suite 40
Marathon, FL 330S0
RE.. Text ~_t '" IIlh1w .llCtrfI/c1JIiDn 01 No N_ 1(.,
Dear Mr. Greoamon:
This ~ is in respo_Ul our II\eeliQa with you and Mr. EabD on Deoembet 7, 1999. AI)'OII
win nocall, Ibis lnOCliDJ - held Ul di...... the I'Iamliaa Departmenl'. posilion on a poaIbIe X!!!
2010 Comprehensive Pic IIIICndmcal \0 allow for the CXICllSiDll of electrical servic:e 10 No N_
Key, The idea of. COlIIpIehensiv. plan amendment WII pRlposod by your c1ioms as . Jll*ible way
10 settle the suil your cli_ have broughl llpinst Monroe COUllty and City EIcclric Systam.
We apprcc:ill\c the (ill of CompMcnai.. Plan policieo you 8IIbmittcd at Ibis m..w., _
justification for your client's position. The s1all' and 1 have had a cIJanc:e 10 nMcw tbo
ComprdlCllSive Pic policies related 10 Ibis mailer. and we tlnd that we would IIllt be able 10
!lUJlpOrI a l:OIIIpIehensi.. plan amendmem which -.ld allow electricity 10 be extended \0 No
Name Key.
Part of our rationole lOr Ibis decision i. that lbcre IIlC simply too _y policlu in the
Com)l1'Chcllsive Plan which would be in conllicl with an amendmenl of Ibis na\1n. AIJowiaa tbo
proposed omcndmcnl would require these other policies 10 be mnended 10 a point that could be in
conflicl with _ stalu\c3.
2
f. d--
-.~. --~-,--- _.~.-. .-_.. ~- .._-"-
- \ '" .
Mr,.... o..-..llI4-
.... nrb.21. 1M
"-'2
COIIIClIuemly. the PI-ma ~ would nlIpIlCt(uJly decline lD recGIIIIDlllI4 . _
~I to the Year 2010 eom.........e PIIUI whicII wollkl alter oxlstiDg polla III U 10
IIIow few the r:- loloD of ~ IOI'Iice to No NIDle Key.
ShouIcI you bavc .y MdiIiU q."""-. pIuK feel tiee 10 CODlIeI the P111lDiDa Sla<< or 1Il)'lOlt
1II (305) 219.2500. Tbook You.
~.
;( /fP.k,u tJ-"7
Ie. .,... ec-w.y
l'IIDDiDt ~
cc: Timothy J. MeOwry, A1CP; Director otGnlwth t.f.~t
K-. Cthon.',Ilaq.; Morpo IIld Hendrict
KiIIlber1y OllRDo ~Ye PIInDIaa MMrpr
a.d M.dowa. A1CP; SelliGr C " .......... "'-
Pile
.
2
-^'.-.~-_.,._----", .-
. '~
C ol!~ of ~L~~~9.E e...AIIl OF COUNTY g)IIMlS~1
MAVOIt,_llouJlfOSf<_.
_ProT.....JaCIlLDnllOn.llIstncr.
-_.-,
SI1II1Oy......,...llIm1Ct.
Mart..., .IICI\_~
Monroe County Planning
Ct: f.(fJl1f 2798 Overseas Hwy
g~ Suite 410
Marathon, Florida 33050
May 13. 1998
Franklin Greenman t:"J~1 h. Ak~
- Rt.J
Greenman &. Man'& . c. }...... "$1...
Gulfside Village. Suite 40 \-,1.. . -.. /i. Ill,'!~ ."'~'
5BOO Overseas Highway MAY I 4 190,-8' .~.
Marathon, FL 33050 p"<
RE, Letter of understanding for the
electrification of No Name Key
Dear Frank:
Pursuant to Sec. 9.5-43 of the Monroe Count v Code. ~ndeQ.1
this document shall constitute a letter of understanding. On
March 25. 1998, a pre-application conference regarding th..
ahove-referenced project was held in the Marathon Planning De.
partment office.
Attendees of the mee1:ing inoluded Franklin Greenman, Richard
Melahi. Ernest a.nd Barbara Damon, Tracy Bookenhauer, Terry and
. - Pam Morrison. Joe and Oira Juhasz. Aldone and Bernard Siezak,
Harry and Janet W'allis and Francisco P1chel thereafter referred
to as lithe applicant. ) , Elizabeth Trotter, Court Reporter, and
Antonia Gerli. Development Review Coordinator (hereafter re-
ferred to as ftthe Planning 8taff") .
The applicant is proposing to provide electricity to the resi-
dents of No Name Key.
The Planning Department finds that the proposal is inconsistent
with both chapters 163 and 380 of the Florida Statutes and the
Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Pertinent facts
related to this issue are listed below,
The intent of chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes is. in part I
to cause lOcal governments to encourage appropriate use of land,
water I and resources. consistent with the public interest i and
deal effectively with future problems that ....y resule from the
use and development of land within their jurisdictions.
PRNONAME/TXTDR Page 1
e
Pd--
"--.-- _...__.._._.,,~^_ '._m~
.
Through the proce.. of comprehensive planning, it is inten4ed
that unit s of local government can pre..rve. promote. protect
and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, ap-
pearance, convenience. law enforcement and fire prevention, an4
general welfare; prevent overcrowding of land and avoid undue
concentration of populat ion. . . and conserve, develop, ut.ilize,
and protect natural resources within their jurisdictions.
Chapter 380 of the Florida Statutes designates the Florida Keye
as an area of critical state concern in part in order to protect
the natural resources and environment. conserve and promote the
community character. and establish a land uae management syet-em
that promotes orderly and balanced growth in accordance with the
capacity of available and planned public utilities And services.
Chapter 38Q lists twelve principles for guiding development with
which all local regulations and programs in the Florida keys
must be consistent. Relevant ~o your p~oposal are the following
principles:
To protect shoreline and marine resources, including man-
groves, coral reef formations, wetlanda, fish and wildlife
and their habitats;
To protect upland resources. tropical biological communi-
ties, freshwater wetlands, rtaCive tropical vegetation, dune
ridges and beaches, wildlife and their habitat,
To ensure maximurn well-being of the Florida Keys and its
citizens through sound economic development;
To 1 imit adverse im.pact.a of development on the quali ty of
water throughout the Florida Keys;
To enhance natural scenic resources r pr01\\Ot.e the aesthetic
benefits of the- natural environment and eDBure that develop-
ment is compatible with the unique historic character of the
Florid keys;
To protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and
amortized life of existing and proposed major public invest-
ments including City Electric service;
TO protect the public health, safety and welfare of the citi-
zens of the Florida Keys and maintain the Florida Keys as a
unique Florida resource.
The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan has been found to
be consistent with both Chapters 163 and 380 of the florida Stat-
utes. lis you know, the thrust of both state planning law and
the Monroe count.y Year 2010 comprehend ve plan is to direct
growth toward exist.ing developed area. and to discourage growth
in areas that are environmentally 8onsit.ive and/or areas that
continue to be in their natural state.
Psge 2
PRNONlIMll/TXTOR
, .
The majority of the acreage on 110 lIame ltey relllaina uncl.evelcped
in its nati"e state. No cOllllllercial development exists on the
island and the limited industrial uses are in the proce.s of
being phased out in accordance with settlement agreements with
the Florida Department of community Affairs. Residential devel-
opment is sparse with the concentration of homes being located
within three subdivisions.
No Name Key is unique, not only because it lacks electrical con-
nections, but also because it is remote from US 1, is located
entirely within a !lational Wildlife Refuge and almost entirely
within the Coa..tal Barrier Resource System (CBRS). Refuge and
CBRS status were necessitated by the need to reduce the exposure
of residents to natural hazards and to reduce adverse impacts on
endangered species.
The proposed project 1s inconsistent with the followin9 goals,
objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan:
GOAL 101 Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the
quality of life, ensure the safety of County reeidents and visi-
tors and protect valuable natural resources.
Objective 101.11 Monroe Count.y shall implement measures to
direct future growth away from environmentally sensitive
land and toward established development areas served by ex-
isting public facilities.
GOl\L 1.02 Monroe county shall direct future growth to lands
which are intrinsically most suitable for development and shall
encourage conservat.ion and protection of environmentally sensi-
tive lands.
objective 102,8.1 Monroe county shall talee actions to dis-
courage private development in areas designated as uni ts of
the coastal Barrier Resource System.
Policy 102,8.1 Monroe County shall discourage develop-
ments which sre proposed in units of the Coastal Barri-
er Resource System (CBRS) by methods including, but not
limited to, negative point.s in the permit allocat.ions
and pOint system.
POlicy 102.8.5 upon adoption of the Comprehensive
Plan, Monroe County shall initiate efforts to discour-
age the extension of facilities and services provided
by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and private pro-
viders of electricity and telephone service to CBRS
unit.s... .
Objective 102.9 Monroe County shall complete and implement a
cooperative land management program for private and county-
owned lands located within and adjacent to parks and conser-
Page )
PRNONAME/TXTDR
vat ion landa which are owned by the state and federal govern-
ments in the Florida Keys.
Policy 102.9.1 Monroe county ahall discourage develop-
ments which are proposed within Conservation Land Pro-
tection Areas by methods including, but not limited to,
negative points in the permit allocation and poine sys-
tem.
Policy 102.9.3 ... Conservation lands for which a Con-
servation protection Area shall be designated include
the following:
1. Fort Jefferson National Monument
2. National Key Deer Refuge....
GOAL 103 Monroe County shall implement regulations and programs
to address the special environmental protection and/or traffic
circulation needs of those areas of Big Pine Key....
Objective 103.1 Monroe County shall regulate future develop-
ment and coordinate the provision of public facilities on
Big Pine Key and No Harne XeYI consist.ent with t.he Goals,
Objectives and policies of this Comprehensive plan, in order
to:
(a) protect the Key deer;
(bl preserve and enhance the habitat of the Key deer;
(c) limit the number of additional vehicular trips from
other island. to Big pine Key;
(d) maintain the rural, suburban, and open space
character of Big pine Key;
(e) prevent" &nd reduce adverse secondary and cumulative
impacts on Key deer.
policy 103.1.1 The purpose of this policy is to insure
the long-term viability of the Key deer by directing
development a.way from. those areas necessary to protect
the Key deer habitat from the impacts of development.
it is recognbed that the viability of the endangered
Key deer depends on the control of both direct (prima-
ry) and indirect (secondary) impacts resulting from
development. . . .
Policy 103.1.10 Upon adoption of the comprehensive
Plan, Monroe County shall require that the following
analyses be undertaken prior to finalizing plans for
the Siting of any new public facilities or the signifi-
cant expansion of existing public facilities required
to support development on 8ig pine Key and No Name Key:
1. assessment of needs;
2. evaluation of alternative sites and design alterna-
tives for the selected site; and
page 4
PRNONIlME/TXTDR
J . assessment of impacts on surrounding land uses and
natural resources.
The ae8eo.ment of impaces on surrounding land uses and
natural resources will evaluate che extent to whicb the
proposed public facility involves public expenditures
in the coastal high ha&ard area and within environmen-
tally sensitive areas, including disturbed salt marsh
and buttonwood wetlands, undisturbed beach/ berm areas,
units of the Coastal barrier resource System, undis-
turbed uplands, habitats of species considered to be
threatened or endangered by the state and/or federal
governments~ offshore islands, and .Conservation Land
Protection Areas. Monroe County shall require that
public facilities be developed consistent with the cri-
teria described in Policy 101.1.1 and ehall support
whenever possible the location of public facilities off
of Big pine Key and Ko Kame Key.
GOAL 207 Monroe County shall protect and conserve existing wild-
life and wildlife habitats.
Objective 207.7 Monroe County shall implement activities to
prohibit the destruction of the federally-designated Key
deer and to protect its habitat.
Policy 207.7.1 Monroe County shall regulate future
development and coordinate the provision of public fa-
cilit.ies on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, consis,tent
with the goals, objectives and policies of this COmpre-
hensive Plan and in order to:
1) p%"otect the Key deer;
2) preserve and enhance the habitat of the Key Deer;
and
3) maintain the rural, suburban, and open space charac-
teristics of Big Pine Key.
GOAL 209 Monroe County shall discourage private land uses on its
mainland, offshore islands and undeveloped coastal barriers, and
shall protect existing conservation lands from adverse impacts
associated with private land uses on adjoining lands.
Objective 209.3 Monroe County shall take immediate actions
to discourage privats development in areas designated as
units of the Coastal Barrier Resource System.
GOAL 215 Monroe County shall provide the necessary services and
infrastructure to support existing and new development. proposed
by the Future land Use Element while lill1iting public expendi-
tures which result in the loss of or adverse impacts to environ-
mental resources in the Coastal ZOne.
Page 5
PRNONAME/TXTOR
"-
..
. J 4 1997 Monroe county shall ini-
Object1ve 215.2 By anua~ ~ lor~tion of feaaible alterna~
~~:~: p~rf':.':1i':.~ic~f r~lic "facilities and infrastif~ture
which will result in the 1088 of or damage to sign. cant
coas~al or natural resources, including, but not. 11m1ted i to
wilderness ar:ea., wildlife habitats, and nat:.ural veget:..t: VI!!
eommunit1es.
Policy 215.2.1 By Jsnuary 4, 1997, Monroe County shall
adopt land Development regulations which require consid-
eration of feasible design alternatives for new publ1c
facilities and infrastructure proposed within the coast-
al zone in order to minimize adverse 1m pacta to natu-
ral resources.
GOAL 1301 Monroe County shall promote and encourage
intergovernmental coordination between the County, the muni?i-
palities of Key West. Key Colony Beach and Layton; the Countles
of Oade and Collier; regional. state and federal governments and
private entit.ies in order to anticipate and resolve present and
future concerns and conflicts.
Objectivs 1301.7 Monroe county shall implement mechanisms to
identify and resolve intsrgovernmental coordination needs
pertaining to environmental issues and natural resource pro-
tection.
Policy 1301.7.12 By January 4, 1997, Monroe County
shall initiate discussions with the FKAA and providers
of electricity and telephone service to assess the mea-
sures which could be taken to discourage or prohibit
extension of facilities and services to Coastal Barrier
Resource Systems units.
Taken collectively, the goals, objectives and policies of the
Monroe County year 2010 comprehensive plan attest to the Coun-
ty's position that all development, including electrification,
must be discouraged on No Name Key. In support of this posi-
tion' the County, as well as state and federal authorities, have
expended (and continue to expend) considerable funds on the pur-
chase of lands on No Name Key in al) effort to ensure that the
primary and secondary impacts of development will not occur on
the island.
Pursuant to Sec. 9.5"43 of the Monroe Countv Land Develonm@nt.
Reaulat.ionsf you are entitled to rely upon the representations
set forth in this letter of understanding as accurate under the
regulations currently in effect. However, the Planning Depart-
ment acknowledges that all items required as part of the applica-
tion for development approval may not have been addressed at the
March 25, 1998, meeting, and consequently reserves the right for
additional departmental comment.
Page 6
PRNONAME/TXTDR
" ,
Ife trust that this information is of a..istance. If you hay.
any quutions regarding tile contents of this letter, or if we
may further asaist you with your project, please feel free. to
contact our oftices (305) 289-2500.
TJM/ag
ee: James Roberta, County Admini.trator
Larry Thompson, General Manager, City Electric System
Richard Grosso
Robert L. Herman, Direc~or of Growth Management
Antonia Gerli, AICP. Development Review Coordinator
Page 7
PRNONAHE:/TXTDR
BOA.ROOF COUNT\' COMMISSIONERS
OUNTY ~ONROE MA.YOR Will1elminaH_y.Districll
KEY WEST FlOIlQA 31040 Mayo< Pro Tern Shirley f.......... Disl",,1 .1
Georse NeugenL Dill"'" 2
NonI WUliamo, DiSlriot 4
Miry Kay Reith. District S
Planning Department.
Suite 410 ~
2798 Overseas Highway
Marathon, FL 33050-2227 ,
305-289-2500 -'I
",.1 t ~,-
June 22, 1999
Frank Greenman, Bsquire
Gulfside Village, Suite 40
5800 Overseas Highway
Marathon, FL 33050
RI!, Administrative Jlppeal of No Name Key Taxpayers for
Electricity
Dear Mr. Greenman:
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution P17-99 from the Planning
Commission Hearing of February 3, 1999, at which time the
Commission denied the application of "Taxpayers for
Electricity" for an appeal of Growth Management Division's
denial of a request to allow electricity to be supplied to
property described herein. This Resolution was signed by the
Chair on J'une 16, 1999.
Pursuant to Section 286.0105, Florida Statutes snd Monroe
County Board of County Commis.ioners' Resolution #].31-1992
appellants must provide a verbatim transcript of the hearing
b..fore the Planning COINIIis..ion within 30 days lapproximately
July 19, 1999, in this case I of the written decision of the
Planning eo...ission. The verbatim tranacript of the hearing
shall be prepared by a court reporter at the appellant's
expense and will be filed ss a part of the record on appeal.
A transcript made from recordings or other secondary means,
does not: provide a sufficiently accurate record of all the
speakers. Therefore, such It secondary" transcripts may not be
accepted as a valid verbatim transc~ipt.
ANONAME.07/TXTDR/98044
fa-
.---
Appeals of Planning Commission decisions, timely filed, will go
before a hearing officer in the manner provided by Monroe County
Code, Section 9.5-535.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please
do not esitate to call me at Z89-Z5Z2.
~
Coordinator
CERTIFIED MAIL
Enclosure
copy: Alicia Putney
ANONAME.07/TXTDR/98044
RESOLUTION NO. PiT.SS
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION DENYING THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL
BY THE TAXPAYERS FOR THE ELECTRIFICATION OF
NO NAME KEY. INC., THEREBY UPHOLDING THE
POSITION OF THE COUNTY AS STATED BY THE
DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING IN A LEITER OF
UNDERSTANDING. DATED MAY 13. 1998, WHICH
STATES THAT THE PLACEMENT OF ELECTRICAL
POWER LINES TO NO NAME KEY WOULD BE
INCONSISTENT WITH CHAPTERS 163 AND 380 OF
FLORIDA STATUES, AS WELL AS WITH THE MONROE
COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHEREAS, Section 9.5-43, Monroe County Code (MCC), states an applicant for
development approval may request a pre-appllcation conference Wilh the development
review coordinator to acquaint the participants with the requirements of these [Monroe
County Codel regulations and the ViewS and concerns of the county; and
WHEREAS, on January 20, 1998, some owners of properly on No Name Key, known
as "Taxpayers for Electricity", requested a pre-application conference in order to,
according to the application, discuss a develot;ment proposal for ',he installation of
electrical service transmission lines from Big ine Key to No Name Key to provide
eleclrical service to the already permitted and buill single family homes on No Name
Key"; and
WHEREAS, on March 25, 1 998, a pre-application conference was held with the Monroe
County planning department's development review coordinator, the attorney for the
applicant. the court reporter for the applicant. and several No Name Key homeowners
and property owners; and
WHEREAS, Section 9.5-43, MCC, states thal after a pre-application conference, the
applicant receives a "letter of understanding" :?ned by the director of planning that
sets forth the issues raised at the conference a states the county's position in regard
to those issues; and
WHEREAS, Timothy J. MeGa'?;, AICP, Director of Planning for Monroe County, signed
such a Iettef on May 13, 998, COlICilKIIlll' that the ~posed development is
inconsistent with both Ch~telS 163 and 3 of the FI Statutes and with the
Monroe County Year 2010 omprehensive Plan and shoukltherefore, be discoul'llged;
and
WHEREAS, Section 9.5-521, MCC, aUows affected p= 0WI'1e1S to appeal any
order, declsion, determination or interpretation by any mfnlStrative official within 30
days of such action; and
WHEREAS, on June 9, 1998, the Planning Department received pa~t for an
adminialnllNe appeal of the letter of under8tandlng from the Taxpayers r Eleotril:ily,
referred to as the appellants heraafter. and
WHEREAS, a &ubllc healing before the PIannlng Commission was noticed for
December 1,19 8; and
WHEREAS, on November 16, 1998, the Plannlng ~rtment received the rest of the
applicatIon 10r the appeal containing the written bUls or the appeal; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department ane~ the requested ~aland prepared a
staff report and packat to the Planning Commission dated ovember 23, 1998,
recommending that the appeal be denied; and
WHEREAS, the Plannll: Commission conducted public hearings on December 1, 1996
and on February 3, 199 ; and
WHEREAS. the appeUants provided testimony and evidence alon9 with arguments
made by their attorney, Mr. Frank Greenman, Esq.; and
WHEREAS, No Name Key Property Owneni =nst Commercial Power (represented
by Ms. Alicia Putney and her attorney, Mr. R ard Grosso, Esq. in absenlla) were
lI:ntad legal standing on the basis that these residents are third party beneficiaries of
t decision under appeal; and
WHEREAS, No Name Key Property Ownets Against Commercial Power provided
testimony and evidence a~ with arguments made by Ms. AlIcia Putney and her
attorney, Mr. Richard Grosso, sq. in absentia.
WHEREAS, Ms. Debra Harrison of World Wildlife Fund, was tendered as a ~lanner and
an expert witness on FloI1da Key$land use. the Rate of Growth Ordinance ( 0(0) and
the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and provided testimony In support
of No Name Key Property Owners Against Commercial Power. and
WHEREAS, the Planning Department staff presented evidence and provided expert
testimony; and
WHEREAS, the ~ Commission, after carefully considering all of the evidence
and testimony s by the appellants, the Planning Del:rtmenl staff, No Name '..
Key Property Owners Against Commercial Power, Ms. Debra rriaon and members of
the public at the public hearl~, as well _the ~ of their attorney, Mr. Garth
Coller, Esq., hereby makes the IIowIng FINDINGS OF FACT:
1.) Baaed on the testimony of the P~ Depa/1ment sIIllf, the issue of the public
hearing was whether the May 13, 998. Ietler of understanding accurataly
concluded thet, based on the requllementB of Ch= 163 and 380, Florida
Statutes, and based on the Monroe = Year fO Plan, the placement of
e/ec:trfcal power lines on No Name Key be discouraged.
2.) As a matter of law, it Is the ~1Ianl's burden to provide evidence and 188timony
that the conclusion Ill8Ched the letter of undeistandlng Is Inaccurate .nd th8t
Inatead, the 2010 Plan does not dI8courage the provision of infn18lruclunt on No
Name Key and in particular. the provialon of comriIetciaI electrical power. '
Ptp20fl
~~~i~~;i.- .. ,-:;.'.~>"~~:'~$~~~
3.) P_nt to S8clIon 163,3194, FIolfda smtutes, devel=~ .:t:. '0:
9::= Ia consIcIered conelAInI wiIIl Ita comp ~
end the ~ danlnplllllllt Ia ~ and t\lrlIlenl
the go8la, obj8cIIVea and lIfthe ~... P ,
4.) As a matIIlr of law, the Planning ~ ClClIlIldenId the origlnal development
=881 and the ~ baaed 01\ overaU gllllll. obj8cIIVea 8nd pollctea oflhe
I'IllI County Y_r 2010 CocnpIwhenelve Plan, Also," a matIIlr C!f II!W, when
reviewing oonaIate:t with the ~ plan. the pia, objecliveB and
pdlllles mull! be con eNd .. a .
.n RlIlI8d on the taallmony [l!.!I9ntad by the PIa~ Depertmllnt alaff end by Ms,
- . ~ --- Ah tk.. who . s8eklI to limit lnc:nsealng
'" -_.._... 1....
3.) Purauentto SectIon 163,3194, FIoIfda staMlIs, d.~.tapment appRlYlId ~ loclIl
=== Is conelcleted coneIaIent wllh III co..lpIllhenaNe ~ the
ment and the = of the deWllopmentls ~ and futtI1e!8
the QOII/a, objeclivell and k:lea of the CCI<III'ftIhenslwl an.
4.) As a mallar of law, tha Planning ~ COIlIldenId the original development
Mroposal and tha appeal ba8ed on overaA goats, objectivea and policies of the
onroe County Year 2010 Co/npl8hentlve Plan. Also, aa a rnaII8r of l8w, when
reviewing c:onsIat8n~ the ~nsMt plan, the goats, objecllYea and
policies must be con as a wh .
5.) Based on the l8alImony gresented by the ~ Depertmant staff end by Ms.
Debra Hanison, the 2 10 Plan, on the , __ to Ilmll lnc:raaaing
development ~\8 of VlIClII\t ~ owners thIOughoulthe County, in
part becaulI8 developments all1llldy by Monroe CoUnty hew exceeded
the ca~ capacity for _hole water .JU81l1y of the ~. as reflecllld in part
by the ni8trlltlve Hearing 0I'lIcer'a Fl ReComme Order.
e.) Baaed on the teatimony of the P1amlng Department staff~ Debra Harri80n
and No Name Key Property 0wneIs AQlilnal Commercial the 2010 Plan
contalns additional measures in III 9081a, objec:Ilves and poIlclea to specifically
ensure thai delIeIopment and the eXpectatiori of devetopment Is dllectsd away
from c:riticaI areas Within the MonRle County. No Name ~... tha carryiI'll/
:,:city of the Key Deer has also been exoeected, II In part by tha
miniatratlve Hearing Office... FInal Order, Is one of thoee spticIflc areas
according to tha testimony and evidence pteSIII1\ed b~ the Planning Depertment
staff, MS. Debra Harrison and No Name Key roperty Ownen Against
Commercial Power,
7.) The measures contained in the PI8n that enaura thai cMNeIopmenI and thallhe
expectallon of davefotln1l!nlls dil1lClad ~ from No Name Key faR In thl8ll areas
as Cited by the Planning Oepa~
1, Discourage public and privale . and Ilmll ~ expedatlons
in the Coastal Barrier ReeouR:es Syatam ObjacIiw 1 .8, Policy 102.8.1,
Policy 102.8.5, Goa120S; and
2, OIscOu::c development thai would adveJ8ely m environmenlaUy
sensitive nda: P~ 209.3, Gelat101, Objective 101. . Goal 102, ~
1(\2,9, Policy 102,9. , Goal 215, 0bjec:IMi 215.2, Policy 215.2.1, Objecl/vl!.
1301,7, P~301.7.12; and '
3. Oiacourage 5'* woukIlIllve~ i"ll:acttl8 endangel8ll ~
Deer. Goal 103. 0 ' 103.1, Policy 103. ,1, oIlc:y 103.1.10, Goal 20 ,
Objecllve 207.7, 207.7.1,
8,) ~ the expert IHtImony of Me. Debra H8ni80n, infnIatrucIure avalIIbilIty
is otten basllI for oMlIfng to _ landowner the 5: ltIat he may
develop. Baaed oolhe l8alImony of Ms. Debra Halrison, infrBlItruclure is a
widely utlIized mecheniam tor mIlIIIgilg J'8h': poIentlal and the basis for the
concurrency /IlIIIIlII18III requinlments Chapter 183, Florida S1atutes.
g,) ~ to the lestmlny of lhe No Name Key PTof:le!ty 0wnet8 AgaInat
Call.._lltal Powllr, limiting I1lfI8aIruc:Iur Is a widely uaed Growth ~
tooIlIIiIized by 8Il1ocal == in Florida and by 8/1 JeveIs of cn::= ~n
8ddItlon, they tealIlied ills JlIecl8ely lhiIlllOl U1et fa Ula beIla Ula ~
on cIeVeIoprrient under the Jill iadlcIfon or the COII8tal Barrier R_
PIp 3 orB
~
10.) Policy 1301.7.12 of the 2010 Plan specifically requires that Monroe County assess
measures, which could be taken to discoura~ or prohibit extension of facililles to
areas within the Coastal Barrier Resource ystem (CBRS). In addillon, Policy
102,8.5 of the comprehensive plan requires that Monroe County initiate efforts to
discourage the extension of facilttles and services provided by private providers of
electricity to CBRS units.
11.) According to the Planning Department staff and as aiso evidenced in Department
of Interior and FEMA maps submitted by No Name Key Property Owners Against
Commercial Power, most of No Name Key, including areas to which appellants
desire commercial electricity, is within Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS)
FL-50 and therefore, has been under the jurisdiction of the Coastal Barrier
Resources Act (CBRA) and the Coastal Barner Improvement Act (CBIA) since
October 24, 1990,
12.) While the appellants argued that the Coastal Barrier Resources Act does not
apply to them, they did not provide any evidence of this.
13.) While the appellants argue that Chapter 366, Florida Statutes, contains language
that requires Monroe County to allow for the provision of electricity, we find that
the language is specific only to the providers of electricity and not to Monroe
County. In addition, the language places no burden on local governments nor
does it negate the requirements of the County's comprehensive plan.
14.) The appellants argued that the Monroe County Building Code's requirement to
wire their homes with 110 VAC (volts altemating current) and the installation of a
weather head suggests that commercial electriCity is going to be provided.
15.) Instead, we agree with the rosition espoused br. the No Name Key Property
Owners Against Commercia Power and the Panning Department staff that
Monroe County's Electrical Codes are standard electric codes based on the need
for fire prevention and that they are necessary even for solar powered homes
which require 110 VAC wirln9 to run 110 VAC appliances such as full sized
refrigerators, washers and dryers, televisions, computers and power tools that are
used successfully in many of No Name Key's solar powered homes.
16.) Merely requiring all homes to provide for electrical service does not obligate the
County to approve the extension of commercial electricity to No Name Key. As a -...
mailer of law, prior actions and services provided by Monroe County or any other
agency do not qbligate Monroe County to provide electricity. In addition,
information provided in the packet demonstrates that the Planning Department
has consistently indicated that provision of commercial electricity would violate the
2010 Plan.
17.) The appellants argued that the Coun~'s Permit Allocation System for residential
development, or the Rate of Growth rdinance (ROGO), in combination with the
duties of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Netional Marine
Sanctuary, Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, Florida Department of
commun~ Affairs, United Stales Fish and Wildlife Service, Unlled States Army
Corps of ngineers, prohibited any future development on No Name Key. The
appellants indicated that the planning director's tesllmony supports this argument.
. Page4of8
18.) Instead, however, we find that the Permit Allocations System for residential
development, or the ROGO, was specifically crafted to ensure that development
was not prohibited and that opportunities for successful competition were made
available to all property owners. In addition, the appellants provided no evidence
of such governmental regulation. by any of the aforementioned agencies
prohibiting development on No Name Key.
19.) The appellants argue that the lack of commercial power on No Name Key
diminished the value of the appellanfs homes. Additionally, the appellants
testified there is no market for solar homes. However, at the time that all
appellants moved to No Name Key, the island had no commercial power, In
addition, according to Exhibit A, tendered by No Name Key Property Owners
Against Commercial Power, a majority of the appellants either moved to or built
their homes on No Name Key within the last four years.
20.) We find that the testimony regarding cost, health risk or potential environmental
degradation do not address or negate the 2010 Plan's current requirements nor
provides evidence that the conclusion reached in the letter of understanding was
inaccurate.
21.) We concur with No Name Key Property Owners Against Commercial Power's
arguments that sustainable developments that utilize alternative energy sources
are a more appropriate form of development which aligns particularly well with the
Refuge settin~, the unique character of No Name Key and the goals, objectives
and policies 0 the County's Year 2010 Land Use Plan and should be encouraged
by local governments. In addition, such developments fit in with Chapter 380,
Florida StaMas, which rec09nizes the need to move away from reliance on non-
renewable resources and that solar powered homes with cistems should be
encouraged, not diminished.
22.) No Name Key Property Owners Against Commercial Power and members of the
public testified that they moved to the island for the allernative lifestyle it offers
and that commercial power would adversely affect that lifestyle which can only be
found on No Name Key. They also argued that they had the most to lose in the
decision because of this, adding that many of them would not have bought or buill
homes on No Name Key if commercially supplied power had existed on the island.
23.) No Name Key Property Owners A~ainst Commercial Power testified that they
enjoh living a life of conservation 10 solar powered homes and had buill and
purc aSed their homes on the island to practice it, that the shared life style had
encouraged a close knit community and a sense of place.
24.) Planning Department staff, No Name KeJ Property Owners Against Commercial
Power and members of the public testifie that the existing development patterns,
along with the minimal infrastructure, which lack both commercially supplied
electrical power and aqueduct supplied water, along with the rural selling and
public ownership of the lands in the National Key Deer Refuge makes the
character of No Name Key unique not only from a local perspective, but from a
national perspective, making the island a national treasure as well.
r
Page S of8
_.-
25.) We find that as a matter of law, it is within the police ,Power .of Monroe County to
pass rules and regulations to protect areas With umque character and
circumstances.
26.) As indicated by the 2010 Plan and based on the testimony of residents from the
island, No Name Key is a unique island in that It lies wKhin a National Key Deer
Refuge. Large expanses of undisturbed native lands contain sensKive habitats
that are critical to many endangered plant and animal species, including the Key
Deer and provide a rural setting for the homes on the island.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW:
1. The appellants have failed to meet their burden of proof by showing that the
Planning Department reached the wrong conclusion in their letter of understanding.
2. The appellants have failed to meet their burden of proof by providing competent and
substantial evidence that contradicted the May 13, 1998, letter of understanding or
the conclusion reached therein. Appellants testimony regardinll cost. potential
health risks and potential environmental degradation was insuffiCient or irrelevant
given that it is the duty of this Board to make decisions based on the applicable laws
and regulations of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Land
Development Regulations.
3. Monroe County has consistentiy held, beginning prior to the adoption of the 1986
Comprehensive Land Use Plan and increaSing~ so with the adoption of the 2010
Plan, that future growth and the expectation to evelop must be directed away from
No Name Key.
4. Infrastructure availability will increase the development expectations of the owners
of vacant land. The com~rehensive plan specifically directs Monroe Coun':Y. to
assess measures that can e taken to discourage or prohibit extension of facilities
to No Name Key. Therefore, sup~orting such an action through the approval of this
appeal would be a County action t at is inconsistent with the 2010 Plan,
5, Planning Department staff, No Name Key Properly Owners Against Commercial
Power, Ms. Debra Harrison, the appellants and members of the public provided
compelling testimony and evidence indicating that the extension of commercial
electricKy to No Name Key would be yet an additional Coun~ action that would
increase the development expectations of properly owners 0 vacant lots on an
island where the County is mandated by the comprehensive plan to decrease them.
6, The Planning Department accurate~ interpreted the overall goals of the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Ian in Its letter of understanding of May 13,
1998, when K concluded that extension of electrical transmission lines to No Name
Key must be discouraged. The letter of understanding is an accurate interpretation
of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. There was no compelling
evidence presented by the apfellant to conlradictthat interpretation. Increasing the
development expectations 0 vacant lot owners on No Name Key would be
inconSistent wKh the overall objectives of the comprehensive plan,
7, Testimony regarding the benefits of solar powered homes over generator powered
Page 6 of8
home as an alternative energy source wa.s com~lIing, b~t not relev!'nt. All the
reasons appellants gave regarding potential nBflatlve environmental Impacts and
otentlal health and safe~ concerns resulting rom Monroe County nC?t allC;>Wlng
~mmerclal power to No ame Key are a direct result of the ap~ellants ch~lce to
use generated power rather than solar power. In addillon, the testimony prOVided at
the hearing suggests that lifestyles that rely on altem.ative ,:nergy sou.rces such as
renewable resources, should be encouraged, There IS no nsk to public health and
safety by limiting the extension of commercial power, given that other Viable
alternatives exist.
8. It is not the direct impacts of commercially supplied kower versus the direct impacts
of power supplied by fossil fuel generators on the ey Deer that are at Issue, but
rather the secondary impacts associated with risk of increased development
expectations and the resulting vehicular trips and loss of habitat due to increased
development.
9. All of appellants moved to No Name Key with the knowiedge that commercially
provided electricity was not available. These property owners have the ability to
move anywhere else in the Florida Keys in order to have such a service provided to
them. In contrast, other No Name Kelf property owners moved to the island
expressly because of the lifestyle that is 0 ered to them there, including the fact that
infrastructure is minimal and commercial electricity is absent. The community
character of the Island is unique, in part, due to the lack of commercial ~ower and is
a special enclave in the Florida Keys that provides a unique quality of ife that must
be nurtured, protected and prolonged.
10. The testimony provided at the hearing regarding the need to protect such
community character, was compelling in that granting the provision of commercial
power would degrade the unique character of No Name Key' and those who chose
to move to the island stand to lose a unique and worthwhile lifestyle. Appellants
could move anywhere else in the Florida Keys to have commercial power, whereas,
those property owners who have successfuWc and knowingly adapted to the lifestyle
on ~o Name Key have no such choice, 0 Name Key Is a unique island in the
FlOrida Keys and in the United States both because of its significant natural
resources and its unique character.
11. There is no constitutional ri~ht to electricity, There is a valid police power basis to
treat No Name Key different y than other areas in the Florida Keys due to the unique
conditions of the island with the presence of sensitive habitats crillcal to a variety of
endangered plant apd animal species, including the Key Deer, the expansive
undeveloped areas as part of a National Key Deer Refuge, and the rural character
of the developed portions of the is/and that relies on renewable altemative energy
sources. II is the right of the legislature to provide different areas, which allow for
different lifestyles treated differently.
Page 7 of8
12. While we find that there are valid reasons for requiring that all houses must meet the
standard electrical code, it may have been an oversight that No Name Keh was not
exempted from the electrical code's mecifiC requirement of a roof-top weat er head.
This oversight in no way provides su cient equitable or iegal basis for overriding the
mandates of the Plan and the Land Development Regulations,
NOW THEREFORE, 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 DENY the administrative appeal by the Taxpayers for the
Electrification of No Name Key, Inc.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of Monroe County, Florida, at a
regular meeting of said Board held on the 3rd day of February, A,D. 1999.
Chair Gorsuch Yes
Vice-Chair Mapes Yes
Commissioner Aultman NO'
Commissioner Hili NO
Commissioner Stuart 'Yes
Resolution passed by the Plannin9 Commission of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular
meeting of said Board held on the 3rd day of February, A.D, 1999.
By: ~:/~~~
lily brsuc, air
Signedthis~dayof ~JNE ,1999
ANI)
BY
~
Page 8 of8
, 'COUN1Y of MONROE 8OARO OF COUNTY ~SSlO
hMYOA. St...... F,trIr'n"".IJq,:r.-. J
,..,. Pro rom. Jack londo-'! ~I.;
-.-,.-.
ICiV WEST f&.OlWM_ """vlloor-'-..,\
1_'~-f6oIl ~~0IIIJc14
J.... L. Roberte Ftl:
CO~fttr ~lftL.tre~" C I: If"
5100 Coli... ao.d 4ut;6_ ~D
P~bllC "~ICe Bldg.
WI", II. Stock 181and ~'.~ ~'-
Key Weet. 1'101'1_ 3JOtt
(305) 2'2-4441 ~
(305) 2'2-4'.. .a. UI"., """" \f....
AUOtlST 2, 1996 ~
....~
Mr. Dale I. Plnl,.. ~f* ..
Direct.or of Eftg~rl"9
utillt.y Board Of t... Clt.y 0' Key -.at. /~......~
P.O. Or_I' 6100
aey W.at. Florida 33041-'100 ~\"-
Dear Me. FJnlqan.
Thenk you roc your reeent !.tter in ret.renc. ~D e18ctric
service at ~ .... ..Y_ Thl. appear. t.o be an o",olng 1..U8 and
ana tnat he>> alt.-dy boon DefOrD tbo Board o( County
COMMis.ioners on January 18, LnS.
You lllhould be GWAt.e that on that. ~to. lho...: So.:.o.-.;J vi ~;Vi.Hit;y
C~1..t()lMtr. ~1d.d that it wou14 not J!lu.ppf.u:t. the IiXl..liWIi!UJl 01
electrlc ....vice to 10 MDee Xey. AllO, y~ ahovlG know tnat. the
.onroe rounty 2010 Ca.prehen.lve Plen a. eOopteO ne. pollcle.
which are cl.arly not In support of ~uch an 9Kl*nMion at ~l~c~_<
.tf.~rvic~, Pl".....!'51': 6.~ att~.;.lGhm(::;:;t~"
l!;hw.ltii'tucti', , must lugqeat to you tbat. the county doe.. not
8upport Q~t.n.to" of e.leetr!c servico to Nu Name Key.
l~ ..-::..~ ~.;~~ '"":'~.:< lUl"'nl';':~_' g'Wt;:5i..il.iHS1 iih,ittH~ <tv nut ta~SitE!L~"'l
to Jet rnA knQw.
Yety t~uly YOUts,
~--------:~ -,.j..~
i 1
-.~' --..i:..-~'.::lZ_j,:o ~
Ja_s L. RObe~ta
Couney Admlni.~r.tor
,JLR: 1 j..
c(:: tJ.OCC
....~'" ,. m...~.
-.'~= ...
D~nt I' ~.r.;;~
ll.:l "... l.- ::-:;--::: ~
.......
fd.-
., . _. IJ: FEB 02'96 13'28 NO.006 P.OI
.. ..."-,.
!!!!W
GaU' ',' f. 'ROE
-- --
~'d ~../
...... ...- ~
Plaan1Df Depart..ne
...1 'a ua
2'7" owe....... H1IJlNay
Merathon, PL :nOlO
J&D~arr 31. 1"&
tlale Plnigan, llIltJ1DeniAI 8\apel:1nt....1l..t. ~~~
Cit.y 11.C$dG IYA- ~_ rLJ-U.l-Q~'~
Poet OfUG. ~ lUll
Kay _t, PL 1l1lHl-li10C1 [P1.~ I
I" fa Z_ .~
I. ,
RB. &1eoc:..i_l ~.. . lfe __ lllIy " .~.-.I
\ "JOMt.R SEIiVlr:f.
Dea.. Mr, "1n1gan,
On Januat"y S. Uti, tile Ilcmroe C;......til' '.r.u ;oQ.., ';om"~'a;,...~,,
Pl~ took .ff.et. ~8Ctlve 102,' gf t.be P.~~ ~~~~.."
..... eau.ty allall t.ake acts...... 1:0 lU_... privati ~"'::Ct....
in .re.. dad_t'" .. ....1" cot t.Ioe Coelll:a1 auuu Rae"",,,..
8:r.t_.
~- ~ ",...~. ..........._ ..... ...u.... "'i.~' .......... ........,....
~.. ~ ~"..,"".... .............-...... .......,ll;.... lOGJ o...courage t.nl!'J extgn-
Wi0i1 c;f'. fl;i,,~.L~>.;.iwiii 6t..\~ setvice. prO".rj,Rd i:1y Ylo~'id.ll Key A.qw8ciuct.
A\J;t;horitv """!!,! ~,.'!"nl"~ ~!'~~ti~"'.:'.e, .....Z. .. _
___ _ ~.......,.. ...~ LY>"'~ ., ,_,.,.Orb' ......_.... "'..... n... ~_,._._
-....~. "'~.,.. f!:';!:I""I'~"'~r:,1", ....,f ;: __u'" ~~~-,::-'::-.:'- __ .;:;:""'....... ~~......-...... *~ci.".1-..
B1~. all of Nc N.~ Kwy li.. W~~h~n ~ COal~al BaY~~er Re~ou~eeb
System Wl~t.
-~--..._... "w ....................-y... ...~.'Yt!I.lt.~pmtt,..f w'i"n.~n th1t> r~",'~t,.> c,::.:
~1;...: .:.~;;;;tiQ.mii ~"4' "...rd. in che reS:L(}ent,al c1""ll~n" Wl~" _.l"a-
cion (ROGel .yet.. will be ...~ ....tiv. DOinte ~n loe.!e~
~"" "" ~'!H~_ ,.___ _ _
---<^~ - - "--_i ~...._ ~"_""","",_"..,,,-,_,
,""""- ',~,,~-~"'r,.,-~ .-_. ~_'_'~_'''''__ .......... ...~.....:.ri~Ci.<~.!,
ny fl!l."';\'""'Tn.. i"'"~'2!"'_t}' !,~;, '~-'::.i'=2--,:=.:.:l,-,;.;. ..;.;..i.-~~.ii..... -
.
.
.. --.,..-. rEB 02'96 13.29 Nft.006 p.02
1D'
~._....
1 _ encl..."" a _ of t.M JIOfti- of I<M COIIIp%ebouwlVO l'lan
pertaiD1ng to tile CIIU ..... . lIllPY of tile Pl'deral Z1III\Ila~:i.ou.
~"rtainJ.Ag to t.be a.aa".l lIan!er lluourcell S)'iJt.8. IIb8n ""lieI'
nfon\llt.i... Oft "11. .~:lec!: beCOlllllIl ava.l.lQla. we "ill f_ri it
t.o yvIIr offic..
Xf y.... II."" any ozua-U....... pl.... do ~ Maita"" "0 call ... at.
U,.,SOO.
Vary "ruly ycNn.
Ckrtn..(A. ~.:..
....t<lOi. _U
~dAIJ PlaNli.... DiNO"O"
cc: Robert ~. 1I1.._1;Q.. of O_b _......t
Clsh....1laIU.1
,
.
•
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners Meeting
09/17/2008
Key West, Florida
Comments by
Hallett Douville, No Name Key, Florida
(305) 872-2055 <douville@bellsouth.net>
Agenda Item P-2 : "A public hearing to consider a
resolution supporting the proposed amendment to Policy
102 . 8 . 5 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
to facilitate central wastewater service to No Name Key. "
Good afternoon Commissioners .
My name is Hallett Douville; No Name Key has been my home
since 1990 .
I have participated in all of the issues affecting No Name
Key over the years and have spoken to this Board several
times this year regarding wastewater and No Name Key. I
also attended the July 23rd Planning Commission meeting
when this agenda item was heard.
This agenda item wording states P-2 is a public hearing to
consider a resolution supporting an amendment to the Comp
Plan" . But, there are
two separate parts to this agenda item. And, this Board is
being asked to vote on BOTH parts that are, and I quote :
• "A resolution of the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners supporting the proposed amendment to Policy
102. 8. 5 of the Comp Plan to facilitate central wastewater
service to No Name Key"; and,
• "An ordinance amending policy 102. 8. 5 of the
Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan to allow the
provision of central wastewater service and support
utilities to developed properties located within the
Coastal Barrier Resources System. "
Both the Resolution and the Ordinance included in the Back-
up material state what this Board decided. Quoting from the
Resolution, page 1, second paragraph from the bottom and
the Ordinance, bottom of page 1 :
"On June 18 , 2008, the Growth Management Staff was
directed by the Board of County Commissioners to amend the
comprehensive plan and land development regulations tol
reword the prohibition on utilities such that the focus and
priority be placed on wastewater treatment first and an
discussion on electric or any other utility, other than:
those required to efficiently support a central waste-
water collection system, be deferred until the wastewater]
goal is accomplished. "
Now, I would like to read what in fact was decided upon at
the July 23, 2008, Planning Commission meeting. Quoting
from the Ordinance, Section 1, page 2, middle of the page .
"Section I . Policy 102 . 8 . 5 of the Monroe County Year
2010 Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended to include the
fol1owinc . "Monroe County shall initiate efforts tof
discourage the extension of facilities and services
rovided by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority and private
roviders of electricity and telephone service +tol
undevelo ed CBRS units, excluding central sanitary
wastewater services and those utilities required to provide
central sanitary wastewater collection. and treatment . "
By adding the word "undeveloped" all of the previous BOCC
decisions were changed drastically. This proposed
ordinance is NOT what you directed staff to accomplish;
and, if passed, will open a can of worms .
You might as well cut the part after the comma ---
"excluding central sanitary wastewater services and those
utilities required to provide central sanitary wastewater
collection and treatment . " ---
Developed by what standard? Developed on what date?
Developed with fewer than five dwelling units per acre?
Developed with no houses, but with a road? How about,
developed with no houses, no road, but a fence?
(2 )
Does Monroe County want to pay for central wastewater on
Big Torch Key? I would think not .
The intention of the BOCC—To allow the extension of
commercial power to NNK if needed to provide a centralized
sewage collection system would still be met if the proposed
language in both the code and comp plan were amended to
remove any reference to developed or undeveloped CBRS
units .
Please vote against this agenda item and send it
back to Staff to be reworked so your goal of helping No
Name Key with the Year 2010 Wastewater mandate has a chance
of being met . .
Thank You
(3 )