10/25/1991 Agreementri
i
BRANCH OFFICE
3117 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY
MARATHON, FLORIDA 33050
TEL. (305) 743-9036
J�� JJM��O` tOG
u: 'y
41
..r'OP .1.
CO., ,t
;Dannp 1. 7101bage
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
MONROE COUNTY
500 WHITEHEAD STREET
KEY WEST, FLORIDA 33040
TEL. (305) 294-4641
M E M O R A N D U M
To: Bob Herman, Director
Division of Growth Management
From: Rosalie L. Connolly, Deputy Clerk
Date: November 15, 1991
BRANCH OFFICE
P.O. BOX 379
PLANTATION KEY, FLORIDA 33070
TEL. (305) 852-9253
As you are aware, on October 25, 1991, the Board of County
Commissioners approved and authorized execution of the Joint
Stipulated Settlement Agreement with DCA.
Attached for handling by your office is the original and one
duplicate of the subject Agreement, now executed and sealed
on behalf of the County. It is our understanding that your
office will follow through on this matter and obtain the
remaining signatures. Please be sure one fully -executed
copy is returned to the undersigned as quickly as possible.
Rosalie L. onnolly
Deputy Clerk
Attachments
cc: County Attorney
County Administrator w/o copy
Finance Director w/o copy
File
11
STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,
Petitioner, )
VS. )
MONROE COUNTY, )
Respondent. )
DRISCOLL PROPERTIES, INC., and )
DRISCOLL FOUNDATION, INC., and )
1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA, and )
SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL PLANNING )
COUNCIL, )
Intervenors. )
JOINT STIPULATED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Petitioner Florida Department of Community Affairs
(Department) and Respondent Monroe County (County) and
Intervenors 1000 Friends of Florida, South Florida Regional
Planning Council, and Driscoll Properties hereby stipulate and
agree as follows:
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Definitions. As used in this agreement, the following
words and phrases shall have the following meanings:
a. Act: The Local Government Comprehensive Planning
and Land Development Regulation Act, as codified in Part II,
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (1987).
b. Agreement: This stipulated settlement agreement.
C. Comprehensive Plan or Plan: Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan, as adopted by Ordinance No. 002-1991 on
9
3
W
February 4, 1991, and its support documents. Where appropriate
rr
these terms refer to portions of the documents.
d. DOAH: The Florida Division of Administrative
Hearings.
e. In compliance or into compliance: Consistent with
Sections 163.3177, 163.3178 and 163.3191, Florida Statutes,
Section 187.201, Florida Statutes, the South Florida
Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan, and Chapter 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code, as well as Sections 380.05 and 380.0552,
Florida Statutes.
f. Notice: The notice of intent issued by the
Department to which was attached its statement of intent to find
the plan not in compliance, issued March 22, 1991.
g. Petition: Refers collectively to all petitions for
administrative hearing and relief in this cause:
1) The Petition for Administrative Hearing filed by
the Department on March 26, 1991.
2) The Petition to Intervene of 1000 Friends of
Florida, dated May 24, 1991.
3) The.Petition to Intervene of South Florida
Regional Planning Council, dated July 8, 1991.
4) The Petition to Intervene of Driscoll Properties,
Inc. and Driscoll Foundation, Inc., dated May 6, 1991.
h. Subsequent Petitions. Three Petitions have been
filed subsequent to the preparation of this agreement, and the
following Petitioners are not signatories hereto:
2
it
0
1) The Petition to Intervene of Henry Morgenstern
dated August 31, 1991.
2) The Petition to Intervene of Upper Keys citizens
Association, Inc., dated September 6, 1991.
3) The Petition to Intervene of Friends of the
Everglades, Inc., dated August 28, 1991.
i. Remedial Action: The preparation and adoption of
a comprehensive plan and the preparation and approval of support
documents in a manner that conforms with and implements the
Policy directions and stipulations included in this agreement, an
action that must be completed in order to adopt a plan that is in
compliance under chapter 163, Part II, F.S., and which is
consistent with the Principles For Guiding Development for the
Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern in Section 380.0552,
F.S.
J. Remedial p an: A plan amendment or support
document, or a portion of a plan amendment or support document,
the need for which is identified in this agreement and its
exhibits, and which the County must adopt to complete all
remedial actions. Remedial plan provisions adopted pursuant to
this agreement must fulfill the obligations of the County under
this agreement.
k. Statement of Jn ent: The statement of intent to
find the plan not in compliance issued by the Department in this
case on March 22, 1991.
I
1• 20part u en : The studies, inventory maps,
surveys, data, inventories, listings or analyses used to develop
and support the plan.
2. Entire Agreement. This is the entire agreement between
the parties and no verbal or written assurance or promise is
effective or binding unless included in this document.
3. Acnroval by Governing BOX. This agreement has been
approved by the County's governing body at a public hearing
noticed in an advertisement published approximately 10 days prior
to the hearing, in the manner prescribed for advertisements in
Section 163.3184(15)(c), F.S. This agreement has been executed by
the appropriate County officer as provided in the County's
charter or other regulations.
participation in the plan review, approval and adoption process
shall be in the spirit of Monroe County Resolution No. 293-1990,
and shall be governed by and proceed in accordance with Vol. 1I,
Section X.C. of the current Monroe County Comprehensive Plan,
Section 9.5-511 of the Monroe County Code, and Sections 163.3174,
163.3181, and 163.3184, F.S.
5• CIIInges in Law. Nothing in this agreement shall be
construed to relieve any party from adhering to the law, and in
the event of a change in any statute or administrative regulation
inconsistent with this agreement, the statute or regulation shall
take precedence.
4
6 Other Persons Unaffected. Nothing in this agreement
shall be deemed to affect the rights of any person under the law.
7. Attorney Fees and costs. Each party shall bear its own
costs, including attorney fees.
8. Effective Date. This agreement shall become effective
upon the last date of signing by the parties.
1 pA
9. P-urvose of Part 1. The parties enter into part I of
this agreement in the spirit of cooperation for the purpose of
avoiding costly, lengthy and unnecessary litigation and in
recognition of the desire for the speedy and reasonable
resolution of disputes arising out of or related to the plan.
10. Department Powsrs. The Department is the state land
planning agency under Chapter 163, F.S., and has the power and
duty to administer and enforce the Act and to determine whether
the plan is in compliance. The Department is also the state land
planning agency under Chapter 380, F.S., and has the power and
duty to administer the Florida Environmental Land and Water
Management Act of 1972 and to determine whether the County's
remedial plan is in compliance with the Principles for Guiding
Development for the Florida Keys Area of Critical State concern.
11. Adoption of pt&n_and Support 59cument . The County
provided the support documents and adopted the plan by ordinance
at a properly advertised public hearing held on February 4, 1991.
5
- FRI �
12. Stipulation 21 Non -Comp fiance. The parties hereby
stipulate that the Monroe county Comprehensive Plan adopted by
Ordinance No. 002-1991 on February 4, 1991 is not "in 3
compliance," as defined in Section 163.3184(1)(b), F.S, and a
e
Paragraph 1 of this
( ) Agreement for the reasons set forth in the
Statement of Intent and the petitions referred to in Paragraph
1(g) 1) through 3).
13. Review of Plan and Finding of Noncompliance. After
reviewing the adopted plan the Department issued its notice and
statement of intent to find the plan not in compliance, and filed
the petition in this case to that effect. The Intervenors
subsequently filed their petitions as described in Paragraph
1(g) -
14. Neaotiation.of AgXC=ent: Intent. Subsequent to the
filing of the petition, the parties conferred and agreed to
resolve the issues in the petition, notice and statement of
intent through this agreement. It is the intent of this
agreement to provide a vehicle for ultimate resolution of all
issues among the parties in this proceeding and to provide
specific schedules, policy guidance and direction for adoption,
submittal and review of the county's Chapter 163, Part II
remedial plan.
15. Exhibits. Exhibits A, Be C, D and E are hereby
incorporated by reference.
16. Description of Provisions Not in compliansA and
Remadial Actinnai Legal Effpot of Act Bement. "Exhibit All to this
agreement is the statement of intent, which specifically
incorporates the Department's ORC Report by reference, and
contains a description of the plan provisions found not in
compliance by the Department and recommends remedial action
necessary to bring the plan into compliance. Whether or not they
are expressly included in Exhibit C (described below), the
objections, recommendations and comments contained in Exhibit A
(ORC Report) shall be addressed by the County and included in its
remedial plan.
"Exhibit B" is the Comprehensive Plan preliminary Policy
Direction adopted by Monroe County on February 4, 1991, as its
document to guide the development of its remedial plan. Exhibit
H provides the basis for the stipulated remedial actions
described in Exhibit C and by attachment provides background
information pertaining to Exhibit C.
"Exhibit C" is a document identified as the Monroe County
Remedial Actions which has been prepared as a composite of the
policy comments of all of the parties, and reflects -the issues
and policy statements. with the understanding that the County's
remedial plan in response to this Agreement shall constitute a
revision of its entire plan under the terms of this Agreement,
Exhibits A and C shall serve as the substantive basis from which
the remedial plan shall be structured, created and adopted. The
remedial plan shall address the policy issues and specifically
7
incorporate the amendments to policy statements Contained in
Exhibit C. The parties agree that the remedial plan shall
provide more specificity in those areas where Exhibits A or C
include only general policy direction and statements. In the
event of conflict between Exhibit A and C, the amendments to the
policy statements in Exhibit C shall control. The parties agree
that the County shall adopt its remedial plan to Conform to and
affirmatively take steps in the direction of achieving the
remedial actions described in the amendments to policy statements
set forth in Exhibit C. The County agrees to ensure that
adequate funds will be made available to carry out studies
necessary for proper development of plan policies.
"Exhibit D" is a document entitled, "Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan, Agreement For Professional Services," with
attachments, which verifies the County's agreement with Wallace,
Roberts and Todd, Consultants, to prepare the County's remedial
plan to be submitted to the Department in accordance with the
schedule attached thereto.
"Exhibit E" is a.more detailed transmittal schedule prepared
by and applicable to Monroe County and the consultants, Wallace,
Roberts and Todd, for completion of the remedial plan.
17. Recommendation to the Administration Commission. upon
full execution by the parties, this agreement shall be submitted
to DOAH with a joint stipulation that the Hearing Officer enter a
recommended order to the Administration Commission that the plan
be found not in compliance. The parties stipulate that the order
6
�rl
shall incorporate, as its findings of fact? , the factual
statements contained in the Statement of Intent and the petitions
referred to in Paragraph 1(g)l) through 3). The parties hereby
stipulate to those factual statements. The parties also
stipulate that the recommended order incorporate, as its
conclusions of law, the legal
� q conclusions included in the
Statement of Intent and petitions referred to in Paragraph 1(g)1)
through 3). The parties hereby stipulate to those legal
iconclusions. The parties also stipulate that the recommended
order should include recommended remedial actions, which shall be
those described in Exhibits A and C.
The parties further stipulate to the entry of a Final Order
by the Administration Commission which adopts the entire
Recommended Order, determines the plan to be not in compliance
and requires Monroe County to perform the remedial actions
described in Exhibits A and C. It is also stipulated that no
sanctions should be imposed upon Monroe County unless the County
fails to deliver a remedial plan, or portion of a plan, in
conformance with Exhibits A and C, and pursuant to the schedule
provided in Paragraph 20, or otherwise fails to make reasonable
progress in the implementation of this agreement. The parties
further stipulate that the final order of the Administration
Commission should provide that it retain jurisdiction over this
matter for this express purpose.
9
18. Florida Keys__ Area of Critical State Concern. Pursuant
to Section 380.0552(3), F.S. the Florida Keys Area, located in
Monroe County, is.designated an area of critical state concern,
and, as such, the County's comprehensive plan and all plan
amendments shall be reviewed by the Department for coordination
and consistency with the principles for guiding development set
forth in Section 380.0352(7), F.S. Any amendment to the plan,
including the remedial plan referenced in this agreement, shall
become effective only upon approval by the Department as the
state land planning agency (Sections 380.0552(9); 380.05(6)(11),
F.S.] and upon adoption of a rule by the Department approving the
remedial plan and rendering it effective pursuant to Section
380.0552(9), F.S. Nothing in this agreement shall be deemed a
waiver by the Department of its right under Section 380.0552(9),
F.S., to recommend to the Administration Commission changes to
the plan consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development
for the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern.
County agrees to consider for adoption or approval by formal
action of its governing body all remedial plan actions described
in Exhibits A and C no later than the time period provided in
this agreement.
accordance with the Stipulated Transmittal Schedule, the County
shall deliver to the Department, after a transmittal public
hearing pursuant to Section 163.3184(3) and the meetings of the
10
0
K,
local planning agency as required by Section 163.3174 of the Act,
all remedial actions, including the remedial plan and support
documents, and the land development regulations referenced in
Paragraph 22, along with a transmittal letter outlining the
remedial action taken for each part of the plan amended. The
County agrees to abide by the following schedule:
ATIPULATMED TRANSXTTTAL SCHEDULE
Dec 18, 1991 BOCC and PC hold joint meeting to select a plan
concept.
®
Mar 10, 1992
DRC holds a special meeting to review the remedial
Plan as an amendment to the existing, plan per
1
9.50511(c)(d), MCLDR.
April 16, 1992
PC holds a public hearing to review the remedial
plan as an amendment to the existing plan per 9.5-
511(3) and (4), MCLDR.
April 27, 1992
County staff receives revised plan from WRT and
distributes; send notice for May 14 public hearing
to newspapers; ad to run on April 30 per
163.3184 (15) (b) (1) , F.S.
May 14, 1992
BOCC holds first public hearing to transmit the
remedial plan to DCA per 163.3184(15)(b)(1), F.S.
May 21, 1992
BOCC holds second public hearing to transmit the
remedial plan to DCA per 163.3184(15)(b)(2), F.S.
May 26, 1992
WRT transmits the proposed plan to DCA for review.
Oct 16, 1992
BOCC holds public hearing to adopt revised
remedial plan and Land Development Regulation per
163.3184(7), F.S.
Oct 21, 1992 County transmits adopted plan to DCA for review.
Dec 7, 1992 DCA sends Notice of Intent to County regarding
compliance status of adopted remedial plan per
163.3184(7), F.S.
W,
The Department shall allow limited and discretionary
flexibility to the County in meeting these deadlines, extending
up to forty-eight (481 hours, and only upon prior written or
taxed twenty-four (24) hour notice, but in no event shall the
final transmittal or final adoption date be altered without the
approval of the Department upon good cause shown, subject to the
provisions of Paragraphs 17 and 26. In the event that the
concept or method of plan development presented by the
Consultants is entirely and summarily rejected by the County,
materially affecting the above deadlines in the transmittal
schedule, the parties agree to reconsider the dates of the
schedule upon immediate twenty-four (24) hour notification by the
County.
A copy of the remedial actions shall simultaneously be
provided to all other parties.
21. interim Reggire ments and Monthly Reports to
Administration commission. By agreement of the parties, the
County shall, at a minimum:
a) implement and strictly enforce existing (1986)
comprehensive plan and land development regulations, including
adequate facility requirements;
b) limit or cease the issuance of building permits in areas
identified with inadequate facility capacity; and
c) submit either written or oral monthly reports to the
Administration Commission of its reasonable and continual
progress in implementing this Agreement.
12
r
dl
( 4 U '. - 1 - - _ 1 i IJ G i :1 . - _ ._I ci i 1 _, 1 ♦ 1 1 I t- H r. 1 1 1 C R. •C. " 1 ( f F- - -
-
The County agrees to enforce this paragraph and adopt a
separate resolution or other written procedures memorializing
this obligation.
22. Simultaneous Adoption of Land Development Reg2lations.
The County shall prepare, adopt and transmit to the Department
necessary changes to its land development regulations
simultaneously with the development, adoption and transmittal of
its Chapter 163, Part 11, comprehensive remedial plan. The
county's land development regulations shall simultaneously be
modified and amended as necessary to be compatible with, further
and implement the remedial plan adopted by the County pursuant to
this agreement, and shall be adopted by October 16, 1992 in
accordance with the Stipulated Transmittal Schedule. The County
shall provide copies of its entire, completed land development
code to all parties at no charge, including three copies to the
Department.
23. yestina Provisions. The County agrees to adopt in its
remedial plan restrictive vesting provisions as allowed by law.
24. Review of Transmittal. The Department shall provide
the County with its objections, recommendations and comments on
the remedial plan and support documents in the manner provided in
Chapter 9J-11, Florida Administrative Code, and Subsections
163.3184(3)-(7), Florida Statutes. Within this time period, the
Intervenors shall also provide to the County written comments or
objections to the transmitted remedial plan along with suggested
remedial actions.
13
25. Adoption or Approval of Remedial Plan Amendm nts.
Within 6o days of receipt of the Department's objections,
recommendations and comments, the County shall considar for
adoption the remedial plan and any amendments to the support
document, and deliver the remedial plan along with a transmittal
letter to the Department as provided in Subsection 163.3184(7),
Florida Statutes, and Rule 93-11.011(3), F.A.C. A copy of the
remedial plan shall simultaneously be provided to all other
parties.
days after receipt of the adopted remedial plan and support
documents, the Department shall issue a notice of intent pursuant
to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, for the adopted remedial
plan in accordance with this agreement. The Intervenors shall
also inform the County in writing of their respective
determinations regarding the issue of compliance.
a. In Compliance; If the adopted remedial plan is
consistent with Section 163.3184 (1) (b) I F.S., meets the intent
and requirements of Exhibits A and C, and adequately addresses
the comments received on the transmitted remedial plan, the
Department shall join the County and Intervenors in requesting
that the Administration Commission issue a final order dismissing
this proceeding and declining to impose sanctions. The
Department shall also initiate rulemaking to find the plan in
compliance in accordance with Chapter 380, F.S.
3
..
m
In order to avoid the imposition of sanctions at this stage
of the proceedings, Monroe County must, pursuant to this
agreement, adopt a plan that is in compliance with this agreement
and that is "in conformance" as that term is defined in Section
163.3184(1)(b), F.S. This agreement does not, in all instances,
describe specific language that will meet each substantive
requirement of the authorities listed in Section 163.3184(1)(b)
of the Act. The revised plan shall meet all requirements listed
in that subsection, however, regardless of whether specific
language related thereto is included in Exhibits A or C.
Further, to the degree that Exhibits A or C require
interpretation to determine whether the remedial plan or plan
portions conform to their requirements, those Exhibits shall be
interpreted in.the manner that is most consistent with Chapter
163, Part II, F.S., Section 380.0552(7), F.S., Chapter 187, F.S.,
Chapter 93-5, F.A.C., and the South Florida Regional Policy Plan.
The comments received pursuant to Paragraph 24 shall guide the
County's adoption of the remedial plan.
b. Not in CoMli�; If the remedial actions are
not adopted, or if the adopted remedial actions are not
consistent with and responsive to the recommendations in Exhibit
A, not in conformance with the amendments to policy statements in
Exhibit C, or inconsistent with the objections, recommendations
and comments received on the transmitted remedial plan, the
15
Department, or Intervenors who have previously challenged the
subject matter of the nonconforming inconsistent provision, shall
issue notice of such insufficiency to the Administration
Commission along with a request, allowing all parties an
opportunity to be heard, that sanctions be imposed as provided in
Subsection 163.3184(11), F.S., until such time as the County
adopts a comprehensive plan that is "in compliance."
Rart IT
27. Purpose of Part II. The parties enter into Part II of
this agreement to provide funding to assist the County to
undertake the remedial actions necessary to bring the adopted
remedial plan submitted pursuant to Subsection 163.3167(2), F.S.
and Chapter 9J-12', F.A.C., into compliance.
26. Liability. To the extent of funds received under this
agreement, the County hereby agrees to hold harmless the
Department, to the extent allowed by law, from all claims,
demands, liabilities and suits of third persons or entities not a
party to this agreement arising out of, or due to any act,
occurrence, or omission of the County, its subcontractors or
agents, if any, that is related to the County's performance under
this agreement.
29. Public Records. The County shall allow public access
to all documents, reports, papers, letters or other material,
subject to the provision of Chapter 1191 Florida Statutes,
k
16
7
prepared or received by the County in conjunction with this
agreement. The Department may unilaterally cancel this agreement
if the County refuses to allow public access to all documents,
papers, letters, or other material subject to the provisions of
Chapter 119, F.S., and made or received by the County in
conjunction with the agreement.
30. Availability of Funds. Payment of state funds pursuant
to this agreement is subject to and conditioned upon the total
' release of authorized appropriations from the Area of Critical
State Concern Trust Fund provided by law. The state of Florida's
performance and obligation to pay under this Agreement is
contingent upon an annual appropriation by the Legislature as
noted in Section 287.0582, Florida Statutes.
31. Consideration.
a. As consideration for work performed under this
agreement, the Department agrees to pay to the County a fixed fee
of up to $247,000.00. Payment will be based on the payment
schedule and other conditions contained in Paragraph 32 below.
b. Use of Funds: Funds may not be used for the
purchase of equipment, fixtures, or other tangible property of a
nonconsumable and nonexpendable nature with an expected useful
life which exceeds the duration of this contract. Funds also may
not be used for attorney fees unrelated to the County's
obligations under this agreement.
17
32. Method of Payment.
Deliverable
Preliminary Payment
for start-up costs
Proposed Remedial Plan
Delivered in full to
the Department
Adopted Remedial Plan
Delivered and Department
Issues Notice of Intent to
Find Remedial Plan "In
Compliance"
r
$ 61,750.00
$ 61,750.00
$ 123,500.00
Concurrent with the effective date of this Agreement, the
Department shall pay to the County 25% of the total funding
amount to compensate for start up costs associated with the plan
remedial revision process. The second payment will be made by
the Department after timely receipt of the deliverable (proposed
remedial plan) which shall be verified by the Department to
include all required proposed remedial action. If the
transmitted remedial actions are not received in accordance with
the schedule set forth in Paragraph 20 of this agreement, or if
the Department in its discretion determines that the transmitted
remedial actions are inconsistent with this agreement, the second
payment shall not be made. The final payment shall be made after
receipt of the adopted remedial actions and issuance by the
Department of a Notice of Intent to find the plan "in
compliance." If the adopted remedial actions are not received in
k
is
� 4T
1
accordance with the schedule in this agreement, or if the
Department determines that the adopted remedial emedial actions are not
in compliance, the final payment shall not be made, the County
shall refund the first and second payments to the Department
twithin 30 days after issuance of the Notice of Intent and no
' payment shall be owed by the Department. In no way does payment
of any of the above amounts guarantee or secure approval by the
Department of the above deliverables submitted by the County in
accordance with the agreed upon schedule.
33. Audit Beguirements.
a. The County shall provide the Department with an
annual financial audit which meets the requirements of 11.45 and
216.349, Florida Statutes, Chapter 10.55o, of the Rules of the
Auditor General.
b. The County agrees to maintain adequate financial
�nancial
procedures and adequate support documents to account for the
expenditures of funds under Part 11 of this agreement.
c. These records shall be available at all reasonable
times for inspection, review, or audit by state personnel and
their personnel duly authorized b " u
Y the Department. Reasonable
shall be construed according to circumstances, but ordinarily
shall mean normal business hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., local
time, Monday through Friday.
19
Wr
d. The County shall also provide the Department with
the records, reports or financial statements, upon request, for
the purposes of auditing and monitoring the funds awarded under
Part II of this agreement. Bills for fees or other compensation
for services or expenses shall be submitted in detail sufficient
for a proper pre -audit and post -audit thereof.
e. The County shall include an accounting of these
funds under Part II of this agreement in the local audit prepared
by the County of the 1990-91 and 1991-92 fiscal years.
f. In the event the audit shows that all or a portion
of the funds provided under Part II, were not spent in accordance
with Chapter 9J-26, Florida Administrative Code, and the
conditions of this agreement, the County shall be held liable for
repayment to the Department of all funds not spent in accordance
with these applicable regulations and agreement provisions within
thirty (30) days after the Department has notified the County of
such noncompliance.
g. The County shall retain all financial records,
supporting documents, statistical records, and any other
documents pertinent to Part II of this agreement for a period of
three years after the date of submission of the final
expenditures report or, if an audit has been initiated and audit
findings have not been resolved at the end of three years, the
records shall be retained until resolution of the audit findings.
h. Bills for any travel expenses shall be submitted
in accordance with Section 112.061, Florida Statutes.
20
IM
■
34. Modification of Part II. Either the Department or the
County may request modification of the provisions of Part II of
this agreement. Changes which are mutually agreed upon shall be
made by written addendum between the Department and the County,
and shall be incorporated as part of this agreement.
35. Sanctions. The parties understand and agree that
failure by the County to meet the terms and requirements of this
Agreement upon execution, in accordance with the schedule set
forth in Paragraph 20, shall subject the County to a
recommendation of sanctions which could be imposed by the
Administration Commission.
21
In witness whereof, the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed by their undersigned officials as duly
authorized.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
William E. Sadowski
Secretary
Date
Assistant General Counsel
DRISCOLL PROPERTIES, INC., and
DRISCOLL FOUNDATION, INC.
Attorney at Law
Date
1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA
Legal Director
Date
22
I
AW
MONROE COUNTY
Wilhelmina G. Harvey •
Mayor/Chairman
October 25, 1991
Date
Attest: DANNy Is. KOLHAGE, Clem
.. -e I , .J&
County le
County Attorney
SOUTH FLORIDA REGIONAL
PLANNING COUNCIL
rr
General Counsel
Date
EXHIBIT "A"
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
IN RE: MONROE COUNTY )
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN )
ADOPTED BY )
ORDINANCE NO. 002-1991)
ON FEBRUARY 4, 1991 )
DOCKET NO. 91-NOI-4401-(N)
The Florida Department of Community Affairs hereby issues
its Statement of Intent to find the Comprehensive Plan of Monroe
County, adopted by Ordinance No. 002-1991 on February 4, 1991,
Not In Compliance based upon the Objections, Recommendations and
Comments Report (ORC Report) issued by the Department on December
2, 1990, which is attached to this Statement of Intent and is
hereby incorporated by reference, and changes made to the plan,
as adopted, which were not previously reviewed by the Department.
The Department finds that the plan is not "in compliance," as
defined in Section 163.3184(l)(b), Florida Statutes (F.S.), and
that it is not consistent with Sections 163.3177, 163.3178,
380.05, and 380.0552, F.S., the State Comprehensive Plan, the
South Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan, and Chapters
9J-5 and 18-21, Florida Administrative Code (F.W.C.), for the
reasons set forth in the Department0s ORC Report.
r
I . CONSISTENCY QF_ MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE ELAN
A. Tnconsistent provisions.
The inconsistent provisions of the plan are identical to
those identified under the various subject headings in the ORC
Report as "Objection(s)." The recommended actions suggested by
the Department to remedy these inconsistent provisions are
identical to those identified under the various subject headings
in the ORC Report as "Recommendation(s)."
B.
The -following Objections -and attendant Recommendations
3
contained
in the ORC Report are excepted and do not constitute
inconsistent provisions of the plan and require no remedial
3
action at
this time:
1.
Objections 1 and 2 found on page 2 of the ORC Report
regarding
Format Requirements.
2.
Objection 5 found on page 14 of the oRC Report
regarding
the Future Land Use Element.
3.
Objection 2 found on pages 34 and 35 of the oRC Report
regarding
the Traffic Circulation Element.
4.
Objection 21 found on page 41 of the ORC Report
regarding
the Traffic Circulation Element.
5.
Objection 2 found on page 81 of the ORC Report
.�
regarding
the Potable Water Element.
6.
Objection 6 found -on pages 136 and 137 of the ORC
Report regarding
the Conservation Element. _
7.
Objection 1 found on page 149 of the ORC Report
Element.
regarding the Recreation and Open Space
2
I
S. Objection 1 found on page 152 of the ORC Report'
regarding the Intergovernmental Coordination Element.
II. CONSISTENCY WITH = STATE COMPREHENSIVE PSi8N
The Plan is inconsistent with and fails to further the State
Comprehensive Plan, including but not' limited to the goals and
Policies set forth on pages.161 to 163 of the Departments ORC
Report. Rule 9J-5.021, F.A.C.
III. CONSISTENCY REGIONA LtLi,CC ?ZiY
The Plan is inconsistent with and fails to further the South
Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan, including but not
limited to the goals and policies set forth on pages 163 to 165
of the Department's ORC Report. Rule 9J-5.021, F.A.C.
IV. CONSISTENCY ME AREAS 2r CRITTCAL STATE CONCERN
A. The Plan is inconsistent with and fails to further the
Florida Keys (Monroe County) Area of Critical State Concern
Principles for Guiding Development, including but not limited to
the principles referenced in the Objections and Recommendations
set forth in pages 166 to 234 of the Department's ORC Report.
Rule 9J-5.005(8)(g), Chapter 18-21, F.A.C., Sections
163.3184(14), and 380.0552, F.S.
B. The following Objections and attendant Recommendations
contained in the ORC Report are excepted and do not constitute
inconsistent provisions of the plan and require no remedial
action at this time:
3
1. Objections 6(a) and 6(e) found on pages 193 and 194 of
the ORC Report regarding the Solid Waste Element.
2. Comment 7 B.(1) found on page 200 of the ORC Report
regarding the Drainage Element.
3. Objection 8(a), 8(c) and 8(f) found on pages 200 to 202
of the ORC Report regarding the Potable Water Element.
4. Objections 10(a), 10(b) and 10(d) found on pages 204
and 205 of the ORC Report regarding the Coastal Management
Element.
5. Objection 11(a) found on page 216 of the ORC Report
regarding the Conservation Element.
6. Objections 13(b), 13(c), 13(d), 13(f), 13(h) and 13(i)
found on pages 226 to 228 of the ORC Report regarding the
Intergovernmental Coordination Element.
1. The plan is not consistent with the South Florida
Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan.
2. The plan is not consistent with the State Comprehensive
Plan.
3. The plan is not consistent with the Florida Keys
(Monroe County) Area of Critical State Concern Principles for
Guiding Development.
4. . The plan is not consistent with Chapter 91-5-and
Chapter 18-21, F.A.C.
4
5. The plan is not consistent with the requirements of
Sections 163.3177, 163.3178, 380.05 and 380.0552, F.S. 6.-
The plan is not "in compliance", as defined in Section
163.3184(1)(b), F.S.
7. In order to bring the plan into compliance, the County
may complete the recommended remedial actions described in the
Department's ORC Report or adopt other remedial actions that
eliminate the inconsistencies.
Executed this ZZ. day of I"QVGn , 1991, at Tallahassee,
Florida.
bbeie+ G.
Robert G. Nave
Division Director
Division of Resource Planning
and Management
2740 Centerview Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32399
T
1
"B"
EXHIBIT
E
E
E
1
1
1
.
1
CMORE MSS PLAN
PRELIM AR? POLIO? DIRECTION
As adopted by the Monroe County Board of Commissioners
1
oa February 4, 1991
1
TIC = OF CONTENTS
introduction...............................................1
Is_
1. Population Growth and Carrying Capacity................3
2. Hurricane Evacuation...................................6
3. Concurrency............................................9
4. Septic Systems.......................................oil
5. sewer Master Plan.... .............................13
6. Drainage Master Plan..................................14
7. Potable Water.........................................16
8. Water Conservation....................................19
9. solid Waste.... o-o ..... oo ........ o-o-o ............ oo.o2l
10. Recyclinq............................................ 026
il. Traffic Level of Service... .......... 0.0.0............28
12. Four-laning US-1.............. 0.0.... 0.0.............. 30
13. Development in the Coastal High Hazard Area.... ..... ..31
14. Development in Saltmarsh and Buttonwood Wetlands.. .... 32
15. Linking Development to Water Quality..................34
16. Land Development Pattern... 36
17. Densities and Intensities of Land Use.................38
18. Linking Future Land Use to Demonstrated Need. ... ......39
19. Retaining the Future Land Use Concept Maps ... ......... 40
20. Areas of Critical County Concern......................42
21. Recreation Facilities and Redevelopment Areas.........43
22. Non -Conforming uses.................0........ 0........ 47
23. Transferable Development Rights.......................49
24. Affordable Housing....................................51
25. Preparing Data Inventories ............................52
INTRODUCTION
Monroe County is in the process of preparing a
comprehensive plan to meet the requirements of Chapters 163
and 380 of the Florida Statutes. In August of last year,
Monroe County transmitted the proposed Monroe''County
Comprehensive Plan 1990-2020 to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) for review under these statutes.
On December 6, 1990, the County received an Objections,
Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) report from the DCA
outlining the plan's inconsistencies with state law. Some
Of the DCA's objections pertain to technical issues that are
appropriate for the County's staff and consultants to
address. For example, the County staff has revised the
format of the plan and provided additional dataon potable
water supplies in. -accordance with the DCA's objections. The--
DCA report also includes objections to various County
policies, or the lack thereof. For example, the DCA
objected to the County,s level of service standard for roads
and the lack of densities and intensities for future land
uses. As an elected body, only the Board of County
Commissioners has the authority to establish or amend County
policy.
A revised version of the Plan was prepared, dated
January 1991, and consists of a Policy Document, a Technical
Document, and four volumes of maps. The revised version
addresses over fifty of the DCA's objections, but does not
alter any of the policies adopted in the August version of
the Plan, nor does it alter any of the Future Land Use Maps.
On February 4, 1992 the County Commission adopted the
revised version in order to comply with the state -imposed
deadline for resubmittal. However, the adoption ordinance
states that the Commission recognizes that there are
deficiencies in the Plan, and that the County will continue
the process of amendment.
To complete a final version of the Plan, and to answer
the remainder of the DCA's objections, a number of major
Policy issues must be resolved. With this in mind, the
Growth Management Division prepared a list of. policy
questions stemming from the DCA's objections to the
comprehensive plan. Upon receiving the policy questions on
December 18, 1990, the County Commission directed the Growth
Management staff to prepare a position paper containing
recommendations for each of the policy questions.
The County Commission discussed the position paper,
"Comprehensive Plan Policy Issues," during a workshop on
February 4, 1992, at Key Colony Beach City Hall. A vote was
taken on each of the twenty-five recommendations in the
paper. The Commission passed the recommendations, either as
t�
written in the position paper or as amended, on twenty-four
issues. The Commission denied the recommendation on issue
number five, the sewer master plan, and discussed no
substitute position for that issue.
Presented in this "Preliminary Policy Direction"
document are the questions and background information for
the twenty-five issues as they were presented to the
Commission, and the policy direction on each issue as passed
by the Commission on February 4th. Be advised that this
document deviates slightly from the official minutes of the
meeting. Grammatical and minor editorial changes have been
made to the Background and Policy Direction sections in
order to clarify the intent of the Commission.
The Preliminary Policy Directions will be finalized
only after public input has been obtained, The Commission
will accept public comment -on -this -document -at -a -.special
meeting in -the Key Colony Beach City Hall on March 14th,
1991 from 1:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.
2
QUESTION #1
should we continue to base this plan on historical growth
rates or do we want decreased growth?
Should we base our growth on a carrying capacity? If so,
what type of carrying capacity? Public facility? Hurricane
evacuation? water quality? Coral reef? Endangered
species? who will conduct this analysis? will they do it
before or after the plan is due?
BACKGROUND
The proposed comprehensive plan is based on the
assumption that the county's historic growth rates will
continue. The plan gives level of service standards for
traffic, solid waste, potable water, drainage, sewage
disposal and parks and recreation facilities. The plan
requires, through concurrency, that these facilities be in
place at the adopted standards concurrent with the impacts
of development.
The plan does not limit the expansion of any facility,
with the exception of traffic facilities. In order to
accommodate the traffic volumes projected for 2010, some
links of US-1 must be widened to six lanes (see Technical
Document, p. 10-41). However, Policy 1.4.2 of the Traffic
Circulation element limits the capacity of US-1 to four
lanes. By adopting this policy, the County has already
limited future growth below the 2020 projection.
Like the policy limiting US-1 to four lanes, the plan's
concurrency requirement could also reduce future development
(see Policy Document, Policies 1.4.5 and 1.4.6, page 2-104).
In accordance with Policy 1.4.6, the County must withhold
development approvals within areas served by inadequate
facilities. While the plan itself does not limit the
expansion of solid waste, potable water, drainage, sewer, or
park facilities, the physical or financial limits of
expanding these facilities could restrict growth via the
concurrency requirement. Due to the unusual geography,
special public facility needs, and unique environmental
resources in the Keys, Monroe County has fewer options for
providing public facilities than the rest of Florida.
The term "carrying capacity" refers to the maximum
amount of growth an area can accommodate within the bounds
of certain constraints. The type of constraint defining the
capacity couldinclude a millage rate of 10 mills. --
(financial); the capacity of a water main (physical); the
ability of the coral reef to withstand nutrient loading
(environmental); or a community's acceptance of a six -lane
highway (community character).
Technicians can determine an area's carrying capacity,
but it is up to the policy makers to choose.the type and
extent of'the constraints. For example, an environmental
consultant could estimate the number of lots the County can
allow to develop, if the County Commission selected
nearshore water quality as the type of constraint and "Class
III standards" as the extent of the constraint..
Should the County decide to base the plan on a carrying
capacity, public facilities provide a good starting point.
Since much of the necessary data is already available, a
qualified consultant could likely complete a public facility
carrying capacity within several months.
In the meantime, staff has prepared a preliminary
estimate of the carrying capacity of the public facilities
listed below. These estimates will change as a more
rigorous analysis is conducted; they are intendedtoprovide
the Board with general guidance only.
1990 Remaining Capacity Dwelling Units
Facility* in Dwelling Units Per Year
Hurricane Bvac 2655 133
Traffic 2500 to 5000 125 to 250.
Potable water 2650 to 4650 •130 to 230
Solid waste 0 or not a constraint 0 or N/A
Recreation not a constraint N/A
Drainage not a constraint N/A
Sewage not a constraint N/A
------------------------------------------------------------
*See subsequent topics for a more detailed discussion of
each of these facilities.
For comparison purposes, since 2972 the County has
permitted an average of 552 single family homes per year.
The hurricane evacuation capacity is based on a target
evacuation time of about 30 hours by the year 2000. The
solid waste capacity is highly dependent on the type of
disposal method assumed. If the County resumes incineration
and landfilling activities in 2995, landfill capacity is
inadequate to serve the existing population over the next
twenty years. If the County extends the haul —out contract
to cover the 20-year horizon, capacity will be adequate.
If the County continues to grow at historic rates, in
spite of these- constraints-, the time will come when growth
must suddenly halt, thereby disrupting the local economy.
If, on the other hand, the County recognizes these
constraints well in advance and acts to slow the rate of
growth accordingly, the chances of an abrupt halt are
minimized and the associated economic impacts will be more
gradual.
4
Environmental carrying capacities will be more
difficult to -establish. The only specific constraint
offered here addresses wetlands (see -Question #14), where
the argument is made that we have already reached our
wetland carrying capacity. water quality carrying capacity
is also discussed (see Question #15) but a specific carrying
capacity cannot be determined at this time. There are
experts available to perform analyses of the environmental
carrying capacity. However, due to the limited data
available, an environmental analysis may take up to five
years to complete.
POLICY DIRECTION
Monroe County should not base its comprehensive plan on
historical growth rates. Instead, the County should
establish population projections based upon carrying
capacity analyses of the Florida Keys. The County should
j hire expert consultants to complete a carrying capacity
analysis of both public facilities and the environment. The
public facility analysis should include hurricane evacuation
needs and should be completed before the plan is finalized.
The environmental analysis should address, at a minimum,
water quality concerns, the coral reef, and endangered
species. The two types of analyses should be completed as
soon as possible, based on consultants' recommendations and
the latest technology. All data used for interpretation
should be scientifically proven.
Prior to completion of the environmental analysis, the
plan's growth rates should reflect the public facility with
the least available capacity. Following completion of the
environmental analysis, the plan's growth rates should
reflect any additional environmental constraints. The
densities and intensities on the Future Land Use map should
be adjusted to reflect the resulting population projections
for 2010. The map should provide the citizens with a
realistic guide on which to base their development
expectations.
The plan should also establish the general guidelines
for a permit allocation system to extend the capacity of the
limiting facility over the plan's 20-year horizon. By
anticipating the cumulative effects of population growth,
rather than reacting in crisis fashion once the restrictions
due to concurrency are triggered, the County can promote
fairness and predictability in land development -in the Keys.
Before a number of units of development has been
selected, then the consultant will identify additional
facilities needed and the associated costs compared against
the cost of the land if it were purchased.
QUESTION 42
will we "maintain or reduce" hurricane evacuation times?.
Using what methods? will we coordinate our population
densities with our hurricane evacuation plan? What is an
acceptable hurricane evacuation time? 36 hours?
BACKGROUND
State regulations (Rule 9J-5.012(3)(b)7, F.A.C.)
require the County to maintain or reduce hurricane
evacuation time (as measured in clearance time). To achieve
this, population densities must be coordinated with the
county's evacuation plan. If the County chooses to reduce
its clearance times, rather than simply maintaining them,
the County must decide how much of a reduction should take
place.
The probability of predicting the location where a
hurricane makes landfall varies the hurricane's distance
from shore. At -twelve hours before landfall, for example,
the National Weather Service (NWS) may say that the chance
of a given location being hit by a given storm is 60
percent. By NWS standards, a clearance time of twelve hours
or less is ideal, since the decision to evacuate can take
place when there is a fair amount of certainty as to where
the storm will hit.• As clearance time increases, the
decision to evacuate is based upon a lower level of
certainty regarding the storm landfall location. According
to the NWS, a twelve to sixteen hour clearance time is not
ideal but is still fairly acceptable. Once clearance time
exceeds 24 hours, real problems with evacuation planning
occur. Therefore, clearance times for any given community
should, at a minimum, be less than 24 hours and ideally
twelve hours or less. While Monroe County cannot achieve
the NwS recommendation of twelve hours, it can reduce the
chance of an evacuation order being issued in a "false
alarm" situation.
Under the most likely scenario, the clearance time for
Monroe County is 34 hours. This is the absolute worst
clearance time in the state, and perhaps in the country.
so, by NWS standards, evacuation decisions in Monroe County
must be made when a great amount of uncertainty still exists
as to the location of storm landfall. The question then
becomes, can the County maintain or reduce hurricane
clearance time and still allow growth?
The Department of Transportation estimates completion
of four-laning of the eighteen -mile stretch by the year
2000. Completion of this project is presently the only
action that will result -in any significant reduction of the
hurricane clearance time. This is an important point.
6
I
Without this project, the County would
rtunity
to reduce clearance times, and could only vmaintaine no ohurricane
evacuation by stopping growth immediately.
The eighteen -mile stretch project will reduce the
' County's estimated clearance time by approximately seven
hours under the most likely evacuation scenario. Therefore,
in order to maintain the current clearance time of 34 hours,
the County must ensure that future development consumes no
more than the seven -hour leeway provided by these roadway
improvements.
' It is possible to provide a rough estimate of the
corresponding number of dwelling units this would allow,
while noting that this estimate fails to consider the
locational distribution of the additional development. A
general rule of thumb is that each hour of clearance
corresponds to roughly 2,000 persons or.885 dwelling units.
Under the scenario of maintaining the clearance time at
34 hours, a total of 6,195 dwelling units could be
accommodated over the next twenty years (309 dwelling units
per year). For comparison, the comprehensive plan presently
allows about 12,000 additional dwelling units to accommodate
a projected population based upon historical growth rates
(see Technical Document, page 14-32). Assuming that
expansion of the eighteen -mile stretch will not be completed
before the year 2000, and that the County continues to issue
Permits at the present rate of 400 per year, the clearance
time would continue to -increase to an estimated 39 hours
until the year 2000, when it would decrease to near the
present level. Since the goal is to maintain the clearance
time at the present level over the planning period, the
County would presumably still be in compliance with State
law. The State has no concurrency requirement for hurricane
evacuation. If the County wished to do so, however, it
could control the rate of this initial ten year increase in
clearance time through a permit allocation system.
The reduction of clearance times is a different case.
Using the same assumptions as above, if the County were to
stop approving development tomorrow, the seven hours gained
by four -laving the eighteen -mile stretch would improve the
clearance time from 34 hours to about 27 hours. The County
cannot significantly reduce the time below 27 hours, without
using County funds to four -lane additional portions of US-1.
As a third alternative, the County may wish to pursue a
compromise between maintaining the present clearance: -.time
(34 hours) and achieving a seven -hour reduction through a no
growth scenario (27 hours). A "halfway pointy of 30 hours
would still reduce the level of uncertainty regarding the
location of storm landfall when an evacuation order is
Issued. Under this compromise scenario, Monroe County could
K-1
accommodate about 2,655 additional dwelling units over the
next twenty years, or about 133 units per Year.
The table
below presents a comparison of the three scenarios. It
should be noted for all of these scenarios that the capacity
in total number of CWecities.applies to the entire
Keys, including incorporated
Clearance Total Dwelling Dwelling Units
Per Year
Standard Units
309
34 hours 6,195 133
1330
—�hours 2,550
_
0
27 hours 0
POLICY DIRECTION
Monroe County is responsibleforprotectingy the health
the
and safety of its citizens. The cannot
loss of life that would result from
additional injuries and
time, which is already the longest is
allowing its clearance
the state, to grow even longer. with respect to hurricane
benefits of
evacuation, the County must recognize that the
safey Of the
population growth come esident addseaboutt2 seconds
Each new r
existing residents.
clearance time; each single family home about
to the overall
4 seconds.
Critics may argue -that, in the lfaceof such
will to evacuate.
c_learance times, most residents
Recent behavior studies refute this assertion. More
fundamental right
importantly, the County should recognize a
visitor to have the opportunity to
of every resident and
his or her life by evacuating. Anything less would
the
save
leave the County morally --if not legally --liable for
J
resulting deaths.
of
The comprehensive plan should include an objective
34 hoursto
reducing the 1990 hurricane clearance time =e°=esants
2000. This objectivep
30 hours by the year clearance time
reasonable compromise btween noToreduction
this objectives
and no additional development. implementn
establishing a development
the plan should includes a policy
to control- the aofuthisatYPef is a
allocation sYAneallocatioa
permit system
population growth.
the County's police power, since it
legitimate exercise of
bears a rational relationship to protection of public health
and safety, and has withstood legal challenges in Sanibel
and other local governments.
8
7
QUESTION #3
Will we limit growth to that amount for which we can provide
facilities?
' BACKGROUND
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, mandates that local
governments choose "levels of service" (LOS) for six public
facilities: roads, sanitary sewer, stormwater, potable
water, solid waste, and parks and recreation. The statute's
' concurrency requirement states that, once LOS standards are
established, local governments cannot issue development
orders or permits if the development will reduce the
established levels of service. The costs of expansion,
upgrading or siting new public facilities thus form a major
constraint to development in areas with inadequate
facilities. Likewise, technological and environmental
constraints which limit the siting of and methodologies for
public facilities must also be considered. If these
limitations on public facilities cannot be overcome, then
development must either slow down or stop until the public
facilities can once again adequately serve the proposed
development.
The DCA's ORC report raises objections to the level of
service standard in every public facility element of the
plan. Had there been densities and intensities identified
on the Future Land Use map, the DCA would have likely
objected to them, because the plan fails to show how the
County will provide the facilities necessary to support
future land uses.
POLICY DIRECTION
There are a number of reasons why the County should
limit growth to that amount for which it can provide
facilities. First, adequate facilities are necessary to
protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Second, the
failure to do so fuels unrealistic development expectations,
ultimately leaving property owners in a "concurrency trap."
Last but not least, state law requires it.
To ensure that development does not exceed public
facility capacity, the County should:
--Limit population growth and the densities and
intensities on the Future Land Use Hap to levels
consistent with County's ability to provide adequate
public facilities (see Questions #1, 2, 4, 6, 7, and
12 for further detail).
__Revise ' the level of service standards for Potable
water, Traffic, and Drainage;
--Add -a facility capacity standard to the solid Waste
LOS; and
--Add design capacity and non-residential standards to
the sanitary sewer LOS.
--Consider the levels of service of optional facilities
under F.S. 163.3177(7)
10 1
1
I
QUESTION #4
Do we want to regulate septic systems beyond what is
currently allowed by HRS? If so, to what extent?
BACKGROUND
Conventional septic tank systems in the Keys are
' inadequate in treating sewage and also contribute to
nearshore nutrient loading, both because of present system
design and because of Monroe County soil/topography
conditions (see Technical Document, pages 7-16 and 7-17).
' It is for these reasons that state agencies strongly
recommend against the continued use of conventional on -site
septic systems (ORC, p. 191; DER comments, p. 29 of 114). A
' recent survey indicates that County residents agree that
there are water quality problems in the Keys (see Question
#15).
The County Commission has already opted for a mandatory
nutrient removal level for on -site disposal systems of sixty
percent (see Policy 1.1.1, Policy Document, p. 2-63,). This
standard exceeds that required by the Florida Department of
Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS). The sixty percent
level was based upon the present nutrient removal capability
of alternative on -site disposal systems (see Technical
Document, pages 7-20 through 7-24). Previous actions by the
County Commission recognize that centralized facilities are
appropriate for some higher density areas and should be
contemplated as part of the overall provision of adequate
sewage disposal facilities (see Technical Document, p. 7-26;
Policy Document, pp. 2-66 to 2-68).
Regulation of sewage disposal systems consists of two
phases: permitting and monitoring. If the County requires
sewage disposal standards above and beyond those set by HRS,
the county will have to enforce those standards. The
county,a role in permitting could be limited to requiring
those systems capable of meeting the County standards. once
permitted, monitoring the systems will prove more difficult,
as it would require on -site inspections of underground
tanks. In fact, the County code (Section 9.5-294) already
requires inspection of septic systems every three years, but
the regulation has never been implemented.
k
i
POLICY DIRECTION
In order to address water quality concerns, the County
should regulate sewage disposal above and beyond the
standards set by HRS. Implementation should take place via
both interim and permanent standards.
Based on the realistic capabilities of on -site systems,
an interim standard would increase
the costsble of development,
but would not place a readily
development. The consultants are to prepare a comparison
between mechanical and passive systems based upon
performance, reliability and cost.
Ultimately, the County should base its standard on the
environmental carrying capacity anis recommended in
Question #I. If nutrient loading into
nearshore water proves to be the limiting environmental
constraint,.the resulting permanent standard for sewage
disposal could lead to a cap on development.
12 3
QUESTION #5
Do we want to join FKAA in the development of a sewer master
plan for the Keys? If so, when and how will we contribute?
BACKGROUND
state law requires the County to provide adequate
sewage treatment facilities concurrent with the impacts of
proposed development (9J-5.0055(2)(a)). Therefore, if the
County wants to meet its -water quality goals, it must
determine whether or not centralized systems in any areas of
the Keys are necessary. A sewer master plan showing the
type and extent of sewer facilities planned throughout the
Keys is required in order for the County'to be able to
ensure compliance with the water quality carrying capacity.
The FKAA has the enabling legislation to implement -plans -for
sewage collection and disposal in. -Monroe -County and can
create sewer districts subject to approval by the County
Commission (see Technical Document, page 7-21 for
discussion). The FKAA's regulation of future public sewer
facilities and the County's regulation of future development
make it imperative that these two agencies join in
formulating a future master plan.
RECOMMMATION
The development of a sewer master plan for the Keys
should be a joint.effort between the FKAA and the County.
The plan should be developed based upon existing water
quality data showing known problem areas and upon a
preliminary water quality goal. The plan should then be
updated within five years upon of the results of continued
water quality monitoring. Therefore, the County should
initiate preliminary meetings to develop a plan as soon as
possible (this year).
The sewer master plan should identify the location and
type of facilities needed, both centralized and on -site.
Centralized facilities must then be provided by the local
government concurrent with the development proposed for that
area. If the FKAA does not pay for such facilities, the
County must do so, either through a sewer impact fee,
special taxing district or other method. The costs of on -
site facilities should continue to be borne by private
developers.
Drafting of the master plan should be initiated in 1991
and the plan should be updated according to improved data
within five years. In the meantime, the two agencies should
begin to tackle the question of criteria for establishment
of sewer districts and how the systems -will be funded.
RECOMMMATION DENIED 8Y 5 - O VOTE. NO SUBSTITUTE POLICY
WAS DISCUSSED.
M
QUESTION #6
Do we want to complete the engineering studies for a
drainage master plan for the county? if so, when?
BACKGROUND
State law requires that the County provide adequate
drainage facilities concurrent with the impacts of
9J-5.0055, F.S.). The County has very
development (Chapter
little data on the existing natural and manmade drainage
in
facilities in the county. Although drainage is general
reasonably good, there am numerous
drainage facilities within ecountyites�with rcvementseto
US 1 completed by the Department of Transportation were
few other
provided with drainage facilities, however, very
-of -way) have. been
publicly owned properties (J.a. rights
For individual sites., the current
planned for drainage.
county Code requires 100% on -site retention for -now -
development and for redevelopment. In addition, the County,
along with state agencies has formulated a Stormwater
Management Ordinance to address drainagefor now
The details of this ordinancehave -yet to be
developments.
finalized, however. In the Comprehensive Plan a Stormwater
will
Master Plan is proposed, to be completed by 1995, which
natural
assess the problem areas of the County, preserve
specify engineering solutions to
drainage features, and
existing deficiencies. The County has received a South
Florida dater Management District (SFwMD) grant to cover at
least a portion of the. costs of the necessary studies.
The DCA objects to the lack of specific actions in the
comprehensive plan that will lead to the completion of the
stormwater Master Plan by 1995 (ORC p. 77, obj. 12).
Likewise, DCA objects to the -lack of specificity in the
Drainage level of service standards (ORC p. 78, obj. 14, and
p. 199, obj. d), and to the incomplete inventory and
evaluation of existing drainage facilities in the
comprehensive plan (ORC P. 198, objs. b & c). In order to
assess the existing conditions, to regulate future drainage
facilities, and to apply the laws of concurrency to drainage
facilities as required, extensive engineering studies must
be completed. with the data available at present, the
County cannot accurately assess whether or not our drainage
facilities comply with the concurrency laws. •
It is clear that 'in -order to comply with state law, the
Stormwater Master Plan and its requisite engineering studies
must be completed. If the County applies the current Code
properly, once the stormwater Management Ordinance. -is
completed on -site retention problems should. be resolved for
new developments. The Master Plan should therefore focus on
the drainage deficiencies and needs for publicly owned
14
properties and rights -of -way. The timing of the Master
Plans completion is also questioned. DCA objects to the
Postponement of the completion of the inventory of existing
drainage facilities, the engineering studies and the
development of the Master Plan to 1995 (ORC p. 199, obis. g
POLICY DIRBCTZON
To comply with state concurrency laws and ensure
adequate drainage facilities, the County should complete the
engineering studies for the Stormwater Master Plan.
Utilizing the SFWMD grant, engineering studies including an
assessment of the existing drainage conditions and an
identification of potential engineering solutions should be
initiated within the next year so that the Master Plan can
be completed prior to 1995.
E
QUESTION 67
What will we do if the FKAA cannot meet the County's potable
water needs?
BACKGROUND
The supply of potable water available to the Keys is
not infinite. The South Florida Water Management District
(SFWMD) controls the quantities made available to local
water utilities in order to preserve the freshwater supply
in the Biscayne Aquifer. The Florida Keys Aqueduct
Authority (FKAA) receives an annual allocation from SFWMD,
issued for five or ten year periods in a Consumptive Use
Permit (CUP). The County, however, has no formal commitment
from FKAA or SrWMD to guarantee a potable water supply for -
the county's population. Nor does the County have a
commitment from FKAA to allocate a set portion of its supply
to the unincorporated County. Therefore, the County must
consider how potable water needs will be met if FKAA's
current CUP permit, which expires in 1995, is not renewed or
increased. The DCA has also raised this question (ORC
report, p. 83, objection 7)..
Although some alternative sources of potable water
exist in the Keys, none are viable for the large scale
production necessary to serve the current and projected
population. Cisterns and reverse osmosis plants are
possible, but expensive. Neither the quantity nor quality
of groundwater in the Keys is good enough to make large
scale use of wells a viable potable water alternative. Some
wells exist in the county, but due to the limited size of
freshwater lenses, large scale well use would lead to
saltwater intrusion. Big Pine Key has one of largest
freshwater lenses in the Keys, yet if, for example, wells
were used as major
days thewater island'srce supplyrOfting freshwaterl
thousand gallonsper
would soon be exhausted even during the wet season.
The quality of water from wells is not considered to be
potable directly from the ground either. In fact,
groundwater in the Keys has been classified by the Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation as Class G-III,
"having no reasonable potential as a future source of
drinking water" (Rule 17-3.403(1)). As a result of these
quantity, duality, and cost constraints, there are no
feasible alternatives to•FKAA-supplied water that could meet
the needs of the entire county. �.
Limited alternative potable water supplies put the
County in a potentially precarious position. South Florida
has a history of droughts and public water supply shortages.
As the region's population continues to grow, the threats of
16
j
0
drought, saltwater intrusion, and increasing demands by all
aquifer users will likely lead to -intergovernmental
competition, as has occurred in the Southwest region of'the
nation. Faced with a finite water supply, SFwMD may deny
future requests from FKAA for increased allocations. For
these reasons the County cannot assume that FKAA's future
CUP allocations will continue to increase.
While the County cannot control future CUP allocations,
the County can exercise some control over consumption of the
current allocation. The current allocation is for-5.56
billion gallons per year, an amount the SFwMD has determined
will be sufficient for five years, based on the continuation
historic growth rates. water conservation is a necessary
' component of any plan to limit water consumption. The
County should therefore adopt the water conservation
guidelines mandated by the South Florida water Management
District (see Question #8 for further details). However,
tthe per capita water consumption rates in the county are
already well within the range recommended by the SFWMD,
reflecting good conservation practices. An increase -in
' water conservation efforts alone cannot be expected to
balance out the increases in water supply that would be
demanded by a population growing at historic rates.
The best way for the County to ensure. that adequate
potable water will be available for the twenty-year horizon
of the comprehensive plan would be to limit water
consumption and stretch the five-year supply into a twenty-
year supply. In order -to reduce consumption by this amount,
the County must grow slower than it has historically.
The five-year water permit is based on the assumption
that the County's population will grow by 6,000 permanent
residents, or a functional population increase of 10,500.
These figures provide a rough estimate of the amount the
County can grow without exceeding the allocation of water.
At 2.26 people per household, the County could allow between
2,650 and 4,650 dwelling units to be built between 1990 and
2020, or about 230 to 230 dwelling units per year. This
preliminary analysis does not take commercial uses into
account, since data on commercial water consumption is not
currently available. It also ignores water consumption
increases due to development in Key west, Key Colony Beach,
and Layton.
The concurrency requirements of Chapter 163, F.S: and the
County's existing land development regulations require that all
development be served by potable water. The FKAA provides the only
county -wide source of potable water in the Florida Keys. In the event
that the FKAA cannot meet the County's potable water needs,
development will be forced to utilize alternative sources, such as
cisterns, wells, and raverse osmosis plants. while these alternatives
are feasible in some cases, they do not provide a reliable basis on
M
which to plan the County's future. Where these alternatives are not
feasible, the County would have to impose a moratorium on now
development.
As a local _ government responsible for the public health, safety,
and welfare of it citizens,
Monroe County should bass its comprehensive
plan on population growth rates that do not outstrip the FKAA s' ability
to provide potablebillion gallons per ye. a The C
FKAA18 five-year CUP
allocation is arounty has no
guarantee this amount will ever increase.
POLICY DIRECTION
The couother.- supplies foevelop and rother than human ingestion.
urage other systems which
utilize other
To further-ensure-that--tha potable water supply will. be
sufficient to most demand, the County should also:
1) Change its potable water level of service for per
capita water provision to a level that more accurately
reflects both permanent and seasonal population usage.
This level of service must -be agreed upon by the
County, srWMD p and FRAA.
2) Seek an interlocal agreement with FKAA regarding
allocations reserved for unincorporated Monroe County.
3) Become more involved with SrWHD toensure
othat
tsthe
hoardKeys
continue to receive equal representation
and equal consideration in water allocation.
4) Seek safe, viable alternative water sources and make
provisions for their use in the County's land
development regulations.
F
F
is
QUESTION #8
Do we want to require more water conservation?
BACKGROUND
Water conservation is an area in which the County has
made significant progress. However, given the fact that the
County cannot.assume that FKAA will continue to receive
increases in its Consumptive Use Permit (see Question #7),
every effort must be made to conserve as much water as
Possible. The land development regulations require the
installation of low volume plumbing fixtures, require
landscaping with 70% native species, regulate landscape
installation, and require the preservation of natural
vegetation. In addition, the FKAA has a conservation -
oriented rate structure, is replacing old distribution pipes
to decrease water loss, has a public education program, and
is enforcing the South Florida heater Management District's
(SFWMD) permanent water restrictions.
' The effect of there programs has been a -decrease in per
capita water use over the last few years. The SFWMD
recommends a gallons per capita per day (gpcd) consumption
rate of approximately 125. When the permanent and seasonal
populations are taken into account, the rates within the
FKAA service area were 128 gpcd in 1989, and 109 gpcd for
1990. Monroe County water consumption rates are well within
' the range acceptable to SFWMD, reflecting reasonable water
conservation efforts.
Nevertheless, due to uncertainties regarding the
Biscayne Aquifer's ability to continue to supply all of
South Florida's water supply needs, both SFWMD and DCA
suggest more stringent water conservation measures. in July
1990, SFWMD identified six mandatory water conservation
measures to be implemented throughout the South Florida.
Three of these will be implemented by FKAA. The other three
fall within the County's jurisdiction. They are:
1) Limiting lawn irrigation to the hours of 5:00 pm to
9:00 am. (A permanent irrigation ordinance is
suggested; some exceptions are allowed.)
2) Requiring the adoption of xeriscape landscape
ordinances.
3) Requiring the installation of ultra -low volume
plumbing fixtures in all new construction.
For an estimate of the cost of these new programs' for the
consumer, see the FKAA Water Conservation Plan.
The DCA has reinforced SFWMD's position in the ORC
report, stating that the plan should "provide measurable
E
policies which are consistent with all six components of
SFwMD's regional water conservation policies (ORC P. 230,
obj. i). Furthermore, the DCA objects to the level of
service listed in the Potable Water element as not
obj. 3).
reflecting water conservation measures (ORC P.
DCA also requires more specific and measurable
85County
i• 14),
policies regarding water conservation (ORC P.
and requires the County to outline
ORC pspecif is implementation -
plans for water cons
POLICY DIRECTION
To
respond
County
. 1)
2)
comply
with
�st�itieel
to DCA objctihecompreheasiveplanthe
must:
3)
4)
Revise - its Level. of Service for potable water to a
per capita consumption rate that reflects water
conservation efforts, and that uses a methodology
agreed upon by FRAA, SFWHD, DCA and the County -
Enact -permanent irrigation regulations that limit
lawn landscape irrigation, or form an agreement
with MA to implement such an ordinance.
Revise the landscaping guidelines in the land
development regulations to enact more comprehensive
xeriscape policies. This would mandate proper
placement of landscape material, water -conserving
irrigation practices, standards for water -
conserving program afor �code implemand establish-
enta-
tion of of a
and compliance.
Change the regulations for low volume plumbing
All
fixtures to require ultra -low volume fixtures.
new and replacement construction should have
plumbing fixtures installed to meet the following
standards at s0 pounds per square inch:
Toilets--1.6 gal/flush; showerheads--2.5 qal/min
and faucets--2.0 qal/min. The County will also
limit the sale of new toilets, showerheads and
faucets to meet the standards set herein.
E
�l
C
H
P
U
QUESTION 99
How will we dispose of our solid waste once the Waste
Management contract is up?
BACKGROUND
Waste Management Inc. (wMi) will haul out all the wet
garbage, yard waste and.construction debris that is
generated within the Municipal Service District through
' 1995. This contract was signed because the county could not
meet the solid waste needs of the current population with
existing solid waste facilities.
while short-term solid -waste needs have been met with
the WMI contract, no policy has yet -been set for resource
recovery, volume reduction and disposal of solid waste once
the contract ends. The County could continue to haul out
all of its solid waste. Besides this option, at best, the
County can meet -its waste disposal needs for 10 years after
' the WMI haul out contract ends in 1995. At worst, if no
other disposal options can be found, even with the
assumption of substantial volume reduction and recycling,
the County will exhaust the remaining capacity at Cudjoe
tlandfill by 2001 regardless of the growth pattern.
Meeting the long-term needs of the County will be
' difficult and costly, and even more so if the population
continues to grow at historic rates. Solid waste management
capabilities do indeed limit the rate of population growth
for which the County is able to adequately provide. Since
state concurrency laws require that solid waste facilities
be available concurrent with the impacts of development, the
available solid waste processing and disposal options must
' be considered in balance with the ability of the County to
generate revenues to pay for each option (see Question #3
for further discussion of this state requirement). The cost
of some options available to the County may be prohibitive
enough to warrant a reduction in the growth rate. The exact
level to which development should be limited to assure solid
waste facility. concurrency cannot be identified at this
time.
Several factors affect the County's ability to meet its
solid waste management needs after 1995. The following
items address the status of some of these factors.
--The role of Crawl Key for solid waste management is
still undefined. It has been purchased to provide a
site for waste disposal facilities, but a
conservation easement prohibits landfills and
incineration.. Plans for a septage treatment plant
are being drafted. A Materials Recycling Facility is
E
E
being considered for the site as well. other volume
reduction and disposal facilities are also possible
for -Crawl Key. The Solid Waste Task Force has
recommended sending out a Request for Proposal for
solid waste processing and disposal facilities at
Crawl Key. This is not being pursued at present.
--of the existing landfills, only the Cudjoe Key
expansion will be open past 1995, with a remaining
capacity of 120,000 cubic yards. The Long Key
landfill has an estimated 80,000 cubic yards of
remaining capacity, but it is operating on a consent
agreement. As the haul out gets underway, the
consent agreement will likely expire.
--The permits for MSD incinerators will expire in 1992.
The high cost of retrofitting the incinerators with
the mandated pollution control devices, along with
public opposition to burn technologies make the
future use of incinerators improbable (see the
Technical Document, p. 9-18 through 9-23).
--No site for an additional landfill has been selected,
although a county -wide evaluation process has been
completed.
--The Board has adopted a policy to implement a
mandatory, county -wide, curbside recycling program,
and has adopted the state -mandated recycling goal of
30% of the total waste stream. The first phase of
the program was initiated in Marathon where the
County is now providing curbside collection services
to about 5000 residences.
--Since the creation of a solid Waste Authority was
rejected in the November election, negotiations with
the City of Key West have not progressed regarding
possible processing of MSD waste at the Montenay
facility.
Public opinion is mixed regarding appropriate methods
for solid waste management in the Keys. In a 1990 survey,
Monroe County residents were asked which solid waste
facilities they think are appropriate for the Keys. Their
answers were:
74% - landfilling 34% - composting
29% - incineration 13% - waste -to -energy
16% - other
The survey also asked, "To avoid creating another
landfill in the Keys, how much more would you be willing to
pay for garbage disposal outside the county?" The responses
were:
22
k
37% - $0, but I'm in favor of haul out
34% - $0, because I don't object to another
landfill in the Keys
19% - $5 more per month
t 6% - $10 more per month
5% - over $10 per month
With the above limitations in mind, estimates of the
service life of MSD facilities have been calculated. Four
scenarios have been developed to analyze the effects of a
range of variables on the length of service life remaining
' for the existing landfills. All of these scenarios make
some important assumptions. They are:
--30%-of the total solid waste stream will be recycled
every--year-beginninq with--1995.
--volume reduction will take place (either through
incineration or -other means) that reduces solid
waste by 75%.
--No capacity in the landfills will be reserved for
emergencies, such as hurricanes or fires.
--All non-combustible construction debris will be
disposed of in a Class III landfill (none exists in
the county at present).
t --The county will continue to grow at historic growth
rates.
' The additional assumptions for each scenario, and the year
in which the County will exhaust its landfill space are
listed below.
o Additional
Scenario Assumptions
k
H
L
F
1 No haul out after 1995.
Cudjoe landfill used for disposal
of all MSD waste.
Year Capacity
Will Be Reached
2001
2 No haul out after 1995. 2004
Both Long & Cudjoe landfills used
(Consent agreement signed for Long Key).
3 Waste from north of 7-mile Bridge is 2005
hauled out or disposed of at Crawl Key.
Lower Keys & Key West waste landfilled
at Cudjoe (in exchange for incineration
at the stock -island Montenay facility).
4 All waste is hauled out, either unlimited
with or without volume reduction.
An out -of -county disposal site is
always available.
f
In summary, the County,s solid waste management will be at a
critical stage after the haul out contract ends in 1995.
The option providing the most capacity is a total haul
liout
(Scenario 4). However, costs may be prohibitive.
By 95
the County will be paying $90 per ton for the haul out, with
further cost increases likely. Most importantly, this
option assumes that there will be an out -of -county landfill
within a reasonable transporting distance that is willing to
take Monroe County trash. This is a dangerous assumption;
landfills in other parts of the nation have already begun to
refuse waste from outside of their jurisdiction.
Other alternatives being considered by the solid Waste
Task Force concentrate on resource recovery, or the recovery
of materials or energy from the waste stream. The Task
Force is considering a combination of composting or
pelletizing with recycling. The implementation of these
options at Crawl Key could potentially eliminate the need
for haul out, and for the sitinq:of additional Class =
landfills in the county. These options could also allow the
remaining capacity at the Cudjoe landfill to be reserved for
emergencies. In addition, pelletizing might eliminate the
need for separate county -wide curbside recycling pickup,
since recyclables are separated as part of the pelletizing
process. Further research is necessary, however, before a
method can be selected.
POLICY DIRECTION
Due to the limitations described above, the County
must:
1) Continue to reduce its solid waste stream. A volume
reduction site should be constructed at Crawl Key. A
method that not only reduces volume but also recovers
resources should be sought. To further conserve its
disposal capacity, the County should improve the
volume reduction rate to greater than the 75%
currently achieved by incineration, if
technologically possible.
2) Achieve the state -mandated recycling goals by 1995.
The County should also improve its recycling rate
beyond that mandated by the state. Up to 65% of the
solid waste stream is potentially recyclable.
Increasing the recycling rate to greater than 30%
would extend the life of the existing landfills (see
Question #10 for further discussion). If haul out is
chosen as a long-term method of solid waste.,disposal,
the contract should include incentives for recycling.
3) Investig
ate ate the feasibility of initiating an
interlocal agreement with the City of Key west to
24
H
process Lower Keys trash at the'Montenay waste -to -
Energy facility only if less expensive than a Request
for Proposal response.
4) Limit population growth to a reasonable level (see
Question #1 for further details).
5) Provide for an alternate means of disposal that does
not depend on conventional landfills by 2001. Crawl
1
Key and other sites should be considered, as well as
the haul out of the residue formed after volume
reduction.
'
6) Reserve some capacity in disposal facilities, either
in the Cudjoe Key landfill or an alternative disposal
'
site, for emergencies.
H
H
H
r
C1
L
QUESTION 610
r
Do we want to fund and implement a comprehensive recycling
program?
BACKGROUND:
The state has mandated that each County reach a 30%
recycling goal by December 31, 1994. No more than half of
this amount can be met with the special wastes: construction
debris, yard trash, white goods and tires. In addition, at
least 50% of each of the recyclable materials, newspaper,
alumin=. glass, and plastic bottles generated in the county
must be recycled by the and of 1994. The County is also
required to negotiate with its present garbage collection
franchises to contract for recyclables pickup before it
considers other public or private alternatives. Although
the law is vague regarding the enforcement of.these
requirements, the state may impose sanctions if the County
does not meet the recycling goals.
The County is making progress towards these recycling
goals, but it has a long way to go. Between July 1989 and
July 1990 17% of the municipal solid waste stream was
recycled. over 25% of the aluminum cans generated in the
county are being recycled as are 12% of the special wastes
re e g recycled.buSeeery helittle Of Technicalthe other Document,materials
P. 9-12 for
are being Y
more data on recycling:
The Board of County Commissioners had at one time
endorsed a 40% recycling goal, but later diminished it to a
30% recycling goal. The Board has also endorsed the
recommendation of the solid Waste Task Force Advisory Board
le
ratea recycling program.ment a idYetm hearecycling budget, curbside, vforathe
rate recycling
current fiscal year was severely cut.
In a 1990 survey, 49% of the county residents said the
County should encourage recycling through curbside pickup.
45$ supported reducing the
ndard age 43�fee,
endorsed can
endorsed neighborhood recycling centers,
and bottle deposits, 31% supported community education
programs, and 27% endorsed mobile recycling centers.
Clearly there is a willingness to recycle among the county's
residents. The new haul out plan, however, fails to provide
an incentive for recycling because it forces an increase in
garbage collection rates whether or not citizens recycle.
in summary, recycling must be made more assessable and
more acceptable to both residential and commercial units* in
order to motto aestate comprehensiveed goals by 1994. recycling program in order County
must commit ordeto
26
increase public awareness of and participation rates in
recycling.
POLICY DIRECTION
The County must:
--Develop an RFP for all viable methods of recycling,
within the parameters of the law.
--Fund and implement a mandatory, variable rate,
curbside recycling program county -wide as soon as
possible, but at least by 1994.
'
--Begin negotiations immediately with the seven garbage
collection franchises in the county so that a
'
decision regarding the methods, facilities, possible
phasing, and staffing or contracting for recyclables
processing can be made within the next six months.
--If the County chooses to handle recycling in-house,
proceed to build the proposed Materials Recycling
Facility on Crawl Key.
--Either re-establish the County's recycling goal of
40% or increase the percentage further. This
'
recommendation is due to the severely limited solid
waste disposal facilities within the county and the
'
high cost of waste haul out (see Question #9 for
further discussion of this issue).
0
r
h
H
I
E
E
OUESTI0R #11
Do we want -to adopt the FDOT standard of LOS C for US-1?
BACKGROMM
Section 9J-5.0055(1)(d), F.A.C., requires local
governments to adopt standards compatible with the FDOT
standards "to the maximum extent feasible." Where a
deviation occurs, the local government must provide
justifrecognizesijustificationsor the ithatnachieve-othersimportantlstate
recogniz �
planning goals and policies.
The previous County Commission directed staff to
prepare the plan based on LOS D, consistent with the
county's current -land development regulations. Accordingly,
Policy 1.1.1 on page 2-67 of the plan's Policy Document
establishes LOS D as the County standard. Page 10-21 of the
Technical Document provides justifications for the
deviation, based on:
1) FDOT funding insufficient to maintain LOS. C;
2) FDOT's designation of US-1 as a "policy
constrained" roadway;
3) the protection of property rights; and
4) avoiding additional development in high hazard and
environmentally sensitive areas.
The FDOT, the DCA 163 review team, and the DCA 380
of LOS D.
review team all objected to the county's standard
oRC report p. 8, objection #2; P. 181, objection "a").
(See
. Two predominant perspectives have emerged from the
debates over a of service o
1, should
US-1,
eevel
are no alternativedard
Given that they routes
we:
1) allow maximum use of the facility?
(i.e. lower the LOS standard)
2) or protect the operation of the facility?
(i.e. raise the LOS standard)
The Planning Commission recommended a standard of
LOS C. There was no consensus on the Transportation
to what the standard should be. A 1989-90
Committee as
survey of Keys residents indicated 63% felt traffic
congestion was a problem on US-1. _.
A task force consisting of representatives from the
County, the DCA, and the FDOT is currently examining how to
The task
best measure the level 0service ;.
preliminary analysis is summarized below. This analysis
28
will change as additional information is collected and does
not consider the effects of planned improvements.
US-1 LOS Task Force Preliminary Analysis
Reserve Reserve
Capacity Capacity
Standard_ (trips) .(dwelling units)
LOS C 16,000
LOS D 69,000
2,500- or 5,000--
10,800- or 21,600--
Notes: -Assumes an equal mix of residential and
non-residential development.
-'Assumes all capacity will be devoted
exclusively to residential development.
POLICY DIRECTION
US-1 provides the lifeblood of the Florida Keys. It is
therefore vitally important to preserve the free movement of
people and goods along this, the County's only arterial.
Does this only arterial warrant the same FDOT standard
applied to less critical roads throughout the state? Yes.
The County should adopt a standard of LOS C per the interim
criteria.
The County has spent the last two years contesting the
FDOT's methods and standards associated with level of
service. The County has spent very little time addressing
the improvements needed on US-1, partly because there was no
consensus as to whether level of service problems existed,
and if so, where they existed. The County has been
successful in forming a multi -agency task force consisting
of FDOT, DCA, and County staff, who are working. together to
develop a customized methodology for measuring level of
service in the Keys. However, neither the FDOT or the DCA
have ever wavered on the question of what the standard for
US-1 should be. The time has come to stop fighting the LOS
C standard itself and direct our attention and resources to
the actions necessary to maintain .that standard.
The County should adopt a Future Land Use Map that
recognizes non -development generated traffic. Properties
rendered unbuildable by the standard of LOS C should be
purchased, preferably by federal and state agencies.
d
OIISSTION #12
How many lanes of traffic on US-1 do we want?
BACKGROQND
If historic growth rates continue, all segments of US-1
that are currently Technfour-ical Documentd will , page 10-41). When
to be six-laned y
the year 2010 (see Technical previous
presented with this limitmUgiintotfour lanesasrecommended
Commission chose to
by the Planninq Commission (Policy 1.4.2, Policy Document,
p. 2-89).
The rationale behind this policy included concerns
about:
1) the feasibility of
accommodating
odatinthe yssix lanes within
the limited land
2) dramatic changes in the character of the Keys;
3) impacts on existing development; and
4) increased development pressures due to increased
accessibility.
opponents to the policy expressed concerns about:
1) limiting the options
in developmentty; and
potential
2) the correspondingeductio
for property owners.
The FDOT raised no objection to this
ofolicy- While
inq tie
FDOT has no formal position on the issue
several staff members have questioned the feasibility of
such a project.
The DCA raised no objection to this policy.
However,
the DCA did object that the torreflectUse thisepolicy8 and
(see
intensities were not adjusted)
ORC report p. 184, objection "k."
The Transportation
laning of Us-1, but the
POLICY DIRECTION
Committee generally opposed the six -
position was not unanimous.
The County policy of
remain in the plan. The
intensities on the Future
citizens with a realistic
development expectations.
limiting Us-1 to four lanes should
County should reduce densities and
Land Use Map to provide.-the
guide on which to base their
]I
K
30
Y'
I
QUESTION #13
Will we "limit public expenditures that subsidize
development in coastal high hazard areas?" will we direct .
population growth away from these area? If so, how?
BACKGROUND
' State law requires the County to limit public
expenditures that subsidize development permitted in coastal
high -hazard areas (CHHA) and to direct population
concentrations away from the known or predicted CHHA (9J-
5.012(3)(b)5 and 6). The County must do*this by limiting
development in the CHHA and relocating or replacing
infrastructure away from these areas (9J-5.012(3)(07). The
' present -comprehensive plan establishes .the CHKA as -PIMA
designated V-zones. However, the DCA objected to this
designation and called for the establishment of the Category
' I Storm Surge Impact Area as the CHHA (ORC, P. 102). The
most obvious action that would limit development in the CHHA
would be to reduce density.
' According to the DCA's recent report, "Coastal
Infrastructure Policy Implementation update, Report Number
' Five" (March 1, 1990), allowance of any additional
development or expansion of infrastructure in the CHRA is
undesirable. However, in view of the extent of the CHHA in
Monroe County, a restriction on further development would
' effectively create a moratorium situation.
Limiting density is considered to be the most
reasonable course of action at this time. In addition,
specific measures such as prohibiting platting of new,
subdivisions, prohibiting new or expanded infrastructure in
designated Coastal Barrier Resource Act areas or other
appropriate areas, and prohibiting development in wetlands -
would be acceptable measures towards complying with state
law.
POLICY DIRECTION
The County should comply with state law by limiting
development within the CHHA. This should be achieved
through limiting overall density in the county and, at a
minimum, prohibiting new or expanded facilities and/or
development in COBRA areas and undisturbed salt marsh and
buttonwood wetlands. In addition, Policy 1.4.2 on page 2-
122 of the Policy Document, which links additional
subdivision plats to a demonstrated need for the additional
lots, should be strengthened to prohibit the platting of new
subdivisions.
OUSSTION #14
will we continue to allow development in undisturbed salt
marsh and buttonwood wetlands?
gACj=0UND
state and regional 1 itania accordanceolicies ace withees ablished
tlands
protection as a high priority
federal policies. The DCAstrongly
urges
goinq sothe
f'arCasetort.
that wetlands protection beincreased,to scarified
say that "...Policy should limit development As discussed in
and previously filled areas ( there are
the Technical Document (Pp. 3-40 through 3_ 46),
many reasons for the trend towards wetlands protection
as..
the last twentY;Years• Wetlands are generally
ecosystems whose productivity is directly valuable to man.
They are generally intolerant/ of even minor physical
alterations (water pooaltheowholewater
federalsistateoand local
compaction, etc.).
governments have found the impacts of developmentconty
productive wetlands to be unacceptable.
basically has not changed current
plaaetl apeelslof wetland
icy under
the recently adopted comprehensiveare
marsh are currently a=loroposed policy to offset thisto develop to 15% of theirlossa.
There is no current o p
of wetlands.
As of 1990, the Florida Keys is estimated
buttonwood a about
6,500 acres of undisturbed salt marsh
andwetlands remaining. Of these, about 2,000 acres are owned
by state and federal agencies and presumably
Will disturbed. The other 4,500 acres are vacant privately owned
acres
land. under current policy, 15% of this, or 675inndirectf
marshlands could potentially be lost directly.
ion Of tidal flOwr
impacts of dovele
onlynt on ach asiteebytsite basis. For that
etc. are measurable only
reason, 15;.is-a minimum estimate of wetlands loss because
in some cases developmentfthe
glin a total 5% could lloss ter tgreater
idal ow
over the entire parcel, rs
sultin
than 15%.
most of the undisturbed sparsely
a=sel�asettled,the
NativelAreada Keys
has been placed within the p Y
and Suburban Residential land use districts. under these
districts, densities of 0.5, 0.3, and 1.0 units per acre are
allowed in wetland marsh areas. Assuming,
for sake of
simplification, that all of the ands could build owned wetlands -in units per acre, the vacant privately
Keys could potentially
lnoted thatamost (about285%) Oflthese
units. It should bthe
undisturbed.wetlands are locate Many K yLarernotyeasilyide
of existing improved subdivisions.
32
accessible from existing roads; therefore, 2,250 dwelling
units is considered to be a liberal estimate of what could
realistically be developed in these areas. over the past
four years, some of these inaccessible areas have served as
TDR sender sites.
POLICY DIRSCTION
Throughout the state and the nation, the direct loss of
undisturbed productive wetland marsh areas is deemed
unacceptable. Likewise, indirect impacts of development on
undisturbed wetland marshes are also unacceptable.
Therefore, Monroe County should not allow development in
undisturbed salt marsh and buttonwood wetlands.
0
E
OQBSTION 415
will we link development decisions -to water quality? If so,
how?
BACKGROUND
Public opinion shows that people generally believe that
there are existing water quality problems in the Keys.
Most
people think that land development in the Keys adversely
affects the nearshore water duality and coral reefs.
Therefore, the public considers water quality a problem, and
believes that development contributes to that problem.
addition, specific adverse effects of development on water
quality have been demonstrated -in recent studies.The
primary environmental impact of concern is nutrient loading
and, secondarily, sedimentation/turbidity effects (see
Technical 'Document, pages 3-9 through 3-19 for a full
discussion). The recently adopted comprehensive plan
includes at least one specific policy to reduce nutrient
loading by requiring a minimum of 60% removal of nutrients,
including total phosphorous and total nitrogen,
rom
wastewater which is discharged from on -site systems. Since
septic systems are a development -related impact, it can be
assumed that there is already existing direction to write
policies linking development decisions to water quality.
In order to do this, monitoring efforts must be
coordinated and a continual monitoring network formed. This
is imperative. The policy to coordinate these efforts and
expand the network where needed has already been adopted in
the recent comprehensive plan (see Policy Document, Policy
1.2.1, page 2-2). once monitoring efforts are consolidated
into one continually updated picture of water quality
patterns in Keys waters and mapped on the GIs system,
problem areas will emerge.
The next step is linking the specific water quality
problem in an area to development. This is.difficult
because the problem will inherently be due to a cumulative
effect of several developments in that area. Direct
(discrete) and indirect (cumulative) sources of water
quality degradation can be identified and tied to the
existing development after analysis of the water quality and
land development data by experts.
The county must then decide upon the water quality
goals it wants to achieve. Only then can an environmental
carrying -capacity based upon water duality be set..-- The
water quality goal should first address overall
environmental duality --namely, abatement of pollution and
nutrient aters watershatsadhighertor fastererate.ouSecondly,
Florida Wats
34
k
the chosen goal should address nuisances, namely abatement
of pollution that is localized and not necessarily entering
offshore waters at a perceivable rate, but is undesirable to
residents. Abatement of any possible sources of
deterioration of marine resources is of primary importance
to the Keys people and economy as a whole. The experts will
help us to decide on dictating realistic water quality
standards and calculating expected cost.
POLICY DIRBCT=ON
Monroe County should immediately (in 1991) implement -
the coordination of a monitoring network and map water
quality trends on the GIS. Monroe County should link its
development decisions to water quality by hiring recognized
professionals to develop a carrying capacity in order to
' achieve compliance with F.S. 380.021 and -the Federal -Clean
Water Act.
0
h
H
H
L
H
I
E
0
QUESTION #16
What pattern of land development will the Future Land Use
map show?
* a continuous strip of development along US -I?
*development along US-1, with some
now
es?
nodes of nodes of development along us -it but no new nodes?
BACKGROUND
The previous direction of the Board in August was to
retain the existing zoning maps as the Future Land Use map.
The land development illcbe all result coatinuousrom stripeof
current zone configurations
development along US-1; in most cases the development will
be commercial. The exception to this will be areas
consisting solely of mangroves and freshwater wetlands.
A 1990 survey addressed
the
fofoercial
responses to the
development along US The percentages
following question are shown below: which pattern of
commercial development do you favor?
A "strip" of businesses along the length of US-1 6%
Businesses limited to certain pockets along US-1 3%
Let the market decide where businesses locate 3%
Other 3%
No opinion
The County should contain development to areas which
are already developed and have public service provision. In
planning Jargon, this is called "clustering." The County
should allow residential development to continue within
existing improved subdivisions. However, commercial and
industrial velspo�enofsh�oelpo itivaiaspectsareas
clusteringthey
already exist.
such development in the Keys include:
*minimizing the number of access points on US-1;
*maximizing public service provision;
*preserving existing open space;
*promoting infill of partially developed areas;
*promoting redevelopment of defunct structures;
*promoting "identity" of town center; and
*enhancing visual appeal from US-1.
POLICY DIRECi'ION
Monroe County should implement the "Land Use Concept
and
"commercial centers" shown on the Future
maps map desiwithin ting whichsaecific dditionalucommercial and industriadaries on the Future l
Use map with .
36
H
development can locate. certain of these areas are also
appropriate for higher density multifamily development,
which could meet the need for affordable rental housing -for-
employees of the nearby businesses. Overall, densities and
intensities should be increased in the urban cores,
commercial centers and redevelopment areas to offset some of.
' the density reductions anticipated in preservation and
rural/native areas. All permitted uses will be controlled
by the surrounding character of development (community
character); this premise will be carried into Question #18.
Eventually, design guidelines specific to each of these
areas may be developed to strengthen its visual character.
k
L
P
k
P
h
P
H
H
U
L
P
k
quzsTiox #17
What densities and intensities will the
show? should the existing zoning maps
Future Land Use .maps?
BACRGROUW
Future Land Use map
continue to serve as
The previous direction from the Board was to retain zne
existing zoning maps as the Future Land Use map. However,
densities and intensities were not specified on the map
itself, or in the policies pertaining to the map, as
required by 9J-5, F.A.C. objections C report
e or37)bjected to this
omission (ORC pp
POLICY DIRE%.WJ.0 i
The densities and intensities shown on the Future Land
Use map must reflect public facility capacity and all
carrying capacities. The County should not retain the
existing zoning map as the Future Land Use map, since it
.does not provide an accurate representation of the capacity
of public facilities to support additional development. The
Future Land Use map must provide Monroe County citizens with
a realistic guide upon which to base their development
expectations. Properties rendered unbuildable should
preferably
federal and state
agencies. No
considerationiser to begiveno avariabledensity
factor.
38
H
QUESTION #29
Will we link our future land uses to demonstrated need?.If
so, how shall we designate vacant land that is not necessary
to meet our future residential and non-residential needs?
HACXGROUND
The County is required by the state to analyze the
amount of vacant land needed to accommodate the projected
Population (9J-5.006(2)c). The gross acreage required in
each land use category, at stipulated densities, must be
calculated. As pointed out in the comprehensive plan,
existing subdivisions can easily accommodate the twenty year
residential_demand,..,with-a. sizabler--surplus_remaining-in_the
year 2010, even.at-historical-growth rates. The current
recession has. already-- af f acted the amount of -now -commercial
development in the County; current commercial vacancy rates
seem significant, although exact figures are not.available.
Therefore, vacant areas with commercial and residential
development potential have been over -designated, given the
anticipated demand at historical growth rates.
Given the national and local economic picture, the
' County should attempt to accurately portray the future land
development pattern to inform property owners of'actual
development expectations. Once a consultant comes on board
' and determines the most legally defensible method of tying
cost to development potential (whether environmental cost or
public facilities cost), then the protection of property
O rights may be addressed. Downzoning will likely take place
in some areas, which raises the issue of compensation.
Acquisition is one possibility; however, the solutions
cannot be determined before the problem is defined.
POLICY DIRBCT?ON
Future land uses must be linked to demonstrated need
and all carrying capacities and justification. The
designation of vacant land not required to meet future needs
will be achieved by the consultant, and will be based on a
legally defensible method of tying development potential to
cost, whether the cost of public facility provision, or the
cost of environmental degradation, and demonstrated by
applicant that need and justification exist. The
distribution of future land uses should provide owners of
land (vacant -and otherwise) with a realistic guide on which
to base their development expectations. The consultant
should make recommendations on land uses without negative
economic impacts. Properties rendered:unbuildable should be
purchased, preferably by state or- federal_agencies.
QUNMON 419
will we retain the Future Land Use Concept maps? Will we
link them to the Future Land Use maps?
BACKGROUND
The Plan adopted for transmittal to DCA did contain the ---
Future Land Use Concept maps; however, the Future Land Use
maps adopted by the Hoard did not relate to the Concept maps
at all. ObJ eCtives
contained inithespolicying to Document®ofConcept
maps are stillill
the Plan
(see pp. 2-119 through 122).
The series -of three Future Land -Use Concept maps _
provide° a general- overview •cf� e-future
f w ciatvaieiaQ intthe big
patterns.An-the-CountY; they
picture at--a-4g234nce: whieh-is_moMdiMcunLt:-t lial[edetoi --
nine separate -map sheets. They were qi
the Future Land Use maps presented with the 4th draft of the
comprehensive plan. (The BOARD.replaced the Future Land Use
map with the current zoning maps prior to transmittal to the
state.) The Concept maps are general, while the Future Land
Use maps were more specific.
The categories shown on the Future Land Use Concept.
the Technical
'■�
maps, and explained within the text of
14-38 through 14-42; see Map 14.2 in the
Document (see pp.
back of the Map Document), are outlined below.
* Each Key has an overall character designation, such as
Rural/Native or suburban, relating to the. future
magnitude. of future development,
population density and
*'Where appropriate, specific areas are designatedfor
commercial development which reflect the type
the adjacent population. in areas
necessary to serve
designated Urban and suburban, "Urban Cores" and
"Commercial Centers" depict these commercial nodes.
These nodes.already contain some commercial
development.
* Historic Districts are shown for four areas which
historical or archaeological
contain significant
resources. These resources must be protected; a
this-
preservation ordnance is proposed to achieve
* Redevelopment Areas were previously shown on the Future
deleted by previous
Land Use Concept maps, but were
Board direction. The original areas proposed,-contaia
d, in SOMO
substandard and noaacous��inTheY conctures tain most of
cases; non -conforms g also
the affordable housing in Monroe County. BY
40
H
L
u
H
0
U
fl
11
0
C�
U
L
designating these as redevelopment areas, the County
can improve.the value of the land through physical
improvements to the structures, the quality of life for
residents and the potential for receipt of federal and
state grants. See the question relating to
redevelopment areas for a more detailed discussion.
* A County Entryway is shown at the County line on US-1,
to define the actual entry into the Florida Keys. The
widening of the 18-mile stretch would allow the
establishment of a pull -off for cars and recreational
vehicles, which would serve as.an educational stop for
visitors. The placement of a kiosk with maps,
brochures and lodging information would allow visitors
to learn.. about eating, lodging, fuel and, recreational
opportunities, as well- as the. fragile _resourcea within_
the Keys. Coordination. with DOT, DNR and local_
• chambers of commerce is recommended.
The Future Land Use Concept maps promote the idea of
clustering development. This is a realistic and effective
way of continuing to most development expectations, while
maximizing efficiency of public service provision and
preserving tracts of open space. other benefits include
promoting infill of partially developed areas, encouraging
redevelopment of defunct structures, strengthening the
identity of certain Keys' "town centers," minimizing the
number of access points on US-1, and improving the visual
aesthetics of development along US-1.
POLICY DIRECTION
The County should retain the Concept maps and integrate
them into new Future Land Use maps which' accurately reflect
future population distributions, public facilities capacity
and the potential for future development.
r�
oomox #20
Will we adopt land use policies for - the Big Pine Key, North
Key Largo, Holiday Isle and ohio.Key ACCCs? Will these
policies address public facility provision; types,
densities, intensities of use; and protection of -
environmentally sensitive land?
BACKGROUND
B1q Pine Xs . The previous Board adopted, by motion,
the "3A" plan sponsored by CARES, overturning the Planning
Commission's recommendation for the "modified IA" plane -
since formatting and revisions oi_3A by the. consultant,
sedway Cooke;. the. plan is.currently being -reviewed by
citizen groups. The plan will be re -submitted -to -the Board
for adoption--approximatsly 3-4- weeks-afta=receiPt- from
citizen's groups.
North Key Lar o. The -North Key Largo Habitat
lt has
Conservation Plan has not yet reached
ce, but no
been submitted to the Planning commission twi
decision has been made. The inventory of acquisitions needs.
to be updated by the Growth management Division, and the
entire Habitat Conservation Plan re -submitted to the
Planning Commission within the next 90 days.
Holiday Isle. The 1990 Holiday .Isle ACCC Focal Point
Plan was submitted to and accepted by the Board last summer.
The Focal Point Plan will be adopted by the Board after
certain conditions have been met by the developer. As of
this date, all conditions have not been met.
Ohio Key. Development restrictions addressing the
allowab a uses within the Ohio Key ACCC are contained within
the current land development regulations. These regulations
adequately protect the resources within the ACCC, and will
be carried over verbatim into the proposed land development
regulations.
Both the DCA 163 and 380 review teams objected to the
omission of specifics regarding the ACCCs (ORC P. 12, #16;
p. 20, #21; p• 21, #23; p. 176, (dd)).
POLICY DIRECTION
The ACCCs must be addressed within the Comprehensive
Plan. The County must move forward and complete
cmic
and environmental carrying capacities as the basis to
finalize the Big pine
Key
e and North
edKey
FaLargo
lureplans
to if
fothe
comprehensive plan
these ACCCs will doom the plan to non-compliance.
42
H
H
U
QUESTION #21
The Future Land Use maps must show all future recreation and
redevelopment sites. Where will they be located?
BACKGROUND
The previous direction from the Board was to remove any
designated recreation and redevelopment sites from the
Future Land Use Concept maps, and the Future Land Use maps
contained in Draft 4 of the Plan. Any identified
redevelopment areas were also stricken from the analysis
portion of the element.
Rule 9J-5 requires the County to analyze the --estimated
gross acreage needed.for-future-land uses, including -
recreation, and to analyze the need for redevelopment. The
DCA objected to the omission of future recreation -sites on
' the Future Land Use maps, and the omission of an analysis of
the need for redevelopment in the County (ORC p. 33, #57;
and p. 179, (oo)). A brief discussion of.recreation
facilities and=-edevelopment areas is given below.
Recreation Facilities
Respondents to a 1990 survey were asked which, if any,
types of additional recreational facilities were needed in
the County. Seventy-four percent felt that additional
recreational facilities were needed; support was strongest
for bicycle/jogging paths, community parks and teen centers.
Of those respondents who felt additional recreational
' facilities were needed, sixty-seven percent felt user -fees
were the way to pay for the new facilities.
The County contains ample open space for passive use in
the form of water and low-lying mangrove areas, as well a&
thousands of acres of state and federal parklands.
Collectively, the County contains over 1.2 million acres of
designated recreation and open space, almost 23,000 acres
for each resident and visitor. This guarantees that the
level of service for these facilities, which is 3 acres per
1,000 persons, will likely never be exceeded._
However, local residents have been vocal about the need
for active recreation facilities for both their children and
themselves. The priority for older residents is continuous
bike/jog paths, while residents with children prefer active
recreation facilities (i.e., ballfields, picnic/play.areas,
community parks).
The following table sets forth the•existing County
active recreation facilities available to residents in the
three generalized areas of the Keys.
1990
Available Recreation
Region
Population
Facilities
Upper Keys
33,559
2
2
ballfields
play areas
Middle Keys
23,929
1
1
ballfield
basketball court
2.tennis
courts
Lower Keys 35,177 1 ballfield
i volleyball court
1 play area
While it.is acknowledged that schools in the upper and
Middle KeYs do allowed limited public use of their
and-somallowfor-
recreaticnal_facilitiesthe facteremainsnces that -A shortagelof
residents can be -made,
active recreation facilities exists in Monroe County.
The positive aspects of acquiring lands for future
recreation use include 4.ucreased. quality of life 'for
residents and, over timincreased
value the land
itself, as vacant land time,
increasinglyscarce
Although the acquisition costs could appear somewhat
formidable, funding is available from state and �ileathe
sources, as well as the County Land Authority.
image of the Keys is that
big
ceas�o minimallyound, the reality
is that many residents -do not have ac
adequate active recreation facilities.
The Comprehensive Plan reCcohmmIInds ext nine years,, as of land
for community park sites over
discussed in the Recreation and open space element
(Technical Document, pages 11-21 through 11-25), and the
Policy Document contains 3objectives
andideally, policies
these direccted
towards this end (pp. 2 9
sis
should be located in areas not presently served by any
recreation facilities. At a minimum, these acquisitions
should be adjacent to significant permanent resident
populations, be large enough for future expansion and should
to minimize vsitr influx
not have direct access :tos�aff�has identifiedislxopotential
into residential are s
parcels that could meet ethe
ofrequirements
parcelsnoted
has already The
process of acquiring
begun.
(11
a]
u
L
Redevelopment Areas
often, the word "redevelopment" is taken to mean
"demolition." This is not the case. it is always less
expensive to redevelop an existing site and buildings than
to demolish and/or start from scratch. Redevelopment
programs allow communities to integrate newer development
and planning concepts into already developed -areas which may
be experiencing elevated vacancy rates, be plagued by
substandard.or deteriorated structures or have other
community concerns, such as affordable housing. Some of
these concepts may be the provision of community green
space, pedestrian walkways, implementation of design
' guidelines or gradual conformance with setbacks and height
restrictions.
some of the positive aspects of redevelopment are as
follows:
*encourage infill development of under-utilized areas;
*designation within Comprehensive Plan improves potential
for federal and state grants for implementation;
*encourage elimination of non -conforming uses;
*encourage renovation of dilapidated or non -conforming
structures;
*allows provision of amenities not considered when
originally constructed (i.e., affordable housing,
recreation facilities, open space);
*prevent alteration or demolition of historic structures;
and
*improve visual aesthetics, for residents and visitors.
Four redevelopment areas were proposed in the fourth
draft of the proposed Comprehensive Plan, and were shown on
the Future Land Use Concept maps. These areas are Stock
island, sands subdivision on Big Pine Key, "The Rock" in
marathon and Hibiscus Park on Key Largo. All warrant
redevelopment consideration, but the concerns differ
somewhat. one common concern, however, is affordable
housing; all of these areas contain significant amounts of
■ the total affordable housing in the County.
r
POLICY DIRECTION
We must plan for future redevelopment and recreation
facilities based on established build -out and carrying•
capacities. Areas within the County which would benefit _
from redevelopment designation are: Hibiscus Park, "The
Rock", Sands subdivision on Big Pine Key and Stock Island.
Additional analysis should be conducted on each of these
areas, with policies written to foster the implementation of
redevelopment plans for each area. Future recreation
facilities must also be identified and shown on the Future
Land Use maps. Parcels which meet the necessary criteria
have been identified by staff on the following keys: Key
Largo; Plantation Key; Marathon; Big Pine; Lower Sugarloaf
and Stock Island.
3
46
L
oQUESTION #22
How will we "eliminate or reduce" nonconforming uses?
BACKGROUND
Nonconforming uses are defined in Section 9.5-4 of the
current land development regulations as "any use lawfully
being made of any land, buildings or structure, other than a
sign, on the effective date of this chapter or any amendment
thereto, rendering such use nonconforming, which does not*
comply with all of the standards and regulations of this
chapter, or any amendment thereto." The discussion here
focuses on nonconforming use, not structures, signs or lots.
' The Land Use element of the Policy Document contains
objectives and policies relating to nonconforming uses, as
required by 9J-5, F.A.C. However, the DCA objected to
Policy 1.1.1 (viii), page 2-119, as being inconsistent with
the intent of the other objectives and policies relating to
nonconforming uses. Subsection viii of Policy 1.1.1 shields
' uses which are incompatible with the designated laud use
from being labeled nonconforming. It contradicts -Subsection
ii of the same policy, in addition to Objectives 1.4, 1.5
and 1.6 and their related policies. Both the DCA 163 and
389 review teams found that these contradictions created an
internal inconsistency within the Plan.
' The purpose of -designating land use districts is to
establish areas of compatible uses. This protects property
values and protects residents from exposure to undue noise,
noxious smells or hazardous materials. The logical
compromise between an existing nonconforming use and the
predominant use within a land use district is to allow the
use to remain, but:
*prohibit its expansion;
*prohibit change to another nonconforming purpose;
*if abandoned, prohibit resuming the use; and
*if destroyed, allow reconstruction or reuse in
conformance with community character.
This safeguards the existing nonconforming use for the life
of the business or residence, but also provides for eventual
compatibility of uses within the district. It allows the
community to guide future development without denying an
individual the continued use of his/her property.
C
POLICY DIRECTION
The County should integrate the four provisions listed
above into the Comprehensive Plan, and remove any
conflicting language from the Policy Document, so as to
reflect the Commission's new direction.
a
L
I
H
I
F11
r
H
I
QUESTION #23
Which areas of the County will be TDR sender sites? which
areas will be receiver sites?
BACKGROUND
The county has a TDR program in place which addresses
the transfer of residential development rights in order to
protect environmentally sensitive lands. The TDRs move
freely among all land use districts, with no designated
receiver sites. ideally, the program should direct
development away from sensitive natural resources towards
less sensitive areas by stipulating those areas which may
receive TDRs, Both the public and.: the. developer benefit;
the former since service extension outside of urbanized
areas is minimized and fragile lands are preserved, and the
latter since the right to develop at a higher density than
allocated is granted.
The Technical Document of the comprehensive plan
recommends the designation of urban, -urban core and
redevelopment areas (shown on the Future Land Use Concept
maps) as receiver sites for TDRs, with all other Concept map
areas acting as sender sites. This strengthens the
objective of directing development toward developed, heavily
populated areas with greater infrastructure capacities, and
away from vacant and sensitive areas..
Discussions with the Land Authority uncovered some
problems with the existing TDR regulations. One, discussed
above, is the lack of designated receiver sites. The county
property appraiser should be informed as to receiver sites
so that taxes may be adjusted accordingly. A suburban
Residential parcel without development rights should be
taxed less than one which retains development rights, due -to
development expectations. Another problem is the difficulty
in monitoring partial and total transfers from parcels. The
current system includes fractional development rights which,
in the absence of a structured monitoring program, are
understandably difficult to track.
The Land Authority has been in contact with the Lincoln
Institute of Land Policy, a well-known urban and regional
planning "think tank." The former director, Dr. B. Chinitz,
is currently on sabbatical teaching at FIU, and has
expressed continued interest in assisting the County.. in
refining its TDR program. Provided funding assistance is
available from the state, the County should endorse this
effort.
The DCA objected to the omission of designated TDR
receiver sites within the comprehensive plan (ORC p. 175,
`I
J
objection bb), since they were refe
renced in the Concept
plan discussion.
POLIO_ t DIREC XON
A complete analysis of the status of the TDR program is
needed to identify weaknesses and potential improvements.
This analysis should include, at a minimum, a listing of
parcels from which development rights have been transferred,
confirmation that all appropriate deed restrictions have
been filed, and a tabulation of development rights already
purchased by the County. A few preliminary recommendations,
given the scenario presented under the Future Land Use
Concept maps, include designation of both sender and'
receiver sites for TDRs, expansion of the regulations
pertaining -to TORS to address transfers to and from
commercial_ zones, and a structured tracking program for
monitoring purposes. ---
50
11
H
H
H
LI
r
I
H
H
I
QUESTION #24
What is "affordabl
BACKGROUND
e
An affordable housing study was performed by the
Plantec Corporation for the County's Affordable Housing
Study Committee in 1987. subsequent meetings of
subcommittees have been held since then, with the latest
report dated January 1990. This report generally
recommended additional studies to answer those questions
posed..above.
Provisions for affordable housing are contained in the
current land development regulations. While these
provisions stipulate details about the actual parcel to be
developed for affordable housing, the question of the type,
location and quantity appropriate to the County is not
addressed.
Although policies addressing the provision of
affordable housing are contained in the Housing element of
the Policy Document, the DCA objected to the lack of
specific direction for attaining affordable housing in the
County (ORC pp. 45-46, #9; p. 49, #27).
POLICY DIRECTION
The provision of affordable housing within the County
must be addressed within the comprehensive plan. However,
the analysis of the Affordable Housing Task Force is
incomplete and does. not yet provide a basis for a decision.
at this point. The consultant should address the type,
location and amount of affordable housing needed to meet the
needs and deficiencies for the timeframe of the plan.
E
E
QUESTION 925
Do we want to collect the data necessary to perform land use.
planning, i.e., land use inventories, groundtruthed
vegetation inventories, water quality monitoring, marina
surveys, and inventories of existing sewer and drainage
facilities? Who will collect this information? Who will
pay for it?
BACKGROUND
state law requires that the county base its plan upon
the "best available data". Collection of new data is not
required. However, it has become obvious that the existing
data has limitations for realistic and responsible planning
purposes. In some cases, historic data are not available at
all; one example -is water quality monitoring information.
However, the state still requires the County to address
water quality concerns.
A 1990 survey showed that most County residents agree
that land use planning and control of development is
important to the duality of life here. In order to plan,
the County must base its decisions on adequate data.
Failure to do so will result in a plan that is not legally
defensible. Collection and analysis of data should be
conducted by both County staff and consultants. Where the
required analysis is beyond the professional expertise of
County staff, the County should rely on consultants.
POLICY DIRSCT 2N
Monroe County must collect the additional data needed
for land use planning. Collection and analysis should be
undertaken by both County staff and contracted consultants.
It will be paid for with a combination of state and local
funds.
(I
52
in r 11QV4 1 r : 56 C:0MM1_IN I T`r' F'ARTNERSH I P PR P . 02
_rw.
EMIIBIT C
MONROE COUNTY REMEDIAL ACTIONS
General Provisions
Pursuant to agreement among the parties, Monroe County shall
review and adopt the following remedial actions in order to adopt
a remedial plan that will be found by the Administration Commis-
sion to be "in compliance." These remedial actions include
policy directions and amendments to policy directions which serve
as the basis for the preparation of the revised Monroe County
Remedial Comprehensive Plan. The policy directions and amend-
ments to policy directions were derived from the Department and
Intervenors' review and comment of the twenty five preliminary
issue statements which were adopted by the Monroe County Board of
Commissioners on February 4, 1991 in its Comprehensive Plan
Policy Direction document. Each remedial action herein will be
comprised of two parts: a statement which embodies the policy
direction adopted by the Hoard, and an amendment to the policy
directions related to the adopted Board policy which the County
shall incorporate into its remedial plan. The "amendment to
policy direction" sections include revisions and changes to each
corresponding issue statement necessary to a finding of compli-
ance; those portions of the Board's policy direction not included
in the issue statement are rejected. Where no amendments are
1
included, the issue statement satisfactorily provides a basis for
preparing the revised remedial plan; where amendments are in-
cluded, the amendment supplements the policy and where there are
conflicts the amendment supersedes the policy direction.
Issue 1. population Growth and Carrying Capacity
- Establish population projections based upon public facility
and environmental carrying capacity analysis.
Revise Future Land Use Map to reflect densities and intensi-
ties of use which are based on this analysis.
Establish a permit allocation system that allocates new
units over the 20-year planning horizon.
Complete an economic analysis that compares the cost of
permitted (allowed) growth versus the cost of purchasing the
developable land.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The D®partment and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
in developing a growth management approach for Monroe County
that accommodates adequate levels of growth, the County must
direct growth away from environmentally sensitive areas and
toward areas with adequate public facilities. The carrying
capacity approach to growth management mast involve the identifi-
cation of natural and man-made limiting factors and shall be
1
e
based on such factors so that available capacity is not exceeded.
Environmental and public facility constraints are expected to
limit even the lowest population projections. The revised.reme-
dial plan must establish densities and intensities of use for
each land use category on the Future Land Use Map which reflect
the public facility and environmental constraints and the plan
must describe the methodology used. Further, include in the
remedial plan a permit allocation system to limit the rate of
hi
growth to levels which reflect infrastructure and environmental
limitations in relation to proposed land uses, including the
capacity of hurricane evacuation, to ensure that needed public
facilities are provided in a coordinated way, and to minimize the
adverse impacts of growth. The more restrictive of a public
facility carrying capacity and environmental carrying capacity
factor shall form the basis of the remedial plan densities and
intensities regardless of other public facility or environmental
constraints.
The remedial plan must include adequate standards for pro-
tection of natural resources and the Future Land Use Map (FLUX)
' must provide such protection. The remedial plan shall and ex-
pand, facilitate and improve the County's existing environmental
standards related to open space, habitat protection and protec-
tion of endangered and threatened species. The remedial plan
shall establish objectives for the conservation, use and protec-
tion t of wildlife and their habitat and restrict the activities
3
known to adversely
affect the survival of endangered and
threatened wildlife. The plan shall include target dates to
identify and complete studies to determine a "carrying capacity
for the environment" and shall state that upon completion of the
studies the plan will be
further amended to reflect its findings.
Further$ the plan shall develop and adopt strong water quality
standards for all new development and redevelopment and establish
requirements to retrofit existing sources of pollution. The FLUX
shall establish densities and intensities of use based upon
existing environmental constraints
identified in the plan'a data
and analysis. Any suggestion in policy direction that the plan
will not be based upon environmental constraints until the carry-
ing capacity analysis is completed is rejected. Also rejected is
the suggestion that the provision of wastewater treatment and
solid waste facilities is not a constraint
on the County'B capac-
ity.
issue 2. nurricaae Evaouation
- Inc?ude an objective and supporting policies to reduce the
1990 hurricane clearance time from 34 hours to 30 hours by.ths
Year 2000.
- To implement this objective include a policy establishing a
permit allocation system to control the annual rate of develop -
meet based on population growth-
4
�i
U l+ i — 1 — `_'� 1 I'1 U N 1 i =1 I_. LI 1'1 1.1 IJ IN 1 I r .--I . � c.. •� r.r . r . . . � . ..- ...
Amendment to policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Hurricane evacuation times in the remedial plan must be
maintained or reduced. The County shall revise the above objec-
tive and supporting policies to reduce or maintain hurricane
clearance times to reflect the results of on -going studies and
the best data available at plan adoption. in the data and analy-
sis section, identify the population at risk in a hurricane, the
population requiring public shelter and/or refuge, and the number
of approved shelter spaces currently available to Monroe County
residents. Additional objectives and supporting policies that
address the need to ensure the provision of approved shelter
spaces outside Monroe County capable of withstanding Category iYI
or stronger hurricanes and their associated storm surges for all
county residents who will require shelter must be included.
These provisions must be coordinated with the Department of
community Affairs' Division of Emergency Management, the south
1 Ficrida Regional planning County and Dade County. As a means of
reducing the 1990 hurricane clearance times, coordinate and
determine potential reserve hurricane evacuation capacity with
the Cities of Key West, Key Colony Beach and Layton.
I
Issue 3. Concurrency Management
E
Limit population growth and the densities and intensities of
use of the Future Land Use Map to levels consistent with the
county's ability to provide adequate public facilities.
Revise the level of service standards for potable water,
traffic and drainage (to be adequate and realistic, based upon
best available data and analysis).
Add a facility capacity standard to the solid waste level of
service standard.
Add design capacity and non-residential standards to the
sanitary sewer level of service standard.
Consider level of service standards for optional facilities
identified under Section 163.3177(7), F•So
Amendment to policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Include the remedial plan a concurrency management system
(cM5) that satisfies all the requirements of Rule 9J-5.0055,
F.A.C. For potable water, sevor, solid waste and drainage, Rule
9J-5.0055(2) (a)l.-4. must be met to satisfy concurrency. In
addition, the concurrency requirements can be met for parks and
recreation as specified in Rule 9J-5.0055(2)(a) and (b). The
county's concurrency management system may rely on transportation
6
OCT — 2, 1 f110N 1 8 : 00 C 0MM11N I TY PAR TNtKSH 1 t— r-rc r rests
facilities included in the first three years of the adopted FDOT
work program only when the provisions of 93-5.0055(2)(c)2.
through 9. are included in the cMS. Further, guidelines for
interpreting and applying the level of service standards to
applications for development orders and permits must be included.
IIssue 4. on -site Sewage Disposal Systems
1 - Regulate sewage disposal above and beyond the standards set
k
n
H
by the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS).
implement with interim and permanent standards.
Include a comparison between mechanical and passive systems
based upon performance, reliability and cost.
Base standards on environmental carrying capacity which
address nutrient loading and maintains the quality of nearshore
waters.
1
H
P
H
H
H
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Establish in the remedial plan interim standards for onsite
sewage disposal systems that meet or exceed the requirements of
the most recently adopted Rule of the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services for the Florida Keys. Include interim
standards for the type of system required, density, depth to the
F
7
M',
water table, location and other limiting factors to ensure the
protection of surface and ground waters. in the preparation of
the wastewater master plan described in Issue 5, the County shall
identify and evaluate the use of advanced onsite sewage disposal
systems and require the
use of those systems that are determined
to be most effective at removing phosphates and total nitrogen
from effluent, and which are determined to be suitable to Monroe
County conditions.
in addition, include in the plan provisions for on -site
inspection of septic tank systems, in conjunction with the HRS.
Include provisions to retrofit or connect to central sewer, if
available, improperly operating existing conventional septic
systems and cesspools through a phased inspection program in
order to ensure the abatement of these systems in the Keys by
1995. This program shall require all inoperative and malfunc-
tioning systems to be corrected, either by connecting to central
sewer, if available, or by providing a system that meets the
minimum standards for nutrient removal established by the County.
issue S. wastewater Disposal Master plan
policy adopted by Monroe County not included in February 4,
1991 policy Direction document.
The SOCC shall initiate discussion with the FM for the
preparation of a Wastewater Disposal Master Plan, and that the
scope of this master plan and the systems to be evaluated be
1
_ 1 1'I V ri 1 .3 k) 1
K determined by the BOCC. The BOCC shall also provide a time cer-
C�
I
C
Ld
L
P
Ll
C
C'
tain for when these discussions would begin in order to address
concerns contained in the ORC with respect to the timing of the
sanitary sanitary wastewater Master Plan Study.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and intervenors concerns with the above
policy statement, subject to the following:
Include in the remedial plan a provision for the County and
the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, or other appropriate central
sewer authority, to jointly prepare and implement a wastewater
management plan which will address central sewer, package plants,
alternative on -site systems, or some combination thereof. The
wastewater management program shall consider a fully integrated
approach to water management from the wellhead in Florida City to
final use and disposal.
The wastewater management plan must determine the areas
where central sewer systems are necessary and identify a stable,
long-term funding source capable of guaranteeing the implementa-
tion of the plan. The wastewater plan shall utilize existing
federal 201 studies in identifying high density areas of the
County where central sewer may be needed. Include in the remedi-
al plan an objective and supporting policies which provide a
commitment to fund and complete a wastewater management study
9
:a.
prior to 1995. The remedial plan should be amended in 1995 to
include the recommendations of the wastewater management plan.
The plan shall demonstrate how the County will coordinate the
development of the wastewater management plan with the Florida
Keys Aqueduct Authority, the Department of Environmental Regula-
tion, and the Environmental Protection Agency. in the develop-
ment of the plan, incorporate the water quality objectives and
standards, including nutrient removal standards for central
sewer, which are to be developed and included in the Florida Keys
stational Marine Sanctuary Program.
=slue 6. stormwater Master Plan
Complete engineering studies for a stormwater master plan
which include an assessment of existing drainage conditions and
identification of potential engineering solutions.
Utilize the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
grant.
Initiate within the next year so that the Master Plan can be
completed prior to 1999.
Amendment to Police Direction
The Department and intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Include in the remedial plan an objective and supporting
policies which address specific provisions for funding and
10
3
UCT PiN 1 8 02 C 0MM1_IN I TY F-FiR 1 NtKSH 1 t' t K
completion of engineering studies for a 5tormwater Master Plan.
The plan shall shorten the timeframes established by the Board in
the policy direction for complu.ing the study by at least one
year. The remedial plan must be amended after completion of the
master plan to include and implement the recommendations of the
stormwater plan. Further, establish a stable, long term funding
source, such as a stormwater utility, for implementing the storm -
water master plan. The engineering studies must assess existing
natural and manmade drainage conditions, preserve natural drain-
age features and specify engineering solutions to existing
deficiencies. include an objective and supporting policies to
correct existing deficiencies and provide for future facility
needs.
Include in the remedial plan an interim drainage level of
service standard for all development and redevelopment which
addresses water quality and quantity. Levels of service stand-
ards to ensure that existing drainage conditions, natural drain-
age features and water quality must be adequately addressed.
Adopt and implement a stormwater management ordinance in the land
development regulations which reflects and implements the provi-
sions of this agreement, including the use of Beat Management
Practices for single family development. The interim level of
service standards established in the plan shall govern until the
development of the stormwater management ordinance.
U
1 - + 1 rqU
Issue 7. potable Water
Develop and encourage the use and re -use of water other
than Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FM) for non -potable water
uses.
Ensure that potable water supply will be sufficient to meet
demand:
a) change the potable water level of service standard
(Loss) for per capita water provision to a level that more
accurately reflects both permanent and seasonal population usage.
This Loss shall be developed jointly by the County, South Florida
Water Management District (sFWMD) and FKAAs
b) seek an interlocal agreement with FKAA regarding
allocation reserved for unincorporated Monroe County;
c) seek equal representation on the SFWMD Hoard and equal
consideration in water allocation;
d) seek sate, viable, alternative water sources and make
provisions for their use in the County's land development regula-
tions.
Amendment to policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Coordinate the preparation of the potable water sub -element
with the south Florida Water Management District and FM to
12
OCT .' 1 -•7�, 1 MON IS : 03 QQMMUN I TY PARTNEKSH 1 r- t-'K r i +
achieve consistency among the water use assessments in the
remedial plan and the County consumptive use permit. Explain in
the Potable water Element how the provision of potable water will
be linked directly to the proposed future land uses and how
Monroe County will ensure the availability of potable water
concurrent with development (recognizing that the FKAA is already
nearing the cap for maximum water withdrawal specified by its
consumptive use permit).
The use and reuse of alternative water as set forth in the
issue statement herein must be consistent with environmental
considerations. Prohibit the use of waterwells as an alternative
water source. Waterwells deplete precious groundwaters resources
which adversely impact the Key Deer.
Include in the remedial plan potable water levels of service
standards for all residential and non-residential development.
The leve
l of service standard shall address minimum design flow,
storage capacity, and pressure for potable water facilities.
Data should be provided regarding water use of residential and
non-residential use. A historical base of 5 years of data is
recommended unless an alternative methodology is shown to be
comparable.
Establish in the remedial plan two levels of service
standards for potable water as recommended by the South Florida
Water Management District. The first should reflect existing
13
levels of service based on historical water use data. The second
would reflect existing historical patterns of water use adjusted
to recognize expected future reductions in water use and imple-
mentation of water conservation strategies, as well as changes in
water use due to Chang®s in the mix of residential and non-resi-
dential consumption consistent with the Future Land Use Map, as
revised. In developing the level of service standard for pota-
ble water that reflects conservation efforts a methodology
should be agreed upon by the County, VKAA and the SFWMD. ,
Establish in the remedial plan raw water peak or maximum
day LOSS, as well as treated water peak LOSS for infrastructure
design purposes as recommended by the District. Sub -analysis of
raw water usage (residential/nonresidential; seasonal/permanent)
should be compiled and translated into a raw water average annual
day flow LOSS.
Further, the plan shall demonstrate how the County will
coordinate the potable water demand and supply with the cities of
Key West, K®y Colony Beach and Layton.
issue 8. Pater Conservation
- Revise the level of service standard for potable water to a
per capita consumption rate the reflects water conservation
efforts and that uses a methodology agreed upon by FKAA, SFWMD,
DCA and the County.
14
�C T- 1- 1 M 0 H 1 8: 0 5 - n M M U N I T Y PA R T N E R S H I P P R P 1 6
Establish policies to enact permanent irrigation regulations
that limit lawn landscape irrigation, or form an agreement with
FKAA to implement such an ordinance.
Establish policies to revise the landscaping guidelines and
land development regulations to enact more comprehensive xeri-
scaps policies. This would mandate proper placement of landscape
material, water conserving irrigation practices, landscape main-
tenance, and establishment of a monitoring program for code
implementation and compliance.
- Change the regulation for low volume plumbing fixtures to
require ultra -low volume fixtures. All new and replacement
construction should have plumbing fixtures installed to meet the
following standards at 80 The per square inch.: toilets, 1.6
gallons par flush; shower heads, 2.5 gallons per minute; fau-
cets, 2 gallons per minute. The County will also limit the sale
of new toilets, shower heads, and faucets to meet the standards
set herein.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Include in the remedial plan the recommendations from the
finalized water conservation report prepared by the south
Florida Water Management District (SF WMD). Also, include poli-
cies supporting implementation of leak detection programs by
I 1s
M(
utilities with unaccounted water losses greater than 10%, as
well as policies identifying implementing programs to encourage
public education of year round water conservation.
Issue 9. Solid Waste
Continue to reduce the solid waste stream. A volume
reduction site should be constructed at Crawl Key. A method that
not only reduces volume but also recovers resources should be
sought. To further conserve its disposal capacity, the County
should improve the volume reduction rate to greater than the 95%
currently achieved, if technologically possible.
- Achieve the State mandated recycling goal of 30% by January
1, 1995. The County shall also improve its recycling rate beyond
that mandated by the State. it haulout is chosen as a long term
method of solid waste disposal, the contract shall include
incentives for recycling to ensure the county achieves its
recycling goal.
Coordinate the provision of solid waste with the City of Key
West and include a requirement for an interlocal agreement with
the City of Key West to process lower Keys solid waste.
Provide for an alternate means of disposal that does not
depend on conventional landfills by the year 2001. Crawl Key and
other sites should be considered, as well as the haulout of the
residue formed after volume reduction.
16
OCT- 11 moN IS : OS i:OMMI_IN I TY PARTNERSHIP PR P. 18
Reserve some capacity in disposal facilities, either in the
Ke oe cudjY landfill or an alternative disposal site, for
temergencies.
1 Amendment to POliay Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Include in the Solid Waste Sub -element a landfill facility
capacity analysis for the five year plan increment and for the 20
year planning timeframe established in the plan. Establish in
the remedial plan a proce
ss and time frame for narrowing the
list of present policy options for the provision of solid waste
facilities to include a specific action strategy. The County
shall achieve the recycling goals mandated by the state and
region by January 1, 1994. Recognize that under chapter 403,
F.S., Monroe County is responsible for providing solid waste
disposal and recycling for all the residents of Monroe County,
including residents of the municipalities.
Use peak population figures in the Solid Waste Element needs
assessment and explain the relationship with waste Management,
Inc., to transport solid waste out of the county. Also, address
' the following additional issues:
(a) what the county will do with its remaining waste stream;
and
17
I
(b) the question
of sludge disposal including the need for a
sludge treatment plant needs to be resolved and other alterna-
tives for short-term processing need to be explained; and
(c) the question of hazardous wastes must be more adequately
discussed. The County must begin immediately to develop a
strategy for managing of hazard
ous wastes; and
(d) strategies for source reduction, including education of
the population to choose products which reduce the volume of
solid waste in the source; and
(s) the question of continuing environmental impacts of
existing landfills.
issue 10. Recycling
Develop an RFP for all viable methods of recycling within
the parameters of the law -
Fund and implement a mandatory, variable rate, curbside
recycling program, countywide, as soon as possible, but at least +i
by 1994. 3
Begin negotiations immediately with the seven garbage col-
lection franchises in the County so that a decision
regarding the methods, facilities, possible phasing, and
staffing or contracting for recyalables processing can be made
within the next six months.
if the County chooses to handle recycling in-house, proceed
to build the proposed Materials Recycling Facility on Crawl Rey•
18
i
']CT — 1 —fie 1 �tON 1 8 1 COMMUN I TY PARTNERSH I P PR P. 0 1
Either reestablish the cou nty's recycling goal of 40$ or
increase the percentage further.
1 Issue 11. Traffic Level of Service
- Adopt a FLUX that recognizes non -development generated
traffic.
- Adopt a level of service standard "C" for U.S. 1, per the
interim criteria.
1 Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Densities and intensities on the Future Land Use Map shall
be based on the four lane limitation on U.S. 1 as described in
' the amendment to Policy Direction for Issue 12.
Include in the remedial plan the revised methodology in the
Task Force Report on U.B. 1 Level of Service in Monroe County as
tapproved by FOCA and FDOT. The revised methodology may be used
for the purposes of the preparation of the comprehensive plan and
land development regulations; however, additional procedures for
traffic assignment and forecasting should be developed for use in
the concurrency management system. Further, the total reserve
capacity and calculation of dwelling units should be adjusted
based on additional traffic data collected. The annual
19
L
adjustment shall be used to determine the cumulative impact of
development approvals and non -development generating traffic,
including tourist impacts and Key West generated impacts.
Further, a Systematic traffic monitoring program should be
established, and the total reserve capacity and calculation of
dwelling units should be adjusted based on additional traffic
data collected. Moreover, implementation of the methodology and
the monitoring system must take into consideration the county-
wide traffic impacts of growth, as well as impacts from non -
development generated traffic. Trips generated on U.S. 1 by
growth in the cities must be included in the methodology, and be
considered in the county -wide mechanism must be identified to
ensure coordination between the County and its three incorporated
cities in the allocation permits.
The plan shall require shared driveway access to U.S. 1,
minimum curb cuts and other access management measures.
Issue 12. Four Laning Q.B. 1
Include a policy to limit V.s. i to four lanes.
Reduce densities and intensities of use on the Future Land
Use Map to provide a realistic guide on which to base development
expectations.
20
OCT 1 -,�- 1 MON 13 : 1 3 i::: OMMUN I T`t PARTNERSHIP PR P . 03
1 I . .
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Include in the comprehensive plan a policy to retain the
existing two lane highway in undeveloped areas of Monroe county;
however, exceptions should be considered where roadwa
y expansions
are scheduled or planned in the FDOT five-year work program and
are consistent with the environmental policies of the comprehen-
sive plan. Define and identify these undeveloped areas to in-
clude those areas where physical or environmental constraints may
' affect the four-lanin of US
g .. 1.
I$su• 13. Development in the Coastal High Hazard Area
- Limit development in the Coastal High Hazard Area through
the overall reduction of density in the county and by prohibiting
new or expanded facilities and/or development in designated
Coastal Barrier Resources Area (COMM) and undisturbed saltmarsh
and buttonwood wetlands.
Strengthen Policy 1.4.2. on page 2-122 which links addition-
al subdivision plats to a demonstrated need to prohibit the
platting of new subdivisions.
21
V 6.r 1
- -� i
� i
1' 1
...J � 1 i v � a •...
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above pc?icr
statement, subject to the following:
The remedial plan shall revise the definition and correctly
identify the coastal high -hazard areas to include those areas
included in the Category I Storm Surge Impact Areas as identified
by the SLOSH Model.
The remedial plan shall discuss the Federal Coastal Barrier
Resources System and its impact on the type and rate of develop-
ment that will be allowed in designated areas in the Conservation
Element, as well as provide a map of the specific location of
these areas designated by this system.
In addition to prohibiting new or expanded facilities and/or
development in undisturbed saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands as
stated in Issue 13, the plan shall strictly limit development
densities and impacts in all saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands,
including disturbed wetlands and in all areas of the county with
natural characteristics which render land unsuitable for develop-
ment. The remedial plan shall define and identify disturbed
wetland areas, as well as include objectives and supporting
policies to protect, conserve and enhance remaining coastal
wetlands.
22
�I
O C T-` 1-F4 1 N O N 1 3: 1 4 COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP PR P. O 5
In cases where the provisions to prohibit development in
designated COBRA and saltmarsh and buttonwood wet
lands would
render all private property unbuildable, the County shall utilize
an expanded transferable development rights program to ensure a
Oreasonable and beneficial use of land. Additionally, the County
shall utilize all available public (federal, state and local) and
private acquisition ro rams.
P g
The remedial plan shall describe the method for County
coordination with the Monroe County Land Trust to increase public
and private acquisition of environmentally sensitive lands.
IsBue 14. Development in Baltmarsh and Buttonwood Wetlands
Monroe County should not allow development in undisturbed
saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands.
Amendment
to poliop Direotion
The Department and Interve
nors concur with the above policy
tstatement, subject to the following:
Prohibit the replacement of existing mangrove or riprap
shorelines, including canals, with vertical bulkheads unless it
can be demonstrated that the mangrove or riprap will not suffi-
ciently control erosion. This recommendation would not prohibit
23
k
the construction of docks for water access nor allow the altera-
tion of undisturbed shorelines.
Prohibit development in wetland areas and strictly limit
development in saltmarsh and buttonwood areas, except nonstruc-
tural development associated with passive recreation. This
prohibition shall not apply where TDR's or other economically
viable use of private property would not exist.
Analyze and estimate in the Coastal Management Element the
need for water dependent uses including commercial fishing,
public access, etc., and specifically reserve through land use
designations and zoning regulations environmentally suitable
undeveloped waterfront areas for water dependent uses, which does
not include residential uses or hotels.
Reflect the best available data for the identification and
accurate classification of wetlands in the conservation Element.
to cases where the provision to prohibit development in
wetlands would render all private property unbuildable, the
County shall utilize the use of an expanded transferable develop-
ment rights program to ensure a reasonable and beneficial use of
land. Additionally, the County shall utilize public and private
land acquisition programs.
24
k
OCT - 2: 1 - 1 MON 18 : 15 c-_OMMUN I TY PARTNERSHIP PR P . 07
C
Issue is. Linking Development to Water Quality
- In 19910 implement the coordination of a monitoring network
and map water quality trends on a GIS.
Link development decisions to water quality by hiring recog-
nized professionals to develop a carrying capacity in order to
achieve compliance with F.S. 380.021 and the Federal Clean Water
Act.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
The implication in the policy direction that Monroe County
cannot link development decisions to environmental concerns until
data is available to prove that water quality degradation has
occurred in the Keys as a direct result of existing development
is rejected. The conclusion and the presumption that Monroe
County must prove a linkage between water quality problems and
existing development in order to reject development proposals is
also rejected. Furthermore, the Department has serious doubts
as to whether Monroe County can develop a definitive "environmen-
tal carrying capacity" for the Florida Keys.
The remedial plan must include objectives and supporting
policies to minimize development impacts to water quality. The
provisions must provide potential solutions for all sources of
25
cumulative development pollution including, but not limited to,
stormwater run-off; wastewater from cesspools, septic tanks
p p ,
small treatment (package) plants, large treatment plants, and
live -aboard vessels; mosquito control; pesticides; landfill
Xeachate; suspended sediments from land development and boating;
heavy metals in leachate from boats and dock pilings; petrochemi-
cals from boats and crab traps; and other assorted debris and
litter. Include criteria in the remedial plan and land develop -
meet regulations to ensure issuance of only those developments
which will not result, either individually or cumulatively, in a
significant degradation of water quality.
Coordinate the development of a water quality monitoring
program with the Department of Environmental Regulation and
Environmental Protection Agency. Include in the Coastal
Management Element a map of the Florida Kays National Marine
Sanctuary and commit Monroe County to coordinating with the
federal government in water quality management and other
objectives.of the sanctuary.
Issue 16. Land Development Pattara
Implement the "urban cores" and "commercial centers" shown
on the Future Land Vse Map where additional commercial and
industrial development can locate (these areas may be appropriate
for higher density multifamily development, which could meet the
need for affordable housing).
26 3
OCT- 1-- 1 M O N 1 a� 1 i COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP PR P 09
Densities and intensities should be increased in the urban
cores, commercial centers and redevelopment areas to offset the
density reductions anticipated in preservation n and rural/native
areas.
- permitted uses will be controlled by the surrounding charac-
ter of development (community character).
Design guidelines for these areas may be developed to
strengthen their visual charact
er.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the followings
The policy direction of implementing the "urban cores" and
"commercial centers" as shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
adopted shall not govern in the development of the remedial plan.
The Future Land Use Concept Maps are not supported by adequate
data and analysis required by Rule 9J-50 F.A.C. These maps
should be superseded by the product that results from this
agreement.
The county should utilize the cluster/node concept but re-
vise the location for cluster/nodes on the Future Land Use Map,
consistent with environmental and public facility constraints.
The revised FLUX shall ensure the maintenance of existing
27
H11
OCT-? 1 -9 1 MON 1 S: 1 7 r-op:mUN I TY PARTNERSHIP PR P. 10,
community character, the compatibility of adjacent uses, the
protection of natural resources, and ensure adequate sites for
affordable and employee housing.
Issue 17. Densities and Intensities of Land Use
- Densities and intensities shown on the Future Land Use Map
must reflect public facility capacity and all carrying capaci-
ties.
The county should not retain the existing zoning map
as the Future Land Use Map, since it does not provide an accurate
representation of the capacity of public facility to support
additional development.
- The FLUX must provide Monroe county citizens with a realis-
tic guide upon which to base their development decisions.
Properties rendered unbuildable should be purchased, prefera-
bly by federal and state agencies.
- No consideration should be given to a variable density fac-
tor.
Amendments to policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the followings
Development expectations velo ent a ectations as reflected on the Future Land Use
Map must be consistent with the ability of the County to provide
28
O C T- 1- 1
M O N 1 8: 1 3 COMMUNITY P A R T N E R S H I P PR P. 1 1
L
H
P
U
i
H
n
I
LI
I
HIT,
required public facilities and services while protecting natural
resources. Property rendered unbuildable shall be assigned
transferable development rights or purchased by public and
private funds. The County must assess the impact of, and justify
the elimination of, variable densities from the plan. Under the
County's current TDR system, variable densities are an integral
component of a viable TDR program that maintains or reduces
densities consistent with environmental and public facility
limitations.
The Future Land Use Element of the remedial plan, including
the densities and intensities on the FLUX shall be consistent
with and facilitate the continued and expanded implementation of
a transferable development rights program. Identify and limit
development densities and intensities in areas which are identi-
fied as habitat for endangered or threatened species. only allow
development to the extent that it is demonstrated to be consist-
ent with the continued viability and recovery of threatened or
endangered species. The future land use element shall also
identify and describe (in terms of their suitability
for development) hardwood hammock areas for which the FRAA is
prohibited from serving critical habitat by the Endangered
Species Act and lands where development potential is constrained
by the Federal Coastal Barrier Resources Act.
OCT-2 1 -9 1 MON 1 8: 1 9 COMMUN I TY PARTNaRSH I P 7-K t' i
LI
Issue Is. Linking Future Land Use to Demonstrated Need
Future land uses must be linked to demonstrated need and all
carrying capacities and Justification.
- Designation of vacant land not required to meet future needs,
will be based on a legally defensible method of tying development
potential to cost, whether cost of public facility provision, or
the cost of environmental degradation, and demonstrated by the
applicant that need and justification exist.
The distribution of future land uses should provide owners
with a realistic guide on which to base their development
expectations.
- Consider land uses with regard to negative economic impacts.
- Properties rendered unbuildable should be purchased, prefera-
bly by state or federal agencies.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Projected growth as reflected on the FLVM must be consistent
with the County's ability to provide the required public facili-
ties and services while protecting natural resources. Proper-
ties rendered unbuildable should be purchased, or assigned
transferable development rights. The future land uses in the
remedial plan shall not result in negative impacts to the County
and the policy direction shall not be construed to mean that in
30
I
IDCT 1 -9 1 NON IS : 1 •? COMMUN I TY PARTNERSH I P PR P. 13
no case can
the plan result in a reduction of market value of
individual properties or to mean that each parcel of land must be
buildable in order to have economic viability.
1 Issue 19. Retaining the Future Land Use Concept
- Retain the concept maps and integrate them into new Future
Land Use Maps which accurately reflect future population distri-
bution, public facility capacity and the potential for future
development.
1 Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the followings
The County may retain the cluster/node concept but shall re-
vise the location for each cluster/node on the Future Land Use
Map to reflect relevant data and analysis, and environmental and
public facility constraints identified in the revised goals,
objectives and policies in the remedial plan. The existing
concept maps shall not govern the remedial plan.
F
H
31
u
Issue 20. Areas of Critical County Concern (ACCC99)
Address the Big Pine Key, North Key Largo, Holiday Isle and
Ohio Key areas of critical county concern (ACCC) by completing
the economic and environmental carrying capacities as the basis
to complete these plans.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Include in the remedial plan of the Future Land Use Element
the required focal point plans or specific goals, objectives, and
policies to adequately address the special needs of the critical
areas, to include the purposes and planning components described
in Section 9.5-477 (a) (b) and (d), MCC, regarding the North Key
Largo ACCC; Section 9.5-478, MCC, regarding the Ohio Key ACCC;
Section 9.5-479, MCC, regarding Sig Pine Key ACCC; and Section
9.5-480, MCC, regarding Holiday Isle ACCC. The County shall
reject Scenario 3A of the Siq Pine Key Focal Point Plan in the
development of the remedial plan.
issue 21, Recreation Facilities and Redevelopment Areas
The plan shall encourage redevelopment within the County
taking into account established buildout and carrying capacities
based on environmental and public facilities constraints.
32
OCT -2 1 --,=+ 1 r-10" 1 8:= 1 COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP PR P. 1 5
Target the following areas for redevelopment designation
including but not limited to Hibiscus Park, "The Rockif, Sands
subdivision on Big Pine Key and Stock Island. The redevelopment
plan shall provide additional analysis of each areas, with poli-
cies to foster the redevelopment plans for.each area.
Provide for future recreation facilities based on the densi-
ties established in the FLUM. Future recreation facilities must
be identified and shown on the Future Land Use Maps.
Amendment to Polioy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
g
The plan must demonstrate how proposed redevelopment is
based on the ability to provide the required public facilities
and services in a manner consistent with environmental and
' public facility constraints.
LMonroe County staff have identified parcels of land which
are potentially suitable for recreation uses based upon criteria
discussed in the preliminary policy direction document. Include
in the remedial plan criteria for determining which areas are
suitable for recreation facilit
ies. The proposed criteria must
' address the environmental sensitivity of the site, as well as
the ability to meet recreational needs.
I
33
7
91
Issue 22. Non -conforming Uses
- The
plan shall include policies
for the reduction or elimi-
nation of non -conforming uses which address t::= following:
a)
prohibit the expansion of non -conforming uses;
b)
prohibit changes to another
non -conforming use;
c)
prohibit resuming abandoned
non -conforming uses; and
d)
if non -conforming structures
or uses are destroyed,
require reconstruction or reuse be in conformance with
comprehensive plan and land development regulations.
Issue 23. Transferable Development Rights
- Complete an analysis of the status of the TDR program in
order to identify weakness and potential improvements. This
analysis should include, at a minimum, a listing of parcels from
which development rights have been transferred, confirmation that
all appropriate deed restrictions have been filed, and a tabula-
tion of development rights already purchased by the County.
Preliminary recommendations including designation of both sender
and receiver sites, expansion of the regulations pertaining to
TDR's to address transfer to and from commercials zones and a
structured tracking program for monitoring purposes will be
considered.
I
34 1
I
OCT 1 --�4 1 MON 1 8: =2 COMMUN I TY PARTNERSHIP PR P. 17
Ci
C�
H
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Include in the remedial plan programs to facilitate the
continued and expanded implementation of the transferable devel-
opment rights program or other appropriate planning techniques to
provide an economically viable use of land which will be limited
by density restrictions in the remedial plan. This program is
one of many alternative methods the County can utilize to achieve
the objectives of the remedial plan.
In the development of the TDR program, receiving sites
shall be in areas that are most suitable for development. The
purchase of TDR's must increase densities suf
ficiently that the
use becomes financially attractive for developers. Provide for
an underlying range of densities in the receiving zones at a
level to encourage the use of TDR's. Further, the regulating and
permitting process must have sufficient integrity to assure
developers that if they pay for the rights, they will be able to
build at the higher densities. In preservation area, permitted
density on -site must be sufficiently low enough to adequately
provide for preservation. TDR should be mandatory on lands
designated for preservation.
L
35
OCT - 2 1 -`3 1 MON 1 8 : 23 COMMUN I TY PARTNERSH I P PR F' . 1 0
Use of
the Monroe
County Land
Authority as a
bank to pur-
chase rights
and serve
as a buyer
of last resort
for development
_
rights a sort of insurance to landowners - by providing a
market for rights under adverse circumstances will facilitate the
process. The Land Authority should also act as a "facilitator"
Of the program, i.e. as an information source and problem solver
to head off problems as a TDR program is implemented. The analy-
eis of the program must also focus on reducing regulatory com-
plexity and improving developer's confidence that they will be
able to use the rights.
Issue 24, Affordable Housing
Address the provision of affordable housing within the coun-
ty. The data and analysis should be prepared addressing the
type, location and amount of affordable housing needed to meet
the needs and deficiencies for the time frame of the plan.
Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Revise the goals, objectives and policies in the remedial
plan to reflect the analysis in the Housing Element based on the
best data available at the time of plan adoption. Through the
36
OCT 1 - 1 NON i S: j:�OMMUN I TY PARTNERSH I P PR P. 1 9
0
Objectives
� es and policies, rely on a thorough analysis to identify
and evaluate the county's housing characteristics and redevelop -
went areas.
Issue 25. Preparing Data Inventories
- Collect the additional data needed for land use planning.
Collection and analysis shall be undertaken by both County staff
and contracted consultants.
1 Amendment to Policy Direction
The Department and Intervenors concur with the above policy
statement, subject to the following:
Establish in the remedial plan that platted lots in improved
subdivisions must meet concurrency requirements (as well as all
other plan requirements), recognizing that they may be vested for
density. Include a provision to allow individual lot owners to
demonstrate on a case by caste basis that the development of their
lot is vested for density pursuant to Chapter 163, F.S. and
existing M.C. Code s. 9.5-181.
1 Monroe County shall adopt in its remedial plan restrictive
vesting provisions allowed by law. The plan shall create a
procedure for establishing vested rights from the provisions of
the new plan, except for public safety matters to include devel-
opment orders having previously received, proceeded and relied in
37
OCT-._• 1 -9 1 MON 1 8 : __4 ::oMMUN I TY PARTNERSHIP PR P . -0
L
good faith upon major developmsnt and DRI approval by Monroe
County and the State of Florida. Any development which is deter-
mined to be vested from the plan provisions, including une con -
currency requirements, will not be required to provide the facil-
ities to meet the concurrency provisions but instead will be
treated as committed development, for which the county will
assure concurrency.
For major developments, Monroe County shall establish spe-
cific vesting procedures which include, but are not limited to,
an inventory of vested major developments existing as of the date
of plan adoption; a determination of the extent of vesting status
as well as identification of specific time -frames for completion
of major development projects determined to be vested; clarifica-
tion that major developments determined not to be vested must
meet all requirements of the new plan, including concurrency; and
provide that projects, where a claim of vested rights has been
made, must within a time certain seek a vested rights determina-
tion or lose its vented rights status altogether.
collection of additional data shall meet the requirements of
Chapter 163, F.S., Rule 9%T-5, F.A.C. and Chapter 380, F.S.
Revise the existing land use map series to depict the fol-
lowing resources and describe their general suitability for
proposed land uses;
a) freshwater lenses;
38
I
13CT MON 1 8 __5 C'0MMUN I TY PARTNERSH I P PR P 1
b) hardwood hammock areas for which FKU is rohib
p ited from
providing central water hookups;
c) other critical habitat protected under the u.S. Endan-
gored Species Act; and
d) lands whose development would be constrained by the
Coastal Harrier Resources Act.
Include a table showing acres of land for each existing and
future land use category. Identify the
amount of commercial and
industrial
land allocated under the new
plan.
New sssus-
Intergovernmental Coordination
Monroe
County did not address this
issue in their
preliminary
policy direction statement.
The Department and the
Intervenors
are adding the following to
the settlement agreement.
LI
r
r
H
Include in the Intergovernmental Coordination Element a
discussion on intergovernmental coordination and state oversight
as critical components of the ACSC designation and to explain in
detail the purpose and intent of the designation.
Include a thorough analysis of existing problems in Monroe
County which require significant intergovernmental coordination
efforts to resolve, including: land and water management;
water quality issues; solid waste disposal; sanitary sower col-
lection, treatment and disposal; on -site sewage disposal;
H
39
OCT-? 1 -9 1 MON 1 8 OMMUI� TY RARTNERSH I H
natural resource protection; affordable housing; traffic circula-
tion; and hurricane evacuation.
Provide in the "needs and cipport::nities" section of the
Intergovernmental Coordination Element a more detailed analysis
and potential solution to:
-the need for internal consistency among plan elements;
-the need for increased intergovernmental coordination with
the City of Key west on hurricane evacuation, transportation,
potable water and solid waste issues;
-the need for increased intergovernmental coordination with
the South Florida Regional Planning Council concerning card Sound
roads, regional and inter -jurisdictional issues, including, among
others, hurricane evacuation and solid waste management;
- the need for increased intergovernmental coordination with
HRS on regulation of OSDS to minimize impacts on natural re-
sources;
-the need for increased intergovernmental coordination with
DER on water quality issues;
-the need for increased intergovernmental coordination with
DNR on establishing f'green line" areas and the marine sanctuary
program;
-the need for increased intergovernmental coordination with
DOT on transportation issues, especially V.S. 1; and
-the need to include relevant federal agencies in these
discussion.
40
I
II
C
OCT 1 -9 1 MON 1 3: 2 6 17-OMMUN I TY PARTNERSH I P PR P. 23
- the need for increased intergovernmental coordination with
Dade County on issues including hurricane shelter space, the
widening of the "18-mile stretch" tretch of V.S. 1, and improvements to
Card Sound Road.
Provide in the discussion of the ACSC designation an expla-
nation of:
-whythe
county feels that the Department of Community
Affairs' application of the principles for guiding development
has not been effective;
-why Monroe County suggests that the conflict between stat
e
and local government is based on differences of statutory inter-
pretation;
-how the application of Chapter 380 might be revised;
- which provisions of the law are currently being
neglected; and
-what avenues Monroe County will pursue to ensure a nonad-
versarial approach to problem -solving with the state.
Provide in the discussion of the ACSC designation suggested
resolutions to the list of current outstanding disputes relating
to the ACSC designation,
include in the Intergovernmental Coordination Element goals,
objectives and policies the following:
-specify what coordinating mechanisms will be established;
-specify XbU actions, programs and activities will be
41
O C T 1- 9 1 M O N 1 8: C 6 C O M M U N I T Y
undertaken by Monroe County to improve water quality;
-specify how interlocal agreements with the DCA? HRS and DER
will hcl- to improve their effectiveness in Monroe County;
-specify LW annual meetings with federal, state, regional
and local agencies with regulatory authority in Monroe county
will improve intergovernmental coordination;
-specify how Monroe County will coordinate with Dade County
to reduce the current deficit of hurricane shelters available to
Monroe County residents;
-specify = Monroe County will improve communication with
the cities and state within the context of the ACSC designation;
-specify how Monroe County will ensure the implementation,
monitoring and evaluation of the Monroe County comprehensive Plan
with the plans and programs of other agencies=
-commit Monroe County to assist the Monroe County Land
Authority in identifying its role in the implementation of the
plan and its role in coordinating activities of private and
public land acquisition in Monroe County;
-commit Monroe County to establishing formal agreements with
the U.S. Department of interior, U.S. Department of Commerce
(NOAA) and the state to monitor water quality and recreational
use of the Florida Say and Everglades National Park, and land and
marine sanctuaries and refuges, in addition to the county's bays,
estuaries and harbors?
-state that once the land development regulations are adopt-
ed, staff will establish procedures to ensure that all comprehen
49
I
L
']CT 1 ;ION 1 3 : =7 COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP PR P . 2M
7
7
i
A
sine pla
n n amendments and land development regulation amendments
are reviewed for consistency with the adopted plan and minimum
state laws and rules.
Include a policy that pursuant to the Evaluation and Moni-
toring section of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element
changes to the plan's goals, objectives, and policies will be
made based on an analysis of their implementation.
NOW Issue - Use Transit Element; Port, Aviation, and Related
Facilities Element
The County shall follow the minimum requirements set forth
in Rules 9J-5.008 and 967-6.o09.
43
'A
EXHIBIT "0"
MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONALSEFMCES
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this 17th day of June
1991 by and between the MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Monroe County, Ronda referred to as the "CLIENT", and Wallace Roberts & Todd, also
identified as "WRT, with office located at 191 Giraida Avenue, Coral Gables, Florida.
33134, hereinafter referred to as the "CONSULTANT.
oWHEREAS, the CLIENT has determined that it is necessary,
interest of the CLIENT to retain a CONSULTANT to rend perform consulti
ng g b�
other professional. services _ in connection with the revision- and amendment: of=its
Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Chapters 183 and 380, Florida Statutes and the s
naiyses and regulations associated therewith.
WHEREAS, the CLIENT desires to engage the CONSULTANT on a contract basis, work assignments as per the authorization procedures hereinafter set forth.for
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do mutuallyagree as follows:
�E�710N 1 E�4AP t�vMENT OF THE Qnwct n rawer
The CLIENT hereby engages the CONSULTANT and the CONSULTANT agrees to
perform services hereinafter described.
SECTION 2. -SCOPE F SERVICES
The CONSULTANT shall do, perform rm and carry out in a professional and proper manner
certain duties related to the preparation of a Comprehensive Plan and related studies,
regulations and implementation tools. Such work shall be carried out in the following
phases of effort each of which shall be subject to specific work assignment.
Phase 2 Plan Preparation
Work assignment number two is defined as Phase 11 - Plan Preparation - Basic Scope of
Services - Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part of this agreement.
Additional phases described as follows will be carried out after completion of Phase 2 in
accordance with schedules of performance and scopes of work which shall be mutually
agreed to by CLIENT and CONSULTANT.
I ,.
Phase 3
Implementation Tools
Phase 4
Special Research Tasks
Phase 5
Plan Refinement
Phase 6
Implementation Tool Refinement
The CLIENT shall do the following in a timely manner so as not to delay the services of
the CONSULTANT.
3.1 Provide ad best available data and base maps as to the CLIENTs
requirements for work Assignments and designate in wrO9 a person wdt".
authority to act an the CLIENTs behalf on au the Work-
AssignmervL -
3.2 Furnish to the CONSULTANT all existing plans studies, reports, and other
available data pertinent to the work described in Exhibit w, and obtain or
provide additional reports and data as required by the CONSULTANT. The
CONSULTANT shad be entitled to use and rely upon such information and
services provided by the CLIENT or others in performing the
CONSULTANT's services under the Work Assignment.
3.3 Arrange for access to and make all provisions for the CONSULTANT to -
enter upon public and private property as is ressonabiy required for the
CONSULTANT to perform services hereunder. Any obstruction to such
access by private property owners shall not constitute a basis for waiver of
any other required entries on to public and private property, nor shad it
provide a basis for termination of the contract. In the event that such
access is so obstructed, CONSULTANT and CLIENT shad work together to
resolve the difficulty in a timely manner.
3.4 Perform such other functions as are indicated in Exhibit W Including but not
limited to arranging ad meetings and hearings associated with the
performance of the CONSULTANT's work, including preparation of minutes
and records.
The services to be rendered by the Consultant shad be commenced upon written notice
from the CLIENT and the work shad be completed in accordance with the following
schedule, unless it shad be modified by the mutual consent of the CLIENT and
CONSULTANT.
•2-
1,
1111
j
7
H
PHASE 2 - PLAN PREPARATION: Submit Draft Comprehensive plan on or before -
December 31, 1M.
SUBSEQUENT SERVICES shall be performed in accordance with schedules of
Performance which shall be mutually agreed to by CLIENT and CONSULTANT.
The CLIENT agrees to pay the CONSULTANT on the basis of a not to exceed sum of
SEVEN HUNDRED AND TWENTY-SEVEN THOUSAND, EIGHT HUNDRED DOLLARS
($727,800) for the Basic Scope of Work identified in Exhibit "A8, including all direct
expenses associated therewith.
Additional services, including but not limited to data generation and tasks
and meetings. -those s .. work ed an
CONSULTANTS h � � � A • shall be reimbursed based on
CO sum � rates with direct expense reimbursement accost: or as additional
p Payments as may be mutually agreed by CLIENT and CONSULTANT.
Subsequent phases of this assignment include:
Phase 3 Implementation Tools
Phase 4 Special Research Tasks
Phase 5 Plan Refinement
Phase 6 Implementation Toot Refinement
Compensation for Phases 3 through 6 shall be determined as may be mutually agreed
by CLIENT and CONSULTANT following the completion of Phase 2, Plan Preparation.
Minor Reimbursable Expenses include
courier a enses, charges for telephone calls, facsimile ch
Copying, mail, airport parking, and other miscellaneous items with costs
generally less than $25.00 per item.
Major Reimbursable Expenses and other significant expenses including b n limitedar �' holel room charges and meals,
related to the performance of the work9 to maps, studies and documents
per diem rate currently Consultant shall be reimbursed for meals at the
mly prescribed by Florida statutes.
SEC170N 6 PAYMENTS To CON4t n T NT -
6.1 CONSULTANT shall submit periodic invoices for services rendered by the
CONSULTANT and Subconsultants based on the following schedule of
milestones consistent with the BASIC SCOPE OF SERVICES,. EXHIBIT "A".
11 -3-
Task Series Fee
2.0 PLAN ORGANIZATION $40,000
2.1.1 DATA ASSEMBLY 8 ANALYSIS S243,000
2.2 ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTS $184,000
23 DRAFT PLAN ELEMENTS $235,800
2.4 PLAN ADOPTION BY SOCC S Z'i,000
�P7k:v;-
Summary Working Paper 1
(Task 2.0.5)
Summary Woricmg Paper 2
(Task 2.1.13)
summary working Paper 3
(Task 22.10)
Draft Plan (Tasks 2.3.1
If fougi 2.U)
Pion AdopWn
The CLIENT. shad make payments in response to CONSULTANTS
statements withM forty4" (45) days.
re Plan, the
Upocr- adoprioe--•of_ tfw_ Monroe -C3"tmty Cbrnprehena'n
CONSULTANT shad provide the CLIENT with a fud computer crick copy of
Me Plant.
6.2 It the CLIENT faits to make any payment due to the CONSULTANT for
services and expenses within sixty (GM days after receipt of the irrsoice, the
CONSULTANT may, after giving seven (7) days written notice to the CLIENT
suspend services until the CONSULTANT has been paid In full all amounts
due for services.
7.1 All Wont a=gnments beyond or in addition to EXHIMT W shall be
authorized In writing in accordance with the CLIENTS policy poor to any
worts being conducted by the CONSULTANT. AU=, 'triton shalt bs on the
form dedneswi as subsequent exhibits attached hereto and made a part of
this Agreement.
7.2 Additional autho izatia w may contain additional instructions or provisions
speWc to the authorized work for the purpose of clarifying certain aspects
of this Agreement pertinent to the work to be undertaken. Such
supplemental instructions or provisions shad not be construed as a
modern of this Agreement. AuthorQaaons shall be dated aW Serially
numbered.
,Sj=ON B. COST_MNTROL
8.1 The CLIENT's budgetary requirements and considerations in. respect of the
Work Assignments shall be sec tooth in said Work AssigrurienL
C
I
I
I
.4-
L
E
G
rl
r
H-
I
I
0
i
j
7
8.2 Opinions of probable construction cost; financtal evaluations, feasibility
studies, economic analyses of - alternate concepts, and utilitarian
considerations of operations and maintenance - costs prepared by the
CONSULTANT under the Work Assignment will be made on the basis of the
CONSULTANT's best judgement as an experienced and qualified
professional.. It is recognized, however, that the CONSULTANT does not
have control over the cost of labor, material, equipment, or services
furnished by others or over market conditions or contractor's methods of
determining their prices, and that any utilitarian evaluation of any fa
cility to
be constructed or work to be performed on the basis of the Work
Assignment must be of necessity speculative until completion of its detailed
design. Accordingly, the CONSULTANT does not guarantee that proposals,
bids, or actual casts will not vary from opinions, evaluations, or studies
sad by the CONSULTANT to the CLIENT thereunder.
SEM7Q 9 NOTIrng-
All nonce requests and authorizations provided for herein shall be in writing and shall be
delivered or mailed addressed as follows:
To the CLIENT. Monroe County Division of Growth Management
SM Jr. College Road, Wing 3
Key West, FL 33040
Attention: Robert Herman
Director of Growth Management
To the CONSULTANT. Wallace Roberts & Todd
191 Giralda Avenue
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Attention: John E. Fernster, AIA
Partner
or addressed to either party at such other address as such
r fumish
to the other party in writing. Each such notice, request, or authoorization shall ety shall edeemed
to have been duty given when so delivered, or, if mailed, when deposited in the mails,
registered, postage paid.
B=ON 10 GENFAe� ranNSlnrn.1,...
10.1 All documents created or prepared by CONSULTANT and which are
necessary for the fulfillment of this agreement, including reproducible copies
of original drawings, estimates, specifications, field notes, and data are and
-5-
C
remain in the property of the CLIENT. In the event the CLIENT uses said
documents on any projects not covered in this contract, it shad indemnify
and save harmless CONSULTANT -from ad damages, including legal fees
and costs; resulting from the reuse of said documents.
10.2 - This Agreement may be terminated by either party with or without cause by
thirty (30) day's written notice to the other party. In the event of any
termination, CONSULTANT will be paid for all. services rendered and
reimbursable expenses incurred to date of termination.
10.3 The CLIENT and CONSULTANT"each is hereby bound and the partners,
successors, executors, administrators, and legal representatives of the
CLIENTand CONSULTANT (and to the extent -permitted by paragraph 10.4
the assigns at -the CLIENT and CONSULTANT) are hereby bound to the
other party of-this:Agreement and to the partners, successors, execx =,
administrators, and legal representatives (and said assigns) of such other
party, in respect of all covenants, agreements, and obligations of this
Agreement.
10.4 The CONSULTANT shad not assign, sublet, or transfer any rights under or
interest in (including, but without limitations, moneys that may become due
or moneys that are due) this agreement or subsequent Work Assignment
without the written consent of the other, except to the extent that any
assignment, subletting, or transfer is mandated by law or the effect of this
limitation may be restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary
in any written consent to any assignment, no assignment will release or
discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this
Agreement. The CLIENT hereby acknowiedges and approves the following
subconsuitants:
Barton•Aschman Associates, Inc.
Keith and Schnars, P.A.
Price Waterhouse
Haben, Culpepper, Dunbar & French, P.A.
Henigar and Ray
Horsley Witten Hegemann, Inc.
Post Buckley Schuh & Jernigan
Special Legal, Technical and Eftronmental Speclaiists
This subconsultant list shad be amended only upon written consent which
may be mutually agreed to by CLIENT and CONSULTANT: The use of the
listed subconsultants by CONSULTANT shah not be considered an i
assignation, subletting, or transferral at rights otherwise preclUded by this
-6-
[1
L�
Li
0
iJ
j
it
j
F1,
10.5 Nothing under this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or
benefits in this Agreement to anyone other than the CLIENT and
CONSULTANT, and all dunes and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to
this Agreement will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of the CLIENT and
CONSULTANT and not for the benefit of any other party.
10.6 This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between CLIENT and --
CONSULTANT and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings,
This Agreement- may only be amended, supplemented, modified, or -
canceled by a written instrument duty executed. by the Monroe County
Board of County Commissioners and the CONSULTANT, provided that the
scope of services may be modified by a written a
Director of Growth M greemant wmcxtted by the
Section 7 of this Agreement.aManagement and CONSULTANT, consistent- with
10.7 CONSULTANT" warrants that he has note 1
Company or person, other than a bona fide employed or retained any
loyee working solely for the
CONSULTANT to solicit or secure this Agreement and that he has not paid
or agreed to pay any person, company, corporation, individual, or firm,
other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT any
fee, commission• percentage, gift, or any other consideration contingent
upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement
10.8 In the carrying out of this Agreement, CONSULTANT will not discriminate
against any employee or applicant for employment because of s
ex, race
creed, color or national origin. In carrying out this Agreement,
CONSULTANT will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are
employed, and that employees are treated during employment without
action shalt
regard to their sex, race, creed, color, or national origin. Such
include, but not be limited to, the following: Upgrading, demotion or
transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination; rates
of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including
apprenticeship. CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places,
available to employees and applicants for employment, such notices as
may be provided by the COUNTY setting forth the provisions of this non-
discrimination clause.
10.9 This Agreement shall be governed by the Laws of the State of Florida
10.10 CLIENT and CONSULTANT acknowledge the expectation to prepare a
landmark plan and CONSULTANT further acknowledges its intent that a.
substantial proportion of its professional efforts in the preparation of the
Comprehensive Plan shall be by its Consulting Partner, WilliarrrH. Roberts _ and it's Partner -in -Charge, Sohn Femsler and that efforts by said individuals
D
7-
shouid approximate 25 - 300/6 of CONSULTANTS' labor.
-+"tLei ► ► :; Y, I . 2-. 1•
The CONSULTANTdoes hereby consent and agree to indemnify and hold harm{ess the
County, its Mayor, the Board of County Commissioners, appointed Boards and
Commissions, Officers, and Employees, and any other agents, individually and
collectively, from all fines, suits, claims, demands, actions, costs, obligations, attorneys
fees, or liability of any kind arising out of the sole negligent- actions of the CONSULTANT
or substantial and unnecessary delay caused by the willful nonperformance of the
CONSULTANT and shall be solely responsible and answerable for*any and all accidents
or injuries to persons or property arising out of its performance of this contract under the
provisions and up to the limits of liability as stained in section 768.28 F.S., as if the
CONSULTANT wero an agency or subdivision of the State. The amount and type -of
insurance overage requirements set forth hereunder shall in no way be cc, stroedas
limiting the scope of indemnity set forth in this paragraph:- The County does hereby
covenant and agree to indemnify and save harmless the CONSULTANT -from any fines,
suits, claims, demands, actions, costs, obligations, attorney fees, or liability of any kind
resulting from a negligent act or omission by the County, its Mayor, the Board of County
Commissioners, appointed Boards and Commissions, Officers, and Employees,
individually and collectively under the provisions and up to the limits of liability as stated
in section 768.28 F.S. Further, the CONSULTANT agrees to defend and pay all legal
costs attendant to acts attributable to the sole negligent act of the CONSULTANT.
At ail times and for all purposes hereunder, the CONSULTANT is an independent
contractor and not an employee of the Board of County Commissioners. No statement
contained in this Agreement shalt be construed so as to find the CONSULTANT or any
of his/her employees, contractors, servants or agents to be employees of the Board of
County Commissioners for Monroe County. As an independent contractor the
CONSULTANT shad provide independent, professional judgment and comply with all
federai, state, and local statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations applicable to the
services to be provided.
the CONSULTANT shall be responsible for the completeness and accuracy of its' work,
plan, supporting data, and other documents prepared or compiled under its obligation for
this project, and shad correct at its expense all significant errors or omissions them
which may be disclosed. The cost of the work necessary to correct those errors
attributable to the CONSULTANT and any damage incurred -by the County as a result of
additionai costs caused by suan errors shall be chargeable to the CONSULTANT. This
provision shall not apply to any maps, official records, contracts, or other data that may
be provided by the County or other public or semi-public agencies.
The CONSULTANT agrees that no charges or claims for damages sha-i`be made by it for
any delays or hindrances attributable to the County during the progress of any portion
.a-
r
Of the services specified in this contract Such de or h'
, shabe-
compensated for by the County by an extension of time for a reasonable to period for the
CONSULTANT to complete the work schedule. Such an agreement shall be -made--
between the parties.
SECT70N 1 INSt 1pANCE POHriF-q
The CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain a standard General Liability Insurance
Policy and a Professional Liability insurance Policy in a minimum limit of $1=,000 in
coverage on each policy. The County shall be named on the General Liability Insurance
Policy as an additionally named insured and shown on the insurance certificate provided
to the Courrty by the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT- shad provide the County a
certificate of Professional Liability Insurance coverage. The CONSULTANT shad o-.
Procure and maintain a workman's compensation policy and -hold the __
from all claims arising thereunder. Nothing herein shad. be c onstr ued to-t
of indemnity set forth above. The certificates shalt provide that if the policies are canceled
' by the insurance company or CONSULTANT during the term of the Contract, thirty (30)
days written notice prior to the effective date of such cancellation will be given to the
Director of Management Services.
0
11
C
1 -9-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to be
executed on the 1 7th day of \ / LA..,A� -- , 1991.
Signed,�seaied and delivered in the
preseaal�l•
r
Attest: OA1�Y�' Clerk
App as to -legai sufficlency:
II P
RylWftness
MONROE COUNTY
ey:
� 0 ,&..
Wilhetrnma Harvey, Mayor
DATE: June--17, 1991
By:
John Fernster, AIA
P er
-10-
E
1
EXHIBrr'A'
BASIC SCOPE OF SERVICES
MONROE COUNTY COIMPREHENSWE PLAN
20 PLAN ORGANIZATION
20.1 Annotated Review of Plan and Related Docsanecas
The Purpose of this task is a comprehensive assessment between and among the current
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan (January, 1991), the requirements of Chapter 163
and 380.055Z FS, the ORC Report, the Comprehensive Plan Preliminary Policy Dkec tj0n
adopted Februarys 4, 1991 and the work tasks and planning methods to be pursued by
this work program: Spey, the prePare-an-annotated outbne of the
Revised Monroe County Comprehensive-Ptem r, ngs referenc*ng the requirements of 163
(and 9J-5) and 380. This task will also identify information required to.address issues in
the ORC in the manner prescribed by the Preliminary Policy Direction. in addition
reference will made of comments received from governmental agencies (SFRPC) and
interest groups and organizations (1000 Friends).
' 202 Resoittiian at Fkdjay Issues
In order to complete the Comprehensive Plan, decisions on policy and methodology are
anticipated to be required from the County Commission. As a result of discussions- with
County staff and others, some issues requiring Board direction have been identified.
These include, but may not be limited to:
• Sanitary Sewer Master Plan (Policy #5)
• Determination of Threshold forcential sewer service
• Potential interim capital expenditure resulting from a Stipulated/Compliance
Agreement
The Consultant will, describe the policy direction needed including as appropriate a
discussion of options and possible consequences in a brief working paper to be
presented at one County Commission meeting. The importance of this task should be
noted. Without this policy direction, neither the Consultant nor staff are provided with a
basis on which to frame the GOPs for these unresolved policy elements as required by
Chapter 163 F.S.
20.3 Intergomxaiatat Agency Input
The Consultant will assist County staff in initial and on -going discussions with key
agencies, namely the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCAj, the South Florida
Regional Planning Council (SFRPC) the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) and the
A-1
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). Up to seven (7) meetings will be
held with other govemmentafagenaes including approximately three (3) with DCA.
2-0.4 Citizen/UtbKM Group Input
The Consultant will assist County staff in obtaining input from key citizen interest groups
including but not limited to 1000 Friends of Florida, the Nature Conservancy and -other -
groups that may have specific comments and suggestions concerning the planning
process. Up to three such meetings will be held.
= S Summary Worbn9 Paper 1
• tiz nr_I tI,• _'• .1 • I•i 1 ••1• • - t • 1 • • _ • _ • = r 1•n •
1 - •II •1= - '• •�•1 1•.� .;�'• c • 1 - • • - t'7c1 ♦_ •-1 • 1 • 7 I 1 r 1:.= • _ _ 11 •� _,.•
21 PL M PR8IARATiOM
The purpose of this phase is to prepare in an expeditious manner, consistent with existing
available or readily/ obtainable data, a draft, updated Comprehensive Plan. Plan elements
to be updated include those contained within the Monroe co = Comprehensive Plan,
1990-2010. (January, 1991). In*additn, two elements not included in the current plan are
to be addressed: Mass Transit and Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities. The following
scope is outlined pursuant to the requirements of SJ•5 F.A.C., but it the intent that the
data collected will address the requirements of both Chapter 183 and 380 F.S. It is
acknowledged that there exists an adopted and acceptable 3W plan and that no
substantial changes or other work related to 380 Issues is necessary. This proposed
scope could be included in a Compliance Agreement between Monroe County and the
State of Florida Department of Community Affolm-
The Plan is intended to follow the policy directives mandated by Monroe County
Commission and to respond to the ORC report of the Florida Department of Community
Affairs. White it is recognized that concerns exist regarding environmental carrying
capacity in Monroe County, much of the data base necessary to establish a quantification
of environmental carrying capacity may not be readily available within the schedule
established for the preparation of a draft Comprehensive Plan. In the absence of
supporting docxunentation certain plan elements may identify methods and procKdtres
to conduct and interpret the necessary research and to make subsequent plan revisions -
Unless noted to the contrary for each element, all Consultant work tasks will utilize best
available data, formatted to meet Consultant specifications and time requirements,
provided by staff. AN base . mapping will be based upon the County's existing 1:2000
scale base maps. - Peron maps will be prepared at this 1:200Q scale, and maps
prepared for Inclusion in the draft Plan and any idendfied reports wilt be at this scale on
A-2 -
C
r
U
U
u
Photographically reduced maps_. Where data is inadequate to meet 9J-5 or other
requirements,- County staff or the Consultant, will where noted, generate such data.
Alternately, where new data is noravadaWe in a timely fashion; plan elements may
be made in "plan - for -a -plan" fashion wherein the plan elements may identify sped
research tasks necessary to generate pertinent data and
Procedures for plan revisions to in ��� and also' identify
corporate such data and analyses.
SUMMARY OF PRODUCTS
Using the best available data and the County's draft plan,- the Consultant will prepare and
deliver a revised plan pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan PreliminaryPolicy cy Direction
rection
adopted by the Co
unty Commission on February 4, 1991; Chapter 3W FS; Rule 9J-5,
FAC; and the Department of Community Affairs• Objections, Recommendations and
Comments (ORC) Report 7Tie-plan-will be based on a pubiic.factifty carrying mpacdy
and will establish-t rk for. u cap�y ttirnately inoorpocatirtg an environmental c�anying-
A total of five (5) format presentations/workshops to the Board of County Commissioners
is included in this Scope of Services. Meetings/presentations include two in the inventory
and Analysts Phase, tiro in the Aft rnative Concepts/Concept Selection Phase, and one
final presentation at transmittal of the plan.
In addition, the Consultant will provide the County with 15 (fifteen) copies of all interim
reports, technical memoranda, summaries, etc. prepared in this Scope of Work. The
Consultant will provide i (one) photo -ready original of the draft Final Comprehensive Plan.
The Consultant will provide one (1) final set of black and white mylars and one (1) final
color -rendered print set of each map series to be prepared.
The purpose of this phase is to document existing conditions and trends to identify any
infrastructure deficits or surpluses that currently exist, and to determine those areas that
' may be constrained by environmental or public facility service factors related to carrying
capacity. Included in this phase are the following subtasks:
2.1.2 Eldstincl d Use Using the County's 1:2000 scale existing land use base
map, supplemented by data generated by the County Property Appraiser's
Office, 1991 FOOT aerials and a staff -conducted gn�und-tnrttting/field
venfic�ort, 9enerafized land uses and natural resource features shalt be
depicted on the existing land use map series. Existing land use acreage
and density shall be presented in tabular form (9J-5.006(1) (a) through
Vacant and undeveloped lands will be analyzed to terms of both the natural
A-3
constralimiting the intensity of use, and naturai features enhancing the
use, of the area . In addition, the land use analysis will address the
redevelopment potential of identified blighted areas, and the elimination of
uses intent with both the community character and existing uses.
Specific Tasks:_
i. The Consultant will confirm with County staff and DCA the land area to be
included in the Comprehensive Plan. For the purposes of preparing this
Scope of Work, the Consultant has taken preliminary direction from County
staff, and is assuming the following with- respect to: the land area to be
inchtded:.
• - The Mak tan&: The mainland area of Monroe County will be treated
as directed by OCA in its-WWr of -January 22;1SW to the Cbuncy.
This indicates therdetailed mapping and analysis of the area will not
be required in the planning effort: Accordingly, the mainland will not
be addresses in doted, and the Future Land Use Map will show the
federaiiy-owned mainland portion of the County as "Conservation."
Ot'tshore islands: eased upon preliminary direction from the County
staff, the revised Plan will address offshore islands greater than 10
acres in sae which are in private ownership. DCA agreed to this in
its December 10, 1990 meeting with County staff. Other islands will
NOT be mapped as part of this planning effort The Consultant will
define a work program for completing an inventory of these islands.
As part of this subtask, the Consultant will confirm these assumptions with
County staff and DCA. In addition, agreement will be reached on the
number to be used for the land area of Monroe County. This will require
investigation of the range of acreage numbers available from such sources
as Federai, State, regional and local government agencies. The Consultant
wig make a recommendation regarding the total land area for County review
and approval.
ii. County staff wiii complete a ground-tnMng/field verification mapping and
inventory exercise to verify the existing land use patterru, water -related and
water -dependent uses and public access pourts/faciifies to the beach or
shoreline, including an inventory of those uses identified that are iocated
widlin the CHHA as defined by the Category 1 storm surge SLOSH model.
The number of multifamily units will also be identified. Indications of
housing cx=to will be provided for areas identified by County staff prior
toAhe field exWcise. The purpose of this min vise wig be to augment the
A-4
C
C
P
L
h
I
I
r
P
k
N
data derived from the Property Appraiser's office, the 1991 FOOT aerials
and the County's existing land use map.
The Consultant wiil prepare a base map for use in the revised
Comprehensive Plan. The base map data, unless noted, will be the same
as those used in the previous Plan, however, the format will be revised to
reduce the total number of sheets in each map series. Offshore islands as
indicated in 2.1.21. above will be included. The scale of the maps will be
1' = 2,000'. The original myiars will be designed for black-and-white/blueiine
reproduction. One set of colored presentation prints will be prepared as
indicated. All presentation maps will be prepared at this scale. Maps to be
reproduced for any reports or for the Plan will be photographically -reduced
versions of the 1:2000 map series. Mapping will be done using a three -step
procedure:
1 • The Consultant will prepare a draft land use map series from the
Existing Land Use map series (January 1991).
2. Using the draft maps prepared above, the County will verify the land
use information, and include additional information not previously
recorded as listed in the tasks below.
3. After completion of the County staff field check and data collection,
the Consultant will prepare the map series.
iv. Using the data generated in task 2.1.2.11. above, as well as the existing
1:2000 scale Existing Land Use Map series, the Consultant will map existing
land use to depict the following generalized uses: residential, commercial,
industrial, agnCultuizi, recreational, conservation, educational, public
buildings and grounds, other public facilities, vacant or undeveloped land,
and historic resources.
V. The Consultant will map natural resources as a task in the Conservation
Bement (2-1.11). As required by 9J-5.006(1) (b), the following natural
resources will be indicated on the Existing Land Use map: existing and
planned waterwells and cones of influence; beaches, shores and estuarine
systems; . rivers, bays, lakes, floodplains, and harbors; wetlands; and
minerals and soils. Data to be used for mapping will be obtained from
existing data, provided to the Consultant by the County.
vi. Using existing best available data, the Consultant.wiil map the generalized
land uses for the adjacent portions of the City of Key West, the City of
Layton, the City of Key Colony Beach, Dade County, and Collier County.
L
m
C
vii. The Consultant wiii tabulate the gross acreage and the general range of
density/intensity for the gross land area for each of the generalized land
uses listed above in task 21.21v. Data to be used for this task will be
generated by the County based upon information provided by the Property
Appraiser's office for commercial and residential land uses by type, size and
location.
viii. Using the inventory of existing factli m generated in both the Traffic
Ctraulation Element and the sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage, Potable
Water, and Natural Groundwater Recharge Element, the Consultant will
conduct an analysis of the sufficiency of these services to provide for the
0,1ostirtg land uses described in task 2121v., as well as for land uses for
which development orders have been issued.
ix. Using the 19 K Platted Lands Survey, including any available updates -
FOOT aerials, and any other appropriate data, provided by the County, an
qualitative lend use analysis; of the vaunt and undeveloped land identified
in task 2.1.2.iv. will be undertaken by the Consultant. This analysis will
consider soils, topography, natural resources, and historic resources.
Potential environmental constraints such as the presence of identified rare
or- endangered species, wetlands, - vegetation, and potential for on -site
sewage disposal (OSDS) will be identified. These data will be depicted by
the Consultant on the Existing Land Use map series to indicate the
suitability for development of the identified vacant land.
X. The Consultant will evaluate the areas five areas (including Big Coppitt Key)
previously identified by the County as redevelopment areas. The evaluation
will rely on data generated from the Property Appraiser's office and existing
land use and adjacent community character. The evaluation of the need for
redevelopment will address a) renewal of blighted areas: and b) elimination
or reduction of uses inconsistent with the community's character and
proposed future land uses. _
The consultant, working with County staff, will develop the policy framework
for the potential redevelopment areas that will set the stage for the
preparation of Chapter 163 Redevelopment Plans. Findings of New►
will not be prepared for the identified redevelopment areas under this scope
of work.
xi. Constraintsto development/redevelopment imposed by FEMA requirements
and the CHHA as determined by the Category.1 SLOSH Model will be
identified by the Consultant. The CHHA will be depicted on the Existing
Land Use Map series.
A-6
C
[I
Ci
h
P
D
H
U
I
I
C�
LI
H
Data Sources: 9 County's Existing Lanct Use map series
• Property Appraiser's Data: commercial land use by lot,
location, type and size, residential land use by type, age -end
location
• Platted Lands Survey (1984), with any updates
• Ground-truthing/field verification by County staff
• 1991 FDOT aerials
• Area of Critical County Concern reports: North Key Largo,
Holiday Isle/Windley Key, Ohio Key and Big Pine Key
• The Coastal High Hazard Area as defined by the category 1
SLOSH model, and mapped by USACOE/Post Buckley Schuh
& Jernigan. The CHHA line determined by this model will be
used during the ground-butiming in this task, as well as for the
inventory of the existing public to in other tasks.
• Monroe County Comprehensive PIM-1990-2010 Ted>nic,w--
Document
Products/ Deliverables:
• Revised Existing Land Use Map series
• Revised Natural Constraints Map series (incorporating elements of Existing
Vegetation and Wildlife Habitats Map series, and Soils Map series)
• Tabulated land use data by acreage, land use and existing density
• Existing Land Use revised narrative text, including existing facility/existing
land use capacity analysis and descriptions of potential constraints to
development and potential redevelopment areas.
2.1.3 Demooranhic Conditions The Consultant will utilize existing data as
available from the 1990 U.S. Census to describe and document resident
and seasonal population characteristics, trends and projections necessary
for the determination of future land use and service requirements. Resident
and seasonal population projections will be made as per BEER
methodologies, or per a methodology as approved/supplied by the County
and/or DCA.
Specific Tasks:
L An analysis of the projected future resident and seasonal population will be
made based upon the 1990 U.S. Census data (as available). Where
specific census data have not been disaggregated, projections will be made
based upon methodologies approved by County staff.
ii. Using available data from the 19W US Census, a demographic profile of the
existing PoPUlation of Monroe County -will be made, including population by
N'.
A-T
sex, race, age group, and household.
Data Sources: 1990 LIS Census Data, by tract (as avaiiabis). It Is
acknowledged that final figures are not expected until mid-
summer 1991. However, it is not expected that the revised
figures will vary significantly from the preliminary data currently
available.
• 1990 Live aboard study (Antonini)
• Comprehensive Plans of Key West. Key Colony Beach and
Layton
• BEBR population projection methodologies/preliminary
reports based on 1990 Census Data (if available)
Unnrna Cncmh► Ca, shensive Plan 1990-2010. Technicst
ROM ucts/Deliverabiea0
• The narrative text concerning population and demographics will be revised to
include demographic data available from the 19M U.S. Census. Popuiat>nn
projections for both permanent and seasonal residents vviii be modified to reflect
current data, and will be compared to projections made for the incorporated areas
of the County. The narrative will also provide an evaluation of the likely effects on
the population projections for the County that would result from the adoption of
policies that would limit growth below its historicai.trend levels.
2.1.4 Economic Overview The Consultantwiii review and describe key indicators
of Monroe County economic conditions and trends including employment
by industry and job type, incomes, housing and other cost of living factors,
tax base trends and construction industry trends.
Specific tasks:
i. Using data from the 1990 U.S. Census, as available, economic
characteristics teristics of the current population will be identified, including
employment by industry and job type, income data, and cost of Truing
characteristics. Data will be disaggregated by tract, if available.
ii. An overview of the- Monroe County economy will be prepared, including the
economic impacts of tourism, commenxal fishing, construction industry, and
other significant sot resss of employment.
Data Sources: 1990 US Census Data, by tract (as available).
• Comprehensive Plans of Key West, Key Colony Beach and
Layton .._
• BEBR population employment projection methodologies/
A-8
N
preliminary reports based on 1990 Census Data (if available)
• County Property Appraiser's/Tax Appraiser data
Monroe County Camorehensive I Technical
Document
Products/Deliverables:
• The economic overview narrative will be revised to include available 1990 data,
as wed as an expanded discussion of the role of the construction industry in
Monroe County and other sectors supported largely by development.
2.1.5 Traffic Circulation Pursuant to the requirements of 9J•5.007 F.A.C., the
Consultant shad prepare the traffic circulation element to establish the
desired and projected transportation system for Monroe County.
Specific Tasks:
i. The
Consultant will review and comment on area evacuation plans prepared
by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACOE) and previous consultants.
■
Use of the existing model will be conducted as practicable. The focus in,
■
this project phase will be to prepare responses that address the Objections,
Recommendations and Comments from OCA.
ii. The Consultant will develop a methodology for estimating and assigning
traffic generated by the existing land use pattern to the area roadway
system. This will be based on the FDOT procedure for Design Traffic
Forecasting for Condor Level Analysis.
A limited amount of new transportation surveys will be conducted during the
Predminaryr phase of the project The County will provide the following data,
if available, to the Consultant for review:
• Trip generation rates and trip lengths for various land -uses;
• Occupancy of residential units during peak season and average,
periods;
• Traffic counts obtained from FDOT, Monroe County, and traffic
studies from private development requests.
Much of this survey information will be gathered from the County or existing
project files. In addition, new daily traffic counts will be conducted -on
between 5 and 10 county road links to establish existing levels of service.
iii. The Consume will document data collection needs, existing or projected
Problem areas, identification and responses to issues identified, and the
A-9
recommended study methodologies for Condor Levei Traffic Volume
Forecasting.
iv. The Consultant will review e)asdM and- projected Population data_and
confirm that the traffic analysis zone boundaries reflect established census
tract boundaries. information regarding e)asMg and projected population,
of (where available), approved and buildable developments; and -
land -use densities by zone will be recorded.
V. The Consultant will assemble and review h tomtation from County records
and from. FOOT" District 6, regarding physical inventories of the area
roadway system, including pavement and right-Ofway widths, traffic counts,
traffic control, and environmentally sensitive areas.
vii. Tfle Consuitaru" analyze and tabulate 1aft c ountsznd County supplied
trip- generation data to provide documentation- regarding specific
transportation chat er tm isics in the County. The trip generation dataused
in this analysis will be based upon surveys previously conducted in Monroe
County, if available. Special generation studies will be conducted at -
locations debemuned necessary to cmnpteie the land use data
requiremerrts. -
viii. The Consultant will review the Final Methodology established for calculating
US 1 Level of Service based on travel speeds and relate the established
Levels of Service to Service Volumes derived from the FDOT Maximum
Service Volume values using the Statewide methodology. The Consultant
will establish a set of congestion criteria which can be incorporated into the
Traffic Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
ix. The Consultant will evaluate e)usdng roadway system pertomtance and
identify existing dew based upon the approved level of service
criteria for the County, and evaluate the discrepancies reflected in the
previous planning studies.
X. The Consultant will review the characteristics of development projects with
the County that have been approved, but are not completed. Information
from the County which identifies those approved projects which might not
be developed due to environmental or other. factors will be reviewed.
xi. Using a trip generation/distribution/assignment technique, the Constant
will estimate the volume and distribution of trips that will be generated by
committed developments and assign these trips to the area roadway
system. The Consultant will compare the future vpiumes derived from this
tabors traffic assinent against a Historic Trend Ariaiysis oh US 1, using
A-10
N
G
r
h
k
u
H
H
U
I
the FDOT Procedure for Design Traffic Forecasting for a Condor Levei.
xii. The Consultant will evaluate the performance of the existing roadway
system considering the increased traffic volumes resulting from committed
deveiopment and identify projected deficiencies on the roadway "system
based on the calculation of Reserved Trips for the twenty-three segments
of US 1 within the increased traffic levels. The Consultant will address any
discrepancies reflected in the previous planning studies.
Aii. The Consultant will map the Existing Traffic Circ uiation system on the
1:2000 base map series.
Data Sources: The following list outlines the data required by the Consultant to
complete the tasks listed above. Data included on this fist are also
regcared for the Mass Transit Element: The following data are to be
provided by the County.,
Provide the Consuitant.with a copy of the County's 1990 Submitted
Plan and 1990 Existing Land -Use (Preliminary Draft), Thoroughfare
Plans, ad traffic studies, traffic count records, and any other technical
traffic information or planning information reasonably available to the
County. The County will make available to the Consultant any Board
of County Commission or County Department meeting minutes for
references, as requested.
• Provide the Consultant with ad available traffic data, and copies of
any design reports, drawings, right-of-way maps, financial records,
and other documents in the possession of the County pertinent to
the project.
• Provide the Consultant with aerial photographs of scale of 1' =100,
or 1 • = 200' (if available) or best substitution for the urban areas and
major roadway corridors.
• The County shag make all provisions for the Consultant to enter
upon public or private property as required for the Consultant to
Perform contracted services.
• The County shag provide written record of detailed discussions or
meeting notes of the level of service standards developed by the
State/County Task Force that should be used as a basis for
evaluating existing deficiencies and for recommending future
roadway needs. _
A•1 i
.
1
• Provide the Consultant with the following specific items:
■
Copies cf recent Applications for Development Approval
* PP
P
(ADA).
* County transportation improvement program listing type of
Prof and estimated costs:
* Available traffic counts for roadways and intersections (from
State, County, and private sources).
* Results of traffic generation counts for various types of
deveioprtrerrt.
* Cost estimates/bids for roadway improvements including
right-of-way aeon.
* Transportation element of prior 1990 comprehensnre plan.
AO
* E tirsg and pro)ected land -use information by zone aM/or
census U=%,.ff avadabie_-
* ' 9 • and - project- population- and employment .by zone
and/or census tract;-if-avedable.
* Roadway design standards adopted for use in Monroe
County.
* Current Traffic Slgnai Data.
* Existing Hurricane Evacuation Study report and/or data.
* Traffic votume adjustment factors by week.
* Comprehensive Plan Roadway Base Maps in Mylar
(reproducible) fo=aL
* Counts of Seasonal Dwelling units by Census Tract or Key
(existing and approved for future construction).
* Traffic Elements of the Comprehensive Plans for Key Colony
Beach, Key West, and Layton.
Products/Deliverables:
• Revised Existing Traffic Circulation map series, as necessary, to reflect data
updates.
• Revised narrative text to reflect data updates.
2.1.6 Housing using the best available data, augmented by the ground-
truthing/field verification exercise undertaken by County staff, the Consultant
wig document and evaluate the existing housing product mix, condition,
tenure and seasonal use. Specific issues to be addressed- in this evaluation
wig include:
• Condition of housing supply by sub -area
• Subsidized rental stock
• Mobile home fac Oss and units by type (including mobile home
A-12
C
h
P
U
H
I
I
Ci
condominiums, cooperatives and subdivisions)
Housing construction by type and location since 1980
Year-round and seasonal occupancy
Specific housing deficiencies will be identified by such factors as: -
Type (single-family/multi-family, density etc.)
• Tenure
• Price -rent distributions
Geographic distribution by type,tenure,etc.
• Seasonal use patterns
Data Sources: 1990 US Census Data, by tract (as available).
• Comprehensive Plans of Key West, Key Colony Beach and
Layton
• BEBR population/employment projection methodologies/
preliminary reports based on 1990 Census Data (if available)
• County Property Appraisees/Tax Appraiser data
• Ficrida Keys Affordable Housing Task Force Report
• 19M Live -aboard Study (Antonini)
• Monroe Cou omiorehensive Plan 1990-2010 TeChnical
Document
Products/Deliverables:
• The inventory section of the existing Housing Element will be revised to include
most recent data and analyses listed above. If the data are available, a further
discussion of the number of multi -fatuity units will be included, as will the inventory
of housing condition in the areas identified for study by the County. (see task
2.1.2.11)
2.1.7 Ssnitary Sewer. Solid Waste Drainage Potable Water and Natural
The Consultant shall provide services necessary to
satisfy requirements of 9J-5.011 F.A.C. and 380.0552 which serves to
provide for sufficient public facilities and services correlated to future land
use projections. This shall include data collection and analysis of sanitary
sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water and natural groundwater
recharge.
Specific Tasks:
i. The Consultant shall collect and identify public and private sanitary sewer
facilities, solid waste facilities, drainage facilities and potable water facilities.
The Consultant will obtain F.D.O.T. 1990 series aerial .photography
A-13
II
reproducible myians for the purpose of mapping existing conditions.
Consultant shad utilize existing data available from Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan 1990-2010, Technical Document, January 1991 and
expand/update as required to include:
(1) Operational entity of each facility
(2) Geographic service area including existing land uses for each facility
(3) Design capacity of each facility
(4) Current demand on facility capacity
(5) Current level of service provided by each facility
Related base mapping (approximately 45 maps)
ii. The Consultant shad analyze each existing fac dity by geographic service
area for capacity suipb m and defu:ien -M. based on existing conditions.
iii. The Consultant shad assess general performance of each facility and
determine adequacy to each to accommodate current levels of service.
iv. The Consultant shad assess general condition of each facility and determine
expected service life. V. Based on. general conditions and expected service life of each facility, the
consultant shad assess pmbiems and opportunities for replacement,
expansion and new facility siting.
vi. The Consultant shalt analyze soil in areas served by septic tanks for
suidabidty to support such facilities. Analysis to be based on sod surveys
provided by such agencies as the United State Department of Agriculture,
Soil Conservation Service.
vii. The Consultant shad identify and map natural groundwater aquifer recharge
areas and major natural drainage features. Prime groundwater recharge
areas for the Floridan Aquifer adopted by regional water management
districts (as applicable) shad be depicted.
vid. Based on the groundwater recharge areas and drainage features identified,
regui and/or programs which pertain to thaw areas assessed for
strengths and deficiencies in maintaining the specific functions of the
drainage features and groundwater aquifer areas.
ix. The Consultant will reformat and write the Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste,
Drainage, Potable Water, and Natural Groundwater .Recharge Element
indtx*ig production of the required maps produced-aff.1'=2,000' scale. .
rMn
X. The Consultant will solicit input and direction from -the Monroe e County Solid
Waste Task Force and Monroe County Commission related to long range
solid waste policies. The Consultant will review previously conducted sofid
waste studies and wiii develop alternative solid waste strategies beyond -the
initial 5 year planning period, which will include alternative and generakmd
geographic locations, but not specific facility siting. In addition the
Consultant will develop alternative strategies regarding the disposal of
sludge beyond the initial 5 year planning period.
xi. The Consultant will evaluate the proposed solid waste generation rates
and
levei of service standards and determine level of service adequacy in terms
at seasonal fluctuation in population.
xiL The Consultant will evaluate all wastewater treatment -plants uWtdng wdit lg
data available for Monroe County, HRS, and DER. For each- of-the-
apprmftats 250 STP•s Consultant will confirm and compiete the inventory
and identify the location of the geographic service area, assess general
performance and determine adequacy of each as it relates to the future
level of service.
_
xfa. The Consultant will Identify• - • and map on 1 - 200 sole renal photography
(FOOT 1990 series reproducible mylars), permitted septic tank and
cesspools. In addition, based on interviews with public officials, septic tank
installers and other individuals in the industry, the Consultant will map to the
greatest extent possible unpenmitted septic tanks and cesspools. The work
effort will include the necessary field surveys to reasonably ascertain the
location of unpennitted septic tanks and cesspools where other data is
unavailable. This work effort will be the basis of the Master Sewer Plan and
Water Ouaiity/Environmental Carrying Capacities Studies to be conducted
in subsequent phases.
xiv. The Consultant will assess the feasibility of the construction of a
septage/sludge disposal site and or sludge transfer facility.
xv. The Consultant will evaluate the proposed sanitary sewer level of service
standards and determine level of service adequacy in terns of permanent
and seasonal fluctuations in population and including the evaluation of iivve-
aboards.
xvi. The Consultant will reassess proposed potable water level of service and
develop methodologies for level of service measurability as well as relate the
level of service to seasonal fluctuations in populations_.
xvii. The Consultant will assess the results .of the FKAA Aquifer Storage Study
A-'15
and incorporate the results into the future potable water source evadabiNiy
analysis
xviii. The Consultant will identify and map existing permitted potable waterymb
and assess the existing fresh water lenses mapping efforts based on
existing available data and determine its adequacy for use in the piam - To
the greatest extent possible, based on interviews with public officials, water
wed drillers and other individuals involved in the industry, the Consultant wig
map unperrnitted potable water webs. The Consultant wig undertake the
necessary field surveys to reasonably ascertain the kxzdon of unpermitted
potable water wells when other data is unavailable.
xoc. The Consultant will assess the viability of utilizing alternate sources of
potable water•- _-
xx. The Consultant will assess the viability and appticabiiity/ of increased use of
water reuse facilities.
vd. For each of the proposed drainage levels of service, Consultant will assess
and describe its appropriateness and appiicabiiih/ to the Ronda Keys.
Assessment of specific drainage system will be c -- - lucted in a subsequent
phase in conjunction with Water Duality/Environmental Carrying Capacity
Studies. As a result of these analysis a Storm Water Master Plan and Storm
Water Ordinance will be developed.
rill. The Consultant will assist in developing/revising the Capital improvements
Bement including future facility/upgrade cost estimates and facility siting for
the initial fire year planning period.
Data Sources:
.lr . r-ITAM
SFWMD
Dade County Comprehensive Plan
HRS
Monroe County Fire Department
DER _
Monroe County Department of Heatth
Solid Waste USEPA
Monroe County land Development Regulations
Monroe County Municipal Service District.
Monroe County Contract with Waste °Meiiagement
Waste Management
A46
H',111
F"
U
H
I
C�
I
H
H
L
k
Monroe County Solid Waste Task Force
DER
Sanitary S� _ HRS
DER
Monroe County Staff
FKAA
Monroe County Department of Health
201 Facilities Plan
USGS Quad Maps
DMinage FEMA Maps
SFWMD
Federat Emergency Management -Agency
Products/Deliverables
• Revised Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Potable Water, San'
Waste, Natural Groundwater/Aquifer Y Sewer, Solid
Recharge Element.
• Revised Facility Service Area Maps.
Mapping of all septic systems cesspools on 1'=200', FDOT 1990 series
aerial photography.
' M8PPM9 of all Potable water wells and, as necessary, fresh water lenses
21.8 Using the data sources listed below, as well as the
data collected for the public facilities element, the Consultant will compile an
irwen<orY of existing land uses, natural resources and habitats, historic
fesources, beach and dune systems, public access facilities, and existing
infrastructure within the coastal area. These facilities will be mapped on the
e3d3ting land use map series. As the entire Florida Keys area falls within the
Waastal zone as defined in 9J-5, the inventory required In this element shall
include data complied for the Land Use Element:
Data which are unavailable or are insufficient to meet the minimum criteria
of the Rule will be identified, and policies for incorporating the data into the
Plan will created. Wetlands data is one such element. The USACOE/EPA
are about to undertake an advanced wetlands identification program (ADID).
Results are expected to be available in September,1992.. GOPs to augment
the Board's policies with respect to no satt marsh or buttonwood wedands
loss will be included in the Plan, but reference to existing wetlands will be
C
A-17
based on existing data, which are acknowledged to be inadequate.
Specific tasks:
Generalized existing land uses in the Coastal Area will be inventoried and
mapped. This work will be completed as part of the tasks listed under 2.1.2'
above. The County's current Existing land Use map series (January 1991
wig serve as the base information.
In addition to generalized land uses in the Coastal Area, the Consultant will
invwm yr vmw dependent and water -related uses. These uses will include
the following:
a. gx"c.access poarts to the beach or shoreline through public lands,
prWM property open tq_the gerterai pubtir,.or•other legai means; -
b. parking facilities for beach or shoreline access;
C. coastal roads and iaci�es providing scenic overlooks;
d marinas;
e. boat ramps;
If. public docks; _
g• IM i ig pig; and
h. other traditional shoreline fishing areas.
It Is assumed that the Florida DNR Beach Access Study will provide an
inventory of items listed under a. and b. above and that County staff will
provide information pertaining to items c. through h. from its detailed list and
maps of water dependent uses. Additional details related to live-aboards
will be provided by the County from the recent study completed by the
University of Florida.
Aq information will be mapped in draft form by the Consultant at 1' = 2,000'
and then provided to the County staff for ground truthing and verification.
Once the County) staff has approved the draft maps, the Consultant will
complete the final map series (see Subtask 2.1.2.111).
H. The Consutiant, In cxxtjtnc ioct with County staff, will identify a) conflicts
among spedfic shoreline uses; b) the need for water dependent and water -
related development sites; and c) the need for edeveiopment. Attention will
be given to establishing dear priorities for coastal area uses, with particular
emphasis on land and waterfront needs and Issues related to commerciW
fishing, sport fishing and Iive4xwds.
It Is anted that acal policy/ direction will be needed in this area
from the County Commission.
A-18
The -Consultant will map natural resources as art' of the e Conservation
Element As required by 9J-5.012(2)(b), selected natural resource features
in the coastal area will be inventoried and analyzed. These resources
include the following:
& _ vegetative cover;
wk tife habitat;
C•- areas subject to coastal flooding; and
d. - other areas of speclai concerrrto local government
Data to be used for mapping will be obtained from existing data, provided
to --the Consultant by the County staff:
' iv. � analysis- is_ of occur g - estuarine conditions will occin
fig, magopmg and analysis work conducted as
Part -Of the Conservation Element:-
Eldsting data will be used to desc hbe conditions -in the ma
jor estuarine
. inclU(Mg Florida Say,. Barnes Sound, Blackwater Sound, and Card
Sound. If possible, smaller sounds and embayments will be addressed
where data is available.
The analysis will focus on a) assessment of general estuarine conditions;
b) identification of known existing punt and non -point source pollution
Probtems; c) actions needed to remedy existing pollution problems, and d)
Identification
of existing state, regional and local regulatory programs which
will be used to- maintain or improve estuarine environmental quality.
Agencies to be contacted will include:
• Everglades National Park
• Biscayne National park
• Florida Department
of Environmental Resources
• Florida Department of Natural Resources .
• National Marine Fisheries (NOAA)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
The Consultant team will address these issues in a workshop with the
C untY st3ff, and if appropriate, representatives of the above4sted
agencies. issues related to near -shore water quality will be addressed in
a special water quality monitoring study.
The Consultant will coordinate this work effort with the current management
1318nnmg study now underway for the National Marine Sanctuary and with
A49
the Surface Water improvement Management (SWIM) Plan completed in
1990. for Florida Bay and the Lower Everglades. -
v. The County staff wiii meet with DNR to determine the need for and
procedure for delineating the Coastal Coristruction Control Line (CCCL).
If It is deemed appropriate, DNR will proceed with studies necessary to
delineate the line. This should be completed prior to preparing post
disaster redevelopment plan(s). The determinatiion of this line is the
responsibility of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) pursuant to
Chapter 177 et. seq. F.S.
vi. Previously identified redevelopment areas looted within the coastal- zone
will be refined and mapped. It Is assumed that the Coastal High Hazard
Area Shari be mapped In accordance with Category 1 storrn--surga.as -
deveioped in the SLOSH model. The County will endeavor to obtain a
ruling tram OCA with respectto the approach to be followed in the Plan -with
respect to relocating public faci ides from the CHHA. OCA and the Board
have determined that the CHHA will be the category 1 storm surge as
determined by the SLOSH model. This will resuitin few areas of the Keys
NOT falling within the CHHA: Section 9J-5.012(2) (e)2 and 3 refer to
requirements that I,A astruc;tutre and facilities be inventoried, and the
potential for relocation be analyzed. As the relocation of many of these
facilities outside the designated CHHA would be impossible, DCA
clarification on -the County's and Consultant's approach to this element will
be required.
vii. In order to establish construction standards that would minimize impacts on
existing beach/berm systems, and monitor the effects of beach erosion/
accretion, historic and existing Mean High Water Lines (MHWL) will need to
be established pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 177 et. seq. F.S.
As in task 21.10.v. above, the Cbunty will have to request action on the
part of DNR.
viii. Beach and dune systems will be mapped on the Natural Features map
series. Data will be obtained from the Beach Access study for the Florida
Keys now being completed by DNR. In the event that additional information
is needed to map dune systems, the Consultant will use 1991 FDOT aerials,
and County staff wiii follow-up with ground -frothing.
The analysis of beach and dune systems will focus on a) trends in beach
erosion and accretion; b) the effects of shore protection structures; and c)
the effects of existing and potential beach renoupshment areas. AN
information will be derived from existing data sources provided by and/or
Identified by Canty staff%
a
Data
Sources: 0 County's Existing Land Use map series
• Coumy's Existing Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat map series
• County's Water Dependent/Related Use map series
• Property Appraiser's Data commercial land use by lot,
location, type and size, residential land use by type, age and
location
• Platted Lands Survey (1984), with any updates
• Ground-bulling%field verification
• 1991 FDOT aerials
• List of designated COBRA sites
• Area of Critical County Concern reports: North Key Largo,
Holiday lsle/Windley
Key, Ohio Key and Big Pine Key
• The Coastal High Hazard Area as defined by the category 1
SLOSH model, and mapped by USACOE/Post Suddey S&a,>h
& Jemigan. The CHHA Ins determined by this modei will -be —
used during the ground-truthing in this task, as well as for the
inventory of the existing public facilities in other tasks.
'Monme County Gorril2rehensive Plan1 Technical
Document
Products/Deliverables:
• The Consultant will revise the existing Coastal Management narrative to reflect
updated and expanded information pertaining to a) coastal area land uses; b)
water -dependent and water -related uses; c) beach and dune systems; d) the
estuarine system; e) natural disaster planning; and f) infrastructure within the
coastal area. Existing text, graphics, tables and maps prepared for the January
1991 version of the Plan will be used to the maximum extent possible. All relevant
and appropriate comments in the ORC will be addressed.
2.1.9 Conservation Element The Consultant will revise, as necessary, the
inventory and analysis of the natural
resource systems required under 9J-
5.013, including bays, harbors, estuaries, rivers, lakes, estuarine marshes,
wetlands, shores, beach and dune systems, floodplains, known sources of,
commercially available minerals; areas identified as experiencing soil erosion
problems; fisheries, wildlife and marine habitats and vegetative communities,
e
including dominant species present and species listed by the federal, state,
or local
governments as endangered, threatened, or species of special
concem.
Spec:tic Tasks:
i. The Consultant will evaluate existing data sources identified by County staff.
Available information, which has been compiled and analyzed in previous
A-21
studies, mil be reviewed, data gaps identified, and sources of additlonal
information determined. All studies used. in the preparation of the January
1991 version of the Plan, as wed as those cued in the ORC as sources of
best avadable data, wiii be provided by County staff' .
County staff will assist the Consultant by codecting add Ronal information
from lam, minty, state and federal agencies, as weii as from scientists
involved in special research projects in the Keys, as aP r0Pnate.
ii. The Consultant will map the required natural resources at a scale of
1 , 3 2,000', on the revised County bass
ap sedes identified inor all areas ot the
task 21.2I or the
County, excdt�smve of offshore msiands not
Mainland area of the County.
Based on input from County staff, it is assumed that the following-._
information will be used in this task:
. Existing topographic maps prepared by the USGS wiii be used as the
basis for mapping bays, rivers, and lakes;
The existing Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Maps will be used for
mapping estuarine marshes, wetlands, and upland vegetation.
. The 1:20M Soils map will be used for mapping soils.
FENIA maps will be used to map floodplain areas, augmented by the
SLASH maps, which wiii be used to map the Coastal High Hazard
Area (CHHA).
The ONR Beach Access study will be used to map beach and dune
systems.
County staff wig provide information- pertaining to the location of
harbors, estuaries, shores, commercially valuable minerais (assumed
to be actively mined areas): sod and erosion problem areas, fishery
resource areas, living marine resources, marine habitat areas, and
endangered, threatened, or species of special concern..
The Consultant will generate mapped information pertaining to
waterwelis, existing zones of influence, and aquifer recharge areas.
onceail of the required data is assembled, the preparation of the natural
Resources -maps will require a three -step process:__ . .
M
H
H
U
H
0
H
I I
H
C
1 • The Consultant will plot all available information listed above on the
1:MM base maps.
2. County staff wiil verify/ground-troth as necessary the plotted
information.
3. The Consultant will revise the draft maps, and prepare the -final
1:MOO map series.
Following the completion of the Natural Resource maps, the Consultant will
analyze the potential for conservation, use, or protection for each identified
natural resource. This will require the review of all Information provided in
2.1.11.1 above. In addition, County staff will provide information to the
Consultant for this analysis pertaining to hazardous waste sites and any
known areas of contamination: .
iv. The degradation of the nearshore water quality as a result of stonnwater
runoff and nutrient loading from septic systems has been identified as a key
area of study. It is hypothesized that there is also a linkage between the
nearshore water quality and the -health of the coral reefs. The scope of
work for such a study will be incorporated into this planning process. The
proposed study will set up the monitoring system to establish any linkage
between nearshore water quality and onshore nutrient loading and
stormwater.
Data Sources: County's Existing Land Use map series
County's Existing Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat map series
• County's Water Dependent/Related Use map series
• Property Appraiser's Data: commercial land use by lot,
location, type and size, residential land use by type, age and
location
• Platted Lands Survey (1984), with any updates
• Ground-truthing/field verification
• 1991 FDOT aerials
• Area of Critical County Concern reports: North Key Largo,
Holiday Isle/Windley Key, Ohio Key and Big Pine Key
• The Coastal High Hazard Area as defined by the category 1
SLOSH model, and mapped by USACOE/Post Buckley Schuh
& Jernigan. The CHHA line determined by this model will be
used dig the ground-tnnhing in this task, as well as for the
inventory of the existing public facilities in other tasks.
•Mon e Ca vehensive Plan1 Technical
Document
A-M
Products/Deliverables:
• The Consultant will revise the existing Conservation element to reflect da
updated and expanded information pertaining to natural resources. EXf3dng
text, graphics, tables and macs prepared for the January 1991 versiom of
the Plan will be used to the maximum extent possible. All reievanr-and
appropriate comments in the ORC wid be addressed.
2.1.10 Recreation and Open Space 'The Consultant will revise, as necessary, the
inventory and analysis of recreation and open space pursuant to -the
requirements of 9J•5.014 and the comments in the ORC.
Specific tasks:
L The Consultant wid revise .ttw inver=V ot. recreatcoa- and open space....
fam" t s; listed in the January.1991 version of the Plan as requested in the
ORC report Spur, the Consuitant, with staft-input, will expand he
inventory of state-owned recreation sites to include the specific areas listed
in the ORC report.
In addition, the Count will update the inventory to reflect the most
current information on pubdc and private recreation facilities. This will be
provided by County staff from its records.
ii. With more than 1.2 million acres of publicly owned land and water available
for recreational use and open space, Monroe County easily exceeds any
standard level of service measure for the adequate provision of recreation
and open space. However, due to the unique physical form of the Keys,
with a dispersed population living along a 100 mile long chain of islands,
active recreation facilities are not always immediateiy avaiiable to residents.
With the assistance of County staff, the Consultant shad establish a set of
recreation and open space standards appropriate to the Keys, differentiating
between standards for active and passive recreation.
The proposed standards will be reviewed with County staff and DCA for
The recreation and open space needs of the existing population will be
determined by applying the revised standards established above.. Particular
attention wil be directed toward satisfying needs for active recreation
fadlitles, including. potential acquisition sites or possible joint -use facilities
and/or sites.
A-24
111
k
11
k
k
[i
C
[1
I
L
P
H
C
iv. Projections and analysis of the future needs for recreation sites, open space
and recreation facilities will be developed based upon the alternative land
use concept identified in subsequenr phases.
Data Sources: County's Existing Land Use map series
• County's Existing Vegetation and Wki fe Habitat map series
• County's Water Dependent/Related Use map series
• County's Existing Recreation and Open Space Facilities map
series
Property Appraiser's Data: commercial land use by lot,
location, type and size, residential land use by type, age and
location
• Platted Lands Survey (1984), with any updates
• 1991 FOOT-aeriats
• Area of Critical County Concern reports: North Key Largo;
Holiday Isle/Windley Key, Ohio Key and Sig Pine Key
Monme County CorrmrehensivePin 1 Technical
Document
Products/Deliverables:
• Revised map series, as necessary, to reflect data updates.
• Revised narrative text to reflect data updates.
2.1.11 entat CoordiniMnn Sement For aft municipalities within the
County, as well as adjacent municipalities and counties, all local
govemments, special districts, water management districts, regional
Planning agencies, utilities, and regional and state agencies will be
identified, and the existing coordination mechanisms will be described (9J-
5.015(1)(a) and (b)). As well, the Consultant shaft make initial contact with
NOAA to monitor the implications and requirements of the proposed Florida
Keys Marine Sanctuary.
An analysis of the effectiveness of the existing coordination mechanisms,
specific problems and needs, and coordination with the principles for
guiding development pursuant to Chapter 380 F.S. will be made. Specific
problems and needs within the specific plan elements that would benefit
from improved or additional intergovemmentarcoordination will be identfied
as the plan elements are developed.
2.1.12 Cavite! IrnornvPmerits E'e.ment and Fsca! Condt ns This element shah be
based upon the public facility needs as identified in the other
comprehensive plan elements, and shad support --the future land use
element as developed in subsequent phases of the Plan. In this task, the
A-25
public facility needs as identified in the other elements of the Plan will be
irnentoried,- and initial cysts and revenue socu= identified for the existing
system. The fiscal.implications-of-existing.deficiencies-shaft be examined -
relative to the revenue sources available to the County.
The geographic service area and location of major system components for
the pdit education and public health systems will be identified, as wed as
existing revenue sources and funding mecthanisms available to the County.
Based upon the alternative concepts developed in subsequent phases, the
pied capital facdties needs and you rmW funding sources and
Iecthactisms will be identified (9J-5.0160)(a) through (c)).
An 'assessinent of the Cou Ws ability to finance programmed capital
imprcvei,a sbaud upon projecOwns- of revenues, population, debt service
ohIgwtim r a i and.odw-tacntai'a as .lisW.in the Rule wig be made.
Specific Tasks:
L With County staff, verify the existing data with respect to identified revenue
sources, County debt obligations, and current County budget obligations.
H. Upon completion of the public facilities elements, incorporate the fiscal
implications of identified capital facilities needs and/or deficiencies.
iii. Revise the narrative text as necessary to reflect any new or additional
information.
Data Sources:
• Monroe County Co Technicai
Document
• Monroe County Division of Management Services
2.1.13 Summary Working Paoer 2• Summary of Conclusions Based upon the
inventory and analysis of existing conditions and trends undertaken in the
tasks above, key problems, constraints and policy conflictswiil be identified.
Such key issues ere apated to include the following:
• Key measures of carrying capacity and the extend such measures
are quantifiable and defensible based upon existing data or data that
may be made available by further research.
• Current or projected future fad= to meet applicable level of service
standards.
C
• Inability to define or agree upon apphcabie level of service standards.
• Conflicts between present/projected growth patterns and important
natural resources or capacity limitations. _
• Measures of development suitabiitty based upon factors of natural
resources, access and ability of adequate services and utilities.
A presentation of conclusions will be made to the Board of County
Commissioners summarmng the findings of the data collection and analysis
Phase of the Ptah. At this presentation, key problems, constraints and
policy conflicts will be identified and discussed in terns of their implications
on future phases of the Plan.
The Purpose of this phase is to develop alternative land use concepts for the future
development of Monroe County. Up to three aitematives, based upon such factors
as Projected Population growth, infrastructure and public facility limitations, and
environmental and natural resource constraints, as appropriate, will be identified.
Implications of these alternative future land .use scenarios on each of the Plan
elements will be identified.
®
■
2.Z1 Future Growth ro ectiens and Scenarios based upon the inventory Of
existing COndi Ions and public facility capacity analysis developed In the
previous phase, future growth projections and scenarios will be developed
as a basis for determining the policies regarding the future land use pattern
of Monroe County, and to evaluate alternative strategies to meet identified
I" of service (LOS) standards
for all required elements. Future population
capacity scenarios based upon infrastructure capacity will be developed.
The economic and fiscal impacts of these growth projections will be
identified.
2.Z2 Future I and Use/Growth Allocations Based upon the future growth'
Profs developed in task 2.Z.1, and the factors pertaining to
development suitability and carrying capacity as determined in previous
Phases, the Consultant will prepare up to three alternative future land
use
allocation patterns. in addition, the Consultant will caiculate the future land
use requirements in acres based upon the growth projections.
Growth zlocatcn -Ofa-s tc the pct-ftritial land use patterns t!^a::.*%;s prciected
growth may develop. Based upon such factors as public facility capacity,
P
environmental suitability, and policy constraints, alternate patterns of fixture
growth will be developed.
- A-27
2.2.3 Traffic Circulation Analysis of future traffic circulation will be based upon
existing and projected traffic patterns and projected traffic demand
generated by the projected future land use patterns, emptoyment, and
population distribution.
1, Consultant will evaluate and test up to three land -use scenarios
giving consideration to the relative impact on roadway operations,
I" of spice standards, and hurricane evacuation a t na.
Consultant will evaluate several scenarios for the corridor as to its
function and design (i.e., intrastate route with limited access, sonic
route, or frequent access concept).
2. Upon identification of a 'preferred' future land uSe plan Consultant
wil recommend modification to the thoroughfare plan if the analysis
indiates that addkkuvd needs or sigmficant capacity defici -vvW
oaxsr. The Consultant will coordinate the appbcation of the Corps
of Engineers hurricane eve cx--tion model to test probable evacuation
times under the identified land use and thoroughfare plan scenarios.
The recommendations will consider previous improvement plans
prepared by others.
3. The Consultant will evaluate the performance of aitemate traffic and
thoroughfare plan modifications costs and capacities. Consideration
of environmental and financial constraints will be applied to
improvement recommendations. Consultant will clarity the
designation of US 1 as a constrained facility and identify its
implications on future widening on US 1.
2.2.4 H=ina Based upon the growth scenarios (2.2.1) the Consultant will
estimate future housing needs of County residents. including estimates of
seasonal and permanent population requirements. Special attention
will be
sultant
given to measurement of the need for affordable housing. The Co
will create up to three future housing scenarios which vary in total housing
units, and distribution by housing type density, cost and location.
Housing analyses will be focussed on the defined requirements of 9J-5.010.
Our work scope in this task will include:
Analyses of the amount of defined housing need that
can be met by the private sector within current market
conditions.
Analyses of the housing need which can be protected to
A 28
e
N
IJ
I
G
L1
k
0
H
H
C
be met by the private sector within cut, nit market
conditions by type, tenure, cost or rent and income range of
households served.
Evaluation of sub -market areas in terns of their
Potential as sending or receiving zones for the MR
Program addressed elsewhere in the comprehensive
planning program.
• Analyses of programs to eliminate substandard housing
conditions including the identfic ation of
Pub/Private Programs that may be applicable.
2.2.5
GrOmdmiter-Rech8[IIS The COrmuitant-will evaluate -the reiationsftip-o --
three (3) alternative land use concepts on the infrastructure support
systems. For each of the alternatives the Consultant will Identify the ability
ofthe infrastrucxure to supportthe existing and future growth allowed by the
future land use plan map and Identify system capacity surpluses and
deficiencies. Where deficiencies -are identified, the Consultant will identify
the improvements required to provide the proposed level of service in terms
of facility replacement, expansion and new facility siting including estimated
capital costs. Upon selection of the preferred concept, the Consultant will
identify and evaluate alternative methods and techniques for the provision
of necessary services, with particular reference to potable water, sanitary
sewer, and solid waste.
Upon selection of a Final Future Land Use Plan, facility capacity shag be
assessed for surpluses and deficiencies in accordance with 9J-05.011. This
shag be based on both the initial five year planning increment and the year
2010 planning increment.
2.2.6 Coastal Management Based upon the future growth and land use
scenarios developed above, the impacts of the future land use pattern,
traffic circulation, infrastructure, and population on the natural resources of
the coastal zone will be identified. Potential impacts on identified historic
resources will also be identified. Alternative approaches to the mitigation of
impacts on natural and man-made systems will be identified and evaluated.
2.2.7 Recreation and Oe _n Snare Based upon the growth projections the
Consultam will create up to three concern for the provision cf recreation
and open space facilities and services for future residents. Such concepts
may vary in the determination of standards for the prbvision of recreation
facilities and for the types (active vs. passive) and geographic allocation of
0
A-29
park and recreation faatities.
2.2.8 Intercovernmentat Coarclination Based upon projected growth scenarios,
areas requiring additional intergovernmental coordination will be identified
and evaluated. As an identified Area of Criticai State Concern, the future
growth projections developed for the Keys will be evaluated in terms of
eXisting coordination and administration programs.
2.2.9 The future capital needs
of each irnrast ucture element will be analyzed relative to the projected land
use patterns, and the requirement that the infrastructure be able to support
that land use pattern. The analysis wil include an examination of the
loc a on and timing of infras'trtuctiure provision to meet the projected land use
pattern. The amity of the County to finance.these improvements based
upon.fut" popes growth and revenue projections will be examined
2.2.10 Summanr Working Paper 3• Alternative Cone= A working paper.
sturtmat . g the altemauve concepts, and the requirements and impacts of
the sitematives will be prepared. The alternatives will be summarized, and
the land use impacts and requirements otthe afterrmWGIS on such elements
as natural resources, public facd4 needs, traffic circulation, housing,
funding, coastal management, and recreation and open space will be
arrayed in matrix form
2.2.11 rzncept Selection and Policy Directions Based upon the results of the
analysis and evaluation of the alternative concepts, a preferred concept for
the future land use pattern of Monroe County will be determined by the
Board of County Commissioners in up to two County Commission
workshops. The selection of the preferred alternative will possibly require
that certain policies and policy intent be revisited and re-evaluated in order
to be supportive of and • comet with the future land use pattern.
Direction from the Board of County Commissioners regarding those
potential policy issues will be provided to the Consultant in the workshop
sessions.
23 Drat Plan Qemerris
As a result of the selection of the preferred concept for the future land use pattem
of Monroe County, each of the Plan elements required under Chapter 163 F.S. Wil
be developed to reflect the land use pattern selected. For each element, a series
of Goals, Objectives and Policies (GOPs) will be developed as- a framework for
guiding the future development of Monroe County. The GOPs will be generated
to be consistent with the PCIftin of the State ComprehensiVe Plan, the South
Ronda Regional Planning Council, adjacent jurisdictions, and Chapter 380 F.S.
e
Nt
Principles
for Guiding Development, as,. derived during this process. The
Consultant, with Staff, will evaluate the GOPs for internal consistency among the
required Plan elements.
Those elements for which sufficient data do not exist, orwhich have been identified
in previous phases as requiring special studies, will be developed as "plan for a
Plan" elements, with appropriate GOPs relating- to the intent of the study. The
Policies adopted by the Board of County Commissioners relating to those elements
will be identified, and serve as the basis for - the goals statements in these
elements.
2.3.1 FLdM t_and Use Element As a refinement of the land use concept selected
by the County Commission, the Consultant will prepare goals, objectives
and policies (GOPs) for land -use as a basis for the establishment atft
future development pattern- of- Monroe County. The Consultant will a1w
analyze and document the following:
• Availability
of public facilities and services to support the existingand
proposed land uses.
■
The suitability of existingundeveloped and vacant land
p d to support
future growth.
• Calculations of the gross acreage and dens' of land u
use categories
necessary to support the projected population.
In order to visually represent the Future Land
d Use Element, a Future land
Use map series will be prepared to depict the distribution and pattern of
future land uses as per 9J•5.006(4).
To the extent supported by existing available data the consultant will identify
areas in need of redevelopment or areas potentially in need of
redevelopment. Such areas may include blighted areas in need of renewal
and/or the elimination of uses inconsistent with the community character
and future land use pattern. Where supporting documentation of need for
redevelopment does not exist Consultant may identify necessary research
tasks and conduct inventories of redevelopment needs, as an addition
service task, for future plan amendments.
2.3.2 Traffic Circulation Element
1. Review the current thoroughfare plan and define recent revisions and
assumptions and Inaccuracies use in its development. Identify and
evaluate discrepancies between the County and FDOT in functional
A-31
ciassificatzon designations.. Compare these discrepancies against a
set of technical criteria to determine the proper func donat_
classification designation for each discrepancy.
2 Prepare exhibit and other do=nentation for the Year 2010 area
roadway system described in the thoroughfare plan.
3. Document the evaluation and performance of the roadway system
described in the thoroughfare plan and identify projected deficiencies
and tare needs.
4. Establish the right-ot-way width which should be protected or
reserved for US 1 so that the necessary rigtit-ot-way to support d
future land -use map - can be proves..- Prepare the apptopcmts
cross-section i ustrationsand descriptions to allow for this land tone —
reserved.
5. Prepare a Summary Report summanang the results of the roadway
system and thoroughfare plan evaluations. In this report, describe
the f ftre character Q.e., operation and function) of US 1 as to its
access provisions; need for a parailel frontage roads; recommended
traffic signal spacing criteria; and design standards.
6. Consistent with FOOT Rule 14 97.003 and 14-97.004, F.A.C., develop
criteria for a classification system and standards for permitting
driveways onto State and County roads. Criteria will include
consideration of the roadway facility design, function of classification,
posted speed, location/frequency of signalized intersections and
existing driveway locations.
7. Conduct a one -day workshop meeting with the County staff and
review agencies selected to participate in the project The purpose
of this workshop will be to - review the Roadway System and
Thoroughfare Plan Evaluation Summary Report.
S. Prepare cost estimates for recommended modifications and additions
to the thoroughfare pian. These estimates will reflect Monroe County
and Florida Department of Transportation standard construction
costs provided to us by the County.
9. Prepare a staging strategy and Identify the first five-year increment
for implementation of the thoroughfare plan.
10. Update Traffic Cron Efement revisions incorporating data and
n-3z
ki
findings of all study tasks. This work product will be consistent with
the requirements of Rule 9J-5 as presented to the Florida Legislature
by the Department -of -Community Affairs and with the Objecx =
Recommendations and Comments Report received from DCA.
11. Present recommended Traffic Circulation Element Comprehensive
Plan amendments to the County.
Based on the Future Land Use Plan Bement, the Consultant will develop
the GOPs required under the Rule (9J-5.007(3)). The goals will establish the
long-term end toward which c =uiation programs and activities are
ultimately diverted, and will contain the specific objectives for each goal
statement As required by Rule 9J-5.007(4), a Future Traffic Ctrcx W*m Map
will be. nxorporated into the Plan.
2.3.3 Housinn Element Based upon the Future Land Use element, GOPs relating
to the provision of -housing pursuant to 9J-5.010(3) shaft be developed.
These policies shaft contain siementsensuring adequate affordable hoeing,
the elimination of substandard housing units, the provision of adequate sites
' for affordable housing construction, the conservation and preservation of
the existing housing stock, and principles regarding the location of such
housing types as group homes, mobile homes, et cetera.
2.3.4 Sanitary Sewer. Solid Waste, Drafnace. Potable Water and Natuiml
GrouactZMr Recharge Element The Consultant will consolidate the data
collected and anatyzed during Phase 2.1.6 into sub -element format
consistent with the overall Comprehensive Plan. Based on the finalized
Future Land Use/Growth Allocation Concept, the Consultant will address
each of the requirements for Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Drainage Potable
Water and Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Goats, Objectives and
Policies as required by Rule 9J-5.011(2).
1 Based on the
excstrng infrastructtre conditions analysis the
Consultant will develop goats and objectives designed to coma,
existing deficiencies.
2) Based on the finalized Future Land Use/Growth Allocation Concept,
the Consultant will develop goals and objectives which will coordinate
the extension of or increase the capacity of facilities to meet future
needs'
3) Based on the finalized Future- Land Use/Growth Allocation Concept
the Consultant will develop goals and objectives designed to result
in the maximization of the use of existing facilities and the
E`1�1 A-33
discouragement of urban sprawi.
4) Based on the finalized Future Land Use/Growth Allocation Concept
the onsuitant-wiil develo�-goals
Cand . objectives addressing .the
conservation of potable water resources and the protection of -natural
groundwater recharge areas and natural drainage features.
In accordance with Rule 8J-5.011(2)(c) the Consultant will develop the
implementation policies related to the above mentioned goals and objectives
and wid speciiicadiy address estabdshing priorities for repiacettang
con acting existing potable water, sewer and drainage facility deficiencies
and to provide for future face iLy needs in relation to the implementation of
the Futtre Land Use Element
The Count wid develop policies -related to each of the goals and
objectives- establishing - level of service -standards to be utilized in
deveioprttent and. adc;ft n" of the Coturty's Concurrency
Mamgement System as required by Rule 9J.5.0055.
2.3.5 coastal Management Element This element shall provide GOPs that may
restTfct development activities which would damage or destroy these coastal
neaources, and that protect human life and limit public expenditures on
facimes in areas subject to destruction in nature! disasters. * Due to the
unique physical form of the Keys, the location of many public facility
elements will be within the grew identified as the Coastal High Hazard Area.
The purpose of this element Is to develop GOPs which will enable the
County to enhance the protection of these coastal resources from damages
or destruction by incompatible or intensive uses, to protect human life, and
to- rninii, ize public expenditures in areas prone to damage from natural
disasters. These GOPs wdi provide direction for the County in determining
the future uWzation of coastal areas. pursuant to the requirements of 9J-
5.012(3).
2.3.6 Conservation Qement The purpose of this element is to develop GOPs to
conserve, protect, and appropriately use the natural resources of the Keys,
as well as the identification of activities which may be restricted because of
their adverse effect on water quality and the survival of endangered or
threatened species. The GOPs developed for this element shall provide
policy direction for the County to promote the conservation, use and
protectio<t of natural resources pursuant to SJ•5.013(2).
2.3.7 Recreation and Open Space Based upon the preferred concept, this
ebment shad ir>dude GOPs pursuant to 9J-5.014(3) to meet the recxeation
Ian
E
N
0
H
H
0
WIC open space novas oT the uounty, ano to Develop measursals
standaras forine proves= of pubticly-accessible open space and reeroaum
facdtes.
The Consultant wiH develop policies reiated to each- of the goats and
Obj6=M a mg level Of service standards to be utilized -in
daveloptnent and adOpl= of the County's Concurrency M eg 1 Mfg_..
System as required by Rule 9J.5.0M.
2.34 IEMmerg The purpose of eft Gleam* is to
PrOvtde GOPS wftich outline arid establish the mechanisms necessary to
COOrdtnate the comprehanaive plan with the plans and acuities at Cltler-
Lff is of local gOvOrrr"O t; the acRIooi board, service eutl�oritles, adowers
muncipakties and cotulties, the State, end the South Aorlda q
PWM 'gig Councat.
These GOPS, pursuant to 9J-5.013(3), strati provide coordination of the
P" acmes Manama by the specific elements of the Plan, and
Co=9 tiort of the adopted' level of service standards for the required
elements.
2.3.9 Capital Based upon preferred concept for the
Future t.2110 USO element at the Plan, eft element shall provide the
141IM1.43anams and padcIft for the irrlptementation, development; and
Provision of those public !_ties requifed to meet the adopted level of
service smndacds for each element
Included within this element shell be a schedule of those public faulty,
improvements for which the County is responsible, a description of the
PrOlSM location(=), the development of an annual review and monnoring of
the cs3pitais,
I24 plan Atlopdon
As part of the basic swvices, Consultant shall particip in up to fin (5)
Presentations as identrnw in ttte basic $Cape of Services, including hearings for
Me purposes of Plan Adoption by the Board of County Comrntasionum (BOCC).
Requests for plan revisions by the SOCC after trar>smrssion of the t=me1 Draft at the
direction of County staff may constitute a basis for Consultant to request additionet
Services up on as stated in Sectrcm 3 of the Agreement for Professional
Services. Consultant may aft 0e requested to assist the County in plan review
ana approval by the State of Florida, inettidang responses to an Objections,
RecommenaaU= and Comments (ORC) Report, and/or presentations to the
E, Governor ano Cabinet Such sus shm be reimbursed as additional services
as ciirectoo by COuntY.
1
1
1
1
1
7
E7o-AB[T'B'
HOURLY MING RATES
The following are hourly billing rates for key WRT staff persons to be essignect to this
project Included in the hourly rates are all costs associated with tabor, overhead and
specific minor direct expenses as defined under Section 5. Compensation. Hourly rgoo-
are subject to modification annually. Subconsultant invoices wilt be reimbursed without
additional charge.
Founding Partner $155.00/Hr.
Partner4n.Charge $130.00/Hr.
Senior Plarmer $80.00,$100.00/Hr.
Plarmer/Project Coordinator $55.00-$65.00/Hr.
Gmphics-Technician/Clerical $30.00-$38.00/Hr.
B•1
. 4 .� .. �aclosure t 3) '
S«OXi� STxTLZ:L�'T %''Dial SECT:01 _�...�Zi3lfst. May ii. 1990
QORi�A STATCTrS_ OIL PUISLIC ��ITIii' CRS11riFS
FiIS FORI1i MUST BE S IGN= IN THE PRESENCL• OF A NOTARY PUBLIC OR On'= OI'FICI1l
,k=O]X= TO ADUMLSTEi1 OATHS.
I. '; his swoca statement >s sub:ztuted W101 Bid. Proposal or Coauaa No•
for Monroe County Co=rehensive Plan
Wallace Roberts 6 Todd -
This sworn statement is submitted by sworn stateateati
(dams oI entity sucm =g
whose busivats address is 191 Giralda Avenue — penthouse
Coral Gables, Florida 33134 arsd
(if appsicabie) its Federal Esnpicya iiseatiIInsioa Number (F'= is 23-1615 Z41
(If the entity flan to FM iactude the Social Seetaity Number of the udividuat signing this sworn
statemens:
_I
3. My name is John E. l;emsler dad anti relationship in-tts
Epp pruu name of individual algnutgl
CUM named above is „ Partner
a. 1 understand th:s a 'public entity crime as dewed in Paragtapd 287.233(2)(91, Ftorlda Stet =
means a violation of anti state or. federal law by *.person with respect to and directly relaud to the
transaction of business ante any public eatity or with as agency or political subdivision of any outer
state or with the United Stat= iactuding, but not limited to, any bid or contract for goods or
set Accz to be provided to any public entity or an agency or political subdivision of nay outer sate
or of the [Jailed. States and invomng antitrust. fraud. then, bribery, cailusioa.: ac3;e•.ee:tag,
eotsapiracy, or mmenat mistspmseatattoa.
S. I understand that •counted• or •conviction• as clod d in Paragraph 237.233(2)(b),,Flortds Stntntes.
means a finding of guilt or a coamcuon of a public entity aims, with or without an adludicauen of
guilt, in any federal or state trial court of record relating to charges brought by indictment or
iaforresuoa after July 1, 1989. as a result of a jury verdie:. aonjury trtai. or entry of a pica of guilty
or note contendae
6. I understaad that aa'afBMw as defined in Paragraph 287.133(1)(1) Finrid2 SMINIM taeaas:
1. A predecessor or succasar of a person convicted .of a public entity aiater or
2. Act entity under the coauat of nay natural person who is acuvc is the management of the
catity and who has been convicted of a public entity curse. The term 'affiliate' includes th se
offices. directors. atc:;rsm partners. sitsreholdets. employees. member4 and agents who arc active
to the management of an affiliate. The ownership by vac person of shales consurutiag a coatroliiag
interest to another persm or a pooling of equipment or income asn=9 Ferrous when not for fair
marice: value under as amn length agreement. shall be a prima facia cus that one pezon centres
anotaer person. A person who imcmn;ty enters into a joint venture with a penon who has been
coanczed of a public tauty acme is Florida airing the preceding 36 mcaths snail be co%. udemn an
aitlliate. - .
7. L understand that a 'person• as defined in Paragraph 237.233(i)(e), Florida SLttttes means any
natural person or entity organiTzA under tileny taws of astate or of flu United States with the legal
power to eater into a binding contract and whleh bids or applies to bid an contracts for the provision
of goods or services let by a public entity, or which otherwise ==a= or applies to transact bustaess
with a public enuty. The term "pence Includes those ofIIcets. directors:• executives. partners,
shareholders. employees, members. and agents who are active in managemeat of an entir :
8. Based on information and belief. the statement which I have marfced beiew is true in rcistion to the
erury submitting this sworn statement. (Please Indicate which statement applies.)
r
kv,
h
u
H
H
H
I',
11
I
H
R �+Olt�tCt-thC anury subttt usugwus-sworsmuzCtuc nl:IIl
parmeem soarsttotdeR, eatatOrees. metaaees:�r-sgests�vao are
nor am stall= of the eauty have orut caarged with a=
subsequens. to July 1, 1989.
caavw0d of a puwic eauty crt:ae
� TM sudlY submiuing tab sworn staumea. or one or - mare of the am cess,= alraaas._.
cm=uva% partnem ihareholden. employees. me Dcm or q ut who are acwn to name of _
the enury, or an sftiltam of the eaury has Dean caugod wltp and emnu ed of a pubic eauq owe
tubse4tteat to July 1. 1989. A= MGM lockets which addulanal summonsis appriss.l ,
'here has base a proassdla` ==Min the coavfottoa beforo a heaftr6aftr of
theTtataa of Florida. Dlvimm of Admtalstrattve mesump - The Vaal order ewam.by the
hetulag amar dud not place the person or amlSste on, uu co vmm veaaor der. iphma___
aam* a copy of the "al order l
13e petm or nit E= was plsoed an the odavlctd vaadorUSL ?base hss. bees a
sttbseott U prooee q befose a ham mg omcw- of the State of Fonds. lxvblwot
HeumigL Tie tlt:s,t order catered by tree hesnng otdeas amunlaed that it
(PIO/thaMM a iateset: to semvrs tru pes:oa os atrltlsto tam the ooavrcten veadQs l�
CM of the dw osdar j
'nre peace or staltau has am bees plaoed.oa.tha _vendor
diset�tbs� ant scam airs& by or pence ft *I* the Dspae:Dtms of Gaoem swrieaul.-I, •"
June 21, 1991
STATE OF
:OUN Y OF, tsC.
MtSONALLY APPEARED DUC RE b :the ttadealgmed su Amzyy,
&)n S. -Geymte-?e who. afsor f=t beta; swore by mr. att> h=cr sigaswra
Isms of radividum signta;l
tpue pr=ded above an tbts Zt uy of'UU'�G
My eoaaaission expires t
MWART rustic nAU of r:oeua A
Aw cO30mic'm oxmn ismmav 2s. INN
0
I T O F.RWF LATE IS I
'�� SSUED AS A MATT1`Fi INFOAMATfON OYLI' ANO i
COMFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE
DOES NOT AMEND. EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE Aia:OADtD BY THE
: r.�5 ISU SRAYC rE 01tP0RA'f1QN POLICIES BELOW.
; ; �OQ!�l.4IN i eZ E'::'SUITE 310 COMPANIES AFFORIDING COVERAGE
:;1 081143
srna v A uTICA ItCTTiAL : SE'_�RA5C' "'.
co1P�AN.3 CHIO CASUALTY (,'7.
.l'tTlA
:RED
ROBERTS & TODD
:iT�l+�+ C. iIl}: '1'P.AYEL= 55
to 6OUTH BROAD STREET ,��;"D CONTINENTALrl3z3aL:1 c:J.
";ADLFP'4I:1. FA 14102
eewAN• is
rrn�
>,aRAar�s �•c; PErmoc
WIG IS TO C£PTtFv T•+AT THE MUC3£S OF INSUIIANGE LISTED BELOW HAVE TEEM ISfUED TO THE rmem EO CUMEN W! --'- I''N T►JS
YOTIIWMMSTANO NG ANr 11tOU1REMlNT TCNM ORCON TION OF ANT CC'1T=TACT O>A OTME� O yE KIN 1SMSl.W CT Et 11L THETE-iTWI
eZRTIF CATE MAT e£ ISSUED OR MAT Nl11TAIN. THE IVSURANCEAF:ORDED 9Y THE �L�� CESClIIdED
XC.::SIOt11 ANO CONO'TIOt+13 OF 73L'CH FOLIC::S LIMItS SHM" MAW MA" I M NEDUCEC By FAIO C.A.M!
POLICT VMCT111E POLICT E2004t10"
*'rPq OF INsmama POUCTWUNSOM CATE 1MM = t•1
GG'492da1.C Q !� v f)
:LAENA\ r.+Aa1YT,
CiP"1.J�- : :.:LIYaw ::.t. L
C
CLttmENCIAL OMPAL LIA~C'r •K0,
.:.aeck� A &:,V 0 G
:.A1Ma 1JAoc X oc•-�+• C F F 13 5 9 3 9 9 5 i S; 9 I 51 S% Q 2 3 00 , U 00
eA�I occvrl�c��ce s,
a ?:w+t� s, GCNTT1AeTCl11•t IiQT. Fw OAMwOE .wr.. w «•.• s 50,00901
IS'= cams #AM+ w
0108NCo s kG►i
Ausawas •A LIAAILITr t
X AN. Auto
AIL avvfteO A JtOS lCO1L+ ehJ.Jw+ 1
scrccuMd AYTCS
BAU°U141917 lU/30i90 10/30/91
X ...ac0 Auscs
i M0`I.0r...li0 A.TOS
aAr1JwE _u►s1uT-
scmw INJus1,
►Mwe"ve
•�MC}�.r CAMAAC
66404 C:::*.; Pig _L
susE L1Aa+LlTr .• =:ev C ULr 13 6 9 4 0 2 S r 5 i 91 5 r 5/ 92 ``"'&i2--
_
X h,1YPEI.•
!-fja- .N JarePIL.A CCPM T;A1 ."•t!�!
wpp�Ell•! GpMPEN{ATION rLACM ACC nr
Are 6KLT1!316K153 4i 24/91 fl, 24192 wss"i-VOL0 -wT
[MPLorells• LIAaILITT 031E:-GA40
--
=5.:QU.�C'
s 5 . -,300 , QO�
3 500OU0
1 300:000
S500,000
-- e1.U0n.000 :.::Ili' AI;C&.,
OTNEII AAh;4313QA2 7!18/9n %!lfi/91 Iftj
PROFr—� IONAL 75.:)1�i1 DED. I'ER
ERRORS fi 0"I55IONS
lCRIPTION OF OP61141- Ns:LOCATI mam .
ADDI':TONAL :NSURED AS PER FUR4 CG20261185 ATTACHED.
HE: MONROE COUNTY. FL. I:0?1PREIIENSIVE PLAN.
:-"FICAT! HOLDER CLIClLLATiOM --
•LIES' BE CAVCELtED SEFLgE T;+E
MONROE COUNTY DIVISION
nc r^n1.�•rt; �. � N1Gi:;�lcu-r
5S25 .:3. COLLF.GL KOAD, DING 3
KEY WEST. 33040
ATTS: ROBERT H RMAN
,7nrr—ro n^ r,%?nt.;,rm MAXAG7,4?NT
SHOU:O ANW OF -mf! ABOVE DES.:AIMED'OL.
B VIRAT10N DATE 'F"t11t7l. w- NIL IS=YMIO C~ •wANr :t1:- �>>24sii�!cl�
MAIL�Ln SAT$ W*rr % NOr= T ' "" CZPTWICAT! "OLDER MAMEM TO T•I
ee� tn>tnet!11t7R1ET9�EIYSL><C�1Q�t.+�.��OLVIK'!��TfQ�QL.�l'.��t7(�7
ENV C P P 2 3 o 93 9 4- c:oM�lIiC 1I�l GENE AEI
THIS ENDGMEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE REDID IT CAREo:uu y.__
ADDITIONAL INSURED=DESIGNATEEY PERSON OF -
ORGANIZATION
This endorsement aeddies oasurance provided under the folbwing•
COMMERCIAL, GENERAL UABILITY COVERAGE PART.
SCHEDULE-
Manw of Feraaa or Mumli atlem
MONROE COUNTY, FL.
CIO MONROE COUNTT" DIVISION OF GROWTH HANAGEHENT
5625 JR. COLLEGE ROAp, WING 3
lCB2 WEST;_ FL".-. 33.040
RE: KONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
('Ina entry eppearsabow.infone�stionregtfintd to oom0latettas endorsarant ww be shown ire the 0eawanons
asapplicable to this a�doraament.)
WHO IS AN INSURED (Swbm if) b amended to induda as an insured the person at organization shown in the
SCh@cule as an assumd but aflywNh respect to babildy arising out of your operations or pre+mses ON "d by or
rent so to y=L
CG Z0 261185 C40wwm. fnsunmm terviQes Otfiet. One..1984 Q .
:SIRPREHENSIUE PLAN TEL:1-305-292-4538 Sep 12.91 17:30 P4o.017 P.02
PROPOSED PROJECT DEUYERABL&BGHEDUtE-
November 6, 1NI
Transmit Concepts Paper to County for inclusion in BOCC
agenda packet.
November 13, 1$01
Special Meeting of BOCC to select a Preferred Concept
(presentation).
November 20, 19V1
Optional second Meeting of BOCC to select a Preferred
Concept.
December 17, 1991
Transmit first draft of Goals, Objectives and Policies and draft
Future Land Use map, Future Traffic Circulation map and draft
capital improvements program- t*_ COUnty for- staff
consideration.
January 6, 1992
Transmit draft Comprehensive -Plan GOPs and Future land
Use map and element, Future Traffic Circulation map anc
draft capital improvements program to County for inclusion in
90CC agenda packet. --
January 13, 1992
First Special Melting of BOCC to review Future Land Use
Map and Element, and GOPs, Future Traffic Circulation map
and draft capital improvements program.
January 20, 1992
Second Special Mnsting of BOCC to review Future Land Use
Map and Element, and GOPS. Draft Plan elements (Pubiiu
Participation, Traffic, Housing, Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste,
Drainage, Potable Water arid Natural Groundwater Recharge,
Coastal Management and Conservation. Recreation and Open
Soacet, Intergovernmental Coordination. and C604fil
Improvements) transmitted to County staff for review.
January 27, ' 1992
Transmit full draft Plan to County for inclusion in BOCC
eyonda packet. Advertise for first public hearing.
February 3, 1992 '
Special Meeting of SOCC (first hearing) to consider
Comprehensive Plan (GOPs and all eldrnertts).
A caveat should be added that these dates indicate when the BOCC is proposed to take
action. If the BOCC fesis that it- Is unable to make a decision at that point, DCA must
Understand that they may legitimately request further investigation of -the issue/problem
by the Consultant and/or staff, and that any such direction would add time to this
schedule.
EXHIBIT E
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
TRANSMITTAL AND ADOPTION SCHEDULE
Nov 5, 1992 WRT sends working paper on carrying capacity
determination and level of service standards to
County.
Nov 61 1991 County receives working paper on carrying capacity
determination and level of service standards;
County distributes BOCC/PC agenda packet for Nov
13 meeting.
Nov 13, 1991 BOCC and PC hold joint meeting to consider
carrying capacity determination and LOS standards.
Dec 3, 1991 WRT sends working paper on alternative concepts to
County.
*Dec 4, 1991 County receives working paper on alternative
concepts; County distributes BOCC/PC agenda packet
for Dec 11 meeting (available to public).
Dec 11, 1991 BOCC and PC hold joint meeting to discuss
alternative plan concepts.
+Dec 180 1991 BOCC and PC hold joint meeting to select a plan
concept.
Jan 31, 1992 WRT sends draft of entire plan to County.
Feb 14, 1992 County sends comments on draft of entire plan to
WRT.
*Feb 27, 1992 County distributes draft copies of entire plan to
DCA, Intervenors, DRC, PC, and BOCC for courtesy
review (available to public).
+Mar 10, 1992 DRC holds a special.meeting to review the remedial
plan as an amendment to the existing plan per
9.50511(c)(d), MCLDR.
April 3, 1992 DCA staff and Intervenors send comments on plan to
County (cc: WRT).
April 6, 1992 Monroe County and WRT receive comments on plan
from Intervenors and DCA staff.
+April 16, 1992 PC holds a public hearing to review the
remedial plan as an amendment to the existing
plan per 9.5-511(3) and (4), MCLDR.
+*April 27, 1992 County staff receives revised plan from WRT
and distributes; send notice for May 14
cen1�15P(1)d F.S.
to run on
April 30per 633184((b)
May 4, 1992 County staff sends notice for May 21 meeting to
newspapers; ad to run on May 7 per
163.3184(15)(b)(2), F.S.
+May 14, 1992 BOCC holds first public hearing to transmit the
remedial plan to DCA per 163.3184(15)(b)(1), F.S.
+May 21, 1992 BOCC holds second public hearing to transmit the
remedial plan to DCA per 163.3184(15)(b)(2),
+*May 26, 1992 WRT transmits the proposed plan to DCA for review.
Aug 17, 1992 DCA sends ORC report to County per 163.3184(6),
F.S.
t revised
+oct 16, 1992 reeme ialdplanblic hearing
and LandDenvelopmet Regulation per
163.3184(7)1 F.S.
+*Oct 21, 1992 county transmits adopted plan to DCA for review.
ing
+Dec 71 1992 DCA snds NOtiCs statusoofIntent adoptedoCounty rem dialrplandper
compliance
163.3184(7), F.S.
Dec
21,
1992
DCA notices proposed rule pursuant to Ch. 380,
F.S.
Jan
2,
1993
Notice of proposed rule appears.
Jan
24,
1993
Public hearing on DCA proposed rule.
Feb
4,
1993
File proposed rule with Secretary of State.
Feb
24,
1993
Ruecomes effective
le approving
io aunty plan bhearingsp etc.).
ohallnge,
(subject rule
BOCC - Board of County Commissioners
DRC - Development Review Committee
PC - Planning Commission
DCA - Department of Community Affairs
ORC - objections, Recommendations, and Comments
LDR --Land Development Regulations
i
BOCC
Meetings
Nov
13,
1991
Dec
11,
1991
Dec
i8,
1991
May
140
1992
May
21,
1992
Oct
16,
1992
Carrying Capacity/LOS
Alternative Concepts
Alternative Concepts
Transmittal Hearing
Transmittal Hearing
Adoption Hearing
PC Meetings
Nov 131 1991 Carrying Capacity/LOS
Dec 11, 1991 Alternative Concepts
Dec 18, 1991 Alternative Concepts
April 16, 1992 Review Amendment
DRC Meetincts
Mar 10, 1992 Review Amendment
Key West Lions Club 9:00 AM
TBA
TBA
Key Largo Library
9:00
AM
TBA
5:05
PM
TBA
5:05
PM
TBA
5:05
PM
Key West Lions Club 9:00 AM
TBA TEA
Key Largo Library 9:00 AM
TEA TEA
TEA
TBA
* highlight dates for distribution of documents to Intervenor/
DCA/public.
+ target dates subject to sanctions (Paragraph 20, Joint Stipulated
Settlement Agreement).
h�=t '•. — i — '-:4 1 E i 1 '-� �_. U r•1 r•1 11 r-4 1 I t F-: H 1 r' r- r-'
7
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
2 7 S 0 C E N T E R V I E W D R I V E I T A L L A H A S S E E, F L O R I D A 3 2 3 9 9- 2 1 0 0
LAWTON CHILES
Govcmor
October 24, 1991
WILLIAM E, SADOWSKI
Sccretary
Commissioner Jack London
Board of County Commissioners
Monroe County
Key West, Florida 33040
Dear Commissioner London:
I was delighted to have an opportunity to meet with you and
members of the Monroe County planning staff on October 15, 1991
and to discuss the Joint stipulated settlement Agreement to
revise the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. I commend your
Board of County Commissioners and planning staff for their
persistence and dedication to revising the County plan and feel
we have made significant progress in reaching a mutually
agreeable solution to accomplish this goal. I particularly
appreciate the insight and local political knowledge you were
able to bring to the table throughout the negotiation meeting.
It is clear that your presence served to enlighten Department
staff, as well as the Intervenors, as to the positions and
concerns of Monroe County.
The Department was persuaded by the County's justification
for an earlier disbursement of planning assistance funds and the
need for additional flexibility in the plan submission and review
schedule. Therefore, the funding schedule in Part II of the
agreement has been revised. A portion of the funds available to
the County will be disbursed upon execution of the agreement,
with additional disbursements at plan transmittal and adoption
phases. The balance of the funds will be disbursed once the plan
is found to be in compliance. I hope that the revised plan
submission and review schedule (Exhibit E) is both flexible and
realistic, and will provide adequate opportunities for public
participation - an essential component in any comprehensive
planning effort.
E.MERCENCY .MANAGEMENT • HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
PIIII�I
t o ID 'v' — i`— '_1 I T 1_I E I mo_ 0 i=: C, r•1 r•1 I_I r-4 I T• i' P 1::4 R' T t-a E R' H I F' P R P. iD c
Commissioner Jack London
October 24, 1991
Page 2
we also discussed various Department and State initiatives
in the Florida Keys. These efforts include land acquisition
programs, water quality initiatives, coordination with the
Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) and the
Florida Keys Resource planning and Management Committee (RPMC).
This Department's goal is to help the County define its
vision of the future, a vision that is both practicable and
attainable. We will continue to support enhanced land
acquisition efforts in the Florida Keys as the county
comprehensive plan develops. We will Continue our support for
state acquisition efforts under the CARL, Preservation 2000 and
Florida Communities Trust programs. And we will support
appropriate legislative changes to enhance the Land Authority
efforts, as well as regional acquisition efforts such as the
South Florida Water Management Committee's Save our Rivers
acquisition program on Big Pine Key. Finally, to the extent
necessary, we will continue to cooperate with private acquisition
efforts such as those of the Florida Land and Sea Trust and the
Nature Conservancy@
water quality initiatives include the Department's
participation as core state staff to the Florida Keys National
marine Sanctuary program. The Department has pledged staff to
assist in the development of a management plan with a major
emphasis dealing with water quality issues. The National Marine
Sanctuary Management Plan will look at local needs related to
correcting identified pollution sources. DCA will facilitate
implementation through support of federal and state funding
earmarked to correct facility deficiencies and water quality
programs.
Coordination with the Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services will focus on development of a new
Florida Keys rule for septic tanks. The Department will also
request HRS assistance in establishing a septic tank monitoring
program for the Keys.
The Governor recently recommended that the Legislature
transfer the State's Coastal Zone Management Program to this
Department (from the Department of Environmental Regulation).
This will enhance the Department's ability to assist in
interagency coordination efforts related to coastal zone
activities in the Keys (e.g., regulation of sanitary sewer
systems).
The Resource Planning and Management Committee could
facilitate coordination of county -wide issues such as water
quality and interagency coordination. The water quality
initiatives under the National Sanctuary program will also be
coordinated with the Florida Keys RPMC.
t-lO'•:'- 1--1 T U E 1 5: 21 1 17Gh1MU1-4 I T''r' F'HF:TtJEF: S H I F' F'R F' . 0k---•
1111
I .,
Commissioner Jack London
October 24, 1991
Page 3
i appreciate your specific request that the Department join
the County in defense of possible future civil rights challenges
directed against the new plan. I have directed the General
counsel's office to advise me in respect to whether the
Department could assume responsibility for damage awards
resulting from such claims.
Notwithstanding, I can assure you that the Department is
prepared to actively assist the County in defending the approved
comprehensive plan against lawsuits which challenge the integrity
or legality of the plan. The question of financial
responsibility is a more complex issue. Initial research
confirms that, under both state and federal constitutions,
statutes and case law, the Department is immune from this type of
suit, and such immunity can only be waived by general law passed
by the Legislature. Specifically, a state agency such as the
Department is prohibited from agreeing to accept financial
liability and waiving this liability by contract. It is clear
from Article X, Section 13, Florida Constitution, that only the
Legislature can waive sovereign immunity by way of general law.
Pursuant to the doctrine of sovereign immunity and applicable
Florida law, the prescribed method of collection against a state
agency such as the Department would be to file a claims bill with
the Florida Legislature. It is noteworthy that the Department of
Insurance, Division of Risk Management, which provides coverage
for suits against the state, specifically exempts suits for
eminent domain and inverse condemnation.
As we agreed in the October iS meeting, the Department will
prepare a memorandum of understanding or "protocol" which fully
reflects its position in this matter, including our willingness
to actively assist the County in any future litigation regarding
implementation and compliance of the comprehensive plan.
I appreciate the continued cooperation and dedication of the
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners and staff in the
effort to finalize a Joint Stipulated Settlement Agreement. If
we can keep this effort on track the result will be a
comprehensive plan that comports with both the letter and spirit
of Florida's Growth Management Act, and establishes an exciting
vision for the future of Monroe County.
Very truly yo s,
W liam E. Sadowski
secretary
T1_IE 1 5 _ -1 1 171_1r'1r•11_1F4 I T`f' F'HF:TF4EF:SH I F' F'F: F . CI i
Commissioner Jack London
October 24, 1991
Page 4
cc: Mayor Wilhelmina Harvey
commissioner John Stormont
Commissioner Earl Cheal
Commissioner Doug Jones
C:I W PS 11PB.WDCAILONWNLR.C24