Resolution 194-1998
County Attorney
RESOLUTION NO, 194 -1998
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, EVIDENCING THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF A RECOMMENDED ORDER
OF DETERMINATION OF VESTED RIGHTS PROMULGATED BY THE VESTED RIGHTS
HEARING OFFICER, IN RE: THE APPLICATION OF TAYLOR POINT CORP.
WHEREAS, on January 4, 1996, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
became effective; and
WHEREAS, development applications "in the pipeline" as of January 4, 1996 are subject
to a determination of vested rights pursuant to Policy 101.18.1 of the Plan; and .. 1'\
~oSr=
WHEREAS, a hearing on the application of Taylor Point Corp. for deterJ;g'o~f~ted
or--<. . 1'\
rights was held before the County's Vested Rights Hearing Officer, Mr. Randy ~~r, ~; 6jd
C::;i~ -0 ;0
WHEREAS, pursuant to a review of the application and attached eXhi~in~g~er~ith
. :-':Po "9 C)
.." C> '" ;0
the Director of Planning's memorandum dated November 3, 1997, the~emin~fJleer
promulgated on April 6, 1998 an Order regarding that application for determination of vested
rights; now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,
FLORIDA:
The Findings of Fact set forth in Paragraphs 1 - 4, and Conclusions of Law set forth in
Paragraphs 5 - 11 of the Recommended Order of the Vested Rights Hearing Officer are
approved. Paragraph 11 of the Recommended Order is modified to provide
(1) that this determination of Vested Rights shall terminate two years from the
date of this Resolution; and
(2) applicant shall submit a complete building permit application for all
development within the scope of this Vested Rights determination, no later than six (6)
months from the date of this Resolution, and shall secure a Certificate of Occupancy
prior to the expiration of the two-year termination date of this determination of Vested
Rights.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting of the Board held on the 13th day of May, 1998.
Mayor Jack London
Commissioner Keith Douglass
Commissioner Shirley Freeman
Comn;1issioner Wilhelmina Harvey
./~..;,~-,. C~9mml$sioner Mary Kay Reich
t;:~"t:Jf':""~"" i;' ,~.~':-.._;~ -".~.
] ."',,- I\-'f ..p.
\~,~\~' ',-~ r>iil.)
, (SEAt) h-~~~~I
Att~~n Y L. KOLHAGE, Clerk
yes
yes
yes
absent
yes
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MON COUNTY, FLORIDA
By'P.rrQ g~~ .
Dep y Cle
~;
Mayor/Chairman
jvrrestaylor
BEFORE THE VESTED RIGHTS
HEARING OFFICER IN AND FOR
MONROE, COUNTY FWRlDA
INRE:
THE VESTED RIGHTS APPLICATION OF:
Taylor Point Corp,
/
This cause came on to be heard by the Vested Rights Hearing Officer, who, after having reviewed
the application and exhibits, heard oral presentation of the Applicant and hislher attorney, if any, makes the
following findings offact and conclusions oflaw:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I, This Vested Rights Recommended Order pertains to the following described property:
Lots I, 2, 3 and 4 of Taylor's Point according to the
map or plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 4, Page
148 of the Public Records of Monroe County
2. The Applicant has taken the following actions to obtain approval for the development sought:
a, December 7, 1993, a pre-application conference, pursuant to S9.5-43 Monroe County
Code was held between representatives of the Applicant and staff of the Monroe County
Planning Department;
b. May 5, 1994, a Letter of Understanding, pursuant to S9.5-43, regarding the pre-
application conference was issued by Lorenzo Aghemo, Director of Planning, which states
in part "[pJursuant to S9.5-43 of the Monroe County Land Development Regulations, the
applicant is entitled to rely upon the representations set forth in this letter of
understanding, as accurate under the regulations currently in effect";
c. The delay in the issuance of the Letter of Understanding was the result "staffing
constraints" within the Planning Department;
d, The Letter of Understanding indicates that there are existing uses of the subject
property; that the extension of use sought was a for a restaurant of2,672 square feet and a
Gift shop of 400 square feet; that such use in a Mixed Use Land Use District would
require a Minor Conditional Use and that the existing marina, which would have required
a Major Conditional Use if developed under the then existing Land Development
Regulations, such being the case, the application would be treated as an "amendment to a
Major Conditional Use".
e. An Application for Development Approval (minor conditional use) based on the Letter
of Understanding was submitted August 31, 1994:
f October 3, 1994 a letter acknowledging receipt of the application was issued by Silvia
Vargas, Senior Planner, Monroe County Planning Department, indicating that the
application lacked certain items and specifically addressed was the requirement that the
application include either an on-site sewage treatment plant or connection to an existing
sewage treatment plant;
g. The letter made no indication that electing either alternative for wastewater disposal
would affect the processing of the application;
h, February 28, 1995, Lorenzo Aghemo issued a letter in which it was determined that,
by shared use of sewage treatment facility, among other reasons, the proposed
development would be aggregated with Key Largo Bay Beach Resort;
i. The aggregation issue was the subject of a series of correspondence between Lorenzo
Aghemo, John Weller, architect for the project and Andrew Tobin, attorney for Taylor
Point, Corp. which culminated in a May 5, 1995 letter from Lorenzo Aghemo to John
Weller which maintained the County position on aggregation as set forth in the February
28, 1995 letter by Lorenzo Aghemo;
j. September 6, 1995, a hearing before the Monroe Planning Commission was held on the
Applicant's appeal from an administrative decision;
k. At the proceeding, Planning staff reversed their position on aggregation apparently
rendering moot the appeal of an administrative decision;
1. October 5, 1995, Andrew Tobin, Esquire sent a letter to Antonia Gerl~ Acting Planning
Director, seeking final development review of the project;
m. The record is unclear on the exact time, but at some point during 1995, a revised plan
was submitted by the Applicant and accepted by the County for a project differing
significantly from that envisioned by the Letter of Understanding of May 5, 1994:
construction of 2,933 square foot restaurant; renovation of 1800 square feet of office
space and 20 I 8 square feet of new retail space;
n. It is understood by both Parties that it is the revised proposal which is the subject of this
Vested Rights review;
o. The next response in the record is an August 14, 1996 letter from Jake Jacobus,
Monroe County Development Review, which determined that the project is a high
intensity use requiring a Major Conditional Use approval;
p. Upon further analysis, Staff determined that the Marina use cited in the Letter of
Understanding was not a true Marina use and the applicant demonstrated that the
proposed development was not a high intensity development for the proposes of traffic
generation impact.
3, The Applicant has been diligent and acting in good faith in pursuing the development sought and
has substantially changed it's position by continuing to expend a substantial sum in the application process;
4. The development (application process) has commenced and has continued in good faith without
interruption.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
5. Item 1 b above constitutes an approval, pursuant to ~9.5-43, Monroe County Code, upon
which the Applicant could justifiably rely, Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, Policy 101,18.2
(1).
6. It is the opinion of the County that a Letter of Understanding pursuant to ~9.5-43, Monroe
County Code, is not an "approval for development", (See memorandum of Tim McGerry dated November 3,
1997 attached as exhibit I).
7, The Plan states that, among other things, vested rights may be granted if the applicant
"reasonably relied upon an official act by the County." ~101.I82 (2)(a) Monroe county Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan.
8. Further, the Plan states an official act may be "one or more valid unexpired pennits or
approvals issued by Monroe County, ... ," ~101.I8.2 (2)(a)(l) Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive
Plan (emphasis added).
9, The proper analysis, under the facts of this Application, is whether the Letter of Understanding
was an "official act by the County" upon which the Applicant could have "reasonably relied" and it is the
conclusion of the undersigned that it is, when coupled with the remainder of the Findings of Fact contained
in paragraph 2, above.
10, It would be highly inequitable or unjust to affect the rights of the Applicant by requiring the
Applicant to conform with the Plan. Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, Policy IOI.l8.2
(2)(b ),
II. It is the recommendation of the undersigned that the Applicant's request for Vested Rights be
Granted subject to the following restrictions:
a, The geographic scope of this Determination is limited to the scope relative to the total
area of the development site as contemplated by the revised plans submitted by Mr, Weller
in 1995;
b. The duration of this Determination and its termination shall be as provided by law as it
existed immediately prior to the effective date of the Plan;
c. The substantive scope of this Determination shall be as contemplated by the revised
plans submitted by Mr. Weller in 1995;
d, By virtue of this determination, the Applicant is entitled to development as
contemplated by the May 5, 1994 Letter of Understanding as modified by the plans
submitted in 1995 by Mr. Weller and is subject to the Monroe County Land Development
Regulations existing January 4, 1996, however, amendments to the Monroe County
Land Development Regulations shall apply if such amendments would have applied to the
development notwithstanding Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan:
e. The Applicant is entitled to the construction contemplated by the Letter of
Understanding of May 5, 1994, as modified by the plans submitted by Mr. Weller in 1995,
so long as the construction is timely commenced and subject to quarterly reporting to
ensure that development is continuing in good fuit~
DONE AND ORDERED at Marathon, Monroe County,
~ ,1998.
Florida this ~day of
z~~
~,
Randolph W. a tier, squire
FBN 377163
Vested Rights Hearing Officer