Item R5BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: January 16, 2013 Division: Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes No X Department: Plannina & Environmental Resources
Staff Contact Person/Phone #: Christine Hurley — 289-2500
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing to consider approval of an Ordinance amending Section 130-
160 of the Monroe County Code, Transferable Development Rights, to revise the Land Development
Regulations to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and to clarify the application and approval process for
the transfer of a Transferable Development Right (TDR).
ITEM BACKGROUND: A modification is necessary to address a direct inconsistency with Policy 101.13.4 of
the Comprehensive Plan, which provides criteria for sender sites. Per Policy 101.13.4, a sender site is eligible to
transfer a TDR if a) it is zoned Offshore Island (OS), Mainland Native (NISI), Native Area (NA), Sparsely
Settled (SS), Parks and Refuge (PR), or Conservation (C) and b) one of the specified environmentally sensitive
habitat types exists on the sender site. Policy 101.13.4 does not list any criteria for a receiver site; therefore, any
site that has a maximum net density is eligible to receive a TDR. The criteria for sender and receiver sites, as
set out in Section 13 0-160, are not consistent with Policy 101.13.4.
In addition, modifications are necessary to:
* Address inconsistencies with Comprehensive Plan Policies 101.13.2 and 101.13.3, where additional
restrictions/requirements concerning Big Pine Key, No Name Key and North Key Largo are not reflected in
the land development regulations;
* Clarify that the following Land Use (Zoning) Districts shall not be permitted as receiver sites because they
do not have a maximum net density: Improved Subdivision (IS, IS-D, IS-M, or IS-V), Urban Residential
Mobile Home (URM or URM-limited), Mainland Native (MN), Native Area (NA), Offshore Island (OS), or
Sparsely Settled (SS); and
* Clarify that a TDR may be transferred in part provided it is rounded to the nearest tenth. However, in no
event shall a property owner utilize part of a sender site's acreage as the land use intensity shall be
exhausted.
* Clarify that the sender site shall be either dedicated to the County or be placed in a conversation easement
prohibiting its future development.
During a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 24, 2012, the Development Review Committee reviewed
the subject request and recommended approval to the BOCC. The Planning Commission held a public hearing
on May 30, 2012, and recommended approval to the BOCC.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: The 1986 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan altered permitted
residential development densities and intensities, and as a result the development potential of some parcels was
limited. To address this issue and to preserve undisturbed and environmentally sensitive resources, in the 1990s
the BOCC adopted a TDR program (Comprehensive Plan Objective 101.13 and associated policies & MCC
§9.5-265 of the Monroe County Development Regulations). Subsequently, MCC §9.5-265 was renumbered to
MCC § 130-160.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: nla
STAFF RE C OMNIENDATIONS : Approval
TOTAL COST: NIA INDIRECT COST: NIA BUDGETED: Yes No NIA
DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE: NIA
COST TO COUNTY: NIA SOURCE OF FUNDS: NIA
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No NIA AMOUNT PER MONTH NIA Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty x OMB/Purchasing Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
6L },
MEMORANDUM
MONROE COUNTY PLANNING &ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
We strive to be caring, professional and fair
To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
Through: Christine Hurley, AICP, Director of Growth Management
Townsley Schwab, Sr. Director of PI & Environmental Resources
From: Steven Biel, Senior Planner
Date: December 27, 2012
Subj ect: AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AMENDING MONROE COUNTY CODE SECTION 130-160)
TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, TO REVISE THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE MONROE
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; TO CLARIFY THE APPLICATION AND
APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE TRANSFER OF A TRANSFERABLE
DEVELOPMENT RIGHT; PROVID NG FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING
FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR
TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLAAWING AGENCY AND THE
SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDJIVG
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
Meeting: January 16, 2013
I REQUEST
The Planning &Environmental Resources Department is proposing an amendment to the text
of §130-160 of the Monroe County Code, which concerns the County's regulations relating
to transferable development rights (TDRs).
II RELEVANT PRIOR COUNTY ACTIONS:
Language concerning transferable development rights exists in both the Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan and the Monroe County Code.
The following is an excerpt for the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Technical Document (page 2-105) that explains the purpose and history of the TDR program:
In order to better protect certain environmentally sensitive sites, the 1986 Monroe
County Comprehensive Plan, prepared in accordance with Chapter 380, Florida Statutes
(Areas of Critical State Concern), greatly altered permitted residential development
densities and intensities. In the process, some parcels were rendered unbuildable. In
some cases, parcels were too small to permit development of a single family unit at the
new lower permitted densities. To address this problem and to avoid any potential
Page I of 8 ale #2012-035)
1 property "takings," as well as to preserve undisturbed and environmentally sensitive
2 resources, a Monroe County Transferable Development Rights (TDR) program was
3 adopted. The purpose of this program is to mitigate the impact of new development
4 regulations on development expectations and property rights by allowing rights to
5 develop to be transferred (or sold) from properties which have limited development
6 potential.
7
8 Under the County's current TDR regulations in the Monroe County Code, any development using
9 TDRs must be approved as a minor conditional use, which requires at least the review and approval
10 of the Development Review Committee and Planning Director. Additional development density is
11 allowed for TDR receiver sites, up to the maximum net density of the receiver site's Future Land Use
12 Designation and Land Use District. Before a building permit is issued for development using TDRs, a
13 deed of transfer must be recorded on the sender site with a covenant prohibiting any development
14 which would require the use of the density that was transferred from the site. Under these current
15 provisions, TDRs may be transferred from parcels in the County with the identified habitat and
16 zoning districts to another parcel as long as the allocated density of the receiver site is greater or equal
17 to the allocated density of the sender site, and the habitat type of the receiver site is not more sensitive
18 that the habitat type of the sender site. TDRs may be used for the development of hotel units, but not
19 for any other commercial development.
20
21 Note: MCC §9.5-265 was renumbered to MCC §130-160. No changes to the provisions were
22 made at the time of the organizational renumbering.
23
24 During a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 24, 2012, the Development Review
25 Committee reviewed the subject request and recommended approval to the Board of County
26 Commissioners.
27
28 During a regularly scheduled public hearing held on May 30, 2012, the Planning
29 Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance and recommended approval to the Board of
30 County Commissioners.
31
32 III REVIEW
33
34 A modification is necessary to address a direct inconsistency with Policy 101.13.4 of the
35 Comprehensive Plan. Policy 101.13.4 provides criteria for sender sites (see policy below).
36 Per Policy 101.13.4, a sender site is eligible to transfer a TDR if a) it is zoned Offshore
37 Island (OS), Mainland Native (MN), Native Area (NA), Sparsely Settled (SS), Parks and
38 Refuge (PR) or Conservation (C) and b) if it is contains one or more of the specified
39 environmentally sensitive habitat types exists on the sender site. Policy 101.13.4 does not
40 provide any direct criteria for a receiver site. Therefore, any site that has a maximum net
41 density that can be achieved is eligible to receive a TDR.
42
43 In addition, modification is necessary to address inconsistencies with Policies 101.13.2 and
44 101.13.3 of the Comprehensive Plan where additional restrictions/requirements are not
45 reflected in the Monroe County Code.
46
Page 2 of 8 (File #2012-035)
I A modification is necessary to clarify that a TDR may be transferred in part provided it is
2 rounded to the nearest tenth. However, in no event shall a property owner utilize part of a
3 sender site's acreage as the land use intensity shall be exhausted.
4
5 Finally, it is necessary to clarify that the sender site shall be either dedicated to the County or
5 be placed in a conservation easement prohibiting its future development.
7
8 The following comprehensive plan policies relate to the criteria of the county's TDR
9 program.
Ob
9 Jec�l0�: Monroe County shall adopt innovative Land Development Regulations which
implement the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Such regulations shall
include a Permit Allocation System for residential and non-residential development and revisions
to the existing Transferable Development Rights (TDR) regulations to address existing
deficiencies in the TDR program.
Policy 101.13.2: By January 4, 1998, Monroe County shall evaluate the existing TDR program
and adopt Land Development Regulations which address identified deficiencies in the program.
The following issues shall be considered in evaluating the program:
1. revision to the current tax policy whereby owners of sites which have transferred
development rights continue to pay taxes on such rights until development orders have been
issued for the transferred rights at the receiver sites;
2. establishment of criteria for designation of sender and receiver sites based upon factors such
as the environmental characteristics of the land;
3. establishment of mechanisms to enhance the value and marketability of TDRs such as
assigning density bonuses to receiver sites;
4. clarification of the status of sites which have transferred development rights, including the
possible requirements that sender sites be dedicated as public or private open space through
conservation easement or other mechanism. At a minimum, the LDRs shall be revised to
require that a restrictive covenant be recorded on the sender site deed at the time of the
Allocation Award for the Permit Allocation System; and
5. establishment of a management and accounting system to tract TDRs.
Polled 01.13 3: The Maximum Net Density is the maximum density allowable with the use of
TDRs, and shall not exceed the maximum densities established in this plan. The assignment of
TDRs to Big Pine Key, No Name Key, and North Key Largo from other areas of the County shall
be prohibited.
PoligL 101;13 4: In conjunction with the evaluation of the existing TDR program pursuant to
Policy 101.13.2, parcels within the following habitats and land use districts shall be designated as
sender sites for Transferable Development Rights (TDRs),-
Any parcel within these zoning categories:
Offshore Island (OS) Sparsely Settled (SS)
Main land Native (MN) Parks and Refuge (PR)
Native (NA) Conservation (C)
Habitat of the following types which lie within any zoning category:
Freshwater wetlands
Saltmarsh/Buttonwood wetlands
Page 3 of 8 (File #2012-035)
I High quality high hammock
2 High quality low hammock
3 Moderate quality high hammock
4 Moderate quality low hammock
5 High quality pinelands
6 Low quality pinelands
7 Beach berm
8 Palm Hammock
9 Cactus Hammock
10 Disturbed Wetlands
11
12 The criteria set forth in the Monroe County Code are not consistent with those set forth in
13 Policy 101.13.4. Per MCC §130-160, there is not any direct criteria for a sender site.
14 However, one of the criterion for a receiver site states that the allocated density of the
15 receiver site shall be greater than or equal to the allocated density of the parcel from which
16 the TDR is severed and the sensitivity of the receiver site, as shown in MCC §118-7(1), is
17 less than or equal to the sensitivity of the parcel from which the TDR is severed. This
18 criterion does not limit the sender site to be in any of the land use districts specified in Policy
19 101.13.1 or does not limit the sender site to contain any of the specified habitat types.
20 Therefore, the land development regulation is more liberal than the superseding
21 comprehensive plan policy. The Monroe County Code should be amended to provide
22 consistency.
23
24 MCC § 130-160 does not expressly state that a restrictive covenant be recorded on the sender
25 site deed at the time of the Allocation Award for the Permit Allocation System as required by
26 Policy 101.13.2. The Monroe County Code should be amended to also state this requirement
27 rather than rely on an applicant to understand that the comprehensive plan contains additional
28 requirements.
29
30 MCC §130-160 does not expressly state that TDRs cannot be transferred to Big Pine Key, No
31 Name Key and North Key Largo, as stated in Policy 101.13.3. The Monroe County Code
32 should be amended to also state this requirement rather than rely on an applicant to
33 understand that the comprehensive plan contains additional requirements.
34
35 Staff is also proposing revisions to MCC §130-160(a) to remove references to an Improved
36 Subdivision (IS, IS-D, IS-M, or IS-V) lot being a valid receiver site. It is unclear why this
37 language exists as the Improved Subdivision (IS) districts do not have a maximum net
38 density. Also, to clarify that the following Land Use (Zoning) Districts shall not be
39 permitted as receiver sites because they do not have a maximum net density: Urban
40 Residential Mobile Home (URM or URM-limited), Mainland Native (MIS, Native Area
41 (NA), Offshore Island (OS), or Sparsely Settled (SS). Furthermore, clarification is being
42 provided in that a transferrable development right must be transferred in whole and that a
43 development right cannot be partially transferred.
44
45 In addition, staff is proposing revisions to the procedure for obtaining approval. The
46 revisions are necessary in order to clarify the existing process. Staff is not adding or
47 removing any of the procedural steps. A minor conditional use permit is currently required
Page 4 of 8 (Fite #2012-035)
I and shall continue to be required. As a note, the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan does
2 not contain any policy providing direction as how to approve the transfer of a TDR.
3
4 Therefore, staff recommends the following changes (deletions are and
5 additions are underlined) :
6
7 Sec. 130-160. Transferable development rights.
8
9 (a) General and criteria. All residential development rights allocated or established in
10 sections 130-157, J W � �4.% �~% �--� and 130;162 are be transferable -
11 from one parcel of land to alnzr Q another parcel of land, ' -
12 , provided that the sender and receiver sites
13 meet all of the following criteria:
14
15%VJLnet •i
16 '
1
17
18 •
19 .
20 -
WAX
21-}
22
23
24LA mnent .
5cxhLA%,� of
25 -
26 . .
27 •
2$ •
29
30
31 ilancity,
32% .
33'
34
35 1 A sender site is the land area from which the development rights to be transferred_ is
36 derived. In the event an a licant intends to only use art of a 2reater pMpeAY for a
37 transferrable develo ment right a lication the additional land area not required to
38 amass the transferable development ri ht s shall not be considered art of the sender
39 site and not sub' ect to conservation as required in subsection (8). As part of the
40 a lication required in subsection b 2 the applicant shall vrovide a boundga
41 survey and le al description that i dentify the boundaries of the sender site within the
42 greater rrovert `.
43
44 A sender site shall _ be within one of the foil owing_ Land Use(Zonin ) Districts in
45 subsection a and contain at least one of the following habitat types in subsection b
Page 5 of 8 (File #2012-035)
1
Cal -Land Use
(Zoning) Districts: Conservation (C) Mainland Native (MN,
Native
2
Area (1tilA),
Offshore Island OS Parks and Refu e PR or Sparsely
Settled
3
4
(b) Habitat Tvpes:
Freshwater wetlands Saltmarsh/Buttonwood wetlands,
5
quality high
hanunock, High quality low hammock Moderate quality
--.High
him
6
hammock,
Moderate quality low hammock High quality pinelands Low
qualitX
7
pinelands.
Beach/berm. Palm Hammock Cactus Hammock and/or Disturbed
8
wetlands-
9
10
2
The maximum net densities set forth in sections 130- 157 and 130- 1 62 shall not be
11
exceeded and new development on a receiver site shall be .developed in compliance
12
with each and ever re uirement of this Land Development Code.
13
14
3
The maximum net densities set forth for the gpiplicable future land use category in the
15
com rehensive plan shall not be exceeded and new development on a receiver site
16
shall be developed in compliance with each and every re uirement of the
17
comprehensive plan.
18
19
(4_)
The assignment of transferable development rights to receiver sites designated tier 1
20
shall be prohibited.
21
22
(5)
The assignment of transferable development rights to receiver sites on Big Pine Key,,
23
No Name Key, and North Key Largo from other areas of the CoIM,. shall be
24
,prohibited, excluding the assignments of transferable„ development rights a) from
25
sender sites on Bip, Pine Key to receiver sites on..BI2 Pine Ike • b from sender sites
25
on No Name Key to receivers sites on No Name Key, and c from sender sites within
27
North Key Largo to receiver sites within North Key Largo.
28
29
(6)
The assi pment of transferable development rights to receiver sites within_ Land Use
30
Zonin Districts that do not have a maximum net densities is rohibited Cincluding.,
31
but not limited to Improved Subdivision IS IS-D IS-M or IS-V Urban Residential
32
Mobile Home URM or URM-limited Spars UISettled (SS), Native Area NA
33
offshore Island D S and Mainland Native MN .
34
35
7
A development right may be transferred in art provided it is rounded to the nearest
36
tenth *i.e. if a sender site is designated Native Area�NA and consists only of two 2
37
acres of upland, the..prgperty owner may transfer the fractional 0.50 transferable
38
development right). However in accordance with subsection $ in no event shall a
39
moperty owner utilize part of a sender site's„ acreage for a transferrable development
40
ri ht and maintain the ri ht to develop that acres a as the land use inten,sity shall be
41
exhausted.
42
43
$
Prior to application for a buildina vermit authorizing the develo ment of a residential
44
dwelling unit on a receiver site requiring,a transferable development ri ht the sender
45
sites shall be a dedicated to the Count or !21 laced in a conservation easement
46
prohibiting its future development. A conservation easement shall be reviewed and
Page 6 of 8 (File #2012-035)
1 Lapproved by the Plannin and Environmental Resources Department rior to its
2 recording_in the official, records of the County.
4 (b) Procedure. The transfer of development rights shall be carried out as follows:
5 IV V
8
to '(2.) ThkLe tr-afiSfar Af J ia; wal Anm iant
11
12 •
13 •
14
1546, •
16 thia trAnqfAmad dgh=Q34317
17 LI) A minor conditional use pennit shall be required to identif determine the eli ibilit
18 of and document the approval of the sender and receiver sitepursuant to the vrocess
19 set forth in section 110-69. If a single receiver site is proposed to receive transferable
20 development n'jahts from multi le sender sites a conditional use permit application
21 for each sender site shall be required. All sender and receiver sites associated with a
22 proposed transfer of a transferable development right shall be identified at the time of
23 amlicatxon*
24 2 The minor conditional use Permit a lication required in subsection b 1) shall be
25 submitted in a form provided b the Planninja and Environmental Resources
26 Department and include the follo�vin
27 al The names and addresses of the vroperty owners of record for the sender site s
28 and receiver sites •
29 121 The propertv record cards from the Monroe C Property A
Mraiser of the
30 sender sites and receiver site s
31 c written legal descri tions of the sender sites and receiver sites •
32 d A copy of the affidavit of intent to_transfen
33 e Boundga surve sand legal descriptions of the sender sites and receiver
34 site s, prepared by a surveyor registered in the State of Florida, showiU the
35 boundaries of the sites, elevations, bodies of water and wetlands, total acres e,
36 total -upland acres a and total acreage by habitat- and
37 _ vegetative studies of the sender sites) and receiver sites}.
38 3 A development order shall memorialize a royal of the minor conditional use vermit
39 required in subsection b 1 . The develo ment order shall include lan ua e
40 requirig n a Deed. of Transfer described in this subsection ,below). After successfully
41 as,sin r all applicable appeal periodsthe development order shall be recorded in the
42 official records of the Monroe Couniv Clerk of the Circuit Court. Such recordiniz
Page 7 of 8 (File #2012-035)
1 shall be carried out so that the document is associated with all applicable sender and
2 receiver sites; and
3 4 Prior to issuance of a building.permit authorizin the develo ment of a residential
4 dwelling.unit all or a part of which is derived from a transferred development n' aht, a
5 deed of transfer shall be recorded in the chain of title of the sender site transferor
5parcel) containing a restrictive covenant rohibiting the develo ment that would
7 rewire use of any of the allocated density that was transferred from the uarcel.
8
to
a
12
yi A A%J NWIA A W %J A-L AS tWO fE)OfHS P %Pf *A,-*
4rrzr��+�n�+rdra rtt♦ •
13
14
15 IV RECOMMENDATION:
15
17 Staff has found that the proposed text amendment would be consistent with the provisions of
18 §102-158(d)(5)(b): 1. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those
19 on which the text or boundary was based; 2. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding
20 demographic trends); 3. Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and
21 natural features described in volume I of the plan; 4. New issues; 5. Recognition of a need for
22 additional detail or comprehensiveness; or 6. Data updates. Specifically, staff has found that
23 the proposed text amendments are necessary due to a recognition of a need for additional
24 detail or comprehensiveness.
25
26 Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners amend the Monroe County Code
27 as stated in the text of this staff report.
Page 8 of 8 (File #2012-035)
A cr
r�
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ORDINANCE NO. - 2013
AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING MONROE COUNTY
CODE SECTION 130-160, TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS; TO REVISE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE MONROE
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; TO CLARIFY THE
APPLICATION AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE
TRANSFER OF A TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL
OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR
TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY
AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR
CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, this amendment revises the land development regulations pertaining to the transfer
of development rights in order to be consistent with the Year 2010 Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan and to clarify the application and approval process; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Transferrable Development Right (TDR) program is to mitigate
the impact of new development and property rights by allowing development rights to be
transferred or sold from properties which have environmentally -sensitive characteristics; and
WHEREAS, an amendment is necessary to address a direct inconsistency with Policy 101.13.4
of the Year 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. Policy 101.13.4 provides criteria for
sender sites. Per Policy 101.13.4, a sender site is eligible to transfer a TDR if a) it is zoned
Offshore Island (OS), Mainland Native (MN), Native Area (NA), Sparsely Settled (SS), Parks
and Refuge (PR) or Conservation (C) and b) one of the specified environmentally sensitive
habitat types exists on the sender site. Policy 101.13.4 does not provide any direct criteria for a
receiver site; therefore, any site that has a maximum net density that can be achieved is eligible
to receive a TDR. The criteria set out in Section 130-160 are not consistent with Policy 101.13.4;
and
WHEREAS, an amendment is necessary to address inconsistencies with Policies 101.13.2 and
101.13.3 of the Year 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan where additional
restrictions/requirements are not reflected in the Monroe County Code. Section 130-160 does
Page I of 7
not expressly state that TDRs cannot be transferred to Big Pine Ivey, No Name Ivey and North
Ivey Largo, as stated in Policy 101.13.3; and
WHEREAS, an amendment is necessary to clarify that the following Land Use (Zoning)
Districts shall not be permitted as receiver sites because they do not have a maximum net density:
Improved Subdivision (IS, IS-D, IS-M, or IS-V), Urban Residential Mobile Home (URM or
URM-limited), Mainland Native (MN), Native Area (NA), Offshore Island (OS), or Sparsely
Settled (SS); and
WHEREAS, a modification is necessary to clarify that a TDR may be transferred in part
provided it is rounded to the nearest tenth. However, in no event shall a property owner utilize
part of a sender site's acreage as the land use intensity shall be exhausted; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to clarify that the sender site shall be either dedicated to the County
or be placed in a conservation easement prohibiting its future development; and
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 24, 2012, the Monroe County
Development Review Committee reviewed the ordinance and recommended approval to the
Board of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled public hearing held on May 30, 2012, the Planning
Commission reviewed the ordinance and recommended approval to the Board of County
Commissioners.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS:
Section 1. Section 130-160 shall be amended as follows (deletions are st�e�� and
additions are underlined):
Sec.130-160. Transferable development rights.
(a) General and criteria. All residential development rights allocated or established in
sections 130-157, ' �^ ' C4, ��a , �� � «and 130-162 are be transferable i:H-�}3e}e
e at from one parcel of land to another parcel of land, the
�"""' � " "� "�":a�"+:", r"'''+" + '� + ' ,provided that the sender and receiver sites
!.l G4L1J1
meet all of the following criteria:
aaLa 1 ✓ v 1 ✓ / (Y1K�
i
f
ho ao:.ojA«oa r. 13 .n1..4+oa I..4.
vv uv V vavj/VK Vll 0.j710.1Gv�Ip&'
Th�ri�%&W V��iJL A.L%dW A ,.Y,,...o...+ ,.�+t..LL :.w s+o eef,.l;o 441., e ,.i. ntJea;.r.epr rpouirpmant_r
�1S-Ei2�
Page 2 of 7
r� / a a ■ . a- a ■ a
Mir
r . w a w ■ w pp�p
a a • a
■ a ■ ON Y a A l a
w W a 1 • a
■■
s A A ■ a .r a
■ • ■ ■� ■ ■
r • .■ a a w a
■ ■q 9• .s ■ ■
a IRAN a a ■
■ ■ . ■ ■ ■
a• a a 4 w ■ ■ ■
■■ r ■ ■ III■ ■
a s ■ A a ■ r
■ ■ ■ ■�+II
J 4 a a ■ w • a
qLwj■ .4 RI NELMLVIIIIII.ippig III Itzqm ■
a w ■ a
■ .� ■ ■V IP 414111111- ■
a A • ■ ■ a a
■ ! ■■ ■ ■ "!
■ a a ■ a 1 J A 1 a •
■ ■ . ■ ■�"r ■
A w 1 A ■ a a■
rr ■ R ■ .� ■ t ■
• ■ ► a ■ ripr a ■
■ ■ ■ •
a■ a
► a r• ■
! ■ ■ ■� ■ ■■ ri ■
MN- V &*AMW�'M • •r ■ ■dM
+ r a
■ ■
-
a. a •
�
w
■ ■ ! ■M ■� ■
a w a a • a w■ a
s ■ 4 1119 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIk 111100111
I'-".
w A r a a i w A w
a 1 w w ■. .
- ■ .ems
a ■ A
r. a * i A
a r r . ■ ■ w ■
a r aon
1 w A a
(1) A sender site is the land area from which the development ri hg�t(s) to be transferred is
derived. In the event an applicant intends to onlv use part of a areater property for a
transferrable development right application, the additional land area not required to
amass the transferable develo ment ripht(s) shall not be considered part of the sender
site and not subject to conservation as required in subsection (8). As part of the
application required in subsection (b)(2). the applicant shall provide a boundary
survey and legal description that identify the boundaries of the sender site within the
r�propertv.
A sender site shall be within one of the following Land Use (Zoning) Districts in
subsection (a) and contain at least one of the following habitat tykes in subsection (b)•
a. Land Use (Zoning) Districts: Conservation (C) Mainland Native (MNl Native
Area CNA Offshore Island (OS) Parks and Refue (PR) or Sparsely Settled
b. Habitat Types: Freshwater wetlands. Saltmarsh/Buttonwood wetlands Hi,ph
quality high hammock Highquality low hammock Moderate quality high
hammock, Moderate quality low hammock -Highquality pinelands Low quality
pinelands, Beach/berm. Palm Hammock, Cactus Hammock and/or Disturbed
wetlands.
(2) The maximum net densities set forth in sections 130-157 and 130-162 shall not be
exceeded and new development on a receiver site shall be developed in compliance
with each and every requirement of this Land Development Code.
(3) The maximum net densities set forth for the Imnlicable future land use category in the
comprehensive plan shall not be exceeded and new development on a receiver site
shall be develoued in compliance with each and every requirement of the
comprehensive plan.
(4) The assimment of transferable development rights to receiver sites designated tier I
shall be prohibited.
(5) The assignment of transferable develotpment rights to receiver sites on Big Pine Key
No Name Key, and North Key Largo from other areas of the County shall be
Page 3 of 7
prohibited, excluding the assignments of transferable development rights a from
sender sites on Big Pine Key to receiver sites on Big Pine Key-, b) from sender sites
on No Name Key to receivers sites on No Name Kev and c) from sender sites within
North Key Largo to receiver sites within North Key. Lard
(6) The assignment of transferable development rights to receiver sites within Land Use
(Zoning) Districts that do not have a maximum net densities is prohibited (including
but not limited to. Improved Subdivision (IS IS-D IS-M or IS-V) Urban Residential
Mobile Home (URM or URM-limited)Sparsely Settled (SS), Native Area
Offshore Island (OS), and Mainland Native (MN�
(7) A development right may be transferred in partprovided it is rounded to the nearest
tenth (i.e. if a sender site is designated Native Area (NA) and consists only of two(2)
acres of upland, the property owner may transfer the fractional 0.50 transferable
development r�&). However, in accordance with subsection (8) in no event shall a
property owner utilize part of a sender site's acreage for a transferrable develo ment
right and maintain the right to develop that acreage as the land use intensity shall be
exhausted.
(8) Prior to application for a building,permit authorizing the development of a residential
dwelling unit on a receiver site requiring a transferable development right the sender
site(s) shall be a) dedicated to the Coupor b) ,placed in a conservation easement
prohibitine its future development. A conservation easement shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department prior to its
recording in the official records of the County.
(b) Procedure. The transfer of development rights shall be carried out as follows:
qq orighi:n san d rm A4r- 4 ax q'pt PX
r Y uuva� vi v�T
•4L ia 4nma���'rF� �����e�«l.,
~ V t./1f.L11111115 TL
dn '�`"�
��� tior4 A rQ� � +�Ln4 • e-J• c�_ *�o v efn
uYYa v v'ixa
(�l The ,.TAfflAo ,.,+.. Q JQa„ ,.t,. n gn ..+...Ct...,.L'-
„......el ..f1..«.7 ..+ .. . +:.ti.o 4.... L...::..�:>o.. +1.... , ,�L.s,.
1./ V K4 {All' 41111V � „� �
vV�'17nL. tt.e ,.1,tQ o +,. w� 0,7 «t;l .ao ol,. „+ ,.,.,7e .a +l. F
�p Y� a au au.�u�uUQ
(1) A minor conditional use permit shall be required to identify, determine the eli ibility
of and document the approval of the sender and receiver site pursuant to the process
set forth in section 110-69. If a single receiver site is proposed to receive transferable
development rights from multiple sender sites a conditional use permit application
for each sender site shall be required. All sender and receiver sites associated with a
proposed transfer of a transferable development right shall be identified at the time of
application;
Page 4 of 7
(2) The minor conditional use permit application required in subsection (b)ffl shall be
submitted in a form provided by the Planning and Environmental Resources
Department and include the following
a) The names and addresses of the property owners of record for the sender
site(s) and receiver sites);
b) The nronertv record cards from the Monroe County Property Appraiser of the
sender site(s) and receiver site(s�
c) Written legal descriptions of the sender site(s) and receiver site(s�
d) A copy of the affidavit of intent to transfer•
e) Boundary surveys and legal descriptions of the sender site(s) and receiver
site(s), urenared by a surveyor registered in the State of Florida showine the
boundaries of the sites, elevations, bodies of water and wetlands total
acreage, total upland acreage and total acreagebv habitat: and
14
fl Vegetative studies of the sender site(s) and receiver site(s�
(3) A development order shall memorialize approval of the minor conditional use permit
required in subsection (bXl). The development order shall include lap u�age
reauiriniz a Deed of Transfer described in this subsection (below) After successfully
Passing all applicable appeal periods the development order shall be recorded in the
official records of the Monroe County Clerk of the Circuit CourtSuch recording
shall be carried out so that the document is associated with all applicable sender and
receiver sites: and
(4) Prior to issuance of a buildingpermit authorizing the development of a residential
dwelling unit all or a part of which is derived from a transferred development ri h�
deed of transfer shall be recorded in the chain of title of the sender site (transferor
parcel) containing a restrictive covenant prohibiting the development that would
require use of any of the allocated density that was transferred from the parcel
AAA
Section 2. Severability.
If any section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence or provision of this ordinance shall be
adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect,
impair, invalidate, or nullify the remainder of this ordinance, but the effect thereof shall be
confined to the section, paragraph, subdivision, clause, sentence, or provision immediately
involved in the controversy in which such judgment or decree shall be rendered.
Page 5 of 7
Section 3. Conflicting Provisions.
In the case of direct conflict between any provision of this ordinance and a portion or provision
of any appropriate federal, state, or County law, rule code or regulation, the more restrictive shall
apply.
Section 4. Transmittal.
This ordinance shall be transmitted to the Florida State Land Planning Agency as required by F.S.
380.05 (11) and F.S. 380.0552(9).
Section 5. lifinit,
This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of the State of Florida but shall not
become effective until a notice is issued by the Florida State Land Planning Agency or
Administration Commission approving the ordinance.
Section 6. Inclusion in the Monroe County Code.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be included and incorporated in the Code of Ordinances
of the County of Monroe, Florida, as an addition to amendment thereto, and shall be
appropriately renumbered to conform to the uniform marring system of the Code.
Section 7. Effective Date.
This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law and stated above. This ordinance
applies to any applicable application submitted after the effective date.
(The remainder of this page left intentionally blank.)
Page 6 of 7
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida
at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2013.
Mayor George Neugent
Mayor Pro Tem Heather Carruthers
Commissioner Danny Kolhage
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
Commissioner David Rice
MONROE COUNTY BOARD of COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Attest: Amy Heavilin, Clerk
Deputy Clerk
COU111 NTY ATTCA EY
PPROV�40 AST CFjM
Date: ~ .1--? Y
r
Mayor George Neugent
Page 7 of 7
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
PLANNING COAL ISSIGN RESOLUTION NO, P22-12
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE
REQUEST BY THE PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL
RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOR AN ORDINANCE BY THE
MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AMENDING MONROE COUNTY CODE SECTION 13 0- 160,
TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, TO REVISE THE
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE MONROE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; TO CLARIFY THE APPLICATION
AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE TRANSFER OF A
TRANSFERABLE DEVELOPMENT RIGHT; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF
CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR
TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY
AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR
CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled public meeting held on May 30, 2012, the
Monroe County Planning Commission conducted a review and consideration of a request filed
by the Planning & Environmental Resources Department for a text amendment to § 13 0-1 60 of
the Monroe County Code; and
WHEREAS, language concerning transferable development rights exists in both the
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and the Monroe County Code; and
WHEREAS, this text amendment revises Section 130-160 of the Monroe County Land
Development Regulations to be consistent with the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and to
clarify the application and approval process for the transfer of a transferable development right
(TDR); and
WHEREAS, more specifically, this text amendment addresses a direct inconsistency
with Policy 101.13.4 of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, which provides criteria for
TDR sender sites; and
Resolution 022-12
File #20 1 2-035 Page 1 of 5
WHEREAS, MCC § 130-1 d0 does not expressly state that a restrictive covenant be
recorded on the sender site deed at the time of the Allocation Award for the Permit Allocation
System as required by Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.13.2; and
WHEREAS, MCC § 130-1 60 does not expressly state that TDRs cannot be transferred to
Big Pine Ivey, No Name Key and North Key Largo, as stated in Policy 101.13.3; and
WHEREAS, MCC §130-160(a) references an Improved Subdivision (IS) lot as being a
valid receiver site and should be revised IS district does not have a maximum net density; and
WHEREAS, a minor conditional use permit is currently required for the transfer of a
transferable development right and shall continue to be required; however, revisions are
necessary in order to clarify the existing process; and
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 24, 2012, the Monroe
County Development Review Committee reviewed the ordinance and recommended approval to
the Board of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission was presented with the following documents and
other information relevant to the request, which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the
record of said hearing:
1. Staff report prepared by Steven Biel, Senior Planner and Joseph Haberman, AICP,
Planning & Development Review Manager, dated May 18, 2012; and
2. Sworn testimony of Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources
Department staff; and
3. Sworn testimony of the general public; and
4. Advice and counsel of Susan Grirnsley, Assistant County Attorney, and John Wolfe,
Planning Commission Counsel; and
WHEREAS, based upon the information and documentation submitted, the Planning
Commission makes the following Findings of Fact:
1. Text amendments to the Monroe County Code shall not be inconsistent with the
provisions and intent of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan; and
2. §102-158(d)(5)(b) of the Monroe County Code provides the provisions that must be
met for a text amendment:
1. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those on which
the text or boundary was based; and/or
2. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends); and/or
3. Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features
described in volume I of the plan; and/or
4. New issues; and/or
5. Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; and/or
Resolution #P22- l 2
File #2012-03 5 Page 2 of 5
6. Data updates; and/or
7. For FLUM changes, the principles for guiding development as defined in the
Florida Statutes relating to changes to the comprehensive plan; and
3. Text amendments to the Monroe County Code shall not be inconsistent with the
Principles for Guiding development in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State
Concern; and
WHEREAS, based upon the information and documentation submitted, the Planning
Commission makes the following Conclusions of Law:
1. The proposed text amendments are consistent with the provisions and intent of the
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan; and
2. The proposed text amendments are consistent with the provisions and intent of the
Monroe County Code:
a. The proposed text amendments meet all of the standards for text amendments as
set forth in §102-158(d)(5)(b) of the Monroe County Code, specifically,
recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness.
3. The proposed text amendments are not inconsistent with any of the Principles for
Guiding Development in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law support its decision to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners the
following text amendment:
Section 1. Section 130-160 shall be amended as follows (deletions are and
additions are underlined:
Sec.130-160. Transferable development rights.
(a) General. All residential development rights allocated or established in sections 130-157;
s and 13 0--162 shall be transferable in whole or in part from one
parcel of land to any other, . ,
provided that:
3
i
Resolution #P22- 1 2
File #20 1 2-03 5 Page 3 of 5
(5} (JI The development of the receiver site complies with each and every requirement of
this Land Development Code;
QLTbe develonment of the receiver site shall not exceed the maximum net densities set
out in sections 13 0-15 7 and 13 4-12;
(3j.A sender site shall be from one of th following Land Use Zo
niWj Districts and/or
contain one of the followin.habitat tvM:
Ca) Land Use Zonin Districts: Con anon Mainland Native M, Native
Area A Offshore Island O Parks and Refuge PR or S12arselv $.ettle
Cb) Habitat T es: Freshwater wetlands Saltmarsh/Buttonwood wetlands High
qMft high hammock,High gualilylow hammoc Moderate uali hi h
hammock Moderate guality low hammock High gME11yinelands Low qualitv
inelands Beach/berm. Palm Hammock Cactus Hamm.oc and/or Disturbed
wetlands
ffi Tier I receiver sites shall be _.rrdiscouraged; and
(5) The assimment of transferable develgaMentrighLs to Bi Pine Key, No Name Ke
and North Key Largo from other areas of the Conn shall be prohibited.
a
}
IV A and
(b) Procedure. The transfer of development rights shall be carried out as follows:
(1) A minor conditional use permit shall be required to identify, determine the eligibility
of and document the approval of the sender and receiver site, pursuant to the process
set forth in section 110-69. If a single receiver site is proposed to receive transferable
development rights from multiple sender sites, only a single minor conditional use
permit shall be required. All sender and receiver sites associated with a proposed
Resolution #P22- 12
File #20 i 2-03 5 Page 4 of 5
transfer of a transferable development right shall be identified at the time of
application;
(2) The minor conditional use permit application required in subsection M(l) shall be
submitted in a form provided by the planning and environmental resources
department and include the following al the names and addresses of the property
owners of record for the sender site(g) and receiver site(s). b) the propertv record
cards from the Monroe County Property Appraiser, c written legal descriptions of the
sender site(s) and receiver site(sLd) a copv of the affidavit of intent to transfer, e)
boundary surveys of the sender sites) and receiver site(s). prepared by a surveyor
registered in the State of Florida showing the boundaries of the sites. elevations,
bodies of water and wetlands, total acra&e, total upland acreage and total acreage by
habitat, and fl vegetative studies of the sender sites) and receiver siteCsj.
(3) A development order shall memorialize approval of the minor conditional use permit
rewired in subsection (b)(1). After successfullypassing all applicable appeal periods, the
development order steal l be recorded in the official records of the Monroe County Clerk of the
Circuit Court. Such recording shall be carried out so that the document is associated with all
a licable sender and receiver site •and
(3) Prior to issuance of a buildinzpennit authorizing the development of a residential
dwellin unit, all or a vart of which is derived from a transferred development righL a
deed of transfer shall be recorded in the chain of title of the sender site (transferor
parcel) containing a restrictive covenant prohibitingany development that would
require use of any of the allocated density that was transferred from the parcel.
AMPA
. . . . . .
anal
. . . . .
PLANNING CO S SION OF MO OE COUNTY, FLORIDA
-
BY JUH 2 7 2012
on
Denise Werling, Chair
—'—' AGENCYCLERK
Signed this a 7 day of ...J � 2012.
Resolution 022-12
File #2012-035
Page 5 of 5
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CO TEE
RESOLUTION NO. DRC 09-12
A RESOLUTION BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES AND CHAIR OF THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST BY THE PLANNING &
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT FOR AN
ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AI�IENDING MONROE
COUNTY CODE SECTION 13 0-160, TRANSFERABLE
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, TO REVISE THE LAND
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH
POLICY 101.13 A OF THE MONROE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR TRANSM117AL TO THE
STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY
OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING
FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on April 24, 2012, the
Development Review Committee (DRC) of Monroe County conducted a review and
consideration of a request filed by the Planning & Environmental Resources Department for text
amendments to § 13 0-1 60 of the Monroe County Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Environmental Resources Department is proposing
amendments in order to revise the regulations pertaining to transferable development rights in
order to provide consistency with Policy 101.13.4 of the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, at the DRC meeting, DRC members reviewed the amendments and
requested minor revisions; and
WHEREAS, based upon the information and documentation submitted, the
Development Review Committee Chair and Senior Director of Planning &Environmental
Resources found:
Resolution # DRC 49-12
File #2012-03 S Page 1 of 2
I. The proposed text amendments are consistent with the provisions and intent of the
Monroe County Comprehensive Plan; and
2. The proposed text amendments are consistent with the provisions and intent of the
Monroe County Code; and
3. The proposed text amendments are not inconsistent with any of the Principles for
Guiding Development in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA that the information provided in the
staff report and discussed at the April 24, 2012 meeting supports the Chair's decision to
recommend approval to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners with
revisions as discussed at the meeting.
Dateeepr
}:
Uwnsley Sc Aefo'pxiient Review Committee Chair and
Senior Directorrianning and Environmental Resources
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me, an officer duly authorized in the State aforesaid
and in the County aforesaid, to take acknowledgments, personally appeared Townsley Schwab, to
me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and she
acknowledged before me the she executed the same.
SS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this day of
2012.
Resolution # DRC 09- 1 2
File #2012- 03 5
NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF FLORIDA,
MMU GAIL CRM1f
WIN T*-dam
A my ema "No an Jo gou
C=1111-111
1 OWN TbNO NOW
Page 2 of 2