Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Item Q4
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS County of Monroe A Mayor Heather Carruthers, District 3 ( T$ne Florida Keys (, Mayor Pro Tem George Neugent, District 2 t� ) ��` �� �' Danny L. Kolhage, District 1 David Rice, District 4 Sylvia J. Murphy, District 5 County Commission Meeting May 18, 2016 Agenda Item Number: Q.4 Agenda Item Summary #1607 BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Planning/Environmental Resources TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Michael Roberts (305) 289-2502 3:00 P.M. Public Hearing AGENDA ITEM WORDING: An ordinance by the Monroe County Board Of County Commissioners amending the Livable Communikeys Program Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key amending the tier designation for property owned by Longstock II, LLC, legally described as lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, block 1; lots 1 through 18 block 2, Sam-N-Joe Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 76 of the public records of Monroe County Florida and lots 1 through 9, block 3, Darios Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 92 of the public records of Monroe County Florida; having real estate numbers 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 and 00300670- 000000 from Tier I to Tier III on Figure 2.1 (Tier map for Big Pine Key and No Name Key); creating Action Item 3.3.5 to restrict the development of the four subject parcels to only affordable housing; providing for severability; providing for the repeal of inconsistent provisions; providing for the transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency; providing for the filing with the Secretary of State and for an effective date; and providing for the inclusion in the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan. ITEM BACKGROUND: The property owner, Longstock II, LLC submitted a request to amend Figure 2.1 of the Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key (LCP) by amending the Tier Designation for Parcel #'s 00300090-000000; 00300 180-000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000 from Tier I to Tier III. Being the LCP is incorporated by reference into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan, amendments to the LCP require a text amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. Based on public comment and public participation at the October 21, 2015 BOCC transmittal meeting, the BOCC directed staff to include an additional amendment in addition to what the applicant proposed, as an Action Item in the LCP designating Parcel #'s 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000 for affordable housing only. The applicant agreed to this change during the BOCC transmittal hearing. Staff recommended draft text to amend the Livable CommuniKeys Plan by creating Action 3.3.5 to designate the four subject parcels as affordable housing as a Land Use District overlay for only affordable housing development, which the BOCC voted to include in the transmittal package. The Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) in their capacity as the State Land Planning Agency reviewed the amendment and issued an Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report on March 8, 2016 in which they objected to the Tier amendment and recommended amending the Tier designation to Tier IL Staff recommends adopting the amendment as originally proposed from Tier I to Tier III as originally proposed based on the data and analysis provided. The ORC report also included an objection to the proposed Affordable Housing Overlay and recommended changing the proposed text amendment to specify that only "deed restricted affordable housing" can be developed on the subject parcel. Staff concurs with this recommendation from DEO and has revised the recommended language in Action 3.3.5. The applicant also agrees with this new wording. [The ORC report and Staff response to the ORC report are included as attachments to the staff report]. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: On December 17, 2003 the BOCC passed Resolution 562-2003 approving the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan (LCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key as the policy document to direct growth and development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The LCP was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on August 18, 2004 and incorporated by reference into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan. On October 21, 2015 the BOCC transmitted an amendment to the LCP amending Figure 2.1 (Tier Map) of the LCP and designated the four subject parcels as affordable housing overlay for only affordable housing development. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Ordinance amending the Tier designation in Figure 2.1 of the subject parcels and the revised text to Action Item 3.3.5 of the LCP. DOCUMENTATION: 2015-116 Longstock Ordinance - adoption ordinance Seahorse LCP amendment BOCC SR 5-18-2016 Attachment 1 - Key Deer Protection Alliance.docx Attachment 2 - Henry Lee Morgenstern.docx Attachment 3 - USFWS.docx Attachment 4 - ORC Report Attachment 5 - staff response to ORC report Attachment 6 - applicant response to ORC Application File by Longstock, II LLC FINANCIAL IMPACT: Effective Date: Expiration Date: Total Dollar Value of Contract: Total Cost to County: Current Year Portion: Budgeted: Source of Funds: CPI: Indirect Costs: Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: Revenue Producing: If yes, amount: Grant: County Match: Insurance Required: Additional Details: REVIEWED BY: Mayte Santamaria Completed 04/27/2016 6:57 PM Steve Williams Completed 05/02/2016 9:49 AM Budget and Finance Skipped 04/27/2016 6:48 PM Maria Slavik Skipped 04/27/2016 6:48 PM Christine Hurley Completed 05/02/2016 1:04 PM Michael Roberts Completed 05/02/2016 1:18 PM Mayte Santamaria Completed 05/02/2016 2:27 PM Kathy Peters Completed 05/02/2016 2:48 PM Board of County Commissioners Pending 05/18/2016 9:00 AM Jaclyn Carnago Pending 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 ORDINANCE - 2015 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS PROGRAM MASTER PLAN FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF BIG PINE KEY AND NO NAME KEY AMENDING THE TIER DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY LONGSTOCK II, LLC, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 AND 5, BLOCK 1; LOTS 1 THROUGH 18 BLOCK 2, SAM-N-JOE SUBDIVISION PLAT BOOK 3 PAGE 76 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA AND LOTS 1 THROUGH 9, BLOCK 3, DARIOS SUBDIVISION PLAT BOOK 3 PAGE 92 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA; HAVING REAL ESTATE NUMBERS 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590- 000000 AND 00300670-000000 FROM TIER I TO TIER III ON FIGURE 2.1 (TIER MAP FOR BIG PINE KEY AND NO NAME KEY); CREATING ACTION ITEM 3.3.5 TO RESTRICT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FOUR SUBJECT PARCELS TO ONLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY; PROVIDING FOR THE FILING WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHEREAS, on December 17, 2003 the BOCC passed Resolution 562-2003 approving the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan (LCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key as the policy document to direct growth and development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The LCP implements the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) as well as provides for the development needs of the community; and WHEREAS, the LCP was completed in August 2004, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on August 18, 2004 and incorporated by reference into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan by Policy 101.20.2(1); and WHEREAS, Longstock 11, LLC submitted an application requesting to amend Figure 2.1 of the Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key by amending the Tier Designation for Parcel #'s 00300090-000000; 00300180- 000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000 from Tier I to Tier III; and 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee considered the proposed amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 28t' day of July, 2015; and WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 26t' day of August, 2015, the Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of considering the transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency, for review and comment, a proposed amendment to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission made the following findings: 1. The proposed amendment is not anticipated to adversely impact the community character of the surrounding area; and 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key and the Habitat Conservation Plan; and 4. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statute; and 5. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part H of Chapter 163, Florida Statute WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the 21" day of October 2015, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing to consider the transmittal of the proposed amendment, considered the staff report and provided for public comment and public participation in accordance with the requirements of state law and the procedures adopted for public participation in the planning process; and WHEREAS, based on public comment and public participation in accordance with the requirements of state law and the procedures adopted for public participation in the planning process, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners directed staff to include an additional amendment as an Action Item designating Parcel #'s 00300090-000000; 00300180- 000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000 for affordable housing only; and WHEREAS, at the meeting staff recommended draft text to amend the Livable CommuniKeys Plan by creating Action 3.3.5 designate the four subject parcels as affordable housing overlay for only affordable housing development, which the BOCC voted to include in the transmittal package; and WHEREAS, at the October 21, 2015 public hearing, the BOCC voted to transmit the amendment to the State Land Planning Agency; and 2 93 WHEREAS, the State Land Planning Agency reviewed the amendment and issued an 94 Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report on March 8, 2016 that identified two 95 objections and associated recommendations; and 96 97 WHEREAS, the County must address the two identified objections and determine whether 98 to adopt the amendment, adopt the amendment with changes or not adopt the amendment; and 99 100 WHEREAS, the ORC report's first Objection to the proposed map amendment states: "The 101 site is entirely surrounded by property designated as Tier I. All Tier III properties on Big Pine Key 102 are either adjacent to US I or other Tier III properties. Reclassifying this property as Tier III could 103 serve as a stimulus or foothold to prompt future requests for Tier changes. Little data was submitted 104 to justify the proposed change. The Harvest value of the properties submitted indicates the parcel 105 would more appropriately he designated Tier H. The County's Land Development Code Section 130- 106 130(e) indicates that a map change may he made to correct errors in mapping the Tier system, but 107 does not list specific criteria to he met in order to change the designation. No data has been 108 provided to demonstrate that an error in mapping was made. Since all allocations for Tier I have 109 been utilized, the only way to allocate development to this scarified site is by changing the Tier 110 designation. Changing the Tier designation on the subject parcels would allow the county to replace 111 the existing units for the development of up to 44 additional permanent dwelling units 112 113 WHEREAS, the ORC report's recommendation for addressing the first Objection was to 114 "Provide data and analysis demonstrating that the parcel is suitable to he designated as Tier II and 115 reassign a Tier II designation; " and 116 117 WHEREAS, in response to the ORC Report's first Objection and Recommendation, 118 Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources staff stated that the Objection does not 119 address the Tier Overlay criteria and that the proposed amendment does not increase the already 120 currently permitted density of the site. The Tier 11 designation is inappropriate because the only 121 criteria the subject parcels meet for Tier 11 is the reflective H value; and 122 123 WHEREAS, the ORC report's second Objection to the proposed text amendment state 124 "The proposed text amendment does not provide a meaningful and predictable basis for an 125 affordable housing overlay;" and 126 127 WHEREAS, the ORC report's recommendation for addressing the second Objection was to 128 "Develop criteria and definitions for an affordable housing overlay or to change the proposed text 129 amendment regarding the four parcels to specify that only "deed restricted affordable housing" can 130 he developed at the location instead of referring to an affordable housing overlay. " 131 132 WHEREAS, in response to the ORC Report's second Objection and Recommendation, 133 Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources concurs with the recommendation to change 134 the proposed text amendment regarding the four parcels to specify that "deed restricted affordable 135 housing" can be developed at the location instead of referring to an affordable housing overlay; and 136 137 138 139 140 141 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 142 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA: 143 144 Section 1. The Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key as 145 adopted by reference into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan is 146 amended as follows: 147 148 (1) Amending the Tier designations on Figure 2.1 for four (4) parcels having real 149 estate numbers 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 and 150 00300670-000000 from Tier I to Tier III as shown on Exhibit 1 attached 151 hereto and incorporated herein. 152 153 (2) Creating Action Item 3.3.5 as follows (Deletions are stricken through and 154 additions are underlined): 155 156 Action Item 3.3.5: New development on the four (4) parcels legally 157 described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 And 5, Block 1, Lots 1 through 18 Block 2, Sam- 158 N-Joe Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 76 of the Public Records of Monroe 159 County Florida and Lots 1 Through 9, Block 3, Darios Subdivision Plat Book 160 3 Page 92 of the Public Records of Monroe County Florida; having real 161 estate numbers 00300090-000000, 00300180-000000, 00300590-000000 and 162 00300670-000000 shall be limited to deed restricted affordable housing. 163 164 Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or 165 provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall 166 not be affected by such validity. 167 168 Section 3. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in 169 conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. 170 171 Section 4. Transmittal. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Director of Planning to 172 the State Land Planning Agency pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida 173 Statutes. 174 175 Section 5. Filin2 and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the 176 secretary of the State of Florida but shall not become effective until a notice is 177 issued by the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission 178 finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and 179 after any applicable appeal periods have expired. 180 181 Section 6. Inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan. The number of the foregoing 182 amendment may be renumbered to conform to the numbering in the Livable 183 CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key as adopted by 184 reference into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan and shall be 4 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 incorporated in the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2016. Mayor Heather Carruthers Mayor pro tem George Neugent Commissioner Danny L. Kolhage Commissioner David Rice Commissioner Sylvia Murphy BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA (SEAL) ATTEST: AMY HEAVILIN, CLERK DEPUTY CLERK :1 Mayor Heather Carruthers 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 To: The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners Through: Mayte Santamaria, Senior Director of Planning & Environmental Resources From: Michael Roberts, Sr. Administrator, Environmental Resources Date: April 26, 2016 Subject: An Ordinance by the Monroe County Board Of County Commissioners amending the Livable Communikeys Program Master Plan For Future Development Of Big Pine Key And No Name Key amending the Tier designation for property owned by Longstock II, LLC, legally described as lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, block 1; lots I through 18 block 2, Sam-N-Joe Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 76 of the public records of Monroe County Florida and lots I through 9, block 3, Darios Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 92 of the public records of Monroe County Florida.; having real estate numbers 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 and 00300670-000000 from Tier I to Tier III on figure 2.1 (Tier Map For Big Pine Key And No Name Key); creating action item 3.3.5 to restrict the development of the four subject parcels to only affordable housing (File 2015-116) Meeting: October 21, 2015 transmittal/May 18, 2016 adoption I REQUEST A request by the applicant (Longstock II, LLC) to amend the Livable Communikeys Program Master Plan For Future Development Of Big Pine Key And No Name Key amending the Tier designation for property owned by Longstock II, LLC, legally described as lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, block 1; lots 1 through 18 block 2, Sam-N-Joe Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 76 of the public records of Monroe County Florida and lots 1 through 9, block 3, Darios Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 92 of the public records of Monroe County Florida.; having real estate numbers 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 and 00300670-000000 from Tier I to Tier III on figure 2.1 (Tier Map For Big Pine Key And No Name Key); creating action item 3.3.5 to restrict the development of the four subject parcels to only affordable housing (Exhibit I). File No. 2015-116 pg. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Subject Parcels (outlined in blue) (2012) II BACKGROUND INFORMATION & RELEVANT PRIOR COUNTY ACTIONS Site Information Address: 201 County Road, Big Pine Key Legal Description: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 Block 1; Lots 1 through 18 Block 2 Sam-N-Joe Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 76 of the Public Records of Monroe County Florida and Lots 1 through 9, Block 3, Darios Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 92 of the Public Records of Monroe County Florida. Real Estate (RE) Numbers: 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000 Applicant: Longstock II, LLC Size of Site: 3.93 acres Land Use District(s): IS (North 1/z) and URM (South 1/z) FLUM Designation: RM (North 1/z) and RH (South 1/z) Tier Designation: I Flood Zone: AE - 8 Existing Use: Sea Horse RV Campground The parcel consists of a developed RV Campground containing 130 documented units, consisting of 125 transient units and 5 market rate units (Letter of Development Rights Determination dated 9/29/2014). Existing Vegetation / Habitat: Scarified; Developed Land Community Character of Immediate Vicinity: The surrounding community is a mix of dense residential development interspersed with sparsely developed and undeveloped areas. The adjacent land use (zoning) districts consist of IS, URM and SR land use districts. File No. 2015-116 pg. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 • On March 19, 2003 the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved Resolution 119-2003 authorizing submittal of the Habitat Conservation Plan for Key Deer and other protected species on Big Pine Key and No Name Key (HCP). • On December 17, 2003 the BOCC passed Resolution 562-2003 approving the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan (LCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key as the policy document to direct growth and development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The LCP implements the HCP as well as provides for the development needs of the community. • The LCP was completed in August 2004, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on August 18, 2004 and incorporated by reference into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan by Policy 101.20.2(1). • The LCP was amended in June 2009 (Ordinance 020-2009) to revise certain figures to depict only the lands covered by the HCP; to implement the ROGO requirements of the HCP; to define the number of dwelling units to be permitted over the life of the Incidental Take Permit (ITP), including the limitations on Tier I development; to establish certain control dates for development and mitigation; and to regulate the construction of fences and accessory structures. • The Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance 022-2012 on September 21, 2012 to amend the Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key, to amend the Tier designation on Figure 2.1 (Tier Map for Big Pine Key and No Name Key), and Table 2.7, Institutional Uses, for the Seacamp property from Tier I to Tier III, as directed by the Board of County Commissioners in Resolution 562-2003. DRC Review At its regularly scheduled meeting on July 28, 2015, the Monroe County Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed amendment. The information provided in the staff report and discussed at the meeting supports the Chair's decision to recommend approval to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners. PC Review At its regularly scheduled meeting on August 26, 2015, the Monroe County Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment. The Planning Commission requested staff to provide additional data related to the potential for impacts to the Key deer and continued the request to the September 30, 2015 meeting date. At its regularly scheduled meeting on September 30, 2015, the Monroe County Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment. The information provided in the staff report and discussed at the meeting supports the Planning Commission's decision to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners. BOCC Review At its regularly scheduled meeting on October 21, 2015 the Board of County Commissioners reviewed the proposed amendment, took public testimony, and voted to transmit the File No. 2015-116 pg. 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 amendment with an amendment to create an affordable housing overlay on the subject parcels. DEO Review The Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) reviewed the proposed amendment and issued an Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) report on March 8, 2016 (Attachment 4). The ORC report contained the following two objections: • DEO objected to the proposed Tier designation and recommended changing the Tier designation to Tier II. • DEO also objected to the proposed Affordable Housing Overlay and recommended amending the text amendment language to require only deed restricted affordable housing. In response to the ORC report (Attachment 5), staff pointed out that the Tier II designation would be inappropriate as the parcels do not meet the criteria for Tier IL Staff agrees with the DEO recommendation to revise the text amendment language to reflect a requirement for deed restricted affordable housing rather than an Overlay. The applicant provided a response to the ORC report (Attachment 6). The applicant's position is consistent with Planning & Environmental Resources staff opinion in that the Tier II designation is inappropriate. The applicant also agrees to the recommended revision to the text amendment regarding the establishment of deed restricted affordable housing on the subject parcels. III PROPOSED AMENDMENT Request for an Amendment to Figure 2.1 of the Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan for the Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key Tier Map from Tier I to Tier III, for property owned by Longstock II, LLC, Big Pine Key, having real estate no's. 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000, as depicted below: File No. 2015-116 pg. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 osed Figure 2.1: Proposed Amendment foi Parcels: Review of Amendment The Tier Maps for Big Pine Key and No Name Key has been developed based on relative wildlife habitat quality as defined in the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). Monroe County developed the Tier Maps pursuant to county -wide Smart Growth Initiatives adopted in Goal 105 of the Comprehensive Plan and Strategy 1.1 of the LCP. File No. 2015-116 pg. 5 I "The Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) focuses on the Key deer as an "umbrella species" and 2 operates under the assumption that avoiding and minimizing impacts to Key deer habitat, will 3 also provide direct protection to both populations and habitats of other terrestrial species. In 4 the development of the HCP, the ecology and population dynamics of the Key deer was 5 studied for three years and a Population Viability Analysis (PVA) model, including a spatial 6 component, was produced to evaluate the impacts of development scenarios on the Key deer 7 population. Based on the Key deer studies done for the HCP and the resulting spatial model, 8 lands in the study area were classified into three "Tiers." Tier 1 lands are higher quality Key 9 deer habitat. Tier 3 lands are the lowest quality Key deer habitat. Most of the parcels in Tiers 10 2 and 3 are interspersed among developed parcels and among canals. These areas provide 11 little habitat value to the covered species." (Pg. 2 Habitat Conservation Plan) 12 13 As noted in the HCP, "the Key deer are wide ranging and utilize virtually all available habitat 14 in the project area, including developed areas (Figure 2.1, Lopez 2001)." Figure 2.1 does 15 indicate the utilization or distribution of Key deer, during the 3 year study period, within or 16 adjacent to the subject properties but it is not as significant as other locations. (Pg. 20 Habitat 17 Conservation Plan). 18 19 20 21 22 Figure 2.2 (Exhibit 5) of the HCP provides the Lower Keys marsh rabbit habitat, as identified 23 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This figure displays the Lower Keys marsh rabbit 24 habitat on Big Pine Key and No Name Key (Faulhaber 2003) based on the most recent data 25 on its distribution within the covered area (Figure 2.2). Figure 2.2 does not indicate Lower 26 Keys marsh rabbit habitat within or adjacent to the subject properties. (Pg. 23 Habitat 27 Conservation Plan). File No. 2015-116 pg. 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Fipfe 2,2. Lwxer Keys xraanh rabbit habitat (Source: United States Fish inn Wildlife Senice) As provided on page 35 of the HCP: In order to address impacts to carrying capacity and mortality, the spatial model includes a carrying capacity and a "harvest" (i.e., human -related mortality) grid in a Geographic Information System (GIS). The grids represent the entire study area as an array of IOx10 meter cells; each cell's value represents its contribution to the total carrying capacity or harvest of the study area. A weighting factor grid supported the development of the carrying capacity and harvest grids. The objective of the weighting grid was to address location -specific conditions that affect carrying capacity and harvest. For example, two grid cells of the same vegetation type may contribute differently to the carrying capacity of the Key deer depending on their proximity to canals: a pineland cell located in the middle of a large pineland area would provide better habitat to the Key deer than an isolated pineland cell surrounded by canals. Similarly, development of a pineland cell near US-1 would create a lesser vehicle collision impact (due to shorter travel distance to US-]) than development of a pineland cell located far from US-1 (due to the longer travel distance to US-]). Six parameters entered into the weighting factor grid (Figure 2.4): Figure 2.4 (Exhibit 6) depicts the 6 grid layers used to generate the weighting factor for the final carrying capacity grid. The deer corridor deer density, house density and distance from US parameters reflect low utilization of the subject properties by Key deer. File No. 2015-116 pg. 7 t_ 6 Ar .. v W'4�1 i Deer Corridors Deer Density House Density Al ,J F : s Water Barriers Distance from U.S. 1 Patch Quality Figure 2.4. Six grid layers used to generate weighting factor grid (darker shades = higher value for the deer) 2 3 The final carrying capacity grid (Figure 2.5) represents the contribution of each 1Ox10 meter 4 cell to the total carrying capacity of the study area after applying the weighting factor. Lopez 5 (2001) estimated the number of Key deer that could be supported by available habitat in Big 6 Pine Key and No Name Key. 7 8 The final harvest grid represents the proportional contribution of each 1Ox10 meter cell to the 9 total harvest in the study area. Lopez (2001) determined that approximately 8.4 percent of the 10 deer population dies from human -related causes (total mortality is about 17 percent). He 11 allocated this percentage equally among all the 1 Ox 10 meter cells for the study area. Then, he 12 applied the weighting factor to each cell; the result was a differential contribution of the cells 13 to the total human related mortality, or harvest, H. File No. 2015-116 pg. 8 File No. 2015-116 pg. 9 2 For the Big Pine Key and No Name Key planning area the Tier Maps are intended to be 3 based upon habitat sensitivity identified in the HCP, primarily as represented on the weighted 4 Harvest Grid Map (Figure 2.5 of the HCP, above). 5 File No. 2015-116 pg. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 In response to the Planning Commission request for additional scientific detail, Dr. Roel Lopez (Texas A&M University) provided the original harvest grid data to the Planning & Environmental Resources Department on September 1, 2015 in order for staff to more closely evaluate the H values for the subject parcels. �1 Is H 1. z. I fii �t jti.2 n tt ,.v3 ! F j s¢ �iIi ��wanv�i d , Legend BPK— , H —Grid Value High 0000260112 � Low, 0 r � . r•,,, m> ,, ,�„ .li.,Imti91t, ,r „z,„ua(�i uir, H-grid data provided by Roel Lopez, PhD. Texas A&M University Subject parcels outlined in blue The `H' grid data provided by Dr. Lopez reflects the low habitat value of the subject parcels. The actual `H' values for the subject parcels range from 0.000176 to 0.000188 per 10 x 10 meter cell, well below the Tier I mean of 0.000259. The subject parcels are developed land outside existing deer corridors (HCP Figure 5.2, below) and do not meet the criteria for Tier I designation as provided in Policy 205.1.1, MCC §130-130 or the Habitat Conservation Plan, as noted below: File No. 2015-116 pg. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 HCP Figure 5.2 Key deer corridor across Sands Subdivision ¢ - - ATLANTIS oK EASEMEYtlT r HOLLERICH LVTTONS H IBIyI.CUS 21ST /I m MERCEDES G �^ a HAMM K 23RD w ILOTS UO F K a E a SAMS � w z .. D I Z Q � O O K LORD _ Overseas Heritage Trail r. OVERmm ---SEAS - _ OVFxZSEAS 'q, /- m 5TH F File No. 2015-116 Sands corridor with subject parcels in blue pg. 12 C a) C a) CL L 0 r�. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 H-Grid depicting deer corridor from Figure 2.4 (page 7 of this report) and the Sands Corridor from Figure 5.2 with subject parcels in blue The Big Pine Key and No Name Key planning area the Tier Maps are intended to be based upon habitat sensitivity identified in the HCP, primarily as represented on the weighted Harvest Grid Map (Figure 2.5 of the HCP). The HCP describes the habitat description and associated H values that should be reflected in the Tier designation. These descriptions are provided in Table 2.7 (below). Table 2.7 (HCP n2. 43) Tier classification system (vacant privately -owned lands) Tier I Description Lands where all or a significant portion of the land area is characterized as environmentally sensitive and important for the continued viability of HCP covered species (mean H per 1 1Ox10 meter cell = 0.259 x 10-3). These lands are high quality Key deer habitat, generally representing large contiguous patches of native vegetation that provide habitat for other protected species as well. Scattered lots and fragments of environmentally sensitive lands that may be found in platted 2 subdivisions (mean H per 10 x10 meter cell = 0.183 x 10-3). A large number of these lots are located on canals and are of minimal value to the Key deer and other protected species because the canal presents a barrier to dispersal. Scattered lots within already heavily developed areas that provide little habitat value to the 3 Key deer and other protected species (mean H per l Ox10 meter cell = 0.168 x 10-3). Some of the undeveloped lots in this Tier are located between existing developed commercial lots within the US-1 corridor or are located on canals. File No. 2015-116 pg. 13 I The proposed amendment is consistent with the above Tier descriptions. The site is 2 developed and the mean H value per 10 x 10 meter cell is 0.000182 (0.182 x 10-3). 3 4 The `H' values for the associated parcels are: Sea Horse RV Park RE # H Area (square feet) Avg `H' (10m X 10m) from TAMU data 00300090-000000 0.0044 26,910 0.000183 00300180-000000 0.0148 96,048 0.000176 00300590-000000 0.0084 42,435 0.000187 00300670-000000 0.0015 5,589 0.000188 5 6 In addition to the `H' values described above, the HCP provides qualitative criteria for each 7 Tier. The table below provides the qualitative description of each Tier and a comparison of 8 the site characteristics to the specified criteria. 9 10 Tier Description Subject Parcels Site Characteristics • Lands where all or a significant • The subject parcels are scarified portion of the land area is and densely developed with NO characterized as environmentally environmentally sensitive habitats sensitive and important for the . As stated above, the subject site continued viability of HCP covered does not contain native vegetation 1 species. that provides habitat for Key deer • High quality Key deer habitat, or other protected species generally representing large contiguous patches of native vegetation that provide habitat for other protected species as well • Scattered lots and fragments of • The subject parcels are close to environmentally sensitive lands that suitable habitat, however the may be found in platted subdivisions parcels themselves are scarified 2 . Located on canals and are of and are platted subdivisions (Dario's and Sam'N'Joe) minimal value to the Key deer and . parcels are not on a canal —and other protected species because the no barrier to Key deer dispersal is canal presents a barrier to dispersal present. • Scattered lots within already heavily • The subject parcels are heavily developed areas that provide little developed subdivisions and habitat value contain no habitat. 78% of land 3 • Some undeveloped lots are located within 500' is developed land. between existing developed • No commercial uses are adjacent commercial lots within the US-1 to the subject parcels. corridor or, • The site is not located on a canal • are located on canals. File No. 2015-116 pg. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 There is no `H' impact associated with the proposed amendment to the Master Plan. The subject parcel contains no native habitat and supported 130 lawfully established units. The amount of H impact for this type of development is based on traffic generation because vehicle collisions with Key deer are the most important human -related cause of mortality for the Key deer (HCP page 41). Based on the average daily trip assumptions in the HCP (9.5 ADT/unit), the 130 units developed on the site generate 1,235 average daily trips (ADT). The subject parcels lie partially within the IS land use district (north 1/z) and partially within the URM land use district (south 1/z). The corresponding FLUM designations are Residential Medium (RM) on the north and Residential High (RH) on the south. There is no change proposed for the site's land use district or FLUM designations. Note that as originally platted, the four parcels consisted of 32 platted lots. IV. CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE FLORIDA STATUTES, AND PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING DEVELOPMENT A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the amendment furthers: Goal 101 Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life, ensure the safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources. File No. 2015-116 pg. 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Obiective 101.20 Monroe County shall address local community needs while balancing the needs of all Monroe County communities. These efforts shall focus on the human crafted environment and shall be undertaken through the Livable CommuniKeys Planning Program. GOAL 105 Monroe County shall undertake a comprehensive land acquisition program and smart growth initiatives in conjunction with its Livable CommuniKeys Program in a manner that recognizes the finite capacity for new development in the Florida Keys by providing economic and housing opportunities for residents without compromising the biodiversity of the natural environment and the continued ability of the natural and man-made systems to sustain livable communities in the Florida Keys for future generations. Obiective 105.1 Monroe County shall implement smart growth initiatives in conjunction with its Livable CommuniKeys and Land Acquisition Programs which promote innovative and flexible development processes to preserve the natural environment, maintain and enhance the community character and quality of life, redevelop blighted commercial and residential areas, remove barriers to design concepts, reduce sprawl, and direct future growth to appropriate infill areas. Policy 105.2.1 Monroe County shall designate all lands outside of mainland Monroe County, except for the Ocean Reef planned development, into three general categories for purposes of its Land Acquisition Program and smart growth initiatives in accordance with the criteria in Policy 205.1.1. These three categories are: Natural Area (Tier 1); Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier 11) on Big Pine Key and No Name Key only; and Infill Area (Tier III). The purposes, general characteristics, and growth management approaches associated with each tier are as follows: 1. Natural Area (Tier I): Any defined geographic area where all or a significant portion of the land area is characterized as environmentally sensitive by the policies of this Plan and applicable habitat conservation plan, is to be designated as a Natural Area. New development on vacant land is to be severely restricted and privately owned vacant lands are to be acquired or development rights retired for resource conservation and passive recreation purposes. However, this does not preclude provisions of infrastructure for existing development. Within the Natural Area designation are typically found lands within the acquisition boundaries of federal and state resource conservation and park areas, including isolated platted subdivisions; and privately -owned vacant lands with sensitive environmental features outside these acquisition areas. 2. Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier II): Any defined geographic area on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, where scattered groups and fragments of environmentally sensitive lands, as defined by this Plan, may be found and where existing platted subdivisions are not predominately developed, not served by complete infrastructure facilities, or not within close proximity to established commercial areas, is to be designated as a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area. New development is to be discouraged and privately owned vacant lands acquired or development rights retired to reduce sprawl, ensure that the Keys carrying capacity is File No. 2015-116 pg. 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 not exceeded, and prevent further encroachment on sensitive natural resources. Within a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area are typically found: scattered small non-residential development and platted subdivisions with less than 50 percent of the lots developed; incomplete infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, or electricity; and scattered clusters of environmentally sensitive lands, some of which are within or in close proximity to existing platted subdivisions. 3. Infill Area (Tier III): Any defined geographic area, where a significant portion of land area is not characterized as environmentally sensitive as defined by this Plan, except for dispersed and isolated fragments of environmentally sensitive lands of less than four acres in area, where existing platted subdivisions are substantially developed, served by complete infrastructure facilities, and within close proximity to established commercial areas, or where a concentration of non-residential uses exists, is to be designated as an Infill Area. New development and redevelopment are to be highly encouraged, except within tropical hardwood hammock or pineland patches of an acre or more in area, where development is to be discouraged. Within an Infill Area are typically found: platted subdivisions with 50 percent or more developed lots situated in areas with few sensitive environmental features; full range of available public infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, and electricity; and concentrations of commercial and other non-residential uses within close proximity. In some Infill Areas, a mix of non-residential and high -density residential uses (generally 8 units or more per acre) may also be found that form a Community Center. Policy 205.1.1 The County shall establish the following criteria at a minimum to use when designating Tiers: 2. Lands on Big Pine Key and No Name Key designated as Tier I, II, or III shall be in accordance with the wildlife habitat quality criteria as defined in the Habitat Conservation Plan for those islands. Bit Pine Key/No Name Key Livable CommuniKeys Plan Strategy 1.1 Create a Tier Map for the planning area depicting the locations of Tier I, Tier II and Tier III lands as described in Comprehensive Plan Policy 105.2.1. Base the Tier Map on the habitat needs of federally endangered resident species in the planning area as set forth in the anticipated ITP and HCP in terms of relative H of parcels within the planning area. Strate2y 1.2 Assign relative H units to all parcels within the planning area as per the method described in the HCP in order to ensure compliance with the permitted level of take of federally endangered species contained in the anticipated ITP. Action Item 1.2.1: Use the parcel -specific H unit spreadsheet included with the HCP to assign H to individual parcels within the planning area. File No. 2015-116 pg. 17 I 2 Action Item 1.2.2: 3 For development proposal applications involving multiple parcels, sum the H units 4 for the individual parcels to generate the total H impact of the development. 5 6 Strate2y 2.1 Continue to utilize the Land Use District Maps and supporting FLUM to 7 regulate land use type, density and intensity on an individual parcel basis within the 8 planning area. The distribution of future development shall be guided by a Tier System 9 Overlay Map pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan Smart Growth Initiatives (Goal 105). 10 11 Action 2.1.2 Adopt the Tier System Map separate from but as an overlay of the Land 12 District Maps. The Tier System Overlay Map shall be used primarily to guide the 13 distribution of development through the application of the residential rate of growth 14 ordinance and the non-residential rate of growth ordinance pursuant to the strategies set 15 forth in this Master Plan. 16 17 B. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development 18 for the Florida Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes. 19 20 For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that 21 plan with the principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles, the 22 principles shall be construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or 23 applied in isolation from the other provisions. 24 25 (a) To strengthen local government capabilities for managing land use and development 26 so that local government is able to achieve these objectives without the continuation of 27 the area of critical state concern designation. 28 (b) To protect shoreline and marine resources, including mangroves, coral reef 29 formations, seagrass beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat. 30 (c) To protect upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, 31 native tropical vegetation (for example, hardwood hammocks and pinelands), dune ridges 32 and beaches, wildlife, and their habitat. 33 (d) To ensure the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound 34 economic development. 35 (e) To limit the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the 36 Florida Keys. 37 (f) To enhance natural scenic resources, promote the aesthetic benefits of the natural 38 environment, and ensure that development is compatible with the unique historic 39 character of the Florida Keys. 40 (g) To protect the historical heritage of the Florida Keys. 41 (h) To protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and 42 proposed major public investments, including: 43 1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities; 44 2. Sewage collection and disposal facilities; File No. 2015-116 pg. 18 1 3. Solid waste collection and disposal facilities; 2 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities; 3 5. Transportation facilities; 4 6. Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries; 5 7. State parks, recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned 6 properties; 7 8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and 8 9. Other utilities, as appropriate. 9 (i) To limit the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of 10 the Florida Keys. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 0) To make available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys. (k) To provide adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a post disaster reconstruction plan. (1) To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintain the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource. C. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (F.S.). Specifically, the amendment furthers: 163.3161(4), F.S. — It is the intent of this act that local governments have the ability to preserve and enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and resources, consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land within their jurisdictions. Through the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units of local government can preserve, promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and general welfare; facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing, and other requirements and services; and conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources within their jurisdictions. 163.3161(6), F.S. - It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans shall have the legal status set out in this act and that no public or private development shall be permitted except in conformity with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof, prepared and adopted in conformity with this act. 163.3177(1), F.S. - The comprehensive plan shall provide the principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental, and fiscal development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the plan and its elements. These principles and strategies shall guide future decisions in a consistent manner and shall contain programs and activities to ensure comprehensive plans are implemented. The sections of the comprehensive plan containing the principles and strategies, generally provided as goals, objectives, and policies, shall describe how the local government's programs, activities, and land File No. 2015-116 pg. 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 development regulations will be initiated, modified, or continued to implement the comprehensive plan in a consistent manner. It is not the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations in the comprehensive plan but rather to require identification of those programs, activities, and land development regulations that will be part of the strategy for implementing the comprehensive plan and the principles that describe how the programs, activities, and land development regulations will be carried out. The plan shall establish meaningful and predictable standards for the use and development of land and provide meaningful guidelines for the content of more detailed land development and use regulations. V. PROCESS Comprehensive Plan Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the Planning Commission, the Director of Planning, or the owner or other person having a contractual interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning shall review and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the Development Review Committee and the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall review the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning & Environmental Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the public hearing. The Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the transmittal of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, and considers the staff report, staff recommendation, and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may or may not recommend transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency. If the amendment is transmitted to State Land Planning Agency, they review the proposal and issue an Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report. Upon receipt of the ORC report, the County has 180 days to adopt the amendments, adopt the amendments with changes or not adopt the amendment. VI. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval to amend the Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key by amending the Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan for the Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key Tier Map (Figure 2.1) from Tier I to Tier III, as depicted on Exhibit 1. Staff also recommends creating Action Item 3.3.5 to restrict the development of the four subject parcels to deed restricted affordable housing. VIL ATTACHMENTS 1. Letter from Key Deer Protection Alliance 2. Letter from Henry Lee Morgenstern 3. USFWS E-mail (8/18/2015 & 9/24/2015) 4. DEO ORC Report 5. County Response to ORC Report 6. Applicant Response to ORC Report File No. 2015-116 pg. 20 EXHIBIT I AMENDMENT TO THE LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS PROGRAM MASTER PLAN FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF BIG PINE KEY AND NO NAME KEY TIER MAP (FIGURE 2.1) FROM TIER I TO TIER III 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000 irror Monroe County ON Tw psallwo AteA y planning and EnvironmentM Sri 1ram.r.r r -r� o�w ,per) TryResources Department 00 Tmf ICI tddrArwj P qu'v 2 r T�Qf Opm q n mm no, oi9 Big P`ww Ko aml No Name jvy W",f 2009 era .,.. .. File No. 2015-116 pg. 21 File No. 201 116 .VLORIDA 'kp" °D-1' )Wreeuan -.411— Mayte Santamaria Senior DijJjoj of PlajDL", rw_ "GIKPONaw_*IIIVAVA• is� Development Review Committee Meeting Tuesday, July 28, 2o15 ROM 1=,@Trlerf-ro'cec-ceciz)peciesoii-&igt"i-ne Key and No Name Key and Associated Incidental Take Permit and Implementation of the Livable Communi-Keys Program's Master Plan for Development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, The Key Deer Protection Alliance participated in the development of both the Habitat Conservation Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key and the Livable Communi-Keys Master Plan for Future Development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. We are concerned that any decision regarding a change in use and a change in the Tier designation of Seahorse property on Big Pine Key will negatively affect the population dynamics, the carrying capacity and/or the secondary impacts to the federally -listed endangered Key deer. Please consider the following comments and our request that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service examine these proposed changes to the Seahorse property on Big Pine Kay and scientifically demonstrate they will not have any negative effects on the Key deer. 0 RAJ-401 VEEN After more than eight years of negotiation, the Florida Department of Transportation, Monroe County and the Florida Department of Community Affairs established the Big Pine Key Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in coordination with the Service on June 9, 20o6. The goal of the HCP was to address impacts to several species listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) resulting from potential development activities over a twenty-year period (20o6-2026) on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The development of the HCP included extensive public involvement and was based on years of scientific study. This scientific research lead to the development of a population viability analysis (PVA) model (Lopez 2001) which evaluates the impacts of development scenarios on the Key deer population and the development of a conservation priority classification system aimed at protecting species habitat while accommodating responsible development. M Livable Communi-Ke s Program Master Plan for Big Pine Kev_and No Name Kev. While the :HCP was being developed, Monroe County crafted its first Livable Communi-Keys (LCP) Program Master Plan for Future Development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Public involvement was extensive and a workable compromise was achieved and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on December 17, 2003. The County's Vaster Plan for Future Development of No Name Key and Big Pine Key is inexorably linked to the Service's HCPand ITP. The LCP, which is considered wholly a part of the Monroe County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, was developed as a companion document to the HCP. Reference to the :[Master Plan is made extensively throughout the HCP. A change to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan., the LCP or the HCP requires a detailed analysis to make sure appropriate changes are made to the corresponding documents. The "Tier Classification System"- Monroe Coum versus Bi-, Pine Kev and No Name -Key. The conservation priority classification system (aka the Fier system) for Big Pine Key and .No Name Keg is di;,�ferent from that of unincorporated Monroe County.I In Monroe County, the Tier system is based on location, size and quality of upland terrestrial habitat. Can Big Pine Key and No Name Key, the Tier system is based on the PVA model, which is made up of two main components; a matrix model of population dynamics; and, a spatial model of carrying capacity and secondary impacts. Six parameters entered into the calculation of the weighting factors2, only one of which (patch quality) is related to the duality of the upland terrestrial habitat. The six parameters are:. house density, deer corridors, patch quality, deer density, distance from, S-r and water barriers. l'e •ar s; The Importance of ALL Habitats to the KeyDeer Key deer are currently using all of the habitat that is available to them on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, including the habitat of the Seahorse property. Key deer corridors are critical to provide for the necessary movement of the Key deer within its range. Habitat utilized by the Key deer as a corridor is often densely developed and/or scarified and, which is often difficult to maneuver through. Even a junkyard can be valuable Key deer habitat if it is utilized by the Key deer as a corridor. 1 As stated in Policy 20 .1.1 of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Policy 10 .2.r is not relevant to the Tier classification system used on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. 2 The "Tier Classification System" in Table 2.7 on page 43 of the Habitat Conservation Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key is data that is identified for "privately -owned vacant land". The Sands Corridor, which ties in very close proximity to the Seahorseproperty, is also made up of dense residential development on scarified land. This corridor is essential to the north - south movement of the Key Deer herd across US-1. This is precisely why the Incidental Take Permit prohibits all new development that results in any habitat loss in the Sands Corridor. Chan &f, a -Tier Classification from Tier i to 3 on Big Pine Kev Should Involve the Service. N1 Big Pine Key to the Key deer would be to ask the United States Fish and Wildlife service to weigh in on this decision. The Service should be asked, "Will the proposed changes in use from a campground and RVpark to an affordable housing complex on Big Pine Key have negative impacts the endangered Key deer?" If the answer is "yes," we need to know how much of an effect based upon the science utilize in the Habitat Conservation Plan. The answers from the Service should be a prerequisite to any decision being made by the Monroe County Planning Department. If the Planning Department has already communicated with the Service regarding this issue, we would ask that any such communication be made part of the record. Sincerely, //s// Alicia Putney, Secretary (305) 304-92-12 AttorneyHENRY LEE MORGENSTERN ■ i FLORIDA. Box 337 32190 Phone: (386) 749-0122 E-Mail Address: Henry_LeeM@yahoo.com To: Bryan Powell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [Sent to email: <bryan_powell@fws.gov>] From: Henry Lee Morgenstern, Esq. Date: September 9, 2015 Re: Tier change for Seahorse lots on Big; Fine Key Dear Mr. Powell, I represent Last Stand and Key Deer Protection Alliance regarding Monroe County's proposal to change the Seahorse trailer park lots on Big Pine Key (BPK) from Tier I to Tier 3 for the purpose of developing them into affordable housing. Attached is your memo of August 18, 2015, where you say that FWS is supportive of this change. I am writing to suggest that the Service re -consider this position. First, it appears that such a Tier change may be unnecessary. See attached email indicating that MC staff is now considering amending their land use rules to allow affordable housing in Tier I on Big Pine Key. (The HCP has no prohibition against, nor even mentions, affordable housing, so such an alternative would not involve the Service or the HCP in any way.) Second, it is my opinion that changing the Tier I designation on any lot on BPK to Tier 3 would be a "non -minor" amendment of the HCP as defined in HCP Sec. 6.3, p. 69. As stated in that section, all non -minor- arriendments require a new application, NE A, public notice period, and other procedures listed. Changing a Tier I designation on BPK to Tier 3 is a non -minor HCP amendment because: 1. The existing Tier designations are part of the HCP. Sec. 2.4.5, pp. 43-44. Therefore, changing the Tier designations constitutes a change (amendment) to the HCP. 2. Amendments are only "minor" if they "do not deplete the level or means of mitigation" and "do not alter the terms of the permit." HCP Sec. 6.3. 3. All of the "Avoidance and Minimization" guidelines listed in Sec. 5.3.2, pp. 57-60 are "terms of the permit" and are also integral parts of the "level or means of mitigation" referred to in Sec.6.3. See definition of "mitigation" in Sec. 5.3, p. 56. Note that ALL of these guidelines are part of the mitigation contemplated by the HCP, regardless of whether they deal with H Value. H Value is only one of the many considerations contemplated by the HCP. 4. Changing a lot from Tier 1 to Tier 3 on BPK would "deplete the level or means of mitigation" by decreasing the species protection afforded by Guidelines 4, 5, 8, 10, and 21: a. As to Guideline 4: Units that would have been counted in the 10 unit maximum for Tier 1 will no longer be so counted. The reason this guideline limits developments in Tier I to 10 units or H less than .022, "whichever results in a lower H" is because it is possible for 10 Tier 1 units to have a cumulative H value greater than .022. Thus, the Guideline 4 cap on the total H in Tier 1, as identified in the HCP, will be increased, depleting the mitigation afforded by that cap. b. The comment in your memo that you can change a Tier designation based on "the existing conditions of [the] parcels" (i) arbitrarily changes the baseline on which the entire HCP is based on a piecemeal basis, without uniform criteria or justification in the body of the HCP, see HCP Sec. 1.5, and (ii) would mean that anyone can just let the habitat value on them- parcel deteriorate and thereby avoid the requirements of the HCP. This "alters the terms of the permit." c. As to Guideline 5. The changed lot will now be allowed to have multiple -family and other development previously not allowed in Tier 1, changing the terms of the permit. d. As to Guideline S: The changed lot will now be allowed to have commercial development previously not allowed in Tier 1. This would "depl ete the mitigation" intended by the HCP of specifically discouraging commercial development, and the traffic it entails, south of Lytton's Way, due to the impact on US road kills. It also changes the terms of the permit. e. As to Guideline 10: The development priority on the lot will change, giving higher priority to habitat that was formerly in Tier 1. For example, Tier 3 development on BPK gets +20 ROGO points, while Tier I on BGK gets zero points. f. As to Guideline 21: Changing a lot fi-om Tier 1 will allow intensified uses on adjacent lots, regardless of the nature of such adjacent lots, or the effect such intensified uses may have on the protected species, "depleting the mitigation" intended by the guideline. In conclusion, my clients respectfully suggest that the: Service withdraw its support of the proposed Tier change, or at a minimum advise the county that any such change would be non - minor, requiring all the procedures in HCP Sec. 6.3. Thank you for your consideration. /signed and sent electronically/ HENRY LEE MORGENSTERN, Esq. cc: Mayte Santamaria Alicia Putney Roberts -Michael From: Powell, Brian <briart_powell@fws.gov> Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2015 4:51 PM To: Roberts -Michael Cc: Ashleigh Blackford Subject: Re: Big Pine Key Tier designations Mike, The Service reviewed the revised report you provided regarding the Tier amendment request for the Seahorse RV property can Big Pine Key. We also verified the existing land use with a site visit and through review of aerial photographs. The Service agrees that the condition of the Seahorse RV property (developed prior to the Big Pine HCP) is consistent with the definition of the Tier 3 designation and is supportive of the requested change. I will provide you with a letter that formally supports the requested change with justification of our support. I hope to have this letter to you early next week. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Brian Powell Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S.. Fish and Wildlife Service South Florida. Ecological Service Office 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, Fl 32960 772-469-4315 - office 772-562-4288 fax On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 4.27 PM, Roberts -Michael <Roberts-Michael4i=,trioelroccountN-I1.(ov> wrote Thanks for your earlier review and recommendations. I have attached a revised report incorporating your suggestedX edits. The Planning Commission heard the proposed amendment on August 26, 2015. The e-mail you provided (text below) was provided to the Commission. Some members of the Commission read your message to indicate that the Ui Service was not in fact supportive of the proposed amendment, but were rather requesting additional supporting analysis. I have NOT supplied any further analysis, other than providing the qualitative descriptions you suggested. Please review the edited version _ and if you can, respond with language that assures the Commission that the Service concurs with the Planning & Environmental Resources Staff recommendation. Thanks for your time and assistance. Michael Roberts, CEP PINS Sr. Administrator f Environmental Resources Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources From: Powell, Brian [rnailto:brian gowell@fws_gov] Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 4:45 PM To: Roberts -Michael c: Ashleigh Blackford Subject: Re: Big Pine Key Tier designations Mike, As we discussed this afternoon, the Service would be supportive of the requested tier designation change if the justification for each individual parcel is supported by the current tier designation description. Two of the parcels show an "H" value that is within the Tier 2 value range, however the existing condition of those two parcels is representative of the qualitative description of the Tier 3 designation. As such I think it would be more appropriate for the staff report to highlight that and use it as the justification for the change rather than the "H" value. Fish and Wildlife .Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service South Florida ]Ecological Service Office 1339 20th Street Vero Beach, Fl 32960 772-469-431.5 - office 772-562-4288 fax On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 11:57 AM, Roberts -Michael <Roberts-Michael,ic niociroecounty-fl.=gov> wrote: Ashleigh & Brian; We are currently processing the attached Tier amendment request for a property on Big Pine Key. The parcel is currently designated Tier I, but as you will note from the attached report, it meets none of the criteria for that Tier designation. Please review the attached and if you have any objections or comments please let me know. Thanks Michael Roberts, CEP; PWS Sr. Administrator/ Environmental Resources Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources (305) 289-2502 Michael Roberts Senior Administrator, Environmental Services Monroe County Growth Management 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400 Marathon, Florida 33050 Service Consultation Code: Project: 9= DWM� Dear Mr. Roberts: 2015-TA•0363 Big Pine Key -No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan, Seahorse RV Campground Tier Designation Change Monroe This letter is in response to Monroe County's request for technical assistance dated August 13, 2015, related to the Tier amendment request on the S,eahorse RV Campground property (Campground)_ TheTier amendment request was to change the Tier designation of the Campground from Tier I to Tier 3. The Campground is an existing RV campground containing 130 documented units- The Campground does not meet the Tier I definition described in Section 2.4.5 of the Big Pine Key No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP); and is more appropriately described as a Tier 3 property. If approved, this Tier change will not result in a decrease in protective measures and/or mitigation requirements under the HCP because the Campground was an existing development prior to the implementation of the HCP. Therefore, a change in Tier designation or land use at the Campground will not affect the baseline used in the F.CP. Additionally, the replacement ()f redevelopment of existing dwelling units will not impact the H value of the Campground property nor will it require mitigation in accordance with the HCP and Coutity's Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan. Finally, it theTier designation change is approved and the Campground is subsequently redeveloped, the property will be subject to current Monroe County ordinances including deed restrictions for free roaming cats, which will be an overall improvement in protection for species identified for conservation under the HCP. Based on the above discussion, the Service has no objection to and supports the request to amend the Tier designation at the Campground as presented in the September 8, 2015, staff report submitted to the Service. Michael Roberts Ex" If you have any questions, please contact Brian Powell at 772-469-4315. Sincerely yours, 4 �Y]Zox imnzln- Field Supervisor South Florida Ecological Servkes Office March 8, 2016 The Honorable Heather Carruthers Mayor, Monroe County Board of County Commissioners 500 Whitehead Street, Suite 102 Key West, FL 33040 Dear Mayor Carruthers: The Department of Economic Opportunity has completed its review of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Monroe County (Amendment No. 16-IACSC), which was received on January 8, 2016 and determined complete on January 8, 2016. We have reviewed the proposed amendment in accordance with the state coordinated review process set forth in Sections 163-3184(2) and (4), Florida Statutes (F.S.), for compliance with Chapter 163, Pai-LI11, IL F.S. Review comments received by the Department from the appropriate reviewing agencies are also enclosed. The attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report outlines our findings concerning the amendment. We have identified two objections and have included recommendations regarding measures that can be taken to address the objections. We have spoken to your staff regarding the Department's objections and ways the County can address the issues raised in the attached report. We look forward to working together with you to address these issues. The County should act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt the proposed amendment. Also, please note that Section 163.3184(4)(e)1, F,S., provides that if the second public hearing is not held within 180 days of your receipt of the Department of Economic Opportunity report, the amendment shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended by agreement with notice to the Department of Economic Opportunity and any affected party that provided comment on the amendment. For your assistance, we have enclosed the procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. Florida Department of Economic Opportunity I Caldwell Building 1107 E. Madison Street I Tallahassee, FIL 32399 866.FLA,2345 1950.245.7105 1850.921,3223 Fax -,fQ I wMmfacebQok.Co—m—/FLDJQ An equal opportunity employer/program. Auxiliary aids and services are available upon request to individuals with disabilities. All voice telephone numbers on this document maybe reached by persons using TFY/TDO equipment via the Florida Relay Service at 711. The Honorable Heather Carruthers March 8, 2016 Page 2 of 2 If you have any questions related to this review, please contact Rebecca Jetton, at (850) 717-8494, or by email at Rebecca,jetton@deo.myfiorida.com. Sincerely, Taylor Teepell, Director Division of Community Development Tr/rj Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report Procedures for Adoption Agency Comments cc: Ms. Mayte Santamaria, Senior Director Planning and Environmental Resources, Monroe County Ms. Isabel Casio Carballo, Executive Director, South Florida Regional Planning Council Department staff identified the following objections and comments. If the,city adopts the amendment without addressing the objections, the Department many find the amendment not in compliance pursuant to Section 163.3184(4)(e)4, Florida Statutes (F.S.). Objection 1: The site is entirely surrounded by property designated as Tier I. All Tier III properties on Big Pine Key are either adjacent to US 1 or other Tier III properties. Reclassifying this property as Tier III could serve as a stimulus or foothold to prompt future requests for Tier changes. Little data was submitted to justify the proposed change. The Harvest value of the properties submitted indicates the parcel would more appropriately be designated Tier 11. The County's Land Development Code Section 130-130(e) indicates that a map change may be made to correct errors in mapping the Tier system, but does not list specific criteria to be met in order to change the designation. No data has been provided to demonstrate that an error in mapping was made. Since all allocations for Tier I have been utilized, the only way to allocate development to this scarified site is by changing the Tier designation. Changing the Tier designation on the subject parcels would allow the county to replace the existing units for the development of up to 44 additional permanent dwelling units. Authority: Section 163.3177(1)(f) and (6)(d)2.h, Florida Statutes (F.S.); Section 380.0552(7)(c), F.S.; Recommendation: Do not adopt the proposed Tier change as proposed. Provide data and analysis demonstrating that the parcel is suitable to be designated as Tier 11 and reassign a Tier II designation. Objection 2: The proposed text amendment does not provide a meaningful and predictable basis for an affordable housing overlay. Authority: Section 163.3177(1). F.S.; Section 380.0552(7)(e), F.S. Recommendation: Develop criteria and definitions for an affordable housing overlay, including, but not limited to, proximity to employment centers, public transportation, income guidelines, deed restrictions, absence of habitat for endangered species and not within a Military Installation Area of Influence. Based on these criteria, the County should support the Tier amendment by demonstrating that the site is an appropriate location for affordable housing. The Department is aware of the need for construction of affordable housing and undestand the effort to create additional affordable housing opportunities. If there is insufficient time to create the affordable housing overlay, the County could change the proposed text amendment regarding the four parcels to specify that only "deed restricted affordable housing" can be developed at the location instead of refer -ring to an affordable housing overlay. Section 163.3184(4), Florida Statutes May 2011 NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: Please submit three complete copies of all comprehensive plan materials, of which one complete paper copy and two complete electronic copies on CD ROM in Portable Document Format (PDF) to the Department of Economic Opportunity and one copy to each entity below that provided timely comments to the local government: the appropriate Regional Planning Council; Water Management District; Department of Transportation; Department of Environmental Protection; Department of State; the appropriate county (municipal amendments only); the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (county plan amendments only); and the Department of Education (amendments relating to public schools); and for certain local governments, the appropriate military installation and any other local government or governmental agency that has filed a written request. SUBMITTAL LETTER: Please include the following information in the cover letter transmitting the adopted amendment: - Department of Economic Opportunity identification number for adopted amendment package; Summary description of the adoption package, including any amendments proposed but not adopted; ordinance number and adoption date; Certification that the adopted amendment(s) has been submitted to all parties that provided timely comments to the local government; Name, title, address, telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of local government contact; Letter signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local government. ADOPTION AMENDMENT PACKAGE: Please include the following information in the amendment package: Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated March 11, 2013) In the case of text amendments, changes should be shown in strike-through/underline format; In the case of future land use map amendment, an adopted future land use map, in color format, clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation, and its adopted designation; A copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate. Note: If the local government is relying on previously submitted data and analysis, no additional data and analysis is required; - Copy of executed ordinance adopting the comprehensive plan amendment(s); Suggested effective date language for the adoption ordinance for state coordinated review: The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be the date the Department of Economic Opportunity posts a notice of intent determing that this amendment is in compliance. If timely challenged, or if the state land planning agency issues a notice of intent determining that this amendment is not in compliance, this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, or land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administration Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of a resolution affirming its effective status, a copy of which resolution shall be sent to the Department of Economic Opportunity. List of additional changes made in the adopted amendment that the Department of Economic Opportunity did not previously review; List of findings of the local governing body, if any, that were not included in the ordinance and which provided the basis of the adoption or determination not to adopt the proposed amendment; Statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewed by the Department of Economic Opportunity to the ORC report from the Department of Economic Opportunity. Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated March 11, 2013) Eubanks, Ra From: Hight, Jason <Jason. Hight@ MyFWC.com > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 4:39 PM To: DCPexternalagencycomments; santamaria-mayte@monroecounty-fl.gov Cc: Wallace, Traci; Chabre, Jane; Krueger, MaOssa Subject, Monroe County 16-1ACSC (Resolutions 341-2015 and 408-2015) Ms. Santamaria: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) staff has reviewed the proposed comprehensive plan amendment in accordance with Chapter 163-3184(.3), Florida Statutes. We have no comments, recommendations, or objections related to fish and wildlife or listed species and their habitat to offer on this amendment. If you need any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Jane Chabre either by phone at (850) 410- 5367 or by email at FWCConservationP]aiiiiingSe-i-vice,�,(a)MvFWC.com. If you have specific technical questions, please contact Marissa Krueger at (561) 882-5711 or by email at Marissa.KrueUr@JnyfWc.cojn. Sincerely, Jason Hight Biological Administrator 11 Off cu of Conservation Planning Services Division of Habitat and Species Conservation 620 S. Meridian Street, MS 5135 Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600 (850) 228-2055 Project ID 22409, Monroe County 16-1 CPA-ACSC Euba!#�, From: Manning, Terese <tmanning@sfwmd.gov> Sent- Wednesday, February 03, 2016 5:19 PM To: DCPexternalagencycomrnents Cc: Mayte Santamaria (Santamaria-Mayte@MonroeCounty-FLGov); Jetton, Rebecca; Isabel Cosio Carballo (isabe[c6sfrpc.com); Isabel Moreno Subject: Monroe County, DECI #16-1ACSC, Comments on Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Package Dear Mr. Eubanks: The South Florida Water Management District (District) has completed its review of the proposed amendment package from Monroe County (County). The package includes two Future Land Use Map Amendments. There appear to be no regionally significant water resource issues; therefore, the District forwards no comments on the proposed amendment package. The District offers its technical assistance to the County and the Department of Economic Opportunity in developing sound, sustainable solutions to meet the County's future water supply needs and to protect the region's water resources. Please forward a copy of adopted amendments to the District. Please contact me if you need assistance or additional information. Sincerely, Terry Manning, Policy and Planning Analyst South Florida Water Management District Water Supply Implementation Unit 3301 Gun Club Road, MSC 4222 West Palm Beach, FL 33406 Phone: 561-682-6779 Fax: 561-681-6264 E-Mail. tmanning@sfwmd.pov We value your opinion. Please take a few minutes to share your comments on the service you received from the District by clicking on this link. South Flop.,ta 7wqooa+ Gincil M M M � DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2016 TO: COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: STAFF AGENDA ITEM MILD SUBJECT: LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROPOSED AND ADOPTED AMENDMENT CONSENT AGENDA Pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statues, Council review of Amendments to local government comprehensive plans is limited to 1) adverse effects on regional resources and facilities identified in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida (SRPP) and 2) extra -jurisdictional impacts that would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan of any affected local government within the Region. A written report containing an evaluation of these impacts, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes, is to be provided to the local government and the State Land Planning Agency within 30 calendar days of receipt of the amendment. Council staff has not identified adverse effects to regional resources and facilities or extra jurisdictional impacts that would result from the following map and text amendments: South Florida Regional Council 3440 Hollywood Boulevard, Suite 140, Hollywood, Florida 33021 954.985,4416 Phone, 954.985-4417 FAX www.sfreglonalcouncil.org City of Pembroke Pines N/A V 02/01/2016 01/06/2016 5-0 15-3ESR (received 01-15-16) The adopted amendment reflects a recent property annexation and change to the City's Land Use Plan Map designation of approximately 66 acres of real property (located East of US 27, on the North side of Sheridan Street). The parcel retains the current Broward County Land Use Plan designation of "Community Facilities" but the Community Facilities designation will now be applied to the City of Pembroke Pines Land Use Plan. *TBP: To Be Provided Recommendation Find the proposed and adopted plan amendments from the local governments listed in the table above generally consistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Pion far South Florida. Approve this report for transmittal to the local governments with a copy to the State Land Planning Agency. 2 Eubanks, 14, From: Ray, Suzanne E. <Suzanne.E,Ray@dep.state.f1.us> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:36 PM To: Eubanks, Ray, DCPexternalagencycomments Subject: Monroe County 16-1ACSC Proposed To., Ray Eubanks, DEC? Plans Processing Administrator Re: Monroe County 16-IACSC — State Coordinated Review of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Office of Intergovernmental Programs of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) has reviewed the above -referenced amendment package under the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The Department conducted a detailed review that focused on potential adverse impacts to important state resources and facilities, specifically: air and water pollution: wetlands and other surface waters of the state; federal and state-owned lands and interest in lands, including state parks, greenways and trails, conservation easements; solid waste; and water and wastewater treatment. Based on our review of the submitted amendment package, the Department has found no provision that, if adopted, would result in adverse impacts to important, state resources subject to the Department's jurisdiction. Feel firee to contact me at S tizanne.e.rayLit der) s ta (e, 1-1, u s or (85 0) 245-2 i 72 for assistance or additional information. Please send all amendments, both proposed and adopted, to plan. review(i.�)dep.state.fl.tisor Florida Department of Environmental Protection Office of Intergovernmental Programs, Plan Review 3900 Commonwealth Blvd., MS 47 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 A;0 moll OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER (850) 617-7700 Tm CAPITOL 400 SOUTH MONROJE SMET TAiri.&uAssim, FLoRrDA 32399-0800 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES COMMISSIONER ARAM H. PuTNAM January 28, 2016. VIA EMAIL(Santamaria-mayte@monroecounty-fl.gov) Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department Ms. Mayte Santamaria 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite Marathon, Florida 3300 Re: MACS Docket # -- 20160111-689 Monroe County Resolution 341-2015 and Aesolution 408-2015 Submission dated January 5, 2016 Dear Ms. Santamaria: The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (the "Department") received the above - referenced proposed comprehensive plan amendment on January 11, 2016 and has reviewed it pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes to address any potential adverse impacts to important state resources or facilities related to agricultural, aquacultural, or forestry resources in Florida if the proposed amendment(s) are adopted. Based on our review of your county's submission, the Department has no comment on the proposal. If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 850-410-2289. Sincerely, Stormle Knight Se. Management Analyst I Office of Policy and Budget cc: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity (SLPA #, Monroe County 16-1 ACSC) i* 1-800-HELP PLA www.FreshFromFlorida.com FDOT.11''�) -.Florda D;qpiartmera of 27rainsportadon- JOCKSCOTT 100,0 NW 11 I merweMtn �xa Miami, FL 33172 Ray Eubanks, Plan ,,Pro oessing A&nihistrator Department of Economic Opportunity Community Planning and Developmeht 107 East Madison Street Caldwell Building, MSC 160 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Subject: Comments for the Proposed Comprehensive Platt Amendment, Motiroe County #16-1AGSC Dear Mr. Eubanks-, 'he Florida Department of Transportation, District Six, completedi'a_ review of the Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Monroe County #16-IACSC. The District has reviewed the amendment package per Chapter 163 Florida Statutes and has, found no adverse impacts to transportation resources and facilities of State Importance. Please contact me at 305-470-W5 if you have any questionsconceming our response. Sincerety, ennath a 10 s Transportation Planner Cc: Harold Desdunes, P,E., Florida Department of Transporta#on,. District 6 Carl Filer, Jr. P.E., Florida Department of Transportation, District 6 Lisa Colmenares, AICP. Florida Department Of Transportai6n, District 6 Mayte Santamaria, N10hroe County www,dot-statell.us United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE South Florida Ecological Services Office 1339 204 Street Vero Beach. Florida 32960 October 21, 2015 Michael Roberts Senior Administrator, Environmental Services Monroe County Growth Management 2798 Overseas Mghway, Suite 400 Marathon, Florida 33050 Service Consultation Code; Project: Subject: County: Dear Mr. Roberts. 2015-TA-0363 Big Pine Key -No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan, Seahorse RV Campground Tier Designation Change Monroe This letter is in response to Monroe County's request for technical assistance dated August 13,2015, related to the Tier amendment request on the Seahom RV Campground property (Campground). The Tier amendment request was to change the Tier designation of the Campground from Tier I to 7-ter 3. The Campground is an existing RV campground containing 130 documented units. The Campground does not meet the Tier I definition described in Section 2.4.5 of the Big Pine Key No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP); and is more appropriately described as a Tier 3 property. If approved, this Tier change will not result in a decrease in protective measures and/or mitigation requirements under the HCP because the Campground was an existing development prior to the implementation of the HCP. Therefore, a change in Tier designation or landuse at the Campground will not affect the baseline used in the HCP. Additionally, the replacement or redevelopment of existing dwelling units YAII not impact the H value of the Campground property nor will it require mitigation in accordance with the HCP and Coulity's Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan. Finally, if theTier designation change is approved and the Campground is subsequently redeveloped, the property will be subject to current Monroe County ordinances including deed restrictions for free roaming cats, which will be an overall improvement in protection for species identified for conservation under the HCP. Basedon the above discussion, the Service has no objection to and supports the request to amend the Tier designation at the Campground as presented in the September 8, 2015, staff report submitted to the Service, Michael Roberts Page 2 If you have any questions, please contact Bzian Powell at 772-469-431 S. Sincerely yours, 'An i C 6�Roxanna H/� inzm 4� 0 Field Supervisor E South Florida &ological Services Office 'a C 0 E x CL 0 U) County of Monroe Planning & Environmental Resources Department 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 410 Marathon, FL 33050 Voice: (305) 289-2500 FAX: (305) 289-2536 We strive to be caring, professional, and fair. MEMORANDUM DATE: April 21, 2016 TO: BOCC Board of Countv Commissioners Mayor Heather Carruthers, Dist. 3 Mayor Pro Tern George Neugent, Dist. 2 Danny L. Kolhage, Dist. 1 David Rice, Dist. 4 Sylvia Murphy, Dist. 5 FROM: Michael Roberts, Sr. Administrator/Environmental Resources THROUGH: Mayte Santamaria, Sr. Director Department of Planning & Environmental Resources SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY'S OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS (ORC) REPORT ON THE BIG PINE KEY LCP AMENDMENTS FOR LONGSTOCK II, LLC. MEETING DATE: May 18, 2016 The property owner, Longstock 11, LLC submitted a request to amend Figure 2.1 of the Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key (LCP) by amending the Tier Designation for Parcel #'s 00300090-000000; 00300 180-000000; 00300590- 000000 & 00300670-000000 from Tier I to Tier III. Being the LCP is incorporated by reference into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan, amendments to the LCP require a text amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners conducted a public hearing for the purpose of considering the transmittal of the proposed amendment to the State Land Planning Agency on October 21, 2015. Based on public comment and public participation, the BOCC directed staff to include an additional amendment as an Action Item designating Parcel #'s 00300090-000000; 00300180-000000; 00300590-000000 & 00300670-000000 for affordable housing only. Staff recommended draft text to amend the Livable CommuniKeys Plan by creating Action 3.3.5 to designate the four subject parcels as affordable housing as a Land Use District overlay for only affordable housing development, which the BOCC voted to include in the transmittal package. The proposed Text amendment is as follows: 2015-116 ORC Response Meino 1 1( C 11 Action Item 3.3.5: Designate four (4) parcels having real estate numbers 00300090-000000, 00300180-000000, 00300590-000000 and 00300670-000000 as an Affordable Housing overlay restricting the development of the parcels to affordable housing_onlonl . The Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) in their capacity as the State Land Planning Agency reviewed the amendment and issued an Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report on March 8, 2016. DEO had the following objections and comments to the proposed Text amendment (shown in blLIC throLIghOLIt this report): tr�ection 1: T e site is entirely SUrrOUndcd. by property designated. as Tier 1, All Tier 111 properties on Big mine Key are either ad"acent to 1.JS 1 or other Tier ill properties, Reclassifying this property as Tier 111 could. serve as a stimulus or foothold. to prompt FLitUrC requests for Tier changes. I.,ittle data was SUbmitted. to jLIstify the proposed. change, The Hat -vest valLIC of the properties SUbmitted. indicates the Marcel woUld. more appropriately be designated. Tier lie The COUnty`s 1..,and. Development Code Section 130-130(c) indicates that a male change may be made to correct errors in mapping the Tier system, bUt does not list specific criteria to be met in order to change the designation, No data has been provided. to demonstrate that an error in mapping was made, Since all allocations for Tier f have been Utilized, the only way to allocate development to this scarified. site is by clanging the Tier designation, Changing the Tier designation on the SUblect parcels wo�:�ld. allow the COUnty to replace the existing Units for the development of LIP to 44 additional permanent dwelling Units, The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code allow for property owners to apply for a Tier map amendment at any time (see Section 130-130 and Section 102-158). Section 130- 130 of the Land Development Code provides the criteria for Tier designations and map amendments. The tier criteria do not include the consideration of "stimulus or foothold to prompt future requests for Tier changes." Each application would be fully reviewed on the adopted criteria, as well as consistency with the Livable Communikeys Plan, Habitat Conservation Plan and the Incidental Take Permit. Further, the Tier criteria do not include any analysis or projection of what the future use or development of a particular parcel might be in assigning a Tier designation. It should be noted that DEO recently approved a similar Livable CommuniKeys Plan amendment and tier amendment. DEO reviewed an amendment to the Livable CommuniKeys Plan for property owned by Seacamp (11 parcels), from undesignated and Tier I to Tier III on Figure 2.1 of the LCP. On May 4, 2012, the DEO issued its Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report to Monroe County which stated that the agency does not identify any objections or comments related to important state resources and facilities that will be adversely impacted by the amendment if it is adopted. On November 20, 2012, DEO issued a Notice of Intent finding the amendment "In Compliance." 2015-116 ORC Response Memo Page 12 With regard to the Tier designation of surrounding properties, it should be noted that these properties are also largely developed lands, as depicted in the recent imagery below (also see Figure 1, attached). 1999 imagery: 2003 imagery: 2015-116 ORC Response Memo Page 13 While the H value associated with the subject parcels is consistent with the H values for Tier II, the criteria for Tier designation include additional factors to consider beyond the H value — particularly the level of development within and in close proximity to the site (Table 1, below). DEO states that no data was provided to support the proposed amendment; however, staff provided an in-depth analysis of the criteria that clearly demonstrated that the subject parcels do not meet the Tier I criteria and that Tier III would be the more appropriate designation (see 10/21/2015 Staff Report). Data was provided regarding deer locations & distribution, 6 grid layers that generate the weighting factors of the carrying capacity grid, harvest grid, marsh rabbit habitat, H-values, deer corridors, habitat (or lack thereof), HCP tier classifications and qualitative criteria, consistency with adopted documents and confirmation from USFWS (verified the Seahorse property is consistent with the definition of the Tier 3 designation with a site visit and thorough review of aerial photographs -see attachment 3 to the staff report ). The Tier designation criteria from the Comprehensive Plan and the Livable Communikeys Plan (LCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key are discussed below. In addition to Staff s comments, the applicant provided a response to the ORC report, their comments are attached as Attachment 6 to the staff report. §130-130(d) stipulates that the tier boundaries for parcels on Big Pine Key and No Name Key shall be designated using the Big Pine Key and No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan (2005)(HCP) and the adopted community master plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key (LCP). Goal 1 of the LCP states that Tier I lands are termed "Natural Area, " Tier II lands are called "Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area" and Tier III lands are the "Infill Area." For Big Pine Key and No Name Key the habitat sensitivity information presented in the HCP can be used directly to define the environmental protection priorities incorporated into their Tier Map coverages. Strategy 1.1 Create a Tier Map for the planning area depicting the locations of Tier I, Tier II and Tier III lands as described in Comprehensive Plan Policy 105.2.1. Base the Tier Map on the habitat needs of federally endangered resident species in the planning area as set forth in the anticipated ITP and HCP in terms of relative H ofparcels within the planning area. Comprehensive Plan Policy 105.2.1 Monroe County shall designate all lands outside of mainland Monroe County, except for the Ocean Reef planned development, into three general categories for purposes of its Land Acquisition Program and smart growth initiatives in accordance with the criteria in Policy 205.1.1. These three categories are: Natural Area (Tier 1); Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier II) on Big Pine Key and No Name Key only; and Infill Area (Tier III). The purposes, general characteristics, and growth management approaches associated with each tier are as follows: 2015-116 ORC Response Meino P i g c 14 Table 1. Tier Designation Criteria Tier Comprehensive Plan Policy 105.2.1 HCP Table 2.7 Tier Classification System Natural Area (Tier I): Any defined geographic area Lands where all or a significant portion of the where all or a significant portion of the land area is land area is characterized as environmentally characterized as environmentally sensitive by the sensitive and important for the continued viability policies of this Plan and applicable habitat conservation of HCP covered species (mean H per IOx10 meter plan, is to be designated as a Natural Area. New cell 0.259 x 10-3). These lands are high quality development on vacant land is to be severely restricted Key deer habitat, generally representing large and privately owned vacant lands are to be acquired or contiguous patches of native vegetation that 1 development rights retired for resource conservation provide habitat for other protected species as and passive recreation purposes. However, this does not well. preclude provisions of infrastructure for existing development. Within the Natural Area designation are typically found lands within the acquisition boundaries of federal and state resource conservation and park areas, including isolated platted subdivisions; and privately -owned vacant lands with sensitive environmental features outside these acquisition areas. Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier II): Any Scattered lots and fragments of environmentally defined geographic area on Big Pine Key and No Name sensitive lands that may be found in platted Key, where scattered groups and fragments of subdivisions (mean H per 10 x10 meter cell environmentally sensitive lands, as defined by this 0.183 x 10-3). A large number of these lots are Plan, may be found and where existing platted located on canals and are of minimal value to the subdivisions are not predominately developed, not Key deer and other protected species because the served by complete infrastructure facilities, or not canal presents a barrier to dispersal. within close proximity to established commercial areas, is to be designated as a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area. New development is to be discouraged 2 and privately owned vacant lands acquired or development rights retired to reduce sprawl, ensure that the Keys carrying capacity is not exceeded, and prevent further encroachment on sensitive natural resources. Within a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area are typically found. scattered small non-residential development and platted subdivisions with less than 50 percent of the lots developed; incomplete infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, or electricity; and scattered clusters of environmentally sensitive lands, some of which are within or in close proximity to existing platted subdivisions. Infill Area (Tier IIf): Any defined geographic area, Scattered lots within already heavily developed where a significant portion of land area is not areas that provide little habitat value to the Key characterized as environmentally sensitive as defined deer and other protected species (mean H per by this Plan, except for dispersed and isolated fragments IOx10 meter cell 0.168 x 10-3). Some of the 3 of environmentally sensitive lands of less than four undeveloped lots in this Tier are located between acres in area, where existing platted subdivisions are existing developed commercial lots within the US - substantially developed, served by complete 1 corridor or are located on canals. infrastructure facilities, and within close proximity to established commercial areas, or where a concentration o non-residential uses exists, is to be designated as an 2015-116 ORC Response Memo P a (c 15 Infill Area. New development and redevelopment are to be highly encouraged, except within tropical hardwood hammock or pineland patches of an acre or more in area, where development is to be discouraged. Within an Infill Area are typically found: platted subdivisions with 50 percent or more developed lots situated in areas with few sensitive environmental features; full range of available public infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, and electricity; and concentrations of commercial and other non-residential uses within close proximity. In some Infill Areas, a mix of non-residential and high -density residential uses (generally 8 units or more per acre) may also be found that form a Community Center. The subject parcels consist of portions of two platted subdivisions (Sam N Joe and Darios) and are adjacent to Sands Subdivision. The area is served by paved roads, potable water supply and electricity. Review of the Tier criteria above clearly indicates the appropriate Tier designation for the subject parcels should be Tier III. Since all allocations for Tier I iia%,c beell UtiIiZCC, tlie oniv wav to allocate dc� ,, loptncnt to %liiu 0 0 scarifieda % u t�� ..t %.� Ti � � �t� ,. %1 �, h t �,° %I Tier do iana%io, 01%l C uulbjec% parcels WOU!cl allOW %lIC COLIA V to replace %liC CXi,,tilla U11iU, 101' 1,11C CICNCIOINTICIM, Ol` Uj) to 44 The Tier designation does not affect the development rights of the subject parcels. The Letter of Development Rights Determination for the subject parcels recognized 130 documented units consisting of 125 transient units and 5 market rate units. As platted, the parcels consist of 32 platted IS and URM lots, each of which could be developed at an as -of -right density of 1 unit per lot. This development potential is present regardless of the Tier designation. The only effect of the Tier designation for these parcels is the prohibition of the development of affordable housing in Tier I. DEO Recommemhifion: Do not adopt the proposed Tier cha�nac as proposed. Pro%,idc data a�nd a�nalvsis dealonstrating that the parcel is sUitable to be desialiated as Tier H a�nd reassian a Tier H ale sia c[tiog," As demonstrated in the Tier criteria discussion above, the subject parcels do not meet the criteria for designation as Tier 11 and are more appropriately designated as Tier III. 2015-116 ORC Response Meino P i g c 16 The second objection provided by DEO addresses the affordable housing overlay: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Objec--ion I iie proposed teat, atIlei alc is does ;°sit, pro%,, e a area f;°tgfiil atici predictable basis; for a,,i af6orciable t srulutr to o,erlay. To address the absence of the basis for the overlay, DEO offered this recommendation from the ORC DEO O Recommendation: Dec ,,elop criteria atici cie .A itio, r for ar" af6ordable WLIu J a ct%,;erlav, °Clul(ill'a, bUt. ;srt, llrrrlt.cci to, prc xiallt.v to errrlrlc�rvalei"t. CCI t.Cru, J)Ubllc; traa,,isportat:lol , l;�;c�« t=lc 0 0 ultti lr u, CICC i restrrc;trcr� s, absegic;e of t abitat for egida: to red species a�,,id g°srt �6 l i i a Military tallat. i cr£,"Area Of' ffi1 , c Based og,i fliese criteria, flIC sul "t, <asullci ullfrcr1 t.l}c liar atIe i i dt-II e ,_t. %v (Jet ogistratigia that: toe site is ari appropriate loc;at.log° for affordable W 1�JIIU. "I hc, Depart.aici t. is a��,are of t.l e ; eed for Cog rt. act.tcr ° of` a 6ordable WLI. f,ig a,.id fl e effort: to create acicilt.lcr,°al af'.(6rciablC 110ur 011'a crl)lrOrtutAffltIC,,.. if' t.lICTC lr 1, ,,UfikiClffl t.iale to create t.li a€fcrrciable ! 0Uu 01to o%,erlar flie OLIAMN c;b UICI dia "tae t:lie pr6)liE)sed text: at eil dalegl°t, regardig'a t.li fCrurr parcels, to specify t.l}at oifly "deed restricted affordable � srurr a" c;ati be deg ,,eloped at, t.li locatiogi igist.caci of rc fern;°a: to ari aff6orciable t LILJ 1'a o%,e lay. Staff concurs with DEO's recommendation and has amended the proposed text amendment to the following: Action Item 3.3.5: New development on the four (4) parcels legally described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 And 5, Block 1, Lots 1 through 18 Block 2, Sam-N-Joe Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 76 of the Public Records of Monroe County Florida and Lots 1 Through 9, Block 3, Darios Subdivision Plat Book 3 Page 92 of the Public Records of Monroe County Florida, having real estate numbers 00300090-000000, 00300180-000000, 00300590-000000 and 00300670-000000 shall be limited to deed restricted affordable housing. 2015-116 ORC Response Meino Page 17 I I I I ll;;1�11�!Ip;�IljT.11 wo 00 %MTH I OROPEZA ATTORNEYS AT LAW Barton W. Smith, Esq. Tel: 305-296-7227 Fax: 305-296-8448 bart,,'ii)stniLhorope7a.com April 18,2016 Ms. Mayte Santamaria Director of Planning Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400 Marathon, FL 33050 Re: Department of Economic Opportunitv ORC Report m4ardina Amendment No. 16-1 ACSC Dear Mayte, Please allow this letter to clarify and comment on the Department of Economic Opportunity ("DEO") Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report dated March 8, 2016 ("ORC Report") recently sent to Mayor Carruthers regarding the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Monroe County (Amendment No. 16-1 ACSC) approved via Resolution 341-2015. The ORC Report is attached as Exhibit A for your reference. I have also enclosed a copy of this letter package and request that you date stamp and return the copy package in the enclosed self- addressed FedEx envelope. There are several misstatements and misunderstandings in the objection and comments section of the ORC Report as set forth below. 0 b Je,LLtion I� which reads as follows: Objection 1: The site is entirely surrounded by property designated as Tier I. All Tier III properties on Big Pine Key are either adjacent to US I or other Tier III properties. Reclassifying this property as Tier III could serve as a stimulus or foothold to prompt future requests for Tier changes. Little data was submitted to justify the proposed change. The Harvest value of the properties submitted indicates the parcel would more appropriately be designated Tier Il. The County's Land Development Code Section 130-130(e) indicates that a map change may be made to correct errors in mapping the Tier system, but does not list specific criteria to be met in order to change the designation. No data has been provided to demonstrate that an error in mapping was made. Since all allocations for Tier I have been utilized, the only way to allocate development to this scarified site is by changing 00062646 - v5 138-142 Simonton Street - Key West, Florida 33040 - Phone: (305) 296-7227 - Fax: (305) 2 4TWFAF,7UM1F,-wA.PAvAF,X3 April 18, 2016 Page 2 the Tier designation. Changing the Tier designation on the subject parcels would allow the county to replace the existing units for the development of up to 44 additional permanent dwelling units. 1) Re: "The site is entirely surrounded by property designated as Tier I. All Tier III properties on Big Pine Key are either adjacent to US I or other Tier III properties." The surrounding area is not a criteria under the County's Land Development Code for Tier Designation. Monroe County Code Section 130-130(d) states that "The tier boundaries shall be designated using the Big Pine Key and No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan (2005) and the adopted community master plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key." There is no mention of reviewing surrounding property or location of subject property to US I or other Tier III properties. As previously discussed and pursuant to the documentation previously provided, the designation of the property as Tier I was a data error and such designation should be amended to Tier 111. 2) Re: "Reclassifying this property as Tier III could serve as a stimulus or foothold to prompt future requests far Tier changes." Again, as discussed with the you and the commission multiple times, the standard here is that the subject amendment is in compliance with the HCP (as defined below) and Big Pine Key and No Name Key Communikeys Master Plan, not whether the amendment could maybe or possibly in the future cause another property owner to seek reclassification of tier designation. In addition, the subject property is very unique in Big Pine Key and No Name Key in that it has been scarified and heavily developed that provide[s] little value to the Key deer and other protected species for decades, and was in the such condition when the tier designations were initially designated. 3) Re: "Little data was submitted to justify the proposed change. The Harvest value of the properties submitted indicates the parcel would more appropriately be designated Tier IT" a) Tier III designation only designation appropriate under County Code, Comp Plan and HCP As presented and submitted several times, voluminous data was included with the original applications, staff report and backup files and is included herein by reference, which all evidences that the subject property should have been designated Tier III pursuant to the standards set forth in the Monroe County Code (as defined below) and the HCP and also because the HCP and Big Pine Key and No Name Key Communikeys Master Plan designated the subject property as developed land and never identified it to be included as Tier I. Pursuant to 130-130 of the Monroe County, Florida Code of Ordinances ("Monroe County Code") governing tier designation, which were originally adopted in 2005, challenged and amended and re -adopted in 2006, the tier boundaries are designated using the Big Pine Key and 00062646 - v5 Ms. Mayte Santamaria April 1 S, 2016 Page 3 No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan (2005) (which is actually titled "Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other Protected Species on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, Monroe County, Florida (April 2003, April 2006 Revision) (the "HCP") and the adopted community master plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key, the tier overlay district map may be amended to reflect existing conditions in an area if warranted because of drafting or data errors. It was a data error to designate the Property as Tier I and such designation should be amended to Tier III for the reasons set forth below. Policy 105.2.1 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan revised August 29, 2013 ("Comp Plan"), sets forth the following definitions of Tier I, Tier II and Tier III categories of land: Natural Area (Tier I): Any defined geographic area where all or a significant portion of the land area is characterized as environmentally sensitive by the policies of this Plan and applicable habitat conservation plan, is to be designated as a Natural Area. New development on vacant land is to be severely restricted and privately owned vacant lands are to be acquired or development rights retired for resource conservation and passive recreation purposes. However, this does not preclude provisions of infrastructure for existing development. Within the Natural Area designation are typically found lands within the acquisition boundaries of federal and state resource conservation and park areas, including isolated platted subdivisions; and privately -owned vacant lands with sensitive environmental features outside these acquisition areas. Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier II). Any defined geographic area on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, where scattered groups and fragments of environmentally sensitive lands, as defined by this Plan, may be found and where existing platted subdivisions are not predominately developed, not served by complete infrastructure facilities, or not within close proximity to established commercial areas, is to be designated as a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area. New development is to be discouraged and privately owned vacant lands acquired or development rights retired to reduce sprawl, ensure that the Keys carrying capacity is not exceeded, and prevent further encroachment on sensitive natural resources. Within a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area are typically found: scattered small non-residential development and platted subdivisions with less than 50 percent of the lots developed; incomplete infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, or electricity; and scattered clusters of environmentally sensitive lands, some of which are within or in close proximity to existing platted subdivisions In all Area Tier III: Any defined geographic area, where a significant portion of land area is not characterized as environmentally sensitive as defined by this Plan, except for dispersed and isolated fragments of environmentally sensitive lands of 00062646 - v5 WTA"TA TO F, WO <• 18,2016 Page 4 less than four acres in area, where existing platted subdivisions are substantially developed, served by complete infrastructure facilities, and within close proximity to established commercial areas, or where a concentration of non-residential uses exists, is to be designated as an Infill Area. New development and redevelopment are to be highly encouraged, except within tropical hardwood hammock or pineland patches of an acre or more in area, where development is to be discouraged. Within an Infill Area are typicallyfound: platted subdivisions with 50 percent or more developed lots situated in areas with few sensitive environmental features; full range of available public infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, and electricity; and concentrations of commercial and other non- residential uses within close proximity. In some Infill Areas, a mix of non- residential and high -density residential uses (generally 8 units or more per acre) may also be found that form a Community Center. Under the definitions above of "Natural Area (Tier 1)" from the Comp. Plan, the Property clearly does not meet the criteria of a Tier I property as no part of the Property is "environmentally sensitive" and the Property is not "within the acquisition boundaries of federal and state resource conservation and park areas, including isolated platted subdivisions; and privately -owned vacant lands with sensitive environmental features outside these acquisition areas." This position is supported by the Vegetative Habitat Assessment dated January 5, 2015, prepared by Biosurveys, Inc. (the "Habitat Assessment"), which was previously provided. Per the Habitat Assessment, "There is no vegetative habitat area found on the subject parcel; that represents 'sensitive' or `critical' wildlife habitat." The Habitat Assessment concludes that the existing vegetative habitat on the Property is not suitable habitat for the covered species of the HCP. The subject property also clearly does not fall under the Tier II designation as stated in the ORC Report as the property could in no way be seen as a "transition or sprawl reduction area" and it (i) is part of an existing platted subdivisions which is predominately developed, (ii) it served by complete infrastructure facilities, and is in close proximity to established commercial areas. The Property falls under the definition of "Infill Area (Tier 111)" from the Comp Plan as (a) the Property is "not nearly as environmentally sensitive", (b) mobile homes and trailers have occupied the subject Property since the 1960s; (c) the Property has contained up to 130 residential dwelling units which in the past has been populated with more than 250 residents; (d) the Property is substantially developed with much more than 50% developed lots (as shown in the pictures previously provided and in the Habitat Assessment; (e) the Property contains adequate infrastructure and a full range of available public infrastructure as evidenced by the 1990 Building Permit number 90101333 issued for installation of a 15,000 gallon sewer treatment plant, (f) the Property contains internal roads and driveways showed on the pictures previously provided and shown in the Habitat Assessment; and (g) the Property consists of platted subdivisions as shown on previously provided documentation. More importantly, the HCP and Big Pine Key and No Name Key Communikeys Master Plan governs the property's tier designation pursuant to County Code Sec. 130-130. The HCP was 00062646 - v5 A I-XF-ril 18, 2016 F �'age 5 submitte . by FDOT, Monroe County and Florida Commi I ir to US Fish and Wildlife Services to govern development on Big Pine Key and addresses development over 20-year timeline. Since 1995, Big Pine Key was under a building moratorium due to a lack of concurrence with the State of Florida transportation requirements, as the level of service (LOS) of US-1 was insufficient. (The moratorium was lifted temporarily in 1996.) Improvements to US-1 would improve the LOS, thereby alleviating the building moratorium. The Service agreed to allow the US- I improvement project to proceed on the condition that an HCP be prepared. deer and background research occurred between 1998-2003. The models utilized were Population Viability Analysis (PVA) which created an H factor.' According to the HCP, the factor was developed to determine the incidental take of undeveloped property. Incidental ta uses PVA to determine development scenarios and their effect on the Key deer population. P. HCP. The purpose is to deten-nine the amount of incidental take which allows a stabilizel population and does not cause the key deer to be instinct over a I 00-year period. Id. The HC provides for the minimization and gation of the incidental take." Id. "ITP itself does n e *f cferet that may occur as a result of covered activities during the permit period." Id. Therefore, accordin to the HCP and Big Pine Key and No Name Key Communikeys Master Plan the subject propert is designated as developed land and not identified to be included as Tier 1. Based on the Key deer studies done under the HCP, Monroe County developed a conservation priority classification for private undeveloped lands in the study area. P. 3 HCP, 2.4.5 The Tier System: A Planning Tool to Manage Development and Conservation. Based on the Key deer studies completed under the HCP and the resulting spatial model, Monroe County developed a conservation priority classification for private undeveloped lands in the study area. The private undeveloped lands in the study area are classified into three "Tiers" (Table 2.7 and Figure 2.6). Most of the parcels in Tiers 11 and III are interspersed among developed parcels and among canals. These areas provide little habitat value to the covered species. The tier classification helped in determining the location of potential new development and prioritizing mitigation areas. P. 43 HCP. Pursuant to the HCP, Tier I lands are higher quality Key deer habitat. Tier III lands are the lowest quality Key deer habitat and provide little habitat value to the covered species. The following tier classification table is included in the HCP as Table 2.7: I Created by R. Lopez of Texas A&M, which data was obtained by Mike Roberts, County Biologist., and submitted as �Qart of the transmittal package soporting the Tier 11I desiggation. 00062646 - v5 April 18, 2016 Page 6 Table 2.7. Tier classification system (vocant lxivateh--owned land,,) Alea (acres) ftc, Pine -No Name Mer Description Kev Kev confirawdtiability of HCP covered species (mean Hper IWO meter cen = 0.259 x 10-). These lands, are high quality Key deer Scattered lots arid fi-agments of en'tuonmentally samtrue lands 1016 that may be fomd in platted subdivisions (mean H per 10 x10 meter .is- 0. 183 x 10'). A luge munber of these lots are located on cands mid are of minimal value to the Key &-er and other protected species because the canal pTesents a bonier to dispersal, 3 Scattered lots widdu already heavily &-Moped areas ffiat provide 585 little habitat value to the K&%, deer and otherproteded speckes (uranHperiOxIOurterc�11=0,168xlO"). Someoftbe un&velojam' d lots in this Tier are located between wasting developed con-mercid lots uithin the US- I corfidor or aire located M canals Total LB3-11 zl'!k Under these descriptions of the tiers in the HCP, the Property should have been designated Tier III as it currently is, and has been for decades, a "heavily developed area that provide[s] little value to the Key deer and other protected species". As the Habitat Assessment finds that (i) "scarified areas and mature tree canopy" dominate the property, "with no discernable plant reproduction or viable natural understory", (ii) "the browse level is too high for Deer to reach 85% of the parcel's vegetation due to lack of sustainable plant reproduction of mature trees", (iii) the "vegetative habitat appears to be unsuitable of the resting, cover, loafing or foraging of the Deer", it is evident that the Property should have been designated Tier 111. The HCP does not classify developed property because developed property was not density at the time of the adoption of the HCP. 00062646 - v5 April 18, 2016 Page 7 The HCP provides maps of Big Pine Key and No Name Key providing for each undeveloped parcels Tier designation. Depicted below is the area subject to the Tier Amendments as identified in the HCP: 'n., 2 Big Pone Key Tu— 3 No Name Key td 00062646 - v5 Ms. Mayte Santamaria April 18,2016 Page 8 r, 110- 1 rlaqwn I k'901 wgraffs skyr.) E#1 616re M I E a It I a I to] W KKW-J aw"m mem am I wa ta I R1 I ERI I WWN IN 11 U-1 N I IRK4 17-J I I I Rf M I WSJ W 8 Uid 0 6 If Ly•111�1111qi I; It is also important to reiterate that the proposed tier amendment to correct a data error in no way increases the H value on the subject property, but in fact substantially reduces the H value. First, the method to assign H to a development activity must address the diversity of development types. The model runs assume development on vacant parcels and further assumed that the impact of development was equal to the entire H of the parcel. However, the model understood that development activities will also occur on already developed parcels and may involve expansion of existing facilities or redevelopment of the parcels to the same or a different land use. Also, road paving of widernflig -Waas addressed under 'Ll-le model. Second, the method to assign H to a development activity recognized that different land uses cause different levels of human activity (and, therefore, different potential effects on Key deer). For example, all things being equal, a single family residence and a 3,000 square foot store 00062646 - v5 Ms. Mayte Santamaria April 18, 2016 Page 9 would have different effects on the level of traffic generated and, therefore, on the risk of Key deer road mortality. In order to assign H to any development activity, the HCP developed a method that meets the two conditions described above. The main premises of the method are: I. If development occurs on an undeveloped parcel, the impact equals the H of the parcel: The HCP assumes that an undeveloped parcel is fully available to the Key deer and that new development affects the habitat value of the entire undeveloped parcel. Therefore, the impact of such development equals the H of the entire parcel 2. If development occurs on a developed parcel, the impact of development equals the H of the footprint of the additional development: The HCP assumes that the impact of existing development has been already realized; therefore, the H of development that occurs in parcels that are already developed is associated with the footprint of the additional activity instead of the entire parcel area. 3. The effect of the development activity depends on the type of development or land use: Because roadway mortality is the largest cause of human -related mortality of Key deer, the value for a development activity is multiplied by a factor that accounts for the traffic generated by the specific land use or type of activity (Table 2.5). The subject property clearly falls under scenario 2 of the HCP as it is a developed parcel, so that "If development occurs on a developed parcel (e.g., expansion or redevelopment), the impact of development equals the H of the footprint of the additional development." Here, impacts have already been realized for 130 units on the subject property. The correction to Tier III designation would not permit additional development above impacts already realized as seen by the calculations below based on multipliers in Table 2.5 of the HCP. Table 2.5, 11111taltipslicr Cor hoed ee�e;e dc'velol5ntetnt eJateebi;a>$7' r Average Da il% Land Use `!'rip (.ene•raetlo11' li $lultlyslicr Variable Na nne Sinaxler t'anti!?.° renideotial 5>..5 t Fence, conl\' 0.2' R4.,"' lac t eil 70 7.4 (Iter I JXX) vet. 11.) \Yd,t"r I lotccl Norte+! 7.9 t).X (P''m r-o"l) \Y) t a c.>1Taee 5.9 o.t, (per 1,()(M) sql It) M, t„ Institutional I.; L4 (pet, I 01)t) ae1. IY.) \ I 4c st Inchntitrial 5 0.5 titer IAPWse1.1L.) \Yt,a'.1 Re,xeational 67 ! _ MR]", '11w multiplier is hased on tra131e 16t1t ➢°sat i<)nl 19e d`a LLV L' \'4lnn W'le L`ol1➢tilt)tbti \\'➢$14 K l' 61 zB' qY'e: th nu 1 n➢npont:nit human -related c;aus; W'tnoulaliv, for the: 1 .N1 deer, ... Avc:r.atw daily t,ip generation was u,tirnawd born the Institute o1` 1`r1011c Enginee. ' _01.�11121L daily trip ➢nc-,neration h, herd use has not hwn 'c-crific d Aw the Florida Ke1 '. Fence., and acccssory uses, as delimxl in the Nl onroc t`ounty Lind 1'3�,-Ooptoent Resgulation,. are a"tunW to eantie no add➢t➢onaI tral]ne ➢rnpiet.. they \%es'S assnnned to cause: habitat for q (ehan&c n1 K), %eMich has a lesser cffc:cl on the matrix. model than eh;ntves in 11. 00062646 - v5 Ms. Mayte Santamaria April 18,2016 Page 10 Development of Property as of HCP Approval I Proposed Development with Tier Amendment - 125 RV spaces - 5 Market Rate Units - 32 Affordable Housing Units on Property H Multiplier= (5*9.5*l)+(l25*7.9*.8)=7.5 I H Multiplier= 32*9.5*1=304 As can be seen above, with the approval of the tier amendment, the H Value on the subject property will be cut in almost a third, significantly lower than current H Value. Therefore, as take is not increased in this instance, any development permitted after the Tier Amendment would not be subject to the HCP. 4) Re: "The County's Land Development Code Section 130-130(e) indicates that a map change may be made to correct errors in mapping the Tier system, but does not list specific criteria to be met in order to change the designation. No data has been provided to demonstrate that an error in mapping was made." County Code Section 130-130(e) actually states that "the tier overlay district map may be amended to reflect existing conditions in an area if warranted because of drafting or data errors or regrowth of hammock." As stated and evidenced above and in previously submitted documentation, multiple "data errors" occurred which resulted in the inaccurate designation for the property as Tier 1, not any "mapping errors". County Code Section 130-130(e) also states "the tier overlay district map amendments shall be made pursuant to the procedures for map amendments to this chapter" which procedures have all been followed in this instance. 5) Re: Since all allocations for Tier I have been utilized, the only way to allocate development to this scarified site is by changing the Tier designation. Changing the Tier designation on the subject parcels would allow the county to replace the existing units for the development of up to 44 additional permanent dwelling units. It is unclear where the "44" dwelling units comes from as this number should be "27". It also needs to be reiterated that previously there were 125 transient and 5 market rate units located on the property. Objection 2, which reads as follows: The proposed text amendment does not provide a meaningful and predictable basis for an affordable housing overlay. We agree to amend the language to provide as follows (deletions are stricken through and additions are underlined): "(2) Creating Action Item 3.3.5: as follows: 00062646 - v5 Ms. Mayte Santamaria April 18, 2016 Page 11 o-FAy so that any new residential development is deed restricted to affordable housing." The ORC report contains several misstatements and misunderstandings and I hope this letter has adequately addressed such misstatements and misunderstandings but please reach put to me at your convenience if you have any questions or to farther discuss. Sincerely, Barton W. mith, Esq. 00062646 - v5 000 62) (46 - v5 Rick Scott Cissy Proct6i GOVERNOR L; EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FLORIDA DEPARYMENTof ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY 7"M IT] —eAUn0-1T1ffM'?%7i!�-dl Mayor, Monroe County Board of County Commissioners 500 Whitehead Street, Suite 102 Key West, FL 33040 The Department of Economic Opportunity has completed its review of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Monroe County (Amendment No. 16-IACSC), which was received on January 8, 2016 and determined complete on January 8,2016. We have reviewed the proposed amendment in accordance with the state coordinated review process set forth in Sections 163.3184t2) and W, Florida Statutes (F.15.1, for compliance with Chapter 163, P.— 11, • 1 f- I L F.S. Review comments received by the Department from the appropriate reviewing agencies are also enclosed. findings concerning the amendment. We have identified two objections and have included recommendations regarding measures that can be taken to address the objections. We have the issues raised in the attached report. We look forward to working together with you to address these issues. The County Aiould act by choosing to adopt, adopt with changes, or not adopt the proposed amendment. Also, please note that Section 163.3184(4)(e)l, F.S., provides that if the second public hearing is not held within 180 days of your receipt of the Department of Economic Opportunity report, the amendment shall be deemed withdrawn unless extended by wgmmt;le-itt--oo,K4r-ir-ff,F,,&&-t,w--iti4�ti!.AW(trrie,iK "v��-*rr*'?Tlic 6`lTt—d-f-rm-Lhi provided comment on the amendment. For your assistance, we have enclosed the procedures for final adoption and transmittal of the comprehensive plan amendment. Florida Department of Economic Opportunity I Caldwell Building 1107 E. Madison Street I Tallahassee, Fl. 32399 866.FLA.23451850.245J105 1850.921.3223 Fax MWw.floriclaiobs.org I i6a I wMAfaobook.rorn ff L= An equal opportunity employer/program- Auxiliary aids and services are avallaWe upon request to Individuals with disabilities. All voice telephone numbers on this document may be reached by persons using M/TDD equipment via the Florida Relay Service at 711. fimmc. a - If you have any questions related to this review, please contact Rebecca Jetton, at (850) 717-8494, or by email at Rebecca.jetton@deo.myflorida.com. M= TaylorTeepnell, Director Division of Community Development Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report Procedures for Adoption Agency Comments cc: Ms. Mayte Santamaria, Senior Director Planning and Environmental Resources, Monroe County M. Isabel Cosies Carballo, Executive Director, South Florida Regional Planning Council I I I Lill I 1' 11 r 111 F" I r I 11� 1 TV JrA TpTfarin' I n E a R 3 Department staff identified the following objections and comments. If the ' city adopts the amendment without addressing the objections, the Department many find the amendment not in compliance pursuant to Section 163.3184(4)(e)4, Florida Statutes (F.S.). properties on Big Pine Key are either adjacent to US I or other Tier III properties. Reclassifying this property as Tier III could serve as a stimulus or foothold to prompt future requests for Tier changes. Little data was submitted to justify the proposed change. The Harvest value of the properties submitted indicates the parcel would more appropriately be designated Tier 11. The County's Land Development Code Section 130-130(e) indicates that a map change may be made to correct errors in mapping the Tier system, but does not list specific criteria to be met in order to change the designation. No data has been provided to demonstrate that an error in ini-3pping, was mode. Since all allocaticirvis for ]Tier ; have b, een utflized, the oniy way to allocate development to this scarified site is by changing the Tier designation. Changing the Tier designation on the subject parcels would allow the county to replace the existing units for the ro ITM�J� = MW Authority: Section 163.3177(1)(f) and (6)(ll Florida Statutes (F.S.); Section 380.0552(7)(c), F.S.; TrOcEr.-R= Obiection 2: The proposed text amendment does not provide a meaningful and predictable basis for an affordable housing overlay. but not limited to, proximity to employment centers, public transportation, income guidelines, feed restrictions, absence of habitat for endangered species and not within a Military Installation Area of Influence. Based on these criteria, the County should support the Tier amendment by demonstrating that the site is an appropriate location for affordable housing. The Department is aware of the need for construction of affordable housing and undestand the effort to create additional affordable housing opportunities. If there is insufficient time to create the affordable housing overlay, the County could change the proposed tee, amendment regarding the four parcels to specify that only "deed restricted affordable housing" can he developed at the location instead of referring to an affordable housing overlay. lei Nll�f �" �PZ'q 1 0 a NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMIITED: Please submit three complete copies of all copies on CD ROM in Portable Document Format (PDF) to the Department of Economic Opportunity and one copy to each entity below that provided timely comments to the local government: the appropriate Regional Planning Council; Water Management District; Department of Transportation; Department of Fnvironmental Protection; Department of State; Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (county plan amendments only); and the Department of Education (amendments relating to public schools); and for certain local governments, the appropriate military installation and any other local government or governmental agency that has filed a written request. '$Tl adopted amendment: - Department of Economic Opportunity identification number for adopted amendment package; Summary description of the adoption package, including any amendments proposed but not adopted; - Certification that the adopted amendment(s) has been submitted to all parties thai provided timely comments to the local government; Letter signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local g•vernment. amendment package: Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated March 11, 2013) --- — In the case of text amendments, changes should be shown in strike-through/underlina format; In the case of future land use map amendment, an adopted future land use map, in color format, clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation, and its adopted designation, M14CA-4 -a,#; a i'f it�1111 data and analysis is required; The effective date • this • amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenge shall be the date the Department of Economic Opportunity posts a notice of inte determing that this amendment is in compliance. If timely challenged, or if the sta land planning agency issues a notice of intent determining that this amendment is not xomalia—nce this amendment shal". ber—cLc#e eff-Rctive on the date the state-Jlm-�Lpp-L.%�,j agency or the Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopt • to be in compliance. No development orders, development permits, land uses dependent on this amendment may be issued or commence before it hill become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the Administratio Commission, this amendment may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of, Department of Economic Opportunity, — List of additional changes made in the adopted amendment that the Department M Economic Opportunity did not previously review; I List of findings of the local governing body, if any, that were not included in the ordinance and which provided the basis of the adoption or determination not to adopt the proposed ?mendment; Statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewe�. by the Department of Economic Opportunity to the ORC report from the Department of Economic Opportunity, Effective: June 2, 2011 (Updated March 11, 2013) r'" Eubaniii From: Hight Jason <Jason, Hight@ MyFWC.com > Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 4:39 PM To: DCPexternalagencycomments, santamaria-mayte@monroecounty-fl.gov Cc. Wallace, Traci; Chabre, Jane; Krueger, Marissa nF ubject: Monroe County 16-IACSC (Resolutions 341-2015 and 408-2015) Ms. Santamaiia: Gxx a I . ErSTIOVI - 0 8= rRIIIII MIRFIO I Val amendment. If you need any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact Jane Chabre either by phone at (850) 4 10- 5367 or by email at FWQQonsorvatLonPlannw er S - vIr'esrO)MyFWQ.com. If you have specific technical �! questions, please contact Marissa Krueger at (561) 882-5711 or by email at Marissa.KrpeMrLvrAyfwc.com. S incerely, Jason Hight BioloRical Administrator Ii Office of Conservation Planning Services 31iwisiex 620 S. Meridian Street, MS 5135 Tallahassee, FL 32399-1600 (850) 228-2055 Project ID 22409, Monroe County 16-1 CPA-ACSC Euban OWMENAMOOM L_'P.WL... From: Manning, Terese <tmanning@sfwmd.gov� Sent Wednesday, February 03,2016 5:19 PM To. DCPextemalagencycomrnents Cc: Mayte Santamaria (Santa maria- M ayte @Mon roeCounty- FLG ov); Jetton, Rebecca; Isabel Cosio Carballo (isabelc@sfrpc.com); Isabel Moreno SubjKt: Monroe County, DEO #16-IACSC, Comments on Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Package Dear Mr. Eubanks: regruf1dill' S%111119-dilL Jidlef reslrl - rce - I - syl-11 package. The District offers its technical assistance to the County and the Department of Eco nom ic -opportunity in developin; PI information. M= RPT72� - V'S7-VTW SoLrth Florida Water Management District Water Supply Implementation Unit 331I Gun * Club Road, MSC 4222 West Palm Beach, FL 33406 Phone: 561-682-6779 Fax: 561-681-6264 E-Mail: tmanning@sfwmd.gqv We value your opinion. Please take a few minutes to share your comments on the service you received from the District by clicking on this Link. DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2016 FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROPOSED AND ADOPTED AMENDME CONSENTAGENDA I Pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida Statues, Council review of Amendments to local government comprehensive plans is limited to 1) adverse effects on regional resources and facilities identified in the A written report containing an evaluation of these impacts, pursuant to Section 163.3184, Florida statutes, is to be provided to the local government and the State Land Planning Agency within 30 calendar days of receipt of the amendment. Mopr-oe - county 16-1ACSC V N/A 02/01/2016 10/21/2015 5-0 (received 01-17-16 These proposed amendment submission consists of two amendments to the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. Amendment I seeks to amend the Livable Communikeys Program Master Plan to encourage the development of affordable housing within four parcels located in Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Amendment 2 seeks to change the designation of a parcel of land in the Monroe County Future Land Use Map from Residential Conservation to Recreation and Conservation. South Florida Regional Council 31�41, H,#0jwi,rI R*yleywi, Switt 1,11, HillyxiiI, Fitflea 33412' 954.985.4416 Phone, 954.985-4417 FAX www-sfregionalcouncil,org 5L 4EGOIX4K R From: Ray, Suzanne E. <SuzanneLRay@dep.state.fI.us> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:36 PM To: Eubanks, Ray-, DOextemalagencycornments, Subject- Monroe County 16-lACSC Proposed To: Ray Eubanks, DEO Plans Processing Administrator Re: Monroe County 16- 1 ACSC — State Coordinated Review of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment The Office of Intergovernmental Programs of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) has reviewed the above -referenced ame.adment package under- the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The Department conducted a detailed review that focused on potential adverse impacts to important state resources and facilities, specifically: air and water pollution; wetlands and other surface wate of the state; federal and stat"wned lands and interest in lands, including state parks, greenways and trails, conservation easements; solid waste; and water and wastewater treatment. Based on our review of the submitted amendment package, the Department has found no provision that, if adopted, would result in adverse impacts to important, state resources subject to the Department's jurisdictfio Feel free to contact, ine "at Lis or (850) 245-2i72 for assistance or additional information. Please send all amendments, both proposed and adopted, to plan. review( ']'�dqp. state, fLus or Florida Depwtment of Environmental Protection Office of Intergovernmental Programs, Plan Review 3900 Commonwealth Blvd., MS 47 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 ResourcesDepartment 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 0400 marathon,t t. 33050 I' DACS #t 0 .# . i+ Monroe County Resolution 341-2015 and Resolution 408-20 Submission dated January 5, 2016 important state resourcesorfacilities related to agricultural, aquacultural,orfbmstry resources in a• r t t t r r ttr r' t oi, our t tur cou.iVs sub.-,rsa, • �-r, t { t a'�rt r t t qppillSPIRIT t • # # Sincerely. Stermie Knight CC., Florida Department { Opportunity (SLPA Monroe County 16-1 , 1 00-HELPF A I www.FreshFromFlorida.com Ray Eubanks, PlAn_ Processing Admin istrator Mpartment of EcortQmic Oppqrtunity Goinmunity Planning and Developmeht 107 Past Madison Street Caldvv011 Building, MSG 160- Tallahassee, FlMda �090 Subject, Comments for the Proposed Comprehensive Pis" Ariiohombnt Mahroa County #16-IACSC Dear Mr. Eubanks: The Florida Department of Transportation, District Six, complWedA review, of the Proposed Comptehertsive Plan Amendment, Monr6e Counly #16-IACSC. Tfto District has reviewed the arse meet paokage per Chapter 163 PoIda S.Otut es and has. and no adverse impacts to tans rtation rbsourceb and fat-ilities of- to importance. Please contact me at 305-470-6445 if you have any questions Mconpa..I' . ng our response. Cc- Hetrold Ngdunes, RE, Florida Department of Transporta(iort.- DiArict 6 Q Ile �rl•ida Dvartment •of Tramm-0400n, Pistrict 6Flof. Lisa Colmerfarps, AICP Florida Department of TfarispbftW h., DiStriat (0� . I . io. mayte Santarnaria, Mohroe County WWV.dotsta�e-Eus I Packet Pg. 2424 1 United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Fl South Florida Ecological Services Office 1339 10 Street Vera Bftcli Florida -' 32960 October 21, 2015 a =- 111+3 t VA I 111A9 JALI Mo=e County Growth Management 2798 Overseas ffighway. SWte 400 Marathon, Florida 33050 W-07=1 01 2015-TA-0363 Big Pine Key -No Name Key ffabitRt Conservafion Plan. T )570oon -- i�- C CX"Ce na fill L 0 the Tier designation at the Campground as prcsented in the September 8, 2015, staff report su'bmitted to the Smice. mXIMNIM, MEM= I; xamnna xn Field Sapervisor South Florida Ecological Services Office ZMM 1 • 114- Agent: BryanHawks !! Barton W. Smith Smith '' r Hawks Lau !1 I f i1'1 I'! Y q R�7 i? Fy United States ] Department g� g+{ p g q of the Interior (� �+ FISH &WILDLIFE ti FISH AND Wll.,DLIFE SERVICE South Florida Ecological Services Office RCH 3 1339 20"' Street Vero Beach, Florida 3296Q � Je � E p 4 October 21, 2015 f .1 2015 Michael Roberts Senior Administrator, Environmental Services Monroe County Growth Management 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400 Marathon, Florida 33050 Service Consultation Code: Project: Subject: County: Dear Mr. Roberts: 2015-TA-0363 Big Pine Key -No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan, Seahorse RV Campground Tier Designation Change Monroe This letter is in response to Monroe County's request for technical assistance dated. August 13, 2015, related to the Tier amendment request on the Seahorse RV Campground property (Campground). The Tier amendment request was to change the Tier designation of the Campground from Tier I to Tier 3. The Campground is an existing RV campground containing 130 documented units. The Campground does not meet the Tier I definition described in Section 2.4.5 of the Big Pine Key No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP); and is more appropriately described as a Tier 3 property, If approved, this Tier change will not result in a decrease in protective measures and/or mitigation requirements under the HCP because the Campground was an existing development prior to the implementation of the HCP. Therefore, a change in Tier designation or land use at the Campground will not affect the baseline used in the HCP. Additionally, the replacement or redevelopment of existing dwelling units will not impact the H value of the Campground property nor will it require mitigation in accordance with the HCP and County's Livable CommuniKeys Program Master Plan. Finally, if the Tier designation change is approved and the Campground is subsequently redeveloped, the property will be subject to current Monroe County ordinances including deed restrictions for free roaming cats, which will be an overall improvement in protection for species identified for conservation under the HCP. Based on the above discussion, the Service has no abjection to and supports the request to amend the Tier designation at the Campground as presented in the September 8, 2015, staff report submitted to the Service. Michael Roberts Page 2 If you have any questions, please contact Brian Powell at 772-469-431 S. Sincerely yours, Roxanna Hinman Field Supervisor South Florida Ecological Services Office ounty of Monroe Growth Management Division Planning & Environmental Resources Department 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 410 Marathon, FL 33050 Voice: (305) 289-2500 FAX: (305) 289-2536 We strive to be caring, professional, and fair. Dear Applicant: Board of County ConaWssioners Mayor Danny L. Kolhage, Dist, 1 Mayor Pro Tem Heather Carruthers, Dist. 3 George Neugent, Dist. 2 David Rice, Dist. 4 Sylvia Murphy, Dist. 5 Date: �p r 9 , z;/5 Time: This is to acknowledge submittal of your application for '/�xi Type of application to the Monroe County Planning Department. ro_ject J Tame Thank you. Planning Staff Monroe Paige I of 1 MCPA GIs Public Portal Scott P. Russell, CFA Pan ZMn• 9 .,aepatl In IMCPtI Pu61c Partai Ma,br k Morir Out SubabAi Ysress El SectIo "S SEC1 1,y Parcels elect Shor'elBuffer Measure Lot Lmes rteajlts Hooks 1-IcIP EbtteIN11ttsourGe111112' ouledtutorial! 2015 Condo II �sl>w6 0 •MCPA (i1S Public Portal 2013 C'ondoiL Monroe Overlap Subdivisions 2012 Conga` -„Section Lines Parcels Shoreline 2011 Condo",spot Lines looks Leads 2010 Condo` - Easements '(?Text Displays 2009 Conda',�Quabfied Condo Sales Q.ualified Sales �,�Transportation 2008 Condo 2015 Sales 111 2014 sales N 2013,Sales 2012 Sales 2011 Sales 2010 Sales 2009 Sales 2008 Sales Road Cemerline Road Block Name Zoom-in7oom-in to a defined extent... 'Zoom-oufLoom-out to a defined extent... OBJECTID SDE.DBD.W PARCELS.I) SDE.DBOAV_PARCELS.REC7 AR SDE.DBO.4V PARCELS.GEQ_E'EAT 60316 111320.0009 00111320-000800 39044 2666: 60041 111320.000901 00111?'20-000901 27434 2666 47165 303570 00303570-000000 47654 2566' httD://ais.MCDafl.ore/rnonroe 6/ Packet Pg. 2432 AMBLARD YANIC ROSE-MARIE BAGINSKI BETTEANN BALTUFF BRADLEY D 280 SANDS RD 1472 LONG BEACH DR PO BOX 431470 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4569 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-1470 BARROWS ROBERT BEIS JOHN A AND CASEY D BIG PINE CHRISTIAN CENTER INC 30894 HAMMOCK DR 1014 MONTCLAIR DR 100 COUNTRY ROAD BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 POPLAR BLUFF, MO 63901-2139 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BLAIR REA BURRIS CHARLENE G CAMPBELL DIANE 185 COUNTY RD PO BOX 430828 30854 HAMMOCK DR BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4808 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-0828 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 CARNAHAN JOHN A CASEY MINORI CH'RISTENSON RICHARD M 16294 JANINE DR 31049 AVE F 175 FREEDOM LN WHITTIER, CA 90603-1530 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 COFFMAN ROBERT A AND MARGARETE COPPOLA MICHAEL C JR COUNTY OF MONROE 16544 SPIELMAN RD PO BOX 430437 500 WHITEHEAD STREET WILLIAMSPORT, MD 21795-4111 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-0437 KEY WEST, FL 33040 COURSEN LANE CRABB GERALDINE RAE DAVIS MARK O III 30886 HAMMOCK DR 31052 AVENUE H 28096 GULF BLVD BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4821 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4643 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-6146 DEMAURO ROBERT T]C DETWEILER PATRICIA M DILLON GARY 17195 KINGFISH LN W 915 N SUMMIT ST 30477 COCONUT HWY SUGARLOAF KEY, FL 33042 IOWA CITY, IA 52245-5936 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4726 DUNWELL JOYCE ANN DZURNAK JOHN FORD DUSTIN S 31024 AVE F 31059 AVENUE G 31012 AVENUE D BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4524 FRIIS-PETTITT DEBRA AND GORDON I GRUHN MILTON D HARTLEY MICHAEL AND ROMA J 284 COUNTY RD 2718 FRANK ST 30956 EDWARD RD BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4817 LANSING, MI 48911-6403 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4813 HASKINS THOMAS J HEATON RICKY D HEEKE BERNARD ALIEN 17088 FLYING FISH LN PO BOX 604 406 IRIS ST SUGARLOAF KEY, FL 33042 KETCHUM, OK 74349-0604 KISSIMMEE, FL 34747-4623 ��rtie'�� Ian HERBST JACQUELINE HERNANDEZ JOSE M ARGUELLES HOWARTH WALTER A AND SUSAN 10511 SW 108TH AVE APT F183 30926 MERCEDES RD 30858 PALM DR MIAMI', FL 33176-8147 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4812 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4622 JENSEN STACEY S KNIGHT TIMOTHY M JR KUHN DENNIS P AND KIMBERLY 31040 AVE F 31019 AVENUE G 62 CUTTHROAT DR BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4559 SUMMERLAND KEY, FL 33042 KWEST, LLC LADD ANNE MARIE LAFFERTY CHARLES D 3720 N ROOSEVELT BLVD PO BOX 13054 13130 PONDVIEW DR KEY WEST, FL 33040-4533 HAYWARD, WI 54843-3054 SOUTH LYON, MI 48178-8703 LEGARE ROBERT LEISNER WALDO W AND EFIGENIA R LUKRYTZ WILLIAM L 40 RUE MAURICE 1716 CATHERINE ST PO BOX 430591 ST REM1, QUEBEC JOL 21-0 KEY WEST, FL 33040 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-0591 CANADA MART INEZ HECTOR MAURENE FREEDMAN HOLDINGS LLC MCALEAR LARRY M 3941 NW 59TH AVE 2612 ARNOLD ST 252 SANDS RD VIRGINIA GARDENS, FL 33166-5739 SARASOTA, FL 34231-2900 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE MOORE WILLIAM C AND NONDUS C LFE OROPEZA SCOTT PLAN LAND AUTHORITY PO BOX 430549 2 DRIFTWOOD DRIVE 1200 TRUMAN AVE STE 207 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-0649 KEY WEST, FL 33040 KEY WEST, FL 33040-7270 PALMER CHARLOTTE A PEACOCK JEFFREY AND VILMA PEDRO FALCON ELECTRICAL 350 COUNTY RD 8224 BERNARD DR N CONTRACTORS INC BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 MILLERSVILLE, MD 21108-1109 31160 AVENUE C BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4516 PEREZ MANUEL M PHILLIPS AYDEN PRICE THOMAS L AND MARY JANE 181 LOMA LN 31044 AVE H 31041 AVE F BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-3113 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 REECE ROBERT E AND JUDITH A REID SEWARD K JR RICHARD PIERRETTE 6720 W 126TH PL 138 SANDS RD 1063 ST PAUL LEAWOOD, KS 66209-3231 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4570 ANCUNNE LORETTE, QUEBEC G2E 1Y4 CANADA ROBERTS AMANDA M ROBERTS CHARLES F ROBERTS TODD S 30957 MERCEDES RD 5585 2ND AVE PO BOX 432103 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4812 KEY WEST, FL 33040-5932 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-2103 ROSENTHAL BYRON ROYAL PALM R V PARK INC RUSINIAK PATRICIA M PO BOX 128 PO BOX 421075 45 INDIAN RD DOVER, OH 44622 SUMMERLAND KEY, FL 33042-1075 BUFFALO, NY 14227-1635 SCHINDLER ROSS SCHULZ HENRY C AND DONNA M SIEGEL VERNON E JR TIC 373 STIRRUP KEY BLVD 1545 NEPTUNE AVE 30915 BAILEY RD MARATHON, FL 33050 BEACHWOOD, NJ 8722 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4811 SMITH PAUL HENRY SNELL BILL AND LINDA LIVING TRUST THIEDE PETER P AND MILDRED C 1892 NEW ELAM CHURCH RD 5/11/2012 210 COUNTY RD NEW HILL, NC 27562-8926 3800 DONALD AVE BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 KEY WEST, FL 33040-4511 TIITF TIRADO ALVARO A AND TERESA E TRAMMELL HARLAN MCKINNEY III 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL 4430 SW 97TH AVE 30926 EDWARD RD STATION 115 MIAMI, FL 33165-6865 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 TALLAHASSEE, FL 32399-3000 TROUTNER CHRIS ANN VANMETER CHARLES N III AND PAMELA L VAZQUEZ ALFREDO JR TIC 31033 AVE F 30918 EDWARD RD 127 SHORE DR BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4813 SUGARLOAF KEY, FL 33042 WAR PATH FAMILY FARM INC WAR PATH FAMILY FARM INC WILFONG JOYCE ELAIN'E PO BOX 1570 PO BOX 53 31028 AVENUE H HOPKINSVILLE, KY 42241-1570 NEW CASTLE, NH 03854-0053 BIG PINE KEY, FL 33043-4643 WITTERSTAETER STEVE E AND ELLEN M PO BOX 3854 OCALA, FL 34478-3854 Detail by Entity Name Page I of 2 Florida Limited Liabilily Company LOWGGTOCKU.LLC E±M Information Document Number FEV6|NMumbmr Date Filed State Status 700SSHRIMP RD STE2 KVVYWEST, FL33D4O 7009 SHR|MPRD GTE2 L10000112243 273783070 10/27/2Q1O FL ACTIVE Req:istered Agent, Name & Address 8TR0NK, MATTHBW 7Q09SHRIMP RD STE2 KVVYWEST, FLJ3O40 Authorized P,erson(s) Detail Name &Address Title MGR FOSS, DONAL0A 25505VVTWELVE MILE RD SOUTMF|ELD.k8|«8Q34 AmmalReom,ts Report Year Filed Date 2013 01/31/2013 2014 0212512014 Document Images 0212512014 ANNUAL REPORT 0113112013 ANNUAL REPORT 02/08/2012 ANNUAL REPORT 01/05/2011 --ANNUAL REPORT View image in PDF format View image in PDF forma=t View image in PDF Vewmage in PDF format -y-wimage in PDF format I Packet Pg. 24361 Detail by Entity Name Page 2 of 10/27/201 it -- Florida Limited Liability View image in PDF format http://search.sunbiz.org/lnquiry/CorporationSearcl-i/SearchResultDetail?iDquirytype—Entity... b/ ,) Packet Pg. 2437 \ gr }\} ¥\ d}} ƒ \ ^\ \ MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA ARTMEiIT UN as a Comprehensive Plan (CP) Text Amendment Application An application must be deemed complete and in compliance with the Monroe County Comprehensive Plait and Coyle by the staffprior to the item tieing scheduled for review Application Fee: $5,531.00 The base fee includes two internal staff meetings with applicants; one Development Review Committee meeting, one Planning Conunission public hearing; and one Board of County Commission public hearing. If this minimum number of meetings/hearings is exceeded, additional fees shall be charged pursuant to Fee Schedule Resolution and paid prior to the private application proceeding through public hearings. Advertisement Fee: $245.00 Surrounding Property Owner Notification Fee: $3.00 per each property owner (only applicable if amendment affects specific and defined area) Transportation Study Review: $5,000.00 Deposit (any unused funds will be returned upon approval) Submittal hate: June 8, 2015 Applicant/Agent Authorized to Act for Applicant: Smith Oropeza Hawks. P.L. as agent for Longstock 11, LLC Bryan Hawks and Barton W. Smith Applicant (Name of Person, Business or Organization) Name of Contact Person/Agent 138-142 Simonton Street, Key West, FL 33040 Contact Person/Agent Mailing Address (Street, City, State and Zip Code) 305-296-7227 bait 1_)smithoroneza=com and bt an rc smithoropeza.com Contact Person/Agent Phone # Contact Person/Agent Email Address Goal(s), Objectives) and/or Policy(s) of the Comprehensive Flan Affected.: Figure 2.1 of the Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine and No Name Key as incorporated into Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan (Revised 10/1/2014) by Policy 101.20.2 of the Comp Plan 00029085 - 'age 1 of 6 0 20 i ,, Please describe the reason for the proposed text amendment (attach additional sheets if necessary): Please see attached letter Pursuant Chapters 163 and 380, Florida Statutes, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan must be consistent with Florida Statute, with the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, and with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida Keys area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statute. Please describe how the proposed text amendment is consistent with each of the following (attach additional sheets if necessary): 1) The proposed amendment is consistent with Part 11 of Chapter 1.63, Florida Statute. (At a ininimum, please review and address Sections 163.3177, 163.3178, 163.3180, and 163.3184, ES) Specifically the amendment furthers: Please see attached letter 2) The proposed amendment implements and is consistent with the following Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan: Please see attached letter 00029085 - Page 2 of 6 6 6/201:j 3) The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statute: Please see attached letter The Board of County Commissioners may consider an ordinance to transmit to the State Land Planning Agency an amendment if the change is based on one or more of the following factors. Please describe how one or more of the following factors shall be met (attach additional sheets if necessary): 1) Changed projections (e.g. regarding public service needs) from those on which the text was based N/A 2) Changed assumptions (e.g. regarding demographic trends): N/A 0002908E - Page 3 of 6 06/2013 3) Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features described in the Comprehensive Plan Technical Document: Please see enclosed letter 4) New issues: N/A 5) Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness: N/A 6) Data updates: N/A In no event shall an amendment be approved which will result in an adverse community change of the planning area in which the proposed development is located. Please describe how the text amendment would not result in an adverse community change (attach additional sheets if necessary): Please see attached letter 00029085 - vPage 4 of 6 06/20Ei All of the following must be submitted in order to have a complete application submittal: (Please check as you attach each required item to the application) Completed application form Applicable fees (check or money order to Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources) Existing text of Comprehensive Plan Goal(s), Objective(s), and/or Policy(s) affected SEE ATTACHED LETTER Proposed amendment(s) to text of Comprehensive Plan Goal(s), Objective(s), and/or Policy(s). Must be provided in strikethrough and underline format. SEE ATTACHED LETTER If applicable, the following must be submitted in order to have a complete application submittal:. 24 Agent Authorization form (required if application is submitted on behalf of another party) SEE TAB I Proof of Ownership & Ownership Disclosure Form (required if application affects specific and defined area) SEE. TAB 2 El Sealed Boundary Survey, prepared by a Florida registered surveyor — five (5) sets (required ff application affects specific and defined area) PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED Location map (required if application affects specific and defined area) SEE TAB Copy of current Future Land Use Map (required ff application affects sped c and defined area) SEE ATTACHED LETTER Typed mailing labels (name and address) of all property owners within a 300' of the boundaries of the affected property (required if application affects specific and defined area) LIST ENCLOSED AS TAB 4 BUT LABELS NOT ENCLOSED AS INSTRUCTED BY GAIL CREECH 300' Radius report, prepared by the Monroe County Property Appraiser's Office (required if application affects specific and defined area) SEE TAB 5 Traffic Study, prepared by a licensed traffic engineer (required f f application affects specific and defined area) SEE ATTACHED LETTER Iff Transportation fee of $5,000 to cover the cost of experts hired by the Growth Management Division to review the traffic study — any unused funds deposited will be returned upon approval (required if application affects specific and defined area) SEE ATTACHED LETTER If deemed necessary to complete a full review of the application, within reason, the Planning & Environmental Resources Department reserves the right to request additional information. Additional fees may apply pursuant to the approved fee schedule, 00029085 - ,,Page 5 of 6 06/ 01 113y signing this application, the Applicant certifies themselves as a person who is familiar with the information contained in application, and that to the best of their 4edge such information is true, complete and accurate._--" Signature of Applicant: State of Florida, County of Monroe County JA, The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of r y 0 LY by S He/she is nersonally known to me or has produced as identification. rRY Pia �¢ c PAT,I GAH /NfS�ER 7 ' MY J!r........ Notary Public p ar e LXI II S: 4cplunoer 20, 2c" My Commission Expires Send application package to the Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department, Marathon Government Center, 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400, Marathon, FL 33050. 00029085 - v;Page t of 2 03/20 i 3 June 9.2014 I hereby authorize Barton W. Smith, Esq. and BUan Hawks of Smith Oropeza HawksP..L_.,.. be listed as authorized agent (Name of Agent) for Longstock 11, LLC for the application submittal for (Name of Property Owner(s) the Applicant(s)) Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block I, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18, Block 2; of SAM-N-JOE SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 76, of the Public Records of Monroe County, Florida, and Lots, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3, of DARIO'S SUBDIVISION, acco.rding to the Plat thereof as recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 92, of the Public Records of Monroe County, Florida, Key (island): B,ig,,Pine Key_ and Real Estate number: 00300090-000000, 00300180-000000, 00300590-000000, 00300670-0000W This authorization becomes effective on the date this affidavit is notarized, and shall remain in effect until terminated by the undersigned. This authorization acts as a durable power of attorney only for the purposes stated. The undersigned understands the liabilities involved in the granting of this agency and accepts full responsibility (thus holding Monroe County harmless) for any and all of the actions of the agent named, related to the acquisition of approvals/permits for the aforementioned. applicant, Note: Authorization is needed from each owner of the subject property. Tliz-�Cfbre, one or more authorization forms must be submitted with the application on if there ar7multiple wners. LrAl� Matthew Sitink, Authorized Signatory STATE OF.. N e%J Ll a -4- COUNTYOF NikbaK The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this r day of -FCC2015 by Matthew Strunk who is _Zpersonally known or produced identification -Type of Identification), did / did not take an oath. MARIE CERULLI NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Ne,.v York No. 010E5015137 Qualified iq��.kcounty Comnlission Expires July 12,20.12 OD030262 - v1 Notary Printed Name: MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA _vlju L1 s Ownership Disclosure Pursuant to Section 101-6 of the Land Development Code, this form shall accompany land -use related applications. The intent is to disclose the identity of true parties in interest to the public, thereby enabling the public to ascertain which parties will potentially benefit. Any person or entity holding real property in the form of a partnership, limited partnership, corporation, assignment of interest, trust, option, assignment of beneficial or contractual interest, or any fora of representative capacity whatsoever for others, except as otherwise provided, shall, during application submittal for a specified application types, make a public disclosure, in writing, under oath, and subject to the penalties prescribed for perjury. Exemptions to the requirements of this section include the beneficial interest which is represented by stock in corporations registered with the federal securities exchange commission or in corporations registered pursuant to Chapter 517, Florida Statutes, whose stock is for sale to the general public. This written disclosure shall be made to the planning director at the time of application. The disclosure information shall include name and address of every person having a beneficial or contractual interest in the real property, however small or minim 1. If the property is owned fee simple by an INDIVIDUAL, tenancy by the entirety, tenancy in common, or joint tenancy, list all parties with an ownership interest as well as the percentage of such interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary): m If the property is owned by a CORPORATION, list the officers and stockholders and the percentage of stock owned by each. (Use additional sheets if necessary): LONG TOOK 11, LLG, a Florida limited liability company Name and Address f o f Ownership Donald A. Foss Revocable Living Trust, dated January 26, 1984, as amended on October 5, 1993 — 25505 W, 12 Mile Rd., Suite 3000, Southfield, MI 48034-8316 99% DAF Venture Corp., a Michigan corporation - 25505 W, 12 Mile Rd., Suite 3000, 1% Southfield, MI48034-8316 00029085 - viPage 1 of 2 03/20t o If the property is in the name of a TRUSTEE, list the beneficiaries of the trust with the percentage of interest. (Use additional sheets if necessary): Name and Address % of Ownership * In the case of a trust, the four largest beneficiaries must also sign the affidavit. m If the property is in the name of a GENERAL or LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, list the name of the general and/or limited partners. (Use additional sheets if necessary): Name and Address % of'Qwnershi If there is a CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE, with an individual or individuals, a Corporation, Trustee, or a Partnership, list the narnes of the contract purchasers below, including the officers, stockholders, beneficiaries, or partners. (Use additional sheets if necessary): Name and Address % of Ownershi * Please provide date of contract * If any contingency clause or contract terms involve additional parties, list all individuals or officers, if a corporation, partnership, or trust. (Use additional sheets if necessary): Name and Address By signing this form, the signer certifies that he or she is a person who is familiar with the information contained in the form, and that to the best of his or her knowledge h information is true, complete and accurate. Printed Name / Signature of Person Completing Form: State of Florida, County of Monroe t, 4ALThe foregoing instrument was acknowledged before rnZ713 AS day of U. . 0 t by r !� & - 14dwks He/she is personally known to me or has produced as identification. 6i�v PyBJ PATRICIA GAE CANISTER Notary Public MY COMMISSION N IT151155 % o bXIIIRES: September 20.2018 My Commission Expires I i-o /j o t 00029085 - ,Wage 2 of 2 0312013 0 Search nearby: (hotels resomants) 201 C.UNTY Rd M K-Y, r" l: 2 jsm 1j; Street Vlow, Search nearby yen is qw- Ln W'V Is ALI 2M t ri qull�'e� k' mdu Rd Aej M* J' 210 M R� A V ° He rya Ave G T Rd Ca Winn-Ddoc 'm E CC- Zz a o6n'�Cl 7� 0 t,n A I breezy rim" RV Eddsolrs Vgh Ave,) A CVS Phum.q - r4wto ON Ko 2: 'L Y_A, WL4saMf"nClRlkm4 N springe"Sgim'MMUR 2� "Wy CAI A) s H'Vej wmm�es C� IDA Food m Gom;Ftnd Cnmm,j,ucy (D Rd L 6th AW Ind Wled Em NAME ADDI ADD2 CITY STATE ZIP COUNTRY R€ LOCATION AMBLARD YANIC ROSE-MARIE 290 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4559 300410.000000 280 SANDS RD BAGINSKI BETTEANN 1472 LONG BEACH DR BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 303680.000000 31014 AVENUE E BALTUFF BRADLEY D PO BOX 431470 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-1470 300390.000000 30519 AAND B EDWARD RD BARROWS ROBERT 30894 HAMMOCK DR BIG PINE: KEY FL 33043 251180.000000 VACANT LAND 251190.000000 30894 HAMMOCK DR REIS JOHN A AND CASEY D 1014 MONTCLAIR DR POPLAR BLUFF MC 63901-2139 305340.000000 31057 AVENUE F BIG PINE CHRISTIAN CENTER INC C/O LAWES STEVE 100 COUNTRY ROAD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 111170.000000 100 COUNTY RD BLAIR REA 185 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4808 111340.000100 185 COUNTY RD BURRIS CHARLENE G PO BOX 430828 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-CS28 300510.000000 30917 MERCEDES RD CAMPBELLD'.ANE 30854 HAMMOCK DR BIG. PINE KEY FL 1301 251150.000000 30854 HAMMOCK DR CARNAHAN JOHN A 16294 JANINE DR WHITTIER CA 90603-1530 111320.000600 189 FREEDOM LN CASEY MINORI 31049 AVE F BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 305330.00000C 31049 AVENUE F CHRISTENSON RICHARD M 175 FREEDOM LN BIG. PINE KEY FL 33043 111320.000700 175 FREEDOM LN COFFMAN ROBERTA AND MARGARETE 16544 SPIELMAN RD WILLIAMSPORT MD 21795-4111 111320.000800 151 FREEDOM LN COPPOLA MICHAEL C JR PO BOX 430437 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-C437 251280.00000030870 HAMMOCK DR COUNTY OF MONRCE C/O BOCC 500 WHITEHEAD ST KEY WEST FL 33040 305440.000000 VACANT LAND 105290,000000 VACANT LAND 305140.000000 VACANT LAND 300540.000000 VACANT LAND 305300.000000 VACANT LAND 300330.00OCOO VACANT LAND 305150.000000 VACANT LAND 303550.000000 VACANT LAND 303570.000000 VACANT LAND 305430.000000 VACANT LAND 305420.000000 VACANT LAND 305520.000000 VACANT LAND COURSEN LANE 30886 HAMMOCK DR BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4821 251170.000000 30886 HAMMOCK DR CRABB GERALDINE RAE 31052 AVENUE H,. BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4643 306020.O0000 31052 AVENUE H DAVIS MARK 0 III 28096 GULF BLV❑ BIG PINE KEY FL 13043.514E 300530R10I 30933 MERCEDES RD DEMAURO ROBERTTIC 17195 K€NGF15H LN W SUGARLOAF KEY FL 33042 300440.000000 30950 EDWARD RD DETWEILER PATRICIA M 915 N SUMMIT ST ICWACITY IA 52245-5936 300250000000 3093E NATHALIE ST DILLON GARY 30477 COCONUT HWY BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4726 303540.000000 31013 AVENUE D DOT/ST. OF FL (STATE OF FLORIDA SRD� TALLAHASSEE FL 32399 111160,000000 VACANT LAND DUNWELLIOYCE: AN N 32024 AVE F BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 305280.000000 31024 AVENUE F DZURNAK IOHN 31059 AVENUE G BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 306540.000000 31059 AVE G FORD DUSTIN 5 31012 AVENUE D BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4524 303520.000000 31012 AVENUE D FRI15-PETTITT DEBRA AND GORDON 1 284 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33C43-4817 111400.000201 284 COUNTY RD CHURN MILTON 0 2718 FRANK ST LANSING MI 48911-6403 300340,000000 30957 EDWARD ST HARTLEY MICHAEL AND ROF'r7A 1 30955 EDWARD RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4813 300430.000000 30956 EDWARD RD HASKINSTHCMA51 17086 FLYING FISH LN SUGARLOAF KEY FL 33042 300420,000000 272 SANDS RD HEATON RICKY D PO BOY: 604 KETCH UM OK 74349-0504 111320.002100 134 SANDS RD HEEKE BERNARD ALLEN 406 IRIS ST KISSIMMEE FL 34747-4623 300570.000000 260 SANDS RD HERBST JACQUELINE 105115W 108TH AVE APT F183 MIAMI FL 33176-8147 111340.0D0101 VACANTLAND HERNANDEZ JOSE M ARGUELLES 30925 MERCEDES RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4512 300520.000000 30925 MERCEDES RD HOWARTH WALTER A AND SUSAN 30858 PALM DR BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4522 1.11320.002300 142 SANDS RD JENSEN STACEY 5 31040 AVE F BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 305250.000000 31040 AVENUE F KIN IGITT TIMOTHY M JR 31019 AVENUE BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4559 306490..00000031019 AVENUE.G KU HN DENNIS P AND KIMBERLY 62 CUTTHROAT DR SUMM.ERLANO KEY FL 33042 300350.000000 30943 EDWARD RD KWEST, LLC 3720 N ROOSEVELT BLVD KEY WEST FL M040-4533 300270.000000 30928 NATHALIE RD 300260.000000 30932 NATHALIE RD LADD ANNE MARIE PO EO.# 13054 HAYWARD WI 54643-3054 305450.000000 31026 AVENUE G LAFFERTY CHARLES D 13130 PONOVIEW DR SOUTH LYON MI 48178-8703 306660.000000 31020 AVENUE H LEGARE ROBERT 4D RUE MAURICE ST RFMI QUEBEC JOE 2L0 CANADA 306510.000000 31035 AVE G LEISNER WALDO WAND EFIGENIA R 1716 CATHERINE ST KEY WEST FL 33040 300150.000000 30921 BAILEY RD LONGSTOCK R LLC 7009 SHRIMP RD STE 2 KEY WEST FL 33040-6067 300590AODC00 201 COUNTY RD 300180.000000 201 COUNTY RD 300670.002000 201 COUNTY RD 300090.000000 201 COUNTY RD LUKRYTZ WILLIAM L PO BOX 43CS91 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-0591 300460,000000 30934 EDWARD RD Eaten. i i l l Pf rt may", in i`4.i%2 r 1= .. _ .� MARTINEZ HECTOR 3941 NW 59TH AVE VIRGINIA GARDENS FL 33156-5739 30524C.009000 31048 AVENUE F MAURENE FREEDMAN HOLDINGS L'-C 2512 ARNOLD ST SARASOTA FL 34231-2900 306530.000000 31051 AVE G MCALEAR LARRY M 252 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 300580.000000 252 SANDS RD MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND AUTHORITY 1200TRUMAN AVE STE 207 KEY WEST FL 33040-727C 303650,000000 VACANT LAND 303640.000000 VACANT LAND 111120.000000 VACANT LAND MOORE WILLIAM C AND NONDUS C L/E. PO BOX 430549 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-0549 305160.000000 VACANT LAND NORMAN JACQUI TERESA LIVING TRUST DTD 11/30/07 27450 BARBADOS LN RAMROD KEY FL 33042 303660.000000 31030 AVENUE E OROPEZA SCOTT 2 DRIFTWOOD DRIVE KEY WEST FL 33040 303490.01 31036 AVENUE D PALMER CHARLOTTE A 350 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY FL .13043 111400.000202 350 COUNTY RD PEACOCK JEFFREY AND VILNIA 8224 BERNARD DR N MILLERSVILLE MD 21108-1109 305410.000000 31066 AVE G PEDRO FALCCN ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS INC 31160 AVENUE C BIG PINE KEY FL 13043-4515 300490.000000 305 COUNTY RD PHILLIPSAYDEN 31044 AVEH BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 305630,00000031.1044 AVEH PRICE THOMAS L AND MAR`d JANE 31041 AVE F BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 305320.000000 31041 AVENUE F REECE ROBERT E ANDJUD17H A 6720 W 126TH PL LEAWOOD KS 66209-3 231 306500.000000 31027 AVENUE G REID SEWARD KJR 139 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4570 111320,002200138 SANDS RD RICHARD PIESRE77E 1063 ST PAUL ANCUNNE LORETTE QUEBEC G2E ILY4 CANADA 306640.000000 31036 AVENUE H ROBERTS AMANDA %1 30957 MERCEDES RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4812 300550.000000 30957 MERCEDES RD ROBERTS CHARLES F 5585 2N€0 AVE KEY WEST FL 33Q40-5932 300240.000000 3.0944 NATHALIE RD 300220,000000 SANDS RD 300210.000000 1.54 SANDS R❑ 300230.000600 30950 NATHALIE RD ROBERTS TCDD 5 PO BOX 432103 BIG PINE KEY FL 35043-2103 300550.00D000 30197 MERCEDES RD ROSENTHAL BYRON PO BOX 128 DOVER OR 44622 111130-CODIGO 156 COUNTY RD ROYAL PALM R V PARK INC C/O RICHARD C REASIN CPA PA PO BOX 421075 SUMMERLAND KEY FL BB3C42-1075 251030.000000 1.63 CUNNINGHAM LN RUSINIAK PATRICIA M 45 IN'.DI.AN RD BUFFALO NY 14227-1635 300290.002000 193 COUNTY RD SCHINDLER ROSS 373 STIRRUP KEY BLVD MARATHON FL 33050 300450.003000 30946 EDWARD RD SCHULZ HENRY C AND DONNA M 1545 NEPTUNE AVE BEACHWOOD NJ 09722 300500.003000301 COUNTY RD SIEGEL VERNON E JR T/C 30915 BAILEY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 3BC43-4811 300160..00D000 30915 BAILEY RD SIEGELVERNON ESTATE 30915 BAILEY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4811 300160.000100 30907 BAILEY RD SMITH PAUL HENRY 1892 NEW ELAM CHURCH RD NEW HILL NC 27552-8926 111320.000500 146 SANDS RD SNELL BILL AND LIND.A LIVING TRUST 5/11/2012 3800 DONALD AVE KEY WEST FL. 33040.4311. 30355OX03000 31029 AVENUE D SOUTHERNMOST HOMES INC 3720 N ROOSEVELT BLVD KEY WEST FL 33040-4533 111340.000000 151 COUNTY RD THIEDE PETER P AND MILDR ED C 210 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 111230.00-1 210 COUNTY RD TIITF C/O DEP 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL STATION 115 TALLAHASSEE FL 32399-3000 305130.000000 VACANT LAND S05120.000000 VACANT LAND 305110.000000 VACANT LAND TIRADO ALVARO A AND TERESA E 4430 SW 97TH AVE MIAMI FL 33165-5865 300370.000000 30935 EDWARD RD TRAMMELL. HARLAN MCKINNEY III 30926 EDWARD RD BIG PINE. KEY H. 33043 300470.000000 30926 EDWARD R❑ TROUTNER CHRIS ANN 31033 AVE F BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 305310.000000 31033 AVENUE F UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WASHINGTON DC 20240 111400.000200 VACANT LAND VANMETER CHARLES N III. AND PAMELA L 30918 EDWARD RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4813 300480.000001) 30918 EDWARD RD VAZQUEZ ALFREDO JR T/C 127 SHORE DR SUGARLOAF KEY FL 33042 303504.pQOpOQ 31028 AVENUED WAR PATH FAMILY FARM INC PO BOX 1570 HOPKINSVILLE KY 42241-157D 251320.00000 VACANT LAND WAR PATH FAMILY FARM INC C/OTARBELL DUSTAN PO BOX 53 NEW CASTLE NH 03854-0053 251310-OCOOQO VACANT LAND WILFONG JOYCE ELAINE 31028 AVENUE H BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4643 305650.000000 31028 AVENUE H WITTERSTAETER STEVE E AND ELLEN M PO BOX 3854 OCALA FL 34478-3854 111320.000901 147 FREEDOM LN Eaten. i i1 1�.l P rt may", in i`4.i%2 r 1= .. _ .� o8tr90E !� .i..- u, � 00450€ �096tr0E NII m I 04LEfl£ v. 0£E£OE M noa 0£€90£ D79 fl£ � c m $ OOL£D£ �, �� d m ~ - aaL 5ry � e 04EEOE __-oal�_!...�..._.. OOL OOL - Da F._�.....�...�.b6t ._ .-.__�.._._ -.. - a Q N ® woo. � Q 06990E 069901E �`� 08990E "�•I LOoO r .E 09990E �l OL990E R 40LOOO' . wOL990E WOO OL990£" aaL OS S' � m ffO cN3 t- r M it 0$£OOE SU 08590E ®c� OLs9()E Rj 0$ESOE a� OL£SQ€ m "!L I � 06490E _ 09590E co_ O6ESQ€ o9£SO£ m R 009m G o5S90E ohs9o£clq ou5 Q-- , —� Nf n 0€9 E a, OZ590E v = OusoE - - oz£5oE _ tr99o# ° 04490E SObbsOE `eEim 0L£SOE ° 04990E `.-.` - 005901E OOES01 N = 09990€ �2 06tr90£ �� � 06zS0E oot-....- oat out aDt 5 L9 a$ 09 O P � .-.. N C, L Q to ate VOL OS i. 9'£S SfaL -..- OEiDOE o950oE F 5 OPPOo£ +r o59oOE _ OSPOOE otrSooE ° ` 09$oOE wMGM ;2 • OL voE R k OZ5D0£ N 3 0131700€ K OLsoo£ �A41 S 06VOo€ v °, 00900E r O N p � a ® ® C o O O 0 T r I SEL SEt OtiZL4Z v ° OEzLgz DZZ45Z N ® o gb 06450E not ® OL9Eo£ tta4 I a 00t o O I � 044EO€ OE'Y£O€ -{ u I � 084901E w -1 OZ9£DE ® - OSVEO£ Oztr£0€ M1 I" oLLSQE A = 1 0£9S0€ " n p9tr€0£ ` = O4trE0£ h 7 QLSEOE�� DL4EOE M . OOCEoE o 09Ls0£ 099EoE 095€0£ Q$iEO€ < 06E£OE t OV4SO£ 060£o€ o8EEo£ DEL50£ 005 £ R ' OLEEO£ Il ® oZL4o£ a N o4S£OE D9EE0£ N ® 04440E eQ ��o QzS€oE Os€EOE a4t oat . �c -To rn 4$ ' 96'Z9 S6'Z9 _ .. 9° ZL 1 CP CT Q 9b'ZS M �� M 6S SOt F OLW3Z ° { N R _ Sz°�vcit_- OELL4z `e Q Omgz Lo LO'50t .� OL44sz 8'40t OOLLSz N in O Sqq- r r � I Pt. S D4z00E +r N �2 va • OSZDO€ to =-... ?m_TI �� SIB _.. LOl00b" Q I° 09z00E _ aasLLt �" r i DLzoo£ ^ �� I ° I a I) o c �tm 1 o o m But .Q CL 1 o � .- T Monroe CountyAppraiser - Radius Aeport AK: 1322814 Paarc-;el ID: 00251030-000000 Physical Location 163 CUNNINGHAM BIG PINTKEY Legal Description: BK 3 LOTS 6 THRU 11 AND PT E 1/2 OF NE 114 PINE U, A MMOCK PB3-161 BIG PINE I EI'OR433-894 OR192 OwnersName: ROYAL PALM R V PARK INC CIO RICHARD C REASI . CPA P.Y. Address; PO BOX 421075 SUNIMERLAND KEY FL 33042-1075 AK: 1375551 Parcel ID: 00303500-000000 PhysicalLocation 31028 AVI NUE D BIG PINE KEY Legal Deserilstioaa: BIi. 27 LT 16 SANDS SUB PBI-65 BIG PINE KEY OR532- 932 OR983-9481958(YY'ILL) OR1067-892 OE 198`?-2011 OwnersName: VAZQUEZ ALFRED(;JE'PIC Address: 127 SHORN` DR SUGARLOAF KEY FL 33042 AK: 1375578 Parcel ID: 00303520-000000 Physicaal Location 31013 A ENIiE D BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK. 27 LT 18 SANDS SUB PB1-U5 BIG PINE, KPY` OR537.47 3 OR988-948/58GB11,L OR1067-892 OR1982.2015 OR' Owners Nanxet FORD DUSTIN S Address- 31012 1VENUE D BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4524 AK: 1375543 Parcel II): 003034W-000000 Physical Location 31036 AVENCI.E D BIG PINE I-EY Legal 10cscriptiona: BK>7I..T 15 SANDS SUB PB1-65 BIG PINS KEY OR50?- (_&' OR583-:748/9 i8(R1'II.,L) OR1007-832 C)R.1982-201i Owners Nance: OROPEGA SCOTT Address: ? DRIFTWOOD DRIVE KEY WEST FL 33040 Ali: 1375560 Parcel ID: 00303510-000000 Physical Location 31020AVRNUED BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 27 LT 17 SANDS SI113 PBI-65 BIG. PINE KEY OR537-47 3 OR983.948/58WILL ORI067.892 OR1982-201.5 OR' O w•ners Name: CONF IDE 7`P1:AL DATA F.S. 119.07 Address: AK: 1372391 Parcel ID: 00300290.000000 Physical Location 193 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BLK 3 LT 8 AND 9 SAIt1-N-,JOE SUB P133-76 BIG PINE IEEY OR245-38/99 OR,400-811 ORIWL2206/2208�4'ILL 0. Owners Na rne: RUSINIAK PATRICIA M Address: 45115NDIAN RD BUFFALO NY 14:227-1635 AIi: 1375594 Parcel II): 00303540.000000 Physical Location 81013 AVENUE D BIC PIMA KEY Legal Description: BK 28 LTS 1 AND 2 SANDS SUB P131-65 BIG PINE KEY OR 274-182 OR87(3.838 Owners Naanae: DILLON GARY Address: 30477 COCONUT IPArY BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4726 AK: 1375705 Parcel ID: 00303650-000000 Physical Location VACANTLAND BIG PINE KEY Legal. Description; BE 28 LT 14 SANDS SUB PBI-65 BIC PINE KEY OR485-20 3 (PROB444-06-CP-163-K) OR2232-2387/89PFT OR2 Owners Nante: MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND AUTI-IORITY' Address- 1200TRUYIANAVESTE207 HEY WEST FL 33040-7270 AK: 1375730 Parcel ID. 00303680-000000 PhysicalLocation 31014 AVENUE E BIG PINE IMY Legal Description. SANDS SU. B PB) G"a BIG PINE KEY LOTS 17 & 18 EK 280 R29-326-327 OR644-54 OR801-1938 OR1324-741/43A Owners Name: BACINSIU BETTEANN Address: 1472 LONG BEACH DR BIG PINE KCY FL 93043 AK: 137.5691 Parcel ID: 00303640-000000 Physicaal 1.acattiona VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal. Description: BK 28 LT 13 SANDS SUB PBJ-65 BIG PINE KEY OR485-20 3 (PROB-#44-06-CP-163-K) OR2282-2387/89PET OR2 Owners Naanne: MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND AUTTIORITY Address; 1200 TRUMAN AVE STE 207 KEY WEST FL 33040-7270 AK: 1375616 Parcel ID: 00303560.000000 PhysicalLocation VAC_ NT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 28 LT 5 SANDS SUB PB1-65 BIG PINE KEY G51-25415 5 OR452-313 D/C 0111765-2137 OR1027-14 M(CTT) Owners Nance: MONR.OI.~:' COUNTY Address: 500 WHITEH:E.AD ST KEY NVEST FI., 33040 June 2, 2015 Paige I of 10 AK: 1.375718 Parcel ID: 00309660.000000 PhysicalLocation 31030 AVENUE E BIG PINE HEY Legal Description: BLK 28 LTS 15 AND 16 SANDS SUB PB1-65 BIG PINE. K EY OR430-9011902 OR552.9C9 OR785-1424 OR1847 Ors n rs Natnae: NORMAN JACQIT1 TERESA LI'7NG TRUST DTD 11/30/07 Address: 27450BARBADOSLN RAMROD KEY FL 33042 AK: 1375608 Parcel ID: 00303550.000000 PhysicalLocation 31029 AVENUE D BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 28 LTS 3 A:NTD 4 SANDS SUB PB1-65 B1O PINTE KFY OR 433.868 OR671-660 011688-573D/C OR814-1277 OR2 Owners Naarne: SHELL BILL AND LINDA LIVING TRUST 5/1112012 Address: 3800 DONI LD AVE KEY WEST FL 33040-4511 AK: 1,:375624 Parcel ID: 00303570-000000 Physical ,Location VACANT LAND SIG PINE, KEY LegalDescription: BK 28 LT 6 SANDS SUB PB1-GIi I3IG PINE IiEY G51-25415 5 OR452-31.:30A, OR1765-2137 OR 1927.1476(CI'T) Owners Name: MONROE COUNTY Address: 500 WIJITEHEAD ST KEY NVEST FL 33040 AK: 1139254 Parcel ID: ()Oil] 160.000000 Physic al l..ocaatioan VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: 26 60 2913IG PINE KEY PT E112 OF NE1/4 ORI20-20.5-2 o6 OR214.527 Owners Narne- DOT/ST. OF FL (STATE OF FLORIDA SRD) Address: TALLAIIASSEE FL 32399 Ali: 13722.51 Parcel III'•: 00300150.000000 Physical Locartion 30921 BAILEY RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 1 LOTS 6 AND 7 SA\1-N-JOE SUB 1`133.76 BIG PINE KE Y OR162-29:3 Owners Naanne: LEISNER WALDO W AND F.FI ENIA R Address: 1716 CATHLRINE ST KEY WEST FI, 33040 Ali: ] 139203 I'xra:el 1I3: 00111 120=000000 I'dzysicaal Locaation VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Description. 26 f(5 29 BIG PINE KEY PT EI/2 OF NH i/4 OR22-212121 3 OR72.328/329 OR] 20-201/202 OR304.577/578 OR]; Owners Name: MONiR.OE COUNTY COi'4PRFF1BNSIN`E PLAN LAND AUTFIORITY Address: 1200 TRUMAN AVE STE 207 Ii,,Y'VEST Fl, 33040.7270 AK: 1372447 Parcel ID: 00300350-000000 Physical Location 30943 EDWARD RD BIG PINE KFY Legal Description: DARIOS SUB BIG PINE KEY P133.92 LOTS 4 & 5 OR427-74 7 OR809.929 OR1561.1292QIC, OR1758-2154155C OR OwnersName: KLIIIN DENNIS P AND KIMBERLY Address: 02 CUTTHROAT DR SUMMERLAND KEY FL 33042 AIi: 1372501 Parcel ID: 00300410.000000 Physical Location 280 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LT 1 DARIUS SUB 1`I33.92 BIG PINE KEY O Z48.91 -92 OR 1159.1596 OR1668.1555/56F/J ORI686-970/"i 1 C},; nets Na me AMBLARDYANIC ROSE-MARIE Address: 280 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4569 AIi: 13724.39 Parcel ID: 00300340-000000 Physical Location 30957 EDWARD ST BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BX 1 LT 3 DARIOS SUB PB3-92 BIG PINE KEY OR351-345 OR1578-1516R/S(,)NIII) OR1.578-1517D/G(J:\Z11) Ownaers Narne: GRLJIIN MII,'I`ON D Address: 2718 FRANK ST LANSING MI 4,8911.6403 AK: 8865252 Parcel ID: 00111400-000202 PhysicalLocation 350 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KE`i` Legal Descriptiona: 26 66 29 BIG PINE KEG" PT E 1/2 OF NBIA OR1348-1585 OR1.577-32C1T OR 588.1213/1.4LP/CT OR1593.2058 OwnersName: PALMER CHARLOTTE A Address: 350 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 Ali: 1372269 Parcel ID: 00300160-000000 Physical Location 30915 BAILEY RD B1G PINE. KEY Legal Descriptions: BK 1 LT 8 SAPvl-N-JOE SUB PB3.76 BIG PINE KEY OR677- 468 OR683-58/C OR826-1399 OR1539-1,067 OR2490 Owners Nsaaniez SIEGEL VFRNON E JR T/C Address: 30915 B AILEY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043.481I AK: 1372625 Parcel ID: 00300530.000000 Physical Location 30933 MERCEDES BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LT 13 DARIOS SUB P134.92 BIG PINE KEY 01160:3-88 9 OR1647-1490 OR] 919 24:37/58 OR2452-2292/J3 OB Oaaners Naakne: DAVIS iMARK O 111 Address: 28096 GULF BLVD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-6146 June 2, 2015 Page 2 of 10 AK1139-i l8 Parcel ID: 00111340-000101 Playsicaal l,ocaation V=AC 1NT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BIG PINE KEY PT E1/2 OF NE1/4 OR334-234 OR614-454 OR641.1 OR804-197VQ/C OR:2010-867l879F/J Owners Naane: HERBSTJACQUELINE ,Address: 10511 SW 109tH AVM APT F183 tilA v1I FL 33176-8147 AK: 137 7503 P x.cel ID: 00305440.00000C3 PIeI='sncait Location VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 38 LT 16 SAN1.)S SUB PBI-65 BIG PINE EIEY G68-352 OR1014-1258/AFF OR1014-1259D/C (1'/R LETTERS Owners Naanae:: CCOUNTY OF MONROE %BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Address: 500 S TJITEHEAD ST KEY WEST FL 33040 AK: 1378801 Parcel ID: 00306620-000000 Physical Loc:aat-acre. 31052 AVENUE H BIG PIN, KEY" Legaal. Description: BK 46 LT 13 iANI.) 14 SANDS SUB PI31-65 BIG PINE KEY C) R578-370 ORI 199-2277D/C Owners Vanes: CRABB GERALDINE RAE Address: 31052 AVFNI3E 1-I BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4643 AID: 1372340 Parcel IDs 00,300240-000000 Physical Location 309,14 NA`I'RALIE RL BIG PINE IiEY Legal Description: BK 3 LT 4 SAM-N-JOE SI.M PB3-76 BIG PINE+' KE4 OR53C - 457 OR615-584 OR645-781 OR1095,906 OR1116-603 Owners Naanee: ROBERTS CHARLES F Address: 5585 2ND AVE' KEY WEST FL 33010-5932 AK: 11394.75 Parcel ID: 00111320-000700 Playsicaal 12ocation 1 75 FREEDOM LN BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BIG PINE KEY PT E312 OF NE1/4 (LOT 2) OR464-863F O R470-911/912 OR829.518INC OR829-,549/AFF OR86" Owners Nanne: CHR:ISTENSON RICILARD M Address: 175 FREEDOM LN BIC, PINE KEY FL 83043 AK: 1:372595 Parcel ID:, 00300500-000000 Physical Location 301 COUNI'Y RD BIG PINT; KEY LegalDescription: BK 2 LT 10 DARIOS SUB BIG PINE I�EY P133-92 OR4ir3- 805 OR467>565 OR6,13-764DIC OR 1191.2085/94WILI Owners Nzar ne. SCH L7LZ HENRY C AND DONNA M Address: 154.5 NEPTUNE AVE BEACHWOOD NJ 08722 AK: 1377350 Parcel ID: 00305290.000000 Physical Location VACANT LANE) BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 38 LT 1 SANDS SUB PBI-65 BIG PINE IiEY J2-357 OR 919-480/482 OR920-989189OR920-990/91UE OR160£ Owners Naanse: COUNTS.' OF MONROE % BOARD OF C011NTY COMMISSIONERS Address: 500 WIIITEI HAD STREET KEY WEST FL 33040 AIi: 1377201 Parcel ID; 00305140-000000 Physical Location VACANT LANll BIG PINE IiEY Legal Description: BK 37 LT 4 SANDS SUB PBl-65 BIC, PINE KEY OR396-100 9/10 OR1859-698(CTT) ORI859-712(CTT) 0111923-1C OwnersName- COUNTY OF MONROE % 130ARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Address: 500 Va HIT}! HEAD ST KEY WEST FL 33040 AI{: 8821123 Parcel ID: 00300160-000100 I'Isysicai Location 3090711 ILEY RD BIG PINE EEY Legal Description; BK I LT 9 SAKI-N-JOE SUB PB3-76 BIG PINE IiEY OR677- 469 0R683-58C OR826-1399 OR1306-1712 OR2265-2 Owners Name: SIEGEL V`ERNON ESTATE Address: 30915 BAILEY RD BIG PINE KEY Fl, 33013-4811 AK: 1139505 Parcel ID: 00111320.000901 Physical Location 147 FREEDOi9 LN BIC, FINE ICTT' Legal Description: 26 66 69 BIG PINE KEY PT E1/2 OF NEIA LOT 4 OR464 -862i OR571-777 OR1039-107V76C OR1038.1077 OI Owners Naanee: WITTERSIAFTER STEVE E AND ELLEN M Address.: PO BOX. 3854 OCALA FL 34478-13854 Ali: 1139629 Parcel ID. 00111320-002100 Physical Lication 1:34 SANDS RD 13IG PINE KEY Legal Description: `26 66 29 BIG PINE KEY PT E112 OF NE 1/4 (LOT 23) OR 470=976/977 O1i927-45D1C OR927-44 OR996-83 OR R Owners Name: HEATON RICKY ) Address: PO BOX 604 KETCHUM OK 74349-0604 AK: 1372650 Parcel ID: 00300560-000000 PhiTsicaal Location 30197 MERCEDES BIG PINE KEY Legal Description; BK 2 LT 16 DARIOS SUB PB3-92 BIG PINE RE OR48-69/ 90 CASE83 :363-CP-23 OR2084-1360 OR2015-1622�,U Owners Marne; ROBERTS TODD S .Address: PO BOX 432103 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-2103 June «, 2015 Page 3 of 10 AK: 1372374 Parcel ID: 00300270-000000 PhysicalLocation 30928 NATHALIE: RE BIG PINE KEY L,egnt Dcseription: BK 3 LT 7 SAM-N-JOE SUB PB3-76 BIG PINE KEY ORI50- 109 OR198-505/06 01i1437.1080/82PET OR1437-112: Owners Name: KVrEST, LI,{C, Address: 3720 N ROOSEG'ELT BLVD KEY WEST Fl, 33040-4533 AK: 137268:1 Parcel ID: 00300590-000000 Physical Location 201 COUNTY RD BIC PINE KEY Le gaxl Description: BE 3 LTS 1 T14RU S DAI2IOS SUP P113-92 BIG, PINE KEY O R484-851/52 OR484-729/34 OR615-584 OR645- 781 0 Owrners Nance: LONGSTOCH II LLC Address-, 7009 SHRIMP RD STE 2 KEY WEST FL 33040-6067 AK: 1372366 Parcel ID: 00300260-000000 PhysicalLocation 30933 NATHALIE RI: BIG PINE KEY Legal Descriptiow BK 8 LT 6 SAM-N-JOE SUB P133- 76 BIGPINE KEY OR150- 109 OR198-50:5150{i OR1444-22251261'R OR2044-6541 Owners Name: KIlEST, LLC Address: 3720 N ROOSP\ELT BIA'D EEN WEST F1, 33040-4533 AK: 1372323 Parcel ID: 00300` 20-000000 Physical Location SANDS RD BI(, I'I RTE KEY Legal Desca iptic aa: I3Ii 3 LT 2 S AY9-N-JOE SLIB PB3-7G I3I{ PINE KEY OR533- 457 OR615-584 OR645-781 ORI09,7 J06 ORI116-60:3 Owners Name: ROBERTS CUARLF,S F Address: ,5852NDAVE KEY WEST FI, 33040-5932 AK: 1.377228 Parcel ID: 00305160-000000 PhysicalLocationVACANTLAND BIG PINT RE, Legal Description: BIB 37 LT 6 SA\TDS SL-IB PBI-6,5 BIG PINIII IiEY- OR643.710 /711 OR798-9071)/C OR21.5 i-2209/10 OR2242-193 OwnersName: MOORS' WILIAAAI C AND NONDUs C IJE Address: PO BOX 430549 B1G PINE KEY FL 33043.0549 AK: 1.378691. Parcel ID: 00306,510-000000 Physical Locaation 31035 AVE G BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 46 LT.'3 SANDS SUB PB1-65 BIG PINE KEY OR373-594 OR577-833Q OR.592-65 OR725-129 OI21024-1884(CP Owners INTanae: LEGARE ROBERT Address: 40 RUE MAURICE ST REM CIUI J01, 2L0 C,ANADA AK: 1377198 Parcel ID: 00305130-000000 Physical Location VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Descrigat:iosa: BK 37 LT 3 SANDS SUB PBI.65 BIG PINE ICY OR396401 1/1012 OR1977.487CQIC OR2336-1695/1696 OR2336 Owners Nan' e: TIITF CIO DEP Address: N00 COi+MONWEALTH BLI'D MAIL STATION 115 TALLAHASSEE 1'L 32399-3000 AIi: 1372633 Parcel II1: 00300540-000000 Physical Location VACANT LAND 1,410 PINE KEY Legal Description: BN 2 LT 14 DAi2IOS SUB B1O PINE KEY i'B3,92 OR445.23 9 OR766-1898D/C OF905-1309 OP,922-173 OR931.59 Owners Nance. GOUNITY OF MONROE C;/0 BOCC; Address: 1100 SIMONTON ST KEY %NEST FL 33040 AK- 1139645 Parcel 1D: 00111J20-002300 Phy'sic:aI Location 142SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: 26 66 29 BIG PINE KEY PT E1/2 OF NE1/4 (LOT 25) OR 470-952153 OR930-2363D/C OR936.222 OR2026-4,76 Owners Name: HOWARTH WALTER A AND SUSAN Address: 80858 PALM DP BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4622 AI": 1139467 Parcel ID: 00111320-000600 Physical Location 189 FREEDOri1 LN BIC; PINE IiEY Legal Description: 26 66 29 BIC PINE'; KEY PT EIY2 OF NEJ/4 (LOT 1) OR4 "r 5-690/69I OR831-16.89/1690 UN3dECORDED D/C O OwnersName: CAR.NAHAN JOIIN A Address: 16294 JANINE DR WHITTIEII CA 90603-1530 AK: 1377368 Parcel ID00305300.000000 Physical Location VACANT LAND BIC, PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 38 LT 2 SANDS SUB PBI-65 BIG PINE KEY J2-357 OR 919-480/482 OR920-988/90 OR920.992/93L/E OR160 Ow hers Naame: COUNTYOF MONROE % BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Address: 500 WHITEHEAD STREET KEY WEST FL 33040 AIL: 1.372641 Parcel ID: 00300550-000000 Physical Location 30957 MERCEDES BIG PINE KEY Legal Description& BK 2 LT 15 DARIUS SL-B PB3-9)2 BIG FINE KEY OR48-8W 90(CASE-83.363-CP-20) OR1603-117 OR21.49-1922 C Owners Name: ROBERTS AMANDA M Address: 30957 MERCEDES RD 131G PINTS KEY FL 33043-4812 I1aa1e 2, `'2015 Page: 4 of 10 AK: 1372285 Parcel ID: 00300180.000000 Physical Location 201 COUNTY RD BIC PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LTS 1 TI]RU 18 SAl(°I-N-JOE SUB P133-76 BIG PINE E EY OR335-279 OR484-851-852 OR484-729134 OR61 i Owners Nan -go: LONG'STOCK II LLC Address: 7009 SHRINIP RD STE 2 KEY WEST FL 33040-6067 Ali: 1378671 Parcel ID: 00306490-000000 Physical Location 31()79AVENUEG BIC, PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 46 LT I SANDS SLB PB1 65 BIG PINE KEY OR5 7-833 Q OR574-21(PROB-77-271-C,P-I2) OR734-444 OR754 ROwwne s Naarne: I,:Nlc TTIMOTH'r MJR. Address: 31019 AVENUE G BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4559 Ali: 1139696 Parcel ID: 00111340-000000 Physical Location 151 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BIG PINE IiEY PT E11'2 OF NEIA 011334.234 OIZ503-2 OR 481-932/33 ORS34-2419DIC OR834-24't0(31WILL OR Owners Name: SOUTHERNMOST HOMES INC Address: 3720 N ROOSEVELT BLVD KEY WEST FL 33040-4533 AK 11396:37 Parcel II?: 00111320-002200 PhysicalLocation 138 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BIG PINE KEY" PT E1/2 OF NE1/4 (LOT 24) OR470-97817 S 011875-1647D/C OR875-1648 0111381-2328 OR144( O wners Na,nne: REND SF,WARD K JR Address: 138 SANDS RD BIG FINE KEY FL 33048-4570 AK: 1372617 Parcel ID: 00300520-000000 Physical Location 30925 ii1ERCE DRS BIG, PINE; KEY Description: BK 2LT 12 DARIOS SUB BIG PINE KEY PB3-92 OR, 8.50 9 OR603-890 OR696-802 OR1622-798 OR1694.1592/c Owners Nance: I-IERNAKDEZ JOSE M Aidi. UELLE:S Address 30925 MERGEDES RD BIG PINE KEY Fl:. .33043.4812 Ali: 1377490 Parcel ID:O(1:305430-000000 Physical Location VACANTLAND BIC, PINE KEY Legal Description: BI% 38 LT 15 SANDS SUB PBI-65 BIG PIISC KEY (368-352 (UIR D/CON FILE) OR1014.1258AF F OR1014-12591 COawaners Naante: MONROE COUNTY %BOARD OF COUNTY CUMNESSIONERS Address: 500 GVI-IITEREAD ST KEY WEST FL 33040 AK: 1378704 Parcel ID: 00306520-000000 Physical Location VACANT LAND BIG PINE IiEY Legal Descript.iclal, Big 46 LT 4 SANDS SUB PBI-6.5 BIG PINE hEY OR626-129 OR799-1960L/A OR852-653Q/C OR1083-481/32 ORI OwnersName; COUNTY OF IVIONROE THE %BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Address: 500 tNTIITEHEAD ST KEY WEST FL 33040 Ali: 137€3712 Parcel ID: 00906530-000000 Physio al Location 31051 AVE, G BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 46 LT 5 SANDS SUB FBI-65 BIG PINE KEY OR273-594 OR577.833Q OR592-65 ORi648-128 OR788-1031 OR' Owners Nance: MAT RENE FREEDMAN HOLDINGS LLC Address: 2612 ARNOLD ST SARASOTA FL 34231-2900 Ali: 1377309 Parcel ID: 00305240-000000 Physical Location 31048 AVENUE F BIG PIN, KEY Legal Description; BK 37 LOT 14 AND WLY 1/2 LOT 13 SANDS SUB PI31-65 B ICl PINE KEY OR412-794/795 OR1129-2159/60GUAI Owners Name: 1IARTINEZHECTOR Address: 394I NW 59TII AVE VIRGINIA GARDENS FL 3316E-5739 AK: 1372765 Parcel ID: 00300670-000000 Physical Local -saga 201 COUNTY till BIG PINE KEY Legal Description. BK 3 LT 9 DARIOS SI.1B PB3-92 BIG PINE: KEY OR176-330 /31 OR1362-1978/79ORD OR 1375-523124 OR2192-34 Owwners N'anne: LONGSTOCK II LLC Address: 7009 SHRIMP RD STE 2 KEY WEST FI., 33040-6067 AK: 1872544 Parcel ID: 00300450-000000 Physical I.oc:ntioan 30946 EDWARD Rif BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BIi 2 LT 5 DARIOS SUB BIG PINE KEY PB3-92 OR431-281 OR766-1898D/C OR905-1309 OR922-173 OR931-594 Owners Name: SCHINDLER ROSS Address: 373 STIRRUP KEY BLVD MARATHON PL 33050 Ali: 1377341 Parcel ID: 00305250-000000 Physical Location 31024 AVENUE F BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: SANDS SUB PBl-65 BIG PINE: I E:Y LOT 1.7 & 18 BLE i17 OR912-7941796 ORI129-2159/60/Gt; 1RD OR1173-2 owwneeg Naj11e; DUNWELL JOYCE ANN Address: 31024 AVE F BIG PINE KEY FI. :33043 June 2, 2015 Page 5 of 10 Ali: 1377406 Parcel ID: 00305340.090000 Physical Location 31057 AVENUE F Bl(= PINE KEY Legal Description BK 38 LT 6 SANDS SUB PBI.65 BIG PINE KEY OR525-5 14 011582.723D/C OR1547-804 OR1940-2 75 OR2378- O wrners Nannne; BEIS JOHN A AND CASEY D Address: 1.014 MONTCLAIR DR POPLAR BLUFF N1C 63001-2139 Ali: 1:372552 Parcel ID: 00300460-00000t1 Physical Location 30934 EDWARD RD BIG PINE KF:Y Legal De scrip ion: BK 2 LT 6 D MRCS S17B BIG PINE KEY PI33-92 OR430-544 OR961-1836 OR1441.1855 OR1441-1856Y62'1'R OR 1i OwnersNarne: LUXRYTZWILLLYtI1, -Address: PO BOX 430591 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-0591 AK: 1377317 Parcel ID: 00305250-000000 Physical Location 31040 AVENUE F 131G PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 37 LTS 15 & 16 SANDS SUB I'B1-G+3 BIC PINE KEY OR 412-794--1 95 ORI129-2159I6COUARD OR1175.2142L f}wnerq Na e: JENSEN STACEY S Address: 31040AVM; F° BIC, PINE KEY FL 33043 All: 1372561 Parcel ID: 00300470.000000 Physical Location 30926 1;1.)WAR.D RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LT 7 DARIOS SIT13 PB:3.92 BIG PINE KEY 011430.545 OR804-1355 OR1647.863(JMI1) (UNR D/C ON PILE OwnersName: TRANIMELL HARLAN NICKINNEY III Address: 30926 ED',la'ARD RD BIG PINE HEY I'L 33013 AK: 1139183 Parcel 11): 00111:320-000800 Physical Location 161 FREEDOM LN BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: 26 66 29 BIG PINE KEY PT E I/2 OF NF.1/4 (LOT 3) OR4 &4-863E OR471-793/794 OR653-544D/C OR.653-549/5 Owe ncrs i+ aanne; COFFMAN ROBERT A AND NI YRGARETE Address: 1654.4 SPIELMAN RD 1N'11.1.I:'A.:'11SPOII'I' MD 21795-4111 AI{: 1377392 Parcel ID: 00305330-000000 PhysicalLocation 31049 AVENUE F BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 38 LT 5 SANDS SITB PBI-65 BIG PINE KEY 011467.8 72 OR1297-1555 OR 1471-1065 OR1:592.136GD/C; OIII Owners Nanny: CASEY MINO.RI Address::31049 AVE F BIC PINE KEY FL 3304:3 AK: 1377473 Parcel IDc 00305410.000000 PhysicalLocation 3106Gi AVE G BIG PINE KEY Legal Description; SANDS SUB PBI-63 B1G PINT: KEY LOTS 12 & 13 BLE 38 OR473-284/285 OR1039-506(LD) OR1060-1393(94(Cf Ownners Nanae: PEACOCK JEFFREYAND ViLMA Address: 8224 BERNAPD DR N MILLERSVILLE MD 21108-1109 AK: 1372609 Parcel IIO: 00300.510-000000 Physical Location 30917 MERCEDES BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LT 11 DARIOS SUB BIG PINE KEY P138.92 OR 3-88 9 OR]OOS-992 OR1469.1095AFF Ownners Nannei BURRIS CHARLENE G Address: PO BOX 430828 BIG PINE KEY- Fl, 33043-0828 AEA: 1372315 Parcel ID: 00300210-000000 Physical Location 154 SANDS RD B1G PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 3 LT 1 SAM-N-JOE Still PB3--r6 BIG PINE KEY OR536- 457 OR615-584 OII645-781 OR1095-906 OR1116-603 OwnersName: ROBERTS CHARLES F Address: 5585 2ND ANTE KEY WEST FL 3,1040.5932 Ali: 1878836 Parcel ID: 00306650-000900 Physical I.ocatio'n 31025 AVENUE IJ BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 46 L`I` 17 SANDS SUB PB1-65 BIG PINE KEY 011373-59 4 OR577-833 OR592-65 OR798-1766 OR1152-1804R/. Owners Nanny: WILFONG JOYCE ELAINE Address: 31028 AVEITUE H BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4643 AK: 1372587 PatrceI ID; Q0300490-00CI000 Physical. Location 305 COUNTY RD BIC) PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LT 9 DARIOS SUB BIG PINE KEY OR503-67 OR645-2 ODIC OR645-23 OR17 fig-2446 OR21.77-2273/ 75 OR21 Owners Name: PEDRO FALCO v' ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS INC Address: 81160 AVENUE C BIG PINE KEY FL 38043.4516 Ali: 1377180 Parcel ID: 00305120-000000 Physical Location VACAIN7 L.AIN`D BIG PIINTE KEY Le4� aI Description: EK 37 LT 2 SANDS SUB PB1-f35 BIG PINE KEY OR390-101 1/1012 OR1597-1966Q/C- 0R1977-487CQ/0 O 233G-1 Qwners Name: T1ITF C/O DEP Address: 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL STATION 115 TALL IL-kSSEE FL 32399-3000 June 2,2015 Page 6 of 10 AK: 1377384 Parcel ID: 00305320.000000 Physical Location 31041 AVENUE F BIG PINT HEY Legal Description: BK 38 LT I SANDS SUB P BI.65 BIG PINE IiEY OR467-872 ORI ?97-15:55 0111.416-1265 OR1678 `223/37F/J-STL/ Owners Name: PRICE ` ROMAS L _-ND MARY' 7ANE Address: 31041 AVE F BIG PINE KEY PI- 33043 Ai%: 1377376 Parcel ID: 0030531.0-000000 Physical Locations 31033 AlTN17E F BIG PIME KEY Legal Descriptiona BK 38 13 3 SANDS SUB PB1-65 BIG PINE KEY OR467-872 OR1297-1555 OR1376-2496 OR1480-2346 OR1.746-1, Owners Name: TROUTNER CIIRIS .ANN Address: 31033 AVE F BIG PINE KEG' FL 33043 Ali: 1139700 Panrcel ID: 00111340-00}100 I Physical Location 185 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BIG PINT. KEY PT EI/2 OF ` EV-1 OR:334-234 OR502-1 OR614-454 OR641-1 •R804.1977Q/C OR.1639-117761 Owners Maine: BLA1R REA Address: IM C°OUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043.4808 AK: 1139211 Parcel ID: 0011 I I30.0()0000 PhysicalLocation 210 COUNTY RD BIG PINTE EEY Legal Description. 20 6629 BIG PINE KEY PT EII2 OF NE1/4 OR3E94-678 O R470.628 OR632-756 OR781-11 OR161 7-10131/52QCt Owners Narae: TI-IIEDG. PETER P AND NIILDRED C Address: 210 COUNTY RD BIG, PINE KEY FL 33043 AID: 1323098 Parcel ID: 00251320-000000 Physical Location VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Description- BK 5 LT 11 PINE HAMMOCK PB3.1O BIG PINE KEY OR2:30-131-1320R1076-1699(1'{".) Owners Name: WAR PATH PAMILY FARM INC Address: PO BOX 1570 HOP1t1NSVILLF. IY`Y 42241-1570 AK: 1139220 Parcel ID: 00111130-000I00 PhysicalLocation 156 COLTNT-Y RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: 26 66 2 BIG PINE KEY PT FI/2 OF NEI/4 01 470-6,11 OR637-98 OR1627.1973174 0111627-19751761AFF 01, Owners Name: ROSENTHAL BY ONN Address: PO BOX 128 DONTR OH 44622 AK: 1139882 Parcel ID; 00111400-000200 Physical Location VACANT LAND BIG PINE,, KEY Legal Description: 26 66 29 BIG PINE KEY PT E1/2 OF NE1/4 OR,648-363- 364 OR664-1231124 OR659-514Q OR1724-1/3 OwnersName: LIMITED STATES OF ANIER:ICA Address: WA.SIIINGTON DC 20240 AK: 1372463 Par(.el ID: 00300370-000000 Physical Location 30935 EDIAARD RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK I LT 6-7 DARIOS SUB PBS-92 BIG PINE KEY 013,474-1 9OR837-680DIC OR88.5-758 OR948-2256/57 OR973 Owners Nanne: TIRADO ALtABO A AND TERESA E Address: 4430 Slav` 97TH AVE MIAAlI FL 3316545865 .rill: 1372668 Parcel ID: 00800570.000000 Physical Location. 260 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 2 L`I' 17 DARIOS SUB P13:3-92 BIG PINE KEY OR48-9V 92 OR1603-117 OR2653-1482/M 0R2660-1155/57C OwnersName: HEEKE BERNARDAILEN Address: 406IRIS ST KISSI'vlIa EE FL 34747-4623 AK: 1372480 Parcel ID: 00300390-000000 Physical Locations 3091; A. AND B BIG PINTE KEY Legal Description: DARIOS SUB PB3.92 BIG PINE KEY LOTS 8& 9 BLI 1 OR5 r .-I50-986 OR739.175 OR780.269 OR898-753 OR4162-1f Owners Name: BALTUFF BRADLEY D Address: PO BOA: 431470 BIG PINE IiEY FL 33043-1470 AK: 1372676 Parcel 117: 00300580-000000 PhysicalLocation 252 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 2 LT 18 DARIOS SUB PB3-92 BIG PINE KEY OR48-91- 92 OR1131-703 OR1961-378/79QIC(CT`I`) Owners Name: MCAI..E AR LARRY M Address: 252SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043 AK: 1323055 Parcel ICJ: 00251280-000000 Physical l..oc°ation 30870 HAMMOCK DI B BIG P1ivTE ISEI Legal Descriptions BK .5 E '112 LX 7 LT 8 AND 9 PINE FIAMMOCK PB3-'163 BI G PINE HEY OR330-46/47 OR869.230 7 OR.869-2308 Owners Name: COPPOLA MICIiA.EL C JR Address: PO BOX 430437 BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-0437 June 2, 2015 Page 7 0f 10 AIi: 1322954 Parcel ID: 00251180-000000 Physical Location VACANTT I..AND BIG PINE KEY Legal Descrip low BK 4 L`I' 10 PINE IIAMMOC KPB3-1.63 BI(,' PINE KEY OR2 11-200-201 ORI16'2-I897 OR1194-225FJ ORI760-62,. Oww n l rs Name: BARROWSROBERT Address: 30894I r AMOCK DR BIC PINE KEY Fl, :39043 AK: 1139262 Paarcet ID:00111170-000000 Plzysiczal I,ocat.iou 100 t;()TJ \7Y RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: 26 66 29 BIG PINE KEY PT EI/2 OF i E It4 OR411-361 1365 OR814-21 I6(PROB 80-26-CP-23) OR962-146711z Owners Name: BIC PINE CI4RISTIAN CENTER INC C10 LANVE S STEVF., Address: 100 COUNTRY ROAD BIC, PINE KEY FL 33043 AH: 1372536 :Parcel ID: 00300440-000000 P aysic al Location 30950 EDNN'ARD RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LT 4 DARIOS SUB P133-92 BIG PINE KEY OR48-89 /90 CASE#83 363-CP•23 OR1084.1360(CMS) OR1651 Ovvners Narhae: DEMAU'RO ROBERT T/( Address: 17495 KINCPISi-I 1,N NV SITGARLOAF KEY FL 33042 AIi: 1322962 Parcel ID: 00251190-000000 Physical Location 30894 HAMMOCK D1 BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK -I LT I PINE IIAMMO{CK PB3-163 BIG PINE KEY OR2 11-202.203 OR1162-1896 OR 1.194-225Fl ORI 160-621 Owvners T> arne: BARROWS ROBERT Address; 30891 HAMMOCK DR BIG PINE KEY FL 33043-4821 AM 1322920 Parcel ID: 002511.60-000000 PhysicalLocation :3085413Ai Nm0CK DI BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: PINE HAMMOCK PBS-163 BIG PINE KEY LOTS 7 & 8 BN 4 OR1.89-552I53 OR<40C)/OS OR193-413 OR497-462 O Owners. N arne: CAM:PBELL DLNNE Address: 30854 HAMMOCK DR BIG PINE KEY FI:. 33043 . -.__ AK: 1378682 Parcel 113: 00306500-000000 Physicaal Location 31027 AVF.NIIE G BIG PIMP; IiEY Legal Description: BK 40 LT 2 SANDS SITE P131-65 BIG PINE, KEY OR373-594 OR577-838Q 011600-113 OR694- 3 20 OR1342-162812: Owners Name: REECE ROBERT E AND JTTDITH A Address: 6720 W 126TII PL LEA4VC. OD KS 66209-3231 AK: 1372421 Parcel ID,: 00300330.000000 Physical Location VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal Descript.iow BE 1 L'I' 2 DARIOS SUB PB3-92 BIG PINE KEY OR227.161 /62 OR678-197D/C; OR882-45 OR996-1886 0RI431-1 E Owners Naanae: COUNTY OF MONROE CIO BOCC Address: 1100 SIMONTON ST KEY WEST Fl, 138040 AID.: 1278828 Parcel ID: 00306640-000000 Physical. Location 31036 ANENUE I1 BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 46 LT 16 SANDS SUB PBl-65 BIG PINE KEY OR373-59 4 OR577-833Q OR592-65 OR937-1827 OR943-1113 0 Owners Name RICHARD PIERRETTE Address:. 1063 ST PAUL ANCUNNE LORETTE QUl G2E 1Y4 CANADA AK: 1372579 Parcel ID: 00300480-000000 Physical Location 30918 EBWARD R.D BIC PINE KEY Legal Description: BE 2 LT 8 DARI:OS SITE BIG PINE KEY PB3-92 011,510.328 OR842-395 OR1140-3.23 OR2732-2329 Owners Name: VANMETER CCILARLES N III AND P:AMELA L Address: 30918 EDWARD RD BIG PINE KEY FL 33043.4813 AKz 1372358 Marcel ➢D: 00300250-000000 Physical Location 30936 NATHALIE ST BIC, FINE IiEY Legal Description: BK 3 LT 5 SAM-N-dOE SUB BIG PINE KEY P133- 76 OR442- 6911692 OR922.17391)/C OR928-434/435 OwwnersName: DETWEILERPATR1CIA M Address: 915 N SUMMIT ST IOWA CITY LA 52245-5936 AK: 1323080 Parcel, ID: 00251310.000000 Physical Location VACANT LAND BIC, PINE KEY Legal Description— BK 5 LT 10 PINE HAMMOCK 1?133-103 BIG, PINE KEY OR190 -74/75 OR1076-1699 OwnersNarrne: WAR PATH FAMILY FARM INC CiOTARBF,LLDUSTAN Address: PO BOX 53 NEW CASTLE NH 03354-0053 AH: 1378844 Parcel ID: 00306660-000000 PhysicalLocation 31020 A- ETNUE H BIC PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 46 LT I8 SANDS SUB 1`131406 BIG PINE HEY OR469-30 4 OIi8'21-1728 OR905-342 011009-1375 OR1141-3Ca8(( Owners Name: LAFFERT`t" (:I4:4RLES D Address: 13130 PONDVIEW DR SOUTH LYON MI 48178-8703 June 2, 2015 Page 8 of 10 AKr 1322946 Parcel ID: 00251170-000000 PhysicalLocation 30886 HAMMOCK DI BIG PINEE KEY Legal Description: BK 4 LT 9 PINE) LYYIyt10C]i PB3 163 BIG PINE KEY OR406- 408 OR 1,066-1868 OR111.1-1.980 OR 1207-606 OR1484 Owners Name: COURSEN LANE Address: 3088b HA\1\SOCK DR BIC: PINE IiEY FL 33043-4821 AI{: 1372196 Parcel ID: 00300090-000000 Physical Location 201 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BE I UPS I THRU 5 SAM 1\7 JOF. SUB PB 3.76 BIG PINE K HY OR335-279 OR484-851-852 OR484-729134 OR615 Owners Name: LONGSTOCIi Il LLC Address: 7009 SHRIMP RD STE 2 KEY WEST FL 33040-60G7 AK: 1372.528 Parcel ID: 00300430,000000 Physical Location 30956 EDWARD RD BIC, PIi"E KEY Legal Description: BK 2 LT 3 DARIOS SUB PB3-92 BIG PINE 11EY OR48-8919 0 CASE83-363-CF-23 OR 1084-1360 OR1147.405 ORl Owners Nfaxne: HARTLEY MICHAEL AND ROMA J Address: 3095E EDWARD RD BIG PINE KEY FL 83043-1813 AK: 1372510 Parcel ID:00300429-000000 Physical Location 372 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Deserilrtiom BE 2 LT 2 DARIOS SI1B PB3-92 BIC PINE KEY' OR48-9119 2 OR1199-3I71I8(JB) PRl200-700MlL((.'.14S) Owners Name. HASKINS TIIOM.AS JJ Address: 17088 FLYING FISH LN SUGARLOAF KEY FL 33042 AK: 1378721 Parcel ID: 00306540-W0000 PhysicalLocation 31059 ANTE G BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: BK 46 LT G SANDS SUB PBI.65 BIG PIKE I EY OR37.3-594 OR57 7-833Q OR592-65 OR788-1767 ORI1.94-630(C` Owners Name: DZURNA1i 7OHN Address: 31059 AVENUE G GPIPINE KEY FL 33043 AID: 1377481 Parcel lI}: 00305420-000000 Physical Location VACANTLAND BIG III NE KEY Legal Description: BIB 38 LT 14 SANDS SUB P131-135 BIG PINE KEY (368.352 (0/R DIC ON FILE:) 0R1014.I2581AFF(J\III) OR101 Owners Name: MONROE COUNTY OF % BOARD OE COUNTY COMiMISSIONERS Address: 500 WHITEDHEAD ST KEY WEST PI, 33040 AK. 1377511 Parcel ID: 00305450-000000 Physical Location 3102G AVENUE G _ BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: LT 17 & 18 BLE 38 SANDS SUB PBI-65 BIC, PINK. KEY OR 351 412-413 ORG51-564 OR781.1595 RE! 30545 COY Owners Name: LADD ANNE MARIE Address: PO BOX 13054 HAYW RD WI 51848-8054 AK: 8821034 Parcel ID: 00i 11400-000201 Physical Location 284 COUNTS' RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: 26 66 29 BIG PINE KEY PT E 112 OF NTE 114 OR1247-14 56t5 7 OR1536-538 OR 1564-2345C OR2674-2244/45 C Ow ers Nzaine: FRIIS-PETTITT 1DEBRA AND CORDON I Address: 284 COUNTY RD BIG PINE KEY FL 3:3043-481 i AK: 1139459 I'aarcel I13: 00111320-000500 Physical Location 146 SANDS RD BIG PINE KEY Legal Descriptions 26 66 29 BIG PINE KEY PT E.1l2 OF NE V4 OR681-510 O R631-510 OR77114623 OR779-1427-DC OR799-1936 Ilwners Name: SMITIi PAUL HENRY Address: 1892 INEiS' EELAM CHURCH RD NEW HILL NC 27562-8926 AK: 1378840 Parcel ID: 00306630-000000 Physical Iaocation 31044 AVEII BIG PINE KEY Legal Description: 13K 46 LT 15 SANDS SUB PB1-65 BIC, PINE KEY" OR570.42 OR6.57-794Q1C OR657.793 UNRECORDED DIC ON Owners Name: PHILILIPS AYDEN Address: 31044 AVE H BIG PINE KEY Fl, 33043 AK: 1872331 Parcel ID: 00300230.000000 Ph ,=sical Location 30950 NATHALI"L RD BIC, PINE F.EY Legal Description: BK 3 LT 3 SAM N JOE SUB P133-76 BIC, PINE KEY OR536- 457 OR615.584 OR645 781 OR1095-906 OR] I16-603 O wv hers Name: ROBERTS CILARLES F Address: 5585 2ND AVE KEY WEST FL 33040.5932 AK: 1377171, Parcel ID: 00305110-000000 Physic.al I.locat:iol.1 VACANT LAND BI:G PINE 1' E Y Legal Description: BK 37 LT I SANDS SUB PBI-65 BIG PINE KEY OR896-101 V1012 ORl"i97-196flQlC 0R1977-4870 0122836-1605 ON hers Name, TIITF CIO DEP Address: 3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD MAIL STATION 1.15 TALL A IASSEE FL 32399-8000 Julie 2, 2015 Page 9 of 10 Axis 1877210 Parcel ID: 00305150�000000 Physical I..,ocal.ion VACANT LAND BIG PINE KEY Legal D scription: BX 37 LT 5 SANDS SUIB PB1-£35 BIG, FINE KEY OR396-100 9/10 OR1859 69b(C9"C) OR1859-712(C7T)0111923-IC Owner "dame: COUNTY OF MONROE % 13O_iRD OF COUNT' COMMISSIONERS Address: hOO WEITEHE20 ST HEY W ST FL 3:3040 June 2, 2015 fags 10 of 10 SMITH OROPEZA HAWKS ATTORNEYS AT LAW Bryan Hawks, Esq. Tel: 305-296-7227 Fax: 305-296-8448 bn June 8, 2015 VIA FEDEX Ms. Mayte Santamaria MOiVOC COUMV Planning & Environmental Resources Department '1798 Overscas Highway, Suite 400 Marathon, FL 33050 Re: Proposed Text Amendment to Fig4Le 2.1 of the Master Plan foie Future I Develgpmeat of Big Pine and No NamK e ire. --("Master ter Plan " ) as incOrporated into . - Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan (Revised 10/1/2014) (the"Corn Plan") by Policy 101.20..,2,(1) of the Comp -Plan Dear Mayte, Please allow this letter to serve as additional infornuation in support of vie er)cloed Comprehensive Plan (CP) Text Amendment Application "'Application") made (1111 6ehalf of Longstock 11, LLC ("Owner") which is being submitted in conjunction with the previously submitted Tier Map Amendment dated February 17, 2015 (,the "Tier Arnendmen,"). As discussed, in connection with the Tier Amendment, Owner requests a text amendment to amend the tier designation of the property ovoned by Owner having Real Estate Nos. 00300090-000000, 00300180-000000, 00300590-000000 and 00300670-000000 (the "Property") from Tier f toTier III on Figure 2.1 (Tier Map for Llig Pine Key and No Name Key) of the Master Plan as incorporated into the Comp Plan by Policy 101.20.2(1) of the Comp Plan. I have also enclosed copy package of the Application and this letter and request that you please date stamp both and return the copy package in the enclosed self-addressed FedEx envelope. Property Background The Property is located at 201 County Road/Bailey Road on Big Pine Key, mile marker 32. The Property is currently and has historically been used as a RV and Mobile Home park. The property is comprised. of 4 contiguous parcels having a total land area of 171,013 square feet (3.9259 acres). A copy of a survey of the Property has been previously provided. The property is legally described as Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1. :1.ots 1, -;. 33, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, Block 2, SAM-N-JOF- SUBDI-VISION., according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 76, Public Records of V.oiiroe County, Florida, and Lots 00030150 138-142 Simonton Street - Key West, Florida 33040 - Phone: (305) 296-7227 - Fax: (305) 296-8448 I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, Block 3, DA.RIO'S SUBDIVISION, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 3, Page 92, Public Records of Monroe County, Florida. The property is located within an Improved Subdivision ("IS") Land Use (Zoning) District for the Northern half and Urban Residential. Mobile Home ("URM") Land Use (Zoning) District for the Southern half of the property. Consistent with its Zoning Maps, the Northern half of the property is within the Residential Medium (RM) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) category and the Southern. Half of the property is within the Residential High (RH) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) category. The Property is designated as Tier I on the Tier Overlay Map. The maps below depict the property's boundaries (outlined in red) along with its FLUM category, Zoning Map district and Tier designation for the Property and the surrounding area. Roads Parse Is F4tus2 Land Use Map (FLUM) LjA - Agriculture nAD - Airpprt District. IC - Cpnser—tion 00030150 Future Land U.— Map (FLUM) (cantina ad) Edu'cati©a I - Indu�t.ial 7NS - Inctitutbonal =M . Mdrtary rn,mc - Mixad U selCommercial I..:...IMCF - Mixed Us�l Gommerc{ai Fishing F-IMPI - Mainland Native Future LRnd Use Map (FLUM) (continued) APB - Public. B ufl din gsf Grawnds I:::IPF - Public Facilibas I R - Recre,.b— C_.3'RC - Rexiden+W Can ervatian HRH - Residential High Future Land Use Map (PLUM) (cpntinued) FIRL - R—ldential Law FDRM - Residenti.a,l Medium 82UNDS-Unde.,glnated 0 1 a Roads Parcels El Zoning Airport []Area []Area of County Critical Concern ECommercial Fish Areas OCommercial Fishing Special District Commercial Fishing Village ElConservistion District 00030150 Zoning (continued) Elbestination Resort WAIncorporated E-11ndustrial EDImproved Subdivision -/Duplex/MasDnry ifflMaritime Industries OMilitary Facilities OMainland Native F—]Mi..d Use 01ilative Area Ooffshore island Zoning (continued) spark and Refuge Okes.lution 277-1986 EDResearch Park ORecreational Vehicle ElSparsely, Settled E"31 Suburban Commercial E]Suburban Residential -/Limited 1-711-irban Commercial Zoning (continued) OUrban Residential ElUrba. Residential Mobile Home DUrban Residential Mobile 14— Limited Y ■' Raa.ds "Cie, 0-11ay District i+TZ'er I - Platr,ral Area Parcels iI - Transition and Sprawl Area NTier III - Infill Area t4l�lTi- TIT -A - 6pecial Lrate ckion Arsa !Military Amendment Request As previously stated in the Tier Amendment, the designation of the Property as Tier I was a data error and such designation should be amended to Tier Ill on Figure 2.1 ('Fier Map for Big Pine Key and No Name Key) of the Master Plan as incorporated into the Comp Plan by Policy 1 t11.20.2(1) of the Comp Plan for the reasons sett forth herein in order to allow the Owner to 00030150 4 move forward with affordable housing allocations on the Property. Policy 1.01.20.2(1) of the Comp Plan states as follows: Policy 101.20.2 The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as a part of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community Master Plans have been completed in accordance with the principles outlined in this section and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners: Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No ]'dame Key, dated August 2004 and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on. August 18, 2004 is incorporated by reference into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The term Strategies in the Master Plan is equivalent to the teen Objectives in the Comprehensive Plan and the terin Action Item is equivalent to the term Policy, the meanings and requirements for implementation are synonymous. (Ordinance 029-2004, Amended by Ordinance 020-2009). Figure 2.1 of the Master Plan is below: LivwR,PT—f— Big A., K"'—d So S4ow ke, Legere FaF— 1 7 T— d—g t— en ilq Nu. Kry -d tin N.amz K- The following requested teat amendments to Figure 2.1 of the Master Plan are in Blue: 0M01sa "Figure 2.1 Tier designations on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Notwithstand ria the maLp arbove.., the pareels ha°i,. Real -state 1.Nlos. 00300090-000000,003001800000000, 0030C 590-000000 and0030i167i)-000000 are deli=mated Tier Data Errors The Board of County Commissioners may consider the transmission to the State Land Planning Agency of an amendment to an ordinance if the change is based on one or more factors, including data errors.. It was a data error to designate the Property as Tier I and such designation should be amended to Tier III for the following reasons: According to the Monroe County website (ham//www.a onroecounty- fl.gov/1ndex.aspx` N1L 192) Monroe County designated parceI:s into a tier system to assist with allocating / awarding permits to appropriate areas / properties from an environmental and planning perspective. Generally, the tier designations are: -Tier I - Environmentally sensitive land -Tier II - Transition or sprawl reduction area on Big .Pine Key or No Name Key -Tier III - Inf ll area, not nearly as environmentally sensitive (lots that are 50% or more developed) platted subdivisions with adequate infrastructure -Tier IIIA - Special protection areas (no IIIAs on Big Pine Key or No Name Key), the intent is for the areas that do not fit into Tier I or Tier III to be placed in IIIA (e.g., the environmentally sensitive areas that were split by roads, were invaded with exotic plants or trees, or included some types of vesting) Policy 105.2.1 of the Comp Plan, sets forth the following definitions of Tier I and Tier III categories of land: Natural Area (Tier I): Any defined geographic area where all or a significant portion of the land area is characterized as environmentally sensitive by the policies of this flan: and applicable habitat conservation plan, is to be designated as a Natural Area. New development on vacant land is to be severely restricted and privately owned vacant lands are to be acquired or development rights retired for resource conservation and passive recreation purposes. However, this does not preclude provisions of infrastructure for existing development. Within the Natural Area designation are typically found lands within the acquisition boundaries ®f federal and state resource conservation and park areas, including isolated platted 00030150 subdivisions, and privately -owned vacant lands with sensitive environmental features outside these acquisition areas. . Infill Area (Tier III): Any defined geographic area, where a significant portion of land area is not characterized as environmentally sensitive as defined by this flan, except for dispersed and isolated fragments of environmentally sensitive lands of less than four acres in area, where existing platted subdivisions are substantially developed served by complete infrastructure facilities, and within close proximity to established commercial areas, or where a concentration of non-residential uses exists, is to be designated as an lnfrll Area. New development and redevelopment are to be highly encouraged, except within tropical hardwood hammock or pineland patches of an acre or more in area, where development is to be discouraged. Within an Irzdll Area are typically.found: platted subdivision. with 50 percent or more developed lots situated in areas with few sensitive environmental features; full range of available public infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, and electricity; and concentrations of cornm.ercial and other non- residential uses within close proximity. In some `1011 Areas, a mix of' non- residential and high -density residential uses (generally 8 units or more per acre) may also be found that,form a Community Center. Under the definitions above of "Tier I" from the County's website and "Natural Area (Tier I)" from the Comp Plan, the Property clearly does not meet the criteria as a Tier I property as no part of the Property is "environmentally sensitive". This position is supported by the Vegetative Habitat Assessment dated January 5, 2015, prepared by Biosurveys, Inc. (the "Habitat Assessment"), which is attached as Exhibit A. Per the Habitat Assessment, "There is no vegetative habitat area found on the subject parcel; that represents `sensitive" or `critical' wildlife habitat." The Habitat Assessment concludes that the existing vegetative habitat on the Property is not suitable habitat for the covered species of the Big Pine Key and No Name Key Habitat Conservation Plan (2005) (which is actually titled "Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other Protected Species on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, Monroe County, Florida (April 2003, April 2006 Revision) (the "HCP"). The Property properly falls in-ider the definition of "Tier III" from the County's website and "Inf ll Area. (Tier III)" from the Comp Plan as (a) the Property is "not nearly as environmentally sensitive", (b) mobile homes and trailers have occupied the subject Property since the 1960s; (c) the Property recently contained 130 residential dwelling units which in the past have served as housing for more than 250 residents; (d) the Property is substantially developed with much more than 50%o developed lots (as shown in the pictures attached as Exhibit B and in the Habitat Assessment; (e) the Property contains adequate infrastructure and a full range of available public infrastructure as evidenced by the 1990 Building Permit 00030150 7 number 90101333, attached as Exhibit C, which was issued for installation of a 15,000 gallon sewer treatment plant; (fi) the Property contains internal roads and driveways showed on the pictures attached as Exhibit 13 and shown in the Habitat Assessments and (g) the Property consists of platted subdivisions as shown on Exhibit D (outlined in red). Pursuant to the HCP, Tier I lands are higher quality Key deer habitat. Tier III lands are the lowest quality Key deer habitat and provide little habitat value to the covered species. The following tier classification table is included in the HCP as Table 2.7. Table IT Tier class cations st (vacarujai"•ately-owned lands) Area (acres) Big Pine No Natue Iler Description Rev Kev Lands whereall or a stgm cant portion of the land area is 9734 characterized as en1mronmentally smsittve and rt nt for the co nmeued vntbihn of HCP covered specter (mean 11 per 10,VAO nie3ea cell = 0.259 x 101. Theme lands are high -1 Key deer habitat, generally repressen= loge come t tts patches of taive vegetation that provide habitat for tui r protected species as well 2 Scattered lots and fi-amnents of errvuoru ,entally sensitive lands 101.6 that may be found in platted subdi srous (mean H per lta .x 10 er er cell = 0.183 x IV), A large aimaber of these lots are located on gals and are of n al t*alue to the Key deer and odiff protected species, becauw the caml pteteras a baffier to dispersal. 3 Scattered Lots -%-Lthin alread+R, heaa9. i y developed areas that proide 58,5 little habitat value to the Key deer and other protected species H per lOxlO meter cell = 0.168 x 1 ') of the undeveloped lists to flus Tier are locate be ft—ftn custi tg developed commercial lest, skithin the US-1 corridor or are located on cowls Total 1,133.5 217O Under these descriptions of the tiers in the HCP, the Property should have been designated Tier III designation because it currently is, and has been for decades, a "heavily developed area that provide[s] little value to the Key deer and other protected species". The Habitat Assessment states that (i) "scarified areas and mature tree canopy" dominate the property, "with no discernable plant reproduction or viable natural understory", (ii) "the browse level is too high for Deer to reach 85% of the parcel's vegetation due to lack of sustainable plant reproduction of mature trees", and (iii) the "vegetative habitat appears to be unsuitable of the resting, cover, loafing or foraging of the Deer". From review of the historical and existing use and nature of the Property, it is evident that the Property should have been designated Tier Ill, and its prior designation as. Tier I was based on a data error. 00030150 8 Pursuant to the Master flan, Tiers I and II minimize development impact on natural resources and are sparsely settled areas while Tier III encourages development in disturbed areas already heavily settled. Again, a data error was made when the Property was designated Tier I as the Property has been, and continues to be, a heavily settled and disturbed area consisting of developed platted subdivisions. It should also be noted that the Property is not within the Sands Corridor. The HCP is clear that "no development will be pennitted which may result in habitat loss on the Sands corridor", as shown in Figure 5.2 of the HCP, which is below- Pf—te Ce1ebped lands i Tic, S 0 2NO Fe-1 i ch, Please note that the Property, outlined in orange, is outside of the Sands corridor and thus its designation as Tier III and proposed subsequent redevelopment as affordable housing will not result in habitat loss on the Sands Corridor. The Habitat Assessment confirms that the Sands Corridor for ley Deer travel is well to the east of the Property. Affordable Housing In addition to correcting the data error which incorrectly designated the Property as Tier I, the approval of the text amendment Application and Tier Amendment are necessary in order to provide much needed affordable housing in the area. Owner is in the process of reducing the dwelling units on the Property from the current 130 dwelling units and designating the Property with thirty-two (32) affordable dwelling units (one dwelling unit per lot in compliance with 00030150 9 URM, IS, R -I and RM designations) by entering into a single deed -restriction for the thirty-two (32) units which shall have a term of 99 years which shall be recorded on all of the Property. Pursuant to 138-24(c)(4) of the Monroe County Code, no affordable housing allocations can be awarded to property within a tier I designated area or within a tier II designated area on Big Pine Ivey.. Pursuant to 130-161(6) of the Monroe County Code, in order to be entitled to incentives for affordable housing, among other requirements, the "parcel of land proposed for development of affordable or employee housing shall only be located within a tier III designated area or, within a tier Ili -A (special protection area) designated area that does not propose the clearing of any portion of an upland native habitat patch of one acre or greater in area.". The substantial need for affordable housing in the area surrounding the Property is well - documented. As stated in the Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report dated April 2015 prepared by Robert Jones, Director of FCRC Consensus Center of Florida State University (the "Assessment") attached as Exhibit E, there is a major community need for over 6,500 affordable housing units solely for the workers of Ivey West, 32 miles to the south of the Property. Per the Assessment, "cost -burdened" households are considered to be those paying more than 30% of income for rent or mortgage costs. In Monroe County, more than half of the renter households are cost -burdened, ascompared with a statewide figure of 43%. The following chart (information taken from page 12 of the Assessment) clearly shows that the housing burden of over 35% of a household's income is very high in the Big Pine Ivey area surrounding the Property as a more than 42% of all renters in this area are using more than 35% of their income on rental costs, evidencing the community need for more affordable housing: AREA HOUSEHOLDS HOUSING HOUSING BURDEN OF 35% BURDEN OF 35% (OWNER) (RENTER) Big Pine/Monroe 1619 44% 42%© County Both the Comp Plan and Master Plan recommend the retention and expansion of affordable housing to the greatest extent possible. Goal 601 of the Comp Plan states that "Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to facilitate access by all current and future residents to adequate and affordable housing that is safe, decent, and structurally sound, and that meets the needs of the population based on type, tenure characteristics, unit size and individual preferences." In order to assist in meeting (i) Monroe County's goal to facilitate adequate and affordable housing and (ii) facilitate the achievement of the objectives and goals set forth in the Comp Plan and Master Plan, Owner seeks to develop the Property as affordable housing. The only way that Owner can obtain affordable housing allocations for the Property is by the approval of the text amendment Application and Tier Amendment amending the Property's designation to Tier III. 00030150 10 Consistency with the Comp Plan, the Florida Statutes, and Principles for Guiding Development A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the following Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Comp Plan. Specifically, the amendment furthers: Goal 101: Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life, ensure the safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources. Objective 101.0 Monroe County shall address local community needs while balancing the needs of all Monroe County communities. These efforts shall focus on the human crafted environment and shall be undertaken through the Livable CommuniKeys Planning Program. Goal 102: Monroe County shall direct future growth to lands which are intrinsically most suitable for development and shall encourage conservation and protection of environmentally sensitive lands. Goal 105 Monroe County shall undertake a comprehensive land acquisition program and smart growth initiatives in conjunction with its Livable CommuniKeys Program in a manner that recognizes the finite capacity for new development in the Florida Keys by providing economic and housing opportunities for residents without compromising the biodiversity of the natural environment and the continued ability of the natural and man-made systems to sustain livable communities in the Florida Keys for future generations. Objective 105.1 Monroe County shall implement smart growth initiatives in conjunction with its Livable CommuniKeys and Land Acquisition Programs which promote innovative and flexible development processes to preserve the natural environment, maintain and enhance the community character and quality of life, redevelop blighted commercial and residential areas, remove barriers to design concepts, reduce sprawl, and direct future growth to appropriate infzll areas. Policy 105.2.1 Monroe County shall designate all lands outside of mainland Monroe County, except for the Ocean Reef planned development, into three general categories for purposes of its Land Acquisition Program and smart growth initiatives in accordance with the criteria in Policy 205.1.1. These three categories are: Natural Area (Tier 1); Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier 11) on Big Pine Key and No Name Key only; and Infill Area (Tier III). The purposes, general characteristics, and growth management approaches associated with each tier are as follows: 00030150 11 Natural Area (Tier 1): Any defined geographic area where all or a significant portion of the land area is characterized as environmentally sensitive by the policies of this Plan and applicable habitat conservation plan, is to be designated as a Natural Area. New development on vacant land is to be severely restricted and privately owned vacant lands are to be acquired or development rights retired for resource conservation and passive recreation purposes. However, this does not preclude provisions of infrastructure for existing development. Within the Natural. Area designation are typically found lands within the acquisition boundaries of federal and state resource conservation and park areas, including isolated platted subdivisions; and privately -owned vacant lands with sensitive environmental features outside these acquisition areas. 2. Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier Il): Any defined geographic area on Big Pine Ivey and No Name Key, where scattered groups and fragments of environmentally sensitive lands, as defined by this Plan, may be found and where existing platted subdivisions are not predominately developed, not served by complete infrastructure facilities, or not within close proximity to established commercial areas, is to be designated as a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area. New development is to be discouraged and privately owned vacant lands acquired or development rights retired to reduce sprawl, ensure that the Keys carrying capacity is not exceeded, and prevent further encroachment on sensitive natural resources. Within a Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area are typically found: scattered small non-residential development and platted subdivisions with less than 50 percent of the lots developed; incomplete infrastructure in terms of paved roads, potable water, or electricity; and scattered clusters of environmentally sensitive lands, some of which are within or in close proximity to existing platted subdivisions. Infill Area (Tier III): Any defined geographic area, where a significant portion of land area is not characterized as environmentally sensitive as defined by this Plan, except for dispersed and isolated fragments of environmentally sensitive lands of less than four acres in area, where existing platted subdivisions are substantially developed, served by complete infrastructure facilities, and within close proximity to established commercial areas, or where a concentration of non-residential uses exists, is to be designated as an Inhll Area. New development and redevelopment are to be highly encouraged, except within tropical hardwood hammock or pineland patches of an acre or snore in area, where development is to be discouraged. Within an Infil Area are typically found: platted subdivisions with 50 percent or more developed lots situated in areas with few sensitive environmental features; full range of available public infrastructure in tenors of paved roads, potable water, and electricity; and concentrations of 00030150 12 commercial and other non-residential uses within close proximity. In some Infill Areas, a mix of non-residential and high -density residential uses (generally 8 units or more per acre) may also be found that form a Community Center. Policy 105.2.2 Monroe County shall prepare an overlay map(s) designating geographic areas of the County as one of the three Ticrs in accordance with the guidance in Policy 105.2.1, which shall be incorporated as an overlay on the zoning map(s) with supporting text amendments in the Land Development Regulations. These maps are to be used to guide the Land Acquisition Program and the smart growth initiatives in conjunction with the Livable CommuniKeys Program (Policy 101.20.1).. Policy 105.2.4 Monroe County shall prepare a specific data base tied to its Geographic Information System, containing information needed to implement, monitor, and evaluate its Land Acquisition Program, smart growth initiatives, and Livable CommuniKeys Program. Goal 601 Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to facilitate access by all current and future residents to adequate and affordable housing that is safe, decent, and structurally sound, and that meets the needs of the population based on type, tenure characteristics, unit size and individual preferences. [9J-5.010(3)(a)] Objective 601.. By January 4, 1998, Monroe County shall complete initial implementation of the following defined policies, including establishment of a structured monitoring program, to reduce by 50% the current estimated affordable housing need for households in the very low and low income classifications (HUD definitions) 2002. [9J-5.010(3)(b)I and 3] Policy 601.1. Within one year of the effective date of this Plan, Monroe County shall complete an. assessment of affordable and special housing needs utilizing detailed housing data from the 1990 U.S. Census and an assessment of target areas and. population segments representing priority affordable housing needs as a basis for establishing specific quantifiable near and long-terin affordable housing programs. Results of the assessment shall be used to update the Comprehensive Plan°s affordable housing policies.. Policy 601.1..2 By January 4, 1997, Monroe County shall adopt Land Development Regulations which establish a point system in conjunction with the permit allocation system for apportioning future development on an annual basis. The point system shall assign a positive point rating to affordable housing projects. 00030150 13 Policy 601.1.7 All affordable housing projects which receive development benefits from Monroe County, including but not limited to affordable housing points in the Permit Allocation System and donations of land., shall be required to maintain the project as affordable on a long-term basis pursuant to deed restrictions or other mechanisms specified in the Land Development Regulations, and administered by Monroe County or the Monroe County Horsing Authority. For the purposes of developing such Land Development regulations, the following guidelines shall apply: "Moderate Income" is the amount which represents one hundred -twenty percent (120%) of the median annual household income for Monroe County. "Low Income" is the amount which represents eighty percent (80%) of the median annual household income for Monroe County. "Very Low Income" is the amount which represents fifty percent (50%) of the median. annual household income for Monroe County. "Cost -burdened" describes a household which pays a monthly rent or monthly mortgage payinent, including taxes and insurance that exceeds thirty percent (30%) of the median annual household income for Monroe County. Policy 601.1.12 By January 4, 1997, Monroe County shall adopt Land Development Regulations which may include density bonuses, impact fee waiver programs, and other possible regulations to encourage affordable housing. B. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Master Plan. Specifically, the amendment furthers: Strategy 1.1 Create a Tier Map for the planning area depicting the locations of Tier 1, Tier 11 and Tier III lands as described in Comprehensive Plan Policy 105.2.L Base the Tier Map on the habitat needs of federally endangered resident species on the planning area as set forth in the anticipated ITP and HCP in terms of relative H of parcels within the planning area. Goal 2. Manage future growth for the next twenty years on Big Pine Ivey and No Name Key consistent with the community vison, while minimizing impacts on the endangered species and maintaining existing biodiversity. C. The amendment is consistent with Florida Statutes. There are no provisions of the Florida Statutes inconsistent with the proposed amendment. 00030150 14 D. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida Keys Area, Section 38i1.0552(7), Florida Statutes. For the purposes of reviewing the consistency of the adopted plan, or any amendments to that plan, with the principles for guiding development, and any amendments to the principles, the principles shall be construed as a whole and specific provisions may not be construed or applied in isolation from the other provisions. (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern designation. (b) Protecting shoreline and marine resources, including mangroves, coral reef formations, seagrass beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat. (c) Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, fi-eshwater wetlands, native tropical vegetation (for example, hardwood hammocks and pinclands), dune ridges and beaches, wildlife, and their habitat. (d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic development. (e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida Keys. (f) Enhancing natural scenic resources, promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment, and ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys. (g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys. (h) Protecting the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments, including: 1. The Florida Keys Aqaeduct and water supply facilities; 2. Sewage collection, treatment, and disposal facilities; 3. Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities; 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities; 5. Transportation facilities; 6. Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries; 7. State parks, recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned properties; S. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and 9. Other utilities, as appropriate. 00030150 1 (i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation, maintenance, and replacement of stormwater management facilities; central sewage collection, treatment and disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and maintenance ofonsite sewage treatment and disposal systems. 0) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and operation of wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss. 381.0065(4)(1) and 403.086(10), as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by central wastewater treatment facilities through permit allocation systems. (k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida Keys. (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys. (in) Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a post disaster reconstruction plan. (n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource. Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7) Florida Statutes, the proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development as a whole and is not inconsistent with any Principle. No Adverse Community Change There will be no adverse change to the surrounding community if the text amendment is approved as the Property is located adjacent to other residential areas and is maintaining the same use that has been on the Property since the 1960s. If any change occurs to the surrounding community it will be beneficial, as the redevelopment into affordable housing would ensure the Property is inhabited by fewer residents than its previous use. Waiver of Traffic Study As the proposed affordable housing insures that the Property is inhabited by fewer residents than have historically lived on the Property, we respectfully request a waiver of the traffic study and transportation fee required on the Application. Conclusion 00030150 16 Based on the foregoing, Owner requests that the proposed text amendment be considered and. adopted contemporaneously with the approval of the Tier Amendment. Thank you for your consideration and assistance, and please feel free to contact me with any questions. 00030150 17 EXHIBIT A 00030150 - v2 t ASSESSMENT Field d q rM ' 3i`' of ParcelJanuary 0 Report r are y: Harry A. DeLashmutt- i s ys, Inc, 74 26h Street Marathon, Florida 33050 Phone — 3 42-221 Email — hdelashmutt@comeast.net Introduction: This vegetative habitat assessment was conducted on the subject parcel by the undersigned on January 5, 2015. The report identifies the vegetative habitat found on the parcel with its size, diversity, any disturbance, sustainability, and qualitative characteristics. Previous mapping of the vegetative habitat by the County was compared to this field "truthing" assessment, The Growth Management Division of Monroe County has mapped the parcel area as "Developed" land and several surrounding parcel designations as "Hammock" in their GIS Habitat Mapping. A habitat map in 1985 identified the area as bavig isolated remnants of Slash Pineland-41 I which supports the fact that the subject parcel was historically covered with pineland vegetation pre - development time. The land is considered upland and there is no welland indication factors found on or near the site. The Tier designation by the County of the parcel area is Tier I and the general area is included in the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) coverage for the Key Deer on Big Pine Key. This parcel is a densely developed site providing temporary occupied recreational vehicle parking (RV Park) in the two subject subdions on Big PineMonroe County, Currently there are 125 designated vehicle spaces and five (5) tnobile home spaces located on this parcel of land. Thv 3.9 acre parcel has been multi -lot lattedandm ed b Assessm it Methods - The vegetative habitat was identified by using species identification, elevation changes, species diversity and size, soils, comparative analysis, and plant/hydric indicators. Qualitative factors based on relative health, reproductive evidence, disturbance, space requirements, and wildlife support. References used in the assessment were Native Trees and Shrubs ofthe Florida Keys by Paul Scurlock, Pine Rockland Plant Guide by Dr. Daniel Austin, and Trees ofEverglades Nation Park and the Florida Keys by George Stevenson. The State of Florida statute Chapter 62-340, Delineation of the Landward Extent of Wetlands and Surface Waters provided the strategy or methodology used for locating any transitional ecotone or wetland habitat on the subject property. All trees found on the parcel were identified, measured, and mapped. The trees were categorfizedd "Native or indigenous", "Exotic", or "Invasive Exotic" plant species. Identification & Biology of Xon-native Plants in Florida's NaturalAreas by Langeland & Burks was referericed for the invasive exotic plant identification. Mapping was relative to driveways and boundaries of the parcel. Low understory and ground plants were analyzed and discussed later in this report but not mapped due the abundance of exotic landscaping palms and plants scattered among the structures or small yards of the RV Park compound. The habitat was classified using the Monroe County habitat analysis LDR protocol which the Tier system was built upon and replaced it, K Photo 3/16/13) TW D-iy Oh.Cx Z-1.9 F'a ' Lana] "" ".p "Lu", 2— "Oph�q—hv awn Othwh,"Wh, ✓ n12 ,.hv hydrology, and geographic location within the overall ecosystem surrounding the parcel. In this case, the undeveloped sites in the Sands sub -division and to the west of the subject parcel were utilized for evaluatin ecies ttle and diversi!�, since there was little inditakwnk&�� 7177-49W a natural occurring habitat on or immediately adjacent to the subject parcel, The 1985 County Habitat Maps indicate "FLUCCS" Code 411 (Slash Pineland) as the habitat type for the surrounding undeveloped tracts of land to the parcel. Current GIS County habitat mapping also shows surrounding habitat as Pincland — 411 on vacant lands. This indication also would identify the content of a climax upland habitat community that would be found on the parcel without any human or exotic plant disturbance. This parcel was historical "Slash Pineland- 411 " habitat t.ype, The existing vegetative habitat found on this parcel has been altered by initial clearing of historic pincland and the planting of a mix of shade generating exotic and native trees during development, The planting probably occurred as the development progressed as an RV Park and residential mobile home court. There, is axe 41 exotic shade producing trees that show a consistent maturity or canopy size that have been placed at the parcel boundaries and along motor access drives. Native shade canopy trees such as Mahogany, Jamaica Dogwood, Gumbo Limbo and Strangler Fig are also found mixed with the exotics. The primary exotic trees are the Trumpet Tree or Tabebuia spp. There are only two listed plant species found — 10 Silver Thatch Palms (Cocothrinax argentala) trees and Mahogany Trees (Swietenia mahagony) scattered on the parcel (see map below). Understory and sustainable reproduction is absent under the mature canopy trees. Exotic tropical palms and plants make up the typical understory open space vegetation. Compared to the climax community for this parcel, there are 39 total native trees including the Silver Thatch Palms and only two mature Slash Pines (Pinus ellioui var. densa) found on the 3.9 acre parcel. Slash pine should be the dominant tree wecies found in this upland area of Biv-Pine-Kq—,�66wwA *xm k, exotic canopy trees and palms account for 61 percent of the total vegetative habitat, Blo-diversity of natural plant species on the property is lacking. Connection with adjacent natural habitat is interrupted by surrounding developed lots. The lack of reproduction in the limited open space of the developed parcel presents a vegetative sustainability concern, Habitat Type Classification af the Parcel: The existing vegetative habitat type found on this subject parcel is highly disturbed by the initial altering by clearing, development density, scarified access drives, and the percentage of exotic plants. The current habitat type for the RV Park area is therefore classified as "Disturbed with Exotics — 740.5". The scattered nature of the existing trees, high percentage of exotic plants, lack of diversity� and the highly disturbed understory /ground cover vegetation from development prevents labeling the upland habitat on this parcel as either a pineland or a hammock, Notable findings of the Up dand habitat, Of the total canopy trees found on the parcel � 61 percent are exotic species (57 total) Understory is primarily exotic palms and landscape plants in limited open space of development Invasive exotic plants account for 16 percent of the total vegetation Of the 39 native canopy trees and palms, only two (2) are Slash Pine remnants (9" & I I " DBB) Listed plants found —Silver Thatch Palm, (End. Species) — 10; Mahogany, (Threatened) - I I 4 pr"ZIls R,4A - (3) rp-) rr.) rk) r 2s c 41 — Z��1111-1 - )- Ve4 a-tato F- DT- O—aF-7-v-- -r laa ) -rw.- ft--16"t4d— spp NP-W.,f.114 Z, P,,;, wr - td-*As"z Ir."S"o 0 9 L) S O-All lip. � /�* LA 4 — Gutfal�w..UL A I —in, CP- CAiaLa G - F- L;—L. Dr- 6r. �%w.a® Ra,14( P—ias k TV--. TL.-&:k Wr - W-rMaKs . ar -f b&A C,) X a H a North Hall of Fame] — Bailey Rd. is Between Aerial Photos — Google 3/16/13 Note: Fxclusion of the 4 Lots in SW Comer Contains High Level of Exotic Vegetation and is FenciA from Subj Parcel N I outbhalf of Parcel — Nathalie Rd. at Bottom of Aerial Photo -- Goo le 3/16/13 Invasive Exotic Pignte Prbilmd on Parcel LLEPPCCIRSS Brazilian Pepper Schinus terebinthifolius — TEX I Seaside Mahoe Thespesiapopulnea lEX I Umbrella Tree Schefflera actinophyfla JEX 1 Bowstring Hemp Sanseviena hyacinthoides lEX 11 Oyster Plant Tradescantia spathacea lEX I ID smaies aunng'he AUP development and is ocated well td-- tA e east of the subject parcel. During the course of this comprehensive walk around assessment on the parcel, the undersigned encountered multiple incidents with free roaming domestic pets — also an impact. It is the Opinion of the undersigned that the existing vegetative habitat of this subject parcel is not suitable habitat for the imperiled wildlife that are subject of the HCP on Big Pine Key. Ile "H factor"calculation would be reversed with any re -development of the parcel since there would be no increase 'in footprint development impact, have a lower spacial density, increased open space and optimal vegetative buffers. The existing upland vegetative habitat is predominandy mature exotic and native canopy trees once planted for shade following the historical clearing of indigenous pineland. It has very limited and sparse understory of exotic tropical plants and palms. Forage height of native vegetation is beyond A. reach. Scarified ground areas are the rule with little to no low browse species. The proper classification of the upland habitat is "Disturbed with Exoties — 740.5". There is no vegetative habitat area found on the subject parcel that represents "sensitive" or "critical" wildlife habit.qt. Habitat Assessment conducted by Harry DeLashmull 6=1 ' g Biologist January 5, 2015 Dios eys, Inc. AM&C-h_mentr. Land Surveys, Sands Corridar Fig., MC Tier Map of Parcel Area IR View of Mail Center — Access Drive frza Natheiie Rd. th he Rd. — Large Mahogany Trees w Typical Access Drive with RV Spaces on Each Side Drive Tharu with A" Gumbo Limbo Center View of Ste' Cornier of Parcel frm, Count Road NW Corner frm County Rd. L*oWng to Mercedes 0 Ores Irm Bancy Rd — Norfolk Pine & 5 Trumpet Trees Access Drive - Typical Scarified Spaces — Trumpet Tree on PJght Side MOvY.o 1 qil 111 040 Mercedes Rd. —North Fenced Boundary of Parcel W, . If Tahebuia SOP — Pink Trumpet Tree — Access Drive (All photos above taken by.H. DeLashmutt - iosurveys, Ine, 1/5/15) MI m i ummm a m 0-9. o T- 11 - ® S0 T-H, - �aql Nhl., 00030150 - v2 Goc)gle earth ,�r, A Go,'L-)Sie earth }� earth meters , n titt}sm t � t�i x iia�tt sir M � i <' 11.. tt iVitb esf itii 3 Goo,gle earth Go,-)sle earth Iee Go%oglc earth 'eel 10 rmters#======���3 A Go c.-sle earth 10 EXHIBIT C 00030150 - v2 Permit Into nnation - Permit 90101333 In 2 ME zRalKN&VTs 2 4 r ESTIMATESPLEASE NOTE: FEES LISTED ARE VEFORE WRITING ANY CHECKS, PLEASE jM - DEPARTMENT T Permit Number Permit Type Property Address Application Date Issued Date Master Number C.O. Number C.O. Issued C-404 Type Applied Value Calculated Value RE 00300090000000 Unit Address SAM N jOE SUB P9 3-761 City/State/Zip KEY WEST, FL 33040 0 W N E R ON PERMIT Name LIVELY ENTERPR15ES Address 2949 OVERSEAS HWY City/State/Zip MARATHON, FL 3:3050 Type Private RE Balance Due Status Operator Operator Project Number Operator Usage Class Units Contractor ID VAN ■ + MIMIN ,I _ i MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION 1 NOTES 15,000 GALLONS. DER PERMIT DC44182565 TO EXISTING MOBILE HOME/RV PARK,, PLANNING APPROVAL. 8-23-90. No planreviews on file for this permit littp:/fegov.monroecounty-fl.gov/eGovPlus/permit/permit_all.asp0permit_no-90101.333&pid=00300090000000[511212014 8:05:30 AM] Pen»it Inforitnation - Peniiit 90101333 PF-BL02 FLAT; RATE 000 850.00 850.00 PF-EL05 FLAT RATE 0.00 35.00 35.00 PF-PL6 FLAT RATE 0.00 300.00 300,00 TOTAL FEES: TOTAL PAID TO DATE: PENDING PAYMENT: BALANCE: I_ i Use of this website constitutes your acceptance of the website_disclaimer antl terms of use. Your privacy is important to us; for more information see our urivacv mlic.. Copyright ® 2007 - THE PLUS SERIES 0 -,Ill Rights Reserved http.11egov.n7onroecountg,-f7,govleGovP1uslpennitlperitiit_all.aspx?ponnit no=90101333&:pid=00300090000000[511212014 8:0530 Alva] I 00030150 P) M E on po ------------ SAM-N-JOE SUBDIVISION, �" "ECTICK t6-TQtTN4Mp sG $QV,-fjj-#tAXqj 29CAST 410 PIKE KRY.WarfloE aQUOITT�FLQgJSA no"."R -.4 T--r 2 .1Z j-4 11""T-TIMITen, -"TtM*l MCMISTE r 1 9 0 4110MMIYARPM-F :r*TM- D A R I O'S `-WB DIV IS ION D 'FA 'SEC r� am: 26 -7 ow 996 illpf Aso Ag.D Pan- � 7,,3 tT' I =51 4,01F ------------- w E a IM. N r�I 1Mi I ff M.Tay, in 0432 1111111 M= — - "1 11 - ............. I I I 10.1sona9m 00030150 Monroe County Affordable Housing Permits 1 0 A1101d,111, Nuusiify Permits El mila Ma xers Assessment Report Prepared by: Robert Jones, Director FCRC Consensus Center, Florida State Uniersiy STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents................. ........................................................................................... 2 Executive Summary...'=3 I. ASSESSMENT SCOPE AND ORGANIZATION ........ ................................................. 10 11. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY -CONTEXT ...... ............................. 11 III. WORKFORCE HOUSING CHALLENGES- IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES .............. 14 A- WORKFORCE HOUSING STAKE-1-TOLDFR PERSPECTIVES COMMON nirm,'s ............ ................ 14 B. WORKFORcE HousiNG STAKEHOLDER PERSPEcriVES COMMON ISSUES ................... _ ........... 15 C. STAKEHOLDER IDEAS AND ISSUES- MATRIX .......................... ........ ........ ................... .................. 16 D. STAKEHOLDER IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES... ........... — ............................................................ .........22 1. County Government Perspective and Ideas ........... ...... ...... ... - ..... __ ........ 22 2. Municipal Government Perspectives and Ideas ... ....... - ...... . . ..... ....................24 3. State Government Ideas and Perspectives, ... ____ ...... ........... - .......... ................................. 26 4. Education Ideas and Perspectives...... - ....... ........ ........................... 27 5. Development Ideas and Perspectives ..................................................................... .................28 6. Lodging, Hospitality and Tourist Development Ideas and Perspectives ............... .........29 7. Business Sector Ideas acid Perspectives..... ... . . . ............ ...................................... . ...................... 31 & Non Profit Sector Ideas and Perspectives ........ a ....................... ............................................. 34 9. Military Sector Ideas and Perspectives ........ ........... ........................ ............ ............... .37 IV. WORKFORCE HOUSING PROCESS- STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES ,,, ......... _38 A, INFORAIXI710N NEEDED TOINF01W CONSENSUS BUILDING ON WORIU�ORCE HOUSING ........ 38 B. WORKFORCE HousING PROCE SS-STAKEIIOJ. DER PERSPECTIVES ....... .....a_ ........................42 V. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY- -NEXT STEPS ..... ....... .................. 44 Appendices 1. List of Interviews/Meetings ............................................... ...................... ........... - ........................... 45 2. Affordable lJousing, Advisory Committee Ordinance ...................................... .......... ... __.__,48 3. Workforce Housing Assessment Background Papers .................. ..................... ........ __ ...... __._50 4. Workforce Housing Roundtable Summary of Comments, August 2014 ................ ......... ___51 5. Public Conament-Email .... .... ............... ......... .. - ................................ a_ ..a—.. '.... 56 6. "Affordable Housing White Paper", September 2014, Donald Craig, AICP Director of Planning & Nicole Malo, AICP Planner, City of Key West.... .................... ............................. 57 7. Draft Sample Advisory Committee Procedures and Protocols .......................... ___ ................. 58 8. Information on the FCRC Consensus Center, FSU.... ................................................................... 68 Monroe County Workforce 1 lousing Stakeholder Assessment Report., April 2015 2 Monroe County faces the quadruple impact of high land values, land limited by geographic and environmental features, housing supply limited by controlled growth (the Rate of Growth Ordinance) and a tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service -sector employment. In August 2314 the Monroe County Comrnission approved a stakeholder assessment effort, to be conducted by the FCRC Consensus Center at Florida State University (Consensus Center), to solicit perspectives and ideas on workforce housing challenges and on whether a county -wide consensus building effort should be convened to address the complex issues surrounding; workforce housing in the Florida Keys. This assessment report sets out the context for addressing workforce housing issues and used interviews, meetings and review of data and documents to assess stakeholder perspectives on the County's workforce housing challenges. These perspectives include county, city, regional, state and federal government levels, housing and tourist development leaders in Monroe County, the business and tourist community and non- profit community and civic organizations. Based on this stakeholder input, the assessment report summarizes the themes, concerns, issues, and interests that stakeholders believe ought to be considered in addressing workforce housing needs in Monroe County. (See below) The workforce housing affordability crisis in the Florida Keys identified by the Monroe County Commission in 2014 is real. "Cost -burdened" households pay more than 30"o of income for rent or mortgage costs. In 2013, 51° rd (or 16,849) of Monroe County households pay more than 30'io of income for housing while statewide that figure is 43%. More than half of Monroe County renters are cost burdened (8,350 of 14,002) while about 45% of Monroe County homeowners are cost burdened (8,499 of the 18,936). In November 2014 the United Way of Florida released its report, ALICI (asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed: Study of Financial Ilardship, which indicates that nearly half of all Monroe County households (14,221of 29,241) live above the federal poverty line but still struggle to afford basic expenses including housing, child care, food, transportation and health care.' `l'hc Report also evaluates community conditions for each of Florida's counties using a weighted "Economic Viability Dashboard" in three core areas using; a scale of 1 (worst) to 100 (best).' Monroe County's results area as follows: Core Areas Rating Grade Housing Affordability (40% 14 of 100 Poor job Opportunities 40% 67 of 100 Goad Community Support 20% 48 of 100 Poor , The Report -,i-as initially developed in New Jersey and no-,v fire other states including Florida, California, Michigan, Indiana and Connecticut, have used the model and developed reports in 2014. hrtp.,1J»_«_°e Irbat1ail€toKg! corrunde /pLlbl_iC26 €t Jl7_Irt�� rtitil3l,L1 2ti.5/01 -WLI sdi�jlt-ct7 r]_�t� fan)lies-in tli ds Z The Index: provides the means to compare counties in Florida and to see changes over time. The Housing Affordability area includes three key indicators including: the Household Survival Rudget (quantifying the cost of the housing, child care, food, health care, transportation); health insurance; and housing burden. The Job Opportunities area includes three key indicators including: Income Distribution; Employment hate; and New Hire Wages, The Community Support area includes three key indicators: Violent crime rate; the annual payroll of human services nonprofirs per capita; and Access to good basic health care. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 3 The findings of all of several recent reports on Monroe County's current housing situation confirm that there is a significant and growing shortage of affordable workforce housing, both rental and ownership. In addition there exists a policy gap in that affordable housing for the working and middle classes is largely left to individual municipalities and counties to deal with. Over 75 persons participated in the interviews and meetings and identified a range of workforce housing issues. While some offered perspectives from the same sector, they live and work in different parts of the Keys and the ideas they offer are not necessarily the same as others sharing that perspective. FIowever, across the various perspectives the following emerged as six common themes regarding key workforce housing issues: 1. A Shared vision of success for Workforce Housing in Monroe County 2. 'fake Action on Workforce Housing 3. Build upon the past affordable housing studies and reports 4. Defining the problem first based on data 5. Seek a balanced package of options as there is no single strategy that will salve the workforce housing crisis 6. View housing as community infrastructure, like transportation and water supply Issues generally identified as important from most perspectives included: 1. Addressing the ROGO system and workforce housing, including transfers and fractional ROGOs 2. Density and livable workforce housing 3. Relaxing height restrictions in light of Federal flood insurance changes and to create more workforce housing 4. Monroe housing Authority role in workforce housing 5. Transportation and its relationship to and role in workforce housing; 6. Workforce Rousing site identification and audit of publicly owned property. 7. Creation of new workforce housing units that arc both affordable and livable with development incentives and public private partnerships 8. Preservation and maintenance of existing workforce housing and incentives to preserve workforce housing 9. Related workforce issues due to high cost of housing (insurance, childcare, food insecurity etc.) 10. County, City and state affordable housing policies and regulations including; length of deed restrictions 11. Explore and expand funding sources to expand workforce housing in Monroe County The Stakeholder Assessment sought to identify how different stakeholders viewed the challenges of ,workforce housing facing Monroe County and its residents. The over 50 issues and ideas identified and summarized from the many interviews and meetings, help to shed light on the complexity of the issues and on the healthy diversity of views on how to best address the challenges even among those sharing the same stakeholder perspective. The assessment interviews were conducted with the understanding that the themes and ideas identified would be shared with the Commission and inform any, committee that would engage in subsequent consensus building on workforce housing solutions. It was also understood that individual views would not be attributed but the related thernes perspectives would be summarized. The report provides input from following perspectives: County Government; City Government; Education; Development; Lodging/Ilospitality/Tourism; Business; Non Profit; and Military. Over 50 workforce housing ideas and Mmlroc Coianty Workforce Housing Stakebolder Assessiiient Repnrt, April 2015 issues were identified in the Assessment from different perspectives in the following categories: Overall 1. No single solution, menu of options 2. Build on work to date (studies„ task farces, etc.) 3. Target different levels of workforce to provide WhI 4. Engage private and public sector employers in finding WI -I solutions 5. Political will to implement solutions 6. Focus on rental housing 7. Addressing NIl',/IBY and workforce housing 8. Encourage public private partnerships for WI-1 9. Encourage W1-1 affordability and livability 10.. Support living wages in the Keys 11. Expand the Keys economy beyond tourism 12. Address negative impacts on. Keys communities of transient workforce 13. Clarifying workforce housing and affordable housing definitions Workforce Housing Funding 1. Workforce housing site identification and audit 2. Remedy Sadowski Trust Fund donor inequity 3. Land Authority funds for workforce housing construction 4. Dedicated local funding for workforce housing 5. Consider inclusionary WII fee 6. address online marketplace for vacation rentals that connects users with property to rent with users looking to rent the space(c.g. AirBnB) and its impact on bed tax revenue 7. Provide assistance to workforce renters (down payment/deposit) Workforce Housing & Transportation. 1. Increase highway capacity to adjust ROGO evacuation formula 2. Address related issues -Transportation options for employees 3. Address & improve transit issues in the upper and lower Keys - Workforce Housing Planning & Zoning; 1. Create a County Workforce I lousing Development Plan 2. Consider adjusting height restrictions to increase workforce housing 3. Allow increased density for W11 4. Tax Credit Property 'Management after 15 yrs. 5. Encourage mixed use 6. Explore "Micro housing" 7. Enforce housing Codes 8, ROGO Allocations and. Transfers, Fractional ROGO for W1- 9. ROGOItorn-tula 10. Address redevelopment and Wl I 11. Encourage commercial construction of Wl I by reducing impact fee. 12. Explore and assess the role of live --aboard boats in W11 13. Encourage hospitality industry and the commercial sector to build WII Preserve Existing Workforce Housing 1. Preserve/maintain affordable units 2. Address "lost" A] I/W11 units 3. Revisit land trusts as a too] 4. Provide for "no net loss" principle of affordable & workforce housing in the County housing element 5. Adopt a "lease form" for local governments owning underlying land for WI I 6. Address loss of deed restrictions for AH 7. Address RV/'Trailer Parks, as WId and conversion issues Workforce Housintr & Related Issues 1. Address related issues insurance costs- wind 2. Address 2018 1°EMA flood insurance issues. 3. Address related issues- Daycare 4. homelessness & Workforce housing 5. Protect military buffer areas 6. Address "food security" (i.e. access b-ill pcopic ;u all 0111 s W cnou"gh food last. om �tctl�e, hcAhhti life) and workforce housing. Workforce Housing & Site Identification Workforce Housing Construction 1. Audit Local Government owned public lands for 1. Waive building fees for W WI1 2. Buy dawn interest rates for WH projects 2. Re -purpose land owned by local government for 3. Cut taxing rates on WIT WH 4. Commercial properties for WTI -tax and insurance breaks 3, Focus all 3-tier oronerties on W11 Workforce Honsin&r & the Education Sector I I 1. Engage the school system. as largest employer Improve. teacher housing needs data I- Molirm County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Asscssment Report, April 2015 Monroe County staff has gathered detailed baseline data that included an inventory of affordable and workforce housing projects completed over the past 2 decades in Monroe County, along with the public incentives that were made to assist in the housing development. In the course of the assessment interviews and meetings, various studies and data sources were identified on best practices from other jurisdictions and ideas developed or considered but not implemented by previous affordable housing task forces. Among the range of stakeholders interviewed, all expressed the need for a focused and comprehensive county -wide workforce housing dialogue that involved those with a stake in the outcome. it any believed that such a committee should develop a package of consensus recommendations, informed by data and the range of stakeholder and public perspectivcs, that can provide for both short and longer term actions for the Board of County Coirinussion's consideration. W ule some of those interviewed remained skeptical that there will be sufficient "political will" to Implement the Committee's recommendations as has been the case in the past, many believed drat this was an urgent and timely issue for the County to address in light of hotel redevelopment and the economic upturn. In the i{all of 2014, following the initiation of this Assessment, the Commission re -appointed members to the existing Affordable housing Advisory Committee and with the thought of convening and charging there with addressing workforce housing issues and providing the County Commission with its recommendations. The reconvened committee would review this assessment report and other data as it addressed its charge..A workforce housing conu,24ttee, ad hoc or otherwise, appointed and charged by the CountyCornillission to address workforce housing issues in the Florida Keys was explored in the assessment interviews. A significant number of those interviewed applauded the County Commission's action in re -purposing the existing Affordable Ilousing Advisory Committee to focus, at least in the short term, on workforce housing. It was suggested that rlus approach could provide representation from each District in the County, offer workforce housing perspectives from the public, private and nonprofit sectors, and minimize confusion and any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing committee might create. It was also pointed out that this charge would be consistent with the Comnuttee's current mission to address affordable housing opportunities in Monroe County for both "residents and workforce." The Commission should review the current Committee appointments to ensure that a balance of workforce housing stakeholder perspectives are included in its membership. If the Commission charges the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to develop consensus recommendations on workforce housing actions for consideration by the Monroe County BOCC, most stakeholders interviewed suggested there should be a sufficient range of stakeholder perspectives represented and participating in the consensus building. This would allow the C-orrunittee to develop informed .workforce housing consensus findings and recommendations that stakeholders might support and the County Commission could act upon. There is a great deal of public and stakeholder interest in the workforce housing issues the Committee will take up. The membership requirements, as set forth in both Florida statute and the Monroe County Resolution, do not reference .representation of the municipalities in the County, the military, the School Board and perhaps other organisations impacted by workforce housing policies and programs and with a stake in contributing to solutions to improve the availability of workforce housing in the Porida Keys. Monroe mound Workforce Housing StaLcholdcr Assesstnent Report, April 2015 6 Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 The format for the Committee meetings should encourage constructive public and stakeholder input. The Commission might consider charging the Committee With establishing an engagement strategy to involve a broader range of stakeholders in their development of findings and recommendations. This might be accomplished through opportunities for public input during their own meetings, as well as through Committee sponsored advisory workgroups, joint workshops with municipal taskforces and city, commissions, workshops at key moments in the development of options and recommendations, online surveys and other techniques. It was observed by many that an advisory committee developing recommendations on workforce housing will require dedicated staff, including legal and planning expertise, and facilitation support L'_ the C:omniittee to do its work expeditiously. This is because of the complexity of the charge, the intense public interest in the issue, the linkages with other issues and programs and activities in the public, private and non-profit sectors, and the desire for timely actions to address the current workforce housing challenges. The Monroe County board of County Commissioners should review this Assessment Report and charge the Affordable. Housing Committee to focus its efforts in the coming year on workforce housing. With a charge from the County Commission, the Committee should establish its procedures and approach and a schedule for meetings that would permit it to deliver back to the BOCC its workforce housing recommendations by mid-2016. The Committee should consider. • Developing a shared vision of success; • Jointly defining the workforce problems faced in the Florida Keys; • Reviewing the range of issues and options identified in previous studies; • Reviewing the experience and lessons learned with successful workforce housing projects developed in the ILeys to date; • Reviewing this Stakeholder Assessment Report, and • Developing a package of consensus findings and recommended solutions for consideration by the Monroe County board of County Commission. This stakeholder assessment report confirms that there is wide agreement that ;Monroe County is facing a significant and growing workforce housing crisis with shortages for both affordable rental and ownership units. 'There is also agreement that no single strategy will solve the workforce housing crisis in Monroe County. Instead the challenge ahead is to craft a balanced package of targeted options that have been refined through discussion and debate and that can serge as a consensus framework for addressing and implementing solutions. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 9 Monroe County faces the quadruple impact of high land values, land limited by geographic and environmental features, housing supply limited by controlled growth (the bate of Growth Ordinance) and a tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service -sector employment. In August 2014 the Monroe County Commission approved a stakeholder assessment effort, to be conducted by the FCRC Consensus Center at Florida State University (Consensus Center), to solicit perspectives and ideas on workforce housing challenges and on whether a county -wide consensus building effort should be convened to address the complex issues surrounding workforce housing in the Florida Keys. The 2005 Harvard report, "Strengthening the Workforce and Communities through Housing Solutions" suggests, solutions to the workforce housing challenge require a broad - based, proactive approach.' This stakeholder assessment engaged a broad range of public, private and non profit stakeholders to clarify substantive issues involved, options to consider, information needed and process and coordination issues. This assessment report sets out the context for addressing workforce housing issues and used interviews, meetings and review of data and documents to assess stakeholder perspectives on the County�'s workforce housing challenges. These perspectives include county, city, regional, state and federal government levels, housing and tourist development leaders in Monroe County, the business and tourist community and non-profit community and civic organizations. Based on this stakeholder input, the assessment report summarized the themes, concerns, issues, and interests that stakeholders believe ought to be considered in addressing workforce housing needs in Monroe County. The assessment seeks to address the following questions: 1. What are the range of affordable workforce housing and related issues from the perspectives of County, City, State and Federal housing and tourist development leaders, the business and tourist community and the non-profit community and civic organizations and residents? 2. What are the linkages with development and land use issues, transportation mobility? 3. What interests, organizations and individuals should participate in a stakeholder county -wide committee process to develop consensus recommendations on affordable workforce housing issues in Monroe County? How Should the County convene a stakeholder committee to develop recommendations on workforce housing in Monroe County, and its cities? 4. What is needed in terms of base line current data on workforce housing programs in 3 "By the time a workforce housing affordability problem begins to affect the bottom line, the forces that contribute to high housing casts have long been in place and are difficult to reverse. For the housing and business communities to forestall such an outcome, the}' must establish a working relationship characterized by respect, truss, and an any areness of each other's intc•rr•4ts. 'they must have access to information about the causes of the affordabilitg problem and data that demonstrate its effects." Monroe County Workforce 1-Dousing Stakeholder lssessznent Report, April 2015 10 Monroe County? What information and data on best practices should be considered in any subsequent stakeholder consensus building; process? r• • �r • rON N*11411 The workforce housing affordability crisis in the Florida Keys identified by the Monroe County Conrtnission in 2014 is real. "Cost -burdened" households pay more than 30'i o of income for rent or mortgage costs. In 2013, 51u'f) (or 16,849) of Monroe County households pay more than 30° � of income for housing while statewide that figure is 43° ". More than half of Monroe County renters are cost burdened (8,350 of 14,002) while about 4Y o of Monroe. County homeowners, are cost burdened (8,499 of the 18,936), In November 2014 the United Way of Florida released its report, ALICI (Asset I.inritcd, Income Constrained, I mploycd: Study of Financial Hardship, which indicates that nearly half of all Monroe County households (14,221of 29,241) line above the: federal poverty line but still struggle to afford basic expenses including; housing, child care, food, transportation and health case.' The Deport also evaluates community conditions for each Florida county using a weighted "l conornic Viability Dashboard" in three core areas employing; a scale of 1 (worst) to 100 (best).' Monroe County's results area as follows: Care Areas Ratirs Grade Housing Affordability 40% 14 of 100 Poor job Opportunities 40% 67 of 100 Good Community Support 20%t, 48 of 100 Poor 4 Workforce housing can refer to any farm of housing, including ownersbip of single or multi -family homes, as well as occupation of rental units. Workforce housing is generally understood to mean affordable housing for households with earned income that is insufficient to secure quality housing in reasonable proximity to the workplace. The term "workforce" is meant to connote those who are gainfully employed, a group of people who are not gipically understood to be the target of affordable housing programs. Workforce housing, then, implies an altered or expanded understanding of affordable housing. Workforce housing is commionly targeted at "essential �,vorkcrs" in a community i.e. police officers, firemen, teachers, nurses, medical personnel. Ilowever resort communities generally define "essential" more broadly to include service workers, as they often are characterized by high real estate costs and a high number of low -paying service jobs essential to the local tourism economy. ' The Report was initially developed in Nefv Jersey, and now five other states including Florida, C.aliforiva, Michigan, Indiana and Connecticut, have used the model and developed reports in 2014. Furs //v-NX-\S ftlDatlnnta.ore/curcnniae fpuUls:_ nnnsf' ieln rsu� larc _2t)ISi1)( study_ i�e_d ,Ir I E 4an is rl;sn = l — _ fanrilic s-in-Florid a & The Index provides the means to compare counties in Florida and to see changes over time. The Mousing Affordability area includes three key indicators including: the Household Survival Budget (quantifying the cost of the housing, child care, food, health care, transportation), health insurance; and housing burden. The Job Opportunities area includes three key indicators including: Income Distribution; Employment hate; and Now Hire Wages. The Community Support area includes three key indicators: Violent crime rate; the annual payroll of human services nonprofits per capita; and Access to good basic health care. Monroe County Workforce Housing, Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015.11 KEY FACTS AND ALICE STATISTICS FOR MCi` ROE COUNTY °'rotrt lftc? AI ICE' l'loridta of 1'ijmfsacial I lard+-ho, t "all, 2014 .App ndi%, i Big Coppitt Key /Monroe nty Population llouseboldf Poverty % 1I_IC'l_ Abore r11.1C1-i % l:lnerFtploy rnenl Rule I Jonfing; Burden or'er 35% Cllrner f 1 oyvsu, Burden overTbres{cold 35% Renter 2016 833 1 2% 35%0 1 53°!0 °!0 55% 72% Big Dine Ke / onroe Coun Population 3777 1 hvvfeholdf 1619 Porerty % 10% AIJ 1- % 35% AboveALICL' Tbre.f{cold % 56% (;;ctnphy- rnenf Raze 4% Ilousiq Burden o'er 35% Onmer 44% I-Itm ink Burden over 35%n Renter 42% Key Lar o/Monroe County Population Households Porerly % 4LICE AboreALIC"I Threshold % ITme.,vpla)j- ment Rate Ilonsztig Burden or'er 35% Onmer Ilousinng Burden over 35% Renter 11409 4517 15% 38% 47% 9% 44% 57% Key West Pt)puialion Ilouseboldr Por'er�y % ALICE % AboreALIC;I-' Ilnemployr- T mefhrdd % ment Rate 1.lourin,?, Burden arer 35% Qlaner 11ousiq Burden at'et 35% Renter 24870 9322 19°fo 35% 56% 4% 44% 68% Lower Keys /Monroe County Population Households Porerly % ALICE % Ahore AI-ICt' Threshold % Unemploy- ment Ride Houssq Burden over Housing Bnvden over 35% Onmer 35% Renter" 10394 4314 8% 23% 62% 5% 42% 56% Marathon Population Ilousehedds Pored)` % AIJC1- % AboreALICL I hreshold `"10 Uumplg- talent Rave I lousing Burden over 35% Omer I lousing Burden orer 35% Renter 8389 3371 14% 41% 45% 9% 40% 65% Middle Ke s/Monroe County Populalion Households Anvr�y % ALICE % Abore ALICL Threshold % tlnenrpiny- ment Rafe Housiq) Bulden or'er 35% C7vvner- Housiasg Burden ores 35% Renter 9731 4068 13% 40% 47% 10% 42% 64i°!9 North Ke Lar,o/Monroe nty Population Ilouseholdr Porely fllo ,/t -IC1, % Ahore 11LIC1 Threshold % l inernpl0 Housing Burden over ment Rate 35% iY xner I lousing Burden orrer 3.5 % Renter 1166 510 11% 20% 69% 4%Q 36%® 25% Stock Island/ Monroe Coun Ptlpralation Households Poreriy % A -LICE Abore ALICE Threshold % t'nernplrty- ment Rule housing Burden or'er 35% Omer Ilousiq Burden over 33% Renter 3736 1111 14% 62% 24% 8% 53% 69% Tavernier/ Monroe County Population Households POr'erly % ALICE Abm-eALICE % Threshold % l ne'i71 went Bate Hou,iing Burden 07'Pr 35% 0m tier H(msh2g B17Yderr OPCr 35% Renter 2491 953 6°!0 46% 48% 7% 46% 37`;ao Upper Ke s/ onroe County Populalion I-lo,rasehoRs POrerf_)� `fo l /o Above .1II.10 'I7)resbokl % L.7nemplGy'- ment Rate jlouftnn Burden wer 35% C)rvner I I09d52ng Bin -den Over 35%a Renter 21234 8633 13% 37% 50% 9% 43% 54% Monroe County NVorldorce Flousing 5takehoIder Assessment Report, April 2015 12 The findings of all of several recent reports can Monroe County's current housing situation confirm that there is a significant and growing shortage of affordable workforce housing, both rental and ownership. In addition there exists a policy gap in that affordable housing for the working and noddle classes is largely left to individual municipalities and counties to deal with. In Monroe County an hourly wage needed to afford a two -bedroom FMR is $26.27/hour.' In order not to pay more than 30% of family income on housing, a household must earn $4,553 monthly or $54,640 annually. The findings of all of the reports on Monroe County's current housing situation confirm that there is a significant and growing shortage of affordable workforce housing, both rental and ownership. A significant portion of the current workforce housing in Monroe County is rental and there is a large rental housing deficit. As is the case throughout Florida, there has been increase in the demand for rental housing in Florida following the great recession and subsequent housing crisis, particularly among younger households and families with children. Statewide, the percent of households renting increased from 29.4 percent in 2007 to 34.4 percent in 2012 (American Coinniunity Survey, 2012; Sliiinberg Center for I lousing Studies, University of Florida, 2013)." The Shimberg Center has found that affordable rental shortages are most pronounced in southeast Florida, (SCI IS, 2013). In an Affordable housing Solutions White Paper (October 2014)" Donald Craig, Planning Director for the City of Key West, projected a deficit of amore than 6,500 units of affordable housing units in the City and characterized the affordability challenge as follows:. "The C:ity's Comprehensive flan identified the City of Key West median household income as $52,004 while the; average annual wages earned by a worker in the City are approximately 537,844 indicating that by standard guidelines for mortgage lending at the median level, a home: should cost no more than S166,012, or three tunes the median income. This is clearly inconsistent with actual cost of housing in the City, when the Ivey West Board of Realtors reports that at the end of July 2014 the median sales prices of 162 single family homes sold in the preceding 7 months was 5630,000 and the median sales prices for Condo/Townhouses was $368,000. Clearly persons and families malting the median income or average wage cannot afford for -sale housing, even if such were being built. As to rental housing, the situation is not better. Even though dated and most assuredly higher, the 2010 reported median gross monthly rent in the City was $1,359. In order to be affordable to the average wage earner in the City, the monthly rent should be no more than $946. Rent such as this is not available in the City at this point and tune and results in workers sharing housing in increasing numbers, or paying 40-50% of their income for housing." 7 "0ut of Reach 2014: Florida", htt_1':/ nlal c_r3rg/o<;,r,r2(�14f hl-, National Income Mousing Coalition (Affordable l Ionsing White Paper- Donald Craig, DICE' Director of Planning & Nicole Malo t1ICF,Planner, Cityof Ivey lest: 1 Cite{_;onmaission 14-111- 07_A4ccting _Agcnda_Full Detail.pAf Monroe County Workforce Housing stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 13 The 2015 Home Matters Deport from the Florida Housing Coalition} confirms what other reports have found regarding rapid increases in rents for vacant units on the market while Florida's home ownership has declined steadily since its peak in 2007. Tighter mortgage lending standards, rising mortgage interest rates and fees, and a high percentage of cash sales have squeezed many low and moderate income homebuyers out of the market. There currently exists a policy gap to fund workforce housing development. Federal programs through IIUD or state governments are generally targeted towards low-income programs designed for people that make less than 604o of Area Median Income (AMI). The I,mv-Inncome housing Tax Credit, which mainly spurs development of rental properties, is an example of this, Affordable housing for the working and middle classes has been largely left to individual municipalities and counties to deal with. FII. WORKFORCE IDEAS A. Critical Affordable Workforce Housing Common Themes The over 75 persons participating in the interviews and meetings identified a range of workforce housing issues. While some offered a perspective from the same sector, they lived and worked in different parts of the Keys and the ideas they offered ,were not necessarily the same as others sharing; that perspective. flowever, across the various perspectives the following six common themes regarding key workforce housing issues emerged: 1. A Shared vision of success for Workforce Housing in Monroe County will be important to guide and gauge the menu of strategies and actions needed to address workforce housing. 2. Action orientation,. All acknowledge the workforce housing context is complex and challenging but needs immediate focus and attention and that addressing; gaps in workforce housing throughout the Florida Keys will require immediate and longer term actions, even if those interviewed had differences in emphasis on those options and actions. 3. Build upon the past affordable housing studies and reports. Many agreed with the following statement, "The comprehensive studies, recommendations and published works on the topic do not need to be repeated. The metrics of this problem are well known and documented. The dynamics and facts have changed little over the years." 4. Define the problem(s) first. There needs to be a careful effort to define the shared workforce housing; problem facing Monroe County in a multifaceted way (different levels and needs of workers, rental vs. ownership, different locations in the Keys) and then based on data and knowledge, move to identify, craft and implement `°solutions. htt /is uu.ccan JllPariuhi t.;jdcscsfl <rt5tc z ,ltitrs {I zkrt 02,2015 finil Mcnnroc: Count), \Vorldorce f lousing; itakch€ lder Asscssnient Report, April 2015 14 No single strategy. There does not appear to be a single strategy to pursue but rather a menu of combined strategies to address the workforce housing challenges in the Florida Keys Any, corninittee should seek to develop a balanced package of both shoat term and longer -term strategies and actions that are targeted to addressing the needs of different sections of the workforce and to different parts of Monroe County. 6. Housing as community infrastructure. Given its importance to the local economy, the County should consider ti%orkforce housing as it considers other critical infrastructure such as transportation and water supply. Workforce housing should recenle the policy, planning; and Financial attention that other areas of local infrastructure receil,-e. The County should seek to better integrate the housing element with other plan elements such as the future land use, public facilities, transportation and capital improvements. B. Critical Affordable Workforce Housing Common Issues Issues generally identified as important to address from most perspectives included: 1. Addressing the ROGO system and xvorkft�rce housing, including transfers and fractional ROGOs 2. Density and livable workforce housing 3. Relaxing height restrictions in light of Federal flood insurance changes and to create more workforce housing; 4. Strengthen Monroe County Housing Authority's role in workforce housing 5. Address transportation and its relationship to and role in workforce housing 6. Update Monroe C ounty's workforce housing; site identification and audit of publicly, owned property i. Create new workforce housing units that are both affordable and listable with. development incentives and public private partnerships S. Preserve and maintain existing workforce housing and provide incentives to preserve workforce housing 9. Address related workforce issues due to high cost of housing (insurance, childcare, food insecurity- etc.) 10. Review and consider changes in the County, City and state affordable housing policies and regulations including; length of deed restrictions ] oriro Counts! Workforce l lotisirig SLikchcrldc.r lssessmcnt Report, ,April 2015 15 11. Explore and expand funding sources to expand workforce housing in Monroe County C. Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives on Workforce Housing Matrix The Stakeholder assessment sought to identiR- how different stakeholder perspectives viewed the challenges of workforce housing facing Monroe County and its residents. The over 50 issue,-, and ideas identified and summarized from the many interviews and meetings, help to shed light on the complexity, of the issues and on the healthy diVerslt}, of views on how to best address the challenges.. The assessment interviews were conducted with the understanding that the themes and ideas idtn6fied would be shared with the Commission and inform any committee that would engage in subsequent consensus building on -,vorkforce housing solutions. It was also understood that individual views would not be attributed but related perspectives would be summarized. Workforce housing ideas and issues identified in the A,;,;cssmcnt from different perspectives and included issues displayed in the matrix below in the following nine categories: 1. Overall (12 lsweslldea-) 2. Workforce housing ousing Funding (7 lswesl ldea.$) 3. Workforce Housing Nanning, Zoning & ll,"nforccment (1-3 lssiteslldeas) 4. Workforce Housing &'Fronsportation (4 RulesIldeas) 5, Workforce I lousing & Site Identification (3 LallesIldeas) 6. Workforce Housing Construction (/ lssuesl Idea,,) 7. Workforce Housing- preserve 13xisting (7RiueslIdeai) 8. Workforce Housing& the Education Sector (21swesIldeas) 9. Work -force Housing & Related Issues (6 lssueslldeas) Monroe Counti, Workforcc I lousiiig Stakeholder .Assessment Rcport, April 2015 16 Zt Wt cry cn 0 WD tp cn bZr o a o c a m -0 C 1, '5 0 it P 0 91 Mp! 0 min min -15 0- . . . ......... F� ei RI oil 6 z — Qj u C,3 ry u Q) rj lu lu Zt z f-4 Iz z CID 14 E t5 C4n u C-) � 4 C. ell Lri r c1c CN LI) 'to Ln cn I ell, CJ cn Zj 0..4 tc m cn 't CJ 0 c 75 t4 Cl) 73a o c— -0 :I bS tc cq r-I D. Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives on Workforce Housing Over 75 persons participated in the intenriews and meetings and identified a range of workforce housing issues. Below is a compilation summary of the input received from individuals representing different sectors (public, private and non-profit) and residing in different parts of Monroe County. 1. County Government- Ideas and Perspectives Build on affordable housing work to date • We need to understand and build on what's been learned from various task forces and studies and apply to the current workforce housing situation in the Keys. Review what incentives are in ordinances and how have they worked. Flow do we retool to work better. What about inclusionary zoning? What about density bonuses and density waivers? What they are how they work. Ilow to retool to work better. What doesn't work. • Game up to speed on what was done previously so we know where things were when walked away. o silver bullet, no easy fix • We need a balanced menu of options. Acknowledge the broad range of different of solution and levels of housing. • There is no easy fix, no one way to handle: this problem. Workforce Housing Shortages • We are short over 6000 units and under ROG 0 we will get 700 over the next 10 years. That does not come close to solving the problem. • The Affordable Housing Committee should focus initially on workforce. • We are short 6,800 units of work force housing. This is a crisis and housing is the most expensive item on the County's list. • lJousing affordability in the Keys includes insurance, the cost of food and the cost of daycare as well as housing. Rental workforce housing focus • Our most critical need is in lower income and service ranges and we should focus especially on rentals for this segment of the workforce. • 98" o of the residents of county -run public housing is workforce housing for working individuals (with the exception of the elderly and disabled). Rent is capped to .30° o of household income and the, remaining amount is subsidized. Windstorm and Flood Insurance Rates • The current windstorm and flood insurance situation is huge affecting all residents not just lower income. • If you can't pay cash, you need insurance to secure a bank loan. • FIRM- fair insurance rates for Monroe- is engaged in grass roots advocacy work. • The Federally subsidized program flood insurance program was amended and will set a new basis for Florida insurance rates, setting the stage for immediate dramatic increases flood insurance rates for both residential and commercial properties. County growth management and affordable housing. • Should affordable housing; be part of the County growth management function which is built more to slow growth or placed elsewhere with good staff support to allow it to be more active in identifying parcels and developers in getting the job done? Empower and support the Affordable Housing Committee • The Committee needs to consider a menu of recommended consensus workforce housing solutions as a package for the County Commission to consider and implement. Protect and support the Committee's affordable housing staff. • In the past considering the complex incentives and transactions for developers to build affordable housing has opened staff to attach by those opposing development in general. It has been a very public and vitriolic situation where staff have been personally attached. Site Identification. ° We should identify every piece of county property that is vacant, demolished, big enough for affordable housing and zoned properly. Preserve and maintain affordable units. • We've lost some affordable housing that was bought at low rates and sold at market rate and restrictions were ignored. We have to pay attention so games are not played with this and we lose these. units. Mixed Use. • We should encourage this but it has not caught on except in Ivey West. • We should explore mixed use and mixed income levels vs. low income property, projects makes for better self policing and safer and more livable communities, • The only exception to this is tax credit properties where everyone is low income with no one is over 60% AMI. Address Management on Tax Credit Properties after 15 years. For the first 15 years, the developer is liable and responsible to maintain the tax credits and the housing. After the 15"' year property management tends to deteriorate as less cash is devoted to upkeep. Consider allowing Land Authority bed tax funds for construction. • Currently they can only use the funding for land acquisition. • Consider changing the Tourist Development Council ('I.'DC) law to allow those dollars to be used for affordable housing development. Height Restrictions. • Should be open to relaxing this where this could produce more workforce housing. • Consider handling this on a site specific basis. • There are areas in town where building higher would not block views. The City of Ivey West would have the capacity to implement this although it would first have to be approved by referendum. Explore Micro Housing. • This is being implemented in cities such as New Fork. It might be applied in cities in the Keys to cut down on the commute time. • Note that 1—bedroorn units are the shortest in supply for the public housing and tend to be occupied longer, usually by elderly and disabled. Enforce Housing Codes.. Nfonrue County Workforce Housing 5takdioldcr Assessment Report, April 2015 23 • Enforce housing codes in terms of illegal multiple occupancy. IIDGG ® ROGO allocation system for permits early on effectively eliminated affordable housing construction. Three things need to came together for successful workforce housing. funding, available land and allocations. however these have not coincided. Years ago funding was available but land and allocation were not. Hospitality Industry and Workforce Housing. • The industry should step up and participate in efforts to provide more affordable workforce housing. Some are, others should. • Some wonder why County taxes would be used to subsidize the hotels' workforce housing. Hotels should do more. • We should collect data on what hoteliers are doing; in providing; workforce housing for their employees. Local Medicated Funding Source. We need a Local dedicated funding source (sales tas, "sin" tax, etc.) that can support the construction of workforce housing; not just ]arid acquisition. .Address Sadowski Trust Fund Donor Inequity. • Monroe County contributes 60'U o and gets back 8'' o. This should be addressed when funding; resumes. AddressNIM 'Y I-listoricall}= there has been community- reactions to the old low income projects. This may continue to be an issue. Related Affordability Issues • Insurance and Day Care can figure in challenges for workers in terms of costs on tight family budgets. • Many work 2-3 service jobs to be able to afford housing and anther costs such as food. • The "situationally" homeless are part of the workforce housing puzzle in Monroe County. Hurricanes and Workforce Housing. • In the last hurricanes in the Keys transportation from Miami stopped and restaurant and lodging businesses in the Upper Keys had to shut their doors for lack of employees. 2. Municipal Government- Ideas and Perspectives Target the Levels of Workforce to Serve We need to define more clearly what kind(s) of workforce housing we want for the community. Hourly wage earners may always be renters in the Florida Keys. There is a shortage of decent, reasonably priced, available housing, especially one -bedroom rentals. Engage Employers • We need the businesses in Monroe Countv. with the different types of employees (Dourly, salaried) to he at the table and part of the solution. hotels have the highest occupancy rate and the most profits of any place in the country. They have begun to help with avorkforce housing and they should continue to do Monroe Counry Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, Aprij)M5 24 snore. Vacation rentals • We need to address this challenging issue and its impact on workforce housing in the current marketplace. Height restrictions • Ease height restrictions where there aren't view issues to allow for more workforce housing. Mixed use. a Seek more mixed uses with the school board and other public properties_ Land Acquisition 0 Focus land acquisition on workforce housing properties. Focus on Redevelopment Key West is, nearing build out and most constructiOn Is redevelopment and rernodeling. Loss of Deed Restrictions Address and audit the Los-, of Deed Restrictions. ("Of the total 1,089 affordable units, 223 are expected to have their deed restrictions expire, or have expired b�, the end of 2015. " (S'ee Appendiv #6). "No net loss" of existing workforce housing 0 Amend the Comprehensive Nan's housing element so that future development will result in "no net loss" of existing workforce/affordablc rental housing for households earning 80'o'('j or less than the area mean income. High land values Emit tax credit funded affordable units • Difficult to both finance and construct units at any level except at the 60°'O of median through heavily subsidized tax credit funding. Lack of reasonably priced land has meant few of these projects have been built. • In the City of Key West, its annual allocation of 91 affordable housing BPAS units. Re -purpose land owned by local government Land owned by the county should be re -purposed for affordable and workforce housing. Consider additional funding sources A tax on every alcoholic beverage sold or a 1"o real estate transfer tax could generate funding for workforce housing. Relying upon the ].,and Authority funds won't be enough. Development Plan and Funding for Workforce Housing We need to figure out how to put the land authority/I lousing Authority and bed tax money together and form development plan for affordable housing. ROGO AH Allocations • Each year in City of Key West there are 90 affordable housing ROGO allocations with the City able to borrow ul-.) to 10 years ahead to create more affordable housing. • Focus all tier-3 properties on workforce housing if it doesn't raise a property rights issue. Adopt lease form a Cities should consider adopting a lease form with the public sector owning the Monroe Coujit-s, Workfo)rcc dousing titakehold r ,Assessment Report, ;April 2015 25 underlying land. Support non -profits and their work on affordable and workforce housing 0 provide funding for nonprofit affordable housing entities. 3. State Government- Ideas and Perspectives FFHC Set Aside for Monroe County • Work to preserve the Monroe County set aside Florida Finance Housing Corporation competitive applications for affordable housing tax credit Sadowski Fund • Sadowski Fund affordable housing funding has not been available for affordable housing since 2006. Work to bring that funding back. Tourist Development Tax and Workforce Housing • Tourist Development Tax should support the building of workforce housing. Funds go to the Monroe County Land Authorit-Y ($4 ri-ifflion) and Key West (S8 million). • Consider changing the tourism bed tax statute to allow for supporting the 11 - construction of workforce housing. Combination of Issues • In the Keys need to consider four factors: hurricane evacuation; environmental protection of land and species-, affordable housing-, and water supply. • During the economic downturn there was less interest in building All, Rising Rents • Rising rents represent a big challengc for workforce housing and strategies to address this should be considered. NIMBY issues and Workforce Housing • Monroe County needs to address the NIMBY issue that is a barrier to workforce housing. Protect Navy Noise and Crash Zone but look for workforce housing opportunities • Work with the Navy to protect noise and crash zones while looking for opportunities to build workforce housing. Support Deed Restrictions • Support the use of 99 year leases for $1 -A ffi)rdable forever. • ikssess current state of enforcement of deed restricted land and work to extend leases to 99 years. Identify and Aggregate Workforce Housing Parcels • More could be done to identify parcels of land and aggregate them and analyze opportunities for workforce housing on surplus lands. • There may be opportunities for duplexes and quadaplexes on scarified small lots for rental units. Height Restrictions • Consider relaxing height restrictions especially in the center of the islands with existing tall buildings. This would provide additional workforce housing FEMA Flood Maps Monroe (' ,()Unt)T Workforce flousing Stakeholder Asscssrnuw Report, April 2015 26 • Address the impacts of the new FElbLA flood snaps on Monroe County and workforce housing. Homeless • Homeless are an important issue to address in a tourist economy. I low many of the homeless are there because of lack of affordable housing in the Keys? ROGO System • ROGO system has evolved and the modeling is scientifically and statistically defensible in terms of hurricane evacuation time. • There are affordable housing ROGC)s that have not been used. • The most recent annual travel study that shows how long takes to get over the 22 segments of the U.S. I highway, indicates a segment starting to fail in Islamorada. Engage the Hotel and Hospitality Industry • Iloteliers should be more engaged in the workforce housing discussion. Convened a recent meeting for hotehers in Islamorada to discuss this issue and only .3 came. Enforcement of Housing Ordinances • bleed to address and enforce the ordinances regarding unlawful modifications of homes and overcrowding of residenccs. Mobile Houses and RV Parks and Workforce Housing • Need to address the question of the role of mobile%RN' parks in supplying workforce housing and the impact of conversions of these parks on availabilit}' of affordable housing. 4. Education Sector Ideas and Perspectives Target the kind of housing needed • Education has the same levels of workforce housing needs as other sectors. • have to focus on the target population in terms of addressing; gaps in workforce housing, e.g. 'Teachers, support and adn-rinistrative staff, service industry workers, etc. Partnerships for workforce housing • Interested and exploring partnerships for workforce housing development on school board owned property. Recruitment and Retention • Recruiting and retaiiung; teachers anti professors in the Keys is a veijT challenging; problem due to the relatively high cost of housing. • Retention continues to be a problem and accessible and affordable workforce housing is part of it. There is a huge organisational cost to retrain. Student Enrollment Stable The current context in terms of student enrollment is stable but not increasing, having decreased during the economic downturn. Single vs. Family Teachers • `Ve have lot of young employees with over 70 new teachers." Young single teachers may rent space with roommate(s), but teachers with family is another matter as there is very little family friendly workforce housing;. • Many teachers in Upper Keys commute to Miami bade vs. secure housing in Monroe C owity Workforce FIousing Ptak colder hssussnicnt Rcport, April 2015 27 Monroe County. • In Key West and the lower keys, the property, values are the highest and present a challenge for }route; teachers and teachers with families. Involve the Public School System at the Workforce Housing Table • Since the Public School system one of the larger employers in the County in terms of teachers, support and administrative staff, there should be place at a workforce housing table for this perspective. Increasing reliability of teacher housing needs data • The School system is working on improving the reliability of their data and its Collection related to employee housing needs. Public private partnerships Encourage and support public private partnerships as part of the workforce housing solution. 5. Development Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives Development Constraints • The critical areas of state concern and environmental issues constrain the available land fir workforce housing. • The cost of labor and insurance is climbing so incentives for workforce housing will be an important stimulus. Authorize Land Authority to Build Workforce Housing • Fund the Monroe County Housing Authority or other similar successful organizations to build workforce housing. Convert public land for workforce housing • The school board and the city may have large tracts that can be converted for workforce housing. • Need to use infrastructure $$ making land improvements for property we should own- RFPs for developers. Tax credit housing and workforce Meridian West- 102 units for very low income. It has the lowest turnover of any very low-income housing project in Florida ww%ith 3 bedroom apartment renting for. around $1100, The very low and low income are the best served in terms of affordable housing of the workforce population. Workforce housing is where the gaps are. Livability and Affordability • Tax credit developers- Designed for good purpose but because of bureaucratic overhead, can only do large scale projects that may look out of place and unattractive to the people living in and nearby the units/development. • Livability ideas are secondary with landscaping and signage not given a high priority. Need to consider "livability" not just tax credits and affordability when building workforce housing. Scale is an issue here with smaller lifojects there is a greater chance of empowering residents to maintain their homes. The larger projects lave ongoing maintenance and management costs Address Spectrum of Workers and Housing Needs Monroe (;ount4' Workforce HousingStakeholder Assessment Rcjatart, April 2015 28 • I laJTe to Clarify what -,vorkers want and need in terms of housing. What is the real need? Employees from Eastern Europe- Hawks Cay- Vast majority of employees- 6 months at a time. Is sharing all apartment for these workers a bad idea? • What portion of staff/employers made up of transient migrant Nvorkers? What are their needs? I -low many are working in City of Key West and where can their housing, needs be best addressed? What role might dormitories play' Incentives for smaller unit projects • Consider prm-ldffig iriccritlVes for more smaller unit projects that will be more livable, The tax credit resource funding for this doesn't practically work below 20-25 ul-lits because of costs. • Provide incentives for small apartment complexes, not big units, e.g. develop 10- 20 units with multiple occupancy. • They can be nicely done dorm style with shared kitchen consistent with character, built to code and also presenye green space, Hotels re -openings and workforce housing impacts • May not be new hotels corrill-ig on but those that were shut doN-,,n are reopening. We need to be careful about what that means in terms of housing demand. There may not be growth in the population going f6nvard, Workforce Housing and Live Aboard Boats What are the City of Key West statistics on Mooring Fields. There may be more than 120 boats in mooring Fields providing, affordable housilig, How many boats are there for a short or longer time? TJow many are providing workforce housing? What is the quality? Addressing Trailer and RV Parks as Workforce Housing • What role do existing trailer and RV parks play in affordable workforce housing in Monroe County? • What has been the enforcement experience with the 30°o rule in converting trailer parks in the County , Waive building permit fees • HaNc local governments waiN,c building permit fees for affordable and workforce housing projects. ects. Political will • Is there the political will to implement workforce housing solutions? • There has been at times, for example the last Workforce I lousing Task Force In 2007 had some of it recommendation implemented. Encourage mixed use • We should be encouraging mixed use in central areas throughout the Keys. Consider greater use of an inclusionary affordable housing fee 1P The County should set a fee for incluslonary housing such as the S40,000 per inclusionary housing credit that Marathon is proposing. This fee would be paid to the Monroe County Housing Authority in an affordable housing trust fund to be distributed to those who actually build affordable housing. This would create a subsidy paid from new market rate or transient (hotel) projects to be distributed to those who actually build the affordablc housing. Monroc County Workforce 11()tusing StakLholdcr Assessment Report, April 2015 29 • To assure the housing is built and completed, the subsidy would not be funded until the certificates of occupancy for the affordable housing are issued. • This type of commitment would incentivin those who are willing to build affordable housing, and the fund-., would come from those building the projects that require inclusionary housing without the market rate developer from having to use sornC Of his/her market rate allocations on affordable housing. • All transient unit development and re -development should require inclusionary affordable housing ordinance, or impact fee assessment. Increase density and height • With limited land,-, on which to build affordable housing, increase the density and height (e.g. 40 feet vs. 35 feet) for affordable housing to make this feasible. • Increased density in appropriate zoning districts Nvithin commercial areas to facilitate workforce housing- • Increase height in appropriate -areas. • Build up! Build new! Much of the KWITA properties are old, ugly, small and inefficiently sparse. Density needs to increase. Increase the capacity of highways • To increase ROGO allocation work together to secure funding to increase the capacity of hil, RhwaVs. Review city and county owned lands for use as workforce housing 1b Identify all city and county owned lands for workforce housing that do not present environmental issues and utilize for workforce housing. Develop a workforce housing 10-year strategic plan. • Look for early successes in the first 3-5 years in adjusting regulations. Set a goal of cutting the gap in -,vorkforce housing by 50°o. • The approach to "renter vs. ownership" should be "both/,and." Address the 2018 PEA changes • We need to prepare in required elevations (A F 7 becomes 9) and 60`,o of houses will be in jeopardy making theta harder to resale or rebuild. Surplus land • The County and Cities should inventory surplus land and identify land that can be used for workforce housing. • Lift the cap on the number of credits, keep construction costs per unit low ($25,000) • Consider additional sales subsidy to help deals that are short. Identify and Aggregate Parcels of Public Land County and the ("itics haven't done enough to idcritif , parcels of land and aggregate them. We need to do more surplus land analysis. Additional density for workforce housing • We have to be creative. We should consider giving additional derisff), to developers who are constructing a workforce community/development with a couple market rate units. Add commercial development and redevelopment • Based on employees and square feet (use industry standards and sales tax codes) for an impact fee assessment. ]Monroe Col-1111-Y Work Force Hnusing Stakeholder Asscssmctit R(:pori, April 2015 30 ROGO Transfers • Implement a ROGO transfer ordinance whercby a market rate unit may be dislodged if an affordable unit replaces the dislodged market rate. • Issue no market rote ROGO units for multi -unit development project,.;, instead, issue "affordables" and require developers to take the affordable units and deed restrict existing market rate properties and then dislodge the market rate for use elsewhere as their market rates, Buy Down Interest Rates for Workforce Housing Projects • Use land authority money or impact fees to buy down interest rates for development costs for work force housing projects. Cut Taxing Rates on Workforce Housing • legislation to cut taxing rates on affordable and workforce housing. Commercial Properties for Workforce Housing • Give corruncrcial properties that are used for workforce housing rental the Same tax and insurance (flood) breaks as priniary homestead properties. G. Lodging, Hospitality and Tourist Development— Ideas and Perspectives The Hospitality Economy • Ilospitality represent,, 80"I'0 of the economic activity in the Keys. Its workforce is very transient and generally looluing to rent not purchase. Lodging Industry and Workforce Housing 10 Lodging industry may be only industry in the Keys that is trying to address workforce housing for new properties. For example the Westin in Key West has 75 units set aside housing 105 people from managers to cooks. Marketing and the Keys 4- Focusing on creating a year round destination with success in Key West. Spreading the marketing effort out over the year to increase visits and occupancy in the off season and slow season. Colorado recently decided it had marketed sufficiently and moved to disband their statewide marketing effort. The next season resulted in a big drop in tourism. Tourism remains the key part of the Key's economy. Importance of continuing to market the Keys • Colorado experience in cutting budget for statewide marketing led to big drop in the tourism economy. Environmental Land Acquisition vs. Affordable Housing • With the years in which funding was put towards environmentally land acquisition, relatively little was invested affordable housing. What is a smart split between the 2 purposes? Transportation and the Keys. • The transit service from INfiallu'-Dade to Marathon and north in the Upper Keys is currently funded by the Dade County local transit '/2 penny, state and federal dollars but no Monroe Countysupport for the transit service. • As job opportunities grow in Nharni Dade, what impact will this have on the 1 1 1 supple of lodging industry and related tourist industry employees i In the Upper Keys? "Getting on has at Walmart in Florida City to go south for work, the Monroe Countv Workforce Flousilig Stakcholckr Assc!ssincnt Rep)rt, April 2015 31 question for workers is Ho-w available is work, where and how much does it Pay. • Ilomtstead and Florida Ciry pro -Vide high densities of immigrant populations which housing in Monroe County does not offer. • I-lotels in the Upper Keys are interested in working with Monroe and Dade Counties in finding a solution to sustaining and improving the transit service that provides lodging and howMarathon hospitality works from athon and north. Some hotels rovi gIng ,,are supplementing the bus routes with their own busses. • We need better transit In the lower Keys to support the workforce transportation needs. • Better public transportation in the lower keys. Reliability and cost of public transportation options to deal -with fact that more affi)rdable housing is further away from jobs. • Need reliable transit frorn workforce housing to work especially with parking issues in Key West. Alternatives such as biking and scooters are not practical given weather. Consider using smallerandmore transit vehicles in the Key West area. Employee turnover • I)cr;on dependent industries cannot outsourcc jobs. Need to Find ways to reduce employee turnover which often relates to housing/rental costs. Vacation rentals and Preserving Affordable Units • This is a large problem throughout the Keys impacting the supply of workforce housing, flowe\,er it may be that many are above the workforce housing Price range. • More important than building new workforce housing is how can we maintain what is affordable for the median income workers. During the downturn property values went down while rentals went up. Workforce housing is primarily the rental housing market. Consider whether there might be restrictions or new regulations creating some disincentives for converting units to vacation rentals. Online Vacation Rentals Marketplace • Address the online market place for vacation rentals that connects users with property to rent with users looking to rent the space(e.g. A1rBnB) and its impact on beef tax revenue • Also, related to this is the new addition of Air B&B and lack of regulation and enforcement. This raises safety issues as well as the "free ride" by not paying the bed tax. It may be much easier to rent through this approach than to a workforce tenant. Help Workforce Renters • Consider providing down payment/deposit assistance. Hospitality Industry Data • hotels have been reluctant to share data on workforce housing as some is tied to Qmplo)ment contracts and privacy concerns. Disseminating Workforce Housing Inforitnation • We need more effective affordable housing information that is available to workers. Monroe Cotinly \Vorkforcc I lousing Stakcholdcr A s,;essmc tit Report., April 2015 32 Height restrictions • Can build more rental units on both 2"d and 3" floors with First floor commercial in the lower Iseys if the height restrictions are eased. For example consider strip malls with the upper level dedicated to housing. Public Property • County and Cities may be the biggest land owners and should identify public property with buildings that might be tarn down to build housing. Balance environmentally land acquisition with affordable housing investment. Historically, nothing or little has been allocated to -wards 11I-1 effort. What is a smart split between the 2 purposes. IM$Yst ("Not in my back yard") • Lodging industry did general marketing efforts focusing on nurses and police and workforce housing which helped. l lower cr, there continues to be a lack of creating new workforce housing. • Give land Authority the ability to devote some of the bed tax funding to purchase workforce housing. Retention and the High Cost of Housing • 'Tourist Development Council data shows that 94% of those leaving the County are leaving because of high cost of living and housing. Rents going up • While land values dropped down during the recession, rentals went up as many, owners faced with increases in wind storm and flood insurance and property taxes passed these on to tourism workers. 7. Business Sector including Real Estate Island. economy and community • Ilousing has always presented a dilernrna and changes in an island community and economy. 100 years alto the cigar manufacturers had to address this. • We have a dynamically changing environment with a finite piece of real estate and nothing else to fail back on. Over the past 15 years, credit should be given for successfully put6rig together affordable housing units in the face of regulatory and NlE"v BY hurdles, but we are still far short of bridging the gap and meeting the demand. • "Checks and land" can solve the workforce housing problem, Clarify our workforce targets for housing • It is not clear what kind of workforce and housing are we seeking to provide? lintel, motel, restaurant or managers- each with a different set of problems. • We don't know anymore what the community needs, Igo we need single residential occupancy for 500 guest workers in Ivey West? Probably not. • We may not have an analytical feel for what we need in terms of workforce housing throughout the Keys. Impact on community of transient workforce • What are we doing to the cultural makeup of the community with a transient workforce? Children grow up and move to less expensive places instead of making Monroe County their home. Nlonroe Counn, Workforce housing Stakeholder Asscssinunt report, April 2015 33 " Biggest concern is the character and flavor. of Monroe county may be going away and losing our foundation. The next generation shrinking. Wind and flood insurance " rising insurance costs are compounding the housing problem- driving rents up beyond affordabihry. Political will • We will need the political will to make changes to bridge the gap of workforce housing • Previous Task Forces on affordable housing have been very difficult and challenging to serve on in terms of pleasing the elected leaders and citizens. • I3o we have the political will to continue grappling with this problem and implementing solutions? Is the problem only a sl-)ortagc: of affordable units suitable for workforce housing? • We have opportunities but do we have the political wdl to get this done? There's too much, "I've got mine," in the COTraTTauTTtty. lIow many of our elected leaders works or owns a business? Land trusts as a toot • The Bahama band Trust debacle has naade serious discussion of land trusts as part of the tool kit very difficult. Prioritize units over "money in lieu of • Is it even possible to prevent gentrification on island that is 2X3 square miles? Don't look for SS in lieu of as we need units. Hold off major changes to worlorce housing pending the Affordable Housing Committee's work " ]'he County appears to be getting ready to change income limitations to target working households at the: middle level. l lold off implementing changes until the have reinstituted and charged the Affordable I lousing Comi-11 ttee. Permit Bed Tax to support purchase/building of workforce housing • Change the law to allow purchase and building of workforce housing. Put it where people can get to work. S. Non -Profit Sector Ideas and Perspectives Living wages • affordable housing programs for lour income earners range from 80 to 140 ",� of AMI, )-et real wages for career t}'pe workers are closer to 60jn AMI. • Employers in ]!Monroe County are not expected to pay a living wage. The wealth created in our tourist economy depends upon low ,vage, high turnover, and low skill employees. Limited housing supply and investment wealth • The outside wealth that purchases a second home or invests in real estate in the Keys drives up the asking and selling prices for all properties where the dynamic of a limited supply of land and great wealth seeking investment churns on constantly. This dynamic is shared with other- resort locations. The compromises workers make then is to work several jobs and/or to live in substandard housing or to leave. Monroe C ount�v Workforce Housing, 5takcho➢dc.r Assessment Report, April 2015 34 We need to get more citizens of Nloriroc County invested in the future of this place. ROGO and affordable housing • The measured gap between the number of units needed and the available ROGOs demonstrates the futility of trying to build our -way out of the crisis. The negotiations with DF10 provide affordable housing units for the next 20 years within the frame work of evacuation limits. These neAv affordable units are critical but will not solve the need. • The operative assumption for allowing more density for certain types of affordable housing is that all of the types of ROGOs are not necessarily equal. Consider assigning a ROGO value of less than one unit for affordable homes less than 600 square feet or so. The Comprehensive Plan, the DHO, and evacuation models can be exarnined for alternative methods to allow more density for affordable units that are smaller. • The second home owners who are not necessarily in residence during the hurricane evacuation season is an example of units counted against evacuation times where the actual impact may not eNist. The number of homes that are vacant in Monroe County due to second home ownership has been noted in sc�,eral studies • The Area of State Critical Concern uses the dwelling unit as its basic unit of control. The management of and regulation of all home types will become critical to assessing evacuation time. Monroe County should audit all housing types and create an inventory detailing the status of each ROGO. Benefits from an audit would include identifying flood prone structures, uninhabitable units, illegal units, etc. • Change ROGO to square footage, Affordable housing has not been protected • When government has granted greater densities or used inclusionary zoning it has not always registered, audited or tracked compliance to ensure the permanency of these precious units. Deed restrictions were not monitored. • The temptation to convert affordable units into market rate units, rental or ownership, is too great and with little penalty or notice. Affordable housing "lost units" The C0111111U1111L), has a strong common interest in protecting those affordable units it has lost after subsidizing or underwriting their creation. If the will were to exist, these "lost "units could be investigated and the current owner asked to revert them to affordable status. Licris, and other mechanisms exist to "take" on the public's behalf what was not proper to convert in the first, place. Redevelopment and inclusionary zoning • Inclusionary, zoning as a government policy has been in place for new development. It is time to explore requiring affordable housing units from redevelopment projects. Lower and Middle Keys different workforce housing issues • The lower and rniddlc keys have different issues and solutions from the upper keys where day labor bused in from the mainland can assist in the workforce. But the market dynamics are found in corrinion through all of the keys. Monroe Couniy \Vorkforcc Flouring Stakeholder Assc,ssnient Report, April 2015 35 Funding inequity strong argument can be made to correct the inequity of the donor/recipient that exists, based on the S6 million a year that Monroe County gives to The Sadowski Housing Trust Fund every year compared to the pittance of $300,000 in Sl IIP funds returned this year and in the past. Transportation • Lack of transportation infrastructure makes workforce housing more problematic. New workforce housing partnerships needed Many differing approaches in scope and scale will be required with various partnerships between govcminent, private, for profit and nonprofit developers. Affordable yet substandard housing Rental housing that costs less than $900 a month, regardless of size or condition, is termed affordable despite being unsafe or substandard or very small. Political will • The political will to mare real changes in policies, incentives, regulations and to c0runut resources remains to be sustained. Don't repeat studies, focus on action The comprehensive studies, recommendations and published works on the topic do not need to be repeated. The metrics of this problem are well known and documented. The dynamics and facts have change(] little over the years: outside wealth creates seasonal homes that are not available; the profit generated from transient units puts pressure on dense mobile home and RV parks; tourist industry wages are low, turnover is high, landlords can rent substandard units due to high demand for any type of housing, etc. Other related issues • While workforce housing is the focus of the moment, there are important related issues of food insecurity, education, child care for employees are critical to the workforce housing discussion. • While addressing workforce housing, we should address homelessness {and the growing youth 1,. of this population) and help with the path back to working for families. • Where will the employees of the new lodging establishments be housed? • There has been a huge uptick in the demand at food pantries across the County and not just among homeless people but with working families still in homes. 47,0 of families countywide with kids under 18 are eligible for reduced lunch. Of this population, 46"o are minorities. Lack of -affordable workforce housing has led to food insecurity. If we didn't have a housing problem we wouldn't have a food security issue. • Many elected leaders are not aware of the childcare challenges faced by those working and living in the Keys. Those who haven't raised family here are not aware of the lack of child care options and its impact on the work force. • If we can't control housing costs for working families, all other costs such is childcare, food prices, etc. are related and compounded. Expand the Keys Economy. 0 We need to think outside the box and expand our efforts to build a future Keys 1\1011roe Coul-Iry Workforce Housing Stakeholde 1,i,esstnetat Report, April 2015 36 economy beyond tourism. ' We need all Darts of the demographic in Nfonroe County. 9. Military Sector Ideas and Perspectives Recruitment and retention Workforce housing affects the recruitment and retention. The housing set aside for the base: 'workforce has a ton; wait list. Dousing is the #1 issue: for their civilian workforce. "There is not a week where the Commander is not involved in a family housing issue. Communication and coordination In terms of the Naval Air Station lines of communication and coordination have been improved with the Commander now the point of contact for coordination. Presence in the community In terms of presence in NIonroe County, there are roughly 1600 military (including; Coast Guard), 1000 civilians and 400 contractors or about .3000 employees and about 5500 including families, spouses and dependents. Evacuation procedures ' In terms of evacuation, the Conhrnanding Officer implements the recommendations of the Count), E inergency Manager and will close the base and issue evacuation orders for military personnel. Civilian workers are urged to evacuate and are provided travel orders and funds to evacuate. The 550 RV units in the Naval Air Station campgrounds evacuated first. Need for buffer areas and workforce housing • In terms of searching for solutions to locating workforce housing in Key West, the Naval Air Station strives to protect public health and welfare and its mission by keeping buffer areas separate without housing in the high noise of unsafe areas surrounding the base. • The Naval Air Station does not get directly involved in growth issues such as density and intensity unless it directly impacts the buffer areas. Only excel3tion to this was their support for the widening of the 18-mile stretch of US 1. • (.general concern with the impact of vacation rentals on the supply of workforce rental housing for the over 5,500 Base employees and their families, spouses and dcpcndents. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakc hokict :lsscssmet)r Report, April 2015 37 A. Information Needed to Inform Consensus Building on Workforce Mousing Monroe County staff has gathered a draft detailed baseline data that included an inventory of affordable and workforce housing project, completed over the past 2 decades in Monroe County, along with the public incentives that were shade to assist in the housing development. (See: h /jcoit�tiu5.t u.�cit€/'car c�i__1-lt�u n- A�.,s sstncntjpdFs2/DR,11'"l' (:«unt:�'_AFi= llousjng-1>�zetzc,_and Incenliees x,9- 2,_12d The maps that provide the locations of the developments included in the Table throughout Monroe County. Monroe County Workforce [ lousing Stakeholder Assessment Report, <\pril 2015 -38 Monroe Countv Workforce Housing Stakcholdcr Assessi-nent Report, April 2015 39 Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakcholdcr Asscwrncnt Report, April 2015 40 Staff also provided information on the ROGIO system and annual allocations. Based on the affordable housing units that are in the Affordable and Workforce housing Projects 'fable, the distribution of deed restricted affordable housing units is currently; ROGO Subarea1° ni is Upper Keys 346 Lower Keys 431 Big Pine Key and No Name Key 19 Total 79 Now incorporated as Islamorada Now incorporated as Marathon 4 Total including those now incorporated 805 The balances of Affordable Housing Allocation1° available as of Quarter 3 Year 23 ()an. 13, 2015-.April 13, 2015) are: a. Big Pine/No Name Key Subarea affordable housing allocation breakdown into the two income categories are as follows: 1) ,cry low, low, & median income 8 ulloccalions and 2) moderate. income 8 alloc�tiran. and b. Unincorporated Monroe Count}7 excluding the Big Pine/No Name Key Subarea affordable housing allocation breakdown into the two income categories are as follows: 1) ven, low income, low income and median income 114 (tllocalions and 2) moderate 112 ullocalions. The additional affordable allocations by Subarea up through 2023 include 710 total including 20 to Big Pine Kcy/No Name Key Subarea and 690 available for countywide allocation except for Big fine Key/No Name Key subarea 10 The I O(30 subareas are defined in Section 138-20 of the land dcN el pment code as follmvs: Sec. 138-20. - General provisions. (c)'1"he ROGO allocation syicm shall apply within the unincorporated area of the. county outside of the county, mainland, and such area, for purposcs hereof, has been divided into subareas as follmv,;: (1) upper Keys: the unincorporated area of the county north of Tavernier Creek and corporate limits of the Village of Islamorada (approximately mile marker 90). (2) Lo,,vur Keys: the unincorporated area of the count, from the corporate limits of the Village of Islamorada (approximately toile marker 72) south to the corporate limits of the City of Key West at Cow Kerr Bridge on U.S. i lighway I (approximately mile marker 4), excluding Big pine Key and No Name KLV, (3) Big Pine Key and No Name I cy: the islands of Big fine Key and No Name Key within unincorporated the county. Monroe County Code Sec. 138-24. Residential ROGO allocations...... (1) Yearly residential ROGO allocation ratio. Each subarea shall have its number of market rate residential ROGO allocations available per ROGO year. _affordable ROGt� allocations shall be available forcountywide allocation except for Big, Pine Key and No Name l�Cey. Tbc; amival allocations for Big Pinc Key- and No Nanic Key shall be eight market rate and two affordable duelling units. Monroc County Workforce llousing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 41 In the course of the assessment interviews and meetings, various studies and data sources were identifted on best practices from other yurisdictions and ideas developed or considered but not implemented by previous affordable housing task forces. These background papers can be found at. hti.l :f fconsensuti.Isu cluf 'cork c jcc l lcausin _s cssiucrit/ B. Workforce Housing Stakeholder Perspectives on the Process Going Forward Among the range of stakeholders interviewed, all expressed the need for a focused and comprehensive county -wide workforce housing dialogue that involved those with a stake in the outcome. Many believed that such a committee should develop a package of consensus recommendations, informed by data and the range of stakeholder and public perspectives, that can provide for both short and longer term actions for the hoard of County Commission's consideration. While some of those inter iewed remained skeptical that there ,,vill be sufficient "political will" to implement the Comn-uttee's recommendations as has been the case in the past, many believed that this was an urgent and timely issue for the County to address in light of hotel redevelopment and the economic upturn. As one stakeholder put it, "the re-establishing of the Affordable housing Com-ni.ttee is a goad step. Funding staff to work with it will be a measure of the commitment to effect real solutions. The mix of expertise, perspective and operating experience that the committee can bring to bear has great potential value. Ilowever, the community support and political will must be nurtured for difficult decisions on the demonstrated effective approaches of density, height and permanent protection and the mix of rentals and ownership." In the Ball of 2014, following the initiation of this Assessment, the Commission re- appointed members to the existing Affordable I -lousing Advisory Committee and with the thought of convening and charging them with addressing workforce housing issues and providing. the County Commission with its recommendations. The reconvened committee would review this assessment report and other data as it addressed its charge. A workforce housing committee, ad hoc or otherwise, appointed and charged by the County Commission to address workforce housing issues in the Florida Keys was explored in the assessment interviews. A significant number of those interviewed applauded the County Commission's action in re -purposing the existing Affordable Housing Advisory Committee to focus, at least in the short term, on workforce housing. It was suggested that this approach could provide representation from each District in the County, offer workforce housing perspectives from the public, private and nonprofit sectors, and mininuze confusion and any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing committee. might create. It was also pointed out that this charge would be consistent with the Committee's current mission to address affordable housing; opportunities in Monroe County for bode "residents and workforce." (empbam added) A workforce housing coru nittee, ad hoc.. or otherwise,. appointed and charged by the County C:omi- fission to address workforce housing issues in the Florida Keys was explored in the assessment interviews. A significant number of those interviewed suggested the County Morjre,c Couiiry Workforce Housing 5takcholder Asscssmcnt Report, April 2015 42 Commission should consider utilizing and re -purposing the existing affordable Housing Advisory Committee to focus at least in the short term on workforce housing." It was suggested that this would provide representation from each District in the County and minimize confusion and any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing committee might create in relation to the Affordable Dousing Advisory Committee. It was also pointed out that this would be consistent with the Committee's current mission to address affordable housing opportunities in Monroe County. The Ordinance also provides that, "The advisory committee may perform additional responsibilities related to affordable housing at the request of the BOCC, including creating best management practices for the development of affordable housing in the community." [2-701(c) ] The Commission should review the current Committee appointments to ensure that a balance of workforce housing stakeholder perspectives arc included in its membership. If the Conirmssion charges the Affordable Ilousing Advisor), Committee to develop consensus recommendations on workforce housing actions for consideration by the Monroe County BOCC, most stakeholders interviewed suggested there should be a sufficient range of stakeholder perspectives represented and participating in the consensus building, Tf' s would allow the Committee to develop informed workforce housing consensus findings and recommendations that stakeholders might support and the County Commission could act 13 upon. `there is a great deal of public and stakeholder interest in the workforce housing issues the Committee will take up. The membership requirements, as set forth in both Florida statute and the Monroe County Resolution, do not reference representation of the municipalities in the County, the military, the Monroe County School Board and perhaps other organizations impacted by Workforce housing policies and programs and with a stake in contributing to solutions to improve the availability of workforce housing in the Florida Keys.1` The format for the Committee meetings should encourage constructive public and stakeholder input. The Commission might consider charging the Committee with establishing an engagement strategy to involve a broader range of stakeholders in their development of findings and recommendations. This might be accomplished through opportunities for public input during their own meetings, as well as through Committee t' This would be consistent with their responsibility for developing every three years an affordable housing incentive recommendations report to the BOCC. The next triennial report will be due December 31 2017 1-The Current membership includes the following I 1 members: Sylvia Murphy, Monroe County BOC,t_,13spires 11/2015, "I'im Root, District 1, 1:1" pires I1./2016, Heather Roberts, 1-istriet 1, Expires 11/2016, James D. Cameron, District 2, l3xpires 11 /2018, Randy Wall, District 2, Expires 11 /2018, Warren I.,eamard, District 3, Expires 11 /201 G, Ken Naylor, District 3, Expires 11/2016,11ana Eskra, District 4, Expires 11/2018, Edwin Swift 11I, District 4, Expires 11 /2018, William Wiatt, District 4, Expires I 1 / 2016, Jim Saunders, District 5, Expires 11 /2016 and Stephanie Scuderi District 5, Expires 11 /2016. 14 httl :/.JrK4rzr.i �r3 "cxu> " e fll" i /I7octlr i: nt /IIGai J\ The membership follows the requirements of hlorida Statute 420-9076 and Monroe County Resolution 062-2009, and calls for representation from thane involved in affordable housing in: the residential home building industry from both a business and labor perspective„ the mortgage and banking industry, the real estate industry, an advocate for low income persons, a for profit and a not for profit provider of affordable housing, a representative of employers in the County and a member of the local lilaaning, and a representative of essential services personnel, Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessnicrit Report, April 2015 43 sponsored advisory tivorkgroups, joint workshops with municipal taskforces and city commissions, workshops at key moments in the development of options and recommendations, online surveys and other techniques. (See Appe dia%- # for Adr isot), Group process recowmendatio,ns). It was obsen-ed by many that an advisory committee developing; reconrunendations on workforce housing will require dedicated staff, including legal and planning expertise, and facilitation support for the Committee to do its work expeditiously. This is because of the complexity of the charge, the intense public interest in the issue, the linkages with other issues and programs and activities in the public, private and non-profit sectors, and the desire for timely actions to address the current workforce housing; challenges. The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners should review this assessment Report and charge the affordable 14ousinR Cominittee to focus its efforts in the coming; year on workforce housing. With a charge from the County Cornrrussion, the Committee should establish its procedures and approach and a schedule for meetings that would permit it to deliver back to the BOCC. its workforce housing recommendations by mid-2016. The Committee should consider. • Developing a shared vision of success; • Jointly defining the workforce problems faced in the Florida Keys; • Reviewing the range of issues and options identified in previous studies; • Reviewing the experience and lessons learned with successful workforce housing projects developed in the Keys to date; • Reviewing this Stakeholder assessment Report; and • Developing a package of consensus findings and recommended solutions for consideration by the .Monroe County Board of County Commission. This stakeholder assessment report confarans that there is wide agreement that Monroe County is facing a significant and growing workforce housing crisis with shortages for both affordable rental and ownership units. There is also agreement that no single strategy will solve this crisis. Instead the challenge ahead for Monroe County, and municipalities and the range of stakeholders interested in workforce housing, is to craft a balanced package of targeted options that have been refined through discussion and debate and that can serve as a consensus framework for addressing; and implementing; solutions. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessirrent Report, April 2015 44 Name Organization Position 1, Tony Allen Allen -Beyer Funeral Home Owner 2. Steven Auger Florida Housing Finance Corporation Executive Director 3, Debbie Swift Batty Historic Tours of America Director of Property Development 4. Jennifer Bennett Tourist Development Council Research Director 5- Kristen Brenner American Caribbean Real Estate Realtor G. Dustan Carpenter Divine Dining by Dusran Caterer 7. 1 leather Carruthers Mon -roe County Board of County Commissioners Commissioner, District 3 8. J. Manuel Castillo, Sr. Key West I lousing Authority EAecilfii)e Director 9. Harold Cates City of]fie y West Mayor 10. Don Craig City of Cy West Planning Director 11. Pornchal Davidson Naval Air Station, Key West Commander, Executive Officer 0 11 Ron Dernes Naval Air Station, Key West Special Asst. Advisor to the I 11 Commanding Officer 13. Brenda Edmonds Remax Realty, Marathon Realtor 14, Hana Eskra Gorman Development Inc. Florida Market President "t 15, Debra Farrell, 21,t Century Schwartz Realty Realtor 16. George Garrett City of Marathon Planning Director IT Roman Gastesi Monroe County Administrator 18. Karen Hamilton South Florida Regional Planning Council Regional Planner 19. Christine I lurley Monroe Coun Growth Management Division Director 20. Rebeccajetton Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Planner 21. Dertickjohnson Coco Plum Real Estate Realtor 22. Danny Kolhage Monroe County Board of County Commissioners Commissioner, District 1 (Mayor Pro Tenn) 23. Kurt Lewin First State Bank of the Florida Keys FIXeCUti%Te Vice President 24. Kara Lunqgren The Islamorada Resort General Manager 25. Ysela Llort Miami -Dade Transit Director 20. Capt. Steve McAlearney Naval Air Station, Key West Commanding Officer 27. Ashley Monnier Naval Air Station, Key West Community planning Liaison Officer 28. NaTICV Muller Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Tallahassee Policy & Special Programs Director 29, Jim Murley South Florida Regional Planning Council Executive Director 30. Sylvia Murphy Monroe County Board of County Commissioners Commission, District Five 31. Mark Moss habitat for I lumanity Key West Executive Director 32. Virginia Panico Key West Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice President 33. Mary Pecorino Coast to Coast Real Estate Group Realtor 34. Mark Porter Monroe County Schools Superintendent 35. Barbara Powell Florida Department of Economic Opporturijitv Planner Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 45 30. Dick Ramsey City of Marathon Mayor 37. Holly Raschein Florida Mouse of Representatives, District Representative 120 38. David Rice Monroc County Board of County Commissioner, District 4 Con-irnissioners 39. Mark Bison Citizen (eiwailewmevI) 40, 'Tim Root Mingo & Company CE-0, Corartiercial construction 41, Mark Rousch Monroe Couray, Land Authority Director 42. Mayte Santarnaria Growth Managernent, Monroe County, Assistant Director of planning Florida and Environmental Resources 43. Jim Saunders Bavview Land I)cvcl( T) ) & Peri-nitring Manager 44, Stephanie Scudcri _Lent flonic BancShares- Centennial Bank Senior VP, Director of Business Development 45. Jeff Sharkey The Capitol Alliance Group, Tallahassee CI 0 46. Jeff Sharp, Ray Frets, & Florida Keys Seahorse Park, I Iornewwner's Homeowners Seahorse Park Christy Crooks Association Big Pine Kev 47. Pritam Singh The Singh Company, Key West Dcvc1oper 48, Andrew Spann Mt, Carmel Communications, St. Louis, Real Developer F.'.statc Investment & Dci,clopmcnt 49. Tern, Strickland Yankee Freedom 11 Manager 50. I-,,d Swift I listoric Tours of America C 17 51, Lisa'Yennysori Monroe County 52. David Thoiripson Key Largo Developer 53. Sandy Tuttle American Caribbean Real Estate, Marathon Realtor and Lower Keys Assoc. of Realtors 54. Jodi Weinhofer The Lodging Association of the President Florida Keys & Key West 55. Donna Wit -idle Southeri-ir-nost Realty}, Ke)T West Realtor - Monroe County Workforce Housing Roundtable Participants, August 20'. 56. Debbie Swift Batty ST Richard Beal 58, heather Carruthers 59, J. Manual Castillo Sr. 60. Rita Cotter 61. Raymond Fries 62. Johnath-an Gueverra 63. Derrickjohnson 64. Amber Ernst -Leonard 65. Mark Moss 66. Jack Niedbalslu 67. Holly Rascheiti 68, David Rise 69. Timothy W. Root 70. Mark Rosch 71. Jim Saunders 72. Bob Shillinger historic Tours of America/Habitat for Humanity Skeeter's Marine Monroe BOCC (District 3 Commissioner) Key West and Monroe Co. I lousing Congressman Garcia's Office Florida Keys Seahorse Park Association Florida Keys Community College Marathon and LoNver Keys Assoc. of Realtors Florida Keys Community College I labitat for Humanity, Lower Keys and Key West I labitat for I lumanity, Upper Keys Florida I louse of Representatives AOCC Utility Board Keys EnQrgy/WorkfQrcQ Homing i-ncmbcr Monroe Co. Land ,Authority BaAw-lew Homes/Development Monroe Co. Attorney's Officc Monroe: Counry Workforce llouqing SrakeholdLr 1ssc4smcnt Report, April 2015 46 �;- , 73. Donna Sty ton 74. jeff Stuncard 75. Owen Trep-anier 76. Mark Warmouth 7T Tirn Wondeflin 78. Charles'fodd Young Morida DOH, Monroe Co, Village of Islamorada Trepanier and Associates, Inc. IndiVidual Advocate/Wells Fargo Bank I labitat for I lumanim-, Middle Kevs I Tabitat for Humanity, Middle Keys Monroe Counry Workforcc Housing Stikholder Assessn-ienv Report, April 2015 47 hM J-Z.oiisci-isus.f,,Li.edu/Workf-vcc-HOLIS'lI AFFORDABLE HOUSING STUDIES-FLORIDA Sadowski flousing Coalition Press Release, 2015 Report from the l,'Ior1da Ilousing Coalition, 2015 Out of Reach 2014: Florida Al-.,I('E Report: Study oC Financial I lardship 2014 United Way of Florida Monroe Couniv AtTordable Housing Dt�vclopments and Incentives DE-,kf�T3/25/2015 FCRC Consensus Center: Assessing A Workforce Tlousing Initiative, 2014 A],](-.P- Report: Study of Financial I lardship 2014 Monroe County FIXccrpt Monroe County 2014 Income I.Jmir,: and Rent Limits Florida I fousing Finance ("'orPoration Key West Data 43pdaics, 2012 :'affordable I lousing Advisory Committee, 2012 Ntonroc County I lous ng Needs Assesment, 2008 Islamorada —Workforce housing Support Study, 2007 ;lffi)rdable I I ousing Presentation, 2007 Affordable I lousing Background, 2006 Affordable I lousing Needs Assessment 2006 Report on Retaining Tourism Workers fl, 2006 Affordable Housing White Paper, Don Craig, City of Key West, 2014 I\Ionroc County and Acquisition and Man-agcmcnt Master Plan, 2006 Summary of Workforce flousing'Fask Force Recommendation',; 1, 2006 Summary of Workforce Ilousing'Fask Force Recommendations 11, 2006 Study of the Monroe County Tourism Workforce: Report can Retaining Tourism Workers, 2005 Florida Keys Strategy Paper, 2001 Operation Seamless, 2000 DCA GENERAL INFORMATION- MONROE COUNTY Monroe County Profile, 2012 Monroe County Population Projections 2010-2030,2011 11ousingand population Chart, 2010 MONROE COUNTY AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN Florld,a Keys Areas of Critical Concern, 2013 Florida Key,,Areas of Critical Concern, 2012 AFFORDABLE HOUSING- BEST PRACTICES AND TOOLS A [fordable I I o using Funding Sources, 2014 FHC Workforce I I o usingToo Is, 2009 Workforce I lousing Best Practices AFFORDABLE HOUSING- LOCAL MEDIA COVERAGE Video Iink: Key West Housing Crisis Part I -Video Video Link: Key West Housing Crisis Part 11 Video Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 48, , , Sec. 2-700. - Establishment of affordable housing advisory committee. (a) The affordable housing advisory committee shall be established and operational by June 30, 2008. It shall comply with all requirements in F.S. � 420.9076 (2007) or as subsequently amended. (b) The committee shall consist of 11 members who shall be appointed by the BOCC by resolution. (c) The committee must include; (1) One. citizen who is actively engaged in the residential horriebuilding industry in connection with affordable housing. (2) One citizen who is actively engaged in the banking or mortgage banking industry in connection with affordable housing. (3) One citizen who is a representative of those areas of labor actively engaged in home building in connection with affordable housing. (4) One citizen who is actively engaged as an advocate for flow -income persons in connection with affordable housing. (5) One citizen who is actively engaged as a for -profit provider of affordable housing. (0) One citizen who is actively engaged as a not -for -profit provider of affordable housing. (7) One citizen who is actively engaged as a real estate professional in connection with affordable housing. (8) One citizen who actively serves on the local planning agency pursuant to F.S. � 163.3174. (9) One citizen who resides within the jurisdiction of the local governing body making the appointments. (10) One citizen who represents employers within the jurisdiction. (11) One citizen who represents essential services personnel, as defined in the local housing assistance plan. (d) All meetings of the advisory coininittec are public meetings, and all committee records are public records. (e) Staff, adirainistrative, and facility support to the advisory committee shall be provided by the BOC:C. The advisory committee shall be cooperatively staffed by the local government department or division having authority to administer local planning or housing programs to ensure an integrated approach to the work of the advisory committee. (Ord. No. 014-2008, § 1) Sec. 2-701. - Duties of the affordable housing advisory committee. (a) The affordable housing advisory conu-nittee shall review established policies and procedures, ordinances, land development regulations, and the adopted local government comprehensive plan of the appointing local government and shall recommend specific actions or initiatives to encourage or facilitate affordable housing while protecting the ability of the property to appreciate in value, The recommendations may include the modification or repeal of exiting policies, procedures, ordinances, regulations, or plan provisions; the creation of exceptions applicable to affordable housing or the adoption of new policies, procedures, regulations, ordinances, or plan provisions, including recommendations to amend the local government comprehensive plan and corresponding regulations, ordinances and other policies. (b) By December 31, 2008, the affordable housing advisory committee is required to submit its Monroe County WorkForce Housing Stakcholdcr Asscssmc nt Report, April 2015 49 incentive recommendations report to the BOCC. After this initial submission, the reports are required to be submitted triennially on December 31, of the year preceding the submission of the local housing assistance plan. At a minimum, the advisory committee shall submit a report to the local governing body that includes recommendations on, and evaluates the implementation of, affordable housing incentives in the following areas: (1) The processing of approvals of development orders or permits as defined in F.S. 5 163.3164(7) and (8), for affordable housing projects is expedited to a greater degree than other projects; (2) The modification of impact fee requirements, including reduction or waiver of fees and alternative methods of fee payment for affordable housing; (3) The allowance of flexibility in densities for affordable housing; (4) The reservation of infrastructure capacity for housing for very loNv income, low income and moderate income persons; (5) The allowance of affordable accessory residential units in residential zoning districts; (6) The reduction of parking and setback requirements for affordable housing; (7) The allowance of flexible lot configurations, including zero -lot -line configurations for affordable housing; (8) The modification of street requirements for affordable housing, (9) The establishment of a process by which a local government considers, before adoptions, policies, procedures, ordinances, regulations, or plan provisions that increase the cost of housing; (10) The preparation of a printed inventory of locally owned public lands suitable for affordable housing; (11) The support of development near transportation hubs and major employment centers and mixed -use developments; (12) Other affordable housing incentives as recommended. (c) The advisor con-m-ittee may perform additional responsibilities related to affordable housing at the request of the BOCC, including creating best management practices for the development of affordable housing in the community. (Ord. No. 014-2008, g 1) Sec. 2-702. - Public hearing, The approval of the advisory committee of its local housing incentive strategies recommendations and its review of local government implementation of previously recommended strategies must be made by affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the advisory committee taken at a public hearing. Notice, of time, dates, and place of public hearing of the committee to adopt final local housing incentive strategies recommendations must be published in a newspaper of general paid circulation, must contain a short summary of the incentives strategies recommendations to be considered by the committee, and must state the public place where a copy of the tentative recommendations can by obtained by interested persons. (Ord. No. 014-2008, § 1) Sec. 2-703, - Commission action required. (a) Within 90 days after the date of receipt of the local housing incentive strategies recommendations from the advisory committee, but no later than March 31, 2009, the BOCC shall adopt an amendment to its local housing assistance plan (L11AP) to incorporate the local housing incentive strategies it will implement within its jurisdiction. The BOCC; trust consider all of the strategies specifcd in subsection2-701 as recommended by the committee.. (b) However, the amendment at a minimum, must include: (1) Assurance that permits for affordable housing are expedited to a greaten- degree than other protects. (,Permits" are defined by statute to include development orders, building permit, zoning permit, subdivision approval, rezoning, certification, special exception, variance, or any other official action of local government having the effect of permitting the development of land); (2) An ongoing process for rewietw of local policies, ordinances, regulations, and plan provisions that increase the cost of housing prior to their adoption and (3) A schedule for implementing the incentive strategies... b) By Mai, 2, 2009, the BOCC shall notify the Florida Housing Finance Corporation by certified snail of its adoption of the amended LHAP and include a copy of the approved amended plan. (Ord. No. 014-2008, 5 1) Mortroe Cowiry Workforce Housing stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 50 WORKFORCE HOUSING ROUNDTABLE August 25, 2014 Marathon, Florida Representative Holly Raschein, Florida House of Representatives District 120 Pcwia�czlis in the If%i force I lrer sin,g Routidtable were haired io pror ide comivents° for eonsideratiot) in tl)e 1F orkforce Hou iyig Assessi,venl being conducted by the I (,-RC C'on.re.�rsiis (.eaater at l-S'tl. Below isa list rof the re.95ondentr and lire conq5iled responsesfbrthe tl'om#ientfong gttealion.r- 1. Debbie Swift Batty Organization: Historic Tours of America/Habitat for Humanity 2. Richard Beal Organization: Skeeter's Marine 3. Heather Carruthers Organization: Monroe BOCC (District 3 Commissioner) 4. J. Manuel Castilla Sr., Organization: Key West and Monroe Co. Housing 5. Rita Cotter Organization: Congressman Garcia's Office 6. Raymond Fries Organization: Florida Keys Seahorse Dark Association 7. Derrick Johnson Organizations): Marathon and Lower Keys Association of Realtors, American Legion, Overseas Village Homeowners Association. 8. Johnathan Gueverra, Organization: Florida Keys Community College 9. Amber Ernst -Leonard Organization: Florida Keys Community College 10. Mark Moss Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Lower Keys and Key West 11. Jack Niedbalski Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Upper Keys 12. Holly Raschein Organization: Florida House of Representatives 13. David Rice Organization: Monroe County Commission 14. Mary. Rosch, Organization- Monroe County Land Authority 15. Timothy W. Root Organization: Member of Utility Board Keys Energy, Appointed member of Workforce Housing Committee by Commissioner Kohlage 16. Bob Schillinger Organization: Monroe Co. Attorney's Office 17. Donna Stayton Organization: Florida DOH, Monroe Co. 18. Jeff Stuncard Organization: Village of Islamorada 19. Jim Saunders Organization: Bayview Homes/Development 20. Owen Trepanier Organization: Trepanier and Associates, Inc. 21. Mark W armouth Organization: Individual Advocate/Wells Fargo Bank 22. Tim Wonderlin Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys 23. Chris Todd young Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys Monroe Count-• Workforce Housing; Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 51 P WHAT ARE IMPORTANT. ! WORKFORCE .: RO.: ! V ter! is rPorkiii • The I OO-)-car deed restriction. • Consideration of workforce housing. • Collection of affordable housing (in -line) fees. • When funded, Sadowski. • lilorida housing finance Corporation funding. Monroe County 40 funding. Ivey West housing authority and Munroe County I lousing Authority's management of government owned apartments. • T'ax-credit housing has made gains recently, particularly in the Upper Keys. Building has slowed over the past several years and presently, is proceeding but only at a n odcratc rate. • Land Authority — some,,vhat. • I'1'I''s (public private partnerships) • Our park provides for visitors accommodation and tourist revenues. • Ilabitat does well 'because they use partnerships and provide permanent housing. • Ilabitat for humanity. • Norman developments in Upper Keys. • New pro)ects on Stock Island. • Habitat for humanity-- he is one of the leading builders and renters of homes. They need more assistance froFn government to provide land to build. • Not enough information to know. • Not much, if anything. • Nothing. • Nothing! lI'%`ial' not? • Confusion on definitions. • financing, high costs • Cost of insurance. • Set up funds for new construction, first time home; buyers. • Sadowski fund --replenished for Monroe County. • Sadowski act funding. • Lack of triccntives for building affordable housing.. • More work, fewer people to do it, Workforce/affordable housing programs do not cover the full range of individuals struggling to afford to lire and work in the. Keys. • Insufficient collaboration and comprehensive county wide planning. • 1 don't see a strategic plan all encompassing of all entities. This confusing; topic must be simplified, and can be. • We need to figure out how to put the land authority/housing authority and bed tax money together and form development plan for affordable housing. • Workforce housing is not affordable for working people.. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder :lssessnient Report, April'_ti15 52 • Availability of housing to reduce out of pocket rental cost to less than 20% salary. Personally I am being priced out of housing as I do not qualify for affordable housing. My rent went u $350 in the past three years with 10 pay raises to offset. • Tourism/service jobs with low salaries. Wages insufficient for high cost of living, • Not enough housing. • Lack of availabilitAT. • Buildable land for affordable housing. • More second-horne owners eating up properties. • Limitations with non -tier 3 land • Regulations, density, height, • Length of permitting time, • State housing allocations, land development, Legislation to cut taxil-ig rates on affordable housing. • Corincalon with Job creators and requirements for housing. • Many affordable units historically approved had short-term (20 years) deed restrictions that are now expiring. • Prior developers have not developed workforce housing as required. • I I ousing for new businesses which require numerous ernployees. Identifying property to locate workforce housing and providing incentives to builders. Always bein91 as we are now, lagging behind the need. • Landlords are having to raise their rent as they incur more costs for their properties through tax increases, sewer, etc. • Needs to be split between rental and home ownership. Not a on -sire.-fits-all solution. • Availability of rentals. • I IGTV. • Affordable housing advisory corru-nittee, 2. WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE THE FUTURE HOLD FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY? W'bal are lbe,fliture Lhalleqgv,� lbal need to he addressed? • Affordable housing allocations. • Limited land/permitting. • Difficulty to get permits. • Finding a formula that functions as a continuum. One size fits all will not work. • Lack of land on which to build housing. • Land acquisition. There are less vacant buildable lots available each year. The market rate applications/construction is increasing rapidly. • Height ordinances • Higher cost for rental properties, wind and flood insurance, plus higher taxes. • Funding to offset housing costs, • County requirements to match funding sources (IJUD)_ • Lack of funds to subsidize or offer incentives. Ntoiiroe County Wofkforcc Housing Stakeholder Ass(�?:sniuiit Report, API-11 2015 53 • (:hanging state legislation to Land Authority and Housing Authorit}- money to be used for -,r-orkforcc housing. Using; our bed tax money for workforce housing. • Much of our current affordable housing is aging and not up to par for hurricanes which could lead to a future loss of workforce housing. • Ways to bring in ne'v workforce housing for those at the top of the wage spectrum. • Environmental regulations often "trump„ the ability to build. • Rising sea 1eNTels. • Insurance rates, • Tay:. rates, • The same as the past 15 nears. • Focus! We need heads down, rolled up sleeves, and accountability! Distinct set aside time and deliverables. lFheal are the ji urc (pporl;iniliee lhal should be Ieaennged? • Funding is increasing. • Land Authority movev. • Counties (municipalities) inclusionary housing requirements should be funded partly by business development with funding for employee/affordable housing.. • Sadowski fund --replenished for 1\4onroe County. Set up funds for new construction, first tirne home buyers. • Local, state; and federal funds. • State leverage for units to become allocated for affordable housing/workforce housing. • huge opportunities if we effectively link workforce housing to development and redevelopment projects. • Ilousing; units must be incorporated in new developments being constructed. • Require developers to build housing for the workforce. • As energy efficient technolom, becomes better and better it should be used to make new housing more affordable in the long; term, especially since electricity is not cheap. • Smoke free housing as an amenity for the health and safety of residence as a cost -saving benefit for refurbishing units. • Explore increasing height limit of structures and increase densities in certain zonings. Use state and federal land for large affordable projects. • Buildable land for affordable housing. • Density requirements. • Build up! Build near! Much of the KWILA properties are old, ugly, small and inefficiently sparse. Density needs to increase. • The greatest opportunity is the current threat to our sera ice economy. This threat has to be leveraged to bring this issue to the forefront. • Need to greatly increase the affordable workforce rentals. • ILousing requirements for conurturcial dc� elopinerit. • Rising flood and windstorm insurance rates, Monroe Coiinr4, Workforce Housing Std,eholdcs -issessn-rent Report, April 2015 54 kl, - Aly I fV,"Iial.rlralegie.k,,-I)oiildiA,Iojii-oo Couia), cwisider in. adfb-essi�g ivfwk .li)rre housin� issuesgoh�gfimpard? • Putting together a task force /con-irmittee. • Task force with staff (and legal support). Suggestions: * All transient unit development and re -development to be inclustOnati, housing ordinance, or impact fee assessment. * Add commercial development and redevelopment based on employees /square feet (use industry standards and sales tax codes) for an impact fcc assessment. * Fund the Monroe County Housing Authority or other similar successful organizations to build workforce housing. * Implement a ROGO transfer ordinance whereby a market rate unit may be dislodged if an affordable unit replaces the dislodged market rate. ci Issue no market rate ROGO units for multi -unit development projects, instead, issue "affordables" and require developers to take the affordable units and deed restrict existing market rate properties and then dislodge the market rate for use elsewherc as their market rates. • Use land authority money or impact fees to buy down interest rates for development costs for work force housing projects. I in districts within 1 • Increased density' i appropriate zoning distri ts w'th' commercial areas to facilitate workforce housing. • Increase height in appropriate areas. • Special considerations for landlords to make rental units affordable, while monitoring them to verify affordability. • Again, un4ing developers, county and Key West city, government representatives and Ending; funding strearns for us to define land acquisitions, builders to build on this land, and the Mousing Authority to oversee these affordable units. • Offer additional subsidies or incentives. County -wide effort to identify and acquire property. to build. • Work with DI O to increase ROGO allocations. • Leveraging all resources. • Many need more space. • ]-,'ocus all tier-3 properties ou,,,,orkforce housing, • Give commercial properties that are used for workforce rental the same tax and insurance (flood) breaks as primary homestead properties. • Focus land acquisition on workforce housing properties. • Provide funding for nonprofit affordable housing entities. • Develop a comprehensive plan that also deal with density and height restrictions, • Create a strategy. There is no 1 year, 5 year, 10 year plan. Set goals, Consider "Outside the box" ideas. • Keep our unique parks. • Adding to the planning smoke free amenity to curb costs in renovation. it is a CDC best practice for reducii-ig secondhand smoke and it's related to chronic health issues. Monroc County Workforce Housing Srakcholdcr Assessvnent Report, April 2015 55 From: Mike Rison <dfcmike (riserv.net> Subject: Re: Article in Key West Citizen regarding Affordable Housing Monroe County Date: August 28,2014 11:28:02 AM EDT To: Bob Jones I was reading an article in the Key West Citizen regarding "Affordable Housing" and your name was mentioned soliciting Citizen comment,-,. I would like to submit a comment about the "Affordable flousing" issue in Monroe County. Please suggest the best way to submit a comment. I might suggest same background information that could form the basis for your continued study of this issue. As follows: The only place there is an "Affordable I lousing" issue in the Florida Keys (Monroe. County) is Key AVcst). That pressure is caused by 2 by 4 mile Island with 22,000 permanent residents that welcome,.; 2,000,000 Visitors per year. To service those 2,000,000 Visitors Key West has approximately 7000 lodging units. In most areas across the country prices flow percentage wise from the cost of residential housing (for many different reasons) in the case of Key West because the Tourist Development Council has clorie such a spectacular job of enticing visitors to visit Key West all pricing flows from the room rates of lodging. Consider this; a company was formed to purchase 4 old and aging hotels, closed them down, spent 3 year,,-, re -constructing them and will soon add 700 additional rooms to the lodging supply! The first thing that appears necessary is a fee on all Lodging to build "Affordable (lousing" for all working people as almost everyone in Key West is impacted by these huge numbers to support the Lodging Industry. A solution put forward by (probably by Developers) was to provide cheap transportation to areas of Monroe County that have cheap housing costs, like Florida City. So enter the Lower Key-, Shuttle (Key West to Marathon, S2.00), The Upper Keys Shuttle (Marathon to Florida City S0.50 with a transfer). So for a maximum $2.50 you can ride anywhere between mml and mm120,120 miles the only problem is you could spend 2-4 hours on an air conditioned bus each way every, day. All subsidized by the Federal Government with no cost borne by the recepientant,% of this great service. I have personally spent about 54.50 to ride to Fort Lauderdale International Airport (the Senior price). That's the Lower Keys Shuttle, The Upper Keys Shuttle, #38 Busway, The Metro Rail, The Tri Rail, free shuttle to Fort Lauderdale Int. Airport. Also as printed in the news paper your e-mail address is listed incorrectly (ra* e li t. ) that last dot after edu will cause an e-mail program to "choke". This may be your first indication of how the "powers that be" try to impede your work while still appearing to support the idea of Citizen input! If you need a copy I have included as an attachment a copy of the Citizen containing your e-mail address as printed in the Citizen. Regards MR dfcmikc.(_—evi nut Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 56 Affordable I Lousing White Paper- Donald Craig, AICP Director of Planning & Nicole Malo AlCP,PIanner, September 2014 City of Key West; "est mcetin J�)Z2491 A CiLy Commission 14- 10- ---- -- - ---- L (17 cc _FLI I I)ctail.ndf Monroe County Workforce I lousing Stakeholdcr Assessment Report, April 2015 1 57 There was a request for a sample of protocols that the Board of County Csonuxussion and any corm -mace they charge with addressing workforce housing might consider as they develop the charge and organize the Committee's efforts. These are based on protocols developed and used by a variety of local , regional and statewide committees that have been charged with seeking; consensus on policy options. CONSENSUS Defining Consensus Consensus is a deliberative process where a group seeks a shared understanding of a problem considers and evaluates all options and strives to achieve a practical agreement that all can live with. Consensus means that, to the extent possible, each member comnn'ts to work toward agreements that meet their own and other members needs so that all can support the outcome. Consensus is a process, an attitude and an outcome. Consensus processes have the potential of producing better quality, more informed and better -supported outcomes. As a process, consensus is a problem solving approach in which all members: 1. _Jointly share, clarify and distinguish their concerns, 2. Educatc each other on substantive issues, 3. Jointly develop alternatives to address concerns; and then; 4. Seek to adopt recommendations everyone can embrace or at least live with. In a consensus process, members should be able to honestly say: • I believe that other members understand my point of view; • I believe I understand other members' points of view, and • Whether or not I prefer this decision, I support it because it was arrived at openly and fairly and because it is the best solution we can achieve at this time. Consensus as an attitude means that each member commits to work toward agreement~ that meet their own and other member needs and interests so that all can support the outcome. Consensus as an outcome means that agreement on decisions is reached by all members or by a significant majority of members after a process of active problem solving;. In a consensus outcome, the level of enthusiasm for the agreement may not be the same among all members on an)' issue, but on balance all should be able to live with the overall package. Levels of consensus on a committee outcome can include a mix of: • Participants who strongly support the solution; • Participants who can "live with" the solution; and, Monro c County- Workforce l lousing Stakeholder Assemnent Rcport, April 2015 58 Some participants who do not support the solution but agree not to vote against it. SUCCE'SSFkJL MEETINGS Successful Meetings Overview A successful meeting is a collaboration bet -wren members, staff, chair, facilitator, consultants (if relevant) and affected stakeholder interest groups. Consensus -based processes and decisions, developed working with diverse stakeholder interests affected by the issue(s), takes time to educate members' on the range of issues and possible solutions. Members have different levels of expertise and knowledge on the issues and require different levels of preparation and education ("getting tap to speed") before they are prepared to evaluate options and make: decisions. This is especially relevant to consensus -based decisions that strive for unanimity, or at a minimum a 75% level of support. In consensus -based processes one is not dealing with a simple majority decision requirement, instead the full range of issues and options are evaluated with the goal of ensuring stakeholder interests are addressed to the extent possible, and at a nainunum are fairly considered. The reality is that consensus decisions, once reached, are durable, efficacious, long-lasting, and will have achieved the support of most if not all of the stakeholder interests affected by the issue(s). A meeting will be successful to the extent that staff, chair, facilitator(s) and project consultants plan meetings and meeting objectives, ensure members receive relevant materials, and design and prepare agenda packets, worksheets, surreys, and summary reports sufficiently in advance of meetings. A meeting will be successful to the extent that members' review materials, study the issues, consult with constituent stakeholders between meetings, complete pre and between meeting assignments, and prepare prior to the meetings. If there are documents and/or information members believe should be evaluated they should let chair/staff/facilitator know. Similarly, if there arc meeting objectives and/or agenda items member's think should be added to the agenda, they should identify them during; "Agenda Review" and during; the "Next Steps" phase of each meeting where next meeting agenda items are requested. In summary, meeting success is a group effort requiring collaboration, cooperation, planning, commitment, time and resources. It is the responsibility of staff, chairs, facilitators, consultants, members, stakeholder groups, and the: public to ensure meetings are productive and successful. In short, it is "our" responsibility. C 0 NSF 'uss- Bu I LDING AND DECISION -MAKING PROCEDURES The Monroe County Affordable Rousing Committee (Committee) will seek consensus on ,guidance and recommendations to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) The Committee's consensus building and decision making process is participatory, on matters of substance, the members will jointly strive for agreements which all of the members can accept, Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 59 support or at least agree not to appose. In instances where, after vigorously exploring possible ways to enhance the members' support for the final decision on an issue or package of advisory recommendations, and where 100% acceptance or support is not achievable, final recommendations of the Committee ,will require at least a 750o favorable vote of all members present and voting. This super majority decision rule underscores the (committee's view of the importance of seeking consensus. In the event the Coininittee can not reach consensus (75% in favor) on a decision, a minority report may be requested immediately following the vote, describing the rationales and preferences of those dissenting, to be included in the meeting summary report. The Committee will make advisory recommendations only when a quorum is present. A quorum shall be constituted by at least S1°o of the appointed members being; present (simple majority). The Committee will utilize Robert's Rules of Order, as modified by the C:oirunittee's adopted consensus guidelines and procedures, to male and approve motions; however, flee 75" o supermajority voting requirement will supercede the normal voting requirements used in Robert's Rules of Order for decision making on substantive motions and amendments to motions. In addition, the Committee will utilize their adopted meeting guidelines for conduct during meetings. The Committee will make substantive advisory recommendations using their adopted facilitated consensus -building procedures, and will use Robert's Rules of Order only for formal motions once a facilitated discussion is completed. The Committee's facilitation team, in general, should use parliamentary procedures set forth in Robert's Rules of Order, as modified by Committee's adopted procedural guidelines. Any voting member may make a motion when a quorum is present, and after a thorough discussion. A second is required to discuss the motion. If a motion is seconded, the Facilitator will open the floor for discussion. The Facilitator will recognize members swishing to speak on the motion. The Facilitator will, if time permits, recognize other participants wishing to speak on the motion. The facilitator may elect or be requested by the member making the motion to take a "straw poll" on the motion. Based on the result, the Facilitator may table the motion with the agreement of the member moving it, pending further discussion. The member making the motion may accept friendly amendments to the motion. After completing discussion, the Facilitator will call the discussion to a close and restate the motion, with any friendly amendments, and call for a vote. If the motion receives a 751 o or more favorable vote of the members present and voting it will be approved. EMBER's SOLI: Prepare for meetings. Review documents and background material prior to meetings. Deep to the agenda and meeting procedural polices and guidelines. ✓ The Committee process is an opportunity to explore possibilities. Offering or exploring an idea does not necessarily imply support for it. ✓ Listen to understand. Seek a shared understanding even if you don't agree. v'' Be focused and concise —balance participation & minimize repetition. Share the airtime. ✓ book to the facilitator(s) to be recognized. Please raise your hand (or tent card) to speak. ✓ Speak one person at a time. Please don't interrupt each other. V Focus on issues, not personalities. `UsmA insult instead of argzament is the sign of ca s;null N)Md ✓ Avoid stereotyping or personal attacks. ` vlud Ibi-o2m is Aroaand lost. " Monroe County Workforce Housingu Stakeholder Assessment Deport, April 201-5 60 ✓ To the extent possible, offer options to address other's concerns, as well as your own. J Participate fully in discussions, and complete meeting assignments as requested. V Represent and communicate with member's constituent group(s). Refrain from using electronic devices during the meetings; Keep electronic devices turned off or silent. FACILITATOR'S ROLE (RC(FCRC Consensus Center Ca,' `SST) ✓ Design and facilitate a participatory Committee process. ✓ Ensure- a fair process during which all perspectives are considered. Enhance the opportunity for consensus building encouraging constructive discussions among the members. V Assist the Committee to build consensus on advisory recommendations. v' Assist participants to stay focused and on task. ✓ Assure that participants follow ground rules. v/ Prepare agenda packets and provide meeting summary reports. MONROE COUNTY STAFF ROLE ✓ Respect meeting process and guidelines. MEMBERS S OF THE PUBLIc RoL ✓ Respect meeting process and guidelines. ✓ Provide input during provided public comment opportunities. ✓ Consult and provide input to their representative stakeholder members to enhance the efficacy of the process. GUI F1..1NES FOR BRAINSTORMING Speak when recognized by the Facilitator(s)- Offer one idea per person without explanation. No comments, criticism, or discussion of other's ideas. +� Listen respectively to other's ideas and opinions. Seek understanding and not agreement at this point in the discussion. THE NAMS` ACKING PROCESS ✓ Determines the speaking order. +r Participant raises hand to speak (or raise name tent). Facilitator(s) will call on participants in turn. ✓ Facilitator(s) may interrupt the stack (change the speaking order) in order to promote discussion on a specific issue or, to balance participation and allow those who have not spoken on an issue an opportunity to do so before others on the list who have already spoken on the issue. GuIf1ELIi' ES FOR RE -PORTS AND PRESENTATIONS ✓ Facilitator introduces presenter. ✓ Hold all questions until report or presentation is complete, unless invited by the speaker. V Facilitator stacks names. ✓ Facilitator calls on members to speak, Clarifying questions only. (For discussions, see guidelines below.) Monroe C:ountV Workforce I-Iousing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 61 UIDELINES 1`0It DiscussiONS AND PROPOSALS V Facilitator guides process. ✓ Meeting guidelines remain in effect. ✓ Facilitator stacks names. ✓ Proposal is presented (no comments or discussion). ✓ Clarifying questions are taken (no comments or discussion of the proposal). ✓ Discussion of proposal (focus on issues, refine proposal, and consensus building;). v' Consensus/Acceptability ranking as needed. ✓ Facilitator rests for consensus with a motion to approve and a vote. ACCEP'1'AB11-ITY RAN1tiING SCAI-E During the meetings, members will be asked to develop and rank options, and following; discussion and refinement, may be asked to do additional rankings of the options if requested by members and staff. Please be prepared to offer specific refinements or changes to address your reservations. The following scale will be utilized for the ranking exercises: ACCEPTABILITY 4= Acceptable, 3= Acceptable, 2= Not Acceptable, l = Not RANKING I agree I ap ve ivillr minor I don't agree unless major .acceptable SCALE reservations reservations addressed PRIORITIZATION RANKING SCALD; 5 Highest Level of Priority; Urgent 4 High Priority 3 Moderate Level of Priority 2 Low bevel of Priority 1 Lowest Possible Priority, Committee Should not Pursue Topic RANK � 4 3 2 1' ItAvv AvERA 1 1 $c�R� AGENDA SUBMITTAL AND CONSIDERATION PROCEDURES All agenda items must be subrnitted by close of business ten (10) days prior to the next scheduled Committee meeting. The staff "Vill review a proposed agenda item for a determination of whether the issue falls under the charge of the Committee. Staff will notify the member proposing the agenda item of the determination whether the issue will be placed on the Committee's next agenda. Committee members will receive all proposed agenda items and supporting documentation at least seven days prier to the next scheduled Committee meeting. No new agenda iterns will be considered at the Con nittee meeting with the exception of those issues raised by the staff that have been determined to require iminediate Committee action, or by the unanimous (100%) approval of a quorum of the Committee through the Chair. Monroe County Workforce Hmzsing Stil,-eholder Assessment Report, April 2015 62 Agenda items that meet submittal criteria and arrive after the established deadline will be placed on the next regularly scheduled Con-imittee meeting agenda. Based on number of agenda items the Facilitator, in consultation .with the Chair, may allocate a specific amount of time for each agenda item. The Committee by a 75 o favorable vote may discuss requested agenda items not meeting the submittal criteria requirements but may not tape any formal action on the issue until the next scheduled Committee meeting. Special meetings may be called by the staff in consultation with the Chair, based on urgency and necessity for immediate action. AGENDA t:NDA ITEro,1 SUBMITTAL CRITERIA. Agenda item must be submitted 10 days prior to regularly scheduled Committee meeting;. Proposed agenda item must clearly state the action requested of the Committee. If applicable, proponent should provide exact ordinance, rule or statutory references that the proposal addresses. Proponent should provide all necessary supporting documentation required for Comrmittcc and staff to determine the merits of the request. Proponent must indicate that they have not requested any additional actions on the proposed agenda items such as an administrative hearing or declaratory statement. Proponent must provide the following; contact and agenda information:. CONTACT INFORMATION Name: Organization/Re resentation: Address: Phone and Fax Numbers: E-Mail Address: Date Submitted: AGENDA ITEM INFORMATION Date of Committee Meeting: Name of Presenter: Representation of Presenter: Agenda Item Tide: Amount of Time Requested: Rationale for Agenda Item: S ecitic Action Requested: Background Documentation: 1. Facilitator introduces the agenda item/proposal. 2. Proponent states the action requested and provides rationale for proposal. Monroe County Workforce 1lousing Stakehnider Assesssraent Report, April 2015 63 3. Facilitator asks Committee members only for clarifying questions (a clarifying question addresses a specific point that is not understood, and should not indicate support or opposition to the proposal). 4. After questions, the facilitator opens the issue up for discussion. All Committee members and Staff wishing to speak raise their naive tents and be acknowledged by the. Facilitator prior to speaking. Committee approved meeting guidelines are in effect at all times. FOR PROPOSALS (issues requiring Committee action): Following Cominittec member's preliminary discussion, the facilitator asks if any members of the public wishes to address the Committee on the current issue under Collhm'ttee consideration. The he facilitator serves as a moderator for public input. The facilitator asks for those who wish to speak in favor of the proposal or topic under discussion to offer brief comments, others who wish to spear in favor will be asked to offer new points or simply state agreement with previous speakers. The same opportunity and requirements will be offered for thosee who wish to speak in opposition to the proposal or topic under discussion. The facilitator ensurers that all views are expressed and sinvlar views are not repeated. Members may, through the facilitator or chair, ask clarifying questions to members of the public offering comments. The facilitator or chair may limit public comment to three (3) minutes per person. This process will be used for substantive Committee issues and not for procedural matters before the Committee. FOR DISCUSSION ISSUES (no formal action required): Following Committee member's preliminary discussion, the facilitator asks if any members of the public wishes to address the Committee on the current issue under Committee consideration. The facilitator serves as a moderator for public input. Members of the public will be provided one opportunity to comment per discussion agenda item, and may be limited to three (3) minutes. Members may, through the facilitator or chair, ask clarif�ling questions to members of the public offering comments. This process is used for Committee substantive issues and not for procedural matters before the Cfoinmittee. FOR PROPOSALS AND DISCuSSION ISSUES (Substantive Agenda Items): After discussion and public comment, a Committee member may make a motion for an action on the issue. If there is a second to the motion, the facilitator will call for discussion. Once a motion is made and seconded the discussion will be restricted to only Coninjittee members unless the facilitator or chair requests specific clarification from the staff or a member of the public. Members may request specific clarification from a member of the public through the facilitator/chair. A member may wish to second a motion for the purpose of Committee discussion and not necessarily as a show of support for the motion. If the motion involves an option that the public has already commented on, then the note is taken, if the proposed action (motion) is materially different from what was discussed, an additional opportunity should be provided for public comment, and then the Committee votes on the motion. Only motions to approve will be considered. There will be no motions to disapprove. If there is no motion after discussion or a motion with no second, the requested action is not approved. Monroe County Workforce I Jouging Stakeholder Assessment Rcport, April 2015 64 MEETING PROCESS PROC EDURES • Facilitator introduces each agenda item. • Proponent/ Presenter provides overview, rationale for proposal, and any requested action. • Clarifying questions from members (i.e. something you don't understand). Names stacked (raise name tents). • Committee begins discussion only after all questions are answered. • General discussion by Committee members. When appropriate: Facilitator asks if any members of the public Xvishes to address the Committee on the current issue; under Committee: consideration. Facilitator asks for those who wish to speak in favor of the proposal or topic under discussion to offer brief comments, others who wish to speak in favor will be asked to offer new points or simply state agreement with previous speakers. • The same opportunity and requirements will be offered for those who wish to speak in opposition to the proposal or topic under discussion. • Facilitator ensures that all views are expressed and similar views are not repeated. • Facilitator may instruct members of the public to avoid repeating points, and encourage them to sutmmarize key points and to submit lengthy prepared statements into the record that will be included in the meeting summary (instead of reading them). When appropriate: Members of the public will be provided one opportunity to comment and may be limited to three (3) minutes. • Members may, through the facilitator or chair, ask clarifying questions to members of the public offering comments. • After public comment, facilitator calls for members' discussion and stacks names of members ;wishing to speak. Members explore the pros and cons of all options prior to making a formal motion. Any voting; member may make a motion when a quorum is present which will require a second. • If a motion is seconded, the facilitator opens the floor for discussion. The Facilitator will recognize members wishing to speak on the motion. ° Committee votes on the motion. Once a motion is on the floor discussion is restricted to Committee members except as allowed by the facilitator or chair for purposes of clarification. • For Committee members offering a second, is it understood that they may be seconding for purposes of discussion, and not necessarily due to agreement with tile motion. • Committee members may offer friendly amendments. If accepted by maker of the motion, the friendly amendment becomes a part of the motion currently under discussion. • lit order to get a "read" on a motion, the Facilitator may elect or be requested by the member making the motion to take a "strati poll" on the motion. Eased on the result, the Facilitator may suggest to the member moving that they withdraw or table the motion pending further discussion. ° Comnuttee. members may offer an amendment to the motion: second required, discussion, vote on the amendment only. • The motion on the table is now the motion as amended (if amendment was accepted by the mover and approved by 75° o or greater of the Committee). After completing discussion, the Facilitator will call the discussion to a close and restate the motion, with any friendly amendments or approved amendments, and the Facilitator will call for a vote. If the motion receives a 750 o or greater favorable vote of the Committee members it will be deemed approved.. Mooroe County Workforce Flousing Stakeholder Assessment ];deport, April 2015 65 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCEDURES POLICY PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES: Public comment opportunities provided during Committee meetings are for comments only. The public is also encouraged to provide their comments in writing using; the Public Comment Forms to ensure accuracy. All written and or electronic comments will be included as in the Facilitator's Summary Report. Public comment provided orally during meetings will be summarized and included in the facilitator's Summary Deport. TIME LIMITS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT POLICY: The minimum time allowed per person wishing to comment is three (3) minutes and the maximum is fire (5) minutes. The facilitator will check for the number of people wishing to comment and the amount of time left in the meeting, and poll Con-jiluttee inembers for the amount of time they prefer to allow for each person wishing to comment from three (3), four (4) or five (5) minutes. PUBLIC OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD POLICY: The. Committee will provide a regularly scheduled general public comment opportunity at each Committee meeting. In addition, the public will be provided an opportunity to Comment prior to the Comi-nittee voting on substantive policy matters (actions that are not procedural or ministerial in content). If a decision is to be made over the course of multiple meetings (i.e., discussed at one meeting and voted on at another meeting) the public will be allowed an opportunity to spear on the issue during the regularly scheduled Public Comment opportunity. If a decision is to be made at the same meeting where the issue is first discussed the public -will be provided an opportunity to speak. after Committee discussion but before a vote is taken. If there are a large number of individuals wishing to speak from the same group, the Committee Chair and facilitator may decide to require representatives of groups to speak on behalf of their respective ,groups, rather than all members of a group speaking. The group shall elect one person to speak on their behalf and notify the Committee of their selected representati3=e prior to public comment. PROCEDURE FOR REQUESTING TO INTAKE PRESENTATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE: Members of the public wishing to make a presentation to the Committee should contact their constituent stakeholder representative on the Cornrnittee. If the Committee member agrees that the presentation is relevant and beneficial to the Committee they will discuss the presentation with staff, and staff will review the presentation for relevance, accuracy of data, and balance of perspective and if deemed beneficial to the Committee, they will present the request to the Committee for their consideration. If the Committee is interested in having the presentation it will be scheduled for a. subsequent meeting with appropriate time set for the agenda per agenda submittal policy. DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION TO COMMITTEE PROCEDURES: Members of the public wishing to distribute information to the Committee should provide the information to the facilitator or staff in electronic format for distribution to the Committee. Monroe County Workforce (lousing Stakeholder Assessment Report, April 2015 66 COMMITTEE MEETING ATTENDANCE POLICY Any members of the Committee who fails to attend two consecutive regularly scheduled meetings will be contacted by staff to determine why the member was not able to attend and if the member still wishes to sere on the Committee. If the member cannot demonstrate his or her absence was for good cause, which includes but is not limited to personal or family illness or military service, or no longer wishes to serve on the Committee, Staff will request the member submit a written resignation from the Committee to their appointing member of the County Corninission. If the member refuses to resign, the Committee will recommend to the board that the member's appointment be terminated and a new member be appointed as a replacement. COMN11TTEE ADOPTED GuimNc PRINCIPLES 1. The Cornniittee will adhere to their charge and purpose by providing advisory recommendations to the County Commission 2. The Committee will strive to achieve consensus on the evaluation and development of substantive advisory recommendations submitted to the County Commission. 3. The Committee will operate under adopted policies and procedures that are clear and concise, and consistently and equitably applied. 4. Committee members will seine as liaisons between the stakeholder groups they have been appointed to represent on the Committee, and they should strive to both inform and seek input on issues the Committee is addressing from those they represent. MEETING FREQUENCY POLICY The Committee shall agree on a workplan and schedule consistent with meeting its charge at its organizational meeting. Additional meetings may be called by the Staff or Committee chair as required. ABSENTEE COXIT,111 ITEE, MEXIBE CCU AMEN-r POLICY Any member of the Committee who wishes to have their comments/opinions read into the record at a meeting they will not be able to attend, may send their written comments by e-mail to the Facilitator and the Staff. The member should identify the agenda item(s) that the comment(s) pertains to. The Facilitator will read the absentee member's comments into the record during the discussion portion of the specific agenda item the member is commenting on, and the tnernber's comments will be included in the: Facilitator's meeting summary report. The Committee member may only make one comtinent per agenda item, and each comment will be limited to a maximum of fivc-hundred (500) words. CHAIR ELEcTiON POLICY The Committee will elect a chair from within the existing membership, who will serve in that position for a one-year term. The Chair will work with the facilitator to moderate the Committee meetings. Monroe County Workforce dousing Stakeholder tlsscssrnent Report, April 2015 67 `T acilitating Consensus Solutions, Supporting Collaborative .Action. The Florida State University Morgan Building, Suite 236 2035 Fast Paul Dirac Drive Tallahassee, FL 32310 Phone: (850) 644-6320 Fax: (850) 644-4968 http: //consensits.fsu.edu The FCRC Consensus Center serres as an independent public resourr faailitratiq consensus solulims and mi sorting collaborative action. The Consensus tenter, based at Florida State University in Tallahassee and University of Central Florida in Orlando, provides consensus building and collaborative planning services, education, training and applied research. Through our work, we strive to build a broader understanding of the. value of collaborative approaches and create a cadre of leaders, professionals, managers, stakeholders and students skilled iia using collaborative consensus building processes to produce and implement solutions. The tenter offers neutral technical assistance to a wide range of public and private organizations, professionals, agency staff and private citizens engaged in collaboration on public and organizational challenges throughout Florida and the country. We help to design and implement efforts for strategic planning and public problem -solving. We have substantial experience assisting with a range of stakeholder collaborations on topics such as building codes, land use, water resources, environmental, energy, airspace. Contact us ;f you'd like to explore utilizing a collaborative approach and the Center's services. Robert M. Jones, Director FCRC Consensus Center r jora�s� st�..�t�1i Monroe County Workforce Ho tising Stakeholder Assessmcnt Report, April 2015 68 I t Gq .14 �abl i C' *M'ck� Last Stand Comments to the BOCC May 18, 2016 Agenda Item Q.4 Presented by Deb Curlee, Vice -President Last Stand opposes this Resolution to change the Tier designation of the Seahorse/Longstock property on Big Pine Key through a map amendment. Instead, we request that you consider an alternate process: a text amendment to the Master Plan, which would allow affordable housing in Tier II parcels on Big Pine Key. Let us be clear: Last Stand is not opposed to this affordable housing project. In fact, we support more affordable housing — on Big Pine and throughout the Keys. However, we are opposed to using the map amendment process to accomplish even this laudable goal. We too along with the DEO are concerned about triggering unintended consequences. There are eleven federally -listed Endangered and Threatened Species on Big Pine and No Name Keys. The Habitat Conservation Plan (or HCP) and Incidental Take Permit (or ITP) were developed after eight years of study, model testing, analysis, peer review, and public meetings. The resulting assignment of Tier designations on Big Pine and No Name was done deliberately and differently than in the rest of Monroe County. The amount of vegetation on a given parcel was only one factor in six. All of the Tier criteria were based on solid science and considered the entire Big Pine and No Name area — as a unique, contiguous project unit. When we look at that extensive scientific process, we understand why the subject property, and so many like it on Big Pine and No Name, came to be designated Tier I — despite the fact that some of those properties were fairly developed and had less hardwood hammock than some other Tier I parcels. Last Stand believes that the Tier I designation at Seahorse — and all those properties surrounding it that were also designated as Tier l — was not made in error. It Because of our concern about negative effects on Endangered Species' habitat from the additional clearing allowed on Tier III properties, we consulted Attorney Henry Morgernstem, who was actively involved in all eight years of the HCP/ITP process. He believes it would require a full NEPA review to make the proposed changed from Tier I to Tier III, and he is prepared to argue that. Based on Mr. Morgenstern's opinion, Last Stand thinks that the Big Pine and No Name area should continue to be looked at as a single project unit, or serious questions will arise as to whether the ITP is being followed. Last Stand believes that relying on a map amendment for the Seahorse/ Longstock project would set an unfortunate precedent, opening the floodgate for hundreds of requests for similar, individual map amendments. This would over- burden staff and possibly trigger actions by the US Fish and Wildlife Service that would problematic. Accomplishing a minor text amendment to the Master Plan would allow orderly redevelopment of Tier II properties for affordable housing, and neither impact ROGO nor move the US Fish and Wildlife Service to require re -opening the involved HCP and ITP process. For the BOCC to keep its decision -making power, maintain orderly control of Tier changes and advance the Seahorse project (and other affordable housing) on Big Pine, we respectfully request that you direct staff to explore the text amendment process to allow affordable housing in Tier II on Big Pine. Thank you. /1 V 4- Alicia Roemmele-Putney 215o No Name Drive No Name Key, FL 33043-5202 (305) 872-8888 May 18, 2016 Re: May 18, 2016 BOCC Meeting — Key West, Florida, Agenda Item Q-4 Public Hearing: Sea Horse RV Campground, Big Pine Key Proposed Tier Designation Change from Tier III to Tier I Dear Mayor Carruthers and Fellow Monroe County Commissioners: The Key Deer Protection Alliance (KDPA) has been involved with this proposed Tier Designation change on Big Pine Key beginning with the Development Review Committee. We voiced our strong opinion against the proposed changed on the grounds that the property was correctly designated as Tier I; and, that because the Tier designations of Big Pine Key and No Name Key are based on the science of the HCP, they cannot be changed without amending the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). All of the land surrounding the Sea Horse RV Campground property is correctly designated as Tier I. There was no mapping error. The only properties on Big Pine Key that are designated as Tier III are canal lots or parcels along US-1. (See Proposed Figure 2.1, page 6 of staffs "Background Information and Relevant Prior County Actions.") In your packet you will find: i.) A letter from Attorney Lee Morgenstern stating that in order to change a Tier designation on Big Pine Key, the Habitat Conservation Plan would have to be amended. This is based upon the fact that the tier designations for Big Pine Key and No Name Key were based on the Key deer studies done for the HCP, and the resulting spatial model, which determined each property's H-value. (See page 6 of staffs "Background Information and Relevant Prior County Actions.") 23M 2.) A letter from Roel Lopez providing the H-values of the subject parcels, which ranged from 0.000176 to o.000188 (per to x to meter cell.) The average H-value of Tier II lands is 0.000183, which falls between the range of the H-values for the Seahorse RV and Campground's parcels. 3.) A letter from the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) objecting to the proposed Tier change from Tier I to Tier III. The DEO concurs with KDPA that all of the lands surrounding the subject property were correctly designated Tier I lands and no mapping errors occurred. The DEO also agreed with KDPA in that a change to the designation of the property from Tier I to Tier III could "serve as a stimulus or foothold to prompt future requests for Tier changes." (See page 3 of the March 8, 2016 DEO letter to Monroe County.) Instead of amending their approach, the Applicant and Staff are still seeking a change from Tier I to Tier III, in spite of the fact that the DEO objected to such a change and to do so again will likely result in a second letter of objections. KDPA continues to believe that if the law were to be followed, the only way to change the Tier designation of Seahorse RV and Campground property would be to amend the HCP. We also believe that this is not going to happen. Having said that, we are adamantly against using Tier I lands for affordable housing in Monroe County. And, finally, we believe there is no justification for changing the Seahorse RV and Campground property from a Tier I to a Tier III. The DEO, cognizant that without a change from Tier I, the property cannot be redeveloped as affordable housing on Big Pine Key, went on to recommend that staff "provide data and analysis demonstrating that the parcels are suitable to be designated as Tier II lands. (See page 3 of the March 8, 2016 DEO letter to Monroe County.) We would recommend that staff be directed to do precisely that..."provide data and analysis demonstrating that the parcels are suitable to be designated as Tier II. If, and only if, staff can accomplish this task, we would recommend both a change from Tier I to Tier II and a text amendment allowing affordable housing in Tier II provided certain strict criteria are met. The criteria for such text amendment. or conceivably an affordable housing overlay district, should include all of the elements in the Recommendations by the DEO, along with all of the following additional suggested protective measures. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT For example, the proposed text amendment would allow Affordable Housing on Tier II on Big Pine Key providing all of the following criteria are met: (1) The project is redevelopment, not new development; (2) The redevelopment project is deed restricted as affordable housing; (3) The redevelopment project would not increase the existing density; (4) The redevelopment project would not include any clearing of native habitat; (5) The redevelopment project would not increase the previously existing intensity in use, including vehicular traffic; (6) For redevelopment on Big Pine Key, the property must have been developed prior to the adoption of the HCP and issuance of the Incidental Take Permit on June 30, 2003; (7) For redevelopment on Big Pine Key, the property is not located in a Key Deer Corridor, as defined by the HCP; (8) For redevelopment on Big Pine Key, the property is not located within the 500-meter buffer zone of Lower Keys marsh rabbit habitat, as defined by the HCP; and, (9) For redevelopment off Big Pine Key, the property cannot be designated as federal or state endangered or threatened species habitat. Please vote no on this Application. Please help us protect the Key deer while ensuring more affordable housing projects on Big Pine Key. Please direct staff to fast track a text amendment that would allow affordable housing in Tier II designations on Big Pine Key. This is a win -win approach. It is the prudent path to follow. Please choose it.