The URL can be used to link to this page

Item A1 A.1 County of Monroe , L, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Rw Mayor Sylvia Murphy,District 5 i. Mayor Pro Tem Danny Kolhage,District 1 The Florida Keys 3;� Michelle Coldiron,District 2 t l; Heather Carruthers,District 3 =% David Rice,District 5 County Commission Meeting February. 12, 2019 Agenda Item Number: A.1 Agenda Item Summary #5107 BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Planning/Environmental Resources TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Emily Schemper(305) 289-2506 3:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing to consider approval of an ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners amending the 2030 Comprehensive Plan to create Goal 109, Objective 109.1, Policies 109.1.1, 109.1.2, 109.1.3, 109.1.4, 109.1.5, 109.1.6 to establish a Hurricane Irma Recovery Process to provide for the development of workforce housing for a period of 2 years, defining the term workforce housing, establishing workforce housing shall be a permitted use in certain land use districts, providing density bonuses for workforce housing, amending the development review procedures and amendment procedures to facilitate workforce housing, as recommended by the BOCC (File 2018-010) ITEM BACKGROUND: The Monroe County Planning &Environmental Resources Department is proposing amendments to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as directed by the BOCC on November 29, 2017, to create Goal 109, Objective 109.1, Policies 109.1.1, 109.1.2, 109.1.3, 109.1.4, 109.1.5, 109.1.6 to establish a Hurricane Irma Recovery process to provide for the development of workforce housing for a period of 2 years, defining the term workforce housing, establishing workforce housing shall be a permitted use in certain land use districts, providing density bonuses for workforce housing, amending the development review procedures and amendment procedures to facilitate workforce housing. The need to protect and preserve an adequate inventory of affordable/workforce accessible housing is a continual, as well as, a growing challenge in the County, particularly after the impacts of Hurricane Irma. Staff, in coordination with Commission Carruthers, discussed the potential impediments to the development of workforce housing as well as some potential solutions to the creation of this housing and assist in the recovery of the Florida Keys. On November 29, 2017,proposed comprehensive plan amendments to incentivize and prioritize the provision of workforce housing after the significant damage caused by Hurricane Irma were presented to the BOCC and public. The BOCC provided direction to staff on the proposed amendments and directed staff to start processing the amendments to incentivize workforce housing and assist in the rebuilding and recovery of Monroe County. Packet Pg.2 A.1 Community Meeting and Public Participation In accordance with LDC Section 102-159(b)(3), a Community Meeting for the Comprehensive Plan text amendments was held on January 9, 2018 in Marathon and on June 26, 2018 in Marathon for the Land Development Code text amendments. Based on public input at the community meetings, staff is proposing an alternative option which would require applicants to apply for a workforce overlay district in order to be eligible for workforce housing incentives. Development Review Committee and Public Input The Development Review Committee considered the proposed amendment at a regular meeting(s) on January 30, 2018, and August 21, 2018, and received public input. Public Input and Comment Staff, the Planning Commission, and the BOCC has/have received numerous e-mails and letters regarding the proposed amendment from individuals, as well as, community organizations and groups. The feedback received has been reviewed and considered by staff as the proposed amendment is moved through the review process. In response to received public comments, additional options and language has been developed by staff PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS See the 11x17 attachment (Exhibit 1) with the drafted proposed text amendments, PC recommendations and staff revised language. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT Community Meetings There are several applications that require(d) community meetings. For comprehensive plan and land development code text amendment applications, community meetings are required a minimum of three (3) months prior to the first required public hearing (Planning Commission). Major conditional use, development agreements, and map amendment applications require a community meeting no more than 120 days, but no less than 45 days, prior to the first required public hearing (Planning Commission). During the amendment process, the proposed.time-frame for community meetings was proposed to be reduced. However, the reduction of the maximum time-frame that a community meeting may occur prior to a public hearing may have unintended consequences. Additionally, the original amendment language imposed a new "cap" on the time-frame for community meetings for text amendments. Staff does not recommend imposing this new time limit, as the current code does not include a maximum, which would not work in the applicant's favor. If the BOCC wishes to maintain the community meetings required for certain applications, staff recommends maintaining the maximum time-frame at 120 days prior to first required public hearing. Shortening the maximum time-frame to 60 days may not leave an applicant and staff adequate time to address issues identified at the community meeting while meeting public notice requirements and internal deadlines for staff reports. Packet Pg.3 A.1 Military Installation Area of Impact(MIAI) During review of the proposed text amendment, the Planning Commission recommended the proposed text amendment be limited to Stock Island and Rockland Key. As such, and in accordance with Comprehensive Plan Policy 108.1.1, the County transmitted the proposed change to the comprehensive plan to the commanding officer of Naval Air Station Key West, which if approved, would affect the intensity, density, or use of the land adjacent to or in close proximity to the Naval Air Station Key West(within the Military Installation Area of Impact(MIAI)). Key Terms: • DNL=Day-night average sound level • NLR—Noise-Level Reduction =NLR (outdoor to indoor) to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation unto the design and construction of the structure On January 25, 2019, the County received a response from the Commanding Officer (Exhibit 2) stating the following: Pursuant to the 2018 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones(AICUZ) Study, Naval Air Station. Key West does not support any increased residential density in high noise areas 6SDNI_ and above. Per Table 7-1 of the 2018 AICU7. Study(Enclosure 1), residential use is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74. The absence of viable alternative development options should be determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to approvals indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be met if development were prohibited in these zones. Where the community determines that these uses must be allowed, measures to achieve an outdoor to indoor Noise Level Reduction(NLR)of at least 25dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30dB in DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into building codes and be in individual approvals; for transient housing a NLR of at least 35dB should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. As can be seen on the map series (Exhibits 3 and 4), and according to the Navy's AICUZ Land-Use Compatibility Recommendations, residential uses are discouraged in the 65-69 DNL and strongly discouraged in the 70-74 DNL, and are recommended to be located in other areas unless a study is undertaken identifying the need for housing. Household units are listed by the Navy as not compatible and should be prohibited in the 75-79 DNL. Packet Pg. 4 A.1 TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENTPOTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE I NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLuun CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO<75 275 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL ONl DNL ONL DNL DNL 10 Residential 11 Household units NA NA NA Y Y' Nt N70 N N 1 1.11 Single units;detached N N Y2 Y Y' NJe N�e N N 11.12 Single units;semidetached N N N Y Y' Ns" Nee N N 1 1.13 Single units;attached row N N N Y Y' Nee Nee N N 1 1.21 Two units;side-by-side N N N Y Y I N7e Nee N N 11.22 Two snits;one above the other N N N Y Y' N7e Nee N N 11.31 Apartments;walk up N N N Y Y' N7e Nee N N 11.32 Aportments;elevator N N N Y Y' Nee N7e N N 12 Group quarters N N N Y V' N„ Ns N N 13 Residential hotels N N N Y Y' Nee N7e N N 14 Mobile home parks or courts N N N Y Y' N N N N 15 Transient lodgings N N N Y Y' N7e — N7e Nee N 16 Other residential N N N Y Y' Nal N" N N Notes: 1. A"Yes"or a"Na"designation for compatible land use a to be used only for general comparison.Within each,uses exist where further evaluation may be needed in each category as to whether it is clearly compatible,normally compatible,or not compatible due to the variation of densities of people and structures.In order to assist installations and local governments,general suggestions as to federal Aviation Regulations(FARs)ore provided as a guide to densities In some categories.In general.land-use restrictions which limb commerciol,services,or industrial buildings or structure occupants to 25 per acre in APZ 1 and 50 per acre in APZ 2 are the range of occupancy levels,including employees,considered to be low density.Outside erects should normally be limited to assemblies of not more than 25 people per acre in APZ I,and Maximum(MAX) assemblies of 50 people per acre in APZ 2. 28.a. Although local conditions regarding the need for housing may require resdentiol use in these zones,residential use is discouraged in DNL 65.69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74.The absence of viable alternative development options should be determined one an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to approvals indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be met it development were prohibited in these zones. b. Where the community determines that residential uses must be allowed,measures to achieve outdoor to indoor NLR of at least 25 dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30 dB DNl 70.74 should be incorporated into building codes and be in individual approvals;for transient housing a NLR of at least 35 dB should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. c. Normal permanent construction can be expected to provide an NLR of 20 dB;thus,the reduction requirements ore often stated as 5,10,or 15 dB over standard construction and normally assume mechonkal ventilation,upgraded sound transmission class ratings In windows and doors and closed windows year round.Additional consideration should be given to modifying NLR levels based on peak noise levels or vibrations. d. NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems.However,building location and site planning,design,and use of berms and barriers can help mitigate outdoor exposure,particularly from ground level sources.Measures,hot reduce noise at o sire should be used wherever practical in preference to measures which only protect interior spaces. If the County desires to allow for increased residential density in areas where residential use is discouraged or strongly discouraged, the County would need to demonstrate that other viable development options do not exist by conducting an evaluation that indicates that a demonstrated community need for the for the residential use would not be met if development were prohibited in these zones. Monroe County has already undertaken numerous studies, including its most recent Evaluation and Appraisal Report, and the 2015 Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report (Exhibit 5) which identifies the need for affordable housing in the lower Florida Keys. The proposed text amendment could assist in addressing this need further. As can be seen in the attached maps (Exhibits 4 and 6), there is a limited supply of affordable housing in the Lower Keys, and there is limited land available for potential new, larger scale affordable housing development. The proposed text amendment would result in a potential increase of affordable residential dwelling units within the 70-74 DNL and the 65-69 DNL; however, any household units developed would require specific design measures to achieve an indoor NLR of 25 dB within the 65-69 DNL and an indoor NLR of 30dB within the 70-74 DNL. Packet Pg. 5 A.1 Maximum Density The table below shows a comparison of the number of affordable/workforce housing dwelling units that could be built on currently vacant land, within the respective FLUM/Zoning districts, based on current regulations and the proposed density increase in Goal 109. For more detailed analysis of development potential by island/traffic segment, see Exhibit 10 — Island/Segment Analysis and Geographic Recommendations. CURRENT MAX MAX DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT DIFFERENCE POTENTIAL POTENTIAL (Affordable WITH GOAL 109 (Affordable (Affordable Housing Dwelling Housing Dwelling Housing Dwelling Units) Units) Units) 7,042 10,563 +3,521 Income Categories The Planning Commission recommended limiting density bonuses to projects that propose at least 50% low and/or very low income categories. Based on public feedback during the hearing process, staff recommends the income category requirements be maintained as discussed at the November 2017 meeting: density bonuses limited to project that are rental for very low, low, and median income. Big Pine Key and No Name Key Parcels within Big Pine Key and No Name Key are not eligible for Goal 109. Duck Key Parcels within Duck Key are not eligible for Goal 109 based on its Development of Regional Impact status. Ocean Reef Parcels within Ocean Reef are not eligible for Goal 109. Tier applicability Goal 109 is only applicable to parcels or lots that are designated as Tier III. Comprehensive Plan amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the Planning Commission, the Director of Planning, or by the owner or other person having a property 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 to 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 & Packet Pg.6 A.1 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. The amendment is transmitted to State Land Planning Agency, which then reviews the proposal and issues 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. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: On November 29, 2017, proposed comprehensive plan amendments to incentivize and prioritize the provision of workforce housing after the significant damage caused by Hurricane Irma was presented to the BOCC and to the public. The BOCC provided direction to staff on the proposed amendments and directed staff to start processing the amendments to incentivize workforce housing and assist in the rebuilding and recovery of Monroe County. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the BOCC consider adoption of Goal 109, with the following changes, as presented in this staff report, the Amendment Table, and the Segment Analysis: 1. Change the community meeting deadlines to the recommended shorter time-frame, however, allow a maximum time-frame of 120 days for map amendments, major conditional uses and development agreements. Do not impose a maximum time-frame for text amendments. 2. Limit the density bonuses to projects that are rental only, for very low, low, and median income, as discussed at the November 2017 meeting. 3. Limit the density bonuses in Goal 109 to the following islands/segments, based on MIAI, traffic, and Employment analysis: a. Saddlebunch/Shark Key(segment 4) b. Sugarloaf(segment 5) c. Summerland(segment 7) d. Ramrod(segment 8) e. Little Torch(segment 9) f. Long Key(segment 16) g. Tavernier(segment 22; and the unincorporated portion of segment 21) DOCUMENTATION: 2018-010_Goal_109_CP-BOCC_SR_DRAFT_1.31 Ex.l_Amendment_Table_HR_Element Ex.2-Navy_Response Ex.3_Goal 109_Maps_ELU_FINAL Packet Pg.7 A.1 Ex.4_Goa1109_Maps_LUD_FINAL Ex.52015 MCWH_Stakeholder Assessment Ex.6_Existing_AH_locations Ex.7_MOCO_Housing_Strat_post_Irma Ex.8 2018 Income Limits Ex.9AHACrec_Reso.01-2016 Ex.10_Island_Segment_Analysis Ex.11 Density Examples Transmittal Reso_stamped_with_draft ord FINANCIAL IMPACT: Effective Date: N/A Expiration Date: N/A Total Dollar Value of Contract: N/A Total Cost to County: N/A Current Year Portion: N/A Budgeted: N/A Source of Funds: CPI: N/A Indirect Costs: N/A Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: N/A Revenue Producing: N/A If yes, amount: N/A Grant: N/A County Match: N/A Insurance Required: N/A Additional Details: N/A REVIEWED BY: Emily Schemper Completed 01/31/2019 3:20 PM Peter Morris Completed 01/31/2019 3:40 PM Assistant County Administrator Christine Hurley Skipped 01/31/2019 3:39 PM Budget and Finance Completed 01/31/2019 5:04 PM Maria Slavik Skipped 01/31/2019 5:07 PM Kathy Peters Completed 01/31/2019 5:09 PM Board of County Commissioners Pending 02/12/2019 10:00 AM Packet Pg.8 �� A.1.a 0 1 2.3')\-)A, 2 ' '' V.-- /I 4 w 5 MEMORANDUM N 6 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT c 7 F 8 9 To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners -a 10 a 11 Through: Emily Schemper, AICP, CFM, Acting Senior Director of Planning and Environmental Q 12 Resources a 13 a 14 From: Cheryl Cioffari,AICP, Comprehensive Planning Manager 15 c 16 Date: January 30, 2019 d 17 Q. 18 Subject: AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY o 19 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO CREATE y 20 GOAL 109, OBJECTIVE 109.1, POLICIES 109.1.1, 109.1.2, 109.1.3, 109.1.4, 109.1.5, c 21 109.1.6 TO ESTABLISH A HURRICANE IRMA RECOVERY PROCESS TO 22 PROVIDE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF WORKFORCE HOUSING FOR A 3 23 PERIOD OF 2 YEARS, DEFINING THE TERM WORKFORCE HOUSING, 24 ESTABLISHING WORKFORCE HOUSING SHALL BE A PERMITTED USE IN 25 CERTAIN LAND USE DISTRICTS, PROVIDING DENSITY BONUSES FOR g 26 WORKFORCE HOUSING, AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 27 PROCEDURES AND AMENDMENT PROCEDURES TO FACILITATE c2 28 WORKFORCE HOUSING, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE BOCC; PROVIDING M 29 FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ‘-i 30 PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND LL 31 PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR 32 INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING cli 33 FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (File 2018-010) cc 34 v U 35 Meeting: February 12,2019 m 36 a 37 0i 38 I. REQUEST o T 39 1 40 The Monroe County Planning &Environmental Resources Department is proposing amendments 8 41 to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as directed by the BOCC on November 29, 2017, to create Goal 01 42 109, Objective 109.1, Policies 109.1.1, 109.1.2, 109.1.3, 109.1.4, 109.1.5, 109.1.6 to establish a o 43 Hurricane Irma Recovery process to provide for the development of workforce housing for a period c 44 of 2 years, defining the term workforce housing, establishing workforce housing shall be a N 45 permitted use in certain land use districts, providing density bonuses for workforce housing, d 46 amending the development review procedures and amendment procedures to facilitate workforce 2 47 housing. 0 48 Q BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 1 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg.9 A.1.a 1 II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2 3 The Monroe County Mayor declared a State of Local Emergency on September 5, 2017 due to 4 Hurricane Irma, a"threat of danger to the populace inhabiting Monroe County" and that the County w 5 "may require expedient action in order to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community." E 6 c ca 7 At 9:10 a.m. on September 10, 2017, Hurricane Irma made landfall near Cudjoe Key as a Category 8 4 Hurricane with maximum sustained winds of 130 mph. Significant damage has occurred to the c 9 housing stock which is largely the lower cost housing options to the members of the workforce. 10 a 11 Monroe County faces the quadruple impact of high land values, land limited by geographic and E cc 12 environmental features,housing supply limited by controlled growth(the permit allocation systems) c 13 and a tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service-sector employment. a 14 > 15 The housing affordability problem of Monroe County has widespread economic impacts, including c 16 a growing recognition of the important link between an adequate affordable housing supply and d 17 economic growth. Many of the business sectors in the Keys, including professional services, retail a 18 trade, tourism and health care, find it increasingly difficult to attract and maintain workers. o 19 Affordable housing has posed and continues to pose a major challenge for local governments,public y 20 agencies and the private sector in the Keys. The service and retail industries generate high demand c 21 for affordable housing from low income earning workers, while the limited land area and linear Ta- 22 geography of the Keys severely limit the potential supply and locations of housing in the County. o 23 24 Furthermore,unlike other areas in the State,working families cannot find affordable housing nearby. c 25 As a result, a severe imbalance exists between supply and demand, resulting in escalating housing 26 prices. This imbalance is worsened by a number of other contributing factors, including: 27 • strong demand for second homes which reduces the supply of housing for permanent re 28 residents; cl 29 • conversion of permanent housing for transient use as vacation rentals which reduces the ,i 30 housing supply and increases affordable housing demand; u_ 31 • high construction costs due to transportation costs of goods, limited labor market, and g 32 caprock conditions; a ecii 33 • higher costs due to regulations and insurance(building standards are among the most rigorous vi 34 in the State); 0 35 • limited permit allocations due to hurricane evacuation standards,habitat protection and water m 36 quality objectives; and a 37 • limited non-profit and private sector capacity for funding assistance and housing production. vi 38 0 T 39 The need to protect and preserve an adequate inventory of affordable/workforce accessible housing R1 40 is a continual, as well as, a growing challenge in the County, particularly after the impacts of 0 41 Hurricane Irma. I 0 42 0 43 Staff, in coordination with Commission Carruthers, discussed the potential impediments to the c 44 development of workforce housing as well as some potential solutions to the creation of this housing N 45 and assist in the recovery of the Florida Keys. On November 29,2017,proposed comprehensive plan 46 amendments to incentivize and prioritize the provision of workforce housing after the significant E 47 damage caused by Hurricane Irma was presented to the BOCC and the public. The BOCC provided m a BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 2 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 10 A.1.a 1 direction to staff on the proposed amendments and directed staff to start processing the amendments 2 to incentivize workforce housing and assist in the rebuilding and recovery of Monroe County. 3 4 Community Meeting and Public Participation il 5 In accordance with LDC Section 102-159(b)(3), a Community Meeting for the Comprehensive Plan N 6 text amendments was held on January 9, 2018 in Marathon and on June 26, 2018 in Marathon for c 7 the Land Development Code text amendments. Based on public input at the community meetings, it 8 staff is proposing an alternative option which would require applicants to apply for a workforce a 9 overlay district in order to be eligible for workforce housing incentives. E 10 a 11 Development Review Committee and Public Input E 12 The Development Review Committee considered the proposed amendment at a regular meeting on m 13 January 30, 2018 and August 21, 2018, and received public input. a 14 > 15 Public Input and Comment c 16 Staff, the Planning Commission and the BOCC has received numerous emails and letters regarding 17 the proposed amendment from individuals, as well:as, community organizations and groups. The 2D. 18 table below provides a summary of concerns identified by the public. The feedback received has c 19 been reviewed and considered by Staff as the proposed amendment is moved through the review v 20 process. In response to received public comments, additional options and language has been o 21 developed by Staff. ‘- To 22 o Identified Concerns #of times referenced in public comment a 0 .N Oppose increased density 75 Traffic 69 Workforce housing in the cities 56 Retain Protest Procedure . ' . . 46 LLI Changes community character 43 g Enforce vacation rentals 30 �I Lower Keys is low-density 28 01 Retain citizen input through community meetings 27 v Follow existing Livable Communikeys Plans 21 m "Do/Build the right thing in the right place 9 v Concern about 1300 units . 9 0' 0 Goal 109 not needed in Key Largo . 9 `-• To Impact to infrastructure/sewer/water/schools 9 Negatively affects property values . 7 of Require inclusionary housing for hotels/commercial 5 0 co Retain Planning Commission approval for affordable housing projects c 20 units or more 5 N r Increased Crime 4 a) Lack of.public transit/high commuting costs for housing occupants 4 c Enforce Affordable Housing deed restrictions 3 0 a BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 3 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 11 A.1.a Impact to water quality 3 Lack of compliance with development approvals (currently) 3 Lack of shopping opportunities (supermarkets, conveniences) in the co Lower Keys for residents of affordable housing 3 Use of military land for housing 3 c Concern about out of county developers 2 F Effective Date: Limit length; require approval by one date/substantial d completion by another 2 E ms Address Tourism impact to Affordable Housing 1 ai Concern about definition requiring 70% of income to come from a Monroe County for a federally funded project 1 c Concern about quality of housing 1 a a) Consider species focus and buffer areas - 1 N Impact of low-income housing on tax revenue of County 1 . Increased garbage and litter _ __ _ 1 2 Lack of data to support increased density 1 c Less market-rate development 1 y No density increase for sub areas and overlay areas unless explicitly c authorized 1 _ To Parking issues 1 0 Toll/surtax for tourist to fund Affordable Housing - 1 1 c 2 N 3 ;III. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS a', 4 re 5 See the 11x17 attachment (Exhibit 1) with the drafted proposed text amendments, PC 6 recommendations and staff revised language. I_I 7 u' 8 IV. ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT g 9 cei 10 Community Meetings NI v 11 There are several applications that required community meetings. For comprehensive plan and land 0 12 development code text amendment applications, community meetings are required a minimum of three m 13 (3) months prior to the first required public hearing (Planning Commission). Major conditional use, v 14 . development agreements and map amendment applications require a community meeting no more than cl 15 120 days, but no less than 45 days, prior to the first required public hearing (Planning Commission). ,-•i 16 During the amendment process, the proposed timeframe for community meetings was proposed to be o 17 reduced. However,the reduction of the maximum timeframe that a community meeting may occur prior 01 18 to a public hearing may have unintended consequences. Additionally, the original amendment language o 19 imposed a new "cap" on the timeframe for community meetings for text amendments. Staff does not co 20 recommend imposing this new time limit, as the current code does not include a maximum,which would N 21 not work in the applicant's favor. c 22 d 23 If the BOCC wishes to maintain the community meetings required for certain applications, Staff o 24 recommends maintaining the maximum timeframe at 120 days prior to first required public hearing. a BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 4 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 12 A.1.S 1 Shortening the maximum timeframe to 60 days may not leave an applicant and staff adequate time to 2 address issues identified at the community meeting while meeting public notice requirements and 3 internal deadlines for staff reports. 4 cc 5 Military Installation Area of Impact(MIAI) 6 During review of the proposed text amendment, the Planning Commission recommended the proposed 7 text amendment be limited to Stock Island and Rockland Key. As such, and in accordance with 8 Comprehensive Plan Policy 108.1.1,the County transmitted the proposed change to the comprehensive 9 plan to the commanding officer of Naval Air Station Key West, which if approved, would affect the 10 intensity, density,or use of the land adjacent to or in close proximity to the Naval Air Station Key West 11 (within the Military Installation Area of Impact(MIAI)). 12 13 Key Terms: 14 • DNL=Day-night average sound level ; 15 • NLR—Noise-Level Reduction=NLR(outdoor to indoor)to be achieved through 16 incorporation of noise attenuation unto the design and construction of the structure 17 0 18 On January 25, 2019, the County received a response from the Commanding Officer(Exhibit 2) stating 0 19 the following: 20 0 Pursuant to the 2018 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones(AICUZ) Study, Naval Air 0 Station, Key West does not support any increased residential density in high noise areas 65DNL and above. Per Table 7-1 of the 2018 AICUZ Study(Enclosure 1), residential use is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74. The absence of viable alternative 0 development options should be determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to approvals indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not he met if development were prohibited in these zones. Where the community determines that these uses must be allowed, measures to achieve an outdoor to indoor Noise Level Reduction(NLR) of at least 25dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30dB in DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into u.I building codes and be in individual approvals; for transient housing a NLR of at least 35dB 21 should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. o� 22 23 24 As can be seen on the map series (Exhibits 3 and 4), and according to the Navy's AICUZ Land-Use o 25 Compatibility Recommendations, residential uses are discouraged in the 65-69 DNL and strongly 26 discouraged in the 70-74 DNL, and are recommended to be located in other areas unless a study is 27 undertaken identifying the need for housing. Household units are listed by the Navy as not compatible o 28 and should be prohibited in the 75-79 DNL. 29 0 0 0 co 0 N G) rts U BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 5 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 13 A.1.a TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE I NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR '.55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO<73 275 TO 79 80 TO 114 R NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 4.-. 10 Residential E N 11 Household units NA NA NA Y Y' N2" N7e N N C 1 1.1 1 Single units;detached N N Y2 Y - Y' N2" N" N N It 11.12 Single units;semidetached N N N Y Y' N2" N2" N N 11.13 Single units;attached row N N N Y Y' N" N" N N a) 1 _ .. 1 1 1.21 Two units;side-by-side N N N Y Y' N" N" N N -a 11.22 Two units;one above the other N N N Y Y' N" N" N N a) 11.31 Apartments;wok up N N N Y Y' N28 we N N E 11.32 Apartments;elevator N N N Y Y' N25 N" N N C 12 Group quarters N N N Y Y. N2" N7" N N L4 d 13 Residential hotels N N N Y Y' N26 N2" N N 14 Mobile home parks or courts N N N Y Y' N N N N > ,----- - - V) 11.5 Transient lodgings N N N Y Yn N" N7" N" N d 1-- - a)--- -- -- . 1 !16 Other residential N N N Y Y' N't N"" N N • 0 2 ) 8. Notes: E 1. A"Yes"or a"No'designation for compatible land use is to be used only for general comparison.Within cock,uses exist where further evaluation may be needed in each 0 category as to whether it is cleorly compatible.nomsolly compatible,or not compatible due to ur nor ra Iid,of densities of people and structures.In order to assist installations V and local governments,general suggestions as to Federal Aviation Regulation:(FARs(are provided ns o guide to densities in some categories.In general,lard-use restrictions which limit commercial,services,or industrial buildings or structure occupants to 25 per acre in APZ 1 and 50 per acre in APZ 2 ore the range of occupancy levels,including rn O employees,considered to be low density.Outside events should normally be limited to assemblies of not more than 25 people per acre in APZ I,and Maximum IMAX! si- 3 assemblies of 50 people per acre in APZ 2. Tii 28.a. Although local conditions regarding the need for housingmay require residential use in these tones,residential use is discouroged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in 0 g 9 9 Y q g 9Y 9 O ONL 70-74.The absence of viable alternative development options should be determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to approvals indicating that o 0 demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be mer if development were prohibited in these zones. �.� b. Where the community determines that residential uses must be allowed,measures to achieve outdoor to indoor NLR of at least 25 dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30 dB DNL 70.74 should be incorporated into building codes and be in individual approvals;for transient housing o NLR of of least 35 dB should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. c. Normal permanent construction can be expected to provide on NLR of 20 dB;thus,tire reduction requirements are often stated os 5,10,or 15 dB over standard construction C and normally assume mechonkal ventilation,upgraded sound transmission class ratings In windows and doors and closed windows year round.Additional consideration should O be given to modifying NLR levels based on peak noise levels or vibrations. N d. NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems.However,building location and site planning,design,and use of berms and barriers con help mitigate outdoor > exposure,particularly from ground level sources.Measures that reduce nose at a site should be used wherever practical in preference to measures which only protect itter;or re 4 .. spaces. s..r 5 M 6 If the County desires to allow for increased residential density in areas where residential use is �l 7 discouraged or strongly discouraged, the County would need to demonstrate that other viable Q 8 development options do not exist by conducting an evaluation that indicates that a demonstrated ce 9 community need for the for the residential use would not be met if development were prohibited in these cei 10 zones. Ln I 11 12 Monroe County has already undertaken numerous studies, including its most recent Evaluation and m 13 Appraisal Report, and the 2015 Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report (Exhibit 5) which a 14 identifies the need for affordable housing in the lower Florida Keys.The proposed text amendment could �l 15 assist in addressing this need further. As can be seen in the attached maps (Exhibits 4 and 6), there is a a 16 limited supply of affordable housing in the Lower Keys, and limited land available for potential new rzi 17 larger scale affordable housing development. 0 18 al 19 The proposed text amendment would result in a potential increase of affordable residential dwelling units o 20 within the 70-74 DNL and the 65-69 DNL; however, any household units developed would require o 21 specific design measures to achieve an indoor NLR of 25 dB within the 65-69 DNL and an indoor NLR N 22 of 30dB within the 70-74 DNL. c 23 I BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 6 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 14 A.1.a. 1 Maximum Density 2 The table below shows a comparison of the number of affordable/workforce housing dwelling units 3 that could be built on currently vacant land, within the respective FLUM/Zoning districts,based on 4 current regulations and the proposed density increase in Goal 109. For more detailed analysis of w 5 development potential by island/traffic segment, see Exhibit 10—Island/Segment Analysis and N 6 Geographic Recommendations. c 7 i= w _ CURRENT MAX DEVELOPMENT MAX DEVELOPMENT E DIFFERENCE -o POTENTIAL POTENTIAL WITH GOAL 109 = (Affordable Housing Dwelling a). (Affordable Housing Dwelling (Affordable Housing Dwelling E Units) Units) Units) Q co 7,042 10,563 +3,521. a ai 8 y 9 Income Categories d 10 The Planning Commission recommended limiting density bonuses to projects that propose at least 50% 2 11 low and/or very low income categories. Based on public feedback during the hearing process, staff fa. 1r 12 recommends the income category requirements be maintained as discussed at the November 2017 o 13 meeting: density bonuses limited to project that are rental for very low, low, and median income. a; 14 0 15 Big Pine Key and No Name Key a o 16 Parcels within Big Pine Key and No Name Key are not eligible for Goal 109. 0 17 18 Duck Key c 19 Parcels within Duck Key are not eligible for Goal 109 based on its Development of Regional Impact y 20 status. d re 21 `-' 22 Ocean Reef 01 23 Parcels within Ocean Reef are not eligible for Goal 109. F! 24 `� 25 Tier applicability 0I 26 Goal 109 is only applicable to parcels or lots that are designated as Tier III. re 27 1 28 V. CONSISTENCY. WITH THE MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE o 29 PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING DEVELOPMENT,AND FLORIDA STATUTES. m 30 0i 31 A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the c 32 Monroe County 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically,it furthers: `-i 33 0 34 Goal 101: Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life, ensure the of 35 safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources. c 36 co 37 Objective 101.2: As mandated by the State of Florida, pursuant to Section 380.0552, F.S. and N 38 Rule 28-20.140, F.A.C., and to maintain the public health, safety, and welfare, Monroe County 39 shall maintain a maximum hurricane evacuation clearance time of 24 hours and will coordinate E 40 with the State Land Planning Agency relative to the 2012 Memorandum of Understanding that c 41 has been adopted between the County and all the municipalities and the State agencies. BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 7 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 15 ' ' A.1.a - 1 2 Objective 101.3: Monroe County shall regulate new residential development based upon the 3 finite carrying capacity of the natural and man-made systems and the growth capacity while 4 maintaining a maximum hurricane evacuation clearance time of 24 hours. r 5 y 6 Policy 101.3.3: Monroe County shall allocate at least 20%of the annual allocation, or as may be c 7 established by the State of Florida,pursuant to Administration Commission Rules, to affordable 8 housing units as part of ROGO. Any portion of the allocations not used for affordable housing . . a 9 shall be retained and be made available for affordable housing from ROGO year to ROGO year: E 10 Affordable housing eligible for this separate allocation shall meet the criteria specified in Policy c • An 11 601.1.4 and the Land Development Code,but shall not be subject to the competitive Residential E 12 Permit Allocation and Point System in Policy 101.6.4. Any parcel proposed for affordable c 13 housing shall not be located within an area designated as Tier I as set forth under Goal 105 or a 14 within a Tier III-A Special Protection Area as set forth in Policy 205.1.1. 15 to 16 Policy 101.3.10:Notwithstanding any other provision of the Plan,ROGO allocations utilized for c 17 affordable housing projects may be pooled and transferred between ROGO subareas, excluding a. 18 the Big Pine/No Name Keys ROGO subarea, and between local government jurisdictions within o 19 the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern (ACSC). Any such transfer between local y 20 government jurisdictions must be accomplished through an interlocal agreement between the c 21 sending and receiving local governments. o 22 0 Polio•101.5.25 Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards for • r the future land-use categories,which are shown on the FLUNI and described in o Policies"101.5.1-101.5.20[§163.3177(6)(a)1.,F_S.). to .Future Land Use Densities and Intensities �+ Minimum Residential _ Nonresidential • ch r open Space Fu a_and Use Category - o -Ratio.' I ?.nd Corresponding. s .• Allocated Density"' \53.uniuri Net Density >i3'•irtum Intensity LL =onin'. • (pet upluidacre) (�ooi area ratio) . (per buildable aa?) Aeticuitu.-zrAquaculture 0 du 11.A 0.25 Per (A)(d) 0 rooms+spaces NA untie:lying -I (no directly corresponding zoning Cl) zoning • UI Airport(AD) a du N;A 0.10 0.20 C.)(4D toning) mm.0 os+ C4 spaces . N. .0 Connie:cisl(COMM) 0 dd N+A 0.15-0.50 0.20. a (C1.and C2 zoning) 0 roams+spaces . N/A V Conservation(C) .'0 du . NIA 0.05 0.90 - I (CD zoning) 0 inoms;spaces •N±A 0 N Education(E)t`' 0 du • /A 0.30 • Pe: I (no directly correspondiag uaderlysg o zoning) . 0 rooms spaces N A . . . zoning • 0 Indussuial(I) 1 du 2 du . 0_25-0.50 0.20 coo (I and Nil zonin=) 0 roams+spaces Nr Y p Institutional(DIS)''°' 0 du N-A Pe: CO (to directly corresponds 030 tiader1ying N 23 zoning) 15 roori�spaces 24 rooms+spaces, . zoning C d E t co v Q BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 8 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet_Pg."16 A.1.a Mainland Natare(]21) 0.01 du NIA 0:p5-0 op .(MN zoning) 2 spacesf" A 0.03 . . •. ' -Military(h3) 6 du 12 du • 0.30 0.50 0.20 (N1,zonine) 10 roov.a paces . .20 rcvri-s?spacee • �o Mixed U e`Contrite cias 1 du(DR.?SILT,ND) 2 du(NU) '0,10-0.45 (mcf m 3 du(SC) 6.18du(SC)r•-;' .(SC,.1 C,DR,NIL') 'E (SC,LiC,Dti,RV,MIJ 6 du(LTC) 12 du(UC). 0.20 C and Commercial Apasttnents 12-1S du(MU)`-' -2,500 SF(RV) IC ` MI zoning) (RV)' 18 du(DR) H 0.30-0.60(MI) c-• 5-15 rootrs spaces I0-25-roocrsrspaces d •MnsedUse-Tonunercial 1 du 12 du.(C'FA,CFSD) '0 Fishing(MCF)10. (CFSD-20)"' C (CFA,CFV,CFSD 3 du(CFA,all other 025-0;40 0.20 E zoaiag) CFSD). Q I dav]o:(CFV) NA(CFV) C CO 0 rooms+spaces NIA n, Presercaaod(P)'-' 0 du NA > (P zoaiag) 0 roans+spaces NJA _ 0 1.00 .— C Public Buildinestiaads 0 da NIA 0.30 Pe: a) (PB)-;`' • wade:lying y (no directly correspon±n 0 rooms/spaces N 4 zoning Q. zoning) . Public 0 du NA 0.30 • Pe: 0 Facilities.(PF)`''' 0 roomsIspaces NA nada:Vine C. (no directly corresponding zoning' Co zoo) 0 Recreaion(R) 0 du NA 0.20 .010 Tu (PR zoning) 2 rooas,spaces NA 0 Residentia]C'enser:aaon 0-0.10 du(OS) NA 0-0.20 015 (RC) 0.25 du(NA) s--. 1 (OS and NA zoning) 0 roo¢•sI spaces NIA . C Residential Lou-(RL) 0.50 du 3 du(SP.-L) 0.25 0.50(SR, C (SS,SR and 5c-L zoning) 5 du'(SR) SR L) •N '0I a) 1 dvQot(SR)'"" o.so(ss) W 0 rooues'spaces N'A(SS) KA. M 'F,esidenua]Medium(R2 ) 1 du,lo:(IS,I.S.--sr,IS- NA (IS.IS-V;IS-NI and IS-D'=' AS) I" zoning). 2 du7os(IS-D) 0 0.20 0 rooms spaces NA Residenda]::ieh( -I) 6 du(UR) 12 5 du(UP.)`'` G (IS-DC'',URM,UR:M:-L ldu4ot 2. LJRNI L NA 5 D,URNS, Le. and LJR zoning) 2 dulor(IS-D) OF -L) 0 0.20 f�I 0-10 roonsnr;spaces. 0-20:goslspaces U Note .O • 2 • (a) The allocated densities for submerged lands, sale ponds, fresh:T-ater ponds, and ntangro,es shalt' be 0 and the d U I OO- 0 T . I To /o V I O r 0 co r 0 N r C CI) E t V co Q BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page9of15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 17 • : A.1.a, '. • maximum net density-bonuses.shall notbe available, ilable, (b) The hfasin:uni Ne:Densi y is the maximum density allowable with the use of TDPs,o:for quali-yin£affordable housing development. TDRs can be utilized to attain the density between the allocated density standard up to the inaxirtuni net d n_ity standard. Deed restricted affordable dn'elling'units may be built up"t:the tnaxitnunt net density witsout the use of TDRL.`NIA"means that rua_tiimum net density bonuses shall notbe available.:3uiidable aces 1 means the portion ofa parcel of land that is developable.and is not required open space. (c) Additional open space requirements may apply based en environmental protection criteria;in these cases,the most N resticti:•e regsiirement shall apply. C (d) Future-land use catego iesof Aricultur&Aquaculrue,Education,Institutional,Preservation,Public Buildings,Lands. ~ and Public Facilities,which have ne directly corresponding zoning_,may be.used Wish dear or existing zoning districts 4, as appropriate. C a, (e) Within the Mainland Native future laud use.'distict,campground spaces and nonresidential buildings shall,only be E periaited for educational;research or sanitary purposes. V C (I) For properties consisting of hammocks,pinelaads or disturbed teedands within the Mined Use'Commercial and• to Mixed Use Commercial:Fishing furore land"use categories, the ma mudz floor area rang shall be 0.10 sad the E mattimun net density bonuses-shall not be available_ C c) A misure of uses shall be maintained for parcels designated as MI zoning disaictthat are within the MC•5u-ure Land to use category.V a:kin_waterfront and water"dependant use such as manna,: 'sa honseiatarket,boat repair,boat a building,boat stamp,or other siteiLar uses,shall comprise a ininimunt of 35.”of the upland.area of the properry, > adjacent to the rho:elme,pursuantto Police•101.5.0. N (h) In the Rv zoning dietrict.Cominercial apartments shall be allowed,not to exceed 10%of total-space5 allowed or in d existence on the-saterwhiche er is less_ t (i) The allocated.density for the CFSD=30 zoning district(Little.Torch:tiey) shall be 1 dwelling unit per acre,or 1 a) dwelling unit per parcel for those parcels"existing as of September 15,1936,whichever is less,and"th ttaaxiuu a net Q- density bonuses shall no:be available.Residential dessi}•.shall be allowed in addition to tha,penrittad.nonresidential 0 uses and intensi-v.(ie.,density and anrensity shall net be counted cuatularirely). U (i) P'i:hiu IS subdiaisions With primarily single fancily residential units.,IS-D zoning may be,used-nisi a R4 Moreland i. are designation for platted lots which hare a duplex that wan lawfully esablished poor to September 15,1955. C (k)The maximum net densir,shall be 35-dubuildable acre for,the VR zoning disnict and shall be 13 du buildable acre for • the MU and ISC'zoning district for derelopnent where-all units aredeed restricted affordable dwelling units.For the To .U'zonins district marker rate housin"m y be"dev-eloped as part:of an affordable or'eatployee housing project,With a o nia-siaivu net density note+:ceedins 13 dwbuildable acre. CD (1) vessels,including Irre-aboa:d vessels,or associated we:slips'are not considered duelling units and do riot count when calculating density.. (m) .Within the Residential Lou future land rise category,the viavii um net density for plated lots of less than 0.-0,gross • C aces within the SR zoning district shall be 1 dwelling unit per platted lot,provided all of the following conditions are C 1 tier 'v_, .> 2 CL 3 4 Policy 101.13.2: The Maximum Net Density is the maximum density allowable with the use of 71 5 TDRs,and shall not exceed the maximum densities established in this Plan.TDRs may be utilized LLi 6 to attain the density between the allocated density standard up to the maximum net density 7 standard. Deed restricted affordable dwelling units may be developed up to the maximum net a 8 density without the use of TDRs. The assignment of TDRs to Big Pine Key,No Name Key, and ixI 9 North Key Largo from other areas.of the County shall be prohibited. v1 10 11 Objective 105.2: Monroe County shall maintain, with assistance of the state and federal m 12 governments, a 20-year Land Acquisition Program to; 1) secure funding for environmentally v 13 sensitive lands; 2) retire development rights on privately-owned vacant lands to limit further cis 14 sprawl and equitably balance the rights of property owners with the long-term sustainability of ri 15 the Keys man-made and natural systems; and, 3) secure and retain lands suitable for affordable To c 16 housing. This objective recognizes the fmite limits of the carrying capacity of the natural and c7i 17 man-made systems in the Florida Keys to continually accommodate further development and the o 18 need for the significant expansion of the public acquisition of vacant developable lands and o0 19 development rights to equitably balance the rights and expectations of property owners. This N 20 includes the recognition that Monroe County must ensure public safety through the ability to c 21 maintain a 24-hour hurricane evacuation clearance time. W 22 to a BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 10 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 18 A.1.a 1 GOAL 601: Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to facilitate access by residents 2 to adequate and affordable housing that is safe,decent, and structurally sound, and that meets the 3 needs of the population based on type,tenure characteristics,unit size and individual preferences. 4 14 P 5 Policy 601.1.4: All affordable housing projects which receive development benefits from .E cn 6 Monroe County, including but not limited to ROGO allocation award(s) reserved for affordable c 7 housing, maximum net density, or donations of land, shall be required to maintain the project as it 8 affordable for a period of 99 years pursuant to deed restrictions or other mechanisms specified in a 9 the Land Development Code, and administered by Monroe County or the Monroe County . 10 Housing Authority. c 11 E 12 Policy 601.1.8: Monroe County shall allocate at least 20%of the annual ROGO allocation, or as co 13 may be established by the State of Florida, pursuant to Administration Commission Rules, to E. 14 affordable housing units, as specified in Policy 101.3.3. Affordable housing eligible for this > 15 separate allocation must meet the criteria established in the Land Development Code. c 16 .c 17 Policy 601.1.9: Monroe County shall maintain land development regulations which may include E0. 18 density bonuses, impact fee waiver programs, and other possible regulations to encourage c 19 affordable housing y 20 c 21 Objective 601.2: Monroe County shall adopt programs and policies to encourage housing of To 22 various types, sizes and price ranges to meet the demands of current and future residents c 23 0 24 Objective 601.3: Monroe County shall continue implementation efforts to eliminate substandard c 25 housing and to preserve, conserve and enhance the existing housing stock, including historic g 26 structures and sites. ._ 27 re 28 Policy 601.3.1: M 29 Monroe County shall coordinate with other County agencies to monitor housing conditions. `'i 30 Standards for evaluation of the structural condition of the housing stock are summarized below: 1- 31 Sound: Most housing units in this category are in good condition and have no visible defects. g 32 However, some structures with slight defects are also included. mi 33 cn 34 Deteriorating: A housing unit in this category needs more repair than would be provided in VI 35 the course of regular maintenance, such as repainting. A housing unit is classified as 0 36 deteriorating when its deficiencies indicate a lack of proper upkeep. a 37 vi 38 Dilapidated (Substandard): A housing unit in this category indicates that the unit can no 0 39 longer provide safe and adequate shelter or is of inadequate original construction I including R 40 being constructed below the minimum required elevation by FEMA or the County's o 41 Floodplain Regulations. aI 42 0 43 Policy 601.3.2: The County Code Compliance Office and Building Department will enforce 03 01- 44 building code regulations and County ordinances governing the structural condition of the N 45 housing stock, to ensure the provision of safe, decent and sanitary housing and stabilization of d 46 residential neighborhoods. E 47 0 r 4 BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 11 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 19 A.1.a 1 B. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida 2 Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7),Florida Statutes. 3 4 For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that plan w 5 with the principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles,the principles E 6 shall be construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied in isolation m 7 from the other provisions. it 8 = a) 9 (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local 10 government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern aci 11 designation. a 12 (b) Protecting shoreline and benthic resources,including mangroves,coral reef formations,seagrass beds, _ 13 wetlands,fish and wildlife,and their habitat. 1a 14 (c) Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native tropical a) 15 vegetation(for example,hardwood hammocks and pinelands),dune ridges and beaches,wildlife,and y 16 their habitat. _ a) 17 (d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic c 18 development. c. 19 (e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida Keys. c 20 (f) Enhancing natural scenic resources,promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment,and v 21 ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys. c 22 (g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys. 23 (h) Protecting the value,efficiency,cost-effectiveness,and amortized life of existing and proposed majoro 24 public investments,including: 25 26 1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities; c 27 2. Sewage collection,treatment,and disposal facilities; ._ 28 3. Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities; 29 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities; 30 5. Transportation facilities; 0. 31 6. Federal parks,wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries; H1 32 7. State parks,recreation facilities,aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned properties; u. 33 8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and g 34 9. Other utilities,as appropriate. 01 35 U) 36 (i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation, maintenance, 1 v 37 and replacement of stormwater management facilities; central sewage collection; treatment and U 38 disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and maintenance of onsite sewage m 39 treatment and disposal systems. a 40 (j) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and operation of �I 41 wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss. 381.0065(4)(1) and 403.086(10), o 42 as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by central wastewater treatment facilities 731 43 through permit allocation systems. o 44 (k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida cI 45 Keys. o 46 (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys. co 47 (m)Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural N 48 or manmade disaster and for a postdisaster reconstruction plan. c 49 (n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining d 50 the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource. c co z a BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 12 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg.20 A.1.a 1 Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7) Florida Statutes, the proposed amendment is not inconsistent 2 with the Principles for Guiding Development as a whole and is not inconsistent with any 3 Principle. 4 w 5 C. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statute N 6 (F.S.). Specifically, the amendment furthers: c 7 it 8 163.3161(4), F.S. —It is the intent of this act that local governments have the ability to preserve 9 and enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and a 10 resources, consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal c 11 effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land within 1= 12 their jurisdictions. Through the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units c 13 of local government can preserve, promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, F. 14 comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and cu 15 general welfare; facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, c 16 sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing, and other requirements and d 17 services; and conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources within their Q. 18 jurisdictions. v 19 20 163.3161(6), F.S. — It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans shall have the c 21 legal status set out in this act and that no public or private development shall be permitted To 22 except in conformity with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof, prepared c 23 and adopted in conformity with this act. 24 25 163.3177(1), F.S. —The comprehensive plan shall provide the principles, guidelines, standards, o to 26 and strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social,physical, environmental, 27 and fiscal development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the a 28 plan and its elements. These principles and strategies shall guide future decisions in a �, 29 consistent manner and shall contain programs and activities to ensure comprehensive plans i 30 are implemented. The sections of the comprehensive plan containing the principles and F- 31 strategies, generally provided as goals, objectives, and policies, shall describe how the local ga 32 government's programs, activities, and land development regulations will be initiated, of 33 modified, or continued to implement the comprehensive plan in a consistent manner. It is not co 34 the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations in the v 35 comprehensive plan but rather to require identification of those programs, activities,and land 0 36 development regulations that will be part of the strategy for implementing the comprehensive a 37 plan and the principles that describe how the programs, activities, and land development vi 38 regulations will be carried out. The plan shall establish meaningful and predictable standards o 39 for the use and development of land and provide meaningful guidelines for the content of To 40 more detailed land development and use regulations. o 0 41 0I 42 163.3201, F.S.—Relationship of comprehensive plan to exercise of land development regulatory o 43 authority.—It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans or elements thereof o 44 shall be implemented, in part, by the adoption and enforcement of appropriate local N 45 regulations on the development of lands and waters within an area. It is the intent of this act E 46 that the adoption and enforcement by a governing body of regulations for the development E 47 of land or the adoption and enforcement by a governing body of a land development code for 0 a BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 13 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet:Pg.21 A.1.a 1 an area shall be based on, be related to, and be a means of implementation for an adopted 2 comprehensive plan as required by this act. 3 4 VI. PROCESS t~ 5 Comprehensive Plan Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the y 6 Planning Commission, the Director of Planning, or the owner or other person having a contractualal 7 interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning shall review f- 8 and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the Development Review c 9 Committee and the Planning Commission. . 10 d 11 The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall E 12 review the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning & c 13 Environmental Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the n. 14 public hearing. The Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the 15 Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the u) 16 transmittal of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, and considers the staff report, staff d 17 recommendation, and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may or may not t 18 recommend transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency. The amendment is transmitted to State E 19 Land Planning Agency, which then reviews the proposal and issues an Objections, 20 Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report. Upon receipt of the ORC report, the County has o 21 180 days to adopt the amendments, adopt the amendments with changes or not adopt the amendment. ra 22 0 23 r, 24 VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION c 25 2 26 Staff recommends the BOCC consider adoption of Goal 109, with the following changes, as ._ 27 presented in this staff report, the Amendment Table, and the Segment Analysis: w 28 1. Change the community meeting deadlines to the recommended shorter timeframe,however, 71 29 allow a maximum timeframe of 120 days for map amendments, major conditional uses and HI 30 development agreements. Do not impose a maximum timeframe for text amendments. u. 31 2. Limit the density bonuses to projects that are rental only, for very low, low, and median of 32 income, as discussed at the November 2017 meeting. et 33 3. Limit the density bonuses in Goal 109 to the following islands/segments, based on MIAI, vl 34 traffic, and Employment analysis: 0 35 a. Saddlebunch/Shark Key(segment 4) d. 36 b. Sugarloaf(segment 5) �,I 37 c. Summerland(segment 7) a, i 38 d. Ramrod(segment 8) as 0 39 e. Little Torch(segement 9) of 40 f. Long Key(segment 16) o 41 g. Tavernier(segment 22; and the unincorporated portion of segment 21) 03 0 42 `" a) E 0 0 a BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 14 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg.22 A.1.a 1 VI.II.EXHIBITS 2 3 1. Proposed Text Amendment-Hurricane Recovery Element 4 2. NASKW Response 01.25.2019 5 3. Goal 109 Map Series=Existing Land Use 6 4. Goal 109 Map Series—Land Use Designation co 7 5. 2015 Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment 8 6. Existing Affordable Housing Map Series 9 7. Monroe CountyHousingStrategies Post-Irma g 10 8. Monroe County 2018 Qualifying Income Limits (rental and ownership) 11 9. Monroe County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee Recommendations to the BOCC to — 12 Resolution 01-2016. F. 13 10. Island/Segment Analysis and Geographic Recommendations 14 11. Density Examples 0 15 12. Transmittal Resolution and Draft Ordinance n. E 0 U o> 0 0 CD 0 N a) LL ceI O m 1 0 C7 0 co N V a1 BOCC SR 02.12.2019 Page 15 of 15 File 2018-010 Packet Pg.23 A.1.b 3.0 GOALS,OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES 3.1 FUTURE LAND USE Proposed Amendment(deletions are s#ieken-thre ;additions are shown in underlined):Modifications made by staff following discussions and public input at the DRC and Planning Commission meeting are shown in purple with a double underline. 7 a Hurricane Irma Recovery BOCC Direction/vote at Planning BOCC Transmittal c 12 11.29.17 meeting Commission Hearing-02.12.2019 t- Recommendations 10.24.2018 E Goal 109 C NKMR M K R C C1 cc At 9:10 a.m.on September 10.2017,Hurricane Irma made landfall near Cudioe Key as a Category 4 Hurricane with maximum sustained E a winds of 130 mph.Significant damage has occurred to the housing stock within the County,primarily among lower cost housing options a occupied by the members of the workforce.In the recovery from the impacts of Hurricane Irma,Monroe County shall manage future growth YES a to enhance the quality of life and safety of County residents,and prioritize the provision of workforce housing that is safe,code-compliant Y Y Y Y 1 > and resilient. c a a a Objective 109.1 t. In order to advance the recovery from the impacts of Hurricane Irma, Monroe County shall incentivize the development and redevelopment of resilient.workforce housing to improve the safety and welfare of County residents,preserve the quality of life and the 0 economy of the Florida Keys,reduce the need for workforce housing,and better protect the County from future damage. o For the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal and the associated objectives and policies,the terms`development'and'redevelopment'shall o mean the following for a period of two(2)years from the effective date<insert date>of the Goal 109: Y Y 1 Y 1 YES Redevelopment means the substantial improvement and/or demolition and replacement of existing development on a site. 9 t Development means the carrying out the construction of new structures: the demolition of a structure and reconstruction, the cc substantial improvement of a structure and/or a change in the intensity of use of land,such as an increase in the number of dwelling o units in a structure or on land or a material increase in the number of businesses,manufacturing establishments,offices or dwelling E units in a structure or on land. ui o' BOCC Direction/vote at Planning BOCC Transmittal m 11.29.17 meeting Commission Hearing-02.12.2019 c ro Recommendations ri 10.24.2018 ' Policy 109.1.1 C N ' K M R M K R C Ci E Notwithstanding the land uses provided in Chapter 130[Land Use Districts)of the Monroe Coun Land Develo ment Code for a 1 - c d riod of two 2 ears from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal a workforce housing shall be a permitted use in all land use districts where detached or attached dwellings, employee housing or commercial apartments is included as a current permitted use. The term"workforce housing"is interchangeable W with the terms detached or attached dwellings,employee housing or commercial apartments included in the land use districts.The y y y 1 YES c,. development of workforce housing is subject to the other requirements included in the land use districts,including but not limited to, m E size requirements.bufferyards,access.etc. u Delete the provision"or until all County affordable ROGO x allocations are utilized"in this policy and following policies. < DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 1 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.24 A.1.b The following Land Use Districts allow dwelling Example: units,employee housing or commercial apartments: Sec.130-88.Mixed Use District(MU). (a) The following uses are permitted as of right in the mixed use district: CFA(130-77) (I) Detached dwellings;[workforce housing] _ (2) Commercial retail,office,restaurant uses,or anycombination thereof,of low and medium intensity,and of less than 2,500 square10 CFSD(130-79)[except CFSD 4,6 and 7J feet of floor area (3) Institutional residential uses,involving less than ten dwelling units or rooms; E CFV(130-80) (4) Commercial apartments[workforce housing]involving less than six dwelling units,but tourist housing use,including vacation rental use,of commercial apartments is a DR(130-81) prohibited; I(130-82) (5) Commercial recreational uses limited to: ~ a. Bowling alleys: IS(130-83) b. Tennis and racquet ball courts: E MI(130-85) a Miniature golf and driving ranges; 0 MF(130-86) d. Theaters; a MN(130-87) t Health clubs;and a f Swimming pools: m MU(130-88) (6) Commercial fishing; NA(130-89) (7) Institutional uses; a OS(130-90) (8) Public buildings and uses; N (9) Home occupations—Special use permit required; RV(130-92) (10)Parks; m SC(130-93) (1I)Accessory uses: a 130-94 (12)Vacation rental use of detached dwelling units is permitted if a special vacation rental permit is obtained under the regulations established in section 134-1; a SR (130-94) (13)Replacement of an existing antenna-supporting structure pursuant to section 146-5(b): E SR-L(130-95) (14)Collocations on existing antenna-supporting structures,pursuant to section 146-5(c): 0 SS(130-96) (15)Attached wireless communications facilities.as accessory uses,pursuant to section 146-5(d): (16)Stealth wireless communications facilities,as accessory uses,pursuant to section 146-5(e); c UC(130 97) (17)Satellite earth stations less than two meters in diameter,as accessory uses,pursuant to section 146-5(f); o UR(130-98) (18)Attached and detached dwellings involving less than six units,designated as employee housing[workforce housing]as provided for in section 139-I;and 10 0 URM(130-99) 09)Wastewater nutrient reduction cluster systems that serve less than ten residences. 0c N BOCC Direction/vote at Planning Commission BOCC Transmittal v 11.29.17 meeting Recommendations Hearing-02.12.2019 ce 10.24.2018 a PolicyE 109.1.2 C N K M R M K R C Ci d w The workforce housing to be prioritized by Monroe County shall mean dwelling units for those who derive at least 70%of their ix' income as members of the workforce in Monroe County and who meet the affordable housing income categories of the Monroe II County Code.Workforce means individuals or families who are gainfully employed supplying goods and/or services to Monroe YES m County residents or visitors. t- Notwithstanding the density limitations in Policy 101,5,25 and Section 130-157 of the Land Develo ment Code for a eriod of two Y Y N \ 1 E (2)years from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal 109 � a E a x to E u ti t DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 2 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.25 A.1 b workforce housing may be developed pursuant to a maximum net density of 25 du/buildable acre for the UR zoning district and 18 du/buildable acre for the MU and SC zoning districts and will not require Transferable Development Rights(TDR) as shown in the table below_ The maximum net density standards in Policy 101.5.25 for affordable housing can be applied to the development of workforce housing without the use of TDRs. The County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee(AHAC)recommended the BOCC change the Code to redefine affordable housing and make sure all affordable ROGOs are used for"workforce housing."The BOCC agreed and directed staff to amend the Land Development Code to create a new definition for"workforce housing"and Goal 109,which will be considered by the BOCC within the next couple of months. Definitions proposed by the AHAC: Workforce means individuals or families who are gainfully employed supplying goods and/or services to Monroe County residents or visitors. Workforce Housing means dwelling units for those who derive at least 70%of their income as members of the Workforce in Monroe County and who meet the affordable housing income categories of the Monroe County Code. These proposed definitions are problematic if the County wants to continue to support private developers of affordable housing via participation and set aside of Low Income Housing Tax Credit(LIHTC)Projects.Based on FHFC BOCC Transmittal guidance,if we adopt these definitions,the projects would not meet"Housing Assistance Act Hearing the Internal Revenue Code$421g)." Similarly,the County's existing requirement of"employee housing"in certain zoning -02.12.2019 districts is a current regulation that may cause issues regarding LIHTC funding.(See email dated 11.30.2018 from Acting Director of Planning&Environmental Services to the BOCC.) M K R C Ci s: c f7 OPTION for Policy 109.1.2—increase density.if rental units'? ...workforce housing, limited to exclusively rental units,may be developed pursuant to a maximum net density of 37.5 0 du/buildable acre for the UR zoning district and 25 du/buildable acre for the MU and SC zoning districts and will not require N Transferable Development Rights(TDR). Limit density bonus to ce proiects that propose at Maintain existing density bonus for projects which include units in least 50%low and/or the moderate income category. very low income categories. w Provide a 50%density bonus for projects which are limited to rental units for the very low,low and median income categories. ml a ro UR=37.5 du/buildable acre MU and SC=27 du/buildable acre E c Notwithstanding the density limitations in Policy 101.5.25 and Section 130-157 of the Land Development Code,for a period of two (2)years from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal 109,the maximum net density standards in 1 Policy 101.5.25 for affordable housing,with a 50%density bonus,can be applied to the development of workforce housing which are limited to exclusively rental units in the very low,low and median income categories without the use of TDRs j[1 the I I¢_, Nil and Sc Koning dititncts. These workforce housing_units may be developed pursuant to a maximum net density of 37.5 du/buildable acre within the UR zoning district and 27 du/buildable acre within the MU and SC zoning districts and will not require Transferable Development Rights(TDRs),;ts shown in the table below. DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 3 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.26 A.1.b Land Use District Allocated Maximum Net Workforce Housing Ivtanimum Net Density DcpSit}' Density DU/Buildable Acre DU/Gross Acre DV/Buildable of Upland Acre *Limited to rental of verElow.low and median income Mixed Use(MUJ j Q TDRs: 12.0 Affordable:27.0 Affordable: 18.0 C Suburban Comrite al TDRs:6.0 Affordable:27.0 Affordable l$,Q m Urban Residentia 11,,Q TDRs: 12.0 Affordab e:37.5 a Affordable:25A t Ts BOCC Direction/vote at Planning Commission BOCC Transmittal 11.29.17 meeting Recommendations Hearing-02.12.2019 — 10.24.2018 Policy 109.1.3 C N K MR M K R C Ci `o All workforce housine projects which receive development benefits from Monroe(bunt durin the.eriod.f two 2 years from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Goal includin but not limited to,receiving affordable ROGO allocation award(s),reservations of affordable ROGO allocations,maximum net density standards without the use of TDRs,rental workforce housine density bonuses or the restructured development approval procedures included under Goal 109,shall be required to maintain the project as workforce housing for a period of 99 years pursuant to deed restrictions or other mechanisms specified in the Land Development Code. x' All affordable housing proiects greater than 20 dwelling units developed as workforce housing during,the oeri d of two(2)years from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal� 1 eil-feunty "° shall not be subiect to Section 139-1(a)(61h.(AJJbrdable housing projects shall be no greater than 20 units unless approved YES by resolution of the County Planning Commission. The Planning Commission's decision may be appealed to the BOCC using the 1 1 1 \ l E procedures described in Section 102-185,with the BOCC serving as the appellate body for the purpose of this section only;J. — — E a w c d E L U Q DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 4 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.27 A.1.b BOCC Direction/vote at Planning Commission BOCC Transmittal 11.27.19 meeting Recommendations Hearing-02.12.2019 10.24.2018 C N K M R M K R C Ci A r E Policy 109.1.4 0 Notwithstanding the development approval procedures included in Chapter 110[Development Reviewl of the Land Develo ment Limit Goal 109 to apply F BOCC direction included in de,Co fora wo eriod of t 2 ears from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal only to Stock Island and the green cells below. E including expedited .0 c a process and density E bonus. a \ A (See Maps with MIA[ m boundary and noise '—. contours. a li E 0 C) m 0 Development Agreement . 0 o Existing Process Recovery Process Recovery Process Planning Commission Staff Revised BOCC Transmittal Hearing c Presented to BOCC Option A Option B Recommendations Recommendations 02.12.2019 .y 11.29.2017 10.24.2018 01.25.2019 ce Cutnmunitl M K R C Ci m Community meeting Community Meeting Meeting 30-1211 E Community Meeting 30-fill 3(I-fi0 days prior to days prior to W ce EMIdays prior to public hearing, public hearing, public hearing, _ 1 noticed and advertised at noticed and noticed and col 45-120 days prior to public hearing least 15 days prior to the advertised at least 15 advertised at least a noticed and advertised at least 15 days c..„,„,1...aerr amuher. 1'r, meetingdays prior to the 15 days prior to ~i ('.nnoo..c c. ne K.dhr 1'O. prior to the meeting (,„t,n„.„rterM,uyM lea meeting the meeting 0 (.lonnol mer N.vtern l c. E Movor Rwc 1'e, 0 C a Development Review Committee(DRC) M K R C Ci .E (last Tuesday of the month) .- ,i w 2 noticed and advertised at least 15 days DRC DRC c rior to the meeting Contemewercameher. No 0 pCmrvn,srAcrKoaaPe ye. .0 L l'munlaar,mer\hrq,ln 1e, u f,mm11aon c.Neureur No 1�" Mayor Rme ye, a DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 5 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.28 A.1.b Planning Commission(PC) M K R C Ci (last Wednesday of the month) 3 noticed and advertised at least 15 dais PC PC PC prior to the meeting r E W C W BOCC M K R C Ci (third Wednesday of the month) ea E C c m noticed and advertised at least 15 days Ea prior to the meeting a 4 BOCC BOCC BOCC . 'a public hearings and adoptions shall take c place at the board's meeting which is closest to the subject property or at the a. E board's meeting site that is next closest to e i the subject property a, 0 DEO M K R C Ci c 5 Rendered to DEO for review and approval DEO DEO DEO —45 day review 0 M K R C Ci 6 If Appealed,sent to DOAH DOAH DOAH DOAH cc a c a E a w Major Conditional Use = Existing Process Recovery Processto I— EI Recovery Process Planning Staff Revised BOCC Transmittal Hearing a Presented to BOCC Commission Recommendations 02.12.2019 E Option A Option B 11.29.2017 Recommendations 01.25.2019 a 10.24.2018 QE 1 Community meeting Community Meeting Community M K R C Ci w 30-60 days prior to Community Community Meeting Meeting 30-120 . Meeting 30-60 days 30-60 daysprior to days prior to public e 1 public hearing,noticed E 45-120 days prior to public hearing and advertised at least prior to public public hearing. hearing,noticed noticed and advertised at least 15 days connnssxwerKo0ase Yes 15 days prior to the hearing,noticed noticed and and advertised at gas prior to the meeting conmissionerMsrphy ties meeting and advertised at advertised at least 15 ct Conmissioner Neueena No Mayor Rite yes DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 6 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.29 A.1.b least 15 days prior days prior to the least 15 days prior to the meeting meeting to the meeting Development Review Committee(DRC) M K R C Ci 71 (last Tuesday of the month) comur..NmcH amrther. No 2 Cortuntastoner Kolltage Yea DRC DRC DRC ee noticed and advertised at least 15 days ComnassMner%[npdrq Yes prior to the meeting Conntnsioner Ncogrnr No c Mayor Rice Ye. a, E Planning Commission(PC) M K R C Ci c (last Wednesday of the month) o E 3 PC PC PC PC 4 c noticed and advertised at least 15 days 10 a prior to the meeting > Written protests. M K R C Ci e a, In the event of m written protests E against a proposed V Protest procedure by affected property major conditional a) owners—the amendment shall not become use permit signed io Ts effective except by the favorable vote of by the real four members of the PC[LDC Section property owners of 0 110-6(c)(6)states: Written protests.In the 50 percent or more of the people e event of written protests against a Keep protest c Protest procedure required to he .2 4 proposed major conditional use permit **not noted in vote table** procedure as it I eliminated noticed in Section issigned by the real property owners of 20 currently exists. cc percent or more of the people required to 110-5(d),such be noticed in Section 110-5(d),such application shall E application shall not be approved except not be approved o by the concurring vote of at least four except by the ILI commissioners before the full board of concurring vote of cc either commission.] at least four m commissioners is i before the full ~i board of either m commission. v c 13 m 9Gf+ et 5 Option removed following legal input. 'uS DEO M K R C Ci m .c Rendered to DEO for review and approval DEO DEO DEO DEO —45 day review a DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 7 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.30 A.1.b If Appealed,sent to If Appealed,sent to If Appealed.sent to M K R C Ci 7 If Appealed,sent to DOAH DOAH DOAH DOAH If Appealed,sent to DOAH a z Minor Conditional Use 5 2 Existing Process Recovery Process I- e a Planning Commission BOCC Transmittal Hearing E Recovery Process Recovery Process laPresented to BOCC 11.29.2017 Recommendations 02.12.2019 a 10.24.2018 QE Development Review Committee(DRCZ M K R C Ci c (last Tuesday of the month) a a 1 DRC DRC DRC .a noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the a .c meeting a DEO M K R C Ci v 2 DEO DEO DEO a, Rendered to DEO for review and approval—45 day 0 review a 0 M K R C Ci If Appealed,sent to PC. If Appealed,sent to PC. If Appealed,sent to PC. c 0 3 If PC decision is appealed,sent to DOAH If PC decision is appealed,sent to If PC decision is appealed,sent to .''" DOAH DOAH a cc m E a iu Policy 109.1.5 Notwithstanding the amendment procedures included in Chapter 102(Administration)of the Land Development Code,for a period of two(2)years from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal,amendments 21 to facilitate workforce housing shall follow theprocedures below: a c Comprehensive Plan-Text Amendment a C c Existing Process Recovery Process a E Recovery Process Planning Staff Revised BOCC Transmittal Hearing Presented to BOCC Option A Option B Commission Recommendatio 02.12.2019 it 11.29.2017 Recommendations ns c 10.24.2018 01.25.2019 _ E 1 Concept Meeting M K R C Ci u a DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 8 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.31 A.1.b Discuss amendment with staff and identify whether or not the 11111111,111 proposed text amendment will have a county-wide impact Concept Meeting Concept Meeting Concept Meeting mR..v"`r`'""ehen l cs requirement requirement requirement t Ya,e,n,.n,mr w,ri+u, Y. eliminated eliminated eliminated r..mnu w.ner\e,ie.,n V. NI..RI, N"es 72 BOCC impact meeting(if county-wide impact) IIIIIIIIIIIIf M K R C Ci e A Private proposals to amend the text of Code and/or Comp Plan ~ cmnsa.,, ,rsmen. 1.4 require a public meeting with the BOCC("Impact Meeting") c',mma^"^Kr"^'"^Qe '" BOCC:impact m Cn e.ma .mre,murpm in BOCC impact meeting BO CC impact meeting meetingE 2 prior to the application proceeding to the DRC for review.All eaaa,nm ee crm,e ,. requirement requirement c Impact Meetings shall be held in Marathon. sec"` N. eliminated eliminated requirement E eliminated Q e A a. noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting h Wil Community Meeting Community M K R C Ci m 30-60 days prior to Meeting a c h. Community meeting(if county-wide impact) a",mmus,nmerc'nmaher. V. Community Meeting public hearing, minimum of 30 E Commn.,,nner KoIhace ve. 30-60 days prior to noticed and days prior to ° („„„„„y,e„efNI„mh, Vt., Community Meeting t.) 3 c,»,mn..nmer�eneem 1'e. reauircment public hearing,noticed advertised at least public hearing, a, MayorRre Yes and advertised at least 15 days prior to the noticed and At least 3 months prior to public hearing(PC).noticed and eliminated 15 days prior to the meeting advertised at To c advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting meeting least 15 days 0 prior to the meetg in `o .a Development Review Committee(DRC) M K R C Ci re 4 (last Tuesday of the month) C.nrn,n,>"mer r.,m,n,er. Ye. DRC DRC DRC Cnrmm,.mner Koala.. Ves noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting Comm" `""r M ir!, V. d Cmmni.m.\e„een, yesE cci hlaw,r Rne Yes Planning Commission(PC) M K R C Ci x, (last Wednesday of the month) a m t- 5 noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting PC PC PC PC d E c d E i BOCC-transmittal hearing M K R C Ci w (third Wednesday of the month) BOCC-transmittal BOCC-transmittal BOCC-transmittal BOCC-transmittal `c 6 hearing hearing hearing hearing E noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting Y a 7 DEO DEO-ORC report DEO-ORC report DEO-ORC report DEO-ORC report M K R C Ci DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 9 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.32 A.1.b Rendered to DEO for review and comment—60 day review - ORC report BOCC—adoption hearing M K R C Ci i (third Wednesday of the month) BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption i 8— hearing hearing hearing hearing I- V. noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting e a DEO M K R C Ci E a E 9 DEO-NOI DEO-NO1 DEO-NOI DEO-NOI a c Rendered to DEO for compliance review—45 day review- a notice of intent(NO1) m a M K R C Ci a If Appealed,sent to If Appealed.sent to If Appealed.sent to m 10 If Appealed,sent to DOAH DOAH DOAH DOAH DOAH E 0 U m 0 FLUM Mau Amendment o 0 Existing Process Recovery Process c Recovery Process Planning Staff Revised BOCC Transmittal n Presented to BOCC Option A Option B Commission Recommendation Hearing a 11.29.2017 Recommendations s 02.12.2019 10.24.2018 01.25.2019 m Community meeting Community Community M K R C Ci m Meeting 3(1-60 days Meeting 30-120 �+ Community Meeting Community Meeting - - I cc prior to public days prior to 30-60 days prior to 30-60 days prior to =i 45-120 days prior to public hearing(PC),noticed and advertised public hearing,noticed public hearing,noticed hearing,noticed and public hearings m 1 advertised at least noticed and at least 15 days prior to the meeting c„, ,,,;a,nc,n,ah,,r, yes and advertised at least and advertised at lea•t ea Co oe,e.,,a ae ye. 15 days prior to the 15 days prior to the 15 days prior to the advertised at least ,..i, C mn,<u�nneruurt,hr Ye, meetin 15 clays prior to a c atM e,,n,�,, s.eS meeting meeting E Mayor Wee Yesthe meeting c Em Development Review Committee(DRCZ M K R C Ci a1 (last Tuesday of the month) 2 'C.... .....,.. .C.nnhers yes .. Cneem.unrer Kolb/ate te Ye, DRC DRC DRC a noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting `"""""`"""'ht"'tt s" E (onm,nwener Ncueen, Yea' L Jlawr RMe Yes 0 4 DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 10 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.33 A.1.b Plannina Commission(PC) M K R C Ci (last Wednesday of the month) 3 PC PC I't• Pt' noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting m r Protest procedure by affected property owners—the amendment M K R C Ci E shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of four c A members of the BOCC c,�„r,ti.,�r,rr r amnhrn E 1 r, I•,'o , ,loner K„lhac. \„ C fmunm.uwer NInrph, \n Ea ("murrrr..,„nrrNe(tecro ir. "IsorIOcr 'r. c LDC Section 102-158(d)(8)a.states: "A written protest E concerning an application for an amendment to the land use (zoning)district map or a FLUM amendment at the transmittal c stage may be filed before the BOCC hearing by the owners of no a less than 20 percent of the area of the land to be affected.Protests concerning a FLUM amendment may be made only at the N'hen a super maioritc a transmittal hearing.In the event of a written protest against such L is required(favorable °' amendment by owners of 20 percent of the affected property, vote of four members of E where the signatures and protest are found to be true and the PC/BOCCI,a vote u accurate,the amendment shall not become effective except by the cannot occur unless all ca favorable vote of four members of the BOCC.Rounding up of members of the board G decimals and percentages shall not be permitted." representina the :1, complete board 0 LDC Section 102-158(d)(8)b. states: "A written protest membership are Keep protest c 4 concerning an application for an amendment to the land use Protest procedure rp escnt procedure as it 4 eliminated N '(zoning)district map or a FLUM amendment at the transmittal currently exists. a, stage may be filed by ten percent of the owners of land within 600 cc feet of the affected property. Protests concerning a FLUM c amendment may be made otdv at the transmittal hearing. In the E event of a written protest of ten percent of the owners within 600 Option:modify%of w feet of the affected property, the amendment shall not become persons protesting ce effective except by the favorable vote of four members of the m, BOCC.In calculating whether a sufficient number of protests have 0 tO been received to trigger the requirement for a supermajority vote, I- the number of protests must meet or exceed the ten percent threshold without resorting to rounding up." E v c a E a E .e u g a DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 11 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.34 A.1.b BOCC—If processed BOCC—If processed BOCC—If M K R C C1 as a Small Scale as a Small Scale BOCC—If processed as processed as a Small Amendment Amendment a Small Scale Scale Amendment, BOCC-transmittal hearing Amendment,(163.3187, (163.3187,F.S.)can (imina 87,F.S.)can (imina 87,F.S.)can F.S.)can eliminate eliminate (third Wednesday of the month) eliminate transmittal eliminate transmittal B hearing and BOCC hearing and BOCC transmittal hearinLand transmittal hearing BOCC can adopt. and BOCC can I n opt.can adopt. caad noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting adopt. E 5 4 c **Limited to proposed **Limited to proposed **Limited to proposed ** E public hearings and adoptions shall takeplace at the board's amendment of 10 acres Limited to meeting which is closest to the subject property or at the board's amendment of 10 acres amendment of10 acres or fewer for the proposed amendment E or fewer for the or fewer for the < meeting site that is next closest to the subject property construction of of/0 acres or fewer construction of construction of a affordable housing affordable housing affordable housing for the construction o. units of affordable a units** units'* _> housing units C a .c DEO e o. 6 Rendered to DEO for review and comment—60 day review- DEO—ORC report DEO—ORC report DEO—ORC report DEO—ORC report g V ORC report a, 0 BOCC—adoption hearing M K R C Ci (third Wednesday of the month) o a noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting BOCC—this is only BOCC—this is only BOCC—this is only BOCC—this is only 2 BOCC hearing if BOCC hearing if BOCC hearing if BOCC hearing if ro processed as a small processed as a small processed as a small processed as a small public hearings and adoptions shall take place at the board's scale amendment scale amendment scale amendment scale amendment E meeting which is closest to the subject property or at the board's a meeting site that is next closest to the subject property wi cc 2 , _ .o DEO M K R C Ci a 8 Rendered to DEO for compliance review—45 day review— DEO-NOI DEO-NOI DEO-NOI DEO-NOI E notice of intent(NOI) c a M K R C Ci ii 9 If Appealed,sent to DOAH If Appealed,sent to If Appealed,sent to if Appealed,sent to DOAH DOAH DOAH DOAH t `c a E .a u a >r < DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 12 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.35 A.1.b Land Development Code-Text Amendment Recovery Process Recovery Process Planning Commission Staff BOCC Transmittal Hearing — Existing Process Presented to BOCC Recommendations Revised 02.12.2019 r 11.29.2017 Option A Option B 10.24.18 Recommen a dations c 01.25.2019 E Concept Meeting M K R C Ci c .11111MConcept Meeting Concept Meeting, Concept Mleeting Discuss amendment and identify whether or not the proposed requirement eliminated requirement eliminated requirement eliminated text amendment will have a county-wide impact a BOCC impact meeting(if county-wide impact) M K R C Ci a C Private proposals to amend the text of Code and/or Comp Plan require a public meeting with the BOCC("Impact Meeting") BOCC impact meeting BOCC impact meeting !MCC impact meeting F. prior to the application proceeding to the DRC for review.All requirement eliminated requirement eliminated requirement eliminated E Impact Meetings shall be held in Marathon. o U noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting o A Community Meeting Community M K R C Ci 30-60 days prior to Meeting a public hearing,noticed minimum c Community meeting(if county-wide impact) and advertised at least of 30 days o Community Meeting 15 days prior to the prior to at least 3 months prior to public hearing(PC),noticed and 30-60 days prior to meeting public cc 3 advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting Community Meeting public hearing,noticed hearing. c comm,ss tenet(amrlrra Yei requirement eliminated and advertised at least m :Morton was made by Commissioner Kolhacr and seconded by noticed and E Conmussionct ihirphs.tuner Land Deselopment Code Text ("itt1°sst'•nerKollt.tae Yei 15 days prior to the _d Amendment Recover Process. to eliminate the concept (bmm,ssu•ncr Morphs Yea meeting advertised WI msrnnn.BMX-impact meeting.eliminate commirnty meting (onnmssemer\nicrn, lb at least 15 (K and to maintain DRC Ihold additional Special meetings) \Idea Rice Yes days prior m to the a m meeting 1--, c. Development Review Committee(DRCZ M K R C Ci E (last Tuesday of the month) 0 m E noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting a n 4 Mellon was made ha Commissioner Kothane and seconded by DRC DRC DRC w Cottmuua nea Murphy.under I and Des elopment(',de Text Amendment Recos err Proves,. In eliminate the concept Commissioner(-amit ers Yes m mectmg.ROC('impact mcetnta.eliminate cotnnninity meeting C'nntnissumet Kolb.< Yes E and to minim a,DRC I bold additional special nieentiesi ('omtnismonet Murphy Yes o m Conun,ssionrr!solemn Yes Mayor Rice Yes Q. DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 13 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.36 A.1.b M KRC Ci Planning Commission(PC) 5 (last Wednesday of the month) PC PC PC PC noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting m BOCC—adoption hearing M K R C Ci r 6 (third Wednesday of the month) BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption e hearing hearing hearing hearingE 1— noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting a DEO M KR C Ci E SI a Rendered to DEO for compliance review—60 day review— E 7 final order DEO—final order DEO—final order DEO—final order DEO—final order c a 21 day challenge period E a M K R C Ci c If Appealed,sent to If Appealed,sent to If Appealed,sent to a 8 If Appealed,sent to DOAH DOAH m DOAH DOAH DOAH e 0. 0 U a, Zoning Map Amendment o R 0 Existing Process Recovery Process to Recovery Process Planning Staff Revised BOCC Transmittal c Presented to BOCC Commission Recommendations Hearing a 11.29.2017 Option A Option B Recommendatio 01.25.2019 02.12.2019 a ns re 10.24.18 a Community Community M K R C Ci E Meeting 30-60 Meeting 30-120 to Community meeting Community Meeting 30- Community Meeting 30- days prior to days prior to _ 60 days prior to public 60 days prior to public public hearing, public hearing, m 1 hearing,noticed and hearing,noticed and noticed and noticed and H advertised at least 15 advertised at least 15 a days prior to the days prior to the 45-120 days prior to public hearing(PC),noticed and advertised advertised at advertised at least t—i at least 15 days prior to the meeting meeting meeting least 15 days 15 days prior toa prior to the the meeting E lo meeting m E Development Review Committee(DRC) M K R C Ci a_I (last Tuesday of the month) x w noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting c 2 i--- URC DRC DRC E L Motion ass made by Commissioner Carru herc:md seconded by Commissioner Camnhers Yes N Commissioner Newton. under lnnmc Map Amendment Commissioner Kolb.ee No Q Recover•Process.to keep the(omnnunn%Nernst chatrgme Cannussiuner Murphy No teuefrnme to yp.RO dayspnor to the PC berm,!.namnam DRC. Commissioner Neugcnt Yes and ettnunote protest procedure. _Manor Rice Yes - DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 14 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.37 A.1.b Planning Commission(PC) M K R C Ci (last Wednesday of the month) 3 PC PC 1't Pt: noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting a Protest procedure by affected property owners—the amendment M K R C Ci a shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of four c io members of the BOCC it Motion w„a nude St e'onnnnotter t•amnhen and aec°nkd by Cotmwamne! icetment. under toning Map Amendment m Recovery Process.to keep the Community steams chanatnc E timeframe to;Len at,prior to the PC hearing.nwntaut DRC. 0 LDC Section 102-158(d)(8)a.states: "A written protest nod dkmnate prote,t Pmcedrtre E concerning an application for an amendment to the land use Q (zoning)district map or a FLUM amendment at the transmittalLc stage may be filed before the BOCC hearing by the owners of no When a super maiorit' a less than 20 percent of the area of the land to be affected.Protests is required(favorable c concerning a FLUM amendment may be made only at the vote of four members of m transmittal hearing.In the event of a written protest against such cor„.. t_,r„ni,, e,, the BOCCI,a vote m amendment by owners of 20 percent of the affected property, conrmsaionerWnlhaer No cannot occur unless all E where the signatures andprotest arefound to be true and lotr[nmttneeNinepin N° members of the board o gn emtntnatnner�ateem 1'rs U accurate,the amendment shall not become effective except by the MavorRoe yes representing the Keep protest Protest procedure m 4 favorable vote offour members of the BOCC.Rounding up of complete board procedure as it c, eliminated membership are present currently exists decimals and percentages shall not be permitted" o t, LDC Section 102-158(d)(8)b.states: "A written protest concerning e an application for an amendment to the land use(zoning)district •„ map or a FLUM amendment at the transmittal stage may be filed Option:modify%of tz by ten percent of the owners of land within 600 feet of the affected persons protesting property. Protests concerning a FLUM amendment may be made I only at the transmittal hearing.In the event of a written protest of E ten percent of the owners within 600 feet of the affected property, wi the amendment shall not become effective except by the favorable ix vote of four members of the BOCC. In calculating whether a m sufficient number of protests have been received to trigger the m requirement for a supermajority vote,the number of protests must 1— meet or exceed the ten percent threshold without resorting to EI iii rounding up." E 73 M K R C Ci aa) E BOCC—adoption hearing a (third Wednesday of the month) BOCC— w 5 BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption BOCC—Adoption Adoption c hearing hearing hearing hearing and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting E .c V 4 t0 Q DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 15 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.38 A.1.b public hearings and adoptions shall take place at the board's meeting which is closest to the subject property or at the board's meeting site that is next closest to the subject property m E N DEO M K R C Ci c 6 Rendered to DEO for compliance review—45 day review—appeal DEO DEO DEO DEO E or waive appeal c d E a c m M K R C Ci If Appealed,sent to If Appealed,sent to If Appealed, 0 7 If Appealed,sent to DOAH DOAH DOAH DOAH sent to DOAH c a, .c a, n E 0 0 m 0 C N K M R Planning Commission BOCC Transmittal Hearing m Recommendations 02.12.2019 ° 0 10.24.18 Policy 109.1.6 Y l Y ' 1 M K R C Ci o Notwithstanding Section 138-24 [Administration] of the Land Development Code, for a q period of two(2) ears from the effective date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal .the followin,shall be the cc ROGO distribution: ts Change allocation distribution to be: E Number of available annual residential ROGO allocations. The number of market rate 75%for very low,low and median income w residential ROGO allocations available in each subarea of the unincorporated county and the cc I total number of affordable residential ROGO allocations available countywide shall be as 25%for moderate income 1 d follows: mi Subarea YES a, Hl- E Lower Keys 4- E 8 a Teial-metrieef-rate 26 l Change the distribution between the lower income categories and w moderate income? c a, 360* Increase the allocations to the lower income groups? E Ineetnes 0 350* a DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 16 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 POcIsstP9.39 A.1.b rea Number of Market Rate Dwelling Units Upper Keys 61 Lower Keys 57 Big Pine and No Name Keys 8 77 Total market rate 126 •E tt Number of Affordable Recovery Process distribution for • c Dwelling Units workforce housing ~ Affordable dwelling units E' k" E 75%*of the remaining balance of c Very Low.Low,and Median Incomes 360* allocations on effective date of the E Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal Q 25%*of the remaining balance of 10 Moderate Income 350* allocations on effective date of the a Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal c Total affordable i 910 d L E. *Includes one annually for Big Pine Key and No Name Key., o U m in accordance with Section I1S 24(a)(1) of the land Development Code, the ['tannin c, Commission shall get the proportion of very low income low income.and median income o allocations to moderate income allocations for ill affordable housine allocations remaininc o at the conclusion of the 2-ycar effective period of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal. c 0 y d o_ Based on public input received at the public meetings and hearings,staff is proposing an alternate option which would require an overlay district in order to be eligible for the density bonus proposed as part of these workforce E housing initiatives.The overlay option would be reflected in the text amendments to Land Development Code,but are presented here for your consideration. 1, w o: x Alternate Option: Develop Overlay District in the Land Development Code Planning BOCC Transmittal Hearing; Commission 02.12.2019 0 Recommendations 10.24.18 d Notwithstanding the density limitations in Policy 101.5.25 and Section 130-157 of the Land Development Code,for a period of two(2)years from the effective M K R C Ci a date<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal,the maximum net density standards in Policy 101.5.25 for affordable housing,with a 50%density d bonus,can be applied to the development of workforce housing which are limited to exclusively rental units in the very low,low and median income NO a K w c d E u m a Q DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 17 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 MOW Pg.40 A.1.b categories without the use of TDRs where a Workforce Housine Initiati e O erlav district has been annlied to the parcel pursuant to the subsection below Section aii<inacrt IN,. These workforce housing units may be developed pursuant to a maximum net density of 37.5 du/buildable acre within the UR zoning district and 27 du/buildable acre within the MU and SC zoning_districts and will not require Transferable Development Rights(TDRs)as shown in the table below: J,and Use District \!located Density Maximum Net Density Workforce !rousing Maximum Net Density DU/Gross Acre of DU/Buildable Acre J)U/Buildable Acre Upland *Limited to rental of very low,low and median income. Mixed Use(MU) 1.0 TDRs: 12.0 Affordable:27.0 Affordable:18.0 a Suburban Commercial(SC) ,2,Q TDRs:6.0 Affordable:27.0 N d Affordable:18.0 c Urban Residential_(UR) Q TDRs: 12.0 Affordable:37.5 Affordable;25.0 a, 0 0 a) Workforce Housing Initiative Overlay. a. Purpose. The purpose of this overlay district is to identify compatible areas for the development of workforce housing consistent with 4 Comprehensive Plan Goal 109. b. Boundaries.Property identified on the Monroe County Land Use(Zoning)District Map as Urban Residential(UR),Suburban Commercial(SC) cde and Mixed Use(MU). c. The use within the overlay district shall be subiect to all land development regulations of the underlying zoning district with the exception of those E regulations controlling density. d. Workforce housing uses within the overlay district shall be developed with the following density regulations: cc Land Use District Allocated Density Maximum Net Density Workforce Housing Maximum Net Density DU/Gross Acre of DU/Buildable Acre DU/Buildable Acre for rental units Wad designated as very low, low and median income. G! E Mixed Use(MU) 1.0 TDRs: 12.0* Affordable:27.0* Affordable: 18.0* wl Suburban Commercial 3.0 TDRs:6.0* Affordable:27.0* SIC Affordable:18.0* DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 18 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.41 A.1.b 11rban_Resitiential(URI fzQ TDRs:12.0* Affordable:37.5* Affordable:25.0* * For properties consisting of hammocks.Dinelands or disturbed wetlands within the Mixed Use/Commercial and Mixed Use/ Commercial ishint future land use cateorie&theim,1ximum net_density bonuseSshall nQLbc av it lab.le, m e. The regulations set forth in this chapter Hurricane Irma Recovery Process may be applied to specific sites meeting the following criteria: 1. The property shall contain a minimum of 0.5 acres of upland; 2. ihe..orppert]shall be located within a Tier Illsi,siinated area: 3. The propert�shall have gll int'rastrnc urc_in_placc_and shal_I_msct_admtcd LOS(tr potable water,wastewater and stop a ter; 4. J c roperta•shallppt belpcated within a designated CBRS unit One additional visitor off-street parking space shall be provided for every five(5)dwelling units; 7. At least one continuous pedestrian walkway shall be provided from the main property entrance to the public sidewalk,bike path and/or street edge of pavement.The walkway shall be at least five feet wide and shall meet all applicable ADA Accessibility Guidelines• i o. 9. Str re )containing a€tPrdebl -wprklorce housing units shall not be located within a velocity(V)zone. v f. Application of the Workforce Housing Initiative Overlay to a specific property shall require an jtmendmvnl to_Lhe Land Use District(Zoning)Man °__._ _, �., o, according to the Wrkforce tlousme Inccnuac I)eyelooment RevLet� .mess in $tenon 140-7. 0 c 0 a `c a E a w a .0 m c a E a E w C a E t u a DRAFT Amendments for Discussion Page 19 of 19 BOCC 02.12.2019 Packet Pg.42 A.1.c DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR STATION vemsr PO BOX 9001 KEY WEST FL 33040.9001 11000 Ser PR712/032 25 Jan 19 Ms. Cheryl Cioffari Monroe County Planning& Environmental Resources Dept. c 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400 Marathon, FL 33050 Dear Ms. Cioffari, ar E This letter is prepared in response to Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Text CD Amendment: Goal 109 (File 2018-010). We have reviewed the proposed amendment, and appreciate Monroe County's critical need for affordable workforce housing. ea Pursuant to the 2018 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (AICUZ) Study, Naval Air d Station, Key West does not support any increased residential density in high noise areas 65DNL '1 and above. Per Table 7-1 of the 2018 AICUZ Study(Enclosure 1), residential use is discouraged r in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74. The absence of viable alternative a development options should be determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior c to approvals indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be ci met if development were prohibited in these zones. Where the community determines that these o, uses must be allowed, measures to achieve an outdoor to indoor Noise Level Reduction (NLR)of at least 25dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30dB in DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into c building codes and be in individual approvals; for transient housing a NLR of at least 35dB �? should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. We look forward to continue coordination on the proposed text amendment. My point of m contact is my Community Planning Liaison Officer, Ms. Ashley Monnier, she can be reached at re COMM: (305) 293-2633 or via e-mail: ashley.monnier@navy.mil. Sincerely, .c . J. BAKER Captain, U.S. Navy Commanding Officer Enclosure: (1) AICUZ Table 7-1 Copy to: Emily Schemper, Acting Senior Director of Planning and Environmental Resources, Monroe County Packet Pg.43 (le;;lwsue/i luawpuewv ueld anisuayaJdwo3 - 601• leos) asuodsam AneN-z•x3 :;uewyoeuy U (I) atnsoToua Q c) a S-L a6od suoliopueuxuoaab ui puo slshlouy A4wcoodoD asn puol•L U as n- tiA ocA ezA A A A cA sA N sapisnpul palllo puo'6wysilgnd'6ul4uud LL [cA ocA ezA A A A sA sA N 6uunpoinuow:spnpoid palllo puo Jadod 9Z (EA ocA ezA A A A cA cA N 6uunpoinuow :saJnixli puo aJnilwnd SZ cA oeA otA A A sA sA N 6ul.inpo4nuow :(arnilwni A idapxa)spnpo�d poor",puo Jaywnl VZ 6uunpo4nuow alopaiow lollwls icA ocA ezA A A A N N N puo Jayioal 'sopgoi wo.14 apow spnpoJd cpnpoJd paysluli Jay()puo laaoddy £Z LcA ocA ozA A A A rA N N 6ulinpoinuow:spnpoid Illw aluxal LZ (cA ocA ezA A A A rA N N 6uunpo4nuow:spnpoid paipupi puo pooj lZ e6I poinuowl OL N N ezN ezN LA A N N N lolivaplsai Jay() 91 N ezN ezN ezN LA A N N N s6ul6pol ivalsuOJ j S I N N N N LA A N N N siAno)Jo Dliod awoy allgow q I N N ezN azN LA A N N N slaioy loltuaplsab C I N N azN ezN LA A N N N siauonb dnoiO Z I N N ezN ezN LA A N N N Joionala:sivaw4Jody L£•I I N N ezN etN 1A A N N N do NIlom a4uaw4Jody LC-1 I N N ezN ezN iA A N N N aayio ayt anogo auo:shun oral ZZ•L I N N ezN ezN I A A N N N apls-Aq-apls:shun oral I L•1 i N N ezN ezN to A N N N MOJ palpoiio atlun al6u1S C LL I N N ezN ezN (A A N N N payootaplwas:shun al6ulS Z I•I I N N ezN etN IA A zA N N paipotap:shun al6ulS I L•1 I 1 N N ezN ezN iA A VN VN VN shun ployasnoH L l Iloiluaplsab 01 1NO 1Na 1NO 1NO 1NO 1NO II ZdV I ZdV 3NOZ 3WVN 'ON 68 Ol 08 6L 01 SLR SL> 01 OL 69 Ol S9 P9 01 SS SS> dV31) warns £ 3NOZ 3SION L 3NOZ 3SION l 3NOZ 3SION LS3NOZ 1VI1N310d 1N3GIJ)V 3Sf1 aNVI S13A31 3SION SNOIIVON30101OJ32J A1111911VdWOJ 3S(1 aNv1 t-L 319V± Apn4S sauoZ asn algltodwop suoliollotsul J!V tsom Aa)l Uolio4S.4lV 10A0N 1VNId Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study FINAL TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 >_75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 28 Chemicals and allied products; N N N Y Y Y Y29 Y3c Y3' manufacturing 29 Petroleum refining and related industries N N N Y Y Y y29 Y3o y31 30 'Manufacturing (continued)3 31 Rubber and misc. plastic products; N N N Y Y Y Y2° Y30 Y31 manufacturing 32 Stone,clay,and glass products; N N Y'' Y Y Y Y29 Y3o Y3' manufacturing 33 Primary metal products;manufacturing N N Y4 Y Y Y y29 Y30 Y11 34 Fabricated metal products;manufacturing N N Y: Y Y Y y29 Y3o y31 35 Professional,scientific, and controlling instruments;photographic and optical N N N Y Y Y 25 30 N goods; watches and clocks 39 Miscellaneous manufacturing N Y5 Y5 Y Y Y y29 Y30 Y11 40 Transportation,communication and 1 utilities&7 41 Railroad,rapid rail transit,and street N Y 5, YS Y Y Y Y29 Y30 Y31 railway transportation 42 Motor vehicle transportation N Y 5,7 Y5 Y Y Y y29 y30 y31 43 Aircraft transportation N Y 5,7 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o y31 44 Marine craft transportation N y 5,' Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o y31 45 Highway and street right-of-way N Y 5,' Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o y3' 46 Automobile parking N Y 5•' Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o y31 47 Communication N Y 5-' Y5` Y Y Y 2532 3032 N 48 Utilities N Y 5,' Y5 Y Y Y y29 Y3o y31 485 Solid waste disposal (landfills,incineration, N N N Y Y NA NA NA NA etc.) v n 7. Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-6 D urt "' Attachment: Ex.2-Navy_Response (Goal 109 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal) FINAL Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 275 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 49 Other transportation,communication, and N Y 7 Y7 Y Y Y 2532 3012 N utilities 50 ITrade 51 Wholesale trade N Y5 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 y30 y31 52 Retail trade—building materials, N Ye YP Y Y Y y39 Y70 Y31 hardware,and farm equipment 53 Retail trade"—shopping centers,home improvement store,discount club, N N Y9 Y Y Y 25 30 N electronics superstore 54 Retail trade—food N N Y11 Y Y Y 25 30 N 55 Retail trade—automotive,marine craft, N yl2 Y12 Y Y Y 25 30 N aircraft,and accessories 56 Retail trade—apparel and accessories N N Y13 Y Y Y 25 30 N 57 Retail trade—furniture,home furnishings, N N Y13 Y Y Y 25 30 N and equipment 58 Retail trade—eating and drinking Y N N N Y Y 25 30 N establishments 59 Other retail trade N N Y9 Y Y Y 25 30 N 60 Services" 61 Finance,insurance,and real estate services N N y15 Y Y Y 25 30 N 62 Personal services N N Y'6 Y Y Y 25 30 N 62.4 Cemeteries N y17 y17 Y Y Y y29 y3o y 31,37 63 Business services(credit reporting;mail, N N Y18 Y Y Y 25 30 N stenographic reproduction;advertising) 63.7 Warehousing and storage services N Y19 Y19 Y Y Y Y29 y3o y31 64 Repair services N y2o y2o Y Y Y y29 y30 y31 65 Professional services N N y18 Y Y Y 25 30 N 13 0) C) x iti 7.Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-7 -vup D A n cn Attachment: Ex.2-Navy_Response (Goal 109 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal) Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study FINAL TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 >_75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 65.1 Hospitals,other medical facilities N N N Y Y' 25 30 N N 65.16 Nursing homes N N N Y Y N28 N28 N N 66 Contract construction services N Y70 y2° Y Y Y 25 30 N 67 Governmental services N N Y" Y Y' y28 25 30 N 68 Educational services N N N Y Y' 25 30 N N 69 Miscellaneous N N Yi8 Y Y Y 25 30 N 70 1Cultural,entertainment and recreational 71 Cultural activities(& churches) N N N Y Y' 25 30 N N 71.2 Nature exhibits N y21 y71 Y Y' YIP N N N 72 Public assembly N N N Y YI Y N N N 72.1 Auditoriums,concert halls N N N Y Y 25 30 N N 72.11 Outdoor music shells,amphitheaters N N N Y Y' N N N N 72.2 Outdoor sports arenas,spectator sports N N N Y Y Y33 y33 N N 73 Amusements-fairgrounds, miniature golf, N N Y Y Y Y Y N N driving ranges; amusement parks,etc. 74 Recreational activities(including golf N y20.I' Y20,2' Y Y' Y26 25 30 N courses,riding stables,water recreation) 75 Resorts and group camps N N N Y Y' Y28 Y28 N N 76 Parks N Y20•21 Y20,21 Y Y' Y28 y28 N N 79 Other cultural,entertainment and N Y17 20 y17,20 y YI Y28 Y28 N N recreation 180 !Resource production and extraction 81 Agriculture(except livestock) Y6 Y22 Y22 Y y Y34 y35 y36 Y36,37 81.5,81.7 Livestock forming and breeding N Y22,23 y22.23 Y Y Y34 Y35 N N 82 Agricultural related activities N Y22.24 y72.24 Y Y Y34 Y35 Y36 Y36,37 .17 a x a 7. Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-8 "V D um A n -.' Attachment: Ex.2-Navy_Response (Goal 109 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal) FINAL Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 z75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 83 (Forestry activities2s N Y24 y?4 Y Y y34 y35 y36 y36,37 84 ;Fishing activities26 N26 y?4 Yea Y Y Y Y Y Y 85 Mining activities N y24 Y24 Y Y Y Y Y Y 89 Other resource production and extraction N Y24 Yea Y Y Y Y Y Y 90 Other I 91 Undeveloped Land Y Y Y NA NA NA NA NA NA 93 Water areas N27 N27 N27 NA NA NA NA NA NA Adapted from OPNAVINST 1 1010.36.0(Navy 2008). Notes: 1. A"Yes"or a"No"designation for compatible land use is to be used only for general comparison.Within each,uses exist where further evaluation may be needed in each category as to whether it is clearly compatible,normally compatible,or not compatible due to the variation of densities of people and structures.In order to assist installations and local governments,general suggestions as to Federal Aviation Regulations(FARs)are provided as a guide to densities in some categories.In general,land-use restrictions which limit commercial,services,or industrial buildings or structure occupants to 25 per acre in APZ 1 and 50 per acre in APZ 2 are the range of occupancy levels,including employees,considered to be low density.Outside events should normally be limited to assemblies of not more than 25 people per acre in APZ 1,and Maximum(MAX) assemblies of 50 people per acre in APZ 2. 2. The suggested maximum density for detached single-family housing is 1 to 2 dwelling units per acre(Du/Ac).In a Planned Unit Development(PUD)of single-family detached units where clustered housing development results in large open areas,this density could possibly be increased,provided the amount of surface area covered by structures does not exceed 20%of the PUD total area.PUD encourages clustered development that leaves large open areas. 3. Other factors to be considered:Labor intensity,structural coverage,explosive characteristics,air pollution,electronic interference with aircraft,height of structures,and potential glare to pilots. 4. Maximum FAR of 0.56 in APZ 2. 5. Maximum FAR of 0.28 in APZ 1 and 0.56 in APZ 2. 6. No structures(except airfield lighting),buildings,or aboveground utility/communications lines should normally be located in clear zone areas on or off the installation.The clear zone is subject to severe restrictions.See UFC 3-260-01 "Airfield and Heliport Planning&Design"dated 10 November 2001 for specific design details. 7. No passenger terminals and no major aboveground transmission lines in APZ 1. 8. Within SLUCM Code 52,Max FARs for lumber yards(SLUCM Code 521)are 0.20 in APZ 1 and 0.40 in APZ 2.For hardware/paint and farm equipment stores,SLUCM Code 525,the Max FARs are 0.12 in APZ 1 and 0.24 in APZ 2. 9. Maximum FAR of 0.16 In APZ 2. 10. A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned,developed,owned,or managed as a unit.Shopping center types include strip, neighborhood,community,regional,and super regional facilities anchored by small businesses,supermorket or drug store,discount retailer,department store,or several deportment stores,respectively.Included in this category are such uses as big box discount and electronics superstores.The Max recommended FAR for SLUCM 53 should be applied to the gross leasable area of the shopping center rather than attempting to use other recommended FARs under"Retail"or"Trade." 11. Maximum FAR of 0.24 in APZ 2. 1 2. Maximum FAR of 0.14 in APZ 1 and 0.28 in APZ 2. CO n X :: 7. Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-9 cn D Aco n Attachment: Ex.2-Navy_Response (Goal 109 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal) Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study FINAL TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO<75 z75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 13.Maximum FAR of 0.28 in APZ 2. 1 4. Low intensity office uses only.Accessory uses such as meeting places,auditoriums,etc.,are not recommended. 15. Maximum FAR of 0.22 for"General Office/Office park"In APZ 2. 16. Office uses only.Maximum FAR of 0.22 in APZ 2. 17. No chapels are allowed within APZ 1 or APZ 2. 18. Maximum FAR of 0.22 in APZ 2. 19. Maximum FAR of 1.0 in APZ 1 and 2.0 in APZ 2. 20. Maximum FAR of 0.11 in APZ 1 and 0.22 in APZ 2. 21. Facilities must be low intensity and provide no tot lots,etc.Facilities such as clubhouses,meeting places,auditoriums, large classes,etc.,are not recommended. 22. Includes livestock grazing but excludes feedlots and intensive animal husbandry.Activities that attract concentrations of birds creating a hazard to aircraft operations should be excluded. 23. Includes feedlots and intensive animal husbandry. 24. Maximum FAR of 0.28 in APZ 1 and 0.56 in APZ 2.No activity that produces smoke or glare or involves explosives. 25. Lumber and timber products removed due to establishment,expansion,or maintenance of clear zones will be disposed of in accordance with appropriate DoD Natural Resources Instructions. 26. Controlled hunting and fishing may be permitted for the purpose of wildlife management. 27. Naturally occurring water features(e.g.,rivers,lakes,streams,wetlands)are compatible. 28.a. Although local conditions regarding the need for housing may require residential use in these zones,residential use is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74.The absence of viable alternative development options should be determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to approvals indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be met if development were prohibited in these zones. b. Where the community determines that residential uses must be allowed,measures to achieve outdoor to indoor NLR of at least 25 dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30 dB DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into building codes and be in individual approvals;for transient housing a NLR of at least 35 dB should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. c. Normal permanent construction can be expected to provide an NLR of 20 dB;thus,the reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10,or 15 dB over standard construction and normally assume mechanical ventilation,upgraded sound transmission class ratings in windows and doors and closed windows year round.Additional consideration should be given to modifying NLR levels based on peak noise levels or vibrations. d. NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems.However,building location and rite planning,design,and use of berms and barriers can help mitigate outdoor exposure,particularly from ground level sources.Measures that reduce noise at a site should be used wherever practical in preference to measures which only protect interior spaces. 29. Measures to achieve an NLR of 25 must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received,office areas,noise sensitive areas,or where the normal noise level is low. 30. Measures to achieve an NLR of 30 must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received,office areas,noise sensitive areas,or where the normal noise level is low. 31. Measures to achieve on NLR of 35 must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received,office areas,noise sensitive areas,or where the normal noise level is low. 32. If the project or proposed development is noise sensitive,use indicated NLR;if not,land use is compatible without NLR. 33. Land use compatible provided special sound reinforcement systems are installed. 34. Residential buildings require an NLR of 25. 35. Residential buildings require an NLR of 30. 36. Residential buildings not permitted. at c'> CD 7. Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-10 � D A n tD Attachment: Ex.2-Navy_Response (Goal 109 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal) FINAL Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 Z75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 37. Land-use not recommended,but if the community decides use is necessary,hearing protection devices should be worn. Key: Y(Yes) = Land use and related structures compatible without restrictions. N(No) = Land use and related structures ore not compatible and should be prohibited. Y. = (Yes with restrictions)The land use and related structures are generally compatible.However,see notes indicated by superscript. N. = (No with exceptions)The land use and related structures are generally incompatible.However,see notes indicated by superscript. SLUCM = Standard Land Use Coding Manual,U.S. Department of Transportation. NA = Not Applicable(no data available for that category). FAR = (Floor Area Ratio)A floor area ratio is the ratio between the square feet of floor area of the building and the site area. It is customarily used to measure non- residential intensities. Du/Ac = (Dwelling Units per Acre)=This metric is customarily used to measure residential densities. DNL = Day-night average sound level. Lcrt = Mathematical symbol for DNL. CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level(normally within a very small decibel difference of DNL). NLR = (Noise-Level Reduction) =NLR(outdoor to indoor)to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation into the design and construction of the structure. 25,30,or 35= The numbers refer to NLR levels.Land use and related structures generally compatible however,measures to achieve NLR of 25,30,or 35 must be incorporated into design and construction of structure.However,measures to achieve an overall noise reduction do not necessarily solve noise difficulties outside the structure and additional evaluation is warranted.Also,see notes indicated by superscripts where they appear with one of these numbers. 13 ty n ;: 7. Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-11 1 CID Ln A Attachment: Ex.2-Navy_Response (Goal 109 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal) A.1.f MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING To STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT APRIL 2015 E Monroe County f= Affordable Housing Permits Q � c c Upper Keys 61' >_ O a) at L a. E O U Middle Keys o 7.1 eol a Ka Lower Keys m 0 0 E coy O Affordable Housing Permits (n ,,�/pp�� E:::: rs�"O e Source.MmmeCwnlY-GmrnS MenepameM-PunnnBDepehmenl o e�i bs C CaE.Hnux.Eu�.b• dql.E.�Irs+e�immre...i a) O e•.1„ 21 A 1 cNi Ln Assessment Report Prepared by: Robert Jones, Director FCRC Consensus Center, Florida State Uniersity Packet Pg. 51 A.1.f STAKEHOLDER AssJ ssl I�:N 1 1ZI:PORT IA13L1. OP CON"1 I NTS Contents 2 Executive Summary 3 I. ASSESSMENT SCOPE AND ORGANIZATION 10 II. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY-CONTEXT 11 III. WORKFORCE HOUSING CHALLENGES- IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES 14 A.WORKFORCE HOUSING STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES COMMON THEMES 14 B.WORKFORCE HOUSING STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES 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 and Perspectives 31 8. Non Profit Sector Ideas and Perspectives 34 (.7 9. Military Sector Ideas and Perspectives 37 IV.WORKFORCE HOUSING PROCESS- STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES 38 y A. INFORMATION NEEDED TO INFORM CONSENSUS BUILDING ON WORKFORCE HOUSING 38 B.WORKFORCE HOUSING PROCESS-STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES 42 V. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY--NEXT STEPS 44 f6 a.+ Appendices U)i 1. List of Interviews/Meetings 45 2.Affordable Housing Advisory Committee Ordinance 48 vi 3.Workforce Housing Assessment Background Papers 50 2i 4.Workforce Housing Roundtable Summary of Comments,August 2014 51 5.Public Comment Email 56 6. "Affordable Housing White Paper",September 2014,Donald Craig,AICP Director of Planning&Nicole Malo,AICP Planner,City of Key West 57 w 7.Draft Sample Advisory Committee Procedures and Protocols 58 8. Information on the FCRC Consensus Center,FSU 68 U lC Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 Packet Pg. 52 A.1.f MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 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 c tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service-sector employment. In August 2014 the Monroe co County Commission approved a stakeholder assessment effort, to be conducted by the FCRC Consensus c Center at Florida State University (Consensus Center), to solicit perspectives and ideas on workforce housing E challenges and on whether a county-wide consensus building effort should be convened to address the c complex issues surrounding workforce housing in the Florida Keys. a) E a This assessment report sets out the context for addressing workforce housing issues and used interviews, c meetings and review of data and documents to assess stakeholder perspectives on the County's workforce a 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- a profit community and civic organizations. Based on this stakeholder input, the assessment report summarizes d the themes, concerns, issues, and interests that stakeholders believe ought to be considered in addressing a workforce housing needs in Monroe County. (See below) Eo 0 The workforce housing affordability crisis in the Florida Keys identified by the Monroe County Commission a; in 2014 is real. "Cost-burdened" households pay more than 30% of income for rent or mortgage costs. In o 2013, 51% (or 16,849) of Monroe County households pay more than 30% of income for housing while o statewide that figure is 43%. More than half of Monroe County renters are cost burdened (8,350 of 14,002) 9? while about 45% of Monroe County homeowners are cost burdened (8,499 of the 18,936). c d E In November 2014 the United Way of Florida released its report, ALICE (Asset Limited, Income N Constrained, Employed: Study of Financial Hardship, which indicates that nearly half of all Monroe County y households (14,221of 29,241) live above the federal poverty line but still struggle to afford basic expenses 4 including housing, child care, food, transportation and health care.' The Report also evaluates.community conditions for each,of Florida's counties using a weighted "Economic Viability.Dashboard" in three core t areas using a scale of 1 (worst) to 100 (best).'-Monroe County's results area as follows: Y co clii Core Areas -. Rating Grade i • .Housing Affordability(40%) 14 of 100 Poor U 2 Job Opportunities (40%)_ 67 of 100 Good ,r;l Community Support (20%) 48 of 100 Poor N 1 The Report was initially developed in New Jersey and now five other states including Florida,California,Michigan,Indiana and j Connecticut,have used the model and developed reports in 2014. •; mm https://www.frbatlanta.org/codev/publications/partnersupdate/2015/01/study-sheds-light-on-working-families-in-flor-ida y . E 2 The Index provides the means to compare counties in Florida and to see changes over time.The Housing Affordability area um includes three key indicators including:the Household Survival Budget(quantifying the cost of the housing,child care,food,health Q care,transportation);health insurance;and housing burden.The Job Opportunities area includes three key indicators including: Income Distribution;Employment Rate;and New 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 3 . Packet Pg.53 A.1.f 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. r E Over 75 persons participated in the interviews and meetings and identified a range of workforce housing cac 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. However,across the various perspectives the following emerged as six common themes regarding key workforce housing issues: a) d E 1. A Shared vision of success for Workforce Housing in Monroe County 2. Take Action on Workforce Housing `° 3. Build upon the past affordable housing studies and reports 4. Defining the problem first based on data v, 5. Seek a balanced package of options as there is no single strategy that will solve the workforce housing crisis 6. View housing as community infrastructure,like transportation and water supply 0 Issues generally identified as important from most perspectives included: 0 1. Addressing the ROGO system and workforce housing,including transfers and fractional ROGOs o 2. Density and livable workforce housing 2? 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 N 6. Workforce Housing site identification and audit of publicly owned property. 7. Creation of new workforce housing units that are both affordable and livable with development -1_°1a incentives and public private partnerships 8. Preservation and maintenance of existing workforce housing and incentives to preserve workforce Y housing En 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 V 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 <NI� workforce housing facing Monroe County and its residents. The over 50 issues and ideas identified and w summarized from the many interviews and meetings, help to shed light on the complexity of the issues and :.o 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 themes perspectives would be summarized. The report provides input from following perspectives: County Government; City Government; Education; Development; Lodging/Hospitality/Tourism; Business; Non Profit; and Military. Over 50 workforce housing ideas and Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 4 Packet Pg. 54 A.1.f - issues were identified in the Assessment from different perspectives in the following categories: Overall Workforce Housing Planning&Zoning 1. No single solution,menu of options 1. Create a County Workforce Housing Development Plan 2. Build on work to date (studies;task forces,etc.) 2. Consider adjusting height restrictions to increase �a 3. Target different levels of workforce to provide workforce housing WH 3. Allow increased density for WH y 4. Engage private and public sector employers in 4. Tax Credit Property Management after 15 yrs. al finding WH solutions 5. Encourage mixed use k- 5. Political will to implement solutions 6. Explore"Micro Housing" _m 6. Focus on rental housing 7. Enforce Housing Codes E 7. Addressing NIMBY and workforce housing 8. ROGO Allocations and Transfers,Fractional ROGO m 8. Encourage public private partnerships for WH for WH E 9. Encourage WH affordability and livability 9. ROGO Formula Q 10.Support living wages in the Keys 10. Address redevelopment and WH too 11.Expand the Keys economy beyond tourism 11. Encourage commercial construction of WH by reducing a 12.Address negative impacts on Keys communities of impact fee. transient workforce 12. Explore and assess the role of live-aboard boats in WH d 13.Clarifying workforce housing and affordable 13. Encourage hospitality industry and the commercial -cm housing definitions sector to build WH. Q, Workforce Housing Funding Preserve Existing Workforce Housing o 1. Workforce housing site identification and audit 1. ' Preserve/maintain affordable units C.) 2. Remedy Sadowski Trust Fund donor inequity 2.• Address"lost"AH/WH units o 3. Land Authority funds for workforce housing 3. Revisit land trusts as a tool T- construction 4. Provide for"no net loss"principle of affordable& es 4. Dedicated local funding for workforce housing workforce housing in the County housing element 0 5. Consider inclusionary WH fee 5. Adopt a"lease form" for local governments owning 6. Address online marketplace for vacation rentals underlying land for WH d that connects users with property to rent with 6. Address loss of deed restrictions for AH N users looking to rent the space(e.g.AirBnB) and 7. Address RV/Trailer Parks as WH and conversion issues N its impact on bed tax revenue Q 7. Provide assistance to workforce renters (down 1- payment/deposit) ..• a Workforce Housing&Transportation Workforce Housing&Related Issues o 1. Increase highway capacity to adjust ROGO 1.- Address related issues insurance costs-wind as evacuation formula 2. Address 2018 FEVMA flood insurance issues. y 2. Address related issues-Transportation options for 3. Address related issues-Daycare T1 employees 4. Homelessness&Workforce Housing I 3. Address&improve transit issues in the upper and 5. Protect military buffer areas lower Keys 6. Address "food security" (i.e. access by all people at all inI times to enough food for an active,healthy life) and c workforce housing. , . NI Workforce Housing& Site Identification Workforce Housing Construction x 1. Audit Local Government owned public lands for 1. Waive building fees for WH w WH 2. Buy down interest rates for WH projects m 2. Re-purpose land owned by local government for 3. Cut taxing rates on WH E WH 4. Commercial properties for WH-tax and insurance breaks v 3. .Focus all 3-tier properties on WH Q Workforce Housing&the Education Sector 1. Engage the school system as largest employer 2. Improve teacher housing needs data . Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 5 Packet Pg. 55 A.1.f 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 r range of stakeholders interviewed, all expressed the need for a focused and comprehensive county-wide E workforce housing dialogue that involved those with a stake in the outcome. Many believed that such a cuc 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 Board of cu County Commission's consideration. While 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 that this was an urgent and timely issue for the County to address in light of hotel redevelopment and the economic upturn. as In the Fall 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 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 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. .o 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 minimize confusion and any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing committee might create. It was also pointed out E that this charge would be consistent with the Committee's current mission to address affordable housing N opportunities in Monroe County for both "residents and workforce." y The Commission should review the current Committee appointments to ensure that a balance of workforce v 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 ca sufficient range of stakeholder perspectives represented and participating in the consensus building. This =� would allow the Committee to develop informed workforce housing consensus findings and recommendations that stakeholders might support and the County Commission could act upon. I 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 CI Resolution, do not reference representation of the municipalities in the County, the military, the School x 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. 0 Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 6 Packet Pg. 56 A.1.f WI {,E., Kr y, x f1 7 5t Aff nU(blt:Hroci ey Prrnil t y V/ ii r. . „. .. I ..ems.' . 11 4.4 1 C tit,__ in • .„,.., : ea I— i Key Largo ya t 212 Perm�ls • ;• C .r C el.. , C . lt3 • pIulPI) I ram. E C /j d is ci V, Duck Key t c 1 Affordable Housing Permit A a) \. . "i E to 1 ./ • ' Q 44 . 1)14 17) 1116 I t �.,gir e a ? MI i « NI _ 6 o Atleroatee Housing Percents W Mde Markers r —(°.(sl'H . Overseas Hwy(US(I Cd t V as *m om a.+...r..tr....�.str e.t♦rrs4.M 10.NrI0...p.ti..q MRr.l.u.e.rf�r el Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 Packet Pg. 57 A.1.f \ -••rgiek A Big Pine Key and No Name Key • 16 Affordable Housing Permits • 44 i MOS \I ••••• lq.,,.. .4. 81/4 CZ 4., . ! ' i'. • .: . Val 1 ••••' • : i.r,• \ 1...''. .1411° "CAM 341, *I ' ..... ',. • E 0 . * .: :.1 .;:i Z. " • .AAa. ''.1. 7.r"'" >-1.1\ ,t,47.4e.. .•(k''4irdiir '" •1-!" '1, .., • c cts it :,- ,r-.2...... -. ,..., - ...._...., . • rr;Ail, . 4.' $ * 7 '• -i./i. '''Ilt' .,. -•---I l ... .5 ca ..4 ...,-77:t,3 4 - • : a 1 .:.,.„..,.._ \-- ----.7.1 • - 1:3 •, • ' M - . • ''`. '...4.,,t 7— . C ,N. •' 1 ......,-1.' - ..,74 ,.teesioj.____ _-i•-•... .. •..t. 44. • . 1 ' c ,..ii-A• Cti \ . ' ,kt--.'',...'7 - -. ' • a.'". A" silt a- Ik . • - "1r i .' '' •— '. tAtt ;,._:,..:, .. . : -• ii, 'moo ea et- .g ,,,s,.,, , tt.'• , . , •-•, ...?.,:V•T'S. ,..l_-• ' .741'----•.t,. .+0er,1l- I „ .ccaco) c Housing Permits CU S.- t, ••, - ,•-, J1,111111 . . • in. aPo,, .„,,i,eis ll ffiI A'.•', 1\ • \ Overseas HAI,(US I) E 10.. . • ' 1 r •' •,,, • h * ' , ' •. ;'.-:: ‘ k1S' .1,4 • 3: co c) z , _ ca a) LI --. . w Lower Keys . V ,1., .• • tis. E 492 Affordable Housing Permits , tr) ' , r 4411P4f 114 ..., : ..., • .1. . .., • ,1 '.. , , r• .- ••••:°( • r • r• e u) u) < Ci) -a 44 •N• .. —0- U.:T.' It ••C Jr t„.), A iii - kv •N --WK--33,7`• - .."',. ' • . . - . 7 V 1 'a VT. CO ft,„; •, _ ;.:„.. ! .... ....r. , •is. . .-. C7.) AU''''). ,'-.. - .lie,. .. %Inn- 3 - . ••• • -** =I ....., ..., - _.!5.1 3 .' 1 \giteti.• ',,, i''... : •- •. .1,..u.....!". • .•4-s.. . .4.'• 1 . -.. -elf... < ' , •,•:,,X; :',.. Kior,, •': . r! 2 l'• .''L.',0 1. . . '....,' 4P,'"-'1 'If- . ...,„,--.•.,i ,e-- . . - .• re—.r• c. cv . ',hr., ...,• -,' ._ . .,"7— in • ' .d. , •' . ‘.. ,.iL ••••••• r f ' •1 14? ....4 X :', 10%.41,1/.41 . - . e..' • -V ' . - `',•-• - ...- w •. A -.v.. -.... ,t;- Tilriz.I ' 0 Affordable Housing Pe,'••- 4E; k oilgriiii Ch • ! ' . real Overseas Hwy(US E ..c ' r . < ...............-MO.11\1111111M111•111111.111111.1111114111ti Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 8 Packet Pg. 58 .. A.1.f: 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 w commissions, workshops at key moments in the development of options and recommendations, online surveys and other techniques. asc It was observed by many that an advisory committee developing recommendations on workforce housing c 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 a) sectors,and the desire for timely actions to address the current workforce housing challenges. co 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: 0 c.) • 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 N Monroe County Board of County Commission. Q This stakeholder assessment report confirms that there is wide agreement that Monroe County is facing a -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 yl' through discussion and debate and that can serve as a consensus framework for addressing and . ?� implementing solutions. VI 2 u� 0 N inI w w d E V Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 - 9 Packet Pg. 59 MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING STAKEHOLDER ASSESSMENT REPORT I. ASSESSMENT SCOPE AND ORGANIZATION 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 • a=i 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 ' aai. 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 a. address the complex issues surrounding workforce housing in the Florida Keys. The 2005 Harvard report, "Strengthening the Workforce and Communities through s Housing Solutions" suggests, solutions to the workforce housing challenge require a broad- based, proactive approach.3 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. 0 This assessment report sets out the context for addressing workforce' housing issue's 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 N 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: • o 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 x� organizations and residents? 2. What are the linkages with development and land use issues,transportation mobility? 2 3. What interests, organizations and individuals should participate in a.stakeholder ,n! county-wide committee process to develop consensus recommendations on N 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 m 3 http://bit.ly/ikcpnfm, "By the time a workforce housing affordability problem begins to affect the bottom line,the Q forces that contribute to high housing costs have long been in place and are difficult to reverse.For the housing and business communities to forestall such an outcome,they must establish a working relationship characterized by respect, trust,and an awareness of each other's interests.They must have access to information about the causes of the affordability problem and data that demonstrate its effects." • Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 10 Packet-Pg. 60 A.1•.f Monroe County?What information and data on best practices should be considered in any subsequent stakeholder consensus building process? II. WORKFORCE HOUSING4 IN MONROE COUNTY- CONTEXT w 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% of - income for rent or mortgage costs. In 2013, 51% (or 16,849) of Monroe County households r 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 45% of • • Monroe County homeowners are cost burdened (8,499 of the 18,936). a In November 2014 the United Way of Florida released its report, ALICE (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed: Study of Financial Hardship, 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 c and health care.5 The Report also evaluates community conditions for each Florida county g using a weighted"Economic Viability Dashboard"in three core areas employing a scale of 1 (worst) to 100 (best).Monroe County's results area as follows:• of 0 Core Area.? • Rating • Grade w Housing Affordability (40%) 14 of 100- • Poor Job Opportunities.(40%) 67 of 100 .Good Community Support (20%) 48 of 100 Poor . aci • w N d N N 4 Workforce housing can refer to any form of housing,including ownership 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 peopleto Y who are not typically understood to be the target of affordable housing programs.Workforce housing,then, implies an altered or expanded understanding of affordable housing.Workforce housing is commonly targeted I at"essential workers"in a community i.e.:police officers,firemen,teachers,nurses,medical personnel. However resort communities generally define"essential"more broadly to include service workers,as they often UI are characterized by high real estate costs and a high number of low-paying service jobs essential to the local tourism economy. inI 'The Report was initially developed in New Jersey and now five other states including Florida,California, NI Michigan,Indiana and Connecticut,have used the model and developed reports in 2014. o https://www.frbatlanta.org/commdev/publications/partnersupdate/2015/01/study-sheds-light-on-working- I j families-in-florida 4.; m 6 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 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 Rate;and New 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 Packet Pg.61 A.1.f. KEY FACTS AND ALICE STATISTICS FOR MONROE COUNTY (From the ALICE Florida Report:Study of Final:dal Hardship, Fall, 2014,Appendix H) . Big Coppitt Key/Monroe County r . Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy Housing Burden over Housing Burden over E % . . Threshold%. ment Rate 35% Owner 35%Renter c it co 2016 833 . 12% 35%. 53°/0 9° 55% 72%°/o: Big Pine Key/Monroe County c -Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unempl y- Housing Burden over Housing Burden over E Threshold% ment Rate. 35% Owner - 35%Renter c 3777 _ 1619.. 10% . 35% 56% 4% 44% 42% E Key Largo/Monroe County Q c Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy- Housing Burden over Housing Burden over .co Threshold%. ment Rate 35%Owner 35%Renter . a ai 11409 . 4517 15% 38% _ 47% 9% . 44% 57% . N Key West d Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy Housing Burden over Housing Burden over m . % Threshold%. . ment Rate. 35% Owner . 35%Renter . . E 24870 .. 9322. 9% .. 35% 56% 4%. .. 44% . • 68% . 0 U Lower Keys/Monroe County Population' Households Poverty% ALICE . Above ALICE Unemploy- Housing Burden over ` Housing Burden over Threshold% ment Rate 35% Owner 35%Renter. 10394 : . 4314 8% 23% . . 62% 5% 42%- 56% . : j Marathon } Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy Housing Burden over Housing Burden over 0 . Threshold% , ment Rate. . 35% Owner . 35%Renter. , N 8389 3371 14% 41%_ 45%0 9%0 40% . 65%0 N Middle Keys/Monroe County a Population Households Poverty% ' ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy- Housing Burden over Housing Burden over ' 1,13 % . Threshold% .ment Rate. 35% Owner. 35%Renter _ . o • ,9731 - 4068 13% 40% 47% . : 10% 42% . 64% c North Key Largo/Monroe County s Population -Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy Housing Burden over Housing Burden over iliI Threshold% ment Rate 35% Owner _ 35%.Renter = 1166 . 510 11% 20% 69% 4% 36% 25% UI Stock Island/ Monroe County 2 Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy- Housing Burden over Housing Burden over �I Threshold% .ment Rate 35% Owner .35%.Renter N 3736 1111 14% 62% 224%. 8%1 53% 69% ull Tavernier/ Monroe County w Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy- Housing Burden over Housing Burden over c • . % Threshold% . ment Rate 35% Owner 35%.Renter E 2491 .' . .953_ i 6% . 46% 48% 7% . . 46% 37% Gs v Upper Keys/Monroe County r Population Households Poverty% ALICE Above ALICE Unemploy- Housing Burden over Housing Burden over Q Threshold%, ment Rate 35% Owner . 35%Renter 21234 8633 13% 37% 50% 9% 43% 54% Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 12 Packet Pg. 62 • A.1.f • 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. N c In Monroe County an hourly wage needed to afford a two-bedroom FMR is $26.27/hour.' c.. In order not to pay more than 30% of family income on housing, a household must earn $4,553 monthly or$54,640 annually. a) The findings of all of the reports on Monroe County's current housing situation confirm Q. 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. co Statewide, the percent of households renting increased from 29.4 percent in 2007 to 34.4 Q- percent in 2012 (American.Community Survey, 2012; Shimberg Center for Housing Studies, University of Florida, 2013)." The Shimberg Center has found that affordable rental shortages are most pronounced in southeast Florida. (SCHS,2013). o In an Affordable Housing Solutions White Paper (October 2014)8 Donald Craig, Planning o 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: E "The City's Comprehensive Plan identified the City of Key West median household N income as $52,004 while the average annual wages earned by a worker in the City are N approximately $37,844 indicating that by standard guidelines for mortgage lending at the median level, a home should cost no more than $166,012, or three tini'es the median income.This is clearly inconsistent with actual cost of housing in the City,when the Key s West Board of Realtors reports that at the end of July 2014 the median sales prices of Y 162 single family homes sold in the preceding 7 months was $630,000 and the median sales prices for Condo/Townhouses was $368,000. Clearly persons and families making - 1 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 �I 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 time and results in workers sharing housing in increasing numbers, or paying 40-50% of their income for housing." w c a5 E s 0 r 7"Out of Reach 2014:Florida", http://nlihc.org/oor/2014/FL,National Low Income Housing Coalition 8 Affordable Housing White Paper-Donald Craig,AICP Director of Planning&Nicole Malo AICP,Planner, City of Key West:http://legistarl.granicus.com/KevWest/meetings/2014/10/2491 A City Commission 14-10- 07 Meeting Agenda Full Detail.pdf Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 13 -Packet Pg. 63 - A.1.f The 2015 Home Matters Report from the Florida Housing Coalition9 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. a There currently exists a policy gap to fund workforce housing development. Federal programs through HUD or state governments are generally targeted towards low-income F programs designed for people that make less than 60% of Area Median Income (AMI). The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, which mainly spurs development of rental properties,is a) an example of this. Affordable housing for the,working and middle classes has been largely left to individual municipalities and counties to deal with. III. WORKFORCE HOUSING CHALLENGES- STAKEHOLDER IDEAS AND PERSPECTIVES y A. Critical Affordable Workforce Housing Common Themes m 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 v and worked in different parts of the Keys and the ideas they offered were not necessarily the ; same as others sharing that perspective. However, across the various perspectives the following six common themes regarding key workforce housing issues emerged: o (.9 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 a) workforce housing. y m 2. Action orientation. All acknowledge the workforce housing context is complex.and challenging but needs immediate focus and attention and that addressing gaps in 11) 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. N x 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 gni problem are well known and documented. The dynamics and facts have changed little over the years." Cs4� 4. Define the problem(s) first.There needs to be a careful effort to define the shared w workforce housing problem facing Monroe'County in a multifaceted way (different a9 m 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. 9 http://issuu.com/flhousing/docs/home matters report 02.2015 final Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 14 Packet Pg. 64 A.1..f. . 5. 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 committee should seek to develop a balanced package of both short 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 workforce housing as it considers other critical infrastructure such as transportation and water supply. Workforce housing c should receive the policy, planning and financial attention that other areas of local ct infrastructure receive. The County should seek to better integrate the housing element with other plan elements such as the future land use, public facilities, (a transportation and capital improvements. B. Critical Affordable Workforce Housing Common Issues ._ Q.°_' Issues generally identified as important to address from most perspectives included: 1. Addressing the ROGO.system and workforce housing,including transfers and y fractional ROGOs o �a 2. Density and livable workforce housing 3. Relaxing height restrictions in light of Federal flood insurance changes and to create a=i more workforce housing N w d 4. Strengthen Monroe County Housing Authority's role in workforce housing a a> 5. Address transportation and its relationship to and role in workforce housing 6. Update Monroe County's workforce housing site identification and audit of publicly owned property y� 7. Create new workforce housing units that are both affordable and livable with development incentives and public private partnerships 1 8. Preserve and maintain existing workforce housing and provide incentives to preserve N� workforce housing x W 9. Address related workforce issues due to high cost of housing (insurance, childcare, food insecurity etc.) E 10. Review and consider changes in the County,City and state affordable.housing Q policies and regulations including length of deed restrictions Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 15 Packet Pg. 65 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 identify how different stakeholder perspectives viewed the challenges of workforce housing facing Monroe County and its residents. The c over 50 issues and ideas identified and summarized from the many interviews and meetings, L help to shed light on the complexity of the issues and on the healthy diversity of views on how to best address the challenges. The assessment interviews were conducted with the a) 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 a) workforce housing solutions. It was also understood that individual views would not be attributed but related perspectives would be summarized. as a Workforce housing ideas and issues identified in the Assessment from different perspectives and included issues displayed in the matrix below in the following nine categories: c as r 1. Overall (12 Issues/Ideas) 2. Workforce Housing Funding (7 Issues/Ideas) U 3. Workforce Housing Planning,Zoning&Enforcement (13 Issues/Ideas) 4. Workforce Housing&Transportation (4 Issues/Ideas) �a 5. Workforce Housing& Site Identification (3 Issues/Ideas) 6. Workforce Housing Construction (4 Issues/Ideas) d 7. Workforce Housing-Preserve Existing (7 Issues/Ideas) N a1 8. Workforce Housing& the Education Sector (2 Issues/Ideas) 9. Workforce Housing&Related Issues (6Issues/Ideas) .a a) N (NI 1C a) t V of Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 16 Packet Pg. 66 A.1.f ISSUES/IDEAS STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES (11=Noted as issue/idea in the interviews) , . County City State Education Development Lodging/Hospitality Business Non-Profit Militag 49 Tourism -o OVERALL a 1. No single solution,menu of I/ 4/ I/ I/ I/ V • V V V E options Fo 2. Build on work to date I/ I/ I/ I/ I/ I/ I/ I/ G/ (studies, task forces,etc.) al 3. Target different levels of I/ I/ I/ 6/ I/ I/ I/ 6/ I/ 'cn— • a workforce to provide WH 4) ..c 4. Engage private and public I/ ./ I/ I/ I/ i/ I/ I/ I/ 0 '6. sector employers in finding E WH solutions 0 C.) 5. Political will to implement I/ I/ I/ 4/ I/ I/ V cr) solutions o T- 6. Focus on rental housing I/ I/ 6/ 6/ I/ I/ V ./ I/ 7. Addressing NIMBY and I/ 6/ V i/ I/ I/ I/ I/ 0 CD workforce housing 3. Encourage public private I/ I/ I/ V I/ I/ I/ 0/ t a) partnerships for WH E ). Encourage WH affordability I/ I/ I/ I/ Vou) 0 and livability cn 10.Support living wages in the I/ < a) Keys -0 11.Expand the Keys economy I/ 1/ I/ beyond tourism cv se 12.Address negative impacts on I/ I/ 2 u) Keys communities of I = transient workforce 13.Collect data on WH I/ I/ I/ I/ (.)1 2 provided by hoteliers ce,1 c) c.) k 11.1 .g a) o as = ..tt Packet Pg. 67 A.1.f ISSUES/IDEAS . . STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES w. County City State Education Development Lodging/Hospitality Business Non-Profit Military d Tourism a WORKFORCE HOUSING FUNDING c 14.Workforce housing site ✓. ✓ ✓ :✓ :✓ ✓ ✓ V . V . E ct identification and audit c cc 15. Changing the Tourist ✓ .✓ ✓ ✓ n, Development Council(TDC) ar law to allow those dollars to 'w be used for affordable cu housing development. cu 16. Remedy Sadowski Trust ✓ ✓ 6/ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ V E Fund donor inequity o 17.Land Authority funds for U ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ workforce housing o construction . cc 18.Dedicated local funding for ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 0 workforce housing ( 19.Consider inclusionary WH ✓ ✓ ✓ . ✓ I a) fee • 20.Address Air B&B and ✓ d. impact on bed tax revenue N 21.Provide assistance to ✓ V ✓ Q L. workforce renters (down m payment/deposit) o. I(WORKFORCE HOUSING-PLANNING,ZONING,ENFORCEMENT Y. 22.Create a County Workforce ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ V r co Housing Development Plan ±1 23.Consider adjusting height ✓ 6/ ✓. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ - = restrictions for more WH �j 24.Allow increased density for ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ V ✓ ✓ . M WH r. 25.Tax Credit Property ✓ ✓ ✓ N Management after 15 years in' 26.Encourage mixed use ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ j c a) E r• as d Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 18 Packet Pg. 68 A.1.f ISSUES/IDEAS STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES County . City State Educatio Development Lodging/Hospitality Business .Non-. Militag d n Tourism Profit` 27.Enforce Housing Codes ✓ V ✓ c 28.Explore"Micro Housing" ✓ .✓ V . 29.ROGO Allocations and V V V V V ✓ V V c Transfers,Fractional ROGO a 30.ROGO Formula ✓ V ✓ ✓ ✓ V V ✓ . . 31.Address redevelopment and V :✓ . : . ✓ : . V ✓ 0. WH c 32.Encourage commercial. ✓ V ✓ V ✓ V a construction of WH by E o reducing impact fee. •U 33.Explore the role of live- ✓ V V a) aboard boats in WH 10 34.Encourage hospitality V V ✓ V •✓ V C industry to build WH 0 WORKFORCE HOUSING&TRANSPORTATION c 35.Increase highway capacity to V V ✓ .✓ V V ✓ V 01 adjust ROGO evacuation N formula I H 36.Address related issues- V V V ✓ ✓ V ✓ N. Q. Transportation options for y employees o. 37.Address transit issues in the ✓ .✓ ✓ ✓ upper Keys cc). 38.Address&improve transit V V V V V uI issues in the lower Keys . . . . . i WORKFORCE HOUSING&SITE IDENTIFICATION 39.Re-purpose land owned by ✓ V V V V 2 local government for WH - to! 10.Focus all 3-tier properties on V c WH �! x w w m E. . w a Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 19 Packet Pg.69 A.1.f ISSUES/IDEAS . . STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES County City State Education Development Lodging/Hospitality Business Non- Military. 49 . •Tourism • Profit -�a 11. Audit Local Government -✓ V V V .✓ � c a) • owned public lands for WH . . • . E Q WORKFORCE HOUSING—CONSTRUCTION c 12.Waive building fees for WH ' V ✓ • ✓ • ✓ •co Er_ 13.Buy down interest rates for ✓ V > WH projects 14.Cut taxing rates on WH • ✓ . . • c 15.Commercial properties for • V ✓ ✓ L WH-tax and insurance breaks .: C U WORKFORCE HOUSING—PRESERVE EXISTING WH 0 46.Preserve/maintain ✓ ✓ V ✓ V ✓ • ✓ ✓ • V r • - affordable units �a 17.Address"lost"AH/WH ✓ V j units 18.Revisit land trusts as a tool ✓ •✓ ✓ • c a> 19.Provide for"no net loss"of V ✓ . u) N affordable&WH in County d housing element Q 50.Adopt a"lease form" for V •✓ 1/ 1/ • V L local governments owning . underlying land for WH 51.Address loss of deed ✓ ✓' V V V .✓ V V • d • restrictions for AH N 52.Address RV/Trailer Parks as V 1/ I V 1/ .✓ ✓ 1/ - _ WH and conversion issues WORKFORCE HOUSING—EDUCATION U1 •53.Engage the school system as . V .V • ' ' . ✓ �1 largest employer in WH • . a- • c 54.Improve teacher housing • 1/ N t needs data collection • `n • w w C a) E .0 v o • Z Q Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 20 - • . - Packet Pg.70 A:1:f ISSUES/IDEAS . . STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES. County City State Education Development Lodging/Hospitality Business :Non- Military. E,, Tourism Profit' 4 WORKFORCE HOUSING—RELATED ISSUES 55.Address related issues .✓ V ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ V E insurance costs-wind co 56.Address 2018 FEMA flood ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 0- insurance issues. 57.Address related issues- ✓ ✓ c Daycare d 58.Homelessness&Workforce ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ c Housing 59.Protect military buffer areas ✓ ✓ G C.)50.Address "food security"and ✓ WH c ra CD r C d fA d ffl d O s d Ca Cr) x C.) 2 0 N� W C d as Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 21 Packet Pg.71 A.1.f D. Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives on Workforce Housing Over 75 persons participated in the interviews 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. E 1. County Government- Ideas and Perspectives Build on affordable housing work to date a) • We need to understand and build on what's been learned from various task E 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. How do we retool to work better. What about inclusionary zoning? What about co density bonuses and density waivers? What they are how they work. How to a retool to work better.What doesn't work. • Come up to speed on what was done previously so we know where things were when walked away. t No silver bullet, no easy fix a • 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 7a • We are short over 6000 units and under ROGO we will get 700 over the next 10 years.That does not come close to solving the problem. 8, • The Affordable Housing Committee should focus initially on workforce. E • 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. • Housing affordability in the Keys includes insurance, the cost of food and the cost of daycare as well as housing. 73 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. cn • 98% of the residents of county-run public housing is workforce housing for =l working individuals (with the exception of the elderly and disabled). Rent is capped to 30% of household income and the remaining amount is subsidized. 2 Windstorm and Flood Insurance Rates • The current windstorm and flood insurance situation is huge affecting all N residents not just lower income. • If you can't pay cash,you need insurance to secure a bank loan. w • FIRM-Fair insurance rates for Monroe-is engaged in grass roots advocacy work. c m • 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 Q properties. County growth management and affordable housing. • Should affordable housing be part of the County growth management function Packet Pg.72 A.1.f 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 attack by . those opposing development in general. It has been a very public and vitriolic situation where m staff have been personally attacked. Site Identification. co • We should identify every piece of county property that is vacant, demolished,big a enough for affordable housing and zoned properly. Preserve and maintain affordable units. c m • We've lost some affordable housing that was bought at low rates and sold at d 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 Key West. o • We should explore mixed use and mixed income levels vs. low income property a 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 15th year property management tends to deteriorate as less cash is devoted to upkeep. -ow Consider allowing Land Authority bed tax funds for construction. t • Currently they can only use the funding for land acquisition. . • Consider changing the Tourist Development Council (l'UC) law to allow those dollars to be used for affordable housing development. II Height Restrictions. • Should be open to relaxing this where this could produce more workforce 2 housing. • Consider handling this on a site specific basis. (NI • There are areas in town where building higher would not block views. The City of Key West would have the capacity to implement this although it would first l! have to be approved by referendum. c Explore Micro Housing. a) • This is being implemented in cities such as New York. It might be applied in o cities in the Keys to cut down on the commute time. Q • Note that 1—bedroom units are the shortest in supply for the public housing and tend to be occupied longer,usually by elderly and disabled. Enforce Housing Codes. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 23 Packet Pg.73 A.1.f • Enforce housing codes in terms of illegal multiple occupancy. ROGO • ROGO allocation system for permits early on effectively eliminated affordable housing construction. Three things need to come 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. a) • We should collect data on what hoteliers are doing in providing workforce housing for their employees. co Local Dedicated Funding Source. ai • We need a local dedicated funding source (sales tax, "sin" tax, etc.) that can y support the construction of workforce housing not just land acquisition. a=i Address Sadowski Trust Fund Donor Inequity. mc • Monroe County contributes 60% and gets back 8%. This should be addressed when funding resumes. t.) AddressNIMBY • Historically there has been community reactions to the old low income projects. This may continue to be an issue. o 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 other costs such as food. y Vl • 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 y� lack of employees. 2. Municipal Government- Ideas and Perspectives 2t Target the Levels of Workforce to Serve NI • 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. Ui There is a shortage of decent, reasonably priced, available housing, especially one-bedroom rentals. as E Engage Employers • We need the businesses in Monroe County with the different types of employees (hourly, salaried) to be 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 workforce housing and they should continue to do Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 24 Packet:Pg.74 A.1.f more. Vacation rentals • We need to address this challenging issue and its impact on workforce housing in the current marketplace. ra Height restrictions • Ease height restrictions where there aren't view issues to allow for more workforce housing. cca Mixed use. F= • Seek more mixed uses with the school board and other public properties. d Land Acquisition • Focus land acquisition on workforce housing properties. a) Focus on Redevelopment ct • Key -West is nearing build out and most construction is redevelopment and remodeling. n. Loss of Deed Restrictions • Address and audit the Loss of Deed Restrictions. ("Of the total 1,089 affordable units, 223 are expected to have their deed restrictions expire, or have expired by CD the end of 2015." (See Appendix#6). Q- "No net loss" of existing workforce housing v • Amend the Comprehensive Plan's housing element so that future development will result in "no net loss" of existing workforce/affordable rental housing for households earning 80% or less than the area mean income. o High land values limit tax credit funded affordable units C7 • Difficult to both finance and construct units at any level except at the 60% of median through heavily subsidized tax credit funding. Lack of reasonably priced land has meant few of these projects have been built. y • 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 2 housing. Consider additional funding sources • A tax on every alcoholic beverage sold or a 1% real estate transfer. tax could generate funding for workforce housing. Relying upon the Land Authority funds -I won't be enough. Development Plan and Funding for Workforce Housing • 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. ROGO AH Allocations • Each year in City of Key West there are 90 affordable housing ROGO c allocations with the City able to borrow up to 10 years ahead to create more affordable housing. ase • Focus all tier-3 properties on workforce housing if it doesn't raise a property rights issue. Adopt lease form • Cities should consider adopting a lease form with the public sector owning the Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 25 Packet Pg.75 A.1.f underlying land. Support non-profits and their work on affordable and workforce housing • Provide funding for nonprofit affordable housing entities. 3. State Government- Ideas and Perspectives E FFHC Set Aside for Monroe County • Work to preserve the Monroe County set aside Florida Finance Housing F= Corporation competitive applications for affordable housing tax credit m Sadowski Fund • Sadowski Fund affordable housing funding has not been available for affordable ai housing since 2006.Work to bring that funding back. Tourist Development Tax and Workforce Housing ca • Tourist Development Tax should support the building of workforce housing. Funds go to the Monroe County Land Authority ($4 million) and Key West ($8 million). c d • Consider changing the tourism bed tax statute to allow for supporting the d construction of workforce housing. Combination of Issues o • 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 AH. Rising Rents 0 • Rising rents represent a big challenge for workforce housing and strategies to address this should be considered. a) NIMBY issues and Workforce Housing y • Monroe County needs to address the NIMBY issue that is a barrier to workforce y housing. L 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. N Support Deed Restrictions • Support the use of 99 year leases for$1-Affordable forever. 0 1 • Assess current state of enforcement of deed restricted land and work to extend 2 leases to 99 years. Identify and Aggregate Workforce Housing Parcels N • More could be done to identify parcels of land and aggregate them and analyze opportunities for workforce housing on surplus lands. 4.1 • There may be opportunities for duplexes and quadaplexes on scarified small lots for rental units. E Height Restrictions m • Consider relaxing height restrictions especially in the center of the islands with Q existing tall buildings.This would provide additional workforce housing FEMA Flood Maps Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 26 Packet Pg.76 A.1.f • Address the impacts of the new FEMA flood maps on Monroe County and workforce housing. Homeless • Homeless are an important issue to address in a tourist.economy. How 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 ROGOs that have not been used. co • The most recent annual travel study that shows how long takes to get over the 22 c segments of the U.S. 1 highway,indicates a segment starting to fail in Islamorada. Engage the Hotel and Hospitality Industry • Hoteliers should be more engaged in the workforce housing discussion. Convened a recent meeting for hoteliers in Islamorada to discuss this issue and m only 3 came. N Enforcement of Housing Ordinances • Need to address and enforce the ordinances regarding unlawful modifications of homes and overcrowding of residences. Mobile Homes and RV Parks and Workforce Housing • Need to address the question of the role of mobile/RV parks in supplying a, workforce housing and the impact of conversions of these parks on availability of affordable housing. o t7 4. Education Sector Ideas and Perspectives Target the kind of housing needed • Education has the same levels of workforce housing needs as other sectors. y • Have to focus on the target population in terms of addressing gaps in workforce housing, e.g. Teachers, support and administrative staff, service industry workers, etc. c Partnerships for workforce housing • • Interested and exploring partnerships for workforce housing development on in school board owned property. _l Recruitment and Retention • Recruiting and retaining teachers and professors in the Keys is a very challenging 2 problem due to the relatively high cost of housing. in' • Retention continues to be a problem and accessible and affordable workforce N housing is part of it. There is a huge organizational cost to retrain. tol Student Enrollment Stable • The current context in terms of student enrollment is stable but not increasing, c having decreased during the economic downturn. Single vs. Family Teachers co • 'We have lot of young employees with over 70 new teachers." Young single Q 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 Dade vs. secure housing in Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 27 Packet Pg.77 A.1.f. Monroe County. • In Key West and the lower keys, the property values are the highest and present a challenge for young 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. c 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. F. 5. Development Stakeholder Ideas and Perspectives CNN Development Constraints • The critical areas of state concern and environmental issues constrain the available land for workforce housing. • The cost of labor and insurance is climbing so incentives for workforce housing will be an important stimulus. o 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 m • The school board and the city may have large tracts that can be converted for y workforce housing. y • Need to use infrastructure $$ making land improvements for property we should own-RFPs for developers. -°'o 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 with 3 bedroom apartment renting y 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 c priority. Need to consider "livability" not just tax credits and affordability when building workforce housing. ocu • Scale is an issue here with smaller projects there is a greater chance of Q empowering residents to maintain their homes. The larger projects have ongoing maintenance and management costs Address Spectrum of Workers and Housing Needs Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 28 Packet Pg. 78 - A.1.f • Have to clarify what workers 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 an apartment for these workers a bad idea? • What portion of staff/employers made up of transient migrant workers?.What are their needs?How many are working in City of Key West and where can their housing needs be best addressed?What role might dormitories play? cuc L. Incentives for smaller unit projects • Consider providing incentives for more smaller unit projects that will be more a) livable. The tax credit resource funding for this doesn't practically work below 20-25 units because of costs. • Provide incentives for small apartment complexes, not big units, e.g. develop 10- . a 20 units with multiple occupancy. fac • They can be nicely done dorm style with shared kitchen consistent with character,built to code and also preserve green space. Hotels re-openings and workforce housing impacts • May not be new hotels coming on but those that were shut down are reopening. We need to be careful about what that means in terms of housing demand. There o. may not be growth in the population going forward. V Workforce Housing and Live Aboard Boats C) • What are the City of Key West statistics on Mooring Fields. There may be more than 120 boats in mooring fields providing affordable housing. How many boats c are there for a short or longer time? How many are providing workforce C7 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 N in Monroe County? N • What has been the enforcement experience with the 30% rule in converting trailer parks in the County? Waive building permit fees r • Have local governments waive building permit fees for affordable and workforce housing projects. v) Political will =I • Is there the political will to implement workforce housing solutions? v� • There has been at times, for example the last Workforce Housing Task Force in 2007 had some of it recommendation implemented. Encourage mixed use NI • We should be encouraging mixed use in central areas throughout the Keys. Consider greater use of an inclusionary affordable housing fee w • The County should set a fee for inclusionary housing such as the $40,000 per inclusionary housing credit that Marathon is proposing. This fee would be paid E 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 affordable housing. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 29 Packet Pg.79 A.1.f • 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 incentivize those who are willing to build affordable housing, and the funds would come from those building the projects :— that require inclusionary housingwithout the market rate developer from having ra, to use some of his/her market rate allocations on affordable housing. w • All transient unit development and re-development should require inclusionary affordable housing ordinance, or impact fee assessment. �— Increase density and height aa) • With limited lands 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. a) • Increased density in appropriate zoning districts within commercial areas to facilitate workforce housing. • Increase height in appropriate areas. • Build up! Build new! Much of the KWHA properties are old, ugly, small and inefficiently sparse.Density needs to increase. a=i Increase the capacity of highways • To increase ROGO allocation work together to secure funding to increase the capacity of highways. Review city and county owned lands for use as workforce housing a, • 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 workforce housing by 50%. N • The approach to "renter vs. ownership" should be"both/and." Address the 2018 FEMA changes w • We need to prepare in required elevations (AE 7 becomes 9) and 60% of houses will be in jeopardy making them harder to resale or rebuild. a Surplus land • The County and Cities should inventory surplus land and identify land that can be used for workforce housing. co • Lift the cap on.the number of credits, keep construction costs per unit low ($25,000) v' • Consider additional sales subsidy to help deals that are short. Identify and Aggregate Parcels of Public Land • County and the Cities haven't done enough to identify parcels of land and aggregate them. We need to do more surplus land analysis. Additional density for workforce housing r • We have to be creative. We should consider giving additional density to E developers who are constructing a workforce community/development with a couple market rate units. co Add commercial development and redevelopment • Based on employees and square feet (use industry standards and sales tax codes) for an impact fee assessment. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 30 Packet Pg.80 A.1.f ROGO Transfers • Implement a ROGO transfer ordinance whereby a market rate unit may be dislodged if an affordable unit replaces the dislodged market rate. • Issue no market rate ROGO units for multi-unit development projects, instead, -- issue "affordables" and require developers to take the affordable units and deed r restrict existing market rate properties and then dislodge the market rate for use N elsewhere as their market rates. _ co Buy Down Interest Rates for Workforce Housing Projects E • Use land authority money or impact fees to buy down interest rates for a) development costs for work force housing projects. Cut Taxing Rates on Workforce Housing d • Legislation to cut taxing rates on affordable and workforce housing. Commercial Properties for Workforce Housing • Give commercial properties that are used for workforce housing rental the same d tax and insurance (flood) breaks as primary homestead properties. >_ N C d 6. Lodging, Hospitality and Tourist Development-- Ideas and Perspectives The Hospitality Economy • Hospitality represents 80% of the economic activity in the Keys. Its workforce is very transient and generally looking to rent not purchase. Lodging Industry and Workforce Housing m • 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. a) Marketing and the Keys N •. Focusing on creating a year round destination with success in Key West. N 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. N 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 2� • With the years in which funding was put towards environmentally land N acquisition,relatively little was invested affordable housing. What is a smart split between the 2 purposes? Transportation and the Keys. c • The transit service from Miami-Dade to Marathon and north in the Upper Keys E is currently funded by the Dade County local transit 1/2 penny, state and federal co dollars but no Monroe County support for the transit service. • As job opportunities grow in Miami Dade, what impact will this have on the supply of lodging industry and related tourist industry employees in the Upper Keys? "Getting on bus at Walmart in Florida City to go south for work, the Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 31 Packet Pg. 81. A.1.f. question for workers is How available is work, where and how much does it pay." • Homestead and Florida City provide high densities of immigrant populations which housing in Monroe County does not offer. • Hotels in the Upper Keys are interested in working with Monroe and Dade w Counties in finding a solution to sustaining and improving the transit service that provides lodging and hospitality works from Marathon and north. Some hotels are supplementing the bus routes with their own busses. i= • We need better transit in the lower Keys to support the workforce transportation :d needs. • Better public transportation in the lower keys. Reliability and cost of public transportation options to deal with fact that more affordable housing is further away from jobs. c=o • Need reliable transit from workforce housing to work especially with parking m issues in Key West. Alternatives such as biking and scooters are not practical >_ �N given weather. Consider using smaller and more transit vehicles in the Key West area. m Employee turnover a • Person dependent industries cannot outsource jobs. Need to find ways to reduce V 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 o housing. However it may be that many are above the workforce housing price C9 range. • More important than building new workforce housing is how can we maintain E what is affordable for the median income workers. During the downturn N property values went down while rentals went up. Workforce housing is N 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 Y • Address the online market place for vacation rentals that connects users with y property to rent with users looking to rent the space(e.g. AirBnB) and its impact on bed tax revenue • Also, related to this is the new addition of Air B&B and lack of regulation and 2 enforcement. This raises safety issues as well as the "free ride" by not paying the ,n' bed tax. It may be much easier to rent through this approach than to a workforce N tenant. Help Workforce Renters • Consider providing down payment/deposit assistance. c Hospitality Industry Data • Hotels have been reluctant to share data on workforce housing as some is tied to pi employment contracts and privacy concerns. Q Disseminating Workforce Housing Information • We need more effective affordable housing information that is available to workers. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 32 Packet Pg.82 A.1.f Height restrictions • Can build more rental units on both 2"d and 3rd floors with first floor commercial in the lower Keys 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 N property with buildings that might be torn down to build housing. Balance environmentally land acquisition with affordable housing �= • investment. Historically, nothing or little has been allocated towards AH effort. What is a smart split between the 2 purposes. NIMBYism ("Not in my back yard") • Lodging industry did general marketing efforts focusing on nurses and police and workforce housing which helped. However, there continues to be a lack of cca 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 an • 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 s taxes passed these on to tourism workers. 7. Business Sector including Real Estate Island economy and community • Housing has always presented a dilemma and changes in an island community Q and economy. 100 years ago the cigar manufacturers had to address this. . • We have a dynamically changing environment with a finite piece of real estate s° and nothing else to fall back on. Over the past 15 years, credit should be given . for successfully putting together affordable housing units in the face of regulatory and NIMBY hurdles, but we are still far short of bridging the gap and =� meeting the demand. • "Checks and land" can solve the workforce housing problem. 2 Clarify our workforce targets for housing • It is not clear what kind of workforce and housing are we seeking to provide? Hotel,motel,restaurant or managers- each with a different set of problems. • We don't know anymore what the community needs. Do we need single residential occupancy for 500 guest workers in Key West?Probably not. c 49 • 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. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 33 Packet Pg. 83 A.1.f • 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 upTo beyond affordability. 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. -o c • Do we have the political will to continue grappling with this problem and implementing solutions? Is the problem only a shortage.of affordable units suitable for workforce housing? @ • We have opportunities but do we have the political will to get this done?There's d too much, "I've got mine," in the community. How many of our elected leaders works or owns a business? Land trusts as a tool • The Bahama Land Trust debacle has made serious discussion of land trusts as °' part of the tool kit very difficult. (.) Prioritize units over "money in lieu of" of • Is it even possible to prevent gentrification on island that is 2X3 square miles? Don't look for$$in lieu of as we need units. Hold off major changes to workforce housing pending the Affordable �? Housing Committee's work c • The County appears to be getting ready to change income limitations to target E working households at the middle level. Hold off implementing changes until we have reinstituted and charged the Affordable Housing Committee. N Permit Bed Tax to support purchase/building of workforce housing • Change the law to allow purchase and building of workforce housing. Put it a where people can get to work. as 8. Non-Profit Sector Ideas and Perspectives N� Living wages • Affordable housing programs for low income earners range from 80 to 140 % of AMI,yet real wages for career type workers are closer to 60%AMI. • Employers in Monroe County are not expected to pay a living wage. The wealth N created in our tourist economy depends upon low wage, high turnover, and low skill employees. Limited housing supply and investment wealth c • 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 co of a limited supply of land and great wealth seeking investment churns on Q 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 County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 34 Packet Pg. 84 A.1.f • We need to get more citizens of Monroe 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 DEO provide affordable housing units for the next 20 years within the frame work of evacuation limits. These new affordable units are = co critical but will not solve the need. • The operative assumption for allowing more density for certain types of a) 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 DEO, and evacuation models can be examined 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 exist. The number of homes that are vacant in Monroe County due to second home ownership has been noted in n several 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. co Affordable housing has not been protected N • When government has granted greater densities or used inclusionary zoning it Q has not always registered, audited or tracked compliance to ensure the permanency of these precious units. Deed restrictions were not monitored. o t • The temptation to convert affordable units into market rate units, rental or Y ownership,is too great and with little penalty or notice. N Affordable housing "lost units" • The community 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 2� revert them to affordable status. Liens and other mechanisms exist to "take" on c the public's behalf what was not proper to convert in the first place. C•1� 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 E redevelopment projects. Lower and Middle Keys different workforce housing issues • The lower and middle keys have different issues and solutions from the upper a. keys where day labor bused in from the mainland can assist in the workforce. But the market dynamics are found in common through all of the keys. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 35 Packet Pg.85 A.1•.f Funding inequity • A strong argument can be made to correct the inequity of the donor/recipient that exists, based on the $6 million a year that Monroe County gives to The Sadowski Housing Trust Fund every year compared to the pittance of$300,000 Ts in SHIP funds returned this year and in the past. Transportation y • Lack of transportation infrastructure makes workforce housing more a problematic. I— t New workforce housing partnerships needed m • Many differing approaches in scope and scale will be required with various a partnerships between government,private, for profit and nonprofit developers. d Affordable yet substandard housing Q • Rental housing that costs less than $900 a month, regardless of size or condition, c is termed affordable despite being unsafe or substandard or very small. a Political will .• The political will to make real changes in policies, incentives, regulations and to 2 d commit resources remains to be sustained. s m Don't repeat studies, focus on action i • The comprehensive studies, recommendations and published works on the topic o 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: outside cs wealth creates seasonal homes that are not available; the profit generated from a o transient units puts pressure on dense mobile home and RV parks; tourist 0 industry wages are low, turnover is high, landlords can rent substandard units due to high demand for any type of housing, etc. c0i Other related issues vni N • While workforce housing is the focus of the moment, there are important related N issues of food insecurity,education, child care for employees are critical to the a workforce housing discussion. • While addressing workforce housing, we should address homelessness (and the z growing youth % of this population) and help with the path back to working for families. `° u) • 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 1 and not just among homeless people but with working families still in homes. 2 47% of families countywide with kids under 18 are eligible for reduced lunch. Of id this population, 46% are minorities. Lack of affordable workforce housing has N led to food insecurity. If we didn't have a housing problem we wouldn't have a ;d food security issue. w • Many elected leaders are not aware of the childcare challenges faced by those c working and living in the Keys. Those who haven't raised family here are not E aware of the lack of child care options and its impact on the work force. u • If we can't control housing costs for working families, all other costs such as Q childcare, food prices, etc. are related and compounded. Expand the Keys Economy. • We need to think outside the box and expand our efforts to build a future Keys Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 36 Packet.Pg.86 A.1.f economy beyond tourism. • We need all parts of the demographic in Monroe County. 9. Military Sector Ideas and Perspectives 7a Recruitment and retention U) • Workforce housing affects the recruitment and retention. The housing set aside for the base workforce has a long wait list. Housing is the #1 issue for their I= 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 E a been improved with the Commander now the point of contact for coordination. Presence in the community • In terms of presence in Monroe County, there are roughly 1600 military (including Coast Guard), 1000 civilians and 400 contractors or about 3000 cuc employees and about 5500 including families, spouses and dependents. d Evacuation procedures `o. • In terms of evacuation, the Commanding Officer implements the recommendations of the County Emergency 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 Ivey West, a) the Naval Air Station strives to protect public health and welfare and its mission N by keeping buffer areas separate without housing in the high noise of unsafe N areas surrounding the base. Q • 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 exception to •o' this was their.support for the widening of the 18-mile stretch of US 1. Y • General concern with the impact of vacation rentals on the supply of workforce cn rental housing for the over 5,500 Base employees and their families, spouses and dependents. U 2 �I 0 N x W r C d E .0 t) Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 37 Packet Pg.'8'7 A.1.f IV. WORKFORCE HOUSING PROCESS- STAKEHOLDER PERSPECTIVES ra A. Information Needed to Inform Consensus Building on Workforce Housing y c Monroe County staff has gathered a draft 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 -62 development. d (See:http://consensus.fsu.edu/Workforce-Housing- a Assessment/pdfs2/DRAFT County AFF Housing Developments and Incentives v9- coc 2.pdf d The maps that provide the locations of the developments included in the Table throughout Monroe County: .2 m o Monroe County Affordable Housing Permits o ® o t0- Upper Keys AI eA soft B � Middle Keys -mp ®- � p Z d Bo eo Lower Keys ®-� ;F., yl 0 ap0 >l O Affordable Housing Pern,ds U iY) I Mile Markers 2l e Q NI ow.6owd:Monroe cowry-Oro.Mange*•PYrcYp Dep.. oxrt..wwom.,.e,.a,..ro oGiso—< ."Ac.rr Fn.ro..oeri er.c..,.mw.oa Eniin...�ai rom,,,.x.om�ro. It) K W i. d E (o Q Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 38 Packet Pg.88 A.1.f t.• Upper Keys • C 232 Affordable Housing Permits )" 4-. Ir 0l . , 4 P I , .x: JI I it, Ke lare , j 272 Pcvm-rs. ' 14 a) i # t. c •1 . 4 � E a♦ J ' to l7 Y at Affordable Hous.ng Pennts .. Y , r Mile Markers a • .fir' Overseas Hwy(US 11 O I ...C.'Duck Key a ]`1t 1 Affordable Housing Permit :it a) , 's .�. E ai l N t yr fA 4Ille WI' ',IP - . , x 0 Y 0 ... .4 .,...---"--- ,." ..,',....!N;1 , • I L' �c • C0- > t^ h TA. r- U r•: a � { A - ,�is 2 A40047 q- ., i li . •" CNA a .'v:,{� `�,,,� i � ' _ t to `L 0 Affordable Hnusing Permits w *O.: ' Mae Markers :if f Overuas Hwy(US I) d E U R =ee��tta111111111re...erre.ollta Mimeo r.,w......MX e........r ex NM.r..me...gm.4. Q Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 Packet Pg. 89 A.1.f -.4 I Big Pine Key and No Name Key 16 Affordable Housing Permits i I �{.r- .. N Name n.. E • ,1 }e•l eiKey ermn c l S 4e - r I 4 . `` v.; ; c v 1 •t ss ; ( a , ?� $i ' Q • .r •,� c .s r� 4. I %t vs 111\ iY:"N't a) -) = sat • 1I� O ANordaDN Housing Permits 2 ' .1f T , •• •A '!4 MrM Markers a G 1 E t t 'A• i �: • I 1'A - Overseas Hwy(US II 0 • _..�`l .. • �} f ,,__II °�.a..er.r�..ra ....a�.•ate. c) rts 0 .r c Lower Keys :y` . i E 492 Affordable Housing Permits ` 410Fle' I A" 'Lls'. '4 , .. o % 4r ` ` a) SC 03 •.-ate. I (A 1 y, �Cr - r" = S l ' '4e1 a - {fit i .16 .ii.,t.. AL,, .• • •-r yi• vie -.04 • 0 • t ; _ •tea . 0 k N i w c.,...., „Ivy to X and II r.. .• W e ts' • 44:. (, r 0 Affordable Housing Permits C .. y' e/ Mdk Markers Ctia..' •��- Overseas Hwy(US I) U IQ Z Q - e....asMetessa.wa�er11.MYa1111111\eM.erkeNLIIII e..rla.rsw rr.rron rra•u. earl Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 }l l Packet Pg. 90 A.1.f Staff also provided information on the ROGO system and annual allocations. Based on the affordable housing units that are in the Affordable and Workforce Housing Projects Table, the distribution of deed restricted affordable housing units is.currently: Uhl y. ROGO.Subarea10 is F— Upper Keys . 346 5 Lower Keys 431 Big Pine Key and No Name Key 19. Total 796 a Now incorporated as Islamorada • : 5 Now incorporated as Marathon 4 : w Total:including those now incorporated 805; . : The balances of Affordable Housing Allocation'' available as of Quarter 3 Year 23 (Jan. 13,: a. 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):very low, low, & median income 8.. - allocations and:2) moderate income 8 allocations;and o b. Unincorporated Monroe County excluding the Big Pine/No Name Key Subarea affordable housing allocation breakdown into the two income categories are as ' . follows: 1) very low income, low income and median income 114 allocations and 2). E moderate 112 allocations: N . N The additional affordable allocations by Subarea up through 2023 include 710 total including d 20 to Big Pine Key/No Name Key Subarea and 690 available for countywide allocation except for Big Pine Key/No Name Key subarea �▪o tn 10 The ROGO subareas are defined in Section 138-20 of the land development code as follows: 21 Sec..138-20.-General provisions. (c)The ROGO allocation system shall apply within the unincorporated area of the county outside of the county mainland,and such area,for purposes hereof,has been divided into subareas as follows: U (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)Lower Keys:the unincorporated area of the county from the corporate limits of the Village of Islamorada N (approximately mile marker 72) south to the corporate limits of the City of Key West at Cow Key Bridge on U.S. Highway 1 (approximately mile marker 4),excluding Big Pine Key and No.Name Key. (3)Big Pine Key and No Name Key:the islands of Big Pine Key and No Name Key within unincorporated the county. C E tt Monroe County Code Sec.138-24.Residential ROGO allocations v (1)Yearly residential ROGO allocation ratio.Each subarea shall have its number of market rate.residential ROGO allocations available per ROGO year.Affordable ROGO allocations shall be available for countywide allocation except 4 for Big Pine Key and No Name Key.The annual allocations for Big Pine Key and No Name Key shall be eight market rate and two affordable dwelling units. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 41 Packet Pg.91. A.1..f 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. These'background papers can be found at: http://consensus.fsu.edu/Workforce-Housing-Assessment/ „a E B. Workforce Housing Stakeholder Perspectives on the Process Going Forward cac 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 E the outcome. Many believed that such a committee should develop a package of consensus c recommendations, informed by data and the range of stakeholder and public perspectives, E that can provide for both short and longer term actions for the .Board of County Commission's consideration. While some of those interviewed remained skeptical that there a will be sufficient "political will" to implement the Committee's recommendations as has been the case in the past, many believed that this was an urgent and timely issue for the N County to address in light of hotel redevelopment and the economic upturn. As one stakeholder put it, "the re-establishing of the Affordable Housing Committee is a good 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 o bring to bear has great potential value. However, 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." c7 r In the Fall of 2014, following•the initiation of this Assessment, the Commission re- a) appointed members to the existing Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and with the N thought of convening and charging them with addressing workforce housing issues and y providing the County Commission with its recommendations. The reconvened committee would review this assessment report and other data as it addressed its charge. 0 d' 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 in 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 0 approach could provide representation from each District in the County, offer workforce housing perspectives from the public,private and nonprofit sectors, and minimize confusion c and any duplication of effort that an ad hoc workforce housing committee might create. It N� 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 both "residents w and workforce?' (emphasis added) m A workforce housing committee, ad hoc or otherwise, appointed and charged by the County s Commission to address workforce housing issues in the Florida Keys was explored in the assessment interviews. A significant number of those interviewed suggested the County Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 .42 .Packet Pg.92 • A.1,f - 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 Housing 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 m that, "The advisory committee may perform additional responsibilities related to affordable F . 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 44 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 cp 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 Committee to develop informed workforce housing consensus findings and recommendations that stakeholders might support and the County Commission could act E upon.13 Ci • 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 o 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 E solutions to improve the availability of workforce housing in,the Florida Keys.' y d dA The format' for the Committee meetings should encourage constructive public and stakeholder input. The Commission might consider charging the Committee with .da establishing an engagement strategy to involve a broader range of stakeholders in their development of findings and recommendations. This might be accomplished through . •. Y opportunities for public input during their own meetings, as well as through Committee to x 72 This would be consistent with their responsibility for developing every three years an affordable housing incentive Ui recommendations report to the BOCC.The next triennial report will be due December 31 2017 2� 13 The Current membership includes the following 11 members:Sylvia Murphy,Monroe County BOCC,Expires . 11/2015,Tim Root,District 1,Expires 11/2016,Heather Roberts,District 1,Expires 11/2016,James D.Cameron, District 2,Expires 11/2018,Randy Wall,District 2,Expires 11/2018,Warren Leamard,District 3,Expires 11/2016,Ken ,,1 Naylor,District 3,Expires 11/2016,Hana Eskra,District 4,Expires 11/2018,Edwin Swift III,District 4,Expires 11/2018,William Wiatt,District 4,Expires 11/2016,Jim Saunders,District 5,Expires 11/2016 and Stephanie Scuderi , District 5,Expires 11/2016. E 14 http://www.monroecounty-fl.gov/DocumentCenter./Home/View/695 The membership follows the requirements of Florida Statute 420.9076 and Monroe County Resolution 062-2009,and calls-for representation from those 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 planning,and a representative of essential services personnel. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 43 Packet Pg. 93 A.1.f 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. (See Appendix #7 for Advisory Group process recommendations). It was observed by many that an advisory committee developing recommendations on j_ workforce housing will require dedicated staff, including legal and planning expertise, and c facilitation support for the Committee to do its work expeditiously. This is because of the 1= 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. E desire for timely actions to address the current workforce housing challenges. c a) E V. WORKFORCE HOUSING IN MONROE COUNTY--NEXT. . a STEPS a d 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 z on workforce housing: a. E 0 With a charge from the County Commission, the Committee should establish its procedures y 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; d • Reviewing the range of issues and options identified in previous studies; • Reviewing the experience and lessons learned with successful workforce housing N. projects developed in the Keys to date; • Reviewing this Stakeholder Assessment Report;and • Developing a package of consensus findings and recommended solutions for T) consideration by.the Monroe County Board of County Commission. ,Y m vI 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 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 NI a.consensus framework for addressing and implementing solutions. w r c d E. n:0 Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 . 44 Packet Pg.94 A.1,f. APPENDIX#1 LIST OF MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING INTERVIEWS AND MEETINGS ra Name Organization Position 1. Tony Allen Allen-Beyer Funeral Home : Owner i N 2. Steven Auger Florida Housing Finance Corporation Executive Director - cca 3. Debbie Swift Batty Historic'Tours of America Director of Property H Development c 4. Jennifer Bennett Tourist Development Council Research Director E 5. Kristen Brenner American Caribbean Real Estate Realtor c a) E 6. Dustan Carpenter Divine Dining by Dustan Caterer Q 7. Heather Carruthers Monroe County Board of County Commissioner,District 3 - Is Commissioners a ai 8. J. Manuel Castillo,Sr. Key West Housing Authority Executive Director > 9. Harold Cates City of Key West ,Mayor: : c 10. Don Craig . . City of Key West Planning Director. . . . ' . y 11. Pornchai Davidson Naval Air Station,Key West Commander,Executive Officer: . 0. 12. Ron Demes Naval Air Station,Key West Special Asst.Advisor to the p Commanding Officer y 13. Brenda Edmonds Remax Realty;Marathon Realtor c 14. Hana Eskra Gorman Development Inc.. Florida Market President . T 15. Debra Farrell, 215,Century Schwartz Realty Realtor p 16: George.Garrett City Of Marathon Planning Director. t7 17. Roman Gastesi Monroe County Administrator c 18. Karen Hamilton. South Florida Regional Planning.Council Regional Planner E 19. Christine Hurley Monroe County Growth Management Division Director , N 20. Rebecca Jetton Florida Department of Economic Planner N Opportunity Q 21. Derrick Johnson Coco Plum Real Estate Realtor: : a`) 22. Danny Kolhage Monroe County Board of County Commissioner, District 1 (Mayor : p Commissioners . Pro Tem) .. . . " a 23. Kurt Lewin First State Bank of the Florida Keys. . Executive:Vice;President : r 24. Kara Lundgren The Islamorada Resort General Manager cn1 25. Ysela Llort" Miami-Dade Transit Director : _ 26. Capt. Steve McAlearney Naval Air Station,Key West Commanding Officer 61 27. Ashley Monnier Naval Air Station,Key West Community Planning Liaison 2I Officer. N 28. Nancy Muller Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Policy &:Special Programs N Tallahassee . . . Director - . Lr)I 29. Jim Murley South Florida Regional Planning Council Executive Director i 30. Sylvia Murphy Monroe County Board of County Commission,District Five c Commissioners a) 31. Mark Moss Habitat for,Humanity.Key West Executive Director s 32. Virginia Panico. Key West Chamber of.Commerce Executive Vice President. 33. Mary Pecorino Coast to Coast Real Estate Group - Realtor Q 34. Mark Porter Monroe County Schools Superintendent. 35. Barbara Powell Florida Department of Economic Planner Opportunity Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 45 Packet Pg.95 A.1.f 36. Dick Ramsey City of Marathon Mayor . 37. Holly Raschein Florida House of Representatives, District Representative 120 38. David Rice Monroe County Board of County Commissioner,District 4 Commissioners Id r 39. Mark Rison Citizen (email comment) 40. `Tim Root Mingo&Company CEO,Commercial construction 41. Mark Rousch Monroe County Land Authority Director 03 42. Mayte Santamaria Growth Management, Monroe County, Assistant Director of Planning F Florida - and Environmental Resources d 43. Jim Saunders Bayview Land Development&_Permitting Manager 44. Stephanie Scuderi Home BancSliares- Centennial Bank Senior VP,Director of Business d Development Q 45. Jeff Sharkey The Capitol Alliance Group,Tallahassee - CEO a 46. Jeff Sharp,Ray Freis,& Florida Keys Seahorse Park,Homeowner's Homeowners Seahorse Park co a Christy Crooks Association Big Pine Key a) 47. Pritam Singh The Singh Company,Key West Developer .- 48. Andrew Spann Mt. Carmel Communications, St. Louis, Real Developer t . Estate Investment&Development -- a) 49. Terry Strickland Yankee Freedom II Manager : : Q 50. Ed Swift . Historic Tours of America CEO O U 51. Lisa Tennyson - Monroe County 52. David Thompson Key Largo Developer • o 53. Sandy Tuttle American Caribbean Real Estate,Marathon Realtor iii and Lower Keys Assoc. of Realtors . C C.7 54. Jodi Weinhofer The Lodging Association of the - President r Florida Keys &Key West e. 55. Donna Windle Southernmost Realty,Key West Realtor w W a) N y Monroe County Workforce Housing Roundtable Participants,August 2014 a a`) 56. Debbie Swift Batty Historic Tours of America/Habitat for Humanity d • 57. Richard Beal Skeeter's Marine4.1 58. Heather Carruthers Monroe BOCC (District 3 Commissioner) yi 59. J. Manual Castillo Sr. Key West and Monroe Co. Housing = 60. Rita Cotter Congressman Garcia's Office vi 61. Raymond Fries Florida Keys Seahorse Park Association 2 62. Johnathan Gueverra Florida Keys Community College ul1 63. Derrick Johnson Marathon and Lower Keys Assoc. of Realtors N 64. Amber Ernst-Leonard Florida Keys Community College ink 65. Mark Moss Habitat for Humanity,Lower Keys and Key West W 66. Jack Niedbalski Habitat for Humanity,Upper Keys . 67. Holly Raschein Florida House of Representatives E 68. David Rise AOCC -c 0 co 69. Timothy W. Root Utility Board Keys Energy/Workforce Housing member = 70. Mark Rosch Monroe Co. Land Authority Q 71. Jim Saunders Bayview Homes/Development 72. Bob Shillinger Monroe Co.Attorney's Office Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 46 Packet Pg. 96 A.1.f 73. Donna Stayton Florida DOH,Monroe Co. 74. Jeff Stuncard Village of Islamorada 75. Owen Trepanier Trepanier and Associates,Inc. 76. Mark Warmouth Individual Advocate/Wells Fargo Bank 77. Tim Wonderlin Habitat for Humanity,Middle Keys 78. Charles Todd Young Habitat for Humanity,Middle Keys ca I- r a) E c as E c ca a ai > y c a) s a E 0 c.) a) 0 R O 0 a, E w w d N N d O L a) ca W 2 U 2 N 0 N Iii r d E t C1 a3 Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 47 Packet Pg. 97 A.1.f. - APPENDIX#2 MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING ASSESSMENT BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS 73 http://consensus.fsu.edu/Workforce=Housing-Assessment/ • E u) c AFFORDABLE HOUSING STUDIES-FLORIDA i Sadowski Housing Coalition Press Release,2015 Report from the Florida Housing Coalition,2015 . . • d Out of Reach 2014:Florida-Link E v ALICE Report: Study of Financial Hardship 2014 United Way of Florida m E AFFORDABLE &WORKFORCE HOUSING MONROE COUNTY • c co Monroe County Affordable Housing Developments and Incentives DRAFT 3/25/2015 a FCRC Consensus Center: Assessing A Workforce Housing Initiative,2014 ALICE Report: Study of Financial Hardship 2014 Monroe County Excerpt c Monroe County.2014 Income Limits and Rent Limits Florida Housing Finance Corporation m Key West Data Updates,2012 • a Affordable Housing Advisory Committee,2012 C Monroe County Housing Needs Assessment,2008 0 Islamorada. Workforce Housing Support Study,2007 On Affordable Housing Presentation,2007 0 - Affordable Housing Background,2006 To Affordable Housing Needs Assessment 2006 C Report on Retaining Tourism Workers II,2006 . .. Affordable Housing White Paper, Don Craig,City of Key West,2014 a Monroe County and Acquisition and Management Master Plan,2006 E cn Summary of Workforce Housing Task Force Recommendations I,2006 y ai Summary.of Workforce Housing Task Force Recommendations II,2006. Q • Study of the Monroe County Tourism Workforce:Report on Retaining Tourism Workers,2005 i Florida Keys Strategy Paper,2001 ' -0 Operation Seamless,2000 DCA . m GENERAL INFORMATION-MONROE COUNTY r Monroe County Profile,2012 NI • Monroe County Population Projections 2010-2030,2011 2 Housing and Population Chart,201Q " UI 2 MONROE COUNTY AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN ,nl Florida Keys Areas of Critical Concern,2013 N Florida Keys Areas of Critical Concern,2012 61 >i AFFORDABLE HOUSING-BEST PRACTICES AND TOOLS W Affordable Housing Funding Sources,2014 FHC d Workforce Housing Tools,2009 E Workforce Housing Best Practices ' R AFFORDABLE HOUSING-LOCAL MEDIA COVERAGE Q • Video Link:Key West Housing Crisis Part I-Video Video Link:Key West Housing Crisis Part II Video Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 48 Packet Pg.98- A.1.f APPENDIX#3 MONROE COUNTY AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE ORDINANCE SECTION 2-700-703 E �. W t Sec. 2-700. - Establishment of affordable housing advisory committee. c (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 homebuilding industry in connection with 4 affordable housing. c�a (2) One citizen who is actively engaged in the banking or mortgage banking industry in connection d with affordable housing. .> .N (3) One citizen who is a representative of those areas of labor actively engaged in home building in connection with affordable housing. L (4) One citizen who is actively engaged as an advocate for low-income persons in connection with a affordable housing. V (5) One citizen who is actively engaged as a for-profit provider of affordable housing. (6) 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 s housing. 0 (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 E appointments. N (10) One citizen who represents employers within the jurisdiction. N (11) One citizen who represents essential services personnel,as defined in the local housing assistance plan. `m (d) All meetings of the advisory committee are public meetings, and all committee records are public -a records. _ (e) Staff,administrative,and facility support to the advisory committee shall be provided by thee, BOCC. The advisory committee shall be cooperatively staffed by the local government department or y� 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) V� 2 Sec. 2-701. -Duties of the affordable housing advisory committee. (a) The affordable housing advisory committee shall review established policies and procedures, N ordinances,land development regulations,and the adopted local government comprehensive plan of ire 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 - c 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 Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 49 Packet Pg. 99 A.1.f 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. § 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 F allowance of flexibility in densities for affordable housing; (4) The reservation of infrastructure capacity for housing for very low 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 E 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 f0 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 s transportation hubs and major employment centers and mixed-use developments; (12) Othera. affordable housing incentives as recommended. (c)The advisory committee may perform additional responsibilities related to affordable housing at • c.j the request of the BOCC,including creating best management practices for the development of affordable housing in the community. (Ord. No. 014-2008,§ 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 y 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 d of the tentative recommendations can by obtained by interested persons. (Ord. No. 014-2008,5 1) 77 0 Sec. 2-703. - Commission action required. (a) Within 90 days after the date of receipt of the local housing incentive strategies recommendations ins from the advisory committee,but no later than March 31,2009, the BOCC shall adopt an amendment to its local housing assistance plan (LHAP) to incorporate the local housing incentive strategies it will implement within its jurisdiction.The BOCC must consider all of the strategies specified 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 greater degree than other ;n! projects. ("Permits" are defined by statute to include development orders,building permit,zoning • w 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 review 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 May 2,2009, the BOCC shall notify Q the Florida Housing Finance Corporation by certified mail of its adoption of the amended LHAP and include a copy of the approved amended plan. (Ord. No. 014-2008, § 1) Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 50 Packet Pg. 100 A.1.f APPENDIX#4 MONROE COUNTY WORKFORCE HOUSING ROUNDTABLE SUMMARY OF COMMENTS, AUGUST 2014 cc WORKFORCE HOUSING ROUNDTABLE w c ca August 25, 2014 Marathon, Florida �= Representative Holly Raschein, Florida House of Representatives District 120 as E v ROUNDTABLE COMMENT FORM SUMMARY Q Participants in the Workforce Housing Roundtable were invited to provide comments for consideration in the ca Workforce Housing Assessment being conducted by the FCRC Consensus Center at FSU. Below is a list of the n. respondents and the compiled responses for the Comment form questions: N c 1. Debbie Swift Batty Organization: Historic Tours of America/Habitat for Humanity co 2. Richard Beal Organization: Skeeter's Marine Q: 3. Heather Carruthers Organization: Monroe BOCC (District 3 Commissioner) . c 4. J. Manuel Castillo Sr.,Organization: Key West and Monroe Co. Housing y 5. Rita Cotter Organization: Congressman Garcia's Office o 6. Raymond Fries Organization: Florida Keys Seahorse Park Association . o 7. Derrick Johnson Organization(s): Marathon and Lower Keys Association of Realtors, c American Legion, Overseas Village Homeowners Association. . 8. Johnathan Gueverra, Organization: Florida Keys Community College 9. Amber Ernst-Leonard Organization: Florida Keys Community College. N 10. Mark Moss Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Lower Keys and Key West _ m 11. Jack Niedbalski Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Upper Keys 12. Holly Raschein Organization: Florida House of Representatives 13. David Rice Organization: Monroe County Commission 3= 14. Mark 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 N� 16. Bob Schillinger Organization: Monroe Co.Attorney's Office 17. Donna Stayton Organization: Florida DOH, Monroe Co. 0'1 18. Jeff Stuncard Organization: Village of Islamorada 19. Jim Saunders Organization: Bayview Homes/Development 20. Owen Trepanier Organization: Trepanier and Associates, Inc. N 21. Mark Warmouth Organization: Individual Advocate/Wells Fargo Bank ink 22. Tim Wonderlin Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys 23. Chris Todd Young Organization: Habitat for Humanity, Middle Keys a) E a as Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 51 Packet Pg. 101 A.1.f 1. WHAT ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES AFFECTING MONROE COUNTY'S WORKFORCE HOUSING? What is working well? • The 100-year deed restriction. • Consideration of workforce housing. w • Collection of affordable housing(in-line) fees. co • When funded,Sadowski. • Florida housing finance Corporation funding. Monroe County 40 funding. Key West housing authority and Munroe County Housing Authority's management of government owned c apartments. a) • Tax-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 moderate rate. co • Land Authority—somewhat. d • PPP's (public private partnerships) y • . :Our park provides for visitors accommodation and tourist revenues. • Habitat does well because they use partnerships and provide permanent housing. • Habitat for humanity. • Gorman developments in Upper Keys. y • New projects on Stock Island. o • Habitat for humanity-- he is one of the leading builders and renters of homes.They need more assistance from government to provide land to build. • Not enough information to know. • Not much,if anything. E • Nothing. • Nothing! N What's not? •o • Confusion on definitions. t d • Financing,high costs • Cost of insurance. N� • Set up funds for new construction, first time home buyers. • Sadowski fund--replenished for Monroe County. V1 • Sadowski Act funding. 2� • Lack of incentives for building affordable housing. • More work, fewer people to do it, ,ni • Workforce/affordable housing programs do not cover the full range of individuals struggling w to afford to live and work in the Keys. c • Insufficient collaboration and comprehensive county wide planning. • I 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 Assessment Report,April 2015 52 Packet Pg. 102 A.1.f • . 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 up $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. r • Lack of availability. • Buildable land for affordable housing. vac • More second-home owners eating up properties. • Limitations with non-tier 3 land • Regulations,density,height. • Length of permitting time, • State housing allocations,land development, co • Legislation to cut taxing rates on affordable housing. • Connection with job creators and requirements for housing. N • 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. • Housing for new businesses which require numerous employees. Identifying property to locate workforce housing and providing incentives to builders. Always being,as we are now, cal lagging behind the need. • Landlords are having to raise their rent as they incur more costs for their properties through o tax increases, sewer, etc. 2? •. Needs to be split between rental and home ownership. Not a one-size-fits-all solution. c • Availability of rentals. E • HGTV. �' d •. . Affordable housing advisory committee, a 2. WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE THE FUTURE HOLD FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING a IN MONROE COUNTY? s ns What are the future challenges that need to be addressed? 1 • Affordable housing allocations. _ • Limited land/permitting. o1 • Difficulty to get permits. 2� • Finding a formula that functions as a.continuum. One size fits all will not work. c • Lack of land on which to build housing. t • Land acquisition. There are less vacant buildable lots available each year.The market rate applications/construction is increasing rapidly. c • Height ordinances E • Higher cost for rental properties,wind and flood insurance,plus higher taxes. • Funding to offset housing costs. • County requirements to match funding sources (HUD). • • Lack of funds to subsidize or offer incentives. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 53 Packet Pg. 103 A.1.f • Changing state legislation to Land Authority and Housing Authority money to be used for workforce 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 new workforce housing for those at the top of the wage spectrum. • Environmental regulations often "trump" the ability to build. • Rising sea levels. F- • Insurance rates, • Tax rates, • The same as the past 15 years. • Focus! We need heads down,rolled up sleeves,and accountability! Distinct set aside time and Q deliverables. a What are the future opportunities that should be leveraged? •. Funding is increasing. • Land Authority money.. m cui • Counties (municipalities) inclusionary housing requirements should be funded partly by business development with funding for employee/affordable housing. • Sadowski fund--replenished for Monroe County. Set up funds for new construction, first time home buyers. • Local, state and federal funds. To • State leverage for units to become allocated for affordable housing/workforce housing. C7 • Huge opportunities if we effectively link workforce housing to development and redevelopment projects. • Housing units must be incorporated in new developments being constructed. I • Require developers to build housing for the workforce. N • As energy efficient technology becomes better and better it should be used to make new housing more affordable in the long term, especially since electricity is not cheap. a • Smoke free housing as an amenity for the health and safety of residence as a cost-saving benefit for refurbishing units. R • Explore increasing height limit of structures and increase densities in certain zonings. Use Ni state and federal land for large affordable projects. _ • Buildable land for affordable housing. v' • Density requirements. 2� • Build up!Build new! Much of the KWHA properties are old,ugly, small and inefficiently sparse. Density needs to increase. cst� • The greatest opportunity is the current threat to our service economy.This threat has to be w leveraged to bring this issue to the forefront. • Need to greatly increase the affordable workforce rentals. • Housing requirements for commercial development. • Rising flood and windstorm insurance rates. Q Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 54 Packet Pg. 104 A.1.f 3. HOW SHOULD THE COUNTY BEST ADDRESS THESE OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES AS WELL AS THE NEEDS OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND RESIDENTS IN THE FLORIDA KEYS? What strategies should Monroe County consider in addressing workforce housing issues going forward? a • Putting together a task force/committee. • Task force with staff(and legal support). Suggestions: N o All transient unit development and re-development to be inclusionary housing ordinance, i= or impact fee assessment. m o Add commercial development and redevelopment based on employees/square feet (use industry standards and sales tax codes) for an impact fee assessment. d o Fund the Monroe County Housing Authority or other similar successful organizations to build workforce housing. o Implement a ROGO transfer ordinance whereby a market rate unit may be dislodged if a an affordable unit replaces the dislodged market rate. o 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. .2 market rate properties and then dislodge the market rate for use elsewhere as their market a rates. E o Use land authority money or impact fees to buy down interest rates for development Ci costs for work force housing projects. of o Increased density in appropriate zoning districts within commercial areas to facilitate o workforce housing. o o Increase height in appropriate areas. • Special considerations for landlords to make rental units affordable,while monitoring them to d verify affordability. • Again,unifying developers, county and Key West city government representatives and finding aNi funding streams for us to define land acquisitions,builders to build on this land,and the Q Housing Authority to oversee these affordable units. • Offer additional subsidies or incentives. Countywide effort to identify and acquire property to build. • Work with DEO to increase ROGO allocations. • Leveraging all resources. N� • Many need more space. • Focus all tier-3 properties on workforce 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. Int • Provide funding for nonprofit affordable housing entities. • Develop a comprehensive plan that also deal with density and height restrictions. c • Create a strategy.There is no 1 year, 5 year, 10 year plan. Set goals. Consider "Outside the E 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 reducing secondhand smoke and it's related to chronic health issues. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 55 Packet Pg. 105 A.1.f ' • • APPENDIX#5 EMAIL COMMENTS From: Mike Rison<dfcmike@iserv.net> - E • Subject: Re: Article in Key West Citizen regarding Affordable Housing Monroe County � • . c Date: August 28,2014 11:28:02 AM EDT • 0 • To: Bob Jonesrmjones(a,,FSU.edu ~ C I was reading an article in the Key West Citizen regarding"Affordable Housing"and your name was mentioned soliciting: E. Citizen.comments. I would like to submit a comment about the"Affordable Housing"issue in Monroe County. Please c •suggest the best way to submit a comment. -. E I might suggest some background information that could form the basis foryouur continued study of this issue. c a As follows: The only place there is an"Affordable Housing issue in the Florida Keys(Monroe County)is Key w West). That pressure is caused by a 2,by 4 mile Island with 22,000 permanent residents that welcomes 2,000,000 Visitors • .'_ per year. To service those 2,000,000 Visitors Key West has approximately 7000 lodging units. t . d • In most areas across the country prices flow percentage wise from the cost of residential housing(for many different ' . `o. reasons)in the case of Key West because the Tourist Development Council has done such a spectacular job of E 0 enticing visitors to visit Key West all pricing flows from:the room rates of lodging. consider this;a company was formed C) to purchase 4 old and aging hotels,closed them down,spent 3 years re-constructing their and will soon add 700 01 • additional rooms to the lodging supply! The first thing that appears necessary is a fee on all Lodging to build"Affordable. o Housing" for all working people as almost everyone in Key West is impacted by these huge numbers to support the �a Lodging Industry. • o . (7 A solution put forward by(probably by Developers)was to provide cheap transportation to areas of Monroe County that . C have cheap housing costs,like Florida City. So enter the Lower Keys Shuttle(Key West to Marathon 2.00 The Upper .d . Keys Shuttle(Marathon to Florida City$0.50 with a.transfer). So for a maximum.$2.50 you can ride anywhere between E. mml arid mm120,120•miles the only"problem is you could spend 2=4.hours on an air conditioned bus each way every N • day. All subsidized by the Federal Government with no'cost borne by the recepientants of this great.service. I have Q personally spent about$4.50 to ride to Fort Lauderdale International Airport(the Senior price). That's the Lower Keys d Shuttle,'The Upper Keys Shuttle,#38 Busway,The Metro Rail,The Tri Rail,free shuttle to Fort Lauderdale Int.Airport. a • . O• Also as printed in the news paper your e-mail address is listed incorrectly(rmjones@fsu.edu.)that last'dot after edu will .. - Y cause an e-mail program to."choke". This may be your first indication of how the"powers that be"try to impede your • - . cMa • work while still appearing to support the idea of Citizen input! If you need a copy I have included as an attachment a •NI copy of the Citizen containing your e-mail address as printed in the Citizen. X I • Regards • MR • • . . dfcmike@iserv.net • o . N I- X W C d • E- L • O • . . . Q . • Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April2015 56 •Packet Pg. 106 • A.1.f • • • APPENDIX#6 "AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHITE PAPER-CITY OF KEY WEST DONALD CRAIG&NICOLE MALO • Affordable Housing White-Paper-Donald Craig,AICP Director of Planning&Nicole Malo alo AICP,Planner, E September 2014 City of Key West c http://legistarl.granicus.com/KeyWest/meetings/2014/10/2491 A City.Commission.14-10- . F` 07 Meeting Agenda Full Detail.pdf +. • • • E E co a ai • • en • d • t a• E O V • • • O !0 0 • (� - . d • E• N W 01 N • • - d O Y W • • U �I • 0 N I W - C d t • Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 $7 Packet Pg. 10.7 A.1•.f APPENDIX#7 SAMPLE COMMITTEE PROTOCOLS To There was a request for a sample of protocols that the Board of County Commission and any committee they charge with addressing workforce housing might consider as they develop the charge y and organize the Committee's efforts.These are based on protocols developed and used by a variety i of local,regional and statewide committees that have been charged with seeking consensus on policy I- options. cu E —COMMITTEE PROCESS OVERVIEW °' CONSENSUS .co F. Defining Consensus cod 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. E V Consensus means that, to the extent possible,each member commits to work toward agreements that Q; meet their own and other members needs so that all can support the outcome. �a Consensus is a process, an attitude and an outcome. Consensus processes have the potential of 2? producing better quality,more informed and better-supported outcomes. a) E As a process, consensus is a problem solving approach in which all members: 1. Jointly share,clarify and distinguish their concerns; N 2. Educate 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. z .rod 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. U)1 0 Consensus as an attitude means that each member commits to work toward agreements that meet N� 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 any issue, but to 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, Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 58 Packet Pg. 108 A.1.f • Some participants who do not support the solution but agree not to vote against it. SUCCESSFUL MEETINGS Successful Meetings Overview r NE A successful meeting is a collaboration between members, staff, chair, facilitator, consultants (if g relevant) and affected stakeholder interest groups. Consensus-based processes and decisions, r developed working with diverse stakeholder interests affected by the issue(s), takes time to educate m members' on the range of issues and possible solutions. Members have different levels of expertise . ac and knowledge on the issues and require different levels of preparation and education ("getting up 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 w 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 minimum 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). Q; E 0 A meeting will be successful to the extent that staff, chair, facilitator(s) and project consultants plan y meetings and meeting objectives, ensure members receive relevant materials, and design and prepare agenda packets,worksheets, surveys,and summary reports sufficiently in advance of meetings. a 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 are meeting objectives and/or d agenda items member's think should be added to the agenda, they should identify them during N "Agenda Review" and during the "Next Steps" phase of each meeting where next meeting agenda items are requested. 0 t . 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, col members, stakeholder groups, and the public to ensure meetings are productive and successful. -In x short,it is "our" responsibility. 2 —�-.ADVISORY COMMITTEE cv ORGANIZATIONAL AND PROCEDURAL POLICES AND GUIDELINES -- - -- — --- —=_—---- --- --- W w CONSENSUS-BUILDING AND DECISION-MAKING PROCEDURES °1 The Monroe County Affordable Housing Committee (Committee) will seek consensus on guidance and recommendations to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) Q 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 Packet Pg. 109 A.1.f support or at least agree not to oppose. 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 75% 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 Committee can not reach consensus (75% in favor) on.a decision, a. t 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. F= The Committee will make advisory recommendations only when a quorum is present. A quorum d shall be constituted by at least 51% of the appointed members being present (simple majority). The Committee will utilize Robert's Rules of Order, as modified by the Committee's adopted g consensus guidelines and procedures, to make and approve motions; however, the 75% supermajority voting requirement will supercede the normal voting requirements used in Robert's Rules of Order .0 for decision making on substantive motions and amendments to motions. In addition,the Committee, a, will utilize their adopted meeting guidelines for conduct during meetings. The Committee will make •N substantive advisory recommendations using their adopted facilitated consensus-building procedures, , s 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. c . Any voting member may make a motion when a quorum is present,and after a thorough discussion. To A second is required to discuss the motion. If a motion is seconded, the Facilitator will open the 8 floor for discussion. The Facilitator will recognize members wishing 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 N 64 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 r receives a 75% or more favorable vote of the members present and voting it will be approved. . COMMITTEE PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES 1 = MEMBER'S ROLE . 2' ✓ Prepare for meetings. Review documents and background material prior to meetings. c ✓ Keep to the agenda and meeting procedural polices and guidelines. ✓ The Committee process is an opportunity to explore possibilities. Offering or exploring an idea t does not necessarily imply support for it. . ✓ Listen to understand. Seek a shared understanding even if you don't agree. E ✓ Be focused and concise—balance participation&minimize repetition. Share the airtime. ✓ Look 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. ✓ Focus on issues,not personalities. "Using insult instead of argument is the sign of a small mind." ✓ Avoid stereotyping or personal attacks. 'Mud thrown is ground lost." Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 60 Packet Pg. 110 A.1.f ✓ To the extent possible, offer options to address other's concerns,as well as your own. ✓ Participate fully in discussions, and complete meeting assignments as requested. ✓ Represent and communicate with member's constituent group(s). ✓ Refrain from using electronic devices during the meetings; Keep electronic devices turned off or silent. E FACILITATOR'S ROLE (FCRC Consensus Center @ FSU) co ✓ Design and facilitate a participatory Committee process. ✓ Ensure a fair process during which all perspectives are considered. d ✓ Enhance the opportunity for consensus building encouraging constructive discussions among the members. E ✓ Assist the Committee to build consensus on advisory recommendations. ✓ Assist participants to stay focused and on task. a ✓ Assure that participants follow ground rules. ai ✓ Prepare agenda packets and provide meeting summary reports. > MONROE COUNTY STAFF ROLE ✓ Respect meeting process and guidelines. 0 U MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ROLE ✓ 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 2 the process. E GUIDELINES FOR BRAINSTORMING y d ✓ Speak when recognized by the Facilitator(s). N ✓ Offer one idea per person without explanation. ✓ No comments, criticism, or discussion of other's ideas. a • Listen respectively to other's ideas and opinions. d ✓ Seek understanding and not agreement at this point in the discussion. co to THE NAME STACKING PROCESS =i Determines the speaking order. v� ✓ 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• rl on a specific issue or, to balance participation-and allow those who have not spoken on an issue N an opportunity to do so before others on the list who have already spoken on the issue. X GUIDELINES FOR REPORTS AND PRESENTATIONS W ✓ Facilitator introduces presenter. °7 ✓ Hold all questions until report or presentation is complete,unless invited by the speaker. n ✓ Facilitator stacks names. 14 ✓ Facilitator calls on members to speak. ✓ Clarifying questions only. (For discussions, see guidelines below.) Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 61 Packet Pg. 111 A.1.f GUIDELINES FOR DISCUSSIONS AND PROPOSALS ✓ 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). V Discussion of proposal (focus on issues,refine proposal,and consensus building). • Consensus/Acceptability ranking as needed: ✓ Facilitator tests for consensus with a motion to approve and a vote. ACCEPTABILITY RANKING SCALE d 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 g members and staff. Please be prepared to offer specific refinements or changes to address your o. reservations.The following scale will be utilized for the ranking exercises: > N C ACCEPTABILITY 4.= Acceptable, 3=Acceptable, 2= Not Acceptable, 1= Not. 2 RANKING I agree I agree with minor I don't agree unless major ' Acceptable - c. SCALE • reservations 'reservations addressed- E 0 PRIORITIZATION RANKING SCALE 5 Highest Level of Priority;Urgent 4 High Priority 3 Moderate Level of Priority 2 Low Level of Priority d 1 Lowest Possible Priority; Committee Should not Pursue N TOPIC RANK 5 4 3 2 1 RAW AVERAG] N SCORE AGENDA SUBMITTAL AND CONSIDERATION PROCEDURES d All agenda items must be submitted by close of business ten (10) days prior to the next scheduled col Committee meeting. _ The staff will 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. N in Committee members will receive all proposed agenda items and supporting documentation at least w seven days prior to the next scheduled Committee meeting. . d E No new agenda items will be considered at the Committee meeting with the exception of those issues o raised by the staff that have been determined to require immediate Committee action, or' by the Q unanimous (100%) approval of a quorum of the Committee through the Chair. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 62 Packet Pg. 112 A.1.f. Agenda items that meet submittal criteria and arrive after the established deadline will be placed on the next regularly scheduled Committee 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. r E The Committee by a 75% favorable vote may discuss requested agenda items not meeting the submittal criteria requirements but may not take any formal action on the issue until the next scheduled Committee meeting. a) msc Special meetings may be called by the staff in consultation with the Chair, based on urgency.and necessity for immediate action. E AGENDA ITEM SUBMITTAL CRITERIA aE. ai Agenda item must be submitted 10 days prior to regularly scheduled Committee meetings. Proposed agenda item must clearly state the action requested of the Committee. If applicable, m proponent should provide exact ordinance,rule or statutory references that the proposal addresses. o, Proponent should provide all necessary supporting documentation required for Committee 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/Representation: N Address: . m Phone and Fax Numbers:. E-Mail Address: Date Submitted: AGENDA ITEM INFORMATION co Date of Committee Meeting Name of Presenter: v� Representation of Presenter int Agenda Item Title: . Amount of Time.Requested: N� Rationale for Agenda Item: Specific Action Requested: Background Documentation: MEETING PROCESS—AGENDA ITEM CONSIDERATION PROCEDURES co 1. Facilitator introduces the agenda item/proposal. 2. Proponent states the action requested and provides rationale for proposal. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 63 Packet Pg. 113 A.1.f 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 name tents and be acknowledged by the Facilitator prior to r speaking. Committee approved meeting guidelines are in effect at all times. N aiC FOR PROPOSALS (issues requiring Committee action): 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. 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 speak in favor will be asked to offer E 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 c under discussion. The facilitator ensures that all views are expressed and similar views are not w repeated. Members may, through the facilitator or chair, ask clarifying questions to members of the cn public offering comments. The facilitator or chair may limit public comment to three (3) minutes per r person. This process will be used for substantive Committee issues and not for procedural matters E before the Committee. 0 () 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 c 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 clarifying questions to members of the public offering comments. This process is used for Committee substantive issues and not for procedural matters before the Committee. a> 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 Committee members unless the facilitator or chair requests specific clarification from the staff or a member of the public. Members may request specific cni 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 v� for the motion. If the motion involves an option that the public has already commented on, then the vote 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. I,I x Only motions to approve will be considered. There will be no motions to disapprove. If there is no w motion after discussion or a motion with no second, the requested action is not approved. E s 0 as Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 64 Packet Pg. 114 A.1•.f MEETING PROCESS PROCEDURES • 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. c • General discussion by Committee members. • When appropriate: Facilitator asks if any members of the public wishes to address the Committee m on the current issue under Committee consideration. Facilitator asks for those who wish to speak -a in favor of the proposal or topic under discussion to offer brief comments, others who wish to d 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. ai • 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 summarize 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. c • After public comment, facilitator calls for members' discussion and stacks names of members 2? 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. d • 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 Y 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 the 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. awl • In order to get a "read" on a motion, the Facilitator may elect or be requested by the member N making the motion to take a "straw poll" on the motion. Based on the result, the Facilitator may col suggest to the member moving that they withdraw or table the motion pending further discussion. t IJ • Committee 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 co mover and approved by 75% 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 Q or approved amendments, and the Facilitator will call for a vote. If the motion receives a 75% or greater favorable vote of the Committee members it will be deemed approved. Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 65 Packet Pg. 115 A.1.f 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 w using the Public Comment Forms to ensure accuracy. All written and or electronic comments will be N included as in the Facilitator's Summary Report. Public comment provided orally during meetings will cc be summarized and included in the Facilitator's Summary Report. H TIME LIMITS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT POLICY: The minimum time allowed per person wishing to comment is three (3) minutes and the maximum is five (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 , Committee members for the amount of time they prefer to allow for each person wishing to _ comment from three (3), four (4) or five (5) minutes. a ai 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 Committee voting on substantive policy matters c. (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 U be allowed an opportunity to speak on the issue during the regularly scheduled Public Comment o; opportunity. If a decision is to be made at the same meeting where the issue is first discussed the o public will be provided an opportunity to speak after Committee discussion but before a vote is .1 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 m respective groups, rather than all members of a group speaking. The group shall elect one person to N speak on their behalf and notify the Committee of their selected representative prior to public comment. °1 -a 0 PROCEDURE FOR REQUESTING TO MAKE PRESENTATIONS TO THE COMMITTEE: Members of 12 cc the public wishing to make a presentation to the Committee should contact their constituent y stakeholder representative on the Committee. 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 u.)1 the Committee is interested in having the presentation it will be scheduled for a subsequent meeting N with appropriate time set for the agenda per agenda submittal policy. W DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION TO COMMITTEE.PROCEDURES: Members of the public wishing 4; to distribute information to the Committee should provide the information to the facilitator or staff in electronic format for distribution to the Committee. 0 cc z Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 66 Packet Pg. 116 A.1.f 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 serve on the Committee. If the member cannot demonstrate his or her absence was for a 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 Commission. If the member refuses ca 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. E COMMITTEE ADOPTED GUIDING PRINCIPLES 1. The Committee will adhere to their charge and purpose by providing advisory co 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. Q; 4. Committee members will serve 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 s organizational meeting. Additional meetings may be called by the Staff or Committee chair as a) required. Nd w ABSENTEE COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENT POLICY d 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 as Facilitator and the Staff.The member should identify the agenda item(s) that the comment(s) pertains y 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 member's comments will �I be included in the Facilitator's meeting summary report. The Committee member may only make one comment per agenda item, and each comment will be limited to a maximum of five-hundred (500) words. o N 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 Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 67 Packet Pg. 117 A.1.f APPENDIX#8 INFORMATION ON FCRC CONSENSUS CENTER,FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY Fclit CONSENSUS CENTER 1 d. "Facilitating Consensus.Solutions, Supporting.Collaborative Action." The Florida State University a Morgan Building,Suite 236 .7) 2035 East Paul Dirac Drive Tallahassee,FL 32310 Phone: (850) 644-6320 Fax: (850) 644-4968 v httpt//consensus.fsu.edu rn ;S.SpTE�j elk;PA THE o Pig L" ,F ' FLORIDA STATE c? .' 1 UNIVERSITY C N - The FCRC Consensus Center serves as an independent public resource facilitating consensus solutions and N supporting collaborative action. The Consensus Center,based at Florida State University'iri Tallahassee and University of Central P. 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 in using collaborative consensus building processes to produce and implement solutions. v� The Center offers neutral technical assistance to a wide range of public and private organizations, ' to 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 W with a range of stakeholder collaborations on topics such as building codes,land Use,water w resources,environmental, energy,airspace. aCi Contact us if you'd like to explore utilizing a collaborative approach and the Center's services. co Robert M.Jones,Director FCRC Consensus Center rmjones(u,fsu.edu Q Monroe County Workforce Housing Stakeholder Assessment Report,April 2015 68 Packet Pg. 118 A.1.h MONROE COUNTY T1-fE FLORIDA-/CEPS - A-$OVE RECOVERY `' At 9:10 a.m. on September 10, 2017,Hurricane Irma made landfall near Cudjoe Key as a Category 4 Hurricane with maximum sustained winds of 130 mph. We are at this time still in the midst of determining the full extent of its catastrophic impacts and documenting our shared vision of recovery. 1.73 Fort Myers E F. ;2' • ,� y.�r4 hunulosk: C f • 4' c ` r. r' o •► Q • • CL The Florida Keys are a chain of islands connected by 112 miles of US Highway 1, extending from Key 0 Largo to Key West, representing the most southerly point of the continental United States. The surrounding water is designated as an Outstanding Florida Water and includes the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary,the second largest marine sanctuary in the United States.The Keys are the location of 76 North America's only coral reef and the third largest coral reef system in the world. The Keys are also home to over 30 species of threatened and endangered species and is one of the most ecologically diverse ecosystems in the United States. • A a rn O O 2 ti - x co The regional and statewide resources of the Florida Keys prompted its designation by the Administration r Commission as an Area of Critical State Concern in December, 1975 and the Florida Legislature in 1979 (Section 380.0552, F. S.). As required by the State of Florida, the Florida Keys local governments have adopted policies to control growth based on the Florida Keys carrying capacity. The carrying capacity constraint with the lowest threshold is the requirement to maintain hurricane evacuation clearance times at or below 24 hours—in our hurricane prone location. Irma Recovery-Page 1 of 5 Packet Pg. 119 A.1.h The rate and distribution of future growth has been limited by implementing Permit Allocation Systems. The Florida Keys local governments, with the exception of Key Colony Beach, have adopted a performance-based allocation system for both residential development and commercial development because of the requirement to maintain a 24-hour hurricane evacuation clearance time, environmental needs including water quality and habitat protection, as well as to maintain and enhance the community character. The Permit Allocation Systems create a competitive permit allocation system whereby those applications with the highest scores are awarded building permits. E After a hurricane evacuation clearance time study in 2012, the State of Florida provided 3,550 allocations for a period of 10 years(355 per year)to the local governments as follows: Y Total Annual Market Rate Affordable d Allocations Allocations Allocations Monroe County 197 126 71** Marathon 30 24 6 Islamorada 28 22 6 ca Key West Varies 91 Varies a No less than 60% Key Colony Beach 6* n/a n/a Layton 3 n/a n/a *Key Colony Beach does not have a permit allocation system **Monroe County updated Comp Plan to make all affordable housing allocations available for award Based on the State's allocation and rate of distribution, the Florida Keys are anticipated to reach build out in 2023, after which no further development will be permitted. o To 0 The Florida Keys are a world renowned tourism and resort destination, with a long established 0 commercial and recreational fishing industry and extensive accessible coral reefs which support a large recreational snorkeling and scuba diving industry. The dominant industry throughout the Keys (incorporated and unincorporated areas) is tourism. This segment of the economy has held the lead position in employment in the County for more than 30 years. The tourism industry category of 0. "Hotel/Eat-Drink/Entertainment" includes eating and drinking establishments, hotel/motel space along with seasonal rental properties and entertainment venues such as museums, theaters parks and beaches. This ecosystem is the lifeblood of marine-based tourism and fisheries economy unrivaled in the State of c Florida generating over$4B in economic activity. Ln 0 While an economic engine, tourism also increases the costs for public safety, sanitation, additional oI infrastructure and utilities like water, sewer, power, roads, bridges, sidewalks, lighting, parking, boat o ramps, mooring fields, parks and beaches. It also increases the cost of living and the costs of land and 2i housing, and places demands on the environment and the water quality. W The Florida Keys face the quadruple impact of high land values, land limited by geographic and environmental features, housing supply limited by controlled growth(the permit allocation systems) and a tourism economy with a prevalence of lower paying service-sector employment. The housing affordability problem of the Florida Keys has widespread economic impacts, including a growing recognition of the important link between an adequate affordable housing supply and economic growth. Many of the business sectors in the Florida Keys, including professional services, retail trade, tourism and health care, find it increasingly difficult to attract and maintain workers. Affordable housing Irma Recovery-Page 2 of 5 Packet Pg. 120 A.1.h 1 has posed and continues to pose a major challenge for local governments, public agencies and the private sector in the Florida Keys. The service and retail industries generate high demand for affordable housing from low income earning workers, while the limited land area and linear geography of the Keys severely limit the potential supply and locations of housing. Furthermore, unlike other areas, working families cannot find affordable housing nearby. As a result, a severe imbalance exists between supply and demand, resulting in escalating housing prices. This imbalance is worsened by a number of other contributing factors, including: • strong demand for second homes which reduces the supply of housing for permanent residents; • conversion of permanent housing for transient use as vacation rentals which reduces the housing supply and increases affordable housing demand; • high construction costs due to transportation costs of goods, limited labor market, and caprock conditions; E • higher costs due to regulations and insurance (building standards are among the most rigorous in the State); • limited permit allocations due to hurricane evacuation standards, habitat protection and water quality objectives; and • limited non-profit and private sector capacity for funding assistance and housing production. The need to protect and preserve an adequate inventory of affordable/workforce accessible housing is a d continual as well as a growing challenge in the Florida Keys, particularly after the impacts of Hurricane E Irma. o 0 rn Community Characteristics: 2016 estimated population: 76,047(BEBR 4/1/16 estimate) o 2016 estimated households: 33,991 with an average household size of 2.18(BEBR 4/1/16 estimate— �? (Between 2000 and 2010, only Monroe County in Florida had a net loss of households) 2015 estimated population: 75,901 (ACS 2015 5-year estimates) Under 5 years to 24 years: 16,861 25 years to 64 years: 44,164 65 year and over: 14,876 2015 estimated housing units: 52,913 (ACS 2015 5-year estimates) 2015 estimated vacant housing units: 24,003 (ACS 2015 5-year estimates) 2015 estimated occupied housing units: 28,910(ACS 2015 5-year estimates) Estimate of owner occupied housing units: 17,675 Owner occupied housing units with value less than$149,999: 2,109 0' Owner occupied housing units with value between$299,999- $150,000: 3,913 0 Owner occupied housing units with value greater than$300,000: 11,653 2 Estimate of renter occupied housing units: 11,235 Gross rent as a percentage of household income:(ACS 2015 5-year estimates) w Less than 15.0 percent: 746 15.0 to 19.9 percent: 940 L 20.0 to 24.9 percent: 1,128 25.0 to 29.9 percent: 1,212 30.0 to 34.9 percent: 1,120 35.0 percent or more: 5,364 Housing unit built between 1990-present: 13,239 (ACS 2015 5-year estimates) Housing unit built between 1970-1989: 24,086(ACS 2015 5-year estimates) Housing unit built between 1930 or earlier— 1969: 15,588 (ACS 2015 5-year estimates) Irma Recovery-Page 3 of 5 Packet Pg. 121 (IewsueJ1;u ew w ni puay ueId asuayaJdwo3-601, !Boo) ewI;Jsod—;eJS H 1 6u!sno;;i OOOW L•x3 :;uawgoeny N L N 1- Q 01 a T C. 7 d , a ovo O r. f6 al a ., , a s cA w o a.) ts o 'CI o o N � i0 CA •r n O N O , O •t 4- O d r o T Le. o .. ;; O, , O o o o o e N o o , T V Z M U •..... CZ 00 Ii CZ- 04 O N tit W. O z p 7 • X O. ,o N o GJ m � m - ,- m _, v n 0 o , N R. 5 g Mao o 'n _ _ ,0 � oo 0 0 ti m 4' N0o o - o o , om .N V p N WI 6 CID O. 'O HCV C..) y u •E cc +U+ Q cz o � c;c� s4-4o et OG col 1 N e N y 0 t . � f N + O VQ (Oo o m o o o vIA norngo Oo ^ mNn v n �.v a cW> + Zm L. G U W .. a'G U Z cC g vw v, y 0cC m u U v w U 3 ma w o °`esi C0 .' R CT CtS MN o 0 o v M o N o 0 0 N m O. ti m -et e..1 -4 l ti ° o d . o m o ! Nen C Z Z i r O w a p 0.) _ V h 4 m �i yYy a) -o a Y Y Y N CZ CO 04 O_ 2 Y ca. CS ata - O it W Y Y Y o Y u. • J `O O rQ' Q Y = uri Cl Y K = Y J� .4 V K O v a le u, Q d V Y 2 _ W r J W NO3 W a E. a = V - rr �FyILI CC kJ iD •~ 1[ 2 C. V V V O V V 0 Me J a 0 Q ,n V ,l, D V, ,A O l7 R Y N V A.1.h TffFFLORIPA /CF:rS - RlSINgAROVFle6COVFTRY GOAL:Rebuilding a stronger Florida Keys ✓ promote public health, safety and general welfare; • advance adaptation to coastal flooding, storm surge and other hazards; • protect property, residences and businesses,from storm impacts and minimize damages; • minimize public and private losses due to storms; ✓ preserve of economy during and after disaster, including business viability and workforce housing; cc ✓ preserve and protect the environment, including natural and historic resources; and ✓. enhance resiliency. STRATEGY: To address the unique challenges and diverse needs in our long term housing recovery . c E DEVELOP PROGRAMS TO: o Wind-retrofitting of Residential Structures-provide funding options to harden existing housing .as units d Installing hurricane shutters or impact-windows; Metal roofs; Reinforced trusses and Reinforced garage doors o Provide funding to elevate existing private residences above BFE (Elevation of Residential Structures) o Provide funding to demo and replace private residences to meet or exceed Building Code and ci . Floodplain requirements (Demolish and Rebuild of Mitigated Building Envelope) o Develop and increase the supply of workforce housing &choice of rental housing opportunities - ‘- identify areas damaged properties or areas of less damaged properties to more easily and more 0, quickly rebuild safe, energy—efficient and cost effective housing units (Community Workforce Housing Programs) E Purchase scattered sites for single family homes;purchase parks and redevelop N� multifamily housing,purchase less vulnerable sites for workforce housing a o Provide funding to rebuild and repair resilient existing housing units as safe, energy—efficient and cost effective housing units (New Construction or Rehabilitating Residences damaged by the in storm) c o Identify areas to purchase and not rebuild in that area(provide financial incentives to purchase areas in dangerous or high-risk zones) Provide funding to purchase developed properties in V zone with existing residences to o! create additional open space and natural buffers and rebuild housing outside of the V O zone • 21 o Relocate and rebuild in another less vulnerable location-safe, durable,physically accessible, energy—efficient and cost effective housing units (Purchase &Rehab assistance) • w o Provide funding to purchase abandon damaged structures and demo unsafe structures o Provide funding to improve infrastructure for drainage at housing units—lessen flooding E vulnerability o Develop infrastructure for improved mass transit-improve mobility& access to services/jobs a o Provide funding to repair and flood proof commercial structures and add housing units over the commercial structure to improve local economic conditions,particularly the continued availability of workforce housing &jobs (Flood-proofing of Non-Residential Structures) o Identify/explore cost effectiveness of different types of factory-built housing to replace manufactured housing units Irma Recovery-Page 5 of 5 Packet Pg. 123 A:1.i• ; • MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA I' PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT • 2798 Overseas Hwy,Suite 400,Marathon,FL.33050; (305)289-2500 • :Rental Affordable Housing Units Monroe County.2018:Qualifying_Income:Limits Income.Limits for Single Persons` r . . Household Size Very Low Low Median I .'Moderate- H • 50% 80%. 100% 120% c :1 Person z $30,900 $49,400:. : $61,800 $74,160 . • : . 2 Persons $35;300 • $56,450 $70,600. . • $8.4,720: 3:Persons $3.9,700 $63 500 - .-$79,400 . $95,280 . 4 Persons . $44,100 $70,550. $88,200 $105,840 5 Persons $47.;650` $76 200:- $95;300 $114,360. .' a 6 Persons, $51,200 $81,850.- $102,400 $122,880 7 Persons :.: $54,700 $87,500 $109,400. $131;280 a 8 Persons $5.8,250: - •$93,150: $116,500 • $139,800 Per MCC§101=1:Affordable Housing Definitions y. s . . Income Limits for.Married or.Domestic Partn rs Very Low Low • Median Moderate Household Size 50% 80% 100% . - 120%. 2 Persons $47,067. $75,267 • $94,133 . : $112,960 : 0 • 3 Persons $52,933 $84,667: - $105,867 - . . $127,040. ` 4 Persons _ :..$58,800 . $94,067 $117,600. :$141,120. . 5 Persons $63,533` $101,600. : $127,067 $152;480 : .6 Persons . $68,267 - $109,133 $136;533. $163,840 . £ 7 Persons .: : $72;933 $116;667 $145,867 $175,040 d' • 8 Persons $77,667 • :$124,200 - :- $155,333 $186,400.' : c Per MCC§139-1(a)(6).(j) . . • o1. Maximum'Mointhly Rental.Rates Very Low .Low 1 Median Moderate x • Unit Size' ( 50% 80% 100%`. 120%n . Y. . .Efficiency $773 $1,235. $1;545:. $1,854. d.. 1.bedroom $883 . • : $1;411 $1,765 I $2,118. _ 2 bedrooms $993 : $1,588. $1,985 : $2,382 3 bedrooms $1,103 $1,764 : $2,205 $2,646 bedrooms $1,191 $1;905 $2,383 • $2;859` . .Per MCC§139-1(a)(6)(i)and MCC§101-1 Affordable Housing-Definitions • Updated 04/03/2018 • Packet Pg:124 A:1.i :MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA ' , PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT � -2798 Overseas Hwy,Suite 400,Marathon,FL 33050; (305)289-2500 Owner Occupied Affordable Housing Units Monroe County 2018 Qualifying Income Limits Limits Single Tnc n e Per ome- for g sons' Household Size Very Low Low Median Moderate Moderate N 50% 80% : 100% 120% 160% _ c 1.Person $30,900 ; $49,400 $61,800 • $74,160 $98,880 4 2 Persons $35,300 $56,450 $70,600 $84,720 $112,960 c $63,500 $79;400. $95,280 $127,040 : .3 Persons $39,700. � 4 Persons $44,100 $70,550 $88,200 $105,840 $141,120 d 5:Persons $47,650 $76;200< $95;300 $114,360. $152,480 : a 6 Persons $51,200. . $81,850:. : $102,400 $122,880 .. $163,840. g 7 Persons . .$54,700 ` $87,500 • $109,400 : .$131,280 $175,040,. .a - 8 Persons $58,250: $93,150 $116,500 $139,800 $186,400 :> Per MCC§101=1:Affordable Housing Definitions c . . = . . T Limits forMarried Income.Limits Marr d or Domestic Partners - E Household Size Very Low Low Median Moderate Moderate 50% 80% 100%: . 120% 16o% c; • 2 Persons $47,067 $75,267 $94,133 : $112,960 . $150,613; ig 3 Persons $52,933 $84,667_ $105,867 $127,040 • $169,387 o • 4 Persons $58,800 : : $94,067 "$117;600. $141,120 $188,160 2 5 Persons $63,533 $.101-,600 $127,067 - $152,480 . $203.307 .- . 6 Persons . $68,267: $109,133`. :-.$136,533 $163,840 $218,453 7 Persons $72,933. $116;667 $145;867 -$175,040 : $233,387: . dI 8 Persons $77,667 • $124,200.: . $155,333 $186,400 :: $248,533 c Per MCC§139-1(a)(6)(j): c co Maximum Sales Price ` coun ty ty Unit Size Median. I Ratio Maximum . . . W. . Income f Sales Price • d Efficiency•. $84,400 3.75 $316,500 z 1 Bedroom $84,400 . 3.75 $316,500 2 Bedroom $84,400'' 4.25 : . $358,700 >.3 Bedroom . $84;4.00 4.75 $400,900. Per MCC§101-1. Definition of Maximum sales price,owner occupied affordable housing unit Updated 04/03/2018 Packet Pg.125 A.1.j No. 01-2016 A RESOLUTION OF THE MONROE COUNTY ' AFFORDABLE HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE. PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, ON THE TASKS ASSIGNED TO THE COMMITTEE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A WORKFORCE HOSUING DEVELOPMENT PLAN. . . H 0 F- WHEREAS, on May 21,,2008, the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County adopted d Ordinance 014-2008, which amended the Monroe County Code to establish the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, including its assigned duties; and d E a WHEREAS, Monroe County Code Section 2-701 includes the specific duties of the Affordable co Housing Advisory Committee; and E. m WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, at a regular meeting held.on the 20th of c August, 2014, approved an agreement between FCRC Consensus Center, FSU, and Monroe County . Board of County Commissioners for professional services on Affordable Workforce Housing . . Stakeholder Assessment; and c WHEREAS, at a- regular meeting held on the 20th of May, 2015, the Board of County c Commissioners reviewed and discussed the Monroe County Workforce Housing :Stakeholder. o Assessment Report generated by FCRC Consensus Center,FSU, dated April2015; arid WHEREAS, at a regular meeting.held on the 20th_ of May, 2015, the Board of "County, o Commissioners adopted Resolution 139-2015 assigning additional duties to the Affordable Housing r. Advisory Committee; and o. N WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the 10th of June, .2015, the Board of County . ri Commissioners adopted Ordinance 014-2015 amending Section 2-700 of the Monroe County Code to `i establish the 14 members of.the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee and directed staff to amend Resolution 139-2015 to add one additional duty to the committee; and WHEREAS, on October 16, 2015, the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted Ti Resolution 01-2015, providing recommendations on the first three tasks assigned to the committee for the development of a workforce housing development plan; and s WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the. 17th of November; 2015; the Board of County Commissioners adopted Resolution 393-2015, supporting and encouraging collaboration between the < County of Monroe and incorporated municipalities of Monroe County on addressing the issues of affordable and workforce housing; and Packet Pg. 126 WHEREAS, on November 20, 2015;. the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee adopted Resolution 02-2015, recommending to the Board of County Commissioners an amendment to the Local. Housing Assistance Plan,as required by the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program Act; and WHEREAS, on November 20, 2015,._ the :Affordable Housing Advisory. Committee, recommended .to the Board of County Commissioners a Review. of Surplus Land .Inventory .and Inventory List and provided an inventory of county-owned real property which may be appropriate for affordable housing; and E - WHEREAS on January 22: 2016; the Affordable Housing ,. � S Advisory Committee adopted 2: Resolution 03-2015, recommending that the Board of County Commissioners support and fund a nexus study as the first step in considering the expansion of the current County residential inclusionary housing d program to cover transient and commercial development in the County; 4 CD WHEREAS,the Monroe County.Affordable Housing.Advisory Committee has held meetings on August 21, 2015, September 18, 2015, October 16, 2015, November 20, 2015, December 18, 2015,. g'. January 22',2016, February 19, 2016,March 18, 2016, April 22, 2016, May 20, 2016,June 17, 2016,and n. July 22, 2016 to produce consensus recommendations to the BOCC on the issues included in their >.. charge; •_ m NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MONROE COUNTY AFFORDABLE a: HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE: c The Monroe.County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee provides recommendations to the BOCC, - attached as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein. as PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Monroe County Affordable Housing Advisory Committee at a meeting held on the 22nd.day.of July,.2016. o _ O X : Jim Cameron _absent. Tim Rootre X Capt. Ed Davidson X Jim.Saunders absent .Hana Eskra X Stephanie.Scuderi 21 X Bill Hunter X Ed Swift III : _XWarren Leamard X . Randy Wall. ¢i X Kurt Lewin _absent: . Jodi Weinhofer x X. . Ken Naylor absent .William Wiatt a) Es as 2 Packet Pg. 127 A.1.j EXHIBIT 1. 6ZACIX011eig WORKFORCE AND WORKFORCE HODS+ING DEiFINNiITIONS AND NEED OCTOBER 2015AHAC CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The BOCC should review the. Committee's recommended definitions for "Workforce" and "Workforce Housing." If the BOCC accepts the Committee's recommendation, it should direct staff to propose any Land Development Code amendments needed to incorporate them. T 2. Workforce means individuals or families who are gainfully employed supplying goods and/or services to Monroe County residents or visitors. co 3. Workforce Housing means dwelling units for those who derive at least 70% of their income as members of the Workforce in Monroe County and who meet the affordable housing income categories of the a Monroe County Code. °' 4. Based on the current, available data, the Committee believes there is an unmet Workforce Housing need co throughout Monroe County, specifically near employment centers. It recommends the BOCC recognize that Monroe County continues to experience a critical Workforce Housing need. The need and demand for Workforce Housing appears most critical for those households at the median, low and very low- income levels and is most severe in the middle and lower Keys. d TASK#3 QUALIFYIING&M!ONIMTORING DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE PIOIUSINLG o t) OCTOBER 2015AHAC UNANIMOUS CONSENSUS RECOMMENDATIONS The bold language for recommendation#7 below were suggested refinements that were agreed to by the AHAC at the June 17 meeting. . ' 0 The Committee recommends the BOCC take action to strengthen the County's ability to qualify and monitor deed restricted affordable housing in unincorporated Monroe County. N 5. The BOCC should direct staff to continue to build its database of deed-restricted units. 6. The Committee strongly recommends staff coordinate, collaborate and share information with the vI Monroe County Housing Authority,municipalities,nonprofit entities, and the real estate sector to create a dynamic countywide database,inventory for existing affordable housing. 7. By October 2016,County staff"should develop proactive mechanisms including code requirements col . and fines based on HUD guidelines to enhance the monitoring of affordable housing including w consideration of securing the services of the Monroe County Housing Authority,additional County staff or 3`d party monitoring services or some combination thereof. Funding estimates for such.a program should be developed.and evaluated by staff and the Monroe County Housing Authority and should be o considered in deciding how to develop the most cost effective monitoring and qualifying approach. 8. The Committee strongly recommends staff coordinate and share information with the municipalities in developing these options,with a goal of developing a countywide monitoring mechanism program. 9. The Committee strongly recommends that the County identify and fund an enhanced enforcement program as an essential element for maintaining affordable workforce housing in the County. This program should address compliance and enforcement of deed restricted property to maintain our 3 Packet Pg. 128 A.1,j available housing stock. a) Authorize Code Compliance and/or the Monroe County Tax Collector's Office to more aggressively pursue illegal rentals. b) Require that owner-occupied units be homesteaded. TASK#_4 I)EMEWP SOLD TuIO kS FYO.1R REIWAL WARMI RCE e- 10. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and develop comprehensive.plan and land E development code amendments to create a workforce housing overlay which can be applied to ci properties (through a map amendment) to provide additional density bonuses for workforce i developments that offer only workforce housing rentals in perpetuity on Tier III designated lands. d (formerly 4 c m 11. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and recommend a proactive approach to E enhance the enforcement:Against illegal vacation rentals; tourist housing and vacation rentals of affordable housing units;including additional code compliance staff to focus on short-term rentals and a continued partnership with the Monroe County Tax Collector. (formerly 4 b.) c 12. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct. the Land Authority .to evaluate and provide recommendations to the BOCC on utilizing Land Authority funds to buy back expiring deed K. restrictions in order to preserve rental affordable housing. The Land Authority should consider E remaining deed restriction timeframes and make recommendations on potential monetary offers to. 8 provide for a range of additional deed :restriction years, including a priority for perpetual deed restrictions in order to preserve existing affordable housing. (formerly 4 c). �. 0 13. The AI-IAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and provide recommendations to the 0 BOCC on strategies and best practices for engagement, outreach, public awareness and education to io address the NIMBY ("Not in my backyard") sentiment to workforce housing and collaborate with the N developers,municipalities, the private and non-profit sectors. (formerly 4 d.) o GRA=a3 c DEVELOP manKumm FOUR WORKFORC«E HOUShNGIX PROPERTIES, I+N®LUDI+NG STRATEGIES FOR I+NCMS1 AN@ 61 d DENSITY. a 14. The AHAC recommends the BOCCconsider issuing requests for proposals (RFP) for the development of workforce housing on county-owned land,as a key priority. The AHAC'_recommends the BOCC. direct staff to collaborate with other public entities which own land in the county and recommend how x best to increase and target incentives for leasing back the properties to workforce housing developers. The .AHAC also recommends the BOCC direct the Land Authority to prioritize the purchase of d. additional Tier 3 lands for the development of workforce housing. The BOCC may also consider future z RFPs for the development of affordable housing. (formerly 5/6 a.) . cou 15. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and legislative issues and develop recommendations on the development of a property tax incentive for homeowners that rent a lawfully established existing market rate unit 'to a member of the workforce in any Tier within the very low,low and median affordable housing income limits and rental rates. (former/y 5/6 b.) 4 Packet Pg. 129 A.1 ' • 16. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate:the legal; financial and legislative issues and develop recommendations on the creation of a 10-year: tax incentive :for the development of only workforce housing. (formerly.5/6 c) .- 17.. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff,to maintain and update the.inventory of County:owned. land that can be used for affordable housing.development;(formerly=5/6 d.) 18. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and develop comprehensive plan and land T • :development code amendments.to allow property owners of Tier 3 designated lands with an existing E market rate dwelling unit to add an accessory workforce housing residential unit which will-require the, e. use of an affordable ROGO: Staff should evaluate residential zoning districts, density standards,income F. levels,maximum size of the accessory workforce housing residential unit and the minimum property size m for the development of an accessory_residential workforce housing:unit. This can be a method to E incentivize the development of smaller"starter units". for the workforce. (former/y 5/6 e) m : 19..The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate and develop comprehensive plan and land development code amendments to create a Workforce Housing overlay for the_Planning Commission to 2 a ": recommend:and Board of County Commissioners to approve an extra story for the development of an; exclusive workforce housing project,up to maximum of 40 feet. (formerly 5/6 1) '_ 20. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to revise existing.Land_Development Code Section 130- . 1(1.1 to provide another incentive_for the preservation of affordable housing and:the development of E market rate housingon Improved Subdivision S Tier III ro erties as follows: ° � ), p p p y: "ROGO exemptions transferred under this program may be transferred on:a 1 for 1 basis where the o ROCO.exemption? arc to be tiansfcrrcd to Tier'III; single-family residential lots or patcc13 within.the tip Im-roved Subdivision S land use district and the same ROGO planningsubarea for the development of ° P � ) p C7 single family detached dwelling units.:-Ilowcvcr, where, tran3fer3 arc :to be :Made to:commercial or recreational Workingwatcrfront3 (a3 defined byFlorida..Statutc3 :or to:multi famil rojects in:non IS : : ( ' ), y p. lc. . di3trict3,.the transfer? ?hall result In no fewer.than two dccd.re3t iCtCd affordable or.Workforce.hou3ing N - unit3.remaining:on an eligible sender site(3) for each market rate ROC(3, exemption transferred." (former/y eci 5/6&). m . 21::The.AHAC_recommends the.BOCC direct staff to evaluate;and develop comprehensive plan and land . ; development code amendments. to create an additional:workforce housing density bonus in the Mixed;: V Use'Zoning District to provide additional density only for the development of workforce rental housing in the inedian,low and very low income.categories which is deed restricted in'perpetuity and located on a�, Tier 3 designated lands. fforri.lerty 5 6 h. a� TeA§70 7 DEE EL�OPP ilklayt;GIrE`TiCtlf*IVE�ASE T�Ht iEf 1VI�ONROE�COiJN�TY#I3i0VJSuI�NG 461 Alir� k fOltIo O S)RQ,LE4I, W©RI FCIIRCE H!O�USh I ,SI EC G CAL4�LY S A • MAMA GUMIEENTiE�NMT�T IT F,.O�R}I.eNT L WOO + +;:O CEfm!O SI�No See Task_3, Recommendations 7-9 that address this Task . 5. Packet Pg. 130 A:1.j . a ° . EXPLORE ANC, PROPOSE LOCAL RENDING SOUROES 1 o a I ) :4wANiD WORKFORCE I:i®USING EK MONNROE E•OUNTY Unquestionably these recommendations will be costly, in developing these recommendations, the AHAC believes from the past 12 months of discussions that the Commission should set a 10-year target of raising at least $10 million annually from local funding sources to help expand workforce housing in Monroe County and address the unmet Workforce Housing need throughout Monroe County, specifically near employment centers. E 22. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and operational issues E and make recommendations on whether and how to establish an annual fee on non-primary residences that are not utilized as long-term rentals (6:month rentals or greater) to be dedicated to supporting c workforce housing and the enforcement of regulations. (formerly 8.a.1) 23. The AHAC recommends the BOCC.direct staff to evaluate the legal, statutory, financial and operational E issues and make recommendations on whether and how to establish a property tax exemption for non- primary residences, that rent their residence for not less than.6 months (long term) to a member of the Monroe County workforce. Every property owner claiming the additional reduction in assessed value. ai must annually file an application with the Monroe County Property Appraiser, including documentation 'v and affidavit regarding the qualifying workforce housing.occupant of the residence for the year in which ., the reduction is sought. (formerly 8.a.2) E 24. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legislative, economic and financial V issues, including and take the necessary steps and make recommendations on whether and how to of propose to statutory amendments to increase by 1 penny the Tourist Impact Tax to provide additional g dedicated funding for the acquisition of land for workforce housing.and construction .of workforce o housing in Monroe County. Evaluate including a sunset date of 10 years_ (Formerly 8-b 1) co 25. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to engage with the Community Foundation of the N.' Florida Keys(CFFK),municipalities, and the business and tourist sector in Monroe County to establish a c community workforce housing fund administered by the FKCF that can provide additional dedicated g funding for workforce housing in Monroe County and rental assistance loans. (Formerly 8 d.) 26. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and economic issues and '1_ make recommendations on whether and how to increase the ad valorem tax on residential/commercial Q properties.and commercial properties that are not rented at affordable rates in order to provide in order Q to provide additional dedicated, funding for the acquisition of land for workforce housing and a,! construction of workforce housing in Monroe County_(Formerly 8-e) t 27. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and economic issues and a) make recommendations on whether and how to create a tax incentive for commercial properties that include workforce housing on the same site._(Formerly 8-e.1) TomS+K#J RE I'EyW�j MIDRE aNINIEN�DIW`001 O}RTCE HtOOi�]S+I�NG ST1 TEGI'ES AS BEN,`OM►�ENTtS TtiOIS)10.114E4S510TWAE�SEVAS+KS A-II) 28. The AHAC recommends the BOCC direct the Land Authority to evaluate and provide recommendations to the BOCC on utilizing Land Authority funds to buyback expiring deed restrictions in order to preserve rental workforce housing. The Land Authority should consider remaining deed 6 Packet pg. 131 A.1.j . restriction timeframes and make recommendations on potential monetary offers to provide for a range of additional deed restriction years, including a priority for perpetual deed restrictions in order to- : preserve existing workforce housing. (Formerly 9-a:) Note:Land Authority staff has stated that statutory amendments would not be needed for draft recommendation. 29. In light of;the-workforce housing crisis in Monroe County,the AHAC recommends the BOCC continue to support of the provision of Sadowski Trust funding and the dedicated tax credit project for the o Florida Keys as a key legislative priority. (Formerly 9-b.), 5TAC1750 DEVELOP STRAP FO+R DEVELOPING INCLUSIONARY EEOUSING co REQUIIDEMENTS FOR IEO.SPIT�AND QOM! 'EERCIAL DEVE 0 MOENTS 4. `moo SUPPORT BUILLDING WOR 1'OR®E HOUSINNG. 30: "The AHAC recommends that the Board of County Commission support and fund a nexus study as 5 the first step in the expansion of the current County residential inclusionary housing program to cover < transient and commercial development in the County." AHAC January 2016 Resolution to the BOCC a March 2016 AHAC Meeting. The. Committee emphasized with staff and the BOCC the urgency of �. completing the nexus study as. soon as possible in order to advance policy recommendations. on �2 establishing,an:inclusionary housing program for transient and commercial development in the County.. a) 31: The AHAC recommends the.BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal; financial,arid economic issues and o make recommendations on whether and how to amend the land development code.to not allow . c? inclusionary requirements to be satisfied through "linkage' under Sec. 130-161 (c) with affordable c housing units built in proportion of the government investment. (Formerly 10-a.) r 0 32. The-AHAC recommends the BOCC direct staff to evaluate the legal, financial and;economic issues and make recommendations on whether and how to amend land development code to not allow inclusionary requirements to be:satisfied through `linkage' under Sec. 130-161 (c) with affordable housing units already-existing/built._(Formerly 10-b). : o Note:linkage should not be available for existing affordable projects as they do not address the need for additional L' affordable.housing a, TASK 14. OPPORT yIJ�NITI'ES FOR INTERTG-VE IAIMENTO C««ODPEiRIAT "O+'1V ON o RKFORCE HOUSING Q 33. Building on the Februaryx 2016 Workforce Housing.Intergovernmental Roundtable and the. continuing l participation of municipal planning directors in the AHAC process, the. AHAC recommends each 1. jurisdiction pass a resolution to commit their respective Planning Director's meet to discuss at least m twice a year to explore and implement consistent strategies for closer intergovernmental cooperation and t collaboration on workforce housing. (formerly 11 a)' coo Note:At the March 2016 AHAC meeting the Committee agreed that intergovernmental cooperation is a "very important"element of the AHAC's work and tasks on workforce housing. There was agreement that the planning directors review the potential areas that have been identified.for cooperation at the Intergovernmental Roundtable and report back to their respective governing boards and the • . AHAC with any recommendations or suggestions for the Committee's consideration. Packet Pg. 132 - A:1.j . .. Below are the potential intergovernmental cooperation opportunities identified in the February 2016 Intergovernmental Workforce Housing Roundtable: A. Collaborate on monitoring and qualing Affordable Housing(AHAC Recommendation on Task 3) B. Seek to develop consistent affordable housing terminology C. Develop a more consistent intergovernmental approach to deed restrictions D. Identibl county and municipal Funding Sources for Affordable Housing E. Purchase land to Address the Growing Workforce Housing Crisis. F. Support inclusionary Housing and Redevelopment r G. Provide incentives for Building Workforce Housing w H Work together on Homeowners and Flood Insurance Costs co I Take a new look at the Hurricane Evacuation Formula J. Review policies on backyard houses and work force housing K Communicating with the public on the workforce housing need solutions' co• . a ai >. .N 01 O ta.. tD O• . O r of "I. - 2 8 Packet Pg. 133 A.1.k MIAI ANALYSIS TRAFFIC ANALYSIS EMPLOYMENT _ - ANALYSIS Island(s)/ Noise Zones Residential MIAI 2017 ATTDS Current. Goal 109 . Difference Traffic . Employment./Job: Corresponding within the . Allowed? .Compatible? . Affordable Max Max Net Capacity Center? US1 Segment MIAI LOS/ Net Potential Potential ? . E. Reserve Trips Units[Trips Units/ ' . .R . Available .(assumes 6.5 Trips .I . • . H trips per • c dwelling unit) . d Stock Island 60-64 DNL Yes .Yes LOS B/ .511 units/ 766 units/ 255 units/ No. ' •n/a—no traffic r .1,348 trips 3,321 trips 4,979 trips 1,657 trips • capacity . E. Segment 1 available E •65-69 DNL Discouraged Yes with c • • -Footnote 28 . .sound a • attenuation 0. > 70-<75 •Strongly Yes • ,with • . . 'l- c Discouraged sound. t. . -Footnote 28 ..attenuation . . w • a >75 to 79 Not •No • E: • Permitted o U Rockland/Big 60-64 DNL Yes ' : Yes: LOS B/ 555 units/ 832 units/ 277 units/ 'No. n/a—no traffic o Coppitt 1,341 trips 3,607 trips 5,408 trips 1,801 trips .capacity To c' available 0 Segment 3 65-69 DNL• Discouraged Yes with . . • • . w Footnote 28 sound ' y attenuation • • . • - >. • 70-<75 'Strongly I Yes with • . . Discouraged ' sound • - I. ' ' -Footnote 28 • attenuation ; • m >75 to 79 Not No .E. 'Permitted N . .a Saddlebunch/ n/a n/a n/a . • LOS B/ 96 units/ 144 units/ 48 units/ Yes.• Yes.Larger parcels c. Shark Key 4,034 trips 623 trips 934 trips 311 trips near US1;outside N available Capacity of neighborhoods. . o Segment 4 . for up to x . • • 620 Existing businesses • LU . • . units. •. include: r . c. . Fish Restaurant, • s._ • Baypoint Market,. .� Baby's Coffee . . . Q 1 of 4 .Packet Pg. 134 EMPLOYMENT MIAI ANALYSIS : TRAFFIC ANALYSIS. ANALYSIS Island(s)/ Noise Zones Residential MIA' . 2017 ATTDS Current Goal 109 Difference Traffic Employment/Job 7a Corresponding within the Allowed? Compatible? Affordable Max. Max Net Capacity Center? p US1 Segment MIAh LOS/ Net Potential . Potential ? E N. Reserve Trips Units/Trips Units/ co Available (assumes 6.5. Trips. " trips . . _ . per :� dwelling unit) Sugarloaf n/a n/a n/a LOS A/ 167 units/ 250 units/ 83 units/ Yes. Yes,Large vacant 7,944 trips 1,083 trips 3,321 trips . 542 trips parcels along the a Segment 5 available Capacity highway. E for up to c. 1,222 Existing businesses ' 1° a . units. include: . , m Sugarloaf Lodge, co Sugarloaf Pizza, c Sky Dive Key .�. West,Backcountry : a Boat Rentals,Fire ' E: Station,Precision c U Auto Repair, Mangrove Mamas, o Sugarloaf School co `- Cudjoe n/a n/a n/a : LOS'A/ ' ' 537 units/ 806 units/ 269 units/ No, . . n/a=no traffic CD 3,188 trips 3,492 trips 5,239 trips 1,746 capacity Segment 6 available H cc Summerland n/a . n/a n/a LOS A/ 85 units/ 127 units/ 42 units/ Yes. Yes. 3,188 trips 551 trips 826 trips 275 trips of Segment 7 available Capacity Existing businesses c for up to include:FL Sea E 252 Base,Summerland ad d units. Key Marina,coffee W shop,boat rentals, c' restaurants,dock c and lumber supply, . H offices,Murray's 0 Market,ACE x Hardware,Shell W gas station,Bank, ' c Mote Marine, E. Dion's Quik Mart o o Z 2 of 4 Packet Pg.135 . A.1.k MIAI ANALYSIS TRAFFIC ANALYSIS EMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS Island(s)/ Noise Zones Residential MIAI 2017 ATTDS Current' Goal 109 Difference Traffic Employment/Job m Corresponding within the Allowed? Compatible?. Affordable Max. Max Net Capacity Center? p US1 Segment MIAI LOS/ Net Potential'. Potential ? E Reserve Trips /Units' Trips Units/ c Tr ips(assumes 6.5 F= trips per dwelling unit) . . : a► Ramrod n/a • n/a n/a LOS B/ 84 units/ 126 units/ 42 units/ Yes. Yes. a tripsP 2,133 trips 545 817 trips 272 trips d. Segment 8 available • Capacity Existing a for up to Businesses include:, c 328 Garden Center, 11. units. Boat detailing, o Auto of the Keys, ? • N . Towing c . Five Brothers -c o Grocery, a Boondocks : E: Little Torch n/a ' n/a ' n/a .` LOS A/ 61 units/ 91 units/ 30 units/ Yes. Yes. tj 2,504 trips. 396 trips 595 trips 198 trips Segment 9 available Capacity Existing business : c for up to . include:Church, �.. 385 Dolphin Marina, units. Kiki's Sandbar, C- Palmers's Resort,. '. Little Palm Island >,.: . . shoreside c Big Pine Key n/a n/a n/a LOS C/ 1,839 units/ 2,759 units/ 920 units/ No.;. n/a—no:traffic al 1,295 trips 11,956 trips 17,934 trips 5,978 capacity o Segment 10 available . Ecu : Duck Key/ n/a - n/a n/a LOS C/ 54 units/ 81 units/ 27 units/ n/a n/a-DRI limits MI Conch Key 1,252 trips 351 trips 526 trips 175 trips DRI additional units 2 available limits 1° Segment 15 addition. yI I units ° Long Key n/a n/a n/a LOS C/ - 82 units/ 123 units/ 41 units/ Yes. Yes. i 2,459 trips' 534 trips 801 trips 267 trips State Park,Waste Segment 16 available Capacity Transfer Station, m for up to Grocery/Convenien E 378 ce,Post Office, co . . ant,Marina Q . . . . - . . units. Restaurant, Packet Pg. 136 A.1.k EMPLOYMENT MIAI ANALYSIS TRAFFIC ANALYSIS. ANALYSIS Island(s)/ Noise Zones Residential MIAI 2017 ATTDS Current Goal 109 Difference Traffic " Employment/Job o Corresponding within the Allowed? Compatible?: Affordable Max. Max Net Capacity Center? ;p'. US1 Segment MIAI LOS/ Net Potential Potential ? E Reserve Trips' Units/Trips Units/ co Available (assumes 6.5 Trips it- trips per dwelling unit) . . d Tavernier n/a n/a n/a LOS A/ 17 units/ 25 units/ 8 units/ Yes. Yes. .a 8,876 trips 108 trips . .161 trips 54 trips Tavernier Towne, ID Segment 22(also available Capacity Mariner's Hospital, includes one for up to ' Professional . . c parcel in Segment 1,365 . Offices,Hardware a to' 21) units. Store,Fitness,Bird ; Center,hair salons, .? co gas station, C restaurants,etc. m a .o 0 Key Largo n/a n/a n/a LOS A/ 2955 units/ ` 4;433 units/ 1,478 units/` No: . n/a=no traffic 8,333 trips 19,208 trips 28,813:trips 9,604 trips capacity co' Segment 23 available o y . .N C cu Qf, a N C. U) Q . Pg:137 Packet A.1.1 DENSITY EXAMPLES A. Wet Net Villas, Islamorada=7.3 units per acre=9 units per buildable acre Approximately 4.4 acres 32 homes(16 duplexes) Density=7.3 units per acre=9 units per buildable acre Iv tf.11: % 14,, 4'40\: ' /:‘tr:4 cn /,I4 j* \ w r �.,,. a a) '' c is w ' _ -10 CO ` � /4:001, 1 / c3 f W / E o IlL `t a f U \ - N:4 , _ , i'v ci To a ni E co x w N c m G I k w A. II ri, ipir-----_ i; aria 4 r r , , 11 1 a .l1 i4.'' �.' ' w ; F----:- —4 ' 1 ' II ij i .10... Packet Pg. 138 A.1.I B. Lincoln Gardens Subdivision,Stock Island = 9.6 units per acre =12 units per buildable acre Approximately 26 acres 250 lots/homes Lot size—40'x 87' Density=9.6 units per acre= 12 units per buildable acre It — ...„ I.,11: _41! _,Xv II 1/11 tr pi Irf . a .1.1.-1111..t,r. Wig ' - .111 ,i itIi1 1 .41111;till 'I . i k", To" Hof, F_ P �Yrr iiiikiitilititi:riolii) ililiti i,141 . ; 111161 114,4141111.-1-111" .1114. 4 Iliiii ill it E. 1 ti • E ; ortiligli logi r. i ,- r' 1c. 11,...,, . _ A. F. m .1.-- V"..idi - .ji i • 1 co il' -1 1.14 24 ..! m I •Fie .. ikisA1 . co a o o ' II .1 1 pig. g To j LI At- II 11111/11 E E co >------------- --___ . x w c . v- e- - 4-'..----'......''' -4. , ;.; 1� E . ii___ .. a- _ 1 i . I 4:- co { M • _ = L of • " _ re : ." 1� Packet Pg. 139 A.1.I C. Bluewater Homes,Tavernier= 13.3 units per acre = 16.6 units per buildable acre Approximately 2.7 acres 36 lots/homes Density= 13.3 units per acre = 16.6 units per buildable acre Ka1.fig j; cr1 r . • --7..._ . ... y �S �,rr • , , . # t ' L, ---- , *• _ � 7'- '" - � 1.4 ' E . , ca il I E � `LW 1 .: / :0 - #;ii , k - • a • ca # c E 1ia. • 410 ' 1 rlijitk - , " -1-: (� . o AlC .- "4,- r 1 . ,c3 R rn :L o 76 o Z. E cu x w Ui c is ILO I as we ma p_ - ..`' — .g ., • E .� .t'A. ..• •. • L ;' ' f9 • y F r .... •. • + ..4.!,,:' it • Packet Pg. 140 A.1.I D. Banyan Grove Apartments,Stock Island = 19.2 units per acre=24 units per buildable acre Approximately 2.5 acres 48 dwelling units Density= 19.2 units per acre=24 units per buildable acre ---, 411 4 . - A.......... v..4.. , ,,A14. -t• • ANN 4 TO iibiliou, ,. I 111- , t , P _ fit t, 11 - A E In . 1 :• c .61 rilt i -L ;•,,, , - ,! 1- ... I ,, ,, . 11 :.. 1 ; .8 , [ a, I, • .....vi , a .. al 111$ :••, E •:t 1 •• •. 1.. St i 1* flt .... A' r.T. , .. II , •. • EN e rioa S' In 1111111111111.14 It . . 1;4 o .c a) a • ,•.,. . E 4 , + , o a 1 rg a C.) !-, cr) c , To 0 4 t.9 /NIA c•olo Dtzg .61. 14 flit' dir7 _ , Ili -lit .. .. -a. Aiief In a E ,-• al x -•'• t. • tu . . 1.'.'... . _ _ . . I 0 I *- I. ' , .,• , oi ..1 - •. **Ai • . *i • 10 - . 4 14 ' - ; *- ' rimi" sh•41 l' 1 r 1 --- w ., Ac•if. ','!tIP.4 4.-, %.,„ ‘-z,, ..,,,i c .•„,4,.. • , W $4 E 1k- -. • 17: .., • • , '•Pilo..- u , • J % 111 ,..., m•••mkra sr 0 ca , . . • ' 1 1 1 . 14 all r {-. • • 4 • ,o.. .-- - , ..„, i.,L'•,`tii, ii 1 . . !.M At. .4t • hf . 1 I‘I*s1• irk% tgi, WV . ! .. .....--- 0 ', -. - At' ). ", . . , . .... ., -. _ , . . ,_ _.%, .,,_ .-. •...tIcliiiiiiiihr, , • . • • • - - - . v ; ..7,-• , - Packet Pg. 141 A.1.I E. Kawama Tower, Key Largo = 38 units per acre =47 units per buildable acre Approximately 1.3 acres 50 dwelling units Density= 38 units per acre =47 units per buildable acre -M ` , . .. T F 4Y '( r V`,, 4 To r , ` I= it 44 ?I' ll° 49 ' a) +,.,� Lit 1 �� . •. • �N �� ! (6 rllw a) L t • N 1 Q R U " • ,.. • c , i ,/ Its r. ci R x 1:' 'Hp 44 1_"1? - l' lli w , :: .Arikeye w. • .1* .._-_ u m ,ems-�'� g. �I '' ` J !C 1. ��, �,., .... 4 > W ,M ?I�R Ed '.' fir. —' cu • t' i;',', ,,i. Q ✓• +',; !,/i.i r pot Packet Pg. 142 A.1.I F. Examples Outside Monroe County tilikii444ck., \-,N, i_rN mi Ldes t y r } �� - ill 4 , IiII Ill . i » , I ! .:: ... . _ _ Z .1 ir 6) j� Q 1 •.'r `i` r C \lat.utiaka To nhomes.Tacoma. Washington t a) a 29 units per acre =36 units per buildable acre E 0 U C, fi 1t.' o r »�,� �v Ti • :. n a)fir.+ • ao CI , - 4,15,43,,e.:•- • - 7,-. .- •,'.� t1 a. 1'.. ry=~ _' tl II. 6 ,� - - LI +7.ii al } . E i� t F 1co ��t�tt 111 •I t x v Hommocks Apartments. Mamaroneck, New York 30 units per acre =38 units per buildable acre Packet Pg. 143 A.1.I � r 1 11 __ .....__. I1 .. .II )i� f4 r , 1�r ~Y I 1 r �► -aa ,.-Nlii al .• a d Yorkshire Terrace. Los Angeles. California c d t a) a E o 35 units per acre =44 units per buildable acre v rn 0 Ts O (7 y a) a E as x w N c a) w ... t-'-• f - i.i d � 'in • E a U 03 Q �1Il1 1'IR! !II rig Ii 1su ly t 1 III , Ocean Park Co-op. Santa Monica. California 41 units per acre=51 units per buildable acre Packet Pg. 144 1 -cii."-Oock ss %.k 4 7.4 ,„ . ..... .. 6 i 7 c co 8 MONROE COUNTY; FLORIDA it 9 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS +0' i 0 RESOLUTION NO. - 2019 E -0 i i 0 0 12 A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF E 13 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TRANSMITTING TO THE 0 0 14 STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY AN ORDINANCE BY a 15 THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY 16 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE 2030 CI) 17 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO CREATE GOAL 109, 0 = o 18 OBJECTIVE 109:1, POLICIES 109.1.1, 109.1.2, 109.1:3, L. 0. 19 109:1.4, 109.1.5, 109.1.6 TO ESTABLISH A HURRICANE E 20 IRMA RECOVERY PROCESS TO PROVIDE FOR THE o 21 DEVELOPMENT OF WORKFORCE HOUSING FOR A 0) o .22 PERIOD OF 2 YEARS, DEFINING THE TERM ..- To" 23 WORKFORCE HOUSING, ESTABLISHING WORKFORCE 24 HOUSING SHALL BE A.PERMITTED USE IN CERTAIN 25 LAND USE DISTRICTS, PROVIDING DENSITY BONUSES 72 0 26 FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING, AMENDING THE = 27 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES. AND to 4:5 28 AMENDMENT PROCEDURES TO FACILITATE =1 29 WORKFORCE HOUSING, AS RECOMMENDED BY THE 3 30 BOCC, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING 131 G. 31 FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; EL 32 PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND 0 33 PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; to' 01 34 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY cn a. 35 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR AN ixi 36 EFFECTIVE DATE. To P 37 E co 38 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners ("Board") conducted a c c 39 public hearing for the purpose of considering the transmittal pursuant to the State Coordinated !I= 40 Review Process in Section 163.3184(4), Florida Statutes, to the State Land Planning Agency for .2 41 objections, recommendations and comments, and to the other Reviewing Agencies as defined in t .c 42 Section 163.3184(1)(c), Florida Statutes, for review and comment on a proposed amendment to 0 ca 43 the Monroe County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan as described above; and = <I 44 45 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission and the Board support the 46 requested text amendment; and Resolution No. -2019 Page 1 of 3. File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 145 A.1.m. 47 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY 48 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA: 49 50 Section 1. Recitals and Legislative Intent. The foregoing recitals and statements of 5 i legislative intent are true and correct and are hereby incorporated as if fully stated ;s 52 herein. E 53 c 54 Section 2. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the recommendation of the 1` 55 Planning Commission to transmit the draft ordinance, attached as Exhibit"A:", for at 56 adoption of the proposed text amendment. E S7 = d 58 . Section 3. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby transmit the proposed E 59 amendment to the State Land Planning Agency for review and comment in c al 60 accordance with the State Coordinated Review process pursuant to Section i 61 163.3184(4), Florida Statutes. a' 62 c 63 Section 4. The Monroe County staff is given authority to prepare and submit the required s 64 transmittal letter and supporting documents for the proposed amendment in a. 65 accordance with the requirements of Section 163.3184(4),Florida Statutes. o 66 V 67 Section 5. Inconsistency; Partial Invalidity, Severability,.and Survival of.Provisions. If o 68 any provision of this ordinance, or any portion thereof, is held to be invalid or 69 unenforceable in or by any administrative hearing officer or court of competent o 70 jurisdiction, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision, or any portion 71. thereof, shall neither limit nor impair the operation, enforceability, or validity of 2 72 any other provision of this ordinance,or any remaining portion(s)thereof. All other $1 as 73 provisions of this ordinance, and remaining portion(s) thereof, shall continue . 74 unimpaired in full force and effect. rI 75 76 Section 6. Repeal of. Inconsistent .Provisions.. All: ordinances or parts of ordinances. in �� 77 conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict:The E 78 repeal of an ordinance herein shall not repeal the repealing clause of such ordinance r 79 or revive any ordinance which has been repealed thereby. of 80 d 81 Section 7. Captions and Paragraph Headings. Captions and paragraph headings; where it To 82 used herein, are inserted for convenience only and are not intended to descriptively P 83 limit the scope and intent of the particular paragraph or text to which they refer. E 84 c 85 Section 8. The Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to forward a certified copy of this 86 resolution to the Director of Planning. c 87 °f E 88 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County; 0 89. Florida; at a regular meeting held on the_ day of . Q 90 91 92 Resolution No.=2019 Page 2 of 3 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 146 :A.1.rn. 93 Mayor,Sylvia Murphy 94 Mayor Pro Teen Danny L. Kolhage 95 Commissioner David Rice 96 Commissioner Heather Carruthers 97 Commissioner Michelle Coldiron 98 99 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 10o OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA 101 1.02 BY 103 Mayor Sylvia Murphy d 104 E Q 105 (SEAL) 106 107 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK 108 109 110 DEPUTY CLERK o. O "MQNROE`COUNTY ATTORNEY '.¢PP0 AS TO FO To 'i$ i • y • • c0 31 d a " E cc O� d ra v RJ Resolution No. -2019 Page 3 of 3 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 147 A.1.m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 2 ` �`-)1 3 . , j 6 ,i E 7 MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA E 8 MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS F 9 ORDINANCE NO. -2019 c 10 E 11 c 12 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY E 13 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 14 TO CREATE GOAL 109,OBJECTWE 109:1;POLICIES 109.1.1, 109.1.2, a 15 109.1.3, 109.1.4, 109.1.5, 109.1.6 TO ESTABLISH\A HURRICANE d 16 IRMA RECOVERY PROCESS , TO PROVIDE'. FOR THE to17 DEVELOPMENT OF WORKFORCE HOUSING FOR A PERIOD OF 2 18 YEARS,. DEFINING THE TERM WORKFORCE 'HOUSING, w 19 ESTABLISHING WORKFORCE HOUSING SHALL BE A PERMITTED 0 20 USE IN CERTAIN LAND USE DISTRICTS,:PROVIDING DENSITY 21 BONUSES FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING, AMENDING THE an 22 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES'.AND AMENDMENT o 23 PROCEDURES _TO FACILITATE --WORKFORCE HOUSING, AS c 24 RECOMMENDED BY THE BOCC; PROVIDING FOR 0 25 SEVERABILITY; 'PROVIDING\.FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING -a 26 PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE °i 27 LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; cs 28 PROVIDING .F.OR ,INCLUSION `N• THE MONROE COUNTY aI 29 .% COMPREHENSIVE PLAN;PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. r 30 3. ai 31 'ti a,ra- 32 w 33 , N 34 WHEREAS, on the 29)h day of November, 2017, at a special call BOCC.meeting, the cI 35 Monroe County Board of County-Commissioners directed staff to propose amendments to the re' 36 Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code to incentivize workforce housing,prioritize the T 37 provision of workforce housing and assist in the rebuilding and recovery of Monroe County; and 38 c ccs 39 WHEREAS, on January 9, 2018 a community meeting was held, as required by LDC it 40 Section 102-159(b)(3), to discuss the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment, and to c 41 provide for public participation; and E 42 0 43 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Development Review Committee(DRC) considered the co 44 proposed amendment at a regularly scheduled meetings held on the 30th day of January and 21st of • a. 45 August, 2018 and recommended approval through Resolution 27-18; and 46 Ord -2019 Page 1 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 149 A.1.m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing on the 24th 2 day.of October, 2018, for review and recommendation on the proposed Comprehensive Plan text 3 amendment; and 4 . 5 WHEREAS, based upon the information and documentation submitted, the Planning w 6 _ Commission made the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: w c 7 i 8 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the 9 Monroe County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and E 10 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development c 11 for the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Sec. 380.0552(7), F.S.; and E Q 12 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with.Part II of Chapter 163,Florida Statute; and R 13 • � . 14 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning-Commission adopted Resolution No. P34-18 N 15 recommending approval of the proposed amendment with the following changes: s 16 1. Retain the protest procedures as they exist in the current Code; _` 0 0.17 2. Retain the community meeting for text amendments, which was proposed to be E o 18 removed,but allow for a'shorter timeframe(3,0-60 days prior to PC); 0 19 3. Limit the entire Goal and its policies to apply only to Stock Island and Rockland Key o 20 (both the expedited process`and thedensity,bonuses); and 21 4. Limit density bonus to projecfs,that propose at least 50% low and/or very low income 22 categories; and , . - - CD ( a -a 23 . \ ti , o 24 WHEREAS, at•.a regular meeting held on the .. day of 2019, the Monroe 1 25 County Board of County•Commissioners held a public hearing to consider the transmittal of the ai 26 . proposed text amendment,considered the-staff report and provided for public comment and public r 27 participation in accordance with•..the.requireinents'of state law and the procedures adopted for .03i 28 public participation in the planning process; and Q, 29 s E 30al WHEREAS, at the . \ . . . , . . , public hearing, the BOCC adopted of 31 Resolution_-2019; transmitting the proposed text amendment to the State Land PlanningCD ce 32 Agency; and 'm 33 34 WHEREAS, the State Land Planning Agency reviewed the amendment and issued an 35 Objections, Recommendations and Comments(ORC) report on , 36 received by the County on ; and c 37 E 38 WHEREAS,the ORC report ; and a 39 a 40 WHEREAS, the County has 180 days from the date of receipt of the ORC to adopt the 41 proposed amendment, adopt the amendment with changes or not adopt the amendment; and Ord -2019 Page 2 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 150 : A.1:m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 2 WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting on the a'day of ,201_,the BOCC 3 held a public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment; 4 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY r 6 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA: y c 7 co it 8 Section.1. The text of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as follows c 9 (Deletions are shown stnl�; additions are shown underlined): E 10 • a c a) 11 Goal109 12 At 9:1 0 a.m. on September 10,2017,Hurricane.Irma made landfall near Cudjoe Key as a Category C 13 4 Hurricane with maximum sustained winds of 130 mph: Significant damage has occurred to the a 14 housing stock within the County; primarily among'lower cost housing.options occupied by the 15 members of the workforce: In the recovery.from the impacts of Hurricane•Irma, Monroe County c 16 shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life and safety of\County residents, and a 17 prioritize the provision of•workforce housing that'is safe, code-compliant and resilient. a 18 �; . E 0 19 Obiective.109.1 \ , 20 In order to advance the recovery from the impacts of Hurricane Irma, Monroe County.shall o 21 incentivize the development and redevelopment of-resilien smorkforce housing to improve the 22 safety and welfare of:County_residents, preserve the quality:of life and the economy of the o 23 Florida Keys, reduce,tlieneed'.for.workforce housing, and better protect the.County from 12 24 . future damage. \ • •\, :, ` ,� .. o 25 ` . o 26 For the_Hurricane Irma•Recovery Goal and\the associated objectives'and.policies;the terms 45 27 'development' and `redevelopment' shall mean the following for a period of two (2) years 28 ,from the effective date-insert date>.'of,.the Goal 109: 3i 29 1 ` d 0. 30 Redevelopment means the substantial improvement and/or demolition and replacement:of E co 31 existing development on a site. ` ' ri 32 1 of 33 Development means the carrymg out the construction of new structures;the demolition of a 34 a structure and reconstruction,the substantial improvement of a structure and/or a change re 35 in the intensity o u numbe r'Mintier of dwelling units in a p 36 structure or.on larid_or a material increase in the number of businesses, manufacturing y 37 establishments, offices or dwelling units in a structure or on land. co 38 39 Policy.109.1.1 c a) 40 Notwithstanding the land uses provided in Chapter 1301-Land.Use Districts1 of the Monroe .E 41 County Land Development Code, for a period of two (2).years from the effective date<insertco 42 date>of the Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal workforce housing shall be a permitted use in all = a 43 land use districts where detached or attached dwellings, employee housing or commercial 44 apartments is.included as a current.permitted use. The term "workforce housing" is 45 interchangeable with the terms detached or attached dwellings, employee housing or Ord -2019 Page 3 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 151 :A.1.m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 commercial apartments included in the land use districts. The development of workforce 2 housing is subject to the otherrequirements included in the land use districts, including but 3 not limited to, size requirements,bufferyards; access, etc. 4 5 Policy 109.1.2 r 6 The.workforce housing to be prioritized by Monroe..County shall mean dwelling.units for E 7 those who derive at least 70%of their income as members of the workforce in Monroe County c 8 and who meet the affordable 'housing income categories .of the Monroe County Code. al 9 Workforce means individuals or families who are gainfully employed supplying good§.and/or c 10 services to Monroe County residents or.visitors. E 11 ts 12 Notwithstanding the density limitations in.Policy 101.5.25 and Section 130-157 of the.Land E 13 Development Code, for a period of two (2) years from the effective date <insert date> of the a 14 Hurricane.Irma Recovery. Goal. 109 workforce housing `may be developed pursuant to a co 15 maximum net density.of 25 du/buildable.acre.'for.the UR zoning district arid 18 du/buildable . 6 16 acre for the MU and SC zoning districts and will not require.Transferable Development Rights 17 (TDR), as shown in the table below. \ ` . 18 • 19 The.maximum net density standards in.Policy 101.5.25•for.affordable.housing can be applied E 20 to the development of workforce housing without the use.of TDRs. o o 21 622 Notwithstanding the density limitations mPolicy 101.5.25 and Section 130-157 of the Land o 23 Development Code, for a period of two (2) years from the effective date <insert date>of the cTO 24 Hurricane.Irma Recovery Goal 109, the maximum-net density-standards in Policy 101.5.25 25 for affordable housing, .with d 50% density'bonus,.can.be: applied.to the development of 1 26 workforce housing which.are limited to.:exclusively rental units in the very low. low and $i. 27 median income categories without.the useof TDRs in the UR, MU and SC zoning districts. 228 These workforce housing units may be developed pursuant to a maximum net density of 37.5 �1 29 du/buildab1e acre''withiri"the'rUR zoning district and 27 du/buildable acre:within the MU 3 30 and SC zoning districts and will not require Transferable Development Rights (TDRs), as -01 31 shown in the table.below:• a E 32 ,` ° Land Use.District Allocated ' Maximum Net Workforce . Housing of Density Density Maximum Net Density d DU/Gross DU/Buildable DU/Buildable Acre i Acre of Acre *Limited:to rental of very low,. ',Upland low and median income. N Mixed Use(MU) 1_0 TDRs 12.0 Affordable: 27.0 a Affordable: Isz 18.0 c Suburban 3.0 TDRs: 6.0 ' Affordable:27.0 E Commercial (SC) Affordable: c 18.0 < Urban Residential 6.0 TDRs: 12.0 Affordable:.37.5 (UR) Affordable: 25.0 Ord -2019 Page 4 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 152 A.1.m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 2 Policy 109.1.3 3 All workforce housing projects which receive development benefits from Monroe County 4 during the period of two (2) years from the effective date'<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma 5 Goal, including but not limited to, receiving. affordable ROGO allocation award(s), ii • 6 reservations of affordable ROGO.allocations,maximum net density standards without the use 7 of TDRs,rental workforce housing density bonuses or the restructured development approval c 8 procedures included under Goal 109, shall be required to maintain the project as workforce E` 9 housing for a.period of.99 years pursuant to deed restrictions or other mechanisms specified c 10 in the Land Development Code. . E 11 c 12 All affordable housing projects greater than 20 dwelling units developed as.workforce housing E 13 during the period of two (2) year from the effective date'<insert date>of the Hurricane Irma 14 Recovery Goal, shall not be subject to Section 139=1(a)(6)h. • a 15 ` a) 16 Policy 109..1.4 ( . IA 17 Notwithstanding the development approval procedures included in Chapter 110[Development s 18 Reviewl of. the Land Development Code, for a:period.of two(2)years from the effective date LeL a 19 <insert date>of the Hurricane.Irma Recovery.Goal, the development of workforce housing E 20 shall follow the procedures below: . . v 21 c Development-Agreement tTS - O Community meeting__ ( -a 1 30-120 days prior to publiclhearing,noticed and advertised at.least 15 days:prior to the $i meeting Vi Development Review Committee (DRC) 3 2 noticed and advertised at least.15 days prior to the meeting a E Planning'Commission''(PC) • - yi 3 noticed and advertised at�least 15 days prior to the meeting ce 73 BOCC . E - v, c al noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting 4 public hearings and adoptions shall take place at the board's meeting which is closest to a) . E the subject property or at the board's meeting site that'is next closest to the subject c cts property 5 DEO • • Ord -2019 Page 5 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 153 A.1:m. Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution Rendered to DEO for review and approval—45 day review 6 If Appealed, sent to DOAH 2 Major. Conditional Use Community meeting d E 1 30-120 days prior to public hearing,noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the c meeting. f.: , Development.Review Committee(DRC) noticed and advertised at least_15 days,prior'to.the.meeting Planning Commission (PC) E - noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting c.)cc . • .. • . . \ ', \ .. .. of Protest procedure by affected-property owners-the amendment shall not become 4 effective exceptby-the-favorable Vote,of four members of'the PC — . c7 DEO r, 5 Rendered to DEO for review and approval-45 day review If Appealed, sent to DOAH.-. `\ ' si 4 ` °. Minor,Conditional Useo Development Review Committee(DRC) 1- noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting 1 E 2 Rendered to DEO for review and approval=45 day review If Appealed, sent to PC. 3 If PC decision is appealed, sent to DOAH Ca 5 6 Policy 109.1.5 Ord -2019 Page 6 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 154 A.1.m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 Notwithstanding the amendment procedures included in Chapter 102 [Administration] of the Land 2 Development Code,.for a period of two (2) years from the effective date <insert date> of the 3 Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal, amendments to facilitate workforce housing shall follow the 4 procedures below: 5 r Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment Community meeting(if county-wide impact) co I- 1 A minimum of 30.days prior:to public hearing,noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting ' CD Development Review Committee(DRC) ;• • a . — noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior'to the meeting Planning Commission(PC) co - noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting t : BOCC=transmittalti, hearings o�. ' 0 4 noticed and advertised at least 15.\days prior-to the meeting ' 5 Rendered to DEO-for review and comment—60 day_review—ORC.report BOCC—adoption hearing.. \ w (noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting a� 0.. DEO. co Rendered'to DEO for compliance review=45 day_review-notice of intent:(NOI)' too 8 If Appealed,sent to DOAH 6 7 i= 8 c FLUM Map Amendment Community meeting 1 30-120 days prior to public hearing,noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting Ord -2019 Page 7 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 155 A..1.m. Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution Development Review Committee(DRC) noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting Planning Commission(PC) N 3 noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting F . Protest procedure by affected property owners-the amendment shall not become 4 effective except by the favorable vote of four member of the BOCC E BOCC-transmittal hearing n. noticed and advertised at.least..15_days prior to the meeting \ a) f, ,` - 5 public hearings and adoptions shall take'place at the board's meeting which is closest to the subject property or at the board's meeting site that is.next closest`to the subject a. property _ DEO 6 Rendered to DEO for review and\approTal--60 day review—ORC report as BOCC-adoption hearing \' v noticed and advertised at least`15 days:prior:to the meeting $� public hearings and adoptions shall take.place at the board's meeting which is closest to the subje—o property or at,the board's meeting site that is next closest to the subject (property \ `,, ai DEO,. . 8 o Rendered Ito DEO for compliance review--45 day review—notice of intent(NOI) a �I If Appealed; sent to:DOAH: N 1 � 2 Land.Development Code - Text Amendment Community meeting (if county-wide impact) c 1 A.minimum of 30 days prior-to public hearing,noticed and advertised at least 15.days. • a prior to the meeting Ord -2019 Page 8 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 156 A.1:m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution Development Review.Committee(DRC) 2 noticed and advertised at least.15 days prior to the.meeting Planning Commission (PC) T. 3 E noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting c 10 it BOCC—adoption hearing c 4 E noticed and advertised.at least 15 days prior to the meeting c d E DEO a a. 5 - Rendered to.DEO for compliance review,:60.day review—.'final order 0 21 day challenge periods. 0 ., - \ w If Appealed., sent to DOAH L 6. ' o 1 2 .; .. o ZoningrMap`Amendment-. O Community meetings \, c9 _ o 1 30-120 days prior to.public\hearing,noticed and advertised at least 15 days:prior to the meeting f' '- _ `� i De'velopment.Review Committee(DRC): s`•- 3- noticed and adverti`sed'at le s't\15 days prior to the meeting a Planning Commission`(PC). of 3 noticed and`advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting rei Ts Protest.procedure•by affected property owners-the amendment shall not become E 4 effective except by the favorable vote of four members of the BOCC co 03 BOCC adoption hearing d 4 E noticed and advertised at least 15 days prior to the meeting 0 DEO 5 Rendered to DEO for compliance review-45 day review—appeal or waive appeal Ord -2019 Page 9 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 157 . .. A.1.m. Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 6 . If Appealed, sent:to DOAH ." 1 2 : Policy 109.1.E ,u" r 3 Notwithstanding Section-.138-24 [Administrationl of the Land Development Code, for. a 4 period of two (2)years from the effective date<insert date>.of the:Hurricane Irma Recovery 5 Goal,the following shall be the'ROGO distribution: 7 Number of available annual residential ROGO allocations.,The number of market rate E 8 residential-ROGO allocations available in each subarea,of the unincorporated county and the 2 9 total number of affordable. residential ROGO allocations"available countywide shall.be as E 10 follows: ( 11 �.. c Subarert 1\r.tunber-ef.Divelling-bruits a) Upper Keya ( . `; ft1- Lowe `$. .. . . d Big ,. .n., 7_D; o N ATE1yf e TIa & \` , a. �.ti " Total markctt rate ,\ ;;' v Very Low, Low, d Median" 4.6451c. \ / 58 Subarea Number of Market Rate Dwelling Units "Di l ; •Upper Keys`°. \` ` 61 3� Lower Keys . 57 c. Big Pine and No.Name Keys'. . �\ '' 8 r,. Totabmarket rate . . , 126 o co Number of Affordable Recovery Process distribution for �► Dwelling Units workforce housin. Affordable dwelling units .F p 75%*of the-remaining"balance of E Very Low,Low,and Median 360* . allocations on effective.date of the c Incomes co Hurricane Irma Recovery Goal F`- 25%*.of the remaining balance of Moderate Income 350* allocations on effective date of the - Hurricane.Irma Recovery Goalto s = Total affordable 91.0 910 *Includes"one annually for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Ord -2019 Page 10 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 158 A.1.m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 In accordance with Section 138-24(a)(3) of.the Land Development Code, the Planning 2 Commission shall set the proportion of very low income, low income; and median.income 3 allocations to moderate income allocations for all affordable housing.allocations remaining at 4 the conclusion of the 2-year effective period of the Hurricane.Irma Recovery Goal. 5 �a r_ 6 *** CO 7 C 8 Section 2. Severability: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or it 9 provision of this ordinance is held invalid,the remainder of this ordinance shall not d 10 be affected by such validity. 11 E 12 Section 3: Repeal of.Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in B 13 conflict with this:ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. a 14 cu 15 Section 4. Transmittal.This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Director of Planning to the 16 State Land Planning Agency pursuant to Chapter 163 and\3$0;.Florida Statutes. 17 : Q. 18 Section 5. Filing and Effective Date. This ordinance.shall.be filed in the Office of the E 0 19 Secretary of the State\of.Florida but shall.not become effective'until a notice is v 20 issued by the State Land Planning Agency or m Administration Commission finding o 21 the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and after any . Ta o 22 applicable challenges have been resolved. 0 23 •, 24 Section 6. Inclusion`in the Comprehensive Plan. The text amendment shall be incorporated 25 in the Monroe County -Comprehensive Plan. The numbering of the foregoing -12 26 amendment may be renumbered to conform to the numbering m the Monroe County I 27 . Coinprehensive Plan. . 3. 28 t•;` Q 29 PASSED'AND ADOPTED.by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, .0 30 . at a regular meeting held on the ' day of . , • N 31 . 01 32 . Mayor Sylvia Murphy, District 5 to 33 Mayor Pro Terri Danny L. Kolhage, District 1 ce1 34 -, - m Comissioner Michelle Coldiron, District 2 p 35 `. Commissioner Heather Carruthers,District 3 '. to 36 . Commissioner David Rice, District 4 . to 37 i- 38 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS d 39 OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA 40 cc 41 BY = a 42 Mayor Sylvia Murphy 43 (SEAL) 44 Ord . -2019 Page 11 of 12 File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 159 A.1.m Exhibit"A" to Transmittal Resolution 1 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK 2 3 4 DEPUTY CLERK 5 N u a) a a) �, \ • of : /CD • � f c F .. \` • a 01 03CD �\ - fA C r - C a) E .0 v t0 Ord -2019 Page 12 of 12. . File 2018-010 Packet Pg. 160 Richard Grosso, Esq. Richard Grosso, P.A. 6511 Nova Drive Davie,FL 33317 Mail Box 300,grossor@yahoo.com 954-801-5662 Sent via email to: boccdis1 @monroecounty-fl.gov, boccdis2@monroecounty-fl.gov,boccdis3 @,monroecounty-fl.gov, boccdis4@monroecounty-fl.gov boccdis5@monroecounty-fl.gov and hand-delivered February 12, 2019 Mayor Sylvia Murphy, Mayor Pro Tern Danny Kohlage Commissioners Heather Carruthers, Michelle Coldiron, David Rice, Monroe County Commission Re: Goal 109 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments Dear Mayor and Commissioners, I write on behalf of Don DeMaria, Dr. Lesley Thompson, Sean Thompson, and Mary Beth Wells,residents of Monroe County who oppose the proposed"Goal 109"and its increased density in the island neighborhoods. They are extremely concerned about the process that resulted in the current Planning Staff presentation to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), as described in my letter to you dated February 7, 2019, on behalf of fourteen civic, homeowner, and environmental groups representing thousands of residents Keys-wide. They are also extremely concerned about the substance of Goal 109,as set forth in my letter to you of May 7, 2018. Rather than repeat these concerns, I refer you to those two earlier letters, the substance of which is incorporated herein by reference, and copies of which are included here. Thank you. Sincerely, /s/Richard Grosso Richard Grosso,Esq. cc: Robert Shillinger, Monroe County Attorney Christine Hurley,Asst. Monroe County Administrator Don DeMaria Dr. Lesley Thompson Sean Thompson Mary Beth Wells 1 Richard Grosso, Esq. Richard Grosso, P.A. 6511 Nova Drive Davie,FL 33317 Mailbox 300 grosso.richard@yahoo.com 954-801-5662 May 7, 2018 Denise Werling, Chair Monroe County Planning Commission Marathon Government Center 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 410 Marathon,FL 33050 Re: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments—"Goal 109" Dear Chair and Commissioners: I write on behalf of Florida Keys Citizens Coalition,Friends of the Lower Keys(FOLKs), Island of Key Largo Federation of Homeowners Associations (IKLFHA), Key Deer Protection Alliance,Inc.,Last Stand,and Save Summerland Native Areas (SSNA), concerning the proposed "Goal 109" workforce housing amendments to the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan).We keenly understand the affordable housing challenges facing Monroe County,aggravated by Hurricane Irma.The vulnerability of affordable housing to hurricanes,storm surge and flooding in the Keys is clearly apparent. The issue requires the same forward-thinking that Monroe County brought to its carrying capacity-based land use planning and sea level rise planning. We support the County's prioritized goal of addressing the workforce housing challenges, but we see some major problems that would prevent community support of Goal 109. The increased densities proposed in Goal 109 would be too high for all areas of Monroe County where they would be authorized, as they would allow projects that are out of scale and character with the existing development patterns and community character throughout the County. The proposed additional density bonuses are an understandable,but still reflexive and ill-advised, reaction to Hurricane Irma that, if enacted,would prove to have been a very unfortunate planning decision. We believe the County's laudable adoption of a priority for addressing the workforce housing problem can be accomplished by means other than substantial density increases, so that both rural residents and those in our municipal areas can support and benefit from them.We want to be part of the process of enacting a meaningful,balanced workforce housing initiative that does not undermine the land use and environmental planning that has come before it, and which truly prioritizes workforce housing development. Please accept and consider our comments in that spirit. 1 Definitions We agree with and support the Policy 109.1.2 proposed definition of workforce and workforce housing. We oppose the definition of"development"within Goal 109, which includes businesses, manufacturing and commercial enterprises. Goal 109 should be limited to its stated purpose of incentivizing workforce rental housing. Inconsistent with Community Character Community character was first recognized as an important critical planning element in the Florida Keys in the 1986 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Planners and elected officials realized that if we did not protect the unique character of the Florida Keys, in both the built and the natural environment,then what makes the Keys distinct would be lost and/or significantly damaged. As described in the current Land Development Code, "Community Character means the image and perception of a community as defined by the recognizable natural and built landmarks, boundaries and features that provide a sense of place and orientation and the interrelationship of all these characteristics." Protecting and enhancing the unique community character and quality of life of the Florida Keys is one of the three dominant land use determinants in the Comp Plan. See Future Land Use (FLU) Goal 101, Objective 101.5 and Policy 105.1.2. Between 2000 and 2012, a forward-thinking, in-depth community planning process,based on extensive research and community engagement by staff and professional planning consultants, resulted in Community Master Plans, including the Lower Keys Livable CommuniKeys Plan, the Big Pine and No Name Key Livable CommuniKeys Plan, the Tavernier to MM 97 Livable CommuniKeys Plan and the Key Largo Livable CommuniKeys Plan (Livable CommuniKeys Plans). Through these plans, local residents and businesses clearly and unequivocally expressed the communities' desires and goals to maintain their low density, rural, or otherwise unique community island character. These Livable CommuniKeys Plans reflect residents' desire to continue building single- family homes on individual lots and in small clusters for people who work in the Keys — our teachers, law enforcement officers, firefighters,and other workers. Goal 109's proposed 50%density bonus,on top of the already-existing affordable housing bonuses', would create density in our rural and suburban island communities that is higher than the current residential maximum anywhere in the County. It is completely the opposite of the communities' goals as expressed in these Livable CommuniKeys Plans. These plans have been ratified by the County and are enforceable planning documents on which residents and businesses have relied since their inception starting in 2004. Please see Table 1 on page 4, which shows the density increases in 2002 and also the proposed density increases in Goal 109. Please also see the photographs of four recent affordable housing projects with their respective densities,on pages 10 through 13. ' Mixed Used increased by fifty percent.Urban Residential more than doubled.And Suburban Commercial tripled. 2 Given the limited number of affordable ROGO allocations2,new workforce housing should be built in the most appropriate locations. The County's plan should not include rezoning rural or low-density areas for high-density apartment buildings. Unsupported by Data and Analysis Additionally, the policies that would implement Goal 109 appear to be overly broad in terms of the allowed development densities and locations that do not have clear support in data and analysis. We are unaware of any data and analysis that would justify the proposed increase in density for workforce rental housing over and above the existing affordable housing density bonuses. This data and analysis is required by Florida law and is especially important given the carrying capacity limitations that underlie the Comp Plan. A suitability analysis relative to the vast area to which these allowances would apply would be required. Specifically,we are aware of no data to support Goal 109's implied assumption that higher density workforce rental housing is needed in the rural and low—density island communities of unincorporated Monroe County to serve the local workers.Workforce housing(employee housing) is already allowed throughout the rural communities of unincorporated Monroe County, and a density bonus, without retiring any development rights, already exists for affordable housing in the Mixed Use, Suburban Commercial and Urban Residential land use districts. Goal 109 assumes that the existing density bonuses provided for workforce housing in the three zones is insufficient to incentivize' workforce housing. That is not the case. Workforce housing projects have been built throughout unincorporated Monroe County using the existing bonus density.' We specifically question the existence of actual data and analysis to support Policy 109.1.1 to demonstrate that: • The existing density allowances in those categories are not adequate to provide meaningful workforce housing opportunities. • The increased densities to be allowed would materially increase the supply of workforce housing. • All of the locations/zoning districts in which the maximum densities would be authorized are suitable in terms of access to public facilities and services, proximity to workplaces, vulnerability to storm impacts and flooding, community character, and environmental sensitivity. 2 Currently there are 467 Affordable Housing ROGOs available. 3 Stock Island,Big Coppitt,Big Pine Key and Key Largo have attracted affordable housing under the current density bonuses. 3 Table 1: Affordable Housing Density: As of Right,Existing and Proposed by Goal 109 TODAY TODAY TODAY TODAY TODAY PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOS Goal 109 Goal 109 ED Goal 109 Dwelling Allocated Max Incentive Total Incentive Bonus for Total Total Units 'As of Net Density- for affordable increase lower lower Increase Allowed Right' (must retire affordable /employee over Max income income over Per Acre development employee (no Net workforce workforce Max Net rights housing retirement density rentals units density elsewhere) of rights required) Mixed Use 1 12 6 18 50% 9 27 125% Suburban 3 6 12 18 200% 9 27 350% Commercial Urban 6 12 13 25 108% 12.5 37.5 213% Residential Based on the data available,the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee found an unmet workforce housing need throughout Monroe County specifically adjacent to the employment centers such as Key West and Marathon, making Goal 109's proposed solution unworkable and inappropriate. Many projects throughout Monroe County have successfully utilized the existing bonus density,and the resulting projects are more densely built than any other developments in Monroe County. We've attached four photos that will help one visualize the effects of currently allowed density in these three zoning districts. The Goal 109 proposed density bonus would aggravate already dangerous traffic problems, creating onerous commute times and expense for working families and ruining the scenic beauty of US 1, endangering its designation as an All-American Road,one of only 30 in the Country, and the only one in Florida. While the motivations for reacting positively to applicant-proposed, high-density affordable housing projects are understandable given the current situation, it is not a sound solution. It violates all well-known principles of smart growth planning. The solution to our workforce housing problem should not be applicant-driven. The County and the municipalities need to control the solutions. Other Environmental&Land Use Impacts The environmental sensitivity of much of the land in unincorporated Monroe County is a major issue relative to this proposal. So is the hurricane and flooding vulnerability of much of that land. Overall,the draft plan amendment does not"incentivize"the type of housing needed in the places it is needed and appropriate. Some of the larger parcels to which the increased densities would apply have critical habitat for listed species, intact coastal mangroves and/or other ecological sensitivity. Avoiding further loss of natural resources is a major requirement of the Comp Plan,based on the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study. Loss of natural resources would 4 be avoided by eliminating the proposed "density bonus" and assisting in the development of the high-density workforce housing in the established employment centers. Similarly, the natural beauty of the Florida Keys will be further marred given the urban sprawl that would be allowed by the proposed plan amendments. Section 163.3177(6) (a)(9),Fla. Stat. has been adopted into the Comp Plan (for example, FLU Obj. 105.1) specifically to discourage urban sprawl. The proposed plan amendment,contrary to state statutes and Comp Plan provisions,promotes, allows, or designates significant amounts of urban development to occur in rural areas at substantial distances from existing urban areas and their employment centers rather than directing increased density to existing developed areas and preserving existing open space. The Need to Maintain Community Input Reducing the intervals for noticing Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code text changes can be appropriate,but the County should not adopt the provisions of proposed Policies 109.1.4 and 109.1.5. These provisions would eliminate the"4/5 protest"provision of 110-6(c) (6) of the Land Development Code, which requires a 4/5 vote of the Board of County Commissioners to approve a major conditional use application over the protests of 20%of the property owners within the immediate vicinity of a proposed project. This provision provides an important layer of protection for surrounding property owners to not only help protect their property rights and also to protect the character of their communities that benefits us all. Further,elimination of the community meeting would interfere with residents' ability to be informed of Comp Plan and LDC text amendments in their neighborhoods in time to make their concerns known to the Planning Commission and Planning staff, and thus to participate in the recommendations made to their elected representatives. Community meetings are important because: • Community meetings begin with a layperson's explanation of a proposal - why it is necessary and what the impacts will be. This is followed by public Q&A. Community support for a good idea starts here.It is also the opportunity for County staff to incorporate changes that will reduce opposition further along in the approval process. • Changes to the Comp Plan and Land Development Code are complicated,with significant impact to all of unincorporated Monroe. Considerable time from concept to approval allows ample opportunity for public involvement. • Since public notice of meetings does not include detail,without a community meeting,the first notice of a Comp Plan or Land Development Code change would be two weeks before the Planning Commission meeting, after staff has already fmalized its recommendation. This is too late in the process. Once an application is finalized and a staff report prepared, citizen opposition or calls for modifications have very little realistic chance of impacting the fmal decision. The community meeting should not be eliminated. 5 Suggested Solutions Monroe County should eliminate the Goal 109 workforce housing"density bonus"and the provisions removing the "4/5 protest vote" and the community meetings. The County should remove the business, manufacturing and commercial references in the definition of "development." We urge the County to direct its commitment to solving the workforce housing problem in the following ways: 1. Make 80%of the County's ROGOs available only for workforce rental housing for a three- year period for Very Low, Low, and Median, leaving 20% of the market rate ROGOs available for single-family homes. Make these affordable ROGOs in the workforce rental category available to Marathon and Key West, the urban employment centers where the workforce is needed. This effort should be coordinated with the planning being done by the municipalities that are creating their own housing recovery plans.For example: • Marathon has areas with roadway capacity and room for parking. It has potential new projects but few building rights. In the past several years Monroe County has transferred ROGOs to Marathon for affordable housing projects.If Marathon can build new workforce rental housing, the County should share its ROGOs with Marathon to facilitate that. • Key West has ROGOs (BPAS). Through rezoning and better utilization, Key West has identified capacity for over 1500 new living units within their city limits. Key West has demonstrated a willingness to pool BPAS with County ROGOs for developments in appropriate locations on nearby islands. 2. Direct the County Housing Authority to work with developers to build workforce housing on available County-owned sites in Marathon and Key West. 3. Fund the staff necessary to effectively enforce existing affordable housing and vacation rental rules and requirements most especially as widespread vacation rental abuses demonstrably encroach on affordable/workforce housing stocks. 4. Direct additional resources to help Monroe County residents rebuild their damaged properties by waiving permitting fees and expediting inspections. 5. Address the impact of the tourism industry on the workforce housing crisis. The role of the tourism industry's role in the economic health of the Florida Keys is a given, but it is complex. Tourism's centrality to the Keys economy is one of the reasons local and state (as well as federal) authorities try so hard to protect and restore the Keys' endangered marine and terrestrial habitats. The prevalence in that industry of"lower paying service sector employment" (Jan. 9, 2018 Staff Report) is one of the primary factors driving demand for affordable housing, which "in turn has widespread economic impacts." The tourism industry creates additional affordable housing demands for its workers, but typically pays those workers at an income level that makes it hard for them to afford to live here. (Jan. 9,2018 Staff Report). 6 6. We think that a sustainable solution to the housing affordability problems in the Keys must include a meaningful funding component under which companies of a certain size threshold are contributing an increased surtax to support housing subsidies, or car,plane, ferry, tour bus and cruise ship visitors are contributing more through a surtax and/or toll/ sticker fees for travel into the Keys on US 1 or Card Sound Road(with residents exempt). Such an approach should not be rejected out of hand over concerns that tourism would suffer. We think it likely that a reasonable but meaningful affordable housing fee(designed to offset the tourist industry's impact on affordable housing) would not realistically keep people from visiting the Keys but would make a real difference in the provision of housing. 7. We believe the County should encourage and in some cases require businesses to establish housing for their employees on-site. If large multifamily workforce developments are needed,they should be placed close to employment centers in the municipalities. 8. We also recommend that the recent thorough and well-documented report of the Monroe County Workforce/Affordable Housing Advisory Committee should be used in all such planning. Conclusion As the County continues to revise this proposal, we hope to see that the community input from the Jan.29,2018,Community Meeting be reflected in a revised proposal. As far as we know, nothing has been done with this meeting's notes, which captured the community's input at the meeting. Neighborhood compatibility was one of the primary concerns raised at that forum. The discussion at pages 3 and 4 of the Introduction to the County's Comp Plan reminds us all of the priority that remains to protect and restore the Keys natural habitats and, thus, of the necessity to direct workforce housing to appropriate infill and redevelopment areas: 2 Among the four main guidelines for future development in the Florida Keys established in the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study (FKCCS) are the following, which are most pertinent here: 1. Prevent encroachment into native habitat. A wealth of evidence shows that terrestrial habitats and species have been severely affected by development and further impacts would only exacerbate an already untenable condition. 2. Continue and intense existing programs. Many initiatives to improve environmental conditions and quality of life exist in the Florida Keys. They include land acquisition programs, the wastewater and stormwater master plans, ongoing research and management activities in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, and restoration. 3. Iffurther development is to occur,focus on redevelopment and infill. Opportunities for additional growth with small,potentially acceptable, additional environmental impacts may occur in areas ripe for redevelopment or already disturbed. 4. Increase efforts to manage the resources. Habitat management efforts in the Keys could increase to effectively preserve and improve the ecological values of remaining terrestrial ecosystems. 7 The FKCCS noted the critical importance of preventing further destruction of terrestrial habitats, stating, "Any further encroachment into areas dominated by native vegetation would exacerbate habitat loss and fragmentation"and concluded, "Development in the Florida Keys has surpassed the carrying capacity of upland habitats to maintain their ecological integrity." The Carrying Capacity Study is the basis for much of the Comp Plan. As written, Goal 109 would conflict with several of the key provisions of the Plan,most notably: FLU GOAL 101: shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life, ensure the safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources. Objective 101.5: shall regulate future development and redevelopment to maintain and enhance the character of the community and protect natural resources by providing for the compatible distribution of land uses consistent with the[FLUMJ designations .... GOAL 102: shall direct future growth to lands which are most suitable for development and shall encourage conservation and protection of environmentally sensitive lands (wetlands, beach berm and tropical hardwood hammock). Objective 102.3: shall maintain land development regulations which will direct new development to areas having appropriate topography and soil conditions and to where site disturbance and man's activities will have fewer adverse effects on natural vegetation, terrestrial wildlife, natural landforms and marine resources. Policy 105.1.2: shall enforce the design guidelines established within the Livable CommuniKeys Plans and its land development regulations which ensure that future uses and development are compatible with scenic preservation and maintenance of the character of the casual island village atmosphere of the Florida Keys. Monroe County is a very special place due to the efforts of so many,including this Planning Commission and our current Board of County Commissioners. Its desirability is a factor in the affordability of housing. Our efforts to ensure that our teachers, law enforcement personnel and other critical workers can and want to continue to live here must make certain that the resulting built and expanded communities are cohesive and the ecosystem upon which our economy and way of life depend is maintained and restored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, /s/Richard Grosso/s/ 8 Cc:Mayor David Rice,BOCC Hon.Heather Carruthers,BOCC Hon.Danny Kohlage,BOCC Hon. Sylvia Murphy,BOCC Hon. George Neugent,BOCC Christine Hurley,Asst.Monroe County Administrator Robert Shillinger,Monroe County Attorney Michelle Coldiron,Mayor of Marathon Craig Cates,Mayor of Key West Chris Sante,Mayor of Islamorada Barbara Powell,DEO Capt.Ed. Davidson,FKCC Caron Balkany,FOLKs, SSNA Alicia Putney,KDPA Dottie Moses, IKLFHA Mark Songer,Last Stand 9 School Board Property-Trumbo Road— Key West 8 ,� .=emu"(1 rok,t,-!.,-Nxi:-, :.-K4,'.,:._,40 \, ', o ,- e, �.L .4-. a�Tt !e j i \3q 10 z • Al,s , * •"" -4 A i'I ki:;`,';'.A'‘,,,.. ,),,,,,,,,„„ ,,,,,,,'11;;;',4:,-7i44,1,1.''. 4-4.1,' ifktiWt-z•:::: ,,,,Ir.,..-- 3 +5 t .;t p}{�1::. 1_II1"1•_il l l l 1111 y ,'� �_' (1 p `"!9 Y y4. 3! t�:.t '°� � Tom,,. 1"" a.� Yd j } a r. �I :Z. tk f 8.. i ew '' F # `� z4 � '` ,_ ,� • L lj 1,11 II Illl7llil111111111 ..�� } .L. � f+:::TTT .� ,,: / lF 111 II 11 Il .41.1111 1_I li 1 4 ?Am \\� f _ l .' a ktr., 4 1 i li1741 ili llili 714' l f,. q �' '�e 1l a j'. �.+y „a.l j'.}1.i if_II iI:0II:- -1 ,... , �� . Land Area: 5.91 acres • Up to 118 units max at 20 Dwelling Units per acre • Up to 236 units max at 40 Dwelling Units per acre Zo • In ,, + pj�les '�°�' «-- � ` =� 1.. 1 d �`_ v :.af. y�N; A 9 • •j:, 4 t 1. i�� - "' 1 \ L.,. t , I Yk }y' „'� I' - ,..,�-, a :iT Y?'t ti 0 dj -1, t l lart&•au�1 j?",eT:o-N .c1• "� r h�� * t 1 "�''-_ ,y�+,J�F. Y s,' j A qN r Q1 < b.r t,I I� a �lr yr tS J �I _•, a < ,. N .-...by , a 1 -....,.. — J d • ti. ;f a `p .1�1. �. ,...,P Kd .S '�-� ., " K OI C 4 • � w t i if, x `4°„� V :. Y"^.r,1 fi. ,ti i f fJ1°rf'bl Y • ?ga, 2'r, 1 ,..� "1 FG \r ;S ?�.v" rJer (D b L1 ,� rw I FJb, v l r f� tt f rl L �' r`.I V.,,,� i k i .w •f i i y i..'r �.:.. a1-! p ly 1 �' � '�� Vf f"h �j -:,,� f �,4440, ' °" .sp,l E ; 1r/' yM 9 i M t ,p rl � "' "••a w,i�A''/':�� a n F: . la"� I +i ,1,-.-,,,,, �ti?;�f �.,t�y 4? '�� f' .4` 1� � y in � t � y . 9S�n :1�t�„�. /•ii��4 • --'-'-a.,,::- ,...., , ,� !' T4El A +t Q p-t tR.f,' ?'," s - )s.! Y'24 � . ''. +aa<:: 9 5. T.r `'.,�-F SIT.�4.4 ;,,,• z.a 1 ` a 4 .'. a,",,..�"4r0. r'�'.',, r 1 y r a ' , X �'''''''''''',1"...".. a;� w� , � - "`1' 4'S'", �."�S y ° y.,y `�i �' f�S7,��k.: it '��s'a• ,.L �s^�—eL -. "+ i +1n 1 r� b .'�b E"i x•.fig �. lb a � . -,:.....,.. �,. y 'p w. t r k. t i 7 9 f ' .•;'' i r 3 9 .4 �'• �I y R .d " M r. ` t'r. ot a x;S•) 1. a -,, ry y _ii 'k yt .• i �•- f x .1f fix, a�' �• c'' ` fp Ul y s vt T i 1,!,,111(I�,' �� . s [ tCT K L., V5 ^A ^ +� ! is 1 I fT�f .i .. 4 4 '4� 4. �. y"� 1Y ._... i / " T 1 C 4 f lV Irtr i a�rrQ�. r r ..' "s, : 3 n r :s`d a it { ?4,...:9 r.x � rry r{ rF fi.� !g ..Y 'e �k� � r+ Yam' flT�.Y y ' y a 4d,► " r r a T d '.. r 4r yq g' b V.t� ,� ;i� JY 01 t , i , 1,'i 1.ff'? ' x I r ,7 1 Y c I. ,, (�.��r�`j1 + ' ' ' ' ' sF1� tail I ' . rW \It. , T t 6 ! �� ih t9F � . . e "' w d , .b .mowter'. r k, , FF-o--i r'Y' ',�� F x II. 4 s, r ",}=4„Yu,"i qc_.-.,,.w f�t�",• ry ', n y . :, v `- {1 R. .,.......„:„, , 0-15'^xtb $ 1,� Cr :}}.� 1�:k it ij "/ sa, r0 , B' C yv 1 r i a ,,,,,,,:,, ,„ H ^� iy -' 1 '' t SY € i I • f -.e"I @ -1 �. s a y fit sl jy . _, _.`' ,+ ��t•` j a 1t " _r; { a®, ' s �t ^ *t 'f• r ,lam z. «._ ° . Al' :y +. rt T • ,,f,, ' " r='',t r yy^^ \ `, 1<y••�'1 a w _:1�y a '" '""� ., ,> Y M1• M` r� i �" t .. r ,!....,1 y „4! • ," `^+.- l'a- "�t ,', €y c .,.s .3 is +)ss an.°' ,.,,,:' -' ` t '.- • o- a ` >.\_ .' c ( t .e 1 - � fir., ' a9 v�"xt��'". x^¢z Y ,dam n k� j i -p •+?.�? .ce ..1 / _ . e t -$q . r t : 4 J- „ =,d ,d[' t , TM, b 1 a ( 3. .J '�. y ¢V°`3 a, 0. i ,,_.. • i. 'S E3�.g� , :r: '- • `Ya i 2 •� frb i(f k,FA _ � i'a t '>> } 55�,t .•. i ^� s.�./S�, v„ •ks,.tF..:r ,IS k . .. S-�A'r+�','..>Xhre .}�.,.. „ ,.G.,1 .,td,,,,,I P,b.,li 23u4 tib. , ,. • Lower Keys- Little Torch Cottages 48 units (24 duplexes) on a footprint of about 3.5 acres-roughly 14 units per acre --,F,-• ----7-4...uxrduzz,Enzt.,..7 .77:17,71 - - - ,- ,i..10.0%,i,-.. -1., - ,:. :-.:.,,,, ., , .,' : -A, .•. .,,,, „; :••-, . ...•;,•x.,..-4,,,-"..,‘„4,-v,ii.„4-,,,,,....,,,,,,IvAt: - , ,• ,,,,tef.,•%,441,1,1.,..,,,,,,4---t,-,1-417.• •••-•!.."-• ;. .,4-4. ... 4r,ir ,r,i, )y ''--,S*•.- 4....--,4,• - _5, : ..„.;., 1; ... , ,, _.,_, . ,, --c1,,,,.,„`,7,,,,,,-- .-,,-;,14T,,.. 045;.%NiL.1 '-'" !..r.--4,k-7,-. .-I,,.. .. i 1 :1.F..,-- "---•"- - '. '-' ". s' -...L;•,I.V%-"A;..;'..:.).1'"'1`t.'e'!.:.;.t*.),'"•1).‘i.;7t:i-Irt.41.';r,I''lVi1.-,.i-:.„.,-gF..P V,,I',,4.•MFi,::-IA 4..-'.t. IiIi,;;I'I!I a.7r'.'7.'-A'•I6Z,,',„.,..i'..,-.','.':'t'i;':,)','-r:f.';-)-').1;..';:')''.''r•• ' ..%i'','' - ""r i'1i'•_-''.'-.•J..‘'t'..•._.,.,''''-„'•'.L'''74v... --:',f,;, tt.,;,e:_i'''':.''',•"-''':",l-_'-'•'I:‘.i..'.`,'':'I.-i4.!;,b•;.''.4'.'-...".',',,,:-_,.7"I:*.41)*;t))'V',.f 4-,r.fi,,,",A*.r;44t,i.,-'y;,..:r;,,;;n."4;,'7.2--.4'44,,1,IF'VP Xt,1.-t*b-i;fV';,.:ii14.4..4 " _ e• -• r▪ i I , , - . . , i . ,„. „ 1/ ;( 3,'' 4, - CI t• ;;Jor-0,;-,',,A1,,, I• '.',.-/ ' . . '''''.14• "a' ,* ------. ,..,+" ; 12%,::, •,__4•4.4A,-,. .*.e"..0,•,- . k,/: : • , .I, ,;,,,, ;... zt.v .-Y.., - --.. 7-4 Yaw 7.;v-:, p-,,,,,,,,,,q,,,t-A -,, -•-•fiw--,,,-, , , 4.• ,. , , ..,. ,_•,k... 1••..- •. . -,z,*,44,5 . ff.,,,,ik,v4-1 . .• :54,kw----10..‘, f, -; .'-. - . • --• •• .__ .-'...,..* -..:. • T'---."' ''-7•-:4$,lAtiVb",ti.=, ;''''-. .4:4.N1 1, 4.. -;-.--.1L:.- - ' , ", I'2(11497Cr--4°----':.....7 1.,'r..0.4 A ct AtAe4;4,1• ;1.. • -• ' , •..-••,-•': . - -.,-_._•_- ,. ,7:-.• a - •.• AV.'.,-,iw-,,:,:,`,7., " ,',,:,t„„,T•.:"iIi,4',4A,p.'',4,-:-i:„,P,,T..,,.,,',,AV. 6.t.i274f,F;,;,5.44,i..z,..„, .11 , ' :I:7,,,„'•".--, ".. .11.L','• ' ''''',..trel,r14.e,-4-Ali ''' %.grr'' 4. ' ..;-r"Ze ••:: ir-0,, -..,L.,s.,.r.-,;,_--..-..r.- ..:y-4, -;,;%',t''.,,,,' it,,,,..?„-;-:.,,v'it,4,,,,,,,'44__,,,,,,,z,V.,,,,,,e41'%.,,,,,,,4, ,, ,,-.0.....' -',-i i ''' s'-i ',,,.!- " r ILI!. ' ...L.- -,-,,.,- .,,,,, , •:t..•,..e-. ,:...4.'))4,,,,.*-t ),,,s,-,41q• ..-- '-_,,,....- "74-10"3 -_,,,),-' ., ,f.'',"--,..7-4.--4-...-.:*14I.kiI 4',-41:01:4}-41.f .z.,.',-' ,.'4,toi„: "'",,, •'..' .S.'W...1 ''',4-,- 'I .-:44--- ,I -.. ..4t5b, - • . • ', • ,--'i;44"-1=*, 41.4•4;' ,4.-7irk---,,,,,-i-v - ',,-,-----,%,.* ';''t,,W13 ';',7;,*5",`;774.21. ,i • ','••• - ,,..„, , . :AN:,NVIl'icteI"4A1:- 'ot;--e)-4.4II"1-4; i4-1 - ,aW..,( nr,,- •••=i,''i ,,,T e.:7,14w,t:;?2I'IV,'.. `-.4 -1-• ' . -4 ; 'szi,7- '):).,s..,z4,,,:'4"-,..A.;„)m ") -.4-6,-11,c):),) )1,,,..__)s),-i..--)-- ' .).....- ,_, 1.._•,.,11% 'V.,7 7,.;:.y,a,-'.'" :7*'-'':iNA:111 " ;;;" / -,'.. 7I•;.:;445.,-. 1 I . , fr:z.r .J.x.y1; '' 1:7-4,,ts.A . . --w-. ''- ','?"`4'`A.'''.'-'.:C't,•!•'Ztil. - .1--„,,,,,,-.";;;:rA•kc••,•,,A 1 la ,,,%...--:-,..,„ ,,,,,F,,,,,,,,, ,,'„ . -,4:-),:--'4- • )-) cr, t' ,-z).,r,,;=:% VY 1 kti.'. ..-.' -.---'..-- """"'CP '-' .,, . f,:iN,,:,t,,,:.1%i , ,0,...„.„:„Al , , ,,,. .,. „,...,--,,,,,.. ,,,,,,i,d " , .ri -.. .,..,, . . • 1'-?..„ ,-:.k. la..,'..7, , rg.,- ,;•?..--4.) .,,,,ce i----/.!: •i I 1 2, - • 7-1.49-36° t.S. --It"1 --•.c."• .,'„i:II,44 1 r k, ,,k .- i, .....;44,%.,,r ,..,.„ 'A,• -,. '..;,,4.-•I",,,,--.,'„bi, ' '9_, .,,t,41.-g, , ..,-1F465°V,."`iiI;.-.;-.---,, , , -7,...•,•-•-, )..yr..•_....),, ..,„4- AA." ' ' .,*.:::Lf'!4'','",- " V --. .:(1..."----- •,- . 34'1' '1"AtLotrV•,1 ":5...5::4_1',tilF4'''!: ' ,i,k'''-7-7`,4-:.• ;" . ' . -7";,25.9-4-': .• :A e.-•i14-,.....••,-- ••••,. ",:tr;••;=,;;v•••••.,i•-'-.••-• I'.-,,... „..-,.0:•:,.-f,4!..-1 •-• . '-'1' --•-• ' - ' - - 'Es''' --- VTI' - ' =-1% 'W-Mt•-&-."-- -- 1221 6 ."71;!;•:: ::-I'I'AI',*, 'i 'cs, - --',.sl.i;,-%47Saig.4.-;••'•;;dr4e• ;;77 , --6116V,; ' , it*J",:::7'c,,,, It. 4: ri! Fi. 4 ,.,„ . • . ..,,, , • .....„, , _:_.:,,:‘,..„.„,..,,... •••••• : .1, _ At.-.' _------"-- -,; =-,: 7--' 1'''''''',7• 1*;P'":3 14,tt I i '2,',,-,-7.,,-..I.-- ii•-.•,-_,--,...,'`.:-..'":, ,:'.,4I,r..:I?:"1.,/;,-.4•. -------=-"'' --,--,--, .. tt=-.-_-,- . . - ,,f-,,,,,.'.,,,,,,„----,,,,,-,- 1,,'.,-,...,--•-.--. • 'r.'Priitt..• :';'-'''q:A''•'. . ;' ''-'•/='''''''''''. -,----;.ier---T--::------7• ---..••:::'.t.•..4.1.1'.."-' . '7.4144-.:i-11‘;•-.„.`,;-.1-•--.,4*t\`4.C.7.-e--Ii'2--l-- _ „,-----------------: - • --- --,"- '" .--,'-" ' ``" ' '' r vp.±. .-.....4 ,..., . _ 14141 ...---1'.---------itEa- • 7,7-.7,7.,.. ,,,•-7.,7:,,-:4,,,,..4...?,:i• .1r4.-...t,,,lie,;•••71;„. f• .t1 -,,-f.,f:;',...:,',f ;' '''' :.. , ,.' . ....2,,e4,,,.:'••;...i',1,:-.,'...zIa... , 0,4 AI,-.,..1,,...,,,vitre- v - .,.• ' -,;'•:,;',...'%,, ;, •.,:),''.g. i./...1.4t.4•,-,.;, v,,,i',trz,,,..,t •,1_,-,-,---. -,,,•-...,'"-:.,„,, ;. 1 q . ,,' .. ,: -..Y.{ , : ..,.,.—7.titiii'4:-..,„'''‘L'''‘ ze.-,.,-q.,..e..x..1a,---;..-'4-;.. ,,.; ,4.,.x. -,.• ,-. .,,v , - % -• ` ; * ,--044.- 0 ,,,,...7;t:, ,,,,,,„..". .,„ "cr, •,,.'.. .":c.,7:4-t.,.T.., ,,N:,,.,‘..,,,,,,,,,J,,,,",--' .,--„.--3,,L,',. I I,.:':•'..';' :1,'"F. ,' "''N"A':':. ''''`r. "';',';'.' )-7:),.7-))``'.`t..'7'..-;,'-0.5•-•• .,; '.-,-.':-•- ,:3,2.7-:•..-'.'-,-?'--.-•.--,1,-.- •!:,-.:::•,6:,: .".."- •in-Ac;-•,,ili,.,-..F.••,•.:-:.-.?•• -,4-4;•"1".,,..-,t1,,,.:if,2i,0,;,','C.A.''''1/2?'f'..,:;1-li',*it),):t4"*..,:•!'.t;,&'--4-4.:t"„-V.,,-1. "--,-,-----.:,-•-.,,--,-.-,-'r•, •-...-„,-,..,..,,-..,...-:„,:,,4g4„Alie,,,:i.-,r,„:-..:,.:„,,,,-,--- -•,..:,,......,.....---z-%",:',"„1„Lr•C1;-•!-„,,--i",f".&•;',H.',-7,,„,,,",t,';:•.,,'.';,,-"-7,0.",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;t8t0u.,-;.- ----.;-...-...,..,, ,,-,..:•-"_.-•.,",-.:•••.;,,-,„_„,__ '.;--- ''-=• -•,,- -"M'',0,-,Y.4'!'":;-' T.I.°,141 ,-,;t-,••••''-::2%:•-•&:" --i;•-•t4-,-7,'7;•'?",'W14.4**,,'"•,•:,,,i4F.,1",i'A•z,,,.„---eA,,.-;:,3';•-i.V"--'---- -- ':- - ,•,....,,--_,7, -"":"'-', •,,,,,,- ,,•-,-,,v,-,-,--lw-.,,J„,„•- :,--4.• ..k9-04,,,k,„,t.,-,,-•--,,:,,•••.,1.,-„,,:, Vf.64,,,,3,-1-,:•,:- .-•:64,,,,,k0f,-,--•,-',-,„,•:,-,4,4,,,,,,,,,3,•••,,.-„: ‘,-• ,.-----f,-,r.f,.-:-..,,,":,-,7,,,,: t",?, 7,-, 11 41-k-----,-:-,••••\,-avi•',,9"z,*-4---, •,-:,,,,,:-.•-,,,-E-t,:r------ " --" ' -• "'-- 1 - - --------- i!•-••'Or 4'r''' . '- -'- -•tlizt - --i.,,-.----=-;,: i- t6- . -----z -,: 7)Lti! , -, -,:-:-.4---,-,.. " , • ." •-•_.i-:-.,-Wn -.• -1 9; 4`,.or-"-zI-,-,----•-:, tit -'',.-'•-•'• ---i t -..-- •• 1 tiai,-,:i It - 4-). 1 ffillIi II 'II '11:'115 i „II if, 1',4:: -- 4-.144, ,• $.:41,L. • , Iv-• .:.- •)'-)-1 T -1-vi•-=.1.1.-t • ., ), A %-tart-,To-h-AtiVoi - ,-- 'I •••,•.I - • 4._ •",..1 ., i • ',el), ;,. x. .,,.. . -,- --•,.,,i: . _i__,-1,- • 1 7: .2 7.75.7.7t-71,-:71-7,--t Z.:.-,.• I . i • •1111 s'--".- „.. 1 Tii-- ''''i.'ilia', •F -.,,,,,,,,.-.:::,--i-.,,,..,,,:c;.;,1 t; I I,,, „.L4--. -..,.:..,..4,s.. ,,_.:1-,..:,.---,t,.-,,,,: .,,,,.--_.. .•,°-.. 1 ::-1 -:-ACr:47.-i.- i'",:.-fill:',71•Tz;,,,, - ' --,-,:',.'. ...7",',-...,----,.< i t 4i,f : .-.',:-.: :e...-- .- ---7,---- 1. , - - •. i•,...:.---... ...-,c,:-.."---" . -'.,',,,,5-.-/.ktir- e)' - , • ,.-.. , .1,„,-.Z:_--Z7,7-.4-1.7,-,..,„ :=14•L 'f:-. - . - . `,,,' - ,.;,,...,..,'!,,,..„_---.„-77--- ---...• .--,:-; • . ; ',.,,: ,_-:-.::,......0.-"-------.,,,.. ..".•-•- •'`..t-,,---N. ti 1,,-...=!--'''.-7"'" - ' 1 ..F.,777."''''' ' __....0‘0;- s:4 ;-•:---:,....,.. ,,,, .: ..--7.--..',._,,akz,,,,,A,a;:i;.fr-m-jl _ :•,,'0 ti?7,.„-, g.*It ..iy•„ 1,,V77,,'..,..". "'---4' • ^ •I''', 4. -',";::111..,''' -.17--. _ 17--..---:-'•- • ',4_,,...:.., i„ ,t10 ::1:,11,'":-Ai-, ..3'•i.---.7.".'^v..:. '''''- . - ---- _ _ .......„,;,-„,..;•-,;;;,,torcr,tl-t.!-1,: . , ..:,••;."..--- { ,,f , _,7,,I;,,;;ZC,.,..-7,• ----,,"•- -.--:--' :.-`.7.,.......7-,.,:rA.t,-W-;., '.:-,,.., i.., 41.-,:-L,'•-;-' ZOW.,-"..;'.. ,•:•.-11„,-...."4..,-.;,. 7, ,,• . V"ftlligilvativ, ..:- " :t4t •- 12 ) Marathon -Sea Grape Apartments 56 apartments on 4.7 acres—approximately 12 units per acre. f -' ; � . � f mot; x•" d µQ•`t �' ,,, : it*,pf 0 444 1 RAN } 4 't ' i$ ' cT '�' 1 1�:` mob,. �'u. J v.y� �+. # 1.`y�y�, ,ip .'.....„..,. .i iG� • 4 x e6 € ; . ' a r„ Per f;. _ 4 � _ :.„...„,.,„ „,,,,..„ _,...:::.„,;.... 44 t: . ':)116.'t f.1.7", . z,e...'", '''C' '" Z. 0;447.....:.,---.4 •.''''''''''' 44 l' yf . WM .K .' I :C 4 5 it`.tt g - -'`.'fin 4 5b 'y , r'� -# ,-1 4x,,pr,,,:-,,,,,,, . ,P $Sgtit _'._°'"or , .4.-w.:AA 1.r ..„.^ . . ,.-_-- ,ift t ' .�z 1 �� .'�atr. � . n�'X`* ��` raj *_ % :. .� t} ri a at i' ' 1 � � ��, .�:�. '3 _ '''':/ ""''''. . '"" '';',''1 ..F r 1 y ,� .F ill : ,:_,..„, L ,:,,,, ,, _, A r' jOii d te . . :_,..u,..„,,,,.,.-,,..,.4:.4,-,,,,,r,.,.f._ .--- —mot;teA,„:°,--.'.'",..,.f.t.".',2 '.'::.,,:;,:,z ---:— - ...47',. t.-'', ':.:.;:'. te 1 F';'..'. --- . .t.. st �. `.. - � �, '"�`. .� R. ` . - 1,`Y;, 4, fi Y k 7 A J s.. � liLt. ‘,..,1-4-',.- - '' V. ' ' 13 Richard Grosso, Esq. Richard Grosso, P.A. 6511 Nova Drive Davie,FL 33317 Mailbox 300 grosso.richard@yahoo.com 954-801-5662 Sent via email to: boccdis 1 @monroecounty-fl.gov boccdis2@monroecounty-fl.gov boccdis3 @monroecounty-fl.gov boccdis4@monroecounty-fl.gov boccdis5@monroecounty-fl.gov February 7, 2019 Mayor Sylvia Murphy, Mayor Pro Tern Danny Kohlage Commissioners Heather Carruthers,Michelle Coldiron,David Rice Monroe County Commission Re: Goal 109 Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments Dear Mayor and Commissioners, I write on behalf of many civic, environmental, and homeowner groups -- representing thousands of residents of the Florida Keys -- who oppose the proposed "Goal 109" increased density in the island neighborhoods.' These organizations are extremely concerned about the process that resulted in the current Planning Staff presentation to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). This presentation, which seems to completely ignore the recommendations of the Planning Commission made at a public hearing was only made available very recently. It appears to diverge significantly from the prior concepts upon which the public had the opportunity to comment. The Planning Commission's recommendations were not available to the public as of 8 am this Monday morning, although its meeting was held more than three months ago. We obtained a copy of the Planning Commission's recommendations only by making a special request. The BOCC meeting is just a week away. The process used in arriving at this new presentation to the BOCC for the upcoming Goal 109 vote appears to have occurred well outside of any public awareness or input. These are important issues which have been under consideration by the public as well as by Planning Staff and Planning Commissioners since November of 2017.The public deserves a much greater amount of information and input than is being allowed by what would amount to a last-minute turn-around on Goal 109. 1 Please see Appendix A for reference. 1 We are deeply concerned about the significant changes to Goal 109 which Planning Staff is now presenting to the BOCC.Planning Commission recommendations on Goal 109 were made at its meeting on October 24,2018 with a 4-1 vote recommending adoption of Goal 109—including its definition of workforce housing restricting tenants to those earning 70% of their income providing goods or services in Monroe County. The Planning Commission also voted to restrict the 50% density bonuses of Goal 109 to Stock Island and Rockland Key, near the employment center of Key West, and to preserve the protest vote and community meetings. Then,just recently, the Planning Staff presentation appeared, completely changing.Goal 109 by eliminating the workforce housing requirement and recommending that the density bonuses--which the Planning Commission recommended be limited to Stock Island and Rockland Key -- instead be allowed in the island neighborhoods of Tavernier, Little Torch, Ramrod, Summerland, Saddlebunch, and Sugarloaf, in the Suburban Commercial, Urban Residential, and Mixed Use zoning districts, far from the employment centers. 2 Parcels which previously could only be used for employee housing—which is true workforce housing -could instead be used for affordable housing—which, even with income limitations, can be used by residents who do not meet Monroe County's needs for housing for its workforce. The entire purpose of Goal 109, as repeatedly announced to the public,was to incentivize workforce housing. What Planning Staff has presented eliminates workforce housing from Goal 109 in a last-minute process which was not transparent and which completely ignores the Planning Commission recommendations. Goal 109's density bonuses themselves—which the Planning Commission recommended be restricted to Stock Island and Rockland Key—as now presented by Planning Staff would be spread through the island neighborhoods. Neither the Planning Commissioners — to our knowledge — nor the public has had the opportunity to review and study these recommended Planning Staff changes, about which the public is only now being made aware. We have previously expressed our concerns that the Goal 109 density bonuses do not belong in the low-density island neighborhoods.Based on community input and scientific studies during the Livable CommuniKeys process, plans were developed and made part of the County Comprehensive Plan calling for low-density housing in those island neighborhoods.We attach,for your convenience, a copy of our previous correspondence which addresses in detail the substance of our objections concerning the spread of high-density housing into low-density neighborhoods.' The Planning Staffs presentation directly contradicts the express desires of these communities,as well as the recommendations of the Planning Commissioners. As we have seen, affordable housing is already being built. The existing zoning and existing density bonuses are working.Additional"density bonus incentives" -which would allow 2 The belated input from the Navy concerning the Military Installation Area of Impact(MIAI)-which may have contributed to Staffs last minute suggestions contrary to the Planning Commission vote to locate high-density housing only in Rockland Key and Stock Island--is yet another process problem. The issue has not been explained to the public,nor fully briefed for Planning Commissioners. 3 Please see Appendix B. 2 density in the island neighborhoods higher than what exists now in the employment centers of Key West and Marathon—is not needed and makes no sense. The Planning Staff presentation violates the essential transparency of the decision-making process. The proposed Goal 109 plan amendments should be sent back to the Planning Commission for consideration of the impact of the MIAI on location of high-density housing and Staffs suggestions concerning the elimination of the definition of workforce housing. We urge the Board of County Commissioners to postpone a vote until after community meetings are held, and input received from the Development Review Committee, the Planning Commission,and the public, on the new approach to Goal 109 included in the current Staff report. Sincerely, /s/Richard Grosso Richard Grosso,Esq. cc: Robert Shillinger,Monroe County Attorney Christine Hurley,Asst.Monroe County Administrator Florida Keys Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America Florida Keys Citizen Coalition Florida Keys Environmental Fund, Inc, Friends of the Lower Keys (FOLKs) Island of Key Largo Federation of Homeowner Associations (IKLFHA) Key Deer Protection Alliance Last Stand,Lower Keys Alliance,Inc. Save Sununerland Native Areas Upper Keys Citizens Association Cudjoe Gardens Property Owners Assoc. South Point Homeowners LLC. Sugarloaf Shores Property Owners Association Upper Sugarloaf Residents Association 3 DENSITY PER ACRE Living Living Living Unit Unit Unit Living Living Living Living Living g Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Living Living Living Unit Unit Unit Living Living Living Living Living Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Residential Density — ( units per acre) 25 20 15 10 5 IP Key West Marathon Islamorada County Low Medium High Market Rate + AH Density 30 25 20 15 it 10 5 .PI all 0 Key West Marathon Islamorada County Low Medium High Affordable/Workforce ; rrec-r-,77.r-ejt; ....r.rer.er:-r7.-r•-j:ir;°W.-r•-z:7ittr:•47:0t:et>lrAle.S"111 Goal 109 • DOES NOT APPLY APPLIES • Key West Marathon Key Largo Islamorada Tavernier Key Colony Beach Lower Keys Layton • (-^ 4 'vote. , • ••• •' • . . '• - : - • -•- • - --•„, r. • : r r r 0-,•-tro.g- . . - - . . . - -•, — rtr.• •••‘-'-fri•' - .4• r-•-`tr f`t•*--i'rrri.-• t•--t...-rirr. ;4 no: "'r,f4 i;pee,t•rfp: 7,vie•••• •'4;4- : : - - Lower Keys LCP Area — 18,774 acres 10% Undeveloped Acreage 90.3% ■ Developed Acerage 9.7% 90% 5 Lower Keys LCP - The developed 10% 6% ■ Residential 9% Rights of way & utilities 85% ■ Commercial US 1 Road Miles - Lower Keys LCP MIXED USE SUBURBAN COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL/RURAL TOTAL - 14.8 MILES 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 k:4;t4s,-Xia `4:.'rPWP. .-' rr,-r;fft*f#rf MC Sec. 130-46 p pur Theose of Suburban Commercial is to establish areas designed and intended to: - Serve the needs of the local area • - Be established at locations convenient to residents - Reduce trips on US1 0 .r ;. .'�.; - - _ • Rt` tf a.% w„s n �- t tt y.'t�n tr t J.�.. f A. �.g .t'�s ro:ro.a rc' ,,44 x • -r, •t 8•�eS �rat+',.'�_ 3•fJr2,6,'0+:A7 s ��3 sf`- ; ."o srrr s:.4 ?T: r c- • ' 'i{t rs y r i`t'...' 4 .j'+s � s�sr � i��`Y'�. 7 §'t sft t ' - :r' f rs' ,.e s..: y. i sus �f�i�r�.t'SS'� � ��f"..��":-Y r.4'>.t S' tl.'I+CQ- ..F"' :�E f . � • . - Residential Density - County 30 25 20 15 10 0 — IN ill III SR IS SC UR UC MU ■ Residential Density As of Right Residential Density Affordable AHAC Recommendation 30 25 20 15 10 SR IS SC UR UC MU ■ As of Right Affordable Goal 109 Goal 109 Recommendation 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 _ SR IS SC UR UC MU ■ Residential Density As of Right Residential Density Affordable Residential Density Goal 109 Maximum Residential Density 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Key West Marathon Islamorada County Goal 109 Low Medium High Affordable/Workforce Rural Improved Subdivision Living Living Living Unit Unit Unit , Suburban Commercial Urban Living Living Living Living Unit Unit _ Unit Living Unit Unit Living Living Living Unit Unit Unit Commercial Commercial Living Living Living Unit Unit Unit DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY , NAVAL AIR STATION I��' PO BOX 9001 • KEY WEST FL 330409001 11000 Ser PR712/032 25 Jan 19 Ms. Cheryl Cioffari Monroe County Planning& Environmental Resources Dept. 2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 400 Marathon, FL 33050 Dear Ms. Cioffari, This letter is prepared in response to Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment: Goal 109(File 2018-010). We have reviewed the proposed amendment, and appreciate Monroe County's critical need for affordable workforce housing. Pursuant to the 2018 Air Installations Compatible Use Zones(AICUZ) Study, Naval Air Station, Key West does not support any increased residential density in high noise areas 65DNL and above. Per Table 7-1 of the 2018 AICUZ Study(Enclosure 1), residential use is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74. The absence of viable alternative development options should be determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to approvals indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be met if development were prohibited in these zones. Where the community determines that these uses must be allowed, measures to achieve an outdoor to indoor Noise Level Reduction(NLR) of at least 25dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30dB in DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into building codes and be in individual approvals; for transient housing a NLR of at least 35dB should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. We look forward to continue coordination on the proposed text amendment. My point of contact is my Community Planning Liaison Officer, Ms. Ashley Monnier, she can be reached at COMM: (305) 293-2633 or via e-mail: ashley.monnier(c�navy.mil. Sincerely, B. J. BAKER Captain, U.S. Navy Commanding Officer Enclosure: (1) AICUZ Table 7-1 Copy to: Emily Schemper, Acting Senior Director of Planning and Environmental Resources, Monroe County FINAL Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 z75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 10 Residential 11 Household units NA NA NA Y Y1 N28 N28 NI N 1 1.1 1 Single units;detached N N Y2 Y Y' N28 N78 N N 1 1.12 Single units;semidetached N N N Y Y' N28 N28 N N 11.13 Single units;attached row N N N Y Y' N28 N28 N N 11.21 Two units;side-by-side N N N Y Y' N?8 N28 N N 1 1.22 Two units;one above the other N N N Y Y' N28 N28 N N 1 1.31 Apartments;walk up N N N Y Y' N28 N28 N N 1 1.32 Apartments;elevator N N N Y Y' N28 N28 N N 1 2 Group quarters N N N Y Y1 N28 N28 N N 13 Residential hotels N N N Y Y1 N28 N28 N N 14 Mobile home parks or courts N N N Y Y' N N N N 15 Transient lodgings N N N Y Y' N28 N28 NG8 N 16 Other residential N N N Y Y' N28 N28 N N 20 Manufacturing3 1 21 Food and kindred products;manufacturing N N Y4 Y Y Y y29 Y3o y31 22 Textile mill products;manufacturing N N Y4 Y Y Y Y20 Y3o y3' 23 Apparel and other finished products; products made from fabrics,leather and N N N Y Y Y Y29 Y30 Y3I similar materials;manufacturing 24 Lumber and wood products(except N Y5 YS Y Y Y Y29 Y3o Y31 furniture);manufacturing 25 Furniture and fixtures;manufacturing N Y5 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o yai 26 Paper and allied products;manufacturing N Y5 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o Y31 27 Printing,publishing,and allied industries N Y5 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o Y31 7.Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-5 Enclosure (1) Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study FINAL TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 28 Chemicals and allied products; N N N Y Y Y Y 29 3U Y Y 31 manufacturing 29 Petroleum refining and related industries N N N Y Y Y Y29 y3o y31 30 Manufacturing(continued)3 31 Rubber and misc. plastic products; N N N Y Y Y Y29 Y30 y31 manufacturing 32 Stone,clay,and glass products; N N Y4 Y Y y y29 Y3o Y31 manufacturing 33 Primary metal products;manufacturing N N Y4 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o y31 34 Fabricated metal products;manufacturing N N Y4 Y Y Y Y2o y30 Y3' 35 Professional,scientific,and controlling instruments;photographic and optical N N N Y Y Y 25 30 N goods; watches and clocks 39 Miscellaneous manufacturing N Y5 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o y31 40 Transportation,communication and utilities°•7 41 Railroad,rapid rail transit,and street N Y 5• Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y30 y31 railway transportation 42 Motor vehicle transportation N Y 5.7 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y30 Y3i 43 Aircraft transportation N Y 5.7 Y5 Y Y y Y29 Y3o y31 44 Marine craft transportation N Y 5.7 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y30 Y31 45 Highway and street right-of-way N Y 5.7 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 Y3o y31 46 Automobile parking N Y 5,7 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 y30 y31 47 Communication N Y 5,7 Y5 Y Y Y 2532 3032 N 48 Utilities N Y 5,7 Y5 Y Y Y Y29 y30 y31 485 Solid waste disposal(landfills,incineration, N N N Y Y NA NA NA NA etc.) 7. Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-6 FINAL Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 Z75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 49 Other transportation,communication,and N Y 7 Y7 Y Y Y 2532 30'2 N utilities 50 Trade 51 Wholesale trade N Y5 Y5 Y Y Y y29 Y30 y31 52 Retail trade—building materials, N ye YA Y Y Y Y?° Y10 Y31 hardware,and farm equipment 53 Retail trade'°—shopping centers,home improvement store,discount club, N N Y9 Y Y Y 25 30 N electronics superstore 54 Retail trade—food N N Y" Y Y Y 25 30 N 55 Retail trade—automotive,marine craft, N Y12 Y'2 Y Y Y 25 30 N aircraft,and accessories 56 Retail trade—apparel and accessories N N Y13 Y Y Y 25 30 N 57 Retail trade—furniture,home furnishings, N N Y13 Y Y Y 25 30 N and equipment 58 Retail trade—eating and drinking N N N Y Y Y 25 30 N establishments 59 Other retail trade N N Y9 Y Y Y 25 30 N 60 Services" 61 Finance,insurance,and real estate services N N vs Y Y Y 25 30 N 62 Personal services N N Y16 Y Y Y 25 30 N 62.4 Cemeteries N Y17 Y17 Y Y Y y29 Y30 Y 31,37 63 Business services(credit reporting;mail, N N Yle Y Y Y 25 30 N stenographic reproduction;advertising) 63.7 Warehousing and storage services N Y19 Yi9 Y Y Y Y79 Y30 Y31 64 Repair services N Y20 Y?0 Y Y Y Y29 Y30 Y31 65 Professional services N N Y1° Y Y Y 25 30 N 7.Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-7 >1 _ « « m ow w w > w w w w w w v 0, 0, C) - o < = a CT > Ui _ -I I~ ~ o k � c \ • ■ s co ± ��§ § I g � \ / 0 0 ƒ \ @ \ m / / z I ,a 2 (3 » ; ; f " § & ? - \ 0 § t z z S. \ \ ) - S. # ;* 2I E { G a a2 ; ) a / ! o ( w a 0 f z / § , 2 0 { 0 , E a $ ; § - a , , o E ] _ - IS E, $ E a 1 i = 2 2 4 2 § ® - % | 7 I = ` » / Z 4I ; f f 3 ƒ co 2 0 a °7. » j ƒ FE 6 E ® § $ \ q { > C 1« E C ! a - � - z , = J E - c & ƒ \ ƒ i / \ ) \ 7 - 2 % g } \ { 2 c q ƒ� o _ , ( g ! m $ ( § ® n 2 * » _ n & § § ) \ s % \ - § ƒ z ) 0 * Io n ; « _ o - i k \ / \ ; $ \ \ ( \ / ƒ a \ \ % ± m / E \ § Q � & ( o " / > { § 3 o - , 7 § \ § - \ 3 ' ƒ J ƒ o E e ƒ . . a - 2 ƒ - A \ NInn n = z z « z z z z z ZZZZZZ z z z z z z 2 m - m72 o . k \ a. § f \ -< > 0 Z e j t z z zz z . z / z z ' z z \ z z ; - ? \ { § ` \ M - ~ ~ _ § w ƒ S -< % -< * 2 . \ . / z / « ZZZ j z } \ Z Z in -< -< -< a a a -< -< -< -< -< -< -< -< x -< -< -< -< -< z § § 71 N a 0 Z « ± % % ± « ± 3 3 f ® « 2 2 2+ O. } } } - j \ \ - / z % -< j S « 9 \ j % 2 \ � z , % 0 N -< \ -< \ -< -< § a \ z § z z t § 4 % G } W 2 rt ) / % IV ) z j z z z o z ZZZZZZ o z % W z z 7 \ § t m Iv o \ -< 0 § % y z * z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z 7 J -n w w w CO Z I FINAL Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO <75 >_75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 83 Forestry activities25 N Y24 Y24 Y Y Y34 y3s y36 y36.37 84 Fishing adivities2° N26 Y24 ®111.11. Y Y Y Y 85 Mining activities N Y24 Y24 Y Y Y Y Y 89 Other resource production and extraction N Y24 Y Y Y Y 90 Other Eli MIMI 91 Undeveloped Land Y Y NA NA NA NA NA NA 93 Water areas N2' N" N77 NA NA NA NA NA NA Adapted from OPNAVINST 11010.36.0(Navy 2008). Notes: 1. A"Yes"or a"No"designation for compatible land use is to be used only for general comparison.Within each,uses exist where further evaluation may be needed in each category as to whether it is clearly compatible,normally compatible,or not compatible due to the variation of densities of people and structures.In order to assist installations and local governments,general suggestions as to Federal Aviation Regulations(FARs)are provided as a guide to densities in some categories.In general,land-use restrictions which limit commercial,services,or industrial buildings or structure occupants to 25 per acre in APZ 1 and 50 per acre in APZ 2 ore the range of occupancy levels,including employees,considered to be low density.Outside events should normally be limited to assemblies of not more than 25 people per acre in APZ 1,and Maximum(MAX) assemblies of 50 people per acre in APZ 2. 2. The suggested maximum density for detached single-family housing is 1 to 2 dwelling units per acre(Du/Ac).In a Planned Unit Development(PUD)of single-family detached units where clustered housing development results in large open areas,this density could possibly be increased,provided the amount of surface area covered by structures does not exceed 20%of the PUD total area.PUD encourages clustered development that leaves large open areas. 3. Other factors to be considered:Labor intensity,structural coverage,explosive characteristics,air pollution,electronic interference with aircraft,height of structures,and potential glare to pilots. 4. Maximum FAR of 0.56 in APZ 2. 5. Maximum FAR of 0.28 in APZ 1 and 0.56 in APZ 2. 6. No structures(except airfield lighting),buildings,or aboveground utility/communications lines should normally be located in clear zone areas on or off the installation.The clear zone is subject to severe restrictions.See UFC 3-260-01 "Airfield and Heliport Planning&Design"dated 10 November 2001 for specific design details. 7. No passenger terminals and no major aboveground transmission lines in APZ I. 8. Within SLUCM Code 52,Max FARs for lumber yards(SLUCM Code 521)ore 0.20 in APZ 1 and 0.40 in APZ 2.For hardware/paint and farm equipment stores,SLUCM Code 525,the Max FARs are 0.12 In APZ 1 and 0.24 in APZ 2. 9. Maximum FAR of 0.16 in APZ 2. 10. A shopping center is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned,developed,owned,or managed as a unit.Shopping center types include strip, neighborhood,community,regional,and super regional facilities anchored by small businesses,supermarket or drug store,discount retailer,department store,or several department stores,respectively.Included in this category are such uses as big box discount and electronics superstores.The Max recommended FAR for SLUCM 53 should be applied to the gross leasable area of the shopping center rather than attempting to use other recommended FARs under"Retail"or"Trade." 11. Maximum FAR of 0.24 in APZ 2. 12. Maximum FAR of 0.14 in APZ 1 and 0.28 in APZ 2. 7. Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-9 Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study FINAL TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO<75 Z75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 13.Maximum FAR of 0.28 in APZ 2. 1 4. Low intensity office uses only.Accessory uses such as meeting places,auditoriums,etc.,are not recommended. 1 5. Maximum FAR of 0.22 for"General Office/Office pork"In APZ 2. 16. Office uses only.Maximum FAR of 0.22 in APZ 2. 17. No chapels are allowed within APZ 1 or APZ 2. 1 8. Maximum FAR of 0.22 in APZ 2. 1 9. Maximum FAR of 1.0 in APZ 1 and 2.0 in APZ 2. 20. Maximum FAR of 0.11 in APZ 1 and 0.22 in APZ 2. 21. Facilities must be low intensity and provide no tot lots,etc.Facilities such as clubhouses,meeting places,auditoriums,large classes,etc.,are not recommended. 22. Includes livestock grazing but excludes feedlots and intensive animal husbandry.Activities that attract concentrations of birds creating a hazard to aircraft operations should be excluded. 23. Includes feedlots and intensive animal husbandry. 24. Maximum FAR of 0.28 in APZ 1 and 0.56 in APZ 2.No activity that produces smoke or glare or involves explosives. 25. Lumber and timber products removed due to establishment,expansion,or maintenance of clear zones will be disposed of in accordance with appropriate DoD Natural Resources Instructions. 26. Controlled hunting and fishing may be permitted for the purpose of wildlife management. 27. Naturally occurring water features(e.g.,rivers,lakes,streams,wetlands)ore compatible. 28.a. Although local conditions regarding the need for housing may require residential use in these tones,residential use is discouraged in DNL 65-69 and strongly discouraged in DNL 70-74.The absence of viable alternative development options should be determined and an evaluation should be conducted locally prior to approvals indicating that a demonstrated community need for the residential use would not be met if development were prohibited in these zones. b. Where the community determines that residential uses must be allowed,measures to achieve outdoor to indoor NLR of at least 25 dB in DNL 65-69 and NLR of 30 dB DNL 70-74 should be incorporated into building codes and be in individual approvals;for transient housing a NLR of at least 35 dB should be incorporated in DNL 75-79. c. Normal permanent construction can be expected to provide an NLR of 20 dB;thus,the reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10,or 15 dB over standard construction and normally assume mechanical ventilation,upgraded sound transmission class ratings in windows and doors and closed windows year round.Additional consideration should be given to modifying NLR levels based on peak noise levels or vibrations. d. NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems.However,building location and site planning,design,and use of berms and barriers can help mitigate outdoor exposure,particularly from ground level sources.Measures that reduce noise at a site should be used wherever practical in preference to measures which only protect interior spaces. 29. Measures to achieve an NLR of 25 must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received,office areas,noise sensitive areas,or where the normal noise level is low. 30. Measures to achieve an NLR of 30 must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received,office areas,noise sensitive areas,or where the normal noise level is low. 31. Measures to achieve an NLR of 35 must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received,office areas,noise sensitive areas,or where the normal noise level is low. 32. If the project or proposed development is noise sensitive,use indicated NLR;if not,land use is compatible without NLR. 33. Land use compatible provided special sound reinforcement systems are installed. 34. Residential buildings require an NLR of 25. 35. Residential buildings require an NLR of 30. 36. Residential buildings not permitted. 7.Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-10 FINAL Naval Air Station Key West Air Installations Compatible Use Zones Study TABLE 7-1 LAND USE COMPATIBILITY RECOMMENDATIONS NOISE LEVELS LAND USE ACCIDENT POTENTIAL ZONES' NOISE ZONE 1 NOISE ZONE 2 NOISE ZONE 3 SLUCM CLEAR <55 55 TO 64 65 TO 69 70 TO<75 z75 TO 79 80 TO 84 NO. NAME ZONE APZ I APZ II DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL DNL 37. Land-use not recommended,but if the community decides use is necessary,hearing protection devices should be worn. Key: Y(Yes) = Land use and related structures compatible without restrictions. N(No) = Land use and related structures ore not compatible and should be prohibited. _ (Yes with restrictions)The land use and related structures are generally compatible.However,see notes indicated by superscript. N. = (No with exceptions)The land use and related structures are generally incompatible.However,see notes indicated by superscript. SLUCM = Standard Land Use Coding Manual,U.S.Department of Transportation. NA = Not Applicable(no data available for that category). FAR = (Floor Area Ratio)A floor area ratio is the ratio between the square feet of floor area of the building and the site area.It is customarily used to measure non- residential intensities. Du/Ac = (Dwelling Units per Acre)=This metric is customarily used to measure residential densities. DNL = Day-night average sound level. Len = Mothematical symbol for DNL. CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level(normally within a very small decibel difference of DNL). NLR = (Noise-Level Reduction)=NLR(outdoor to indoor)to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation into the design and construction of the structure. 25,30,or 35= The numbers refer to NLR levels.Land use and related structures generally compatible however,measures to achieve NLR of 25,30,or 35 must be incorporated into design and construction of structure.However,measures to achieve an overall noise reduction do not necessarily solve noise difficulties outside the structure and additional evaluation is warranted.Also,see notes indicated by superscripts where they appear with one of these numbers. 7.Land Use Compatibility Analysis and Recommendations Page 7-1 1