Item R09 R.9
G BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
County of Monroe Mayor Sylvia Murphy,District 5
The Florida Keys l'U � � Mayor Pro Tern Danny Kolhage,District 1
�pw° Michelle Coldiron,District 2
Heather Carruthers,District 3
David Rice,District 4
County Commission Meeting
October 16, 2019
Agenda Item Number: R.9
Agenda Item Summary #6106
BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Planning/Environmental Resources
TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Cheryl Cioffari (305) 289-2506
1:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing regarding adoption of an ordinance by the
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners amending Policy 101.5.25 of the 2030 Monroe
County Comprehensive Plan to address density issues on parcels of land within the residential
medium (RM) Future Land Use Map category and the Improved Subdivision (IS) zoning district that
are not platted lots.
ITEM BACKGROUND:
The Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department is proposing amendments to
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as directed by the BOCC on August 15, 2018, to amend Policy
101.5.25 to address density issues on parcels of land, that are not platted lots, within the Residential
Medium (RM) Future Land Use Map category and the Improved Subdivision (IS) zoning district.
Monroe County's current adopted Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code (LDC) have
allocated density requirements that require a parcel to be a duly recorded lot on a plat approved by
the County in order to develop a single family residential dwelling unit within the RM FLUM and IS
zoning district.
The majority of parcels within IS zoning districts and with RM FLUM designations are platted lots
within subdivisions identified on plats approved by the County. However, there are a number of
parcels with RM FLUM and IS zoning designations that were created without plat approval or that
contain land included on a plat but only identified as a "tract" or for some other purpose; such
parcels do not meet the definition of "lot." Lot means a duly recorded lot as shown on a plat
approved by the County. (Also described as platted lot [Ref. LDC Section 101-1]. The legal
descriptions for a number of these parcels show that the property is located within a Tract of land
included in a duly recorded plat, but these were not divided into "lots" at the time of the plat. In
some cases, these tracts of land were subsequently divided into multiple parcels that were never
shown as lots or parcels on a plat, re-plat, or amended plat approved by the County and recorded by
the Clerk of Court's office. Such parcels do not meet the definition of"lot" and therefore have no
density assigned to them. In addition, they may be in violation of LDC 110-96(a) depending on the
terms of conveyance.
Packet Pg. 2540
R.9
Sec. 110-96. -Plat Approval and Recording Required.
(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and(c) of this section,plat approval shall be required
for:
(1) The division of a parcel of land into three or more parcels of land;
(2) The division of a parcel of land into two parcels of land where the land involved in the
division was previously divided without plat approval; or
(3) The division of a parcel of land into two parcels of land where the disclosure statement
required under subsection (e) of this section is not attached to the conveyance.
The majority of these parcels were designated IS with the adoption of the land use district map in
1986 and RM with the adoption of the FLUM in 1993 (effective 1997).
Community Meeting and Public Participation
In accordance with LDC Section 102-159(b)(3), a Community Meeting for the Comprehensive Plan
and Land Development Code text amendments was held on November 27, 2018 in Marathon and
provided for public input. Issues identified by the public at the meeting included:
• "current configuration" of parcels and how strict the date/location of parcel lines would be
• Paved roads —what constitutes a paved road
• ROGO process for owners who previously submitted applications under the current code
Development Review Committee and Public Input
At a regular meeting held on January 15, 2019, the Development Review Committee (DRC)
considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment and corresponding Land
Development text amendment, and provided for public comment.
Planning Commission and Public Input
On February 27, 2019, at a regular public meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
regarding the proposed amendment and provided for public comment. The Planning Commission
considered the application, the staff report, and the comments from the public in their
discussion, and recommended approval with changes, as discussed at the public hearing, of the
proposed CP text amendment (Resolution P15-19). The PC recommended the selection of Option
A (which would not require use of a TDR) as presented in the staff report dated February 12, 2019,
with the following changes:
1. Edit (n) 1) as follows:
The parcel boundaries must have been established in their current configuration prior to
September 15,1986, except for de minimis changes (no more than 10% of the parcel's
ht4aiid area) to the parcel boundaries made after September 15, 1986, but prior to
44August 12, 1992, which did not create another buildable parcel ek de minimis
and
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS
Staff has reviewed the language presented to the BOCC at the August 15, 2018 meeting and the
direction they gave to proceed with the amendments without the requirement for a TDR. Presented
here are two options, both of which contain the following criteria:
Packet Pg. 2541
R.9
1) The parcel boundaries must have been established in their current configuration prior
to September 15,1986, except for de minimis changes (no more than 10% of the parcel's
area) to the parcel boundaries made after September 15, 1986, but prior to August 12,
1992, which did not create another buildable parcel;
2) The applicant must provide sufficient evidence that the parcel boundaries were
established before September 15, 1986 (such as one or more of the following: boundary
survey, deed, etc.);
3) The parcel may not be identified for any other use or purpose on a plat (e.g., "park,"
"common area," etc.);
4) The subject parcel may not be a fractional portion of a platted lot;
5) The subject parcel must have a minimum of 2,000 sf of upland that is not reserved as
an access easement or designated purpose other than residential use;
6) The parcel must have a Tier designation of Tier III;
7) The subject parcel must include all infrastructure (potable water, adequate wastewater
treatment and disposal wastewater meeting adopted LOS,paved roads, etc.); and
8) The subject parcel must comply with Policy 301.2.5 of the Comprehensive Plan
regarding legal access.
Proposed Amendment:
Deletions are sti44eti this�t�)Hgli.; additions are shown in uu (JerHne(., changes proposed by staff after
BOCC direction are shown in per:
Policy 101.5.25
Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards for the future land use
categories, which are shown on the FLUM and described in Policies 101.5.1101.5.20. [F.S. §
163.3177 6 a l.]
Future Land Use Densities and Intensities
Residential Nonresidential
Maximum Minimum
Future Land Use Category Maximum Open Space
Allocated Densi Net Density Intensity
��
and Corresponding Zoning �a�ro� ty Ratio
(per upland acre) (per buildable (floor area
acre) ratio)
Agriculture/Aquaculture
(A)(a) 0 du N/A Per
025
(no directly corresponding 0 rooms/spaces N/A . underlying
zoning) zoning
Airport(AD) 0 du N/A
(AD zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.10 0.20
Commercial(COMM) 0 du N/A 0.15 0.50 0.20
(C1 and C2 zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A
Conservation(C) 0 du N/A
(CD zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.05 0.90
Education(E)(a) 0 du N/A Per
(no directly corresponding 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.30 underlying
zoning) zoning
Packet Pg. 2542
R.9
Industrial(I) 1 du 2 du
0.25-0.60 0.20
(I and MI zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A
Institutional(INS)(a) 0 du N/A Per
(no directly corresponding 15 rooms/spaces 24 0.30 underlying
zoning) rooms/spaces zoning
Mainland Native (MN) 0.01 du N/A 0.95-0.99
(MN zoning) 2 spaces(e) N/A 0.03
Military(M) 6 du 12 du
(MF zoning) 10 rooms/spaces 20 0.30-0.50 0.20
rooms/spaces
2 du(MI) 0.10-0.45
1 du 6-18 du(SC) (SC,UC,DR
(DR,MU,MI)
Mixed Use/Commercial 3 du(SC) 12 du(UC) MU)
(MC)OW 6 du(UC) 12-18 du
(SC,UC,DR,RV,MU Commercial Apartments (MU)(`' <2 500 SF
and MI zoning) (RV)(1) 18 du(DR) (RV) 0.20
5-15 rooms/spaces 10-25 0.30-0.60
rooms/spaces (MI)
1 du 12 du(CFA,
Mixed Use/Commercial (CFSD-20)c) CFSD)
Fishing(MCF)0 3 du(CFA, all other CFSD)
(CFA, CFV, CFSD 1 du/lot(CFV) N/A(CFV)
0.25-0.40 0.20
zoning)
0 rooms/spaces N/A
Preservation(P)(a) 0 du N/A
(P zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0 1.00
Public Buildings/Lands 0 du N/A Per
(PB)(a)
(no directly corresponding 0.30 underlying
0 rooms/spaces N/A zoning
zoning)
Public Facilities(PF)(a) 0 du N/A Per
(no directly corresponding 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.30 underlying
zoning) zoning
Recreation(R) 0 du N/A
0.20 0.90
(PR zoning) 2 rooms/spaces N/A
Residential Conservation 0-0.10 du(OS)
(RC) 0.25 du(NA) N/AN/A 0-0.20 0.95
(OS and NA zoning) 0 rooms/spaces
3 du(SR-L)
0.50 du 5 du(SR)
Residential Low(RL) or 0.50(SR,
(SS SR and SR-L 1 du/lot(SR) 0.25 SR-L)
zoning) N/A(SS) 0.80(SS)
0 rooms/spaces
N/A
Residential Medium(RM) 1 du/lot(IS, IS-V,IS-M)-�2E N/A
(IS IS-V,IS-M ..) and i rou 8, ()pa°rccl)
Packet Pg. 2543
R.9
IS-D 0)zoning) 2 du/lot(IS-D)
0 rooms/spaces N/A 0 0.20
12-25 du
6 du(UR) (UR)WN/A(IS-D,
Residential High(RH) Idu/lot(URM,URM-L) URM
(IS-D 0),URM,URM-L 2 du/lot(IS-D)
and UR zoning) URM-L)
0-10 rooms/spaces 0 0.20
0-20
rooms/spaces
Notes:
(a) The allocated densities for submerged lands, salt ponds, freshwater ponds, and mangroves
shall be 0 and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available.
(b) The Maximum Net Density is the maximum density allowable with the use of TDRs, or for
qualifying affordable housing development. TDRs can be utilized to attain the density between the
allocated density standard up to the maximum net density standard. Deed restricted affordable
dwelling units may be built up to the maximum net density without the use of TDRs. "N/A" means
that maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. Buildable acres means the portion of a
parcel of land that is developable and is not required open space.
(c) Additional open space requirements may apply based on environmental protection criteria; in
these cases,the most restrictive requirement shall apply.
(d) Future land use categories of Agriculture/Aquaculture, Education, Institutional,Preservation,
Public Buildings/Lands, and Public Facilities,which have no directly corresponding zoning, may
be used with new or existing zoning districts as appropriate.
(e) Within the Mainland Native future land use district, campground spaces and nonresidential
buildings shall only be permitted for educational,research or sanitary purposes.
(f) For properties consisting of hammocks,pinelands or disturbed wetlands within the Mixed Use/
Commercial and Mixed Use/Commercial Fishing future land use categories, the maximum floor
area ratio shall be 0.10 and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available.
(g) A mixture of uses shall be maintained for parcels designated as MI zoning district that are
within the MC future land use category. Working waterfront and water dependent uses, such as
marina, fish house/market,boat repair,boat building,boat storage, or other similar uses, shall
comprise a minimum of 35% of the upland area of the property, adjacent to the shoreline,pursuant
to Policy 101.5.6.
(h) In the RV zoning district, commercial apartments shall be allowed,not to exceed 10% of total
spaces allowed or in existence on the site,whichever is less.
(i) The allocated density for the CFSD-20 zoning district(Little Torch Key) shall be 1 dwelling
unit per acre, or 1 dwelling unit per parcel for those parcels existing as of September 15, 1986,
whichever is less, and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. Residential density
shall be allowed in addition to the permitted nonresidential uses and intensity(i.e., density and
intensity shall not be counted cumulatively).
(j) Within IS subdivisions with primarily single family residential units, IS-D zoning may be used
with a RM future land use designation for platted lots which have a duplex that was lawfully
established prior to September 15, 1986.
(k) The maximum net density shall be 25 du/buildable acre for the UR zoning district and shall be
18 du/buildable acre for the MU and SC zoning district for development where all units are deed
restricted affordable dwelling units. For the UR zoning district market rate housing may be
developed as part of an affordable or employee housing project with a maximum net density not
Packet Pg. 2544
R.9
exceeding 18 du/buildable acre.
(1) Vessels,including live-aboard vessels, or associated wet slips are not considered dwelling
units and do not count when calculating density.
(m) Within the Residential Low future land use category, the maximum net density for platted
lots of less than 0.40 gross acres within the SR zoning district shall be I dwelling unit per platted
lot,provided all of the following conditions are met:
1) The parcel must be one full platted lot shown on a plat approved by the County and duly
recorded prior to January 2, 1996;
2) The platted lot may not be identified for any other use or purpose on the plat(e.g., "park,"
"common area," etc.);
3) The platted lot must have a Tier designation of Tier III;
4) Notwithstanding Policy 101.13.2, the maximum net density may only be reached with the
transfer of one (1) full TDR to the SR lot,regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated
density assigned to it;
5) Notwithstanding Policy 101.13.2, the maximum net density may only be reached with the
transfer of one (1) full TDR to the SR lot,regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated
density assigned to it;
6) The TDR must meet all requirements and procedures specified in Policy 101.13.3 and Section
130-160 of the Land Development Code;
7) TDRs under this provision may not be transferred into noise zones of 65 DNL or greater; and
8) 7) The subject parcel must comply with Policy 301.2.5 regarding legal access.
(aa).. itjaiaa the....q~esidejitiaall Medium I aiid use c ateg STY, the allocated dejisity �sjt iji the I .
vuuaaiaa3dist is shaallll...[) q &N, llll�aa8..uaaa�� q�y,�°q�at°a°ell go,p2jj:ell� !Ii2 meet all oi'tae kfflp �sI'll8,
OPaaagitiojis
q) [b1 bra uaaadaaries must have Iweia es aal-Aished ill their c uaru°em cojif uaM the !' 121i �l°.:��;�.
emeau bea° q L q 2 (, excer�9 fog de minimis chap no mope than 10`%z ofthe u�arcel's areab o
the parcel b���ndaales made afteaer�teml�ea ll 5 ...11986 lout aia to Rust ll2 ll992z which dial.
11ol c .e.ale all tbel b l a 1
/2) Ek as pll caaaat must 121°�pw de suq"qicieaa:l evidejice that the 12�.1,cell [)ouauadaaries vs,ere..es aal-rlli.�shed
lwi'o e lluuv��iaaa bru uaj]d2l°y �ujjey, deed,
eq�pe2alre�° q 1986 1a� ��aae g;��°a�ua���°1 oi't e k
eta:. .
q q:qa u24ucd uuuaa �Dot q1(' Iipu u1nu1� oijµcj use o; u211uiIro. apuu...y12UJ� e W d<u
cazuuuu,uwp aica cij,.,
1 q 1.'
y� q�1�e �ualrw�l�°� q�aa�°a,;�ll rruaaay,aauu� lr�:..aa grra°��°�uuaaaall 1„��u�°��uuaa u�;,uq"aa �lla1����N lluu.,
5 fhe su17 cct paa ce1 must have a mrnimum f 2z000 sf of Upland that is not resea-ved as an
access.easement oa desi�napu�°posc �1hea tl��n aesralentral.:�nse>
...
afaa auuaa uuq". o
,Fier 111.;
jill qua jea gl'2llceV must iaaa:llu de all ill g1°sastf°uyLu f,e
treaatmeaaa aaua;j disgfuulaall vs,aa tevVaaer nieepijuf aid m!ed LQ , e��.= eHS:egA 12aave l aaiid
f ) q q q Y y.. e 1 � ..
y q�ipe �ua1�r°�a.°� ��u�°a°ci uuauuyl a.°uuuua�j �,a-u�iu,.q uuiva.° y�bq.�,.y uuq"�iu�° uuuua�u�°ciucua�uve q i��� u�°e���u�°;Nuuag
iu ai
>k>k>k>k>k
Staff analysis of parcels within the IS zoning district indicates that there may be approximately 57
privately-owned vacant parcels (not qualifying as "lots") that would meet the criteria of the
proposed amendment. The number of parcels within this scenario may vary as property owners
have (and continue to) split and combine properties without County Planning & Environmental
Packet Pg. 2545
R.9
Resources Department knowledge (nor plat approval). If this amendment is adopted, each parcel
shall be individually evaluated at the time of an application for development with the criteria
established. Property owners must provide sufficient evidence that the parcel was created prior to
September 15, 1986.
For further reference, attached to this agenda item is a staff report prepared in 2015 regarding the
Planning Commission Appeal of a building permit denial for a non-platted parcel in the Twin Lakes
neighborhood in Key Largo. The staff report includes additional history and analysis of the
requirements for platting within the Monroe County Code and Florida Statutes.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
On May 22, 2019, at a regularly scheduled meeting, the BOCC held a public hearing to consider the
transmittal of the proposed text amendment, considered the staff report, and provided for public
comment and public participation in accordance with the requirements of state law and the
procedures adoption for public participation in the planning process. The BOCC was presented with
two options and selected Option A —which did not require a TDR. The BOCC adopted Resolution
155-2019 transmitting the proposed amendment to the State Land Planning Agency (DEO) for
review and comment.
Following their review of the proposed amendment, DEO issued an Objections, Recommendations
and Comments (ORC) report on August 22, 2019 (attached). The ORC report did not identify any
objections, recommendations or comments. The County has 180 days from the date of receipt of the
ORC to adopt the proposed amendment, adopt the amendment with changes or not adopt the
amendment.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
n/a
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed amendment.
DOCUMENTATION:
2018-196 BOCC SR 10.16.19
2018-196_Ordinance
Map Analysis -Potentially Eligible Parcels
Related 2015 Staff Report regarding appeal
Resolution 155-2019
2018-196 MONROE CO. 19-03ACSC (ORC)
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Effective Date:
Expiration Date:
Total Dollar Value of Contract:
Packet Pg. 2546
R.9
Total Cost to County:
Current Year Portion:
Budgeted:
Source of Funds:
CPI:
Indirect Costs:
Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts:
Revenue Producing: If yes, amount:
Grant:
County Match:
Insurance Required:
Additional Details:
REVIEWED BY:
Emily Schemper Completed 09/25/2019 10:12 AM
Steve Williams Completed 09/25/2019 11:36 AM
Maureen Proffitt Completed 10/01/2019 8:44 AM
Assistant County Administrator Christine Hurley Completed
10/01/2019 8:48 AM
Budget and Finance Completed 10/01/2019 3:25 PM
Maria Slavik Completed 10/01/2019 3:42 PM
Kathy Peters Completed 10/01/2019 4:35 PM
Board of County Commissioners Pending 10/16/2019 9:00 AM
Packet Pg. 2547
2
3 °
4
5 MEMORANDUM
6 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
e
7 Go
CD 04
9 To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (D
10
11 Through: Emily Schemper, AICP, CFM, Senior Director of Planning and Environmental
12 Resources
13
14 From: Cheryl Cioffari, AICP, Assistant Director of Planning C
15
16 Date: September 20, 2019
e
17
18 Subject: An ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners amending Policy 0
19 101.5.25 of the 2030 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan to address density issues on CL
20 parcels of land within the residential medium (RM) Future Land Use Map category and
21 the Improved Subdivision (IS) zoning district that are not platted lots. (File 42018-196)
22 a
23 Meeting: October 16, 2019 <
24 r-
CL
25 I. REQUEST CL
26 E
0
27 The Monroe County Planning & Environmental Resources Department is proposing amendments U
28 to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as directed by the BOCC on August 15, 2018, to amend Policy 7
29 101.5.25 to address density issues on parcels of land,that are not platted lots,within the Residential r-
30 Medium (RM) Future Land Use Map category and the Improved Subdivision (IS) zoning district.
31
32 II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
33
34 On July 26, 2016, the Monroe County Planning Commission (PC) considered an appeal by a 7
35 property owner who had been denied a building permit for a single family residence on an unplatted
36 parcel of land with a Residential Medium (RM) Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation and co
37 within an Improved Subdivision (IS)zoning district based on the density standard of one dwelling U
38 unit per platted lot for the RM and IS districts in the Comprehensive Plan and LDC. The PC denied 0
39 the applicant's appeal.
40
41 On July 18,2018, at their regularly scheduled meeting,the BOCC held a public hearing to consider
42 a request for a Beneficial Use Determination (BUD) and the recommendations of the special N
43 magistrate for a parcel within an IS zoning district and with an RM FLUM, for which a building
44 permit was denied because the property does not constitute a"lot" for purposes of density. E
45
46 The special magistrate had issued a recommendation that the BOCC deny the owner's request for
47 relief under the BUD ordinance. The BOCC denied the applicant's request for relief. The BOCC
48 also directed staff to propose options for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and/or LDC that
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page I of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2548
R.9.a
I would allow owners of parcels that do not constitute a"lot" within the IS zoning district to apply
2 for a single family residence.
3
4 Monroe County's current adopted Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code(LDC)have
5 allocated density requirements that require a parcel to be a duly recorded lot on a plat approved by
6 the County in order to develop a single family residential dwelling unit within the RM FLUM and
7 IS zoning district. 00
8
9 The majority of parcels within IS zoning districts and with RM FLUM designations are platted lots
10 within subdivisions identified on plats approved by the County. However, there are a number of �
11 parcels with RM FLUM and IS zoning designations that were created without plat approval or that
12 contain land included on a plat but only identified as a "tract" or for some other purpose; such
13 parcels do not meet the definition of"lot." The legal descriptions for a number of these parcels
14 show that the property is located within a Tract of land included in a duly recorded plat, but these
15 were not divided into "lots" at the time of the plat. Lot means a duly recorded lot as shown on a
16 plat approved by the County. (Also described as platted lot [Ref. LDC Section 101-1]. In some
17 cases, these tracts of land were subsequently divided into multiple parcels that were never shown z
18 as lots or parcels on a plat, re-plat, or amended plat approved by the County and recorded by the 0
19 Clerk of Court's office. Such parcels do not meet the definition of"lot" and therefore have no
20 density assigned to them. In addition, they may be in violation of LDC 110-96(a) depending on
21 the terms of conveyance.
22 a
23 Sec. 110-96. - Plat Approval and Recording Required.
24 (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and(c) of this section,plat approval shall be required
25 for:
26 (1) The division of a parcel of land into three or more parcels of land;
27 (2) The division of a parcel of land into two parcels of land where the land involved in the
28 division was previously divided without plat approval; or
29 (3) The division of a parcel of land into two parcels of land where the disclosure statement
30 required under subsection (e) of this section is not attached to the conveyance. U,
31
32 The majority of these parcels were designated IS with the adoption of the land use district map in
33 1986 and RM with the adoption of the FLUM in 1993 (effective 1997).
34
35 On July 18,2018, at their regularly scheduled meeting,the BOCC directed staff to propose options
36 for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and/or LDC that would allow owners of parcels that
37 do not constitute a"lot" within the IS zoning district to apply for a single family residence.
38
0
39 On August 15, 2018, at the regularly scheduled meeting BOCC meeting Staff presented options co i
40 for BOCC consideration. Staff s proposal included a requirement that the subject parcels transfer
41 in a Transferable Development Right(TDR). The BOCC directed staff to process text amendments 00
42 to the Comprehensive Plan and LDC that would allow unplatted parcels within the RM FLUM
43 designation and IS zoning district to apply for a ROGO allocation in order to build a single family
44 residence on such a parcel without the use of TDRs.
E
45
46
47
48
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 2 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2549
R.9.a
I Community Meeting and Public Participation
2 In accordance with LDC Section 102-159(b)(3), a Community Meeting for the Comprehensive
3 Plan and Land Development Code text amendments was held on November 27, 2018 in Marathon
4 and provided for public input. Issues identified by the public at the meeting included:
5 • "current configuration" of parcels and how strict the date/location of parcel lines would be
6 • Paved roads —what constitutes a paved road 17
00
Ir-
7 • ROGO process for owners who previously submitted applications under the current code
N
8
9 Development Review Committee and Public Input
10 At a regular meeting held on January 15, 2019, the Development Review Committee (DRC)
11 considered the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment and corresponding Land
12 Development text amendment, and provided for public comment.
13
14 Planning Commission and Public Input
15 On February 27,2019, at a regular public meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing
16 regarding the proposed amendment and provided for public comment. The Planning Commission
17 considered the application, the staff report, and the comments from the public in their 0
18 discussion, and recommended approval with changes, as discussed at the public hearing, of a.
19 the proposed CP text amendment (Resolution P15-19). The PC recommended the selection of 0
20 Option A (which would not require use of a TDR) as presented in the staff report dated February
21 12, 2019, with the following changes:
22 1. Edit (n) 1) as follows: E
23 The parcel boundaries must have been established in their current configuration prior to
24 September 15,1986, except for de minimis changes(no more than 10%of the parcel's hWlan
25 area) to the parcel boundaries made after September 15, 1986, but prior to Jm"August
0
26 12, 1992, which did not create another buildable parcel. SHek de minimis e'^^ rages f^ •st have �
27 , ,,,,af a in t4 0 1 m e G "nty R t , zeeeo 4• and
28
29 Previous Relevant BOCC Action:
30 On May 22, 2019, at a regularly scheduled meeting, the BOCC held a public hearing to consider W
31 the transmittal of the proposed text amendment, considered the staff report, and provided for public
32 comment and public participation in accordance with the requirements of state law and the
33 procedures adoption for public participation in the planning process. The BOCC was presented
34 with two options and selected Option A — which did not require a TDR. The BOCC adopted
35 Resolution 155-2019 transmitting the proposed amendment to the State Land Planning Agency
36 (DEO) for review and comment.
37 0
38 Following their review of the proposed amendment,DEO issued an Objections,Recommendations
39 and Comments (ORC) report on August 22, 2019 (attached). The ORC report did not identify any 17
00
40 objections, recommendations or comments. The County has 180 days from the date of receipt of
41 the ORC to adopt the proposed amendment, adopt the amendment with changes or not adopt the "'
42 amendment.
as
43
44 III. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AMENDMENTS
45
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 3 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2550
R.9.a
I Deletions are sli•ue<en tlii•migli.; additions are shown in un(
e Hne(j, changes proposed by staff after
2 BOCC direction are shown in per:
3
4 Policy 101.5.25
5 Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards for the future land
6 use categories, which are shown on the FLUM and described in Policies 101.5.1101.5.20.
7 [F.S. § 163.3177(6)(a)l.] 00
cv
Future Land Use Densities and Intensities 2
Residential Nonresidential
Minimum U)
Future Land Use Category Maximum Net Maximum Open Space
and Corresponding Zoning Allocated Density(a) Density(a)(b) Intensity Ratio W
(per upland acre) (per buildable (floor area
acre) ratio) CL
griculture/Aquaculture
(A)(a) 0 du N/A Per
(no directly corresponding 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.25 underlying
zoning) zoning z
0
Airport(AD) 0 du N/A
IL
(AD zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.10 0.20 0
Commercial(COMM) 0 du N/A
(C1 and C2 zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.15-0.50 0.20
Conservation(C) 0 du N/A 0.05 0.90
(CD zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A E
(a'E)
Education( 0 du N/A Per underlying �
(no directly corresponding 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.30 zoning IL
zoning) CL
Industrial(I) 1 du 2 du 0
(I and MI zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.25-0.60 0.20
Institutional(INS)(a) 0 du N/A Per underlying
(no directly corresponding 15 rooms/spaces 24 rooms/spaces 0.30 zoning 0
zoning) U)
Mainland Native(MN) 0.01 du N/A 5:
(MN zoning) 2 spaces(e� N/A 0.03 0.95-0.99
Military (M) 6 du 12 du
(MF zoning) 10 rooms/spaces 20 rooms/spaces 0.30-0.50 0.20
2 du(MI) 0.10-0.45
(DR I du MI) 6-18 du(SC)W (SC,UC,DR,
Mixed Use/Commercial 3 du(SC) 12du18 du
MU)
(MC)0(g) 6 du(UC) (MU)(k) <2,500 SF
(SC,UC,DR,RV,MU and Commercial Apartments 0
I zoning) (RV)(h) 18 du(DR) (RV) 0.20
10 25 0.30 0.60
5 15 rooms/spaces rooms/spaces (MI) °�
1 du 12 du(CFA, C14
(CFSD-20)c) CFSD)
Mixed Use/Commercial 3 du(CFA, all other CFSD)
Fishing (MCF)01 du/lot(CFV) N/A(CFV)
(CFA, CFV, CFSD zoning) 0.25-0.40 0.20
0 rooms/spaces N/A
Preservation(P)(a) 0 du N/A
(P zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0 1.00
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 4 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2551
R.9.a
Public Buildings/Lands
(PB)(a) 0 du N/A Per underlying
(no directly corresponding 0.30 zoning
zoning)
0 rooms/spaces N/A
Public Facilities(PF)(a) 0 du N/A Per underlying
(no directly corresponding 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.30 zoning M
zoning)
Recreation(R) 0 du N/A °-
(PR zoning) 2 rooms/spaces N/A 0.20 0.90
Residential Conservation 0-0.10 du(OS)
(RC) 0.25 du(NA) N/A 0-0.20 0.95
(OS and NA zoning) 0 rooms/spaces
3 du(SR-L)
0.50 du 5 du(SR)
or 0.50(SR, SR-
Residential Low(RL) 1 du/lot(SR) 0.25 L)
CL
(SS SR and SR-L zoning) ����
N/A(SS) 0.80(SS)
0 rooms/spaces
N/A
esidential Medium(RM) 1 d /lot(IDS IS-V,IS-M)_ibt N/A
(IS r'1,IS-V,IS-ML) and IS-D .. G ° "°. ) n`
2 du/lot(IS-D) 0
zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0 0.20
12-25 du(UR)
6 du(U ) �� E
Residential High(RH) Idu/lot(URM,URM-L) N/A(IS-D,
(IS-D 0),URM,URM-L and 2 du/lot(IS-D) URM,
R zoning) URM-L) IL
CL
0-10 rooms/spaces 0-20 0 0.20 E
rooms/spaces
Notes:
(a) The allocated densities for submerged lands, salt ponds, freshwater ponds, and mangroves shall be 0
and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. 0
(b) The Maximum Net Density is the maximum density allowable with the use of TDRs, or for
qualifying affordable housing development. TDRs can be utilized to attain the density between the
allocated density standard up to the maximum net density standard. Deed restricted affordable dwelling
nits may be built up to the maximum net density without the use of TDRs. "N/A" means that maximum
et density bonuses shall not be available. Buildable acres means the portion of a parcel of land that is
developable and is not required open space.
(c) Additional open space requirements may apply based on environmental protection criteria;in these
cases, the most restrictive requirement shall apply.
(d) Future land use categories of Agriculture/Aquaculture, Education, Institutional,Preservation,Public CO
Buildings/Lands, and Public Facilities,which have no directly corresponding zoning, may be used with
new or existing zoning districts as appropriate. 17
00
(e) Within the Mainland Native future land use district, campground spaces and nonresidential buildings
shall only be permitted for educational,research or sanitary purposes. N
(f) For properties consisting of hammocks,pinelands or disturbed wetlands within the Mixed Use/
Commercial and Mixed Use/Commercial Fishing future land use categories,the maximum floor area E
E
ratio shall be 0.10 and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available.
(g) A mixture of uses shall be maintained for parcels designated as MI zoning district that are within the
C future land use category. Working waterfront and water dependent uses, such as marina, fish
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 5 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2552
R.9.a
house/market,boat repair,boat building,boat storage, or other similar uses, shall comprise a minimum of
35% of the upland area of the property, adjacent to the shoreline,pursuant to Policy 101.5.6.
(h) In the RV zoning district, commercial apartments shall be allowed,not to exceed 10% of total spaces
allowed or in existence on the site,whichever is less.
(i) The allocated density for the CFSD-20 zoning district(Little Torch Key) shall be 1 dwelling unit per
acre, or 1 dwelling unit per parcel for those parcels existing as of September 15, 1986,whichever is less,
and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. Residential density shall be allowed in 00
addition to the permitted nonresidential uses and intensity(i.e., density and intensity shall not be counted
cumulatively).
0) Within IS subdivisions with primarily single family residential units, IS-D zoning may be used with a
RM future land use designation for platted lots which have a duplex that was lawfully established prior to
September 15, 1986.
(k) The maximum net density shall be 25 du/buildable acre for the UR zoning district and shall be 18
du/buildable acre for the W and SC zoning district for development where all units are deed restricted
affordable dwelling units. For the UR zoning district market rate housing may be developed as part of an
affordable or employee housing project with a maximum net density not exceeding 18 du/buildable acre.
(1) Vessels,including live-aboard vessels, or associated wet slips are not considered dwelling units and
do not count when calculating density.
(m) Within the Residential Low future land use category, the maximum net density for platted lots of 0
less than 0.40 gross acres within the SR zoning district shall be 1 dwelling unit per platted lot,provided a
all of the following conditions are met: 0
1) The parcel must be one full platted lot shown on a plat approved by the County and duly recorded
prior to January 2, 1996;
2) The platted lot may not be identified for any other use or purpose on the plat(e.g., "park," E
"common area," etc.);
3) The platted lot must have a Tier designation of Tier III;
4) Notwithstanding Policy 101.13.2,the maximum net density may only be reached with the transfer E
E
of one (1) full TDR to the SR lot,regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated density gej
assigned to it;
5) Notwithstanding Policy 101.13.2, the maximum net density may only be reached with the transfer r_
of one (1) full TDR to the SR lot,regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated density
assigned to it;
6) The TDR must meet all requirements and procedures specified in Policy 101.13.3 and Section
130-160 of the Land Development Code;
7) TDRs under this provision may not be transferred into noise zones of 65 DNL or greater; and
8) The subject parcel must comply with Policy 301.2.5 regarding legal access.
(.j]( Withiji the gyesidvaatiaall..Mediaa,m q'ut re llaaaad.:us cat uury., illav 211V �N`a[�d �N„1]a it ysjt aiaa..:the a yuuaaiaa.8 ��
district shallqe��u�° � 1���aaraN��°u�.��uuaaa�;a�ia�����1�r�1�r�����1�r�u��a �N �� all �;�q �llae q�:�llll���,-�aa,f a.°��aa�Nita��aasl'
qarea
�3
vg rya a1 va° upy.,q ➢ ( exca t aor de m�mmis changes ono more than 10`%z oa tf as aa�iuu u �
e q��°ar �u aaa their a:aarreli a:a uaa u
he r�arcl's arabo �i
the aacel l� undaa :es man e aftea...�eptembea ll 5 ll98(�. 1�ut rior to ugus9 12 1992 which did
not create another 1ni1 1�1�1 ::._.r�Cei00
( q.i uat n ust 121,Mde sufficigit evidejice that the pal,ei houiidaries �s,ere esta fished
�vq�ul:v vq��y,rrua�rv�° � , q�➢�;y (�aaa.°ll�aa� ��aac:.���°rrua��t°c ��q"�ll�� q��llll���,-iaa 1���aaaa�Naa�: �aa�°vc::1', �Ncc�N,,c�a.°.(..;.
avuzuuquhc:, a �c E'11 111q� Dol I)c hlca ullp na d �6� anu s: �pll.Bua a use(2. giuun�lu�ro: (2ua arrugaa�...�a .:Mid< 4)
..y.( Ek �aaUv wr°d my he as grr�ac iuuaaaall muAioji.uO'aa 02[!d lluarr.�;
5 The sect paa ce1 manse have a minimum f 2z00�).sC of plane ghat is not reserved as an �
:.. ........ .........
access easement or:desi;�na��nna pose a�lhea fl an a esi:�len�ral:..:use,
a) [k g2aa�s°c] !1a11st llaaave as Tier deli aaaaiiuuaa o Tier 111,.
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 6 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2553
1) [b� 12�1,cel niust ijiclude all ill firastructure �Y�Stewater
treatniem aiid disffidsal WastcWatcr niectijig�W�m!d LQ5, �= 4�HM2!ffi!Yd D:Lld�), ajid
111v mr d M!L!�Mdy y �O 25 oi'the Con1121'eligisive laii fvg�j°dijlg
2
3 00
4 IV. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT
C14
5 .2
6 Monroe County's current adopted Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code (LDC)have iz
U)
7 allocated density requirements that require a parcel to be a duly recorded lot on a plat approved by
8 the County in order to develop a single family residential dwelling unit within an RM FLUM and
9 IS zoning district.
10
11 Per Policy 101.5.3 of the Comprehensive Plan, "the principal purpose of the Residential Medium
12 (RM) future land use category is to recognize those portions of subdivisions that were lawfully W
13 established and improved prior to the adoption of this plan and to define improved subdivisions as Z
14 those lots served by a dedicated and accepted existing roadway, have an approved potable water 0
15 supply, and have sufficient uplands to accommodate the residential uses. Development on vacant 0a.
16 land within this land use category shall be limited to one residential dwelling unit for each such
17 platted lot or parcel which existed on or before January 4, 1996."
18
E
19 The following definitions are provided in the Glossary of the Comprehensive Plan: <
20 0 Buildable Acre means the upland portion of a parcel that is not required open space.
21 Also referred to as Buildable Area. a.
0.
22 0 Plat means an official subdivision approved by the Board of County Commissioners E
0
23 U
24 The maj ority of parcels within IS zoning districts and with RL FLUM designations are platted lots
25 within subdivisions identified on plats approved by the County. However, there are a number of 0
26 parcels with RL FLUM and IS zoning designations that were created without plat approval or that T
27 contain land included on a plat but only identified as a "tract" or for some other purpose; such
28 parcels do not meet the definition of"lot." The legal descriptions for some of these parcels do not
29 reference a plat; for others the legal description shows that the property is located within a Tract (0
30 of land included in a duly recorded plat, but these were not divided into "lots" at the time of the
31 plat, or were designated for some other purpose on the plat. In some cases,these tracts of land were
32 subsequently divided into multiple parcels that were never shown as lots or parcels on a plat, re-
33 plat, or amended plat approved by the County and recorded by the Clerk of Court's office. Such
34 parcels do not meet the definition of"lot" and therefore have no density assigned to them. 0
35
36 Additionally, the current Comprehensive Plan and LDC do not assign a maximum net density to 17
00
37 RM FLUM and IS zoning districts and, as such,the use of TDRs is not an option. Owners of vacant
38 parcels that do not meet the definition of"lot" and are within the RM FLUM and IS zoning district
39 therefore do not have any residential density.
40 E
41 The majority of these parcels were designated IS with the adoption of the land use district map in
42 1986 and RM with the adoption of the FLUM in 1993 (effective 1997). Although the Land
43 Development Regulations establishing the IS zoning district became effective on September 15,
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 7 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2554
R.9.a
1 1986, the current zoning maps became effective on August 12, 1992. The proposed criterion for
2 parcel boundary establishment has been set based on these dates.
3
4 Staff analysis of parcels within the IS zoning district indicates that there may be approximately
5 57 privately-owned vacant parcels (not qualifying as "lots") that would meet the criteria of
6 the proposed amendment. The number of parcels within this scenario may vary as property
7 owners have (and continue to) split and combine properties without County Planning & 00
8 Environmental Resources Department knowledge (nor plat approval). If this amendment is cv
9 adopted, each parcel shall be individually evaluated at the time of an application for development
10 with the criteria established. Property owners must provide sufficient evidence that the parcel was �
11 created prior to September 15, 1986.
12
13 V. CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE
14 PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING DEVELOPMENT,AND FLORIDA STATUTES.
15
16 A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the
17 Monroe County 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically,it furthers: z
0
18
a.
19 GOAL 101 0
20 Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality of life, ensure the safety of
21 County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources. [§163.3177(1), F.S.]
22 E
23 Objective 101.1
24 Monroe County shall ensure that all development and redevelopment taking place within its 2
25 boundaries does not result in a reduction of the level-of-service requirements established and
26 adopted by this comprehensive plan. Further,Monroe County shall ensure that comprehensive plan E
27 amendments include an analysis of the availability of facilities and services or demonstrate that �?
28 the adopted levels of service can be reasonably met. [§163.3177 & 163.3180, F. S.]
29
30 Objective 101.3 T
31 Monroe County shall regulate new residential development based upon the finite carrying capacity
32 of the natural and man-made systems and the growth capacity while maintaining a maximum
33 hurricane evacuation clearance time of 24 hours.
34
35 Policy 101.3.1
36 Monroe County shall maintain a Permit Allocation System for new residential development known (n
37 as the Residential Rate of Growth Ordinance(ROGO) System. The Permit Allocation System shall
38 limit the number of permits issued for new residential dwelling units The ROGO allocation system 0
39 shall apply within the unincorporated area of the county, excluding areas within the county �i
40 mainland and within the Ocean Reef planned development(Future development in the Ocean Reef
41 planned development is based upon the December 2010 Ocean Reef Club Vested Development 00
42 Rights Letter recognized and issued by the Department of Community Affairs). New residential N
43 dwelling units included in the ROGO allocation system include the following: affordable housing
44 units; market rate dwelling units; mobile homes; and institutional residential units (except hospital
45 rooms).
46
47 Vessels are expressly excluded from the allocation system, as the vessels do not occupy a distinct
48 location, and therefore cannot be accounted for in the County's hurricane evacuation model. Under
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 8 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2555
R.9.a
I no circumstances shall a vessel,including live-aboard vessels,or associated wet slips be transferred
2 upland or converted to a dwelling unit of any other type. Vessels or associated wet slips are not
3 considered ROGO allocation awards, and may not be used as the basis for any type of ROGO
4 exemption or THE(Transfer of ROGO Exemption).
5
6 ROGO Allocations for rooms, hotel or motel; campground spaces; transient residential units; and
7 seasonal residential units are subject to Policy 101.3.5. 00
CD
8 N
9 Policy 101.5.3 2
10 The principal purpose of the Residential Medium (RM) future land use category is to recognize �
11 those portions of subdivisions that were lawfully established and improved prior to the adoption
12 of this plan and to define improved subdivisions as those lots served by a dedicated and accepted
13 existing roadway, have an approved potable water supply, and have sufficient uplands to
14 accommodate the residential uses. Development on vacant land within this land use category shall
15 be limited to one residential dwelling unit for each such platted lot or parcel which existed on or
16 before January 4, 1996.
17
18 Policy 101.18.3 0
19 Within the IS, IS-D, URM, URM-L and CFV land use districts (zoning), parcels platted as of
20 September 15, 1986 shall not be further subdivided in a way that creates more net lots than the
21 original plat.
22 E
23 Policy 301.2.5
24 In order to proceed with development, a parcel shall have legal access to public or private roads, C
25 rights of way or easements or such access shall be established.
26 E
27 B. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida U
28 Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes.
29
30 For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that plan U)
31 with the principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles,the principles
32 shall be construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied in isolation
33 from the other provisions.
34
35 (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local
36 government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern
37 designation.
38 (b) Protecting shoreline and benthic resources, including mangroves, coral reef formations, seagrass
39 beds,wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat.
40 (c) Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native tropical
41 vegetation(for example,hardwood hammocks and pinelands), dune ridges and beaches,wildlife,and
42 their habitat. �
CD
43 (d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic N
44 development.
45 (e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida Keys. 0
E
46 (f) Enhancing natural scenic resources,promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment, and
47 ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys. 2
48 (g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys.
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 9 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2556
R.9.a
I (h) Protecting the value,efficiency, cost-effectiveness,and amortized life of existing and proposed major
2 public investments,including:
3
4 1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities;
5 2. Sewage collection, treatment, and disposal facilities;
6 3. Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities;
7 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities;
00
8 5. Transportation facilities;
9 6. Federal parks,wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries; `'"'
as
10 7. State parks,recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned properties;
11 8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and U)
12 9. Other utilities, as appropriate.
13
14 (i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation, maintenance,
15 and replacement of stormwater management facilities; central sewage collection; treatment and
16 disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and maintenance of onsite sewage D
17 treatment and disposal systems.
18 (j) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and operation of
19 wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss. 381.0065(4)(1) and 403.086(10), z
0
20 as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by central wastewater treatment facilities
21 through permit allocation systems. 0
22 (k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida
23 Keys.
24 (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys.
25 (m)Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of anatural
26 or manmade disaster and for a postdisaster reconstruction plan.
27 (n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining 0.
28 the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource. 0.
29 Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7) Florida Statutes, the proposed amendment is not inconsistent 0
30 with the Principles for Guiding Development as a whole and is not inconsistent with any
31 Principle.
32
.0
33 C. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statute
34 (F.S.). Specifically, the amendment furthers:
35
36 163.3161(4), F.S. —It is the intent of this act that local governments have the ability to preserve
37 and enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and
38 resources, consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal
39 effectively with future problems that may result from the use and development of land within
40 their jurisdictions. Through the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units U
41 of local government can preserve, promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, co
42 comfort, good order, appearance, convenience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and to
43 general welfare; facilitate the adequate and efficient provision of transportation, water, 17
44 sewerage, schools, parks, recreational facilities, housing, and other requirements and
45 services; and conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources within their
46 jurisdictions.
47 E
48 163.3161(6), F.S. — It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans shall have the
49 legal status set out in this act and that no public or private development shall be permitted
sOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 10 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2557
R.9.a
I except in conformity with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof, prepared
2 and adopted in conformity with this act.
3
4 163.3177(1), F.S. — The comprehensive plan shall provide the principles, guidelines, standards,
5 and strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social,physical, environmental,
6 and fiscal development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the
7 plan and its elements. These principles and strategies shall guide future decisions in a 00
8 consistent manner and shall contain programs and activities to ensure comprehensive plans N
9 are implemented. The sections of the comprehensive plan containing the principles and
10 strategies generally provided as goals objectives and policies shall describe how the local U)
11 government's programs, activities, and land development regulations will be initiated,
12 modified, or continued to implement the comprehensive plan in a consistent manner. It is not
13 the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations in the
14 comprehensive plan but rather to require identification of those programs, activities, and land
15 development regulations that will be part of the strategy for implementing the comprehensive
16 plan and the principles that describe how the programs, activities, and land development
17 regulations will be carried out. The plan shall establish meaningful and predictable standards
18 for the use and development of land and provide meaningful guidelines for the content of 0
19 more detailed land development and use regulations.
20
21 163.3201, F.S. —Relationship of comprehensive plan to exercise of land development regulatory
22 authority. It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans or elements thereof E
23 shall be implemented, in part, by the adoption and enforcement of appropriate local
24 regulations on the development of lands and waters within an area. It is the intent of this act
25 that the adoption and enforcement by a governing body of regulations for the development
26 of land or the adoption and enforcement by a governing body of a land development code for E
27 an area shall be based on, be related to, and be a means of implementation for an adopted
28 comprehensive plan as required by this act.
29
30 VI. PROCESS .2
31
32 Comprehensive Plan Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the
33 Planning Commission, the Director of Planning, or the owner or other person having a contractual
34 interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning shall review
35 and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the Development Review
36 Committee and the Planning Commission.
37
38 The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall 0
39 review the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning & co
40 Environmental Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the
41 public hearing. The Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the 00
42 Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the
43 transmittal of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, and considers the staff report, staff
44 recommendation, and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may or may not
45 recommend transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency. The amendment is transmitted to State
46 Land Planning Agency, which then reviews the proposal and issues an Objections,
47 Recommendations and Comments (ORC)Report. Upon receipt of the ORC report, the County has
BOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 11 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2558
R.9.a
1 180 days to adopt the amendments, adopt the amendments with changes or not adopt the
2 amendment.
3
4 VIL STAFF RECOMMENDATION
5
6 Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment.
00
N
iz
U)
0.
�s
a�
a�
i
�s
i
�s
i
cv
4j
sOCC SR 10.16.19 Page 12 of 12
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2559
R.9.b
4 +
5 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
6 MONROE COUNTY BOARD R OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
7 ORDINANCE NO. -2 1
S
9 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF00
10 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, AMENDING POLICY 101..5.25 OF
11 THE 2030 MONRCIF COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN T .
12 ADDRESS DENSITY ISSUES ON PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN
13 THE RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM ( ) FUTURE LAND USE MAP
1.4 CATEGORY THE IMPROVED SUBDIVISION ( S) ZONING �
1.5 DISTRICT THAT ARE NOT PLATTED LOTS; PROVIDING FOR
1.6 SEVER ILIT ; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
17 PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE
18 LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY F~ STATE;
19 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY TY
20 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR F°F C"DIVE
21 DATE. IL
22
23
24
25 WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018 a community meeting was held, as required by LDC
26 Section 1 2-159(b)(3), to discuss the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment, and to
27 provide for public participation; and
28
29 WHEREAS,,the Monroe County development Review Committee (D C) considered the
30 proposed amendments at a regularly scheduled meeting held. on the 11'r, day of December, 201 ;
31 and
32
33 WHEREAS, on December 11, 2018, the Monroe County Development Review 0i
34 Committee (LTC) reviewed the proposed amendment; and
35 00
36 WHEREAS, staff :is recommending approval of the proposed amendments to the 2030
37 Comprehensive plan, as directed by the BOCC on August 15, 2018, to amend Policy 101..5.25 to
38 address density issues on parcels of land within the residential medium (RM) Future Land Use
39 Map category and the Improved Subdivision (IS) zoning district that are not platted lots; and �
40
41 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing on February
42 27, 201.9, for review and recommendation on the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment;
43 and
44
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-1.96 gage 1. of 7
Packet Pg. 2560
1. WHEREAS, based on discussion and public input at the hearing, the PC recommended
2 the selection of Option A (which would not require use of a TDR) as presented in the staff report
3 dated February 12, 2019, with the following changes:
4 1. Edit (n) 1) as follows:
5 The parcel boundaries must have been established in their current configuration prior
6 to September 15,1986, except joir de inininzis changes (no inore than .10% of the
7 parcel's ut4affd area) to the parcel boundaries madeqfier Sepleinber 15, 1986, but
8 prior to JHb-14A 1992, which did not create another buildable parcel—. Sr h 00
9c el
10 and as
U)
12 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. P15-19
13 recommending to the BOCC approval with changes, as discussed during the Planning Commission
14 hearing, of the proposed amendment; and
15
16 WHEREAS, at the May 22, 2019, public hearing, the BOCC adopted Resolution 155-
17 2019, approved transmittal of the proposed text amendment to the State Land Planning Agency; z
0
18 and
19 0
20 WHEREAS, the State Land Planning Agency reviewed the amendment and issued an
21 Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) report, received by the County on August
22 22, 2019; and.
E
23
24 WHEREAS, the ORC report did not identify any objections, recommendations or IL
25 comments; and E
0
26
27 WHEREAS, the County has ISO days from the date of receipt of the ORC to adopt the
28 proposed amendment, adopt the amendment with changes or not adopt the amendment; and
29
0
30 WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the 16'�' day of October , 2019, the BOCC held
31 a public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment,
00
Ir-
32, considered the staff report and provided for public conirrient and public participation in accordance Q
C14
33 with the requirements of state law and the procedures adopted for public participation in the
34 planning process;
E
35
36 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
37 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
38
39 Section 1. The text of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as follows
40 (deletions are shown 4-+tek-e�- �, ; additions are shown underlined):
41
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 2 of 7
1 Packet Pg. 2561
I Policy 101.5.25
2 Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards for the future
3 land use categories, which are shown on the FLUM and described in Policies 10 1.5,1
4 101.5.20. [ES. § 163.3177(6)(a)l.]
Future Land Use Densities and Intensities
Residential Nonresidential
......................... Minimum
Future Land Use Category Maximum Net Maximum Open Space
00
and Corresponding Zoning Allocated Density Ito Density lo", Intensity Ratio
(per upland acre) (per buildable (floor area
acre) ratio)
AgricullUre/Aquaculture
Per U)
(A) 0 du I N/A 0.25 underlying
1(no directly corresponding 0 roorns/spaces N/A zoning
zoning)
Airport (AD) 0 du N/A
0.10 0,20
(AD zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A
Commercial (COMM) 0 du N/A
(C I and C2 zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.15-0.50 O.20
Conservation (C) 0 du N/A 0.05 0.90 Z
(CD zoning) 0 roorns/spaces N/A 0
Education (E) Per IL
0
(no directly corresponding 0 du N/A 03. o underlying
zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A zoning
Industrial (1) 1 du 2 dU
(I and..M.I.zonins) 0 rooms/spaces N/A. 0.25-0.60 0,20
E
Institutional (INS) N/A Per
(no directly corresponding 0 du 24 0.30 underlying
zoning) 15 roorns/spaces 1,001118/spaces zoning IL
CL
Mainland Native(MN) 0.01 du N/A E
0
(MN zoning) 2 spaecs,1 N/A 0.03 0.95-0.99
Military (M) 6 du 12 du
20 030-0.50 0,20
(MF zoning) 10 rooms/spaces
rooms/spaces
2 du (MI) 0.10-0.45
I du 6-18 du (SC)ter (SC, UC,DR, 0
(DR,MU, MI)
12 du (UC) Mu) (0
Mixed Use/Commercial 3 du (SC)
6 du (UC) 12-18 du 00
(MU) <2,500 SF
(SC, UC,DR,RV, MU and Commercial Apartments
MI zoning) (RV) '10 18 dL1 (DR) (RV) 0.20 C14
10-25 030-0.60
5-15 rooms/spaces E
ar
rooms/spaces, (MI)
ca
1 du 12 du (CFA,
Mixed Use/Comrnercial (CFSD-20) w CFSD) <
othe 3 du (CFA, a
Fishing (MCF) "' .all r CFSD)
(CFA, CFV, CFSD zoning) I du/Jot (CFI) N/A (CFV) 0,25-0.40 0.20
0 rooms/spaces N/A
Preservation (P) 0 du N/A
(P zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A o 1.00
Ordinance -2019
File 201 8-1 96 Page 3 of 7 Packet Pg. 2562
Public Buildings/Lands CI du N/A Per
(PB)1,11 0.30 underlying
(no directly corresponding 0,roorns/spaces N/A zoning
zoning)
Facilities (PF) 0 du N/A Per
(nod irectly corresponding 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.30 under.lying
zoning) zoning
Recreation (R) Odu N/A
0.20 0.90
(PR zoning) 2 rooms/spa�ces N/A
Residential Conservation 0-0.10 du (OS) 00
T_
N/A CD
(RC) 0,25 du (NA) N/A 0-0.20 0 95 C14
(OS and NA zoning) 0 rooms/s paces..,
3 du (SR-L)
0.50 du 5 dU (SR) U)
Residential Low (RL) or 0.50 (SR, SR-
I du/lot(S�R) 0.25
(SS, SR, and SR-L zoning)
N/A (SS) 0.80 (SS) .2
0 rooms/spaces CL
N/A
1 du/lot (IS, IS-V, IS-M).(Lr N/A
Residential Medium Ll/pre-1 9�86 parcel)
(IS(")7 IS-V, IS-M ", and IS- Z
D Q'zoning) 2 du/lo( (IS-D) 0
0 rooms/spaces N/A 0 0.20
CL
12-25 du 0
6 du (UR)
N/A (IS-1),
Residential High (RH) I du/lot (U`RM, URM-L) C
URM, 0
(IS-D 01, URM, L�RM-L and 2 du/Jot (IS-D) E
UR zoning) URM-I..) <
0 0.20 C
0—10 rooms/spaces
0-20
rooms/spaces I CL
E
Notes: 0
(a) The allocated densities for submerged lands, salt ponds, freshwater ponds, and mangroves shall
be 0 and the maximurn,net density bonuses shall not be available.
C
(b) The Maximum Net Density is the maximum density allowable with the use ofTDRs, or for
qualifying affordable housing development. TDRs can be utilized to attain the density between the 2
allocated density standard up to the rnaxirnurn net density standard. Deed restricted affordable 0
dwelling units may be built up to the maximurn net density without the use of TDRs. "N/A" means
that maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. Buildable acres means the Portion of a
parcel of land that is developable and is not required qpen s ace. 00
(c) Additional open space requirements may apply based on environmental protection criteria; in
4i
these cases,the most restrictive re uirement shall apply. C
0
(d) Future land use categories of Agriculture/Aquaculture, Education, Institutional, Preservation, E
Public Buildings/Lands, and Public Facilities, which have no directly corresponding zoning, may be
used with new or existing zoning districts as appropriate.
(e) Within the Mainland Native future land use district, campground spaces and nonresidential
buildings shall only be 2ermitted for educational, research or sanitary purposes.
(f) For properties consisting of hammocks, pine]and,,;or disturbed wetlands within the Mixed Use/
Commercial and Mixed Use/Commercial Fishing future land use categories, the maximum floor
area ratio shall be 0.10 and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available.
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 4 of 7
1 Packet Pg. 2563
(g) A mixture of uses shall be maintained for parcels designated its MI zoning district that are
within the MC future land use category. Working waterfront and water dependent uses, such as
marina, fish houseftnarket, boat repair, boat building, boat storage, or other similar uses, shall
comprise a minimum of 35% of the upland area of the property, adjacent to the shoreline, pursuant
to Policy 10 1,5 A
(h) In the RV zoning district, commercial apartments shall be allowed,not to exceed 10% of total
spaces allowed or in existence on the site, whichever is less.
(i) The allocated density for the CFSD-20 zoning district (Little Torch Key) shall be I dwelling
unit per acre, or 1 dwelling unit per parcel for those parcels existing as of September 15, 1986, 00
whichever is less, and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. Residential density
C14
shall be allowed in addition to the permitted nonresidential uses and intensity (i.e., density and
intensity shall not be counted cumulatively). U_
(j) Within IS subdivisions with primarily single family residential units, IS-D zoning may be used
with a RM future land use designation for platted lots which have a duplex that. was lawfully
established prior to September .15, 1986,
(k) The maximum net density shall be 25 dulbuildable acre for the UR zoning district and shall be
8 du/buildable acre for the MU and SC zoning district for development where all units are deed
restricted affordable dwelling units. For the UR zoning district market rate housing may be
developed as part of an affordable or employee housing project with a maximum net density not
exceeding 18 du/buildable acre.
Z
(1) Vessels, including live-aboard vessels, or associated wet slips are not considered dwelling units 0
and do not count when calculating density.
IL
(m) Within the Residential Low future land use category, the maximum net density for platted lots 0
of less than 0.40 gross acres within the SR zoning district shall be I dwelling unit per platted lot,
provided all of the following conditions are met:
1) The parcel must be one full platted lot shown on a. plat approved by the County and duly E
recorded prior to January 2, 1996;
21) The platted lot may not be identified for.any other use or purpose on the plat (e.g., "park," IL
'"common area," etc.); CL
E
3) The platted lot must have a Tier designation of Tier 111; 0
4) Notwithstanding Policy 10 1.1,3.2, the maxii-nurn net density may only be reached with the
transfer of one(1) full TDR to the SR tot, regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated
density assigned to it;
5) Notwithstanding Policy 101.13.2, the maximurn net density may only be reached with the
transfer of one (1) full TDR to the SR. lot, regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated 0
density assigned to,it;
00
6) The TDR must rneet all requirements and procedures specified in Policy 10 1.13.3 and Ir-
Section 130-160 of the Land Development Code; C14
7) TDRs under this provision may not be transferred into noise zones of 65 DNL or greater;
and E
8) 7) The subject parcel must comply with Policy 301.2.5 regarding legal access.
(n) Within the Residential Medium future land use category, the allocated density within the IS <
zoning district shall be I dwelling unit per parcel for pat-eels that meet all of the following
conditions:
1) The parcel boundaries must have been established in their current configuKgjgp_pfi2r
to September 15,1986, except for de minirnis changes (no rnore than 10% of the parcel
area to the parcel boundaries made after September 1_5,1986,but prior to An ust 12
g�
1992 which did not create another buildable, arcel�
Ordinance_-2019
File 2018-196 Page 5 of 7
1 Packet Pg. 2564
2) The applicant must provide sufficient evidence,that..the parcel boundaries were
establish bour7dary
survey, deed etc,)
;
3) The parcel rnav not be identified for any other use or purpose on a plat (e.2., "poark
"common area,"etc.);
4) The subject parcel rnay not be a fractional portion of a platted lot;
5 The subject parcel must have a minimum of 2 000sf of u land that is, not reserved as
an access easement or designated puippsw other than residential us,e•
6) The parcel must have a-Tier designation of TierM
00
7) The subject parcel must include all infrastructure(potable water addecivate wastewater
treatment and dim osurl wastewater meeten ado ted LQ S ctc. g)jcept aged roads); and
8) The,subject parcel must corn y with Policy 3011.2.5 of the Cornprehensive Plan U-
regarding legal access.
2
3 Section 2. Severabilit F. f any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or
4 provision of this ordinance:is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not
5 be affected by such validity.
z
6 0
7 Section 3, Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
0
8 conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
9
10 Section 4. MM2 and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the
E
I I Secretary of the State of Florida and shall become effective as provided by law.
12
(L
13 Section 5. Inclusion in the Cop121EhEgjj1tEcart. The text amendment shall be incorporated 0.
E
14 in the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, The numbering of the foregoing 0
15 amendment may be renumbered to conform to the numbering in the Monroe County
16 Comprehensive Plan,
17
18 0
19
20 00
21 THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK C14
22
23 SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE E
24
25
26
27
28
29
Ordinance -2019
File 20�18-196 Page 6 of 7 Packet Pg. 2565
I PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
2 Florida, at a regular meeting held on the day of
3
4 Mayor Sylvia Murphy, District 5
5 Mayor Pro Tem Danny L. Kolhage, District 1
6 Commissioner Michelle Coldiron, District 2
7 Commissioner Heather Carruthers, District 3
8 Commissioner David Rice, District 4
9 00
10 cv
12 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
13 OF MONROE COUNTY, FL
14
15 BY
16 Mayor Sylvia Murphy
17 (SEAL)
18
19 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK z
20 0
21, IL
0
22 DEPUTY CLERK
E
MM0 COUNTY ATTORNEY
AOV�e=I t�70rft IL
ell,
S'Tr.',jf-'-jj E
ASSISTANT C'O N TTOPARY 0
0
00
C14
E
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 7 of 7
1 Packet Pg. 2566
. R.9.e
1
2 ^:
3 ^ �
.r `
4 5
7
8 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
9 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 00
10 RESOLUTION NO. 155 -2019
I1 �
12
13 A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
14 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TRANSMITTING TO THE STATE
15 LAND PLANNING AGENCY AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE
16 COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING
17 POLICY 101.5.25 OF THE 2030 MONROE COUNTY
18 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADDRESS DENSITY ISSUES ON
19 PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM
20 (RM) FUTURE LAND USE MAP CATEGORY AND THE
21 IMPROVED SUBDIVISION (IS) ZONING DISTRICT THAT ARE
22 NOT PLATTED LOTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
23 PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;
24 PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND
25 PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE;
26 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY
27 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE IL
CL
28 DATE.
29
30
31
32 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners conducted a public LO
LO
33 hearing for the purpose of considering the transmittal pursuant to the State Coordinated Review
34 Process in Sec. 163.3184(4), F.S., to the State Land Planning Agency for objections,
35 recommendations and comments, and to the other Reviewing Agencies as defined in Sec.
36 163.3184(1)(c), F.S., for review and comment on a proposed amendment to the Monroe County U)
37 Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan as described above; and
38 .
39 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission and the Monroe County Board
40 of County Commissioners support the requested text amendment;
41
42 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
43 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA:
44
Resolution No. 155 - 2019 Page 1 of 2
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2567
45 Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the recommendation of
46 the Planning Commission to transmit the draft ordinance, attached as Exhibit A,
47 for adoption of the proposed text amendment.
48
49 Section 2. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby transmit the proposed
50 amendment to the State Land Planning Agency for review and comment in
51 accordance with the State Coordinated Review process pursuant to Section
52 163.3184(4), Florida Statutes.
53 00
54 Section 3. The Monroe County staff is given authority to prepare and submit the required cv
55 transmittal letter and supporting documents for the proposed amendment in 2
56 accordance with the requirements of Section 163.3184(4), Florida Statutes. iz
U)
57
58 Section 4. The Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to forward a certified copy of this
59 resolution to the Director of Planning.
60
61 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
62 Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 22°d day of May, 2019.
63
64
65 }; Mayor Sylvia Murphy, District 5 Yes
co
66 . r - Mayor Pro Tem Danny L. Kolhage, District 1 Yes
67 Commissioner Michelle Coldiron, District 2 Yes
68 Uj ``'-- Commissioner Heather Carruthers, District 3 Yes
Q=
69 Commissioner David Rice, District 4 Yes
c
70
71 cx:tad
ca CL
72 -Jr_-
73 0 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE TX,-FLORIDA
i
14
`1
23 BY
LO
LO
Mayo ylv' Murphy
F
% a
0
KEVIN MADOK, CLERK U)
81
82 N OE COUNTY TTORNEY
83 DEPUTY ftERK p Aft0MM:
AWISTANT W if r�T'i ORNEY
Date: G
Resolution No.155 -2019 Page 2 of 2
File 2018-196
Packet Pg. 2568
1
2 -
3
4
5 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
6 MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
7 ORDINANCE NO. -2019
8
9 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF 00
10 COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AMENDING POLICY 101.5.25 OF
11 THE 2030 MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO 2
12 ADDRESS DENSITY ISSUES ON PARCELS OF LAND WITHIN
13 THE RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (RM) FUTURE LAND USE MAP
14 CATEGORY AND THE IMPROVED SUBDIVISION (IS) ZONING
15 DISTRICT THAT ARE NOT PLATTED LOTS; PROVIDING FOR
16 SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
17 PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE
18 STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF
19 STATE; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE
20 COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR AN
21 EFFECTIVE DATE. IL
22
23
24 E
25 WHEREAS, on November 27, 2018 a community meeting was held, as required by LDC
26 Section 102-159(b)(3), to discuss the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment, and to
27 provide for public participation; and
28
29 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee (DRC) considered
30 the proposed amendments at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 11'11 day of December,
31 2018; and
LO
32 LO
33 WHEREAS, on December 11, 2018, the Monroe County Development Review
34 Committee (DRC) reviewed the proposed amendment; and
35 0
36 WHEREAS, staff is recommending approval of the proposed amendments to the 2030
37 Comprehensive Plan, as directed by the BOCC on August 15, 2018, to amend Policy 101.5.25 to
38 address density issues on parcels of land within the residential medium (RM) Future Land Use
39 Map category and the Improved Subdivision(IS) zoning district that.are not platted lots; and
40
41 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing on
42 February 27, 2019, for review and recommendation on the proposed Comprehensive Plan text
43 amendment; and
44
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 1 of 7
Packet Pg. 2569
I WHEREAS, based on discussion and public input at the hearing, the PC recommended
2 the selection of Option A (which would not require use of a TDR) as presented in the staff report
3 dated February 12, 2019, with the following changes:
4 1. Edit (n) 1) as follows:
5 The parcel boundaries must have been established in their current configuration
6 prior to September 15,1986, except for de minimis changes (no more than 10% of the
7 parcel's upkan area) to the parcel boundaries made after September 15, 1986, but
8 prior to Ady-4JAugust 12, 1992, which did not create another buildable parcel-. Sue r
00
10 Reeords; and
11
12 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. P15-19
13 recommending to the BOCC approval with changes, as discussed during the Planning
14 Commission hearing, of the proposed amendment; and
15 (n
16 WHEREAS, at the 201_, public hearing, the BOCC adopted
17 Resolution -201 ) transmittal of the proposed text amendment to the
18 State Land Planning Agency; and
19
20 WHEREAS, the State Land Planning Agency reviewed the amendment and issued an
21 Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC) report, received by the County on
22 ; and
23
24 WHEREAS, the ORC report ; and IL
25
26 WHEREAS, the County has 180 days from the date of receipt of the ORC to adopt the
27 proposed amendment, adopt the amendment with changes or not adopt the amendment; and
28
LO
LO
29 WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on the day of the
30 BOCC held a public hearing to consider adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan text
31 amendment, considered the staff report and provided for public comment and public
32 participation in accordance with the requirements of state law and the procedures adopted for
33 public participation in the planning process;
34
35 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
36 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
37
38 Section 1. The text of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended as
39 follows (deletions are shown stf"en thfo additions are shown underlined):
40
41
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 2 of 7
Packet Pg. 2570
I OPTION A (directed by BOCQ:
2 Deletions are strieke thf ; additions are shown in underlined; changes proposed by
3 staff after BOCC direction are shown in urle:
4
5 Policy 101.5.25
6 Monroe County hereby adopts the following density and intensity standards for the future
7 land use categories, which are shown on the FLUM and described in Policies 101.5.1-
8 101.5.20. [F.S. § 163.3177(6)(a)l.]
00
Future Land Use Densities and Intensities
cv
Residential Nonresidential 2
Minimum iz
Future Land Use Category Maximum Net Maximum Open Space
and Corresponding Zoning Allocated Density(a) Density(1)(1) Intensity Ratio
(per upland acre) (per buildable (floor area
acre) ratio)
griculture/Aquaculture
APer
(no directly corresponding 0 roomsd/spaces N/A 0.25 underlying
zoning
zoning)
Airport(AD) 0 du N/A
(AD zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.10 0.20
Commercial (COMM) 0 du N/A IL
0.15-0.50 0.20
(Cl. and C2 zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A
Conservation(C) 0 du N/A
(CD zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.05 0.90 4)
Education(E)cdi 0 du N/A Per
(no directly corresponding 0.30 underlying
zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A zoning
IL
Industrial(I) 1 du 2 du
CL
(I and MI zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0.25-0.60 0.20
0
Institutional(INS) 0 du N/A Per �?
(no directly corresponding 24 0.30 underlying
zoning) 15 rooms/spaces rooms/spaces zoning
cv
Mainland Native(MN) 0.01 du N/A 0.95-0.99LO
LO
(MN zoning) 2 spaces N/A 0.03
Military(M) 6 du
12 du
(MF zoning) 10 rooms/spaces 20 0.30-0.50 0.20
rooms/spaces 0
1 du 2 du(MI) 0.10-0.45
(DR,MU,MI) 6-18 du(SC) (SC,UC,DR,
Mixed Use/Commercial 3 du(SC) 12 du(UC) MU) as
(MC)W'g' 6 du(UC) 12-18 du
(MU)(") <2 500 SF 0
(SC,UC,DR,RV,MU and Commercial Apartments ( ) (18 du DR ARV)I zoning) (RV)0'� 0.20
5-15 rooms/spaces 10-25 0.30-0.60
rooms/spaces (MI)
Mixed Use/Commercial 1 du 12 du(CFA,
Fishing(MCF)(') (CFSD-20)0" CFSD)
(CFA,CFV, CFSD zoning) 3 du(CFA, all other CFSD) 0.25-0.40 0.20
1 du/lot(CFV) N/A(CFV)
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 3 of 7
Packet Pg. 2571
0 rooms/spaces N/A
Preservation(P) 0 du N/A
(P zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0 1.00
Public Buildings/Lands 0 du N/A Per
(pB)(a)
(no directly corresponding 0.30 underlying
0 rooms/spaces N/A zoning
zoning)
Public Facilities (PF) 0 du N/A Per
(no directly corresponding 0.30 underlying 00
onin 0 rooms/spaces N/A
g) zoning cCD
v
Recreation(R) 0 du N/A 0.20 0.90 2
(PR zoning) 2 rooms/spaces N/A
Residential Conservation 0-0.10 du(OS) U)
(RC) 0.25 du(NA) N/A 0-0.20 0.95
(OS and NA zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A
3 du (SR-L)
0.50 du 5 du(SR) CL
Cs
Residential Low(RL) or 0.50 (SR, SR-
(SS, SR, and SR-L zoning) 1 du/lot(SR)�m> 0.25 L)
N/A(SS) 0.80 (SS)
0 rooms/spaces
N/A
CL
esidential Medium RM 1 du/lot(IS, IS-V,IS-M), or N/A
(ISu,IS-V,IS-Mu nd IS- 1/pre-1986 parcel)
2 du/lot(IS-D)
0)zoning) 0 rooms/spaces N/A 0 0.20 0
12-25 du
(UR)(�) C
6 du(UR)Residential High(RH) 1 du/lot(URM,URM-L) N/A(IS-D, CL
URM
91
(IS-D 0),URM,URM-L and 2 du/lot(IS-D) '
R zoning) URM-L) 0 0.20
0-10 rooms/spaces0-20
rooms/spaces
Notes: LO
LO
(a) The allocated densities for submerged lands, salt ponds, freshwater ponds, and mangroves shall
e 0 and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available.
(b) The Maximum Net Density is the maximurn density allowable with the use of TDRs, or for
qualifying affordable housing development. TDRs can be utilized to attain the density between the U)
allocated density standard up to the maximum net density standard.Deed restricted affordable
dwelling units may be built up to the maximum net density without the use of TDRs. "N/A" means
that maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. Buildable acres means the portion of a E
parcel of land that is developable and is not required open space.
(c) Additional open space requirements may apply based on environmental protection criteria; in
these cases,the most restrictive requirement shall apply.
(d) Future land use categories of Agriculture/Aquaculture, Education,Institutional,Preservation,
Public Buildings/Lands, and Public Facilities, which have no directly corresponding zoning,may be
used with new or existing zoning districts as appropriate.
(e) Within the Mainland Native future land use district, campground spaces and nonresidential
buildings shall only be permitted for educational, research or sanitary purposes.
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 4 of 7
Packet Pg. 2572
• R.9.e
(f) For properties consisting of hammocks,pinelands or disturbed wetlands within the Mixed Use/
Commercial and Mixed Use/Commercial Fishing future land use categories,the maximum floor
area ratio shall be 0.10 and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available.
(g) A mixture of uses shall be maintained for parcels designated as MI zoning district that are
within the MC future land use category. Working waterfront and water dependent uses, such as
marina, fish house/market,boat repair,boat building, boat storage, or other similar uses, shall
comprise a minimum of 35% of the upland area of the property, adjacent to the shoreline,pursuant
o Policy 101.5.6.
(h) In the RV zoning district, commercial apartments shall be allowed,not to exceed 10% of total
00
spaces allowed or in existence on the site, whichever is less.
(i) The allocated density for the CFSD-20 zoning district(Little Torch Key) shall be 1 dwelling
nit per acre, or 1 dwelling unit per parcel for those parcels existing as of September 15, 1986,
whichever is less, and the maximum net density bonuses shall not be available. Residential density
shall be allowed in addition to the permitted nonresidential uses and intensity(i.e., density and
tensity shall not be counted cumulatively).
(j) Within IS subdivisions with primarily single family residential units, IS-D zoning may be used
with a RM future land use designation for platted lots which have a duplex that was lawfully
established prior to September 15, 1986.
(k) The maximum net density shall be 25 du/buildable acre for the UR zoning district and shall be
18 du/buildable acre for the MU and SC zoning district for development where all units are deed
restricted affordable dwelling units.For the UR zoning district market rate housing may be
developed as part of an affordable or employee housing project with a maximum net density not
exceeding 18 du/buildable acre.
(1) Vessels, including live-aboard vessels, or associated wet slips are not considered dwelling units
and do not count when calculating density.
(m) Within the Residential Low future land use category,the maximum net density for platted lots
of less than 0.40 gross acres within the SR zoning district shall be 1 dwelling unit per platted lot,
provided all of the following conditions are met:
1) The parcel must be one full platted lot shown on a plat approved by the County and duly
recorded prior to January 2, 1996;
2) The platted lot may not be identified for any other use or purpose on the plat(e.g., "park,"
"common area," etc.);
3) The platted lot must have a Tier designation of Tier 111; N
LO
4) Notwithstanding Policy 101.13.2,the maximum net density may only be reached with the LO
Ir-
transfer of one(1) full TDR to the SR lot,regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated
density assigned to it;
5) Notwithstanding Policy 101.13.2,the maximum net density may only be reached with the 0
transfer of one(1) full TDR to the SR lot,regardless of the size of the lot and the allocated
density assigned to it;
6) The TDR must meet all requirements and procedures specified in Policy 101.13.3 and E
Section 130-160 of the Land Development Code;
7) TDRs under this provision may not be transferred into noise zones of 65 DNL or greater;
and
8) 7)The subject parcel must comply with Policy 301.2.5 regarding legal access.
n Within the Residential Medium future land use cate o the allocated density within the IS
zoning district shall be 1 dwelling unit per parcel for parcels that meet all of the following
conditions:
1) The parcel boundaries must have been established in their current configuration prior
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 5 of 7
Packet Pg. 2573
R.9.e
to September 15,1986, except for de minims chances (no more than 10%of the parcel's
area)to the parcel boundaries made after September 15, 1986,but prior to August 12,
1992, which did not create another buildable parcel:
2) The applicant must provide sufficient evidence that the parcel boundaries were
established before September 15, 1986 (such as one or more of the following: boundary
survey, deed, etc.);
3) The parcel may not be identified for any other use or purpose on a plat(e.g., "park,"
"common area,"etc.);
4) The subject parcel may not be a fractional portion of a platted lot; 17
00
5) The subject parcel must have a minimum of 2,000 sf of upland that is not reserved as
an access easement or designated purpose other than residential use:
6) The parcel must have a Tier designation of Tier III,
7) The subject parcel must include all infrastructure(potable water, adequate wastewater
treatment and disposal wastewater meeting adopted LOS, etc. except_ paved
oad • and
8) The subject parcel must comply with Policy 301.2.5 of the Comprehensive Plan
regarding legal access.
1
2 ��
3 Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or
4 provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall
5 not be affected by such validity.
6
7 Section 3. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
8 conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. E
9
10 Section 4. Filin2 and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the a.
11 Secretary of the State of Florida and shall become effective as provided by law.
12 U
13 Section 5. Inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan. The text amendment shall be
14 incorporated in the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. The numbering of the
LO
15 foregoing amendment may be renumbered to conform to the numbering in the LO
16 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan.
17
0
18
19
20
21 THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
22
23 SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE
24
25
26
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 6 of 7
Packet Pg. 2574
I PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
2 Florida, at a regular meeting held on the day of ,
3
4 Mayor Sylvia Murphy, District 5
5 Mayor Pro Tem Danny L. Kolhage, District 1
6 Commissioner Michelle Coldiron, District 2
7 Commissioner Heather Carruthers, District 3
8 Commissioner David Rice, District 4
9 00
10
11 �
12 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
13 OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
14
15 BY
16 Mayor Sylvia Murphy
17 (SEAL)
18
19 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK
20
21 IL
22 DEPUTY CLERK
0.
IL
�s
LO
LO
0
U)
4j
Ordinance -2019
File 2018-196 Page 7 of 7
Packet Pg. 2575
R.9.f
Ron DeSantis Ken Lawson
G V���RNOR 1.,. 111:`CirJ"'ri' l iyVllflEC„TOR
FLORIDA
EcoNomic
August 22, 2019 00
cv
The Honorable Sylvia Murphy 2
Mayor, Monroe County iz
102050 Overseas Highway,Suite 234 U'
Key Largo, Florida 33037
Dear Mayor Murphy:
The Department of Economic Opportunity("Department") has completed its review of the
proposed comprehensive plan amendment for Monroe County(Amendment No. 19-03ACSC),which
was received and determined complete on July 15, 2019. We have reviewed the proposed amendment
in accordance with the state coordinated review process set forth in Sections 163.3184(2)and (4),
IL
Florida Statutes(F.S.),for compliance with Chapter 163, Part II, F.S.The Department does not identify
any objections or comments to the proposed amendment and this letter serves as the Objections,
Recommendations and Comments Report. Review comments received by the Department from the
appropriate reviewing agencies, if any,are enclosed.
The County should act by choosing to adopt,adopt with changes,or not adopt the proposed L
amendment. For your assistance,we have enclosed the procedures for final adoption and transmittal of CL
the comprehensive plan amendment.The second public hearing,which shall be a hearing on whether o
to adopt one or more comprehensive plan amendments, must be held within 180 days of your receipt
of the Department's attached report,or the amendment will be deemed withdrawn unless extended by �s
agreement with notice to the Department and any affected party that provided comment on the
amendment pursuant to Section 163.3184(4)(e)1., F.S.
If you have any questions related to this review, please contact Courtney Johnstone, Planning
Analyst, by telephone at(850)717-8463 or by email at courtney.johnstone@deo.myflorida.com.
Sincere U
1 es D. Stansbury, Chief
reau of Com unity Planning and Growth
JDS/cj
00
Enclosure: Procedures for Adoption
Agency Comments
cc: Christine Hurley,County Administrator, Monroe County
Isabel Cosio Carballo, Executive Director,South Florida Regional Planning Council
Florida Department of Economic Opportunity I Caldwell Building 1 107 E Madison Street I Tallahassee, F/L 32399
.t itter c m/l'=L Dr::O J w.Facebook corrV/L DL--0
An equal opportunity employer/program..Auxiliafy aidsand serviceare available upon request to individuals,with
disabilities.All voice telephone numbers on this document may be reached by persons using 7"/'Y17TD equipment via
the Florida Relay Service at 711..
Packet Pg. 2576
R.9.f
SUBMITTAL OF ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
FOR STATE COORDINATED REVIEW
Section 163.3184(4), Florida Statutes 00
cv
NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: Please submit three complete copies of all comprehensive plan
materials, of which one complete paper copy and two complete electronic copies on CD ROM in iz
U)
Portable Document Format(PDF)to the Department of Economic Opportunity and one copy to each
entity below that provided timely comments to the local government:the appropriate Regional Planning
Council;Water Management District; Department of Transportation; Department of Environmental 2
CL
Protection; Department of State;the appropriate county(municipal amendments only);the Florida Fish (n
and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services
(county plan amendments only); and the Department of Education (amendments relating to public
schools);and for certain local governments,the appropriate military installation and any other local
government or governmental agency that has filed a written request. IL
SUBMITTAL LETTER: Please include the following information in the cover letter transmitting the
adopted amendment:
Department of Economic Opportunity identification number for adopted amendment package;
IL
0.
Summary description of the adoption package,including any amendments proposed but not o
adopted; �?
cs
Ordinance number and adoption date;
Certification that the adopted amendment(s) has been submitted to all parties that provided
timely comments to the local government; .
Name,title, address,telephone, FAX number and e-mail address of local government contact;
U
Letter signed by the chief elected official or the person designated by the local government.
ADOPTION AMENDMENT PACKAGE: Please include the following information in the amendment
package:
In the case of text amendments,changes should be shown in strike-through/underline format, 00
cv
In the case of future land use map amendment, an adopted future land use map, in color
format,clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation,and its adopted designation;
A copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate.
Effective:June 2,2011(Updated rune 2018) 'gage 1 of 2
Packet Pg. 2577
R.9.f
Note: If the local government is relying on previously submitted data and analysis, no additional data
and analysis is required;
Copy of executed ordinance adopting the comprehensive plan amendment(s);
00
Ir-
Suggested effective date language for the adoption ordinance for state coordinated review:
"The effective date of this plan amendment, if the amendment is not timely challenged, shall be iz
the date the state land planning agency posts a notice of intent determining that this
amendment is in compliance. If the amendment is timely challenged,or if the state land
planning agency issues a notice of intent determining that this amendment is not in compliance,
this amendment shall become effective on the date the state land planning agency or the CL
Administration Commission enters a final order determining this adopted amendment to be in
compliance."
List of additional changes made in the adopted amendment that the Department of Economic
Opportunity did not previously review;
IL
List of findings of the local governing body, if any,that were not included in the ordinance and
which provided the basis of the adoption or determination not to adopt the proposed amendment;
Statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes not previously reviewed by the
Department of Economic Opportunity to the ORC report from the Department of Economic Opportunity.
CL
IL
U
00
N
E ective:June 2,201.1(Updated June 2018) Page 2 of 2
Packet Pg. 2578
R.9.f
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER � THE CAPITOL
(85o)6r7-77oo a;, 400 SOUTH MONROE STREET
TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA 32399-o800
�w
C38
LORIDA EP RT ENT OFAGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
00
CommiSST®NER Nicoua rs = ' T'y FRIED
C14
U)
July 18,2019
CL
VIA EMAIL(cioffari-cheryl@monroecounty-fl.gov)
Ms.Cheryl Cioffari,AICP
Acting Senior Director of Planning&Environmental Resources
2798 Overseas Highway,Suite 400
Marathon, FL 33050
Re: DACS Docket#—20190717-97
Monroe County
Submission dated July 15,2019
Dear Ms.Cioffari:
The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services(the"Department") received the above- O
referenced proposed comprehensive plan amendment on July 17,2019,and has reviewed it pursuant to
the provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes,to address any potential adverse impacts to important
state resources or facilities related to agricultural,aquacultural,or forestry resources in Florida if the
proposed amendments)are adopted. Based on our review of your county°s submission,the 0
Department has no comment on the proposal.
If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 850-410-2282.
Sincerely, d
U
'411 W
Gail Lolley i
Sr. Management Analyst 11
O lice of Policy and Budget
cc: Florida Department of Economic Opportunity
(SLPA#: Monroe County 19-03ACSC;19-04ACSC; 19-05ACSC)
t HELPFLA www.FreshFromFlorida.com
Packet Pg. 2579
R.9.f
From:
Cc: EUILA06M
Subject: Monroe County 19-3ACSC Proposed
Date: Tuesday,August 13,2019 4:47:24 PM
Attachments: 00
Q4rd
Ir-
To: Ray Eubanks, DEO Plan Review Administrator �
Re: Monroe County 19-3ACSC—State Coordinated Review of Proposed Comprehensive
Plan Amendment
The Office of Intergovernmental Programs of the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection(Department)has reviewed the above-referenced amendment package under the
provisions of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The Department conducted a detailed review that
focused on potential adverse impacts to important state resources and facilities, specifically:
air and water pollution; wetlands and other surface waters of the state; federal and state-owned
lands and interest in lands, including state parks, greenways and trails, conservation
easements; solid waste; and water and wastewater treatment.
Based on our review of the submitted amendment package,the Department has found no
provision that, if adopted, would result in adverse impacts to important state resources subject
to the Department's jurisdiction. E
Please submit all future amendments by email to p;lan.myinm.(a .If your
submittal is too large to send via email or if you need other assistance, contact Lindsay
Weaver at(850) 717-9037. e
�s
�s
�s
00
CD
cv
Packet Pg. 2580
From:
To:
Cc: MMi09ff-LhE UQ1114 WAMace—ThO2
Subject: Monroe County 19-3ACSC,19-4ACSC,19-SACSC
Date: Tuesday,July 23,2019 9:27:31 AM
........
00
Dear Ms. Cioffari:
C14
.2
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) staff has reviewed the proposed
comprehensive plan amendments in accordance with Chapter 163.3184(3),Florida Statutes.
We have no comments, recommendations,or objections related to listed species and their
habitat or other fish and wildlife resources to offer on these amendments.
If you need any further assistance,please do not hesitate to contact our office by email at
If you have specific technical questions,
please contact Christine Raininger at(561) 882-5 811 or by email at
z
0
Sincerely, a.
0
Jason Hight
Biological Administrator 11
Office of Conservation Planning Services E
Division of Habitat and Species Conservation
620 S. Meridian Street,MS 5135 a.
Tallahassee,FL 32399-1600 0.
(850)228-2055 E
0
Monroe County 19-3ACSC 39864
Monroe County 19-4ACSC 39865
Monroe County 19-5ACSC 39866 0
d
U
W
0
W
z
0
00
C14
E
Packet Pg. 2581
R.9.f
F D C
Flori(ifti. De ton
Cd
July 29, 2019 .2
iz
U)
Cheryl Cloffari, AICP
Actingit Planning Director
Monroe Planning it l Resources
Overseas2798 it
Marathon, I
MonroeIL
Subject: Comments for the
PolicyTo . .25 - Density within the Residential
districtImproved Subdivision (IS)zoning
Dear Ms. i ri: IL
Department0.
The has reviewed the proposed amendment to Monroe County's
ComprehensiveIPolicy . . . The amendment would
densityui t that require a parcel to be a recorded lot on a plat approved
the County in order to developsingle it residential lliwithin
Residential Medium ( ) land use categoryn Improved ivii (IS) zoning
district. In it r 163, Florida Statutes,the focus of our review
on major transportation issues, including ady r impacts to transportationfacilities
f state importance.
U
DistrictThe i the proposed comprehensivel n it
would t adversely impact transportationresources ci` i of state importance.
Pleasect me at 305-470-5393 if you have any questionsconcerning
Sincerely,
,
31
Shereen Yee Fong
Transportaaticn Planner :°
v v"W,idol.gov
Packet Pg. 2582
Ms. Cheryl Cioffari
July 29, 2019
Page 2
Cc: Emily Schemper, Monroe County
00
Harol esdunes, P.E., Florida Department of Transportation, District 6
Dat Huynh, P.E., Florida Department-of Transportation, District 6
Kenneth Jeffries, Florida Department of Transportation, District 6
Ray Eubanks, Department of Economic Opportunity
Isabel Cosio Carballo, South Florida Reg ion ai Pianning Council
Isabel Moreno, South Florida Regional Planning Council
z
0
(L
0
E
(L
0.
E
0
0
d
U
w
0
w
z
0
00
C14
E
Packet Pg. 2583
R.9.f
From: AVO,
To: �. r&H �.➢ t.
Cc: � „..J 3t ,; Vsallrel t esuo C airha �g tP ;� I.. u° um u 'mcuu
�� 8 afl�mnn�somr¢ve�:o:uuroft�- Mg
Subject: Monroe County,DEO#19-3ASCS, 19-4ACSC,and#19-SACSC,Comments on Proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Packages
Date: Thursday,July 18,2019 5:26:24 PM 00
cN
Dear Mr. Eubanks: as
iz
U)
The South Florida Water Management District (District) has completed its review of the three
proposed amendment packages from the Monroe County (County). The amendments are text
amendments to the County's Comprehensive Plan to address density issues on, certain
nonconforming lots and to allow for the repair and replacement of residential land uses in certain CL
Cs
situations. There appear to be no regionally significant water resource issues; therefore, the District
forwards no comments on the proposed amendment package.
The District offers its technical assistance to the County and the Department of Economic
IL
Opportunity in developing sound, sustainable solutions to meet the County's future water supply
needs and to protect the region's water resources. Please forward a copy of the adopted
amendments to the District. Please contact me if you need assistance or additional information.
Sincerely,
IL
Ms.Terry Manning, Policy and Planning Analyst CL
South Florida Water Management District
Water Supply Implementation Unit
3301 Gun Club Road
West Palm Beach, FL 33406
Phone: 561-682-6779
Fax: 561-681-6264
E-Mail: tmanni;n,g@sfwt�nn.,,.d.ggv
U
00
cv
Packet Pg. 2584
09 OCTOBER 2019
Clifford H. and Susan E. Schneider
234 Tupelo Rd.
Naples, FL 34108
fxrp@embarqmail.com
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners, via Email
and District 2 Commissioner, Michelle Coldiron, via Email
Marathon Government Center
2798 Overseas Highway
Marathon, FL 33050
RE: Monroe County Residential Lot Definition 2018-196
Dear Recipients,
I am writing concerning BOCC Item 2018-196 Ordinance.
My wife and I own two vacant lots and a residence on Big Pine Key in the Punta Brisa
Subdivision. They are located within Tract B of Punta Brisa which was platted in Monroe
County in 1951. The Punta Brisa developers were Edward and Helen Barry. We also
own the adjoining home and property at 1655 Helen St., Big Pine Key, FL 33043.
Between 1951 and the 1960's the Barry's created and sold other residential lots as a re-
subdivision of said Tract B,A, and C of said Plat, Punta Brisa.
The Barrys described the lots via metes and bounds descriptions as referenced on an
unrecorded plat and sold said lots. Parcel IDs were created and the lots were created
on the Monroe County Tax roles.
There is a map of said lots in with a number 157. I have a copy of this document that
obtained during title research of our surrounding properties in Punta Brisa. All of the
, Punta Brisa lots are part of lands that were platted.
Over the years numerous homes were permitted and constructed on the said Tract B, A,
and C residential lots. A portion of Tract B was also re-platted into the Lambert
Subdivision Plat.
I am a Florida Licensed Professional Engineer. I have practiced civil engineering since
1967. My experience includes USAF Military Engineering, Assistant County Engineer for
Collier County, City Engineer for the City of Naples, and private practice as a partner in
a Civil Engineering/Land Surveying/Land Planning firm, with offices throughout the
State of Florida.
During my career, I became very familiar with subdivision of land via both Un-recorded
and Recorded plats. Lots legally sold via metes and bounds with lots depicted on Un-
R9 � 1cta
recorded plats or maps. The lots were legally created nevertheless. Some Counties
have drawers with said technically Un-recorded plats or maps. Other lots were sold via
recorded plats. Both methods were totally legal based on the time of sale or creation.
As years past, the Florida State Legislature and Counties/Municipalities adopted
subdivision regulations. Said Statutes and Regulations did not negate the lots/parcels
that were created prior to said subdivision regulations. I will not belabor the historical
dates of the rules enactment.
For the record we own land in Punta Brisa Tract B as follows:
Parcel ID 00309770-000000, created by Warranty Deed from the Developer, Barry in
1963
(The above parcel contains our single family home at 1655 Helen Street, Big Pine Key)
Parcel ID 00309840-000000, created by Warranty Deed from the Developer, Barry in
1960, vacant
Parcel ID 00309790-000000, created by Warranty Deed from the Developer, Barry in
1961, vacant
All of the above adjoining lots were legally created by the Developer, sold to a Grantee,
and entered into the Monroe County Tax Rolls as legal lots. They have been taxed
accordingly, for almost 60 years. We are not alone. Numerous other taxpayers own
similar lands.
Our above parcels front a dedicated road easement, Helen Street, that contains, water,
sewer, electrical power, telephone, and cable service. The dedicated road easement
connects to Bogie Rd., a County maintained right of way.
In 2017 I heard rumor that Monroe County had changed the definition of a lot from a lot
to a "platted lot". I learned about the issue on a web blog, The Coconut Telegraph,
BigPineKey.com and other local media, like Konk Life.This was a shock to me. We had
never been notified of such a change.
I immediately began a dialog with then Monroe County Planning Director, Mayte Santa
Maria. I called her and explained my knowledge of historic lot sales by metes and
bounds via Un-recorded plats. I explained my professional background in civil
engineering, land surveying, and subdivisions. Mayte Santa-Maria seemed totally un-
informed of how lot sales could legally occur from metes and bound descriptions
and sales maps, Un-recorded plats, or the like.
I further informed Mayte Santa Maria of my specific knowledge of the Punta Brisa
Subdivision on Big Pine Key. I told her that I had an actual copy of the Punta Brisa Tract
B sales map / Un-recorded plat.
I told Santa-Maria that her arbitrary re-definition of "lots" was wrong and that the Punta
Brisa Tract B lots were created legally under the current laws at the time of sale by
deed.
I asked Santa-Maria if she would like a copy of said map and she said yes. I emailed
Santa-Maria photo .JPEGs of the said map. Subsequently, I hand delivered a full size
blueprint of said map to Santa Maria's office at the Marathon Government Center.
I subsequently had email contacts with Santa-Maria who told me that she would review
my submittals and report back to me. I specifically asked Santa-Maria to report her
findings to me. Santa-Maria never responded to me.
I retained copies of said email correspondence.
I have now learned that Monroe County is actually denying building permits to
applicants who apply to build on a lot that is not actually a "Platted Lot" in a County
Subdivision Plat, referenced by Lot/Block.
I am shocked and appalled to learn that the County is in fact denying building permits to
owners of legally created lots. I am further shocked and appalled to learn that through a
hidden obscure action of the County, that density rights were stripped from owners of
legally created lots. This stripping of density rights occurred via an ordinance described
as a setback definition ordinance. The description of said ordinance spoke nowhere to a
loss of density rights. I have a copy of a Monroe County internal email from a Gail
Creech, Planning Commission Coordinator to a Joseph E. Haberman, AICP, Planning
and Development Review Manager. Creech writes, "What do you want to call it?
Amending Setback Requirements?" Haberman replies with a description that speaks
only to clarifying setback requirements. The property owners nor public had no way of
knowing that their building density rights were being stripped away, prior to passage of
said ordinance.
I believe that this lot re-definition action occurred buried in an ordinance that did not
identify said action, and that this action was in violation of the State of Florida "single
subject" rule.
What motivated the County to strip property owners rights by burying lot re-definition
language in a setback revision ordinance? I have asked for internal communications as
such and have been provided nothing.
The stripping of development rights from a landowner is similar to a re-zoning. In this
case, property owners were not notified of the lot definition change. This should have
occurred after legal notice to individual owners, a Community Information Meeting,
Public Hearings and a chance for public input from the owners of legal lots. No such
notice was given. I implore the County Commission declare the lot re-definition null and
void, to rescind all previous action, and grandfather those lots previously created.
I further implore the County to rescind all building permit denials that were based
on the lot re-definition criteria.
The action of stripping property land use rights and density allowances is tantamount to
an outright taking.The action was arbitrary, capricious, and completely absurd.
If the County wanted to take away property rights there were many other legal venues
available:
Purchase said rights, willing seller/willing buyer
Vacation of rights with compensation
Eminent Domain taking with compensation
Instead the County secretly and deviously stole land rights from taxpayers. Was the
action a mistake and oversight by the County? Or ,was it a carefully orchestrated
maneuver? Who decided to make this change? Was it a committee? Where are the
minutes? I have asked for said information and have been provided nothing.
Was this lot re-definition action reviewed by the County Attorney in advance?
Were the ramifications explained to the decision makers? Where is a copy of the
County Attorney's notes on this action?
I made a records request and the County Attorneys Office stated to me that the
County Attorney's office has no notes, files, or documentation regarding the
buildable lot re-definition. This was confirmed in an email from Bradley-Brian,
Senior Coordinator of the Monroe County Attorney's Office, email dated Oct. 1,
2019.
Reports claim that 215 lots in Monroe County were affected. I think that the action
affects many more properties. I requested specific information of the affected
"non-platted" lots. Monroe County has not furnished me with the said defined lot
count by parcel ID.
I have learned that the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners will consider an
ordinance, 2018-196, to allow density for only Tier III un-platted lots.
Why does the text amendment exclude Tier I and Tier II properties? The ROGO scoring
system in particular provides adequate protections for these tiers by lowering ROGO
scores and such.
Limiting the text amendment to only Tier III lots is unnecessary, given the numerous
code provisions that make it already difficult to build on Tier I and Tier II properties. The
other requirements and conditions of the text amendment are more than sufficient to
significantly limit the number of buildable lots without outright exclusion of Tier I and Tier
II properties. It is the right thing to do, and the just thing to do, to at least let Tier I and
Tier II properties, that meet the other text amendment requirements, be eligible for a
density allocation.
Please include Tier I and Tier II lots in the text revision allowing a density
allotment.
The Ordinance 2018-196 text has another problem. If an owner of a lot sells a portion of
one lot to an adjoining owner and the remaining portion to the other adjoining owner,
neither of the 'enlarged' parcel owners can build on their lots. This seems unreasonable
and makes no sense. Please delete this reference.
Respectfully Submitted,
Clifford H. Schneider, P.E. fxrp@embarqmail.com
cell 2392872297