The URL can be used to link to this page

Item I2BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date. August. 17 2011 Division: Growth Management Bulk Item: Yes X No ® Staff Contact Person: Christine Hurlev. AICP Growth Management Director AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of a resolution by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners approving the 2011 Annual Public Facilities Capacity Assessment Report. ITEM BACKGROUND: This report is the annual assessment of public facilities capacity mandated by Chapter 114 of the Monroe County Land Development Regulations. Section 114-2, Adequate Facilities and Development Review Procedures, contains two major sets of requirements: the minimum service standards for the four primary public facilities (roads, solid waste, potable water, schools), and an annual assessment process to determine the available capacity of these public facilities. Section 114-2 includes an equitable procedure for issuing permits when the rate of growth is likely to outpace the current capacity of these public facilities. Section 114-2(b)3 requires the Director of Planning to prepare an annual report to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners on the capacity of available public facilities. Section 114-2(b)(4) requires the Monroe County Board of County Commission to consider this report and approve its findings either with or without modifications. The County Commission cannot act to increase development capacity beyond that demonstrated in this report without making specific findings of fact as to the reasons for the increase and identifying the source of funds to be used to pay for the additional capacity. Once approved by the Monroe County Board of County Commission, the Public Facilities Capacity Assessment Report becomes the official assessment of public facilities upon which development approvals will be based for the next year. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: The BOCC has considered and approved annual assessments of public facilities capacity each year since 1987. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: None STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval TOTAL COST: NIA INDIRECT COST: BUDGETED: Yes No DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE: COST TO COUNTY: SOURCE OF FUNDS: REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes — No AMOUNT PER MONTH Year APPROVED BY: County Atty x OMB/Purchasing Risk Management DOCUMENTATION: Included Y Not Required DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM # To: Through: From: Date: RE: MEMORANDUM MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT We strive to be caring, professional and,fair Christine Hurley, AICP, Growth Management Director Mayte' Santamaria, Assistant Director of Planning and Environmental Resources Kathy Grasser, Comprehensive Planner July 19, 2011 2011 Annual Assessment of Public Facilities Capacity 1 2 Planning staff has completed the 2011 assessment of public facilities capacity and 3 prepared a report for consideration by the Board of County Commissioners. 4 5 The public facilities assessed included Transportation, Solid Waste, Potable Water, 6 Schools, and Parks and Recreation. The assessment was based on standard analytical 7 methodologies. 8 9 The assessment did not identify any areas of inadequate facility capacity operating below 10 the County's adopted level of service standards for County Roads, Solid Waste, Potable 11 Water, Schools, or Parks and Recreation. 12 13 Roads 14 Two segments of U. S. I were found to have marginally capacity. The Lower 15 Matecumbe and Tea Table Segments are below the LOS threshold. These two segments 16 have reserve volume or reserve capacities within the 5% allocation. There is on -going 17 construction along these segments and travel speeds are expected to improve after 18 construction is complete. 19 20 Potable Water 21 The construction of the new water supply wells and reverse osmosis water treatment 22 facility, the new reclaimed systems, and the ability to operate the 3.0 MGD reverse 23 osmosis desalination plants during emergency situations provide an adequate supply of 24 water to meet current and future demands. 25 26 Schools 27 The Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) capacity rate for Monroe County School 28 District is 11,242 students and the Capital Outlay of Full -Time Equivalent (COFTE) is 29 7,518. The actual utilization during the 2010 — 2011 school year was 66.88%. Overall, 30 the projected growth utilization rate is 1.03% for the years 2010-2011 through 2014- 31 2015. August 17, 2011 Page 1 of 2 1 Solid Waste 2 There is adequate capacity for solid waste generation for the next 12 months. 3 4 Parks and Recreation 5 There is a surplus of parks and recreational facilities (acreage). 6 7 Based on the facts contained in the report, there is sufficient capacity in all public 8 facilities to serve anticipated allocations awards for residential and non-residential 9 development over the next twelve month period. August 17, 2011 Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. -2011 A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVING THE 2011 MONROE COUNTY PUBLIC FACILITIES CAPACITY ASSESSMENT REPORT AS SUBMITTED BY THE MONROE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES WHEREAS, the annual assessment of public facilities capacity is mandated by Chapter 114 of the Monroe County Land Development Regulations: 1. Section 114-2, Adequate Facilities and Development Review Procedures, contains two major sets of requirements: the minimum service standards for the four primary public facilities (roads, solid waste, potable water, schools), and an annual assessment process to determine the available capacity of these public facilities. Section 114-2 includes an equitable procedure for issuing permits when the rate of growth is likely to outpace the current capacity of these public facilities; and 2. Section 114-2(b)3 requires the Director of Planning to prepare an annual report to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners on the capacity of available public facilities; and 3. Section 114-2(b)(4) requires the Monroe County Board of County Commission to consider this report and approve its findings either with or without modifications. The County Commission cannot act to increase development capacity beyond that demonstrated in this report without making specific findings of fact as to the reasons for the increase, and identifying the source of funds to be used to pay for the additional capacity; and WHEREAS, once approved by the Monroe County Board of County Commission, the Public Facilities Capacity Assessment Report becomes the official assessment of public facilities upon which development approvals will be based for the next year; and WHEREAS, the Monroe County Land Development Regulations requires the Board of County Commissioners to adopt an annual assessment of public facilities capacity for unincorporated Monroe County. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners makes the following findings of facts: 1. The 2011 annual assessment is used to evaluate the existing level of services for roads, solid waste, potable water, and educational facilities; and 2. The 2011 Public Facilities Capacity Assessment Report becomes the official assessment of public facilities upon which development approvals will be reviewed and approved for the upcoming year; and Page 1 of 3 3. Section 114-2 of the Land Development Regulations provides the minimum standards for level of service for roads, solid waste, potable water and educational facilities; and 4. Section 114-2 of the Land Development Regulations requires the annual assessment of public facilities capacity to clearly state those portions of unincorporated Monroe County with adequate, inadequate or marginally adequate public facilities; and 5. The 2011 annual assessment finds that sufficient capacity exists for solid waste, potable water, and educational facilities to meet anticipated growth through 2012; and 6. The capacity assessment of transportation facilities is based on the 2011 US-1 Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study prepared by URS, the County's transportation consultant; and 7. U. S. 1 segments with reserve speeds of less than or equal to 3 mph ("marginally adequate") should be given particular attention when approving development applications; there are seven segments of U.S. 1 in this category, #3-Big Coppitt (MM 9.0 — MM 10.5); Segment #18-Tea Table (MM 77.5 — MM 79.5); Segment 410-Big Pine (MM 29.5 — MM 33.0); Segment #19-U. Matecumbe (MM 79.5 — MM 84.0); Segment #14-Grassy (MM 54.0 — MM 60.5); Segment #20-Windley (84.0 — 86.0); Segment #17-L Matecumbe (MM 73.0 — MM 77.5); and 8. There is level of service changes to seven (7) segments: four (4) resulted in positive level of service changes while three (3) resulted in negative level of service changes. a. The Big Coppitt segment (3) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' b. The Saddlebunch segment (4) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' c. The Sugarloaf segment (5) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' d. The Grassy Key (Segment 14) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' e. The Cudjoe segment (6) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' £ The Summerland segment (11) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' g. The Windley Key (Segment 20) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `C' 9. Compared to 2010, the median segment speeds increased in thirteen (13) of the 24 segments ranging between 0.1 mph to 3.4 mph. Eleven (11) segments experienced a decrease in median speeds, ranging from 0.1 znph to 3.2 mph, compared to last year's data. 10. The biggest difference in speed change was observed for segment 20, Windley Key. The level of service changed from an `A' to a `C'. The Windley Key segment experienced a noticeable drop in speed due to residual effect of the draw bridge operation at the Snake Creek. Page 2 of 3 11. Based on this year's results, the Lower Matecumbe (Segment 17), and Tea Table (Segment 18) continue to function below the LOS C threshold; both have reserve capacity within the 5% allocation. 12. Big Coppitt (Segment 3) and Grassy (Segment 14) have improved to LOS C. 13.In March 2008, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) approved the FKAA's modification of WUP 13-00005-5-W for a 20-year allocation from the Biscayne and Floridan Aquifers. 14. The WUP provides an annual allocation of 8,751 Million Gallons (MG) or 23.98 MGD and a maximum monthly allocation of 809 MG with a limited annual withdrawal from the Biscayne Aquifer of 6,492 MG or 17.79 MGD and an average dry season (December 1"-April 30"') of 17.0 MGD. 15. The reverse osmosis water treatment system provides an additional 6.0 MGD of potable water. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA: The annual Assessment of Public Facilities Capacity for 2011 is approved. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 17"' day of August, 2011 Mayor Heather Carruthers Mayor pro tent David Rice Commissioner Kim Wigington Commissioner George Neugent Commissioner Sylvia J. Murphy BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA I: AT'TEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK DEPUTY CLERK Mayor Heather Carruthers MONROE COUNTY ATTORNEY 'App VED AS TO FORK ate M. GRII Y �:UNTY ATTORNEY AS !( Page 3 of 3 2011 MONROE COUNTY PUBLIC FACILITIES CAPACITY ASSESSMENT REPORT GROWTH MANAGEMENT TRANSPORTATION POTABLE WATER EDUCATION SOLID WASTE PARKS AND RECREATION Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 1 of 56 TABLE OF CONTENTS ExecutiveSummary...................................................................................................... 3 I. Growth Management....................................................................................................11 II. Transportation...............................................................................................................24 III. Potable Water................................................................................................................37 IV. Education......................................................................................................................44 V. Solid Waste...................................................................................................................47 VI. Parks and Recreation.....................................................................................................51 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 2 of 56 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Monroe County Land Development (LDC) Section 114-2 mandates an annual assessment of the roads, solid waste, potable water, and school facilities serving the unincorporated portion of Monroe County. In the event that these public facilities have fallen or are projected to fall below the level of service (LOS) required by the LDC, development activities must conform to special procedures to ensure that public facilities are not further burdened. The LDC clearly states that building permits shall not be issued unless the proposed use is or will be served by adequate public or private facilities. As required by LDC Section 114-2 the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) shall consider and approve the annual report, with or without modifications. Any modifications that result in an increase of development capacity must be accompanied by findings of fact, including the reasons for the increase and the funding source to pay for the additional capacity required to serve the additional development. Once approved, this document becomes the official report on public facilities upon which development approvals will be based for the next year. This report distinguishes between areas of adequate, inadequate and marginally adequate facility capacity. Inadequate facility capacity is defined as those areas with capacity below the adopted LOS standard. Marginally adequate capacity is defined as those areas at the adopted LOS standard or that are projected to reach inadequate capacity within the next twelve months. 2011 ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC FACILITIES Potable water, roads, solid waste, and schools have adequate capacity to serve the growth anticipated in 2011 at the adopted level of service standard. The status of each facility is summarized below. Potable Water In March 2009, South Florida Water Management District approved the FKAA's modification of WUP 13-00005-5-W for a 20-year allocation from the Biscayne and Florida Aquifers. This water use permit (WUP) provides an annual allocation of 8,751 million gallons or 23.98 MGD. The planned constriction of the new water supply wells and Reverse Osmosis (RO) water treatment facility will provide an additional capacity of 6.0 MGD. With the constriction of the new water supply wells and reverse osmosis (RO) water treatment facility, the new reclaimed systems, and the ability to operate the 3.0 MGD RO desalination plants during emergency situations, there is an adequate supply of water to meet current and future demands, based on current conditions and projections. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 3 of 56 Schools Enrollment figures for the 2010-2011 through 2014-2015 school years indicate that there is adequate capacity in the Monroe County school system. The overall 2010-2011 utilization is 66.88% of the school system capacity. Solid Waste Monroe County has a contract with Waste Management Inc. (WMI). The contract authorizes the use of in -state facilities through September 30, 2016, thereby providing the County with approximately five (5) years of guaranteed capacity. There is adequate capacity for solid waste generation for the next twelve (12) months. Roads: Based on the findings of the 2011 U.S. 1 Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study for Monroe County, as prepared by URS Corporation Southern Consultants, U.S. 1 has an overall level of service (LOS) C. Compared to last year's (2010) study results, on U. S. 1, there are level of service changes to seven (7) segments — four (4) resulted in positive level of service changes while three (3) resulted in negative level of service changes. • The Big Coppitt segment (3) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' • The Saddlebunch segment (4) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' • The Sugarloaf segment (5) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' • The Grassy Key (Segment 14) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' • The Cudjoe segment (6) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' • The Summerland segment (11) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' • The Windley Key (Segment 20) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `C' SUMMARY Public facilities continue to be adequate. Potable water, solid waste, roads, and schools have sufficient capacity to serve the growth anticipated in 2011 at the adopted level of service. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 4 of 56 INTRODUCTION The 2011 Annual Assessment of Public Facilities Capacity is mandated by the Monroe County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 114-2, titled Adequate Facilities and Development Review Procedures. The State of Florida requires all local jurisdictions to adopt regulations ensuring "concurrency" or providing public facilities in order to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service standard. In other words, local governments must establish regulations to ensure that public facilities and services that are needed to support development are available simultaneously with development impacts. Section 114-2 contains two main sets of requirements: the minimum service standards for the four primary public facilities (roads, solid waste, potable water, schools), and an annual assessment process to determine the available capacity of these public facilities. Section 114-2(3) requires the Director of Planning to prepare an annual report to the BOCC on the capacity of available public facilities. This report must determine the potential amount of residential and nonresidential growth expected in the upcoming year and make an assessment of how well the water supply facilities, solid waste, roads, and schools will accommodate that growth. The report considers potential growth and public facility capacity for only the next twelve months. In addition, the report must identify areas of unincorporated Monroe County with only marginal and/or inadequate capacity for public facilities. Section 114-2(b)(4) requires the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) to consider this report and approve its findings either with or without modifications. The BOCC cannot act to increase development capacity beyond that demonstrated in this report without making specific findings of fact as to the reasons for the increase and identifying the source of funds to be used to pay for the additional capacity. Once approved by the BOCC, this document becomes the official assessment of public facilities upon which development approvals will be based for the next year. In the event public facilities have fallen or are projected to fall below the level of service (LOS) standards required by the Comprehensive Plan or the LDC, development activities must conform to special procedures to ensure that public facilities are not further burdened. The Comprehensive Plan and the LDC clearly states that building permits shall not be issued unless the proposed use is or will be served by adequate public or private facilities. Comprehensive Plan Objective 10 1. 1 states: "Monroe County shall ensure that at the time a development permit is issued, adequate public facilities are available to serve the development at the adopted level of service standards concurrent with the impacts of such development." The LDC, Section 114-2, "Adequate Facilities and Development Review Procedures" states: "Local governments must establish regulations to ensure that public facilities and services that are needed to support development are available simultaneously with development impacts." 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 5 of 56 PUBLIC FACILITIES STANDARDS There are four (4) primary public facilities that must be monitored for adequate capacity according to the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code (LDC). These facilities are roads, solid waste, potable water and schools. The available capacity for each of these facilities may be either sufficient to accommodate projected growth over the next year, marginally adequate, or inadequate. In situations where public facilities serving an area are projected to be only marginally adequate or inadequate over the next year, the LDC sets out a review procedure to be followed when issuing development permits in that area. Section 114-2(b)(5)b of the LDC states: "The county shall not approve applications for development in areas of the county which are served by inadequate facilities identified in the annual adequate facilities (Public Facility Capacity Assessment) report, except the county may approve development that will have no reduction in the capacity of the facility or where the developer agrees to increase the level of service of the facility to the adopted level of service standard." The LDC goes on to state that "in areas of marginal facility capacity as identified in the current annual adequate facilities report, the county shall either deny the application or condition the approval so that the level of service standard is not violated." The determination of an additional development's impact on existing public facilities in areas with marginal or inadequate capacity is determined by a "facilities impact report" which must be submitted with a development application. Comprehensive Plan, Policy 101.1 establishes that at the time a development permit is issued, adequate public facilities are available to serve the development at the adopted level of service standards concurrent with the impacts of such development. Roads: The LOS for roads is regulated by Section 3.3 Traffic Circulation of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 301.1.1 establishes the LOS for County roads. The policy states: "For all County roads, Monroe County hereby adopts a minimum peak hour level of service (LOS) standard of D, based on the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) methodology for determination of LOS, as measured by peak hour traffic volume. The County shall maintain the level of service on County roads within five percent (5%) of LOS D. Policy 301.1.2 establishes the LOS for U.S. 1. The policy states: "For U.S. 1, Monroe County hereby adopts a level of service (LOS) standard of C based on the methodology development by the US-1 LOS Task Force and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners in August 1991, for analyzing the LOS on US-1 in Monroe County. This methodology replaces a peak hour volume standard for US-1. The level of service on US-1 shall be maintained within five percent (5%) of LOS C. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 6 of 56 Section 114-2(a) of the LDC pertains to the minimum standards for public facilities. 1. Roads: a. U.S. 1 shall have sufficient available capacity to operate at a Level of Service (LOS) C on an overall basis as measured by the U.S. 1 Level of Service Task Force Methodology. In addition, the segment(s) of U.S. 1, as identified in the U.S. 1 Level of Service Task Force Methodology, which would be directly impacted by a proposed development's access to U.S. 1, shall have sufficient available capacity to operate at LOS C as measured by the U.S. 1 Level of Service Task Force Methodology. b. County Road 905 within three (3) miles of a parcel proposed for development shall have sufficient available capacity to operate at LOS D as measured on an annual average daily traffic (AADT) basis at all intersection and/or roadway segments. All secondary roads where traffic is entering or leaving a development or have direct access shall have sufficient available capacity to operate at LOS D as measured on an annual average daily traffic (AADT) basis. c. In areas which are served by inadequate transportation facilities on U.S. 1, development may be approved provided that the development in combination with all other development will not decrease travel speeds by more than five percent (5%) below LOS C. Potable Water: The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan regulates the LOS standards and the LDC regulates the source of potable water for development or use. Objective 701.1 Monroe County shall ensure that at the time a development permit is issued, adequate potable water supply, treatment, and distribution facilities are available to support the development at the adopted level of service standards concurrent with the impacts of such development. Policy 701.1.1 Monroe County hereby adopts the following level of service standards to achieve Objective 701.1 and shall use these standards as the basis for determining facility capacity and the demand generated by a development. Level of Service Standards 1. Quantity: Residential LOS 66.50 gal./capita/day Non -Residential LOS 0.35 gal./sq. ft./day Overall LOS 132.00 gal./capita/day (Ord. 021-2009) Equivalent Residential Unit 149.00 gallons per day (2.24 average persons per household x 66.5 gallons/capita/day) 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 7 of 56 2. Minimum Pressure: 20 PSI at customer service 3. Minimum Potable Water Quality: Shall be as defined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (Part 143-National Secondary Drinking Standards, 40 CFR 143, 44FR 42198) The LDC Section 114-2(3) does not include a LOS standard but requires sufficient potable water from an approved and permitted source shall be available to satisfy the projected water needs of a proposed development, or use. Approved and permitted sources shall include cisterns, wells, FKAA distribution systems, individual water condensation systems, and any other system which complies with the Florida standards for potable water. Solid Waste: The Comprehensive Plan and the LDC require that "sufficient capacity shall be available at a solid waste disposal site to accommodate all existing and approved development for a period of at least three years from the projected date of completion of a proposed development or use" (LDC, Section 114-2(a)(2)). Objective 801.1 Monroe County shall ensure that solid waste collection service and disposal capacity is available to serve development at the adopted level of service standards, concurrent with the impacts of such development. Policy 801.1.1 Monroe County hereby adopts the following level of service standards to achieve Objective 801.1, and shall use these standards as the basis for determining facility capacity and the demand generated by a development. Level of Service Standards: Disposal Quantity: 5.44 pounds per capita per day or 12.2 pounds per day per ERU (Equivalent Residential Unit) Haul Out Capacity: 95,000 tons per year or 42,668 ERUs. Duration of Capacity: Sufficient capacity shall be available at a solid waste disposal site to accommodate all existing and approved development for a period of three (3) years from the projected date of completion of the proposed development or use. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 8 of 56 Schools: The Comprehensive Plan does not establish a LOS standard for schools but does include Policy 1301.5.6 which requires the County to coordinate with the District School Board of Monroe County on the siting and expansion of required facilities. LDC Section 114-2 requires that school classroom capacity be available to accommodate all school -age children to be generated by the proposed development or use. Parks and Recreation: An annual assessment of parks and recreational facilities is not mandated by Monroe County Code, Section 114-2, but data for parks and recreational facilities is provided in this document. Level of Service standards for parks and recreational facilities are not mentioned in the LDC, but are listed in Policy 1201.1.1 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Policy 1201.1.1 Monroe County hereby adopts the following level of service standards to achieve Objective 1201.1, and shall use these standards as the basis for determining recreation land and facility capacity: Level of Service Standards for Neighborhood and Community Parks: 1. 0.82 acres per 1,000 functional population of passive, resource -based neighborhood and community parks; and 2. 0.82 acres per 1,000 functional population of activity -based neighborhood and community parks within each of the Upper Keys, Middle Keys, and Lower Keys subareas. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 9 of 56 14 PERMITTING AND PUBLIC FACILITIES SERVICE AREAS LDC Section 114-2(b)(2) Adequate Facilities and Development Review Procedures divides unincorporated Monroe County into three (3) service areas for the purpose of assessing potential growth and how public facilities can accommodate that growth. The boundaries mentioned in the Monroe County Land Development Code have been revised to account for incorporations of the Village of Islamorada and the City of Marathon. Section 114-2(b)(2) defines the county's unincorporated public facilities service areas: • Upper Keys Service Area: north of the Whale Harbor Bridge; • Middle Keys Service Area: between the Seven Mile Bridge and Whale Harbor Bridge; and • Lower Keys Service Area: south (west) of the Seven Mile Bridge. The map shows the three (3) service areas of the Keys as they are currently recognized. MONROE COUNTY MAP The Upper Keys MM 112-91 The Middle Keys MM 91-47 I 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 10 of 56 I. GROWTH MANAGEMENT GROWTH ANALYSIS This section of the report examines the projected growth of Monroe County's permanent, seasonal and functional population, occupied and vacant housing data, Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) and Nonresidential Rate of Growth Ordinance (NROGO) allocations and Building Department permit data. CENSUS DATA The U.S. Census Bureau released 2010 demographic information related to population, housing on March 17, 2011. The following tables provide summary information for Monroe County and the incorporated municipalities. Information from the 2000 Census has been included for comparison purposes. The permanent population for the Florida Keys (unincorporated and incorporated) declined by 8% (-6,499 people) from the year 2000 to 2010. Total housing units increased by 1,147 units or 2%. The number of occupied units decreased by 2,457 units or 7%. Vacant units increased by 3,604 units or 22%. Census 2000 Census 2010 Change % Change POPULATION City of Key West 25,478 24,649 -829 -3.25% City of Marathon 10,255 8,297 -1,958 -19.09% City of Key Colony Beach 788 797 +9 1.14% City of Layton 186 184 -2 -1.08% Village of Islamorada 6,846 6,119 -727 -10.62% Unincorporated Monroe County 36,036 33,044 -2,992 -8.30% Total Population (Uninc. County & Cities) 79,589 73,090 -6,499 -8.17% HOUSING UNITS City of Key West 13,306 14,107 +801 6.01% City of Marathon 6,791 6,187 -604 -8.89% City of Key Colony Beach 1,293 1,431 +138 10.67% City of Layton 165 184 +19 11.15% Village of Islamorada 5,461 5,692 +231 4.23% Unincorporated Monroe County 24,601 25,163 +562 2.28% Total Housing Units (Uninc. County & Cities) 51,617 52,764 +1,147 2.22% Total housing units (Uninc. County & Cities) 51,617 52,764 +1,147 2.22% Occupied housing units (Uninc. County & Cities) 35,086 32,629 -2,457 -7.00% Vacant housing units (Uninc. County & Cities) 16,531 20,135 +3,604 21.80% Vacant housing units (Uninc. County & Cities) F 32.02% 1 38.16% 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 11 of 56 POPULATION ESTIMATES Functional population is the sum of seasonal and permanent population estimates. Permanent residents are people who spend all or most of the year living in Monroe County, and as such, exert a relatively constant demand on all public facilities. Seasonal population figures are the number of seasonal residents and visitors in the Keys on any given evening. They are composed of the tourist population and residents spending less than six months in the Keys. The seasonal population has a higher cyclical demand on public facilities like roads and solid waste. The 2010 estimated population for unincorporated Monroe County is 70,808 (2010) and by 2030 it is projected to increase by 3,149 additional persons. This is an increase of 157.5 persons per year through the twenty year planning horizon. Functional Population Estimates and Projections, 2010-2030 Functional Population Year Lower Keys Middle Keys Upper Keys Unincorporated Monroe County Total 2010 39,645 2,183 28,980 70,808 2015 40,181 2,212 29,370 71,763 2020 40,592 2,234 29,668 72,494 2025 41,003 2,256 29,966 73,225 2030 j 41,414 j 2,278 30,265 73,957 Source: Fishkind & Associates, Inc., 2010, Unincorporated Monroe County Population Projections BEBR, February 2010, Number of Households and Average Household Size in Florida: April 1, 2009 The population projections for the 2010-2030 planning period indicate a loss of permanent population. The data suggests the permanent population losses and associate increase in vacant housing units is being shifted into an increase in seasonal population. Fishkind & Associates estimates that while permanent population decreases at an average rate of less than one percent every five years, seasonal population increases at an average rate of 2.57 percent every five years; resulting in a shift in population from permanent to seasonal. Overall, functional population or total population for the unincorporated County will increase at an average rate of less than one percent, every five years, in the twenty year planning period. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 12 of 56 HOUSING According to the U.S. Census, housing units are broken down into occupied and vacant units. The Census defines housing units as "a house, apartment, group of rooms, or single room occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters." Occupied housing units are occupied if there is "at least one person who lives in the unit as a usual resident at the time of the interview, or if the occupants are only temporarily absent, for example, on vacation. However, if the unit is occupied entirely by people with a usual residence elsewhere, the unit is classified as vacant, such as seasonal units. The table below shows the housing units by status and tenure from the 2007-2009 American Communities Survey. Housing Units by Status and Tenure by Units in Structure 2007-2009 Monroe County -Unincorporated and Incorporated Areas HOUSING OCCUPANCY Estimates Percent Total housing units 54,115 Occupied housing units 28,909 53.40% Vacant housing units 25,206 46.60% UNITS IN STRUCTURE Estimates Percent Total housing units 54,115 1-unit, detached 28,671 53.00% 1-unit, attached 5,333 9.90% 2 units 1,751 3.20% 3 or 4 units 2,350 4.30% 5 to 9 units 3,152 5.80% 10 to 19 units 1,603 3.00% 20 or more units 3,420 6.30% Mobile home 7,705 14.20% Boat, RV, van, etc. 130 0.20% HOUSING TENURE Estimates Percent Occupied housing units 28,909 Owner -occupied 19,368 67.00% Renter -occupied 9,541 3 3.00% Average household size of owner - occupied unit 2.42 Average household size of renter - occupied unit 2.63 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 13 of 56 RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL RATE OF GROWTH ORDINANCES ROGO Due to the limitation on the amount of growth the County could absorb, based on the Carrying Capacity and Hurricane Evacuation Studies, on June 23, 1992, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance 016-1992, creating the Residential Dwelling Unit Allocation System, known as the Rate of Growth Ordinance or ROGO. ROGO was developed as a response to the inability of the road network to accommodate a large-scale hurricane evacuation in a timely fashion. It is used as a tool to equitably distribute the remaining number of permits available both geographically and over time. ROGO allows development subject to the ability to safely evacuate the Florida Keys (the Keys) within 24 hours. The annual allocation period, or ROGO year, is the 12-month period beginning on July 13, 1992, (the effective date of the original dwelling unit allocation ordinance), and subsequent one-year periods. The number of dwelling units which can be permitted in Monroe County has been controlled since July of 1992 (adoption of Ordinance 016-92). Rule 28-20.140, F.A.C., and Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.2.3 regulate the number of permits issued annually for residential development under ROGO. Monroe County can award 197 allocations per year. These allocations are divided up geographically and issued quarterly. Each year's ROGO allocation of 197 new units is split with a minimum of 71 units allocated for affordable housing in perpetuity and market rate allocations not to exceed 126 new residential units per year. Rule 28-20.140(b), F.A.C., and Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.2.3 state: "The number of permits issued annually for residential development under the Rate of Growth Ordinance shall not exceed a total annual unit cap of 197, plus any available unused ROGO allocations from a previous ROGO year. Each year's ROGO allocation of 197 units shall be split with a minimum of 71 units allocated for affordable housing in perpetuity and market rate allocations not to exceed 126 residential units per year. Unused ROGO allocations may be retained and made available only for affordable housing and Administrative Relief from ROGO year to ROGO year. Unused allocations for market rate shall be available for Administrative Relief. Any unused affordable allocations will roll over to affordable housing. A ROGO year means the twelve-month period beginning on July 13." LDC, Section 138-24(2) establishes that ROGO allocations are to be awarded quarterly. "Each subarea shall have its number of market rate housing residential ROGO allocations available per ROGO quarter determined by the following formula: a. Market rate residential ROGO allocations available in each subarea per quarter is equal to the market rate residential ROGO allocations available in each subarea divided by four. b. Affordable housing residential ROGO for all four ROGO quarters, including the two available for Big Pine Key, shall be made available at the beginning of the first quarter for a ROGO year." 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 14 of 56 HISTORY Tier System On September 22, 2005, the BOCC adopted Ordinance 025-2005 which revised ROGO and NROGO to utilize the Tier overlay as the basis for the competitive point system. On March 15, 2006, the BOCC adopted Ordinance 009-2006 to implement the Tier System, a Rate of Growth Ordinance. The Tier System changed the service areas (subareas boundaries) mentioned in the Introduction. It is the basis for the scoring of NROGO and ROGO applications and administrative relief. The new ROGO and NROGO subareas are the Lower Keys (Middle Keys are not included in the Lower Keys), Upper Keys, and Big Pine / No Name Keys. Tier Ordinance 009-2006 provides vesting provisions and allows for allocation of an annual cap of 197 residential dwelling units. The Tier System made changes such as subarea boundary districts for allocation distribution, basis of scoring applications, and administrative relief. • During ROGO Year 14 (2004), Ord. 009-2006 was enacted changing the allocation number to 197 (126 market rate 71 affordable) pursuant to Rule 28-20.110, F.A.C. The same rile also returned 165 allocations to the County to be used for affordable housing. • By ROGO Year 15 (2005), the new Big Pine/No Name Key subarea was created. Of the 197 allocations, 8 market rate and 2 affordable allocations are assigned to this subarea. Big Pine Key and No Name Keys Efforts to address the development impacts on the habitat of the Key Deer, Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit and the Eastern Indigo Snake on Big Pine Key/No Name Key started in the mid-1980s. In 1998, Monroe County, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) signed a Memorandum of Agreement in which they committed to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for these two Keys. The Livable CommuniKeys Program (LCP), Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key was adopted on August 18, 2004 pursuant to Ordinance 029-2004. The LCP envisioned the issuance of 200 residential dwelling units over 20 year horizon at a rate of roughly 10 per year. A minimum of twenty percent (20%) of the 10 units per year are to be set aside for affordable housing development (e.g. 2 units per year set aside for affordable housing.) On June 9, 2006, a Federal Incidental Take Permit (4TE08341 1 -0, ITP) from the U.S. Federal Fish and Wildlife Commission was issued to three (3) permitees: Monroe County, Florida Department of Transportation, and the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The ITP ensures that development bears its fair share of required mitigation and that the take of the covered species is minimized and mitigated. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 15 of 56 NROGO Monroe County adopted the Non -Residential Rate of Growth (NROGO) in 2001 in order to ensure a reasonable balance between the amount of future non-residential development and the needs of a slower growing residential population. Nonresidential permits include everything that is not residential, such as industrial, commercial, nonprofit and public buildings, and replacement or remodeling of existing nonresidential strictures and is regulated by the Nonresidential Rate of Growth Ordinance (NROGO). Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.3.1 limits the County's availability of nonresidential square footage that may be permitted. This policy assures that the balance of residential to nonresidential development is maintained. On average, the BOCC approves an annual availability of 35'000ft2 of NROGO floor area allocations. Policy 101.3.1 states: "Monroe County shall maintain a balance between residential and non-residential growth by limiting the square footage of non-residential development to maintain a ratio of approximately 239 square feet of new non-residential development for each new residential unit permitted through the Residential Permit Allocation System." Big Pine and No Name Keys NROGO for the Big Pine/No Name Key subarea is treated differently given the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Key Deer and other protected species. The maximum amount of nonresidential floor area to be allocated is limited to a maximum of 2,500 square feet for any one site. Section 138-51 of the LDC establishes the semi-annual award distribution of NROGO allocations and the annual award allocations on Big Pine Key and No Name Keys. LDC, Section 138-51: Annual allocation The Board of County Commissioners may make available for allocation all or part of the maximum annual allocation. This annual allocation may be distributed between the two allocation dates. First allocations for Big Pine Key and No Name Key For the first allocation period (starting ROGO year 15, quarter 1), the maximum amount of floor area available for allocation shall be based on the number of permits issued under the 200 allocations authorized by the Big Pine Key and No Name Key Community Master Plan and the number of ROGO allocations to be made available in the ROGO year 15, beginning July 14, 2006. Separate allocations for Big Pine Key and No Name Key Allocations for Big Pine Key and No Name Key shall be administered and awarded separately from those for the remainder of the unincorporated county. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 16 of 56 RATE OF GROWTH ORDINANCE (ROGO) ANALYSIS There is a time lapse which occurs between the ROGO allocation date and the permit issuance date. An allocation award expires when its corresponding building permit is not picked up after sixty (60) days of notification by certified mail of the award, or after issuance of the building permit, or upon expiration of the permit. The data presented in the table below do not include allocations issued in Key West, Key Colony Beach, Layton, Islamorada or Marathon. ROGO ALLOCATIONS ROGO Year 14 (July 13, 2005 — July 14, 2006) One -hundred and twenty-six (126) market rate and seven (7) affordable housing allocations were approved. On July 19, 2006, the BOCC approved the reservation of forty (40) affordable housing allocations (Ordinance 273-2006). There were 173 allocations awarded in Year 14. YEAR 14 ALLOCATIONS AWARDED MARKET RATE 126 ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF AFFORDABLE HOUSING 7 AFFORDABLE RESERVATIONS 40 TOTAL 173 ROGO Year 15 (July 15. 2006 — July 13. 2007 Eighty-nine (89) market rate ROGO allocations were awarded. There were thirty-seven (37) administrative reliefs allocations awarded and twelve (12) affordable housing allocations were awarded. There were five (5) allocations reserved by County Resolution 273-2006. There were 143 allocations awarded in Year 15. YEAR 15 ALLOCATIONS AWARDED MARKET RATE 89 ADMINSTRATIVE RELIEF 37 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 12 AFFORDABLE RESERVATIONS 5 TOTAL 143 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 17 of 56 ROGO Year 16 (July 14. 2007 — July 14. 2 Ninety-five (95) market rate ROGO allocations, thirty-one (31) administrative relief allocations and nine (9) affordable housing allocations were awarded. On July 19, 2006, the BOCC approved Resolution 273-2006 reserving one -hundred and thirty-three (133) affordable housing allocations. Two -hundred and sixty-eight (268) allocations were awarded in Year 16. YEAR 16 ALLOCATIONS AWARDED MARKET RATE 95 ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF 31 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 9 AFFORDABLE RESERVATIONS 133 TOTAL 268 ROGO Year 17 (July 15. 2008 — July 14. 2 Two -hundred and eight -five (285) market rate allocations, fifty-five (55) administrative relief allocations and one (1) affordable housing allocation were awarded. Three hundred and forty-one (341) allocations were awarded in Year 17. YEAR 17 ALLOCATIONS AWARDED MARKET RATE 285 ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF 55 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 1 AFFORDABLE RESERVATIONS 0 TOTAL 341 * Monroe County received 80 additional allocations through agreements. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 18 of 56 ROGO Year 18 (July 14, 2009 — July 12, 2010) Ninety-three (93) market rate and ten (10) administrative relief allocations were awarded. There were twenty-five (25) market rate allocations held in abeyance. One hundred and twenty-eight (128) allocations were awarded in Year 18. YEAR 18 ALLOCATIONS AWARDED MARKET RATE 93 MARKET RATE -HELD IN ABEYANCE 25 ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF 10 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 0 AFFORDABLE RESERVATIONS 0 TOTAL 128 ROGO Year 19 (July 13, 2010 —April 12, 2011)[Quarters 1-31 Seventy-one (71) market rate and three (3) administrative relief allocations were awarded. Nineteen (19) market rate allocations were held in abeyance. Ninety-three (93) allocations were awarded in Year 19, Quarters 1, 2, and 3. YEAR 19 QTRS 1, 2, AND 3 ALLOCATIONS AWARDED MARKET RATE 71 MARKET RATE -HELD IN ABEYANCE 19 ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF 3 AFFORDABLE HOUSING 0 AFFORDABLE RESERVATIONS 0 TOTAL 93 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 19 of 56 NONRESIDENTIAL RATE OF GROWTH ORDINANCE (NROGO) ANALYSIS The "maximum annual allocations" and the distribution between the first and second allocation dates are determined by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) and as recommended by Growth Management and the Planning Commission. This provides flexibility and assures that goals are being met. A summary of square footage of non-residential floor area previously made available and allocated in the unincorporated Keys from Year 14 (2006) to Year 19 (2011) is shown below. NROGO Allocations for Unincorporated Monroe County (Excluding Big Pine/No Name Keys) Year 14 (2006) to Year 19 (2011) Year Amount Available Total Allocations Awarded Year 14 (2006) 16,000 sq/ft 12,494 sq/ft Year 15 (2007) 18,000 sq/ft 12,500 sq/ft Year 16 (2008) 35,000 sq/ft 17,938 sq/ft Year 17 (2009) 30,000 sq/ft 13,056 sq/ft Year 18 (2010) 22,500 sq/ft 6,350 sq/ft Year 19 (Period 1, 2011) 22,500 sq/ft 6,116 sq/ft Monroe County Technical Document July 2011 NROGO for the Big Pine/No Name Key subarea is treated differently given the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Key Deer and other protected species. The maximum amount of nonresidential floor area to be allocated is limited to a maximum of 2,500 square feet for any one site. A summary of allocations in these environmentally sensitive keys is shown below. NROGO Allocations for Big Pine/No Name Keys Year 14 2006 — Year 19 2011 Year Number of Applicants Total Allocations Awarded Year 15 (2007) 2 5,000 sq/ft Year 16 (2008) 2 3,809 sq/ft Year 17 (2009) 0 0 sq/ft Year 18 (2010) 0 0 sq/ft Year 19 (Period 1, 2011) 0 0 sq/ft Monroe County Technical Document July 2011 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 20 of 56 BUILDING PERMIT DATA There were 2,067 dwelling units that received a building permit from April 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010. Of these units, approximately 80 percent were single family homes and 16 percent were mobile homes and recreational vehicles. An average of 190 new and replacement dwelling units were permitted from 2001 to 2010. Of the 2,067 dwelling unit permits issued, 1,172 were the result of obtaining a ROGO allocation. Of the 2,067 dwelling units permits issued, a total of 1,229 dwelling units received a certificate of occupancy. Residential Building Permit Activity, April 1, 2000 — December 31, 2010 Mobile Total Permits Year Single Duplex Multi Home / Hotel / Permits Issued Received Family Family RV Motel Issued Under CO ROGO April 1, 2000- December 31, 2000 92 0 35 32 7 166 92 165 January 1, 2001- 151 0 13 55 1 220 118 157 December 31, 2001 January 1, 2001- 193 0 25 81 0 299 181 162 December 31, 2002 January 1, 2001- 235 0 0 44 0 279 161 152 December 31, 2003 January 1, 2001- 126 0 0 47 0 173 105 175 December 31, 2004 January 1, 2001- 295 0 0 29 0 324 160 111 December 31, 2005 January 1, 2001- 377 0 2 14 0 393 198 92 December 31, 2006 January 1, 2001- 106 0 0 13 0 119 103 118 December 31, 2007 January 1, 2001- 46 0 3 11 0 60 45 61 December 31, 2008 January 1, 2001- 24 0 0 3 0 27 4 29 December 31, 2009 January 1, 2001- 5 0 0 2 0 7 5 7 December 31, 2010 TOTAL 1,650 0 78 331 8 2,067 1,172 1,229 Monroe County Technical Document July 2011 RV -Residential Vehicle CO -Certificate of Occupancy 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 21 of 56 A total of 706 dwelling units were demolished from 2000 Census to 2010. The highest demolition rate occurred in years 2005 and 2006 with 353 units demolished. This accounts for about 50 percent of units demolished from 2001 to 2010. An average of 70 dwelling units were demolished per year between 2001 and 2010. At this time it is not possible to determine, whether a demolition was for a single family, a mobile home, etc. Housing Demolition and Replacement Year Residential Demolitions April 1, 2000 - December 31, 2000 2 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2001 17 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2002 24 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2003 32 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2004 80 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2005 169 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2006 184 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2007 79 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2008 52 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2009 40 January 1, 2001-December 31, 2010 22 TOTAL 706 Monroe County Technical Document July 2011 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 22 of 56 A total of 642 mobile homes were replaced with a single family dwelling unit; 229 single family homes were replaced with a single family unit; and 294 mobile homes were replaced with a mobile home. A total of 1,165 replacement units received a certificate of occupancy from April 1, 2000 to end of 2010. Replacement Units Receiving Certificate of Occupancy April 1, 2000 — December 31, 2010 MH to SFR RV Park Model Total Units Year SFR MH to MH to Replacement Replacement Receiving SFR a CO April 1, 2000 - 21 55 21 0 0 97 December 31, 2000 January 1, 2001- 11 41 14 0 0 66 December 31, 2001 January 1, 2001- 14 47 18 0 0 79 December 31, 2002 January 1, 2001- 27 34 26 0 0 87 December 31, 2003 January 1, 2001- 85 27 19 0 0 131 December 31, 2004 January 1, 2001- 90 28 19 0 0 137 December 31, 2005 January 1, 2001- 136 22 18 0 0 176 December 31, 2006 January 1, 2001- 143 12 30 0 0 185 December 31, 2007 January 1, 2001- 54 18 23 0 0 95 December 31, 2008 January 1, 2001- 30 7 24 0 0 61 December 31, 2009 January 1, 2001- 31 3 17 0 0 51 December 31, 2010 Total 642 294 229 0 0 1,165 Monroe County Technical Document July 2011 MH-Mobile Home; SFR-Single Family Residential; CO -Certificate of Occupancy; RV -Recreational Vehicle It is important to highlight that in the last ten years (2001-2010) a total of 936 mobile home units were replaced. Of the 936 mobile home units replaced, 642 were replaced for single family units. The replacement of mobile home units to single family units represents a 68.5 percent loss of mobile homes to single family units, in the last ten years. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 23 of 56 IL TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Roads are one (1) of the four (4) critical public facilities identified for annual assessment in the Monroe County Land Development (LDC). The Comprehensive Plan and LDC regulations require U.S. 1 to remain at a LOS C or higher and that all county roads to remain at a LOS D or higher. The Monroe County Division of Public Works is charged with maintaining and improving secondary roads within the boundaries of unincorporated Monroe County. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is responsible for maintaining U.S. 1. Monroe County has conducted travel time and delay studies of U.S. 1 annually since 1992. The primary objective of the U.S. 1 Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study is to monitor the level of service on U.S. 1 for concurrency management purposes pursuant to Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Policy 301.1.1., and LDC Section 114-2(a). The study utilizes an empirical relationship between the volume -based capacities and the speed -based level of service methodology developed by the U.S. 1 Level of Service Task Force. The U.S. 1 Level of Service Task Force is a multi -agency group with members from Monroe County, the Florida Department of Transportation and the Florida Department of Community Affairs. The 1997 adopted methodology considers both the overall level of service from Key West to the mainland and the level of service on 24 segments. The methodology was developed from basic criteria and principles contained in Chapter 7 (Rural Multilane Highways), Chapter 8 (Rural Two -Lane Highways) and Chapter 11 (Urban and Suburban Arterials) of the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual. U.S. 1 Segments and Mile Markers Segment Number Mile Marker Segment Name Segment Number Mile Marker Segment Name 1 4-5 Stock Island 12 40-47 7-Mile Bridge 2 5-9 Boca Chica 13 47-54 Marathon 3 9-10.5 Big Coppitt 14 54-60.5 Grassy 4 10.5-16.5 Saddlebunch 15 60.5-63 Duck 5 16.5-20.5 Sugarloaf 16 63-73 Long 6 20.5-23 Cudjoe 17 73-77.5 L. Matecumbe 7 23-25 Summerland 18 77.5-79.5 Tea Table 8 25-27.5 Ramrod 19 79.5-85.4 U. Matecumbe 9 27.5-29.5 Torch 20 84-86 Windley 10 29.5-33 Big Pine 21 86-91.5 Plantation 11 3 3 - 4 0 Bahia Honda 22 91.5-99.5 Tavernier This section of the report investigates the current capacity of the transportation network in Monroe County. The analysis includes changes in traffic volumes, the level of service (LOS) of U.S. 1, and the reserve capacity of the highway. All data and analysis was obtained from the 2011 U. S. 1 Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study prepared by URS Corporation Southern. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 24 of 56 EXISTING ROADWAY FACILITIES There are over 100 miles of islands in Monroe County connected by 42 bridges on one single highway. This single highway, the Overseas Highway (U.S. 1), functions as a collector, an arterial, and the "Main Street' for the Keys. U.S. 1 is a lifeline for the Keys from both public safety and economic perspectives. Each day it carries food, supplies and tourists from the mainland. In the event of a hurricane, it is the only viable evacuation route to the mainland for most of Monroe County. U.S. 1 in Monroe County is predominantly a two-lane road. Of its 112 total miles, approximately 80 miles (74%) are two-lane segments that are undivided. The four - lane sections are located on Key Largo (MM 95 to 108), Tavernier (MM 90 to 95), Marathon (MM 48 to 54), Bahia Honda (MM 35 to 37), and from Key West to Boca Chica (MM 2 to 9). In addition to U.S. 1, there are 450 miles of county (secondary) roads with 38 bridges. Combined, U.S. 1 and county (secondary) roads have approximately 340 intersections in the Keys. LEVEL OF SERVICE ON U.S. 1 SEGMENTS There are twenty four (24) segments of U.S. 1 from Mile Marker 4 to Mile Marker 112. The segments were defined by the U.S. 1 Level of Service Task Force to reflect roadway cross sections, speed limits, and geographical boundaries. The Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code require each segment of the highway maintain a LOS of C or better. The LOS criteria for segment speeds on U.S. 1 in Monroe County depend on the flow characteristics and the posted speed limits within the given segment. Segment speeds reflect the conditions experienced during local trips. Given that U.S. 1 serves as the "main street" of the Keys, the movement of local traffic is also an important consideration on this multipurpose highway. However, the determination of the median speed on a segment is a more involved process than determining the overall level of service since different segments have different conditions. Segment conditions depend on the flow characteristics and the posted speed limits within the given segment. Flow characteristics relate to the ability of a vehicle to travel through a particular segment without being slowed or stopped by traffic signals or other devices. Segments with a series of permanent traffic signals or other similar traffic control devices in close proximity to each other are considered to be "Interrupted Flow Segments" and are expected to have longer travel times due to the delays caused by these signals or control devices. Roadway segments without a series of signals or control devices are considered to be "Uninterrupted Flow Segments". 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 25 of 56 Full -Si nalized Intersections Mile Marker Key Street Segment 4.4 Stock Island College Road 1 4.6 Stock Island Cross Street 1 4.8 Stock Island MacDonald Avenue 1 19.5 Upper Sugarloaf Crane Boulevard 5 30.3 Big Pine Key Key Deer Boulevard 10 48.5 Marathon 33rd Street/School Crossing 13 50 Marathon Sombrero Beach Boulevard 13 52.4 Marathon 107th Street 13 52.5 Marathon 109th Street 13 53 Marathon Pedestrian Crossing 13 53.5 Fat Deer Key Key Colony Causeway 13 54 Fat Deer Key Coco Plum Drive 13/14 90 Plantation Key Woods Avenue/School Crossing 21 90.5 Plantation Key Sunshine Road 21 91.5 Tavernier Ocean Boulevard 21/22 99.5 Key Largo Atlantic Boulevard 22/23 101 Key Largo Tradewinds 23 105 Key Largo Pedestrian Crossing 23 Uninterrupted segments may have one or more traffic signals, but they are not in close proximity to one another as in the interrupted segment case. The methodology used to determine median speed and level of service on a particular segment is based upon that segment's status as an interrupted or uninterrupted flow segment. For all "uninterrupted" segments containing isolated traffic signals, the travel times were reduced by 25 seconds per signal to account for lost time due to signals. The Marathon and the Stock Island segments are considered "interrupted" flow facilities. Therefore, no adjustments were made to travel times on these segments. Uninterrupted Flow Uninterrupted Flow LOS A> 35 mph LOS A 1.5 mph above speed limit LOS B> 28 mph LOS B 1.5 mph below speed limit LOS C> 22 mph LOS C 45 mph below speed limit LOS D> 17 mph LOS D 7.5 mph below speed limit LOS E> 13 mph LOS E 13.5 mph below speed limit LOS F< 13 mph LOS F more than 13.5 mph below speed limit 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 26 of 56 z o� H� �o a o N e � w w 'S a� a� o �o N � w w �-y •� ,-. � � o ,-. v O N � v � ,� � o v c� .. v��i .. m � � v c� o� W � U w a U 0 O U N W Ww a M Vl V Vl V V V V V M Vl Vl M Vl Vl Vl V V V V V V V Vl 7 W U rr^^ h 0 N Qi CC 7 G M V Vl V V Vl N Vl Vl V Vl V Vl V Vl V Vl V N Vl Vl Vl N V V Vl Vl Vl M Vl Vl Vl V Vl Vl V Vl V Vl V l� V V V V 0 A U a V vi V 't V 't vi V O vi V vi V vi V vi vi vi `� V in 'Z •� M Vl M N N N N M l� � � � N � V N V Vl �O �O O w U_ ij O O^ r'�pl � O� � vi O O O l� � M M � � O � O � � � co � � � �' �•' ro m ro > o sh OVERALL LEVEL OF SERVICE ON U. S. 1 The overall level of service or capacity of the entire length of U.S. 1 is measured in the average speed of a vehicle traveling from one end to the other of U.S. 1. Both Monroe County and the Florida Department of Transportation have adopted a LOS C standard for the overall length of U.S. 1. In other words, a vehicle traveling from Mile Marker 4 to Mile Marker 112 (or vice versa) must maintain an average speed of at least 45 mph to achieve the LOS C standard. The median overall speed during the 2011 study was 47.1 mph, which is 0.2 mph higher than the 2010 median speed of 46.9 mph. The mean operating speed was 46.9 mph with a 95%. Compared to last year's (2010) study results, there is level of service changes to seven (7) segments — four (4) resulted in positive level of service changes while three (3) resulted in negative level of service changes. • The Big Coppitt segment (3) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' • The Saddlebunch segment (4) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' • The Sugarloaf segment (5) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' • The Grassy Key (Segment 14) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' • The Cudjoe segment (6) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' • The Summerland segment (11) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' • The Windley Key (Segment 20) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `C' Compared to 2010, the median segment speeds increased in thirteen (13) of the 24 segments ranging between 0.1 mph to 3.4 mph. Eleven (11) segments experienced a decrease in median speeds, ranging from 0.1 mph to 3.2 mph, compared to last year's data. The biggest difference in speed change was observed for segment 20, Windley Key. The level of service changed from an `A'to a `C'. FACTORS AFFECTING LEVEL OF SERVICE Speed Limit The posted speed limits affect both the segment and the overall LOS. For instance, a lower speed limit could benefit a segment's LOS by reducing the difference between the travel speed and the posted speed limit. The reduction in the speed limit, however, negatively impacts the overall LOS because motorists tend to travel at reduced speeds to comply with the speed limits, whereas the overall LOS C threshold is set at 45 mph regardless of the speed limit changes. For these reasons, the posted speed limit is an important component in this study. A large part of the traffic in Monroe County consists of tourist travelers, who generally tend to have a leisurely driving style. The traffic also tends to include a large number of recreational vehicles. Combined with some slow moving heavy vehicles, the travel speeds tend to go below the speed limits when there are no opportunities for faster moving vehicles to pass. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 28 of 56 In Big Pine Key, due to the Key Deer habitat and other endangered species, the speed limit is strictly enforced with additional signs and frequent police presence. The travel speeds in this segment were observed to be near the posted speed limit, unless impeded by delays created by the signal. Delay Events A delay event occurs whenever the speed of the test vehicle fell below 5 mph. The delay event continues until the test vehicle's speed rose to 15 mph. During the study, the observers encountered a total of 141 separate delay events (a 17.5% decrease compared to the 2010 study). Eleven (11) of these delay events totaling 1 hour 17 minutes and 27 seconds were excluded from the overall travel times and the segment travel times. The excluded delays were caused by nonrecurring events such as accidents and roadside constriction. In addition to these eleven (11) nonrecurring delay events, 2 drawbridge delay events were also excluded during this year's travel times (15 minutes and 5 seconds). However, the drawbridge delay events are accounted in calculating the overall travel speeds. Signal Delays The largest single recurring delay source along U.S. 1 in Monroe County is traffic signals. During the 2011 study, 118 (84%) out of 141 delay events were caused by signals which is 12% higher than the 2010 study. The signal delays accounted for 46 minutes and 14 seconds (31% of total delays). The mean delay per event for signals in segments 10, 13, 14 and 22 are higher than the LOS C threshold value of 25 seconds, which is the signal impact discounted in the methodology. The signal on Big Pine Key segment (Segment 10) caused 14 (11%) signal delay events accounting for 4 minutes and 42 seconds, which is similar to last year's total of 4 minutes and 57 seconds. The signals on Marathon segment (Segment 13) were the most significant, causing 47 signal delay events (6 more than last year) accounting for 20 minutes and 4 seconds (43% of the total signal delays), which is almost 2.5 minutes more than the 2010 signal delays in this segment. The mean delay per event at the Marathon signals was higher than the 25 seconds threshold at 26 seconds. The mean delay per trip was also higher than the 25 seconds threshold at 43 seconds. Accident Delay The accident delays, classified as nonrecurring events were the largest delay events during the 2011 study. There were 6 accident delays recorded during the 2011 study accounting for 49 minutes and 18 seconds. The accident delays accounted for 33% of the total delays. The accident delays were excluded from the overall and segment travel time. Turning Vehicles Delay There was only 1 left -turn delay amounting to 11 seconds during this year's study; a significant reduction from last year's 17 delays at 6 minutes and 18 seconds. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 29 of 56 Draw Bridge Delay Since the reconstruction of the Jew Fish Creek Bridge, the bridge across the Snake Creek is the only bridge along the entire length of U.S. 1 in Monroe County that causes drawbridge delays. The Snake Creek Draw Bridge (between Segments 20 and 21) created 2 drawbridge related delays during this year's travel time nuns, totaling 15 minutes and 05 seconds. The drawbridge delays were excluded from the segment travel time but included in the overall travel time. Congestion Delay There were nine (9) congestion related delays events this year totaling 8 minutes and 36 seconds. The congestion delay events contributed an average of 57 seconds of delay per trip, which is similar to last year's average congestion delay per trip of 55 seconds. Constriction Delay The constriction delay was the third largest delay event. During the 2011 study there was on- going constriction at the following segments: 1. Tavernier (Segment 22) 2. Key Largo (Segment 24) The five (5) constriction delay events accounted for 28 minutes and 9 seconds in 2011. This is a decrease from 2010 constriction delays accounting for 57 minutes and 26 seconds. The constriction delay reduction is partly due to the completion of road work along Cross and Grassy Keys. There was constriction at around MM 53 in Marathon; most of the delays in this area were recorded as either congestion or signal delay due to combined effect of the delays. The ongoing constriction in Big Pine Key did not cause any delays; it may have caused reduction in travel speeds without causing any delay events. RESERVE CAPACITIES The difference between the median speed and the LOS C standard gives the reserve speed, which in turn can be converted into an estimated reserve capacity of additional traffic volume and corresponding additional development. The median overall speed of 47.1 mph compared to the LOS C standard of 45 mph leaves an overall reserve speed of 2.1 mph. County regulations and FDOT policy allow segments that fail to meet the LOS C standards to receive an allocation not to exceed five percent below the LOS C standard. This provision will allow a limited amount of additional land development to continue until traffic speeds are measured again next year or until remedial actions are implemented. These segments are candidates for being designated either "backlogged" or "constrained" by Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). In 2010, there were 4 segments identified to be functioning below the LOS C threshold. Based on this year's results, the Lower Matecumbe (Segment 17), and Tea Table (Segment 18) continue to function below the LOS C threshold; the other two segments - Big Coppitt (Segment 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 30 of 56 3) and Grassy (Segment 14) have improved to LOS C. The Lower Matecumbe (Segment 17) and Tea Table (Segment 18) however, has reserve capacity within the 5% allocation. According to the Florida Department of Transportation District (FDOT) Six 2011/2012 — 2015/2016, there is ongoing constriction of the Overseas Heritage Trail bike path and vistas happening at various locations throughout the Florida Keys. • Big Coppitt, Segment 3 is located at approximate mile marker 9 through 10.5. Resurfacing and bridge repair/rehabilitation are currently in the preliminary engineering state. Constriction should start in year 2014. This segment has a reserve volume of 522 trips. • Grassy Key, Segment 14 is located at approximate mile marker 54 through 60.5. Constriction of the bike path/trail starts in 2013. This segment has a maximum reserve volume of 3,074 trips. • Lower Matecumbe, Segment 17 is located at approximate mile marker 73 through 77.5. There are no work projects are cited in this year's FDOT Transportation Plan. This segment has a LOS D. The maximum reserve volume is -671 trips and falls within the 5% (1,196 trips) allocation criteria. • Tea Table Relief Bridge, Segment 18 is located at approximate mile marker 77.5 through 79.5. There is preliminary engineering for resurfacing between Old SR 4A/MM77.5 to Jerome Avenue (mile marker 81.5) which starts in 2012 and constriction starting in 2014. This segment has a LOS D. The maximum reserve volume is -328 trips and falls within the 5% (571) allocation criteria. TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic counts can be very useful in assessing the capacity of the road network and help determine when capacity improvements need to be made. The Average Daily Traffic information is used in a formula called a "weekly factor" to estimate the annual average daily traffic. This is an estimated average amount of traffic at a particular location on any given day of the year. The data were recorded by date, day of the week, time of the day, and direction. The field data collection took place between February 28, 2011 and March 13, 2011. Fourteen (14) round trips were made to successfully complete the twenty-eight (28) required northbound and southbound nuns. These runs represent a sample of two nuns of each day of the week. Every one of the twenty-eight travel time nun data sheets was quality checked. The seven-day, 24-hour traffic data were collected in Islamorada, Marathon, and Big Pine Key from February 27, 2011 to March 5, 2011, concurrently with the travel time runs. The two primary measurements for determining traffic volumes are the average daily traffic (ADT) or weekday count, and the annual average daily traffic (AADT) which includes the weekend. ADT counts are collected from both directions over seven (7) twenty-four hour periods which usually include a weekend. The amount of traffic counted over the week is then divided by five or seven to yield the average daily traffic for a particular location. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 31 of 56 Mechanical traffic counters and hoses were installed on February 27, 2011 at the following locations: • Upper Matecumbe, on the south side of the Whale Harbor Bridge (MM 84) • Marathon, in front of McDonalds (MM 50) • Big Pine Key, on the south side of the North Pine Channel Bridge (MM 30). U.S. 1 is predominately a four -lane facility in Marathon and a two-lane facility in Upper Matecumbe and Big Pine Key. Seven-day continuous traffic counts recorded at three locations along U.S. 1 yielded the following average daily traffic and AADT volumes for 2011. These volumes for 5-day and 7-day are averages of the raw volumes counted. The volumes have been adjusted using 2010 seasonal and axle factors to estimate the 2011 AADT's. The AADT have increased (except in Big Pine Key) due to higher seasonal factor recorded by FDOT compared to previous year. On Big Pine Key additional traffic volume data were collected, at the request of Monroe County, for a variety of purposes. The data indicates localized differences in traffic volumes throughout U.S. 1 in the island of Big Pine Key. TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR 2010 AND 2011 2010 2011 % Change Big Pine Key (MM 30) 5 — Day Average 20,651 20,468 -0.89% 7 — Day Average 20,115 20,070 -0.22% AADT 17,842 17,684 -0.89% Marathon (MM 50) 5 — Day Average 31,883 32,156 0.85% 7 — Day Average 30,548 31,097 1.77% AADT 27,547 27,782 0.85% Upper Matecumbe (MM 84) 5 — Day Average 22,588 24,326 7.14% 7 — Day Average 22,634 24,508 7.65% AADT 19,516 21,017 7.14% Both the average 5-Day ADT and the 7-Day ADT shows a decrease at the Big Pine Key location and increases at the Marathon and the Upper Matecumbe locations. Overall, the AADT decreased Big Pine Key while increasing in Big Pine and Upper Matecumbe. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 32 of 56 N aye O N aye wn 0') O o aye aui CD N �n co O aye aui CD N c N 0 -� 00 0 CD 0 Npq M 0 � � N � a O N cfl CD 00 011 0 a� CD N W � � W O LL _ L.0 O a)0 7mm u CD N Z N O (n ME O 4Cll N CaC Stu M O U U U ` t� u• t4u� _ O N J r 0 O CN N O 11- O O �? N O U O O O O O O O O O O O cd O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O w U LO M M — O LO M — O M M N N N N N L OLLMli A-11V(l 3JbRi3AV -lvnNNV a� o •� o N •� a _U � N Cli clj i N N CA ! ; ■ +II o 0 i N i ! a CF) p clj clj N a] c t+ ■ it © o .� Nclj m SU. N ? t �■ � i � � R fl o � � N ` i ? N E E Cd �i CL i i N 0 �. U N � L ? C g ; M t N clj CA 3 t CA clj ■: i L i i N clJ C N o clJ o ® ■ ii a 03 0 • '� yrr t� I i clJ a-. q N 6 clj clJ V N it i � Ste. �'" � ■ � 0 1 j O} N t7 (9 0 co c � clj .� Cd CL clJ I clj • u1 .�-= clj i N CA■ i i i� i bA N Clj clJ U U 0 `14 cd �' C) 4 4i Q r u > CQ C1 'eh O_ C) C3 C O U CH 00 cljr? N-.... o M 00 0 N N CJ N N a N 00 c0 clj UCA G�PIUeA)1ii11b t' O clJ O CA U N The median overall speed during the 2011 study was 47.1 mph, which is 0.2 mph higher than the 2010 median speed of 46.9 mph. The mean operating speed was 46.9 mph with a 95% confidence interval of plus or minus 0.5 mph. The mean and median speeds correspond to LOS C conditions. The highest overall speed recorded in the study was 48.7 mph (0.3 mph higher than the 2010 highest overall speed of 48.4 mph), which occurred on Friday, March 11, 2011 between 4:00 p.m. and 6:30 p.m., in the northbound direction. The lowest overall speed recorded was 41.9 mph (0.8 mph lower than the 2010 lowest overall speed of 42.7 mph), which occurred on Monday, March 7, 2011 between 1:45 p.m. and 4:15 p.m. in the southbound direction CTTMMA RV Based on the findings of the 2011 U.S. 1 Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study for Monroe County, as prepared by URS Corporation Southern Consultants, U.S. 1 has an overall level of service (LOS) C. The following is a summary of the 2011 U.S. 1 Arterial Travel Time and Delay Study results: a) The calculated AADT volumes have increased (except in Big Pine Key) due to higher seasonal factor recorded by FDOT compared to previous year. b) The overall travel speed on U.S. 1 for 2011 is 0.2 mph higher compared to the 2010 overall travel speed. c) Compared to 2010 data, the travel speeds on 11 of the 24 segments have decreased. They are: - Stock Island (-0.3 mph) - Duck (-0.3 mph) - Sugarloaf (-1.3 mph) - Long Key (-0.9 mph) - Cudj oe (-0.3 mph) - Tea Table (-0.4 mph) - Big Pine (-1.0) - Windley (-2.9 mph) - Bahia Honda (-0.4) - Key Largo (-1.0 mph) - Marathon (-0.3 mph) The Windley Key segment experienced a noticeable drop in speed due to residual effect of the draw bridge operation at the Snake Creek. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 35 of 56 Travel speeds on 13 segments have increased. - Boca Chica (+1.1 mph) - Big Coppitt (+2.1 mph) - Saddlebunch (+0.5 mph) - Summerland (+0.1 mph) - Ramrod (+1.0 mph) - Torch (+1.5 mph) - 7-Mile Bridge (+1.3 mph) - Grassy (+4.1 mph) - L Matecumbe (+0.4 mph) - U Matecumbe (+0.5 mph) - Plantation (+0.2 mph) - Tavernier (+1.1 mph) - Cross (+1.7 mph) d) Compared to last year's (2010) study results, there are LOS changes in seven of the 24 segments. - Big Coppitt segment (3) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' - Saddlebunch segment (4) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' - Sugarloaf segment (5) increased from LOS `C' to LOS `B' - Grassy Key (Segment 14) increased from LOS `D' to LOS `C' - Cudjoe segment (6) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' - Summerland segment (11) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `B' - Windley Key (Segment 20) decreased from LOS `A' to LOS `C' e) Segments with reserve speeds of less than or equal to 3 mph should be given particular attention when approving development applications. This year, there are seven segments of U.S. 1 in this category, one less than last year. - Big Coppitt (MM 9.0 - MM 10.5) - Big Pine (MM 29.5 - MM 33.0) - Grassy (MM 54.0 - MM 60.5) - L Matecumbe (MM 73.0 - MM 77.5) - Tea Table (MM 77.5 - MM 79.5) - U. Matecumbe (MM 79.5 - MM 84.0) - Windley (84.0 - 86.0) Two contiguous segments in the lower keys, Saddlebunch (MM 10.5 - M 16.5) and Sugarloaf (MM 16.5 - MM 20.5) have been removed from this year's list compared to last year's list. The Windley (MM 84.0 - MM 86.0) is the new segment on this year's list, which makes up a 13 mile (MM 73.0 - MM 86.0) stretch of U.S. 1 in the upper keys that is of critical concern. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 36 of 56 III. POTABLE WATER The Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) is the sole provider of potable water in the Florida Keys. FKAA's primary water supply is the Biscayne Aquifer, a shallow groundwater source. The FKAA's wellfield is located in a pineland preserve west of Florida City in south Miami -Dade County. The FKAA's wellfield contains some of the highest quality groundwater in the State, meeting all regulatory standards prior to treatment. Laws protect the wellfield from potential contamination from adjacent land uses. Beyond the County's requirements, FKAA is committed to comply with and surpass all federal and state water quality standards and requirements. The groundwater from the wellfield is treated at the FKAA's Water Treatment Facility in Florida City, which currently has a maximum water treatment design capacity of 29.8 million gallons per day (MGD). The primary water treatment process is a conventional lime softening/filtration water treatment plant and is capable of treating up to 23.8 MGD from the Biscayne Aquifer. The secondary water treatment process is the newly constricted Reverse Osmosis water treatment plant and is capable of producing 6 MGD from the brackish Floridan Aquifer. The product water from these treatment processes is then disinfected and fluoridated. The FKAA treated water is pumped 130 miles from Florida City to Key West supplying water to the entire Florida Keys. Including overlapping coverage, the FKAA maintains 187 miles of transmission main at a maximum pressure of 250 pounds per square inch. The transmission pipeline varies in diameter from 36 inches to 12 inches. The FKAA distributes the treated water through 690 miles of distribution piping ranging in size from 3/4-inch to 12 inches in diameter. The FKAA maintains storage tank facilities which provide an overall storage capacity of 45.2 million gallons system wide. The sizes of tanks vary from 0.2 to 5.0 million gallons. These tanks are utilized during periods of peak water demand and serve as an emergency water supply. Since the existing transmission line serves the entire Florida Keys (including Key West), and storage capacity is an integral part of the system, the capacity of the entire system must be considered together, rather than in separate service districts. Also, the two saltwater Reserve Osmosis (RO) plants, located on Stock Island and Marathon, are available to produce potable water under emergency conditions. The RO desalination plants have design capacities of 2.0 and 1.0 MGD of water, respectively. At present, Key West and Ocean Reef are the only areas of the County served by a flow of potable water sufficient to fight fires. Outside of Key West, firefighters rely on a variety of water sources, including tankers, swimming pools, and salt water either from drafting sites on the open water or from specially constricted fire wells. Although sufficient flow to fight fires is not guaranteed in the County, new hydrants are being installed as water lines are replaced to make water available for fire -fighting purposes and pump station/tank facilities are being upgraded to provide additional fire flow and pressure. A map of the various FKAA facilities in the Keys is shown on the next page. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 37 of 56 FLORIDA KEYS AQUEDUC TRANSMISSIDN do UIS1 SYSTEM OVERVI 45.2 MG STORAGE �ESPW&BUTN9N Y n Y&,8 2 59 9.. KEY WEST PWMP5 F ®9 2. 2'W9 "I _ ENw ER rig •°°gym"�`�.,-��c . T, TT�lTIt#E ` rc.� 2. Sii3cK iSLAait! �_�SA.�.ATNiiiN 2 #9 NP PLeI iq 2 sc9 Pm wJMPS .,,ems MG r 2 5 W rs i 9 RAM F20D KEY IN, � saxTlda, t tWU rw PLO � ... 5. BIG PINE XEY 96 CR 4 Y 899 H9 PUMP g 2 75 Hr WkHiPS �2 3G FP S. SUMMERLAND KEY $ al °y f"i 2 39 H "MPT � 19 MC6 t 9 •- DUCK � � \Wl# $R ivy y 6 4. 936P G�PP�TF KEY � j t. MARATHON { 4 �2 FS HI 1 YJM?T i (. I.2 MG 1 iy —B.SYfaE dW Demand for Potable Water The table and graph below provide a historical overview of the water demands in the FKAA service area, Water Use Permit (WUP) allocation limits, yearly percent change, and water allocation remaining. In March 2009, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) approved the FKAA's modification of WUP 13-00005-5-W for a 20-year allocation from the Biscayne and Floridan Aquifers. The WUP provides an annual allocation of 8,751 Million Gallons (MG) or 23.98 MGD and a maximum monthly allocation of 809 MG with a limited annual withdrawal from the Biscayne Aquifer of 6,492 MG or 17.79 MGD and an average dry season (December 1st -April -1 of 17.0 MGD. In order to meet the requirements of this limitation, the FKAA constricted a new Floridan Aquifer Reverse Osmosis (RO) water treatment system. This RO water treatment system is designed to withdraw brackish water from the Floridan Aquifer, an alternative water source, which is approximately 1,000 feet below the ground surface, and treat to drinking water standards. The new RO water treatment plant provides added capability to limit Biscayne aquifer withdrawals and is designed to meet current and future water demands. The RO water treatment system provides an additional 6.0 MGD of potable water. 2011 1\lonroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 38 of 56 Along with the new reverse osmosis water treatment plant, compliance with withdrawal limits can also be accomplished by using other alternative water sources (blending of the Floridan Aquifer, reclaimed water and operation of the RO desalination plants), pressure reduction, public outreach, and assistance from municipal agencies in enforcing water conservation ordinances (i.e. irrigation ordinance). Annual Water Withdrawals 2000 to 2010 Year Annual Withdrawal (MG) % Change WUP Limit (MG) WUP +/- Annual Allocation (MG) 2000 6,228 10.60% 5,778 -450 2001 5,627 -9.70% 5,778 151 2002 6,191 10.03% 7,274 1,083 2003 6,288 1.57% 7,274 986 2004 6,461 2.74% 7,274 813 2005 6,471 0.16% 7,274 803 2006 6,310 -2.49% 7,274 964 2007 5,846 -7.35% 7,274 1,428 2008 5,960 1.95% 8,751 2,791 2009 5,966 0.09% 8,751 2,785 2010 5,917 -0.82% 8,751 2,834 Source: Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, 2011 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 39 of 56 Demand for potable water is influenced by many factors, including the number of permanent residents, seasonal populations and day visitors, the demand for commercial water use, landscaping practices, conservation measures, and the weather. In 2010, the FKAA distributed an annual average day of 15.69 MGD — 16.21 MGD from the Biscayne Aquifer plus 0.52 MGD from Floridan RO Production as shown in the table below. Also, this table provides the water treatment capacities of the RO plants. The emergency RO plants do not require a WUP because the water source is seawater. Projected Water Demand in 2011 (in MG) Annual Allocation FKAA Permit Thresholds 2010 Pumpage 2011 Water Demand Proj ected Average Daily Withdrawal 23.98 16.21 16.54 Maximum Monthly Withdrawal 809.01 533.26 563.33 Annual Withdrawal 8,751 5,917 6,036 Biscayne Aquifer Annual Allocation/Limitations Average Daily Withdrawal 17.79 15.69 15.68 Average Dry Season Withdrawal* 17 16.23 16.33 Annual Withdrawal 6,492 5,727 5,723 Floridan RO Production Average Daily Withdrawal 6 0.52 1.1 Emergency RO WTP Facilities Kermit L. Lewin Design Capacity 2.00 (MGD) 0.00 (MGY) 0 Marathon RO Design Capacity 1.00 (MGD) 0.00 (MGY) 0 All figures are in millions ofgallons *Dry Season is defined as December thru April Source: Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, 2011 The maximum monthly water demand of 533.26 MG, shown in the figure below, occurred in April of 2010. Preliminary figures and proj ections for 2011 indicate a slight increase to an annual average daily demand to 16.54 MGD and an increase in maximum monthly demand to 563.33 MG as compared to 2010 figures 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 40 of 56 The table below provides the amount of water used on a per capita basis. Based on Functional Population and average daily demand, the average and projected water consumption for 2010 and 2011 is approximately 105 and 106 gallons per capita (person), respectively. Per Capita Water Use Year 1 Functional Population Daily Withdrawal (gallons)2 Average Water Consumption Per Capita (gallons) 2000 153,080 17,016,393 111 2001 153,552 15,415,616 100 2002 154,023 16,962,082 110 2003 154,495 17,228,192 112 2004 154,924 17,652,596 114 2005 156,150 17,730,000 114 2006 15 5,73 8 17,287,671 111 2007 155,440 16,017,315 103 2008 154,728 16,285,383 105 2009 155,441 16,345,205 105 2010 155,288 16,210,959 104 2011 1 156,054 1 16,540,000 1 106 Source: 1. Unincorporated Monroe County Population Projections - Monroe County Planning Department, 2011 (Population Projections 3-15-2011 document) 2. Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, 2011 Improvements to Potable Water Facilities FKAA has a 20-year Water System Capital Improvement Master Plan for water supply, water treatment, transmission mains and booster pump stations, distribution mains, facilities and strictures, information technology, reclaimed water systems, and Navy water systems. In 1989, FKAA embarked on the Distribution System Upgrade Program to replace approximately 190 miles of galvanized lines throughout the Keys. FKAA continues to replace and upgrade its distribution system throughout the Florida Keys and the schedule for these upgrades is reflected in their long-range capital improvement plan. The FKAA's Water Distribution System Upgrade Plan calls for the upgrade or replacement of approximately 38,240 feet of water main during fiscal year 2011. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 41 of 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 J O O O O O O u1 Ln O O� ONO O O 00 00 Q1 N N i/)• i/? -(n -(n -(n -(n -(n -(n i/l- O O O 0 Ln Ln O O O n n r-I O O lD 1� N N r-I 1� � O O �•� O ' O O O O O O O a o 0 0 0 0 r- of 41 c � `n o 0 0n lZ coo, O \p N N N M r-I Ql E U ; i/} i/} i/} i/} i/} i/} i/} -Ln o 0 0 0 0 o rn C w N o N O. "O �" � — M O O O O n 01 N O O co Ln r�-1 lZ coo Q N N M N 00 Cj CJ � U zs C�j CA U CA Cd Ln O O O O 000 co O p C�jp N O lD O O r- Ll1 Ln On rq O lD co U Y U LL O O O O O O O O n O zs O M p l�D to =, U N r1 Ln M N r I Lr Cd p v L.. 3 LL i/? i/? i/l- O o �. O U N CL C N aJ 0 O N Si O Q co N E 7 CA O S-. Cd s N U O N Q w N cd N O QJ G N N u (6 N Y _O + O O � H L a �' sU. Q 4J N +� � O � O� 0 U C�jCCA N A '0 In •� Q1 c� 11 0O C� N L L Q -0 E •� H O s0. (6 (6 (6 L N U O U v > ++ O 0 [� [� sD. H d L L OC Z H N SUMMARY In summary, with the constriction of the new water supply wells and RO water treatment, the new reclaimed systems, and the ability to operate the 3.0 MGD RO desalination plants during emergency situations, there is an adequate supply of water to meet current and future demands, based on current conditions and projections. FKAA will continue to monitor and track conditions and events that could negatively impact the existing water supply. Any such impacts will be evaluated to determine future changes necessary to continue servicing Monroe County with adequate supply. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 43 of 56 IV. EDUCATION FACILITIES The Monroe County School Board oversees the operation of 13 public schools located throughout the Keys. School Board data includes both unincorporated and incorporated Monroe County. The system consists of three high schools, one middle school, three middle/elementary schools, and six elementary schools. Each school offers athletic fields, computer labs, bus service and a cafetorium that serves as both a cafeteria and an auditorium. In addition to these standard facilities, all high schools and some middle schools offer gymnasiums. The Monroe County school system is divided into three (3) sub -districts (see map below). School concurrency ensures coordination between local governments and school boards in planning and permitting residential developments that affect school capacity utilization rates. Sub -district 1 covers the Upper Keys from Key Largo to Lower Matecumbe Key and includes the islands that make up Islamorada and Fiesta Key and includes one high school and two elementary/middle schools. Sub -district 2 covers the Middle Keys from Long Key to the Seven Mile Bridge and includes one high/middle school and one elementary school. Sub -district 3 covers the Lower Keys, from Bahia Honda to Key West and includes one high school, one middle school, one elementary/middle school, and five elementary schools. itl5 Miles from Key Largo to fey West toy mm Key Lar C4 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 44 of 56 School concurrency ensures coordination between local governments and school boards in planning and permitting residential developments that affect school capacity utilization rates. The Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) capacity rate is 11,242 students and the Capital Outlay of Full -Time Equivalent (COFTE) is 7,518. The actual utilization during 2010 — 2011 was 66.88%. Overall, the projected growth utilization rate is 1.03% for the years 2010-2011 through 2014-2015. LOCATION ACTUAL 2010-2011 FISH CAPACITY ACTUAL 2009-2010 COFTE ACTUAL 2010-2011 UTILIZATION CORAL SHORES SENIOR HIGH 981 746 76.00% KEY WEST SENIOR HIGH 1,431 1 338 94.00% HORACE O'BRYANT MIDDLE 1,038 707 68.00% MARATHON SENIOR HIGH 1,370 619 45.00% MAY SANDS SCHOOLS 30 25 85.00% GERALD ADAMS 652 441 68.00% PLANTATION KEY SCHOOL 650 433 67.00% GLYNN ARCHER ELEMENTARY 598 257 43.00% POINCIANA ELEMENTARY 641 612 95.00% SIGSBEE ELEMENTARY 522 228 44.00% SUGARLOAF ELEMENTARY 1,215 745 61.00% STANLEY SWITLIK ELEMENTARY 871 469 54.00% KEY LARGO SCHOOL 1,243 897 72.00% TOTAL 11,242 7,518 68.88% Annually, prior to the adoption of the district school budget, each school board must prepare a tentative district facilities work program that includes a major repair and renovation projects necessary to maintain the educational and ancillary facilities of the district. Some of the items listed in the 2010-2011 Monroe County School District Work Plan include HVAC, flooring, roofing, safety to life, sewers projects, and fencing for various schools. Other items include physical education field renovations, concrete repairs, ADA projects and site drainage maintenance. The 2010-2011 Monroe County School District 1.50 Mill Revenues Source actual value is $7,792,830. The PECO Revenue Source actual budget is $9,965,757, PECO maintenance revenue is $450,919. The revenue from capital outlay and debt service is $52,683. Additional revenue sources include proceeds from '/2 cent sales surtax at $10,536,621 and funds carried forward at $59,397,657. The total revenue source for this time period is $69,898,961 and total revenue available is $67,814,034. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 45 of 56 The total project costs for maintenance, repair and renovation during 2010-2011 is $21,085,964. Plans approved by the school board that reduce the need for permanent student stations such as acceptable school capacity levels, redistricting, busing, year-round schools, charter schools, magnet schools, public -private partnerships, multi -track scheduling, grade level organization, block scheduling or other alternatives. The charter school was successfully formed at Sigsbee School. Glynn Archer School is being moved into the planned Horace O'Bryan replacement. This will free up the old Glynn Archer campus for other uses. The Monroe County School District is in compliance with the class size reduction requirement. The Board has approved the plan to close Glynn Archer Elementary School in the most recent Plant Survey. The property is being considered for Administrative offices or surplus to the City of Key West. SUMMARY Enrollment figures for the 2010-2011 through 2014-2015 school years indicate that there is adequate capacity in the Monroe County school system. The overall 2010-2011 utilization is 66.88% of the school system capacity. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 46 of 56 V. SOLID WASTE FACILITIES Solid waste management is a critical issue in the Florida Keys. While problems of landfill sitings, facilities, financing, and hazardous waste disposal have increased throughout Monroe County, the unique setting of the Keys makes waste management even more difficult. The geographic isolation, the limited land area, the environmental constraints, and the presence of nationally significant natural resources adds to the challenge of responsibly and efficiently managing the Keys' solid waste stream. Comprehensive Plan Policy 801.1.1 establishes the level of service for solid waste as 5.44 pounds per capita per day or 12.2 pounds per day per equivalent residential unit (ERU) and establishes a haul out capacity of 95,000 tons per year or 42,668 ERUs. The Comprehensive plan requires sufficient capacity shall be available at a solid waste disposal site to accommodate all existing and approved development for a period of three years from the projected date of completion of the proposed development of use. The Monroe County Land Development Code (LDC), in compliance with State concurrency requirements, require that, "... sufficient capacity shall be available at a solid waste disposal site to accommodate all existing and approved development for a period of at least three years from the projected date of completion of a proposed development or use" (LDC, Section 114-2(a)(2)). This regulation went into effect on February 28, 1988, and serves as a level of service (LOS) standard for solid waste disposal. The LDC also requires that solid waste management plans be completed before any proposed development of a Major Conditional Use is reviewed by the Growth Management Department. Solid waste generation rates and capacity assessments must be submitted for review and coordination with the Public Works Division, Department of Solid Waste/Recycling (PWD- DSW/R). In 2010, the County provided solid waste service to accommodate 70,808 residents. FDEP certification of solid waste data for December 31, 2009 is reported to be 71,311 residents in the County. For the purpose of this document, this data will be used as the most recent certified data. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 47 of 56 The table below summarizes historical solid waste generation for the service area. Solid Waste Generation in Tons per Year FY FDEP Total Recycling Disposal 1998 N/A N/A N/A 1999 N/A N/A N/A 2000 158,327 59,798 131,825 2001 125,893 51,435 96,075 2002 134,950 6 8,73 8 113,071 2003 134,734 34,619 113,427 2004 112,102 13,757 110 333 2005 212,470 73,085 212,470 2006 200,338 12,206 200,338 2007 134,467 12,497 134,467 2008 130,245 13,743 130,245 2009 116,884 12,099 95,327 Monroe County Technical Document July 2011 Data collection calendar year is January 1 to December 31. These are scale tonnages. Fluctuations in yearly data may be a result of major storm events, economic conditions, and other generation factors. FDEP calendar years do not coincide with Monroe County's calendar years, thus creating a differential in datum between departments. The historical solid waste generation values for Monroe County show a steady increase of total solid waste generation between the years 1998-2001. During the period 2002 - 2006, the County's solid waste generation was significantly higher. These higher values do not correspond to normal solid waste generation trends within the County and in actuality result from a cluster of outliers. The outliers are functions of favorable economic conditions (greater consumption of goods and services) and storm events that cause a significant amount of over generation due to debris. Furthermore, during the period of 2007-2008, an economic recession affected solid waste generation, significantly reducing standard trends for generation growth. The tourism industry in the Florida Keys is another large factor in solid waste generation that needs to be accounted for in projected demands calculations. In 2009 the Monroe County Tourist Development Council estimated 3.3 million tourist visited the County and future tourism will continue to rise as general population increases, thus having a serious impact on the solid waste generation within the County. Solid waste is collected by franchise and taken to the three historic landfill sites, which serve as transfer facilities. At the transfer stations, the waste is compacted and loaded on Waste Management, Inc. (WMI) tricks for haul out. Recyclable materials, including white goods, tires, 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 48 of 56 glass, aluminum, plastic bottles and newspaper are included as part of the solid waste haul out contract. A recent (2009) amendment to the contract includes WMI and the County's commitment to increase annual recycling rate to 40 percent by 2014. Solid Waste Transfer Facility Sizes and Capacities Transfer Facility Acreage Capacity Cudj oe Key Transfer Station 20.2 acres 200 tons/day Long Key Transfer Station 29.5 acres 400 tons/day Key Largo Transfer Station 15.0 acres 200 tons/day Source: Waste Management Inc., 1991 Any future declines will also reflect the diligent efforts by the citizens of the County to reduce the amount of solid waste they generate, through the conscious consumption of goods, composting, mulching or other sustainability efforts. Additional factors which are less easily quantifiable could also affect solid waste generation. The amount of constriction taking place in the County, and thus the amount of constriction debris being disposed of, also significantly affects the total amount of solid waste generated. Periods with less constriction could have contributed to the decline in total waste generation. Finally, the weather affects the rate of vegetative growth, and therefore affects the amount of yard waste generated. Drier years could result in less total waste generation. The analysis below represents a general trend of solid waste generation with respect to functional population growth. The LOS creates a conservative rate of solid waste generation in comparison to the increasing trend of solid waste generation between the years 1998-2000, thus predicting a comparative or slightly higher annual solid waste production in relation to population. Limitations on future growth should reduce the amount of constriction and demolition debris generation. Recycling efforts in Monroe County have increased and should reduce the amount of solid waste generation. Solid Waste Generation Trends GENERATION POPULATION Year (Tons/Yr) Permanent Seasonal Functional (LBS/CAP/DAY) 2000 158,327 36,036 33,241 69,277 12.52 2001 125,893 36,250 33,263 69,513 9.92 2002 134,950 36,452 33,285 69,737 10.6 2003 134,734 36,543 33,307 69,850 10.57 2004 112,102 36,606 33,329 69,935 8.78 2005 212,470 37,164 33,351 70,515 16.51 2006 200,338 36,466 34,019 70,485 15.57 2007 134,467 35,749 34,568 70,317 10.48 2008 130,245 34,788 35,550 70,338 10.15 2009 116,884 36,268 35,043 71,311 8.98 Source: Monroe County Recommended Functional Population Series, Fishkind & Associates 2010 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 49 of 56 SUMMARY Monroe County has a contract with Waste Management (WMI). The contract authorizes the use of in -state facilities through September 30, 2016, thereby providing the County with approximately five (5) years of guaranteed capacity. There is adequate capacity for solid waste generation for the next twelve (12) months. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 50 of 56 VI. PARKS AND RECREATION An annual assessment of parks and recreational facilities is not mandated by Monroe County Land Development Code; however, data is provided. The Level of Service standards for parks and recreational facilities is provided in Policy 1201.1.1 of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Parks and Recreational Facilities Level Of Service Standard The level of service (LOS) standard for neighborhood and community parks in unincorporated Monroe County is 1.64 acres per 1,000 functional population. To ensure a balance between the provisions of resource- and activity -based recreation areas the LOS standard has been divided equally between these two types of recreation areas. Therefore, the LOS standards are: 0.82 acres of resource -based recreation area per 1,000 functional population; and 0.82 acres of activity -based recreation area per 1,000 functional population Resource -based recreation areas are established around existing natural or cultural resources of significance, such as beach areas or historic sites. Activity -based recreation areas can be established anywhere there is sufficient space for ball fields, tennis or basketball courts, or other athletic events. LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan Policy 1201.1.1, Monroe County Functional Existing Demand in Surplus or (Deficit) in Parks and Recreation Population 2010 Acreage Acreage Acreage 0.82 acres per 1,000 functional population of passive, resourced-based 138,803 2,502 113.8 136.2 neighborhood and community parks 0.82 acres per 1,000 functional population of passive, activity -based 138,803 4,343 113.8 320.2 neighborhood and community parks Draft Monroe County Technical Document, Chapter 13, Recreation and Open Space, May 11, 2011, Section 13.5.1.1.2. There are approximately 10,900 acres of resource -based recreation lands currently available in the County for public use. Removing beaches which are primarily Federal and State owned from the resource -based lands results in approximately 250 acres remaining. 2011 Monroe Countv Public Facilities assessment Report Page 51 of 56 Level of Service Analysis For Activity -Based Recreation Areas The Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan allows activity -based recreational land found at educational facilities to be counted towards the park and recreational concurrency. As of May 2011, a total of 98.98 acres of developed resourced-based and 118.25 acres of activity -based recreation areas either owned or leased by Monroe County and the Monroe County School Board. The activity -based recreational facilities that are inventoried include facilities and activities such as baseball/softball, football/soccer, tennis courts, basketball courts, picnic tables and picnic pavilions, volleyball courts, handball/racquetball courts, equipped play areas, multi -use areas, benches, tracks, piers, bike paths, boat ramps, fishing, swimming, swimming pools, barbeque grills, shuffleboard courts, beaches and restrooms. Additionally, other recreation uses and facilities are indicated such as historic strictures, bandshells, dog parks, skateboard facilities, aquatic parks, museums, and concessions. The subareas for the park and recreational facilities include the Upper Keys, north of Tavernier; Middle Keys, between Pigeon Key and Long Key; and the Lower Keys, south of the Seven Mile Bridge. The tables below provide resource- and activity -based parks and recreation in acres for the three subarea planning areas. MIDDLE KEYS RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PLANNING AREA MM 38.5-73 Mile Classification (Acres) Name Location Marker Facilities Resource Activity Sunset Bay Park Grassy Key 58 Beach 0.6 NA Vaca Key Boat ramp, teen club, 2 Yacht Club (1) (Marathon) 54 tennis courts, basketball NA 2 court Beach, picnic pavilions, Sombrero Beach ball field, 2 volleyball (Switlik Park) Monroe County 50 courts, equipped play 0.6 8 area, dog park, pier, fishing, BBQ Old 7-Mile Bridge Monroe County 41-47 Fishing, Bicycling, 5 NA Beaches 7-Mile Bridge Pigeon Key 45 Historical strictures 5 NA 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities assessment Report Page 52 of 56 UPPER KEYS RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PLANNING AREA MM 73-112 Mile Classification (Acres) Name Location Marker Facilities Resource Activity Hibiscus Park Key Largo 101.5 Vacant, inaccessible 0.5 NA (Buttonwood Lane) waterfront Riviera Village Boat basin, four picnic Park Key Largo 105.5 pavilions, 1.8 NA (Bay Drive) Waterfront, benches Garden Cove Park Key Largo 106 Boat ramp 1.5 NA Ball field, 3 basketball Friendship Park Key Largo 101 courts, picnic shelters, NA 2.38 Play equipment, restrooms, trail Key Largo 2 boat ramps, play Community Park- Key Largo 99.6 equipment, aquatic 1.5 13.6 Jacobs Aquatic park, 3 swimming Center pools, beach Varadero Beach Key Largo 95.5 Beach 2 NA Park Beach, two ball fields, play equipment, Harry Harris Key Largo 94 swimming boat ramp 2 15.1 County Park (Tavernier) BBQs, shuffleboard, beach, picnic tables, restrooms Key Largo Play Equipment, picnic, Old Settlers Park (Tavernier) 92.5 shelter, beach, butterfly NA 3 garden Sunset Point Park Key Largo 92 Vacant waterfront 1.2 0.9 (Tavernier) access, boat ramp Burr Beach Park Key Largo 91 Vacant, waterfront 0.1 NA (Sunny Haven) access Old State Rte. 4A Matec ppbe Key 82.5 Vacant 0.3 NA Old State Rte. 4A Upper Hurricane Matec Key 81 Historical marker 1.2 NA Monument Anne's Beach, Lower Beach, swimming, bike Lower Matecumbe Matecumbe Key 73.5 path, picnic pavilions, 6.1 6 Beach (5) boardwalk 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 53 of 56 LOWER KEYS RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PLANNING AREA MM 0-38.5 Mile Classification (Acres) Name Location Marker Facilities Resource Activity Picnic pavilions, beach, Veteran's Memorial Park Little Duck Key 40 BBQs, boat ramp 0.6 24.9 (Ohio Key) swimming, beach, restrooms Missouri Key/South side Missouri Key 39 Roadside pull -off, beach 3.5 NA US 1 Heron Ave./Tarpon St. Big Pine Key 30 Vacant 0.7 NA Historic House, 2 tennis J. Watson Field (Stiglitz Big Pine Key 30 courts, volleyball, play 1.2 2.4 Property) (2) equipment, baseball picnic Big Pine Key Park Big Pine Key 30 Vacant 5.5 4.6 Play equipment, 3 Blue Heron Park Big Pine Key 30 pavilions, basketball, NA 5.5 volleyball, Bob Evans/ Chamber of Big Pine Key 30 Vacant 0.3 NA Commerce Benches, waterfront, Palm Villa Park Big Pine Key 30 play equipment, NA 0.6 basketball State Road 4 Little Torch Key 28 Boat ramps 0.1 NA Ramrod Key Park Ramrod Key 27 Beach*, swimming 1.2 1.2 West Summerland Park West Summerland Key 25 2 Boat ramps 31.8 NA Play equipment, volleyball, picnic tables, Bay Point Park Saddlebunch Key 15 trail, basketball, 2 tennis NA 1.58 courts, pavilions, soccer nets Boca Chica Beach, S R Boca Chica Key 11 Beach picnic table * 6 NA 941 (3 ) Palm Drive cul-de-sac Big Coppitt Key 11 Vacant 0.1 NA Big Coppitt Volunteer Fire Big Coppitt Key 10 Play equipment NA 0.75 Department Park (4) benches, skateboard Wilhelmina Harvey Park Big Coppitt Key 9.5 Play equipment, path NA 0.65 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 54 of 56 Gulfview Park, Delmar Big Coppitt Key 10 Boat ramp 0.2 NA Ave. Rockland Hammock Rockland Key 10 Vacant 2.5 NA Play equipment, volleyball, baseball, Bernstein Park Raccoon Key 4.5 track, trail, soccer field, NA 11 tennis courts, basketball, restrooms East Martello Park Key West Island 1.5 Picnic teen center, Historic Fort 14.56 NA 1.6 mile beach, concession area, 2 band Higgs Beach Park, C.B. shells, pier, picnic Harvey, Rest Beach Key West Island 1 pavilions and grills, 5 5 12.1 tennis courts, playarea, bike path, volleyball, swimming, dog park West Martello Park Key West Island 1 Historic Fort 0.8 NA Whitehead Street Key west Island 1 Historic Fort, Museum 0.8 NA Lighthouse Pines Park (S. Roosevelt) Key West Island 1 -F Picnic NA 1.72 (1) The total acreage of the Yacht Club is approximately 6.0 acres. The unique layout of this facility restricts active recreation to approximately 2 acres partially leased to the Marathon Yacht Club by Monroe County. (2) House and yard (1.2 acres) owned by Monroe County. Additional 2.4 acres leased by Monroe County from the Big Pine Athletic Association. (3) Lands Leased to Monroe County from U. S. Navy. (4) Church to west of park has public access 2 basketball, volleyball, and bocce courts. (5) Beach leased to Village of Islamorada *Denotes approximate acreage; (for beaches the length of the beach x a minimum of 15 ft.) Source: Monroe County Technical Document July 2011 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 55 of 56 Acquisition of Additional Recreation Areas The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan states in Objective 1201.2 that "Monroe County shall secure additional acreage for use and/or development of resource -based and activity -based neighborhood and community parks consistent with the adopted level of service standards." The elimination of deficiencies in LOS standards for recreation areas can be accomplished in a number of ways. Policy 1201.2.1 of the Comprehensive Plan provides six (6) mechanisms that are acceptable for solving deficits in park level of service standards, as well as for providing adequate land to satisfy the demand for parks and recreation facilities that result from additional residential development. The six (6) mechanisms are: 1. Development of park and recreational facilities on land that is already owned by the county but that is not being used for park and recreation purposes; 2. Acquisition of new park sites; 3. Interlocal agreements with the Monroe County School Board that would allow for the use of existing school -park facilities by county residents; 4. Interlocal agreements with incorporated cities within Monroe County that would allow for the use of existing city -owned park facilities by county residents; 5. Intergovernmental agreements with agencies of state and federal governments that would allow for the use of existing publicly -owned lands or facilities by county residents; and 6. Long-term lease arrangements or j oint use agreements with private entities that would allow for the use of private park facilities by county residents. To date, the county has employed two of these six mechanisms — acquisition of new park sites and interlocal agreements with the School Board. 2011 Monroe Counts Public Facilities Assessment Report Page 56 of 56