Loading...
Item U3 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: March 20, 2002 Division: Growth Management Bulk Item: Yes No X Department: Planning and Environmental Resources AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Public hearing to approve an ordinance reorganizing and amending Chapter 9.5 Sections 227, 286, 288, and 335 through 350 of the Monroe County Code pertaining to environmental development standards, including habitat analysis, environmental design criteria, transplantation, open space, development in disturbed wetlands, and development along shorelines. ITEM BACKGROUND: The item is one component of an in-progress reorganization and revision to County Code Chapter 9.5, the Land Development Regulations. The proposal consolidates the regulations pertaining to environmental development standards within a single code division, reduces redundancy within those regulations, and implements policies contained within the Year 20 I 0 Comprehensive Plan. The proposed revisions replace interim regulations pertaining to shoreline development and to development in disturbed wetlands that are contained within Memorandums of Agreement between Monroe County and the DCA, and also implement Comprehensive Plan policies, including policies amended via Stipulated Settlement Agreement between the County and the DCA. PREVIOUS REVELANT BOCC ACTION: The BOCC adopted the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan on April IS, 1993. The BOCC approved the Intergovernmental Agreement to Set Interim Standards for Marine/Terrestrial Access with the DCA on March 19, 1997. On July 22, 1999 the Board approved a Memorandum of Agreement with the DCA setting interim standards for development in disturbed wetlands. On January 13, 1999, the Board approved amendments to the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to development adjacent to wetlands and along shorelines. The DCA objected to portions of those amendments in April, 1999, resulting in a Stipulated Settlement Agreement with the DCA approved by the Board on February 22, 2001. CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: ST AFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval TOTAL COST: None BUDGETED: Yes No X COST TO COUNTY: None REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No X AMOUNT PER MONTH N/A Year N/A APPROVED BY: County Atty ~ OMB/Purchasing Risk Management _ ,AICP DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL: DOCUMENTATION: Included X To Follow Not Required_ AGENDA ITEM # t(? DISPOSITION: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO MCC CHAPTER 9.5 SECTIONS 277, 286, 288, 335-350 ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The proposed reorgttnization and revisions have been initiated by the Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department to consolidate the environmental development standards within one code division, to reduce duplication, and to implement Policies contained within the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. AMENDMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Staff: APPROV AL November 8, 2001 Staff Report DRC: APPROVAL November 15,2001 Resolution #D25-0 1 PC: APPROV AL January 9, 2002 Resolution #PI0-02 ORDINANCE No._ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 9.5, SECTIONS 227, 286, 288, AND 335 THROUGH 350, REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE MONROE COUNTY CODE; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department is proposing amendments to the Monroe County Land Development Regulations regarding environmental development standards in order to consolidate those standards, reduce redundancy, and implement policies contained in the Year 20 I 0 Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on November 15, 2001, the Development Review Committee considered the proposal and recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the Planning Commission in Resolution No. D25-0 I; and WHEREAS, at a regular meeting on January 9, 2002, the Monroe County Planning Commission, sitting as the local planning agency, after due notice and public participation in the public hearing process, conducted a public hearing and recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the Board in Resolution No. PIO-02; and WHEREAS, based on the above findings, the Board has determined that it is necessary and desirable to amend the above referenced Land Development Regulations; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: Section l. Sections 95-227, 9.5-286, 9.5-288 and 9.5-335 through 350 of the Monroe County Land Development Regulations are hereby amended to read as shown on attached "Exhibit I": Section 2. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such invalidity. Section 3. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. Section 4. The provisions of this ordinance shall be included and incorporated in the Code of Ordinances of the County of Monroe, Florida, as an addition or amendment thereto, and shall be appropriately renumbered to conform to the uniform numbering system of the Code. Section 5. The provision of this ordinance shall take effect when acknowledgment of its receipt for filing in the Office of the Secretary of State of the State of Florida has been received and when it has been approved by the State Land Planning Agency pursuant to F.S. 380.0552(9). Page I of2 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting of the Board held on the _ day of ,20_0 Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy Mayor Pro Tern Dixie Spehar Commissioner Murray Nelson Commissioner George Neugent Commissioner Nora Williams BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: MA YOR/CHAIRMAN (SEAL) A TTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK DEPUTY CLERK '~ASTOFORM G L CUFFI ~y B Attorney's Office Page 2 of2 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 DELETE: Sec. 9.5-277 Existing conditions map Sec. 9.5-286 Shoreline setback Sec. 9.5-288 Bulkheads, seawalls, rip-rap and fences Sec. 9.5-335 through 9.5-350 Environmental Standards INSERT: Division 8. Environmental Standards Sec. 9.5-335. Purpose of environmental performance standards. It is the purpose of this division to provide for the conservation and protection of the environmental resources of the Florida Keys by ensuring that the functional integrity of natural areas is protected when land is developed. (Ord. No. 33-1986, S 9-801) ISec. 9.5-336. Existing conditions map. 2(a)Applicability: The existing conditions map, which consist of the 1985 Department of Transportation aerial photographs at a scale of 1" = 200', depicting habitat types coded according to the system set forth in the comprehensive plan is hereby designated, established and incorporated as a part of this chapter; and the originals thereof, which are on file at the offices of the property appraiser and the department of planning, shall be as much a part of this chapter as if the information contained therein were set out in full in this chapter. (b) Review and Amendment: The existing conditions map may be refined to reflect conditions legally in existence on February 28, 1986. Such refinements shall be made pursuant to the procedures for typographical and drafting errors in section 9.5-511(e). The existing conditions map as referenced throughout this chapter is intended only to serve as a general guide to habitat types for the purpose of preliminary determination of regul~~ory requirements. The County Biologist shall make the final determination of habitat type based upon field verification. Unlawful conditions shall not be recognized when determining regulatory requirements. Sec. 9.5-337. Habitat analysis required. (a) As a part of an application for approval of development on lands classified on the existing conditions map as slash pineland or tropical hardwood hammock, the applicant shall prepare and submit a habitat analysis that analyzes the distribution and quality of native habitat within the parcel proposed to be developed in accordance with the standards of this division unless the applicant stipulates that the slash pinelands or I Adopted by State Rule 28-20.025(19) on Jan. 04,1996. Note that subsection (b) mistakenly referred to the "land use district map" instead of the "existing conditions map." 2 Subsections (b) and (c) revised to provide a logical order. It is also clarified that the County biologist is ultimately responsible for making final determinations based on actual field conditions. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 1 of 42 Boee Ordinance Exhibit 1 tropical hardwood hammock is of high quality pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. Once a development permit has been issued and site preparation commenced, the habitat quality rating either resulting from the habitat analysis or as a result of the applicant's stipulation of high quality shall remain in perpetuity and all future development of the parcel shall conform to the applicable pinelands or hammock so analyzed or stipulated. This shall be assured by attachment of a deed restriction to run with the land, stating the amount of required open space and prohibiting activities within that open space, including: removal, trimming, or pruning of native vegetation; acts detrimental to wildlife or wildlife habitat preservation; excavation, dredging, removal, or manipulation of the substrate; activities detrimental to drainage, flood control, or water and soil conservation; dumping or placing of soil, trash, or other materials; and any other restrictions as may be stated on the deed restriction. Likewise, a habitat analysis which is part of a development application or permit, which application for development is then denied or abandoned or which permit is abandoned or expired without site preparation having commenced, shall be revised and resubmitted according to the applicable standards at the time of submittal of a new application for development. (b) The habitat analysis shall be prepared in accordance with the procedures and methods specified herein by a biologist qualified under section 9.5-28 of this chapter, however, all habitat analyses are subject to the approval of the county biologist. Where the habitat analysis requires consideration of commercially exploited, threatened or endangered plant and animal species, the analysis shall consider those native plants and animals listed under state and federal law at the time of application. Where consideration of regionally important plants is required, the habitat analysis shall consider those plants listed by the Monroe County Environmental Resources Department at the time of application. (c) The habitat analysis required pursuant to this section on any residentially zoned parcel of land that is the subject of an unexpired, positive determination of vested rights shall be conducted pursuant to the land development regulations in effect at the time the vested rights determination was made. (Ord. No. 33-1986, S 9-802; Amd. of 1-2-98; Ord. No. 40-.i 998, S 1) Sec. 9.5-338. Waiver of habitat analysis. The director of environmental resources may, after a site visit, waive or limit the requirements for a habitat analysis if the director determines that there are no significant natural areas on the parcel proposed for development. (Ord. No. 33-1986, S 9-803; Ord. No. 40-1998, S 1) Sec. 9.5-339. Habitat type analysis. (a) The analysis ofthe quality of undisturbed land shall be carried out according to the following habitat types as indicated on the existing conditions map: Proposed Environmental Development Standards 2 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (1) High hammock; (2) Low hammock; (3) Pinelands. (Ord. No. 33-1986, ~ 9-804; Ord. No. 40-1998, S 1) Sec. 9.5-339.1. Habitat analysis objective. The habitat analysis, also known as the habitat evaluation index (HEI) system, shall evaluate the relative ecological and cultural quality of the remaining hardwood hammocks and slash pinelands of the Florida Keys both with respect to their inherent character and integrity and their context in the Florida Keys ecosystem landscape. (Ord. No. 40-1998, ~ 1) Sec. 9.5-339.2. Automatic high quality forest classification. (a) Tropical hardwood hammocks and slash pinelands that meet the requirements of this section shall be classified as high quality habitats without the need for a habitat analysis. (1) Category 1: Tropical hardwood hammocks of twelve and one-half (12.5) acres or more in size shall be classified as high quality hammocks. a. Rationale: These hammocks are important due to their size, landscape position, and relatively undisturbed character. The documented use of these hammocks by forest-nesting and fledgling birds elevates their potential importance with respect to wildlife value in general. In fact most of them currently have documented status as habitat for listed animal species and as habitat for many rare and listed plants. Many also contain potentially rare and valuable archaeological resources. (2) Category 2: Tropical hardwood hammocks owned by federal, state or local governments or by private organizations that are managed or were purchased for the primary purpose of conservation shall be classified as high quality hammocks. a. Rationale: Hammocks purchased for their conservation or preservation value should presumably be managed to conserve and enhance that value. (3) Category 3: Tropical hardwood hammocks on offshore islands (islands not connected by vehicular access to the Overseas Highway) shall be classified as high quality hammocks. a. Rationale: The landscape position feature makes these hammocks valuable, especially with respect to their integral relationship with the marine Proposed Environmental Development Standards 3 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 community. Offshore islands also usually represent areas of minimal disturbance and exposure to secondary impacts. (4) Category 4: All slash pineland habitats excluding those located within improved subdivision (IS) zoning districts shall be classified as high quality pinelands. a. Rationale: Pinelands are crucial habitat for the endangered Key deer and harbor significant freshwater wetlands that serve as habitat to a number of other listed and nonlisted wildlife species. This habitat likewise harbors a wide range of listed, rare and endemic plants. Regularly burned pinelands are of unquestionably higher quality than nonburned pinelands. Pineland habitat in the keys is rare and any areas that have a possibility of undergoing burn management are considered to have a substantial level of value for conservation. Burning and mechanical removal of hardwood and deadwood buildup for small pineland parcels is increasingly practiced. IS-zoned pinelands are specifically excluded here due to increased secondary impacts, increased costs and logistical coordination needed for burning, and land use considerations. (5) Category 5: Palm Hammocks: A hammock or portion thereof which contains a prevalence of palms of the genus Thrinax as determined by the procedures outlined in this division shall be classified as high quality habitat. a. Rationale: Monroe County contains the only rockland palm hammocks in the United States and these are found primarily (but not exclusively) in the middle keys (Grassy Key through Key Vaca). Most of them have been permanently removed (Key Vaca). One significant stand (Curry Hammock) is a state park. The remainder should be protected to preserve a valuable cultural resource and wildlife habitat. (6) Category 6: Berm hammocks found on sw.dy berm substrate, usually at or near the shoreline shall be classified as high quality habitats. a. Rationale: Berm hammocks are extremely rare and are unique to the Florida Keys. They are often subjected to intense development pressures due to their shoreline location. The remainder should be protected to preserve a valuable cultural resource and wildlife habitat. (7) Category 7: Cactus hammocks with a prevalence of native cactus species of the genera Opuntia and Cereus snall be classified as high quality habitats. a. Rationale: Cactus hammocks are extremely rare in and unique to the Florida Keys and the remainder should be protected to preserve a valuable cultural resource and wildlife habitat. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 4 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (8) Category 8: Coastal Rock Barrens communities with often sparse, low-growing xeric rare plants and cacti shall be classified as high quality habitats. Vegetation is distinctive with the occurrence of relatively rare ground covers such as Indigofera keyensis, Opuntia triacantha and others. a. Rationale: This is an extremely rare community that is currently known at only four sites in the Florida Keys. The remaining habitat should be protected to preserve a valuable cultural and wildlife habitat, especially for rare plants. (Ord. No. 40-1998, 9 1) Sec. 9.5-339.3. Habitat analysis definitions and approach. If the tropical hardwood hammock or pineland does not automatically qualify for one of the above high quality categories, a habitat analysis must be completed as required by this division. The methods and procedures for performing the habitat analysis shall be set forth by the director of environmental resources and shall be made available in the form of a procedural handbook to qualified biologists wishing to conduct habitat analyses in the Florida Keys. The handbook may be updated from time to time by the director of environmental resources. The handbook shall include official lists of threatened, endangered, commercially exploited, regionally important and invasive exotic plants to be used in conducting the habitat analysis. The official Threatened and Endangered Animal Species Maps shall also be made available by the county for inspection by qualified biologists to fulfill the procedural requirements of conducting the habitat analysis. The Threatened and Endangered Animal Species Maps may be updated as required from time to time at the discretion of the board of county commissioners using the procedure outlined in section 9.5-511. The quality of the tropical hardwood hammock or slash pineland shall be rated according to the criteria listed in this division for each habitat type and according to the guidance provided by the habitat analysis handbook and the director of environmental resources. The handbook shall also set forth official procedures for determination of palm hammocks and other automatic quality categories. (Ord. No. 40-1998, 9 1) Sec. 9.5-340. Habitat analysis for high hammocks. (a) The quality of high hammocks shall be analyzed on the basis of the following indices and scores: (1) Tree size: a. Rationale: Larger trees indicate older, more mature hammocks which are culturally and ecologically important and also may generally increase available habitat niches. b. For hammocks located from Plantation Key north (inclusive): Proposed Environmental Development Standards 5 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 1. The three dominant canopy tree species have average diameters at breast height (DBHs) of8 inches or more indicates a score of 1.5. 2. Two of the three dominant canopy tree species have average DBHs of 8 inches or more indicates a score of 1.0. 3. One of the three dominant canopy tree species has an average DBH of 8 inches or more indicates a score of 0.5. 4. None of the dominant canopy tree species have average DBHs of 8 inches or more indicates a score ofO. c. For hammocks located from Windley Key south (inclusive): 1. The three dominant canopy tree species have average diameters at breast height (DBHs) of six (6) inches or more indicates a score of 1.5. 2. Two of the three dominant canopy tree species have average DBHs of six (6) inches or more indicates a score of 1.0. 3. One of the three dominant canopy tree species has an average DBH of six (6) inches or more indicates a score of 0.5. 4. None of the dominant canopy tree species have average DBHs of six (6) inches or more indicates a score of O. (2) Soil depth: a. Rationale: Hammock~ with greater soil humus depth are generally older and more mature. They've had no disturbance or a length of time has passed since the last disturbance. They generally present a greater diversity and integrity of microhabitats for wildlife and plants including soil organisms and stable soil chemistry . b. An average soil depth of four (4) inches or more indicates a score of 2.0. c. An average soil depth of two (2) inches or more but less than four (4) inches indicates a score of 1.0. d. An average soil depth of less than two (2) inches indicates a score of O. (3) Woody plant species diversity: Proposed Environmental Development Standards 6 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 a. Rationale: Hammocks with higher diversity are ecologically and culturally significant in that they are a natural seed source for plant species dispersal and may represent more mature forests. These hammocks represent a storehouse of biological diversity and essentially define hardwood forest character in the Florida Keys. b. For hammocks located from Plantation Key north (inclusive): 1. Thirty-seven (37) or more native woody species present indicates a score of 6.0. 2. Thirty-two (32) to thirty-six (36) native woody species present indicates a score of 5.0. 3. Twenty-seven (27) to thirty-one (31) native woody species present indicates a score of 4.0. 4. Twenty-two (22) to twenty-six (26) native woody species present indicates a score of 3.0. 5. Seventeen (17) to twenty-one (21) native woody species present indicates a score of 2.0. 6. Twelve (12) to sixteen (16) native woody species present indicates a score of 1.0. 7. Less than twelve (12) native woody species present indicates a score ofO. c. For hammocks located from Windley Key south (inclusive): 1. Thirty-four (34) or more native woody species present indicates a score of 6.0. 2. Twenty-nine (29) to thirty-three (33) native woody species present indicates a score of 5.0. 3. Twenty-four (24) to twenty-eight (28) native woody species present indicates a score of 4.0. 4. Nineteen (19) to twenty-three (23) native woody species present indicates a score of 3.0. 5 . Fourteen (14) to eighteen (18) native woody species present indicates a score of 2.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 7 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 6. Nine (9) to thirteen (13) native woody species present indicates a score of 1.0. 7. Less than nine (9) native woody species present indicates a score of O. (4) Threatened, endangered, commercially exploited and regionally important plants: a Rationale: A hammock that provides habitat and conditions for rare and listed plants to flourish has a relatively significant ecological and cultural value. The presence of rare plants often indicates a greater habitat stability in terms of microclimate and niche availability for these plants. b. For hammocks located from Plantation Key north (inclusive): 1. Twelve (12) or more listed species present indicates a score on.o. 2. Seven (7) to eleven (11) listed species present indicates a score of2.0. 3. One (1) to six (6) listed species present indicates a score of 1.0. 4. No listed species present indicates a score ofO. c. For hammocks located from Wmdley Key south (inclusive 1. Ten (10) or more listed species present indicates a score on.o. 2. Five (5) to nine (9) listed species present indicates a score of2.0. 3. One (1) to four (4) listed species present indicates a score ofl.0. 4. Nu listed species present indicates a score ofO. (5) Invasive exotic plant infestations: a. Rationale: The more susceptible (less resistant) a hammock is to exotic invasion, the more likely it is that the habitat is of lower complexity or integrity or that it is not sufficiently insulated from such effects. b. Total invasive exotic infestation of five (5) percent or less indicates a score of 4.0. c. Total invasive exotic infestation is more than five (5) percent but infestation by combined category one (1) invasives is at five (5) percent or less indicates a score of 3.5. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 8 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 d. Six (6) percent to ten (10) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score of3.0. e. Eleven (11) percent to twenty (20) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score of 2.0. f. Twenty-one (21) percent to thirty (30) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score of 1.0. g. More than thirty (30) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score ofO. (6) Threatened and endangered animal species: a. Rationale: Hammock that provides habitat for listed animal species is presumed to provide important and intact wildlife refuge areas that should be preserved for ecological and cultural reasons. Potential habitat is extremely important for provision of recovery areas and temporary refuge. b. The hammock is a known or probable habitat for listed animal species indicates a score of 3.0. c. The hammock is a potential habitat for listed animal species indicates a score of2.0. d. The hammock has no mapped or documented status for listed animal species indicates a score of O. (7) Forest size: a. Rationale: Larger forests are less subject to disturbance due to an insulating effect. They are also more likely to contain a higher structufal, microhabitat, and species diversity due to the heterogeneous nature of tropical hammock plant distribution. Larger forests are also more attractive habitat for birds and other wildlife as indicated primarily by the keynote species studies done for various birds. b. The contiguous hammock is ten (10) or more acres in size indicates a score of 5.0. c. The contiguous hammock is at least seven (7) but less than ten (10) acres in size indicates a score of 4.0. d. The contiguous hammock is at least four (4) but less than seven (7) acres in size indicates a score of3.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 9 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 e. The contiguous hammock is at least one (1) but less than four (4) acres in size indicates a score of 2.0. f. The contiguous hammock is at least 0.375 acres but less than one (1) acre in size indicates a score of 1.0. g. The contiguous hammock is less than 0.375 acres in size indicates a score of o. (8) Perimeter disturbance: a. Rationale: The level of fragmentation of a hammock, measured as the amount of perimeter disturbance related to size, has been shown to lower the resistance of hammocks to direct and secondary effects of the disturbance, especially where development exists. These disturbances include exotic invasion sources, exotic predators, human intrusion, and others. The integrity of the hammock habitat can be lowered by the extent and nature of perimeter disturbance versus the ability of the hammock to withstand it. b. An edge to area ratio of 0.005 or less indicates a score of 3.0. c. An edge to area ratio of more than 0.005 but less than 0.01 indicates a score of 2.0. d. An edge to area ratio of 0.01 or more but less than 0.02 indicates a score of 1.0. e. An edge to area ratio of 0.02 or more indicates a score of O. (9) Wildlife habitat: a. Rationale: A primary hammock function in the Keys is availability of food sources for resident and migratory birds and other animals. In fact, the development of our highly diverse tropical Caribbean hammocks is owed in large part to transport of Caribbean flora by the white-crowned pigeon and other migrating birds. This availability is relatively easy to determine. It is measured by the quality and amount of fruit produced by the hammock. The better the fruit production of the hammock, the more likely it is that birds and other animals on which hammock distribution and seed dispersal depend will utilize the resource. These areas are also considered important for maintenance of resident and migratory bird populations. b. Fifteen (15) or more species of category 1 fruit producers indicates a score of 3.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 10 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 c. Twelve (12) or more species of category 1 fruit producers, or, twenty-two (22) or more species of combined categories 1 and 2 fruit producers indicates a score of2.5. d. Ten (10) or more species of category 1 fruit producers, or, eighteen (18) or more species of combined categories 1 and 2 fruit producers indicates a score of2.0. e. Twenty (20) or more species of any category fruit producers indicates a score of 1.5. f. Fifteen (15) to nineteen (19) species of any Category fruit producers (at least one species must be in category 1 or 2) indicates a score of 1.0. g. Less than fifteen (15) of any category fruit producers, or, all fruit producers are in category 3 indicates a score of O. (10) Community connectivity: a. Rationale: Nearly as important as size is the landscape position of the hammock within the local island and overall Keys island ecosystem. Isolation from other useable habitats caused by intervening development has short term effects on behavior patterns influencing forest availability to wildlife, and long term effects on dispersal and breeding patterns affecting species populations. b. A ward only one ofthe following scores (if applicable): 1. The hammock is part of a contiguous closed canopy hammock, buttonwood and/or mangrove forest (an~ combination of these habitats) with a combined contiguous closed canopy of at least twelve and one-half (12.5) acres in size but less than thirty (30) acres in size indicates a score of 0.5. 2. The hammock is part of a contiguous closed canopy hammock, buttonwood and/or mangrove forest (any combination of these habitats) with a combined contiguous closed canopy of thirty (30) acres or more in size indicat~s a score of 1.0. c. A ward only one of the following scores (if applicable) and add it to the score from subsection b above (if awarded) to obtain the total score for this criterion: 1. The hammock is contiguous with or within three hundred (300) feet of at least ten (10) acres but less than fifty (50) acres of contiguous Proposed Environmental Development Standards 11 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 undisturbed habitat of any class or combination of classes including salt marsh, buttonwood wetlands, hammock, beach berm, coastal rock barrens, freshwater wetlands, freshwater ponds, salt ponds, mangroves and/or enclosed/semi-enclosed embayments indicates a score of 0.5. 2. The hammock is contiguous with or within three hundred (300) feet of fifty (50) or more acres of contiguous undisturbed habitat of any class or combination of classes including salt marsh, buttonwood wetlands, hammock, beach berm, coastal rock barrens, freshwater wetlands, freshwater ponds, salt ponds, mangroves, and/or enclosed semi- enclosed embayments indicates a score of 1.0. (b) The quality of the hammock shall be determined on the basis of the cumulative scores indicated under subsection (a) as follows: (1) A cumulative score of twenty-seven (27) or higher shall indicate a high quality high hammock; (2) A cumulative score of sixteen (16) or more but less than twenty-seven (27) shall indicate a moderate quality high hammock; and (3) A cumulative score ofless than sixteen (16) shall indicate a low quality high hammock. (Ord. No. 33-1986, S 9-805; Ord. No. 40-1998, S 1) Sec. 9.5-341. Habitat analysis for low hammocks. (a) If the habitat type is low hammock, the applicant shall provide the following required information: (1) Woody plant species diversity: a. Rationale: Hammocks with higher diversity are ecologically and culturally significant in that they are a natural seed source for plant species dispersal and may represent more mature forests. These hammocks represent a storehouse of biological diversity and essentially define hardwood forest character in the Florida Keys. b. Twenty-three (23) or more native woody species present indicates a score of 6.0. c. Twenty (20) to twenty-two (22) native woody species present indicates a score of 5.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 12 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 d. Seventeen (17) to nineteen (19) native woody species present indicates a score of4.0. e. Fourteen (14) to sixteen (16) native woody species present indicates a score of 3.0. f. Eleven (11) to thirteen (13) native woody species present indicates a score of 2.0. g. Eight (8) to ten (10) native woody species present indicates a score of 1.0. h. Less than eight (8) native woody species present indicates a score of O. (2) Threatened, endangered, commercially exploited and regionally important plants: a. Rationale: Hammocks that provide habitat and conditions for rare and listed plants to flourish have a relatively significant ecological and cultural value. The presence of rare plants often indicates a greater habitat stability in terms of microclimate and niche availability for these plants. b. Six (6) or more listed species present indicates a score 3.0. c. Three (3) to five (5) listed species present indicates a score of2.0. d. One (1) to two (2) listed species present indicates a score of 1.0. e. No listed species present indicates a score of O. (3) Invasive exotic plant infestations: a. Rationale: The more susceptible (less resistant) a hammock is to exotic invasion, the more likely it is thdt the habitat is of lower complexity or integrity or that it is not sufficiently insulated from such effects. b. Total invasive exotic infestation of five (5) percent or less indicates a score of 4.0. c. Total invasive exotic infestation is more than five (5) percent but infestation by combined category 1 invasives is at five (5) percent or less indicates a score of 3.5. d. Six (6) percent to ten (10) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score of3.0. e. Eleven (11) percent to twenty (20) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score of 2.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 13 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 f. Twenty-one (21) percent to thirty (30) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score of 1.0. g. More than thirty (30) percent infestation by category 1 invasives indicates a score ofO. (4) Threatened and endangered animal species: a. Rationale: Hammock that provides habitat for listed animal species is presumed to provide important and intact wildlife refuge areas that should be preserved for ecological and cultural reasons. Potential habitat is extremely important for provision of recovery areas and temporary refuge. b. The hammock is a known or probable habitat for listed animal species indicates a score of 3.0. c. The hammock is a potential habitat for listed animal species indicates a score of2.0. d. The hammock has no mapped or documented status for listed animal species indicates a score of O. (5) Forest size: a. Rationale: Larger forests are less subject to disturbance due to an insulating effect. They are also more likely to contain a higher structural, microhabitat, and species diversity due to the heterogeneous nature of tropical hammock plant distribution here. Larger forests are also more attractive habitat for birds and other wildlife as indicated primarily by the keynote species studies done for various birds. b. The contiguous hammock is ten (10) or more acres in size indicates a score of 5.0. c. The contiguous hammock is at least seven (7) but less than ten (10) acres in size indicates a score of 4.0. d. The contiguous hammock is at least four (4) but less than seven (7) acres in size indicates a score of 3.0. e. The contiguous hammock is at least one (1) but less than four (4) acres in size indicates a score of 2.0. f. The contiguous hammock is at least 0.375 acres but less than one (1) acre in size indicates a score of 1.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 14 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 g. The contiguous hammock is less than 0.375 acres in size indicates a score of O. (6) Perimeter disturbance: a. Rationale: The level of fragmentation of a hammock, measured as the amount of perimeter disturbance related to its size, has been shown to lower the resistance of hammocks to direct and secondary effects of the disturbance, especially where development exists. These disturbances include exotic invasion sources, exotic predators, human intrusion, and others. The integrity of the hammock habitat can be lowered by the extent and nature of perimeter disturbance versus the ability of the hammock to withstand it. b. An edge to area ratio .of 0.005 or less indicates a score of 3.0. c. An edge to area ratio of more than 0.005 but less than 0.01 indicates a score of 2.0. d. An edge to area ratio of 0.01 or more but less than 0.02 indicates a score of 1.0. e. An edge to area ratio of 0.02 or more indicates a score of O. (7) Wildlife habitat: a. Rationale: A primary hammock function in the Keys is availability of food sources for resident and migratory birds and other animals. In fact, the development of our highly diverse tropical Caribbean hammocks is owed in large part to transport of Caribbean flora by the white-crowned pigeon and other migrating birds. This availability is a relatively easy to determine. It is measured by the quality and amount of fruit produced by the hammock. The better the fruit production of the hammock, the more likely it is that birds and other animals on which hammock distribution and seed dispersal depend will utilize the resource. These areas are also considered important for maintenance of resident and migratory bird populations. b. Ten (10) or more species of category 1 fruit producers indicates a score of 3.0. c. Eight (8) or more species of category 1 fruit producers, or, fifteen (15) or mort: species of combined categories 1 and 2 fruit producers indicates a score of2.5. d. Five (5) or more species of category 1 fruit producers, or, twelve (12) or more species of combined categories 1 and 2 fruit producers indicates a score of 2.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 15 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 e. Fifteen (15) or more species of any category fruit producers (at least one species must be in category 1 or 2) indicates a score of 1.5. f. Ten (10) to fourteen (14) species of any category fruit producers (at least one (1) species must be in category 1 or 2) indicates a score of 1.0. g. Less than ten (10) of any category fruit producers, or all fruit producers are in category 3 indicates a score of O. (8) Community connectivity: a. Rationale: Nearly as important as size is the landscape position of the hammock within the local island and overall Keys island ecosystem. Isolation from other useable habitats caused by intervening development has short term effects on behavior patterns influencing forest availability to wildlife, and long term effects on dispersal and breeding patterns affecting species populations. b. Award only one of the following scores (if applicable): 1. The hammock is part of a contiguous closed canopy hammock, buttonwood and/or mangrove forest (any combination ofthese habitats) with a combined contiguous closed canopy of at least twelve and one- half (12.5) acres in size but less than thirty (30) acres in size indicates a score of 0.5. 2. The hammock is part of a contiguous closed canopy hammock, buttonwood and/or mangrove forest (any combination of these habitats) with a combined contiguous closed canopy of thirty (30) acres or more in size indicates a score of 1.0. c. Award only one of the following scores (if applicable) and add it to the score from subsection b above (if awarded) to obtain the total score for this criterion: 1. The hammock is contiguous with or within three hundred (300) feet of at least ten (10) acres but less than fifty (50) acres of contiguous undisturbed habitat of any class or combination of classes including salt marsh, buttonwood wetlands, hammock, beach berm, coastal rock barrens, freshwater wetlands, freshwater ponds, sal[ ponds, mangroves and/or enclosed/semi-enclosed embayments indicates a score of 0.5. 2. The hammock is contiguous with or within three hundred (300) feet of fifty (50) or more acres of contiguous undisturbed habitat of any class or combination of classes including salt marsh, buttonwood wetlands, hammock, beach berm, coastal rock barrens, freshwater wetlands, Proposed Environmental Development Standards 16 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 freshwater ponds, salt ponds, mangroves, and/or enclosed semi- enclosed embayments indicates a score of 1.0. (b) The quality of the hammock shall be determined on the basis of the cumulative scores indicated under subsection (a) as follows: (1) A cumulative score of twenty-four (24) or higher shall indicate a high quality low hammock; (2) A cumulative score of fifteen (15) or higher but less than twenty-four (24) shall indicate a moderate quality low hammock; and (3) A cumulative score ofless than fifteen (15) shall indicate a low quality low hammock. (Ord. No. 33-1986, ~ 9-806; Ord. No. 40-1998, ~ 1) Sec. 9.5-342. Habitat analysis for palm hammocks. If a low hammock has an abundance and density of thatch palms such that twenty (20) percent of the dominant canopy plants or any portion thereof are palms, the hammock shall be considered a palm hammock. (Ord. No. 33-1986, ~ 9-807) Sec. 9.5-343. Habitat analysis for pinelands. (a) The quality of pinelands shall be analyzed on the basis of the following indices and scores: (1) Pineland size: a. Rationale: Larger forests are less subject to disturbance due to an insulating effect. They are also more likely to contain a higher structural, microhabitat, and species diversity due to the heterogeneous nature of pinel and herbaceous plant distribution. Larger forests are also more amenable to culling of hardwoods and deadwood through bum management. b. The contiguous pineland is ten (10) or more acres in size indicates a score of 3.0. c. The contiguous pineland is at least three (3) but less than ten (10) acres in size indicates a score of 2.0. d. The contiguous pineland is at least one (1) but less than three (3) acres in size indicates a score of 1.0. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 17 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 e. The contiguous pineland is less than one (1) acre in size indicates a score of O. (2) Perimeter disturbance: a. Rationale: The level of fragmentation of a pineland, measured as the amount of perimeter disturbance related to its size, has been shown to lower the resistance of pinelands to direct and secondary effects of the disturbance, especially where development exists. These disturbances include exotic and hardwood invasion sources, exotic predators, human intrusion, and others. The integrity of the pineland habitat can be lowered by the extent and nature of perimeter disturbance versus the ability of the pineland plant and animal community to withstand it. b. An edge to area ratio of more than 0.005 but less than 0.01 indicates a score of 2.0. c. An edge to area ratio of 0.0 1 or more but less than 0.02 indicates a score of 1.0. d. An edge to area ratio of 0.02 or more indicates a score ofO. (3) Invasive exotic plant infestation: a. Rationale: The more susceptible (less resistant) a pineland is to exotic invasion, the more likely it is that the habitat is of lower complexity or integrity or that it is not sufficiently insulated from such effects. b. Total invasive exotic infestation of five (5) percent or less indicates a score of 4.0. c. Total invasive exotic infestation is more than five (5) pefcent but infestation by combined category 1 invasives is at five (5) percent or less indicates a score of 3.5. d. Six (6) percent to ten (10) percent infestation of category I invasives indicates a score of3.0. e. Eleven (11) percent to twenty (20) percent infestation of category 1 invasives indicates a score of2.0. f. Twenty-one (21) percent to thirty (30) percent infestation of category I invasives indicates a score of 1.0. g. More than thirty (30) percent infestation of category 1 invasives indicates a score ofO. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 18 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (4) Topographic disturbance: a. Rationale: Significant topographic disturbance, especially by placement of limerock fill, is highly disruptive to the delicate pinel and habitat and conditions need for rare herbs and other plants to flourish. The microhabitats, prevalence of caprock, solution holes and pockets of fine soils and algal mats form a balanced ground-level ecosystem that is essentially destroyed by permanent topographic alteration. b. Topographic alteration often (10) percent or less indicates a score of 3.0. c. Topographic alteration of eleven (11) percent or more but less than twenty (20) percent indicates a score of2.0. d. Topographic alteration of twenty (20) percent or more but less than thirty (30) percent indicates a score of 1.0. e. Topographic alteration of thirty (30) percent or more indicates a score ofO. (5) Threatened, endangered, commercially exploited and regionally important plants: a. Rationale: A pinel and that provides habitat and conditions for rare and listed plants to flourish has a highly significant ecological and cultural value. The presence of rare plants often indicates a greater habitat stability in terms of microclimate and niche availability for these plants and also indicates a pinel and with a healthy herbaceous component. b. Twenty (20) or more listed species present indicates a score of 6.0. c. Fifteen (15) to nineteen (19) listed species present indicates a score of 5.0. d. Eleven (11) to fourteen (14) listed species present indicates a score of 4.0. e. Six (6) to ten (10) listed species present indicates a score of2.0. f. One (1) to five (5) listed species present indicates a score of 1.0. g. No listed species present indicates a score of O. (6) Hardwood and herbaceous plant biomass: a. Rationale: Invasion by hardwoods and increases in hardwood plant biomass cause pinelands to progress towards a hardwood community crowding and shading out the herbaceous component and eventually changing the landscape significantly. The more advanced this successional process the lower the Proposed Environmental Development Standards 19 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 quality of the pineland and the more difficult it is to arrest or reverse (both by natural means and human management means). b. A hardwood coverage of twenty-five (25) percent or less indicates a score of 3.0. c. Hardwood coverage oftwenty-six (26) percent to thirty-three (33) percent indicates a score of 2.0. d. Hardwood coverage of thirty-four (34) percent to fifty (50) percent indicates a score of 1.0. e. Hardwood coverage of over fifty (50) percent indicates a score of O. (b) The quality of the pinel and shall be determined on the basis of the cumulative score as follows: (1) A cumulative score of sixteen (16) or higher shall indicate a high quality pineland; and (2) A cumulative score ofless than sixteen (16) shall indicate a low quality pineland. (Ord. No. 33-1986, S 9-808; Amd. of 1-2-96; Ord. No. 40-1998, S 1 3Sec. 9.5-344. Environmental design criteria. No land shall be developed, used or occupied except in accordance with the following criteria unless the County biologists recommends an authorized deviation in order to better serve the goals, objectives and policies of the plan and the director of planning or planning commission approves the recommendation as a minor or major conditional use. No recommendation for an authorized deviation from these environmental design criteria shall be made unless the County biologist makes written findings of fact and conclusions of biological opinion which substantiate the need and/or benefits to be derived from the authorized deviation. Sec. 9.5-345. General environmental design criteria. No land shall be developed except in accordance with the following general criteria: 4(a) To the maximum extent practicable, development shall be sited so as to preserve all listed threatened, endangered, commerdally exploited, and regionally important native plant species and all native trees with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of greater than four (4) inches. In those instances where an applicant can demonstrate that avoidance of 3 The language of this section, may have been erroneously deleted by State Rule 28-20.025(31) on Jan. 04, 1996. This (amended) language provides necessary flexibility for applying the complex environmental standards of this code. 4 Implements Compo Plan Policy 205.2.9 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 20 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 such species or trees is not possible by clustering or by an alternate design approach, then such species and trees shall be relocated or replaced with nursery stock of the same species or equally rare species suitable to the site pursuant to a transplantation plan approved in accordance with section 9.5-346 (TRANSPLANTATION PLAN). 5(b) Champion and specimen trees: All champion and specimen trees shall be preserved in their natural condition. 6( c) The habitat of threatened and endangered animals shall be preserved to the maximum extent practical through the configuration of open space. (d) All areas of disturbance shall be managed to avoid the introduction and/or establishment of the invasive exotic plant species listed in section 9.5-4. 7(e) All invasive exotic plant species shall be removed from the parcel proposed for development. 8 (f) Clustering: It is the purpose of this subsection to minimize the environmental impacts of development by requiring design of a development on a parcel of land to incorporate clustering of the development away from the natural areas on the parcel that are the most susceptible to harmful impacts of development. Clustering requirements shall apply to all development, including plat design, and shall be achieved in the following manner: (1) When a parcel proposed for development contains more than one (1) habitat type, all development shall be clustered on the least sensitive portions of the parcel. For the purpose of this subsection, the relative sensitivity of separate habitat types shall be as listed below with subsection (a) being the most sensitive and subsection (u) being the least sensitive. a. 9Freshwater wetlands; b. Saltmarsh and/or buttonwood association wetlands; c. Cactus hammock; d. Palm hammock; e. Beachlberm; f. Pinelands (high quality); g. High hammock (high quality); h. Low hammock (high quality; 1. High hammock (moderate quality); J. Low hammock (moderate quality); 5 Implements Compo Plan Policy 205.2.8 6 Implements Compo Plan Policy 207.1.5 7 Implements Compo Plan Policies 205.2.10 and 206,1.7 8 Implements Compo Plan Policies 102.3.2, 103.1.9,205.2.3, and 205.2.4 9 Freshwater and saltmarshlbuttonwood wetlands require 100% open space ratios, but were added to top of list for comparison to other habitats for TDR transfers. Other habitats on list were rearranged to more accurately reflect their relative rarity and sensitivity. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 210f42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 k. Pinelands (low quality); 1. High hammock (low quality); m. Low hammock (low quality); n. Disturbed beachlberm; o. Disturbed with freshwater wetlands (lawfully converted to disturbed uplands); p. Disturbed with salt marsh and/or buttonwood association wetlands (lawfully converted to disturbed uplands); q. Disturbed with slash pines; r. Disturbed with high hammock; s. Disturbed with low hammock; t. Disturbed; and u. Disturbed with exotics; (2) Development within the least sensitive habitat shall achieve the maximum density or intensity allowable by Article VIII, Division 1 of this chapter and shall fully utilize the net buildable area of the habitat prior to expanding to the next least sensitive habitat type on the site. For proposed plats, these clustering requirements shall be applied such that the number of proposed lots are sized and configured to achieve the highest allowable density within the least sensitive habitat prior to locating additional lots within the next least sensitive habitat. For disturbed habitats only, development or proposed plats shall utilize one hundred (100) percent of the disturbed habitat, except for the area of any required setbacks, before expanding to the next least sensitive habitat type. (3) In addition to the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) above, development shall be clustered within the least ecologically valuable area of each habitat as determined by the County biologist. 1O(4)All development shall be dustered in a manner that reduces habitat fragmentation and preserves the largest possible area of contiguous, undisturbed habitat(s). The planning director may vary the clustering requirements described above in order to reduce habitat fragmentation. (g) The planning director, in consultation with the county biologist, may approve an application that modifies or waives the minimum yard requirements set out in this chapter in order to preserve champion and specimen trees or the habitat of threatened and endangered animals. IJSee.9.5-346. Transplantation plan. (a) All transplantation plans required by this chapter shall contain the following: 10 Implements Compo Plan Policies 205.2.4 and 207.1.5 II Adopted by State Rule 28-20.025(30) on Jan. 04, 1996. Language further amended by County Staff. Implements Compo Plan Policy 205.2.9 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 22 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (1) A survey indicating the location, size, quantity and species to be transplanted; (2) Identification of the transplantation site including the ultimate location, size and species of all plants to be transplanted. a. Where the probability that a plant will survive transplantation is low, as determined by the County Biologists, then the applicant shall remove that plant and replace it with nursery stock of equal or more rare species. b. Any plants so removed shall be replaced with nursery stock at the ratio of two (2) replacements for each one (I) plant removed. Replacement nursery stock plants shall be of the minimum sizes set forth in section 9.5-367, unless the County Biologist determines that plants of specific sizes are needed to ensure their survival at the proposed transplantation site. (b) A transplantation plan shall constitute a binding agreement between the County and the applicant. Failure to implement a transplantation plan shall constitute a violation of the Monroe County Code and may be considered cause to delay the issuance of a C.O., cause the C.O. to be revoked, or cause Code Enforcement proceedings to be initiated against the applicant, as described in Chapter 6.3 of the Monroe County Code: (1) A transplantation plan shall be approved by the County Biologist prior to issuance of a permit and shall be attached as a condition on the permit. (2) Transplantation or replacement of plants, as described in the transplantation plan, shall be completed prior to issuance of a C.O. and shall be a condition of such issuance. Where a e.O. is not applicable, transplantation or replacement of plants shall be completed within a time frame outlined in the transplantation plan, as approved by the County Biologist. (3) All transplanted or replaced plants shall have a durable, easily identifiable tag to facilitate their identification for subsequent inspections. (4) A transplantation inspection will be scheduled on the one (1) year anniversary of the date of the e.O. If less than eighty (80) percent of all transplanted or replaced plants are surviving on this date, then the County Biologist shall allow the applicant thirty (30) calendar days to replace any dead or dying plants. If less than eighty (80) percent of all transplanted or replact::d plants are surviving on this second date, then the C.O. for the parcel may be revoked or Code Enforcement proceedings may be initiated against the applicant, as described in Chapter 6.3 ofthe Monroe County Code. (c) All transplantation shall be on the development site unless there IS no suitable planting area available, as determined by the County Biologist. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 23 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (1) No plants may be transplanted into (or replaced into) any area which would require clearing of native vegetation or significant disturbance of existing native root systems to make room for the new plants, or within an existing high quality hammock in its natural state. (2) Suitable planting areas shall include any area that is lawfully cleared (excluding the construction impact zone), previously disturbed, vegetated with non-native vegetation, or sparsely vegetated with native vegetation, including any required open space, bufferyards, or landscaped areas. 12(3) If the suitable planting areas on the development site are too small or otherwise unsuitable to accommodate any or all of the required transplantation or replacement plants, then the transplantation plan shall propose payment into the County Restorations Fund for the balance of the required plants. l3( d) County Restoration Fund: (1) In lieu of transplantation or on site replacement as determined by the County Biologist, the applicant shall pay into the County Restoration Fund an amount equal to three hundred and fifteen (315) percent of the cost of nursery stock to replace the required transplantation plan at the ratio of three (3) replacement plants for each one (1) plant removed. (2) The cost of replacement plants shall be determined by averaging their priceson signed and sealed price lists submitted to the County Biologist by three private nurseries on behalf of the applicant. All quotes must be for nursery stock of Threatened, Endangered or Regionally Important status and that must be at least three feet tall from the top of the soil. ~Sec. 9.5-347. Open space requirements. (a) Purpose: It is the purpose of this section to provide for open space as a part of a development plan in order to ensure the continued existence of natural wildlife habitat and to provide open green areas for the movement, aesthetics, and safety of the human population utilizing the development. Native plant communities within required open space areas shall not be cleared or otherwise disturbed, including ground cover, understory, midstory, and canopy vegetation. All such areas shall be maintained in their natural conditivn. 12 Implements Compo Plan Policy 210.1.8 13 Implements Compo Plan Policy 210.1.8 14 Adopted by State Rule 28-20.025(13) on Jan, 04, 1996 and further amended by Staff. Proposed Environmental Development Standards 24 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (b) No land shall be developed, used or occupied such that the amount of open space on the parcel proposed for development is less than the open space ratios listed below for each habitat. Land Type of Existing Conditions Map Open Waters 15Mangrove and freshwater wetlands 16Saltmarsh and buttonwood wetlands High hammock (high-quality) High hammock (moderate-quality) High hammock (low-quality) Low hammock (high-quality) Low hammock (moderate-quality) Low hammock (low-quality) Palm hammock Cactus hammock Pinelands (high-quality) Pine lands (low-quality) Beach berm Disturbed 17Disturbed with hammock 18Disturbed with saltmarsh and buttonwood Disturbed beachlberm Disturbed with exotics 19Disturbed with slash pines Off-shore islands "t.. g '" Open Space Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.60 0.90 0.20 0.40 See Sec. 9.5-348(d) 0.20 0.20 0.60 0.95 (c) Exceptions: For tropical hardwood hammock of either high or low elevation (excluding pine lands, palm hammocks, cactus hammocks, and beach berm hammocks) occurring on residentially zoned lots, in no event shall allowable clearing for a single family residence be less than 2000 square feet, plus allowance for a twelve (12) foot wide driveway and the minimum area required for wastewater treatment as specified by the Florida Department of Health. (d) No structures shall be permitted in the required open space except for the following: (1) Up to fifty (50) percent of the total area of driveways, parking areas, passive recreational uses, and active recreational uses provided that: a. They do not cumulatively occupy more than ten (10) percent of the total required open space area; 15 Implements Policies 102.1.1,204.2.1, and 207.13.1 and was already adopted pursuant to rule 28-20.025 16Implements Policies 207.1.4 and 207.12.5 17Implements Policy 205.2.6 18 Development in disturbed wetlands determined by KEYWEP evaluation 19 Implements Policy 205.2.6 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 25 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 b. They are constructed of permeable materials; c. They do not require the removal of native vegetation; and d. They are located within a disturbed upland habitat. (2) Structures buried underground including but not limited to septic tank drain fields, utility lines, and underground tanks, provided that: a. They are covered with permeable materials; b. They do not require the removal of native vegetation; and c They are located within a disturbed upland habitat. (3) Docks, piers and walkways located over submerged lands, or within mangroves, or freshwater wetland habitats that are elevated by means of pilings or other such supports such that the area of land or water underneath the structure is not topographically altered and remains in a vegetated state. (e) Required open space shall be maintained pursuant to the most restrictive design criteria listed for each habitat which applies to the development as listed in this division. Permittable clearing within each habitat type shall be assessed on a cumulative basis such that any additional or proposed clearing shall be determined by accounting for all previous clearing that occurred on the site since February 28, 1986. Major development sites approved prior to September 15, 1986 shall not be permitted to clear additional habitat beyond the clearing originally approved without first obtaining approval under the terms ofthis chapter. Sec. 9.5-348. Environmental Design Criteria for Specific Habitat Types In addition to the general criteria set forth in this division, specific criteria shall apply to individual habitats as outlined below. (a) Hammock: All structures developed, used or occupied on land classified as hammock (all types and all levels of quality) shall be designed, located and constructed such that: 20 (1) All areas of required open space are maintained in their natural condition, including the preservation of canopy, mid-story, under-story vegetation, ground cover and leaf litter layer; and 21 (2) Clearing of native vegetation is limited to area of approved clearing shown on the approved site plan, which shall include a construction impact zone around all structures. Construction barriers shall be required at the outer 20 Implements Compo Plan Policies 102.2.2 and 207,1.5 21 Implements Compo Plan Policy 205.2,7 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 26 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 edge of the construction impact zone and shall be visible and of durable material such as wood, fabric, wire fencing, rope or wire cable. Barriers shall remain in place until final inspection for a Certificate of Occupancy has been approved. During construction, there shall be no disturbances of the ground surface and vegetation within required open space areas. (b) Pine lands: All structures developed, used or occupied on land classified as pinelands (all types and all levels of quality) shall be designed, located and constructed such that: 22(1) All areas of required open space are maintained in their natural condition, including canopy, mid-story, under-story vegetation, and ground cover. Dead vegetative matter, including leaf litter layer, may be removed for fire safety; and 23(2) All structures are separated from the body of the pinelands classified as high quality by a clear, unvegetated fire break of at least fifteen (15) feet width. Any clearing required to create this firebreak shall be deducted from the total area of clearing allowed for the parcel. Clearing of native vegetation shall be limited to the area of approved clearing shown on the approved site plan, and the required firebreak. Construction barriers shall be required at the outer edge of the area to be cleared and shall be visible and of durable material such as wood, fabric, wire fencing, rope or wire cable. Barriers shall remain in place until final inspection for a Certificate of Occupancy has been approved. During construction, there shall be no disturbances of the ground surface and vegetation within required open space areas. 24( c) Beach Berm Complex or Disturbed with Beach Berm: All structures developed, used or occupied on land classified as a beach berm complex or as disturbed with beach berm shall be designed, located and constructed such that: (1) All structures are elevated on pilings or other supports; 2\2) No beach berm material is excavated or removed and ao fill is deposited on a beach berm except as needed for shoreline stabilization or beach renourishment projects with a valid public purpose that furthers the goals of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, as determined by the planning director. All such projects shall require approval by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a County building permit; 26(3) The clearing of beach berm vegetation is limited to the minimum clearing required to allow development of a pt::rmitted use. Beach berm areas disturbed during construction shall be immediately restored to stable 22 Implements Compo Plan Policies 102.2.2 and 207.1.5 23 Implements Compo Plan Policies 102.2.2 and 205.2.7 24 Implements Compo Plan Policies 102.2.3 and 207.8. I 25 Implements Compo Plan Policy 206.1.4 26 Implements Compo Plan Policies 206.1.5 and 206.1,6 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 27 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 condition pursuant to a restoration plan approved by the Director of Environmental resources. Restoration techniques shall be designed to achieve the maximum stability possible. Native plants shall be used exclusively in re-vegetation. 27(4) A construction impact zone is provided and construction barriers are required at the outer edge of the construction impact zone and shall be visible and of durable material such as wood, rope or wire cable. No fencing or other material that can entrap wildlife may be used as a construction barrier on a beach berm. No vehicular or pedestrian traffic shall be permitted outside of the construction barriers for the duration of the construction period. Barriers shall remain in place until final inspection for a Certificate of Occupancy has been approved. (5) Marine Turtle Beach: In addition to the previous requirements, proposed development which may impact marine turtles shall be in accordance with Sec.9.5-349(p). (d) Mangroves, Wetlands, and Submerged Lands: All structures developed, used or occupied on land classified as mangroves, wetlands or submerged lands (all types and all levels of quality) shall be designed, located and constructed such that: 29(1) Generally: Only docks and docking facilities, boat ramps, walkways, water access walkways, water observation platforms, boat shelters, non-enclosed gazebos, riprap, seawalls, bulkheads, and utility pilings shall be permitted on or over mangroves, wetlands, and submerged lands, subject to the specific restrictions of this subsection. These restrictions shall not apply to disturbed wetlands that have been lawfully converted into uplands through filling. Trimming and/or removal of mangroves shall meet Florida Department of Environmental Protection requirements. 30(2) Protection of circulation patterns: Shoreline structures shall be designed to protect tidal flushing and circulation patterns. 31 (3) Dredging: The following restrictions shall apply to dredging activities: a. No new dredging shall be allowed in Monroe County except as specified for boat ramps in section 9.5-349(1)(SHORELINE SETBACK, BOAT RAMPS); b. No maintenance dredging shall be permitted within areas vegetated with seagrass beds or characterized by hard bottom communities except for maintenance dredging in public navigation channels; 27 Implements Compo Plan Policies 206.1.2 and 206.1.5 29 Implements Compo Plan Policy 203.1.1,204.2.2,204.2.3 and 207.13.1 30 Implements Compo Plan Policy 212.6.4 31 Implements Comp, Plan Policies 202.8.2 (amendment required) through 202.8.6, and Policies 203.2.3 and 204.2.8 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 28 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 c. In order to facilitate establishment of bottom vegetation, maintenance dredging in artificial waterways shall not exceed depths greater than six (6) feet at mean low water (ML W). This policy does not apply to the entrance channels into Key West Harbor and Safe Harbor; d. All dredged spoil materials shall be placed on permitted upland sites designed and located to prevent runoff of spoil material into wetlands or surface waters; e. All dredge activities require approvals by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a County permit. 32(4) Placement offill: No fill shall be permitted in any mangroves, wetlands, or submerged lands except: a. As specifically allowed by this section or by section 9.5-349(k) & (1) (SHORELONE SETBACKS, BULKHEADS, SEA WALLS, RIPRAP and BOAT RAMPS); or 33b. To fill a manmade, excavated water body such as a canal, boat ramp, boat slip, boat basin or swimming pool if the County biologist determines that such filling will not have a significant adverse impact on marine or wetland communities; or c. As needed for shoreline stabilization or beach renourishment projects with a valid public purpose that furthers the goals of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, as determined by the County biologist; or 34d. For bridges extending over saltmarsh and/or buttonwood association wetlands that are required to provilie automobile or pedestrian access to dwelling units located on upland areas within the same property for which there is no alternate means of access. Such bridges shall be elevated on pilings so that the natural movement of water, including volume, rate and direction of flow shall not be disrupted or altered; e. As approved for Disturbed Saltmarsh and Buttonwood Association Wetlands with appropriate mitigation as defined by the wetland regulations of section 9.5-348(d)(6); f. All such projects shall require approval by the Florida Department of 32 Implements Compo Plan Policies 102.1.1,203.1.1,204.2.1,204.2.2 (amendment required), 204.2.3 (amendment required), 207.1.4, and 207.13.1 33 Implements Compo Plan Policy 202.14 34 Implements Compo Plan Policy 204.2.3 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 29 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a County building permit. 35(5) After-The-Fact Exclusion: No "after the fact" permits shall be issued that violate Monroe County dredge and filling regulations. All fill shall be removed and all damages mitigated. 36(6) Development in Disturbed Wetlands: Lands classified as disturbed with saltmarsh and buttonwood association may be filled for development in accordance with the following criteria: a. Disturbed wetlands proposed for filling will be evaluated by a County Biologist using the Keys Wetlands Evaluation Procedure (KEYWEP). 1. Wetland quality categories based on KEYWEP scormg: a) "Red-flag" wetlands are those wetlands whose high level of functional capacity and lack of disturbance prohibit development under any circumstances. b) High functional capacity wetlands: those wetlands which score at 7.0 or higher, regardless of previous disturbance. Development is prohibited under any circumstances. c) Moderate functional capacity wetlands: those wetlands which score below 7.0, but greater than or equal to 4.6. These wetlands are suitable for development with appropriate mitigation. d) Low functional capacity wetlands: those wetlands which score less than 4.6 or are assigned a "green- flag" designation as suitable for development. These wetlands are suitable for development with appropriate mitigation. 2. Wetlands determined by KEYWEP to have a high functional capacity (those wetlands that score at or above 7.0 and those wetlands that are assigned a "red flag") are not suitable for filling. The open space ratio for such wetlands will be 1.0 35 Implements Compo Plan Policy 204.2.8 36 Implements Compo Plan Policy 204.2.4 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 30 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 3. Wetlands determined by KEYWEP to have moderate or low functional capacity (those wetlands that score below 7.0 or are assigned a "green flag") are suitable for filling with appropriate mitigation, as determined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). All such projects shall require documentation that all aspects of DEP and ACOE mitigation have been satisfied prior to issuance of a County building permit. b. Placement of fill within disturbed wetlands is subject to the environmental design clustering criteria (See Section 9.5-345(f). Less sensitive habitats on the subject parcel must be developed before disturbed wetlands are filled. c. Any portion of a wetland filled under these provisions shall be considered "disturbed" habitat with a required open space ratio of 0.20. In the event that State and/or Federal permits restrict fill to the development area only, this provision will not apply. d. Any development within a wetland so filled shall conform to the setbacks established by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) permits. If fill so placed extends to the subject parcel property line, standard minimum yard setbacks will apply. 37(7) Vegetated buffer required between development and wetlands: Except as allowed in Section 9.5-345(GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN CRITERIA), a minimum vegetated setback of fifty (50) feet shall be maintained as an open space buffer for development occurring adjacent to all types of wetlands, with the following exceptions: a. If a fifty (50) foot setback results in a less than 2,000 square feet of principal structure footprint of reasonable configuration, then the setback may be reduced to allow for 2,000 square feet of principal structure footprint of reasonable configuration, provided that the setback is not reduced to less than twenty-five (25) feet; b. On properties classified as scarified adjacent to wetlands, the wetland setback may be reduced to twenty-five (25) feet, without regard to buildable area, if the entire setback area: (i) is planted and maintained in native vegetation meeting the standards of a Class 'D' bufferyard or a bufferyard providing similar protection (Sec. 9.5-379 Bufferyard Standards) with the exception that understory trees may be substituted for canopy trees; 37 Implements Compo Plan Policy 204.2.6 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 31 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (ii) contains a site-suitable stormwater management plan approved by the County Biologist; and (iii) is placed under conservation easement. c. The wetland setback required by this subsection shall not apply to mangrove or wetland fringes occurring along man-made canals, channels, or basins. 38 Sec. 9.5-349. Shoreline setback. 39(a) Purpose: The purpose of this section is to allow for reasonable access between the land and water, provide secure boat storage, assure good water quality, provide an appearance consistent with community character, protect structures from the effects of long-term sea level rise, protect beaches and shores from erosion, protect over-water views, avoid adverse impacts on navigation, and protect marine and terrestrial natural resources. (b) 40Principal structures shall be set back as follows: (1) Along lawfully altered shorelines including manmade canals, channels, and basins, principal structures shall be set back at least twenty (20) feet as measured from the mean high water (MHW) line; (2) Along open water shorelines not adjacent to manmade canals, channels, or basins, and which have been altered by the legal placement offill: a. and where a mangrove fringe of at least ten (10) feet in width occurs across the entire shoreline of the property, principal structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet as measured from the mean high water (MHW) line or the landward extent of the mangroves, whichever is further inland. b. and where no mangrove fringe exists, principal structures shall be set back at least thirty (30) feet from the mean high water (MHW) line, provided that native vegetation exists or is planted and maintained in a ten (10) foot width across the entire shoreline as approved by the County Biologist, and is placed under_conservation easement; otherwise the setback shall be fifty (50) feet as measured from the mean high water (MHW) line. 38 Adopted by State Rule 28-20.025(23) on Jan. 04, 1996. Language further amended by County Staff. 39 Implements Compo Plan Policies 202.10.6 and 212.2.1 40 Implements Compo Plan Policies 212.2.1 and 212.2.3 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 32 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 c. On infilllots surrounded by significant development where principal structures are set back less than fifty (50) feet from mean high water (MHW) or the landward extent of mangroves, the Director of Planning and Environmental Resources may evaluate the community character, the presence or absence of environmental features, and the setbacks on adjacent developed properties within two parcels on either side of proposed development, and may allow principal structures to be set back as far as practicable or in line with adjacent principal structures. In no event shall the setback be less than twenty (20) feet. On shorelines where the existing pattern of setback is greater than thirty (30) feet, the greater setback shall apply. 41(3) Along unaltered and unlawfully altered shorelines, principal structures shall be set back fifty (50) feet as measured from the mean high water (MHW) line or the landward extent of the mangroves, whichever is further landward; (c) Accessory structures, as defined in Sec. 9.5-4(A-2), within the shoreline setback shall be constructed at a height not to exceed eighteen (18) inches above existing grade and shall meet the following design criteria: (1) Along altered shorelines, including manmade canals, channels, and basins: a. In no event shall the total, combined area of all structures occupy more than sixty (60) percent of the upland area of the shoreline setback; b. Pools, spas, and any screen structures over pools or spas shall be set back a minimum often (10) feet, as measured from the mean high water (MHW) line; (2) Along open water shorelines which have been altered by the legal placement offill, and where a mangrove fringe of at least ten (10) feet in width occurs across the entire shoreline of the property: a. In no event shall the total, combined area of all structures occupy more than thirty (30) percent of the shoreline setback; b. Accessory structures other than docks and erosion control structures shall be set back a minimum of fifteen (15) feet, as measured from the mean high water (MHW) line or the landward extent of the mangroves, whichever is further landward, and shall be located in upland areas; (3) Along unaltered shorelines: 41 Implement Comp, Plan Policy 212.2.1 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 33 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 a. In no event shall the total, combined area of all structures occupy more than thirty (30) percent of the shoreline setback; b. Accessory structures other than docks and erosion control structures shall be set back a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet, as measured from the mean high water (MHW) line or the landward extent of the mangroves, whichever is further landward, and shall be located in upland areas; ~) Storm water and pollutant runoff: All structures shall be designed such that storm water and pollutant runoff is contained on site, consistent with the stormwater management standards of this chapter. Pools, spas, fish cleaning tables, and similar pollutant sources shall not discharge directly into surface waters. Structures should be made of permeable materials, whenever practical, to allow the infiltration of stormwater runoff. (e) Applicability of open space and bufferyard requirements: All structures within the shoreline setback shall be located such that the open space ratios for the entire parcel and all scenic corridors and bufferyards are maintained. (f) Enclosed structures and gazebos: No enclosed structures, other than a dock box of five (5) feet or less in height, shall be allowed within the shoreline setback. Non-enclosed gazebos must be detached from any principal structure on the parcel. No decks or habitable spaces shall be constructed on the roof of any non-enclosed gazebo. Any gazebo within the shoreline setback shall not exceed two-hundred (200) square feet in area and the highest portion of the roof shall be no more than twelve (12) feet above grade. Screen enclosures over pools shall not exceed twelve feet in height. (g) Boat Shelter Criteria: Non-enclosed boat shelters may be erected only over a cut-in boat slip, basin, or ramp and may not extend into the adjacent waterbody beyond the mouth of the cut-in area, nor extend over any mangroves, submerged seagrasses or hardbottom communities. The roof and supporting members of a boat shelter may extend two(2) feet into the shoreline setback around the perimeter of a boat basin or boat ramp. No decks or habitable spaces shall be constructed on the roof of any boat shelter. The highest portion of the roof of any boat shelter shall be no more than twelve (12) feet above grade. (h) Preservation of native vegetation: Structures shall be located in existing cleared areas before encroaching into native vegetation. The remaining upland area of the shoreline setback shall be maintained as native vegetation or landscaped areas that allow the infiltration of storm water runoff. {i) Applicability of side yard setbacks: Side yard setbacks shall ue maintained for all structures in the shoreline setback except for docks, sea walls, fences, and retaining walls. 42 (j) Tidal flushing and circulation: Shoreline structures shall be designed to protect tidal flushing and circulation patterns. Any project that may produce changes in circulation patterns shall be approved only after sufficient hydrographic information is 42 Implements Compo Plan Policy 212.6.4 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 34 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 available to allow an accurate evaluation of the possible impacts of the project. Previously existing manmade alterations shall be evaluated so as to determine whether more hydrological benefits will accrue through their removal as part of the project. 43 (k) Bulkheads, seawalls, and riprap: Bulkheads seawalls or riprap shall be permitted, provided that: (1) Bulkheads, seawalls and/or riprap may be allowed as a principal use where it is demonstrated that their purpose is necessary for erosion control. Any attachments to seawalls or bulkheads, such as davits, cleats, and platforms, or any other elements that constitute docking facilities shall not be allowed except as accessory to a principle use. Seawalls may have a cap of up to two (2) feet in width without being considered a dock. Vertical type seawalls or bulkheads shall be permitted only to stabilize severely eroding shorelines and only on manmade canals, channels, or basins. Such seawalls or bulkheads shall be permitted only if native vegetation and/or riprap and filter cloth is not a feasible means to control erosion. 44No new seawalls, bulkheads, or other hardened vertical structures shall be permitted on open water. Existing, deteriorated seawalls and bulkheads on open water shorelines may be repaired and/or replaced and are exempt from the non-substantial improvements limitations except on known or potential sea turtle nesting beaches. Repairs and/or replacements must maintain the existing footprint to the maximum extent practical. (2) (3) (4) Whenever feasible, riprap, bulkheads and seawalls should be placed landward of any existing mangroves or wetland vegetation. Native upland, wetland, and aquatic biotic communities shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. (5) Wherever feasible, riprap shall be placed at the toe of solid seawalls to dissipate wave energy and provide substrate for marine organisms. (6) 4544No seawalls, bulkheads, riprap or other shoreline hardening structures shall be permitted on or waterward of any portion of any beach berm complex which is known to be or is potential nesting area for marine turtles, as determined by the County Biologist, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, and/or other appropriate agencies. Within known or potential nesting areas, the County biologist may, in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, determine that specific segments of shorelines have been previously, lawfully altered to such a degree that suitable nesting habitat for marine turtles is no longer present. In such cases, the County biologist in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection may recommend reasonable measures to restore 43 Implements Compo Plan Policy 202.10.6 and Objective 212.6 and subsequent Policies. Note that the provisions for fences are deleted here and incorporated into the "fence" 44 Implements Compo Plan Policy 102.8.3 and 204.2.2 (amendment required for latter) 45 Implements Compo Plan Policy 212.2.1 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 35 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 the nesting habitat. If such measures are not feasible, the setback requirements of this subsection do not apply. Restoration of suitable nesting habitat shall be required for unlawfully altered beaches. (7) Beach renourishment projects on open water may be approved only upon a determination by the County biologist that the project has a valid public purpose that furthers the goals of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. (8) All such projects shall require approval by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a County permit. (1) Boat Ramps: Boat ramps shall be permitted, provided that: (1) All boat ramps shall be located and designed so as not to create a setback nonconformity for existing structures from the new MHW line created by the boat ramp. All boat ramps shall be confined to shorelines of manmade canals, channels, and basins with little or no native vegetation. (2) (3) The width of boat ramps, including side slopes, shall be limited to fifteen (15) feet, except that ramps serving commercial uses, public uses, or more than three dwelling units may be thirty-five (35) feet in width. All above-water ramp, side slope or wall structures shall be located landward of the original MHW line. This area shall be subtracted from the total area allowed for structures in the shoreline setback in section 9.5-349(c) (SHORELINE SETBACKS). (4) (5) A maximum of two accessory docks, abutting either or both sides of the ramp, are allowed. These docks may extend beyond MHW, but shall comply with all requirements of this section and section 9.5-348(d) (MANGROVES, WETLANDS, AND SUBMERGED LANDS). (6) Construction of a boat ramp shall not involve any filling of surface waters except for the minimum amount needed for the actual boat ramp surface, side slopes, walls or pilings for accessory docks. Walls may not exceed two (2) feet in width. (7) Dredging shall be limited to the minimum amount necessary to construct the boat ramp and may not exceed one hundred (100) cubic yards of total excavation above and below MHW. No dredging of submerged grass beds or hard bottom communities shall be allowed. (8) All such projects shall require approval by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a County permit. 46 (m) Docking facilities: Docking facilities shall be permitted, provided that: 46 Implements Compo Plan Policies 212.5.2 and 212.5.3 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 36 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (1) All required permits from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Army Corps of Engineers shall be obtained prior to issuance of a County permit; Docks shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the width of the waterbody as measured laterally across the waterbody from the point of mean low water of the proposed location of placement to the opposing point of mean low water; No dock together with a moored vessel shall preempt more than twenty-five (25) percent of the navigable portion of a man-made waterbody; Notwithstanding the provisions of section 9.5-4(A-2), docking facilities may be constructed on adjacent parcels under the same ownership and within the same zoning district, provided that a legally established principal use and/or structure exists on one parcel. In the event that ownership of the adjacent parcel containing such an accessory dock is severed from the parcel containing the principal use/structure, the dock must be removed and the shoreline restored. (2) (3) (4) (5) Any docking facility shall meet at least one of the following conditions: (a) At least four (4) feet water depth at MLW at the terminal end of the docking facility, and continuous access to open water; or (b) A docking facility that extends across a full ten (10) percent of the width of any body of water may terminate in water less than four (4) feet at ML W if this water depth occurs within five (5) horizontal feet of the terminal end of the docking facility such that the centerline of an average vessel will rest in water of adequate depth, and continuous access to open water is available; or (c) Docking facilities may be developed on the shoreline of lots in a subdivision that was approved before September 15, 1986, if the docking facility is located in a channel or canal that was dredged before September 15, 1986, and if there is a ML W depth of at least four (4) feet at the terminal end of the docking facility. Such docks shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the width of the channel or canal. (d) Docking facilities may be permitted which terminate over seagrass beds or hardbottom communities when the water depth at the terminal platform is at least four feet above the top of all seagrasses, corals, macro algae, sponges, or other sessile organisms at ML W and continuous access to open water is available. All such projects shall require approval by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a County permit. (6) Secure Tie-Down Provisions: All docks with boat lifts, davits or similar lifting mechanisms shall provide cleats, rings, or similar features that can be Proposed Environmental Development Standards 37 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 used to tie down the vessel when it is out of the water in order to stabilize the vessel during high winds. (7) Floating Dock Allowance: Any docking portions extending over water no shallower than four (4) feet at mean low water (ML W) may be supported by floats; (8) Marginal Docks: On shorelines landward of a seawall, revetment or manmade canal or channel, a dock may run the entire length of the shoreline, parallel to the water's edge, provided that: (a) The landward edge of the dock is located entirely on the upland shoreline and no walkway is needed to provide access to the dock. (b) All portions of the dock that extend over submerged lands are cantilever beam or pile supported. (9) T-Style Docks: Where a mangrove fringe or wetland vegetation exists along the shoreline, then a dock with a walkway perpendicular to the shoreline, such as a "T" or "L" dock, shall be the primary design permitted and shall be designed as follows: (a) The portion of the dock parallel to the shoreline may run the entire shoreline length ofthe parcel and shall not exceed five (5) feet in width. (b) The dock and walkway shall be located so as to avoid or minimize covering wetland vegetation or mangroves. ( c) The walkway connecting the dock to the shore shall not exceed four (4) feet in width. One such walkway shall be allowed for every one hundred (100) feet of shoreline length or fraction thereof (for example, 75 feet of shoreline may have one walkway and 101 feet of shoreline may have two). (d) Where a mangrove fringe or wetland vegetation exists along the shoreline and a "T" or "L" style dock would extend over more than ten (10) percent of the width of the waterbody, the County biologist will coordinate with and approve an alternative design which shall receive approval by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers prior to issuance of a County Permit. Such alternate design shall only have the minimum deviations from this subsection to address this unique siiuation. If a mangrove fringe will be removed, the dock shall not extenJ more than twenty (20) feet along the shoreline. On shorelines exceeding one hundred (100) feet in length, one such dock shall be allowed for every one hundred (100) feet of shoreline. (10) Pier Type Docks: Pier type docks shall be permitted, provided that: (a) Such structures are oriented approximately perpendicular to the shoreline; Proposed Environmental Development Standards 38 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (b) Such structures are located in an existing break in the mangroves or shoreline vegetation; however, if no such break exists, a walkway, no more than four (4) feet in width, may be cut through the mangroves or shoreline vegetation; (c) Such structures are no longer than twice the linear shoreline frontage of the parcel or one hundred (100) feet, whichever is less. For purposes of this subparagraph, dock length shall be measured from ML W out to the waterward extension of the dock. A special exception may be granted by the Director of Planning and Environmental Resources to allow the minimum relaxation of this length restriction as is necessary to provide the upland owner with access to adequate water depths specified for docking facilities. Such special exceptions shall only be granted based on a written determination that, amongst other criteria, the proposed dock will not be inconsistent with community character, will not interfere with public recreational uses in or on adjacent waters, and will pose no navigational or safety hazard. At least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the issuance of a County permit issued under such a special exception, the Director of Planning and Environmental Resources shall ensure that shoreline property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the subject parcel are notified by regular mail of the proposed special exception in order to allow an opportunity for appeal. (d) If proposed, the terminal platform is no wider than eight (8) feet in one dimension and does not exceed a total of one hundred and sixty (160) square feet in area. The terminal platform may include stairways for swimming access provided that all stairways are contained within the square footage allowed for the terminal platform. The terminal platform may include a non-enclosed gazebo that does not exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area and the highest portion of the roof shall be no more than twelve (12) feet above the decking or terminal platform level. (n) Water access structures: The following specific types of structures, or portions thereof, extending over mangroves, wetlands, or submerged lands, shall be permitted only on shorelines of water bodies other than manmade canals, channels, and basins. All required permits from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Army Corps of Engineers shall be obtained prior to issuance of a County permit. (1)47Water Access Walkways: Water access walkways, shall be permitted, provided that such structures are: (a) Oriented approximately perpendicular to the shoreline; 47 Implements Compo Plan Policy 212.5.4 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 39 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (b) Designed to terminate in water no deeper than six (6) inches at ML W or extend further than 10 feet from the waterward extent of mangroves; (c) Designed so that the decking is elevated at least two (2) feet above MHW, except for a ramp or stair section at the waterward end which must be limited to no more than ten (10) foot long; (d) Do not exceed four (4) feet in width and do not include a terminal platform or gazebo or roof structures; (e) Designated by signs of at least one (1) square foot each to be placed on each side of the structure that states "No Mooring of Motorized Vessels Allowed"; and (f) Designed not to terminate over seagrasses or hardbottom communities. (2Y8Water Observation Platforms: Water observations platforms shall be permitted, provided that such structures are: (a) Oriented approximately perpendicular to the shoreline; (b) Designed to terminate in water no deeper than six (6) inches at ML W or begin the terminal platform no further than 10 feet beyond the waterward extent of mangroves; (c) Designed so that the top of the decking, including the terminal platform, must be elevated at least five (5) feet above MHW, except for a ladder or steps that may be may be added for swimming access only in the absence of seagrasses or hardbottom communities; (d) Designed with a krminal platform that does not exceed one hundred and sixty (160) square feet, inclusive of any steps or ladder. The terminal platform may include a non-enclosed gazebo that does not exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area and the highest portion of the roof shall be no more than twelve (12) feet above the decking or terminal platform level. (e) Shall be designed with handrails and designated by signs of at least one (1) square foot each to be placed on each side of the structure that states "No Mooring of Motorized Vessels Allowed". (0) Special approvals: 48 Implements Compo Plan Policy 212.5.4 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 40 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (1) For structures serving commercial uses, public uses, or more than three dwelling units, the Director of Planning and Environmental Resources or the Planning Commission may approve deviations from the requirements of the subsection above as part of a minor or major conditional use permit. Such approval may include additional structures or uses provided that such approval is consistent with any permitted uses, densities, and intensities of the land use district, furthers the purposes of this section, is consistent with the general standards applicable to all uses, and the proposed structures are located in a disturbed area of an altered shoreline. Such additional uses are limited to waterfront dining areas, pedestrian walkways, public monuments or statues, informational kiosks, fuel or septic facilities, and water-dependent marina uses. Any such development shall make adequate provision for a water quality monitoring program for a period of five (5) years after the completion of the development. For structures serving three or fewer dwelling units the Director of Planning and Environmental Resources may approve designs that address unique circumstances such as odd shaped lots or shorelines, even if such designs are inconsistent with the above standards. Such approval may be granted only upon the Director's written concurrence with the applicant's written finding that the proposed design furthers the purpose of this section and the goals of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. Only the minimum possible deviation from the above standards will be allowed in order to address the unique circumstances. No such special approval will be available for after- the-fact permits submitted to remedy a Code Enforcement violation. 49Docks or docking facilities lawfully existing along the shoreline of manmade canals, channels, or basins, or serving three or fewer dwelling units on any shoreline, may be expanded or extended beyond the size limitations contained in this section in order to reach the water depths specified for docking facilities. Any such modifications shall comply with each and every other requirement of this section and section 9.5- 348(d)(MANGROVES, WETLANDS AND SUBMERGED LANDS). (2) (3) (4) All structures lawfully existing within the shoreline setback along manmade canals, channels, or basins, or serving three or fewer dwelling units on all)' shoreline, may be rebuilt in the same footprint provided that there will be no adverse impacts on storm water runoff, navigation or turtle nesting habitat. 50 (p) Requirements for marine turtle nesting areas: Notwithstanding the provisions above, no development other than pile supported docks and walkways designed to minimize adverse impacts on marine turtles shall be allowed within fifty (50) feet of any portion of any beach berm complex which is known to be or is a potential nesting area for marine turtles. Any development shall comply with Article IV, Section 13-61 through 13- 67 (Sea turtle protection ordinance). (1) The fifty (50) foot setback shall be measured from either the landward toe of the most landward beach berm or from fifty (50) feet landward of MHW, whichever is less. The maximum total setback shall be one hundred (100) feet from MHW. 49 Implements Compo Plan Policy 212.5.3 50 Implements Compo Plan Policy 207.8.7 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 41 of 42 BOCC Ordinance Exhibit 1 (2)51 Within known or potential nesting areas for marine turtles, as determined by the County Biologist, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, and/or other appropriate agencies, the County biologist may, in cooperation with other appropriate agencies, determine that specific segments of shorelines have been previously, lawfully altered to such a degree that suitable nesting habitat for marine turtles is no longer present. In such cases, the County biologist in cooperation with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection may recommend reasonable measures to restore the nesting habitat. If such measures are not feasible, the specific requirements of this subsection do not apply. Restoration of suitable nesting habitat shall be required for unlawfully altered beaches. Any such dock or walkway shall be designed to the following criteria to minimize adverse impacts on marine turtles. (3) (a) The structure shall have a minimum horizontal distance of four (4) feet between pilings or other upright members. (b) The structure shall have a minimum clearance of two (2) feet above grade. (c) If stairs or a ramp with less than the minimum two (2) feet clearance above grade is required, such stairs or ramp shall be enclosed with vertical barriers no more than two (2) inches apart. (4) All outdoor and indoor artificial lighting complies with sections 13-63 and 13-64 of Article IV of the Monroe County Code, Protection of Sea Turtles. Sec. 9.5-350. Reserved 51 Implements Compo Plan Policy 212.2.1 Proposed Environmental Development Standards 42 of 42 MEMORANDUM TO: The Board of County Commissioners FROM: RaIphGouldy, Senior Administrator, Environmental Resources DATE: February 26, 2002 RE: Proposed.Amendmentstothe.Monroe County Land Development Regulations Pertaining to Environmental Development . Standards MEETING DATE: March 20, 2002 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The proposed revisions reflect reorganization and revision to the Environmental Development Standards of the Land Development Regulations, including consolidation of those standards within a single code division, incorporation of interim regulations pertaining to development along shorelines and within disturbed wetlands, and implementation of Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policies. II. ANAL YSIS A. County requirements for changes to the land development regulations. Article XI of Chapter 9.5 sets forth the requirements for amending the text of the land development regulations. Specifically, Sec. 9.5-511(d)(5)b sets forth six criteria for amending the Land Development Regulations, at least one of which must be met. In this case, items (iv), New issues, and (v), Recognition of a need for additional detail and comprehensiveness, are the reasons behind the proposed revisions. B. Compliance with Chapter 163, Section II, Florida Statutes The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act (Ch. 163, Sec.II, F.S.) requires that local government comprehensive plans and plan amendments be consistent with the state comprehensive plan and the appropriate regional policy plan (the South Florida Regional Planning Council), and sets forth the minimum requirements for land development regulations necessary to implement the adopted comprehensive plan. The proposals are in compliance with all of the applicable requirements of this section. C. Chapter 380.0552, F.S., "the Principles for Guiding Development" applies to Monroe County in relation to the Area of Critical State Concern designation. These principles are listed below in italics with Staff s comments following. Page I 1. To strengthen local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local government is able to achieve these objectives without the continuation of the area of critical state concern designation. The proposed revisions preserve existing guidelines for evaluating the development potential of sensitive habitats, provide for conservation of the ecological functions of such habitats, and set appropriate development standards adjacent to wetlands and shorelines, thus meeting requirements of the Comprehensive Plan within the framework of local government regulations. 2, To protect shoreline and marine resources, including mangroves, coral reef formations, seagrass beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat. The proposed LDRs are predicated on evaluation and protection of sensitive environmental resources, in order to preserve the ecological interrelationships between uplands, shorelines, wetlands, marine resources, and wildlife. 3. To protect upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native tropical vegetation (for example, hardwood hammocks and pine lands), dune ridges and beaches, wildlife, and their habitat. The proposed regulations are designed to evaluate and preserve the components and ecological functions of uplands, wetlands, shorelines, beaches, and mangroves, and to protect wildlife habitat, shoreline anchorage, and water quality. 4. To ensure the maximum well-being afthe Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic development. The proposed regulations are designed to manage development in a manner that balances preservation of environmental resources with development and protection of private property, thus ensuring the continued economic well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens. 5. To limit the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida Keys. The proposed regulations are designed to ensure that development is accompanied by preservation and/or enhancement of natural Page 2 environmental functions that are integral to maintaining the water quality of the Keys. 6. To enhance natural scenic resources, promote the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment and ensure that development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys. The proposed development standards are intended to enhance and/or preserve natural scenic resources, and will ensure that development is compatible with the natural historic character of the Keys. 7. To protect the historical heritage of the Florida Keys, The proposal is not related to the historical heritage of the Keys. 8. To protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and proposed major public investments, including: a. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities; b. Sewage collection and disposal facilities; c. Solid waste collection and disposal facilities; d. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities; e. Transportation facilities; f Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries; g. State parks, recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned properties; h. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op. 1. Other utilities as appropriate, The proposed regulations are not directly related to this principle. 9. To limit the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida Keys. The proposed regulations are designed to limit adverse impacts of all types of development on the environmental resources of the Florida Keys. 10. To make available adequate affordable housingfor all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys. The proposed regulations are not directly related to this principle. Page 3 11. To provide adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a postdisaster reconstruction plan. The shoreline and wetland setback components of the proposed regulations are designed, in part, to protect the economic welfare by limiting potential damage to property due to storm related events. 12. To protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource. The proposal is not directly related to this principle. D. Consistency with 2010 Comprehensive Plan The proposal is consistent with and implements policies contained within the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. III. PROPOSED REVISIONS: The proposed revisions to the Environmental Standards are included as Exhibit 1. IV. FINDINGS: 1. The proposal is consistent with Section 9.5-511 of the Monroe County Code. 2. The proposal is in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. 3. The proposal is in compliance with Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. 4. The proposal is consistent with policies of the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. V. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Environmental Resources staff recommends APPROV AL ofthe proposed amendments to the Environmental Development Standards included as Exhibit 1. Page 4