Item R1
Jan 20 04 09:01a
Growth Mgt
(305)289-2854
p.2
Memorandum
m:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
The Board of County Commissioners ..fl/VJ
Timothy 1. McGany, AICP, Director of Growth~rent
January 20, 2004
~.... , .:l y, Ili. . Amendment to Big Pine Key and No Name Key Comp Plan
Transmittal per recommendation of the Planning Commission.
At the January 14th meeting, the Planning Commission recommended the following amendment to the
proposed Policy 101.5.12, part of Amendmetif#7'ig.the staffreport (underlined language is new):
)
Policy 101.S.12 0 /'_~ '
Non-residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Ke)lNewkll be allocated pursuant to
the following additional criteria:
1. Development must be infill in existing commercial areas in Tier 2 and Tier 3 lands, mainly along
the U.S. 1 corridor on Big Pine Key.
2. All new non-residential development will be limited to disturbed or scarified lands.
3. New allocation awards shall be allowed to exceed 2,500 square feet per site if located within the
designated Community Center Overlay as designated by Action Item 4.1.5.
4. New allocations shall be awarded moderate positive points to applicants who fulfill the additional
criterion set forth in Strategy 4.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and
No Name Key.
All new non-residential development within the planning area shall be exempt from criterion 5, 6, 7,
and 17 of Policy 101.5.5. Development that is exempt from NROGO will not be subiect to criteria 1
through 4 above.
Staff recommends approval of the amendment proposed by the Planning Commission.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: January 21. 2004
Division: Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes
No-L
Department: Planning
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
A public hearing to consider a DCA Transmittal Resolution for amendments to the Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan based on recommendations adopted as a part of the Livable CommuniKeys
Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The amendments include the addition of
policies, changes to policies and the deletion of policies. Future Land Use Map changes are also
proposed pursuant to Action Item 2.1.3 of the Master Plan. (One public hearing required).
ITEM BACKGROUND:
All of the proposed comprehensive plan amendments and map amendments are included as a part
of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Amendments
are only recommended in the LCP Plan, but must be formally changed through the
comprehensive plan amendment process.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
The Board adopted the Master Plan on December 17,2003.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
None
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Approval.
TOTAL COST:
N/A
BUDGETED: Yes
No
COST TO COUNTY:
N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
Nol
AMOUNT PER MONTH
Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty -L OMB/Purchasing
, AICP
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
DOCUMENTATION:
Included X
To Follow
Not Required_
AGENDA ITEM #---12L
DISPOSITION:
v\~~/
\:
YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS
AS RECOMMENDED BY THE LIVABLE
COMMUNIKEYS MASTER PLAN FOR BIG PINE KEY
AND NO NAME KEY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
HARVEY GOVERNMENT CENTER
JANUARY 21, 2004
DRC:
PC:
Staff:
YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS
AMENDMENTS TO THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BASED
ON RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED AS A PART OF THE LIVABLE
COMMUNIKEYS MASTER PLAN FOR BIG PINE KEY AND NO NAME
KEY. THE AMENDMENTS INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF POLICIES,
CHANGES TO POLICIES AND THE DELETION OF POLICIES.
FUTURE LAND USE MAP CHANGES ARE ALSO PROPOSED
PURSUANT TO ACTION ITEM 2.1.3 OF THE MASTER PLAN.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Approval
December 29,2003
Staff Report
Approval
January 5,2004
Resolution #DO 1-04
Approval
January 14,2004
Resolution #PO 1-04
DRAFT BOCC TRANSMITTAL RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO.
- 2004
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TRANSMITTING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PLANNING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT AMENDING THE YEAR
2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS
ADOPTED AS A PART OF THE LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS MASTER
PLAN FOR BIG PINE KEY AND NO NAME KEY.
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing
on January 21, 2004, for the purposes of considering the transmittal to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs, for review and comment, a proposed amendment to the Monroe County
Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map as described above; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners support the requested amendments to the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA THAT:
Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby adopt the recommendation of
the Planning Commission pursuant to the draft ordinance for the adoption of the proposed
amendments to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map;
and
Section 2. The Board of County Commissioners does hereby transmit the proposed
amendment with a copy of the adopted Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and
No Name Key to the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review and comment in
accordance with the provisions of Sections 163.3184 and 380.0522, Florida Statutes; and
Section 3. The Monroe County Staff is given the authority to prepare and submit the
required transmittal letter and supporting documents for the proposed amendment in accordance
with the requirement of9J-11.006 of the Florida Administrative Code; and
(The remainder of this page left intentionally blank)
Page 1 of2
Initials _
Seelio. 4. The Clerk of the Board is hereby directed to forward a copy of this resolution to
the Director of Planning and Environmental Resources.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board OfCOWlty Commissioners of Monroe COWlty,
Florida at a regular meeting held on the 21 5t day of January, 2004.
Mayor Murray Nelson
Mayor Pro Tern David P. Rice
Commissioner Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Dixie Spehar
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
Mayor Murray Nelson
(SEAL)
A TIEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
DEPUTY CLERK
Page 2 of2
Initials_
DRAFT BOCC ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO. -2004
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED AS A PART OF
THE LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS MASTER PLAN FOR BIG PINE KEY
AND NO NAME KEY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL
ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; AND DIRECTING THE
CLERK OF THE BOARD TO FORWARD A CERTIFIED COPY OF THIS
ORDINANCE TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting on December 1 ih, the Monroe County
Board of County Commissioners adopted the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine
Key and No Name Key (referred to hereafter as the Master Plan) as the policy document to direct
growth and development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan is the product of the Livable CommuniKeys program as
outlined in the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Objective 101.20 which is to
address community needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan was created in conjunction with the Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP), a mechanism required by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) whereby the
concerns and responsibilities ofthe various public agencies with regard to the conservation of the
Key Deer and other covered species, and public and private development of Big Pine and No
Name Keys can be coordinated; and
WHEREAS, many Objectives and Policies within the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
specifically address the growth and development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to
protect the endangered species; and
WHEREAS, the HCP and the LCP process set forth much more comprehensive
conservation and development plans that will allow development on the island and protection of
the endangered species on the island; and
WHEREAS, many of the findings of both the HCP and the LCP conflict with Policies in
the Year 2010 Plan and the plans may not be implemented until those comprehensive plan
policies are amended; and
WHEREAS, many of the goals, strategies and action items within the Master Plan
address specific policies within the Comprehensive Plan by either replacing or changing them;
and
WHEREAS, as a part of these amendments, the Master Plan will be adopted as a part of
the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore any conflicts between the two must be resolved; and
Page 1 of 10
Initial
WHEREAS, as a part of the comprehensive LCP process, Future Land Use Map
amendments are proposed to bring properties in conformity with the Master Plan and other
guiding documents; and
WHEREAS, all of the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map changes
have been recommended by the Master Plan, as adopted on December 1 ih, 2003 and the
adoption resolution states that the Future Land Use and Land Use District map changes would be
brought before the commission at a subsequent hearing; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments were reviewed during a meeting of the
Development Review Committee on January 5,2004 which was continued from December 29th,
2003; and
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting on January 14, 2004, the Monroe
County Planning Commission reviewed the amendments and recommended approval, to the
Board of County Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners were presented with
the following information, which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said
hearing:
1. The Staff Report prepared on January 9, 2002; by K. Marlene Conaway, Director,
Planning and Environmental Resources;
2. Proposed changes to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Future
Land Use Map;
3. The sworn testimony of the Growth Management Staff;
4. Comments by the public; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners examined the
proposed amendments to the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map
submitted by the Monroe County Planning Department at a public hearing on January 21st,
2004; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners makes the following
Findings of Fact based on the evidence presented:
1. Objective 101.20 mandates the county to complete a series of master plan documents
to address local needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County. The Big
Pine Key and No Name Key Master Plan is the first of the Livable CommuniKeys
plans to be completed, and require implementation of the recommended Strategies
and Action Items. The LCP Plan itself must be adopted as an amendment to and a
part of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. Policy 101.20.2 will provide a
mechanism to recognize individual Master Plans as they are adopted by the BOCC as
Page 2 of 10
Initial
a part of the Comprehensive Plan, enabling the framework created within the plans to
have the same standing as the Comprehensive plan; and
2. In order to maintain consistency between the different planning documents that
pertain to Big Pine Key and No Name Key, the LCP Master Plan and the Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) must be included when considering future development,
both public and private. On page 34 of the LCP, it is recommended that Objective
103.1 ofthe Comprehensive Plan be amended; and
3. Because the LCP master plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan create a three-tier
system to direct growth to infill areas and away from areas that contain important
native vegetation, sources of funding needs to be identified to purchase
environmentally sensitive lands. The planning area contains a large amount of native
habitat that is valuable to many of the endangered species which live there, and in
order to permanently preserve it, it must be protected through public ownership. Page
60 of the master plan recommends encouraging the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) to find a dedicated funding source to acquire Tier I lands within the
planning area for preservation purposes; and
4. Policy 101.6.5 ranks proposed acquisition lands according to three priorities, however
it did not previously take into account the implementation of a Habitat Conservation
Plan such as the one which has been drafted for Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Page 60 of the master plan recommends that consideration of the implementing the
HCP should be a factor in the ranking of lands for acquisition purposes; and
5. Portions of the ROGO and NROGO system outlined in the Year 2010 Comprehensive
Plan specifically mention Big Pine Key and No Name Key as areas which should
receive additional negative points in both ROGO and NROGO. Because the master
plan adopts a new ROGO system for only Big Pine and No Name Keys, those areas
should be exempted from the current ROGO system; and
6. Policy 103.1.1 includes many elements that are replaced with the implementation of
the LCP master plan, including a new limit on ROGO allocations to 10 per year for
the next 20 years and the corresponding amount of non-residential floor area. The
new ROGO system for Big Pine is described in Strategy 3.1 and Strategy 3.2 of the
master plan and will be unique to the planning area. Non-residential floor area is
limited to 47,800 square feet by Action Item 4.1.1 in the master plan which
corresponds to 239 square feet for each residential planned for the next twenty years.
The limit on vehicular trips set forth in Policy 103.1.1 is reflected in Action Ite~
4.1.8 which prohibits any new high intensity uses, which have corresponding trip - -- - -"
generation rates to those prohibited in Policy 103.1.1 (they generate more than 100
trips per 1000 square feet per day); and
7. Policy 103.1.2 directs the county to replace the ACCC (Area of Critical County
Concern) designation with zoning designations consistent with the categories shown
on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). Each of these changes are outlined in Action
Page 3 of 10
Initial
Item 2.1.3 which also specifically states that Policy 103.1.2 should be deleted. These
changes will be reflected in a new zoning map to be adopted by the BOCC; and
8. Policy 103.1.7 requires the county to initiate a land management program with other
government agencies for private and county owned lands within and adjacent to state
and federal owned conservation projects. Strategy 10.2 and the associated action
items outline a program for lands acquired for conservation purposes by the county in
order to fulfill the mandates set forth in the HCP which require a 3:1 mitigation to
development ratio. The action items include offering lands acquired for conservation
to the FWS for management, formulating management objectives for specific
habitats, restoration of lands to improve Key deer habitat, and reporting as required
by the HCP; and
9. Policy 103.1.8 requires that upon the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the
Habitat Evaluation Index (HEI) in the Land Development Regulations shall be
revised to incorporate greater consideration for the habitat of species of special status,
including the Key deer. The required changes have been completed and were adopted
as a part of the LDR's in 1999 and will not be effected by the LCP master plan; and
10. Policy 103.1.9 mandates that the county revise the Land Development Regulations to
require the 'clustering' of development to avoid the fragmentation of Key deer
habitat. This requirement has been fulfilled and clustering is required under Section
9.5-345(f) of the LDRs. Clustering is supported within the master plan through limits
placed on development in Tier I lands; and
11. The HCP modeled the development of new and expanded public facilities on Big
Pine and found that if existing use were to expand and new uses were to be placed in
scarified, Tier III areas there would be little or no impact to the endangered species
overall, and the impact that would occur could be minimized and mitigated. Policy
103.1.10 requires a siting analysis for any new or significant expansion of public
facilities on Big Pine which is to include:
1. assessment of needs;
2. evaluation of alternative sites and design alternatives for the selected sites; and
3. assessment of impacts on surrounding land uses and natural resources.
All three of these requirements have been met as a part of the HCP and LCP process
and both documents explain where any new public facilities should be placed. Public
facilities are directly addressed in Goal 6 (parks and recreation) and Goal 7 (other
public facilities); and
12. One of the reasons the HCP was developed as part of a solution to relieve localized
traffic constraints on Big Pine. Some improvements have been made by FDOT to
U.S. 1 through Big Pine, including an intersection improvement project and re-timing
of the traffic signal, and a proposed third lane will be completed after adoption of the
HCP. Policy 103.1.11 requires the implementation of certain projects and the
Page 4 of 10
Initial
consideration of solutions to the traffic problem by FDOT, which will be completed
after adoption of the HCP; and
13. As a direct result of the HCP process, permanent traffic solutions have been
addressed through the HCP analysis. Impacts have been addressed and many of the
suggested projects are either completed or will be completed when the HCP is
approved by USFWS. Results of the HCP process include the at-grade fencing along
U.S. 1, Key deer underpasses, and the extension of the third lane on the west end of
the island. Policy 103.1.12 requires a study to evaluate the different options for
traffic circulation concurrency issues, which was part of the purpose of the HCP and
the recommendations are included in the LCP as a part of Goal 15; and
14. Policy 103.1.14 discourages tour groups on Big Pine in order to reduce the traffic and
illegal feeding of the Key deer population. The language of this policy is reflected in
Action Item 12.1.5; and
15. Policy 103.1.15 requires the county to restore, where practicable, disturbed wetland
and upland native vegetation in order to improve Key deer habitat. The policy has
been duplicated in Action Item 10.2.6; and
16. Policy 207.7.5 requires the county to identify the freshwater lens system on Big Pine
and the associated keys and implement special measure to protect the system. Goal
11 specifically addresses the freshwater system and proposes protective mechanisms,
most of which are already in place; and
17. Policy 207.7 is similar to Policy 103.1.14 which discourages tour groups on Big Pine
Key. This policy is addressed in Action Item 12.1.5; and
18. Policy 207.7.9 states that "Monroe County shall incorporate specific management
guidelines to protect Key deer (developed pursuant to Policy 207.2.3) as stipulations
for land development orders for all development occurring on Big Pine and No Name
Keys". Specific guidelines are outlined in both the HCP and the LCP for all
development, not just development orders, on Big Pine and No Name Keys. Both
documents describe a level of development that minimizes impacts on endangered
species and requires mitigation where impacts do occur; and
19. Policy 207.7.10 requires the county to adopt revisions to the LDRs which limit the
area that may be enclosed by fencing so as not to interfere with Key deer movement.
The LDRs were amended and Big Pine and No Name Keys have special fencing
regulations described in Section 9.5-309(c); and
20. Both Policy 207.7.11 and Policy 207.7.17 require the county to work with the
USFWS to develop roadside management techniques to reduce deer-vehicle
collisions, illegal deer feeding, and increased visibility. Roadside management
techniques are required in Action Item 15.2.2 of the master plan; and
Page 5 of 10
Initial
21. Both the HCP and the LCP encourage infill commercial development within the U.S.
1 corridor area on properties already scarified. The Future Land Use Map Change
from Residential Conservation (RC) to Mixed Use Commercial (MC) of the
properties described as Lots 21 and 22, Tropic Island Ranchettes is consistent with
the Master Plan because the properties are scarified, have been used commercially
since 1986, and are within the U.S. 1 corridor area, where development and
redevelopment are directed and encouraged.
22. The HCP and the LCP require and provide mechanisms for the protection of the
habitat of endangered species. Part of this protection is the designation of areas in
Tier I which are to remain undeveloped or developed at the current level of
development. The properties currently designated on the Future Land Use Map as
Mixed Use Commercial (MC) are only partially developed with residential uses,
contain a large amount of native habitat, are located within Tier I, and are not within
the main U.S. 1 corridor where further commercial development may occur. The
properties to the south of the MC site are under public ownership, while properties to
the north are single family residences with the FLUM designation of Residnetial Low
(RL).
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners makes the following
Conclusions of Law based on the evidence presented:
1. The Livable CommuniKeys Program requires Monroe County to produce a series of
Master Plans which addresses local needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe
County; and
2. The LCP Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key was created in conjunction
with the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and implements the HCP, both of which
control development and conservation on the islands; and
3. The Master Plan was adopted as the policy document to direct growth and
development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key; and
4. The Master Plan, as adopted, recommends the amendments proposed by this
ordinance in order to avoid conflicts with existing Objectives and Policies and to
enable the implementation of both the HCP and the LCP; and
5. The proposed amendments are internally consistent with and further the Goals,
Objectives, and Policies of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Principals of
Guiding Development set forth in Chapter 380, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners hereby supports the
decision of the Monroe County Planning Commission and the staff of the Monroe County
Planning Department; and
Page 6 of 10
Initial
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners that
the following amendment to the Monroe County Code be approved, adopted and transmitted to
the state land planning agency for approval;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, THAT:
Section 1.
to read as follows:
Create Policy 101.20.2 in the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Policy 101.20.2
The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as
a part of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following
Community Master Plans have been competed in accordance with the principals outlined
in this section and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Master Plan for Future Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key, adopted
December 17,2003.
Section 2. Amend Objective 103.1 of the Year 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive
Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough format):
Objective 103.1
Monroe County shall regulate future development and coordinate the provision of public
facilities on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and
Policies of this Comprehensive Plan, the Livable CommuniKevs Master Plan and the
Habitat Conservation Plan, for Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to:
(a) protect the Key deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium);
(b) preserve and enhance the habitat of the Key deer;
(c) limit the number of additional vehicular trips from other islands to Big Pine Key;
(d) maintain the rural, suburban, and open space character of Big Pine Key; and
( e) prevent and reduce adverse secondary and cumulative impacts on Key Deer.
[9J-5.006(3)(b)1 and 4]
Section 3. Amend Policy 101.6.4 of the Year 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive
Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough format):
Policy 101.6.4
The County will coordinate with DCA to ensure that DCA continues to support enhanced land
acquisition efforts in the Keys based on needs identified in this comprehensive plan. This
coordination shall ensure continued support of state acquisition efforts under CARL,
Preservation 2000 and the Florida Communities Trust programs. The County encourages the
Department to work at the state level to create a dedicated acquisition fund for Tier I lands on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key based on the results of the Carrying Capacity Study, the
requirements of the incidental take permit and Habitat Conservation Plan and the Master Plan
Page 7 of 10
Initial
for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The County and the Department will also support
appropriate legislative changes which will have the effect of enhancing the Land Authority
efforts throughout the County, and the South Florida Water Management District's
acquisitions on Big Pine Key. Similarly, cooperation will continue with private acquisition
efforts, such as The Nature Conservancy and the Florida Land and Sea Trust.
Section 4. Amend Policy 101.6.5 of the Year 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive
Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough format):
Policy 101.6.5
Monroe County shall annually compile a list prioritizing the lands requested for County
acquisition due to the Permit Allocation System. The lands of the property owners who meet
the criteria in Policy 101.6.1 shall be ranked according to:
1. the environmental sensitivity of the vegetative habitat, marine resources, and impacts
to the quality of near shore waters as specified by the ranking in the Environmental
Design Criteria section of the Land Development Regulations;
2. whether the property is in known, probable, and/or potential habitat for one or more
threatened and/or endangered species, as indicated on the most recent Protected Animal
Maps; and
3. whether development on the property will adversely impact successful
implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan or protection and recovery of threatened
or endangered species, such as development on Big Pine Key, No Name Key, Ohio Key,
and North Key Largo.
Those lands considered most sensitive according to the combination of (a), (b), and (c).
above shall be ranked as the highest priority for acquisition.
Section 5. Create Policy 101.5.11 and 101. 5. 12 in the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan to read as follows:
Policy 101.5.11
Residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key will be subject to the
allocation system set forth in Strategy 3.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for
Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The Land Development Regulations will be amended
to include the point system as detailed in the Master Plan. Eligibility to compete within
the allocation system will be based on the location of the proposed development. with
respect to the Tier System Overlay Map incorporated herein by reference.
Policy 101.5.12
Non-residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key New will be allocated
pursuant to the following additional criteria:
1. Development must be infill in existing commercial areas in Tier 2 and Tier 3
lands, mainly along the U.S. 1 corridor on Big Pine Key.
Page 8 of 10
Initial
2. All new non-residential development will be limited to disturbed or scarified
lands.
3. New allocation awards shall be allowed to exceed 2,500 square feet per site if
located within the designated Community Center Overlay as designated by Action Item
4.1.5.
4. New allocations shall be awarded moderate positive points to applicants who
fulfill the additional criterion set forth in Strategy 4.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys
Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
All new non-residential development within the planning area shall be exempt from
criterion 5, 6, 7, and 17 of Policy 101.5.5.
Section 6. Delete the following Policies from the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan: 103.1.1, 103.1.2, 103.1.7, 103.1.8, 103.1.9, 103.1.10, 103.1.11, 103.1.12,
103.1.14,103.1.15,207.7.5,207.7.7,207.7.9, 207.7.10, 207.7.11, and 207.7.17.
Section 7. Change the Future Land Use Map Designation of the properties from
Mixed Use Commercial (MC) to Residential Low (RL)with the following real estate numbers:
00110460.000000, 00110540.000000, 00110640.000000, 00110720.000000, 00110720.000100,
00110730.000000, 00110740.000000, 00110750.000000, 00111020.000000, 00111020.000010,
00111020.000020, 00111020.000030, 00111020.000040 and illustrated on the attached map
which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached as Exhibit 1.
Section 8. Change the Future Land Use Map Designation of the properties from
Residential Conservation (RL) to Mixed Use Commercial (MC) with the following real estate
numbers: 00111420.000100 and 00111420.000500 and illustrated on the attached map which is
hereby incorporated by reference and attached as Exhibit 2.
Section 9. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or provision of
this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such
validity.
Section 10. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are
hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
Section 11. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Planning Department to the
Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida Statutes.
(The remainder of this page intentionally left blank)
Page 9 of 10
Initial
Section 12. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of
Florida, but shall not beeome effective WltH a notice is issued by the Department of Community
Affairs or Administrative Commission finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163.
Florida Statutes.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County.
Florida at a regular meeting held on the day of 2004.
Mayor Murray Nelson
Mayor Pro Tern David P. Rice
Commissioner Dixie Spehar
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Charles "Sonny" McCoy
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
Mayor Murray Nelson
(SEAL)
A TrEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
DEPUTY CLERK
Page 10 of 10
Initial
" ... ...Mr'\..... .....f"\'\-,...,~,_, ,.'''''' ~",
""''''-7' f -NWf"
Exhibit 1
RC
RC
1:::::::::1 Me to RL
.........
The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map is proposed to be amended as
indicated above and briefly described as:
~
Chanae Future Land Use District from MC to RL for RE:
110460,110540.110640.110720.110720.0001.110730.
110740.110750. 111020, 11020.0001. 11020.0002.
11020.0003. 11020.0004
~
250
Map Amendment # M23063
Feet
;;J
=: ic~ 1;B-
1-, ~
,.=Jj
,."'..l ~A
.....r-rl? __~,."'"
...--1,> ,/ /,- /"
:_)r~./ L.'. l .~
r'~ "1 ", . I ~. q~.i)).'>
t''-.-,---.....,~-, p"'7.....~;; '.... ... . .'"
_..._~'--.~~.. '~-~'" -
I ........... . . .1""..../
I i. t "'.' · .. g c1'J..J 1".-;-(/1
I 0/. .~,?7 ) t
",;i~~"~'''--'"'l.~, . ~_ ..A--,.,;.-.: .'
( .....,....,..,... . -J-";""........,...~.~....,
[ <l" '~'r.!; 'ii./p
U1~1'~iJ
I l ...J' <'''7
I It'll 'iir
' I . . ,. .
~..>....... ~~
O:...,......~.~ . .f'
... c:: ,~ tr- \:J .. "., _'~' '............ I\ L",
...'...." .AI' .., "!u.~" "~"~W'., ''"'''lJ
~
-=:]
~
-;t
'\,
Proposed Land Use District Map Amendment: Street Map
Key: Big Pine
Mile Marker: 32
Proposal: Chanqe Future Land Use District from MC to RL
Property Description: RE: 110460, 110540, 110640, 110720, 110720.0001,110730,110740,
110750,111020,11020.0001,11020.0002, 11020.0003, 11020.0004
Map Amendment # M23063
land Use District Map # 332
Proposed Land Use District Map Amendment: Aerial
Key: Big Pine
Mile Marker: 32
Proposal: Chanqe Future Land Use District from MC to RL
Property Description: RE: 110460, 110540, 110640, 110720, 110720.0001,
110730,110740,110750,111020,11020.0001,
11020.0002, 11020.0003, 11020.0004
Map Amendment # M23063 Land Use District Map # 332
~
I
260
Feet
Exhibit 2
............................ ..................................
........................................ .....................................
...........................:....... ............................................
..:'",........................... .....................io......................
.:........................,..... .................................L.........
~t.~~~ .~ ~ ~.~ ~..~. ~.~.~ ~n~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~.~.~.~.~..~. ~~t~ ~.~ i ~~~~~~;r~ ~ ~
..............:.............. ..................................:............
................................. ..............................."....:........
........................... ..........................,............
~~g,~ ~ ~ .~. ~ ~ ~ ~'.~ ~~~~g~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~.~ .~..~~,~~~ g ~ ~ ~ ~_~ I~~~iI~ ~
:::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::,:::::::::::-::::::::,::
,.......; ~.. ... ..... .'>'..'...;........ - ".. .......... ..............+.............
.::::::: :::::;;;;:::: :: :::: ::: ::': :::::::::::::: :::::
..:::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
. ...... .'.:.:...,"., ... '. . . ~ .... .,"-,.;,. ...... ........ ... ... ....:.. -'.. ..'... " ,...,.-. . ...... .. .
::::::':::::::::: :::::,::::: ::: :::::::: :':::: :::::::::::::::
RC
1:::::::::1 RC to MC
.........
The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map is proposed to be amended as
indicated above and briefly described as:
Chanqe Future Land Use District from RC to MC for RE: 111420.0001
and 111420.0005
Map Amendment # M23063
~
150
Feet
Proposed land Use District Map Amendment: Street Map
Key: Big Pine
Mile Marker: 30
Proposal: Chanqe Future Land Use District from RC to MC
Property Description: RE 111420.0001 and 111420.0005
Map Amendment # M23063
land Use District Map # 344
Proposed Land Use District Map Amendment: Aerial
Key: Big Pine
Mile Marker: 30
Proposal: Chanqe Future Land Use District from RC to MC
,
Property Description: RE 111420.0001 and 111420.0005
150
Map Amendment # M23063
land Use District Map # 344
Feet
l\vab\e Comm\ln\Keys \,togtam
~._-
-
-
~
~,
.~/
t't~j
",.--'-"i ~
" ~
""'~
,-r' 'l .." \
"....,~ "':,. .I
('. "-Lfr.'''1 tt:... l....'l<'1;"l~.-;;;Ir .. jj; .I
~~....'f("!!. ,/ "". /'
G. ". ,.J' ~~....tf!;
.. t,t .v>" ~_ ,'/
Monroe County
Planning and Environmental
Resources Department
~'I
c:J~.~ (
~~
-'""""
December 2003
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
f\
~. \
?.<' \
/ l' (
/ (
lwi1f -, I 0
~~
\ '~~.
'\ (v'4""-, \.
\\ 'V~I)
'\
)~ ~,...! . aster Plan
( --- 7 \~
\ for 'UM' ;.' . 10 i . " 0 _,
",\. J.\....n I "\ . f--v, '"
'~ . 1 . ~". .) L-I G\
"'\ D IfW ~.? \ , ~ . 8.\
\ ---~ \...~
~I~ 2003~023 \:(~JI'. .. '.~'
1:1 I......f-... \\''-'
f,; .)\ .~, I ; 1
AdOPt:~he Board of C~~:mw.Sioners ' 0 'I~j
\.-....- ~
\0;:;:::= -\
,z;- ecember 17, 2003 1\ f'J
~ iJ ',~'" "'''''j \ \j
\ i>";fi .' 'I \ ,'~"
) A '.".r<f ~ ~ ~" \
! i ,.,Ji4:;r,- ~ }"'",,;;.)
f:. ~, , j::/ J{(, .,.:(', {' ::~ \
~. r" '----..'" f'" I .. \
.,.. "",- .....".;",- ,,/ .t'--.
,~ .~. -....""""'. ('
" /' ""r \
p . '""./ , ; \
t-,i\ r"J' "if''''"''!I' \
..r;/" ~ ~---'fij) .. \
4''1....-., , \
~:/.,,< t .\....
' \'l'\\
.......-.."/...'.; '~~
,_"I _.
._r~:;' "'" ", ~ ~ ... 4->
~'-;;-v;r/ ",..1",/,' "
Prepared by~'i ~ q~~ \';' \J . ",fj( .- '. ."', ~::j
Monroe County Department ofPl~vfr;;;:;~tal Resources
~~~~'
".r...., \,~~,./ with
C) ('.~/~
~",:::-~Patneia L. McNeese, Environmental Consultant
c::J~ V/' K. Marlene Conaway, Director and Project Leader
~~ Robert Will, Planner
2
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Community Vision
"We envision Big Pine and No Name Key as:
· A rural community with a small town atmosphere and way-of-life where people feel a
connection with their friends and neighbors.
· A community rich in natural and scenic resources including endangered habitat found
nowhere else in the world.
· A unique community in the Florida Keys where people can live in harmony with the
natural world.
· Where residents and visitors can take advantage of the local goods and services without
fighting traffic.
· Where kids of all ages have plenty of recreational opportunities.
· Where the dreams of home ownership and planting roots in the community can be real-
ized.
· Where government regulations make sense and work for the betterment of all.
· Above all, we envision a community that responds to the needs of all its inhabitants."
3
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Executive Summary
During the spring and fall of 2000, the residents and property owners of Big Pine and No Name
Keys worked with Monroe County planning staff on the Livable CommuniKeys Program (LCP)
to identify the needs and desires of the community for future development on Big Pine Key and
No Name Key.
Alternative potential development patterns and types were drafted during the process for evalua-
tion to determine any possible impacts to the endangered species which make these islands their
home. In order for any new development to occur, including road improvements, a permit from
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) was required. Therefore, the county and state have
funded the preparation of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the islands.
The HCP is a proposal to mitigate and compensate for the potential negative effects of develop-
ment activities on the endangered species. The HCP is being reviewed by the USFWS to deter-
mine if it meets the species protection criteria.
The HCP is a permit application to allow a limited amount of development to occur as long as
the impact on the endangered species is minimized and mitigated and the long term viability of
the species is considered. The USFWS interest is in the protection of the endangered species,
while the LCP plan provides the framework for development activities.
The LCP Master Plan minimizes impacts from development on the endangered species by di-
recting development to areas of low habitat value and reducing trip length; limiting the amount
of proposed development to maintain the rural character and to maximize the amount of habitat
protected; and mitigating development by purchasing land for permanent protection.
The proposed LCP Master Plan will classify all land on Big Pine and No Name Keys into three
'tiers' based on conservation and infill priorities. Most of the islands are classified as Tier 1
because of their environmental sensitivity and importance for the continued viability of the en-
dangered species. Tier 2 lands are canal lots located a distance from U.S. 1 with a potential for
secondary impacts on the endangered species from traffic. Tier 3 lands are canal lots in close
proximity to U.S. 1, which provide little habitat value to the endangered species and because of
location, a decreased potential for deer kills from vehicles. Some undeveloped lots in Tier 3 are
also located between existing developed commercial lots in the U.S. 1 corridor.
The development activities proposed in the Plan are expected to occur over a 20-year horizon.
Proposed activities include:
· Residential units at a rate of roughly 10 per year for a total of 200 units.
· New commercial development, limited to 2,400 square feet a year, around existing com-
mercial areas, mainly along the U.S. 1 corridor.
· New recreational facilities constructed on existing developed or disturbed/scarified lots.
· Limited expansion of community uses, churches, public offices, wastewater facilities,
and the existing fire station.
· The widening of local, paved roads to accommodate bicycle paths, and storm water and
sanitary sewer infrastructure and a third lane on U.S. 1.
4
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Table of Contents
Chapter One:
Introduction
Summary ofLCP and HCP Processes
Format of Master Plan Elements
8
15
19
Chapter Two: Land Use and Redevelopment Element
Goal 1: Directing Growth
Goal 2: Managing Growth
Goal 3: Housing
Goal 4: Non-Residential Uses
Goal 5: Community Organizations
Goal 6: Recreational Uses
Goal 7: Public Facilities
Goal 8: Accessory Uses
Goal 9: Land Acquisition
23
29
36
42
47
50
53
57
59
Chapter Three: Environmental Protection Element
Goal 10: Natural Resource Management
Goal 11: Freshwater Resource Management
64
69
Chapter Four: Community Character Element
Goal 12: Community Character
Goal 13: Historic Resources
72
76
Chapter Five: Economic Development Element
Goal 14: Economic Development
79
Chapter Six: Traffic and Transportation Element
Goal 15: Transportation
83
Chapter Seven: Community Participation Element
Goal 16: Community Participation
87
Capital Costs Summary
91
5
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.5
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.7
Figure 4.1
Figure 6.1
Table 1.1
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table 2.3
Table 2.4
Table 2.5
Table 2.6
Table 2.7
Table 7.1
Table 7.2
List of Figures
Map of private, upland, vacant residential parcels.
Flow chart illustrating master plan process.
Tier designations on Big Pine and No Name Key.
FLUM and land use district changes.
Existing uses and commercial types in the U.S. 1 Corridor.
Location of existing institutional uses on Big Pine.
Location of existing recreational facilities and library.
Existing government facilities on Big Pine.
Private, undeveloped land within Tier I and Tier II.
Conceptual U.S. 1 corridor area map.
Existing platted residential and major roadways.
List of Tables
Updated demographics for Big PineINo Name from the 2000 Census.
H multiplier for land use development categories.
Calculation ofH impact for different development activities.
H-value budget for future development on Big Pine and No Name.
Housing outside single family subdivisions.
Housing figures of Big Pine and No Name from the 2000 Census.
Big Pine Key commercial data.
Institutional uses on Big Pine Key.
Estimated cost of capital improvements
Estimated cost of 3 to 1 mitigation
12
21
28
35
43
49
52
54
62
73
86
10
25
26
34
36
37
42
47
91
92
6
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
BOCC
CARL
ESA
FDCA
FDEP
FDOT
FKAA
FKCCS
FKERTF
FLUM
FWS
HCP
ITP
LCP
NGO
NROGO
PUV
PYA
ROGO
SFWMD
SMMP
SOR
SWMP
TDR
TNC
TRE
Acronyms
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
State of Florida Conservation and Recreational Lands Program
Endangered Species Act
Florida Department of Community Affairs
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Florida Department of Transportation
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study
Florida Keys Environmental Restoration Trust Fund
Future Land Use Map
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Habitat Conservation Plan
Incidental Take Permit
Livable Communi Keys Program
non-governmental organization
Non-residential Rate of Growth Ordinance
private upland vacant parcel
population viability analysis
Residential Rate of Growth Ordinance
South Florida Water Management District
Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan
State of Florida Save Our Rivers Program
Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan
transferable development rights
The Nature Conservancy
transferable ROGO exemptions
7
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Introduction
The Livable CommuniKeys Program (LCP) is a community-driven planning effort to address
the very specific needs of unique island communities within the Florida Keys. The overall goal
is to determine the appropriate amount, type and location of additional development within the
LCP planning area. The LCP process includes community participation through a variety of
methods. This process generates a community vision and alternative development scenarios.
The scenarios are evaluated for feasibility within the current regulatory and physical framework
and for how well they fit the community vision. A preferred alternative is identified and a mas-
ter plan for future development is written around the preferred alternative. A Master Plan con-
tains the specific development layout for the LCP planning area as well as action items that must
be implemented to achieve the development and community vision. The Master Plan is a work-
ing document that is continually scrutinized and updated by the community.
Relationship to Comprehensive Plan
The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1993 and became effective
in its entirety in 1997. It contains the guiding goals, objectives and policies for implementation
of growth management actions over the 20-year period covering 1990 through 2010. Some of
the actions apply equally throughout Monroe County such as the need for adequate solid waste
disposal facilities or the allocation of building permits limited by hurricane evacuation clearance
times. Other actions, such as the need for preservation of historic resources or the planning of
recreational facilities, while applying county-wide, vary in their importance by locale. There are
also local needs that are not addressed in the Comprehensive Plan at all such as community
goals towards beautification.
The Master Plan does not replace the Comprehensive Plan but focuses on the very specific needs
of the local community. It is also a proactive planning tool rather than a strict regulatory docu-
ment in that it identifies actions needed to meet the community's needs and goals. The Master
Plan is attached as an addendum to the Comprehensive Plan. Some existing Comprehensive
Plan policies will not be affected at all by the Master Plan. Other existing policies may be modi-
fied for consistency or entirely replaced by the Master Plan. The Livable CommuniKeys Pro-
gram and Master Plan development are outlined in the comprehensive plan in Policy 101.20.1
that states:
"Monroe County shall develop a series of Community Master Plans. Master Plans will be de-
veloped in accordance with the following principles:
1. Each Community Master Plan will contain a framework for future development and redevel-
opment including the designation of growth boundaries and future acquisition areas for pub-
lic spaces and environmental conservation;
2. Each Community Master Plan will include an Implementation Strategy composed of action
items, an implementation schedule, and a monitoring mechanism to provide accountability to
communities;
3. Each Community Master Plan will be consistent with existing Federal and State require-
Introduction
8
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
ments and overall goals of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan to ensure legal requirements are
met. While consistency with the goals of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan is paramount, the
2010 Plan will be updated and amended where appropriate;
4. Each Community Master Plan will be closely coordinated with other community plans and
other jurisdictions to ensure development or redevelopment activities will not adversely im-
pact those areas;
5. Each Community Master Plan will include appropriate mechanisms allowing citizens contin-
ued oversight and involvement in the implementation of their plans. Through the Commu-
nity Master Plans, programs for ongoing public involvement, outreach, and education will be
developed;
6. Each Community Master Plan will include a Capital Improvements program to provide cer-
tainty that the provision of public facilities will be concurrent with future development;
7. Each Community Master Plan will contain an environmental protection element to maintain
existing high levels of environmental protection as required in the 2010 Comprehensive
Plan;
8. Each Community Master Plan will include a community character element that will address
the protection and enhancement of existing residential areas and the preservation of commu-
nity character through site and building guidelines. Design guidelines for public spaces,
landscaping, streetscapes, buildings, parking lots, and other areas will be developed through
collaborative efforts of citizens, the Planning Department, and design professionals reinforc-
ing the character of the local community context;
9. Each Community Master will include an economic development element addressing current
and potential diversified economic development strategies including tourism management.
The preservation and retention of valued local businesses, existing economies, and the devel-
opment of economic alternatives will be encouraged through the process;
10. Each Community Master Plan will contain a Transportation Element addressing transporta-
tion needs and possibilities including circulation, safe and convenient access to goods and
services, and transportation alternatives that will be consistent with the overall integrity of
the transportation system not resulting in negative consequences for other communities; and
11. Each Community Master Plan will be based on knowledge of existing conditions in each
community. The Planning Department will compile existing reports, databases, maps, field
data, and information from other sources supplemented by community input to document
current conditions; and
12. Each Community Master Plan will simplify the planning process providing clarity and cer-
tainty for citizens, developers, and local officials by providing a transparent framework for a
continuing open dialogue with different participants involved in planning issues."
Introduction
9
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Relationship to State Legislation
The Comprehensive Plan was required to be adopted by Monroe County under Florida Statute
163 and must be compliant with the required format and minimum content listed in the Florida
Administrative Code (F AC 9J-5). The Master Plan will be adopted as a modification of the ex-
isting Comprehensive Plan and the Florida Department of Community Affairs will review the
modification for compliance with the applicable statutes and codes. This review will likely be
most focused in areas where Master Plan policies replace existing Comprehensive Plan policies
and serve as the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) for elements which address this plan-
ning area. Of course a comprehensive plan may include elements that are either optional or not
listed at all in FAC 9J-5 and that is where the Master Plan is particularly valuable.
Master Plan for Big Pine and No Name Keys
This Master Plan covers Big Pine Key, No Name Key and the Newfound Harbor Keys, collec-
tively referred to as the "planning area" throughout this document. For purposes of information
presentation (such as demographics), the Newfound Harbor Keys are included with Big Pine
Key. A companion document to this Master Plan, the "Big Pine Key & No Name Key Develop-
ment Alternatives Report," (hereafter referred to as the Development Alternatives Report) sum-
marizes the background information for these islands.
Demographics
Some of the demographic information in the Development Alternatives Report was extrapolated
from the 1990 census. Table 1.1 below presents some updated data from the 2000 census. The
data show that most of the population live north of u.s. 1. Nearly 25% ofthe permanent house-
hold population are in rented units. During the winter season the population increases by nearly
38% to an estimated 6,944. The average persons per household on Big Pine is 2.21 and on No
Name it is 2.48.
Table 1.1 Updated demographics for Big Pine/No Name from the 2000 census.
> Big Pine No Name CoJDbined
-.
trotal Permanent Population 5,032 40 5,072
North of U.S. I 4,458 40 4,498
South of U.S. I 574 0 574
n Families 1,419 13 1,432
n Owned Housing Unit 3,749 36 3,785
In Rented Housing Unit 1,222 4 1,22t
lSeasonal Population (i.e., additional) 1,912 23 1,935
f:>ource: u.s. Census 2000
Introduction
10
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Existing Land Conditions
As natural habitat is acquired by resource agencies for preservation, most of the vacant buildable
upland parcels remaining under private ownership are located within improved subdivisions or
in commercial acreage near U.S. 1. There are approximately 2,920 vacant building residential
lots remaining and approximately thirty-one parcels of vacant private upland commercial land
remains covering about 18 acres. The remainder of the planning area is developed (about 12%
of the land area), under public ownership (about 72% of the land area) or is located in un-
buildable wetlands (under both public and private ownership). Public land owners primarily in-
clude the US. Fish and Wildlife Service Refuge System, the State of Florida and Monroe
County.
Figure 1.1 on the following page shows vacant, upland residential lots under private ownership.
Development Context and Constraints
Listed below for reference purposes are the primary existing constraints on Big Pine Key and No
Name Key development. All of these constraints apply county-wide but their particular applica-
tion to Big Pine Key and No Name Key is discussed here.
· Concurrency Standards: Since March of 1995 the segment of US. 1 on Big Pine Key had
been operating below the adopted level of service in the Comprehensive Plan. This has
been the primary development constraint because it triggered a development moratorium
on all new traffic-generating development. In 2002 FDOT completed an intersection im-
provement project and deer underpasses which improved the level of service to an ac-
ceptable level, however further improvements such as adding a third lane to the segment
are necessary to permanently raise the operating level of service. This has been a pri-
mary motivating factor behind completion of the HCP; the issuance of the incidental take
permit will allow necessary road improvements to go forward, thereby lifting this con-
straint on development.
· ROGO: As of the date of this report, the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO)
allocates 49 total units (market rate plus affordable) annually to the Lower Keys. This is
the latest number in a step down reduction that has occurred since the ROGO started.
The reductions have mostly been related to required performance standards set forth in
the Comprehensive Plan. It is considered unlikely at this time that the total allocation
number will increase at least in the next 3-5 years. Therefore, permits for Big Pine and
No Name Key will continue to be limited along with the rest of the Lower Keys under
ROGO. The point system used to rank permits for allocations under ROGO is currently
structured to give a competitive advantage to units proposed outside Big Pine and No
Name Keys. This was done to bolster protection of natural resources on these two is-
lands. With the issuance of the Incidental Take Permit and adoption of the LCP by the
county, the ROGO will be restructured.
· NROGO: "NROGO" is the acronym for "Non-residential Rate of Growth Ordinance"
under which the construction of new or expanded commercial uses is regulated. The
amount of new and expanded commercial space allowed on Big Pine and No Name Keys
Introduction
11
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Legend
Other Parcels
.. Vacant Residential
.. Wetland Boundary
December 17, 2003
~ l\vab\e Commun',Keys \,togtam
.1V' ,,~~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Private, Upland, Vacant
Residential Parcels
~
t
N
~
,- r
1',,10nroe County
Planning and Environmental
Resources Department
This m.-p u for Monror County Growth Manaaement DIVISion purposes
only. The daU contained herein js illustrative only a'ld may not accurately
depict boundaries, parcels. roads. nght ofway$. or identification l!lfomnr:ion
Figure 1.1 Map of Private, Upland Vacant residential parcels.
Introduction
12
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
is tied to the level of residential development permitted as is the case for the entire
county. As of the date of this report, the dwelling unit allocation ordinance allocates 49
total units annually to the Lower Keys. At 239 square feet of commercial space per resi-
dential unit allocated under NROGO, this sets the approximate Lower Keys commercial
rate at 11,711 square feet per year (NROGO does not allocate commercial space by Keys
sub-area but does so Keys-wide on an annual basis). As previously noted, the residential
allocation is subject to change (usually decreases), so the commercial allocation could
also change. The point system used to rank permits for allocations under NROGO is
currently structured to give a competitive advantage to development proposed outside
Big Pine and No Name Keys. This was done to bolster protection of natural resources on
these two islands. With the issuance of the Incidental Take Permit and adoption of the
HCP by the county, the point system may be restructured.
· Nutrient Credit System: The Comprehensive Plan requires no net increase in the level of
nutrients in wastewater effluent. The number of building permits is tied to the number of
cess pits or substandard wastewater treatment replaced by a compliant treatment system.
The Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan (SWMP) originally projected that
this infrastructure would be in place by 2010 to meet Florida law and Comprehensive
Plan requirements. Implementation of the SWMP is behind schedule but still well within
the 20 year planning horizon of this Master Plan. Once the upgraded sewer service is
installed, or all illegal cess pits are eliminated, nutrient level of service standards will be
met for all existing and future development.
· Tier System: Monroe County's new Smart Growth Initiatives (Comprehensive Plan
Goal 105), "Tier Map," is designed to refocus land acquisition efforts, conserve natural
resources and direct future development to infill areas in coordination with the Livable
CommuniKeys Program. The Tier System will consist of a set of maps and regulations
directing growth to infill of existing subdivisions and commercial areas. The Tier Sys-
tem plays a major role in the implementation of this Master Plan and the HCP.
Additional future constraints on numbers and locations of permits are:
· Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP): The HCP applies to the Big Pine Key/No Name Key
area only, not county-wide. The Incidental Take Permit, when issued, will limit develop-
ment on Big Pine and No Name Keys to the level that will result in a maximum projected
"take" of Key deer over the twenty-year planning horizon. The development levels con-
tained in this Master Plan have been designed to meet the requirements of the anticipated
Incidental Take Permit while meeting community needs.
· Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study (FKCCS): The FKCCS analyzed the extent to
which current and future projected development exceeds maximum impact thresholds of
natural resources and infrastructure. The results of the FKCCS will be used to modify
the ROGO and NROGO at some time in the near future and this may affect the number
and location of residential permits that can be issued county-wide.
Introduction
13
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Acquisition Framework
For many years, the concurrent need for natural resource protection and relief to regulated land
owners has been present throughout the Keys and particularly heightened for Big Pine and No
Name Keys. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) has been purchasing property
under the refuge system since the National Key Deer Refuge was established in 1959. They can
conduct acquisition activities essentially anywhere within the refuge administrative boundaries,
which encompass the entire planning area. Their focus in the past has been on natural lands,
usually on acreage parcels, that have higher wildlife habitat value. In the early 1990s they pro-
duced a priority acquisition plan that focused on remaining habitat and preservation of wildlife
movement corridors.
These two islands were included in three ongoing state acquisition efforts in the 1990s: the Con-
servation and Recreational Lands (CARL) Program, the Florida Forever Program (formerly
Preservation 2000) and the Save Our Rivers (SOR) Program. The latter program concentrated
on protection of the existing freshwater sloughs and wetlands on Big Pine Key and has been
completed. There are lands remaining to be purchased within the CARL boundaries. Also, the
CARL boundaries are periodically reviewed at which time new lands may be added. Monroe
County has actively prioritized Big Pine and No Name Keys for purchases by the Monroe
County Land Authority. Many purchases by private citizens have also been made to gamer ad-
ditional "points" towards an allocation under the county's dwelling unit allocation ordinance
(ROGO) and these properties have been deeded over to the county. The HCP and LCP proc-
esses will somewhat change and concentrate the focus of future acquisition efforts. Future ac-
quisition and management of vacant lands will be a major component of this Master Plan.
Introduction
14
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Summary of LCP and HCP Processes
Livable CommuniKeys
The Livable CommuniKeys Program (LCP) is a community-driven planning effort aimed at de-
termining the amount, type and location of additional development appropriate for the planning
area. The Big Pine KeylNo Name Key community is the first one in the county to embark upon
the LCP planning process. The process was initiated in April 2000. The Development Alterna-
tives Report was generated in March 2001. These interim products of the LCP process were
then coordinated with the development of the HCP over the next year and a half. This Master
Plan is the result of that coordination.
Community Input Summary
Three major public workshops and meetings facilitated the LCP effort and were followed up by
newsletters mailed to all residents, property owners and interested parties. Stakeholder discus-
sions and citizen surveys were also conducted. The newsletters summarized needs and desires
expressed by the community in the workshops. A fourth newsletter was issued in January of
2003 and summarized the development proposals set forth in this plan. From this outreach effort
key community issues were identified and a community vision was formulated. The community
vision and stated planning objectives were used to evaluate possible development alternatives.
This evaluation is contained in the Big Pine Key & No Name Key Development Alternatives
Report.
Key Community Issues
In the LCP workshops the following key community issues were identified:
1. Ascertain the distribution of future residential development within the project area.
2. Maintain the rural character of the project area while still allowing some future development.
3. Implement solutions to the congestion on U.S. 1 and minimize the need for local trips on
U.S. 1.
4. Develop a community gathering place and/or more active recreation facilities.
5. Discourage new development on No Name Key.
Planning Objectives
1. Minimize the need for local vehicular trips on and across U.S. 1 from north to south.
2. Improve the level of service on U.S. 1 to a standard that, in accordance with local regula-
tions, would allow some development and to maintain that level of service over the planning
horizon.
3. Discourage new development on No Name Key.
4. Encourage additional commercial development to be oriented to the local community rather
than to the regional or tourist community.
5. Continue to allow some new development but generally keep the level low to achieve the
maintenance of a "rural community" envisioned by the community.
6. Provide for a community gathering center and some active recreation.
7. Provide for a conservation plan with reasonable level of implementation costs and logistics.
8. Provide for a conservation plan that complies with current regulatory constraints.
Summary of LCP and HCP Processes
15
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
9. Provide greater certainty to the property owners and Key deer herd managers as to the loca-
tion of future development.
10. Minimize the alteration of undisturbed natural habitat.
Community Vision
"We envision Big Pine and No Name Key as:
· A rural community with a small town atmosphere and way-of-life where people feel a
connection with their friends and neighbors.
· A community rich in natural and scenic resources including endangered habitat found
nowhere else in the world.
· A unique community in the Florida Keys where people can live in harmony with the
natural world.
· Where residents and visitors can take advantage of the local goods and services without
fighting traffic.
· Where kids of all ages have plenty of recreational opportunities.
· Where the dreams of home ownership and planting roots in the community can be real-
ized.
· Where government regulations make sense and work for the betterment of all.
· Above all, we envision a community that responds to the needs of all its inhabitants."
Alternatives Analysis
Several alternative planning strategies for Big Pine Key and No Name Key were formulated.
These strategies were aimed at satisfying basic community needs within the existing regulatory
framework. The alternatives were then subjected to a planning analysis to see which ones were
consistent with the community vision, addressed the ten planning objectives, could meet com-
munity needs and desires, and were within reasonable cost and feasibility. Alternatives for resi-
dential, commercial, recreational and transportation development were all evaluated. The analy-
sis is contained in the Big Pine Key & No Name Key Development Alternatives Report, which
is a companion document to this Master Plan. Alternatives considered to be the most feasible
for fulfillment of community needs and desires included a clustered residential plan and a com-
mercial redevelopment plan. Options for meeting community recreational and transportation
needs were also presented. These alternatives were then analyzed for consistency with environ-
mental goals, particularly protection of endangered species. This was done through develop-
ment of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for these islands.
Habitat Conservation Plan
The development of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine and No Name Keys was
considered a reasonable way to resolve ongoing conflicts over the impacts of development on
natural resources. The Big Pine Key & No Name Key Development Alternatives Report re-
counts the history of these conflicts and previous failed planning efforts for the islands. Section
10 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) allows a developer, the "applicant," to apply for a per-
mit for "incidental take" of federally-designated endangered species. The process basically in-
volves determining the level of reduction or "take" of the species caused by the proposed devel-
opment. The applicant proposes the development along with a plan for mitigating the "take"
caused by the development. The mitigation plan is written in the form of a Habitat Conservation
Plan.
Summary of LCP and HCP Processes
16
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
The HCP process for Big Pine Key and No Name Key was initiated in February 2000. The ap-
plicants are Monroe County, the Florida Department of Community Affairs (FDCA) and the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The FDOT is a builder of proposed develop-
ment within the state road right-of-way (U.S. 1) whereas the remaining two entities have author-
ity over permitting of proposed development in the remainder of the planning area. The Habitat
Conservation Plan document was produced with the assistance of an HCP committee made up of
concerned agencies and citizen representatives. The document was completed in March 2003
and an application for the Incidental Take Permit was made to the FWS in May 2003. The proc-
ess to develop the HCP consisted of three major components: 1) study of the endangered species
populations and conditions necessary for their continued viability, 2) crafting of a proposed de-
velopment action within this context and determination of the level of "take" caused by the ac-
tion, and 3) development of a plan for mitigating the determined level of "take."
Key Deer PV A Analysis
The HCP was designed to cover all federally-protected species known to occur on the two is-
lands. Of the nine species covered, two were prioritized for analysis based on their sensitivity to
development: the Florida Key deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and the Lower Keys marsh
rabbit (Sylvilagus palustris hefneri). If the habitat needs of these two species could be met, the
needs of the remaining seven would be met automatically. Of the two species, the Lower Keys
marsh rabbit is the more endangered, largely due to fragmentation of habitat already having oc-
curred throughout much of its range in the Lower Keys. Protection of existing preferred habitat,
mostly wetlands, is less an issue than secondary impacts (e.g., predation by domestic cats) and
limitations on dispersal caused by existing development barriers. Additional "take" of this spe-
cies had to be prevented due to its precarious situation. This was done by proposing a prohibi-
tion on development within the core habitat (mostly wetlands) and within buffer zones that sur-
round the core habitat.
The Florida Key deer is a wide-ranging species with a core population located on Big Pine Key
and No Name Key. For this species a population viability assessment (PV A) was completed and
a model was developed to theoretically predict the response of the population to scenarios in-
volving habitat loss, secondary mortality impacts (e.g. road kills) and major catastrophic events
(i.e. hurricanes). One product of this model analysis was an actual map of the islands showing
areas necessary for continued viability of the deer population and areas most suited for human
development (i.e. least affecting deer viability). This map was used to re-analyze the LCP alter-
natives and generate a proposed development action. A detailed explanation of the PV A and
modeling process is contained in the HCP document.
Summary of Proposed Action
The proposed development action in the HCP is expressed in terms of the total level of irhpacJ_-
that will result in an acceptable level of "take" of the Key deer and no "take" of the Lower Keys
Marsh Rabbit. The level of "take" of the Key deer is determined by the removal of habitat value
measured in discrete units. The habitat value units are assigned to individual parcels within the
planning area and consist of two main components: direct impact (habitat loss) and indirect im-
pact (roadway mortality). Location and traffic generation are the two primary development
components causing these impacts. The HCP will equate the total loss of habitat value units to a
specific level of acceptable impact. Monroe County will need to track the impact of issued per-
mits to ensure that the total acceptable level of habitat value units is not exceeded. The HCP
Summary of LCP and HCP Processes
17
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
will not specify exactly where permits will be issued or for what type of development, but it will
provide clear direction to the county on which locations and types will have greater impact. Fur-
thermore, the preferred development alternative, generated by the LCP process and refined
through the HCP process, has been analyzed using the PV A model. This process has allowed
the county to plan for distribution of potential permits over the maximum available range of
types and locations to meet community needs.
Summary of Habitat Conservation Plan
The Habitat Conservation Plan proposes to mitigate the "take" of Key deer mainly by putting
habitat under public protection. Habitat protection is considered the highest priority action for
protection of Key deer and other listed animal and plant species. Thus the habitat value units
expended by allowing development can be mitigated to some extent by acquiring a certain level
of habitat value elsewhere. In addition avoidance and minimization measures were applied at
every step in the preparation of the HCP and the LCP to reduce potential impacts from the pro-
posed future development plan. Mitigation will also involve management of the acquired habitat,
and other activities. The HCP also proposes actions to minimize development impacts. Exam-
ples include implementation of traffic calming designs and restrictions on fencing. The Master
Plan provides the details on how these minimization and mitigation actions will be implemented.
Effect of Issuance of Incidental Take Permit
The application for an Incidental Take Permit under Section 10 of the ESA was submitted in
May 2003. Issuance of a permit is expected within two years. It is very important to note that
because the HCP process included all concerned agencies and stakeholders, including the FWS
in a technical support role, the HCP document as currently proposed is expected to be acceptable
to the federal government with a minimal amount of changes. Of course the document must go
through the public process and the final content may change. Based on the substantial coordina-
tion that has taken place thus far and in consideration of the substantial permit processing time
involved, Monroe County is moving forward now with this Master Plan. There are components
of the Master Plan that could be changed later, however, to match the final HCP document that
accompanies the issued Incidental Take Permit. Both documents have a planning horizon of
twenty years that starts upon issuance of the Incidental Take Permit.
Summary of LCP and HCP Processes
18
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Format of Master Plan Elements
There are six elements in this Master Plan. Each one focuses on an issue of heightened impor-
tance to Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The format for these elements is different from the
comprehensive plan because this Master Plan is a culmination of the LCP process, not a starting
point. Therefore, the community and planning staff have already reviewed and analyzed much
of the available data about the island and they have been through a planning process whereby
"problems" (questions, issues, uncertainties) have been identified and needs have been verbal-
ized. Many of the opportunities and constraints for meeting these needs have also been analyzed
through the development alternatives analysis. This information is contained in the Big Pine
Key & No Name Key Development Alternatives Report.
The Master Plan seeks to further condense and refine the products of the development alterna-
tives analysis process. The Master Plan provides the tools for problem solving by fulfilling
three basic tasks:
· Statement of the goals of the LCPIHCP process as it applies to the planning area,
· Refined analysis of specific community and planning needs to fulfill the goals,
· Identification of strategies to meet the needs.
Goals: Each element states a specific planning goal designed around the major topics to be ad-
dressed through the LCP process such as growth and redevelopment, economic viability, envi-
ronmental protection, and community character. This particular Master Plan also includes goal
language designed to address the requirements ofthe HCP process.
Current Conditions Summary: A certain amount of information specific to the planning area is
available and can be presented or cited in the Master Plan now. Some of this information was
provided during the LCP process in newsletters and workshops. Demographics, inventories of
community facilities, and land ownership patterns are examples of information presented in this
section.
Analvsis of Community Needs: The problem, issue or shortfall in the community or environ-
ment is stated here. These have been identified either by the community or by the planning
staff. The community includes the affected public, stakeholders, and elected officials and they
have identified needs to the planning staff in a variety of ways: workshop participation, mail sur-
veys, meetings, phone calls, and letters. The planning staff identified additional needs either
through planning analysis of existing information, professional judgment based on observations
of data or conditions, or coordination with facility or service providers.
Final Strategies and Action Items: As part of the Master Planning process the planning staff has
identified and evaluated possible strategies for meeting each need. The possible strategies were
also evaluated relative to one another to identify conflicts and to identify opportunities for one
strategy to fulfill multiple needs. In this way a final set of strategies was completed. Action
items were then developed towards implementation of each strategy.
The plan is therefore written in the form of goals, strategies and action items rather than goals,
objectives and policies as in the Comprehensive Plan. Where strategies and action items replace
current comprehensive plan policies, this is noted and action items for deleting or modifying
Format of Master Plan Elements
19
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
those policies are included in the applicable element. It is very important to note that this plan
will be an addendum to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehen-
sive Plan remains in effect in the Big Pine Key/No Name Key planning area.
The plan format is illustrated in the flow chart in Figure 2.1. The flow chart starts with an indi-
vidual need identified in the plan. A comprehensive strategy for meeting the need is formulated
based on the information in hand. If the information in hand is sufficient to implement the strat-
egy the action items for implementation can be written directly into the Master Plan. If not, an
action item can be written to procure new information or further analyze existing information.
Note that new information not only feeds back into implementation but may reveal new strate-
gies, may redefine the need or may even reveal new needs. To be a meaningful and current im-
plementation tool over the entire twenty-year planning horizon the Master Plan must include this
iterative process of problem solving that monitors success and identifies changing conditions
and new issues. It must also allow for timely response and tracking of progress towards problem
solving.
Using this format the Master Plan moves the LCP/HCP process into its final phase by taking the
following steps:
1. Adopt as the plan framework, the preferred land use scenario developed during the LCP/
HCP process providing the basis for the anticipated incidental take permit.
2. Develop and refine the implementation details of the preferred land use scenario.
3. Include mechanisms for ensuring that the Master Plan complies with the anticipated inci-
dental take permit through the twenty-year planning horizon.
4. Include mechanisms and revisions for ensuring that the Master Plan complies with the
Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
5. Address new issues relevant to the planning area that were not addressed in either of the
aforementioned processes (Comprehensive Plan and HCP) and that have no impact or a
positive impact on the ability to comply with those two processes.
Format of Master Plan Elements
20
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Identified
Community Need
Identified Strategy
ENOUGH INFORMA nON IN HAND FOR IMPLEMENT A nON?
~
~
YES
NO
Write Action Items to
Obtain Information
Write Action Items
for Implementation
Monitor and Update
Figure 1.2 Flow chart illustrating Master Plan process.
Format of Master Plan Elements
December 17, 2003
New Information
May Change
Need or Strategy
New
Need
Identified
21
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
'<;'""
0; \
,/. \
/....tl \
) .f' )
,. ;
.r} /-~ 'l
<: ~,~ \"
( . ~~ ).
lll11U _ \'''-
~~~
~ II II llll II ~---........
~~'J ~~
"Vc.& lI!}
I
~(
i ,-
~.~ (..
--\ It: V", . \ A
~~\~ {e,.,&,~'-~~~ ~~ OU"",O ~~.~
of~~')), '''---'~)W ~ \ -~v.jP" . . \
1f~ } ../'&..1/ :::l
+~< ~n,';:" ~. ...,:.
(' "i:r"'_ -\ -~"'\ t>-l .. 0;
"\ \;, ~ \,. , . "
""L;_ LAND UsE AND \~ (~ "'j
REDIWELOPMENr ELEME~r:;.i~
l/ \ t
."" '\
l-..--J
\.
\
"....
,
\.
\
"
,I
/
I
\
'"
"\"
C)
-.
...,1./ '..
/~~--: ,r--.~,.j""~>
.-./C'---'" ..y,/
~"f' ..;. . ~
~-J
\ .6
" . .. ~:~
----
--
---
,--
'-..-..
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
22
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 1
Direct future growth to lands that are intrinsically
most suitable for development and encourage con-
servation and protection of environmentally sensi-
tive lands by using the relative wildlife habitat value
of land as a basis for development decisions on Big
Pine Key and No Name Key.
Current Conditions Summary
The Habitat Conservation Plan as implemented under the anticipated Incidental Take Permit
(ITP) will create a direct link between wildlife habitat conservation and land development for
the next twenty years. The direct link mechanism is the Harvest (measured in H-units) ofindi-
vidual parcels within the planning area. The HCP document explains how the H-unit was devel-
oped based upon the Population Viability Analysis (PV A) of the Key deer. The PV A revealed
that both "harvest" (mortality) and the deer carrying capacity of the habitat (known as "K") af-
fect the population viability of the deer. The model further revealed that when a parcel is devel-
oped, the corresponding increase in harvest potential (additional traffic mortality) is a much bet-
ter indicator than the corresponding removal of habitat as to the projected viability of the deer
population over the 100-year PV A horizon. In fact, harvest turned out to be a very good indica-
tor of development impacts when multiple development scenarios were processed through the
PV A model. Therefore, the weighted Harvest Grid Map generated from the PV A will be used to
predict the projected levels of take of endangered species for various development scenarios.
Monroe County applied this map towards the planning of future development for the next twenty
years through the LCP process.
A mechanism for translating the Harvest Grid Map into a land use regulatory tool exists under
the county's Smart Growth Initiative, otherwise known as the Tier System. Policy 105.2.1 de-
fines the Tier System categories in detail. The three Tier categories are based on environmental
protection and future land use planning priorities. Tier I lands are termed "Natural Area," Tier II
lands are called "Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area" and Tier III lands are the "Infill Area."
For Big Pine Key and No Name Key the habitat sensitivity information presented in the HCP
can be used directly to define the environmental protection priorities incorporated into their Tier
Map coverages. Planning priorities set during the LCPIHCP process can be used to refine the
map where needed.
The same spatial model of the PV A that generates the Harvest Grid Map allows calculation of
H-unit by individual parcel using a summing method applied to the grids contained within the
parcel. Therefore, Monroe County will use this calculation to project the level of impact of each
individual development proposal on endangered species and, ultimately, on ITPIHCP-
compliance. The anticipated Incidental Take Permit will authorize a total take of approximately
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
23
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
78 female Key deer (PV A-model based number) and no take of the Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit in
the twenty-year period covered by the permit. This is expressed in terms of development within
the HCP as a total allowable H of 1.1 units. Furthermore, the anticipated ITP will require miti-
gation through the acquisition and protection of at least 3.3 total H units (mitigation ratio of 3 to
1). The projected amount of development that could be accommodated by 1.1 units of H was
estimated as the equivalent of approximately 600 residential units. This was done by running
the PV A model through several scenarios in which the least valuable habitat was always devel-
oped first. The scenarios used equivalent units that were characterized as single family residen-
tial units within subdivisions. A method was needed for the direct translation of equivalent units
into all types of land uses anticipated by the LCP process such as commercial, public facilities,
and roadways. The HCP does this by supplying a multiplier for those uses generating additional
traffic (translating to harvest impact) beyond that generated by a single family residential unit.
Analysis of Community Needs
Tier Map
The Tier Map for Big Pine Key and No Name Key has been developed based on relative wildlife
habitat quality as defined in the HCP. Monroe County is in the process of developing the Tier
Maps pursuant to county-wide Smart Growth Initiatives adopted in Goal 105 of the Comprehen-
sive Plan. For the Big Pine Key and No Name Key planning area the Tier Maps are based upon
habitat sensitivity identified in the HCP, primarily as represented on the weighted Harvest Grid
Map.
H unit Tracking System
Pursuant to the anticipated ITP and the HCP, the H-Value of all parcels developed and parcels
acquired for the purpose of mitigating endangered species take will need to be continuously
compiled and monitored. A system for tracking the H for each parcel developed, and how much
H is in the mitigation bank must be created and monitored. An annual report will be presented
detailing this information.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 1.1
Create a Tier Map for the planning area depicting the locations of Tier I, Tier II and Tier III
lands as described in Comprehensive Plan Policy 105.2.1. Base the Tier Map on the habitat
needs of federally endangered resident species in the planning area as set forth in the anticipated
ITP and HCP in terms of relative H of parcels within the planning area.
Strategy 1.2
Assign relative H units to all parcels within the planning area as per the method described in the
HCP in order to ensure compliance with the permitted level of take of federally endangered spe-
cies contained in the anticipated ITP.
Action Item 1.2.1: Use the parcel-specific H unit spreadsheet included with the HCP to as-
sign H to individual parcels within the planning area.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
24
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 1.2.2: For development proposal applications involving multiple parcels, sum
the H units for the individual parcels to generate the total H impact of the development.
Action Item 1.2.3: Devise a trip generation equivalency system to account for the difference
in harvest impact between non-residential and residential uses in accordance with HCP re-
quirements. Use the revised version of HCP Table shown below in Table 2.1. This revision
provides more detail regarding the uses that are anticipated in this Master Plan.
Table 2.1 H multiplier for land use development (both new and expansion) categories.
"'~~"~~~))an.~T~Jl
(GeDeratioD~;.....;...
esidential (any type)
ccessory Uses 3 (on vacant parcels)
(includes neighborhood pocket parks)
9.5
0.2
70.0 7.4 (per 1,000 sq. ft.)
5.9 0.6 (per 1,000 sq. ft.)
13.0 1.4 (per 1,000 sq. ft.)
5.0 0.5 (per 1,000 sq. ft.)
67 7.0
ffice - government or private
nstitutional (includes community and religious organizations)
ndustrial (includes public utilities)
ecreational (major parks) and Library
ource: Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer
1 The multiplier is based on traffic generation because vehicle collisions with Key deer is the most important hu-
man-related cause of mortality for the Key deer.
2 Average daily trips generation was estimated from the Institute of Traffic Engineers Manual; daily trip generation
by land use has not been verified for the Florida Keys.
3 Fences and auxiliary uses, as defmed in the Monroe County Land Development Regulations, are assumed to cause
no additional traffic impacts; they were assumed to cause habitat loss (change in K), which has a lesser effect on the
matrix model than changes in H.
Action Item 1.2.4: Use the formulas in Table 2.2 of this Plan, (Table 2.6 of the HCP) to de-
termine the H impact of development permitted after March 15, 1995.
Strategy 1.3
Prepare a public acquisition strategy to acquire parcels with the highest H first because of their
relative habitat value, to maximize mitigation potential and ensure compliance with the antici-
pated ITP/HCP.
Action Item 1.3.1: Prioritize the purchase of Tier I lands over Tier II and Tier III lands in or-
der to achieve the highest possible level of H protection and to ensure compliance with the
anticipated ITP mitigation requirements. Within Tier I, Florida Key deer movement corri-
dors, as depicted in the HCP document shall be further prioritized for acquisition.
Action Item 1.3.2: Consider the following acquisition mechanisms applied within the plan-
ning area as eligible to be counted for the purpose of providing H unit equivalent mitigation:
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
25
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
.~ ~.~ ..,.~
~II),,,,,,,"= 'I:: ......11) "1"= ... II)
">"1:: "-'- ~o I~..c_ -...... .~- .... ....
co C6 II) i:: II) :<;:: II) 1) ._ .S a ~ 0 .";:: II) .9 0
~ .~ @-;:;: ~ 8 ~ "8 co ~ I:: 8] 't ..8 ~ "8 ~ '-
I::::s .::: 0 'S g. .J:: 8 ~ ~ '" ':-'~ '" II) "0 .J:: 8 ~ 0
"'6 ~II)::S~ 511) 11)8 ~-- ~~ 1::11) 'C X
00 "-'l?--> o.....c:: >~ 001::1:: [...c:: II) "0
3 ~ ~ ~ I:: II) 0...... ~ ~::s ~ 'C I:: II) ...... > II)
~_ - 11)"0 ,-I:: '" ......."'!:::B- ~~ 01:: _ ......
....- 11)"08> 00 1::1I)c..>c..>_0 ~"O ~o - '"
.: a .J:: I:: 0.. ;> 00 ~ ...c::.2 ~ I:: ..s ,<::) ...... I:: 00 ~ ~ .5 N'
~...... ...... '" 0 II) 00 ...... '" 8 .9 II) ..... II) '" l;::...... r--
~ .~ ~~ = ~ ~ ..s ~ .~ >.- ~ ~ ca ~ ~ .2 '0 '5 ~ 8
~~ 00511)0 11)...... "O~~"'"OS c..>::s 11)...... 0 II)
0.. '" ::s 8"0 II) ;g & ::r: 215.g 0.. '- .- 5 "0 ;g & ~ ~ 0
...... ;;:: "2 '" ~ ~ '" '- .s '" I:: ~ 2 :a I-< I:: '" '- X .~ I:: II
ao "'11)1-<'0 c..>1I)(;...,II).J::o ~I::"O ~,$ c..>1I)'- ox
c..> 00 -.J:: II) >.. II) 0 co co c..> ,$'C '" ~ -.::. >.. II) 0.::: "0 '-"
~ (g ~...... ~ ..8 "2 ~ 0 ~.S ~ ~ B- ~ "0 '8 "2 ~ 0 'S ~ ~
.... - ~ ...... ~ 8 ~ 0 o;..::.~ ~ > II) I-< 0 _ . ~ CL 0 .~~ ~ '" 0
o ~ c..> I:: 0 ::s '" 0 00 ~ '- 8 ~ 8,..8 ~ ~ ...... -g- . ~ Q't ~ ~ I-<
I:: .J:: ~ ~ ~o ~ g. =~ ~ I:: ~ lS @- ~ "0 II) I:: ::s '~..8 ~ OO::s I:: II) ~ .~ 13
o ...... II) 00 .J:: 00 .- .J:: = I':< c..> 1I)...c:: "0...... ::s .- .J:: ... >
- 0 >, II) "- >. ...... .-.... 0........ 0 I:: c..> > >. ... ...... "0 .., 0....
'0 ~ ~. 7' S E-< ~:E 1-" S 00 .~ 00.::: 0 1::'';:: '" '" i)"O 1-' 0 00 'j:. c .- 8,
~ ~ '" 1::,- ..... ......"0 0._ II) ::s = ~ 0 g;::; 0.. I:: a 55'';:: II) 01)._ ~......
<Ii ..= 0"2 g 0 5 0 II) ~ O::s 8 ~ ~.::; > II) ::s 0 8 II) I::"' 00 c..>::s 8 x g :; 0
:! ...... ~ 8, 0 I:: 8 ......"0 II) '';:: c..> I::~ ;> .g ~ t;;; II) . ~ ~ "E ~"O'';:: II) ~ ~ ~
· ;0;0. 0 c:! c..> 1-<0 tE .... ~.;; 8 "2 N !:: 0 II) II) '" j5..J:: ._ c..> II) N ~ '" ._
~J C).I':< ~I~ rn ~~ ;.r;1~ ,,1-<.0 0."'.- ~1..5 [l.OO .elf:; '0 61<2"::"0 ~ '0 rJ'S
CJ
ell ~ ~ I
= = "
~ ~ ~
~ 1 ]
:a
'"
c;::
&
'"
--
~
""
c;::_
& :g
'" 0
-::::::
* u
u
:E a.
=:=c:=
* &
u~
[ ~
:I: 4::
II g-
tl-
~*
tJ6
-= 1--
S
c..
Q
'!l
>
CIJ
'C
-
=
CIJ
...
~
:s
...
~
-
CJ
ell
c..
.5
::t
...
Q
=
.S
-
ell
:;
CJ
-;
U
N
N
CIJ
:E
ell
Eo-
I
=
Q
:c
Q.
"C
u
~
Cl
=
Q
:c
ell
.'a
u
-;
t.l
==
~
:I:'"
II
tl
~
~
>;
]
c.S
11)
bo
.5
'"
-
c
.S:
u
E
'"
c
o
U
*
.i!J
'2
::s
"E
11)
S
Q..
o
Q)
>
11)
"0
'It
*
u
~
:I: '"
II
u
..
J
c
.S:
-
u
E
'"
c
o
u
]
-
c
11)
:"5l
'"
II)
...
I
C
~
tl
..
J
11)
'"
::s
C
o
'"
'"
11)
u
~
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
-
=
s
Cl.
Q
!
Cl
....
Q
~
3
"E
11)
"0
'en
~
'il
u
...
.
!llol
....
Q
!
"0
11)
Q..
o
Q)
>
11)
"0
:5
"
.~
e
u
e
~
*
N
.0
*
.-,
N
.0
*
u
~
:I: '"
II
"
~
=t
-
II
u
..
J
.-,
'"
..><:
...
'"
Q..
11)
>
'en
'"
'"
Q..
-
11)
u
'"
Q..
'"
C
11)
8-
tl
J
c
.S:
'"
c
'"
Q..
~
"0
11)
Q..
o
Q)
>
~
*
.-,
u
~
:I: '"
-.,
.~
"
..
'"
~
"
c;::
&
'"
-
*
u
~
:I:'"
II
.-,
11)
'"
::s
-
c
11)
...
~
c.;...<
:.a
-
"E
a
Q..
o
Q)
>
11)
"0
~
11)
'"
::s
>,
...
o
'"
'"
11)
u
~
N
.0
*
11)
'"
.~
...
11)
..s::: .
......"0
o 11)
. ~ ...
00 11)
. -
0-
'"
>-'1::
.0 ::s
"0 I::
11) .-
:as
::E ~
::s 11)
S >
.~ 2
- '"
8 '"
:a I::
~'" .S:
]
..
:I: '"
II
tl
..
'"
tJ
I
'"
::s
0'
11)
11)
..s:::
-
"0
11)
u
I::
~
>-.
"0
'"
~
C;;
.~
Q)
U
...
'"
Q..
'-
December 17, 2003
.-,
'"
11)
]
.5
-
00
'E
'"
.~
11)
~
-
"0
.~
00
I::
';;'
'"
Q.. C;;
'- I::
o 0
~ :-8 ';]
Oil "0 11)
] !]
* * I::
o o~
~ ~~
o 0 I::
.0 .o~
II II *
tl tl ;:;;
e. ~;o
.j J'~
.-,
-
en
::i
gp
:.a
::s
U
.5
....
0)
0)
CI
;>,
~
co
'"0
"I:
o
fi:
....
<2
c
co
c::
c
.S
'"
~
0)
'"
6
u
~
:.0
co
:I:
<.i
::
'"
,~
.-,
'"
"0
'"
o
...
t::
:.a
-
00
C
';;'
~
Vi
"0
'"
o
...
"0
11)
>
'"
Q..
-
00
c
'2
11)
"0
~
'"
"0
'"
~
26
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
1. Outright purchases by Monroe County for conservation purpose using county funds,
state funds, grants or other outside funding sources, whether or not the property is later
donated to the federal government for conservation purpose or transferred/sold to the
State of Florida for conservation purpose.
2. Properties purchased for the purpose of conservation by the State of Florida which do
not specifically prohibit use of the funds for mitigation purposes.
3. Lots dedicated to Monroe County to achieve points for the ROGO eligibility.
Strategy 1.4
Compile the H units of parcels permitted for development as permits are issued in order to allow
continuous determination of the individual and cumulative H units of developed parcels. At the
same time, continuously compile the H units of conservation parcels acquired for the purpose of
mitigating H units developed.
Strategy 1.5
Evaluate and demonstrate compliance with the total allowable H under the ITP/HCP through
annual reporting ofH units developed and H units acquired.
Action Item 1.5.1: Based on the annual report, evaluate whether there continues to be a
steady and available rate of H units for meeting community needs throughout the twenty-
year planning horizon.
Action Item 1.5.2: Based on the annual report, evaluate whether the acquisition strategyen-
sures a steady and available rate of H units for mitigation (through identification of future
acquisition areas) throughout the twenty-year planning horizon.
Action Item 1.5.3: Based on the annual report, evaluate whether the program ensures that H
units protected through acquisition substantially mitigates H units lost through development.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
27
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
~
Legend
.. Tier 1
Tier 2
.. Tier 3
December 17, 2003
~
'kf1 \..\vab'e Comm\l"\Keys \,togtam
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Tier Map
.
>>
6i~.~
N
+
i'vIonroe County
PlalUling and Environmental
Resources Department
ThIS map IS for Monroe County Growtb Manqemem o"VUlon pUrposes
only The data contamed hereIn 1I11lurtrati..e only and may not acc..*ly
depIct boundaries, parcels, roads, n&ht ofways. or idenb.ficat:lon information
Figure 2.1 Tier designations on Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
28
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 2
Manage future growth for the next twenty years on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key consistent with the
community vision, while minimizing impacts on the
endangered species and maintaining the existing
biodiversity .
Current Conditions Summary
The primary mechanisms for implementation of the Tier System are the permit allocation system
and land acquisition. These two programs are already in place and need merely to be revised to
implement the HCP and this Master Plan. Tiers I and II minimize development impact on natu-
ral resources and sparsely settled areas. Tier III encourages development in disturbed areas al-
ready heavily settled. It is envisioned that future development patterns will be accomplished
through the application of minimum eligibility requirements for competing in the permit alloca-
tion system. Tier III applicants will be immediately eligible to compete whereas Tier I and Tier
II applicants will be required to amass points via land preservation prior to being eligible for en-
try into the system. In this way, the competition aspect of the allocation system is preserved
while the subjective evaluation of point awards (a growing problem since the system was first
implemented) is eliminated. The land acquisition program, the second implementation mecha-
nism of the Tier System, will be reviewed and revised to prioritize parcel acquisition according
to Tier category.
As described in Goal 1, the distribution of future development within the planning area will be
based directly on the H units of the land to achieve minimization and avoidance of impacts. The
Tier category coverages were developed following this same format of habitat sensitivity infor-
mation presented in the HCP, primarily as depicted on the Harvest Grid Map. Much of this in-
formation was available and was brought into the LCP process during development of the pre-
ferred land use alternative.
Land use alternatives developed in the LCP were organized by land use category according to
the pnmary focus area identified by the community: residential, commercial, recrea-
tionaVcommunity facilities, and transportation. The alternatives analysis is presented in the Big
Pine Key & No Name Key Development Alternatives Report. The alternatives considered most
feasible (preferred) for the first three land use categories are identified in that report as:
· Residential Clustered,
· Commercial Redevelopment, and,
· New Community Facilities and Scattered Community Facilities (two alternatives were
combined).
The transportation alternatives were further analyzed and preferred alternatives were later identi-
fied to be:
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
29
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
· Three-Ianing of U.S. 1 on Big Pine Key, and,
· Cross-island road for local traffic.
The basic desired rate of development was also set during the LCP process for the twenty-year
planning horizon:
· 200 residential units, and,
· 47,800 square feet of additional commercial floor area (to correspond with residential).
The conceptual maps of the above alternatives (and all other alternatives considered) are con-
tained in Appendix 5 of the Big Pine Key & No Name Key Development Alternatives Report.
The preferred alternatives were combined and refined into a single preferred land use alternative
to which were added plans for expansion of institutional uses and planned public facilities. Dur-
ing development of the HCP this preferred alternative was further refined to form a specific land
use plan for Big Pine and No Name Keys. This is the plan for which the proposed levels of take
of federally-protected endangered species was determined through PV A modeling. Therefore,
implementation of this specific plan will comply with the anticipated Incidental Take Permit.
The plan components are as follows:
· Residential - Up to 200 new units over the next twenty years.
· Commercial - Up to 47,800 square feet of commercial floor area over the next twenty years
in the U.S. 1 Corridor Area (south of Lytton's Way) to be used for infill and expansion of
existing businesses. Development is limited to Tier III disturbed and scarified uplands. Total
trip generation over the twenty-year horizon is limited to the equivalent of 200 residential
uni ts.
· Major RecreationaVCommunity Facilities - One major recreational and community center
facility to be located at the county-owned "Mariner's Resort" site in southeastern Big Pine
Key; Three additional public parks to be located on disturbed uplands; Expansion of the ex-
isting public library by up to 5,000 square feet.
· Minor (Neighborhood) Recreational - Up to seven neighborhood "pocket parks" on dis-
turbed or scarified sites in any of the following subdivisions:
Pine Channel Estates Palm Villa Port Pine Heights
Cahill Pines and Palms Sands
Doctor's Arm Eden Pines Colony
· Community Organizations - Allow for expansion of existing community organizations such
as religious institutions and civic clubs on scarified land already owned by them on the date
of the issuance of the Incidental Take Permit.
· Public Facilities - To include the following public facilities needs anticipated over the next
twenty years, all of which are to be restricted to disturbed and/or scarified areas:
1. Sewage treatment needs outlined in the Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master
Plan (SWMP), including facilities for collection and treatment,
2. Stormwater treatment needs outlined in the Momoe County Stormwater Management
Master Plan (SMMP) including facilities for collection and treatment,
3. Public office space to be located in the U.S. 1 Corridor Area, and
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
30
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
4. Expansion of county emergency response facilities at the current location.
· Accessory Lots and Fences - Approximately 250-300 vacant lots allowed to either be fenced
or developed with accessory uses primarily on Tier II and Tier III lands.
· Roads - To include three-Ianing of U.S. Highway 1 only. The cross-island road was in-
cluded in the PV A modeling effort as part of the total development impact. However, the
road was subsequently withdrawn from consideration by the Board of County Commission-
ers (BOCC) based on planning issues identified through further study and public input. One-
way access from the western area of Big Pine Key to the central business area (surrounding
Key Deer Blvd.) may still be considered as well as improvements to other roadways as per-
mitted in the HCP.
Analysis of Community Needs
Reconciliation of the Tier Map, Future Land Use Map (FLUM) and Land Use District Map
Land use within the planning area is already regulated pursuant to the Future Land Use Map
(FLUM) of the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Use District Maps (a.k.a., zoning maps). The
Master Plan horizon (most likely 2025) will now extend beyond the comprehensive plan horizon
(2010) because it must correspond with the federal Incidental Take Permit (ITP). Therefore, any
FLUM or Land Use District revisions required to implement the LCP or HCP should be in-
cluded in this Master Plan. Revisions must still be consistent with the intent of the Comprehen-
sive Plan. In addition to map revisions, the regulatory status and relationships of the FLUM,
Lan~ Use District Map and Tier System Map must be codified.
H-unit Budget
A total of 1.1 units of H may be developed over the twenty-year planning horizon, as long as the
mitigation ratio of 3: 1 mandated by the HCP is maintained. The community and planning staff
have formulated a general development scenario that meets community needs and complies with
the HCP. In order to ensure that the desired scenario can be followed, the plan must partition H
to the various planned uses, at least in the early stages. This will ensure that reserve H units are
available for each planned use when it is ready to develop, promoting an orderly development
process over the twenty-year horizon. The H unit budget for each land use type will ensure the
fair and reasonable partitioning of development potential towards that land use type in compli-
ance with the spatial and temporal commitments made in the HCP and pursuant to the LCP. The
H unit budget will be used as a guide and is more important near the beginning of the process.
The county may consider changing the H unit budget according to changing conditions within
the planning area. Changes would merely redistribute H units among uses but could not result in
a change that would exceed the total number of H units allowable under the anticipated ITP and
HCP.
Comprehensive Plan Consistency
Once the HCP and Master Plan for Big Pine Key are formulated and completed, inconsistencies
with existing Comprehensive Plan policies must be addressed. For every policy in the Compre-
hensive Plan that specifically addresses Big Pine and No Name Keys the Master Plan will in
some way address that policy issue. The Comprehensive Plan policies will be individually
evaluated to determine whether or not they are affected by the Master Plan, and if they will be
replaced or modified.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
31
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 2.1
Continue to utilize the Land Use District Maps and supporting FLUM to regulate land use type,
density and intensity on an individual parcel basis within the planning area. The distribution of
future development shall be guided by a Tier System Overlay Map pursuant to the Comprehen-
sive Plan Smart Growth Initiatives (Goal 105).
Action Item 2.1.1: Continue to recognize the FLUM categories and land use districts as the
regulatory tool used for evaluating individual development proposals for compliance with
land development standards such as type of use, intensity of use, and open space. This will
promote orderly and safe development that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
will protect the integrity and conformance status of existing development.
Action Item 2.1.2: Adopt the Tier System Map separate from but as an overlay of the Land
Use District Maps. The Tier System Overlay Map shall be used primarily to guide the distri-
bution of development through the application of the residential rate of growth ordinance
(ROGO) and the non-residential rate of growth ordinance (NROGO) pursuant to the strate-
gies set forth in this Master Plan.
Action Item 2.1.3: Adopt the following parcel-specific revisions to the FLUM and Land Use
District Map. These revisions are either required actions pursuant to the Comprehensive
Plan or needed to facilitate the implementation of this Master Plan (see Figure 2.2):
1. Revise the Land Use District Map to remove the Area of Critical County Concern
(ACCC) land use district designation from all parcels within the planning area and re-
place the designation with the applicable underlying FLUM category and land use dis-
trict for each parcel in the planning area. Delete Policy 103.1.2 requiring this change
from the Comprehensive Plan.
2. Change the designation of acreage identified as real estate parcel numbers:
00110460.000000; 00110540.000000; 00110640.000000;
00110720.000000; 00110720.000100; 00110730.000000;
00110740.000000; 00110750.000000; 00111020.000000;
00111020.000010; 00111020.000020; 00111020.000030; and
00111020.000040 on Big Pine Key from Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) to Resi-
dential Low (RL) on the FLUM and from Destination Resort (DR) to Suburban Residen-
tial (SR) on the land use district map. This proposed change will reduce the intensity of
the existing land use district and bring it into conformity with the current use a~s~r-:- c .
rounding community. Additionally it will protect existing sensitive habitat.
3. Change the designation of Lots 21 and 22, Tropic Island Ranchettes from Residential
Conservation (RC) to Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) on the FLUM and from Native Area
(NA) to Suburban Commercial (SC) on the land use district map. This change was a re-
quest by the property owner in order to recognize a commercial use existing before 1986
and to allow for minor expansion of the use.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
32
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
4. Change the designation of acreage identified as real estate parcel numbers
00111470.000000 and 00111470.000100 from Suburban Residential (SR) to Suburban
Commercial (SC) on the land use district map. Leave the existing FLUM designation of
Institutional (INS) unchanged. This change was a request by the property owner in order
to allow for expansion of existing community and institutional facilities.
Action Item 2.1.4: Create a new land use district category, Light Industrial (LI), for the pur-
pose of providing a more appropriate definition and accommodation of existing light indus-
trial uses on Big Pine Key. The LI category may be considered for parcels within the Mixed
Use/Commercial (MC) FLUM category that do not border on U.S. Highway 1 and are cur-
rently occupied by light industrial uses such as, but not limited to construction material and
lumber yards, outdoor and/or enclosed storage, warehouses and distribution centers, auto and
. .
manne servIces.
Action Item 2.1.5: Once Master Plan FLUM changes are adopted pursuant to Goal 2, Strat-
egy 2.1, Action Item 2.1.3, consider any future changes to the FLUM to be inconsistent with
the intent of the adopted Master Plan and the intent of the HCP, except that changes to the
Conservation designation may be considered consistent with both plans.
Strategy 2.2
Limit the total impact over 20 years to not exceed H units of 1.1.
Action Item 2.2.1: Create an H unit budget for the general land use types and amounts estab-
lished through the LCP preferred alternative process and refined through development of the
HCP.
Action Item 2.2.2: Use the following "H unit budget" table (Table 2.3), based on the final
preferred development scenario modeled in the HCP, as a guideline for the approximate
amount of H that should be anticipated for planned development over the twenty-year hori-
zon.
Action Item 2.2.3: Include discussion ofthe H unit budget in the annual review ofHCP com-
pliance and change the budget as needed to meet community needs within HCP limits upon
approval by the Board of County Commissioners.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
33
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Table 2.3. H unit budget for future development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Land Use Scel1ario Modeled in. the HCP .... , .:.,.: <,,';';x. PercentageH
For Endangered Suedes Impacts '. .... ~ro~ed Units Estimated
Residential Single Family House 200 23%
Residential Accessory Lots (no additional traffic impact) Developed SFR Lot 250 5%
Commercial (new and expansion) 1,000 Square Feet 47.8 39%
Community Organizations (new and expansion) 1,000 Square Feet 10 2%
Community Park Facility Parcel I 6%
lLibrary Expansion 1,000 Square Feet 5 1%
lPublic Offices (new and expansion) 1,000 Square Feet 10 1%
!Emergency Facility Expansion 1,000 Square Feet 7 1%
IUs I Three-Laning Mile .25 1%
!Existing Roadway Paving Mile 5 16%
Remaining public uses (minor parks, stormwater etc.) N/A N/A 5%
Total 100%
Note: The percentage ofH estimated is a generalized H unit value based on parcel averages and is for estimation
purposes only
~ource: Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer
Strategy 2.3
Revise the Future Land Use Element policies of the Comprehensive Plan regulating the Big Pine
Key and No Name Key Area of Critical County Concern.
Action Item 2.3.1: Revise Objective 103.1 of the Comprehensive Plan to add the Master Plan
and the Habitat Conservation Plan as guiding documents with which future land develop-
ment regulation on Big Pine Key and No Name Key must be consistent.
Action Item 2.3.2: Delete the following policies under Objective 103.1 of the Comprehensive
Plan: 103.1.1 and 103.1.2; 103.1.7 through 103.1.12; 103.1.14 and 103.1.15. These policies
are specifically addressed in this Master Plan.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
34
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Zoning iFLUM Changes
1. Zoning: ACCC to district
con-esponding to FLU1y!
FL1J~1:lTnchanged
2. Zoning: DR to SR
FLUM: MC to RL
3. Zoning: NA/SC to SC
FLUM: RC to MC
4. Zoning: SR to SC
FLUM: Unchanged (INS)
~ \.\vab\e Comm\ln\Keys ptogtam
'fV' ,,~~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Proposed Zoning/FLUM Changes
(,'
\:'.,
'1:;.2)
~/")
'" ,.-.-'
....~. ,..,::. "
.. ~M...'
N
-L
.
Mile Marker - Residential Roads
Parcels - Key Deer Blvd.
-U.S.1
Monroe County
Planning and Envirorunental
Resources Department
Legend
ACCC
This map IS for Monroe County Growth M..nqement DivUlon purposu
only The data contaned herein is Illustrative only and may not acCUrll:e1J
deplct boundaricl. parcell, ro.dt, righl of way" or identifical:iOD information
Figure 2.2 FLUM and Land Use District changes listed in Strategy 2.1, Action Item 2.1.3.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
35
Livable Communi Keys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 3
Maintain housing opportunities for all segments
the population while limiting the total number 0
new housing units to preserve the rural character 0
the planning area and minimize impacts on the criti-
cal habitat areas.
Current Conditions Summary
As described earlier, the LCP process envisions issuance of 200 residential dwelling units over
the twenty-year planning horizon. The first 30 of those 200 permits will be issued to applicants
who had already received an allocation but could not be issued a permit due to the traffic con-
currency moratorium. These applicants were awarded regulatory relief through beneficial use or
administrative relief after waiting for at least five years. All but two of the permits will be is-
sued for single family lots within Tier III. The two remaining lots are in Tier I.
The 170 additional permits to be issued over the next twenty years will be located primarily on
privately owned vacant upland lots zoned for residential use. There are a total of 1,539 private
vacant upland residential lots located in improved subdivisions. Of these, 756 (49%) are in
Tiers II and III. This illustrates the fact that there is sufficient area and in fact a large surplus of
lots available to accommodate planned development.
Most residential development within the planning area takes place in single family residential
subdivisions at the rate of one house per lot. Table 2.4 shows the characteristics of existing
housing outside of single family subdivisions.
Table 2.4 Housing outside single family subdivisions.
Number
Status
nstitutional (shelters, etc.)
518
121
93
61
Permanent
Permanent or seasonal
Permanent
Transient
ource: u.s. Census 2000
Table 2.5 below summarizes the status of current housing on Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
The average size for households on Big Pine Key is 2.21 persons and for No Name Key is 2.48
persons.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
36
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Table 2.5 Housing figures for Big Pine and No Name Keys from the 2000 census.
Vacantfor. Vacant.SeaVaci~rtHQyvner..... . Renter Totals
sale sonal Other .Occu led. OceD ied
45 727 98
3
18
20
ousehold Pop 36 4
* The total population is 5,032 which includes 61 persons in correctional or other institutional living quarters.
ource: U.S. Census 2000
These data show that at least 23% of existing housing units are reserved for seasonal or recrea-
tional use. Another 17% are renter occupied while 55% are owner occupied. About 3% of total
units were available for sale or rent at the time of the census.
The 2000 Census reports that the per capita income on Big Pine was $23,169. The per capita
income of Monroe County was $26,102. Within the County a reported 7,977 individuals had an
income that placed them below the poverty level, roughly 10.2%. On Big Pine the ratio remains
similar: 472 individuals below the poverty level (roughly 9.5%).
ROGO on Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Being competitive in the current ROGO system on Big Pine and No Name is extremely difficult.
Even if an applicant proposes to building in an improved subdivision on a scarified lot (gaining
10 points for infill and 1 point for a disturbed habitat) they are assessed -10 for being on Big
Pine or No Name. An additional 10 points are subtracted if the lot is within the proposed CARL
boundaries which consist of approximately 80% of Big Pine and 100% of No Name. Ten more
points are subtracted if the lot is located with a Priority I or II acquisition area of the National
Key Deer Refuge, which overlaps with much of the CARL boundaries on and covers 100% of
No Name. In order to protect threatened or endangered species, 10 points for each species are
subtracted if the applicant proposes to build in the known habitat.
The known habitat of the Key deer covers both of the islands so a minimum of -10 points will
affect the applicant. Another ten points will be subtracted from any application to No Name
Key because it is a unit of the Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS). Therefore, just for
being located on Big Pine and No Name an applicant would typically be subject to as little as _
20 and as much as -80 points in ROGO.
The proposed ROGO system described in this Master Plan simplifies the process. Competition
will only be between Big Pine and No Name applicants and the points system will be based pre-
dominantly on the Tier designations set forth in the HCP. Additional negative points will-ais:-_-
courage development in designated Key deer corridors, close to marsh rabbit habitat, and on No
Name Key. To enter the proposed system, a threshold of '0' must be reached and the most nega-
tive points which would be imposed would be -40 (for No Name Key within range of marsh
rabbit habitat).
Housing Affordability
Retention of existing affordable housing is one of the most difficult issues to address in an area
such as the Florida Keys where market pressure can be heavily slanted towards market rate
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
37
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
housing as development slows. This is a particularly heightened issue within the planning area
because Big Pine Key has traditionally been perceived as a "bedroom-community" for workers
employed in the cities of Key West and Marathon. As existing dwelling units become more
valuable due to growth restrictions, redevelopment of units which may now be affordable into
market-rate units becomes more attractive to many owners. This pressure is too great to over-
come with the use of incentive-based programs so the normal means of retaining affordable
housing is to require new affordable units to remain affordable for a specified period of time.
County regulations now require a period of fifty years for new affordable units to remain afford-
able.
Certain land use districts have been traditionally more accommodating to affordable types of
housing including commercial districts (as employee housing), mobile home, and duplex or
multi-family districts.
Analysis of Community Needs
Define Residential Development
There is a need to clearly define the types and locations of residential development to be permit-
ted. Most residential development will take place in subdivisions but further clarification is
needed to address housing in other Tier II and III areas (e.g., commercial and mixed use) and to
firmly establish future zoning guidelines for these areas.
Revise ROGO
The dwelling unit allocation system (ROGO) will need to be revised to implement the Tier Sys-
tem Overlay Map and to be consistent with the Master Plan and HCP. The Tier system incorpo-
rates most of the factors used in the existing ROGO to assign negative and positive points. By
using habitat value, species protection and location as the basis of Tier designation a simplified
allocation system can be developed. The revised system should be based on encouraging devel-
opment to occur in infill areas, Tier III, and discouraging development, using weighting catego-
ries, in Tiers I and II. The system should also include additional major negatives for any devel-
opment proposed in the Key deer corridor or on No Name Key and within the 500 meter buffers
of Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit habitat (occupied or unoccupied).
Existing Affordable Housing Stock Inventory
The existing information on affordable housing within the planning area needs to be compiled
including the types, locations, conditions, and projected longevity.
Affordable Housing Retention and Expansion
As the pool of housing becomes more limited, the incentive to redevelop existing affordable
units into market-rate units may increase. There is a need to determine current and future trends
and to take steps to ensure that affordable housing is retained or replaced and, if possible, ex-
panded.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 3.1
Control the overall level of residential development for the next twenty years consistent with the
community vision and the growth plan developed through the Livable CommuniKeys planning
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
38
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
process. Future development shall also be consistent with the incidental take permit and the ac-
companying Habitat Conservation Plan for the Florida Key Deer and Other Protected Species.
Action Item 3.1.1: Limit the total allocations for new residential units over the next 20 years
to 200 units.
Action Item 3.1.2: Do not consider the replacement of existing, legally established residen-
tial units as of the date this plan as new development nor shall on-site replacement be consid-
ered to have any H impact.
Action Item 3.1.3: Permit residential units at a steady rate over the twenty-year planning ho-
rizon and encourage the distribution of units to designated infill areas. The Rate of Growth
Ordinance (ROGO) and Tier Map Overlays shall be the mechanisms used to implement dis-
tribution patterns to minimize impact on the resource and rate of growth allocations.
Action Item 3.1.4: Allow residential units of any type listed in the applicable FLUM catego-
ries and land use districts with the exception that new transient residential units shall be pro-
hibited.
Action Item 3.1.5: Permit employee housing in Tier I with a ROGO allocation or TRE within
the planning area ifthe following criteria are met:
1. The FLUM designation is Institutional.
2. The institutional use was in existence prior to March 15, 1995.
3. The proposed development does not clear any native habitat.
4. It can be demonstrated that no additional traffic impacts will be generated from the
development.
5. The residential use must remain a part of the institutional use and may not be used by
a for-profit entity.
If the above criteria are met, the institutional housing shall be considered to be at a threshold
of '0' points unless any other environmental points are applicable (i.e. the development is
located within a deer corridor, Lower Keys marsh rabbit buffers, on No Name Key, etc.)
Action Item 3.1.6: Prohibit transfer of development rights (TDRs) from islands outside of the
planning area to within the planning area pursuant to Policy 101.13.4. Additionally, TDRs
and transferable ROGO exemptions (TREs) within the planning area shall not be transferred
from a higher (infill) tier category to a lower (conservation-open space) tier category, except
as provided for in Action Item 3.1.5. Transfers to and from the same tier category are per-
mitted except in Tier I.
Strategy 3.2
Revise the Comprehensive Plan policies regulating the rate and allocation of residential growth
to adjust for allocation according to the Tier System for Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Action Item 3.2.1: Amend the current ROGO to base eligibility to compete in the allocation
system upon the location of the proposed development with respect to the Tier System Over-
lay Map. Remove any direct references to the planning area from Sec. 9.5.122.3
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
39
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 3.2.2: The revised ROGO for Big Pine Key and No Name Key shall include:
a. A threshold eligibility of "0" is required to enter the allocation system and compete for
an allocation award;
b. Applications in Tier III have no negative points and therefore achieve the threshold
and are automatically eligible to enter the allocation system. Baseline negative values
assigned to Tier I and II applications are as follows:
Tier II -10
Tier I -20
Additional negative points will be accumulated based on the following criteria:
Identified Key deer corridor -10
Within 500 meter buffer of Marsh Rabbit habitat -10
No Name Key -10
The above criteria are cumulative e.g. an application within Tier I (-20), a deer corridor
(-10), and Lower Keys marsh rabbit habitat (-10) would have a total score of -40;
c. Points may be acquired to reach the threshold and to make the application more com-
petitive through land dedication in Tier I or Tier II (two points) and by aggregating lots
in Tier II or Tier III (three points). No aggregation oflots will be permitted in Tier I;
d. A competitive points based system will be used to award allocations to eligible appli-
cants within each allocation period;
e. An additional perseverance point will be added for each year an applicant is in the sys-
tem after year one;
f. Applications in Tier III, which entered the current ROGO allocation system prior to
adoption of this plan will receive an additional perseverance point for every year they
have been in the ROGO system. Applicants in Tier I and Tier II, if they acquire the
points necessary to reach the threshold will also receive a point for every year in the sys-
tem.
g. An applicant will be eligible to apply for administrative relief in five years if an allo-
cation award has not been received. The form of relief will be property purchase for Tier
I lands and either property purchase or permit award for Tier II and Tier III lands.
Action Item 3.2.3: Count as part of the 200-unit cap, the 30 residential units that have been
awarded allocations for beneficial use and administrative relief. These units may be issued
upon County approval of the HCP and need not be held for adoption of this Master Plan.
Action Item 3.2.4: Allocate residential units within the planning area at the rate of no greater
than lOin any given year. More than 10 residential awards may be allocated if the excess
consists of affordable units, that may be accumulated and issued in any allocation period or
"borrowed forward" from future allocations. The allocation rate in this policy replaces that
in Policy 103.1.1 of the Comprehensive Plan, which shall be deleted from the plan.
Action Item 3.2.5: Reserve the 10 unit per year allocation rate provided in Strategy 3.2, Ac-
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
40
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
tion Item 3.2.4 ( above) separately out of the Lower Keys annual allocation for the exclusive
use of the Big Pine Key and No Name Key planning area for at least the first five years of
the twenty-year planning horizon. This will provide for housing opportunities within the
planning area that were not available during the temporary deferral of awards preceding
adoption of this plan. At the end of five years, the need for and effect of a reserve allocation
shall be reevaluated and the reserve either abolished or continued. However the planning
area shall continue to bear its fair share of the minimum 20% affordable housing set-aside
(i.e. 2 units per year) as part of the annual 10-unit allocation pursuant to ROGO require-
ments.
Action Item 3.2.6: Limit allocation awards in Tier I to no more than two percent of all resi-
dential units permitted over the twenty year planning period or a total of H = 0.022, which-
ever results in the lower H.
Strategy 3.3
Retain and expand availability of affordable housing within the planning area to the greatest ex-
tent possible.
Action Item 3.3.1: Identify the locations and characteristics of the existing pool of affordable
housing in the planning area. These areas shall be targeted for the formulation and imple-
mentation of retention and expansion mechanisms.
Action Item 3.3.2: Consider an incentive program for existing mobile home parks and other
existing or potential affordable housing in the planning area to provide for retention of af-
fordable status.
Action Item 3.3.3: Set aside a minimum of 20% (i.e., 2 per year) of dedicated ROGO units
for affordable housing development within the planning area. This number may be adjusted
during the annual BOCC review ofthe HCP status report.
Action Item 3.3.4: Consider provision of incentives for businesses to build affordable hous-
ing, including employee housing, in conjunction with their businesses on U.S. 1.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
41
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 4
Provide opportunities for redevelopment and expan-
sion of existing businesses and limited new non-
residential uses within the U.S. 1 Corridor on scari-
led lands.
Current Conditions Summary
The LCP process envisioned a redevelopment focus for the commercial uses within the planning
area, primarily those near U.S. Highway 1 on Big Pine Key. The allocation of 47,800 s.f. of
new commercial floor area represents the maximum, that may be needed to serve the additional
200 residential units (at the rate of 239 square feet per unit per year established by the Non-
residential Rate of Growth Ordinance). Therefore, much of the new floor area is to be used for
redevelopment and expansion of existing businesses.
The only commercial business (outside possible home-based businesses) located on No Name
Key is an operating borrow pit. That site is used for materials extraction only and is not open to
the public. Therefore the focus of discussion for non-residential development issues is Big Pine
Key. Table 2.5 lists some characteristics of existing businesses on Big Pine Key.
Table 2.5 Big Pine Key commercial data.
CollUDereial Typ~
Number Floor Area
estaurant
27 21~82
6 19,952
3 6,431
40,392
15 75,313
8 30,28
6 13,91
21 89,20
9 490,30
ndoor or Outdoor Storage
uto or Marine Service
ource: Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department
Most businesses are located near U.S. Highway 1 in the central business area of Big Pine Key~-
This area was identified as the U.S. 1 Corridor Area for purposes of analysis during the LCP
process. All of the businesses in Tier III are located in the U.S. 1 Corridor Area. It also appears
at this time that the 47,800 square foot limit on commercial envisioned in the LCP process may
be more than adequate to accommodate future expansions. Further analysis of existing commer-
cial uses will help to identify where future commercial expansion is likely to take place and
whether the 47,800 square foot limit is likely to be needed within the twenty-year planning hori-
zon.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
42
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
1;11\ \.ivable Comm~nil(e~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Existin Land Use in the U.S. 1 Corrido
/
---'
,...-
.r-
,..-'--~
Legend
· Mile Marker .. Office Commercial
- Residential Roads ~ Financial
- Key Deer Blvd. iI Vacant Commercial
- U.S. 1 .. Mobile Home Parks
.. Government O'Wflership ..
Hotel, Motel
c=J Residential ..
Industrial, Utility
.. Retail Commercial _
__ Institutional
"
+
Jvlouroe C01Ully
Plmming and EnvirolUuental
ResolU'ces Department
n.;, mop" forMo_ CooJ\lyOrowthMulo(.me>lOM.onpupot"
atlly. The datacon1aiMdbeltiDiI illUltratM oNy~m'YllOt.lCcurate.ly
c>>p;tbcnalaries, pucell,lOldI. rightofM.)lI. oridenlifiCabOJ1WOnnalJDIL
Figure 2.3 Existing uses and commercial types in the U.S. 1 Corridor on Big Pine Key.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
43
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Industrial uses are scattered throughout the U.S. 1 corridor area, however most do not directly
front U.S. 1 but are located off of side streets. Many industrial uses operate 'in the open', that is
to say they are not located entirely within a building structure. Concrete plants, marine repair
shops, and auto yards typically only have a small building but much of the site is utilized for
work and storage. Industrial uses are not currently subject to NROGO, therefore additional floor
area for manufacturing, assembly, wholesaling, or distribution no allocation is necessary.
In January 2003 Monroe County proceeded with a design charrette planning process for the
commercial corridor area of Big Pine Key. The charrette was a facilitated community discus-
sion during which design concepts were developed and graphically assembled at the meeting for
immediate reaction. The focus of the discussion was the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the idea of a
community center was presented as a layered concept based primarily on walking distance to the
existing commercial center of Big Pine Key.
Analysis of Community Needs
Define Commercial Development
There is a need to clearly define the types and locations of commercial development permitted.
The proposed development plan includes redevelopment and infill of existing commercial uses
in the U.S. 1 Corridor Area. The Tier Map shows Tier I and Tier III lands within the U.S. 1 Cor-
ridor Area. The HCP requirements place some limitations, especially on the intensities of uses
that can be permitted if the maximum floor area (47,800 square feet) is to be accommodated.
Further guidance on commercial redevelopment is found in the Smart Growth Initiatives (Policy
105.2.15) that call for the creation of Community Center Overlay districts where commercial
redevelopment and infill may be encouraged.
During the LCP process the Community Center idea was expressed as the "Main Street" devel-
opment alternative. While this alternative was not ultimately selected as the preferred develop-
ment alternative it did convey an existing centralized business focus surrounding the Key Deer
BoulevardlU.S. 1 intersection having potential for enhancement. The U.S. I Corridor Area De-
sign Charrette held in January 2003 with the community also identified this intersection as a fo-
cus for future commercial development.
Revise NROGO
Some portions of NROGO are to be automatically updated as Master Plans for individual com-
munities are completed. NROGO for Big Pine Key will need to be revised accordingly and will
also need to be revised for compliance with the development limits set forth by the Master Plan
and ITP. In addition, NROGO needs to be updated to implement the Tier System.
Although certain types of industrial floor area are not subject to NROGO, the HCP requires all
increases in floor area to be considered development and must be accounted for in the total 1.1 H
allowed over the 20-year horizon. Therefore, the H impact for new industrial floor area shall be
calculated and subtracted from the total H allowed for commercial development.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
44
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 4.1
Plan the overall level of non-residential development for the next twenty years to be consistent
with the community vision and development plan selected through the Livable CommuniKeys
planning process. It shall also be consistent with the incidental take permit and the accompany-
ing Habitat Conservation Plan for the Florida Key Deer and Other Protected Species.
Action Item 4.1.1: Limit the total amount of new commercial floor area that may be permit-
ted to 47,800 square feet over the twenty-year planning horizon. This amount may be re-
vised at a later time based on data indicating a change is warranted.
Action Item 4.1.2: Designate the U.S. 1 Corridor Area as the area defined in the Big PinelUS
1 Corridor enhancement plan, incorporated herein by reference.
Action Item 4.1.3: Direct non-residential development and redevelopment to infill in existing
non-residential areas on Tier II and Tier III lands, mainly in the U.S. 1 Corridor Area. New
commercial development will be limited to disturbed or scarified land - no clearing of pine-
lands and/or hammock will be permitted.
Action Item 4.1.4: Prohibit new non-residential development in Tier I. Redevelopment and
expansion of existing institutional uses in Tier I is allowed, but is restricted to disturbed or
scarified land.
Action Item 4.1.5: Create a Community Center Overlay on Big Pine Key pursuant to Policy
105.2.15 of the Comprehensive Plan where Tier III infill and incentives for redevelopment
will be encouraged. The Community Center Overlay will cover the area described as the
Village Center as defined in the Big Pine KeylU.S. 1 Corridor Enhancement Plan.
Action Item 4.1.8: Prohibit the following new uses or change in use:
a. Any high intensity use (based on trips generated per day).
b. Outdoor storage as a principal use.
c. Outdoor retail sales as a principal use.
Action Item 4.1.9: Limit new commercial uses to medium and low intensity uses with corre-
sponding limitations on trip generation. This restriction replaces those in Policy 103.1.1 of
the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 103.1.1 shall be deleted from the plan.
Action Item 4.1.10: Create a new land use district category called Light Industrial (LI) for
the purpose of more appropriate definition and accommodation of existing light industrial
uses on Big Pine Key. The LI category may be considered for parcels within the Mixed Use/
Commercial (MC) FLUM category that do not border on u.s. Highway 1 and are currently
occupied by light industrial uses such as, but not limited to construction material and lumber
yards, outdoor and/or enclosed storage, warehouses and distribution centers, auto and marine
servIces.
Action Item 4.1.11: Prohibit new light industrial uses in the Suburban Commercial land use
district fronting on U.S. 1.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
45
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 4.1.12: Count H impact for new industrial square footage, even if exempt from
NROGO, as part of the total 1.1 H available for development activities over the 20-year
planning horizon. The H used for industrial development shall be counted as a part of the H
to be used for commercial development.
Strategy 4.2
Revise the comprehensive plan policies regulating the rate and allocation of non-residential
growth to adjust for allocation according to the Tier System.
Action Item 4.2.1: Revise the non-residential rate of growth ordinance (NROGO) to base eli-
gibility to compete in the system upon the location of the proposed development with respect
to the Tier System Overlay Map and make the following changes to the NROGO point sys-
tem:
a. Revise Criterion 6 to delete Big Pine Key and No Name Key from the critical habitat
list.
b. Revise Criterion 1 to encourage, by awarding positive points, both infill development
and the redevelopment of existing commercial properties in Tier III to bring them
into closer conformance with the current comprehensive plan and land development
regulations. This point criterion shall not apply to the redevelopment of historic re-
sources.
c. Add an evaluation criterion, that encourages, by awarding positive points, the loca-
tion of new commercial floor area within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and within the
Community Center Overlay area.
Action Item 4.2.2: Allow new commercial square footage allocation awards to exceed 2,500
square feet per site within the designated Community Center Overlay provided they follow
adopted design guidelines (see Community Character Element).
Action Item 4.2.3: Prohibit the transfer of commercial floor area from outside the planning
area pursuant to NROGO. Transfer of commercial floor area from one site to another en-
tirely within the planning area may be allowed provided the receiver site is located within the
designated Community Center.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
46
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 5
Maintain the viability of existing community organi-
zations by providing opportunities for limited rede-
velopment and expansion.
Current Conditions Summary
The LCP/HCP process sought to ensure that existing community organizations could remain vi-
able and expand according to their needs within existing zoning limitations. Table 2.7 lists these
organizations.
Table 2.7 Institutional uses located on Big Pine Key.
NA
ower Keys Property Owners 309070 IS
111070 SR
Religious
St. Francis 110040 NA 1
ord of the Seas 111074.068 NA 1
ig Pine Baptist 111470 SR 3
ig Pine Methodist 111450 SR 3
ineyard Christian 111170 SR I
t. Peter's 11 0400 SC 3
emorial Gardens Cemetery 110830.0001 I 3
ig Pine Neighborhood Charter School 111420.0023 SC 3
247000 MU
All of these institutional uses have been existing for at least 20 years and no new uses are antici-
pated at present. A number of these institutions have expressed an interest in redevelopment of
existing square footage or a limited expansion to better serve the needs of the present population.
Analysis of Community Needs
Plan for Future Community Organization Needs
The existing community organizations in the planning area have been identified. Some have
built their current land ownership to capacity while others have expressed a desire to expand.
The permitted action under the HCP will allow for a limited amount of expansion needs. For the
remaining facilities there is a need to define the future potential for expansion and maintain
flexibility so that future requests can be handled.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
47
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 5.1
Allow the limited expansion of existing community religious, civic and institutional organiza-
tions over the next twenty years consistent with the community vision and development plan and
with the incidental take permit and the accompanying Habitat Conservation Plan for the Florida
Key Deer and Other Protected Species.
Action Item 5.1.1: Expansion of non-public institutional floor area and uses is allowed in all
Tier designations within the planning area, but only on lands currently owned by the organi-
zations on the date of the issuance of the Incidental Take Permit, to ensure avoidance and
minimization of impacts to the Key deer and other covered species.
Action Item 5.1.2: Limit floor area allocations to 2,500 square feet per organization, per year.
Action Item 5.1.3: Monitor the total amount of new floor area allocated towards expansion of
existing non-public institutional uses as specific proposals are received. At the point where
new floor area is expected to exceed the H units budgeted, consider allocation of H from
commercial or public facilities categories to fulfill community organization needs for both
existing expansions and new uses. Include this as a discussion item during presentation of
the annual report and obtain Board of County Commissioners' approval prior to revising the
H budget.
Action Item 5.1.4: Allow allocation and permit issuance for non-public institutional floor
area at any time during the twenty-year planning horizon.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
48
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Ii
~ l\vab\e CommUn\Keys Ytogtam
'fV' ,,~~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Existing Institutional Uses
Chic Ol'ganizations
1. The Lions Club
2. Lower Ke~'s Pl'Opel'ty Owners Assn.
3, Big Pine Ke~' :l\Ioose Lodge
....',.m.......~' ." ..',.'Ti......::.....\
""\1 .. . _' I !~:::\\
, ;,it ~)\s"L\~ )
,.~\.~~, .-'-\----:1"/
j: '-',
,: "..
\;~:_cc: ___J
Religious Ol'ganizations
4, St, Francis of the Ke~'s
5. Lol'd of the Seas
6, Fh-st Baptist Church
7. Big Pine United Methodist
8. Yine~'al'd ChI'istinn
9. St, Peter's
@,r
Other Institutional
10, Pinewood l\Iemor'ial Cemetal'y
11. Big Pine Neighbor'hood Chnrter School
12. Seacamp
,/:::2)
,'~':r. r .,:.
, ;.r:- ..~ ~----. .........../
--~. 1'-. -"'
"
-L
. Mile Marker - Residential Roads
Parcels - Key Deer Blvd.
-U.S.1
tvlonroe County
Plmming mId Environmental
Resources Department
Legend
nus map II for Monroe Coucty Growth MmqemcntDlvlIIOD purpole.
only The data contlinedhernn II illustr.uive only and may notaccu.ratr:l,.
depict boulldarier, parcell, roads. right OfWIYJ, or 1dentificab.0II infonnmlon
Figure 2.4 Location of existing institutional uses on Big Pine Key.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
49
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 6
Provide facilities for the active and passive recrea-
tional needs of all age groups In the community
while avoiding unnecessary impacts to the protected
.
speCles
Current Conditions Summary
The LCP process identified a strong need for recreational facilities. The final vision included
addition of a major park and recreational facility somewhere within the planning area and the
possible addition of some smaller parks. The county is moving forward immediately with plan-
ning for the major park. The old Mariner's Resort property on the eastern shoreline of Big Pine
Key has been purchased and the county is proceeding with plans for major recreational facilities
at that site. Scarified land both north and south of US-l at the western end of Big Pine Key is
also publicly owned and was identified as an area that may be appropriate for a passive sunset
park.
Other major county-owned recreational sites within the planning area include Watson's Field
and the Blue Heron facility. Scattered "pocket parks" maintained by the county or by individual
neighborhoods also exist throughout the planning area. The county has a branch library located
in the Winn Dixie Shopping Center and arrangements have been made to expand the library into
existing vacant floor area at that site. This expansion may be able to accommodate some meet-
ing facilities for the community although the extent of this is not yet known. For public hearings
and meetings the community uses facilities located at the Big Pine School or at one of the com-
munity organization buildings on Big Pine Key.
Analysis of Community Needs
Develop Maior Recreational Facilities
Monroe County has recently purchased the old Mariner's Resort property for development of
major recreational facilities on Big Pine Key. The planning process for this site has begun. This
will fulfill the need for one large recreational site anticipated during the LCP/HCP process. Two
more sites of approximately 3 acres each were also anticipated. These will most likely be lo-
cated near U.S. 1. During the LCP process, a desire by the Catholic Church to possibly build an
athletic field on their property was also identified.
Expand County Branch Library
The Big Pine branch of the Monroe County Library is in need of expansion. The Big Pine com-
munity is also in need of reliable meeting facilities that mayor may not be connected to the li-
brary. Therefore, an allowance for a 7,500 square foot facility (5,000 s.f. expansion over exist-
ing) was included in the HCP modeling effort. Although the library is planning to expand at its
current leased site, the accommodation of a new building should remain in the Master Plan to
allow planning flexibility over the entire twenty-year horizon.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
50
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Plan Neighborhood Recreation.
The extent of existing neighborhood recreational facilities such as playgrounds and boat ramps
needs to be identified and the sites evaluated. These areas should be evaluated for utilization of
existing facilities and the need for new facilities. The HCP modeled up to seven new "pocket
park" sites in designated subdivisions.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 6.1
Plan for recreational and community facilities over the next twenty years to be consistent with
the community vision and development plan selected through the Livable CommuniKeys plan-
ning process to meet the needs of Big Pine Key and No Name Key residents. Planned facilities
shall also be consistent with the incidental take permit and the accompanying Habitat Conserva-
tion Plan for the Florida Key Deer and Other Protected Species.
Action Item 6.1.1: Designate and develop the property currently known as "Mariner's Re-
sort" for the purpose of meeting the active recreation needs of the community over the
twenty-year planning horizon.
Action Item 6.1.2: Allow up to three new public parks on disturbed and/or scarified uplands
to be located within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area. The intent of this Action Item is to provide for
the needs of the Florida Keys Overseas Heritage Trail and the U.S. 1 Corridor Area design
guidelines (see Community Character Element). Therefore, these two purposes shall be
given priority for park designation.
Action Item 6.1.3: Allow up to seven new neighborhood "pocket parks" on disturbed and/or
scarified lands in any of the following subdivisions:
Pine Channel Estates
Cahill Pines and Palms
Doctor's Arm
Palm Villa
Sands
Eden Pines Colony
Port Pine Heights
Neighborhood parks are intended to provide minor local recreational opportunities within
walking and/or biking distance of most residents served. Pocket parks may include passive
and or active recreational uses such as green space, boat ramps, tennis courts, volleyball
courts, playgrounds and similar uses.
Action Item 6.1.4: Allow expansion of the existing county library to be located on scarified/
disturbed uplands within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
51
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
1. Palm Villa Park (passive)
2. \Vatson Field (actiw)
3. Blue Heron Park (active)
4. Ivlonroe County Library
5. Mariner's Resort (future)
(active and passive)
~ \.\vab\e Comm\l"\Keys \,togtam
'N' ,,~~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Existing County Recreation Facilities
r......,
-?
','
."~.:~':
,.r, '...__...... ..
--' 1_.. >"~ '"
^f3i
"
Parcels
- Key Deer Blvd.
-U.S.1
~
-;-
Legend
. Mile Marker - Residential Roads
Monroe County
Planning .md Environmental
Resources Depal1ment
nus map is ror Monroe County Growth Management Division purposes
only. The data contained herelR IS illustrative only and may not accurcely
depict boundaries, parcels. roads, fight of ways, or Identification Inronalltion
Figure 2.5 Location map of existing recreational facilities and library.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
52
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 7
Provide adequate public facilities to serve the exist-
ing and future needs of Big Pine Key and No Name
Key
Current Conditions Summary
Certain public facilities are already planned including sewer and stormwater facilities within the
twenty-year horizon. The Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan sets out priorities
for provision of advanced wastewater treatment to county "hot spots" where collection and cen-
tralized treatment systems are recommended. Facilities are required to be available by the Year
2010 in order to fulfill comprehensive plan mandates. Even if this schedule falls behind, it is
safe to assume that these facilities will be built within the twenty-year planning horizon of this
Master Plan. Major subdivision areas slated for package treatment and collection facilities in-
clude Sands Subdivision and surrounding subdivisions, the Doctor's Arm/Tropical Bay area,
Eden Pines Colony subdivision, the Tropical Key Colony/Pine Channel Estates area, and Port
Pine Heights subdivision.
The Stormwater Management Master Plan contains mainly regulatory and nonstructural im-
provement recommendations for handling stormwater. The plan does have a list of retrofit pro-
jects but none of them are located within the planning area. Therefore, at present it is assumed
that there will be no major public stormwater collection systems installed.
Several buildings house government services in planning area now. The following is a list of the
existing non-recreational government facilities:
Monroe County: Big Pine Animal Shelter
Emergency Response Facilities
Library
Police Substation
State of Florida: Road Prison
Department of Children and Families
U.S. Government: National Key Deer Refuge offices and facilities
U.S. Forest Service
Monroe County anticipates the need to expand emergency response facilities and is currently
proceeding with expansion plans. Other types of government services are not normally planned
into a timeframe beyond five to seven years. Therefore, without knowing what additional gov-
ernment services may be needed in the planning area over the twenty-year horizon, floor area
was reserved for government service uses in the preferred land use scenario during the
LCPIHCP process.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
53
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Offices
2. State Road Prison
3. Big Pine Key Volunteer Fire Department
U.S. Forest Service
4, Monroe COWlty Library
Monroe County Sheritl'Substation
National Key Deer Refuge Otlice
5. t...lonroe COWlty Aninlal Shelter
~ \.\vab\e Comm\Jn\Keys Ytogtam
'fVJ ,,~~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Existing Government Facilities
<:
?
33
b'7;:~-;:;~r~:-- ;."
{j>;~.'~::::~::~i
':'.
r\..~
~7~')"
N
I
,-
~:..::'::;
Parcels
- Key Deer Blvd.
-U.S.1
tvlonroe County
Planning and EnvirolUuental
Resources Department
Legend
. Mile Marker - Residential Roads
This map is for Monroe County Growth Manq:!metlt Division purposes
only. The data contalOedberein IS illustrative only and mI., lIot accurately
depict boundaries, parcels, roadli, nght of w.,s, oridenbflubon information
Figure 2.6 Existing government facilities on Big Pine Key.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
54
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Analysis of Community Needs
Public Buildings. There is a need to project and address the maintenance of existing public fa-
cilities on Big Pine Key, including expansions necessary to maintain an appropriate level of ser-
vice into the twenty-year horizon. Of the existing facilities analyzed during the LCP/HCP proc-
ess, the only identified expansion need was an addition to the emergency services facilities to be
built in 2003. Due to the usually short planning horizon for capital facilities at the county level
(5 years or less), additional floor area for future government office space was modeled in the
HCP. In the case of Big Pine Key, however, there is a need for further analysis of public facili-
ties into the twenty-year planning horizon. This will help anticipate future needs and identify
mechanisms to meet changing conditions.
Wastewater and Stormwater Facilities. According to the county's Sanitary Wastewater Master
Plan and Stormwater Management Master Plan, these types of facilities are scheduled to be in-
stalled in the planning area within the twenty-year horizon. Potential sites for sewage treatment
facilities have been identified and were included in the LCP/HCP planning process. Potential
sites for stormwatertreatment have not been identified. Collection systems will be installed
along existing roads. Although the timing of these facilities is laid out in their respective plans,
implementation of both plans has fallen behind schedule. Therefore, there will be a need to
monitor this situation. There is probably also a need to re-evaluate projected sewer and storm-
water layouts in light of new development assumptions for Big Pine Key introduced through the
LCP/HCP process.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 7.1
Limit development of new and expanded public facilities to the level necessary to adequately
serve existing and future development over the twenty-year planning horizon. Public facilities
development shall also be consistent with the incidental take permit and the accompanying
Habitat Conservation Plan for the Florida Key Deer and Other Protected Species and the Year
2010 Comprehensive Plan.
Action Item 7.1.1: Install a sanitary sewage treatment system in accordance with the Monroe
County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan. Components may include centralized or cluster
facilities for collection and treatment, all of which shall be developed on disturbed and/or
scarified uplands or in existing rights-of-way. The projected sewage treatment requirements
for the planning area should be revisited and confirmed to be consistent with the final devel-
opment plan adopted pursuant to the Master Plan and the HCP.
Action Item 7.1.2: Allow installation of stormwater treatment systems in accordance with the
Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan. Any facilities installed for central-
ized collection and treatment should be developed on disturbed and/or scarified uplands or in
existing rights-of-way.
Action Item 7.1.3: Allow development of new and/or expanded public offices to be located
on disturbed and/or scarified uplands within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
55
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 7.1.4: Allow expansion of emergency response facilities on scarified uplands at
their current location on Big Pine Key.
Action Item 7.1.5: Public facilities may be built at any time during the twenty-year planning
horizon.
Action Item 7.1.6: Monitor the total amount of new floor area allocated towards public facili-
ties as specific proposals are received. At the point where new floor area is expected to ex-
ceed the H budgeted, consider allocation of H units from the non-residential category as
needed. Likewise, at any point where the Board of County Commissioners identifies the H
budget towards government uses to exceed actual needs, consider re-allocation of H from
public uses back to private uses. Include this as a discussion item during presentation of the
annual report and obtain Board of County Commissioners' approval prior to revising the H
budget.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
56
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 8
Recognize the community s desire for certain acces-
sory uses and security fencing by allocating a lim-
ited amount ofH-valuefor these uses.
Current Conditions Summary
In analyzing the impact of habitat development on the population viability of the Key deer, the
PV A model considered loss of all habitat within each individual parcel developed. Fencing of a
parcel was likewise modeled as a complete loss of habitat from that parcel because fencing
makes the habitat inaccessible to deer. Because the model was based on the current status of
access by deer to all parts of the planning area, the fencing of new vacant habitat was generally
considered unacceptable. Fencing of developed parcels in Tier II and III was acceptable because
the model assumed most of the habitat value is already lost from the developed parcel for the
incidental take permit.
Accessory uses are those that serve or support a principal use development. Residential acces-
sory uses may include such items as storage sheds, gardens, play equipment, swimming pools or
boat docks. Commercial accessory uses may include such items as storage, trash enclosures,
sewage treatment plants, signage, parking lots, and other uses or equipment specific to the busi-
ness being served.
Monroe County has considered one means of retiring development rights through the purchase
of subdivision lots and resale to adjacent developed lot owners at a reduced price. The possibil-
ity of building accessory uses on these lots may make this mechanism more attractive to adja-
cent owners. Therefore the county expressed a desire for approximately 250 vacant "accessory
lots" in Tiers II and III to be modeled in the PV A and included as a development impact in the
HCP.
Analysis of Community Needs
Clarify Regulatory Status ofFences and Accessory Uses
The Master Plan needs to specify the appropriate locations for fences and accessory uses based
on the HCP model. Appropriate design standards for fences within the planning area are already
contained in the land development regulations and should be retained through the planning hori-
--
zon.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 8.1
Regulate the overall level of new habitat to be occupied by accessory uses and/or enclosed by
fences over the next twenty years consistent with the level of habitat alteration contained in the
incidental take permit and the accompanying Habitat Conservation Plan for the Florida Key
Deer and Other Protected Species.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
57
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 8.1.1: Regulate new fences as follows:
a. Prohibit new fences on Tier I lands except for fencing of developed lots within Port
Pine Heights and Kyle-Dyer Subdivisions and fencing required for safety purposes at any
location to enclose the immediate impervious area of pools and tennis courts.
b. Prohibit new fences in non-residential areas along U.S. 1.
c. Permit new fences on developed canal lots and vacant canal lots that are contiguous to
and serve a principal use within Tier II and Tier III and within Port Pine Heights and
Kyle-Dyer Subdivisions. All fences shall be designed to meet adopted fence design
guidelines for the planning area already contained in the land development regulations.
d. Allow replacement of fences existing on the date this plan is adopted in their existing
configuration.
e. Do not consider fencing of developed property in Tier II or III (whether developed
with principal or accessory uses) to have H impact additional to the development as mod-
eled in the HCP as a reduction in K.
Action Item 8.1.2: Regulate new accessory uses as follows:
a. Prohibit new accessory uses on Tier I lands except accessory uses located within Port
Pine Heights or Kyle-Dyer Subdivisions and other areas with existing fenced yards.
b. Permit new accessory uses to be located on the same parcel as the principal use within
Tier II and Tier III lands and within Port Pine Heights and Kyle-Dyer Subdivisions. Do
not consider accessory uses located on the same parcel as the principal use to have any H
unit impact additional to the principal use.
c. Permit new accessory uses on vacant lots contiguous to and serving a principal use
within Tier II and Tier III lands and within Port Pine Heights and Kyle-Dyer Subdivi-
sions. Consider new accessory uses located on vacant lots to impact H-Value.
d. Allow for the replacement of existing accessory uses and/or for their relocation else-
where on the same parcel for safety and security purposes.
e. Continue to apply all other Comprehensive Plan and land development regulations re-
garding types, placement and other features of accessory uses.
Action Item 8.1.3: Monitor fence and accessory use allocations as specific proposals are re-
ceived. At the point where these uses are expected to exceed the H budgeted, consider allo-
cation of H from other categories as needed or consider modifying the regulations concern-
ing these uses. Include this as a discussion item during presentation of the annual report and
obtain Board of County Commissioners' approval prior to revising the H budget.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
58
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 9
Implement a land consolidation and acquisition sys-
tem that provides fair, equitable and efficient com-
pensation to land owners who are willing sellers on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Current Conditions Summary
The most challenging aspect of the Master Plan will be implementation of a coordinated and ef-
ficient system of compensation to land owners who wish to sell their parcels to the county.
There are three basic levels of government land acquisition currently operating. At the federal
level, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife may purchase lands authorized by their land protection program
within the administrative boundaries of the refuge system. The entire planning area is included
in the National Key Deer Refuge boundaries for purposes of acquisition. However, the federal
government usually purchases property with wildlife habitat value that is either undisturbed or
can be restored. This usually excludes platted subdivision lots in certain areas that do not lend
themselves to management for conservation purposes.
The State of Florida participates in acquisition primarily through two programs: the Conserva-
tion and Recreational Lands (CARL) Program and the Florida Forever Program. CARL pur-
chases are made within the authorized CARL boundaries while grant funding from the Florida
Forever Program has been used by Monroe County in non-CARL areas county-wide to mainly
purchase platted lots with relatively undisturbed habitat.
The Monroe County Land Authority conducts acquisition at the local level. The Land Authority
may purchase properties outright and hold them but usually tries to resell or transfer them to
some other entity that will accept the property for management purposes. For properties within
the CARL boundaries, for example, the Land Authority may expedite purchases for willing
seller owners who want to avoid the arduous state purchasing process. Then the county can re-
sell the property to the state. For purposes of implementing the HCP and this Master Plan, the
primary means of funding acquisition are anticipated to be existing state programs and the Mon-
roe County Land Authority.
The HCP estimates the projected cost of land acquisition for mitigation at approximately $6.8
million over the twenty-year life of the Incidental Take Permit. However, this estimate only
covers the purchase of lands needed to mitigate H impacts at the ratio of 3 to 1 (acres preserved
to acres impacted). The implementation of Smart Growth Initiatives and the Tier System
through this Master Plan broadens the scope of acquisition to cover all vacant, private Tier I
lands and probably most vacant, private Tier II lands within the planning area. Because we have
established that there is a surplus of property in Tier III to accommodate development over the
twenty-year horizon, there may eventually be a need to add some Tier III acquisition to the
above cost.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
59
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
To put this purchase cost in perspective, it is useful to know that the levels of development con-
templated in this HCP and Master Plan are only slightly higher than the current comprehensive
plan allows. Therefore the above cost is not purely a result of these processes because much of
it already existed under the current plan. What changes under this plan is the focus of acquisi-
tion and the increased urgency to acquire especially sensitive Tier I lands.
Analysis of Community Needs
Provide Relief for Willing Sellers
There is a need to prioritize vacant Tier I properties based on habitat value for acquisition and to
acquire these and other properties at a fair and reasonable price. Regardless of how zoning and
permitting issues are handled, the level of development contemplated in the LCP/HCP process is
only slightly higher than the current comprehensive plan allows. Therefore, there is a need to
continue current acquisition efforts and to reprioritize and focus those efforts to conform with
the new Master Plan.
Anticipate and Address Funding Needs
The above preliminary analysis gives some indication as to the level of funding needed to fully
implement the HCP and this Master Plan. Further analysis is needed to anticipate acquisition
costs and identify where county acquisition will be most effective. In addition, acquisition must
be coordinated with existing state programs to encourage updating of those programs for in-
creased support ofthe HCP and Master Plan.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 9.1
Implement the Acquisition Strategy developed in Goal 1 making offers in 2003 to purchase
those lands identified to have the highest priorities.
Strategy 9.2
Identify and pursue existing and new acquisition resources.
Action Item 9.2.1: Update Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.6.4 to encourage the FDCA to
work at the state level for a dedicated acquisition fund for Tier I lands within the planning
area based on results of the Carrying Capacity Study and the requirements of the anticipated
ITP and HCP.
Action Item 9.2.2: Revise Policy 101.6.5 to add to item 3 the consideration of whether or not
development on the subject property may adversely impact successful implementation of a
Habitat Conservation Plan.
Action Item 9.2.3: Encourage the State of Florida to revise the CARL boundaries within the
planning area to correspond with coverage of Tier I and Tier II lands as depicted on the Tier
System Overlay Map for the purpose of prioritizing purchases.
Action Item 9.2.4: Create an environmental mitigation fee for new residences, non-
residential floor area and institutional uses in order to ensure that development bears its fair
share of the required mitigation under the anticipated ITP. The mitigation fee will be set to
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
60
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
cover at least 50% of the actual cost of acquiring mitigation land at the required 3 to 1 H in
the HCP. The Board of County Commissioners will review and revise the amount of the
mitigation fee on a yearly basis. The mitigation fee may also be used for management activi-
ties of acquired lands including fire management, invasive species control, restoration and
monitoring. Affordable housing allocations will not be subject to the mitigation fee.
Action Item 9.2.5: Encourage the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to support the goals of the
HCP by providing relief to property owners within the acquisition boundaries of the National
Key Deer Refuge and continuing to acquire land with high H-value, even though federal pur-
chases cannot be applied to the required mitigation.
Strategy 9.3
Identify and pursue existing and new means of retiring development rights.
Action Item 9.3.1: Amend the administrative relief and beneficial use provisions of the Com-
prehensive Plan and land development regulations to require purchase of land for Tier I ap-
plicants and to allow purchase or issuance of permits for Tier II and Tier III applicants, as
appropriate.
Action Item 9.3.2: Encourage density reduction through lot consolidation especially on Tier
II lands. Mechanisms may include conservation easements, tax relief, and accessory lot pur-
chase mechanisms for privately owned, vacant land in Tier II and Tier III.
Action Item 9.3.3: As an alternative to direct purchase, evaluate and encourage the use of
conservation easements, life estates and purchase/retirement of development rights from un-
der-density developed parcels for the purpose of retiring development rights and providing
tax relief.
Action Item 9.3.4: Track conservation easements placed on property as a part of the H track-
ing system. Enforcement of conservation easements shall be done by the Monroe County
Growth Management Division.
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvements Projects
The primary fiscal impact of the Land Use and Redevelopment Element will be in the form of
required acquisition funds to implement the HCP and this Master Plan. A minimum of $6.2 mil-
lion may be needed to implement the HCP and an additional $44.5 million may be needed to
implement the Master Plan.
Known capital facilities improvements within the planning area over the next twenty years in-
clude the expansion of the existing emergency response facilities, the installation of sewage
treatment facilities, expansion of the existing library, and the development of major recreational
facilities at the Mariner's Resort park site. The first three items were previously planned or
mandated facilities and were not new community needs identified in the LCP process. The need
for a major recreational facility was identified through the LCP and previous planning processes.
It is projected to be completed by 2004 and it is estimated that the facility will cost approxi-
mately $ 2.4 million to build (operating costs are not available at this time).
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
61
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Legend
Parcels
.. Tier 1
Tier 2
December 17, 2003
~ \..ivab\e Commun\J(eys ptogtam
IV' ,,~~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Private, Vacant Parcels in Tiers 1 and 2
'~~.'..,~~,,!' !....1....;= -:~,.'. ,.,f\
,\:tr.. .. ,"
r"~;"~:){""!.4..
~ ~' \;--..
'~~'-~l;
\~-~.\ ',\..~,
.....r I
,)---.. \.
t
.,,'70,<:\
>-.-1. :::..\
-<--.L:=:') .
,Y
. .c, '.
''':":'~c~ ~'''>)
".;-~ '.v - {;.~ -I '
\ \( . .-/~ ~ I
, ~... -.p:' _ c....,',..?.,...
r{#r"'-'. r
..~-.- ~;q - '-
.. / . ~.._,'iffP~'
~. ". """"''','l''t'f-.
J;";~i{c">~),>>" """
()
... (~;.~/
'('
I'-
-1-
','.,'1
,
',~:Y
Monroe County
Planning and Environmental
Resources Department
This map is for Monroe County Growth ManaaementDiYision pwpOStl
only The data tontmned herein 11 illustrative only and may not accur8l:ely
depict boundaries. parcels, roads, right or ".,., or identificabon Information
Figure 2.7 Private, undeveloped land within Tier I and Tier II.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
62
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
~f;\
,r \
; ,
~. \
J" ~ i
J.... (
I (~\
'"! t,. ..(t("'-:t ~
UWJ.I -- ~
~ ~\.
\ ~
) ~
!. Q ~~~~ ~
\'-1, I~" ~ 0
~ . r
~..rl ~n,- '"
'\\" r ' V' ~~'.. ~" 4.,
'. ~'\ p' ~
.~..1VVIRO l ENTAL\( (~, ,'')
~
\
t
JJ~~';fi. ; '~, ~.
(,,711 .. /~ ~
Fj ~ \
'. J.
. .
<::"'"lr'~5 .
/' \\
"'-. ':\
/~. ~
/"~ \:,....;. ;,.\
Q~~. ',.j.~~~?f/I
Q ) /--.. .'/
r -.....J
.~.~~
~~r-~
\:Y~"'~
'-
'-
''.-
't---
-
.~~' ?f..'.l... .
7 Ji1 lU
,
.
i=: ~'. ;
r. . ~
,. .. /~.......-,/
I> . .~~
tP//
4.#....
~/
~" .r-.-:c::.;::::.>
~,,-~' ~~.;JI,A
~~~
Environmental Protection Element
63
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 10
Protect and manage natural resources within the
planning area in order to ensure continued viability
and biodiversity of plant and animal life and to
maintain compliance with the anticipated Incidental
Take Permit (ITP).
Current Conditions Summary
Environmental protection within the planning area has primarily been implemented to date using
the following mechanisms: existing environmental design criteria in the land development regu-
lations, discouragement of development of environmentally sensitive areas through the ROGO
point system and acquisition of habitat. The HCP and Master Plan strategies will primarily
change the second mechanism with the addition of the Tier Map Overlay. With this new system
comes an accelerated acquisition program. Monroe County has anticipated this trend county-
wide and must contemplate being in the position of holding more and more land, either tempo-
rarily until it can be resold, or permanently. With this increased land ownership comes the need
for constant attention to land management issues. In 2001 Monroe County hired a full-time land
steward to address management issues on county lands. Prior to that, there was no dedicated
land management framework within county government.
Due to its environmental sensitivity and biodiversity the planning area has received the attention
of numerous conservation land management entities. Those operating within the planning area
at present include the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS, Florida Keys Refuges), Monroe
County and two private non-profit organizations, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the Flor-
ida Keys Environmental Restoration Trust Fund (FKERTF, National Audubon of Florida, Trus-
tee). Of the latter two, TNC is a land owner in the area. The FKERTF performs habitat restora-
tion and management activities on publicly owned lands in the area. The State of Florida is a
major land owner in the area but through a cooperative agreement, turns management of lands
they acquire over to the FWS.
All of these entities, with the exception of Monroe County have been engaging in natural re-
source land management activities within the planning area for many years and all have focused
on management of undisturbed habitat or habitat that can be restored. Traditional habitat man-~_-
agement within the planning area usually includes the following activities: land protection (i.e.,
from dumping, roaming domestic animals, poaching, etc.), eradication of invasive exotic vegeta-
tion, habitat restoration through removal of disturbed areas, and controlled burning of pinelands.
These activities are best suited to unpopulated or sparsely populated areas. Until recently most
agencies have generally avoided the acquisition of platted, improved subdivision lots, whether
they contained natural habitat or not.
Environmental Protection Element
64
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
The application of management activities to subdivision lots brings a suite of additional tasks,
the most important of which is coordination with neighboring land owners. The amount of work
needed to manage small fragmented subdivision parcels has made the cost-benefit ratio seem
less attractive in the scheme of a management program that covers thousands of acres. After all,
the primary purpose for acquisition of many of these lots has been to prevent additional develop-
ment impacts on wildlife and biodiversity within the planning area. Once a lot is acquired how-
ever, the land-owner is responsible for its management compatible with resource conservation
goals and with the surrounding neighborhood. Over the last few years, the FWS has begun to
shoulder responsibility for management of many of these lots within priority areas. The FWS
through a cooperative agreement with Monroe County manages many county-owned subdivision
lots.
The population viability analysis of the Key deer demonstrates that the remaining hammocks
and pinelands within the planning area have very high habitat value for the deer. Development
of these habitats is currently discouraged mainly through the Rate of Growth Ordinance
(ROGO) point system. Because the Tier System Overlay Map is based upon the H of parcels,
hammocks and pinelands have already been mapped as Tier I "Natural Lands."
The submitted HCP greatly limits the clearing of native habitat. Limited clearing is only permit-
ted on parcels to be developed for residential purposes or for local road widening. The total cu-
mulative amount of clearing permitted over the 20-year period of the HCP is no more the .2 per-
cent of the current extent of native habitat (a total of 7 .1 acres) and no more than 20% of any
individual lot with native habitat for wildfire prevention purposes only.
Analysis of Community Needs
Habitat Management Implementation
There is a need to plan for organized habitat management of lands acquired for conservation
purposes that will meet the requirements of the HCP. The county has not traditionally engaged
in natural lands management in the past and has only recently dedicated one employee position
to this activity. Therefore, efficient habitat management will likely be accomplished through
heavy coordination with existing management entities operating within the planning area. There
is a need to anticipate future management needs based upon habitat acquisition goals and to de-
termine how the county will handle expanding management responsibilities. There is a further
need to organize completed annual management activities into report form to fulfill HCP man-
dates.
HCP Compliance Reporting
There is a need to coordinate all of the activities contained in the HCP and produce an annual
report of their status. These activities include the compilation of H units permitted and pur-
chased as described in the Land Use and Redevelopment Element, and the minimization and
mitigation measures described throughout the HCP. Many of these measures involve habitat
management activities.
Environmental Protection Element
65
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Protection of Hammocks and Pinelands
All remaining hammocks and pinelands are included in Tier I on the Tier System Overlay Map.
Further protection is needed for parcels that may be developed. The HCP limits further clearing
of hammocks and pinelands to no more than 20% and the preferred land use scenario modeled in
the PV A included very little new clearing of pinelands and hammocks. Therefore, all of these
habitats within the planning area should be classified as automatic high quality due to their high
wildlife habitat value.
Comprehensive Plan Consistency
Policies in the comprehensive plan specifically aimed at protection of unique habitat and wild-
life communities on Big Pine need to be updated.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 10.1
Revise policies in the comprehensive plan specifically aimed at protection of unique habitat and
wildlife communities in the planning area.
Action Item 10.1.1: Delete policies 207.7.5, 207.7.7, 207.7.9, 207.7.10, 207.7.11, and
207.7.17 from the Conservation and Coastal Element of the Comprehensive Plan. These
policies cover habitat and wildlife protection issues that either have been fulfilled since the
policies were written, or are addressed as part of the HCP as implemented in this Master
Plan.
Action Item 10.1.2: Amend existing habitat analysis policies and regulations to add all ham-
mocks and pinelands located within the planning area (on Big Pine Key and No Name Key)
to the "Automatic High Quality" category with corresponding open space ratios applied.
Action Item 10.1.3: Limit any clearing of native habitat on parcels to be developed for resi-
dential purposes or for local road widening. The total amount of clearing permitted over the
20-year period is no more the .2 percent of the current extent of native habitat (7.1 acres) and
no more than 20% of any individual lot with native habitat (for wildfire prevention purposes
only).
Strategy 10.2
Formulate and carry out a plan for habitat management of lands acquired for conservation pur-
poses to meet the goals of this Master Plan and the HCP.
Action Item 10.2.1: Offer any lands acquired for conservation purposes to the FWS for man-
agement under the refuge system. Terms of offer, ownership and management arrangements
are to be worked out on an individual parcel basis and will not be limited by this plan.
Action Item 10.2.2: Work with land managers of the FWS, state and non-governmental or-
ganizations to formulate a coordinated land management system for the planning area.
Environmental Protection Element
66
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Action Item 10.2.3: Identify and prioritize conservation lands under county ownership and
management for implementation of management activities. Anticipate future management
needs based upon the projected acquisition of properties required to implement the HCP and
this Master Plan.
Action Item 10.2.4: Based on interagency goals formulated pursuant to Goal 4, Strategy 4.2,
Action Item 4.2.2, formulate management objectives for specific habitats and locations
within the planning area on conservation land under county ownership and management.
Action Item 10.2.5: Identify and prioritize management activities such as fence removal,
trash removal, invasive exotic vegetation control, invasive exotic animal control, control of
free-roaming domestic pets, controlled burning and habitat restoration.
Action Item 10.2.6: Monroe County shall restore, where practicable, disrupted wetland and
native upland vegetation systems on County-owned public lands on Big Pine Key and No
Name Key in order to improve Key deer habitat.
Action Item 10.2.7: Use a GIS database for continual tracking and update of management
activities and for HCP reporting of management activities. Coordinate this as appropriate
with the existing GIS management database used by FWS.
Action Item 10.2.8: The status of management activities shall be organized into report form
annually to fulfill HCP mandates.
Strategy 10.3
Coordinate all of the required activities contained in the HCP and produce an annual report of
their status. Present the report annually to the Board of County Commissioners, ITP applicants
and the public prior to submission to the FWS.
Action Item 10.3.1: Combine tracking ofH permitted and H acquired as outlined in the Land
Use and Redevelopment Element using a GIS-based system. Compile tracking results for
presentation in the annual report.
Action Item 10.3.2: Track and compile annually all management activities and other minimi-
zation and mitigation activities carried out in fulfillment of the HCP and present this infor-
mation in the annual report.
Action Item 10.3.3: Conduct annual formal coordination with the other ITP applicants and
other management entities working within the planning area to coordinate management ac-
tivities and exchange information. In the annual report, provide a summary of relevant man-
agement efforts being conducted by others such as monitoring of the Key deer population by
the FWS refuge office.
Environmental Protection Element
67
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects
The HCP anticipates acquisition of approximately 300 acres of Tier I lands over the twenty-year
planning horizon to satisfy mitigation requirements. The HCP further estimates the management
costs of Tier I lands acquired for mitigation to average approximately $1,000 per acre per year
for the first two or three years of management, after which time costs should decrease to ap-
proximately $100/acre/year. Management of mitigation lands is therefore projected to cost ap-
proximately $1.27 million over the twenty-year horizon. Further analysis of the cost is needed
to confirm the per unit cost of management for land in all Tiers and to add the projected acquisi-
tion that will be needed to implement the Master Plan requirements over and above the HCP re-
quirements.
Environmental Protection Element
68
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 11
Protect the quality and quantity of water In the
lfreshwater lens systems on Big Pine Key and No
Name Key so as to preserve ecosystems dependant
upon fresh water.
Current Conditions Summary
The entire habitat, wildlife assemblage and the unique character of the historic and current hu-
man community in the planning area are all based on the presence of the freshwater lenses on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The lenses exist as two major underground basins of fresh
water with ground surface expression in the form of freshwater sloughs through the center of the
island and numerous freshwater solution holes and ponds scattered throughout the area. Much
of the freshwater slough habitat was acquired during the 1990s as part of the South Florida Wa-
ter Management District's (SFWMD) Save Our Rivers (SOR) project in which the special hy-
drology of the area was recognized. Ownership of all lands acquired during the SOR project
have since been transferred from the SFWMD to the Florida Department of Environmental Pro-
tection (FDEP) to be added to the CARL project.
The county conducted a working group planning study of the lens pursuant to Comprehensive
Plan requirements. Mainly as a result of that study several consumptive wells were phased out
on Big Pine Key with the provision of potable water by the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
(FKAA). Also, a monitoring system was set in place as a cooperative effort of the SFWMD and
the FWS.
Analysis of Community Needs
Continue to Monitor the Lens.
The SFWMD has installed monitoring wells throughout Big Pine Key for use by the FWS in
monitoring the water quality and the surface and depth extent of the freshwater lens. A GIS map
of the lens would be very useful for land use planning and design purposes.
Consumptive Well Prohibition and Phase-Out.
The phase-out of consumptive wells on Big Pine Key is to be a continuing management activity
to be credited towards minimization of impacts on wildlife, especially the Key deer, under. the
HCP. Policies in the comprehensive plan specifically aimed at protection of the freshwater leris- -
on Big Pine Key need to be reemphasized in this Master Plan.
Extractive Mining Regulations.
The Year 2010 Comprehensive plan restricts extractive mining operations to the conditions set
forth on individual permits. No new operations or expansion of existing operations is permitted.
All extractive operations are required to submit the following documentation to ensure the pro-
tection of ground water resources: a storm water management plan, soil erosion and sedimenta-
Environmental Protection Element
69
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
tion control plan, a reclamation plan, and survey information documenting excavation depth.
Existing resource extraction operations are not permitted to go below sixty (60) feet in depth,
effectively limiting the scope of existing operations.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 11.1
Continue to regulate development activities that may impact freshwater lens systems.
Action Item 11.1.1: Prohibit new consumptive wells within the planning area.
Action Item 11.1.2: Identify and phase out existing consumptive-use wells and replace them
with potable water supplies and cisterns.
Action Item 11.1.3: Consider adoption of design standards such as minimization ofimpervi-
ous surfaces that promote the protection and recharge of the freshwater lens system. This is
especially applicable to the major southern lens underlying the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the
Community Center Overlay.
Action Item 11.1.4: Prohibit new resource extraction activities and expansions of existing
operations within the planning area. Continue to monitor existing operations upon review of
their required annual operating permits.
Strategy 11.2
Implement management activities that enhance and restore the lens.
Action Item 11.2.1: Encourage the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to map the extent of the
freshwater lens on the GIS database. Utilize this mapped overlay to coordinate land manage-
ment and restoration activities conducted within the planning area.
Action Item 11.2.2: Incorporate protection of the existing freshwater lens and lens-based
freshwater wetlands into land management plans. Coordinate with state, federal and non-
governmental land managers within the planning area to encourage them to enhance and re-
store the freshwater lens and freshwater wetlands through lens monitoring, restoration of
freshwater slough hydrology, reduction of salt water intrusion, and improvement of freshwa-
ter habitat.
Environmental Protection Element
70
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
~f:'\
/', \
rJ~. }
(' ~ ~
:' /
/(~. \
(!.:'.. \
\.~ ~ ~r~ ')..
hWm - ~,
~ (t \L
~1I1111l1l1 \ -\..~
\ ~~
) .(~ ./
(" 0 ~(Y. f~
\, _ t:! /?i ~
\~~~ ~-~) \~. .~. ~
""'7~ COMMf!lYITY \< 0\:, f
C~~CT~R,1fjl~ENT\~ o.~
" . ~
~ 1
''''"" ". ..<< \
.~tl ,\ ;".#. ; ~r\ ~
J.. "~,t9~y..,~G'~ ~~\~
j:: .',: . t, ~/
r. r 'f},}
,.', /,...-- ., /.
'" .~,..~ f , I.
I;;;' // ~!r')- . \
fj.~_rJ , ',,' ,~\
, ~~ \'\
/~ .~
j~'1J ,. .)
\".(;::yfl-., . '1l,>;../'-/,' /
.', ~"\ f .' r" ,;ID- .'
LJ VVt '. ~ ,:;\~ .. ~ ~p' ;)J
~ ~?fjf u... ..(
.,. j ...--..., .,
.~~/' ~~#
_t'" \'....~~.~
I '<~, v"'" .",.....-?
t""" ',.../_~
e", t
--....:1
(t\)
...J
C')
.~.....-.. -.......
.i ",
'~, ~.....-." .-."')
c:JCP/ v/ ~- -
"-.~ ..~
~
Community Character Element
71
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 12
Define, maintain and enhance the community char-
acter of Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Current Conditions Summary
Community character was a major point of discussion and planning focus during the LCP proc-
ess. Defining the community character meant many things to LCP workshop participants in-
cluding recognition of the unique natural character of the planning area, maintaining the area's
rural feel and moderate pace, and enhancement of community gathering areas for conducting
business, socializing and recreation. In January 2003 Monroe County proceeded with a design
charrette planning process for the commercial corridor area of Big Pine Key. The charrette was
a facilitated community discussion during which design concepts were developed and graphi-
cally assembled at the meeting for immediate reaction. The focus of the discussion was the U.S.
1 Corridor Area and the idea of a village center was presented as a layered concept based pri-
marily on walking distance to the existing commercial center of Big Pine Key. The Corridor
Enhancement Plan final draft was transmitted to the Planning Department and certain elements
will be adopted as a part of this Master Plan.
Two major planning efforts will be conducted for corridor improvements over the next three to
five years. The first is the three-Ianing of U.S. 1, which is expected to proceed once the inciden-
tal take permit is issued. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) will plan and fund
that project. The second major effort is the design and development of the Florida Keys Heri-
tage Trail project being conducted by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP). This project currently has major funding in place.
Analysis of Community Needs
U.S. 1 and Maior Street Beautification
The idea of the Main Street element introduced and evaluated during the LCP process drew
some support in the community with ideas for beautification of U.S. 1 and the commercial cen-
ter of the island. Circulation and ease of accessibility for the human population was integrated
into the beautification element during the corridor enhancement charrette process. This should
be explored further and coordinated with other agencies working in the corridor, especially in
light of pending major U.S. 1 modifications such as three-laning and the addition of the heritage
trai 1.
Commercial Building Design Guidelines
There may be a need for design guidelines for new and replacement buildings. Recommenda-
tions for design guidelines are included in the Corridor Enhancement Plan. Care should also be
taken to ensure that design requirements do not stifle a positive redevelopment momentum.
Community Character Element
72
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
The Corridor Enhancement Plan and Community Center Overlay
The county has completed a Corridor Enhancement Plan for the U.S. 1 Corridor Area. Designa-
tion of a Community Center Overlay District pursuant to Policy 105.2.15 should also be consid-
ered. These efforts should address some ofthe aspects of the Main Street Alternative considered
during the LCP process and further refined during the corridor enhancement charrette process.
These include focus on the main business center of Big Pine, improved pedestrian and bicycle
circulation, improved vehicular traffic circulation, beautification, strategic integration of existing
green space, and introduction of employee housing. The U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the Commu-
nity Center Overlay will also designate boundaries for the purpose of encouraging concentration
of new commercial floor area over the twenty-year horizon.
..
....:.:l...
~~
=-';J:1.
_IIUtn.
.....~....3:!':
...<....~{C ::0<"1
<"\e-",r . -.... ;1" l;
v 'J' .. i"-tl
...1 e,~ ~. ~-: q:. I
~ '?J"":' -. t' ;1"' ·
_N,._,,'ii ..(~ ~"A"
\J~
.....
0..
Q)
u
s::
o
u
~
0..
E
~
U'.l
~
.~
~
E
Q)
..0
E-<
....
tI.l
t: ~
tI.l tI.l
U ....
>.~
.... >.
"- ~
l:l-
= ....
~g
o
U
;...;
Q)
.....
s::
Q)
U
>.
.....
'2
;::l
E
E
o
U
"0
=
~ .
Q)
~g
:;E.;g
U'.l
~ .-
Q)"O
-< gp
I-<:.g
0-
"0 ~
'6 ~
o s::
U 0
"0
- Q)
czi ~
.,D
;:J U'.l
- ~
~ Q)
;::l ~
.....4-<
fro
U s::
= 0
0._
u~
_ 5b
-.:i . Cii
Q)
Q)"O
S ~
001-<
i:i:c.8
Community Character Element
73
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 12.1
Define the boundaries and planning priorities for the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the Community
Center Overlay.
Action Item 12.1.1: Designate the U.S. 1 Corridor Area as the area defined in the Big Pinel
U.S. 1 Corridor enhancement plan, incorporated herein by reference. It is a focus of commu-
nity activity due to the dominant land use pattern of commercial and other non-residential
uses. A program of planning focus on this area shall be continued and accelerated.
Action Item 12.1.2: Designate a Community Center Overlay on Big Pine Key pursuant to
Policy 105.2.15 where Tier III lots receive incentives for redevelopment. The Community
Center Overlay will cover the area described as the Village Center as defined in the Big Pine
Key/U.S. 1 Corridor Enhancement Plan.
Action Item 12.1.3: Prohibit the designation of new commercial land use districts beyond
that contained in this Master Plan in order to protect the existing viability of the U.S. 1 Corri-
dor Area and Community Center Overlay and to prevent the perpetuation of sprawl or strip
commercial zoning.
Action Item 12.1.4: Provide for a community meeting facility either in conjunction with li-
brary facilities or as a stand-alone facility. The Community Center Overlay is the preferred
location for a community meeting facility.
Action Item 12.1.5: Continue to discourage tour busses within the planning area.
Strategy 12.2
Develop a Corridor Enhancement Plan for the U.S. 1 Corridor Area.
Action Item 12.2.1: Generate a Corridor Enhancement Plan, based upon the corridor en-
hancement charrette process, that includes ideas for improvement of traffic and pedestrian!
bicycle movement, beautification, and incorporation of parks/open space.
Action Item 12.2.2: Develop design guidelines to be adopted as a part of the Land Develop-
ment Regulations which shall be applied to all new development or substantial redevelop-
ment within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the Community Center Overlay based on recom-
mendations of the Corridor Enhancement Plan.
Action Item 12.2.3: Explore the possibility of a limited access one-way local traffic enhanc.e- .
ment from Ship's Way to Key Deer Boulevard as part of the Corridor Enhancement Plan.
Action Item 12.2.4: Prohibit new formula retail businesses and restaurants in the planning
area through the development of Land Development Regulations.
Community Character Element
74
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 12.2.5: Coordinate with land owners, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser-
vice, to explore opportunities for restoration and incorporation of remaining native habitat
into the corridor design including purchases, removal of fences, removal of exotics, open
space design, historical features and educational materials.
Action Item 12.2.6: Prohibit new industrial uses on U.S. 1 within the planning area in order
to enhance the community character of the U.S. 1 Corridor Area.
Community Character Element
75
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
GOAL 13
Identify, protect and enhance historic resources on
Big Pine and No Name Keys.
Current Conditions Summary
The Comprehensive Plan contains standards for designation of historic structures and districts
within the county (Objective 104). The planning area contains several archeological sites and
older structures that may be of local historic importance. Only one structure has been designated
pursuant to the county process to date. That structure is on the eastern shoreline of Big Pine Key
at the site of a former shark fishery and processing plant. There may be other structures and
sites suitable for designation. The county is currently conducting an inventory of historical sites
county-wide.
Analysis of Community Needs
Historic Resources Identification and Protection.
The comprehensive plan contains policies regarding designation and protection of historic re-
sources. There is a need to specifically address resources within the planning area. Many are
archeological resources while a few buildings of historic value also remain. Standards are
needed to protect and encourage the preservation and enhancement of these resources.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 13.1
Provide for retention of remaining historic resources within the planning area through the Com-
prehensive Plan process for historical designations (Objective 104).
Action Item 13.1.1: Receive and review the results of the Historic Architectural Survey of
Unicorporated Areas of Monroe County completed in 2003in order to identify historic and
archeological resources within the planning area.
Action Item 13.1.2: Continue to encourage the protection of the existing historic designated
resources.
Action Item 13.1.3: Consider new designation categories based on the results of the Historic
Architectural Survey ofUnicorporated Areas of Monroe County completed in 2003.
Strategy 13.2
Provide for protection of existing and newly discovered historic resources in accordance with
Comprehensive Plan Objective 104 and related policies.
Community Character Element
76
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects
The fiscal implications of the Community Character Element depend mainly on the final design
and implementation strategies of the Corridor Enhancement Plan. The extent of new capital im-
provements projects, if any, associated with that effort are unknown. However, two new capital
projects being conducted by others in the corridor include the three-Ianing of U.S. 1 by FDOT
and the Florida Keys Heritage Trail project led by FDEP. Coordination with these agencies may
provide an opportunity for the county to have a good portion of the Corridor Enhancement Plan
funded through these two projects.
Community Character Element
77
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
\'-...
~l \
r' \
/. \
/ -; J
(~\~
H~h
\ '~
\ ~
} <<1\
c -+i~ f~'^" ( \
~j" ~~
~ ~\~_ 3.
~ , ;
\ . t> .' 'I
I ECON'fM:tIC \ 0- ; t
DE - \~~PM~N~MEN1\ o~~
\, ~,
~ t
~ \
l~ &;:~'k~
,~'., : j:::' ~\ l ~,' ~," , l' ) l
r'. ~J "--~ r"}....l ').. ~
? . /., ~."",.r \
r .;/.... ' , , ',1",1; \
l~ /'" .,r'" "
~<:! " ~!>._.r'.i . \
(;iYJ c/> , \
. ~ ~\' , ~
.."
/~ ~
,r-~ ~,. '''' .t,;.
(~r'Tj~. . . ,;
G ~' " g"'::'.".". (/:,f
Q . ~.-' ,,/
; ".r""~';"~)
I~~' '-
~J~~~/
.......- \. '\~
~ <., ') ~'--J
r-'') (i~/~
..........W
/~,
~r)
~~
,.,
J) '-<....,
<.. i
v
Economic Development Element
78
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 14
Identify and enhance economic development oppor-
tunities for Big Pine Key and No Name Key that re-
spond to the economic needs of the community and
are compatible with the community character and
the environment.
Current Conditions Summary
Since 1995 there has been a moratorium on all traffic generating development on Big Pine Key
and No Name Key because the segment of U.S. 1 that passes through Big Pine has been found to
have an inadequate level of service (concurrency has not been met). This has not only prevented
residential development, but has greatly impacted commercial development on the island (as
well as areas west of Big Pine). With the implementation of the HCP road improvements are
scheduled to begin which are anticipated to improve the level of service beyond the planning
horizon.
During the LCP process the community indicated that additional commercial development
should be oriented to the local community rather than the regional or tourist economy. New de-
velopment should be kept at a small scale to maintain the rural and suburban character of the
islands envisioned by the community. Currently, Big Pine has a mix of locally owned busi-
nesses, franchises and national chain stores. Many of the businesses, such as the grocery store,
the drug store, banks, and restaurants serve not only the residents of Big Pine, but also other ar-
eas of the Lower Keys.
With the lifting of the moratorium on traffic-generating development, there is now an opportu-
nity for existing businesses to expand and redevelop and for new buildings to be constructed,
promoting an economic benefit to the community. However, there are many needs that have to
be addressed in order to promote positive economic redevelopment on Big Pine. Most busi-
nesses have frontage on U.S. 1, but some are set back so that access is difficult and signage is
not always visible. Many areas of the roadway need maintenance, parking enforcement, and
stormwater management techniques installed. The corridor enhancement plan has identified
guidelines for improving the look of the corridor including addressing building design features
and recommendations for improved signage as well as alternative access ways to make it easier
to move between business sites. --'- ,. .
Currently there are many opportunities within the corridor for individual businesses to expand
and redeveloped if they so desire. There are numerous scarified sites that are either vacant or the
buildings are under utilized. Employee housing is currently very limited and could be located on
commercial properties which would then gain a density bonus for expansion of the commercial
use.
Economic Development Element
79
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Analysis of Community Needs
Retain Economic Viability
Because business development and redevelopment will be closely controlled by the limits within
the HCP and Master Plan there is a need to ensure the economic viability of current businesses,
community organizations, commercial structures and projected future businesses relative to po-
tential regulatory impacts.
Encourage Positive Redevelopment
A major component of ensuring economic viability is the need to encourage positive redevelop-
ment of existing businesses and community organizations. Current impediments to redevelop-
ment on Big Pine Key should be examined and strategies formulated to streamline the process
and provide appropriate incentives.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 14.1
Maintain and enhance economic activity and opportunity within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area.
Action Item 14.1.1: Inventory and analyze the characteristics of existing commercial uses
within the corridor. Examine commercial uses for expansion potential in order to project the
likely rates and amounts of commercial to be added over the planning horizon. This will
help evaluate whether the H budgeted for commercial development is likely to be needed or
used. Include traffic generation projections in the analysis.
Action Item 14.1.2: Use the results of the county-wide economic study to assist in determin-
ing future commercial use trends and needs into the twenty-year planning horizon. This in-
formation may be used to identify ways to retain the marketability of existing business uses
and commercial structures within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area.
Action Item 14.1.3: Create a new land use district category called Light Industrial (LI) for the
purpose of more appropriate definition and accommodation of existing light industrial uses
on Big Pine Key. The Light Industrial category may be considered for parcels within the
PLUM category, Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) that do not border U.S. 1 and are currently
occupied by light industrial uses such as, but not limited to construction material and lumber
yards, outdoor and/or enclosed storage, warehouses and distribution centers, auto and marine
servIces.
Strategy 14.2
Encourage positive redevelopment of non-residential development within the planning area.
Action Item 14.2.1: Examine and revise the existing regulations regarding nonconforming
uses and structures in consideration of projected commercial patterns over the twenty-year
horizon, the recommendations of the Corridor Enhancement Plan features, and consistency
with the community vision and the HCP.
Economic Development Element
80
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 14.2.2: Allow increased allocation of floor area within the designated Commu-
nity Center Overlay pursuant to the limits outlined in NROGO and encourage transfer of
commercial floor area from within the planning area to the Community Center Overlay.
Action Item 14.2.3: Only require new design guidelines for new development, the replace-
ment of an existing building or if 2,500 square feet is added. Ensure that new commercial
design guidelines do not create a burden on existing businesses with potential for redevelop-
ment.
Action Item 14.2.4: Provide incentives to business to provide minor beautification elements
to existing properties. Minor elements are those which are not classified as replacement of
additions of 2,500 square feet or greater, and could include but are not limited to additional
landscaping, building fa<;ade improvements, and pedestrian-friendly additions.
Action Item 14.2.5: Explore ways of easing some financial burden of redevelopment such as
county or state funding of landscaping within the Corridor Area as an alternative to business
owners bearing the entire cost.
Economic Development Element
81
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
~f;\
r \
/' \
r - \
r -;, l
// /
(/Ki\
t ~ :-2(~ "'),"
hWtH -, ~~
~ P \
'" '1~.
, ~
, CY'45'\.,~ \
\ '<\'-"c.& ~ I
\., (".)/
\,
,
\
''"'\
~
\,'j
\
"""
~~ ,'"
~~~ /\
~~? f~~\' " (~
~t?~@ \~ ~
I f ii\ ~ JU I.
. ~'. \ b:, ,--:~
('1.ijV t . 3
'\ t ~... .. .
\. ) , . . ~
~,!-. I \ t> <-rf'l '. ~
(I~ TRAFFJ& AND \<~ ( \. .. f
TRA^,~RTATliJ tLEMEMTo~~1J
~,
~
o
'~~
-
"---
",.-
',.
... ">
t, "\..
\,\,\
......,,-.
"-\
lL ~"',
Vb . I
n;)'t,.J"7, . . /
\~ ~ .;,,\,,,f'''.,,;...:, ~~'" r~~f~r.f
'fr u.,...;.> 0,'
.,,) ,~~^-"-_:,J
,1'-...-.""'-"... .-'\.-,........./...
.;~ -~~/~/'"
k.~. t\""~/
{"'~, r~ ~
'0' \/ --
\, \, ~r-",'---~
\.., ,,~,...j"
~
n
.....,)
Traffic and Transportation Element
82
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 15
Provide a safe, convenient, efficient and environ-
mentally compatible motorized and non-motorized
transportation system for the movement of people
and goods on Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Current Conditions Summary
Included in the final preferred alternative that was modeled in the HCP process was a plan for
widening U.S. 1 to three lanes within the business segment of Big Pine Key and also a plan for
future local road development including:
Consideration of one-way access from the west side of the island to Key Deer Boulevard
(north of U.S. 1). This was originally modeled in the HCP as the cross-island road im-
provement but after further consideration the county decided not to proceed with this
project.
Widening of the following existing roads by a total of 15 feet to accommodate the instal-
lation or upgrading of bicycle paths: Watson Boulevard, Newfound Harbor Road, Key
Deer Boulevard, and Wilder Road.
Widening of all other existing local roads by 5 feet, when necessary, to accommodate the
installation of bicycle paths, stormwater infrastructure and/or sanitary sewer infrastruc-
ture.
Some habitat alteration was modeled for road widening but no alteration may take place within
habitat areas of the Lower Keys marsh rabbit such as areas adjacent to portions of Watson
Boulevard. It should be noted that, like capital facilities planning, the county's planning horizon
for local roads is fairly short, at seven years, when compared to the Master Plan horizon. Al-
though Monroe County does not currently anticipate widening all local roads, or even a large
proportion of them, the ability to do so was built in primarily to maintain flexibility in meeting
future public facilities needs, including sewer and stormwater collection systems and water dis-
tribution systems. The HCP commits to design coordination on future maintenance of roads in
order to incorporate standards that will help reduce vehicular-deer collisions. The county has
already incorporated the design standards into recent repaving projects.
Analysis of Community Needs
Three-Laning of U.S. 1
There is a need for the county to closely and continually coordinate with and assist PDOT on
design and implementation of future U.S. 1 three-Ianing.
Traffic and Transportation Element
83
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17,2003
Local Roads
There is a need to develop and implement a local road and bike path improvement/maintenance
program with appropriate design controls and traffic/roadside management in coordination with
PWS. The county's current seven-year road plan serves as the basis for this program.
Analvsis of Local Traffic Movement
A two-way, cross-island roadway has been rejected as a means of addressing local traffic move-
ment within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area north of U.S. 1 and west of Key Deer Boulevard. Further
consideration of local traffic circulation improvements should be part of the Corridor Enhance-
ment Plan process.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 15.1
Maintain close coordination with PDOT on the three-lane plan for U.S. 1 in order to provide ap-
propriate county support where needed, to ensure consistency with the Corridor Enhancement
Plan and to ensure compliance with the anticipated ITP/HCP requirements.
Strategy 15.2
Ensure that the seven-year local road/bike path maintenance and improvement program is con-
sistent with the anticipated ITP/HCP and this Master Plan on an annual basis.
Action Item 15.2.1: Map all local roads on the GIS database and characterize by ownership,
pavement status, and other features.
Action Item 15.2.2: Coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to identify design
and roadside management techniques, including the appropriate location for their use, aimed
at increasing human safety and decreasing wildlife impacts. The feature designs shall be in-
tegrated into the seven-year road plan where appropriate.
Action Item 15.2.3: Evaluate the need for traffic calming elements, both on U.S. 1 and
county roads where increased development may warrant such elements for safety purposes.
Action Item 15.2.4: Limit new paving to roads or portions ofroads that serve Tier III proper-
ties or public facilities.
Action Item 15.2.5: Permit maintenance of private easements in their existing footprint and
elevation.
Action Item 15.2.6: Permit the minimum necessary road widening within existing rights-of-'
way to accommodate the following:
a. bike paths and/or sidewalks.
b. public facilities including sewage collection systems, stormwater collection and treat-
ment systems, water distribution systems and other utilities.
Traffic and Transportation Element
84
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects
The county's seven-year road plan existed prior to and separate from this Master Plan. The
county's planned roadway improvements were modeled in the HCP and included in this Master
Plan. The only additional fiscal impacts introduced by that process are associated with the addi-
tion of wildlife management design and construction aspects to already existing road mainte-
nance and widening plans. It is estimated that these management items (e.g., speed bumps,
signs, etc.) add a small amount to the cost of road maintenance on average. The projected capi-
tal cost of the current seven-year road plan is $1.5 million. Therefore, we can assume that the
HCPlMaster Plan requirements will add only a small amount to that cost for at least the next
seven years. There are no other new fiscal impacts or capital costs to Monroe County intro-
duced by the Traffic and Transportation Element.
Traffic and Transportation Element
85
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
~ \..\vab\e Comm"'"'Keys \,togtam
fVJ ,,~~
Big Pine Key and No Name Key
Residential and Major Roads
, ,-,--~-~...
"
A!>';;I
:r,/:,
7<./>
'. -'
,..
+
. Mile Marker - Residential Roads
Parcels - Key Deer Blvd.
-U.S.1
Monroe County
Planning and Environmental
Resources Depal1ment
Legend
This map is for Monroe County Growth Mu18ement Division pwpOStl
only The dati contlUl.edhereJn IS illustrative only and may not accural:ely
depict boundane.. parcell, roadr, right of W"Y., or iclenti6cllt:ion informltion
Pigure 6.1 Platted residential and major roadways on Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Traffic and Transportation Element
86
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
~f;\
r \
./. \
)..., \
} ~ :
" I
) "
/ 04 \
~~~\,
i I .~' )-.,
~-l ~
fI ""
\ '~
\ r'
\ o{'.......1 "...-
) ~
! 0 ~R r~ Jj;'
(" U~\~~ .~~ 0 0 "
l } ',/fJr 3 ~
"'\ i' .,;'...J \ A
~ ~ . · C\) , '\ b :_' \
~~ - \ \..~ '-'j
'~, ~.
.' '\
" . :' t>r; \
A: tf. \~'J
.~4rr.p ~, H
;Pv/ .it I';"f ~~~ / {
''^'' fJ. ., ~' , '" "to ,\.
/,'" ~~':l.1.?) ). \
,,> r"
.~:~ :\
.( \\~
A \,~
~./ --"
~'i-/~ ",,'''' <1'\.
," ('~~,I~",!7? ~. ,/
1J [,,\ \1,,~ ~.".",tt~
,., ty-'" , , ~/
,/i ,..,.r~'~~:U'
i;~'-'~/"-
.~ ",/
~~~..---------.r
\ '\,......,....r-v..',...--
....:t.. '\
c'-.j
r.......
/
'-. )
J'
, ... .~'
" >"~~
pi r
ti:J'
,,-""<-
()
..1-........
,i,.'''v-;t;;~/--..,.j...'''~)
-::Jr::;;--.tVI
~ \~~~~
Community Participation Element
87
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
GOAL 16
Encourage community involvement in implementing
and monitoring the Livable CommuniKeys Program
(LCP) Master Plan
Current Conditions Summary
The community has demonstrated their interest in planning for the future of Big Pine Key and
No Name Key by attending workshops, community meetings and sending letters to the planning
department concerning what they hoped to achieve in this planning process. Continuous commu-
nity feedback has allowed staff to gain an understanding of the needs and desires of the commu-
nity. The community interest has kept the project on tract moving forward toward the Vision.
Pour Livable CommuniKeys newsletters were written and distributed to all residents of the com-
munity and to property owners who may live in a different location. The newsletters were an
outreach effort to the community, as a whole, to assure that everyone had an opportunity to be-
come informed about the issues being addressed in both the LCP Master Plan and the Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP). Each of the three LCP workshops was well attended by sometimes
more than 100 residents.
Policy 101.20.1 of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan directs that the LCP Master Plans be devel-
oped following certain principles. Principle number Two states that the community master plans
will include "a monitoring mechanism to provide accountability to the communities." Principle
number Pive directs that "each Community Master Plan will include mechanisms allowing citi-
zens continued oversight and involvement in the implementation of their plans. Through the
Community Master Plans, programs for ongoing public involvement, outreach, and education
will be developed."
Analysis of Community Needs
Continuing Community Involvement
Mechanisms need to be developed to assure that the citizens of this planning area are kept in-
formed and have an opportunity for meaningful comment on plan implementation, at a minimum
including the H budget, community facilities, U.S. 1 expansion and progress on the corridor en-
hancement plan.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 16.1
Provide updates to the community on all aspects of plan implementation and the status of public
projects on Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Community Participation Element
88
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Action Item 16.1.1: Work closely with the County communications office to distribute infor-
mation through press releases and the Monroe County web site.
Action Item 16.1.2: Continue to provide speakers to civic and service organizations to dis-
cuss LCP Master Plan issues.
Action Item 16.1.3: Publish and distribute a public newsletter on a periodic basis to provide
community awareness and update on the progress.
Strategy 16.2
Provide opportunities for public review of the annual development and acquisition report re-
quired in the HCP and Strategy 1.5.
Action item 16.2.1 Present the report annually in a public meeting before the Planning Com-
mission including the evaluation and demonstration of compliance with the total allowable H
and the H of conservation parcels acquired for the purpose of mitigating H developed.
Action Item 16.2.2: Place the annual Report on the County web page and in the Public Li-
brary on Big Pine Key.
Strategy 16.3
Establish a Big Pine Key Corridor Area Enhancement Committee to advise the Planning Com-
mission on project proposals within the identified corridor.
Action Item 16.3.1: Appoint five to seven Committee members to include representatives
from the business community, the general citizenry, and design professionals to serve as vol-
unteers reviewing and commenting on plans for projects and improvements along the corri-
dor.
Action Item 16.3.2: Specify procedures for Committee review of development and redevel-
opment proposals concerning conformance to the Architectural Guidelines in the Big Pine
Key/US 1 Corridor Enhancement Plan.
Action Item 16.3.3: Hold all meetings of the Committee in a public format and advertise the
date and agenda following the Plorida "Sunshine" Law requirements.
Action Item 16.3.4: Support the Committee by having the planning department provide tech-
nical and secretarial staffing, mailings, advertising, and preparation of Committee reports.
Community Participation Element
89
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
,,/
I
\
,----..
~ 1'"1_)
r-: I ~/
\ ").., ---
.....-. '--, l . /
/" \:
Jl"L.....-',....., .,
,/\.."~ ;( ......,-.""-
/../.".----.1 ......;1
~""( .... .:,-)
" "'--,.r-'"
y
~,
=:.
....,
~
t
'\ \
, "';vr" ,
\, , ,A- ~-f~ ,~. \ )
r. ~~rrr- , M; / >""
? -'.; e/ ~l, (,' <")-lk/ ~. \'
jr:;;. j/ "'--4:;{, ( ,?) .'P
T '~ ~'~' A \
~. r' -I' \
' "'....- ,..... ...
L',~ ~/ <:-'v-) -\
~ < ~~'
. ",,- \
~ ~
r~, \It. ... ~\
(~~r",,~, '. , /
G ~~ \J, \., :";.""",pt-l)/
" Jr f ~""..:J
~....~
~~~/
\. '\-/~
~
!:'
~QO'
"~D
\
......\ ..-
~: '(i:. "
'\! \.
~o~
. .
. ~
/'1
V
Capital Costs Summary
90
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
Capital Costs Summary
Table 7.1 below lists the estimated costs of the major capital improvements that are called for in
the plan. Not every suggested project is included in this list (e.g. public offices or neighborhood
parks) because many are undefined at this time and it is not possible to determine what costs
may be involved. The seven year roadway improvements plan only extends to the year 2006.
After this date the new cost estimates will have to be included to achieve a more accurate total
cost over the planning horizon. Estimates were gathered from various sources including:
· The Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan
· The Monroe County Seven Year Roadway/Bicycle Path Plan
· The Plorida Keys Overseas Heritage Trail Master Plan
· The Monroe County Capital Projects Plan
· The Monroe County Annual Budget
Table 7.1 Estimated cost of capital improvements
ire Station Redevelopment
ommunity Park Development
oadwaylBike Path (including stonnwater management)
verseas Heritage Trail (including landscaping)
astewater Treatment Facilities
Total Cost of Capital Improvements
2,400,000
3,500,000
1,557,170
$ 1,485,000
$ 35,550,000
$ 44,492,170
mpact Fees
DOT/DEP/National Park Service
Table 7.1 also identifies the sources of the funding for each of the projects. Both the fire station
and the community park development have been allocated funding in the year 2003 and are pro-
jects which have already begun. The roadway improvements only pertain to county maintained
roads and bike paths and are funded through impact fees. The proposed widening of U.S. 1 will
be done by PDOT, which has already allocated funding for the design of the project. Funding
sources have not been identified for the improvements to this section of the Overseas Heritage
Trail, however the DEP is actively seeking sources at this time. The Monroe County Sanitary
Wastewater Master Plan outlines a number of sources for use in funding wastewater facilities
including user fees and charges, bonds and loans, grants, financial assistance for low income in-
dividuals, and assessment fees. Some areas of Big Pine have been determined to be 'hot spots'
and are ranked as 4th, 5th, 8th, and 9th in terms of priority in the Lower Keys. These 'hot spots'
will be addressed after the current wastewater projects are underway and funding sources will be
pursued at that time.
Capital Costs Summary
91
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key
December 17, 2003
The table below estimates of the cost of reaching the 3 to 1 mitigation factor required by the
HCP.
Table 7.2 Estimated cost of 3 to 1 mitigation
Estimated land value (based on average cost)
Annual management costs: $1,000 per acre for the fIrst three years
Annual management costs: $100 per acre after the fIrst three years
~O year monitoring ($5,000 per year)
$ 6,185,000
$ 810,000
$ 459,000
$ 100,000
Total cost over 20 years
[source: Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer
$ 7,554,000
Mitigation costs will be shared by the county, the state, and the federal government. Much of
Big Pine and No Name are included in the state's CARL program. When lands within the
CARL boundary are acquired, the county can apply to the state for reimbursement for monies
spent on acquisition. Additionally, all of Big Pine and No Name are within the National Key
Deer Refuge and lands acquired which have significant value to the endangered species may be
turned over to the US Pish and Wildlife Service for management purposes, reducing the overall
management cost to the county.
Both the capital costs and the mitigation would cost an estimated $52,046,170 over the twenty
year period.
If purchase of all private, vacant Tier I lands were necessary, a preliminary estimate in 2002 in-
dicates the assessed value of these lands would be approximately $16 million. Purchase price is
typically higher then the assessed value, therefore a higher number could be expected.
Capital Costs Summary
92
BOCC STAFF REPORT
Memorandum
W:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
The Board of County Commissioners
K. Marlene Conaway, Director of Planning and Environmental Resources
January 9,2004
Proposed revisions to the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan per recommendations of the
Big Pine Key and No Name Key Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan
I.
Background
The Comprehensive Plan amendments outlined in this staff report are a direct result of recommended
Action Items developed as a part of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No
Name Key. Most of the recommended changes are deletions of policies that have either been
accomplished or are updated and addressed in specific sections of the master plan. The Board of
County Commissioners adopted the Big Pine Key and No Name Key Master Plan on December 17,
2003.
This staff report will outline each of the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Map amendments,
explaining why the action is recommended and where it is addressed within the master plan (if
applicable).
II. Proposed Changes
The following is a list of changes that are either specifically recommended within the Big Pine Key
and No Name Key Master Plan or are changes necessary to implement specific changes
recommended in the adopted Plan. Underlined language is to be added. Cross out is deleted.
Amendment # 1
Action Item 2.1.3 recommends adopting new Puture Land Use designations for portions of Big
Pine Key and No Name Key which will bring them into conformity with policy's set forth in the
Comprehensive Plan and with the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan.
Staff Recommendation: Recommend the amended Puture Land Use Map for Big Pine Key and
No Name Key for adoption to the BOCC as detailed in the adopted Livable CommuniKeys
Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
Amendment # 2
Page 1 of 12
Objective 101.20 mandates the county to complete a series of master plan documents to address
local needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County. The Big Pine Key and No Name
Key Master Plan is the first of the Livable CommuniKeys plans to be completed, and require
implementation of the recommended Strategies and Action Items. The LCP Plan itself must now
be adopted as an amendment to and a part of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The following
Policy will provide a mechanism to recognize individual Master Plans as they are adopted by the
BOCC as a part of the Comprehensive Plan, enabling the framework created within the plans to
have the same standing as the Comprehensive plan.
Staff recommendation: Add the following policy to the comprehensive plan:
Poliey 101.20.2
The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as a part
of the ?lan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community
Master Plans have been competed in accordance with the principals outlined in this section and
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Master Plan for Puture Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key. adopted
December 17. 2003.
Amendment # 3
In order to maintain consistency between the different planning documents that pertain to Big
Pine Key and No Name Key, the LCP Master Plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)
must be included when considering future development, both public and private. On page 34 of
the LCP, it is recommended that Objective 103.1 of the Comprehensive Plan be amended.
Staff recommendation: Amend Objective 103.1 as follows:
Obiective 103.1
Monroe County shall regulate future development and coordinate the prOVlSlon of public
facilities on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies
of this Comprehensive Plan, the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan and the Habitat
Conservation Plan, for Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to:
(a) protect the Key deer (Odocoileus virginian us clavium);
(b) preserve and enhance the habitat of the Key deer;
(c) limit the number of additional vehicular trips from other islands to Big Pine Key;
(d) maintain the rural, suburban, and open space character of Big Pine Key; and
(e) prevent and reduce adverse secondary and cumulative impacts on Key Deer.
[9J-5.006(3)(b)1 and 4]
Amendment # 4
Because the LCP master plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan create a three-tier system to
direct growth to infill areas and away from areas that contain important native vegetation,
sources of funding needs to be identified to purchase environmentally sensitive lands. The
planning area contains a large amount of native habitat that is valuable to many of the
Page 2 of 12
endangered species which live there, and in order to permanently preserve it, it must be protected
through public ownership. Page 60 of the master plan recommends encouraging the Department
of Community Affairs (DCA) to find a dedicated funding source to acquire Tier I lands within
the planning area for preservation purposes.
Staff recommendation: Amend Policy 101.6.4 as follows:
Policy 101.6.4
The County will coordinate with DCA to ensure that DCA continues to support enhanced land
acquisition efforts in the Keys based on needs identified in this comprehensive plan. This
coordination shall ensure continued support of state acquisition efforts under CARL,
Preservation 2000 and the Plorida Communities Trust programs. The County encourages the
Department to work at the state level to create a dedicated acquisition fund for Tier I lands on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key based on the results of the Carrying Capacity Study. the
requirements of the incidental take permit and Habitat Conservation Plan and the Master Plan for
Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The County and the Department will also support appropriate
legislative changes which will have the effect of enhancing the Land Authority efforts
throughout the County, and the South Plorida Water Management District's acquisitions on Big
Pine Key. Similarly, cooperation will continue with private acquisition efforts, such as The
Nature Conservancy and the Plorida Land and Sea Trust.
Amendment # 5
Policy 101.6.5 ranks proposed acquisition lands according to three priorities, however it did not
previously take into account the implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan such as the one
which has been drafted for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Page 60 of the master plan
recommends that consideration of the implementing the HCP should be a factor in the ranking of
lands for acquisition purposes.
Staff recommendation: Amend Policy 101.6.5 as follows:
Policy 101.6.5
Monroe County shall annually compile a list prioritizing the lands requested for County acquisition
due to the Permit Allocation System. The lands ofthe property owners who meet the criteria in Policy
101.6.1 shall be ranked according to:
1. the environmental sensitivity of the vegetative habitat, marine resources, and impacts to
the quality of near shore waters as specified by the ranking in the Environmental Design
Criteria section of the Land Development Regulations;
2. whether the property is in known, probable, and/or potential habitat for one or more
threatened and/or endangered species, as indicated on the most recent Protected Animal
Maps; and
3. whether development on the property will adversely impact successful implementation of
a Habitat Conservation Plan or protection and recovery of threatened or endangered
Page 3 of12
species, such as development on Big Pine Key, No Name Key, Ohio Key, and North Key
Largo.
Those lands considered most sensitive according to the combination of (a), (b), and (c). above
shall be ranked as the highest priority for acquisition.
Amendment # 6
Portions of the ROGO and NROGO system outlined in the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
specifically mention Big Pine Key and No Name Key as areas which should receive additional
negative points in both ROGO and NROGO. Because the master plan adopts a new ROGO
system for only Big Pine and No Name Keys, those areas should be exempted from the current
ROGO system.
Staff Recommendation: Add the following policies to the comprehensive plan:
Policy 101.5.11
Residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key will be subiect to the allocation
system set forth in Strategy 3.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and
No Name Key. The Land Development Regulations will be amended to include the point system
as detailed in the Master Plan. Eligibility to compete within the allocation system will be based
on the location of the proposed development with respect to the Tier System Overlay Map
incorporated herein by reference.
Policy 101.5.12
Non-residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key New will be allocated pursuant
to the following additional criteria:
1. Development must be infill in existing commercial areas in Tier 2 and Tier 3 lands. mainly
along the U.S. 1 corridor on Big Pine Key.
2. All new non-residential development will be limited to disturbed or scarified lands.
3. New allocation awards shall be allowed to exceed 2.500 square feet per site if located within
· the designated Community Center Overlay as designated by Action Item 4.1.5.
4. New allocations shall be awarded moderate positive points to applicants who fulfill the
additional criterion set forth in Strategy 4.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for
Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
All new non-residential development within the planning area shall be exempt from criterion 5.
6. 7. and 17 of Policy 101.5.5.
Amendment # 7
Policy 103.1.1 includes many elements that are replaced with the implementation of the LCP
master plan, including a new limit on ROGO allocations to 10 per year for the next 20 years and
the corresponding amount of non-residential floor area. The new ROGO system for Big Pine is
described in Strategy 3.1 and Strategy 3.2 of the master plan and will be unique to the planning
area. Non-residential floor area is limited to 47,800 square feet by Action Item 4.1.1 in the
master plan which corresponds to 239 square feet for each residential unit planned for the next
twenty years. The limit on vehicular trips set forth in Policy 103.1.1 is reflected in Action Item
4.1.8 which prohibits any new high intensity uses, which have corresponding trip generation
Page40f12
rates to those prohibited in Policy 103.1.1 (they generate more than 100 trips per 1000 square
feet per day). In order to implement the changes proposed in the master plan, this policy must be
deleted.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.1.
Poliey 103.1.1
The purpose of this policy is to insure the long term 'liability of the Key deer by direetiBg
development away from those areas neeessary to proteot the Key deer habitat from the impaets
of deyelopment. It is reeognized that the viability of the endangered Key deer depends on the
control of both direet (primary) and indirect (seoondary) impaets resulting from development.
Development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key may be allO'tyed only in aeeordanee with the
permit alloeation system. In order to protect the amount and quality of habitat areas neeessary to
promote the recovery of the Key deer, single family housing units and mobile home units shall
not exeeed eight (8) per year, including affordable housing units. NOB resideBtial de'/elopment
shall not exeeed 239 square feet for each Bew residential l:lnit permitted Uflder the permit
alloeation system. Monroe County shall deny approval of any pliblie or priyate non residential
development proposed for Big Pine Key or No Name Key if the deyelopment would generate
more than 100 trips per 1000 square feet per day or attract more than 25 vehieular trips per 1000
square feet per day or a total of 100 vehiel:llar trips per day from beyond Big Pine Key or No
Name Key. Ho\vever, redevelopment and de'/elopment actiyities which do not generate new
vehicl:llar trips and do not result in loss of habitat shall not be prohibited by this poliey. In order
to protect the acoessibility to the Key deer of all areas \vithin their range which arc required to
meet all of their life cycle and genetic need, the units shall be direeted away from Key deer
corridors by applioation of the poiBt oriteria in Policies 101.5.1(8) and 101.5.5(7). [9J
5.012(3)(0)1; 9J 5.013(2)(0)5 and 6]
Amendment # 8
Policy 103.1.2 directs the county to replace the ACCC (Area of Critical County Concern)
designation with zoning designations consistent with the categories shown on the Puture Land
Use Map (PLUM). Each of these changes are outlined in Action Item 2.1.3 which also
specifically states that Policy 103.1.2 should be deleted. These changes will be reflected in a
new zoning map to be adopted by the BOCC.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.2.
Potiey 103.1.2
By Janl:lary 1, 1997, Monroe County shall adopt Land Development Regulations v,hich replace
the existing .^..CCC zoning desigaation OB all parcels within that area of Big Pine Key formerly
desoribed as the ACCC in the 1986 version of the Comprehensiye Plan and Land DevelopmeBt
Regulations with zoniBg oategories eOBsistent with the land use oategories sho':/R on the Future
Land Use Map. These land use oategories are based on natural resouree oonstraints as well as
the degree of e)eisting improvement as deseribed below:
1. all subdivisions eurrently desigaated IS (ACCC), within ':;hioh improvements are in place
and ',,<,hi ok are substantially deyeloped or disturbed (i.e., Port Pine Heights, Eden Pines
Page 5 of 12
Colony, and a portion of Koehn's), shall be assigned a zoning eategory eonsistent with
the Residential Medium land use category;
2. all s1:1bdivisions eurrently designated 88 (}J.CCC), within which some improvements have
been made and '.villeh are partially developed or disturbed (i.e., Pine Heights, Pine Ridge,
and a portion of Koehn's), shall be assigned a zoning category eonsistent with the
Residential Low land use eategory;
3. all subdivisions eurrently designated (ACCC), within whieh some improvements ha'/e
been made and whieh are partially developed or disturbea (i.e., Pine Key fLeres and the
western portion of Palm Villa ':!ithin the fJ.CCC), shall be assigned a zoning category
eonsistent with the Residential Lovl land 1:lse category;
4. all other s1:lbdiyisions currently designated (}J.CCC) but within whieh there is little or no
distl:lfbance or development (i.e., 8ea Vie>;!, Pine Grove, and Pine Crest), shall be
assigned a zoning eategory consistent with the Residential Conservation land 1:lse
eategory; and
5. all 1:lnplatted, 1:lnsubdiyided land 'lIill be assigned a zoning category consistent with the
Residential Conservation land use category.
These land use eategories are eonsistent with the namral reSOl:lfee value of these lands. fJ.ll potential
development, regar<lless of the l:H1derlying maximum permitted densities, will be s1:lbject to all federal,
state and local regulations.
Amendment # 9
Policy 103.1.7 requires the county to initiate a land management program with other government
agencies for private and county owned lands within and adjacent to state and federal owned
conservation projects. Strategy 10.2 and the associated action items outline a program for lands
acquired for conservation purposes by the county in order to fulfill the mandates set forth in the
HCP which require a 3:1 mitigation to development ratio. The action items include offering
lands acquired for conservation to the PWS for management, formulating management
objectives for specific habitats, restoration of lands to improve Key deer habitat, and reporting as
required by the HCP.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.7.
Paliey 103.1.7
Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Monroe County shall initiate a cooperati'le land
management planning program for private and county ov.ned lands located within and adjaeent--, c
to state and federal go';ernment owned parks and eonservation lands ':!hieh are in or affeeted by
land uses on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, including:
1. National Key Deer Refuge;
2. 8ave Our Rivers/Big Pine Key 'Netlands 8lough Project;
3. C01:lpon Bight/Key Deer CARL Project; and
Page 6 of12
4. COHpon Bight State }~q1:latic Preserve.
Monroe County shall complete these plar.ning efforts and implement the land management plans
by Jan1:ulTY 4, 1998. (See Objeetive 102.9 and related polieies.) [9J 5.006(3)(e)6]
Amendment # 10
Policy 103.1.8 requires that upon the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the Habitat
Evaluation Index (HEI) in the Land Development Regulations shall be revised to incorporate
greater consideration for the habitat of species of special status, including the Key deer. The
required changes have been completed and were adopted as a part of the LDR's in 1999 and will
not be effected by the LCP master plan.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.8.
Paliey 103.1.8
Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the existing Habitat E'laluation Inde~ (HEI), found in
Seetions 9.5 336 through 9.5 342 of the Land Development Reg1:llations (Moflioe COHaty
BOCC, 1990), and whieh is adopted by referenee in this Comprehensi'le Plan, shall be re'lised to
give greater consideration to the habitat of species of speoial status, incl1:lding the Key deer. The
HEI shall be revised to inelude, at a miniml:Hl1, the follo\ying:
1. a written methodology for oompleting the HEI;
2. requirements for integrating data regarding the historic sightings of rare and endangered
speeies and oritioal nestin~feeding areas for birds; and
3. eval1:lation criteria which will better differentiate high, medium and low quality habitat
Bef-ore adoption, the re'lisions shall lmdergo scientific peer re'liew by experts in terrestrial and
wildlife eeology. To the e~tent possible, the re':iewers shall include those indi'lid1:lals v:ho
participated in development of the existing HEI methodology. (See Policy 205.2.1.) [9J
5.013(2)(c)3]
Amendment # 11
Policy 103.1.9 mandates that the county revise the Land Development Regulations to require the
'clustering' of development to avoid the fragmentation of Key deer habitat. This requirement
has been fulfilled and clustering is required under Section 9.5-345(f) of the LDRs. Clustering is
supported within the master plan through limits placed on development in Tier I lands.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.9.
Paliey 103.1.9
By Jan1:laT)' 4, 1997, Monroe COlmty shall adopt re'lisions to the Land De'lelopment Regulatiofls
pertaining to development siting and cl1:lstering so as to ayoid the consmnption and
fragmentation of Key deer habitat by requiring the follo'.ving:
Page 7 of 12
1. v:hen a parcel pr-opesea for de':elopment eentains more than one (1) habitat
type, all development shall be clustered en the least sensitive portiones) of the
pareel (as is ourrently reql:lired); and
2. deyelopment permitted on the least sensiti':e portiones) ef a pareel shall be
cll:lsterea within that portiones) of the parcel. (See Conservation and Coastal
Management Poliey 205.2.3.) [9J 5.013(2)(c)3]
Amendment # 12
The HCP modeled the development of new and expanded public facilities on Big Pine and found
that if existing use were to expand and new uses were to be placed in scarified, Tier In areas
there would be little or no impact to the endangered species overall, and the impact that would
occur could be minimized and mitigated. Policy 103.1.10 requires a siting analysis for any new
or significant expansion of public facilities on Big Pine which is to include:
1. assessment of needs;
2. evaluation of alternative sites and design alternatives for the selected sites; and
3. assessment of impacts on surrounding land uses and natural resources.
All three of these requirements have been met as a part of the HCP and LCP process and both
documents explain where any new public facilities should be placed. Public facilities are
directly addressed in Goal 6 (parks and recreation) and Goal 7 (other public facilities).
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.10.
Potier If}3.1.10
Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Momoe COl:lnty shall reEll:lire that the follov:ing
analyses be undertaken prior to finalizing plans for the siting of any new public faeilities or the
significant expansion (greater than 25 percent) of existing pl:lblic facilities req1:lired to support
de':elopment on Big Pine Key or No Name Key:
1. assessment of needs;
5. e':all:lation of alternati'le sites and design alternatives f{)r the selected sites; and
6. assessment of iFllf>acts on surrounding land l:lses and natl:lral reSOl:lrces.
The assessment of impacts on sl:lrrol:lnding land uses and natural reSOl:lrces 'llill e':aluate the
extent to '.vhieh the proposed public faeility invol'les publie expenditl:lres in the eoastal high
hazard area and within environmentally sensitive areas, inelading distl:lrbed salt marsh and
buttowllood v:etlands, l:lndistl:lrbed beaehlberm areas, units of the Coastal Barrier Resol:lrces
System, undistl:lrbcd uplands (partieularly high ql:lality hammoeks and pinelands), habitats of
species eonsidered to be threatened or endangered by the state and/or f-ederal governments,
offshore islands, and Conservation Land Protection Areas. Momoe COl:lnty shall reql:lire that
public facilities be developed consistent ':lith the criteria described in Polioy 103.1.1 and shall
support 'llhencver possible the looation of public facilities off of Big Pine Key and No Name
~
Amendment # 13
Page 8 of12
One of the reasons the HCP was developed as part of a solution to relieve localized traffic
constraints on Big Pine. Some improvements have been made by PDOT to U.S. I through Big
Pine, including an intersection improvement project and re-timing of the traffic signal, and a
proposed third lane will be completed after adoption of the HCP. Policy 103.1.11 requires the
implementation of certain projects and the consideration of solutions to the traffic problem by
PDOT, which will be completed after adoption ofthe HCP.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.11.
Poliey 193.1.11
By Jamlary 1, 1998, Momae COURty, iR eonj1:llletion with FDOT, shall iRlplemeat the follawing
enviromneatally sensitiye Transportatiaa System Managemeat (TSM) teehniqt:les to relieve
localized traffie oORstraints on Big Pine Key:
1. petition the FDOT to lower the US 1 daytime speed limit on Big Pine to 35 mph and to
offset this impact on o'lerall travel speeds by raising the speed limit elsev,here;
2. re time the traffic signal at the Key Deer Boule':ard/US l/Chapman Street interseotion;
3. request the FDOT to propose alternative solutioas to assist in resolviag the traffic
problems on Big Pine Key. [9J 5.006(3)(e)3]
Amendment # 14
As a direct result of the HCP process, permanent traffic solutions have been address through the
HCP analysis. Impacts have been addressed and many of the suggested projects are either
completed or will be completed when the HCP is approved by USPWS. Results of the HCP
process include the at-grade fencing along U.S. 1, Key deer underpasses, and the extension of the
third lane on the west end ofthe island. Policy 103.1.12 requires a study to evaluate the different
options for traffic circulation concurrency issues, which was part of the purpose of the HCP and
the recommendations are included in the LCP as a part of Goal 15.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.12.
Poliey 193.1.12
By Jafll:lary 4, 1998, MOlH'oe County shall initiate a traffic engineering and enviromneataI impaet
study to determine the feasibility, eost and environmental impacts of enhanoing traffie eapaeity
on Big Pine Key. This stl:ldy "",ill e'lall:late seyeral alternatives to eahaneing traffio eapaeity on
US 1 in order to meet traffic cireulation coneurrency management eonstraiats, including:
1. a thiee lane, at grade seetion;
2. a road'Nay section with ele'lated roadways, frontage roads and Key deer l:lnderpasses;
3. an at grade roadv:ay section with a fencing program. along US I to control Key deer
orossmg;
1. reducing the speed limit of US 1 on Big Pine Key; and
5. adding traffic signals.
For each of these alternatives, the study shall evall:late the feasibility, costs, and effeetiveness of
eaoh of the alternatives, as well as the associated environmental impacts ',vhieh may threaten the
Page 9 of 12
suocessful proteetion and reeo':ery of the Key deer. The en',irenmental impacts to 8e evaluated
\"ill, at a minimWR, include the petential for:
1. increased Key deer read kills;
2. secondary de',elopment (i.e., increased development potential) and assooiated loss of
habitat and increased ',ehioular traffic; and
3. dismption of natural Key deer beha'liors, including breeding and seasonal migration
patterns.
No additional tlH'ough traffic lanes on US 1 v:ill occur \'.'itholit an overpass or ether mitigating
measure or design feature to ensure the successful protection and recovery ofihe Key deer.
Amendment # 15
Policy 103.1.14 discourages tour groups on Big Pine in order to reduce the traffic and illegal
feeding of the Key deer population. The language of this policy is reflected in Action Item
12.1.5.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.14.
Poliey 103.1.14
MOHioe County shall discolK'age tOlK' groups on Big Pine Key. (See Conservation and Coastal
Management Policy 207.7.7.) [9J 5.0l2(3)(c)1; 9J 5.013(2)(c)5 and 6]
Amendment # 16
Policy 103.1.15 requires the county to restore, where practicable, disturbed wetland and upland native
vegetation in order to improve Key deer habitat. The policy has been duplicated in Action Item 10.2.6.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 103.1.15.
Poliey 103.1.15
MOHioe County shall restore, \vhere practicable, dismpted '.vetland and native upland yegetation
systems on Coooty owned Pliblic lands on Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to improye
Key deer habitat. (See Conservation and Coastal Management Goal 210 and related ebjeetiyes
and policies.) [9J 5.0l2(3)(a); 9J 5.013(2)(a)]
Amendment # 17
Policy 207.7.5 requires the county to identify the freshwater lens system on Big Pine and the
associated keys and implement special measure to protect the system. Goal 11 specifically
addresses the freshwater system and proposes protective mechanisms, most of which are already
in place.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 207.7.5.
Poliey 207.7.5
By JaIHiary 4, 1998, MOHioe CoWlty shall identify the fresm'later lens systems and assoeiated
recharge ar-eas on Big Pine Key and adjacent keys. Special measm--es shall be implemented to protect
Page 10 of 12
the ql:laIltity and quality of ground>.vater r-eeh.arge to the freshwater 18Rses. (See Natmal Gfeood>.vater
Aquifer Reoharge Element Objeetive 1101.2 and r-elated policies.) [9J 5.012(3)(0)1; 9J 5.013(2)(e)5
and-e}
Amendment # 18
Policy 207.7 is similar to Policy 103.1.14 which discourages tour groups on Big Pine Key. This
policy is addressed in Action Item 12.1.5.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 207.7.7.
Poliey 207.7.7
By January 4, 1998, Monroe County shall initiate actions to diseourage tour gT-Clups on Big Pine
Key. [9J 5.012(3)(0)1; 9J 5.013(2)(6)5 and 6]
Amendment # 19
Policy 207.7.9 states that "Monroe County shall incorporate specific management guidelines to
protect Key deer (developed pursuant to Policy 207.2.3) as stipulations for land development
orders for all development occurring on Big Pine and No Name Keys". Specific guidelines are
outlined in both the HCP and the LCP for all development, not just development orders, on Big
Pine and No Name Keys. Both documents describe a level of development that minimizes
impacts on endangered species and requires mitigation where impacts do occur.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 207.7.9.
Poliey 207.7.9
By January 1, 1998, Monroe Cmmty sh.all incorporate spe6ifie management guidelines to proteot
Key deer (developed pl:lrsuant to Polioy 207.2.3) as stipulations for land development orders for
all development oool:lrring on Big Pine and No Name Keys. [9J 5.012(3)(6)1; 9J 5.013(2)(0)5
and 6]
Amendment # 20
Policy 207.7.10 requires the county to adopt revisions to the LDRs which limit the area that may
be enclosed by fencing so as not to interfere with Key deer movement. The LDRs were amended
and Big Pine and No Name Keys have special fencing regulations described in Section 9.5-
309(c).
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 207.7.10.
Policy 207.7.10
By January 1,1997, Monroe COl:lnty shall adopt revisions to the Land Development Regulati6Hs--' _ ,
pertaining to 60nstru6tion of fen6es on Big Pine Key. These shall limit fen6ing to the eFle10sure
of the buildable area of a property to provide for Key deer 6ireulation and to avoid hazardol:ls
oonditions for ehildren and Key deer. (9J 5.012(3)(6)1; 9J 5.013(2)(6)5 and 6)
Amendment # 21
Page 11 of12
Both Policy 207.7.11 and Policy 207.7.17 require the county to work with the USPWS to
develop roadside management techniques to reduce deer-vehicle collisions, illegal deer feeding,
and increased visibility. Roadside management techniques are required in Action Item 15.2.2 of
the master plan.
Staff recommendation: Delete Policy 207.7.11 and Policy 207.7.17.
Poliey 207.7.11
Momoe County, in cooperation \vith the PWS, shall de'/elop and implement roadside
management teclmiques which allo'N greater visibility of Key deer and which decrease Key deer
feeding on shoulders in high high'Nay mortality areas on Big Pine Key. These teelmiques may
inehide clearing and graveling of road shoulders along Key Deer Boale'/ar-d, 'N atson :Bm:1leyard,
and 'Nilder Road. [9J 5.0l2(3)(c)1; 9J 5.013(2)(e)5 & 6]
Poliey 207.7.17
MOlH'De ComHy shall coordinate with PNS and PGP'NPC to develop criteria to determme roadway
management techniques to redl:lee vehicular deer collisions 'lIithin the National Key Deer Refuge.
Page 12 of12
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #POI-04
PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION NO. POI-04
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OP COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OP A REQUEST PILED BY THE PLANNING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND THE YEAR
2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS
ADOPTED AS A PART OP THE LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS MASTER
PLAN POR BIG PINE KEY AND NO NAME KEY.
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting on December 1 ih, the Monroe County
Board of County Commissioners adopted the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine
Key and No Name Key (referred to hereafter as the Master Plan) as the policy document to direct
growth and development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan is the product of the Livable CommuniKeys program as
outlined in the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Objective 101.20 which is to
address community needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan was created in conjunction with the Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP), a mechanism required by the US Pish and Wildlife Service (USPWS) whereby the
concerns and responsibilities of the various public agencies with regard to the conservation of the
Key Deer and other covered species, and public and private development of Big Pine and No
Name Keys can be coordinated; and
WHEREAS, many Objectives and Policies within the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
specifically address the growth and development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to
protect the endangered species; and
WHEREAS, the HCP and the LCP process set forth much more comprehensive
conservation and development plans that will allow development on the island and protection of
the endangered species on the island; and
WHEREAS, many of the findings of both the HCP and the LCP conflict with Policies in
the Year 2010 Plan and the plans may not be implemented until those comprehensive plan
policies are amended; and
WHEREAS, many of the goals, strategies and action items within the Master Plan
address specific policies within the Comprehensive Plan by either replacing or changing them;
and
WHEREAS, as a part of these amendments, the Master Plan will be adopted as a part of
the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore any conflicts between the two must be resolved; and
PO 1-04
Page 1 0[9
Initial
WHEREAS, as a part of the comprehensive LCP process, Puture Land Use Map
amendments are proposed to bring properties in conformity with the Master Plan and other
guiding documents; and
WHEREAS, all of the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Puture Land Use Map changes
have been recommended by the Master Plan, as adopted on December 1 th, 2003 and the
adoption resolution states that the Puture Land Use and Land Use District map changes would be
brought before the commission at a subsequent hearing; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments were reviewed during a meeting on January 5,
2004 which was continued from December 29th, 2003 of the Development Review Committee;
and
WHEREAS, during a regular meeting held on January 14, 2004, the Monroe County
Planning Commissiori conducted a public hearing on the proposed text; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission was presented with the following information,
which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said hearing:
1. The Staff Report prepared on December 29, 2003; by K. Marlene Conaway, Director,
Planning and Environmental Resources,
2. Proposed changes to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Puture Land
Use Map,
3. The sworn testimony of the Growth Management Staff,
4. Advice from John Wolfe, the Planning Commission Counsel; and
5. Comments by the public; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following Pindings of Fact based
on the evidence presented:
1. Objective 101.20 mandates the county to complete a series of master plan documents to
address local needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County. The Big Pine Key
and No Name Key Master Plan is the first of the Livable CommuniKeys plans to be
completed, and require implementation of the recommended Strategies and Action Items.
The LCP Plan itself must be adopted as an amendment to and a part of the Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan. Policy 101.20.2 will provide a mechanism to recognize individual
Master Plans as they are adopted by the BOCC as a part of the Comprehensive Plan, enabling
the framework created within the plans to have the same standing as the Comprehensive
plan; and
2. In order to maintain consistency between the different planning documents that pertain to Big
Pine Key and No Name Key, the LCP Master Plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)
PO 1-04
Page 2 of9
Initial
must be included when considering future development, both public and private. On page 34
of the LCP, it is recommended that Objective 103.1 of the Comprehensive Plan be amended;
and
3. Because the LCP master plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan create a three-tier system to
direct growth to infill areas and away from areas that contain important native vegetation,
sources of funding needs to be identified to purchase environmentally sensitive lands. The
planning area contains a large amount of native habitat that is valuable to many of the
endangered species which live there, and in order to permanently preserve it, it must be
protected through public ownership. Page 60 of the master plan recommends encouraging
the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to find a dedicated funding source to acquire
Tier I lands within the planning area for preservation purposes; and
4. Policy 101.6.5 ranks proposed acquisition lands according to three priorities, however it did
not previously take into account the implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan such as
the one which has been drafted for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Page 60 of the master
plan recommends that consideration of the implementing the HCP should be a factor in the
ranking of lands for acquisition purposes; and
5. Portions of the ROGO and NROGO system outlined in the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
specifically mention Big Pine Key and No Name Key as areas which should receive
additional negative points in both ROGO and NROGO. Because the master plan adopts a
new ROGO system for only Big Pine and No Name Keys, those areas should be exempted
from the current ROGO system; and
6. Policy 103.1.1 includes many elements that are replaced with the implementation of the LCP
master plan, including a new limit on ROGO allocations to 10 per year for the next 20 years
and the corresponding amount of non-residential floor area. The new ROGO system for Big
Pine is described in Strategy 3.1 and Strategy 3.2 of the master plan and will be unique to the
planning area. Non-residential floor area is limited to 47,800 square feet by Action Item
4.1.1 in the master plan which corresponds to 239 square feet for each residential planned for
the next twenty years. The limit on vehicular trips set forth in Policy 103.1.1 is reflected in
Action Item 4.1.8 which prohibits any new high intensity uses, which have corresponding
trip generation rates to those prohibited in Policy 103.1.1 (they generate more than 100 trips
per 1000 square feet per day); and
7. Policy 103.1.2 directs the county to replace the ACCC (Area of Critical County Concern)
designation with zoning designations consistent with the categories shown on the Puture
Land Use Map (PLUM). Each of these changes are outlined in Action Item 2.1.3 which also
specifically states that Policy 103.1.2 should be deleted. These changes will be reflectedul a-- _
new zoning map to be adopted by the BOCC; and
8. Policy 103.1.7 requires the county to initiate a land management program with other
government agencies for private and county owned lands within and adjacent to state and
federal owned conservation projects. Strategy 10.2 and the associated action items outline a
program for lands acquired for conservation purposes by the county in order to fulfill the
PO 1-04
Page 3 of9
Initial
mandates set forth in the HCP which require a 3:1 mitigation to development ratio. The
action items include offering lands acquired for conservation to the PWS for management,
formulating management objectives for specific habitats, restoration of lands to improve Key
deer habitat, and reporting as required by the HCP; and
9. Policy 103.1.8 requires that upon the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the Habitat
Evaluation Index (HEI) in the Land Development Regulations shall be revised to incorporate
greater consideration for the habitat of species of special status, including the Key deer. The
required changes have been completed and were adopted as a part of the LDR's in 1999 and
will not be effected by the LCP master plan; and
10. Policy 103.1.9 mandates that the county revise the Land Development Regulations to require
the 'clustering' of development to avoid the fragmentation of Key deer habitat. This
requirement has been fulfilled and clustering is required under Section 9.5-345(f) of the
LDRs. Clustering is supported within the master plan through limits placed on development
in Tier I lands; and
11. The HCP modeled the development of new and expanded public facilities on Big Pine and
found that if existing use were to expand and new uses were to be placed in scarified, Tier In
areas there would be little or no impact to the endangered species overall, and the impact that
would occur could be minimized and mitigated. Policy 103.1.10 requires a siting analysis for
any new or significant expansion of public facilities on Big Pine which is to include:
1. assessment of needs;
2. evaluation of alternative sites and design alternatives for the selected sites;
and
3. assessment of impacts on surrounding land uses and natural resources.
All three of these requirements have been met as a part of the HCP and LCP process and both
documents explain where any new public facilities should be placed. Public facilities are
directly addressed in Goal 6 (parks and recreation) and Goal 7 (other public facilities); and
12. One of the reasons the HCP was developed as part of a solution to relieve localized traffic
constraints on Big Pine. Some improvements have been made by PDOT to U.S. 1 through
Big Pine, including an intersection improvement project and re-timing of the traffic signal,
and a proposed third lane will be completed after adoption of the HCP. Policy 103.1.11
requires the implementation of certain projects and the consideration of solutions to the
traffic problem by PDOT, which will be completed after adoption of the HCP; and
13. As a direct result of the HCP process, permanent traffic solutions have been address through
the HCP analysis. Impacts have been addressed and many of the suggested projects are
either completed or will be completed when the HCP is approved by USPWS. Results of the
HCP process include the at-grade fencing along U.S. 1, Key deer underpasses, and the
extension of the third lane on the west end of the island. Policy 103.1.12 requires a study to
evaluate the different options for traffic circulation concurrency issues, which was part of the
purpose of the HCP and the recommendations are included in the LCP as a part of Goal 15;
and
PO 1-04
Page 4 of9
Initial
14. Policy 103.1.14 discourages tour groups on Big Pine in order to reduce the traffic and illegal
feeding of the Key deer population. The language of this policy is reflected in Action Item
12.1.5; and
15. Policy 103.1.15 requires the county to restore, where practicable, disturbed wetland and
upland native vegetation in order to improve Key deer habitat. The policy has been
duplicated in Action Item 10.2.6; and
16. Policy 207.7.5 requires the county to identify the freshwater lens system on Big Pine and the
associated keys and implement special measure to protect the system. Goal 11 specifically
addresses the freshwater system and proposes protective mechanisms, most of which are
already in place; and
17. Policy 207.7 is similar to Policy 103.1.14 which discourages tour groups on Big Pine Key.
This policy is addressed in Action Item 12.1.5; and
18. Policy 207.7.9 states that "Monroe County shall incorporate specific management guidelines
to protect Key deer (developed pursuant to Policy 207.2.3) as stipulations for land
development orders for all development occurring on Big Pine and No Name Keys".
Specific guidelines are outlined in both the HCP and the LCP for all development, not just
development orders, on Big Pine and No Name Keys. Both documents describe a level of
development that minimizes impacts on endangered species and requires mitigation where
impacts do occur; and
19. Policy 207.7.10 requires the county to adopt revisions to the LDRs which limit the area that
may be enclosed by fencing so as not to interfere with Key deer movement. The LDRs were
amended and Big Pine and No Name Keys have special fencing regulations described in
Section 9.5-309(c); and
20. Both Policy 207.7.11 and Policy 207.7.17 require the county to work with the USPWS to
develop roadside management techniques to reduce deer-vehicle collisions, illegal deer
feeding, and increased visibility. Roadside management techniques are required in Action
Item 15.2.2 of the master plan; and
21. Both the HCP and the LCP encourage infill commercial development within the U.S. 1
corridor area on properties already scarified. The Puture Land Use Map Change from
Residential Conservation (RC) to Mixed Use Commercial (MC) of the properties described
as Lots 21 and 22, Tropic Island Ranchettes is consistent with the Master Plan because the
properties are scarified, have been used commercially since 1986, and are within the U.S. 1
corridor area, where development and redevelopment are directed and encouraged.
22. The HCP and the LCP require and provide mechanisms for the protection of the habitat of
endangered species. Part of this protection is the designation of areas in Tier I which are to
remain undeveloped or developed at the current level of development. The properties
currently designated on the Puture Land Use Map as Mixed Use Commercial (MC) are only
PO 1-04
Page 5 of9
Initial
partially developed with residential uses, contain a large amount of native habitat, are located
within Tier I, and are not within the main U.S. 1 corridor where further commercial
development may occur. The properties to the south of the MC site are under public
ownership, while properties to the north are single family residences with the PLUM
designation ofResidnetial Low (RL); and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission makes the following
Conclusions of Law based on the evidence presented:
1. The Livable CommuniKeys Program requires Monroe County to produce a series of Master
Plans which addresses local needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County; and
2. The LCP Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key was created in conjunction with
the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and implements the HCP, both of which control
development and conservation on the islands; and
3. The Master Plan was adopted as the policy document to direct growth and development on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key; and
4. The Master Plan, as adopted, recommends the amendments proposed by this ordinance in
order to avoid conflicts with existing Objectives and Policies and to enable the
implementation of both the HCP and the LCP; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding Pindings of Pact support its decision
to recommend APPROVAL to the Board of County Commissioners of the amendments to the
Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan as follows:
Amendment 1. Create Policy 101.20.2 in the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan to read as follows:
Policy 101.20.2
The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as a part
of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community
Master Plans have been competed in accordance with the principals outlined in this section and
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Master Plan for Puture Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key, adopted
December 17,2003.
Amendment 2. Amend Objective 103.1 of the Year 2010 Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough
format):
PO 1-04
Page 6 of9
Initial
Objective 103.1
Monroe County shall regulate future development and coordinate the provlSlon of public
facilities on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies
of this Comprehensive Plan, the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan and the Habitat
Conservation Plan, for Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to:
(a) protect the Key deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium);
(b) preserve and enhance the habitat of the Key deer;
(c) limit the number of additional vehicular trips from other islands to Big Pine
Key;
(d) maintain the rural, suburban, and open space character of Big Pine Key; and
(e) prevent and reduce adverse secondary and cumulative impacts on Key Deer.
[9J-5.006(3)(b)1 and 4]
Amendment 3. Amend Policy 101.6.4 of the Year 2010 Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough
format):
Policy 101.6.4
The County will coordinate with DCA to ensure that DCA continues to support enhanced land
acquisition efforts in the Keys based on needs identified in this comprehensive plan. This
coordination shall ensure continued support of state acquisition efforts under CARL, Preservation
2000 and the Plorida Communities Trust programs. The County encourages the Deoartment to work
at the state level to create a dedicated acquisition fund for Tier I lands on Big Pine Key and No Name
Key based on the results of the Carrying Capacity Study. the reQuirements of the incidental take
permit and Habitat Conservation Plan and the Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The
County and the Department will also support appropriate legislative changes which will have the
effect of enhancing the Land Authority efforts throughout the County, and the South Plorida Water
Management District's acquisitions on Big Pine Key. Similarly, cooperation will continue with
private acquisition efforts, such as The Nature Conservancy and the Plorida Land and Sea Trust.
Amendment 4. Amend Policy 101.6.5 of the Year 2010 Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough
format):
Policy 101.6.5
Monroe County shall annually compile a list prioritizing the lands requested for County acquisition
due to the Permit Allocation System. The lands of the property owners who meet the criteria in Policy
101.6.1 shall be ranked according to:
1. the environmental sensitivity of the vegetative habitat, marine resources, and
impacts to the quality of near shore waters as specified by the ranking in the
Environmental Design Criteria section of the Land Development Regulations;
PO 1-04
Page 7 0[9
Initial
2. whether the property is in known, probable, and/or potential habitat for one or
more threatened and/or endangered species, as indicated on the most recent
Protected Animal Maps; and
3. whether development on the property will adversely impact successful
implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan or protection and recovery of
threatened or endangered species, such as development on Big Pine Key, No
Name Key, Ohio Key, and North Key Largo.
Those lands considered most sensitive according to the combination of (a), (b), and (c). above
shall be ranked as the highest priority for acquisition.
Amendment 5. Create Policy 101.5.11 and 101. 5. 11 in the Monroe County Year
2010 Comprehensive Plan to read as follows:
Policy 101.5.11
Residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key will be subject to the allocation
system set forth in Strategy 3.2 of the Livable Communi Keys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and
No Name Key. The Land Development Regulations will be amended to include the point system
as detailed in the Master Plan. Eligibility to compete within the allocation system will be based
on the location of the proposed development with respect to the Tier System Overlay Map
incorporated herein by reference.
Policy 101.5.12
Non-residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key New will be allocated pursuant
to the following additional criteria:
1. Development must be infill in existing commercial areas in Tier 2 and Tier 3 lands, mainly
along the u.s. 1 corridor on Big Pine Key.
2. All new non-residential development will be limited to disturbed or scarified lands.
3. New allocation awards shall be allowed to exceed 2,500 square feet per site if located within
the designated Community Center Overlay as designated by Action Item 4.1.5.
4. New allocations shall be awarded moderate positive points to applicants who fulfill the
additional criterion set forth in Strategy 4.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for
Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
All new non-residential development within the planning area shall be exempt from criterion 5,
6, 7, and 17 of Policy 101.5.5.
Amendment 6. Delete the following Policies from the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan: 103.1.1, 103.1.2, 103.1.7, 103.1.8, 103.1.9, 103.1.10, 103.1.11, 103.1.12,
103.1.14, 103.1.15,207.7.5,207.7.7,207.7.9,207.7.10,207.7.11, and 207.7.17.
Amendment 7. Change the Puture Land Use Map Designation of the properties
with the following real estate numbers: 00110460.000000, 00110540.000000, 00110640.000000,
00110720.000000, 00110720.000100, 00110730.000000, 00110740.000000, 00110750.000000,
00111020.000000, 00111020.000010, 00111020.000020, 00111020.000030, 00111020.000040
PO 1-04
Page 8 0[9
Initial
and illustrated on the attached map which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached as
Exhibit 1 from Mixed Use Commercial (MC) to Residential Low (RL).
Amendment 8. Change the Puture Land Use Map Designation of the properties
with the following real estate numbers: 00111420.000100 and 00111420.000500 and illustrated
on the attached map which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached as Exhibit 2 from
Residential Conservation (RL) to Mixed Use Commercial (MC).
PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Planning Commission of Monroe County, Plorida, at
a regular meeting held on the 14th day of January, 2004.
Chair Lynn Mapes
Vice Chair Denise Werling
Commissioner David C. Ritz
Commissioner Julio Margalli
Commissioner James Cameron
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
PLANNING COMMISSION OP MONROE COUNTY, PLORIDA
BY
Lynn Mapes, Chair
Signed this _ day of
,2004.
PO 1-04
Page 9 of9
Initial
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION #DOI-04
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLUTION NO. dOl-04
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OP A REQUEST PILED BY THE PLANNING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND THE YEAR
2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BASED ON RECOMMENDATIONS
ADOPTED AS APART OP THE LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS MASTER
PLAN POR BIG PINE KEY AND NO NAME KEY.
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting on December l7t\ the Monroe County
Board of County Commissioners adopted the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine
Key and No Name Key (referred to hereafter as the Master Plan) as the policy document to direct
growth and development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan is the product of the Livable CommuniKeys program as
outlined in the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Objective 101.20 which is to
address community needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County; and
WHEREAS, the Master Plan was created in conjunction with the Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP), a mechanism required by the US Pish and Wildlife Service (USPWS) whereby the
concerns and responsibilities of the various public agencies with regard to the conservation of the
Key Deer and other covered species, and public and private development of Big Pine and No
Name Keys can be coordinated; and
WHEREAS, many Objectives and Policies within the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
specifically address the growth and development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to
protect the endangered species; and
WHEREAS, the HCP and the LCP process set forth much more comprehensive
conservation and development plans that will allow development on the island and protection of
the endangered species on the island; and
WHEREAS, many of the findings of both the HCP and the LCP conflict with Policies in
the Year 2010 Plan and the plans may not be implemented until those comprehensive plan
policies are amended; and
WHEREAS, many of the goals, strategies and action items within the Master Plan
address specific policies within the Comprehensive Plan by either replacing or changing them;
and
WHEREAS, as a part of these amendments, the Master Plan will be adopted as a part of
the Comprehensive Plan, and therefore any conflicts between the two must be resolved; and
DOI-04
Page 1 0[9
Initial
WHEREAS, as a part of the comprehensive LCP process, Puture Land Use Map
amendments are proposed to bring properties in conformity with the Master Plan and other
guiding documents; and
WHEREAS, all of the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Puture Land Use Map changes
have been recommended by the Master Plan, as adopted on December 1 ih, 2003 and the
adoption resolution states that the Puture Land Use and Land Use District map changes would be
brought before the commission at a subsequent hearing; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments were reviewed during a meeting on January 5,
2004 which was continued from December 29th, 2003 of the Development Review Committee;
and
WHEREAS, The Development Review Committee was presented with the Staff Report
prepared on December 29, 2003; by Robert Will, Senior Planner, which by reference is hereby
incorporated as part of the record of said hearing:
WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee has made the following Pindings of
Pact based on the evidence presented:
1. Objective 101.20 mandates the county to complete a series of master plan documents to
address local needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County. The Big Pine Key
and No Name Key Master Plan is the first of the Livable CommuniKeys plans to be
completed, and require implementation of the recommended Strategies and Action Items.
The LCP Plan itself must be adopted as an amendment to and a part of the Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan. Policy 101.20.2 will provide a mechanism to recognize individual
Master Plans as they are adopted by the BOCC as a part of the Comprehensive Plan, enabling
the framework created within the plans to have the same standing as the Comprehensive
plan; and
2. In order to maintain consistency between the different planning documents that pertain to Big
Pine Key and No Name Key, the LCP Master Plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)
must be included when considering future development, both public and private. On page 34
of the LCP, it is recommended that Objective 103.1 of the Comprehensive Plan be amended;
and
3. Because the LCP master plan and the Habitat Conservation Plan create a three-tier system to
direct growth to infill areas and away from areas that contain important native vegetation,
sources of funding needs to be identified to purchase environmentally sensitive lands. The
planning area contains a large amount of native habitat that is valuable to many of the
endangered species which live there, and in order to permanently preserve it, it must be
protected through public ownership. Page 60 of the master plan recommends encouraging
the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to find a dedicated funding source to acquire
Tier I lands within the planning area for preservation purposes; and
DO 1-04
Page 20f9
Initial
4. Policy 101.6.5 ranks proposed acquisition lands according to three priorities, however it did
not previously take into account the implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan such as
the one which has been drafted for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Page 60 of the master
plan recommends that consideration of the implementing the HCP should be a factor in the
ranking of lands for acquisition purposes; and
5. Portions of the ROGO and NROGO system outlined in the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
specifically mention Big Pine Key and No Name Key as areas which should receive
additional negative points in both ROGO and NROGO. Because the master plan adopts a
new ROGO system for only Big Pine and No Name Keys, those areas should be exempted
from the current ROGO system; and
6. Policy 103.1.1 includes many elements that are replaced with the implementation of the LCP
master plan, including a new limit on ROGO allocations to 10 per year for the next 20 years
and the corresponding amount of non-residential floor area. The new ROGO system for Big
Pine is described in Strategy 3.1 and Strategy 3.2 of the master plan and will be unique to the
planning area. Non-residential floor area is limited to 47,800 square feet by Action Item
4.1.1 in the master plan which corresponds to 239 square feet for each residential planned for
the next twenty years. The limit on vehicular trips set forth in Policy 103.1.1 is reflected in
Action Item 4.1.8 which prohibits any new high intensity uses, which have corresponding
trip generation rates to those prohibited in Policy 103.1.1 (they generate more than 100 trips
per 1000 square feet per day); and
7. Policy 103.1.2 directs the county to replace the ACCC (Area of Critical County Concern)
designation with zoning designations consistent with the categories shown on the Puture
Land Use Map (PLUM). Each of these changes are outlined in Action Item 2.1.3 which also
specifically states that Policy 103.1.2 should be deleted. These changes will be reflected in a
new zoning map to be adopted by the BOCC; and
8. Policy 103.1.7 requires the county to initiate a land management program with other
government agencies for private and county owned lands within and adjacent to state and
federal owned conservation projects. Strategy 10.2 and the associated action items outline a
program for lands acquired for conservation purposes by the county in order to fulfill the
mandates set forth in the HCP which require a 3: 1 mitigation to development ratio. The
action items include offering lands acquired for conservation to the PWS for management,
formulating management objectives for specific habitats, restoration of lands to improve Key
deer habitat, and reporting as required by the HCP; and
9. Policy 103.1.8 requires that upon the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the Habitat
Evaluation Index (HEI) in the Land Development Regulations shall be revised to incorporate,- , ..
greater consideration for the habitat of species of special status, including the Key deer. The
required changes have been completed and were adopted as a part of the LDR's in 1999 and
will not be effected by the LCP master plan; and
10. Policy 103.1.9 mandates that the county revise the Land Development Regulations to require
the 'clustering' of development to avoid the fragmentation of Key deer habitat. This
DO 1-04
Page 3 0[9
Initial
requirement has been fulfilled and clustering is required under Section 9.5-345(f) of the
LDRs. Clustering is supported within the master plan through limits placed on development
in Tier I lands; and
11. The HCP modeled the development of new and expanded public facilities on Big Pine and
found that if existing use were to expand and new uses were to be placed in scarified, Tier III
areas there would be little or no impact to the endangered species overall, and the impact that
would occur could be minimized and mitigated. Policy 103.1.10 requires a siting analysis for
any new or significant expansion of public facilities on Big Pine which is to include:
1. assessment of needs;
2. evaluation of alternative sites and design alternatives for the selected sites;
and
3. assessment of impacts on surrounding land uses and natural resources.
All three of these requirements have been met as a part of the HCP and LCP process and both
documents explain where any new public facilities should be placed. Public facilities are
directly addressed in Goal 6 (parks and recreation) and Goal 7 (other public facilities); and
12. One of the reasons the HCP was developed as part of a solution to relieve localized traffic
constraints on Big Pine. Some improvements have been made by PDOT to U.S. 1 through
Big Pine, including an intersection improvement project and re-timing of the traffic signal,
and a proposed third lane will be completed after adoption of the HCP. Policy 103.1.11
requires the implementation of certain projects and the consideration of solutions to the
traffic problem by PDOT, which will be completed after adoption of the HCP; and
13. As a direct result of the HCP process, permanent traffic solutions have been address through
the HCP analysis. Impacts have been addressed and many of the suggested projects are
either completed or will be completed when the HCP is approved by USPWS. Results of the
HCP process include the at-grade fencing along U.S. 1, Key deer underpasses, and the
extension of the third lane on the west end of the island. Policy 103.1.12 requires a study to
evaluate the different options for traffic circulation concurrency issues, which was part of the
purpose of the HCP and the recommendations are included in the LCP as a part of Goal 15;
and
14. Policy 103.1.14 discourages tour groups on Big Pine in order to reduce the traffic and illegal
feeding of the Key deer population. The language of this policy is reflected in Action Item
12.1.5; and
15. Policy 103.1.15 requires the county to restore, where practicable, disturbed wetland and
upland native vegetation in order to improve Key deer habitat. The policy has been
duplicated in Action Item 10.2.6; and
16. Policy 207.7.5 requires the county to identify the freshwater lens system on Big Pine and the
associated keys and implement special measure to protect the system. Goal 11 specifically
addresses the freshwater system and proposes protective mechanisms, most of which are
already in place; and
DO 1-04
Page 4 of9
Initial
17. Policy 207.7 is similar to Policy 103.1.14 which discourages tour groups on Big Pine Key.
This policy is addressed in Action Item 12.1.5; and
18. Policy 207.7.9 states that "Monroe County shall incorporate specific management guidelines
to protect Key deer (developed pursuant to Policy 207.2.3) as stipulations for land
development orders for all development occurring on Big Pine and No Name Keys".
Specific guidelines are outlined in both the HCP and the LCP for all development, not just
development orders, on Big Pine and No Name Keys. Both documents describe a level of
development that minimizes impacts on endangered species and requires mitigation where
impacts do occur; and
19. Policy 207.7.10 requires the county to adopt revisions to the LDRs which limit the area that
may be enclosed by fencing so as not to interfere with Key deer movement. The LDRs were
amended and Big Pine and No Name Keys have special fencing regulations described in
Section 9.5-309(c); and
20. Both Policy 207.7.11 and Policy 207.7.17 require the county to work with the USPWS to
develop roadside management techniques to reduce deer-vehicle collisions, illegal deer
feeding, and increased visibility. Roadside management techniques are required in Action
Item 15.2.2 of the master plan; and
21. Both the HCP and the LCP encourage infill commercial development within the U.S. 1
corridor area on properties already scarified. The Puture Land Use Map Change from
Residential Conservation (RC) to Mixed Use Commercial (MC) of the properties described
as Lots 21 and 22, Tropic Island Ranchettes is consistent with the Master Plan because the
properties are scarified, have been used commercially since 1986, and are within the U.S. 1
corridor area, where development and redevelopment are directed and encouraged.
22. The HCP and the LCP require and provide mechanisms for the protection of the habitat of
endangered species. Part of this protection is the designation of areas in Tier I which are to
remain undeveloped or developed at the current level of development. The properties
currently designated on the Puture Land Use Map as Mixed Use Commercial (MC) are only
partially developed with residential uses, contain a large amount of native habitat, are located
within Tier I, and are not within the main U.S. 1 corridor where further commercial
development may occur. The properties to the south of the MC site are under public
ownership, while properties to the north are single family residences with the PLUM
designation of Residnetial Low (RL); and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee makes the following
Conclusions of Law based on the evidence presented:
1. The Livable CommuniKeys Program requires Monroe County to produce a series of Master
Plans which addresses local needs while balancing the needs of all of Monroe County; and
DO 1-04
Page 5 of9
Initial
2. The LCP Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key was created in conjunction with
the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and implements the HCP, both of which control
development and conservation on the islands; and
3. The Master Plan was adopted as the policy document to direct growth and development on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key; and
4. The Master Plan, as adopted, recommends the amendments proposed by this ordinance in
order to avoid conflicts with existing Objectives and Policies and to enable the
implementation of both the HCP and the LCP; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding Pindings of Pact support its decision
to recommend APPROVAL to the Planning Commission of the amendments to the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan as follows:
Amendment 1. Create Policy 101.20.2 ill the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan to read as follows:
Policy 101.20.2
The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan as a part
of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community
Master Plans have been competed in accordance with the principals outlined in this section and
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners:
1. Master Plan for Puture Development of Big Pine Key and No Name Key, adopted
December 17, 2003.
Amendment 2. Amend Objective 103.1 of the Year 2010 Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough
format):
Objective 103.1
Monroe County shall regulate future development and coordinate the proVISIon of public
facilities on Big Pine Key and No Name Key, consistent with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies
of this Comprehensive Plan, the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan and the Habitat
Conservation Plan, for Big Pine Key and No Name Key in order to:
(a) protect the Key deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium);
(b) preserve and enhance the habitat of the Key deer;
(c) limit the number of additional vehicular trips from other islands to. Big Pine
Key;
(d) maintain the rural, suburban, and open space character of Big Pine Key; and
(e) prevent and reduce adverse secondary and cumulative impacts on Key Deer.
[9J-5.006(3)(b)1 and 4]
DO 1-04
Page 6 of9
Initial
Amendment 3. Amend Policy 101.6.4 of the Year 2010 Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough
format):
Policy 101.6.4
The County will coordinate with DCA to ensure that DCA continues to support enhanced land
acquisition efforts in the Keys based on needs identified in this comprehensive plan. This
coordination shall ensure continued support of state acquisition efforts under CARL, Preservation
2000 and the Plorida Communities Trust programs. The County encourages the Department to work
at the state level to create a dedicated acquisition fund for Tier I lands on Big Pine Key and No Name
Key based on the results of the Carrying Capacity Study. the requirements of the incidental take
permit and Habitat Conservation Plan and the Master Plan for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The
County and the Department will also support appropriate legislative changes which will have the
effect of enhancing the Land Authority efforts throughout the County, and the South Plorida Water
Management District's acquisitions on Big Pine Key. Similarly, cooperation will continue with
private acquisition efforts, such as The Nature Conservancy and the Plorida Land and Sea Trust.
Amendment 4. Amend Policy 101.6.5 of the Year 2010 Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and strikethrough
format) :
Policy 101.6.5
Monroe County shall annually compile a list prioritizing the lands requested for County acquisition
due to the Permit Allocation System. The lands of the property owners who meet the criteria in Policy
101.6.1 shall be ranked according to:
1. the environmental sensitivity of the vegetative habitat, marine resources, and
impacts to the quality of near shore waters as specified by the ranking in the
Environmental Design Criteria section of the Land Development Regulations;
2. whether the property is in known, probable, and/or potential habitat for one or
more threatened and/or endangered species, as indicated on the most recent
Protected Animal Maps; and
3. whether development on the property will adversely impact successful
implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan or protection and recovery of
threatened or endangered species, such as development on Big Pine Key, No
Name Key, Ohio Key, and North Key Largo.
Those lands considered most sensitive according to the combination of (a), (b), and (c). above
shall be ranked as the highest priority for acquisition.
Amendment 5. Create Policy 101.5.11 and 101. 5. 11 in the Monroe County Year
2010 Comprehensive Plan to read as follows:
DO 1-04
Page 7 0[9
Initial
Policy 101.5.11
Residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key will be subject to the allocation
system set forth in Strategy 3.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big Pine Key and
No Name Key. The Land Development Regulations will be amended to include the point system
as detailed in the Master Plan. Eligibility to compete within the allocation system will be based
on the location of the proposed development with respect to the Tier System Overlay Map
incorporated herein by reference.
Policy 101.5.12
Non-residential development on Big Pine Key and No Name Key New will be allocated pursuant
to the following additional criteria:
1. Development must be infill in existing commercial areas in Tier 2 and Tier 3 lands, mainly
along the U.S. 1 corridor on Big Pine Key.
2. All new non-residential development will be limited to disturbed or scarified lands.
3. New allocation awards shall be allowed to exceed 2,500 square feet per site iflocated within
the designated Community Center Overlay as designated by Action Item 4.1.5.
4. New allocations shall be awarded moderate positive points to applicants who fulfill the
additional criterion set forth in Strategy 4.2 of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for
Big Pine Key and No Name Key.
All new non-residential development within the planning area shall be exempt from criterion 5,
6, 7, and 17 of Policy 101.5.5.
Amendment 6. Delete the following Policies from the Monroe County Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan: 103.1.1,103.1.2, 103.1.7, 103.1.8, 103.1.9, 103.1.10, 103.1.11, 103.1.12,
103.1.14,103.1.15,207.7.5,207.7.7,207.7.9, 207.7.10, 207.7.11, and 207.7.17.
Amendment 7. Change the Puture Land Use Map Designation of the properties
with the following real estate numbers: 00110460.000000, 00110540.000000, 00110640.000000,
00110720.000000, 00110720.000100, 00110730.000000, 00110740.000000, 00110750.000000,
00111020.000000, 00111020.000010, 00111020.000020, 00111020.000030, 00111020.000040
and illustrated on the attached map which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached as
Exhibit 1 from Mixed Use Commercial (MC) to Residential Low (RL).
(The remainder of this page left intentionally blank)
DOI-04
Page 8 of9
Initial
Amendment 8. Change the Future Land Use Map Designation of the properties
with the following real estate numbers: 00111420.000100 and 00111420.000500 and illustrated
on the attached map which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached as Exhibit 2 from
Residential Conservation (RL) to Mixed Use Commercial (MC).
PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Development Review Committee of Monroe County,
Plorida, at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of January, 2004.
Pred Gross, Director, Lower Keys Island Planning Team
Ralph Gouldy, Senior Administrator, Environmental Resources
Robert Will, Senior Planner
Department of Health (by fax)
Department of Public Works (by fax)
Department of Engineering (by fax)
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE OP MONROE COUNTY, PLORIDA
By
Pred Gross, DRC Chair
Signed this _ day of
,2004.
DO 1-04
Page 9 of9
Initial