Item L6 Chapter 3 Assessment of Comprehensive Plan Elements Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
CHAPTER 3:ASSESSMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS
a. Introduction
The State of Florida requires all local governments (counties and municipalities) to
adopt Local Government Comprehensive Plans that guide future growth and
development. Such plans have been required since the adoption in 1985 of Florida's
Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act,
also called the Community Planning Act(Chapter 163, Part II, F.S.).
Subsequent to its adoption in 1993, the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
was challenged and amended pursuant to then existing Rule 9J-14.022, F.A.C. and
Rule 28-20.100, F.A.C. The final Plan was adopted in 1995. The Growth
Management Division is the administrative entity that implements the goals,
objectives and policies (GOPs), as set forth in the Plan.
The statutory mandates for the Plan extend beyond those established in Chapter
163 F.S., including the following provisions:
• As an Area of Critical State Concern, any local comprehensive plan enacted,
amended or rescinded by the County is effective only after review of the
proposed plan, amendment or recession by the DCA to determine whether the
proposed plan, amendment or recession is in compliance with the "Principles for
Guiding Development" found in Chapter 380, F.S.
• After the Plan was challenged in 1995, subsequent legal proceedings prompted a
Final Order and Recommendations by the Administration Commission. The
effect of the Final Order was that 95 percent of the Plan became effective but the
disputed provisions required further action. Rule 28-20.100, F.A.C. established
the "Five Year Work Program" (the "Program"),which was expanded to 10 years.
The Program outlines the actions the County must achieve every year and
identifies the various agencies involved.
Due to these actions, development and growth in the County is governed by a
unique set of rules, laws and principles for planning.
b. Assessment of Existing Plan Elements
The following assessment of successes and shortcomings reviews the
implementation status of the fifteen (15) elements currently included within the
existing 2010 Plan. This assessment primarily focuses on the County's efforts since
the 2004 EAR. In addition to the following reviews, and for clarification of the entire
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-1 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Comprehensive Plan, the County should consider adding a Definitions/Glossary
section.
A. Future Land Use Element
Overview
The primary purpose of the Future Land Use Element(FLUE) is to provide for an
effective and efficient balance of the County's anticipated growth demands with
its goals for hurricane evacuation, economic development, maintaining
community character and protecting its natural resources. It is one of the most
important elements as it lays the foundation upon which the rest of the Plan is
built.
This element consists of five goals, addressed through 41 objectives and 106
policy statements. The objectives and policies within the FLUE facilitate its goals
through provisions for growth management; concurrency; natural resource
protection; hurricane evacuation; redevelopment; nonconformities; historic
resources; land use categories, including airport and military facilities; and
availability of land for affordable housing and public school facilities.
The FLUE designates the proposed future general distribution, location and
extent of the uses of land and includes standards for the densities and intensities
of each land use category. The element contains both a series of maps depicting
the Existing and Future Land Use pattern and a section of GOPs.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes. Shortcomings and Recommendations
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
FLUE GOPs of the Plan, which were designed to accommodate the County's
limited growth without jeopardizing its natural or cultural resources or
compromising the community's safety or quality of life.
• The County should consider whether or not to address the dwelling unit
allocation (20%) being reserved for affordable housing (e.g. after five years of
accumulation, unused allocations are rolled over to administrative relief.
• The FLUE GOPs (Objective 101.1 and associated policies) have been
successful in promoting orderly and economical development through its
Concurrency Management System by ensuring that public facilities and
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-2 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
services, including roads, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water,
parks and recreation and schools be available concurrent with the impacts of
development as was required by Rule 9J-5, F.A.C.
• The FLUE includes Objective 101.2 and associated policies relating to
reducing hurricane evacuation clearance time to 24 hours by 2010. The
majority of these policies have been successfully implemented, including
revisions to the Permit Allocation System for residential development, and
participating in efforts to monitor and reduce hurricane evacuation clearance
times; and efforts to evaluate hurricane evacuation models. To comply with
the requirements outlined in Rule 28-20.110, F.A.C. and to comport with
Objective 101.2 in the Plan, in 2010, the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation
Study "The Miller Model" was updated to include phased evacuation; the
Florida Department of Transportation's 5-Year Work Program roadway
projects; and updated participation rate and traffic flow rate assumptions to
determine projected clearance time results.
• Policy 101.2.6 prohibits new transient residential units . This prohibition is
periodically reviewed and extended. This Policy should be evaluated and
amended, as appropriate, to address transient residential units.
• The Work Program currently included in the existing FLUE Policy 101.2.13
includes tasks and activities through Year Ten (July 12, 2007). The County
has successfully implemented the majority of the tasks included in the
original Work Program.
— Remaining tasks include completion of the Tier Overlay mapping and
specific actions related to hurricane evacuation, land acquisition,
wastewater treatment and disposal, and stormwater improvements. The
County addressed habitat protection with the implementation of the Tier
Designation Review Committee and subsequent review and
recommendations for parcels previously challenged in an administrative
proceeding. Wastewater facilities have been delayed due to funding
shortfalls. Senate Bill 550 extended the deadline from 2010 to 2015 for
the upgrade of wastewater treatment facilities to advanced treatment
standards in the Florida Keys.
— Rule 28-20.140, F.A.C., amended Policy 101.2.13. The Comprehensive
Plan should include additional or revised tasks or activities as may be
necessary, such as those outlined in the Monroe County 30-Day Report,
2010, issued by the Administration Commission, including recent
statutory deadlines for wastewater improvements.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-3 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
— The BOCC adopted a tier zoning overlay designation for approximately
3,093 parcels in May 2011. The future land use and tier maps will need to
be reviewed and amended as appropriate to reflect the results of the
County's review.
— Additionally, the County should review and amend, as necessary, the
clearing limits established in Policy 101.4.22 for the Tier designations to
further protect native upland habitat.
— An analysis of the resulting Tier mapping indicates that a substantial
amount of vacant land in Tier 1 has a Mixed Use land use designation. The
County should review the land use designations for these parcels.
• Objective 101.4 and the associated polices establish the Future Land Use Map
categories and the density and intensity standards for each category. These
policies should be evaluated to determine if: 1) the existing density and
intensity standards recognize and encourage the unique
development/redevelopment patterns within the County; 2) if the floor area
ratio maximums promote compatibility in each of the Future Land Use
categories; 3) if the density standards under maximum net density should be
modified or eliminated; and 4) if open space ratios should be adopted into
the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the County should review and clarify
the uses permitted under the Conservation category, consider the creation of
a Preservation category for publically owned lands, and establish a
Commercial category.
— The County should consider creating a light industrial zoning district
under the Industrial and Mixed Use / Commercial FLUM designations.
— Since each land use category has vesting language for uses that were
allowed before 1996, it makes research very complicated. The County
should consider making the vesting language an appendix to the
Comprehensive Plan.
• The FLUE contains several GOPs related to maintaining and enhancing water
quality (Objective 101.9 and 102.5). To implement these policies, the County
adopted Sanitary Wastewater and Stormwater Master Plans and expended
limited financial resources to address existing wastewater and stormwater
issues. Additionally, the County assigns positive points for proposed
developments that will be connected to a central wastewater system to direct
growth to areas with sewers. Water quality improvements continue to
remain a top priority for the County. The County has adopted a Stormwater
Management Ordinance and prepared a Manual of Stormwater Management
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-4 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Practices which provides information on acceptable forms of Best
Management Practices (BMPs), e.g. rate control structures, catch basins with
skimmers and baffles, and wet and dry detention/retention facilities. The
County continues to address wastewater issues.
— Although originally planned to provide compliance by July of 2010, the
Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan (the "Master Plan") has
fallen short mainly due to a gap in funding. Although many tasks
identified in the Master Plan remain incomplete, all are being addressed.
The remaining tasks consist mainly of costly capital improvement
projects for which funding remains the key issue to implementation.
• Policy 101.3.1 requires the maintenance of a balance between residential and
non-residential growth by limiting the square footage of non-residential
development to maintain a ratio of approximately 239 square feet of new
non-residential development for each new residential unit permitted
through the Residential Permit Allocation System. This ratio may be
modified from time to time through amendments to the land development
regulations based upon market and other relevant studies as required by
policy 101.3.5. Further, Policy 101.3.5 requires the County to conduct a
market demand analysis and economic assessment to determine the demand
for future non-residential development in the County. As part of the 2010-
2030 update of the Technical Document for the new Plan, an economic
assessment will be completed; however, a market demand analysis
component has not been scheduled.
— The County should review historical non-residential growth and demand
trends and the results of the economic assessment to determine if
revisions to Policy 101.3.1 and Policy 101.5.5 are necessary to allow the
expansion and growth of existing businesses.
— Additionally, the County should make the appropriate amendments to
strengthen economic development strategies to support a balanced,
diversified, and robust economy.
• Policy 101.4.7 states the principal purpose of the Industrial land use category
is to provide for the development of industrial, manufacturing, and
warehouse and distribution uses, with other commercial, public, residential,
and commercial fishing uses also allowed. The County should consider
limiting residential uses to workforce housing.
• Policy 101.4.15 states the principal purpose of the Conservation land use
category is to provide for publicly owned lands held primarily for the
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-5 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
preservation of natural and historic resources and compatible passive
recreational uses. The County should consider a Conservation district that
does not allow recreational uses.
• Policy 101.4.16 states the principal purpose of the Airport District land use
category is to prohibit the development of residential, educational or other
uses which are characterized by the regular presence of large numbers of
people within the hazard areas of civil and military airports. The County
should consider revising this policy to reflect the existing legal opinion that
the County FLUM designation applies to the airports owned by the County
within the cities of Key West and Marathon, and that the County is to review
all permit applications.
• Policy 101.4.21 provides the Future Land Use Densities and Intensities table.
The County should consider revisions to the table to add the minimum open
space ratios by future land use category.
• Policy 101.4.24 states that in order to preserve the existing community
character and natural environment, the County shall limit the height of
structures, including landfills to 35 feet. Exceptions will be allowed for
appurtenances to buildings, transmission towers and other similar
structures. The County should amend this policy to be consistent with the
recent Land Development Code amendment.
• Policy 101.5.4 pertains to the residential Permit Allocation and Point System.
The County should evaluate the existing ROGO points for potential
amendments (e.g. add points for solar or other criteria to encourage green
standards); the County should further define the availability criteria for the
Central Wastewater System; and the County should consider whether or not
to continue to cap the number of perseverance points that may be
accumulated.
• Policy 101.5.5 states the County shall implement the non-residential Permit
Allocation and Point System based primarily on the Tier System, and the
points are to be applied cumulatively. The County should consider
eliminating NROGO, at a minimum as a public hearing process.
Consideration should include what the standards would be; will there be a
maximum square foot cap per site or by each building within certain FLU
categories; where is it appropriate to have larger buildings; and should the
County continue the limit of 2,500 square feet per application?
• Policy 101.5.8 states that Monroe County may develop a program, called
Transfer of ROGO Exemption (TRE) that would allow for the transfer off-site
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-6 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
of units to another site in the same ROGO sub-area. The County should revise
this policy to establish meaningful and predictable criteria for issuing ROGO
exemptions and to provide guidelines for the content of land development
regulations. Additionally, a policy should be created to allow the transfer of
ROGO allocations or exemptions from Tier I, II, and III-A to Tier III.
• Policy 101.6.1 states that the County, State, and other acquisition agencies
shall, upon property owner's request, purchase property for fair market
value or permit the minimum reasonable economic use of the property. The
County should consider adding a definition of "Fair Market Value" and
evaluate the ad valorem valuation limit requirement (e.g. should the
valuation limit be revised from 1992?)
• Objective 101.7 pertains to the County evaluating redevelopment areas and
the preparation of redevelopment plans. The County should evaluate
whether or not this objective and its associated policies are needed.
• Policy 101.8 and its associated policies pertain to eliminating or reducing the
frequency of uses which are inconsistent with the applicable provisions of
land development regulations and the FLU Map, and structure which are
inconsistent with applicable codes and land development regulations. The
County should evaluate its policies relative to non-conforming structures for
fairness to assure that during redevelopment the community character is
preserved.
• Objective 101.13 pertains to the adoption of innovative Land Development
Regulations which implement the GOPs of the Plan, including Permit
Allocation System for residential and non-residential and the existing
Transferable Development Rights (TDR) regulations. The County should
consider revamping its TDR system to allow the relocation of density within
subareas that are being moved from Tier I, II, II-A to Tier III (in all cases) and
from wetlands to other Tier III areas.
• Policy 101.13.5 requires that the County map potential Transferable
Development Rights (TDRs) sender and receiver sites and map parcels from
which development rights have been transferred. While the County has
maps of the various habitat types identified as "sender sites" in Policy
101.13.4,the County maps currently do not track the movement of TDRs. The
County should review this policy and determine the most appropriate way to
track the transfer of TDRs.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-7 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
— The County will determine if policies need to be revised to provide
further detail and guidance for the development of implementing land
development regulations.
• The FLUE directs the development of comprehensive land acquisition
program (Objective 101.6 and 102.4.1) and smart growth initiatives (Goal
105) in conjunction with its Livable CommuniKeys Program (Objective
101.20) to protect natural habitat and facilitate balanced and sustainable
development.
These GOPs have been successfully implemented through:
— The development and implementation of the Tier System and revisions to
the Permit Allocation System. In 2006, the County adopted a Tier System
to direct growth to acceptable areas and encouraging conservation in
areas with environmental sensitivity. The tier boundaries are depicted
on the Tier Overlay District Map.
1) To further implement smart growth initiatives, Goal 105 and related
rate of growth policies (101.5.4) should be evaluated to determine
how to establish scoring criteria for wetlands.
2) Tier criteria in Policy 105.2.1 should be revised and additional
categories should be established to address military lands (Tier
military) and right-of-ways (Tier 0).
— A Land Acquisition and Management Master Plan was developed in
August of 2006. The plan includes a detailed funding plan, identifying
both current and future funding sources and an implementation strategy
for acquisition. The plan also discusses the land needs associated with
affordable housing development and identifies potential funding for the
program.
— Adopting Policy 101.6.6 requiring that administrative relief, in the form of
the issuance a of building permit, is not allowed for lands with the Florida
Forever targeted acquisition or Tier 1 lands unless certain conditions are
met.
1) The County should develop criteria for administrative relief
determinations for Tier III-A parcels that are served by central
wastewater systems.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-8 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
— The adoption of Livable CommuniKeys Plans (LCP) for Key Largo, Stock
Island/Key Haven, Big Pine Key/No Name Key and Tavernier.
1) The County should continue the completion of the Lower Keys LCP and
Duck Key/Conch Key LCP.
• Objective 101.7 and 101.8 direct the preparation of redevelopment
standards and Land Development Regulations (LDRs) amendments to
address the large number of non-conforming commercial structures that are
non-compliant as to on-site parking, shoreline setbacks, stormwater
management, landscaping, and buffers; and provide incentives for
redevelopment and permit the continuance of businesses while moving
towards an integrated streetscape. The current Plan recognizes the large
number of non-conforming commercial structures and through
implementation of Policy 105.1.4 and the implementing LDRs the County has
reduced the number of existing nonconformities.
• Objective 101.7 requires the County to "...evaluate potential redevelopment
areas and prepare redevelopment plans for areas determined to be in need of
redevelopment." Pursuant to Objective 101.20 and its associated policies,
each of the Livable CommuniKeys Plans provides a framework for future
development and redevelopment, an assessment related to the physical and
socio-economic conditions, identifies implementation strategies, capital
improvement needs and site and building guidelines within the areas served
by each of the LCPs. Each of these plans consistently encourages
redevelopment over new development.
— While the Plan does not directly incentivize redevelopment, the County's
growth limitations and the ROGO and NROGO processes, could in theory,
act as a catalyst, for redevelopment, providing that planning objectives
and strategies, such as those outlined within the Livable CommuniKeys
Plans, are better articulated, supported and incentivized within the Plan.
• The FLUE policies are structured to direct development away from the
County's natural resources (Objective 101.11 and Goal 102) and areas within
high risk special flood hazard zones (Objective 101.14), while preserving
property rights. The County continues to implement these policies through
on-going coordination with the Federal and State's oversight agencies
including: the Federal Emergency Management Agency, DCA, Department of
Environmental Protection, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission, the Florida Park Service,the SFWMD and the U.S.Army Corps of
Engineers.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-9 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
— With respect to Policy 101.14, the County should evaluate and revise the
CHHA related policies to reflect the recent statutory changes.
— Pursuant to Goal 102 of the Plan, the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for
Big Pine Key and No Name Key was implemented in 2006 to protect the
Florida Key deer as well as other protected species, including the Lower
Keys marsh rabbit and the eastern indigo snake. The HCP outlines the
planned growth patterns and rate as well as the anticipated impact that
growth will have on the species.
• The FLUE has protected the community's desired character by restricting
building height, administering the existing Sign Ordinance, encouraging
compact development, limiting new development and redevelopment to uses
that are compatible with the future land use designations, and providing
consideration to the compatibility with the surrounding area (Policies
101.4.24, 101.5 and 101.15.1).
• Objective 101.15 states the County should enforce and update the existing
Sign Ordinance in order to maintain and improve the visual character of the
County and protect adjacent land uses. The County should consider deleting
this Objective and deferring to the LDC to control signage.
• As required by Objective 101.17, the County has established and maintains a
Geographic Information System.
— Policy 101.17.4 requires that the Growth Management Division
coordinate with the Property Appraisers' Office to ensure existing land
uses and density and intensities of use are accurately depicted in their
GIS. In 2010, the County developed a GIS data set for an Existing Land Use
Map series, utilizing the Property Appraisers GIS data, in particular the
Property Classification (PC) codes, to assign a generalized land use
designation. There are certain limitations and discrepancies in utilizing
Property Appraisers GIS data. County staff continues to refine the data and
resolve,to the greatest extent practical,the differences between data sets.
— Since this appears to be an administrative action, the County should
consider deleting Objective 101.17 and related policies from the Plan.
• Policy 101.18.2 pertains to vested rights. The County should evaluate if this
policy should be eliminated or should a new time period be provided for
after the Plan is updated.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-10 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• Policy 101.19 recognizes that significant excess platted residential
subdivision lots exist, relative to the County's carrying capacity based upon
hurricane evacuation, traffic circulation, water quality and marine resources.
The County should evaluate the limits for platting due to the lot splits and
other subdivisions of land that are creating surface water issues.
• Objective 102.4 pertains to a Land Acquisition Master Plan. The County
should consider evaluating and determining if the Land Acquisition Master
Plan needs to be update.
• Policy 103.2.5 states that the County shall monitor FKAA compliance with
federal regulations prohibiting potable water hookups to certain designated
habitat areas. Since the County does not have regulatory authority over the
actions of certain utility providers, (e.g. Keys Energy, FKEC, FKAA) the
County should consider evaluating this policy for deletion or amendment.
• The FLUE contains Goal 104 and associated objectives and policies related to
the preservation and protection of the historic districts. The County has over
600 sites and structures that have been designated locally or nationally
historically significant. The County should consider evaluating its objectives
and policies to assure that historic preservation efforts such as those
established through the Tavernier Historic Overlay District are consistent
and extended to other historic sites and structures throughout the County.
• Goal 105 states that Monroe County shall undertake a comprehensive land
acquisition program and smart growth initiatives in conjunction with its
Livable CommuniKeys Program in a manner that recognizes the finite
capacity for new development in the Florida Keys by providing economic and
housing opportunities for residents without compromising the biodiversity
of the natural environment and the continued ability of the natural and man-
made systems to sustain livable communities in the Florida Keys for future
generations. The County should consider revisions to add a provision, or
other policy, that the criteria of the Comprehensive Plan and Land
Development Code are utilized to evaluate and designate parcels within the
Tier System.
• The County should determine if policies need to be revised to provide
additional strategies for protecting and preserving water dependent uses
and provide further detail and guidance for the development of
implementing land development regulations.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-11 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3-Date Certain
Policy Assessment Matrix, and should be reviewed closely and revised or
deleted accordingly.
B. Conservation and Coastal Management
Overview
The purpose of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element is to
promote the conservation, use, and protection of natural resources and to plan
for, and where appropriate, restrict development activities where such activities
would damage or destroy coastal resources and threatened and endangered
species habitat; and protect human life and limit public expenditures in areas
that are subject to destruction by natural disaster.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes, Shortcomings and Recommendations
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Conservation and Coastal Management Element GOPs of the Plan. The
protection of the environment has been the focus of much of the land use
planning effort since the adoption of the existing Plan.
• Goal 202 directs Monroe County to maintain and enhance nearshore water
quality and the associated marine resources. To implement these policies,
Monroe County adopted Sanitary Wastewater and Stormwater Master Plans
and utilized the County's limited financial resources to address existing
wastewater and stormwater issues. The County participates in the Water
Quality Protection Program and continues to coordinate with the State and
federal agencies, and nonprofit organizations on the health and integrity of
environmentally sensitive lands and marine resources.
— The County should review and revise, as appropriate, the existing
stormwater regulations to further reduce pollutant discharges into
ground and surface waters from stormwater runoff.
• The GOPs direct the County to address liveaboards (Objective 202.4), marina
siting (Objective 202.5), boating impacts management (Objective 202.7), and
the protection of marine resources. The County prepared reports in 2001
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-12 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
(Project Proposal for a Keys-Wide Mooring Field System) and 2002 (Keys-Wide
Mooring Field System Preliminary Planning Document) which addressed
impacts associated with liveaboard anchorages and made recommendations
for the siting of mooring fields. The County codified regulations for the
establishment and management of mooring fields in Chapter 26 of the Code
of Ordinances, and created its first liveaboard mooring field in Boot Key
Harbor. The County has codified a prohibition on mooring or docking of
'liveaboard vessels' in manmade canals and basins. The County created
several no discharge zones which in 2002 were encompassed by the federal
No Discharge Zone that included all state waters of the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary (Sanctuary). In 2010 that zone was expanded to include all
the waters, both state and federal of the Sanctuary. In 2007, the County
completed the Monroe County Marina Siting Plan; however, it received
objections from DCA, and has not been adopted by the BOCC. Additionally,
the County continues to maintain a system of aids to navigation and boating
regulatory zones and disposes of derelict and abandoned vessels in
coordination with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
— The County should revise and update the Monroe County Marina Siting
Plan for adoption into the Plan.
• Policy 202.11.1 requires the County to coordinate a, "...review of application
guidelines for aerial pesticide spraying and alternatives to aerial applications
of pesticide." The final report, "Aerial and Tidal Transport of Mosquito
Control Pesticides into the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary" (Pierce,
et al) was issued in 2005.
• Goal 204 and associated objectives and policies direct Monroe County to
protect and enhance marine and freshwater wetlands. Policy 204.1.1
requires the County to "...participate in the Florida Keys Advance
Identification of Wetlands (ADID) Program." The ADID program was a joint
effort of the USEPA, USACE, and the County, utilizing federal wetland
delineation methods. The Florida Keys ADID project included mapping of
marine and freshwater wetlands throughout the Keys. The ADID project
mapped marine and freshwater wetlands throughout the Keys (within
approximately 65,000 acres of highway-connected islands) and conducted a
functional evaluation of these wetlands. The map series produced for the
ADID program was produced on hand-drawn maps that were then digitized.
The ADID project included the development of a functional assessment
methodology called the Keys Wetland Evaluation Procedure (KEYWEP). In
conjunction with the ADID, the assessment team scored many wetlands
throughout the County using the KEYWEP. For wetland regulatory purposes,
the County utilizes scores assigned during the ADID through KEYWEP to
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-13 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
determine the appropriate level of protection or suitability for development
of wetlands. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the
water management districts utilize the Uniform Mitigation Assessment
Method (UMAM - see Section 373.414(18), F.S. and Rule 62-345, F.A.C.) for
wetland regulatory purposes. UMAM is a standardized procedure for
assessing the functions provided by wetlands and other surface waters, the
amount that those functions are reduced by a proposed impact, and the
amount of mitigation necessary to offset that loss.
- While the ADID mapping was completed, the process did not involve the
State of Florida wetland delineation method (Section 373.421, F.S.). The
County should evaluate the state methodology and coordinate with state
and federal agencies to ensure the County is making determinations that
are consistent with Chapter 373, F.S. The County should review and
compare both the KEYWEP and UMAM procedures to determine if
revisions are necessary for the County and ensure consistency with
Chapter 373,F.S.
• Goal 205 directs Monroe County to protect and enhance native upland
vegetation and protect and conserve existing wildlife and wildlife habitats.
These GOPs have been successfully implemented through:
- The development and implementation of the Tier System (Policy 205.1.1)
and revisions to the Permit Allocation System. In 2006, the County
adopted a Tier System to direct growth to acceptable areas and
encouraging conservation in areas with environmental sensitivity. The
tier boundaries are depicted on the Tier Overlay District Map.
1) To further protect native upland habitat the County should review and
amend, as necessary, the clearing limits for the Tier designations (Policies
205.2.6 and 101.4.22).
2) Tier criteria in Policy 205.1.1 should be revised and additional categories
should be established to address military lands (Tier military) and right-
of-ways (Tier 0).
- The development of a Land Acquisition and Management Master Plan in
August of 2006. The plan includes a detailed funding plan, identifying
both current and future funding sources and an implementation strategy
for acquisition. The plan also discusses the land needs associated with
affordable housing development and identifies potential funding for the
program.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-14 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
1) Conservation land acquisitions have included freshwater wetlands,
freshwater ponds, buffer areas, and critical recharge areas of the
groundwater lenses which sustain freshwater flows into the wetland
habitat areas.
— Since 2005, the Monroe County Land Steward is a partner with the
Florida Keys Invasive Exotics Task Force and has undertaken numerous
exotic plant removal projects in County-owned parcels, using annual
grant funding from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission Invasive Plant Management Section.
1) The policies in the current Plan prohibit the planting of highly invasive
exotic plants throughout the County. The County provides education to the
public of the need to remove invasive plant materials from existing
developed areas.
• The GOPs (Objective 203.3, Goal 207 and associated objectives and policies)
direct the County to protect wildlife habitats and threatened and endangered
species. The County developed and adopted a Livable CommuniKeys Plan
and Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for Big Pine Key and No Name Key. The
HCP was implemented in 2006 to protect the Florida Key deer as well as
other protected species, including the Lower Keys marsh rabbit and the
eastern indigo snake.
• Policy 207.1.1 requires an EIA for major development. However, "major
development" is not defined. The County should include a definition within
this policy.
• Policy 207.2.1 states: The Monroe County Biologist, in coordination with
DNR, FGFWFC, and the FWS, shall prepare management guidelines for
wildlife species designated as threatened and endangered by the state and
federal governments. To the maximum extent possible, the County shall rely
on guidelines and public educational materials prepared by the state and
federal governments. The guidelines have not been completed. The County
should complete these guidelines.
• Pursuant to the requirement of Objective 206.3, beach management plans are
recommended to address the problems of erosion and invasive plants.
• The Objective 208.2 and its associated policies direct the County to establish
standards for mining activities and the reclamation of abandoned mining
sites. Policy 208.4.2 requires the County to inventory abandoned mining
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-15 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
sites. As of December, 2010, there is no complete inventory of abandoned
mining sites. The County should inventory abandoned mining sites.
• Goal 210 of Plan calls for an ongoing restoration program for public lands.
The County undertakes projects based on management or maintenance
needs or by public request. The County uses a combination of local, State,
and federal funds to implement specific projects. Local funding comes from
the Monroe County Environmental Land Management and Restoration Fund,
which receives monies paid to the County as fines or penalties for
environmental crimes, or as payments in lieu of replacement of native
vegetation destroyed during the land development process.
• Goal 212 of the Plan requires the prioritization of the County's shoreline
development. In 2005 the County retained the South Florida Regional
Planning Council (SFRPC) to develop the Monroe County Marine Management
Strategic Plan which included strategies for protecting and preserving water
dependent uses (specifically working waterfront uses). In 2007 the County
again retained the SFRPC to develop the Monroe County Working Waterfronts
Master Plan which included recommended Plan and Land Development
Regulation amendments designed to prevent the conversion of water
dependent facilities and services to non-water dependent development.
These amendments have not been adopted.
— The County should evaluate existing policies regarding the protection and
preservation of water dependent uses and provide further detail for the
development of implementing land development regulations.
• Policies 212.2.1 and 212.2.3 establish the shoreline setbacks for principle
and accessory structures. The County should evaluate the setback
requirements for consistency with community character of existing
structures and, as appropriate, revise the setback standards.
• Policy 213.1.1 requires the County to prepare a "Public Access Plan" by
December 31, 2006. Although this plan has not been completed, the update
of the Technical Document that is currently underway will provide an
inventory and estimated need for public access points, marina, boat ramps,
etc. The County should determine if further studies are necessary.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-16 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• Goal 216 and its associated objectives and policies direct the County to
reduce hurricane evacuation clearance time to 24 hours by the year 2010. In
2010, the Florida Keys Hurricane Evacuation Study (The Miller Model) was
updated to include phased evacuation; the Florida Department of
Transportation's (FDOTs) 5-Year Work Program roadway projects; and
updated participation rate and traffic flow rate assumptions to determine
projected clearance time results. The County continues to participate in
efforts to update evacuation model assumptions.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
C. Traffic Circulation Element
Overview
The purpose of the Traffic Circulation Element is to provide a safe, convenient,
efficient, and environmentally-compatible motorized and non-motorized
transportation system for the movement of people and goods in the County.
The FDOT is responsible for maintaining and improving U.S. 1 and South
Roosevelt Boulevard/S.R. A1A. SR A1A begins at the intersection of Bertha
Street and Roosevelt Boulevard as a four lane undivided roadway, extending
eastward past the Key West International Airport (KWIA) before terminating at
the intersection with U.S. 1 at the east end of the island.
The Monroe County Division of Public Works is responsible for maintaining and
improving County roads. The Division of Engineering is responsible for planning
County road and bridge improvements and overseeing and administering
contracted road and bridge repair projects.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Traffic Element GOPs of the Plan.
• The Traffic Circulation Element currently promotes orderly and economic
development through the Concurrency Management System by ensuring that
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-17 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
public facilities and services, including roads be available concurrent with the
impacts of development(Objective 301.2).
• The GOPs direct the County to ensure all roads have sufficient capacity to
serve development at the adopted Level of Service (LOS) standards. Further,
Policy 301.2.1 requires the County to use the methodology developed by the
US-1 Task Force to monitor peak season traffic volumes and, "...determine
the cumulative impact of development and through traffic." An annual
arterial travel time and delay study is conducted by FDOT. The results are
used in conjunction with the Methodology to determine US-1 LOS.
— The County maintains an inventory of their major maintained roads and
bridges, respectively, including CR-905 through North Key Largo and
Card Sound Road (CR-905A), which, when combined, provide an
alternate route to the mainland.
• In accordance with Objective 301.6, the FDOT's Five Year Work Program,
which is updated annually and incorporated into the County's Capital
Improvement Schedule, provides a schedule of major roadway
improvements.
• Pursuant to Policy 301.3.1, the Monroe County Engineering Division
prepares a Seven Year Roadway/Bicycle Path Plan, which is updated annually.
Proposed roadway improvements are evaluated and prioritized based on a
point system developed by the County.
Recommendations
• Coordination with the FDOT is vital in the Florida Keys. While the County
provides for FDOT representation at the County's Development Review
Committee, unfortunately FDOT representation is not consistent. The
potential for better coordination is vital due to the significance of U.S. 1 in the
County and the implementation of the Livable CommuniKeys Plans.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-18 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
D. Mass Transit
Overview
The purpose of the Mass Transit Element is to provide a coordinated surface
transportation system for transportation disadvantage people with the County
and to encourage such as system for all residents and guests.
The County is currently served by two main public transit systems:
• Miami-Dade Transit in the northern region of the County with two routes
(Dade-Monroe Express and Card Sound Express) serving the County from
Key Largo to the City of Marathon; and
• The City of Key West Department of Transportation which operates:
— Key West Transit with four fixed-route bus routes serving the City of Key
West and Stock Island;
— The Lower Keys Shuttle providing service in the southern portion of the
County from the City of Marathon to the City of Key West; and
— The Key West Park-N-Ride at The Old Town Garage.
• Other transit related services providing limited service in the County include:
— Monroe County Transit's Paratransit Service;
— Guidance Clinic of the Middle Keys; and
— Greyhound Bus Line.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Mass Transit Element GOPs of the Plan.
• Objective 401.1 seeks to, "...encourage the provision of transit service for all
residents to major trip generators." As noted above, public transit services
are available: the Dade-Monroe Express (MDT #301) in the northern region
between Florida City, Key Largo and Marathon; the Card Sound Express
(MDT #302) between Florida City and Ocean Reef Club (Key Largo); and the
Lower Keys Shuttle in the southern region of the County between Key West
and Marathon.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-19 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• While there is no official transfer station for the aforementioned transit
services, the bus stop at U.S. 1 and Sombrero Beach Road (MM 50) does serve
as a midway point at which riders can transfer to/from the Lower Keys
Shuttle and the Miami-Dade Express #301 route.
Recommendations
• The County should continue to develop strategies to reduce trips on U.S. 1.
• The County should continue to coordinate with the municipalities to further
facilitate mass transit in the Florida Keys. Coordination and actions may be
taken to:
— Establish coordination agreements with Key West Transit and other
transit operators.
— Provide signage alerting passengers to the location of the "transfer" stop
at MM 50.
— Developing an inventory of designated bus stops and shelters.
— Providing additional designated bus stops and shelters (signed, with or
without amenities) throughout the U.S. 1 Corridor. This is especially
significant north of Marathon.
— Develop park-and-go facilities.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
E. Ports,Aviation and Related Facilities
Overview
The purpose of the Ports, Aviation and Related Facilities Element is to provide a
safe, convenient, efficient, and environmentally-compatible motorized and non-
motorized transportation system for the movement of people and goods in the
County.
Within the County, there are eight airport facilities. The Key West International
Airport (KWIA) provides commercial flights to the community. The Florida Keys
Marathon Airport (FKMA) provides mainly general aviation services. There are
also four private airports or airstrips, one seaplane facility, and one military
aviation facility: the U.S. Naval Air Station Key West (NAS KW). The KWIA and
the Naval Air Station are situated in the Lower Keys. The FKMA is located in the
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-20 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Middle Keys. The seaplane facility is located on Stock Island. The four private
airstrips are located throughout the Florida Keys.
Naval Air Station Key West (NASKW) consists of approximately 5,800 acres with
facilities located in 13 different areas of the lower Florida Keys. Boca Chica
Field, NAS Key West's primary site and airfield, is located on Boca Chica Key.
Boca Chica Field is approximately three miles east of the City of Key West and
consists of approximately 4,700 acres encompassing nearly the entire key. In
the 1970s and 1980s, the Navy implemented an Air Installations Compatible Use
Zones (AICUZ) program at NAS Key West (Boca Chica Field) to encourage,
through local cooperation, compatible development in and around the Navy
airfield in the County.
While there is an abundance of coastline in the County, only two areas are
considered port facilities. The Port of Key West, which consists of cruise ship
berths and passenger ferries; while the privately owned Stock Island port is
considered to be the only truly industrial, deep water port in the County.
Additionally, HB 7207, which amended Chapter 163, F.S., had numerous changes
related to the compatibility of development with military installations and how
local governments and military installations exchange information.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Ports,Aviation and Related Facilities Element GOPs of the Plan.
• The GOPs (Objective 501.1) direct the County to preserve existing airports,
airstrips, and related activities; and to coordinate surface transportation
access to existing and new public airport facilities. The County continues to
implement these GOPs. Recently, the County built a 400-space parking
garage located on the south side of the Terminal at the Key West Airport.
This garage provides 95 short-term spaces, 150 long-term spaces, and 155
parking spaces for car rentals. A total of 13 curb spaces are provided for
taxis.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-21 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• Pursuant to the requirement of Policy 501.2.2 related to the updated airport
master plan, recent additions to Florida Keys Marathon Airport include the
following:
— Monroe County Sheriff's hangar and apron;
— Expansion of the Grant Air (17130) apron and hangar;
— Construction of 32 "T-Hangars;"
— Coast(17130) apron;
— Antique Air Hangar;
— Relocated four-bay shade hangars to the northeast sector;
— Construction of the Mosquito Control Facility at the east end of the
airport; and
— New Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting(AARF) Building.
• Goal 502 and its associated objectives and policies direct the County to
preserve and enhance existing ports and port related activities. In 2006, the
County developed a Livable CommuniKeys Plan for Stock Island/Key Haven
which addressed ports and port related uses in this planning area.
• The County has included a liaison from NASKW as a non-voting member of
the Planning Commission.
• The County continues to notify the commanding officer of NASKW of
proposed changes to the Plan and land development regulations that would
affect the land use adjacent to the military base.
Recommendations
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-22 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
F. Housing Element
Overview
The Housing Element is intended to provide guidance for the development of
plans and policies to meet housing deficits and summarize existing and future
housing needs.
The Housing Element includes:
• An assessment of existing housing conditions and characteristics.
• A future housing needs assessment based on population projections.
• A determination of available vacant land for residential development
purposes.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Housing Element GOPs of the Plan.
• The County developed the Land Acquisition and Management Master Plan in
August of 2006 as required by Policy 601.1.6. The plan includes a detailed
funding plan, identifying both current and future funding sources and an
implementation strategy for acquisition. The plan also discusses the land
needs associated with affordable housing development and identifies
potential funding for the program.
• To implement Policy 601.1.12, the County has adopted Land Development
Regulations to provide incentives to promote the development of affordable
housing. While the County has provided a variety of incentives to encourage
the development of affordable housing, affordable housing continues to be an
issue in the County.
• As required by Policy 601.1.1, in 2007, the Monroe County Housing Needs
Assessment was prepared by Florida International University. The purpose of
the assessment was to, "provide a quantitative housing needs assessment
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-23 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
that can serve as a baseline for understanding the County's housing supply
and demand relationship by sub-region."
• The establishment of the Tavernier Historic District provides a mechanism
for protection of significant housing as required by Policy 601.3.4.
Recommendations
• The County has developed a variety of incentives to encourage the
development of affordable housing; however, due to the high cost of land,
limited subsidies and limited available ROGO allocations, the availability of
affordable housing continues to be an issue in the County. The County should
continue to coordinate with the municipalities and the DCA regarding
affordable housing.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
G. Potable Water Element
Overview
The purpose of the Potable Water Element is to support the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) in the fulfillment of their statutory obligation and
authority to provide for a safe, high quality and adequate supply, treatment,
distribution, and conservation of potable water to meet the needs of present and
future residents.
There are no significant sources of fresh surface water in the populated Florida
Keys portions of the County. Today, the FKAA remains the sole supplier of
centralized potable water to the Keys, and the vast majority of the County
residents receive their potable water, supply and distribution, from the FKAA
system. Therefore,the County, being a retail customer of FKAA, does not have any
local responsibility for potable water supply or distribution to its citizens. The
primary source of water to the Keys is from the FKAA's Florida City wellfield,
which pumps water from the Biscayne Aquifer and the Floridan Aquifer System in
southeastern Miami-Dade County.
There are alternative potable and non-potable water supplies in use in the Keys;
such as: private cisterns, private wells (See Natural Groundwater Aquifer
Recharge element for listing), home desalinization systems, and bottled water.
Most users of these alternative sources rely on them only as supplements to the
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-24 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
FKAA water. Cistern and well water, are often reserved for irrigation and other
non-potable uses. A few residents of mainland Monroe County are served by
private wells and cisterns.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Potable Water Element GOPs of the Plan.
• As required by Objective 701.1, Policy 701.1.3 and Policy 701.1.4, the Potable
Water Element currently promotes orderly and economical development
through the Concurrency Management System by ensuring that public
facilities and services, including potable water be available concurrent with
the impacts of development.
• Objective 701.4 seeks to assure cooperation between the County and Miami-
Dade County to, "...protect the recharge area of the Florida City Wellfield from
potential sources of groundwater contamination." Protection of the FKAA
Florida City Wellfield is accomplished through the provisions of the Miami-
Dade County Potable Water Supply Well Protection Ordinance (Miami-Dade
County Code 24-43). This Code contains the following provisions regarding
the protection of the County's water supply service: Septic Tanks, Sanitary
Sewers, Stormwater Disposal Methods, Prohibition of Hazardous Materials
within Wellfield Protection Areas, Excavation, Pipelines for Hazardous
Materials and Prohibition of Resource Recovery and Management Facilities
with Wellfield Protection Areas.
• Objective 701.8 addresses the capacity issue relating to fire flows. The FKAA
and the County entered into an agreement in September 2007, for installation
and maintenance of fire hydrants in unincorporated Monroe County. This
agreement acknowledges that the majority of the water distribution system is
not designed to provide fire flow and FKAA does not guarantee fire flow. The
purpose of fire hydrants are to provide various locations for the filling of fire-
fighting apparatus. The agreement also states that the County Fire Rescue will
recommend fire hydrant locations for proposed plans on the distribution
system, while FKAA will evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of the
recommended locations. The agreement continues to define funding and
maintenance fee responsibilities between the County and the FKAA.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-25 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• To further Objective 701.9, the County has water efficiency standards to
augment the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) and FKAA
programs as defined in the 2007 Florida Building Code.
• As required by Policy 701.9.1, the County adopted Section 114-102 of the LDC
which requires that 70 percent of the plant materials used to satisfy
landscaping requirements for new development will be native species which
require little irrigation.
• The County has a water conservation component of the NROGO (Section 138-
47, of the Monroe County Land Development Code (MCLDC) as required
under Policy 701.9.7. The intent of this ordinance is to encourage the
planting of native vegetation and promote water conservation. The graded
scale (points) are assigned to the project based on the percentage of native
landscape plants on the property beyond what is required within landscaped
bufferyards and parking areas.
• To implement Objective 701.9, the County developed a 10-year Water Supply
Work Plan that identifies alternative water supply projects, traditional water
supply projects, conservation, and reuse necessary to meet the
unincorporated area water supply needs, consistent with the SFWMD Lower
East Coast Regional Water Supply Plan and the FKAA 20-year Water System
Capital Improvement Master Plan.
Recommendations
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
H. Solid Waste
Overview
The purpose of the Solid Waste Element is to provide for adequate collection,
disposal and resource recovery of solid waste in an environmentally sound and
economically feasible manner to meet the needs of present and future County
residents.
The Public Works Division, Department of Solid Waste/Recycling (PWD-DSW/R)
overseas the solid waste disposal and recovery program for the County.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-26 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Solid Waste Element GOPs of the Plan.
• The Solid Waste Element currently promotes orderly and economical
development through the Concurrency Management System by ensuring that
public facilities and services, including solid waste be available concurrent
with the impacts of development as required by Objective 801.1.
• Pursuant to Policy 801.1.2, and MCLDC, Section 114-2(a)(2), "... sufficient
capacity shall be available at a solid waste disposal site to accommodate all
existing and approved development for a period of at least three years from
the projected date of completion of a proposed development or use".
— The determination of sufficient capacity is assessed on an annual basis. As
stipulated in Section 114-2(b)(3) of the MCLDC, capacities for solid waste
and other public facilities are updated and presented each year on or
before June 15th in a public facilities capacity assessment report that is
approved by the Board of County Commissioners.
• The County entered into a haul out contract with Waste Management Inc.
(WMI) in 1990 to have its solid waste hauled out of the County, pursuant to
Objective 801.3. Since that time, the County has continually renewed five year
contracts with WMI. The County has been paying annual disposal fees on a per
ton basis of municipal solid waste.
• To implement Objective 801.4, currently, the County's recycling program
consists of a voluntary curbside collection system, recycling centers at each of
the solid waste transfer stations, and voluntary commercial collection.
Recycling programs related to commercial establishments have been
developed and put in place. The Monroe County School District has developed
and implemented programs at all County schools.
— In addition to the curbside collection, recycling centers have been made
available to the residents as part of County's recycling program. The
current drop-off centers are located at (1) Cudjoe Key Transfer Station
(MM 21.5, Blimp Road), (2) Long Key Transfer Station (MM 68), and (3)
Waste Management Recycling Center (MM 100.2, 300 Magnolia St. Key
Largo).
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-27 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
— These locations accept recyclable material that coincides with curbside
collection of recyclable material.
— In addition to typical recyclable materials (paper, plastic, glass, and
metals), electronic waste (E-waste) and household hazardous wastes are
accepted twice a month.
• As required by Policy 801.4.7,a program to remove, crush and haul abandoned
vehicles for processing has been developed by the County. This service is
provided to the County through contractual agreements.
• In accordance with Objective 801.5, the County is responsible for monitoring
small quantity hazardous waste generators. This program is managed by the
Department of Health. There are approximately 800 potential small quantity
generators that are registered in the County. Each small quantity generator is
responsible for the transportation and disposal of its own hazardous waste;
however, as part of the agreement with the County, small quantity generators
can contract with the County's private contractor,at reduced rates.
— PWD-DSW/R has temporary storage facilities at Cudjoe, Long Key, and Key
Largo for small quantities of household hazardous material and electronic
waste. The County accepts household hazardous material and electronic
waste during specified times and days at all three transfer station sites and
sponsors special collection events at no charge to residents. Small
quantities of these materials are accepted from businesses for a fee during
regular collection hours. In addition, the County has encouraged auto
repair stations to voluntarily collect batteries and waste oil from their
customers as a public service.
— PWD-DSW/R offers training sessions and classes on hazardous waste
management to various business and community groups. Training, along
with evaluation and assessment, is one of the topics on which the
Cooperative Extension Service has written materials, slides, and a video
that are available upon request. The County sponsors special household
hazardous material and E-waste collection events at no charge to residents.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-28 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• Objective 801.7 directs the County to promote public awareness of the
initiatives to recycle and reduce the solid waste stream. A revised
comprehensive program for public education and awareness of recycling is
currently in development and is being implemented for the entire County.
Updated brochures, an on-line newsletter, press releases, and media
interviews are prepared on a regular basis by PWD-DSW/R.
— A list of all local newspapers, radio stations and television stations has
been compiled. News releases and public service announcements are sent
regularly to all local newspapers and radio stations. Paid advertisements
have been utilized for publicizing special recycling events. Brochures have
been prepared and distributed and flyers to promote recycling events have
been circulated throughout the County by PWD-DSW/R.
Recommendations
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
I. Sanitary Sewer
Overview
The purpose of the Sanitary Sewer Element is to provide for the adequate,
economically sound collection, treatment, and disposal of sewage which meets
the needs of present and future residents while ensuring the protection of public
health, and the maintenance and protection of ground, nearshore, and offshore
water quality.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes. Shortcomings and Recommendations
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Sanitary Sewer Element GOPs of the Plan.
• The Sanitary Sewer Element currently promotes orderly and economical
development through the Concurrency Management System by ensuring that
public facilities and services, including sanitary sewer be available concurrent
with the impacts of development, as required by Policy 901.1.1.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-29 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• The County is designing and constructing sanitary sewer facilities in order to
comply with Objective 901.4 and Sections 380.0552, 381.0065 and 403.086 of
the Florida Statutes. Since facilities are being constructed, the County should
revise the level of service standards in Policy 901.1.1 to establish a level of
service standard to ensure that adequate facility capacity will be provided for
future development.
• Pursuant to Objective 901.1, the County has adopted a Sanitary Wastewater
Master Plan and continues to utilize the County's limited financial resources
to address existing wastewater issues. Additionally, the County assigns
positive points for proposed developments that will be connected to a central
wastewater system to direct growth to areas with sewers.
• Although originally planned to provide compliance by July of 2010, the 2006
Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan (the "Master Plan") has
fallen short mainly due to a gap in funding. Although many tasks identified in
the Master Plan remain incomplete, all are being addressed. The remaining
tasks consist mainly of costly capital improvement projects for which funding
remains the key issue to implementation.
- The Keys Wastewater Plan - November 2007 Report, prepared at the
request of the Florida House of Representatives Environmental and
Natural Resources Council, identified progress of the individual projects
along with local government responsibilities for specific facilities. The
executive summary of the report cited a funding gap of approximately
$336 million in meeting the July 2010 date for compliance.
- In April 2010, the Florida Senate and House approved SB 2018 extending
the deadline for compliance to the end of 2015, and postponing fines and
potential liens against property owners. In addition, the bill authorized
$200 million of State funding for improvements; however, the source of
funding remains unresolved. Meeting the 2015 extension requires a
detailed financial plan to implement necessary plant and infrastructure
improvements. The funding gap of $330 Million, which has already
stretched the County's capacity for debt service, continues to broaden due
to a delayed revenue stream resulting from delays in design and
construction of new systems.
- The County should revise the Plan to be consistent with all relevant
deadlines for wastewater improvements.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-30 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• To date, the County has not imposed assessments on residents as it could
result in home forfeitures and financial hardship. The varying costs among
projects pose additional problems. For example, areas such as Cudjoe
Regional System, projected at $20,000 per EDU, costs up to two times as
much as other systems costing approximately $10,000 per EDU.
Improvements to Cudjoe Regional System could require supplemental
funding to bring costs in-line with other systems to avoid an unreasonable
burden to the residents. The County looks to State and Federal assistance to
make up the difference. Due to uncertainties, all alternative avenues for
funding need to be explored and implemented. Without a detailed financial
plan and diligent pursuit of funding sources, there is concern that the 2015
extension may not be met.
• Pursuant to Objective 901.1, the County guarantees that the available facilities
are able to support the development at the adopted level of service. The
capacity data in the permits from the new development of the Waste Water
Treatment Plan have all been calculated so that there is sufficient room for
growth - (technical data). There are currently no plants that have met the
100% utilization rates. Based upon the population projections by planning
area noted in Chapter 2, "Community-Wide Assessment, population and the
migration from Upper to Lower Keys, there may be a need to confirm plant
capacities.
- The pending EPA Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes
and Flowing Waters and Marine Systems, 40 CFR, part 131, may have
impacts on both existing and proposed facilities. The mandates
associated with this program may introduce additional requirements for
treatment and result in further improvements to both regional and small
private facilities.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-31 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
J. Drainage
Overview
The purpose of the Drainage Element is to provide a stormwater management
system which protects real or personal properties, and which promotes and
protects ground and nearshore water quality.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
Drainage Element GOPs of the Plan.
• The Drainage Element currently promotes orderly and economical
development through the Concurrency Management System by ensuring that
public facilities and services, including drainage be available concurrent with
the impacts of development as required by Objective 1001.1 and Policy
1001.1.2 of the Plan.
• The GOPs direct the County to provide stormwater management system
which protects real and personal properties, and which promotes and
protects ground and nearshore water quality. The County has adopted a
Stormwater Master Plan, a Stormwater Management Ordinance and prepared
a Manual of Stormwater Management Practices which provides information on
acceptable forms of Best Management Practices (BMPs), (e.g. rate control
structures, catch basins with skimmers and baffles, and wet and dry
detention/retention facilities).
• Policy 1001.1.3 requires the establishment of Stormwater Management
Ordinance. In the past, the only controls on stormwater imposed by the
County were those involving flood protection and floodplain encroachment in
Section 122 of the MCLDC. Subsequently, the MCLDC has been revised, based
on recommendations provided in the County's Stormwater Management
Master Plan (SWMMP), to not only provide stormwater controls for flood
protection and floodplain encroachment, but also to include water quality
controls in Section 114-3 of the MCLDC.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-32 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Recommendations
• Policy 1001.1.6 directs the County to complete an inventory and analysis of
existing public and private drainage facilities in the County. At the present
time, only project specific surface water management systems exist in the
County that are capable of servicing existing land use or mitigating associated
impacts. A facility-specific land use inventory has not been completed to
ascertain the drainage system needed to serve a combination of residential,
commercial, industrial, extractive, institutional and agricultural land uses as
well as public facilities, conservation/preservation areas and vacant lands.
The County should undertake the inventory and evaluation of existing
drainage structures and facilities within County ROWS, identifying flooding
issues; and, obtain data from the FDOT and municipalities for their facilities,
collaborating efforts to resolve common issues.
— The Division of Public Works is the maintenance department for County
buildings, parks, vehicles and equipment, and roads. The Monroe County
Engineering Division should consider hiring a contractor to undertake the
inventory and evaluation of existing drainage structures and facilities
within County ROWS and identify flooding issues by using drainage system
records and plans and by obtaining data from the County Road
Department, FDOT, etc.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-33 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
K. Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element
Overview
The purpose of the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element is to protect
the quality and quality of water in the potable water aquifer and the freshwater
lens systems and preserve ecosystems dependent upon freshwater.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
GOPs of the Plan.
• The potable water supply resources used by the County, including both the
aquifer system and treatment facilities, are geographically located in Miami-
Dade County - entirely outside of the County's jurisdiction (see Chapter 8.0,
Potable Water Element). As a result of the potable water source for the County
being located entirely within Miami-Dade County, aquifer protection related to
the FKAA's Florida City Wellfield is accomplished through the provisions of the
Miami-Dade County Wellfield Ordinance,pursuant to Goal 1101 of the Plan.
• The current Stormwater Management Ordinance addresses the need to handle
stormwater on site as a water quality strategy; however, it does not stress the
need to retain natural drainage features and reduce impervious surfaces as
required by Policy 1101.2.1.
• Objective 1101.2 requires the County to, "...map the freshwater lens systems
and associate recharge areas in the Florida Keys..." The maps of freshwater
lenses on Big Pine Key were updated in 2010, by Geoview, Inc. under a
contract by The Nature Conservancy, and presented in "Final Report,
Geophysical and Hydrogeological Study of Big Pine Key, FU, dated October 15,
2010.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-34 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Recommendations
• While the current Stormwater Management Ordinance addresses the need to
handle stormwater on site, in order to comply with Policy 1101.2.1, standards
are needed to ensure impervious surfaces do not reduce the quantity or
quality of aquifer recharge to the point where the natural resources are
significantly degraded.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
L. Recreation and Open Space Element
Overview
The purpose of the Recreation Element is to plan for a comprehensive system of
recreation and open space lands available to the public.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
GOPs of the Plan.
• The Recreation and Open Space Element currently promotes orderly and
economical development through the Concurrency Management System by
ensuring that public facilities and services, including parks and recreation be
available concurrent with development and as required by Objective 1201.1.
• Lands designated as Recreation (Policy 101.4.9) provide for public and private
activity-based and resource based recreational facilities. Lands designated
Conservation (Policy 101.4.15) are primarily for the preservation of natural
and historic resources as well as compatible passive recreational uses. The
County has an abundance of recreation and conservation lands and hundreds
of thousands of acres of submerged lands available for recreational use.
• The County has been diligent in providing recreation lands, both resource-
based and activity-based for the use and enjoyment of its residents and the
tourist and seasonal population.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-35 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Recommendations
While the County has been successful in implementing the majority of the GOPs
outlined in the existing Plan, several key provisions have yet to be fully achieved,
while others should be reviewed and modified. These policies are discussed below:
• The County should consider whether or not to eliminate park and recreation
Level-of-Service (LOS). This LOS is not statutorily required.
• The County should undertake the development of a Parks and Recreation
Management and Maintenance Master Plan pursuant to Policy 1201.3.3, which
requires the County to adopt a master plan for each existing county-owned
park. In addition to the requirements for the these master plans as outlined in
Policy 1201.3.6, these plans should also address proper management
techniques consistent with the updated elements of Future Land Use,
Recreation and Open Space, Historic Sites, and Conservation and Coastal
Management; and general maintenance requirements and costs.
• Policy 1201.6 directs the County to ensure access to publicly-owned recreation
and open space areas, including the handicapped and disable. The County
should review current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards for
accessible design and ensure that the County's policies are consistent.
• Policy 1201.6.4 requires preparation of a Monroe County Parks and Recreation
Master Plan; Policy 1201.6.2 requires the development of an annual park and
recreation facility management plan. In 2005, the County developed a Draft
2005 Monroe County Parks and Recreation Master Plan. This "final draft"of the
document was submitted to the County for review and adoption, but has not
been adopted as of December 2010. The County should evaluate the draft plan
and develop an up-to-date park and recreation management plan.
• Objective 1201.9 directs the County to create a Parks and Recreation
Department. This department was created in 1995, but funding and staffing
for this department was never provided. The County currently has a Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board which reports to the County Commission and
works with both Growth Management and Public Works Divisions.
— The Division of Public Works is the maintenance department for County
buildings, parks, vehicles and equipment, and roads. The County should
consider deleting this policy due to lack of funding and BOCC direction not
to pursue a Parks and Recreation Department.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-36 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
M. Intergovernmental Coordination Element
Overview
The purpose of this element is to increase the effectiveness, efficiency, and
responsiveness of government; provide for consistency in decisions and actions
between various departments and agencies; and to improve citizen awareness
and participation.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcominas
Overall, since the last EAR (2004), the County has successfully implemented the
GOPs of the Plan.
• Through the existing GOPs, the County has effectively coordinated with local,
state and federal agencies.
• Interlocal agreements have been established with the FKAA and other utility
providers to provide wastewater services.
• Some of the interlocal agreements to be entered into that are specified in
policies throughout this element appear, from best available data, that they
have not been entered into or established.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-37 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Recommendations
• The policies identifying specific inter-local agreements should be reviewed
closely and should be revised or deleted accordingly.
• Policy 1301.1.2 states that Monroe County must establish a complete list of
existing and planned intergovernmental and interagency agreements, which
must be updated annually. This has been accomplished through the listing of
agreements posted on the County Clerk's website. This website is difficult to
search for all interlocal agreements. The County may want to create a
comprehensive list of all interlocal agreements for inclusion as an appendix
in the Technical Document of the Plan.
• The County, TDC and the Chamber of Commerce should jointly promote the
County's parks as family-friendly attractions.
• The element includes other outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
N. Capital Improvements Element
Overview
The Capital Improvement Element (CIE) provides for review criteria of capital
improvements, coordination with the budget, level of service standards, and
concurrency management.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
Overall, the County has been successful in implementing the GOPs within the
CIE.
• Through the Capital Improvements Element (Goal 1401), the County ensures
that the adopted level of service standards are achieved and maintained and
that existing deficiencies are eliminated.
• The County is currently reviewing and modifying its processes for identifying
and including necessary capital improvements in the annual update.
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-38 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
• The County prepared an amendment to the CIE in December 2010 to respond
to the annual update requirements of Chapter 163 F.S. In February 2011, the
amendment was found to be in-compliance by DCA.
Recommendations
• The County should revise the LOS standards for Recreation and Open Space
(Policy 1201.1) and adopt sanitary sewer LOS standard to ensure that
adequate facility capacity will be provided for future development (Policy
901.1.1).
• Funding shortfalls continue relating to sanitary sewer implementation. The
County continues to seek funding sources.
• The element includes outdated or no longer applicable objectives and
policies; these are identified in the attached Appendix 3 and should be
reviewed closely and revised or deleted accordingly.
0. Cultural Resources Element
Overview
Cultural Resources is an optional element not required by Chapter 163, F.S. and
as such, no specific requirements have been instituted for this element.
The following are the major achievements, successes, shortcomings and
recommendations for the element:
Successes and Shortcomings
• Pursuant to Goal 1501 and its associated objectives and policies, the BOCC
created the Tourist Development Council (TDC). The TDC sets an overall
direction for the County tourism marketing effort, including cultural
activities.
• The residents of the County approved a 3-cent sales tax on tourist lodging
(the bed tax) to be used for tourist advertising, promotion, and some tourist
related capital projects.
• The Florida Keys Council of the Arts (FKCA) is the main source of information
on arts and culture in the Florida Keys. The FKCA provides grants, supports
Art in Public Places, and promotes the Florida Keys rich and diverse history
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-39 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
in art and culture. The Arts Council provides services to visual and
performing artists, arts organizations, students and the public, striving to
instill a passion for and participation in the arts. The FKCA maintains an
artist registry; publishes and distributes a weekly and quarterly Cultural
Calendar and gallery guide.
Recommendations
• Goal 1501 directs the County to ensure accessibility, stewardship and
cooperative facilitation in protecting and fostering cultural activities. The
County should review current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
standards for accessible design and ensure that the County's policies are
consistent.
• No Data Inventory and Analysis is available regarding existing conditions or
future needs, including an inventory of cultural resources, public artworks,
art education, and programming to formulate a basis to determine the
effectiveness of this element.
The Remainder of This Page Intentionally Left Blank
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-40 Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars,P.A.
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
CHAPTER 3:ASSESSMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENTS............................................ 1
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................I
Assessment of Existing Plan Elements .....................................................................................I
Future Land Use Element...............................................................................................2
Overview................................................................................................................2
Successes,Shortcomings and Recommendations.................................................2
Conservation and Coastal Management....................................................................12
Overview..............................................................................................................12
Successes,Shortcomings and Recommendations...............................................12
Traffic Circulation Element.........................................................................................17
Overview..............................................................................................................17
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................17
Recommendations...............................................................................................18
MassTransit...................................................................................................................19
Overview..............................................................................................................19
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................19
Recommendations...............................................................................................20
Ports,Aviation and Related Facilities .......................................................................20
Overview..............................................................................................................20
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................21
Recommendations...............................................................................................22
HousingElement............................................................................................................23
Overview..............................................................................................................23
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................23
Recommendations...............................................................................................24
PotableWater Element.................................................................................................24
Overview..............................................................................................................24
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................25
Recommendations...............................................................................................26
SolidWaste .....................................................................................................................26
Overview..............................................................................................................26
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................27
Recommendations...............................................................................................29
SanitarySewer...............................................................................................................29
Overview..............................................................................................................29
Successes,Shortcomings and Recommendations...............................................29
Drainage..........................................................................................................................32
Overview..............................................................................................................32
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................32
Recommendations...............................................................................................33
Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element...................................................34
Overview..............................................................................................................34
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................34
Recommendations...............................................................................................35
Recreation and Open Space Element.........................................................................35
Overview..............................................................................................................35
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................35
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-i Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars PA
October 2011
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Recommendations...............................................................................................36
Intergovernmental Coordination Element...............................................................37
Overview..............................................................................................................37
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................37
Recommendations...............................................................................................38
Capital Improvements Element..................................................................................38
Overview..............................................................................................................38
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................38
Recommendations...............................................................................................39
Cultural Resources Element........................................................................................39
Overview..............................................................................................................39
Successes and Shortcomings...............................................................................39
Recommendations...............................................................................................40
Chapter 3:Assessment of Comprehensive 3-i Evaluation and Appraisal Report
Plan Elements Keith and Schnars PA
October 2011