Item B3BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: Mav 22, 2012 Division: Grossth Management
Bulls Item: Yes No X Staff Contact Person/Phone 4: Christine Hurlev x2517
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: A public hearing to consider an ordinance amending the Monroe County 2010
Comprehensive Plan, to create an overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series to establish the Military
Installation Area of Impact to implement Policy 108.2.1.
ITEM BACKGROUND: The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) sent a letter to Mayor
Heather Carruthers, dated July 11, 2011, which stated that the current Monroe County Comprehensive Plan does
not address compatibility of lands adjacent to an existing militaiy installation. A local government that does not
address compatibility of land proximate to an existing militaiy installation in the future land use plan element by
June 30, 2012, shall enter into mediation. Mediation would include representatives from the Naval Air Station
Key West, Monroe County, the State Land Planning Agency, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and
potentially other private land owners. If a local government comprehensive plan does not contain criteria
addressing compatibility by December 31, 2013, the agency may notifi- the Administration Commission, which
may impose sanctions pursuant to s. 163.3184(8), F.S., including the direction to state agencies to not provide
funds to increase the capacity of roads, bridges, or water and sewer systems for those local governments with
plan amendments determined not to be in compliance. The Administrative Commission may also specifi- that
the local government is not eligible for grants under the following programs: Florida Small Cities Community
Development Block Grant Programs, Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program, and revenue
sharing. If the local government has a Coastal Management Element, the Administrative Commission may also
speci -- that the local government is not eligible for funding pursuant to s.161.091, F.S., regarding beach
management and maintenance funding.
It is important to note that if the ,State land Planning Agency finds the comprehensive plan amendment "not in-
comyliance; " the amendment package would be sent to the Division ofAdministrative Hearing (DOAH) for an
administrative hearing as to its compliance.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
On July 15, 2003, the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 031-2003, amending Section 9.5-252(C)(3)h. (AICUZ) and creating
Section 9.5-258 of the Land Development Code that specifies restrictions on private property adjacent to NAS Key West.
On July 15, 2011, the BOCC asked the Growth Management Director to include an agenda item on the August BOCC
meeting to discuss the DCA letter and militaiv compatibility.
At the August 17, 2011, BOCC meeting, the Growth Management Director provided a summan- of the staff s meeting with
NASKW. The BOCC directed the Growth Management Director to include an agenda item on the September BOCC
meeting to provide a status on the development of draft policies to satisfy the requirements of Section 163.3175, F.S., as
well as to review proposed revisions to the 2010-2030 Technical Document. At the same meeting, the BOCC also directed
the Growth Management Director to include an agenda item on the October BOCC meeting to review the final proposed
policies and to provide staff direction on how to proceed.
On September 21, 2011, the BOCC directed the Growth Management Director to include an agenda item for the October
BOCC meeting to provide a status report on the development of draft policies as well as to review proposed revisions to the
2010-2030 Technical Document and to provide staff direction on how to proceed.
At the October 19, 2011 BOCC meeting, the Growth Management Director presented the planning staff's proposed militail-
compatibility strategies and requested direction to process the proposed amendments for inclusion into the Monroe County
2010 Comprehensive Plan.
On December 14, 2011, the BOCC held a public hearing to consider a resolution to transmit to the State Land Planning
Agency an amendment to the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan. as required by Sections 163.3177 and 163.3175,
Florida Statutes, to create militaiv compatibility criteria.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval
TOTAL COST: INDIRECT COST: BUDGETED: Yes No
DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE:
COST TO COUNTY:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
AMOUNT PER MONTH Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty OMB/Purchasing
DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required
DISPOSITION:
Risk Management
AGENDA ITEM #
ORDINANCE NO. -2012
AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS CREATING AN OVERLAY TO THE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP SERIES TO ESTABLISH THE MILITARY INSTALLATION AREA OF
IMPACT PURSUANT TO POLICY 108.2.1 OF THE 2010 MONROE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING
FOR THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR
TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY; PROVIDING
FOR THE FILING WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND FOR AN
EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING FOR THE INCLUSION IN THE
MONROE COUNTY 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
WHEREAS, Sections 163.3175, and 163.3177, Florida Statute (F.S.), require local
governments to address compatibility of development with military installations and require the
exchange of information between local governments and military installations; and
WHEREAS, Sections 163.3175, and 163.3177, F.S., require the adoption of criteria to be
used to achieve the compatibility of lands adjacent or closely proximate to military installations
within the future land use plan element by June 30, 2012. A local government that does not
address compatibility of land proximate to an existing military installation in the future land use
plan element by June 30, 2012, shall enter into mediation. Mediation would include
representatives from the Naval Air Station Key West, Monroe County, the State Land Planning
Agency, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and potentially other private land owners;
and
WHEREAS, if a local government comprehensive plan does not contain criteria
addressing compatibility by December 31, 2013, the State Land Planning Agency may notify the
Administration Commission, which may impose sanctions pursuant to Section 163.3184(8), F.S.,
including the direction to state agencies to not provide funds to increase the capacity of roads,
bridges, or water and sewer systems for those local governments with plan amendments
determined not to be in compliance. The Administration Commission may also specify that the
local government is not eligible for grants under the following programs: Florida Small Cities
Community Development Block Grant Programs; Florida Recreation Development Assistance
Program; and revenue sharing. If the local government has a Coastal Management Element, the
Administration Commission may also specify that the local government is not eligible for
funding pursuant to s.161.091, F. S., regarding beach management and maintenance funding; and
1
WHEREAS, County staff, in conjunction with representatives of Naval Air Station Key
West has collaborated on various policies and standards to address military compatibility within
the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment establishes a Military Installation Area of Impact
(MIAI) overlay to the Future Land Use Map as the companion map amendment to proposed
Comprehensive Plan Policy 108.2.1, requiring the adoption of the MIAI overlay; and
WHEREAS, at the October 19, 2011 Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) meeting,
the BOCC directed Monroe County staff to process the proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee considered the
proposed amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 17th day of October, 2011;
and
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 1st day of December, 2011,
the Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of considering
the transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency of the proposed amendment to the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and recommended approval of the amendment; and
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 14th day of December, 2011,
the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing to consider a
resolution to transmit to the State Land Planning Agency an amendment to the Monroe County
2010 Comprehensive Plan, as required by Sections 163.3177 and 163.3175, Florida Statutes, to
create military compatibility criteria and an amendment to create an overlay to the Future Land
Use Map Series to establish the Military Installation Area of Impact to implement proposed
Policy 108.2.1; and
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 14th day of December, 2011,
the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners voted to transmit the proposed
comprehensive plan amendments to the State Land Planning Agency; and
WHEREAS, on March 20, 2012, Monroe County received an Objections,
Recommendations and Comments (ORC) report from the State Land Planning Agency. The
ORC report contained four (4) objections to the companion text amendment as well as
recommendations regarding measures that can be taken to address those objections to the
County's proposed amendment (Amendment No. 12-1 ACSC); and
WHEREAS, Monroe County has address the objections in the ORC report and has
proposed revisions to Policy 108.2.1, in the companion text amendment, which includes the
adoption of the MIAI FLUM overlay;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The Military Installation Area of Impact Future Land Use Map Overlay of the
Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan is hereby adopted and attached hereto as Exhibit
A.
2
Section 2. This ordinance is contingent upon the passage by the Board of County
Commissioners and the approval of the State Land Planning Agency of the
ordinance creating Policy 108.2.1, shown on Exhibit B, requiring the adoption of
the Military Installation Area of Impact Future Land Use Map Overlay.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or
provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall
not be affected by such validity.
Section 4. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
Section 5. Transmittal. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Director of Planning to
the State Land Planning Agency pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida
Statutes.
Section 6. Filing and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the
Secretary of the State of Florida but shall not become effective until a notice is
issued by the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission finding
the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and after any
applicable appeal periods have expired.
Section 7. Inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan. The numbering of the foregoing
amendment may be renumbered to conform to the numbering in the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and shall be incorporated in the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting held on the day of A.D., 2012.
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
DEPUTY CLERK
Mayor David Rice
Mayor pro tem Kim Wigington
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Heather Carruthers
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
M.
P
Mayor David Rice
MONROE COUNTY ATTORNEY
APPR77 AS T .Q FORM.,
SUS�N-�M�IMLEY
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
c
q
c3 y
v N
cc
C
cc
_ cc
J
O y
c L
L �
Q LL
O ++
++ a
cc 7
O
4aU
cc
N y
o
L
i
O O
++ a
C
Exhibit B
ORDINANCE NO. -2012
AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ADDRESSING THE COMPATIBILITY OF LANDS
ADJACENT TO OR CLOSELY PROXIMATE TO MILITARY
INSTALLATIONS IN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IN THE 2010
MONROE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; CREATING GOAL 108,
OBJECTIVE 108.1, POLICY 108.1.1, POLICY 108.1.2, POLICY 108.1.3, POLICY
108.1.4., POLICY 108.1.5, POLICY 108.1.6, POLICY 108.1.7, OBJECTIVE 108.2,
POLICY 108.2.1, POLICY 108.2.2, POLICY 108.2.3, POLICY 108.2.4, POLICY
108.2.5, POLICY 108.2.6, POLICY 108.2.7, AND POLICY 108.2.8; PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF INCONSISTENT
PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND
PLANNING AGENCY; PROVIDING FOR THE FILING WITH THE
SECRETARY OF STATE AND FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND PROVIDING
FOR THE INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY 2010 COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN.
WHEREAS, Sections 163.3175, and 163.3177, Florida Statute (F.S.), require local
governments to address compatibility of development with military installations and require the
exchange of information between local governments and military installations; and
WHEREAS, Sections 163.3175, and 163.3177, F.S., require the adoption of criteria to be
used to achieve the compatibility of lands adjacent or closely proximate to military installations
within the future land use plan element by June 30, 2012. A local government that does not
address compatibility of land proximate to an existing military installation in the future land use
plan element by June 30, 2012, shall enter into mediation. Mediation would include
representatives from the Naval Air Station Key West, Monroe County, the State Land Planning
Agency, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and potentially other private land owners;
and
WHEREAS, if a local government comprehensive plan does not contain criteria
addressing compatibility by December 31, 2013, the State Land Planning Agency may notify the
Administration Commission, which may impose sanctions pursuant to Section 163.3184(8), F.S.,
including the direction to state agencies to not provide funds to increase the capacity of roads,
bridges, or water and sewer systems for those local governments with plan amendments
determined not to be in compliance. The Administration Commission may also specify that the
local government is not eligible for grants under the following programs: Florida Small Cities
Community Development Block Grant Programs; Florida Recreation Development Assistance
1
Program; and revenue sharing. If the local government has a Coastal Management Element, the
Administration Commission may also specify that the local government is not eligible for
funding pursuant to s.161.091, F.S., regarding beach management and maintenance funding; and
WHEREAS, County staff, in conjunction with representatives of Naval Air Station Key
West has collaborated on various policies and standards to address military compatibility within
the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, at the October 19, 2011 Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) meeting,
the BOCC directed Monroe County staff to process the proposed amendments; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee considered the
proposed amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 17th day of October, 2011;
and
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 1st day of December, 2011,
the Monroe County Planning Commission held a public hearing for the purpose of considering
the transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency of a proposed amendment to the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and recommended approval of the amendment; and
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 14th day of December, 2011,
the Monroe County Board of the County Commissioners held a public hearing for the purpose of
considering the transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency of a proposed amendment to the
Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and recommended approval of the amendment;
and
WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 14th day of December, 2011,
the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners recommended approval of the amendment
and voted to transmit the proposed comprehensive plan amendments to the State Land Planning
Agency; and
WHEREAS, on March 20, 2012, Monroe County received an Objections,
Recommendations and Comments (ORC) report from the State Land Planning Agency. The
ORC report contained four (4) objections as well as recommendations regarding measures that
can be taken to address the objections to the County's proposed amendment (Amendment No.
12-1 ACSC); and
WHEREAS, Monroe County has proposed revisions to the proposed goals, objectives
and policies, to address the objections raised by the State Land Planning Agency in the ORC
report; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan is amended as follows: (Deletions are
S�,- eke �h and additions are underlined.)
2
Goal 108
The compatibility of lands adjacent to or closely proximate to the Boca Chica airfield of Naval
Air Station Key West (NASKW) pursuant to Sections 163.3175 and 163.3177, Florida Statutes,
shall be achieved through the implementation of the Objectives and Policies, incorporated herein.
Achieved is defined as being consistent with the Objectives and Policies, incorporated herein.
Obiective 108.1
Naval Air Station Key West and Monroe County shall exchange information to encourage
effective communication and coordination concerning compatible land uses as defined
herein.
Policy 108.1.1
Monroe County shall transmit to the commanding officer of Naval Air Station Key West
information relating to proposed changes to comprehensive plans, plan amendments,
Future Land Use Map amendments and proposed changes to land development
regulations which, if approved, would affect the intensity, density, or use of the land
adjacent to or in close proximity to the Naval Air Station Key West (within the Military
Installation Area of Impact (MIAM. Pursuant to statutory requirements, Monroe County
shall also transmit to the commanding officer copies of applications for development
orders requesting a variance or waiver from height requirements within areas defined in
Monroe County's comprehensive plan as being in the MIAI. Monroe County shall
provide the military installation an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed
chan4es.
Policy 108.1.2
Monroe County shall coordinate with Naval Air Station Key West and the Department of
Economic Opportunity (State Land Planning Agency) to review Best Practices and
provide guidance on recommended sound attenuation options to be identified in
development orders for optional implementation in new constriction and redevelopment
of existing strictures in areas located within the MIAI. The list of recommended sound
attenuation options may be based on the level of noise exposure, level of sound
protection, and the type of residential constriction or manufactured housing that is
proposed. Monroe County and the Naval Air Station Key West will coordinate with the
Department of Economic Opportunity to identify state and federal housing programs, and
to develop informational literature to inform qualified homeowners of the availability of
potential funds for sound attenuation.
Policy 108.1.3
Within 30 days from the date of receipt from Monroe County of proposed changes, the
Naval Air Station Key West commanding officer or his or her designee may provide
comments to Monroe County on the impact proposed changes may have on the mission
of the military installation. Monroe County shall forward a copy of any comments
regarding comprehensive plan amendments to the state land planning agency. The
commanding officer's comments, underlying studies, and reports shall not be binding on
Monroe County. Monroe County shall take into consideration any comments provided
by the Naval Air Station Key West commanding officer or his or her designee and shall
also be sensitive to private property rights and not be unduly restrictive on those rights.
Policy 108.1.4
Monroe County shall include a representative of Naval Air Station Key West as an ex
officio, nonvoting member of Monroe County's Planning Commission. The NASKW ex
officio member represents all military interests in Monroe County_
Policy 108.1.5
Monroe County shall notify the Naval Air Station Key West commanding officer or his
or her designee of any development proposals that are scheduled for the Development
Review Committee (DRC) at the earliest date possible. NASKW may provide comments
on proposals to the DRC.
Policy 108.1.6
The Navy is undertaking an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate
alternatives for future airfield operations at Naval Air Station Key West. Monroe County
shall work closely with the Navy throughout the process of the EIS and shall discourage
the Navy from increasing its operations at NASKW that negatively impact the
surrounding community_
Policy 108.1.7
In order to protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of
NASKW, pursuant to Section'180.0552 (7)(h)4., F.S., protect the public health, safety,
and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys, pursuant to Section'180.0552 (7)(n), F.S.,
and encourage compatibility, Monroe County will encourage the Navy to acquire all land
it is impacting with its operations and noise within any graphic area with 80+ Day -
Night Average Sound Level (DNL), and any areas where an aircraft mishap could occur.
Obiective 108.2
Monroe County shall consider the protection of public health, safety and welfare as a
principal objective of compatible land use planning on lands adjacent to or closely_ proximate
to the Boca Chica airfield of NASKW.
Policy 108.2.1
Monroe County shall adopt an overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series identifying the
Military Installation Area of Impact (MIAD to define the zone of influence of NASKW;
within which growth management policies shall guide land use activities and uses in
areas exposed to impacts generated by Navy operations.
Policy 108.2.2
Density and intensity standards and land uses established by the Future Land Use
Element and Future Land Use Map, on the effective date of this policy, for properties
located within the MIAI overlay shall be recognized and allowed to develop to the
maximum development potential pursuant to the standards existing on the effective date
of this policy_
Policy 108.2.3
Monroe County and Naval Air Station Key West (NASKW) recognize the existing
density and intensity, as of the effective date of this policy, established by the Future
Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map for property adjacent to or closely
proximate to NASKW. NASKW has indicated that it will not object to the issuance of
development orders, within the MIAI, if properties have development rights on Future
Land Use Map, Land Use District (Zoning) Map, approved development agreements or
Section 380.032, F.S. agreements with the State Land Planning Agency. NASKW may
provide comments and suggest measures to mitigate potential impacts.
Policy 108.2.4
Existing development located within the MIAI overlay shall be recognized and allowed
to redevelop. Further, the property's established density and intensity standards and land
uses provided by the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map shall be
recognized and allowed to redevelop to the maximum development potential pursuant to
the standards existing on the effective date of this policy_
Policy 108.2.5
Monroe County will maintain the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designations, for any
application received after the effective date of this policy, for properties located within
the MIAI overlay. FLUM amendments that increase density and/or intensity within the
MIAI overlay received after the effective date of this policy, are not permitted unless
Monroe County transmits the requested FLUM amendment to NASKW, pursuant to
Policy 108.1.1. Within 30 days of receipt, the NASKW commanding officer or his or her
designee may provide comments on the proposed amendment, based on appropriate data
and analysis, to Monroe County indicating whether the property is located within a noise
zone or land use incompatibility zone and whether the proposed density and/or intensity
increase is incompatible with NASKW.
If NASKW indicates the property is within a land use incompatibility zone, the Board of
County Commissioners shall adopt a resolution providing a finding determining whether
the property is subject to the restrictions of increasin4 density and/or intensity for the
application filed for the property within the MIAI boundary. Monroe County will
maintain the FLUM designations for properties adjacent to or closely proximate to
military installations for which NASKW provided data and analysis, which meets the
requirements of Section 163.3177(1)(f), F.S., as of the effective date of this policy, which
supports a determination that the property is within a land use incompatibility zone.
Additionally, for FLUM amendments requesting an increase of density and/or intensity
within a land use incompatibility zone, Monroe County shall encourage the Navy to
acquire these lands, pursuant to Policy 108.1.7, for the protection of the public health,
safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys.
If NASKW indicates the property is within a noise zone, Monroe County may consider
Future Land Use Map amendments requesting an increase in density and/or intensity
within the MIAI overlay, if the property owner submits a supplemental noise study, based
on professionally accepted methodology approved by Monroe County and NASKW, to
determine whether the noise level is greater than or less than 65 DNL (Day -Night
Average Sound Level) at the subject property (site) requesting the proposed FLUM
amendment.
• Once the applicant submits the supplemental noise study, Monroe County and
NASKW shall review the submitted, supplemental noise study for professionally
acceptable sufficiency. The Naval Air Station Key West commanding officer or
his or her designee may provide comments, based on appropriate data and
analysis, to Monroe County stating whether the Navy recognizes the noise study
as a "professionally accepted methodology."
• NASKW shall be provided up to nine (9) months from receipt of the supplemental
noise study, submitted with the application requesting a FLUM amendment which
proposes increases in density and/or intensity within the MIAI overlay, to provide
comments to Monroe County. Once comments are received or, if comments are
not received within nine (9) months from NASKW, the County shall allow the
applicant to proceed through the public hearing process with the submitted,
supplemental noise study, based upon the methodology defined in the Monroe
County Technical Document of the adopted Monroe County Comprehensive Plan.
• Monroe County shall take into consideration any comments and accompanying
data and analysis, provided by the Naval Air Station Key West commanding
officer or his or her designee regarding the professional acceptability of the
methodology of the noise study_
• Considering the supplemental noise study, based on professionally accepted
methodology reviewed by Monroe County and NASKW, if provided, the Board
of County Commissioners shall adopt a resolution providing a finding
determining whether the property, within the MIAI boundary, is or is not subject
to the restrictions on increasing density and/or intensity for the application filed.
• After 90 days of the adoption of the Board of County Commission resolution,
Monroe County will schedule the required public hearings for the FLUM
application requesting an increase in density and/or intensity, filed for the
property within the MIAI boundary.
Alternatively, with a requested FLUM amendment, a supplemental noise study, based on
professionally acceptable methodology, can be submitted that was modeled using the
Integrated Noise Model which has been adopted by the FAA as the standard model used
for Part 150 studies or NOISEMAP which is used by the Department of Defense for
modeling military aircraft noise for Air Installation Compatible Use Zones.
The Board of County Commissioners may condition a granting of a resolution on a
waiver of liability against or indemnification of the County by the requesting property
owner for any cause of action or claim based upon the current or future uses and
operations at NASKW.
Policy 108.2.6
For any application received after the effective date of this policy, within the MIAI
overlay, Monroe County will not approve NEW land uses, as demonstrated on the MIAI
Land Use Table (permitted uses shown in Column 42), through a Future Land Use Map,
Text, overlay or LUD map amendment.
The MIAI Land Use Table provides the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Categories
(Column 1) as of the effective date of this policy and includes the permitted uses
(Column 2), allocated density per acre (Column 3), maximum net density per buildable
acre (Column 4), the floor area ratio (Column 5), and corresponding zoning category
(Column 6) within each FLUM category located within the MIAI boundary. Further the
MIAI Land Use Table provides land uses located within the 65-69 DNL Noise Zone 2
and NASKW's suggested land use compatibility within this noise zone. The table
includes land uses allowed (Column 7), land uses allowed with restrictions (Column 8),
land uses that are generally incompatible but allowed with exceptions (Column 9) and the
land uses that are not compatible and should be prohibited. Column 11 provides notes
associated with Columns 7, 8, 9 and 10 and indicates that additional land uses may be
permitted based upon existing the provisions adopted within the Comprehensive Plan
(reference the MIAI Land Use Table attached as Exhibit 1).
Policy 108.2.7
Nonresidential land uses expressly allowed within the residential Future Land Use
Categories (see Column 11 MIAI Land Use Table) as land uses permitted in the Land
Development Readations that were in effect immediately prior to the institution of the
2010 Comprehensive Plan (pre-2010 LDR's), and that lawfully existed on such lands on
January 4, 1996, shall be recognized through a "Letter of Development Rights
Determination" process and transmitted to the State Land Planning Agency.
Policy 108.2.8
Within the MIAI overlay, Monroe County may consider requests from property owners
for reduction in density and/or intensity or changes in uses that reduce incompatibility of
land uses with Goal 108 and associated Objectives and Policies.
Section 2. The Military Installation Area of Impact Land Use Table pursuant to Policy
108.2.6 is hereby adopted and attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, item, change, or
provision of this ordinance is held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall
not be affected by such validity.
Section 4. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in
conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
7
Section 5. Transmittal. This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Director of Planning to
the State Land Planning Agency pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida
Statutes.
Section 6. Filing and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the
Secretary of the State of Florida but shall not become effective until a notice is
issued by the State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission finding
the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and after any
applicable appeal periods have expired.
Section 7. Inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan. The numbering of the foregoing
amendment may be renumbered to conform to the numbering in the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and shall be incorporated in the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting held on the day of 12012.
Mayor David Rice
Mayor pro tem Kim Wigington
Commissioner Sylvia Murphy
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Heather Carruthers
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
I: 1
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
DEPUTY CLERK
91
Mayor David Rice
al
9I
E`o
v'
I
d�
mom
�m
m
EE
as
E
E
o EE�
E
OZJ
Em�
E
O
v
m
0
E
E
d
E
Al
E
E
E
-
€
Ey
vE
-
5}.y
rl
�a
awl
EEE
-moo E
EE.
E.
EEEEE
E �
� E
-`..EV
c�
EeE
k
EE
EE.�
E
cEo
c
E o
E
ss
LL
�LLa= v
s
tt tt
01
O
�.ZI
o
0
0
O 4
.
of
ZI ZI
Z E
0
0
Q
ZI
E
II
of EI
of E
m
m
-
c
U
JI
a' m
0
ZI
a0
a0
a0
og
og
og
Ya
3
1
5
5
W
_
E
E
—
f
�
{t,._
I
Q £
—
E
E
E
E
-
E
E
o -
Z Z
Z Z
oI ZI
Q
03
50
m
-
5 m
>
`oEN
E
-
m
-
Eon
�
c
m
o
�
K
U
E.-
a s
o g
N
€�€3RAvEa4„
Ya
Yr a
3
}
E
E
1
1O
5
�
E
Om
G .s
d o
E
- E H
_
I E
o
o
o
oEc _ S
E o S o
S
v
�
x
�
o
c
y
>
m
�I
o
of E
Z Z
O 4
ti
c
v
Q
H
o f
N
my
-
E
�o
o
nH
� H
� E
0
m E
E
�
JI
3
E
m
c
mo
o
�
m
a o
�
-
E
�
m
o
m
m
E
o
o
y
ym
c
E
o y
m
3
o
-
�-
m
m
-
_
E
o
m
x
_
E
0
m
x
c
a
N
ï
î
í
MEMORANDUM
ì
MCP&ERD
ë
ONROE OUNTY LANNING NVIRONMENTAL ESOURCES EPARTMENT
We strive to be caring, professional and fair
ê
é
To:
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
è
ç
Through:
Christine Hurley, AICP, Director of Growth Management
ïð
ïï
From:
Mayté Santamaria, Assistant Director of Planning
ïî
ïí
Date:
May 10, 2012
ïì
ïë
Subject:Request to create an overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series to establish the
ïê
Military Installation Area of Impact within the Monroe County 2010
ïé
Comprehensive Plan.
ïè
ïç
Meeting:
May 22, 2012
îð
îï
I.REQUEST
îî
îí
This is a request by Monroe County tocreate an overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series to
îì
establish the Military Installation Area of Impact to implement Policy 108.2.1.
îë
îê
II.BACKGROUND INFORMATION
îé
îè
Sections 163.3175, and 163.3177, Florida Statute (F.S.), requirelocal governments to address
îç
compatibility of development with military installations and requirethe exchange of information
íð
between local governments and military installations. The requirements of the law include:
íï
íî
•Local government must transmit to the commanding officer of the relevant associated
íí
installation or installations information relating to proposed changes to comprehensive plans,
íì
plan amendments, and proposed changes to land development regulations which, if approved,
íë
would affect the intensity, density, or use of the land adjacent to or in close proximity to the
íê
military installation.
íé
•At the request of the commanding officer, affected local governments must also transmit to the
íè
commanding officer copies of applications for development orders requesting a variance or
íç
waiver from height or lighting restrictions or noise attenuation reduction requirements within
ìð
areas defined in the local government’s comprehensive plan as being in a zone of influence of
ìï
the military installation. Each affected local government shall provide the military installation
ìî
an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes.
ìí
•Local government shall take into consideration any comments provided by the commanding
ìì
officer or his or her designee and must also be sensitive to private property rights and not be
ìë
unduly restrictive on those rights. The local government shall forward a copy of any
ï
comments regarding comprehensive plan amendments to the state land planning agency.
î
•A representative of a military installation acting on behalf of all military installations within
í
that jurisdiction shall be included as an ex officio, nonvoting member of the county’s or
ì
affected local government’s land planning or zoning board.
ë
•The adoption of criteria to be used to achieve the compatibility of lands adjacent or closely
ê
proximate to military installations within the future land use plan element, pursuant to Section
é
163.3177(6)(a), F.S. If a local government does not adopt criteria and address compatibility of
è
lands adjacent to or closely proximate to existing military installations in its future land use
ç
plan element by June 30, 2012, the local government, the military installation, the state land
ïð
planning agency, and other parties as identified by the regional planning council, including, but
ïï
not limited to, private landowner representatives, shall enter into mediation.
ïî
ïí
The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) sent a letter (Exhibit 1) to Mayor Heather
ïì
Carruthers, dated July 11, 2011, which stated that the current Monroe County ComprehensivePlan
ïë
does not address compatibility of lands adjacent to an existing military installation. A local
ïê
government that does not address compatibility of land proximate to an existing military installation
ïé
in the future land use plan element by June 30, 2012, shall enter into mediation. Mediation would
ïè
include representatives from the Naval Air Station Key West, Monroe County, the State Land
ïç
Planning Agency, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and potentially other private land
îð
owners. If a local government comprehensive plan does not contain criteria addressing compatibility
îï
by December 31, 2013, the agency may notify the Administration Commission, which may impose
îî
sanctions pursuant to s. 163.3184(8), F.S., including the direction to state agencies to not provide
îí
funds to increase the capacity of roads, bridges, or water and sewer systems for those local
îì
governments with plan amendments determined not to be in compliance. The Administrative
îë
Commission may also specify that the local government is not eligible for grants under the following
îê
programs: Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Programs; Florida Recreation
îé
Development Assistance Program; and revenue sharing. If the localgovernment has a Coastal
îè
Management Element, the Administrative Commission may also specify that the local government is
îç
not eligible for funding pursuant to s.161.091, F.S., regarding beach management and maintenance
íð
funding.
íï
íî
Summary of Previous Meetings & Actions:
íí
íì
On July 15, 2003, the BOCC adopted Ordinance No. 031-2003, amending Section 9.5-252(C)(3)h.
íë
(AICUZ) and creating Section 9.5-258 of the Land Development Code that specifies restrictions on
íê
private property adjacent to NAS Key West.
íé
íè
On July 15, 2011, the BOCC asked the Growth Management Director to include an agenda item on
íç
the August BOCC meeting to discuss the DCA letter and military compatibility.
ìð
ìï
On August 15, 2011, Monroe County staff met with Naval Air Station Key West (NASKW) staff to
ìî
discuss the development of military compatibility strategies. During the meeting, Navy operations
ìí
were discussed and NASKW identified the concerns and desired outcomes related to military
ìì
compatibility. A summary of the meeting discussion is attachedas Exhibit 2.
ìë
ìê
On the August 17, 2011 BOCC meeting, the Growth Management Director provided a summary of
ï
the staff’s meeting with NASKW. The BOCC directed the Growth Management Director to include
î
an agenda item on the September BOCC meeting to provide a status on the development of draft
í
policies to satisfy the requirements of Section 163.3175, F.S., as well as to review proposed
ì
revisions to the Technical Document. On August 17, 2011 BOCC meeting, the BOCC also directed
ë
the Growth Management Director to include an agenda item on the October BOCC meeting to
ê
review the final proposed policies and to provide staff direction on how to proceed.
é
è
On August 24, 2011, Monroe County staffheld a conference call with the Secretary and staff of the
ç
Department of Community Affairs to discuss and review the County’s draft military compatibility
ïð
strategies. The Department of Community Affairs provided a suggestion regarding a sound
ïï
attenuation policy and a potential funding source.
ïî
ïí
On September 14, 2011, Monroe County staff met with NASKWstaff to discuss and review the
ïì
County’s draft military compatibility strategies. NASKW identified the concernsand suggested
ïë
revisions.
ïê
ïé
On September 16, 2011, Monroe County staff met with NASKW staff to discuss and review the
ïè
County’s draft military compatibility strategies and NASKW’s recommended revisions.
ïç
îð
On the September 21, 2011 BOCC meeting, the Growth Management Director provided a summary
îï
of the staff’s meeting with NASKWand presented the planning staff’s proposed military
îî
compatibility strategies.NASKW staff submitted requested revisions to the County’s proposal. The
îí
BOCC directed staff to continue to work with NASKW to finalize language for the military
îì
compatibility strategies as well as to expedite the processing of thecomprehensive plan
îë
amendments.
îê
îé
On October 17, 2011, the Monroe County Development Review Committee reviewed and discussed
îè
the text amendment. NASKW representatives were in attendance and made comments on the
îç
proposal.
íð
íï
On the October 19, 2011 BOCC meeting, the Growth Management Director presented the planning
íî
staff’s proposed military compatibility strategies and requested direction to process the proposed
íí
amendments for inclusion into the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
íì
íë
On October 17, 2011 Development Review Committee reviewed the proposed amendment.
íê
Representatives of NASKW attended the meeting and provided comments related to the proposed
íé
text amendments addressing military compatibility.
íè
íç
On December 14, 2011, the BOCC held a public hearing to consider a resolution to transmit to the
ìð
State Land Planning Agency an amendment to the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan, as
ìï
required by Sections 163.3177 and 163.3175, Florida Statutes, to create military compatibility
ìî
criteria.
ìí
ìì
On March 20, 2012, Monroe County received an Objections, Recommendations and Comments
ìë
(ORC) report from the State Land Planning Agency (Department of Economic Opportunity). The
ìê
ORC report contained four (4) objections as well as recommendations regarding measures that can
ï
be taken to address the objections to the County’s proposed amendment. The objections included
î
the following:
í
ì
1.The policy and the accompanying MIAI map fail to establish meaningful and predictable
ë
guidelines and standards for the use and development ofland and fail to provide meaningful
ê
guidelines for the content of more detailed land development and use regulations because (1)
é
the terms “noise zone” and “land use incompatibility area” are not defined; and (2) these
è
areas are not depicted on the MIAI map.
ç
Recommendation:
The County should revise the amendment to define noise zones and
ïð
land use incompatibility areas based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis,
ïï
including the 2007 AICUZ Study, and identify appropriate uses and development
ïî
controls to achieve compatibility. The revision should include mapping the noise zones
ïí
and land use incompatibility area more specifically than the MIAI overlay. The County
ïì
should also identify the accident potential zones and clear zones within the Military
ïë
Installation Influence Area and propose suitable uses in these zones consistent with the
ïê
uses identified in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zones Study for NAS-Key West.
ïé
ïè
st
2.The Department objects to option one [1optional noise study methodology] because the
ïç
methodology specified is not professionally accepted for the purpose intended; i.e., it is not
îð
an appropriate methodology for determining noise zones for a military installation. The
îï
Department also objects based on the creation of an internal inconsistency because both
îî
methodologies rely solely on noise levels in making a determination regarding whether
îí
increases in density and intensity can be allowed and fail to take into account land use
îì
incompatibility areas, which is one of the criteria that the policy requires to be addressed.
îë
Recommendation:
The County should revise the policy to include a professionally
îê
acceptable methodology applicable to military air operations. The County should also
îé
revise both methodologies to account for land use incompatibility areas. The Department
îè
recommends the County use or adopt the 2007 AICUZ Study.
îç
íð
3.Sections 163.3184(1)(b) and 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes, provide that any plan amendment
íï
must be consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development in designated areas of
íî
critical state concern. Section 380.0552(7)(h)4 establishes the following Principle for the
íí
Florida Keys ACSC: “Protecting the value, efficiency, cost effectiveness, and amortized life
íì
of existing and proposed major public investments, including … Key West Naval Air Station
íë
and other military facilities.” As proposed the amendment is inconsistent with this Principle.
íê
Policy 108.2.5 does not address public safety concerns as provided for in Section
íé
163.3175(1), F.S. and the Principles for Guiding Development (380.0552(7)(n), F.S.).
íè
Principle (n) provides that proposed plan amendments must be consistent with protecting the
íç
public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining the
ìð
Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
ìï
Recommendation:
The County should amend the policies to ensure the protection of the
ìî
Key West Naval Air Station.
ìí
ìì
4.The Goal provides that the County “shall promote and encourage.” Section
ìë
163.3177(6)(a)3.a., F.S. requires, “The future land use plan element shall include criteria to
ìê
be used to: a. Achieve [emphasis added] the compatibility of lands adjacent or closely
ï
proximate to military installations, considering factors identified in s. 163.3175(5).” The
î
Department objects because the Goal is not consistent with Section 163.3177(6)(a)3.a., F.S.
í
Recommendation:
The County should amend the Goal to be consistent with the
ì
language of the statute.
ë
ê
The County has prepared a response to the State Land Planning Agency ORC report (attached as Exhibit
é
4). No revisionsare proposed to the overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series identifying the Military
è
Installation Area of Impact (MIAI).
ç
ïð
III.PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
ïï
ïî
** Military Installation Area of Impact (MIAI) Overlay attached as Exhibit 3 **
ïí
ïì
Proposed Policy 108.2.1directsMonroe County to adopt an overlay to the Future Land Use Map
ïë
Series identifying the Military Installation Area of Impact (MIAI); within which growth
ïê
management policies shall guide land use activities and uses in areas exposed toimpacts generated
ïé
by Navy operations. The overlay is presented in Exhibit 3.
ïè
ïç
Within the proposed MIAI overlay the following growth management policies are proposed:
îð
1)The density and intensity standards and land uses established by the Future Land Use
îï
Element and Future Land Use Map existing on the effective date of the military compatibility
îî
policies for properties located within the MIAI overlay will be recognized and will be
îí
allowed to develop to the maximum development potential pursuant to the standards existing
îì
onthe effective date of the military compatibility policies.
îë
2)Thedensity and intensity, existing on the effective date of the military compatibility policies,
îê
asestablished by the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map for property
îé
adjacent to or closely proximate to NASKWwill be recognized. Additionally, NASKW has
îè
indicated that they will not object to the issuance of development orders, within the MIAI, if
îç
properties have development rights on Future Land Use Map, Land Use District (Zoning)
íð
Map, approved development agreements or Section 380.032, F.S., agreements with the State
íï
Land Planning Agency.
íî
3)Existing development located within the MIAI overlay will be recognized and allowed to
íí
redevelop. Further, the property’s establisheddensity and intensity standards and land uses
íì
provided by the Future Land Use Element and Future Land Use Map will be recognized and
íë
the property will be allowed to redevelop to the maximum development potential pursuant to
íê
the standards existing on the effective date of the military compatibility policies.
íé
4)Monroe County will maintain the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designations, for any
íè
application received after the effective date of the military compatibility policies,for
íç
properties located within the MIAI overlay. FLUM amendments that increase density or
ìð
intensity within the MIAI overlaythat arereceived after the effective date of the military
ìï
compatibility policies will not be permitted unless Monroe County transmits the requested
ìî
FLUM amendment to NASKW. If NASKW indicates the property is within a land use
ìí
incompatibility zone; Monroe County will maintain the FLUM designations for properties
ìì
adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations for which NASKW-provided data
ìë
and analysis, whichmeets the requirements of Section 163.3177(1)(f), F.S., as of the
ìê
effective date of this policy, which supports a determination that the properties are within a
ï
land use incompatibility zone. If NASKW indicates the property is within a noise zone,
î
Monroe County may consider Future Land Use Map amendments requesting an increase in
í
density or intensity within the MIAI overlay, if the property owner submits a supplemental
ì
noise study, based on professionally accepted methodology (based upon the methodology
ë
defined in the Monroe County Technical Document of the adopted Monroe County
ê
Comprehensive Plan) approved by Monroe County and NASKW, to determine whether the
é
noise level is greater than or less than 65 DNL (Day-Night Average Sound Level) at the point
è
on interest of the proposed FLUM amendment.
ç
5)For any application received after the effective date of the militarycompatibility policiesthat
ïð
is within the MIAI overlay, Monroe County will not approve NEW land uses, as
ïï
demonstrated on the MIAI Land Use Table (presented in the Military Compatibility Text
ïî
amendment), through a Future Land Use Map, Text, overlay or LUD map amendment.
ïí
ïì
This overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series which establishes the Military Installation Area of
ïë
Impact (MIAI) is contingent uponthe passage by the Board of County Commissioners and the
ïê
approval of the State Land Planning Agency of the ordinance creating Goal 108, Objective 108.1,
ïé
Policy 108.1.1, 108.1.2, 108.1.3, Policy 108.1.4., Policy 108.1.5, Policy 108.1.6, Objective 108.2,
ïè
Policy 108.2.1, Policy 108.2.2, Policy 108.2.3, Policy 108.2.4, Policy 108.2.5, 108.2.6, Policy
ïç
108.2.7, and Policy 108.2.8 to address the compatibility of lands adjacent or closely proximate to
îð
military installations in its future land use element in the 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan.
îï
îî
IV.CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2010 COMPREHENSIVE
îí
PLAN, THE FLORIDA STATUTES, AND PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING
îì
DEVELOPMENT
îë
îê
A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the
îé
Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
îè
îç
B. The amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida
íð
Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statute.
íï
íî
For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that plan
íí
with the principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles, the principles
íì
shall be construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied in isolation
íë
from the other provisions.
íê
íé
(a)Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that
íè
local government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical
íç
state concern designation.
ìð
(b)Protecting shoreline and marine resources, including mangroves, coral reef formations,
ìï
seagrass beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat.
ìî
(c)Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native
ìí
tropical vegetation (for example, hardwood hammocks and pinelands), dune ridges and
ìì
beaches, wildlife, and their habitat.
ìë
(d)Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound
ï
economic development.
î
(e)Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida
í
Keys.
ì
(f)Enhancing natural scenic resources, promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural
ë
environment, and ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character
ê
of the Florida Keys.
é
(g)Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys.
è
(h)Protecting the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and
ç
proposed major public investments, including:
ïð
1.The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities;
ïï
2.Sewage collection, treatment, and disposal facilities;
ïî
3.Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities;
ïí
4.Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities;
ïì
5.Transportation facilities;
ïë
6.Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries;
ïê
7.State parks, recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned
ïé
properties;
ïè
8.City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and
ïç
9.Other utilities, as appropriate.
îð
îï
(i)Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation,
îî
maintenance, and replacement of stormwater managementfacilities; central sewage
îí
collection; treatment and disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and
îì
maintenance of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems.
îë
(j)Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and
îê
operation of wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss.
îé
381.0065(4)(l) and 403.086(10), as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by
îè
central wastewater treatment facilities through permit allocation systems.
îç
(k)Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the
íð
Florida Keys.
íï
(l)Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida
íî
Keys.
íí
(m)Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of
íì
a natural or manmade disaster and for a postdisaster reconstruction plan.
íë
(n)Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and
íê
maintaining the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
íé
íè
Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7) Florida Statutes, the proposed amendment is consistent with the
íç
Principles for Guiding Development as a whole and is not inconsistent with any Principle.
ìð
ìï
C. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statute
ìî
(F.S.). Specifically, the amendment furthers:
ìí
ìì
163.3175(4), F.S. - Each affected local government must transmit to the commanding officer of
ìë
the relevant associated installation or installations information relating to proposed changes
ìê
to comprehensive plans, plan amendments, and proposed changes to land development
ìé
regulations which, if approved, would affect the intensity, density, or use of the land adjacent
ï
to or in close proximity to the military installation. At the request of the commanding officer,
î
affected local governments must also transmit to the commanding officer copies of
í
applications for development orders requesting a variance or waiver from height or lighting
ì
restrictions or noise attenuation reduction requirements within areas defined in the local
ë
government’s comprehensive plan as being in a zone of influence of the military installation.
ê
Each affected local government shall provide the military installation an opportunity to
é
review and comment on the proposed changes.
è
ç
163.3175(5), F.S. - The commanding officer or his or her designee may provide commentsto
ïð
the affected local government on the impact such proposed changes mayhave on the mission
ïï
of the military installation. Such comments may include:
ïî
(a) If the installation has an airfield, whether such proposed changes willbe incompatible with
ïí
the safety and noise standards contained in the AirInstallation Compatible Use Zone
ïì
(AICUZ) adopted by the military installationfor that airfield;
ïë
(b) Whether such changes are incompatible with the InstallationEnvironmental Noise
ïê
Management Program (IENMP) of the United StatesArmy;
ïé
(c) Whether such changes are incompatible with the findings of a Joint Land Use Study (JLUS)
ïè
for the area if one has been completed;and
ïç
(d) Whether the military installation’s mission will be adversely affectedby the proposed
îð
actions of the county or affected local government.
îï
The commanding officer’s comments, underlying studies, and reports are notbinding on the
îî
local government.
îí
îì
163.3175(6), F.S. - The affected local government shall take into consideration anycomments
îë
provided by the commanding officer or his or her designeepursuant to subsection (4) and
îê
must also be sensitive to private propertyrights and not be unduly restrictive on those rights.
îé
The affected localgovernment shall forward a copy of any comments regarding
îè
comprehensive plan amendments to the state land planning agency.
îç
íð
163.3175(7), F.S. - To facilitate the exchange of information provided for in this section, a
íï
representative of a military installation acting on behalf of all military installations within
íî
that jurisdiction shall be included as an ex officio, nonvoting member of the county’s or
íí
affected local government’s land planning or zoning board.
íì
íë
163.3175(9), F.S. - If a local government, as required under s. 163.3177(6)(a), does not adopt
íê
criteria and address compatibility of lands adjacent to or closelyproximate to existing
íé
military installations in its future land use planelement by June 30, 2012, the local
íè
government, the military installation, thestate land planning agency, and other parties as
íç
identified by the regionalplanning council, including, but not limited to, private landowner
ìð
representatives,shall enter into mediation conducted pursuant to s. 186.509. If thelocal
ìï
government comprehensive plan does not contain criteria addressingcompatibility by
ìî
December 31, 2013, the agency may notify the AdministrationCommission. The
ìí
Administration Commission may impose sanctionspursuant to s. 163.3184(8). Any local
ìì
government that amended itscomprehensive plan to address military installation
ìë
compatibility requirementsafter 2004 and was found to be in compliance is deemed to be in
ìê
compliance with this subsection until the local government conducts itsevaluation and
ï
appraisal review pursuant to s. 163.3191 and determines thatamendments are necessary to
î
meet updated general law requirements.
í
ì
163.3177(6)(a)3.a., F.S. - The future land use plan element shall include criteria to be used to:
ë
a. Achieve the compatibility of lands adjacent or closely proximate tomilitary installations,
ê
considering factors identified in s. 163.3175(5).
é
è
163.3177(6)(a)11., F.S. - Local governments required to update or amend their comprehensive
ç
plan to include criteria and address compatibility of lands adjacent or closelyproximate to
ïð
existing military installations, or lands adjacent to an airport as defined in s. 330.35 and
ïï
consistent with s. 333.02, in their future land use plan element shall transmit the update or
ïî
amendment to the state land planning agency by June 30, 2012.
ïí
ïì
V.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
ïë
ïê
Staff recommends approval of the proposed overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series to establish
ïé
the Military Installation Area of Impact.
ïè
ïç
VI.PROCESS
îð
îï
Comprehensive Plan Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the
îî
Planning Commission, the Director of Planning, or the owner or other person having a contractual
îí
interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning shallreview
îì
and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the Development Review
îë
Committee and the Planning Commission.
îê
îé
The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall
îè
review the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning &
îç
Environmental Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the
íð
public hearing. The Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the
íï
Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the
íî
transmittal of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment, and considers the staff report, staff
íí
recommendation, and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may or may not
íì
recommend transmittal to the State Land Planning Agency. The amendment is transmitted to the
íë
State Land Planning Agency, which then reviews the proposal and issues an Objections,
íê
Recommendations and Comments (ORC) Report. Upon receipt of the ORC report, the County has
íé
180 days to adopt the amendments, adopt the amendments with changes or not adopt the amendment
íè
íç
VII.EXHIBITS
ìð
ìï
1.July 11, 2011,Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) sent to Mayor Heather
ìî
Carruthers, regarding military compatibilitycriteria.
ìí
2.Summary of August 15, 2011, County meeting with Naval Air Station Key Weststaff.
ìì
3.Policy 108.2.1 Military Installation Area of Impact OverlayMap
ìë
4.Monroe County ORC Response
ìê
5.DEO ORC Report
ìé
Û¨¸·¾·¬ ï
÷ÄÔÓÚÓÈ
Û¨¸·¾·¬ î
MEMORANDUM
MCP&ERD
ONROE OUNTY LANNING NVIRONMENTAL ESOURCES EPARTMENT
We strive to be caring, professional and fair
To:
Christine Hurley, AICP, Growth Management Director
From:
Mayté Santamaria,Assistant Director of Planning & Environmental Resources
Date:
August 24, 2011
Subject:
Summary of August 15, 2011 Meeting with Naval Air Station Key West
Summary our discussions with Naval Air Station Key West (NASKW) on August 15 2011:
1.County staff received an overview of the military installation operations.
2.NASKW identified the concerns and desired outcomes related to military compatibility
NASKW staff:
1.For new development:
a.would accept existing density and intensity of the Future Land Use Map, with the
corresponding text, with sound attenuation
b.would not ask Monroe County to deny permits for any development, within AICUZ or
noise contours if properties have development rights on Future Land Use Map or Land
Use District (Zoning) Map.
2.For redevelopment:
a.would accept existing density and intensity of the Future Land Use Map, with the
corresponding text, with sound attenuation
b.would not ask Monroe County to deny permits for any development, within AICUZ or
noise contours if properties have development rights on Future Land Use Map or Land
Use District (Zoning) Map.
3.Would be willing to support the following land use compatibility strategies that Monroe County
could adopt as Comprehensive Plan policies:
a.Monroe County would not approve Future Land Use Map amendments that would
INCREASE density or intensity within 65 DNL and above.
b.Within a designated Area of Military Influence, Monroe County would not approve NEW
USES (over and above those already permitted) which are individually excluded from a
noise zone within the (Table 6-2) 2007 AICUZ, that are not already permitted within a
ï
Future Land Use Category or Land Use District (LUD) category, through a Future Land
Use Map, Text, overlay or LUD map amendment.
4.Related to sound attenuation disclosure: NASKW will be providing information on disclosures
other communities make related to noise zones. Once the County receives this information, the
County will review together and determine how that could work
To determine #3B above, Monroe County staff would need to take the Noise Zone Contours and create a
table within each noise zone that demonstrates each FLU category and LUD category with permitted use
information.
For example:
Uses within
table 6-2 not
permitted within
LUD
LUD
Noise FLUFLUeach noise zone
Suburban Maritime
ZoneResidential LowIndustrial(over and above
ResidentialIndustrial
those permitted
in the
FLUM/LUD)
Uses Permitted:Uses Permitted:
1.Residential1.Manufacturing
2.Public 2.Warehouse
3.Institutional 3.Distribution
X,
Etc.
14.Vested existing 4.CommercialEtc. Y,
uses from 19965.Public Z,
6.Residential
7.Commercial
Fishing
NASKW will provide the following:
1.August 15, 2011 Meeting slide show
2.Noise Study Navy used to develop 2007 AICUZ (if it can be released)
3.EA Correctness finding (DODIG)
4.Map showing geographic area impacts [decreases and increases] (1977 AICUZ to 2007 AICUZ )
5.Escambia County and other area disclosure examples
6.Table 6-2 from the 2007 AICUZ in Excelformat
7.Inventory of Navy owned land within 80 DNL and 85DNL (maps and ownership – if not Navy
owned, provide property owner information)
8.1979 resolution where County required disclosure in Big Coppitt
Monroe County will provide the following:
1.2003 Ordinance when 1977 AICUZ boundary and land use table was amended to determine
differences.
î
Û¨¸·¾·¬ ì
MONROE COUNTY ORC RESPONSE
The Department of Economic Opportunity hadthe following objections and comments to the Monroe
County proposed comprehensive plan amendment (DEO No. 12-1ACSC):
DEO Objection 1:
Monroe County Policy 108.2.1 establishes a Military Installation Area of Influence
(MIAI) within which growth management policies shall guide land use activities and uses in areas
exposed to impacts generated by Navy operations. Policy 108.2.5 provides that Monroe County will
maintain the FLUM designations and their associated densities and intensities inthe MIAI. However,
Policy 108.2.5 also provides that increases in density or intensity may be considered if the property
owner submits a scientific study using one of two options to show that the subject property is not within
a noise zone or land use incompatibility area.
The policy and the accompanying MIAI map fail to establish meaningful and predictable guidelines and
standards for the use and development of land andfail to provide meaningful guidelines for the content
of more detailed land development and use regulations because (1) the terms “noise zone” and “land
use incompatibility area” are not defined; and (2) these areas are not depicted on the MIAI map.
Authority:
Section 163.3175(1)and (5), 163.3177(1)and (6)(a)2.f. and 3.b, and 380.0552(7)(a), Florida
Statutes, (F.S.)
DEO Recommendation:
The County should revise the amendment to define noise zones and land use
incompatibility areas based upon relevant and appropriate data and analysis, including the 2007
AICUZ Study, and identify appropriate uses and development controls to achieve compatibility. The
revision should include mapping the noise zones and land use incompatibility area more specifically
than the MIAI overlay. The County should also identify the accident potential zonesand clear zones
within the Military Installation Influence Areaand propose suitable uses in these zones consistent with
the uses identified in the Air Installation Compatible Use Zones Study for NAS-Key West.
COUNTY ORC RESPONSE:
Pursuant to Section 163.3175(4), F.S., Monroe County has defined a
zone of influence of the military installation as an overlay to the Future Land Use Map, titled the
Military Installation Area of Impact (MIAI).The MIAI overlay area was established by reviewing
various maps and data of the 1977, 2004 and 2007 AICUZ reports, including noise boundaries, crash
zones, facilities location maps, etc [see Exhibit A]. It is important to note that neither 163.3177(6)(a)3.a.
nor 163.3175, F.S., require the adoption of specific noise or safety boundaries but simply require
coordination with the commanding officer, “within areas defined in the local government’s
comprehensive plan as being in a zone of influenceof the military installation” (see Section
163.3175(4), F.S.).
agreed
Monroe County has determined, and the Navy has (see proposed Policy 108.2.3 and 2007
AICUZ excerpts), that the existing map designations and associated density/intensity standards provide
for appropriate uses and development controls to achieve compatibility. For example, the 2007 AICUZ
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
114
Page of
states: “Pressure to make significant changes in future land use are expected around NAS Key West. In
addition to limited population growth, most of the land is already developed or compatibly zoned(Page
7-14).”
As such,Monroe County determined that the “noise zones” and “land use incompatibility zones,” the
Navy uses as the basis for its comments on comprehensive plan amendments does not need to be
depicted on the MIAI overlay to the FLUM, as these “boundaries,” fluctuate based upon changes to
aircraft types, NASKW operations, etc. (see excerpts of 2007 AICUZ and excerpts from Monroe County
Technical Document below) and this makes the boundaries unpredictable for the Countyand the
property owners in the zone of influence.
The County recognizes that NASKW will base its evaluation and comments on Navy documentation,
which may include the 2007 AICUZ report or subsequently revised reports. The statutes, however,
contemplate local government discretion indefining the zone of influence it deems appropriate based on
local knowledge, experience and conditions.
agreed to
This approach was discussed and months prior to the County’s transmittal. At the August 15,
2011 initial meeting with NASKW staff, Mr. Ron Demes,discussed the AICUZ revisions from 2004 to
2007, which included changing the flight patterns (operational changeof flying tighter turns)due to
discussions with Rebecca Jetton (DCA) and Marlene Conaway (former Monroe County Planning
Director) regarding an agreement between DCA and the property owner ofEnchanted Island (Raccoon
Key) [see Exhibit B, a map depicting the change between the 2004 and 2007 AICUZ].
Final Submission AICUZ Update for NAS Key West, March 2007
Pursuant to the , (Executive
Summary, page 1):
“In May of 2004, an AICUZ Update for NAS Key West was approved by the Chief of
Naval Operations. The AICUZ Update superseded the 1977 AICUZ and addressed
aircraft noise, aircraft safety, and land use compatibility in the vicinity of the installation.
Continued dialog between NAS Key West command, local government and community
officials in the City of Key West and Monroe County with respect to the 2004 AICUZ
Update resulted in this document. This document is an update to the 2004 AICUZ
study… As a part of this AICUZ Update, a noise study was conducted. The noise study
contains calendar year 2001 (CY01) and 2007 (CY07) noise contours for aircraft
operations associated with the use of NAS Key West. The noise contours depicted in the
2004 AICUZ were updated to reflect the operational alternative of shortening the
approach and pattern to Runway 07. The result is a pull-back in the contours near Key
Haven, Raccoon Key, and Stock Island.”
(Introduction, Pages 1-4 and 1-5): NAS Key West entered into dialog with thelocal
government officials regarding the 2004 AICUZ update per Chief of Operations approval
letter of May 25, 2004. The flight track for the approach to runway 07 was subsequently
shortened from the standard flight track used. This change had a negative impact on NAS
Key West air operations but was modified by the Navy due to several key factors. The
factors include: the majority of operations using the airfield are by tactical military
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
214
Page of
aircraft capable of tighter turns; pilots using the airfield are experienced in tactical
maneuvers; weather for Boca Chica Field provides for 97% VFR flight conditions; and
the pattern could be managed through a modification of course rules, thorough flight
briefings and aggressive air traffic control procedures. As discussed later in the
document, a flight track only approximates the center of a flight pattern that actually
represents a band of flights generated when using a particular approach or pattern.
Depending on types and numbers of aircraft using a particular patternand various other
factors, the track may vary significantly. This variance will occasionally result in a flight
outside the band. It should be noted that if the type and numbers of military aircraft
currently operating from NAS Key West changes in the future, the impact of this flight
track reduction may prove to be more severe thus causing the Navy to revisit the flight
track for Runway 07.”
2010-2030 Monroe County Technical Document
Additionally, the (FLU Page 108-109) states:
“In April of 2003 the Navy published the Environmental Assessment for Fleet Support
and Infrastructure Improvements –Naval Air Station Key West (EA). In 2004, the Navy
prepared an updated CY 2007 AICUZ map for NAS Key West. The 2007 AICUZ map
encompassed a substantially larger area compared to the 1977 AICUZ map.
The environmental impacts of all of the planned and current aircraft were not evaluated
by the Navy’s EA in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
For example, the EA purported to evaluate the impacts of the Super Hornet aircraft,
however, evidence of this is not found in the report. Specifically, the Super Hornet
aircraft was mentioned in only three pages of the 232-page EA and those three pages did
not discuss the noise or other environmental impacts. Further, the Draft EA was
distributed to the public and reporting agencies for input and this input was the basis for
the final comments published in the April 2003 EA. None of the public or agency
comments mention the Super Hornet aircraft, thereby creating the assumption neither the
public nor the 11 reporting agencies have evaluated the impacts of the Super Hornet
aircraft at NAS Key West.
The impacts of introducing this type of aircraft at NAS Key West are clearly significant.
It is important to point out that the Navy also published in 2003 the Final Environmental
Impact Statement for the Introduction of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Airport to the East
Coast of the United States. The impacts of the Super Hornet aircraft on the east coast of
the United States are recognized in this publication. However, the environmental impacts
resulting from F/A-18E/F Super Hornet operations at NAS Key West were not discussed.
Because of the deficiencies and discrepancies noted above, the 2007 AICUZ map has not
been codified into the LDC and is not utilized by the County when considering
development applications.
The Navy is currently undertaking an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate
alternatives for future airfield operations at NAS Key West. If properly undertaken, the
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
314
Page of
EIS will consider current airfield operations and changes in the type and number of
aircraft operations at NAS Key West. In addition, to evaluate impacts fully the Navy
must ensure that all analysis is undertaken utilizing the mostcurrently accepted peer
reviewed methods. This includes, but is not limited to the evaluation of military aircraft
noise.
In their May 12, 2010, Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS (Federal Register Vol. 75, No
91) the Navy listed, among others, “consistency with existing land use control plans,
policies and actions” as factors to be evaluated in the EIS. In this regard, the Final EIS
will potentially inform and lead to the creation of a revised AICUZ map. The Draft EIS
was scheduled to be released by theNavy during the summer of 2011, but has been
delayed to the summer of 2012. The Final EIS and Record of Decision are scheduled for
spring and fall 2013 respectively.”
PROPOSED POLICY REVISIONTO ADDRESS DEO OBJECTION #1:
Policy 108.2.1
Monroe County shall adopt an overlay to the Future Land Use Map Series identifying the
Military Installation Area of Impact (MIAI) to define the zone of influence of NASKW; within
which growth management policies shall guide land use activities and uses inareas exposed to
impacts generated by Navy operations.
* Also see Policy 108.2.5 – for revisions to address land use incompatibility zones
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEO Objection 2:
Policy 108.2.5provides that Monroe County may consider future land use map
amendments that increase density or intensity within the MIAI overlay if the property owner submits a
scientific study utilizing either of two specified methodologies to show that the subject property is not
within a noise zone or land use incompatibility area based on the uses proposed.
The Department has received a letter from NAS-Key West objecting to the first optional methodology
under Policy 108.2.5. According to the Navy’s written objection, option one is intended for
civilian/commercial air operations and does not use the methodology accepted by the Department of
Defense for military air operations and this methodology is not valid when applied to the NAS-Key West
air operations.
The second option would employ the Integrated Noise Model adopted by the FAA or NOISEMAP which
is used by the Department of Defense to demonstrate that a parcel of land is within a noise contour level
that produces less than 65 decibels of noise.
The Department objects tooption one because the methodology specified is not professionally accepted
for the purpose intended; i.e., it is not an appropriate methodology for determining noise zones for a
military installation. The Department also objects based on the creation of an internal inconsistency
because both methodologies rely solely on noise levels in making a determination regarding whether
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
414
Page of
increases in density and intensity can be allowed andfail to take into account land use incompatibility
areas, which is one of the criteria that the policy requires to be addressed.
Authority:
Sections 163.3175(1) and (5),163.3177(1)(f), 163.3177(2), 163.3177(6)(a),and
380.0552(7)(h).4, F.S.
DEO Recommendation
:The County should revise the policy to include a professionally acceptable
methodology applicable to military air operations. The County should also revise both methodologies to
account for land use incompatibility areas. The Department recommends the County use or adopt the
2007 AICUZ Study.
COUNTY ORC RESPONSE:
For the land use incompatibility zones, Monroe County is proposing to
revise the policy to clarify that the County will consider comments from NASKW on the proposed
amendment, based on appropriate data and analysis, indicating whether the propertyis located within a
NASKW land use incompatibility zone and whether, on a case-by-case basis, NASKW believes the
proposed density or intensity increase is incompatible with its operations. The County recognizes that
NASKW will base its evaluation and comments on Navy documentation, which may include the 2007
AICUZ report or subsequently revised reports.
For the noise zones, based on our discussions leading up to the proposed comprehensive plan
agreed
amendments, the County, DEO and NASKW previouslythatstudies could be conducted to show
that a particular property, in fact, is not in a NASKW noise zone. Indeed, as noted, the assumed noise
and safety contours produced by the Navy change frequently; twice in the last nine years and the Navy is
underway with an EIS, as stated previously.
The County has amended Policy 108.2.5 to providea mechanism for the Navy to provide input into
whether or not a property owner needs to conduct a noise study. First, the Navy will be included in the
review of any request for increase in density and/or intensity. Next, if the Navy finds and notifies the
County during the review process, that the site requesting a density and/or intensity increase is within an
area the Navy indicates is in 65 DNL or greater, the Navy may notify the County of such, and include
data and analysis indicating same.
If the property owner disagrees with this Navy interpretation, the property owner will have two (2)
optional noise study methodologies they can pursue:
Option 1lays out a specific process for allowing a property owner that believes his property is not
professionally
within a noise zone to submit a supplemental, site-specific noise analysis, based on a
acceptable methodology
, to determine whether the site islocated within a 65 DNL or greater, in which
case, it should not be recommended for increased density or intensity. The Navy will have the ability to
review the study conducted by the property owner and if theNavyagrees that the study was conducted
by a professionally acceptable methodology, the property owner may move forward in the public
hearing process. If the Navy does not agree that the study was conducted by a professionally acceptable
methodology, the Navy will provide written comments indicating so and will provide data and analysis
indicating the density and/or intensity should not be recommended to the Board of County
Commissioners for any increase.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
514
Page of
The process for Policy 108.2.5 using Option 1 is as follows:
Policy 108.2.5 Process:
1.Applicant submits FLUM application requesting an increase in density or intensity
2.County send application to NASKW
3.NASKW, within 30 days, says whether property is located within a noise zone or land use
incompatibility area and whether the proposed density or intensity increase is incompatible with
NASKW.
A.If within land use incompatibility zone:
a.based on data & analysis, staff recommend denial
b.encourage the Navy to purchase property
c.proceed with public hearings
B.If within a noise zone:
a.based on data & analysis, staff recommend denial
i.encourage the Navy to purchase property
ii.proceed with public hearings
b.Applicant can choose to do supplemental noise study
i.Applicant submits supplemental noise study
ii.County reviews for “professionally acceptable methodology”
iii.Navy reviews for “professionally acceptable methodology” –have 9 months
to agree with study & methodology
1.Navy says not professionally acceptable methodology, based on data
& analysis
a.County considers & includes NASKW comments and make
staff recommendation to BOCC
b.proceed with public hearings
2.Navy agreesprofessionally acceptable methodology, based on data &
analysis
a.Noise study says equal to or greater than 65DNL
i.County considers & includes NASKW comments and
staff recommendation of denial to BOCC
ii.proceed with public hearings
b.Noise study says less than 65DNL
i.County considers & includes NASKW comments and
staff may recommend approval to BOCC (pending
other issues – concurrency, environmental issues, etc)
ii.proceed with public hearings
It is further anticipated, based on the Navy’s assurance, that the Navy and Monroe County will develop
a professionally acceptable methodology, which the County will include within the Technical Document
to the Comprehensive Plan. This methodology will then be available for property owners to use if
seeking increased density and/or intensity through a Comprehensive Plan amendment.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
614
Page of
Option 2, as requested and provided by NASKW staff, allows a property owner to submit a
supplemental noise study, based on professionally acceptable methodology using Integrated Noise
Model which has been adopted by the FAA as the standard model used for Part 150 studies or
NOISEMAP, which is used by the Department of Defense for modeling military aircraft noise for Air
Installation Compatible Use Zones.
This option has been included at the request of NASKW and the County has proactively and
continuously reached out, since September 2011, to the NASKW staff, to request the data necessary to
conduct this alternative. To date, NASKW has not supplied any additional information and states “we
do not have the data files at NAS Key West” (email from Gail Kenson, October 6, 2011). As such, the
County cannot evaluate the Integrated Noise Model or NOISEMAP modeling option (Option 2) and
cannot obtain the data for these models. Currently, the County cannot determine if the Navy’s requested
methodology is a feasible option, as it does not appear the County or an applicant can get the necessary
data to complete the analysis. The County may not be able to implement the second optional
methodology; however, we have included it since NASKW has indicated they will provide the
information in the future.
PROPOSED POLICY REVISIONTO ADDRESS DEO OBJECTION #2:
Policy 108.2.5
Monroe County will maintain the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designations, for any
application received after the effective date of this policy(insert effective DATE), for properties
located within the MIAI overlay. FLUM amendments that increase density and/orintensity
within the MIAI overlay received after the effective date of this policy(insert effective DATE),
are not permitted unless Monroe County transmits the requested FLUM amendment to NASKW,
pursuant to Policy 108.1.1. Within 30 daysof receipt, the NASKW commanding officer or his or
her designee, may provide comments on the proposed amendment, based on appropriate data and
analysis, to Monroe County indicating whether the property is located within a noise zone or
land use incompatibility zone and whether the proposed density and/or intensity increase is
incompatible with NASKW.
If NASKW indicates the property is within a land use incompatibility zone, the Board of County
Commissioners shall adopt a resolution providing a finding determining whether the property is
subject to the restrictions of increasing density and/or intensity for the application filed for the
property within the MIAI boundary. Monroe County will maintain the FLUM designations for
properties adjacent to or closely proximate to military installations for which NASKW provided
data and analysis, which meets the requirements of Section 163.3177(1)(f), F.S., as of the
effective date of this policy, which supports a determination that the property iswithin a land use
incompatibility zone. Additionally, for FLUM amendments requesting an increase of density
and/or intensity within a land use incompatibility zone, Monroe County shall encourage the
Navy to acquire these lands, pursuant to Policy 108.1.7, for the protection of the public health,
safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys.
If NASKW indicates the property is within a noise zone,Monroe County may consider Future
Land Use Map amendments requesting anincrease in density and/orintensity within the MIAI
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
714
Page of
overlay, if the property owner submits a supplemental noise study, based on professionally
accepted methodology approved by Monroe County and NASKW, to determine whether the
noise level is greater than or less than 65 DNL (Day-Night Average Sound Level) at the subject
property (site) requesting the proposed FLUM amendment.
Once the applicant submits the supplemental noise study, Monroe County and NASKW
shall review the submitted, supplemental noise study for professionally acceptable
sufficiency. The Naval Air Station Key West commanding officer or his or her designee
may provide comments, based on appropriate data and analysis, to Monroe County
stating whether the Navy recognizes the noise study as a “professionally accepted
methodology.”
NASKW shall be provided up to nine (9) months from receipt of the supplemental noise
study, submitted with the application requesting a FLUM amendment which proposes
increases in density and/or intensity within the MIAI overlay, to provide comments to
Monroe County. Once comments are received or, if comments are not received within
nine (9) months from NASKW, the County shall allow the applicant to proceed through
the public hearing process with the submitted, supplemental noise study, based upon the
methodology defined in the Monroe County Technical Document of the adopted Monroe
County Comprehensive Plan.
Monroe County shall take into consideration any comments and accompanying data and
analysis, provided by the Naval Air Station Key West commanding officer or his or her
designee regarding the professional acceptability of the methodology of the noise study.
Considering the supplemental noise study, based on professionally accepted methodology
reviewed by Monroe County and NASKW, if provided,the Board of County
Commissioners shall adopt a resolution providing a finding determining whether the
property, within the MIAI boundary, is or is not subject to the restrictions onincreasing
density and/or intensity for the application filed.
After 90 daysof the adoption of the Board of County Commission resolution, Monroe
County will schedule the required public hearings for the FLUM application requesting
an increase in density and/or intensity, filed for the property within the MIAI boundary.
Monroe County may consider Future land Use Map amendments that increase density or
intensity within the MIAI overlay, if the property owner submits a scientific study, utilizing
option (1) or (2) below, to show that the subject property is not within a noise zone or land use
incompatibility area based on the uses proposed, based upon a resolution adopted by the Board
of County Commissioners (BOCC).
The NASKW commanding officer or his or her designee may provide comments, within 30 days,
to Monroe County on the proposed removal from the MIAI requirements.
1)The scientific study shall be conducted in accordance with professionally accepted
methodology and should be conducted in accordance with the following minimum
recommended standards to ensure that the parcel is not within the MIAI because the
noise level is <65 DNL:
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
814
Page of
Conduct 10 random (representative) 24 hour measurement surveys
Measurements shall be conducted on days when there are active training operations
o
for fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft typically deployed to NASKW for varying
durations.
In order to assure "average" conditions over the 10 days, it is required that data be
o
acquired for each direction of airport operation in proportion to the proper (annual)
percent for the typical aircraft deployed at NASKW.
Ten (10) representative days is a requirement for estimating the yearly average DNL.
o
A sample of 10 days provides an estimate of the actual yearly DNL (Day-Night
o
Average Sound Level), accurate to within 1 decibel (dB), with 90 percent confidence.
Typically deployed is defined based on an inventory of the type of aircraft in
o
operation at NASKW during the preceding year, with the frequency of those types
being agreed to by County staff prior to the study being conducted.
Alternatively, the any property owner may submit,with a requested FLUM amendment, a
supplemental noise study, based on professionally acceptable methodology, can be submitted
that was modeled using the Integrated Noise Model which has been adopted by the FAA as the
standard model used for Part 150 studies or NOISEMAP which is used by the Department of
Defense for modeling military aircraft noise for Air Installation Compatible Use Zone.
The Board of County Commissionersmay condition a granting of a resolution on a waiver of
liability against or indemnification of the County by the requesting property owner for any cause
of action or claim based upon the current or future uses and operations at NASKW.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEO Objection 3:
The NAS-Key West installation in the Florida Keys is an important state resource
and is specifically indentifiedfor protectionin the Florida Keys ACSC Principles of Guiding
Development. The NAS-Key West contributes over $536 million annually to the Keys
economy. Department staff have conducted public workshops regarding Joint Use studies. Staffhave
written and met with the elected body encouraging the adoption of military strategies to prevent
encroachment that could affect the ability of the Naval Air Station-Key West to carry out its mission.
Sections 163.3184(1)(b) and 380.0552(7),Florida Statutes,provide that any plan amendment must be
consistent with the Principlesfor Guiding Developmentin designated areas of critical state concern.
Section 380.0552(7)(h)4 establishes the following Principlefor the Florida Keys ACSC: “Protecting
the value, efficiency, cost effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and proposed major public
investments, including…Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities.” As proposed the
amendment is inconsistent with this Principle.
Policy 108.2.5 does not address public safety concerns as provided for in Section 163.3175(1), F.S. and
the Principles for Guiding Development (380.0552(7)(n), F.S.).Principle (n) provides that proposed
plan amendments must be consistent with protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens
of the Florida Keys and maintaining the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
914
Page of
Authority:
Section 163.3184(1)(b), Section 380.0552 (7) and (7)(h)4.and (n), and Section 163.3175
DEO Recommendation:
The County should amend the policies to ensure the protection of the Key West
Naval Air Station.
COUNTY ORC RESPONSE:
Monroe County recognizes that DCA has held prior workshops on Joint
Land Use Studies (JLUS) and has written letters to encourage the adoptionof military strategies to
prevent encroachment. Further,the County recognizes that some local governments use a JLUS and/or
a specific AICUZ report, as default criteria or to define their zones of influence;however, existing
conditions on the lands adjacent to or closely proximate to NASKW require particular consideration of
competing public policies, which Chapters 163 and 380, F.S., recognize.In fact, Objection 3 of the ORC
Report recognizes these varied and sometimes competing public policies: protection of the Key West
Naval Air Station vs. protection of the public health, safety, and welfare of thecitizens of the Florida
Keys.
Although DEO is objecting to the approach the County has developed and,even though,other “affected
local governments” may choose different approaches, the County’s proposed amendments are not
inconsistent with the Principlesfor Guiding Development(PGD). As Section 380.0552(7), F.S., states,
“for the purposes of reviewing the consistency of the adopted plan, or any amendments to that plan, with
the principles for guiding development, and any amendments to the principles, the principles shall be
construed as a wholeand specific provisions may not be construed or applied in isolation from the other
provisions.” The County considered the legislative intent of the Area of Critical State Concern
designation and drafted policies to balance the various objectives within PGD. In particular, the
proposed policy implements the following PGD:
(a)Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local
government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern
designation.
(d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic
development.
(f)Enhancing natural scenic resources, promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment, and
ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys.
(g)Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys.
(h) Protecting the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of existing and proposed major
public investments, including:
1.The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities;
2.Sewage collection, treatment, and disposal facilities;
3.Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities;
4.Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities;
5.Transportation facilities;
6.Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries;
7.State parks, recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned properties;
8.City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and
9.Other utilities, as appropriate.
(k)Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida Keys.
(l)Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
1014
Page of
(n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining the
Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
compatibility
Section 163.3164(9), F.S., defines as “a condition in which land uses or conditions can
coexist in relative proximity to each other in a stable fashion over time such that no use or condition is
unduly negatively impacted directly or indirectly by another use or condition.” The County’s
amendments simply provide an opportunity for individual property owners to show that, in fact, their
proposed request is compatible with the Navy’s operations. Neither the definition of compatibility nor
any other statutory provision cited,preclude a private property owner from providing data to indicate a
proposed use or development is noise-compatible.
As noted in the 2007 AICUZ (pg. 7-15), development existing around the airfield took place prior to the
recognition of the 1977 AICUZ. Many of these property owners have vested rights, which the County
and NASKW recognized in the initial meeting held on August 15, 2011. NASKW personnel present at
that meeting included: NASKW Commanding Officer Patrick Lefere, Executive Officer Greg Wilson,
agreed to
Ron Demes, Gail Kenson, Richard Ruzich, etc. At this meeting the parties the following
parameters, which were the basis for thepolicy framework Monroe County developed in concert with
former DCA Secretary Billy Buzzett, Division Director Tom Beck, ACSC Administrator Rebecca Jetton
and DCA Attorney Richard Shine, as follows:
“NASKW staff:
1.For new development:
a.would accept existing density and intensity of the Future Land Use Map, with the
corresponding text, with sound attenuation
b.would not ask Monroe County to deny permits for any development, within AICUZ
or noise contours if properties have development rights on Future Land Use Map or
Land Use District (Zoning) Map.
2.For redevelopment:
a.would accept existing density and intensity of the Future Land Use Map, with the
corresponding text, with sound attenuation
b.would not ask Monroe County to deny permits for any development, within AICUZ
or noise contours if properties have development rights on Future Land Use Map or
Land Use District (Zoning) Map.
3.Would be willing to support the following land use compatibility strategies that Monroe
County could adopt as Comprehensive Plan policies:
a.Monroe County would not approve Future Land Use Map amendments that would
INCREASE density or intensity within 65 DNL and above.
b.Within a designated Area of Military Influence, Monroe County would not approve
NEW USES (over and above those already permitted) which are individually
excluded from a noise zone within the (Table 6-2) 2007 AICUZ, that are not already
permitted within a Future Land Use Category or Land Use District (LUD)
category, through a Future Land Use Map, Text, overlay or LUD map
amendment.”
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
1114
Page of
Nonetheless, Monroe County is proposing revisions to Policy 108.1.7 to address the issues raised in
Objection 3. In order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys
as well as protect NASKW, Monroe County will encourage NASKW to purchase the lands adjacent to
or closely proximate to the Boca Chica airfield of NASKW that are negatively impacted by the Navy’s
Final Submission AICUZ Update for NAS Key West, March 2007,
operations. It is noted within the
that the Navy has programs to acquire property rights to protect its operational integrity. Previously,
NASKW was pursuing the purchasing of landsto protect the base and protect the public health, safety,
and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys, pursuant to Section 380.0552 (7)(h)4. and (n), F.S. As
stated in the 2007 AICUZ (Page 7-4), the Navy purchased numerous undeveloped lots totaling over 600
acres outside the airfield boundary to the east of NAS Key West in the 1980s to prevent further
encroachment.
PROPOSED POLICY REVISIONTO ADDRESS DEO OBJECTION #3:
Policy 108.1.7
In order to protect the value, efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and amortized life of NASKW,
pursuant to Section 380.0552 (7)(h)4., F.S., protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the
citizens of the Florida Keys, pursuant to Section 380.0552 (7)(n), F.S., and encourage
compatibility, Monroe County will encourage the Navy to acquire all land it is impacting with its
operations and noise within any geographic area with 80+ Day-Night Average Sound Level
(DNL),and any areas where an aircraft mishap could occur.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEO Objection 4:
The amendment adds Goal 108 to the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan. The
goal states:
Monroe County shall promote and encourage the compatibility of lands adjacent
to or closely proximate to the Boca Chica airfield of NAS Key West (NASKW)
pursuant to Sections 163.3175 and 163.3177, Florida Statutes.
The Goal provides that the County “shall promote and encourage.” Section 163.3177(6)(a)3.a., F.S.
Achieve
requires, “The future land use plan element shall include criteria to be used to: a. [emphasis
added] the compatibility of lands adjacent or closely proximate to military installations, considering
factors identified in s. 163.3175(5).” The Department objects because the Goal is not consistent with
Section 163.3177(6)(a)3.a., F.S.
DEO Recommendation:
The County should amend the Goal to be consistent with the language of the
statute.
Authority:
Section 163.3175; 163.3177(6)(a)3.a.;163.3184(1)(b); 380.0552(7)(a,) F.S.
COUNTY ORC RESPONSE:
The County’s proposed amendments implement the express Legislative
encourage
intent of 163.3175(1), F.S.; specifically, “to cooperate with military installations to
compatible land use, help prevent incompatible encroachment, and facilitate the continued presence of
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
1214
Page of
compatibility
major military installations in this state.” Section 163.3164(9), F.S., definition for [means
a condition in which land uses or conditions can coexist in relative proximity to each other in a stable
fashion over time such that no use or condition is unduly negatively impacted directly or indirectly by
another use or condition] is not an inflexible one and leaves room for local governments to craft their
own compatibility programs. The definition does not include the “achieve” target but directs that the
uses should not create overly negative impacts to one another. It appears, given the definition of
“compatibility” that the objection’s distinction between “promote and encourage” and “achieve” is
insignificant.
Moreover, this effort is not strictly driven by Monroe County adopting a comprehensive plan policy
relative to NASKW. The land adjacent to or closely proximate to NASKW has been developed for an
extensive period of time. The development existing around the Boca Chica airfield took place prior to
the recognition of the 1977 AICUZ (pg. 7-15 2007 AICUZ) and the existing development and naval
base have continued to coexist in relative proximity to each other since that time.
As the 2007 AICUZ states on page 7-4, within the AICUZ footprint, the majority of non-Navy owned
developed
lands/parcels are or submerged. As the 2007 AICUZ recognizes, most of the land around the
airfield is already developed and “achieving” compatibility is difficult. While Monroe County will
consider the comments provided by NASKW, based on the most recent AICUZ or other Navy
documentation, the County must also be sensitive to private property rights, not be unduly restrictive on
those rights, and recognize the pre-existing development surrounding NASKW.
This objection is unexpected to the County, as this “issue” was not included in any prior
no objection
communications with DEO staff (or DCA staff) and NASKW (the Navy) has to the
agreed to
proposed text of Goal 108. On August 15, 2011, County and NASKW met, developed and a
set of parameters, which formed the basis for the policy framework Monroe County developed in
concert with DCA and NASKW to address military compatibility.
The basis for these parameters was offered by NASKW and the discussion included the fact that most of
the land around the airfield was developed decades ago, with FLUM and zoning designations that
indicated the privately owned land surrounding NASKW had well established private property rights.
The very first point of discussionby NASKW was the fact that the Navy waswilling to allow property
owners to develop based on theexisting rightsfor the property. The Navy requested, and the County
not
agreed, toincrease density andintensity in areas in close proximity to NASKW which would create
additional incompatibilities with Navy operations.Thisgeneral basis was recognized by bothparties as
the starting point for the development of comprehensive plan amendments and; therefore, requiring the
County to “achieve” compatibilitywhen existing development/uses are present,isdifficult. The entire
comprehensive plan amendment premise was established to recognize the current position and reality
existing within the County and to prevent further allowance of incompatible uses or increases in density
that create additional incompatibilities.
As required in Section 163.3175, F.S., the County’sproposed amendment stipulates that “the
commanding officer or his or her designee may provide advisory comments to [Monroe County] on the
impact such proposed changes may have on the mission of the military installation. Such advisory
comments shall be based on appropriate data and analyses provided with the comments” (163.3175(5),
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
1314
Page of
F.S.) and that Monroe County will “take into consideration any comments and accompanying data and
analyses provided by the commanding officer or his or her designee…as they relate to the strategic
mission of the base, public safety, and the economic vitality associated with the base’s operations, while
also respecting private property rights and not being unduly restrictive on those rights” (163.3175(6),
F.S.).
While “achieving” compatibility is an aspirational target, Monroe County is proposing to adopt and
implement the strategy incorporated within Goal 108 and associated Objectives and Policies in order to
reach compatibility with the lands adjacent to or closely proximate to NASKW, as it is constrained by
existing property rights. Based upon the information provided and the existing conditions surrounding
NASKW, Monroe County has made revisions to the text of Goal 108 to address DEO’s concerns.
PROPOSED POLICY REVISIONTO ADDRESS DEO OBJECTION #4:
Goal 108
The compatibility of lands adjacent to or closely proximate to the Boca Chica airfield of Naval
Air Station Key West (NASKW) pursuant to Sections 163.3175 and 163.3177, Florida Statutes,
shall be achieved through the implementation of the Objectives and Policies, incorporated herein.
Achieved is defined as being consistent with the Objectives and Policies, incorporated herein.
Monroe County shall promote and encourage the compatibility of lands adjacent to or closely
proximate to the Boca Chica airfield of Naval Air Station Key West (NASKW) pursuant to
Sections 163.3175 and 163.3177, Florida Statutes.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT FOR MONROE COUNTY
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (DEO NO. 12-1ACSC)
1414
Page of
Û¨¸·¾·¬ ë