Item D1 *QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: January 31, 2014 Division: Public Works Division
Bulk Item: Yes _ No X Department: En ink eering Services Department
Staff Contact Person/Phone #: Judy Clarke X4329
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Appeal by FPT Trust No. 1 of the denial of an after the fact right-of-
way permit for a 38-ft. wide driveway connection at 29 Calle Uno, Rockland Key. (THIS IS A
QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING).
ITEM BACKGROUND: Charlie Toppino and Sons submitted a right of way permit application for a
38-ft wide driveway connection. Staff denied the permit because the proposed width is greater than the
maximum allowable width of 24-ft. FPT Trust No. 1 is appealing the denial as allowed by Monroe
County Code Section 19-46.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: None
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: Not applicable
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
TOTAL COST: n/a INDIRECT COST: BUDGETED: Yes No
DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE:
COST TO COUNTY: $0 SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No AMOUNT PER MONTH Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty OMB/Purchasing Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM#
Revised 7/09
�fS�t
Engineering Department
MEMORANDUM ° �*
To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
From: Judy Clarke, P.E. Director of Engineering Serv►ces
Date: December 18, 2013
Re: Appeal of denial of after the fact right of way permit application for 38' wide
residential driveway connection
This item is an appeal of Engineering Department's denial of an after the fact right of way permit
application for a 38-ft. wide driveway connection at 29 Calle Uno, Rockland Key. Attached
pictures show that the driveway extends 3-ft. onto the county right-of-way. Staff denied the
application because the Monroe County Code, by reference to the Monroe County Public Works
Manual, limits the width of residential driveways to a maximum of 24 feet.
In March 2013 Code Compliance notified the property owner and contractor that work consisting
of construction of a concrete driveway was being performed on the site without the appropriate
building permit. The Monroe County eGovPLUS summary sheet for the code case is attached.
On April 8, 2013, Mr. Patrick Ortega of Charley Toppino and Sons submitted a right of way
permit application. Engineering staff reviewed the application and responded via email on April
15, 2103 that the site plan needed to be revised to reflect a maximum of one 24-ft width
driveway or 2-12 ft. driveways rather than the 38-ft. wide driveway shown on the site plan. Mr.
Ortega re-submitted the same permit application and site plan on August 7, 2013. On August 19,
2013 staff emailed a second denial to Mr. Ortega; the denial again stated that Monroe County
does not issue right of way permits for 38-ft wide driveways and that 24 feet is the maximum
allowable width. Copies of the right of way permit applications and staff emails are attached.
Monroe County Code Section 19-42 Construction Standards and Specifications states that "All
construction, repairs and/or restoration within county public rights-of-way and easements shall
conform to the technical standards and specifications contained in the 1995 edition of the
"Monroe County Public Works Manual. " Standard Road Detail R 7.1-Asphalt Driveway
Residential (copy attached) shows the geometry for residential driveways and indicates a
maximum width of 24 feet. This detail is used for residential driveways regardless of
construction material (asphalt, concrete, brick pavers). Standard Road Detail R 8.2-Concrete
Driveway, which is referenced in the appeal, shows the transition where there is curb and gutter
and is not applicable to this location. Engineering staff consistently issues residential driveway
connection permits with a maximum width of 24-ft. or in the case of a circular driveway for no
greater than 2 12-ft. width connections.
January 2, 2014
At the request of the property owner's attorney, staff evaluated whether or not the pavement
connection could be permitted as a sidewalk rather than a driveway. Staff determined that this
was not an acceptable solution; a memo dated December 16, 2013 outlining the evaluation and
resulting determination is attached.
Page 2 of 2
Ss
t
-
�
4 ll,p
Yt, 1
l
(tt){ W
-
IOWA
Y!",6'11,il'
ts�l`+I
b`r s $sstr�lh t rs t P
t rtr
SEE
{� ISf t SI � t sr li h 4 s}44 iUs,tifll))t{ti
AN
t s sl i i}1;� fil is s,iS 1(s st r
,
s 4 t S n s `rsr yri ° t
r ,�� ` r�
(r !`
......
�.• - - h t �1 t ,s� ri 1 s
i SY i s`it
ih
-
f , t
" x lti
MTI -
.
oil
WACO
-
s
-
_
iy o tf § ~#l'{t f i �j i'Yl 4 s�# d•�q
yt y 4i 1Srt�V ty t s� {t Yt � itt�r SS.k.
tt'AIt �Z�,
S
t i i
£ t F � 6 I x
itri}'}����'
' t1u
�jr "` ¢
zj-
NOt
j j t £ + � .i U,a.�i"��}� xfh`frN"�'.k�i,�; f 4 ,'."'A 'T�'�{,�t`�✓w�u,�
a+ ,
6
t
u
} �t
�t
s�
k
t � #
R/W LINE �"— SYMMETRICAL ABOUT C
A
.a. :;.a•. ..;, ::�- z
" . CONC. SWK.TYPE A` K 4 THI K M!N. WHERE
JOINT H WIRE MESH
;K6"T HICK(ALT) NO MESH, , REQUIRED a
tO` MIN. (I WAY) g ALTERNATE 6" CONCRETE
244 MAX. (2 WAY) SIDEWALK 3,000 PS.I. MIN.
WITH NO WIRE MESH MAY BE
USED 1N LIEU OF 4"CONCRETE
! SIDEWALK. SEE STANDARD
z,q
DETAIL R•10.0
EDGE OF
o b ROADWAY PAVEMENT
5 MIN r�
10`MAk. LO*A
20'—0" MIN.
PLAN
4'•0" MIN.. VARJE
CONCRETE GRADE FROM SIDEWALK TO PAVE MT EDGE)
ROAD
SIDEWALK- 8 PAVEMENT
1
sxsw W2.9RE MESH SECTION A —A
. l A
{V N d.Uj i
m m cn
SECTION 8--8 o =cc's
0: Cc u
lal
F
A BASE COURSE 6" THICK
vw
S Q ] W
�
r _1 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACE COURSE !" THICK c v w w
J NOTE a � +�
3 WHERE SIDEWALK IS NOT REQUIRED DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT � a a e
SHALL EXTEND TO R/W LINE. > z a
MONROE
3
APPROVED REVISED STANDARD ROAD DETAILCOUNTY p
HALT DRIVEWAY
PUBLIC WORKS .91c83 RESIDENTIAL 1
DEPARTMENT SHEET I OF-1
TYPE 'B'JOINT CONSTRUCT ADD'TL PAV'MT
A (SEE TABLE, 1.) �- R/W LINE {
t
DRIVEWAY 4"THICK7
SIDEWALK SEE NOTE
`a so SEE
MIN. 0-WAY) p p pfiC�c�S
24'MAX. 2-WAY ` ZC34
(42'MAX. ATSERVICE l ¢ti Io
STATIONS)
WARP TYPE 'C`JOINT � s I�`,\`` w a
SLOPES t �111 `
CURB 81 IGU' rLI A 4.
PV'MT EDGE s" I^ 6_O„ ( 6'-0"
CURB '4 CURB -:Jk c
TRANSITION TRANSITION TR:t«:>;':"'=:N
PLAN TRAFFIC
BACK OF SIDEWALK PROFILE
FRONT OF
SIDEWALK PROFILE ( TOP OFI CURB PROFILE
T6_O„ DRIVEWAY CURB
GUTTER LINE CURB CURB
TRANSITION TRANSITION
TABLE I.
PROM
DRIVEWAY ADO'TL 6"CONC. SWK,
!r PROFILE WtDTH (APPROACH SIDE OPtLY!
10' MIN. MAY BE USED FOR SINGLE UP TO I5' 1 ADDED WIDTH = 15'
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS 20' 11 -E0' 1
25' _
J 34 pnd per N4 ADDED W EDT H
4-0" VARIES
.•I 1 MIN. (MARE THAN 5=O°} i wt j
3 ;�;,• •- -:}:�• _ -- _ _ TYPE C JOINT m Nx
6x6-W29x W2.9 , o ��
::�•w:a':•' o Inti
WIRE MESH TYPE C JOINT '� .:
a ¢ v
SECTION A— A DRIVEWAY
CURB
NOTES: W 3
1. SPACE JOINTS IN ACCORDANCE W c
WITH STD. DETAIL R-10.0
2. AN ALTERNATE 6" CONCRETE SIDEWALK WITH NO MESH MAY BE USED a N
IN LIEU OF THE 4"CONCRETE SIDEWALK. (SEE R-10.0) m m cc
y Ir v
x
c U �
MONROE APPROVED REVISED STANDARD ROAD DETAIL
COUNTY
PUBLIC WORKS 9/B3 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY 8 . 2
D PATET SHEET I OF!
CONSTRUCT ADD'TL PAV'MT
TYPE'B' JOINT A (See Table 0 g
® }l} R/W LINE
t>
o z SIDEWALK IVE EE NOTE THICK
¢ �12' MIN. I-WAY it v
24 MAX.{2-WAY}
(42 MAX. AT SERVICE OQ-1
STATIONS) � r-`t�a� `1`1\�`` uj
WARP
cr
SLOPES TYPE 'C'JOINT a
>o
CURB a,GUTTER
PV`MT EDGE CURB -,•i
TRANSITION A TRANSITION TR;a v5 ti.: ti
PL.A N TRAFFIC
BACK OF SIDEWALK PROFILE FRONT OF SIDEWALK PROFILE
-TOP OF CURB PROFILE
'6"0" DRIVEWAY CURB 6'0"
GUTTER LINE CURB CURB
TRANSITION TRANSITION
PROFILE TABLE I.
ae IO'MIN•MAY BE USED FOR SINGLE DRIVEWAY ADD`TL 6"CONC.SWK.�
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS WIDTH (APPROAOI SIDE ONLY I �
UP TO I5 ADDED WIOTH=15'
25• I = S I
4'-0" VARIES 'and over 11 NO ADDED WIDTH
it MIN. (5'-O"OR LESS)
31 TYPE 'C'JOINT
a OL
6x6-W2.9x W2.9
WIRE MESH '� � DRIVEWAY o 0 0 0
SECTION A- A CUR$ a s
NOTES: i
m
I. SPACE JOINTS IN ACCORDANCE '" m
WITH STD. DETAIL R-IO.O a 2 Z
a 0 W
2. AN ALTERNATE 6" CONCRETE SIDEWALK WITH NO MESH MAY BE USED " C
w
IN LIEU OF THE 4"CONCRETE SIDEWALK. (SEE R- 10.0) 9 m w
a a z
a 0 0
r9 c> Q
MONROE APPROVED REVISED STANDARD ROAD DETAIL
COUNTY
PUBLIC WORKS 9f83 CONCRETE DRIVEWAY .
DEPARTMENT SHEETZOF
Barton W. Smith, Esq. SMITH OROPEZA, P.L. Patrick Flanigan, Esq.
Managing Partner I
Gre
gory S. Oropeza, Esq. Richard McChesney, Esq.
n 138-142 Simonton Street
Key West, Florida 33040
Telephone : (305) 296-7227
Facsimile : (305) 296-8448
September 17, 2013
VIA HAND-DELIVERY
Judith S. Clarke, P.E.
Director of Engineering Services
1100 Simonton St.
Key West, FL 33040
RE: FPT Trust No. I's Appeal of the Denial of its 29 Calle Una Pen-nit
Dear Judi,
My firm represents FPT Trust No. I ("FPT"), which owns real property situated at 29 Calle Una,
East Rockland Key, in Monroe County, Florida ("Property"). Pursuant to Monroe County Code
See. 19-46, FPT hereby exercises its right to appeal to the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners the Engineering Department's August 19, 2013 denial of a Driveway Connection
permit to FPT for the Property.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On or about August 8, 2013, FPT submitted an application to the Monroe County Engineering
Department for a driveway connection for the Property with a proposed site plan. Pursuant to
the application and site plan, the subject connections consist of two side-by-side driveways, each
measuring approximately seventeen feet (IT) in width. The driveway extends outward to the
electric pole in order to ensure that vehicles leaving and entering the property do not collide with
the electric pole. Moreover, the driveway's width is due to portions of the driveway covering a
drainage field remaining from when the septic tank was removed and central sewers were
installed. True and correct copies of FPT's application and proposed site plan are attached
hereto and incorporated herein as composite Exhibit A. On August 19, 2013, you denied FPT's
application, citing the width of the proposed connection as the basis for denial. A true and
correct copy of that denial is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit B. In the denial,
you stated that "...the County does not issue permits for 38 ft. wide driveways. 24 ft. is the
maximum allowable driveway connection width (see e-mail below from [Administrative
Assistant] Brearme Erickson.) Accordingly, we are denying this application for a 38 ft. wide
driveway connection."
Ms. Erickson's referenced e-mail provided that everything "looks fine,"with the exception of the
width of the proposed driveway connection. In her e-mail, Ms. Erickson stated: "Monroe County
only allows for a maximum of one 24' wide driveway connection or any 2 driveway connections
that total no more than 24' (ex. 2-12' connections). In order to issue your permit, please forward
RECEIV QFp 4
ED ,- 1 7 201
an updated site plan showing a maximum 24' wide connection." A true and correct copy of Ms.
Erickson's e-mail is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit C. The sole basis for
denial of FPT's application was the width of the proposed connection.
ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF APPROVAL
The Engineering Department erred in denying FPT's application on the basis of the width of the
proposed driveway connections, and the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
should overrule the Engineering Department. Pursuant to Monroe County Code, there is no
aggregate maximum allowable width for driveway connections to single family residences. Thus,
there is no authority for the Engineering Department's denial of the permit on that basis. The
driveway connections on the subject property satisfy Monroe County Code and attendant County
regulations, and should be approved.
Chapter 19 of Monroe County Code governs permits for public right-of-way use permits. Sec.
19-41 specifically addresses the permitting requirements for access driveways. Sec. 19-41
provides:
(a) A request to install a single-family residential driveway access shall be
submitted indicating the street address, lot and block number, a description
of the nature of the construction (size), and the amount of intrusion into
the county right-of-way. No insurance or bonding is required.
(b) Access driveways onto rights-of-way shall be limited to the least possible
number required to adequately serve the intended use and shall conform to
all applicable traffic safety standards. Prior to installation within county
rights-of-way, the application shall be reviewed by the engineering
director regarding any effects on sidewalks, ditches, swales, curbs or other
facilities located within rights-of-way or easements. Once a permit is
issued, all construction and improvements shall be subject to inspection by
the engineering department.
Sec. 19-41 does not set a maximum permissible width for access driveways or grant the
Engineering Department the authority to deny an application on such a basis. While the width of
a driveway could ostensibly bear on "effects on sidewalks, ditches, swales, curbs or other
facilities Iocated on rights-of-way or easements," there is no indication that the application at
issue implicated such concerns. There is also no indication that the width of a driveway or
driveways bears any relationship to the limitation that driveways be "...limited to the least
possible number required to adequately serve the intended use..." or that the subject connections
fail to conform to any applicable traffic safety standard.
The Monroe County Engineering Department ostensibly relied on Sec. 19-42 to support denial of
the permit on the basis that the proposed width exceeds 24 feet, but this reliance was incorrect.
Monroe County Code Sec. 19-42 provides:
All construction, repairs and/or restorations within county public rights-of-way
and easements shall conform to the technical standards and specifications as
2
contained in the 1995 edition of the "Monroe County Public Works Manual,"
which manual is hereby adopted pursuant hereto and, by reference, incorporated
herein. Revisions to the 1995 "Monroe County Public Works Manual" may be
adopted by the board of county commissioners by resolution.
The applicable section of the Monroe County Public Works Manual ("Manual"), R 8.2, in
part 2 "Standard Specifications and Details," is attached hereto and incorporated herein
as Exhibit D. R 8.2, "Standard Road Detail for Concrete Driveways" is incorporated by
reference into the provisions of Chapter 19 of the Monroe County Code.
The Standard Road Detail for Concrete Driveways provides a twelve feet (12') minimum
width for one-way driveways and a twenty-four feet (24') maximum for two-way
driveways. There is no maximum width for one-way driveways. The proposed driveway
connection, as shown on the site plan consists of two (2) one-way driveways,
approximately sixteen feet eight inches (1 b'8") wide each, with a five feet (5') wide
planter separating them. See Exhibit B.
Monroe County Code contains no criteria for determining whether a driveway is "one-
way" or"two-way," but the width of each driveway limits the feasibility of two standard-
sized vehicles passing one another on each individual driveway. The driveways are
separated by the five feet (5') wide planter labeled as the "NEW PLANTER" on the site
plan. See Exhibit A. While the driveway connection meets the right of way in line with
the planter, the strip of concrete between the outer edge of the driveway and the planter is
a mere five feet (5') long by five feet (5') wide. This strip will not be utilized for vehicle
storage, ingress, or egress, and thus does not constitute a part of the driveway, but instead
constitutes a paved area separating the two individual driveways.
Each driveway is a one-way driveway, measuring approximately sixteen feet eight inches
(16'8") wide, which complies with the Manual's standard. The Manual establishes no
maximum permissible width for a one-way driveway. The existence of two (2) one-way
driveways on the same property does not violate Sec. 19-41(b)'s provision that access
driveways be "limited to the least possible number required to adequately serve the
intended use" or that these driveways would fail to conform to applicable traffic and
safety standards. Accordingly, there are no grounds under County Code to justify the
denial of the permit in question.
Alternatively, assuming arguendo, that the site plan shows the existence of a single,
approximately thirty-eight feet long (38'), one-way driveway, the permit should still have
been issued. The Standard Road Detail for Concrete Driveways clearly shows a twelve
feet (12') minimum width for one-way driveways and a twenty-four feet (24') maximum
width for two-way driveways. There is no maximum width for one-way driveways. As
has previously stated, Monroe County Code contains no criteria for determining whether
a driveway is "one-way" or "two-way," but in light of the access needs of the property
and the placement of the columns supporting the structure on the property, it is infeasible
for vehicles to travel in opposite directions on the proposed driveway or for a vehicle to
use half of the driveway for ingress to the property and the other half of the driveway for
3
egress. While two vehicles can pull in and out of the driveway simultaneously, it is
physically impossible for two vehicles to enter the property simultaneously and then
simultaneously exit the property by use of the other half of the driveway. Pursuant to the
Monroe County Code, the maximum width of twenty-four feet (24') applies only to two-
way driveways. The simple fact that a driveway is wide enough to accommodate two cars
does not bring it within the ambit of the Manual's provision prohibiting a single 2-way
driveway exceeding 24 feet in width. This fact is further supported by the lack of
maximum permissible width for 1-way driveways: If a driveway's mere ability to
accommodate two vehicles side by side makes it a "two-way" driveway, a permissible
one-way driveway (which may be of unlimited width under the Manual) could be
arbitrarily termed a two-way driveway, and thereby denied necessary permits by the
Engineering Department.
Assuming arguendo that the two driveways are considered a single one-way driveway of
approximately thirty-eight (38) feet in width, the driveway would still comply with the
Manual's standard, which is incorporated into Monroe County Code, that a one-way
driveway be at least twelve (12) feet wide. The Manual provides no permissible
maximum width for a one-way driveway. There is no indication that the existence of a
thirty-eight (38) feet wide driveway violates Sec. 19-41(b)'s provision that access
driveways be "limited to the least possible number required to adequately serve the
intended use" or that this driveway would fail to conform to applicable traffic safety
standards. Accordingly, there are no grounds under County Code to justify the denial of
the permit in question.
CONCLUSION
In light of the subject driveway's compliance with the Monroe County Public Works
Manual and applicable provisions of Monroe County Code, FPT Trust No. i respectfully
requests that the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners overturn the
Engineering Department's denial of a permit for driveway connection at 29 Calle Uno,
East Rockland Key.
On behalf of FTP Trust No. 1
Barton Smith, Esq.
Florida Bar No. 20169
SMITH OROPEZA, P.L.
138-142 Simonton Street
Key West, Florida 33040
Telephone: 305-296-7227
Facsimile: 305-296-8448
Primary Email:
barCd,ismi thoropeza.coni
Secondary Email:
keilina u.sin ithoropeza.com
4
MONROE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION
Driveway Connection/Right-Of-Way Permit
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE)
SECTION 1: FILL OUT COMPLETELY
� OWNERS:
NAME: FPT LAND TRUST NO. 1
ADDRESS:
P.G. BOX 787
j
KEY WEST FLORbA 33041
(CITY) (STATE) (ZIP)
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (305) 296-5606
(Area code) (Phone number)
CONTRACTOR and/or AUTHORIZED AGENT of OWNER:
NAME: CHARLEY TOPPING & SONS, INC.
ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 787
KEY WEST FLORIDA 33041
(CITY) (STATE) (ZIP)
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (305) 296-5606
(Area code) (Phone number)
SECTION 2: FILL OUT COMPLETELY
I
DATE: WORK EXPECTED TO BEGIN: WORK EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED:
ADDRESS OF PROPOSED WORK: 29 CALLE UNO, EAST ROCKLAND KEY
MILE MARKER: 9.5 BLOCK: 1 LOT; 23,24,25
SUBDIVISION: KEY/ISLAND:
ROCKLAND VILLAGE EAST ROCKLAND KEY
WORK to be PERFORMED - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL:
CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DRIVEWAY OF APPROX.860 S.F. IN FRONT OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
Exhibit A
MONROE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION
Driveway Connection/Right of Way Permit
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE)
SECTION 3: READ-SIGN
1. Finish elevation of driveway must conform to elevation of ground at swales.
2. All construction shall be performed in accordance with Monroe County's Standard Specifications and Details.
Residential-MC Standard Specifications&Details Commercial-MC standard Specifi
cations iptions Details
3. Permit for driveway on private property must be obtained separately from the building department.
4. No landscaping is to be performed In the right of way.
5. Any drainage problem,damage,etc...resulting from construction is the responsibility of the owner.
6. issuance of a permit does not preclude the County from conducting work including,but not limited to,utility
work and/or drainage work,within the right of way.
7. Applicant shall contact Monroe County Engineering Department for inspection prior to and at the completion of
work at 305-292-4426.
1 hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know that same to be true and correct. All provisions
of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be compiled with whether specified herein or not. The granting
of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any local,state or federal laws
regulating construction or the performance of construction.
DATE: 08/08/2013 SIGNATURE:
MONROE COUNTY USE
Approved for issuance of permit:
(Signature of Engineering Department Representative)
COST OF PERMIT: PERMIT NUMBER:
Exhibit A
RIGHT—OF—WAY ATTACHMENT
It Is the Applicant's responsibility to determine when work requires additional permits or approvals.
This permit is valid only for work performed within the County's right-of-way and does not authorize any work on
private property or other governmental property.
The issuance of this permit by MONROE COUNTY does not negate the need to obtain other permits from other agencies
when such work falls under their purview.
*As an example,such approval may be required form MONROE COUNTY'S GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION,
the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION,and/or the UNITED STATES ARMY OF CORPS
OF ENGINEERS. Other agencies,such as the UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,FLORIDA FISH AND
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION and SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT may also need to
grant approval of the work
fftlpful finks:
Growth M
anaaement-Bsrildina-305-295-3990 U.S.Fish& Wildlife Senrke-800-3"-94.53
United States Army Corers of En 1a veers-202-761-0099 F(aTlda Fish& Wildlife Commission-S61-62S-S122
Office of the Ombudsman and Public Services t Florida DEP-8S0-24S-2118
S,, go Florida Water Ml{,9gSMWt Dlstrlct-561486.OW—Ft only TON Free 800-432 204S
Applicant shall obtain any utility clearances PRIOR TO DIGGI NG by calling SUNSHINE STATE ONE CALL at -432 0
*Existing utility service shall not be disrupted without specific authority of the concerned utility and public
nodf ication by newspapers or the airways that the disruption will occur.Repairs determined to be of an emergency
nature are not subject to the notification procedure.
Link to anroe Eoan Codes--Chaster 19-Article IL—Roads—Public Right of Way Use Permit€1R WW.municode.com
"I hereby certify that I have read the foregoing,that all the information submitted in this application is accurate,and
that all work will be done in compliance with all applicable laws. I declare that all existing aerial and underground
utilities have been located and the appropriate u ' 'es notified of the proposed work."
APPLICANTS SIGNATURE: `` --
Signature
DATE: 04/0 812013
Exhibit A
SWALE CALCULATIONS: I
EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE=2,074 SF
AV NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE=860 SF
Tb TOTAL LOT AREA=7,000 SF d+a xi
— an
g , 1 NEW%OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE=41.9% 010.,w.P_
4 ! = 860 x.208=179 dREQ.SWALE VOLUME
= [ —j (89N x VD)12=4 SF CROSS SECTIONAL AREA
179d 4SF=45fl
SECTION THROUGH SWALE17
s
i LOT 25 b r L
,
EXISTING hV EXISTING SEPTIC
BALCONY '] COVER Z
EXISTING
? NEW V CONC.SLAB
DOCK G
j NEW PLANTER {.)
wr N >
$ b\ m
r Q
! LOT 24 EXISTING ONE t
I STORY ELEVATED s" ,7 �' _ s'a' a l
�j 4 28 D' LWL
� •�•�, o- i I a� �ce.oue 1
eXIS olo UTILITY
u . LINE ADNE
MNc,
1' .,, a.....
I A � EXISTS TREE
S'Wx lx11) SITE
SWALE;EXACT PLAN
-•- - �� .+ LOCA' ON'O BE
N il'2
DETEF44NM II
LOT28 DURING f_... ..
.� "2
.............. ___. I of
` -
b 1 ;rT PLAN
vV.�. w
: ,2Dt,
3132'
m 1' -
R- . ........._ ....................... ..._........_____....................................
c
DECEMBER 16, 2013 EVALUATION OF CONNECTION
AS A SIDEWALK
S.
Engineering Department r
MEMORANDUM
To: Christine Limb rt, County Attorney's Office
From: Judy Clarke -'
Date: December 16, 2013
Re: 29 Calle Uno Rockland Key— Right of Way Encroachment
I have reviewed the information for 29 Calle Uno Drive with respect to the suggestion that the
approximately 36 inches of pavement on the county right of way be permitted as a sidewalk. My
comments, which are outlined below, are based on design criteria from the FDOT's 2013
Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets
and Highways (also called the Florida Greenbook), which contains the uniform design standards
for local roads.
• The Engineering Department inspector visited the site and reported that the right of way
measures 15' from the edge of pavement(EOP)to the outer edge of the right of way.
The distance from the EOP to the concrete transmission pole located in front of the
residence is 10'4" and the pavement width from the back of the transmission pole to the
edge of the right of way is 3'2".
• The current design width for a sidewalk is 5' when it is separated from the curb (or in this
case the travel way) by a buffer strip. The design criteria allow the width to be reduced to
4' when physical constraints exist.
• The minimum clear zone (distance from the EOP to the sidewalk) on a rural road with a
25 mph speed limit is 6'.
• Ideally 3' of width should be provided behind the sidewalk to allow for above ground
utilities (such as water/sewer valve boxes).
• There is currently no sidewalk on either side of Calle Una Drive.
Based on the existing conditions at the site and the design criteria outlined above, if I were
designing a sidewalk for this road I would place it 6' from the EOP so that most of the width of
the sidewalk would be in front of the concrete transmission pole rather than where the 36" of
pavement is currently located. This configuration would maximize the unobstructed width of the
sidewalk for ADA purposes while still keeping the minimum clear zone. There is currently no
sidewalk on either side of Calle Uno Drive and the County does not have any plans to construct
sidewalks in this neighborhood.
December 16, 2013
Given that the 36"pavement in question is not located where a sidewalk would be constructed, it
does not extend across the entire width of the property and there is no sidewalk anywhere else on
Calle Uno Drive, considering it a sidewalk and permitting it as such would serve no purpose
other than to contrive a reason to permit, after the fact, something that was placed on the right of
way improperly. Based on this, permitting it as a sidewalk is not a satisfactory resolution to this
issue. Therefore, the unpermitted work on the county's right-of-way should be removed. If the
applicant wishes to proceed with their appeal, the engineering department will set the appeal of
the denial of the after-the-fact permit on the BOCC's agenda, January 16, 2014 in Key West at
the Harvey Government Center.
Page 2 of 2
AUGUST 19, 2013 STAFF DENIAL EMAIL
Clarke-Judith
From: Clarke-Judith
Sent: Monday,August 1y, 2O132l)OPK4
To: patrick@chadeytoppinoandsons.comm'
Cc: Erickson-Breanne
Subject: FVV: ROW permit application
Attachments: 29 CALLEUNU.pdf
Tracking: Recipient Delivery
'pa,hck@>chvr|eytoppinoandsnnx.00m'
E,ickson'B'eanne Delivered:D/z9/20z3Z:0Vpm
Goodafternonn— I've reviewed the attached and have the following comments:
1. Please submit the$25 ROW permit application fee;
2. The application is for an approximately 38 ft.wide driveway connection; as staff indicated on April 15m when the
first application for this driveway connection was submitted, the County does not issue driveway connection
permits for 38 ft. wide driveways. 24 ft.wide is the maximum allowable driveway connection width (see email
below from Breanne Erickson). Accordingly,vve are denying this application for a38 ft. wide driveway
connection permit.
Sincerely,
Tudidi S. Cbudke,P'E.
Director nf Engineering Services
11on Simonton Street
Key West,r/u,maoxm*u
omoeaoo-2nm-4000
Favxo5-oon-oue1
HELP US HELP YOU|
Please take amoment to complete our Customer Satisfaction Survey:
Your feedback |s important tous!
Please note Florida has a very broad pvumc records law Most written communications to or from the County regarding County business are public records
available to the public and media upon request,Your e-mail communication may»nsubject tv public disclosure.
From: Erickson-Breanne
Sent: Wednesday, August O7, 2Ul33:Z] PM
To: C|arke']udith
Subject: FVV: ROW permit application
From: Patrick Ortega
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 12:03 9M
To: Ehckson'8raanne ~
Cc:
Subject: RE: ROW permit application
�
Hi Breanne,
Hope all is well with you.. Please see attached documents for submission for a right of way permit.. I realize that it will
be denied and will apply for a variance subsequently, as per codes.. Please contact me if anything else is required..
Thanks,
Patrick Ortega
Charley Toppino& Sons, Inc.
(305)296-5606
(305)522-1083
From: Erickson-Breanne [ .ail o ri n- r w i )M nro� o ni -F .Gp
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:28 PM
To: 'patrick@charleytoppinoandsons.com'
Subject: RE: ROW permit application
Hi Patrick,
Tina forwarded your email on to me as I am now helping handle ROW permits. The application looks fine, however your
site plan needs to be changed. As far as I can tell, your site plan shows an approximately 38'wide driveway connection.
Monroe County only allows for a maximum of one 24' wide driveway connection or any 2 driveway connections that
total no more than 24' (ex. 2-12' connections). In order to issue your permit, please forward an updated site plan
showing a maximum 24'wide connection.
If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.
far Er`
Administrative Assistant
Monroe County Engineering
1100 Simonton Street#216
Key West, FI.33040
(305)292-4427
From: loSacco-Tina
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 1:49 PM
To: Erickson-Breanne
Subject: FW: ROW permit application
Please;Thank you.
305-292-4426
Before printing this e-mail message,ask yourself whether you really
need a hard copy.
Please note:Your e-mail communication may be subject to public
disclosure.
Florida has a very broad public records law.Most written
communications to or from the County are public record,available to
the public and media upon request
From: Patrick Ortega [ ai.lto:patrick@charie ttoop inoandsons.com
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 8:07 AM
2
APRIL 8, 2013 RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT APPLICATION
APRIL 15, 2013 ENGINEERING STAFF DENIAL EMAIL
Clarke-J udit
From: Erickson-Breanne
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 2:08 PM
To: Clarke-Judith
Subject: FW: ROW permit application
From: Erickson-Breanne
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:28 PM
To: 'Patrick@charleytoppinoandsons.com'
Subject: RE: ROW permit application
Hi Patrick,
Tina forwarded your email on to me as I am now helping handle ROW permits. The application looks fine, however your
site plan needs to be changed. As far as I can tell,your site plan shows an approximately 38'wide driveway connection.
Monroe County only allows for a maximum of one 24'wide driveway connection or any 2 driveway connections that
total no more than 24' (ex. 2-12' connections). In order to issue your permit, please forward an updated site plan
showing a maximum 24'wide connection.
If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.
Y Y
Administrative Assistant
Monroe County Engineering
1100 Simonton Street#216
Key West, FL 33040
(305)292-4427
From: LoSacco-Tina
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 1:49 PM
To: Erickson-Breanne
Subject: FW: ROW permit application
Please;Thank you.
305-292-4426
Before printing this e-mail message,ask yourself whether you really
need a hard copy.
Please note:Your e-mail communication may be subject to public
disclosure.
Florida has a very broad public records law.Most written
communications to or from the County are public record,available to
the public and media upon request
From: Patrick Ortega [maiIto: trick@charlevtoor)inoandsons.com]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 8:07 AM
To: LoSacco-Tina
Subject: RE: ROW permit application
TINA,
PLEASE SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS, AS PER YOUR REQUEST.. PLEASE LET ME KNOW WHAT I NEED TO DO..I
APPRECIATE YOUR ASSISTANCE..
THANKS,
PATRICK ORTEA
CHARLEY TOPPINO &SONS, INC.
(305) 296-5606
(305) 522-1083
From: LoSacco-Tina [mai Ito:LoSacco-Tina(@ MonroeCou nty-FL.Gov]
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 1:45 PM
To: 'patrick@charleytoppinoandsons.com'
Subject: ROW permit application
Attached is the permit application—fill it out completely and return it,we will take a look and get back with you.
Enjoy the weekend!
9'r stcc Xomrizcca-
Senior Technician - Engineering
.Monroe County BOCC
noo Simonton St., Suite 2-216
Xey `West, FL. 33040
305-292-4426
`We have not inherited the earth from our parents,
'We are borrowing it from our children.
Before printing this e-mail message, ask yourself whether you really
need a hard copy.
Please note: Your e-mail communication may be subject to public
disclosure.
Florida has a very broad public records law. Most written
communications to or from the County are public record, available to
the public and media upon request
2
MONROE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION
Driveway Connection/Right-Of-Way Permit
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE)
SECTION 1: FILL OUT COMPLETELY
OWNERS:
NAME: FPT LAND TRUST NO. I
ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 787
KEY WEST FLORIDA 33041
(CITY) (STATE) (ZIP)
TELEPHONE NUMBER: (305) 296-5606
(Area code) (Phone number)
CONTRACTOR andLor AUTHORIZED AGENT of OWNER:
NAME: CHARLEY TOPPINO & SONS, INC.
ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 787
KEY WEST FLORIDA 33041
(CITY) (STATE) (ZIP)
TELEPHONE NUMBER, (305) 296-5606
(Area code) (Phone number)
SECTION 2: FILL OUT COMPLETELY
DATE: WORK EXPECTED TO BEGIN: WORK EXPECTED TO BE COMPLETED:—----------------------
ADDRESS OF PROPOSED WORK. 29 CALLE UNO, EAST ROCKLAND KEY
MILE MARKER: 9.5 BLOCK: 1 LOT: 23,24,25
SUBDIVISION: ROCKLAND VILLAGE KEY/ISLAND., EAST ROCKLAND KEY
WORK to be PERFORMED - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL:
CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DRIVEWAY OF APPROX. 860 S.F. IN FRONT OF SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
MONROE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION
Driveway Connection/Right of Way Permit
(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE)
SECTION 3: READ—SIGN
1. Finish elevation of driveway must conform to elevation of ground at swales.
2. All construction shall be performed in accordance with Monroe County's Standard Specifications and Details.
Residential-MC Standard Specifications&Details Commercial MCStandardS,pecifications.&e Details
1. Permit for driveway on private property must be obtained separately from the building department.
4. No landscaping is to be performed in the right of way.
S. Any drainage problem,damage,etc...resulting from construction is the responsibility of the owner.
6. Issuance of a permit does not preclude the County from conducting work including, but not limited to, utility
work and/or drainage work,within the right of way.
7. Applicant shall contact Monroe County Engineering Department for inspection prior to and at the completion of
work at 305-292-4426.
1 hereby certify that I have read and examined this application and know that same to be true and correct. All provisions
of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. The granting
of a permit does not presume to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of any local,state or federal laws
regulating construction or the performance of construction.
04/08/2013
DATE: SIGNATURE:
MONROE COUNTY USE
Approved for issuance of permit:
(Signature of Engineering Department Representative)
COST OF PERMIT: $ PERMIT NUMBER:
RIGHT. OF—WAY ATTACHMENT
It is the Applicant's responsibility to determine when work requires additional permits or approvals.
This permit is valid only for work performed within the County's right-of-way and does not authorize any work on
private property or other governmental property.
The issuance of this permit by MONROE COUNTY does not negate the need to obtain other permits from other agencies
when such work falls under their purview.
*As an example,such approval may be required farm MONROE COUNTY'S GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION,
the STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION,andfor the UNITED STATES ARMY OF CORPS
OF ENGINEERS. Other agencies,such as the UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE,FLORIDA FISH AND
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION and SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT mayalso need to
grant approval of the work.
Helpful HAS:
Growth Management-Building-305-295 3990 U.S.Fish&Wildlife Service-800 3449453
United States Army Corps of Engineers-202-761-0099 Florida fish& Wildl a Commission-561-625-5122
gfflm-of tks _mon and PublicS4'_rvirci I l kd D -850-245-2118
South Florida Water Management District-561-686-8800—FL only Toll Free 900-432-2045
Applicant shall obtain any utility clearances PRIOR TO DIGGI NG by calling SUNSHINE STATE ONE CALL at 8004324770
*Existing utility service shall not be disrupted without specific authority of the concerned utility and public
notification by newspapers or the airways that the disruption will occur.Repairs determined to be of an emergency
nature are not subject to the notification procedure.
Link to Monroe Coup Codes—Chapter 19-Article It.—Roads Public Right of Way Use Permit OR rbtW.municode.com
"I hereby certify that I have read the foregoing,that all the information submitted in this application is accurate,and
that all work will be done in compliance with all applicable laws. I declare that all existing aerial and underground
utilities have been located and the appropriate u ' 'es notified of the proposed work."
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE:
Signature
DATE: 04/08/2013
SWALE CALCULATIONS:
B._0. EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE=2,074 SF
- NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE=860 SF rtE Nao9 ENa Y[ER NG
TOTAL LOT AREA=7,000 SF ,� W
�I
NEW%OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE=41.91/o =30L&ftDr-
4 960 x.208=179 cfREQ.SWALE VOLUME F1
(8'W x VD)/2=4 SF CROSS SECTIONAL AREA
179 cf!4 SF=45 If
0 SECTION THROUGH SWALE 5
,.
1/4" 1.O- 1 �
._..._.._..... . .
r
HMCSE 0 46US
I t i
LOT 25 Q _.
I EXISTING - EXISTING SEPTIC
i BALCONY ; COVER Z
EXISTING -- NEW 6"CONC.SLAB Z
DOCK D Q >
� i �• � • �^� � w < es F
w - 3
m ( o ut Q d
NEW PLANTER U p
8 4 i U DO
U: Q
LOT 24 EXISTING ONE
b STORY ELEVATED s 78 0
29' 0LWL
II
� t
39I
EXISTING UTILITY _....._. .._.
P LINE ABOVE Autoead Flo No
EXISTING TREE
SW x45'L x 1'D SITE
t` SWALE;EXACT PLAN
LOCATION TO BE
as DETERMINED
LOT 23 DURING
_...._ _._.. . _ —4 CONSTRUCTION SheeiNumber
_
xsa � 42 25 0 1 of 1
.a.._.__.
�.� SITL,PCB Gate MAR 27,2013
1 : ......
..........P. ..,,,
CODE COMPLIANCE CASE SUMMARY
Code Enforcement Detail Page 1 of 2
6 September 30, 2013 - 11:04 AM My Account I Disclaimer Priva(,v Policv
t , Monroe County eGovPLUS
1!21z_ _t, Us r s
CODE ENFORCEMENT DETAIL
Case Number ICE13030088 Tenant
Case Date 03-12-2013 ^� Add Info
Origination 16-E-MAIL Status 0-OPEN
Operator I atwells Officer SVP
PROPERTY ON CASE
RE 100148900000000 1 Owner FPT LAND TRUST NO 1
Property Address 29 CALLE LINO j Owner Address rP.O. BOX?87
City/State/Zip ROCKLAND KEY FL 33040 City/State/Zip rKEY WEST FL 33041-0787
Phone
CASE DESCRIPTION
COMPLAINT:WORK WITHOUT PERMIT- DRIVEWAY Et
ENTRANCE DOOR
COMPLAINT CODE ( S )
1:CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PERMIT
2: CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT PERMIT
NOTES
2013-03-12 09.48:09 IF THEY ARE RENTING THIS PROPERTY, I DON'T SEE AN
OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE. SA
INSPECTIONS / EVENTS DETAIL
DATE TIME INSPECTION/ EVENT TYPE INSTRUCTIONS/COMMENTS
10-18-2013 09:24:45 REINSPECTION
09-18-2013 09:24:16 COMMENT CODE REVIEWED W ND, SV
08-19-2013 12:13:47 REINSPECTION SPOKE W J. CLARKE. ROW PERMIT APPLIED
FOR.SV
RC'D CALL FROM BARTON SMITH ON BEHALF OF
07 15 2013 10:09:33 COMMENT CODE PO IN RESPONSE TO 2ND NOTICE.
PLAT/SURVEY INVESTIGATION IN PROGRESS.
REQUESTED UPDATES AS AVAILABLE. SV
07-08-2013 10:38:18 REINSPECTION NO PERMITS. SV
07-08.2013 10:29:58 COMMENT CODE PREPARED 2ND COURTESY NOTICE&SENT TO
MARATHON TO BE MAILED. SA
07.08.2013 09:36:58 COURTESY NOTICE/LETTER ISSUED 2ND NOTICE. SV
SPOKE WITH PO.WORKING WITH BUILDING AND
05.01-2013 11:20:31 REINSPECTION ENGINEERING.TIME EXTENSION NEEDED.
REQUESTED UPDATES AS AVAILABLE. SV
04-18-2013 11:20:00 REINSPECTION NO PERMIT ACTIVITY RELATED TO CASE,WILL
REI.SV
03-14-2013 13:47:50 COMMENT CODE PREPARED WRITTEN WARNING 8:SENT TO
MARATHON TO BE MAILED. SA
03-14.2013 13:36:23 COURTESY NOTICE)LETTER PREPARED CN TO SA FOR MAILING. SV
03-13.2013 10:08:05 COMMENT CODE RECEIVED SITE PICTURES FROM INSPECTOR
PHINNEY. REVIEWED WITH ND. SV
03-13-2013 08:44.23 MAKE VIOLATION MAKEVIO RECORDED VASKOS
http://egov.monroecounty-fl.gov/eGovPlus/code,,"code dtl.aspx?case no=CE13030088 9/30/'`2013
Code Enforcement Detail Page 2 of 2
03.12.2013 09:47:46 CREATE A CASE COMPLAINT RECORDED BY ATWELLS
RECEIVED CALL FROM INSPECTOR PHINNEY OF
WORK THROUGH SWO.
03.12-2013 08:54:14 COMMENT CODE SPOKE WITH PO/CONTRACTOR AND DISCUSSED
CONTINUED WORK ON SITE. STATES ONLY
CLEANING HAD BEEN DONE, ADVISED TO
CEASE AND DESIST ALL WORK INVOLVING
VIOLATION DUE TO STOP WORK ORDER. SV
SENIOR INSPECTOR HELD CONFERENCE CALL
03-12-2013 08:46:46 COMMENT CODE WITH PO/CONTRACTOR. PO ACKNOWLEDGED
VIOLATION AND OBTAINED CORRECTIVE
ACTION INSTRUCTIONS.SV
RECEIVED EMAIL NOTIFICATION IN A.M. FROM
BUILDING INSPECTOR BOWDEN OF VIOLATION
AND INTENT FOR BUILDING INSPECTOR
03-12-2013 08:45:10 INITIAL INSPECTION TYPE PHINNEY TO POST SWO.CONDUCTED SITE
® VISIT MID-DAY AND OBTAINED PICTURE OF
POURED CONCRETE DRIVEWAY. NO ONE AT SITE
AT TIME OF VISIT AND NO SWO OBSERVED.
SV
Use of this website constitutes your acceptance of the website dixlaimq jnd terms of use.
Your privacy is important to us,for more information see our privacy,policy.
Copyright 0 2007-THE PLUS SERIES®-All Rights Reserved
http,,F"F,'egov.monroecounty-fl.gov/eGovPIus�code/code dtl.aspx?case .no CE13030088 9/30/2013