Resolution 277-2003
County Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 277
- 2003
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, EVIDENCING THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF A RECOMMENDED
BENEFICIAL USE DETERMINATION PROMULGATED BY THE SPECIAL
MASTER, IN RE: ORIN OPPERMANN
WHEREAS, on January 4,1996, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan became
effective; and
WHEREAS, the application of Orin Oppermann for determination of beneficial use was
heard by Special Master J. Jefferson Overby on March 24, 2003; now therefore:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
The Findings of Fact and ConclUSions of Law and recommendations of the Special Master as
set forth in the proposed determination are APPROVED and the application of Orin Oppermann is
accordingly APPROVED, subject to the conditions listed in the attached Proposed Beneficial Use
Determination, dated May 15,2003. '"
,=> .,
o C'j ~::; r
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monro~~nty~lori~,
at a regular meeting of the Board held on the 15th day of July, 2003. ~~>'~. I" .,
o
::.:':J
- .~
yes _.... v ..... '-~
~~\~; -~ rr1
- C'J
YOy ., 0
yes --r.:, r,j !'0 ;:0
0'> c:;
yes
yes
Mayor Spehar
Mayor Pro T em Nelson
".:.~9~~issioner McCoy
;,~~-~. . ' '. .-~iiii'. io...n. er Neugent
. ....~.,"
. Cf)m. .,(~. ~_.er Rice
'<" ,'. '. """j/"\
';-\
~~
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
~~J~ >n ~
By
(SEAL)
Attest: DANNY l... KOLHAGE, Clerk
Mayor/Chairman
BENEFICIAL USE
MONROE COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER
In Re: Orin Oppermann- Beneficial Use
Application
/
PROPOSED
BENEFICIAL USE DETERMINATION
The matter was heard at a duly advertised and regularly scheduled, public hearing
on March 24,2003, at the Government Center, Marathon. This case was assigned to 1.
Jefferson Overby, designated Beneficial Use Special Master. The Applicant represented
himself. Assistant County Attorney John Wolfe and Planning Director K. Marlene
Conaway, Director of Planning, and Fred Gross, Planner, represented Monroe County.
ISSUE
Whether the applicant will be denied all reasonable economic use of his property
by application of Policies 203.1.3 and 204.24 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan, and
Moratorium- Objective 301.2 ofthe Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Section 9.5-252(
Airport Districts) of the Land Development Regulations and whether the applicant is
entitled to relief under Policies contained in Objective 101.18 of the Year 2010
Comprehensive Plan (as administered and implemented in the "Agreement between the
Department of Community Affairs and Monroe County" dated February 23, 1998), the
approved portions of Ordinance 052-1997 and the Monroe County Code.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. The Applicant is the owner of record, and purchased the subject property
on November 21,2000, the street address of which is #5 Calle Dos, Rockland
Village which is a lot of record, located at Lot 5,Rockland Village 2, Plat book
7, Page 17, Rockland Key, Monroe County, Florida, Mile Marker 9. The lot is
zoned "Improved Subdivision" and is currently vacant.
2. The applicant has neither previously applied for nor received a ROGO
allocation and building permit for the lot .
3. The lot is located in the Air Installation Compatible Use Overlay Zone
(AICUZ) and is in the area designated as Composite Noise Rating (CNR) 3 Zone.
Pursuant to current Land Development Regulations 9.5-252- new residential development
is prohibited in this area.
4. The site has no TDR value as it is in an improved subdivision, under the
current code.
5. This lot is the only one in this subdivision (of the 45 single family homes
there) that remains undeveloped. ( 30 lots in the CNR-2 zone were erroneously issued
building permits).
6. The subject property was approved for a front yard variance with the
condition that a building permit must be acquired before construction could begin.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
7. The Applicant's lot is designated Improved Subdivision, which allows one
residential dwelling and accessory uses to be permitted on this lot, except for the changes
now occasioned by the 2010 Plan.
8. The Planning Department has found that the applicant will have been
2
denied all reasonable economic use of his property should he not receive a
building permit and has recommended he be awarded a building permit.
A. As an Improved Subdivision lot the subject property has no TDR
value.
B. This property(1ot) is the only remaining undeveloped lot in the
subdivision.
9. Pursuant to Policy 101.18.5 and Section 4(D) of the Agreement
between DCA and Monroe County, I have considered:
A. the economic impact of the Policy (or regulation) that prohibits
development on the applicants' lot, which is located within an Improved Subdivision; and
B. the extent to which the regulations have interfered with the
applicant's reasonable investment-backed expectation that some use could be made of
this lot.
C. staff recommendations.
10. The lot is located within an improved subdivision that is mostly
developed.
11. A strict application ofLDR 9.5-252 would prevent or prohibit the
applicant from developing a single family dwelling on this lot.
12. Although just compensation is the preferred option under Policy 101.18.5,
neither the applicant is interested in selling, nor the land authority is interested in
acquisition of this lot.
13. Limited development of this lot should be approved as the minimum
3
necessary to avoid a taking based on current land use case laW: and that this lot is suitable
for development under specific conditions.
WHEREFORE, I recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that a final
beneficial use determination be entered approving limited development on this lot
subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall resubmit a building permit application
including revised building and, if necessary, site plans, including written approval by the
Department of Health of the on-site wastewater disposal and treatment system.
2. This Beneficial use determination shall not exceed five (5) years
and is contingent upon the applicant's releasing Monroe County from all liability, if any,
past, present and future, with regards to the subject property.
3. The subject property and proposed residence shall be required to
meet all provisions of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations,
and of the Monroe County Code.
4. The applicant shall be required to pay any impact fees for his
building permit.
5. The applicant shall not be exempt from ROGO, a ROGO allocation
must be applied for and received by the applicant.
6. Applicant shall be required to sign a release acknowledging that
the property is in a CNR-3 AICUZ (high noise) area and will hold both Monroe County
and the Navy harmless of all impacts related to this location.
7. Applicant shall be required to meet all sound attenuation measures
4
required by the Monroe County Building Department for construction of a residential
dwelling in a CNR-3 AICUZ (high noise) area.
DONE AND ORDERED this May 15,2003
5