Resolution 257-1999
County Attorney
RESOLUTION NO. 257 -1999
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:
THE APPLICATION OF JERRY AND LYNNE PETTY
WHEREAS, on January 4, 1996, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan
became effective; and
WHEREAS, the application of Jerry and Lynne Petty for determination of beneficial use
was heard by Special Master J. Jefferson Overby on January 28, 1999; 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 Jerry
and Lynne Petty is accordingly APPROVED, subject to the conditions listed in the Proposed
Beneficial Use Determination, dated February 28, 1999.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting of the Board held on the 9th day of June, 1999.
3: c:J \D ."
C) :to. U) r-
:;0 -" c... fT1
~,,~~.~ ~ 0
0' r-- N ~
oc;. N '-'
~ 35 ::' :::0
~:~ ~g~ ~ ~
..." ;p. .. C)
r C") (.,.).
BOARD OF COUNTY CO$tMISrsIO~R~
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Mayor Wilhelmina Harvey
Commissioner Shirley Freeman
;.:j, b!'Y't~~oner George Neu~ent
'11,"/ ,CommisSiOner Mary Kay Reich
~ 1;:"ComTissioner Nora Williams
.~
.t
yes
yes
yes
By fi?J~~)
Deputy Clerk
. - ~\
By ~. ~ \\~.aJ "^" . . . ---~ ~
Mayor/Chairman
jvrpetty
BENEFICIAL USE
MONROE COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER
In Re: JERRY & LYNNE PETTY- Beneficial Use
Application
/
PROPOSED
BENEFICIAL USE DETERMINATION
The above entitled matter was originally heard at a duly-advertised and regularly
scheduled, public hearing on January 28, 1999, by J. Jefferson Overby, designated
Beneficial Use Special Master. David Paul Horan, Esq., represented the applicants.
Assistant County Attorney Garth Coller and Planning Director Timothy J. McGarry,
Director of Planning represented Monroe County.
ISSUE
Whether the applicants will be denied all reasonable economic use of their
property by application of Policies 203.1.3 and 204.24 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive
Plan, and whether the applicants are 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
1. The Applicants purchased the subject property prior to 1984., which are
Tracts FS and GF of Pine Key Acres Subdivision, Big Pine Key (RE# 00296010000 and
#00296140000). The lot (78,000 square feet) has no zoning, since it is located in an "Area
of Critical County Concern" (ACCC) which was eliminated by the 2010 Comprehensive
Plan. However under the guidelines of the plan it has a designation of "Residential Low"
and a zoning classification of "Suburban Residential" and is currently occupied by a
structure that is 80% or more completed.
2. The Applicants had submitted an application for a residential building
permit and in May, 1983, a permit was issued for the construction of a single family
residence (permit #A10505).This permit expired in 1987. In 1989, Mr. Petty submitted an
application to complete the residence, however, the permit was never picked up after its
approval. In July 1993, the applicants submitted revised plans, but nothing was done on
these plans.
3. There currently exists a building moratorium on Big Pine Key and the
time period for applying for the reissuing of an expired permit has long ago expired.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
4. The Applicant's property can be used for one residential dwelling and
accessory uses at a minimum gross lot size of 2 acres. The site already contains a
residence that is more than 80% completed. The house (uncompleted) was permitted pre-
ROGO.
5. Application of Policy 203.1.3 of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan has
rendered the lot unbuildable.
A. Under the 2010 Comprehensive plan the subject property is of
insufficient size (since it is less than 2 acres). Since the house was under construction
2
before 1986, there is a presumption that it contains sufficient TDRs to be developed.
B. Development of a residential dwelling on the applicants' lot is
unlikely, because of the building moratorium that is in place in Big Pine Key.
C. Substantial costs would be required to meet the new building code
standards, to compete in ROGO, and to retrofit the existing structure.
D. There are no variances or other administrative options are
available, because the current lot size would still render the property unbuildable.
6. 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 Big Pine Key; and
B. the extent to which the regulations have interfered with the
applicants' reasonable investment-backed expectation that some use could be made of
this lot.
7. The mostly developed property is located within an improved subdivision
that is partly developed.
8. A strict application of Policy 203.1.3 and Policy would prevent or prohibit
the applicant from completing construction of a single family dwelling on this property.
9. Although just compensation is the preferred option under Policy 101.18.5,
neither the applicants are interested in selling, nor the land authority are interested in
acquisition of this property with an almost complete residential structure, which would
then have to be demolished at the County's expense.
3
10. Limited development of this lot should be approved as the minimum
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 applicants shall provide the building Department with written
approval by the Department of Health of the on-site wastewater disposal and treatment
system for the property within 120 days.
2. The applicants shall pay all required impact fees prior to obtaining
a permit (a reinstatement of the prior permit only).
3. The Building Department shall reinstate permit #A10505 after
receiving written approval of the on-site wastewater disposal and treatment system from
the Department of Health and other information from the applicants deemed reasonably
necessary by the Building Department to complete final inspections of the property.
4. The reinstated permit shall be subject to normal inspection
deadlines and expiration dates under Chapter 6, Monroe County Code, now in force and
as amended in the future.
5. The single family residence shall meet the building codes under
which the original permit was issued, and shall be allowed to complete construction only
within the original footprint of the existing approved site plan.
6. The applicants shall be required to provide a conservation
4
easement to Monroe County, in perpetuity, for pinel and portions of the subject property
as determined by the Director of Environmental Resources of Monroe County.
7. This Beneficial use determination shall not exceed five (5) years
and is contingent upon the applicants' releasing Monroe County from all liability , if any,
past, present and future, with regards to the subject property.
8. The provisions of Section 9.5-292 of the Monroe County Land
Development regulations do not apply to the permitting of this residence, since this is a
single family house, and is considered to have a de minimus impact on US 1
DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of Febru
5