Loading...
Resolution 453-1999 County Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 453 -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 GLENN AND BARBARA GRAY WHEREAS, on January 4. 1996. the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan became effective; and WHEREAS, the application of Glenn and Barbara Gray for determination of beneficial use was heard by Special Master J. Jefferson Overby on March 26, 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 Glenn and Barbara Gray is accordingly APPROVED, subject to the conditions listed in the attached Proposed Beneficial Use Determination, dated March 31, 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 September, 1999. yes yes yes yes yes By .Jk,o-i....Q..C. ~)6 ~ - Deputy Clerk BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA ...... -, ~ ~ ~ .Jo ~J iV'........ ~. ~ I-"-\~:- By jbugray ....."1.. 'klNnOO 30MNOW " -.. 0 .MIO .)410 3f)VH'O~ ., ANNVG L& :IU&cl L -l~O 66 Q~003~ H03 0311.:1 Mayor/Chairman BENEFICIAL USE MONROE COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER In Re: Glenn and Barbara Gray- Beneficial Use Application / PROPOSED BENEFICIAL USE DETERMINATION The above entitled matter was originally heard at a duly-advertised and regularly scheduled, public hearing on September 25, 1997, by the former Special Master, who disqualified himself. The matter was originally filed as a vested rights case but converted at the applicants' request to a beneficial use case prior to the February 12, 1999 hearing. The matter was finally heard at a duly advertised and regularly scheduled, public hearing on March 26, 1999, at the Harvey Government Center, Key West. This case was reassigned to 1. Jefferson Overby, designated Beneficial Use Special Master. David Paul Horan, Esq., Horan & Horan, represented the applicants. Assistant County Attorney Garth Coller and Planning Director Timothy J. McGarry, Director of Planning, and Ross Alliston, Director of Environmental Resources, 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 whet~er 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 in May 8, 1990, which is a lot of record, located at Lot IB, Ramrod Shores 2nd Addition, Ramrod Key. The lot is approximately 15,000 square feet) and is zoned "Improved Subdivision" and is currently cleared. The lot contains a partially built single family residence with a concrete slab and columns. There is also a septic system and utility connections on site. 2. The Applicants were issued a building permit for a residential building (permit #90-1-0886) in May 11, 1990. Due to adverse conditions suffered by the applicants, the work was discontinued and the permit expired in September 1991. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 3. The Applicants' 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. 4. Application of Policy 203.1.3 of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan has rendered the lot unbuildable. A. As an Improved Subdivision lot the subject property has no TDR value. B. Completion of the residential dwelling on the applicants' lot is prohibited, because the subject lot would require a variance from the setback, for the northern shoreline of the property, to be in compliance with the setback requirements 2 required under 2010 Comprehensive Plan 203.1.3. C. The New comprehensive plan had the effect of reducing the TDR value of the property to zero. D. Although the applicants' original permit was issued prior to RaGa, it would be unfair and an unreasonable and inequitable financial burden to require the applicants to bear the additional $107,000.00 costs and delays caused by entering the RaGa system. Furthermore, denial of beneficial use would require the demolition of the prior improvements on the subject property. 5. 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 applicants' reasonable investment-backed expectation that some use could be made of this lot. C. staff recommendations. 6. The lot is located within an improved subdivision that is partly developed. 7. A strict application of Policy 203.1.3 and Policy would prevent or prohibit the applicant from developing a single family dwelling on this lot. 8. 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 lot, which is located along the canal shoreline of a mostly-developed, 3 small-lot subdivision. 9. 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 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 applicants' 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, except the set-back from the northern edge of the subject lot shall be exempt from the 50 foot shoreline set-back provisions of Section 9.5-286(a) of the Monroe County Code provided that said shoreline set-back is not less than twenty (20) feet and that storm water runoff is contained on site. 4. The applicants shall not be required to pay any impact fees for their building permit. 5. The applicants shall be exempt from RaGa, because their permit 4 was one of the "committed" units recognized prior to the adoption ofROGO. DONE AND ORDERED this 31st day of March, 1999. 5 l3)