Item X1
.at f'\.A.L ~ ~ r-u- f) ~ ~...9--~~. QIo..~
~o.~
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: 15 October 2003
Division:
Growth Management
Bulk Item: Y es ~ No
Department:
Marine Resources
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
First of three public hearings on an Ordinance amending Chapter 5.5, Boats, Docks, and Waterways, prohibiting
diving and snorkeling within manmade waterbodies and within 300 feet of improved residential canals, marinas,
and commercial shorelines during the dates of the "Lobster Mini-season." (Three public hearings required)
ITEM BACKGROUND:
Lobster mini-season brings a large number of divers to the Florida Keys. Many of the these visitors dive in
residential canals and along residential and commercial shorelines disturbing the tranquility of neighborhoods
and creating potentially dangerous hazards to navigation. With the large numbers of individuals diving canal
areas in the past concern has been raised that these individuals may be injured by passing vessels. This
Ordinance is modeled after a similar ordinance passed by Islamorada, the Village of Islands.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
None
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
None
ST AFF RECOMMENDATIONS;
Approval
TOTAL COST:
None
BUDGETED: Yes
No
COST TO COUNTY:
None
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
No -L AMOUNT Per Month
Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty X
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
DOCUMENTATION: Included ~ To Follow
Not Required
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM NO.:
X/
BC031030.doc
09/24/03 10: 18 AM
Marine Resources
ORDINANCE NO. 2003
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
CREATING ARTICLE VII IN CHAPTER 5.5 OF THE
COUNTY CODE OF ORDINANCES, "BOATS, DOCKS AND
WATERWAYS," PROHIBITING DIVING AND SNORKELING
WITHIN MANMADE WATERBODIES, AND WITHIN 300
FEET OF MARINAS, IMPROVED RESIDENTIAL, AND
COMMERCIAL SHORELINES DURING THE ENTIRETY OF
THE TWO-DAY SPORT SEASON FOR SPINY LOBSTER;
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CODE; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the Marine Fisheries Department of the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission authorizes a two-day sport season each year
for the harvesting of spiny lobster; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds that the increased
diver and boat traffic in the navigable canals, and within 300 feet of marinas,
improved residential, and commercial shorelines during the two-day sport season
presents heightened public safety problems not generally applicable at other times
of the year; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds and declares these
public safety problems to constitute a public nuisance, detrimental to the
community as a whole, due to the level of policing and emergency services
required to respond to accidents and collisions that occur because of the close
proximity of divers and vessel traffic in small areas; and
WHEREAS, the close proximity of divers to public and private property, as
well as their interaction and exploration of docks, piers, and bulkheads in search
of spiny lobster, leads to unnecessary destruction of property and deleterious
environmental effects; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners declares this unnecessary
destruction of property and the deleterious environmental effects caused in the
navigable canals, marinas, and along improved residential and commercial
shorelines to be a public nuisance; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissionersl finds and declares that
the interaction of divers with publicly and privately owned docks, piers, and
bulkheads, in the canals, marinas, and along improved residential and commercial
shorelines, additionally constitutes the crime of trespass under state law; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds that the prohibition
of diving and snorkeling does not intrude upon the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission's jurisdiction over the harvesting of spiny lobster and
in fact furthers the Commission's stated intent of protecting and conserving
Florida's spiny lobster resources.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA; THAT THE
FOLLOWING SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE MONROE COUNTY CODE
OF ORDINANCES:
Section 1. Add Article VII, Chapter 5.5, "Boats, Docks, and Waterways as
provided immediately below:
Article VII. Diving and snorkeling prohibited during the lobster mini-season.
Sec. 5.5-140: Intent and Purpose
(a) The intent and purpose of this Article is to abate the destruction of
property, deleterious environmental effects, and criminal trespass that
results from the close proximity of divers to public and private property,
as well as their interaction and exploration of docks, piers, and
bulkheads in search of spiny lobster during the lobster mini-season;
which activities constitute a public nuisance,
Sec. 5.5-141: Definitions
(a) Definitions shall apply as provided in Article I of this Chapter or as
referenced from other Chapters as appropriate.
Sec. 5.5-142: Diving and snorkeling prohibited.
(a) It is a public nuisance and unlawful for any person to dive or snorkel in
any manmade waterbody as defined in this chapter, marina, or within 300
feet of an improved residential or commercial shoreline during the entirety
of the lobster mini-season. A map reflecting the boundaries of the
prohibited areas shall be available at the Department of Marine Resources,
Monroe County for reference by the public and shall be incorporated by
reference into this ordinance. The prohibited areas shall be marked by
signs on the shoreline at conspicuous places, as has previously been done
for the general slow speed I no wake zone for man made waterbodies, at
marinas and along the main arterial waterways of the County as may be
helpful to inform the public of the existence of the prohibition.
(b) Exception - Nothing in this ordinance shall prohibit diving incidental to
vessel or dock maintenance provided the' diver performing the
maintenance lawfully displays a diver down flag and otherwise complies
with the requirements of Chapter 327, Florida Statutes, as amended from
time to time.
Sec. 5.5-143: Penalties.
(a) Any person cited for a violation of this Article shall be deemed charged
with a non criminal infraction, shall be cited for such an infraction, and
shall be cited to appear before the County Court. Citations shall be
issued pursuant to S 327,74, F.S. (uniform boating citations) by any law
enforcement agency authorized to issue such citations. The civil penalty
for any such infraction is fifty dollars ($50,00), except as otherwise
provided in this section.
(1) Any person cited for an infraction under this section may:
(i) Post a bond, which shall be equal in amount to the applicable
civil penalty; or
(ii) Sign and accept a citation indicating a promise to appear.
(2) The officer may indicate on the citation the time and location of the
scheduled hearing and shall indicate the applicable civil penalty.
(3) Any person who willfully refuses to post a bond or accept and sign a
summons is guilty of a misdemeanor or the second degree.
(4) Any person charge with a non criminal infraction under this section
may:
(i) Pay the civil penalty, either by mail or in person within ten (10)
days of the date of receiving the citation, or
(ii) If he/she has posted bond, forfeit bond by not appearing at the
designated time and location.
(5)Ifthe person cited follows either of the above procedures, he/she shall
be deemed to have admitted the infraction and to have waived his/her
right to a hearing on the issue of commission of the infraction. Such
admission shall not be used as evidence in any other proceedings.
(6) Any person electing to appear before the County Court or who is
required to appear shall be deemed to have waived the limitations on
the civil penalty specified in subsection (a). The County Court, after
a hearing shall make a determination as to whether an infraction has
been committed, If the commission of an infraction has been proven,
the County court may impose a civil penalty not to exceed five
hundred dollars ($500,00).
(7) At a hearing under this chapter the commission of a charged
infraction must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
(8) If a person found by the County Court to have committed an
infraction, he/she may appeal that finding to the Circuit court.
(9) Failure to pay fines within thirty (30) days shall be punished as a
secondary misdemeanor.
Section 2. Add the following definitions to Article I of this Chapter,
(b) "Dive" means to wholly or partially submerge one's body while
equipped with a mask or goggles, whether or not any type of underwater
breathing apparatus is used,
(g) "Lobster mini-season" means the two-day sport season authorized by the
Marine Fisheries Department of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission pursuant to Section 68B-24.005, Florida Administrative Code,
as amended from time to time.
Section 3. Severability.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provision of this Ordinance is
held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance shall not be affected by such
invalidity,
Section 4. Repeal of inconsistent ordinance clauses.
All Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are
hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict.
Section 5. Inclusion in the Monroe County Code.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be included and incorporated in the
Code of Ordinances of the County of Monroe, Florida, as an addition to
amendment thereto, and shall be appropriately renumbered to conform to the
uniform numbering system of the Code.
Section 6. Effective date
This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Office of the
Secretary of State of the State of Florida,
THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALL Y BLANK
It ASS)~D AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe Co\.lJ1ty,
Florida, at a regular meeting of said Board held on the 171t1 day of _ Decembt..'T . 2003.
Mayor Dixie Spehar
Mayor Pro Tem Murray Nelson
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Commissioner David Rice
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
DANNY L. KOLHAGE. CLERK
Board of County Commissioners
Of Momoe County, Florida
BY
Deput)' Clerk
Mayor/Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
L~AL SUFFl.~
Sv'0J/.. .
A~~~O
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: October 15.2003
Division:
Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes
No -1L-
Department: Planning
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
A public hearing to adopt an ordinance amending Section 9.5-309, Monroe County Code [fences]
to clarify how the height of fences is measured and allow fences in residential areas to exceed 3
feet in height within the clear sight triangle if they are set back a minimum of 10 feet from the
edge of the pavement. (One public hearing required).
ITEM BACKGROUND:
It was brought to the attention of the Planning Department that many neighborhoods do not
conform to current fence regulations and that new fences installed according to current
requirements disrupt community character in terms of safety and visual continuity. The Planning
Department held a public workshop on August 2ih in Key Largo where comments regarding the
proposed amendments were heard and additional issues were addressed. The Development
Review Committee made comments and changes based on public input from the workshop. The
Planning Commission heard the proposed ordinance on September 24, 2003, made comments
and changes, and continued the hearing to the October 8th meeting in Marathon for the purpose of
receiving further public input before approving the amendment.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
None.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Approval.
TOTAL COST:
NA
BUDGETED: Yes NA
No
COST TO COUNTY:
NA
SOURCE OF FUNDS
NA
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes NA No
AMOUNT PER MONTH
Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty ~ OMBlPurchasing N
isk Management NA
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
CP
DOCUMENTATION:
Included X
To Follow
Not Required_
AGENDA ITEM # 0
,
DISPOSITION:
Revised 2/27/01
~~
LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
TEXT AMENDMENT
FENCE HEIGHT REGULATIONS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
HARVEY GOVERNMENT CENTER
OCTOBER 15, 2003
DRC:
PC:
Staff:
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT
SECTION 9.5-309
OF THE MONROE COUNTY CODE
THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES TO CLARIFY HOW THE HEIGHT OF
FENCES IS MEASURED AND ALLOW FENCES IN RESIDENTIAL
AREAS TO EXCEED 3 FEET WITHIN THE CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE
IF THEY ARE SET BACK A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM THE EDGE
OF THE PAVEMENT.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Approval
September 9,2003
Staff Report
Approval
September 15, 2003
Resolution #D29-03
Approval
October 8,2003
Resolution #P58-03
DRAFT BOCC ORDINANCE
ORDINANCE NO.
- 2003
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING SECTION 9.5-309
AND SECTION 9.5-367, MONROE COUNTY CODE, CLARIFYING
HOW THE HEIGHT OF FENCES IS MEASURED AND ALLOWING
FENCES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS TO EXCEED 3 FEET WITHIN THE
CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE IF THEY ARE SET BACK A MINIMUM OF
10 FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE PAVEMENT; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ALL
ORDINANCES INCONSISTENT HEREWITH; PROVIDING FOR
INCORPORATION INTO THE MONROE COUNTY CODE OF
ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has determined that it is in the interest
of the public's health, safety and welfare to regulate the height of fences within the clear sight
triangles located at intersections and driveways on public streets; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission was presented with a staff report
prepared on September 9,2003, by Robert Will, Planner and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2003, the Monroe County Planning Staff and
Commission, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, approved of recommendations made by the
Development Review Committee and made other recommendations for clarification of the
proposed amendment and continued the item to the regular Planning Commission meeting on
October 8, 2003; and
WHEREAS, on October 8, 2003, the Monroe County Planning Commission, at a
regularly scheduled public hearing, approved the proposed text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the BOCC conducted a public hearing on October 15, 2003, and considered
the proposed Text and recommendation of staff; and
WHEREAS, the BOCC was presented with the following evidence which IS by
reference incorporated as part of the record of said hearings:
1. Staff report prepared on September 29, 2003 by K. Marlene Conaway;
2. Proposed Text Amendment;
3. Sworn testimony of the Planning staff; and
4. Comments from the public; and
WHEREAS, Monroe County Code Sec. 9.5-309 regulates the height, location, and types
of fences permitted within the unincorporated county; and
WHEREAS, A significant number neighborhoods within the unincorporated county have
fences which are non-conforming as to the height requirements within the clear sight triangle set
forth in Section 9.5-309; and
Page 1 of6
WHEREAS, existing regulations require fences to be limited to a height of three feet if
located within the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427; and
WHEREAS, new fences constructed to the existing regulations would disrupt
neighborhood character with regard to required setbacks and height limitations within the front
yard setback and clear sight triangle; and
WHEREAS, the County's traffic consultants, URS Corp., have advised the county that
chain link fences obstruct visibility and should not be permitted within the clear sight triangle
WHEREAS, the BOCC has made the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law based on
the evidence presented:
1. In the interest of public safety, clear sight lines must be maintained in all areas where
vehicles and pedestrians may interact, including residential streets and driveways.
2. Any fences located within the sight triangles as required in Section 9.5-427 on non-
residential properties and all properties on US 1 and designated arterial streets shall remain
limited to three feet in height due to the traffic volume on non-residential properties and
increased speed limit on US 1 and arterial streets.
3. In residential neighborhoods to allow for increased security of private property and visual
continuity fences may exceed three feet in height if they are setback at least ten feet from the
edge of the pavement to allow for drivers of vehicles to adequately see oncoming traffic or
pedestrians.
4. Fences that do not impair visibility so that movement may still be detected on either side
of the fences may be higher than those which may not be seen though, but must not be
constructed in the clear sight triangle.
5. In addition to fencing, shrubbery and hedges may obstruct vision in the clear sight
triangle and should be maintained only to a height ofthree feet.
WHEREAS, the BOCC has examined the proposed amendment to the Monroe County
Code submitted by the Monroe County Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, the BOCC hereby supports the decision of the Monroe County Planning
Commission and the Planning and Environmental Resources Department staff recommendation;
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the BOCC that the following amendment to the County
Code be approved, adopted, and transmitted to the State Land-Planning Agency for approval;
NOW, THEREFORE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
Page 2 of6
Section 1. Chapter 9.5, Article VII, Division 5, Section 9.5-309 Monroe County Code,
is hereby amended to read as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and
strikethrough format):
Sec. 9.5-309. Fences.
It is the purpose of this section to regulate fences and free standing walls in order to protect
the public health, safety and welfare.
(a) Height: In general, all fences shall be measured from the finished elevation adiacent to
the fence highest point of any lot and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height", except as
f-allows:
(1) For properties with access to U.S. #1 and to County designated arterial streets and
for all non-residential properties with access to any public street. no fence
exceeding three (3) feet shall be located within a clear sight triangle as defined in
Section 9.5-427 that interferes with the safe and adequate view of vehicles and
pedestrians utilizing streets and sidewalks;
(2) No fence exceeding (3) feet shall be located at the intersection of any two public
streets within the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427;
(3) For residential properties on local streets, fences located within the clear sight
triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427 may exceed three (3) feet in height if located
on private property a minimum of (1 0) feet from the edge of pavement of the street.
the sidewalk or the bike path, whichever is closer to the property. On unpaved
streets. the distance shall be measured from the approximate edge of the cleared
right of way. If the setback of existing fences on the street is greater then ten (10)
feet the fence shall be setback the same distance or to a maximum of twenty (20)
feet. whichever is less:
fB {ilNo fence shall exceed four (4) feet in height within any front yard setback or
within any side yard setback when such a yard is adjacent to a public street, except
as follows:
a. Within all land use districts, fences of five (5) feet in height may be permitted
if constructed of chain link or other material which does not impair visibility;
b. Within land use districts DC, SC, I, MI, and AD, and when permitted in a
commercial fishing district around storage lots, fences may be constructed to a
height of six (6) feet;
c. Within land use districts IS, SR, SR-L, SS and NA, fences may be constructed
to a height of six (6) feet provided that no other residentially developed
property is located within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property;
d. On Stock Island and on Key Haven, fences may be constructed to a height of
six (6) feet.
(2) No fence c)(eeeding three (3) feet from the natural grade immediately adjacent to
the fence shall be located y:ithin a clear sight triangle as defined by this chapter
consistent '.vith the requirements of bl:lfferyards that interferes '.'lith the safe and
adequate vie',," ofyehicles and pedestrians l:ltilizing streets and sidewalks;
Page 3 of6
~ (5) Hedges and shrubbery shall be maintained at a height not to exceed 3 feet if
located with in the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427. Fences which
do not impair visibility shall be kept clear of vines and other vegetation.
@ When it is necessary to use a fence to contain athletic activity, the fence may
exceed six (6) feet to a maximum of twelve (12) feet, and be designed not to impair
visibility; and such fences shall be subject to a minor conditional use approval.
(b) Setbacks: In general, fencing may be located anywhere on the property, including the
property line, except as follows:
(1) The use of a fence shall not negate buffer-yard requirements and standards;
ho:wever, fences may be located within required buff-eryards providea that they are
loeated along the inside or ol:ltside edge of the reql:lired bufferyard, and The clearing
of existing native vegetation provides the cover in the required b\:lfferyard. No
clearing ,....ill to locate a fence in the buffer yard will only be permitted to facilitate
the construction of fences located '.vi thin a required bufferyar-d except as provided
a&twe along the inside or outside edge of the required buffer yard.
(2) No fence shall be placed so as to extend into or through any wetlands or water
bodies, or extend beyond the mean high tide line on any property.
ill Fences placed on any structure shall not violate height requirements for that
structure.
ill In no event shall fences be approved if they restrict fire and emergency access to
individual or adjacent properties;
~ illSetback requirements for Big Pine and No Name Key are listed in section 9.5-
309(c).
(c) Big Pine and No Name Key: The purpose of this section is to recognize and provide for
the particular habitat needs of the Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key. \Vhereas Big Pine Key and No Name Key serve as the
core area or center of the Key deer population, where the majority of the Key Deer
population is loeated during some part of each year; and whereas the Key Deer depends
upon the ability to move freely and safely throughout its range as well as the ability to
have access to nataral habitat for the purposes of feeding, watering, resting, birthing, and
other aetivities neeessary to earry out its life history; and, v;hereas the eoncentration of
de';elopment and human activity on Big Pine Key and No Name Key have the greatest
effect on the short and long term s\:lrvival of the Key deer, it is hereby the intent of this
section to limit fences on Big Pine Key and no Name Key so that deer movement
throughout Big Pine Key and No Name Key is not hindered while allowing for
reasonable use of minimal fencing for the purposes of safety and protection of property.
In addition to all other standards set forth in this section, all fences located on Big Pine
Key and No Name Key shall meet the standards ofthis subsection as listed below:
(1) In the Improved Subdivision (IS) land use district, fences shall be set back as
follows:
a. On canal lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge
of abutting street rights-of-way; and built to the edge of all other property
lines or as approved through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordination
letter;
Page 4 of6
b. On all other lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the
edge of abutting streets rights-of-way, at least five (5) feet from side property
lines and at least ten (10) feet from the rear property line. or as approved
through a u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service coordination letter;
(2) In all other land use districts, fences may enclose up to a maximum of and not to
exceed the net buildable area of the parcel only;
(3) Enclosure of the freshwater wetlands by fences is prohibited;
(4) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer access to native habitat,
including pinelands, hammocks, beach berms, saltmarshes, buttonwoods and
mangroves is maintained wherever possible;
(5) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer corridors, as identified
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, shall be maintained;
(6) Fences shall not be permitted without a principal use except where the enclosed
area consists of disturbed lands or disturbed land with exotics.
(d) Use: Fences may be allowed as accessory uses within any land use district and without a
principal use existent where upland security is required as otherwise permitted in section
9.5-288.
(e) Construction material: Fences may be constructed of natural or manmade materials,
including but not limited to brick, lumber, stone, metal, plaster, concrete and masonry:
(1) All materials shall be approved by the planning director as in conformance with the
visual character of the surrounding neighborhood and community character.
(2) No barbed or razor wire shall be permitted except in the Industrial (1) and Airport
(AD) districts with the approval of the planning director.
(f) Attachments to fences: No attachments to fences shall be allowed, including but not
limited to, banded and ribbon wire, signs projecting above six (6) feet from the ground
level, broken glass or metal strips except as a minor conditional use approval. The only
exception shall be a maximum of two (2) electrical lights attached to the fence not
exceeding two (2) feet in height above the maximum height limit. These lights shall
comply with all requirements of division 12 (outdoor lighting) and be permitted as of
right.
(g) Required permit: All fences shall be constructed pursuant to a building permit issued by
the county building department.
(h) Limited clearing: To allow construction of protective fences and gates, limited clearing
may be permitted if the following design standards have been met:
(1) Such limited clearing does not occur in scenic highway corridors established and
adopted in this chapter;
(2) Limited clearing shall not remove native vegetation that would provide for the
minimum buffer required in division 11, section 9.5-375, of this article;
(3) Existing tree canopies within hardwood and pineland hammocks are not removed.
(i) Maintenance: All fences shall be maintained in good repair at all times.
Page 5 of6
~~r--~",-ltU...) .&0 ...)1ItJ ~I'\.U,.,.,..""""",,,,,,~ .....w_."'...... ,.-...... ...... ....._
Section 2. Chapter 9.5, Anicle VII, Division 10, Section 9.5-367 Monroe County Code,
is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underlint fonnat):
Sec. 9.5-367. Laudseapin~ materials.
All required landscaping materials shall be of the types and minimum sizes set forth in this
section. Canopy trees shaU have a minimum ofthrce (3) inches dbb or twelve (12) feet in height.
Undemory trees shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in height. Shrubs shall be a minimwn of
three (3) feet in height. Shrubs and shall be maintained at a heilJht not to exceed 3 feet if located
with in the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427.
Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or provision of this ordinance is
held invalid, the remainder of this ordinance shall not be affected by such invalidity.
Section 4. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are hereby
repealed to the extent of said conflict.
Section 5. The provisions of this ordinance shaH be included and incorporated in the
Code of Ordinances of the County of Monroe. FJori~ as an addition or amendment thereto, and
sbalJ be appropriately renumbered to confonn to the unifonn numbering system of the Code.
Section 6. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary of State of
Florida. but shall not become effective until a notice is issued by the Department of Community
Affairs or Administrative Commission approving the ordinance.
Section 2 This ordinance shall be transmitted by the Planning and Environmental
Resources Department to the Department of Community of Affairs to determine the consistency
of this ordinance with Florida Statutes.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida. at a regular meeting of said Board held on the day of , 2003.
Mayor Spehar
Mayor Pro Tem Nelson
Commissioner MCCoy
Commissioner Neugent
Commissioner Rice
(SEAL)
Attest: DANNY L.KOLHAGE, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
By
Deputy Clerk
Mayor/Chairperson
MONROE COUNTY AlTOHNE'1
~OFORM:
RO RT N. WOLFE
CHIEF ,,~~T CJ':!N~ HORNEY
Oatt '- t:) 0.
Pagt6of6
BOCC STAFF REPORT
Memorandum
W:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Board of County Commissioners
K. Marlene Conaway, Director of Planning and Environmental Resources
September 29,2003
Text Amendment changing clear sight-triangle requirements for fences and
clarifying excess language
STAFF REPORT
I. Background
The current fence ordinance (Section 9.5-309 of the Monroe County Code) restricts the height of
fences on all properties to a maximum of three (3) feet if the fence is located within the clear sight
triangle. The clear sight triangle on a local street is measured by going from the edge of pavement
back 20 feet into the drive, and extending from the intersection of the centerline of the drive and the
centerline of the roadway 150 feet in either direction. For many of the smaller lots in the county
(typically 50' by 100') the clear sight triangle encompasses their entire front yard, precluding them
from having a fence higher than three feet. While this effectively maintains the clear sight area for the
visibility of pedestrians and bicyclists, the clear sight area may be maintained on residential streets by
reducing the distance to the edge of pavement to 1 0 feet. While not changing the clear sight triangle
measurement requirements, it would allow a home owner to setback a fence ten feet from the edge of
pavement and exceed three feet in height while allowing the necessary distance for a vehicle to
emerge and see pedestrians and other vehicles before leaving the property. The clear-sight triangle
requirement remains for properties with access to US 1, county designated arterial streets and all non-
residential properties.
Currently, fences may be five feet in height in the front yard setback if they are made of chain link and
are not located within the clear sight triangle. Additional language in the proposed text allows a fence
made of other materials which do not impair visibility to be five feet in height as well (e.g. spaced iron
bars, vinyl pickets etc.)
The proposed changes also clarify the way in which the height of a fence is measured (previously
there were two different methodologies). Six foot fences are allowed in commercial fishing districts
for properties used as storage lots.
Other changes include clarifying where fences may be located within required buffer yards and
deleting superfluous information regarding the justification for having separate fence regulations for
Big Pine and No Name Key.
The revised ordinance brought back the requirement for clear sight triangles at the intersections of
public streets, which was inadvertently removed from the first draft. Additionally, a section regarding
the height of hedges and shrubbery was restricted to 3 feet in the clear sight triangle to address
concerns raised at a public workshop held on August 27th, 2003. A summary of these comments and
staff responses is attached to this staff report.
During the DRC meeting held on September 15, 2003 the county biologist requested that the
shrubbery height limitation in the clear sight triangle be repeated in the landscaping standards for ease
of review during the permitting process. Further clarification as to where in the landscaping section of
the Monroe County Code the hedge height limitation should be referenced was requested by the DRC
to the Planning Commission. Staff recommends placing the shrubbery height limitation at the end of
the paragraph describing landscaping material height in section 9.5-367.
Additionally, the county biologist recommended that the language "or as approved through a
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordination letter" be duplicated in section (c)(l) b. as it is in
section a. for canal lots.
These changes were addressed at the September 24 Planning Commission meeting along with a few
other changes as indicated below. The county's traffic consultant, Raj Shanmugam, P.E. of URS
Corp. was asked to provide an opinion on the proposed changes to the ordinance. The planning
department received his letter dated September 22, 2003 and a copy is attached to this staff report.
The Planning Commission continued the public hearing to the regular meeting on October 8, 2003.
II. Proposed Text
The Planning Staff has prepared the following text to amend the Monroe County Code:
Underlined text is new and strikethrough text is to be deleted.
Sec. 9.5-309. Fences.
It is the purpose of this section to regulate fences and free standing '.valls in order to protect the
public health, safety and welfare.
(a) Height: In general, all fences shall be measured from the finished elevation adiacent to
the fence highest point of any lot and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height~ exoept as
follows:
(1) For properties with access to U.S. #1 and to County designated arterial streets and for all
non-residential properties with access to any public street. no fence exceeding three (3)
feet shall be located within a clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427 that
interferes with the safe and adequate view of vehicles and pedestrians utilizing streets and
sidewalks;
(2) No fence exceeding (3) feet shall be located at the intersection of any two public streets
within the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427;
(3) For residential properties on local streets. fences located within the clear sight triangle as
defined in Section 9.5-427 may exceed three (3) feet in height iflocated on private
2
property a minimum of (10) feet from the edge of pavement ofthe street. the sidewalk or
the bike path, whichever is closer to the propertv. On unpaved streets, the distance shall
be measured from the approximate edge ofthe cleared right of way. Ifthe setback of
existing fences on the street is greater then ten (10) feet the fence shall be setback the
same distance or to a maximum of twenty (20) feet, whichever is less:
f4 {1)No fence shall exceed four (4) feet in height within any front yard setback or within
any side yard setback when such a yard is adjacent to a public street, except as follows:
a. Within all land use districts, fences of five (5) feet in height may be permitted if
constructed of chain link or other material which does not impair visibility;
b. Within land use districts DC, SC, I, MI, and AD, and when permitted in a commercial
fishing district around storage lots, fences may be constructed to a height of six (6) feet;
c. Within land use districts IS, SR, SR-L, SS and NA, fences may be constructed to a height
of six (6) feet provided that no other residentially developed property is located within
two hundred (200) feet of the subject property;
d. On Stock Island and on Key Haven, fences may be constructed to a height of six (6) feet.
(2) No f-ence exceeding three (3) feet from the natural grade immediately adjacent to the
fence shall be located within a clear sight triangle as defined by this chapter consistent
with the requirements ofbufferYMds that interferes ''lith the safe and adequate vie'.... of
vehicles and pedestrians utilizing streets and side't'.alks;
~ (5) Hedges and shrubbery shall be maintained at a height not to exceed 3 feet iflocated
with in the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427. Fences which do not impair
visibility shall be kept clear of vines and other vegetation.
@ When it is necessary to use a fence to contain athletic activity, the fence may exceed
six (6) feet to a maximum of twelve (12) feet, and be designed not to impair visibility;
and such fences shall be subject to a minor conditional use approval.
(b) Setbacks: In general, fencing may be located anywhere on the property, including the
property line, except as follows:
(1) The use of a fence shall not negate buffer_yard requirements and standards; hov.e'ler,
f-cRees may be located '.vithin required b1:lff-cryards provided that they Me located along
the inside or o1:ltside edge of the required bufferyard, and The clearing of existing native
vegetation provides the co'.'er in the required bufferyard. No clearing will to locate a
fence in the buffer yard will only be permitted to facilitate the construction of fences
located within a required h1:lfferyard except as pro'.'ided above along the inside or outside
edge of the required buffer yard.
(2) No fence shall be placed so as to extend into or through any wetlands or water bodies, or
extend beyond the mean high tide line on any property.
ill Fences placed on any structure shall not violate height requirements for that structure.
{1) In no event shall fences be approved if they restrict fire and emergency access to
individual or adjacent properties;
~ illSetback requirements for Big Pine and No Name Key are listed in section 9.5-309(c).
(c) Big Pine and No Name Key: The purpose of this section is to recognize and provide for
the particular habitat needs of the Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key. 'AThereas Big Pine Key and No Name Key serve as tbe
core area or center of the Key deer population, ,...here the majority ofthe Key Deer
3
population is loeated during some part of each year; and '",hereas the Key Deer depends
upon the ability to move freely and saf-cly throughout its range as 'Nell as the ability to
haye aocess to natm-al habitat for the pl:lI'poses of feeding, '."Mering, resting, birthiBg, and
other aeti'/ities neeessary to carry out its life history; and, whereas the cOBeentFation of
development and h1:HFlan acti'/ity OB Big Pine Key and No Name Key haye the greatest
effect on the short and long term sl:1rvi'/al of the Key deer, it is hereby the iBtent of this
section to limit fences on Big Pine Key aNd no Name Key so that deer movement
throughout Big Pine Key and No Name Key is not hindered while allowing for
reasonable use of minimal fencing for the purposes of safety and protection of property.
In addition to all other standards set forth in this section, all fences located on Big Pine
Key and No Name Key shall meet the standards of this subsection as listed below:
(1) In the Improved Subdivision (IS) land use district, fences shall be set back as follows:
a. On canal lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge of abutting
street rights-of-way; and built to the edge of all other property lines or as approved
through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordination letter;
b. On all other lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge of
abutting streets rights-of-way, at least five (5) feet from side property lines and at least
ten (10) feet from the rear property line. or as approved through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service coordination letter:
(2) In all other land use districts, fences may enclose up to a maximum of and not to exceed
the net buildable area ofthe parcel only;
(3) Enclosure of the freshwater wetlands by fences is prohibited;
(4) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer access to native habitat,
including pinelands, hammocks, beach berms, saltmarshes, buttonwoods and mangroves
is maintained wherever possible;
(5) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer corridors, as identified by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, shall be maintained;
(6) Fences shall not be permitted without a principal use except where the enclosed area
consists of disturbed lands or disturbed land with exotics.
(d) Use: Fences may be allowed as accessory uses within any land use district and without a
principal use existent where upland security is required as otherwise permitted in section
9.5-288.
(e) Construction material: Fences may be constructed of natural or manmade materials,
including but not limited to brick, lumber, stone, metal, plaster, concrete and masonry:
(1) All materials shall be approved by the planning director as in conformance with the
visual character of the surrounding neighborhood and community character.
(2) No barbed or razor wire shall be permitted except in the Industrial (I) and Airport (AD)
districts with the approval of the planning director.
(f) Attachments to fences: No attachments to fences shall be allowed, including but not
limited to, banded and ribbon wire, signs projecting above six (6) feet from the ground
level, broken glass or metal strips except as a minor conditional use approval. The only
exception shall be a maximum of two (2) electrical lights attached to the fence not
exceeding two (2) feet in height above the maximum height limit. These lights shall
4
comply with all requirements of division 12 (outdoor lighting) and be permitted as of
right.
(g) Required permit: All fences shall be constructed pursuant to a building permit issued by
the county building department.
(h) Limited clearing: To allow construction of protective fences and gates, limited clearing
may be permitted if the following design standards have been met:
(1) Such limited clearing does not occur in scenic highway corridors established and adopted
in this chapter;
(2) Limited clearing shall not remove native vegetation that would provide for the minimum
buffer required in division 11, section 9.5-375, of this article;
(3) Existing tree canopies within hardwood and pinel and hammocks are not removed.
(i) Maintenance: All fences shall be maintained in good repair at all times.
Sec. 9.5-367. Landscaping materials.
All required landscaping materials shall be of the types and minimum sizes set forth in this
section. Canopy trees shall have a minimum of three (3) inches dbh or twelve (12) feet in height.
Understory trees shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in height. Shrubs shall be a minimum of
three (3) feet in height. Shrubs and shall be maintained at a height not to exceed 3 feet iflocated
with in the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427.
III. Recommendation
Staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed text amendment.
5
Memorandum
W:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Board of County Commissioners
K. Marlene Conaway, Director of Planning and Environmental Resources
September 29,2003
Responses to public comment at the Upper Keys fence meeting, August 27,2003
On August 27th, 2003 the planning department held a public workshop to discuss proposed changes in
the fence ordinance with elected officials, fence contractors, and citizens. The department sought feed
back in order to incorporate any concerns into the changes at this time. Below are topics which were
raised for discussion at the meeting and the staff response to each comment. Some comments have
been combined because they were similar.
Property Safety
Currently fence regulations restrict the height of fences within the front yard set back area to four feet
(five feet for chain link) and further restricts the height to three feet if the fence will be located within
the clear sight triangle. The way in which the clear sight triangle is measured (described in Section
9.5-427) reduces the fence height to three feet across the entire front yard of many smaller lots in
different sections of the Keys. Concerns were raised that a fence three feet in height does not
adequately protect property, a primary reason for installing a fence.
The staff response to this dilemma is to balance the security of private property and the safety of the
public when using streets and rights of way. The purpose of limiting a fence height to three feet
within the clear sight triangle is to allow the driver to see other vehicles, pedestrians, or bicycles which
may be traveling on the street or the side or the road. The proposed ordinance allows fences to exceed
three feet in height if they are set back 10 from the edge of the pavement, allowing enough room for
the driver of a vehicle to see beyond any obstruction which may be in the front yard setback.
Decreased setbacks for non-opaque fences
Reducing the setback requirement for fences that are non-opaque (i.e. it is possible to see movement
through them) should only have to be setback five feet from the edge of pavement, or should be able
to be placed on the property line regardless of where the edge of pavement is located. Only fences
that are opaque should be set back ten feet from the edge ofthe pavement.
The staff response to this proposal is the compromise of continuing to allow three foot fences within
the sight triangle and higher fences if they are setback ten feet from the edge of the roadway. Based
on a letter from the county's traffic consultants, URS Consulants Inc., staff has determined that
Page 1 of3
although many types of fences are non-opaque when looking through them at a wide angle, as the
angle becomes smaller (e.g. a car exiting a driveway) the fence tends to block the line of sight
completely. Therefore, the recommended ten foot setback from the edge of pavement for all fences
on residential streets allowed both for an increase in fence height and allowances for clear sight areas
to be maintained.
Vegetation and other obstructions in the clear sight triangle
Concem about overgrown vegetation within clear sight triangles on residential streets was expressed a
number of times throughout the meeting. Properties with overgrown vegetation mayor may not have
a fence, however, plants have grown so as to be more a sight obstruction then a fence. High
vegetation is not only a problem on private properties, but also on portions of the county right of way.
These areas are of concern because they are directly adjacent to the edge of the pavement of both the
roadway and bike path where a clear sight triangle is most important. ill many areas cars are parked in
the right of way and create an obstruction in the clear sight triangle.
Based on a review of other fence guidelines, a section has been added to the proposed fence ordinance
which requires the height of hedges and shrubbery to be maintained at a height of 3 feet if they are
located in the clear sight triangle, and fences which do not impair visibility must be kept clear of vines
and other vegetation that could impair visibility. Parking in the clear sight triangle is less of a problem
because the vehicles are not always present, and it is more difficult to enforce parking in the clear
sight triangle as parking on county right of way is legal unless posted otherwise.
Flexibility for different neighborhoods
Different communities have different sets of fence characteristics. Older fences have different
setbacks then fences permitted recently. Fences contribute greatly to the visual continuity (or lack
thereof) of a community and can define the 'look' of an area. Requiring a new, stringent setback
requirement could disrupt the community character of an area where fences had previously been
permitted to be set back further due to clear sight requirements.
The proposed ordinance recognizes that some flexibility is required to maintain the existing character
of a neighborhood that has fences set back farther then the new changes permit. A new fence in a
neighborhood where fences are set back farther than ten feet from the edge of the pavement will be
required to be consistent with the neighborhood character and be set back the same distance as the
existing fences (up to twenty feet). Measurement of the neighborhood fence character will be
determined by surrounding properties on the street.
Definition of 'does not impair visibility'
The proposed ordinance will allow fences constructed of chain link or other material 'which does not
impair visibility' to be up to five feet high in the front yard setback, if set back ten feet from the edge
of the pavement. Concern has been raised over what constitutes something that does not 'impair
visibility' so as to avoid confusion during the permitting process.
Page 2 of3
A review of numerous other fence regulations in the state of Florida indicates that while the permitted
types of fences are outlined (i.e. masonry, chain link, picket), the term 'does not impair visibility' or
similar verbiage is not further defined in terms of actual fence construction. The intent of this
guideline is to provide for visual recognition of movement on the public right of way for safety
purposes. While fences may be non-opaque from a wide angle, as the angle decreases there reaches a
point where the fence becomes opaque, no matter what style it is or how it is constructed. Staff has
determined that instead of defining specific kind of fence construction types, a ten foot setback for all
fences over 3 feet high would alleviate safety concerns.
Administrative concerns
Concerns have been raised over ways to improve the administrative process of fence permitting. The
process should be made clearer, and simplified to be a walk-through if there are no problems.
Currently the ordinance only addresses paved roads, a methodology for determining setbacks from
unpaved streets should be included. The current ordinance cites two ways of measuring the height of
the fence: one from 'the highest point' on the lot and another from 'the natural grade immediately
adjacent to the fence.'
Staffhas addressed a few of these issue in the revisions ofthe current ordinance, including a treatment
for unpaved roads and clarifying how fence height is to be measured. Further work in simplifying the
permitting process is needed by making brochures available and other illustrative document to help
applicants understand the guidelines of the ordinance.
Page 3 of3
,,..-...
OURS
September 22, 2003
Ms. K. Marlene Conaway
Director of Planning
MONROECOUNTYPL~GDEPARTMENT
2798 Overseas Highway Suite 410
Marathon, Florida 33050
Re: An Opinion on Chain-Link Fence within Clear Sight Triangle
O('ar Ms. Conaway:
We have reviewed and researched engineering standards to determine if chain-link fences can be allowed
within the intersection sight triangles without creating sight obstruction. Our review included checking
roadway design standards, such as FDOT Standard Index and the 1990 AASHTO Green Book. Neither of
these design standards has any specific reference to chain-link fences within clear sight triangles. However,
these standards recommends against placing any object within the clear sight triangle that may impair the
visibility of approaching vehicles at an intersection. We also spoke with design engineers and landscape
architects and able to ascertain their opinion on the subject issue. Although clear visibility may be attained
through the chain-links at a wider angle, as the angle of sight gets acute, such as in the case of a driver
attemptmg to look through the fence at an intersection, the chain-links tend to progressively reduce the line of
sight. Further, although initially the fence may be free of vegetation growth, overtime the chain-links may
facilitate the growth of vine on the fence and will create visual obstruction. Although this is manageable, it
could create enforcement problems.
Based on the limited research our opinion remains the same, i.e.: chain-link fences create sight obstructions
and therefore, just as any other object that creates sight visibility problems should not be placed within the
clear sight triangle. Our opinion is consistent with views expressed by your local contractors, according to your
e-mail, clear sight triangles are needed on US 1 and all intersections and any street intersecting with an arterial,
and be void of any obstructions including chain-link fences. The design standards do not differentiate between
arterial street, local street, and driveway intersection in the application of clear sight triangle design standards.
The only variable is the length of sight triangle, which is based on the roadway design speed.
As for the setback distance, it is recognized that most drivers stop close to the edge of the intersection, whereas
many others leave several feet between the edge of pavement and the front of the vehicle. The AASHTO
standards recommend for general design purposes the setback distance should be measured 20' from the edge
of the pavement. However, the 1990 AASHTO Green Book, Chapter V - Local Roads and Streets, Table V-II
states that for Local Street design the setback distance may be lower but should not be less than .!2.::...
I hope the above information is adequate for you to establish a meaningful clear sight triangle policy. Should
you have any questions, please call me.
URS Corporation
Lakeshore Complex
5100 NW 33rd Avenue. Suite 150
Fort Lauderdale. Fl 33309-6375
Tel: 954.739.1881
Fax: 954.739.1789
G d 34003S\2(X)3"' Fencr IS5ue'..\tC090303 J.oe
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #P58-03
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P58-03
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PLANNING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND THE
MONROE COUNTY CODE SECTION 9.5-309 AND SECTION 9.5-367 BY
ALLOWING RESIDENTIAL FENCES TO BE EXCEED THREE FEET IN
HEIGHT IF LOCATED TEN FEET FROM THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT ON
RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND OTHER CLARIFYING LANGUAGE.
WHEREAS, it was brought to the attention of the Planning and Environmental
Resources Department by Key Largo residents that many neighborhoods have existing fences
that do not meet current setback requirements and that new fences would disrupt neighborhood
character with regard to required setbacks; and
WHEREAS, on August 27t\ 2003, the Planning and Environmental Resources
Department held a public workshop at the Key Largo Public Library for the purpose of
discussing the proposed fence regulation changes with fence contractors and the general public;
and
WHEREAS, concerns were raised and suggestions were made at the public workshop
regarding changes to the proposed ordinance; and
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on September 2, 2003, the
Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of proposed text
amendments to Monroe County Code Section 9.5-309 (Fences); and
WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee continued the proposed amendments
to the regular meeting on September 15, 2003 because staff had revised the ordinance based on
concerns and suggestions made a the August 27th meeting but had not finalized the revisions; and
WHEREAS, at the regular meeting on September 15, 2003 the Development Review
Committee reviewed the revised staff report by Robert Will, Senior Planner dated September 9,
2003; and
WHEREAS, members of the committee suggested that proposed section 9.5-309 (a)(5)
relating to the restricted height of hedges in the clear sight triangle be referenced in the
landscaping standards;
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission was presented with the following information,
which by reference is hereby incorporated as part of the record of said hearing:
1. Staff report prepared on September 9,2003 by Robert Will, Planner; and
2. Sworn testimony of the Planning staff; and
Resolution P58-03
Page 1 of5
3. Advice from John Wolfe, the Planning Commission Counsel; and
4. Comments from the public; and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2003, the Monroe County Planning Staff and
Commission, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, approved of recommendations made by the
Development Review Committee and made other recommendations for clarification of the
proposed amendment and continued the item to the regular Planning Commission meeting on
October 8, 2003; and
WHEREAS, on October 8, 2003, the Monroe County Planning Commission, at a
regularly scheduled public hearing, approved the proposed text amendment; and
WHEREAS, the County's traffic consultants, URS Corp., have advised the county that
chain link fences obstruct visibility and should not be permitted within the clear sight triangle;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding findings support their decision to
recommend APPROVAL to Board of County Commissioners of the proposed text amendment
to the Monroe County Code Chapter 9.5, Article VII, Division 5, Section 9.5-309, and Division
10, Section 9.5-367 to read as follows (additions and deletions shown in underline and
strikethrough format):.
Sec. 9.5-309. Fences.
It is the purpose of this section to regulate fences and free standing 'Nalls in order to protect
the public health, safety and welfare.
(a) Height: In general, all fences shall be measured from the finished elevation adlacent to
the fence highest point of any lot and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height~ exeept as
follO\\'s:
(1) For properties with access to U.S. #1 and to County designated arterial streets and
for all non-residential properties with access to any public street. no fence
exceeding three (3) feet shall be located within a clear sight triangle as defined in
Section 9.5-427 that interferes with the safe and adequate view of vehicles and
pedestrians utilizing streets and sidewalks:
(2) No fence exceeding (3) feet shall be located at the intersection of any two public
streets within the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427:
(3) For residential properties on local streets, fences located within the clear sight
triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427 may exceed three (3) feet in height iflocated
on private property a minimum of (10) feet from the edge of pavement of the street.
the sidewalk or the bike path, whichever is closer to the property. On unpaved
streets, the distance shall be measured from the approximate edge of the cleared
right of way. If the setback of existing fences on the street is greater then ten (10)
feet the fence shall be setback the same distance or to a maximum of twenty (20)
feet. whichever is less:
Resolution PS8-03
Page 2 of5
fB G}No fence shall exceed four (4) feet in height within any front yard setback or
within any side yard setback when such a yard is adjacent to a public street, except
as follows:
a. Within all land use districts, fences of five (5) feet in height may be permitted
if constructed of chain link or other material which does not imoair visibility;
b. Within land use districts DC, SC, I, MI, and AD, and when permitted in a
commercial fishing district around storage lots, fences may be constructed to a
height of six (6) feet;
c. Within land use districts IS, SR, SR-L, SS and NA, fences may be constructed
to a height of six (6) feet provided that no other residentially developed
property is located within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property;
d. On Stock Island and on Key Haven, fences may be constructed to a height of
six (6) feet.
(2) No fence exceeding three (3) feet from the natural grade immediately adjacent to
the fence shall be located within a clear sight triangle as defined by this chapter
consistent with the requirements of bufferyards that interferes with the safe and
adequate view of vehicles and pedestrians utilizing streets and sidewalks;
~ (5) Hedges and shrubbery shall be maintained at a height not to exceed 3 feet if
located with in the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427. Fences which
do not imoair visibility shall be kept clear of vines and other vegetation.
(Q} When it is necessary to use a fence to contain athletic activity, the fence may
exceed six (6) feet to a maximum of twelve (12) feet, and be designed not to impair
visibility; and such fences shall be subject to a minor conditional use approval.
(b) Sctbtlcks: In general, fencing may be located an)'\vhere on the property, including the
property line, except as follows:
(1) The use of a fence shall not negate buffer_yard requirements and standards;
ho'.vever, fences may be located \vithin required bufferyards provided that they are
looated along the inside or outside edge of the req\:lired bufferyard, and The clearing
of existing native vegetation provides the cover in the required b\:lfferyard. No
olearing \vill to locate a fence in the buffer yard will only be permitted to facilitate
the construction of fences located within a required bufferyard except as pro'lided
abe;te along the inside or outside edge of the required buffer yard.
(2) No f-snce shall be placed so as to extend into or thro\:lgh any wetlands or '::ater
bodies, or extend beyond the mean high tide line on any property.
ill Fences placed on any structure shall not violate height requirements for that
structure.
G} In no event shall fences be approved if they restrict fire and emergency access to
individual or adjacent properties;
f3-t illSetback requirements for Big Pine and No Name Key are listed in section 9.5-
309(c).
(c) Big Pine and No Name Key: The purpose of this section is to recognize and provide for
the particular habitat needs of the Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) on
Resolution P58-03
Page 3 of5
Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Whereas Big Pine Key and No Name Key serve as the
core area or center of the Key deer population, where the majority of the Key Deer
population is located dl:lriBg some part of each year; and whereas the Key Deer depends
upon the ability to move freely and safely throughOl:lt its range as well as the ability to
ha'le access to natl:lral habitat for the plHposes of feediBg, watering, resting, birthing, and
other acti','ities Beeessary to carry out its life history; and, whereas the eOBcefltratioB of
development and hl:lIRafl actiyity on Big Pine Key and No Name Key have the greatest
eff-ect on the short and long term survival of the Key deer, it is hereby the intern of this
section to limit f-ences OB Big PiBe Key and no Name Key so that deer movement
throughout Big Pine Key and No Name Key is not hindered while allowing for
reasonable use of minimal fencing for the purposes of safety and protection of property.
In addition to all other standards set forth in this section, all fences located on Big Pine
Key and No Name Key shall meet the standards of this subsection as listed below:
(1) In the Impro';ed Sabdivision (IS) land use district, fenees shall be set back as
f-ollov,'s:
a. On canal lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge
of abutting street rights-of-way; and built to the edge of all other property
lines or as approved through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordination
letter;
b. On all other lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the
edge of abutting streets rights-of-way, at least five (5) feet from side property
lines and at least ten (10) feet from the rear property line. or as approved
through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordination letter:
(2) In all other land use districts, fences may enclose up to a maximum of and not to
exceed the net buildable area of the parcel only;
(3) Enclosure of the freshwater wetlands by fences is prohibited;
(4) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer access to native habitat,
including pinelands, hammocks, beach berms, saltmarshes, buttonwoods and
mangroves is maintained wherever possible;
(5) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer corridors, as identified
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, shall be maintained;
(6) Fences shall not be permitted without a principal use except where the enclosed
area consists of disturbed lands or disturbed land with exotics.
(d) Usc: Fences may be allowed as accessory uses '.vithin any land use district and 'llithol:lt a
principall:lse eJ(istent 'Nhere Mpland security is required as otherwise permitted in section
9.5 288.
(e) Construction material: Fences may be constructed of natural or manmade materials,
including but not limited to brick, lumber, stone, metal, plaster, concrete and masonry:
(1) All materials shall be approved by the planning director as iB conformance '.vith the
yist:lal character ofthe sl:lIToundiBg neighborhood and community character.
(2) No barbed or razor wire shall be permitted except in the Industrial (I) and :\irport
(:\1)) districts with the appro';al of the plar.ning director.
Resolution P58-03
Page 4 of5
(f) AUachmcnts te fences: No attachments to fences shall be allov/ed, iBehiding but not
limited to, banded and ribboR wire, sigHs pr-ojeeting above six (6) feet from the ground
level, broken glass or metal strips except as a minor eonditionall:lse appr-o',al. The only
exception shall be a maximum of two (2) electri",al lights attached to the fence not
exceeding two (2) feet iB height above the maximum height limit. These lights shall
oomply with all requirements of di'lisioB 12 (outdoor lighting) and be permitted as of
right;
(g) Requil"Cd permit: i\ll feBoes shall be ",oBstructed pursuant to a building permit issued by
the COl:lflty bttilding department.
(h) Limited el-caril'lg: To allo',v cOBstruction of protective feaces and gates, limited oleariBg
may be permitted if the follo',viBg design. standards have been met:
(1) Such limited cleariBg does not oeem iB soenic highv/ay eorridors established and
adopted iB this chapter;
(2) Limited eleariBg shall not remove Bative 'legetatioB that ""oMld provide for the
miBimum buffer required in diyision 11, section 9.5 375, of this article;
(3) Existing tree canopies within hardwood and pineland hammocks are not removed.
(i) },lail'ltenance: i\ll feBces shall be maintained in good repair at all times.
Sec. 9.5-367. Landscaping materials.
All required landscaping materials shall be of the types and minimum sizes set forth in this
section. Canopy trees shall have a minimum of three (3) inches dbh or twelve (12) feet in height.
Understory trees shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in height. Shrubs shall be a minimum of
three (3) feet in height. Shrubs and shall be maintained at a height not to exceed 3 feet if located
with in the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of Monroe County, Florida at a
regular meeting held on the 8th day of October, 2003.
Chair Jerry Colman
Vice Chair Denise Werling
Commissioner David C. Ritz
Commissioner Julio Margalli
Commissioner Lyne Mapes
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
PLANNING COMMISSION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Jerry Coleman, Chair
Signed this
day of
,2003.
Resolution PS8-03
Page 5 of5
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION #D29-03
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE RESOLUTION NO. D29-03
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PLANNING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO AMEND THE
MONROE COUNTY CODE SECTION 9.5-309 BY ALLOWING
RESIDENTIAL FENCES TO BE EXCEED THREE FEET IN HEIGHT IF
LOCATED TEN FEET FROM THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT ON
RESIDENTIAL STREETS AND OTHER CLARIFYING LANGUAGE.
WHEREAS, it was brought to the attention of the Planning and Environmental
Resources Department by Key Largo residents that many neighborhoods have existing fences
that do not meet current setback requirements and that new fences would disrupt neighborhood
character with regard to required setbacks; and
WHEREAS, on August 2th, 2003, the Planning and Environmental Resources
Department held a public workshop at the Key Largo Public Library for the purpose of
discussing the proposed fence regulation changes with fence contractors and the general public;
and
WHEREAS, concerns were raised and suggestions were made at the public workshop
regarding changes to the proposed ordinance; and
WHEREAS, during a regularly scheduled meeting held on September 2, 2003, the
Development Review Committee conducted a review and consideration of proposed text
amendments to Monroe County Code Section 9.5-309 (Fences); and
WHEREAS, the Development Review Committee continued the proposed amendments
to the regular meeting on September 15,2003 because staff had revised the ordinance based on
concerns and suggestions made a the August 27th meeting but had not finalized the revisions; and
WHEREAS, at the regular meeting on September 15, 2003 the Development Review
Committee reviewed the revised staff report by Robert Will, Senior Planner dated September 9,
2003; and
WHEREAS, members of the committee suggested that proposed section 9.5-309 (a)(5)
relating to the restricted height of hedges in the clear sight triangle be referenced in the
landscaping standards;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL VED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the preceding findings support
their decision to recommend APPROVAL to Monroe County Planning Commission of the
proposed text amendment to the Monroe County Land Development Regulations as follows and
with further clarification as to where in the landscaping section of the Monroe County Code the
hedge height limitation should be referenced.
Resolution D29-03
Page 1 of 4
Sec. 9.5-309. Fences.
It is the purpose of this section to regulate fences and free standing walls in order to protect the
public health, safety and welfare.
(a) Height: In general, all fences shall be measured from the finished elevation adiacent to
the fence highest point of any lot and shall not exceed six (6) feet in height except as
follows:
(1) For properties with access to U.S. #1 and to County designated arterial streets and for all
non-residential properties with access to any public street, no fence exceeding three (3)
feet shall be located within a clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427 that
interferes with the safe and adequate view of vehicles and pedestrians utilizing streets and
sidewalks~
(2) No fence exceeding (3) feet shall be located at the intersection of any two public streets
within the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427;
(3) For residential properties located on local streets, fences exceeding three (3) feet in height
may be located a minimum of (10) feet from the edge of pavement of the street, the
sidewalk or the bike path, whichever is closer to the property. On unpaved streets, the
distance shall be measured from the approximate edge of the cleared right of way. If the
setback of existing fences on the street is greater then ten (10) feet the fence shall be
setback the same distance or to a maximum of twenty (20) feet, whichever is less;
fl1 illNo fence shall exceed four (4) feet in height within any front yard setback or within
any side yard setback when such a yard is adjacent to a public street, except as follows:
a. Within all land use districts, fences of five (5) feet in height may be permitted if
constructed of chain link or other material which does not impair visibility;
b. Within land use districts DC, SC, I, MI, and AD, and when permitted in a commercial
fishing district around storage lots, fences may be constructed to a height of six (6) feet;
c. Within land use districts IS, SR, SR-L, SS and NA, fences may be constructed to a height
of six (6) feet provided that no other residentially developed property is located within
two hundred (200) feet of the subject property;
d. On Stock Island and on Key Haven, fences may be constructed to a height of six (6) feet.
(2) No fence exceeding tm-ee (3) feet from. the natural grade immediately adjacent to the
fence shall be located within a clear sight triangle as defined by this chapter consistent
with the requirements of buffer yards that interferes with the safe and adequate view of
vehie1es and pedestrians utilizing streets and sidewalks;
~ (5) Hedges and shrubbery shall be maintained at a height not to exceed 3 feet iflocated
with in the clear sight triangle as defined in Section 9.5-427. Fences which do not impair
visibility shall be kept clear of vines and other vegetation~
@ When it is necessary to use a fence to contain athletic activity, the fence may exceed six
(6) feet to a maximum oftwelve (12) feet, and be designed not to impair visibility; and
such fences shall be subject to a minor conditional use approval.
(b) Setbacks: In general, fencing may be located anywhere on the property, including the
property line, except as follows:
(1) The use of a fence shall not negate buffer_yard requirements and standards; however,
fences may be located within required bufferya-rds pro'lided that they are located along
the inside or outside edge of the required bufferyard, and The clearing of existing native
vegetation provides the eover in the required bufferyard. No clearing will to locate a
Resolution D29-03
Page 2 of 4
fence in the buffer yard will only be permitted to facilitate the construction of fences
located '.vi thin a reqliired bufferyard except as provided above along the inside or outside
edge of the required buffer yard.
(2) No fence shall be placed so as to extend into or through any wetlands or water bodies, or
extend beyond the mean high tide line on any property.
ill Fences placed on any structure shall not violate height requirements for that structure.
ill In no event shall fences be approved if they restrict fire and emergency access to
individual or adjacent properties;
f31 illSetback requirements for Big Pine and No Name Key are listed in section 9.5-309(c).
(c) Big Pine and No Name Key: The purpose of this section is to recognize and provide for
the particular habitat needs of the Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) on
Big Pine Key and No Name Key. 'Nhereas Big Pine Key aftd No Name Key serve as tne
core area or center of the Key deer population, where the majority of the Key Deer
population is loeated dliring some part of each year; aNd ':.<nereas the Key Deer depends
upon the ability to mo','e freely and saf-ely throughout: its range as well as tne ability to
haye access to natural habitat for the pt:rrposes of feediNg, '.vatering, resting, birthing, and
other acti','ities necessary to carry Olit its life history; aftd, whereas the concentratioN of
deyelopment and hliffian activity ON Big PiNe Key and No Name Key have the greatest
effect on the short and long term slir,'i','al ofthe Key deer, it is hereby the intent ofthis
section to limit fences on Big Pine Key and no Name Key so that deer movement
throughout Big Pine Key and No Name Key is not hindered while allowing for
reasonable use of minimal fencing for the purposes of safety and protection of property.
In addition to all other standards set forth in this section, all fences located on Big Pine
Key and No Name Key shall meet the standards ofthis subsection as listed below:
(1) In the Improved Subdivision (IS) land use district, fences shall be set back as follows:
a. On canal lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge of abutting
street rights-of-way; and built to the edge of all other property lines or as approved
through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service coordination letter;
b. On all other lots, fences shall be set back at least fifteen (15) feet from the edge of
abutting streets rights-of-way, at least five (5) feet from side property lines and at least
ten (10) feet from the rear property line or as approved through a U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service coordination letter.
(2) In all other land use districts, fences may enclose up to a maximum of and not to exceed
the net buildable area of the parcel only;
(3) Enclosure of the freshwater wetlands by fences is prohibited;
(4) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer access to native habitat,
including pinelands, hammocks, beach berms, saltmarshes, buttonwoods and mangroves
is maintained wherever possible;
(5) All fences shall be designed and located such that Key deer corridors, as identified by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, shall be maintained;
(6) Fences shall not be permitted without a principal use except where the enclosed area
consists of disturbed lands or disturbed land with exotics.
(d) Use: Fences may be allowed as accessory uses within any land use district and without a
principal use existent where upland security is required as otherwise permitted in section
9.5-288.
Resolution D29-03
Page 3 of 4
(e) Construction material: Fences may be constructed of natural or manmade materials,
including but not limited to brick, lumber, stone, metal, plaster, concrete and masonry:
(1) All materials shall be approved by the planning director as in conformance with the
visual character of the surrounding neighborhood and community character.
(2) No barbed or razor wire shall be permitted except in the Industrial (I) and Airport (AD)
districts with the approval of the planning director.
(f) Attachments to fences: No attachments to fences shall be allowed, including but not
limited to, banded and ribbon wire, signs projecting above six (6) feet from the ground
level, broken glass or metal strips except as a minor conditional use approval. The only
exception shall be a maximum of two (2) electrical lights attached to the fence not
exceeding two (2) feet in height above the maximum height limit. These lights shall
comply with all requirements of division 12 (outdoor lighting) and be permitted as of
right.
(g) Required permit: All fences shall be constructed pursuant to a building permit issued by
the county building department.
(h) Limited clearing: To allow construction of protective fences and gates, limited clearing
may be permitted if the following design standards have been met:
(1) Such limited clearing does not occur in scenic highway corridors established and adopted
in this chapter;
(2) Limited clearing shall not remove native vegetation that would provide for the minimum
buffer required in division 11, section 9.5-375, of this article;
(3) Existing tree canopies within hardwood and pineland hammocks are not removed.
(i) Maintenance: All fences shall be maintained in good repair at all times.
PASSED AND ADOPTED By the Development Review Committee of Monroe County,
Florida at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of September, 2003.
Fred Gross, Island Planning Team Director (Lower Keys)
Ralph Gouldy, Senior Administrator, Environmental Resources
Aref Joulani, Senior Administrator, Development Review
Jerry Buckley, Planner
Robert Will, Planner
Department of Health (by fax)
Department of Public Works (by fax)
Department of Engineering (by fax)
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Fred Gross, DRC Chair
Signed this _ day of
,2003.
Resolution D29-03
Page 4 of 4