Item P6 Liz Yongue
From: Gomez-Krystal <Gomez-Krystal@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 12:11 PM
To: Ballard-Lindsey; County Commissioners and Aides; Kevin Madok; Pamela G. Hancock;
Senior Management Team and Aides; Liz Yongue; InternalAudit
Cc: Gastesi-Roman; Shillinger-Bob; Williams-Jethon; Cioffari-Cheryl; Livengood-Kristen;
Rubio-Suzanne; Pam Radloff; County-Attorney; Allen-John; Danise Henriquez; Saenz-
Stephanie; Hurley-Christine; Rosch-Mark; Gambuzza-Dina; Beyers-John
Subject: item P6 BOCC 12/13/2023 ADDED TIME APPROXIMATE
Attachments: P6 AIS.pdf, Time Approx for BOCC 12.13.2023 rev.pdf
Good afternoon,
Please be advised,that item P6 has a time approximate added to the Agenda:
"An Ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners amending the Monroe County Land
Development Code to establish Section 130-143, creating the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District, including
the purpose and intent, boundary, applicability, and NROGO allocation standards, as proposed by
Smith/Hawks PL on behalf of Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC. "TIME APPROXIMATE 11:30 A.M."
Sincerely,
Executive Administrator
Monroe County Administrator's Office
1100 Simonton Street, Suite 2-205
Key West, FL 33040
(305)292-4441 (Office)
(305)850-8694(Cell)
Courier Stop#1
Notary Public
w.r o n r y e c_ u�n1y:�:V_e.gpy
gqjz..- Y .�.. _rn groecou�_n�.Y..-.�..:. .Y.
PLEASE NOTE: FLORIDA HAS A VERY BROAD RECORDS LAW. MOST WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS TO OR FROM THE COUNTY REGARDING COUNTY BUSINESS
ARE PUBLIC RECORDS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA UPON REQUEST. YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATION MAY BE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE.
1
P6
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY of MONROE �� i Mayor Holly Merrill Raschein,District 5
The Florida Keys Mayor Pro Tern James K.Scholl,District 3
Craig Cates,District 1
Michelle Lincoln,District 2
' David Rice,District 4
Board of County Commissioners Meeting
December 13, 2023
Agenda Item Number: P6
2023-1073
BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Planning & Environmental Resources
TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Emily Schemper
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
An Ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners amending the Monroe County
Land Development Code to establish Section 130-143, creating the Tavernier Commercial Overlay
District, including the purpose and intent, boundary, applicability, and NROGO allocation standards, as
proposed by Smith/Hawks PL on behalf of Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC.
ITEM BACKGROUND:
On March 23, 2022, the Planning and Environmental Resources Department received an application
from Smith/Hawks, PL (the "Agent") on behalf of Singletary Concrete Products, Inc. and Cemex
Construction Materials Florida, LLC (the "Property Owners" and "Applicants") and The Vestcor
Companies, Inc. and Blackstone Group — Tavernier 925, LLC (the "Developers") to amend the Monroe
County Land Development Code. The initial application and proposed text would establish the
Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District to allow for a nonresidential ROGO (NROGO) allocation
of up to 70,000 square feet on property located at 92501 Overseas Highway, Key Largo, with parcel
identification numbers 00490250-000000 and 00089490-000000 (the "Property"). The Applicants have
submitted multiple amended and restated applications and revisions to the proposed text since the initial
submittal. The current amended and restated application (the "Application") was received via email on
November 20, 2023.
The proposed text was most recently revised and resubmitted to the Planning Department [via
email] on November 13, 2023. The amended text as it is currently proposed would establish the
Tavernier Commercial Overlay ("TCO") District (the "Overlay") and allow for an NROGO
allocation of up to 49,900 square feet, which could allow for the development of a 49,900 SF
commercial supermarket, including a liquor store, on the Property.
Please see attached Staff Report for item background, proposed amendment
3659
language, and analysis.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
N/A
INSURANCE REQUIRED:
No
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department's professional staff
recommends that the BOCC CONTINUE the Applicants request to amend the Land Development
Code ("LDC") establishing Section 130-143, the Tavernier Commercial Overlay, until such a time
that all current requests to amend the Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Code, Future
Land Use Map and Land Use District Map, and the proposed Development Agreement, are
processed and prepared to be heard at the same BOCC Hearing to ensure consistency of all
concurrently proposed amendments relative to this Property.
In the event that the BOCC elects to vote on this item at the December 13, 2023 public hearing, the
Planning & Environmental Resources Department's professional staff recommends DENIAL of the
proposed amendment to the Land Development Code establishing Section 130-143.
DOCUMENTATION:
2022-053_BOCC_Staff Report_12.13.23.docx
Exhibit 1 to Staff Report_2022-053 DRC Reso 13-22.PDF
Exhibit 2 to Staff Report_2022-053 PC Reso P16-23.pdf
Exhibit 3 to Staff Report_Proposed Language With Staff Reccomended Edits.docx
Exhibit_4_13OCC_Ordinance Draft.pdf
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
3660
2 _r
3
4
5
6 MEMORANDUM
7 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
8
9
10 To: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
11
12 Through: Emily Schemper, AICP, CFM, Senior Director of Planning and Environmental
13 Resources
14
15 From: Cheryl Cioffari, AICP, Assistant Director of Planning
16 Devin Tolpin, AICP, CFM, Principal Planner
17
18 Date: November 21, 2023
19
20 Subject: An ordinance by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners amending the
21 Monroe County Land Development Code to establish Section 130-143, creating the
22 Tavernier Commercial Overlay District, including the purpose and intent, boundary,
23 applicability, and NROGO allocation standards, as proposed by Smith/Hawks PL on
24 behalf of Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC (File 2022-053)
25
26 Meeting: December 13, 2023
27
28
29 I. REQUEST
30
31 On March 23, 2022, the Planning and Environmental Resources Department received an application
32 from Smith/Hawks, PL (the "Agent") on behalf of Singletary Concrete Products, Inc. and Cemex
33 Construction Materials Florida, LLC (the "Property Owners" and "Applicants") and The Vestcor
34 Companies, Inc. and Blackstone Group —Tavernier 925, LLC (the "Developers")to amend the Monroe
35 County Land Development Code. The initial application and proposed text would establish the Tavernier
36 Key Commercial Overlay District to allow for a nonresidential ROGO (NROGO) allocation of up to
37 70,000 square feet on property located at 92501 Overseas Highway, Key Largo, with parcel
38 identification numbers 00490250-000000 and 00089490-000000 (the "Property"). The Applicants have
39 submitted multiple amended and restated applications and revisions to the proposed text since the initial
40 submittal. The current amended and restated application(the "Application") was received via email on
41 November 20, 2023.
42
43 The proposed text was most recently revised and resubmitted to the Planning Department [via
44 email] on November 13, 2023. The amended text as it is currently proposed would establish the
45 Tavernier Commercial Overlay ("TCO") District (the "Overlay") and allow for an NROGO
46 allocation of up to 49,900 square feet, which could allow for the development of a 49,900 SF
47 commercial supermarket, including a liquor store, on the Property.
48
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 1 of 26
File 2022-053
3661
I In the application that was submitted on November 20, 2023, the Applicants state the reason for the
2 requested amendment is: "LDC Section 138-51 (b) provides a maximum nonresidential floor area
3 allocation of ten thousand square feet (10,000 sf) and Section 138-51 (c) prohibits an allocation of
4 nonresidential floor area that expands the structure to more than 10,000 square feet of nonresidential
5 floor area, excluding: a) a structure in the Urban Commercial (UC) land use (zoning) district may
6 receive an allocation that expands the structure to not more than 50,000 square feet and b) a structure
7 within an overlay district established in a community master plan, in which the maximum shall he
8 governed by the master plan if applicable, or within Chapter 130 specifically allowing such a structure
9 of over 10,000 square feet. Notwithstanding the standards contained in section 138-51(c), the proposed
10 revised amendment permits an NROGO allocation of up to, but not exceeding,forty-nine thousand, nine
11 hundred square feet(49,900 sf)for specific mixed-use properties in Tavernier that make up the overlay
12 district, and will allow for the construction of a Publix grocery store, including a liquor store, that fits
13 with the architectural design and community character of the City of Tavernier that it will serve."
14
15 The Applicants' full explanation and justification of the proposed amendment is included in the file for
16 the application(File 2022-053).
17
18 Concurrent Applications
19 File 2022-054: A corresponding Land Use District (Zoning) map amendment for the Property to apply
20 the Overlay.
21
22 File 2022-012: A request for a Major Conditional Use Permit to develop the Property in two phases.
23 Phase 1 of the development proposal includes the construction of a 64,080 square foot grocery and liquor
24 store (a commercial retail use). Phase 2 of the development proposal is the development of 86 attached,
25 deed-restricted affordable housing dwelling units. Pursuant to LDC Section 139-1(f), any nonresidential
26 development subject to the inclusionary provisions of the LDC are required to obtain certificates of
27 occupancy on said deed restricted affordable housing prior to the resulting nonresidential use and
28 structure. As of the date of this report, a revised application and plan set has not been submitted with
29 this file.
30
31 File 2023-205: A request to amend the Monroe County 2030 Comprehensive Plan to establish a site-
32 specific subarea policy on a portion of the Property. This application remains incomplete.
33
34 File 2023-206: A request to amend the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) on a portion of the Property from
35 Mixed Use Commercial(MC) to Residential High(RH). This application remains incomplete.
36
37 File 2023-207: A request to amend the Land Use District (zoning) on a portion of the Property from
38 Suburban Commercial (SC) to Urban Residential(UR). This application remains incomplete.
39
40 It should be noted that the proposed text references a development agreement as being required
41 for any development within the proposed overlay. As of the date of this report, an application for
42 a development agreement has not been submitted.
43
44 II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
45
46 Site Information:
47 Location: 92501 Overseas Highway, MM 92.5, Tavernier(Island of Key Largo)
48 Boundary: Affected parcels are outlined in orange in the image below.
49 Parcel ID Numbers (2 Parcels): 00490250-000000 and 00089490-000000
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 2 of 26
File 2022-053
3662
I Applicant: Singletary Concrete Products Inc. and CEMEX Construction Materials Florida, LLC
2 Agent: Smith/Hawks, PL
3 Size of Affected Portion of Property: 841,940.3 SF (19.33 acres) gross area; including 611,384.2 SF
4 (14.04 acres) upland, 209,913.57 SF (4.82 acres) mangroves, and 20,642.5 SF (0.47 acres) manmade
5 pond according to the submitted boundary survey signed and sealed by David S. Massey on May 26,
6 2022
7 FLUM Designation: Mixed Use/ Commercial(MC)
8 Land Use Districts: Suburban Commercial (SC); proposing overlay land use district
9 Tier Designation: III
10 Flood Zones: AE (EL 8, 9, 10, and 11); VE (EL 11)
11 CBRS: No
12 Existing Uses: previously developed as a cement plant with outdoor storage
13 Existing Vegetation/Habitat: Undeveloped Land, Exotic, Mangrove, Hammock, and Water
14 Community Character of Immediate Vicinity: Adjacent land uses include residential to the north,
15 east,and south with commercial retail to the west across US 1.Part of the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker
16 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor District Overlay (TC), established by LDC Section 130-128.
17
paw
i
of
D
18 Property outlined in orange (image dated 2022)
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 3 of 26
File 2022-053
3663
I Historic Aerial Imager of the Pro erty
1f
2
3 Subject Property (image dated 1968) Subject Property (image dated 1975)
4
f
F r j IM
5
6 Subject Property (image dated 1994) Subject Property (image dated 2002)
7
8 Concept Meeting
9 In accordance with LDC Section 102-158(b)(1), a concept meeting was held on June 28, 2022, and it
10 was determined that the proposed text amendment will not have a county-wide impact because the
11 proposed amendment is limited to a portion of Tavernier.
12
13 Community Meeting and Public Participation
14 In accordance with LDC Section 102-159(b)(3), a community meeting is not required for Land
15 Development Code text amendments that do not have a county-wide impact. However, a community
16 meeting is required for the accompanying Land Use District Map Amendment Request(File 2022-054),
17 which is requested to apply the proposed overlay to the Property. The Community Meetings for File
18 2022-054 were held on August 18, 2022, and on January 5, 2023. Concerns from the Community
19 Meetings included, but were not limited to:
20 ■ Inconsistency with community character and the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan;
21 ■ Increased traffic and the associated negative impacts;
22 ■ The County's insufficient balance of ROGO Allocations to accommodate the development
23 request;
24 ■ Access off USI; and
25 ■ Negative environmental impacts
26
27 Development Review Committee Meeting and Public Input
28 On October 25, 2022, the DRC considered the proposed amendment and provided for public input. On
29 November 14, 2022,the Chair of the DRC signed Resolution No. DRC 13-22,recommending DENIAL
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 4 of 26
File 2022-053
3664
I of the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code establishing Section 130-143 to the Planning
2 Commission and Board of County Commissioners.
3
4 Planning Commission Hearing
5 On April 28,2023, the Planning Commission passed and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No.
6 P16-23 recommending DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code
7 establishing Section 130-143 to the Board of County Commissioners.
8
9 At the Planning Commission hearing, comments from the public included a concern that the proposed
10 affordable housing component of the project (86 affordable dwelling units) would not be built. Bart
11 Smith, on behalf of the Applicant, indicated that the Applicant would include language in the proposed
12 text amendment that the affordable units would be required to be built prior to the proposed large scale
13 retail building, and confirmed that the Applicant acknowledges that they are responsible for securing the
14 required ROGO allocations for the proposed units and would be willing to include language stating such
15 within the proposed text amendment.
16
17 Excerpt from page 10 (public comment) of April 28, 2023 PC Minutes:
rt aecann,se wear"eat y rreeC of �� tl"a rc rrnrtrgatrr7n. ]e act twat t re app scant is C orng all
affordable housing protect seeins to be the controlling tiring here. when in order to do this they've
required to have an affordable housing conponent. It is secondary to them but it shouldn't be
secondary to the community. It should be phase one, as she is concerned that as phase t-wo it
naay never get doge. This is not something acceptable to the cornrxaunity character of Tavern'
or there wouldn't be this na,arxy people here participating. Ms, Miller thanked the (:"oraaraxrssiona
for listening,
18
19 Excerpt from page 15 of April 28, 2023 PC Minutes:
11'Is. Schenrper had been surprised at hoax strong the an,curnent c°anne across regarding this retailer
feint; the ec:onornic engine needed for the affordable housing. The nneat of tine anrendnaent
allows the large non-residential structure. It's really not written to guarantee that array housing is
there. The question would be for the applicant, if they would be willing, to write into the
aniendnaent sonnething about the affordable units being required where the ROGOs are conning
fronn, what happens if you don't get the RO(`TO allocations. et cetera.
Mr, Smith responded that they would certainly write irn that they were required because if they're
required to be CO'd, there tile applicant has put theniselves Ili a position that if they don't get
there built, then the other part can't occur. fills. Scheirnper asked if the owner would then be
suing, the County because the applicant wasn't given. ROGO allocations. Mr. Smith stated it
would be Ilia to the applicant to obtain the development rights. They have talked to the Village of
Islannorada who is amenable to do an 10A to provide the units because it's in their back yard.
So., by ally nnecharnisru necessary but the applicant is required to obtain the development rights.
Ms. Scheuaper asked if Islanaovada had 86 affordable RO(:iOs or rraarket rates. Mr. Smith stated
they had the 300 ,Turf° ones. Ms. Scherntaer stated that currently., those are not allowed to be
transferred to Monroe County per the Monroe County ordinance. Mr. Smith stated that that
ordinance was not effective yet and was oil appeal, Ms. Scheuaper stated that was the sarue for
IsSlarrrorada. Mr. Sinnith stated that as soon as the hurricane evacuation was addressed, their that"s
finial, whereas Monroe (_'orrnty"s was appealed oil. oil numerous grounds. But the applicant
acknowledges they have to be able to get the developnneut rights. Ms. Scheunper asked if that
woLild be sonnething the applicant would be willing to write into the arinendnnent. NII. Srrnitln
confirmed that to be correct, it was always tine intent on that. The two parts work in unison with
the conrurerciial retail buying clown the cost of the land to wake the affordable housing feasible.
20
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 5 of 26
File 2022-053
3665
I It should be noted that amendments to the version of the proposed text that was reviewed by the
2 Development Review Committee and Planning Commission were submitted on May 25,2023,and again
3 on November 13, 2023. The most recently revised text includes a reduction in the amount of allowable
4 NROGO allocation from what was previously proposed. The submitted changes to the text are identified
5 [iii or, iige flex ] below in Section 111.
6
7 Previous Relevant BOCC Action
8 On September 16, 1988, an Application for a Land Use Map amendment from Suburban Commercial
9 (SC) to Industrial (I) (File# M9315) was received by the Planning Department. It appears that this file
10 was never processed because it was submitted when the new Comprehensive Plan was being drafted and
11 the pending application was put on hold and eventually closed.
12
13 On June 30, 2003, a Letter of Understanding (LOU) was issued, to address the potential construction of
14 300 affordable housing units on the Property. A development application nor approval followed the
15 issuance of this LOU.
16
17 III. APPLICANTS' PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS
18
19 The Applicants' proposed text, as submitted on September 22, 2022, is shown as follows: additions are
n,imleflitne. Following the Planning Commission meeting on April 28, 2023, the revised text
21 submitted on November 13, 2023 is shown in orr°anrrnye do.nbk, Enid.fliiie with deletions
22 4:h#o rr gk
23
24 Chapter 130 —LAND USE DISTRICTS
25
26 *****
27
28 ARTICLE IV. —OVERLAY DISTRICTS
29
30 Sec 130 1.4 a�v�µ� ��n�µn rye `„oInIm�e cnailOven1�:�y �lss]rict
31
32 (a) llIF!y!fll�ose ��tid 1pt�gqµpt � bn flfl Peugrrp�ru�� of tb .� a�vfle rr°��:ne rr° xp' ,N ( orfi fie rrcia�l �. v d,2y ..l istrrict is t�k.
33 rrn rrp�rrrr rr rrn� a�ppllnnwaV�.11S �p�rr ka�ls �rrV��.S�!iveti, aIrr�4l.... dk ides of tV � d.kn� rr V� rr�uwn Pllau�....a ml to alllloww
d tb 1:jpprrrr°...Svrryu !1nij! prr;nnfrrarrrrfly.
34 anrr°�p�S rr" u�nwan e �rr.rn�rrn�rrrr.,rr°c Han rr'nw�tarrn 4 ��vrr rrkpnlfrrrr rrn� rrrrn an uw�arrrr'n dnrr 4 ....arrrr'rr an rr.r
35 `...,lfvew t w rrnee,rr : o elfnlliqlYngrrA 1f°e Ana rrrrfts o t.„le I.-JppeE Se w. l w nrrarralCa is to pErr2yide acc,eww)INe.
36 T: c ssitnrr a !arr...prr rrnm:rr,nrr ift rr°esid ifts of tbw 1 nw E S ys, Mlfle rr°rr dnuc>Itw !Md di a,ml trr°p....g !� lra.Ooi� oi:
37 Overseas I ngban�yily arrrrW gjV i rrgctS r Ord"..Ta v rr°rr, i lr,
38
39 (1b III �i �i � y bnrr a v rrrrnnrr rr.x' (. on in i rrciarrl Ovrr rrkiy...:1?istlrict u4narr.�:�.b u4owirr qs...arrrr� a,, ve rrlay...�Hstrict,:
40 oirr dnrr ��f dnc na� arrrrrra... I.Jse District a,N�;l;,%; � n�a� � rr�� �arrve ( a�r.. y ...
j. p wrrnnrr rr ��';� v m nrrw °Harr �. y rr arrµ In �rrn�°
41 u4: aaf l be u4 owi✓ as tbw N gtldi rry p.arrrr°grr k...:witt-rr Moir rr°oe ( rr gtAy !)grM fl:)..wlnnunfiberrs 004„90250
42 000000 a ml 0008949Q..0Q0Q0Q, qm[ �rr pgfly deua�rr°nbed qs-l.
43
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 6 of 26
File 2022-053
3666
DESCRIPTION Parcel 1, REP D00,9 4--00DO100
W the Island of Key Largo, and known as Lot E, according to the survey made by George L.
flwacDonald, CIA Engineer, of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 and Government Lot 2,
and the SW 1/4 of the SE I/4 of S'ectlon 7„ and Government Lots 1 and E rW Section 34,
Township 62 South Range 39 East, accorudlop to, the ICI at thereof recorded In Plat Book 1,
Page 64, of the Public records of Monroe County,, Fkorld1o,i LESS and EXCEPT Read Right of Way
for Gild State Rood 4A across the triangular portion of the Northwest corner of said Lot,
DESCRIPTION, ParceL 2, RE, C 049,02501-01,01,0000
That p ortlorn of the South 290 feet lying Easterly of the Easterly right of vay line of State
Road No, 5, US. No. 1 (formerly O d State load No. 4-Aiy, of Tract 2 of 'Plat of Saarvey of Ellie
Property [in the NE 1f4 and the SE 1/4 of Section 27, Townships 62 South, Range 38 East, Key
Largo, Monroe County, Florida" according to a reap, or Iplat thereof recorded In Plat Book a,
Page 99, of the Public, Records of Monroe County,, f'lorldia,
DESERIPTi®Na Parcel
A portion of Tract 2, lying Easterly of Iild State Road 4-A, IP'1at of Survey of EIINs Property
according to the Plat thereof as recorded In Not Back a at Page 99 of the Pubtic Records
of Monroe County, Florida and being more p orticularly de cr bed as follows,
Commending at the 4ntersectlon formed by the South Line of said Tract P' and the Easterly right
of way lime of 111d State Road 4®A, said point being oin a circu to,r curve concave to th Northwest
and ha ling for it's elements a radius of 2126,08 feet and a chord bearing to the Point Hof tangency
of N.13*56'18"Ej thence run In a N^Iorthea terNy direction along the arc of 'aid curve for a distance
of 335,98 feet to said Point of tangy cyi thence run N,09" 4"4 E„ along Wd Easterly right of way
line of ULd State Road 4-A for a distance of 73,26 feet to the PAINT OF SIV15II'1fwlING of the parcel.
hereinafter dre cirlhedl thence continue, N,09*2 4'4e2"E. for a diletance of 76,32, feed thence run
S.0 *'Sly" "E. *bong the East Urie of Tract 2 for a cllstance of 74,72 feetu talvnce run S.97*29'2V
along a line described as the (North line of the South 400 feet of Tract 2 for a diStance of 18,99
1 feet Naa>c.4a to the POINT OF BEGINNING
2
3 ( ) pp!jwl.rrllb llllnuf , frrn (,yrd rr lorr° au Prr°n2p rrlwy arwinrr rr°...:to uuluf>irrr the u�laurrnalaurrak a ml rrrr d uu lnrrrwrr
4 4:„orrderrrr,d wnlhnrr� thet TarrvcYI"rr�)Icr k,, 9 ,nJ?]Yn)Yilerc)Ial Overha1/..1?)I wtr)Icty arr� aSniemUJIV11crrft to the �r�'1'V11c)Ia::
5 Lam[ LJ,'�c f luuulrrnu l a�!-F rarr% a:.� 1" aufu be regg„nrred auml u�uuch ovrr rrf,auy u�fnau,jf be uJf(rur (.M the p, fTi ual
6 Lam[',y N'S, ffnu,lrrnu.t ��//lF�rorr i. IbJlq .:,
7
:°drt ,�, laf lr,�;wrw�flrw.0 ` o l�lr,lrw ?� :, f th(_ I -wf, r.i in'(_1 p rr.r.f; to , 'k_ r f-wi f,r.n���� flffffnp„ �Illf�,fl,�fuvu�un tn,
..
a° y
��,1 4, ,, lJl;.� l„ w., I p rlwi j„rli lrr.f r. rrpiirr.r�C ` r-wrw , wi . -wiw �, r .� ��vrrrrrrnn��lrr � r
lwwl,,r. iwr.r�, n� a'..
10 1., orrnn i rru naul Qvrr rrhuu f lktrruu l uJf au,f f have the lrraf f owitw Nf pGO auf f o auaurrrrrrn `wlaurrrr l rr(k.-.
11
12 to ma xin luurn arrflocarrt)InJi] of IC'rrolY�rc w"rrdciaial floor area,, The of
13 iaoi�rr'cu'ti)'Idcrr�aiarrl floor area to be a rrflocat.ed or t.rrarrrrllud.errreM1,al to t.V;Ic l..,arrvca'rr�rricr C,ornniea'cial
14 �J �
ad to au. n1la xi luun� t,rr�� /f}- �JiJyir 'I� ��)�) u�nyu�aurrrru 1 c
I�vrra,Yl° arr ��nw�lf)I�°� w Darr �.:e )11YV"ll)I�� .... ... .. ., ..
5 J'o Marrxrrn9ini floor... arrrrrraai ... rr'rr a4ruc1urrc. Nowrnrrrruadd4�;,rrftnarr ... rrnmiarr wnt„�nrrn the
16 f auvcnrr irr rr ' C"orlin l rru nauf Ovrr rrf auy..f fklrr°n.r t uJngfl be pr rrnjrrnitcd to receive qtn auf f o aulnrrki�
17 lfnaul guSp urrn(k the a rruucturc to niore lhaurrn W, 00 uuqgg!:uu r'ec , but inot po..u,xu,eed au r1lau.xnn l urn.
18 rr�r "lf} G�f�f� u� � �1�1,.uuggaurrg r'ect of inoirr rrcuu iduurrn; iqj floor area,
19
20 (e ��drrt�,�, ltf�l ,t-wrw�fi„rw�� thr,. J7" oy lr',lr n,,,, r ont-llrwr.,f Hn tfw " w, (.i`„f w,V. u�Nc wfthirrn the
21 I rliiwiiwr it l-wf u,OvrrudU lr�Ntrrict uJ ff....be uuub cct to auff...faurrnd dcvck)P!Dg!A.. rru, p,uufaup>Iorrnuu...of, phr,�.
22 wna d .�rrn p n'k nnrrn$� a . `wtrrnc i 9Jr ljr'r_d. lr rwrs��°'ralrti,w� �'y,Of , !iJflrw in�� nG „ n wjfiyrf,al�iY�r'�d
23
24 (f) :°d'o o, ltflSttI'w"fwr tioI' fw,,.,,fwt, lrw"fi sti"M- wws(_s sh ff rwrtt, N_ "l,, wt'hin thr,
25 arf,r.i rwlr.w. Irli wi�i wr.i l l-af uri r.rl w l rlrJti llo
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 7 of 26
File 2022-053
3667
1
2 (g) jig j As Qnhu 1 At iw a Qm GO v(Ngrlqy �dllfl bg �in]itgo !�2 4
3
4
5 d 1bg WAS wpow wShn �Yiib !bg gNggpdgp gE Wag rgwlqti�l!�u: g�I!Amfli!ul, NRQQQ
6 l2gi2li2D�L.
7
8 (h) !QyjAgglog poyQg yyyyAcd in Scuing AW 11 42MY Mly fAt of nomysidusial
9 J"�,).()(10 allocation shall by dw-lyppy ApplynyppQ nub 1h, WQVy±; (Q lick rpsyly:ty]
10 ","orl"'f6rc(-
12 which will not by ion ygyp""y Qhhcki-
13
14 AU MckWunal Who W WcoM UADoonhul (hWay Widul QU lbQ sutdAwilo W 1cus um]
15 woodioncos of! 12QICIP UK act! to 10,100 1 hL 02. 1 11133.whl owbudcoacd,
16 bckw
17
18 ko N pulJohow, sh VS.,appawd by WQ Swal Whwny 11wrKskown as pwa W)Q
19 Dockwonol Aw1wwQM appErs IL
20
21 y the issuancc of ( 0042gy q[Q;qpq_n;y Q q room ysidyntial spinquy By is morc thm'�
22 (1000 fc(-t'�
23
24 a. At Was twygy [hy QW) p[lby 11prkRyyy [H"Qgg§j;UYg unks mum lux q wyk ad
25 irt'ificau", 'mt N', an"J,
26 bo hunumt to the stanchirds pontainyd in Squino 11plylpygy Q, a )-)Avstrkm
27 moistly, on lowanp,00 V; -Go ypnIn So wDQHWVW PLO Opm By y"ah nom ysidusial
28 a (-a to th(', South
29
30 (k) uppyly to Spytion I 111271. By Rx quIr ( vmmuvwl (hyday !?Ittdvt thou Pon On a ( dass I"
31 Ran W ( 'ork)or I Ju FR[pugg[ppoSplo; !1DWY SyMpsy w M
32 t'bct' is i(.t'uioQ'J' ao") co( Qw Cc vivoiJog. mWWOMOIS achwic at Watluo"', c ZQ cod, Soul!
33 wouaw"J, t'l)Q tx 'ud 100M
34 wooLaWd I Woo 1 11028= hn QoW DADoocoull Quduy 119dwiM bmunSdon Q)
35 S"a ulog W pwpwy 110c owowa''- L'�SJ l"') i�uuot' err S (�tlua 1410
36
37 SaWo 114061, (hadwo QiJag kwowd Who Cc hwok Dwwoull
38 (huday 051101 Sball bQ dhgnd cod knuand Sub lot! W illuudoutJ('to I
39 )rrr,twwodws va Cc oulb pw ay„ M QE W KS00100 PUM cod S(' ut'b Uo(� ('r[ tb(�
40 o('t)L�(�Sk)cotJW SIM Loa cloW raw (0) tic wwWod 000(''utu[C U 'YJlt's
41 Smazz. ally plidwidno wulkway pws Ed punuum w 11S.000 Co nkys Q SM k
42 UnDould w nal A any AM inyoold TAT Ahly any w On Spippliant NOT ,%D,A stanchimis,
43
BOCC SR 11132023 Page 8 of 26
He 2022-053
3668
S('-("t'oi'� 4- 12(1. fo(,,;tt'('-"J tf (- I ,t"'
2 4 ffl 'got' Hkmt i'�"Jktry 'I ff'(-r", f6i,
3 (']'�Stij( ts
4
5 i o,�,' -Grp,; f (,-uJ o,W,' o f'(, 1 o[J"'J i J'�HL""�
6
7 to At, tfjijr,"' 0") ('J ty"" Sriof to tf (- J iru"' ul, it :J('Ju" ou"Jk, u"'ult[fk- f'11' to tbc
8 fo("' tt'('-"J ",'Jtf 'H'� moi' Iro(- o 1 1,t, t t -t
9 t 1,p"J, J/,)o I't 1 1, t,V to fr. G�,r: t
10 1% Aft,(,x -ti'p"J tf (- U'6t'i tf oftf (-
("j
12 1 o i i J -ti'�,,J ATf'0i'(,Jkt1jf(- Hol�,J 1,
o�""Y, 'Q("juu'Quu '(-o("(- to tbc
13 oi' tf�(- -t"' of ('Jolilft- tfjr"' J/ v o I'� 1, 1%-
14 tf�tt' f6i oi'�(- of
15 tj1(2 tf�(- (-Ss(-I'�t"Ktf rtir.i, o t, 1,
16 t,
17
18
19
20 Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and in the event that the BOCC chooses to adopt
21 the Overlay, Staff recommended changes are included as Exhibit 3 to this Staff Report and
22 reflected in the draft Ordinance.
23
24 IV. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT
25
26 Proposals to amend the text of the Land Development Code are reviewed in accordance with Chapter
27 102,Article V.Land Development Code Section 102-158(a)specifically identifies the purpose of Article
28 V Amendments and states:
29
30 Purpose. The purpose of this article [Article V- Amendments] is to provide a means for
31 changing the text of this Land Development Code,which also includes changes to the land
32 use (zoning) district map and overlay district maps. It is also intended to add to the
33 statutory procedures and requirements for changing the future land use map (FLUM) at
34 the transmittal stage. The process for changing the text of the Comprehensive Plan shall
35 follow the process established Chapter 163, Part 11, Florida Statutes, and shall require a
36 Concept Meeting as detailed in subsection (d)(3) of this section, and shall provide for
37 community participation as specified in Section 102-159(b). This article is not intended
38 to relieve particular hardships, nor to confer special privileges or rights on any
39 person, nor to permit an adverse change in community character, analyzed in the
40 Technical Document(data and analysis), but only to make necessary adjustments in
41 light of changed conditions or incorrect assumptions or determinations as
42 determined by the findings of the BOCC. In determining whether to grant a
43 requested amendment to the text of this Land Development Code, or land use
44 (zoning) district map, or overlay map, the BOCC shall consider, in addition to the
45 factors set forth in this article, the consistency of the proposed amendment with the
46 provisions and intent of the comprehensive plan and consistency with the principles
47 for guiding development in Section 380.0552, F.S. [emphasis added].
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 9 of 26
File 2022-053
3669
1
2 Staff is reviewing the proposed amendment for consistency with the County's Comprehensive Plan, the
3 Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan, internal consistency with the Code and State Statutes (including
4 163.3187, F.S.,), Rules, and balancing all the requirements and policy issues.
5
6 Comparison of Development Potential
7 The Property is currently located within the Suburban Commercial Land Use (zoning) District, Mixed
8 Use/Commercial Future Land Use, and is designated as Tier 3 on the County's Tier overlay map.Under
9 the existing zoning requirements, both commercial retail and employee housing dwelling units are
10 permitted uses. The primary change that would result from adoption of the proposed overlay is the ability
11 to construct a nonresidential structure that is over 10,000 square feet, up to 49,900 square feet, with
12 receipt of that nonresidenttal floor area allocation within a single allocation quarter[for properties within
13 the overlay].
14
15 To better understand the Applicants' request, below is a summary of the maximum development
16 potential of the Property based on 14.04 acres (611,384.2 SF) of upland' under the current Code as
17 compared to the maximum development potential under the proposed text amendment:
18
Nonresidential Square Footage (SF) Max Net Density Allocated Density
Existing Code Commercial retail: 202.11 units 42.11 units
(ref. LDC Sections Low intensity: 213,984 SF
130-157 and 130- Medium intensity: 152,846 SF
164) High Intensity: 91,708 SF
Proposed Code Commercial retail: 202.11 units 42.11 units
(ref. LDC Sections Low intensity: 213,984 SF
130-157 and 130- Medium intensity: 152,846 SF
164) High Intensity: 91,708 SF
19
20
Maximum NROGO Allocation Maximum Square Footage (SF)
Existing Code 10,000 SF/Allocation Quarter 10,000 SF/ Structure
(ref. LDC 138-51)
Proposed Code 49,900 SF/Allocation* 49,900 SF/ Structure; and/or
(ref.proposed 49,900 maximum SF within overlay
LDC Section 130-
143)
* The maximum nonresidential floor area to be allocated or transferred to the Tavernier Key
Commercial Overlay District shall be limited to a maximum of 49,900 square feet.
21
22 The Applicants' proposed text would relax the development restrictions within the Overlay by allowing
23 for the potential NROGO allocation of up to 49,900 square feet within a single allocation quarter and
24 for a single structure as opposed to a maximum of 10,000 square foot per structure as set forth in LDC
25 Section 138-51. As currently drafted, it is apparent that the intent of the overlay is to limit the
26 nonresidential development potential of the Property to no more than 49,900 square feet of
27 nonresidential floor area and 86 units of deed restricted affordable housing.
1 Upland acreage is based on survey completed by Massey-Richards Surveying&Mapping,LLC and digitally signed by
David S.Massey on May 26,2022.
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 10 of 26
File 2022-053
3670
1
2 It should be noted that as of November 16, 2023, there are approximately 33 affordable ROGO
3 allocations available. Therefore, there is not currently a sufficient number of ROGO allocations
4 available to develop the 86 units of affordable housing referenced throughout the Applicants'
5 concurrent applications for development. The Applicants are aware that there is not a sufficient
6 number of ROGO allocations currently available for the proposed project and that the County
7 cannot guarantee that additional ROGO allocations will become available for the Applicants.
8
9 Traffic Review
10 Due to the specificity of the proposed development through this application and concurrent applications,
11 Staff requested that a Level III Traffic Study be submitted, reviewed and approved before the proposed
12 text amendment be considered by the Planning Commission. A Level III Traffic Study was initially
13 received by Staff on November 10, 2022, updated in February 2023, May 2023, and again November
14 2023. The Study and subsequent revisions have been forwarded to the County's Transportation
15 Consultant(AECOM) for review, with the most recent review comments dated November 21, 2023.
16
17 As of the date of this report, the comments that remain outstanding are listed below:
18
19 1. The TIS states that the Liquor store is located within Publix but will have its own entrance and
20 not be accessible from Publix. Please confirm whether the 2,100 sf liquor store is part of the 49,
21 340 sf supermarket or not. If part of the supermarket, then for trip generation purposes the
22 supermarket square footage needs to be reduced.
23 2. ITE Trip Generation Manual provides both average rates and fitted curve for the proposed land
24 uses. Fitted curve seems to generate more daily trips for the proposed land uses. Please confirm
25 why average trip rates were used as opposed to the fitted curve?
26 3. Overseas Highway /US 1 &Project Driveway intersection evaluation discussion in the TIS
27 indicates that once the site is fully developed, occupied and operational a signal warrant
28 analysis will be conducted. Considering that a new signal will have an impact on US 1 traffic
29 flow, Monroe County in general does not prefer adding new signals if a less restrictive
30 improvement(other than a signal) can accommodate the traffic demand. As such, we
31 recommend including an assessment of potential impacts to US 1 traffic flow as part of any
32 future analysis or studies related to adding a signal at this location. Also, considering a recent
33 signal at Burton Drive which is approximately 950 feet from the project driveway location and
34 access management spacing requirements, a signal at the project driveway may not be
35 desirable.
36 4. As indicated in Table 6, Segment 21 (Plantation) is projected to be overcapacity. The shortfall
37 of 76 daily trips in Segment 21 must be mitigated. As indicated in the previous comment/
38 responses and discussed at the March 27, 2023 meeting, the applicant should develop specific
39 mitigation measures consistent with the LDC Section 114-2(a)(1)b.
40 5. As discussed at the March 27, 2023 meeting between the applicant and Monroe County, the
41 method of using Placer. Ai data to offset capacity is not consistent with the industry standards /
42 procedures and LDC Section 114-2(a)(1)b.
43 6. The truck turning paths show the trucks making turns from the through lane (not from the
44 dedicated turn lanes). Please review and update as needed. Also,please be advised that the site
45 plan as presented may need to be changed according to the Monroe County and Tavernier
46 Design Guidelines. As such, there may be additional comments during future reviews.
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 11 of 26
File 2022-053
3671
1 7. Please confirm if the timing/phasing used as part of the Synchro analysis for US 1 and Burton
2 Drive intersection is the latest/final signal timing obtained from FDOT.
3 Based on the trip generation numbers provided in the submitted Revised Traffic Study, it appears the
4 daily trip generation is as follows:
5
6 ITE Code 220: 86 units * 6.02 = 518 daily trips
7 ITE Code 850: (49,340 SF/1000) * 97.77 =4,824 daily trips
8 ITE Code 899: (2,100 SF/1000) * 107.21 =225 daily trips
9
10 Total=5,567 daily trips (without excluding pass-by trips)
11
12 It should be noted that the Revised Traffic Study appears to describe a development with a total of 51,440
13 SF of nonresidential floor area. According to a phone conversation with the Applicant that took place
14 on November 15, 2023, this was an error and the actual development that would be proposed if the
15 Overlay is adopted would be less than 49,900 SF. Any subsequent development approvals will require
16 a revised and approved traffic study.
17
18 This calculation does not include any"internal capture"that may exist between the proposed residential
19 units and nonresidential square footage. The submitted Level III Traffic Study goes on to provide a more
20 detailed analysis of the daily trip generation,potential impacts to affected segments of US 1 and potential
21 impacts to relevant intersections.
22
23 If the proposed LDC text amendment and corresponding LUD Overlay map amendment are approved,
24 these comments would be addressed during the major conditional use approval review process. As of
25 the date of this report, the Applicants have yet to propose any mitigation measures consistent with the
26 requirements set forth in LDC Section 114-2(a)(1)b. The Applicants' assert that with the addition of a
27 new Publix at the Property, less vehicles will be traveling through Segment 21 (MM 86.0 —MM 91.5)
28 as the existing customer base that lives within Segment 22 (MM 91.5 to MM 99.5) would "transfer
29 nearly all of their supermarket shopping trips to the new Publix store in Tavernier."Although this may
30 be a compelling argument, there are two major flaws.First,this type of analysis has not historically been
31 accepted with regards to mitigation. Second, there is nothing in the proposed LDC Text Amendment or
32 corresponding applications that would only allow the development of a Publix Supermarket. Rather, the
33 proposed commercial retail space could be occupied by any number of existing or unknown businesses
34 or corporations, as the LDC does not and cannot regulate or require a specific business to occupy the
35 Property.
36
37 Consistency with the LDC
38 In accordance with LDC Section 102-158(d)(7)(b),the BOCC may consider the adoption of an ordinance
39 enacting the proposed map and text amendments to this Land Development Code based on one or more
40 of the following factors:
41
42 1. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those on which the text or
43 boundary was based;
44
45 Per the Applicant:No response provided.
46
47 2. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends);
48
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 12 of 26
File 2022-053
3672
I Per the Applicant:No response provided.
2
3 3. Data errors, including errors in mapping, vegetative types and natural features described in
4 volume 1 of the plan;
5
6 Per the Applicant:No response provided.
7
8 4. New issues;
9
10 Per the Applicant:No response provided.
11
12 5. Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; or
13
14 Per the Applicant: "The proposed Overlay is based on a need for additional detail or
15 comprehensiveness. The current Code has provisions that encourage overlay districts to he created
16 to benefit and promote the character of the community in its development. Permitting the Overlay
17 furthers the objectives of the Code as it encourages the orderly development and construction of
18 commercial structures or buildings that fit with the architectural design and community character
19 of the Tavernier community. The Overlay encourages sound, attractive, and practical procedures
20 for the Tavernier community, and such provisions will result in flexible planning that benefits the
21 community the Overlay will serve.
22
23 Staff does not support the claim that the proposed text amendment to the Land Development Code
24 would address a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness. Alternatively, it appears that the
25 proposed amendment would be creating inconsistencies between the proposed overlay and the
26 adopted Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan.
27
28 To address the concerns of inconsistency,the Applicants must address the following two (2)main
29 issues: 1) consistency with the Tavernier LCP and Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor
30 Development Standards and Guidelines ("US1 Guidelines") and 2) consistency with community
31 character.
32
33 The Applicants assert that the Overlay "furthers the objectives of the Code as it `encourages the
34 orderly development and construction of commercial structures or buildings that fit with the
35 architectural design and community character of the Tavernier community". However, the
36 proposed language does not support this assertion nor have the Applicants submitted data and
37 analysis demonstrating consistency with community character.
38
39 In accordance with LDC Section 101-1, community character is defined as the image and
40 perception of a community as defined by the recognizable natural and built landmarks,
41 boundaries and features that provide a sense of place and orientation and the
42 interrelationship of all these characteristics.
43 The Property is within the Suburburban Commercial (SC) Land Use District and the Tavernier
44 Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor District Overlay (TC), established by LDC
45 Section 130-128.All proposed development within the existing overlay must comply with the
46 Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Hi2hway Corridor Development Standards and
47 Guidelines, which are adopted as part of Chapter 130 of the Land Development Code. The
48 Property is also subject to the policies and guidelines provided in the Tavernier Livable
49 CommuniKeys Plan, which is adopted as part of the County's Comprehensive Plan.
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 13 of 26
File 2022-053
3673
1
2 The Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway Corridor Development Standards and
3 Guidelines include specific building types, with the intent of guiding the development of new
4 construction so that it continues to define the character of Tavernier and so that the massing, scale,
5 and materials of new structures are compatible with this existing character. The guidelines provide
6 for the construction of large commercial buildings through the aggregation of smaller buildings,
7 as depicted in the excerpts from the guidines pictured below:
8
5. Building Types
The inlc m is lrr guide: Elie. developine.nl cil noe ,v con.slructic:rn so lh,rl hitilding;s contirruue. to
dei'rne ar charraicte;r" iclr Tarvernlc"r and than, the niassing, scale ,ind miter" M s ol, flew
st�ITIOurVs trre cOrnpartrlrle Willi this ch inmer. These acre the reconlnlended types, fr'rr' new
construction ill [lie, corridor. The listed building types MC rlot the rrrliverse of huuildings
thaul carn he developed in the corridor-, they are merely ailiplied e.xarrnples of llre guidelines
and slarnd irds in this document. Figure 27 does not ,rccurAcly reflect all county
regul itions and is illustnaive ol'htlildhig concept only.
Large Corurnercial Building,
The intent is tl7ult low�orrrlcle ur lurlclirlg
°I
r n�lr
Ill ill the'. r ul ti
1 wl ,� ay
Gene rail l 11-ban zone", deep lol:s or in � � �P rh r�"✓��
the suNrr-Nrrl r0r11e. r,
l ^
This building type is characterized by ��t" a �� °i y�
[lieziggregartion of 4rllarlle.r bu'ilehrlg"�; � �ml ot�i i„�.,
wf. V
where POSSRAC, these S1101,11d he � �
Kr'A S iJ�YH an b
irrr;irlaaed l tiv Q .,r
is to create 7rb�Itr�e
arc c'c ssrhsle open sptic c (Figntre 27).
, ry
The building, nuary he chid wily siding ).,� �,,0�"�
or linished with slucco. The primary y��
111 .arde is llilled Willi trrcarde.s arnd
Figure 27 Large Commercial Building Type
llarlconie�s, wirrclr�r�r�s alr-e covered Willi
opera ale 13arhwnr i shutici-s, and rool"s .Ire stalrrding scant nuelurl.
9
10
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 14 of 26
File 2022-053
3674
Niultifitnifly Residential
The n-chilectnre ot' the hnilding should coflsis( of the inateiI reconiniended in these
giiidelines anal it S11011,11d be colnpilllil)IC With ',1I-ChilCCuIl-4Il tnd tirbin ch,iI,-.1c1cl- of,
T,,,tvcrnicr. Access to Individn,,A1 Ulli(S Should he obvious froni the street level (Fi�ilre 28).
W
J,
Ph "I"N
,45h
1-J
j
..............
Figure 26 MuRil Family Building
2 To further guide new development within the TC Overlay, these guidelines utilized transect
3 zoning. The transects do not eliminate the standards set by the County's Code or zoning laws, but
4 are intended to help organize the regulations according to the transect with which the property
5 belongs. The Transect Map, which is adopted as part of the Land Development Code through
6 Section 130-128, is pictured below:
7
Twerni at Trans act
T 2 b�,b
T3 50,Ibm,
T4G.,—LU,ban
H--X.y
The Property
KEY LARCO
D—Hey
TAVERMER
8
9
10 As depicted in the above map, the Property is within the Suburban Zone of the TC overlay, which
I I "is characterized by intermittent occurrences of open space, residential development of diverse
12 densities, and industrial and general commercial uses following a pattern similar to that found in
13 the mainland suburbs." According to the Glossary, Suburban, is "characterized by low density
14 residential, this zone is more vegetated than the general urban zone. In this zone blocks tend to be
15 larger." Alternatively, according to the Guidelines, "the urban zone is the area where most of the
16 retail and commercial mixed use development are found and it is the area that the community
17 identifies as its center".
18
19 The establishment of the proposed overlay would allow for a single nonresidential structure of up
20 to 49,900 square feet on the Property. This is not consistent with the adopted Guidelines, which
21 encourage the aggregation of smaller buildings when considering large scale commercial
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 15 of 26
File 2022-053
3675
I development. The proposed amendment would allow for the size of a nonresidential structure that
2 is inconsistent with the established community character that is indicated by the existing smaller
3 scale development within the Suburban zone. This is inconsistent with existing community
4 character and would allow for development that does not comply with LDC Section 130-128
5 nor Comprehensive Plan Policy No. 105.1.2.
6
7 Land Development Code Section 130-128(b): The Tavernier Creek to Mile
8 Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines are
9 hereby adopted by reference and declared a part of this chapter. Within the overlay
10 district, as designated on the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1
11 District Overlay Map, uses permitted as of right and uses requiring a minor or
12 major conditional use permit shall be reviewed based upon the Tavernier
13 Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor Development Standards
14 and Guidelines and approved if found in compliance with these standards and
15 guidelines.
16
17 Comprehensive Plan Policy No. 105.1.2: Monroe County shall enforce the design
18 guidelines established within the Livable CommuniKeys Plans and its land
19 development regulations which ensure that future uses and development are
20 compatible with scenic preservation and maintenance of the character of the casual
21 island village atmosphere of the Florida Keys.
22
23 For reference, under the existing SC Zoning District, the development of 49,900 nonresidential
24 square feet and 86 affordable residential dwelling units is permissible; however, no one (1)
25 nonresidential structure may exceed 10,000 square feet.
26
27 The proposed text amendment would allow both:
28 1) a structure greater than 10,000 square feet within the SC Zoning District; and
29 2) allows for the allocation or transfer of the entire 49,900 square feet of nonresidential
30 development (NROGO floor area) at one time. Therefore, no phasing of the resulting project
31 would be required.
32
33 6. Data updates;
34
35 Per the Applicant: No response provided.
36
37 7. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and the principles for guiding development as
38 defined in Section 380.0552, Florida Statutes.
39
40 Per the Applicant: No response provided.
41
42 Staff has not found the proposed text amendment consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the
43 principles for guiding development as defined in F.S. Section 380.0552 as noted in section V of
44 this Report.
45
46 The proposed amendment is not consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.5.6:
47
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 16 of 26
File 2022-053
3676
I The principal purpose of the Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) future land use category is to
2 provide for the establishment of mixed use commercial land use (zoning) districts where
3 various types of commercial retail and office may be permitted at intensities which are
4 consistent with the community character and the natural environment. Employee housing
5 and commercial apartments are also permitted. In addition,Mixed Use/Commercial land use
6 districts are to establish and conserve areas of mixed uses, which may include maritime
7 industry, light industrial uses, commercial fishing, transient and permanent residential,
8 institutional,public, and commercial retail uses.
9
10 This future land use category is also intended to allow for the establishment of mixed use
11 development patterns,where appropriate.Various types of residential and nonresidential uses
12 may be permitted; however, heavy industrial uses and similarly incompatible uses shall be
13 prohibited. The County shall continue to take a proactive role in encouraging the preservation
14 and enhancement of community character and recreational and commercial working
15 waterfronts.
16
17 In order to protect environmentally sensitive lands, the following development controls shall
18 apply to all hammocks,pinelands, and disturbed wetlands within this land use category:
19
20 1. only low intensity commercial uses shall be allowed;
21 2. a maximum floor area ratio of 0.10 shall apply to nonresidential development; and
22 3. maximum net residential density shall be zero.
23
24 Additionally, as previously discussed, the Property is subject to the Tavernier Creek to Mile
25 Marker 97 Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan. In accordance with Comprehensive Plan Policy
26 101.19.2, the Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2030 Comprehensive Plan
27 as a part of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan.
28
29 The Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 dated February
30 11, 2005 and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on February 16, 2005 through
31 Ordinance 002-2005 is incorporated by reference into the Comprehensive Plan. The term
32 Strategies in the Master Plan is equivalent to the term Objective in the Comprehensive Plan and
33 the term Action Item is equivalent to the term Policy; the meanings and requirements for
34 implementation are synonymous.
35
36 In reviewing the Tavernier CommuniKeys Plan, it is evident that the vision was to preserve the
37 heritage and natural setting of the existing community, with limited redevelopment of commercial
38 properties. The CommuniKeys Plan even includes an Action Item [below] that prohibits the
39 designation of new commercial land use districts beyond those that are already contained within
40 the Master Plan in order to prevent further sprawl or strip commercial zoning.
41
42 Action Item 3.1.3 of the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan: Prohibit the designation of new
43 commercial land use districts beyond that contained in this Master Plan in order to protect the
44 existing viability of the US Corridor Area and Community Center and to prevent the further
45 sprawl or strip commercial zoning.
46
47 The proposed text amendment is inconsistent with the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan,
48 which renders the proposed amendment inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy No.
49 101.19.2.
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 17 of 26
File 2022-053
3677
I (d.) In no event shall an amendment be approved which will result in an adverse community
2 change to the planning area in which the proposed development is located or to any area in
3 accordance with a livable communikeys master plan pursuant to findings of the board of county
4 commissioners [Ref. Code Section 102-158(d)(7)d.].
5
6 Per the Applicant.• "There will he no adverse change to unincorporated Monroe County if the Overlay
7 is approved. As discussed herein, there are no increased concurrency, environmental, or practical
8 impacts associated with the increased NROGO permitted within the Overlay. All such development
9 will he required to at a minimum comply with level of service, concurrency, and performance
10 standards as set forth in the Code. "
11
12 Staff anticipates the proposed amendment will result in an adverse community change to Tavernier.
13
14 The theme throughout the Tavernier LCP is one of protection for the natural environment,preservation
15 of the historic elements of Tavernier and guided development and growth in a manner that is
16 compatible with community goals. The LCP provides a number of goals, objectives and action items
17 to enact policies consistent with the theme and intent of the LCP. In reviewing the Tavernier LCP and
18 the Community Vision statement therein, it appears the proposed amendment may not be consistent
19 with the Community Vision:
20 We envision the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 Planning Area as:
21
22 An island community committed to preserving its heritage,natural setting and
23 stands of native tropical hardwood hammocks, with improvements to the
24 visual character of the U.S. 1 corridor, limited redevelopment of commercial
25 properties, and neighborhoods where residents have access to the water and
26 recreational facilities.
27
28 The text amendment as drafted proposes to relax the development restrictions on the Property without
29 providing adequate data to support such a change nor demonstrating consistency with the Tavernier
30 LCP and existing community character.
31
32 For example, within the Suburban Zone, the intent of the building configuration standards is to break
33 down the apparent mass of buildings wider [or deeper] than 50 feet by creating facade insets at
34 intervals appropriate to the mass of the building. The maximum continuous facade of any building
35 fronting US1 cannot be greater than 50 feet. A building wider than 50 feet will be architecturally
36 defined as a series of smaller units, with insets between primary facades. The inset facade shall not be
37 setback less than six(6) feet.
38
39 The overlay and text as proposed, do not include provisions that support or expand upon construction
40 consistent with the architectural theme of Tavernier.The primary change that would result from
41 adoption of the proposed overlay would be the ability to construct a nonresidential structure that is
42 over 10,000 square feet [on properties within the overlay].
43
44 The Tavernier Community is well established and primarily developed in accordance with the adopted
45 guidelines and Livable CommuniKeys Plan. As the primary component of the text amendment is the
46 ability to construct a nonresidential structure that is greater than 10,000 square feet, staff considered
47 the affect the amendment would have on the existing character of the Tavernier Community as a whole,
48 and within the Suburban Transect. To aid in this review for consistency,Staff reviewed the size of
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 18 of 26
File 2022-053
3678
I existing buildings of surrounding properties within both the Suburban and Urban transect zones.
2 According to data from the Monroe County Property Appraiser's website, the largest existing
3 commercial structure within 600 feet of the Property is approximately 12,000 square feet, known as
4 the Vaughn Building.For reference only, some recogizable commercial buildings within Tavernier are
5 described in the table below:
6
Common Property Name Building Square Transect Zone per US 1
Footage (approximate) Design Guidelines
Tavernier Towne* 526,686 General Urban
Mariners Hospital* 75,737 General Urban
FKEC Property 59,403 General Urban
Tavernier Commercial Center 26,782 General Urban
`Old' Bank of America 9,420 Suburban
Vaughn Building 12,000 Suburban
*Nodes of community center per Guidelines and LCP
7
8 Pursuant to LDC Section 101-1, community character means the image and perception of a
9 community as defined by the recognizable natural and built landmarks, boundaries and features
10 that provide a sense of place and orientation and the interrelationship of all these characteristics.
11
12 The allowance of a structure that is up to 49,900 square feet is much larger than existing structures within
13 the transect area noted as Suburban and would be inconsistent with the established community character.
14 The existing LDC, when coupled with the TC Overlay Guidelines and Tavernier LCP, intentionally
15 limits the maximum size of each structure.
16
17 As previously stated, the proposed text amendment is inconsistent with the Tavernier Livable
18 CommuniKeys Plan, which renders the proposed amendment inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan
19 Policy No. 101.19.2. Additionally, the proposal is inconsistent with Comp Plan Policy 101.5.6 which
20 states that various types of commercial retail and office may be permitted at intensities which are
21 consistent with the community character and the natural environment.
22
23 V. CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2030 COMPREHENSIVE
24 PLAN, THE PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING DEVELOPMENT, AND FLORIDA
25 STATUTES.
26
27 A. The proposed amendment is not consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the
28 Monroe County 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, it is inconsistent with:
29 Policy 101.5.6
30
31 The principal purpose of the Mixed Use/Commercial(MC)future land use category is to provide for
32 the establishment of mixed use commercial land use (zoning) districts where various types of
33 commercial retail and office may be permitted at intensities which are consistent with the
34 community character and the natural environment. Employee housing and commercial apartments
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 19 of 26
File 2022-053
3679
I are also permitted. In addition, Mixed Use/Commercial land use districts are to establish and
2 conserve areas of mixed uses, which may include maritime industry, light industrial uses,
3 commercial fishing, transient and permanent residential, institutional,public, and commercial retail
4 uses.
5
6 This future land use category is also intended to allow for the establishment of mixed use
7 development patterns, where appropriate. Various types of residential and nonresidential uses may
8 be permitted; however, heavy industrial uses and similarly incompatible uses shall be prohibited.
9 The County shall continue to take a proactive role in encouraging the preservation and enhancement
10 of community character and recreational and commercial working waterfronts.
11
12
13 Policy 101.19.1
14 Monroe County shall develop, maintain, and update periodically, as appropriate, with public input,
15 the Livable CommuniKeys Community Master Plans. Community Master Plans will be maintained
16 in accordance with the following principles:
17
18 1. Each Community Master Plan will contain a framework for future development and
19 redevelopment including the designation of growth boundaries and future acquisition areas for
20 public spaces and environmental conservation;
21
22 2. Each Community Master Plan will include an Implementation Strategy composed of action items,
23 an implementation schedule, and a monitoring mechanism to provide accountability to
24 communities;
25
26 3. Each Community Master Plan will be consistent with existing Federal and State requirements and
27 overall goals of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan to ensure legal requirements are met. While
28 consistency with the goals of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is paramount, the 2030 Plan will be
29 updated and amended where appropriate;
30
31 4. Each Community Master Plan will be closely coordinated with other community plans and other
32 jurisdictions to ensure development or redevelopment activities will not adversely impact those
33 areas;
34
35 5. Each Community Master Plan will include appropriate mechanisms allowing citizens continued
36 oversight and involvement in the implementation of their plans. Through the Community Master
37 Plans,programs for ongoing public involvement, outreach, and education will be developed;
38
39 6. Each Community Master Plan will include a Capital Improvements program to provide certainty
40 that the provision of public facilities will be concurrent with future development;
41
42 7. Each Community Master Plan will contain an environmental protection element to maintain
43 existing high levels of environmental protection as required in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan;
44
45 8. Each Community Master Plan will include a community character element that will address the
46 protection and enhancement of existing residential areas and the preservation of community
47 character through site and building guidelines. Design guidelines for public spaces, landscaping,
48 streetscaping, buildings, parking lots, and other areas will be developed through collaborative
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 20 of 26
File 2022-053
3680
I efforts of citizens, the Planning Department, and design professionals reinforcing the character of
2 the local community context;
3
4 9. Each Community Master Plan will include an economic development element addressing current
5 and potential diversified economic development strategies including tourism management. The
6 preservation and retention of valued local businesses, existing economies, and the development of
7 economic alternatives will be encouraged through the process;
8
9 10. Each Community Master Plan will contain a Transportation Element addressing transportation
10 needs and possibilities including circulation, safe and convenient access to goods and services, and
11 transportation alternatives that will be consistent with the overall integrity of the transportation
12 system not resulting in negative consequences for other communities; and
13
14 11. Each Community Master Plan will be based on knowledge of existing conditions in each
15 community. The Planning Department will compile existing reports, databases, maps, field data,
16 and information from other sources supplemented by community input to document current
17 conditions; and
18
19 12. Each Community Master Plan will simplify the planning process providing clarity and certainty
20 for citizens, developers, and local officials by providing a transparent framework for a continuing
21 open dialogue with different participants involved in planning issues.
22 Policy 101.19.2
23 The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as a part of
24 the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community Master
25 Plans have been completed in accordance with the principles outlined in this section and adopted by
26 the Board of County Commissioners:
27 *****
28 2. The Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 dated February
29 11, 2005 and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on February 16, 2005 is incorporated
30 by reference into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The term Strategies in the Master Plan is equivalent
31 to the term Objective in the Comprehensive Plan and the term Action Item is equivalent to the term
32 Policy; the meanings and requirements for implementation are synonymous. Adopted by Ordinance
33 002-2005.
34 *****
35 Policy 105.1.2
36 Monroe County shall enforce the design guidelines established within the Livable CommuniKeys
37 Plans and its land development regulations which ensure that future uses and development are
38 compatible with scenic preservation and maintenance of the character of the casual island village
39 atmosphere of the Florida Keys.
40
41 Policy 105.1.3
42 Monroe County shall, through its development standards and Land Development Code, continue
43 to foster the retention and redevelopment of small businesses on the U.S.1.
44 Tavernier LCP
45 Community Vision
46 We envision the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 Planning Area as: An island community
47 committed to preserving its heritage, natural setting and stands of native tropical hardwood
48 hammocks, with improvements to the visual character of the U.S. 1 corridor, limited redevelopment
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 21 of 26
File 2022-053
3681
I of commercial properties, and neighborhoods where residents have access to the water and
2 recreational facilities.
3
4 Action Item 3.1.1: Designate a "Community Center" from MM 91 to Burton Dr. pursuant to Policy
5 105.2.15 where Tier III infill and incentives for redevelopment will be encouraged.
6
7 Action Item 3.1. 2: Require that any new development or redevelopment approved within the
8 designated US Highway 1 Community Center, meeting the following criteria, be consistent with
9 design standards established pursuant to Action Items 3.2.3 and 3.3.3:
10 1. Any new or expanded non-residential structures of greater than 2,500 square feet in floor area;
11 2. Any new or expanded outdoor retail sales;
12 3.Any new residential structure containing more than three units or redeveloped residential structure
13 containing more than three units that involves a change in floor area,building height or configuration
14 of building footprint;
15 4. Any new transient residential structure or redeveloped existing transient residential structure that
16 involves a change of floor area, building height, or configuration of building footprint.
17
18 Action Item 3.1.3: Prohibit the designation of new commercial land use districts beyond that
19 contained in this Master Plan in order to protect the existing viability of the US 1 Corridor Area and
20 Community Center and to prevent the further sprawl or strip commercial zoning.
21
22 Strategy 3.2
23 Develop and adopt a Commercial Corridor Enhancement Plan for the U.S. 1 Corridor Area between
24 MM 91 and MM 93.5.
25
26 Action Item 3.2.3: Develop and adopt design standards and design guidelines for development within
27 the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the Community Center.
28
29 B. The amendment is not consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida
30 Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes.
31
32 For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that plan with the
33 principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles, the principles shall be
34 construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied in isolation from the other
35 provisions.
36
37 (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local
38 government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern
39 designation.
40 (b) Protecting shoreline and benthic resources, including mangroves, coral reef formations, seagrass
41 beds, wetlands, fish and wildlife, and their habitat.
42 (c) Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native tropical
43 vegetation(for example,hardwood hammocks and pinelands),dune ridges and beaches,wildlife, and
44 their habitat.
45 (d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic
46 development.
47 (e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida Keys.
48 (f) Enhancing natural scenic resources,promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment, and
49 ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys.
50 (g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys.
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 22 of 26
File 2022-053
3682
I (h) Protecting the value,efficiency,cost-effectiveness,and amortized life of existing and proposed major
2 public investments, including:
3
4 1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities;
5 2. Sewage collection, treatment, and disposal facilities;
6 3. Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities;
7 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities;
8 5. Transportation facilities;
9 6. Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries;
10 7. State parks,recreation facilities, aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned properties;
11 8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and
12 9. Other utilities, as appropriate.
13
14 (i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation, maintenance,
15 and replacement of stormwater management facilities; central sewage collection; treatment and
16 disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and maintenance of onsite sewage
17 treatment and disposal systems.
18 (j) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and operation of
19 wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss. 381.0065(4)(1) and 403.086(10),
20 as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by central wastewater treatment facilities
21 through permit allocation systems.
22 (k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida
23 Keys.
24 (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys.
25 (m)Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural
26 or manmade disaster and for a post disaster reconstruction plan.
27 (n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining
28 the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
29
30 Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7)Florida Statutes, the proposed amendment is not consistent with the
31 Principles for Guiding Development as a whole.
32
33 As noted in the analysis in Sections IV and V of this Report,the proposed amendment is inconsistent
34 with the County's Comprehensive Plan. Approval of the proposed amendment would limit the
35 County's ability for managing land use without direct oversight provided by designation as an area
36 of critical state concern.
37
38 C. The proposed amendment, is not consistent with the Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statute
39 (F.S.). Specifically:
40
41 163.3161(4), F.S. — It is the intent of this act that local governments have the ability to preserve and
42 enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and resources,
43 consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal effectively with future
44 problems that may result from the use and development of land within their jurisdictions. Through
45 the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units of local government can preserve,
46 promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance,
47 convenience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and general welfare; facilitate the adequate and
48 efficient provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools,parks,recreational facilities,housing,
49 and other requirements and services; and conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources
50 within their jurisdictions.
51
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 23 of 26
File 2022-053
3683
1 163.3161(6),F.S. —It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans shall have the legal status
2 set out in this act and that no public or private development shall be permitted except in conformity
3 with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof,prepared and adopted in conformity with
4 this act.
5
6 163.3177(1), F.S. — The comprehensive plan shall provide the principles, guidelines, standards, and
7 strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental, and fiscal
8 development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the plan and its elements.
9 These principles and strategies shall guide future decisions in a consistent manner and shall contain
10 programs and activities to ensure comprehensive plans are implemented. The sections of the
11 comprehensive plan containing the principles and strategies, generally provided as goals, objectives,
12 and policies, shall describe how the local government's programs, activities, and land development
13 regulations will be initiated, modified, or continued to implement the comprehensive plan in a
14 consistent manner.It is not the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations
15 in the comprehensive plan but rather to require identification of those programs, activities, and land
16 development regulations that will be part of the strategy for implementing the comprehensive plan
17 and the principles that describe how the programs, activities, and land development regulations will
18 be carried out. The plan shall establish meaningful and predictable standards for the use and
19 development of land and provide meaningful guidelines for the content of more detailed land
20 development and use regulations.
21
22 163.3194, F.S. — (1)(a) After a comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, has been adopted in
23 conformity with this act, all development undertaken by, and all actions taken in regard to
24 development orders by, governmental agencies in regard to land covered by such plan or element
25 shall be consistent with such plan or element as adopted.
26
27 (b) All land development regulations enacted or amended shall be consistent with the adopted
28 comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and any land development regulations existing at
29 the time of adoption which are not consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or
30 portion thereof, shall be amended so as to be consistent.If a local government allows an existing land
31 development regulation which is inconsistent with the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or
32 element or portion thereof, to remain in effect, the local government shall adopt a schedule for
33 bringing the land development regulation into conformity with the provisions of the most recently
34 adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof. During the interim period when the
35 provisions of the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and the
36 land development regulations are inconsistent, the provisions of the most recently adopted
37 comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall govern any action taken in regard to an
38 application for a development order.
39
40 163.3201, F.S. — Relationship of comprehensive plan to exercise of land development regulatory
41 authority.—It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans or elements thereof shall be
42 implemented, in part, by the adoption and enforcement of appropriate local regulations on the
43 development of lands and waters within an area. It is the intent of this act that the adoption and
44 enforcement by a governing body of regulations for the development of land or the adoption and
45 enforcement by a governing body of a land development code for an area shall be based on,be related
46 to, and be a means of implementation for an adopted comprehensive plan as required by this act.
47
48 163.3202, F.S. —Land development regulations.-
49 (1) Within 1 year after submission of its comprehensive plan or revised comprehensive plan for review
50 pursuant to s. 163.3191, each county and each municipality shall adopt or amend and enforce land
51 development regulations that are consistent with and implement their adopted comprehensive plan.
52 (5) The state land planning agency shall adopt rules for review and schedules for adoption of land
53 development regulations.
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 24 of 26
File 2022-053
3684
1
2 VI. PROCESS
3
4 Land Development Code Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the
5 Planning Commission, the Director of Planning,private application, or the owner or other person having
6 a contractual interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning
7 shall review and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the Development Review
8 Committee and the Planning Commission.
9
10 The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall review
11 the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning & Environmental
12 Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the public hearing. The
13 Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the Board of County
14 Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the adoption of the proposed
15 amendment, and considers the staff report, staff recommendation, Planning Commission
16 recommendation and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may adopt the proposed
17 amendment based on one or more of the factors established in LDC Section 102-158(d)(7).
18
19 VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
20
21 The amendment as drafted proposes to relax the development restrictions on the Property without
22 providing adequate data to support such a change nor demonstrating consistency with the Tavernier LCP
23 and existing community character. It is anticipated that the proposed overlay, would result in an adverse
24 change in the character of the Tavernier Community.
25
26 As described throughout this Report, the proposed text amendment would allow for development that is
27 specifically noncompliant and inconsistent with the following Land Development Code Sections and
28 Comprehensive Plan Policies [as well as the policies described throughout Section V of this report]:
29
30 0 Land Development Code Section 130-128(b)
31 0 Comprehensive Plan Policy No. 101.5.6
32 0 Comprehensive Plan No. 101.19.2
33
34 Additionally, on September 1, 2023, the Applicants submitted a separate request to amend the
35 Comprehensive Plan to establish a site-specific subarea policy on a portion of the Property in addition
36 to submitting requests to amend the FLUM and LUD on a portion of the Property that is located within
37 the proposed Overlay. These applications were incomplete when submitted and have not yet been
38 processed by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department.
39
40 The Applicant's proposed overlay language includes a requirement for a Development Agreement on
41 the site prior to permitting of the proposed uses. No Development Agreement application has been
42 submitted yet as of the date of this staff report.
43
44 Staff recommends that the BOCC CONTINUE the Applicant's request to amend the Land Development
45 Code establishing Section 130-143, the Tavernier Commercial Overlay, until such a time that all
46 current requests to amend the Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Code, Future Land Use
47 Map and Land Use District Map, and the proposed Development Agreement, are processed and
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 25 of 26
File 2022-053
3685
I prepared to be heard at the same BOCC Hearing to ensure consistency of all concurrently
2 proposed amendments relative to this Property.
3
4 In the event that the BOCC elects to vote on this item at the December 13, 2023 public hearing, Staff
5 recommends DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code establishing Section
6 130-143.
7
8 VIII. EXHIBITS
9 1. DRC Resolution No. DRC 13-22
10 2. PC Resolution No. P16-23
11 3. Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits
12 4. Draft Ordinance
BOCC SR 12.13.2023 Page 26 of 26
File 2022-053
3686
1 /
3
R r
r
5
7 I IC➢NIT E COUNTY,, FLORIDA
8 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
I'T°IE
9 RESOLUTION NO. D Cr 1.3-22
1.0
I A RESOLUTIONBY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
12 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF AN ORDINANCE
1.3 BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
14 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE MONROE COUNTY .LAND
15 DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH SECTION 1300-143,
16 CREATING THE TAVERNIER KEY COMMERCIAL OVERLAY
17 (TICCCI) DISTRICT; INCLUDING U NG THE PURPOSE 1 INTENT,
18 BOUNDARY, APPLICABILITY, 1` II.OGO ALLOCATION
1.9 STANDARDS,IIARDS, N I U NONRESIDENTIAL AND
20 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL; FOR
21 PROPERTIES LOCATED AT' 9'2501 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY,WAS', EY
22 LARGO, APPROXIMATELY ]'WALE MARKER 12. , HAVING
23 PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 00089490-000000 AND
24 01049012 00-0I0I0101010; AS PROPOSED BY CEMEX CONSTRUCTION
STRUC:TION
25 MATERIALS FLORIDA, LLC F/KJA SINGLErT RY CONCRETE
26, PRODUCTS INC.; PROVIDING FOR E "E - ILIT '"
27 PROVIDING FOR REPEAL L OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;
28 PROVIDING ING FOR. TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND
29 PLANNING 1 GE IC:"Y AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE;
30 PROVIDING G FOR INCLUSION IN THE MO OE COUNTY
31 CODE;E; PROVIDING' FOR 1 EFFECTIVE DATE. (FILE 20I22®01 3)
32
33
34
35 WHEREAS, on March 23, 2022, the Planning and Environmental Resources Department
36 received an application f ro n Snuith/I lawks, PL (the "Agent",) on beliall`of Singeletary Concrete
37 Products, Inc. and C"e.unex Construction Materials Florida, LLC (the "Applicants,") and The
38 Vestcor Companies Inc. and Blackstone group __. "Tavernier 925, LI,C" (the "Developers") to
39 amend Monroe County Land Development Code to establish the Tavernier Key Commercial.
40 Overlay District (the "Overlay") to allow for a nonresidential R.OGO allocation Of rule to 70,000
41 square tcet, which could allow for the development of a 64,0�8,0 Slry commercial supermarket,
42 including a liquor store, on property located at 92501. Overseas Highway, Key Largo with parcel
43 identification numbers 000' 9490-000000 and 00490250-000000 (the "Property"), and
44
45 WHEREAS,a corresponding Land Use District(Zoning)map amendment for the Property
46 to apply the Overlay was su:ubmitted (File 2022F054) .and is under review; and
47
Resolutioji DRC 13-22 Page I of
H i 1e 2022-05 3
3687
1 WHEREAS, an amended and restated text amendment application was received on May
2 19, 2022 (the "Application", File 2022-053); and
3
4 WHEREAS, the proposed text was revised and resubmitted to the Planning Department
5 for review on September 22, 2022; and
6
7 WHEREAS,the Property is within the boundary of the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys
8 Master Plan, a Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97, (the "LCP"); and
9
10 WHEREAS,the Property is within the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway
11 1 Corridor District Overlay (TC) as identified in the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S.
12 Highway 1 Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines (the "Corridor Development
13 Guidelines"); and
14
15 WHEREAS, the Property is within the Suburban Zone as identified in Corridor
16 Development Guidelines; and
17
18 WHEREAS, the Suburban zone is characterized by intermittent occurrences of open
19 space, residential development of diverse densities, and industrial and general commercial uses
20 following a pattern similar to that found in the mainland suburbs; and
21
22 WHEREAS, the vision for the corridor allows the individual zones to maintain their
23 distinctive characteristics, yet, encourages a unified image of the corridor as a whole, where
24 landscape and the built environment share common elements; and
25
26 WHEREAS, Staff is recommending edits to the Applicant's proposal in an effort to
27 provide for internal consistency of the Land Development Code (LDC), and to further implement
28 goals, strategies and action items of the LCP and the Corridor Development Guidelines, which
29 represent the community's vision for the Tavernier area;
30
31 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee (DRC) reviewed and
32 considered the proposed amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on October 25, 2022;
33 and
34 WHEREAS,the professional staff memorandum for the DRC meeting dated October 14,
35 2022, completed by Cheryl Cioffari, AICP, Assistant Director of Planning, and Devin Tolpin,
36 AICP, CFM, Principal Planner, requests and recommends the Applicant address: (1) consistency
37 with the Tavernier LCP and Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor Development Standards
38 and Guidelines ("US1 Guidelines") and (2) consistency with community character.
39
40 WHEREAS, based upon the information and documentation submitted, the Development
41 Review Committee Chair found:
42 1. The proposed amendment is not consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of
43 the Monroe County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and
44 2. The proposed amendment is not consistent with the Principles for Guiding
45 Development for the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Sec. 380.0552(7),
46 F.S.; and
47 3. The proposed amendment is not consistent with Part 11 of Chapter 163, Florida Statute;
Resolution DRC 13-22 Page 2 of 3
File 2022-053
3688
1 4. The proposed. amendment will result in an adverse change in community character to
2 the sub-area which a proposed amendment affects or to any area in accordance with the
3 Tavernier Livable Coi-nniuniKeys Master Plan pursuant to findings of the BOCC; and
4 5. The proposed amendment,is not necessary due to new issues and recognition of a need
5 for additional detail or comprehensiveness, as required by Section 102-158 of the
6 Monroe County Code,
7
8 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
9 COMMITTEE OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA that the information provided in the staff
10 report and discussed at the October 25, 2022 meeting supports the Chair's decision to recommend.
11. DENIAL of the proposed arnendment to Land Development Code establishing Section 130-143
12 to the Planning Conimission and Board Of COLtiinty Commissioners,,
13
14
15
M Date
o .
.......... ..........
17 Emily Scheinper, AlCP, CFM
18 Senior Director of Planning & Environi-nental, Resources
19
20 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me, an officer dLIly authorized in the State aforesaid.
21, and in the County aforesaid to take acknowledginents, personally appeared Emil), Schernper, to
22 me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrUnienI and she
23 acknowledged before me that she executed the same,
24
25 WITNESS in,), hand and official sea] in the County and State last aforesaid this day of
26 2022,
27
28 K—00—TI'AR Vr"P AU I C, S1 A 1 E 0 FF`L(-RI D,
ALISON J.S,MITH
Notary Pubk-Statel,of Rorida
Commission#HH 155590
mv Comm Expires Jul19,2025
aonded throLgh sationat Notary An RM
ResolUtion DRC 13-22 Pa ye 3 of 3
File 2022-053
3689
n
2
4
i I
Ca
I't ONLIOE COUNTY, FLORIDA.
1!ra ONROE COUNTY I'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P16-23
9
10 A RESOLUTION BY 1"LH MONROE C.O N"1 'lt PLANNING
11 COMMISSION RECOMMENDING T1iA"1 THE MONII (.DE
17 COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DENY THE
13 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE SEEKING TO
14 a 11 LLB ND L HE ,11I NRO E COUNTY LAND li'F..VEI...GLPMEN'T CODE
13 TO CREATE,I Iry, A NEW "I AVERNIE R KEY COMMERCIAL
16 OVERLAY DISTRIC.'"T ("I'KCO") VIA THE NEW CREATION OF
17 C"ODE, SECTION 1.30-14.3, INCLUDING AMENDMENTS L O "I E
18 MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT,LC)PMENT CODE, THAJ'
19 WOULD RE LA"I E., TO NROGO ALLOCATION L ION STANDARDS, THE
20 PURPOSE AND INTENT, BOUNDARY, AND APPLICABILITY,
31 AND MAXIMUM UM NON-RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL
22 1.)EVELC:II°MENT POTENTIAL, ALL, RELATING TO
3.3 PROPERTIES TIES LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS 1-11G;IJWAY,
24 LARG90, APPROXIMATE XIMATE TILE MARKER 9 .: , CURRENTLY
33 HAVING' 1'II OPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS I.08 490-
6 C)t10001 O AND 01)4311 C1-1)()O()l)C13 AS PROPOSED D IY C"]e;NU
27 CONSTRUCTION MA"I'ERIA1,1"3 FLORIDA, LLC: la/I°./'A
28 INdMLETAILY C"C NC'RE"LE PIrC DIJC'TS INC.; PROVIDING' FOR
29 SEVERA IILITYt PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING
TING
:30 PROVISIONS; PRONA MNG E"t)L~l'L'li.ANSMl"I'TAL"L°41 THE; STATE;
31 LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY" OF STATE
133 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONICOE COUNTY
33 CODE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE TI'►E DATE'.,
34
33
36 8AMEREAS, on March 23, 2022, the Monroe County 6'Iannin and I.'rivironme tal.
37 Resources Dcpnnartnncrnt received all application firm Smith//av ks, P,f- (tile "Agent"), agar behalf
38 of `yin letaary Concrete Products, Inc. and ('emex Construction Materials 1,loria.laa, 1.1_,C.` (tile
39, "Applicants") aand 'I"lie Vestcor C onapaanies, Inc, and Blackstone Group._.. rv1l";.avernier 925, LLC (tine
40, -Develope rs") sceking to aarnencl to Monroe C'tannnnty [.,and Development Code to create as new
41 1"avernier Key Commercial Overlay 1.)istrict (""1Xt'O) via the tiev,\,, creation of Code Section 130-
2 143, including amendments to the Monroe County 1-and Development C;`analn that vvOUld rclaate to
43 f" RO ("K) Allocation Standards, the Purpose and Intent, Boundary, and Applicability, and
44 MaaxiolUrn Non-Residential and Residential Developnrnent PotentiA, all relaating to properties
erties
MOM-Oe C OU11ty Planning a ad Environncnta[ ReSOUrces L)ctrartma:nt File No 2022-0513.
i of
3690
I located at 92501 Overseas I I ighw ay, Key Largo,current I y having Property I dentificati on Numbers
2 00089490-000000 and 004902)50-000000 (the "Property"). and
3
4 WIIEREAS, an applicat iot,12 seeing approval ot' a corresporiding Land Use District
5 ("LUD") rnap amendment f6r the Prc)perty to apply the Overlay has been received 1'rom the above-
6 named Agent. Applicants, and/or Developers, and is ctirrentl)l Under revicNv, and
7
8 WHEREAS, an amended and restated text amendment application was received on May
9 19, 2022'; and
I I WtIEREAS, the proposed text was revised and resubmitted to the Monroe COLUIty
12 planning and 1"rivironilicrital Resources Depar-tment for review on Septervitier 22, 2022,- and
13
14 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Conirnittee ("DR.C,-) considered
15 the proposed text arriendnient at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 25 Ih day of"October,
16 2022, and
17
18 WHEREAS, on Novenibcr 14, 2022, the DRC Chair signed ReSOILItion No. DRC 13-22,
19 recomnieriding that the Monroe County Planning Con,imission and the Monroe Counly, Board of
20 COUnt)r Corfiniissioners DENYISSIT DENIAL OF the request seeking to amend the Monroe
21 (.ounty Land Development Code in order to create brand-new (..,ode Section 130-143, as
22 ref'crenced above; and
23
24 WHEREAS "the Property is within the boundary of"the Tavernier Livable (.7ornmuniKeys
25 Master Plan. as Master Plan 1"orTz1vernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 (the and
26
27 WHEREAS, the Property is vvitl'iin the Yavernier(Ir"reck Io Mile Marker 97 1 I.S, lligiiNvay
28 1 'orridor District Overlay ("I"C") as identified in the Tavernier Creek. to Mile Marker 97 1,-J,S.
29 Highway I Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines (the "Corridor Development
30 Guidelines"); ,,ind
3 1
32 WHEREAS, (lie Property is within the Suburban Zone as identified in Corridor-
33 Developtnent Guidelines: and
34
35 WHEREAS, the Suburban Zone is characterized by, intermittent occurrences (.A' opcn
36 space, residential development (,&diverse densities. and industrial and general coninlercial uses
37 following a pattern similar to that t"OUnd in the mainland suburbs; and
3 8
39 WHEREAS, the vision fi:)r [lie corridor allows the individual zcmes to maintain their,
40 distinctive characteristics, yet, encourages as Unified nuage of the corridor as a whole, where
41 landscalie and the built environment share coinnion elements, and
Monroe("owity Planning mid Fnv4omnentali Resources Departnient File No, 2022-054,
Monroe COLUIty Planning and Env rc-Mmcntal Resources Department Filc No, 2022-053.
2 of 5
3691
I WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning (.7orrimission ("Planning Commission") held as
2 public hearing on the 28'a' day of April, 2023, fear revievv and recommendation on. the subject
3 request f(A' appr(Wal 01"a Land Developi-nent Code text amendment as described above., and
4
5 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning arid L'Invironniental Resources Department's
6 professional staff report ("iiieiiiotraridLitIl"),joiintly prepared and cornpleted by Assisuant Director
7 of' Planning Cheryl Cioll'ari, AIC-'.P., and Principal Planner Kevin Tolpin, C!"N.,
8 recornmends that the Planning Commission DENVISSUE DENIAL OF the subject requesit for
9 approval of a Land Development Code text arnendinent in order to create Code Section 130-143.,
10
II WHEREAS, based upon the information and dOCUrneritation Submitted, the Planning
12 OnInliSSiOu, found:
13 1, rllr-1,, proposed at"nendment is not consistent with the Goals, Ob.�'jectiv,es and Policies of
14 the N&.)nroe ounty Year 2030 Cornprehensive Plan; and
15 2. rybe proposed aniendirient is not consistent with the Principles for Guiding
16 Development for tile 1'°'Iorida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Ila. Stat. §
17 380.0552(7),- and
18 1 The proposed amendinent is not consistent with Part 11 of Chapter 163, F orida
19 Statutes',
2 0 4. The proposed atnendrricnt,"+ill result in an adverse change in community character
21 to the sub-area which, as proposed amendment affects or, to any area in accordance
22 with the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan pursuant to findings of
23 the BOCC, and
24 5. The proposed arnendirient is not a necessary adjustment in light of changed
25 conditions, incorrect assuniptions or deterni i n at ions, or recognition of a need for
26 additional detail or coinprehensiveness, as required to aller (lie text of`the Monroe
27 County [,and Development Code in accordance with Code Section 102-158,
28
29 WHEREAS,the Planning C I onnnission hereby acloptsas an appetided exhibit ofthe public
30 heariti,
,g conducted regarding this application the official minutes of this hearing attached as
31 Exhibit 'A.- hereto; and
32
33 WHEREAS, the Planning Cornmission accepts all ofthe findings of fact iri the Monroe
3 4 Coutity Planning and, Environmental Resources Departnient's professional staff report, and
35 hereby adop�ts them as the Planning C.ornniission's own, findings of fact; and
36
37 WHEIZEAS,the Planning Commission accelits all ofthc conclusions of lave in the Monroe
3 8 County planning and Env it-onnienuil ReSOUrces Departinent's prof ssional stall' report. and
39 hereby adopts them as the Planning Commission's own findings of fact-, and
40
41 WHEIZEAS, the Planning C I onirnission has considered the full record before it, including
42 but not limited to all remarks by Agent and all public comment, and
4,3
44 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission accepts all of Principal Planner Devin 'ToIpuI*s
45 fact and expert opinion testiniony and hereby adolits, her fact and expert opinion testimony on
46 all que st ions/i ss ties art'factas the Planning Commission's own findings offact; and
3 (4i
3692
I WHEREAS, (fie planning Conimission accepts all ot'Planning Director L'Imily Scherliper's
2 fact and expert opinion testiniony arid hereby adopts her, fact and expert opinion lestiniony on
3 all questicHis/issues offilet as the Planning Comillission's Own findings of fact; sAnd
4
5 NOWTHEREFORE, BE IT Ali SOLVE D BY THE PLANNING C'OMMISSION OF
6 NIONR,OE COUN"IY, FLORIDA:
7
8 section L Recitals. The foregoing recitals, findings of fl.ict, and conclusions of law are
ct true and correct and are hereby hicorpoil,a(ed as it" t1ifly set forth herein, arid the record of this
lt1 procceding is hereby incorporated as iffully stated herein.
11
12 Section 2. ]'lie Monroe County Planning Conirnission has dL.IlV considered the entirety
13 ofthe record before it,
14
15 Section 3. The Monroe County PlannilIg C.OffluliSSi011 C011CUrs, Nvittl the detailed
16 recommendatiorns), findings arld conCIUSiOuS off4ct and law ofthe Monroe ("aunty Planning and
17 I-I'jivironmental Resources I)epartinent's professional stall', including but not limited to the
18 testinionial and documentary findings and conclusions, of fact and law of' the Department I S
19 testifying proficssional staffand the Departnient's professional staff'report,
20
11 Section 4. l"ollowing considered review of' tire full record bcfore it, based upon
22, competent Substantial evidence in the record, niore patlicularly referenced above in the foregoing
23 pref1mory and operative recitals. prefatory and operative findings of fact, and prel"atory and
24 operative conclusions of law, all detailing said evidence, the Mourne Counij, Planning
25 (onimission hereby recommends that the Monroe (7ounly BOCC' DENVISSUL DENIAL
26 OF the instant request to apprc-)ve amenchuent of"the' County's Land Devek.)pnlcnt Code to create
27 ("ode Section 130-143 as referenced above,
This I�esolutioii arid its i lite rpretat ion
Section 5. C'onstruction and Interpretation.
30 shall be liberally construed in fimm- of`the Monroe County Planning C.ornmission and Monroe
,.31 CIOUrIty Board of ounly Commissioners ("BOCC17) and SLICII interpretation shall be entitled to
.32 great weight ill adversarial adiiiinistrative proceedings, at trial, oil appeal, and in any/all
33 bankruptcy' proceedings. The interpretation Of N110111-0e (..'.OlAnty Comprehensive Plan provision(s),
34 Horida Building Code, I'lorida Statutes, and Morn-L)c County Cocle(s) provision,ts,) whose
35 interpretation arises out Of', relates to, or is interpreted in connection with this Resolution shall be
36 liberally construed and criflorced in favor ot"the Monroe('.1 OUIlty planning Commission arid 130(V
37 arid such interpreuvion shall be entitled to great weight in adversarW administrative proceedings,
38 at trial. on appeal., arld in bankruptcy, proccedings.
39
40 Section 61. Inconsistency, Partial Invalidity, Se'verability, and Survival of
41 Provisions., It' any provision ()]"this Resolution, or any, portion thereof, is held to be invalid or
42 Unenforceable in or by any adniinistrative I'Learing officer or court of c(.iiiipletcjit,jtii-isdicti(,)ii, the
43 invalidity or unenforceability of such provision, or any pc)rtion thereof. shall neither limit nor
44 impair the operation, enforceability, or validity of any other provision of`this Resolution, oi- ally
45 remaining portion(s) thereof'. All other, provisions of' this Resolution, and rern'k,11111rig P011i0n(S)
46 thercof" shall COutillLIC Lill impaired in ILill force and effect.
4ol,5
3693
I 'Section 7. Captions and Paragraph Headings. Captions and paragraph headings,
2 where used herein, are inserted for convenience only and are riot intended to descriptively limit
3 the scope and intent of'the particular paragraph or text to which they refel%
4
5 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of'Motiroe
6 1"lorida, at a regular meeting held on the 28"" day of'April, 2,023.
7
8 Joe Scarpelli, hair X 11",S
9 1 on Demes, Vice ('hair YIS
10 (Jeorge NCLIgent, C01111TAISS10ner NO
I I Rosemary Thoirias, Cornmissitmer NIL'
12 David Ritz. ('onimissioner No
13
14 PLANNING COMMISSION OF MONROE. COUNTY, FLOWDA
15
16 By:
mo timission (.'hair-Jo-e-Scarlictli
17 N4011roe ((,
2 '�19 Signed this ...............-"-, 2023
20
21 10 41, UE AGU�LA
,22 Notary Public-State OF pwrida
Comm,ission#HH 0307�6
2 3 MYCOmm,ExPire Oct 311,2024 ................. ..........
SondL�d through Nadana�Notary As�sr
24 NOTAR E' 01", FLORIDA
25
26 Monroe (..'0U11ty Planning Commission ("-'0Ul1SCl
27 pnt w eel s To
28 FILED WITH '1111"HE
29
.1 30 (111ri.1, W9"�, Fscf
31 Date.- o"D 7 )023
w,k.,4ENC;Y CLERK
5 of 5
3694
PL,ANNIN(.j C,'OMMISSION
April 28, 2O23
m9glin-Minutes
,The Planning Corrinlission of'Monroe County conducted as hybrid v irtual and in-person meeting
on Friday, April 28, 2023, beginning at 10:00 a.m.
CALL TO ORDER by Chair Scarpelli
PLEDGE OFALLE(,'](AN,CE
ROLL CALI., by lIze Aguila
PLANNING COM.MISSION MEMBERS
Joe Scarpelli, Chair Present
Ron Dernes, Vice C'hair Present
George Neugent, Commissioner present
David Ritz, Commissioner Present
Rosemary I'liorrias, (,onimissiorier Present
DOUglaS Pryor, LI'x-Officio Member (MCSD) Absent
hristina Gardner, Fx-Officio Member (NASKW) Absent
STAUT
I"Imily Schernper., Senior Director of Planning and L'Invironmental Resources
Cheryl Cioffari, Assistant Director of'Planning
Mike Roberts, Assistant Director of Environmental RCS(r�)UI-CCS
13 rad Stein, Developti'ient Review Manager
DevinTolpin, Principal Planner
Peter Morris, Assistant (."OUnt), Attorney
John all , Plant-iing Commission Counsel
Ilze AgUila, Planning Cominission SUpervisor.
COUNTYRESOL11.111][ON 1,31-92 APPELLANT TO PROVIDE RECORD FOR APPEAL
COLItIty RCS01110011 131-92 was read into the record by Mr. John Wolfe,
SUBMISSION OF PROPERIN POSTINS' AFFIDAVITS AND P110TOG"RIAPHS
Ms. Ilze Aguda confirmed receipt of' all necessary imperwork. Additional copies of
Presentations were also received.
SWEAIZINGPIF COUNTy s,,rAFF
County stafTwas sworn in by Mr, John Wolfe, along Nvith all applicants and pUblic participants.
CHANG&S ,ro ,ruE A(IENDA
None, herns 1, and 2 read togedier.
3695
p1SC'L0S1,J1ZE OF EX PAR,rf.: ('0MMUNICATIONS
Chair Scarpelli disctosed that fie had spoken with Mr. Bart Sinith regarding Items I and 2, and
had received as lot of correspondence concerning Items I and 2 via email, This will not affect his
decision today,
Commissioner Ritz stated, that he'd had numerous discussions With nUrnerous people on both
ISSUCS. ']"his, will not affect [its decision today.
("-'onimissioner Neugent stated that he had been to the Ceinex site, and spoken With SOrne of' the
principaIs involved in Iterris I and 2, and in communication with Paellas regarding Iterns, 3 and 4.
This Nvill not aM�ct his decision today,
('t)iiiii�iissioiiet 1-1,i(.)iiias statcd she had received nUrnerous co 111111 Lin i cations but did not speak with
anyone. This will not affect her Judgment today.
Commissioner Denies stated that lie had only spoken to: tWO COL1111t),' Cornmissioners and that
surely Nvould not al'I'ect hisjudgment today,
APPIMVAL OF MINUTES
Not applicable,
Chair Scarpelh annOLUICed that public comments NVOUld be litilited to three minutes to keep
things moving along. If as prior speaker has rtiadc the saITIC comments that a subsequent speaker
wiislics to, niuke, it is acceptable to state that YCM agree with as prior speaker to avold repetition
and keep things, moving forward,
M E E`17 I N G
AGENDA ITEMS
I. AN QRDINAN(T BY T11E MONROE, COUNTY 130ARI) OF COUNTY
COMMM tSS ION E.RS FSTABLISI I1N(J MONROE', COUNTY I-AND 1)["VE LO P M EIN'T CoDE"
SECTION 130-1143 TAVERNIER KEY C(MMERCIAL OVE"RLAY ("I"K(.10), f")ISTRICT',
ESTABLISHING PURPOSF� AND IN EM", BOL,M)ARY. APPLICA1311-1 FY, NROGO
ALLOCATION STANDARDS, AS-01-'-RIG111 AND CONDITIONAL ulSl.'"S. ANI.)
MAXIML.Al NONRESIDIENTIAL AND RESIDE'N'11A1_, DFAIELOPMENT POTENTIAL,
I"OR PROPERTIES LOCAJED A`F 92501 OVERSLAS HIGHWAY, KE,'Y LARGO,
A P P R 0 X I N1 ATJ,,",L Y MIL 9 F" MARKER 2,5, HAVING PARCL.1- IDEXHFICATION
NUMBIERS 00089490-000000 AND 00490250-0000001- AS PROPOSE'D BY SMUTTUHAWKS,
PL ON BEMAIT OF 0"W"X C"ONSTRUC"TION MATERIALS FLORIDA, LLC' F/K/A
SIN(.1LE-JARY C.ONCREAE PROL)[Al"I'S IN(,'.,,, PROVIDIN(.i F,'OR SFXERAMLITY,
PROVIDIN(,ii U`01R REIPI"AL, 01, MM'l-ICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING I`OR
TRANSMITT'AL TO T] IL S'TATE LAND PLANNIN(", AGE`N ' AND TIFF SFC.RETARY
01, S"J'A"ITI. PRO I)VIDING FOR INC,LUSION IN THE:' N,1:1(I)NROE COUNTY ('01 f
PROVIDINo-ii FOR AN I 41"FIC"I'l V F" DAT'll, J-11,1` 2022-053)
2
3696
2. AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD QF COUNTY
COMMI'SSIONERS AME,NDIN6 THE MONROL, COUNTY I.AND USE DISTRICT
(ZONIN(.;) MAP TO APITY FHE TAVERNIER KFY COMMERCIAL., OVI,,"Rl,.,,AY (`FKCO)
DISTRIC"T, 1`0 PROPERTY I.,0CALF"D AT92501 OVERSE'AS HIGHWAY, KEY I.,ARG0,
APPROXIMA111.,Y MlIA" MARKER 92,5, (,,'JJRRENT1..Y HAVINC) PAR( EL,
IDENTIFICATH)N NUMBERS 00089490-000000 AND 00490250-00(I000 AS P11.0POSE1:
BY CI:MEX CONSTRUCTION MATFRIAL,S Fl,.(11)RIDA, 11C F/'K/A SING IXTA RA"
1 .1 W I I)I N G FO R
F"lJ-' PRODUCTS INC,; PROVIDING FOR SF`VERAB1L,lTY; PR(
REPE'Al., OF CONFIJ('"FING PROVIS IONS�, PROVIDING FOR TRANSMIT'I'AL, TO I TJF�
ST A ATU" FAND PL, NNI,NG AGE'NCY AND THE SUICRH"'ARY OF STATE; f ROVIDING
FOR AW"NI)MENT 'ro 'I'Llu" I-AND USE' DISTRICT (ZONING) MAI:); PROVIDING FOR
AN FIFFLIVTFVL� DATE. (F'1,1..,E 2022-tl54)
(10:07 a.m.) Ms. Devin 'I"olpin, principal planner, presented the staff report, having worked on
these items with Ms. Cheryl (I.I ioffari, Assistant Director of"Planning. This presentation concerns
a private request to establish the Tavernier Key (11 oniniercial Overlay District. The applicant has
apphed for a text r arrienchrient to the County's F,and Development Code to establish the overlay,
an(] an amendment to the Fand Use District Map to acu.1,11fly apply the overlay to the sub"ject
property. This overlays proposed shall apply to t%VO continuous properties aggregated to make up
one property at Mile Marker 92 in Tavernier. This property is Iocatecl within the Suburban
Commercial zoning district, the Mixed Use 0)runiercial I'LA)VI category, and is also located
within the ,Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U S. Highway I Corridor District orTC overlay.
'I"'his property is also sub'ject to die policies and guidelines provided in the 'Favernier Livable
CornniniKeys Plan which as part of the COUntV'S Conip plan.,
The proposed amendment establishes the overlay district with a purpose, intent and a boundary,
and requires an amendment to the [,and t,Jse District Map to apply the overlay to as new property.
The amendment would also alloNv for NROGO allckcafions or transfers of' up to 70,,000 square
feet of floor area which cc)uld be used for a single structure. The amendment Would limit the
rna,,sinlUni development potential of the property to 70,000 square feet of non-residential floor
area and 86 units of deed restricted affordable 11OLISing. There is no relerence to limiting market
rate units. The full text of"the proposed amendment is included on, pages four and five of`the
written staff rep(:irt. It is important to note that the traffic study SLIbruittled with these applications
has not yet been approved. "I"he applicant has submitted a request in writing to have this item
scheduled before the Planning Commission in accordance with established rules and procedures
despite the study not yet being approved as requested by the Planning Director. Additionally, the
applicant has submitted vvritten ack rim I edge ment of the C01111ty"S insufficient balance of.
allbrclable RO(-'i0 allocations though the text in the, overlay does, provide f,,)r developrnent of up
to 86 affordable units on (lie property.
Ms. "Folpin: emphasized that the proposed development would allow for the clevelopirient of a
70,000 sqUare foot non-residential structure on the property. The applicant has made and is,
likely to continue to make assertions specific to a certain business. The County I-and
Development Code and C. Plan cannot and will not regulate the ownership of a property,
only the use. ']'here are no development controls in place that can ensure a specific business such
as Publix operates a structure or retains the property and theref"ore, amendments to the I,and
3
3697
Developilient Code cannot be reviewed based on a, specific business plan by as property owner" It
is Imperative to consider this request based on tile fact that the Proposed 70,000 squarc foot.
structure that could be allowed within this overlay inay, be any coannercial business,
"file principal issue when considering the amendment to create this overlay is, the language
regarding tile NR(1)GO regulations, Currently, the Land Development Code limits the arnount of
new commercial floor area to be allocated to as site to as maXimurn of 10,000 square feet per.
quarler. ']'his aniount, ot'square footage allocated quarterly works tca slow developriletitto ensure
deliberate and consistent developilient, Occurs within as given area. The overlay would allow f'or
the allocation Of 70,0100 square feet at one time. There is as sufficient balance ofrion-residential
floor area in tile NROGO bank and this COUld likely be achieved without issue, More
importantly, the arriendnient vvOLIld allovk, lot- a single structure to receive an allocation of III) to
70,000 square feet of conintercial floor area, Currently, the code does not allow for ail allocation
of new tion-residential floor area ilim WOUld expand tile structure to more than 10,000 square feet
Liniess, that, structure is located within the Urban Commercial zoning district, in which case tile
structure WOUld be firinted to as maxinIU111 ol: 50,000 square feet unless that Structure Is within ail
overlay established in a community rnastcr plan or Chapter 130 specifically allowing a structure
over 10,000 square feet, In this case, the proposed amendrilent would be establishing as new
overlay within Chapter 130 that would specifically allow a Structure over 10,01010 square feet,
"I'llere i,s an adoptive process when revievving aniendments to the land development code and the
zoning maps, A concept meeting Nvas held on .11,1111c, 28 where it was detertnitied that these
amendments would not have a C(Ailitywide impact. Two community meetings have been, held to
discuss this project. "Fliese items were presented to the Development Review Corruntinity Nvberc
tile chair signed a resolution reconiniending denjal of these amendnients, Today the files are
being presented to the planning Commission who will inake a recommendation to the BOCV,
who then will ultimately adlopt or deny these arneildITICIAS. Wheat reviewing an applicaLiorl for
ail anlendnient to the text of the County's Land Development Code and 1_,and Use District Maps,
the BO(ICI must consider the tactorS included in the written staff report. Staff must review for
consistency with the Comp Plan. the Favernier Livable ConimuniKeys plan ail(] the County"S
Currently adopted code. The code does not allow IM an aniendinellL to be approved which would
result in ain adverse change in COITIIIILIJlitN° character to the subarea tile proposed amendment
aff'ects or to any area in accordance %vith the Livable (.'onirn un i Keys Plan. It is for this reason
that N,%)Iien reviewing proposed text and map aniencirrients, staff 111LIst review for consistency with
the COM111LItlity c h r a aractend for ,in), potential changes to that existing character. 'Fllis is lilrther
reinforced in the Purpose of ScOrion 102-158 ofthe County's [,and Development Code. ]'his is
the that provides a ineans for changing the text of the LDC. It states, "T'his article is not
intended tea relieve partiCiAlar hardships not, to confer special Privileges or rights on any person
not, to pertrilL ail adverse change in coniniunity characteu. but only to make necessary ad
I JUStli"TtentS
in light of changed conditions or incorrect assumptions or determinations as deterill I tied by the
BOC'( Amendments must be reviewed, for consistency with the Comp [)Ian and code. The
Tavernier Livable OMITILIni Keys Plan is adopted and implemented as part, ofthe ''onip Plan. In
reviewing this C.,orni'llurliKeys Plan it is evident that the vision was to preserve the, heritage and
tianiral setting of the existing community with limited redevelopilient of commercial properties.
The ConitiluniKeys Plan goes so far as to include an action item that prohibits the designation of
4
3698
new commercial land Use districts beyond those already ct.Mtained in the jilaster plan in ()rder to
prevent further sprawl and strict commercial zoning.
It is important to note that commercial retail uses cOUld be pennitted, on this subject property and
would be consistent with the Underlying Suburban Coniniercial zoning, HoNNever, because the
property is also located within the TC overlay district,, staff niust review for consistency with the.
Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 LJ,S, I[ighway Corridor development standards and
guidelines \\,hich are adopted as part of Chapter 130 of the Land Development Code. 'I"hese,
guidelines include sliecific building types with the intent of guiding new clevelopment so that it
continues to define the character of"Tavernier and so that the massing scale and materials of new
structures are compatible kvith the existing character, The guidelines provide lot, the construction
of large conirrierciai buildings through file aggregation of smaller buildings. if' this Proposed
amendment is not approved, the property still does have a very high arnount of non-residential
floor area that could be constructed on the property in a manner that is consistent Nviffi these
guidelines,
"To further guide development within the Tavernier Corridor overlay, these guidelines utilize
transect zoning. These transects do tiot elirninate the standards set by the County's code or
zoning laws but are intended to help organize the regulations according to the transect with
which the property, belongs. This property is located within the subUrban traiisect Nvhich is
characterized by intermittent occurrences of' open space, residential development of diverse
densities, and industrial and general commercial uses following a pattern similar to that Found in
file mainland suburbs. Alternatively, the Lirban zone is the area where most of the retail and
commercial mired use developtnerit are found and it is the area that the community identities as
its center. To aid in the review for corisisteric,I y, of the proposed overlay with the existing
Tavernier C011111lUnity character, staff revievved the size of existing buildings of surrounding
properties within both the urban and suburban transect zones. T'he ability 'to construct a structure
of Lobo to 70,000 square f' et would result in one that is munch larger than existing structures within
the suburban zone and WOUld be inconsistent within the established community character. The
existing land development code, when coupled wit.11 the Tavernier Corridor Overlay (midelines
and the Tavernier Livable ComulLflu Keys Plans intentionally limits the maxil"111,1111 size of' each
struCtUre. Additional]),., the proposal is inconsistent \vith (:'ornp Plan Policy 10 1.5,,6, which states
that variOUS types of' commercial retaill and of uses inay be permitted at intensities that are
consistent with the con-un Lill it), character and (lie natural environtnent.
The text amendment, as drafted, proposes to relax the development restrictions on the property
WithOUt providing adequate data to support such as change nor demonstrate consistency with, tile
Tavernier Livable ConinuiniKeys Plan and existing coininunity character. It is anticipated that
the proposed overlay would result in an adverse effect in the character of the Tavernier
community, It is fim- the reasons described today and throughout the \vritteil staff reports that
stall recommends denial of the proposed amendment to the Land Develotiment (,".ode to establish
Section 1301-1,43. the Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay, and denial of the proposed Land Use
District Mal) Airienchment to apply the overlay to time subject Property.
Conitnissioner Ritz wanted to clarify that whether this ("ornmission relcornmends approval or
denial, this still goes before the 130CC He also wanted to confirni that if appro%,al is
5
3699
recorriniended. and assurning the BOCC recornniends approval, that nothing would get, built until
the applicant cornes back and actually proposed something, and asked it' that something Nvould
require a ma'gor conditional List', Ms, Tolpin stated that it would be specific on exactly what was
being proposed and in this case, yes, it would require a maJor conditional use pernrit if' the
applicant proposed a 70,000 square ftiot retail building. Corntnissioner Ritz asked ifthat would
also be U'Lle it' a 50,0O J square foot retail building were proposed, arid Ms. Tolpin stated that it
Would, The applicant has made certain assertions about building as Publix and affordable
housing, but they would have to come back and actually show exactly what they were going to
do. Commissioner NeUgent asked that in light ofthis, ifthis were denied today, ifthis part ofthe
request Would still go before the BOCC. Ms. Tolpin stated that it would, unless the applicant
amended it, and it would be noted that the Plarm'drig Conimissicm recommended denial, Chair
Scarpelli then asked to hear from the applicant,
Mr. Bart Smith, representing the applicant, stated that a very specific pro.ject is being proposed
for a unique parcel not only in the Upper Keys but in the Florida Keys. This is, the Centex parcel
"Inch is 20 acres having 15 acres of scarified land, which is 600,00() Square fleet. There are
probably less than five parcels left that are this size that Nave the zoning Of" Suburban
Commercial; and there's probably only one. The other parcels are Industrial, but fie has not
fi.-nuld any in Monroe County that meet this size and scope, So 600.000 square feet, based on the
Current Suburban Commercial zoning, has a potential of 152,000 square feet of conirriercial and
can do Ul) to 216 units ol'affordable housing, Thiere's a mention about no limitations on market.
rate. Suburban Commercial only allows for market rate if it's nonconforming and "'as built
before the code. There is no niarket rate on the parcel. Fhe applicant would, be willing to add as
provision that, no developi-rent of market rate could ever happen in the IIJ(Ure. The applicants are
the Toppino, faindy and the Hurwitz. fancily. Everyone is familiar with the Toppino family and
their dedication to this conn'Truniq, They have looked at different sites throughout the Keys to
try to bring affordable housing to the comi-nunity. Most times the land costs are such that it
doesn't make sense. Mr. Smilth gave prior examples. Also, this is not a(Tordable housing, it is
NNOrkforce housing where tenants are required to be employed in, Mimiroe County. This parcel*s
very rectangular size and being Situated on I J,S, I allows the corninercial venture to buy down
the land to build the 86 U[IiICS ol'workt'orce housing. The applicant is not here today because a
50.1000 square foot building isn't allowed. Regardless of the size of`the building, all commercial
retail is required to go for as maJor conditional use, The applicant is here solely requesting an
allocation over 10,000 square feet, All other provisions are to limit the use of the property, to the
greatest extent possible to giVC the C0111111LIllity ccilainty that this is what is going to occur.
Everyone iniderstands the Unknown is the most concerning part.
This parccl's, potential is 152,000 square fcet of' coniniercial retail. This limits it to (lie store
which is as total of 70,000 square feet which is as great reduction, Mr. Smith went into why the
store was important to (fie Florida Keys as as whole. r Flie sole request of the overlay that is of'
importance is to get a 70,000 square foot allocation. The development of tile store will come
back before the Commission. The allocation is being requested in one part, and the applicant is
agrecing to limitations on the properly. as to the amount of total squat-e footage 'that could ever
be built, and limiting to 86 units of"workibrce housing. ]'his is, legislative at this Juncture and
looks for COTISiStency with the (I ojyip Plan and Principles for Guiding the Development. The
C I orrip Plan in no place prohibits a store on this type of acreage ot'70,000 square feet. Then the
6
3700
Cornp Plan adopts the Livable Cornmuni Key's plan which in the Suburban zone does not prollibit
a store of'this size. It has tile dimension and development criteria in the Urban zone and states
that commercial uses should be the sanle as Suburban oil the mainland. Mr. Smith provided
(10CLUnentation of other PUblix store sizes throughout the state. The Principles, for Guiding
Development are Supposed to be reviewed as a whole, Management ol' Land Use has been
identified as being inconsistent, but the reality, is putting more restrictions oil the property
provides more management (,)I' land uses. And, as, many are aware, one of'the Principles is for
the provision cal'providing affcyrdable housing. Mr. Smith listed related prior court cases, stating
that ultimately, the courts decided for afR)rdable 11OUSing in every, case, so it is consistent vvith
the I'll-inciples for Guiding I)evelopment. Who owns it can't be, limited, but the intensity call be
limited. The Livable Conirnurn Keys limits it to only commercial low or inediurn intensity which
is vvhy that limitation wasn't put into the anlendirient because it already exists. This creates the
Tavernier Key Commercial )verlay District allowing the Public grocery store and liquor store..
The design is, not cortiplete but will corne he6ore the C'orrimission at, a later date. Fhe applicant
has provided the purpose, intent, bOUndary, tile NROGO allowance for the allio cation, subject to
all other land development regulations, and provides maximurn limitations which control tile
land even. niore, 'flat is consistent vvith the Principles k,)r iniding Development. This proposes
workf'orce 11OUSing buildings in the back and oil the side. The development is consistent vvith
community character.
Alternatively. the applicant could propose an allocation of 50,000 square 1"eet by just doing the
LUD which would not be legislative, and because it's under the FL,UM, tile applicant nleets tile
reciLr1irernents. The proposed s,ize is related to having additional storage in cases of"emergencies
sand
d storrils, which is being done in other coastal communities. Mr, Smith detailed tile sizes of
Publix stores in both. Suburban and rural areas of tile state for size comparison, This item is
solely to create an oveday that allows the allocation in one allocation and in exchange, hillit tile
aniount of'sqUaTe fbotage ot'developirient on, the property providing additional land use controls
than currently exist and most importantly, providing the workt'orce hOUSing. Typically, traffic
studies are not done at this stage but the applicaant has ,iddressed this and identified trips that may
need to be mitigated. The applicant's position is that by building this it, will actually reduce
lengths ol'trips because people don't have to drive as far, but it is within at least five percent of
level of service C'. ']"he applicant is willing to do mitigation but that is done at tile, building
perillit stage. The traffic study is not necessary at this stage but Nvas required. Mr. Smith asked
the Coninlission reconlinerid approval.
Chair Scarpelli asked I'Or Conimission ooninlents or questions, C.oninnssioner Dernes clarified
that one of'the court cases that Mr. Smith, had cited frorn 2003 with a proposal fi.ir a development
offol'Rumvay ITS, which happened to be an accident potential zone, the court had sided with the
Navy, so it wasn't every single case. Chair Scarpelli then asked for public comment.
Mr. Jarnes Anderson purchased his liorrie in 1982 and is vehemently opposed to the PUblix
complex and housing, lie has enjoyed his, peace and quiet and is very concerned about a
development destroying property values, increasing crime, and additionally burdening
emergency services, lie had participated in the Livable Corninuni Keys pro'ject and it WOUid
seem like a %vaste of time having worked on the LC13, Mr. Anderson stated that the (brilier
C(.mirnissioner, the Tavernier Historical Gr(Alp and everyone would be opposed to this and asks
7
3701
the Corinmission to deny the Publix as there already is one at TaVeT-JliCr TOWI-1. The traffic Study
has not been completed yet. I le Would like to preserve the heritage of"I'avernier,
Captain Spenser Bryan, Monroe County Sheriff"s 01'Fice, stated that on behalf or Sherif Rarnsay
and the Sherif'rs Office, they Support the all'ordable housing as it has been an issue for a long
time. There is a problem keeping deputies because it*s too expensive to live down here, s o the
more affordable housing, the better. It is not i just the Sheriffs Department but I teachers,
and any other essential personnel, There are three Jads in the County and the one in the Middle
Keys is not staffed. They have clepulies vvho want to live clown here and be part of the
C011-111111flity but Unfortunately, can't afford to be here. I'liese same iSSLIes, about PUbliX were
brought (if) both in MaratIlon and Islarnorada, Understanding the traffic suld), has not yet been
done, the same thing was said about those Publix stores causing traffic iSSUes. Ile does not
believe it vvill. The light at Burton Drive that has been installed will cluell some ol"the problems
in this area. The Publix in Islarnorada has caused zero issues as Ear as traflic which is crazy
because everything in Islaniorada c auses a traffic issue. The Sheriff's Office supports this
project and hopes the Corritnission Nvill consider it.
Mr. Richard Barreto spoke Ior the. Tavernier Community Association and thanked file
Conlillissioll for agreeing to host the ineeting at the Murray Nelson Center, Ile has reviewed the
Written pUblic comments fig-ulna 26 individuals and two community organizations. Additionally,
oil June, 14, 2022, the TCA hosted a meeting where 80 residents of the community attended,
There weric" countless responses in person and by zoont at the DRC meeting and the two
community meetings preceding this C01111niSSi011 meeting. Those comments rnade verbally are
not part of the Conlin i ss ion's inaterial, but (.)Lit of all of those corriments there was otily one
individual that supported the commercial aspect cff this development. That is very telling
because the applicant will have you believe that this pro'ject will bring 111LIC11 needed service to all
area with filTlited options, and that It is needed, but the people who live and work here are singing
a very differcrit tune. We are tell6lg You that we understand the proposal and have plenty of
options. More is not necessarily better. We value Our 'FaVC11lier comillUllity, Please listen to Lis.
The level three trat"fic study is required where the applicant hailed to respond to several
outstanding issues, and has elected alternatively to have the Board consider it without the belief-it
of'the approved study. That art approved level three traffic Study is required, and given that it
has not been submitted to this Conlinission, that in and of i(sclf`!sh(,)Ldd be grounds for denying
this proposed arnendment. Reading further into the applicariCs response to the stall'report, it's
clear that as lot of'these layers Nvc've been going through over the last year the applicant reels is
unnecessary and all inconvenience, ']'hey would rather you Just push this ol'I"to the BOCC, let
them review it and sill it all Out in the context o'a major conditional use perinit. While that
would be convenient, that is not how the system works. The systems is designed to protect this
coninlUllity and our environmetit. Every layer of' review, including this one, has a critically
impoil-tarn l"unction, This Comillission's recottimendation has meaning. The proposed
COMITICITial overlay district violates the Tavernier L(T and essentially creates a new commercial
land use district in direct violation and totally inconsistent vvith Section 313 of' the Tavernier
LCP. This section prohibits, the designation of' rim commercial land use districts bey4and that
contained in the master plan. there is no such Tavernier conn'llercial overlay contained in the
CUrrent master plan. TherCs a lot ot'ado about affordable housing but that is not the priority, of
this developnicni. The corru-nercial aspect is in plivase one and is the priority, It will do nothing
8
3702
but aggravate workforce 11OUSing for quite some tirne to come with really, no guarantees that tire
affbi-dable 11OUSing will ever be built. There will be an adverse conimUllity change to Tavernier
if the amendment is approved and it defies logic to think otherwise. The only building larger
than this is Mariner's Hospital. The fact that Publix has been able to build sh-nilar-sized
buildings throughout the State off,lorida is riot'justification to build one here in Tavernier. The
proposed amendment is not consistent with tile Cornp flan. This commercial building does not
fit in any way with the comniunity character ol'Tavernier, lie asks the Commission to Support
the Planning Department's recommendation as they have conducted a detailed review of' the
applicable provisions of tile, laws and concluded that the C.ornmission should refuse the approval.
He supports that Conclusion and thanked the Connnission For the opportunity to sPeak.
Ms. Joan Scholz stated that it is riot because of the Unknown that she is, speaking today., as Mr.
Smith referenced in his statements, but it is because of the building overdevelopinent, the
ecosystern, traffic, 11ragile environment and the water situation heing experienced now with four
miles of pipeline being replaced. the three water main breaks, the lack of"reserve that Nve have,
and the Aqueduct knows we are over capacity of building. We don't need another Publix, which
is a mile froin VVinn Dixie and a f \v miles from tile other Publix. Ms, Scholz thanked the
Planning Departinent llor having spent so much time on this, She is, in agreement with the
Planning Department and asks tile Conirnission to deny this application and give a
recommendation of-no" to tile, BOCC.
Mr. Frank Pla was riot available to speak.
Ms. 1,inda Norman lias ll,ad a Itome in the area f6r over 45 years. Her shopping has improved
over those years. In tile beginning there was a grocery store called Clara and Doug*s \Olich is
11OW Sunrise Market. That was as mile from her honie when Winn Dixie opened t\yvo rniles fi-om
her home which offered a wide variety of products, Whin Dixie is an comfortable bike ride if'she
doesn't want to drive her car, She questions why the developer would want to build a huge
Publix store only one mile from the Whin Dixie and less than ten miles From their existing, so(:m
to be expanded store at rnile marker 101.5. It doesnt niake sense and its existence NVOUld be a
travesty to the small, quiet town ot-Favernier., She read earn article ab(.)Llt as PUblis. Supermarket to
be built in GainesviHe proposed to be 55,000 square floor, sirialler than the one proposed iln
Tavernier, and will anchor as 46,000 square fool shopping center in Gainesville which will
become a hub for as population ofabOUt 141,00() people. ']'his is a 64,000 square foot store to be
supported by the entire islands of tile Florida Keys Nvith a population ol'83,000. Most of tile cars
are driving through Tavcmicr heading to Key West or Miami. Key L,argo l'isheries has their
main niarket at mile marker 100, and they opened as smaller location for the residents in
'Favernicr, and the town could riot support that little shop and they have now closed after only
two months, What will happen when PUblix finds OL11 a PLiblix ofthat size cannot be supported
in Tavernier. We're going to have a show of' as building sitting there, She wholeheartedly
objects to this development.
Ms. Sue Miller of' Islamorada stated that this does riot affect only Tavernier, rather all of tile
entire Florida Keys. ']'here is too mUCII traffic and not enough water. There is an aff(-�rdablc
housing issue but this 70,000 square foot retail space %vould USC more than 86 eniployces. A
store this size is going to increase the cicniand for affordable housing. She doesn't expect to see
9
3703
as lot of Sheriff's deputies and firefighters and other eniployees there. The applicant says they are
going to mitigate the traffic. Ifthey have corn e magic to mitigate tr-affic iiii all S1101.11d hear about
it because we already, need a lot of traflic triftigation, The fact that the applicant is c1ciing an
affordable housing proJect seerns to be the controlling thing here, when in order tio dio this they're
required to have earn affordable housing component, It is secondary to (heril but it shouldn't be
secondary to the community, It should be phase one., as she is concerned that as phase two it
may riever get done. This is not something acceptable to the collUllUllityl character ot"Favernicr
or there vvouWn't be this many people here participating. Ms, Miller thanked the Commission
for listening.
Mr. Burke Cannon represents the I"ecleration of Homeowners as Dottie Moses is out and could
not rilake it. Mr. Cannon agreed iiivith everything staff recommended, The lawyers have never
come up with a statistic that says we have this many people, boat hands, teachers, firefighters,
and how rinich affordable housing do we need, It seems like we sho Uld know ]low many people
we have employed here and how, inany are not living here beicause of this affordable I-LOUSing
problem. He Understands the Sheriff's Office has as problem and they can't afford it, bait this iS
going to be endless. '['his kind of proJect won't cover aff'ord,ablic housing t'on' everybody here.
The I"ederation mernbers voted UllatlillIOUSly to (.)b.ject to this application Im a map aniendment
and ()verlay Similar lleighborhoods, live vvithin the Tavernier LC P and the Federation is in full
support oil' their ob'jections to the overlay district. It i I n s obvious, the Conli Lill ity intended to
maintain a tai saiall town, cornmercial footprint, The opening vision statement expresses the goal
clearly. N11r. Cannon read the goal to the (onlrins4on. The existing code prollibits a quarterly
allocation of non-residential floor area of' more than 10,000 square feet. 'I"his proposal is for
70,000, which is a Inige difTerence that rejects the intent of`tine corrinlUnity'S wishes as reflected,
in the 1,01, which expresses a desire to redevelop at a village scale. One of the ICUN Submitted
addressed the large arnount of tflanning and illpUL that NVellt into the, Taviernicr LCII. This was
not an overnight thing. What is the point of'planning for the I'Loure and gathering C01111111.11lity,
input ()n coning, it'each and every development request, for expallSion is granted'? Offering an
exception to the 1111C f'or this developinent encourages nlore requests fiver spot' zoning, Mr,
Cannon reiterated that there is no traffic Study, and another ilern in the 1,CP is the safety aspect
all(] that this cannot cause more dangerous traffic problems. This is all historic district, The
applicant, who is not fi-orn Tavernier, assurries they knowi what's best for the Tavernier
C0111 ill Lill ity even if the Tavernier C()UTUTILILlity does not Nvant what they have to) offO% Nis Burke
,,
asked the ('onimission to aHow the I,av7t,�Jrjier Ca,)jlnjljjnity s; vision to maintain the existing snlafl
IoNvil C0111171L.Inity character by limiting the development ofcornmercial propetlies. r This overlay,
does not tit that vision and the Federation reconnnends denial.
Mr. Andrew Tobin thanked the Conlinission for having the hearing in Key Largo as it is
important the Corrit-nissioners get to know the area. Nlr. Tobin came to the Keys in '7'6, was a
prosecutor for three years, was the Countys first Zoning pr0SCCllt0r, went through the 1995
(I omp ["]all efforts, litigated the 1992 Cornp Plan, litigated in state and federal court on, zoning
iSSUcs and has read maybe as thousand cases involving zoning and land use. There is no case law
or authority that supports this, Doing something bad to get to something good is not part of the
criteria the ( orrarnSSIon IS CXJ)eCted to follow. The proposed PUblix good which is the econornic
engine for affordable housing is not as factor in, the Commission's decision whether to create a
new zoning category. This is as 700 percent increase in the floor areas ratio oil' a development
10
3704
within the Tavernier L,C T area. 'I he I drban Residential maXill'11,11.11 is 50,000, and file developer is
asking for 70.0t 00,. Mr. "I I obin SUggeStS tile, 0-mirmssion not overlook the Comp [),[at) arid the
slow, small development Potential vision. The whole purpose (:&the allocation system was that
orre developer would not suck up all of`the allocatkms for as particular area, arid with this, that is
going OUt the \vuldow. "Flie applicant is asking the Commission to overlook all of'the existing
laws, the Comp Plan, the 1,01 and basically saying, we have good intentions. Mr. Tobin
represented PUblix in Islamorada and it took there six or seven years to finally get development
approval because Islarnorada also has very restrictive zoning regulations, ']"his is bad precedent
and %ii-Al"obin urges the Clonnnission to t'ollow staff's recommendation.
Mr, Allan Aldridge, a Tavernier resident for over 30 years, is on the "Faveriner CorrilliUllity
Association board, lie supports his friends and neighbors in the community who have spoken.
One of the most Critical infi-aStIAICtUIT issues today is water and tile water pipeline. Currently, an
organization called APANA that does commercial and industrial property evaluations R)r
resources, states that as large grocery store uses about 350,000 gallons or rnore of water per
month. individual residences, on average, use 300 gallons a day, multiplied by 86 11OUSing units
is about 774 ()lr x) gallons of water a month. Together, this is the development ot'a property that
will use upwards of 1. niffliori gallons ofwater per, nionth, in a pipeline that has already in three
locations in this area had significant line breaks, in fact ruptures, of the pipe, one being almost
eight feet long, Mr, Aldridge is all engineer and stated this is a big deal. 'file FKAA Director
recently ill interviews made it very publicly kilmvii that it's going to take over tell years (fl`
prowlects to refflace our critical water infrastructure pipeline supplying the Keys arid lie doesn't
know where lives going to get tire money to do that. Adding Lhis to all of the other things, that
will be considered in the next Left years that will add more and more water Usage is something the
Commission should take into account when reviewing this pro.ject and the several others,that will
Conte before them.
Ms. Phyllis Mitchell thanked the ( onimission and asked thern to please rernernber as They're
making their decision that they represent the people of the I'lorida Keys. More development
means more traffic. More traffic is a huge safety factor both oil all everyday [eve] from people
jumping oil (lie highway after waiting too long to get oil, to [lie ability to evacuate the Keys
NO-rich is now at a very dangerous level, Nis, Mitchell asked flic Commission to give this deep
thought, 1"Acellent points have been expressed this morning, She is confident the Cortimlission
will do a good,j(:�)b,
Ms. 'I ammy Freitag stated that she was speaking for herself and Nir. Frank I larrington, please
do not destroy the 'Favenlier I fistoric District. She lives in her grandparents' home which Nvas
purchased in the sixties. It has been a nightinare to get Out of her street With the light at 13mlon
novv. It will be ITILIC11 more of a[ nighttliare with another light l'or a PUblix. She understands the
need for affordable housing but PUI)liX is not necessary. She has no problem going to any
grocery store, arid there is a liqUOl- store at "Favernier Town arid everywhere. Please keep the
Conlillunity as is.
Ms. Lisa Reatil stated she had nothing additional to add.
11
3705
Ms, Lisa Benriett. thanked the Coiritnission and 'tile COR1111unity. When she first carne down in
19,68 there Nvas, only, the Shopper and Montey's. She dearly loves those memories of growing Lill
in the Floe-ida Keys. Everything she's heard so far abOLIt the infrastructure and whaCs going oil
concerns her very ITHIC11. She hopes and prays,the (4.)rrarnssion makes the right decision.
Mr. Tomi Raffanello of' Islamorada represeins (lie Islarnorada ConLIMILlity Alliance, 'I here isn't
ITILICII snore lie can add as fir as contev cis the others were right oil the rnoney,. The Tro' horses
hors
of affordable housing is a myth. There i�s nothing ,affordable abOLIt it. The staftitc needs to go
[lack to Tallahassee and be revised. Right now, a ("zin-tily of three or four making 140 to) $150,000
qualifies for affordable housing and that's not where wc want to be. He was as fed and a cop and
it took hirn 30 years to make that kind of money. As to Publix, sometimes you have to look, at
the need for something. It' lie stood oil this root' he could see the other two Public stores from
here, Thcre is no need, Boil it dok\n to a simple thing, where is the need for a 70,000 square
FOOt PUblix in a town like this, The traffic and water IS (An OfCC)utrol. '[-'here is no need, and it's
art easy decision it' file Cominission really takes a look at it. It is an adverse change in the
citizens' lives and lie asks the Con-n-nission to do the right thing arid deny this.
Ms. Karen Rodriguez who has lived here since 2009 stated that everything she has heard sounds
good, but one of the underlying things to renietrit.)er is they want to build 86 affordable IIOLISIIlg
units behind all of that comrnercial property. Why not JUSIr turn it into as park arid have the
affordable housing in it. That's it.,
Mr, kflin i IoNve stated that lie has nothing to add that hasn't already been said, He has scanned
through the Planning Department's report and was struck by the arnornit of"work, and intelligence
and training and all of those things that went into pix)LILICirig it, in([ lie thanked the Manning staff.
TWO things leapt out at him and that wvas the fairly long list of inconsistencies with the Favernier
I-C11, arid the Monroe County Corrip Plan ,lid, as bUTIC11 of Florida Statutes, Arid then, a list of'
requests and concerns voiced by the Planning Department and community residents about filings
it needed to learn or didn't understand. After each one of those iterris there was as comment froill
the staff' saying no response l�ias been received from the applicant, NIL, I lowe's main point has
more to do with file nurnber of people present today, This is what democracy is all abOUt,
Average Citizens who live in this C01111111,11lity are ntaking their voices heard. About half the
people here have referred to the, Comp Plan, the "Favernier LCP and the I'lorida state laves that
according to the Planning Department niake this application seen) to be inappropriate and worthy
ot'dienial. These dOCUITICIIIS have corne fl-0111 11OUrs and hours of work, tinie and money over the
years by people creating a visit,:)n for its connilunity. There are niaybe as hundred people here but
there are many hundreds more who arc SUPPOI-firig LIS who are riot here, those who have passed
on or moved aw,ay, but they are here too in spirit with their thoughts and visions and ideas for
flow (his comill Lill i ty should be. Mr. I lc we wanted to recognize that many people have led to this
rnoment and lie hears their voices saying this is riot appropriate. Oil a snore positive note, that
piece of property i,s al'i opportunity to make sornething appropriate for this COLTILTIL]Ility He IlOpCS
the Planning Cominission can spend more tirne on planning for that piece ol'property, rather tllaln
on legal defense, ,ante wly that will benefit the owner cirld the community.
Cuts. Patricia McGrath of' Cirassy Key stated that her concern, akmg with those abOLn F KAA is
abOLIt the storrilwater rLiflOff and the sewage that will be created with either one of the
12
3706
developments. FKAA has stood up against losing local control of their authority. Both
aftbrciable and work6orce housing are most impoilant, Publix can afford to do the workforce
housing first, It seems the citizens are being threatened, watch out or we will do whatever
alternative we, have. Ms. McGrath thanked the Nanning I)epartment R..)r the massive number of
hours putting their rep(m,t together. She Would like to see the Corniiiission comae forth with
zoning and property Use regulations that would not even allovv, someone like PUblix to comae in
and, waste all of our taxpayer dollars. Ms. McGrath thanked the Conitnission.
Mr. John Magill from Richmond, Virginia has lived here 26 years, went to Virginia
ommonwealth University and has a masters degree it) platining,. 'File biggest disaster of' all
planning is the saying -bUild it and, they will come," I le wvas as proJect inspector on as 300,000
square foot auditorium and civic center arena and as 600,000 pro.1ject, and a carpenter on a civic
center town inall, both of' which are in the process of beings demolished, and those were built
only, 30 years ago. Ile hates to see (his happen. 'I'lle whole place should be built Nvith affordable
housin g. Mr. Magill thanked the Commission for allowing hires to speak.
Nis, Sylvia, (last narne Unknown) COUld not connect via Zoorn to speak,
Chair Scarpell'i closed public corinnCilt, Mr. W()IfC Suggested the applicant be allowed to rebut
the comnients and then allow the Planning staff to wrap Lip. Ms. (I ioffiari indicated there were
two more hands raised to speak in the Zoom audience. Mr. Robert Hilton all(] Ms. Lynn Hilton
and Ms. Fina (last flarLIC unknown) dropped their hands. Public comment was then officially
closed.
Mr. Bart Smith reiterate(] in rebuttal that this is a unique property that is presently all industrial
concrete block plant. C.'ornmercial uses are permitted. Large buildings are permitted oil
conit'nercial uses. There is no change in the zoning district. All that is being requested is that all
allocation greater than 10,010() square Feet be allocated to the property, It does not change file list
of Permitted Uses, the conditional uses or the requirements that this goes back to. What it does
change is it allows restrictions above and beyond What the code has to be put oil this, property,
The applicant has agreed that all, tlicy, can do is get this, allocation and that's it, which means no
market rate h()USi1lg. The applicant Nvill come back and satisfy every condition. There is
nowhere in the Comp Plan. tile [,('11 or the Land Developmcnt ("ode that piollibits buildings of
this nature. In fact, it expressly provides they are aHovved. I IC Understands the statements about
COITI 111 Lill ity character, but that C01111111.11lity: character is defined by the property and what its
allowed uses are in these documents. These uses are allowed. Sometimes file tougher decisions
are the ones that need to be inade. In this case, hike every tinge, there's something that we want,
We want Nvorkforce housing, but we have to have an economic engine to drive it. "I'llis is what.
call be done on this property, it is perrilissible and within (it(,, realm of`the Conli-nission's ability
to recorlit-riend approval. The Commission will have, another shot to look at every part of this.
the traffic study is at the finish line. A traffic study fin' a land use text anierichilent that doesn't
change anything in the code is, not a rcqUirement. The applicant is doing it now to provide the
dOCUITIC11tatiOn. It is as requirement of' the conditional use approval and will be finalized vvell
I
before that, Mr, Srnitli asked the Corrunission to recommen ) approval to the BOCC If' the
(7ornniission wants, as stronger cilAidition to parts of' the %vorkforce housing. the applicant is
13
3707
arrienable to those. Any statements as to the water supply or levels of service fie vehernently
disagrees with and they are made solely to say no to anything.
Ms. Finny S ceper, Sei Directo f'Planingid I nvirornliental Resources, stated that she
was, not sure it' Mr. Smith's was coril'used about the Land Development Code requirernent lor
the size of the structure or it' lie was making as separate argument, but he had stated there is
nothing in the Land Development Code that WOUld prohibit as building ol"this size. 'chat is not
true. Part of'what the applicant is asking f'or is an NRO(,,.iO allocafi(:)n that WOUld go to a building
that is larger than 10,000 square 'feet.. Il'YOU cannot get the NROGO for as building that's larger.
thart 10.000 square feet, then you cannot build a building that is larger than 10,000 square feet,
theref'ore, it is not allowed by the Land Devc1olinient Code. It is not written Into the Zoning
category necessarily but it: is iniplemented by the NI OGO code. 'Is, 'Folpin has presetited all of
this and it's in the staff report but M'S. Schen'llier wanted to make sure the (.','onn-nission
understood these points.
Another assertion has bccn that there is no place I'Lir the County to be reviewing C011"U'LlUlIlly
character in this process, 'That is entirely untrue. Section, 102-58 ol'the 1-and Development Code
is specifically ab0LIt aniendi-nerus to the Land Developrilent Code, and the purpose states, "'I'llis
article is not intended to relieve particular hardships, not- to confer special privileges, or rights 011
any person, nor to permit all adverse change in C0111 III Lill,it),' character." Then f"Lifther down, in the
Section Under the procedures, action by the Board ol' County (..'onnnissioncrs, "'The Board rnay
consider the adoption cal' an ordinance enacting as anIp arnendtnent if' it meets the l'6llo%Ning
l'actors." And there are seven factors listed which includes the Principics l"or GUidillg
Development, which ml% Sillith has pointed Out. But it' you continue it also Says Linder that
section, "III no event shall an aniendmen( be approved which shall result iii an adverse change ill
corruminitv character to the Subarea which a proposed amendment aflectsx or to any area in
accordance with as 1-iveable ''oulLnUIliKeys Master Ilan purstmin to the findings ol'the BOCCI"
Again, that's all Under amendments. It's not U11LICT the conditional use permit review, It's under
aarncndllrients to the code. SO COITUTILAI'lily character is definitely as ilactor in the ConimissiOn's
consideration of"this,
Going back. LIJ) W the first Part (ruder arnendmerItS Under (lie purpose, to paraphrase, this article is
not iritelided to confer special privileges or rights on any person, We've, heard a lot abOut PUbliX
today. YOU are not actually reviewhig specifically for Publix, You are reviewing for a large
reta i I budding, And, the way the kinguage is dral"ted, it doesn't specifically say commercial
retail., it says non-residential. So the way this is drafted it ",ould allow as non-residential structure
of'ups to 70,000 square feet oil the site, we clop knc,)w which retailer, we don't even knovv if it is
retail. It could be light industrial, It could be all kniazon warchOUSC. It could be whatever, we
don't know. The point is you don't actually knil-M who the tenant of'that building is going to be
or the owner in the I'Liturc. So when reviewing aniendments in particular N/OLI need to think ab(Alt,
the larger picture arld what would be possibly allowed.
That has played inter the traffic Study as well, PvIs. Schemper agreed with Mr. Smith that the
traffic study is all pact approved so it is not U'Lle that they have not submitted as traffic Study, Staff
has reviewed most of'that. It's really come down to mitigation, But, it'the ''ornniission reviews
this just, because this is a PUbliN. that could be confierring special privilege on an individual
A
3708
person or entity. Also, regarding PUbfix, Mr. Smith gave sizes of nURIber of other 1"Ublix stores
in Florida, but none of those were island PubliN, stores,, nor the sizes of the other PUblix stores in
the Keys, already. From Ms. Schemper's knowledge, the Islat-norada store is about 35,000 square
feet, and the other Key Largo Publix getting rebuilt at Trade Winds Plaza is about 60,,000 square
fect, so that one wc)uld be about the saine size as the one proposed Iteie. Ifflart of the argument
is that this can be sonic sort offlost-hurricane supply chain systern, if the other Key I-argo PUbliX
is also sery ing as that, then are both necessary,. Again, you are not reviewing;JUSt for Publix so
there is no guarantee that something like that would be Put in place. l,b is has not been
designated as some sort ofernergency rnanagernent facility.
Ms. Scheiriper had been surprised at hoNv strong the argUITICut carne across regarding this retailer
being the economic engine needed f'(..)r the aftrdable housing, The nicat of the amendment
allows the large non-residential structure, It"s really not written to guarantee that any housing is
there. The question would be for the applicant. it' they would be willing, to Nvi-ite into the
arnendment sorniething about the affordable units being required where the R(.),GO,s are coming
froni, what happens if you don't get the ROGO allocatio'ns, et cetera.
Mr. Smith responded that they would certainly write in that they \vere required because i,f they're
required to be C'Wd, their the applicant has put thernselives in a position that if they don't get
thern built. then the other part cant OCCUr, Ms. Schernper asked if the owner would then be
sowing the ('aunty bCCaUSe the applicant wasnt given RO(iO allocations, Mn, Smith stated it
would be up to the applicant to obtain the devOopment rights. They have talked to the Village of
Islamorada who is amenable lo do ail 110A to provide the Units because it's in their back yard.
So, by, any mechanism necessary but the applicant is required to obtain the development rights.
Ms. Schemper asked if Islarnorada bad 86 affordable ROGOs or market rates. Mr, Smith stated
they had the 300 July ones. Ms. Schernper stated that currently, those are, not allowed to be
transferred to Monroe ("(".arnty peer the Monroe C'OUnty ordina r ordinance. M . Smith stated that that
�
ordinance was not effective yet and was on appeal. Ms. Scherriper stated that was the Saar lor
Islarnorada. Mr, Smith stated that as soon as the hurricane evacuation was addressed, then that's
final, whereas Monroe ('aunty's was appealed on, on numerOLIS grounds. But the applicant
acknovOedges tlwy have to be able to get the development rights, Ms. Schemper asked it' that
Would be somethin i
g the applicant would be willing to write into the anlendinent. Mr. Smith
confirmed that, to be correct. it w,vas always, the intent on that. The two parts work in unison with
the conimercial retail buying down the cost of the land to make the affordable housing feasible.
Chair Scarpelli asked ifthat wouldn't be more appropriately part ol'a conditional use instead of a
land use amendment. Ms. Schernper stated that because the purpose of this land development
code amendinent and Nvhat it"s doing is allowing as larger building, and the argument is that the
reason for the larger building is to fund the affordable housing, that it's all one big picture,. "]'his
has been done Nvith other pro"jedS, but tl')(,' full J)iCtUre of'the develop meilL plan very ofte'll gets
written into the actual policy.
Ms. Scheniper also wanted to make sure the Commission understood that the way the
an.lendnieta is currently written, it's actually putting nlore limits in sonic vvays on the,
development allowed oil that property. Whether that's in ternis ONIUrnber ofunits, total arrIOUnt
01" SCIUare footage, whether smaller buildings or larger buildings, the total aulOUut of square
15
3709
fbotage right now is written in to be limited. BUI it is also written to himit. which uses. NIS,
Schemper wanted the Conlinission to be aware that other uses that WOUld normally be allowed in
Suburban Commercial do include things like office space, restaurant space, cormlilercial
recreation, public buildings, parks, public infrastructure, institutional, et cetera, So there are two
directions to go. L'ither it's written that non-residential uses are allowed LIP to 70,000 square Im
building or ii'they want to he specific that it has to be corntnercial retail, that's another direction
to go, or if'they want, to list additional uses, She Nvas not actually sure what the intent of the
applicant was because right now, the purpose says, commercial retail, but the list of'requirements
says non-residential LISCS,. Mr. Srnith stated that the purpose is con,imercial retail. Ms. Schernper
stated that was somedurig to keep in mind, it' (lie Commission wanted it limited to commercial
retain or left open to other things that Could possibly go there With it SUCh as public buildings,
institutional, ('Afice, et cetera,
Corrunissioner NCLAgent asked if it Would be fair to say that ill'this was denied, something is go Ing
to be built L'm the 20 acres by somebody. Ms, Schemper stated son-lething would probably be
built there, 'ves. It would have to be in smaller buildings. It could be more units., more square
t'oowge, but smaller individual buildings, That is where the conflict is between what is being
proposed and h(..)w the current code is written. The maxi"ILH11 square footage that could go oil the
site right now is about 1201,0100 square 1ect. Ms, Tolpin stated that it ranges based on the
intensity, 1roni 91.000 for high intensity up to 212,000 square feet for a low-intensity use. Ms.
Scheniper addcd that that would all have to be in individual smaller buildings, It could be
developed as a combined development plan, but it would all be smaller individual indcpcndent
buildings, C"()Irraln
issioner RjtZ COLIfirmed that Was alillost twice the aniount of square fbotage
that could be built there if' they built it in smaller units. Mr, Smith, added that the applicant is
corurnitted to die 1.1111tS, that certainly before the (I 0 ol' the non-residential, that. the
units would be CO'd, but the final reconimendation Could Includes that language with direction
fear staffto finalize that language, and he would request approval with that language.
("hair Scarpelli wanted to clarity that it would have be a bunch of smaller stores, bent that they
Would also only be able to be developed ()lie per quarter at 10,000 square feet, Ms, Schclilper
stated that would be correct, it would be slower. Conli-nissioner Denies asked it large building
was defiried in the ("'onip Plan or it' that was just sub,jective. Ms. Schemper responded that It's
greater than I0,000 square feet. This limitation is, not in the Conip Plan Much is why they're
able to reCILICS1,this through the Land Development ode only. The Land Dcvclopment Code can
be more restrictive than the (lonip flan, but this does not require a Comp plan aLlienchilem, It's
in the NROGO section of the code, "Maxin11.1111 floor area per structure, a structure Shall [lot
receive an allocation," that's the NROGO SkjUare footage, -shalf not receive all allocation that
expands the structure tO more than. 10,000 square fect of non-residential floor area, excluding as
structure in the Urban C,ornmercial land use district.*' where those can go up to 50,000, "and a
structure m/ithin an overlay district established in a coninflUllity jilastcr plan in which the
maxiMUL111 shall be governed by the master plan Wapplicable, or within Chapter 130 specifically
allowing SUCh a structure of'over 10,00101 squaric Ceet,- That last phrase is exactly what is before
the Commission today. It is a pmq)osal Im an overlay within Chapter 130 specifically allowing as
Structure Ot'over 10,000 square feet
16
3710
(I,onirnissioner Ritz stated that lie has lived in Key Largo for over 30 years and knows about halt'
the audience. Fle is aware that Tavernier is very proud. and rightly so, of the historic nature of'
Tavernier and wants, to protect that. Ile also knows they are not particularly interested in
protecting the historic nature of the cement plant so that would be an exception. Ile is also a big
Can of the COMMUlliKeys plan anti the hard work that people put into it and thinks, that's really,
illiportant to keep community character in the forefront of Our ininds whether at this step or the
next step. The applicant has stated this is a 0-acre site, unique cir somewhat unique, and Ile
agrees with that. The applicant should also get credit For proposing about. hall' of the
development that he Could otherwise propose. Workforce housing is the, top priority. Ile would
love to have as park in front and wcm-k'force housing in the back. It's as swell idea. if it were his
property and lie could afford to do it, he would do it. I le®s looked at building affordable housing
and it's tough, and oftentimes you need an economic engine to make it work. FIC Understands
what is being proposed. He agrees with Ms. Schemper that, if that's the reason, then the
applicant's feet must be field to the fire to build the affordable housing first and non-residential
second, because were not considering if just as as Publix, to make sure that we get the work.Force
housing, if that's one of`the reasons, we're approving it. Commissioner Ritz goes I)), the site four
or five times as week. In the Iasi sever-al weeks lie has assurned that there is some development
there and tried to pull into the C ernex Plant from every direction and leaving every direction to
try it:) figure how this traffic is going to How. It i,s going to be tough and lie is curious as to
what the traffic Study says. lie believes it call be clone but the traffic study is going to be
critically important to niakc sure people can both enter and exit, northbound all(,] SOUthbound oil
(flat little road. The site is surrounded by residential so bUff'ers should, be addressed. "]'here are
several Publix stores we can look at. 'The Pub ix in Key Largo incidentally has affordable
housing behind it. When lie first moved here it was hard to find Publix when driving by because
it's hidden behind all of the native landscaping. Publix in Islamorada is out in the open and is a
rather attractive building. Big buildings like (lie hospital arid, the Publix in Islarnorada call be
built and be attractive with community character, and there can be very unattractive small
buildings maybe like a gas station that's riot very attractive, Size may not be the defining factor
but rather- the community character. The architectural style and use is more irupOrtant to
community character than the size. A good point is if this doesn't go there, what does go there.
Something is going to go there and it's a. big site, So that needs to be kept in rnind. Tavernier
may be hit Nvith niore trallic because it would dram/ pe(.iple front north and south, but Waniorada
rnay ",,in both for "affordable housing and tral"I"ic. Commissioner Ritz is no longcr on the FKAA
board of directors, but was oil there Im as long time and there is lots and lots of water in Florida,
We have a flooding problern, riot as water problem. It's a storage pn)bleni. The FKAA has built
wells in Nliann., has an RO plant in Miallli, I't Would warrant another presentation to this Board
from the FKAA to have some assurances, but when lie Nvas oil the board there was lots, of"'vater
available to come down this way. Traffic, however, is a problem.
Corrunissioner NeUgent stated that for the 20 years lie, was on the FMCC lie would drive back
and forth between Key Largo and Key West, and the time it takes him to get from one place to
another today is the same as Back their. So MOT has been doing a good„job in clearing up some
of the traffic bottlenecks. A lot of' traffic prolflents are self-induced by all the events 0111
weckends when traffic gets backed Uf) for miles from the Stretch to the event. Also, the l")C
spends, about $76 million a year on advertising for people to come down to the Keys.
Commissioner Neugent travels now between Key Largo and Key West once a week now, and
17
3711
trafflic is not his, number one issue. Affordable housing is his number one issue. 600 units 'were
just built it) tile L,ower Keys and their occupancy rate is between 95 and 100 percent. One was
Just finished last xvcek with 28,0 units mid it is fully occupied. There is no question if) his lilikid
that we need housing. 5,0O l units were lost in, unincorporated Monroe County tram Hurricane
Irnia that were either Substantially damaged or destroyed. 'I'lie County has been playing catch-up
from as housing standpoint,, and adding vacation rentals and second homes, which have bought Lip
all of' the somewhat affordable hOUSing stock in N4(:)nrOe County. "I'lle housing need cannot be
denied. This pro I I Ject is attractive because cat' the affordable 11OUSing elen'lent within the PL b ix
grocery store. Publix is very SUCCessf'Ld and people like PUblix. There are some positives in this
proliect and he, believes it would take some trLd'fic ofl'the immediate area.
(7ornniissioner 1)cilles stated that, lie normally starts as air advocate of maxinlUrn density and
intensity and than takes mitigating (;.actors kip and down, When denying an owner the right to
develop their property, something should compensate thern fbr it, Bill, ill this case, we try to
balance con-ununity character, imPact to the COMIllUllity Vel-SUS the right of'a person to develop
their property economically. lie transits (.lie Keys and tries to stop at as diflerent restaurants or
retail stores and buy something every time he come through here. Ile is the chairman of the
board ol'a financial institution that opened all office in 'Favernierand enjoys Corniung® Lip here. Ile
hasn't, been as FOrtUrtate as Cominissioner NCUgent %vidi the traffic issues. Collunissionel, Denies
asked Nis, Schernper about thile point made by Mi% St-nith that the traffic study isWt nornially
required at this phase of'devck�apnient. Ms. Schernper responded (flat because this is as significant
change in the zoning to what type cal" development could, be allowed oil the property, it's
important to look at Lill the Eactors as soon as possible, Iningine approving this anicildryielit and
in six months when it conies time I'or building permits, there's no capacity on the, road here.
StalTasked that the applicant do the traffic study and they agreed. 'Flicy went back and forth oil
the mitigation as part of' the applicant's clairn was that it may clCtUally redUCC, trips based on as
new type of' traffic ca1CUIUS. StafT stuck with the way the CalCUlatiOn is usually done, not
knowing what retailer dais could be, and this will require [lie mitigation. The applicant INIas
agreed they would do that, but haven't yet identified the option for i-nitigation. Commissioner
Dernes stated that years ago the actual comment as to tral7lic c,Lirkie back that you can't niake it
any worse. I didn't really buy that but I arri sensitive to traffic, The comment about this
increasing crinic., lie takes as as neiltral comment. As to the additional housing requirement
versus what is built, gtjarariteeing this housing its actually built is definitely a priority, His other-
concern is calls oil file an aunt of commercial space, for whatever rcas(�ni, on the site as well as
the Nvorkf'orce affordable 1101.1sing, understanding arl'ordable is a cornroversial term, but that that
is vvritten in there so we don*t suddenly see niarkel. rate hOUsing p0ppillg Ul) like MUShrOORIS.
Coniiniissi(,)jilc,r ']'Iioii,ias first thanked all the residents who came to speak on this itern, noting that
they are trying to protect their community and they should be applauded ('or that, Everyone was
very eloquent in their coninients. Conitnissioner I'hornas made as motion to uphold stafT
I
reconinicticlation to deny the proposed aniendillent to the I-and Development Clocle.
Chair Scarpelli conmented that both density and intensity should be looked at, along with
diversity. The limiting factor ol'the square ('(,,)otage is a good thing in this amenchimit, however
it's all the same thing, one big bo),,. 'That has potential issires in itself'being so large considering
that it's, proven that it doesn't have to be that large to lie SUCCCSSfiJI in other areas, We 11,,rive
1.8
3712
SUPU large stores that still remain vacant in other municipalities, Chair Scarpelli would be
CUriOUS to see what is the right square footage, but it surely isn't going to be one store of 1 50,C)00
square feet because that is the maxirrium density for this area, brat it also Shouldn't be one store at
70,000 square feet. On the other hand, lie can see, the applicant's point that 10,000 square feet
per quarter on as 2Cl-acre site is not condLiCive, either, Soniething needs to happen that allows it, to
meet in the iniddle somewhere to ilia,ke it make sense. Chair Scarpelli thanked the public for
corning out and sharing their voice today.
Mo�tion: Commissioner Thomas made as 1110ti011 On, Ite"I I to deny the application and
uphold decision of Planning Director. Coni in is,sio tier Demes seconded the tricition.
Roll Call: Conitnissioner Denies, Yes; Commissioner Thomas, Yes; Commissioner
Neugent, No; Commissioner Ritz, No; Chair Searpelli, Yes. 'I'lle motion passe�d 3 to 2,.
(,',orniriissioner Ritz, asked Chair Scarpelli for clarification. Understanding the Commission is not
in as position to negotiate with the apfflicant at this point, but asked if Chair Scarpelli had been
HISinUating that if it were 50,000 square fieet that lie would be in favor of it, Chair Scarpelh
responded possibly, The point is Nve're riot talking about a 7'0,000 square toot Publix, bUt a
70,000 square foot as a rnaxinium and no configuratitin whatsoever, And as I'ar as that being
developed at one tinic, he does not think, that's correct and that's what is against the Land
I)e\,clopment Code as it's currently written. NIaybe on the County's side they need to look at
that for sl'.)ecif"ics sites such as this, the zoning being Urban Conimercial and that 10,000 square
feet is too little oflan allocation 6or as site this size. Commissioner Ritz added that the botiom line
iis a recommendation is being made to the BOCC, so lie was trying to determine where the
majority ofthe Commission, actually was.
Mr. Wolfe suated that since the vote was to deny f1re'ril I., the vote on Item 2 was nol needed.
(Recess from 12:18 p.rn, it) 12:30.)
Mr, Wolfe stated (fiat it had been earlier stated that Items 3 and 4 would be read together.
However, though the presentations may have some overlap. these items need to be heard
individually.
3, 7-ELEVEN (DANIEL BARRY, Jr. &" AR(BER BARRY), 98200 OVERSE AS
HIGHWAY, KEY L:AR(,-.'O,, Fl, 33037 MILE MARKER 98: A PLUAC, HEARING
A REQUES I I FOR A VARIANCT- TO ACCESS STANI.)ARDS SET FORT]I
IN
VII ()I, I'l
CHAPTFR 11 4, ARTICIA". IF MONROE C01JNTY I-AND DF`V[L0PMENT
COD ' BY AXIS INFRASTRUCTURE. LLC. ON BF]LAI-l' OF DANIEL & ARCHER
BARRY. APPROVAL WOU1,A) RLI SULT IN TWO (2) ACCESS DRIVES ON T'l IF SUBJ11"CT
1 0 1_)I R,I y
R T]I A F A R 1-1' S 1)AC f-'D 1,1, S S 'I'l I A N 'T 1-1 F R F()U I R,F D 1)1 STA N CE 0 F 24 5 F FJ:,F
R,Ij,?t.)l"S'j"
FROM ADJACENT ('JJRB CUTS. THE VARIAN( F, IS L"D FOR THE
DEVF11.,OPMI:�1'N-f' OF A HIGH INTF,"NS]"I"Y COMME'RCIAL. 7-E1.FVEN C(.-)NVFNILNCF
STORE WITH 11 1111"LING STATIONS, ON PROPER'l"'Y DESC'R111F.11) AS LOTS I
THROU(JIi 6, BLOCK 1, ROCK HARBOR, F',S]"ATES, ACCORDING 'F(.) FIFF PL,AF
'I'll FRL,"OF, AS RECORDI"'D IN PLAT BOOK 3, AT PAG[" 187, OF PUBLIC REC( RDS
19
3713
OF MONROE COUNTY, FL(WIDA, IIAVIN(J PARCEL ID NUMBL"R 00519590-000OW
(FILE 2022-206)
(12:31 p.m) Ms. Devin Toiflin, 1-1rincipal f1lantier, presented the staff report, I'his is a request
for a variance to access standards to (7hap(er 114, Afticle VII to the ],,an(] Development (''ode ('or
11 prop o used high-intensity commercial retail L,ise. This property is approximately 1.09 acres
located in the Suburban Commercial zoning district designated as Mixed Use Commercial can the
ounty's Future Land Use Map. ThC PrOpOly iS CUrrenfly operated by a conimercial retail store,
The applicant is proposing to completely redevelop the subject property kvith a 4,73O square Im
connnercial retail convenience store with five double-sided fueling stations, and one additional
Rec 90 fueling station, Ms, Tolpin presented the proposed site plan, The fetid development code
requires that when a property substantially inrllirov,es that it must come into full compliance with
(lie access standards. ']'here is a 245-fioot ruininiuni distance between ctirb cuts onto U.S. I for
properties such as this. This, site fflan illCIUCIeS two access drives onto t,,;.S, I., one cm, either side,
each being two-way, thzit, do meet the 245-foot CLJr'b cut requirenlem front the Grand Street
intersection, but they do not meet that distance reqUil-CiflCilt Crorn the access drives of' the
property to the north. 011C driveway is about 43 feet, all([ (lie other is about 45 ficct from the Curb
cuts of (lie driveways to tile north which is the reason fior tile variance. When reviewing for a
variance, the applicant most deinonstrate that they tneet all eight ofthe required criteria and must
demonstrate a showing of good and sufricient cause that failure to grant the variance would
result in an exceptional hardship, that the variance is [lie tinnimurn necessary to provide relief,
,a,mong the other criteria contained iin tile staff' report and presented on the screen. Staff' has
found that the applicant has met all eight of those required criteria, and staff recommends
apliroval of this requested variance with the conditions that were included, in the stafT report and
on the screen. These are general conditions.
[.)enles asked if* someone came in and built exactly what is there today, if the,v,
would also require a variance. Nis. Tolpin responded that, yes, in order to substantially improve,
redevOop a 110V Use or expand all existing use they would have to comply with the sanic
standards. Commissioner Ritz asked iftlic afliflicant cc:)uld simply i-nove the ingress or egress tile
correct nuniber of feet, or would tile J)H1
y, then be iii trouble with tile other side, M s, To I i
responded that becaUSC Of tile lerigill of the property there is not sufficient area to be 245 feet
ftorn both the driveway's to the north and tile Grand Street intersection, Chair Scarpelli wanted
to clarify that the existing curb cut oil that end ol'property Nvas roughly in the same Ideation as it
is presently. Ms. Tolpin responded that that w,as correct, more or less. It may be rnoving a little
bit but 110t by Much. r I'liere were no further questicffls, or coniments from the Corruilission, (-'hair
Scarpelli asked to hear froni the apl)licant.
Ty I larris, attorney for tile applicant, stated that lie had the same; team present as the last little
they were beflore tile Planning Conimission; Jason from Axis Hutton and lan Rairden (.)f Kin ley
I lorn as the traffic consultant. At the llast meeting tile applicant had met five ofthe eight criteria.
After a lot 01' public input and discussion Nvith sutl'C the access was re,vorked and staff"hers now
determined that all eight criteria have been niet, As JUSt stated, to rebuild the Arithoily's, that is
there novv., they would he here asking fear tile san'le thing because there iis not enough room for
anything over. 2,500 square feet to illect tile access driveway, requirements, Nit% I larris state(,] that
having given, their presentation at the prior meeting, he would be available to answer questions
20
3714
and reserve some time for rebuttal it' needed. "I"'here were no Commission qUestions of the
applicant at this tinie.
Chair Scarpelli their asked for public comment, eniphasizing that this item is regarding the
variance, Mr, Wolfe also clarified that the speakers should litrut their conirrients to anything
a,bot.it the variance. If the variance is approved, then they would have another shot on the major
conditional use to diSCUSS the concerns regarding the proposed developi-nent.
Ms. Anti I lelmers, as resident, ol"Cirand Street, spoke on behalf of the Federation of Homeowners
for Ms. Dottie Moses was unable to attend. The l-ederation represents 2,500 people who live in
this c(-mininnity. They had held two COMMUllitV rneetings with almost 140 people in attendance.
Of those people, there were only two people who spoke in favor of this. One was the broker for
the real estate deal and the other was a consultant. In regards to the variance the issue is safety.
The C0111u`11,1114y is not averse to having a business there, but, not this business. This is simply out
of complete adherence with any reasonable expectations of this property. Specifically to the
variance request. the applicants came before the Corrimission several Months ago to request a
variance and that request was tabled. They have n(,-)vv corne back and, in their geller-orts
munificence. they have told tile coninitmity we heard you loud and clear-, you don't warit Grand
Street access, so what were going to do is move it to the other side of the property where it's 40
feet from an entrance to a second gas station. Back-to-back gas stations, one of which will be a
24-hour operation with a convenience S101V that includes sec 90 fuel and eleven PLUTIPS next to
one where people and entering and exiting. It"s simply something that is going to cause as
dangel-OLIS situation every day, not only for those of Lis who live in the area, although that's
primarily who the Commission will be hearing from., but indeed everyone, Ifyou are in a lane in
which people are going to suddenly need to make turns or in which there is as boat being Pulled irl
and out, that is going to be a probleul. ISSUeS SUch as congestion and cuing at this site, ILiel
deliveries, the store inventory deliveries, trash processing, will all afica traffic, This is already a
dangerous area of the highway for accidents and fatalities and will be more so. Deceleration arid
slowing distances are simple niatters of physics, but they are arks life arid death iSSUes. Finally,
as to community character, while it is not strictly as residential area in the median it certainly is
not amenable to what basically will become a truck stop. We appreciate that in Monroe County
we have a Planning staff'that has been nothing but lieIpffil and cooperative, and we also have a
layer above the Panning staff, County staff makes the recoilimendations and analyses based on
the statutory requirements of the code, The Planning Commission is here to listen to residents
and Lo make decisions encompassing evcrythitig, including the code, but also including what it is
like for those who five here, work here, raise children here, go to school and business here and
go to dinner here. The Commission has, the authority to make this decision and Just because YOU
can, doesn"t nican you should with this variance, arid vve hope you'll decide you won't.
M r. J 1) arballo, a resident of Rock I larbor E'states, for over 43 years, representing the Rock
I larb(:)r Property Owners Association, stated at that at the last Planning (ormnission meeting the
Commission had been concerned ,ibmit the traffic inovement vvithin and around the entry and
exit from the site and asked the developer to provide some hil'on-nation regarding the circulation
around the site arid, access and it has still not been provided, In the latest plan submitted about
two weeks ago, they removed the Rec 90 labels from the fuel purrips. Before. the Rec 90 was the
boat fueling station arid the two punips, on the end ofeach island which lined Ull With the two old
21
3715
driveways, That made good sense. 'file pump labels have disappeared so now no one is Sure
"/hcre those are going to be, Mr, Carballo presented photographs of how cars park at the 7-11 to
get, gas. Jr-fic, fine the fuel tank up at tile hose. '"Iri,ey don't stop on the pad normally where the
car stops so they take up more room on the site. Mr. Carballo presented photos taken at tile Torn
Thumb at mile marker 97 showing a big boat and a pickup taking up all three punlps, along Nvith
the congestion of"people pulling in and Out, in all directions. Mr, Carballo presented photos of as
traffic backup at imile marker 97 onto U,S, I � I le then presented photos of' tile Anthony's
driveway with all outboard sticking out from the Marathon station to the Anthony's Curb cut.
Commissioner Denies asked Nil,. Carballo to go back to as prior photo, which fie did. 1 milers
with boats, RN's and delivery trucks cannot circulate the property. Mr. Carballo presented
diagrarns, of tile site plan with various traffic patterns depicted, while explaining NClUired
turnarounds for traffic. Mr. Carballo presented variOLIS examples of diagrams generated from
site conflict software showing huge crisscross,traffic conflicts,
Mr, Bill Wrublevski lives across I*roni Anthony's on Rose Street oil the ocean side, fie has a,
commercial driver's license and part of]its busir ess is driving heavy trucks, What was prop()sed
on (lie initial plan at the first inecting in Marathon was for as WD501 fuel truck, which is a
standard fuel truck seen everywhere. i'his new redesign is for a WB40 Fuel delivery truck
because they can't get it in with this new, design being so close to the other driveway, I le took,. a
SLH-VCY on April 20 frorn Key Largo to Palm Beach to !see how rnany ofthe smaller fuel trucks
were out there, and, they couldn't find one OUt ofthe 50, trucks that they smv. All Nvere the larger
fuel trucks. Flis concern is the that community is being told that just fior I'his one 7-11 dicy're
going to have as special truck just to deliver fuel to get into this entrance because a bigger truck
Cannot get into this entrance. Mr, M[Rtblevski presented diagrams showing tile size differences
bctween the fuel delivery trucks. Imagine two fuel delivery trucks trying to get into two staticms
at the sarne thne or being backed up ul traffic, A big truck needs tO LISC two lanes of traffic, and
the 1"DOT classifies this zone as a high accident area. The applicarit's own plans shoNv these
trucks will have to inake SiX ILL1111S to deliver fuel, This is a major conceni. Mr. WrUblevski
hopes this is not approved,. It is going to cause undue learn and a safely concern for the
conuilunity.
Ms. Jeanne Brennan has as bachelot's and master*s clegree in, geophysics, and has been visiting or
living in the Keys I-or 30 years. Ms. Brennan presented crash data for the Keys using data from
local jurisdictions, Ms,, Brennan presented a display from F'A'oni from the TM wg,P study shoin
(lie Key Largo area where tile proposed 7-1 1 is has a number of'high crash list segments Within
that area. Ms. Brennan then presented a diagram froni FDOT data showing fatalities in this area
From 20 14 to 2018. The proposed 7-11 does pose a threat to public safety, because it is in all, area
that is already high crash. Ms. Brennan then presented as diagram inClUding the years 2018 to
2022 arid there were 459 crashes in that area clLfl-ing that lime span. Ms., Brennan then presented
a cliagrain tier the 'If'0111 ThUnib which is as 24-hour gas station located in an area Without as ]cat; of.
Curb cuts ad'jacent to it and no resil(Jeri dial properties in tile area, yet there is a high cluster of'
accidents, around tile TOM Fliumbd I'lliS is what vVOUld be expected to happen at this proposed 7-
11 location. It's reasonable to assurne that Curb cuts and intersections lead to more accidents.
It's an observation everyone has forril driving the highways. In this area there are the curb cuts,
there's Almay Street, (hared Street and Largo Landings, so (here area lot of residences, Not, so
at the Foril I'llUmb. Ms. Brennan then showed the data oil the injuries firom the accidents in the
22
3716
area. 'Fhe variance shOLild, not be approved because it does not meet all of the requirements that
the risks of'public safety will riot be increased. '['here is an increased risk of public safety ifthis
variance is granted.
Ms, Jody Koblenzer stated her farnily has lived on Rose Street liar 43 years. fhis proposed gas
s,tation directly inipacts the traffic safcty OfthiS COlut"I'lUnity and for visitors it) the Keys. U.S. I
can be dangerous and this will inake it worse, The Cornmission's decision today can save lives.
The signs tell slower traffic to keep right. That nicans, the faster traffic is going to be in the left-
hand lane. Each vehicle entering and exiting the gas station vvill be slowing down in the fast
lane, With the gas station in the niedian, the deceleration of a rnov itig vehicle is at least 20�O feet,
and longer than a football field if the vehicle is towing a boat. The neighbors see and hear
vehicles screeching then- brakes because the vehicle ahead of therm is making as quick left-hand
turn Preens the fast lane. She witnessed thisjust this past week, Adding another gas station of any
size will multiply the dangers, Her traffic, engineer conFirnis that this is a high-generation facility
in close proximity to Grand Street, and tire existing Marathon gas station and will create
11LUTICrOUS COnfliCtS With trafflic and hazardous conditions likely resulting in additioll'al accidents.
Mr. Matt Koblenzer is a retired Naval aviator and airline captain having 60 years of flying
experience, over 20,000 hours of cockpit time, and had the privilege oftransporting thousands of
people sal7ely tIn'OLJgIlOUt the globe, To do that, fie has to be arinually trained, consisting of
demonstrating equipment and systern abilities and knowledge, maneuvering in many tight Spots
on aircraft carriers and spent years weaving a Triple Seven around taxiways and into tight
terminal gates. Fle has driven as 16,000 pound rig that supports and transports his, 3346ot sailboat
that he has taken to regattas and other events. I le has experience Nvith stopping distances and
turning radius requirements on land, sea and air. With his experience operating this heaving
equipment he can state that: the planned development being looked at will lead to accidents. He
has been taught to analyze CIOSUre rates, stopping distances and turning radiLlSes, lie, is acutely
aware of the startled reaction of' operator behaviOUrs, especially when they face unexpected
situations which have just: been presented. People cfaa not react well to that. It is his opinion that
traffic will not be able to navigate this gas station in this location as presented, Mr, Koblenzer
hopes the Commission will protect the traveling public in their consideration ofthis matter as lie
has in his Charge.
Ms. Lilsa Gal-ragen has lived in Rock Harbor Estates in a house built by her grandpa for the last
54 years. I't's the only place she's lived in the Key°s. She enlisted eight vok,inteers to study five
gas stations in Key Largo in the one block of Grand Street that lies in the median. These
VOILinteers have spent weeks Studying traffic flow, noise, congestion at)(] pollution at their
location. We all have been at Out- stations at various tinics during daytime and might firne hours
and their observations have been surprising. Ms, Gahagen focused oil Grand Street, 155 feet
long, bordered oil the north by Anthony's and t1rie proposed T-I 1 and on the sc.)uth by as boat
dealership. Ms. Cialiagen presented photographs showing cars parked oil both sides ofthe street,
dUrripsters located along the street meaning garbage pickup stops, traffic on ("irand, and truck
stops to unload parts, to the boat dealership. It is not (111COMIT1011 to have to go around these
trucks tan cross, over the northbound, lane to enter her ileighbourhood. When encountering this
SiblatiOn, cars turning left oll'of northbound U.S. I run, the hazard of missing the Grand Street
median turn, UnIling into a car going around all Unloading truck, Or PUllilb-1 into Anthony's
23
3717
parking lot to go back south. She has been, involved in these situations niany times. The line of
vision to the south of U,S, 1. going east is obstructed by Signs, LILifitV poles and wires. Unsafe
conditions already exist at this corner. ("orribined, with tile possible thousands extra 7-11 traffic
and this is truly all accident waiting to happen. In the County's Land Use Development Code
Section 10.3, to 187 regarding obt,,fining a vari I ance, requirement number three states, in part, "The
applicant UIUSt demonstrate the variance will not create a threat to public health and safety or
create as public nuisance." 'Fire proposed 7-11 will in fact create as threat to public satety, every
time the residents of flock Harbor Estates enter their neigh boil rhood, and it will also affect all the
drivers on north and southbound IJ,S. I at this location, A Few months ago she vvrote all email to
the Con-u-nissioners about her concernis which talked about a niciriber of her larruly being killed
in this area, She, does not want Irer fiarnily or anyone else's to have as death in theirs. Do not
al'.)prove this variance.
Nis. Nancy Truesdale is as recovering attorney having spent 15 years practic4ig la",, and reaching
high school for 16 years. She has owned property and lived around rude marker '98, since 001 .
Over the last 201-some ye,,ars cd' [living oil both sides of (J.S. I she has gained a great deal ol'
experience with tile traffic and gencral driving conditions in this area. Ili preparation for this
hearing she vN/as one. ofthe tkvt) volunteers recruited by Ms. 1-isa Gahagen to observe traffic at the
TOM Thumb, her husband took those Torn "I"hunib pictures, and also those at Antholly's, over the
several weeks getting ready for today. Ms. Ciahagien referenced the 1-and Developi-nient Code
that regiLlkites and guides, this Board in decisions. The applicant wants YOU to grant its request for
a variance and in order fbil' you. to do so YOU 111USt determine that all eight of the standards of
Section 102-1 87(d) one through eight have been met. She does not believe that one, two., three
and eight have been inct. One is good and sufficient cause. Their caLlSe is because they want tc)
pUt all I I-J)UUlp gas station at this location. Last tinie when this item was looked at in. Marathon
file Conunission asked the appilicant to go back and re-evaluate their application and make sonic
changes as you wierien t certain because ofthe unique characteristics of this property, Not many
properties, in Monroe Cotinty are in the niedian of U.S. 1, and even fewer have cross streets like
(irand Street, and even fewer have these noncoriftirming driveways. Hierc is a lot going on with
this property. By their own filing they stated egress from Grand Strect WOUld, quote. i"result in a
(fuelling past any reasonably spaced driveway connection oil Grand Street, even if Overseas
Highway ingresses and egresses were rilaintained.- .Cost, because access from Grand Street can,t
be safely designed for this proposed Use doesn.t mean that creating single driveways within 46
feet ofthe neighboring Marathon gas station and across the street tron-i N]rnay is sonalellow safer.
It's riot. ]'here is no sale driveway for this li I-purnp gas station and, consequently, the appl icant
has failed to show good and SUffilcient cause, 'I wo, failUl-C to grant the variance Nvould result in
exceptional hardship to the applicant. The applicant states that if you don't grant the variance fi)ii
this compromised driveway back to back with the Niarathon station and across frorn; Ali'llay [flat
they would have 10 Use Grand Street,. Fhat's fiatilly analysis because by their own documents
they state diat Grand Street Would be Unsafe. Their application reveals there is no safe driveway
for the: proposal and, as as result, that does, not mean you have I o grant this. And, eight, the
variance is the rninirnuin necessary. This isn't the IllininIUM, this is the iiiaxillIL1111,
Mr. Andrew Tobin, read into the record the conclusion reached by Nir, Moss who is a traffic
safety expert witness for crashes and negligence cases. The report is in the Coninlission's
packet. onsidering the large number ofdaily trips expected to occur at this station, the existing
24
3718
hazarcIC)US conditions that will be exacerbated and the numerous conflicts that will occur as as
result of the developArent, based upon on my background, experience and training, it is my
opinion vvithin a reasonable degree of engineering probability and certainly that this high-
gencration facility in close proximity to Grand Street and the existing Marathon gas station will
create numerous conflicts with traffic and hazardous conditions that rare likely to result in
accidents." That is the public health safety issue. A lot more tinle could be spent going over tile
various tralTic issues. Grand Street is a problem. It's got as blind corner. Every time YOU cross
into Rock Flarbor Estates YOU have to pull ahriost into LJ,S, I to cross. N4r. Tobin had prepared a
inernorandUrn 01' laNV for the Commission (hat Nvas in their packet. The law oil exceptional
hardships is that it has to be a legal hardship. Legal hardship is defined in about a hundred cases
as, "It is impossible to Use tile property for the PLH-POSe for which it is zoned to qualify it flor a
legal hardship," As staff correctly points out, this, is a commercial retail use. The use is
primarily for the sale of* consumer goods, products, merchandise or services. Substantial
improvenlent is defined that you call have any ty, pe of corrunercial use at the existing store, you
call repair it up to, 50 percent of pre-destruction value, so there is no hardship here. A legal
hardship is not, we cant do "rhat "re want to do. 'I I here has to be criteria. 'Fhcre was a recent
case of' a variance where his clients were protesting as house, next to their house and the court
reversed the Planning Commission's decision because not all of the criteria had been nlet. So ,
yes, you call have a smaller house; yes, you call have a smaller gas station; yes, you call have
something other than, a high traffic generating facility in as high crash area. Mr. Tobin has
represented a lo(. of'property okvners and is in favour 4 property rights, but the standards have to
be ruCt, )l()U have to meet all of therri, and the offier standard is the 1111runlUrn necessary. Mr.
Tobin believes that staff', who does a great Job and spent as lot of time on this, looked at this ill a
linear fashion and didn't contemplate the law which is you have to be denied, you can't Use Your
property at all in order to quafily Cor a variance, it has to be impossible. There's one case that
talked about the F'lorida law and that was Herrera vs. ("itry cal' Miann where the COU11 reJected a
variance based oil the Failure to shovv that the project could not be reduced in size or the project
might not quality for federal financing. Sojust because you can t LISC it lor tile highest use, and
this is squeezing every square inch, does not inean it's, a legal hardship. So they do not qualify
under tile law for a legal hardship, Based up(,)n the traffic salety, and a lot of'tinle could be spent
can this, the Moss report is good and has a lot ot'exhibits arid photographs in it.
Mr. Shannon Donnelly is a chef"that, has been here 30 years, is a father and a business owner. I le
is a supporter cal"the coniniunity and the Keys, and in all the places he has traveled and cooked in
five-star restaurants in Canada, the U.S. and Europe. the nuiliber one thing that lie always looks
for is what comes first. It's cornmon sense. S5,000 does not need to be spent oil a safety expert
to cite all cal"the things people have brought Up here. The number one thing that cornes first is
safety. This area is designated as a high-crash., high-fatality area. Fatality rneans Your wife, your
child, or your grandmother is not corning home. There are a Couple cif options. YOU call light as
tire or dig a hole because sornebody is dead. If' you allow this to go in we are going to have
more deaths. His kids have been here since they were born and have driven by the bodies. hJust
happened to, his son the other day, You saw point blank all of tile accidents that circle this area.
'I"his is going to magnify, 10 firnes what we already have as a problern. We've got tell pounds of
Slurpees in a five:-POUnd bag that is bursting at the SCaITIS. This is going to be the catalyst fior
more lieop e to die. The applicant does not meet tile criteria. Safety is going to be adversely
affected as NveH as this being as nuisance, N(ruSZ11MC is his last concern. His wife and children
25
3719
coming horne frorn crossing the street are his niain concern. His f"arnily alone has been itivolved
With R)Ur accidents. When they cite this 559 crashes, there are even niore tender- benders and
near misses. He waited at Grand Street for 15 minutes the other day aandl Ile calls it the roulette
corner. The Commission is here to represent its, to keep us, your constituents and our children
sal'e, At Grand Street your physical body has to be six feet beyond where the white line is where
your car is SUPPOSed to St0j) in order to be able to see what is conning fi-orn the northbound lane.
People cannot rnake that turn when you're tfiat fear out, This proposal takes, away the saict), net
that is there,. Anthony's has two turns coming in on the left-hand' side as you're driving north.
When you can't rnake that turn, you have to try to back Lip, so you back into somebody that's,
behind you. Anthony's is the safety in I zoric for thein to go around that person that's stick g on or
the garNige truck that's there. C.orning in with somebody on your tail" doing 60 miles ,In 11OUt",
you don*t have a great deal ol'tinic to brake or see. It's a blind corner. Fdris goes in, this super
high-density grotesque rrionstrosity operating 24-7, we're going to have so many more traflic
problems there or so many more people stopping or trying to stop and that safety net is going to
he gone, YOU Won't have flie oppOl-tUnity to swing a little bit wider and miss that person, Mr.
Donnell 's concern is safety and it's the ornmission'sJob to keep their constituents safe.
Rosemary Donnelly stated she is niarried tk,,r Mr. Safety and is the person Nvho had the 11ront cat her
minivan ripped, otT by someone trying to make the corner, pulling as trailer in as really tight,
narrow congested area. She is against giving the variance to the 7-11 f'or the cornmon sense
reason that it is, as high-intensity gas station in an area that is already overstressed Nvith the
arriount of traffic in that area, illiClUding bikers, \,\,alkers, people freaked out that they're taking
their aninials to the vet, and walkers to the convenience store that's already there, Please take
into consideration riot only those living in the Upper Kcys but those that live in the Rock Harbor.
neighbourhood.
MS. Susan Cashin \\'as called Upton to speak, at which firrie an Un ident i tied, unintelligible speaker
spoke from the audience and did not use the microphone.
Ms, Kathleen LUdke (phonetic) was riot available to speak.
Mr, Grant Rcfllin was not available tio speak,
Ms. Phyllis, Nlitclictl of' Ishimorada came here today Cor the silliest ol reasons. She loves
Anthony's. ']'here are very Few places 1-01-s to find clothes in the Keys. Air 1-01, is little old
ladies. Her daughters think Anthony's is I'c)r little old ladies, though she disagrees. She has
never seen as C01111111,111ity as well put together making a point: tor the saFety of their area as those
present today and she is PITMd of thern. She believes they've niade the pc)int"
Ms. Leshe Bennett was not availabIc to speak.
M.s, Joyce Bennett stated that she has, heard so many worries about the community arid safety.
She used to own the two-story building Ieross the street from Anthorty's which at that thne 'was a
dance StUdiO and she observed quite a I'm accidents then and knows it's even worse now. But
the reason she's here is she really loves the Keys and she doesn't want to see snore gas Stations
26
3720
and more liquor stories. She would like to see more Arithony's as well because she's one of`those
ladies, Please leave Anthony"s alone,
Mr, Tony Davenport. is ['resident ot'Landings off.argo right cross the street frojin the proposed 7-
11 and a fOUrth-generation Conch, really from Key West, and lie has seen a lot cat'igroillvth Lip and
down the Keys, both good, and bad. Putting three gas stations within 250 yards from each other
makes no sense and it really is a residential safety cf,)ncern. 'I'lle maj
jor concern is the safety issue
that the 7-11 would bring. No one has mentioned the heavily-utilized sidewalk with, runners,
walkers, bikers, peiople Pushing babies in strollers and people walking dogs. People focused oil
critcring and exiting the 7-11 will riot be playing attention to the sidewalk. fie also has witnessed
many vehicles exiting and going the %vrong way, There have been over five fatalities ill the last
three years in that two-mile stretch, tvvo right in front of Landings of I-argo. '['here are many
residents in the area with children and there's the school buses corning by. Oil behalf of
Landings of Largo, Mr. Davenport requests the Commission vote no. Something conliniercial is
going to go there but there's g0t to be something as lot less density Prone traffic wise like
Anthony's or relay be a Bass Pro Shop.
Ms. ,Joan Scholz of" Islarnorada believes the residents in the area have made their point. She
passes through this area every single day, In addition to, the school buses there is the JBT
transportation system that stops and as rilany know, someone JUSt got killed getting off of the
bus, walking ill frorit and getting killed, Safety should be 1111111ber one for this variance and we
doin't need another gas station.
Ms. Shirley Abraham stated that she had not plannedd to speak. She thought she was signing
something to say site was here. She has been coming to the Keys since, the 70s to visit her
parents and bought as retirement hoilic in '94. Ms. Abraharn liias seen as lot of changes. She loves
the Keys. I ler children now come and one is thinking about buying so it's in her history. She
has seen a lot of change that have not been to the good, horrible traffic and places going out of'
busitiess, at times. It's truly a paradise but slie*s afraid we're going to ask too much ecologically
and environmentally. I ler brother was an environmental lawyer and has done work in Marathon
with (lie shallow wells so the waters are at issue, too. We need to concentrate on what iis
iniportant here and not make it go down the tubes. Anyi-nore traffic and she, rnay be going north.
Mr, John Abrallani was not available to speak.
Ms. Toy Martin was not available to speak.
Mr. John Kocol owns the building he bought. frorri M.s. Joyce Bennett twelve years ago. It's the
Island I larrullock Pet I lospital today. lie also owns a few properties in the subdivision that lie
rents to file local workforce. fit this tirne he has seen rulnicl-OUS accidents here. Ile is a free
market capitalist that believes anybody should be able to develop their pr(,)perty within the
boundaries of the law as long as it doesn't sacrifice Public safety. and this I can obvious case
where it does,, The only thing that makes sense to hint to try and work Out a solution w0l.fld be to
put in deceleration lanes, and lie has proposed this at every opportunity. 'the coninients, being
received today are what you would clxpect frorn a cominunity trying to preserve its quality of
life. Safety is a, core valUle to all of us. We elect public officials t(.--) uphold our core values, and
27
3721
every tine those core values are not honoured a stnall piece of our community dies with is
Please don't let that happen in this case, The land development regulations are written arid
erilbi-ced for good and sound reasoning arid should not be circumvented when it comes, to public
safety Please reject the variance request. and require deceleration lanes as as condition ifyou are
to approve this project.
MS. SLIsan Holler was waiting to speak on the next item. Chair Scarpelli asked tbr anyone
wanting to speak on Item 1
Mr. I-Imique RodrigUez, Vice President of Pirates Cove Association was not planning to speak
today but listening to the distance of the CL111) cuts and the size of the fuel delivery vehicles, that
need to be reduced to snake the turn in, as lie was listening to this lie recalled that lie was the
driver engineer instructor for the City of'M.iarrii and his Job was to teach the firefighters how to
maneuver those large vehicles. In thinking about this, the Curb cuts, are 43 to 45 feet from the
existing Curb CLAS going itItO the Marathon gas station. Another genflenian pointed out that they
had to reduce the size of the fuel delivery trucks to be able to rnake the turn into the gas station.
That raised a reel flag because those fuel delivery trucks have a pivot point very close to the cab.,
so they can make much tighter corners than a boat on a trailer. Now, we have an I 8-foot pickup
truck towing a 30-lbot boat, which is very common, arid then you have to add five feet of trailer.
Now we're at 53 fact of vehicle. They were talking about the large Fuel delivery tracks being 50
feet, Now we*re at 53 feet with, a pivot point that is much further back on the rig. Ifthey can't
make as turn vvith as vehicle where the pivot point is way further forward, you can't possibly
expect to, make the, tU111 with as boat and trailer pivoting much further back unless Y(Al take Lill tWO
lanes, If a person tries to turn in through tNvo lames, they may not have a good field of' view of
what's inside the gas station, SO they start making a turn and there's another vehicle there or they
can't quite make the turn. Now what do you do. You've got to back Lip Oil the highway. Fle
sees this as an issue creating potential accidents.
Nis. Minii Bentolila, the president of Pirates Cove, wanted to say that Pirates Cove is very
concerned with this as well, not just Rock Harbor arid Landings of Largo. She agrees with
everything everyone has said. Ff wrr weeks ago she was heading bonne fin)m north and had Just
passed the CVS, was in the left-hand lane, and someone in the Light-hand lane slowed down to
turn so everyone had to stop super quick, and one of the people in the cars turned left into the
left-hand lane arid almost, wiped her out.. This is what people do. They coine &�)wn frorn Miami
and don't realize it's only 45 nines an hoar. They're going 60 tinles, an 11OL11% When you have all
these bUSinesses flim you have to slow down for in order to turn into nand (his is why there's so
ninny accidents. Please don't grain the variance.
Mr. Don Bower of'Grand Street ccmu-nented on the (ornnussioner who said there was not 11-ILICII
traffic and lie has to go back to Marathon. lie invited Coniniksioner NeUgent to meet hiiii by
Grand Street to look at the COMMUnity and cross, the street and all of the traffic conditions Nvould
he seen Light then and there, Chair Scarpelli asked what lie was serving. Mr, Bower stated he
would greet, hini as a neighbour arid lie could put his order in. It would take them a few rninutes
to get across the highway but fie would vvait for them and keep the lights on.
28
3722
Ms. fina (last naine unknown) had attempted to speak, on earlier iterns I & 2 but could not get,
connected. She stated the solution to the problem Nvith Gerncx was for Monroe County to buy it
and leave it a green space. Mr. John W'olfc stated that this public comment has to be on Itern 3,
Mr. Ignacio Llrbieta spoke on behalf of the Marathon gas station jUSt. north of`tine property. He
works for the company that owns that gas station. previous to 2021, his family had been tile
owner of that property For many, years. Of course he has as conflict here but, in all sincerity,
there's a seriOUS potential for hazards low the customers and erliployees. The existing nearby
driveovay is already Close to his Current driveway but to add a very high-traffic business next
door that would also have heavy trucks and boat trailers entering and exiting. lie would like to
confirm everything that's been said before, that this is certain to create a bit of competition and
additional traffic and hazards on Overseas Highway. Ile is familiar with the technique tear justify
circulation inside ofa development to suggest that you're going to use a tank wagon or bobtail
short truck, That's riot realistic in this business. Delivering from Poll Everglades where the fuel
is corning froin all the way to Monroe (:',gusty in a truck ovith half f ofthe capacity, cspecially 'to as
site so far south from the nearest terminal and especially to as site that*s, projected to have such
high volume is riot realistic. Any circulation studies, should be analyzed with the realities in
mind that it's going to be heavy tanker trailers entering and exiting, and they, may have to do
sonre special maneuvering to dirop fuel. Having t\vo driveways with trucks potentially, doing the
same thing at the same time is almost certain to create a hazard and definitely create additional
traffic. The traffic study did riot support the version that there would be overflow onto Grand
Street and Overseas Highway, and that needs to be Substantiated before they have atly chance of
really proving thatt they have an exceptional CirCL11tostance or the other standards required under
the code,
Ms. Janice Lindsay-Hartz has lived in Pirates Cove for 36 years. and N,vants to, add to everyone's
safety issues vvith, as hUillan-eye view of'what happens on a daily basis here. She encourages the
Commission to go to Grand Street and conie to Pirates When site leaves Pirates Cove
froln, Gasparillo f.)rive to, head m-'a-th, she cannot cross tvvo lanes of" traffic corning burriper-to-
bUl'11per at 45 to 50, Ludes per hour, so she turns right, gets up to 45, tries, to get in the leti lane but
traffic is going fast and it's hard to get in. "I'lien she's looking for Grand Street where she call go
across and go north, and have the same problerris everyone has, described. Traffic, is tailgating
her, they swerve at'OUnd, give you the finger, sornetinies swerve right in front to rnake as
staternient that She ShOLdchl't be in this lane, and then she is slowing down to make the left turn.
']'his is very frightening and scary and is on as daily basis, Adding this hilgh-interisity gas station
to \vhat everyone has said is already as high accident area is going to inake it impossible. She will
need to go even further south to turn around to goat north, She lives here because of tile small
t0vVL1 COL111111,inity character, but this is tUrnirlg it into this Speedway, a dangerous area, and she
asks the Corninission to please consider this Nvhen looking, at this project.
Ms. Ronnie Harris lives at Rock I larbor Estates. A public safiety issue she has not yet heard
addressed is whether it's safe, to live near as gas station. In an, article by Fossil Fuel their
conclusion is with due diligence as homeowner can reduce long-term risk by avoiding hornes
located in close proximity to gas stations. There is air abundance ofscientific research regal-ding
the health hazards of living near as gas station. Columbia I Jni,Vcrsity found many of the nation's
gas stations are leaking hazardous vapors into the Surrounding environment and despite the array
29
3723
of' modern sailety and health guidelines, these gas stations often entit ten tinies the amount Of
emissions used to determine setback regulations. A Suldly, ofI.J,S. gas stations found that benzene
emissions from gas station storage tank vents were high enOUgh (l) constitute a health concern at.
as distance oful) to 524 feet. The FITA reconiniends screening school sites within 1 0010 f*eet of a
gas stati(mi. A, joint Bloomberg School of Health and John I lopkins (.Jniviersity analysis oil tile
health implications of living llear as gas station concluded that part iCU1arlY impacted are residents
living near gas st ations who spend significant amounts of time at ]ionic and children who five
and play nearby. The National Institute ot'Health has pulflisfied countless research reports o:11 tile
dangers of'repeated exposure to liquid and vaporized gasoline. Long brain and kidney darnage
are frequently cited as the most pressing health concerns. According to the World I lealth
Organization there is no safe level fcH- benzene. Ms. Lindsay-Hartz stated she could go on and
oil with examples of' headaches. low built rate, childhood leukentia and benzene seeping into
nearby lionics. Denying the request to add I I fUCI PUITIP stations making as total of'20 FueI pLaTil)
stations sandwiched between three densely populated residential neighbourhoods is the only
thing to do and is.justified by following the guidelines in (lie Land Development Code Section
110-65 and 67, An addit,ional gas station is not appropriate within the context ofthe surrounding
neighborhoods, is not consistent %vith the COMMUnity cliaractcr., will have an adverse effect oil
the valUe of'the surrounding hornies and properties., and is as significant threat to the health and
well being ofthose living ricarby. F'or these and the many reasons that the very zealous neighbors
has already discussed, she implores the Commission to deny this variance,
Mr. John Wolfe pointed out that a fair alTIOUnt 01' that information was not relevant to the
variance which is obviously tile portion was about all of the studies which are hearsay. The
Conitilission can listen to it ancl do what they want kvith it but lie needed to point that out, 'hair
Scarpelli then closed public coninicilit.
Connirissioner Demes asked MIr. Wolfe to further explain his latest coninients. Mr. Wolfe
explained that this hearing is only about the variance and there were as lot of'extrernely germane
coninients about the dangers and safetics abOLft that, 'Tire portion about gas, stations themselves
being inherently dangerous because of' Furnes has nothing to do with this part of the variance,
That's all lie was saying, Chair Scarpelli asked iftlic applicant wanted to, speak.
N11r, Ty I larris stated (lie he appreciates the comments from the public speakers, He will have
Jason, Green and lan Rairden speak to some of (lie issues that. arc germane to tile variance
request. This is as quasi-Judicial proceeding and when someone purpoils to lie all expert in
something, they have to be qualified, To tile extent. that as report was introduced into the record
that lie hasn't seen and did not get as chance to cross-cxarnine that person, that evidence does riot,
constinite substantial competent evidence for purposes of overturning the staffrecoinniendation,
Staff" recommended approval and the presumption is that all eight criteria have been met. to
overcorrie that it must be shown that the applicant has not met that,
Mr. Jison Green stated that most ofthe testimony, in his opinion, was bascd oil tile use and this
application is about the access. Staff has already stated that. a variance Nvould be needed for any
driveway for any use on this Site for anyone redeveloping, this site. It is incorrect to state that tile
variance is needed to get a stilaller truck in and all of these other comments related to that. Large
trucks, Full-size fire trucks can all inakc the turn to get into this site. A variance is nc)t needed
30
3724
because of that, The variance is needed because of the separation frorn Grand Street and nearby
driveways. It is unr()rturiate to try to tic the use to accidents. Gas stations do not inherently
caUse, accidents and death and those are not fair statements. Most of the examples given were
Z I ay be backups
ibout Ider, nonconforming, too sniall sites for the, uses that were shown. Thet-e m
and boat trailers, hanging out into the roadway on other sites,. Unfortunately, some of' the
comments would lead him to believe there is not a single Wiry YOU could ever design a gas station
here. These standards, the drivewa.ys, the radii that come into the driveways all have to Illelet
FIXITF and County regulations which were put ill place because of' safety factors. As far as
backups. one of`the things done when the site Nvas changed, was to make sure there was enough
room between the fuel delivery area and the end of`the gas pumps. There is 30 feet between, a
vehicle parked at the end, and as fuel tanker if'one is parked there, The assuniption that it is going
to back vehicles up and gOkl C,111't get around vehicles fails. fie is confused having heai.d
testimony that both more and less driveways are better. Today WS full driveways and this is
Cutting th,11, in half`.. The driveways are 35 fleet wide., which its much larger than the typical
standard coninicrcial driveway of 24 feet. They have run numerous truck turns \vith different
vehicles arid, a lire truck call circulate through (lie entire site. This is as very well designed site to
accommodate as lot of tile w1lat-its. The applicant is also going to restore and niatch the pathway
that is, there on the west side of the site for the southbound side to enhance arid improve
pedestrian circulation. The Commission needs to look at where else a commercial development
would put the driveways.
Chair Scarpelli noted that the applicant had mentioned using the Grand Street access and there
were iriajor issues with utilizing Grand Street, including the nightniare that it would create on
Grand Street. The public coninient was they, did not want the access on Grand Street. Mr, fail
Rairden of Kinfley Horn added that the applicant has off'cred to Put that in if the COLulty wants
that, The applicant caliVI fix bad drivers and other streets with poor visibility. '"I'lloSC iSSUCS that
are there are not being added to or create([ by the applicant. The original traffic Study was dorle
b,ased oil the four driveways. It was reviewed., nier all county guidelines and was approved.
Subsequent to the prior meeting it was updated to show the two driveways, arid that study was
also approved and niects level of service standards,
Coin ni i ss,ioner Genies stated with Grand Street getting a lot of local trat'llic crossing I l.S. I, it
would be is disaster to have the traffic going in and out of as gas station jon there. I IC aSSUrnes new
cuts require FDOT permits. and asked where the FDOT concurrence is with (fie plan right now,
Mr. Green responded that FIXTI, was fine with tile fibur driveway option because they Nvei-en't
lour Full driveways, so under then- rules they treat that as one driveway, This plan has been
submitted to FDO]"'and is Linder review as it is required to be resubilii1ted. I l,e hasn't gotten their
comments I yet birit lie believes it wvill riot be an issue fc)r them becaLlSe they were fine with the
fOUr drive layout. The next step is the engineering within the right-of way but the access is being
reviewed currently. Any work done in the right-of-way requires FDO`F approval. Mr. Grecri
understands the publics concern but in his proficssional opinion, this rneets the criteria arid lie
agrees with staffs recommendation.
'j,hoUgh NIS. f)eVill folpin had ilothing to add, Mr. Peter Morris qualified her as an expert in the
fields of Planning arid Floodplain N/lanagenlent, and she listing leer degrees, licensures and work
31
3725
experience. The Conit-nission accepted her as an expert. Ms. Folpin then read the eight required
standards Ibr as variance into the record,
Corninissioner Dernes stated that after listening to the passionate input from the coilinwilit),, Ile
wanted to clarif�y that this variance decision has nothing to do with tile use ofthe properly and
that the use would be reviewed through the conditional use. Conirnissioner Ritz also noted that
having sat thl-OUgh lOtS 01" public hearings, this conimunity had spoken eloquently and
knovyWgeably and he is PIT)Ud to be one of their neighbc)rs. He is viewing this as simply an
aCCeSS iSSLlc and lie, does not see the exceptional hardship, [,)or does see as threat to public safety,
so lie will vote against, this variance based oil public safety. Chair Scarl')e1h asked Ms. Tolpin
about the criteria t )r public health and sallety and asked What it vVOLlld be reviewed against. Ms.
l'olpin responded that it is reviewed based oil the documentation available at tile firne the
application is submitted. Peter Morris added that the Coninussion neccls to be very analytically
Cil-CUfllspect and not hypothesize too far afield froin what's in (Ile file, In other words, don't get
too adventurOUS theorizing. The longer the analytical chain ol'what Could potendidly result in a
danger, the longer that is, the niore tenuous the reasoning is. It's a matter of managing liability
exposure on appeal, Chair Scarpelh stated that there has been some very interesting and
compelling testimony today about health zinc] safety as far as traffic concerns go. I,Jnftounately,
that's due to the nature OfWhCre vve live and the highway vve live off'ofas a one lifieblood kind
of road scenario, lie does not. know that that, ShOLlid allect, people, developing their property,
Denies echi)ed ("'anima sswner Ritz on the C0111111Unity input and presentations,
stating that in his time oil the Coninfission lie hasn't seen such good coinniunity input as SeCu ill
this niceting and he applauds their effc)as.
Motiran: Commissioner Ritz made a motion to deny based on there not being enough
evidence for an exceptional hardship and the variance increasing the risk, to public safety.
(7oninfissioner Neugent seconded the motion.
Roll Call: Commissioner Denies, No; Commissioner 'Thomas, No; Commissioner Neu gent,
Yes; Commissioner Ritz, Yes; Chair Searpelli, No. The motion failed 3 to 2.
Mr. Wolfe clarified that this nicans the Conimission is agreeing to allow the variance and uphold
the staff'report. Mr,. Morris thought that to niake sure the record is abundantly clear, they should
have another vote on a motion to approve consistent with the stall s, rcconiniendations.
Motion: Commissioner "I'lionjas made a motion to uphold the staff report and
recommendations to approve the variance. (",ominfissioner Demes seconded the inotion.
Roll Call: Commissioner Demes, Yes; Commissioner rhornas, Yes; Commissioner.
Neugent, No; Commissioner Ritz, No; Chair Scarpelli, Yes. The motion passed 3 to 2,.
4. 7-ELEVE.N (DANIEL BARRY, Jr., & ARCHER BARRY), 98200 OVERSEAS
HIGHWAY, KEY LARGO, FL 33037 MILE MARKE'R, 9 : A PUBLIC NIFE-TING
CON(.7F.RNING A RFQUFST FOR A MAJ OR CONDITIONAl. USE' PERMIT' R,Y AXIS
INFRASTR(JGHJRE, LLC ON 131"HALF ('*" DANIET, & ARCHE'll BARRY, F"OR
CONS' RIJCTION' 01--' A HIGH INTENSITY (-'OMkIFR(1IAL 7-ELEVFN CONVENIENCE
32
3726
STORE, WITH 11, FUE'LING STATIONS, O PROPF"RTY DE'SCRI13111 AS LOTS I
I J "1"'0 THE PLA'"I"
'111ROUG11 6, BLOCK 1, RO(.,,,K HARBOR ESTATES, ACCOR,r)I NG
THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PI-A"I" 1300K 3, AT PAW" 187, OF PUBLIC RECORDS
OF MONROL" COUNTY, I'LORIDA, CURREN'"ITY HAVING PARCEL it) NUMBS'R
005 19590-000000, (FILE 2022-02 1)
(2:05 p.m.) Ms. Devin "folpin, principal Planner, presented the staff`rep This application is
for the nia'jor conditional use to develop the 4,730 square foot high-intensity c(initnercial retail
store oil the property, "I'llis includes five double-sided fueling stations, plus one Rec 90 fueling
punip. This pr(,iperty is located in the Suburban C oniniercial zoning district which does allow for
high-intensity cornnicrcial retail uses as as maJor conditional use. The site plan with approval of,
that variance has dernoristrated corriphance with all required rules, and restrictions of the [,.and
Develop rneru Code, including parking, open space. buffer yards, storniwater and landscaping
reqU irc nie tits. Staff reviewed this application for consistency with the standards presented and in
the staff report. Staffrecorrunends approval,. Of note, the site plan (lid include a sidewalk in the
C'0Unty-(.:)N,Yned right-of'-way adjacent to Grand Street. This sidewalk is not required, It wasn't
treated favorably by the engineering departillent, but they, did not say that it could not be done. If'
the C,ornmission does recornmend approval ref"this application and wants that sidewalk there. it
would need to be added as a condition of'approval as it is not required, it is additional. Also of'
note, the C"OUnty has received written protests by more than 20 percent of the Surrounding
property owners which requires a supermajority of the planning Convaiission to approve this
major conditional use permit, meaning I'(-,)ur niernbers must vote to approve as opposed to tile
usual three.
Ms. Schernper then addressed the sidewalk. She had spoken with engineering yesterday abOUt
this to clarify whether this could possibly be permitted or if' it was an absoltrite no, It could
possibly be done, but the concern is the sidewalk does lead to the Multiuse path oil the
souillbound side of' median property, so it is connecting people on the ocean side through the
rnechan to tile path. However, engineering stated that if you put (fie sidewalk in, it would, likely
require tile curb cut and pedestrian apron towards U.S, I in the northbound lanes, and that then
becomes arl indicator to pedestrians that this is a good place to cross tile highway, So the
concern is more People nlay be encouraged to cross there without any soil of crosswalk just by
putting the sidewalk there, along Grand Street. People are already crossing there. One idea was
to have a sidewalk, area for crossing through the gas station property itself' within the parcel
boundary so that no one is walking through cars backing in and out. of parking. Site is, explaining
this in the event the Conunission decides they want that, sidewalk as a condition as she would not
want a condition added that would be impossible to rueet. (-.1lair Scarpelli did not think the apron
was required. Ms. Schernper responded that she was not fully aware (if the rules. Chair Scarpelli
thought it would prevent people frorn parking oil that side ofthe road. Corru-nissioner Ritz n(::itcd
that there, was a bus stop right across (lie street. Chair Scarpelli then asked it' the applicanl
wished to speak.
Mr. Ty Harris stated that as par as the sidewalk goes it could be put in or not, but staff hags stated
that the they meet all criteria for the maJor conditional use. The burden now shifts by th(:)se
opposed to prove by competent: SUllstantial evidence that the applicant soniellow doesn't meet
that burden, The applicant will listen to opposition and respond to each iSSLJc as needed. There
33
3727
were no further C,ormilission questions or comments. Chair Scarpelli their asked for public
Coninient,
Mr. Tobin corninented that i�t had been stated that the burden has now shifted to the opponents
and lie had as point ()f'order, Mr, N,lorris explained to Mr, Toupin that lie was speaking 01.1t Of turn,
NIS. SUSan Cashin lives at mile marker- 98.2 which is right in the bulls eye. Almost cvcryone in
the state is having as problem with horfleovvner insurance. Many C0111parries have left the state
and homeowner insurance has been hard to get. or find. The coniparry she was with For over 1 0
years notified her in February of non-renewal as the carrier was reducing eXPOSUIV, I ler agent,
v0iorn had been with t"or over .2(1) years, I ound her a new conipany, in March with Florida Family.
After completing art application and paying, she Nvas then notified in April that she was ineligible
due to the proximity ofa gas station, which is the Marathon gas station, She cannot be the only
person having this problem but she believes this is only the tip of`the iceberg and is concerned
abOUt \vhat N,vill happen if file larger 7-11 developnient is allowed to be built. She, along Nvith
everyone that she knows, does not want or need as gas station or convenience store at this
location. There is, one already oil the next property, Site is concerned for her health, safety and
property values. Accidents already occur regularly, Ms. ('whin presented an aerial that her
insurance company had sent her indicating she \A,,,as too close to as gas station, air(], asked the
Corninission to please vote no.
MS. Susan Holler, a realtor with Location Real F,'state for 17 years fit sales and living in Pirates
Cove Im 25 years, realizes there is no iriatheniatical data to prove that back-to-back gas stations
can hurt pr(:)perty values in neat-by neighborlic)ods, but in lier experience and opinion this ineg"t
gas station will negatively inipact property vahJCS in the neighboring subdivisions. She knoNv,s
what buyer's look fi.)r in as property. A large rna'jority of thern comefrorn big cities and all toad to
he looking for ill escape from the, congested hustling cities and for quiet, safe neighborhoods,
This proposed gas station is going, to have motorbikes, cars, trucks, boats, senlis, all tilarieuvering
to get oil and (AT the highway and trying to Use the cross Street to get from one side of the
highway to another, Grand Street is already difficult to traverse with the boat business on, that
street. It is a short street with a blind spot. There is also the veterinary business, Buyers want to
live in the Keys because they don't want the noise an(] light pollution, That wont be possible
with as 24-7 lighted niega station, not to merition tire effiects ofall that light on the local wildlife,,
Buyers will say 110 to a property for a little highway n(.)ise, let alone noise from as mega gas
station. In her opinion, surrounding property values vvill show deterioration in price and sales it'
this developtoent is allmved. but by the tinie that can be proven it will be too late.
Mr. Andrew Fobin lives oil Grand Street and regarding this developtrient, which is really as truck
stop, warned to get a point oforder clarified, A Planning G011111lissi011cr Said that the approval of'
the variance has nothing to do kvith the use of the property, and lie asked if he had understood
that correctly. C,onunissioner Denies stated that that had been, his question. Mr, rl'ob i 11 scanted
that ifthat is the ruling, their this niaJor COnditiOlUd Use becomes very, very important, I'veryone
agrees that going from flour driveways to two drrvcways, is a reduction, in theory, but if it's going
from four to two 1:'()r the highest intensity rise that vve kno", of in the Keys dien they did riot
qrralif for a legal hardship, so lie is glad the variance does not have anything to do with the [Ise,
Mr. Fobin submitted t.Nvo prior Planning Clonitnission ReSOILitiOnS fl-0111 the late 80s, one in Silver
34
3728
Shores for a 2,500 square foot convenience store with two pumps and four stations, similar to file
one in Key Laar'go next to the elementary school, a very small station. "I"he Planning Director at
the thric, ])oil Craig, approved those and the Plinning Commission overturned staff"s
recorrunendation. That was at Silver Shores and, Woods Avenue oil Plantation Key. 'Fli e
purpose of'subirritting the resolutions is to eiripliasize that, one ofthe sections riot covered in the
report is 110-65, authorized conditional uses. "A Planning Commission is empowered within
their review of minor or ma'jor conditional use applications respectively to approve, or approve
with conditions, or to deny any application that may not be appropriate within any particular arca
in the context ('4'surrounding properties and neighbor-hoods," That was, section (c), Section (a)
says, "The designation of a use in a land Use zoning district as as conditional use does not.
constitute ain authorization or assurance that such use will be approved," He knows that sortie of
the Planning ("ornmissioners are riot fialliliar with Grand Street, the Upper Keys, and the
residential areas oil lmay Street that are going to look directly into this gas station, Ile
appeared before the BOCC last morith and they are going to hopefully have as moratorium on gas
stations because 1.111like Collier County which has time pages specifically directed to gas stations,
lighting pollution, and all the other things (fiat are irnportant. one of,' the things that is very
common is to have as setback betvveen gas stations, because gas stations are magnets for traffitc.
He would ask for all of the evidence that was provided ror the variance to be considered in the
context of this naikjor con ditiOlIal use. Fhere are many jurisdictions that have setbacks frcml
residential areas, Monroe, (i"ounty does riot have specific regulations on that, but Under 110-6,5,
the Planning C'ornrnissic)n has the authority aas the final arbiter or jUdges that decides, Monroe
C I ounty does riot have specific regulations so it's, more clifficult to figUIT out 110AN to protect the
health, safety and welfare of the corrullunitY, "['his is not one gas station being approved, but
basically two gas staticuis. One has 5,000 square ficet of convenience store, the other one has
3,000. T'Ilis one has I I pumps, the other one lias nine purrips. This is what is at stake here is the
neighborhood is going to be changed. T'he applicant is riot entitled to any particular Use or the
highest and best use of property. That is as zoning concept, that everyone is fiamiliar with, 'No
property owner is entitled to the highest and best rise, especially Nvith traffic safety issues, Nvith
berizene issues, with, school bus issues. "I'llat segment ol'Monroe County, is a dangerous segment
and is surrounded by a residential area, as stable residential area. All of the evidence that you
heard on traffic safety was riot inade 1.11). The COUnty'S ONVII trafflic report (flat the M)CC adopted
shows this as a high crash area. With all due respect to the applicant, yes, a gas station doesn't
necessarily create accidents, but it is as magnet. (ars go in, cars go Out at all hours ofthe night,
die.y*re pulling boats, there are trucks. all(] they're backing Lip on, the 'r Yhose are the
things that: should be considered in a major conditional use approval. "rhe applicant is riot,
entitled to the highest and best use of the property. There is precedent from Conunissioners in
the past, Grace Marrillo, John Scharch, Ron Miller. They were concerned with over
devc1opilient. In the recent years the ('0(Juty has had ROGO and slower growth and Alocations.
That's great, but there's still as role for the Planning Commissioners to decide what, is arl
appropriate use, and under the ma'jor conditional use Criteria, just because you meet the technical
requirerneurs and just because staff' recornfliends approval under those requirements is not a
substitute fOr y(Air judgment, E"veryoric in this roorn is very passionate about having back-to-
back gas stations. It is a precedent that you do not want to set because gas stations have
unlimited resources and lie does, not believe they care Much about the local residents, Please
don't set the precedent.
35
3729
Commissioner Thomas asked flor a copy of Mr, Tobin's paperwork, which he provided.
Commissioner Ritz thought Mr, Tobin had raised a good point about all of the testimony Crom
Rena 3 and NA,liether it would be okay to consider all of*that testimony or it'the Folks needed to
come Lip and repeat everything they had said for Itern 3. Mr. Wolf'e stated that the items can't be
totally, separated and there were a lot of' points made that are directly relevant to the major
conditional use all(] the Conimissic)n can definitely consider those. The community does not
have to get up and repeat, everything. Con-imissi(mer, Ritz wanted the audience to be made aware
that they, do not need to repeat all ol'the prior cornillnents made for hern 3,
Ms. Joy Martin thanked the Coninlissioners for their firne and all of'the neighbors and residents
For their comments, She has lived in the Rock Harbor area f'or,over 30 years and is f7iarniliar vvith,
the different traffic flow, AfthOUgh this may, not generate more traf'fic, it will generate the
congestion and issues resulting with the use of' the property as a 7-11 and a 1711.11ti-PUDIP gas
station. This development brings pollution via air and, light, Anyone can Google what it 1.11eans
to live by as 24-hour convenience store and gas station and can see the restionses in the studies. It
doesn't only show, increased crime, traffic congestion, risk fi.,)r pedestrians and accidents. It's
Just the nature of'the bea,st with that type ot'development, (I ouple that with the fact that it's next
to another gas station. Ms. Martin is concerned Nvith the emissions in the immediate area with so
many PULTIps and big tankers filling those punips. I"his is all issue for anyone having breathing
concerns and just our duality of .These reasons are some of the reasons why 41SUrance
coilipanies are rating residences near a gas station ineligible Im coverage. If homeowner
coverage cannot be obtained their property owners are going to be in default of their niortgages.
11' it can be obtained elsewhere there will be a prenikun increase with nacre risk. Ms. Cashin
shared her cancelation lor ineligil')ility and she's the tit) ol'the iceberg, That is an adverse lulpact
on the residents and the neighborhood, 'I"'his will also afl`ect Landings (.4'Largo. She had reached
Out to as local insurance conipany and she asked them to contact the F'lorida Family grOUP about
insurance 1'or homeowner pith regard to a gas station arid the reply Crone the underwriter Was,
"We would not be interested in ariv property near a gas station." It' the traffic condition that
already exists in the area worsens as, we predict wilith this use, this area will be a greater IlUb I,�)r
ferider benders and worse, accidents with injuries or Catalities. I'llis will adversely impact all
Keys residents to include all that use the bike way and the highway,, Fhe bike path there is used
regularly, and people cross the street there to get on the JIT'F bus. Insurance has always been an
issue though lionicownLr insurance hasn't, but now it will be, for all ol'these residents., with this
high-impact use. This is the adverse impact oil property values that the stall' had referenced in
their report that they were not aware cal'any adverse inipacts at this tiine. She is now putting staff'
on notice ol'this, adverse inipact.
Ms. Ann HeIrriers referenced Chair Scarpelli's comment regarding the scope concerning safety
and the argument inade by the applicant that the curb cuts would simply be needed in an)! event
even were there to be another business such as Anthony's put into that location. By tile
,applicant's own traffic study, there is an increase of'trips per, clay at this site Frorn aroUnd 60 to
673, So there is race way not to understand and acknowledge that diis will be an enonnous
increase of' traffic Stopping, turning, corning in and out. That said, it is interesting and not an
extrapolation to say that we as residents have presented I'DOT data showing specifically that this
is a high impact, high traffic, high fatality, high accident area. It is not as stretch of imagination
to say that. It'you take the data that exists today and multiply by ten Onies the number ot'cars
36
3730
making stops and trying to get in and out ot'a specific area that already has a gas station 40 feet
away, it's going to be as problem, 'This is exactly whY we have a Planning Commission because
you all are charged with making those decisions above arid beyond what the statutory
requirement may say. It is interesting that the attorney has acknowledged that the applicant has
not yett completed the process of obtaining a (trial opinion from FDOT. That is tile state agency
authorized to evaluate safety and make decisions. It can*t Inc Justified that if one agency says
something is okay. then it must be okay.
Ms, Jody Koblenzer reminded the C I I I onimission that Ms. Ronnie Flarris, had made a presentation
and May not have been aware that Items 3 arid 4 had been separated, and asked there to please
recall tile fact that she does have, !studies that she found on the benzene. A high-intensity,
business at this site would severely daimige the community character-. A 24-hour business is,
inappropriate, The llight pollution Would be particularly, intrusive to the garden units of'Landings
of Largo. Truck deliveries at night Would be disturbing during the time of' day that residents
need to renew their spirits, and energies. Residents of file Keys have chosen to live here for the
quality of fife, please consider the impact on then- lives today.
Mr, Joe Wrobleski of"Rose Street pointed out how much more traffic will be: going through this
area. Ile sat at the Torsi Thumb for hours counting cars and oil average, in an, hour, theres
approximately 80 cars going through the Torn Thumb. He spent several hours at Andiony's and
there"s approximately 30 cars that went through Arithony's, and OLA of tile 30, tile Mullber that
went into tile store were live so most oaf`those people were just driving through there. This will
be a hundred-and-some pereent increase in the amount of traffic in this area which is a rnaJo[,1
safety concern, Ile (Joogled, safely concerns on convenience stores and oil the FBI report in
2021 arid these stores are number fOUr Under violent crinies. Number seven is a gas station,
Both of the top tell will be in his back yard. I le has riot heard one person speak for this
development and fie hopes the Commission takes that into consideration.
Mi% 11) Carbello disclosed that lie spent 35 years working I"or Marathon Oil, which was, part of
Speedway which is now, owned by 7-11. It's already been shown that this is as high-crash,
location from niarker 96 to 9,9, and the reason is sunple. The light turns green at the CVS,
every(l.me has been backed Lip there a mile or two so Nyhen the light turns green and they get
Out of'that downtown Key [..,argo area, they're, cooking to point south. C"onversely, coming up
fi-orn Tavernier., you may or nlay not get trapped at the Harry Flarris light, but YOUre in that 50
nlile-per-hour zoning coming north. By Keys standards, you're in the wide open !spaces. That's
a 50 niph zone conning north with all the people blasting out of the traffic light at 101, all(] this is
a perfect storm of corim-gence right at mile marker 98, Mt% (rr°arbello presented photographs of
what it looks like to pull out From (irand Strcct. Mr. Carbeilo mentioned that lie looked for 24-
hour businesses in this neighborhood. T0111 ThUmb is one, and you have to go all tile way to the
Speedway for the next one that 7-11 owns. 'I Isere are no other 24-hour businesses in this stretch
ot'higlivvay, Its dark, cluiet and peaceful. "I'lie Marathon station closes at 10:00 and Anthony*s
at 5:30. This WOUld plunk one right in the middle of these three subdivisions arid would be a
great detriment to the quality of life. The community character %,ould change significantly '1111
that one strip ot'highway, 'I"his shrinkage of(fie tanker, truck and how they're going to get this if]
and out, lie has the turning software and has run sail ol:l the turning diagrains, and it doesn't work.
Hie W1350 doesn't work. Coca-Cola and Frito Lay use W1340, and Ile Could give an hour talk on
37
3731
boats, RVs, tulibUtances, fire trucks, tie's looked at all ofthern. It looks great when there are no
cars in the place. You put one boat, car or RV in there and YOU can't swing any ofthern through
there. 'I lien witir tire 44,000 gallons, you do riot fill that Lip with a, teaspoon Of a ti-Lick. That will
need every bit of five to eight tankers to supply those I I purrips. The character will significantly
change. It's the fact of taking a very low-inipact, quiet,, nice neighborhood store and turning it
into high intensity.
Ms. Jearnie Brennan who had presented the crash slides earlier slated that if this conditional rise
penrid: is approved crashes will be added on, top of what is already there. Some people five only
50 Het away fircan this proposed site. Any tinie you enter and exit VOU're going to have to slow
down, so all of those slow-downs will increase the, possibility for traffic conflicts, and fllen
exiting the property YOU haVC to accelerate. The community character is going to be adversely
impacted by the approval of this application, The character right now is quiet. The lighting
would be 24-7. This area is quiet, dark and peaceful. Traffic Counts, while the Studies show it's
in the 600 range. her estiniales are that it's much higher, closer to 3,0010. The trip counts and
V011,1111C of traffic estimated by the applicant is grossly underestintated, in her professional opinion
froin information publicly available, She believes it's the burden (-&the applicant to show that
these large trucks in and out will work in this area, Fhe gentleman that taught people hovv to
navigate fire trucks says It's not going to work.. The neighbor next door at the Marathon station
says it's riot going to work with the tanker truck conflicts. Take judicial notice of the Collier
County regulations that require a mininium ofa 50-foot setback, (Ile purpose being to ensure that
ficlCiliitieS with I'UCI pumps do riot adversely inipact ad.jaccrit land uses, especially residential land
uses. The high levels of' traffic, glare and intensity of use ass(�nciated with facifi(ies with Fuel
JILIATIPS, particularly those open 24 hours, may be incompatible with Surrounding uses, eSpeCially,
residential uses. There is precedence in Florida for denying these 24-7 gas station operations that
C0114liCt With C0111111LInity character, She requests the (I ornmission deny this application,
Mr, Shannon Donnelly stated diat the Cloninlission has been presented Nvith, ,in influx of input
From the comulUnity and there has been over 60 letters written in opposition to this., Ile hopes
they have read all of those letters becaUSC to his knowledge, there has been no one in support of
this. A compounding flact is this iSSUC With insurance. Ile is still paying on his house and ]file
were denied. he would riot be able to carry his mortgage, so that W'01,ild cost hire his horne. W'e
know this is going to be detrimental tO Our CuVil"(111111011. Value in our own lives and our safety.
All of`the things that are going on in the, Keys and the amount of charige we've seen. Jjr1UCh Of'
which has riot beery positive., a lot of' it has been (,:�iut of our control. Mr. Donnelly 1)efieves the
Commission has been presented with enough evidence and vvith, examples that they would be
justified in saying we do not want this becaLlSe We are representing our local coniniunities for
their best interests and their safety, He believes the Commission has the obligation to (to this,
Just because you can do soaiething because it's leg,.fl does not. mean it's the right thing to do. Mr.
Donnelly, also speaking for his wife, Ms. Rosernary Donnelly, is begging the Cloninlission to riot
let this be approvetrL It is going to cost people their. lives.
his. Nanc y TI'Liesdalle clarified that the Collier County regLdatiOnS that were Put into the record
say that separation from adjacent pU111p facilities should be 500 feet., and riot 50. Allowing this
Would certainly adversely affect the character ofthis neighborhood. Back-to-back gas stations is
unprecedented in the Keys, it doesn't exist. To have something like this on a property as unique
38
3732
as this one is because of the Grand Street cut i,S COITIPOUnded. photos were shown of`the other
high-use station, the Tom Thumb. On cither side of that Tom Thumb there is, no residential
neighborhood on either side,, There is a single house on the southbound side and that's it. The
TOM "I'JIL1111h, was appropriately placed in an area that does not affect tile quality of life of' local
residents. Tbat is, not true for this Anthony's property. Ms. Truesdale asked the ,cornrnission to
please vote no,
Ms. Lisa Cialiagen asked if the Conirnission ever went on field trips. She is afraid the
Corriniission is not going to realize the impact orwhat this will do to the neighborhood until they
see what the residents see every day when they try to get out of their neighborhood at 5:00
o'clock when the cars are backed LIP at the light in Key Largo, or trying to get across the street to
go SOUthbound. Adding 7-11 in the median is going trr be a nightmare. k4s. Gahagen asked the
Commission to Please vote no for this.
Mr. Steve Hartz state(] that lie is a retired lawyer and lie wants, to adopt everything that the
residents have said, They have been very eloquent, Ile cannot add too MUCII, but rioted that it
was first stated that FDOT was on board with this idea, Mr. Rarnon Sierra off-,DOT who is the
traffic services program engineer flor this arena told the Federation homeowners in a pUblic
meeting that they clont render any opinion until after the County's decision, so that should never
be considered that, FDOT has made the decision. That comment by the applicant should be
stricken and not used, in connection with this or any other application, Also, on [)age, six of the
staff report on the conditioaal use approval, it says that no evidence has been submitted to
support or, disprove the applicant's financial and, technical capacity to complete the development.
The burden of`proofunder thie (.,ornriiissiori's rules is on the applicant. The absence of evidence
is as basis for an adverse inference on as fundamental issue, So they, haven't really trier their
burden and this application has to be denied on that point. It sounds like just as lawyer's point but,
it's actually pretty important, 1f`his isn't 7-11 applying., these are the Archers. He has no idea it'
they have the ability to create the development outlined.
']'here was n(-,) further public cornniern. public conirnent was, closed,
Mr. Ty I larris stated that lie has been in the Position that staff has when there is so, much pressure
to recommend denial, yet staff has reconiniended approval because they have triet the criteria for
this niaJor conditional use, It'things are Just ruled, by the nuniber of people that want or don't
want something we probably WOUldnt even have a high school in Islarnorada. Going through
the Toin T'humb data, no one said there was some extra level o,f crinnnal activity happening at
the 24-hour Torn Thumb. L,00king at the classification ofgas stations and 24-hour stores may be
a relevant feature but the one closest to, this has naa niention ofari elevated crinic, rate. "The traffic
crash data was over a seven-year period, which is as long time. As Ear as conirritinity character,
he is not asking fiat® a rezoning or anything that's not already allowed in the zoning classification.
I f this; was as 2,5(")0 square foot store they INOUldn't even be here. Anything over 4,500 square
feet will get kicked LIP tO the Planning Commission because it's considered high intensity. Mr.
Flarris doesn't beheve the opponents have met their, burden of overcoming the competent
substantial evidence From the staff'report as to any of these elements, He WOUld be hard pressed
to go through the tesfiniony and find sorne to that degree. This project
ject is under contract with 7-
I I so tire ability to complete the Project is not air issue. Mr, Jason Green confirmed that to lie
39
3733
correct adding that Axis I[utton is very financially capable ofcorripleting this project, They have
clone 60 to 80 commercial properties per year over a 25-year period and are very able and
financially Successful vvith then, projects
jects throughout the U.S, He echoed the comments about the
compatibility component. '['here are multiple examples Lip and down US. I where gas stations
are in the rniddle of the two directions and there is the Marathon gas station here. L,00king at the
community character requirements in the plan, it talks about Sirnilar to ad.jacerit uses, '"I'llat
nreans this corridor is ripe for a gas suation. 'I"here is one, there, and lie disagrees with some of
tile pUbliC comments about as gas station that is five feet away frorn the site not being a problern
l'or residents but this one is. Ile does not see how that can be differentiated, All ofthe County's
ari1 -iteria is based oil safety and compatibility with tl e comulUnity. Lightingd jj)0,j , cr I
standards in the code has to be niet, landscaping, et cetera. There are a lot of permitting
rcqUirenients at the state and federal level that inust, be rilet for Underground gas tanks, There
are also monitoring levels and other safety Ceatures flint are Put into place. A lot of what has
been discussed have been alder stations and noncr-)nfi-.)rniing sites that have issues that need to be
corrected. lie disagrees With the adjacent, property owner saying we will cause thern problems
with their fueling. The applicant's site plan shows they call get their trucks off' (lie street, fuel
efficiently, and provide access to everyone else Wing,the Site, ']'here is no conflict between these
sires. The Marathon is able to successfully be refueled, so how is a larger, better designed, site
not going to be able, to be refueled. This is an appropriate location, the zoning allows (lie use,
and the'lob is to make sure the criteria are met, which they have. It vvill be the best looking thing
that's up, and down this, corridor right now. Fle is proud of' the landscaping and willing to do
more. The applicant is willing to offer anything that would help create safety and improve lives
and be part (if' the community. This use does not cause traffic accidents. Any SUccessfill
business that is drawing trips on the roadway is going to have those issues so it's not as gas
station. Mr. Green hopes the Commission can get past this, gas station component as the location
is appropriate.
(I hair Scarpelli asked about the site plan and some of the evidcrice provided shovving a boat
trader at the end of the row cat"pumps and asked il"that, was as Rec 90 punip, Mr. Green believed
that it could be a Rec 90 pump but he Would have to check. Chair Scarlictli asked if'diesel was
being provided at this station. Mr. Green did ri(�)t know the answer to that. As to the spacing,
there is about 30 I'M between the parked vehicle at. the end fuel station and the turning path of a
truck where they
refill the feel. Chair Scarpelfi stated that the photo was kind of compelling and
that's why lie was asking. Mr. Green stated that lie was confident in the Site Circulation, Mr. lain
Rairden added that (lie traffic study was based on methodology agreed to vvith, the County, "].hey
looked at both weekday and weekend, and morning and afternoon for the peak hour traffic to
acconiniodate the highest volume oftraffic on the road. Gas stations inherently draw trafl'ic, that
is already on the roadway. The study looks at new trips and pass-by trips and shows that they
have, niet the standards hased on, the C',OLH1tY*S guidelines, and staffagreed,
Commissioner Ritz stated that one of the comments frorn the public had been (flat drivers turn
left froin the fast lane as opposed to turning right fr(r,)ni the slow lane, and asked what
accommodations have been rnade tt)r tLirning left from the last lane. Mr. Rairden stated that
there is, no deceleration lane designed or provided at this driveway. They had looked at. what the
FDOT requirements are for right and left turn lanes and there is riot a guideline for providing as
deceleration lane into as site like this, so they did not provide one. Gerverally, the way FDOT
40
3734
looks at the turn lanes in general is when there are multiple lanes of traffic going in one direction
there is ail opportunity for a car to M()VC ()Vrer to the adjacent lane to contirlue their flovv, so it's a
little less stringent oil what's required. Clornmissioner Ritz asked it there were D01' standards
for a 1`01,11--lane divided highway where you're turning left, into an establishment, Mr, Rairden
responded that they were not able to find that in the guidelines.
'rhLre vvere no further Commission questions for applicant. Ms. '"Folpin had no ful-ther
comments. Mr. Green wanted to make a closing statement saying that lie gets the emotional
Outpouring aird concern. Ile has, worked on both sides in the public and private sector arid has as
lot of respect for the Conimissions Job, but asked them to please understand the context of this
and rely on the standards ofthe County,
Mr% John Wolfe, explained that there have been as couple of different references, on the
C'orinriission's scope of authority and efTectively the role of the Planning Cornmission. The
Commission is not bound by stall's reconnnendation, as, they know. However, if the
Commission decides to not go wk ith the staff and den.), this, they need to state which conditions
aren't met because the law must be applied. Mr. Peter Morris added that this decision is being
made within as containment field and what it's interfaced with are the criteria that are enumerated
in the code which are laid out in the staff report. The criteria is, where the Conimission decides
\\,here to ultimately land, and not as pOpUlarity contest or anything extrinsic to what's in file code.
Cornilussioner Demes complimented staff, recognizing that they work really [lard with this
having a lot of community input. Fic appreciates owners' rights. This is a very difficult
decision, Technically, the criterion for approval has been niet for the Land Developrnent Gode,
but he just got realigned by the attorneys, Before Mr, Wolfe and Mr. Morris sp()kc, he was, 5 1
Percent against and 49 percent for. But now lie finds it difficult to find solid criteria put together'
by the staiTten deny this request arid!, it's Unfortunate because lie has to sleep at night. Ile thinks
the right thing to do is, to clieny it, Being charged Nvith what the attorneys just stated, lie, is going
to have to vote against this. Mr. Wolfe Started that he was not trying to suggest that file
Commission Is bound by the staff report. but that as denial must be stated as teeing based on ix)t
meeting one cif the:criteria.
Commissioner Ritz cornmented on Corninissioner Denies' 51 percent, and added that cormillinity
character and Public safety is a criteria, I fit's riot appropriale for the area, then the Commission
is allowed 'to rnake that, determination. As lie had been driving through Marathon this, week. he
appreciated the architecture of all of the new construction with the metal roof's, broad porches,
and thought that Marathon is really turning around and becoming a very attractive part of' the
Florid,i Keys,. Then you see the 7-11 and Speedway and it's like, a turd in a punchbowl. There's
all ofthese beautiful new buildings. and then these very corporate entities that look exactly the
same anywhere in the country, and are not Keysee in any way, shape or fashion. They do not
rneet the community character of Marallion and certainly do not lit the conimunity character of
Key Largo, particularly when there is one gas station right next door, Commissioner Ritz does
not recall the audience saying the Marathon station was okay arid therefore they should not have
another one. Ile heard that it was not A a), and they didn't want to exacerbate the situation. arid
expanding the footprint of the gas station there would be making those problems w'orse.
Commissioner Ritz was particularly compelled by Ms, C,,tshirr's testimony Nvidl the insurance,
41
3735
FIC is not sure staff`was aware (,)f'that point., that being that close to as gas station VOU could lose
your lu.)i-neowners nrisurance, That is quite shocking and the neighbors, that will be abutting the
new gas station, it' it goes in will, also be shocked by that, So that's nevv inrorniation that staff,
didn't have. He does not believe stafTwas aware of'the JBT bus statiotr: across the street so he"s
riot sure (A'tile impacts (:A that. So new things were learned today, but based oil the real estate
valLIC!S, the coniniturity character and public safety, lie is going to vote against this,
C I
,orrunissioner Neugent added that it could riot be articulated any blotter than Conirnissioner Ritz
had done, and having listened to the people that have made their presentation and expressed their
opposition to both the con-iniunity character and the salety issue, he will riot vote Jor this either.
C.,oiiimiis�sic)i,ict-']'Iioriii,is stated she lives in Marathon and she has seen what they have done to her
area and it's been as disaster, orurnissioner Dernes asked which criteria tile inArrance iSSUC
VVOL11d come under, Conirnissioner Ritz resporideld that it would be Under real eSt3te VlIUeS,
C,onirnissioner Demes, stated that that Iliad also caught his attention. Chair Scarpelli stated that
this is one of"those where you find yourself` in a difficult position as, to what is the right tllillg"
(1early, staft7was very diligent with going through the whole process, and the applicant as well
in doing their due diligence and everybody irreeting the criteria. Bar then, You start to get into
some of these t1lings such as vvilere the coniturtnity brought Lip very illLeresting tLU'lling radius
graphics that seern to be concerning. They aren't, the prol"essional on thejob doing the study but
their information is still very usellil in rnaking these decisions, You would think that a propert.y
in between two roadways heavily traveled would be an ideal location. For as gas station rather than
it being actually adjacent to a residential neighborhood because it is like that in other parts (A,the
F'Iorida Keys. The public right-of-way is 65 feet our either side of'this gas station and (fiat's quite
the bt.fflcr. The landscaping on this project is really well done anti you. Nvon't even see the
parking Iot fi-(:�ini the road. Chair ScarpeHi then asked for a motion.
Commissioner 'Ritz niadc as motion to deny the request based oil this riot being appropriate tor, the
area,, it does not tricet the community character standards, it has a tregative inipact on the real
estate values due to t1le insurance issues, and there is as public safety issue with the traffic.
Commissioner Thornas seconded the notion.
Motion: Commissioner Ritz made as motion to deny as articulated. Commissioner Thomas
seconded the motion.
Roll Call: Commissioner Deni Ves; Commissioner Thomas, Ves; (" )"imissioner
Neu gent, Ves; Coin na ission er Ritz, Ves; Chair Scarpelli, No. The motion passed 4 to 1.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
GROWTH N1AN'A(,'jEMENT COMMENT S
None,
ADJOURNMENT
The Monroe County Planning Corrunission meeting was adjourned at 3-140 p,rir.
42
3736
The Applicant's proposed text as submitted on November 13, 2023, is shown as follows: additions
are in blt..ie tniderline, and deletions are Staff edits are shown as follows:
additions are in red Underline and deletions are i�ed
Sec. 130 14,3. ]Famp rnier Coiliiliercial )vel la I is rc it
..............2...............................................................
(a) !Ilurp!2�� j!gO ��ntent. l"Ile pj,!�p2se of' die Favernier C,ornrnercial Overlay 12istrict is to,
g2als, objectives, and p2licies of flie C"OITIPL�h�'Ilsive Plan and to allow
kirger-scale i7om, *w*"Al-i'+�441-no n res i den li i�,I I devej2p!Dent ill a scarified area of' die ljpp�,r,
SQ`i t�lat pdniarfly use die use of'p�,rrnanent residents of able ljpp�,r Keyu�, l"Ile intent is�
!2 pLovide accessible neeessiliei nonresidenfi,'d Uses to p�,rrnanent residents of' die ljpp�,r
SOS dle
cryryiaracter of-Favernier,
(b) FlieTavernier C,ornrnercicd Qverlay 12istrict �diall be �diown as all overlay district,
oil die 01'ficial Land Use District map, F big, 'Favernier C,ornrnercial Qverjay 1 fist rict udiall be
�diown as die bot.nidary parcels widi Monroe C,ot..Illty !Iarcel ID in.irnbers 00490250-.
000000 and 00089490-000000, and dg[,,keed in ffie Lila
J-L�LLL� U-----J-1.
OLEANDER DR
KeyFargo ......................................................
Approx. MM 92. "1............................... ................................................ .......................
.......................... .............
...........
.............. ............
.........
....................
UKAN�jL HLOSSUM11 P
IYI
0008949�0-000000
00490250-000000
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
3737
!!UHOH� Hill fkxdueuon�,;
P !: t��
ewil'eFHd w4h4l flit? Favemieiz(;offiffitweial amendment to flit? (-A'fieial 17and.
U"kx 14,itfiet Map FNu4vd and ti+kjefi ove be tidjown on the Gffieial 17and U ie:
Oi4Fiet I,4,
iffli
W Appuca[)HRN. beams labUnl nli wiffiin ffie hiven-jel, Lonlalercial (herlay !�isu,icli shall be
�bjs��j �o ffie l'ollowing �jandards:
An amendmenli �o ffie Official Land Use Disujcli M�'I[,) is lv(jUired and SUch overlay ball
be shown on ffie Official Land Use Disulicli Ma[,,�
2, 1 bg dgyglonign! singlg pgpl'esidenfial Sh'UCftH'C ffiali coWains more lhan M,000
�q� re fi-eli wiffiin ffie Overlay [?isu,i(j shall be SLJ �g�j �o ffie muis and condifions of
an ap[,,�roved Deve](Mign! Agreemenli as defined in secli ions 0-�32, 0- 33, and
MUS11 inclUde:
Provisions l'or ffie devel( pnlenli ol'86 woi3O'orce hQUsing d yglling �qjb�sk and
b, Prelerred leasing mjandards l'or essenfial workers ol'ffie wor0'Ql'('C Ui-JCS:°, and
c, An �i�e 1,flan ffiali inclUdes ffie 1'6142wing !!I addifion do all si�e
Igffi�"'Cmews in accordance wiffi ffie Land DeveloUnlenli Code
i pgdg �!Jan walkway onnecung �:bg !1�b!jl,gmidenfial 1,'aiki Ing area �o
Qj,�,!ngg Road, Re( LilC ligb!ing i'm ffie 1,,ed esujan walkway
11 , d , W
111LO be in compliance wiffi Chaj,'��g!, l by, A�,ficje V1,
i�, 11'0Lfldoor ligwingy !� 12!'Wh2sed, in addifion �o all req�uj!,emews (-A'Chaj,'�m,
l l4n Au'JCJC Vfx SUCh ligb!in hall be desig!jgd and locaW SUch ffiali ffie
IINIX411UM il]Unnnafion meaSUred in 1'oo�candles ali any p!,�2pgj,�y line
ad,Jacenll �o residenfi,'Il Uses shall noli exceed ZU0 (Q,j babe CWCAT and
non('Lfl(-A'High�m, �Liffi ffig �21't:he 1,,fiedesujan walkway,
3, All lines adjacenli �o US, b shall [,,�rovide a (jass f, Scenk, ('orridol, BU11'er,
e [,,ernjWin nce Wiffiffie pgj,n �Wdondifonal4, All develcU'Dienl shall
gum 1'gq ujvmeWs gl' 'bapjgr l 20, Arjicle III, Pernj�W and Condifional Uses,
5, 1ndLWl'i,'IJ Uses pgj,nn�W wiffiin ffie Overlay,
Notwiflj�,,ta�lldiIh�gA2�2 VFC)vlti+Ion�" eontained in fln+ oveflayi Within the 1"HVk1MWF
(;o I'll 1,11 efe i al OveFICiy Di+tFiet `djalj I-w�±!j �eet to all land develc)V!22�2nt ol'the k..IndeFl�flg
130--93kj2j(.Zj bib bt in du ,tfial tj�ie+ `djall not I-w pefonakid Within
obit?? 1"Hvei*lieF
within flit? Favemieiz(;Offlffitweial (4vefb�t!Y4�et �4*dl t-,w
to , and eondition , ofa !2 1±�!Iovnlent Agf�xenient w, defined in Seetion 110-1 a2a:j I()--I Ea and
4,it4htw defined t-,K-4ow:i.
a7 A vnd!E2�ff d � Y::jbe Boat�d of Coun t��2 I'l)H+�FICHIeR r W r vift of the
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
3738
to Seetion 1 1441�le 1"Civenlief (;C)I'll 1,11 kxR ia I Ovkwlay Dia+tfiet �,Jjall VFovide a
� , , t Hig:i2 1 2
1� eenie CoFFidc 1 w 4.44'kw eontw!ou�" to u 7S7 1 7 Am�EXII+ ative
plant niateFial that i�+ wtained and niek th koltlflg::f�x w1ative to JoeatJoEj:±�ze and
�,Jjall I-w eounted towaf�d the total ji!tIntl enient of Seetion 114--12 8n
in seetion 114428r the FavemieF (;ovnniefeial Ovk1FI&
Di�+tFiet CIII I-11 C)n a I-11 e apt iilong:�2�2
to Seetion 142-4yn,
within tilt? FttveffifeF
.Offlfflt?Feial (4v (Fktt4N�+tFiet loeated that tilt? fflaxima,fffl ilkifflination
vnew,,awe d in kwteandlkx,ti+at the noFth f±2p!�sty line ofthe Feti4dentiiiLvilfvel and
of the nwwkx�,,idefitiiil pCiFeel �,Jjall not k1weed i�wE2=A!)j I'6F eutc)14' and noneutc)14, !jgbt�"7
N c) !i„any Tede+tFian walkway to
(j) nt al-K)w �,Jjclll 1-)�L�eFn2iqkld to j2j� k)F liki to be eoniplia
with ADA
log ate d w4hin flit? FaveFnieF CHaffiffiefZeial
r,dlall m:)t feq�HiH Di�+tiziet knF+ k)F inttwnal t-,wtween two.
difl�fkmt laild u�. (.'2niflgj
4v-I 7ei n and 17kic 41g:2!�Aodi kwee I leak" , ),Alk
c a7 At le FIoF to as availal-4ki I'6F IeW ie
I
!C) 'AC)FWFa+ loeated within Mwwoe County `,Jjall have a,
AlteF eew+tF�"fetiwi and tilt? the WOF4
WoFhkwee
tO lew,w flit? FoF tilt? avoidanee 01 1 det g
ftfqti tl Wi I I Wedi f6Fee.
it wid wit? a+im e� a I WoFhet flit? tiat
wodief ti+Ijall be ielkleted ovef ofl±L
2"Nli fill u fill Deydo,a,p ent IIIPote nth fl.
Mere shall be no allocaied 01 IINIXiRlLim neli den0y siandard available I'or markei-raie
dwelfijig au k gi, iransienli Limis,
2, The Favernier C,ornrnerciql Overlay I�istrict shall be firnited to a rnaxirnt..irn ioial
developn ��n
I ! 01'
a. 49,900 syl,!are I'eet ohionresidential floor aka.. 42±212fqll� and
b: 2i I t ��I( Led restricted Wwoi3O'orce housing sera ggq� � and
th � iN I
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
3739
c, accessory uses and strt.!cttIr(.s,.
fvgLihi iofis ol, �he kfidej (14;114o: "4111 �he exe� plion ol, �Ilose I�egkll"ilions
A) AEkwations, Nowithstanding S'ection 138-51; iind Ihe kikrel�niel (4eel( �o Mile
Miwkel 97 IJ:S: tlith�tilt � Col+idol� S jindmAs iind !h�, Fa vernier
I allocation standards C',ornrnercial OverkV I)istrict shall have the folloWilig, NROGO ,
.3 , and 'h aresafisfied-
,im Maxinit"Irn allocation of'nonresidential floor area, The arnot.nit of nonresidential floor,
area to be allocate d or trawd'erred to the Faye rnier C,ornrnercicd Overlay I?istrict shall,
be firnited to a rnaxirnt..u�n of'41200 sqgare 1'ec3,
b: 2, Maxirnt..irn floor ar(la pgL strt..icttjre, A sing]S� gQgjCsidential principal strt..icttjres within
the 'Favernier C,ornrnercial Overlay I istrict shall be pgqnitted to receive an allocation.
t at expands the strtjctt..ire to rnore than 10,000 sqgare 1'ect, bt..q not to exceed a.
rnaxirnt..irn of'49 900 sguare I'eet oh-lonresidential floor area,
�N N o in Seetion 13044 L the 4(22�200 ��tkiaFkx I�et of,
deed
Fk ,tFieted wofkkwee fioti�,,in we I I' h ol'noiwe�,,idential deve,lopi'llent
on the C4, the F N tiived I-)kiildin XFI'114+ k)F the worlil'oFee h C)ki
will not be
t(:) flit? i�,O+uimee of' it (;eFtifieate that i�i
I'TIC)Fkl than
a7 At le C4, the 'Alodil'oree nlkj�',t have
2� Z�I
Feeklivk1d a ol Oeetiv�arnr�y Whieh Will HCA INI kHIFeW KMIHI-)I�::
witfih4�*,id
to the �,Aan&4,gontained in Seetion 114-7H ol'a �d
IMIlk WHY5 '-)k iihr j!�2d into an apFoved lan6,ecipeL n 14)1,11 th ti+C)tifll:
(f) Na� �yi�:Wanding LIK Secli ions 39-�(g), 2-�(b) and �39-�(i), err eygj,k 'orce hQUsing
1IMS11 be pl'ovided on-si e consishng (-a1'24% (2� agar s) ygry Ja y inc(-Mle, 24'La (2� Jg��
income, 26%) (22 rqn�s) !jjgdian income and 26%) (22 aqn�s) income, Ng bauilding
ROGO Allocafion or u,ansfi-r ffiali WOUld
gLpand a nonresidenfial su,w,eure wiffiin �:he Overlay 1a2 !11a2!v �ban M,000 S(ILN11V leCII Unless
,ind Unfil bUilding [,,ernj�s I'or all 86 woi3O'orr;e hgaur!'jjg aum�s have been iSSUed,
(g) All new residenfi,'d rrurnu s devel(-U'aed wiffiin ffie overlay dish'kei shall be �o ffie ROGO
ffiali have less flian fiv- 11-111111 11-121,11-11111 1 On
!bg jvqajired deed resu'ichon ffi�!'SWinli �o Secfion €38-22(b,j(A,jb:
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
3740
Ej,ior �o ffie iSSWince ol'a Cerfifica�e cA'Q(,(,UU,'in(,,y dabs ,I nonresidenfial su,ucWre ffiali is more
ffian M,000 S(ILN11V 1'00�
Ali leasli 50%) !,�Ll�jired 86 woi3O'orce h()Usin 111LO have received a
Cerlifica�e oll)(,,�,Upancy; and
2, Ali leasli 50'Yq !hg jvq��ired 86 woi3O'orce hOUsing ��!IOS 111LO have received
ap[,,�roved 1'()Undaji��jj !'jj�pecnons,
dui)..:All pi,ovisions oDbg ('gnipl,ehensive Plan, hiven-ner Livable CQIIIRWi-jkey� Clan, ffie
h,iveri-ner C,reek �o Mile Marke7 r 9 US lligheLa o y �' rridor DeveloUnle li n S�a d nad rs and
GUidelines and ffie Land Developnign! ap[,,dy g2spjv Jy g2jg!jjpjed herein,
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
3741
-n
{r
3
4
5 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
6 MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
7
8 ORDINANCE NO. -2023
9
10 AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
11 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE MONROE COUNTY LAND
12 DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH SECTION 130-143,
13 CREATING THE TAVERNIER COMMERCIAL OVERLAY (TCO)
14 DISTRICT; INCLUDING THE PURPOSE AND INTENT, BOUNDARY,
15 APPLICABILITY, NROGO ALLOCATION STANDARDS, AND
16 MAXIMUM NONRESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
17 POTENTIAL; FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS
18 HIGHWAY, KEY LARGO, APPROXIMATE MILE MARKER 92.5,
19 HAVING PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 00089490-000000 AND
20 00490250-000000; AS PROPOSED BY CEMEX CONSTRUCTION
21 MATERIALS FLORIDA, LLC F/K/A SINGLETARY CONCRETE
22 PRODUCTS INC.; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING
23 FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR
24 TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND
25 THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE
26 MONROE COUNTY CODE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
27 (FILE 2022-053)
28
29
30 WHEREAS, on March 23, 2022, the Planning and Environmental Resources Department
31 received the initial application from Smith/Hawks, PL (the "Agent") on behalf of Singletary Concrete
32 Products, Inc. and Cemex Construction Materials Florida, LLC (the "Applicants,") and The Vestcor
33 Companies, Inc. and Blackstone Group — Tavernier 925, LLC (the "Developers") to amend Monroe
34 County Land Development Code to establish Section 130-143, the Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay
35 District (the "Overlay") including the purpose and intent, boundary, applicability, NROGO allocation
36 standards, and maximum nonresidential and residential development potential, for property located at
37 92501 Overseas Highway, Key Largo with parcel identification numbers 00089490-000000 and
38 00490250-000000 (the "Property"); and
39 WHEREAS, a corresponding Land Use District (Zoning) map amendment for the Property to
40 apply the Overlay was submitted (File 2022-054) and is under review; and
41
42 WHEREAS, the proposed text was revised and resubmitted to the Planning Department for
43 review on November 13, 2023; and
44 WHEREAS, an amended and restated text amendment application was received on November
45 20, 2023 (the "Application", File 2022-053); and
1 of 7
3742
I WHEREAS,the Property is within the boundary of the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Master
2 Plan, a Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97, (the "LCP"); and
3 WHEREAS, the Property is within the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1
4 Corridor District Overlay (TC) as identified in the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1
5 Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines (the"Corridor Development Guidelines"); and
6 WHEREAS, the Property is within the Suburban Zone as identified in Corridor Development
7 Guidelines; and
8 WHEREAS, the Suburban zone is characterized by intermittent occurrences of open space,
9 residential development of diverse densities, and industrial and general commercial uses following a
10 pattern similar to that found in the mainland suburbs; and
11
12 WHEREAS, the vision for the corridor allows the individual zones to maintain their distinctive
13 characteristics, yet, encourages a unified image of the corridor as a whole, where landscape and the built
14 environment share common elements; and
15
16 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee ("DRC") considered the
17 proposed text amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 25th day of October, 2022; and
18 WHEREAS, on November 14, 2022, the Chair of the DRC signed Resolution No. DRC 13-22,
19 recommending DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code establishing
20 Section 130-143 to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners; and
21 WHEREAS, the professional staff memorandum for the Planning Commission Hearing dated
22 April 13, 2023, completed by Cheryl Cioffari, AICP, Assistant Director of Planning, and Devin Tolpin,
23 AICP, CFM, Principal Planner, recommends DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Land
24 Development Code establishing Section 130-143; and
25 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Planning Commission("Planning Commission")held a public
26 hearing on the 28th day of April, 2023, for review and recommendation on the proposed Land
27 Development Code text amendment; and
28 WHEREAS, on April 28, 2023, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. P16-23,
29 recommending DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code establishing
30 Section 130-143 to the Board of County Commissioners; and
31 WHEREAS, the Applicant submitted revised proposed language on November 13, 2023 to be
32 considered by the Board of County Commissioners following the recommendation of denial by the
33 Planning Commission on April 28, 2023; and
34
35 WHEREAS, the professional staff memorandum dated November 21, 2023, for the Board of
36 County Commissioners Hearing, completed by Cheryl Cioffari, AICP, Assistant Director of Planning,
37 and Devin Tolpin, AICP, CFM, Principal Planner, recommends DENIAL of the proposed amendment
38 to the Land Development Code establishing Section 130-143; and
39
40 WHEREAS, at a regularly scheduled meeting held on December 13, 2023, the Monroe County
41 Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC" "Monroe County", or the "County") held a duly noticed
2 of 7
3743
I public hearing, considered the professional staff report and recommendation accompanying this
2 proposed text amendment to the Code, and provided for public comment and public participation in
3 accordance with the requirements of state law and the procedures adopted for public participation in the
4 planning process; and
5
6 WHEREAS, based upon the documentation submitted and information provided, including but
7 not limited to the documentation and information furnished in the Department's professional staff report,
8 the BOCC hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
9
10 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals,Objectives and Policies of the Monroe
11 County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and
12 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the
13 Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Sec. 380.0552(7), F.S.; and
14 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part 11 of Chapter 163, Florida Statute;
15 4. The proposed amendment will not result in an adverse change in community character to the
16 sub-area which a proposed amendment affects or to any area in accordance with the Tavernier
17 Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan pursuant to findings of the BOCC; and
18 5. The proposed amendment is a necessary adjustment in light of changed conditions, incorrect
19 assumptions or determinations, or recognition of a need for additional detail or
20 comprehensiveness, as required to change the text of the Land Development Code in
21 accordance with Section 102-158 of the Monroe County Code.
22
23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
24 OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
25
26 Section 1. The text of the Monroe County Land Development Code is hereby amended as follows
27 ( additions are shown underlined):
28
29 *****
30
31 Sec. 130-143. Tavernier Commercial Overlay District
32
33 (a) Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District is to implement
34 applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and to allow larger-scale
35 nonresidential development in a scarified area of the Upper Keys that primarily serves the needs of
36 permanent residents of the Upper Keys. The intent is to provide accessible nonresidential uses to
37 permanent residents of the Upper Keys, while maintaining the character of Tavernier.
38
39 (b) Boundary. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be shown as an overlay district on the
40 Official Land Use District map. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be shown as the
41 boundary of the parcels with Monroe County Parcel ID numbers 00490250-000000 and 00089490-
42 000000, and depicted in the map below:
43
3 of 7
3744
OLEANDER DR
Key (Largo
Approx. MIM 9'2.5 ��
: ....
a
d i� tl
� d
�..
00089490-000000
........................................ o
00490250-'000000
2
3
4 (c) Applicability. Development within the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be subiect to
5 the following standards:
6 (1) An amendment to the Official Land Use District Map is required and such overlay shall be
7 shown on the Official Land Use District Map
8 (2) The development of a single nonresidential structure that contains more than 10,000 square
9 feet within the Overlay District shall be subiect to the terms and conditions of an approved
10 Development Agreement as defined in sections 110-132, 110-133, and must include:
11 a. Provisions for the development of 86 workforce housing dwelling units; and
12 b. Preferred leasing standards for essential workers of the workforce units; and
13 c. An approved site plan that includes the following in addition to all site requirements
14 in accordance with the Land Development Code:
15 i. A pedestrian walkway connecting the nonresidential parking area to Orange
16 Blossom Road. Required lighting for the pedestrian walkway must be in
17 compliance with Chapter 114, Article VI.
18 ii. If outdoor lighting is proposed, in addition to all requirements of Chapter 114,
19 Article VI, such lighting shall be designed and located such that the maximum
20 illumination measured in footcandles at any property line adjacent to residential
21 uses shall not exceed zero(0)for cutoff and noncutoff lights, with the exception
22 of the pedestrian walkway.
4of7
3745
1 (3) All property lines adjacent to U.S. 1 shall provide a Class E Scenic Corridor Buffer.
2 (4) All development shall be permitted in accordance with the permitted and conditional use
3 requirements of Chapter 130, Article 111, Permitted and Conditional Uses.
4 (5) Industrial uses are not permitted within the Overlay.
5 (d) Maximum Development Potential.
6 (1) There shall be no allocated or maximum net density standard available for market-rate dwelling
7 units or transient units.
8 (2) The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be limited to a maximum total development
9 potential of:
10 a. 49,900 square feet of nonresidential floor area; and
11 b.86 deed restricted workforce housing dwelling units; and
12 c. accessory uses and structures.
13 (e) NROGO Allocations. Notwithstanding Section 138-51,the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District
14 shall have the following NROGO allocation standards provided that the criteria set forth in
15 subsections M, (g) and (h) are satisfied:
16 (1) Maximum allocation of nonresidential floor area. The amount of nonresidential floor area to be
17 - allocated or transferred to the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be limited to a
18 maximum of 49,900 square feet.
19 (2) Maximum floor area per structure. A single nonresidential principal structure within the
20 Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be permitted to receive an allocation that expands
21 the structure to more than 10,000 square feet,but not to exceed a maximum of 49,900 square feet
22 of nonresidential floor area.
23 (t) Notwithstanding LDC Sections 139-1(g), 139-1(h) and 139-1(i), 86 workforce housing units must
24 be provided on-site consisting of 24% (21 units) very low income, 24% (21 units) low income, 26%
25 (22 units) median income and 26% (22 units) moderate income. No building permit shall be issued
26 for a structure receiving an NROGO Allocation or transfer that would expand a nonresidential
27 structure within the Overlay to more than 10,000 square feet unless and until building permits for all
28 86 workforce housing units have been issued.
29 (2) All new residential units developed within the overlay district shall be subject to the ROGO permit
30 allocation system or transfer of ROGO exemptions of existing lawfully established permanent
31 market rate or affordable dwelling units that have less than five years remaining on the required deed
32 restriction pursuant to Section 138-22(b)(4)b.
33 (h) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a nonresidential structure that is more than
34 10,000 square feet:
35 (1) At least 50%(43)of the required 86 workforce housing units must have received a Certificate
36 of Occupancy; and
37 (2) At least 50% (43) of the required 86 workforce housing units must have received approved
38 foundation inspections.
39
5 of 7
3746
I (i) All other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Tavernier Livable Communikeys Plan, the
2 Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 US Highway Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines
3 and the Land Development Code apply unless expressly exempted herein.
4
5
6
7 Section 2. Recitals and Legislative Intent. The foregoing prefatory recitals and determinations,
8 including but not limited this ordinance's title, are true and correct, and are hereby
9 incorporated as if fully stated herein.
10
11 Section 3. The Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department's professional
12 staff report accompanying this item/Resolution is hereby incorporated as if fully stated
13 herein and its analysis and determinations of fact and law to the extent not plainly
14 inconsistent with this Resolution are hereby accepted and adopted as if fully stated herein.
15
16 Section 4. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance, or any part or portion thereof, is held to
17 be invalid or unenforceable by any administrative hearing officer or court of competent
18 jurisdiction, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision, or any part or portion
19 thereof, shall neither limit nor impair the operation,enforceability, or validity of any other
20 provision of this ordinance, or any remaining part(s) or portion(s) thereof. All other
21 provisions of this ordinance, and remaining part(s) or portion(s) thereof, shall continue
22 unimpaired in full force and effect.
23
24 Section 5. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances in conflict with this ordinance are
25 hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. The repeal of an ordinance herein shall not
26 repeal the repealing clause of such ordinance or revive any ordinance which has been
27 repealed thereby.
28
29 Section 6. Transmittal. This ordinance shall be transmitted to the Florida State Land Planning
30 Agency pursuant to Chapter 163 and 380, Florida Statutes.
31
32 Section 7. Filing and Effective Date. This ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary
33 of State of Florida, but shall not become effective until a notice is issued by the Florida
34 State Land Planning Agency or Administration Commission finding the amendment in
35 compliance with Chapter 163, F.S., and if challenged until such challenge is resolved.
36
37 Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective as provided by law and stated
38 above.
39 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,Florida,
40 at a regular meeting held on the day of , 2023.
41
42 Mayor Holly Merrill Raschein
43 Mayor Pro Tem James K. Scholl
44 Commissioner Craig Cates
45 Commissioner Michelle Lincoln
46 Commissioner David Rice
47
6 of 7
3747
1
2 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
3 OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
4
5 By:
6 MAYOR HOLLY MERRILL RASCHEIN
7
8 (SEAL)
9 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK
10 MWOE COUNTY ATTORNEY'
11 By: �d
P�
12 AS DEPUTY CLERKData: 11/28/23
7 of 7
3748
Liz Yongue
From: Ballard-Lindsey <Ballard-Lindsey@ Mon roeCounty-FL.Gov>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 3:28 PM
To: County Commissioners and Aides
Cc: Schemper-Emily; Liz Yongue
Subject: FW: cemex comments
Attachments: cemex inconsistencies dec 6.docx
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
FYI.
L%vuL .yy Ballard,
Aide to Roman Gastesi, County Administrator
Business Manager-Administration
1100 Simonton Street, Suite 2-205
Key West, FL 33040
(305)292-4443 (Office)
(305)393-4442 (Cell Phone)
(305)292-4544 (Fax)
Courier Stop#1
Ballard-Lindsey@monroecounty-fl.gov
www.monroecounty-fl.gov
Monroe County, Florida
"The Florida Keys"
"We may encounter many defeats, but we must not be defeated." Maya Angelou
PLEASE NOTE: FLORIDA HAS A VERY BROAD RECORDS LAW. MOST WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS TO OR FROM THE
COUNTY 2E(�ARDIN COUNTY BUSINESS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND MEDIA UPON
REQUEST. YOUR EMAIL COMMUNICATION MAY BE SUBJECT'TO PUBLIC DISCLOSURE.
Pleo e c.on,dder the environrrrent wwlien
4�0 0"1111
deciding hetl'ier to print this erra:�iL
From: beckyjetton@gmail.com <beckyjetton@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 2:53 PM
To: Ballard-Lindsey<Ballard-Lindsey@ Mon roeCounty-FL.Gov>
Subject: cemex comments
You don't often get email from beckyjetton@arnail.com. Learn why this is important
1
CAUTION:This email originated from outside of the County. Whether you know the sender or not, do not click links or
open attachments you were not expecting.
P6 public hearing cemex comments
2
CEMEX
92501 OS Highway, Real estate number 00089490-000000
My name is Rebecca Jetton representing the Tavernier Community Association.
Mr. Tobin will provide my resume which includes a degree in Political Science
from FSU and 17 years of experience in administering the FI Keys Area of Critical
State Concern for the Dept of Community affairs and DEO.
I have been accepted as an expert in planning in several Division of Administrative
hearings involving the Florida Keys and the cases are listed at the end of the
resume.
I have reviewed the proposed Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District
amendment, and it is my opinion that the Land development code establishing
section 130-143 to create the Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District is
inconsistent with the adopted comprehensive plan.
The vision for the Tavernier LCP was to preserve the heritage and natural setting
of the existing community, with limited redevelopment of commercial properties.
Comprehensive plan policy/Action Item 3.1.3 of the Tavernier LCP prohibits the
designation of new commercial land use districts beyond that contained in the
Master Plan to protect the viability of the US 1 Corridor Area and Community
Center and to prevent further strip commercial zoning.
The creation of this new commercial overlay conflicts with this policy and your
code must be consistent with your comprehensive plan.
Chapter 163.3201 requires that land development regulations be consistent with
the adopted comprehensive plan. The State land planning agency will find the
proposed Tavernier Commercial overlay inconsistent with the principles for
guiding development "a" if you adopt a code which is inconsistent with your
comprehensive plan.
The proposed commercial retail is Inconsistent with Policy 105.1.3 which provides
that Monroe County shall through its development standards will continue to
foster the retention and redevelopment of small businesses on the US 1.
The current annual nonresidential allocation for the entire keys is a little over
47,000 sq ft., which is less than the 49,900 sq ft. that this one structure is
requesting.
Urban development of this intensity is supposed to occur within the community
center of the Tavernier LCP, not in a suburban area.
The proposed change is inconsistent with Comprehensive plan policy 101.5.6
which provides that various types of commercial retail and office may be
permitted at intensities which are consistent with the community character. This
large structure is not consistent with the community character envisioned by the
LCP and while not on the agenda today, the proposed plans do not meet the
adopted corridor guidelines which call for an aggregation of smaller structures,
with insets and facades, not a big box grocery store. Additionally, there is no
guarantee that this structure will remain a grocery store.
The Tavernier LCP intentionally limits the size of structures to ten thousand square
feet to maintain the community character of the suburban areas. The proposed
change to the code will now convert the suburban area to an urban area. Urban
development of this intensity is supposed to be located within the community
center at Burton Way.
Policy 101 .19.1 provides that LCP include the designation of growth
boundaries which are called community centers.
Policy 101 .19.2. requires the County to maintain the Community
Center overlays.
Policy 101.5.22 addresses the purpose of the Community Center (CC) overlay is
to identify a defined geographic development focal area. The areas designated
community center is where the urban zone containing most retail and commercial
mixed use are located.
The largest building within 600 feet of this structure is the Vaughn building with
12,000 square feet as compared to the urban areas containing Tavernier town
with over 500,000 sq ft of urban development.
Nothing within the proposed text amendment requires improvements to the
visual character of the U.S. 1 corridor by supporting, the existing design standards
within the Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor Development.
The proposed commercial retail is inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy
101.5.6 which states that various types of commercial, retail and offices may be
permitted at intensities which are consistent with the community character and
the natural environment. The community character of this area is suburban, not
urban.
Policy 105.1 .2 provides that the County shall enforce the design
guidelines which ensure that future development are compatible with
the maintenance of the character of the casual island village
atmosphere of the Florida Keys.
Code 102-158 provides that "no amendment shall be approved, which will result
in an adverse community change to an area with a liveable communikeys master
plan.
The approval of this commercial retail overlay will result in increased traffic
issues. The traffic report indicates there could be as many as 500 vehicles per hour
attempting to merge with another 2800 vehicles traveling north or south. Many of
the cars will stack up in the 140 foot median which is only capable of holding 5 or
6 cars at a time. There will be traffic safety conflicts from the three residential
streets located between the project and Burton Drive
Plantation segment 21) is projected to be overcapacity. The applicant is relying on
traffic data that does not meet the industry standards ( LDC Section 114-2(a)(1)b.)
Policy 301 .2.3 provides that Monroe County shall not permit new
development which would significantly degrade the LOS below the
adopted LOS standards on U.S. unless the impact is mitigated. No
mitigation has been proposed. Your most recent, relevant, traffic
study shows that the approval of this development will drop the LOS
at Burton way to a LOS D.
Policy 401 .1 .1 requires retail shopping facilities generating over two
thousand (2,000) trips per day be built to accommodate mass transit
by being designed to include adequate turning for large vehicles,
sheltered areas with seating that can serve as a bus stop.
Policy 105.1 .2 provides that the County shall enforce the design
guidelines established within the Livable CommuniKeys Plans and
ensure that future development is compatible with the maintenance
of the character of the casual island village atmosphere. The proposal
is not consistent with the design guidelines.
Section 102-158(d)(7)(b), requires the board to evaluate the proposed text
amendments based on: Changed projections or assumptions; data errors or new
issues or a need for additional comprehensiveness. The proposed amendment
creates inconsistencies between the proposed overlay and the adopted Land
Development Code and Comprehensive Plan with little Justification.
The site plan is inconsistent with The Mixed Use/Commercial development
controls for hammocks and disturbed wetlands which allow low intensity
commercial uses with a maximum floor area ratio of 0.10 .
People choose places to live and stay based on their perception of community
character. Community character is defined as the image and perception of a
community as defined by the recognizable natural and built landmarks that
provide a sense of place. ) The proposed text change does not accomplish this.
Please follow staff and planning commission recommendations to deny this
development.
There are several Key Largo issues on the December 13 BOCC agenda. The CEMEX/Publix
project is one of them (see article below). Item P6 on the agenda is intended to create the
Tavernier Commercial Overlay District which was most recently revised to allow for an NROGO
allocation of up to 49,900 square feet (down from the original 70,000 SF request), which could
allow for the development of a 49,900 SF commercial supermarket, including a liquor store, on
the Property.
Other changes to the project include additional applications including
1) a request to amend the Monroe County 2030 Comprehensive Plan to establish a site specific
subarea policy on a portion of the Property,
2) a request to amend the Land Use District (zoning) on a portion of the Property
from Suburban Commercial (SC) to Urban Residential (UR), and
3) a request to amend the Land Use District (zoning) on a portion of the Property
from Suburban Commercial (SC) to Urban Residential (UR).
These additional 3 applications are not complete and will not be voted on at Wednesday's
BOCC meeting. In addition, a development agreement will be required which the applicant has
not even submitted yet.
County Staff recommends that the BOCC CONTINUE the Applicant's request to amend the
Land Development Code establishing the Tavernier Commercial Overlay, until such a time that
all current requests to amend the Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Code, Future Land
Use Map and Land Use District Map, and the proposed Development Agreement, are
processed.
In the event that the BOCC elects to vote on this item at the December 13, 2023 public hearing,
the Planning & Environmental Resources Department's professional staff recommends
DENIAL.
The Federation continues to object to the project as it is in violation of the Tavernier
Livable Communikeys Plan. (see the attached letter that we sent in 2022) and the
TRAFFIC it will create will be unbearable regardless what the developers say.