Item B1 B1
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY of MONROE 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
Special Board of County Commissioners Meeting Meeting
February 15, 2024
Agenda Item Number: B1
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 January 19, 2024. 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
4
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 Applicant's request to amend the Land Development
Code ("LDC") establishing Section 130-143, the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District, 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 February 15, 2024, 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:
BOCC SR2.pdf
Exhibit 1 PC Resolution.pdf
Exhibit 2 PC Resolution.pdf
Exhibit 4 Draft Ordinance.pdf
Proposed Revised Languate Cemex LDC Overlay.pdf
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
N/A
5
1 r
2
3
5
6 MEMORANDUM
7 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCEs DEPARTMENT
9
10 o: Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
11
12 Through: Emily Scheer, AIC , CFM, Senior Director of Planning and Environmental
13 Resources
1
15 From: Cheryl Cioffari, AICP, Assistant Director of Planning
16 Devin Tolpi , AICP, CFM, Planning and Development Review Manager
17
18 Date: January 23, 2024
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
26Meeting: r 5,2024
27
28
29 1. 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 (N ) allocation of up to
37 70,000 square feet on property located at 92501 Overseas Highway, Key Largo, with parcel
38 identification numbers 0090250-000000 and 0008990-000000 (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
1 November 20, 2023.
42
43 The proposed text was most recently revised and resubmitted tote Planning Department [via
44 emaifl on January 19, 2024. The amended text as it is currently proposed wouldestablish e
45 Tavernier Commercial Overlay (" ") District (t "Overlay") and allowfor an NROGO
6 allocation of up to 49,900 square feet, which could allow for the development of a 49,900
7 commercial supermarket, including a liquor store, on the Property.
48
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 1 of 25
File 2022-053
6
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 be
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 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. As of the date of this report, this application
33 remains incomplete.
34
35 File 2023-206: A request to amend the Future Land Use Map(FLUM)on a portion of the Property from
36 Mixed Use Commercial (MC)to Residential High(RH). As of the date of this report,this application
37 remains incomplete.
38
39 File 2023-207: A request to amend the Land Use District (zoning) on a portion of the Property from
40 Suburban Commercial (SC)to Urban Residential (UR). As of the date of this report,this application
41 remains incomplete.
42
43 It should be noted that the proposed text references a development agreement as being required
44 for any development within the proposed overlay. As of the date of this report, an application for
45 a development agreement has not been submitted.
46
47
48
49
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 2 of 25
File 2022-053
7
"Jaw
AM
J'A im
W"
irma It
NAN&[PIA o's
V
.. ........
W"A(�01',
R
XT,
,j
I Historic Aerial Ima er of the Pro er
Ty
!
is qI� Nr:
" V7"
.A
2
3 Subject Property (image dated 1968) Subject Property (image dated 1975)
4
lr�s
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
1 1 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 US I; 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 02.15.2024 Page 4 of 25
File 2022-053
9
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 2dor 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 rt
xcsrptrom page 10 (public comment) of April 28, 2023 PC Minutes:
[TG,�'�ve Tar;aXy i i=ee a Tot oT tr ME c rullt"i gm 0a t I o n, ie act t at t ie app icnt is oing ari
affordable housing project seems to be the controlling thing here,when in order to do this they're
f 01
r r
equired to have an affordable housing component,, It is secondary to theirs but it shouldn't be
se
secondary to the community. It should be phase one.. as she is concerned that asphase two it
may never get done. This is not something acceptable to the community character of Taverme
or there wouldn't be this many people here participating. Ms. Miller thanked the Commission
for listening.
18 ..._- __.wwwwuwmww a mmu mmmummmmmm1
19 Excerpt from page 15 of April 28, 2023 PC Minutes:
WERENUM MINIM
Ms. Schemper had been surprised at how strong the argument came across regarding this retailer
being the economic engine needed for the affordable housing. The meat 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, if they would be willing. to write into the
amendment somethmg about the affordable units being required where the ROGOs are coming
from,what happens if you don't get the ROGO allocations. et cetera.
Mr. Smith responded that they would certainly write in that they were required because if they're
required to be CO'd. then the applicant has put themselves 'in a position that if they don't get
them built, then the other part can't occur. Ms. Schemper asked if the owner would then be
suing the County because the applicant wasn't given ROGO allocations. Mr. Smith stated it
would be tip to the applicant to obtain the development rights. They have talked tote Village of
Islamorada who is amenable to do an I 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 Islamorada had 86 affordable ROGOs or market rates. Mr. Smith stated
they had the 300 July ones. Nis. Schemper 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 on appeal, Ms. Schemper stated that was the same for
Isla mors da. Mr. Smith stated that as soon as the hurricane evacuation was addressed, then that's
final, whereas Monroe County's was appealed on, on numerous grounds. But the applicant
acknowledges they have to be able to get the development rights. Nis. Schemper asked if that
would be something the applicant would be willing to write into the amendment. Mr. Smith
confirmed that to be correct, it was always the intent on that. The two parts work in unison with
the commercial retail buying down the cost oft e land to make the affordable housing feasible.
20
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 5 of 25
File 2022-053
10
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,
3 November 13, 2023 and again on January 19, 2024. The most recently revised text includes a reduction
4 in the amount of allowable NROGO allocation from what was proposed and discussed at the Planning
5 Commission Hearing. The submitted changes to the text are identified [in on°,;nng �exi] below in Section
6 11I.
7
8 Previous Relevant BOCC Action
9 On September 16, 1988, an Application for a Land Use Map amendment from Suburban Commercial
10 (SC) to Industrial (1) (File# M9315) was received by the Planning Department. It appears that this file
l l was never processed because it was submitted when the new Comprehensive Plan was being drafted and
12 the pending application was put on hold and eventually closed.
13
14 On June 30, 2003, a Letter of Understanding (LOU) was issued, to address the potential construction of
15 300 affordable housing units on the Property. A development application nor approval followed the
16 issuance of this LOU.
17
18 III. APPLICANTS' PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS
19
20 The Applicants' proposed text, as submitted on September 22, 2022, is shown as follows: additions are
21 in blue Linder V„ni'ue„o Following the Planning Commission meeting on April 28, 2023, the most recently
22 revised text submitted on January 19, 2024 is shown in rn rm.��. t'r��,11�J�� unit, r hn, with deletions � .�+��; 4--ti
... , _
23
24
25 Chapter 130— LAND USE DISTRICTS
26
27 *****
28
29 ARTICLE IV.—OVERLAY DISTRICTS
30
31 Sep. ommmmmmem•eial OvemKKla I j trick
32
33 (a) Pnmm .pose and ,mmtmmmt. "C'll ur m mle tic Tnmvennnen 1 �.f ._ ol�su r ,l .�t.. v maa � is irl t� ls to
�.P v
34 u 2u��lm rpLic2ble _ n�^ct 4,n l ies slhe nsive Plan and to allow.._.35 1 n qE_5_gale �Lgrt�r>�mencnal...wreta.uI, vc�ttpurn nl_�a3m scar~ified are�nww wf the U)!L�°_IV,e _t�-� t_1arl���,a hil�
36 serves theneeds of Fa(LirmngLii�ziit as sidents of'th w�1pp it &� �„"�M ohm intent is to g�r�avud accessible
37 nec ssiti s 1. 1�enntsnentresidents of tkqe._I n K�gy� whnlc "l�r ,:rurF r,��_li rk•,�Gr l�r ll�b�;�F Yr.:r,r � ,a ,:-�
38 �.,lr,� � .n��, i' ,""ia"r . ..�t z�r a'mnan tau i�4lpe clliaractem o a'vemiiier.
39
40 i(b) .....!,'he'Favernnner ld��sae('omrnercial 0 erla Ljistrict shall be,shown as an ok4verla di�stnict
41 on tllue Offi nal l and I.J,e 1) strnct n��?��w�44w o pnuap "�'IWme T vernuuett_1 . v Commercial Over�y� istriet
.....
42 �1ra11 be sluo n as the boundary,of the laanc ;l.' 'With„Monroe Count 1�an�.�_1...➢,1 numbers 00 d.90250-
43 000000 and I1I10S��490 0000001 and �{r° �r�.(nnd� in the
44
45
46
47
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 6 of 25
File 2022-053
11
I )Q VIr)41LOCnL 'A itj-W W Fa erflrle s[i,,tuH be
2 hC FoIC( "v c r j St'a111% ,�,�t..N.,e
3 CEO ffne lard Use l�-A
4 Sh, v"r n U11 f'T"I,c l tlr<<} �? , b, l_tr�,e°� dla
5 °'iIIIMj4.,71�)I1lE ,`_1y.�6�;1(tY �wllf�,i�1E.
�6i,( `allhi(IY t P;, y aaC �,��'°1GIVv.;C. ` IY.(P4 �'1l.` D �.4��.,�a1 10 hc,,, f64"}'If` a1.1CJ C,6,WG"16kfP1 Fn, Y�C 'u I f 'p'r I"time♦
7 kY rl�rfrl,r�,lef �.),Ilcn rt; w
_ < �[,�ri�l�lr,�f cl� .yry�o(ru,ir, (I 11��:}� I .t� 1 14�� � � J. ,�.v III�;'I�ryr,fr,�;
_._ _ _ r� r�rfle
8 -
9 V",t P v i ' III ("o r 1h rail WC k IYITgG".r 1 "knT rlsl'JC'w,�, IV"flf,�>fL
10 l wr°ell"p FWIl..i',I,1 " (<}I W r�Wl'Y�l('si� ly YIk��E 7 Q7f l.�Y,(, r,'w,o I IOP'u?;
11 I�wl.'V ;� ) kC°;� ad.( ,6t<� 1(11Y P"IIfJ��Ilit ICl,� tll� fo)IC� `ot0e„i=�h fCI 1�( ft" it ;�, <II,I w-,k�1,f�.a,ll.l�a`,CJA r {a
1 ....
12 yt�rllt
13 ( q
14 yr1y I<1mat l y; AJ rs ,; I. k(t`,`9E'll1 rnd_ 1� t4�CIrC"._J JP`t� eflp'.� for IJlt
_.._..._
15 vyl wa=, Il.ly ........ 1'rr_Ar1 iC K v L
16 ik if Ou'do"or, in "z� WJ�I.I�ECf �(� �rJ] IlBNr�i€I`. rlt ¢`r( 1d,ll Vyrl l 1 14,,
17 /0 IF Io,` Q s u c 1"I Ii`w7,C'ItIII `t, 1,� It lll.ehl (Pr6. IBt.rtx hnuu)
w
18 TlrlM,. n lalmmrrrrd in kurlumdRs 41 alr liar pp
19 Q,Prx.P,.�. 1r. rlrrl Ir�t.IlG�ktar u,,� tllw ef ,o°rla „nlly�E1 mg jymed . .,Ir? 1irj Ito, r°Lltr,f'1e
20 kid _
Yoh W (i.yIIO.Y,4rr: (;I_i17e_
21 Il1r ti{®t(111 Ill�m nC' 1"iIC�'vI("Je I p, �'✓ GI"��(r€„ 11 rYlVll1 ".
22
23 i, 61itninjoy Wes Moms to M. I shall pL'I,IWr,W a (Am'` E v6ul.lPt;; rd..oql,l.Jor ka-C, R l
24 4. 1A Feu r.'krimn Ire <&Abe jarrnlrwd Ire umttAtiime 4;ti;rkr Liar Irennitux'I EurL'[ a;tr�trl,lZl���r�wrf ri��rt
25 .rgr,l , ll«crr�. rtf I��r,k,l r TWO, ,`�thii�Y�.� III,,Y`r�rlrrlt��.,�'l tr,.rrrlrLlll,�r�l�r,
26 " WAC°9aubd uW q"m nu Iie['I E 'lliMn tpl("'
27 Vr"oflJH,-a E"loflumfEYrIY1111ti: ��, GG ir i�1,I 1�.�", °r �(�III�f �C16." ��E �u. �fl�' i 'I(fJl' 6',�,I to lu'I1 ..IIP ��QUt.
1
28 c trl.�rty. llrrl ��li�J� [,;kri �,�I I,Lr,IrIIII;J jr„r,`�Ylrl is I ,�iraE� Ctl �lr.,. IIErr6C4,....
k I
29
...
30
310 � G �ti auwd a� Dm C^G •P� N �rv �dk a'.�. 1a 9wlwtt1v k au Qf1�&0u4 Martllul< r �^�, "�+f�?& i as@u�� r1 a� VP,k�•d•V
32 �firt. w"��'°r'. P¢q,'µ „"�a,�rq• .� r�5t�P4P�n.; fi," �1 "4 �a.�,,^.�1 Cd� ': , �4�1i '� K��" �4 � .` 4rr ��9 ( �; �bP� ren^a..� �� v � ,WIY46
33
Y@
34
35
36 � p4N,.aln. u.rKlrr,:��!Atil
37 1 rf1.n WH he no arll,r,r°w ed or IlWabr= m den II
38 kFl. �.". r 1" 1rsl6Y`il( lYi_'{ �'6'I{Ifll.'r lklllr`r.
39 j uY 4.rr kq DIsuict shall b 1ixllit.ti�6.,1 P.r, au I�rr,��l��olillrlc� �rxE<�l F.I�.� r;�l�.wq°rr�ltE°i��or;.
40
41 Y. 41u900Saa,l;�. 9v,�y°t �.rl`Ilr.rlll�,.r��l�C� IItIE.�I, ll�r6.rl ,.�rEa;r: rrr�G
42 Ids. QQr,,dj rtPr.;,,,,_u1 ��rGP�f rr�r�� Irarll�Elcifx, r.i��,�,a°llrlr_Y ur lll.�,; Ir.Gtr
43 C �sLlll�ti�.l..
44
_.
45 e) NROGO AlbeafonsNf,IrrFitlt.rr� r�r�lrro.ra "b,to_u.,t,r�rcl I 3 w`;I Lhc '1'��vermicr �v r,.� aTnnq r�u��1 2vjg °�m� :
-..
46 nn l�( C;(" Lil ocatioiu �tari(tar(is y sr�,✓i�.ir.rJ. 46bd-1 0
47 sml,SQQOIIOI o"V,4 aM juld (h) 1t, KUd:..
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 7 of 25
He 2022-053
12
1
2 N/laxiiwniarti„allocatimi of iioriresidou dal i����ararea, The i.A.��.:���.nr.�u�rr�����t� ��i�t� ii� -II nonres�den aI
3 floor area to l.ae ailloc ted transferredor.. to l�ve„ ,.�.a�l"Jernie �_= w.Conirnerc,W �lv�r District
4 sh aH;..be liriiited to �a nia ii]IILIM O 0 4> A�
�..� ..
5 ,: C'^ ax.iniu m floor area taare. .i, (df'A^ l",IIY"� Pl, irf I,s�
6 i,n j ii i, stra�c_hire itlj n th Tave mien:... C,,,a�u�ameii C.._p.aal .Our .11District shall n,anitte
7 Lo rec6ve an allo aali< a h ,jnds tIhaastructure to rnore than I 0 QQQ s Lmre feet, but riot to
8 exceed a.rnax.hila~ui :..._o �,i.vi 11..1... ��1 �,���`� F, aiaaa~a Meet of inoTiresia�ential floor area,
9
10 (i) ' ���fY1',i, "wol'[["l11, -if�{�� �1,; 1.' 1�< <.; J�iJ .i `.'Jn1 ( 111E
1�1,` k j ,� f I r IJ:Jo "" 1.l"I J}'I 10) 1)')O s IPIJf°jroi i I,IY1�ra" ti
..
12
13
14
15
16 t! 104.fib r:7qu }r � �.rii i.j.(,r,. .Y...1 i.r.�;@ �.,-06[.,. r�«m if�l,i .�i.,j .ii �,,i ,y'M S'�.etl .k,'ti"�, , �*:."�.;"�2i'a� p.¢ :.,ry i�ila++i� 1^T,, 4`r ��n,X F.r y.P.}:: Vd,7k•1 i'd.ti,i��4.{:(:Fez
17
18
I<l) flI, 0kftl I1'P` {r f1 # �I"d�„1 �`,�` r,rr['�r 1 Io Il[f„ k U' ril
20 ""[ili J11 M i W �.MWIII Y 1 1'V 1( ;11Lf,' ' 1 �I,II <<,IIII+iili„f�1,
21 no, off 'd
22Lfl�
23
24 (h) I iI,[ to II��e I .,II,EJP r_^ r,� ,I
25 0'10 1 L� i -
26
27 of ? )C' . I....
28 ..............((
29 t 0,t f`' it Irl „f1 l� Ilil'i serf �� U'fl[ flkil rt it f� �.1; ii '{(i��yi,
.., v J .,,
30
31
32 i a.' �0 r1�a iu+ b4 r ti�ariaaaa� ��a kia1�P0 q!,J'w......... ..... ....
33 �1apa�1h YYr MIQiBMr� iaho � : f� �a14 d 4ie�iNa a" 5 4d r4al al �a1k7fii i.p:G�ra ryi riaat " 4�n014i �i M6� 5.�u*t
.. „_ ........ ... .. _,.. ..... . .._ ,,,,, ... .. .... _.. .. ....,_ ..... ..... ... .......... ,.... ..... __... .,..
34 ,64 1�'i wIv
&(4
afil u' °M i�"
35 �ar� aRnaiy a l i� ofa �� a i�.�48f rindM1GryaT-��1Si°.a.., a�;i �1.M1v�� �q r.1fi+UIP�:;�
36
37 (i) 11 '1r„'-j I' Pi'Wa'[ . (J,s (rj d� 1_ �_-�Jlirj"11' Il ,fi: (fir, ����a,V,1f. J ,r,, :°f ISIC�� ],i �.,rl"il/° ('11')dr[r'f 1j'fflkc.,,s
38 ((i ,lIk .11.lw.f'd UIf^J 11a6<�I1"IC
39 d >( etl ,i
:1 ff t
40
41
42 *****
43
44 Staff has reviewed the proposed amendment and in the event that the BOCC chooses to adopt
45 the Overlay, Staff recommended changes are included as Exhibit 3 to this Staff Report and are
46 reflected in the draft Ordinance.
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 8 of 25
File 2022-053
13
1
2 IV. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT
3
4 Proposals to amend the text of the Land Development Code are reviewed in accordance with Chapter
5 102,Article V.Land Development Code Section 102-158(a)specifically identifies the purpose of Article
6 V Amendments and states:
7
8 Purpose. The purpose of this article [Article V- Amendments] is to provide a means for
9 changing the text of this Land Development Code,which also includes changes to the land
10 use (zoning) district map and overlay district maps. It is also intended to add to the
11 statutory procedures and requirements for changing the future land use map (FLUM) at
12 the transmittal stage. The process for changing the text of the Comprehensive Plan shall
13 follow the process established Chapter 163, Part 11, Florida Statutes, and shall require a
14 Concept Meeting as detailed in subsection (d)(3) of this section, and shall provide for
15 community participation as specified in Section 102-159(b). This article is not intended
16 to relieve particular hardships, nor to confer special privileges or rights on any
17 person, nor to permit an adverse change in community character, analyzed in the
18 Technical Document(data and analysis), but only to make necessary adjustments in
19 light of changed conditions or incorrect assumptions or determinations as
20 determined by the findings of the BOCC. In determining whether to grant a
21 requested amendment tote text of this Land Development Code, or land use
22 (zoning) district map, or overlay map, the BOCC shall consider, in addition tothe
23 factors set forth in this article, the consistency of the proposed amendment with the
24 provisions and intent oft a comprehensive plan and consistency with the principles
25 for guiding development in Section 380.0552,F.S. [emphasis added].
26
27 Staff is reviewing the proposed amendment for consistency with the County's Comprehensive Plan, the
28 Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan, internal consistency with the Code and State Statutes (including
29 163.3187, F.S.,), Rules, and balancing all the requirements and policy issues.
30
31 Comparison of Development Potential
32 The Property is currently located within the Suburban Commercial Land Use (zoning) District, Mixed
33 Use/Commercial Future Land Use,and is designated as Tier 3 on the County's Tier overlay map. Under
34 the existing zoning requirements, both commercial retail and employee housing dwelling units are
35 permitted uses.The primary change that would result from adoption of the proposed overlay is the ability
36 to construct a nonresidential structure that is over 10,000 square feet, up to 49,900 square feet, with
37 receipt of that nonresidenital floor area allocation within a single allocation quarter[for properties within
38 the overlay].
39
40 To better understand the Applicants' request, below is a summary of the maximum development
41 potential of the Property based on 14.04 acres (611,384.2 SF) of upland' under the current Code as
42 compared to the maximum development potential under the proposed text amendment:
43
Nonresidential Square Footage(SF) MaxNetDensity Allocated Density
Existing Code Commercial retail: 202.11 units 42.11 units
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 02.15.2024 Page 9 of 25
File 2022-053
14
(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
1
2
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.
3
4 The Applicants' proposed text would relax the development restrictions within the Overlay by allowing
5 for the potential NROGO allocation of up to 49,900 square feet within a single allocation quarter and
6 for a single structure as opposed to a maximum of 10,000 square foot per structure as set forth in LDC
7 Section 138-51. As currently drafted, it is apparent that the intent of the overlay is to limit the
8 nonresidential development potential of the Property to no more than 49,900 square feet of
9 nonresidential floor area and 86 units of deed restricted affordable housing.
10
11 It should be noted that as of November 16, 2023, there are approximately 33 affordable ROGO
12 allocations available. Therefore, there is not currently a sufficient number of ROGO allocations
13 available to develop the 86 units of affordable housing referenced throughout the Applicants'
14 concurrent applications for development. The Applicants are aware that there is not a sufficient
15 number of ROGO allocations currently available for the proposed project and that the County
16 cannot guarantee that additional ROGO allocations will become available for the Applicants.
17
18 Traffic Review
19 Due to the specificity of the proposed development through this application and concurrent applications,
20 Staff requested that a Level III Traffic Study be submitted, reviewed and approved before the proposed
21 text amendment be considered by the Planning Commission. A Level III Traffic Study was initially
22 received by Staff on November 10, 2022, updated in February 2023, May 2023, November 2023 and
23 again January 2024. The Study and subsequent revisions have been forwarded to the County's
24 Transportation Consultant ( AECOM ) for review, with the most recent review comments dated
25 November 21, 2023.
26
27 As of the date of this report, the comments that remain outstanding are listed below:
28
29 1. The TIS states that the Liquor store is located within Publix but will have its own entrance and
30 not be accessible from Publix. Please confirm whether the 2,100 sf liquor store is part of the 49,
31 340 sf supermarket or not. If part of the supermarket, then for trip generation purposes the
32 supermarket square footage needs to be reduced.
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 10 of 25
File 2022-053
15
1 2. ITE Trip Generation Manual provides both average rates and fitted curve for the proposed land
2 uses. Fitted curve seems to generate more daily trips for the proposed land uses. Please confirm
3 why average trip rates were used as opposed to the fitted curve?
4 3. Overseas Highway/US 1 & Project Driveway intersection evaluation discussion in the TI
5 indicates that once the site is fully developed, occupied and operational a signal warrant
6 analysis will be conducted. Considering that a new signal will have an impact on US 1 traffic
7 flow, Monroe County in general does not prefer adding new signals if a less restrictive
improvement(other than a signal) can accommodate the traffic demand. As such, we
9 recommend including an assessment of potential impacts to US I traffic flow as part of any
10 future analysis or studies related to adding a signal at this location. Also, considering a recent
11 signal at Burton Drive which is approximately 950 feet from the project driveway location and
12 access management spacing requirements, a signal at the project driveway may not be
13 desirable.
14 4. As indicated in Table 6, Segment 21 (Plantation) is projected to be overcapacity. The shortfall
15 of 76 daily trips in Segment 21 must be mitigated. As indicated in the previous comment/
16 responses and discussed at the March 27, 2023 meeting, the applicant should develop specific
17 mitigation measures consistent with the LC Section 11 -2(a)(I) .
18 5. As discussed at the March 27, 2023 meeting between the applicant and Monroe County,the
19 method of using Placer. Ai data to offset capacity is not consistent with the industry standards /
20 procedures and L C Section 11 -2(a)(1) .
21 6. The truck turning paths show the trucks making turns from the through lane (not from the
22 dedicated turn lanes). Please review and update as needed. Also, please be advised that the site
23 plan as presented may need to be changed according to the Monroe County and Tavernier
24 Design Guidelines. As such, there may be additional comments during future reviews.
25 7. Please confirm if the timing/phasing used as part of the Synchro analysis for US I and Burton
26 Drive intersection is the latest/final signal timing obtained from FDOT.
27 Based on the trip generation numbers provided in the submitted Revised Traffic Study, it appears the
28 daily trip generation is as follows:
29
30 ITE Code 220: 86 units * 6.02 = 518 daily trips
31 ITE Code 850: (47,240 SF/1000) * 97.77=4,619 daily trips
32 ITE Code 99: (2,100 SF/1000) * 107.21 =225 daily trips
33
34 Total= 5,362 daily trips (without excluding pass-by trips)
35
36
37 This calculation does not include any "internal capture" that may exist between the proposed residential
38 units and nonresidential square footage. The submitted Level III Traffic Study goes on to provide a more
39 detailed analysis of the daily trip generation, potential impacts to affected segments of US 1 and potential
0 impacts to relevant intersections.
1
2 If the proposed LDC text amendment and corresponding LUD Overlay map amendment are approved,
3 these comments would be addressed during the major conditional use approval review process. As of
4 the date of this report, the Applicants have yet to propose any mitigation measures consistent with the
5 requirements set forth in L C Section I 1 -2(a)(1)b. The Applicants' assert that with the addition of a
6 new Publix at the Property, less vehicles will be traveling through Segment 21 (MM 86.0 —MM 91.5)
7 as the existing customer base that lives within Segment 22 (MM 91.5 to MM 99.5) would "transfer
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 11 of 25
File 2022-053
16
I nearly all of their supermarket shopping trips to the new Publix store in Tavernier." Although this may
2 be a compelling argument, there are two major flaws. First,this type of analysis has not historically been
3 accepted with regards to mitigation. Second, there is nothing in the proposed LDC Text Amendment or
4 corresponding applications that would only allow the development of a Publix Supermarket. Rather, the
5 proposed commercial retail space could be occupied by any number of existing or unknown businesses
6 or corporations, as the LDC does not and cannot regulate or require a specific business to occupy the
7 Property.
8
9 Consistency with the LDC
10 In accordance with LDC Section 102-158(d)(7)(b),the BOCC may consider the adoption of an ordinance
1 1 enacting the proposed map and text amendments to this Land Development Code based on one or more
12 of the following factors:
13
14 1. Changed projections (e.g., regarding public service needs) from those on which the text or
15 boundary was based;
16
17 Per the Applicant:No response provided.
18
19 2. Changed assumptions (e.g., regarding demographic trends);
20
21 Per the Applicant: No response provided.
22
23 3. Data errors, including errors in mapping,vegetative types and natural features described in
24 volume 1 of the plan;
25
26 Per the Applicant: No response provided.
27
28 4. New issues;
29
30 Per the Applicant: No response provided.
31
32 5. Recognition of a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness; or
33
34 Per the Applicant: "The proposed Overlay is based on a need for additional detail or
35 comprehensiveness. The current Code has provisions that encourage overlay districts to be created
36 to benefit and promote the character of the community in its development. Permitting the Overlay
37 furthers the objectives of the Code as it encourages the orderly development and construction of
38 commercial structures or buildings thatfit with the architectural design and community character
39 of the Tavernier community. The Overlay encourages sound, attractive, and practical procedures
40 for the Tavernier community, and such provisions will result inflexible planning that benefits the
41 community the Overlay will serve.
42
43 Staff does not support the claim that the proposed text amendment to the Land Development Code
44 would address a need for additional detail or comprehensiveness. Alternatively, it appears that the
45 proposed amendment would be creating inconsistencies between the proposed overlay and the
46 adopted Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan.
47
48 To address the concerns of inconsistency, the Applicants must address the following two (2) main
49 issues: 1) consistency with the Tavernier LCP and Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway I Corridor
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 12 of 25
File 2022-053
17
I Development Standards and Guidelines ("US I Guidelines") and 2) consistency with community
2 character.
3
4 The Applicants assert that the Overlay "furthers the objectives of the Code as it 'encourages the
5 orderly development and construction of commercial structures or buildings that fit with the
6 architectural design and community character of the Tavernier community". However, the
7 proposed language does not support this assertion nor have the Applicants submitted data and
8 analysis demonstrating consistency with community character.
9
10 In accordance with LDC Section 101-1, community character is defined as the image and
I I perception of a community as defined by the recognizable natural and built landmarks,
12 boundaries and features that provide a sense of place and orientation and the
13 interrelationship of all these characteristics.
14 The Property is within the Suburburban Commercial (SC) Land Use District and the Tavernier
15 Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway I Corridor District Overlay (TC), established by LC
16 Section 130-128. All proposed development within the existing overlay must co ply with the
17 Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway Corridor Development Standards and
18 Guidelines, which are adopted as part of Chapter 130 of the Land Development Code. The
19 Property is also subject to the policies and guidelines provided in the Tavernier Livable
20 CommuniKeys Plan, which is adopted as part of the County's Comprehensive Plan.
21
22 The Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway Corridor Development Standards and
23 Guidelines include specific building types, with the intent of guiding the development of new
24 construction so that it continues to define the character of Tavernier and so that the massing, scale,
25 and materials of new structures are compatible with this existing character. The guidelines provide
26 for the construction of large commercial buildings through the aggregation of smaller buildings,
27 as depicted in the excerpts from the guidines pictured below:
28
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 13 of 25
File 2022-053
18
5. Building Types
The intent is to guide the development of new construction so that buildings continue to
define a character for Tavernier and that the massing, scale and materials of new
structures are compatible with this character. These are the recommended types for new
construction in the corridor. The listed building types are not the universe of buildings
that can be developed in the corridor, they are merely applied examples of the guidelines
and standards in this document. Figure 27 does not accurately reflect all county
regulations and is illustrative of building concept only.
Large Commercial Building
The intent is to create a building A ,
prototype that would tit in the
General Urban zone deep lots or in
the suburban zone. �' r ��
This building type is characterized by
the aggregation of smaller buildings;
where possible, these should be "I
arranged as to create positive i,
accessible open space (Figure 27).
The building may be clad with siding
or finished with stucco. The primary . VAI'11�,
fa4ade is lined with arcades and
balconies; windows are covered with Figure 27 Large Commercial Building Type
operable Bahama shutters, and roofs are standing seam metal.
1
2
Multifamily Residential
The architecture of' the building should consist of the materials recommended in these
guidelines and it should be compatible with architectural and urban character of
Tavernier. Access to individual units should be obvious from the street level (Figure 28).
A
Figure 28 Multi Family Building
3
4 To further guide new development within the TC Overlay, these guidelines utilized transect
5 zoning. The transects do not eliminate the standards set by the County's Code or zoning laws, but
6 are intended to help organize the regulations according to the transect with which the property
7 belongs. The Transect Map, which is adopted as part of the Land Development Code through
8 Section 130-128, is pictured below:
9
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 14 of 25
File 2022-053
19
Tarerrdar Transa�
TYE—ban
6 T3 SUbUMM
Ta General UrW
H—x.y
The Property
.,
KEY LARGO
t...a.y
TAVERNIER
2
3 As depicted in the above map,the Property is within the Suburban Zone of the TC overlay, which
"is characterized by intermittent occurrences of open space, residential development of diverse
5 densities, and industrial and general commercial uses following a pattern similar to that found in
6 the mainland suburbs." According to the Glossary, Suburban, is "characterized by low density
7 residential, this zone is more vegetated than the general urban zone. In this zone blocks tend to be
8 larger." Alternatively, according to the Guidelines, "the urban zone is the area where most of the
9 retail and commercial mixed use development are found and it is the area that the community
10 identifies as its center".
11
12 The establishment of the proposed overlay would allow for a single nonresidential structure of up
13 to 49,900 square feet on the Property. This is not consistent with the adopted Guidelines, which
14 encourage the aggregation of smaller buildings when considering large scale commercial
15 development. The proposed amendment would allow for the size of a nonresidential structure that
16 is inconsistent with the established community character that is indicated by the existing smaller
17 scale development within the Suburban zone. This is inconsistent with existing commui
18 character and wouldallow for development that does not comply with Section130-128
19 nor Comprehensive Plan Policy No. 1 .1. .
20
21 Land DevelopmentCode Section - 2 (b): The Tavernier Creek to Mile
22 Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines are
23 hereby adopted by reference and declared a part of this chapter. Within the overlay
24 district, as designated on the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway 1
25 District Overlay Map, uses permitted as of right and uses requiring for or
26 major conditional use permit shall be reviewed based uponthe Tavernier
27 Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway I Corridor Development Standards
28 and Guidelines and approved if found in compliance with these standards and
29 guidelines.
30
31 Comprehensive Plan Policy No. 105. . : Monroe County shall enforce the design
32 guidelines established within the Livable Comunieys Plans and its land
33 development regulations which ensure that future uses and development are
34 compatible with scenic preservation and maintenance of the character of the casual
35 island village atmosphere of the Florida Keys.
36
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 15 of 25
File 2022-053
20
I For reference, under the existing SC Zoning District, the development of 49,900 nonresidential
2 square feet and 86 affordable residential dwelling units is permissible; however, no one (1)
3 nonresidential structure may exceed 10,000 square feet.
4
5 The proposed text amendment would allow both:
6 1) a structure greater than 10,000 square feet within the SC Zoning District; and
7 2) allows for the allocation or transfer of the entire 49,900 square feet of nonresidential
8 development (NROGO floor area) at one time. Therefore, no phasing of the resulting project
9 would be required.
10
11 6. Data updates;
12
13 Per the Applicant: No response provided.
14
15 7. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and the principles for guiding development as
16 defined in Section 380.0552, Florida Statutes.
17
18 Per the Applicant.-No response provided.
19
20 Staff has not found the proposed text amendment consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the
21 principles for guiding development as defined in F.S. Section 380.0552 as noted in section V of
22 this Report.
23
24 The proposed amendment is not consistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy 101.5.6.-
25
26 The principal purpose of the Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) future land use category is to
27 provide for the establishment of mixed use commercial land use (zoning) districts where
28 various types of commercial retail and office may be permitted at intensities which are
29 consistent with the community character and the natural environment. Employee housing
30 and commercial apartments are also permitted. In addition, Mixed Use/Commercial land use
31 districts are to establish and conserve areas of mixed uses, which may include maritime
32 industry, light industrial uses, commercial fishing, transient and permanent residential,
33 institutional, public, and commercial retail uses.
34
35 This future land use category is also intended to allow for the establishment of mixed use
36 development patterns,where appropriate. Various types of residential and nonresidential uses
37 may be permitted; however, heavy industrial uses and similarly incompatible uses shall be
38 prohibited.The County shall continue to take a proactive role in encouraging the preservation
39 and enhancement of community character and recreational and commercial working
40 waterfronts.
41
42 In order to protect environmentally sensitive lands,the following development controls shall
43 apply to all hammocks, pinelands, and disturbed wetlands within this land use category:
44
45 1. only low intensity commercial uses shall be allowed;
46 2. a maximum floor area ratio of 0.10 shall apply to nonresidential development; and
47 3. maximum net residential density shall be zero.
48
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 16 of 25
File 2022-053
21
I Additionally, as previously discussed, the Property is subject to the Tavernier Creek to Mile
2 Marker 97 Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan. In accordance with Comprehensive Plan Policy
3 101.19.2, the Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2030 Comprehensive Plan
4 as a part of the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan.
5
6 The Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 dated February
7 11, 2005 and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on February 16, 2005 through
Ordinance 002-2005 is incorporated by reference into the Comprehensive Plan. The term
9 Strategies in the Master Plan is equivalent to the term Objective in the Comprehensive Plan and
10 the term Action Item is equivalent to the term Policy; the meanings and requirements for
11 implementation are synonymous.
12
13 In reviewing the Tavernier CommuniKeys Plan, it is evident that the vision was to preserve the
14 heritage and natural setting of the existing community, with limited redevelopment of commercial
15 properties. The CommuniKeys Plan even includes an Action Item [below] that prohibits the
16 designation of new commercial land use districts beyond those that are already contained within
17 the Master Plan in order to prevent further sprawl or strip commercial zoning.
18
19 Action Item 3.1.3 of the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan: Prohibit the designation of new
20 commercial land use districts beyond that contained in this Master Plan in order to protect the
21 existing viability of the US1 Corridor Area and Community Center and to prevent the further
22 sprawl or strip commercial zoning.
23
24 The proposed text amendment is inconsistent with the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan,
25 which renders the proposed amendment inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan Policy No.
26 101.19.2.
27
2 ( .) In no event shall an amendment be approved whichwill result in an adverse community
29 change tote planning area in whichthe proposed development is located or to any area i
30 accordance with a livable communikeys master plan pursuantr i s of the board of county
31 commissioners [Ref. Coe Section 102-158(d)(7)d.l.
32
33 Per the Applicant: "There will be no adverse change to unincorporated Monroe County if the Overlay
34 is approved. As discussed herein, there are no increased concurrency, environmental, or practical
35 impacts associated with the increased NOGG permitted within the Overlay. All such development
36 will be required to at a minimum comply with level of service, concurrency, and performance
37 standards as set forth in the Code. "
3
39 Staff anticipates the proposed amendment will result in an adverse community change to Tavernier.
40
1 The theme throughout the Tavernier LCP is one of protection for the natural environment,preservation
42 of the historic elements of Tavernier and guided development and growth in a manner that is
43 compatible with community goals. The LCP provides a number of goals, objectives and action items
44 to enact policies consistent with the theme and intent of the LCP. In reviewing the Tavernier LCP and
45 the Community Vision statement therein, it appears the proposed amendment may not be consistent
46 with the Community Vision:
47 We envision the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97PIanning Areas:
4
OCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 17 of 25
He 2022-053
22
I An island community committed to preserving its heritage,natural setting and
2 stands of native tropical hardwood hammocks, with improvements to the
3 visual character of the U.S. 1 corridor, limited redevelopment of commercial
4 properties, and neighborhoods where residents have access to the water and
5 recreational facilities.
6
7 The text amendment as drafted proposes to relax the development restrictions on the Property without
8 providing adequate data to support such a change nor demonstrating consistency with the Tavernier
9 LCP and existing community character.
10
1 1 For example, within the Suburban Zone, the intent of the building configuration standards is to break
12 down the apparent mass of buildings wider [or deeper] than 50 feet by creating facade insets at
13 intervals appropriate to the mass of the building. The maximum continuous facade of any building
14 fronting US1 cannot be greater than 50 feet. A building wider than 50 feet will be architecturally
15 defined as a series of smaller units, with insets between primary fagades. The inset facade shall not be
16 setback less than six(6) feet.
17
18 The overlay and text as proposed, do not include provisions that support or expand upon construction
19 consistent with the architectural theme of Tavernier.The primary change that would result from
20 adoption of the proposed overlay would be the ability to construct a nonresidential structure that is
21 over 10,000 square feet [on properties within the overlay].
22
23 The Tavernier Community is well established and primarily developed in accordance with the adopted
24 guidelines and Livable CommuniKeys Plan. As the primary component of the text amendment is the
25 ability to construct a nonresidential structure that is greater than 10,000 square feet, staff considered
26 the affect the amendment would have on the existing character of the Tavernier Community as a whole,
27 and within the Suburban Transect. To aid in this review for cons istency,Staff reviewed the size of
28 existing buildings of surrounding properties within both the Suburban and Urban transect zones.
29 According to data from the Monroe County Property Appraiser's website, the largest existing
30 commercial structure within 600 feet of the Property is approximately 12,000 square feet, known as
31 the Vaughn Building. For reference only, some recogizable commercial buildings within Tavernier are
32 described in the table below:
33
Common Property Name Building Square Transect Zone per US]
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
34
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 18 of 25
File 2022-053
23
I Pursuant to LC Section 101-1, community character means the image and perception of a
2 community as defined by the recognizable natural and built landmarks, boundaries and features
3 that provide a sense of place and orientation and the interrelationship of all these characteristics.
4
5 The allowance of a structure that is up to 49,900 square feet is much larger than existing structures within
6 the transect area noted as Suburban and would be inconsistent with the established community character.
7 The existing LDC, when coupled with the TC Overlay Guidelines and Tavernier LC , intentionally
8 limits the maximum size of each structure.
9
10 As previously stated, the proposed text amendment is inconsistent with the Tavernier Livable
I I CommuniKeys Plan, which renders the proposed amendment inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan
12 Policy No. 101.19.2. Additionally, the proposal is inconsistent with Comp Plan Policy 101.5.6 which
13 states that various types of commercial retail and office may be permitted at intensities which are
14 consistent with the community character and the natural environment.
15
16 V. CONSISTENCY WITH THE MONROE COUNTY YEAR 2030 COMPREHENSIVE
17 PLAN, THE PRINCIPLES FOR GUIDING DEVELOPMENT, AND FLORIDA
18 STATUTES.
19
20 A. The proposed amendment is not' consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the
21 Monroe County 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, it is inconsistent with:
22 Policy 101.5.6
23
24 The principal purpose of the Mixed Use/Commercial(MC)future land use category is to provide for
25 the establishment of mixed use commercial land use (zoning) districts where various types of
26 commercial retail and office may be permitted at intensities is are consistent with the
27 community character and the natural environment. Employee housing and commercial apartments
28 are also permitted. In addition, Mixed Use/Commercial land use districts are to establish and
29 conserve areas of mixed uses, which may include maritime industry, light industrial uses,
30 commercial fishing, transient and pen-nanent residential, institutional, public, and commercial retail
31 uses.
32
33 This future land use category is also intended to allow for the establishment of mixed use
34 development patterns, where appropriate. Various types of residential and nonresidential uses may
35 be permitted; however, heavy industrial uses and similarly incompatible uses shall be prohibited.
36 The County shall continue to take a proactive role in encouraging the preservation and enhancement
37 of community character and recreational and commercial working waterfronts.
38
39
40 Policy 101.19.1
41 Monroe County shall develop, maintain, and update periodically, as appropriate, with public input,
42 the Livable CommuniKeys Community Master Plans. Community Master Plans will be maintained
43 in accordance with the following principles:
44
45 1. Each Community Master Plan will contain a framework for future development and
46 redevelopment including the designation of growth boundaries and future acquisition areas for
47 public spaces and environmental conservation;
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 19 of 25
File 2022-053
24
1
2 2. Each Community Master Plan will include an Implementation Strategy composed of action items,
3 an implementation schedule, and a monitoring mechanism to provide accountability to
4 communities;
5
6 3. Each Community Master Plan will be consistent with existing Federal and State requirements and
7 overall goals of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan to ensure legal requirements are met. While
8 consistency with the goals of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan is paramount, the 2030 Plan will be
9 updated and amended where appropriate;
10
11 4. Each Community Master Plan will be closely coordinated with other community plans and other
12 jurisdictions to ensure development or redevelopment activities will not adversely impact those
13 areas;
14
15 5. Each Community Master Plan will include appropriate mechanisms allowing citizens continued
16 oversight and involvement in the implementation of their plans. Through the Community Master
17 Plans, programs for ongoing public involvement, outreach, and education will be developed;
18
19 6. Each Community Master Plan will include a Capital Improvements program to provide certainty
20 that the provision of public facilities will be concurrent with future development;
21
22 7. Each Community Master Plan will contain an environmental protection element to maintain
23 existing high levels of environmental protection as required in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan;
24
25 8. Each Community Master Plan will include a community character element that will address the
26 protection and enhancement of existing residential areas and the preservation of community
27 character through site and building guidelines. Design guidelines for public spaces, landscaping,
28 streetscaping, buildings, parking lots, and other areas will be developed through collaborative
29 efforts of citizens, the Planning Department, and design professionals reinforcing the character of
30 the local community context;
31
32 9. Each Community Master Plan will include an economic development element addressing current
33 and potential diversified economic development strategies including tourism management. The
34 preservation and retention of valued local businesses, existing economies, and the development of
35 economic alternatives will be encouraged through the process;
36
37 10. Each Community Master Plan will contain a Transportation Element addressing transportation
38 needs and possibilities including circulation, safe and convenient access to goods and services, and
39 transportation alternatives that will be consistent with the overall integrity of the transportation
40 system not resulting in negative consequences for other communities; and
41
42 11. Each Community Master Plan will be based on knowledge of existing conditions in each
43 community. The Planning Department will compile existing reports, databases, maps, field data,
44 and information from other sources supplemented by community input to document current
45 conditions; and
46
47 12. Each Community Master Plan will simplify the planning process providing clarity and certainty
48 for citizens, developers, and local officials by providing a transparent framework for a continuing
49 open dialogue with different participants involved in planning issues.
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 20 of 25
File 2022-053
25
I Policy 101.19.2
2 The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as a part of
3 the plan and be implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community Master
4 Plans have been completed in accordance with the principles outlined in this section and adopted by
5 the Board of County Commissioners:
6
7 2. The Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 dated February
8 11, 2005 and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on February 16, 2005 is incorporated
9 by reference into the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The term Strategies in the Master Plan is equivalent
10 to the to Objective in the Comprehensive Plan and the term Action Item is equivalent to the to
I I Policy; the meanings and requirements for implementation are synonymous. Adopted by Ordinance
12 002-2005.
13
14 Policy 105.1.2
15 Monroe County shall enforce the design guidelines established within the Livable CommuniKeys
16 Plans and its land development regulations which ensure that future uses and development are
17 compatible with scenic preservation and maintenance of the character of the casual island village
18 atmosphere of the Florida Keys.
19
20 Policy 105.1.3
21 Monroe County shall, through its development standards and Land Development Code, continue
22 to foster the retention and redevelopment of small businesses on the U.S.1.
23 Tavernier LCP
24 Community Vision
25 We envision the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 Planning Area as: An island community
26 committed to preserving its heritage, natural setting and stands of native tropical hardwood
27 hammocks, with improvements to the visual character of the U.S. I corridor, limited redevelopment
28 of commercial properties, and neighborhoods where residents have access tote water and
29 recreational facilities.
30
31 Action Item 3.1.1: Designate a "Community Center" from MM 91 to Burton Dr. pursuant to Policy
32 105.2.15 where Tier III infill and incentives for redevelopment will be encouraged.
33
34 Action Item 3.1. 2: Require that any new development or redevelopment approved within the
35 designated US Highway I Community Center, meeting the following criteria, be consistent with
36 design standards established pursuant to Action Items 3.2.3 and 3.3.3:
37 1. Any new or expanded non-residential structures of greater than 2,500 square feet in floor area;
38 2. Any new or expanded outdoor retail sales;
39 3.Any new residential structure containing more than three units or redeveloped residential structure
40 containing more than three units that involves a change in floor area,building height or configuration
41 of building footprint;
42 4. Any new transient residential structure or redeveloped existing transient residential structure that
43 involves a change of floor area, building height, or configuration of building footprint.
44
45 Action Item 3.1.3: Prohibit the designation of new commercial land use districts beyond that
46 contained in this Master Plan in order to protect the existing viability of the US I Corridor Area and
47 Community Center and to prevent the further sprawl or strip commercial zoning.
48
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 21 of 25
File 2022-053
26
I Strategy 3.2
2 Develop and adopt a Commercial Corridor Enhancement Plan for the U.S. 1 Corridor Area between
3 MM 91 and MM 93.5.
4
5 Action Item 3.2.3: Develop and adopt design standards and design guidelines for development within
6 the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the Community Center.
7
8 B. The amendment is not consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the Florida
9 Keys Area, Section 380.0552(7),Florida Statutes.
10
11 For the purposes of reviewing consistency of the adopted plan or any amendments to that plan with the
12 principles for guiding development and any amendments to the principles, the principles shall be
13 construed as a whole and no specific provision shall be construed or applied in isolation from the other
14 provisions.
15
16 (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local
17 government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern
18 designation.
19 (b) Protecting shoreline and benthic resources, including mangroves, coral reef formations, seagrass
20 beds, wetlands,fish and wildlife, and their habitat.
21 (c) Protecting upland resources, tropical biological communities, freshwater wetlands, native tropical
22 vegetation(for example,hardwood hammocks and pinelands),dune ridges and beaches,wildlife,and
23 their habitat.
24 (d) Ensuring the maximum well-being of the Florida Keys and its citizens through sound economic
25 development.
26 (e) Limiting the adverse impacts of development on the quality of water throughout the Florida Keys.
27 (f) Enhancing natural scenic resources, promoting the aesthetic benefits of the natural environment, and
28 ensuring that development is compatible with the unique historic character of the Florida Keys.
29 (g) Protecting the historical heritage of the Florida Keys.
30 (h) Protecting the value,efficiency,cost-effectiveness,and amortized life of existing and proposed major
31 public investments, including:
32
33 1. The Florida Keys Aqueduct and water supply facilities;
34 2. Sewage collection,treatment,and disposal facilities;
35 3. Solid waste treatment, collection, and disposal facilities;
36 4. Key West Naval Air Station and other military facilities;
37 5. Transportation facilities;
38 6. Federal parks, wildlife refuges, and marine sanctuaries;
39 7. State parks, recreation facilities,aquatic preserves, and other publicly owned properties;
40 8. City electric service and the Florida Keys Electric Co-op; and
41 9. Other utilities, as appropriate.
42
43 (i) Protecting and improving water quality by providing for the construction, operation, maintenance,
44 and replacement of stormwater management facilities; central sewage collection; treatment and
45 disposal facilities; and the installation and proper operation and maintenance of onsite sewage
46 treatment and disposal systems.
47 (j) Ensuring the improvement of nearshore water quality by requiring the construction and operation of
48 wastewater management facilities that meet the requirements of ss. 381.0065(4)(1)and 403.086(10),
49 as applicable, and by directing growth to areas served by central wastewater treatment facilities
50 through permit allocation systems.
51 (k) Limiting the adverse impacts of public investments on the environmental resources of the Florida
52 Keys.
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 22 of 25
File 2022-053
27
1 (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys.
2 (m)Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural
3 or manmade disaster and for a post disaster reconstruction plan.
4 (n) Protecting the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the Florida Keys and maintaining
5 the Florida Keys as a unique Florida resource.
6
7 Pursuant to Section 380.0552(7) Florida Statutes,the proposed amendment is not consistent with the
8 Principles for Guiding Development as a whole.
9
10 As noted in the analysis in Sections IV and V of this Report,the proposed amendment is inconsistent
11 with the County's Comprehensive Plan. Approval of the proposed amendment would limit the
12 County's ability for managing land use without direct oversight provided by designation as an area
13 of critical state concern.
14
15 C. The proposed amendment, is not consistent with the Part 11 of Chapter 163, Florida Statute
16 (F.S.). Specifically:
17
18 163.3161(4), F.S. — It is the intent of this act that local governments have the ability to preserve and
19 enhance present advantages; encourage the most appropriate use of land, water, and resources,
20 consistent with the public interest; overcome present handicaps; and deal effectively with future
21 problems that may result from the use and development of land within their jurisdictions. Through
22 the process of comprehensive planning, it is intended that units of local government can preserve,
23 promote, protect, and improve the public health, safety, comfort, good order, appearance,
24 convenience, law enforcement and fire prevention, and general welfare; facilitate the adequate and
25 efficient provision of transportation, water,sewerage, schools,parks, recreational facilities, housing,
26 and other requirements and services; and conserve, develop, utilize, and protect natural resources
27 within their jurisdictions.
28
29 1633161(6), F.S.—It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans shall have the legal status
30 set out in this act and that no public or private development shall be permitted except in conformity
31 with comprehensive plans, or elements or portions thereof, prepared and adopted in conformity with
32 this act.
33
34 163.3177(1), F.S. — The comprehensive plan shall provide the principles, guidelines, standards, and
35 strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental, and fiscal
36 development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the plan and its elements.
37 These principles and strategies shall guide future decisions in a consistent manner and shall contain
38 programs and activities to ensure comprehensive plans are implemented. The sections of the
39 comprehensive plan containing the principles and strategies, generally provided as goals,objectives,
40 and policies, shall describe how the local government's programs, activities, and land development
41 regulations will be initiated, modified, or continued to implement the comprehensive plan in a
42 consistent manner. It is not the intent of this part to require the inclusion of implementing regulations
43 in the comprehensive plan but rather to require identification of those programs, activities, and land
44 development regulations that will be part of the strategy for implementing the comprehensive plan
45 and the principles that describe how the programs, activities, and land development regulations will
46 be carried out. The plan shall establish meaningful and predictable standards for the use and
47 development of land and provide meaningful guidelines for the content of more detailed land
48 development and use regulations.
49
50 163.3194, F.S. —(1)(a) After a comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, has been adopted in
51 conformity with this act, all development undertaken by, and all actions taken in regard to
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 23 of 25
File 2022-053
28
I development orders by, governmental agencies in regard to land covered by such plan or element
2 shall be consistent with such plan or element as adopted.
3
4 (b) All land development regulations enacted or amended shall be consistent with the adopted
5 comprehensive plan,or element or portion thereof, and any land development regulations existing at
6 the time of adoption which are not consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan, or element or
7 portion thereof,shall be amended so as to be consistent. If a local government allows an existing land
8 development regulation which is inconsistent with the most recently adopted comprehensive plan,or
9 element or portion thereof, to remain in effect, the local government shall adopt a schedule for
10 bringing the land development regulation into conformity with the provisions of the most recently
11 adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof. During the interim period when the
12 provisions of the most recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, and the
13 land development regulations are inconsistent, the provisions of the most recently adopted
14 comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall govern any action taken in regard to an
15 application for a development order.
16
17 163.3201, F.S. — Relationship of comprehensive plan to exercise of land development regulatory
18 authority.—It is the intent of this act that adopted comprehensive plans or elements thereof shall be
19 implemented, in part, by the adoption and enforcement of appropriate local regulations on the
20 development of lands and waters within an area. It is the intent of this act that the adoption and
21 enforcement by a governing body of regulations for the development of land or the adoption and
22 enforcement by a governing body of a land development code for an area shall be based on,be related
23 to, and be a means of implementation for an adopted comprehensive plan as required by this act.
24
25 163.3202, F.S.—Land development regulations.-
26 (1) Within I year after submission of its comprehensive plan or revised comprehensive plan for review
27 pursuant to s. 163.3191, each county and each municipality shall adopt or amend and enforce land
28 development regulations that are consistent with and implement their adopted comprehensive plan.
29 (5) The state land planning agency shall adopt rules for review and schedules for adoption of land
30 development regulations.
31
32 VI. PROCESS
33
34 Land Development Code Amendments may be proposed by the Board of County Commissioners, the
35 Planning Commission,the Director of Planning,private application, or the owner or other person having
36 a contractual interest in property to be affected by a proposed amendment. The Director of Planning
37 shall review and process applications as they are received and pass them onto the Development Review
38 Committee and the Planning Commission.
39
40 The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing. The Planning Commission shall review
41 the application, the reports and recommendations of the Department of Planning & Environmental
42 Resources and the Development Review Committee and the testimony given at the public hearing. The
43 Planning Commission shall submit its recommendations and findings to the Board of County
44 Commissioners (BOCC). The BOCC holds a public hearing to consider the adoption of the proposed
45 amendment, and considers the staff report, staff recommendation, Planning Commission
46 recommendation and the testimony given at the public hearing. The BOCC may adopt the proposed
47 amendment based on one or more of the factors established in LDC Section 102-158(d)(7).
48
49
50
51
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 24 of 25
File 2022-053
29
I VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
2
3 The amendment as drafted proposes to relax the development restrictions on the Property without
4 providing adequate data to support such a change nor demonstrating consistency with the Tavernier LCP
5 and existing community character. It is anticipated that the proposed overlay, would result in an adverse
6 change in the character of the Tavernier Community.
7
8 As described throughout this Report,the proposed text amendment would allow for development that is
9 specifically noncompliant and inconsistent with the following Land Development Code Sections and
10 Comprehensive Plan Policies [as well as the policies described throughout Section V of this report]:
11
12 N Land Development Code Section 130-128(b)
13 M Comprehensive Plan Policy No. 101.5.6
14 M Comprehensive Plan No. 10 1.19.2
15
16 Additionally, on September 1, 2023, the Applicants submitted a separate request to amend the
17 Comprehensive Plan to establish a site-specific subarea policy on a portion of the Property in addition
18 to submitting requests to amend the FLU M and LUD on a portion of the Property that is located within
19 the proposed Overlay. These applications were incomplete when submitted and have not yet been
20 processed by the Planning and Environmental Resources Department.
21
22 The Applicant's proposed overlay language includes a requirement for a Development Agreement on
23 the site prior to permitting of the proposed uses. No Development Agreement application has been
24 submitted yet as of the date of this staff report,
25
26 Staff recommends that the BOCC CONTINUE the Applicant's request to amend the Land Development
27 Code establishing Section 130-143, the Tavernier Commercial Overlay, until such a time that all
28 current requests to amend the Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Code, Future Land Use
29 Map and Land Use District Map, and the proposed Development Agreement, are processed and
30 prepared to be heard at the same BOCC Hearing to ensure consistency of all concurrently
31 proposed amendments relative to this Property.
32
33 In the event that the BOCC elects to vote on this item at the February 15, 2024 public hearing, Staff
34 recommends DENIAL of the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code establishing Section
35 130-143.
36
37 VIII. EXHIBITS
38 1. DRC Resolution No. DRC 13-22
39 2. PC Resolution No. P16-23
40 3. Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits
41 4. Draft Ordinance
BOCC SR 02.15.2024 Page 25 of 25
File 2022-053
30
31
1
3
4
7 MONROE COUNTY, L A
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
9 RESOLUTION NO. DRC 13-22
0
II A RESOLUTION BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
12 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF AN ORDINANCE
13 BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOA F COUNTY
14 COMMISSIONERS AMENDING THE MONROE COUNTY LAND
15 DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH SECTION 1 0-14 ,
16 CREATING THE TA VERNIER Y COMMERCIAL VE AY
17 (T CC)) DISTRICT; INCLUDING THE PURPOSE A NTE ,
18 BOUNDARY, APPLICABILITY, NROGO ALLOCATION
19 STANDARDS, AND MAXIMUMS E TIAL AND
20 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL; FOR
21 PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, KEY
22 LARGO, APPROXIMATELY LE MARKER 92.5, HAVING
23 PARCEL IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 000 9 -0000 0 AND
24 0049 2 -0 0 0 ; AS PROPOSED BY CE EX CONSTRUCTION
25 MATERIALS FLORIDA, LLC. FI A SINGLETARY CONCRETE
26 PRODUCTS INC.; PROVIDING FOR SEVE ILITY;
27 PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS;
28 PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAN
29 PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE;
30 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY
31 CODE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (FILE 2022- )
32
33
34
35 WHEREAS, on March 23, 2022, the Planning and Environmental Resources Department
36 received an application from Smith/Hawks, PL. (the "Agent") on behalf of Singeletary Concrete
37 Products, Inc. and Cerneex Construction Materials Florida, LL.0 (the "Applicants,") and The
38 Vestcor Companies, Inc. and Blackstone Group — Tavernier 925, L LC (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 ROGO allocation of up to 70,000
41 square feet, which could allow for the development of a 64,00 SF commercial supermarket,
42 including a liquor store, on property located at 92501 Overseas Highway, Ivey Largo with parcel
43 identification numbers 000 94 0-000000 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 submitted (File 2022-054) and is ender review; and
47
Resolution DRC 13-22 Page i of
File 2022-053
32
I 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 II of Chapter 163,Florida Statute;
Resolution DRC 13-22 Page 2 of
File 2022-053
33
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 CommuniKeys 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
1.1 DENIAL, of the proposed amendment to Land Development Code establishing Section 1.30-1.43
12 to the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners,
13
14
15
16 Date
17 ---——------------------------------------—------
Emily Schemper, AICP, CFM
18 Senior Director of Planning & Environmental Resources
19
20 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day before me,an officer duly authorized in the State aforesaid
21 and in the County aforesaid to take acknowledgments, personally appeared Emily Schemper, to
22 me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and she
23 acknowledged before me that she executed the same.
24 �1
25 WITNESS my hand and official sea] in the County and State last aforesaid this day of
26 2021
27
28 ALWN J.SMITH X_R*PU , C,'STATE OF FLOi.�I_DA
Notary Public-state of Florida
Commission#Hm 155590
my Comm.Expires Jul 19,2025
Bonded throLgh National Notary Assn.
RM
Resolution DRC 13-22 Page 3 of 3
File 2022-053
34
35
1
3
4 .
5
6
7 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
8 MONROE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P16-23
I COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE MONROE
!2 COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DENY THE
13 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AN ORDINANCE SEEKING TO
14 AMEND THE MONROE
15 TO CREATE A NEW TAVERNIER KEY COMMERCIAL
16 OVERLAY DISTRICT (" „) VIA THE NEW CREATION OF
7 CODE SECTION 130-143, INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO THE
18 MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT
19 WOULD RELATE TO NROGO ALLOCATION STANDARDS,THE
20 PURPOSE AND INTENT, BOUNDARY, AND APPLICABILITY,
21 ANDRESIDENTIAL
22 DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL, ALL RELATING TO
23 PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, KEY
24 LARGO, APPROXIMATE MILE MARKER . , CURRENTLY
25 HAVING PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION -
2 - CEMEX
27 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS FLORIDA,
28 SINGLETARY CONCRETE PRODUCTS •,
PROVIDING FOR
2PROVIDING
3 s PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE
31 LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE;
32 PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY
33 T '.
34
35
36 WHEREAS, on March 23, 2022, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental
37 Resources Department received an application from it / aw s, P.L. (the "Agent"), on behalf
38 of Singletary Concrete Products, Inc. and Cemex Construction Materials Florida. LLC (the
3 "Applicants")and The Vestcor Companies, Inc. and Blackstone Group—Tavernier 925, LLC (the
40 "Developers") seeking to amend to Monroe County Land Development Coe to create a new
1 Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District("TKC ") via the new creation of Code Section 1 -
2 13, including amendments tote Monroe County Land Development Code that wo !d relate to
3 NROGO Allocation Standards, the Purpose and Intent, Boundary, and Applicability, and
44 Maximum Non-Residential and Residential Development Potential, all relating to properties
Monroe County Nanning and IEnvironrnenW Resources Department IFile No. 2022-053.
1 of 5
36
I located at 92501 Overseas Highway. Key Largo,currently having Property Identification Numbers
2 00089490-000000 and 00490250-000000 (the "Propert)"), and
3
4 WHEREAS, an application' seeking approval of a corresponding Land Use District
5 (LUD) map amendment for the Property to apply the Overlay has been received from the above-
6 named Agent, Applicants,and/or Developers, and is currently under review-, and
7
8 WHEREAS, an amended and restated text amendment application was received on May
9 19, 2022': and
10
11 WHEREAS, the proposed text was revised and resubmitted to the Monroe County
12 Planning and Environmental Resources Department for review on September 22, 2022, and
13
14 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee ("DRC") considered
15 the proposed text amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on the 25 th day of October,
16 2022. and
17
18 WHEREAS, on November 14, 2022, the DRC Chair signed Resolution No. DRC 13-22,
19 recommending that the Monroe County Planning Commission and the Monroe County Board of
20 Count) Commissioners DENY/ISSUE DENIAL OF the request seeking to amend the Monroe
21 Count) Land Development Code in order to create brand-new Code Section 130-143. as
22 referenced above; and
23
24 WHEREAS,the Pro pert) is within the boundary of the Tavernier Liva6le CommuniKeys
25 Master Plan. a Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 (the"LCP"); and
26
27 WHEREAS, the Property is within the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway
28 1 Corridor District Overlay ("TC") as identified in the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S.
29 Highway I Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines (the -Corridor Development
30 Guidelines"). and
31
32 WHEREAS, the Propert) is within the Suburban Zone as identified in Corridor
33 Development Guidelines. and
34
35 WHEREAS, the Suburban Zone is characterized by intermittent occurrences of open
36 space, residential development of diverse densities, and industrial and general commercial uses
37 following a pattern similar to that found in the mainland suburbs: and
38
39 WHEREAS, the %ision for the corridor allows the individual zones to maintain their
40 distinctive characteristics, yet, encourages a unified image of the corridor as a whole. where
41 landscape and the built environment share common elements; and
Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department File No.2022-054.
Monroe Count) Planning and Environmental Resources Department File No.2022-053.
2 of 5
37
I WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning Commission ("Planning Commission") held a
2 public hearing on the 2 `h day of April, 2023, for review and recommendation on the subject
3 request for approval of a Lad Development Code text amendment as described above; and
4
5 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental esouces Department's
6 professional staff report ("memorandum")jointly prepared and completed y Assistant Director
7 of Planning Cheryl Cioffa i, A.I.C. ., and PrincipalPlanner Devin Tolpin, A,LC. ., C. .,
recommends that the Planning Commission DENYIISSUE DENIALthe subject request for
approval of Land Development Code text amendment in order to create Coe Section 13 -1 3;
1
I I WHEREAS, based upon the information and documentation submitted, the Planning
2 Commission found:
13 1. The proposed amendment is not consistent i the Goals, Objectives and Policies of
14 the Monroe County Year 2030 Comprehensive an; and
15 2. The proposed amendment is not consistent i e Principles for Guiding
16 Development forte Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Fla. Stat.
7 380.0552(7). and
18 3. The proposed amendment is not consistent a 11 of Chapter 13, Florida
19 Statutes-,
20 4, The proposed amendment wi result in an adverse change in community character
21 to the sub-area whichs cts or to any area in accordance
22 with the Tavernieri o i eys Master Plan pursuant to findings
23 the ; an
24 5, The proposed amendment is not a necessaryse t in light of changed
25 conditions, incorrect ass r determinations, or recognition of a need for
26 additionaldetail comprehensiveness, as required to alter the text of the Monroe
27 County Land Development Code in accordance with Coe Section 1 2-15 .
2
29 WHEREAS,the Planning Commission ere y adopts as an appended exhibit oft e public
30 hearing conducted regarding this application the official minutes oft is hearing attached as
31 Exhibit "A." hereto; an
32
33 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission accepts all of the Findings of fact in the Monroe
34 County Planning and Environmental Resources Department's professional staff report, and
35 hereby adopts e as the Planning Co ission`s own findings of fact; an
36
37 WHEREAS,the Planning Commission accepts all oft e conclusions of law in the Monroe
38 County Planning and EnvironmentalResources Department's professional staff report, and
39 hereby adopts them s the Planning Commission's own findings of fact; an
WHEREAS,40
41 the Planning Commission as considered the full record before it, including
2 but not limited to all remarks by Agent and all public comment; and
3
44 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission accepts all of Principal Planner Devin T°ol in"s
45 fact and expert opinion testimony and hereby adopts e fact and expert opinion testimony on
46 all questions/issues of fact as the Planning Commission's own findings of fact; an
3 of 5
38
I WHEREAS,the Planning Commission accepts all of Planning Director Emily Schemper's
2 fact and expert opinion testimony and hereby adopts her fact and expert opinion testimony on
3 all questions/issues of fact as the Planning Commission's own findings of fact, and
4
5 NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
6 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
7
8 Section 1. Recitals.The foregoing recitals,findings of fact,and conclusions of law are
9 true and correct and are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein, and the record of this
10 proceeding is hereby incorporated as if fully stated herein.
11
12 Section 2. The Monroe County Planning Commission has duly considered the entirety
13 of the record before it.
14
15 Section 3. The Monroe County Planning Commission concurs with the detailed
16 recommendation(s), findings and conclusions of fact and law of the Monroe County Planning and
17 Environmental Resources Department's professional staff, including but not limited to the
18 testimonial and documentary, findings and conclusions of fact and la" of the Department's
19 testifying professional staff and the Department's professional staff report.
20
21 Section 4. Following considered review of the full record before it, based upon
22 competent substantial evidence in the record, more particularly referenced above in the foregoing
213 prefatory and operative recitals, prefatory and operative findings of fact, and prefatory and
24 operative conclusions of law, all detailing said evidence, the Monroe County Planning
25 Commission hereby recommends that the Monroe County BOCC DENY/ISSUE DENIAL
26 OF the instant request to approve amendment of the County's Land Development Code to create
27 Code Section 130-143 as referenced above.
28
29 Section 5. Construction and Interpretation. This Resolution and its interpretation
30 shall be liberally construed in favor of the Monroe County Planning Commission and Monroe
31 County Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC-) and such interpretation shall be entitled to
32 great weight in adversarial administrative proceedings. at trial. on appeal, and in any/all
33 bankruptcy proceedings. The interpretation of Monroe County Comprehensive Plan provision(s).
.34 Florida Building Code, Florida Statutes, and Monroe County Code(s) provision(s) -,%hose
35 interpretation arises out of, relates to, or is interpreted in connection with this Resolution shall be
36 liberally construed and enforced in favor of the Monroe County Planning Commission and BOCC
37 and such interpretation shall be entitled to great weight in adversarial administrative proceedings.
38 at trial. on appeal. and in bankruptcy proceedings.
39
40 Section 6. Inconsistency, Partial Invalidity, Sever abill ty, and Survival of
41 Provisions. If any provision of this Resolution, or any portion thereof, is held to be invalid or
42 unenforceable in or by any administrative hearing officer or court of competent jurisdiction. the
43 in-validity or unenforceability of such provision. or any portion thereof. shall neither limit nor
44 impair the operation, enforceability, or validity of any other provision of this Resolution, or any
45 remaining portion(s) thereof. All other provisions of this Resolution, and remaining portion(s)
46 thereof,. shall continue unimpaired in full force and effect.
4 of 5
39
Section 7® Captions and Paragraph Headings. Captions and paragraphea in s,
2 where used herein, are inserted for convenience only and are not intended to descriptively limit
3 the scope and intent of the particular paragraph®r text to which they refer,
5 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of Monroe County,
6 Florida, at a regular meeting heldn the 28h day ®f April, 2023.
7
Joe Scarpelli, Chair YES
9 Ron Demes, trice Chair YES
10 George Neugent, Commissioner N
I ( Rosemary Thomas, Commissioner YES
12 David Ritz, Commissioner NO
13
14 PLANNING COMMISSIONCOUNTY,FLORIDA
15
16 By: _ , . _ a._.._. ._. ... .,.,
17 Monroe C inty 'larinin Cc� irriission Chair Jae Scarpelli
1
19 Signed this „� ay of fi , 2023
20
22 Notary Pubic.state of FWr9da
eta, '' Oct0716
rOMMsS�ii�,9 iti�03
24 a�apt through Ndtfcpa i ta Assn. t� T'A ELL.,. !C ST Tw .� F... 0'-kI._._......_
sa`" E � F F lA
25
26 Monroe County Planning Commission Counsel
27 T/roved'�As To Form FILED T
28
29
30 o in J W to Esq.
31 area
A
5 of 5
40
PLANNING COMMISSION
April 28,2023
Meeting Minutes
The Planning Commission of Monroe County conducted m hybrid virtual and in-person meeting
on Friday, April 28,2023, beginning st \O:0Oa.nn.
CALL TO ORDER 6v Chair ScucpeUi
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL 6vl\zc /\gui|n
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
Joe ScaroeUi' Chair Present
Ron Dcmcs Vice Chair Present
George Meugent, Commissioner Present
David Ritz. Commissioner Present
Rooemnmr} Thomas, Commissioner Present
Douglas Pryor, Gu'0fOcio Mcmnber(M[SD) Absent
Christina Gardner. Ex'OOicio K@ernbcr(NAShiVY) Absent
STAFF
Emily Schcnoper, Senior Director n[Planning and Environmental Resources
Cheryl Cioffad. Assistant Director n[Planning
Mike Roberts, Assistant Director of Environmental Resources
Brad Stein. Development Review Manager
DcvinTo(pin. Principal Planner
Peter Mon-is. Assistant County Attorney
John \Vn|yc. Planning Commission Counsel
||re /\gui|m. Planning Commission Supervisor
COUNTY RESOLUTION 131-92 APPELLANT TO PROVIDE RECORD FOR APPEAL
Count Resolution 131-92 \,%as read into the record bN Mr. John Wolfe.
SUBMISSION OF PROPERTY POSTING AFFIDAVITS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
Ms. //ze agu//a cnnr/nmco receipt of all ncxcouucy pmpervork. Additional copies of
presentations were also received.
SWEARING OF COUNTY STAFF
County staff was sworn inhy Mr. John Wolfe. along with all applicants and public participants.
CHANGES TO THE AGENDA
None. Items | and 2 read together.
l
41
DISCLOSURE ICI ICATI S
Chair Scarpelli disclosed that he had spoken with Mr. Bart Smith regarding Items I and 2, and
had received a 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 numerous people on both
issues. This will not affect his decision today.
Commissioner Neugent stated that he had been to the Cernex site, and spoken with some of the
principals involved in Items I and 2, and in communication with folks regarding Items 3 and 4.
This will not affect his decision today.
Commissioner Thomas stated she had received numerous communications but did not speak with
anyone. This will not affect her judgment today.
Commissioner De es stated that he had only spoken to two County Commissioners and that
surely would not affect his judgment today.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Not applicable.
Chair Scarpelli announced that public comments would be limited to three minutes to keep
things moving along. If a prior speaker has made the same comments that a subsequent speaker
wishes to make, it is acceptable to state that you agree with a prior speaker to avoid repetition
and keep things moving forward.
MEETING
AGENDAITEMS
1. AN ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS ESTABLISHING MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
SECTION 130-143 TAVE NIER KEY COMMERCIAL OVERLAY (TICCO) DISTRICT;
ESTABLISHING PURPOSE AND INTENT, BOUNDARY, APPLICABILITY, NROGO
ALLOCATION STANDARDS, AS-OF-RIGHT AND CONDITIONAL USES, AND
MAXIMUM NONRESIDENTIAL, AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL,
FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, KEY LARGO,
APPROXIMATELY MILE MARKER 92.5, HAVING PARCEL IDENTIFICATION
NUMBERS OOO89490-000000 AND 00490250-000000a AS PROPOSED BY SMITHIHAWKS.
PL ON BEHALF OF CEMEX CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS FLORIDA, LLC F/IC/A
SI GLETARY CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC.; PROVIDING FOR SEVE ILITY;
PROVIDING FOR REPEAL. OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR
TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LANCE PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY
OF STATE. PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE MONROE COUNTY CODE;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (FILE 2022-053)
2
42
ORDINANCE BY THE MONROE COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS AMENDINGTHE MONROE COUNTY LAND USE DISTRICT
(ZONING) MAP TO APPLY THE TAVERNIER KEY COMMERCIAL OVERLAY (TC )
DISTRICT. TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, KEY LARGO,
APPROXIMATELY IL A E 92.5. CURRENTLY AVIN PARCEL
IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS 000 9 90-00 0 0 AND 00 9025 -00 0 0 PROPOSED
BY CEMEX CONSTRUCTION MATE IALS FLORIDA, LLC F/ /A SINGLETA Y
CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC.: PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR
REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR TRANSMITTAL THE
STATE LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE; PROVIDING
FORAMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE DISTRICT (ZONING) A ; PROVIDING FOR
AN EFFECTIVE DATE. (FILE 2022-054)
(10:07 a.m.) Ms. Devin Tol in. Principal Planner, presented the staff report, having worked on
these items with Ms. Cheryl Cioffari, Assistant Director of Planning. This presentation concerns
a private request to establish the Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District. The applicant has
applied for a text amendment to the County's Land Development Code to establish the overlay,
and an amendment to the Land Use District Map to actually apply the overlay to the subject
property. The overlay proposed shall apply to two contiguous properties aggregated to make u
one property at Mile Marker 92 in Tavernier. This property is located within the Suburban
Commercial zoning district, the Mixed Use Commercial FLUM category. and is also located
within the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Ilighway I Corridor District or TC overlay.
This property is also subject to the policies and guidelines provided in the Tavernier Livable
CommniKe}'s Plan which is adopted as part of the County°s Comp Plan.
The proposed amendment establishes the overlay district with a purpose, intent and a boundary,
and requires an amendment to the Land Use District Map to apply the overlay to a new property.
The amendment would also allow for NROGO allocations or transfers of up to 70,000 square
feet of floor area which could be used for a single structure. The amendment would limit the
maximum development potential of the property to 70.000 square feet of non-residential floor
area and 86 units of deed restricted affordable housing. There is no reference to limiting market
rate units. The full text of the proposed amendment is included on pages four and five of the
written staff report. It is important to note that the traffic study submitted with these applications
has not yet been approved. The 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 written acknowledgement of the County°s insufficient balance of
affordable ROGO allocations though the text in the overlay does provide for development of u
to 86 affordable units on the property.
s. Tolpin emphasized that the proposed development would allow for the development 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 Land
Development Code and Comp Plan cannot and will not regulate the ownership of a property.
only the use. There are no development controls in place that can ensure a specific business such
as Publix operates a structure or retains the property and therefore. amendments to the Land
3
43
Development Code cannot be reviewed based on a specific business plan by a property owner. It
is imperative to consider this request based on the fact that the proposed 70,000 square foot
structure that could be allowed within this overlay may be any commercial business,
The principal issue when considering the amendment to create this overlay is the language
regarding the NROGO regulations. Currently, the Land Development Code limits the amount of
new commercial floor area to be allocated to a site to a maximum of 10,000 square feet per
quarter. This amount of square footage allocated quarterly works to slow development to ensure
deliberate and consistent development occurs within a given area. The overlay would allow for
the allocation of 70,000 square feet at one time. There is a sufficient balance of non-residential
floor area in the NROGO bank and this could likely be achieved without issue, More
importantly, the amendment would allow for a single structure to receive an allocation of up to
70,000 square feet of commercial floor area. Currently, the code does not allow for an allocation
of new non-residential floor area that would expand the structure to more than 10,000 square feet
unless that structure is located within the Urban Commercial zoning district, in which case the
structure would be limited to a maximum of 50.000 square feet unless that structure is within an
overlay established in a community master plan or Chapter 130 specifically allowing a structure
over 10,000 square feet. In this case, the proposed amendment would be establishing a new
overlay within Chapter 130 that would specifically allow a structure over 10,000 square feet.
There is an adoptive process when reviewing amendments to the land development code and the
zoning maps. A concept meeting was held on June 28 where it was determined that these
amendments would not have a countywide impact. Two community meetings have been held to
discuss this project. These items were presented to the Development Review Community where
the chair signed a resolution recommending denial of these amendments. Today the files are
being presented to the Planning Commission who will make a recommendation to the BOCC.
who then will ultimately adopt or deny these amendments. When reviewing an application for
an amendment to the text of the County's Land Development Code and Land Use District Maps,
the BOCC must consider the factors included in the written staff report. Staff must review for
consistency with the Comp Plan, the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan and the County's
currently adopted code. The code does not allow for an amendment to be approved which would
result in an adverse change in community character to the subarea the proposed amendment
affects or to any area in accordance with the Livable CommuniKeys Plan. It is for this reason
that when reviewing proposed text and map amendments. staff must review for consistency with
the community character and for any potential changes to that existing character. This is further
reinforced in the purpose of Section 102-158 of the County's Land Development Code. This is
the article that provides a means for changing the text of the LDC. It states, "This article is not
intended to relieve particular hardships nor to confer special privileges or rights on any person
nor to permit an adverse change in community character, but only to make necessary adjustments
in light of changed conditions or incorrect assumptions or determinations as determined by the
BBC C." Amendments must be reviewed for consistency with the Comp Plan and code. The
Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plan is adopted and implemented as part of the Comp Plan. In
reviewing this CommuniKeys Plan it is evident that the vision was to preserve the heritage and
natural setting of the existing community with limited redevelopment of commercial properties.
The CommuniKeys Plan goes so far as to include an action item that prohibits the designation of
4
44
new commercial land use districts beyond those already contained in the master plan in order to
prevent further sprawl and strict commercial zoning.
It is important to note that commercial retail uses could be permitted on this subject property and
would be consistent with the underlying Suburban Commercial zoning. However, because the
property is also located within the TC overlay district, staff must review for consistency with the
Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S. Highway Corridor development standards and
guidelines which are adopted as part of Chapter 130 of the Land Development Code. These
guidelines include specific building types with the intent of guiding new development so that it
continues to define the character of Tavernier and so that the massing scale and materials of new
structures are compatible with the existing character. The guidelines provide for the construction
of large commercial buildings through the aggregation of smaller buildings. If this proposed
amendment is not approved, the property still does have a very high amount of non-residential
floor area that could be constructed on the property in a manner that is consistent with these
guidelines.
To further guide development within the Tavernier Corridor overlay, these guidelines utilize
transect zoning. These transects do not eliminate 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 transect which 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
the mainland suburbs. Alternatively. the urban zone is the area where most of the retail and
commercial mixed use development are found and it is the area that the community identifies as
its center. To aid in the review for consistency of the proposed overlay with the existing
Tavernier community character, staff reviewed the size of existing buildings of surrounding
properties within both the urban and suburban transect zones. The ability to construct a structure
of up to 70.000 square feet would result in one that is much larger than existing structures within
the suburban zone and would be inconsistent within the established community character. The
existing land development code, when coupled with the Tavernier Corridor Overlay Guidelines
and the Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Plans intentionally limits the maximum size of each
structure. Additionally, the proposal is inconsistent with Comp Plan Policy 101.5.6, which states
that various types of commercial retail and office uses may be permitted at intensities that are
consistent %%ith the community character and the natural environment.
The text amendment, as drafted, proposes to relax the development restrictions on the property
without providing adequate data to support such a change nor demonstrate consistency with the
Tavernier Livable CommuniKeNs Plan and existing community character. It is anticipated that
the proposed overlay would result in an adverse effect in the character of the Tavernier
community. It is for the reasons described today and throughout the written staff reports that
staff recommends denial of the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code to establish
Section 130-143. the Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay, and denial of the proposed Land Use
District Map Amendment to apply the overlay to the subject property.
Commissioner Ritz wanted to clarify that whether this Commission recommends approval or
denial, this still goes before the BOCC. He also wanted to confirm that if approval is
5
45
recommended, and assuming the BOCC recommends approval, that nothing would get built until
the applicant comes back and actually proposed something, and asked if that something would
require a major conditional use. 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 permit if the
applicant proposed a 70,000 square foot retail building. Commissioner Ritz asked if that would
also be true if a 50,000 square foot retail building were proposed, and Ms. Tolpin stated that it
would. The applicant has made certain assertions about building a Publix and affordable
housing, but they would have to come back and actually shove exactly what they were going to
do. Commissioner Neugent asked that in light of this, if this were denied today, if this part of the
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 Planning Commission recommended denial. Chair
Scarpelli then asked to hear from the applicant.
r, Bart Smith, representing the applicant, stated that a very specific project is being proposed
for a unique parcel not only in the Upper Keys but in the Florida Keys. This is the Cemex parcel
which is 20 acres having 15 acres of scarified land, which is 600,000 square feet. There are
probably less than five parcels left that are this size that have the zoning of Suburban
Commercial, and there's probably only one. The other parcels are Industrial, but he has not
found 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 commercial and
can do up to 216 units of affordable housing. There's a mention about no limitations on market
rate. Suburban Commercial only allows for market rate if it's nonconforming and was built
before the code. There is no market rate on the parcel. The applicant would be willing to add a
provision that no development of market rate could ever happen in the future. The applicants are
the Toppino family and the Hurwitz family. Everyone is familiar with the Toppino family and
their dedication to this community. They have looked at different sites throughout the Keys to
try to bring affordable housing to the community, Most times the land casts are such that it
doesn't make sense. Mr. Smith gave prior examples. Also, this is not affordable housing, it is
workforce housing where tenants are required to be employed in Monroe County, This parcel"s
very rectangular size and being situated on U.S. I allows the commercial venture to buy down
the land to build the 86 unites of workforce housing. The applicant is not here today because a
50,000 square foot building isn't allowed. Regardless of the size of the building, all commercial
retail is required to go for a 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 give the community certainty that this is what is going to occur.
Everyone understands the unknown is the most concerning part.
This parcel°s potential is 152,000 square feet of commercial retail. This limits it to the store
which is a total of 70,000 square feet which is a great reduction, Mr. Smith went into why the
store was important to the Florida Keys as a whole. The sole request of the overlay that is of
importance is to get a 70,000 square foot allocation. The development of the store will come
back before the Commission. The allocation is being requested in one part, and the applicant is
agreeing to limitations on the property, as to the amount of total square footage that could ever
be built, and limiting to 86 units of workforce housing. This is legislative at this juncture and
looks for consistency with the Comp Plan and Principles for Guiding the Development. The
Comp Plan in no place prohibits a store on this type of acreage of 70,000 square feet. Then the
46
Comp Plan adopts the Livable CommuniKeys plan which in the Suburban zone does not prohibit
a store of this size. It has the dimension and development criteria in the Urban zone and states
that commercial uses should be the same as Suburban on the mainland. Mr. Smith provided
documentation of other Publix store sizes throughout the state. The Principles for Guiding
Development are supposed to be reviewed as a whole. Management of Land Use has been
identified as being inconsistent, but the reality is putting more restrictions on the property
provides more management of land uses. And, as many are aware, one of the Principles is for
the provision of providing affordable housing. Mr. Smith listed related prior court cases stating
that ultimately, the courts decided for affordable housing in every case. so it is consistent with
the Principles for Guiding Development. Who owns it can't be limited, but the intensity can be
limited. The Livable CommuniKeys limits it to only commercial low or medium intensity which
is why that limitation wasn't put into the amendment because it already exists. This creates the
Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District allowing the Publix grocery store and liquor store.
The design is not complete but will come before the Commission at a later date. The applicant
has provided the purpose, intent, boundary, the NROGO allowance for the allocation, subject to
all other land development regulations, and provides maximum limitations which control the
land even more. That is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development. This proposes
workforce housing buildings in the back and on the side. The development is consistent with
community character.
Alternatively, the applicant could propose an allocation of 50,000 square feet by just doing the
LUD which would not be legislative, and because it's under the FLU , the applicant meets the
requirements. The proposed size is related to having additional storage in cases of emergencies
and storms. which is being done in other coastal communities. Mr. Smith detailed the sizes of
Publix stores in both suburban and rural areas of the state for size comparison. This item is
solely to create an overlay that allows the allocation in one allocation and in exchange, limit the
amount of square footage of development on the property providing additional land use controls
than currently exist and most importantly, providing the workforce housing. Typically, traffic
studies are not done at this stage but the applicant has addressed this and identified trips that may
need to be mitigated. The applicant's position is that by building this it will actually reduce
lengths of trips because people don't have to drive as far, but it is within at least five percent of
level of service C. The applicant is willing to do mitigation but that is done at the building
permit stage. The traffic study is not necessary at this stage but was required. Mr. Smith asked
the Commission recommend approval.
Chair Scarpelli asked for Commission comments or questions. Commissioner Demes clarified
that one of the court cases that Mr. Smith had cited from 2003 with a proposal for a development
off of Runway 03. 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.
r. James Anderson purchased his home in 192 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 CommuniKeys project and it would
seem like a waste of time having worked on the LCP. Mr. Anderson stated that the former
Commissioner, the Tavernier Historical Group and everyone would be opposed to this and asks
7
47
the Commission to deny the Publix as there already is one at Tavernier Town. The traffic study
has not been completed yet. He would like to preserve the heritage of Tavernier.
Captain Spenser Bryan, Monroe County Sheriffs Office, stated that on behalf of Sheriff Ramsay
and the Sheriffs Office, they support the affordable 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, so the
more affordable housing, the better. It is not just the Sheriffs Department but EMS, teachers,
and any other essential personnel, There are three jails in the county and the one in the Middle
Keys is not staffed. They have deputies who want to live down here and be part of the
community but unfortunately, can't afford to be here. These same issues about Publix were
brought up both in Marathon and Islamorada. Understanding the traffic study has not yet been
done, the same thing was said about those Publix stores causing traffic issues. He does not
believe it will. The light at Burton Drive that has been installed will quell some of the problems
in this area. The Publix in Islamorada has caused zero issues as far as traffic which is crazy
because everything in Islamorada causes a traffic issue. The Sheriff"s Office supports this
project and hopes the Commission will consider it,
Mr. Richard Barreto spoke for the Tavernier Community Association and thanked the
Commission for agreeing to host the meeting at the Murray Nelson Center. He has reviewed the
written public comments from 26 individuals and two community organizations. Additionally,
on June 14, 2022, the TCA hosted a meeting where 80 residents of the community attended.
There were countless responses in person and by zoom at the DRC meeting and the two
community meetings preceding this Commission meeting. Those comments made verbally are
not part of the Commission's material, but out of all of those comments there was only one
individual that supported the commercial aspect of this development. That is very telling
because the applicant will have you believe that this project will bring much needed service to an
area with limited options and that it is needed, but the people who live and work here are singing
a very different tune. We are telling you that we understand the proposal and have plenty of
options. More is not necessarily better, We value our Tavernier community. Please listen to us.
The level three traffic study is required where the applicant failed to respond to several
outstanding issues, and has elected alternatively to have the Board consider it without the benefit
of the approved study. That an approved level three traffic study is required, and given that it
has not been submitted to this Commission, that in and of itself should be grounds for denying
this proposed amendment. Reading further into the applicant's response to the staff report, it's
clear that a lot of these layers we've been going through over the last year the applicant feels is
unnecessary and an inconvenience. They would rather you just push this off to the BOCC, let
them review it and sift it all out in the context of a major conditional use permit. While that
would be convenient, that is not how the system works. The system is designed to protect this
community and our environment. Every layer of review, including this one, has a critically
important function. This Commission's recommendation has meaning. The proposed
commercial overlay district violates the Tavernier LCP and essentially creates a new commercial
land use district in direct violation and totally inconsistent with Section 313 of the Tavernier
LCP. This section prohibits the designation of new commercial land use districts beyond that
contained in the master plan. There is no such Tavernier commercial overlay contained in the
current master plan. There's a lot of ado about affordable housing but that is not the priority of
this development. The commercial aspect is in phase one and is the priority. It will do nothing
48
but aggravate workforce housing for quite some time to come with really no guarantees that the
affordable housing will ever be built. There will be an adverse community change to Tavenlier
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 similar-sized
buildings throughout the State of Florida is not justification to build one here in Tavernier. The
proposed amendment is not consistent with the Comp Plan. This commercial building does not
fit in any way with the community character of Tavernier. He asks the Commission to support
the Planning Department's recommendation as the) have conducted a detailed review of the
applicable provisions of the laws and concluded that the Commission should refuse the approval.
He supports that conclusion and thanked the Commission for the opportunity to speak.
Ms. Joan Scholz stated that it is not because of the unknown that she is speaking today, as Mr.
Smith referenced in his statements, but it is because of the building overdevelopment, the
ecosystem, traffic, fragile environment and the water situation being experienced now with four
miles of pipeline being replaced, the three water main breaks, the lack of reserve that we have,
and the Aqueduct knows we are over capacity of building. We don't need another Publix which
is a mile from Winn Dixie and a few miles from the other Publix. Ms. Scholz thanked the
Planning Department for having spent so much time on this. She is in agreement with the
Planning Department and asks the Commission to deny this application and give a
recommendation of"no" to the BOCC.
Mr. Frank Pla was not available to speak.
Ms. Linda Norman has had a home in the area for over 45 years. Her shopping has improved
over those years. In the beginning there was a grocery store called Clara and Doug's which is
now Sunrise Market. That was a mile from her home when Winn Dixie opened two miles from
her home which offered a wide variety of products. Winn Dixie is a 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 Winn Dixie and less than ten miles from their existing, soon
to be expanded store at mile marker 101.5. It doesn't make sense and its existence would be a
travesty to the small, quiet town of Tavernier. She read an article about a Publix Supermarket to
be built in Gainesville proposed to be 55.000 square foot, smaller than the one proposed in
Tavernier. and will anchor a 46,000 square foot shopping center in Gainesville %Nhich %%III
become a hub for a population of about 141.000 people. This is a 64,000 square foot store to be
supported by the entire islands of the Florida Keys with a population of 83,000. Most of the cars
are driving through Tavernier heading to Key West or Miami. Key Largo Fisheries has their
main market at mile marker 100, and the) opened a smaller location for the residents in
Tavernier, and the town could not support that little shop and they have now closed after only
two months. A'hat will happen "hen Publix finds out a Publix of that size cannot be supported
in Tavernier. We're going to have a show of a building sitting there. She wholeheartedly
objects to this development.
Ms. Sue Miller of Islamorada stated that this does not affect only Tavernier, rather all of the
entire Florida Keys. There is too much traffic and not enough water. There is an affordable
housing issue but this 70.000 square foot retail space would use more than 86 employees. A
store this size is going to increase the demand for affordable housing. She doesn't expect to see
9
49
a lot of Sheriffs deputies and firefighters and other employees there. The applicant says they are
going to mitigate the traffic. If they have some magic to mitigate traffic we all should hear about
it because we already need a lot of traffic mitigation, The fact that the applicant is doing an
affordable housing project seems to be the controlling thing here, when in order to do this they're
required to have an affordable housing component. 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 two it
may never get done. This is not something acceptable to the community character of Tavernier
or there wouldn't be this many people here participating. Ms. Miller thanked the Commission
for listening.
Mr. Burke Cannon represents the Federation of Homeowners as Dottie Moses is out and could
not make it. Mr. Cannon agreed with 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 much affordable housing do we need. It seems like we should know how many people
we have employed here and how many are not living here because of this affordable housing
problem. He understands the Sheriffs Office has a problem and they can't afford it, but this is
going to be endless. This kind of project won't cover affordable housing for everybody here.
The Federation members voted unanimously to object to this application for a map amendment
and overlay. Similar neighborhoods live within the Tavernier LCP and the Federation is in full
support of their objections to the overlay district. It is obvious the community intended to
maintain a small town commercial footprint. The opening vision statement expresses the goal
clearly. Mr. Cannon read the goal to the Commission. The existing code prohibits a quarterly
allocation of non-residential floor area of more than 10,000 square feet. This proposal is for
70,000. which is a huge difference that rejects the intent or the community's wishes as reflected
in the LCP, which expresses a desire to redevelop at a village scale. One of the letters submitted
addressed the large amount of planning and input that went into the Tavernier LCP. This was
not an overnight thing. What is the point of planning for the future and gathering community
input on zoning if each and every development request for expansion is granted? Offering an
exception to the rule for this development encourages more requests for spot zoning. Mr.
Cannon reiterated that there is no traffic study, and another item in the LCP is the safety aspect
and that this cannot cause more dangerous traffic problems. This is an historic district. The
applicant, who is not from Tavernier, assumes they know what's best for the Tavernier
community even if the Tavernier community does not want what they have to offer. Mr. Burke
asked the Commission to alloy` the Tavernier community's vision to maintain the existing small
town community character by limiting the development of commercial properties. This overlay
does not fit that vision and the Federation recommends denial.
Mr. Andrew Tobin thanked the Commission for having the hearing in Key Largo as it is
important the Commissioners get to know the area. Mr. Tobin came to the Keys in '76. was a
prosecutor for three years, was the County's first zoning prosecutor, went through the 1985
Comp Plan efforts, litigated the 1992 Comp Plan, litigated in state and federal court on zoning
issues and has read maybe a 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 Commission is expected to follow. The proposed Publix good which is the economic
engine for affordable housing is not a factor in the Commission®s decision whether to create a
new zoning category. This is a 700 percent increase in the floor area ratio of a development
10
50
within the Tavernier LC P area. The Urban Residential maximum is 50,000, and the developer is
asking for 70,000. Mr. Tobin suggests the Commission not overlook the Comp Plan and the
slow, small development potential vision. The whole purpose of the allocation system was that
one developer would not suck up all of the allocations for a particular area, and with this, that is
going out the v%in ow. Teapplicant is asking the Commission to overlook all of the existing
laws, the Comp Plan, the LC P and basically saying, we have good intentions. Mr. Tobin
represented Publix in Islamorada and it took the six or seven years to finally get development
approval because Islamorada also has very restrictive zoning regulations. This is bad precedent
and Mr. Tobin urges the Commission to follow staffs recommendation.
Mr. Allan Aldridge. a Tavernier resident for over 30 years, is on the Tavernier Community
Association board. Ile supports his friends and neighbors in the community who have spoken.
One of the most critical infrastructure issues today is water and the water pipeline. Currently, an
organization called APANA that does commercial and industrial property evaluations for
resources. states that a large grocery store uses about 350,000 gallons or more of water per
month. Individual residences, on average, use 300 gallons a day, multiplied by 86 housing units
is about 774.000 gallons of water a month. Together, this is the development of a property that
will use upwards of 1.2 million gallons of water per month, 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 an engineer and stated this is a big deal. The FKAA Director
recently in interviews made it eery publicly known that it's going to take over tell years of
projects to replace our critical water infrastructure pipeline supplying the Keys and he doesn't
know where he's going to get the money to do that. Adding this to all of the other things that
will be considered in the next ten years that will add more and more water usage is something the
Commission should take into account when reviewing this project and the several others that will
come before them.
Ms. Phyllis Mitchell thanked the Commission and asked the to please remember as they're
making their decision that they represent the people of the Florida Keys. More development
means more traffic. More traffic is a huge safety factor both on an everyday level from people
jumping on the highway after waiting too long to get on, to the ability to evacuate the Keys
which is nova at a very dangerous level. Ms. Mitchell asked the Commission to give this deep
thought. Excellent points have been expressed this morning. She is confident the Commission
will do a good job.
Ms. Tammy I-reitag stated that she was speaking for herself and Mr. Frank Harrington. Please
do not destroy the Tavernier Historic District. She lives in her grandparents' home which was
purchased in the sixties. It has been a nightmare to get out of her street with the light at Burton
now. It will be much more of a nightmare with another light for a Publix. She understands the
need for affordable housing but Publix is not necessary. She has no problem going to any
grocery store, and there is a liquor store at Tavernier Town and everywhere. Please keep the
community as is.
Ms. Lisa Ream stated she had nothing additional to add.
it
51
s. Lisa Bennett thanked the Commission and the community. When she first carve down in
1968 there was only the Shopper and ontey's. She dearly loves those memories of growing up
in the Florida Keys. Everything she's heard so far about the infrastructure and what`s going on
concerns her very much. She hopes and prays the Commission makes the right decision.
r. Tom R.afftnello of Islamorada represents the Islarnora a Community Alliance. There isn't
ranch more he can add as far as context as the others were right on the money. The Trojan horse
of affordable housing is a myth. There is nothing affordable about it. The statute needs to go
back to Tallahassee and be revised. Right now, a family of three or four making 140 to$i 50,000
qualifies for affordable housing and that's not where we want to be. He was a fed and a cop and
it took hire 30 years to make that kind of money. As to Publix, sometimes you have to look at
the need for something. If he stood on this roof he could see the ether two Publix stores from
here. There is no need. Boil it down 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 out of control. There is no need and it's
an easy decision if the Commission really takes a look at it. It is an adverse change in the
citizens` lives and he asks the Commission to do the right thing and deny this.
s. Karen Rodriguez who has lived here since 2009 stated that everything she has heard sounds
good, but one of the underlying things to remember is they want to build 86 affordable housing
units behind all of that commercial property. Why not just turn it into a park and have the
affordable housing in it. That's it.
r. John Howe stated that he has nothing to add that hasn't already been said. He has scanned
through the Planning Department's report and was struck by the amount of work and intelligence
and training and all of those things that went into producing it,and he thanked the Planning staff.
Two things leapt out at him and that was the fairly long list of inconsistencies with the Tavernier
LC:P, and the Monroe County Comp Plan and a bunch of Florida Statutes. And then, a list of
requests and concerns voiced by the Planning Department and community residents about things
it needed to learn or didn't understand. After each one of those items there was a comment from
the staff saying no response has been received from the applicant, Mr. Howe's main point has
more to do with the number of people present today, This is what democracy is all about.
Average citizens who live in this community are making their voices heard. About half the
people here have referred to the Comp Plan, the Tavernier LCP and the Florida state laws that
according to the Planning Department make this application seem to be inappropriate and worthy
of denial. These documents have come from hours and hours of work, time and money over the
years by people creating a vision for its community. There are Maybe a hundred people here but
there are many hundreds more who are supporting us who are not here, those who have passed
on or moved away, but they are here too in spirit with their thoughts and visions and ideas for
how this community should be. Mr. Howe wanted to recognize that many people have led to this
moment and he hears their voices saying this is not appropriate. Can a more positive note, that
piece of property is an opportunity to make something appropriate for this community. He hopes
the Planning Commission can spend more time on planning for that piece of property. rather than
on legal defense, some way that will benefit the owner and the community.
Ms. Patricia McGrath of Grassy Key stated that her concern, along with those about FKAA is
about the storrnwater runoff and the sewage that will be created with either one of the
12
52
developments. FA A has stood up against losing local control of their authority. of
affordable and workforce housing are most important. 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 Planning Department for the massive number of
hours putting their report together. She would like to see the Commission come forth with
zoning and property use regulations that would not even allow someone like Publix to come in
and waste all of our taxpayer dollars. Ms. McGrath the the Commission.
Mr. John Magill from Richmond. Virginia has lived here 26 years, went to Virginia
Commonwealth University and has a master's degree in planning. The biggest disaster of all
planning is the saying "build it and they will come." He was a project inspector on a 300.000
square foot auditorium and civic center arena and a 600,000 project, and a carpenter on a civic
center town all. both of which are in the process of being demolished, and those were built
only 30 )ears ago. Ile hates to see this happen. The whole place should be built with affordable
housing. Mr. Magill thanked the Commission for allowing him to speak.
Ms. Sylvia (last narne unknown) could not connect via Zoom to speak.
Chair Scarpelli closed public comment. Mr. Wolfe suggested the applicant be allowed to rebut
the comments and then allow the Planning staff to %%rap up. Ms. Cioffari indicated there were
two more hands raised to speak in the Zoom audience. Mr. Robert Hilton and Ms. Lynn Hilton
and Ms. Tina (last name unknown) dropped their hands. Public comment was then officially
closed.
Mr. Bart Smith reiterated in rebuttal that this is a unique property that is presently an industrial
concrete block plant. Commercial uses are permitted. Large buildings are permitted on
commercial uses. There is no change in the zoning district. All that is being requested is that an
allocation greater than 10,000 square feet be allocated to the property. It does not change the 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 on this propert%.
The applicant has agreed that all they can do is get this allocation and that's it., which means no
market rate housing. The applicant will come back and satislj every condition. There is
nowhere in the Comp Plan. the LC P or the Land Development Code that prohibits buildings of
this nature. In fact, it expressly provides they are allowed. He understands the statements about
community character, but that communit) character is defined by the property and what its
allowed uses are in these documents. These uses are allowed. Sometimes the tougher decisions
are the ones that need to be made. In this case, like every time, there's something that we want.
We want workforce housing. but we have to have an economic engine to drive it. This is what
can be done on this property. it is permissible and within the realm of the Commission's ability
to recommend approval. The Commission will have another shot to look at every part of this.
The traffic stud) is at the finish line. A traffic study for a land use text amendment that doesn't
change anything in the code is not a requirement. The applicant is doing it now to provide the
documentation. It is a requirement or the conditional use approval and will be finalized well
before that. Mr. Smith asked the Commission to recommend approval to the BOCC. If the
Commission %%ants a stronger condition to parts of the workforce housing, the applicant is
13
53
amenable to those. Any statements as to the water supply or levels of service he vehemently
disagrees with and they are made solely to say no to anything.
s. Emily Schernper, Senior Director of Planning and Environmental Resources, stated that she
as not sure if Mr. Smith's was confused about the Land Development Code requirement for
the size of the structure or if he was making a separate argument, but he had stated there is
nothing in the Land Development Code that would prohibit a building of this size. That is not
true. Part of what the applicant is asking for is an NROGO allocation that would go to a building
that is larger than 10,000 square feet. If you cannot get the NROGO for a building that's larger
than 10,000 square feet, then you cannot build a building that is larger than 10,000 square feet,-
therefore. it is not allowed by the Land Development Code. It is not written into the zoning
category necessarily but it is implemented by the NROGO code, Ms. Tol in has presented all of
this and it's in the staff report but Ms. Schemper wanted to make sure the Commission
understood these points.
Another assertion has been that there is no place for the County to be reviewing community
character in this process. That is entirely untrue. Section 102-58 of the Land Development Cade
is specifically about amendments to the Land Development Code, and the purpose states, **This
article is not intended to relieve particular hardships, nor to confer special privileges or rights on
any person, nor to permit an adverse change in community character." Then further down in the
section under the procedures. action by the Board of County Commissioners, "The Board may
consider the adoption of an ordinance enacting a reap amendment if it meets the following
factors." And there are seven factors listed which includes the Principles for Guiding
Development. which Mr. Smith has pointed out. But if you continue it also says under that
section, "in no event shall an amendment be approved which shall result in an adverse change in
community character to the subarea which a proposed amendment affects, or to any area in
accordance with a Liveable CommuniKeys Master Plan pursuant to the findings of the BOCC."
Again, that's al under amendments. It's not under the conditional use permit review. It's under
amendments to the code. So community character is definitely a factor in the Commission's
consideration of this.
Going back up to the first part under amendments under the purpose, to paraphrase, this article is
not intended to confer special privileges or rights on any person, We've heard a lot about Public
today. You are not actually reviewing specifically for Public. You are reviewing for a lame
retail building. And, the way the language is drafted, it doesn't specifically say commercial
retail, it says non-residential. So the way this is drafted it would allow a non-residential structure
of up to 70,000 square feet on the site, we don't know which retailer, we don't even know if it is
retail. It could be fight industrial. It could be an Amazon warehouse. It could be whatever, we
don't know. The point is you don't actually know who the tenant of that building is going to be
or the owner in the future. So when reviewing amendments in particular you need to think about
the larger picture and what would be possibly allowed.
That has played into the traffic study as well, Ms. Schemper agreed with Mr. Smith that the
traffic study is all but approved so it is not true that they have not submitted a traffic study. Staff
has reviewed most of that. It's really come down to mitigation. But, if the Commission reviews
this just because this is a Publix, that could be conferring special privilege on an individual
14
54
person or entity. Also, regarding Publix, Mr. Smith gave sizes of a number of other Publix stores
in Florida, but none of those were island Publix stores, nor the sizes of the other Publix stores in
the Keys already. From Ms. Schemper's knowledge, the Islamorada store is about 35,000 square
feet, and the other Key Largo Publix getting rebuilt at Trade Winds Plaza is about 60,000 square
feet, so that one would be about the same size as the one proposed here. If part of the argument
is that this can be some sort of post-hurricane suppl) chain system, if the other Key Largo Publix
is also serving 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. This has not been
designated as some sort of emergency management facility.
Ms. Schemper had been surprised at how strong the argument came across regarding this retailer
being the economic engine needed for the affordable housing. The meat 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, if they would be willing, to write into the
amendment something about the affordable units being required where the ROGOs are coming
from. what happens if you don't get the ROGO allocations, et cetera.
Mr. Smith responded that the) would certainly write in that they were required because ifthey're
required to be CO'd, then the applicant has put themselves in a position that if they don't get
them built, then the other part can't occur. Ms. Schemper asked if the owner would then be
suing the County because the applicant wasn"t given ROGO allocations. Mr. Smith stated it
would be LIP to the applicant to obtain the development rights. They have talked to the Village of
Islamorada who is amenable to do ail I 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 Islamorada had 86 affordable ROGOs or market rates. Mr. Smith stated
they had the 300 July ones. Ms. Schemper 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 on appeal. Ms. Schemper stated that was the same for
Islamorada. Mr. Smith stated that as soon as the hurricane evacuation was addressed, then that's
final, whereas Monroe CountN's was appealed on, on numerous grounds. But the applicant
acknowledges they have to be able to get the development rights. Ms. Schemper asked if that
would be something the applicant would be willing to write into the amendment. Mr. Smith
confirmed that to be correct, it was always the intent on that. The two parts work in unison with
the commercial retail buying down the cost of the land to make the affordable housing feasible.
Chair Scarpelli asked if that wouldn't be more appropriately part of a conditional use instead of a
land use amendment. Ms. Schemper stated that because the purpose of this land development
code amendment and what it's doing is alloying a 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. This
has been done with other projects, but the full picture of the development plan very often gets
written into the actual policy.
Ms. Schemper also wanted to make sure the Commission understood that the watt the
amendment is currently written. it's actually putting more limits in some ways on the
development allowed on that property. Whether that's in terms of number of units, total amount
of square footage, whether smaller buildings or larger buildings. the total amount of square
15
55
footage right now is written in to be limited. But it is also written to limit which uses. Ms.
Schemper wanted the Commission to be aware that other uses that would normally be allowed in
Suburban Commercial do include things like office space, restaurant space, commercial
recreation, public buildings, parks, public infrastructure, institutional, et cetera. So there are two
directions to go. Either it's written that non-residential uses are allowed up to 70,000 square foot
building or if they want to be specific that it has to be commercial retail, that's another direction
to go, or if they want to list additional uses. She was 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 uses, Mr. Smith stated that the purpose is commercial retail. Ms. Schemper
stated that was something to keep in mind, if the Commission wanted it limited to commercial
retail or left open to other things that could possibly go there with it such as public buildings,
institutional, office,et cetera.
Commissioner Neugent asked if it would be fair to say that if this was denied, something is going
to be built on the 20 acres by somebody, Ms. Schemper stated something would probably be
built there, yes. It would have to be in smaller buildings. It could be more units, more square
footage, but smaller individual buildings. That is where the conflict is between what is being
proposed and how the current code is written. The maximum square footage that could go on the
site right now is about 120,000 square feet. Ms. Tolpin stated that it ranges based on the
intensity, from 91,000 for high intensity up to 212,000 square feet for a low-intensity use. Ms.
Schemper added 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 independent
buildings. Commissioner Ritz confirmed that was almost twice the amount of square footage
that could be built there if they built it in smaller units. Mr. Smith added that the applicant is
committed to the workforce units, that certainly before the CO of the non-residential, that the
units would be CCU' , but the final recommendation could includes that language with direction
for staff to finalize that language,and he would request approval with that language.
Chair Scarpelli wanted to clarify that it would have be a bunch of smaller stores, but that they
would also only be able to be developed one per quarter at 10,000 square feet. Ms. Schemper
stated that would be correct, it would be slower. Commissioner Demes asked if large building
was defined in the Comp Plan or if that was just subjective. Ms. Schemper responded that it's
greater than 10,000 square feet. This limitation is not in the Comp Plan which is why they're
able to request this through the Land Development Code only. The Land Development Code can
be more restrictive than the Comp Plan, but this does not require a Co►rip Plan amendment. It's
in the NROGO section of the code, "Maximum floor area per structure, a structure shall not
receive an allocation," that*s the NROGO square footage, "shall not receive an allocation that
expands the structure to more than 10.000 square feet of non-residential floor area, excluding a
structure in the Urban Commercial land use district," where those can go up to 50,000, "and a
structure within an overlay district established in a community master plan in which the
maximum shall be governed by the master plan if applicable, or within Chapter 130 specifically
allowing such a structure of over 10,000 square feet." That last phrase is exactly what is before
the Commission today. It is a proposal for an overlay within Chapter 130 specifically allowing a
structure of over 10.000 square feet.
16
56
Commissioner Ritz stated that he has lived in Ke) Largo for over 30 )ears and knows about half
the audience. He is aware that Tavernier is very proud. and rightly so, of the historic nature of
Tavernier and wants to protect that. He also knows they are not particularly interested in
protecting the historic nature of the cernent plant so that would be an exception. He is also a big
fan of the CommuniKeys plan and the hard work that people put into it and thinks that's really
important to keep community character in the forefront of our minds whether at this step or the
next step. The applicant has stated this is a 2 -acre site, unique or somewhat unique, and he
agrees with that. The applicant should also get credit for proposing about half ofthe
development that he could otherwise propose. Workforce housing is the top priority. He would
love to have a park in front and workforce housing in the back. It's a swell idea. If it were his
property and he could afford to do it, he would do it. He's looked at building affordable housing
and it's tough. and oftentimes you need an economic engine to make it work. He understands
what is being proposed. Fie agrees with Ms. the per that if that's the reason, then the
applicant's feet must be held to the fire to build the affordable housing first and non-residential
second. because we're not considering it just as a Publ ix, to make sure that we get the workforce
housing, if that's one of the reasons we're approving it. Commissioner Ritz goes by the site four
or five times a week. In the last several weeks he has assumed that there is some development
there and tried to pull into the Cernex Plant from every direction and leaving every direction to
try to figure out how this traffic is going to flow. It is going to be tough and he is curious as to
what the traffic study says. lie believes it can be done but the traffic study is going to be
critically important to make sure people can both enter and exit northbound and southbound on
that little road. The site is surrounded by residential so buffers should be addressed, There are
several Publix stores we can look at. The Publix in Key Largo incidentally has affordable
housing behind it. When he first moved here it was hard to rind Publix when driving by because
it's hidden behind all of the native landscaping. Publix in Islarnorada is Out in the open and is a
rather attractive building. Big buildings like the hospital and the Publix in Islamorada can be
built and be attractive with community character. and there can be very unattractive small
buildings maybe like a gas station that"s not very attractive. Size may not be the defining factor
but rather the community character. The architectural style and use is more important 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 in . Tavernier
may be hit with more traffic because it would draw people frorn north and south, but Islamorada
may win both for affordable housing and traffic. Commissioner Ritz is no longer on the FKAA
board ot'directors, but was on there for a long time and there is lots and lots of water in Florida.
We have a flooding problem. not a water problem. It's a storage problem. The FKAA has built
wells in Miami, has an RO plant in Miami. It would warrant another presentation to this Board
from the FKAA to have some assurances, but when he was on the board there was lots of water
available to come down this way. Traffic, however. is a problem.
Commissioner Neugent stated that for the 20 )ears he was on the BOCC he 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 then. So FDOT has been doing a good job in clearing up some
of the traffic bottlenecks. A lot of traffic problems are self-induced by all the events on
weekends when traffic gets backed up for miles from the Stretch to the event. Also. the TDC
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
57
traffic is not his number one issue. Affordable housing is his number one issue. 600 units were
just built in the Lower Keys and their occupancy rate is between 95 and 100 percent. One was
just finished last week with 280 units and it is fully occupied. There is no question in his mind
that we need housing. 5,000 units were lost in unincorporated Monroe County from Hurricane
Irma that were either substantially damaged or destroyed. The County has been playing catch-up
from a housing standpoint, and adding vacation rentals and second homes which have bought up
all of the somewhat affordable housing stock in Monroe County. The housing need cannot be
denied. This project is attractive because of the affordable housing element within the Publix
grocery store. Publix is very successful and people like Publix. There are some positives in this
project and he believes it would take some traffic off the immediate area.
Commissioner Demes stated that he normally starts as an advocate of maximum density and
intensity and then takes mitigating factors up and down, When denying an owner the right to
develop their property, something should compensate them for it. But. in this case, we try to
balance community character, impact to the community versus the right of a person to develop
their property economically. He transits the Keys and tries to stop at a different restaurants or
retail stares and buy something every time he come through here. He is the chairman of the
board of a financial institution that opened an office in Tavernier and enjoys corning up here. He
hasn't been as fortunate as Commissioner Neugent with the traffic issues, Commissioner ®ernes
asked Ms. Sc em er about the point made by Mr. Smith that the traffic study isn't normally
required at this phase of development, Ms. Schernper responded that because this is a significant
change in the zoning to what type of development could be allowed on the property it's
important to look at all the factors as soon as possible. Imagine approving this amendment and
in six months when it comes time for building pen-nits, there's no capacity on the road here.
Staff asked that the applicant do the traffic study and they agreed. They went back and forth on
the mitigation as part of the applicant's claim was that it may actually reduce trips based on a
new type of traffic calculus. Staff stuck with the way the calculation is usually done, not
knowing what retailer this could be, and this will require the mitigation. The applicant has
agreed they would des that, but haven't yet identified the option for mitigation, Commissioner
bermes stated that years ago the actual comment as to traffic carve back that you can't make it
any gorse. I didn't really buy that but I am sensitive to traffic. The comment about this
increasing crime. he takes as a neutral comment. As to the additional housing requirement
versus what is built, guaranteeing this housing is actually built is definitely a priority. His other
concern is caps on the amount of commercial space, for whatever reason, on the site as well as
the workforce affordable housing, understanding affordable is a controversial term, but that that
is written in there so we don't suddenly sec market rate housing popping up like mushrooms.
Commissioner Thomas first thanked all the residents who carve to speak on this item, nesting that
they are trying to protect their community and they should be applauded for that. Everyone was
very eloquent in their comments, Commissioner Thomas made a motion to uphold staff
recommendation to deny the proposed amendment to the Land Development Code.
Chair Scarpelli commented that both density and intensity should be looked at, along with
diversity. The limiting factor of the square footage is a good thing in this amendment, however
it's all the same thing, one big box. That has potential issues in itself being so large considering
that it's proven that it doesn't have to be that large to be successful in other areas, We have
1
58
super 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 150.000
square feet because that is the maximum density for this area, but it also shouldn't be one store at
70,000 square feet. On the other hand, he can see the applicant's point that 10,000 square feet
per quarter on a 20-acre site is not conducive. either. Something needs to happen that allows it to
meet in the middle somewhere to make it make sense. Chair Scarpelli thanked the public for
coming out and sharing their voice today.
Motion: Commissioner Thomas made a motion on Item I to deny the application and
uphold decision of Planning Director. Commissioner Demes seconded the motion.
Roll Call: Commissioner Demes, Yes; Commissioner Thomas, Yes; Commissioner
Neugent, No; Commissioner Ritz, No; Chair Scarpelli, Yes. The motion passed 3 to 2.
Commissioner Ritz asked Chair Scarpelli for clarification. Understanding the Commission is not
in a position to negotiate with the applicant at this point, but asked if Chair Scarpelli had been
insinuating that if it were 50.000 square feet that he would be in favor of it. Chair Scarpelli
responded possibly. The point is we're not talking about a 70,000 square foot Publix, but a
70,000 square foot as a maximum and no configuration whatsoever. And as far as that being
developed at one time, he does not think that's correct and that's what is against the Land
Development Code as it's currently written. Maybe on the County's side they need to look at
that for specifics sites such as this. the zoning being Urban Commercial and that 10,000 square
feet is too little of an allocation for a site this size. Commissioner Ritz added that the bottom line
is a recommendation is being made to the BOCC. so he was trying to determine where the
majority of the Commission actually was.
Mr. Wolfe stated that since the vote was to deny Item 1. the vote on Item 2 was not needed.
(Recess from 12:18 p.m. to 12:30.)
Mr. Wolfe stated that 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 BARR AS
HIGHWAY, KEY LARGO,- FL 33037 MILE MARKER 98: A PUBLIC HEARING
CONCERNING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ACCESS STANDARDS SET FORTH
IN CHAPTER 114. ARTICLE VII OF THE MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE BY AXIS INFRASTRUCTURE, LLC. ON BEHALF OF DANIEL & ARCHER
BARRY. APPROVAL WOULD RESULT IN TWO (2) ACCESS DRIVES ON THE SUBJECT
PROPERTY THAT ARE SPACED LESS THAN THE REQUIRED DISTANCE OF 245 FEET
FROM ADJACENT CURB CUTS. THE VARIANCE IS REQUESTED FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL 7-ELEVEN CONVENIENCE
STORE WITH 11 FUELING STATIONS, ON PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS I
THROUGH 6. BLOCK 1, ROCK HARBOR ESTATES, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3. AT PAGE 187. OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS
19
59
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, HAVING PARCEL ID NUMBER 00519590-000000.
(FILE 2022-206)
(12:31 p.m.) Ms. Devin Tolpin, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. This is a request
for a variance to access standards to Chapter 114, Article Vil to the Land Development Code for
a proposed high-intensity commercial retail use. This property is approximately 1.09 acres
located in the Suburban Commercial zoning district designated as Mixed Use Commercial on the
County's Future Land Use Map. The property is currently operated by a commercial retail store.
The applicant is proposing to completely redevelop the subject property with a 4,730 square foot
commercial retail convenience store with five double-sided fueling stations, and one additional
Rec 90 fueling station. Ms. Tolpin presented the proposed site plan. The land development code
requires that when a property substantially improves that it must come into full compliance with
the access standards. There is a 245-foot minimum distance between curb cuts onto U.S. I for
properties such as this. This site plan includes two access drives onto U.S. 1, one on either side.
each being two-way, that do meet the 245-foot curb cut requirement from the Grand Street
intersection, but they do not meet that distance requirement from the access drives of the
property to the north. One driveway is about 43 feet, and the other is about 45 feet from the curb
Cuts of the driveways to the north which is the reason for the variance. When reviewing for a
variance, the applicant must demonstrate that they meet all eight of the required criteria and must
demonstrate a showing of good and sufficient cause that failure to grant the variance would
result in an exceptional hardship, that the variance is the minimum necessary to provide relief,
among the other criteria contained in the staff report and presented on the screen. Staff has
found that the applicant has met all eight of those required criteria, and staff recommends
approval of this requested variance with the conditions that were included in the staff report and
on the screen. These are general conditions.
Commissioner ®ernes asked if someone came in and built exactly what is there today, if they
would also require a variance. Ms. Tolpin responded that, yes, in order to substantially improve,
redevelop a new use or expand an existing use they would have to comply with the same
standards. Commissioner Ritz asked if the applicant could simply move the ingress or egress the
correct number of feet, or would they then be in trouble with the other side. Ms. Tolpin
responded that because of the length of the property there is not sufficient area to be 245 feet
from both the driveways to the north and the Grand Street intersection. Chair Scarpelli wanted
to clarify that the existing curb cut on that end of property was roughly in the same location as it
is presently. Ms. Tolpin responded that that was correct, more or less. It may be moving a little
bit but not by much. There were no further questions or comments from the Commission, Chair
Scarpelli asked to hear from the applicant.
Ty Harris. attorney for the applicant, stated that he had the same team present as the last time
they were before the Planning Commission; Jason from Axis Hutton and Ian Rairden of Kimley
Horn as the traffic consultant. At the last meeting the applicant had met five of the eight criteria.
After a lot of public input and discussion with staff the access was reworked and staff has now
determined that all eight criteria have been met. As just stated, to rebuild the Anthony's that is
there now. they would be here asking for the same thing because there is not enough room for
anything over 2,500 square feet to meet the access driveway requirements. Mr. Harris stated that
having given their presentation at the prior meeting. he would be available to answer questions
20
60
and reserve some time for rebuttal if needed. There were no Commission questions of the
applicant at this time.
Chair Scarpelli then asked for public comment, emphasizing that this item is regarding the
variance. Mr. \kolfe also clarified that the speakers should limit their comments to anything
about 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 development.
Ms. Ann Helmers, a resident of Grand Street, spoke on behalf of the Federation of Homeowners
for Ms. Dottie Moses was unable to attend. The Federation represents 2,500 people who live in
this community. They had held two community meetings 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 community 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 Commission several months ago to request a
variance and that request `vas tabled. I hey have now come back and. in their generous
Munificence, they have told the community we heard you loud and clear, you don't want Grand
Street access, so what we're 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 store that includes Rec 90 fuel and eleven pumps next to
one where people and entering and exiting. It's simply something that is going to cause a
dangerous situation every day. not only for those of us who live in the area, although that's
primarily who the Commission "ill be hearing from. but indeed everyone. If you are in a lane in
which people are going to suddenly need to make turns or in which there is a boat being pulled in
and out, that is going to be a problem. Issues such as congestion and cuing at this site, fuel
deliveries, the store inventory deliveries, trash processing, will all affect traffic. This is already a
dangerous area of the highway for accidents and fatalities and will be more so. Deceleration and
slowing distances are simple matters of physics but they are also life and death issues. Finaliv,
as to community character. while it is not strictly a 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 helpful and cooperative, and we also ha%e a
layer above the Panning stall. County staff makes the recommendations and analyses based on
the statutory requirements of the code. The Planning Commission is here to listen to residents
and to make decisions encompassing everything. including the code, but also including "hat it is
like for those who live 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 mean you should with this variance. and we hope you'll decide you won't.
Mr. JD Carballo, a resident of Rock Harbor Estates for over 43 years, representing the Rock
Harbor Property Owners Association. stated at that at the last Planning Commission meeting the
Commission had been concerned about the traffic movement within and around the entry and
exit from the site and asked the developer to provide some information regarding the circulation
around the site and 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 pumps. Before. the Rec 90 was the
boat fueling station and the two pumps on the end of each island which lined it with the two old
21
61
driveways, That made good sense. The pump labels have disappeared so now no one is sure
where those are going to be. Mr. Carballo presented photographs of how cars park at the 7-11 to
get gas. They line the fuel tank up at the hose. They 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 the Tom
Thumb at mile marker 97 showing a big boat and a pickup taking up all three pumps, along with
the congestion of people pulling in and out in all directions. Mr. Carballo presented photos of a
traffic backup at mile marker 97 onto U.S. 1. He then presented photos of the Anthony's
driveway with an outboard sticking out from the Marathon station to the Anthony's curb cut.
Commissioner Dernes asked Mr. Carballo to go back to a prior photo, which he did. Trailers
with boats, RVs and delivery trucks cannot circulate the property. Mr. Carballo presented
diagrams of the site plan with various traffic patterns depicted, while explaining required
turnarounds for traffic. Mr. Carballo presented various examples of diagrams generated from
site conflict software showing huge crisscross traffic conflicts.
Mr. Bill Wrublevski lives across from Anthony's on Rose Street on the ocean side. He has a
commercial driver's license and part of his business is driving heavy trucks. What was proposed
on the initial plan at the first meeting in Marathon was for a WD50 fuel truck, which is a
standard fuel truck seen everywhere. This 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. He took a
survey on April 20 from Key Largo to Palm Beach to see how many of the smaller fuel trucks
were out there, and they couldn't find one out of the 50 trucks that they saw. All were the larger
fuel trucks. His concern is the that community is being told that just for this one 7-11 they're
going to have a special truck just to deliver fuel to get into this entrance because a bigger truck
cannot get into this entrance. Mr. Wrublevski presented diagrams showing the size differences
between the fuel deliver; trucks. Imagine two fuel delivery trucks trying to get into two stations
at the same time or being backed up in traffic. A big truck needs to use two lanes of traffic, and
the FDOT classifies this zone as a high accident area. The applicant's own plans show these
trucks will have to make six turns to deliver fuel. This is a major concern. Mr. Wrublevski
hopes this is not approved. It is going to cause undue harm and a safety concern for the
community.
Ms. Jeanne Brennan has a bachelor's and master's degree in geophysics and has been visiting or
living in the Keys for 30 years. Ms. Brennan presented crash data for the Keys using data from
local jurisdictions. his. Brennan presented a display from E-Corn from the Tmp study showing
the Key Largo area where the proposed 7-11 is has a number of high crash list segments within
that area. Ms. Brennan then presented a diagram from FDOT data showing fatalities in this area
from 2014 to 2018. The proposed 7-11 does pose a threat to public safety because it is in an area
that is already high crash. Ms. Brennan then presented a diagram including the years 2018 to
2022 and there were 459 crashes in that area during that time span. Ms. Brennan then presented
a diagram for the Tom Thumb which is a 24-hour gas station located in an area without a lot of
curb cuts adjacent to it and no residential properties in the area, yet there is a high cluster of
accidents around the Tom Thumb. This is what would be expected to happen at this proposed 7-
11 location. It's reasonable to assume that curb cuts and intersections lead to more accidents.
Ws an observation everyone has form driving the highways. In this area there are the curb cuts,
there's Almay Street, Grand Street and Largo Landings, so there are a lot of residences. Not so
at the Tom Thumb, Ms. Brennan then showed the data on the injuries from the accidents in the
22
62
area. The variance should not be approved because it does not meet all of the requirements that
the risks of public safety will not be increased. There is an increased risk of public safetN if this
variance is granted.
Ms. Jody Koblenzer stated her family has lived on Rose Street for 43 years. This proposed gas
station directly impacts the traffic safety oft is community and for visitors to the Keys. U.S. I
can be dangerous and this will make it worse. The Commission's decision today can save lives.
The signs tell slower traffic to keep right. That means the faster traffic is going to be in the left-
hand lane. Each vehicle entering and exiting the gas station will be slowing down in the fast
lane. With the gas station in the median, the deceleration of moving vehicle is at least 200 feet,
and longer than a football field if the vehicle is towing a boat. The neighbors see and hear
vehicles screeching their brakes because the vehicle ahead of them is making a quick left-hand
turn from the fast lane. She witnessed this just this past week. Adding another gas station of any
size kill multiply the dangers. Her traffic engineer confirms that this is a high-generation facility
in close proximity to Grand Street and the existing Marathon gas station and will create
numerous conflicts with traffic and hazardous conditions likely resulting in additional 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 of transporting thousands of
people safeIN throughout the globe. To do that, he has to be annually trained, consisting of
demonstrating equipment and system 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. He has driven a 16.000 pound rig that supports and transports his 33-Foot sailboat
that he has taken to regattas and other events. lie has experience with 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 closure rates, stopping distances and turning radiuses. Ile is acutely
aware of the startled reaction of operator behaviours. especially when they face unexpected
situations which have just been presented. People do not react well to that. It is his opinion that
traffic kill 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 of this matter as he
has in his charue.
Ms. Lisa Gahagen has lived in Rock I larbor Estates in a house built by her grandpa for the last
54 years. It's the only place she's lived in the Keys. She enlisted eight volunteers to study five
gas stations in Key Largo in the one block of Grand Street that lies in the median. These
volunteers have spent weeks studying traffic flog, noise, congestion and pollution at their
location. We all have been at our stations at various times during daytime and night time hours
and their observations have been surprising. Ms. Gahagen focused on Grand Street. 155 feet
long, bordered on the no by Anthony's and the proposed 7-11 and on the south by a boat
dealership. Ms. Gahagen presented photographs showing cars parked on both sides of the street,
dUrripsters; located along the street meaning garbage pickup stops traffic on Grand, and truck
stops to unload parts to the boat dealership. It is not uncommon to have to go around these
trucks to cross over the northbound lane to enter her neighbourhood. When encountering this
situation. cars turning left off of northbound U.S. I run the hazard of missing the Grand Street
median turn, turning into a car going around an unloading truck, or pulling into Anthony's
23
63
parking lot to go back south. She has been involved in these situations many times. The line of
vision to the south of U.S. I going east is obstructed by signs. utility poles and wires, Unsafe
conditions already exist at this comer. Combined with the possible thousands extra 7-11 traffic
and this is truly an accident waiting to happen. In the County's Land Use Development Code
Section 103 to 187 regarding obtaining a variance, requirement number three states, in part, 'The
applicant must demonstrate the variance will not create a threat to public health and safety or
create a public nuisance." The proposed 7-11 will in fact create a threat to public safety every
time the residents of Rock Harbor Estates enter their neighbourhood, and it will also affect all the
drivers on north and scut bound U.S. I at this location. A few months ago she wrote an email to
the Commissioners about her concerns which talked about a member of her family being killed
in this area. She does not want her family or anyone else's to have a death in theirs. Do not
approve this variance.
Ms. Nancy Truesdale is a recovering attorney having spent 15 years practicing law and teaching
high school for 16 years. She has owned property and lived around mile marker 98 since 2001.
Over the last 20-some years of living on both sides of U.S. I she has gained a great deal of
experience with the traffic and general driving conditions in this area. In preparation for this
hearing she was one of the two volunteers recruited by Ms. Lisa Gahagen to observe traffic at the
Tom Thumb, her husband took those Tom Thumb pictures, and also those at Anthony's over the
several weeks getting ready for today. Ms. Gahagen referenced the Land Development Code
that regulates and guides this Board in decisions. The applicant wants you to grant its request for
a variance and in order for you to do so you must determine that all eight of the standards of
Section 102-187(d) one through eight have been met. She does not believe that one, two. three
and eight have been met. One is good and sufficient cause. Their cause is because they want to
put an I 1-pump gas station at this location. Last time when this item was looked at in Marathon
the Commission asked the applicant to go back and re-evaluate their application and make some
changes as you weren't certain because of the unique characteristics of this property. Not man)
properties in Monroe County are in the median of U.S. 1, and even fewer have cross streets like
Grand Street, and even fewer have these nonconforming driveways. There is a lot going on with
this property. By their own filing they stated egress from Grand Street would, quote, "result in a
queuing past any reasonably spaced driveway connection on Grand Street, even if Overseas
Highway ingresses and egresses were maintained." Just because access from Grand Street can"t
be safely designed for this proposed use doesn't mean that creating single driveways within 46
feet of the neighboring Marathon gas station and across the street from Almay is somehow safer,
It's not. There is no safe driveway for this I 1-pump gas station and, consequently, the applicant
has failed to show good and sufficient cause. Two, failure to grant the variance would result in
exceptional hardship to the applicant. The applicant states that if you don't grant the variance for
this compromised driveway back to back with the Marathon station and across from Almay that
they would have to use Grand Street. That's faulty analysis because by their own documents
they state that Grand Street would be unsafe. Their application reveals there is no safe driveway
for the proposal and, as a result, that does not mean you have to grant this, And, eight. the
variance is the minimum necessary. This isn't the minimum,this is the maximum.
Mr. Andrew Tobin, read into the record the conclusion reached by Mr. Moss who is a traffic
safety expert witness for crashes and negligence cases. The report is in the Commission's
packet. "Considering the large number of daily trips expected to occur at this station, the existing
24
64
hazardous conditions that will be exacerbated and the numerous conflicts that will occur as a
result of the development, based upon on my background, experience and training. it is my
opinion within a reasonable degree of engineering probability and certainty that this high-
generation facility in close proximity to Grand Street and the existing Marathon gas station will
create numerous conflicts with traffic and hazardous conditions that are likely to result in
accidents." That is the public health safety issue. A lot more time could be spent going over the
various traffic issues. Grand Street is a problem. it's got a blind comer. Every time you cross
into Rock Harbor Estates you have to pull almost into U.S. I to cross. Mr. Tobin had prepared a
memorandum of law for the Commission that was in their packet. The law on 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 the property for the purpose for which it is zoned to qualify it for 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
improvement is defined that you can have any type ofcommercial use at the existing store. you
can repair it up to 50 percent of pre-destruction value, so there is no hardship here. A legal
hardship is not, we can't do what we want to do. There has to be criteria. There was a recent
case of a variance where his clients were protesting a house next to their house and the court
reversed the Planning Co mission's decision because not all of the criteria had been met. So.
yes, you can have a smaller house: yes, you can have a smaller gas station; yes, you can have
somethino other than a high traffic generating facility in a high crash area. Mr. Tobin has
represented a lot of property owners and is in favour of property rights, but the standards have to
be met, you have to meet all of them, and the other standard is the minimum necessary. Mr.
Tobin believes that staff, who does a great job and spent a lot of time on this, looked at this in 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 qualify for a variance. it has to be impossible. There's one case that
talked about the Florida law and that was Herrera vs. City of Miami "here the Court rejected a
variance based on the failure to show that the project could not be reduced in size or the project
might not qualify for federal financing. So just because you can't use it for the highest use. and
this is squeezing every square inch. does not mean it's a legal hardship. So they do not qualify
under the law for a legal hardship. Based upon the traffic safety. and a lot of time could be spent
on this, the Moss report is good and has a lot of exhibits and photographs in it.
Mr, Shannon Donnelly is a chef that has been here 30 years, is a father and a business owner. Ile
is a supporter of the community and the Keys. and in all the places he has traveled and cooked in
five-star restaurants in Canada. the U.S. and Lurope, the number one thing that he always looks
for is what comes first. It's common sense. $5.000 does not need to be spent on a safety expert
to cite all of the things people have brought up here. The number one thing that comes first is
safety. This area is designated as a high-crash. high-fatality area. Fatality means your wife. %our
child, or your grandmother is not coming home. There are a couple of options. You can light a
fire or dig a hole because somebody 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. It just
happened to his son the other day. You saw point blank all of the accidents that circle this area.
This is going to magnify 10 times what we already have as a problem. We've got ten pounds of
Slurpees in a five-pound bag that is bursting at the seams. This is going to be the catalyst for
more people to die. The applicant does not meet the criteria. Safety is going to be ad%ersely
affected as well as this being a nuisance. Nuisance is his last concern. His wife and children
25
65
coming home from crossing the street are his main concern. His family alone has been involved
with four accidents. When they cite this 559 crashes, there are even more fender benders and
near misses. He waited at Grand Street for 15 minutes the other day and he calls it the roulette
corner. The Commission is here to represent us, to keep us, your constituents and our children
safe. At Grand Street your physical body has to be six feet beyond where the white line is where
your car is supposed to stop in order to be able to see what is coming from the northbound lane.
People cannot make that to when you're that far out. This proposal takes away the safety 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 make that turn, you have to try to back up, so you back into somebody that's
behind you. Anthony's is the safety zone for them to go around that person that's sticking out or
the garbage truck that's there. Coming in with somebody on your tail doing 60 miles an hour,
you don't have a great deal of time to brake or see. It's a blind comer. If this goes in, this super
high-density grotesque monstrosity operating 24-7, we're going to have so many more traffic
problems there or so many more people stopping or trying to stop and that safety net is going to
be gone. You won't have the opportunity to swing a little bit wider and miss that person. Mr.
Donnelly's concern is safety and it's the Commission's job to keep their constituents safe.
Rosemary Donnelly stated she is married to Mr. Safety and is the person who had the front of her
minivan ripped off by someone trying to make the corner, putting a trailer in a really tight,
narrow congested area. She is against giving the variance to the 7-11 for the common sense
reason that it is a high-intensity gas station in an area that is already overstressed with the
amount of traffic in that area, including bikers, walkers, people freaked out that they're taking
their animals to the vet, and walkers to the convenience store that's already there. Please take
into consideration not only those living in the Upper Keys but those that live in the Rock Harbor
neighbourhood.
Ms. Susan Cashin was called upon to speak, at which time an unidentified, unintelligible speaker
spoke from the audience and did not use the microphone.
Ms. Kathleen Ludke (phonetic) was not available to speak.
Mr. Grant Rollin was not available to speak.
Ms. Phyllis Mitchell of Islamorada came here today for the silliest of reasons. She loves
Anthony's. There are very few places for LOLs to find clothes in the Keys. An LOL is little old
ladies. Her daughters think Anthony's is for little old ladies. though she disagrees. She has
never seen a community as well put together making a point for the safety of their area as those
present today and she is proud of them. She believes they've made the point.
Ms. Leslie Bennett was not available to speak.
Ms. Joyce Bennett stated that she has heard so many worries about the community and safety.
She used to own the two-story building across the street from Anthony's which at that time was a
dance studio and she observed quite a few 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 more gas stations
26
66
and more liquor stores. She would like to see more Anthony's as well because she's one of those
ladies. Please leave Anthony's alone.
Mr. Tony Davenport is President of Landings of Largo right cross the street from the proposed 7-
11 and a fourth-generation Conch, really from Key West, and he has seen a lot of growth up and
down the Keys. of good and bad. Putting three gas stations within 250 yards from each other
makes no sense and it really is a residential safety concern. The major concern is the safety issue
that the 7-11 would bring. No one has mentioned the heavily-utilized sidewalk with runners,
walkers, bikers. people pushing babies in strollers and people walking dogs. People focused on
entering and exiting the 7-11 will not be paying attention tote sidewalk. He also has witnessed
many vehicles exiting and going the wrong way. There have been over five fatalities in the last
three years in that two-mile stretch, two right in front of Landings of Largo. There are any
residents in the area with children and there's the school buses coming by. On behalf of
Landings of Largo. Mr. Davenport requests the Commission vote no. Something commercial is
going to go there but there's got to be something a lot less density prone traffic wise like
Anthony's or maybe a Bass Pro Shop.
Ms. Joan Scholz of Islamorada believes the residents in the area have made their point. She
passes through this area ever) single day. In addition to the school buses there is the JBT
transportation system that stops and as any know, someone just got killed getting off of the
bus, walking in front and getting killed. Safet) should be number one for this variance and we
don't need another gas station.
Ms. Shirley Abraham stated that she had not planned to speak. She thought she was signing
something to say she was here. She has been coming to the Keys since the 70s to visit her
parents and bought a retirement home in '94. Ms. Abraham has seen a lot of changes. She loves
the Keys. tier 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 goad, horrible traffic and places going out of
business at times. It's truly a paradise but she's afraid we're going to ask too much ecologically
and environmentally. Her brother was an environmental lawyer and has done work in Marathon
with the shallow wells so the waters are at issue. too. We need to concentrate on what is
important here and not make it go down the tubes. Anymore traffic and she may be going north.
Mr. John Abraham was not available to speak.
Ms. Joy Martin was not available to speak.
Mr. John Kocol owns the building he bought from Ms. Joyce Bennett twelve years ago. It's the
Island Hammock Pet Hospital today. lie also owns a few properties in the subdivision that he
rents to the local workforce. In this time he has seen numerous accidents here. He Is a free
market capitalist that believes anybody should be able to develop their property within the
boundaries of the law as long as it doesn't sacrifice public safety, and this I an obvious case
where it does. The only thing that makes sense to him to try and work out a solution would be to
put in deceleration lanes. and he has proposed this at every opportunit). The comments being
received today are what you would expect from a community trying to preserve its quality of
life. Safety is a core value to all of us. We elect public officials to uphold our core values and
27
67
every time those core values are not honoured a small piece of our community dies with it.
Please don't let that happen in this case. The land development regulations are written and
enforced for good and sound reasoning and should not be circumvented when it comes to public
safety. Please reject the variance request and require deceleration lanes as a condition if you are
to approve this project.
Ms. Susan Holler was waiting to speak on the next item. Chair Scarpelli asked for anyone
wanting to speak on Item 3.
Mr. Enrique Rodriguez, Vice President of Pirates Cove Association was not planning to speak
today but listening to the distance of the curb cuts and the size of the fuel delivery vehicles that
need to be reduced to make the turn in, as he was listening to this he recalled that he was the
driver engineer instructor for the City of Miami 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 cuts going into the Marathon gas station. Another gentleman pointed out that they
had to reduce the size of the fuel delivery trucks to be able to make the turn into the gas station.
That raised a red flag because those fuel delivery trucks have a pivot point very close to the cab,
so they can make much tighter comers than a boat on a trailer. Now we have an 18-foot pickup
truck towing a 30-foot boat, which is very common, and then you have to add five feet of trailer.
Now we're at 53 feet of vehicle. They were talking about the large fuel delivery trucks being 50
feet. Now we're at 53 feet with a pivot point that is much further back on the rig. If they can't
make a turn with a vehicle where the pivot point is way further forward, you can't possibly
expect to make the turn with a boat and trailer pivoting much further back unless you take up two
lanes. If a person tries to to in through two lanes, 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
cant quite make the turn. Now what do you do. You've got to back up on the highway. fie
sees this as an issue creating potential accidents.
Ms. Mimi Bentolila, the President of Pirates Cove, wanted to say that Pirates Cove is very
concerned with this as well, not just Rock Harbor and Landings of Largo. She agrees with
everything everyone has said. Two weeks ago she was heading home from north and had just
passed the CVS, was in the left-hand lane, and someone in the right-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 and almost wiped her out. This is what people do. They come down from Miami
and don't realize it's only 45 miles an hour. They're going 60 miles an hour. When you have all
these businesses that you have to slow down for in order to to into and this is why there's so
many accidents. Please don't grant the variance.
Mr. Don Bower of Grand Street commented on the Commissioner who said there was not much
traffic and he has to go back to Marathon. lie invited Commissioner Neu gent to meet him by
Grand Street to look at the community and cross the street and all of the traffic conditions would
be seen right then and there. Chair Scarpelli asked what he was serving. Mr. Bower stated he
would greet him as a ncighbour and he could put his order in. It would take them a few minutes
to get across the highway but he would wait for them and keep the lights on.
28
68
Ms. Tina (last name unknown) had attempted to speak on earlier items I & 2 but could not get
connected. She stated the solution to the problem with Cemex was for Monroe Count), to buy it
and leave it a green space. Mr. John Wolfe stated that this public comment has to be on Item 3.
Mr. Ignacio Urbieta spoke on behalf of the Marathon gas station just north of the property. Ile
works for the company that owns that gas station. Previous to 2021. his family had been the
owner of that property for any years. Of course he has a conflict here but in all sincerity.
there's a serious potential for hazards for the customers and emploNees. The existing nearby
driveway is already close to his current drivewa) but to add a very high-traffic business next
door that would also have heavy trucks and boat trailers entering and exiting, he 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. Fie is familiar with the technique to justify
circulation inside of a development to Suggest that you're going to use a tank wagon or bobtail
short truck. That's not realistic in this business. Delivering from Port Everglades where the fuel
is coming from all the way to Monroe Count), in a truck with half of the capacity, especially to a
site so far south from the nearest terminal and especially to a site that's projected to have such
high volume is not 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
some special maneuvering to drop fuel. (laving two 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 not support the version that there would be overflow onto Grand
Street and Overseas Highway, and that needs to be substantiated before they have any chance of
really proving that they have an exceptional circumstance or the other standards required under
the code.
Ms. Janice Lindsay-Hartz has lived in Pirates Cove for 36 years, and "ants to add to everyone's
safety issues `with a human-eye view of what happens on a daily basis here. She encourages the
Commission to go to Grand Street and come to Pirates Cove. When she leaves Pirates Cove
from Gasparillo Drive to head north, she cannot cross two lanes of traffic coming bumper-to-
bumper at 45 to 50 miles per hour, so she turns right, gets up to 45, tries to get in the left lane but
traffic is going fast and it's hard to get in. Then she's looking for Grand Street where she can go
across and go north and have the same problems everyone has described. Traffic is tailgating
her, they swerve around, give you the finger, sometimes swerve right in front to make a
statement that she shouldn't be in this lane, and then she is slowing down to make the left turn.
I-his is very frightening and scary and is on a daily basis. Adding this high-intensity gas station
to what even one has said is already a high accident area is going to make it impossible. She will
need to go even further south to to around to go north. She lives here because of the small
town community character. but this is turning it into this speedway. a dangerous area, and she
asks the Commission to please consider this when looking at this project.
Ms. Ronnie Harris lives at Rock Harbor Estates. A public safety issue she has not yet heard
addressed is whether it's safe to live near a gas station. In an article by Fossil Fuel their
conclusion is with due diligence a homeowner can reduce long-term risk by avoiding homes
located in close proximity to gas stations. There is an abundance of scientific research regarding
the health hazards of living near a gas station. Columbia University found many of the nation's
gas stations are leaking hazardous vapors into the surrounding environment and despite the array
29
69
of modern safety and health guidelines, these gas stations often emit ten times the amount of
emissions used to determine setback regulations. A study of U.S. gas stations found that benzene
emissions from gas station storage tank vents were high enough to constitute a health concern at
a distance of up to 524 feet. The EPA recommends screening school sites within 1,000 feet of a
gas station. A joint Bloomberg School of Health and John Hopkins University analysis can the
health implications of living near a gas station concluded that particularly impacted are residents
living near gas stations who spend significant amounts of time at home and children who live
and play nearby. The National Institute of Health has published countless research reports on the
dangers of repeated exposure to liquid and vaporized gasoline, Long brain and kidney damage
are frequently cited as the most pressing health concerns. According to the World Health
Organization there is no safe level for benzene, Ms. Lindsay-Hartz stated she could go on and
on with examples of headaches, low birth rate, childhood leukemia and benzene seeping into
nearby homes. Denying the request to add l I fuel pump stations making a total of 20 fuel pump
stations sandwiched between three densely populated residential neighbourhoods is the only
thing to do and is justified by following the guidelines in the Land Development Code Section
1 10-65 and 67. An additional gas station is not appropriate within the context of the surrounding
neighborhoods, is not consistent with the community character, will have an adverse effect on
the value of the surrounding homes and properties, and is a significant threat to the health and
well being of these living nearby. For these and the many reasons that the very zealous neighbors
has already discussed, she implores the Commission to deny this variance.
r. John Wolfe pointed out that a fair amount of that information was not relevant to the
variance which is obviously the portion was about all of the studies which are hearsay. The
Commission can listen to it and do what they want with it but he needed to point that out. Chair
Scarpelli then closed public comment.
Commissioner Demes asked Mr. Wolfe to further explain his latest comments, Mr. Wolfe
explained that this hearing is only about the variance and there were a lot of extremely germane
comments about the dangers and safeties about that. The portion about gas stations themselves
being inherently dangerous because of fumes has nothing to do with this part of the variance.
Thates all he was saying. Chair Scarpelli asked if the applicant wanted to speak.
r. Ty Harris stated the he appreciates the comments from the public speakers. He will have
Jason Green and Ian Rairden speak to some of the issues that are germane to the variance
request. This is a quasi-judicial proceeding and when someone purports to be an expert in
something, they have to be qualified. To the extent that a report was introduced into the record
that he hasn't seen and did not get a chance to cross-examine that person, that evidence does not
constitute substantial competent evidence for purposes of overturning the staff recommenclation.
Staff recommended approval and the presumption is that all eight criteria have been meta To
overcome that it must be shown that the applicant has not met that.
r. Jason Green stated that most of the testimony, in his opinion, was based on the use and this
application is about the access. Staff has already stated that a variance would be needed for any
driveway for any use on this site for anyone redeveloping this site. It is incorrect to state that the
variance is needed to get a smaller truck in and all of these other comments related to that. Large
trucks, full-size fire trucks can all make the turn to get into this site. A variance is not needed
30
70
because of that. The variance is needed because of the separation from Grand Street and nearby
driveways. It is unfortunate to try to tie 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
about older. nonconforming, too small sites for the uses that were shown. There may be backups
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 way you could ever design a gas station
here. These standards, the driveways, the radii that come into the driveways all have to meet
FDOT and County regulations which were put in place because of safety factors. As far as
backups. one of the things one when the site was changed was to make sure there was enough
room between the fuel deliver) area and the end of the gas pumps. There is 30 feet between a
vehicle parked at the end and a fuel tanker if one is are there. The assumption that it is going
to back vehicles up and you can't get around vehicles fails. fie is confused having heard
testimony that of more and less driveways are better. Today it's four full driveways and this is
cutting that in half. The driveways are 35 feet wide., which is much larger than the typical
standard commercial driveway of 24 feet. They have run numerous truck turns with different
vehicles and a fire truck can circulate through the entire site. This is a very well designed site to
accommodate a lot of the what-ifs. The applicant is also going to restore and match the pathway
that is there on the west side of the site for the southbound side to enhance and improve
pedestrian circulation. The Commission needs to look at where else a commercial development
would put the driveways.
Chair Scarpeill noted that the applicant had mentioned using the Grand Street access and there
were major Issues with utilizing Grand Street, including the nightmare that it would create on
Grand Street. The public comment was they did not want the access on Grand Street. Mr, Ian
Rairden of Kimlev Horn added that the applicant has offered to put that in if the County wants
that. The applicant can't fix bad drivers and other streets with poor visibility. Those issues that
are there are not being added to or created by the applicant. The original traffic study was done
based on the four drive%a)s. It was reviewed, met all county guidelines and was approved.
Subsequent to the prior meeting it was updated to show the two driveways, and that study was
also approved and meets level of service standards.
Commissioner Dernes stated with Grand Street getting a lot of local traffic crossing U.S. I. it
Would be a disaster to have the traffic going in and out of a gas station there. He assumes new
cuts require FDOT permits. and asked where the FDoT concurrence is with the plan right now.
Mr. Green responded that FDOT was fine with the four driveway option because they weren't
four full driveways, so under their rules they treat that as one driveway. This plan has been
submitted to FDOT and is under review as it is required to be resubmitted. He hasn't gotten their
comments yet but he believes it will not be an issue for the because they were fine with the
four drive la)OLIt. The next step is the engineering within the right-ol'-way but the access is being
reviewed currently. Any work done in the right-of-way requires FDOT approval. Mr. Green
understands the public's concern but in his professional opinion. this meets the criteria and he
agrees with staffs recommendation.
Though Ms. Devin Tolpin had nothing to add. Mr. Peter Morris qualified her as an expert in the
fields of Planning and Floodplain Management. and she listing her degrees. licensures and work
31
71
experience. The Commission accepted her as an expert. Ms. Tolpin then read the eight required
standards for a variance into the record.
Commissioner Demes stated that after listening tote passionate input from the community, he
wanted to clarify that this variance decision has nothing to do with the use of the property and
that the use would be reviewed through the conditional use. Commissioner Ritz also noted that
having sat through lots of public hearings, this community had spoken eloquently and
knowledgeably and he is proud to be one oftheir neighbors, He is viewing this as simply an
access issue and he does not see the exceptional hardship, but does see a threat to public safety,
so he will vote against this variance based on public safety. Chair Scarpelli asked Ms. Tolpin
about the criteria for public health and safety and asked what it would be reviewed against. Ms.
Tolpin responded that it is reviewed based on the documentation available at the time the
application is submitted. Peter Morris added that the Commission needs to be very analytically
circumspect and not hypothesize too far afield from what's in the file. In other words, don't get
too adventurous theorizing. The longer the analytical chain of what could potentially result in a
danger, the longer that is, the more tenuous the reasoning is. It's a matter of managing liability
exposure on appeal. Chair Scarpelli stated tatters has been some very interesting and
compelling testimony today about health and safety as far as traffic concems go. Unfortunately,
that's due tots nature of where we live and the highway we live off of as a one lifeblood kind
of road scenario. He does not know that that should affect people developing their property.
Commissioner Demes echoed Commissioner Ritz on the community input and presentations,
stating that in his time on the Commission he hasn't seen such good community input as seen in
this meeting and he applauds their efforts.
Motion: Commissioner Ritz made a motion to deny based on there not being enough
evidence for an exceptional hardship and the variance increasing the is to public safety.
Commissioner Neugent seconded the motion.
Roll ® Commissioner Demes, No; Commissioner Thomas, No; Commissioner Neugent,
Yes; Commissioner Ritz, Yes; Chair Scarpelli, No. The motion failed
Mr. Wolfe clarified that this means the Commission is agreeing to allow the variance and uphold
the staff report. Mr. Morris thought that to make sure the record is abundantly clear, they should
have another vote on a motion to approve consistent with the staff s recommendations.
Motion: isi® e Thomas made a motion to uphold the staff report and
recommendations to approve the variance. Commissioner De es seconded the motion.
Roll ® Commissioner Demes, Yes; Commissioner Thomas, Yes; Commissioner
Neugent, No; Commissioner Ritz, No; it Scarpelli, s® The motion passed
4. 7-ELEVEN (DANIEL BARRY, Jr. ARCHER
H16—HWAY KEY LARGO, FL 33037 MILE MARKER 98: A PUBLIC MEETING
CONCERNING A REQUEST FOR A MAJOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY AXIS
INFRASTRUCTURE, LLC, ON BEHALF OF DANIEL & ARCHER BARRY, FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL 7-ELEVEN CONVENIENCE
32
72
STORE WITH II FUELING STATIONS, ON PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS LOTS I
THROUGH 6. BLOCK 1, ROCK HARBOR ESTATES, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT
THEREOF. AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 3. AT PAGE 187. OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CURRENTLY HAVING PARCEL ID NUMBER
00519590-000000. (FILE 2022-021 1 )
(2:05 p.m.) Ms. Devin Tolpin. Principal Planner. presented the staff report. This application is
for the major conditional use to develop the 4,730 square foot high-intensity commercial retail
store on the property. This includes five double-sided fueling stations plus one Rec 90 fueling
pump. This property is located in the Suburban Commercial zoning district which does allow for
high-intensity commercial retail uses as a major conditional use. The site plan with approval of
that variance has demonstrated compliance with all required rules and restrictions of the Land
Development Code, including parking. open space. buffer yards, stormwater and landscaping
requirements. Staff reviewed this application for consistency with the standards presented and in
the staff report. Staff recommends approval. Of note. the site plan did include a sidewalk in the
County-owned right-of-way adjacent to Grand Street. This sidewalk is not required. It %%asn't
treated favorably by the engineering department, but they did not say that it could not be done. If
the Commission does recommend approval of 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 County has received written protests b) more than 20 percent of the surrounding
property ov%ners which requires a supermajoritN of the Planning Commission to appro%e this
major conditional use permit. meaning four members must vote to approve as opposed to the
Usual three.
Ms. Schemper 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 absolute no. It could
possibly be done. but the concern is the sidewalk does lead to the multiuse path oil the
southbound side of median property, so it is connecting people on the ocean side through the
median to the path. However, engineering stated that if you put the sidewalk in, it would likely
require the curb cut and pedestrian apron towards U.S. I in the northbound lanes. and that then
becomes an indicator to pedestrians that this is a good place to cross the highway. So the
concern is more people may be encouraged to cross there without any sort 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. She is explaining
this in the event the Commission decides they want that sidewalk as a condition asshe would not
`rant a condition added that would be impossible to meet. Chair Scarpelli did not think the apron
was required. Ms. Schemper responded that she was not fully aware of the rules. Chair Scarpelli
thought it would prevent people from parking on that side of the road. Commissioner Ritz noted
that there was a bus stop right across the street. Chair Scarpelli then asked it' the applicant
wished to speak.
Mr. Ty Harris stated that as far as the sidewalk goes it could be put in or not. but staff has stated
that the then meet all criteria for the major conditional use. The burden now shifts by those
opposed to prove by competent substantial evidence that the applicant somehow doesn't meet
that burden. The applicant will listen to opposition and respond to each issue as needed. There
33
73
were no further Commission questions or comments. Chair Scarpelli then asked for public
comment.
Mr. Tobin commented that it had been stated that the burden has now shifted to the opponents
and he had a point of order. Mr. orris explained to Mr. Tobin that he was speaking out of tum,
Ms. Susan Cashin lives at mile marker 98.2 which is right in the bull's eye. Almost everyone in
the state is having a problem with homeowner insurance, any companies have left the state
and homeowner insurance has been hard to get or find. The company she was with for over 10
years notified her in February of non-renewal as the carrier was reducing exposure. Her agent,
whom had been with for over 20 years, found her a new company in March with Florida Family.
After completing an application and paying, she was then notified in April that she was ineligible
due to the proximity of a 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 what will happen if the larger 7-11 development is allowed to be built. She, along with
everyone that she knows, does not want or need a gas station or convenience store at this
location. There is one already on the next property, She is concerned for her health, safety and
property values. Accidents already occur regularly. Ms. Cashin presented an aerial that her
insurance company had sent her indicating she was too close to a gas station, and asked the
Commission to please vote no.
Ms. Susan Holler, a realtor with Location Real Estate for 17 years in sales and living in Pirates
Cove for 25 years. realizes there is no mathematical data to prove that back-to-back gas stations
can hurt property values in nearby neighborhoods, but in her experience and opinion this mega
gas station will negatively impact property values in the neighboring subdivisions. She knows
what buyers look for in a property. A large majority of them come from big cities and all tend to
be looking for an escape from the congested bustling cities and for quiet, safe neighborhoods.
This proposed gas station is going to have motorbikes, cars, trucks, boats, semis all maneuvering
to get on and off 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 and light pollution. That won't be possible
with a 24-7 lighted mega station, not to mention the effects of all that light on the local wildlife.
Buyers will say no to a property for a little highway noise, let alone noise from a mega gas
station. In her opinion, surrounding property values will show deterioration in price and sales if
this development is allowed, but by the time that can be proven it will be too late.
Mr. Andrew Tobin lives on Grand Street and regarding this development, which is really a truck
stop, wanted to get a point of order clarified. A Planning Commissioner said that the approval of
the variance has nothing to do with the use of the property, and he asked if he had understood
that correctly. Demes stated that that had been his question. Mr. Tobin stated
that if that is the ruling, then this major conditional use becomes very, very important. Everyone
agrees that going from four driveways to two driveways is a reduction, in theory, but if it's going
from four to two for the highest intensity use that we know of in the Keys then they did not
qualify for a legal hardship, so he is glad the variance does not have anything to do with the use.
Mr. Tobin submitted two prior Planning Commission Resolutions from the late 80s, one in Silver
34
74
Shores for a 2.500 square foot convenience store with two pumps and four stations, similar to the
one in Ke\ Largo next to the elementary school. a very small station. The Planning Director at
the time. Don Craig, approved those and the Planning Commission overturned staff's
recommendation. That was at Silver Shores and Woods Avenue on Plantation Key. The
purpose of submitting the resolutions is toemphasize that one of the sections not covered in the
report is 110-65. authorized conditional uses. "A Planning Commission is empowered within
their review of minor or major conditional use applications respectively to approve, or approve
with conditions, or to deny any application that may not be appropriate within any particular area
in the context of surrounding properties and neighborhoods." That was section (c). Section (a)
says, -The designation of a use in a land Use zoning district as a conditional use does not
constitute an authorization or assurance that such use will be approved," He knows that some of
the Planning Commissioners are not familiar with Grand Street. the Upper Keys, and the
residential areas on Almay Street that are going to look directly into this gas station. He
appeared before the BOCC last month and they are going to hopefully have a moratorium on gas
stations because unlike Collier County which has nine pages specifically directed to gas stations,
lighting pollution, and all the other things that are important, one of' the things that is ver)
common is to have a setback between gas stations, because gas stations are magnets for traffic.
lie would ask for all of the evidence that was provided for the variance to be considered in the
context of this major conditional use. There are man) jurisdictions that have setbacks from
residential areas. Monroe Count) does not have specific regulations on that, but under 110-65.
the Planning Commission has the authority as the final arbiter or judges that decides. Monroe
County does not have specific regulations so it's more difficult to figure out how to protect the
health. safet) and welfare of the community. This is not one gas station being approved. but
basically two gas stations. One has 5,000 square feet of convenience store, the other one has
3.000. This one has I I pumps, the other one has nine Pumps. This is what is at stake here is the
neighborhood is going to be changed. The applicant is not entitled to any particular use or the
highest and best use of propert). That is a zoning concept that everyone is Familiar with. No
property owner is entitled to the highest and best use. especially with traffic safety issues, with
benzene issues. with school bus issues. That segment of Monroe County is a dangerous segment
and is surrounded by a residential area. a stable residential area. All of the evidence that you
heard on traffic safety was not made up. The County's own traffic report that the BOCC 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 a magnet. Cars go in, cars go out at all hours of the night,
they're pulling boats, there are trucks, and they're backing up on the highway. Those are the
things that should be considered in a major conditional use appro%al. The applicant is not
entitled to the highest and best use of the property. There is precedent from Commissioners in
the past. Grace Manillo, John Scharch, Ron Miller. The) were concerned "it h over
development, In the recent years the County has had ROGO and slower growth and allocations.
That's great. but there's still a role for the Planning Commissioners to decide what is an
appropriate use, and under the major conditional use criteria,just because you meet the technical
requirements and just because staff recommends approval under those requirements is not a
substitute for your judgment. Everyone in this room 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 he does not believe the) care much about the local residents. Please
don't set the precedent.
35
75
Commissioner Thomas asked for a coy of Mr. To in's paperwork, which he provided.
Commissioner Ritz thought r° Tobin had raised a goad point about all of the testimony from
Item 3 and whether it would e okay to consider all oft at testimony or if the folks needed to
come up and repeat everything they had said for Item 3. Mr. Wolfe 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 and the Commission can definitely consider those. The community does not
have to get up and repeat everything. Commissioner Ritz wanted the audience to be made aware
at they do not need to repeat all of the prior comments made for Item 3.
s° Jay Martin thanked the Commissioners fortheir time and all of the neighbors and residents
fort sir comments. She has lived in the Rock Harbor area for over 30 years and is familiar with
the different traffic flow. Although is may not generate more traffic, it will generate the
congestion and issues resulting with the use of the property as a 7-1 1 and amulti-pump gas
station. This development brims pollution via air and light. Anyone can Google what it means
to live by a 2 m our convenience store and gas station and can see the responses in the studies. t
doesn't only show increased crime, traffic congestion, risk for pedestrians and accidents. It's
just the nature of the beast with that type of development. Couple t at with the fact that it's next
to another gas station. Ms. Martin is concerned with teemissions in the immediate area with so
any pumps and big tankers filling those pumps. This is an issue for anyone having breathing
concerns and just our quality of life. These reasons are some of the reasons why insurance
companies are rating residences near a gas station ineligible for coverage° If homeowner
coverage cannot be obtained then property owners are going to be in default oftheir mortgages.
If it can be obtained elsewhere there will be a premium increase with more risk. Ms. Cas in
shared her cancelation for ineligibility and she's the tip of the iceberg. That is an adverse impact
on the residents and the neighborhood. This will also affect Landings of largo. She had reached
out to a local insurance company and she asked them to contact the Florida Family group about
insurance for homeowner Vvith regard to a gas station and the reply from the undefwriter was,
e would not be interested in any property near a gas station." If the traffic condition that
already exists in the area worsens as we predict with this use, this area will be a greater hub for
fender benders and worse. accidents with injuries or fatalities. This will adversely impact all
Keys residents to include all that use the bike way and the highway. The bike path there is used
regularly, and people cross the street there to get on the JBT bus. Insurance has always been a
issue though homeowner insurance hasn't, but now it will be, for all ofthese residents, with this
high-impact use. This is the adverse impact on property values that the staff had referenced i
their report that they were not aware of any adverse impacts at this time. She is now putting staff
on notice oft is adverse impact.
s. Ann Helmers referenced Chair Scar elli°s comment regarding the scope concerning safety
and the argument made by the applicant that the curb cuts would simply be needed in any event
even were there to be another business such as Anthony's put into that location. By the
applicant's own traffic study, there is an increase of trips per day at this sits from around 60 to
673. Sothere is no way not to understand and acknowledge that this will be an enormous
increase of traffic stopping, turning, coming in and out. That said, it is interesting and not an
extrapolation to say that we as residents have presented FDOT data showing specifically that this
is a high impact, high traffic, high fatality, high accident area. It is not a stretch of imagination
to say that. If you taste data that exists today and multiply by ten times the number of cars
6
76
making stops and trying to get in and out of a specific area that already has a gas station 40 feet
awa%. it's going to be a problem. This is exactly why we have a Planning Commission because
you all are charged with making those decisions above and beyond what the statutory
requirement may say. It is interesting that the attorney has acknowledged that the applicant has
not yet completed the process of obtaining a final opinion from FDOT. That is the state agency
authorized to evaluate safety and make decisions. It can't be justified that if one agency says
something is okay, then it must be okay.
Ms. Jody Koblenzer rernincled the Commission that Ms. Ronnie Harris had made a presentation
and may not have been aware that Items 3 and 4 had been separated, and asked them to please
recall the fact that she does have studies that she found on the benzene. A high-intensity
business at this site would severely damage the community character. A 24-hour business is
inappropriate. The light 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 the Keys have chosen to live here for the
quality of life. Please consider the impact on their lives today.
Mr. Joe Wrobleski of Rose Street pointed out how much more traffic will be going through this
area. He sat at the Tom Thumb for hours counting cars and on average, in an hour, there's
approximatel% 80 cars going through the To Thumb. He spent several hours at Anthony's and
there's approximately 30 cars that went through Anthony's, and out of the 30, the number that
went into the store were five so most oft ose people were just driving through there. This will
be a hundred-and-some percent increase in the amount of traffic in this area %hich is a major
safety concern. Ile Googled safety concerns on convenience stores and on the FBI report in
2021 and these stores are number four under violent crimes. Number seven is a gas station.
of of the top ten will be in his back yard. lie has not heard one person speak for this
development and he hopes the Commission takes that into consideration.
Mr. JD Carbello disclosed that he spent 35 years working for Marathon Oil. which was part of
Speedway which is now owned by 7-11. It®s already been shown that this is a high-crash
location from marker 96 to 99. and the reason is simple. The light turns green at the CVS,
everyone has been backed up there fora mile or two so when the light turns green and they get
out of that downtown Key Largo area, they're cooking to point south. Conversely. coming up
from Tavernier, you may or may not get trapped at the Harry Harris light, but you're in that 50
mile-per-hour zoning coming north. By Keys standards, you're in the wide open spaces. That's
a 50 mph zone coming north with all the people blasting Out of the traffic light at 101. and this is
a perfect storm of convergence right at mile marker 98. Mr. Carbello presented photographs of
what it looks like to pull out from Grand Street. Mr. Carbello mentioned that he looked for 24-
hour businesses in this neighborhood. To Thumb is one. and you have to go all the way to the
Speedway for the next one that 7-11 owns. There are no other 14-hour businesses in this stretch
of highway. It's dark, quiet and peaceful. The Marathon station closes at 10:00 and Anthon%-*s
at 5:30. _�hls would plunk one right in the middle of these three subdivisions and would be a
great detriment to the quality of life. The community character would change significantly in
that one strip of highway. This shrinkage of the tanker truck and how they're going to get this in
and out. he has the turning software and has run all of the turning diagrams. and it doesn't work.
The \A'B50 doesn't work. Coca-Cola and Frito Lay use W1340, and he Could give an hour talk on
37
77
bets, RVs, ambulances, fire trucks, he's looked at all of them. 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 of them through
there. Then with the 44,000 gallons, you do not fill that up with a teaspoon of truck. That will
need every bit of five to eight tankers to supply those I I pumps. The character will significantly
change. It's the fact of taking a very low-impact, quiet, nice neighborhood store and turning it
into high intensity.
s. Jeanne Brennan who had presented the crash slides earlier stated that if this conditional use
permit is approved crashes will be added on top of what is already there. Some people live only
50 feet away from this proposed site. Any time you enter and exit you®re going to have to slow
down so all of these slaw-downs will increase the passibility for traffic conflicts, and then
exiting the property you have 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 estimates are that it®s much higher. closer to 3,000. The trip counts and
volume of traffic estimated by the applicant is grossly underestimated in her professional opinion
from information publicly available. She believes it's the burden of the applicant to show that
these large trucks in and out will work in this area. The gentleman that taught people horn to
navigate fire trucks says it's not going to work. The neighbor next door at the Marathon station
says it's not going to work with the tanker truck conflicts. Take judicial notice of the Collier
County regulations that require a minimum of a 5 -foot setback, the purpose being to ensure that
facilities with fuel pumps do not adversely impact adjacent land uses, especially residential land
uses. The high levels of traffic, glare and intensity of use associated with facilities with fuel
pumps, 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
conflict with community character. She requests the Commission deny this application.
r. Shannon Connelly stated that the Commission has been presented with an influx of input
from the community and there has been over 60 letters written in opposition to this. He hopes
they have read all of those letters because to his knowledge, there has been no one in support of
this. A compounding fact is this issue with insurance. Fie is still paying on his house and if he
were denied. he would not be able to carry his mortgage, so that would cost him his home, We
know this is going to be detrimental to our environment, value in our own lives and our safety.
All of the things that are going on in the Keys and the amount of change we've seen, much of
which has not been positive, a lot of it has been out of our control, Mr. Donnelly believes the
Commission has been presented with enough evidence and with examples that they would be
justified in saying we do not want this because we are representing our local communities for
their best interests and their safety. He believes the Commission has the obligation to do this.
Just because you can do something because it's legal does not mean it's the right thing to do. Mr.
Connelly, also speaking for his wife, Ms. Rosemary Donnelly, is begging the Commission to not
let this be approved. It is going to cost people their lives.
s. Nancy Truesdale clarified that the Collier County regulations that were put into the record
say that separation from adjacent pump facilities should be 500 feet, and not 50. Allowing this
would certainly adversely affect the character of this 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
78
as this one is because of the Grand Street cut is compounded. Photos were shown of the other
high-use station, the To Thumb. On either side of that To Thumb there is no residential
neighborhood on either side. There is a single house on the southbound side and that's it. The
Torn Thumb was appropriately placed in an area that does not affect the quality of life of local
residents. That is not true for this Anthony's property. Ms. Truesdale asked the Commission to
please vote no.
Ms. Lisa Gahagen asked if the Commission ever went on field trips. She is afraid the
Commission is not going to realize the impact of what 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 up at the light in Key Largo, or trying to get across the street to
go southbound. Adding 7-11 in the median is going to be a nightmare. Ms. Gahagen asked the
Commission to please vote no for this.
Mr. Steve Hartz stated that he is a retired lawyer and he wants to adopt everything that the
residents have said. They ha%e been very eloquent. He cannot add too much. but noted that it
was first stated that FDOT was on board with this idea. Mr. Ramon Sierra of FDOT who is the
traffic services program engineer for this area told the Federation homeowners in a public
meeting that they don't render any opinion until after the County's decision, so that should never
be considered that FDOT has made the decision. That comment b%, the applicant should be
stricken and not used in connection with this or any other application. Also, on page six of the
staff report on the conditional 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 proof under the Commission's rules is on the applicant. The absence of evidence
is a basis for an adverse inference on a fundamental issue. So they haven't really met their
burden and this application has to be denied on that point. It sounds like just a lawyer"s point but
it's actually pretty important. This isn't 7-11 applying. these are the Archers. He has no idea if
they have the ability to create the development outlined.
There was no further public comment. Public comment was closed.
Mr. T% Harris stated that he has been in the position that staff has when there is so much pressure
to recommend denial, yet staff has recommended approval because they have met the criteria for
this major conditional use. If things are just ruled by the number of people that want or don't
want something we probably wouldn't even have a high school in Islamorada. Going through
the Tom Thumb data, no one said there was some extra level of criminal activity happening at
the 24-hour Tom Thumb. Looking at the classification of gas stations and 24-hour stores may be
a relevant feature but the one closest to this has no mention of an elevated crime rate. The traffic
crash data was over a seven-)ear period. which is a long time. As far as community character.
he is not asking for a rezoning or anything that's not already allowed in the zoning classification.
If this was a 2,500 square foot store they wouldn't even be here. Anything over 4.500 square
feet will get kicked up to the Planning Commission because it's considered high intensity. Mr.
L_
Harris doesn't believe 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 testimony and find some to that degree. This project is under contract with 7-
11 so the abilit% to complete the project is not an issue. Mr. Jason Green confirmed that to be
39
79
correct adding that Axis Hutton is very financially capable of completing this project. They have
done 60 to 80 commercial properties per year over a 25-year period and are very able and
financially successful with their projects throughout the U.S. He echoed the comments about the
compatibility component. There are multiple examples up and down U.S. I where gas stations
are in the middle of the two directions and there is the Marathon gas station here. Looking at the
community character requirements in the plan, it talks about similar to adjacent uses. That
means this corridor is ripe for a gas station. There is one there, and he disagrees with some of
the public comments about a gas station that is five feet away from the site not being a problem
for residents but this one is. He does not see how that can be differentiated. All of the County`s
and F OT"s criteria is based on safety and compatibility with the community. Lighting
standards in the code has to be met, landscaping, et cetera. There are a lot of permitting
requirements at the state and federal level that trust be met for underground gas tanks. There
are also monitoring levels and other safety features that are put into place. A lot of what has
been discussed have been alder stations and nonconforming sites that have issues that need to be
corrected. He disagrees with the adjacent property owner saying we will cause them problems
with their fueling. The applicants site plan shows they can get their trucks off the street, fuel
efficiently, and provide access to everyone else using the site. There is no conflict between these
sites. 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 the use,
and the job is to crake sure the criteria are met, which they have. It will be the best looking thing
that`s up and down this corridor right now. He 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 of the community. This use does not cause traffic accidents. Any successful
business that is drawing trips on the roadway is going to have those issues so Ws not a gas
stations Mr. Green hopes the Commission can get past this gas station component as the location
is appropriate.
Chair Scarpelli asked about the site plan and some of the evidence provided showing a boat
trailer at the end of the row of pumps and asked if that was a Rec 90 pump. Mr. Green believed
that it could be a Rec 90 pump but he would have to check. Chair Scarpelli asked if diesel was
being provided at this station, Mr. Green did not know the answer to that. As to the spacing,
there is about 30 feet between the parked vehicle at the end fuel station and the turning path of a
truck where they refill the fuel. Chair Scarpelli stated that the photo was kind of compelling and
that's why he was asking, Mr. Green stated that he was confident in the site circulation, Mr. fan
Rairden added that the traffic study was based on methodology agreed to with the County. They
looked at both weekday and weekend, and morning and afternoon for the peak hour traffic to
accommodate the highest volume of traffic on the road. Gas stations inherently draw traffic that
is already on the roadway. The study looks at new trips and pass-by trips and shows that they
have fret the standards based on the County°s guidelines, and staff agreed.
Commissioner Ritz stated that one of the comments from the public had been that drivers turn
left from the fast lane as opposed to turning right from the slow lane, and asked what
accommodations have been made for turning left from the fast lane. Mr. R.air en 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 not a guideline for providing a
deceleration lane into a site like this, so they did not provide one, Generally, the way FDOT
A
80
looks at the turn lanes in general is when there are multiple lanes of traffic going in one direction
there is an opportunity for a car to move over tote adjacent lane to continue their flow. so it's a
little less stringent on what's required. Commissioner Ritz asked if there were DOT standards
for a four-lane divided highway where you're turning left into an establishment. Mr. Rairden
responded that they were not able to rind that in the guidelines.
There were no further Commission questions for applicant. Ms. Tolpin had no further
comments. Mr. Green wanted to make a closing statement saying that he gets the emotional
outpouring and concern. He has worked on both sides in the public and private sector and has a
lot of respect for the Commission's job, but asked them to please understand the context of this
and rely on the standards of the County.
Mr. John Wolfe explained that there have been a couple of different references on the
Commission's scope of authority and effectively the role of the Planning Commission. The
Commission is not bound by staff s recommendation, as, they know. However, if the
Commission decides to not go with the staff and deny 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 a 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 Commission decides
where to ultimately land, and not a popularity contest or anything extrinsic to what's in the code.
Commissioner Dernes complimented staff, recognizing that they work really hard with this
having a lot of community input. He appreciates owners' rights. This is a very difficult
decision. Technically, the criterion for approval has been met for the Land Development Code,
but he'List got realigned by the attorneys. Before Mr. Wolfe and Mr. Morris spoke. he was 51
percent against and 49 percent for. But now he finds it difficult to find solid criteria put together
by the staff to deny this request and it's unfortunate because he has to sleep at night. He thinks
the right thing to do is to deny it. Being charged with what the attorneys just stated, he is going
to have to vote against this. Mr. Wolfe stated that he was not trying 10 Suggest that the
Commission is bound byte staff report, but that a denial must be stated as being based on not
meeting one of the criteria.
Commissioner Ritz cornmented on Commissioner Dernes' 51 percent, and added that community
character and public safety is a criteria. If it's not appropriate for the area, then the Commission
is allowed to make that determination. As he had been driving through Marathon this week he
appreciated the architecture of all of the new construction with the metal roofs, broad porches,
and thought that Marathon is really turning around and becoming a very attractive part of the
Florida Keys. Then you see the 7-11 and Speedway and it's like a turd in a punchbowl. There's
all of these 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
meet the community character of Marathon and certainly do not fit the community character of
Key right next door. Commissioner rig itz does
Largo, particularly when there is one gas station R
t:� CD
not recall the audience saying the Marathon station was okay and therefore they should not have
another one. He heard that it was not okay and the® didn't want to exacerbate the situation, and
expanding the footprint of the gas station there would be making those problems worse.
Commissioner Ritz was particularly compelled by Ms. Cashin's testimony with the insurance.
41
81
He is not sure staff was aware oft at point, that being that close to a gas station you could lose
your homeowners insurance. That is quite shocking and the neighbors that will be abutting the
new gas station, if it goes in will, also be shocked by that. So that's new information that staff
didn't have, He does not believe staff was aware of the JBT bus station across the street so he's
not sure of the impacts oft at. So new things were learned today, but based on the real estate
values, the community character and public safety, he is going to vote against this.
Commissioner Neugent added that it could not be articulated any better than Commissioner Ritz
had one, and having listened to the people that have made their presentation and expressed their
opposition to of the community character and the safety issue, he will not vote for this either.
Commissioner Thomas stated she lives in Marathon and she has seen what they have done to her
area and it's been a disaster. Commissioner Dernes asked which criteria the insurance issue
would come under. Commissioner Ritz responded that it would be under real estate values.
Commissioner Demes stated that that had 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 thing.
Clearly, staff was very diligent with going through the whole process, and the applicant as well
in doing their due diligence and everybody meeting the criteria. But then, you start to get into
some of these things such as where the community brought Lip very interesting turning radius
graphics that seem to be concerning. They aren't the professional on the job doing the study but
their information is still very useful in making these decisions. You would think that a property
in between two roadways heavily traveled would be an ideal location fora as station rather than
it being actually adjacent to a residential neighborhood because it is like that in other parts oft e
Florida Keys. The public right-of-way is 65 feet on either side oft is gas station and that's quite
the buffer. The landscaping on this project is really well one and you won't even see the
parking lot from the road. Chair Scarpel I i then asked fora motion.
Commissioner its made a motion to deny the request based on this not being appropriate for the
area, it does not meet the community character standards, it has a negative impact on the real
estate values due tote insurance issues, and there is a public safety issue with the traffic.
Commissioner Thomas seconded the motion.
Motion: Commissioner Ritz made a motion to deny as articulated. Commissioner Thomas
seconded the motion.
Roll Call: Commissioner Dames, Yes; Commissioner Thomas, Yes; Commissioner
Neugent, Yes; Commissioner Ritz, Yes; Chair Scar pelli, o® The motion passed 4 to 1.
BOARD DISCUSSION
None.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMENTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The Monroe County Planning Commission meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m.
42
82
83
1 _
2
3
"„ ,s+,,
5 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
6 MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
7
8 ORDINANCE . -2024
9
10 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING
11 MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO NEWLY
12 CREATE SECTION -1 "TAVERNIER KEY
13 COMMERCIAL OVERLAYI I "; INCLUDING
14 AND INTENT, BOUNDARY,APPLICABILITY,NROGO ALLOCATION
15 STANDARDS, AND MAXIMUM NONRESIDENTIAL AND
16 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL; S
17 LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, KEY LARGO,
18 CURRENTLY HAVING PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS
19 00089490-000000 AND - Y LOCATED
20 AT MILE .5; AS PROPOSED BY CEMEX CONSTRUCTION
21 MATERIALS FLORIDA, LLC,
22 PRODUCTS, INC.; PROVIDING FOR SV ; PROVIDING
23 FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR
24 TRANSMITTAL TO THE STATE LAND PLANNING
25INCLUSION N THE
26 MONROE COUNTY CODE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVEATE.
27
28 WHEREAS, on or about March 23, 2022, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental
29 Resources Department received an initial application from Singletary Concrete Products Inc. and Cemex
30 Construction Materials LLC ("Applicants") via their retained agentSmith/Hawks P.L. and from The
31 Vestcor Companies Inc. and Blackstone Group - Tavernier 925 LLC ("Developers"), seeking for the
32 Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (" OCC", "Monroe County", "Board", or the
33 "County") to approve the creation of a Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District ("Commercial
34 Overlay", "Tavernier Commercial Overlay", or "Commercial Overlay District') by approving the
35 creation of Land Development Code ("L C") Section 130-143, including the purpose and intent,
36 boundary, applicability, NROGO allocation standards, and maximum nonresidential and residential
37 development potential for two (2) parcels of land located at 92501 Overseas Highway, Key Largo,
38 currently bearing property identification numbers 0009490-000000 and 00490250-000000 ("subject
39 property"or the "property"); and
40
41 WHEREAS, a corresponding land use district map amendment for the property to apply said
42 Commercial Overlay District was submitted' and is currently being reviewed by the Monroe County
43 Planning and Environmental Resources Department ("Department'); and
44
45 WHEREAS, the proposed text previously received, reviewed and considered was changed
46 (revised)by the Applicant by resubmittal by the Applicant on or about January 19, 2024; and
Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department File No.2022-054.
1 of 8
84
I WHEREAS, an amended and restated text amendment application was received on November
2 20, 2023 (the "amended application" or"application ,)2; and
3 WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the boundary of the Tavernier Livable
4 CommuniKeys Master Plan,a Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97,(the"Monroe
5 County LCP" or"LCP"); and
6 WHEREAS,the subject property is located within the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S.
7 Highway 1 Corridor District Overlay("TC")as identified in the adopted Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker
8 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines ("Monroe County Corridor
9 Development Guidelines" or"Corridor Development Guidelines"); and
10 WHEREAS, the adopted Monroe County Corridor Development Guidelines establish that this
11 property is located in the "Suburban Zone"of the adopted Corridor Development Guidelines; and
12 WHEREAS, the "Suburban Zone" of the established Corridor Development Guidelines is
13 characterized by intermittent occurrences of open space, residential development of diverse densities,
14 and industrial and general commercial uses following a pattern similar to that found in the mainland
15 suburbs; and
16
17 WHEREAS,the vision for this established corridor allows the individual zones to maintain their
18 distinctive characteristics, yet, encourages a unified image of the corridor as a whole, where landscape
19 and the built environment share common elements; and
20
21 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee ("DRC") considered the
22 proposed text amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on October 25, 2022; and
23 WHEREAS, on November 14th, 2022, the Chair of the DRC signed Development Review
24 Committee Resolution No. DRC 13-22 recommending that the Monroe County Planning Commission
25 and Monroe County Board of County Commissioners DENY said amendment to the Monroe County
26 Land Development Code to create this Commercial Overlay District by newly creating Land
27 Development Code Section 130-143; and
28 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department's
29 professional staff report prepared for the Monroe County Planning Commission hearing dated April 13,
30 2023, completed by Assistant Director of Planning Cheryl Cioffari, A.I.C.P., and Principal Planner
31 Devin Tolpin, A.I.C.P., C.F.M., likewise recommends DENIAL of said amendment; and
32 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Planning Commission ("Planning Commission")held a public
33 hearing on April 28, 2023, to review and consider said amendment; and
34 WHEREAS, on April 28, 2023, the Monroe County Planning Commission issued Planning
35 Commission Resolution No. P16-23 recommending that the Monroe County Board of County
36 Commissioners DENY said amendment; and
37
'-Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department File No.2022-053.
2 of 8
85
I WHEREAS, following the public meeting of the Monroe County Development Review
2 Committee, following the public hearing of the Monroe County Planning Commission, and following
3 the DRC's and the Planning Commission's recommendations that the Monroe County Board of County
4 Commissioners DENY the proposed amendment, the Applicant then submitted a revised proposed text
5 amendment to the Planning and Environmental Resources Department on or about January I 9th 2024,
6 for the Board of County Commissioners to consider; and
7
8 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department's
9 professional staff report dated January 23,2024,prepared for the Monroe County BOCC's special public
10 hearing dated February 15,2024, completed by Assistant Director of Planning Cheryl Cioffari, A.I.C.P.,
I I and Planning and Development Review Manager Devin Tolpin, A.I.C.P., C.F.M., recommends that the
12 Monroe County BOCC DENY this proposed text amendment to the Monroe County Land Development
13 Code to create this Commercial Overlay District by newly creating Code Section 130-143; and
14
15 WHEREAS, at a duly noticed special public hearing dated February 15, 2024, the Monroe
16 County Board of County Commissioners considered the foregoing and the Department's most recent
17 professional staff report recommending that the Monroe County BOCC DENY this proposed text
18 amendment to the Monroe County Land Development Code to create this Commercial Overlay District
19 by newly creating Code Section 130-143, and provided for public comment and public participation in
20 accordance with the requirements of state and local law; and
21
22 WHEREAS, based upon the documentation submitted and information provided, including but
23 not limited to the documentation and information furnished in the foregoing Monroe County Planning
24 and Environmental Resources Department's professional staff reports, the Monroe County Board of
25 County Commissioners hereby enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
26
27 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals,Objectives and Policies of the Monroe
28 County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and
29 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the
30 Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes; and
31 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part It of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and
32 4. The subject proposed amendment will not result in an adverse change in community character
33 to the sub-area which a proposed amendment affects or to any area in accordance with the
34 Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan pursuant to findings of the BOCC; and
35 5. The proposed amendment is a necessary adjustment in light of recognition of a need for
36 additional detail or comprehensiveness, incorrect determinations or assumptions or changed
37 conditions as required to approve a change to the text of the Monroe County Land
38 Development Code in accordance with Monroe County Land Development Code Section
39 102-158.
40
41 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
42 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
43
44 Section 1. Recitals and Legislative Intent. The foregoing recitals and determinations, including
45 but not limited this Ordinance's title, are true and correct, and are hereby incorporated as
46 if fully stated herein.
47
3 of 8
86
I Section 2. The above Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department
2 professional staff reports prepared by Assistant Director of Planning Cheryl Cioffari,
3 A.I.C.P., and Planning and Development Review Manager/Principal Planner Devin
4 Tolpin, A.I.C.P., C.F.M., are hereby incorporated as if fully stated herein and their
5 analysis and determinations of fact and law to the extent not plainly inconsistent with this
6 Ordinance are hereby accepted and adopted as if fully stated herein.
7
8 Section 3. The text of the Monroe County Land Development Code is hereby amended as follows
9 (changes (additions) are shown below via the below underlined text):
10
Section 130-143. Tavernier Commercial Overlay District
15 (a) _Purpose and Intent.The purpose of the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District is to implement
16 applicable ,goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and to allow larger-scale
17 nonresidential development in a scarified area of the Upper Keys that primarily serves the needs
18 of permanent residents of the Upper Keys. The intent is to provide accessible nonresidential uses
199 to permanent residents of the Upper Keys, while maintaining the character of Tavernier.
21 (b) Boundary. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be shown as an overlay district on
22 the Official Land Use District map. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be shown
23 as the boundary of the parcels with Monroe County Parcel ID numbers 00490250-000000 and
24 00089490-000000, and depicted in the map below:
25
4of8
87
L. . J,-
Key Largo OLEANDER.
Approx. MM 92.5 -. . ..
... Q ........ . ..u.. ...... .
j I
r
00089490-000000
Mw 00490250-000000
3 (c) Applicability. Development within the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be
54 subject to 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 subject 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 in
14 accordance with the Land Development Code:
15 i. A pedestrian walkway connecting the nonresidential parking area to the right of
16 way known as Orange Blossom Road. Required lighting for the pedestrian
17 walkway must be in 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 exterior property line adjacent to
21 residential uses, not included in this overlay, shall not exceed zero (0) for cutoff
22 and noncutoff lights,with the exception of the pedestrian walkway or any lighting
23 required for life safety, as provided by Monroe County.
24 3. All perty lines adjacent to U.S. 1 shall provide a Class E Scenic Corridor Buffer.
25 4. All development shall be permitted in accordance with the permitted and conditional use
26 requirements of Chapter 130, Article III, Permitted and Conditional Uses.
5 of 8
88
5. Industrial uses are not permitted within the Overlay.
3 (d) Maximum Development Potential.
4 1. There shall be no allocated or maximum net density standard available for residential market-
5 rate or transient dwelling units.
6 2. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be limited to a maximum total development
7 potential of-
8 a. 49,900 square feet of nonresidential floor area; and
9 b. (86) deed restricted workforce housing dwelling units; and
1 c. accessory uses and structures.
12 (e) NROGO Allocations. Notwithstanding Section 138-51, the Tavernier Commercial Overlay
13 District shall have the following NROGO allocation standards provided that the criteria set forth
14 in subsections (fl, (g) and (h) are satisfied:
15 1. Maximum allocation of nonresidential floor area. The amount of nonresidential floor area
16 to be allocated or transferred to the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be limited
17 to a maximum of 49,900 square feet.
18 2. Maximum floor area per structure. A single nonresidential principal structure within the
19 Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be permitted to receive an allocation that
20 expands the structure to more than 10,000 square feet, but not to exceed a maximum of
2� 49,900 square feet of nonresidential floor area.
23 (f) Notwithstanding LDC Sections 139-1(fl, 139-1(g) and 139-1(h), 86 workforce housing units
24 must be provided on-site consisting of 24% (21 units) very low income, 24% (21 units) low
25 income,26%(22 units)median income and 26%(22 units)moderate income.No building_permit
26 shall be issued for a structure receiving an NROGO Allocation or transfer that would expand a
27 nonresidential structure within the Overlay to more than 10,000 square feet unless and until
29 building permits for all 86 workforce housing units have been issued.
30 (g) All new residential units developed within the Overlay shall be subject to the ROGO permit
31 allocation system or transfer of ROGO exemptions of existing lawfully established permanent
32 market rate or affordable dwelling units that have less than five years remaining on the required
33 deed restriction pursuant to Section 138-22(b)4)b.
35 (h) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a nonresidential structure that is more
39 than 10,000 square feet:
38 1. At least 50%(43)of the required 86 workforce housing units must have received a Certificate
39 of Occupancy; and
40 2. At least 50% (43) of the required 86 workforce housing units must have received approved
4� foundation inspections.
43 (i) All other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Tavernier Livable Communikeys Plan, the
44 Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 US Highway Corridor Development Standards and
45 Guidelines and the Land Development Code apply unless express) exempted herein.
46
47 *****
48
49
50
51
6of8
89
I Section 4. Interpretation and Construction. On the basis that laws, decisions, and determinations
2 issued and/or approved pursuant to or made in accordance with Florida Statutes Chapter
3 163 and Chapter 380 and the Monroe County Land Development Code and
4 Comprehensive Plan are not in derogation of the common law, the ordinance approved
5 herewith shall not be interpreted or construed by any administrative tribunal or court of
9 competent jurisdiction as in derogation of the common law.
8 Section 5. Non-Reliance by Third-Parties / Non-Reliance by Third-Parties to Enforce Third-
9 Par!y Claims or Benefits. No third-party natural or legal person(s) shall be entitled to
10 rely upon or utilize any term or provision of this Ordinance to enforce or to attempt to
I I enforce any third-party claim(s) or entitlement(s) to or benefits) from any provision of
12 this Ordinance.
13
14 Section 6. Severbility. If any provision of this Ordinance, or any part or portion thereof, is held to
15 be invalid or unenforceable by any administrative hearing officer or court of competent
16 jurisdiction, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision, or any part or portion
17 thereof,shall neither limit nor impair the operation,enforceability,or validity of any other
18 provision of this Ordinance, or any remaining part(s) or portion(s) thereof. All other
19 provisions of this Ordinance, and remaining part(s) or portion(s) thereof, shall continue
31 unimpaired in full force and effect.
22 Section 7. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are
23 hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. The repeal of an ordinance herein shall not
24 repeal the repealing clause of such ordinance or revive any ordinance which has been
25 repealed thereby.
26
27 Section 8. Transmittal. This Ordinance shall be transmitted to the Florida state land planning
Bagency pursuant to Chapters 163 and 380, Florida Statutes.
30 Section 9. Filing and Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary
31 of State of Florida, but shall not become effective until a notice is issued by the Florida
32 state land planning agency ("Florida Commerce") or Administration Commission
33 finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and if
Pchallenged until such challenge is resolved.
36 Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective as provided by law and stated
37 above.
38
39 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida,
Vat a special public meeting held on the day of 52024.
42 Mayor Holly Merrill Raschein
43 Mayor Pro Tern James K. Scholl
44 Commissioner Craig Cates
45 Commissioner Michelle Lincoln
19 Commissioner David Rice
48 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
49 OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
50
51 By:
52 MAYOR HOLLY MERRILL RASCHEIN
MONROE COUNTY ATTORNEY
7 of 8 �E TO ID JFORM
Date:
90
1
2
3
4
5
6 (SEAL)
7 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK
8
9 By:
10 AS DEPUTY CLERK
8of8
91
The Applicant's proposed text as submitted on January 19, 2024, is shown as follows: additions
are in .blue, underline. Staff edits are shown as follows: additions are in reel t'l,"ji""n(I erl i lie and
deletions are
ection 130 143. Tavernier Commercial Overla District
e of the 1averrder Commercial Overt District is to
(a) .L' p e and Intent. The RUM
goals j--ob Lctilv2L, i��s oL 9 n Uin—iiLd to-s--�n -mL-
ied a rea,of Lh 1 st
er �e a q. scarifi
fjdM qr il y..�gy��. t-,s he o needs
.......... ................. !z............of .�wLt�(unt residents of' t gys. The intent is to
pLqv kfe,accessible nonresidential uses to )q qLigLiLresidenls of,,the 1-j cr whHe
,M.,, intaining 1!i(Lcharaig.ter of Tavernier,
.................................................
(b) Lioundary. The Tavernier Commercial Civeriqy, 1.2Lst over La\�
&trict on the Official Land Use Dist,rict Corrin-wricial Overlav District
shaH be shown as the bound al the r-�els with Mo
Parcel It.) nurnbers
00490250 000000 and 00089490-000000. and ij.ni.c.t.ed in the rna
......................... "I....................
OLEANDER—DR
.F
Key Largo .................. .. .....
..........Approx. MM 925 ..........
............
[HE,
............ fli I ....... ...... .....................
...................................................... I L I I
0
..........
...........
...............
... .................
. ............
.............
.......... ...........................
00089490-000000
00490250-000000
(c) A lcA!LfljjL. -)�yelq inegit within the�r-,tvg.EniLiLCommercial QvgLa District shall be
"iqb'ect to the following 5.1�1!2dAr
.................... ..
Exhibit 3 Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
92
I. An aniendment to the Official L.an.d Use District al M L ).-is recLuired an(,]SLIC.11 oyerlLA� shOl
be shown on the Official Laind LJse District k1k).
..... .......The deve I in 2 non e lresidenl[W structure that contains m W)OO ore than 1
...........................
s.q et within the Overlay District shall be skjNqqj� j!jg terns arld con&tioris of
Linn�iL)L)z(Lv�LcL[)ea lL��Miejit AgIL nerq efined in sections 110 13 2, 1 l 0-1�.3 3, and g
inut s nlchude:
......................................................
a. Provisions for the d rent of 86 workforce hOUSi qHrngL wsand
b, Preferred fbir essential workers of the work once Ullits and
c. A _W rgygd s�it t includes the 1611lowing., 1.1irements
................
in accordance with the ➢L,and Qev j U)" im e n t""'Code:
...........
i, A--WLd L,.,tr itk i I Lw )nrLectLm,, lie ononL siALi� Ekjg�j�
jlgguL 131�1 sorn Road. Re tAir d li L Lll>
.......................................... ...q................ PR_[LL-
p e,(je s' IrILISt The in c
a fianc'e ith 2hmLtLLI-L4.A—rficle V-L
__trian
ii, YILSOMLL- Ljiapte�
!14 AA.i C!��.........V L, .�s.u4.c. h.. ➢iJ�htirq!�shall�bcde�si !2g�d a n..d I oc a t.c d s tA q h. t 1]al t e-
maximuni, illurnination meaSUred in footcandles it
e se jjLL� residentlal u �, io n�.j ided in this ov L not
..................—..— _L_Lj_ _L it ---
exceed zero_(a["�.y__cqtofj'and noncutoff i-'I-Lt�. With the ex ption of tile-UL - - I -N,
u i red flor,jift- a j]Lrgyjde b
o i ii.r..o e ti n t.,L............... . ........... ......
3 A I I j2i.T.) _j.j-ne-._AjVaLgjl.....t.......t o.....LL.......S, I sha.11 u°unviafe..au Class E..Scenic Corridor Buffer,
....
4. All deye Gar pjj,je �sh,gLLLk EMLItted in accordance With ttLepLe Li1j,!,Lqd and conditional
.............................. ..........
Li� gj rrenients of'Chap.LeL.,j,'..�(L Article AILPernjtteld and Conditionai Uses.
5, Indust rial uses e ar not-p hie OyerlA)�� 1,g Koi-4_Ep)i1ted within t
............
M
oft-t4RI+'I-10
(d) Maximum Deve as inent Potential.
standard available for residential f. There shall be no allocated or maximurn net
'-.-........................... ................................................. ...................
market-rate or transient dwellin 1 units,,
.............
2. The Taven'lier Comniercial OverIqLQLisiIjq shall be ➢fiiin�ted to a maxinigni total
...................................
a. I-L),9QQ_�-�L�4L_,feet of nonresidential floor are a. arld
Via. k �deed�restricredwo�rkforce�hoys�in-,j :�".jfi
c, accessory-uses and structures.
(e) NROGO Allocations. Notwitfistanding5��cniaanx ➢3 -ill �fa� �auv�rrnrcn Lcl!llai(��L
Qv E➢ District Shall�haye the aj,L��Kgion standards pKgyided that the
4�� — ......................................................:........................
criteria set f"arth in subsections Lf)., 121 e satisfied:
L Maximum allocation ofrionresidential floor area. The arnount of'rion reside ntial floor
arr.-a to be allocated or transferred to Ithe Tavernier Commercial Overia
y [2.istria shal I
..........................
The hrn4ed to a maximuni OfA(�) (.LO.square fect,
I maxinium floor.,,L structure. A s.tjjigjle nonresldenflai I 11[ij l s geture w4hill
...........➢....................................................................- - L ----�
theTavernier Corrunercial Overla,� District shall gp.Lq!�4 to r,eceive arit allocation
.............
Exhibit Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
93
, but rj, t to exceed a� —Q................................................................................
maxiTnum 499 ��fqet of nonresidential floor at."ea.
..................... ............
(f) Notwiffistandin l.j.)C Section,s1,319-1 19
....... _workfor(a hoti—'
unillsnIUA be I -SUC COIISiSfirlL) inn o-n 2 4 11,�
—...k(2
jirdt,�,�'Jj�..�Ajncome, 2611,,o, 2.,u it. )jjj�jian incorne ard WIN) modc,,rate inconw.
...-1- 9 -2- ...................
issued for a sn ucture receMp.&.,�gj NOG Allocation or
...............................................-,----,—
transfer that would x d a nonresidential structure within the Overla to more than
Alaj Uare fect. Ufflqss and Until bUildin.p ousi q gMlits for all 86 workfoirce� h
......................................................................... ................... ............................................
d 4- S0110 have been iSSL fX- -be'-wiWea
——-——- --------------------- ...........
(g) All new residential units de e o ed withan the"()OyrerL� di-str-kt shall b slj ect to the
...................--............................................................................................................................................ ............................................................... --------—..................................
L�LQQD jLgrnit allocation �j��LeLn_j2Ltrqnsfer of ROGOSNempti� s..
—-——---------------------.........- ?nL
Lsaa blushe amerunauiruenLiLnqrkct raL oLi�, affbirdable dwellirIg units t1hat have less than five
. ...................................
i !g�SjRj Lia, restrictJon auuay a raato Section 13& b,
(h) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of.Occupanc , gonresidential Structure that is Aj ..............
Ingre than 10,090 feet:
I. At least 01,,o p�q!�ir d 86 workft.) io Lmkqnits must have rec.eived a rce
eiicate of 0 C tiF gna inn I At least 501% 1()�.work fo rce housin mits eived
I.i..r p uj foundation in..........
0) A!Lg±qsii�KLs- a, jqy��Lnier I.Jivable Coi2j!:!jj!DjhM l tg
the'Favernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 US I ligtr�yqy 'on odor Develo___pftigq Standards and
(.-hddelines and the L..and ve➢o
mgj��,VRII unfe—ris ex)r
Exhibit 3 Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
94
95
Liz Yongue
From: Gomez-Krystal <Gomez-Krystal@MonroeCounty-FL.Gov>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2024 9:45 AM
To: Ballard-Lindsey; County Commissioners and Aides; Senior Management Team and
Aides; Hurley-Christine; Gambuzza-Dina; Rosch-Mark; Clark-Richard; Beyers-John;
Kevin Madok; Pamela G. Hancock; Liz Yongue; Pam Radloff; Gastesi-Roman; Shillinger-
Bob; Williams-Jethon; Cioffari-Cheryl; Livengood-Kristen; Rubio-Suzanne;
County-Attorney; Allen-John; Pagidas-Naomi; Saenz-Stephanie; Brouillette-Marie
Subject: Item 131 BOCC 02/15/2024 SPECIAL MEETING REVISED BACK-UP
Attachments: Proposed Revised Langauge Cemex LDC Overlay.pdf, Exhibit 4 Draft Ordinance.pdf
Good morning,
Please be advised,the agenda item back-up has been revised for item B1.
"PUBLIC HEARINGS: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."
Agenda item back-up is attached.
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 onryec_ u�n1yy: .....gpy
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
The Applicant's proposed text as submitted on January 19, 2024, is shown as follows: additions
are in blue undedine. Staff edits are shown as follows: additions are in i h n�,^ and
deletions are i d
Sec�fifioli� 130 143. Tvivelrlq�ielr
(a) llql�el9t! "I"he u21" th e I'av ern i er C,om M crej aj Qv(,J ay Di stri ct i s to,
imp1grngiij gpj)1j(:" le a g�2gj�a ve,
b i S, and pa2fi cj es of the C"ornpEgbt,nsi ve P]an and to
aflow Igger sca]e nonresidential (1�,Yelopment in a. scarified area. of"th(:, IJ po:,E 1�(:,,y s that.
pLimaIlly serves the negds of p�,rmanent residents of" the !1po't, Keys� "I"he intent is to,
pl-9vide accessible nonreential uses to pgj,manentsiden rets of"the lJ ppgj- Kgy y�, � bjle
mainta,ining jhg �:,hara.ctsider ofFa.vernier.,
Olt) P2!lndAry! "I"he "Ya.vernier Commercia] CMday District sha,11 be shown as an overlay,
district on the Of'ficia] Land 1-Ne Commercia] 0, verlay District
sha,11 be shown as the boundau u2111, pqL glra uyjth Monroe Counly Parcel 11) numbers,
00490250 000000 and 00089490 000000, and depicted in the Map below:
............ L-LLLL-L...L....L—j I.........................----jj.......
OLEANDER DR
KeyIL,argo ..................... ........ ...........................E
Approx. 12.5 ................................
.................... ..........
...............
i' .......................
a ..............
Li ............. ................ ............................
LU
0 ......................
.......... ....................
............... .... ....
paid �
tm
UHANUE 13LOSSUMI
j
00089490-000000
Ile
IN
004�90250-,000000
(c) Appfl(alll ouu it Lhvelop!22glt Within theTavernier('ollit-nercial Overlay Qkstrict shall N,
SLO ect to the Following ,t (1, A,-
)j �ja I al ,s 1.
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
I. An amendment to the Official an d Use DistrictM lip I�ilqllinldatl d such overlay �11'111
be shown on the Official I"Ind Use 12istrict M'112:
I The developijigiij Q�" g �Jtlgjg notiresidential structure that contains, ITIore than 10,000
feet Within the Ovei'lay Dktri('t shall be SuLuect to the terniss and conditions of,
'Itl 111TE(MId Developl!)g!)i Agnellient ass defined it, sections...all 1,32, 110 1,33 and
I N
must iticlude-.
s l)f figM -
gin. Provision forthedevelopigI)l(J0orkforc ousing and
r ! ! d sb Pferred eassing � Ifl ssor eentiaworkersofth workf()TCC it It an d
c� At] apj?E(�ygd sitg phin that includess the followitIg In addition to afl site 1-eqMIEg!]!gt1tss
In accordance With the I"Ind I cycloP122git Code-
i. A pgjgsstrjan walkway g�fl!)g('tjt1g the notiressidential gnu tking area to the
1-il-11! �A' "m hmnvll �ss Oratigg !flgssom Roa(L Regqj1-ed figlnting 6 or the.
pg(jgsstrjan walkway IDMg I24n In compliance with (ImIgg- I I 4N Article V1,
H jightiM' is P]-Qpgsed� In addition to 111 1-egq!Eg!22g1t '11
� 1112igl
I 14N ArLic ,h VIN ssu(ji figIlling shall be dessig!)g(I and located such that the
111aximum djunlination Illeassured In footcandless at any j2i-Qpgl-� ..
fitle a& gtlt to ressidential ussesN not Included In thiss oveflayN �nIigjj fl(n!
exceed zero (I1) 661- cutoff, and noticutoff, I gjqs w le exceplIgD ith tt o F, th e,
pg�jgsstrjan walkway QE gj)y figlIting]-NIJI-ed for I I fe sa F'Cly, gs p]-ovj ded by
Monroe Coutl!y�
-owny fitle$ 'Idjacctlt to tj s I shall j?!Qyjde a Class F, scenic Corridor Buffer,
3 ll pi 's
4. All develo12121git shall be P4 u-111jued In accordance With the pg-111jued and cotldjtjotlaj
IISC T4 q9IE9Mgt1tss of,("haigg- 1,30N Article HIN Permitted and Conditional tjsses,
5. Industrial ussess are not Pg-ElItLed Within the Ovellal
slieh 4nme as a 1)11nkhtlt pemlIt is isslie('l Awthe nonFes4lew�'fl
I,ee�r
(d) N1,axinumn
........................................................................................................................................................
L I'llere shall be no '41ocated or 111axil Ilum net denssila tan lard available for ressidentiat
mark et rate or tran ss I en t dw el 1!D g Milt iss
2 The Tavernier Commercial Overlay 12istrict shall be finlited to a 111aximum total
an 41L900 ssgq�]-e floorarea; and
b. (�()dggd restricted Work force housing d ygjfitlg MI)IIss; and
C� (ICCCSSOTY USCS and sstructuress�
(c) l „ I0 Allocatioins. Notwithstanding 5g�jjotl 1,38
L' I'aVernier (�oITI III erciat
Ovgjgy Qistrict shall have the following Nj��XiO allocation standarch's J?E(nYjded that the.
criteria set for[h In sub secti( t s (20 �fl d(!I) (11 C sa
2 1 $( ti h4 d
1. Maximum allocation oftionressidential floor area. The floor
area to be allocate xl�or tratissferred to the Tavernier Commercial Ov4�Ijay 12istrict sshajj.
be fimited to a maximum o6,49N900 smare feet,
I Maximum floor area pg- sstructur4 A singIg 11(21n6;,ss4detltial pl-iflljpaj structure Within
the Tavernier Commercial Overlay Qistrict shall be pg-111JUed to receive an allocation
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
11191 9'NNIDOS 111C SITUCtUre to III ore than 10,000 sqqgE� klet but not to exceed a
:� n
maximum o 41L900 sg!r9E9 floorarea,
(1) Ns)twIthstancfit r,- LDL cn!Ions 139 1(D, U2 and 139 1(U), �; wo2LIJorce housIng,
unIts must be p�S�yIded on cute consIsfing Q11 24'yq (2 u iqjIts) yeLy VQ y Income, 24%)
unIts) �s2w Income, 20%) (,22 !jLlIts) I!n .fian Income and 20% (,22 )jLlIts) I!S2n1�Late u'ncoale
No budding pgrmit shall be Issued for a structure receiving an NROGO Allocation oc
transfer that Would expand a nonresidential structure within the Overha-Y to ITIore than
10,000 sqqgEg feet unjess, and until budding pg-Mits, for all 80 workforce liol�tslng qflq�
have been issual, vv�2(9.V2 [)n La414S skaH not be ImFeasonab� y w4khekl,
GO All fln vy L'S , 'I] units devejop )! within the o0verkly 4j shall be sub'ect to the
j
ROGO pgrillit allocation ssyggll or transfer of, ROGO of, existing lg yfuljy
establisslied pg-nlanent market rate or affordable dwelfing
!ifl I t� th,It have less than five
yg,ir� reiDgMID9 QD the reggired deed restrictio: n pg]-ssuant to Section 1,'1)8!!!!2 )
20 )(4)L
(h) Ejor to the Issuance of, a Cel-Lificate of, Q(,(,uP,1t)cy for a nonressidential structure that iss
III on, than I 0,000 ss%!�9E9
( ) feet-.
' 80 w in aI. At eas 50vo (42 g� C Ired kfehs $ he
I t c -L an d
�Ey Certj h cate o F,()(,(,uW I
ave Ie-I At least 50�' 4 of4he AH nUji-ed 80 workfolce u ho sin III ust 11, , ceived
,Ipp]-ove d foundatjQil
0) All otli ,E J?E(9YIssjonss of,the Comp]-chenssive Plan., Tavernier Livable Conllllutljkey pjgfl,
the'Favernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 US I ljjjj�y9y �''orrjd I ,
I or )�,Vu,,
Jop!21glt standal-Oss and.
Guidefiness and the � "Ind Developl!)g!)l( )n�jg apply MI)Igss exp]-C)�)Jy g2Sg!DPjgd herejn�
Exhibit 3.Proposed Text with Staff Recommended Edits(File 2023-053)
-n
{r
3
4
5 MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
6 MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
7
8 ORDINANCE NO. -2024
9
10 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE
11 MONROE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO NEWLY
12 CREATE SECTION 130-143 TO CREATE A "TAVERNIER KEY
13 COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRICT"; INCLUDING THE PURPOSE
14 AND INTENT, BOUNDARY, APPLICABILITY, NROGO ALLOCATION
15 STANDARDS, AND MAXIMUM NONRESIDENTIAL AND
16 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL; FOR PARCELS
17 LOCATED AT 92501 OVERSEAS HIGHWAY, KEY LARGO,
18 CURRENTLY HAVING PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS
19 00089490-000000 AND 00490250-000000, APPROXIMATELY LOCATED
20 AT MILE MARKER 92.5;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
28 WHEREAS, on or about March 23, 2022, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental
29 Resources Department received an initial application from Singletary Concrete Products Inc. and Cemex
30 Construction Materials LLC ("Applicants") via their retained agent Smith/Hawks P.L. and from The
31 Vestcor Companies Inc. and Blackstone Group - Tavernier 925 LLC ("Developers"), seeking for the
32 Monroe County Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC", "Monroe County", "Board", or the
33 "County") to approve the creation of a Tavernier Key Commercial Overlay District ("Commercial
34 Overlay", "Tavernier Commercial Overlay", or "Commercial Overlay District") by approving the
35 creation of Land Development Code ("LDC") Section 130-143, including the purpose and intent,
36 boundary, applicability, NROGO allocation standards, and maximum nonresidential and residential
37 development potential for two (2) parcels of land located at 92501 Overseas Highway, Key Largo,
38 currently bearing property identification numbers 00089490-000000 and 00490250-000000 ("subject
39 property" or the"property"); and
40
41 WHEREAS, a corresponding land use district map amendment for the property to apply said
42 Commercial Overlay District was submitted' and is currently being reviewed by the Monroe County
43 Planning and Environmental Resources Department("Department"); and
44
45 WHEREAS, the proposed text previously received, reviewed and considered was changed
46 (revised)by the Applicant by resubmittal by the Applicant on or about January 19, 2024; and
'Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department File No.2022-054.
1 of 8
I WHEREAS, an amended and restated text amendment application was received on November
2 20, 2023 (the "amended application" or"application")2; and
3 WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the boundary of the Tavernier Livable
4 CommuniKeys Master Plan, a Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97, (the"Monroe
5 County LCP" or"LCP"); and
6 WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 U.S.
7 Highway 1 Corridor District Overlay("TC")as identified in the adopted Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker
8 97 U.S. Highway 1 Corridor Development Standards and Guidelines ("Monroe County Corridor
9 Development Guidelines" or"Corridor Development Guidelines"); and
10 WHEREAS, the adopted Monroe County Corridor Development Guidelines establish that this
11 property is located in the "Suburban Zone" of the adopted Corridor Development Guidelines; and
12 WHEREAS, the "Suburban Zone" of the established Corridor Development Guidelines is
13 characterized by intermittent occurrences of open space, residential development of diverse densities,
14 and industrial and general commercial uses following a pattern similar to that found in the mainland
15 suburbs; and
16
17 WHEREAS,the vision for this established corridor allows the individual zones to maintain their
18 distinctive characteristics, yet, encourages a unified image of the corridor as a whole, where landscape
19 and the built environment share common elements; and
20
21 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Development Review Committee ("DRC") considered the
22 proposed text amendment at a regularly scheduled meeting held on October 25, 2022; and
23 WHEREAS, on November 14th, 2022, the Chair of the DRC signed Development Review
24 Committee Resolution No. DRC 13-22 recommending that the Monroe County Planning Commission
25 and Monroe County Board of County Commissioners DENY said amendment to the Monroe County
26 Land Development Code to create this Commercial Overlay District by newly creating Land
27 Development Code Section 130-143; and
28 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department's
29 professional staff report prepared for the Monroe County Planning Commission hearing dated April 13,
30 2023, completed by Assistant Director of Planning Cheryl Cioffari, A.LC.P., and Principal Planner
31 Devin Tolpin, A.LC.P., C.F.M., likewise recommends DENIAL of said amendment; and
32 WHEREAS,the Monroe County Planning Commission("Planning Commission")held a public
33 hearing on April 28, 2023, to review and consider said amendment; and
34 WHEREAS, on April 28, 2023, the Monroe County Planning Commission issued Planning
35 Commission Resolution No. P16-23 recommending that the Monroe County Board of County
36 Commissioners DENY said amendment; and
37
2 Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department File No.2022-053.
2of8
I WHEREAS, following the public meeting of the Monroe County Development Review
2 Committee, following the public hearing of the Monroe County Planning Commission, and following
3 the DRC's and the Planning Commission's recommendations that the Monroe County Board of County
4 Commissioners DENY the proposed amendment, the Applicant then submitted a revised proposed text
5 amendment to the Planning and Environmental Resources Department on or about January 19th 2024,
6 for the Board of County Commissioners to consider; and
7
8 WHEREAS, the Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department's
9 professional staff report dated January 23, 2024,prepared for the Monroe County BOCC's special public
10 hearing dated February 15, 2024, completed by Assistant Director of Planning Cheryl Cioffari,A.LC.P.,
11 and Planning and Development Review Manager Devin Tolpin, A.LC.P., C.F.M., recommends that the
12 Monroe County BOCC DENY this proposed text amendment to the Monroe County Land Development
13 Code to create this Commercial Overlay District by newly creating Code Section 130-143; and
14
15 WHEREAS, at a duly noticed special public hearing dated February 15, 2024, the Monroe
16 County Board of County Commissioners considered the foregoing and the Department's most recent
17 professional staff report recommending that the Monroe County BOCC DENY this proposed text
18 amendment to the Monroe County Land Development Code to create this Commercial Overlay District
19 by newly creating Code Section 130-143, and provided for public comment and public participation in
20 accordance with the requirements of state and local law; and
21
22 WHEREAS, based upon the documentation submitted and information provided, including but
23 not limited to the documentation and information furnished in the foregoing Monroe County Planning
24 and Environmental Resources Department's professional staff reports, the Monroe County Board of
25 County Commissioners hereby enters the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
26
27 1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Monroe
28 County Year 2030 Comprehensive Plan; and
29 2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the Principles for Guiding Development for the
30 Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern, Section 380.0552(7), Florida Statutes; and
31 3. The proposed amendment is consistent with Part 11 of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and
32 4. The subject proposed amendmentwill not result in an adverse change in community character
33 to the sub-area which a proposed amendment affects or to any area in accordance with the
34 Tavernier Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan pursuant to findings of the BOCC; and
35 5. The proposed amendment is a necessary adjustment in light of recognition of a need for
36 additional detail or comprehensiveness, incorrect determinations or assumptions or changed
37 conditions as required to approve a change to the text of the Monroe County Land
38 Development Code in accordance with Monroe County Land Development Code Section
39 102-158.
40
41 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
42 COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
43
44 Section 1. Recitals and Legislative Intent. The foregoing recitals and determinations, including
45 but not limited this Ordinance's title, are true and correct, and are hereby incorporated as
46 if fully stated herein.
47
3 of 8
I Section 2. The above Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department
2 professional staff reports prepared by Assistant Director of Planning Cheryl Cioffari,
3 A.LC.P., and Planning and Development Review Manager/Principal Planner Devin
4 Tolpin, A.LC.P., C.F.M., are hereby incorporated as if fully stated herein and their
5 analysis and determinations of fact and law to the extent not plainly inconsistent with this
6 Ordinance are hereby accepted and adopted as if fully stated herein.
7
8 Section 3. The text of the Monroe County Land Development Code is hereby amended as follows
9 (changes (additions) are shown below via the below underlined text):
10
11 *****
12
14 Section 130-143. Tavernier Commercial Overlay District
15 (a) Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District is to implement
16 applicable goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and to allow larger-scale
17 nonresidential development in a scarified area of the Upper Keys that primarily serves the needs
18 of permanent residents of the Upper Keys. The intent is to provide accessible nonresidential uses
20 to permanent residents of the Upper Keys, while maintaining the character of Tavernier.
21 (b) Boundary. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be shown as an overlay district on
22 the Official Land Use District map. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be shown
23 as the boundary of the parcels with Monroe County Parcel ID numbers 00490250-000000 and
24 00089490-000000, and depicted in the map below:
25
4of8
.,.
OLEANDER era N
Prey (Largo
Approx.4 MIM 92.5 :. ..
�Il ...
II
I� d
00089490-000000
.... µ ,o
44
�N
° 00490250-000000
3 (c) Applicability. Development within the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be
5 subject to 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 subject 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 in
14 accordance with the Land Development Code:
15 i. A pedestrian walkway connecting the nonresidential parking area to the right of
16 way known as Orange Blossom Road. Required lighting for the pedestrian
17 walkway must be in 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 exterior property line adjacent to
21 residential uses, not included in this overlay, shall not exceed zero (0) for cutoff
22 and noncutoff lights,with the exception of the pedestrian walkway or any li _ghting
23 required for life safety, as provided by Monroe County.
24 3. All property lines adjacent to U.S. 1 shall provide a Class E Scenic Corridor Buffer.
25 4. All development shall be permitted in accordance with the permitted and conditional use
26 requirements of Chapter 130, Article III, Permitted and Conditional Uses.
5of8
2 5. Industrial uses are not permitted within the Overlay_
3 (d) Maximum Development Potential.
4 1. There shall be no allocated or maximum net density standard available for residential market-
5 rate or transient dwelling_ units.
6 2. The Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be limited to a maximum total development
7 potential of:
8 a. 49,900 square feet of nonresidential floor area, and
9 b. (86) deed restricted workforce housing dwelling units, and
10 c. accessory uses and structures.
11
12 (e) NROGO Allocations. Notwithstanding Section 138-51, the Tavernier Commercial Overlay
13 District shall have the following NROGO allocation standards provided that the criteria set forth
14 in subsections (f), (g) and (h) are satisfied:
15 1. Maximum allocation of nonresidential floor area. The amount of nonresidential floor area
16 to be allocated or transferred to the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be limited
17 to a maximum of 49,900 square feet.
18 2. Maximum floor area per structure. A single nonresidential principal structure within the
19 Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be permitted to receive an allocation that
20 expands the structure to more than 10,000 square feet, but not to exceed a maximum of
22 49,900 square feet of nonresidential floor area.
23 (f) Notwithstanding LDC Sections 139-1(f), 139-1(g) and 139-1(h), 86 workforce housing units
24 must be provided on-site consisting of 24% (21 units) very low income, 24% (21 units) low
25 income,26%(22 units)median income and 26%(22 units)moderate income.No building permit
26 shall be issued for a structure receiving an NROGO Allocation or transfer that would expand a
27 nonresidential structure within the Overlay to more than 10,000 square feet unless and until
29 building permits for all 86 workforce housing units have been issued.
30 (g) All new residential units developed within the Overlay shall be subject to the ROGO permit
31 allocation system or transfer of ROGO exemptions of existing lawfully established permanent
32 market rate or affordable dwelling units that have less than five years remaining on the required
34 deed restriction pursuant to Section 138-22(b)(4)b.
35 (h) Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a nonresidential structure that is more
37 than 10,000 square feet:
38 1. At least 50%(43)of the required 86 workforce housing units must have received a Certificate
39 of Occupancy; and
40 2. All required 86 workforce housing units must have received approved foundation
42 inspections.
43 (i) All other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, Tavernier Livable Communikeys Plan, the
44 Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 US Highway Corridor Development Standards and
45 Guidelines and the Land Development Code apply unless expressly exempted herein.
46
47 *****
48
49
50
51
6of8
I Section 4. Interpretation and Construction. On the basis that laws, decisions, and determinations
2 issued and/or approved pursuant to or made in accordance with Florida Statutes Chapter
3 163 and Chapter 380 and the Monroe County Land Development Code and
4 Comprehensive Plan are not in derogation of the common law, the ordinance approved
5 herewith shall not be interpreted or construed by any administrative tribunal or court of
6 competent jurisdiction as in derogation of the common law.
8 Section 5. Non-Reliance by Third-Parties / Non-Reliance by Third-Parties to Enforce Third-
9 Party Claims or Benefits. No third-parry natural or legal person(s) shall be entitled to
10 rely upon or utilize any term or provision of this Ordinance to enforce or to attempt to
11 enforce any third-parry claim(s) or entitlement(s) to or benefit(s) from any provision of
12 this Ordinance.
13
14 Section 6. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance, or any part or portion thereof, is held to
15 be invalid or unenforceable by any administrative hearing officer or court of competent
16 jurisdiction, the invalidity or unenforceability of such provision, or any part or portion
17 thereof,shall neither limit nor impair the operation,enforceability,or validity of any other
18 provision of this Ordinance, or any remaining part(s) or portion(s) thereof. All other
19 provisions of this Ordinance, and remaining part(s) or portion(s) thereof, shall continue
20 unimpaired in full force and effect.
21
22 Section 7. Repeal of Inconsistent Provisions. All ordinances in conflict with this Ordinance are
23 hereby repealed to the extent of said conflict. The repeal of an ordinance herein shall not
24 repeal the repealing clause of such ordinance or revive any ordinance which has been
25 repealed thereby.
26
27 Section 8. Transmittal. This Ordinance shall be transmitted to the Florida state land planning
29 agency pursuant to Chapters 163 and 380, Florida Statutes.
30 Section 9. Filin2 and Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the Secretary
31 of State of Florida, but shall not become effective until a notice is issued by the Florida
32 state land planning agency ("Florida Commerce") or Administration Commission
33 finding the amendment in compliance with Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, and if
34 35 challenged until such challenge is resolved.
36 Section 10. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective as provided by law and stated
37 above.
38
39 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida,
440 at a special public meeting held on the day of , 2024.
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
48 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
49 OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
50
51 By:
52 MAYOR HOLLY MERRILL RASCHEIN
7of8
1
2
3
4
5
6 (SEAL)
7 ATTEST: KEVIN MADOK, CLERK
8
9 By:
10 AS DEPUTY CLERK
MONROF COUNTY e Y
OI
RM
m * I" S�.m
'Date:
8of8
' tr
or
ree
Tal(v,,ern.ier
Ma
JIjamer-
: r � gi : s n n "c � ta tle
Februiry 16,2005,
fair r '
�
r
F '
/
Mcinw. ," I r Pl .nn"img& Flavilofig enf I Resources Mpartmoit,and.
p "' wl a
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
I%
f B„
MASTER
��%i%J%P(ul, e 114„ iir J �,dry I�JIr
FOR TAVERNIER QREE
TO MILE MARKER
2004.2024
o ; //
wr
rip all l % l
Ir,:--„IrJ(���/ f Illlllllllllll%ll %////// oa0i11
l% if' % Y
Prepared b io
yf % r P
/ qp
/went of Planning ental Resources
with
Vlarlew,Conaway, Planning Director and Proj' �
David Dacquisto Upper Keyszr for
Jeff Stuncard Principal Plan "'% /
Maureen Lackey, Senior Planner
Robert Will, Senior Planner
Heather Cotton, Planner
Jason King, Planner
Kim Rohrs, GIS Planner
2
Community Vision
We envision the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 Planning Area as:
An island community committed to preserving its heritage, natural setting
and stands of native tropical hardwood hammocks, with improvements to
the visual character of the U.S. 1 corridor, limited redevelopment of commer-
cial properties, and neighborhoods where residents have access to the water
and recreational facilities.
3
Executive Summary
The Livable CommuniKeys Program is the local community planning initiative of the Monroe
County Planning Commission and the Planning & Environmental Resources Department. The
Livable CommuniKeys program is the forum in which community and redevelopment plans that
offer a clear direction for each community's future are prepared. This Master Plan has been cre-
ated for the planning area of Tavernier Creek Bridge to approximately Mile Marker 97 of unin-
corporated Monroe County. Over the last four years, the residents and property owners of the
planning area have met with Monroe County Planning Staff to identify the needs and desires of
the community for future development and preservation of the planning area.
Objective 101.20 of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan states that "Monroe County shall
address local community needs while balancing the needs of all Monroe County communities.
These efforts shall focus on the human crafted environment and shall be undertaken through the
Livable CommuniKeys Planning Program." The Planning Department, with Policy 101.20.1,
was charged with the task of designing a Community Master Plan for the Tavernier Creek to
Mile Marker 97 area.
The creation of this document involved coordination with local agencies and reports already cre-
ated such as the Stormwater Master Plan, Monroe County Seven Year Roadway and Bicycle
Path Plan, Monroe County Wastewater Master Plan, Florida Keys Scenic Highway and Over-
seas Heritage Trail, 1990 and 2000 U.S. Census Reports and District Six FDOT projects and
others. This plan utilizes current conditions for the following areas: Land Use; Transportation,
Parks and Recreation, Community Facilities, Environmental Resources; Economic Development
and Tourism; Historic, Cultural, and Archeological Resources; and Housing and Community
Design and Streetscape for the planning area. With this report, staff will proceed to implement
the goals for this particular island community to guide future development and redevelopment
including the protection of existing residential and commercial areas.
The theme throughout the LCP is one of protection for the natural environment,preservation of
the historic elements of Tavernier and guided development and growth in a manner that is com-
patible with community goals.
The LCP introduced several new concepts and new strategies to implement the goals identified
through the plan development process:
• Adopt and utilize the tier system to categorize land according to environment sensi-
tivity in order to guide protection and acquisition of land by the county.
• Evaluate non-conforming land uses to determine appropriate designation and con-
tinue to utilize the Land Use District Map and supporting Future Land Use map to
evaluate individual properties.
• Preserve the natural environment by adopting a tier map system, limiting clearing for
new construction to maintain tree cover and increasing the native hammock buffer
areas adjacent to US 1. Designate MM 91 to Burton Dr. as a"Community Center"
with guidelines and standards including the "Commercial Enhancement Plan"that
protect and compliment the town of Tavernier's historic context.
4
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
• Protect the integrity of Tavernier's Historic District by researching and clearly identify-
ing the boundaries of the district and by providing guidelines and standards that manage
future development and protect historic resources and the natural environment.
• Recognize the shortage of housing for employees, maintain and improve the existing
stock of affordable housing in combination with the development of new employee hous-
ing as part of the development or redevelop of commercial buildings constructed at a vil-
lage scale under the design guidelines and standards established for the area.
• Plan for new commercial development based on an inventory and analysis of existing
commercial uses and future needs assessment.
• Recognize the importance to the community and economy of existing marina facilities
encouraging redevelopment to meet existing health and environmental standards and
protect existing legally established commercial uses located within the shoreline setback
by providing an opportunity to rebuild in the existing footprint if destroyed.
• Coordinate efforts of the Florida Department of Transportation and the county to pro-
mote a safer pedestrian and bicycle environment and to mitigate the affect of U.S.1 traf-
fic on residential neighborhoods.
• Protect, maintain and acquire public shoreline as part of a county wide parks and recrea-
tion master plan that includes a range of passive and active recreational opportunities.
• Maintain community involvement in the implementation of the plan by providing pro-
gress updates and creating a committee to advise the Planning Commission on project
proposals within the identified corridor.
5
Table of Contents
Chapter One:
Introduction 9
Summary of the LCP Planning Process 27
Format of Master Plan Elements 29
Chapter Two: Land Use and Redevelopment Element
Goal One: Directing Growth 32
Chapter Three: Community Character Element
Goal Two: Preserve Neighborhood Qualities 37
Goal Three: Maintain Community Character 40
Goal Four: Protect Historic and Cultural Resources 43
Chapter Four: Housing Element
Goal Five: Maintain Housing Affordability 49
Chapter Five: Environmental Protection Element
Goal Six: Preservation, Management, and Restoration 54
Chapter Six: Economic Development Element
Goal Seven: Redevelopment and Infill 59
Goal Eight: Water Dependant Commercial Uses 63
Chapter Seven: Transportation Element
Goal Nine: Transportation System 67
Chapter Eight: Parks and Recreation Element
Goal Ten: Parks and Recreation 72
Chapter Nine: Community Facilities Element
Goal Eleven: Public Facilities 80
Chapter Ten: Community Involvement Element
Goal Twelve: Community Involvement 85
Capital Costs Summary 88
Glossary 89
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Location/boundary map of the planning area. 11
Figure 1.2 Aerial map indicating hammock areas. 13
Figure 1.3 ADvanced IDentification map of the planning area. 14
Figure 1.4 Historic overlay district with historically significant sites. 16
Figure 1.5 Vacant lands within the planning area. 19
Figure 1.6 Proposed tier system map. 25
Figure 1.7 Flow chart illustrating the master plan process. 30
Figure 2.1 Map of proposed FLUM and zoning changes. 35
Figure 3.1 Historic overlay district and proposed expanded district area. 47
Figure 4.1 Existing residential areas within the planning area. 50
Figure 6.1 Existing commercial uses within the planning area. 62
Figure 8.1 Existing parks and recreation areas. 74
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Public and private vacant and developed lands. 18
Table 1.2 Population and housing demographics. 20
Table 1.3 Annual household income for the planning area. 22
Table 1.4 Distribution of vacant lands in the proposed tier system. 24
Table 8.1 Public shoreline access points. 73
Note: The totals on different tables and within the text may not be identical because of the different data sets used to
generate them.The primary differences are because of rounding,the inclusion of bay-bottom in the base numbers or
changes in the tax rolls.The differences, for the most part, are less than five percent(5%).
7
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Acronyms
ADID Advanced Identification of Wetlands
ALS Advanced Life Support
BOCC Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
CARL State of Florida Conservation and Recreational Lands Program
DCA Department of Community Affairs
EAR Evaluation and Review
ESA Endangered Species Act
FDCA Florida Department of Community Affairs
FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation
FKAA Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
FKCCS Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study
FKERTF Florida Keys Environmental Restoration Trust Fund
FLUM Future Land Use Map
FWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
HCC Historic District Commission
HPC Historic Preservation Commission
IS Improved Subdivision
LCP Livable CommuniKeys Program
LOS Level of Service
MCLA Monroe County Land Authority
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NROGO Non-Residential Rate of Growth Ordinance
PUV Private Upland Vacant Parcel
PVA Population Viability Analysis
ROGO Residential Rate of Growth Ordinance
SFWMD South Florida Water Management District
SMMP Monroe County Storm water Management Master Plan
SOR State of Florida Save Our Rivers Program
SSMP Monroe County Sanitary Sewer Master Plan
TDR Transferable Development Rights
TNC The Nature Conservancy
THE Transferable ROGO Exemptions
Introduction 8
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Introduction
The Livable CommuniKeys Program is a community-driven planning effort to address the very
specific needs of unique island communities within the Florida Keys. The overall goal is to de-
termine the appropriate amount, type and location of additional development within the LCP
planning area. The LCP process includes community participation through a variety of methods.
This process generates a community vision, assesses the needs of the community with goals and
objectives. The objectives are evaluated for feasibility within the current regulatory and physical
framework for how well they fit the community vision. A Master Plan contains the specific de-
velopment layout for the LCP planning area as well as action items that must be implemented to
achieve the development and community vision. The Master Plan is a working document that is
continually scrutinized and updated by the community and planning staff.
Relationship to Comprehensive Plan
The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1993 and became effective
in its entirety in 1997. It contains the guiding goals, objectives and policies for implementation
of growth management actions over the 20-year period covering 1990 through 2010. Some of
the actions apply equally throughout Monroe County such as the need for adequate solid waste
disposal facilities or the allocation of building permits limited by hurricane evacuation clearance
times. Other actions, while applying countywide, vary in their importance by locale. Actions
such as the need for preservation of historic resources or the planning of recreational facilities
take on different meaning in different local communities up and down the Keys. There are also
local needs that are not addressed in the Comprehensive Plan at all such as community goals to-
wards beautification.
The Master Plan does not replace the Comprehensive Plan but focuses on the very specific needs
of the local community. It is also a proactive planning tool rather than a strict regulatory docu-
ment in that it identifies actions needed to meet the community's needs and goals. The Master
Plan is attached as an addendum to the Comprehensive Plan. Some existing Comprehensive
Plan policies will not be affected at all by the Master Plan. Other existing policies may be modi-
fied for consistency or entirely replaced by the Master Plan. The Livable CommuniKeys Pro-
gram and Master Plan development are outlined in the comprehensive plan in Policy 101.20.1
which states:
"Monroe County shall develop a series of Community Master Plans. Master Plans will be de-
veloped in accordance with the following principles:
I. Each Community Master Plan will contain a framework for future development and redevel-
opment including the designation of growth boundaries and future acquisition areas for pub-
lic spaces and environmental conservation;
2. Each Community Master Plan will include an Implementation Strategy composed of action
items, an implementation schedule, and a monitoring mechanism to provide accountability to
communities;
Introduction 9
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
3. Each Community Master Plan will be consistent with existing Federal and State require-
ments and overall goals of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan to ensure legal requirements are
met. While consistency with the goals of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan is paramount, the
2010 Plan will be updated and amended where appropriate;
4. Each Community Master Plan will be closely coordinated with other community plans and
other jurisdictions to ensure development or redevelopment activities will not adversely im-
pact those areas;
5. Each Community Master Plan will include appropriate mechanisms allowing citizens contin-
ued oversight and involvement in the implementation of their plans. Through the Commu-
nity Master Plans, programs for ongoing public involvement, outreach, and education will be
developed;
6. Each Community Master Plan will include a Capital Improvements program to provide cer-
tainty that the provision of public facilities will be concurrent with future development;
7. Each Community Master Plan will contain an environmental protection element to maintain
existing high levels of environmental protection as required in the 2010 Comprehensive
Plan;
8. Each Community Master Plan will include a community character element that will address
the protection and enhancement of existing residential areas and the preservation of commu-
nity character through site and building guidelines. Design guidelines for public spaces,
landscaping, streetscaping, buildings,parking lots, and other areas will be developed through
collaborative efforts of citizens, the Planning Department, and design professionals reinforc-
ing the character of the local community context;
9. Each Community Master will include an economic development element addressing current
and potential diversified economic development strategies including tourism management.
The preservation and retention of valued local businesses, existing economies, and the devel-
opment of economic alternatives will be encouraged through the process;
10. Each Community Master Plan will contain a Transportation Element addressing transporta-
tion needs and possibilities including circulation, safe and convenient access to goods and
services, and transportation alternatives that will be consistent with the overall integrity of
the transportation system not resulting in negative consequences for other communities; and
11. Each Community Master Plan will be based on knowledge of existing conditions in each
community. The Planning Department will compile existing reports, databases, maps, field
data, and information from other sources supplemented by community input to document
current conditions; and
12. Each Community Master Plan will simplify the planning process providing clarity and cer-
tainty for citizens, developers, and local officials by providing a transparent framework for a
continuing open dialogue with different participants involved in planning issues."
Introduction 10
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
d'
Ifn%J,U'l r, Ys togtom 9i
�a
Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97
Tavernier Study Area
96
95
94
93
N
A
92 o ub
Ml-
'.I
ro•,
Tavernier Study Area
P1 ng afid onmenW Gar,+i�'" x
Rea 'a T i ment ■
Ilus msp is fw bAmssue Cl.uY Ctowth bAana9—DhaAen
piap�es may-'hie date rmNeme dlunm is illy_ ative oni ���✓,:i{,
ar�d may rwtacn m,]y depsstbmmdaries,peae h,maas, ���'�Is��^ 0 I6 91
Mles
mepmaay:xe D—Nw te<aom
Figure 1.1 Locationiboundary map of the planning area.
Introduction 11
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Relationship to State Legislation
A Comprehensive Plan is required to be adopted by Monroe County under Florida Statute 163
and must be compliant with the required format and minimum content listed in the Florida Ad-
ministrative Code (FAC 9J-5). The Master Plan will be adopted as a modification of the exist-
ing Comprehensive Plan and the Florida Department of Community Affairs will review the
modification for compliance with the applicable statutes and codes. This review will likely be
most focused in areas where Master Plan policies replace existing Comprehensive Plan policies
and serve as the Evaluation and Review (EAR) for this planning area.
Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
This Master Plan covers the area from the Tavernier Creek Bridge at approximately Mile Marker
91 to Mile Marker 97. The geographic boundaries of the planning area are illustrated in Figure
1.1.
Offshore Islands
The Florida Keys archipelago from Tavernier Creek to MM 97consists of Key Largo and addi-
tional scattered islands including Tavernier Key and Pigeon Key with other offshore islands
such as Butternut Key, Dove Key and Rodriquez Key in the vicinity.
While not specifically part of the Tavernier Creek to MM 97 Livable CommuniKeys Master
Plan, offshore islands are a vital facet of the Florida Keys natural environment. In recognition
of the important part they play, off shore islands are afforded special protection under Policy
102.7.2 and Policy 102.7.3 of the 2010 Master Plan which limits development potential on off-
shore islands. The Monroe County Land Development Regulations further limit development
on offshore islands affording them another level of protection through Sections 9.5-122.3
Evaluation criteria, 9.5-262 Maximum residential density and district open space and 9.5.347
Open space requirements amongst other provisions.
Island Geology
This island community extending from Tavernier Creek Bridge to approximately Mile Marker
97 is comprised of Key Largo Limestone, formed from ancient reefs, which are extremely po-
rous. The geological processes that formed the reefs and the Florida Keys as we know them to-
day began in the Pleistocene Period. During this era, melting glaciers raised sea level to where
water covered much of the Florida peninsula and all of the area that is now the Keys.
The warm temperatures and shallow waters that covered this area were ideal for coral growth.
Scientists have discovered that the Keys developed into a nearly continuous coral reef tract from
the area that is now Miami to the Dry Tortugas. Core samples show massive hard corals and
point to a larger, denser coral reef system than the living reef that now lies off our shores. When
the last Ice Age struck, about 28,000 years ago, sea levels dropped drastically, and the Keys, as
well as the Florida Bay, were transformed into swamp, then dry land. Then, about 11,000 years
ago, water levels moderated to approximately current levels, leaving the Keys exposed and fill-
ing Florida Bay.
Introduction 12
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97
ADID HIarn1' ock
w�
i
G,/ 1fIL
Hammock it Nt it
Monroe County N
4 my
pCaaas�au� a� a`u�aa'�aaaaaua�rxtal
resources aepprtment
�'��n]'.:,,;:,.,- anlr Ll�rtMrv.,nr, dd:x'mu r,rll�v4.r:•••a�IM
ann-0rr�rc4 r uclF I pn r.4:,r��4u' 9.0 rA �bn�if, fF 'I
rGhr d iap+r,. A vf'nnnwe� I'....dwxv,n
& J�v+T' 44 [14Y,Y''w] Pvr:(ilY,� NI ttA!t
Figure 1.2 Aerial map indicating hammock areas.
Introduction 13
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Tavernier Creek to Mime Marker 97
ARID Habitat
9Ou?'
a �
Habitat
�i
water , I„
Mangrove
'Semb m+a.crgrove
IP��dU,ilallil�J Saltmarsh
Bu4tcnrnva✓vcud
Hammock '� D
Piinelands V �i
Exotics
IUIIVIVIVIVIVIVIVIVIV Developed
IFiresliwatcr(hardwood
Vllll[IIIIIII full Fre hwater pm
(Freshwater marsh
Gra.ssllarads AN, U
RidgeMammackr.
DuM w nll�fl� II�
't� rllMi�ror �
u;, iatllni �F
r io mr
� I
�� mtalo!�imu ,amo� n
i lion
oa
@iTirn'aar aaaanty
Planning mental
R�saar��mr�I�hg�a�rdv�exst
ultra rr,at rc P/A.ri. L� nvtlh 4,w uq ip y;h.o
a;
hn�m±z Yv +;rr;i t,�,u, f.m twr N"-'Mr,'. :,
Figure 1.3 ADvanced IDentification map of the planning area.
Introduction 14
Near Shore Waters
The shallow waters near the shore are composed of a series of interconnecting and interdepend-
ent natural habitats. These include fringing saltmarsh/buttonwood or transitional, fringing man-
groves and sea-grass, meadows as well as hard-bottom regions, patch reefs and bank reefs. The
areas' ecosystem, as well as other areas throughout the Florida Keys, supports a diverse assem-
blage of species, including those which are commercially and recreationally important, unique to
the area or spatially limited due to habitat constraints.
Hammock Types
Tropical Hardwood Hammocks can be very dense and support many types of Keys' wildlife.
Tropical Hardwood Hammock is found only in the Keys and some parts of Miami-Dade County,
the more diverse hammocks are primarily located in the Keys. The Tavernier Creek to Mile
Marker 97 planning area has vacant as well as developed lands with Tropical Hardwood Ham-
mock. These hammocks are either low elevation (below five feet mean sea level) or high eleva-
tion (above five feet mean sea level). The elevation of land, with the associated salinity of the
soil, creates two different types of forests. Those hammocks with lower elevations and saltier
soils typically have smaller trees, while higher elevation forests typically can get larger trees and
a wider variety of plant species.
Large areas of hammock, some vacant and some developed residentially, are located within the
Harris Ocean Park Estates and Palma Sola Subdivisions, near U.S. 1 at Mile Marker 92 Ocean-
side, Mile Marker 94 ocean and bayside, within Lime Grove Estates both ocean and bayside and
at the northern end of the planning area, in Key Largo Narrows.
ADID Wetlands Classifications
ADvanced IDentification of Wetlands (ADID) studies were performed within the planning area.
Larger wetlands are mapped within the following platted subdivisions in the area: Largo Beach,
Ocean Park Village, Palma Sola, and unfilled platted lots within Hammer Point. There are also
wetlands identified within Lime Grove Estates, and large wetland tracts adjacent to Hammer
Point and Sunset Acres, as well as Oceanside north of Burton Drive at Mile Marker 93. Other
individual wetland lots are scattered throughout the planning area. Figure 1.3 illustrates the
habitat within the planning area.
Endangered Species
The Monroe County Endangered Species Animal Maps identify five separate areas of federally
designated endangered species habitat within the planning area. These are the Palma Sola subdi-
vision, the isolated hammock north of Harry Harris Park, the hammocks on both ocean and bay
side at Mile Marker 94, bay side at approximately Mile Marker 94.3-95, and both ocean and bay
side at Key Largo Narrows at the northern end of the planning area. All of these marked habitat
areas indicate that the White Crowned Pigeon is known within the area, and the other five poten-
tial species are the Indigo Snake, the Key Largo Woodrat, the Key Largo Cottonmouse, the Mi-
ami Black Head Snake and the Schaus' Swallowtail Butterfly.
Introduction 15
,.............
...._... ...
w„
ry� IIry �Po �y {p,� III y ��
&M,III P P �W w8' A q.'W w�' V�I
Tsee VV
;dim
r roe �.r k to �°��8 � rker~ 7' �� '�,� a wr U� , , � ..
Historically Significant Sites700
� x f
5, rIlk
r ""m
A,
N ��d� e
r ww w
4 Historic District
EI Si tes
"A', �
�
--------------------------------
of ° gym
r
r
f
�u7
'hum"*MIA M"'.. p&m,YA,.
9umw�,wium � 'M�'uw glVw!hw mvWuuArdmpp' yp�,®d'�wwu'MddtwX.CFuw ryina,h1
LL11 flN5Vw1 �u!ll L.cwvr W¢.+.3�bMY hu�'str 6 Jb'J'ip'�Am„
I .. ...�"'.,., .«V k�m.utl"rmM`b',ux�Emm'+L:d"MI�,u'rsr ulE mreuumYYvirvt,
ireiwu9 .
mmmmmmmmmmW�%NWPMWPoW�%NWPMWPoW�%NWPMWPo....
Figure 1.4 Historic overlay district with historically significant sites.
Introduction 16
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Historical and Cultural Context
The history of this Tavernier Creek to MM 97 planning area is the culture that created the island
community. Limes, tomatoes, pineapples and tropical fruits qualified Tavernier as a farming
community in the early 1900's. Hurricane destruction and the advent of Flagler's Railroad re-
sulted in the demise of the farming industry with a corresponding change to a commercial fish-
ing trade in the historical area.
As a result of continued efforts, by local organizations and residents, to maintain the historical
resources within Tavernier much of the community remains contextually intact. A historic over-
lay designation, known as "Historic Tavernier", was established in the planning area with adop-
tion of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. It is one of the most unique and well-preserved historic
communities in unincorporated Monroe County. The community includes a mixture of historic
structures located on the ocean side between Coconut Row to the south and just beyond mile
marker 92 to the north. Several historical structures within the community are located along
U.S. I (Overseas Highway) and are currently occupied by commercial uses. A majority of the
historic structures are residential homes nestled in the neighborhood that extends behind the
commercial area. The purpose of the historic overlay designation was to protect Tavernier's his-
toric resources in accordance with Objective 104 of the Comprehensive Plan. Prior to the desig-
nation, the historical homes and businesses located within the area were lost or in danger of be-
ing compromised as a result of increased pressure from new development. It is evident that cur-
rent development in the outer fringes of the historic community does not fit within the context of
the community character.
The planning area also consists of an assortment of archaeological and cultural resources. To
the south of Tavernier Historic District and on the ocean side is a large parcel of land between
Ocean Boulevard and Tavernier Creek Bridge, which is known as Tavernier Creek Hammocks.
The Land Authority recently donated the parcel of land to the State of Florida with the intent
that it be preserved as a conservation area. Aside from its more apparent environmental quali-
ties, the land holds rich historical, cultural, and possible archaeological resources. The Tavern-
ier Creek Hammocks has indisputable ties to the history of the Upper Keys. According to a local
report, the area around Tavernier, like that of much of the Upper Keys, was a thriving commu-
nity of farmsteads focused on the production of pineapples, tomatoes, and other vegetables
which were exported to the mainland. Tavernier was a sparsely populated area with large tracts
of land being utilized for cultivation. The Tavernier Creek Hammocks was once one of these
thriving farmsteads, which extended behind what is today the Tavernier Town Plaza. After a
series of irreparable events in the early 1900's, attention turned towards commercial fishing as a
source of income. Tavernier Creek became an essential route between the Atlantic Ocean and
the Florida Bay, and a central location to establish business and residence. Tavernier steadily
became a thriving multifaceted community that offered an abundance of services and opportuni-
ties.
In addition to the farm on the Tavernier Creek Hammock parcel, the site includes a cistern of
unknown origin, and the location of an old ball field. The ball field was a popular area for com-
munity activity. It was located on the southern end of the property until being relocated adjacent
to the Old Tavernier School between 1930 and 1940. The Tavernier Creek Hammocks is sig-
Introduction 17
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
nificant to local heritage and is an attractive location for sustainable improvement in a manner
which can enhance social value, spark economic opportunity,provide an educational and recrea-
tional resource for residents at a minimal cost while protecting and preserving the integrity of
the existing environment.
The primary method of protecting resources in the planning area has been through the establish-
ment of a historic overlay, land acquisition, and the designation of historic places and sites. Ac-
cording to a report produced by GAI consultants, fifty-three (53) historical sites have been iden-
tified as significant and eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.
Land Use
The planning area contains most of the uses that are needed to support a small thriving commu-
nity. The residential community is primarily single family and mobile homes, although there are
a couple of condominium complexes. Commercial uses are primarily located on U.S. 1 with the
largest concentration in the MM 91 to MM 93.5 area. Services and light industrial uses (boat
repair, garages, construction companies, etc.) are concentrated bayside in this same general area,
although, a mix of uses can be found throughout the U.S. 1 corridor. Water dependent uses such
as marinas and boat rentals and water economically enhanced activities such as restaurants and
hotels are located on the Florida Bay and Atlantic Ocean.
Table 1.1 Public and private vacant and developed lands Parcels Acres
Parcels Acres Percent of Teital-
a���a
Private Developed 2,912 623 35.8
Public 442 822 47.2
ti3
Private Vacant 1,210 295 17.0 10°6 /
Total 4,564 1,740 100.0 ❑Private Developed ®Public ❑Private Vacant
Source:Monroe County Planning Department
The Tavernier Creek to MM 97 planning area consists of 1,740 acres divided into 4,564 separate
parcels and lots. Six hundred and twenty three acres are developed, leaving 1,117 acres vacant.
The majority of this acreage is in public ownership: 822 acres. The remaining vacant 295 acres
are in private ownership.
In order to determine the potential for future development in the planning area a vacant land
analysis was undertaken using the County Geographical Information System (GIS) and the data
from the property appraisers files. The majority of vacant lands in the Tavernier Creek to MM
97 planning area are publicly owned; 822 acres. There is a total of 295 vacant acres in private
ownership divided into approximately 1,210 parcels, 660 of which are lots zoned for single fam-
ily or mobile home construction. Nearly one hundred and seventy(170) of these lots and most of
the parcels are in the designated Natural and Conservation area and are slated for acquisition.
Part of the four hundred and ninety (490) lots remaining in the planning area may be inappropri-
ate for development because of fragmented hammock areas or wetlands.
Many of the non-residential properties, which appear as undeveloped in the property appraisers
data base are currently being used as storage lots or parking for existing businesses. Of the 110
vacant commercial parcels (20 acres) there are only 40 truly available parcels and five of these
are in the Natural Resources and Conservation Area. However, a number of the existing sites are
under utilized and are ripe for redevelopment.
Introduction 18
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Tavernier Creek to MHe Marker 97'
Exisiting Government Owned
and Private Vacant Land
1,
Vacant Land Public Ownership
Resudentual Vacant Mate of Flcruda
commerucad Vacant monroe county
Institutional Vacant L®®� Village of Islarmoratda 4 r y
Federal
"k_
.� .',�liI�"d"r
f
�r�1
top
" ..
lka
x
.y � t
0
� w
�a1
iY1p� N
1 iti±b6nroe County
Pl a nnind;iincd, `hv,oninental
12csraaaa�re�s T�,�^ �rtnxrmaaC
ab", -�,1A.
q�nxrryna �} 'C7v�iYa+l w r�+d Rrm. fl tx+,hune nl,�m
fi C�Y-'R',C 7 flq b ..wt4w,
,b7 i w.��v;. �Jrn R ,..,G
Ply G A.
Figure 1.5 Vacant lands within the planning area
Introduction 19
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Demographics
The demographic information included in this Master Plan was taken from the 1990 and 2000
Census. The data indicate that the permanent population of the planning area has declined more
than ten percent (10%) from a population in 1990 of 4,301 to a population of 3,852. The de-
crease in population occurred while housing units counted in the Census increased by 235 units,
a 7.3% increase. The shift in housing in the planning area is towards more seasonal occupancy
(seasonal includes all types of second vacation home uses). In 1990, 998 units or 31% of the
planning areas 3,206 housing units were only used on a seasonal basis. In 2000 1,455 units, 42%
of the total housing units, were for seasonal use, an increase of 457 seasonal units.
The Census Bureau statistics identified a decrease in the total number of rental units in the plan-
ning area in the ten years between 1990 and 2000, from 681 rental units (606 rented, 75 for rent)
to 560 rental units (520 rented, 40 for rent) in 2000, a decrease of 121 rental units. This decrease
in actual numbers of rental units, even with an increase in the number of total housing units re-
flects an increase in seasonal/weekend owners. Single family residential homes account for 42%
of the residences in the planning area. The remainder of the residential units is multi-family
dwellings (4%), condominiums (24%) or mobile homes (30%). The decrease in permanent
households and rental units in this planning area of primarily small houses and mobile homes
illustrates the problem with the loss of affordable employee housing county-wide.
The planning area's permanent population of 3,852 residents is split evenly between males and
females. The numbers of individuals living permanently in the area have decreased for all age
groups, with the largest decrease in the 21 to 54 year old age groups (15%). The over 55 age
group and the under 20 have decreased by 7.6% and 4.15%respectively.
Table 1.2 Population and housing demo ra hics
Census Blocks 97p6 12 and9707 Coup
1990 2000 Change rn Change
1990 2000 Percent
e
Persons 4,301 3,852 -10.4 78,024 79,589 2.0
Male 2,219 1,948 -12.2 40,976 42,327 3.2
Female 2,082 1,904 -8.5 37,0481 37,262 0.6
0-20 780 748 -4.1 15,786 15,464 -2.1
21-54 2,055 1,749 -14.9 40,601 42,591 4.7
55-85 1,466 1,355 -7.6 21,637 21,534 -0.5
Households 1,971 1,755 -11.0 33,583 35,086 4.3
House units 3,206 3,441 7.3 46,2151 51,617 10.5
Persons per occupied housing unit 2.03 2.19 7.9 2.24 2.23 -0.4
Occupied houses 1,971 1,755 -11.0 33,583 35,086 4.3
Renter occupied 606 520 -14.2 12,729 13,186 3.5
Vacant houses 1,235 1,686 36.5 12,632 16,531 23.6
For rent 75 40 -46.7 2,0101 1,663 -20.9
For sale 71 67 -5.6 943 759 -24.2
Not occupied 34 30 -11.8 560 304 -84.2
Seasonall 998 1,455 45.8 7,928 12,628 37.2
Otherl 57 931 63.2 1,191 1,177 -1.2
Source:U.S.Census 1990 and 2000
Introduction 20
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Population Projections
The permanent population in the planning area is 3,852 residents living in 1,755 households. Fu-
ture population projections are made for a locality to provide government with the amount and
timing of growth for which services and facilities will be needed in the future. Making popula-
tion projections for the County is difficult. Normally to project future populations the availabil-
ity of land designated for development is considered along with the rate of development of new
homes, the numbers of households, which will result from development and the persons per
household. In a planning area such as this, where the permanent population decreased by 10%
while housing units increased by 7%,projecting future populations becomes very difficult.
ROGO is the system whereby residential permits are issued in Monroe County. Since 1992
when ROGO was started approximately 70 permits have been issued in the planning area. With
more than six hundred lots in the planning area appropriately zoned for development of single
family homes and land zoned for commercial uses which can be developed for employee hous-
ing there is available land for residential development. The current County and State emphasis
on providing housing for the local workforce indicates that there will probably be an increase in
allocations for affordable housing. For this projection it is determined that new development
over the next twenty years will either continue at the same rate of the last ten years or increase
by a maximum of 50% over the next 20 years. Therefore, between 140 and 210 new housing
units will be constructed in the Tavernier Creek to MM 97 planning area by the year 2024.
The percentage of permanent housing units of the total will most likely continue at the current
percentage (51% permanent households) or decrease over the next 20 years. Using 51% for the
calculation results in a projection of 70 to110 new housing units constructed in the planning area
will be for permanent residents. This will increase the permanent population by between 155 and
234 persons if the household size continues to be 2.19 persons per household. The total perma-
nent population will increase to between 4,010 and 4,085 persons. If the percentage of seasonal
to permanent units continues to increase at the rate experienced between 1990 and 2000 the
number of permanent households will be reduced by 10% and the permanent population will
decrease. With the opportunities for providing employee/affordable-housing units in the plan-
ning area the potential for maintaining a larger percentage of the additional units as permanent
housing has increased.
The County is required by Florida Statutes to plan for and provide adequate public facilities and
services to the "functional population", which is a combination of the permanent, seasonal, and
transient populations. By the year 2024, the new housing units constructed in the planning area
will require service for an increase in the functional population of between 310 and 460 persons.
Introduction 21
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Income
The 2000 Census income statistics for the planning area report that nearly half of the households
earn less than $40,000 annually and 63% earn less than $50,000. While 3% earn more than
$150,000 annually. In 1990, 75% of the permanent residents earned less than $50,000 annually.
The largest decrease in numbers of households was in the below $20,000 annual income level,
which decreased by 39%. It is impossible to tell from the statistics if this decrease in the lowest
income levels is because of improving salaries and total income or if it reflects the change in the
population to more seasonal and less rental units.
Based on the 2000 U.S. Census figures, the median income for this planning area's residents is
$42,830, which is comparable to the County median income of$42,283.
Table 1.3 Annual Household income for the planning area
Census Tract 9706(1,2,3)a&9707 wnroe County
1900 2000 1990 2000 '
Total Households 1,971 1,755 33,583 35,086
Median Household Income(S) 30,231 42,830 29,351 42,283
H usehold lncome
Less than$20,000 585 355 10,642 7,254
$20,000-$39,999 686 539 11,648 9,057
$40,000-$49,999 212 209 3,406 3,870
$50,000-$74,999 258 292 4,435 6,974
$75,000-$99,999 117 166 1,341 3,632
S100,000-S150,000 64 124 1,109 2,411
More than$150,000 48 70 1,030 1,908
1. Actual total household figures for the planning area are estimates calculated with population demograhic data.
Source:U.S.Census 1990 and 2000
Land Acquisition
For many years, the concurrent need for natural resource protection and relief to regulated land-
owners has been a recognized problem throughout the Keys. Agencies who are participants and
have been intermediaries in the acquisition of some of the sites within the Florida Keys Ecosys-
tem project are The Nature Conservancy, Monroe County Land Authority (MCLA), State of
Florida, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and South Florida Water Management District.
In the early 1990s a priority acquisition plan that focused on remaining habitat and preservation
of wildlife movement corridors was developed. All of these agencies can conduct acquisition
activities essentially anywhere within the administrative boundaries that encompass the entire
planning area. Their focus in the past has been on natural lands, usually on acreage parcels, that
have higher wildlife habitat value.
Acquisition of land through the Florida Keys Ecosystem project includes most of the remaining
unprotected Rockland hammocks (tropical hardwood hammocks) in the Keys. It is important
habitat to many rare plants and animals and consists of 17 sites in the Upper and Middle Keys
encompassing the remaining fragments of unprotected tropical hardwood hammock greater than
12.5 acres. The project includes habitat for migratory birds, the state-threatened white-crowned
pigeon and 34 species of rare vascular plants and 34 rare animals. All the project sites are threat-
Introduction 22
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
ened by intense development in the Keys.
Within the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 planning area, there are three areas which
are part of this project: Dove Creek (498 acres, several large ownership's, remaining subdivided-
187 acres acquired through MCLA), Tavernier Creek (83 acres, one major ownership), and Key
Largo Narrows (one major ownership-acquired through MCLA).
Additional parcels in public ownership include: the former Ragen Tract (Tavern Towne Ham-
mock); lands near the former Cooke Barrow Pit, Oceanside at Mile Marker 92; the former Unger
tracts located ocean side at Mile Marker 94 and bayside at Mile Marker 94.5; the former
Richardson tract bayside in Lime Grove Estates at Mile Marker 96; and the former DeCarion/
Roberts Tract, also known as Curry Cove, at the Key Largo Narrows, Mile Marker 97 Ocean-
side.
In addition to public agency purchase of private property, purchases of private lots have been
made by ROGO applicants to garner additional "points" towards an allocation under the
county's dwelling unit allocation system. These properties have been deeded to Monroe County.
Publicly owned lands account for 840 acres, nearly 50% of the vacant land in the planning area,
and 440 of the 4,565 vacant parcels.
Comprehensive Plan Goal 105
This Comprehensive Plan amendment was designed to refocus land acquisition efforts, conserve
natural resources and direct future development to infill areas in coordination with the Livable
CommuniKeys Program. The proposed Tier System consists of a set of over-lay maps and regu-
lations directing growth to infill existing subdivisions and commercial areas and identifying
those areas, which should be acquired for conservation and density reduction. The System has a
major role in the implementation of this Master Plan and the FKCCS. The mapping of the land
outside of mainland Monroe County into one of three tiers provides a focus for acquisition and
guidance to the public of areas most appropriate for development.
Natural Resource and Conservation Areas (Tier 1) are designated to conserve and protect signifi-
cant environmental habitat and provide for restoration and connection of fragmented habitat
patches. Development is severely restricted and the vacant lands are included in County, State
and Federal acquisition and conservation boundaries.
Introduction 23
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Transition Areas (Tier 11) are designated to offer an alternative to developing fragmented habitat
areas and to help reduce low-density sprawl. Subdivisions in this area are less than fifty percent
(50%) built out. These areas are often appropriate for future development but because of the low
density are also appropriate for a County density reduction program. This is a cooperative pro-
gram between existing residents of the area and the County to acquire lots and either sell them
back to the neighbors or maintain them as open space. New development is discouraged, but al-
lowed with restrictions in the amount of permitted clearing. The current acquisition program is
expanded to include vacant platted subdivision lots in this Tier.
Infill Area (Tier 111) is designated for redevelopment and infill of new development. Develop-
ment is encouraged in these subdivisions that are more than fifty percent (50%) built. Full infra-
structure is present or in future plans. Community Centers may be designated and become eligi-
ble as receiver sites for Transfer of Development Right (TDR) and corresponding higher den-
sity.
The Tier system has been used as a tool in developing this Master Plan to estimate the develop-
ment potential and amount of land acquisition required in the planning area. The map (Figure
1.6) and table (Table 1.4)present the distribution of parcels under the working draft Tier System
in the Tavernier Creek to MM 97 planning area. The actual Tier Maps will be adopted as a zon-
ing overlay after additional refinement.
Table 1.4 Distribution of vacant lands in the proposed Tier system
Tier I Tier It Tier M
1S/URM I MIRMI IS/URM'
Parcels Lots Parcels Lots Pareels Lots
Private Vacant Residential 500 170 280 245 275 245
Private Vacant Commerciale 6 8 100
Public Land 1 6 30
1. 72 of these lots are being used forparking and storage
SoLyce:Monroe County Planning Department
24
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
�i
<n"n YI'i �U
u pry r° a„_ �u� � to M 0 8.e
Tie r Ma p
I
Tier Designation
I r l��G.711 r�
We ridtlooka�p
_..r._..r._..r._..r._..r._..r._..r._..r._..r._ —
f�1
yr ,
q
r �
Figure 1.6 Proposed Tier system map.
Introduction 25
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Development Context and Constraints
Listed below for reference purposes are the primary existing development constraints from Tav-
ernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97. All of these constraints apply countywide but their par-
ticular application to this planning area is discussed below.
ROGO: As of the date of this report, the residential rate of growth ordinance (ROGO) allocates
42 total units (market rate plus affordable) annually to the Upper Keys. Permits for the planning
area will continue to be limited and allocated with the rest of the Upper Keys under ROGO.
Since the inception of the Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) in 1992, sixty-three permits for
new homes, including five affordable houses, have been issued and constructed in the planning
area. Three applicants aggregated lots to receive extra points in the ROGO system decreasing
the overall potential density. There are currently 17 ROGO applications awaiting allocation
awards. Two of the 17 applications have received points for lot aggregation, further reducing the
potential units.
Approximately 25% to 30% of the remaining vacant lots are environmentally sensitive and will
receive negative environmental points in ROGO and have therefore been avoided by potential
ROGO applicants.
NROGO: "NROGO" is the acronym for "Non-residential Rate of Growth Ordinance" under
which the construction of new or expanded commercial uses is regulated. The amount of new
and expanded commercial space permitted is tied to the level of residential development permit-
ted, which is 239 square feet of commercial space per residential unit allocated. NROGO does
not allocate commercial space by Keys sub-area but does so Keys-wide on a semi-annual basis.
To date, there have been no NROGO applications for any projects between Tavernier Creek
Bridge and Mile Marker 97.
Florida Keys Carrying; Capacity Study (FKCCS): Implementation of the FKCCS is required in
the work program in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan. The FKCCS is being used to modify the
ROGO and NROGO and this may affect the number and location of residential permits that can
be issued in the future county wide.
Summary of the LCP Planning Process 26
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Summary of the LCP Planning Process
Community Vision
We envision the Tavernier Creek Bridge to MM 97 Planning Area as:
An island community committed to preserving its heritage, natural setting
and stands of native tropical hardwood hammocks, with improvements to
the visual character of the U.S. 1 corridor, limited redevelopment of com-
mercial properties, and neighborhoods where residents have access to the
water and recreational facilities.
The community vision was written taking into consideration the responses received from the
community at workshops, in the survey of the residents and landowners, and in the U.S. 1 busi-
ness survey between MM 91 and MM 93.5.
LCP Citizen Participation Process
Three major public workshops and meetings held on March 1, 2001, September 20, 2001, and
March 26, 2002 facilitated the LCP planning effort providing an opportunity for direct participa-
tion of the community with planning staff and each other. In addition surveys were used to try
and gain a broader understanding of the concerns and desires of the members of the community
who did not attend the meetings. The survey was included in the second of three newsletters that
were mailed to all residents, property owners and interested parties. An additional survey was
sent to businesses in the area to gain a better understanding of the issues of importance to the
commercial segment of the population. From this outreach, the key community issues were iden-
tified and a community vision formulated.
Community Issues
As a result of the many forms of feedback from residents, evaluation of the planning area and
analysis of the existing conditions, several issues were identified by the Community:
1. Maintain the existing small town community "island" character of the area.
2. Preserve the remaining significant natural lands.
3. Recognize the uniqueness of and preserve the Tavernier Historic District.
4. Limit additional new commercial development while providing opportunities to redevelop
existing commercial structures.
5. Increase opportunities for local community involvement in planning issues.
6. Improve and expand existing water access and provide additional shoreline access for the
residents.
7. Protect the existing water-related/dependent uses such as restaurants, marinas, and commer-
cial fishing and permit rebuilding if destroyed in the footprint.
Summary of the LCP Planning Process 27
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Planning Issues and Objectives
From the start of the planning process and throughout the development of the Existing Condi-
tions Report and this Master Plan a number of planning issues and objectives have been identi-
fied and considered in the development of this plan. Following in no specific order of impor-
tance:
• Reduce impacts on safety and traffic movement from the highway and unlimited access
development patterns.
• Provide opportunities for affordable/employee housing for the residents of the commu-
nity.
• Reduce land use conflicts from non-conformities.
• Provide for flexible building setback and parking standards within the U.S. 1 corridor to
reflect the historic development patterns.
• Explore alternative parking solutions for conforming and non-conforming commercial
uses.
• Identify and protect existing water dependent uses, both environmental and economic,
recognizing that the waters of the Keys are why people want to be here.
• Maintain and increase opportunities for water access for the community.
• Find ways to reduce the impact on the residential community from the large numbers of
tourists that travel through the area on U.S. 1.
• Increase the land acquisition program to preserve the remaining high quality hammocks
and wetlands in the planning area.
• Work with the neighborhoods in a cooperative effort to purchase hammock areas that
create their"sense of place".
• Preserve the character of historic Tavernier, including the setting and context.
Because many of the planning concerns involved issues specific to the U.S. 1 corridor area, the
Planning Department contracted for a Corridor Enhancement Plan which was funded by FDOT.
Two public workshops were held specifically to address aesthetic and planning issues within the
corridor area from Tavernier Creek to approximately MM 94.5. The first workshop was held
on October 23, 2003 with a follow up design and planning workshop on December 4, 2003.
Many of the ideas and recommendations which resulted from these workshops and the Tavernier
Corridor Enhancement Plan are integrated into the LCP master Plan.
The Livable CommuniKeys Program (LCP) is a community-driven planning effort aimed at de-
termining the amount, type and location of additional development appropriate for the planning
area and is directly tied to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan through adoption
by the Board of County Commissioners. The need and budget for community facilities and ser-
vices are identified to serve the existing community and any growth that may occur. The Mon-
roe County Department of Planning and Environmental Resources have provided the profes-
sional guidance and expertise in drafting the plan.
Format of Master Plan Elements 28
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Format of Master Plan Elements
There are thirteen elements in this Master Plan. Each one focuses on an issue of heightened im-
portance to the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 Planning Area. The format for these
elements is different from the comprehensive plan because this Master Plan is a culmination of
the LCP process, not a starting point. Therefore, the community and planning staff have already
reviewed and analyzed much of the available data about the island and they have been through a
planning process whereby "problems" (questions, issues and uncertainties) have been identified
and needs have been verbalized.
The Master Plan provides the tools for problem solving by fulfilling three basic tasks:
■ Statement of the goals of the LCP process as it applies to the planning area.
■ Redefined analysis of specific community and planning needs to fulfill the goals.
■ Identification of strategies and action to meet the needs.
Goals
Each element states a specific planning goal designed around the major topics to be addressed
through the LCP process such as growth and redevelopment, economic viability, environmental
protection, and community character.
Current Conditions Summary
Information specific to the planning area is available in the Existing Conditions Report. Some
information was also provided during the LCP process in newsletters and workshops. Demo-
graphics, inventories of community facilities, and land ownership patterns are examples of infor-
mation presented in this section.
Analysis of Community Needs
The problem, issue or shortfall in the community or environment and the opportunities are stated
here. These have been identified either by the community or by the planning staff. The commu-
nity includes the affected public, stakeholders, and elected officials and they have identified
needs to the planning staff in a variety of ways: workshop participation, mail surveys, meetings,
phone calls, and letters. The planning staff identified additional needs either through planning
analysis of existing information, professional judgment based on observations of data or condi-
tions, or coordination with facility or service providers.
Strategies and Action Items
As part of the Master Planning process the planning staff has identified and evaluated possible
strategies for meeting each need. The possible strategies were also evaluated relative to one an-
other to identify conflicts and to identify opportunities for one strategy to fulfill multiple needs.
In this way a final set of strategies was completed. Action items were then developed towards
implementation of each strategy.
Format of Master Plan Elements 29
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
The plan is therefore written in the form of goals, strategies and action items rather than goals,
objectives and policies as in the Comprehensive Plan. Where strategies and action items replace
current comprehensive plan policies, this is noted and action items for deleting or modifying
those policies are included in the applicable element. It is very important to note that this plan
will be an addendum to the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan and the Compre-
hensive Plan remains in full effect in the Tavernier Creek to MM 97 planning area.
The plan format is illustrated in the flow chart in Figure 1.7. The flow chart starts with an indi-
vidual need identified in the plan. A comprehensive strategy for meeting the need is formulated
based on the information in hand. If the information in hand is sufficient to implement the strat-
egy the action items for implementation can be written directly into the Master Plan. If not, an
action item can be written to procure new information or further analyze existing information.
Note that new information not only feeds back into implementation but may reveal new strate-
gies, may redefine the need or may even reveal new needs. To be a meaningful and current im-
plementation tool over the entire twenty-year planning horizon, the Master Plan must include
this iterative process of problem solving that monitors success and identifies changing condi-
tions and new issues. It must also allow for timely response and tracking of progress towards
problem solving.
Identified
C om m unity N eed
New Information
Identified Strategy May Change
5; Need or Strategy
ENOUGH INFORMATION IN HAND FOR IMPLEMENTATION?
YES NO
W rite Action Item s to
Obtain Information
New
N e e d
Identified
Write Action Items
for Im plem entation
;��] 5_;
M onitor and Update
Figure 1.7 Flow chart illustrating Master Plan process.
30
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
I%
LAND USE AND
REDEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
/ii it
l
J J Illlllllllllll%ll rWho$///
Land Use and Redevelopment Element 31
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL ONE
DIRECT FUTURE GROWTH TO LANDS THAT ARE MOST SUITABLE
FOR DEVELOPMENT, PREVENT SPRAWL INTO LESS DEVELOPED
AREAS AND ENCO URA GE PRESERVATION OF ENVIRONMEN-
TALLY SENSITIVE LANDS.
Current Conditions Summary
The community of Tavernier Creek to MM 97 is an older developed community. The majority
of the areas appropriate for development have been developed. Therefore it is understandable
that approximately 45% of the vacant privately owned parcels in this planning area are in the
designated Natural Resource and Conservation Area (Tier I). The area contains several larger
parcels and totals 150 vacant acres; 50% of the remaining vacant privately owned acres.
The 490 IS/URM lots outside the Natural Resource and Conservation area (Tier 11 and Tier III)
are those most likely to be developed in the future. However some of these IS/URM lots may
contain wetlands or fragmented hammock areas or they may be the yard of a developed lot. The
more than one hundred vacant commercial parcels in the property records without structures are
primarily parking lots or driveways of existing businesses. The actual potential new commercial
development sites are much lower approximately forty parcels.
It is projected that between 140 and 210 new single family housing units may be constructed in
the planning area over the next twenty years. With a total of 660 platted IS/URM lots plus 360
vacant parcels which permit residential uses, there are a large number of lots and parcels that
will not receive a permit. According to the estimates at least 80% of the vacant lots and parcels
in the planning area will not receive a permit for a new residential use during the twenty-year
planning horizon. If a portion of the new residential units are built as multi-family employee
housing on commercially zoned parcels the number of single family lots not receiving permits in
the 20 year planning horizon will increase.
Goal 105 was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners to direct the County's future de-
velopment to infill areas in existing subdivisions and commercial corridors and to focus the ac-
quisition program towards preserving wetlands and the important terrestrial habitat areas. The
goal also addresses the need to reduce the over-all numbers of lots and privately owned vacant
lands in the County with a program to purchase fragmented hammocks and vacant lots in subdi-
visions that are less than fifty percent (50%) built (Tier II). These lots may be sold back to the
adjacent neighbors or be held jointly by the community or remain in County ownership as a re-
serve for birds and small wildlife.
Discouraging sprawl is accomplished as much by maintaining existing uses on scarified lands as
it is in preventing development from moving into undeveloped areas. The planning area has a
number of uses that are nonconforming because of the Land Use District they are located in.
Lawfully established residential uses that are over-density or are in a land use district that does
not allow residential uses are made conforming under recent amendments to the Comprehensive
Land Use and Redevelopment Element 32
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Plan and the Land Development Regulations. Non-residential uses that are non-conforming do
not have that same protection and may not be replaced if more than fifty percent (50%) de-
stroyed. Redevelopment of the property is prevented because the non-conformity may not be
expanded. Currently there are non-conforming retail uses,professional buildings and restaurants.
Analysis of Community Needs
Property Rights
There are a large numbers of vacant privately owned lots and parcels in the County. The County
needs to work with landowners to acquire those lots that are least appropriate for future develop-
ment. This is only fair to the landowners who will not receive a permit in the twenty-year plan-
ning horizon.
Goal 105
The Tier maps need to be finalized and adopted for the planning area to give a clear understand-
ing of where development is appropriate and where the County should be concentrating acquisi-
tion efforts. With the State taking additional responsibility for acquiring the Natural Resource
and Conservation Areas (Tier I), the County needs to be purchasing land to reduce the over-all
numbers of lots in the planning area.
Nonconforming Uses
There are non-residential uses and structures within the planning area that are inappropriately
classified in regard to land use designation. These buildings often contribute to the character and
economic vitality of the planning area and need to be evaluated to determine if the land use des-
ignation should be changed. As a result of the non-conforming status of many of these struc-
tures, material improvements or enlargements to the site is extremely difficult, thus the structure
is not improved and many times the building is left vacant.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 1.1
Designate the entire planning area into Natural Resource and Conservation Areas (Tier I), Tran-
sition Area(Tier II) or Infill Areas (Tier III) as appropriate.
Action Item 1.1.1: Prepare Tier System Overlay Map for the planning area based on Goal
105 and established planning criteria and principals for designation of each Tier area and
public involvement.
Action Item 1.1.2: Adopt the Tier system map separate from but as an Overlay of the Land
Use District Map. The Tier System Overlay Map shall be used primarily to focus acquisition
efforts in Tier I and Tier II and to guide development to appropriate areas in Tier II and Tier
III.
Strategy 1.2
Follow the public acquisition strategy, detailed in Strategy 6.2, to purchase land from willing
sellers in the planning area to preserve important upland habitats and reduce the large number of
parcels in the planning area, which will not receive a permit in the twenty year planning horizon.
Land Use and Redevelopment Element 33
Livable CommuniKeys Umter Planfor Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile,Marker 97
Strategy 1.3
Review and evaluate the land use designation of lawfully established non-conforming land uses
and structures within the planning area to determine appropriate designation.
Action Item 1.3.1: Promote community character, establish conformance and resolve land
use issues by identifying and changing the land use designation on parcels of land containing
non-confonning uses and rezone as appropriate.
Action Item 1.3.2: Discourage the continuance of nonconforming uses that are determined in
the review to be inappropriate for the area in which they are located.
Strategy IA
Continue to utilize the Land Use District Map and Supporting Future Land Use Map(FLUM)to
regulate land use type, density and intensity on an individual basis within the planning area.
Action Item 1.4.2: Adopt the following parcel-specific revisions to the Future Land Use
Map(FLUM)category and Land Use District Map:
1. Change the designation of parcels identified with real estate parcel numbers:
566000.00'0000, 566240.0'00000, 477140.000000, 566120.000000,477150.000000,
477160.000000, 477170.000000,477210.000000 and 477180.00,0000 planning area
from Improved Subdivision(IS)to Mixed Use(N"on the Land Use District Map
and from Residential Medium(RM)to Mixed Use Commercial(MC)on the Future:
Land Use Map(FLUM).
2. Change the designation of parcels identified with real estate parcel numbers
476750.000000,476760.000000,476770.000000 and 476780.000000 which are
owned by Monroe County from Improved Subdivision(IS)to Native Area(NA) and
on the Future Land Use Map from Residential Medium(RM)to Residential
Conservation(RC).
3. Change the FLUM designation of parcels identified with the following Real Estate
numbers. 555880.000000; 5560,90.000000, 556080.000000, 555860.000000,
555910.000000; 555890.000000; 555960.0000'00; 555970.000000; 555850.000000;
555840.000000; 556010.000000; 55830.000000; 556020.00000'0; 555820.000000;
556040.000000; 556030.000000; 555990.0'00000; 556070.000000; 556000.000000';
556060.000000, and 5560�50.000000; which are within the Tavernier Creek Bridge to
Mile Marker 97 Master Plan planning area from Mixed-Use Commercial(MC)to
Residential Medium(RM). The purposed change will prevent an established,built-
out neighborhood area with no commercial uses from being considered an area slated
for commercial use pursuant to the FLUM. It is of note that Real Estate numbers:
555940.000000, 555950.0000'00 and 556 100.000000 are not listed on the FLUM as
Mixed-Use (MC)and were not included,
4. Change the Future Land Use Map designation of parcels identified with the following
real estate numbers from Residential Medium (RM) and Residential High(RH)to
Mixed-Use Commercial(MC): 4823 10.000000 and 482320.000000.
34
Land Use and Redevelopment Element
Livable Corr munaiKevs Master Plana for Tavernier CreekBridve to Mile Marker 97
I
u�
r
i
FILi,DhA RM and to MC
s,
i
e �
r
r
"
1
w
orolno�. I rto G
F<�UNv6 E�9w1 to
{ r,
` ,I�
I, I
ZW)41g IS to NA
FLUNI,
a
W to RC tit wwavoe cows ity
H t Sul
ewoUxr 4rwment
'
•�...... �, "' ' �,dXA", f rh d IY rii q, IN
,� 0 hh, �M �v
� 1 .I pt
Om y "JUM r."'Mi-
��t�aoos
I1"v Ftare?.1 Map ofZoning tt:i7d I"IUIMi changes �
35
Lund Use and Reclev l'OPme nt Elenierat
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
I%
COMMUNITY CHARACTER ELEMENT
PON/
// A I's
N
4111VIVP eim!", 1,011/1116/ilw
IS%
A/
i iu,
v 11/2
Community Character Element 36
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL TWO
PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE QUALITIES OF NEIGHBOR-
HOODS BETWEEN TAVERNIER CREEK BRIDGE AND MILE
MARKER 97 - ITS SMALL TOWN UNIQUE CHARACTER, LUSH
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND WATER ORIENTATION.
Current Conditions Summary
The words "small town" serves to both paint a picture and suggest the atmosphere of the Tav-
ernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 planning area. This planning area is not extremely di-
verse, but has many interesting neighborhoods with their own individual identities. From the his-
toric "conch-style" construction, to the mixed use neighborhoods and large commercial center in
the traditional town of Tavernier, to the hammock in the northern end of the planning area, a de-
fining characteristic are the green spaces which separate uses and provides privacy to the
neighborhoods.
The major land use in this island community is native habitat, both upland hammocks and wet-
lands. The natural areas surround the residential neighborhoods giving to each a unique "sense
of place". The tall native trees are in contrast to areas in the lower Keys where the vegetation is
low or was mostly removed during construction activities. The hammock provides a buffer for
the residential neighborhoods from the noise and motion on U.S. 1. The hammock stand in the
median of U.S. 1 contributes to the over-all environmental and scenic quality of the planning
area.
The development pattern is reflected in the proposed Tier Map designations. The infill areas,
Tier III, are the existing neighborhoods with more than 50% of the existing lots developed. Tier
I contains the larger natural areas, greater then four acres,providing the major divisions between
neighborhoods. The smaller patches of fragmented hammocks throughout the area and large
Suburban Residential lots with hammock on U.S. 1 are designated Tier 11.
Citizens of this planning area during the workshops and responding to surveys identified the
proximity to the water, natural environment and open (green area) space as the main qualities
they liked about living in this planning area. Preservation of the natural environment and small
town "island" character are the qualities identified as most important.
Analysis of Community Need
Development Patterns
Preserving the existing development patterns in this planning area - neighborhoods separated by
green space—is of primary importance to the residents. There is also much support for maintain-
ing the tall trees within the neighborhoods. Continued support by citizens of this area for the
protection and preservation of these qualities is critical in the implementation of the Master Plan.
Community Character Element 37
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
U.S. 1 Buffer and Median
The natural vegetated buffer along U.S. 1 and in the median needs to be preserved. The vegeta-
tion not only buffers the residential neighborhoods from the major highway in the Florida Keys,
but also provides a feeling of a green belt between the traditional towns of Tavernier and Rock
Harbor/Key Largo. Expanding the natural vegetation along the roadway would enhance and pro-
vide additional buffer to the road and the neighborhoods.
Tier Maps
A mechanism needs to be instituted to identify those areas more appropriate for infill (Tier III)
development and other areas that need to be preserved (Tier I) in a natural state. Monroe County
is already in the process of developing the Tier Maps pursuant to countywide Smart Growth Ini-
tiatives adopted in Goal 105 of the Comprehensive Plan. Any permitted development in the Tier
11 areas needs to be carefully controlled to consider the character the fragmented hammocks
which contribute to the character of this planning area.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 2.1
Limit clearing for new construction to maintain the tree cover in the neighborhoods and along
the U.S. 1 corridor area.
Action Item 2.1.1: Amend existing habitat analysis policies and regulations to designate all
lots in Tier I in this planning area as automatic high quality and limit clearing to a maximum
of twenty percent.
Action Item 2.1.2: Amend existing habitat analysis policies and regulations to designate all
lots containing hammock areas in Tier 11 and Tier III in this planning area, whether old or re-
growth, as automatic moderate quality and limit clearing to a maximum of forty percent.
Action Item 2.1.3: Cluster new development on lots adjacent to U.S. 1 between Tavernier
Creek and MM 97 away from the roadway maintaining the maximum amount of existing
vegetation, even if the quality of the hammock would dictate clustering the development
closer to the road under Sec. 9.5-345(f).
Action Item 2.1.4: Prohibit the transfer of development rights (TDRs) to increase density on
lots zoned Suburban Residential (SR) with upland native vegetation that are less than 20,000
square feet in size.
Strategy 2.2
Prepare and adopt a Tier System Map for the planning area designating the boundaries of Tier I,
Tier 11 and Tier III lands as described in Comprehensive Plan Policy 105.2.1 and prioritize areas
in Tier I for acquisition to maintain the terrestrial environment and Tier 11 for local character and
environmental quality.
Action Item 2.2.1: Acquire Tier I lands, adjacent to publicly owned land, to preserve the ma-
jor divisions between neighborhoods as well as preserve the most significant environmental
habitat.
Community Character Element 38
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 2.2.2: Prioritize the vacant fragmented hammock patches in Tier 11, which are
not currently protected with a conservation easement, for acquisition by the County. These
fragments are an important character element of the planning area.
Strategy 2.3
Increase the native hammock buffer areas adjacent to U.S. 1.
Action Item 2.3.1: Coordinate with Florida Department of Transportation to plant the median
of U.S. 1 and any excess right-of-way that does not currently contain hammock, with native
vegetation between MM 93 and MM 97.
Action Item 2.3.2: Require landscape buffers in this section of U.S. 1 to be planted with na-
tive plants.
Action Item 2.3.3: Encourage existing businesses between Mile Markers 93 and 97 to pro-
vide native landscape buffers on their properties.
Community Character Element 39
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL THREE
DEFINE, MAINTAIN AND ENHANCE THE COMMUNITY CHARA G
TER FROM MM 91 MM 93.5 .
Current Conditions Summary
Community character was a major point of discussion and planning focus during the LCP proc-
ess. While the planning area (MM 91- MM 97) as a whole is defined by the native terrestrial
habitat Mile Marker 91 to 93.5 has its own unique identity. Defining the community character
meant many things to LCP workshop participants and survey respondents including recognition
of the unique natural character, maintaining the area's historic character and moderate pace, and
enhancement of community gathering areas for conducting business, socializing and recreation.
Homes for the residents of the town are primarily small single family houses or mobile homes;
some built as early as the 1920's and 1930's. Larger homes, built more recently, are beginning
to fill in the shoreline and replace some of the traditional "conch' style homes. Small mobile
homes are also being replaced by "double-wide" or stick built houses. However, the essential
character of the area remains one of small homes nestled along the shoreline or within the up-
land hammocks.
In October 2003 Monroe County proceeded with a design planning process for the commercial
corridor area for Mile Marker 91 to 93.5. The charrette was a facilitated community discussion
during which design concepts were developed and graphically assembled at the meeting for im-
mediate reaction.
Analysis of Community Needs
Parking and Setbacks from U.S. 1
When U.S. 1 was widened to four lanes through this planning area many existing businesses lost
much of their parking and setback from the roadway. The businesses became non-conforming as
to parking and setbacks, this presents a problem when they try to redevelop or when new owners
try and start a new business.
U.S. 1 and Major Street Beautification
The idea of the Main Street element introduced and evaluated during the LCP process drew
some support in the community with ideas for beautification of U.S. 1 and the commercial cen-
ter of the island. Circulation and ease of accessibility for the human population was integrated
into the beautification element during the corridor enhancement charrette process.
Commercial Building Design Guidelines
There may be support for design guidelines for new and replacement buildings. Tavernier is a
`historic community" with many remaining examples of early "conch" construction. Recom-
mendations for design guidelines will be included in the Corridor Enhancement Plan. Care
should also be taken to ensure that design requirements do not stifle a positive redevelopment
momentum.
Scale of Residential Construction
While there is general support in the community for limited additional residential construction,
there is concern that new construction should be of the general scale of existing homes. This is-
sue is not in relation to the larger single-family homes being built in the town, but in relation to
the potential for employee housing projects that maybe proposed in the area. In particular there
was opposition to multi-family"garden apartment"type of units.
Community Character Element 40
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 3.1
Recognize and protect the existing mix of land uses in the U.S. 1 corridor area as the character
that defines planning area.
Action Item 3.1.1: Designate a "Community Center" from MM 91 to Burton Dr. pursuant to
Policy 105.2.15 where Tier III infill and incentives for redevelopment will be encouraged.
Action Item 3.1.2: Require that any new development or redevelopment approved within the
designated US Highway 1 Community Center, meeting the following criteria, be consistent
with design standards established pursuant to Action Items 3.2.3 and 3.3.3:
1. Any new or expanded non-residential structures of greater than 2,500 square feet in floor
area;
2. Any new or expanded outdoor retail sales;
3. Any new residential structure containing more than three units or redeveloped residential
structure containing more than three units that involves a change in floor area, building height
or configuration of building footprint;
4. Any new transient residential structure or redeveloped existing transient residential structure
that involves a change of floor area, building height, or configuration of building footprint.
Action Item 3.1.3: Prohibit the designation of new commercial land use districts beyond
that contained in this Master Plan in order to protect the existing viability of the US I
Corridor Area and Community Center and to prevent the further sprawl or strip
commercial zoning.
Action Item 3.1.4: Prohibit the following new uses or change of uses within the Tavernier
Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 planning area: 1) Commercial retail high-intensity uses
that generate above one hundred and fifty(150) average daily trips per one thousand
(1,000) square feet; 2) Storage areas as a principal use; 3) Outdoor retail sales on a vacant
lot and any new or expanded outdoor retail sales associated with structures of less than
five hundred (500) square feet of floor area.
Action Item 3.1.5: Enact a temporary moratorium on all development meeting the
threshold for design review and approval in Action Item 3.1.2 until adoption of design
standards for the US Highway I Community Center are adopted or six months after the
effective date of this Master Plan, whichever comes first.
Action Item 3.1.6: Require that any development or redevelopment approved within the
designated Tavernier Historic Overlay District (Figure 3.1), to include the areas
designated as the Existing Historic District and Proposed Historic District, meeting the
following criteria, be consistent with design standards and in compliance with regulatory
controls established pursuant to Strategy 4.1:
1. Any structure that is designated by Monroe County as a historic resource;
2. Any structure identified by"The Final Report Historic Architectural Survey of
Unincorporated Areas of Monroe County Florida(2003)"prepared by GAI Consultants
Inc.
Action Item 3.1.7: Enact a temporary moratorium on all development meeting the
threshold for design review and approval in Action Item 3.1.6 until the adoption of design
standards and regulatory controls for the Tavernier Historic Overlay District are adopted
or six months after the effective date of the Master Plan, whichever occurs first.
41
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Strategy 3.2
Develop and adopt a Commercial Corridor Enhancement Plan for the U.S. 1 Corridor Area be-
tween MM 91 and MM 93.5.
Action Item 3.2.1: Define the U.S. 1 Community Center as the area from MM 91 to Burton
Dr. It is the focus of community activity due to the dominant land use pattern of commercial
and other non-residential uses. A program of planning for this area shall be continued and
accelerated.
Action Item 3.2.2: Generate a Corridor Enhancement Plan, based upon the corridor enhance-
ment planning process which includes ideas for improvement of traffic and pedestrian/
bicycle movement,parking, beautification, and incorporation of parks/open space.
Action Item 3.2.3: Develop and adopt design standards and design guidelines for develop-
ment within the U.S. 1 Corridor Area and the Community Center.
Action Item 3.2.4: Provide incentives for property owners on U.S. 1 to make landscaping and
building improvements and bring signs into conformance with the Enhancement Plan.
Strategy 3.3
Adopt a zoning overlay for the designated Community Center defined in Action Item 3.2.1
and specific Land Development Regulations for that overlay.
Action Item 3.3.1: Provide alternative parking options for businesses such as a municipal
parking lot.
Action Item 3.3.2: Provide "contextual" setbacks to preserve the historic character of the
area and remove existing non-conformities.
Action Item 3.3.3: Define the elements that contribute to the community character of Tavern-
ier and adopt Design Guidelines for development and redevelopment so the qualities of the
community are preserved.
Action Item 3.3.4: Prohibit new storage lots on U.S. 1 within the planning area in order to
enhance the community character of the U.S. 1 Corridor Area.
Action Item 3.3.5: Require existing commercial parcels proposed for Employee Housing
density bonuses be developed consistent with the design standards adopted pursuant to Action
Items 3.2.3 and 3.3.3.
Action Item 3.3.6: Encourage small businesses, that are not of historic quality, on U.S. 1 to
add employee apartments; either attached or on the property if construction can be accom-
plished within the design guidelines for the commercial corridor.
Action Item 3.3.7: Encourage adaptive reuse of historic non-residential structures for em-
ployee housing being careful to maintain the historic qualities of the structures.
Community Character Element 42
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL FOUR
PROTECT AND ENHANCE HISTORIC, CULTURAL, AND AR-
CHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES WITHIN TAVERNIER TO MAINTAIN
THE INTEGRITY OF THE COMMUNITY'S UNIQUE CHARACTER.
Current Conditions Summary
The Comprehensive Plan contains standards for recognizing, designating, protecting, and pre-
serving historic structures within the county (Objective 104), which are further implemented
through current Land Development Regulations (Article VIII). Monroe County has stipulated
specific procedures for protecting historic, cultural and archaeological resources in the develop-
ment review process. Under current regulations all new proposed development in the ROGO
and NROGO system carry significant bonus or penalty points for projects, which either have an
adverse or positive affect on a historic structure or known archaeological resource. In addition,
the County coordinates with other agencies and organizations to maintain a current inventory of
historic, cultural, and archaeological resources. The County has worked closely with the Tav-
ernier Historic Group and the Historic Florida Keys Foundation to identify current and potential
places and sites for future preservation within the planning area. In addition, during the past 20
years, three independent cultural resource surveys have been completed with the planning area.
The most recent survey was conducted in July 2003 by GAI Consultants.
At the request of the county, GAI consultants completed an architectural survey of all unincor-
porated areas and an evaluation for listing sites in the National Register of Historic Places and/or
Monroe County Landmarks. The survey included a detailed list of properties located within the
Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 planning area as well as specific recommendations for the
area. Of all the properties surveyed, fifty-three were identified as being eligible for national his-
toric designation. Currently, eight of those properties are designated as Monroe County land-
marks and seventeen are listed as Monroe County Historic Landmarks. In addition to the im-
portance of each individual site and/or structure, the consultants recognized Tavernier as being
collectively significant and recommended that it be nominated as a district on the National Reg-
ister of Historic Places. Other recommendations include, completing a comprehensive survey
every 5 to 8 years, establishing a marker program, conducting a comprehensive review of the
historic preservation ordinance, as well as developing and adopting historic architectural design
guidelines for historic properties or those contributing to historic districts.
The primary method of protecting such resources in the planning area has been through the es-
tablishment of a historic overlay, land acquisition, and the designation of historic places and
sites. The designation process requires the owner of a property proposed for historic designation
to voluntarily submit an application requesting the designation. The Historic Preservation Com-
mission reviews the application based on criteria in the LDRs and recommends either approval
or denial to the Board of County Commissioners. Only those properties approved for historic
designation are subject to the requirements of the ordinance and review by the Historic Preserva-
tion Commission. A certificate of appropriateness is required before a permit may be issued on
the property. Forty-eight historical places and sites have received local, state, and/or national
designation as of adoption of this master plan.
Community Character Element 43
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Analysis of Community Need
Protection of Historic, Cultural, and Archaeological Resources
The Comprehensive Plan and LDRs contain policies regarding the voluntary designation and
protection of historic, cultural, and archaeological resources. There is a need to specifically ad-
dress the resources within the planning area with specific focus on protecting the integrity of the
historic district. Standards are needed that will protect the historical structures, as well as the
current landscape and public infrastructure. Coordination between multiple agencies needs to
take place to ensure that conservation areas are permanently protected from development.
Design Guidelines for Historic District
The Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations do not address specific design
guidelines for historical districts. There is a need to create such guidelines specific to Old His-
toric Tavernier to maintain and enhance the integrity of the district. New development and sub-
stantial improvements have been permitted to occur without regard to the architectural style of
the district. Potentially, as development continues to occur in such a way that it does not harmo-
nize with the current character the integrity of the historic district may be lost. These design
guidelines should be coordinated with the Corridor Enhancement Plan.
Design Review Committee
There is a need to expand the historic preservation functions of the Historic Preservation Com-
mission to oversee all development activities within the planning area. All development activi-
ties that occur within the historic district impact the over-all value of the district and should be
designed to reflect the historic character of the area.
Evaluation and Monitoring Resources
Recently, a survey of existing and potential historic resources has been conducted. There is a
need to update the existing inventory of resources on a regular basis as the number of buildings
and/or sites reach the 50-year threshold for designation eligibility. In addition, there is a need to
maintain coordination between the county and other agencies to ensure that regulations for his-
toric designation, preservation and conservation are being met and to limit the overlap in activi-
ties.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 4.1
Protect the future integrity of Tavernier's Historic District by adopting ordinances that clearly
define the boundaries of the district, commit to preserving the historic qualities of the district
and provide guidelines for all future development activities in the district.
Action Item 4.1.1: Expand the boundaries of the Historic District to include all properties
highway to ocean from the current Historic District Overlay southern boundary through to
Tavernier Creek and the adjacent property to the north in addition to the current historic
overlay.
Action Item 4.1.2: Adopt the expanded boundaries of Tavernier Historic District, as an over-
lay on the Future Land Use Map and the Land Use District Map.
Community Character Element 44
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 4.1.3: Prepare and adopt historic design guidelines and regulations that specifi-
cally define the architectural and contextual qualities and criteria that shall be followed for
all development, remodeling and redevelopment projects within the District.
Action Item 4.1.4: Investigate the option of expanding the authority of the Historic Preserva-
tion Commission to review, approve the design of and issue a Certificate of Appropriateness
for any building permit applications in the Tavernier Historic District for exterior improve-
ment or interior improvement if cited as significant to the properties designation.
Action Item 4.1.5: Investigate the expansion of the boundaries of the Historic District to in-
clude additional areas of historic importance.
Strategy 4.2
Coordinate with the Florida Departments of Transportation, Environmental Protection, and
Community Affairs, local agencies, the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Keys Electric, Key
Largo Waste Treatment District and the South Florida Water Management District to ensure the
continuing protection, maintenance and improvement of the historic area.
Action Item 4.2.1: Work with coordinating agencies to investigate the potential of creating a
passive pedestrian accessible recreation area at the Tavernier Creek hammocks site, bayside,
to be incorporated into the county-wide Overseas Heritage Trail Plan.
Action Item 4.2.2: Work with the Florida Department of Transportation to maintain current
pavement widths. In addition, on local streets discourage finished curbs and gutters, and in-
stead encourage grassy or stone lined drainage ditches or natural swales where needed.
Action Item 4.2.3: Coordinate with Public Works to discourage the act of tree topping and/or
major pruning along public right of way within the Historic District.
Action Item 4.2.4: Acquire hammock lands within the Historic District to maintain the con-
text of the historic community character.
Action Item 4.2.5: Encourage all agencies to work with the Historic Preservation Commis-
sion when considering improvements or changes to any public facility in the Tavernier His-
toric District; they will need a Certificate of Appropriateness to do improvements.
Strategy 4.3
Provide recognition and definition to the Tavernier Historic Overlay District.
Action Item 4.3.1: Establish a voluntary Historic Marker Plaque program for historic homes
that are identified as a local, state, and/or national historic, cultural, or archaeological re-
source.
Action Item 4.3.2: Erect a historical marker on both north and southbound lanes upon enter-
Community Character Element 45
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
ing the Historic Tavernier District.
Action Item 4.3.3: Prepare an application to nominate the area defined as "Historic Tavern-
ier" for designation on the National Register of Historic Places.
Action Item 4.3.4: Create and establish an identification system within the Monroe County
Building Permit Tracking system in order to identify historic or contributing properties,
which will ensure the protection and proper maintenance of such properties.
Action Item 4.3.5: Require that any development, remodeling or redevelopment approved
within the designated Tavernier Historic Overlay District (Figure 3.1), to include the
areas designated as the Existing Historic District and Proposed Historic District, meeting
the following criteria, be consistent with design standards and in compliance with
regulatory controls established pursuant to Strategy 4.1:
1. Any structure that is designated by Monroe County as an historic resource;
2. Any structure identified by "The Final Report Historic Architectural
Survey of Unincorporated Areas of Monroe County Florida (2003)"
prepared by GAI Consultants Inc.
Action Item 4.3.6: Enact a temporary moratorium on all development meeting the
threshold for design review and approval in Action Item 4.3.5 until adoption of design
standards and regulatory controls for the Tavernier Historic Overlay District are adopted
or six months after the effective date of this Master Plan, whichever occurs first.
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects
The major fiscal implications found within the Community Character Element are those of land
acquisition for the preservation of natural resources and of neighborhood character within the
historic district and other neighborhoods within the planning area. The plan calls for all vacant,
privately owned parcels designated as Tier I to be considered for acquisition using state or
county funding resources. Additionally, the plan calls for the acquisition of several fragmented
hammock patches Tier I1 areas in order to preserve community character and protect the patches
from being further divided. While these actions are specifically defined as a part of this element,
they are a part of the larger acquisition program described in the Environmental Protection Ele-
ment.
The Community Character Element also specifically mentions the acquisition of hammock par-
cels in the historic district to preserve the habitat and character of the area. There are approxi-
mately 30 parcels which fall under this category, all to be designated Tier I1 or Tier 1I1. Tier I1
parcels are accounted for in the Environmental Protection Element, however, the Tier III parcels
are not. The approximate assessed value of the 30 parcels in the historic district is $600,000.
Community Character Element 46
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
'Tavernler Creek to Mile Marker, 917
Tavernier Historic District
t
"!
i
i'I 1 � ..
rif
7
1�A"'ddwf,l'�; .
AX
if
Il
L. Y
1
1 q
1 J ill t`
Historic District
Existing Historic District
"v ,� it 't� Proposed Historic District
r i
�A+lC6t'�R"�a �Lw9i��at�v
Planning and E xivnrraxarrnentul
'd�niN lrnrq rt �M w,im.�«a �' tlunrvw69v�1 a�ao�,nn gy6r la�nsnu
a���en�d b �av ay„nv� tiauluassl M ar. �sh„Aw�n�,.�.�ry
e n u�"iFfl� w.v�rn�vmly latl ec[lgmm��Nr .I mr...tla mrail�t,
�M1xl FI'''xu„,Mx,. 9 ll t'.wA'Mmry I grv4N',pp.
➢^q'—d uKyy I I4 1 b"^_BWY:I
Figure 3.1 Historic overlay district and proposed expanded district area.
Community Character Element 47
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
SCIIII
I%
HO USING ELEMENT
PON/
Housing Element 48
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL FIVE
MAINTAIN THE AVAILABILITY OF HOUSING THAT IS AFFORD-
ABLE FOR LOCAL RESIDENTS AND THE WORKFORCE WHILE
PRESERVING THE CHARA CTER OF THE COMMUNITY.
Current Conditions Summary
This planning area has traditionally been a working community from the early farmers and fish-
ermen to the firemen, teachers and service workers who lived within the area. In the last ten
years the demographics of the area has changed with a decline in permanent population of more
than 10%, from 1,971 persons to 1,755 persons. The largest decline in population was in the 21
to 54 age group, (15%); the prime working years.
Housing units have increased, according to the Census Bureau, by 235 units, while permanent
housing has decreased by 11%, 216 units. This includes a decrease in rental units of 121 units.
The change in household types living here permanently is also evident when income level com-
parisons are made in the U.S. Census for the 1989 to 1999 periods. The median household in-
come for the planning area in 2000 was $42,830 (the medium income level county-wide was
approximately $42,283). There was a decrease of 380 households making less than $50,000 a
year in the ten-year period and an increase of 164 households making more than $50,000 a year.
Of the sixteen business owners or managers in the planning area who responded to a Planning
Department survey in June 2002, none indicated that their employees were paid more than
$40,000 a year and most of their employees lived outside the planning area.
With the upward trend of more seasonal units in the area, the cost of existing housing for the
year-round resident is also increasing. According to census figures, 50% of the residents in
owner-occupied units and 50% of the residents in rental units in the planning area spend more
than one fourth of their monthly household income on housing expenses alone. According to the
2000 U.S. Census Bureau, the median owner-occupied dwelling unit in the planning area is val-
ued at $226,000. Discussions with realtors in the area provide an estimate that the selling price
of homes in the area has increased by approximately thirty percent (30%) a year for the last two
years. The number of renter occupied housing has decreased since 1990, while rentals have in-
creased within the county as a whole. The median rent within the planning area is $715.
Approximately one third of the dwelling units in the planning area are mobile homes. These
have traditionally been an economical alternative for both the workforce and retirees to live in
the area. A windshield survey of areas zoned URM, which allow both mobile homes and de-
tached residential units, has resulted in what appears to be an increase of stick built or modular
construction and a corresponding decrease in mobile homes over the last few years. According
to Building Department records, within the past ten years only 16 mobile homes have been re-
placed with single family residences, but over half of those have been in the last two years, indi-
cating an increasing trend at mobile home replacement. However, within the past ten years a
total of 41 mobile homes have been upgraded to newer models but have not been replaced with
single family homes.
Figure 4.1 Shows the existing housing types within the planning area.
Housing Element 49
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Tavernier Creek to MHe Marker 97
Existing Residential Uses >^
f ,F
r >
Residential Use �
�.......... single Fam,illy
Mufti-Family 1 Condominium
�rONS (Recreational Vehicle � `4
�11111111111111JJJJJJ� Mobile Horne ANdITf�
Mobile Home Park 01 iFtuu "fitaY
y
hk� ....
FEW r uio�tia� ..
f
iI
j 1
1 Ra
IY
+ LYE
�r �airru�t,
N Mo'nroe>C.:ounty
Plrana7rrt �nc3 Fax�ix•onaruenta�l
Rcsoi^r,ces 6,ep6rtment
rm, ,W' �aW,n�,k", rr,
.......
ei r A,
hAil�k"a Yrn.M,sr l.rylr I'S+ C,tmtnnura P-,rr.�.u.:5
Figure 4.1 Existing residential areas with the planning area.
Housing Element 50
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Analysis of Community Need
Affordability of housing units
The continuing need for maintaining and increasing the availability of affordable housing in the
area was a concern expressed in the workshops and surveys by some respondents. The occu-
pancy trend in the planning area is towards more seasonal and weekend residents. Housing costs
are rising beyond the affordability of the current permanent residents. When homes are sold, at
current prices, they are out of the range of affordability for many of the permanent residents of
the community and those who would like to live near where they work. Therefore when most
people sell there homes it is to move out of the Florida Keys as they can not afford to purchase
another house.
Mobile Homes
Housing costs for a mobile home are typically less than that of a single-family dwelling or con-
dominium. As these units are sold they are often purchased by seasonal residents and either de-
molished and rebuilt as more expensive units or only used on a part time basis. Sustainability of
the existing affordable units in the area may also require protection of the existing mobile
homes.
Housing types
Residents have expressed concerns that affordable housing developments will not fit into this
historic community of small conch style houses and mobile homes. They do not see their com-
munity as wanting any additional garden style apartment complexes, which are being used in
other areas to provide affordable housing in the County. More than 60% of the respondents to
the Planning Department community survey supported architectural design guidelines.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 5.1
Promote employee housing above and in conjunction with commercial buildings in the Commu-
nity Center Overlay district, as this planning area has capacity to add some employee-housing
units based on the commercial floor area ratio of the different commercial parcels.
Action Item 5.1.1: Work with businesses in the area when they are ready to develop and re-
develop to identify if the site could also be used to provide employee housing and explain
the county incentives for providing affordable employee housing.
Action Item 5.1.2: Redevelopment projects will come into compliance with landscaping and
bulk regulations so far as practicable.
Housing Element 51
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Strategy 5.2
Encourage the development and redevelopment of commercial and mixed-use zoned land for
employee housing.
Action 5.2.1: Investigate opportunities to acquire commercial properties of sufficient size for
the construction of employee housing units with the County owning the land in perpetuity.
Strategy 5.3
Maintain and improve the existing stock of affordable housing.
Action Item 5.3.1: Continue and expand the existing programs of the Monroe County
Housing Authority to assist first time home buyers purchase housing in the planning area.
Action Item 5.3.2: Identify current mobile home parks that serve as affordable workforce
housing and determine if it would be appropriate for the county to acquire and maintain them
as affordable housing.
Action Item 5.3.2: Investigate reducing the permit cost of the replacement of mobile homes
to encourage existing units to upgrade and remain affordable.
52
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
I%
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ELEMENT
PON/
// A %iris 15A
eim!",
f i, . it
..
Environmental Protection Element 53
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL SIX
PRESERVE, MANAGE, AND RESTORE WHERE APPROPRIATE, THE
NATURAL RESOURCES WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA, TAKING
CARE TO PRESERVE OPEN SPACE AND PROTECT WATER QUAL-
ITY AND TO ACQUIRE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LANDS.
Current Conditions Summary
Environmental protection within the planning area has primarily been implemented using the
following mechanisms environmental design criteria in the Land Development Regulations, dis-
couraging development in environmentally sensitive areas through the ROGO point system and
acquisition of terrestrial and wetland habitat.
Natural resource land management activities within the planning area have focused on manage-
ment of undisturbed habitat or restoration of disturbed habitat areas. Traditional habitat manage-
ment within the planning area has usually included the following activities: land protection (i.e.,
from dumping, roaming domestic animals,poaching, etc.), eradication of invasive exotic vegeta-
tion, habitat restoration through replanting of disturbed areas. These activities are best suited to
unpopulated or sparsely populated areas. Until recently most agencies have generally avoided
the acquisition of platted, improved subdivision lots, whether they contained natural habitat or
not. The application of management activities to subdivision lots presents additional problems,
primarily due to concerns of neighbors. The amount of work needed to manage small frag-
mented subdivision parcels has made the cost-benefit ratio seem less attractive in the scheme of
a management program that covers thousands of acres.
The Natural Resource and Conservation areas (Tier I) Map is based upon all areas of hammocks
greater than four acres or undeveloped parcels adjacent to natural areas which provide a buffer
and can be restored. There are approximately 500 parcels of privately owned land in Tier I in the
planning area designated for acquisition. Most of the designated endangered species habitat is
also included in this mapped area, with the exception of turtles and wetland species, which re-
ceive protection on a site-by-site basis.
The majority of the smaller fragmented hammocks isolated by surrounding development are
mapped in the Transition Area(Tier II). They are not of the same high quality of the Natural Re-
source and Conservation Areas, but they provide habitat for songbirds and small animals and
contribute to the quality of the neighborhoods.
Wetlands are also protected. The degree of protection is dependent on the quality of the wetland.
High quality undisturbed wetlands, regardless where they are located, are classified as "red flag"
and may not be disturbed for development activities. Disturbed wetlands may be filled and de-
veloped; the mitigation for the development activity is based on the quality of the wetland on the
site.
Environmental Protection Element 54
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
The natural environment is of critical concern to most of the residents of the planning area. Pres-
ervation of the natural resources in the area was recognized by a large majority of the respon-
dents as important in maintaining the quality of life and character of the planning area.
Analysis of Community Needs
Habitat Management Implementation.
There is a need to plan for organized habitat management of lands acquired for conservation
purposes. The county has not traditionally engaged in natural lands management in the past and
has only recently dedicated one employee position to this activity. Therefore, efficient habitat
management will likely be accomplished through heavy coordination with existing management
entities operating within the planning area. There is a need to anticipate future management
needs based upon habitat acquisition goals and to determine how the county will handle expand-
ing management responsibilities.
Protection of Hammocks.
All remaining hammocks of four acres or greater are included in the Conservation and Natural
Areas (Tier I) Overlay Map and need to be protected as high quality habitat. Further protection
is also needed for smaller habitat parcels (Tier II), which may be within partially developed
neighborhoods. The habitat classification system used to determine open space requirements
should be modified to reduce allowable clearing on lots with habitat.
Public Lands
A large amount of acreage in this planning area approximately 840 acres is in public ownership.
The boundaries for Conservation and Resource Lands (CARL) need to be expanded to include
all of Tier I and be designated for State acquisition. The County should concentrate acquisition
efforts on the Tier 11 fragmented habitat areas.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 6.1
Create and adopt Tier System Land Use District Overlay Maps for the planning area depicting
the locations of Tier I, Tier 11 and Tier III lands as described in Comprehensive Plan Policy
105.2.1.
Action Item 6.1.1: Draft the Tier I overlay to follow the Conservation and Natural Areas
boundary. Tier I will include all contiguous hammock areas above four acres and restoration
areas between fragmented hammocks to increase the hammock size and buffers where possi-
ble.
Action Item 6.1.2: Draft the Tier 11 overlay areas that include the smaller hammock patches
isolated by surrounding development, which provide habitat for songbirds and small animals
and contribute to the quality of the neighborhoods.
Action Item 6.1.3: Draft the Tier III overlay areas to contain subdivisions that are mostly
built out and appropriate for infill development.
Environmental Protection Element 55
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Strategy 6.2
Prepare an acquisition strategy, coordinating with state agencies, to acquire parcels with the
highest habitat value first.
Action Item 6.2.1: Prioritize the acquisition of Tier I lands over Tier II and Tier III lands.
Action Item 6.2.2: Encourage the State of Florida to revise the CARL boundaries within the
planning area to correspond with the coverage of Tier I as depicted on the Tier System Over-
lay Map for the purpose of prioritizing State purchases.
Action Item 6.2.3: Coordinate with the state to acquire the lands within the Natural Resource
and Conservation Areas (Tier I).
Action Item 6.2.4: Prioritize the County acquisition program to Tier II lands and wetland
parcels in Tier III if the State accepts primary responsibility for Tier I acquisition.
Action Item 6.2.5: Identify lots and parcels in the Transition Areas (Tier II) with fragments
of hammock and/or wetlands for public acquisition in close coordination with neighborhood
groups.
Action Item 6.2.6: Provide the highest priority for acquisition in Action Item 6.2.5 to those
parcels with neighboring property owners or communities who want to partner with the
county to purchase the lot and/or will take responsibility for maintenance and protection of
the resource.
Action Item 6.2.7: Acquire as the third priority those scarified lots in the Transition Area
(Tier II), which will be acquired for density reduction. Those communities and/or neighbor-
ing property owners who wish to partner with the county in the acquisition process will re-
ceive a higher priority for acquisition.
Action Item 6.2.8: Prepare criteria to be applied in determining which properties will receive
the first offers in the Transition Areas (Tier II).
Strategy 6.3
Identify and pursue existing and new means of retiring development rights.
Action Item 6.3.1: Amend the administrative relief and beneficial use provisions of the Com-
prehensive Plan to require purchase of land for Tier I applicants and to allow purchase or
issuance of a permit for Tier II and Tier III applicants as appropriate.
Action Item 6.3.2: Encourage density reduction through lot aggregation on Tier II and Tier
III lands.
Action Item 6.3.3: Coordinate with the local community and/or neighboring homeowners
acquiring upland hammock lots in Tier II with the objective of sharing the purchase costs
and deeding ownership and maintenance responsibilities to the community and/or neighbors.
Environmental Protection Element 56
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Strategy 6.4
Formulate and carry out a plan for habitat management of lands acquired for conservation pur-
poses.
Action Item 6.4.1: Offer any lands purchased by the County adjacent to State owned lands to
the State for management.
Action Item 6.4.2: Identify and prioritize conservation lands under County ownership and
management for implementation of management activities and anticipate future management
needs based upon the projected acquisition timing of properties.
Action Item 6.4.3: Identify and prioritize management activities such as fence removal, inva-
sive exotic vegetation control, control of free roaming pets and habitat restoration.
Strategy 6.5
Reduce the permitted clearing of Hammock lots.
Action Item 6.5.1: Amend existing habitat analysis policies and regulations to designate all
lots containing hammock areas in Tier 11 and Tier III in this planning area, whether old or re-
growth, as automatic moderate quality and limit clearing to a maximum of forty percent.
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects
As with the capital costs outlined in the Community Character Element, the capital costs in-
volved in the Environmental Protection Element revolve around the acquisition of sensitive
habitat for the protection of the natural environment and character of the communities. The plan
recommends that the state revise the acquisition boundaries to include Tier I properties to be-
come priority for the state to purchase. There are approximately 392 vacant Tier I parcels in the
planning area under private ownership that are outside of the state preservation boundaries. The
approximate assessed value of these parcels is $1.5 million
The plan also calls for the acquisition of Tier 11 parcels with fragments of hammock and/or wet-
lands by the county or though public-private partnerships with the local neighborhoods. The
cost of implementing this action of the plan is unclear at this time, as the location and amount of
parcels which fulfill the above criteria is unknown. However, the intent was to keep the cost
low to both the county and the partnering neighborhood groups by forming a partnership. The
benefit to the county is the protection of sensitive habitat and a reduction in density, while the
neighborhood retains the benefit of the natural and historic character.
Environmental Protection Element 57
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
I%
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
PON/
// A %iris 15A
l
J J Illlllllllllll%ll rWho$///
Economic Development Element 58
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL SEVEN
SUSTAIN THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL B USI-
NESSES AND ENCO URA GE REDEVELOPMENT OR INFILL BE-
TWEEN MM 91 AND B URTON DRIVE AND DISCO URA GE ADDI-
TIONAL STRIP DEVELOPMENT OF THE U.S. I CORRIDOR.
Current Conditions Summary
There are approximately twenty-four industrial and manufacturing businesses in the planning
area. Most of these are small businesses employing one or two people. They include home-based
occupations or mobile repair services and are located primarily between MM 91 and MM 93.5.
Types of industrial businesses in the area are boat repair, fabrication and other home-based oc-
cupations or mobile repair services. The need to inventory and consider the redevelopment of
water-dependent and water-related uses is included in the 2010 Comprehensive Plan in Objec-
tive 212.1 and Chapter 9J-5.12 of the Florida Administrative Code.
Commercial retail is concentrated along the U.S. 1 corridor area. There are approximately 180
commercial businesses identified in the property appraiser's records in the planning area includ-
ing a major shopping center, restaurants, specialty shops, and professional, construction and ser-
vice related offices.
Tourist housing is an important economic activity in the planning area, providing jobs and cus-
tomers for the restaurants and specialty shops in the area. Eight motels, with 270 rooms, provide
for transient visitors to the area. An additional 160 units may be rented for "vacation rentals" in
the gated community of Ocean Pointe. There are four Recreation Vehicle (RV) Parks with 113
approved recreational vehicle spaces for the camper. Key Largo Ocean Resort, the only park
area zoned Recreation Vehicle (RV) and restricted to transient uses, is currently going through
an amendment process to permit permanent dwelling units.
Analysis of Community Needs
Nonconforming Uses
There are non-residential uses and structures within the planning area that are inappropriately
classified in regard to land use designation. These buildings often contribute to the character and
economic vitality of the planning area and need to be evaluated to determine if the land use des-
ignation should be changed. As a result of the non-conforming status, material improvements or
enlargements to the site is extremely difficult to make, thus the structure is not improved and
many times left vacant. This discourages redevelopment of existing commercial buildings.
Appearance of the Business District
There have been some recent redevelopment projects which have used many elements which
reflect the community character through upgrading commercial structures and landscaping in the
business district over the last few years. There needs to be a way to assure that future redevelop-
ment and infill projects reflect the community character of the planning area. An improved busi-
ness district will attract additional customers to the area.
Economic Development Element 59
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Impact of industrial uses on adjacent homes
Many of the industrial type uses in the mixed-use district are operated without consideration of
the neighboring homes. These businesses should be encouraged to clean up or be shielded from
residential neighboring properties.
Parking and Setbacks from U.S. 1
When U.S. 1 was widened to four lanes through this planning area many existing businesses lost
much of their parking and setback from the roadway. The businesses became non-conforming as
to parking and setbacks, this presents a problem when they try to redevelop or when new owners
try and start a new business.
RV Park Conversions
With ROGO limiting the allocation and permitting of new residential and transient residential
units RV Parks are being converted to un-permitted permanent residential dwellings, which do
not meet the building code or fire safety requirements. One such park, zoned RV, in the area is
currently going through an amendment process to change the zoning to permit permanent resi-
dents. Other Parks are being redeveloped as hotels or motels. The loss of these available spaces
will reduce the variety of overnight stay options for visitors to this area of the Florida Keys.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 7.1
Consider the over-all economic viability of the planning area when reviewing the land use desig-
nations of lawfully established non-conforming land uses and structures in Strategy 1.3.
Strategy 7.2
Maintain and enhance economic activity and opportunity within the U.S. 1 corridor.
Action Item 7.2.1: Inventory and analyze the characteristics of existing commercial uses
within the corridor and expansion potential in order to project the likely rates and amounts of
commercial space needed over the planning horizon.
Action Item 7.2.2: Use the results of the county wide economic study to assist in determin-
ing future commercial used trends and needs into the twenty-year planning horizon. This in-
formation may also be used to retain the marketability of existing business uses and com-
mercial structures.
Action Item 7.2.3: Investigate the feasibility and economic effects of a Formula-Retail Estab-
lishments Ordinance.
Strategy 7.3
Encourage redevelopment of obsolete non-residential structures and uses within the planning
area.
Action Item 7.3.1: Examine and revise, where appropriate, the existing regulations regarding
nonconforming uses and structures to encourage redevelopment of existing properties con-
sistent with the Corridor Enhancement Plan and community vision.
Economic Development Element 60
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 7.3.2: Ensure that new commercial design guidelines do not create a burden on
existing businesses with the potential for redevelopment.
Action Item 7.3.3: Explore ways of easing some of the financial burden of redevelopment
such as county and state funding of landscaping within the designated Historic District and
along U.S. 1.
Action Item 7.3.4: Encourage existing businesses within the mixed-use areas to provide
landscaping or opaque fencing to buffer their operations from adjacent residential
neighbors.
Strategy 7.4
Recognize the importance of the availability of the tourist housing, hotels, motels, condomini-
ums and RV Parks in the planning area to the over-all economic stability of the business com-
munity.
Action Item 7.4.1: Use the results of the county wide economic study to assist in determin-
ing future tourism housing trends to project the need for hotels, motels, tourist housing and
RV Parks over the twenty-year planning horizon.
Action Item 7.4.2: Inventory and analyze the RV Parks in the county to determine their
continuing viability under the existing regulatory structure in the County, and the demand
for rental spaces and the economics of continuing.
Action Item 7.4.3: Implement, where appropriate, the results of the RV Park study includ-
ing regulatory changes.
Economic Development Element 61
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
_......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................._
Tavernier, ,reek fv,3, ,MJJe Moorker 97
Existing Commercial and
Industrial
i
n
��.
n , „
f
V
IT
a�
y
Commercial and Light Indu%tr°tal Uses
_pt
n* n*N whg1', w "iW b M wulwaY�p ti'rµ m�wi�wu
muwW ��e�nMA nm,wmrw�V mb,M�w ev ifuruvrvr� ,rwm,,1.
Wd
L4®�r,��.x�„
Tr luf4Q, q'*Mm'&4 F�,�".�B& P,wu Wp xhwr'�1Mii,SY
�1WW�1WWMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Figure 6.1 Existing commercial and light industrial uses within the planning area.
Economic Development Element 62
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL EIGHT
RECOGNIZE WATER-DEPENDENT AND WATER-RELATED COM-
MERCIAL USES AS A PRIMARY SOURCE OF ECONOMIC SUSTAIN-
ABILITY WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA.
Current Conditions Summary
Citizens place a high value on water-dependent or water-related uses. For the recreational and
commercial boaters alike, marinas, restaurants, bait and tackle shops that surround the shoreline
in the planning area are as important as the gas and convenient stores that dot U.S. 1. The ser-
vices provided by businesses located on land that support water-related activities are reliant eco-
nomically as well on the water in the planning area. The need to inventory and consider the rede-
velopment of water-dependent and water-related uses is included in the 2010 Comprehensive
Plan in Objective 212.1 and Chapter 9J-5.12 of the Florida Administrative Code.
Water-dependent uses include marinas, commercial fishing, boat launching facilities and
beaches. Water-related uses include concession stands, bait and tackle shops and fish houses.
Hotels and restaurants that are located on the water while not water dependent or related as in
the traditional definition are economically enhanced by the location on the water.
Restaurant seating and bars and concessions that are located within the shoreline setbacks and
on docks within the planning area are economically enhanced and dependent on their location in
close proximity to the water. These uses do not conform to the current environmental protection
regulations.
Water-related and water-dependent commercial uses in the planning area and their primary Real
Estate Numbers include:
• Blue Waters Marina(RE 488970, 489135-004300)
• Mangrove Marina(RE 479170, 90340)
• Curtis Marine(RE 489110)
Water-related/economically enhanced because of a location on the water:
• Snappers Restaurant(RE 492290)
• The Weston Hotel(RE 91190)
• Island Bay Resort(RE 490150)
• Bay Breeze (RE 451210)
• Stone Ledge Motel(RE 88640)
• Dove Creek Lodge (RE 492340)
• Popps Motel (RE 88590)
• Travel Trailer Town (RE 486850.0002)
• Coconut Inn (RE 482310, RE 482330)
Economic Development Element 63
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Analysis of Community Needs
Commercial Uses on the Shoreline
Restaurants and motels are often financially dependent on their location on the water, because of
the attraction the water provides to potential customers. Current setback regulations may make it
impossible for many of these uses to redevelop if destroyed. The requirements may also make it
impossible to substantially improve the facilities. There is a need to protect these uses.
Marinas and Mooring;Field
The four marinas in the planning area are needed water access points for the residents of the
community. No new marinas should be permitted, but redevelopment and expansion of existing
marinas could be encouraged if environmental regulations are followed. There is an identified
need for a mooring field within the planning area and Community Harbor has been a recom-
mended area for such a use.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 8.1
Protect existing commercial uses that are located within the shoreline setbacks.
Action Item 8.1.1: Inventory the existing commercial uses on the shoreline and document,
which uses are currently within the shoreline setback.
Action Item 8.1.2: Amend the Land Development Regulations to permit existing commercial
uses to remain within the shoreline setbacks as long as storm water is managed and shoreline
vegetation maintained.
Action Item 8.1.3: Prohibit new commercial uses within the shoreline setback unless permit-
ted as accessory uses.
Action Item 8.1.4: Assure accessory uses permitted within the shoreline setback are properly
managed to protect near shore waters.
Strategy 8.2
Recognize the importance to the community and economy of existing marina facilities.
Action Item 8.2.1: Encourage redevelopment of existing marinas, adding pump out facilities
and controlling storm water run-off to meet existing health and environmental standards.
Action Item 8.2.2: Allow expansion of existing facilities and non-livaboard boat slips, if the
density does not exceed that permitted in the Comprehensive Plan and LDRs.
Action Item 8.2.3: Prohibit the permitting of new marinas in the planning area.
Economic Development Element 64
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 8.2.4: Encourage the implementation of a mooring field at Community Harbor,
utilizing Mangrove Marina as the shore side management facility. The need for a mooring
field in this location was identified in the 30 July 2002 Preliminary Planning Document for a
Keys-Wide Mooring Field System.
Strategy 8.3
Discourage the development of non-water-dependant commercial uses on appropriately zoned
waterfront properties.
Economic Development Element 65
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
SCIIII
I%
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
ii �0„ it
jds
/„ ;„ l % l
J J Illlllllllllll%ll %////// oa0i11
i
v7, 11/2
f i, it
Transportation Element 66
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL NINE
PROVIDE FOR ALL CITIZENS OF THE PLANNING AREA A SAFE
AND VIABLE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM VIA U.S. 1, COUNTY
ROADS AND THE BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN TRAIL.
Current Conditions Summary
The inventory of existing roads, bridges and facilities for Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97
includes U.S. 1 as the principal highway with numerous local and two collector roads serving
the many subdivisions. While U.S. 1 is the only state-maintained road in this planning area,
Monroe County maintains 19 miles of county roads in the planning area. The Florida Depart-
ment of Transportation maintains the one bridge, Tavernier Creek Bridge. U.S. 1 is a four-lane
highway within the planning area, with one traffic signal at Ocean Boulevard, the location of
Tavernier Towne Shopping Center and Mariner's Hospital, a major commercial center.
This U.S. 1 roadway segment, in addition to the county roads in the planning area has a Level of
Service(LOS) `A'. This LOS is the considered the highest standard achievable.
There is a taxi cab service available in this planning area as well as a public bus system. The
Dade-Monroe Express transit system provides public transportation from Florida City to Mara-
thon. This is a contracted service provided through the Miami-Dade Public Transit System.
Sidewalks and curb ramps are currently provided along U.S. 1 on the bayside lanes from the
Tavernier Creek Bridge to Sterling Drive and on the Oceanside lanes from the Tavernier Creek
Bridge to the Tavernier Hotel at MM 91.8. Curb ramps have been recently completed on U.S. 1
by FDOT to provide compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Many destinations in
the southern end of the planning area are easily accessible in a few minutes by walking and bicy-
cling.
The existing pathways for non-motorized travel on U.S. 1 are part of the Overseas Heritage
Trail, a multi-agency collaboration between the Florida Department of Environmental Protec-
tion, Florida Department of Transportation, Monroe County and local governments. The Over-
seas Heritage Trail planned adjacent to U.S. 1 from Key West to Key Largo will provide alterna-
tive transportation and recreational opportunities for citizens and visitors to the Florida Keys.
The existing pathway within the study area is found on the bayside lane of U.S. 1 from MM 97
to 96.5, at this point, the trail crosses U.S. 1 and continues adjacent to the oceanside lane to the
Tavernier Business District at approximately MM 92. The trail is envisioned to be widened to
between 8 feet or 10 feet to accommodate two-way traffic. Current design guidelines suggest
that a bike path should be provided on both sides of the roadway to discourage bicyclists riding
against traffic.
Transportation Element 67
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
In addition to the pathways on U.S. 1, The Monroe County 1997 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
calls for new paths on Westbound U.S. 1 from Mockingbird Road (MM 95.5) to Tavernier
Creek Bridge. A bike lane has been constructed by Monroe County Public Works on the north
side of Burton Street and First Street,providing access to Harry Harris Park.
In this planning area, trail designers will evaluate the use of the West side to provide a facility
for two-way traffic. Environmental and existing development constraints may reduce the width
in some areas to 8 feet.
Analysis of Community Needs
Bicycle and Pedestrian Traffic
Bicycle and pedestrian traffic in this planning area is largely contained within neighborhood
boundaries because of the difficulty of safely crossing U.S. 1. The community has suggested an
additional traffic signal, although it would constrain traffic on this four-lane segment.
Transportation Concerns
At the first community workshop 43% of the respondents to the question of"what they like least
about living in the islands" replied with a transportation issue — traffic congestion, noise and
speed, need for acceleration/deceleration lanes, lack of adequate public transportation, need for
more bike paths, road widening on county roads and alignment, etc.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 9.1
Coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation to implement measures to mitigate
the impact of U.S. 1 traffic on the residential neighborhoods.
Action Item 9.1.1: Explore the potential of replanting excess right-of-way in native vegeta-
tion providing a visual and sound barrier along U.S. 1.
Action Item 9.1.2: Consider and implement different types of traffic calming devices to im-
prove the flow of local automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic within the U.S. 1 corridor.
Action Item 9.1.3: Conduct traffic study and analysis of traffic calming methods to reduce
speed limit through Town Center including narrowing of drive lanes, on-street parking, and
additional landscaping.
Strategy 9.2
Promote safer pedestrian and bicycle travel through signalized crossings.
Action Item 9.2.1: Coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation to provide a
marked crosswalk with intelligent transportation system technologies such as: count-down
signals, illuminated pushbuttons, or other appropriate devices capabilities at the signalized
intersection in front of the Tavernier Towne Center(RE 89910.0001 and surrounding).
Transportation Element 68
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Strategy 9.3
Improve bicycle/pedestrian environment on neighborhood streets.
Action Item 9.3.1: Coordinate efforts of FDOT, County Engineering Department, and Plan-
ning Department to delineate safe bicycle/pedestrian routes through the neighborhood.
Action Item 9.3.2: Initiate landscaping program on designated bicycle/pedestrian routes, if
necessary.
Strategy 9.4
Encourage bicycle/pedestrian traffic between residential and commercial areas.
Action Item 9.4.1: Work with all commercial and business owners and operators to encour-
age the incorporation of bicycle parking onto existing sites and in future development plans.
Action Item 9.4.2: Identify and develop safe bicycle/pedestrian routes between residential
and commercial properties, which could include using aesthetic signs to mark bicycle/
pedestrian routes.
Strategy 9.5
Promote bicycle and pedestrian friendly design.
Action Item 9.5.1: Develop guidelines with suggestions for bicycle/pedestrian friendly de-
sign during redevelopment and development of commercial properties.
Strategy 9.6
Implement the recommendations of the Monroe County Bicycle-Pedestrian Master Plan.
Action Item 9.6.1: Seek funding to implement the findings of the Bicycle-Pedestrian Master
Plan for the construction of a bike path on the bayside from approximately MM 92 to 97 to
complement the existing bike path/sidewalk on the oceanside.
Strategy 9.7
Improve pedestrian safety on side streets and U.S. 1.
Action Item 9.7.1: Coordinate with FDOT to stripe crossings of side streets with U.S. 1.
Strategy 9.8
Improve amenities for transit users.
Action Item 9.8.1: Seek funding to provide bus shelters at regular bus stops.
Action Item 9.8.2: Investigate a circular transit route within the planning area.
Transportation Element 69
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Strategy 9.9
Improve driver safety through the Tavernier area.
Action Item 9.9.1: Work with the Florida Department of Transportation to complete the turn
lane improvements and intersection improvements for the Tavernier area.
Action Item 9.9.2: Work with the Florida Department of Transportation, private business
owners and the community to improve the delineation of driveway access for businesses in
the median at about MM 92.5 (Dairy Queen [RE 490210.0001], Shell Man [RE 490210],
etc.).
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects
Of the many potential projects that are outlined in the Transportation Element, only a small
number would fall under the financial responsibility of the county because most of the work pro-
posed is within the U.S. 1 corridor area where money for improvements may be obtained from
FDOT. There is approximately $250,000 worth of safety improvements that are planned for the
Overseas Heritage Trail for which a funding source has not yet been identified, however the
DEP and National Park Service, along with FDOT are partners and may provide sources of
funding.
Transportation Element 70
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
I%
PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT
PON/
l
J J Illlllllllllll%ll rWho$///
eim!",
i
v7, 11/2
Parks and Recreation Element 71
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL TEN
ENHANCE EXISTING PARK FACILITIES AND PROVIDE ADDI-
TIONAL RESOURCES FOR ACTIVE AND PASSIVE LAND-BASED
RECREATION AND PROTECT SHORELINE ACCESS FOR WATER
BASED RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES FOR ALL AGE GROUPS
WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.
Current Conditions Summary
Currently, there are two parks within the planning area that are appropriately identified as
county owned public recreational facilities. These facilities are actively used by both residents
and visitors. Harry Harris Community Park is the oldest and largest of the two parks. It is a
16.4 acre activity-based recreational facility located at Mile Marker 92.5, which offers ball
fields, basketball courts, restrooms, picnic shelters, boat ramps, swim area, and a playground.
Old Settlers Park is a 3.2 acre neighborhood facility which offers light activity and some passive
recreation. Although it implies "old", the Old Settlers Park was established in October 1996 and
is located within the Historic Overlay of Tavernier. It is a quaint neighborhood park that offers
a small trail, butterfly garden, pavilion, and a playground. Both parks provide beautiful ocean
vistas that capture the Florida Key's unique environment.
There are a number of"pocket-parks" maintained by the county and a few sites throughout the
planning area that are slated to become parks in the future. Currently, there are two county
owned sites, Sunset Point and Sunny Haven that are existing parks, however they remain pri-
marily undeveloped. These locations are less than an acre in size and support residents and visi-
tors within walking or biking distance. Currently, there are plans to improve the boat ramp and
include a dock and kayak launch at the Sunset Point Park. Another two acre parcel located at
Mile Marker 95.5 bayside, known as Varadero Beach, is entirely undeveloped, and slated to be-
come a passive pedestrian oriented park.
The name Varadero means `boatyard' in Spanish. The county-owned property at mile marker
95.5 was named in reference to the popular resort location on the Peninsula de Hicacos in Cuba,
which attracts vacationers from all over the world. Unlike the 12 mile peninsula in Cuba, Vara-
dero Beach in the planning area offers pedestrian access to the bay for swimming. It is desig-
nated as a motor boats prohibited zone within 300 feet of the shoreline in the cove. This code
was enacted in order to protect natural aquatic resources and ensure the protection of the health,
safety, and quality of life for both residents and visitors.
In addition to participating in land-based recreation, many residents and visitors spend their lei-
sure time engaged in recreational activities on the water or at its shoreline. The Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan specifies in Goal 213 that the county shall ensure adequate public access to
the beach or shoreline consistent with public need and environmental constraints. Due to the
high demand for residential waterfront property and the significant focus on development,public
access to the shoreline has become severely limited. Within the planning area, Harry Harris
Park offers the most ideal location for water-based activities. The community park offers two
boat ramps, parking for boat trailers, swim area, and locations for fishing along the shoreline.
Parks and Recreation Element 72
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
The high volume of boating activity during weekends, peak season, and holidays creates diffi-
cult parking conditions. The large volume of traffic at Harry Harris Community Park, has con-
vinced some community members to seek alternative locations for water-based activities and
shoreline access.
There are four county owned parcels with shoreline access, as well as twelve locations where
access exists at the end of local streets. These locations have been utilized for launching boats,
windsurfing, and fishing. These locations offer no parking and are only large enough to serve the
surrounding neighborhood.
Along with the number of locations for land and water based activities, there is an existing bike
Table 8.1 Public Shoreline Access Points
Name Access Descrii ,"oa Possibbe Use
>Access to Sunny Haven Public Park
>Pedestrian and bike access
Beach Ocean Natural shoreline >Swimming and fishing
>Non-motorized boat access
>Non-motorized boat access
>Bike and pedestrian access
Carribean Ave. Dove Creek Natural shoreline >Undesignated parking on shoulder of road
>Fishing
>Deep water access forboats (no parking)
>Pedestrian and bike access
Jo-Jean Way Bay Surfaced boat ramp >Non-motorized boat access
>Fishing
>Deep water access with perimeter canal
>No parking
Lobster Ln. Ocean Un-surfaced boat ramp >Bike and pedestrian access
>Fishing
>Deep water access no boat ramp
Lowe St. Ocean Natural shoreline >Pedestrian and bike access
>Fishing
>Pedestrian and bike access
North Sunrise Dr. Ocean Eroding fill >Non-motorized boat access
>Fishing
>Pedestrian and bike access
Ocean View Dr. Ocean Natural shoreline >Non-motorized boat access
>Fishing
>Deep water access for boats (no parking)
>Pedestrian and bike access
Sunrise Dr. Ocean Surfaced boat ramp >Non-motorized boat access
>Fishing
Source:Monroe County Planning Department
Parks and Recreation Element 73
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
pi w
Existing Public Recreation Areas
AN
l�iQ V P
"m da �^�✓ Y r! �Y
^ n
'�u
� M
Public c Recir tion Area
u
y
id
n'
J
� y
H4 ffafrU',
i
r�
r
c
Oki SwUhm s Wank
ras
�rw
orb
'iu',Vn:WW�YI�JN OI d4uD'�a�w^V,xWrWN''`W N�U''k,'EA'd1'W17&,�N7'A7rVMWwu
{wN�p✓sanfrcmP,f� '�W�a�dl�vww rcmah'x�,mr�M.�v,«�x� n NSb,ravw wsMns:m�up,�
um�aE xa YY ra ',vmvWn,Mru9 MW�rz°3.rmmwrb�m J^� �.rN,aN�k
IWa �:,� p �'MW,mw;gm� w.Gmmtl�:el,�mimrc�atdn¢wmw�a.imi,
�M.M ___ rMNmc,��-- ...�� ^'MXwI&Mrv�i�PA r.?Y,°,NW N'�➢v ��Unmm�Pv.a Psi
Figure 8.1 Existing public parks and recreation areas.
Parks and Recreation Element 74
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
path that abuts the U.S. I corridor. Currently, the Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) is in the process of enhancing the bike path through the Florida Keys Overseas Heritage
Trail Program. It accommodates bike and pedestrian oriented leisure activities, as well as pro-
viding alternative modes of transportation. Finally, there are a number of private businesses and
homeowners parks sprinkled throughout the community that supplement the variety of recrea-
tional opportunities.
Analysis of Community Need
Enhance Recreational Services and Infrastructure
During the LCP process, the public expressed an interest in having a public pool and a commu-
nity center among the recreational services provided within their community, as well as the need
to update the current facilities at Harry Harris Community Park. Due to the lack of available
land and geographical constraints, Harry Harris Park is an ideal location to provide a wider
range of services. Existing neighborhood recreation areas, Sunny Haven, Sunset Point, as well
as other potential sites should be evaluated for utilization and the need for new or updated facili-
ties. A network of trails and waterways designed to connect both community and neighborhood
parks together would create a comprehensive recreational system for all ages with diverse inter-
ests to enjoy.
Expand Passive Resource-Based Recreational Opportunities
There is a lack of accessibility and circulation for passive recreation within the Tavernier Creek
to Mile Marker 97 planning area. Passive recreation differs from activity-based recreation in its
focus on type of activity and geographical location and size. Passive recreation activities occur
within particular natural and/or cultural settings. These parks are typically developed through a
series of linear winding paths and/or circulation systems, which differ from activity-based rec-
reation that is more conducive within large unobstructed open areas. Passive resource-based
recreation areas are typically located within conservation lands, which provide a dual benefit for
the community. These locations offer a recreational amenity while effectively maintaining the
preservation of an ecosystem.
Protect and Increase Public Shoreline Access
During the Livable CommuniKeys Process,protecting and increasing public access to the shore-
line was indicated as a priority within the Tavernier Creek to Mile Marker 97 planning area.
Public access is limited, and therefore a majority of residents and visitors must rely on county-
owned parks to gain access. There is a need for the county to designate or acquire public lands
for the primary purpose of providing shoreline access with facilities to accommodate water-
based activities.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 10.1
Provide a balanced and comprehensive park and recreation system available to the community.
Action Item 10.1.1: Receive and review the results from the county wide parks and recrea-
tion master plan currently being conducted in order to identify opportunities within the plan-
ning area.
Parks and Recreation Element 75
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 10.1.2: Allow for the upgrade of current facilities at Harry Harris Community
Park to accommodate needed changes and evolved interests.
Action Item 10.1.3: Develop and/or enhance the facilities at Sunset Point and Sunny Haven
to provide additional recreational opportunities for residents and visitors within walking and/
or biking distance. This may include passive and/or active recreational uses such as green
space, boat ramp, volleyball court,playground and similar uses.
Action Item 10.1.4: Identify locations and prioritize land acquisition for small local "pocket-
parks" in neighborhoods, which do not have existing public or private recreational facilities
within walking distance of the residents being served.
Action Item 10.1.5: Coordinate with state and federal agencies, non-profit organizations, as
well as other private and public entities to ensure that passive and active recreational oppor-
tunities are being provided to all users, in conformance with standards adopted by the
American Disabilities Act.
Strategy 10.2
Develop a system that will guide the acquisition, design, and development of county owned pub-
lic parks and recreational facilities within the Upper Keys to ensure that the future needs of the
community are being met.
Action Item 10.2.1: Establish a Parks and Recreation Forum for the Upper Keys, including
representatives from public and private agencies as well as interested citizens who are re-
sponsible for overseeing parks and recreation development and to ensure the delivery of ef-
fective and efficient services.
Action Item 10.2.2: Build and foster meaningful public and private partnerships within the
community to ensure equitable distribution of services throughout the Tavernier Creek to
Mile Marker 97 planning area.
Action Item 10.2.3: Prioritize development and services which will maximize the number of
opportunities while accommodating the needs of all users.
Action Item 10.2.4: Utilize available resources and potential funding opportunities to fund
capital improvements projects to enhance parks and recreation facilities, services, and opera-
tional support.
Strategy 10.3
Enhance current passive recreational areas to provide adequate accessibility and outdoor educa-
tion opportunities to all users, while maintaining the sensitive natural and cultural resources
within the planning area.
Action Item 10.3.1: Provide a variety of appropriate quality passive recreational activities
and outdoor educational opportunities where consistent with overarching environmental con-
servation responsibilities.
Parks and Recreation Element 76
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 10.3.2: Design and establish trail improvements to blend with the natural envi-
ronment. Provide improvements and management practices in sensitive habitats adequate to
protect the natural resources.
Action Item 10.3.3: Advocate responsible stewardship of natural resources through the de-
velopment of an interpretive educational program within passive recreational areas.
Action Item 10.3.4: Prioritize the acquisition of public recreational lands to maximize the
preservation of scenic vistas, undeveloped views, and access to water resources.
Action Item 10.3.5: Provide a trail system off U.S. I corridor, with posted access points and
passive recreational facilities to accommodate appropriate uses that connect existing and fu-
ture parks to the greatest extent practical.
Action Item 10.3.6: Incorporate historically significant sites into the design and development
of parks within the Tavernier Historic Overlay district to promote cultural education and
awareness.
Strategy 10.4
Protect and maintain all existing public shoreline access points within the planning area.
Action Item 10.4.1: Identify potential shoreline access points and parcels within the planning
area.
Action Item 10.4.2: Do not allow abandonment of county-owned land with access to the
shoreline.
Action Item 10.4.3: Reclaim county-owned public shoreline access points.
Action Item 10.4.4: Survey the community to determine the need for minor improvements
that will enhance recreational opportunities.
Action Item 10.4.5: Identify and post signage at all public access points.
Action Item 10.4.6: Work with interested residents to provide low-impact amenities at public
access points within their neighborhoods.
Strategy 10.5
Make additional shoreline access available to the public, which offers opportunities for safe and
diverse water-based activities while protecting the integrity of the natural environment and the
residential community character.
Action Item 10.5.1: Make the acquisition of land with shoreline access a priority between
Tavernier Creek and Mile Marker 97.
Parks and Recreation Element 77
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 10.5.2: Coordinate work and activity with other agencies and groups, including
but not limited to the Florida Keys Overseas Paddling Trail Program, Monroe County Ma-
rine Resources, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the DEP Division of
Recreation and Parks, to further ensure harmony and consistency with the overall protection
and preservation of beaches and shoreline within the county.
Action Item 10.5.3: Implement appropriate mechanisms for regulating boating activities lo-
cated within 300 feet of county owned public land with shoreline access in order to provide
appropriate locations for diverse water-based recreation activities and to ensure public safety
and environmental protection.
Action Item 10.5.4: Develop a pedestrianibicycle park at the property recently purchased by
the county at MM 95 (a.k.a. Varadero Beach).
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvements Projects
The Parks and Recreation element outlines numerous potential capital improvement projects,
from the acquisition of pocket parks to the improvement to existing facilities and shoreline ac-
cess points. However, to determine costs of the proposals outlined in the plan, the types of fa-
cilities the community wants must first be determined. The ongoing Parks and Recreation Mas-
ter Plan process will shed some light on what improvements or acquisitions need to take place,
but until the time that specific projects are identified, a cost estimate is not possible.
Parks and Recreation Element 78
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 July 4, 2004
i
I%
/ �
COMMUNITY FA CILITIES ELEMENT
PON/
l
J J Illlllllllllll%ll MOVE
eim!",
12,
v i
x Ohl
Community Facilities Element 79
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GO L ELEVE
PROVIDE ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES TO SERVE THE EXIST-
ING AND FUTURE NEEDS OF THE TAVERNIER CREEK TO MM 97
PLANNING AREA
Current Conditions Summary
Sanitary Wastewater and Storm Water Management
Certain public facilities are already planned including sewer and storm water management facili-
ties. The Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan sets out priorities for provision of
advanced wastewater treatment to the county for "hot spots" where collection and centralized
treatment systems are recommended. Facilities are required to be available by 2010 in order to
fulfill Comprehensive Plan and Florida Law mandates. Even if these schedules fall behind it is
safe to assume that these facilities will be built within the twenty-year planning horizon of this
Master Plan. Major subdivisions slated for service include Harris Ocean Park, Palma Sola,
Sherrill Park, Hammer Point Park and area along U.S. 1.
The Storm Water Management Master Plan contains mainly regulatory and nonstructural im-
provement recommendations for handling storm water. The plan identified needed retrofit pro-
jects in the planning area, they were not considered either a high or medium priority. Listed pro-
jects include the Pipe at the end of Jo Jean Way in Community Harbor and the intersection of
Burton Drive and U.S. 1. Localized flooding in areas with large parking lots are a problem
throughout the Keys.
Schools
The school age children in this planning area attend school in either Islamorada or Key Largo.
Monroe County, over the last ten years has been an area of"losing" school population. In this
planning area persons below age twenty decreased by four percent. Currently there are approxi-
mately 522 school age children (ages 5 to 17) in the planning area. Population projections for
the planning area estimate an additional 155 to 234 persons over the twenty-year planning hori-
zon. If 20% of these persons, as represented in the 2000 Census, are below twenty(20) years old
it will result in an additional thirty (30) to forty-seven (47) students by 2024. The percentage of
seasonal units in the area may continue to increase, which will reduce the actual number of
school age children.
Public Water Supply
The Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority provides public water to the planning area, there is suffi-
cient capacity allocated to service the proposed population increase.
Monroe County Fire Rescue Services
Monroe County Fire Rescue Services oversee the operations of career and volunteer fire/rescue
and emergency medical service in unincorporated Monroe County. Monroe County and the
study area from Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 95 is well served by the Tavernier fire
station located in Tavernier at 151 Marine Avenue, Tavernier, MM 92. The Key Largo fire sta-
tion serves the study area from MM 95 to MM 97.
The Tavernier fire rescue station is staffed 2417 by two (2) full time paid fire fighter/paramedics
augmented by volunteer fire fighters. The Tavernier fire rescue station is provided with the fol-
Community Facilities Element 80
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
lowing equipment: two (2) Advanced life support (ALS) ambulances, two (2) fire engines and
one (1) ladder truck with ninety-five (95) ft. ladder extension. The Fire Rescue Services Depart-
ment will respond to emergency calls with one (1) ALS Ambulance staffed by one (1) fire-
fighter/paramedic and one (1) firefighter/emergency medical technician, and one (1) fire engine
staffed by one (1) firefighter/paramedic. Planned upgrades to the Tavernier fire rescue station
will provided improved living accommodations for crew and a more efficient station design.
Fire rescue uses 2000 to 3000 gallon water tankers to compensate for issues concerning the loca-
tion and supply of water for fire suppression. The water tankers are used to transport water for
fire suppression to the fire. Additional tankers are brought on scene as needed. The existing four
(4) inch water pipes throughout much of the planning area have inadequate water pressure for
fire suppression. The Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority is replacing the four (4) inch pipe with
six (6) inch pipe when repairs are made. The six (6) inch pipe is sufficient for fire suppression.
Additional water for fire suppression is made available through fire wells consisting of six (6)
inch pipe extending ninety (90) feet into the ground to salt-water. Salt-water wells provide an
acceptable supply of water for fire suppression. Fire Rescue Services annually inspects each fire
well to determine if it can supply sufficient water for fire suppression.
Monroe County Fire Rescue Services has a mutual aid agreement with the Islamorada Fire De-
partment. If a structural fire occurs within the study area the Tavernier fire station works coop-
eratively with the Islamorada Fire Department and the Key Largo fire station to suppress the
fire.
Monroe County Fire Rescue Services is the primary emergency medical services ambulance pro-
vider for the Tavernier Creek to MM 95 area. North of MM 95 ambulance services are provided
by the Key Largo Ambulance. Emergency medical services will respond emergency medical
calls with one (1) ALS Ambulance staffed by one (1) firefighter/paramedics and one (1) fire-
fighter/emergency medical technician.
The Fire Marshal's office working with the Monroe County Building Department provides
analysis and review of proposed construction plans to identify fire related concerns and to build
fire safety into the finished project. The Fire Marshal's office also provides for yearly fire safety
inspections of commercial properties and assembly occupancies.
Other Public Facilities and Services
Other public facilities and services are provided to the community from adjacent facilities in the
Village of Islamorada and/or Key Largo, including libraries, a senior center, sheriffs substation
and county office buildings.
Analysis of Community Needs
Wastewater and Storm Water Management Facilities.
According to the Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan and Storm Water Management Master Plan
these types of facilities are scheduled to be installed in the planning area within the twenty-year
planning horizon. Collection systems will be installed in the right-of-ways of existing roads. Al-
though the timing of these facilities is laid out in their respective plans implementation of both
plans has fallen behind schedule. There is also a need to re-evaluate projected sewer and storm
water layouts in relation to new development patterns introduced through this Master Plan.
Community Facilities Element 81
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Water Supply for Fire Suppression
There is a need to continue the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority upgrade program of the water
distribution system that is replacing four (4) inch pipe with six (6) inch or larger pipe and to
identify areas where saltwater wells can be installed to assure sufficient water is available for
fire suppression.
Response to Emergency Calls, Location and Building Identification
It is sometimes difficult for Monroe County Fire Rescue, fire suppression and emergency medi-
cal services, to locate an emergency call location due to inadequate addressing on buildings.
There is a need for all buildings to be identified and addressed in locations clearly visible from
the street. Fire rescue recommends six (6) inch numbers in contrasting colors to the background.
Law enforcement has a similar issue and would also find this helpful.
All Facilities and Services
The public needs to be assured that there will be sufficient public facilities to serve the current
and projected population throughout the twenty-year planning horizon.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 11.1
Continue to prepare a yearly report detailing the adequacy of public facilities in the County and
highlighting specific areas where inadequacies exist or areas that approaching inadequacy.
Action Item 11.1.1: Present the report to the Planning Commission at the Key Largo Plan-
ning Commission meeting so the public is made aware of any inadequacies and any plans for
improving service to the area.
Action Item 11.1.2: Coordinate closely with the Board of Education, Fire Marshall, Florida
Keys Aqueduct Authority, the Key Largo Sewer Authority and other agencies and organiza-
tions providing services and facilities to the planning area.
Strategy 11.2
Increase the availability of water for fire suppression.
Action Item 11.2.1: Bring all residences to within 800 feet of a fire hydrant and all commer-
cial uses within 500 feet of a fire hydrant by working with the Monroe County Fire and Res-
cue and the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority as the two agencies continue to install hydrants
and replace aqueduct pipes.
Action Item 11.2.2: Identify priority areas for pipe upgrading based on a fire needs assess-
ment conducted by Monroe County Fire Rescue Services and work with the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority to include priority areas into their work plan.
Action Item 11.2.3: Identify necessary fire well and hydrant locations during construction
plan review and make necessary fire wells and hydrants a requirement of construction plan
and building permit approval.
Action Item 11.2.4: Continue the program of the Fire Rescue Services to inspect salt water
Community Facilities Element 82
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
wells annually to determine continuing suitability as a supply of water for fire suppression.
Order repair or replacement of fire wells as necessary.
Strategy 11.3
Protect the public health and safety by requiring that all buildings be identified with street num-
bers of at least six (6) inches in height in contrasting colors to the background placed in a loca-
tion clearly visible from the street so they can be located in case of an emergency.
Action Item 11.3.1: Require that all buildings be addressed using numbers of at least six (6)
inches in height placed in a location clearly visible from the street as part of the review for
new construction and remodeling projects and as a condition of building permit approval.
Strategy 11.4
Develop new and expanded public facilities to the level necessary to adequately serve existing
and future development over the twenty-year planning horizon. Public facilities development
shall also be consistent with the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
Action Item IL 4.1: Install a sanitary sewage treatment system in accordance with the Mon-
roe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan. Components may include centralized or clus-
ter facilities for collection and treatment, all of which shall be developed on disturbed and/or
scarified uplands or in existing rights-of-way. The projected sewage treatment requirements
for the planning area should be revisited and confirmed to be consistent with the final devel-
opment plan adopted pursuant to the Master Plan.
Action Item 11.4.2: Allow installation of stormwater treatment systems in accordance with
the Monroe County Stormwater Management Master Plan. Any facilities installed for cen-
tralized collection and treatment should be developed on disturbed and/or scarified uplands
or in existing rights-of-way.
Fiscal Implications and Anticipated Capital Improvement Projects
The largest known public facilities project to be undertaken by the County over the 20 year plan-
ning horizon is the provision of sanitary sewer services to the planning area. According to the
Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan (SWMP) the planning area is the ranked fifth out of 21 `hot
spots' in the Upper Keys in order of importance for the installation of sanitary sewer facilities.
Currently the County is working on the number two ranked `hot spot' in the Upper Keys. The
Key Largo Wastewater Treatment District is the deciding body for the provision of wastewater
service to the planning area. The SWMP estimates that the Tavernier regional wastewater col-
lection system will cost approximately 8.6 million dollars.
Additionally, improvements to the Tavernier Fire station are moving forward as of the writing of
this plan including renovation of the existing structure and the addition of living quarters. The
budgeted amount for the Tavernier fire station is $600,000.
83
Li(AMWg OMMeY � yl-avernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
h JI rrw
,�r
,
o
%
Oil Pilo/
(11111�J
ONF p
Of
84
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
GOAL TWELVE
CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE LOCALIZED SENSE OF COMMU-
NITY, WHICH ENCO URA GES CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT IMPLE-
MENTING AND MONITORING THE LIVABLE COMMUNIKEYS
PROGRAM(LCP) MASTER PLAN
Current Conditions Summary
The community has demonstrated their interest in planning for the future of the Tavernier Creek
to MM 97 planning area by attending workshops, community meetings, responding to surveys
and sending correspondence to the planning department concerning what they wanted to achieve
in this planning process. Continuous community feedback has allowed staff to gain an under-
standing of the needs and desires of the community. The community interest has kept the project
on track moving forward toward the Vision.
Four Livable CommuniKeys News Letters were written and distributed to all residents of the
community and to property owners who may live in a different location. The newsletters were
an outreach effort to the community, as a whole, to assure that everyone had an opportunity to
become informed about the issues being addressed. Each of the three LCP workshops was well
attended by interested residents and business owners in the area.
Policy 101.20.1 of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan directs that the LCP Master Plans be devel-
oped following certain principles. Principle Two states that the community master plans will in-
clude a monitoring mechanism to provide accountability to the communities. Principle Five di-
rects that "each Community Master Plan will include mechanisms allowing citizens continued
oversite and involvement in the implementation of their plans. Through the Community Master
Plans, programs for ongoing public involvement, outreach, and education will be developed."
Analysis of Community Needs
Continuing Community Involvement
Mechanisms need to be developed to assure that the citizens of this planning area are kept in-
formed and have an opportunity for meaningful comment on plan implementation and required
LDR text amendments and progress on the corridor enhancement plan.
Recommended Strategies and Actions
Strategy 12.1
Provide updates to the community on all aspects of plan implementation and the status of public
projects in the planning area.
Action Item 12.1.1: Work closely with the County communications office to distribute infor-
mation through press releases and the "hot topics" page on the web site.
Community Involvement Element 85
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Action Item 12.1.2: Continue to provide speakers to civic and service organizations to dis-
cuss LCP Master Plan issues.
Action Item 12.1.3: Publish and distribute a public newsletter on a periodic basis to provide
community awareness and update on the progress.
Strategy 12.2
Establish a committee to advise the Planning Commission on project proposals within the identi-
fied corridor.
Action Item 12.2.1: The Board of County Commissioners shall appoint five to seven Com-
mittee members to include representatives from the business community, the general citi-
zenry, and design professionals to serve as volunteers reviewing and commenting on plans
for projects and improvements along the corridor.
Action Item 12.2.2: Specify procedures for Committee review of development and redevel-
opment proposals concerning conformance to the architectural guidelines in the Tavernier
Corridor Enhancement Plan.
Action Item 12.2.3: Hold all meetings of the Committee in a public forum and advertise the
date and agenda following the Florida"Sunshine" Law requirements.
Action Item 12.2.4: Support the Committee by having the planning department provide tech-
nical and secretarial staffing, mailings, advertising, and preparation of Committee reports.
Strategy 12.3
Develop a detailed staff work program to implement the Tavernier Creek to MM 97 Livable
CommuniKeys Master Plan.
Action Item 12.3.1: Prioritize Action Items and develop a timeline completion.
Action Item 12.3.2: Involve the community in reviewing the prioritization during a Planning
Commission public meeting.
Action Item 12.3.3: Monitor progress on the work program by preparing a yearly report to
the Board of County Commissioners and the Community.
Community Involvement Element 86
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
I%
CAPITAL COSTS
SUMMARY
PON/
l
J J Illlllllllllll%ll rWho$///
eim!",
i
v7, 11/2
Capital Costs Summary 87
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Capital Costs Summary
While there are significant capital costs to fully implementing the Tavernier Creek to Mile
Marker 97 Livable CommuniKeys Plan, the majority of them will be shouldered by the state and
federal government, or are unknown at this time due to the need for further community input.
Table 11.1 below outlines the known and potential capital costs which are outlined in various
element of this plan. The table indicates an approximate cost as well as the source of funds (if
known at this time).
Table 11.1 Fstimated cost of ca ital im rovements
Project Cost Source of Funds
Tier I Acquisition $ 1,500,000 Unidentified
Tier H and Tier III Hammock lots $ 600,000 Unidentified
Overseas Heritage Trail $ 250,000 FDOT/DEP/National Park Service
Wastewater Treatment Facilities $ 8,600,000 Sources outlined in SWMP
Total Cost of Capital Improvements $10,950,000
The major fiscal implications found within this plan are based upon the proposed acquisition of
environmentally significant lands within the planning area. Within the Historic District bounda-
ries (including the proposed expanded historic boundary), there are approximately 30 vacant,
private parcels Tier 11 and Tier III that contain fragments of hammock with a taxable value of
approximately $600,000. There are roughly 392 private, vacant Tier I parcels targeted for acqui-
sition within the entire planning area with an approximate assessed value of$1.5 million.
Of the many potential projects that are outlined in the plan, only a limited number are defined
enough to estimate a cost.
Capital Costs Summary 88
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Glossary
This glossary is intended to supply general definitions of planning terms and is not intended to
serve as a legal reference.
Acquisition Areas Land identified for public acquisition by County, state and federal govern-
mental agencies including land to be acquired as part of the land acquisition program and smart
growth initiatives of the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan and Livable CommuniKeys
Program to secure for conservation and passive recreation purposes privately-owned environmen-
tally sensitive lands, to limit sprawl by retiring development rights on privately-owned vacant
lands and to acquire land for affordable housing.
Action Items —Comprehensive plans and plans such as the Tavernier Creek to MM 97 Master
Plan are written in a way that goes from the general to the specific. Issues are identified, strate-
gies are developed to explain what you are going to do to address the issue and action items are
developed that tell you how the strategy will be carried out.
Active Recreational Facilities - Facilities, which provide for organized leisure-time activities
requiring equipment and taking place in a prescribed places, sites or fields such as a tennis court,
racquetball court, basketball court, spa/exercise room,playfield/playground, miniature golf
course, golf course and fitness course.
Addendum—This is an addition or supplement to the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan. You
will usually find the Addendum at the end of a report or plan and it provides additional explana-
tion of terms and will often provide the background information that supports statements made in
the main body of the report or plan.
Adaptive Reuse—The development of a new use for an older building or for a building origi-
nally designed for a special or specific purpose. Adaptive reuse is particularly useful for preserv-
ing historic structures.
Affordable Housing - Housing with a controlled sales price or rent within the means of a low to
moderate—income household. Allocations for affordable housing are divided into 50% for those
making less than the medium income(currently $57,200) and 50% for those making 120% of the
medium income. The Planning Department requires a yearly report of the income of occupants of
rental units and the income of a buyer upon the sale of an owner occupied unit.
Archeological and Cultural Resources —Resources that embody and reflect the county's his-
torical, cultural, archeological, and architectural heritage, as reflected in such individual sites, dis-
tricts, and archeological areas.
Buffer -Any space that separates uses. For example, buffer yards are required along the front of
businesses that are located along U.S.1. The buffer can range from twenty feet to five feet in
width depending on the quantity of trees and shrubs planted in the buffer.
Building Footprint -The area under a building.
89
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Built Environment—This refers to the development placed on land and includes streets, com-
mercial buildings and houses. It is the opposite of the natural environment which is land that has
not been built upon or changed from the way it was.
Bulk Regulations —Refer to the limitations placed on development and include restrictions on
the size and height of buildings and restrictions on the placement of buildings on a site including
the distance the building must be placed from lot lines.
Calming Devices - Devices used to slow traffic on residential streets to increase safety and im-
prove the quality of life in the neighborhood. Some examples of traffic calming devices would
include stop signs and speed bumps.
Capital Improvements - These are major county funded projects that include road,park, library,
public buildings, emergency services and police facilities. They often take years to plan and
months to construct.
Certificate of Appropriateness —A"Certificate of Appropriateness" would be granted by the
Historic Preservation Commission after reviewing the proposed changes to an historic structure
and finding that the changes are consistent with the guidelines established to guide work on his-
toric structures.
Cistern -An artificial reservoir e.g. an underground tank, for storing water collected.
Cluster -A development design technique that concentrates buildings in specific areas on a par-
cel to allow the remaining land to be used for recreation, common open space, and preservation of
environmentally sensitive areas.
Commercial—A land use category that includes businesses intended to serve the needs of the
public including services, retail sales and professional services.
Community Center —For the purposes of the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan the area from
MM91 to Burton Dr.. It is the focus of community activity due to the dominant land use pattern
of commercial and other non-residential uses.
Community Corridor Area- Refers to the area between MM91 and 93.5 where businesses are
concentrated.
Community Center Overlay District—A zoning district that will be applied over and in addition
to the existing zoning and that will add specific regulation to areas where mixed-use development
will be focused.
Community Character —In general, this refers to the essential characteristics of a community
without which that community would lose its unique identity. They are the elements that define a
place. The whole of the LCP Plan serves to define the community character in summary the com-
munity character for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 is defined by the area's existing
small town community island character, the "conch-style" houses, the green spaces that separate
uses and its relationship to the water.
90
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97 July 4, 2004
CommuniKeys Program—This is a local community planning initiative of the Monroe
County Planning Commission and the Planning & Environmental Resources Department. The
Livable CommuniKeys program is the forum in which community and redevelopment plans
that offer a clear direction for each community's future are prepared.
Comprehensive Plan -Means the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, which constitutes
the required elements of the County's Comprehensive Plan adopted pursuant to Section
163.3177, Florida Statutes. The comprehensive plan contained a direction to develop
"Community Master Plans" to guide development in the Keys. Out of this direction Individ-
ual plans have been developed and are being developed for distinct areas of the Keys. The
Stock Island plan and Tavernier Creek to MM 97 plans are underway and soon work on the
Key Largo Plan will begin.
Conch Style - The common local name given to an early building style of classic Conch
Houses of Key West and the Florida Keys, based on American and Bahamian traditions, util-
izing available materials to create structures adapted to this climate. Typical examples are
small, wood-frame buildings set on piers with front porches. The earliest surviving examples
in Tavernier date from the early twentieth century.
Conservation Area —An area that has been set aside for careful preservation and protection
by the state or county in order to manage natural resources to prevent exploitation, destruc-
tion, or neglect.
Contextual - The interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs. A building or
object can be said to be contextual if it fits within the environment established by the commu-
nity character. A home painted purple and gold may be appropriate in Minnesota the home of
the Minnesota Vikings but the color choice may be said to be out of context within an area of
"conch-style houses" that are predominantly white with green or blue trim. Setbacks and bulk
may also be a contextual element in a neighborhood.
Dens i —The number of dwellings that may be constructed on a property as measured in
dwelling units or rooms per acre. In order to determine the actual numbers of dwelling units
or rooms that may be constructed, first you must subtract from the property all land that can
not be built upon such as bay bottom and wetlands to arrive at the net buildable area of the
site. Maximum Net density then refers to the maximum density permitted to be developed on
the net buildable acreage with the transfer of development rights (TDR) or bonus for em-
ployee housing.
Development - Development means the carrying out of any building activity, the making of
any material change in the use or appearance of any structure or land or water, or the subdi-
viding of land into two (2) or more parcels.
Employee Housing -An attached or detached dwelling unit that is intended to serve as af-
fordable,permanent housing for working households, which derive at least seventy (70)per-
cent of their household income from gainful employment in Monroe County and meet the re-
quirements for affordable housing; 20% of the employee housing units may be market rate
housing as per sections 9.5-4(A-5) and 9.5-266. (Ord. No. 19-1989, § 1(PD11A); Ord. No. 47-
1999, § 2; Ord. No. 003-2002, § 1)
91
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Exotic Vegetation—See Invasive Exotic
Garden-Type Apartments —Two or three story multifamily structures generally built at ten
to twenty dwelling units per acre, and including related off-street parking, open space and
recreation.
Green Space—See Open Space
Habitat—The sum total of the natural conditions and environmental factors in which a plant
or animal lives.
Hammock—A subtropical forest that is a rare habitat in the Florida Keys, especially those
located five (5) or more feet above sea level, with a diverse assemblage of plants and trees and
that provides habitat for native birds and mammals.
Historic District—Area identified in the Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan and on
the Future Land Use Map as a Historic District because of the historic significance of the area.
There is a current Tavernier Historic District designation.
Historic Site (Historic Property) -A location which has been identified as having a special
significance to the history, pre-history, architecture or culture of a community. A historic site
may or may not have structures on it, its importance comes more from what significant event
took place at that location than what is built upon it.
Historic Overlay -A method used to add additional zoning regulations to a specific area
which are applied in addition to the standards of the underlying or base zoning. These can be
used to add extra protection to areas of historic significance.
Institutional - A zoning designation reserved for uses which serve the recreational, religious,
educational, cultural or health needs of the community, including educational and scientific
research facilities.
Invasive Exotic - Means non-native vegetation; invasive exotic plants north of the Seven Mile
Bridge include Melaleuca(Melaleuca quinquinerva), Australian Pine (spp. Casuarina), Bra-
zilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), Leatherleaf(Colubrina asiatica), and Sapodilla
(Manilkara zapota).
Land Use— The current uses on the land, whether residential, commercial, industrial, vacant
or other.
Lot (also Platted Lot and Recorded Lot) —A parcel of land, that has been legally subdivided
and a plat recorded, of at least sufficient size to meet minimum zoning requirements for use,
coverage, area and to provide such yards and other open spaces as are required in the land de-
velopment regulations.
Monroe County Wastewater Master Plan - See Sanitary Wastewater Management Plan
92
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Mooring Field -An area, off shore, in which there exists facilities and typically a designation for
the purpose of securing watercraft.
National Register of Historic Places - The list of historic properties significant in American his-
tory, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture, maintained by the Secretary of the Inte-
rior, as established by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.
Nonconforming Structure -A lawfully existing (permitted) the size, dimensions, or location of
which does not comply with all of the current standards and regulations; for example the structure
may be built too close to the shore line or it may have been constructed below the flood level.
Nonconforming Use—A use or activity that was lawfully existing (permitted), which because of
changes in the standards and regulations, fails to conform to the present regulatory requirements.
A business that was permitted and conforming once legal at its location may be made noncon-
forming if the Comprehensive Plan or Land Use Regulations are changed so that the use is no
longer allowed at its present location.
Open Space - That portion of any parcel or area of land or water which is required to be main-
tained such that the area within its boundaries is open and unobstructed from the ground to the
sky.
Ordinary Repairs or Maintenance - The work done to prevent the deterioration of a building or
structure, or any part of a building or structure, by keeping the building or structure as nearly as
practicable to its condition before any deterioration, decay, or damage.
Parcel—For the purpose of this LCP Plan,parcel refers to any quantity of land that can be de-
fined by location and boundaries and may or may not be legally subdivided and recorded. A lot is
a parcel of land, but a parcel of land is not necessarily a lot.
Passive Recreational Facilities (Land-Based) —Facilities which provide for unorganized lei-
sure-time activities that do not require equipment but that take place in nature trails and garden
areas are some of the activities that could be described as passive recreational opportunities. They
offer an opportunity to enjoy nature and the outdoors without taking part in the type of strenuous
activities that are offered by such facilities as ball parks, swimming pools and soccer fields.
Permanent Residential Unit-A dwelling unit that is the home of a permanent, full time resident
of the area and counted as such in the census; not a Seasonal Residential Unit or a Transient Resi-
dential.
Perpetuity- The state of continuing for a long time or indefinitely.
Planning Area - Specific to this plan the Planning Area refers to the area between approximately
Tavernier Creek and Mile Marker 97 that is covered in the Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan.
Platted Lot—A lot which is part of a platted subdivision for which the subdivision plat has been
recorded in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the county
93
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
Pocket Park—A small park that may be as small as one lot in area which is used for passive rec-
reation or which may contain playground equipment for small children.
Public-Private Partnership -A merging of public and private resources to achieve an end result
or product that would be difficult to achieve through public or private activity alone.
Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) - The point system that it used to determine the allocation
of residential building permits.
Reconstruction (Historic Structures)—The process of reproducing by new construction, the ex-
act form and detail of a demolished building, structure, or object, as it appeared at a certain point
in time.
Renovation or Rehabilitation of Historic Sites - Referring to the sites that have historical or cul-
tural significance, and meaning the act or process of returning a property to a state of utility
through repair or alteration that makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving
those portions or features of the property that are significant to its historical, architectural, cul-
tural, and archeological values.
Rental Units —Housing occupied by a tenant paying rent to an owner.
Restoration - The act or process of accurately recovering the form and details of a historic prop-
erty and setting, as it appeared at a particular period of time, by means of the removal of later
work or by the replacement of missing earlier work.
Sanitary Waste Water Master Plan -Adopted in May 2000 by the Board of County Commis-
sioners and in the process of being implemented, the objective of the plan is to provide an equita-
ble, ecologically, sound, and economical implementation strategy for managing wastewater and
improving the water quality of the Florida Keys.
Scarified Land -An area that is cleared of native vegetation, or topographically modified such
that the land is not presently in a successional sequence leading to the establishment of the vegeta-
tive communities that were cleared or disturbed.
Setback—The distance a structure is required to be from the property line, another structure and/
or the shore line.
Site—The term is meant to identify a location such as a space of ground occupied or to be occu-
pied by a building.
Sprawl - Growth of urban area that is scattered, unplanned, and unchecked.
Stick Built Houses -Built entirely on-site except that it may include some factory components
such as roof and floor trusses, wall panels, door frames, etc.
Storage Area —Sometimes referred to as a"Storage Lot", storage area is the term used in Land
Development Regulations to describe the outdoor storage of boats, campers, equipment, and ma-
94
Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Tavernier Creek Bridge to Mile Marker 97
terials for more than twenty-four(24) hours. This is considered a light industrial use and does
not include waste transfer stations,junkyards or other heavy industrial uses.
Stormwater Master Plan - See Sanitary Waste Water Master Plan.
Streetscape - The view along a street from the perspective of a driver or pedestrian, especially
of the natural and man-made elements in or near the street right of way, including street trees,
lawns, landscape buffers, signs, street lights, above-ground utilities, drainage structures, side-
walks, bus stop shelters and street furniture.
Tier System -Policy 105.2.1 recognizes the Tier System as a means of acquiring land, direct-
ing development to infill area, reducing sprawl and meeting the Monroe County Comprehen-
sive Plans smart growth initiatives. The Tier System is categorized into three areas: Natural
Area(Tier 1); Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area(Tier 2); and Infill Area(Tier 3).
Transfer of Development Rights TDR - The County's process through which the rights to
develop one lot of land is transferred to another lot. See 9.5-265 of the Land Development
Regulations. Generally, Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)programs include the convey-
ance of development rights by deed, easement, or other legal instrument authorized by local
law to another parcel of land and the recording of that conveyance. TDRs are required to
achieve Maximum Net Density, and a TDR may be purchased in some Land Use Districts to
make a very small lot buildable.
Transient Residential Unit-A dwelling unit with tenancies of less than twenty-eight(28)
days duration used for transient housing such as a hotel or motel room, or space for parking a
recreational vehicle or travel trailer.
Transient Use -Uses involving a Transient Residential Unit.
Vacation Rental - Or vacation unit means an attached or detached dwelling unit that is
rented, leased or assigned for tenancies of less than twenty-eight(28) days duration. Vacation
rental use does not include hotels, motels, and RV spaces, which are specifically addressed in
each district.
Village-Type Design—A design type characteristic of walkable, traditional villages with
amenities and services within easy reach. In the Tavernier Plan the term is further defined to
control bulk by limiting the construction to single family, duplex or town houses with a maxi-
mum of four units per structure.
Water-Dependent Facility -A use that relies on access to open waters to support its activi-
ties. An example of this would be a marina, aquatic equipment rental booth, or a waterfront
restaurant.
Wetlands -Areas of saturated or flooded soils where there is a prevalence of plants that grow
in or are adapted to water, or which require a very wet environment. Wetlands provide impor-
tant habitats, floor and storm protections, and water quality benefits, and their development is
regulated by the federal government.
Workforce Housing—A term sometimes used when referring to employee housing. See
Employee Housing.
95
14A•February 8,2024•Rornon Kevs Rre Pares,
OPEN LETTER TO THE MONROE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Commissioners,on February 15,2024,you will be asked by the Developers ofthe proposed Cemex Site to decide on a'text Amendment that will es-
sentially create the`"FAVERNIER COMMERCIAL OVERLAY DISTRIC't Ifapproved,it will pave the way for the development ofa large grocery and
liquor store as well as 86 deed restricted workforce housing units.As representatives ofcommunky organizations,we would make three initial points.
First,there is no valid health,safety or welfare need that justifies an ex- development research and review process.That process has produced a
ception to the current regulations for suburban commercial develop- tremendous amount of information and often,with so much informa-
ment.If we needed a hospital or a fire station,such jusfification might tion,it is easy to lose track of facts.
exist;clearly lun-ver,that is not the case. The Planning Director in her November Staff Report to the Commis-
Second,we have been repeatedly assured by the Developers that the sion,reported facts and results ofthis long running review.They include
commercial phase would not be built without the Residential phase. the following:
Currently,the ROGOs needed for the residential phase have not been 1.The proposal was reviewed by the Development Review Committee.
secured The Developers,in their filings,have assured the ROGOs will The Board passed a Resolution recommending the Commission NOT
come from the County or from Islamorada.That is not possible at this to approve the Project.
time. At the November BOCC Meeting,the issue of ROGOs came up
in a discussion.The Planning Director was asked to comment,and she 2.The Application was reviewed by the Planning Commission which
explained that the County ROGOs were earmarked for mitigation and voted to recommend DENIAL ofthe Application.
could not be used for the Cemex Project.She further commented that 3.The Planning Department stated,"The proposed Amendment is NOT
ROGOs in the possession ofanother city,(such as lshmorada)cannot be consistent with the goals,policies and objectives ofthe Monroe Coun-
transferred.The County Attorney spoke and explained that the State ac- ry 2030 Comprehensive Plan".
tion relative to hurricane evacuation modeling may ultimately solve the 4.The Planning Department stated,"The proposed Amendment is NOT
problem.The Commission then voted to wait for the State to act.Atthe consistent with the Tavernier LCP"(The LCP specificallyprohibits the
December BOCC Meeting the Commission passed a resolution to ask designation of any new commercial district beyond that contained in
the State to make no decision prior to 2025.Therefore,it appears,that the Master Plan.We have argued and continue to argue that the Over-
the requisite ROGOs am not available.Approving the'text Amendment, lay constitutes a new commercial district.)
knowing the ROGOs are not available,goes against the assurances that
have been made to the Community.The Developers have had two years 5.The Planning Department stated"The Amendment is NOT consistent
to secure the ROGOs.That has not happened with the principles for guiding development for the Florida Keys area
As articulated in Florida Statutes".
Third,The Text Amendment is intrinsically tied to the Map Amend- 6.The Planning Department stated,"The Amendment is NOT consis
ment.Both have been working their way through the approval pro- tentPart II,Chapter 163,Florida State Statutes'.'
cess until the December meeting at which time the developers attorney
asked that the Map Amendment be pulled from the agenda.Because of 7.The Planning Department stated,"STAFF ANTICIPATES THE PRO-
the relationship ben-en the'text and Map Amendments,both should POSED AMENDMENT WILL RESUIX IN AN ADVERSE COM-
be considered at the same meeting.There is only one reason the devel- MUNELY CHANGE TO TAVERNIER AND THE IMMEDIATE
opers attorney would have removed this from consideration and that is AREA'.
to avoid the will ofthe Community who have asked that this very im- In no event shall an amendment be approved which will result in an ad-
portant issue be decided by a super majority ofthe Commission.By tak- verse community change to the planning area in accordance with the
ingupthe'text Amendment alone,a simple majority is all that is needed Livible Communikeys Master Planpursuant to the findingofthe BOCC!
to approve the Amendment.We don't fault Mr.Smith for pursuing this
Adding to these findings of the Staff and Review Committee,we un-
strategy.Smart move on his part!However,we expect you,as our Rep- derscore the concerns relative to traffic safety.The developers have sub
resentatives,to recognize this ploy and to take action to ensure this issue
is hilly transparent and fair to the Community. The Community cared miffed a Level III Traffic Study which we believe still under review.
This study,for the most part,deals with capacity.The State has recently
enough about this issue to walk the streets and speak with the homeown-
ers living within 600'ofthe affected property.Section 102-158(d)(8)of Published a traffic study that suggests that US-1 is already at capacity.
The Commission did not accept those results,but one cannot ignore that
the Land Development Code sets firth the process for securing and fit- thereare capacity issues presently impacting US-1.
ing written protests with the Clerk ofthe Commission.The Communi-
ty was successful in securing and filing the required protest forms.The The Tavernier Community Association has procured its own traffic en
threshold was met and certified by the Clerk That action triggered the gineer too.A copy of his report has been delivered to each ofyou as well
requirement for a super majority vote.We ask you,as our elected Repre- as to the Planning Director.That report points out that the Developers'
sentatives,to ensure that the will ofthe people is realized The Commu- Level III Study fails to forecast the traffic safety issues and conflicts as
nity,by and through their actions,are telling you they do not want this sociated with the"crossing"ofthe 140'medium.Additionally,it points
issue decided bya simple majority.Please do not disenfranchise us. out the Developers'Traffic Study also fails to address conflicts from three
At the December BOCC Meeting,Commissioner Lincoln recognized residential streets between the project and Burton Drive.Our engineer
the importance of the relationship beriveen the Map and'text Amend- concludes:"The existing Cemex location is not well suited for a high
traffic generation site,and it is reasonably probable that the proposed
ments as well as four other separate applications submitted by the lie- supermarket and multi-family housing development will generate
velopers.She made a motion to continue all the Cemex proposals un- hazardous traffic conditions and traffic accidents."
ffi they were ready to be heard at one time.That was a motion in the
best interest of this Community and one that is consistent with the re, We realize the Developers have a right to develop and we are not in op-
ommendations of the Planning Department.The motion passed 3-2; position to development that is consistent with current Land Develop-
however,after the break,Commissioner Scholl came back and said he merit Rules,i.e.,a development that is consistentwith our LCP and other
did not understand what he was voting for and changed his vote which developmental guidelines,but we do not see an overlay is warranted.It
killed the motion.We thank Commissioners Lincoln and Cates for their would allow for a major exemption to our Community Master Plan and
efforts and for supporting the motion We ask that you each recognize negatively impact traffic safety in the area.We urge you to follow the
that there are multiple Applications by the Cemex group and that all are staffs recommendations,which align with the Community's wishes and
interrelated and all,depending on how they are adjudicated,will impact hear all the Applications at one time.Barring that,we urge you to vote
the others.'to deal with these in a piecemeal fashion is time consuming NO to this Application.
and costly to the taxpayers.On February I5th you have scheduled a spe- TAVERNIER COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
cial meeting to consider just one out ofat least six pending Applications KEY LARGO FEDERA'HON OI'HOMEOWNERS
related to the same project.You can do better than that! ISLAMORADA COMMUNITY ALLIANCE
For nvo years,the original Applications have been moving through the HAMMER POINT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION II
71SL,AND
dHE
,., . ry
I �I�)�.lku��°�t�i��.�oJ',�i1 ) u;u Aus7u�w�Aulai:xjlslML1 E " u, I�4Tn b S,d d' , �.
-,ma's; " Tavernier Community
Association
.* - `*• -:? - ''at++•�,�..a�f. - . - - _::,- --`-_-�-� rr:- �k - - ..}fit ,f ,
, r _ . - 4 -..,4'.... \ ' . . .
-''''' ,-1 .:- ''''' ''',7';'.'''';•- -'.,`,1'-':f 1 ittli, - , . -4t .f,'It i. , f,,ii 1 1 1 1 , i 11 .itl kts, :-411,_,-N.:-....,...
' " iji,,,:,r.,‘ ;"It z.1 j, ' 1 ' r il 1 -, , ,,i,.::• ,,, , . , __
+ 7 � r ' i '
�� -K's r�
� . � _ �,'-i,?-1it ,� . r ri ;i- tom � . .� ;
• �
1 �+ r + f
sib
•
•
. I
- U
- W
_ • • ��
• " ;*
�tr�x�. !? •: t t _ . ' Il �t I l
* � . bk:iii
;
• _ ' s y gsi ,'It .. .ri /a,y'. .-. s rh
# ' R . F a _+ . r
4,
, ,
..... ,,,, ,,,
1.
? i - - .r'C , -F r . 4„4. s i"FBI. - " r' -_.,,.,4 '' T1 '.
f p
�' Y-a'- - �` r r - f':�:3 7 i#Y t ° ., .�'+ ' ''tw'`a ' '11r +1,. ` Y.
t . S'"i- j lta •
L
4 t r f+ (�+F I c1 . tt
•t .. " « +. •
- � ± :' Y'4 -r :: - --;1 ''',r. -`) a _ +., 1E. .
,.,.} f, ' . .,yam me!''µ - i , - 'f"' , k.. f` -
z ,t ,e .tc r ef'�s ,,. 9 ,.
.• `r�_ r•' A ,thy ! ' r i
, ue r. �<Y T t'-s.E j i�k J. '- ti!Nr "�i'.. , `,,. t -
•
�F , F' t fit► ISSN t , ..., y ^�� 3
•
4.
^r _ ' , ? f - w..` row.• - 3 ', � 4 1
'r_•i"Y. e•-• ` ... ;.r;IRip t, , yf:,. T-.e".j+ `� mot ., $' -c ^"e`r- .
ss •
,.,• t.,`}Yr i�',,-� -_,fir, - 7�5 .. n '�'." I; 4_.• .�F s,.1'.- - ,� ,- s.
"' ''''' '''''' '',. IV' tc- ;. '''...,,.* ,rr,,,,.. _.,....,.,...: _ . .., .v-.1.4- ,,.- . . ,--,-'....----.•
_ ..4-_,.. -..i.--,
f - a.era. • - . _ _ ,k �YE'• '
if,
ILI- ' ' ' - ' ' ., .,
�' �.. R` +!. Phi ., r
`' �+� :'� 1.---'46*. ,,..."?
'�'�- " =S w.- fir }�" x ? -
•
',;►r' _(fir r� .F 1'!i},3Y:�: _ �'t "-� gj` .. i ,i - , -,`.r '� .
' - Y� _ /' �a �'4#. - _ '°'-` - -�... ii 'r. ` „�, - `tom •, v " •
`., ,r .,.: ,k`--4 ! ,�{,, it` yL, _ '�'r.... aY -yN ',4,a
:s. . ,# ti J�'�"�e•'� r -„� i r ar' ,k=*c�. ..w` ''J. . T C.
F _ .' r
• "
:• . 3c:,,, , IT''
g ... .144„ _
' ::-.7 , . ---, _ _ --.., , ••• , . -_' ' _''.P.', - ,.., rf-•; .*..7 1'',.•'• - ...,4‘44.t. •24. -
---:- igAk ,_ - -- --, _' '''',, - ''''''," , ; ' i' - - ,- Sib.t.i ,, , - .,' ,,'',„,,...;,..,.,, ,'" VII,
f 11:.''1 ''' - . ' ".•.:. '''',46,.,,• .'"' ....-- .-'!„
4 .i L'-' --............, r _ -..- _,,•-•-• i.-,,4 •
$
g-.
• 1 i:--i i
r
a -�
.g. - ---.- 7 ' --'- IY,..,,,t- 7 '-:,-
ifit. , _ ,..
'''h • lik., r--A=1,A,..„,„,,,,,,,,,,:-:., , ',y , _ - - . • „. '
.4 ---i''.' '- n......%.- '-' 'Li ' r 444r... •:lt-,.'it:--'-';,-------,_:. - __'411°' ' -- 4'-' W
• , 7:i, --,,, ' .,, I'. - .-,..,-..._.*-• 2,:,,,,,, . ty, ..r.‘ -..„, _ °;.-- - :-- ,..,:V , •,-. iik -: 4.,-,. ,4 7_.: • - -.4 $-
J
,..... 1 ..
,-..":.•:- '11"'. E'le‘-...' ,,,,,7, s: ' :-' 1,..._ ,..-''
4iiiii ,, :4 .1., i ,.., , ,i-, 1,.....,
. #.,... ...,.....<
t 'I - '-' - r ' $. .,--‘1,..flik,) . ir. .
IL.,-,,,.., r. -." 4.,,,. ._ , , , ,,,_t ,- , ..,. -• — i —- ..- .-,, i ";-,-,„ -4 . ' .. — .
•,,,,.., A., ,,- t fr,,.an_ -ti '' ..,' • ,. ,s ,,•
E f,� i [-. ,'sip ,�w. r~ '' �. t* i#` j(+s t `' *s #, ''
t '
.i d_ii.. a; :..(-)_ .,h
•).., , ..
:....,/,4,.......
, .
, , ,,,,..,
,,r
01 Aerial Looking East
•
`` ,Y
fF � 1• 1
i'''' ',,,,I.,,,,,' 4,',[4' if i ,,,' it l. . ,_
1 I ` ic
A ;. ,
!,
o:. ''.
. . ., .,
r Ira :. ,, lc Conflicts.
..
„ ., .
.„. .
, ft ,
., . , .., : „. ,, . ,,..,,,, . _ ,
, ...:,.,... . ,.. ., _ .
., ,,, . ,„:,, .,„., , .... „:„;, ,,,,
j ,, ,,,,,..: . , ._, :__
k
. ` ' - l ,~ .- e r` it 'I ' r ,_,,, '' /I,M L, -• h 4 6 ' , ' ���
...: . . 4k,;'
a
� ore
w _ .4',.'' - f,„ ‘' ,,,,,'!:::',1100‘. T';
1 •• l r Y � A
A ' 41.4"',,,,. ', ' '-' - : _.. '. ''i,; ' ;
N , ,
. ..,
,r.,
.. . , ,, i.. ,,
, . .... , _
,,.,,,,, ,,
.,: -
( may, }t"' \' . ....'L.8•F, ',, �` I 1
" .,,,,,,2 ':, ' ': . ''' ,:,,,,":,',, ' ..--''''''' . , i ,.; :, ii,'', 17,_
2
v.,... , ,..,.,,,,,,,,,,,,, i, ;7,,,04.“, , .. - '':,,:," .;
itici- ' '''''' ' It w-li'"'' ' .p'''''' I ".' '''.,4r, '')`'',,,' •:,,' 't.,44; '; :1,',I '
liV:' . ..') ' • , /
At,-,. -.T.., - , , , " -- . . -, .. __, , ,,,--,i,
, ...,,, :., ..._ .,
,„
. ,
� :a ,,„ ��. ' _ . YA,, , , f �+, .,ter, .
r � 'T' t p - 4Y
o fir Sr , 1 rr >"', .
, • s /!ti ti t
� • • '• itrr.:- , *„', .a 1•�� ' ,�*;. 1
11 ::-.14, ,'.4.,77., !' ,„.„. __ ,,
''' '""-:,''; '' ' r----. .. - * :. ''''' 70441i z-- l'''' :4S,, ,'',:',., 'itC:1'..;,' :' ;''rf‘1,,r'
i ,..‘„.„.„-,,, ,, ri. :,, . .. , ,:,-...... ,—, i itt,,,,L,J, .,, , ,,
'. k ,,G`, _ '"end s,yi y�,',f;!r y`w. ?�' .,I 41, `Z
#M'i'fe }.,'�jK,''I�ar a W ,ram'f'+Y^ i - q r. 1' f ....
'� ""d 1A�i ';. .Y ''"J'^- -'� , ,Oleander Drive ,
, . , . , . ''''''''' , I i ' ;,,.''';'''') 14*:%,1*,„ , i-.4, ''-'"' -::- .1
r ya ,� i ,( r. fit F ,. -il w.
''...":':*us.,..'"..i,' II'- . - . .-
w d ,:el r"^
•
Li
1 ',i ;, - ?+ �-
Y
�) ..i1 I :Aart f . �f r r i ' .' .ArborLaney, i. ; . 3
,,, ' 1 ' :$3,,..IS
.; .. ji 77. , ''''°", ''''..9, , r",',.''t ' '''''. t!.",... ' , : ' ,
N °'
% s �., ,.fir r u�: ° I
,,..— ---**,.. 1' ,.,,,,,;,,,1 ,:,:,, ,,,,,A,..,/.44. , . ,
} l y�y �
A ,AY Y i., ;I n .h 9 A iy'.' 1 ' �I
4
4 6 � '1 : Garden Street
11
t V 1- k ,i .' , �{.
I
. ,{• C/ I a ,,y f y
•,
.
. ... ",' s *,'� AfF `;�x: "Y
,:..9 13,1;.', fi • y - '
dt , 1ii 'J �ti." , , "; At �yd '_1 " Y1
. / / .
Lim; _ ; ••
•
', ,t1.4,, ,:„''.2, ''',0,,:t.
,'.. . :7*- ., . :',f- -',. ' !, ... ,, .. t ':' ,. t. .. -. , '.., ..' ' ,d,-;::,-,..:: ,'.,-,...:.',, -''''':' ,z:','..,,
,,, •,r„ -,,,, ,,,,,,,.,.: v.. , !, t, ....,-, ,,-....,-_...;22.2..,1:„.,, -7 t ,,,::-.., A . ,,,,:.,,,,... :,,,,, ,,,,,,..,,,,::0,,. ,,,,
,-,_, '. ,,,,- ,:ai, - ; ,v ,±_.,-,;:- ,-- ti , _,:i - . - .., . y,:..-_,--
, . . ,,- .t... - ',I-4- -
/ i/ t1 ,1/ Il1i49
i ' " 3 :.� A'.4 ,' �A �µ>7 k?�i
�r w 'I , w`� lY,y�J. ,
i ,,,,,.,:,1 ,,,,.,
**14-IV:,,. ,
, >+•' �•� ,., �,. ! 'mar 1"�t +.__. .='x ,'`
� , h r+lif ,1•_ r] l � �(, 1 �kb„ 1 Development b.
co
` ,�.;., a.sir'r "�-.. }: , 2
.'%TM/1y
r 7rs ;t ` ..33a ! `'S` ,. =lids a. qq
II
:r '' 1 ''' '''-: .'t,,P'''13 '. ' 't, If tk\IN1,iik v,
s` L c `j ; t� t 7( ,f,' '_ r 3 h a 334 3 *
, ,f, r ''4 ''''' ''' ' - , \r,' so - ,07.,/,
is,
,, , •nq, AV' )( 4 _ '�.' ,.. `F - !'. .' ° �. ems _�,• 3i-
4•''''''.:41 ''- ' .''. i..'-•''':47', ',, ;- 11 ..‘i'' --:1*-1-4-itir'''''`Voi,s-tr: . -.'..,• ' - v- ' ' • --• Itt Ns .. tia, --
. t ., '41 4 --''''',' I- ,. '4, A.,' /4., ,/,., . , .
t ,
Q
17St>" L u „. '4,F r t . '.1/• _ ;`v t 3 -.
N1/4
.}, - •�F 3 ; - g -$ ,q c, - ;\......-z.... ,...,t-_ .„,-,-„,44, , • •• ', , • - - --,- , --, _ '14.714-- _ - itA. - i ' • '-'
J'`-, •.
......
Win._,,- ............d nixie 't,. i, t sef. j ;� • �y . + ' , , r, ..
',,,, N. ., ,, )0,....„,, ...,
„,,,,,„ ..,,,, . _....,. .... ...
_ _ ,
92100 Overseas.Hwy 1i!.- ,-'..-'' - ' .- - \ • ' '.\-•,,-,\:2.4..,„ '•-;.• , •,-,,,„-.--=,--,-: ' -s.-;'''--7-, . " -. • .-
Tavernier,-FL 33070:
v, .,./V.-. ,- '.,,,,N,-, , .
- `R'� ,=' f. f-:�- =>* �: _ `'`` .r• in � _ )
.
<
a •� it ,fii t- f - - :-_ - sk' / 5'
,�-a -t>."r.-i ESY • k�; _ _ - - \' 4\ �• ;. . ♦ _ f lit ti ..
i;� • Y ,- s. 6r ►art{ *k �1, �' t` „ ? ,�x
•
•
ram- F. _ _ t < - . - _ . ; "sr`
\ 1,--- -- ' - -- •-•'-, --. ,.• 0*," .0 •/ . - - -,4'
•
`, A, 7. -s' ,= , 1 ,- #-.F `firk.*•"f _ -
r.
N.
•• c r '� . t - _ .. ; - .. .r`a Tg.: - - f.'_ 'i.s .t •ter. ,s i
•
es .1 �O�v. t, - • ; 4 '#'< h k l - - - `ice} ie� �r. _ A
',i
^- l' �._ x f s: . G '.` _# .�# - _ - i�.,-' a - Traffic,,Hw ■i ■!a l•.. _
-,:e r
.. ,
,..
- . • _ ♦ •y ray *`ik , , }...i` ' k'
F = } ,� , Xsrr '.• t -rf fit{ •'
le
- , „.•,- ,s,..44.1,,,,,,,... „," , -..,- .....,` ...,,,,,V',% '' 4, '. ,.... ..-
+ "•
'g
I - - f5t 4 t ♦ - -• -f > , '4". r,g r y ,��#l.`4,
•
•
, ,
T -..�_ £ ; • id - daft.` T^ -• L' t ._ - # $* ,.*.RV a e sa
,
,
. -s^a! ��1a 'ice+ h - - -- . . I . _ t". 17•£V'`''§`",}. is 7s— if _ • -Y' _ ,-t
€4 � �p ,„ ' r t '''. as A
- - - - - - ..-y ' ••,.• r'3 .;* # .4.a t t -'4 't#=';are .ry
1/0„
' i" .• _b.` ' , h `"' # . -T; r } ` 1.
4 ., S .Irk s i" °'� '= ixk. t,} !
-; • --: 1:-.,ve,.."
-- - y * - ___:,- - '4.rt"--y .tk•., ''•+4 it " e a ,�,•^' } . r r' .` '� , g _z .` r•a� +_L I i 'to is
"to
k. 400:1rine
a! - .y - ^_ x r .:� WI,
3, 4i _ a } $ ' , . r g ` } a M� .i ,# r,' , *4 _ � y ' , V < Y " _.e. ,'I'i
,We
h' - ' • ' -'" - ''' '11 - - - r �
s Ellyr . a R } •
.. •
4 t
4--.-,,7,-.. _ : - _ r;
101111111
%Pa 'jilt
S' . ''''. "
:mow _.,, _ , ,
��ygx `r a''�
.,, .
. _ , .
,.
• -; ..
. .. , -, ....._ _,.
. _. •
_ •
t, +, k s -,-, s �P ? k
! Winn Dixie - MM 91.5 Cropped Labeled- EPSG3857� Date20221206 Lat25.004902 Lori-80.5220_ _ _ �_Mpp0.075
ti
44'
Pc. .. . , •
.. �.'
R
'••:-•-'.;-•.•1.'0'-'''°'-7'‘7'-'''.4::••,1*.'''-..'.,,,,.'."•i•-•-.':.••''''.-,..,,,.,,,'.''••.'.,'.;,::',
,71.7'-,;':'''„..;,'•.;r,,.„.,,-„:-•,-,•*,-„-4,'.'„,'-,',7\.':,,,'`.•r,,,,'"r.',:..,-.-'•'',,,Lc-*."-4'•/—...„',•,,.'',''.','0.'''...'r.,,.,„:"..,;.,•',4•„•,.7.,......,,,,'\•\<..„'.'i---,''‘,••,.-,.-•...'
y .,;,p1.' 1 ,i'•.•'-4-.4,•1',•:-'''I.'-••t.•.1•: ••'''•'..,'../,-,..'-,•-••'''.'.'.t+.k.', ••-',.-'••••••,•••:•.'-•.,'.,',,'..'.„,''',:,....•2-,-'„,'.•,'.-,'.,i--',•-..,.,,..-,---•,.,.,.•-•,2„"I'.;1„'•'/:.•-•r'.„'/
Y efo V Y .r", '
+� t
n
,s+
•
r ,
•
y
•
•,•,• f;•;•.:,...:,;,,,,.4,..•• ,•\..,...'...:••• , ....
,
h ., , • k> • yr, ,I .I -
" • .., •.• L.."...v.,•,.:•-, .0.41. • -., :.....i„„sto „,_,..,,,.• :.:r, ........; :: •.;
iNik, ....--4.,••,,..-:. .,.. - ,:•..,,,,,,,...-•
itt.„......•,• . 4
,
.. ::."::,;',.-':.' ' .
'' 't‘•'''..'j-.-'.,---';','",,i 1—•• ..•.„4,...•-..
•
v .'
Nf,;((,, i \_. « _ o:•,"‘•--•-i••'t•'4i..'§•.•;--,••',,-,t--e--.9',•,-•-,7,,,..i.,..•••..r.-,-.../'•••L•,,.,-*-i._.•„'.40.•4 * I
,}, ., , :' , ,a E"- a"� . ,,,..,•,,,.,,: :sir �:
• • r
:'N,'•-''''.'..'':'.1-4„.':•"-.
.,•.,,...,.,,.
;,,••::-:i...1f-
.„..47,:7•-,,4-,,,,,,,,,,L,,..-•.,.-,,,,.;....:-
:••,,-•,."•:•.••'-..•..‘;...,,,r.,.,-".—,.•-,.',,,,,...„,.•:..,..',,.-,,'•.''..,,•,,'.•-•..•.,-,- ,
c
. .,
• ..•, .•,•,...,„••.
..,....,:...... ,:,. ,„.., : .
°orl~1.+�,��{ *4-.-...
/; - •
�y `, .-r : peg r, + .:
..yy, 4, " 'V4Y 1,•' L
. J,.Wy- a • `P„ y,a.:kr v o f" ' *,
t',,•.,•'•••-•••:..'--...\'.'•'•-,-','4_.-'-.-,'-:.••,.-f,•'i,'•'1/4:••2:-,•,'.',',,.,i,,-,/-;,?,,'',-
•°,'T.• jh :� - •
�� �h Y��'%,�y� ,�j,. :n :"' i•f h '^t�h1 •h" „ "W' `f,`
N<, * ` ]• 1� e" „P l ,8'.rS.Y.,� y \ D r M [^
• '6J ` - `ST' a� / A,:{ x.$n 0- "�-W.q'_ , tP.,. 4 V'- 4i a• S' I.'N ..
e �I�A .fir
]r, r,.l , .4 (1 1/.,� 'dt A 9' . ,/ / rV. •
: �Kd
. w
.-%.e4,.,,,_.1\a„,.#4111\ '''. ' 'li. 1‘ '''''
,
:s
."'""W'1 ," ,:A '4`''. '+. ,��I �,yG h Y w M � ., •'., M' y ,l R'.'r' ''Sa' 1rx ,1 y;a, '' r,
J 11
'' ''J _,, , "' j,�. Vim # • ! y F '
w
•
Y '_`
rd r $'i 3 �..
f�'x .v
, ,
- I'.---:;''.:IiVi.::\„Ar-',..,...,-.'"
,/.:,...,•,f,- 7•,••;.;,,,„,.'.:"•':,[.:'H,..-,•,,L„,•,,,, ••••,::',. - .!''..:•••.'" ;
- y. �:: • '�F' � � )� • - :r J �'Y: , - '`it r
'''':#. 7'.'''- t 4., ....-•.:..". '',-...,4.,,,,',..'4,,.' ,,.."-
.
7 �;.
y rAil 4 r a
e.
„,":„./t."-::::,;,, . •,., r
,
:
A*C • _„:-.''' .:-'' ,' .-'..'.-, -• '.... . ..'",4*. ,':,'''':'-'• ,•-??4,-.'-',:',4„.-1`.;;..,:"-'1, t...-'..':'•-:.-.'..:: 1. '.•' '. ,' .",'''''' - ' "•''''‘iN
, - : ..4- • ; illitNi.•,:• 4:•,....:1.....:,:xv.
x ,;
i o• ---',,:-...•''.0.,:.'.,-wiv,,i,,.lk*'',--,,..-.-,./.''/ •. + � '4 .,,� t�`�
-./1 - .--',*.
-'''....'-!.;,..:i „:.--' '7,-:,:',•''';'/'.::,
Lam... _ .x .. { ,ft t 4
J,.
'd hum r
d.
' , Yid .r`�{. +*, r •
Y•
•
--:
•- ••
,..•
"F r ,.�+• M - .,. r` . - .fir i�y,:.r . , +
. „ .
. -. N.,.,•••,-,-., • :-,:4-,,,,
•-- '-• -.. -,••
• . • .. ..:
7,
._ •
/‘•:.,c,
.•,.• . .. ,,. .. ,,,_ 7.- . ..• -
. #..,_,.. ,. i•,,7: „ , . „,,,..cs, „±.-•-,.,'-i.::•.•••:..,.,,, .0 :, ,, ,:."...,:..:,..,-,'• '.,:::-.!-.. -•',.•: •_....,:* .'.,. • .. .. .. .
, . . ...
• 4
, ,
„..._ .
. . „ ,
•
4,,,:„,,•.,
...t -
.,
{' R . ' .r • i ,.•:•,., ,_('-0.4-7.7,*,,,-,-,.,,,z,•,.,,,,.l..,...,..k,,,.,,•,•..,„,/,,,•v-.,.),.,,,.i:..t,:::-,/::„f,4 1r.:._„.4•.--.-„,:,•.:,,,,,;••.•;••,••:•,,,:,.,':;,
SY'+} a, rE-,,'4,•-.,..-.-.—...-.'-.*:,...t-.4.,.,,1„...:.:,•....f-..,,, i',:,r,.,.o..
*°a :A 7 a.y ...'
.yp Af eta,
•
,.,
..: •- i. •,.
"
...
..y,"' yy�`3 • 1, _ }4,,M.YtP'�i+ • 1' �°'• I .".�" � ' ,. .t
,. ..,.
Y. •�,,.�C 1, r _ -,,,,MI•' ".3f 1' r p;�y,' "W','``iFi kR,' Y"p'-
--.* ' 000.1.;- ..-. •--..•;•)-----',':.. .'• ',...-o'ri .,:.• ...y.4,•:;••:,•':',..•• -,...•.•:-:„;•,...' „.-..i. , ,,, ., , ..
e' ,�14 �'!' ..r't''' � �•,, : , 1 �~ *•i1•'+^R'i'� ";�R�4 � d�fi'' - � .Y.• wT ; , ., ', . ,
r .-- . -41'..744:•';',7•,••i-,-','14-1 .: •'„•,„,•,,, ,,,,.....-,•.'„,,;•;•.:,.„..':,;,„ - _, -
-'. --L ...:-.IV,- 44111C4* ..-"," •.-•' I:. -',.";'''''''''''",'''• :,';'` ' "ti .., ,. .. , *„.„ "
.
x
8.-,i
_ h
r •.
.... ....,
.., •
,
r�'
,r
'''6, ,,, ,..:,..-.:; \.,':_.,,,H.::, ,...:,,,,,,-,,,,,•:,,,,,,•••
.4 .,4.
.. ,. ..„,_ , • 4„. . . ,...,.. ...,. ,..,••••:„.
-
5.. .
..,...„.,,,„ ‘ ..,,,,4„...:„.„.„„,,,4„.....,,.... , .. ,.., ,••,..,,,,,,. , .
,,, .
• ri."- ,.=,...,,i.i,..,,,i...:,:,.....,..-. ••• .:,.• ,... -.,_...:::::••••„,-;,:,,,,:::,,,,•• •.. :•,4„,,,,,,..., .„,..:
, , ,,,,,.. „
..., „ .. • ,
-. s A y. i ..r Y �,r 'G.,.r w,wy. '1 ° ;A'`,'' .eF�. ,� '` * y* r a.. ,
-../ 4*-N,
} • .
w4rie,..„,„,..---:',-•-,-v•„4-,......,1''...,,, ciR
�y�. R
w` awR a� r.. `
.P Y. � �'"4T-
a
•
"'..;,-' .1%
a f • .. ` )o� $: , -- ',..."'• ,+�,`...-4 ♦ x 'mow
y 9!°R4/c)
n"-, , P 6 yf *1 ran k io .1�t p M ••Y! .. n �" �. i
r* • 'bras r,'„Y 4 a9�c,,"4� '•.!,,,.. +t'r•. �'^�•y�. ;� ,.+,d• * �r.J - " •' #3 y}F t 1
�i�f`'X +1• _ ♦ i Y, �7 .dl E"a�'tr''g1r• i�'� ++" !
•� ... • r,„$,•, r . 4 „6.i1 ' „n' t ,,pJ,. Sys' ,1 ,n� 'w y s ,►^,M s+ ,
,Y~ -.� r " �• a it w+ w,y'e a, y7` •
L+wv_;ay�s''y� �,.Y,r a''�'iN'..`w•� .'1'k'�'� i ,. s :p «� ,gip,,, , R•'� •a
•
' - . `:;+. , r47r' 1 �• C' "..M ',`'+ ...it - '6 �'-,i a' &' •
4.
'�'11sI" `k „t C *^w :!,x ', ,RF' i � •� �u• K.,pl,..' ,s ,'n •,p7 r ,r, w:�.
r
"M k
@ � r p '.,r.
! zoomed-.•Winn Dixie - MM 91.5 - Cropped Labeled.- .
EPSG3857_Date202212O0. •Lat25.004902 ,Lon-80.52204__Mppo.075 • ..
'ILA 11
, ,, , • .‘,_ ,.. iiiimi „ir ,..t.. . iik ,
IL
il. 'vs a sw— - gr . . ., ,,,,, / •,,,,,:...,:-, , -s,
, , ,, .--,.
j _A z
, ,.. . .. .. ,,_ „ ,
.,,,,, .
-- .- . ,4:;,ilit •
IL, it, •,4 4
111
,
aA _•,: __,,, .4 .�
. . ....
- l's# 4i ' ' ..
7; 44, ,,,,,... .
, gik- - _ e_ . ,..,...
- ' , ,,,,fr
- . itze,,, , '''' , ._.,,, ..,,,
., . *P'4:::' . _ . _., 4
f
t
-.fir �`�
y
.♦
- y -
.
N
a
i, . q* * wY
k :R s' a : .ate
- -. . a C� Si l
Yp
• 3
' ei; t' : '''''''' ''''l '
• \ •a
B. LL
rr
. ,: itp-- ,- -:,, :--
4 ‘,.,,
tart - ,.,, '-- \.,
. 414'
_. +-j1j
, _„___., .
. ,
..kik, .... .. ....
•
r z
--I _ - ,,. . ,----,,
' '-, .A . ,ie, , . 1 ,
w .
4, 4,-„:41.,-',„.." -' ,.', .. - .-•- : . - .._ '-' ..,
a+n t: '.r. € an.s�.�r .r::
h .
R.
..101 is;,.- : . ,
'117 _/1 ,1 -.,-''//,'-'4illk . * '.''''-'
/ , u ix Super Market `� E, s ji.
� `
. ,,, ,,,, ,,,
,•
• . adnPz ' :AYl � 4 0- its R � Fi . '- B I. , - .,,,,....,,„),,,,,.
---- 101'437 Overseas Hwy ,-- :,.. 7 -
1:: ;
Key_ Largo„ Gil) y�� ,.. .,..
1 - e �j�j
r.v vx
F
.
a,_
i .
"' . ' ' 4:..,_ .7 f . - A; := ' .3 v
rd {{ ylifbk.
t.
z t
,....4,44 ' - -' ..4-''' -—'----.4-1114'Of- ' ' '' _,='',
? a f • S gt ., �.� laa
1 AO/'1.1*,\LN.
Il, ,400, , ,,:4,,,,i.'','''''3-i;:,.. '-:-::tr:4-7''''%k -•.''..,..,.,... .,,..,,
I I' '''' ''' '' 0 ` t ..... ;"
' ;
,i,. .F.,-- --4
++11
;
v
z av
, , i - ti 4
L
_ pp
! Publix MM 101 - Cropped - Labele.d - EPSG3867_Date2022120 —Lat2 .113693 Lon-50.421554 M 0.07
' (e) . ,
.t
..,4:,,, ..,,,,,,,,i, . .;
A ltt_„,„,.. . • ..i.:„...., ,,, /, .. .‘_,.;
,;,„, , ,i, „ ..._ „,.: , , ,
..:_tr,,,.„.,,,,,,, , .....:_ . , . . ..„
, , ,
. .:.
_..
4 . . .. .
. . .
, _
.. , , .
________
1 t t' ' , ', .'''4 1'''', ' ''' ,',' -sp,..,...,:r ./ 4, i,., . .
i.., i , , , _ , ,.A
,,:s.„, , / 44:. ,,. : ,, .,,, "",
.... ,,,,,. . All vie
1 5 e rr--' a • .
41044490, ,,-it. rse.--',....
' . ,, :,,,,,,, - ,ji, '''' , ,,,,, ,, '', f„,...:-.' .,".,, ,
. t , . 1 1 .,..,,,, , ,,,641‘ . .
11.- ,, _,.:. . , , 'ti: .1 - ,..z,-L,.x.,N
,. .,„' -,,,,s. -.'--- ',,,,, I- i ' i-.-; - - ,,,,,.- ..--,..,,,, ,-- _
:,. ,_-... , ,, , ..
.., .
,S` i`, ,r. f A i a
‘„
_, ..,,
• _.
lailiC,,,,,
y ,,
, ,.
1
€ .. ' ...... ' .1.<„. „- - f - tz,
•'..
_ - Z - { ; fit'
_ „R F,r 4` Sr
1.3 �', ...;: ice. y�' -
� �
.R p yY�a ��,l w ` �
- ) t '*-4-z-,-,-°,1,' / ' It ::
: ,- 0
\-',,,k,',N,
_ , . - - _ -.
IC '•i. . / -- ., - 0
_ , , .
. . ,
.. ...,
, -- -.N.,;-ik-, ,
. ,
\ .4--4 . -40 . •
, ,-N- ..
',„ .., --'„... -1' ft ',,,,:q„,,ib ' , .di' . . .
00,,_ ' ,
'' -1.-'::-':'''..,;111,/,k.'t.:,,E,.4,:i7-,H17' ' ,-I''' .
11
7./1?:./1,41/tr'''
i f i
{., .
„..,,,/,,,__ .,,,
,":''''1*'. ''' / ,
...4
,, -,, - ,,,. .,
_,, ---,-
. ,...,,„ ,
,_
,,,,i,,, /
r_
-- .., ._ ,1,- - =. ,:,-,-, ..,
. ..,.. _ ...
CA
r,
3a
, .. ,- a 1 :0. - 2.- I 4„,,,,t,41
• ,'„ ,...,- - . P 'sue'..
,'.,--,-4,. _ ., ' ,
_,,,,,.
, .
, ,
)/ / • .-4," ,,,, -.,, .,..,. . , ,,
. ,
� , ,x eye _ >,,, , : , , ..,.,-}.: lr.„1-14Hiji,
, .„.,,.
- :,.
,. .
, ,-. _ . :- _ .. ,,, .,. ,„---
„, -...,, :..
,.t , ,,
. , _\ .
-,,,,
k
.44ti
r` '' ' 1
t
-_ :::k,
=..: ', ‘
. ..-- ,-, A . ....„
A
.,
4
f . t .Z b 4 ,.,,,,, „.,..,i $''.T . • ,,,
. .-. F
„1/4 _,,,
is
7
yyy •
,,,,,,„, ,,, .,,,
.4. , ,_,, ,,
, , -,,,,,,,
J. _
E
,,.
.„,,
, ,-,77 *,--,
r^
.„,..,:__ .., .4___,,,,,,:„ ,
,.
,
. ,
— , , _--
Y ‘,,,. 4
„, .
,!
7- -
{'-t x, t
,. 0 ;
,,,,, 4,-, # .. 7
lo
1 '~ 'Y ."f ::r �{ ii::
'
-
•; yam'- r'_ a,
. .
7 - - • -,' f -,b,f,47- , 0 / . .
_....
I.
s"
•
4.
N: ! zoomed. Publix MM 101 - Cropped - Labeled - EPSG3857 Date20221206 Lat26.113693 Lon80
_ _ _ - .42 1554 Mpp®.075
•. 1.1,.,:;,,,f, ,,,,. .i.:"in .,
,.,.:.'
. ..,.4.0.t.„•
'.--
,;.7„,,,,t.N,,,,,,'.,,,,,t.,42,-.
,,,,,,,,irmt,Ifs,:f. . ,„:,„,„..., 4. 1 i ,,...,. ,,, .. . ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,_ •...,, ,...,.,,,,,,,:,..„.,,,,..4:.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..„.4,,,,,<„::,..
,..74,,,,,,w.!471,-:',:':',;,, . ..,,,,,lir , 1 GI •, ,.„..„,,,,,,,,„„:„.,:„,,,,„,,,;,„:„.„,:,:,:.., . . --„„,,,,r,
:::Tim.,,, ..,ifliti.,..:"...'. • . ::: 1,74t,,:::,:..*
:, ,.., ,....
.,,,,,,,t1:0,1',•,‘ :::41,1f-k%si-, ,,,..41Pii,',41:'....'....;: .. ',si:0 f....cniI
-. ,p4 ..-- k,..- ....„,,,,fal!.11citig.:,,,,;.,•'.:' tti.,,....44.4t.,,,,.04,41::".....:.,.,::::,..,,. , "..
",
A 2- , ,,&,,,..,-„:440I4e*Aittit,:z1.4.,;:74,,:,. ..q.,..:,, .........;;),,!... ..:,....;....:,:•:.7,•:-..,-. . . -,.,..,..:,, ,,,:,:.ii,1,,,,,•- . i4.,,,,4::!..:!..!,...,..,...:
1 ,7,,,,,,,.. ::;!:41z>-,;c.tt, ,;,,.:,:ttitzt:a,tioeisotti.z:li::,..•:,,i'i:::;.,:. ,,,,., i.,.;;•,:.:....::::::...:;:i....:,.,,,, ....: . •:,.,,, ),...,...,21z:::t:,-ii.i.f.,•;:-4/..,.....-4. a,. .4
kitrs.:Illit:.,t31:i.,:::{:,,.4,:poits*,14,04:4:,1!"1 :\i‘,:.,-.1:5,,;;;;,:.!..,':.• 0 ,,,;,....:,.,,.41:;;;i4.,,,•,,,,,,,,,,,,o;..... ,:::,....., ..,g1,,,:;;,,,...i...: ::,,,,?'....,,,,,:;,,,or.f!....,. ..,•••
,„.,,„„,..„...,.,,,,,,,,4ipi,•,,...'„1,4,,,,•,..4,,,,,,,,,,.:14,..,,,,,,ttkiik,ik.:,!:::,:;...... ..4.074,,.,.....:4,,,.,..:•::- • „, ..:,:......,,..„..i?,,iii.i. ....::::.,....:„...:•,,,.4,:.*. ,,,....
Rtt,ht.,:f.i"!7:.it,§1.1kr*.4-iit;0%\tkfitg,\401.".'ikrviitr::: •
I'ilk'0%);i''.'Z'si:4,'•:...:.:.:i".:1):,.i..t'k;iii,)e,7114:tki.,:,,i1,,,',Z;;.ts,!:..:.}4 ,'...:,;:. : ,. :.....,.,. .,,.:,,:'it ill, ''''';',..:.';*,$.:1.''::!::'.....:.!i'Ail''....'
i,„. s.:,..,-. ,t.o.,c,,,,.:,,tft,,,,,,,,,,,,,,L-k 4.,,,,..›‘.i,:,;.:,,,,,N,,,,,,,,,,,k,:',..,,. ..‘,,,.,),,,,,..-.:. .,,,,,,,,,.,:, '''' '""'‘ '...'''. '1.,'-'./:',•". -- '' '
,,"4,...,,,,,,,,,,f,‘.4,04,,,,,,,,t,,,,.:‘,,.,,,.4,,,,, ,:t-,.,,,,,o,,,,•.,,,,,,,e,,-agt.„
'.,':,.it 1.,'-i,ortf445.:::ilio....s.i.,04,01...'s,,,,,,,I,"44,:i. ,,,„74.k,'.':,•1..,:',4:1,:.t..:.'.‘..
AIN-Alk'''Z:74:iRt;Vitt';74t*t,,IiRbg; I:fitt,,;.. i.,: ,."4,..:- .. ,i.„,.,,, :•::::::,....: ,,:.,...:.,,:i.,..:.,„,
'..... v;..,...,;,..,,:,:...
ikk ',,. 1::: :.,,,iiili.444::itt,c4tAltiP.P.Et1Pk'j::..''' . ;:',..,.4,tfl:1:::.: . att:::':.. -:::::.,.li•'-':''':' ...•,,,,:i ..,:.,s'''
,
''''',1;;..44:4,,..?:::''":..;t:Rt";3!:tiVr;.4..4,1*;$411:41$\7'ilkki'?!.': ''. .:.:''':',2!.:g!it.4•;,..',.. • ' .,;,,,.1.... ..:::. ' ::':.$'.:.::!...!,!:.7.1.1..„... .... ;,.'t:i:.(.)...,
:';':;';'4'.'4.:''''':•...:.:?111.;•4.44:::i4I:iLtkIttlikei,:*-441;1:.!;;.:11;i..;.• ;::',...,.1b.!...,.:;.",115:1.1‘11::)i i,:0ltl,„''i:',.4',i,.,...,•".ik....:,::.„,•,.'',,•%,':z:0,;;''*.1?,':.171,,:4,';:..,,',:,.,.,•r.,:,z„',;A:"',1;,1,)'::,`,1:7:,,-:,:a4-',''.,,,,It 41,:!':t'.<,,,',.„,.'4 3•,.':',-r,,::.•'.1„',i.,:,I•,,;,1',„,:.",.7,7.',.::,<Fl.ir5,:1,,.i1!,o:k:4,",;.4t)it•st:::q::'.,:„.:..:*,:r:.::t.',•:ij::0f,'i'g,:.i‘,'.:,,:,A•,?.i1o:c::,„64,t',%:,,:.4:7.4,,.e:'s.,1,i1!',.:..;.•',:......,•.,4'41'',,;:,‘.!:,„".?1‘,o.'1.::4:.:t4:.i:,.Pf1:!t.,,':..,4F.k:;,..:‘_..',,i.4:,,:.:t'4,'7.,.'4e:,:f:i...:.,,1.:,.'4N,„'":1',,..,.;,t.1.,':...'t.,...,4:'.;;.‘;‘,;...;.,.:Z.V-;i.;....,iZ::t,•:..i...i:4'4,l;..[:,!4::"4.,:/I:r„it;.1 4,.ii.'\64P.444t''').4,.."4"&ir'!'iet4:A:Z'.:ki,.','bt,,ts'.w':, i
41.4A1 % ) „l..l:i:1,4"•1t4..:it',t,i-.i-.','.1:7,.;,4.::,,F".;,4,;•!k,,:4,',,,.L..1';.,71•e'4...:•;..:1,,k'4,:l.,)i"!.:):•1.f,,'.-,k-\,::.;::':,l•1,•?.',j.1,i`t':.t:.,i:..!.T.,:'.,k,...•::,.';,:..,.;.,,:e:„4-,;.:*.,.pk't,.:1•.:.;:..i:.:::!:.pi:.:01:,l.,;4::!I"s4k;i.•.j,•P.k.,:i,:P41:,p..14t.lf.-o:,.!.1.,,iiI0.".:.:'.k,k.k'ks,...','.1,.!;4fI,,i:.":..P'.:,a:s:,',•'"g,‘,,.!A:,..:,..t,.:,i!l2k:t‘::V,:,:.,,4,.,s,i,:.rol:,.:fV,it'f!,:..i,.,2.'4:‘i:.,:t'.:co,.'.i,,:k:.:,,..r:.'../:,,,,,,i4,,4'k141 t.-:.::..:..,;.t,.!•.•;.,:,.,.:'i.),.:,',:,.,',.'.,.:•.,:i.:::..,:::.:'.,..:.......:.,'....:.):'..!:4:1:.:.•,.A..'•.f,.A.'::.•::.:.'g,:i,;,.:,:Y.iA4...i.,i:
i114:.;4.:;'i.;:.ir:i0:,!')zl"':.:,,'.i.•.:':.,;:'..#:C,.•i•:.4'.04..:4!;:i:.::..)::,!,:i,c's:,;,:;,::i:.:':V.•:r,"';.,,.:',•'.)''...;.....:'1*-.,,,..',.:.•':':':'.:.•.'i,t,'.'i'i.,..,.„::Q;:'i...:,,....'.,.:f,.'.,,,.,,,,,,.,,'.4.!.,;:..•",'1„.,.:1 P.5,..:;::;•,.f:.,...i:.:::.i1..:r:..:1:.:i''5.,,..Y.:':2.'.F,4....'.!.:".:;•1,.,'.;':•
1 , 44 ;:.,...,•..''...•H.':.!!:•:.:
:,...,s...,,..•',s'4'.i,,-'',.o:.:.fi:,.'.:f.:.;,..:..':;'.:.'.:,::'"..,:.:.:,,:,!,:..a:,.:;q;.;:1.',1.—,,'.1';,,.':,•,;,,,,:;,.i,.:,..,:4::-.,1!:'•:.i.:.;1':,,:,':.-..?,..,.,k..,,,.:..,'.:..,,,.':',il,'....,f.?',,;,*:::$-,•,.:4:.-7%::k3::?,";:,,A.?k;-,'%*".'..04::.-'.:,:.::.;::::Y,,..;:,•:.:„,..:;:1,;.:....;.:
;',..:,i•:.;.•:!:_,.;:f:'$.*,:,„'.4•f,.'„:,::,1:.:"1.0::-::;,:,i.::.',.,i::":,:.:f:.,:.:1.1.••:'.i.:',k,'.;.-,.:''s.....:,.i,';).:7.t.r,,.i l,....:,7,,4:,.:•-,,:•tt',,••,,f.,i,i:,V,.ii:.:?i..!.,A.::,'f!,ti,,kr,i,,,,,'„,,,,i.,.i-t-•.,'.psl.:.-it,,'.,,,,ig'..;t.,,',:..'..,...t.',:;,:.:,,!-i••..„g',r:;.?...,:.,g,:i
*•:i„.i'';::'i..,gt',,.'..'.:,.'i..,.a!,'.:.''#,4•:,:•,,.•,:::.,,:.;X g
•:8,1:.,;.4.,..,,;'-,•:.i1,,,,t,.,,,,.;c.0,:.,,.?;.:-y:q:,:,.,07..$.,.1..:'..:4.:;);::;
':';,.:.:•:
'':''.,•.••
:
:•
7::;...,.:i..",•.. , ''
' ,t.':'.::::'..1:'::.-, ..:,..••:.,i,..:1..::;[,:. ... :::/ii...::,',,,,,g;::-,,,.......::.:,:.,:,,..--.-..iligy......•,.....;',4::,.':.':,...'.
,',.'""'il: ',..i::•'''.:....:::,. ::',:;,::.':',k,,,:.:!.,$'!:., ..,.,...:...:,..;ziiiii.D.i:.:',..,;,,,,,,-,...::.:....',,,oc.:::,:.:. '
,,,..,:!2...: ......:,:.:,.
is,.,,c,,,..:7:J:!,:...,:....!...,...::, ',,,,! :,:.,..„,:::,.,4,,tpor..4,0,!.,.,:),:;,,:•...A!;•:-.;.sitl.,?.:,.
,,.,ifki.,/,....,::.:': , ..,.,,..,1...atf7Aft.,!;31:,,,,.?Ar61.,::::,;.•:,.,.fp.;:,.,i,,,,i.,,,,:.......-
... t.
..
, ....i...,.,:fa::::,.„.•!..:..,,.... , ::::::;,.:..,;.;15,-;41',,..11040,f1.3.itit.!.!..litti,::::::,;;,..*,,,,,...,-:.,. . . •, .:.0:,..,..,,...,„ ,,,''''''''-:
i,,E4',.'i, '14.1 .!,:........... ...:.:;•/.'...t...,,', i„listi:ii.!:,,,...?E,,...,...... .:,..:..,..:,.,t,f,olitri:jili,ii1:1I,!ii!:.,,,,,... .:.',,i.,..;*,..;:e....ifits. , ..,:..:..,..,..,..,i..,::::.,,!:::!:/ii.%;tioot. !,.,,,,, ,
' ' •••• ..'-'"'''''''''' '' ''''',": ;,14''' .. " ''',,,:,,,:;:,*:;',0;:,'At4'.1tbi.,..:;(..'. • ':"......::.:•;:pk4....,„4.,,,...),:t.k,...,.40qat,*! ... ,t.
.. :4..o.ssi '''....:::...:....:....*::::::•:•.:..;;.,.,,.,. ,.,..:,..)::::1'...,...,,,:„.,.::::'::, .. ..::.:::::::::..0;;;.:•:,..i:.0...N,.'s•it.kj:.;,!Th.;:. .•tpptito ,";.-iii 41,/,:.:
....:..,...:*!*-- tfi '''''':',, ,'..iii4
,.„.•%.,,,:,.:40.::::11i.
ikit:''--- • kv....:,.';'.;::::.....i...,...,,,,4t.f,..:•.,,,!".:..,...,,,,!..10: ,:iiiii.::::,::,,pk,:'...-.:::::,,,;,..p.;E''''....'. . '''...;.:::::...,:iiii: .,,,,,..::,.*Aiegoitolitp: .:.:,:,,:
1 y
,::„;:.:i'lio.i.:Jititifig.r....'';:‘...:,..,.:,..::;:,,...iti,.0
„..„.,:,7,,,,,::„,:.,..:.....:.,:,:,,..,...„.„,,,:., ,,,,,,,;,,:,:•:,.......!,,,.,„„ .„...,, ..: ::„.,.,,,,,,..,,,, .,1
• .,: ''''." • ' •,11111.?,:ii,'i'i';'jtitli.4'•:!:,i.o.!1'#.'.lIlt'"gaN4.
..li .4,,,,,,s. '......:41::§:‘,..,:,!.,i';,.
,;...
— -t:.....' ...... ....ci!'.,„- .',,.:1':::Y;:i':..'' ... '''';'"'4''''' ':::•11.*:f.V.i.Oit'l.;,:,7:,,",t.,:14',.'ts,,,,, gi'.1:41,tsil!,,.'...':4,
. ;:;'.:.i.;.4;44,1;:il'!'::.I:::P;':'').!2':'. :':.•;\:,:iiiiiiittlittati;..1iiiiiii-lf#4:,:,:i
‘,.,"..:4,.,,,.,...*j.::::4....:i:.&;,;,,:f.;:s.0041'4.",....: ;„4,:i!j.::::,,,,. .......i .;';jll.!l:q::tta:io4:.,',Agt'z'''"'F:ll':it.*1:isati.f.;
iif.,,,,),:',,,o, .4,0;11,0,, .4,,,,....„ • ,.„.,..,,:. . .zw.m, , , , :,,,,..j.,4.:',:iS'Nfc.:'''',ailf: ;!?otf"
!' :',..,.. .:":Ac'''''''''' ''•••:‘:,441:.7:::••• • , , ':•I' ''..•••••.t'''''''. .:. ...,P:k.ifs,37,7;i',',..,,•,i;JA:',.!!1.::::1',„ .41./.!... ••••:::',S.':'!:'•:
'i:,.•:‘;i'•• •';;k.' Aks;:.;;#::4311;tri:;. /41i1g$,: ,•... ,... :,:,::•,:::: :.i:::::. ., ''.4:.,•••••.',1...sil r.',...!:.•:,,.,;4,,,,::: 41,;),.;::'.
::,,‘'' *),,i,;',•,,,,.,„:,-.4:1::•• . 1-tlii.': .k .../ ':.•i';01'...:!' , :•••,.;,..,:;F:F.,:1;:::,..":::.. ..1.1 '•, 1V11/:',:•••:;.;.i':',::i:•.f:Eile :.!:!-;t;;I:',.1.:::..*;:ill•:!:.'''::!:!..-.:}iii:::'•:,:li,listi,:„.
11
kt*It.",,,..:,.:,.,: :,b1.1.") :. :),.1 .4.;"..;: '•,...;.‘.,•; ,,,...::•...•:'' .-..:i..!,:l l•fi :"f:).',',.;::::'•::','•;:. ..S':',..`.;..,,6i*iiititills!1!;,.
•tt,;• ;‘,4illisil::14i:i'•:i'.?:f..:ti:::!?.;'''t .:.114'11;iititit'f;54:' ,:.;'''I — :,: I '';: ••tHlii4'":";;:lft::t:Ilif
*ItgliNtet.e.,:• ..."..'fr •••..; 1.!...':•"'''''''''''''' , ::‘,4illtalts-..40.214,!:.•1;:lik.:
z,"„isI144Atillitlifisk;ti,,.4.t::.•::::..'1:. 1. Ot: '...; ••••.:•:••'.13.:•, ,4:ti, „k; 1,:(,,,QZ.\11:.'',c,\Z`,,,tilLiftw,fgrit3.4'"'
.....•••:ik*T,,,,s.A.,,,t,g, ',.. I.,14P',„Ogitt a
Alq,;•.'ailik,s,q?.WILL'et.s...i.' . .! ,, „ lli.,.',: il'e...i.,, .,./1:;,, gpititikwiti,..
:::N'All'...':./:.'..,':..I. ..(...'4;qi. :1ii.. 14ffitfliit14.'Ai'l'Ilititi
.!tIIi$41: ,5:1..i.?....):..,e.!':4itRRIItititi':ifa'it'..;,,'Ilf '"'. ''''''4: •
i!ittkAlli:::...,...,)'.11:.!..:.!...,::: 11:4012A1'''' 4 • ..
ttifitt0h;ifilliletiiiito:;tibt.ititt9""•''''''
„..
iztv,??*tieitt;
ritti)`-''''.'. •
Traffic Safety Report for Proposed Mixed Use Project
Prepared by Miles Moss, P.E.
Proposed Mixed Use Development: Supermarket and Multi-Family Housing
Location: 92501 Overseas Highway, Tavernier, FL
Parcel I.D. - 00089490-000000 & 0049025-000000
Planning File Number: 2022-053
Summary
I am a licensed professional engineer and my area of expertise, since 1970, has been_in
the field of Traffic Safety and Traffic Accident reconstruction. Traffic Accident reconstruction
applies the laws of physics to determine, after an accident has occurred, how fast the vehicles
were traveling at, and what the contributing causes of the accident were. I have been recognized
as an expert witness in numerous courts in the State of Florida to render expert testimony in
traffic safety issues and traffic accident reconstruction.
The purpose of this Report is to review the Developer's Traffic Impact Study (TIS)
(updated January 2023) and to forecast potential traffic safety issues related to the proposed
supermarket and mutli-family housing development. As more fully set forth below, it is my
professional opinion, within a reasonable degree of engineering probability and certainty, that
the project will exacerbate the existing traffic conflicts and create hazardous traffic conditions.
Developers Traffic Impact Study
According to.the. Developer's TIS the proposed development is projected to have 6,813
vehicle trips entering and exiting the location daily. Most will occur during the 12 hour"shopping
day"which averages 500—600 vehicles per hour. The Florida Department of Transportation
currently reports about 31,500 daily trips at the location. These also mostly occur during the
"shopping day"which averages 2600+ vehicles per hour.
The Median
It is important to note that the Developer's TIS fails to forecast the traffic safety issues
and conflicts associated with "crossing" the 140 foot median.
Southbound traffic is likely to use the median to cross U.S. 1 to enter the property;
Southbound traffic exiting the property is likely to use the median to cross U.S. 1 to travel South.
The median has limited stacking capacity. The TIS also failed to address the traffic safety
conflicts from the three residential streets located between the project and Burton Drive (Garden,
Arbor and Oleander).
Analysis
Entering and.Exiting site traffic, stopped at the stop signs must estimate the speed and
distance of approaching traffic on US 1, estimate the time needed for them to safely cross the
roadway, and decide if a safe gap in traffic exists for them to safely cross the roadway1. These
conflicts are often not estimated accurately and will result in accidents.
If the number of safe gaps is limited due to the large volume of traffic on US 1, there will not be
adequate space for the entering or exiting traffic to safely store in the median without obstructing
traffic on US 1 also leading to a hazardous condition.
Exhibit 1 shows the proposed site location on U.S. 1,just south of the curve. U.S. 1 at
this location has the northbound lanes separated from the southbound lanes by a 140-foot wide
median. However, the."useful" portion (101 — 120 ft) of the median can only accommodate
approximately 5-6 vehicles2. Stop signs control exiting traffic from the development, as well as
eastbound and west bound traffic crossing the median area (Exhibit 2).
The project is expected to generate 6,813 trips per day that will conflict with the 31,500 daily trips
on U.S. 1 (Exhibits 3 & 4). It is expected that the 3,406 westbound exiting trips controlled by a
stop sign will conflict with the 16,000 northbound US 1 trips daily. In addition, the 1,873 west
bound exiting trips controlled by a stop sign will conflict with the 15,500 southbound US 1 trips
daily.Also, the 1532 east bound entering trips controlled by a stop sign will conflict with the
16,000 northbound trips on US1. (Exhibit 5).
The evening peak hour will generate 675 vehicle trips, it is expected that the 331 exiting
trips, controlled by a single stop sign, will conflict with the 1616 north bound US 1 trips, and the
155 east bound entering trips, controlled by a stop sign, will also conflict with the 1616
northbound US 1 trips. In addition, the 182 westbound exiting trips, controlled by a stop sign, will
conflict with the 918 southbound US 1 trips.(Exhibit 6).
"Unusual Geometrics"
The Developer's TIS concludes that because of the "unusual geometrics" of a 140-foot
wide median, the analysis software cannot properly analyze the projected resulting conditions,
Entering traffic safe crossing (38 foot + 15 foot vehicle length) require 4.7 — 5.8 seconds (gap time).
4.7 — 5.8 seconds @ 45 mph (speed limit) = 307 — 379 ft safe gape distance (over 1 football field.)
Exiting traffic crossing (50 ft + 15 ft vehicle length) require 5.2 —6.3.seconds (safe gap time) 5.2 —6.3
seconds @ 45 MPH (speed limit)= 342—419 ft safe gape distance (1 — 1.5 football fields)
2 Eastbound median storage 101 ft to stop bar. At 20 ft (15 ft vehicle + 5 ft space) per vehicle = 5
vehicle storage. Westbound median storage 122 ft to stop bar at 20 ft per vehicle =6 vehicle storage.
and intersection delays and vehicle queues may in fact be larger than projected, and a traffic
signal may be needed. While the consultant's software may not be able to "properly analyze"
projectedques,conditions, delays and as a professional engineer and traffic reconstruction
expert, it is my professional opinion that a hazardous condition will result due to the site
generated conflicts.
Considering the large number of trips expected to be generated by the proposed
development, and the continuous traffic flow on US-1, it is reasonable to conclude that delays
and vehicles stopping in the median can easily be expected to occur which will result in
accidents taking place.
With respect to the Consultant's comment"a traffic signal may be required," there is no
indication that the Florida DOT will approve or permit one or two traffic signals at the Northbound
or Southbound lanes of U.S. 1. And while the installation of one or two signals may alleviate
some of the conflicts, the configuration of the immediate area (the curve, speed, and residential
and commercial congestion —two gas stations and a fast-food restaurant with a drive-through) is
likely to generate numerous traffic safety issues and conflicts even with signals.
The writer would be remiss if he did not point out and compare the proposed project to
the three other supermarkets in Key Largo that have safer access to U S 1. 1) The Tavernier
Winn-Dixie which has a visible divided highway two access driveways traffic signal; 2) The Key
Largo Publix which has a visible divided highway, two access driveways, traffic signal; 3) The
Key Largo Winn-Dixie that has a visible divided highway, two access driveways; several
deceleration lanes on both .N and S bound traffic.
Conclusion
Based on education, training, and experience and over 50 years of experience as a traffic
safety engineer and expert in traffic accident reconstruction it is my professional opinion that the
existing CEMEX. location is not well suited for a high traffic generation site and it is
reasonably probable that the proposed supermarket and multi-family housing developments will
generate hazardous traffic conditions and traffic accidents.
Miles E. Moss, PE
Moss Accident Reconstruction
Application: Text Amendment to the LDC'
Applicant: Singeletary 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")
Agent: Barton W. Smith of Sm;i,thHar �
i
i
i
i
I 2 File: 05 i
i
r,
i
i
f
r' Location: 92501 Overseas Highway, MM
92.5, Tavernier (Island of Key Largo)
Parcel ID Numbers (2 Parcels):
frrr ' arf ! a / /a /r
00494254-000000 and 00089490-000000
0; � U%'��/, n NW ��'` 1J,Y/�I�v ���)n����/�/i✓n r(/ /�f f/fV f fy /l�r J� p �f�'�! r, (o
1 4q 0W l�jj1,,;�rpp fiM�,Uf ( � n7 /dfn /h>`r
FLUM Designation: Mixed Use /
v llnlVfi (W1r�rW'r!/w GriW/ /i nrY� � / u,'I�f, Y
Commercial (MC)
� ivy' �(�l!��H'/ %1,���, r,✓�",r ��r °Ar" r IU;;
rY✓� ' �� l��,r a 1 y}� 6 ! e�/YY x r' r J fi,
i����?, �„ '� ,�fi�d'�Dfar�; ur���� -��' `WWWr�r ;%i��W�k� 1� r i +W�,1'�e��lli�w� �,,, �r�,�� ■ Land Use District: Suburban Commercial
( ); ' rop r✓c ing overlay land use district
�.
ithin the alre
ady
1 Mile Marker 97
y -��a �+Te d ,.k ,: ;�'' '/,' �fiJ b�✓ 9w` 1" ,. 9 i � rrf"'?l fj / ����/// / �/�/i
wn �-
strict Overlay
,
h
/
V
< I /
r
/
r,
// / !ry N✓r ,YJ �.rid r ,/
f /
1
r
1) Amendment to LDC to create the Tavernier Commercial Overlay (File# 2022-053)
2) Amendment to LUD Map to apply Overlay to Property (File#2022-054)
3) Amendment to Comp. Plan to create anew goal, objective, and site specific subarea policy
(File# 2023-205)
4) Amendment to FLUM for a portion of the Property from MC to FAH (File#2023-206)
5 Amendment to LUD for a pottlon
i i
/
/
/
/
i
i
/
i
ii /
r ,
r
i
/
„
/
i
1 . Development Agreement - Has not been applied for but would be
required by the proposed overlay text if approved.
2. Major CUP - Application submitted for phased development of a
commercial supermarket and 86 affordable dwelling units
(requires PC Approval, File# 2022-012)
t
_P
db
• Concept Meeting [requiredfortext amendment]
June 28, :022. It was determined that the proposed amenomentwouia not have a County wide impact.
• Comm u n iry Meetings[reqamendment]
• Development Review Committee
October25,2022.The Chair of the DRC signed Resolution No. DRC 13-22 recommending denial of the proposed
• Planning Commission
April 28,2023.The Planning Commission passad I8(bn`,fhg"'(C
an No. P16-23
d am ertdrfii In,
recommending DENIAL,of the propose 't
• Board of CountyCommimonTT
en(eOGG�
Environmental Resowcesoepaitmenls�all.aM the rese mypve�al[re puN&Aza legs� mmission. vla g
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ;� ,1 �� ,���;`f��.
Vuu, Vuu 9 a
d
a
Requires a LUD amendment to apply the overlay to,'a propert
a all
99
• - 1 off
Requires a Deuelcpment A regiment for all development within the Ouerla
- •
. . .
- -
u, Illlllnu,
IIu
a
o�b,u IMaua"rnUnI allocakulon ofnnnesnlcken>thll floor area by site per eadi akcMW pu!arteL The amount of naar_a.kh,.iunall floor wea to be 5IQ.mated _nhalll be Wur..N t4_,a
r"I`Ia1K°IInnVlarn ahare of 11000 square feet for any one He per ea3idi AVCnatlu•`DIn quairt:er.
tu_;p IMaxurcMArII floor area pw MuMm.A structure shia1111 n_,t i ec,_we an _illlocatu ,iru Lhar eMa,rids ai,_ K.r u_u._tune to mn.an,._ Nan 101,0C10 _,u.guare feet of noour-�-sudeinftuall fluor
area, excIlu.uodnnug. a,r a stn a.na.€u.une rla tl..h._ ._1uW c_ou7urrr,_i._lk (w_l�.0 and use jonum._„)MOM Pay I ec&uN,_ an a.ulllocar'iirwou that exptumks r..lhn yrrw.tae r..rN not mor<.. tl..Pon MOO
square feet ssn-u>:! N.ry a structure aAtlhain arsnoven Iay AMC MAWR in a a:onnnuui�rnr..f rnaster pJllauu, lu7 MNu Te nsw„unuu.,um AM be governed by to master pWnu If
aqup.olkaablk oir w ithAino ;;lr apse":....11 yid. spire okanlly aalllowlMg such as Aauatuure of s_nr 10300 nsqu.uwe (~ek.
• • . • • - • •
(e)NROGO Allocations. Notwithstanding Section 138-51,the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall have the following NROGO allocation
standards provided that the criteria set forth in subsections(f), (g) and (h) are satisfied:
1. Maximum allocation of nonresidential floorarea. The amount of nonresidential floorarea to be allocated or transferred to the Tavernier Key
Commercial Overlay District shall be limited to a maximum of 49,900 square feet.
2. Maximum floor area per structure. A single nonresidential principal structure within the Tavernier Commercial Overlay District shall be
permitted to receive an allocation that expands the structure to more than 10,000 square feet, but not to exceed a maximum of 49,900 square
feetof nonresidential floorarea.
IN "I'l""I'll""I'll'll""I'll""I'llI INCONSISTENT °,
Comp. Plan Policy No. 101.5.6: The principal purpose of the Mixed Use/Commercial (MC) future land use category is to provide for the
establishment of mixed-use commercial land use (zoning) districts where various types of commercial retail and office may be permitted at
intensities which are consistentwithithe community character and the natural environment...
Comp. Plan Policy 101.19.1: Monroe County shall develop,, maintain, and update periodically, as appropriate, with public input, the Livable
CommuniKeys Community;Master Plans. Community Master Plans will be maintained..
Comp. Plan Policy 101.19.2: The Community Master Plans shall be incorporated into the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as a part of the plan and be
implemented as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The following Community Master Plans have been completed in accordance with the principles
outlined in this section and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners...
Comp. Plan Policy 105.1.2: Monroe County shall enforce the,design guidelnesstablish�d u�lthin the Livable CommuniKeys Plans and
its land development regulations which ensure that future u ent le with scenic reservation and
maintenance of the characterofthe,casual Island
vi�la h rr �
I� � ,�
i
/
i
, o
Comp. Plan Policy ;roue to foster the
retention and redevelop mentofsma, ll
/
ffff
/
i
/
i
~mll. uuuis � III III uuuuuum 9 a '
.Iluo Illluw I"Illlluw �• '' "" tl�"
a
• Community Vision
Re enrision the Tavernier Creek Bridge to Pule Marken•97 PlanningAreo as':
An island community committed to preserving its heritage, natural setting
•• _ _ • • • -• • • • _ • . • . • .. . and stands of native tropical hardwood hammocks,with improvements to
the visual character of the U.S.1 corridor; limited redevelopment of cmmner-
. vial properties,and neighborhoods where residents have access to the water
• • • . . ••• . and recreational facilities.
GOAL SLVLN
• • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • ST,ST91N THE EXIS'TLUG COMMERCIAL AND LUDLSTRLAL F1USl-
NESSES AND ENCOT rRAGE REDEVELOPMENT OR INFILL BE-
0
T ITTLN:iLVI 91 AND Bf.7RTON DRIVE AND DI.5COLR2GE ADDI-
"IIONAL STRIP DEVLLOPAIENT OF THE U.S.I CORRIDOR.
a'
Tavernier Creek
•
•
rib %i i
r JJ f i%
fr or/ rlrr�
• e .. ® • �,,//101�/
IM
• • An ishridrommurrity svtrhindr`rstoryer'ndchvirnr v'
�,,, IIIIIIIB ii • 4
Illlllllllllllu� d�. �
IN
5, Building Types
a The intent is to guide the development of new construction so that buidings continue to
define a character for Tavernier and that the massing. scale and niaterials of new
stRrcttrres are ccm patiblo with this character. These are the recommended types for new
construction in the corridor. The listed building tykes are not the universe of buildings
that can be developed in the COITidor; they are merelydied examples the guidelines Multifannbly Residential
1 applied l 1es ci Z, The. <111-Chitecture oI the building should consist of the ni.al recommended in these
and Figure ? ties not accurately reflect all county guidelines and it should be compatible: with airc�hitectural and urban character of`
regulations and is illustrative of�building concept only. Tavernier. Access to individual units should he obvious from the strc;t IeVel (Fi�)urc 28).
Large C ominercial Building
The intent is to create it building t
l,rakeatylac that would fit in the l Urban r ei
��� "�w
the suburban
(loop or �m
a 1�1�I craw 12
This building tyke is characterized by ,! b`.e �p f�� , ��t a�� ��%,
k r X
s. l
c re Strcn of smaller hdthe r
wherecrs�srble these should be.
arranged is to create positive tt+ s ,
Figure 26 Multi Family Building
access eipo shretc;e. tFiaur°o ).
rrrl'irr building
with stllccctThetltsrdnr , � �
y
primary
Figure 27 Large Commercial Buih
f a�<rcle� is kneel with arcades and
balcorti ; windows are, covered with rdrngType
operable Bahama shutters, and roofs are standing scans rrtetal.
' YCr(dRCn1J Tavernier Transact
�ttW
®735uWrlban
/Ur
'1'4 GP.—E [Urban
r
jj
' II
umxre r�mrF Vu
I
I uu
r
dui IIIIIIP ���. mlllu,�
• Diu„. � � IIIII � uu°°�iIIIIV i .uVll�W IIIIV ��
f
�«nv rv.09
rwnev Pak �.
nctw Key Subject
Property
i.r
rawerxnr�u�a4� • � • • 1 � • •.
J
Staff recommends that the BOCC CONTINUE the Applicant's request to amend the Land
Development Code establishing Section 130-143, the Tavernier Commercial Overlay, In
order that all of the applicant's current requests to amend the 1 ) Comprehensive Plan, 2)
Land development Code, 3) Future Land Use Map, 4) Land Use District Map - Overlay,
5) Land Use District Map - Zoning, and the proposed Development Agreement, may be
heard at the same BOCC Public Hearing to allow staff (and the public) to review and
analyze all applications concurrently and to ensure consistency of all proposed
amendments relative to this Property.
In the event that the BOCC elects to fake an up or down vole on this Item at the February
15, 2024 public hearing, Stall recommentls GENIAL of the proposetl amentlmenl to the
Land Development Code establishing Section 13P143.
""" iilQ IIIIIIIVu ullllllll ii''II oolll V
mi YYI Y
■ Staff received a request from the applicant (this morning) that the
BOCC process Code and Comp. Plan amendments that would
allow distribution of the County's 300 early evacuation units
■ Such amendments would have a County Wide Impact
■ Such request would impact the ounty's administrative relief pool
;(mitigation of potential takings liability)
■ Discussion of this request has not been duertised
Staff recommends no aotrMEMEMENor� r a
c , � eat �d
: ........ ..
If theB u�r , ,,,,,� ,„ ,, � � � , ,
OCC she �� , , f � � i �ded as
a d ICUS lon (tend
r,
i
/
,
/
Section 130-143,Tavcrniei�Commercial Overfav District
_tiI A iscri ct Y shall t-------------
(a) be s1rown on the Official 1,and Use Drsftid Map.
----------- CIve-day D-istri-cl is bo 2 -Fli-e dev E j 1-c-1 u c-tu rc--I-h-,,utc-o n r-a-hi s_i ac,re_i�H m I 0 C)0 0
Con-11re-h-c-n-s-rve Rlana-n-d bo. square feet whWn the Overlay Dislr�ct shaH be subject to tlie terms and conckCkms of
Alawharger scale nonre�Hemialdeve� mem hi a wadfiedareaofthe I pe,_rKey 'mmed A, as cicfincd in sections 10-B2, 10 �33,and
--------------------------------------------------------------op----------------------------------------------------------------------------I ,_sIllm --an, Findo nurmst greement-------------------------------------------------------I leu-- -------
scrvcs the needs of punianeW rcsdcmts of the Uj�per Keys. The interil is Gcr nxast indude�
% ci-s-e5
forGj cja�opuent(if 86 evorkforcelrou,ipz-dvveIhnj,, L 3-n-d
------------------------------------------------------ url-i
b. Flre�erred leasing standards for essentW workr.-rs o� ffie workforce and
C, 11 111a-t-inc-IL-d-es--t�-ie--fall-I o-wing-J
fie ,T vemser Conutiercid v
01) Fhnmdau��-----------------I-----------------------------------------------------0 exjkky Dislrbcl sl-mJ) be sho-wit ms arf cry-ed-ay, in-accorkinsice wnh Ow F and Dove1olmlerd
disirict on the Official J,and Use Districl map.The'Tavernicy Commercial Overlsay Disirict. the
---- ---- 11 Z au 1
,hash be showit as the bwrndMj wifli Monroe Cour - larM M number,', right ay 1, ge c m"A ti 12
------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------- _ofw krE jj__�j0nan 11knwili-Road R -1 i --f r
nui -z'11 n Q--ttle
00490250,000000 and 00089490-00000C,and depicted tln the mals below, in touml v m, h C e� _14,,,kdicAeV1.
L—iL hap! __I
ir lfm.Odoor EgLitftqs is proposed, in additwn ki afl reqWremerrts of ChapttT
c I Id ug As Al s ned and locmed sucLi thaG the
h Lt!-------------- _11 de_ -------------------------------------------------------------
iflumhumion monsurd
EANDER Dk ------------------------------------------------------------ in Cootcandl-cs,---as a-ny ex-t-cr-'i-o-rlmoporty
hile 'Id lesidential uses, d ni this overlay sjjaH not
j-1cent-to ----------------------------- --- --------------
Key Largo ➢ not �nc�ucle
Approx. MM 9 7cro -(Ct) ir ViOn of flw
--------------------------- --fc JJ3110 lrh--�Jlccwc ---veaysVtrelnt ofyy vvalhAvay Or any [ighting requiied feat'_life safttfr,as provided by
--------------------------------
Ila
3 AlLpr(speiGygifiesa(ijtceritt(r LT"a I
4� AH deve InAlcm slIall
-------------------bo fl)epornik-led ar)d co-nd-fl-borkad
use requtrements of Chapter 130�Ar6c[e H1,flernii@ed and ondf6onal Uses
5� Industrial uses ate nw--pennifled NN7atfijrj t1le ()VOrl Nrpwifl�stam in w fR!,cedin
----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------ay--�---------- _g�t�
pev*uitrWJ4o
aai fimbtd414n&e am
(d) -
There shafl be no auocaCcd m maximuranel densitv Mandaid avaiklde for�esidential
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mnrkct-,r,Mc,sit is es tarot n➢naa➢hnx %sn,t
2 The Tavernuei Conunercial Overby District shaM be lhirited to a maxinirun tolA
... ........
ad---------4---9-- 0 q-f �
au
mcvdo ml twcmi I oT
u ,
de-ed
00089490-000000 c,
(c) NROGO Aflocatiormi. otwitListand i rig Section [3851, Ctie iaverrrier (orrmiercia�
.......... OveLklyOng
00490250-000000 csitefia set ftmth in subsections 4)h(g)and(h)ate satisfied,-
1. of-ri-o-pres i d c n t i a I floor a r ca`Th c x i u n t I n c)ire s i d wit ia I f I(�or
(c) erkry, area to be allocated or U anslened Its the r avcrnger Commercial Ovedat,Eiistrict shall
slLe 'm Standards, v D-is-nricl sball b-e b-c-Urri-i-red to a
------------------------- 2
6o nceed a---------------------- -------------------------
(t) N(�tvolhja�ndmg LEW SeOions 139-1(f), l394(g) and 139-1(jtl 86 workforce houskig
jqdG�w uun u�6 pra�aauaavruapw¢t ¢>v-.,nie ne>ra�r,ustp arxc)LIVI/oj2l units) vesylow__lnconie 240/o (2�
jqkftst arvv snow°rrxr°uu'!a.,26%(22 unds median income and 26Pii,(_22_un_nts)moderale ifi(MMIO,
No tmffld�jng permO shaU bc issued ftrr a slructawrc recciving an NIROGO Aflocalion oi
Iransfer that ivoUld structure i,,�ithin the Overhytome e
------------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
uu]IJ-1 bIfJ_[dJ_ng__p nuills for-A-1-1 86
have I aeen Lssued, withfiAd,
----------------------------------------------- -----------
(g) A,I[ new resideroi I n s deve ed wilMn the o0veHav&-,h4o shaHbe sUlde0jollie
_ ----- -a -I! __---kill--------------- _ -------------------------------------
ROCRI'llerlid lat lOcat ion-sysimt jef of RCYGO of exisOn � wfull,
-------------------------- _ -orimn------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------g� rt------------y
markel rate or aflbrdable div �I I a unils th,,fl have @ess flian five
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------e !ng-------------------------------------------------------------------------
years remahiing on the required deed restriction pursuanl to �-;cction 138,22(bp(jb
(h) Rriqi to th-e i-s-si-m-ne-e-o-fa C a
mufe_than j0,AQO__p LU luare feel�
----------------------
I At least 501N, (41) ot the requnred 86 worktarce housing, units mum finve rec�6vcd
cal f ("Cu e o 0 nutcyl-a-rid
2 At ----5-0-1Y �
9lnned 6 v rkforce-j�min--- fik---miv lve %� nvedf - -- m----- T --------
0) of the COwillrehemive Plark, Tavernier L Lvable C mnununike,,L__
--------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
e M-a rk-e-r-9-7 U-S Fiighn
Guirdefines and ffie Land DevdO Ille I CO le�I�jd'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------p 11---------- J� c -Y
T -c -cpY7c°n fg:.
d @��9 a
J�f� ti
iNAM-M
- - ------------- .................. ........ ....... ...............
........
Elm&
Wr
r
r r h 16reit u � o,
, �,�' „�r „! %r ���,.� fi ,' ,,, -�;, ,„' d ,; �,, i,,./.;/ire,,,, ,. n i/fir � ` A�»re 2,a,,w�,w,mr 1 '��i(�(✓l' „�1 ,r��;.
r/r /r //// � �y;rr/A' i�,„� „�.: Inv+r I�rN eyyl�l��l ✓'", J� 1r,,,.. ��, � ," ,gy pro„ � f,rr,� r ' r"`
ti Y
r
r I
r
n
u-
r
:.' ,; ,, -, ,� ,r�,, yr/rr;�tlIlI r/ �; �� // , ,' �I ,!pia �u r v �� r�l'..ni 7 r ,. +•,MN, „,,
.;., � r� a r 1� �: r,,, U � �� « ,r i ,m rr ,., l��,,.,. «„✓ ,.,»rr»we SI l�, N., ,w6kr ,rrr , ��r,,,
., o,un I+<,n i lE .,.,.. ,r� �d„ ;' /�. 1, NlhrG ,... K '�, ,r,�� �" »m,aFa er�~i.✓..". y��n?, mrr.Y v/1/,
,;V , �r�!✓ylFIf� �diW n,� "r� 1 ,«t,�, R r r��i '„ �• ,.. "s, p: Ip,
f�✓ r� i r � l f, r I ' ri , � � r i „
r
D�y�l r' l ✓r � lu,ri. � rr�i ' ',
r
N/
rlU 1
r
j, '�" "��''�" ��� rq, r� rli, in ;,u'�IWN',r,kVflUru r IiV' rr r a w y I i �h✓1yi th I r Vri�
rl /,
Location: MM 92.S, Tavernier
Address: 92S01 Overseas Hwy, Tavernier, Monroe County, Florida
Real Estate CRE) Number: 004902SO-000000 and 00089490-000000
Property Owner./A lnn icant: SINGLETARY CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC and CEMEX CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS
FLORIDA LLC
Total ProperWArea: 841,940 SF or 19.33 acres
Total Upland Area: 630,S88 SF or 14.48 acres
Total Submerged Area: 211,3 S 2 SF or 4.8 S acres
Land Use District: Suburban Commercial (SC)
Future Land Use Map (F� Mixed Use Commercial (MC)
Designationo
Tier Desig a� Tier III
Flood Zone: Multiple on site: AE 8, AE 9, AE10, AE 11, VE 11
Existing Uses: Scarified, active cement plant; wetland mangroves
Community Character of Immediate Residential and Commercial uses
V c n'tym
Land Development Code Text Amendment creating the Tavernier
Commercial Overlay District allowing the development of a Publix
Grocery Store, including a liquor store, that fits the architectural
design and community character of Tavernier
LDC Text Amendment :
• Pursuant to LDC section 138-51, a maximum NonresidentialSynareFootage(SF) Max NetDensity AllocatedDensity
nonresidential floor area allocation of ten thousand
square feet (10,000 so and Section 138-51 (c) Existing Code Commercial retail: 202.11 units 42.11 units
prohibits an allocation of nonresidential floor area (re f.'LDC,'Sections Low intensity: 213,984 SF
that expands the structure to more than 10,000 130-157and 130- Medium intensity: 152,846 SF
square feet of nonresidential floor area. 104) High Intensity: 91,708 SF
• The current Code unreasonably restricts properties
from utilizing existing development rights for
nonresidential development.
• The entire property currently has the following
permitted density and intensity under the Suburban
Commercial zoning district, but is currently unable to
utilize the permitted development rights based on
LDC section 138-51:
• Amends the Monroe County Land
Development Code to establish the
Tavernier Commercial Overlay District
to allow for a nonresidential ROGO
allocation of up to 49,900 square feet,
which could allow for the development
of a 47,240 SF commercial supermarket,
• 2,100 SF liquor store and up to 86
affordable housing dwelling units.
• Provides language for Sec. 130-143.
Tavernier Commercial Overlay District,
as shown on the following slides:
soction 1130 11 B 1'a%vr?biv1 am In v Iry uuull �d!L (d)
I2A ]122L o lhc a""vilinwi ( oirnrnen,m1 C)vvwjn,,, L!
us� I Thpfv
a1 IEr m rr�!n al i g:L rhn 1:m nr: E:�:Ly, 11 tw kw t t ate 0 A it an S dill d,vv e, J�w f1A luzifi
prifnai,ft srii-,-es ihw paw n;;ti no pivnirrmincro tcsJd(,rvs of ttic TTlipvay K'i,vs Fl", hm m v,R N') 7 The 'I aveyiiuri! Occ,flav Disau v� glh°ffll hc hmk.ed lo i bnNl
c rvoilii inide 111ti 3�l us),s ff,�b JR vtxlarl,Cilit IU kknas fo�li'tlle J ppca da, ra(�,,ientfal cd�
the rhana""Iel 1 49;Pa111 Bqnx u klfld
0u) Boundary, T11", 0,,,t^rkliy K,-4111wt vhiall he: R's an b (N)it reshoed �jn��g�g:�jd
r. aC C e�"S"'J",, ust"s arld s"'.1111cfIfics
(e) SIOGO FUN,M)w NMwAWwWQ Stc��iun 138 5� Ulm Ta,;ara�fet
Q110gy QU Ot SaU hMe Up pj2j onr ihat Ih e
AppikaNky, DeveOpment valun the livenNei Conameunal Owday Lmsnxt Shull a num so is!I (g)mad o,fii) art! itwSC�t^d
�mhI erii ic) Nlax nuliiil allcfcai�iun Orlwninhhumll Ounr ama IN anKAWA 0OWnualkwal 100i
area to be a0cmed ot=nQued to die Tavwaki Comatemd, rdhaU
I An amnAmniv N,dmOiTchAwd TJRr DYNt Map InyMmd and Ruch airidav shall ,w wi.�+s arE 12, HIHIf 2"'1
he sho,,vvi f"111,�the:Ofrk,�all T�e � I "Oop g2�sm�i:nIa m:�� A n!2:K!2i4e�IA E�:IntILe it"I r11
? Ise 6nKOPnMT ofn Qnyr mun0dential fhal cro'Nafin-, mo,fie, Ihan H01,DCO (yfly Qiql Q�j h� rercv,"',',iili
fe�,t viflvni (ked�:[v Dirsrlid df)�Ifl'I)e � u,� flw, and i,ondIfI)ofis o� the sIlucuam M PIE MY 1,Nq pqE2:q� rot to excw eda
;Ipjjpfoved I)e",eflopriiwawl /'Iqj a enwrlt n, m ;e mnr �1 W I +), 1 10 1 s1 a111'�ii ecl at
nwt"PTUN
(1) No Ibufl&nig perntk QmR be hmmd Ex a stuame w6vbg an NROGO Akcafoa cr
11�i L:�I Y"kagmal 2L up in Wan hy 2 mg L a:wA Ir,,m,�fpr th�lj 22�12af� a InOrlYeAhlennat sfnlrIuv� v:ishun� Oru, to niorp th,"all
h� 11�rflv�rfd Jca,"',higx s0ndai& poir cs,�enf%fa� vcOTker's of'Ihc avd ]CI 2gge sm UWE; WO PQ Nggiq� Ramos It ji 86 WMkony hqwh�:g PQ
C Ain ap�)prcr,,,:c�d sm!�pJain t1hat wickudc s thc�fZdkInning in addmcm to all sii iC
fni a-ccm,'Lance:v,ifbi ihjp�L;inid De,,vkq,,-,,menf a army hmv Ww"Uixi Mh mmq 40H ny ly ugrumnabb QMMrQ1
I A r.Nvilml nomwa,", COM'11'('Tinp III'", nrinycsjdcnfiril� jjpad6viqn� ,pacer Io Oftr
i1i"Y'llif M, vv�M,,, hniwxn a,-" ONMFe 11kamnn Qafd, Hi�qua,-d h��Jmm'� tbr Oh,,� urns il]� h� H! J rt k,� O'lle
pi�,d,worian vv3ktv�i,, n-ImAhe w F-�'ti,qpj=) ILI �'j(�h,,4,ll')I e� � �ji�Hlv:%'� 131()Cc, or of ar cxist�flg L,,v[bfflv
ImMkw HoOng &pamarl kv =Mnn m Ahmpjasonm nl`(TqjMer '"ile m "O'lordab fln"d hiw,,, 11(�,;s ihnrl i'lov,
1.14 Allfv k, \,'I nl.wh tluhinfl x •duijl ht rla ,w�xrwr ) and ;uO'i HhA Oha,' Er"a it deaf 1:("smcnrjil
YTI I,,,HIM urn flHunflination unesli ywd In 14'ofcandlw� af afli", t"'deTtor prnqpefl,r
a T2, not invljudk-d m vlm (h) 1?�frol IF) the 0111'a Cen�ificatt ffu�iir a si1luctuge dwi is
cx1cced zvlln (0)1 km AMWR�vd lvm�� Oh", Ira h a n 1(i
11 iIJL�Lgy t�E!�
Voflinm�CmulTv I A L qeApr hiuus�vig ufuJ,Is tnust a" Cmlwd a, lk
l°a,1i1:: ll k:2 : rJ:wAI 21�r ertff cati!!c)f� ag:!�
gag A myKA x: 2 Al KA TO jTjj I Aw itybud 86 voxflh'J',on% hcnjsi�ttg urIJIs friusl 1!UCe�f",ud
usc of( haor; 110 Arkdr TH, RnANd mO CmWilforfad Orr,
ln"JuMna,J uses alp nct jpcnxifiiik"d ikif CK the prr,,cc`dma��
rnft,"M aO ow", rvrdiin Ill,"::, pi:vnJm:d ic)
, a f I I,
rMMY my qwmt WK sudown as
, hom"UJO wITfrul Owl KTja��Ta alf'I
Oinvwn nlotr rh�w) 1"i O'10 TIMOR?& &A
II:o
„1 A m on r rcs..
t,, .,,
n n
4
I�� —, ern
' "w ,Y czar- EI
✓ / �" ./ ', (
v
,'. �i u� �r�0. _. l'. `N.�s,r'"• cr�wx�rar�ynx j , Id
I 4
tl
LM
lk
b �
( n m'4Win�5kmm , IeGE N ..� n
Y 7 4 r"0 _ : M PhaY IIWI L � I I
JI IY
I/ r V � � a�Ci m n•AMVIw.
m M.'�f hk:V Iry PrR'af
y
/ d W
Ho
wu vmatt+.rrr �. 9 JF iX L'' "l
q
" �
e
., ......�
p
Original Application: Current Application:
• Property = 19.33 acres and 14.48 Property = 19.33 acres and 14.48 acres of
acres of upland. upland.
• NROGO Request - 70,000 sf • NROGO Request - 49,900 sf
• 64,094 SF - 61,094 SF • 49,340 SF - 47,240 SF Supermarket
Supermarket with 3,000 SF with 2,100 SF Liquor
Liquor Nonresidential Building Coverage- 7.82%
• Nonresidential Building Coverage - 152,846 SF of medium intensity retail
10.16% allowed per code
• 152,846 SF of medium intensity 32.28% of allowable nonresidential
retail allowed per code floor area being utilized.
• 41.93% of allowable
nonresidential floor area being
utilized.
Tavernier Town Center: Islamorada Publix:
• Approximately 11 acres of upland • Approximately 4.5 acres of upland
• Approximately 137,000 SF strip center • Approximately 38,000 SF Publix
(out lots not included) • 19.4% building coverage
• 28% building coverage • No housing provided on site.
• No housing provided on site.
+a
✓ WWI m iy!
------------------
• In 2013, Rockland Key Commercial Retail Center Overlay District was established in LDC Section 130-131
through Monroe County Board of County Commissioners Ordinance No. 017-2013.
• Staff Report dated November 20, 2012, provided the following:
• "The Land Development Code already caps the size of new nonresidential buildings in the Urban
Commercial (UC) district at 50,000 square feet and caps the size of new nonresidential buildings in
other districts at 10,000 square feet."
• "Staff does not object to the concept of establishing an applicable process for a nonresidential ROGO
bank, or a codified mechanism to award nonresidential floor area that went unallocated in the NROGO
permit allocation system in previous years."
• At the time the Staff Report was prepared, Section 138-51 of the 2012 version of the Land Development Code
did not include any exception outside of structures within the Urban Commercial districts:
Saa 1 3E,57. R4rcf f7GdY1 danra¢kwwu..
al M—all 10 svxWd'.9'Irna tm(sr khIa ou,f tvera IIwo e4 1,11It+YGo.,I,,CAI
•r,•OiY, t o%" iJ&ice Jeri 1 fY Ai v l`4`.A J r., I'll-4„6,.6 x,,J 7 ? 5eF a i. d:.. ✓P u. a .0 �i rl,�(,4Y fi 1
mI, et-, d ,-vr V r 1,� t 1,.a uI, �u✓o. "I e;I1(. "Y')b, xt
, `rt"n ,u✓✓L.dCil� r,„. nrrl,r+ ��:.',"tI" 1�11th ✓ ✓+ 'm,W L. v 15.., ,, i,'mrIG i r I l
.J V,.,
I:ng' Mt 1°tll--,u al"11116 11 IfX i A <11,1 ON,. 1,, ,m, an ✓ �.,..,,: �� �v i^ ,mo v Ir„ E 1 , 01
IX, I .r✓.a ert.l p:..to
OA,mMY54s nffSM«uC.F (dY�Yl'�'S aPu dC(rJrJ f'h.T b'M✓6{� Fn uruC z rtrF.; ,{ ,t A7.[,LA I ,'A.,l 0'2.�, � .'eft . � ..YR��. �*ldbS ,.�Y�.�It
w=,1 ny n ry i ,C*9.1 ��r�i�4 @ i T n�'IC a J en.1,�"!�ry .a n1 6t �"t-,ffY
I(J monvi'I B6LW,'favealser;nCJYAP"21be t, .t 4 x It „i m'-X I r, .r„„ ✓J f',:,. .tw C
{<,fJ u�nrt, aaly tvlEsz Ot.«mk-'._..„� u751'« o Y, ✓+A�a r, �,'.9'a* � .0 �t rG r f� A�s "'I •."I•,I I rr ,� r'.���- nr.ao � ,'1„rr m. a ^€
."i';F �, ,C ,F��• '.�T✓ ..,i•Yx' ). �P,.,..�.. r r..J"O�u .I...
------------------
• In response to the Rockland Application and the corresponding Staff Report, the Monroe County Board of
County Commissioners approved amendments to Section 138 of the Land Development Code through BOCC
Ordinance Nos. 019-2013 and 020-2013.
• The amendments provide an additional exception within Section 138-51(c), which "allows a structure within
an overlay district established in a community master plan in which the maximum shall be governed by the
master plan if applicable or within chapter 130 specifically allowing such a structure of over 10,000 square
feet," and established an application process for the NROGO bank, a codified mechanism to allocate floor area
that went unallocated in previous years.
• Utilizing the exception codified in LDC Section 138-51(c), and the NROGO bank, properties within the
Rockland overlay district were permitted to receive NROGO allocations and develop buildings exceeding
10,000 square feet and up to a maximum of 175,000 square feet of floor area.
• The intent behind the adoption of BOCC Ordinance Nos. 019-2013 and 020-2013 was to permit large
properties to utilize available NROGO allocations to develop large nonresidential developments in suitable
locations.
• Property is located within the Suburban
Commercial Zoning District and Mixed
Use/Commercial FLUM.
• SC Zoning allows commercial retail,
office, restaurant uses, or any
combination thereof, of low and
medium intensity, and of greater than
10,000 square feet by means of a Major
Conditional Use.
• LDC Text Amendments are reviewed for
consistency with the Comprehensive
plan and Florida Communikeys Plan
• The proposed amendment is consistent
with the Comprehensive plan and LCP,
as shown below:
• Review of amendments to the Land Development Code is
based upon consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and
Livable Communikeys Plan:
• There is no express prohibition in the Comprehensive
Plan or LCP restricting the development of
supermarkets or any restrictions on commercial
buildings based on size;
• Nothing contained in the Comp. Plan or LDC provides a
standard of review for supermarkets or the size of a
commercial structure.
• For text amendments, it falls on the Board of County
Commissioners to find that the amendment will result
in an adverse change in community character;
• No evidence has been provided that the proposed
amendment will result in an adverse change to
community character;
• In addition to the above, the Applicant is following all
community character guidelines provided for the
Tavernier overlay district:
• The US 1 Guidelines specifically provides building
types, identifying "Large Commercial Buildings"
and providing that they are permitted in both the
General Urban zone deep lots or in the Suburban
Zone.
• The General Urban and Suburban Zones share
almost all development standards in the US 1
Guidelines, including width and depth of a
building, showing that commercial buildings,
regardless of size, can be developed in either zone.
• Although not required at this point in the review
process, the Applicant has provided the following
to show its commitment to preserving the
community character and following the US1
Guidelines and LCP.
11 1 " ll 1lllll ................
. ......... ............... ................................. ............. 111111111111111—ru�.................— g""",
........................
7 H
owjjjjjjjjjjjjj (
US-1 (FRONT)FACADE ELEVATION
TAVERMERCREEK OVERLAY CRITERIA
SUBURBAN B MOINGCONMURA"ON
HVIGHTMOTWMPTH 4 EXTEMORV& 8, """y"
4 v,�w A'k 4
4 s 611DINGrAt,'ADEGM Kr�4DCW�B)'j'�,V'VOUTSTItATr'R'O"V�DErREATERT"At46rX COMBINA*NsrucrooNGROd�AN HAR61F.SOk�0 00wRANDTolER
RM EW WTH TMERS,WALK UNDER APACADUMRCH,AND SMONG MASS CT'
• PducR GOMMINEUT MMONS,
RWF SHAP5,,Mi (; a r t f",1 1,11","N I OV,
V,
RWr ELtMfN'rS WO HSLOPED ROOFS(WPPCDp
WACHES 8 AKADES . x'"x mo GLAONG PR&Ob MWfH I MAROKAKWS MT'HMEADAND&LL PREATum
AQ WGS, of,(,,l,,,,,, � ho�o", "'m"n UNDERARCADE PROVIDEDN Ok8�RONT FACADE Oy fff,bl(,,ff)�f AV� "W
l,,x),4 lo,""�M............"ly ... j
BULMNG ELEMENTS
RAJ L Rd O$PRMWO A ROUND E,LLVA I FD E N TKV I HAJ MC C I r8C CWTE MA
Rrlorfmr,.M"", ..er.a,g..
r4 ol
�7 SHOTERS,im,
Nr trmA mr,w ROORNG RAHAMASTYLF SHUTTERS PROWDEDAl ENTRY HINCEDAT GROCER UMORSAND
TOMR,AND FLAT kfi"YTEDAT ARCADE
��/�
EX0 WRY
� ;t,,,, o�/ / wr..rwr..rwr..rwr..rwr...„ ..,,.�.aa:�..�..r.rrw.0�;�..r�
—.rv—
.....................................................
.....................
T1
13
.........
ENTRY SIDEWALK PLAN
E M PA 0
ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN ROME
� � • r � � � •
�,
��
,,
f������
�� ,
,,: .
�/ /�
. .�...�.�� .. . �r � ,,,,� ,/
�, , �; wx� r..,w.
�;��� ,
'� ����� '
io 1 �!
i,�
�/
��� f
� / / � � /
i � ,� ��,
��
����1� ,//6 r� i "� ��ramiii
� ,, � r0
�� � ���
�,
�; z � �C ���„�
.���
u�
i� uuom�9 �," �.���.��,� .�w ^�� �Ago
(�`�' I ��;;�°f�" �% IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
/
i
r
/
/
/
/
/
/
/ o
/
/
/
/
/
' .r. M .. F "`a'" ' t � ,Ion'. r�l��%✓;'"
,y I
,r 6
r
I.
1 �
I
i
I
I I
m.,
wm
EMPAD
ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN `
i
r
r
EMPAD
AR HITECTURE AND DESIGN °
� • . • � • •
�, w,r��„o � ��
� � ..,
.;
`k&
i;,
��,.,, �
o, �� / /
� �
.,�,;
R
�,
P""',
,�,, i;-
" ��;,
1 `�
� ,
s.,;,,,e.,..
� � � d %a, ,;,,,, ,,, ,„
�U � �,�,... r
- � � � �.,
a�
..a Vu �
i
i
Fa m�
��,�,��� „s„ � „�
i IfW��ii i�������ICI i i ,,,,
G/ �o �r V 1� � .,P o� �
P
M�
�flP� ��" ��,,, � ���
�i 1 u�.
� � �
w it i� i .��� � �Cii � � ��
��
i���� "u��iii����a�
h,�,�
��. �� „ �i
. �
� �
„��, �` ��� s, u
'�
- % ., .,
DUI, :. :,.:
> .,.
• The proposed Project is consistent with community character and is permitted in
the Suburban Zone under the US 1 Guidelines (as defined in the Staff Report):
• The definition provided in the US 1 Guidelines specifically provides that the
Suburban Zone 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 the mainland
suburbs.".
• Publix at Plaza Del Paraiso — 12100 SW 1271" Ave, Miami — over 68k feet
• Publix at Dadeland — 9105 South Dadeland Blvd, Miami — over 60k
• Homestead Towne Square — 891 N Homestead Blvd, Homestead — over 56K
• Hialeah Mercado — 1585 West 49t" Street, Hialeah — over 69k
• Publix at North Shore — 6876 Collins Ave, Miami Beach — over 56k
• Flagler Park Plaza — 8341 West Flagler St, Miami — over 61k
• Shoppes of Cutler Bay — 20951 Old Cutler Rd, Cutler Bay - over 55K
Illlutl�i �� 11611 � � I I lillll I ��� i,; aV
"" i °� ., J uuuuuiiiuu,uuuuuui III uiuuiiiulimuuuuuuuiiiuu
• (a) Strengthening local government capabilities for managing land use and development so that local
government is able to achieve these objectives without continuing the area of critical state concern
designation.
• (1) Making available adequate affordable housing for all sectors of the population of the Florida Keys.
(m) Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in the event of a natural
or manmade disaster and for a post-disaster reconstruction plan.
Staff asserts that the proposed amendment would limit the County's ability for managing land use
without direct oversight provided by designation as an area of critical state concern:
• Property is still zoned Suburban Commercial
• Subject to all requirements of Major Conditional Use Application, LCP and Tavernier Creek US1
• Adds additional restrictions with overlay and requires development with Development
Agreement with preliminary site plan approval
• Section 380.0552(7)(1) sets forth the Principle to "[make] available adequate affordable housing for
all sectors of the population in the Florida Kew
• Requires 86 units of workforce housing
• If five 10,000 sf commercial buildings built only 21 units required
• Provides preference to first responders
• (m) Providing adequate alternatives for the protection of public safety and welfare in
the event of a natural or manmade disaster and for a post-disaster reconstruction
plan.
• Built above Base Flood
• Generators that will keep store operable post storm
• Parking area for post-disaster relief
** Map Represents one (1) month of Islamorada Consumers - twenty-four (24)
Traff i c . months were analyzed as part of the data set.
• Per Monroe County Code a traffic study has been submitted �
utilizing the ITE manual for super-market and workforce
housing trip generation
• Our study shows that 14 trips will need to be mitigated
at the building permitphase
Also included as supplementary information in our
submission is cell hone data collected b an independent
rd p Y p
3 party(1-month map shown):
• Cell phone data shows the population of Tavernier is
traveling 9 miles North or South to Publix on Highway 1
• With the construction of this store the time and J `
distance to Publix will be greatly reduced for the
Tavernier population therefore reducing overall traffic
on segment 21 and U.S. 1 f ,
• Using the average monthly consumers and the 2 �
expected trips for each a week amounts to an expected „moo
2504 weekly yy trips expected to be transferred from the �
Islamorada Pubiix to the Tavernier Publix.
• breaking those 2504 expected trips a week into daily °
trips provides 701 daily trips.
• The Placer Al data shows that 701 Segment 22 trips
will be removed from Segment 21 once the Tavernier
Publix is built
y t
Applicant and County agreed to mitigation of the 14 excess
dais trips and potential mitigation o tions are being
y p pp g J�1
explored.
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
Cu. 130,443."l,,tveiiiriiimleiir('oiTiiinna�,iiireliI OVreirlay
............W�..............................
and. of Che� Tavejuilei- Cgrrrnnilgjrcla��� Overilly Applicant accepted Staff's proposed revisions as
.................................... . .............................................................................. .
Drict ks, Io i & in t jj g,,p ...Qtgt!,� �Ijg of the
...............................M .111MCIIIIII, !�jg ji
...... ........ ......................... shown in Applicant's proposed text submitted on
Li�!M!�Jhelilsive Phing ajild to allo -jar le t ill..............
................................................................................................ C�. S &t 1 L�LFLa�jrj SefVrj�S tblle jjj(�(qjs of January 19, 2024.
scalrified :Irea of" flli�e 1L ..j
.................................................... ......L..............................................
lig 1,11he jytegt i fti� .gecessible PlIg
ne�nil ve�sjdc pts of th( �jjgp
mnafintahimuimuu.................................................................................................................
Faveirmier Oveirla it Dsric t shall be s)Illlowfl� -as
.......................................................................................................
g ]Phw jijlve]-uIflomr
y �rjct win the Official Land Use Disfirict
C'minuriercial Ov(,!iiir����,iiy.,.,Ilistiiirict. shall be showin gis the hogiinda.j. of,th ..pgj�qJN
-N................................ .......It . Applicant accepted Staff's proposed revisions as
wiflh Mwni�roe Coulint Parvel ED In 1.1111�Ilqdl)e�I-S 00490250- 000000 wind 00089490-
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... shown in Applicant's proposed text submitted on
January 19, 2024.
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
6J A Applicant accepted Staffs proposed revisions
.t o I I o W.i.n..jF_standards.
An to the, Offic�.il Land U se as shown in Applicant's proposed text
...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
12.LS �ici..M uired and s,uch overly stiali be shown submitted on January 19, 2024.
.........................�,!P...............
(h.e. 0 f.f.i.c. ia I La.p...d. U s e Q i..s t.T ict Ma.p
2 The (Jevelo I'm." Nc
nt—of
nonresidenfiM structure that contains niorc than t 0.,� jh2j, 0
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ........... . ... ... • Applicant requests that the following
a District shatl bf,.,�, su
and c onditioW of a a ved w it I.j.4 t the..............0��K.I Y.......................................................................................... subsections of section (c) be revised as
..........................................................................................................
cv.c 1 n! Agrecrnent .5 defined in follows (Additions in RED):
sections
.............................................................. ... I.R.L.I.S.1 i.I.I..0
ovisions for tlie k p a.................P r.................................................................................. deve......................................i h6 f 11in.2
COM - .Industr ial usc,..s a n -ran i u L,d mi Lh—ft i-I ih-L�
b. Pref'erred. I a,ing standards for essential workers of the workforce f 3 L.C....da K.. N i h�ni n�h �r �i n �n �n
qjjjt!:� ........................................................................ 5......... the
c,AnAMQyUl �,iit(,,RL,,tti that includes the fiollowingy in addition to all site
.... ............ ......... ......................
h
i A 1.1 ian walkwa -onnectim he nonre'sidentia,P Ig .rea to (he, r�),hj of.way
........... .......................................................... a——————---
.k.i.i.o..w ri a..s Omnge 1aj0.Bss0.BrY1 lr0.>erd. 12a alnrr'a;atl h XYti for
ix... ......... �d(.,,stfiur�walkva�mi.ist be�in co�nipliince
ait.h Cliapter 114_ArticicV.
................................
fl, ut o W.2 in...........................................................................➢Ito .or W. .......... ad�dkion v,)�alln,,(,. ir.l.m. .,,nts o(. f.(.-,hapjer 11.4—Arficle V1.
. .............. . ..... ....................
s h hlz JE n rneamired in footcan&s
I any cmcrio.r P.E.IP 1 Y kne aalaacc;rIll tc>resia.la;rflVial uses. Wert ir1.c 1auaia°d trr this aa`erla slraIlil Trot
exceed
--strian watkwa or an th. fin
reg,vire far tire salet I ovide by Mmoc Cou Y�
------------jf�
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
................................................................l Develop.Mg
............................. ... ..RI E!!. i. .
a I Applicant accepted Staffs proposed revisions as
..........
L, There shall be no allocated or max um 9
im n dq t wit standuarda avaittable tor shown in Applicant's proposed text submitted on
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ...................... ..........y
market rate or transient, dwebig---miLL January 19, 2024.
.................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
2 'I'he 'l'avernier Commercial Ov, 14.y
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ............Qistrict sh,,A.fl be limited to a..maximum total
p al ol'
gk i.n t.. .............................
............
a. 49,900 :a gar fiect o f.non.re.sidentflal—i.loc)rarew. and
................
b, 86 deed restricted workforce [11O.U.s. in dw Hng in its and
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ........ g....................Q i j—
c...a. .c c cS........................
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
N.RQGO Allocations,Notwithst n in Secfion B8 5 1 J-he 'ravernier
...............................................................................................................................................................................a d...........g.. Applicant accepted Staffs proposed revisions as
Cornrnerd I Ove la District sliall have the Follo i i NROGO allocation
................................. ...s ..a.n..d a.i....d............ .... ...........................C Y shown in Applicant's proposed text submitted on
........................................................5
satisfie& January 19, 2024.
........................................................
1, MaxiMUM altocaflon of nonres'�dential floor area, r rhe amount of
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
MRE.gs id qflli I floor area to be allogged or traqsf�rrqd to the
.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.T.........a........v.......e.r.....n.........i...e.......r..............C....o........m............m.........er......c........i....a.......l............O..v........e.......r......l...ay.........Qi rict shal be limited to a tnax�n,Wrn of.42,99() 5
..............................................................I........ ....quare feet,...............................................................
2. Max" uni floor area p.g[ WnL..............................U ......................................................................................... ...
V.is t.r.j.-c t sh a.]I b e p
............................. .................. ........... ....gmij jgd..........1p r..e..c e i..Y.e al]. a I Q e at j o r] t.t].21 g2q2.Md.5,..
t h e............s 1 i i t c t t t r e..........to...........r n 9 t e...........t h.. ..........1 0 0 00 sq t not. to cx(.,,ec(.t a
gg��j et bu je
maxim of 49.9 s 1.w
..........................................M ........................I 1 00............C .re 9 n n res id e n(JA I...........fl or a ne a...
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
(1)...............Notwithstanding..............LIX.I.................Sections 139::::j(gj ..............Barad. ................I
. ........................................................................................ .... 39 lam. Applicant requests that the following subsections of section (f) be
86 workforce housir b
.........................................................................................................................................16! 115�..........Mlh t..................... p revised as follows (Deletions shown as RED 4fikethr-&�):
myided on site c nsjstj.!jg---!af--24%
.. ..................................................................................... ...............................
i ornc�. 241/.� jmjts..L ow incorne.........Zf. .........G 2——1—1nii-ki I aL—uW—tsLv—e-ry-_l(yw n�( ............. A--
median incorne and 26% (22 qgits) m, �Jgq corne. No uild.in.in P
....................................................................................h........................ 9 gEDA
shall be issued for a structure receiving m NROG'() Allocation or transFer w6fideFee-h
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ..............................................................................................................................................................................................................
that wo u e and a nonresidential structure within the ) C�( v i jg�L��
.....................................................
.0�00s—�..u,jare fieet unless and unt.i.1 b u.i im ermits lJor all 86 workilo.rce
............................................................................................................................................................ ..... ............�TM�ILS IOr Gill 6() rKlo.f.ce No building
........
units have u
ve been issued. permit shall be issued for, a S NROG trUCtUre receiving an O Allocation or
... 4P�
transfer that would expand a nonresidential structure within the Overlay
to more than 1.0,,000 square feeL unless and until building permits for all
86 workforce housing units have been issued..
• Applicant requests that this provision be stricken as income levels
will be handled at the development agreement stage.
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
Ali �� ��sn�.�rr �rr� ��p .. � � l � ay -�ve � district ��� �- . - a Applicant accepted Staffs proposed revisions as
�fieroCROGOexern loons ,
b n �b x b: � �brida�a is dwell
shown in Applicants proposed text submitted on
��'„cx�s��� ���'a���y �sd,�q��i�l�e� ���ru��r���ab
units that: have less t;���� fiv.e gars re. zrr, ,�� on ttnhe rec aubre(i deedd restrh tion January 19, 2024.
puzasnra� ....t.oSectflQii 1 3 8
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
(h) Prior to the issuance of'a Certificate ol'Occupancy &.T a. nonresidential
................. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ........ . .............................................................................................. Applicant requests that the following subsections of
structure that is rnore t ar 1.0 0)(0)(0) scuiare�reev
.................................................................................................................................................b............ ............. section (h) be revised as follows (additions in RED):
A...t. I.e a..s.1 59 (4.3jof t..he—_r
... .......... ............... for a
must have received a Certificate f ....................................................
....................................................................................................................................................................................................................0. ....(..jc.c.jjpancy;__and. nonresidential strUctrure that�s more tha 1.0 000 s uare
,forx howjnv units ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................j .............................................
2......At least 50% (j,3 of. the, rc( uirc.A. 86 worl C
............ ................................................................................. ,---,)------------------I----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MI.]s t b aye e r.e..c ei.y. e..d a.pproved foundation inspections........................................................ 1. At least 5 0 of the re(j.Uired 86 workforce hous.n units rylust
.......................................................................... ....... ..I.I I..... ............................................................................................................................................................................i g............................................................................
hav e.,.x e...c.e.ime d a..Ibmp-�C.cxtifi U; c'..u.pa-ruy---an d..
I At least 5(..?/b .3 t
......................................................................
.h.a. V..0 e iv d a P.pr—aKcd—fQu-n-d-,iLian--in—,Wi�-c--i�n,
Staff Recommendation: Applicant Response:
10............All............odiff............t-irovisions of' the..........C I Taverni Liva Applicant accepted Staffs proposed revisions asble rn re lensive P
.............
C o r r r r u n ik ...............P I a r.l............t h e.................I L f v e r n i e i................C r e e c..............t o.....................M i e....................M..........a r k e r............9 7...........1.....J r S.............I I ighway
Coriidor De el N and Guidelines and the 1. d Dev to ment shown in Applicant's proposed text submitted on
............................................................... p m�m! ignif.ard
..................Y...........�2 ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. .......................................... .............P................................. January 19, 2024.
aimless, 5,.IY gagi. �Igd hgIgin.....
•
• Small Scale Future Land Use Map Amendment [File #2023-206] - Determination
of Completeness received January 29, 2024
• Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment [File #2023-205] - Determination of
Completeness received January 29, 2024
• Land Use Map Amendment [File #2023-207] - Determination of Completeness
received January 29, 2024
• Development Agreement
--- --- ----
January 29,2024
Barton W.Smith,Esq.
Smith Hawks,P.L.
jjdiHawks.coirn
.. .....................wlrs...................................
RE: Determination of Completeness—Request for a Comprehensive Plan(CP)Text Amendment-File#2023-205
Dear Applicant;
Consistent with the standards provided in LDC Section 110-4,1 have reviewed the most recently Submitted documents that are to be considered as part of this application for completeness.The application is complete.
flre �,ite-ad dtes s"i itt wdet-ftHtv eefflf"'4 to"Tie4t,.
Please note that only a completeness review of the application has been performed.Staff will,now begin to review the submitted application for compliance with the LDC and Comprehensive Plan.In accordance with LDC Section 102-158(d)(3),a Concept
Meeting(with the applicant and staff)is required.Staff will review the application as proposed and reach out with potential dates to schedule the concept meeting.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Best,
Demn Folpri,ACT,CFM
Mann i:g&I Dev,",iopmem Reme�AOkrnafrr
Resoujcet
102050 Ovem8ss,mghwsyl<ey aigo F1 K1027
Q5 453 8755
& NWwa OD ilia f"DID"M'•eapf"P memli RwvM or Omwwlw�,uuw��uf�wWmwaurma°
rt i w n fulli'mo m d gmwr�l4Yu qY r,aawn'r IW u l Ru Nr 7r�
�BNd��sum �revwu��ip�il��mn
"�Wmsm�a 6 Pit, d rR+: W Momq
6;"5"rcrc'uRd
r�
jamaq 2%204
With Ham%P.t...
DemAPOWam,
C� �� ;
�. ... h. .m. �.[ ,. n. d".a M�., w d. s.am„o-i�. a r'� r,. I <...k e..�.,i. d..�,: . r �. . m� m �... m �r,,.'�
��...�.NP"�dl'�W,��.7F"ir�"u�rW�d�����'p�..4allmaq�'�q�W,tl41�'�%�W .kq.V�d�����W. d��A.�.��.,,.rXTM���111���#� V�.� '� �..WakM"m"�.1�i�"M"'6�.V�,1,�2k'��.�'w�, " �7"....tlR�.Z �w�.qV��.@�"BtlV�4��79.&N�'�.�W���tl1q�N,RtlN7�u�#��L1�wr�W�kr^k�9 ,��k..���,�k�6.,�VG�wW�M����h�'�p*k�i�ggA�����,-R"�i��,�.b.d0�11�"X��,�I���P"W��,M�',NVtl'tl�kV��P��.�q'gl..5r..
Homo nolol st4wnkyarwornp'I,oloni,5,s roviewof The ampWai OcnNhasbw:on iliorrmic A tnOWbmonNoPrA for ronipillppice with thic,IL",wnd CompirchenOw,Plan.
L el irie it;nciwdtyou hary 4wu°wdw°quiesVw,ns,
saw,
i���anmsinr wsowuu�G,w�ws��," tww wu�
----- ---- ---- ----
Jain,uary 29,2024
Barton W.Smith,Esql.
Smith,Haiwks,R.L.
rrc M I I—f
"n ii t in lH aw k s.c o ni
RE Determination of Completeness—Request for a,Land Use District(Zoning)Amendment-File 2023-2'07
Dear ApUcant:
Consistent with the stainidards pirovidled lin LDC Section 110-4,1I Ihave reviewed the most recently submitted dlocumients that are to be consiidered as part Hof Nis application for comipileteniess.,The application is compLete.
Please note that only a completeness review of the application has been performed.Staff will begin to review the submitted application for compliance with the LDC and Comprehensive Plan.
Let me know if you have any questions,
Best,
DrMin FrApun,AIIICTI,CF10
Iannlng&Devek)piyient RicMiNI Aaragt,�r
"4c)n1roe � Hanningand �esoivcels
O"Jor"nas HIL,Ih";v;"y,Kvy laq;p, I
305 4153 8755
� iiiiii//%%%%%%%%/ %�rrrrrrirrrrri//%�����riii
`8���i�iY''II /
1 %/'
���� � �/
iiiii�/rriii %/%%///iii flip i � 19 �IVlu�r ll'I° ���
/%%���j/i������////////////////////////////////////%/%///%/�� ��f���i ���� I�I J�IVIu�o'�i, o
� �,,, „%f�//ii .Dili%/�h J�/ �����II�
� lip iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii;
/////
i//ia a,, /%f�%%%%%%%%%/
� •
�„
i��r��� '� ��� ��
��,
�,,
�,
�� , .
��
��