Loading...
Resolution 121-2004 County Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 121 -2004 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, EVIDENCING THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF A RECOMMENDED BENEFICIAL USE DETERMINATION PROMULGATED BY THE SPECIAL MASTER, IN RE: THOMAS J. CUNNINGHAM AND CARMEL S. CUNNINGHAM WHEREAS, on January 4, 1996, the Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan became effective; and WHEREAS, the application of THOMAS J, CUNNINGHAM AND CARMEL S, CUNNINGHAM for determination of beneficial use was heard by Special Master John J, Wolfe on December 18, 2000; now therefore: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that: The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and recommendations of the Special Master as set forth in the Proposed Denial of Beneficial Use, dated April 30, 2003, are APPROVED and the application of THOMAS J, CUNNINGHAM AND CARMEL S. CUNNINGHAM is accordingly DENIED, PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting of the Board held on the 17th day of March, 2004, Mayor Nelson Mayor Pro Tern Rice Commissioner McCoy Commissioner Neugent Commissioner Spehar yes yes yes yes y'>c~ jrescunningham BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA "-:> .1 <::::>. C, a <::::::J> r: By (~ ~or/Ch€i>lfrson , .." '-35- '-l 0 ~. ;:; :::0 ~<'"::r :0- :-< :--1 :::: :r :::t7 ..." ::> {"Tj r - Cl () l> f'1 w._..... ~....I .t- :::J r..u __=1 MONROE COUNTY ATTORNEY ~FOAM: RO , WOLFE . D~t~IE'1S~I~g ~!lJATTORNEY ; (.$.E:At.,) ~t~st:D:ANNY L.KOLHAGE, Clerk :..'.--,/ , (" /~~ # ~ B~4h~'t. ...:Jl.. .. 4" I (,. . eputy 'Clerk BENEFICIAL USE MONROE COUNTY SPECIAL MASTER In Re: Thomas J. Cunningham and Cannel S. Cunningham Michael A. Lang and Lisa Michelle McCafferty -Beneficial Use Application PROPOSED DENIAL OF BENEFICIAL USE The above entitled matter was heard at a duly-advertised and regularly scheduled, public hearing on December 18,2000,before John J.Wolfe,designated Beneficial Use Special Master.The Applications for a Determination of Beneficial Use filed by each of the above applicants (the "Applicants"), involve substantially identical issues and were consolidated for purposes of this Hearing by agreement of the Applicants and Monroe County. Andrew Tobin represented the Applicants. Assistant County Attorney Karen Cabanas, Director of Planning, Marlene Conaway, Assistant to the Planning Director,Julie Thomson,and Biologist,Ralph Gouldy,represented Monroe County. ISSUE Whether the Applicants have been denied all reasonable economic use of their property by application of Policy 101.5.1 of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan(the"Plan"), and the County's Rate of Growth Ordinance(Section 9.5-120 et seg. of the Monroe County Code) (the"Code"), and whether the Applicants are entitled to relief under Policies contained in Objective 101.18.5 of the Plan and Section 9.5-173 of the Code. Specifically, whether the evaluation criteria of Section 9.5- 122.3 deny them the ten points for platted, recorded subdivisions with infrastructure. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All properties of the Applicants subject to this Hearing are unimproved lots located in the Torchwood West Unit One and Two subdivisions, Big Torch Key, and are zoned Improved Subdivision (IS). `— ___ 2. The Applicants purchased their respective lots which are the subject of this Hearing (the "Lots"), as shown below on the dates shown below: Applicant(s) Lo~ Block RE Number Purchase Date Thomas J. Cunningham Lot 11 and 11 a, Block l, 002436210-000000 1/15/96 and Carmel S. Torchwood West Unit 1 Cunningham Michael A. Land and Lisa Lot 10 and the North Y2 00243622-002300& 7/21/71 Michelle McCafferty of Lot 9, Block 2, 00243622-002200 Torchwood West Unit 2 3, The Lots are scarified upland canal lots on Big Torch Key which are eligible to submit applications pursuant to the Rate of Growth Ordinance. The subdivisions do not have potable water which raises the issue as to whether they qualify for the ten points pursuant to the evaluation Criteria of Section 9.5-122.3 ofthe Code. The County previously made the determination that if an applicant provides an additional cistern, the Lots will score plus ten (+ 1 0) points for infrastructure. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 4. The Lots are designated Improved Subdivision (IS), which allows one single family residential dwelling per lot. 5. The Applicants have not been deprived of all reasonable economic use of the Lots by the application of Policy 102.1.1 of the Plan and the County's Rate of Growth Ordinance. The Applicants may provide an additional cistern and receive the plus ten (+ 1 0) points for infrastructure available under the Rate of Growth Ordinance scoring system, PROPOSED DETERMINATION WHEREFORE, I recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that a final beneficial use determination be entered denying Applicants' beneficial use applications. DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of April, 2003. / ./ " John 1. Wolfe Speci'll Master