Resolution 584-1988
Planning Director
RESOLUTION NO. 584 -1988
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE ADMINISTRATIVE
BOUNDARY INTERPRETATION OF THE PLANNING
DIRECTOR IN LAND USE DISTRICT MAP BOUNDARY
INTERPRETATION NUMBER 14, Crains Subdivision, Lot 3-8, Bl 55
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA that:
The administrative decision of the Planning Director in Land
Use District Map Boundary Interpretation Number
14
dated
October 17, 1988
attached and incorporated by reference, is
hereby acknowledged, found to be in conformance with the
standards set forth in Sec. 9.5-3 (m), Monroe County Code, and
approved.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of
Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting of said Board held
on the
1st
day of
November
, A.D., 1988.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
/7 ----. ~
?~~t,
Mayor C an
(SEAL)
Attest : DANNY L. KOLHAGE, Clerk
-/2L~~.~
C~er
~HOW
\10
to: V d L - WN 38.
~l,"/-FJ"() ';/~-:'~) ;.~~:" {:: c~
.<dVD LEG/1L Sll{~r:>!C/~:'/ {
LI 1~1 U ...: _~.,...: --,,-~
nu
RW/jh
M E M 0 RAN DUM
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Donald L. Craig, AICP, Assoc. AIA Assistant County
Administrator for Growth Management Division
Department: Planning
by:Jeanne DuBois
SUBJECT: Boundary Determination for Grassy Key, Crain's Subdivi-
sion, Block 55, Lots 3-8
MEETING DATE: October 18, 1988
Previous Relevant Board Action: / / ( ) Referral: Yes No X
Commissioners Distric~
Recommended Action:It is recommended that the NA/IS line be drawn
along the south boundary of Lot 5 thereby including Lots 5, 6, 7 and 8
in the Improved Subdivision district, and Lots 3, 4, and 5 in the Native
Area. This would include a condition to be placed on lot 5 that it be
unified to reflect that it is not buildable by itself.
Summary of Request/Report The property owner requested that Lots 3
through 8 be inspected in order to determine the placement of the bounda-
ry line between the IS and NA land use districts. The biologist made a-
site inspection and determined that Lot 6 could be included in the IS
land use district and approximately 24 feet of Lot 5. An additional
condi tion has been proposed that would allow lot 5 to be included as
well.
Action bY:___Ordinance X Resolution
Citizens Committee Statement
Yes X No
Attached
Agreement/Contract - No.
Approved by County Attorney as to Legality___Yes___N.A.
Standard Form
Approved by Risk Management___Yes
Not Applicable
Approved by Office Fiscal Management
Funding Source N/A
Current Year Cost
Annual Cost
N/A
BUdgeted___Yes
No
Will Proposal Require Additional Personnel?
X No
If Yes State Number
Permanent___ Temporary___ Other
Board Policy(ies) Applicable
Planning Commission Action Taken____Yes
Date X N.A.
Alternatives:The NAilS line could be drawn along the northern boundary
of the pure, undisturbed wetland area. This would place the line approx-
imately twenty-four feet south of the south boundary of Lot 6. This
would result in a lot being included in the IS land use district which
did not have sufficient uplands for development, ano would be inconsis-
tent with the Purpose of the Improved Subdivision landuse district.
Attached Documentation X Yes No
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M
DATE:
October 31, 1988
TO:
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Donald Craig
RE:
Boundary Determination for Lots 3 through 8, Block
55, Crain's Subdivision, Grassy Key
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Background:
The applicant
referenced lots.
use districts:
The NAilS line
district maps.
April 28, 1988.
has requested a boundary determination on the
This property presently lies within two land
Native Area (NA) and Improved Subdivision (IS).
presently runs through lot 6 on the land use
A site inspection of the property was made on
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the NAilS line be drawn along the
south boundary of Lot 5 thereby including Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8 in
the IS district, and Lots 3 and 4 in the NA. To insure that lot
5 is buildable, which it doesn I t appear to be by itself, we
would condition this recommendation on unifying lots 5 and 6.
Alternatives:
The NA/IS line could be drawn along the northern boundary of
the pure, undisturbed wetland area. This would place the line
approximately twenty-four feet south of the south boundary of Lot
6. This would result in a lot being included in the IS land use
district which did not have sufficient uplands for development,
and would be inconsistent with the Purpose of the Improved
Subdi vision land use district. After meeting with Mr.
Schwicker, owner of the lots in question, we have decided a
second possibility exists. We have told Mr. Schwicker that we
would be willing to redraw the NAilS boundary at the south side
of lot 5, if, he unified lots 5 and 6. Thus designating lot 5 as
IS, as well as, lot 6 would not create an unbuildable lot.
Findings of Fact:
1. The designation of the above property as Improved
Subdivision (IS) rather than Native Area (NA) will be consistent
with the purpose of the Improved Subdivision District, Section
9.5-205, and the uses allowed within that district, Section
9.5-234.
2. The determination was based on the following:
Lot 7 and 8 are vegetated with low hardwood hammock and
are in the IS district on the current land use district
map signed by Donald Craig.
The IS/NA boundary cuts across Lot 6.
The approximate northern forty feet of Lot 6 is
vegetated with the same type of hammock vegetation found
on Lots 7 and 8.
The approximate southern twenty
approxima te northern 24 feet
vegetation of a more wetland
buttonwoods being the dominant
south side of this area.
feet of Lot 6 and
of Lot 5 contains
character with large
woody species at the
South of this is an abrupt change
association and south of this an
mangroves changing to open water.
to pure
abrupt
buttonwood
change to
Al though the buttonwood/upland mix area could be
included in the IS designation, it would still be
subject to environmental design criteria for permitting
purposes.
3. Analysis of the existing uses of the property and surrounding
properties indicate that the essential neighborhood
characterisitics support the determination to designate Lots 6, 7
and 8 as Improved Subdivision (IS) and Lots 3, 4 and 5 as Native
Area (NA).
Attachments:
1. Application
2. Current Land Use District Map
3. Aerial Photo
4. Land Use District Map effective Sept. 15, 1986 (Pattison)
5. Staff Report from Environmental Resources Division
A
----
----
-------
--- - ~
1277 -
~
,
\ .
, \
/
/
./
/
/
/
/
/
/
;: --- - I S / //
--~- ~~
~ // \
'~7 ~ /\,
, -"<:~~ ~ /'
,,~. ~~
~
/
.,
/'"
....
N
Land Use District Maps
Monroe County, Florida
Approved by B.O.C.C., February 28,1986
/
Panel or Sh..t# I,,) or- ,</
Applicant: <'CifWtCIc:6.R..
Key: r;M'?7Y
@
FUe# Cl<ff1t1//<; ?,i..KS5'LT_:'?-g
1".600' ~
'Wle Marker: Sb'-
...~r.
Aerial Maps, Monroe County, Florida
Real Estate Data, Inc. -;,~lll) Edition, 19 ~'1
Pan.' or Sh.et# bS'
I 1""600' f
Applicant: SU+r.-VIC;Oc,{
Key: (,,,- /K'551
File # ~,4..!N'> ,,/.kC,S- LTs'S
Mile Marker: )8'
"
,
/' ,
.,//' . /' \
/' ,.~ /'. '
/' ~ /'
.. /' ~(/', /'
v/'./'~~/' /'
, /'. r /'
). < /' /'
/' , /' /'
/' ~ V /'
'X<' ~/') /'/'
/' ~/ '/' /'
'/. ~ /' /'
/' Y /'
'</'./' /'/'
/' /'
V /'
· /'> ~tA..'.::
,.., &.AM leNA
/'
/'
/'
Land Use District Maps
Monroe County, Florida
Jaooary 19,1988
Panel or Sheet# 01/-;
@
N
File # C~;4-'N's; /3!K 5~ i.. T 3-.8 ..
I 1".200' i
Applicant: :;,c.f+wiCK'-e<..
Key: (o((,~c;y
Mle Marker: )$
. .,..,"'.......".,~".,."..,.""=",,.,,"" ,.0"" '. L
--M. ~,.,.-v-..JdJ':~