Item B1
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: February 12,2002
Division: Growth Mana~ement
Bulk Item: Yes
No X
Department: Planning & Environmental Resources
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Continuation of a public hearing at the request of Hawk's Cay Resort (MM 61) to
approve amendments to the Development Regional Impact (DR!) development order, Resolution 365-1986, and
modifications to the Major Development approval for the Hawk's Cay Expansion DR!.
ITEM BACKGROUND: The proposed modifications and amendments create a new Development Corridor #5 with
28 additional hotel units and 18 staff quarters units and transfer rights to Monroe County to develop off-site 128
affordable housing units. If approved the modifications/amendments will increase the number of hotel units
approved under the existing DR! from 269 to 315, not including the 18 units reserved exclusively for employees of
the resort. To be used, the 128 affordable housing units will require a Chapter 380 agreement between the County
and the Department of Community Affairs.
The Planning Commission is scheduled to consider this request at a public hearing on February 6, 2002.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOARD ACTION: On September 18, 1996; February 23, 1998; and December 8,
1999; the BOCC approved amendments to the DR! and Major Development in Resolution Nos. 335A-1996, 086-
1998,616-1999 and 354-2001 respectively. On December 19,2001 and January 15,2002 the BOCC continued the
public hearing to consider the applicant's request.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: None
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Denial
TOTAL COST:
N/A
BUDGETED: Yes N/A No
COST TO COUNTY: N/A
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes N/A No
AMOUNT PER MONTH N/A YEAR
APPROVED BY: County Attorney X
OMB/Purchasing
isk Management
N/A
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
DOCUMENTATION: Included
X
To follow
Not Required
131
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM #:
\}l{ \J~
C:\Colleen\Agenda Item Summaries\Hawks Cay DRI 021202.doc
REVISED DRAFT
RESOLUTION NO. -2002
A RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA,
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT
OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) DEVELOPMENT
ORDER, RESOLUTION NO. 365-1986, AND
MODIFICATIONS TO THE MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
APPROVAL FOR THE HAWK'S CAY EXPANSION DRI;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, on December 5, 1986, after a public hearing, the Monroe County Board of
County Commissioners (Board), adopted Resolution No. 365-1986, a Development Order issued
under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (F.S.), for a Development of Regional Impact (DR!) known
as the Hawk's Cay Expansion DRI; and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1986, the Monroe County Zoning Board recommended that
the Board approve the amendments to the DR! and Major Development for the Hawk's Cay
Resort; and
WHEREAS, on September 18, 1996; February 23, 1998; December 8, 1999; and September
19, 2001; the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners approved amendments to the
DR! and Major Development in Resolution Nos. 335A-1996, 086-1998, 616-1999, and 354-2001
respectively; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2001, Hawk's Cay Investors, Limited, and Hawk's Cay
Developers, Limited (hereinafter Applicant), proposed a non-substantial change pursuant to
Section 380.06(19), F.S. to the 1. 986 DR! Development Order, as amended, by filing a Notice
with Monroe County, the South Florida Regional Planning Council. and the Department of
Community Affairs in accordance with Section 380.06(19), F.S.; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to revise the DR! master plan for the DR! as approved
to create Corridor 5 which will include an additional 28 hotel units, 18 new staff units, and will
transfer 128 units to Monroe County; and
WHEREAS, on October 12,2001, the Applicant also filed an application for modifications
to the 1986 Major Development (hereinafter modifications), as previously amended; and
Page I of6
01/25/02
Initials
WHEREAS, during the review process, the Monroe County Planning Commission, after
due notice and public participation in the hearing process, reviewed the proposed amendments
and modifications to the DR! and Major Development; and
WHEREAS, on January 9, 2002 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
proposed changes and modifications to the DR! and Major Development; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (Board) is the local
government body having jurisdiction over the review and approval of the DR!, in accordance
with Section 380.06, F.S. (2000); and
WHEREAS, the public notice requirements of Monroe County for consideration of the
proposed change have been made; and
WHEREAS, the public was afforded an opportunity to participate in the public hearing and
all parties were afforded the opportunity to present evidence and argument on all issues: and
WHEREAS, the Board has reviewed the above referenced documents, the related
recommendations of the Planning Commission, as well as all related testimony and evidence
submitted by the parties and members of the general public;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The changes proposed by the Applicant in its DRI notification do not
constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to Section 380.06(19), F.S.
Section 2. Resolution No. 365-1986, the 1986 DR! Development Order, as previously
amended, for the Hawk's Cay Expansion DR!, shall be further amended as follows:
(New language is underlined; deleted language is gtrkkiR. through)
Amendments to Resolution No. 365-1986, as amended
I. Substitute revised Master Development Plan dated December 14 ,200 I attached hereto for
the June 12, 2001 revised Master Development Plan, attached to the Development Order as
Exhibit One and referenced in Condition 1.12.
2. Revise the third "WHEREAS" clause as follows:
WHEREAS, Hawks Cay Resort when completed will be a hotel type destination resort
consisting of ~ 493 hotel suites, conference facilities, retail areas, restaurants, and
recreational facilities on approximately 58.8 acres of land located in unincorporated Monroe
County, Florida on Indies Islands at Duck Key; and
Page 2 of6
01/25/02
Initials
3. And two new "WHEREAS" clauses immediately after the third "WHEREAS" clause as
follows:
WHEREAS, Monroe County has experienced a severe shortage of affordable housing
and the number of affordable housing units that can be built is limited under the Monroe
County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2001, the Applicant proposed to transfer development
rights of 128 units from the DRl for use as affordable housing, based on the impacts of the
DRl as originally approved in 1986 and subject to further conditions; and
4. Revise Condition 1.12 as follows:
The land use approved by this development order shall be on the Master Development Plan
attached hereto as Exhibit I for the DRl development located at Duck Key. Bgtll gf tRigi
iXRibitg:ifi This exhibit is incorporated into this Development Order; provided however,
that the Land Use Summary on the Master Development Plan shall control as to the amount
and type of approved development at Duck Key. In addition, Monroe County and its
successors and assigns shall have the right to develop up to 128 affordable housing units of
up to two bedrooms and two baths, subject to the other applicable conditions of this
Development Order.
5. Revise Condition 9.1a. as follows:
The Applicant may construct a maximum of ~ 297 guest units consisting of combinations
of no more than ~ 642 bedrooms and ~654.5 bathrooms at Duck Key. These numbers
exclude the 178 hotel units not subject to DRl review. In addition, there are 18 "affordable
hotel staff quarters" units added pursuant to the changes proposed on October 12, 2001,
which the Applicant may construct a maximum of three dorm-style units with the remaining
units built as cottages consisting of a total of no more than 36 bedrooms and 27 bathrooms.
For purposes of this development order, those "affordable hotel staff quarters" shall be
defined as new rental units that are restricted to (I) a maximum monthly rent of 30 percent
of the median adjusted gross annual income for households within Monroe County divided
by 12; and (2) units exclusively housing Hawk's Cay resort staff. Prior to the issuance of
any certificate of occupancy for any structure containing the staff quarters, a restrictive
covenant(s) running in favor of and enforceable by Monroe County shall be filed in the
official records of Monroe County. The covenant(s) shall be effective for thirty (30) years
but shall not commence running until a certificate of occupancy has been issued by the
building official for the staff quarters units to which the covenant or covenants apply.
Page 3 of6
01/25/02
Initials
~ 7.
I
~
6. Revise Condition 9.1 h as follows:
All new guest units constructed shall adhere to one of the architectural styles and one of the
representative floor plans depicted in Attachment 02 to the "Hawk's Cay Expansion Project
Community Impact Statement" updated May 20, 1997, or submitted as Supplemental
Attachment 02 with the Notification of Proposed Change to a Previously Approved DR! for
the Hawk's Cay DR! dated December 1997, or submitted as Second Supplemental
Attachment 02 with the Notification of Proposed Change to a Previously Approved DRI for
the Hawks Cay DR! dated November 27,2001.
Revise Condition 12 by deleting all existing language, except for the last sentence and
replacing it with the following:
Wastewater Treatment Facility. Within one year from the effective date of the adoption of
this Resolution, the Applicant shall either: (1) enter into a mutually acceptable agreement
with Monroe County or the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) concerning the terms
and conditions of the transfer of the ownership by the Applicant to the County or FKAA at
no capital cost to either entity of all land, wastewater treatment and reuse facilities, and other
appurtenances on Utility Island for the siting and construction of a subregional wastewater
treatment facility by the County or FKAA; or (2) enter into a mutually acceptable agreement
with Monroe County concerning the terms and conditions for extension of the wastewater
service by the Applicant's wastewater treatment facility to residences and businesses in
Conch Key and Duck Key. Under option (1), the Applicant shall have the right to use all
reuse water available from the new subregional wastewater facility and shall be permitted to
retain a solid waste holding area. Provided, however, this Development Order shall remain
in full force and effect if the parties have not entered into such an agreement within one year
so long as the Applicant is using best efforts to conclude an above-described agreement as
expeditiously as possible.
8.
Add new Special Conditions in Section 13 as follows:
The Applicant has agreed to transfer to Monroe County the development rights from
Hawk's Cay DRI based on the impacts of the original DRI approval that the Applicant does
not intend to use through any future development order amendment at the Duck Key site,
subject to the following conditions:
a) The development rights transferred to the County shall be used by the County or its
successors or assigns for development solely for affordable housing (as defined in
the Monroe County Year 2020 Comprehensive Plan. as it may be amended from
time to time) consisting of 128 units with a maximum of two bedrooms and two
baths each.
b) The County shall enter an agreement with the Florida Department of Community
Affairs to establish the location and specific requirements for such housing
Page 4 of6
01/25/02
Initials
consistent with Chapter 380, FS, Chapter 91-2, Florida Administrative Code; and
other applicable laws.
c) Neither the future Agreement between the County and the DCA nor the
development of the affordable housing provided for herein shall be allowed to (I)
adversely affect in any manner the approved DR! and other development rights and
existing vested rights of Hawk's Cay Resort at Duck Key or (2) require the
Applicant to incur any additional costs, mitigation requirements, DR! amendments,
or any other procedural obligation, or any other obligation or responsibility due to
the development of the affordable housing units located off the Duck Key site. The
above-described Agreement between the County and the DCA shall not become
effective until the Applicant has consented to such Agreement based on the
Applicant's determination, in its sole discretion, concerning whether the Agreement
satisfies the conditions stated in this paragraph.
d) Neither the County nor its successors or assigns for purposes of development of the
affordable housing units described herein shall have the right to amend this DRI
development order for any reason without the prior written consent of the Applicant.
Section 3. The Major Development modifications, including the revised Master
Development Plan dated December 14,2001, as proposed by the Applicant on October 12,2001,
as amended, are also approved.
Section 4. Those provisions of the DRI Development Order, Resolution No. 365-1986, as
amended, and the Major Development approval, as amended, which are not further amended by
this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 5. A certified copy of this Resolution, with all exhibits, shall be furnished by the
County by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Applicant, the South Florida Regional
Planning Council, and the Florida Department of Community Affairs within 10 days of its
adoption by the Board.
Section 6. The Applicant shall record a notice of this Resolution pursuant to Section
380.06(15), F.S. (2000).
Section 7. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
(Remainder of this page left blank intentionally)
Page 5 of6
01/25/02
Initials
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a special meeting held on the 12th day of February, 2002.
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Mayor Pro Tern Dixie Spehar
Commissioner Murray Nelson
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Nora Williams
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
(SEAL)
ATTEST: Danny Kolhage, Clerk
By:
Deputy Clerk
Page 6 of6
01/28/02
Initials
County of Monroe
Growth Management Division
2798 Overseas Highway
Suite 410
Marathon, Florida 33050
Voice: (305) 289 2500
FAX: (305) 289 2536
Board of County Commissioners
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy, Dist. 3
Mayor Pro Tern Dixie M. Spehar, Dist. 1
COmIn. Murray Nelson, District 5
COmIn. George Neugent, District 2
COmIn. Nora Williams, District 4
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
Timothy J. McGarry, AICP, Director of Growth Management Divis~a
K. Marlene Conaway, Director of Planning and Environmental Reso~~
January 24, 2002
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Supplemental Staff Report on Modifications to a Major Development
Approval and Amendments to a Development of Regional Impact; Applicant-
Hawk's Cay Investors, Ltd.lHawk's Cay Developers, Ltd.l Village at Hawk's
Cay,Inc: Public Hearing, February 12, 2002
Overview
On January 15, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners continued the public hearing on the
applicant's request for Modifications to a Major Development Approval and Amendments to a
Development of Regional Impact (DR!) for Hawk's Cay until a special Commission meeting on
February 12. [This continuation was the second continuation of a public hearing originally
scheduled for December 19, 2002 as Agenda Item Q-3]. The Planning Commission action on the
request is not scheduled until February 6, 2002.
This memorandum provides an updated staff report with a revised recommendation to the Board of
County Commissioners to supplement the initial staff reports, dated December 4, 2001, and
December 12, 2001. In addition to the materials already provided to the Board for the public
hearing on December 19, 2001, the following additional items are enclosed as part of the agenda
package for the February 12, 2002 public hearing: (1) revised DR! resolution; (2) applicant's
cover letter and revised large and small scale site plans for Hawk's Cay; and, (3) copy of Secretary
of DCA's letter dated Decembel 10,2001.
Please Note: Further changes may be made to the proposed amendments to the DR! prior to or
after the Planning Commission public hearing on February, which may materially affect the staffs
recommendations. Should further changes be proposed, a follow-up report with appropriate
supporting materials will be provided the Board of County Commissioners under separate cover .
Page 1 of3
C:\DOCUMENT\DEV AGREE\hawk'scay-bocc2.doc
Revised DRI and Supplemental Materials
In coordination with the applicant's legal counsel, the Planning staff has revised the proposed
Resolution for Approving Amendments to the DR! and Modifications to the Major Development
Approval for Hawk's Cay, which is attached. The revisions generally reflect minor, technical
changes and the deletion of proposed amendments to Conditions 1.3 (b) and 9.1a that would have
extended the DR! one additional year. The originally proposed DR! extension amendments were
considered unnecessary and would have met the criterion for a Substantial Deviation (Section
380.06, Florida Statutes), as the DR! had already been extended by seven years in 1996.
The applicant has also submitted revised oversized and 11 "xI7" site plans for the Hawk's Cay
Master Plan, provided to the Commission under separate cover. The revised site plans reflect
changes in the legend of the plans consistent with the staff report. All other details remain
identical with the initial site plans provided the Commission.
Staff Evaluation Update
Following the Planning Commission's December 9, 2001, meeting, the Growth Management
Division Director and Planning Director had a teleconference with Mr. Mike McDaniel and other
members of the Department of Community Affairs staff concerning Secretary Siebert's letter of
December 10, 2001. As a result of this discussion, the County staff believes that the main point of
contention is the vesting of the units. Although mentioned in Siebert's letter, hurricane evacuation
is not considered a major issue with the DCA staff.
~
The DCA's legal staff believes that the applicant relinquished its rights to all the 444 units
approved in the original DR!, when the DR! was amended in 1996 to reduce the project from 444
units to 269 units. This interpretation conflicts with those of the legal counsel for the applicant and
the County's Growth Management Division's legal counsel.
As stated in its December 4, 2001, report, the Planning Department's support for the proposed
amendments to the DR! and modifications to the Major Development Approval rests squarely on
DCA's recognition of the 128 affordable housing units and willingness to enter into an agreement
with the County so that these units may be used throughout unincorporated Monroe County. It is
the staff s opinion, that obtaining the rights to these affordable housing units provides sufficient
public benefits to outweigh planning concerns about substantive changes in the underlying
conditions, since the DR! was initially approved in 1986. Therefore, if the County is unable to
obtain the rights to these units and enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with DCA for their
utilization, the staff can not support the amendments as proposed.
Unfortunately, the DCA Secretary's letter and the staffs follow-up discussion with DCA staff
have not alleviated the County staffs concerns about DCA approval of the DR! amendments or its
willingness to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement with the County. In the staffs opinion, the
resolution of DCA concerns about the vesting of the Hawk' Cay DR! are clearly legal issues,
which can only be resolved between the legal staffs of the respective parties or in a court of law.
Page 2 of3
C:\DOCUMENT\DEV AGREE\hawk'scay-bocc2.doc
What concerns the County staff is that if the proposed amendments to the DR! are approved by the
County with no clear-cut indication of DCA support or resolution of the vesting issues, the County
may end up after some protractive appeal process with nothing in terms of direct public benefits.
Even if DCA does not appeal the DR! amendment, the County has no guarantee that DCA will
ever enter into a Memorandum of Agreement to allow the County to fully utilize the 128 units for
affordable housing.
Recommendation
In recognition of this uncertainty, the County staff is reluctant at this time to recommend approval
of the proposed amendments and modifications as written. Therefore, the staff recommends that
the BOCC deny the request for proposed amendments to the DR! and modifications of the Major
Development Approval, unless the DR! is amended to include specific contingency language that
ties the permitting of the new hotel and employee units on Hawk's Cay to DCA approval of a
Memorandum of Understanding with Monroe County on utilization of the 128 units for affordable
housing.
Enclosures
Page 3 of3
C:\DOCUMENT\DEV AGREE\hawk'scay-bocc2.doc
Q ers
CONSULTANTS, INC.
,...., s-... ~.....}lI.....
LOWER KEYS & KEY WEST (305) 294-1238
UPPER KEYS (305) 664-2342
MIAM (305) 661-4928
FAX (305) 294-2164
E-MAIL: SlI1dl8W1llrs@8Dl.com
MEMORANDUM
December 20,2001
TO:
Nicole Petrick, Assistant Clerk
Monroe County Planning Commission
SandraWa1ter~
FROM:
SUBJECT: Revised site plan for Hawk's Cay amendment
As we discussed by telephone, enclosed are 35 copies of both l1X17 and oversized site plans for the
Hawk's Cay amendment, 16 copies for the Planning Commission hearing on January 9, 2001 and 19
copies for the County Commission special hearing on January 15. Note that the 11 X17 site plan is an
attachment to the resolution that contains the development order. Please convey the 19 copies to Colleen
Gardner for inclusion in the BOCC agenda package. We have revised the site plan from that originally
submitted to change legends so that numbers are consistent with those in the staff report~ all other details
remain identical.
Please call me, at 294-1238, if you have any questions. I will be out of town next week, but will be
checking messages and can return your call.
Thanks for your help!
cc.
Pritam Singh
Don Johnson
Betsy Bowman
!.
~
MAIN OFFICE: 600 WHITE STREET, SUITE 5, KEY WEST, FL 33040
10925 SW 199 STREET, MIAMI, FL 33176
lOWER KEYS & KEY WEST (305) 294-1238
UPPER KEYS (305) 664-2342
MIAMI (305) 661-4928
FAX (305) 294-2164
E-MAIL: Sandl8WaIIIIrs@8Dl.com
MEMORANDUM
December 20, 2001
TO:
Nicole Petrick, Assistant Clerk
Monroe County Planning Conunission
Sandra Walter~
FROM:
SUBJECT: Revised site plan for Hawk's Cay amendment
As we discussed by telephone, enclosed are 35 copies of both 11 X17 and oversized site plans for the
Hawk's Cay amendment, 16 copies for the Planning Commission hearing on January 9, 2001 and 19
copies for the County Commission special hearing on January 15. Note that the l1X17 site plan is an
attaclunent to the resolution that contains the development order. Please convey the 19 copies to Colleen
Gardner for inclusion in the BOCC agenda package. We have revised the site plan from that originally
submitted to change legends so that numbers are consistent with those in the staff report; all other details
remain identical.
Please call me, at 294-1238, if you have any questions. I will be out of town next week, but will be
checking messages and can return your call.
Thanks for your help!
cc.
Pritam Singh
Don Johnson
Betsy Bowman
I
"
MAIN OFFICE: 600 WHITE STREET, SUITE 5, KEY WEST, FL 33040
10925 SW 199 STREET, MIAMI, FL 33176
-
County of Monroe
Growth Management Division
2798 Overseas Highway
Suite 410
Marathon, Florida 33050
Voice: (305) 289 2500
FAX: (305) 289 2536
Board of County Commissioners
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy, Dist. 3
Mayor Pro Tern Dixie M. Spehar, Dist. I
Comm. Murray Nelson, District 5
Comm. George Neugent, District 2
Comm. Nora Williams, District 4
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
Timothy J. McGarry, AICP, Director of Growth Manag~ ..J,~ /
K. Marlene Conaway, Director of Planning and Environmental Resour~' V
FROM:
DATE:
February 8, 2002
SUBJECT:
Supplemental Staff Report #3 on Modifications to a Major Development
Approval and Amendments to a Development of Regional Impact for Hawk's
Cay: Public Hearing, February 12,2002
Overview
This memorandum provides an updated staff report with a revised recommendation to the Board
of County Commissioners to supplement previous staff reports, dated December 4, 2001,
December 12,2001, and January 24, 2002. In addition to the materials already provided the Board
under separate cover, enclosed is a copy of the revised DR! resolution, which was recommended
for approval by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on February 6, 2002.
Revised DR! Resolution
The revised DR! resolution, which was recommended for approval by a 3-2 vote of the Planning
Commission, contains a couple of significant changes from the draft resolution provided to the
Board of County Commission with the staffs memorandum of January 24, 2002. [It should be
noted that several minor, non-substantive wording changes to clarify the document have been
made by Growth Management Division staff and the Applicant's attorney to the DR! resolution
rec~mmended by the Planning Commission.] It is the staffs understanding that these revisions are
based on further discussions with the Department of Community Affairs and negotiations between
FKAA, the County, the Applicant, and the Duck Key Wastewater Cooperative, Inc., concerning
the development of a wastewater treatment system.
Page 1 of 5
V' \
The following are the substantive revisions to the proposed amendments to the DR! submitted to
the BOCC in its February 12 agenda package:
· Deletion of Provision to Transfer and Assign Rights to 128 Affordable Housing Units to
Monroe County and Replacement with a New Special Condition 13 to Relinquish Claims
to Any Further Rights to Units under the DR!: In discussions with the Department of
Community Affairs concerning the vesting of units under the DR!, the Applicant and
County Attorney believe that the off-site transfer of the 128 units would cause concern for
DCA. Even if DCA does approve a DR! amendment providing for such a transfer it is
therefore, questionable if it would enter into the necessary Memorandum of Understanding
with the County to effectuate the transfer.
Other than DCA Secretary Siebert's December 2001, letter, no further written
communication have been provided by DCA concerning the vesting of any of these 128
units or the 28 hotel and 18 staff quarter units proposed by the Applicant; however, the
Applicant and County Attorney's office believe that DCA may not have a problem with
such vesting if no off-site transfer of rights is included in the amendment. The County
Attorney has already opined that the DR! is vested for the 444 units approved in its 1986
DR! and that the applicant has not relinquished its rights to these units.
To provide finality to the issue of the number of units authorized under the DR!, the
Applicant has further agreed to a new Special Condition 13 (Paragraph 8). This condition
specifies that the Applicant relinquishes any and all rights to seek vesting or any other
means to reclaim units contemplated by the original 1986 DR!. Therefore, the maximum
number of units that will be approved under the DR! is 315 and any further increases in the
number of units would be subject to existing land development regulations including
ROGO.
· Revision of Condition 12 to Provide Specific Language and Guarantees to Fund and
Construct a Central Wastewater Treatment System for Concn Key, Walker Key, Duck Key,
and Indies Island. Existing Condition 12 in the 1996 DR! amendment calls for the
Applicant and County to reach a mutually satisfactory agreement within one-year of the
adoption of the Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan to dedicate the Wastewater Treatment
Plant and Utility Island at the Hawk's Cay's resort to the County. This condition has
expired. [It should be noted that the County did enter into a separate agreement with the
Applicant to continue negotiations on the subject; however, the Applicant is under no
obligations to enter into any agreement with th~ County for the transfer of the wastewater
facility. ]
The Applicant proposes to have the Duck Key Wastewater Cooperative, Inc. (Co-op) enter
into a BOCC-approved agreement with the FKAA to provide for the funding and
construction of a wastewater collection system to serve Conch Key, Walker Key, Duck
Key, and Indies Island tied into the advanced wastewater treatment at the Duck Key Co-
op's facility.
Page 2 of5
Although the specific details of this agreement have yet to be finalized as of this writing, it
is the Growth Management Division staff's understanding that the successful
implementation of the agreement would lead to a very reasonably priced per EDU capital
cost system that would provide central sewer service to Conch Key and the residential areas
of Duck Key within a three-year period. [Some of the preliminary details and costs of the
system were provided to the BOCC under separate letter from Ms. June Helbling, President
of the Duck Key Property Owners Association.] It is also the staff's understanding that
FKAA would be involved to the extent of moving forward with the collection and vacuum
station to serve Conch Key in order to ensure the FEMA funds are not lost.
The Applicant has proffered several guarantees to ensure that it will follow through on its
wastewater proposal. First, the agreement concerning the funding and construction of the
system would have to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. Second, the
Applicant will not be issued any building permits for the additional 28 hotel units until the
agreement approved by the BOCC has been executed by all parties and performance and
payment bonds have been set. These bonding instruments should provide adequate
protection to the County and affected residents concerning the costs, user fees, and time
frame for completion of the wastewater system as provided for in the agreement.
Staff Analysis
The staff's analysis focuses on three specific issues raised by the proposed amended revisions to
the DR! amendments: (1) loss of the 128 affordable housing units; (2) vesting of units; and, (3)
Duck Key/Conch Key wastewater agreement.
Loss of Affordable Housing Units. The Growth Management Division staff does have concerns
about the deletion of the initial proposal to assign to Monroe County the rights to 128 affordable
housing units for transfer to other areas of the County. Any such transfer was subject to the County
e':itering into a Chapter 380 agreement with the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA).
Unfortunately, it is apparent that any such a transfer is of concern to DCA and that there is little
likelihood of the approval of any such transfer. It further raises the possibility of legal challenges
from environmental and other public interest groups.
In evaluating the significance of the deletion, it should be recognized that the County currently has
47 ROGO allocations with nutrient reduction credits that have gone unused. If the proposed DCA
Rule change to the County's Comprehensive Plan is finally approved and the County is able to
successfully reach agreement with the City of Marathon concerning the transfer of future nutrient
reduction credits generated by the Little Venice Project, the County staff anticipates that a
minimum of 201 additional ROGO allocations with nutrient reduction credits will be available for
affordable housing. [With the large number of nutrient reduction credits anticipated to be
generated by the Little Venice facility, the County hopes to negotiate with the City to obtain
sufficient nutrient credits to cover the existing of 58 available affordable housing allocations
Page 3 of 5
without credits and 39 affordable units to be returned due to the County's progress in meeting its
Work Program objectives. ]
Thus it is very possible that over 300 affordable housing allocations with nutrient reduction credits
may be soon available. Therefore, the staff concludes that the deletion of the 128 affordable
housing units, while important, is not critical especially considering the public benefit of the
proposed wastewater agreement proffered by the Applicant [see below].
Furthermore, the loss of the 128 housing units, coupled with the relinquishing of the rights to
develop any remaining units in the future under the DR!, greatly reduces the potential impacts of
the project on the County in terms of hurricane evacuation, public services and infrastructure, and
environmental resources. Therefore, the staff finds that overall impacts of the DR! as originally
vested are further reduced with this proposed DR! amendment.
Vesting of Units. The County Attorney has opined that the Hawk's Cay DR! is vested for 444
units and impacts as contemplated by the original DR!. Since, the Applicant did not waive these
rights when the DR! was amended in 1996 to 269 units, the County's legal position is that the
Applicant may still try to reclaim these units. The DCA has not provided any written position
supporting or challenging the County Attorney's and Applicant's position on the vesting.
However, the addition of new Special Condition 13 ensures that the ultimate development subject
to the DR! is a maximum of 315 units. The Applicant is relinquishing all claims and vesting to
any of the units contemplated under the original DR! approved in 1986. Therefore, this additional
language clearly closes the door on any future requests for approval in the number of units under
the DR! without meeting the County's current land development regulations, including ROGO.
Wastewater Agreement. The Applicant is under no obligation to dedicate to the County any land
or facilities for a central wastewater system. Any such obligation expired under the existing DR!.
Duck Key and Conch Key have been designated by the County's Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan
to be served by central sewer service as the most economical way for the County to meet its
obligations under the Florida Statutes and the County's Comprehensive Plan to achieve water
mandated quality treatment standards by the year 2010. The Applicant's proposal to provide for
the funding and construction of a wastewater system for the residential islands of Duck Key and
Conch Key through a BOCC approved agreement between the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
and the Duck Key Wastewater Cooperative, Inc. provides the potential for a major public benefit
for the County and its residents that will help achieve this goal.
It will ensure that the $1.7 million in federal and state funds already obligated for construction of
Conch Key are not jeopardized and that Conch Key, Walker Key, Indies Island, and Duck Key can
all be provided central sewer in a very economical and expeditious manner. Without such an
agreement, it is unlikely that the County would be able to provide a similar system in as
economical and expeditious manner, particularly as FKAA is phasing out its involvement in
provision of wastewater services.
Page 4 of5
Furthermore, the requirement for the wastewater agreement to be approved by the Board of County
Commissioners and the proviso that no building permits shall be issued for the hotel guest units
until the agreement is executed and performance and cash bonds are set provide sufficient
guarantees to protect the public interest and those of the residents affected. The Applicant has no
obligation or real incentive to necessarily make such an offer without some other inducements.
Therefore, the staff finds that the proposed agreement for the funding and construction of the
central sewer system along with bonding guarantees will yield a significant public benefit, the
extent of which is dependent upon the contents of the agreement.
Recommendation
The Growth Management Division staff recommends approval of the proposed draft resolution to
amend the DRl and modify the Major Development approval for Hawk's Cay.
Attachment
cc: Danny Kolhage, County Clerk
James L. Roberts, County Administrator
James Hendrick, County Attorney
Page 5 of 5
RESOLUTION NO. -2002
A RESOLUTION BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA,
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT
OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) DEVELOPMENT
ORDER, RESOLUTION NO. 365-1986, AND
MODIFICATIONS TO THE MAJOR DEVELOPMENT
APPROVAL FOR THE HAWK'S CAY EXPANSION DRI;
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, on December 5, 1986, after a public hearing, the Monroe County Board of
County Commissioners (Board), adopted Resolution No. 365-1986, a Development Order issued
under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (F.S.), for a Development of Regional Impact (DR!) known
as the Hawk's Cay Expansion DRI; and
WHEREAS, on September 24, 1986, the Monroe County Zoning Board recommended that
the Board approve the amendments to the DRI and Major Development for the Hawk's Cay
Resort; and
WHEREAS, on September 18, 1996; February 23, 1998; and December 8, 1999; the
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners approved amendments to the DR! and Major
Development in Resolution Nos. 335A-1996, 086-1998, 616-1999, and respectively; and
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2001, Hawk's Cay Investors, Limited, and Hawk's Cay
Developers, Limited (hereinafter Applicant), proposed a non-substantial change pursuant to
Section 380.06(19)(e) 2., F.S. to the 1986 DRI Development Order, as amended, by filing a
Notice with Monroe County, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and the Department
of Community Affairs in accordance w~th Section 380.06(19), F.S.; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to revise the DRI master plan for the DRI as approved
to create Corridor 5 which will include an additional 28 hotel units and 18 new staff units; and
WHEREAS, on October 12,2001, the Applicant also filed an application for modifications
to the 1986 Major Development (hereinafter modifications), as previously amended; and
WHEREAS, during the review process, the Monroe County Planning Commission, after
due notice and public participation in the hearing process, reviewed the proposed amendments
and modifications to the DRI and Major Development; and
WHEREAS, on February 6, 2002 the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
proposed changes and modifications to the DRI and Major Development; and
Page 1 of5
02/08/02
Initials
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (Board) is the local
government body having jurisdiction over the review and approval of the DR!, in accordance
with Section 380.06, F.S. (2000); and
WHEREAS, the public notice requirements of Monroe County for consideration of the
proposed change have been made; and
WHEREAS, the public was afforded an opportunity to participate in the public hearing and
all parties were afforded the opportunity to present evidence and argument on all issues: and
WHEREAS, the Board has reviewed the above referenced documents, the related
recommendations of the Planning Commission, as well as all related testimony and evidence
submitted by the parties and members of the general public;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The changes proposed by the Applicant in its DRI notification, as modified
hereby, do not constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to Section 380.06(19), F.S.
Section 2. Resolution No. 365-1986, the 1986 DR! Development Order, as previously
amended, for the Hawk's Cay Expansion DR!, shall be further amended as follows:
(New language is underlined; deleted language is gtri~bR. through)
Amendments to Resolution No. 365-1986, as amended
1. Substitute revised Master Development Plan dated December 14, 2001 attached hereto for
the June 12, 2001 revised Master Development Plan, attached to the Development Order as
Exhibit One and referenced in Condition 1.12.
2. Revise the third "WHEREAS" clause as follows:
WHEREAS, Hawks Cay Resort when completed will be a hotel type destination resort
consisting of ~ 493 hotel suites, conference facilities, retail areas, restaurants, and
recreational facilities on approximately 58.8 acres of land located in unincorporated Monroe
County, Florida on Indies Islands at Duck Key; and
3. And three new "WHEREAS" clauses immediately after the third "WHEREAS" clause as
follows:
WHEREAS, Monroe County has experienced a severe shortage of affordable housing
and the number of affordable housing units that can be built is limited under the Monroe
County Year 20 10 Comprehensive Plan; and
Page 2 of5
02/08/02
Initials
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to build eighteen (18) new staff units for use as
affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has agreed to cause Duck Key Wastewater Cooperative,
Inc., to enter into an agreement providing substantial public benefit by expanding
wastewater treatment facilities to communities otherwise not served, including Conch Key,
Walker Key, Duck Key and Indies Island; and
4. Revise Condition 1.12 as follows:
The land use approved by this development order shall be on the Master Development Plan
attached hereto as Exhibit 1 for the DR! development located at Duck Key. BgtR. gf tR.iEi
iXR.il?itg ari This exhibit is incorporated into this Development Order; provided however,
that the Land Use Summary on the Master Development Plan shall control as to the amount
and type of approved development at Duck Key.
5. Revise Condition 9.1a. as follows:
The Applicant may construct a maximum of ~ 297 guest units consisting of combinations
of no more than ~ 642 bedrooms and ~654.5 bathrooms at Duck Key. These numbers
exclude the 178 hotel units not subject to DR! review. In addition, there are 18 "affordable
hotel staff quarters" units added pursuant to the changes proposed on October 12, 2001,
which the Applicant may construct a maximum of three dorm-style units with the remaining
units built as cottages consisting of no more than 36 bedrooms and 27 bathrooms. For
purposes of this development order, those "affordable hotel staff quarters" shall be defined
as new rental units that are restricted to (1) a maximum monthly rent of 30 percent of the
median adjusted gross annual income for households within Monroe County divided by 12;
and (2) units exclusively housing Hawk's Cay resort staff. Prior to the issuance of any
certificate of occupancy for any structure containing the staff quarters, a restrictive
covenant(s) running in favor of and enforceable by Monroe County shall be filed in the
official records of Monroe County. The covenant(s) shall be effective for thirty (30) years
but shall not commence running until a certificate of occupancy has been issued by the
building official for the staff quarters units to which the covenant or covenants apply.
6. Revise Condition 9.1h as follows:
All new guest units constructed shall adhere to one of the architectural styles and one of the
representaiive floor plans depicted in Attachment G2 to the "Hawk's Cay Expansion Project
Community Impact Statement" updated May 20, 1997, or submitted as Supplemental
Attachment G2 with the Notification of Proposed Change to a Previously Approved DR! for
the Hawk's Cay DR! dated December 1997, or submitted as Second Supplemental
Attachment G2 with the Notification of Proposed Change to a Previously Approved DR! for
the Hawks Cay DR! dated November 27,2001.
Page 3 of 5
02/08/02
Initials
.)>fJ
~
12
Revise Condition 12 by deleting all existing language, except for the last sentence and
replacing it with the following:
Wastewater Treatment Facility. Within ninety days from the effective date of the adoption
of this Resolution, the Applicant- shall cause Duck Key Wastewater Cooperative, Inc., to
enter such agreement(s) with the Board of County Commissioners and/or the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority (the "Agreement(s)") as may be needed to upgrade the Duck Key
Wastewater Treatment Facility and extend Advanced Wastewater Treatment to the
communities of Conch Key, Walker Key, Duck Key and Indies Island. Provided, however,
this Development Order shall remain in full force and effect if the parties have not entered
into such an agreement within ninety days so long as the Applicant is using best efforts to
ronclude an above-described agreement as expeditiously as possible. No building permit
for the additional hotel units authorized hereby may be issued until the Agreement has been
duly executed and either work has commenced thereunder or such performance and payment
bonds have been provided as may be required by the Agreement( s ).
~
s
l\J
X<J'
~~
...
,.
..
"'
. .
..
...
,!i
j
; ~,:,,~II J
t 8uii
I !llll i
I
I
;
~ ;'
:;
f~
3
.I'~i o.
~ f~ H i~ fj~ II! ,i! i ~
11 E I ~ II ll~ i it'! . : iii
! "",' ~
~ i g I ~ I i 1':,'...... Ii" x \; B
~ I ~ I ~ : d,li/lffl\il,:"il;' T~~i "'.:. ; .. z f
i :: !I1!!!I;II',r 1',,,,I,!lll ail ' ~il .: .. ~ f::),,'
,E ,;,0 ,i ~ ,"11""1' P Hl1l"iwli >. ~ .;:~! n n1 ~
j 111!l'! 1,1, I'd ICi~.. ell Ch ~OI1 0" 0 lQ. ~
l'II.!~q I I I!'~ III Ii Iii.. c.oe o~..!.I1:: nZ ~a .
I'll ." "I" '12' .,d'.C", ~~ iI'"' 0"
~; llll[! i" Ii I III!', I! fifB~~;~m~B UK rfnr~ . . ~. ~.
I ", .j I I III .' · ." ;.. ~ · ~ -". ,."....,= ' ·
. . hi "~~ .~, ~\ c:;:i5 ;,1:,.: \.JLJ LJ~ ~ .
'. 0" ~ '.' ., ~ "" · "
. ~1I "8"::1 ~~r> ~p _ -4 _ ~ ~ . iZ .
. ..' _ " .. ' ' z'
" " \; .
~" 0 ,., ~
~ r--:;l , ~
\; ,~
Z
I ~: m~:~:~ II
!lilljl;!i'll
dd,.!Uili1
!ilJpl!!ii I
",
~ 7.
.;
rJ
Revise Condition 12 by deleting all existing language, except for the last sentence and
replacing it with the following:
Wastewater Treatment Facility. Within one year from the effective date of the adoption of
this Resolution, the Applicant shall cause Duck Key Wastewater Cooperative, Inc., to enter
an agreement, approved by the Board of County Commissioners, with the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority ("the Agreement") to provide for the funding and construction of
wastewater collection infrastructure to provide Advanced Wastewater Treatment to the
communities of Conch Key, Walker Key, Duck Key and Indies Island. Provided, however,
this Development Order shall remain in full force and effect if the parties have not entered
into such an agreement within one year so long as the Applicant is using best efforts to cause
the execution of the above-described agreement as expeditiously as possible. No building
permit for the additional hotel units authorized hereby shall be issued until the Agreement
has been duly executed and performance and payment bonds have been provided as required
by the Agreement.
8.
Add new Special Conditions in Section 13 as follows:
The Applicant and all successors in interest shall hereby relinquish any and all rights to seek
vesting or any other means to reclaim units contemplated by the original Development of
Regional Impact (DRI). This DRI amendment shall constitute the final and maximum
number of units, which may exist pursuant to this DR!.
Section 3. The Major Development modifications, including the revised Master
Development Plan dated December 14,2001, as proposed by the Applicant on October 12, 2001,
are also approved.
Section 4. Those provisions of the DRI Development Order, Resolution No. 365-1986, as
amended, and the Major Development approval, as amended, which are not further amended by
this Resolution shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 5. A certified copy of this Resolution, with all exhibits, shall be furnished by the
County by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the Applicant, the South Florida Regional
Planning Council, and the Florida Department of Community Affairs within 10 days of its
adoption by the Board.
Section 6. The Applicant shall record a notice of this Resolution pursuant to Section
380.06(15), F.S. (2000).
Section 7. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
Page 4 of 5
02/08/02
Initials
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting held on the 12'h day of February, 2002.
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
Mayor Pro Tem Dixie Spehar
Commissioner MUlTBy Nelson
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Nora Williams
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Mayor Charles "Sonny" McCoy
(SEAL)
ATTEST: Danny Kolbage, Clerk
By:
Deputy Clerk
BY
Page S of5
02/08/02
Initials
"fF~'
c . "~
~..
. .
~~;;
~ ;.""
.-"
. .
... a..
. . n
"':;-~
- .. .
. . II
A '"
~~~
. . ~
. ~ .
. -,
:! : ~
:-....
. :.~
E:
,. .
gH
> "
.
" .
<
~:
. !':
~~
. .
r :.
~~
,~ .
': II.
u<
? ~
" <
~F
~
~~
00
nt~
01:
:lz
~/tl
N
o
Z
/tl
~I ;
o
Q
~ Ol~
~ ii--'
H
o
o
!i UHf i
Jf nnf ~
I ~A~~_ )0
I
] ~~~~~ I
t !o!!~ :II
! IHB {
-
~
9
r
~
5
~A
00
o. 6- -'/ J~
/};04 ~ '\\'~:I.~.//,%' ,/
//"", ~/,' '; :-...-:.:,,:;>. /~. -'
/ ~\,O ~ )/
----/ .,1'> ,t ,,/
,,"~ . ~ /.. ./ <<^
~-"~ ~,- ./ =i
~-, ~"""....:., ..-/.' t::::;-:::J
',.,f' i!l:~. ,
:r' ~ t; e!J , rn
... ~x .x IlO ... , 0
'!' ~ '- .,~. n m "
, . . ii' Om- n~ ~o~ 6~ llI, ~
' , ::':':;l:ql'" I ~>g ~D .. .., B. 0 "0 . ..~ ~
"II" Ii'". " ..
:z
I,Hibil: Ii : Hh Pi"'! Iii~ Ei maH H~ J;~! ~ M. " ~,
!iJlli!P~ I I !HI II ~~;o~, g~ ;'~i~ ~II' ... ... m ~ ~"!!~" U 1'1
'ij. 1"111 I :,1' 1 I m. ~11 ;; ~~~ ~< g" z "
f 1,1. 111' "I III fl' H . ~ ... 6 ~~ ~~ )> ...
~ 'Illp f 1111. :IIII"~I !! ~iii J;l ,.~~ ~jl ~ ~
I ! Hi: I I, !~ ~8 z ~ C; ~ t::::3
~~ f) m
" ".
~
:z
<; ~
~ z
~ l:I
m C
III
m
III
c
~
~
)0
:II
-c
Ii! : Im~~=~ il
nillll!iiH j
i!itaf'<< f,q
nq;tli'I"j
~ f t j
!' .
-l -l
Z ~ J' ass
~ ~ ~ > ~>
~ ~ -l fm~ ~~~ I~
~ H~ f~ i~ IH ;i~t ~~
~ ii~ !! 1~1~ i.~ ~
ii ~ i ~: ~ >
a~ 5 I ~ f
j i ~I~
n . c:
~ I rn
-;
c:
z ,.
=< n
,. ~:::cn ~~q=:~ ~
~ -~ B ~~ ~-~ en
~ A_ ~ ~ u
III i
" .
"s
!
9
I
t
.
\
.
\
z
C
II:
...
Z
11.1
....
z
w.
2:
w
~
0.:
-
u..'
o~
w....
<.:1-
o
w
<.:1
z
~
f/)
x
w
"'"
<r. \...... X 7- '
III III III <r ,.
Z Z Q
o · 0 ,--
N'N ~
..,
w
Z
o
N
Z
UJO
Z-
_t-
..JO
~W
Ot-
:r:0
CI)~
~
/ i
I
; J
, ..
;.
"
"
~,
->\
/
/'
Oa ..-
/' ....- ./
,/ III CC'"
/ . > ~ /" ",/
~ ,,/'
;.;:..:~~
... ~ ..
,;
/
.
'.
/'" .. ,.. '.
, .:~
/ .... .'
" ~~.
~.G; ~ /..~~:
". Q. '.A?'
.... 00'
~., D.~~'
. ;.n.t,.v
~1t'U-
...
.'
,
/
,.
-:
.'..
~ O'!
~ ..J
.
....s' UI
W .
'~ U!
<
~ UI
U.I Z
~' 0
., ~ N
.
I
.
)(
o
ex:
0..
0..
<
'.
.
No'Il.SIl'60.~ "L
" ~.e38 98'
o /.
p...
'"
o
...
t
.
It)
-
, -
.
.-..
.
Q.
>
....
---
..J
W
o
a:
~
f-
::)
o
,
1!Ii.l....O.'~__.. __________ .___
~
-
. ',;~.
'~~':, '.
'/~;
. .
:":
......
. 'oo;'.
.r..
f.
.;.....
\
'\
':. ~.
, .
"
.
I.
I
i-:'
,.
..
~o
" "en ~~ t-
. ~ J: .~
0.0 .~
-f. .1) . '. )'
mm )'
.0 .,
~o~~ ~Z',
~~. 0 m .
~~ .Z.
~N
..~O
?O z,
,.~ i m
~OA. ., i:.
~~ . ~
~~, ,~
.. ~ r,".
..g ..... '.
'.
"
'.
N
o
z
.z
G')
i-
o
-t
N
~
ll1
o.
o
C\I
0 -
0 0
- 0
~ -
.
-
~ -
i. ..
W
..J
0 <r
u
(I)
.
-.--..---.
"
,.
.. ..
')
.
.
, .
1,/ .
<
\
\
\
...".
, ~",.
~~.
~~ .~..
",,0 .'.
. ." /' ~".
. .~.
'" ~.
AO~<';'
" "".
. .
\,-;7'" <
<( W
~ a:
LU . <(
x: 4(
a: w
0 a:
- 4(.
<( 'cr: 0.. 0 z
, w t \~ Q Q
~,.,. a: ....J ' 01
. ~ ~
<( CI) .J z
Z 141
< UJ UJ - ~
x: a: . . I- w
0 - 2 UJ · UJ (/) a:
^ ~., . . .~
~
~.
.-.
\
~
~"'..
t-~.
~~.
1,0
c
co
0:
>.
...
'ii)
c:
Q)
a
.
-.
./
.
./
./
..."",-
--.-. ~
~
i:-"'o
~~o
-tO~~
e
l-
e
~
z
~
-
tn
IU
a
.
'.
i
,/ UJ
Z
o
N
Z
LYO
z-
-....
...J()
LLlUJ
0=.-
o:~
XCt
(/)n.
....'
. ~
. .
.
I,
1/
,
/1'
O~
W&AI
(f)(t
O~
G.z
00
(t_
el...
Z
IU
...
IU
(t
,.4
,
/'
,,/
,
..'
,
/
/ ,../
'/ /!-/ ,
// ,'~ ,r"~' ./
,/'// .. /. .;1 ~o:: // ;'8 ~; ///
/ / /Q,,~ .0: ~ ./
/. Q2 / "
/' "g ,/ '"".
/~-_.. -~~ __---.L'
.'
I' .
,,-
"
to
-
rn
co
...-
0) c::
c:
:0 0
::) .,.. QI
"0 en 00
c: .,.. CO
c > c::
J!! ..-f .r-f
'E "t,1 . CU
::) . '.... ..0 ,..
;:S. Q
Q) CI)
- 41
0
.s::::. "'0 QJ l'
~ <Uti)
>
c: .0
- ' .... ..
oj!! Q..Qf
L...'- e u,
Q) c:
.o;j .... ~
EI.O
;j"'- u~
c:M 0 ><
mi .... 0
o~ ,..
,.... Q.'
J-x 41. e.
tI Q) U CU
....
CO 41
o..J.4
u CU
:So
0 0
CO
.-..t OJ
....
401<
Q..
CU c:
(J 0
>:..-f
ell u )
C
~ CU )
a:. 401
Q. cu ,
-~ . ..
QJ ,(
.401 "0 N .
... . QI .,....
O. (I) " ,)
0.0
41 0.."
ac: 0 QI .
So. ,.. D
Ca...,..
0 =' -
.,.. cr "I
u . OJ
CO "0 .... n
c:: CU
.... ...... ",.
uCU 0 :!J
0.o"-f
41 CO
Q~ (I) 0
c::
000 0 ~
C CI) .rot -
..... fo-4 U C
r:: cu
or )( .... >
W N <II. ='
to- ,.... u
~ 0...... ~
\..0 ~ ::2 ~
z<c .. (,j
_~~':l4J'~~.:~.. -'
(,..l
~
r
!
..
00000
'ltCOCO...-co
...- ...-
>.
-
'(ij
c:
Q)
o
I I I I I
0001.00
COO)M M
c
... ...-C\lM'lt1.O
L... L... L... L... L...
C 00000
"0"0"0"0"0
a 'E 'E 'E 'E 'E
/' 00000
Z uuuuu
.... ~ .... ..... .....
g c: c: c: c: c:
Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)
- EEEEE
tn Q.Q.Q.Q.Q.
00000
1&1 Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)
>>>>>
a Q)Q)Q)Q)Q)
00000
'1
...-..
.
a..
>
....
~
.J
W
(J
a:
~
....
:)
o
..... '. .
r
T -'T
~~~f1~~f(tJ~~:'V';~"(;',~'7t ;"'3;i!;~~;'~':'7"?0"L '.,. '~'f" "
\
..,.
~..~...: ~"''','~~''''.'. .', '.
. '. 'i.~~ '. .~ .,~.'
..,".
,:' " ....
. ~ .... .~.::~ . ", ':.
:.. .;: .. '..
.....
... ..
~ . '~"
," ."" .,:-'
. '.:~::\.<~;. ",' .
....
.... .:
....\... .
,.' ........
,'/' t,'
':.
'"0 .
. : :."
.........
. . .... ,"..: "\
: !
'.' .:,',"
,";
',,::
'.
:':' ,":.........
. ".
~.'. .
~'. ~.
-\ . '.
. ,
',~. :",-.
.... .
", ~I"
......
. . ;
" -
. ..
':
;.
.;
.f ~
.' ..--.
to',
~.
,. .. ,:..
...:.
..
".
..
~
.
..
,
.
.
(,
.
.
..
o
:;.. .....\~'. '" ':"
I. .T.r:... .. .>.;.:. ..'.
':,':'
:' ~'.:: .... .
.'-of...:.....
. .... . .
r. .~
..
,-,'
t,
--
v
......
I
--
,,:',tt;V:~ ;~
........:,.;::.~:..
.,':1.:.:q'>,..
......
D..
:~r;,::z", "~'
"""',1( ~:"
'~ ,~'.
.. ._.
~. ~.
...... "1;1
.z... ~
111.11. ....
:s~....
D..III .CI:
E..- ...
.. iit....
~..... % ..1-
WUD.
>.ct au
Ia. ......w
Cc.Z
~o
wU
t- oa.
en
cc z
:e cc
....
'Q.
I.U
I-
--
en
.' "
:.' ", .:. .,'. :::. \t.
. ~~: .: ~;..:',:" '..
'.' .,
.:~
..........
00
00
NN
t1S~
.....'llt
........
.8'"
E.8
Q)E
-Q)
Q.u
Q) Q)
(/)C
CC
WW
(/)(/)
55
WW
0::0::
.....
en
en
..... .....
~eno
.....eno
...enN
.! ~ N~
Ern.....
Q) ::s Q)
u 0) c:
Q) ::s ::s
Cct..,
CCC
WWW
(/)(/)(/)
555
wWUJ
0::0::0::
.... ,
."'..
..... ..' ,':';' '';'.
'~j~1!~t~;{..,::(\i~,\1f)' '" < :,::'
].s ..~. ....;.., ...........r.; ... , ..
& . ..:'.:.' '.'" ... .:..:;;i.~.~.::...:...:
. . .
. .
':. '.""
. ..
'. ...., ..... ...... .
',. )'..:...:i...(.. ~ ..n~:. '. ~. .
....... c;t
:" ~~~, ,
'.,........:"".,....
: ..,.., '"
. .~..
. '. (II)
:. .. .
"
j Z.... ..\
0:
; ,!.
.X
..W
.:.. ..
~.
.:. t;t
.0
.(/)
W
CC
v.~., '.. ..
.. .
. .,.
, .. ..
. '.
. ."
.~
:
~
It.
-
Cr
-
.'
....
.' ,",'
'j
..'
Q.
~--
.0%
u.l0
1-0:
-Uj
'!Z
....~
~a:
a: a:A
o .oit
. L&.. cn".O
Q &LI.lIJ
~ .>1- I
.~ 12 :
. - I
~ .~..J .~
. cr~ ~
. Q. (.)0
!'>> ct .
~9
eLl.
%<
-
".
....
/'
/"
/~
,/
,~.~
///.-../
~
. ',"
'.. . '..~: ... .~
. ..,.'~: :.:.: :.:;;:: .
....:.-::;..' '.~~~:~:~:.....,.
~ .. .. '.' ~
", .~'f .~'; '''::''
.. "
~ .# .: : ~~~
:':: ..; :..;.;.:';.:;,. . '.
,.'
. .
..~ .
. '....
. ..
.
....~.... '.
.~ ,':
0" .:'... "
'" .:,....
. 'i '.
a:
oW.
Z'
.....
0:
.~
(.) ~<
.Z...,. C
. -:e:r 0:
.. ffi.o
: ~z ...J
>.2.WLL
IW'\... " .
.....- ."'~
caz
. w.CI.Q 0
...Z.~ <
Z.ifll <C IJ.J
w~ a: al
(1)2 '0
w..o.O
. axle. a: z
Q. CJO~
'A (J 0..:.
'If' ~
.~.SO
~aQ.
CIa:
:1:9
LL'
<(
"',
.
I'.
:-i".
-.
.
.en,
w
'J-
-c.
-
i......
\iii"
>0
~CIJ
Q'H/l
Ulv~
a:c
~
~'CI)
CL (I).
o.
II:
'"
-
.'
.
o
o
N.....
r-1
~.~
""'r')
::>
(/)<
.0
t-.~
Wo
~~
(/) .
(I)
~~
ex> CD
<
."
~.
.....
(/)<
o~
~o
n
. '.
. "~
........
00
00
NN
r1S ~
....~
....
~ ~
!CD
E-9
CD;
Q.CJ
CD CD
Cl)C
cc
ww
CI)CI)
~~
0::0::
.....
0)
0)
.... ....
~O)o
.... 0) 0.
~ 0) N
CD.... ~
.Q .... N
Ell)....
CD ~ CI)
CJ C) c:
CD ~ ~
C4(-,
CCC
www
Cl)CI)~
-->
[ij[ijw
0::0::0::
~-
.-.....
/;.
..,. -' , ,..,.--' ,
.' ". ,.".-'
.....-- -'- .
./,
.. .
/;'.
"
k .~
r:-:=~ '
I I
~.-
.J'....
.'.
....,..
r
.C:
.t
...
.,...'...~\r
\'1 "_""" .
\\':I.~_~'~.~ '.~ ~..'. ~
/
,.
~ '
;;\. I ,/
,/'
/
. .,
~ "
.~
", 0,
.. ~,. '"
-. .... c:
...1 ..... S Q
:I ......... >,
~ --::
... "." -
::J ~ '" .~
~ Q" ~
...t! ...ts
... c: 0" ...
" .~ ~ ~ .~
"t: 11::. ~
l~ .s
o:a,,~ ~
~::: ~'~Q
::tI ..... ..
"'.......~II:: 0
~ . ~ i o. ~.
~"I: -..
:;0'" ~:t ...
'- ~l .~ 0 .0_
~. .c:....
'... ~ ... .~
~ <3 .'0- ~ "
'0-......... '"
~ .~ "tS ~
~ '" :a ~ ~
31:":1_"1::
... ~ ~ -::::1 ~ ".
:::Qa...~C",
" .. ... .~ e- ~
e ;;: .>. '" .. ,
... '":1 .-. ~ t:s .. ,
i-:;:: "::I"'it~Cl.~
".....~..."::Il::"::Ic:t1i
~ ..... ... c:.... c:t ._"
~.. '\0.... "1:1 .....::
l:'I a t: ~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~..~
.~ ..:: ~ ~ ~ ... - .... ..
... '" "Q '-.. :: ".::"io!!
l:'I .. "'. " " 0() ... ...
.. ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ .9 t ~
':WI. ~:: ~'::" '" .. ~
.. ""!'";) "-. ""::I.. :)~,
... ~ .. .~... ';::... Q,",-
-s=:..~~........
:I :
-== ;;
- -
.:::... .
..
I:
.9
...
&:
"
.~
'"
"
~
~
::tI
~
~
I::
~
"
I::
...
-
"
~ ~
-.. .c:.
U .~
~
.9 Q
~ :a
... '. ~
..5 .;; .~
.. =>>- ~
~
~.... ~
:t '. ~
~:.'; ~
t
~
v
"
e
t:
~
...
-":
... ~l
1:.. 1 ~.....! ~
.~ ~~~"
h ::: "3"; n ;-
~ . I ~.;! ..; ~ ,~
t: .-.\. _ "'..,. ~ :: ~
t1Q :- ~~:a~";
":. :- "...... ....
.!"I 0 ... i~~~~
~ E ~~. ~:" '"' " "
.s'~ 1lO" :;~-.
'S a ~ 1 -. ~ ~
' 1! '! ~ 1! .:s. ClI: 0 r .. c:
a Q ~ .... .." ~ ~ :: ~'Q
.... ':".9~..... -t i:"j! '" ~
C:J" ~ c,~ 0 I: ... ~ _.. 5 ..
- ~~.... ~ Q ~... 0
~ ~ RO. '.:!_ ;; l:I... !:l. "'..... ;.;
O ."-" ... ~.. ~ 6e--.
"... ,,:i'. c: ~ ~'e'" .5 ...
l;'" I: -, "'- i .:. ::; '::
~::. C:J Q -: 1 Q 1 ~ 1.. .'i1 ~
. I:,~ .... == ; ..s _ .... C:J Q " ~
t. e ~"Q l 'c. ~ \:1: ~ .. ~
~!l '~I i! ~ ] .~ ~ t ~ g
"" ~~~...",~~-,,~
~ :5 - 2, 11 ~ " 1: ~ ~
...::- :"::....'::_,,::...~~
.. g .;,.... ~ ~ .:. .... :) ~ Q'-
~ ~ ~ ..:;. ~ :s ;00.. -oJ I: ~ :: ~
'- :)........~ -r::ij..
'S" ":! ''''::" ~ C "::I ~ ~ .. ~
'=''';: ":2~~~~g~":I"::I~
;:. ~So()"'''::I-J...:::''::I~
':.l'~"::Io~~,,-. O':lt:"
"':1 .~ l: .. t .. ~::: ':: ::: lie ~ c:
:: .. .!:! 011... ~ " ., ~ ....l: '..
.....~--., ....u-..."
lie I:I..~ - '::l l>o :.. ~: ~ ~ t: ~ ~ ~
:: ~' ~~'" ~ ~ g .... ~ oS .~ .. e
.;; :: .~:.::: ~ '" ~ :-0 -. _ ~ ~ ~ _
~ ~ ~ ~ ~.~.... ~... .
i:t ~ ...; ::tI ,
.
.
.
. .
. . . .
.
.
-.- -._~
--.~~,..~
_..~~ .
.. '...-
-
-~
a.
>-
f-
-
~~
· t.V.
i;...
".
~t.
1-0
/--
.
~()
~v.
~,_..
'..
. .:~... ..
/.
.
'/
.
:/
>-
~
C
~
~
::::>>
en
1&1
en
::::>>
a
z
C
..I
/
W
en
:::::>
o
z
~
...\i
,
.
I-
Z
W
()
a:::
W
a..
en
W
a:::
()
<(
ON
0;0
<0..-
en
'0
c:
cu
i
~~
a:::E
<(.g
en
w'Q
I-cu
~~
~
~
1/./
co"":":
cri~~
l()N(Y')
B
~
en
c:
Q)
0.
o
W i
I- 0.
-CUcu
en Q) 0
Or.;. en
cu"O
z"Oc:
<l Q) cu
..J 0.-
a.. .Q ,!;
Q) cu
:::::> a> ~
-JQ<(
~
~
L5
a:::
<(
./
00
"":0;
~lt)
~
z
:::::>
I-
en
W
:::>
C>
-J
W
I-
o
J:
u.
o
a::: en
w~
CO::Jj!!
~ 0)'2
:::::> ,!; ::J
(;)~
Z._ Q)
-JJjz
~
~
ifl }"'~
teen
j!!~
,- c:
5::J
COlt)
,......-
..-('1)
~
+--
'2
::J
(Y')
0)
~
II::
CIl
iii
Qj
'5
.c
L..
.E
>.
Qj
>
'iij
:J
~
II)
-
'c
-J:J
~~
Oeo
1-;
u
:J
o
.E
.
,
I
I
l
t
(
r
,........
/
./
/' ./
./
/
.
,.
-..
.....~
.:
'~ - ,
'" ",,,.,-
~
.~. .
;,< , , , , ; i".:1r~r0~~
. '. , ..... ; ..... . .,.jI,.f~~<t~
',. ; .',0 ..
., .t . '~'. ..~~)...
,.
I
I
t
..~ ,', ~ .i.'~
~
../....
..
. . .
~:' ..:
,
~ :;...
0 , '.
~ f/J f/J f/J
~ ~ ~
- "Co,
'2 [ m m
0. 0. .,
:J f/J f/J f/J =
co C\I ""'" ('t) .:to ..J'~~ .
0 ,.
""'" ~ LO ~. '",
ct> r-.. ""'" co
m
~~
(f)"O
zfa
We.
a::>
w
f0-
r/)
en
W
(J
~
en
C!) "0
z!a~
~C:Sm
0:: mOo
~ ~~
a..CC
LLQ)Q)
Oc:o
m m
0:: E '(0
WQ)>
mQ..<(
~
:::>
z
I
...J
~
o
I-
g ,
Z ..J ,
III. g
" ~I
III>
.... en I
~---- ~_..
.
41Q)
C)
C
~
-
f/J
-
'2
:J
~
Q)
1::
co
f/Jf/J~~~ ::s
- - ,- ,- ,- CT
'2,'i 5 C 1;;. ~.-.
z
o
~
i:
IX
(.)
w
c
I
I i
~ .' .(
~ >;
(,) ~. ;."
:) a: 0
a: c c'
... 0
~ r C1
III C c.:s
l/) (J ..%
o U).-
0. .~. tn
o C x
g: ..I ""
~:,;
:'.=:
. ....
~,.,
,".
,-.:.
I ....
~"."
~::..~
.9
(5
C
i
tS
2
-
f/J
C
8
.._'~,rr:,,:'Tl]!',~_
.w
'a:
:;)
...
(,)
:;)
a:
...
~. II)
(,) C
· Z
a: t:
w ~
~ .X
~ W
;..
. :0. ~
.'.
.~. }';I':~:
>.
a:
., a
o z
~ :),
0... a.. ~
2. ...
.~ ~. 0 ! ! ~:
~ \II ~ :) C . .5
~ CD a:. e III' (,,)
'0 o. Ii- Z III Z
a: ... o. o. ~ 2'
Q ... Z (,) ~. ~
~ ~2 i ;c N
2 m".~ t ~'j
~~ i;(t2
Goo. glUC
C)
~
~
.cr
:
Q.
w
II)
o
Q.
o
f
)(
><
t )
I I
t
I
.
r.
.
. ., \
.
I
.t
....
~
"
~
\
\
\
~
\
'"
;
I
~
~
~
"'I
.,:,1,
I"',
."1
~":l
. ~
.'
.',
:.':':.
I'~'.l
,,~.~
:\~~1
~
"
','
,
~
..
---_.~
Board of County Commissioners
RESOLUTION NO.
-2002
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY. FLORIDA CONCERNING ROGO EXEMPTION ISSUES
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has given due consideration
to the ROGO exemption issues described in the attached memorandum from
County Attorney James Hendrick to Growth Management Director Tim McGarry;
and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners finds that the matters set
forth in the said memorandum accurately state the position of the Board of
County Commissioners; now, therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, FLORIDA that the attached memorandum is hereby APPROVED as the
position statement of the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe
County, Florida, at a Special Meeting of said Board held on the 12th day of
February, 2002.
MayorCharles McCoy
Mayor Pro Tem Dixie Spehar
Commissioner Murray Nelson
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Nora Williams
(SEAL)
Attest: DANNY L.KOLHAGE, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
By
Mayor IChairperson
Deputy Clerk
jdresROGOx
memorandum
To: Tim McGarry, Director
Growth Management Division
From: Jim Hendrick, County Attorney
Re: ROGO exemption, Hawk's Cay DR!
Notwithstanding the Memorandum to you from Karen Cabanas dated
October 18,2001, concluding that the Hawk's Cay DR! approval of 444
units are vested, questions continue to be raised concerning the status of
those units. Most recently, the BOCC received a letter from the respected
Environmental & Land Use Law Center, contending that "the development
units for which vested rights or other recognition are sought simply do not
exist." The letter contends that the previous approval is not "unexpired"
under either Section 9.5-120.4 (g), Monroe County Code, or under DR!
vesting law. In support of that conclusion, the author suggests that the
previous approval "expired upon being amended in 1996". Having carefully
considered that argument, I have concluded that the opinion previously
stated by Karen Cabanas is valid, and that the previous approval did not
expire upon amendment.
First, as to the issue whether the units are vested under DR! law, it should be
noted that nothing in the October 18, 2001 Memorandum found the units to
be vested under statutory or common law standards. The Memorandum
refers to the project as "vested" only in the limited sense utilized in LDR
Section 9.5-120.4(g), i.e.,
(g) Vested rights: Landowners with a valid, unexpired development
of regional inlpact approval granted by the county prior to July 13,
1992 shall be exempt from the residential ROGO system.
Thus, it would be more accurate to describe the Landowner (rather than the
units) as ROGO-Exempt (rather than "vested"). Viewed in that light, the
issue is clear, and the necessity for a lengthy vesting analysis is obviated.
Does the Hawk's Cay landowner have a valid, unexpired DR! approval?
Yes. To contend that an approval "expires" when it is amended is to defy
the plain meaning of "amendment". Was DR! approval granted prior to July
13, 1992? Yes; subsequent amendment does not vitiate the original
approval, because the statutory DR! process requires subsequent
amendments to be measured against, and not to deviate substantially from,
the impacts assessed and authorized in the original impact approval.
Accordingly, Hawk's Cay Investors, as the landowner having a valid,
unexpired DR! impact approval predating the 2010 Comprehensive Plan, is
ROGO-exempt.
The above legal analysis finds support in the policy on which ROGO is
founded. As noted in the Memorandum, "At the time the hurricane
[evacuation model] calculations were made, the property was assumed to
have 444 units. Therefore, the reclaiming of these units does not impact
hurri.cane evacuation calculations, as both ROGO and the hotel moratorium
are based on a hurricane evacuation model which assumes these units
already exist." As you know, I served as a consultant to the County in the
drafting of the Comprehensive Plan, and specifically with respect to ROGO.
Dwelling unit data compilation utilized in the hurricane evacuation model
were prepared by Price Waterhouse, utilizing 1990 census data augmented
by calculations of, inter alia, unoccupied units that hadn't been counted in
the census because they were under construction, subsequently permitted, or
vested but unbuilt. In the latter category were the then-unbuilt Hawk's Cay
DR! units. The ROGO base unit count on which Comprehensive Plan
Objective 101.2 and Policies 101.2.1, et seq., rests, includes all 444 Hawk's
Cay units authorized under the original DR! approval.
DEED OF CONVEYANCE
MONROE COUNTY TO FKAA
THIS DEED, made this 12th day of February, 2002, by Monroe County, Florida, party
of the first part, and Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Inc., party of the second part,
WITNESSETH
That the said party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of $10 to it in
hand paid by the party of the second party, receipt where of is hereby acknowledged, has
granted, bargained and sold to the party of the second part, his or her heirs and assigns
forever, the following described lan~d lying and being in Monroe County, Florida:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A parcel of land on Crawl Key Number 5, being a
portion of Government Lot 3, Section 26, Township 65 South, Range 33 East,
Monroe County, Florida, more particularly described as fo/lows:
COMMENCING at the intersection of the centerline of U.S. Highway Number
One with the West line of Section 35, Township 65 South, Range 33 East;
thence N 67. 04' 07" E on said centerline of U.S. Highway Number One, a
distance of 1494.57 feet to the intersection with the centerline of Banana
Boulevard; thence continue N 67. 04' 07" E on said centerline of U.S.
Highway Number One. B distance of 697.54 feet to the intersection with the
Southerly prolong~ion of a rock road at Crawl Key Number 5; tho.;nce N 09'
23' 05" W on said prolongation, a distance of 119.32 teet to the intersection
with the Northerly right-ot-way line of said U.S. Highway Number One as
laid out and in use; thence S 67' 04' 07" W on said right-of-way line, a
distance of 25.72 feet to the Southwest corner ot an Access Easement;
thence N 09' 23' 05" W on the West line of said Access Easement, a distance
01 566,58 leet to the beginning 01 a curve, concave to the East and from
which a radial line bears N 80' 36' 55N E; thence Northerly on the arc 01
said curve having a radius 01 1771.54 leet, a central angle of 11. 28' 55", an
arc distance of 355.01 leet to a point 01 tangency; thence N 87. 54' 10" W,
20.00 leet to the Point 01 Beginning; thence N 02' 05' 50" E, 642.51 teet; thence
N 87' 54' 10" W , 482 leet more or less to the Mean High Water Une; thence
meandering along the said Mean High Water Une in a Southwesterly and
Southeasterly directions lor a distance 01 761 leet more or less to a point
which bears N 87. 54' 10" W Irom the Point 01 Beginning; thence S 87' 54'
10" E, 351 feet more or less back to the Point of Beginning.
Said lands lying in the City of Marathon, Monroe County, Florida and
containinll 7.1 acres, more or less.
Together with an access easement more particularly described as follows:
EASEMENT: A parcel of land on Crawl Key Number 5, being a portion
of Government Lot 3, Section 28, Township 85 South, Relnge 33 East,
Monroe County, Florida, more particul3rly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the intersection of the centerline 01 U.s. HighwlJY Number
One with the West line of Section 35, Township 65 South, Range 33 East;
thence N 67' 04' 07" E on slJid centerline 01 U.S. Highway Number One. lJ
distlJnce of 1494.57 feet to the intersection with the centerline ot BlJnBnB
Boulevard; thence continue N 67' 04' 07" E on said centerline of U.5.
Highway Number One, a distance 01 697.54 leet to the intersection with the
Southerly prolongation 01 a rock road at Crawl Key Number 5; thence N 09'
23' OS" W on said prolongation, a distance 01 119.32 feet to the intersection
with the Northerly right-ol-way line 01 said U.S. Highway Number One as
laid out and in use; thence S 67' 04' 07" W on said right-of-way line, a
distance of 25.72 feet to the Southwest corner of an Access Easement;
thence N 09' 23' 05" W on the West line of said Access Easement, a' distance
01 566.58 leet to the beginning of a curve, concave to the East and from
which a radial line bears N 80' 36' 55" E; thence Northerly on the lJrc of
said curve having a radius of 1771.54 leet, a central angle 01 11' 28' 55': an
arc distance of 355.01 feet to a point 01 tangency, said point also being the
Point 01 Beginning; thence N 02' OS' SON E, 120.00 leet; thence N 87" 54' JON W,
20.00 feet,' thence S O~ OS' 50" W, 120.00 feet; thence S 87" 54' 10" E, 20.00 feet
back to the Point ot Beginning. Said lands lying in t.'2e City of Mare-thon, Monroe
County, Florida.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the party of the first part has caused these presents to be
executed in its name by its Board of County Commissioners acting by the Chair or Vice
Chair of said board, the day and year aforesaid.
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
By
Mayor/Chairman
Deputy Clerk
D. \
FEB-12-2002 11:56 AM WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
P.01
\""'o'.,~~~L~
, \J <:;. p ",,-rl !
~..~(- J"~ 1
'1 L f~VL,.
~".-
p -}.
William L. Paul
711 Palmer Way
Melbourne, Fl.32940
February 12,2002
Monroe County Board of Commissioners
Suite 410
2798 Overseas Highway
Marathon,F1.330S0
Re: Funding for wastewater collection set for hearing Febrwuy 12, 2002 at 5:0 p 11,
To: The Board of Commissioners:
I, William L. Paul, on oat~ states as follows:
My wife and I arc the owners of three properties at Hawk's Cay Resort. On Dt ;1; 1I1:!)Cl1' 8.
2001 a letter of objection was filed with the Monroe Planning Board, a copy i~ ~I' 1,:Iit:he i
and included herein as Exhiblt "A",
I am unable to attend the hearing in Marathon today, I was present at the Plam ir II:
Commission hearings in December. January and February 6, 2002.
Attached, hereto as Exhibit "B" and included herein, is a summary of events f .~'I 11 : 98,
to date of precedent matters relating to this pending issue, which, on informat >r ,;lIld
belief I believe to be a fair and accurate summary of chronological events de . (:' ibl~d
therein.
Tn addition to the objections previously raised. we strongly oppose the waste\\.I'I, :1'
proposal on the following reasons,
1, The proposed agreement is an agreement to agree in the future which is VOl. J,
unenforceable. and does not constitute a contract under the law ofFJorida, th(' f1, :I'~~emmt
leaves all essential elements to be agreed on in the future, which is not allowe I ' lI1de:t the
law,
2,The notice provisions under the Due Process Clause of the V.S, Constitutiol :!1 rid Tbe
Florida Constitution have been violated as no notice of wastewater agreemen1. .I m,e b::en
given, A copy of the notice given is attached and included herein as Exhibit ". 1':
3.The planned addition of46 units is in complete violation of the ROGO prm~i l:I~IS. rhe
DCA has stated that in a letter dated December 10,200 I to the Planning Corn r:, :; H'on
The facts contained in exhibit "B" clearly show that the 1986 approved plan' "(;, I t;~'ot
allowed to be continued, and in fact is not "vested" but is merged into the 26! I:: ill'!. 1Jut
the resort requested. In fact the resort has waived the right to claim vesting w l~ Iii
accepted the "269" plan with 538 bedrooms. 538 baths and 269 kitchens,
4. The wastewater project must be "hid and spec" because the agreement call. 1 :,r the
property to be taken over by the county, Sole source is not allowed,
1 urge the Board of COmmi$lllionerlil to protect the l/af~ty of res:ident51 and vl5lit, ,rl i~l:ld 'ote
against the proposed agreement and all attachments thereto.
FEB-12-2002 11:56 AM WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
P.02
f ~"~I.-
FEB-12-2002 11:57 AM WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
P.03
I R "~: IJ
\:.~.. \, H\ ','.:1'\'\ r
, I
711 Palmer Way,
Melbourne, FI. 3294 I
Dec. 8,2001
Planning Commission,
Monroe County,
Suite 410,
2798 Overseas Highway
Marathon, Fl, 33050
Re: Amendment to Modi1Y Hawk's Cay Development
Public Hearing December 12th, 2001, at 10:00 l.m,
To the Planning Commission:
We are the owners of three properties at Hawk's Cay Resort, 2012 and 6013 Ma:J;, VjJh
Drive. and 7067 Harbor Village Drive (plus dock). We purchased these propert'~,! pIle.
construction under a plan for 247 units. Since that time, many modifications ha"~
already been made to the plan as originally represented, The developers and the :::: i(~rt
are now asking for a new modification which would consist in the building of al1. II: II;!::. 28
units in addition to staffing quarters of 18 units, We strongly oppose this new
construction for the following reasons:
1. These units were not in the original plan of247 units, This new reqU!.,1 i.~ 111
violation of the implied agreement to limit the development to 247 W .:: .
2. The existing villas in the rental program are not and have not been. utJ.i l::d to
reasonable levels of occupancy, i.e. Jess than 50% occupancy. At pre .l~: lI:lhe
levels of occupancy have not yet reached 40% annually.
3. ROGO has created the loophole that creates the artificial market for t i!
proposed development and is therefore not the intent ofROGO. The Ir f::r, t '01'
ROGO is to limit and control growth and this loophole proposal enco :1': d'~s
sprawl.
4, The Resort's business reason appears to be to fund the construction 0 II!::
staffing quarters (present units have reportedly been condemned) wid d :.;!
proceeds from the sale of these 28 units. The developer's interest is ( "i j';)lm
Neither of these reasons is in the interests of either the Homeowners ( :
Hawk's Cay or of Monroe County,
5. We believe that the Resort complex is presently overbuilt, particularl, tl,': i.uelL
fronting Tom's Harbor and the spa units, The construction of the add :i, m,::d
28 units on land not fronting water win be an additional blight on the
f,'!nviron,"l"'nt.
6. We are also concerned that this opens the door to further construction.
__I?~~j~cts_c>.n th~.Htt!eremainin~ open spaces on the property. The Res, rl
owners nave always represented that they are In a partnerstllp W1tt'l tl1e
Homeowners and yet the individual homeowners were not even infom .~: nf
FEB-12-2002 11:58 AM WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
P.04
this new construction project prior to receiving public notice from 11 ,c) ] /'I:'~
County,
We urge the Planning Commission to deny the request to build the additional 2 ; .1 nL~,
We hAve no ohiection to the reoUeAt to huild hOIJ~in't,fnU~c~JtAfr
William and Carole Paul
FEB-12-2002 11:58 AM WPAUL CPAUL
. 321 242 8971
Summary of Hawk's Cay Resort Expansion and Community Involvement
P.05
J:'.,:tgt J Vi J"t
1':, ':, '~I , ~ \ 1 I 8 .. I
An Information Guide to Duck Key In the florid, ~I; IJII
SUMMARY OF HAWK'S CAY EXPANSION AND ~j :'MMUNITY
INVOLVEMENT
For residents new to Duck Key or who are unfamiliar Ii l'le'VE .nt8 or
have been unab'e to attend meetings and hearings Ie II: i',!~ up to the
present expansion. a description of the pertinent histc ,.:~ ':r,:>rn 1986 to
the present is provided below -
This summary uses original documents from Duck KE l PI'::>IpHrty
Association records and 'etters describing nagotistior ~, ::~' tho!
involved parties around Lake Lualle In 1986,
In brief, the expansion plan of the Hawk's Cay Resol : 11!9:!il gf>ne
through three different configurations since 1988:
1. the origina' 1986 Development of Regionallr 1/: lilet
which focused on building conference and tenn~1 tlsloiun
suites and North and South Harbor suites -
2, a 1995 modification proposa' which placed fl l.I' ~,tc>r,
condominiums built by Dav Tech Co, along Du,h 1'(Jfty
Drive and the marina area with 25 luxury suite~ 1:11 be t uilt
along Lake Lucille and the cana', and asked fo. ,i! n
extension of time,
3. and the Pritam Singh building p'an which aln .fDr two
story Conch type houses along Duck Key Oriv<< , .I'lj!:
Marina, and lake Lucille and the nearby canal T r'l:!l plan
also required an extension of time to 2004,
1985
http://www.duckkeyonline.com/duck_key.community/duck_key_archives/resortexp.l1 ,i';:IO_,. 2/12/0:,
FEB-12-2002 11:59 AM WPAUL CPAUL 321 242 8971
.Summary of Hawk's Cay Resort Expansion and Community Involvement
P.06
l-'a~e L. OJ I',
Hawk'. Cay has 156 rooms and 22 two bedroom sui :!! I c: n
approximately 60 acres of land.
1985..86
Declaration of Covenants 1 Conditions and Restridic1' filed by
Hawk's Cay
V\1th resort expansion on the horizon, Yacht Club Islll' l:l-esidents
adjacent to the resort and lake Lucille seek protecti, n 1, j:ror' the
resort and propose that a number of restrictions be I. f!' ; rJ i:i at ad with
Hawk's Cay. Residents around Lake Lucille (Steves I:: '1~1:3S, Lawes,
Oldam, VVi'son, and others) work toward a resolutiof. /'I i=ehruary Of
1986, Hawk's Cay agrees to covenants, conditions l.r, j restrietions
after negotiating with DKPOA and residents around h ! I..ak 9 Lucille
area. This Declaration filed by the resort with the Ccr ':~ is :>inding c r
all subsequent land ho'ders governed by the "protecf!1 :1" ema at
Hawk's Cay Resort, \NIth this agreement, the resort .1 n~,j()r
development project went uncontested. Documentslh IITI 1h 9t perioel
indicate that Duck Key islanders supported the HaVv,;i, Cay expansio
plan, In brief the mu'ti-paged Declaration provides tI f!1 :
1. Hawk's Cay asserts its desire to protect thE I:: l. ill.tt
enjoyment, high quality and residential integrit. III: I:he
residentia' subdivision adjacent to the resort.
2. Hawk's Cay asserts its desires to develop ~ n: "I'Iaintain
its resort property in a manner compatible anc: t:1 :!rlefjc~ial
to the high quality of the residential subdivislo )i; aJ:lj;::u:ent
to resort property.
3. Construction and development wilt be limit! ,(I ':CI hetel,
resort and residentia' development inc'uding f. .c I i.les
conference and meeting rooms, swimming po 1;1, :glnd other
accessory uses appropriate to a resort
4. A protected area is established which limit: . t ' f.l type of
clo...oJop".,~",~..~ anal "'-"".""'0 OoftClllin .0,", rl' ,I'.1,...lG I
activities. Charter boats. rental boats, recreati II" lill da I use
boats. marina offices, stores, restaurants, bar, :11.lbli(:
entertainment or other similar commercial acti . d' i I:~r; al '9
prohibited .
5. Sound levels produced within the protectel . ,; .';ala f:hall
not exceed those normally acceptable in resic?1 llil:id
neighborhoods
6, Live-aboards and houseboats are prohibit<< :1 nl tl:JH
bttp:/lwww.duckkeyonline.com/duck_key_communitY/duc~key_archlveslresort_ex] i.' ";1I)J1 .., 2112/; 2
FEB-12-2002 11:59 AM WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
-.J ...."...""UJc:'lll
P.07
P !ge 3 of. f
marina I Lake Lucille site.
7. ActiVities between 10'30
permitted If they interfere . p.m. and 7:00 8.m :11 rl!~ n!of
the residential O$lghbo,.,,: the peace and e .,i.: 1I"l'ne"t of
8. Restriotions are placed 0 refu .
and boat sewage. n 88, dllCt1argel, .!If'~lJE'nt,
9, Oockside RuIee ,8nd PrtlCedUIll8 8" require.: "!'II8rtl/n
Loo ~uct and operation of vessels in the man'nal .:,' I. .dl g
UCtlle ,.. r,.'~
10, Fueling limitations are set
11. mangroves and other plant species are to b. I
~~~~ .
lro~icafl~ and rather propheticalfy. Yacht Club reslden: I . F.Hlr i_aka
LUCIlle tned but were unsuccessful in obtaining the foI' ."il'.rlg il'
October of 1985:
1. a 'i"-,itation exdusivefy to residential use for th i j il rid
bOrdenng the adjacent community
2. restrictions on building density and height in tt. ~ l!l'1I:'~1
zoned RU-3 Multiple - Family Residential adjacel:l /)
community
3, restrictions Of density and height in the area ZC~I tl1 RlI-
4 Townhouse Residential adjacent to the commu Ii! I'
4. maintenance of the canal and Lucille seawall S '>;'!lIi'lt if
woufd not deteriorate
5. stipulations on anchoring 1 and mOoring on othf ' . Illj:n
waterfront 'and
6. restrictions on the maximum days of docking p II' 1'I1,)fllh
7, restrictions on additional boat slips which woul I f!tc:vire
digging or excavation
Of note and particularly bothersome to the group was t"lli .C:ovlmant's
acknowledgement of the existence of a "marina" and a ,.1. ::iiF,..at'Kf
http://www.duckkeyonline.comlduck_key _.community/duck key.archiveslresort_expam .t) l ",_ 2/12/02
FEB-12-2002 12:00 PM WPAUL CPAUL 321
. ,:)wnmary ot HaWk's Cay Resort Expansion and Community Involvement
242 B971
P.0B
Pa ge 4 of J
zoning down the road 8S Destination Resort.
The group did get assurances and 8 guarantee that-II IrIi'k's Cay
would prohibIt undesirable elementS8Ueh 8S restaur.:'1 till ba rs, publil
entertainment. shoPl, stores I offices, boat storage,.li' d ,otr er
commercial uses such as charter boats in the protec3,,1 Meet
adjoining affected homes. The Yacht Club group waf i;l '!~I) SlJcceSSfUf
in obtaining prohibitions of auditory and visual nu;sar :':II!:I
Wllle the covenant did not contain all the elements s )/, 1;lht t y the
Yacht C'ub group, it seems apparent that the Yacht (II. b :~:rcup and
Duck Key accepted what was negotiated. The group' .' I q:>i:>ke Sparson,
I'8gretted that II we did not accomplish more. Howeve., mF:ho ut Our
effort, there would be no promise of a Covenant of a, l f!-c:r1:.'1
The Yacht Club group was not OPposed to the expan .jl: II', plen and
only wanted protections in the form of a Covenant ,ar:1 ;~~ Ilroups
spokeman is to be belieVed, the rest of Duck Key ger :alll:/lly 'lIiewed
the Yacht Club group's concerns about Lake Lucille E 1" tl'"~
residential community bordering the resort as " just 81 (I: !'lIi.tf
neighborhood dispute of small consequence. II
December 5, 1986
Hawk's Cay is granted preliminary approval by Monre : :::(;'l.lIn ty Zonin
Board to expand the resort as a DRI (Development 01 ri l:~;!j()r al
Impact). Board of County Commissioners grant apprc II: j f'n:
December 5, 1986; the development order becomes. f~ !!I:'::i'/EI Januar
25, 1987.
1986
Approved Expansion Plan - County approved resorts II: t::
Marina Villa Area
expanSion calfs for additional conference and comma, .::i l:I~Pllce plus
an additional 444 units (most one bedroom and some II. itC:::3) Nith a
tota1 of 564 bedrooms, At the north end of the resort, t I!! iV:a Ii 1a Villa
8re8,86 ( 2 bdrm.) suites were planned, Only twenty-t ~;III~I./ill :>e
COMPleted,
Duck Key Drive
Nlnety.six units along with a restaurant and stores wer ! ;,I~:inned
along Duck Key Drive facing Tom's Harbor.
Yacht Harbor aka lake Lucille area
bttp:l/www.duckkeyonline,COmJduck key_community / duck__ key.. archives/resortexparu. (I ~".. 2/12/02
FEB-12-2002 12:01 PM
WPAUL CPAUL 321 242 8971
. '._--",--y~....~ ........ ~VUUln"ULy .lUVUJvcmenr
P.09
Page 5 of . ~
Of particular interest to the residential community be ri: i::l/'irlQ the
retort, the plan called for eo South Harbor Guest su ~;!! Iii r.,.o und Lak,:;
Lucille and 48 luxury guest suites along the lake an.i :la:'1lil adjacer.'
to tho residential neighborhOOd, Between these and -:1': 1!II"d
Admin/stration building 96 Tennis Garden Suites we f.I! pl;:!',rted,
Administration Building and the existing tennis court '
Between administration and the tennis courts a 26/0 'I:: r:'i:~1
Conference Center one level above parking was plain :il~l. A"l
additional 60 bedroom wing will also be added to the I!' .''1.
1986
OKPOA Annual Meeting: Declaration of Covenants, . ::llllI:1Iti. >ns and
Restrictions on the Agenda presented th the membe,' n I :;i ;:1i9llts
1986 -1994
Economic conditions p'ay a part in HaWk's Cay only eli' '~'!etir'1g 22
two bedroom units in the Marina Villa area during this r:' :rl:;)l:t Ten
year limit On Hawk's Cay approval to expire in 199B n. il;; !!'QI5:ftating the
resort asking the Planning Board for an extension anc' ~; l "
modifications to meet market demands.
January 1995
OKPOA Annual Meeting
Don JOhnson Speaks to residents about resort develoj r'lli~nt at the
annual meeting, Initial plan calls for reconfiguration of,,:1 ;:~Uf
restaurant and conference facilities and more clustere : ,1'~lligl' for
units,
It ;s not until November 4th of 1996 that community 'e If ~ S :3,01 (2
Bdrm,) units will be located between Duck Key Drive a 1/; Torr's
Harbor in a 44 foot, four story flat roof building. Adjace 11.1,:) L.ake
Lucille and canal 25 luxury (3 Bdrm.) suites are planne j, A total of
114 more bedrooms than the Original 1986 plan is Pro"':11'9d,
October, 1995
http;//WWw.duckkeyonJine.com/dUCk..key..community/duck . k.ey __archivesJresort._expam .Ct l ." 2/12/02
FEB-12-2002 12:01 PM
321 242 8971
WPAUL CPAUL
'....-.......... wu... VVIWJJu.lJay InVOJvement
P. 10
Page 6 of !4
Notice Sent To Surrounding Property Owners
DUCk Key residents adjacent to resort notified of m. .(/, i,'~~:~ b9fore
Planning Board requesting changes in OR' by He
November 1. 1995
SerendipitoU8fy, a visit to Planning Boafd Office raie !l! tJI)"C:ems
about condo architecture, increase in numbers of bE ;, ::I~:me from
1986 plan, traffic, sewage treatment, Gte,
~per accoun!$ had Indicated fewer unita to b ' I ,,}j~ than In !h,.
1986 plan, but no mention was made of an increasE"! 114 addition"
bedrooms and bathrooms,
November 4, 1995.. All reSidents invited to meeting t~d:1 :m
November 4 at a reaident's home. Sixty- Six residentl ::: I'!ji,'fld,
Hurriedly, action committees are formed in preparatic ";! fol'; N,)vember
9 Planning Board meeting.
November 2 and 6 - OKPOA Board of Directors Mae I" <:: inc lISs
community concerns
November 8 - Phone calls by DKPOA to membershi~, lll'lr~ h Jndred
DUCk Key residents will attend the Planning Board mE f.1 "I!;"
November 9, 1995 - Meeting before Planrling Comr'ni ,.:H ')1", fe r
Modification and f.:'xtenSion of Hawk's Cay Expansion, P Ila'millg Soan
staff's report recommends Preliminary Approval with ( r;,' d.iti01S, but
no presentation is made nOr action taken because Hs' .r~ '1:1 Ca y asks
lor the hearing to be deferred in O/'der to meet with the (: :,n"m, mily
and address its concems,
November 17, 1995 - Hawk's Cay meets with commu,.d I jill~jd listens
to action group reports and concerns on design, dens Y [jj:lt skis,
security, traffic, boat ramp usage, sewage etc. Membe. ~;, ; if! Sl :rveYed
Don Johnson states he came to listen and will meet wi ."1 1)1,(pl )A's
Board
November - December, 1995 - January, 1996
Meetings - DKPOA Officers and/or Board meets with d!'1I 11 kJpe rs, witt
Planning Board staff, with Florida Dept of Environment. : ::'rrjl~a :tion tt
address concerns
http;//WWw,duekkeyon!ine,COlDlduek_,key__community/dUCk key atchivesfresort_ e~pans :".. ' ; ~12102
FEB-12-2002 12:02 PM
WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
.-- ~""'UUUllJlY lnVo/veme.nt
P - 11
Page? OJ 14
December 5, 1995
'nlbnnllfion P8Cket sent oot to membership for revl,.." "'I II a
~\I8Iopm~nt of COI1dominiums atlhe enfran<:e to 0 ,," ::'1(81' Dri\18
llcket IndlCatll how mlVor concems, I, e" archllactu I;; 'c,";; 1n '
~s/~, lleWage, fratrlc, security, Jilt ~s, boat remp "Ill~ Ie 'd~PIr! ;
lI1Ie ,een addl'll8sed to date, , BUIldIng redesigll a, ':1 'I '!4 toedroom
reduction are among the Sigllifocallt Changes presen "' I
December 1995
Presidents Message (newsletter)
bommunHy llIformed of meetIngs toward resolving is. ". Ii, ab >ut
archilecture, density, sewage, jet skis, boat ramp, ale ," ,,,'v
architectural rendering for COI1domllliums inclUded 111 I, >I: '''I' fo,' those
unable to attend meetings.
December 12,1995
DKPOA and Hawk's Cay . Open Meeting .. Ouck Kay F ", ;,',ell :s
New architectural rendering along with Memorandum ( :
Understanding
The understalldillg anivecf at between DKPOA and He f', 'slatu,:
1. HeR and the developer, Dev Tech Co, plan to :~;: r: SlttU:t
a maximum of 222 condominium units in 10 buildi .,!; ~il I")f
which 7 Will be located at the west Side of Duck K V !;JiVE!,
1 located at the south side of Greenbriar Road an .! . !
Jocated at the north side of Marina Villas,
2, HeR will Oonstruet a maximum 10,000 sq. ft,of; ~!I.!di
space at the west side of Duck Key drive.
3. HeR Will construct 15,000 sq. ft, of convention : ;~Ii 11:~f! a:
the resort complex.
4, HeR Will build 7,100 sq. ft, of recreation center in:' /;Joe'
at the west side of Duck Key Drive,
5, HeR will develop and sell single family Jots at ~t 4;1 ,
LUcille for the development of 25 homes. The maxII li, j'r
height of the buildings will be 2 stories and the des ';11 I
bttp;//WWW,duclckeyonline,OOlJJ!duck..~key _ community/duclcc~ key . ,archives/resort. expansi, '" .., 2J 12102
321 242 8971
12 "02 PM WPAUL CPAUL , 'I 1
FEB-12-2"02 '" --, "~'_"un ana Comml1llJty IWo veJnent
P. 12
>age 8 of 14
must be apProved by Hawk's Cay and revie\\ :1; I:IY
DKPOA
6. HeR will reeonfigure the roads on resort PI ":1: O'I"~'.
7, HCR will proVide a boat trailer/RV parking I fJi iit~m&een
from OLlCk Key Drive.
speCIFIC REQUESTS AGREED TO
1. HeR will provide &l long term lease (20 year .1
renewable for another 20 years at 8 COst of $1 ::;: r
100'X100' at the comer of Duck Key Drive and ~:; 'll'l:aonflriar
Rd. for the installation of a ''welcome booth". H~I;, !;,vjll
permit "hOOkup" of sanitation and electricity at ,(II d
weicome booth. HeR will provide a road turn a ~I J n-:1 as
ShOWn on exhfbit 2,
2, HeR will reconfigure the boat ramp to efimin, 1:1! tl.le J$e
DUck Key Drive as a 'aunch ingress and egresf , I :l(llib t 3,
3, HeR Willlalldscepe the east and west Side 0 ,: I,ll:;/< l:ey
Drive in aCCOrdanCe with general understandin,,~ :Ilg
attached at Exhibit 4. landscaping wffl meet or, :~I: ::t:l'3l:r
Monroe County standal'ds in effect at pennit tim .!,
4. HCR will adopt and enforce, to the best of itsi/: j'i'!y, 1he
jet ski restrictions as listed in Exhibit 5,
5. HeR Will attempt to obtain approval to install I 'll
operate a welcome booth on DUCk Key Drive at; ~.I' rrtaill
entrance to Sunset Island Villas for the purpose .,1
prOviding:
a. bridge safety fnformation for pedestrians ~II 11;1
motorists
b. trafflo information and guidance for vis/to. fi
and guests to the resort end reSidences
c, seCUrity for HaWk's Cay Resort, Sunset
Island Villas and the DUCk Key /'8sidences,
A pass through lane for public access will be pro" j ld
DKPOA will assist HeR in this effort if it is determ l~(V by
DKPOA and the Duck Key Security District Advisc~,1 1:3,)i~rd
that this will significantly improve PUblic safety anc 1:111:1
http://WWw,dUCkkeyOol1ne,COtn/duck_key,, community Iduck -key _ ""'hivcslrcsort_ cxpansi J:" " 2 IJ 2/02
FEB-12-2002 12:03 PM
321 242 8971
WPAUL CPAUL
. ,-.- -.- ~.........t.U.u~'y UJVUJV~ment
P. 13
E'age 9 of 4
security of the reSidential islands,
Any financial support from the residential islar ~I. ~:),. t,e
Operation of the welcome booth must be apprl1r' !,~ by the
Duck Key Security Advisory Board under the, ..1 ::!~!linlts
established by Monroe County,
6. There will be no boat dockage allowed on tt }:! !;I~!utr
side of Greenbriar Road or the west side of DL .:,; ~;ey
Drive at Sunset Villas,( Tom's Harbor) Two fist l'I;i l",iei'S as
per Exhibit 8 may be COnstructed near the wes.'11 flrl t:t1 the
Greenbriar Rd, parcel. Piers will be located ne. T :'l'l~
shoreline near lots 5 and 4 of Block 14 accord"I!' '1> ttle
Plat of "Duck Key, Section 1, Part 1, as record. {I i'l Pl at
BOOk 5 at page 82.
7, The deteriorating seawall bordering lake LUlj II !il:lnC the
canal area will be repaired within two years of f \! .
approva' of the development plan,
8. Construction of each building will be complet (I ,^'ithi,
18 months of ground breaking.
9. The Sunset ISland building, to be located on 1"11; S)u1h
QirfA nf ~OI:IlI:lIr'lhriAr....Rd.. ..1uiU I"Qn~.id. t'\f.J:'lf'l..lrV\rG..tt .~1. I 'I ';,
............. -. ...............,.-. . ._" ...., -.......,-...., It.. ...........' ,." ._
units and two floors of height.
Acceptance of these terms and conditions by DKPOA ~.IIII;;I'J n )t
constitute its approval of the Hawk's Cay Resort prOje, :~,. I) :<p OA
defers to local, state, and federal agencies on all othe: J'I ":tIters.
Current rules, regulations, laws, poliCies, and codes al ~ :!:~;pel:ted to
be applied for the protection of the environmen~ sa~ ,: f I:,., public
and preserve the property values on Duck Key,
NOTE: With this agreement numbers of bedrooms ret J" 1 S tc:> that
Proposed in the original 1985 proPOSed DRI.
January 12, 1996
DKPOA Annua' Meeting
New officers elected . additional materials On Hawk's C .J ~I Ij(str buted
January 24, 1996.
Planning Commission unable to consider Hawk's Cay's ~'i ,p,ica tion
htlP://www.dtrokkeyonline.com/duc:k...keyCOlnn1Wlity/dUCk_key_archiveslresort_expausin ." ,/J 2/02
FE~-12-2002 12:04 PM
WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
P _ 14
eO/(;llt "'UO~SUvdxQl.zOSQl;sgJ\mOJtf-.,{~"V.-'lrOnp".c. un __" _. .
" <, 1 ,'~I lUtuoo~"" ~onp/lllOO'0Il1 ,,': ""~"'np'",_, ':dU'"
fi 'peUBIsepElJ
ooq "'ill ~,OJd alllllll//Cl&qOJd IIll UI 'JildOfllAllp loIllu sq 014BUIS Wlljlld
8JePdn ^eo 8.)fM9H seAle Jene'SM8u YOd>fO
966 ~ 'IIJd\t
'JsenbeJ sl~OH Je pelaoueo BU!Je8W
UOtSS!WUlOO ~unoo GJOj&q 6U'J99W
966~ 'oz l(.>.lew
OllplllllV uo eu'llllllu :):)09 jO eollou lieAfB PUll NlltlJqa.:l
U! uO!108 8,p,BOg eu/UURfd jO d,l/UlqUJllW 8U1101ul 'lllla!8ill8u \fOd)fa
40JeW
'8W!JJO UO,suapce ue
puawwo:l<lJ IOU ,,!"" - loa U0!88IWWO:) llJuno:) 941 OJ SUOn8:>Y!JlOW
S,~:lH JO I&\OJddll PWWWo:l<lJ II'^' P. 8llpl"llp PJBOg 8U!UUllld
'Jsenbe; ,(eo -,)fM8H JO JOAeJ U! sep~p PJ90a BU!UUeld
941 p. UOnnlO8ll~ 9111 JO lJliId , 9PllW aq ~IlO 8,>tNI&H lII,^, P$1ll!lollau
IU9WllQJBe SIIlIlllll S1fSll \fQd>la 'JO.\IlJ Uf ~llllds U<!>IU89OUlSnq
IBool 'j:l9fOJd ISUlefle ~eecls SjU9pt8al A9)f lfOna "IS '9OUe!/lI1e WOJj
SllIelUWOO PUll UOflIIlUllIl9Jd S,I8doleAap 01 SU&jS!I PJeog 6U!UUIlId
UO!SSJUlWOO Bu!UUeld}O Bu~ee~ rer->adS
.. 966 ~ I ~ ,{,eruq9~
, ~ sn JO Juew8as ~e)f
)tonO ell} UO 9O!N9S )0 le^aj pue ~!oedeo EMJasaJ pal~foJd 841 4JIM
.uSIQOJd pue 'swOOJ 19J04 luelsueJl jO J&qwnu pue lunowe 94J eonpQJ
OJ UO'~09J'p k>tlod ueld a^!SU911QIdwoO 0 ~ 02' S9JOtJ lJodeJ sJjetS
'r~a P~MO.Jdde 84J lO 9Jep UOfJ8J!dX9 9lU PU&1X8 pus .<J!POW
oJ 19SodOJd JU9JJ~ alU JO le!uep SPUSLUWOO9J UO!SS!WWOO OJ UodeJ
sjJels 6u!tJUSld 'J9U9UJ ~e:> s,)fMeH JO,J 966 ~ · ~ NenJqS:110 9Jep
'U!Jeatj IBpads SIBS UOISS!WwO:) 'I! "'OlEIQ '911ew JatjlOUB 10 esnllOaQ
PI JO 01 ~ud
iWiJW;JAJOAUI Al~unu.nuoJ pue Uo~suedx3" 110s;:)}I Att;) S,:lfMt .r J n All mUmC1
FEB-12-2002 12:04 PM
321
Summary of Hawk's Cay Resort Expansion and Community Involvement
WPAUL CPAUL
242 8971
P. 1 S
Pagf 11 of 14
DKPOA's Summer Newsletter, 1996
Hawk's Cay Update
Information provided on number, type, and location f .f .Ir it.t planned
by Singh, Reminder 8S to dates and times for comml "I t:r in~)rmation
meeting and Ju'y
Planning Board hearing.
July 22, 1996
Hawk's Cay Development 'nformation Meeting for 01 :r:: \ I'~E!~
Community
Pritam Singh speaks to Duck Key community about 'j;! \I\fllor= ment
plans, Unit density will be spread in 3 corridors, Sln~", Mill hi>nor
previously agreed upon Memorandum of Understanf ,j r !;I!l$ !t applief:i
to his project. P'ans oall for 90 to 143 units by Lake ILl ~ille End canal
Singh has agreed to 90 units bordering residential P,)II,!)rT:f along
lake Lucille and cans' and Will leave 1/3 open linear fl : a;e :n that
area,
July 24, 1996
Meeting before Planning Board
Project modifications and extension get Planning Be ~111:I:ipproval bl!
procedural errors require that the Board reconvene .. ~:ll:!~'tumber,
September 5, 1996
Meeting before the Planning Board
Project modifications and extension get Planning Blfh ':j ap!)roval
December 1996
Meeting of County Commission
BOCC approves Hawk's Cay's request for modifica. (; 1'1 I:)f t le proje t
http://www.duckkeyonline.com/duck_keycommunity/duck_key..archives/resort_ex..Ii: I/;bll_". 2/12/12
FEB-12-2002 12:05 PM WPAUL CPAUL 321 242 8971
. ~umtna.ry or HaWk'S cay .Kesort .Hxpansion and Community Involvement
P.16
F'n:~e 12 of: ~
and the extension of its vested rights to expand.
May 7.1997
Planning Board
Board grants 8 variance to reduce minimum side ya. [/ l:w:11~'lck,
February, 1998
Meeting of Planning Board
Singh obtains approval to reconfigure hotel units by Y'I:I\i'!ng 5 -10
units to corridor 4 which will include recreational fao. i:!. !i'@1 of 2 pools,
playing courts, playground, and recreation club, Sin!--~'! ',vi the raws
request to use residential building standards Insteae (I t t.:'Jm mercia/.
He also withdraws the item dealing with handicappe I ; I,:::r::e~ s.
February 23, 1998
Monroe County Commission Hearing
Planning Board approval of Singh modification goes :~'III:tn3! BOCC fc I
action.
later at Commission Meetings
Various setback variances Issued from twenty feet tC;Il/"1 thEln sever
December 11, 2001
Meeting of Planning Board - Hawk's Cay Developer '. ) ;I:S,~ 1m 28
additional villa units in further expansion. Representtj"i~ aslc that iter
be COntinued to another date.
DKPOA takes a position Opposing further expansion :t'l :lIrl th;~t agreel.:
upon in 1995/1996,
http://WWw.duckkeyonline.ComlduCk_key .comtnunity/duck_key .archives/resort expa .1;'1':>1'1,._. 2/12/0;'
321 242 8971
FEB-12-2002 12:05 PM WPAUL CPAUL .
u...............J VL .I.L~WA ~ \.ouy ^eSOn .bXpallslon and Commumty Involvement
P. 17
PLge 13 of 4
December 2001 .. Annual Meeting of Duck Key Pro '(:; ('IV J~ 18OOatio,.,
at CJub Duck Key w All island residents invited to in1 II' 1'I1i1tional part lIt
meeting.
County Representation ( Nora Williams) and Rasor niH,i:e II
presentation invOlving plans for sewage piping and ~'II!,I:e vfater
treatment for the residential island of Duck Key, We.~;, li" ;<e:, and
Conch Key to be tied in to Resort Expansion and tre '"I j'f4:.r of unusec:
building permits to County. Voting w Community exp .E!i ; $I'~S ~nough
interest so that a more complete proposal will be prl~i; inted at a latE:~'
date.
February 3, 2002 - Duck Key Property Association ~~i! :ltin~9 at Club
Duck Key
Partial presentation with bullet points of waste water .~I l)POS al to
Community, Voting
February 6, 2002
Meeting Schedules before Planning Board
Approved by vote of 3 to 2, General Understanding l~ t':i1i! a iater
contract and provisions must be satisfactory to comn ./. I it:" a ld
commissioners
February 12, 2002
Item scheduled for CommiSSioners' Meeting
NOTE: If you have any add/lIonal facts or COI'r9CI/ons JI. 'Me )ring
them to the attention of Duck Key Online,
Saekto (~IY!lO~ 1 f.MIln .~lJ~XJ
hUp;//WWW,dutkkeyon1ine.COlJl/duck key _ COOUDunily /dutk _key _ arch;vC!8/resol1 e_ I::",.. 2/12102
THIS PAQE CReATED BY OUCI< l<eY ONUNf:
COPVRIGHT!!O MATERIAL..,
FEB-12-2002 12:06 PM WPAUL CPAUL
321
242 8971
P.18
PrLge 14 or 14
Summary ofHawkts Cay Resort Expansion and Community Involvement
http://YmN.duekkeyotlllne.oom
nlflOduOkkeyewlJD.!,.2Q1Xl
Duck ~y Online
386 Ealt S..vIM Drtvt
Ouclk Key, Flortdt 33050
305-289-1872
http://www,duckkeyonlitle.comJduck_.key _communityfduck__.key _archives/resort_ e, ~I: n!:i(tn .., 2/12,02
FEB-12-2002 12:06 PM WPAUL CPAUL
321 242 8971
P.19
't.'X I ,,.~,', r II C I.
l'lfnnlna Department
Suite 410
2798 Overseas Highway
Marathon, Florida 33050
Voice: (305) 289 2~
FAX: (305) 2892536
County of Mo:rll~oe
.
~ .1; 1:I.rL!l!..~ ommlsllonl,: !
Mayor (. ': ;"Ileug;nl. District :.
Mayor I '::. Wll No! a Williams, 0: lI1ct.,
Dixie S, }I: r, US'IIic 11
Charles J:II ',~ M,:C Jy, Olstricl3
Murray ~,I ': II, Ois! ict 5
NonCE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OW.NI13R!;
HAWK'S CAY RESORT is requesting approval to modify a major development approval :lr:1 Oev ~Iopment : r
Regional Impact approval to newly create Development Corridor 5 in the ce_nJer of thl I: IIJllert I wbir..h W~ 1
contain twentY-etght (28) new resort units and eighteen (18) new affordable ancillal: d'!f q Jarters arl i
transfer the development rights of 128 affordable housing units to Monroe County. P ~ill :w:y b located ;~ t
approximate Mile Marker 61 and is described as parcels of land within Section 21,':: jl/rlship 66 Soul': I
Range 34 East, Indies Island, Duck Key, Monroe County, Florida, The Land Use [ Ii!) ri~:: is Destinatiln
Resort (DR), Copies of the file will be available for viewing at the Stock 'sland, Marathol , : 1.lf Plantation K-:: y
Planning Departments during normal business hours.
LAND USE DISTRICT: Destination Resort (DR)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to Florida Statutes, Section 380,Q6(19)(n 3 .n, I Chafiter 6, Artk; e
VII of the Monroe County Code in effect prior to 9/16/86 and Section 9.5-73 of the MOI'.':;l: CCtIJ'lty Code Hie
Monroe County Board of Commissioners will hold a Public Hearing at the Marathon C :1'Ji:~nrnent Cenl'f r,
2798 Overseas Highway, Second Floor, Monroe County, Florida, on December 19, !((:'1, al 5:01 PM to
consider the request of HAWK'S CAY RESORT described above. Copies of the fill" ','" be available i:lr
viewing at the Stock Island, Marathon, and Plantation Key Planning Departments dt .'j:' I: 'lonnal businf;':lS
hours,
THE HEARING ON THIS PETITION IS NOT LIMITED TO THOSE RECEIVING TH..::; 1'~OTli~E. IF Y::lU
KNOW ANY NEIGHBOR OR OTHER AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNER WHO FAILE: llw! RfCEIVF. n.l$
NOTIC!:; PlEASE 1NFORMTHEM Or THIS PUBLIC HEARiNG-.. . ... .. . ... . . I
PURSUANT TO SECTION 286,0105 FLORIDA STATUTES AND MONROE COUNn I:; FS:OLJTION #1: :1-
1992, IF A PERSON DECIDED TO APPEAL ANY DECISION OF THE B I,!! HU OF COU~;i fY
COMMISSIONERS, HE SHALL PROVIDE A TRANSCRIPT OF THE HEARING E:: :1:i~E THE BO':C,
PREPARED BY A CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER AT THE APPELLANT: [J(F'ENSE. r ~E
TRANSCRIPT MUST BE FILED AS A PART OF THE RECORD OF THE RECO'.I:: CF "HE APPF AL
WITHIN THE TIME PROV'OED IN SECTION 9.5-521(fj MONROE COUNTY CODE. .F! !,~,SC~IPTS MFJE
FROM RECORDINGS OR OTHER lfSECONDARY. MEANS DO NOT PROVe: 1~1 SlJFFICIENrLY
ACCURATE RECORD OF ALL THE SPEAKERS, THEREFORE, SUCH .SECONPH'(' THANSCRII" TS
MAY NOT BE ACCEPTED AS A VALID VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT BY THIS OFFICE,
Mailed on 11/13/01
02/11/02 13:09 FAX 305 296 1003
02/11/2002 13:15 9544929192
Key West: Golf Club Dev. -+ VHC * Sales
GULF BUILDING
I4J 003/003
PAGE tJ3
1 .JO~ D. Collins
J
600 Corporate Drive
Suire 512
Fort LaudercWe, FL 33334
Ph (954) 492-9191
Fx (954) 492-9192
February 11,2002
Planning Commission Board
MaOlthon Government Center
2798 Overseas Highway
Marathon, FL 33050
RE: Application of Hawk's Cay Investors-Indies Island
Hawk's Cay DRl
To Members of the Board:
I am a resident at 7042 Harbour Village Drive in Duck Key, Florida, and I am in support
of the proposed amendment to the Hawk's Cay DR!. Without the support of the Hawk's
Cay proposal, the cost of replacing our old septic tanks and cesspits with the expensive
individual AWT systems, which will soon be required. will be ex.orbitant-
Hawk's Cay's proposal., which proposes to upgrade the existing treatment plant with the
addition of28 units with 18 ancillary staffunits, reduces the costs with the available
grants from the DCA and other agencies, in tUm solving OUT problem at IS. cost that is
affordable to the residents.
Thank you for your eonsideration.
\~.. .\
tJ
~IJ\
...,.,.."..,.,.,"":.._...~.~......
.- .,.",... .'.'1' '
.' ,.~' .
.".-." .;:..; ..,..... ......"., '..
.:. ~;'.'.." ~ .':i' I: i:.II 'v 'j lo 'IoloI' ,.:, I:,....:::: ....:..~, ~'.';~:.
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY. FLORIDA
Each ofthe undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
Approval of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and take no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully informed as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed Sewer
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aspects of a proposed project of this economic magnitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity.
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Number:
3cj6~ 3-RlP/
~ /( 3-Y/?/
;J 'yv.6- ~40eW ~ .;;2-['9 CJ /d-::6
/I
/"
/...
~-
dP
/~
/{
?/
FLADOCS I013S6vl (267GOI!.DOC)
B.}
FEB 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P,01/01 F-873
:47
. fETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY t FLORIDA
Each of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
Approval of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc, and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and take no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully intonned as
to the tenns and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed Sewer
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aspects: of a propo~ed project of this economic magnitude paid
fOf with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity,
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Number:
:;2 1/" t{/ It" A v, "t' ,....-4') r _
7(/3~3yC;'0
:7 Y'-3,y9~
~g9-/JC2y2-
.v'
...)
FI.ADOCS 101 356vl (2f.7GOI !.poq
'.
FEB 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P.01/01 F-873
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Each of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the followin2 A2enda Item:
"
Approv~l of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and take no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully infonned as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed Sewer
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all upects of a proposed project of this economic magnitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity,
Address:
, <Sj::.l1v/liw (( \ ,
'-r
c
\N. S~~\
FI,...OOCS 101J~6vl (~67GOI !.POC)
'.
FE8 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P,01101 F-873
PETITION 19 THE BO~OF COUNTY CQM~
OF MONROE COUNTY. FLORmA
Bach of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
th. Board of COJmt)' Commissioners of Monroe County tabJe the followina Aaenda Item;
"
Approv~ of ayreement with Hawk's Cay Invostora Ltd" the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater ColJec:tion Infrastructure
and take no aCtion on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully infonned as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million DolJar (approximalcJy) proposc=d Sewer
Aareemcmt and all of the other leaa) and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Aareement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fUlly
and complete I)' informed .. to all aspects of a proposed project of this economic ma~itude paid
for with our money which directl)' affect our re.idontiaJ islaads in perpetuity.
NAME:
Address:
Telephone umber:
-::!PS= >Y~~P'.2os'-
"
"
'1
\ I dLf? d
u
,
,J . _ ^ _ "
.....~~<.
L0 ,~t\'u~L() ,
~~ """":".,
. . '~:.TvVJ-
~\ ~ -'")s" ve -
C'<iO
Fl....DOCS Icm61/1 U67Cinn,DOCI
'.
FEB 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P.01/01 F-873
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY. FLORIDA
Each of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the followin2 A2enda Item:
..
Approval of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and take no 'action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully informed as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed S~w~r
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aapectlil of a proposed project of this economic ma~nitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity.
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Number:
6~
/00 .00
b
FI,...OOCS IOIJS6vl (267GOI !.DOC)
'.F i c: t or- i a shear-er
817-227-3416
1212108/02 08:1217P P.01Z11
GeL CONSTRUCTION
PAGE ell
05/e5/1999 ~1:2e
2e365&40S&
.,
Fl'" '01 11:01 lO."~7.30606
flDHODGSll . RUSS
T-326 P.01l01 f..r3
f)iTlnON TO TIll BOARD pi' g)lJ1lrn' rnMM1U1ON..IIC
Qf ,-MIlO. C01JNTY.. nPllDA
E.:h of cbo udeniped .,. ownen of t'MI pfOpetlY OIl Duck Key ... ~ IUf
U. 8Mr4 ole...., c."""...... of ~ eo.,ty tabl.1ho "Uowina A.... IIaa:
~ Appn>v.J of .......,... wi. Hawkt. Cay......,. LJ4.. dw
FJoricII 1CIy. ~ Autharity. DlICk Key W.....-
Coapcmivl. ... ... Utility Island. LLC. for the Fundina ucl
CORIInK:IioD ufwucewator Callecucm Infr.~
IDd like nO ICtioIl on 11\1. matte&' nil 1M __II oC])uck Key became mort fWly Wonaed II
\0 d. __ IDd coa4tItou of &M Ten Minion Dollar (lIppI'oxtm.-ly) ...... S.wer
,.....t snd all of b ochIr I. and IIlId \lie iN. do.mbed in die prapoMd Sewer
A.,...a. M)'O\II' constituent., wJt of ihIr undcnipld 4ncrv0ll the opportuaity 10 be fully
ADd compl..ly h.to.....-d.. to a11.-ped' of. propoNd ptOjocn of1hi. ecanomac maQlliNCk paid
for with ., ......, which direotly atr.ct ..,........... ........ ill perpeWJy.
dnn:
3D,S C Ci.--f (A..Iv..C 1\ d2 II
'30.5: (' o..Q a-""'...(i...4......
,,~~.. ~C'\'~,~~,.
'd-.<=::> ~""~..~....~,. I
/()(-( /vJJ//;5 5;
~~~- 'd~_ ~;;,;,,~\.
~t::.'S \~ ~-~ <;:'b~
'jOS- J ~7) s(
".I\DOI:I"IJ~1 U.'Qlll.~
a
'.
FEB 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P.01/01 F-873
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Each of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
"
Approval of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd.) the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and ~ake no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully informed as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed S~w~r
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aapects of a proposed project of this economic maillitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity,
NAME: Address: Telephone Number:
-\.
~
e
tl // It /1 ~
/
r &~ .3Qs -7V3 II} 5 ''-.
.5 FI,....pocS IOllS6vI (~67G01LPOC)
FEB 12 '02 07:45 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-342 P,01/01 F-891
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Each of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
Approval of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investof$ Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative~ Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and take no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully infonned as
to the tenns and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed Sewer
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aspects of a. proposed project of this economic magnitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity,
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Number:
,
FLAVOCS IOl3S6vl (267GOl',VOC)
'. ~~~~~'\~.
FEB 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P.01/01 F-873
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Each of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County CommiSlSlioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
...
Approve! of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC. for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and ~ak.e no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully infonned as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed Scwc::r
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents. each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aspects of a proposed project of this economic ma~nitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity.
NAME: Address: Telephone Number:
e,f'-f/ I f- Fo~l2.!l.~)" :] E1 de, St'-19 VI a--li7 J..-g-r;:" JtJJ{'
-{:- ..v1 .f L t I Y,.... ~o rU2Al.- 51 l~a
1
FI.I\OOCS lOIJS6vl (~67Cinl f.poq
FEB 11 '02 17:06 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-333 P,01/01 F-881
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY. FLORIDA
Each of the undersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
Approval of agreement with Hawk's. Cay Investors. Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative. Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and take no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully informed as
to the tenns nnd conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed Sewer
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents. each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aspects of a proposed project of this economic macnitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity,
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Number:
f'l-"'POC~ lOIJS6,1 ()61GOI!.DOC)
01/30/1995 12:52
5513924'342
DOVLE
F'AGE 01
~E8 11 '02 16:4' TO-93924942
fROM-HODGSON 8 RUSS
1-329 P 0110~ ;.87'
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY. F~QRlDA
E4ch of the undet$igned ~ OMlcrs of r~l propel1)' on Duck Key IUld request that
tbe Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
Approval of aireement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd, the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
CooperativCl, Inc. and Utility Island. LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and take no action on this mattc::r until the residents of Duck Key become more thlly informed as
to 'M terms and (!onditione of th. Ten Million Dollar (approximately) pl'Opo.~ S"w~r
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the Opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aspects of a prol'osed project of this economic maanitude paid
for with our mOlley which directly affect Our rOllideati.l island, in perpetuity,
AddrHS:
Telephone Num .r:
DR.
)0) 7(-11 )9'39
L._
f
L
f\.A.DOCS 1311$6, I (~6'Q) !I.DOC)
~. ;~"f'\ ~ ~\ ~ ~:>'\:,:;;" C,:"
FEB 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P,01/01 F-873
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONt~
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Each of the Wldersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Board of CO\lnty Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
,
Approv~l of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investora Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
I
,/
and lake no action on this matte!: until the residents of Duck Key become more fully infonned as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed S~w~r
Agreement and all of the other leial and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aapectSl of a proposed project of this economic ma~itude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity.
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Number:
~P/ - /9,9 "'S
..~
FI.AOOCS I01356vl (~67GOI !.pOe)
'.
FEB 11 '02 12:08 TO-913057430605
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-324 P,01i01 F-873
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
Each of the Wldersigned are owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Boud of County Commiuioners of Monroe County table the followin2 Aaenda Item:
..
Approval of agreement with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastructure
and ~ake no action on this matter Wltil the residents of Duck Key become more fully infonned as
to the terms and con,Utions of the Ten Million Dollar (approximately) proposed Sc;wc;r
Agreement and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be fully
and completely informed as to all aspects of a proposed project of this economic ma~nitude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residential islands in perpetuity.
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Number:
~
jJ~l{h(J L)ft "0 DC
t~
, $-2)
:s;
~ ,,,,0= lOll,." ,,"OO!!,"o<)
FEB 12 '02 11.55 TO.914106436J87
4106436615;
rROH.HODBSON & RUSS
Feb-12-02 12:04PM;
Page 1! 1
Sent By:
T.35J P.Ol/01 F.90J
PETITION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM~ISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY. FLORIDA
Etch of the Wldc;rsigned are O~crs of real propeny on Duck Key and request that
the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County table the following Agenda Item:
Approval of ae:reeruc:nt with Hawk's Cay Investors Ltd., the
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc, and Utility Island, LtC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrqstructure
and take no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Kc;:y become more fully informed as
to the terms and conditions of the Ten Million. Dollar (approximatel)') prDposed Sewer
Agreement and an of tbe other legll' and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As your constituents, each of ~he undersigned deserves the opponunity lO be fully
and completely infOrmed IS to a1l aspects of a proposed project of this economic ma,anltude paid
for with our money which directly affect our residentj.l i.lands in perpetuJty.
NAME:
Address:
Telephooe umber:
~
OL?8'53i/8j
I
---i
rl.AOOC.~ IlIlH6~ I 1267CiOl!.OO~)
,
FEB-12-02 TUE 12:03
p _ 121 1
FE& 12 '02 11:36 TO-9195434~225e
FROM-HODGSON & RUSS
T-3&1 P,01i01 f.901
,ETITION T~ TfJE>>OARD OF COUlS'J.'Y COMMISSIONERS
QF MONROE COUNTY. FLOR1DA
Each of the undersigned al'C owners of real property on Duck Key and request that
the Bo~ra of County Commis~ioners of Mon:oe County table the followini Agenda Hem:
^l'proy~l of agreement with Hawk'. Cay Investors Ltd., the
Floridn Keys Aqueduct Authority, Duck Key Wastewater
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility Island, LLC, for the Funding and
Construction of Wastewater Collection Infrastnlcture
and take no action on this matter until the residents of Duck Key become more fully informed as
to the terms and conditions or the Ten Million Dollar (apPl'oxlmately) proposed Sewer
Asreem<:nt and all of the other legal and land use issues described in the proposed Sewer
Agreement. As YOW" constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be f\.1l1y
and completely informed QS to ..11 ar.:pects of a proposecl proj~ct of this economi~ magnitude paid
for with our money whioh directly affect our rosidential islands in perpetuity.
NAME:
Address:
Telephone Nutnber:
& V/J-NS
Qr
f(s-'1 31 ;/1 r
3)
Fl.iWC>CS 1013$6.1 (:1670011.00<.:)
02/12/02 TUE 12:16 FAX 513 844 2019
FEB-12-02 TUE 12:25
Gmoser & Fox
[4J 001
1""-121:2
FEa 12 . 02 11: 36 10.919543492266
fROH..HODOSON & RUSS
T.a51 P,01/Q1 f.S01
.P~TJTIQ~ TO T,m BOARD OJ' C~1Y COMMISSIONl;R$
OF MONR.OE COUNtY, FLORIDA
Eaeh of the W\denlped are owners ofreaJ proPe.t11 on Duck Key and request that
the Boatd or COWlty Commjs~()ner' of Monroe County table the foUcwinl Agenda Item:
Approyal of ..reC1t1ent with Hawk' _ Cly Inve$1oQ Lt4.. the
Florida KeYJ Aqued'uet Authority, Duck Key WO$~water
Cooperative, Inc. and Utility blan~ LLC. for the F\lncling an4
Construction of Wasrew.tel CoU~uon Jnfraslmcturc
and take no action on this matter \llllU the residents of Duck Key ~comc mOtC fully informed as
to the terms and ~on4itions of the Ten Million Donar (approxhnttely) proposed Sewer
Agreement and all of the o~her leaal and land use issues d4seribed in. the propose4 Sewer
Agreement. A, your constituents, each of the undersigned deserves the opportunity to be 1'uUy
o.nd eompJetely int'onncrclll to an 6J1t>,,<:ts of a pl'Op05Cd. projeQ.t ofthii e~c>nomi~ masnitude p.id
for with our money which directly effect our rosidential isJ..ds in perpetuity.
~
RAME:
Addr05S:
Telepbone umber:
::33
]) ,^c.. t
..:J CJ $'" -7 if S -;A 9 r'
fLADOCS 101355.1 ~.700lI,lX)t:}
Board of County Commissioners
RESOLUTION NO.
-2002
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY. FLORIDA CONCERNING ROGO EXEMPTION ISSUES
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has given due consideration
to the ROGO exemption issues described in the attached memorandum from
County Attorney James Hendrick to Growth Management Director Tim McGarry;
and
WHEREAS,. the Board of County Commissioners finds that the matters set
forth in the said memorandum accurately state the position of the Board of
County Commissioners; now, therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, FLORIDA that the attached memorandum is hereby APPROVED as the
position statement of the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe
County; Florida, at a Special Meeting of said Board held on the 12th day of
February, 2002.
MayorCharles McCoy
Mayor Pro Tem Dixie Spehar
Commissioner Murray Nelson
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner Nora Williams
(SEAL)
Attest: DANNY L.KOLHAGE, Clerk
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
Deputy Clerk
By
Mayor IChairperson
jdresROGOx
memorandum
To: Tim McGarry, Director
Growth Management Division
From: Jim Hendrick, County Attorney
Re: ROGO exemption, Hawk's Cay DR!
Notwithstanding the Memorandum to you from Karen Cabanas dated
Octt>ber T8~ 2001, concluding that the Hawk's Cay DR! approval of 444
units are vested, questions continue to be raised concerning the status of
those units. Most recently, the BOCC received a letter from the respected
Environmental & Land Use Law Center, contending that "the development
units for which vested rights or other recognition are sought simply do not
exist." The letter contends that the previous approval is not "unexpired"
under either Section 9.5-120.4 (g), Monroe County Code, or under DR!
vesting law. In support 'of that conclusion, the author suggests that the
previous approval "expired upon being amended in 1996". Having carefully
considered that argument, I have concluded that the opinion previously
stated by Karen Cabanas is valid, and that the previous approval did not
expire upon amendment.
First, as to the issue whether the units are vested under DR! law, it should be
noted that nothing in the October 18, 2001 Memorandum found the units to
be vested under statutory or common law standards. The Memorandum
refers to the project as "vested" only in the limited sense utilized in LDR
Section 9.5-120.4(g), i.e.,
(g) Vested rights: Landowners with a valid, unexpired development
of regional impact approval granted by the county prior to July 13,
1992 shall be exempt from tne residential ROGO system.
Thus, it would be more accurate to describe the Landowner (rather than the
units) as ROGO-Exempt (rather than "vested"). Viewed in that light, the
issue is clear, and the necessity for a lengthy vesting analysis is obviated.
Does the Hawk's Cay landowner have a valid, unexpired DR! approval?
Yes. To contend that an approval "expires" when it is amended is to defy
the plain meaning of "amendment". Was DR! approval granted prior to July
13, 1992? Yes; subsequent amendment does not vitiate the original
approval, because the statutory DR! process requires subsequent
amendments to be measured against, and not to deviate substantially from,
the impacts assessed and authorized in the original impact approval.
Accordingly, Hawk's Cay Investors, as the landowner having a valid,
unexpired DR! impact approval predating the 2010 Comprehensive Plan, is
ROGO-exempt.
The above legal analysis fmds support in the policy on which ROGO is
founded. As noted in the Memorandum, "At the time the hurricane
[evacuation model] calculations were made, the property was assmned to
have 444 units. Therefore, the reclaiming of these units does not impact
hurriyane_.evacuation calculations, as both ROGO and the hotel moratorimn
are based on a hurricane evacuation model which assmnes these units
already exist." As you know, I served as a consultant to the County in the
drafting of the Comprehensive Plan, and specifically with respect to ROGO.
Dwelling unit data compilation utilized in the hurricane evacuation model
were prepared by Price Waterhouse, utilizing 1990 census data augmented
by calculations of, inter alia, unoccupied units that hadn't been counted in
the census because they were under construction, subsequently permitted, or
vested but unbuilt. In the latter category were the then-unbuilt Hawk's Cay
DR! units. The ROGO base unit count on which Comprehensive Plan
Objective 101.2 and Policies 101.2.1, et seq., rests, includes all 444 Hawk's
Cay units authorized under the original DR! approval.
...
~
----~-
f
z
CC
-'
D.
Z w
CC \)
-' CC
D. Z
-
I- CC
~Z ~
:WLLC
~:E""..I
C\j D. ~ CC
~ 0:1::)
~..IZ t-
fit ~~. D..
en w'" W
> oJ- U
LU cr Z
a:~ 0
W U
Ii; ~
CC z
:E CC
....
Q.
w
t-
-
en
,.
)
.
c
('
>
<
~
c
a:
w
Q. z
.._ t-
Q :r: .S
WcI) (J~ -
!: a: ZCl. 4:( (I)
~UJ --' C W
::i ~ ..:~ CE ....
a: ~a: ffi~ 9 ~
o o~ ~~~u. >0
La. L.. &II '" · N\O
r- 'eCJ Z J: Y.I
e cnfi} wero 0 e(tJ
~ ~~ z"'Zi= < w(l)
_. er<luJ a:
~ !~ W~a: en <lC
w - fflco Q.
0: ~...J 0:> Cl. 0 w (I)
Cl. (Jet Cl.(Jc 0: Z ~ 1ft
C 0 ~ VI
Y'Ci: U)UO: 0
~o ~~~ II:
~-' ~o 0
cr u. cr a: 0-
2:< 2:g
Ll-
e:{
.,
.
%:
.-~-~
../
_.~
./
---~
./
-t. .
\,--,
~j
~
i
\
,
~
.
.... -... \- - ..
. ' .... ~~-
'1 -, - ',~ . ~ ~~~ '~i~ t.
: .~ '. , ,~ .-I.~ .-""- f_"
- _ ,t~W~~ . 6 - ---- c I'~~ f
z~l? ' ~ ~,\\-
I '~~;~-.. ~ \~ '~
; ;~ en;o ,~~. \.
I "rb#'~~"; E , ' . \ ~ ,\
, ., I,~.V e ~ '1"0 ~ - . r- ~'
-
-
I ---- -_. t / j~;-v. 0K'" t e ~ .... '.A /C ~- :--;~.' \ ',~ . ~ R5 \: \,
~ .J<'\~~tt l 't't i ~ I ., / - :L _ ':'~~~~. ~ ~~
f f "N 'I.' >~~ ! Z It"" ~ - /~IAII / llI~Y", ., -.:.- ~ . '---\\
, f' 1.;"// ~ .A~~ ~ ~ N :s: leog ......... .'," 1-/ W ~ L~~';,y . .:::~, ':
~. ~]'''"')' ~ ;x ~c.."O O~ ' 2.:~ --' ~ r, /~ -l.
~j')1 ,.;" g,t""O F ~gs: ~ ~ '~j:&"p' .,....., ';!.!....~" _ -~ C '
l)~ ~ 0 s: \ "'''':; ~ g :? \1 ' ......, --::::,r,-, - .~ ./ -~~.' ::::.
.. .... '~-:1 '<....... =? to: IIQ en _ ...-: ~ --= OJI ~ ~ t'_'''"K.... 'J. , .~.\
>"
, - /~j "LC Ch::ta ~=~, . ,"':in........ ~ '~'II ;;c \'{
.' ~/ .'. ~~'~ <.3~ .~ ~,.t'" ~ .,) I"~/'.......~~~: ~,~.()\? - ;:: '.\':
~ . ')ct,'... J jcJl~St<i~. - 7~~;lSi.,~r:- ((.J'r\ ~~~~ .'~ ~~W/ ~ ~ ",
~~ ( ~ {\(j~n\J '~~ _CJ ~. ,. - ~$ ~-~~ ~
'j ,.S =~ Q"-r-,.. ~r~ (\. ,_,~' .. ~ " .\d:/b:.. ' .o:.-~ ~ ~ ~ '
~11/1_) ~~ ~..o.-"... ~n-() ~~~'iil ~.)~)~\ ~ ~ ~ :~ i l
~ / /1 0; :::--::::." . ~ --r: ~ r, '~1 h\ "-i - p.... ~ :~ ;.c' Ii
'/ 7l_'~ElI ;/~';-~;..; If ~'.. ..,~ . 0 6 0\\ . ./ ~ j" ~
~,~ r/.ar '; (, k- .--' f"" (. ~~.c;) / ,q ~ ~.):r"~';-\_ 1: ~ ~~
c ~~.~- 'C~ ~z~~~~.~i~ ~ ~~~t~7 is ~~~ J~ ~>l=
- ~ I ~ : ~ Q'/ ,0l (/ ,p;.". '. ~~b \: ,~ ~ /. A ~ 9 ~ 5 3 ,; ;:: :::
~ .~~ j , ,-' f.{\i>Qo', .,i..J .Y'~ -'--.....-);. .~ ~~ \. 1-" ~ i ~
\ \~'~~ ~~ ~~' \ 6~. -\ ': ~~, l f . .~. ,;~-r, ~' , I~ ~ 71 ~
'... N'~ ~ .;."(. -w ). ~ " If": y .\ . ~r~ ,'Lf -
, .., . \ ,'o --.. ~!\ '-'~.,~' -e ' I.... ~ \..,..A ooC) ,
\~ ~ ~\ ' 'o::;' ..1) ',J. , ' _ '" 0 ~. ...J - '" f" ~ l!
,\~~,~ \.~ ~~~~'.::'~~ ./ ~? ~~ DO ~ '~J~ \. ~ b-~
\ ,_ ~s:~~:~;~\~~ .',:\~=~.(~.;o.;'~\1'~ I !~~ ~~~
'. ~ l~_N~'X~^; -~'t-;:, - ~ ' ell 0 ~ '.; I C It" ;> =-<
\ \C's~.: ,;~r:~' 5~--i ,'~.. ~7 ..J : ~Y'. ~ \~cn (~.:\' ~ \\ ~ ~~ ~
\~ .;J P . ~ ~. pO' 3~\- -~\.-~':;- ~ 'f;;5, l'~ -~~(-~(' . 2 ~[
,"\ ~ b ~ ~j h . - ,\~ - ,.\ \ ',,", . , -I ( \ _ "C!
. f::J'.". \ \ ' , )... \.. ~ - Q i: s-
- '\ ,\' '" h ';; ~ ~ ~ '\ ~ ~ \\~ ~ ~.l ~~ ~ ,:;' -' 1 N (\/ / r9 \ ~ ~ ~
, ~,(;jfl~ t,~" '\.' gs " ~ , '1 - ~,n (')r:~C i:iflJ, ;;
, ~ 0/ ,~. c !l \. \, >~(, ('~)I :1'~'P IJ"V,;~~ ~ in I
~ ~: \ ~ ~~ i.~ I~ ,'f,"~' ':0 ~~ \
~ m 5 ~ 1,"''''' __~.... 0 . 'I ri'~ '., ;'-..., '/ ! ;:: .
l6 l= ~i \l~" d ~~~lj' r
m 0 :; ~ ,~ 1\ 0- ,~'t ~ I >t ~ J ~
c ~ ~ \ ~ I { , t J yl Y -
:~~' \ ~~\-~~c /
~ ~ ') d> I :
~ \ V .@
N '" ~ 1 ( ) 11 .f: '~ r; 0 I J~
~ ) t\\ U e 'f ~ ( J.
~ r~..;' :1 J
9~ 1~/~)
j ~ ~....h ~
-.--- ~.'~' ~ (/
oo-~~=-~p
_ _ ir-
-~-- 2;-~~~::: >~~ >-
t~:~ 2~3a~ 2~' z
~~i~ B;~~ f~' 0
~~=:::: 77~~> g~ C
"":::T:.= r s' 1':;>-
- _ ~ -2~ ~~ ~
~:~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~
~; z ; ~~~ ~ ~
?:: :/". ~ :; a-c:- "" ~
'3 ~ ~ !.t" ~ ""-
(". - -::.0 "II"
~ Z ~ E. :::0-<
r_ :1*
::...; t". ;:;;
~ ~ ~~
~ /
c-=
:!;
~
;r.
~. - :I'
J-=-""~:'
~'~_'J':..t.
:>
';,;'-:::E- C
l.i_ ~
...
r.
r.
~e~~8
i"",;_~~=
'"
;<l
m
;;.
- . ;A
~
-l
m
;0 '-
-
I
I
,~ Resort EXJI3I1sion at
'-_ .Hawk's Cay
MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
William Cox, Architect
Mozley Company, Inc., Pbnners
I ~,~
suo I .7.!_
II,\WKS CAY EXPANSION i)[VElOPMENTOF REGIONAL IMPACT
lIolw\.,s Coly Invo:slors 1.1I111tl-d, a Florida- Limiled.Pdrlnership by:
IlolWk, Coly M,lIl,lgCnll.'lll, In,:.,a Flor~ Coc"f'orahon.Gcl1E'ral partner
11.1l1'''M' IIt-.k h. rk~k{' .., AU~;U,SI 1')/110
II StI UN! ZOO llHl 400
~ ,.... ~~...
c .'
J. V. N ->. ,/
-~ ,.... :J
r: ~ .
J: /.
n v.c.oOO 0
"\ cr 0 000
c... ro
:J :J
....... VI
~ -" .....>. VI
< ...., (j)(j)~ ~
r-" C 000 <:
.~ J. (")
.~ C C C ;u /0
....... ....
ro :J :J :J tl.l
::::, a :J ~
::: ~[;i[;i lO
Z. ro
0
.-;
---l
0
m
x
(")
ro
ro
Q ,
N
~
-.....J
C
:J ~
r-;
lfl
\ z Vl -1 ---l -1 r-
f ~ >< ~ r- c c -1 -1 1:) m 0 .l> 0 0 1> 0 )a
(f) m -1 1> 1:) 0 0 -, x --l -, et) --l -, -1
-< 0 < et) ~ m 0 VI et) < l> et) l> Z
a ~ -, QJ -1 0 ~ l> ~ et) ~
~ --l "3 OJ ~ 0 l> 0 ,...... - ,...... _. ,......
x t]; OJ m l> ~ m a. m VI ~ :::l 0 :::l Vl C
.:.., r- \0 2 0 c
i ::; - ;u 2 et) Vl
--to 0 Z ,...... . ~ ~ et) 1J ~ -1
ef; r- (!) "'.) -, Vl 0. cc ~ Q C
~ 0 et) 2~ ,...... cr m
C :::l C Q l>
0 ~ " ~ -1 ~ ~OJ II" 1> 3 l> &II
Vl -< n ~ 2 et)
~ 0 "1J ~ m ~ et) 0 -, ;:0 m
0 ~ l> ;:u 0 ~ \0 m
~ n ;:0 i'..) et) Vl et) l>
et) 0 Q Q <<II
< Vl ^ i'..)
0 m 1:) et) n " 0 -1 iiJ C
m ll> m 1:) " 1:) ':D m r 0 a. Z m
1:) x > ::Il ::Il x ::Il 0 C 0 :::l
0 ::Il ;:Il; x ll> m Vl i:
1:) (/l m < 0 0 (/l z 0 0 () ~ z et) l> Q
C :0 m 1:) m (/l 1:) (') Vl ::: ;:u Vl
~ () ~ 1:) ~ ~ 0 :0 ~ VI .--:-'
0 0 0 D 0 .1' --l Vl m i:
z ~ z 'z (/l et) 1J c 0
N X m (/l (/l .. () (/l ""C l> VI 1:>
C) 0 C) Vl " ~
:> ~ Z m m n C) >- ffl -1 n ~ I' Ja
4 Z ~ 0 0 ~ 1:) 0 et) rn
ll> () (/l 1) 0 m Q
0 4 0 0 ~ ::Il 1:) ~ 0 m (/l VI ~
Z m Z ." 0 0 ~ ::Il l> ~ ~ z -<
CD ~ ::Il CZl l> ::Il C 0 :D :D
() 0 '" () c
C ll> C m 0 ~ ~ m
r- (/l C Z ~ Z c :> ~ ()
-< Z ::Il 0 ::c l> C) ::c -< 4
'Tl (/l m -< c
:0 CD ." ~ m JJ en -.....J ~ N ->. Vol N V1 .....en
." -.....J
-; 0 0 m ->. (nV1 ~ fci "-..J en ->. 00 oc.o
c < U"l 1U"10 en "-..J co c.o c.o 00 NO
Z m 0 c c
;:l Vl ~ Vl
0 v t 0 ~ -' e :::l
JJ (lJ cu ~ ::.; ~ r; ;:::;
-< " n " ;:; V' Vl
et) e< rn ~
f' Vl
~
,
-,
et)
.....
en Vol 0
N"-..JO
:0"--0
Attachment E
COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT
Evaluation of Project Changes
referenced to 1985 Community Impact Statement
HAWKS' CA Y EXPANSION PROJECT COMMUNITY IMP ACT STATEMENT
Update August 21, 1995
This update of the Hawk's Cay Major Development Community Impact Statement (CIS)
is cross-referenced with the original document approved in 1986, a copy of which
immediately follows this update, with update attachments following that. For ease of
reference between the two documents, page numbers of the relevant sections of the
original CIS are provided in italics following each question.
1. General Description of Proposed Major Development
a. Provide a general written description of the proposed major development
project. Include in this description the proposed phases of development or
operation and facility utilization, target dates for each of these, and the date of
completion. In addition, indicate the site size, development staging and
appropriate descriptive measures such as quantity and type of residential
units, commercial floor area, capabilities for tourist attractions, number of
hospital beds. For residential developments indicated the anticipated unit per
acre density of the completed project. (Pages 1-3)
The Hawk's Cay Resort is a luxury destination resort located on Indies Island at
Duck Key, Monroe County, Florida. The resort consists of 58.8 acres and contains
178 existing hotel units (156 rooms and 22 suites), three restaurants, a night club,
convenience store, pro shop, and marina.
The site area listed in the Major Development and ADA was 60.8 acres; however, a
new survey conducted in 1988 more accurately defined the mean high water line
than had the previous survey, which reduces the total project area in the 1986 plan
by two acres, reducing the open space in that plan from 37.8 to 35.8 acres.
The Hawk's Cay expansion project was reviewed by Monroe County as a major
development, and received preliminary approval, in 1985. Fmal approval was
contingent on the project ungoing review as a Development of Regional Impact
(DR!) pursuant to Ch, 380.05 and 380.06, Florida Statutes, The Application for
Development Approval (ADA) for the Hawk's Cay Expansion DR! was reviewed by
1
the South Florida Regional Planning Council and Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC) in 1986, and a final Development Order (DO), which
granted both DR! and final major development approval, was issued by the BOCC
on December 5, 1986.
The expansion project approved by the final DO was consistent with that proposed
in the Major Development, which is described in the original Community Impact
Statement (attached to this update), Attachment CIS-I, immediately following this
update, summarizes the pre-DR! existing components of Hawk's Cay, and the
additional development approved in 1986 and as proposed now. The following is a
description of the proposed changes.
~
The total number of new units originally approved was 444, consisting of 324 rooms
(1 bedroom, 1 bath) and 120 suites (2 bedrooms, 2 baths). The total number of units
now proposed is 326, consisting of 301 suites and 25 luxury suites (3 bedroom, 3
baths). These units will be reconfigured on the property to respond to current
market conditions. The new configuration is shown on the revised Site Plan, which
is enclosed as Attachment F to the major development amendment application. For
comparison purposes, the original site plan, excerpted from the ADA, is enclosed as
Attachment CIS-2.
The project area west of Duck Key Drive has been reconfigured to contain 232
suites, all with sunset views, in the newly titled Sunset Island component of Hawk's
Cay Resort This area previously cop~ained 96 units titled Tom's Harbor Lodge, and
at the north end it contained now deleted restaurant facilities. A newly-designed
Sunset Island Clubhouse, with grill facilities (50 restaurant seats), will be situated
approximately in the center of the area, as was also proposed for Tom's Harbor
Lodge, Attachment G2 to the major development amendment application provides
floor plans and elevation drawings of both the Sunset Island Guest Suites and the
Clubhouse.
The Tennis Garden and 96 Tennis Garden Suites, originally planned directly across
Duck Key Drive from the Tom's Harbor Suites, will be removed from the plans
entirely, This reflects market conditions which require all units to have water views.
2
The area previously described as the Conference Garden and 48 Luxury Guest
Suites, situated at the south end of the project, will be replaced with 18 Luxury
Guest Suites (3 bedrooms, 3 baths); and the 60 South Harbor Guest Suites will be
replaced with 7 Luxury Guest Suites. Floor plans are not available for these units, as
they will be custom designed and built for individual purchasers; however, all
building code and flood insurance hurricane elevation requirements will be met as
part of the building permit application process for each unit. The 60-room Inn
Expansion building will be removed from the plans entirely.
The Marina Villas area at the north of Hawk's Cay Resort, originally planned for 86
suites (22 of which are already built), is now redesigned to contain 69 suites. Floor
plans and elevation drawings for these suites are provided in Attachment G 1 to the
~ -
major development amendment application. The adjacent conference center and
ballroom, at the western end of the existing hotel building, will be expanded 15,000
square feet (sf), rather than 26,000 sf as originally proposed. The floor plan for the
conference center expansion is not yet complete; however, it will be one story, and
all building code and flood insurance hurricane elevation requirements will be met as
part of the building permit application process.
Two new buildings for commercial retail use are proposed in the vicinity of the
existing marina and restaurant. The 1986 plan proposed 3,000 sf of additional
space, The present plan proposes 10,000 sf. This space would contain accessory
retail uses normally found in luxury resorts, such as men's and women's clothing and
swim wear, drug store, hair salon, etc. As specific uses are not yet determined, floor
plans cannot yet be designed; however, as with the conference expansion, buildings
will be one story, and all building code and flood insurance hurricane elevation
requirements will be met as part of the building permit application process.
The open space in the 1986 project, corrected by the new sUIVey, was 35.8 acres.
The result of the currently proposed reconfigurement is that the open space will
increase to 36.8 acres. The density will decrease from 10.2 to 8.57 units per acre.
In addition, parking spaces will decrease from 933 to 772, which contributes to the
increase in total open space. These numbers are summarized on the revised Site
Plan (Attachment F),
3
The reconfigurement of resort units does not change the way in which these units
will be used, All units will be posted as hotel units, and licensed and inspected as
such by the Florida Department of Business Regulation, Their owners will be
precluded from using the units as permanent residences. In addition, individual
bedrooms within a unit will not be available for separate rental; i.e., there will be no
"lock-out" rooms within a separate unit, as there are not in the two-bedroom suites
already built The reconfigurement simply addresses the growing market demand for
use of villas by families.
The original phasing plan for Hawk's Cay Expansion Major Development and DR!
~as su.bmitted for planning purposes only, as the note to Table 12.1 of the ADA
indicated:
Specific project details are estimated for planning
purposes only, as future market circumstances may
neceessitate modification of construction beginning
and ending dates, and numbers of units; however, in
no case will numbers of units be changed significantly
[as per Ch. 380,06(19)(b)(11), F.S.] without
additional review and approval,
The Major Development amendment proposes no phases, but rather intends
completion of the project as one continuous phase. The buildout date will be
extended five years, from January 25, 1997 to January 20,2002.
Landscape plans for the overall site remain consistent with what was proposed in
1986. Preservation of native vegetation, protection of the shoreline, and removal of
invasive exotic vegetation are objectives of Hawk's Cay's landscape plans.
Vegetation being retained include Gumbo Limbo, Jamaica Dogwood, Coconut
Palms, Seagrape, Pigeon Plum, Geiger Tree, and Black Ironwood. Invasive exotics
to be removed include Brazilian Pepper and Australian Pine.
Consistent with protection of the shoreline, the new plan proposes construction of a
meandering boardwalk with handrails along the shoreline in the Sunset Island
portion of the property, designed to avoid sensitive vegetation. This boardwalk:
would provide a recreational and educational amenity along the shoreline while
lifting foot traffic up above the actual intertidal zone inself.
4
Identify aspects of the project design, such as clustering, which were
incorporated to reduce public facilities costs and improve the scenic quality of
the development. Describe building and siting specifications which were
utilized to reduce hurricane and fire damage potential to comply with federal
flood insurance regulations. (Pages 4-5)
The proposed amendment to the Hawk's Cay Major Development and DR! has been
designed to substantially reduce public facilities impacts from that which was
originally approved in 1986. This is discussed further in the public facilities sections
below.
Sunset Island buildings will contain 24, 28, and 32 units, with landscaped areas
around and between buildings to provide visual attractiveness, maintain access for
emergency response equipment, and provide less resistance to storm surge in the
event of a hurricane. All buildings throughout the project will meet floor area
elevation requirements of the National Flood Insurance program.
As noted in the 1985 CIS, the existing Inn structure weathered the eye of an intense
hurricane in 1959, and continues to serve as an emergency operations center in the
event of a hurricane, providing the location for government personnel to coordinate
hurricane preparedness, evacuation, and recovery operations, Several hotel rooms
are kept in constant readiness for this emergency use.
The updated Hawk's Cay Resort Hurricane Plan is enclosed as Attachment CIS-3
immediately following this update report. Upon establishment of a hurricane watch,
no further reservations will be taken, people holding existing reservations for the
next 48 hours will be notified that reservations will be cancelled if a hurricane
warning is posted, and all existing guests will be notified to prepare for evacuation.
The issue of hurricane evacuation in the Keys was not considered in the original
ADA or Major Development application. Since then, hurricane evacuation has
provided the basis for Monroe County's Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO), which
went into effect in 1992. Section 9.5-121(F)2. of the Monroe County Code
specifically exempts developments of regional impact from the provisions of ROGO,
as follows:
5
From and after the effective date of the dwelling unit
allocation system, landowners with a valid, unexpired
development of regional impact approval granted by
the county shall be exempt from the dwelling unit
allocation system.
However, the project as now proposed in this Major Development amendment
would substantially reduce impacts from those which would result from the project
as approved in 1986. Total numbers of new units are decreased from 444 to 326,
substantially reducing the numbers of vehicle trips generated. The total number of
parking spaces will decrease from 933 to 772, resulting in a smaller number of
~ -
vehicles located on the grounds at anyone time, reducing the number of vehicles
which could enter the roadway in the event of a hurricane. Please see the traffic
study, enclosed as Attachment CIS-4, for a further discussion of these issues.
A new coordination letter from the Monroe County Fire Marshall is enclosed as
Attachment 13 to the major development amendment application.
2. Impact Assessment
a. Public facilities: Water Supply
1. Identify projected average daily potable water demands at the end of
eac~ development phase and specify any consumption rates which have
been assumed for the project. (Pages 6-7)
Standard planning practices equate potable water demand and wastewater
generation, which is reflected in the summary of these public facilities impacts given
in Attachment CIS-5. Updated generation rates are taken from regulations for
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) onsite sewage
treatment system design contained in Table I, Ch. lOD-6.048(1)(b), Florida
Administrative Code, which went into effect in January 1995. The Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulates the sewage treatment
plant at Hawk's Cay, and also DEP uses HRS's generation rates in estimating flow
for sewage treatment plant capacity,
6
Attachment CIS-5 evaluates all land uses on Hawk's Cay using the new flow rates,
with the old flow rates shown for comparison. The total average and peak potable
water demand approved in the original DR! were 0.1308 million gallons per day
(mgd) and 0,1963 mgd, respectively. The updated evaluation finds total average and
peak demand of 0.1541 mgd and 0.2312 mgd, respectively, for the 1986 plan; and
0.1283 mgd and 0.1924 mgd, respectively, for the new proposal. Total potable
water use for the reconfigured project is 17 percent lower than the 1986 plan using
current rates, and 2 percent lower than that approved in the DR!.
2. Provide proof of coordination with the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority.
Assess the present and projected capacity of the water supply system and
the ability of such system to provide adequate water for the proposed
project. (Page 8)
Please see Attachment J1 of the Application to Amend the Hawk's Cay Major
Development for the new coordination letter from the Florida Keys Aqueduct
Authority. The project as presently designed will consume substantially less potable
water than the original project approved in 1986.
In addition to potable water demand reduction as a result of the reconfiguration,
additional savings will be implemented by the use of water saving bathroom fixtures
in all new Hawk's Cay resort units, which are now required by Monroe County.
These fixtures are estimated to result in as much as 40 percent water use reduction.
3. Describe measures to insure that water pressure and flow will be
adequate for fire protection for the type of construction proposed.
(Page 9)
No change.
b. Public facilities: Waste Water Management
1. Provide projection of the average flows of waste water generated by the
development at the end of each development phase. Describe proposed
treatment system, method and degree of treatment, quality of effluent,
and location of effluent and sludge disposal areas. Identify method and
responsibilities for operation and maintenance of facilities.
7
2. If public facilities are to be utilized, provide proof of coordination with
the Monroe County Waste Collection and Disposal District or its
successor. Assess the present and projected capacity of the treatment and
transmission facilities and the ability of stich facilities to provide
adequate service to the proposed development. (Pages 10-12)
Standard planning practices equate potable water demand and wastewater
generation, which is reflected in the summary of these public facilities impacts given
in Attachment CIS-5. Updated generation rates are taken from regulations for
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) onsite sewage
treatment system design contained in Table I, Ch. lOD-6.048(1)(b), Florida
~dministrative Code, which went into effect in January 1995. The Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulates the sewage treatment
plant at Hawk's Cay, and also DEP uses HRS's generation rates in estimating flow
for sewage treatment plant capacity.
Attachment CIS-5 evaluates all land uses on Hawk's Cay using the new flow rates,
with the old flow rates shown for comparison. The total average and peak
wastewater generation approved in the original DR! were 0.1308 million gallons per
day (mgd) and 0.1963 mgd, respectively. The updated evaluation finds total average
and peak generation of 0.1541 mgd and 0.2312 mgd, respectively, for the 1986 plan;
and 0.1283 mgd and 0.1924 mgd, respectively, for the new proposal. Total
wastewater generation for the reconfigured project is 17 percent lower than the
1986 plan using current rates, and 2 percent lower than that approved in the DR!.
In addition to wastewater flow reduction as a result of the reconfiguration,
additional savings will be implemented by the use of water saving bathroom fixtures
in all new Hawk's Cay resort units, which are now required by Monroe County.
These fixtures are estimated to result in as much as 40 percent reduction.
The form of sewage treatment at Hawk's Cay at the time of the Major Development
and DR! approval was an aerobic digestion package plant which provided secondary
treatment, located on the small island connected by a causeway to the west. 11ris
plant was permitted by DEP for an average capacity of 0.050 mgd, with disposal of
effluent by surface water discharge.
8
In June 1987, DEP issued permit #5244POOI24 (see Attachment CIS-6), providing
for a 0,050 mgd extended aeration expansion to the existing facility, for a total
capacity of 0.100 mgd. A third, or tertiary level of treatment was added by
construction of holding ponds where effluent is retained, allowing further settling
and removal of solids and additional aeration. The water is then recycled for
irrigation of landscaped areas, and any excess is disposed in deep injection wells
located on the utility island. Additional information regarding required quality of
effluent, and methods and responsibilities for operation and maintenance of facilities,
is included in Attachment CIS-6.
~dditio.nal expansion of this facility will be necessary to accommodate completion of
the proposed project. A coordination letter from DEP in this regard is included as
Attachment J6 to the major development amendment application.
3. If applicable, provide a description of the volume and characteristics of
any industrial or other effluents. (Page 13)
No change.
c. Public facilities: Solid waste
1. Identify projected average daily volumes of solid waste generated by the
development at the end of each phe.se. Indicate proposed methods of
treatment and disposal. (Pages 13-14)
It was estimated in the ADA that the pre-DR! existing component of Hawk's Cay
would generate 9.042 cubic yards per day of solid waste. The most recent records
from Marathon Garbage, the local firm which collects Hawk's Cay's solid waste,
indicate that the Resort produced a total of 1038 cubic yards of solid waste between
October 26, 1994 and June 27, 1995, or an average of about 4.3 cubic yards per
day. This is less than half that originally estimated, and also includes solid waste
from 22 new Marina Villa suites which are part of the original Major Development
and DR! expansion project. Therefore, it can be reasonably projected that solid
waste generated by the reconfigured project will be the same or less than that
projected in 1986.
9
2. Provide proof of coordination with Monroe County Waste Collection and
Disposal District or its successor. Assess the present and projected
capacity of the solid waste treatment and disposal system and the ability
of such facilities to provide adequate services to the proposed
development. (Page 15)
A new coordination letter was not required.
Monroe County presently sends all solid waste to Waste Management, Inc.'s land fill
in Broward County.
d. Public-facilities: Transportation
1. Provide a projection of the expected vehicle trip generation at the
completion of each development phase. Describe in terms of external trip
generation and average daily peak hour traffic. (Pages 16-17)
Please see the updated traffic study conducted by David Plummer & Associates,
Inc" enclosed as Attachment CIS-4. The most current methodology in assessing
traffic trip generation was used (Institute of Transportation Engineers [lTE] fifth
edition manual), both for the 1986 project and the plan presently proposed.
Although the ITE manual does not recommend an increase in the trip generation rate
for larger units in the resort hotelland use category, an effort was made to address
the perception that greater numbers of trips would be generated by larger units by
extrapolating adjustments from another comparable land use.
Exhibit 3 of the traffic study summarizes the results. Under current methodology,
the approved 1986 plan and the new plan would generate a daily total Of 4,811 and
3,948 trips, respectively; and the total trips approved in 1986 were 4,529. Total
daily trips for the reconfigured project are 18 percent lower than the 1986 plan using
current methodology, and 13 percent lower than that approved in the DR!.
Under current methodology, average daily peak hour traffic for the approved 1986
plan and the new plan would be 233 and 185 trips, respectively; the peak hour trips
approved in 1986 were 408. Peak hour trips for the reconfigured project are 20
percent lower than the 1986 plan using current methodology, and 54 percent lower
than those approved in the DR!.
10
2. If project is adjacent to U.S. Highway 1, describe the measures, such as
setbacks and access limitations, which have been incorporated into the
project design to reduce impacts upon U.S. 1. (Page 18)
No change.
e. Other Public Facilities (Pages 19-20)
No further update was required beyond that specified in Attachment A of the major
development amendment application.
f. Environmental resources: Shore Line Protection Zone and Natural Vegetation
1. If shoreline protection zones were identified in the environmental
designation survey, describe in detail any proposed site alterations in the
areas including vegetation removal, dredging, canals and channels.
Identify measures which have been taken to protecft the natural, biologic
functions of the vegetation of this area such as shoreline stabilization,
wildlife and marine habitat, marine productivity and water quality.
(Pages 21-22)
The policy of the Hawk's Cay project is to preserve the shoreline protection zone
and natural vegetation to the greatest extent possible, and, in fact, to incorporate
these natural features into the am,:nities of the resort. In this regard, a boardwalk
with handrails is now being proposed to be constructed along the west shoreline of
the project in the area of the Sunset Island suites. This boardwalk would be built to
meander around and preserve outstanding shoreline vegetation, and would lift foot
traffic above the intertidal area thus removing trampling effects.
2. If tropical hammock communities were identified in the environmental
designation survey, describe proposed site alteration in these areas and
indicate measures which were taken to protect intact areas (clumps) of
tropical hardwood hammocks and individual species of tree cactus and
palms prior to, during and after construction. (Pages 23-24)
No change,
11
3. Describe plans for revegation and landscaping of cleared sites including a
completion schedule for such work. (Page 25)
No change.
g. Environmental resources: Wildlife
Describe the wildife species which nest, feed or reside on or adjacent to the
proposed site. Specifically identify those species considered to be threatened or
endangered. Indicate measures which will be taken to protect wildlife and
their habitats. (Page 26)
No change,
h. Environmental resources: Water quality
1. Identify any waste water disposal areas, septic tank drainfields, urban
runoff areas, impervious surfaces, and construction related runoff.
Describe anticipated volume and characteristics. Indicate measures
taken to minimize the adverse impacts of these potential pollution sources
upon the quality of the receiving waters prior to, during, and after
construction. (Pages 27-28)
Wastewater disposal areas and methods are described in the response to question
2.b. above, and there are no septic tank drainfields on the Hawk's Cay property,
Runoff from impervious surfaces will be entirely contained on the property, far
exceeding South Florida Water Management District standards for stormwater
treatment. Please see the revised Site Plan (Attachment F), and the drainage
calculations (Attachment H) for more detailed information on the drainage plan.
Any erosion and potential runoff into nearshore waters which could result from
construction activities will be contained with appropriate staked sediment barriers.
However, the very low relief of the island, and the drainage plan design which
directs runoff away from the shoreline reduce the likelihood of any problem of this
kind.
12
2. Indicate the degree to which any natural drainage patterns have been
incorporated into the drainage system of the project. (Page 29)
No change. See the revised Site Plan (Attachment F) for the new drainage plan, and
Attachment H for the drainage calculations.
i. Economic
1. Provide an analysis of the estimated average annual ad valorem tax yield
from the proposed project during each phase of development. Indicate
assumptions and standards utilized, including but not limited to assessed
value, exemptions, millage rates, etc. (Pages 30-31)
An estimate of total property value at buildout is as follows:
69 villas @ $220,000 each
232 villas at $170,000 each
25 villas at $300,000 each
Commercial 10,000 sf@ $100/sf
50 seat grill at Sunset Island Clubhouse
Site improvements
Conference center expansion
TOTAL
$15,180,000
$39,440,000
$7,500,000
$1,000,000
$200,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$65,820,000
The total tax millage rate for the Hawk's Cay property in 1994 was 14.47. Applying
this rate to the total estimated value at buildout yields a total of $952,416 in added
ad valorem tax revenue, assuming a constant millage rate and distribution schedule.
In addition to the ad valorem tax revenues generated by new construction,
approximately $36,000 per year will be generated by tangible property tax.
2. For each development phase, estimate the average annual construction
expenditure by type i.e., labor, materials, etc., and the percentage of this
expenditure which will occur within the County. (Page 32)
13
The project is now proposed as one continuous phase. Distribution of construction
expenditures is estimated as follows:
Labor
Materials
In Monroe County
$16,455,000
$16,455,000
Outside
$16,455,000
$16,455,000
3. For non-residential developments, project the number of non-
construction permanent employees using appropriate classifications such
as salary and functions. (Page 33)
~
The proposed major development would create in excess of one hundred fifty
permanent new jobs, making Hawk's Cay Resort one of the largest employers in
Monroe County, Florida. The following job classifications would be required:
Management:
Sales and Marketing
Front Desk
Food and Beverage
Housekeeping
Security
Engineering
Banquets and Conventions
Accounting
Service Personnel:
Office Staff
Bell Persons
Maids
Food and Beverage Employees
Front Desk
Engineering
Security Guards
Sales Personnel
Telephone and Reservations
Salaty Ran~e
$30,000-$50,000/year
$25,000-$60,000/year
$30,OOO-$55,OOO/year
$25,000-$50,OOO/year
$25,000/year
$35,OOO-$50,OOO/year
$25,000-$35,000/year
$30,000-$60,OOO/year
$18,000-$25,000/year
$5/hour + gratuity
$7 -$9/hour
$6-$8/hour
$7 -$9/hour
$7 -$II/hour
$lO/hour
$20,000-$25,000/year
$17,OOO-$22,OOO/year
14
j. Housing (Page 34)
Non-applicable.
k. Special Considerations
1. Describe the relationship of the proposed development to county land use
plans, objectives and policies. Also, indicate relationship to existing or
proposed public facilities' plans such as wastewater treatment,
transportation, etc. Identify any conflicts. (Pages 35-36)
~ As no zoning change is proposed, no additional discussion is required. .
2. Indicate any relationship of the project to special land use and/or
development districts such as airport noise and hazard zones, solid or
liquid waste or disposal areas, etc. (Page 37)
Not applicable.
3. If applicable, assess the impact of the proposed development upon
adjacent or nearby municipalities or counties. (Pages 37-38)
The following is an update of the list of impacts presented in the original CIS.
Type of impact
Effect of new plan
Negative:
1. Increased traffic flow
2. Increased demand for services and utilities
Decrease
Decrease
Positive:
1. Upgrade entrance to Duck Key
2. Protect and enhance environment
3. Upgrade recreational amenities
4. Temporary construction employment
5. Permanent employment
Same
Increase (boardwalk)
Same
Same
Decrease (from 300 to 150)
15
Type of im.pact
6.
7.
8.
Provide major convention facilities
Increase local and sub-regional tourism
Increase ad valorem and tangible tax revenues
Effect of new plan
Decrease (less sf)
Decrease (less units)
Increase (more value)
I. Historical and Archaeological resources (Page 39)
No change.
16
0\
~N
~~
0) n.
U')0
0rl
rl
~" tn
r.l rI
....l ~..
H ~.::
r.l a:.
Al IA\,;HMENT K1
Planning Department
RESOLUTION NO. 006 -1990
"" ,
A RESOLUTION BY TilE BOARD OL;o COUNTY COMMISS ION-
ERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, J\PPROVING AMEND-
MENTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL U1PJ\CT
(DRI) . DEVELOPMENT ORDER, RESOLUTION NO.
365-1986, AND MODIFICATIONS TO TilE MASTER DEVEL-
OPMENT APPROVJ\L FOR THE IU\.WK'S CAY EXPANSION
DRI; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREA.9, on December 5, 1906, a(ter a public heari1l9, lhe
Mom:ol9 County Doard uf County CUllllnlaoloalers (Do\.1rd), ...dopted
Resolution No. 365-1906, a Development Order issued under Chapter
300, Florida Statutes (F. S. ), for a Development of Regional Im-
pact (DRI) known as the Hawk's Cay Expanaion DRI; and
WUER.E.l\.9, on September 24, 1906, the Monroe County Zoning
Doard recommended that the Board approv6 the amendments to the
DRI and Major Development for the Hawk's Cay Resort; and
WHEREAS, on September 10,
ments to the DR! and Major
335A-19961 and
1996, the Uoard
Development in
approved amend-
Resolution No.
.
WHEREAS, on December 10, 1997, Hawk' B Cay Investors, Limit-
ed and Hawk's Cay Developers, Limited (horeinafter Applicant),
proposed additional changes to tho 1996 DnI Development Order, as
amended, by filing a NotlficatlDl1 of Pruposed Change (hereinafter
Notification) to a Previously Approved DIU with r-lonroe COUllty,
t.he South Florida Regional Planning CouncJ 1, and the Department
of Community Affairs in accordance with Section 300.06(19), F.S.;
and
WHEREAS, the DRI Notification proposes to rev Ise the DIU
mClster plan for the DRI as approved in Resolution No. 365-1906
and amended in Resolution 3351\-1996 and make non-substantial
deviations pursuant to.Section 300.06(19), F.S.; and
WIIERRA.9, on December 16, 1997, the Applicant also filed an.
application for modifications to the 1906 Major Development (here-.
after modifications), as amended by Resolutioll No. J3SA-1996; and
WIIERE1\.9, during the review process, the f-10nroe County Plan-
ning Commission, after due notice and public participation in the
Page 1 of -1
MDII1\WK3.10/TXTDR, 97013
Initials
~..~-!(:
.~.:.n .
L}\
(1)
t;f(l1
t1~
roo.
lJ1~
~rl
;If)
l'a:lr1
o-1:tll
H~
~a:
hearing process, has reviewed the proposed amendments and modifi-
~ cations to the ~I and Major Development; d
WHEREAS, on February'. 4, 1998, the Planning Commission recom-
mended approval to the Board of the proposed changes and modifica-
tions to the DRI/Major Development and further cla~fied that no
new boat slips shall be allowed at Hawk's Cay; and ,
WHER.E1\.S, .the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
(Board) is the local government body having jurisdiction over the
review and approval of the DR!, in accordance with Section
380.06, F.S. (1996); and .,
WHEREAS, the public notice requirements of r-tonroe County and
Section 380.06 (19) (f)3, f'.S. (1996), (or consideration of the
proposed changes have been made; and
WHEREAS, the public was afforded an opportunity to partici.-
pat~. . in. the. public hbaring. and all ~ja:a..t.iea weru aJ:f.orded the
opportunity to present evidence and argument on all issues and
submit rebuttal evidence on the subject Notification and proposed
modifications before the Board; and
,..
WHRREAS, the Board ha~ reviewed tho above referenced docu-
ments, the related recommendations of the Monroe County Planning
Commission, as well as all relatod testimony and evidence submit-
ted by the partieD and members of the general public; and
WHBRRA.9, there wan competont substantial evidence presented
that the changes set forth in tho proposal do not meet or exceed
any of the DR! substantial deviation criteria in 380.06 (19), F. s.
(1996) .
NOW, TItEREFORB, BS I'!' RESOLVED liY 'rUB MONROB COm'frY BOARD OJ?
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,. MONROE COUWl~, FLORIDA:
Section 1. Tho changes proposed by the Appl icant in its
DRI notification do not constitute a substantial deviation pursu-
ant to Section 380.06 (19), F.S. (1996).
Section J. Resolution No. 365-1986, the DRI Development
Orde=..-, as amended.. by Resolution No. 33SA-1956, for the Hawk's Cay
Expansion DRr, shall be further amended as follows:
(New Languago is
s!~iekeD through)
Unde r l..iIl~;
deleted
language
is
Amendments to Resolution No. 365-1986. as amended
1. substitute Revised Master Develooment Plan dated December 1..
1997. attached hereto fOl" the Mav 20. 1996 Revised Master
Page 2 of tl
MDHAWK3.10/TXTDR, 97013
Initials
..
:'-t.
4d
:;r~.
0'
\l~
~~
coD..
It;~
~rl
~
".. If.
[,JM
.-4:f1o
H~
~a:.
. ..
U\,;";,,"~""''''''''~''I\..'''.,,,," '".....o..&..&... C\."-...."""'-....-...... '-....., '-J..Lt:::J j",f'-\''-......uUl\\ellL U.L..U~.L d.::t L:..^H...LU-
it 1 and referenced in Condition 1.12.
2. Revise cond~cion 9.1 a. as follows:
The Applicant may construct a maximum of 26~uest units,
consisting of combinations of no morc than 55 edroom~ and
556.5 bathroorna ~S - - -l"il:t'9C'- - -euke-elJ - - -( 3- - -bedl.'Oom-,- - -] - - bat.h~
amf- ~44- -liJu.:hl::es - -(i!- -bedl"OOln-,- - d - -bat-hi. Those numbers exclude
the additional 170 existing hotel units that were not subject
to DR! review.
3. Revise condition 9.1 h. as followo:
.,
All new guest units constructed shall adhere to one of the
architectural styles and one of the representative floor
plans depicted in Attachment G2 to the "Hawk's Cay Expansion
Project Community Impact Statement updated May 20, 1997, s;u;:
~\ihmi~~.~.._sVL~.P.P.-lf.l!lflD.~~l" .At.taill.1llle.ll.t . G?;_..~.l.t.lL!.b" Not 1l~1
of a prooosed Chango to a ~rroouslv !\ooroved Q.lU, for the
Hawk's Cay DR! dated December 1997.
4. Add condition 9.1 m, as followa:
No new boat slios ahall be allok[od f,\t Hawk's Cay.
Section 3. The Maj or Development modifications, including
the site development plan, as proposed by the Applicant on Decem-
ber 16, 1997, also are approved. However, the Applicant's propos-
als concerning handicapped accessibility and building code inspec-
tions we1;e withdrawn by the Applicant and therefore, were not
approved.
Section ". Thase provisions of tho DR! Development Order,
Resolution No. 36S-i906, as amended, and the r-1ajor Development
approval, as amended, which are not further amended by this Reso-
lution shall remain in full force and effect.
Section 5. A certified copy of this Resolution, with all
exhibits, shall be furnished by tho County by certified mail,
return receipt requested, to th~ l\ppli-::ant, the Florida Depart-.
ment of Community Affaira and the South Florida Regional Planning
Council within 10 days of its adoption by the Board.
Section 6. The Applicant .shall record
Resolution pursuant to Section 380.06(15), F.S.
a notice
(1996) .
of
this
Section 7.
adoption.
This Resolution shall take effect upon its
Page 3 of 4
MDHAWK3.10/TXTDR, 97013
Ini~ials
~ :~.:t~-
. :':11'
4~
O'l
~1Il
tJ~
((Ill.
1I10
0rl
rl
1.. U1
[.Jr1
~'"'
H~
~m
k.'n~oJ~'" IUJ'VIC"~ >.J:l ....."" wva.u v..... '-VU1U_Y ~UII"\I.1.1d~.1.UlleL.9 UL
. Monroe County, r:'1orida, at a special meet- 1.ng of the Board held
this 23rd day c ?ebruary, A.D., 1998.
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY.KOHLAGE, CLERK
BY:~l~~J
.
MDHAWK3.10/TXTDR, 97013
Hayor London
Mayor Pro Tern Harvey
Commissioner Douglass
Commissioner Freeman
Commissioner Reich
recuseu
'"
ves
ye~
ye~
absent
130J\.H.D OF COUNTY Cor1HISS lONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDJ\
l3y:
,.,.....;::..~, - ~~-~
~~.~ .-..~~ --
HAYOR/CHAIRM1\N
~.
-,
I
DY.
Page " of ,~
Initials
Lj~
~ '..
0'
~l.D
~~
((0..
U'l0
~rl
rl
"" to
[Llrl
0-1 :t1r
H~
~1Il
S1 ^ TE or noRIDJ\)
COUNTY or MONltOE)
Thi.... Copy 11' a True COPT of !be
Oc;n!nCT! ~n ri!o in rhi. Druce. Wltne.l
mv.I'':1nd emu '::>:tklal Seal
Th!-; ..5~--_.__ day of ':tY\Pu. ll.
I' .n,. I !J.95t_
DANNY L. lCOLH-^GB
Clerk ClrcuJl CoUll
!ly "?,rrll q,.~ ~~1" t:S'lo'
4
n.c.
,-
~~
ii ~
! q III! 'Ill
lll!liliiid\
I ~ :~ : ~ ~ II : i i I
IIJ
n
0;
:- 0
[. u
7. r,")
:-J ~
.,' 'i !
. ~
,
U.....:l
OCI-
r., .-i
au
n: H
zt...
o r"
~o
<#
l
I
,&
; ,
j'
: '
11
j'
Ei
l ~
! ;
&'
q
i:
- .
i: :
: i :
I::
)
,j'
,::
~
I
I
!
:u
....
. ,
1ft
J.J
OJ
f..J
&
'\1
Gl
...,
-.J
4-~
," ~.
.'
ATTACHMENT K1
OCT.II ~
P'annlng Department
r
RESOLUT'ON NO. 335A-1996
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,
FLORIDA, APPROV'NG AMENDMENTS TO THE
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI)
DEVELOPMENT ORDER, RESOLUT'ON NO. 365-
1986, AND MOD'F'CA T'ONS TO THE MAJOR
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR THE HAWK'S
CAY EXPANS'ON DR'; PROV'DING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
. ~ ~
_ r-
WHEREAS, on December 5, 1906, after a public hearing, ~he ~pnro~
County Board of County Commissioners, (Board) adopted Hesolution NfB 365:r.
1 986, a Development Order issued under Chapter 300, Florida Statute~,S.~
for a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) known as the Hawk~ C~
Expansion DR'; and \Q G
" a
~ :rJ
WHEREAS, on September 24, 19B6, the Monroe County Zoning Boafd
recommended that the Board approve the amendments to the DRI and Major
Development for the Hawk's Cay Resort; and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 1995, Hawk's Cay Investors, Limited, and Hawk's
Cay Developers, Limited, the owner and developer (hereinafter Applicant),
proposed changes to the 1906 DRI Development Order by filing a Notification of
Proposed Change (hereinafter Notification) to a Previously Approved DRI with
Monroe County, the South Florida Regional Planning Council, and the
Department of C(\~nmunity Affairs in accordance with Section 3BO.OG(19)(f), F.S.;
and
WHEREAS, on March 6 and August 20, 1 996, the Applicant submitted
revisions to the proposed DRI changes in the pending Notification; and
WHEREAS, on August 10, 1995, Hawk's Cay Investors, Limited, also filed
an application for modifications to the 1906 Major Development approval
(hereinafter modifications), which was further revised by the Applicant by
supplemental information submitted December 12, 1 995, May 29, 1996, and July
26,1996;and
1
WHEREAS, the DRI Notification proposes to revise the DRI master plan
for the DR' as approved in Reso'ution No. 365-1986 and extend the build out and
termination date of the DR' pursuant to Section 380,06(19)(c), F.S. (1995); and
. WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Resources Departments
have reviewed the proposed amendments to the DRI and modifications of the
Major Development and recommended aQprova' with conditions of the concept
site plan and recommended de.ni.a.l of the request for lime extension of the
project, as presented in staff report dated July 0, 1996, and updated on
September 3, 1996; and
WHEREAS, during the review process, the Monroe County Planning
Commission, after due notice and public participation in the hearing process, has
reviewed the proposed amendments and modifications to the DRI and Major
Development and recommendations of the Planning and Environmental
Resources Departments; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at its meeting of September 5,
1996, made findings of fact and conc'usions of law that recommended approval
of the modifications to the Major DevelopmenUDRI and extension of the project
termination date from January 25, 1997, to January 20, 2004; and
WHEREAS, on September 5, 1996, the Planning Commission granted a
variance to the Applicant in meeting the minimum sideyard setback requirements
of Section 19-79 of the Monroe County Code in effect prior to September 16,
1986; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (Board)
is the local government body having jurisdiction over the review and approval of
the DR', in accordance with Section 380,06, F,S, (1995); and
WHEREAS, the public notice requirements of Monroe County and
Section 380,06(1P)(f)3, F,S, (1995), for consideration of the prop8sed changes
have been met; and
WHEREAS, on September 18, 1996, the Board held a duly noticed public
hearing on the DRI Notification and has heard and considered the testimony and
documents received therein; and
WHEREAS, the public was afforded an opportunity to participate in the
public hearing and all parties were afforded the opportunity to present evidence
and argument on all issues and submit rebuttal evidence on the subject
Notification before the Board; and
2
WHEREAS, the Board has reviewed the above referenced documents,
the re'ated recommendations of the Monroe County Planning Commission dated
September 5. 1996. as well as all related testimony and eVidence submitted by
the parties and members of the general public; and
. WHEREAS, Board of County Commissioners has duly considered the
findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in Planning Commission
Resolution dated September 5, 1996, and adopts these findings of fact and
conclusions of law as its own; and
WHEREAS, there was competent substantial evidence presented that
the changes set forth in the proposal do not meet or exceed any of lhe DRI
substantia' deviation criteria in Section 380.06(19), F.S. (HJ9S),
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MONROE COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMM'SSIONERS, MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA:
Section 1. The changes proposed by the Applicant in its DRI
notification do not constitute a deviation pursuant 10 Section 380.06(19), F .S.
(1995).
Section 2. Resolution No, 365-1986, the 1986 DRI Development Order
for the Hawk's Cay Expansion DRI, shall be further amended as follows:
(New Language is underlined; deleted language is slriGken through)
Amendments to Resolution No, 365-1 DOG
1, Revise the third uWHEHEAS" clause as follows:
WHEREAS, Hawk's Cay Resort as-prop9sed-in-lhe-AQA when
completed will be a hotel type destination resort consisting of 622 ~
hotel suites, conference facilities, retail areas, restaurants and
recreational facilities on approximately 6+ .5Ji.U acres of land located in
unincorporated Monroe County, Florida on Indies Islands at Duck Key,
and;
Amendments to Attachment A, General <illY
Special Conditions of Developmelll
2, Revise Condition 1,3(b.) as follows:
The Project buildouL..J:2Rl termination a.mL.I:ill..LJJeveloplllent order
expiration date for completing development shall be len-(-l Q)--year6-frGm
tRe-effeGlive-datEKJf...the-develepmeRl-erdeF January 20. 2004, provided
3
that the Applicant, or its successors and assigns, complies with the terms
and conditions of this Development Order. :nlis~. termination dates
may on'y be modified in accordance with Section 300.06(19), Florida
Statutes, (-+009) (1995), Consistent with prior County Determinations
. concerning the original buildout date, these dates alsQ ~.b.illLgovern the
related Hawk's Cay Maior Development AUPIQyaL
3, Revise Condition 1,7 as follows:
The County Attorney, upon recommendation of the building-9ffiGial
Director of P'anning. shall have the authority to stay the effectiveness of
the DRI Development Order upon notification and verification of a violation
of any condition herein.
4. Revise Condition 1,9 as follows:
QeGembeF-J-t,:1-t)8a, January 20, 2004, shall be the delte until which the
County agrees that the Hawk's Cay Resort Development of Regional
Impact and Maior Development shall not be subject to down-zoning, unit
density reduction, or intensity reduction, unless the County can
demonstrate that substantial changes in the conditions underlying the
approval of the development order have occurred, or that the
development order was based on substantially inaccurate information
provided by the Applicant, or that the change is clearly essential to the
public health, safety, or welfare,
5. Revise Condition 1.10. first line, as follows:
The Dire.ctpr of Planning, QuilgiR~Rf:J-l9nin!j is lI)e county official
designated to monitor compliance with all conditions of the Development Order
including the following requirements:
(No additional changes to Condition 1.1 Q}
6. Revise Condition 1,11. first line. and delete subsectiQo (n) as follo~
The Applicant shall submit an Annual report to the RPC, County Director
of PlanninQ. and DCA on each anniversary of the effective date of the
Development Order, which report shall include at a minimum:
4
(fl) The-G~Hmty-Qir-ec;t9F-ef-.PlaAAing,g'=lildin~A{i--Zgnin9--j6-{;le6ig na ted
a&-tRe-I9Gal-9ffic;ial-fe6f'}gA6i91e-fgf-Fec;eiving~he-annual-re port.
7. Substitute Revised Master Development Plan dated M.ifi.20. 1996. for the
origina' Master Development Plan attached to the Deve.1QQ/llent Order as
Exhibit 1 and referenced in Condition 1,12,
8. Revise Condition 1,12 as follows:
The land uses approved by this Development Order shall be as shown on
the Master Development P'an attached hereto as Exhibit 1. and-as--f'=llly
de6GfigeQ4n-an6wef-te-q'=le6tigA-:t-~-or--tI1e-AgA-wl1ic;h--i &--a t taGhed-he retg
a~i9i~ Both of these exhibits are incorporated into this
Development Order; provided. however. that the "Land Use Summary" on
the Master Development Plan shall control as to the amount and type of
aQ.proved deve lopme n t, +ae'e-1-b-1-e~hi9it-2-is-mgd i fied-herein-'e
giffereAtiate-eetween-e~i6ting-deve'epment-amJ-gevelop ment-aut herii!eg
ey-the-deve'epment-erder-aRG--te-aGVaRGe-the-GOn6trUGt jen-eeginning-and
eRGiAg-dated-by-eRe-yeaF-tg-a~unt-feF-4elay&-in-6eGuring-g R l-apf'} revak
9, Revise Condition 7,1 as follows:
Within six months following the completion of 144 new 110lelJJ.ol1s. Pha6~
of the development as defined in this report, the Applicant shall consult
with the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT) to determine the
need for a traffic signal at the intersection of US 1 and Duck Key Drive,
The Applicant shall repeat this after each additional 50 units sU96equeRl
f'}ha6e and following project buildout or until a traffic sinnal is installed at
this location. Copies of all correspondence and reports relnting to such
consultation shall be provided to the Board, the RPC . and the DCA, If
and when a traffic signal at this location is found to be necessnry by the
FOOT, the Applicant shall provide full funding for its installation to the
Florida Department of Transportation, If the Appl!cant fails 10 consult or
provide such funding as required by this paragraph in a timely fashion, the
County may withhold issuance of certificates of occupancy until the
Applicant has conformed with provisions of this par<lgraph.
10. Add New Special Conditions in Sections 9. 10. 11. and 12 as follows:
.a..u Site Planning for 1996 ORI Amendments
.9...1 The Applicant shall adhere to the followinggenerilll1.e.
planning reQ.u.irem.ents for future develoRm~n.Lfollowing
.approvaL of the 1996 amendments to the DRI Development
5
Order proposed by Applicant and extension of this
Development Order to January 20, 2004.
a.. The Applicant may construct a maximum of 269
guest units, consisting of 25 larM-sl!!L~s l3-bedroom.
~h) and 244 suit.e.s.J2.~QQm~2:QgU1L Twenty-
two of the suites are existing, These nurnbeli
exclude the additional 170 ex.is.lingJ101.el units that
were not subiect to DRI review.
b... Ihe....8~ant may construcLa...m..aX!01UrI.LQf...1Q.QQ..Q
sguare feet of addili.Qnal commerC!flLSI2Q!;'!u!'UIN
.ex i s tin g res ill.lbQ1eLCQillI~.2: .
Q.. Th~Rplicant may construclJLmi1xillllllll of 15,QQQ
S.Qllimtl~~Lclli1JiilitLonal convenUPll~Race at Ihe
existing resort hotel com~.
do. The maximum height of any newIY.J;on~tructed units
and commercial or conrerence sill~lures shall be 35
m.et.
~ Ihe...ARPlicant proposes to re-config~the roads
within the DRLas shown on the Revised ~~
Development Plan.
f... IlliL8RPlicant shalLprovide a boaLlri!iLer/RV Rarking
area that cannot be seen rro!J.LOllck I<cy Dr ive.
~ All new guest units shall be constructed within the
"~~ment corridors" iden~in Exhihtl 1, The
f.Qllowing minimum setbacks shall be met:
Setbacklrom mean higlllY!)t~20~
s.e..tback from RIQIDllty line adja..cJmUQ
.Duck Key Drive: 50 feet.
h.. All new guest units constructed shall adhere to one of
the architectural styles and one of the representative
flQor plans depicted in Attachment G2 to the "Hawk's
.c~pansion Proj~t ComrnunitY.JmR~atement
.\.l.m.illte May 20, 1996,"
6
i.. Prior to the issuance of a building ~rrniUlle
8gplicant shall obtain a variance tQ.Jhe minimum side
~rd requirements.
1. Prior to the issuance of any bUildinY..R.IDDlit for hotel
units within a development corrido[L~QQfudmt
shall submit. and the Planning Dir~ctor shall ap~l
a site plan for that portion of the develooment corridor
for which building ~ts are bein9-reguested
indicating the location of the buildIQg~.Jb..e.jJ"'pJ..Iill1g
amJ the landscaR.ing, Parking shalll2!uill11.e
minimum ratio of 1.2.9-s~~eumll~illl~R.ing
QIlthe Master Plan (Exhibit 1) shall be in compliance
with Section 19-127(R.)(1), (b)(2) an~i3) of the pre-
1906 Monroe County Code, as determined by the
Planning Director.
k.. landscaping for parking areas on the Muster
~~n shall be in comQ.]iance willi
~ion 19-127(b)L1L.(liliZL.amUb)Q) of the RI~
1906 Monroe CounlY_~~S-.geteUlline~J.}yj1le
Planning Director, This landscaQiI}~ill!lb.e...provided
in accordance with the following sche~
i.. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of
~pancyforexRQDsion of
develolID1e.n.lYiithin the "ColTlmercial
~Q.aD.S..iQn Area." the ARP-Jicant shall
provide lands!&R.irul. for the common
parking area,
ii.. Prior to the i~uance...Qf certiricale of
Q..'&Upancy for eXQ.QDsion of the
"Con ferenceJ;&n Ie rIB llllroonLlb.e
8p~Lsl1alLRrovide.d..1mdscaping for
the "Inn Overflow Parking Area,"
ilL. Prior to lI~l,.!ance of a certific~
~R.aIEll~-1.0jst unit within the
QeyejQpment corridors, the AQQlkan1
sJli!ILQIQYideJandsc~ming for all of the
common R..illkjn9-.ill.ea:.. including tIN
"Commercial EXP..a!LsjQ~und the
proposed "Overflow Pmkir:uf areas.
7
1.. 811 the proposed construction and .s.i~~
shall comply with the Florida ACJ;~~ibility Co@..lQr
Building Construction or the aoplicable regulations
which are in effect at the time of the ~
aQ.plication, Accessible units in l11e....~QP.llliill1
corridors sl1all be developed at the r~uired rates for
each element of accessibility.
9....2 After receipt of final unconteste.d...buildingJ2~rr!lits for the
units authorized under the 1996 amendments to this DR'
Development Order and after the COUnlY~~1e.nsion of the
Development Order to January 20. 2004, the Armlicant shall
~ulY-WilbJhe following ad d i1.i.Qua I condltiQ!lS:
a... Ihe...8QPlicant will RIQYjQe a 10ng-I!;U1ll le~e-1ZQ...y~rs
renewable for another 20 years al a cost of $1.00 ~
year) for a 100' X 100' piece of pr(mert~ated at tl1e
~r of Duck Key D~e and Greenbriar [1Qi!o..lQ[Jl1e
installation of a Duc~y "welcome booth." The
8pplicant will permit "hooku~anitation and
electricity at said welcome booth. Tile ARplicant will
allow a road turn around,
b... The AQPlicant wilLI.e.c.Qolig!J.f!L1he boat launch ramQjQ
eliminate the use of Duck Key Drive as a direct
launch ingress and egress. as COI1~~R.llliilly. illustrated
on Exhibil..2....aUached hereto.....
~ Ihe...8Q.Rfu&nt will landscape the east and west sides
of Duck Key Drive, Landscap-in9-wi!l meet or exceed
Monroe County standard.s.l!Leffe~lnUlHU2ermit dale.
d. JJ1e..8pplicant will aQQpt and enforce 10 the best of its
ability. the iet slsiNs1riction~1~Ql!l E~!JlbjU
allached hereto.
~ Il1e..8RPlicant will use its best efforts to obtain
a,uprovalto install and operate a welcome booth Qll
Duck Key Drive at the main entrance to Hawk's Cay.
as conceptuallY...illlls1rJ:lkd.Jmj;xlliillt 1 hereto. for
purposes of pI.QYjding:
L Bridge safetDn.fQlmation for oedestrians and
motorists,
o
. .
ii.. Traffic information a-.llil.gYillill~for visitors
and guests to the DRI and nelgl.1.!J.QillllIJ2.u~
Key residences,
lih Station for DRI ~lY-.P~1.~9lllirl.
Mass-through lane for DubHe acc~~ wilLLLe
provided, DI~POA has agreed \oYiJJ.L~Rlild!llt that
it will assist Hawk's Cay Resort ill this effort if it is
determined by DKPOA and the Dl,t~k Key Securit~
District Advisory Board thaUhis t1PQrou!;l.t.will
.s.ignincantlyjmQLQYSLPJJ~!![Qty. ~J lCL1!ULSCCU rity~
l11e resi~utiallit!nd.s.
8Dy financial sUQport from the residential islands for
lil.e..Qperation of the welcome booth mWit be
aRproved by tll~uck l<eY_QegJ[ily_6dviSQLY_Ullilru
under the guidelines established by Monroe County.
L There wil~ no boat dockage a!LQYJed at units on the
swIll side of Greenbriar Road or tile west sid~
Duck Key Drive.
g.. Assumingj;lQRf.QY.a~he 1996 Dnl Deve\.QR~
Order amendments and extenSiQD~IJlJ.~ DRl
Development Order to January 20~2004. the
deteriorating seawall bordering the Lake Lucille and
canal area will be repaired within tWQ..y'ear~Q1Jlle
commencement of con~ction qJ JJew_guest units
adiacent to the seaw-.Sill..
h.. C9.rrs.1ruction of each...b.uilding will be cQillpleted witbln
18 mont~yrollnd breaking.
L DKPOA will be provided cop~l.Q!Lm~rmit
.a~tions made by the Applicant to countyJ1ille
and federal agencies.
1. The following limitations on the Q1JU.ding_s in the
~pment corridors" shall be mandatory:
L Il.JJLmaxirnum number of 11Q1~lllts per
lllijlding shall be seven.
9
.'
iL. No more then 90 hotel units shall be develQ~
in Development Corridor 112 shown on Exl1Hill
1.
ill.. Hotel bUildings in DeveloQn!.enl Corridor #2
;:;hall utilize no more than Iwo:.1ll!!ds of the
Ijnear shoreline frontage.
~ Use of Duck Key Drive Right-of-WayJb~QPJKanLaUts
sole expense, shal~R.Q.1l~ble for obliJining~unt.tillii
any other necessary permils....2.rn.Ls!RRrov!!l.~IO-'1~~
existing unpaved right-of-way for Duck K,~y Drive for
landscaQjng, street lighting, ul.1!k[grounQjJUillyJ.Qc.al.iQllS.Jll
reloca tiOI~~y-rela teel signag~_;wsLQJ.lleliim.ilill
~
II Welcome Booth/Security Station. The Applicant at its sole
expense, shall be res~ble for obtillnillQ CounlUnd any
other necessary permits and approvals to use the existillil
unpaved ri~ht-of-way for Duck Key Drive for a welcQm~smd
information booth/securit~.llim.lQLJh.~Uawk's CMQ.L.Qj~
as conceQ1u..a~picted on Exbibit 1. PrQvieled. however.
that the Applicant shall not erect al1Y--ili!l!au or otll~~
device across Duck Key Drive or require vehicular or
pedestrian traffic to stoP at such booth/station. In addition,
the Applicant. at all times. shall ensure that there is a
through traffic lane available on Duck Ke'i_Ori'LQ...
12.. Sewage Treatment Facili1y, At the Couo.li~tion. the
Applicant shall enter into an Agreement r,oncerning the final
disposition of land. wastewater t~tment.imd reus~
facilities. and other aQW.!.tl~nances on UtilitY-L~anel within
one yea.LQ! the adoQ1LQILQ1J1.Je Monroe County SanitalY.
Wastewater Management Plan btihe BOilrd of County-
Commissioners, Th~greement shall detniltl1e terms al1.d
.c.QI]ditions of the transfer of ownershilLill'~he A[m.l~illJ..UQ
the County. at no capital cost to the Coull1.y........9f all land.
wamewater treatmen.Land reuse facilities&.-!1ncl other
aQPurtenances on Utility Island for the sitiD9-illlli
~LUction of a su.l::lregional wa.sJeW-.9terJJ1fHliJ9<illle.nl
faQlity by the County, The Applicant sh~llllave the riyh.lJQ
use all reuse water available from tile new subregional
faQli~QDlicant sb.a1Lb.~QJ~11J1iUe.Q.-1QJ~1f1jn a solid waste
holding area.
10
Section J. The Major Development modifications, including the
revised fina' site deve'opment plan, as submitted by the Applicant are also
approved.
Section 4. Those provisions of the DRI Development Order,
Resolution No. 365-1936, and the Major Development C1pproval which are
not further amended by this Resolution shall remain in full force and
effect.
Section 5. A certified copy of this Resolution. with all exhibits,
shall be furnished by the County by certified mail, retlll n receipt
requested, to the Applicant, the F'orida Department of Community Affairs
and the South Florida Regional Planning Council within 10 days of its
adoption by the Board.
Section 6. The Applicant shall record a notice of Ihis Hesolution
pursuant to Section 380,06(15), F,S. (1995).
Section 7. This Resolution shall take effect upon its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners
of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting of the Board held on Illis 18th
day of September , A.D., 1996.
Mayor Freeman
Mayor Pro Tem London
Commissioner Harvey
Commissioner Douglas
Commissioner Reich
-..:J..es....___
Absent
------
Absent
Yes
Yes
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLOHlDA
~~T~
By
MA YORI -IAIRMAN
(SEAL)
ATTEST; DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
BY:#~
DEP CL RK
"
BY
11
/
.:.
RESOLUT'ON NO. P 73 -99
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY PLANN'NG
COMM'SS'ON RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS (BOCC) OF THE
REQUEST OF HAWK'S CAY INVESTORS, LTD., HAWK'S
CAY DEVELOPERS, LTD., AND THE VILLAGE AT HAWK'S
CAY, INC. FOR A MINOR DEVIATION TO A DEVELOPMENT
OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) TO RECONFIGURE THE SIZE
OF DEVELOPMENT CORRIDOR THREE TO
ACCOMMODATE A DIFFERENT FOOTPRINT OF UNITS AND
ADD TWO ADDITIONAL FLOORPLANS, ON PROPERTY
DESCRIBED AS BEING A PORT'ON OF THE PLAT OF DUCK
KEY, DUCK KEY, MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, MILE
MARKER 61. THE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS
DEST'NATION RESORT (DR).
WHEREAS, Hawk's Cay Investors, Ltd. Hawk's Cay Developers, Ltd., and The Village at
Hawk's Cay, Inc, are the owners and developers of Hawk's Cay Resort (HCR); and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution #335A-1996, which
extended the expiration date of a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) approval to January 20,
2004, pursuant to the land development regulations in effect immediately prior to September 15,
1986; and
WHEREAS, ..he Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution #086-1998, which
approved a minor deviation to a DRI to reconfigure the hotel units and add Development Corridor 4
and accessory uses;
WHEREAS, the proposed development is located on property legally described as a portion of
the pial. of Duck Key, as recorded in Plat Book 5 at Page 82 of the public records of Monroe
County, Sections 16 and 21, Township 65 South, Range 32 East, Tallahassee Meridian, Duck Key,
Florida; and
WHEREAS, the above described property is located in the Destination Resort (DR) land use
district; and
Page 1 of 3
Initia~
PC Resolution P73-99
WHEREAS, the Planning COI ..ssion was presented with information... ,,J the following:
1. The application for a Modification to a Major Development Approval from Sandra Walters and
Peter Rysman acting as agents for the property owners, dated August 19, 1999; and
2. The staff report prepared~y Barbara Mitchell, Senior Planner, dated September 24, 1999; and
3. The sworn testimony of the Monroe County Growth Management Division staff; and
4. The comments of Garth Coller, Esquire, Planning Commission Counsel; and the
5. Presentation by Pritam Singh, Developer, Village at Hawk's Cay; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made the following Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law, based on the sworn testimony of the Monroe County Planning Department
staff, and the evidence presented:
1. Based on the project's approval as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI), we find that
allowing a reconfiguration of Development Corridor 3, while not increasing the total number of
bedrooms and bathrooms, is consistent with the project's current approval. Based on the
application, we find that relocating three hotel units from an area adjacent to a residential
neighborhood to an area centrally located in the resort is in keeping with the residential
character of the surrounding properties. Therefore, we conclude that the request is consistent
with the DRI.
2. Based on the site plan, we find that the proposed reconfiguration of Corridor 3 will not increase
the total number of hotel units or bedrooms and bathrooms that have been approved by the
DR!. Therefore, we conclude that the total number of bedrooms and bathrooms shall remain in
compliance with BDCC Resolution #335A-1996,
3. Based on the site plan, we find that the amount of open space will remain the same, Therefore,
we conclude that reconfiguration of Corridor 3 shall remain in compliance with BDCC
Resolution #335A-1996,
4, Based on the site plan, we find that the employee parking will be relocated to a centrally
located over-flow parking lot. Therefore, we conclude that adequate parking exists on the site.
5. Based on the site plan, we find that there will be a marginal reduction in vehicular traffic from
the southern end of Greenbriar Drive. Therefore, we conclude that the existing traffic pattern
will not be negatively impacted.
6. Based on the Supplemental Attachment G2, we :1nd that the proposed changes include a
modification to a previously approved floor plan (Unit CC) and the project-wide increase in
square footage will be minimal. Therefore, we conclude that the project shall remain in
compliance with BDGG Resolution 335A-1996.
7.
Based on the site plan, we find that the project is limited to and will continue to be limited to
558 bedrooms and 556.5 bathrooms with constraints on interior building setbacks. Therefore,
we conclude that the project shall remain in compliance with BDGC Resolution 086-1998 other
than for the addition of two new floor plans,
Page 2 of 3
'nma~
PC Resolution P73-99
"
8. Based on the floor plans, we find that the single-story handicapped accessible units are in
compliance with the requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act and the 1997 Florida
Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Therefore, we conclude that the project shall be
in compliance with Sections 553.501-553,513, Florida Statutes; NOW THEREFORE,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA,
that the preceding Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, support its decision
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE BOCC of the request by Hawk's Cay Investors, Ltd"
Hawk's Cay Developer's, Ltd. And The Village of Hawk's Cay, Inc. for a minor deviation to its
Development of Regional Impact (DRI).
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a
regular meeting held on the 7th day of October, 1999.
Chair Mapes Yes
Vice-Chair Gorsuch Yes
Commissioner Hill Yes
Commissioner Marr Yes
Commissioner Stuart Yes
Signed this
~vi
-
day of rtI& tlww-fJt! v
,1999.
RM
CY
BY
PC Resolution P73-99
Page 3 of 3
Initials
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
The Planning Commission
Barbara Mitchell, Senior Planner ~\.
DATE:
September 24, 1999
SUBJECT:
Modifications to a Major Development and Modification to a Development
of Regional Impact (DRI) pursuant to See, 19-79 of the Monroe County
Code in effect immediately prior to September 15, 1986,
Applicant: Hawk's Cay Investors, Ltd, Hawk's Cay Developers, L TD, and
Village at Hawk's Cay, 'nc,
MEETING DATE: October b, 1999
I. REQUEST:
A. Applicant & Owner: The property owners are listed as Hawk's Cay
'nvestors, Ltd. Hawl's Cay Developers, Ltd. And Village at Hawk's Cay,
'nc, Peter Rysman is the individual representing the Village at Hawk's
Cay, Inc, The agent representing the property owner's is Sandra Walter's
of Sandra Walters Consultants.
B. Location: The property is described as being a portion of the plat of Duck
Key, as recorded in Plat Book 5 on Page 82 of the public records of
Monroe County, Sections 16 and 21, Township 65 South, Range 34 East,
Tallahassee Meridian, Duck Key, Monroe County, Florida, The property is
located as approximate mile marker 61 on 'ndies Island.
C. Precise description of requested modification: The applicant is requesting
a minor deviation to a Development of Regional Impact to reconfigure the
size of Development Corridor 3, along the marina at the north of the
property to accommodate a different footprint of units, There is no
expansion in the density of this corridor as specified on the Master P'an
approved and date December 1, 1997, The second request is to add two
additional floor plans, One floor plan expands the approved footprint and
Staff Report to PC.02
Page 1 of7
the second floor plan is to accommodate a single-story, handicap
accessible hotel unit.
II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
A. Land Use District: The property is designated as Destination Resort (DR)
on the current land use district maps and Mixed Commercial (MC) on the
future land use maps. The pre-1986 zoning of the property was RU-3,
RU-4, and BU-2. However, pursuant to Section 19-202 of the Monroe
County Code (MCC), because Hawk's Cay Resort was in existence prior
to County Ordinance #1-1973, the subject parcel was considered to be
within the RU-7 land use district.
B. Surrounding Uses and Neighborhood Character: The subject property is
contained within the Indies Island portion of Duck Key and is separated
from the residentially zoned portion by a canal and Lake Lucille. The
residential area to the south is made up entirely of single-family homes,
within the IS-M land use district. The waterfront lots, including those
bordering the subject property, are nearly built-out, while the non-
waterfront lots are largely vacant. Located on Indies Island, near the
proposed development there is an existing hotel and a variety of
commercial uses, including a restaurant, marina and proposed conference
center.
C. Miscellaneous: The existing development has been reviewed for
compliance with the regulations in effect immediately prior to September
15, 1986. Therefore, this request shall be considered in light of the criteria
list in Section 19-79 of the pre-1986 MCC.
III. PREVIOUS RELEVANT ZONING BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
On December 3, 1985, by Resolution MD14-85, the Monroe County Zoning Board
granted preliminary approval, with conditions, of the expansion of Hawk's Cay Resort.
On September 24, 1986, by Resolution #36-86, the Zoning Board granted approval of
the final community impact statement and the final development plan.
On July 1, 1993, by Resolution #P25-93, the Planning Commission, sitting as the former
Zoning Board, granted approval for a modification to the Major Development to
eliminate one of the hotel buildings, reposition another building, and to relocate the
drainage retention area.
On February 1, 1996, by Resolution #P6-96, the Planning Commission, sitting as the
former Zoning Board, recommended approval to the Board of County Commissioners
(BOCC) of a reconfiguration of the resort project and recommended denial to the BOCC
of the extension of the completion date of the development of regional impact (DRI).
Staff Report to PC.02
Page 2 of7
On July 24, 1996, the Planning Commission, sitting as the former Board of Adjustment,
granted a variance to allow the minimum side yard setback (required by Section 19-
202(e)) to be reduced from twenty (20) ft. to ten (10) ft. (Resolution #P43A-96).
On September 5, 1996, the Planning Commission, sitting as the former Board of
Adjustment, recommended approval to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) of
expanding the existing marina/retail area by 10,000 square feet, expanding the existing
conference center by 15,000 square feet, and extending the date that construction must
be completed from January 25, 1997 to January 20, 2004. (Resolution P42A-96)
On May 7, 1997, the Planning Commission, sitting as the former Board of Adjustment,
granted a variance to allow the minimum side yard set back (required by Section 19-
202(e)) to be reduced from twenty (20) feet to seven (7) feet. (Resolution P44-97)
On February 4, 1998, the Planning Commission, sitting as the former Board of
Adjustment, recommended to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) to
reconfigure the hotel units and add Development Corridor 4, which includes 5-to hotel
units and recreational facilities. (Resolution P-22-98)
IV. PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
On September 18, 1996, by Resolution #335A-1996, the Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC) granted approval of amendments to the development of
regional impact (DRI) development order (Resolution 365-1986), and modification to the
major development approval for the Hawk's Cay expansion DRI, which includes
expanding the existing marina/retail area by 10,000 square feet, expanding the existing
conference center by 15,000 square feet, and extending the date that construction must
be completed from January 25,1997 to January 20, 2004.
On December 5, 1986, by Resolution #365-1986, the BOCC granted approval of the
DR!. Pursuant to condition #1.3(b) of the development order, the termination of the date
for completing the development order is January 25, 1997, and the date may be
modified only in accordance with Section 380.06(19), Florida Statutes (1986).
On February 23, 1998, by Resolution #086-1998, the BOCC granted approval of
amendments to the development of regional impact (DRI) development order
(Resolution 365-1986) and modifications to the major development approval for the
Hawk's Cay expansion DRI, which includes reconfiguration of hotel units and addition of
Development Corridor 4 which includes 5-10 hotel units and recreational facilities.
V. ANALYSIS OF CRITERIA AND RELEVANT FACTORS:
The applicant has applied for minor deviations to the Development of Regional Impact
(DRI). Following is a summary of these proposed changes along with Staff analysis:
Staff Report to PC.02
Page 3 of7
1. The applicant proposes to change the size of Development Corridor 3, along the
marina at the north of the property to accommodate a different footprint of units.
The total number of units in the corridor does not exceed the density range
specified on the previously approved Master Development Plan.
Staff Analysis:
The proposed change to the size of Development Corridor 3 will expand the
boundary of this corridor by 15,000 s.f or approximately 0.34 acres. Currently
this area is unimproved and is used for employee parking. The expansion of this
boundary is requested in order to accommodate the construction of five hotel
units to be relocated from Development Corridor 1.
The project is nearing completion, ninety-seven percent (97%) of the project's
units are either completed or in some phase of construction. A total of 199
permits have been issued for Hawk's Cay. Of these permits, 176 have received
a Certificate of Occupancy, 23 units are under construction. There are permits for
41 units that have completed review by the Building Department and are ready to
be issued. At this time seven (7) units have not started the permitting process.
Currently, 30 units have been constructed in Development Corridor 3. The
approved density for this corridor is between 30 and 60 units. In Development
Corridor 1, permits for 120 units have been issued. The maximum density
approved for Development Corridor 3 is between 80 and 140 units. It is Staffs
understanding that the applicant intends to remove five units from the
southernmost portion of Development Corridor 3 (south of Greenbriar Drive and
north of the canal). This will reduce the number of units from sixteen to eleven in
an area that is immediately adjacent to a single-family neighborhood. A marginal
reduction in vehicular traffic on Greenbriar Drive is expected.
The maximum number of units that could be built in the expanded area of
Corridor 3 appears to be five or six units. Attachment A is the 1999 aerial
photograph indicating the area proposed for expansion and the location of the
Conference Center. The Conference Center approved pursuant to BOCC
Resolution 335A-1996, is in the final stages of Building Department review and
will be constructed adjacent to the multi-level hotel building and the area
proposed for Corridor 3 expansion. Although the construction of these units will
reduce the unobstructed shoreline in this area of the resort, the density of the
overall project will remain the same and the open space ratio is not expected to
change in any significant manner.
As part of the development review process for the Conference Center, the
Applicant has submitted a site plan that identifies an overflow parking lot. The
proposed parking will accommodate any required employee parking. The total
parking required for the resort is 525 spaces, the total parking provided is 667
spaces.
Staff Report to PC.02
Page 4 of7
2. The applicant has added two additional floor plans to those previously approved.
Staff Analysis:
The BOCC Resolution #086-1998 amended BOCC Resolution #365-1986
condition 9.1.h by requiring that all new guest units adhere to one of the
architectural styles as submitted in the Community Impact Statement updated
May 20, 1997 or as submitted as Supplemental Attachment G2. Supplemental
Attachment G2, dated August 18, 1999 includes two new floor plans. These
plans include a single-story unit (Unit HC) that is designed to be handicap
accessible. The second floor plan is a modified Cottage unit (Unit CCE1).
Unit HC is a single story unit with a vertical wheelchair platform lift located at the
entrance to the unit. From the conceptual floor plans submitted, it appears the
unit is in compliance with the 1997 Florida Accessibility Code for Building
Construction. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the structure will comply with
all handicap accessibility requirements. Unit HC is approximately 871 square
feet with two bedrooms and one bathroom. The single-story handicap accessible
units are to be constructed in Development Corridor 4.
Unit CCE1 is a two-story three bedroom, two and % bathroom unit. The footprint
of the originally approved Cottage unit has been expanded to include a 10' x 20'
Library on the first floor. The overall length of the building has been expanded by
4' from 33' to 37'. This results in an overall increase in square footage of 200 s.f.
Unit CCE1 has a total area of the 1,600 s.f. At Staff's request the original floor
plan included a double French door at the entrance to the Library. The doors
have been removed and replaced with a casement opening. At this stage in the
project, the impact of the increase in floor area will be minimal due to the limited
number of units remaining to be constructed. Given the configuration of the
buildings, Unit CCE1 must be constructed as an end unit. The maximum number
of end units to be constructed is four. Furthermore, the project is constrained by
setback limitations and by the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, 558 and
556.5 respectively.
VI. FINDING OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Based on the project's approval as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI),
allowing a reconfiguration of Development Corridor 3 to allow for a different
configuration of units while not increasing the total number of bedrooms and
bathrooms and relocating five hotel units from an area adjacent to a residential
neighborhood to an area centrally located in the resort, Staff finds that the request
is consistent with unique circumstances and conditions apply to the property, in that
the buildings should be designed to be compatible with the surrounding residential
uses as much as possible.
Staff Report to PC.02
Page 5 of7
2. Based on the fact that the proposed reconfiguration of Corridor 3 will not increase
the total number of hotel units or bedrooms and bathrooms that have been
approved by the DRI, Staff finds that the total number of bedrooms and bathrooms
shall remain in compliance with BOCC Resolution #335A-1996.
3. Based on the fact that the amount of open space will remain the same, Staff finds
that reconfiguration of Corridor 3 shall remain in compliance with BOCC Resolution
#335A-1996.
4. Based on the fact that the employee parking will be relocated to a centrally located
over-flow parking lot, Staff finds that adequate parking exists on the site.
5. Based on the fact that there will be a marginal reduction in vehicular traffic from the
southern end of Greenbriar Drive, Staff finds that the existing traffic pattern will be
minimally impacted.
6. Based on the fact that the proposed changes to Supplemental Attachment G2
includes a modification to a previously approved floor plan (Unit CC) and the
project- wide increase in square footage will be minimal, Staff finds that the project
shall remain in compliance with BOCC Resolution 335A-1996.
7. Based on the fact that the project is limited to 558 bedrooms and 556.5 bathrooms
with constraints on interior building setbacks, Staff finds the project shall remain in
compliance with BOCC Resolution 086-1998 with the addition of two floor plans.
8. Based on the fact that the single-story handicap accessible unit is in compliance
with the requirements of the Americans With Disabilities Act and the 1997 Florida
Accessibility Code for Building Construction, Staff finds that the project shall be in
compliance with Sections 553.501-553.513, Florida Statutes.
VI. RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law above, staff recommends:
1. APPROVAL of Hawk's Cay Investors, Ltd.lHawk's Cay Developers, Ltd.Nillage at
Hawk's Cay, Inc. request for the reconfiguration of Corridor and the request to add
two additional floor plans (Unit HC and Unit CCE1) to Supplemental Attachment G2.
Staff Report to PC.02
Page 6 of7
"
.'
Attachment A: Aerial Photograph, Monroe County, Florida, dated February 1999.
Staff Report to PC.02
Page 7 of7
Attachment E
~!~'/1S
COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT
Evaluation of Project Changes
referenced to 1985 Community Impact Statement
HAWKS' CAY EXPANSION PROJECT COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT
Update August 21, 1995
This update of the Hawk's Cay Major Development Community Impact Statement (CIS)
is cross-referenced with the original document approved in 1986, a copy of which
immediately follows this update, with update attachments following that. For ease of
reference between the two documents, page numbers of the relevant sections of the
original CIS are provided in italics following each question.
1. General Description of Proposed Major Development
a. Provide a general written description of the proposed major development
project. Include in this description the proposed phases of development or
operation and facility utilization, target dates for each of these, and the date of
completion. In addition, indicate the site size, development staging and
appropriate descriptive measures such as quantity and type of residential
units, commercial floor area, capabilities for tourist attractions, number of
hospital beds. For residential developments indicated the anticipated unit per
acre density of the completed project. (Pages 1-3)
The Hawk's Cay Resort is a luxury destination resort located on Indies Island at
Duck Key, Monroe County, Florida. The resort consists of 58.8 acres and contains
178 existing hotel units (156 rooms and 22 suites), three restaurants, a night club,
convenience store, pro shop, and marina.
The site area listed in the Major Development and ADA was 60.8 acres; however, a
new survey conducted in 1988 more accurately defmed the mean high water line
than had the previous survey, which reduces the total project area in the 1986 plan
by two acres, reducing the open space in that plan from 37.8 to 35.8 acres.
The Hawk's Cay expansion project was reviewed by Monroe County as a major
development, and received preliminary approval, in 1985. Fmal approval was
contingent on the project ungoing review as a Development of Regional Impact
(DR!) pursuant to Ch. 380.05 and 380.06, Florida Statutes. The Application for
Development Approval (ADA) for the Hawk's Cay Expansion DR! was reviewed by
1
the South Florida Regional Planning Council and Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC) in 1986, and a final Development Order (DO), which
granted both DRI and final major development approval, was issued by the -BOCC
on December 5, 1986.
The expansion project approved by the final DO was consistent with that proposed
in the Major Development, which is described in the original Community Impact
Statement (attached to this update). Attachment CIS-I, immediately following this
update, summarizes the 'pre-DRI existing components of Hawk's Cay, and the
additional development approved in 1986 and as proposed now. The following is a
description of the proposed changes.
~
The total number of new units originally approved was 444, consisting of 324 rooms
(1 bedroom, 1 bath) and 120 suites (2 bedrooms, 2 baths). The total number of units
now proposed is 326, consisting of 301 suites and 25 luxury suites (3 bedroom, 3
baths). These units will be reconfigured on the property to respond to current
market conditions. The new configuration is shown on the revised Site Plan, which
is enclosed as Attachment F to the major development amendment application. For
comparison purposes, the original site plan, excerpted from the ADA, is enclosed as
Attachment CIS-2.
The project area west of Duck Key Drive has been reconfigured to contain 232
suites, all with sunset views, in the newly titled Sunset Island component of Hawk's
Cay Resort. This area previously cop:ained 96 units titled Tom's Harbor Lodge, and
at the north end it contained now deleted restaurant facilities. A newly-designed
Sunset Island Clubhouse, with grill facilities (50 restaurant seats), will be situated
approximately in the center of the area, as was also proposed for Tom's Harbor
Lodge. Attachment G2 to the major development amendment application provides
floor plans and elevation drawings of both the Sunset Island Guest Suites and the
Clubhouse.
The Tennis Garden and 96 Tennis Garden Suites, originally planned directly across
Duck Key Drive from the Tom's Harbor Suites, will be removed from the plans
entirely. This reflects market conditions which require all units to have water views.
2
The area previously described as the Conference Garden and 48 Luxury Guest
Suites, situated at the south end of the project, will be replaced with 18 Luxury
Guest Suites (3 bedrooms, 3 baths); and the 60 South Harbor Guest Suites will be
replaced with 7 Luxury Guest Suites. Floor plans are not available for these units, as
they will be custom designed and built for individual purchasers; however, all
building code and flood insurance hurricane elevation requirements will be met as
part of the building permit application process for each unit. The 60-room Inn
Expansion building will be removed from the plans entirely.
The Marina Villas area at the north of Hawk's Cay Resort, originally planned for 86
suites (22 of which are already built), is now redesigned to contain 69 suites. Floor
plans and elevation drawings for these suites are provided in Attachment G 1 to the
~ -
major development amendment application. The adjacent conference center and
ballroom, at the western end of the existing hotel building, will be expanded 15,000
square feet (sf), rather than 26,000 sf as originally proposed. The floor plan for the
conference center expansion is not yet complete; however, it will be one story, and
all building code and flood insurance hurricane elevation requirements will be met as
part of the building permit application process.
Two new buildings for commercial retail use are proposed in the vicinity of the
existing marina and restaurant. The 1986 plan proposed 3,000 sf of additional
space. The present plan proposes 10,000 sf. This space would contain accessory
retail uses normally found in luxury resorts, such as men's and women's clothing and
swimwear, drug store, hair salon, etc. As specific uses are not yet determined, floor
plans cannot yet be designed; however, as with the conference expansion, buildings
will be one story, and all building code and flood insurance hurricane elevation
requirements will be met as part of the building permit application process.
The open space in the 1986 project, corrected by the new survey, was 35.8 acres.
The result of the currently proposed reconfigurement is that the open space will
increase to 36.8 acres. The density will decrease from 10.2 to 8.57 units per acre.
In addition, parking spaces will decrease from 933 to 772, which contributes to the
increase in total open space. These numbers are swnmarized on the revised Site
Plan (Attachment F).
3
The reconfigurement of resort units does not change the way in which these units
will be used. All units will be posted as hotel units, and licensed and inspected as
such by the Florida Department of Business Regulation. Their owners will be
precluded from using the units as permanent residences. In addition, individual
bedrooms within a unit will not be available for separate rental; Le., there will be no
"lock-out" rooms within a separate unit, as there are not in the two-bedroom suites
already built The reconfigurement simply addresses the growing market demand for
use of villas by families.
The original phasing plan for Hawk's Cay Expansion Major Development and DR!
~as su.bmitted for planning purposes only, as the note to Table 12.1 of the ADA
indicated:
Specific project details are estimated for planning
purposes only, as future market circumstances may
neceessitate modification of construction beginning
and ending dates, and numbers of units; however, in
no case will numbers of units be changed significantly
[as per Ch. 380.06(19)(b)(11), F.S.] without
additional review and approval.
The Major Development amendment proposes no phases, but rather intends
completion of the project as one continuous phase. The buildout date will be
extended five years, from January 25, 1997 to January 20,2002.
Landscape plans for the overall site remain consistent with what was proposed in
1986. Preservation of native vegetation, protection of the shoreline, and removal of
invasive exotic vegetation are objectives of Hawk's Cay's landscape plans.
Vegetation being retained include Gumbo Limbo, Jamaica Dogwood, Coconut
Palms, Seagrape, Pigeon Plum, Geiger Tree, and Black Ironwood. Invasive exotics
to be removed include Brazilian Pepper and Australian Pine.
Consistent with protection of the shoreline, the new plan proposes construction of a
meandering boardwalk with handrails along the shoreline in the Sunset Island
portion of the property, designed to avoid sensitive vegetation. This boardwalk
would provide a recreational and educational amenity along the shoreline while
lifting foot traffic up above the actual intertidal zone inself.
4
Identify aspects of the project design, such as clustering, which were
incorporated to reduce public facilities costs and improve the scenic quality of
the development. Describe building and siting specifications which were
utilized to reduce hurricane and fire damage potential to comply with federal
flood insurance regulations. (Pages 4-5)
The proposed amendmeQt to the Hawk's Cay Major Development and DRI has been
designed to substantially reduce public facilities impacts from that which was
originally approved in 1986. This is discussed further in the public facilities sections
below.
Sunset Island buildings will contain 24, 28, and 32 units, with landscaped areas
around and between buildings to provide visual attractiveness, maintain access for
emergency response equipment, and provide less resistance to storm surge in the
event of a hurricane. All buildings throughout the project will meet floor area
elevation requirements of the National Flood Insurance program.
As noted in the 1985 CIS, the existing Inn structure weathered the eye of an intense
hurricane in 1959, and continues to serve as an emergency operations center in the
event of a hurricane, providing the location for government personnel to coordinate
hurricane preparedness, evacuation, and recovery operations. Several hotel rooms
are kept in constant readiness for this emergency use.
The updated Hawk's Cay Resort Hurricane Plan is enclosed as Attachment CIS-3
immediately follmving this update report. Upon establishment of a hurricane watch,
no further reservations will be taken, people holding existing reservations for the
next 48 hours will be notified that reservations will be cancelled if a hurricane
warning is posted, and all existing guests will be notified to prepare for evacuation.
The issue of hurricane evacuation in the Keys was not considered in the original
ADA or Major Development application. Since then, hurricane evacuation has
provided the basis for Monroe County's Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO), which
went into effect in 1992. Section 9.5-121(F)2. of the Monroe County Code
specifically exempts developments of regional impact from the provisions of ROGO,
as follows:
5
From and after the effective date of the dwelling unit
allocation system, landowners with a valid, unexpired
development of regional impact approval granted by
the county shall be exempt from the dwelling unit
allocation system.
However, the project as now proposed in this Major Development amendment
would substantially reduce impacts from those which would result from the project
as approved in 1986. Total numbers of new units are decreased from 444 to 326,
substantially reducing the numbers of vehicle trips generated. The total number of
parking spaces will decrease from 933 to 772, resulting in a smaller number of
~ -
vehicles located on the grounds at anyone time, reducing the number of vehicles
which could enter the roadway in the event of a hurricane. Please see the traffic
study, enclosed as Attachment CIS-4, for a further discussion of these issues.
A new coordination letter from the Monroe County Fire Marshall is enclosed as
Attachment 13 to the major development amendment application.
2. Impact Assessment
a. Public facilities: Water Supply
1. Identify projected average daily potable water demands at the end of
each development phase and specify any consumption rates which have
been assumed for the project. (Pages 6-7)
Standard planning practices equate potable water demand and wastewater
generation, which is reflected in the summary of these public facilities impacts given
in Attachment CIS-5. Updated generation rates are taken from regulations for
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) onsite sewage
treatment system design contained in Table I, Ch. lOD-6.048(1)(b), Florida
Administrative Code, which went into effect in January 1995. The Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulates the sewage treatment
plant at Hawk's Cay, and also DEP uses HRS's generation rates in estimating flow
for sewage treatment plant capacity.
6
Attachment CIS-5 evaluates all land uses on Hawk's Cay using the new flow rates,
with the old flow rates shown for comparison. The total average and peak potable
water demand approved in the original DRI were 0.1308 million gallons per day
(mgd) and 0.1963 mgd, respectively. The updated evaluation finds total average and
peak demand of 0.1541 mgd and 0.2312 mgd, respectively, for the 1986 plan; and
0.1283 mgd and 0.1924 mgd, respectively, for the new proposal. Total potable
water use for the recon~gured project is 17 percent lower than the 1986 plan using
current rates, and 2 percent lower than that approved in the DRI.
2. Provide proof of coordination with the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority.
Assess the present and projected capacity of the water supply system and
the ability of such system to provide adequate water for the proposed
project. (Page 8)
Please see Attachment 11 of the Application to Amend the Hawk's Cay Major
Development for the new coordination letter from the Florida Keys Aqueduct
Authority. The project as presently designed will consume substantially less potable
water than the original project approved in 1986.
In addition to potable water demand reduction as a result of the reconfiguration,
additional savings \\111 be implemented by the use of water saving bathroom fixtures
in all new Hawk's Cay resort units, which are now required by Monroe County.
These fIxtures are estimated to result in as much as 40 percent water use reduction.
3. Describe measures to insure that water pressure and flow will be
adequate for fire protection for the type of construction proposed.
(Page 9)
No change.
b. Public facilities: Waste Water Management
1. Provide projection of the average flows of waste water generated by the
development at the end of each development phase. Describe proposed
treatment system, method and degree of treatment, quality of effiuent,
and location of effiuent and sludge disposal areas. Identify method and
responsibilities for operation and maintenance of facilities.
7
2. If public facilities are to be utilized, provide proof of coordination with
the Monroe County 'Waste Collection and Disposal District- or its
successor. Assess the present and projected capacity of the treatment and
transmission facilities and the ability of such facilities to provide
adequate service to the proposed development. (Pages 10-12)
Standard planning practices equate potable water demand and wastewater
generation, which is refl~cted in the summary of these public facilities impacts given
in Attachment CIS-5. Updated generation rates are taken from regulations for
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) onsite sewage
treatment system design contained in Table I, Ch. lOD-6.048(1)(b), Florida
~dministrative Code, which went into effect in January 1995. The Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulates the sewage treatment
plant at Hawk's Cay, and also DEP uses HRS's generation rates in estimating flow
for sewage treatment plant capacity.
Attachment CIS-5 evaluates all land uses on Hawk's Cay using the new flow rates,
with the old flow rates shown for comparison. The total average and peak
wastewater generation approved in the original DR! were 0.1308 million gallons per
day (mgd) and 0.1963 mgd, respectively. The updated evaluation finds total average
and peak generation of 0.1541 mgd and 0.2312 mgd, respectively, for the 1986 plan;
and 0.1283 mgd and 0.1924 mgd, respectively, for the new proposal. Total
wastewater generation for the reconfigured project is 17 percent lower than the
1986 plan using current rates, and 2 percent lower than that approved in the DR!.
In addition to wastewater flow reduction as a result of the reconfiguration,
additional savings will be implemented by the use of water saving bathroom fixtures
in all new Hawk's Cay resort units, which are now required by Monroe County.
These fixtures are estimated to result in as much as 40 percent reduction.
The form of sewage treatment at Hawk's Cay at the time of the Major Development
and DRI approval was an aerobic digestion package plant which provided secondary
treatment, located on the small island connected by a causeway to the west. This
plant was permitted by DEP for an average capacity of 0.050 mgd, with disposal of
effluent by surface water discharge.
8
In June 1987, DEP issued permit #5244POO124 (see Attachment CIS-6), providing
for a 0.050 mgd extended aeration expansion to the existing facility, for a total
capacity of 0.100 mgd. A third, or tertiary level of treatment was added by
construction of holding ponds where effluent is retained, allowing further settling
and removal of solids and additional aeration. The water is then recycled for
inigation of landscaped areas, and any excess is disposed in deep injection wells
located on the utility isl~d. Additional information regarding required quality of
effluent, and methods and responsibilities for operation and maintenance of facilities,
is included in Attachment CIS-6.
~dditi9nal expansion of this facility will be necessary to accommodate completion of
the proposed project. A coordination letter from DEP in this regard is included as
Attachment J6 to the major development amencln1ent application.
3. If applicable, provide a description of the volume and characteristics of
any industrial or other effluents. (Page 13)
No change.
c. Public facilities: Solid waste
1. Identify projected average daily volumes of solid waste generated by the
development at the end of each phz.ie. Indicate proposed methods of
treatment and disposal. (Pages 13-14)
It was estimated in the ADA that the pre-DR! existing component of Hawk's Cay
would generate 9.042 cubic yards per day of solid waste. The most recent records
from Marathon Garbage, the local firm which collects Hawk's Cay's solid waste,
indicate that the Resort produced a total of 1038 cubic yards of solid waste between
October 26, 1994 and June 27, 1995, or an average of about 4.3 cubic yards per
day. This is less than half that originally estimated, and also includes solid waste
from 22 new Marina Villa suites which are part of the original Major Development
and DR! expansion project. Therefore, it can be reasonably projected that solid
waste generated by the reconfigured project will be the same or less than that
projected in 1986.
9
2. Provide proof of coordination with Monroe County Waste Collection and
Disposal District or its successor. Assess the present and projected
capacity of the solid waste treatment and disposal system and the ability
of such facilities to provide adequate services to the proposed
development. (Page 15)
A new coordination letter was not required.
Monroe County presently sends all solid waste to Waste Management, Inc.'s land fill
in Broward County.
d. Public-facilities: Transportation
1. Provide a projection of the expected 'vehicle trip generation at the
completion of each development phase. Describe in terms of external trip
generation and average daily peak hour traffic. (Pages 16-17)
Please see the updated traffic study conducted by David Plummer & Associates,
Inc., enclosed as Attachment CIS-4. The most current methodology in assessing
traffic trip generation was used (Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE] fifth
edition manual), both for the 1986 project and the plan presently proposed.
Although the ITE manual does not recommend an increase in the trip generation rate
for larger units in the resort hotel land use category, an effort was made to address
the perception that greater numbers of trips would be generated by larger units by
extrapolating adjustments from another comparable land use.
Exhibit 3 of the traffic study summarizes the results. Under current methodology,
the approved 1986 plan and the new plan would generate a daily total of 4,811 and
3,948 trips, respectively; and the total trips approved in 1986 were 4,529. Total
daily trips for the reconfigured project are 18 percent lower than the 1986 plan using
current methodology, and 13 percent lower than that approved in the DR!.
Under current methodology, average daily peak hour traffic for the approved 1986
plan and the new plan would be 233 and 185 trips, respectively; the peak hour trips
approved in 1986 were 408. Peak hour trips for the reconfigured project are 20
percent lower than the 1986 plan using current methodology, and 54 percent lower
than those approved in the DR!.
10
2. If project is adjacent to U.S. Highway 1, describe the measures, such as
setbacks and access limitations, which have been incorporated into the
project design to reduce impacts upon U.S. 1. (Page 18)
No change.
e. Other Public Facilities (Pages 19-20)
No further update was required beyond that specified in Attachment A of the major
development amendment application.
f. Environmental resources: Shore Line Protection Zone and Natural Vegetation
1. If shoreline protection zones were identified in the environmental
designation survey, describe in detail any proposed site alterations in the
areas including vegetation removal, dredging, canals and channels.
Identify measures which have been taken to protecft the natural, biologic
functions of the vegetation of this area such as shoreline stabilization,
wildlife and marine habitat, marine productivity and water quality.
(Pages 21-22)
The policy of the Hawk's Cay project is to preserve the shoreline protection zone
and natural vegetation to the greatest extent possible, and, in fact, to incorporate
these natural features into the am>:.nities of the resort. In this regard, a boardwalk
with handrails is now being proposed to be constructed along the west shoreline of
the project in the area of the Sunset Island suites. This boardwalk would be built to
meander around and preserve outstanding shoreline vegetation, and would lift foot
traffic above the intertidal area thus removing trampling effects.
2. If tropical hammock communities were identified in the environmental
designation survey, describe proposed site alteration in these areas and
indicate measures which were taken to protect intact areas (clumps) of
tropical hardwood hammocks and individual species of tree cactus and
palms prior to, during and after construction. (Pages 23-24)
No change.
11
3. Describe plans for revegation and landscaping of cleared sites including a
completion schedule for such work. (Page 25)
No change.
g. Environmental resources: Wildlife
Describe the wildife species which nest, feed or reside on or adjacent to the
proposed site. Specifically identify those species considered to be threatened or
endangered. Indicate measures which will be taken to protect wildlife and
their habitats. (Page 26)
No change.
h. Environmental resources: Water quality
1. Identify any waste water disposal areas, septic tank drainfields, urban
runoff areas, impervious surfaces, and construction related runoff.
Describe anticipated volume and characteristics. Indicate measures
taken to minimize the adverse impacts of these potential pollution sources
upon the quality of the receiving waters prior to, during, and after
construction. (Pages 27-28)
Wastewater disposal areas and methods are described in the response to question
2.b. above, and there are no septic tank drainfields on the Hawk's Cay property.
Runoff from impervious surfaces will be entirely contained on the property, far
exceeding South Rorida Water Management District standards for stormwater
treatment. Please see the revised Site Plan (Attachment F), and the drainage
calculations (Attachment H) for more detailed information on the drainage plan.
Any erosion and potential runoff into nearshore waters which could result from
construction activities will be contained with appropriate staked sediment barriers.
However, the very low relief of the island, and the drainage plan design which
directs runoff away from the shoreline reduce the likelihocxl of any problem of this
kind.
12
2. Indicate the degree to which any natural drainage patterns have been
incorporated into the drainage system of the project. (Page 29)
No change. See the revised Site Plan (Attachment F) for the new drainage plan, and
Attachment H for the drainage calculations.
i. Economic
1. Provide an analysis of the estimated average annual ad valorem tax yield
from the proposed project during each phase of development. Indicate
assumptions and standards utilized, including but not limited to assessed
value, exemptions, millage rates, etc. (Pages 30-31)
An estimate of total property value at buildout is as follows:
69 villas @ $220,000 each
232 villas at $170,000 each
25 villas at $300,000 each
ComrnerciallO,QOO sf@ $1oo/sf
50 seat grill at Sunset Island Clubhouse
Site improvements
Conference center expansion
TOTAL
$15,180,000
$39,440,000
$7,500,000
$1,000,000
$200,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$65,820,000
The total tax millage rate for the Hawk's Cay property in 1994 was 14.47. Applying
this rate to the total estimated value at buildout yields a total of $952,416 in added
ad valorem tax revenue, assuming a constant millage rate and distribution schedule.
In addition to the ad valorem tax revenues generated by new construction,
approximately $36,000 per year will be generated by tangible property tax.
2. For each development phase, estimate the average annual construction
expenditure by type Le., labor, materials, etc., and the percentage of this
expenditure which will occur within the County. (Page 32)
13
The project is now proposed as one continuous phase. Distribution of construction
expenditures is estimated as follows:
Labor
Materials
In Monroe County
$16,455,000
$16,455,000
Outside
$16,455,000
$16,455,000
3. For non-residential developments, project the number of non-
construction permanent employees using appropriate classifications such
as salary and functions. (Page 33)
The proposed major development would create in excess of one hundred fifty
permanent new jobs, making Hawk's Cay Resort one of the largest employers in
Monroe County, Florida. The following job classifications would be required:
Management:
Sales and Marketing
Front Desk
Food and Beverage
Housekeeping
Security
Engineering
Banquets and Conventions
Accounting
Service Personnel:
Office Staff
Bell Persons
Maids
Food and Beverage Employees
Front Desk
Engineering
Security Guards
Sales Personnel
Telephone and Reservations
Salary Rane-e
$30,OOO-$50,000/year
$25,000-$60,000/year
$30,OOO-$55,OOO/year
$25,OOO-$50,000/year
$25,OOO/year
$35,OOO-$50,OOO/year
$25,000-$35,000/year
$30,000-$60,OOO/year
$ 18,000-$25,000/year
$5/hour + gratuity
$7 -$9/hour
$6-$8/hour
$7 -$9/hour
$7 -$ll/hour
$10/hour
$20,OOO-$25,000/year
$17,OOO-$22,000/year
14
j. Housing (Page 34)
Non-applicable.
k. Special Considerations
1. Describe the relationship of the proposed development to county land use
plans, objectives imd policies. Also, indicate relationship to existing or
proposed public facilities' plans such as wastewater treatment,
transportation, etc. Identify any conflicts. (Pages 35-36)
, As no zoning change is proposed. no additional discussion is required.
2. Indicate any relationship of the project to special land use and/or
development districts such as airport noise and hazard zones, solid or
liquid waste or disposal areas, etc. (Page 37)
Not applicable.
3. If applicable, assess the impact of the proposed development upon
adjacent or nearby municipalities or counties. (Pages 37-38)
The following is an update of the list of impacts presented in the original CIS.
Type of impact
Effect of new plan
Negative:
1. Increased traffic flow
2. Increased demand for services and utilities
Decrease
Decrease
Positive:
1. Upgrade entrance to Duck Key
2. Protect and enhance environment
3. Upgrade recreational amenities
4. Temporary construction employment
5. Permanent employment
Same
Increase (boardwalk)
Same
Same
Decrease (from 300 to 150)
15
Type of impact
6.
7.
8.
Provide major convention facilities
Increase local and sub-regional tourism
Increase ad valorem and tangible tax revenues
Effect of new plan
Decrease (less sf)
Decrease (less units)
Increase (more value)
I. Historical and Archaeo~ogical resources (Page 39)
No change.
16
6)
Present use of the property:
Destination H.esort
7)
Proposed use 0: t~~ property:
Destination Resort
8) Gross floor area in square feet (Non-residential Uses) :existing; 217,250
proposed: 486,430 total 703680
9)
N/-A-
Number of residential units to be built: ~
10) Number of affordable or employee housing units to be built:
N/A
11) Number of hotel-motel. recreational vehicle, institutional residential,
or campground units to be built per. type:
269 units (includes 22 completed)
12) Has an application been submitted for this site within the past two years?
Yes ~ No ____. If yes, name of the applicant and date of application:
A previous-ritajordevelopment amendment application was filed in August 199~.and amended in
Deeember 1995. The Planninp Commission acting as .the Zoning Board approved the major
Thdevelopment aDDlication.on FehnLal"V IJ1i 1996.
1S applicat10tl MUST 1nclude tlte tems on ATTACHMENT A and be accompanied by
the necessary fee(s). Please contact the Planning Department for fee
information.
'.
I certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application.
and to the best of my knowledge such information is true, complete and
accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the
proposed activities. I understand that the submission of false information may
lead to the denial of Development Approval or revocation of a Certificate of
Compliance. I agree to comply with all provisions of law and ordinance
governing development whether specified or not. The granting of a Certificate
of Compliance does not presume to give authority to violate or disregard the
provisions of any county,. state, or federal law regulating construC'.tion or
performance of this activity.
()./
7-~ -9fc
Date
.,
f}.V P(J OfFICIAL NOT"RY SEAL
6"" ,,~ MARY H BltlGaI
. ~ COMMISSIOII NW@ER
;;..l < CC51561
~~ ~ MY COM"ISSI~ EXP.
~ OF f\.O EC 8199
~
Notary's Na c, Printb!r Stamped or Typed
Personally Known: or Produced II:>..-
Type of 10 produced
Page 2
APDEVEL.03A/TXTFORM
Attachment E
Revised May 20, 1996
COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT
Evaluation of Project Changes
in August 1995 and 1995 Proposals
and in Present May 1996 Proposal
- referenced to 1985 Community Impact Statement
:' ...i~ @@ O\\/7fS ~ '
--- 'WI ~ I
' . I l
I! I .
; <.-" I
'. I
I
. I
.: !
:- . ------.--.J
_..d.---__-.J
HAWKS' CAY EXPANSION PROJECT COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT
Update May 20,1996
This document is revised from the original proposed major development amendment submitted in
August 1995, and the revision dated December 1, 1995. The December 1995 plan was reviewed by
the Monroe County Planning Commission sitting as the Monroe County Zoning Board at a special
meeting held on February 1, 1996; the project design received a recommendation of approval from
the Zoning Board to the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) at that meeting.
100 following text will provide a comparison with the originally approved DR!, and both the August
and December 1995 proposals.
The August 1995 update of the Hawk's Cay Major Development Conununity Impact Statement (CIS)
was cross-referenced with the original document approved in 1986, a copy of which was attached,
with update attachments following that. For ease of reference between the two documents, page
numbers of the relevant sections of the original CIS were provided in italics following each question;
this practice is continued in the following revision, as well. Text describing the present proposal will
also be formatted in italics, to make it easier to distinguish from descrip~ions of earlier plans.
1. General Description of Proposed Major Development
a. Provide a general written description of the proposed major development project.
Include in this description the proposed phases of development or operation and facility
utilization, target dates for each of these, and the date of completion. In addition,
indicate the site size, development staging and appropriate descriptive measures such as
quantity and type of residential units, commercial floor area, capabilities for tourist
attractions, number of hospital beds. For residential !levelopments indicated the
anticipated unit per acre density of the completed project. (pages 1-3)
The Hawk's Cay Resort is a luxury destination resort located on Indies Island at Duck Key,
Monroe County, Florida. Before the expansion project was initiated in the mid-1980s, the
resort consisted of58.8 acres and contained 178 hotel units (156 rooms and 22 suites), three
restaurants, a night club, convenience store, pro shop, and marina.
1
The site area listed in the Major Development and ADA was 60.8 acres; however, a new survey
conducted in 1988 more accurately defined the mean high water line than had the previous
survey, which reduces the total project area in the 1986 plan by two acres, reducing the open
space in that plan from 37.8 to 35.8 acres.
The Hawk's Cay expansion project was reviewed by Monroe County as a major development,
and received preliminary approval, in 1985. Final approval was contingent on the project
undergoing review as a Development of Regional Impact (DR!) pursuant to Ch. 380.05 and
380.06, Florida Statutes. The Application for Development Approval (ADA) for the Hawk's
Cay Expansion DR! was reviewed by the South Florida Regional Planning Council and Monroe
County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) in 1986, and a final Development Order
(DO), which granted both DR! and final major development approval, was issued by the BOCC
on December 5, 1986.
The expansion project approved by the final DO was consistent with that proposed in the Major
Development, which is described in the original Community Impact Statement (CIS, attached
to the August 1995 update). Attachment CIS-I, revised May 20, 1996, now includes columns
listing the vested pre-DR!, existing components of Hawk's Cay, the additional development
approved in 1986, the revised plan as proposed in August and December 1995, and the plan as
proposed now. The following is a description of the proposed changes.
The total number of new units originally approved was 444, consisting of 324 rooms (1
bedroom. 1 bath) and 120 suites (2 bedrooms, 2 baths). The total number of units proposed
in August 1995 was 326, consisting of301 suites (2 bedrooms, 2 baths) and 25 luxury suites
(3 bedroom. 3 baths). The number of units was further reduced in December 1995 (and
approved by the Zoning Board in February 1996) to respond to design concerns raised by Duck
Key residents, to a new total of 269, consisting of 244 suites (2 bedrooms, 2 baths) and 25
luxury suites (3 bedroom. 3 baths), and this total number of units and bedrooms and
bathrooms does not change in the present proposal. These units were reconfigured on the
property to respond to current market conditions, both in the August and December 1995
2
proposals. For comparison purposes, the original site plan, excerpted from the ADA, was
enclosed as Attachment CIS-2 in the August 1995 submittal.
In the present proposal, development corridors are identified within which specific types of
units can be located, as long as overall impact thresholds are not exceeded, therefore allowing
for minor changes in footprint configuration in response to market demands without causing
impact changes. This approach has recently been utilized at the Key West Golf Club on Stock
Island, and has been successful both for the developer and for building permit review by the
City. The proposed development corridors correspond with the Sunset Island, Marina Villas,
and Luxury Guest Suites areas on the site plan which was approved by the Zoning Board in
February 1996, and are identified on the enclosed revised Attachment F, the Revisea Site Plan
and Conceptual Drainage Plan.
A new Attachment G2 contains floor plans and elevation drawings for the specific limited
selection, ,or palette, of buildings proposed to be built within the development corridors. This
attachment replaces the previous Attachment G2 submitted in December 1995, which
contained floor plans and elevation drawings for the Sunset Island Guest Suites.
The project area west of Duck Key Drive was reconfigured in the August 1995 proposal to
contain 232 suites, all with sunset views, and was called Sunset Island. In the December 1995
proposal, Sunset Island contained 170 suites, with the buildir_gs reconfigured to accommodate
a more attractive roof line. In the original DR!, this area contained 96 units titled Tom's
Harbor Lodge, and at the north end it contained now deleted restaurant facilities. In the present
proposal, this area contains a development corridor which meets all applicable setbacks, and
will accommodate units from the palette described in the new Attachment G 2.. The Sunset
Island Clubhouse, with grill facilities (50 restaurant seats), was not changed in December
from the August 1995 proposal, but is deletedfrom the present proposal, and the 50 restaurant
seats are relocated to the area of the existing marina and restaurant, east of Duck Key Drive.
3
As proposed in August 1995, the Tennis Garden and 96 Tennis Garden Suites, planned in the
DR! to be located directly across Duck Key Drive from the Tom's Harbor Suites, will be
removed from the project entirely. This reflects market conditions which require all units to
have water views.
The area descnbed in the DR! as the Conference Garden and 48 Luxury Guest Suites, situated
at the south end of the project, was replaced in both the August and December 1995 plans with
18 Luxury Guest Suites (3 bedrooms, 3 baths); and the 60 South Harbor Guest Suites was
replaced with 7 Luxury Guest Suites. The present plan locates a development corridor in this
area in which unitsfrom the palette described in the new Attachment G2 will be located. The
6~room Inn Expansion building approved in the original DR! has been removed from the plans
entirely.
The Marina Villas area at the north of Hawk's Cay Resort, originally planned for 86 suites (22
of which are already built), was proposed in August 1995 to contain 69 suites, floor plans and
elevation drawings for which were provided in Attachment. In the December 1995 plan, four
new buildings shown on the August 1995 site plan were deleted and replaced with two Sunset
Island-style buildings containing a total of 52 suites (2 bedroom, 2 bath), and revised
Attachment G2 contained typical floor plans and elevation drawings. The present plan locates
one development corridor interrupted by the existing two Marina Villas buildings, to contain
units from the palette shown in the new Attachment G2.
With no changes from the August 1995 proposal, the adjacent conference center and ballroom,
at the western end of the existing hotel building, will be expanded 15,000 square feet (sf), rather
than 26,000 sf as planned in the DR!. The detailed floor plan for the conference center
expansion is not yet complete. However, it will be one story, and all building code and flood
insurance hurricane elevation requirements will be met as part of the building permit application
process. Attachment G4, submitted in December 1995, is an artist's conceptual rendering of
the conference expansion, and no change is proposed.
4
Two new buildings for commercial retail use are planned in the vicinity ofthe existing marina
and restaurant, unchanged from the August 1995 proposal. The 1986 DRI proposed 3,000 sf
of additional space. The present plan proposes 10,000 sf. This space would contain accessory
retail uses normally found in luxury resorts, such as men's and women's clothing and
swimwear, drug store, hair salon, etc. As specific uses are not yet determined, floor plans
cannot yet be designed; however, as with the conference expansion, buildings will be one story,
and all building code and flood insurance hurricane elevation requirements will be met as part
of the building permit application process. Attachment G3, submitted in December 1995,
contains an artist's conceptual rendering of the new commercial area, and no change is
proposed.
The open space in the 1986 project, corrected by the new survey, was 35.8 acres. The result
of the August 1995 reconfigurement was that the open space would increase to 36.8 acres, and
density would decrease from 10.2 to 8.57 units per acre. In addition, parking spaces would
decrease .from 933 to 772, contributing to the increase in total open space. These numbers
were summarized on the Site Plan submitted in August 1995 (Attachment F). The December
1995 site plan proposed an additional increase in open space, to 36.9 acres; with density further
decreasing to 7.60 units per acre. Parking spaces decreased by an additional 57, or one per unit
being removed from the plans, for a total of715, which contributed to the increase in open
space. This increase in open space, decrease in overall density, and decrease in total parking
spaces will remain the same in the present p;'oposal as in the December 1995 plan.
The reconfigurement of resort units does not change the way in which these units will be used.
All units will be posted as hotel units, and licensed and inspected as such by the Florida
Department of Business Regulation. Their owners will be precluded from using the units as
pennanent residences. In addition, individual bedrooms within a unit will not be available for
separate rental; i.e., there will be no "lock-out" rooms within a separate unit, as there are not
in the two-bedroom suites already built. The reconfigurement simply addresses the growing
market demand for use of villas by families, and this continues to be the case for the present
plan.
5
The original phasing plan for Hawk's Cay Expansion Major Development and DR! was
submitted for planning purposes only, as the note to Table 12.1 of the ADA indicated:
Specific project details are estimated for planning purposes only,
as future market circumstances may necessitate modification of
construction beginning and ending dates, and numbers of units;
however, in no case will numbers of units be changed
significantly [as per Ch. 380.06(19)(b)(II), F.S.] without
additional review and approval.
The Major Development amendment has proposed no phases, but rather intended completion
of the project as one continuous phase, and this continues to be the case under the present
proposal. The August and December 1995 plans proposed to extend the buildout date by just
lesS than five years, from January 25, 1997 to January 20, 2002. The present plan proposes an
extension of just less than seven years, to January 20, 2004, which is presumed not to be a
substantial deviation from the original Development of Regional Impact under Section
380.06(19)(c), Florida Statutes (1995).
Landscape plans for the overall site remain consistent with what was proposed in 1986.
Preservation of native vegetation, protection of the shoreline, and removal of invasive exotic
vegetation are objectives of Hawk's Cay's landscape plans. Vegetation being retained include
Gumbo Limbo, Jamaica Dogwood, Coconut Palms, Seagrape, Pigeon Plum, Geiger Tree, and
Black Ironwood. Invasive exotics to be removed include Brazilian Pepper and Australian Pine.
The present plan places a large emphasis on improvements to overall site appearance,
including considerable landscaping along both Duck Key Drive and interior roadways.
The December 1995 plan proposed construction of a meandering boardwalk with handrails
along the shoreline in the Sunset Island portion of the property, designed to avoid sensitive
vegetation. This boardwalk is deleted from the present plan.
Identify aspects of the project design, such as clustering, which were incorporated to
reduce public facilities costs and improve the scenic quality of the development. Describe
building and siting specifications which were utilized to reduce hurricane and fire
damage potential to comply with federal flood insurance regulations. (Pages 4-5)
6
TIle proposed amendment to the Hawk's Cay Major Development and DRI has been designed
to substantially reduce public facilities impacts from that which was originally approved in
1986, and this goal is substantially enhanced by the additional changes in the approved
December 1995 plan and in the present proposal. This is discussed further in the public
facilities sections below.
In the August 1995 plan, Sunset Island buildings contained 24, 28, and 32 units. The
southernmost Sunset Island building in the December 1995 plan contained 16 units, the
remaining seven buildings west of Duck Key Drive each contained 22 units, and the two units
in the Marina Villas area each contained 26 units. In the present plan, no buildings will contain
more than 7 units, all units are no more than two stories, and the maximum height will not
exceed 35 feet.
Landscaped areas around and between buildings will provide visual attractiveness, maintain
access for emergency response equipment, and provide less resistance to storm. surge in the
event of a hurricane. All buildings throughout the project will meet floor area elevation
requirements of the National Flood Insurance program.
As noted in the 1985 CIS, the existing Inn structure weathered the eye of an intense hurricane
in 1959, and continues to serve as an emergency operations center in the event ofa hurricane,
providing the location for gcvernment personnel to coordinate hurricane preparedness,
evacuation, and recovery operations. Several hotel rooms are kept in constant readiness for this
emergency use.
The updated Hawk's Cay Resort Hurricane Plan was enclosed as Attachment CIS-3 in the
August 1995 submittal. Upon establishment of a hurricane watch, no further reservations will
be taken, people holding existing reservations for the next 48 hours will be notified that
reservations will be canceled if a hurricane warning is posted, and all existing guests will be
notified to prepare for evacuation.
7
The issue of hurricane evacuation in the Keys was not considered in the original ADA or Major
Development application. Since then, hurricane evacuation has provided the basis for Monroe
County's Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO), which went into effect in 1992. Section 9.5-
121(F)2. of the Monroe County Code specifically exempts developments of regional impact
from the provisions ofROGO, as follows:
From and after the effective date of the dwelling unit allocation
system, landowners with a valid, unexpired development of
regional impact approval granted by the county shall be exempt
from the dwelling unit allocation system.
However, the project as now proposed in this Major Development amendment would
substantially reduce impacts from those which would result from the project as approved in
1986. Total numbers of new units are decreased from 444 to 269, substantially reducing the
nmnbers of vehicle trips generated. The total number of parking spaces will decrease from 933
to 715, resulting in a smaller number of vehicles located on the grounds at anyone time,
reducing,the number of vehicles which could enter the roadway in the event ofa hurricane.
Please see the traffic study, enclosed as August 1995 Attachment CIS-4, and the December
1995 traffic study addendum reflecting the further decrease in units now proposed (Attachment
CIS-4A), for a further discussion of these issues. As the present plan contains the same
reduction in total number of units and parking spaces, this improvement continues to apply.
A new coordination letter from the Monroe County Fire Marshall was enclosed as Att?~hment
13 to the August 1995 major development amendment application.
2. Impact Assessment
a. Public facilities: Water Supply
1. Identify projected average daily potable water demands at the end of each
development phase and specify any consumption rates which have been assumed
for the project. (Pages 6-7)
Standard planning practices equate potable water demand and wastewater generation,
which is reflected in the summary of these public facilities impacts given in both the
8
August 1995 Attachment CIS-5; and the enclosed Revised Attachment CIS-5 (revised
December 1995), which reflects the additional unit reductions being proposed. Updated
flow rates are taken from regulations for Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative
Services (HRS) onsite sewage treatment system design contained in Table I, Ch. 10D-
6.048(1)(b), Florida Administrative Code, which went into effect in January 1995. The
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulates the sewage treatment
plant at Hawk's Cay, and also DEP uses HRS's generation rates in estimating flow for
sewage treatment plant capacity.
Attachment CIS-5 evaluates all land uses on Hawk's Cay using the current flow rates,
~ with the flow rates from 1986 shown for comparison. The total average and peak potable
water demand approved in the original DR! were 0.1308 million gallons per day (mgd)
and 0.1963 rngd, respectively. The evaluation using current flow rates finds total average
and peak demand of 0.1541 mgd and 0.2312 mgd, respectively, for the 1986 plan.
The August 1995 proposal, with current flow rates, would use 0.1283 mgd and 0.1924
mgd, respectively, as reported in the original Attachment CIS-5. The new December
1995 proposal, also with current flow rates, would use 0.1122 mgd and 0.1682 mgd,
respectively, as reported in the enclosed Revised Attachment CIS-5. Total potable water
use for the August 1995 project is 17 percent lower than the 1986 plan using current
rates, and 2 percent lower than that approved in the DR!; the new December 1995 plan
would decrease potable water use by 27 percent from the 1986 plan using current rates,
and 14 percent lower than that approved in the DR!.
The units presently planned (please see the floor plans and elevation drawings in new
Attachment G2) reconfigure the total living square footage from the December 1995
plan, and this is reflected in revised Attachment CIS-5. No units are planned which
would exceed 2250 square feet (the 25 Luxury Guest Suites in the December 1995 plan
were 3,000 square fee!), 83 new units will now be between 1200 and 2250 square feet in
size (as compared with 22 in the December 1995 plan), and 186 new units will be less
than 1200 square feet in size (as compared with 222 in the December 1995 plan). The
9
total average and peak potable water demand, again using current rates, are now 0.1133
mgd and 0.1699 mgd, respectively, which remains 27 percent less than the August 1995
plan and 14 percent less than that approved in the DR!. Therefore, no significant
change from the December 1995 plan will result from the new proposal in regard to
potable water impacts, and impacts remain below those of the original DR!.
2. Provide proof of coordination with the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority. Assess
the present and projected capacity of the water supply system and the ability of
such system to provide adequate water for the proposed project. (Page 8)
~ Please see Attachment J1 of the August 1995 Application to Amend the Hawk's Cay
Major Development for the new coordination letter from the Florida Keys Aqueduct
Authority. The project as presently designed will consume substantially less potable water
than the original project approved in 1986.
In addition to potable water demand reduction as a result of the reconfiguration,
additional savings will be implemented by the use of water saving bathroom fixtures in all
new Hawk's Cay resort units, which are now required by Monroe County. These fixtures
are estimated to result in as much as 40 percent water use reduction. This remains true
for the present plan.
3. Describe measures to insure that water pressure and flow will be adequate for fire
protection for the type of construction proposed. (Page 9)
No change.
b. Public facilities: Waste Water Management
1. Provide projection of the average flows of waste water generated by the
development at the end of each development phase. Describe proposed treatment
system, method and degree of treatment, quality of effiuent, and location of effiuent
10
and sludge disposal areas. Identify method and responsibilities for operation and
maintenance of facilities.
2. If public facilities are to be utilized, provide proof of coordination with the Monroe
County Waste CoUection and Disposal District or its successor. Assess the present
and projected capacity of the treatment and transmission facilities and the ability
of such facilities to provide adequate service to the proposed development. (Pages
10-12)
Standard planning practices equate potable water demand and wastewater generation,
which is reflected in the summary of these public facilities impacts given in both the
August 1995 Attachment CIS-5; and the enclosed Revised Attachment CIS-5 (Revised
~ December 1995), which reflects the additional unit reductions being proposed. Updated
generation rates are taken from regulations for Florida Department of Health and
Rehabilitative Services (HRS) onsite sewage treatment system design contained in Table
I, Ch. 10D-6.048(1)(b), Florida Administrative Code, which went into effect in January
1995. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulates the sewage
treatment plant at Hawk's Cay, and also DEP uses HRS's generation rates in estimating
flow for sewage treatment plant capacity.
Attachment CIS-5 evaluates aU land uses on Hawk's Cay using the current generation
rates, with the generation rates from 1986 shown for comparison. The total average and
peak wastewater generation approved in the original DR! were 0.1308 million gallons per
day (mgd) and 0.1963 mgd, respectively. The evaluation using current generation rates
finds total average and peak demand of 0.1541 mgd and 0.2312 mgd, respectively, for the
1986 plan.
The August 1995 proposal, using current generation rates, would produce 0.1283 mgd
and 0.1924 mgd, respectively, as reported in the original Attachment CIS-5. The new
December 1995 proposal, also using current generation rates, would produce 0.1122 mgd
and 0.1682 mgd, respectively, as reported in the enclosed Revised Attachment CIS-5.
Total wastewater generation for the August 1995 project is 17 percent lower than the
1986 plan using current rates, and 2 percent lower than that approved in the DR!; the
11
December 1995 proposal would decrease wastewater generation by 27 percent from the
1986 plan using current rates, and 14 percent from the DR!.
The units presently planned (please see the floor plans and elevation drawings in new
Attachment G2) reconfigure the total living square footage from the December 1995
plan, and this is reflected in revised Attachment CIS-5. No units are planned which
would exceed 2250 square feet (the 25 Luxury Guest Suites in the December 1995 plan
were 3,000 square fee!), 83 new units will now be between 1200 and 2250 square feet in
size (as compared with 22 in the December 1995 plan), and 186 new units will be less
than 1200 square feet in size (as compared with 222 in the December 1995 plan). The
~ total average and peak wastewater generation, again using current rates, are now
0.1133 mgd and 0.1699 mgd, respectively, which remains 27 percent less than the
August 1995 plan and 14 percent less than that approved in the DR!. Therefore, no
significant change from the December 1995 plan will result from the new proposal in
regard to wastewater impacts., and impacts remain below those of the original DR!.
In addition to wastewater flow reduction as a result of the reconfiguration, additional
savings will be implemented by the use of water saving bathroom fixtures in all new
Hawk's Cay resort units, which are now required by Monroe County. These fixtures are
estimated to result in as much as 40 percent reduction. This remains true for the present
plan.
The form of sewage treatment at Hawk's Cay at the time ofthe Major Development and
DR! approval was an aerobic digestion package plant which provided secondary
treatment, located on the small island connected by a causeway to the west. This plant
was permitted by DEP for an average cap~city of 0.050 mgd, with disposal of eflluent by
surface water discharge.
In June 1987, DEP issued permit #5244P00124 (see Attachment CIS-6), providing for
a 0.050 mgd extended aeration expansion to the existing facility, for a total capacity of
0.100 mgd. A third, or tertiary level of treatment was added by construction of sand
12
filtration and holding ponds where effluent is retained, allowing further settling and
removal of solids and additional aeration. The water is then recycled for irrigation of
landscaped areas, which provides substantial removal of nutrients by the vegetation, and
any excess is disposed in deep injection wells located on the utility island. Additional
information regarding required quality of effluent, and methods and responsibilities for
operation and maintenance of facilities, is included in Attachment CIS-6.
Additional expansion of this facility will be necessary to accommodate completion of the
proposed project. A coordination letter from DEP in this regard was included as
Attachment J6 to the August 1995 major development amendment application.
Since the February 1996 approval of the December 1995 plan by the Zoning Board,
Hawk's Cay has entered into discussions with Monroe County regarding the needfor
central sewage facilities to serve all of Duck Key. In this regard, coupled with other
considerations Hawk's Cay is willing to deed land on Utility Island, in the area of
Hawk's Cay's existing sewage treatment plant, to Monroe County for the County's use
in providing such a facility.
3. If applicable, provide a description of the volume and characteristics of any
industrial or other effiuents. (Page 13)
No change.
c. Public facilities: Solid waste
1. Identify projected average daily volumes of solid waste generated by the
development at the end of each phase. Indicate proposed methods of treatment and
disposal. (Pages 13-14)
It was estimated in the ADA that the pre-DR! existing component of Hawk's Cay would
generate 9.042 cubic yards per day of solid waste. The most recent records from
13
Marathon Garbage, the local firm which collects Hawk's Cay's solid waste, indicate that
the Resort produced a total of 1,038 cubic yards of solid waste between October 26, 1994
and June 27, 1995, or an average of about 4.3 cubic yards per day. This is less than half
that originally estimated, and also includes solid waste from 22 new Marina Villa suites
which are part of the original Major Development and DRI expansion project.
Therefore, it can be reasonably projected that solid waste generated by the reconfigured
project will be the same or less than that projected in 1986, and the further reduction in
total units by 57 should contribute even further to this solid waste reduction. This
remains true for the present plan.
-
2. Provide proof of coordination with Monroe County Waste Collection and Disposal
District or its successor. Assess the present and projected capacity of the solid waste
treatment and disposal system and the ability of such facilities to provide adequate
services to the proposed development. (Page 15)
A new coordination letter was not required.
Monroe County presently sends all solid waste to Waste Management, Inc.'s land fill in
Broward County.
d. Public facilities: Transportation
1. Provide a projection of the expected vehicle trip generation at the completion of
each development phase. Describe in terms of external trip generation and average
daily peak hour traffic. (Pages 16-17)
The updated traffic study conducted by David Plummer & Associates, Inc. was enclosed as
Attachment CIS-4 to the August 1995 application. The most current methodology in assessing
traffic trip generation was used (Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE] fifth edition
manual), both for the 1986 project and the August 1995 plan. Although the ITE manual does
not recommend an increase in the trip generation rate for larger units in the resort hotel land
14
use category, an effort was made to address the perception that greater numbers of trips would
be generated by larger units by extrapolating adjustments from another comparable land use.
Exhibit 3 of the traffic study sununarized the results. Under current methodology, the approved
1986 plan and the August 1995 plan would generate a daily total of 4,811 and 3,948 trips,
respectively; and the total trips approved in 1986 were 4,529. Total daily trips for the project
as reconfigured in August 1995 were 18 percent lower than the 1986 plan using current
methodology, and 13 percent lower than that approved in the DR!.
Under current methodology, average daily peak hour traffic for the approved 1986 plan and the
August 1995 plan would be 233 and 185 trips, respectively; the peak hour trips approved in
1986 were 408. Peak hour trips for the August 1995 project were 20 percent lower than the
1986 plan using current methodology, and 54 percent lower than those approved in the DR!.
Attachment CIS-4A, enclosed with the December 1995 submittal, contains a traffic update by
David Plummer and Associates, Inc., which reflects the additional 57 unit reduction in the
project proposed. Exlnbit 1 compares both the originally approved DR! plan, the August 1995
plan, and the December 1995 plan. Total daily trips has decreased to 3,289, a reduction from
the original DR! of 31.6 percent. AM and PM peak hour trips decreased to 105 and 154,
reducing the trips from the original DR! by 31.3 percent and 34.3 percent, respectively.
The updated traffic analysis contained in Attachment CIS-4A, submitted in December 1995,
was based on 244 suites (2 bedroom, 2 bathroom), and 25 Luxury Guest Suites (3 bedroom,
3 bathroom), and used a larger trip generation rate for the larger units. The present plan
proposes the same configuration of bedrooms and bathrooms, although, as discussed in the
water and wastewater sections above, the square footage of the 25 larger units is less.
Therefore, the December 1995 traffic plan would still apply to the present proposal, and is
probably quite conservative.
15
2. If project is adjacent to U.S. Highway 1, describe the measures, such as setbacks
and access limitations, which have been incorporated into the project design to
reduce impacts upon U.S. 1. (Page 18)
No change.
e. Other Public Facilities (Pages 19-20)
No further update was required beyond that specified in Attachment A of the major
development amendment application.
f. Environmental resources: Shore Line Protection Zone and Natural Vegetation
1. If shoreline protection zones were identified in the environmental designation
survey, describe in detail any proposed site alterations in the areas including
vegetation removal, dredging, canals and channels. Identify measures which have
been taken to protect the natural, biologic functions of the vegetation of this area
such as shoreline stabilization, wildlife and marine habitat, marine productivity and
water quality. (Pages 21-22)
The policy of the Hawk's Cay project is to preserve the shoreline protection zone and
natural vegetation to the greatest extent possible, and, in fact, to incorporate these natural
features into the amenities of the resort. In this regard, a boardwalk with handrails is now
being proposed to be constructed along the west shoreline of the project in the area of the
Sunset Island suites. This boardwalk: would be built to meander around and preserve
outstanding shoreline vegetation, and would lift foot traffic above the intertidal area thus
removing trampling effects. In addition, water depths in the area preclude fishing and
docking.
This boardwalk is no longer proposed in the present plan.
16
2. If tropical hammock communities were identified in the environmental designation
survey, describe proposed site alteration in these areas and indicate measures which
were taken to protect intact areas (clumps) of tropical hardwood hammocks and
individual species of tree cactus and palms prior to, during and after construction.
(Pages 23-24)
No change.
3. Describe plans for revegetation and landscaping of cleared sites including a
completion schedule for such work. (Page 25)
~ No change.
g. Environmental resources: Wildlife
Describe the wildlife species which nest, feed or reside on or adjacent to the proposed
site. Specifically identify those species considered to be threatened or endangered.
Indicate measures which will be taken to protect wildlife and their habitats. (Page 26)
No change.
h. Environmental resources: Water quality
1. Identify any waste water disposal areas, septic tank drainfields, urban runoff areas,
impervious surfaces, and construction related runoff. Describe anticipated volume
and characteristics. Indicate measures taken to minimize the adverse impacts of
these potential pollution sources upon the quality of the receiving waters prior to,
during, and after construction. (Pages 27-28)
Wastewater disposal areas and methods are described in the response to question 2.b.
above, and there are no septic tank drainfields on the Hawk's Cay property.
17
Runofffrom impervious surfuces will be entirely contained on the property, far exceeding
South Florida Water Management District standards for stormwater treatment. Please
see the revised Site Plan (Attachment F) and the drainage calculations (Attachment H),
submitted with the August 1995 application, for more detailed infonnation on the
drainage pIan. The amount of impervious surface in the present, December 1995 plan has
decreased from that in the August 1995 plan; therefore, revised drainage calculations have
not been provided, as runoff will clearly decrease. This continues to be the case for the
present proposaL
Any erosion and potential runoff into nearshore waters which could result from
~ construction activities will be contained with appropriate staked sediment barriers.
However, the very low relief of the island, and the drainage plan design which directs
runoff away from the shoreline reduce the likelihood of any problem of this kind.
2. Indicate the degree to which any natural drainage patterns have been incorporated
into the drainage system of the project. (Page 29)
No change. See the revised Site Plan (Attachment F) for the new drainage plan, and
Attachment H for the drainage calculations.
I. Economic
1. Provide an analysis of the estimated average annual ad valorem tax yield from the
proposed project during each phase of development. Indicate assumptions and
standards utilized, including but not limited to assessed value, exemptions, millage
rates, etc. (Pages 30-31)
An estimate of total property value at buildout for the August 1995 plan is as follows:
69 villas @ $220,000 each
232 villas at $170,000 each
$15,180,000
$39,440,000
18
25 villas at $300,000 each
Commercial 1 0,000 sf @ $1 OO/sf
50 seat grill at Sunset Island Clubhouse
Site improvements
Conference center expansion
TOTAL
$7,500,000
$1,000,000
$200,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$65,820,000
The total tax millage rate for the Hawk's Cay property in 1994 was 14.47. Applying this
rate to the total estimated value at buildout yields a total of $952,416 in added ad valorem
tax revenue, assuming a constant millage rate and distribution schedule.
In addition to the ad valorem tax revenues generated by new construction, approximately
$36,000 per year will be generated by tangible property tax.
An estimate of total property value at buildout for the December 1995 plan is as follows:
22 villas @ $220,000 each
222 villas at $170,000 each
Commercial 10,000 sf@ $100/sf
50 seat grill at Sunset Island Clubhouse
Site improvements
Conference center expansion
TOTAL
$4,840,000
$37,740,000
$1,000,000
$200,000
$1,500,000
$1,000,000
$53,780,000
The total tax millage rate for the Hawk's Cay property in 1994 was 14.47. Applying this
rate to the total estimated value at buildout yields a total of$778, 197 in added ad valorem
tax revenue from the August 1995 plan, assuming a constant millage rate and distribution
schedule.
19
Tangible property tax would reduce a small amount with the December 1995 from the
approximately $36,000 per year estimated for the August 1995 plan.
An estimate of total property value at buildout for the present plan is as follows:
22 villas@ $220,000 each
247 villas at $180,000 each
Commercial 10,000 sf@$100/sf
50 seat expansion at Water's Edge Restaurant
Site improvements
Conference center expansion
$4,840,000
$44,460,000
$1,000,000
$200,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
TOTAL
$54,000,000
The. total tax millage rate for the Hawk's Cay property in 1994 was 14.47. Applying this
rate to the total estimated value at buildout yields a total of $781,380 in added ad
valorem tax revenue from the present plan, assuming a constant millage rate and
distribution schedule.
Tangible property tax would decrease a small amount with the present plan from the
approximately $36,000 per year estimated for the August 1995 plan, and would increase
a small amountfrom the December 1995 plan.
2. For each development phase, estimate the average annual construction expenditure
by type i.e., labor, materials, etc., and the percentage of this expenditure which will
occur within the County. (Page 32)
The project is now proposed as one continuous phase. Distribution of construction
expenditures for the August 1995 plan was estimated as follows:
In Monroe County
Outside
20
Labor
Materials
$16,455,000
$16,455,000
$16,455,000
$16,455,000
Distribution of construction expenditures for both the December 1995 and present plan
is estimated as follows:
In Monroe County
Outside
Labor
$14,000,000
$ 14,000,000
$ 14,000,000
$ 1 4,000,000
Materials
3. ~ For non-residential developments, project the number of non-construction
permanent employees using appropriate classifications such as salary and functions.
(Page 33)
1be proposed major development would create in excess of one hundred fifty pennanent
new jobs, making Hawk's Cay Resort one of the largest employers in Monroe County,
Florida. The following job classifications would be required:
Salary Range
Management:
Sales and Marketing
Front Desk
Food and Beverage
Housekeeping
Security
Engineering
Banquets and Conventions
Accounting
~30,000-$50,000/year
$25,000-$60,000/year
$30,000-$55,000/year
$25,000-$50,000/year
$25,000/year
$35,000-$50,000/year
$25,000-$35,000/year
$30,000-$60,000/year
Service Personnel:
Office Staff
Bell Persons
Maids
Food and Beverage Employees
Front Desk
Engineering
$18,000-$25,000/year
$5/hour + gratuity
$7-$9/hour
$6-$8/hour
$7-$9/hour
$7-$1l/hour
21
Security Guards
Sales Personnel
Telephone and Reservations
$10/hour
$20,OOO-$25,OOO/year
$17,OOO-$22,OOO/year
The above remains the same for the present plan.
j. Housing (Page 34)
Non-applicable.
k. Special Considerations
1. Describe the relationship of the proposed development to county land use plans,
objectives and policies. Also, indicate relationship to existing or proposed public
facilities' plans such as wastewater treatment, transportation, etc. Identify any
co~flicts. (Pages 35-36)
As no zoning change is proposed, no additional discussion is required.
2. Indicate any relationship of the project to special land use and/or development
districts such as airport noise and hazard zones, solid or liquid waste or disposal
areas, etc. (Page 37)
Not applicable.
3. If applicable, assess the impact of the proposed development upon adjacent or
nearby municipalities or counties. (Pages 37-38)
The following is an update of the list of impacts presented in the original CIS, comparing
the present project (May 1996) with the 1986 approved project:
22
T~e of impact
Effect of May 1996 plan
Negative:
1. Increased traffic flow
2. Increased demand for services and utilities
Decrease
Decrease
Positive:
1. Upgrade entrance to Duck Key Same
2. Protect and enhance environment Same
3. Upgrade recreational amenities Same
4. . Temporary construction employment Same
5. Permanent employment Decrease
6. Provide major convention facilities Decrease (less sf)
7. Increase local and sub-regional tourism Decrease (less units)
8. Increase ad valorem and tangible tax revenues Increase
I. Historical and Archaeological resources (Page 39)
No change.
23
I
(-, ,; /; j - i,'. '-~
\. (
t
RECE!VEC
... I'f'
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
UV
JUN 1 2 1986
MONROE COUN
PLANNING 0
FOR HAWK'S CAY RESORT
Investors
This Agreement is entered into between Hawk's Cay
Ltd. ,
a
Florida
Limited
Partnership
of Community Affairs (.Department") subject to all other
("Developer.I.Owner.) and the State of Florida, Department
governmental approvals and solely at the Owner's and
~
Developer's own risk.
WHEREAS, the Department is the state land planning
agency having the power and duty to exercise general
supervision of the administration and enforcement of Chapter
380, Florida Statutes, which includes provisions relating to
developments or regional impact (DRI); and
,..
L
WHEREAS, the Department is authorized to enter into
preliminary development agreements pursuant to Subsections
9J-2.l8, Florida Administrative Code; and
380.032(3) and 380.06(8), Florida Statutes (1985), and Rule
WHEREAS, the Developer represents and warrants that:
A. The Developer is a Florida Limited Partnership
which Owns in fee simple absolute 60.8 acres
located
in
Monroe
County,
Florida,
more
particularly described in Exhibit "A" to the
Agreement (legal description). No other person or
legal entity has any interest in said land.
B. The Developer is a ~lorida Limited Partnership
which proposes to develop a project known as the
Hawk's Cay Resort hereinafter ref{:rred to as "the
Project".
The Hawk's Cay Resort is a luxury
destination resort located on Indies Island at Duck
Key, Monroe County, Florida. The Hawk's Cay Resort
Page 1
~
12. The date of execution of this Agreement shall be
the date that the last party signs and acknowledges this
Agreement.
DEVELOPER/OWNER
BY:\
f/~
..J
~
./
,/
FLORIDA
OF BRO~RD
The~oregoing instrument was acknowledged before me
this ~ day of ~ ' 1986, by JAMES COHEE
for HAWK'S CAY INVESTORS, LTD. , a Flor ida Limited
Partnership, on behalf of the Partnership.
~~..:1. ~W~~
Notary Public, St e of
Florida
My Commission Expires:
r;;n"RY PU8L,C. snTE Of fLORiDA.
., COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC. 13. 1089.
aO""DEO ThlllU "'OT..",. ,.u.u~ UNDEIIIW"IT~"i
.r
(
Approved as to form and
legal sufficiency:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS:
Page 7
E. The development of Hawk's Cay Resort is important
to the economic growth of the Florida Keys.
F. The preliminary development authorized by this
Agreement is limited to land that has previously
been disturbed by human activity and can no longer
be characterized as a pristine natural system.
G. The preliminary development authorized by this
Agreement will not result in material adverse
impacts to eXisting resources or existing or
planned facilities.
tt
H. The eXisting development was built prior to JUly 1,
1973, and thus is exempt from development of
regional impact review.
(
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual
Covenants contained herein, it is hereby understood and
agreed that:
1. The Developer asserts and warrants that all the
representations and statements concerning the Project made
to the Department and contained in this Agreement are true,
accurate, and correct. Based upon said representations and
statements, the Department concludes that this Agreement is
in the best interest of the State, is necessary and
beneficial to the Department in its role as the state agency
with the responsibility for the administration and
enforcement of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and reasonably
applies and effectuates the provisions and intent of Chapter
380, Florida Statutes.
2. The Project is a development of regional impact as
defined by Section 380.06, Florida Statutes. Within 45 days
from the date of the execution of this Agreement, the
Developer shall meet with the South Florida Regional
Planning Council for the preapplication conference required
Page 3
consists of 60.8 acres with 178 existing hotel
rooms, three restaurants, a night club, convenience
store, and marina.
The resort was recently
renovated to become a first class tourist facility.
The proposed major development is designed to
expand the existing Resort to make Hawk's Cay a
world class destination conference center and
resort.
The major development of Hawk's cay will
result in Monroe County's first tourist facility
capable of bringing large conventions to the
Florida Keys.
\"
The proposed development plan provides for the
addi tion of 444 hotel rooms and suites under a
phase development schedule which will result in a
completed resort of 622 rooms and suites. In
addition to adding rooms, the proposed development
plan provides for new conference centers, retail
areas, restaurants, a professional tennis center
and full landscaping for the entire property upon
,r--
,..
~.
the land owned by the owner.
c. The Developer proposes to develop a portion of the
Project pr ior to issuance of a final development
order.
The Monroe county Zoning Board and the Division
of Archi~es and History and Records Management
(DABRM) have examined the proposal and have advised
the
parties
that
the
proposed
preliminary
development is not likely to cause material adverse
impacts to existing. resources or existing or
D. The owner and Developer do not have any interest in
planned facilities.
any other land or development located within five
miles of the Project.
Page 2
c
a legal description of the area within which
the
14
bUildings
Planned
are
for
construction. The developer may also develop
and redevelop that portion of the commercial
property shown
on Exhibi t
-p- .
SUch
..
commercial development and redevelopment shall
not eXceed 7,400 square feet.
All other lands are to remain undeveloped
and no other development, as defined by
Subsection 380.04, Florida Statutes, shall
'ClCcur until such time as a final development
order is approved for the Project in its
entirety.
The
preliminary
development
authorized by this paragraph shall be subject
to the terms and conditions of the final
development order as well as the apPlicable
I
I
proviSions of attached Exhibit "G".
5. The preliminary development authorized by this
Agreement is less than 25' of -any applicable numerical
gUideline and standard.
6. The Developer and the Owner shall not claim vested
rights, or assert equitable estoppel, arising from this
Agreement or any expendi tures or actions taken in reliance
on this Agreement to Continue with the total proposed
development beyond the preliminary development. This
Agreement shall not entitle the Developer or the Owner to a
final development order approving the total proposed
development nor to particular conditions in a final
development order.
7. In the event of a ~reach of this Agreement or
failure to Comply with any conditions of this Agreement, or
if this Agreement is based upon materially inaccurate
information, the Department may terminate this Agreement or
file suit to enforce this Agreement as provided in Sections
Page 5
by subsection 380.06(7), Florida Statutes (1985). Within
three months from the date of execution of this Agreement,
the Developer shall file an APplication for Development
APproval (ADA) for the project, which shall include all of
the real property owned by the Developer in Monroe County
consisting of 60.8 acres on Duck Key, Indies Island, Monroe
County, Florida as particularlY described and shown on
Exhibits wAw (Warranty Deeds) and Wa" (Plans [21 sheets1 and
community Impact Statement) attached hereto and incorporated
by reference. The ADA shall assess all the impacts
associated with the entire development of the Project,
including the preliminary development authorized by this
Agreement. such assessment of impacts shall not include the
,impacts of the existing development on site as shown on
attached Exhibit wCw.
3. Time is of the essence. Failure to timely attend
the preapplication conference or to timely file the ADA or
to otherwise fail to diligently proceed in good faith to
obtain a final development order shall constitute a breach
of this Agreement. In the event of such a breach, the
Developer shall immediatelY cease all development of the
Project, including the preliminary development authorized by
this Agreement.
4. The Developer may undertake the following
preliminary development after the date of execution of this
Agreement and prior to issuance of a final development
order;
~-.
A. construction of 87 additional guest rooms in
approximatelY 14' buildings pursuant to the
site plan and building specifications attached
hereto as Exhibit wDw. Exhibit "D" shows the
location and approximate footprint of the 14
numbered buildings within which the developer
may build such 87 rooms. Exhibit WE" contains
Page 4
.
12. The date of execution of this Agreement shall be
the date that the last party signs and aCknowledges this
Agreement.
~I f~ia.!
<i)n~c ~/ ~
~es
STATE FLORIDA
COUNTY OF BROlfARD
DEVELOPER/OWNER
BY: ~
-J
-f//~ z
./
/
. Th~oregoing inst~e~t was acknowledged before me
thlS -z=:... day of ~:Y" ' 1986, by JAMES COHEE
for HAWK'S CAY INVESTORS, LTD., a Florida Limited
Partnership, on behalf of the Partnership.
~Zh~h;h.J ~
Notary PUblic, S~
Florida
,..
{
My COlll/llission Expires:
"~I"Olr PUSLiC. ~TATE OF' F'l.ORiDA.
"r CO""'ISSION EXPIIlQ DEC. 13. IDa9.
""01::0 Th"lJ "~fA"., ~".uc; UNtll:""'''IT~..j
Approved as to form and
legal sUfficiency:
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AFFAIRS:
Page 7
380.06 and 380.11, Florida Statutes, including a suit to
enjoin all development.
8. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute a waiver
by any party of the right to appeal any development order
pursuant to Section 380.07, Florida Statutes.
9. The restrictions and conditions of the final
development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, Flor ida
Statutes, shall supersede the restr ictions and conditions
upon development of this Agreement.
10. This Agreement affects' the rights and obligations
of the parties under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. It is
.
not intended to determine or influence the authority or
decisions of any other state or local government or agency:~~~
in issuance of any other permits or approvals which might be ~~ I
required by state law or local ordinance for any development
authorized by this Agreement.
This Agreement shall nQ~:Y A
prohibit the regional planning agency from reviewing a~:.", .l'
commenting on any regional issue that the regional agenQY :i.:1
r
determines should be included -in the regional agency'.S - i-:
report on the ADA.
11. The terms and conditions of this Agreement ,"hall. :'~
~'-
personal representatives, successors and assigns of the
inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, ='~ t.
parties hereto.
provide that any successor with interest in and to any land6- 0f
The Developer and owner shall ensure and~o:l
or parcels affected by this Agreement is bound by the terms...;,: C
of this Agreement.
The Developer shall record this
Agreement in the Official Records of Monroe county, Florida,
and shall provide the Department with a copy of the recorded
, t
Agreement, including Book and page number, within two (2) ..
weeks of the date of execution of this Agreement.
::-
page 6
RESOLUTION NO.
365 -1986
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMl-lIS-
SIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVING
THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL OF
HAWK'S CAY INVESTORS LIMITED AND GRANTING
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND FINAL
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL FOR HA~~'S CAY EXPANSION
DRI, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
WHEREAS, on August 12, 1986, Hawk's Cay Investors Limited,
hereinafter referred to as "Applicant", submitted to Monroe
County an Application for Development Approval (ADA) for a
development of regional impact (DRI) known as' "Hawk's Cay
Resort", in accordance with,Sections 380.05 and 380.06, Florida
Statutes; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 1986, the South Florida Regional
Planning Council (RPC) found the Application sufficient; and
WHEREAS, Hawk's Cay Resort as proposed in the ADA when
completed will be a hotel type destination resort consisting of
622 hotel suites, conference facilities, retail areas, Lestau-
rants and recreational facilities on approximately 61 acres of
land located in unincorporated Monroe County, Florida, on Indies
Islands at Duck Key; and
WHEREAS, on May 15, 1986, the applicant and the Florida
Department of Community Affairs entered into a Section 380.06(8),
F.S., preliminary development agreement for Hawk's Cay Resort
which authorized the applicant to undertake preliminary develop-
ment of 87 additional guest rooms and development and redevelop-
ment of commercial facilities not to exceed 7,400 square feet
pri"or to the issuance of a final DRI development order; and
WHEREAS, the RPC after reviewing the ADA for Hawk's Cay
Resort issued its report and recommendations on October 7, 1986,
in which it recommended that the DRI be approved subject to
certain conditions; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 380.05 and 380.06, F.S., the
B04~d of County Commissioners of Monroe County, hereinafter
referred to as either the "Board" or the "County", as the local
government having jurisdiction, is authorized and required by law
to consider the Hawk's Cav Re~o~t CRT ADA; and
Exhibit E
WHEREAS, the Board has received and reviewed the report and
recommendations of the RPCj and
WHEREAS, the Board on December 5, 1986, held a public
hearing on the ADA and the final development plan at which all
parties were afforded the opportunity to present evidence and
argument on all issues, conduct cross-examination and submit
rebuttal evidence, ~nd any member of the general public request-
ing to do so was given an opportunity to present written or oral
communicationj and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 380.06, F.S., public notice of
said hearing was duly published on October 5,- 1986, in the "Key
West Citizen" and way duly provided to the Florida Department of
Community Affairs (DCA), the RPC, and other persons designated by
DCA rules; and
~~EREAS, the Board at its December 5, 1986, public hearing
fully considered the ADA, the report of the RPC, and the evidence
of record presented at the public hearing, and was otherwise
fully advi~ed in the premises; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
,
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that said Board makes the following
Findings of Fact:
1. The name of the development is Hawk's Cay Resort. The
acthorized agents of the developer are Michael Halpern, Key West,
Florida, and Wade L. Hopping, Tallahassee, Florida. The name of
the developer is Hawk's Cay Investors Limited, 150 East Sample
Road, Pompano Beach, Florida, 33064.
2. The legal description of the property comprising the
proposed Hawk's Cay Resort DRI is set forth in the ADA and is
incorporated herein by reference.
3. On December 3, 1985, the Monroe County Zoning Board
recommended approval of the Hawk's Cay Resort with rezoning
classifications compatible with the DRI uses proposed in the ADA.
On September 24, 1986, the Zoning Board adopted the final major
development approval for Hawk's Cay Resort, which included
adoption gf a RU-7 zoning designation for the entire site.
Nevertheless, a Monroe County land use map related to the Coun-
ty's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, which was being
2
contemporaneously developed. did not reflect the recommended
rezoning in its entirety. The map designated a portion of the
Hawk's Cay Resort as being in the Suburban Residential (SR) and
Suburban Commercial (SC) zoning categories rather than in the
Zoning Board approved RU-7 category.
4. When developed in accordance with the conditions
imposed by this development order. the Hawk's Cay Resort DRI:
(a) will not have, a significant negative impact on the
environment and natural and historical resources of the region;
(b) will have a favorable economic impact on the
-
economy of the region by providing new employment and net posi-
tive regional impacts on the economy of the region;
(c) will efficiently use water, sewer, solid waste
disposal, and other necessary public facilities;
(d) will efficiently use public transportation facil-
ities;
(e) will not adversely affect the ability of people to
find adequate housing reasonably accessible to their places of
,
employment; and
(f) will not create an unreasonable additional demand
- .
for, or additional use of, energy; and
(g) will make adequate provisions for the public
facilities needed to accommodate the impacts of the development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD ENTERS THE FOLLOWING
CONCLUSIONS OF Law:
1. The proceedings herein have been conducted in compli-
ance with the provisions of Chapter 380. Florida Statutes; and
all conditions precedent to the granting of development approval
required by Chapt~r 380, F.S., have occurred.
2. The proposed Hawk's Cay Resort DR! is located within an
Area of Critical State Concern designated pursuant to the pro-
visions of Section 380.05, F.S. and, as approved herein, the DRI
complies with the land development regulations of such Area and
with the provisions of Section 380.06.
3. The proposed Hawk's Cay Resort does not unreasonably
interfere with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted
state land development plan applicable to the area.
3
4. The proposed Hawk's Cay Resort DRI and final develop-
ment plan, when developed s~bject to the conditions imposed by
this development order, are consistent with the Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan, and all other local land development regu-
lations.
5. The proposed Hawk's Cay Resort DRI is in all material
aspects consistent with the report and recommendations of the RPC
submitted pursuant to Section 380.06(12), F.S.
6. The DRI ADA and final development plan for all phases
of the Hawk's Cay Resort, as described in the ADA and Exhibit 2
attached to this development order, are hereby approved, subject
to the general and special conditions of development contained in
Attachment A which is made a part hereof by reference.
7. Unless otherwise specifically provided in Attachment A,
any changes proposed by t~e Applicant to the ADA, as amended
herein, which exceed the limits established in Section
380.06(19), F.S., which limits are presumed not to be substantial
deviations, shall be submitted to the Board, the RPC, and the DCA
for a determination if such changes constitute a substantial
deviation and, therefore, requiring further review pursuant to
Section 380.06, F.S.
8. Definitions contained in Chapter 380, Florida Statutes,
shall control in the construction of this development order.
Hawk's Cay Investors Limited, is the present owner of the proper-
ty which is the subject of this ADA. Hawk's Cay Investors
I
Limited, is bound by the terms of this development order so long
as it owns such property. This development order shall be
binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Applicant and its
assignees or successors in interest.
9. To affect the equivalent RU-7 zoning granted in the
Preliminary Major Development Approval of the Monroe County
Zoning Board on December 5, ~1985, and in the final Major Develop-
ment granted September 24, 1986. The Monroe County Board of
Commissioners will by this resolution correct as errors and
omissions such SC and SR Land Use Districts so as to conform to
the DR district in context of this DRI.
4
10. In the event that any portion or section of this
development order is determined to be invalid by a court of
competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions or sections of
this development order shall remain in full force and effect.
11. Notice of the adoption of this resolution and a cer-
tified copy of this resolution shall be recorded by the Applicant
pursuant to Section'380.06(lS)(f), Florida Statutes.
12. The County shall transmit a certified copy of this
development order by certified mail to the DCA, the RPC, and the
Applicant.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by
he ld on the 5th
day of
the Board of County Commissioners of
a ~Q.c.; t:A. I meeting of said Board
December, A.D., 1986.
Monroe County, Florida, at
\.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
(SEAL)
Attest: DANNY L. I~OL!!LCEJ Ckrk
L2L /!~1~L
Clerk
:DASTOFORM
A ~ --A,.IU. SUr-~/CIEhCY.
BY
Attorney's Office
5
" !
. ,
. .
. ,
l
:
.GE~ERAL AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT
The following are the General and Special Conditions
governing the development of HAWK'S CAY RESORT:
1.0 General Conditions
1.1 The Applicant shall integrate all original and
supplemental ADA information into a Consolidated
Application for Development Approval (CADA) aWl
submit two copies of the CADA to the Regional
Planning Council (RPC), one copy to Monroe County,
and one copy to the Florida Department of Communit~
Affairs \lithin thirty (30) days of the effective
, ,
date of this Development Order. The CADA shall be
prep~red as follows:
(a) Where new, clarified, or revised information
w.:os prepared subsequent to submi t tal of the
ADA but prior to issuance of the 00, whether
in
response
to
formal
a
statement of
information needed or otherwise, the origin~l
pages of the ADA will be replaced with revised
pages.
(b) Revised pages will have a "Page Number (R) _
.
Date" notation, with .Pa~e Number" being the
'Attachment A
." ~M"~
/
1.2
number of tho original page, "(R)" indicating
that the page was revised, and -Date" stating
.
the date of the revision.
The
CADA
and
the
RPC
DRI
assessment
are
incorporated herein bj reference and relied upon by
the parties in discharging their statutory duties
under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and local
ordinances.
Substantial compliance with the
representations contained in the Application for
Development Approval is a condition for approval
unless waived or modified by agreement among the
RPC, County, and Applicant, its successorz, and/or
assIgns.
1.3 (a) 'l'his development shall be subject to further
Chapter 380 review in the event significant
phy~ical development hilS not commenced within
two (2) years from the effective date of the
development order.
Failure to commence
signi f icant ~evel::>pment as requi r'ed by th i:;
paragraph shall stay the effectiveness of the
development
order
and
no
additional
development permits shall be granted until
such time as an amended ADA, providing updated
'.
- 2 -
information, is submit.ted to the RPC, County,
and Department of Conununity Affai rs and an
amended development order is issued.
(b) The
, . i
termlnat on
completing
date
for
=
development shall be ten (10) years from the
effective date of the development order
provided that the Applicant, or its successor~
and assigns, complies with the terms and
conditions of this Development Order.
Thi~
terminat~on date may only be modified in
accordance with Section 380.06(19), Florioa
Stiltutes, (1986).
...........
".
1.4 The effective date of this Development Order shall
be forty-five (45) days from tran!::mittal of th':
Hawk' s Cay nevelopment Order to the Flor loa
"-
)
Department of Communi ty Affai rs, the RPC and the
Applicant:
provided,
however
that
if
the
Development Order is appealed, the effective date
of the Development Order shall not commence until
the day after all appeals have been withdrilwn or
resolved pursuant to Section 380.07(2), Florida
Statutes.
1.5 Within thirty .(30) days of the effective date of
this Development Order, notice of its adoptio.l
shall be recorded with the Clerk, .Monroe County
- 3 -
'.. .
Circuit Court, pursuant ~.o Section 380.06 (15) (f),
Florida Statutes (1986).
1.6 In the event the Applicant, its SUCcessors and/or
i -
f
1
i
1
!
!
f
1
.
j
t
.
i
,
~
,
i
'It
1
I
assigns violates any of the conditions of. this
Development Order or otherwise fails to act in
substantial compliance with the Development Order,
the local government shall - stay the effectiveness
of the Development Order as to the parcel in which
the violative activity or conduct has occurred nnd
wi thhold further pernd ts, approvals, and services
for development In said parcel.
For purposes of
this paragraph, the word .parcel" shall be defined
to mean:
any land area identif ied on the Hawk t s
Cay Resort Master Plan.
Nothing in this paragraph
shall limit the authority of the DCA under Chapter
380, F.S.
1.7 The County attorney, upon recommendation of th~
building official, shall have the authority to stay
the effectiveness of the DRI Development Order upon
notification and verification of a violation of any
condition herein.
1.8' This Development Order runs wi th the land and is
blnding on the Applicant, 1 t..s successors, and/or
assigns, jointly or severally.
- 4
".
1.9 December 31, 1996 shall be the d3te until which the
County
agrees
that
the
Hawk's
Cay
Rezort
Development of Regional Impact shall not be subject
to down-zoning, unit density reduction, or
intensity reduction, unless the County Ciln
:
demonstrate that substantial changes in the
conditions underlying the approval of tht!
development order have occurred, or that the
development order was based on substantial)y
inaccurate information provided by the Applicant,
or that the. change is clearly essential to th~
public health, safety, or welfare.
1.10 The Director of P:anning, Building and Zoning i:;
the
County
official
designated
to
monitor
compliance with all conditions of the Devclop;ner.t
Order including the following requirementz:
(a) The Development Order conditions shall be
reviewed prior to issuance of any local
development permit; and
(b) for any condition that cannot reasonably be
monitored as part of the local permitting and
inspection processes, a notarized affidavit
from the Applicant ass,,!ring compliance with
such D3veloprnent Ord~r conditions shall be
- 5 -
1.11
1
i
j
I
z
..
.
4
j
.
~
1
1
I
...
..
~
~
:.;
..
"
1
9
I
j
inclpd~d as part of the Annual Report require~
by this Development Order.
The Applicant shall submit an Annual Report to the
RPC, County, and DCA on each anniversary of t~lC
effective date of the Development Order, whiclJ
report shall include at a minimum:
(a) A complete response to each question contained
in the annual status report form adopted by
the Department of Community Affairs, to-\lit.
Form BLWM-07-SS, as amended.
(b) Identification and description of any change~
in the plan of development, or in the
representations contained in the ADA, 01." in
the phasing for the reporting year and for the
next year.
(c) A summary comparison of dev~lopment activity
proposed and actually conducted for the year.
(d) Identification of undeveloped tracts of land,
other than individual single family lots, thnt
have been sold to a separate entity or
developer.
(e) Identification and intended use of lanu~
purchased, leased or opti.oned by th~ d~velop~r
adjacent to the project s1 te since thl:'
Development Order was issued.
6 -
(f) An assessment of the Applicant's and the loc~l
government's compliance with the conditions
contained in the DRI Development Order and tiJ(:
commitments which are contained in the ADA.
(g) Specification of any amended DRI ADA or
requests
for
a
substantial
deviation
determination that were filed in the reporting
year or to be filed during the next year.
(h) An indication of change, if any, in local
government jurisdiction for any portion of the
development since issuance of the Development
Orde r.
(i) A list of significant local, state and federal
permits which have been obtained or which ~rt:
pending by agency, type of permit, permit
number, and purpose of each.
(j) A stiltement that all persons have been sp.nt.
copies of the annual report in conformance
with Subsection 380.06 (15) and (10), Floridn
Stntutes.
(k) A copy of any recorded notice of the adoption
of the Development Order of any. subsequent
t
modification
that
Wi\s. recorded
by
the
Applicant
pursuant
to
Subsectio::
380.06(15) (f), Florida Statutes.
,
- 7 -
(1) Copi es of all aff idav its submi t ted to the
County'pur~uant to Condition 1.lOCb) hcrcin.
(m) An}'
other
Information
rcquired
by
the
Department of Community Affairs in accordanc~
.
1
i
1
.
~
j
j
J
J
>
wi th Section 380.06 (15) and (18), Flor ida
Statutes (1986).
j
J
J
..
1
~
j
4
,
1
.
t
,
Cn) The County Director of Planning, Building ana
Zoning is designated as the local off ic.i al
responsible for receiving the annual report.
1.12
The land uses approved by this Development Order
shall be as shown on the Master Development Plan
attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and as fully describcd
in answer to question .12 of the ADA which i5
attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
Both of these
exhibits are incorporated into this Devclo~nent
Order. Table 12.1 of Exhibit 2 is modified hcrein
to differentIate between existing development and
development author ized by this developmcnt oruer
and to advance the construction bcginning and
ending dates .by one year to account for delay~ 5n
securing ~RI.approval.
1.13 Except for development authorized by the ~cction
380.06 (8), F.S., preliminary development ag rce:nH?ll '-
for Hawk's Cay Resort dated May 15, 1986, Chapter
12 of the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan, Volu~c
- 8 -
III, "Land Development Regulations", effective
September 15, 1986, as amended from time to time,
relating to Impact Fees, shall be applicable to
this development so long as said fees are also
applicable to all other similar types
(Hotel/Motel) of development within Monroe County.
2.0 Stormwater Mana~ement
2.1 The Applicant sh~ll design, construct, and maintain the
stormwater manage~ent system to meet the following
standards:
a. Retain the first flush (at least the first
one-half inch) of project runoff in vegetated
retention areas.
b. These vegetated retention areas are to be
constructed so that they allow the retained
stormwater to infiltrate in less than 24 hours.
c. Limit application of pesticides and fertilizers in
vegetated retention areas to twice per year for
preventive maintenance and to emergencies, such as
uncontrolled insect infestation.
- 9 -
d. Consult with and Conform to tha requirel;,allt:
of all applicable State and local agencieE
when expanding the project's drainaga systerr
and installing disposal wells.
e. If t~e proposed drainage system is revised
during permitting, submit tha revised drainage
plan to SFWMD and SFRPC for review anJ
apprt)val.
Wastewater Treatment
3.1 The Applicant shall consult with and conform to the
requirement~ of all applicable Stata and loc~l
agencies when expanding the project's wastcwatel-
treatment facilities.
3.2 The Applicant shall utilize treated wastawater
effluent for project irrigation to reduce th~
projact's demand on fresh water supplies.
4.0 Housing/Energy
4.1 In final design and construction of the project,
the Applicant shall use minimum elevations for
3.0
floors, roadways, and parking areas t~at are
consistent with South Florida Water Hanagemellt
District and Monroe County criteria.
"
- 10 -
4.2 The Applicant shall construct all development so
that it is in conformance with the specificutions
of the State of Florida Energy Efficiency Code for
Building Construction (State Energy Code).
5.0
Archaeloqical Sites
5.1 The Applicant shall notify .State archaeologicul
officials of construction schedules, and delay
construction up to three months in any area where
potentially significant historic or archaeological
artifacts are uncovered, and permit State and local
historic preservation officials to ~urvey and
excavate the site.
6.0 Vegetation
6.1 The Applicant shall remove all invasive exotic
plants from the project site as the site is
,
cleared, use only those plant species identified in
Exhibit 2 of the RPC DRI assessment or other
species approved for use by SFRPC in project
landscaping.
7.0 Transportation
7.1 Within six months following the completion of Phase
2 of the development as defined in this report, the
Applicant shall consult with the Florida Department
..
of Transportation (FOOT) to determine the need for
a traffic signal at the intersection of US 1 and
- 11 -
:
Duck Key Drive. The Applicant shall repeat this after
each subsequent phase and following project buildout or
until a traffic signal is installed at this location.
Copies of all eorrespondenee and reports relating to
such consultation shall be provided to the Board, the
RPC. and the DCA. If and when a traffic signal at this
location is found to be necessary by the FDOT, the
Applicant shall provide full funding for its
installation to the Florida Department of
Transportation. If the Applicant fails to consult or
provide such funding as required by this paragraph in a
timely fashion, the County may withhold issuance of
certificates of occupancy until the Applicant has
conformed with provisions of this paragraph.
B.O Employee HousinR
B.l Beginning with the commencement of the construction
authorized herein, the applicant shall provide daily
employee transportation to and from the Marathon area.
The applicant shall also contribute $5~~QP to an entity
--
acceptable to the County which develops -or otherwise
provides affordable employee housing in the
Marathon/Hawk's Cay Resort area.
- 12 -
.QUESTION 12. Gener~l Project Description
A . Pro v ide a b r i e f s u mm a r y 0 f the m a J 0 r e 1 em en t s 0 f. t Ii e
proposed development. Include all existing and proposed
land uses ancillary to the project (e.g. a neighborhood
shopping center in a residential DRI).
The Hawk's Cay Resort is a luxury destination resort located
on Indies Island at Duck Key, Monroe County, Florida. The Hawk's
Cay Resort consists of 60.8 acres with 178 existing hotel rooms,
;=. /. I .' ~ l ,-
.l~'
1-
three
restaurants,
a night club,
conference
facilities,
marina.
tennis cOUrts, swimming pool and beach, convenience store, and
The resort was r~cent1y renovated to become a first
class tourist facility.
The proposed project is designed to expand the ex~sting
resort to make Hawk's Cay a world class destination conference
center and resort. Hawk's Cay will then. become the first tourist
facility capable of bringing large conventions to the florid~
Keys.
The development plan provides for the addition of 444 hotel
rooms and suites under a phased development schedule which 'wi1l
result in a completed resort of 622 rooms and suites. In addition
to adding rooms. the development plan provides for new conference
facilities, retail areas, a restaurant, a professional tennis
center, and full landscaping for the entire property. The
proposed project uses native vegetation in a lush pattern with
lo~ d~nsity, clustered buildings, to result in an enVironmentally
..
sound and aesthetically pleas1ng design. as follows:
Total Upland Area
Structures, walks. decks, plazas
Driveways, parking and tennis
Pools
landscaped open space '
60.8 acres
8.5 acres
14.3 acres
.2 acres
37.8 acres
12-1
The fntent of the development plan is to provfde a low rfse,
low density, clustered hotel and convention facflfty sensftfve to
the Florida Keys' unique environmental conditions and responsive
l
i
to the goals and'objectives of the proposed land Use plan. The
development plan was designed to have the least Possible adverse
impact Upon the site envfronment and publfc facilfties while
the greatest Possible economic benefits to
the
.
l
i
,
i
producing
.
.
developer and Monroe County.
l
I
r
i
f
I
f
I
I
I
five phases.
,
The expansion of Hawk's Cay is designed to be constructed in
Uorth
Harbor Guest Suites (see Hap H2).
The first phase consists of construction of the
Development Agreement was executed with the Florida Department of
A
Preliminary
Community Affairs,
pursuant to Chapter 380.06(8),
,
Florida
St~tutes, that allows Hawk's Cay Investors Limited to proceed
with the first phase before fssuance of final development
approval, which is subject to the DRI process and requires action
by the Monroe County Commission.
Therefore, the first phase is
planned to begin immediately upon final major
development
fn September, . 1986.
I
approval from the Monroe County Zoning Board, which is expected
on this application by the South florlda Regional Planning
Council and Monroe County Commission.
Additfonal phases, as descrfbed .fn Tables 12.1 and 12.2,
will provide _
· . additional hotel rooms and suftes distributed around the
property and associated with different features and amenities;
Any further construction must await action
,
12-2
. 26,000 square feet of new conference facilities, providing
meeting space for the resort's guests, which will not cause
additional outside traffic to Hawk's Cay;
. a small area (3000 square feet) of additional retail space,
clustered near the entrance road from U.S. Highway I, for
accessory retail uses normally found in luxury resorts such as
men'~ and women's clothing, dr~g stores, swimwear,;etc.; and
/
. extensive landscaping to produce a garden environment that
preserves existing and introduces additional native species of
vegetation.
B. Complete Tables 12.1 and 12.2. (If the development has a
proposed buildout of 10 years or less, show development in
the first five years and subsequently. If the proposed
buildout is greater than 10 years, show by 5-year
increments.)
TABLE 12.1: PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT (MODIFIED)
Phase
Hotel & Motel
Rooms Suites
Commercial
Sq. ft.
3000
Construction
Beginning End
Existing
156
22
84
6
1987
1988
1990
1992
1994
1987
,
.&
2
3
5"
156
38
76
480
3000
4
10
20
14.2
5
TOTAL
6000
1988
1990
. 1992
1994
1996
1996
Note: Spec'ific project details are estimated here for planning
purposes only, as future market circumstances may necessitate
modification of construction beginning and ending 'dates, and
numbers of units; however, in no case will the numbers of units
specified be changed significantly [as per Ch. 380.06(19)(b)(11),
r.s.] without additional review and approval.
17-3 (Revised 1212/86)
" .
.....~. . - . I
...
'-
.~. - ..... '._~... ......-.
.-.. ".'-'. :.: :-',. ':,~." _'-:":"-'~:".
... .._- '.
.. :.... .
TABLE 12.2: E X J S T 114 G AND PROPOSED lAND USES
[xi=:- Phases
Code land Use ting 1 2 3 4 5 TOT Id.
121 Re ta i1 Sales & Services
acre s 2.90 2.80 5.70
S of site 4.20 4.06 8.26
-
.
124 Hotels & Motels
Icres 56.19* - 53.39 :
S of site .81. 43 77.37
.
126 Oil & Gas Storlge faci-
lities - I cre s 0.01 :- 0.01
S of site 0.01 0.01
155 Sewage Treatment faci-
lities - acres 1.70 1.70
S of site 2.46 2.46
Subtotal 60.BO "60.80
563
Other Water Areas
(submerged land)
acres
I of site
8.2
11.9
69.0
100.0
8.2
11.9
- ..
TOTAL
69.0*
100.0
acres
S of site
2.80
4.06
· Abandonment procedures for I total of 3.4 acres of existing County
roadway on Indies Island will be initiated at the outset of each
development phase (see answer to Question 12.C.).
Hote: All land uses are accessory to hotel/motel, as part of a full
service resort complex. $ee Table 12.1 and Hap H2 for greater_
detail. Values given on this table are best estimates for planning
purposes, and it is recognized that changes may be necessary to respond
to real market circumstances at the time. In no case will the number
of hotel/motel units specified in Table 12.1 be changed Significantly
[as per th. 3BO.06(19)(b)(11), f.S.] without additional review and
approval.
-,
I 12- 4
.
, .
" .
~
70
26
39
37
:
H
H
'0
6
o
,
:.. .
-;
2
9
o
o
-
.'
.'
ii.,
.,
1
.. ...
....- .
... ,,: -.'
:~. - ~
j.J' . ~....... -,'
.j\ .,..
~t\ ., ;,1.
...~ ,\-.',
. \\ oJ'
\. ,?~ '.
'.' ~\..\.
~. ,..~. ",
.~~_.~. ;,
~'.. ..:..~~ . ~,. .....~...
rr.~lo.;;,l""~ 01'\ t' ..~~
l':~~~" ~... \!:~ \~\.... .
.~OC'J"~ .~~~,.,.11~ . ,~.. ~
"~~,,,~~':'~_l ..'-.. ----
I
I
...L_
":
r:
.
<
:r.
~
i.:
,.
......i...
---..-- .-'
ij
lOt
t-
al
:E
)(
w
~:
...
,
"
t..
, ~
;
..-..-
J
:. ....
- ._------.:.~
~
..
i
. ',rmi.;;'"'' :ro.( n'(r.':'~ p.i!Jiq,," :;"'."1 k:
J .:-.:.flI "... ~lllt. IJ,~'lh~l, J.. 'I"'~I~' li~'.;:.:.:
'frrrl,n"~I' ", 'iii' ,",", I" J'H"" .lill" :>
""f.,;::'.r .i'f " ;h,.!l' Iff fl'-'" J;r>t:,. r.-
I'iiiliiif.,'. Jrli lil,'fi;I.!l I~ 'f~I~1 'fl.; ;fr! I
:~'._"":~I" .~ f'flr~,.~.~I, " ",f." 'f"'''' "
f.~fJ,ijiJJf!' ~~I 1':WfiJ;: nf !fi~tl;" !!f~~
,fl~~';fi,rJ:J J:i ~ ,;;:!!!:,,! I~ i::.:!: ji::i!!( .
:JI'~(nrnJ' I'!! .!JfJ:.aU tl ;;,';)' -~~J;;:;
1I,::lr",:::f .ff( !I" ,'f!!!r ',,~ .o!lfl! "h';!
II' . ..... I( ffr. "r" "1" . ( rl.1 ,. I.." .:.
· 1!!~rmi;lr ,:11 .'illl:j:: II~I I.if!~ .,.hi.
'UulI'.mn i I,i. 'fu'If=..I' 'I .., h, l:.:i:'{
n.1 Im.JI 'i IcHJfud ,Ir 'II.... 't. .1..
:
i
....
~
..
.
Il
o 0
If
I-
.
f
!
;
f~;:k-;~y
Appendix
;i
!
&110::>8 ~
lEI ~
<: " : J ~
c:: . . _ 2
j ! c & :;i
II - -
~ q ~
i -
d
; i
I i
l> ,
Z l
EXISTING LAND USE PLAN
....-1 CAy 'D_ _ClPoCNl or If DON.. _.c.
. "
=~:~ [SJ f
~[2j f.
fIoooU~'-" UINlod.. Ib-olo ~ ............'" lor'
......... M.""",~w... Arwdl CArpw.....Cftn., r..f1rn
~,., \. fbd. AUClIS' 'fI'