State rightly put kibosh on
developers' free pass
The
Florida Department of Community Affairs has responded to Monroe
County's request to change development rules for working
waterfronts. The 13-page "Statement of Intent to Find
Comprehensive Plan Amendments Not in Compliance" is a fairly
sterile document steeped in bureaucratic language, but the
underlying message is pretty clear: "Not a chance."
The
goal of the working waterfront amendments to the county's
land-use plan ostensibly was to preserve historical uses on
recreational and commercial waterfront — and preserve the
public's access to those areas. But critics of the county's
efforts have known all along that the proposed changes actually
served to give developers a free hand to build whatever they
wanted without being hindered by long-standing development
regulations such as Rate of Growth Ordinance housing
allocations.
We're glad to see the state was not fooled by the ruse — or
distracted by Keys officials' egocentric attempts to apply
political pressure in Tallahassee.
The
proposed amendments were a Swiss cheese of loopholes. It wasn't
just those dubious "corrections" slipped in at the eleventh hour
by Robbie's Marina attorney Jerry Coleman. Other developers
already had packed the amendments with exemptions and exceptions
to development rules. Coleman simply managed to slip in a few
more for his client, too — a move that angered New Stock Island
Properties because it brought more public scrutiny to that
development firm's shenanigans.
Here's just a few of the loopholes:
l
By allowing a planned resort hotel to be exempt from ROGO
requirements, a developer could circumvent a prohibition on new
transient residential units (hotel rooms). It also would save
New Stock Island Properties somewhere between the $30 million
and $45 million it would need to buy existing housing unit
allocations.
*
By excluding working waterfronts from commercial building
allocation requirements, the developer could skirt laws that
require a balance between residential and commercial growth.
*
By exempting hotels that could double as hurricane shelters from
height restrictions, developers could measure height from base
flood elevation rather than ground level, adding about 10 feet
to the waterfront skyline.
*
By using bay bottom to calculate allowable density, developers
could cram more rooms and businesses — and profit — into their
project.
*
And under Coleman's "economically viable" loophole, developers
wouldn't really have to preserve historic use anyway if the use
wasn't deemed profitable — it's a bit vague about who would do
the deeming.
That looks to us a lot like a carte blanche ticket for
developers to do whatever they like. Apparently the state feels
the same way. The DCA says the county can rectify the problems
with its amendments by showing the need to circumvent ROGO, the
need to build to greater density, by explaining why all that
growth won't negatively impact hurricane evacuation times, and
so on. We're not advising anyone to hold their breath pending
these explanations.
Of
course the county plan was deficient in a few other aspects, as
well. It did not take into account the proximity of Naval Air
Station Key West, and the noise and safety issues that go with
that proximity. And county planners neglected to address the
environmental impact of dredging deepwater channels, or of dense
waterfront construction.
In
fairness, it's no surprise that developers would attempt to
circumvent laws that limit their profits. But our elected
officials are a different matter. They are entrusted to look
after the best interests of all Monroe County residents.
Instead, we look with disgust on the tactics employed by our
County Commission to help a small group of individuals beat the
system.
—
The Citizen
|
