Item F18
Monroe County and
Incorporated Municipalities
Key West, Marathon, Key Colony Beach, Layton,
and Islamorada Village of Islands
Local Mitigation Strategy
2015 Update
Florida Keys 1935 Hurricane Memorial
November 2015
Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Authority ..................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Working Group Membership ...................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................... 1-4
1.4 Key Terms .................................................................................................................. 1-4
1.5 Acronyms .................................................................................................................... 1-5
1.6 References ................................................................................................................... 1-5
Chapter 2: The Planning Area
2.1 Geography and Planning Area .................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Population ................................................................................................................... 2-2
2.3 Land Use and Growth Trends ..................................................................................... 2-3
th
2.4 The Florida Building Code (5 Edition, 2014) ........................................................... 2-6
2.5 Number and Value of Buildings and Structures ......................................................... 2-8
2.6 Economic Characteristics ........................................................................................... 2-9
2.7 Transportation ............................................................................................................. 2-9
2.8 Environmental and Historic Resources .................................................................... 2-10
2.8.1 Environmental Resources ............................................................................. 2-10
2.8.2 Historic Resources ....................................................................................... 2-11
2.9 Critical Facilities ....................................................................................................... 2-12
2.10 2015 Updates ............................................................................................................ 2-14
Chapter 3: Mitigation Planning
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 The Mitigation Planning Process ................................................................................ 3-1
3.2.1 LMS Working Group Annual Meetings ...................................................... 13-4
3.3 Public Involvement in Mitigation Planning ................................................................ 3-5
3.4 The 2015 Update: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment ................................ 3-5
3.5 2015 Updates .............................................................................................................. 3-5
Chapter 4: Mitigation Goals
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.2 LMS Mitigation Goals ................................................................................................ 4-1
4.3 ..................................................... 4-2
4.4 2015 Updates .............................................................................................................. 4-2
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) i
Chapter 5: Hurricanes & Tropical Storms
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 5-1
5.2 Defining the Hazard .................................................................................................... 5-3
5.2.1 Future Flooding Conditions ........................................................................... 5-5
5.2.2 Flood Insurance Rate Maps ............................................................................ 5-5
5.2.3 NFIP Flood Insurance Policies & Repetitive Loss Properties ....................... 5-6
5.3 Hurricane Effects in Monroe County ......................................................................... 5-7
5.4 Some Major Hurricanes .............................................................................................. 5-9
5.5 Losses Due to Major Disasters ................................................................................. 5-11
5.6 Impacts of Hurricanes ............................................................................................... 5-13
5.6.1 Buildings ...................................................................................................... 5-22
5.6.2 Transportation Infrastructure and Considerations for Evacuation ............... 5-22
5.6.3 Communications .......................................................................................... 5-24
5.6.4 Water Supply ................................................................................................ 5-25
5.6.5 Electric Power .............................................................................................. 5-27
5.6.6 Wastewater Facilities ................................................................................... 5-28
5.6.7 The Economy, Tax Base and Major Employers .......................................... 5-29
5.6.8 Public Health Considerations ....................................................................... 5-30
5.6.9 Environmental Resources and Natural Functions ........................................ 5-30
5.6.10 Historic Resources ....................................................................................... 5-32
5.6.11 Hazard Profile Summary .............................................................................. 5-33
5.7 Climate Change and Sea Level Rise ......................................................................... 5-33
5.7.1 Hazard Profile Summary .............................................................................. 5-37
5.8 2015 Updates ............................................................................................................ 5-40
Chapter 6: Other Hazards & Risks
6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 6-1
6.2 Strong Storms, including Tornadoes & Water Spouts................................................ 6-2
6.3 Rainfall/Fresh Water Flooding ................................................................................. 6-13
6.4 Drought ..................................................................................................................... 6-15
6.4.1 Florida's Keetch-Byram Drought Index ....................................................... 6-16
6.4.2 Drought in the Florida Keys ......................................................................... 6-17
6.5 Wildland Fire ............................................................................................................ 6-19
6.6 Coastal Erosion ......................................................................................................... 6-23
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) ii
6.7 .................................................................. 6-28
6.8 2015 Updates ............................................................................................................ 6-29
Chapter 7: Monroe County
7.1 Capability Assessment: County Government Structure ............................................ 7-1
7.1.1 Emergency Services Division ....................................................................... 7-2
7.1.2 Emergency Management Department ........................................................... 7-3
7.1.3 Growth Management Division ....................................................................... 7-4
7.1.4 Public Works & Engineering Division .......................................................... 7-6
7.1.5 Florida Department of Health in Monroe County .......................................... 7-7
7.1.6 Monroe County Budget and Finance ............................................................. 7-7
7.1.7 Monroe County School District ..................................................................... 7-8
7.2 Regional Agencies & Organizations .......................................................................... 7-8
7.2.1 South Florida Regional Planning Council ...................................................... 7-8
7.2.2 South Florida Water Management District .................................................... 7-9
7.2.3 Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority ................................................................ 7-10
7.2.4 Electric Utilities ........................................................................................... 7-11
7.2.5 Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Florida Keys ...................... 7-11
7.3 Planning & Development Processes ......................................................................... 7-11
7.3.1 Comprehensive Plan: Year 2010 .................................................................. 7-11
7.3.2 Floodplain Management ............................................................................... 7-14
7.4 Communicating about Hazards ................................................................................. 7-18
7.5 Recent and Near-Term Mitigation Actions .............................................................. 7-19
7.6 2015 Updates ............................................................................................................ 7-20
Chapter 8: City of Key West
8.1 Overview of Key West ............................................................................................... 8-1
8.2 Capability Assessment: City Organization and Agencies ......................................... 8-3
8.3 Hazards and Risk in Key West ................................................................................... 8-9
8.4 Damage Reduction Activities ................................................................................... 8-20
8.5 2015 Updates ............................................................................................................ 8-22
Chapter 9: City of Layton
9.1 Overview of Layton .................................................................................................... 9-1
9.2 Capability Assessment: City Organization and Agencies ......................................... 9-2
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) iii
9.3 Hazards and Risk in Layton ........................................................................................ 9-3
9.4 Damage Reduction Activities ..................................................................................... 9-7
9.5 2015 Updates .............................................................................................................. 9-8
Chapter 10: City of Key Colony Beach
10.1 Overview of Key Colony Beach ............................................................................... 10-1
10.2 Capability Assessment: City Organization and Agencies ....................................... 10-2
10.3 Hazards and Risk in Key Colony Beach ................................................................... 10-5
10.4 Damage Reduction Activities ................................................................................. 10-11
10.5 2015 Updates .......................................................................................................... 10-12
Chapter 11: Islamorada Village of Islands
11.1 Overview of Islamorada ........................................................................................... 11-1
11.2 Capability Assessment: Village Organization and Agencies .................................. 11-2
11.3 Hazards and Risk in Islamorada ............................................................................... 11-5
11.4 Damage Reduction Activities ................................................................................. 11-12
11.5 2015 Updates .......................................................................................................... 11-14
Chapter 12: City of Marathon
12.1 Overview of Marathon .............................................................................................. 12-1
12.2 Capability Assessment: City Organization and Agencies ....................................... 12-3
12.3 Hazards and Risk in Marathon ................................................................................. 12-6
12.4 Damage Reduction Activities ................................................................................. 12-13
12.5 2015 Updates .......................................................................................................... 12-14
Chapter 13: Mitigation Initiatives
13.1 LMS Goals and Priority Hazards .............................................................................. 13-1
13.2 Range of Mitigation Initiatives ................................................................................. 13-2
13.3 Mitigation Initiatives ................................................................................................ 13-3
13.4 Property Owner Initiatives ........................................................................................ 13-4
13.5 Initiatives for Working Group as a Whole ............................................................... 13-5
13.5.1 Working Group Initiatives: 2015 ................................................................ 13-5
13.5.2 Status of Working Group Initiatives: 2010 ................................................. 13-7
13.6 Community-Specific Initiatives ................................................................................ 13-8
13.6.1 Community-Specific Initiatives: 2015 ........................................................ 13-9
13.6.2 Status of Community Specific Initiatives: 2010 ....................................... 13-13
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) iv
13.7 Site-Specific Initiatives ........................................................................................... 13-13
13.8 Prioritizing Mitigation Initiatives ........................................................................... 13-14
13.9 Potential Funding for Selected Initiatives ............................................................... 13-16
13.10 LMS Actions to Support Grant Applications ......................................................... 13-19
13.11 2015 Updates .......................................................................................................... 13-19
Chapter 14: Evaluation, Updates & Revisions
14.1 Distribution ............................................................................................................... 14-1
14.2 Annual Evaluation & Updates (Monitoring) ............................................................ 14-1
14.3 Five-Year Revision ................................................................................................... 14-2
14.4 Incorporating Mitigation Plan Requirements into Other
Local Planning Mechanisms ..................................................................................... 14-3
14.5 Continued Public Participation in Plan Maintenance ............................................... 14-3
14.6 2015 Updates ............................................................................................................ 14-4
APPENDICES
Appendix A1 2015 LMS Update Process .......................................................................... A-xx
Appendix A2 LMS Working Group Annual Meeting Notes (2011-2014) .......................... A-1
Appendix B Public Notices ................................................................................................B-1
Appendix C Resolutions of Adoption ................................................................................C-1
Appendix D NWS Hurricane Wilma in the Florida Keys ................................................. D-1
Appendix E FDEP Strategic Beach Management Plan: Florida Keys Region .................. E-1
Appendix T Mitigation Initiatives, Forms and Tracking Spreadsheets .............................. T-1
TABLES
Table 2-1 2014 Estimated Permanent Population .......................................................... 2-2
Table 2-2 Special Needs Registry (2015) ....................................................................... 2-3
Table 2-3 Floor Area to be Distributed by NROGO ...................................................... 2-5
Table 2-4 Number and Value of Buildings and Structures (2009 and 2014) ................. 2-8
Table 2-5 Notes on Selected Critical Facilities ............................................................ 2-13
Table 2-6 Notes on Selected Infrastructure .................................................................. 2-13
Table 5-1 Hazards Excluded from Further Consideration .............................................. 5-1
Table 5-2 Presidential Disaster Declarations (1965-2014) ............................................. 5-2
Table 5-3 Saffir-Sampson Scale and Typical Damage ................................................... 5-4
Table 5-4 Flood Insurance Rate Maps ............................................................................ 5-6
Table 5-5 NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties .................................................................... 5-7
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) v
Table 5-6 Population Affected by Coastal Flooding (category 2 & 5)........................... 5-7
Table 5-7 Some Major Hurricanes that Affected Monroe County ................................. 5-9
Table 5-8 Some Past Disaster Recovery Costs ............................................................. 5-12
Table 5-9 Expected Building Damage from Hurricane Wind ...................................... 5-14
Table 5-10 Expected Economic Losses from Hurricane Wind ...................................... 5-16
Table 5-11 Number of Essential Facilities Estimated to be Damaged ........................... 5-17
Table 5-12 Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Building-Related Economic Loss ..................... 5-18
Table 5-13 Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Expected Building Damage by Occupancy ...... 5-19
Table 5-14 Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Expected Building Damage by Type ................ 5-20
Table 5-15 Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Expected Damage to Essential Facilities .......... 5-20
Table 5-16 SHMP Summary: Impacts of Hurricanes in Monroe County ...................... 5-21
Table 5-17 Monroe Housing Units Affected by Hurricanes Georges and Mitch ........... 5-22
Table 5-18 Hazard Profile Summary: Hurricanes/Tropical Storms ............................... 5-33
Table 5-19 Hazard Profile Summary: Sea Level Rise .................................................... 5-37
Table 6-1 Enhanced Fujita Scale .................................................................................... 6-4
Table 6-2 Tornadoes (by scale): 1959 2014 ............................................................... 6-6
Table 6-3 Tornadoes (by community): 1998 2014 ..................................................... 6-7
Table 6-4 Water Spouts (by community): 1996-1998 .................................................... 6-7
Table 6-5 Lightning Deaths/Injuries (1959-2014) ........................................................ 6-11
Table 6-6 Reported Hail Damage (1950-2015) ............................................................ 6-12
Table 6-7 Reported High Winds Damage (1950-2015) ............................................... 6-12
Table 6-8 Hazard Profile Summary: Strong Storms ..................................................... 6-13
Table 6-9 SHMP Summary: Inland Flooding Impacts ................................................ 6-15
Table 6-10 Hazard Profile Summary: Flooding (Rainfall Ponding) .............................. 6-15
Table 6-11 Hazard Profile Summary: Drought .............................................................. 6-19
Table 6-12 Monroe County Wildfire Risk Assessment .................................................. 6-21
Table 6-13 Hazard Profile Summary: Wildfire .............................................................. 6-23
Table 6-14 Identified Critically Eroded Beaches and Vulnerability .............................. 6-26
Table 6-15 Hazard Profile Summary: Coastal Erosion .................................................. 6-27
Table 6-16 Hazards: Relative Vulnerability .................................................................. 6-28
Table 6-17 Hazards: Overall Vulnerability Scores ........................................................ 6-29
Table 7-1 ......................................................... 7-1
Table 7-2 Permits Issued in 2012, 2013, 2014 ............................................................... 7-5
Table 8-1 Selected Objectives and Policies (2013 Comprehensive Plan) ...................... 8-2
Table 8-2 Permits Issued in 2012, 2013, 2014 ............................................................... 8-5
Table 8-3 FEMA Reimbursements for Hurricane Georges (DR1249) ......................... 8-11
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) vi
Table 8-4 FEMA Reimbursements for Hurricane Wilma (DR1609) ........................... 8-12
Table 8-5 FEMA Reimbursements for Hurricane Isaac (DR4084) .............................. 8-13
Table 8-6 SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths ............................................... 8-13
Table 8-7 Locations Susceptible to Rainfall/Fresh Water Flooding ............................ 8-14
Table 8-8 Inundation Acreage with 3-foot Sea Level Rise .......................................... 8-15
Table 8-9 Tornadoes in Key West ................................................................................ 8-18
Table 8-10 Important and Critical Facilities in Key West .............................................. 8-19
Table 8-11 Key West Mitigation Projects (1999-2014) ................................................. 8-21
Table 9-1 Layton: Permits Issued (2012, 2013, 2014) .................................................. 9-3
Table 9-2 SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths .................................................. 9-5
Table 9-3 Important and Critical Facilities in Layton .................................................... 9-7
Table 10-1 Key Colony Beach Permit Statistics for 2012, 2013, 2104 .......................... 10-3
Table 10-2 SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths ................................................ 10-8
Table 10-3 Important and Critical Facilities in Key Colony Beach ............................. 10-10
Table 11-1 Islamorada: Permits Issued (2012, 2013, 2104) .......................................... 11-3
Table 11-2 SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths ................................................ 11-8
Table 11-3 Important and Critical Facilities in Islamorada .......................................... 11-11
Table 12-1 Permits Issued & Inspections Conducted in 2012, 2013, 2104 .................... 12-4
Table 12-2 SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths ................................................ 12-8
Table 12-3 Critical and Important Facilities in Marathon ............................................ 12-11
Table 13-1 Hazards: Relative Vulnerability .................................................................. 13-1
Table 13-2 Categories of Mitigation Initiatives ............................................................. 13-2
Table 13-3 2015 High Priority Mitigation Initiatives: Working Group ........................ 13-5
Table 13-4 2010 High Priority Mitigation Initiatives: Working Group ........................ 13-7
Table 13-5 Community-Specific Initiatives ................................................................... 13-8
Table 13-6 Primary Potential Funding for Mitigation .................................................. 13-17
Table 13-7 LMS Actions to Support Grant Applications ............................................. 13-19
FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Location Map .............................................................................................. 2-1
Figure 2-2 Average and Medial Sale Prices of Single Family Homes ......................... 2-9
Figures 2-3 Locations of Critical & Important Facilities ............................................. 2-15
Figure 5-1 Surge Zones for Monroe County ................................................................. 5-8
Figure 5-2 Historical Hurricane and Tropical Storm Tracks ........................................ 5-9
Figure 5-3 CO-OPS Mean Sea Level Trend ............................................................... 5-34
Figure 5-4a-f Estimated Sea Level Rise Impacts ............................................................ 5-38
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) vii
Figure 6-1a Ultimate Design Wind Speeds for Risk Category II Buildings .................. 6-3
Figure 6-1b Ultimate Design Wind Speeds for Risk Category III and IV Buildings ..... 6-3
Figure 6-2 Tornado Previous Occurrences ................................................................... 6-6
Figure 6-3 Lightning Previous Occurrences ............................................................... 6-10
Figure 6-4 Example of the KBDI ................................................................................ 6-22
Figure 6-5 Lower Florida Keys Fire Behavior Potential ............................................ 6-24
Figure 6-6 Critical and Non-Critical Beach Erosion .................................................. 6-19
Figure 7-1a-i Repetitive Loss Properties (Monroe County) ........................................... 7-21
Figure 8-1 Repetitive Loss Properties (Key West) ..................................................... 8-23
Figure 8-2 Concentrations of NFIP Paid Claims (Key West) ..................................... 8-23
Figure 8-3 Key West Critical Facilities Map ........................................................... 8-24
Figure 10-1 Key Colony Beach Repetitive Loss Properties ......................................... 10-9
Figure 11-1a-c Islamorada Repetitive Loss Properties .................................................... 11-15
Figure 12-1 Marathon Repetitive Loss Properties ...................................................... 12-15
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) viii
Chapter 1. Introduction
Monroe County, Florida, and its incorporated municipalities of the Village of Islamorada,
City of Layton, City of Key Colony Beach, City of Marathon, and the City of Key West,
undertook development of this 2015 Update of the Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) because
of its awareness that natural hazards, especially hurricane and flooding hazards, may affect
many people and property. The 2015 Update replaces the 2010 and 2005 Updates of the
1999 LMS. The LMS is a requirement associated with receipt of certain federal mitigation
grant program funds administered by the Florida Division of Emergency Management
(FDEM) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
1.1 Authority
The Board of County Commissioners directed the Monroe County Emergency Management
Department (Monroe EMD) to coordinate with other appropriate departments and agencies,
and the cities of Key West, Marathon, Key Colony Beach, Layton, and Islamorada, to
facilitate the development of the LMS, and subsequent 5-year updates, in conformance with
state and federal guidelines.
The 2015 LMS Update was prepared to comply with the FDEM requirements (Florida
Administrative Code Chapter 27P-22) and the provisions of the federal Hazard Mitigation
and Pre-Disaster Mitigation Programs (44 CFR Parts 201 and 206), and the Flood Mitigation
Assistance Program (44 CFR 78.6). The 2015 Update continues to meet the requirements of
National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System (CRS) Activity 510
Floodplain Management Plan so that participating communities can receive CRS credit
points. Communities and the non-profit organizations located in them must participate in a
mitigation planning process that results in an adopted strategy that is approved by the FDEM
and FEMA in order to qualify for certain federal mitigation funds.
Florida Administrative Code Chapter 27P-22 sets forth the composition and responsibilities
of LMS Working Groups. In particular, Working Groups are to develop and revise the
LMS, set the order of priority of projects submitted for funding, and submit an annual
report. The minimum contents of the LMS are specified and include a number of provisions
that are not explicitly set forth in federal requirements.
1.2 Working Group Membership
The LMS Working Group was established in 1998 pursuant to authorization by the Monroe
County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). It has met periodically since then. The
Working Group meets at several times a year (see Section 3.2.1 and Appendix A1),
convening on January 22, 2015 for the specific purpose of initiating the 2015 Update of the
Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 1-1
The Working Group includes representatives from the Monroe County and all incorporated
municipalities in the county. Prior to the 1999 LMS, Working Group Agreements were
established between Monroe County and the municipalities. The City of Marathon joined
upon its incorporation in late 1999. All jurisdictions have continued participation in the
LMS Working Group meetings and the process to update the LMS every five years.
Representatives from following are designated members of the Working Group who were
notified of each meeting, invited to participate in all meetings (see meeting notes in
Appendix A2) and to provide comments on various drafts, and invited to review and
comment on the 2015 Update before it was finalized for adoption:
Monroe County, Emergency Management (Chair)
Monroe County, Growth Management Director
Monroe County, Senior Director Planning and Environmental Resources
Monroe County, Senior Floodplain Coordinator
Monroe County, Director of Engineering Services
Monroe County, Public Works and Engineering Director
Monroe County, Director Emergency Communications
istrator
Monroe County School District
Monroe County, Grants Administrator
Monroe County, Risk Administrator
Monroe County, Deputy Fire Rescue Chief
Monroe County Extension Service
City of Layton, City Administrator (Vice-Chair)
City of Layton, Floodplain Administrator
Village of Islamorada, Senior Planner
Village of Islamorada, Fire Rescue Chief
Village of Islamorada, Procurement/Grants Administration
City of Key Colony Beach, Police Chief
City of Key Colony Beach, Building Official
City of Key West, KWFD Training Chief / Emergency Management
Coordinator
City of Key West, FEMA Coordinator/Floodplain Administrator
City of Key West, Sustainability Coordinator
City of Key West, Engineering Grants Manager
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 1-2
City of Marathon, Marathon Fire Chief / Emergency Management
Coordinator
City of Marathon, Planning Director
City of Marathon, Public Works Manager
Florida Department of Health in Monroe County
South Florida Water Management District
The South Florida Regional Conservation and Development Council
(SFRC&D)
Monroe County, Historic Florida Keys Foundation
Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Florida Keys
Keys Energy Services
Florida Keys Electric Cooperative
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority , Director of Operations and Benefits & Risk
Manager
Mariners Hospital, Director Facilities Management
The Nature Conservancy
Florida Keys Outreach Coalition for the Homeless
National Key Deer Refuge, Fire Management Specialist
Southernmost Homeless Assistance League (SHAL)
Florida National High Adventure Sea Base, Director
Matecumbe Historical Trust
Monroe Association for Remarkable Citizens
U.S. Coast Guard Assistant District Staff Officer-Public Affairs (ADSO-PA)
Island Christian School, Islamorada
Habitat for Humanity, Lower Keys
Baptist Health Hospital
Key West Art and Historical Society
Historical Florida Keys Foundation
Residents of Monroe County and its municipalities
The following stakeholders were notified and invited to review and comment on the 2015
Update:
Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM)
Florida Keys Community College
The Salvation Army
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 1-3
American Red Cross
St. Justin The Martyr Catholic Church, Key Largo
Big Pine Moose Lodge, Big Pine Key
St. Mary Star of the Sea School, Key West
Monroe County Mosquito Board
Miami-Dade County LMS Chair
th
Office of Congressional Representative Carlos Curbelo, 26 District
Office of State Representative Holly Merrill Raschein, District #120
Members of the public
1.3 Acknowledgments
The 2015 LMS Update was supported by a planning grant administered by the City of
Miami and the Florida Division of Emergency Management EMPA Base Grant funding.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security provided financial assistance to the Miami
urban area through the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) Grant program (2013).
The 2015 LMS Update was facilitated by RCQuinn Consulting, Inc., a mitigation planning
and building code consultant, and AECOM, a global architecture and engineering company
that now includes URS Corporation. The consultants helped to guide the Working Group
through the update process, helped to research and update each chapter, documented
decisions of the group, and collected comments, data, and incorporated the material into the
2015 LMS Update.
The 2010 LMS Update (and the 2005 revision) was prepared with the support of RCQuinn
Consulting, Inc., Charlottesville, VA. The 1999 LMS was prepared with the support of
Janice Drewing Consulting, Inc. of Plantation Key, Florida.
1.4 Key Terms
For the most part, terms used in the Plan have the meanings that are commonly associated
with them:
Disaster
means the occurrence of widespread or severe damage, injury, loss of
life or property, or such severe economic or social disruption that
supplemental disaster relief assistance is necessary for the affected political
jurisdiction(s) to recover and to alleviate the damage, loss, hardship, or
suffering caused thereby.
Floodplain:
.
Hazard
is defined as the natural or technological phenomenon, event, or
physical condition that has the potential to cause property damage,
infrastructure damage, other physical losses, and injuries and fatalities.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 1-4
Mitigation
is defined as actions taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk
to life and property from hazards. Mitigation actions are intended to reduce
the need for emergency response as opposed to improving the ability to
respond.
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP),
located within the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), is charged with preparing Flood Insurance Rate Maps, developing
regulations to guide development, and providing insurance for flood damage.
Risk
is defined as the potential losses associated with a hazard. Ideally, risk is
defined in terms of expected probability and frequency of the hazard
occurring, people and property exposed, and potential consequences.
Flood Hazard Area Floodplain
or is the area adjoining a river, stream,
shoreline, or other body of water that is subject to partial or complete
inundation. The area predicted to flood during the 1% annual chance flood is
-
1.5 Acronyms
The following acronyms are used in the document:
BOCC
Board of County Commissioners
CRS
Community Rating System (NFIP)
FBC
- Florida Building Code
FDEM
Florida Division of Emergency Management
FEMA
U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA)
FIRM
Flood Insurance Rate Map
FMA
Flood Mitigation Assistance (FEMA)
GIS
Geographic Information System
HMGP
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (FEMA)
LMS
Local Mitigation Strategy
NFIP
National Flood Insurance Program (FEMA)
NROGO
- Non-Residential Rate of Growth Ordinance Allocation System
PDM
Pre-Disaster Mitigation grant program
ROGO
Rate of Growth Ordinance
RLAA
- Repetitive Loss Area Analysis
SRL
Severe Repetitive Loss
1.6 References
American Society of Civil Engineers. 2010. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and
Other Structures (SEI/ASCE 7-10). Reston, VA.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 1-5
Federal Emergency Management Agency. Various Panel Dates. Flood Insurance Study and
Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Monroe County, Key West, Key Colony Beach, Layton,
Islamorada, and Marathon, Washington, DC. [Available for public review at planning
and/or permit offices of each jurisdiction.]
Florida Division of Emergency Management. Florida
Guide: Are You Ready? Online at http://www.floridadisaster.org/DEMpublic.asp.
Florida Division of Emergency Management. State of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation
Plan. August 2013.
Florida Sea Grant Program, University of Florida. July 1994. The Effect of Hurricane
Andrew on Monroe County Businesses: Negative Economic Effects and Assistance Sought.
National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/National Weather Service (NWS) Weather Forecast
Key West, Florida. 2010 Conformed Version of the Key West Comprehensive Plan.
Office (WFO) Key West, Florida (undated;
(http://www.srh.noaa.gov/media/key/Research/wilma.pdf).
Monroe County, Florida. Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan: Policy Document.
Monroe County, Florida. Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan: Technical Document.
Monroe County, Florida. Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (2007).
Monroe County Climate Action Plan. November 2013.
Monroe County Cooperative Extension Service. August 1994. The Effect of Hurricane
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 1-6
Chapter 2. The Planning Area
The planning area includes Monroe County and the incorporated municipalities of the
Village of Islamorada, City of Layton, City of Key Colony Beach, the City of Marathon, and
the City of Key West. The Monroe County Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan contains
extensive narrative to describe the County and its policies. The following brief summaries
are, in large part, taken from that document. As of March 2015, the Comprehensive Plan is
undergoing an update; therefore, the 2010 plan is used for this LMS Update except where a
significant change has occurred. For the 2015 Update, the Growth Management Division
updated information for Section 2.3. Florida Building Code information was included as a
new Section 2.4. For information on the Comprehensive Plan update, see
http://keyscompplan.com/ for the updated information.
2.1 Geography and Planning Area
Monroe County is located at the southernmost tip of the State of Florida. The Florida Keys
are situated in a precarious physical location between the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic
Ocean. The Keys consist of an archipelago that sweeps for almost 150 miles in a
southwesterly direction from southeastern Miami-Dade County. The mainland portion of
the County is bordered by Collier County to the north and Miami-Dade County to the east
(See Figure 2-1).
Figure 2-1. Location Map
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-1
The total area of Monroe County is approximately 1.2 million acres (about 1,875 square
miles). Large portions are submerged lands associated with parks and preserves that are
under the jurisdiction of the federal and state governments. The total land area is
approximately 885 square miles, of which about 102 square miles are in the Keys (including
unincorporated and incorporated municipalities). The entire mainland portion is within the
Everglades National Park or the Big Cypress National Preserve and is virtually uninhabited
(only 14 residential buildings).
Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan focuses primarily on the Florida Keys
which is the same planning area for the Local Mitigation Strategy. The Florida Keys are
typically long, narrow, and low-lying islands. The average elevations of the various larger
islands range from four to seven feet above mean sea level. Only one small area in the City
of Key West referred to as Solares Hill rises to 16 feet above mean sea level. Other
relatively high areas are several coral ridges in Key Largo are near Mile-Marker 106.
2.2 Population
The 2014 estimated population of Monroe County and the incorporated municipalities was
74,044 (see Table 2-1). This figure represents a 1.3% increase from the estimated population
in the 2010 Census (73,090).
residents; at peak season, the seasonal population is estimated at nearly 74,000. All told, the
Florida Keys receives more than 3 million visitors each year.
Table 2-1. 2014 Estimated Permanent
Population*
Permanent
Residents
Monroe County (unincorp) 33,793**
Islamorada 6,212
Layton 186
Key Colony Beach 808
Key West 24,620
Marathon 8,425
Total 74,044
* Southeast Florida Regional Planning Council based
U.S. Census Bureau population estimates
**Mainland Monroe County has only 14 residential
buildings; virtually all population is in the Keys.
As of 2015, the Special Needs Registry includes 614 people enrolled in the Special Needs
Hurricane Evacuation Program due to age, medical condition, or other factors that require
assistance from the County to evacuate during an emergency (Table 2-2). The County has
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-2
a small non-English speaking population spread throughout the Keys and a small transient
worker population.
Table 2-2. Special Needs Registry (2015)
Mile Marker Registered Special Needs
0-12 295
13-40 93
41-72 85
73-92 57
93-113 84
Total 614
2.3 Land Use and Growth Trends
Growth trends in Monroe County are regulated through the number of residential permits
issued.
The number of dwelling units (permanent and seasonal) which can be permitted in
unincorporated Monroe County and incorporated municipalities has been controlled by
the Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) adopted by Monroe County in 1992 to implement
portions of its Comprehensive Plan. ROGO was developed as a response to the inability
of the road network to accommodate a large-scale hurricane evacuation in a timely
identified an approximate number of additional dwelling units which could be permitted
and which would not have a detrimental effect on the time needed to evacuate the Keys.
The number of allocations for each area was based upon the supply of vacant buildable
lots. The ROGO system was developed as a tool to equitably distribute the remaining
number of permits available both geographically and over time. Since ROGO has been
implemented, the system has been revised from time to time such as with the adoption of
the Tier System which is described below.
The ROGO system distributes a pre-determined number of allocations for new residential
permits on a yearly basis beginning on or about July 13th each year. Each service area of
unincorporated Monroe County and several of the incorporated areas receive allocations.
The Ocean Reef area of north Key Largo currently excluded from ROGO based upon the
December 2010 Ocean Reef Club Vested Development Rights Letter recognized and
issued by the Department of Economic Opportunity.
Initially, the ROGO system in unincorporated Monroe County allowed 255 allocations for
new residential units. However, the number of allocations in the unincorporated area has
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-3
been subsequently reduced due to incorporations and the lack of progress on the
implementation of the Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan.
The County, in an effort to further address concerns of carrying capacity, implemented
Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan Goal 105 by adopting the Tier System. The
system designates all lands outside of mainland Monroe County, except for the Ocean
Reef planned development into three general categories for purposes of its Land
Acquisition Program and smart growth. The three categories are: Natural Area (Tier 1);
Transition and Sprawl Reduction Area (Tier II on Big Pine Key and No Name Key only;
and Infill Area (Tier III), including a Special Protection Area (Tier III-A) which is a
subset of Tier III. The permit allocation and tier system recognizes the finite limits of the
carrying capacity of the natural and man-made systems in the Florida Keys, which
includes the recognition that Monroe County must ensure public safety through the ability
to maintain a hurricane evacuation clearance time.
The current allocation of 197 is divided into 126 7
and are distributed in unincorporated Monroe County as follows:
61 market rate units in the Upper Keys service area,
57 market rate units in the Lower Keys service area,
8 market rate units in the Big Pine and No Name Keys service area,
36 affordable units for Very Low, Low, and Median Incomes*, and
35 affordable units for Moderate Income (includes one each for Big Pine
Key and No Name Key).
Nonresidential permitting also plays a role in land use and growth trends. Nonresidential
permits include everything that is not residential, including industrial, commercial, non-
profit and public building.
With very little industrial and agricultural activity in the Keys, the predominant form of
nonresidential development is commercial. There are two primary types of commercial
development: retail trade and services (which includes tourism-related development such
as marinas and restaurants). Therefore, the impact of nonresidential development on
public facilities varies significantly based on the type of commercial use.
Nonresidential and residential developments tend to fuel one another. Residential
populations provide markets for nonresidential activities. Nonresidential development, in
turn, helps to drive permanent and seasonal population growth by providing services and
employment. Certain types of nonresidential development also concentrate the demand
for public facilities within certain locations and during peak seasons.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-4
Since residential development is constrained through the ROGO Permit Allocation
System, it was thought that nonresidential (commercial) development should also be
constrained in the interest of maintaining a balance of land uses.
At the time the Comprehensive Plan was prepared in 1991, 17.6% of the land was under
residential use, while 4.6% was used for commercial development). It was determined
that this balance was appropriate at the time. To assure that balance was maintained, the
Comprehensive Plan proposed Policy 101.3.1. In effect, the square footage of new
commercial development that may be permitted is limited to 239 square feet for each new
residential permit issued. The Non-Residential Allocation System (NROGO) in
unincorporated Monroe County, excluding areas with the county mainland and with the
Ocean Reef planned development has a maximum of 47,083 of square feet (sf) of floor
area per NROGO year. Beginning NROGO Year 22 (July 13, 2013), the floor area to be
distributed to three areas is shown in Table 2-3.
dĂďůĞϮͲϯ
: Floor Area to Be Distributed by NROGO
County Subarea Annual NROGO allocation
Upper 22,944 SF
Lower 21,749 SF
Big Pine/No Name 2,390 SF
Total 47,083 SF
The growth in Monroe County that occurred from 2010 to 2015 is described in terms of
permits issued for each jurisdiction in Chapters 7 to 12. Although the reported permit data
cover only three years and do not each report the same metrics, based on those data fewer
than 1,000 single family homes and approximately 2,000 nonresidential buildings (new
and renovated/additions) were constructed since 2010. Compared to the total number of
buildings in the planning area,
Growth rates are regulated through ROGO and NRGOGO. In more well-developed areas
like Key West, there is minimal undeveloped land. All new development, including
redeveloped sites, are subject to the Florida Building Code (see Section 2.4) and other
codes and regulations enforced by each jurisdiction. Vulnerability of new construction to
base flood events (100-year) and design high winds (130-140 mph) is minimized because
new construction must comply with those requirements and thus does not represent a
sub
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-5
th
2.4 The Florida Building Code (5 Edition, 2014)
All communities in Florida are required to enforce the Florida Building Code (FBC). The
th
5 Edition of the FBC was developed in 2014 by the Florida Building Commission,
starting with the 2012 International Codes® and amended to incorporate Florida-specific
provisions. This edition of the FBC is effective June 30, 2015. Building and structures
authorized by building permits issued after that date shall comply with the design and
th
construction requirements of the 5 Edition FBC. FEMA deemed the flood provisions of
th
the 2012 I-Codes, on which the 5 Edition FBC is based, to meet or exceed the
requirements of the NFIP for buildings and structures.
For flood provisions, the FBC,
Building, references ASCE 24,
Flood Provisions of the FBC.
The 2010 FBC, in effect
Flood Resistant Design and
since March 15, 2012, was the first state building code
Construction. ASCE 24 requires
to include flood provisions (the Commission removed
Risk Category II, III and IV
buildings to be elevated or
flood provisions from previous editions). FEMA
protected to a higher level than the
deemed the flood provisions of the 2009 I-Codes, on
NFIP, to a minimum of Base Flood
Elevation plus one foot.
which the 2010 FBC is based, to meet or exceed the
requirements of the NFIP for buildings and structures. FDEM posts excerpts of the flood
provisions online: www.floridadisaster.org/Mitigation/SFMP/lobc_resources.htm.
Descriptions of how the flood provisions in the I-Codes (and thus the FBC) are more
specific and, in some ways, exceed the requirements of the NFIP are contained in Chapter
3 of Reducing Flood Losses Through the International Codes: Coordinating Building
Codes and Floodplain Management Regulations: www.fema.gov/media-
library/assets/documents/96634.
The following are the more significant Florida amendments and differences between the
th
flood provisions in the 2010 FBC and the 5 Edition:
Building: Clarifies that relying on affidavits for issuance of permits does not
extend to the flood load and flood resistant requirements of the FBC; Building:
Adds a section for variances in flood hazard areas; modifies ASCE 24 to
permit dry floodproofing in Coastal A Zones provided designs account for
wave loads, erosion, and scour (does not apply to residential structures or
residential areas of mixed-use structures).
Residential: Refers to local floodplain management ordinances for
requirements for installation of manufactured homes; states the more
restrictive requirements of the flood provisions in Section R322 or FBC, B
Section 3109 (coastal construction control line) govern; adds provisions for
pools in flood hazard areas.
Existing Building: Clarifies that when SI/SD is triggered, compliance with the
FBC, B or FBC, R is required, as applicable.
Wind Provisions of the FBC.
The following are the more significant Florida amendments to
the International Codes that pertain to the design of buildings with respect to wind loads:
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-6
Building: Requires siding, soffit and fascia products shall be capable of
resisting design pressures specified for walls for components and cladding
loads; specifies metal roofing thicknesses and aggregate size and embedment;
requires a margin of safety of 2:1 be applied to all wind uplift resistance test
results except when a margin of safety is specified in a test standard; requires
wood screws and clips to be corrosion resistant; replaces the table for
classification of asphalt shingle classification based on maximum basic wind
speed; replaces underlayment application specifications for various roof
covering types; specifies Florida-specific installation manual for concrete and
clay roof tile in high wind areas; specifies impact resistant coverings to be
tested at 1.5 times the design pressure determined by the FBC or ASCE 7;
provides garage door and rolling door wind loads based on mean roof height;
adds requirements for wind loads for screened enclosures and sunrooms;
requires gable endwalls to be structurally continuous between points of lateral
support; specifies wind load on glass is associated with the ultimate design
wind speed.
Residential: Defines the wind-borne debris region as areas within hurricane-
prone regions located within 1 mile of the coastal mean high water line where
the ultimate design wind speed is 130 mph or greater, or areas where the
ultimate design wind speed is 140 mph or greater
Residential: Specifies component and cladding loads, and garage door loads,
for certain dwellings; requires sunrooms to comply with a standard and
specific wind loads, has requirements for screened enclosures, specifies
additional detail for protection of glazed openings; modifies definitions of
wind zones in ASTM E 1996; modifies wind direction and sector
specifications and surface roughnesses; requires exterior wall coverings and
soffits to resist design pressures specified for walls for components and
cladding loads; clarifies foundations required to resist all loads from roof uplift
and building overturn; adds and expands prescriptive tables for loads for
various building components based on material type; requires exterior doors,
windows, and garage doors to be labeled with permanent label, marking, or
etching; specified testing of garage doors; adds new section on impact-
resistant coverings; specifies wind resistance, underlayment, and attachment of
asphalt shingles, clay and concrete tile, metal roof coverings, wood shingles,
and built-up roofs; modifies requirements for reroofing; specifies roof-to-wall
connections; details retrofitting connections and gable end and hip roofs.
Existing Building: Requires replacement garage doors, exterior doors,
skylights, and operative and inoperative windows to be designed to comply
with wind load requirements; adds a new section with reroofing requirements;
and adds a new chapter with prescriptive methods for partial structural
retrofitting to increase the resistance of gable end walls to out-of-plane wind
loads applicable to buildings that meet specific eligibility requirements.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-7
2.5 Number and Value of Buildings and
Structures
The data for the number and value of structures for the two years shown in Table 2-4 is from
the Monroe County Property Appraiser. It shows a comparison between the number of
structures and associated value, by occupancy type, between 2009 and 2014. This
information summarizes the general exposure of the built environment.
Figure 2-2 shows how the average and medial sale prices of single family homes have
changed between 1965 and 2014. When the 1999 LMS was prepared, the average property
value was $120,000; as of mid-2005 when the 2005 LMS Updated was prepared, the
average value had climbed to $281,000. In 2009, the average property value was $570,500
and in 2014, the average value was $696,700. Similar variations have been experienced in
the value of other types of properties.
Table 2-4. Number and Value of Buildings and Structures
(2009* and 2014*).
Occupancy # in 2009 $ in 2009 # in 2014 $ in 2014
Single-Family Homes 26,132 $14.83 B 26,925 $14.31 B
Manufactured Homes 5,619 $1.10 B 5,506 $846 M
Multi-Family (<10) 2,477 $1.30 B 2,127 $911 M
Other Residential 7,510 $3.56 B 7,513 $3.13 B
Commercial 4,286 $2.46 B 3,885 $2.03 B
Institutional 503 $565 M 442 $408 M
Hotels 452 $1.00 B 430 $1.46 B
TOTALS 46,979 $24.815 B 46,827 $23.095 B
* From the Monroe County Property Appraiser (2009 and 2014)
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-8
Figure 2-2. Average and Median Sale Prices of Single Family Homes in Monroe County
(Monroe County Property Appraiser, 2015)
2.6 Economic Characteristics
geography. The area attracts both seasonal residents and short-term visitors, drawn by the
amenable climate and recreational opportunities. The economy is dominated by tourism and
the commercial fishing industry. The following text is based on the 2010 Comprehensive
Plan.
The service sector, dominated by hospitality (food and lodging), is the largest segment of the
private sector, followed by retail trade. These industries account for nearly 52% of total
employment, and 67% of private sector employment.
Commercial fishing represents 7% of total employment and 9% of private sector
employment. A combination of economic and natural resources factors have led to a decline
in the number of commercial fishing vessels and a long-term downward trend in the total
poundage of the harvest.
Two other private sector categories together account for about 15% of total employment:
construction and finance/insurance/real estate.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-9
Public sector employment accounts for just over 20% of total employment. This category
includes the federal government (and military), State and local government agencies, and
utilities.
Because the tax base in Monroe County is supplemented by tourism, declines in the number
of visitors after major hurricanes lead to reduced revenue associated with the Bed Tax, Sales
Tax, and Infrastructure Tax. Historically, damaging storms result in significant loss of
revenues.
2.7 Transportation
The transportation network in the Florida Keys is unique in that a single road forms its
backbone and the sole link to the Florida mainland. U.S. Route 1, referred to as the
Overseas Highway, runs for 126 miles from Florida City in Dade County to Key West in
Monroe County. Maintained by the Florida Department of Transportation, for most of its
length U.S. 1 is a two-lane highway with 42 bridges (combined total length of 19 miles of
bridge structure).
U.S. 1 is a lifeline for the Keys,
brings food, materials, and tourists from the mainland, driving the local economy.
Approximately 450 miles of roads, including 37 bridges, are maintained by the County.
Card Sound Road, operated as a toll road, is an alternate to U.S. 1 in some locations.
Mainland Monroe County consists primarily of government-owned parks and preserves, and
consequently has few roads. The only County-maintained road is Loop Road, a 16-mile
excursion off of U.S. 41 crossing the Dade and Collier County lines.
The cities of Key West, Marathon, Key Colony Beach, Layton, and Islamorada are
responsible for the streets within their boundaries.
Air transportation is a viable alternative to highway travel. Monro
airports: Key West Airport and Marathon Airport, serve major commercial airlines. Four
privately-owned community airports are also located in the Keys.
2.8 Environmental and Historic Resources
2.8.1 Environmental Resources
The Florida Keys contains many valuable environmental resources. It has unique habitats,
with many rare and/or endangered plant and animal species. Because of these special
environmental considerations, in 1980, through legislative act, the State of Florida
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-10
designated the Keys portion of unincorporated Monroe County and the incorporated
protect the unique environment, vegetation, and natural resources of the designated area by
regulating land development and other activities regarded as detrimental to the environment.
In conjunction with the designation, the legislature enacted the "Principles for Guiding
, Florida Statutes. The law
provides for State oversight of development and changes to land use regulations, a function
carried out by the Department of Economic Opportunity. The Department established Field
Offices in Monroe County to assist in review of development permits and related issues for
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection Office in Marathon submitted the
d federal):
Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary (comprehensive designation)
Bahia Honda State Park
Fort Zachary Taylor State Historic Site
Indian Key State Historic Site
John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park
Lignum Vitae Key State Botanical Site
Long Key State Park
Windley Key Fossil Reef State Geological Site
Curry Hammocks State Park
San Pedro Underwater Archaeological Preserve
Key Deer National Wildlife Refuge
Great White Heron National Wildlife Refuge
Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary
Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary
Everglades National Park (primarily mainland Monroe)
2.8.2 Historic Resources
A significant percentage of tourism in the Keys is associated with its unique archeological,
historical, and cultural heritage and many landmarks. Many sites are listed on the National
Register of Historic Places and designated for protection (available at
http://www.nps.gov/history/). Many identified historic resources could experience
irreversible damage from hurricanes. The Historic Florida Keys Foundation, Inc. has an
agreement with County to provide professional staffing for historic preservation. The
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-11
County has about 330 locally-designated sites identified under Article 8 of the Monroe
County Code as Archaeological, Historical, and/or Cultural Landmarks (available on the
-
Despite recent hurricanes, historic resources have, for the most part, escaped significant
damage. A number of significant properties have been mitigated:
The Old Monroe County Courthouse, a state-owned building, has
suffered wind damage in the past; it was retrofit with window protection
Retrofit the steeple of the Old Key West City Hall with motorized
hurricane shutters was funded by FEMA.
The Key West Armory had roof strapping added, funded by the State
Division of Historic Resources.
The Gato Building rehabilitation project included impact-resistant
windows.
The Oldest House was retrofit with hurricane shutters, funded by Tourist
Development Council.
2.9 Critical Facilities
The Monroe County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan includes content related
to essential services, critical facilities, and important infrastructure. The LMS Work Group
term includes buildings and facilities that are identified by the public entities, utilities, and
non-profit organizations that own them:
Critical Facilities
are buildings and infrastructure that are vital to the
operations and continuity of government operations necessary to perform
essential security missions and services to ensure the general public
health and safety in order to make daily living and working possible.
Critical facilities generally should be functional within 24 to 72 hours
after a declared disaster depending on the severity of the event.
Primary/Important Facilities
are those that should be functional within
seven days after a declared disaster.
Secondary/Standard Facilities
are those that need not be fully
functional until six months after a declared disaster.
Monroe County Emergency Management Department maintains a secured database of
public and critical facilities and certain private non-profit facilities. Figure 2-3 (series at end
of chapter) show locations of the critical facilities identified by each jurisdiction that can be
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-12
plotted (figures prepared mid-2005; only one significant addition in 2015). Table 2-5
contains notes on selected critical facilities and Table 2-6 contains notes on selected
infrastructure. Chapters 8 through 12, the chapters for the municipalities, also include lists
of selected facilities identified by the municipalities.
Table 2-5. Notes on Selected Critical Facilities
Hospitals
Florida Keys Health Systems (DePoo Hospital and Lower Florida Keys Health Center)
Marathon (Middle Keys)
Tavernier (Upper Keys)
All hospitals must evacuate Monroe County in a storm of Category 3 or greater.
Nursing Home
Bayshore Manor, Key West (Monroe County owned and operated) must evacuate
Monroe County when a storm of Category 3 or greater is predicated
Public Schools/Hurricane Shelters
Only selected schools have been identified as suitable shelters for use in tropical storms,
Category 1-2 hurricanes, and other emergency purposes. In most cases, for hurricanes
of Category 3 and higher all persons must evacuate Monroe County and shelters will not
be used:
Key West High School, 2100 Flagler Ave., KW
Sugarloaf Elementary School, Mile-Marker 19, Sugarloaf Key
Marathon High School, 350 Sombrero Blvd, Marathon
Coral Shores High School, Mile-Marker 90 Plantation Key
Key Largo School Cafetorium, Mile-Marker 105, Key Largo
Other facilities that may be used as hurricane shelters:
Saint Justin Martyr Catholic Church, Key Largo
th
Poinciana Elementary School, 1212 14 St, KW (open in 2008)
Other facilities critical/important for recovery:
Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Florida Keys, 30320 Overseas Highway
(storage for water, temporary roof coverings and supplies, client intake for emergency home
repair needs and staging area for volunteer coordination)
Monroe County Medical Exa
The Murray Nelson Government and Cultural Arts Center (added 2010)
Table 2-6. Notes on Selected Infrastructure
Bridges
42 bridges connect primary roadway US 1.
Bascule-type drawbridge on Snake Creek Bridge at Mile-Marker 86, open periodically for marine
traffic; drawbridge operations and possible breakdowns can interrupt traffic flow.
Water Lines
Primary supply pipeline on mainland in Florida City (managed by Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority)
Some distribution pipeline connected to roads and bridges.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-13
Table 2-6. Notes on Selected Infrastructure
Contingency and redundancy:
Primary pipeline serving Upper Keys is subaqueous and does not depend on roads and bridges.
Reverse Osmosis Plant located in Marathon to serve Middle Keys.
Reverse Osmosis Plant located in Stock Island (Key West) to serve Lower Keys.
Reverse Osmosis Plan located in Florida City (Upper Keys)
Power Lines
Electric Power supplied by Florida Keys Electric Cooperative (FKEC) Upper Keys to Marathon
Electric Power supplied by Keys Energy Service (KES) Marathon to Key West.
Majority of electric lines above ground.
No power poles located on bridges.
To prevent loss if bridges are damaged, transmission line power poles are pile-driven into the
water along roads and bridges.
Subsequent to Hurricane Andrew poles re-designed to withstand serious storm conditions were
installed in certain areas such as along the 18-mile stretch. Old equipment is being replaced with
newer, more resilient materials.
Telephone Service
To provide redundancy, two major trunk fibers are provided from Homestead on the mainland to
Key West. One is buried and the other is aerial.
Most cable lines located along underside of fixed bridges, therefore vulnerable if bridges fail.
Digging not feasible because of rock substructure.
Environmental considerations inhibit underwater installations.
2.10 2015 Updates
The LMS Working Group reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more
significant changes include:
Section 2.2: Updated population and Special Needs Registry data.
Section 2.3: Revised the ROGO text.
Section 2.4: Added new section on Florida Building Codes
Section 2.5: Updated the value and number of buildings and structures.
Section 2.8: Updated list of mitigated historic properties
Section 2.9: Updated the table of critical facilities and maps showing
locations
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-14
FIGURE 2-3 Locations of Critical & Important Facilities (series from south to north)
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-15
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-16
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-17
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-18
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-19
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-20
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-21
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 2-22
Chapter 3. Mitigation Planning
3.1 Introduction
An important step in the lengthy process of improving resistance to natural hazards is the
development of a Local Mitigation Strategy. The Monroe County LMS was prepared in
accordance with the guidelines provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
and the Florida Division of Emergency Management, and steps outlined in National Flood
2013 Community Rating System -
15/2013).
The LMS serves several purposes. It sets the stage for long-term resistance to natural
hazards through identification of actions that will, over time, reduce the exposure of people
and property. Further, the LMS is required to be eligible for certain state and federal
mitigation grant funds.
Chapter 5 (Hurricanes & Tropical Storms) and Chapter 6 (Other Hazards & Risks) provide
overviews of hazards that threaten the County, estimates of the people and property exposed
to hazards, the planning process, how hazards are recognized in the local government
processes and functions, and priority mitigation action items. The hazard summary and
disaster history help to characterize future hazards. When the magnitude of past events, the
number of people and properties affected, and the severity of damage, hurricanes and
tropical storm flooding hazards clearly are the most significant natural hazard to threaten
Monroe County.
The LMS Working Group acknowledges that many buildings were built before the adoption
of regulations for development in floodplains in the County and the incorporated
municipalities. Current regulations require new development to be designed and built to
resist anticipated wind and flood hazards. Older buildings, then, may reasonably be
expected to sustain more property damage than new buildings.
3.2 2015 Update: The Mitigation Planning
Process
The LMS Working Group followed a well-established planning process to revise the LMS.
A mitigation planning consultant was retained to guide the Working Group through the
update process, to help research and update each chapter, to document decisions of the
group, and to collect comments and incorporate them into the LMS Update.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 3-1
Monroe EMD publicizes in-
channels. Several meetings were held during which the 2015 LMS Update was discussed
(see Appendix A1 for meeting notices, agendas and notes):
January 22, 2015.
Review the LMS update process and State and federal
requirements that require the Working Group to update the LMS every five
years. Described the LMS components and the State crosswalk that includes
CRS Activity 510 Floodplain Management Plan criteria. The Working Group
must examine each section, and a summary of the update process must be
included. The entire updated plan must be adopted by every jurisdiction, not
just a summary of the updates. Before the meeting, revised community
profile sections (Chapters 7-12) were distributed to community representatives
and comments were sought. The importance of Working Group participation
and contribution was stressed. Each local government member will be
responsible for ensuring that their chapters are reviewed. A representative of
the Key West National Weather Service office was available to review and
comment on Chapter 5 (Hurricanes & Tropical Storms), Chapter 6 (Other
Hazards & Risks).
March 5, 2015.
The consultants prepared revisions to Chapter 5 (Hurricanes
& Tropical Storms) and Chapter 6 (Other Hazards & Risks), which were
distributed to the Working Group two weeks before the meeting. Those
chapters were reviewed including a presentation of Hazus results and
introduction of climate change/sea level rise as a new hazard. Hazus is a
regional multi-hazard loss estimation model developed by FEMA and the
National Institute of Building Sciences. The Hazus results are acceptable for
the purpose of identifying and prioritizing mitigation actions. The
municipalities were asked to review their overall vulnerability and changes
were included in the revised document. New Working Group Initiatives and
new community-specific initiatives were discussed. Following the meeting, the
County hosted a Repetitive Loss Area Analysis workshop.
May 27, 2015.
Notices of the public meeting were published and the meeting
was held at the Marathon Fire Department, Station #14. Only one resident
attended the public meeting and no comments were submitted.
June 23, 2015.
The local government members of the LMS Working Group
met by conference call to review the outcome of the public meeting, to concur
with the addition of two Working Group initiatives and an initiative for each
local government.
October 2015.
The Working Group Chair determined the nature of revisions
prompted by the DEM review did not warrant review. The LMS Update was
prepared and provided for adoption by individual jurisdictions.
The overall mitigation planning process, summarized below, was facilitated by mitigation
planning consultants:
Get Organized.
The Monroe County LMS Working Group was charged with
coordinating a committee comprised of its members to review and update the
LMS.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 3-2
Coordinate.
Prior to the January 22, 2015, meeting, other agencies and other
interested organizations were notified of the planning activity and invited to
participate.
Review Identified Hazards.
The LMS Working Group reviewed the hazard
identification content in the 2010 LMS and hazard events that had occurred in
the intervening years, and confirmed the priority ranking of natural hazards.
Several of the overall community vulnerability ratings were modified for the
2015 Update and Climate Change/Sea Level Rise was added as a hazard. The
resul
combined hurricane wind/storm surge (prepared by FDEM). The Hazus
information provided an order of magnitude estimate of impacts and
storm surge) over other hazards.
Review how Natural Hazards are Addressed.
Working Group members
reviewed brief descriptions of their agencies and on-going actions related to
hazards and provided updates. The results are summarized in Chapter 7
(Monroe County) and Chapters 8 through 12 for the cities of Key West, Key
Colony Beach, Layton, Islamorada and Marathon. To comply with changes in
the FEMA Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool that requires a capability
assessment for each participating jurisdiction, these chapters were slightly
Review Assessment of Risks.
The Working Group reviewed the risk
assessment content (Chapters 5-6) in the 2010 LMS both in the revised draft
impacts.
Research Existing Plans.
The Working Group reviewed existing
comprehensive plans, climate change action plans and flood damage reduction
regulations and referenced pertinent provisions in the LMS. The primary wind
and flood requirements in the Florida Building Code were summarized.
Confirm the Mitigation Goals.
The mitigation goals were discussed and
confirmed by the Working Group.
Identification of Mitigation Actions.
The list of potential mitigation actions
is not static, it changes as new projects are identified, as projects are
completed, and as the priorities of proponents change or better information
about the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of an activity comes to light.
Mitigation actions include projects (typically involving specific buildings or
drainage problems) and other actions that have broader impact (such as public
information and regulatory requirements). A high priority action identified in
the 2005 LMS called for the Working Group to improve the method by which
the list of projects is maintained and updated (this action was completed).
Progress on the Working Group Initiatives from the 2010 LMS was recorded
and new Working Group and Community specific Initiatives for the 2015
LMS were prepared.
Draft the LMS Update.
The draft LMS Update was prepared and circulated
to LMS Working Group members, regional organizations identified and
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 3-3
described in the text, and others on the email distribution list. Comments were
Make Available to the Public and Hold Public Meeting.
A press release
was i, facebook page, and Twitter.
A notice of the public meeting and the availability of the Public Review Draft
of the 2015 LMS Update was published in the Florida Keys Keynoter and The
Reporter (see Appendix B). The County distributed notice to its
<civicplus.com> listserve.
Management office in Marathon. Notices were sent to adjacent counties, state
and regional governmental and non-
profit organizations, neighborhood
associations, the utility companies
that serve the area, and the e-mail
listserve maintained by the LMS
coordinator. The LMS Update was
presented at a public meeting held on
May 27, 2015 at Marathon Fire
Department, Station #14 and
comment period was open until June
12, 2015.
Provide to DEM for Technical
Review.
No comments were
received during the public comment
period. In preparing the final draft for DEM review, additional edits and
updated information were included and the Working Group convened by
conference call to approve submission to the Division of Emergency
Management for review.
Adopt LMS.
The LMS Update was presented to the Monroe County Board of
County Commissioners and the governing bodies of the Village of Islamorada,
the City of Layton, the City of Key Colony Beach, the City of Marathon, and
the City of Key West. Copies of the resolutions of adoption are found in
Appendix C.
3.2.1 LMS Working Group Annual Meetings
The LMS Working Group meets at least annually as required by State regulations (27P-22,
F.A.C.) to discuss changes to the LMS, new actions and status of actions. Since the 2010
LMS Update, the dates for the Working Group meeting are recorded below (minutes
included in Appendix A2):
June 15, 2011 at the Marathon Fire Station
May 30, 2012 at the Marathon Fire Station
March 25, 2013 at the Monroe County Government Center
September 30, 2014 at the Marathon Government Annex
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 3-4
During 2010, the Working Group met several times to work on the 2010 LMS Update
(documentation of that process and those meetings is included in the LMS 2010 Update).
3.3 Public Involvement in Mitigation Planning
Consistent with the standard practices to inform and provide citizens the opportunity to
comment, and to fulfill the public involvement requirements of the mitigation planning
programs, the input was solicited and residents were notified and invited to review the LMS
and attend a public meeting. In January 2015, Monroe County Emergency Management
posted on its public website that the LMS Update was underway and that the general public
is invited and welcome to attend meetings. Five residents of the County and/or
municipalities receive information and regularly attend Working Group meetings. The
results of Working Group meetings, including meeting notes and presentation materials, are
also posted on the Monroe County Emergency Management website.
The Monroe County LMS 2015 Update (Public Review Draft) was presented to the public at
a meeting on May 27, 2015 at the Marathon Fire Department, Station #14. Prior to the
meeting, copies of the Public Review Draft were made available to the public in the offices
of the cities, in the County Growth Management office in Marathon, and posted on the
facebook page, Twitter feed, and listserve (Appendix B). Notice of the meeting was
published in the Florida Keys Keynoter and The Reporter. The Monroe-County LMS
Working Group, federal, state and regional agencies, neighborhood associations, and the
stakeholders on the LMS email notification listserve (see Section 1.2) were notified of the
opportunity to review and provide comments. Comments were requested by June 12, 2015.
One citizen attended the public meeting and no comments were submitted. Had comments
been received they would have been evaluated to determine whether and how to amend the
text, and whether those changes rise to the level that requires formal approval by the
Working Group.
3.4 The 2015 Update: Hazard Identification and
Risk Assessment
Chapter 5 (Hurricanes & Tropical Storms) and Chapter 6 (Other Hazards & Risks) include
descriptions of hazards and characterizations of the assessments of risk. Chapter 5 includes
a series of tables that summarize the 2014/2015 damage projections from data analysis run
Hazus provides a probabilistic risk assessment
based on current scientific and engineering knowledge, and U.S. Census data for population.
As noted in Section 5.5, in 2015 the Working Group decided that like the previously used
he value of Hazus results are not in the precise
numbers, but in the order of magnitude of projected damage (see Tables 5-9 through 5-15).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 3-5
At the March 5, 2015 meeting, the Working Group confirmed this general risk assessment.
With regard to buildings, while many new buildings have been constructed, compliance with
the Florida Building Code and each jurisdictions flood damage prevention regulations limits
vulnerabilities. To account for some of the changes in the preceding 5 years, the Working
Group obtained the total number of each structure category and the current total value of
those structures from the Monroe County Property Assessment Office (see Table 2-4).
3.5 2015 Updates
The LMS Working Group reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more
significant changes include:
Section 3.2: Described the LMS meetings related to the 2015 Update;
updated the description of the planning process to reflect recent actions
Section 3.3: Updated public involvement activities
Section 3.4: Updated to describe use of Hazus analyses to replace TAOS
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 3-6
Chapter 4. Mitigation Goals
4.1 Introduction
State and federal guidance and regulations pertaining to mitigation planning require the
development of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to identified
hazards. Mitigation goals have been established by the Federal Emergency Management
4.2 LMS Mitigation Goals
State and federal guidance and regulations pertaining to mitigation planning require the
identification of mitigation goals that are consistent with other goals, mission statements and
Goal
vision statements. The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan (Year 2010) includes
217:
post-disaster redevelopment to increase public safety and reduce damages and public
As of early 2015, the Comprehensive Plan is being updated.
The LMS Working Group first developed a set of goals as part of the 1999 LMS. These
goals were reviewed and confirmed for the LMS revision in 2005, with one minor addition.
The goals were discussed and reconfirmed for both the 2010 and 2015 Updates. It was
agreed for the 2015 Update that these goals focus on the key hazard mitigation issues for
Monroe County and remain viable. To move towards meeting these goals, the members of
the LMS Working Group consider the range of mitigation initiatives outlined in Section 13.2
when identifying initiatives within their jurisdictions.
Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy Goals
1.Preservation of sustainability of life, health, safety
and welfare.
2.Preservation of infrastructure, including power,
water, sewer and communications.
3.Maintenance and protection of roads and bridges,
including traffic signals and street signs.
4.Protection of critical facilities, including public
schools and public buildings.
5.Preservation of property and assets.
6.Preservation of economy during and after disaster,
including business viability.
7.Preservation and protection of the environment,
including natural and historic resources.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 4-1
4.3
Statement
The Florida State Hazard Mitigation Plan was revised and approved by FEMA in 2013.
primary goals, detailed risk assessment, and a wide variety of
actions.
The primary goals set forth in the State plan include:
Goal 1: Implement an effective comprehensive statewide hazard mitigation
plan
Goal 2: Support local and regional mitigation strategies
Goal 3: Increase public and private sector awareness and support for hazard
mitigation in Florida
Goal 4:
cultural, economic, and natural resources
4.4 2015 Updates
The LMS Working Group reviewed and updated the pertinent sections:
Section 4.2: Noted the mitigation goals were discussed and confirmed
Section 4.3: Updated
(removing the vision and mission statements that are no longer in the
Section 4.4: Former Sect
Goal; this section was removed because the agency produced the National
Mitigation Framework which contains
goal statement
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 4-2
Chapter 5. Hurricanes & Tropical Storms
5.1 Introduction
vulnerability as well as potential impacts of future hazard events. Chapter 5 focuses solely
on the vulnerability and potential impacts from hurricanes and other tropical storms because
these pose the greatest risk to the area in terms of both frequency and magnitude. Hurricanes
and tropical storms are equally likely to occur through the entire extent of Monroe County.
Chapter 6 focuses on additional natural hazards that pose a higher degree of risk to Monroe
County including:
Strong Storms that include Tornadoes and Water Spouts
Rainfall/Fresh Water Flooding
Climate Change and Sea Level Rise
Drought
Wildland Fire
Coastal Erosion
The descriptions of hazards, hazard histories, and impacts that are detailed in this chapter
-15. The overall
vulnerability by each jurisdiction to these hazards is summarized in Table 6-16. Climate
Change and Sea Level Rise is a new hazard for this 2015 Update and describes how it
impacts other hazards including hurricane storm surge, hurricane wind, tropical storm
precipitation (freshwater flooding), wildfire and drought.
Table 5-1 describes some natural hazards addressed in the 2013 State of Florida Mitigation
Plan. These hazards were briefly considered for the LMS and 2015 Update and excluded
because they do not pose significant risks to the area.
Table 5-1. Hazards Excluded from Further Examination
Hazard Reasons for Exclusion
Extreme Heat
Extreme Heat ranking.
The 2013
Freeze
Winter storms do not pose risks to agricultural interests and property because of the
climatological and meteorological characteristics of the Keys. The winter of 1981 was
Winter Storm
especially cold, with temperatures in the low 40°s (record low was 35°F at Coral Key
Village). In mid-January 2010, the Florida Keys experienced one of the longest and most
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-1
intense periods of cold weather recorded, with temperatures remaining more than 10
degrees below normal for nearly two weeks. The greatest effect of an unusually low
temperature would be a resulting low wind chill factor and the National Weather Service
Weather Forecast Office in Key West issues wind chill advisories from time to time.
Overall, the Florida Key are not at risk to winter storms (including snow, ice, sleet, and
blizzard conditions).
Earthquakes are extremely rare in Florida and Monroe County is in the lowest risk are of
the state according to the 2013 State Plan. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) with a
Earthquake
10% probability of exceedance in 50 years for Monroe County is 0% gravity (g) (lowest
potential for seismic ground shaking events). FEMA recommends that earthquakes only be
further evaluated for mitigation purposes in areas with a PGA of 3% g or more.
South Florida and the Florida Keys are not at risk to expansive soils.
Expansive Soils
The 2013 State Plan reports only one sinkhole occurrence in Monroe County (Key West).
Sinkholes
While there is some tsunami hazard for the Atlantic and Gulf coasts for elevations less
than 15 feet above mean high tide and within 300 feet horizontal distance from mean high
Tsunami
tide line, they are an extremely rare hazard in the Florida Keys. The 2013 State of Florida
Hazard Mitigation Plan concludes that the probability of future tsunamis is low.
The 2013 State Plan does not report any high or significant hazard dams in Monroe
Dam / Levee
County.
Failure
The hurricane loss estimate information in this chapter is
based on the Hazus analysis conducted by FDEM in
applicable standardized
2014 and 2015. The wind hazard analysis is acceptable
methodology that contains models
for estimating potential losses
for the purpose of identifying and prioritizing potential
from earthquakes, floods and
mitigation actions. It is supplemented with coastal flood
hurricanes. Hazus uses
hazard impacts estimated by the hurricane storm surge
Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) technology to estimate
modeling (SLOSH) found in the 2013 update of the State
physical, economic and social
of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP).
impacts of disasters.
The SLOSH information is included by community in
Chapters 7-12.
Since 1965, 16 of the 18 events that prompted Presidential disaster declarations were
associated with tropical cyclones (Table 5-2). One declaration was for fire hazard and one
was for a severe cold spell that affected South Florida.
Table 5-2. Presidential Disaster Declarations (1965-2014)
Date of
DR# Declaration Event Assistance Provided*
209 09/14/1965 Hurricane Betsy IA,PA
337 06/24/1972 Tropical Storm Agnes IA,PA
955 08/24/1992 Hurricane Andrew IA,PA
Tornadoes, Flooding, High Winds &
982 03/22/1993 Tides, Freezing IA,PA
1204 02/20/1998 IA,PA
Severe Storms, High Winds,
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-2
Tornadoes & Flooding
1223 06/19/1998 Extreme Fire Hazard PA
1249 09/28/1998 Hurricane Georges IA,PA
1259 11/06/1998 Tropical Storm Mitch IA,PA
1306 10/22/1999 Hurricane Irene IA,PA
1345 10/04/2000 Severe Storms & Flooding IA
1359 02/06/2002 Severe Winter Storm Disaster unemployment
Tropical Storm Bonnie & Hurricane
1539 08/11-30/2004 Charlie IA
1551 09/13/2004 Hurricane Ivan PA-B
1595 07/10/2005 Hurricane Dennis PA
1602 08/28/2005 Hurricane Katrina PA
1609 10/24/2005 Hurricane Wilma IA, PA
1785 08/24/2008 Tropical Storm Fay PA
4084 10/18/2012 Hurricane Isaac PA
* IA = Individual Assistance; PA = Public Assistance
5.2 Defining the Hazard
The most significant hazards that could affect Monroe County are winds and flooding
associated with tropical cyclones (hurricanes, tropical storms, and tropical depressions) and
non-tropical storms (see Chapter 6). Non-tropical coastal storms are less common, although
such storms can produce high winds and flooding rains.
The Monroe County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Keys has one of the highest probabilities of being affected by tropical cyclones in the
Center.
Most of Monroe County has natural elevations of about 4 to 7 feet above mean sea level.
This makes the area vulnerable to coastal flooding. A few areas have poor drainage and
accumulate water during heavy rainfalls.
Hurricanes and tropical storms, as well as tropical depressions, are all tropical cyclones
defined by the National Weather Service, National Hurricane Center, as warm-core non-
frontal synoptic-scale cyclones, originating over tropical or subtropical waters, with
organized deep convection and closed surface wind circulation about a well-defined center.
Once they have formed, tropical cyclones maintain themselves by extracting heat energy
from the ocean at high temperatures and releasing heat at the low temperatures of the upper
troposphere. Hurricanes and tropical storms bring heavy rainfalls, storm surge, and high
winds, all of which can cause significant damage. These storms can last for several days,
and therefore have the potential to cause sustained flooding, high wind, and erosion
conditions.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-3
Tropical cyclones are classified using the
The Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale is a
1 to 5 categorization based on the hurricane's
Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, which
intensity at the indicated time. The scale
replaces the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale
provides examples of the type of damage and
(Table 5-3). As described on the NOAA
impacts in the United States associated with
winds of the indicated intensity. In general,
e
the damage rises by about a factor of four for
(below), the scale has been modified to
every category increase. The scale does not
address the potential for such other hurricane-
indicate only wind intensity and anticipated
related impacts, as storm surge, rainfall-
types of damage and impacts. The
induced floods, and tornadoes. For more
description notes that the scale no longer
information, see to the National Hurricane
s website at:
indicates anticipated storm surge depths.
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutsshws.php
Storm surge is a large dome of water which may be 50- to 100-miles wide and rising from
less than 4-feet to over 18-
landfall, although the timing is influenced by the path, forward speed, and timing of each
storm with respect to the tide cycle. Wind-driven waves are a significant component of
tropical cyclones. The height of waves is influenced by storm characteristics and whether
shorelines are buffered by barrier islands.
Table 5-3. Saffir-Sampson Scale and Typical Damage
Tropical Storm: Sustained
winds 39-73 mph.
Category One Hurricane:
(EQEKMRK[MRHWEVII\TIGXIHSome damage to building structures could
Sustained winds 74-95 mph. occur, primarily to unanchored mobile homes (mainly pre-1994 construction).
Some damage is likely to poorly constructed signs. Loose outdoor items will
become projectiles, causing additional damage. Persons struck by windborne
debris risk injury and possible death. Numerous large branches of healthy
trees will snap. Some trees will be uprooted, especially where the ground is
saturated. Many areas will experience power outages with some downed
power poles.
Category Two Hurricane:
Some roofing material, door, and window damage of buildings will occur.
Sustained winds 96-110 mph Considerable damage to mobile homes (mainly pre-1994 construction) and
:IV]WXVSRK[MRHW[MPP
poorly constructed signs is likely. A number of glass windows in high rise
TVSHYGI[MHIWTVIEHHEQEKI buildings will be dislodged and become airborne. Loose outdoor items will
become projectiles, causing additional damage. Persons struck by windborne
debris risk injury and possible death. Numerous large branches will break.
Many trees will be uprooted or snapped. Extensive damage to power lines and
poles will likely result in widespread power outages that could last a few to
several days.
Category Three Hurricane:
Some structural damage to houses and buildings will occur with a minor
Sustained winds 111-130. amount of wall failures. Mobile homes (mainly pre-1994 construction) and
(ERKIVSYW[MRHW[MPPGEYWIpoorly constructed signs are destroyed. Many windows in high rise buildings
I\XIRWMZIHEQEKI will be dislodged and become airborne. Persons struck by windborne debris
risk injury and possible death. Many trees will be snapped or uprooted and
block numerous roads. Near total power loss is expected with outages that
could last from several days to weeks.
Category Four Hurricane:
Some wall failures with some complete roof structure failures on houses will
Sustained winds 131-155 occur. All signs are blown down. Complete destruction of mobile homes
mph. )\XVIQIP]HERKIVSYW(primarily pre-1994 construction). Extensive damage to doors and windows is
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-4
[MRHWGEYWMRKHIZEWXEXMRKlikely. Numerous windows in high rise buildings will be dislodged and become
HEQEKIEVII\TIGXIH airborne. Windborne debris will cause extensive damage and persons struck
by the wind-blown debris will be injured or killed. Most trees will be snapped or
uprooted. Fallen trees could cut off residential areas for days to weeks.
Electricity will be unavailable for weeks after the hurricane passes.
Category Five Hurricane:
Complete roof failure on many residences and industrial buildings will occur.
Sustained winds greater than Some complete building failures with small buildings blown over or away are
155 mph. 'EXEWXVSTLMGlikely. All signs blown down. Complete destruction of mobile homes (built in
HEQEKIMWI\TIGXIH any year). Severe and extensive window and door damage will occur. Nearly
all windows in high rise buildings will be dislodged and become airborne.
Severe injury or death is likely for persons struck by wind-blown debris. Nearly
all trees will be snapped or uprooted and power poles downed. Fallen trees
and power poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last for
weeks to possibly months.
Storm surge can be modeled by various techniques; one such technique is the use of the
Hurricanes (SLOSH)
model. The model is used to predict storm surge heights based on hurricane category.
Surge inundation areas are classified based on the category of hurricane that would cause
flooding. As the category of the storm increases, more land area will become inundated.
Because winds are moving from a north and/or eastward position, winds move across the
ocean towards shore and form large waves.
5.2.1 Future Flooding Conditions
Due to the impacts of climate change and sea level rise, which are covered more extensively
in Section 6.7, the frequency and severity of flooding conditions are expected to increase in
the future. Surge heights are predicted to be greater due to sea level rise and climate change
is expected to periodically cause more intense rainfall which will exacerbate freshwater
flooding.
5.2.2 Flood Insurance Rate Maps
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) prepares maps to depict areas that are
predicted to flood during events up to and including the 1-percent annual chance flood
(commonly called the 100-year flood). In Monroe County and the cities, virtually all areas
shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are impacted by coastal flooding,
whether due to hurricanes or other tropical storms. Monroe County and the cities all
maintain copies of their current effective FIRMs and the maps are available for inspection
by the public. The FIRM consists of many map panels. Some indication of the extent of the
SFHA is shown on repetitive loss maps found in Chapter 7 (Monroe County) and chapters 8
through 12 (municipalities).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-5
In order to make federal flood insurance available to citizens, communities adopt FIRMs
and administer floodplain management ordinances. Table 5-4 indicates when the County
and cities first joined the NFIP and the date of the current map.
Table 5-4. Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Joined the NFIP Date of Current Map
Monroe County June 15, 1973 February 18, 2005
Islamorada October 1, 1998 February 18, 2005
Key Colony Beach July 16, 1971 February 18, 2005
Key West September 3, 1971 February 18, 2005
Layton July 13, 1971 February 18, 2005
Marathon October 16, 2000 February 18, 2005
In Fiscal Year 2013, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) initiated a
coastal flood risk study for the South Florida Study Area that affects Monroe, Broward,
Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach Counties. The results of that study will be incorporated into
updated digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports for these counties. New surge and wave modeling is underway; completion is
expected in 2017 and revised flood hazard mapping is anticipated to be completed in 3-4
years. Discovery meetings were held in Monroe County in July 2014. More information
about the study is available at http://www.southeastcoastalmaps.com/Pages/Projects/South-
Florida.aspx.
5.2.3 NFIP Flood Insurance Policies & Repetitive Loss Properties
National Flood Insurance Program data identifies properties in Monroe County and the cities
that are, or have been, insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that have
received two or more claims of at least $1,000.
Table 5-5 shows that as of March 2015, there are a total of 916 such properties,
an increase of four properties since February 2010. Data provided in February 2010 noted a
total of 2,048 claims for a total of $60.3 million in claim payments. The 2010 data also
indicated 78% of the repetitive loss properties were single-family homes, nearly 13% were
multi-family buildings, and the remaining were nonresidential structures. In 2015, there was
a total of 2,073 claims countywide for a total of $62.1 million in claims payments. Of the
916 repetitive loss properties, 833 are residential and 83 are non-residential.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-6
Table 5-5. NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties comparison between February
2010 and March 2015
February 2010 March 2015
# of Properties # of Properties # Claims
Total Claim
Payments
(rounded to nearest
1/10 million)
Monroe County 636 631 1,350 $29.3 million
Islamorada 14 16 47 $1.2 million
Key Colony
15 14 39 $1.8 million
Beach
Key West 216 221 563 $25.7 million
Layton 0 0 0 0
Marathon 31 34 74 $4.1 million
Total 912 916 2,073 $62.1 million
5.3 Hurricane Effects in Monroe County
The 2013 State Hazard Mitigation Plan contains results of an analysis that provides an
-6 shows the results of
overlaying 2010 census block population with coastal flood depth grids. The flood depth
grids came from the FEMA Coastal Flood Atlas. Reflecting the generally low-lying
character of the Keys, the difference in population affected by the two categories is not
large. The overall spatial extent of hurricane effects in Monroe County is medium to large,
depending on the size and strength of a hurricane, with all of the County being susceptible to
hurricane high winds and most areas, especially in the populated areas of the Florida Keys,
vulnerable to storm surge (see Table 5-6 and Figure 5-1). Based on previous occurrences,
Monroe County and municipalities are susceptible to hurricanes of all magnitudes, from
Category 1 to Category 5. Probabilities of occurrence of hurricanes are described below
Figure 5-1.
Table 5-6 Population Affected by Coastal Flooding from Category 2 and 5 Hurricanes
1-3 ft 4-6 ft 7-10 ft 11-13 ft 14-16 ft 17-20 ft over 20 ft
Depth
Population
affected by
34,492 50,502 29,123 1 - - -
Category 2
Additional
Population
290 733 1,834 1,376 145 216 202
affected by
Category 5
Source: State of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan, August 2013
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-7
Figure 5-1 depicts surge zones for Categories 1 to 5. A large portion of the Florida Keys is
susceptible to flooding from a Category 1 storm. A larger map of surge zones can be
accessed at http://floridadisaster.org/publicmapping/SURGE/SURGE_MONROE.pdf.
Figure 5-1. Storm surge zones for Monroe County.
Assigning frequencies to hurricanes is difficult, in large part because of the relatively short
record. Based on past storms, it appears that the frequency for a Category 5 storm in Key
West is one every 36 years (or about 3-percent chance in any given year by comparison,
--percent chance of occurring in any given year). A Category 4
storm is likely to occur about once every 22 years (or about 5-percent in any given year).
Category 3, 2, and 1 hurricanes and tropical storms have increasing probabilities of
occurrence in any given year. Overall, Monroe County has been advised that in any given
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-8
year, there is a one in four chance (25-percent) that the area will be affected by a tropical
cyclone of some intensity.
One of the greatest threats posed by hurricanes is their erratic and irregular tracks, making
prediction of landfall difficult. Figure 5-2 illustrates the tracks of past hurricanes and
tropical storms. More hurricanes make landfall during September and October, although
they have occurred in all months of hurricane season.
Figure 5-2. Historical hurricane and tropical storm tracks, South Florida (online
http://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/tools/hurricanes).
5.4 Some Major Hurricanes
The Florida Keys have experienced many hurricanes and tropical storms. Brief descriptions
of some or the more significant storms (Table 5-7) are sufficient to characterize the
hurricane history of the area. As of mid-2015, Hurricane Isaac, described below, is the most
recent hurricane or tropical storm to have an impact in Monroe County.
Table 5-7. Some Major Hurricanes that Affected Monroe County
1919 Hurricane (September 2-15).
The hurricane passed Key West and the Dry Tortugas on a
westward course. Key West recorded winds of 95 mph, with a barometric pressure of 28.81 inches.
Water levels were 5-7 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL)
1929 Hurricane (September 22 to October 4).
The hurricane crossed over Key Largo on a northerly
course. Key Largo reported winds estimated at over 100 mph, a central barometric pressure of 28
inches, and tide levels of 8-9 feet above MSL. Key West experienced tide levels of 5-6 feet above MSL
and winds of 66 mph.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-9
Table 5-7. Some Major Hurricanes that Affected Monroe County
1935 Hurricane (August 29-September 10).
The small, extremely violent, Category 5 hurricane crossed
the Florida Keys on a northwesterly track. The Tavernier-Islamorada area reported winds estimated at
120 mph with gusts from 190-210 mph. Tide levels ranged from 14 feet above MSL in Key Largo to 18
feet above MSL in Lower Matecumbe Key. The storm was so intense and tightly wrapped that Key West
had tide levels of only 2 feet above MSL and average sustained winds of less than 40 mph. Tragically,
the storm caused the death of many WWI veterans who were wor
Overseas Railroad. The 1935 Keys Hurricane remains the strongest storm ever to hit the Continental
U.S.
Hurricane Donna, 1960 (August 29-September 19).
Hurricane Donna curved northwestward over the
Middle Keys near Long Key/Layton and then traveled northward toward the Gulf Coast towns of Naples
and Fort Myers. Areas in the vicinity of the storm experienced winds speed of 128 mph and a central
pressure of 28.44 inches. The storm affected the Everglades with estimated winds of 150 mph. Tide
levels were reported at Upper Matecumbe Key of 13.5 feet above MSL, at Plantation Key 10+ feet above
MSL, and 8.9 feet above MSL in Key Largo. As of 1992 Hurricane Donna, a Category 4 storm, was listed
as the 6th most intense hurricane in the U.S.
Hurricane Betsy, 1965 (August 26-September 12).
Hurricane Betsy passed over Marathon while
moving westward into the Gulf of Mexico. The lowest central pressure was measured in Tavernier at
28.12 inches and wind speeds were estimated to be 120 mph. Tide levels in Tavernier were 7.7 feet
above MSL and Key Largo had tide levels of around 9 feet above MSL.
Hurricane Andrew, 1992.
This storm made landfall in southern Dade and northern Monroe Counties in
the early morning hours of Monday, August 24, 1992. A strong Category 4, the storm severely affected
Monroe County in the Key Largo area, particularly North Key Largo and the community of Ocean Reef.
According to National Hurricane Center, maximum sustained winds for this storm were 145 miles per
hour, with gusts to 175 miles per hour. At landfall, its central barometric pressure was, 926 Mb, is the third
lowest in the 20th Century. At the time, Hurricane Andrew was the third strongest storm this Century.
Storm tides at Ocean Reef have been estimated at about 4.5 feet on the bay side and 3.9 to 5.0 feet on
the ocean side. Because of the storm's intensity and tight configuration, it quickly moved inland.
Hurricane Andrew was costly for Monroe County, including extensive roof and other structural damage to
residences; public safety and administrative buildings; the Card Sound Road toll facility; and resort
buildings; loss of emergency equipment; severe damage to roadways and signs; loss or emergency and
security vehicles; and damage to marinas and craft. Other expenses accrued from large-scale landscape
loss and damage; loss of and damage to private vehicles; damage to recreational facilities; and great loss
of personal property. Many businesses in Upper Key Largo experienced some damage (especially roofs)
and loss of signs and landscaping. County roadways were blocked by debris and street and road signs
were lost. The Florida Keys Electric Coop reported $130,000 in losses of utility poles and related
infrastructure. Total damage in Monroe County exceeded $131,000,000.
Hurricane Georges, 1998.
On September 25, 1998, this hurricane made landfall in the Lower Keys and
affected the entire county to some extent. Hurricane Georges devastated the Caribbean, including Haiti
and the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, and Cuba before taking aim at Monroe County. When it hit
Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic on September 22nd, it was a strong Category 3 with sustained
winds of120 mph. It weakened to a Category 2 by the time it arrived in the Florida Keys, with maximum
sustained winds of 92 mph measured at the Naval Air Station (Boca Chica) near Key West. Gusts of 110
mph were reported in Marathon. According to the Key West Weather Service, precipitation levels in the
Lower Keys were identified as 8.65 inches on the south side of Sugarloaf Key, 8.38 inches at Key West
International Airport, 8.20 inches on Cudjoe Key, and 8.4 inches at Tavernier in the Upper Keys. The
most severe damage was sustained between Sugarloaf Key and Big Pine Key in the Lower Keys.
Damage estimates, including insurable, uninsurable, and infrastructure loss, was nearly $300 million.
Substantial damage occurred to mobile homes and landscaping throughout the keys. Roof and flood
damage occurred in several areas including Big Coppitt, Sugarloaf, Summerland, Ramrod, and Big Pine
in the Lower Keys. Similar damage affected the Middle Keys including Marathon, Key Colony Beach,
Grassy Key, Long Key/Layton, and Duck Key. In the Upper Keys, several hotels and motels, such as the
Cheeca Lodge received damage as did portions of roadway, e.g. Lower Matecumbe where overwash
occurred. A school under construction in Sugarloaf Key sustained damage to the unfinished roof, heavy
damage to the Big Pine Community Center, and damage to the air conditioning unit on the roof of
Marathon High School, which resulted in interior water damage. The City of Key West sustained damage
to private buildings and public property, especially along low-lying areas along South Roosevelt
Boulevard.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-10
Table 5-7. Some Major Hurricanes that Affected Monroe County
Tropical Storm Mitch, 1998
. Arriving on November 4 and 5, Mitch initially was forecast to bring minimal
tropical storm conditions to the Keys. Unfortunately, feeder bands from Mitch containing super cells
spawned several damaging tornadoes in the Upper Keys. Sections with mobile homes were especially
hard hit. Islamorada experienced an F-1 tornado. Rock Harbor and Key Largo were hit by F-2
ly $11 million.
Hurricane Wilma, October 2005.
During the night of October 23 to 24, 2005. Hurricane Wilma visited
Monroe County, resulting in at least 2 injuries and at least $33 million in damage. Over the Upper Keys
from Craig Key to Ocean Reef, maximum winds were measured at 65 knots with gusts to 79 knots. At
Molasses Reef C-MAN station. Overall, average winds across the inhabited Lower Keys were estimated
at 70 to 80 mph with gusts up to 90 mph with general Category 1 Saffir Simpson Damage noted. Rainfall
across the Lower Keys was fairly light but typical for a fast-moving hurricane, 1.50 inches measured at
Pennekamp State Park in Key Largothe bayside of the Upper
Keys, ranging from 4 to 5 feet above sea level with the worst in Lower Matecumbe Key. U.S. Route 1
north of Key Largo was temporarily flooded at least 3 inches at maximum surge during the afternoon
hours on October 24. For a more complete description of the impacts, see Appendix D of this 2015 LMS
UpdateNational Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA)/National Weather Service (NWS) Weather Forecast Office (WFO) Key West,
Florida (http://www.srh.noaa.gov/media/key/Research/wilma.pdf).
Tropical Storm Isaac, August 2012
. The storm that ultimately became Hurricane Isaac was a tropical
storm as it moved west-northwest at 18 mph through the Straits of Florida, with the center passing across
the lower Keys on Sunday, August 26th. The heaviest of the rain bands concentrated over Palm Beach
and Broward counties, producing between 10 and 13 inches of rain. NWS Miami reports record a
maximum of 4.66 inches of rain for mainland Monroe. In preparation for storm surge, strong winds and
residents began filing into shelters, but eventually the island chain only experienced power outages and
flooding in low-lying areas. Newspaper reports mentioned Duval Street in Key West being mostly closed.
rdth
Mobile homes and residences in low-lying areas were evacuated between August 23 and 25 in
anticipation of the storm. Some parts of Monroe County shoreline experienced severe coastal erosion.
Source: http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mfl/?n=isaac, and Monroe County Emergency Management
5.5 Losses Due to Major Disasters
No definitive record exists of all losses public and private due to disasters for Monroe
County. For the United States as a whole, estimates of the total public and private costs of
natural hazards range from $2 billion to over $6 billion per year. Most of those costs can
only be estimated. In most declared major disasters, the Federal government reimburses
75% of the costs of cleanup and recovery, with the remaining 25% covered by states and
affected local jurisdictions. FEMA administers two programs that help with recovery:
Public Assistance program, that provides cost-shared grants for certain
categories of damage/expenditures sustained by State and local governments
and certain types of nonprofit organizations. FEMA provides supplemental
assistance for debris removal, emergency protective measures, and the repair,
replacement or restoration of damaged public facilities and facilities of certain
nonprofit organizations, including damaged roads and bridges, flood control
facilities, public buildings and equipment, public utilities, and parks and
recreational facilities; and
Individual Assistance program, which provides direct assistance to individuals,
families, and businesses for certain losses that are not covered by insurance.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-11
This assistance is intended to help with critical expenses that are not covered
in other ways it is not intended to restore damaged property to pre-disaster
condition.
The Florida Division of Emergency Management coordinates and administers aspects of
FDEM provided the data shown in Table 5-8 which
summarizes some costs associated with disaster recovery from declared disasters in the past
decade (including estimates of some costs that were covered by insurance).
Table 5-8. Some Past Disaster Recovery Costs
Hurricane Georges Damage As Of September 1, 1999*
Public Assistance (Infrastructure & $ 54,257,290
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing $ 6,584,782
Individual Assistance $ 3,966,572
Small Business Administration $ 61,366,100
National Flood Insurance Program $ 38,044,669
Wind Insurance (est.) $131,000,000
TOTAL $ 295,219,413
Tropical Storm Mitch Damage As Of September 1, 1999*
Public Assistance (Infrastructure &
$ 4,021,718
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing $ 754,845
Individual Assistance $ 395,663
Small Business Administration $ 5,678,700
National Flood Insurance Program $ 51,527
TOTAL $ 10,902,183
Hurricane Ivan (DR# 1551)**
Public Assistance (Infrastructure &
$362,648
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing Not declared
Individual Assistance Not declared
Small Business Administration Not declared
TOTAL $362,648
Hurricane Dennis (DR# 1595)**
Public Assistance (Infrastructure &
$6,260,342
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing Not declared
Individual Assistance Not declared
Small Business Administration Not declared
TOTAL $6,260,342
Hurricane Katrina (DR# 1602)**
Public Assistance (Infrastructure & $5,522,803
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing Not declared
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-12
Individual Assistance Not declared
Small Business Administration $3,480,700
TOTAL $9,003,503
Hurricane Wilma (DR# 1609)**
Public Assistance (Infrastructure & $69,875,249
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing $1,980,852
Individual Assistance $24,596,806
Small Business Administration $97,349,200
TOTAL $193,802,107
Tropical Storm Fay (DR# 1785)**
Public Assistance (Infrastructure &
$4,403,549
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing Not declared
Individual Assistance Not declared
Small Business Administration Not declared
TOTAL $4,403,549
Hurricane Isaac (DR# 4084)***
Public Assistance (Infrastructure &
$1,309,537
Emergency Activities)
Temporary Housing Not declared
Individual Assistance Not declared
Small Business Administration Not declared
TOTAL $1,309,537
* Florida DCA, Recovery & Mitigation Section (2005)
** Florida DEM, Recovery Bureau (as of November 6, 2009)
*** Monroe County only, as of February 6, 2015
5.6 Impacts of Hurricanes
To estimate potential damage from hurricanes to Monroe County, the Florida Department of
Emergency Management performed an analysis using Hazus, a regional multi-hazard loss
estimation model developed by FEMA and the National Institute of Building Sciences.
Hazus provides a probabilistic risk assessment based on current scientific and engineering
knowledge, and U.S. Census data for population. The Hazus methodology models distinct
hazard and inventory parameters (wind speed and building types) to determine the impact
(damage and losses) on the built environment. One limiting factor is scale some Hazus
information is available at the county level.
Hazus reports building losses from hazard events in two categories: direct building losses
and business interruption losses. Direct building losses are the estimated costs to repair or
replace damage caused to a building and its contents. Business interruption losses are losses
associated with inability to operate a business because of damage sustained during the event.
Business interruption losses also include the temporary living expenses for people displaced
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-13
from their homes because of the event. All of the Hazus estimates are approximate only and
intended to provide a sense of scale of potential damage. The figures have been rounded up
to the nearest billion, million or hundred thousand for readability and to provide a snapshot
of the potential damage.
FDEM conducted two Hazus analyses to model the impacts of hurricanes. The first
analysis, conducted in September 2014, modeled the impacts of hurricane winds for
different frequency events (10-, 20-, 50-, 100-, 200-, 500- , and 1000-year) at the county
level. This first analysis uses 2010 Census and 2012 dollars. The second analysis, conducted
in January 2015, modeled the impact of both hurricane wind and storm surge for a storm
scenario similar to Hurricane Betsy in 1965, a Category 3 storm, also uses the 2010 Census
for population while updating the dollar value (2012 dollars). A Category 3 storm is
expected to have significant impacts and has a higher probability of occurrence than
Category 4 and 5 storms. The full Hazus reports are available on request from Monroe
County Emergency Management.
Hurricane Wind Analysis by Hazus
Results from Hazus show the impacts from natural hazards in a variety of ways. For this
LMS update, the impacts of more frequent storms are reported. Severity of damage to
different occupancy types of buildings from 10-year, 50-year and 100-year Hurricane wind
storms are shown in Table 5-9. It is important to note that in a 50-year wind event, 8,784
buildings would receive moderate to severe damage while 1,360 buildings would be totally
destroyed. In a 100-year event, 15,200 buildings would receive moderate to severe damage
while 2,330 buildings would be totally destroyed. The damage shown in Table 5-9 are
primarily to residential structures which make up the largest building type in Monroe
County (94% of all buildings).
Table 5-9. Expected Building Damage from Hurricane Wind, by Building
Occupancy Type: 10-year, 50-year, 100-year events (2012 dollars/2010 Census)
0 139 6 28 17 14 2,589 2,793
10-year
0 111 5 22 15 13 4,774 4,940
50-year
0 228 9 48 26 23 10,193 10,527
100-year
0 75 2 13 8 5 522 622
10-year
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-14
50-year 0 213 9 40 25 22 4,876 5,184
100-year 0 373 16 78 45 33 8,766 9,310
10-year 0 17 0 3 2 1 34 57
50-year 0 347 16 80 51 31 3,075 3,600
100-year 0 551 26 132 79 45 5,057 5,890
0 1 0 0 0 0 9 10
10-year
0 36 0 0 1 1 1,322 1,360
50-year
0 57 0 1 1 1 2,270 2,330
100-year
In addition to structural damage, Hazus categorizes projected economic losses under direct
property damage (building, contents, inventory) and business interruption losses (income,
relocation, rental, wage). In each of the 50-year and the 100-year wind events, Hazus
estimates that there could be over $1 billion dollars in damage to the building themselves
($1.1 billion for the 50-year and $1.8 billion for the 100-year) and the content losses could
be approximately $383 million from the 50-year event and $631 million from the 100-year
event. Business interruption costs are also expected to be high in a 50-year event
(approximately $265 million) and a 100-year event (approximately $439 M). There is a
significant difference between the impacts of a 10-year storm and then the 50-year and 100-
year storms which justifies the strong building codes already required in Monroe County.
Table 5-10 shows the predicted damage from 10-year, 50-year and 100-year wind events
with the expected results rounded up to the nearest million or tenth of a million where the
figure is less than $1 million. In a couple cases, the figure is over $1 billion and is rounded
up to the nearest tenth of a billion.
The Hazus model also estimates losses to essential facilities, debris generation and
sheltering needs. For essential facilities, there are 4 hospitals in the region with a total bed
capacity of 148 beds. In addition, there are 14 schools, 21 fire stations, 15 police stations
and 5 emergency operation facilities. Table 5-11 shows expected impacts to essential
facilities from the 10-year, 50-year and 100-year storm events. None of the essential
facilities are expected to have complete damage after the 10-, 50-, or 100-year events. For
the 50-year event, 9 out of the 14 schools, 9 of the 21 fire stations and 9 of the 15 police
stations are expected to have moderate damage. One-half of the hospitals (2 of 4) could
receive moderate damage in a 50-year and 20% of the emergency operation facilities. These
numbers dramatically increase for the 100-year event with all four hospitals, 80% of the
emergency operations facilities, 13 out of 15 police stations, and all 14 schools receiving
moderate damage.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-15
Table 5-10. Expected Economic Losses from Hurricane Wind by Building Occupancy
Type: 10-year, 50-year, 100-year Event (2012 dollars / 2010 Census) (M= Million;
B=Billion)
10-year
$54 M $9 M $0.5 M $6 M $70M
50-year
$747 M $147 M $16 M $153 M $1.1 B
100-year
$1.3 B $232 M $21 M $221 M $1.8 B
10-year
$6 m $2 M $0.1 M $1 M $9 M
50-year
$276 M $51 M $6 M $50 M $383 M
100-year
$468 M $82 M $7 M $74 M $631 M
less than $0.1
10-year
$0 $0.2 M $0 $0.3 M
M
50-year
$0 $4 M $2 M $0 $6 M
100-year
$0 $7 M $2 M $0 $9 M
less than $0.1
10-year
$0.4 M $0.2 M $0.3 M $0.9 M
M
50-year
$12 M $5 M $0.2 M $0.8 M $18 M
100-year
$21 M $8 M $0.3 M $1 M $30 M
10-year
$3 M $2 M $0.1 M $1 M $6 M
50-year
$73 M $22 M $2 M $25 M $122 M
100-year
$130 M $35 M $3 M $36 M $204 M
$less than
10-year
$6 M $0.9 M $0.3 M $7 M
$0.1 M
50-year
$55 M $14 M $0.4 M $7 M $76 M
100-year
$91 M $23 M $0.5 M $10 M $124 M
less than $0.1
10-year
$1 M $0.4 M $3 M $5 M
M
50-year
$29 M $12 M $0.4 M $8 M $49 M
100-year
$49 M $19 M $0.5 M $12 M $81 M
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-16
Table 5-11. Number of Essential Facilities Estimated to be Damaged: 10-year,
50-year, 100-year Event
0 0 0 0 0
10-year
1 9 2 9 9
50-year
4 10 4 13 14
100-year
0 0 0 0 0
10-year
0 0 0 0 0
50-year
0 0 0 0 0
100-year
5 21 4 15 5
10-year
4 19 2 6 4
50-year
4 18 0 6 0
100-year
Predicted Building Debris Generation
Hazus estimates that a total of 167,474 tons of building debris could be generated by a 10-
year wind event, 211,065 tons from a 50-year wind event and 571,058 tons from a 100-year
wind event. If the building debris tonnage is converted to an estimated number of truckloads
(at 25 tons per truck), clean up would require 421 truckloads, 6718 truckloads, and 11201
truckloads from a 10-year, 50-year and 100-year event respectively. A 25-ton dump truck
can cost between $3,700 to $4,200 a week to rent so the costs of disposing just building
debris could easily total several million dollars for the 50 and 100 year storms.
Predicted Shelter Needs
Hazus estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced after hurricanes
and the number of displaced people who would require accommodations in temporary
public shelters. The model estimates 138 households could be displaced due to a 10-year
wind event, 5,586 households after a 50-year wind event and 8,266 households after a 100-
year wind event. Based on a total County-wide residential population of 73,090 (from the
2000 Census), an estimated 26 people would likely seek temporary shelter in public shelters
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-17
in a 10-year storm, and 1,145 people in a 50-year storm and 1,702 people in a 100-year
storm.
Wind/Surge Analysis by Hazus A Storm with Surge Similar to Hurricane Betsy
Scenario
In the Florida Keys, Hurricane Betsy was a Category 3 hurricane when it made landfall in
southern Florida on September 8, 1965, bringing storm tides of up to 6 to 10 feet above
normal between Fort Lauderdale and Key Largo. High winds, tidal flooding, and beach
erosion caused widespread damage along the lower Florida east coast (from
http://www.stormsurge.noaa.gov/event_history_1960s.html . This analysis is for the
combined impacts of wind and storm surge from an event that is similar to Hurricane Betsy
in its track, wind speed, and surge levels. This scenario then runs this similar storm over
Monroe County using the 2010 building and essential facility inventory as well as
population levels and dollar values.
Table 5-12 summarizes Hurricane Betsy losses with the expected results rounded up to the
nearest million or tenth of a million where the figure is less than $1 million. In a couple
cases, the figure is over $1 billion and is rounded up to the nearest tenth of a billion. Hazus
estimates total building-related losses caused by an event similar to Hurricane Betsy could
be $2.9 billion. Another $17 million in business interruptions could be attributed to a storm
similar to Betsy. The model estimated residential occupancies made up nearly 73% of the
total loss.
Table 5-12. Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Building-Related Economic Loss Estimates:
(2012 dollars / 2010 Census) (M= Million; B=Billion)
Building
$1.3 B $146 M $33 M $17 M $1.5 B
Content
$813 M $399 M $61 M $100 M $1.4 B
Inventory
$0 $6 M $8 M $1 M $15 M
Income
$0.2 M $3 M $0 M $0.2 M $3 M
Relocation
$3 M $0.6 M $0 $0.2 M $4 M
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-18
Rental Income
$1 M $0.4 M $0 $0 $1 M
Wage
$0.6 M $3 M $0 $5 M $9 M
Table 5-13 summarizes building damage by occupancy and Table 5-14 summarizes building
damage by building type. Both tables analyze damage by 1-30%, 31-50%, and substantial
damage (over 50%). Residential structures make up most of the structure types
(approximately 97%). It is important to note that in this Category 3 event, of the
approximately 42, 460 residential buildings in Monroe County, approximately 13% of these
buildings would receive up to 30% damage; approximately 10% would receive 31-50%
damage; and approximately 7% would receive over 50% damage. Approximately 70% of
the residential buildings would not be damaged in this type of event. Table 5-14 shows that
of the building types that received over 50% damage, the vast majority were manufactured
housing (98%).
Table 5-13. Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Expected Building Damage by Occupancy
and Level of Damage: (2012 dollars / 2010 Census)
Level of
Damage
0 42 0 7 0 2 5,418 5,469
0 4 0 0 0 0 4,099 4,103
0 0 0 0 0 0 2,785 2,785
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-19
Table 5-14. Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Expected Building Damage by Building Type
(2012 dollars / 2010 Census)
Level of Damage
149 11 3,878 32 1,404 5,474
154 25 2,867 4 1,064 4,114
3 2,717 48 0 18 2,786
For the essential facilities in this 2010 Hazus scenario, there are 3 hospitals in the county
with a total bed capacity of 257 beds. In addition, there are 28 schools, 10 fire stations, 8
police stations and 0 emergency operation facilities. Table 5-15 shows expected impacts to
essential facilities from the Category 3 Betsy-type storm scenario. Of significance, 50% of
both the fire and police stations would suffer a complete loss of use, and 1 hospital would be
inoperable. On the day of the scenario event, the model estimates that 88 hospital beds
would still available with one additional hospital receiving moderate damage and the other
not damage.
Table 5-15 Hurricane Betsy Scenario: Expected Damage to Essential Facilities
Number of facilities
Classification
At Least
At Least Moderate Complete Damage
Total Substantial
Damage Loss of Use
Damage
Fire Stations
10* 5 0 5
Hospitals
3 1 0 1
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-20
Police Stations
8 4 0 4
Schools
28** 14 0 12
* - One fire station received no damage
** - Two schools received no damage
Predicted Building Debris Generation
Hazus estimates that a total of 381,321 tons of building debris could be generated by an
event similar to Hurricane Betsy. If the building debris tonnage is converted to an estimated
number of truckloads (at 25 tons per truck), it would require 15,253 truckloads to remove.
Predicted Shelter Needs
Hazus estimates the number of households expected to be displaced due to a storm similar to
Hurricane Betsy and the number of displaced people that would require accommodations in
temporary public shelters. The model estimates displaced 17,483 households and 46,896
people (out of a total population of 73,090), 64% of the population, would seek temporary
shelter in public shelters.
The 2013 State of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan (Table C.7 to C.10 in Appendix
C: Risk Assessment Tables) provides information on the Count and Value of residential and
commercial structures vulnerable to flooding associated with Category 2 and Category 5
hurricanes. Similarly, Tables C.15 to C.18 in the State Plan provide the count and value of
structures vulnerable to hurricane winds from Category 2 and Category 5 storms. The results
for Monroe County are summarized in Table 5-16. It is interesting to note that while the
impacts of Category 5 storm surge increase over those of Category 2 storm surge, the effects
of hurricane force winds do not increase.
Table 5-16. SHMP Summary: Impacts of Hurricanes in Monroe County (2013).
Number of Number of Value of Value of
Vulnerable Vulnerable Residential Commercial
Structures Structures
Residential Commercial
Structures Structures
Coastal Category 2
27,521 934 $13,310 million $1,022 million
Flooding
Category 5
31,3921,365$5,469 million$882 million
Hurricane Category 2
34,065 1,463 $5,975 million $937 million
Wind
Category 5
34,065 1,463 $5,975 million $937 million
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-21
5.6.1 Buildings
County appraisal data indicate there approximately 70 mobile home/recreational vehicle
parks (land owned by park operator). Between the units installed in those parks and those
installed on individual parcels of land, there are more than 5,600 manufactured homes units.
New manufactured home parks have not been approved since 1987. Installation of new or
replacement units must comply with current codes.
Four hundred fifty-two
there are 7,100 available rooms (including guest houses
which are privately-held condominiums that can function as hotels). Most were built before
current strict standards related to wind and flood hazards. Additions or substantial
renovation will trigger the need to comply with current codes.
A need for affordable housing has been identified in the County and Municipal
Comprehensive Plans and was underscored by the experiences in Hurricane Georges and
Tropical Storm Mitch. The preliminary damage assessments after those storms identified
the number of housing units were determined to have been destroyed or to have sustained
major or minimal damage (see Table 5-17). Hurricane Isaac, the only declaration from 2010
to 2014, did not cause significant damage to homes throughout the area and was declared for
Public Assistance only.
Table 5-17. Monroe Housing Units Affected by Hurricanes
Georges and Mitch
Degree of Damage
Total
Affected Minimal Major Destroyed
Hurricane Georges 1,854 893 470 173
Tropical Storm Mitch 664 165 40 43
5.6.2 Transportation Infrastructure and Considerations for Evacuation and
Warning
Historically, some areas and streets are more vulnerable than others to coastal flooding
and/or pooling of rainfall runoff flooding from heavy rains. In the past decade, the
following areas have been identified as likely to flood repetitively:
MM 109 in the Upper Keys, which can hamper evacuation.
MM 106, Lake Surprise area, vulnerable to the effects of wind driven wave
run-up from E/NE and W/SW directions; heavy rainfall results in ponding.
MM 111, the exposed beach area along the 18-mile stretch bordering Barnes
Sound, experiences wave runup or "piling" with strong E and NE winds.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-22
MM 113, the Point Laura Marina Area, borders Barnes Sound is similarly
susceptible to strong E and NE winds.
MM 73.5 to approximately MM 74.5, the Lower Matecumbe area known as
"Sea Oats Beach", vulnerable to NE / E / SE wind driven wave run-up.
MM 30 -31, Big Pine Key. The area north of the Big Pine Plaza Shopping
Center encompassing Wilder Road and Key Deer Boulevard, while not
normally vulnerable to storm surge effects, experience rainfall ponding.
MM 9-10, Big Coppitt Key, Bayside, experiences wind-generated wave run-
up.
Hurricane Andrew, Hurricane Georges, Tropical Storm Mitch.
Transportation disruptions
in the Keys occurred during evacuations for Hurricane Andrew and Hurricane Georges.
Following Tropical Storm Mitch and Hurricane Georges, debris on U.S. 1 somewhat
impeded traffic flow. Both of the areas airports, Key West Airport and Marathon Airport,
were closed before Hurricane Georges moved through the area. Damage to the airfield
lighting at the Key West Airport closed the facility for five days. The Marathon Airport did
not suffer any notable physical damage, but was closed for four days for debris removal and
assessment and repair.
Hurricane Wilma.
The Monroe County Public Works Division reported the following:
Twenty-five separate work orders were issued for sign repairs in the upper
Keys ($12,799) and Lower Keys ($29,732).
Repair of revetment at the Long Key transfer station ($47,199).
Road repairs on Lobster Lane, Key Largo ($4,869).
Repairs to asphalt and limerock base on Seaview Avenue, Conch Key
($8,900).
Repairs to various roads in the Lower Keys ($299,375).
Repair of asphalt and limerock base, 450 linear feet of riprap barrier wall, and
750 linear
end of Boca Chica Road (estimated $382,000).
Repaired several street lights ($12,000).
Storms were cleaning in the Lower Keys ($15,000).
Repair of traffic signal equipment that was deteriorated by corrosion likely
caused by salt water/moisture intrusion at several locations; it is likely the
damage is attributable to Hurricane Wilma, even though the work was done
nearly a year after the storm.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-23
Warning and Evacuation Procedures
The Florida Keys are one of the most vulnerable areas in the nation to hurricanes. Monroe
County has shelters set up at four schools for Category 1 and 2 storms. Shelters are not
planned for Category 3 and stronger hurricanes because evacuation is mandatory. Due to the
fact that U.S. Highway 1 is the only egress in the Florida Keys, evacuation procedures must
begin early and are staged. The following are the basic procedures outlined in a
memorandum of understanding between the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity
and the County, municipalities, and FDEM:
Approximately 48 hours in advance of tropical storm winds, mandatory evacuation
is initiated for non-residents, visitors, recreational vehicles, travel trailers, live-
aboards, and military personnel.
Approximately 36 hours in advance of tropical storm winds, mandatory evacuation
is initiated for mobile home residents, special needs residents, and hospital and
nursing home patients.
Approximately 30 hours in advance of tropical storm winds, mandatory phased
evacuation of permanent residents is initiated by the following evacuation zones:
Zone 1 Key West, Stock Island and Key Haven to Boca Chica Bridge
R
(Mile Markers (MM) 1-6)
Zone 2 Boca Chica Bridge to West end of 7-mile Bridge (MM 6-40)
R
Zone 3 West end of 7-Mile Bridge to West end of Long Key Bridge (MM
R
40-63)
Zone 4 West end of Long Boat Key Bridge to County Road (CR) 905 and
R
CR 905A intersection (MM 63-106.5)
Zone 5 CR 905A to ,and including Ocean Reef (MM 106.5-126.5)
R
The sequence of evacuation by zones will vary depending on the characteristics of actual
storms. After storms have left the area, the County implements Hurricane Re-entry
Procedures to allow law enforcement the option of separating residents who are traveling to
areas with less damage from those returning to more badly damaged areas.
5.6.3 Communications
Most telephone service in the Keys is directed through facilities in Miami, although some
local capability provides services within single exchanges. To ensure redundancy, two
major trunk fibers are furnished from Homestead on the mainland to Key West (one buried
and one aerial). However, most cable lines are located along the underside of fixed bridges,
making them vulnerable if bridges fail. Installing sub-surface cable is not feasible because
of rock substructure; environmental considerations inhibit underwater installations.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-24
Communications infrastructure suffered in Hurricanes Andrew and Georges, downing
towers and antennas in Dade County (cell towers, radio and TV towers, and repeaters) and
damaging poles and switching equipment. The NOAA weather radio transmitter in Key
Largo was damaged in Hurricane Andrew. Winds associated with Hurricane Georges
communication problems result from loss of electrical power.
special door to
protect the 911 equipment room from flooding.
5.6.4 Water Supply
Although Monroe County receives approximately 42 inches of rainfall per year, there are
virtually no fresh water sources in the Upper Keys due to characteristics of the underlying
limestone base rock. Some small fresh water lenses exist in the Lower Keys, primarily in
Big Pine Key and Key West. Consequently, virtually all-potable water comes from the
Biscayne Aquifer in Florida City via pipeline owned and operated by the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority. The main pipeline that connects to the Upper Keys is laid underwater;
some distribution pipelines are connected to roads and bridges and thus vulnerable to
washout.
The Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority is an independent Special District created by the State
of Florida Legislature, with the primary purpose and function to obtain, treat and distribute
an adequate water supply to the residents and businesses of the Florida Keys. In 1998, the
collection, treatment and disposal throughout the unincorporated areas of Monroe County,
with the exception of Key Largo. The Authority manages the infrastructure used to supply
water and wastewater services to its customers in the Florida Keys, sets rates and provides
customer service.
-Dade
County. It ensures that the supply is protected from hazards and complies with
South Florida Water Management Districts permit requirements, including
identification and use of alternative sources. The Authority also operates and
maintains two Reverse Osmosis emergency water treatment plants in the
Florida Keys, to provide an alternate source when water cannot be supplied
through the pipeline.
The Authority participates in developing policies and procedures for
responding to and recovering from shortages or disruptions in the supply and
delivery of electricity, potable water, waste water collection and treatment and
other fuels which affect or threaten to affect significant numbers of citizens
and visitors.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-25
The Authority, an agency of the State, has contingency plans and works diligently to provide
water in the event of a hurricane in the Keys. Although not required to obtain local building
permits, FKAA is required to meet or exceed the latest edition of the Florida Building Code
when building or renovating its facilities. In addition, FKAA complies with the minimum
design standards for flood protection of water and wastewater infrastructure and the
standards set by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Some redundancy for
the regular supply line was provided by restoring two reverse osmosis plants: the Marathon
facility would serve the Middle Keys and the Stock Island (Key West) facility would serve
the Lower Keys. All primary pumping and water treatment facilities have backup power
generation capability.
Hurricane Andrew:
The water treatment plant in Florida City was damaged (lost roof on
control room; roof on high service pump building; loss of Quonset hut; other minor building
damage; partial loss of communication system). The only impact to customers was
discontinuation of lime softening at the plant.
Hurricane Georges:
The Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority reported that little, if any,
disruption occurred in the transmission system during Hurricane Georges. Distribution
system disruptions occurred in isolated areas due to broken water mains caused by uprooted
trees. Wave action on the ocean side of the Spanish Harbor Bridge washed out a portion of
the approach road and exposed about 250 feet of 24-inch transmission main (subsequently
relocated to the roadway). As a private non-profit entity, FKAA was eligible to receive
$1.69 million in federal disaster assistance. The assistance was used to rehabilitate damaged
facilities.
All new or replaced pump stations are built above the estimate storm surge level of 14 feet
above mean seal level. Other new structures are hardened to help withstand storm damage
and protection operational capacity. An existing transmission station was retrofit with
floodproofed doors.
Private water wells that draw from shallow freshwater sources can be contaminated by
flooding, whether from storm surge or ponded runoff. A number were contaminated by
floodwaters in Hurricane Georges, especially on Big Pine Key, where it appears that flooded
septic tanks, cesspools and drain fields overflowed. After that event the South Florida
Water Management District provided funding to the FKAA to install distribution mains to
homes on Big Pine Key that had wells contaminated by the tidal surge. The project also
supported environmental objectives related to the Key Deer, and endangered species, by
reducing withdrawals from the fresh water lens.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-26
Hurricane Wilma:
In its 2007 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, the FKAA
reported having sustained no significant infrastructure damage and there were no
interruptions of service.
5.6.5 Electric Power
Electric power is supplied by Florida Keys Electric Cooperative (FKEC) from the Upper
Keys to Marathon, and by Keys Energy Service (KEYS) from Sunshine Key to Key West.
The two agencies cooperate to provide the best service for the area. Both utilities purchase
power from larger suppliers.
Keys Energy Service has the capability to generate electricity at its plant in Key West. The
FKEC has limited generating capability at its Marathon Plant. With the exception of the
private community of Ocean Reef in North Key Largo, the majority of electric lines in the
county are above-ground. Due to vulnerability, power poles are not located on bridges but
are submerged. Subsequent to Hurricane Andrew, some poles were re-designed to
withstand higher wind forces. Both electric utilities have replaced older equipment with
newer, more resilient designs and materials.
Hurricane Andrew:
power or on limited power for approximately two weeks. The Florida Keys Electric
Cooperative reported a $130,000 loss of utility poles and related infrastructure. A report by
the Florida Sea Grant Program identified lack of power as one the most significant factors
affecting businesses and, while such damage was difficult to quantify in a monetary sense,
Hurricane Georges:
The Lower Keys experienced significant disruption of electric power.
Damage to transformers, power poles, and transmission lines was responsible for
widespread power outages, especially in areas serviced by Keys Energy Service. Power was
restored on a priority basis with efforts directed at hospitals and critical services. Most
electricity was reestablished within two weeks; however, as with most disasters, restoration
in the hardest hit areas progressed more slowly. Power outages created major economic loss
to Key businesses that are heavily dependent on the tourist trade. Disaster related
unemployment, primarily due to the lack of electricity was significant because of loss of
jobs in the service industry.
Hurricane Wilma:
Florida Keys Electric Cooperative (FKEC)
reported that its power
transmission system sustained no damage and was able to transmit power
immediately after Hurricane Wilma. The power distribution system sustained
moderate damage, with repair costs totaling $712,500. Damage was sustained
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-27
by the land-based portion of the distribution system (downed primary taps,
broken poles, transformer failures) and by the Channel Five water crossing,
where severe winds caused disconnection of the wires. Overall, FKEC
assessed that its power distribution and power transmission systems held up
well, with limited outage.
Keys Energy Services (KEYS)
, in the Lower Florida Keys, experienced only
moderate damage to its system. The utility had very minor damage to the
main transmission 138kV line from the mainland power grid. In the
distribution system, 68 utility poles failed (less than 0.5% of all poles).
Seventy eight (78%) of customers had service restored within 24 hours.
reestablished. Power was re
and contractors. Approximately 112 outside crews and supporting staff
assisted KEYS in the restoration efforts. Total damage was approximate $3.6
million, with impacts to transmission, distribution, generation, and other
support building locations. Even though Hurricane Wilma was a major flood
event, KEYS experienced minimal damage to its underground lines.
Hurricane Isaac
:
Florida Keys Electric Cooperative:
FKEC reported no damage to its
transmission system and minimal damage to the distribution system. Total
incurred costs of $30,000 were for labor to respond and correct small
outages resulting from blown fuses on transformers and lateral taps when
trees and debris affected distribution lines. All outages were corrected
within a few hours.
Keys Energy Services
. KEYS) reported no significant issues on the
primary system, with several service drops caused by trees and vegetation.
Only one pole required replacement.
5.6.6 Wastewater Facilities
Hurricane Georges:
wastewater facilities were surveyed in the two weeks following the storm. All regional
facilities remained functional throughout the event, including facilities in Key West and Key
Colony Beach. Approximately 250 package treatment plants are located throughout the
County to serve such uses as motel, mobile home and RV parks, restaurants, and others.
The loss of power to these small package plants did not result in overflows. While power
was being restored, to prevent health and safety problems sewage was hauled away from
these small collection systems.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-28
5.6.7 The Economy, Tax Base and Major Employers
Disruption of the local economy is an anticipated consequence of hurricanes that directly
affect the Florida Keys. Although major storms may generate debris and cause building and
infrastructure damage, the most detrimental short-term impact of large and small storms is
caused by the loss of electric power. The most significant long-term impact would be
caused by major damage to U.S. 1. Lengthy repairs and limited easy access to the Florida
Keys would directly affect tourism and the flow of goods.
The Florida Keys are susceptible to economic disruption because the primary industries are
related to retail sales, service, tourism, and fishing. Events that cause visitors to stay away
would result in economic loss to local businesses and loss of tax income to local
governments. Visitors lodging the Florida Keys are charged 12.5% in tax which raises an
approximate $4.5 million annually for the county. The 2013 Monroe County Tourist
funds raised from the lodging tax support a
variety of events and festivals that attract visitors. A major hurricane event would have a
significant impact on lodging and the County would lose an important source of revenue for
a period of time. The fishing industry would suffer economically with loss of power (affects
ice production) and transportation disruption (affects transport to the mainland). If a major
hurricane event does strike the Florida Keys, the perception of damage to the area may keep
potential visitors away longer than the time needed to repair lodging and visitor attractions.
With a relatively high percentage of retirees in the area, interruption in government services
that provide social security, disability, unemployment, and welfare payments would result in
some economic impacts.
damage and loss to residential properties can lead to displacement of people. Decrease in
population means loss of clientele for local businesses. Businesses themselves may be
destroyed or damaged to the degree that they cannot operate (whether short- or long-term).
Even without initial major population relocation, business closings can contribute to reduced
services, leading some to relocate in the short-term. Business closings and destruction or
severe damage of facilities like schools, libraries, and other public buildings may eliminate
jobs (even in the short-term) may lead some people to leave the area.
Since 1998, the Florida Keys Employment and Training Council has noted the significance
of disasters on employee dislocation, unemployment, and underemployment. Because of the
nature of the economy and the severe shortage of affordable housing, many employees do
not have a stable economic base. Even a minor interruption in business may have serious
effects on the work force. Given the already short supply of housing, another complicating
factor is the likely reduction in the housing supply due to damage.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-29
Hurricane Andrew and Hurricane Georges:
Both Hurricane Andrew and Hurricane
Georges caused economic disruption in Monroe County, primarily due to the interruption of
tourism. In addition, the fishing industry was hard hit due to the loss of many seafood traps,
lack of ice for storage, and transportation disruption. Loss of power disrupted not only
hospitality and retail businesses, but affected gas stations that could not pump and were slow
to receive fuel because of transportation disruptions. The loss of more than 80 channel
markers throughout the Keys curtailed boating and caused the suspension of cruise ship
visits. In addition, the County and municipal governments were affected by a reduction in
sales, infrastructure, and bed tax revenues immediately after the storm, resulting from
business slow-downs.
Hurricane Wilma:
It has been reported that a number of permanent residents moved out of
the area after flooding rendered at-grade dwelling units uninhabitable. Because affordable
housing is limited throughout the Keys, the damage to those living units has an adverse
impact on an already difficult housing market which makes it more difficult for low income
residents and, in turn, affects the available work force.
5.6.8 Public Health Considerations
Extended exposure of buildings to floodwaters can cause mold growth which thrives in
moist conditions. If mold growth is not treated properly it can cause serious health
conditions, especially in people with breathing difficulty. The most common type of
flooding in Monroe County is saltwater flooding from storm surge. Saturation of building
materials and contents can cause mold growth just like freshwater. All flooded materials
must be dried thoroughly after a storm to reduce the chance of mold growth and protect the
health of occupants.
5.6.9 Environmental Resources and Natural Functions of the Floodplain
After Hurricane Andrew in 1992, the Monroe County Cooperative Extension Service
ect of Hurricane
rocklands, hard wood hammocks, mangrove forests, cypress domes, the freshwater regimes
The study notes that although South Florida ecosystems have evolved to adapt to natural
episodic massive disturbances, including hurricanes, droughts, wildfires, and freezes, the
growth of urban environments has significantly altered the ecology and ability of the
ecosystems to respond and recover from catastrophic events. The floodplains in the Florida
Keys are different from the typical floodplain in the United States as they are all related to
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-30
coastal flooding on smaller islands. Much of the land mass in the Keys is mapped flood
hazard area.
Mangroves are very important to the environment of the Keys and serve as protective
buffers in storms. Hurricane Andrew damaged the mangroves in Everglades National Park
as severely as 80-ced
more limited defoliation and branch damage. The study demonstrated that trees continue to
suffer after the passage of a storm; initial estimates of mortality eventually were increased
by up to 50%. Delayed mortality has been observed following past hurricanes, sometimes
up to 2 years after the initial event.
Marsh Communities appeared to have survived Hurricane Andrew with little apparent
damage, although the loss of periphyton
growth. Hardwood hammocks are more susceptible to wind damage than pines. In North
Key Largo, Hurricane Andrew damaged about two-thirds of the upland hardwood hammock
trees.
Because Hurricane Andrew came ashore north of Monroe County, the Florida Keys reefs,
including those in the Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary, were spared the affects of
hurricane force conditions. Hurricanes can cause major damage to coral reefs; in past
surveys in Puerto Rico, it was found that major hurricanes leave behind considerable breaks
in coral formations.
Hurricanes can have a variety of impacts on fishery resources, including short-term and
long-term impacts that are detected only after extended monitoring. After Hurricane
Andrew, three species appeared to experience harvest declines in 1992 and 1993: Spanish
Mackerel, Dolphin, and Spiny Lobster. In addition, there was a consistent decline in shrimp
following the storm, but catches increased in the following year.
A survey of the commercial fishing industry after Hurricane Andrew, found that 53% of 43
survey respondents reported adverse impacts, primarily in the lobster industry because the
storm occurred during the lobster season. The industry experienced inventory loss (virtually
all 1 million traps were in the water), disruption of utilities (electric power to make ice),
communications (for sales transactions), and transportation.
Overall, hurricanes are necessary and natural occurrences for the historical maintenance of
the natural environment of the Florida Keys. Although Hurricane Andrew caused a
natural resources, the event pointed out opportunities to mitigate the impacts on the industry.
In particular, restoration of power is a high priority.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-31
Hurricane Wilma:
Hurricane Wilma, particularly its storm surge, severely damaged pine
rocklands throughout the Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuges. Virtually all pines on
Cudjoe Key were killed, with high mortality of both young and mature trees on Big Pine,
Sugarloaf, and Little Pine Keys.
attacked and killed significant numbers of the surviving pines on Big Pine Key. Recovery
of the pinelands will be protracted and on Cudjoe Key especially, recovery is far from
assured.
All backcountry islands in Great White Heron and Key West National Wildlife Refuges
were severely damaged by Hurricane Wilma, with both wind and storm surge exacting a
toll. Virtually all vegetation was either defoliated or killed. Little Crane Key was nearly
obliterated, with only a few isolated trees left standing. As of late 2009, most backcountry
islands are on the way to recovery.
A noteworthy large sand island near Boca Grande Key was created by Hurricane Wilma. In
the 2006 and 2007 seasons the site harbored nesting roseate terns, the first known nesting by
this species in Key West National Wildlife Refuge. Fifty-four bird species, including 4
federally listed species, have been observed at the site. The island has progressively shrunk
due to erosion and is now less than 10% of its original size.
5.6.10 Historic Resources
Monroe County has many historic structures that are listed on the State and National
Registers of Historic Places. These structures are owned by the State, the County, and
private owners. Many historic properties, especially in Key West, attract many visitors.
In recent years, properties and sites that are listed on the National Register of Historic Places
have not sustained major damage because the Keys have not had any landfalling major
hurricanes. The Old Monroe County Courthouse, a state-owned building, has suffered wind
Old Key West City Hall with motorized hurricane shutters. In 2005, flooding associated
with Hurricane Wilma the entire ground floor of the
Old Key West City Hall, destroying all of the doors. The tenant abandoned the space
because the saturated interior led to mold growth. Repair work was completed in January
2009: all old finishes were removed, mold was remediated, and retaining walls and impact
windows were used to infill the large arched openings. The total cost of repairs was
approximately $350,000. The Key West Arts & Historical Society operates three historic
sites. During the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons, each site suffered significant damage:
The Custom House Museum (State owned). During Hurricane Wilma, the
basement was flooded, damaging all of the fire protection and electrical
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-32
equipment. The roof and winds were damaged by wind and water intrusion
contributed to interior damage.
During Hurricane Wilma, windows and shutters were damaged by wind. The
fence has deteriorated because of inundation.
Fort East Martello, located near the airport, is flooded during most hurricanes,
affecting the interior courtyard and the citadel. In Hurricane Wilma,
floodwaters destroyed the massive front doors and damaged the gift shop.
5.6.11 Hazard Profile Summary
Table 5-
Table 5-18. Hazard Profile Summary Hurricane/Tropical Storm
Jurisdiction Vulnerability Impact Extent / Frequency Distribution
Magnitude / Location
Monroe County High Moderate Medium to 1-2 every 3 Countywide
to Severe Large years
Key West High Moderate Medium to 1-2 every 5 Citywide
to Severe Large years
Islamorada High Moderate Medium to 1-2 every 5 Village-wide
to Severe Large years
Marathon High Moderate Medium to 1-2 every 5 Citywide
to Severe Large years
Key Colony Beach High Moderate Medium to 1-2 every 5 Citywide
to Severe Large years
Layton High Moderate Medium to 1-2 every 5 Citywide
to Severe Large years
5.7 Climate Change and Sea Level Rise
Sea level rise, associated with climate change is a phenomenon resulting from a consistent
ultimately alter weather patterns with subsequent atmospheric and hydrologic impacts. The
melting of ice at the polar ice caps is predicted to cause a worldwide increase in sea level.
While there is still debate on the degree of the impact, the evidence is clear that a trend is
occurring and sea levels have been rising for the better part of the 20th century and into the
21st century, as acknowledged by the Monroe County Climate Action Plan.
The NOAA Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS) in Key
West maintains the longest running tidal gauge in the western hemisphere (established on
January 18, 1913). Data from a tidal gauge used by CO-OPS (Figure 5-3) shows the
monthly mean sea level without the regular seasonal fluctuations due to coastal ocean
temperatures, salinities, winds, atmospheric pressures, and ocean currents. The long-term
linear trend, including its 95% confidence interval, shows a steady increase in sea level rise.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-33
Figure 5-3. CO-OPS Mean Sea Level Trend from http://co-
ops.nos.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends_station.shtml?stnid=8724580.
Sea level rise and climate change also affect atmospheric and hydrologic patterns which in
turn impact other hazards like inland flood (increased rainfall periods), drought (decreased
rainfall periods), and wildfire (exacerbated by vegetative fuel growth in periods of higher
rainfall and then greater burn risk in drier periods).
An article from
South Florida
change, particularly global warming, for the Atlantic Ocean basin, including:
Decrease in the number of tropical storms and hurricanes from 6 to 34% (due
to increased wind shear over the Atlantic basin)
Increase in the wind intensity of the hurricanes from 2 to 11%
Increase in the height and strength of hurricane storm surge (due to higher sea
level and wind intensity)
Rainfall increases of up to 20% within 60 miles of tropical storms and
hurricanes
At this time, there is no indication of large alterations of historical storm origin
and tracks so South Florida, including Monroe County continues to be a target
of high probability
More extreme drought cycles which also increase the risk of wildfire
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-34
The Monroe County Working Group recognizes there is no need for this LMS Update to go
into the details of what is causing climate change; rather it is necessary to focus on the
impacts of sea level rise on storm surge and coastal flooding and consider mitigation
strategies accordingly. The 2011 SFWMD report states that, according to measurable
changes in its coastal water control structures, sea level rise has already occurred. For
example, in mainland South Florida, a majority of the coastal water control infrastructure
managed by the SFWMD was constructed between 1950 and 1960. The Standard Flood
design criteria used by the District for many of these structures assumes a headwater -
tailwater differential of 6 inches. Due to the fact that several of these structures now have
their discharge controlled by the tide (a rise in mean tailwater elevation), and what has been
measured by tide gauges, then from the period 1950 to 2010, approximately 5.5 inches of
sea level rise has occurred. Overall the report states that the sea level in Florida has risen
about 9 inches over the past century.
As a coastal county, the impact of sea level rise on Monroe County has the potential to be
1
high to severe in the long term. The Southeast Florida Climate Change Regional Compact
has outlined three
-
2070); a 2 foot rise (estimated between 2060-2115); and a 3 foot rise (estimated between
2078-2115 (see Figures 5-4a through 4f at the end of this section). The overlaps in time
periods between the 3 scenarios are due to the uncertainty in making these types of
projections. These scenarios have been adopted by the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners as guidance for the Climate Change Advisory Committee in their
determinations of potential sea level rise impacts.
The SFWMD report states that the main concerns with sea level rise for Monroe County are
the following:
Saltwater intrusion into coastal aquifers and a diminishing of fresh
groundwater which negatively impacts the public water supply including
Monroe County, which gets its drinking water from Miami-Dade County
Increased tropical storm and hurricane surge levels
More frequent coastal flooding and some inundation of coastal real estate by
marine water
1
The Southeast Florida Regional Climate Change Compact was signed by Broward, Miami-Dade, Monroe, and Palm Beach
Counties in January 2010 to coordinate climate mitigation and adaptation activities across county lines.
(http://southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org/ ).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-35
(in the process of
being updated) reported the following impacts to Monroe County:
68% (44,885 ac
vulnerable at the one foot scenario
Military and residential conservation land uses were impacted in the early
scenarios (1 to 2 ft rise)
The two airports in the Keys (Key West and Marathon) are at risk in the one
foot scenario with Key West being most prominent
6% of evacuation routes are impacted at the one foot scenario with a doubling
of the percentage at each additional scenario
Hospitals, schools and emergency shelters will all be impacted
In the November 2013 Monroe County Climate Action Plan, additional impacts to the
County were described. With a warmer atmosphere and ocean, hurricane frequency in the
Atlantic Ocean is expected to decrease but the intensity of hurricanes is expected to
2
increase
scenario was developed by Monroe County GIS staff and provided the following analysis of
vulnerability of households, businesses and county infrastructure in three sea level rise
scenarios:
There is a greater than 75% certainty the 6.82% of developed land would be
impacted by a one foot rise in sea level.
With a two foot rise, the impact increases to 14.19% of the developed land would be
vulnerable.
The three foot rise scenario shows impacts to 28.58% of infrastructure and developed
land.
In summary, the inundation models show that the cost of inaction would be tremendous. A
series of Sea Level Inundation Maps from Monroe County Climate Action Plan covers the
Keys. Pink color shows the areas that have 75-
increase are part of the plan and available. All maps are available at http://fl-
monroecounty.civicplus.com/index.aspx?NID=543
Local impacts related to climate change, especially sea level rise, are already occurring.
Critical public infrastructure including beaches, roadways and especially storm water
drainage treatment and conveyance systems have already begun to show vulnerabilities to
the current rate of rise of sea level, extreme rainfall and seasonal high tides. Coastal
Knutson, T. R., and others. 2010. Tropical cyclones and climate change. Nature Geoscience 3:157-163.
2
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-36
communities throughout Florida, including Monroe County, have begun to seek
infrastructure improvements to address mounting drainage concerns. The predicted
accelerated rate of sea level rise will further exacerbate the impact of saltwater intrusion on
drinking water sources and on coastal habitats. Climate-related challenges currently exist
suggesting action to address these issues is needed immediately. The LMS WG will seek
goals as hazard mitigation.
5.7.1 Hazard Profile Summary
Table 5-
Table 5-19. Hazard Profile Summary Sea Level Rise
Jurisdiction Vulnerability Impact Frequency
Extent / Distribution/
Magnitude Location
Monroe County Medium Moderate Small Continuously Coastal and
to Severe increasing low-lying
over long-areas
term
Key West Medium Moderate Small Continuously Coastal and
to Severe increasing low-lying
over long-areas
term
Islamorada Medium Moderate Small Continuously Coastal and
to Severe increasing low-lying
over long-areas
term
Marathon Medium Moderate Small Continuously Coastal and
to Severe increasing low-lying
over long-areas
term
Moderate Continuously Coastal and
Key Colony Beach Medium Small
to Severe increasing low-lying
over long-areas
term
Moderate Continuously Coastal and
Layton Medium Small
to Severe increasing low-lying
over long-areas
term
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-37
Figures 5-4a 4b. Estimated Sea Level Rise Impacts.
Figures 5-4c. Estimated Sea Level Rise Impacts.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-38
Figures 5-4d 4e. Estimated Sea Level Rise Impacts.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-39
Figures 5-4f. Estimated Sea Level Rise Impacts.
5.8 2015 Updates
The LMS Working Group reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more
significant changes include:
Section 5-1: Added Table 5-1 which describes hazards that are excluded
from further examination; updated Presidential disaster declarations.
Section 5.2.1: Added new section to describe future flooding conditions.
Section 5.2.2: Added overall SFHA map and when new FIRMs will be
prepared.
Section 5.2.3: Updated Repetitive Loss Property information.
Section 5.3: Added population affected by coastal flooding and deleted
probable storm tide ranges; updated historical storm tracks map; added
description of Tropical Storm Isaac.
Section 5.5: Added data on recovery costs for Hurricanes Isaac.
Section 5.6: Added Hazus loss estimation for hurricane wind and
hurricane surge/wind combination; deleted TAOS information; updated
summary of impacts of hurricanes in Monroe County; in several
subsections, added description of impacts of Hurricane Isaac.
Section 5.6.2: Added warning and evacuation procedures.
Section 5.6.7: Added information on impacts of hurricanes to tourism.
Section 5.6.8: Added new section on public health considerations.
Section 5.6.9: Added information on impacts of hurricanes to natural
functions of the floodplain.
Section 5.7: New section on climate change and sea level rise.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 5-40
Chapter 6: Other Hazards & Risks
6.1 Introduction
Hurricanes and tropical storms pose major risks to Monroe County due to high winds and
flooding (the effects of those storms are addressed in Chapter 5). Other natural hazards
addressed in this chapter that affect the area to a lesser degree are high winds other than
hurricane (severe storms/tornadoes), rainfall flooding, drought, wildland fires, and coastal
erosion. These hazards are not profiled with the same degree of detail as hurricanes/tropical
storms because they do not represent the same level of risk and do not threaten large areas
nor affect many people. This is reflected in the summary table at the end of the chapter that
identifies the relative vulnerability. As described in the following sections:
Strong storms, including tornadoes and water spouts can equally affect the
entire county. As with hurricanes and tropical storms, all types buildings are
exposed to the effects of winds, with those that pre-date building code
requirements somewhat more vulnerable than more recent buildings (Section
6.2);
Rainfall pooling and occasional flooding of depressed areas occurs locally in
Marathon and Key West, without severe property damage (Section 6.3);
Drought affects the entire county, is managed by the water providers, and does
not result in property damage (Section 6.4);
Wildland fire risk is very localized, has affected only small areas in the past,
the impacts are limited because of effective response capabilities (Section 6.5);
and
Coastal erosion areas have been identified only in a state study; there is
insufficient reported evidence that many private properties with buildings are
experiencing significant erosion (Section 6.6).
Numerous federal agencies maintain a variety of records regarding losses associated with
natural hazards. Unfortunately, no single source is considered to offer a definitive
accounting of all losses. The Federal Emergency Management Agency maintains records on
federal expenditures associated with declared major disasters. The National Climatic Data
Center (NCDC) of the National Oceanographic & Atmospheric Administration collects and
maintains certain data in summary format, indicating injuries, deaths, and costs, although the
basis of the cost estimates is not identified and the reports are not independently verified
(http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/severeweather/extremes.html).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-1
6.2 Strong Storms, Including Tornadoes & Water
1
Spouts
strong
characteristics: high winds (including tornadoes), heavy rainfall, lightning, and hail.
Generally, thunderstorms form on warm-season afternoons and are local in effect. Storms
that form in association with a cold front or other regional-scaled atmospheric disturbance
can become severe, thereby producing strong winds, frequent lightning, hail, downbursts
and even tornadoes. Strong storms are equally likely to occur through the entire extent of
Monroe County.
Of the estimated 100,000 thunderstorms that occur each year in the U.S., only about 10% are
classified as severe (produces hail at least 1 inch in diameter, winds of at least 58 miles per
hour, or tornadoes). In Monroe County, most strong storms generally do not cause property
damage unless the storm spawns a tornado.
Strong storms generally produce lightning, which kills more people in Florida, on average,
than any other weather related phenomenon. Lightning is defined as a sudden and violent
discharge of electricity from within a thunderstorm due to a difference in electrical charges
and represents a flow of electrical current from cloud-to-cloud or cloud-to-ground.
Nationally, lightning causes extensive damage to buildings and structures, kills or injures
people and livestock, starts many forest fires and wildfires, and disrupts electromagnetic
transmissions.
High winds associated with strong storms other than tornadoes, can cause significant
property and crop damage, threaten public safety and disrupt utilities and communications.
Straight-line winds are generally any wind not associated with rotation and in rare cases can
exceed 100 miles per hour (mph). The National Weather Service defines high winds as
sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for one hour or longer, or winds of 58
mph or greater for any duration. High winds are often produced by super-cell thunderstorms
or a line of thunderstorms that typically develop on hot and humid days.
th
Figure 6-1a and Figure 6-1b shows Figure 1609A and Figure 1609B from the 5 Edition
Florida Building Code. These figures
Category II buildings and Risk Category III and IV buildings, respectively. These wind
speeds are used to design buildings to withstand reasonably anticipated winds in order to
minimize property damage. In Monroe County, the ultimate design wind speed for most
buildings (Risk Category II) ranges from 170 to more than 180 miles per hour (3-second
gust measured at 33 feet above the ground). A probability or recurrence interval is not
assigned to the ultimate design wind speeds. The structures that are most vulnerable to high
1 The Monroe County LMS Working Group gratefully acknowledges the contributions to this section in 2010 by Andrew
Devanas, Science and Operations Officer, National Weather Service Office in Key West, FL.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-2
winds are mobile/manufactured homes and recreational vehicles. See Section 2.4 for a
description of the more significant Florida amendments to the International Codes that
pertain to the design of buildings with respect to wind loads. Data from the Monroe County
Property Appraiser (see Section 5.5.1) indicates there are approximately 5,600
mobile/manufactured home units.
Figure 6-1a. Ultimate Design Wind Speeds for Risk Category II Buildings (5 th Edition FBC).
Figure 6-1b. Ultimate Design Wind Speeds for Risk Category III and IV Buildings (5 th Edition
FBC).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-3
A tornado is a relatively short-lived storm composed of an intense rotating column of air,
extending from a thunderstorm cloud system. Tornadoes may be spawned from storm
systems associated with hurricanes and tropical storms. Average winds in a tornado,
although never accurately measured, are thought to range between 100 and 200 miles per
hour; extreme tornadoes may have winds exceeding 300 miles per hour. The Enhanced
Fujita Scale, Table 6-1, classifies tornadoes by wind speed and is accompanied by a series of
28 damage indicators (http://www.spc.noaa.gov/efscale/ef-scale.html).
A water spout is a violently rotating column of air over water, often spawned from a strong
or severe thunderstorm. Water spouts that come ashore are classified as tornadoes.
Fortunately, most water spouts dissipate over water and do not result in many deaths or
serious injuries. However, over water they are a threat to marine interests. According to the
Storm Events Database of the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), there have been 183
water spouts reported for Monroe County from 1950-2014.
Table 6-1. Enhanced
Fujita Scale
3-Second Gust
Scale (miles per hour)
EF-0 65 to 85
EF-1 86 to 110
EF-2 111 to 135
EF-3 136 to 165
EF-4 166 to 200
EF-5 Over 200
On the U.S. mainland, tornado paths range from a few feet long to as long as 300 miles.
Path widths average 300-400 yards, but severe tornadoes have cut swaths a mile or more in
width, or have formed groups of two or three funnels traveling together. On the average,
tornadoes move over land at speeds between 25 and 45 miles per hour, but speeds of up to
70 miles per hour have been reported. Tornadoes rarely linger more than a few minutes over
a single spot or more than 15-20 minutes in a 10-mile area, but their short periods of
existence do not limit the devastation. The destructive power of the tornado results
primarily from its high wind velocities, sudden changes in pressure, and windborne debris.
Since tornadoes are generally associated with severe storm systems, they are often
accompanied by hail, torrential rain and intense lightning. Depending on intensity,
tornadoes can uproot trees, bring down power lines and destroy buildings.
Hail is also associated with thunderstorms and other such strong storms. It forms when
updrafts carry raindrops into extremely cold areas of the atmosphere where they freeze into
ice. Hail falls when it becomes heavy enough to overcome the strength of the updraft and is
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-4
pulled by gravity towards the earth. Hailstorms cause damage to cars, structures and other
types of property, as well as crops and livestock, and in rare cases to humans.
Strong Storm, Water Spouts &Tornado/Lightning Experience and Probability
Tornadoes and Water Spouts
Most tornado deaths in Florida occur during the fall, winter, and spring seasons when
stronger dynamics are present in the atmosphere capable of producing
According to the National Weather Service
Weather Forecast Office in Key West, there is an equal likelihood of any one area in the
Florida Keys being impacted by a tornado. This demonstrates that the low-lying terrain and
narrow islands do not appreciably slow onshore winds, nor does the topography and
configuration of the islands favor tornado development in any specific area.
Half of tornadoes in Florida occur in the summer months from May through August, but
only less than 10% of tornado-related deaths happen during this period of time. Most
tornado deaths occur during seasons when stronger atmospheric dynamics may produce
supercell/mesocyclone thunderstorms. Figure 6-2 shows the previous tornado occurrences
in the State by F-scale (count). Monroe County is slightly above the state average, having
experienced between 44 to 70 tornadoes during the 50 year period between 1960 and 2010.
The State Hazard Mitigation Plan (2013) identifies Monroe County as likely to experience
2 to 3.5 severe storms per year, including hail, thunderstorms and tornadoes. The northern
part of mainland Monroe County is expected to have a higher frequency of severe storms,
about 3.5 to 9.5 storms every year.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-5
Figure 6-2. Tornado Previous Occurrences (Figure 3.19 from 2013 State Plan)
Table 6-2 summarizes tornadoes (by scale) that affected Monroe County from 1959 to 2014
and Table 6-3 lists detail on tornadoes that hit the area between 1998 and mid-2014 using
National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) data. Based on these previous occurrences, at least
one tornado of magnitude EF-0 and EF-1 is expected to occur somewhere in Monroe County
in any given year. The largest expected extent (magnitude) tornado is expected to be EF-2,
likely to occur on average every 9 to 10 years. During the 60 year span reflected in the two
tables:
A tornado of intensity EF-0 or EF-1 occurs, on average, about once each year;
and
EF-2 tornadoes, much rarer with only 6 reported associated with two
hurricanes, caused most injuries and considerably more property damage.
More intense tornadoes appear unlikely.
Table 6-2. Tornadoes (by scale): 1959 - 2014
Fujita # Tornadoes Cumulative Damage
Scale Reported Deaths Injuries (not adjusted)
F-0 35 0 5 More than $5 million
F-1 15 0 0 More than $30 million
F-2 6 0 71 More than $55 million
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-6
Table 6-3 (by community). Tornadoes: 1998 2014
Location Fujita
Affected Date Scale Deaths Injuries Damage
Marathon February 1998 F-1 0 0 $20,000
Islamorada February 1998 F-0 0 0
Key West June 1998 F-0 0 0 $15,000
Islamorada November 1998 F-1 0 0 $100,000
Rock Harbor November 1998 F-2 0 0 $50,000
Key Largo November 1998 F-2 0 20 $25 mil
Key West May 1999 F-0 0 0
Rick Harbor September 1999 F-0 0 0
Craig Key October 1999 F-1 0 0
Key West October 2000 F-0 0 0
Big Pine Key July 2000 F-0 0 0 $15,000
Big Pine Key August 2000 F-0 0 0
Key West October 2003 F-0 0 0
Marathon June 2005 F-0 0 0 $5,000
Marathon August 2005 F-2 0 0 $5 mil
Sugarloaf Key June 2007 F-0 0 0 $20,000
Marathon June 2007 F-0 0 0 $3,000
Marathon February 2008 F-0 0 0 $2,000
Big Coppit Is August 2008 F-0 0 0 $1,000
Summerland Key August 2008 F-0 0 0 $1,000
Upper Key Largo September 2008 F-0 0 0 $25,000
Craig Key September 2008 F-1 0 0 $120,000
Sugar Loaf Key September 2008 F-0 0 0 0
Stock Island September 2008 F-0 0 0 0
Key Largo August 2010 EF-0 0 0 $500
Big Pine Key April 2013 EF-0 0 0 $30,000
Source: NCDC online
NCDC provides a listing of reported water spouts from the years 1996 to 2001. As there are
183 reported sightings and none of them caused injuries, death or property damage, the ones
from 1996 to 1998 are displayed in Table 6-4 to show the general frequency of these events.
Sightings on the same day were combined into one row for space considerations.
Table 6-4. Water Spouts (by community): 1996 1998
Injuries/
Location Affected Date(s) Deaths Damage
Key West International Airport 05/01/1996 0 $0
East Cape 06/21/1996 0 $0
Long Key 08/04/1996 0 $0
Key West International Airport 08/17/1996 0 $0
Key Largo 08/24/1996 0 $0
Key West International Airport 08/28/1996 0 $0
Big Pine Key 08/30/1996 0 $0
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-7
Table 6-4. Water Spouts (by community): 1996 1998
Injuries/
Location Affected Date(s) Deaths Damage
Key West International Airport 09/07/1996 0 $0
Key Largo & Key West International Airport 09/15/1996 0 $0
Key West International Airport 09/19/1996 0 $0
6NM SE of Key West Airport 03/05/1997 0 $0
S of 7 Mile Bridge 03/14/1997 0 $0
5 NM N of Key West Airport 04/10/1997 0 $0
5N of Duck Key 05/17/1997 0 $0
Just South of Summerland Key 05/22/1997 0 $0
3 NM S MM 84.5, 4 NM SW Cape Sable,
05/23/1997 0 $0
10NM SW Everglades City, Just NW of Key
West Airport
Marathon 06/11/1997 0 $0
East Cape 06/22/1997 0 $0
Craig Key 07/06/1997 0 $0
Key West International Airport 07/11/1997 0 $0
Key West International Airport 07/12/1997 0 $0
Marathon 07/13/1997 0 $0
Key West International Airport 07/15/1997, 0 $0
07/18/1997,
07/19/1997
Duck Key 07/20/1997 0 $0
08/01/1997,
Key West International Airport 0 $0
08/04/1997
Duck Key, Key West International Airport 08/09/1997 0 $0
Flamingo 08/10/1997 0 $0
Tavernier 08/14/1997 0 $0
Key West International Airport 08/16/1997 0 $0
Big Pine Key 08/17/1997 0 $0
Marathon 08/19/1997 0 $0
Marathon, Key West International Airport 08/23/1997 0 $0
Marathon 08/24/1997 0 $0
Long Key 08/30/1997 0 $0
Duck Key 08/31/1997 0 $0
Key West International Airport 09/06/1997 0 $0
Key West International Airport 09/10/1997 0 $0
Key West NAS, Big Pine Key 09/11/1997 0 $0
Key West 09/14/1997 0 $0
Duck Key, Key West Airport 09/15/1997 0 $0
Long Key, Key West Airport 09/16/1997 0 $0
Key West 09/19/1997 0 $0
Key West International Airport 10/02/1997 0 $0
Flamingo 10/18/1997 0 $0
Marathon 04/04/1998 0 $0
Big Coppit Key 05/29/1998 0 $0
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-8
Table 6-4. Water Spouts (by community): 1996 1998
Injuries/
Location Affected Date(s) Deaths Damage
Flamingo 05/31/1998 0 $0
06/08/1998,
Key West 0 $0
06/18/1998,
07/10/1998,
07/14/1998
Big Pine Key, Key West Airport 07/26/1998 0 $0
07/30/1998,
Key West 0 $0
07/31/1998,
08/06/1998
Duck Key 08/08/1998 0 $0
Key West 08/09/1998, 0 $0
08/10/1998
Key West International Airport 08/23/1998 0 $0
Key West International Airport 09/05/1998 0 $0
Ocean Reef 09/24/1998 0 $0
Duck Key 10/10/1998 0 $0
Key West International Airport 10/12/1998 0 $0
Duck Key and Key West Airport 10/13/1998 0 $0
Key West International Airport 10/14/1998 0 $0
For complete listing of NCDC water spout events in Monroe County, see
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/listevents.jsp?eventType=%28Z%29+Waterspout&begin
Date_mm=04&beginDate_dd=01&beginDate_yyyy=1950&endDate_mm=04&endDate_dd=30&en
dDate_yyyy=2015&county=MONROE%3A87&hailfilter=0.00&tornfilter=0&windfilter=000&sort=DT
&submitbutton=Search&statefips=12%2CFLORIDA
Source: NCDC online
Water spouts occur frequently in Monroe County but generally stay over water and typically
not a threat to any development on land. Boaters and people involved in marine activities are
advised to stay a considerable distance any observed water spout. The strength of water
spouts are not measured on a scale comparable to the Fujita scale and are generally not
expected to cause injury, death or damage in Monroe County.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-9
Lightning
Florida leads the nation in lightning deaths and injuries, with most occurring from May to
October (peaking in July). People near water appear to be at greater risk. Figure 6-3 shows
ranges of lightning occurrences by county and shows that Monroe County is below the state
average, having experienced between 11 to 20 lightning events during the 50 year period
Figure 6-3. Lightning Previous Occurrences (Figure 3.22 from 2013 State Plan)
between 1960 and 2010. Monroe County can expect a lightning event to occur
approximately once in every 3 years. Because the Florida Keys are surrounded by water and
most tourism and recreation activities are water-based, lightning is a significant hazard
(Table 6-5).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-10
Table 6-5. Lightning Deaths/Injuries (1959-2014)
Date Death Injury Remarks
September 1959 0 1 Bridge tender
October 1962 0 1 Unknown
June 1974 1 0 Trash collector in vehicle
July 1976 1 1 Fishing boat
August 1980 1 0 Fishing from bridge
September 1982 1 1 Snorkeling
June 1983 1 0 Fishing from bridge
August 1986 0 1 Standing under tree
August 1990 0 1 Fishing from boat
July 1995 0 1 Police officer next to car
July 1997 0 1 Unknown
July 2000 0 1 Fishing boat
August 2001 0 1 Restaurant employee
July 2009 0 1 White St pier
June 2010 0 0 Big Pine tiki hut damaged
July 2012 0 0 Key West residence affected
Marathon - Bonefish Towers complex in
June 2013 0 0
Coco Plum experienced fire and
electrical damage
Stock Island Police officer on
June 2013 0 1
motorcycle got injured
Total 5 12
Average of 0.1 deaths and 0.2 injuries per year
1959-2009 data from NWS Warning Meteorologists, Miami & Key West
2010-2014 data from Storm Events database of the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
Hail and High Winds
Reported hail and high wind events in Monroe County are reported in Table 6-6 and Table
6-7. These events generally are associated with thunderstorms and other strong storms.
Monroe County can expect to have a hail event with the size of hail up to 1.75 inches (44.5
mm) every 10 years. This size hail corresponds approximately to a rating of H5 (which goes
up to H10) on the Torro Hailstorm Intensity Scale with types of damage typically described
Wholesale destruction of glass, damage to tiled roofs, significant risk of injuries.
Monroe County had nine reported high wind events from 1996 to 2015. The high wind
events corresponded with the categories of Gale (8), Strong Gale (9), and Storm (10) on the
every 5 years having experienced 3 such events in a 16 year period with property damage
ranging from no damage to approximately $25,000.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-11
Table 6-6. Reported Hail Damage (1950-2015)
Location Date Size of Property
Hail Damage
Monroe County 08/28/1983 1.75 inches $0
Upper Key Largo 02/25/1994 0.75 inches $0
Marathon 02/02/1998 1.75 inches $0
1.00 1.75
Key West International Airport 04/27/2003 $250
inches
Key Largo 06/13/2007 0.75 inches $0
Pinecrest 06/15/2012 0.88 inches $0
Total Reported Property Damage $250
*= Search for events started with 1950
1950-2015 data from Storm Events database of the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
Table 6-7. Reported High Winds Damage (1950-2015)*
Location Date
Wind Property
Speed Damage
Monroe/Middle Keys 01/07/1996 35 knots $5,000
(40 mph)
Monroe/Lower Keys 03/03/1996 N/R** $25,000
40 knots
Monroe/Lower Keys 02/02/1998 $0
(46 mph)
Monroe/Middle Keys 02/02/1998 40 knots $0
Monroe/Upper Keys 02/02/1998 40 knots $0
Mainland Monroe 02/02/1998 40 knots $0
44 knots
Monroe/Lower Keys 08/01/2001 $0
(51 mph)
Monroe/Middle Keys 08/30/2006 51 knots $0
(59 mph)
Monroe/Upper Keys 01/11/2012 52 knots $2,000
(60 mph)
Total Reported Property Damage $32,000
*= Search for events started with 1950
**=Not Reported
1950-2015 data from Storm Events database of the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)
Notable Storms
A significant non-
very strong winter storm that occurred from March 12-23, 1993. Moving from
wreaked havoc from Florida to New England. It brought heavy rains, wind, and coastal
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-12
flooding to the Southeast and blizzard-like conditions in the Northeast. When it was finally
over, the total damage estimates were over $800 million (over $200 million in Florida). The
Florida Keys experienced high winds and tides and substantial amounts of rainfall and the
County was among the 38 counties declared a Presidential disaster area.
A particularly active year was 1998.
touchdowns. Areas most affected were the Middle Keys including Grassy Key and Valhalla
Beach in the vicinity of Duck Key. Several buildings were damaged. Also significant
problems arose from the displacement of lobster traps which contributed to seaborne debris
and navigational problems. The fishing industry suffered considerable loss of income.
Another notable weather event occurred on July 4, 1998, when severe thunderstorms with
lightning and high winds came up quickly in the Middle Keys. The Key West Weather
th,
Service Office recorded sustained wind speeds up to 70 mph. Because it was July 4 many
boats were offshore celebrating and waiting for fireworks displays. One boat capsized,
resulting in a fatality. This storm did not prompt a major disaster declaration.
The most damaging tornadoes in 1998 were spawned by Tropical Storm Mitch on
November 4 and 5. Islamorada experienced an F-1 tornado, while Rock Harbor and Key
Largo were hit by F-2 tornadoes. One tornado moved at 30 mph, tearing down utility lines,
damaging boats, and damaging more than 600 structures, many of them were mobile homes.
Table 6-8 trong storms.
Table 6-8. Hazard Profile Summary Strong Storms/ Tornado/Lightning
Jurisdiction Vulnerability Impact Frequency
Extent / Distribution/
Magnitude Location
Monroe County Medium Moderate Small 1-2 per year Countywide
Key West Medium Moderate Small 1-2 per year Citywide
Islamorada Medium Moderate Small 1-2 per year Village-wide
Marathon Medium Moderate Small 1-2 per year Citywide
Key Colony Beach Medium Moderate Small 1-2 per year Citywide
Layton Medium Moderate Small 1-2 per year Citywide
6.3 Rainfall/Fresh Water Flooding
Rainfall/fresh water refers to water that collects on the ground surface due to flat topography
and poor drainage or where stormwater drainage systems are not sufficient to safely drain
runoff away. Some drainage system conveyance is disrupted by vegetation or other debris
that blocks inlets or pipes. Rainfall runoff may pond in low-lying areas, often in street
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-13
intersections, and may carry debris, chemicals, dirt, and other pollutants from impervious
surfaces.
Rainfall/fresh water flooding due to the accumulation of rainfall generally is not a problem
in most of Monroe County and the municipalities. Most of the rainfall runs off into the
surrounding seas. The rainfall which is caught in closed basins (depressed areas which
collect rainfall and rainfall runoff) usually will drain relatively quickly because the
underlying coral rock and limestone soils have high infiltration rates. The exceptions to this
are:
The City of Key West does experience some freshwater flooding when storm
drains cannot handle the volume of runoff and the excess flows through the
streets, often more than one-foot deep and more than two-feet deep depending
on the tidal cycle; some low areas do not drain well, resulting in ponding. The
city maintains records of the locations of these areas and actively pursues
projects to improve drainage.
The City of Marathon has identified several locations where ponded water that
can range in depth from one to three feet deep causes access problems and can
affect older, non-elevated, buildings. The city maintains records of the
locations of these areas and actively pursues projects to improve drainage.
The most significant rainfall/fresh water flooding event occurred on November 11-12, 1980.
The storm resulted in $1 million in property damage, primarily in the City of Key West.
Kthe event resulted from the influence of a stalled cold
front and Tropical Storm Jeanne that was over Cuba. These combined systems produced 23
inches of rain in 24 hours, the heaviest 24-hour rainfall ever recorded for the area. Even
though the water was pouring out into the surrounding seas, the intense rainfall resulted in
widespread flooding especially in streets and low-lying areas. Weather Service reports
indicated that 300 vehicles and 500 buildings were seriously damaged.
Monroe County Public Works reports that runoff from intense rainfalls generally does not
result in road or drainage swale damage, although some unpaved roads exhibit washing and
potholes.
The NCDC recorded one rainfall flood event since 2010. On August 20, 2013
thunderstorms produced heavy rainfall of 2 to 3 inches across Key West, resulting in street
flooding in the low-lying sections of Old Town. Greene and Front Streets were closed in Old
Town Key West, and Lower Duval Street and Caroline Street were also flooded. The City
reports the same had occurred later that year during May.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-14
The State Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan (2013) summarizes analyses of residential and
SHMP Table C.3 in Appendix C: Risk
Assessment Tables). Table 6-9 summarizes estimated impacts for Monroe County.
Table 6-9. SHMP Summary: Inland Flooding Impacts (2013).
Number of Number of Value of Value of
Residential Commercial Residential Commercial
Structures in Structures in Structures in Structures in 100
100 and 500-100 and 500-100 and 500-year and 500-year
year Floodplain Floodplain Floodplain
year
Floodplain
Inland Flooding
32,449 1,155 $5,697,665 million $802,455 million
($5.7 Trillion) ($802.5 Billion)
Table 6-10
Table 6-10. Hazard Profile Summary Flooding (Rainfall Ponding)
Jurisdiction Vulnerability Impact Frequency
Extent / Distribution/
Magnitude Location
Monroe County Medium Low to Small to 1 time each More
(locally) Moderate Medium year developed
areas
Key West High (locally) Low to Medium to 3-6 times Multiple areas
Moderate Large each year in the City
Islamorada Medium Low to Small Once every More
(locally) Moderate 3 years developed
areas
Medium Low to Once every More
Marathon Small
(locally) Moderate 3 years developed
areas
Medium Low to Once every More
Key Colony Beach Small
(locally) Moderate 3 years developed
areas
0 times each
Layton Low Low Negligible n/a
year
6.4 Drought
A drought is defined as a prolonged period of dry weather during which there is an
inadequate supply of water to meet water demands that can have severe effects on people
animals, and plants. Lack of rainfall and adequate water supply could result in health
problems for humans, animals, and vegetation. Regulations and water restrictions may force
residents to stop the waste of any potable water or water supply. Drought may be
accompanied by prolonged periods of extreme heat.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-15
Drought is a natural and expected part of the climate in most areas, but the severity of
drought impacts differs based on duration, geographic extent, intensity, human demand for
water, and agricultural practices. Drought can be defined as:
Meteorological drought, an extended period of dry weather.
Agricultural drought, a shortage of precipitation that affects crops.
Hydrologic drought, a reduction in water content in lakes, rivers, streams,
aquifers, and soils that may affect supplies available for all users.
-Byram Drought Index
The Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) is used by the Florida Division of Forestry to
indicate the dryness of the soil and surface fuels. It is primarily used for fire potential
assessment. The drought index is a continuous reference scale for estimating the dryness of
the soil and duff layers. The index increases for each day without rain (the amount of
increase depends on the daily high temperature) and decreases when it rains. The scale
ranges from 0 (no moisture deficit) to 800. The range of the index is determined by
assuming that there is 8 inches of moisture in a saturated soil that is readily available to the
vegetation. Using 35 years of rainfall and temperature measurements from 9 locations
throughout the state average KBDI values are determined for the state on a regional basis.
Figure 6-4 is an example of how the KBDI is illustrated each day.
For different soil types, the depth of soil required to hold 8 inches of moisture varies
(loam=30", clay=25" and sand=80"). A prolonged drought (high KBDI) influences fire
intensity largely because more fuel is available for combustion (i.e. fuels have a lower
moisture content). In addition, the drying of organic material in the soil can lead to increased
difficulty in fire suppression.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-16
Figure 6-4. Example of the KBDI (February 10, 2015).
6.4.2 Drought in the Florida Keys
The Florida Keys are normally characterized by an arid climate and native vegetation is
acclimated to such conditions. However, human usage of potable water continues to rise as
development occurs. The water providers for the Keys, the Florida Keys Aqueduct
Authority and the South Florida Water Management District, impose restrictions on water
use depending on conditions which are continuously monitored. Situations requiring water
usage restrictions have occurred over the last several years:
The City of Key West imposed water restrictions in November 1990.
The City of Layton operated under water restrictions in the mid-1990s.
In 2001 the South Florida Water Management District imposed Phase 1 and
Phase 2 water restriction rules throughout the Keys.
Late 2009, the South Florida Water Management District imposed Landscape
Monroe County.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-17
Using a simplified approach of occurrence over a given period, for the ten-year period of the
1990s the frequency of drought was 20%. This statement of frequency does not imply
severity. Indeed, the National Weather Service Weather Forecast Office indicated that
drought periods in the Keys have not been prolonged or widespread and thus drought is not
considered to be a significant hazard for Monroe County. However, the Department of
online archived records of the KBDI show that the maximum index recorded
for Monroe County is 764 (out of a maximum 800).
Based on this, Monroe County can expect to see severe drought conditions, even if not
prolonged. Because there is relatively little agricultural activity in Monroe, a drought that
impacts the mainland source of water is expected to equally affect the entire extent of
Monroe County. Drought does not cause property damage to buildings. Drought is
generally a broad geographic hazard that is not tied to site specific topographic and geologic
features. Monroe County can expect to see droughts with magnitude/severity of up to 765 on
the KBDI index but more typically in the 500 to 600 range.
The County is supplied with water from the mainland and all residents are very aware of the
need for water conservation on a regular basis, not only during announced drought periods.
Typical usage is 169 gallons per person per day during tourist season and 96 gallons per
person per day off-season. Measures such as encouraging native vegetation and using native
ground cover vegetation in place of lawns contribute to reducing water consumption.
er capita water use is at or
below average in most areas.
In mid-2009, the South Florida Water Management District issued restrictions on water use
throughout its service area, including Monroe County. During this period, the KBDI peaked
at 692 in mid-May. Water restrictions are mandatory and are enforced by the District, local
governments, and law enforcement agencies. Residents and businesses were placed on two-
day-a-week alternating schedules, with watering not allowed between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m.
The restrictions apply to all sources of water for irrigation, including wells, canals, ponds,
and lakes. Use of 100% reclaimed or supplemented reclaimed water is allowed during
specific periods of time, and low-volume systems that apply water direct to root plant zones
may be used provided no runoff is produced. Car and boat washing is allowed
(recommended over non-paved, grassy or porous surfaces), and pressure washing is allowed,
with runoff water channeled to grassy or porous areas.
The 2013 SHMP reported that in 2011, there was continued dry weather in January 2011,
coupled with long-term dryness going back to the previous summer and this led to the
expansion of severe drought conditions over South Florida. Rainfall deficits in October 2011
were in the 36 inch range with the level of Lake Okeechobee remaining steady at about
12.5 feet, which is 2.2 feet below normal. NCDC reported severe drought conditions in the
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-18
mainland area of Monroe County from 2011 to 2012. As of mid-2015, the 2012 drought is
the last reported event in Monroe County. Overall, the 2013 SHMP reported that the County
Table 6-11
Table 6-11. Hazard Profile Summary: Drought
Jurisdiction Vulnerability Impact Frequency
Extent / Distribution/
Magnitude Location
Monroe County Low Low Small 1-2 per Countywide
decade
Key West Low Low Small 1-2 per Citywide
decade
Islamorada Low Low Small 1-2 per Village-wide
decade
1-2 per
Marathon Low Low Small Citywide
decade
1-2 per
Key Colony Beach Low Low Small Citywide
decade
Layton Low Low Small 1-2 per Citywide
decade
6.5 Wildland Fire
Wildland fires are defined as an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels that
exposes and possibly destroys buildings. Wildfires are classified as either wildland (in
relatively undeveloped areas, perhaps with some basic infrastructure such as roads, power
lines, and railroads) or an urban-wildland interface fire (areas with buildings and
development).
Certain conditions must be present for a wildland fire hazard to exist: a large source of fuel;
conductive weather (generally hot, dry, sunny, and windy) and lack of fire suppression
capability due to remoteness or other limitations.
High values of the KBDI, described in Section 6.4.1, are an indication that conditions are
favorable for the occurrence and spread of wildfires, but drought is not by itself a
prerequisite for wildfires. Other weather factors, such as wind, temperature, relative
humidity and atmospheric stability, play a major role in determining the actual fire danger.
High values of the drought index are associated with severe wildfire outbreaks such as
occurred during 1998. However, no threshold point has previously been determined to
indicate that conditions are far above normal and warrant concern. This work operates under
the premise that wide spread drought is accompanied by severe wildfire outbreaks. The
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-19
average KBDI is compared to recent levels of fire activity (1981-present) to determine
threshold levels that indicate above normal fire activity
The Monroe County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan notes that the extent of
the brush and wildland fire threat is minimal for the majority of Monroe County. The
exceptions are the Everglades National Park in mainland Monroe, and on Big Pine, No
Name, Cudjoe, and Sugarloaf Keys in the Lower Keys where there are remnant tracts of
native pine rockland forest.
A primary cause of fires is arson, especially vandalism by school age children and escaped
campfires started by the homeless. Other factors that contribute to fires are high winds and
droughts, lightening, carelessness, and accidents. Problems can also occur, especially in
storms when downed utility lines may spark fires. Accumulated debris after hurricanes
contributes to overall fire potential, including wildland fire potential. After Hurricane
Georges in 1998, brush debris caught fire in Big Pine.
Information provided by the Florida Department of Forestry indicates that while wildland
and brush fires occur infrequently and with little significant consequence in Monroe County,
they may occur more often than many think. However, most wildfires are small and
contained quickly. On rare occasion, incidents are more serious. For the most part, fires in
the Everglades do not threaten residential properties although heavy smoke can lead to road
closures.
Since 1987, there have been 38 unintentional wildfires on U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
lands in the National Key Deer Refuge. The largest occurred in 1992 when three wildfires
burned over 50 acres. Of the 38 wildfires, 6 were caused by lightning and 15 by arson.
Fireworks have also played a role in wildland fire, indicated as the cause of 10 fires. Since
2000, an average of three wildland fires have occurred each year in the Lower Keys
affecting an average of 1.27 acres. The largest potential wildfire in the Keys is
approximately 500 acres, which is the largest contiguous block of vegetation on Big Pine
Key. The extent of any given fire is limited by the size of vegetated areas and also effective
response capabilities (de
In 2007, the Thunderstruck Fire burned 7 acres on Big Pine Key, affecting vacant property
adjacent to residential and commercial structures. The Florida Division of Forestry brought
in resources from Miami to assist in controlling the fire. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
provided helicopter water drops to help control the fire spread. During this event,
firefighters from several stations worked in the yards of homes and several businesses to
prevent damage. Flame lengths on this wildfire exceeded thirty feet, and nearly all the
vegetation was killed as a result of the severity and intensity. NCDC did not report any
wildfire events in Monroe County from 2010 to 2014.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-20
The Florida Department of Forestry reports that areas prone to wildland and brush fires in
Monroe County include Everglades National Park, No Name Key, Big Pine Key, Grassy
Key, Sugarloaf Key, Cudjoe Key, and Big Coppitt Key (including Geiger and Boca Chica).
Table 6-12 provides the wildfire risk assessment from the 2013 State Mitigation Plan that
analyzes relative risk by population, number and value of structures and total acres at risk.
Wildfire Hazard Ranking.
Table 6-12. Monroe County Wildfire Risk Assessment*
Area by Wildfire Risk Population # of Value of Total Acres at
Rating Structures Structures Risk
Low Level of Concern
89,930 39,923 $23,344,290,000 719,886
Areas
Medium Level of Concern
118 77 $28,740,000 1,401
Areas
High Level of Concern
0 1$450,00099
Areas
* 2013 Florida Enhanced State Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix E
Figure 6-5, carried forward from the 2010 Plan, depicts these areas in terms of potential fire
behavior:
Areas of low fire behavior potential are shown in green (flame lengths of less
than 4 feet; relatively easy to control). Fires of this intensity would be most
likely to occur in hardwood hammock areas or in areas where brush has been
removed.
Areas of moderate fire behavior potential are shown in yellow (flame lengths
of 4-8 feet; difficult to control). These areas are characterized as marshes and
areas transitioning out of marshes into uplands.
Areas of high wildland fire behavior potential are shown in red (flame lengths
exceeding 8 ft; very difficult to control, especially during the afternoon when
solar radiation peaks). These areas would be characterized as the pine
rockland uplands that are found on the islands in the Lower Keys, which is
also where the concentrations of structures occur.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-21
Figure 6-5. Lower Florida Keys Fire Behavior Potential.
Existing Mitigation Measures.
Monroe County and Marathon have programs for training
and certifying volunteer fire departments in wildland firefighting. Although, the Department
of Forestry in the Keys received new equipment in the late 1990s, staff levels have been
reduced to only two rangers for all of Monroe County. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Key Deer Refuge has also received grant money to help train fire department
personnel in wildland fire control, fires in wildland urban interface areas, and the Incident
Command System. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has a full time prescribed fire
specialist/firefighter on staff in Big Pine Key, along with a tracked wildland fire engine and
a small wildland fire truck.
The following preventive measures are recommended by the Department of Forestry and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service:
Educational programs, especially for children.
Create defensible space around buildings by removing brush and burnable
materials from around structure so that firefighters have easy access.
Cleaning gutters to prevent build-up of burnable materials.
Timely disposal of yard waste and household debris, particularly mattresses.
Development of ordinances dealing with removal of brush and potentially
dangerous vegetative materials, especially during dry spells and during
hurricane season, and rapid removal of storm debris.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-22
When residential property is threatened by fire, the roof and yard should be
wet down to provide protection.
Selective prescribed burning by a state-certified burn manager, to reduce the
quantities of fuel.
To deal with wildfire threats on Cudjoe Key, the Florida Division of Forestry added water
supply wells and widened some roads to improve emergency vehicle access.
Table 6-13 ; for the municipalities, no
reported events were found but some residual risk remains, especially in larger
municipalities like Islamorada and Marathon where larger tracts of vegetation exist.
Table 6-13. Hazard Profile Summary: Wildfire
Jurisdiction Vulnerability Impact Frequency
Extent / Distribution/
Magnitude Location
Monroe County Low Moderate Small to Less than 1 Select areas
Medium per year mostly the
Lower Keys
and mainland
Monroe
Key West Low Low Negligible Once every n/a
50 years
Negligible
Once every
Islamorada Low Low n/a
25 years
Negligible
Once every Some risk in
Marathon Low Low
25 years Grassy Key
area but no
reported
events
Negligible
Once every
Key Colony Beach Low Low n/a
50 years
Negligible
Once every
Layton Low Low n/a
50 years
6.6 Coastal Erosion
Coastal erosion is the wearing away of land or the removal of beach or dune sediments by
wave action, tidal currents, wave currents, or drainage. Waves generated by storms cause
coastal erosion, which may take the form of long-term losses of sediment and rocks, or
merely in the temporary redistribution of coastal sediments. The concept of probability of
occurrence is not applicable because coastal erosion is a long-term, on-going process.
Erosion in one location may result in accretion nearby.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-23
The following definition has been adopted by the Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP), Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, to identify areas of critical
erosion:
Critical erosion area is a segment of the shoreline where natural processes or human
activity have caused or contributed to erosion and recession of the beach or dune system
to such a degree that upland development, recreational interests, wildlife habitat, or
important cultural resources are threatened or lost. Critical erosion areas may also include
peripheral segments or gaps between identified critical erosion areas which, although
they may be stable or slightly erosional now, their inclusion is necessary for continuity of
management of the coastal system or for the design integrity of adjacent beach
management projects.
Some erosion-related changes are slow, inexorable, and usually gradual. However the
changes on a beach, in contrast, can happen literally overnight, at least during a storm. Even
without storms, sand may be lost to longshore drift (the currents that parallel coastlines) or
sand may be pulled to deeper water, essentially lost to the coastal system. DEP determines
the geographic areas of the state that are at high risk of erosion. The Bureau develops and
publishes an annual report on Critically Eroded Beaches Report.
Strategic Beach
Management Plan: Florida Keys Region (June 2015) illustrates identified critically beaches in
Figure 6-6. Because of the level of detail in this report it is included in Appendix E.
Figure 6-6. Critically Eroded Beaches: Florida Keys Subregions.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-24
During the 2005 hurricane season, hurricanes Dennis, Katrina, Rita, and Wilma caused
erosion and flooding along the coastal barrier beaches of Dade County and the Florida Keys
and mainland beaches of Monroe County.
2015 report, Critically Eroded Beaches in Florida, and the 2015 Strategic Beach
Management Plan Florida Keys Region report some erosion impacts from Hurricanes Rita and
Using this characterization to estimate the extent of erosion vulnerability, Monroe
Wilma.
County has 10.2 miles of shoreline designated critical, and 1.6 miles of shoreline designated
non-g the cape
Sable region and the distal sand keys west of Key West (e.g., Marquesas Keys, Tortugas
Keys), have insufficient data to identify erosion problem areas at this time; however, the
Department has documented substantial erosion in these areas due to
Based on reported observations at one location, the rate of shoreline erosion may be as high
as 3 feet per year in the most vulnerable locations.
It is notable that most reported damage is
to public facilities and park infrastructure:
Hurricanes Rita and Wilma caused moderate beach and dune erosion and
flooding to Sea Oats Beach on Lower Matecumbe Key, Key Colony Beach,
and Little Duck Key, and destroyed park facilities on Little Duck Key.
Hurricanes Rita and Wilma combined to severely impact the park and
destroyed the waterfront campsites and infrastructure at Long Key State Park.
Hurricane Wilma inflicted moderate beach and dune erosion and additional
overwash, and also damaged major structures at West Coco Plum Beach.
Hurricane Wilma caused major beach and dune erosion as well as greater
structural damages at West Key Colony Beach.
Key and caused moderate erosion.
Hurricane Wilma caused moderate to major beach and dune erosion at Calusa
Beach and Loggerhead Beach, and minor dune erosion with beach accretion
within the critically eroded portion of Sandspur Beach.
Hurricane Wilma caused moderate to major beach erosion at Boca Chica
Beach in the Lower Keys and destroyed much of the beach road (since
abandoned).
Hurricane Wilma critically eroded Simonton Beach, a part in Key West.
Hurricanes Rita and Wilma caused minor to moderate beach and dune erosion
cane Wilma
caused additional minor beach and dune erosion along the beach. Also during
Wilma, one of the four detached breakwaters sustained major damage, and the
west shore revetment sustained minor damage.
Hurricane Wilma caused severe erosion on the mainland beaches of Cape
Sable and Key McLaughlin.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-25
NCDC reported the Tropical Storm Fay in August 2008 resulted in damage and
preparedness costs to government facilities and infrastructure totaled $2.8 million, with
about one million dollars due to damage to roads and $200,000 due to erosion. NCDC
reported Hurricane Ike in September 2008 caused - to storm
surge flooding.
In general, some islands and reaches of coastlines of Monroe County are susceptible to
erosion due to the relatively frequent occurrences of hurricanes and tropical storms. Because
of the geologic composition of the Lower Keys, with more calcium carbonate sand beaches,
that area is significantly more vulnerable to erosion than the Upper and Middle Keys. Table
6-14 lists specific areas of reported impacts of critical erosion and what is vulnerable are
Critically Eroded Beaches in Florida and 2015
Strategic Beach Management Plan Florida Keys Region.
Although DEP identifies specific lengths of shoreline as vulnerable to erosion, the reports do
not include any projection of rates of shoreline recession. Without such rates, it is not
possible to identify buildings and infrastructure at risk of future erosion. Park officials and
Public Works monitor past erosion on County-owned land as an indicator of potential
problems. The LMS Working Group asked Monroe County Growth Management to
Sustainability study, which will examine vulnerability to sea level rise. In the future, as
more analyses are done, it should be possible to improve identification of at-risk public
property and infrastructure, along with private property.
Table 6-14. Identified Critically Eroded Beaches and Vulnerability
Location Erosion Condition & Vulnerability
Length (miles)
Sea Oats Beach, Lower Matecumbe Key Critical 0.7 Recreational interests and U.S.
Highway 1
Critically eroded threatening
Long Key Critical 1.0
recreational interests at the Long
Key State Park. Park officials
estimated shoreline recession at 3
ft/year since 1970.
Curry Hammocks, Little Crawl Key Critical 0.1 Critically eroded threatening
recreation interests at Curry
Hammocks State Park (beach
restoration occurring)
Coco Plum Beach, east Non-critical 0.6 City of Marathon public beach park
Coco Plum Beach, west Critical 0.3 Private Development
Key Colony Beach Critical 0.9 Private Development
Key Colony Beach, west shoreline Critical 0.2 Public recreational interests at
Sunset Beach
Sombrero Beach, Vaca Key Critical 0.3
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-26
(beach restoration occurring)
Little Duck Key Critical - 0.2 Monroe County park
Threatening recreational interests as
Bahia Honda Key Critical 2.0
well as the park road and park
development (beach restoration
occurring at Calusa Beach and
revetment along park road)
Boca Chica Key Critical 1.3 Public beach and access road (these
were lost during Hurricanes Rita and
Wilma)
Key West (south coast) Critical 2.8 Recreational beach (beach
restoration occurring at Smathers
Beach; a seawall has been
constructed along most of S.
Roosevelt Boulevard)
Simonton Beach (south shoreline of Key Critical 0.1 City park (was critically eroded by
West) Hurricane Wilma)
Ft. Zachary Taylor (west end of Key West) Critical 0.3 miles Threatening recreational interests
Three post-disaster projects to address beach erosion and loss of sand have been funded
e program. On these beaches and similar sandy beaches in
the area are expected to see similar erosion in the future under similar storm conditions.
Storms that do not move through the region quickly could result in even greater loss of sand:
Smathers Beach in Key West has been renourished several times since the late
1980s. After Tropical Storm Ike (2008), an engineering investigation
confirmed erosion of the permanent beach face of 2,453 cubic yards of sand.
Coco Plum Beach in Marathon sustained loss of approximately 4,444 cubic
yards of sand associated with Tropical Storm Fay (2008).
Table 6-14
Table 6-14. Hazard Profile Summary: Coastal Erosion
Jurisdiction Vulnerability Impact Extent / Frequency Distribution/
Magnitude Location
Monroe County Medium Moderate Small to 1-2 per year Limited
Medium (with coastal selected
storms) areas ranging
from Key
Largo to
Lower Keys
Medium to 1-2 per year 2.9 miles of
Key West High Moderate
Large (with coastal beaches and
storms) Fort Zachary
Taylor
Negligible
Significant No reported
Islamorada Low Low
erosion areas of
generally not significant
an issue erosion
Small
Significant Sombrero
Marathon Low Low
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-27
erosion Beach has
generally not some erosion
an issue areas
Small
Key Colony Beach Low Low Significant Key Colony
erosion Beach and
generally not West Key
an issue Colony Beach
have some
erosion areas
Negligible
Significant No reported
Layton Low Low
erosion areas of
generally not significant
an issue erosion
6.7
The descriptions of hazards, hazard histories, and impacts that are detailed in Chapter 5 and
this chapter -15. A summary of
overall vulnerability by jurisdiction to the identified hazards is in Table 6-16. At its March 5,
2015 meeting, the LMS Work Group agreed to the following:
Flooding (rainfall/
in Key West.
Confirmed that Climate Change and
Sea Level Rise
azard exacerbate other hazards
h and willthe impacts of like surge flooding,
rainfall flooding, and hurricane wind.
Table 6-15. Hazards: Relative Vulnerability
Hazard Vulnerability Impact Frequency Distribution
Hurricane/Tropical Storm High Moderate 1-2 per year Countywide
to Severe
Sea Level Rise Moderate Moderate Continuously Coastal and
to Severe increasing low-lying
areas
Flooding (rainfall ponding) High (locally) Moderate 6-12 times Key West
each year
Strong Storms/
Moderate Moderate 1-2 per year Countywide
Tornado/Lightning
Less than 1 Selected
Wildfire Low Low
per year areas
1-2 per
Drought Low Low Countywide
decade
Coastal Erosion Low Low 1-2 per year Limited
(with coastal selected
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-28
Table 6-15. Hazards: Relative Vulnerability
Hazard Vulnerability Impact Frequency Distribution
storms) areas
Table 6-16. Hazards: Overall Vulnerability Scores
Hazard
Jurisdictions and Overall Vulnerability Rating
Islamorada Marathon Layton Key West
Monroe Key
County Colony
Beach
Hurricane/
High High High High High High
Tropical Storm
Flooding
Medium Medium Medium Medium Low High
(rainfall
ponding)
Strong Storms/
Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
Tornado/
Lightning
Wildfire
Low Low Low Low Low Low
Drought
Low Low Low Low Low Low
Coastal Erosion
Medium Low Low Low Low High
Sea Level Rise
Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium
(Continuous (Continuous (Continuou(Continuou(Continuou(Continuou
increase) increase) s increase) s increase) s increase) s increase)
6.8 2015 Updates
The LMS Working Group reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more
significant changes include:
Section 6.1: Moved text about hazards not further considered to Chapter
5.
Section 6.2: Updated wind maps from the Florida Building Code; added
number of water spouts, table summarizing hail damage and a table
summarizing wind damage; updated map of tornado occurrences, added a
lightning event map, and updated tornado and lightning events.
Section 6.3: Updated rainfall/fresh water flooding events and inland
flooding impacts table.
Section 6.4.1: Added new Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) map;
updated drought conditions.
Section 6.4.2: Added historical record of KBDI.
Section 6.5: Added Monroe County Wildfire Risk Assessment from State
Plan.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-29
Section 6.6: Updated areas affected by coastal erosion based on two
reports released by DEM in 2015; updated map showing critical erosion
areas identified by DEP.
Section 6.7: Updated table of relative vulnerabilities and new table of
overall vulnerability by jurisdiction.
References:
National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/National Weather
Service (NWS) Weather Forecast Office (WFO) Key West, Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, June 2015.
State of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan, August 2013
Monroe County Climate Action Plan, November 2013
Strategic Beach Management Plan for the Florida Keys Region May 2008
Analysis of the Vulnerability of Southeast Florida to Sea Level Rise
August 2012
Annual Report of the Monroe County Tourist Development Council
September 2013
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 6-30
Chapter 7. Monroe County
This chapter contains an overview of Monroe County agencies and their functions as they
relate to natural hazards and hazard mitigation. This plan summarizes the functions of
Emergency Services Division, but does not characterize its functions that deal with
emergency response and immediate post-event recovery. That information is found in the
Monroe County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.
Chapters 8 through 12 describe the cities Key West, Layton, Key Colony Beach, Islamorada
Village of Islands, and Marathon.
7.1 Capability Assessment: County Government
Structure
Monroe County, created in 1823, is a political subdivision of the State of Florida. The
powers and authority of the County emanate from the State Legislature.
The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), which performs the legislative and executive
functions, consists of five members elected at large. Each commissioner represents one of
five districts and is elected for a term of four years. Pursuant to Florida Statute 252, the
BOCC is responsible for safeguarding the life and property of the population of Monroe
County, and to provide effective governmental control and coordination of emergency
operations.
For administrative purposes and to conduct the work of the County, the Board of County
Commissioners (BOCC) has organized County agencies into six functional divisions, each
with several departments (Table 7-1). Selected departments that have direct or indirect roles
in addressing natural hazards are described below.
Table 7-
Mitigation Role
Indirect
Division Departments Supervised Direct or None
County Administrator Airports X
Budget and Finance X
Social Services X
Library Services X
Extension Services X
Information Technology X
X
Project Management X
Wastewater
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-1
Table 7-
Division Departments Supervised Mitigation Role
County Attorney Represents officials and all departments X
employees
Emergency Services Fire/Rescue X
Emergency Medical Services X
Emergency Management X
Fire Marshall X
Upper Keys Health Care Taxing District X
Public Works &
Fleet Management X
Engineering
Facilities Maintenance X
Detention Facilities X
Unincorporated Parks & Beaches X
Higgs Beach & Martello Museums X
Engineering Services X
Roads & Bridges X
Solid Waste Mgmt & Recycling X
Animal Control X
Card Sound Toll Authority X
Growth Management Code Compliance X
Building Department X
Planning & Environmental Resources X
Floodplain Management X
Marine Resources X
GIS Department X
Employee Services Human Resources X
Employee Benefits X
Risk Management X
Safety Office
7.1.1 Emergency Services Division
The Emergency Services Division has administrative responsibility for Fire Rescue,
Emergency Management, the Fire Marshall, and the Upper Keys Health Care Taxing
District. These agencies are responsible for firefighting, emergency medical services, and
urban search and rescue.
The Division of Emergency Services (and its functional units) is responsible for the
following disaster-related activities:
Manage the Emergency Operations Center
Coordinate with local hospitals
Coordinate Special Medical Needs
Coordination with Monroe County School District
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-2
Manage in-county and out-of-county shelters
Provide and coordinate fire rescue resources to support emergency functions
requiring firefighting and emergency response, recovery and assistance
missions. Participating agencies include municipal fire rescue departments,
the Florida Department of Forestry, U.S. Navy, Boca Chica, Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission, Provide and coordinate search and rescue
operations and resources; provide support to local agencies, locate missing
persons, lost vessels, persons trapped in confined areas (including
damaged/destroyed structures); locate downed aircraft, extricate, if necessary,
and treat victims upon rescue.
Review and assess health and medical needs of the County in the event of an
emergency event and obtain resources to meet needs.
Provide, coordinate and direct efforts to complement local emergency
response actions in the aftermath of a hazardous material accident/incident;
secures affected areas and coordinates removal and disposal of materials from
the disaster location.
7.1.2 Emergency Management Department
The Emergency Management Department is a unit of the Emergency Services Division.
Chapter 252.38 of the Florida Statutes requires political subdivisions to develop emergency
plans to provide for the safeguarding of life and property of its citizens.
The Monroe County Emergency Management Department has jurisdiction over the entire
county and serves as liaison for, and coordinator
Federal assistance during post-disaster emergency operations. By State rules, each
municipal emergency management plan must be consistent with, and subject to, the county
emergency management plan. Such consistency will be evidenced in the elements of their
respective preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation plans.
The 2012 Monroe County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP),
establishes official emergency management policy for all agencies and municipalities for
response to, recovery from, and mitigation of, emergencies and disasters within Monroe
County. Examples of other planning and response plans are those pertaining to Hurricane
Evacuation, Shelter, and Refuge of Last Resort Plan, Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant
Emergency Plan, Migration, and Terrorism, among other plans and procedures. The Plan is
available on-line at: http://www.monroecountyem.com/DocumentCenter/Home/View/16
Emergency Management is the primary department responsible for training
and public awareness as it relates to disaster preparedness; throughout the
year, personnel conduct seminars and presentations, and meetings regarding
emergency preparedness.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-3
Emergency Management conducts annual training programs for all county
departments and other county entities participating in Emergency Operation
Center and Shelter operations, and other emergency preparedness activities
and needs.
Emergency Management has established a number of public information and
education programs regarding recovery efforts and available assistance.
Hurricane preparedness information concerning mobile home, travel trailer
and RV hurricane procedures and local shelter information is disseminated to
the public via local television, radio, print media, and other media outlets, each
year prior to Hurricane Season.
Emergency Management personnel, as part of their professional development,
are encouraged to attend State and FEMA courses.
Local personnel are trained through programs of relief organizations
(American Red Cross and HAM radio groups).
Monroe County conducts annual drills and exercises in, but not limited to,
hurricane response, nuclear power plant response, airport disaster response,
mass migration, cruise ships emergencies, terrorism threats, and oil spill
response. These exercises are scheduled in conjunction with the Florida
Division of Emergency Management, and various County, State, and Federal
agencies.
All agencies with emergency response roles participate in annual exercises and
drills.
The Monroe County Emergency Management Department is charged with facilitating,
developing, managing, monitoring and evaluating the Monroe County Local Mitigation
Strategy Plan, in cooperation with the municipalities of Key West, Marathon, Key Colony
Beach, Layton, and the Village of Islamorada. The agency coordinates with the Florida
Division of Emergency Management to process applications for mitigation grant funds. The
Plan is available on line at: http://www.monroecountyem.com/index.aspx?NID=135
Projects funded with hazard mitigation funds, including funds that may be made available as
part of FEMA reimbursements for damage to public facilities, must conform to established
Monroe County codes and regulations.
7.1.3 Growth Management Division
The Growth Management Division recommends and implements policies provided in the
Development Regulations. The Building,
Planning and Environmental Resources, Code Compliance, and Marine Resources
Departments are under the Division's jurisdiction. Planning staff assists in the development
lan and Land Development Regulations.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-4
The Planning and Environmental Resources, Building, and Code Compliance Departments
are responsible for reviewing construction plans, issuing building permits, assuring
compliance with the floodplain regulations, and inspecting projects during construction.
Enforcement of zoning and building standards are intended to safeguard public safety and to
minimize damage associated with high winds and flooding. Table 7-2 shows the number of
permits issued in calendar years 2012, 2013, and 2014. The Division serves as the
coordinator for the National Flood Insurance Program and assists the public in identifying
and implementing flood damage prevention measures (see Section 7.3.2).
Monroe County, Florida
Seven Inspectors
Two Inspectors hold minimal standard
certifications and five Inspectors are cross
certified in each trade; plumbing, mechanical
electrical and structural
Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule
rating:
3 for 1-2 Family Dwellings
3 for Commercial
Table 7-2. Permits Issued in 2012, 2013, and 2014
Activity CY2012 CY2013 CY2014
New single-family, detached 50 100 197
Multi-family (2 or more) 12 0 0
Non-residential (all types) 707 771 709
Residential (additions, alterations, repairs) 3,329 2,989 3,210
Non-residential (additions, alterations, repairs) 225 183 177
Demolition 171 131 141
Mobile home (permanent/temporary) 5 15 19
Total 4,499 4,189 4,453
In the event of a disaster, post-damage inspections are conducted to determine requirements
that are applicable during repair and reconstruction. After a hazard event that prompts
recovery, the Growth Management Division carries out the following specific duties:
Collection of information for preparation of Damage Survey Reports is a joint
effort of MC Emergency Management and MC Growth Management. The
MC Growth Management Division surveys neighborhoods for structural
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-5
damage. For the purpose of re-construction, damage to structures is
For substantially damaged buildings that also are insured by the NFIP, the
Growth Management Division issues letters for application of Increased Cost
of Construction (ICC) claims and requires re-construction through the
permitting process to comply with all current codes.
Mitigation activities in post-disaster situations will be handled through the
Growth Management Division and the Department of Emergency
Management.
Planning Department policies ensure that mitigation related items in the
Comprehensive Plan, such as floodplain and natural resource management, are
dards.
Planning personnel participate in post-disaster appraisals and may formulate
additional mitigation measures for use in the Comprehensive Plan. Personnel
work closely with building and zoning staff to ensure coordination.
Mitigation recommendations, especially those based on direct disaster
experience will be reflected in the Evaluation and Appraisal Reports (EAR)
required for the Comprehensive Plan.
Environmental Resources monitors environmental provisions in regulations,
codes, and plans and coordinates with other agencies as needed.
7.1.4 Public Works & Engineering Division
The Public Works & Engineering Division is responsible for overseeing the maintenance
and operation of County facilities, including roads and bridges. From three locations (Key
heavy equipment, vehicles, repair shop, and fueling stations.
The Public Works & Engineering Division is responsible for the following disaster and
mitigation-related activities:
install shutters, position generators, etc.).
Expedite debris clearance of Overseas Highway (US #1) and County-
maintained roads.
Assist with re-entry and respond to assistance requests from municipal
agencies.
Coordinate and manage debris collection and disposal contractors.
Secure environmental waivers and legal clearances for debris removal and
disposal.
Identify and report damage to public facilities and infrastructure, participate in
preparation of documentation for State and federal reimbursements, and
consider possible mitigation measures as part of repairs and reconstruction.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-6
Establish priorities regarding the repair and/or reconstruction of damaged
transportation routes (roads, bridges, airfields, etc.).
Coordinate emergency contracting and emergency repair of drainage and solid
waste facilities.
7.1.5 Florida Department of Health in Monroe County (DOH-Monroe)
The Florida Department of Health in Monroe County functions as the primary public health
unit for the county and municipalities. DOH-Monroe operates from six locations in the
upper, middle and lower Keys. Each office oversees issues such as environmental health,
rabies and infectious disease control, and community clinical and preventive health services.
DOH-Monroe
including documenting reportable and non-reportable diseases and environmental issues,
regulating and permitting biomedical waste, responding to radiological incidents, inspecting
and permitting group care facilities sanitation inspection, septic tank permitting, regulation
of toxic and hazardous materials, , and permitting of mobile home and RV parks.
The DOH-Monroe is responsible for the following disaster-related activities:
Coordinate ESF 8 activities with representation at the Emergency Operations
Center.
Disaster Community Health Assessment Teams conduct post-disaster
assessments of public health risks.
Following a disaster, DOH-Monroe maintains surveillance of outbreaks of
infectious diseases and takes necessary actions to address problems.
May undertake event-specific activities; for example, after Hurricane Georges
the department reviewed performance of various kinds of septic and waste
systems.
Provides personnel, coordination and planning related to Special Needs
sheltering needs at designated locations and at Florida International
University.
7.1.6 Monroe County Budget and Finance
Budget and Finance includes the Office of Management and Budget, the Purchasing
Department, and the Grants Department.
Budget and Finance is responsible for the following disaster-related activities:
Give guidance to all departments to ensure they collect and maintain thorough
documentation of disaster-related expenditures, the key element in the
reimbursement process which requires maintenance of logs, records and file
copies of all expenditures in order to provide clear accountability for
reimbursement requests.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-7
Establishes financial management procedures in conformance with State and
federal requirements specific to funding sources.
7.1.7 Monroe County School District
The Monroe County School District operates and maintains the school system in the County
and municipalities. In addition to serving the student population, schools are a vital
may function as shelters, school personnel often serve as shelter staff, school buses are used
in evacuations, and school personnel provide shelter support services.
The Monroe County School District mitigation and response activities include:
The District construction standards among the strictest in the State; new
construction is required to meet 150 mile per hour wind-load standards.
The District and school system is a participating member on the Local
Mitigation Strategy Working Group.
The District and Monroe County government cooperate in many emergency-
related efforts, including applying for grant funds to install hurricane shutters
on several schools used as shelters.
Enhanced Hurricane Protection Area (EHPA) construction upgrades were
made possible through funding provide by County, municipality (City of
Marathon), and the District. The following schools will benefit from the
EHPA upgrades: Key West High School, Poinciana School, Marathon High
School, and Key Largo School.
7.2 Regional Agencies & Organizations
7.2.1 South Florida Regional Planning Council
The South Florida Regional Planning Council plans for and coordinates activities of the
South Florida Region (Broward, Miami-Dade, and Monroe Counties). State legislation
ti-
purpose regional entities that are in a position to plan for and coordinate intergovernmental
solutions to growth-related problems on greater-than-local issues.
Regional planning councils are required to develop Strategic Regional Policy Plans.
Emergency Preparedness is one of the six strategic subject areas addressed and goals and
policies contain provisions relating to hazard mitigation. In addition, the other strategic
areas (land use and public facilities, natural resources, economic development,
transportation, and emergency housing), may provide recommendations related to
mitigation. The Plan recognizes the critical link between land use and emergency
preparedness. For example, management of growth in the region relates directly to
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-8
emergency evacuation. Preservation of the environment reduces development or guides
development in ways that maintain important natural areas that may buffer the effects of
storms and other hazards.
The s mitigation and response activities include:
During the development process for the Strategic Regional Policy Plan, the
South Florida Regional Planning Council held workshops with regional
agencies to acquire input. An Emergency Preparedness Workshop which
included discussion of mitigation issues was held and provided an opportunity
to interested agencies to identify their concerns and needs relating to
mitigation.
In its review of documents such as County Comprehensive Plans and
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plans, the South Florida Regional
Planning Council can recommend policies that enhance hazard mitigation.
The South Florida Regional Planning Council conducts other projects that
directly assist in effective emergency management and hazard mitigation, such
as publica
September 1995.
After the unprecedented activity in the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons, the
Florida Division of Emergency Management contracted with the Council to
facilitate, in collaboration with local emergency management officials, consistent
and integrated mapping and analysis of all-hazards evacuation across the Region.
The Regional Evacuation Study for South Florida was completed in 2010. The
Study includes regional hazards, behavioral, vulnerability, population, shelter and
transportation analyses for evacuation. Storm surge map atlases are included. In
2012, the Depth Analysis Atlas for South Florida provided storm surge water
depth for impacted areas. In 2015, a Directional Atlas will further refine storm
surge affected areas through the analysis of paralleling, land falling and exiting
storms.
The South Florida Regional Planning Council is an ex officio member of the
Steering Committee for the Southeast Florida Regional Climate Compact
(Monroe, Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties). The Council
conducted a project with the Compact, funded by the Florida Department of
Government Adaptation Action Areas
7.2.2 South Florida Water Management District
The South Florida Water Management District, operating under the jurisdiction of the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, is responsible for overseeing the very
complex system of waterways and canals that affect the water system throughout much of
South Florida.
The Florida Keys of Monroe County does not contain a system of drainage canals under the
supervision of the Water Management District, as do other counties. However, portions of
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-9
the County on the mainland that are located in Everglades National Park and Big Cypress
coordinate with the District to develop Storm Water Management Master Plans and policies
to improve storm water management techniques and participation in the Surface Water
Improvement Management Program.
The South Florida Water Management Districts mitigation and response activities include:
Analyses and recommendations for water control measures to mitigate hazards
such as floods and droughts.
The District, with support of local governments and law enforcement agencies,
enforces mandatory water shortage restrictions when such restrictions are
activated.
Implementation of storm water management measures advocated by the
District, such as discouraging the use of impervious surfacing and filling and
retention of natural drainage patterns and open space, could help decrease
property damage from a major storm event.
Through the planning and use of various water control techniques, the
and the mixing of fresh and salt water.
7.2.3 Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
The Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority is an independent agency constituted by the State of
Florida with the primary purpose and function to obtain, supply, and distribute an adequate
water supply to the Florida Keys. The Authority manages the infrastructure used to supply
water to the Florida Keys and provides service to the consumer, sets rates, and conducts
billing.
-Dade
County. It examines ways to protect the supply system from hazards and
minimize the opportunities for disruption. The Authority works to find ways
to deal with disruption, including identification of alternative sources when
water cannot be supplied through the pipeline.
The Authority participates in developing policies and procedures for
responding to and recovering from shortages and disruptions in the supply and
delivery of electricity, potable water, and other forms of energy and fuels
which affect or threaten to affect significant numbers of citizens and visitors.
The Authority has 100% redundancy with diesel-powered pumps to mitigate
the loss of water flow to the Keys during electric service outages. The
redundancy includes three desalinization plants: Stock Island (2 million
gallons per day); Marathon (1 million gallons per day); and Florida City (6
million gallons per day).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-10
7.2.4 Electric Utilities
The electric utilities that serve Monroe County are the Florida Keys Electric Cooperative
(FKEC), the Keys Energy System (KEYS), and Florida Power and Light (FP&L). The
mitigation and response activities of the utilities include:
Establish policies and procedures for responding to and recovering from
shortages and disruptions, including the supply and delivery of electricity, and
other forms of energy and fuel, which affect or may affect significant numbers
of citizens and visitors.
Restoration of electric utility services which were interrupted due to major or
catastrophic emergencies. Coordination of services and communications
among utilities and local, state and federal agencies. Identification of
emergency-related problems and development of remedial actions.
FKEC completed its Operations Center in December 2009.
7.2.5 Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Florida Keys
The mission of Habitat for Habitat for Humanity of Key West and Lower Florida Keys, Inc.
is to eliminate substandard housing and provide post disaster recovery assistance to the
community. The organization occupies a 13,000 square foot concrete facility located at
3032
disaster, Habitat is positioned to provide a staging area for post disaster operations including
volunteer deployment, project coordination and supply distribution. Habitat works in
partnership with federal, state, county and municipal disaster response teams as well as
nonprofit organizations such as The American Red Cross, The Salvation Army, State,
national and local ecumenical response groups, and the community at large.
7.3 Planning & Development Processes
7.3.1 Comprehensive Plan: Year 2010
The Monroe County Comprehensive Plan (Year 2010) consists of three parts: the Policy
Document; the Technical Document; and the Map Atlas. The plan is available online at
http://www.monroecounty-fl.gov/pages/MonroeCoFL_Growth/CompPlan2010/index.
The Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan Policy Document contains the goals, objectives and
policies for each element, the capital improvements implementation program, and the
monitoring and evaluation procedures. The Technical Document contains background
information and support data and analyses for the elements of the plan. The Map Atlas
contains maps depicting background information for the various elements (existing land use,
the Comprehensive Plan
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-11
implementation.
The Comprehensive Plan is framed as a series of goals, objectives, and policies that are
organized under fourteen elements. Natural hazards, especially flooding and high winds
associated with hurricanes and coastal storms, stormwater and drainage, and drought are
incorporated throughout. The following are some of the more notable citations:
Goal 101:
Monroe County shall manage future growth to enhance the quality
of life, ensure the safety of County residents and visitor, and protect valuable
natural resources.
Objective 101.2:
Monroe County shall reduce hurricane evacuation clearance times
to 24 hours by the year 2010. This policy is implemented through the Permit
Allocation System and consideration of the new hurricane evacuation transportation
model in consideration of capital improvements.
Objective 101.5:
Monroe County shall implement a Point System which directs
future growth to encourage redevelopment and renewal of blighted areas, to maintain
and enhance the character of the community, to protect natural resources, to encourage
a compact pattern of development, and to encourage affordable housing.
Objective 101.9:
Monroe County shall provide for drainage and stormwater
management so as to protect real and personal property and to protect and improve
water quality.
Objective 101.14:
By January 4, 1997, Monroe County shall adopt Land
Development Regulations which direct future growth away from areas subject to
periodic flooding (with particular focus on the Coastal High Hazard Areas, in which
mobile homes shall be prohibited except in existing parks or subdivisions).
Goal 102:
Monroe County shall direct future growth to lands which are
intrinsically most suitable for development and shall encourage conservation
and protection of environmentally sensitive lands.
Objective 102.8:
Monroe County shall take actions to discourage private
development in areas designated as units of the Coastal Barrier Resources System,
including discouraging extension of facilities and services by providers of electricity
and telephone service.
Goal 206:
rm resources
shall be protected and, where possible, enhanced (through development
standards for siting structures, disturbances, setbacks, restoration of native
vegetation).
Goal 211:
Monroe County shall conserve and protect potable water resources
and cooperate with regional efforts to ensure the continued availability of
quality potable water.
Objective 212.2:
Monroe County shall adopt minimum performance standards
designed to reduce the storm water runoff impacts, aesthetic impacts, and hydrologic
impacts of shoreline development.
Objective 212.
3: Permitted uses and performance standards within the shoreline
setback are outlined.
Goal 216:
Monroe County shall provide for hurricane evacuation, shelters
and refuges, and communication capabilities to promote safeguarding of the
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-12
public against the effects of hurricanes and tropical storms. Among policies
outlined are consideration of impact fees to offset the public costs of hazard
mitigation, evacuation, reconstruction of public facilities, emergency
communications equipment, and similar needs (Policy 216.1.15) and inclusion
in the Post-Disaster Recovery Plan a structured procedure aimed at debris
removal preparedness during hurricane evacuation and re-entry (Policy
216.1.14).
Goal 217:
Monroe County shall develop and implement a program of hazard
mitigation and post-disaster redevelopment to increase public safety and
reduce damages and public expenditures.
Objective 217.1:
Monroe County shall develop and implement a program of hazard
mitigation in the Coastal High Hazard Area which reduces floodplain alteration and
damage or loss due to natural disasters. Policies address new or replacement sanitary
sewage systems, supply of potable water, review of the building code, participation in
nity Rating System, enforcement of setback and elevation
requirements, and public acquisition decisions.
Objective 217.2:
Monroe County shall develop a Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan
which addresses priorities for immediate recovery and long-term redevelopment
including reducing exposure of human life to natural hazards. Policies address
coordination of post-disaster recovery operations, damage infrastructure, FEMA-
designated V Zones and repetitive loss areas, and limits on certain redevelopment.
Objective 217.3:
Monroe County shall adopt Land Development Regulations which
direct future growth away from the Coastal High Hazard Area. Policies include
assigning a negative point rating to developments proposed within this area and
prohibition on placement of mobile homes except on an approved lot within an
existing mobile home park or subdivision zoned for such use.
Goal 701:
Monroe County shall support the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
in the fulfillment of their statutory obligation and authority to provide for a
safe, high quality and adequate supply, treatment, distribution, and
conservation of potable water to meet the needs of present and future residents.
Objectives include water conservation efforts.
Goal 1001:
Monroe County shall provide a storm water management system
which protects real and person properties, and which promotes and protects
ground and near-shore water quality.
Goal 1301:
Monroe County shall promote and encourage intergovernmental
coordination between the County, the municipalities, the counties of Dade and
Collier, regional state and federal governments and private entities in order to
anticipate and resolve present and future concerns and conflicts.
Goal 1401:
Monroe County shall provide and maintain, in a timely and
efficient manner, adequate public facilities for both existing and future
populations, consistent with available financial resources and the other
elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Considerations include elimination of
public hazards, with limitations on public expenditures within the Coastal
High Hazard Area.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-13
In early 2015 the County initiated a significant update and revision process to develop the
2030 Comprehensive Plan (Plan). The goal is to continue to provide an effective and
efficient balance of future anticipated growth in order to enhance the quality of life, maintain
community character, economic development, ensure the safety of County residents and
visitors, and protect valuable natural resources. The proposed update to the Plan includes an
adjustment to ROGO permit distribution to a 20-year period to address build-out challenges
(1,970 permits vs. 8,168 privately owned vacant parcels) and land acquisition priorities.
The County, in an effort to balance community character, economic sustainability, ensure
the safety of County residents and visitors, and protect valuable natural resources with future
anticipated development expectations by property owners, recommended extending the
timeframe for distribution of the 1,970 ROGO allocations through the year 2033. This
extended timeframe can provide a safety net to Monroe County and provide additional time
to implement land acquisition, coordinate with our State and Federal partners on additional
land acquisition funding, and other strategies to reduce the demand for ROGO allocations
and help transition land into public ownership.
Additionally, proposed updates to the Plan include a new Energy and Climate element to
ensure the County is preparing for, exchanging data and developing coordinated strategies to
address future, potential energy conservation and impacts from climate change (for example:
considering climate change impacts such as increased temperatures, sea level rise,
potentially shifting habitat and ecosystem types and the need to withstand increased storm
surge in evaluating public infrastructure decisions).
7.3.2 Floodplain Management
Compliance with the NFIP
The County entered the National Flood Insurance Program in 1973 by adoption of an
ordinance that complies with the requirements of the program. The County reviews all
development proposals in special flood hazard areas
__________________________
and enforces the requirements of the ordinance. To
NFIP Flood Insurance Policies
ensure continued compliance with the NFIP, the
in Monroe County: 15,739
County will continue to:
Claims paid since 1978: 8,019
Enforce the adopted floodplain management
ordinance, including inspection of permitted
https://www.fema.gov/policy-claim-
development and unpermitted activities;
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-13
Maintain records pertaining to floodplain
(as of March 15, 2015)
development, including flood maps and Letters of
__________________________
Map Change, which shall be available for public
inspection;
Notify the public when there are proposed changes to the ordinance or Flood
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-14
Insurance Rate Maps; and
Promote the purchase of NFIP flood insurance policies as financial protection.
Monroe County administers the Floodplain Management Ordinance to regulate development
within areas designated by National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as "areas as of special
flood hazard." The purpose is to "protect the public health, safety and general welfare and to
minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions". Areas of special flood hazard
are identified as those expected to be inundated by the 1%-annual chance flood (commonly
-
The NFIP prepared a Flood Insurance Rate Map for Monroe County (current effective map
is dated February 18, 2005).
where waves are expected to be less than 3-feet high and V Zones where high velocity wave
energies are expec
show the anticipated flood elevations (referenced to mean sea level).
In Fiscal Year 2013, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) initiated a
coastal flood risk study for the South Florida Study Area that affects Monroe, Broward,
Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach Counties. The results of that study will be incorporated into
updated digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports for these counties. Under this study new surge and wave modeling is underway;
anticipated to be completed in about 2 years, and flood hazard mapping is anticipated to be
completed in 3-4 years. Discovery meetings were held in Monroe County in July 2014.
More information about the study is available at
http://www.southeastcoastalmaps.com/Pages/Projects/South-Florida.aspx
non-residential construction and water supply and sanitary sewer systems that are located in
areas of special flood hazard. It prohibits the alteration of sand dunes, mangrove stands or
wetlands if such alterations would increase the potential for flood damage. Placement of fill
and obstructions is discouraged (structural fill is prohibited in V Zones).
Standards are set forth for residential, non-residential, and manufactured (mobile home)
developments in special flood hazard areas. The dominant standard requires that the lowest
floor of buildings (including manufactured homes) be elevated to or above base flood levels.
Enclosures below the elevated lowest floor are allowed only if they meet requirements
specific to the flood zone.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-15
Enclosures Below Elevated Buildings
In 1995, FEMA notified Monroe County that the illegal conversion and occupancy of
enclosures below elevated residential structures had resulted from a deficiency in the
to correct the deficiency or face suspension from the National Flood Insurance Program.
The Board of County Commissioners responded by appointing a task force to address the
problem, which is complicated by the fact that Florida law prevents on-site investigations.
The task force, working with the State and FEMA, developed the concept that evolved into
-year period of 2002 to 2007, NFIP-
insured homes with enclosures below the Base Flood Elevation must be inspected to identify
deficiencies and deficiencies must be corrected in order for flood insurance policies to be
written. As of December 31, 2009, over 2,000 properties had been inspected and
approximately 1,600 had been brought into compliance. In mid-2013, FEMA notified
Monroe County that the Pilot Program for new inspections would end, but that Monroe
County must continue enforcement for all inspected structures and that Monroe County
continue its enforcement of floodplain regulations regarding enclosed areas below the base
flood elevation.
Section 122-6
regarding any non-conformities associated with enclosures.
NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties
Data provided by FEMA to the Florida Division of Emergency Management identifies
properties that are, or have been, insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that
have received two or more claims of at least $1,000. In 2005, unincorporated Monroe
County had only 161 properties that met this definition. As of March 2015, 631 individual
properties have received 1,350 claims, totaling approximately $29.3 million (average
payment of approximately $21,700). Of these 631 properties, 585 properties are residential
and 38 are non-residential. Figures 7-1a to 7-1i (end of chapter) illustrate the areas subject
to repetitive flooding based on NFIP repetitive claims data.
Seven properties in unincorporated Monroe County
have received a total of 30 claims, totaling more than $760,000. The statutory definition is a
residential property that is covered by an NFIP flood insurance policy and (a) that has at
least four claim payments (including building and contents) over $5,000 each, and the
cumulative amount of such claims exceeding $20,000; or (b) for which at least two separate
claim payments (building only) have been made with the cumulative amount exceeding the
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-16
market value of the building. For both (a) and (b), at least two of the qualifying claims must
have occurred within any 10-year period.
In the summer of 2008, the County mailed letters to six owners of properties that FEMA
identified as Severe Repetitive Loss Properties. Two owners responded and applications
were submitted for funding to elevate the buildings in compliance with the Count
requirements. As of early 2015, one project is complete, andthe other property sold and the
property retained the right to the funds awarded. The County is continuing to update the
Repetitive Loss Property list.
Coastal High Hazard Areas
____________________________
Florida Statute (163.3178, F.S.) requires local
Coastal High Hazard Area
governments to amend their Comprehensive Plan (future
Areas which have historically
land use map and coastal management element) to include
experienced destruction or
severe damage, or are
a definition of coastal high-hazard area and to depict the
scientifically predicated to
coastal high-hazard area on the future land use map. The
experience destruction or severe
damage from storm surge,
coastal high-hazard area is the area below the elevation of
waves, erosion, or other
the Category 1 storm surge line as established by a Sea,
manifestations of rapidly moving
Lake, and Overland Surges from Hurricanes (SLOSH)
or storm-driven water.
Note:
This definition and how it
computerized storm surge model. The intent is to limit
public expenditures that subsidize development in these
____________________________
high-risk areas.
Due to its low-lying terrain, approximately 80% of the County is located in the CHHA.
Areas outside the CHHA are chiefly confined to a linear zone along much of U.S. 1 and
some areas of higher elevation on various keys.
Coastal Barrier Resource System
The federal Coastal Barriers Resource Act (CBRA) of 1982 established the Coastal Barriers
Resources System (CBRS). The purpose of the program is to restrict federally subsidized
development of undeveloped coastal barriers to minimize loss of human life, reduce
wasteful expenditures of federal funds, and reduce damage to fish and wildlife habitat and
other valuable natural resources of coastal barriers. The intent of the CBRA is to remove
from undeveloped coastal barriers federal incentives for new development, such as National
Flood Insurance, structural stabilization projects, and Federal assistance for construction of
sewers, water supply systems, airports, highways, and bridges.
On November 1, 1990, the Coastal Barrier Improvement Act (CBIA) reauthorized the
CBRA; expanded the CBRS to include undeveloped coastal barriers along the Florida Keys;
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-17
(OPAs). The CBRS now contains two types of units, System Units and Otherwise Protected
in its regulations applies only to the 15 System
Units; the County does not have policies or regulations for OPAs.
These sites are located throughout the county and include areas such as the undeveloped
portion of North Key Largo and sections of Sugarloaf Key. Most of the CBRS units are
largely undeveloped. Protection of these areas is provided through land use policies in the
Comprehensive Plan and related land development regulations. Among the policies
advocated for these sites is public acquisition, especially portions of North Key Largo.
7.4 Communicating about Hazards
Monroe County and other organizations in the area recognize the importance of informing
residents and visitors about hurricanes, evacuation, public safety, and minimizing damage.
The following are some key ways that communications are undertaken:
The Cofloodplain management page has information about property
inquiries and code requirements, and lists a phone number for the floodplain
management office. The page also has links for flood maps, FEMA technical
bulletins, the inspection program (enclosures), flood warning, and additional
resources (which has a link to the floodplain management ordinance).
The emergency services page offers information about hurricane preparedness,
the Special Needs Registry, what to bring to shelters, the Local Mitigation
Strategy (including meeting and project information), and several links related
sites;
Emergency bulletins are posted on the webpage, information is scrolled on the
Monroe County Government Television Channel (Channel 76), and the
Emergency Management Hotline is activated (1-800-955-5504) when storm
activity or other hazard events threaten;
People can request e-mail notification whenever emergency bulletins are
issued or updated;
Materials are provided in booths at local fairs;
Presentations are offered to schools and other groups;
Both electric companies provide information to property owners about tree
trimming to reduce power outages;
Public information and pre-recorded public service announcements are
transmitted via local radio and
channel;
The Tourist Development Council is structured to transmit emergency
information to the industry (e.g., blast FAX);
organizations such as the Boards of Realtors and individual Real Estate
companies;
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-18
The County participates in the Home Depot annual hurricane event, sending
personnel to the stores in Marathon and Key West; topics covered include
supplies needed for family safety, tips on hardening homes to resist storm
damage, alert notification types, and home generator sizing and safety tips;
Sponsors and promotes Florida Hazardous Weather Awareness Week; and
American Red Cross does some public service announcements related to
hazardous weather.
Hurricane wind and flood hazards are well-recognized throughout the Keys, but the
importance of awareness is emphasized in the Floodplain Management Ordinance (at
Section 9.5-317)(a)(13)) which states that:
reements for deed, purchase, agreements, leases or other contracts for sale or exchange of
lots within areas of special flood hazard shall carry the following flood hazard warning
prominently displayed on the document: FLOOD HAZARD WARNING This property may be
subject to flooding. You should contact the County Growth Management Division and obtain the
latest information regarding flood elevations and restrictions on development before making use
of this property".
7.5 Recent and Near-Term Mitigation Actions
Improving resistance to the impacts of hurricanes is routine in Monroe County. Many
actions are not dependent on external funding but are part of the normal course of business
and compliance with various regulations. As of mid-2015, the following characterize some
of these activities:
The Key West Airport Authority replaced a portion of the terminal. The
replacement was designed and constructed to meet the wind resistance
provisions of the Florida Building Code. [Included in 2005 update]
The dwas replaced
with a fixed span bridge, helping to minimize traffic delays. [Included in 2005
update]
One Federal mitigation grant for a repetitive loss property was approved in
2008, and one was approved in 2009. Both are single-family homes that were
demolished and rebuilt elevated, in compliance with the building code and
floodplain management regulations. [Included in 2005 update]
Installed hurricane shutters on Marathon Airport passenger terminal.
[Included in 2015 update]
Elevated traffic and sallyport gate operators to protect against flooding at
Monroe County Detention Center (MCDC) locations on Stock Island, Key
Vaca Jail, Plantation Key Jail and MCSO Hangar in Marathon. [Included in
2015 update]
Retrofit of overhead rolling doors at MCDC Stock Island
Marathon Garage, to meet 155 mph wind load standards. [Included in 2015
update]
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-19
Riprap boulders protecting three locations (Tidal basin and Wilkinson Point;
H. Harris Park; and MM68 Landfill) have been repaired to provide coastal
erosion protection. [Included in 2015 update]
Moving Mitigation Forward
The County continues to work with FEMA to meet the requirements to allow application to
the Community Rating System. The Growth Management Division brought in external
support to evaluate the steps necessary to meet FEMA compliance requirements before
preparing a formal application.
7.6 2015 Updates
Several County offices and other entities reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some
of the more significant changes include:
Section 7.1: Updated text and table describing functional divisions; updated
permits issued.
Section 7.2: Minor edits to some descriptions of regional agencies
Section 7.3.1: Described the ongoing process to update and revise the
Comprehensive Plan and new elements. Updated ROGO description.
Section 7.3.2: Noted FEMA initiated a coastal flood risk study in FY2013.
Updated status of enclosure inspection program. Clarified description of the
State
figures showing locations of repetitive loss properties.
Section 7.4: Updated descriptions of ways the County communicates about
hazards.
Section 7.5: Updated and added recent mitigation actions.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-20
Figure 7-1a. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Figure 7-1b. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-21
Figure 7-1c. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Figure 7-1d. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-22
Figure 7-1e. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Figure 7-1f. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-23
Figure 7-1g. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Figure 7-1h. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-24
Figure 7-1i. Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-25
This page blank.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 7-26
Chapter 8. City of Key West
The City of Key West, the County seat of Monroe County, is located in the southernmost
is surrounded by the turquoise waters of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Oceans. Aside
from its natural beauty, Key West is noted for historic and cultural resources with over 2500
historic buildings and sites. The National Register Historic District is often referred to as
and is home to the largest and densest Historic District of vernacular wood
framed homes in the nation, most over 100 years old.
8.1 Overview of Key West
Geography
The island of Key West comprises just 3,370 acres in area. It is low-lying, rising from 2 feet
along the shoreline near Rest Beach to 16 feet above mean sea level at Solares Hill. Other
higher elevations are man-made and are the waste management area (landfill) and bridges
such as Garrison Bight Causeway. Most of the newer development is raised buildings built
-feet MSL, certain
locations important for tourism, such as Front Street, Key West Bight, and Mallory Square
are only at 3-feet MSL. Critical areas such as Key West Airport, Lower Keys Hospital,
DePoo Hospital, Florida Keys Community College, South Roosevelt Boulevard, Key West
Landfill, Florida Keys Community College, Poinciana Elementary, Gerald Adams
Elementa
Main Office, Service Station, Storage Facility and Substation, are at very low elevations
(approximately 3-feet MSL).
rocky base; a low dune exists at Rest Beach. Although sandy beaches are present along the
southern shore (e.g., Higgs Beach and Smathers Beach), some were artificially constructed.
the southern shoreline experience erosion due to coastal currents, tides, and wave impact.
The rate of erosion accelerates during storm events. Shallow waters surrounding the island
may contribute to increased storm surge height. Canals, cuts, and inlets experience flooding
due to storm surges that may be higher than along flat shorelines.
Population
The Southeast Florida Regional Planning Council, using US Census data, estimates the City
of Key West has a permanent resident population of approximately 24,620. According to
the 2013 Key West Comprehensive Plan the total number of people on Key West on an
average day, including permanent residents, seasonal residents, the maritime population,
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-1
overnight tourists, day-trippers, cruise ship visitors, commuters, and shoppers, is estimated
to be 56,335. While tpermanent population is projected to decrease slightly during
the five-, ten-, 15-and 20-year planning periods due to growth limitations and the lack of
significant amounts of vacant and developable land, the transient population is expected to
continue to grow and make up the difference.
Land Use & Economy
Key West essentially is completely developed, with a mix of single family residences, multi-
family dwellings, time-share and seasonal units, tourist lodgings (hotels, motels, inns, bed
and breakfasts, etc.), tourist-oriented uses (museums, attractions), marine-related and
recreational uses, commercial uses (restaurants, retail sales, banks, Realtors), medical
facilities and offices, and government uses. Redevelopment and renovation are constant
activities. The City is a world renowned tourist destination, drawing 3 million visitors a
year. It also is a popular location for second homes.
2013 Key West Comprehensive Plan
The 2013 Key West Comprehensive Plan updates the 2008 Conformed Version that
succeeded the 1993 Plan and six subsequent amendments. The plan incorporates the
maximum amount of dwelling units per acre and floor area ratio established as of January 1,
2012. Climate adaptation and resiliency were added and featured more prominently. Key
West recognizes the natural hazards described in the LMS (Chapter 5 and 6) throughout the
2013 Plan, summarized in Table 8-1. The hazards not addressed in the Plan are tornado and
wildfire (as noted in Chapter 6, the city has insufficient areas of vegetation to represent a
risk). There are plans to develop a separate Climate Change Element.
Table 8-1. Selected Objectives and Policies in the 2013 Key West Comprehensive Plan
Relevant to Hazards
Objective 1-1.12: Consider Application of Innovative Land and Water Resource Management, Climate
Adaptation, and Energy Conservation Concepts.
Policy 1.1.12.5: Increased Height:
Policy 1.1.4.6: Increase Resilience of General Landscaping.
Policy 2-1.3.4: Climate Change Preparedness.
Objective 1A-1.5: Historic Preservation in Coastal High Hazard Area
Policy 1A-1.5.1: Compliance with FEMA Standards.
Policy 1A-1.5.2: Hurricane Strategy Plan.
Policy 1A-1.5.3: Activities of Hurricane Recovery Task Force.
Objective 4-3.1 Protect Natural Drainage Features
Policy 4-3.1.1 Ensure that Urban Lands Provide Adequate Drainage and Protection from Flooding
and Manage the Retention of Ground and Surface Water at levels that Enhance Natural Storage
Capacity of Watersheds and Promote Aquifer Recharge
Policy 4-3.1.6 Managing Land Use in the Floodplain
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-2
Table 8-1. Selected Objectives and Policies in the 2013 Key West Comprehensive Plan
Relevant to Hazards
Policy 4-3.1.7 Inspection and Maintenance of Drainage Systems
Objective 4-4.1 Coordinate Issues Surrounding Aquifer Recharge
Objective 5-1.1 Protect Coastal Resources, Wetlands, Estuarine Saltpond Environmental Quality, Living
Marine Resources, and Wildlife Habitats
Policy 5-1.1.3 Protect Stabilize, and Enhance the Coastal and Wetland Shorelines
Objective 5-1.3 Land Use Controls and Construction Standards for Protecting the Natural Shoreline and
the Very Limited Beach/Dune System
Policy 5-1.3.1 Shoreline Setback
Policy 5-1.3.2 Natural Shoreline and Beach/Dune Stabilization
Objective 5-1.4 Limiting Public Subsidy of Development in the Coastal High Hazard Area
Objective 5-1.5 Avoid Population Concentrations in Coastal High Hazard Areas
Policy 5-1.5.3: Adaptation Action Areas.
Objective 5-1.6 Hurricane Evacuation
Objective 5-1.7 Post-Disaster Redevelopment
Policy 5-1.7.2 Post-Hurricane Assessments Bullet #5 (Hazard Mitigation Options in Rebuilding)
Policy 5-1.7.4 Hazard Mitigation and Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
Objective 5-1.10 Public Facility Level of Service Standards in Coastal Area
Objective 5-1.13: Planning for Resiliency and Adaptation in Coastal Areas
Objective 6-1.3 Maintenance of Floodplains
Policy 6-1.3.1 Enforce Policies to Maintain Floodplain
Policy 6-1.3.2
Land Purchase through Save Our Rivers Program or Other Available State and
Federal Programs
Objective 6-1.15: Planning for Resiliency and Adaptation in Natural Areas
Objective 9-1.2 Limitation on Public Investment in the Coastal High Hazard Area
8.2 Capability Assessment: City Organization
and Agencies
The Key West City Commission is composed of 7 members, including the Mayor who is
elected specifically to that office. The Commission sets government policy and adopts
guidance documents, such as the Comprehensive Plan and ordinances establishing various
codes and standards.
Key West is organized into several agencies, each with some authorized responsibilities that,
as described below, have bearing on how natural hazards are recognized and addressed.
City Manager. The City Manager of Key West implements the policies of the Commission
and administers the overall operations of the City. Related to mitigation of the impacts of
natural hazards, the City Manager:
Participates in post-disaster assessment and may develop mitigation initiatives
to address reduction of future loss.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-3
Participates in the Key West Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and
coordinates with the County and other local governments.
-Disaster Recovery Task Force which serves as the
with the responsibility for reviewing available alternatives for damaged
public facilities following a hurricane or other disaster.
May perform an analysis and provide recommendations to the City
Commission for hazard mitigation options, including relocation and
reconstruction of damaged public facilities.
Participates in intra- and inter-governmental disaster planning efforts,
including multi-agency Site Plan Review Committee and Hazard Mitigation.
Key West Planning Department. The Key West Planning Department is responsible for the
e Plan, land development
regulations, and zoning ordinance. Department personnel support the City Commission,
Planning Board, Historic Architectural Review Commission, Development Review
Committee, Bahama Village Redevelopment Advisory Board, Housing Committee, and the
Truman Waterfront Committee. Related to hazard mitigation, the department:
Ensures that mitigation related items in the Comprehensive Plan, such as
floodplain management and natural resource management, are followed and
reflected in the
Participates in post-disaster appraisals and may formulate additional mitigation
measures for use in the Comprehensive Plan.
Works closely with Building Department staff to maintain an accounting
system of permits issued pursuant to ROGO and coordinates actions related to
disaster planning, recovery, and mitigation.
Conducts surveys for hurricane evacuation modeling (and in 2009, hired an
expert on hurricane evacuation).
Incorporates mitigation recommendations, especially those based on direct
disaster experience, in the Evaluation and Appraisal Reports (EAR) required
for the Comprehensive Plan.
Maintains the Water Supply Plan.
Key West Building Department. The Building Department reviews construction plans and
impacts upon species focus areas of concern, issues permits, and inspects projects for
compliance (see Table 8-2). The staff includes: one State Certified Building Code
Administrator, who is also a Certified Floodplain Manager; a second Certified Floodplain
Manager serving as the Floodplain Administrator and who is also a State Certified Code
Enforcement Officer, three fulltime building inspectors; and 4 full-time Permit Technicians.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-4
Specific to hazards, Department personnel:
floodplain management and building code requirements
designed to minimize damage to structures from flooding and wind.
Identify and pursue legislative proposals for the enhancement of flood damage
prevention measures.
Monitor ongoing Substantial Improvement/Damage thresholds.
Review, approve, refer and inspect construction plans/sites for locations
specifically designated as Species Focus Areas for potential impact to
endangered species habitats.
Enforce the Florida Building Code requirements for wind loads and anchoring
foundations into bedrock.
Participates in the Post-Disaster Recovery Task Force.
Participates with the Lawful Unit Determination Team.
Continue to improve public awareness of the Florida Building Code by
conducting workshops and use public forums to educate the public about the
need to obtain permits.
Participates with the Development Review Committee performing multi-
faceted pre-application reviews of significant development projects.
Continues efforts to address and eliminate unsafe structures.
Table 8-2. Permits Issued in 2012, 2013, and 2014
Type of Development CY 2012 CY 2013 CY 2014
New single family 32 18 17
New other (commercial, industrial, religious, etc.) 7 1 12
New multi-family (2 or more) 0 1 0
Commercial (additions, renovation, conversions) 539 599 569
Residential (additions, renovation, conversions) 796 996 932
Other 2 12 4
Demolition 40 45 37
Relocation 0 0 0
Manufactured home (permanent, temporary) 0 0 0
Totals 1,416 1,692 1,571
Key West Historic Architectural Review Commission (HARC). Key West includes
numerous historic resources, including two historic districts listed in the National Register of
Historic Places: Key West Historic District and the US Naval Station (known as Truman
Annex). The Key West Historic District is significant due to its unique concentration of
frame vernacular architecture; possible one of the largest districts of its kind in the Nation.
The district is also recognized as the largest historic district in the State of Florida. HARC
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-5
was created by City Charter and is charged of preserving the character and appearance of the
historic districts and historic structures. By doing so, HARC reviews proposed projects
within the districts and determines their appropriateness based on adopted guidelines that
and
including regulations that are unique to the historic fabric of Key West.
Because historic properties in Key West are significant locally and nationally, they require
special attention and application of sensible reconstruction methodologies after damaging
events. Doing so ensures adequate procedures that will preserve the historic quality and
character found in Key West historic districts. In 2008, the Florida State Historic
Preservation Office (Florida SHPO), Division of Historical Resources prepared a planning
tool, Disaster Mitigation for Historic Resources: Protection Strategies, which will be
adopted by HARC. Since 1991, the City of Key West has been recognized by the U.S.
Secretary of the Interior and the Florida State Historic Preservation Office as a Certified
Local Government; therefore, the City needs to comply with all State and Federal
regulations regarding protection of historic structures in order to maintain the certification.
In 2001, First Lady Laura Bush recognized the Key West Historic District as a Preserve
America Community.
Key West Finance Department. The Finance Department is responsible for overseeing the
day-to-day financial requirements of the City, including establishment of purchasing
procedures for all agencies. To expedite preparation for, response to, and recovery from
disasters, the Finance Department may implement special emergency procedures to expedite
necessary purchase and payment before, during, and after a disaster.
Key West General Services Department. The General Services (Utilities) Department
includes Wastewater, Stormwater, Engineering Services, and Solid Waste, including the
management of the City's waste removal contract with Waste Management. The
Department also includes the Richard A. Heyman Environmental Pollution Control Facility
(Wastewater Treatment Plant) which is operated by a private contractor.
Key West Utilities Director. The Utilities Director is responsible for coordinating various
utility resources in the city. These include the Richard A. Heyman Environmental
Protection Facility (treatment Plant), Sewage Treatment System including pumping and lift
stations, Garbage Collection Program, Waste Transfer Facility, and the Stormwater Utility.
These facilities have specific written emergency plans and procedures designed for use in
emergencies such as tropical cyclones, severe storms, flooding and tornadoes. A separate
plan for hazardous materials is specific to the Sewage Treatment Plant
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-6
evaluates vulnerabilities such as flood height, roof construction, and window protection.
The Utilities Manager provides input in the Post-Disaster Recovery Task Force.
Engineering Department. The Director of the Engineering Services Department is
responsible for engineering and construction related services throughout the City.
Engineering Services staff are professionally qualified to review Civil Engineering plans to
determine compliance with the Florida Building Code and construction requirements. The
Engineering Department performs other responsibilities relating to the construction and
technical needs of the City, including overseeing the engineering requirements of public
facilities such as roads, bridges, sewer treatment facility, and other City buildings. The
Engineering Department monitors public beaches for shoreline erosion and participates in
grant applications for renourishment and mitigation activities.
After a damaging event, Engineering staff conduct damage assessments of public
infrastructure and works with federal and state agencies such as FEMA and Florida DEM to
develop scopes of work and to facilitate funding assistance for recovery operations. Under
the federal Public Assistance Program, mitigation measures to reduce future loss to public
facilities may be included in requests for recovery assistance. The Director of Engineering
provides input to the Post-Disaster Recovery Task Force.
Key West Community Services Department. The Community Services Department is
responsible for overseeing the maintenance and operation of all city facilities, including
buildings, roads and bridges. The Public Works unit is responsible for coordination and
provision of emergency public works, evaluation of infrastructure damage, and preparation
of documentation required for federal reimbursement (including identification of mitigation
components to be incorporated during recovery), and coordination of emergency debris
clearance. The Director of Community Services ities
Maintenance section (FMT). FMT is responsible for maintenance and repairs on some
government structures, and small new construction and additions.
In executing its disaster and recovery responsibilities, Public Works coordinates with the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), Monroe County Department of Public
Works, Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, and Keys Energy System. The Department plans,
coordinates and initiates restoration of the serviceability of transportation routes, bridges,
and assurance as to the safety and affected public and private dwellings and structures.
Key West owns approximately 100 buildings; many are leased to commercial concerns.
Some buildings have hurricane shutters; the presence of rooftop equipment and whether it is
anchored to resist hurricane winds is not known at this time. All work on buildings must
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-7
comply with the Florida Building Code and other pertinent requirements (such as floodplain
management). The City maintains flood insurance policies on some buildings. For leased
buildings, generally if one is damaged, the City provides some abatement of rent during the
period of restoration. If one is destroyed, the lease would be terminated.
Key West Transportation Department. The Transportation Department provides for
citywide and fixed route intra-county transportation services in the Lower Keys, operating a
fleet of buses. It also assists in transportation and evacuation planning.
Hurricane Plan and Procedures are designed to effectively implement its responsibility of
moving civilians to shelters or, in the event of an out-of-county evacuation, to staging areas
for school bus transport to the mainland shelter at Florida International University. The
Department participates in the emergency after-action process and formulates measures to
address future needs.
Key West Police Department. The Police Department is responsible for overall law
enforcement and protection of residents and visitors in the City of Key West. The
Department plays a key role in planning and response during emergencies. The permanent
standing Hurricane Preparedness Committee reports to the Chief of Police and is responsible
for preparation, review, and revisions of plans, procedures, operations and training materials
relating to hurricane preparation, response, and recovery. The committee prepares after-
action critiques of every implementation or exercise of any element of the disaster response
and recovery plan and provides recommendations for addressing future problems.
Emergency Law Enforcement and Traffic Control plan, coordination with other City
Highway Patrol to promote speedy and safe evacuation), communications with base
operations, field personnel, and emergency shelters.
Key West Fire Department. The Fire Department provides emergency management
assistance and direction to the City of Key West in concert with other duties of fire control,
fire prevention, and fire and hurricane public education. The Department plays a lead role in
planning and response for emergencies. In 2015, the Insurance Services Office evaluated
and awarded the department an ISO Public Protection Classification Rating of 2.
Monro
Operations Center, and contributing to pre-planning strategies and evacuation planning. The
Department is responsible for planning for hazardous materials incidents, maintaining a
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-8
hazardous materials inventory and response plan, and responding to hazardous materials
incidents.
Key West Port Department. The City hosts many cruise ships and ferry boats throughout the
year, serving approximately 800,000 visitors a year. The Ports and Marine Services
Director meets with the U.S. Coast Guard when impending weather conditions may prompt
decisions regarding port operations and whether to close the Key West Harbor to cruise
ships, passenger ships, and other large vessels. Prior to storm conditions, the department
coordinates preparation of private vessels in both the City Marina at Garrison Bight and Key
West Bight Marina and secures those facilities.
Key West Human Resources Department. The Human Resources Director is responsible for
monitoring senior City staff participation in the Incident Command System/National
Incident Management System (ICS/NIMS) training program. ICS training is required of
City Management, Department Heads and designated staff. On-line training (IS-100, 200,
700 and 800) is supplemented by classroom training for advanced courses.
Moving Mitigation Forward
is working with other departments to document buildings and infrastructure. Based on the
new changes to the Comprehensive Plan, forthcoming Land Development Regulations will
also be stronger for hazard mitigation standards across residential, commercial and
governmental buildings and infrastructure.
mitigation challenge is to qualify for the CRS and achieve as
high a rating as possible. The City also intends to complete its Post Disaster Recovery Plan
in FY16 and will examine lessons learned and model plans already in existence.
8.3 Hazards and Risk in Key West
Historic Storms
From the wreck of the treasure-laden ship, Nuestra Senora de Atocha, destroyed by a
hurricane in 1622 to the present, hurricanes have played a major role in the life of Key West.
Some of the more significant events include:
of the damage was located in the north and west sides of the island, along
Whitehead and Duval Streets to the Gulf (Bahama Village and Truman
Annex) and the Key West Bight. Damage included buildings that were pulled
off their foundations and swept out to sea, uprooted trees, destruction of a
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-9
lighthouse, and the cemetery located along South Beach was washed away
with the dead scattered in trees. Fort Zachary Taylor, which was under
construction, was severely damaged.
October 11 and 17, 1909. Listed by the National Hurricane Center as one of
the most intense to affect the U.S., this storm was a Category 3 with a
barometric pressure of 957 millibars. According to the Key West Historic
completely unprepared . . . Seven factories, several churches, and much of the
waterfront was destr
matters worse, another Category 3 hurricane struck on October 17, 1910,
causing 30 deaths and $300,000 in damage (not adjusted).
September 9-10, 1919. One of the most deadly and intense hurricanes listed in
the records of the National Hurricane Center, this Category 4 storm (927
millibars), this storm caused approximately 600 deaths. Key West recorded
winds of 95 mph and flood levels were 5-7 feet above Mean Sea Level.
Other Notable Hurricanes that Affected Key West
Hurricanes Donna (1960), Betsy (1965), and Inez
(1966), Tropical Storm Alberto (1982), Hurricanes
Kate (1982), Hurricane Floyd (1987), and Hurricane
Andrew (1992).
November 11-12, 1980. The most notable flooding not produced by storm
surge resulted from the 24-
Nearly 23 inches of rain resulted from the influence of
Tropical Storm Jeanne over Cuba and a stalled cold front. Widespread
flooding affected streets and low-lying areas that were unable to drain due to
the flat topography and continual rainfall. Reports indicate that 300 vehicles
and 500 buildings were seriously damaged.
September 24-26, 1998. Hurricane Georges (Category 2) made landfall in the
Lower Keys. The entire county was affected to some extent (1 death and $300
million total damage). Maximum sustained winds at the Naval Air Station
(Boca Chica) were 92 mph and the Monroe EOC in Marathon reported gusts
to 110 mph. According to the Key West Weather Service, precipitation levels
in the Lower Keys were identified as 8.65 inches on the south side of
Sugarloaf Key, 8.38 inches at Key West International Airport, and 8.20
inches on Cudjoe Key.
October 22, 1999. With little warning, Hurricane Irene suddenly altered its
course and crossed near Key West.
August 26, 2012. Hurricane Isaac reached tropical storm status as it moved
west-northwest at 18 mph through the Straits of Florida, with the center
passing across the lower Keys. The heaviest of the rain bands concentrated
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-10
over Palm Beach and Broward counties, producing between 10 and 13 inches
of rain. NWS Miami reports record a maximum of 4.66 inches of rain for
mainland Monroe. Portions of the Key West shoreline experienced severe
coastal erosion.
Damage due to Hurricane Georges (1998)
Table 8-3
assistance program. These amounts underestimate the total cost of damage to public
property and expenditures of manpower for recovery because they do not include the non-
federal share nor do they include costs determined to be ineligible. Other than debris
removal and emergency work on beaches, the two most costly projects were the seawall
replacement ($6.9 million) and repairs at the incinerator plant ($535,000).
The damage left after Hurricane Georges moved through the Keys illustrates the
vulnerability and the types and magnitudes of damage and costs. Among the reported
damage were the following:
The Hemingway House, a historic property, was damaged by a 146 year old
Banyan tree weakened by the winds and rain.
plane was overturned.
A number of roads and sites were covered in sand and debris.
Houseboats were damaged.
Waterfront businesses suffered damage including lost piers and decks.
Table 8-3. FEMA Reimbursements for Hurricane
Georges (DR 1249)
FEMA Category of Amount of Reimbursements
Damage
A Debris Removal $3,390,800
B Emergency Protective
$1,925,900
Measures
C Roads and Bridges 0
D Water Control Facilities 0
E Buildings and $792,800
Equipment (Public)
F Utilities 0
G Parks, Recreational
$7,597,500
Facilities and Other
Totals $13,707,000
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-11
Damage due to Hurricane Wilma (2005)
Based on the Preliminary Damage Assessment for the City, more than 5,200 structures
(1,512 structures). Eighty-five structures were destroyed and
many vehicles were damaged. Flood damage claims paid by the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) totaled $164 million.
Table 8-4 disaster
assistance program. These amounts underestimate the total cost of damage to public
property and expenditures of manpower for recovery because they do not include the non-
federal share nor do they include costs determined to be ineligible, nor do they include
damage to private property.
Table 8-4. FEMA Reimbursements City Expenditures
for Hurricane Wilma (DR 1609)
Amount of Reimbursements
FEMA Category of Damage
$3,506,346.19
A Debris Removal
$1,858,886.27
B Emergency Protective
Measures
$0.00
C Roads and Bridges
$99,739.00
D Water Control Facilities
$2,040,886.20
E Buildings and Equipment
(Public)
$596,150.92
F Utilities
$1,573,849.36
G Parks, Recreational Facilities
and Other
$9,675,857.94
Totals
Damage due to Hurricane Isaac (2012)
airports closed Saturday night, and volunteers and some residents began filing into shelters,
but eventually the island chain only experienced power outages and flooding in low-lying
areas. Newspaper reports mentioned Duval Street in Key West being mostly closed. In Key
West, privately-owned property experienced minimal damage.
Total damage caused by beach erosion to city-owned shoreline was estimated at more than
$1.2 million.
Table 8-
assistance program. These amounts underestimate the total cost of damage to public
property and expenditures of manpower for recovery because they do not include the non-
federal share nor do they include costs determined to be ineligible.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-12
Table 8-5. FEMA Reimbursements for City
Expenditures for Hurricane Isaac (DR 4084)
Amount of
FEMA Category of Damage
Reimbursements
$93,685
A Debris Removal
$63,573
B Emergency Protective Measures
$0
C Roads and Bridges
$0
D Water Control Facilities
$0
E Buildings and Equipment (Public)
$0
F Utilities
$722,000
G Parks, Recreational Facilities and Other
$880,154
Totals
Hurricane Flooding as Predicted by SLOSH Modeling
verland
Surges from Hurricanes), estimates surges associated with different characteristics of
tropical cyclones (track, forward speed, wind speed, etc.). Table 8-6 is carried forward from
the 2010 Plan as it provide more site-specific potential surge impacts and is to be used in
conjunction with the Hazus results from Chapter 5. The results can be combined with
topographic mapping to delineate inland areas subject to flooding (with a margin of error of
+/- 20).
Table 8-6. SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths (ft above MSL)
Ocean Side Bay Side
Storm Categories Storm Categories
Track Track
Direction 1 2 3 4 5 Direction 1 2 3 4 5
WSW 3 4 9 9 10 WSW 4 6 9 10 10
W 4 6 8 9 10 W 4 7 8 10 10
WNW 4 6 8 9 10 WNW 4 7 8 10 10
WN 4 6 7 9 9 NW 4 6 7 9 9
NNW 4 5 7 9 9 NNW 4 5 7 9 9
N 4 5 7 9 9 N 4 5 7 9 9
NNE 4 5 7 9 9 NNE 4 5 7 9 9
NE 4 5 6 8 9 NE 3 5 6 8 9
ENE 4 5 6 8 10 ENE 4 5 6 9 10
E 3 5 7 8 10 E 4 5 7 9 10
Rainfall/Fresh Water Flooding in Key West
five inches of rainfall, which happens several times each year. The types of damage caused
by flooding of this nature include traffic rerouting, business closures, and flooding above
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-13
finished floor height and above of homes and businesses. In just the Old Town area at North
Duval, a typical storm can disrupt businesses causing losses of approximately $20,000 each
day. Damage to private structures and contents and the costs of clean up are not estimated.
The most susceptible locations are listed in Table 8-7.
According to the NCDC Storm Events Database there has been one significant flooding
event in the last five years. On August 20, 2013 thunderstorms produced heavy rainfall of 2
to 3 inches across Key West, resulting in street flooding in the low-lying sections of Old
Town. Greene and Front Streets had to be closed and Lower Duval Street and Caroline
Street were also flooding.
Table 8-7. Locations Susceptible to Rainfall/Fresh Water Flooding.
Location Status (mid-2015)
The north section of Old Town bounded by the Gulf of Work ongoing with the East Front Street
Mexico and Whitehead and Green Streets, some buildings Flood Mitigation Project. Work
experience flooding above finished floor elevation flooding completed June 2015.
approximately twice a year.
Palm Avenue and Eaton Street (at White Street) which can Not completed Monroe County Right of
reroute 5,000 vehicles per day during heavy rains, affects Way.
businesses, and causes stranding of residents of the
adjacent housing authority homes.
Sirugo Avenue and Sunshine Drive, which has floods Plans are developed and in line for
above finished floors in residences annually. construction.
United Street and Thompson Street basin, which Plans are developed and in line for
has causes flooding of residences finished floor. construction.
North Roosevelt Boulevard (US Highway 1) which floods Florida DOT project completed in
two outbound lanes completely during heavy rain storms 2 September 2014, including flood
to 3 times each year, negatively impacting businesses and mitigation and stormwater run-off
causing significant traffic rerouting. controls.
Fourth Street at Patterson Avenue floods frequently, Plans are developed and in line for
causing commercial business and residential traffic construction.
disruptions.
Blanch, Dennis and Duncombe Streets causing school bus Plans in development.
disruptions and flooding above finish floors of residences.
Duck Street Ave.and 20th Street, causing traffic disruptions
Not completed.
and flooding above finish floors of residences.
Various very localized flooding spots causing water Areas are being prioritized for possible
infiltration into homes and businesses can be found around plan development.
town.
Sea Level Rise
The 2009 Key West Climate Action Plan acknowledges that the topic of climate change has
been discussed for over 30 years and the science of projecting impacts has been determined
to be sound. The Action Plan states impacts are being observed and it is time to act on an
adaptation strategy. NOAA data shows that the mean sea level rise trend is 2.24
millimeters/year with a 95% confidence interval of +/- 0.16 mm/yr based on monthly mean
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-14
sea level data from 1913 to 2006. This is equivalent to a change of 0.73 feet (8.76 inches) in
100 years. In other words, the City can expect a 9-inch rise in tide by 2100.
In the context of this Local Mitigation Strategy, the inevitable impact of sea level rise is
increased flooding for homes, businesses, roads and public facilities (parks, beaches, airport)
affecting everyday activities to which Key West residents and visitors are accustomed. The
Action Plan describes the impact in terms of how many more roads and recreational
facilities will be flooded and tables identify specific impacts on facilities (parks, beaches,
airport, aquarium, etc.) and roadwaysexpected to have portions inundated by saltwater with
a 9-inch tide rise.
As a partner to the Southeast Florida Climate Change Compact (Compact), the City of Key
document, joining the Counties of Monroe, Miami-Dade, Broward and West Palm Beach in
recognizing the planning windows of 3-7 inches of sea level rise by 2030 and 9-24 inches of
sea level rise by 2060. Source: http://www.southeastfloridaclimatecompact.org//wp-
content/uploads/2014/09/sea-level-rise.pdf
Also in conjunction with the Compact, Key West was included in the August 2012
. From that analysis,
Table 8-8 summarizes infrastructure and acreage located at very low elevations
(approximately 3-feet MSL).
Table 8.8. Inundation Acreage with 3-foot Sea Level Rise
Facility
More Likely Possibly Total Total Percent
InundatedInundationAcreageInundation
To Be
Inundated
Key West International Airport150.3 9.3 159.5 170.6 94%
Keys Energy Services Main Office0.7 0.1 0.8 0.8 100%
Keys Energy Services Substation 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 31.1%
Kennedy Drive Key West
FKAA Storage Facility N. Stock 0.0 0.2 0.2 2.3 7.1%
Island
Fleming Key WWTP 1.1 0.7 1.7 11.9 14.6%
Key West Landfill 22.2 1.1 23.4 73.5 31.8%
DePoo Hospital LFKHS 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.2 8.3%
Lower Keys Hospital N. Stock 1.8 0.4 2.2 15.1 14.7%
Island
Florida Keys Community College N.
1.4 1.1 2.5 21.4 11.8%
Stock Island
Gerald Adams Elementary N. Stock
0.4 0.1 0.5 9.5 4.9%
Island
Horace O'Bryant Middle School
4.4 2.8 7.2 9.2 78.7%
(Shelter)
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-15
Key West High School 6.9 4.8 11.7 25.2 46.5%
Poinciana Elementary School 2.4 0.5 2.8 6.9 41%
Sigsbee Elementary School 5.3 0.2 5.5 11.2 48.8%
Floodplain Management & Compliance with the NFIP
The City entered the National Flood Insurance Program in 1971 by adoption of an ordinance
that complies with the requirements of the program. The ordinance has been revised several
times, most recently in 2013 when the City replaced the ordinance with a code-coordinated
ordinance as part of a statewide effort to coordinate
__________________________
local ordinances with the flood provisions of the Florida
NFIP Flood Insurance Policies
Building Code.
in Key West: 7,657
The City reviews all development proposals in special
Claims paid since 1978: 3,426
flood hazard areas and enforces the requirements of the
https://www.fema.gov/policy-claim-
ordinance. To ensure continued compliance with the
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-
NFIP, the City continues to:
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-13
(as of March 31, 2015)
__________________________
Enforce the adopted floodplain management
ordinance, including inspection of permitted
development and unpermitted activities;
Maintain records pertaining to floodplain development, including flood maps
and Letters of Map Change, which shall be available for public inspection;
Maintain a special section of the city web site dedicated to flood damage
prevention information, online flood maps, mitigation measures, elevation
certificates and map changes.
Maintain records pertaining to floodplain development, including flood maps
and Letters of Map Change, which shall be available for public inspection;
Notify the public when there are proposed changes to the ordinance or Flood
Insurance Rate Maps; and
Promote the purchase of NFIP flood insurance policies as financial protection.
NFIP Floodplain Mapping
Key West has participated in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) since September
18, 2005. FEMA initiated a coastal study to revise the FIRM, expected to be completed in 3
to 4 years.
The FIRM delineates areas that have been determined to
-percent-annual chance of flooding in any given year
(commonly called the 100-year flood). Flooding of this frequency is not associated with a
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-16
specific hurricane category. Key West has the following flood zones and flood elevations
(above MSL) shown on the FIRM:
VE Zones (coastal flood with velocity hazard wave action) of 11-13 feet are
near the shoreline and in sections adjacent to Cow Key Channel on the border
with Stock Island.
AE Zones (areas subject to flooding but waves are predicted to be less than 3-
feet in height) of mostly 7-9 feet are indicated for the newer sections of Key
X Zones are delineated in most of the inland areas of the older, historic portion
of the City. X Zones include areas determined subject to flooding by the 0.2-
percent annual-chance flood (500-year) and areas that are outside the 500-
year floodplain.
AO Zones, where flood depths of 1-3 feet are predicted in sloping areas for
Sunset Island offshore of the west side of Key West.
NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties
Data provided by the Florida Division of Emergency Management identifies properties that
are, or have been, insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that have received
two or more claims of at least $1,000. In 2005, 51 properties met the definition. As of
March 2015, 221 individual properties are classified as repetitive loss and have received 563
claims, totaling approximately $25.7 million (average payment of approximately $45,600).
Of these 221 properties, 183 are residential and 38 are non-residential. Figure 8-1 shows the
locations of repetitive loss properties and Figure 8-2 illustrates the bigger picture of insured
flood losses, by showing relative concentrations of NFIP insurance claim payments for
period 2000 through 2014. Both figures are at the end of the chapter.
Eleven properties in Key West are designated as
Severe Repetitive Loss properties, having received a total of 60 claims totaling more than
$2.5 million. In one instance, the cumulative value of flood claims paid is believed to
A Severe Repetitive Loss Property is defined as a residential property that is covered by an
NFIP flood insurance policy and (a) that has at least four claim payments (including
building and contents) over $5,000 each, and the cumulative amount of such claims
exceeding $20,000; or (b) for which at least two separate claim payments (building only)
have been made with the cumulative amount exceeding the market value of the building.
For both (a) and (b), at least two of the qualifying claims must have occurred within any 10-
year period.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 8-17
Tornadoes in Key West
Table 8-9 includes information on tornadoes that have affected Key West since the late
1950s. Fortunately, no deaths or injuries have resulted.
Table 8-9. Tornadoes in Key West
Date Fujita Scale* Damage (not adjusted)
July 1, 1959 F-0 $3,000
June 2, 1966 F-0 $25,000
June 18, 1972 (Hurricane Agnes) F-2 $400,000
August 20, 1978 F-0 $25,000
June 28, 1979 F-0 $3,000
May 16, 1988 F-0 $1,000
May 3, 1989 F-0 Not reported
May 1999 F-0 Not reported
October 2000 F-0 Not reported
October 2003 F-0 Not reported
December 2009 EF-0 $5,000
*Enhanced Fujita Scale (EF) operational February 1, 2007
Source: NWS Key West Warning Meteorologist and NCDC
Drought Hazards
drought is comparable the drought risk throughout the area.
Wildland Fire Hazards
The Florida Forestry Department has not indicated that areas in Key West are likely to
experience significant risk of wildland or brush fires.
Table 8-10 lists facilities that the City deems important and critical. Figure 8-3 shows the
and sewer facilities, city buildings and
emergency facilities (end of chapter; also see Figure 2-3).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) Final Draft for FDEM Review 8-18
Table 8-10. Important and Critical Facilities in Key West
Critical/Essential Facilities: Other Public Facilities:
bridges Dee Poo Hospital
24 sewer lift stations and one Wastewater Lower Florida Keys Health Center
Treatment Plant
U.S. Naval Hospital
4 stormwater lift stations
Key West International Airport
City buildings (New City Hall complete
Florida Highway Patrol Substation South
February 2016), Old City Hall, City Hall Annex, ,
Roosevelt Boulevard
Old Town Garage
US Coast Guard Base
Fire Stations: Central #1, Angela St #2, Kennedy
Military Fuel Storage Facility
#3)
Keys Energy Services Main Office & Substation
City Parks & Recreational Facilities: Martin
Luther King Pool Building, Indigenous Park,
Florida Keys Aqueduct (FKAA) Authority Main
Mallory Square, Douglas Gym, Clayton Sterling
Office, Water Towers, Storage Facility, Pump
sports complex, Wickers Sports Complex,
Station
Bayview Park Recreational Center, Fire Station
Museum
Monroe County Health Department Gato Bldg
Emergency Operations Center (Public Safety
Facility), Fire Station #3,
Coastal & Aquatic Managed Areas
Key West DOT Building, Public Works Building,
OMI Repair Building, Transit Facility
Southernmost Transfer Station
Hazardous Materials Sites (302 Facilities): Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks:
Bell South, 530 Southard Street Key West Villas (Poinciana) LTD Mobile Home
Park
KES 1001 James Street
Stadium Mobile Home Park
Key West Wastewater Treatment Plant, Trumbo
Point Annex, Fleming Key Key West Trailer Court
Naval Air Station, Trumbo Point Mastic
Marinas: Cruise Ship and Ferry Ports:
A & B Marina Mallory Square
Galleon Marina Outer Mole
Garrison Bight Marina Pier B
Hilton Haven Marina KW Ferry Terminal
Key West Seaport
Key West Yacht Club Marina
Truman Annex Marina
City Marina
Ocean Key House
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) Final Draft for FDEM Review 8-19
8.4 Damage Reduction Activities
On-Going Activities
The City activates a Post-Disaster Recovery Task Force after a major damaging event has
occurred. In addition to members from City departments, various neighborhood and
interest-based groups are represented. A main focus of the task force is to encourage public
participation in the post-storm redevelopment planning and review process, including
historic preservation interests. The Task Force also analyzes the outcome of an event and
makes recommendations for mitigation.
System. In recent years, the City addressed identified compliance concerns and has been
invited to reapply to the CRS. The City has also approved a new staff position, expected to
be filled in FY15 to address Repetitive Loss properties and other CRS matters.
-
monthly Planners Forum with the other 5 local governments in the Keys to proactively
address climate change and hazard planning through policy changes. The Sustainability
Coordinator sits on the staff steering committee for the Southeast Florida Regional Climate
Change Compact and attends its regional workshops on stormwater, adaptation action areas,
risk communication, and CRS.
The City was awarded a Climate Change Adaptation Grant through Sea Grant Gulf of
Mexico to overhaul its Land Development Regulations in regards to Adaptation, which will
be complete by the end of FY15.
Regulatory Change: Building Height
On Nov. 4th, 2014 Key West voters approved a Building Height Referendum to allow
buildings with lowest floors below the BFE to exceed the height restriction when the
buildings are raised on higher foundations. The final regulations, expected in May 2015, will
allow buildings, by exception to the building height regulations, to be voluntarily raised up
to 4 feet above the BFE, provided the maximum height is no more than 40 feet in height.
Buildings outside of the mapped SFHA (i.e., located within the
zones) are not subject to flood hazard area requirements and thus are not affected by this
change.
The exception allows the Building Department to approve applications to elevate buildings
if the applications meet the guidelines for the height exception. Approval for structures
located within the historic district is contingent on Historic Architectural Review
Commission approval to elevate higher than the minimum flood level.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) Final Draft for FDEM Review 8-20
Floodplain Management Changes
The City revised its floodplain management regulations in 2013, in part to coordinate with
the Florida Building Code. It includes a number of standards that exceed the NFIP
minimum requirements:
Eliminated 36" height above grade rule for mobile home parks, in favor of
minimum elevation to Base Flood Elevation for new or substantially
improved manufactured homes.
Prohibited installment of manufactured homes in coastal high hazard areas
(Zone V).
Re-enacted five-year cumulative rule for Substantial Improvement
calculations.
Removed elevation exemption for utilities and servicing equipment for
otherwise exempted historic buildings.
Mitigation Projects
The City has undertaken various projects to reduce exposure to future damage, such as
drainage improvements and retrofits of public buildings and facilities (with or without
FEMA funding). Table 8-11 lists projects completed between 1999 and 2004.
Table 8-11. Key West Mitigation Projects (19992014)
Mitigation Project Location and Notes on Activity
Key West Transfer/SWTE. Notes: Pending grant approval to redevelop the site as the Key
West Department of Transportation / Monroe County School District Transportation Hub and
Fleet Services Center.
DOT Building
FDS Gym. Notes: Seeking grants to enhance the structure to be used as a general
population shelter and point of distribution.
Fire Station #1
HMGP
Grinnell Street (Backflow preventers)
William Street
Elizabeth Street
Green Street
Duval Street
Ashby Street Pump Station. Notes: Control panel was raised above BFE and provided
elevated platform for portable electric generation. Seeking grants to install permanent
emergency power for all pumping stations.
Simonton Street (Duval/Front Pump Station)
East Front Street Flood Mitigation Project (new outfall, gravity wells, new inlets, tide valve)
Major Pipe Cleaning Project. Notes: Ongoing.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) Final Draft for FDEM Review 8-21
Table 8-11. Key West Mitigation Projects (19992014)
Mitigation Project Location and Notes on Activity
White Street
Kamien Subdivision. Notes: Ongoing.
Fort Street. Notes: Ongoing.
Reynolds Street
Searstown / Donald Ave
2005 Project: 26 Locations
Margaret Street
East Front Street Flood Mitigation Project: 6 Locations
Olivia Street
Rest Beach Berm re-nourishment and associated seagrass mitigation delayed due to
extended Army Corps of Engineers permit application review.
Dog Beach Berm
South Beach Berm
Simonton Beach Berm
-
Smathers Beach Bermre-nourishment delayed due to extended Army Corps of Engineers
permit application review.
Seawall Additional Length
South Beach Pier
Flood
Margaret Street building, Key West Bight
Proofing
8.5 2015 Updates
Section 8.1: Revised to update population estimates and objectives and
policies based on the 2013 Comprehensive Plan.
Section 8.2: Updated agency descriptions to reflect current organization and
descriptions of functions related to hurricanes and hazard mitigation.
Section 8.3: Added text on Hurricane Isaac; added new subsection on sea
level rise; updated continued compliance with the NFIP; expanded text on
repetitive loss properties, severe repetitive loss properties, and updated map
of repetitive loss properties; updated list of critical facilities.
Section 8.4: Added description of new Sustainability Coordinator;
summarized regulatory change related to allowing elevated buildings to
exceed building height restrictions; updated recent mitigation projects.
Plans consulted during the 2015 update:
2013 City of Key West Comprehensive Plan
2011 Key West Strategic Plan
2009 Key West Climate Action Plan
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) Final Draft for FDEM Review 8-22
Figure 8-1. NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties (2015). Note: The south side of Stock Island not part of
the City of Key West.
Figure 8-2. Concentrations of NFIP Paid Claims (2000 2014).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) Final Draft for FDEM Review 8-23
Figure 8-
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) Final Draft for FDEM Review 8-24
Chapter 9. City of Layton
The City of Layton, incorporated in 1963, is located in the Middle Keys primarily on the
east side of Overseas Highway, just north of Long Key State Park entrance.
9.1 Overview of Layton
Geography
Layton comprises just 85 acres in area. Layton is building almost entirely on waterfront
property, mostly canals. It is low-lying, with all land below 6 feet above mean sea (MSL).
Population
The Southeast Florida Regional Planning Council, using US Census data, estimates the City
of Layton has a permanent resident population of 186. The seasonal population increases to
as much as 250. Current population projects indicate the permanent population may grow to
205 by 2020.
o
disasters. In 2014, the Monroe County Social Services registered just one person in the
Layton area as having special needs for hurricane assistance.
Land Use & Economy
small
businesses (restaurants and convenience stores).
addition, growth is limited through the Rate of Growth Ordinance to implement portions of
mprehensive Plan. ROGO, as the ordinance is called, establishes a building
permit allocation system for residential construction. The purpose is to encourage in-fill of
platted lots served by existing infrastructure and to limit growth to enable safe and timely
hurricane evacuation. Pursuant to ROGO and an agreement between the City, County and
the Department of Economic Opportunity, the annual allocation for Layton is three permits
per year for residential dwelling units.
According to the current City of Layton Comprehensive Plan (amended in 2015), the pattern
of development in the past has been largely limited to single family homes along with
commercial development along the Overseas Highway is expected to continue in the future.
The approximately 50 acre tract in the southeast quadrant of the City is now owned by the
City of Layton and the comprehensive plan and ordinances are being amended to maintain
that property without development in perpetuity. This parcel is the only unplatted vacant
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-1
land in the City. All new construction, reconstruction, and improvements to existing
buildings must comply with the current Florida Building Code requirements.
Layton joined the National Flood Insurance Program in July 1971 and administers a
floodplain management ordinance that meets or exceeds the minimum federal requirements.
In 2001, the city qualified for the NFIP Community Rating System.
9.2 Capability Assessment: City Organization
and Agencies
members, including the Mayor who is elected
specifically to that office. The City Council sets government policy and adopts guidance
documents, such as the Comprehensive Plan 1996 and ordinances establishing various codes
and standards, and responsible for the adoption of the Local Mitigation Strategy.
Layton is organized into several agencies, each with authorized responsibilities that, as
described below, have bearing on how natural hazards are recognized and addressed.
Mayor.
The Mayor implements the policies of the Commission and administers the overall
operations of the City, including hiring staff as funded by the Council and chairing the
Council meetings. The Mayor also sits on the LMS Working Group.
City Clerk.
The City Clerk is appointed by the City Council and is responsible for
maintaining City records, publishing meeting notices, maintaining the financial records,
Community Rating Systems Coordinator, Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group
member, and other duties as directed by the City Council.
Administrative Assistant to the Mayor.
The Administrative Assistant is responsible for the
daily activities of the City and in the absence of the Mayor, represents the Mayor at official
meetings and functions.
Layton Planning Department.
The Planning Department is responsible for the
and the City Planner is the
Vice-Chair for the LMS Working Group.
City Building Official.
The Building Official reviews construction plans, issues permits,
and inspects projects for compliance. He is also the Floodplain Manager and a member of
the LMS Working Group. Layton enforces the Florida State Building Code. The
Department is responsible for enforcing zoning and building standards and the Land
Development Regulations.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-2
Layton , Florida
Building Department has 2 staff members,
including a Certified Floodplain Manager
City Clerk has 1 staff member who is a Certified
Municipal Clerk.
Administrative Department has 1 staff member
Planning Department has 1 staff member
Code Enforcement Department has 1 staff
member and an appointed Code Enforcement
Board
Table 9-1. Layton: Permits Issued (2012, 2013, 2014)
CY 2012 CY 2013 CY 2014
New single-family, detached 0 0 0
New single-family, attached 0 0 0
Multi-family (2 or more) 0 0 0
Non-residential (all types) 0 0 0
Residential (additions, alterations, repairs) 16 19 20
Non-residential (additions, alterations, repairs) 14 11 15
Demolition 0 4 0
Relocation 0 0 0
Mobile home (permanent/temporary) 0 0 0
Total Permits Issued 30 31 36
Moving Mitigation Forward
The City is striving to maintain its rapid response on disasters and flood issues and is
striving to improve its CRS rating from Class 8 to Class 7.
9.3 Hazards and Risk in Layton
Historic Storms
Hurricane Donna (August 29-September 19, 1960). A Category 4 hurricane, this storm is
listed among the most intense in U.S. history. It curved northwestward over the Middle
Keys before turning north towards the mainland at Naples and Fort Myers. Wind speeds of
128 mph and central pressure of 28.44 inches were measures. Tide levels ranged from 13.5
feet above MSL at Upper Matecumbe Key, +10 feet at Plantation Key, and 8.9 feet in Key
Largo. The high water mark closest to Layton was nearly 8 feet (ocean side, Craig Key Mile
Marker 72).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-3
Hurricane Betsy (August 26-September 12, 1965). A Category 3 hurricane, Betsy passed
over Marathon moving westward into the Gulf of Mexico. At Tavernier, central pressure
was recorded at 18.12 inches and wind speeds were estimated at 120 mph. Flood levels
were measures at 9 feet MSL in Key Largo.
tornadic activity in the area.
Hurricane Georges (September 25, 1998). Near Layton at Mile-Marker 70, storm debris
rendered U.S. 1 impassable to civilian vehicles. The high water marks closest to Layton
were 4.6 feet at Mile-Marker 69.5 and 5.7 feet at Long Key State Park Mile-Marker 66.8.
Tropical Storm Mitch (November 4-5, 1998) affected the City of Layton.
Effect of Recent Hurricane Disasters
Damaged city property; a reimbursement of over $7,000 was received for
damage to signs and streets, park cleanup, and EOC staffing.
flooding, and most roofs suffered wind damage (shingles). About 2% of
homes sustained significant wind damage.
Due to a 4-day power outage, all businesses were closed or experienced
restricted operations.
Lobster fishermen lost approximately 50% of their traps.
Damage from Hurricane Wilma
Although there was only minor damage to City property, there was severe water and wave
action caused more than $1,000,000 in damage to the waterfront commercial and residential
properties on the north side of the Overseas Highway as the surge from the storm exceeded
5.5 feet above Base Flood.
Damage from Hurricane Isaac
The City of Layton sustained no damage.
Hurricane Flooding as Predicted by SLOSH Modeling
Surges from Hurricanes), estimates surges associated with different characteristics of
tropical cyclones (track, forward speed, wind speed, etc.). This information is carried
forward from the 2010 Plan as it provide more site-specific potential surge impacts and is to
be used in conjunction with the Hazus results from Chapter 5. The results can be combined
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-4
with topographic mapping to delineate inland areas subject to flooding (with a margin of
error of +/- 20%). The closest available predications are made for Conch Key Mile-Marker
63 and Islamorada Mile-Marker 82 (Table 9-2). Although storm surge flooding cannot be
predicted simply at any given location, these charts can be used to approximate surge
flooding in Layton.
Table 9-2. SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths (ft above MSL)
Ocean Side Mile-Marker 63 Ocean Side Mile Marker 82
Storm Categories Storm Categories
Track Track
Direction 1 2 3 4 5 Direction 1 2 3 4 5
WSW 4 6 8 9 9 WSW 4 5 7 8 9
W 4 6 7 8 9 W 4 6 7 9 10
WNW 4 5 7 8 9 WNW 4 6 7 9 10
WN 4 5 7 7 8 NW 4 6 7 9 10
NNW 4 5 6 7 8 NNW 4 5 7 8 10
N 3 5 6 7 8 N 4 5 7 8 9
NNE 3 4 6 7 8 NNE 4 5 6 8 9
NE 3 5 6 8 9 NE 4 5 6 7 8
ENE 4 6 8 10 11 ENE 3 5 6 7 8
E 5 8 10 11 12 E 3 4 6 7 8
Floodplain Management & Compliance with the NFIP
The City entered the National Flood Insurance Program in 1971 by adoption of an ordinance
that complies with the requirements of the program. The City reviews all development
proposals in special flood hazard areas and enforces the requirements of the ordinance. To
ensure continued compliance with the NFIP, the City
_______________________________
will continue to:
NFIP Flood Insurance Policies in
Enforce the adopted floodplain management
Layton: 89
ordinance, including inspection of permitted
development and unpermitted activities;
Claims paid since 1978: 8
Maintain records pertaining to floodplain
development, including flood maps and Letters of
https://www.fema.gov/policy-claim-statistics-
Map Change, which shall be available for public
flood-insurance/policy-claim-statistics-flood-
insurance/policy-claim-13
inspection;
(as of March 31, 2015)
_______________________________
Notify the public when there are proposed
changes to the ordinance or Flood Insurance Rate Maps;
and
Promote the purchase of NFIP flood insurance policies as financial protection.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-5
NFIP Floodplain Mapping
Layton has participated in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) since July 23,
1971. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) prepared a Flood Insurance Rate Map
for Monroe County and incorporated municipalities (current effective map is dated February
18, 2005). The FIRM delineates areas that have been determined to be subject to flooding
-percent-annual chance of flooding in any given
year (commonly called the 100-year flood). FEMA initiated a coastal study to revise the
FIRM, expected to be completed in 3 to 4 years.
All land in Layton is subject to flooding; all buildings are subject to some degree of risk
depending on type of construction and elevation above grade. Areas designated as VE
Zones (coastal flood with velocity hazard wave action) are shown as exposed to flooding
ranging from 11-13 feet above MSL. Areas delineated as AE Zones (areas subject to
flooding but waves are predicted to be less than 3-feet in height) are exposed to flooding 8-9
feet above MSL.
NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties
Data provided by the Florida Division of Emergency Management identifies properties that
are or have been insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that have received
two or more claims of at least $1,000. Based on data as of March 2015 there are no
repetitive loss properties in Layton.
Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Water Spouts and High Winds (Other than Hurricane)
Layton, like the rest of the Keys, has low-lying terrain. Section 6.2 characterizes the entire
area encompassed by Monroe County and the cities as having equal distribution of winds.
The risk of severe storms, tornadoes, water spouts and high winds in Layton does not vary
from the rest of the planning area. All new buildings, replacement buildings, and additions
rements.
Rainfall/Ponding Flooding
Layton does not have any identified areas where rainfall/ponding flooding is so severe or
prolonged as to cause access problems or damage to buildings.
Drought Hazards
Drought hazards for the planning area are describ
drought is comparable the drought risk throughout the area.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-6
Wildland Fire Hazards
The Florida Forestry Department has not indicated that areas in Layton are likely to
experience significant risk of wildland or brush fires. The exception to this statement may
increase fire hazards during some dry periods.
The locations of the -3 are shown in Figure 2-3.
Table 9-3. Important and Critical Facilities in Layton
Critical/Essential Facilities: Other Facilities:
City Hall/Fire Rescue Complex Florida Keys Marine Laboratory
Bell South Mobility Towner U.S. Post Office
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority Pumping
Station (Mile-Marker 70, Long Key)
Hazardous Materials Sites (302 Facilities): Mobile Home and Recreational
Vehicle Parks (as of October 1995):
None
None
9.4 Damage Reduction Activities
On-Going Activities
densities in the Coastal High Hazard Area, improving hurricane evacuation
timing, and protection of native vegetation and natural shorelines.
Other measures dealing with hazard planning include the consideration of
mobile home restrictions and the need to increase the availability of
emergency generators for use in the City.
The Building Department implements mitigation policies reflected in the
Florida Building Code and Land Development Regulations, including
standards to reduce vulnerability to high wind load and enforcement of the
The Planning Department implements mitigation measures reflected in the
Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations, including
regulations designed to minimize damage to structures from wind and waves
resulting from storms and floodplain management controls.
New construction must include storm shutters or high impact windows and
doors designed to resist design winds of 180 mph and debris impacts.
The Comprehensive Plan calls for engineering and other analyses to be
undertaken before post-disaster redevelopment is undertaken so that
appropriate building regulations can be adopted and design guidelines
established for replacement or repair of infrastructure.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-7
Layton participates in the Community Rating System (CRS) of the National Flood Insurance
Program. The CRS recognizes actions that exceed the minimum requirements. In return,
Actions undertaken by the City include:
Maintains elevation certificates
Makes NFIP map determinations
Requires new buildings and substantially improved or damaged buildings to
be elevated 3 feet above the BFE.
Limits enclosures below elevated buildings to 300 square feet
Sends annual NFIP mailings to all local lenders, realtors, and insurance
companies
Keeps NFIP library in City Hall
Warns citizens of impending flooding
The City monitors building repairs or improvements in order to enforce the
Substantial Damage/Improvement 50% rules.
Recent Projects
In 2002, with a Federal-State Hazard Mitigation Grant, the City of Layton installed
hurricane retrofit measures to the City Hall/Fire Station to meet the 159 miles per hour
standards. The total cost was $75,000 (50% Federal, 25% State, 25% City).
Replacement culverts were installed under South Layton Drive to assist in tidal water flow
in the canals. Rip-rap storm water retention swales and native plants were included in the
project. The $60,000 project was funded locally.
9.5 2015 Updates
The City reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more significant changes
include:
Section 91: Updated population; described acquisition of large parcel of land.
Section 9.2: Updated position descriptions to include LMS responsibilities.
Section 9.3: Noted Hurricane Isaac did not affect the City.
Reference: City of Layton Comprehensive Plan amended 2015
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 9-8
Chapter 10. City of Key Colony Beach
10.1 Overview of Key Colony Beach
Geography
Key Colony Beach, a man-made island community built in 1957, comprises just 285 acres in
area. It is low-lying, with all land below about 5.5 feet above mean sea (MSL). The entire
south shore faces the Atlantic Ocean and the west shoreline faces Vaca Cut, which connects
the Atlantic to the Gulf of Mexico. The island, located approximately between Mile Marker
53 and Mile Marker 54, contains numerous dead-end canals, channels and bays that
experience flooding due to storm surges that may be higher than along flat shorelines.
Population
The Southeast Florida Regional Planning Council, using US Census data, estimates the City
of Key Colony Beach has a permanent resident population of 808 in 2014. The seasonal
population increases by as much as 3,600.
In 2014, the Monroe County Social Services registered 14 people in the area between Mile
Marker 53 and Mile-Marker 60 as having special needs for hurricane assistance.
Land Use & Economy
Key Colony Beach is a well-planned community comprised of single family, duplex, and
multifamily dwellings. These uses are served by limited commercial development,
including light retail, restaurants, offices and marinas. Just over 10% of the land area is used
for recreational purposes.
The City joined the National Flood Insurance Program in July 1971 and administers a
floodplain management ordinance that meets or exceeds the minimum federal requirements.
About 35% of the buildings were constructed prior to 1971.
Comprehensive Plan
The City of Key Colony Beach adopted its Comprehensive Plan in February 1992. The plan
includes nine elements pertaining to the future growth and development of the City.
Throughout the plan are numerous goals, objectives and policies that acknowledge hurricane
risks, especially related to evacuation, growth, ensuring safety, providing adequate facilities,
managing storm water, working with providers of water supply and wastewater services, and
requirement compliance with codes. The Infrastructure Element and the Conservation and
Coastal Element contain specific policies relevant to mitigation of future risk and damage.
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
The Infrastructure Element includes:
Complete a detailed engineering study of drainage and implement priority
storm water projects. As of 2015, the construction of identified projects is
75% construction complete with citywide storm water retention systems.
On-site wastewater disposal facilities to minimize potential environmental
been upgraded to 2016 standards.
Establish and coordinate acquisition programs. The City has acquired several
properties over the past ten years.
The Conservation and Coastal Element includes:
New development encroaching into the 100-year floodplain shall incorporate
elevation and flood protection measures sufficient to protect against the 100-
year flood.
The City shall maintain consistency with program policies of the National
Flood Insurance Program.
The City shall monitor new, cost-effective programs for minimizing flood
damage.
Such programs may include modifications to construction setback
requirements or other site design techniques, as well as upgraded building and
construction techniques.
10.2 Capability Assessment: City Organization
and Agencies
The City of Key Colony Beach is a Commission Form of Government. The City
Commission is composed of 5 members, including the Mayor who is selected by the
Commission to that office. The City Commission sets government policy and adopts
guidance documents, such as the Comprehensive Plan, the Land Development Regulation,
and ordinances establishing various codes and standards.
Key Colony Beach is organized into several departments, each with authorized
responsibilities that, as described below, have bearing on how natural hazards are
recognized and addressed.
Mayor/City Administrator.
The Mayor of Key Colony Beach implements the policies of the
Commission and administers the overall operations of the City. With regard to floodplain
management the Mayor (or designee) is appointed to administer and implement these
provisions consistent with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program.
Key Colony Beach Planning and Zoning Committee.
The Key Colony Beach Planning and
Zoning Committee is respon
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Regulations. City personnel serve as staff
to the Committee and are involved in the following related to hazard mitigation:
Ensures that mitigation related items in the Comprehensive Plan, such as
floodplain management and natural resource management, are followed and
Participates in post-disaster appraisals and may formulate additional
mitigation measures for use in the Comprehensive Plan.
Works closely with the Building, Code Enforcement, and Fire Department to
ensure coordination of actions related to disaster planning, recovery, and
mitigation.
Reviews construction plans for compliance to the NFIP regulations.
Responsible for enforcing planning and zoning standards.
Key Colony Beach Building Department.
The Building Department is responsible for
regulations of building construction pertaining to life safety, health, and environmental land
use zoning regulations. The department is staffed by the Building Official, a Building
Inspector, a Permit Clerk and an on-call State of Florida Registered Engineer. Related to
mitigation of hazards, the department is responsible for the following:
Review of construction plans and issuing building permits
Inspection and enforcement during construction
Designated as coordinator for the National Flood Insurance Program.
Table 10-1. Key Colony Beach Permit Statistics for 2012, 2013,
2014
Permits Issued
CY CY CY
2012 2013 2014
291
New single-family, detached
012
Duplexes
000
Multi-family (3 or more)
000
Non-residential (all types)
357343355
Residential (additions, alterations, repairs)
91521
Non-residential (additions, alterations, repairs)
020
Demolition
000
Relocation
1,0711,1041,065
Number of inspections
Key Colony Beach Public Works Department.
The Public Works Department works under
the Building Official and is responsible for overseeing the maintenance of most city
facilities, including buildings, roads, and bridges. It operates and maintains City vehicles.
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Public Works is responsible for coordination and provision of emergency public works,
initial evaluation of infrastructure damage and preparation of documentation required for
federal reimbursement (including identification of mitigation components to be
incorporated), and coordination of emergency debris clearing.
In executing its disaster recovery responsibilities, Public Works coordinates with the Florida
Department of Transportation, Monroe County Department of Public Works, Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority, and Florida Keys Electric Co-op. The department plans, coordinates
and initiates restoration of the serviceability of transportation routes, bridges, and assurance
as to the safety of affected public and private dwellings and structures.
Key Colony Beach Code Enforcement Board and Officer.
The Code Enforcement Board
and Officer oversee after-the-fact code compliance issues pertaining to safety, health, and
environmental land use zoning regulations. The department is staffed by a Code
Enforcement Officer and an Administrative Assistant. Related to mitigation of hazards, the
department is responsible for: working closely with the Building, Planning, and Fire
departments to ensure coordination of actions related to disaster planning, recovery, and
mitigation; and participating in post-disaster appraisals.
City Clerk/Finance Administrator.
The Finance Administrator is responsible for
overseeing the day-to-day financial requirements of the City, including establishment of
purchasing procedures for all agencies. To expedite preparation for, response to, and
recovery from disasters, the Finance Administrator may implement special emergency
procedures to expedite necessary purchase and payment before, during, and after a disaster.
Key Colony Beach Police Department.
The Key Colony Beach Police Department is
responsible for overall law enforcement and protection of residents and visitors in the City
of Key Colony Beach. The department plays a key role in planning and response during
emergencies to include but not limited to: coordination with Florida Highway Patrol to
promote speedy and safe evacuation, communicates with base operations, field personnel,
and emergency shelters.
Marathon Fire Department.
The City contracts with the City of Marathon to provide
emergency management assistance and direction to the City of Key Colony Beach for all life
safety in connection with other duties of fire control, fire prevention, and fire and hurricane
public education. The department plays a lead role in planning and response for all
emergencies. As required under U.S. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5, has
adopted and uses the National Interagency Incident Management System (NIIMS) and will
adopt the National Fire Service Incident Management System (IMS) Incident Command
System (ICS) as the baseline incident management system. ICS is implemented for all fires,
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
haz-mat incidents, rescues, structural collapse and urban search and rescue operations,
manmade and natural disasters, and EMS responses that require two or more rescue
companies.
10.3 Hazards and Risk in Key Colony Beach
Historic Storms that have affected the Key Colony Beach Area:
1929 Hurricane (September 22 to October 4) The hurricane crossed over
Key Largo on a northerly course. Key Largo reported winds estimated at
over 100 mph, a central barometric pressure of 28 inches, and tide levels of 8-
9 feet above MSL. Key West experienced tide levels of 5-6 feet above MSL
and winds of 66 mph.
1935, Hurricane (August 29-September 10) - The small, extremely violent,
Category 5 hurricane crossed the Florida Keys on a northwesterly track. The
Tavernier-Islamorada area reported winds estimated at 120 mph with gusts
from 190-210 mph. Tide levels in the Florida Keys ranged from 14 feet
above MSL in Key Largo to 18 feet above MSL in Lower Matecumbe Key.
The storm was so intense and tightly wrapped that Key West had tide levels
of only 2 feet above MSL and average sustained winds of less than 40 mph.
One of the most tragic aspects of the 1935 storm was the unfortunate death of
many WWI veterans who were working on construction of the first Overseas
Highway.
Hurricane Donna, 1960 (August 29-September 19) Hurricane Donna curved
northwestward over the Middle Keys near Long Key/Layton and then
traveled northward toward the Gulf Coast towns of Naples and Fort Myers.
Areas in the vicinity of the storm experienced winds speed of 128 mph and a
central pressure of 28.44 inches. The storm affected the Everglades with
estimated winds of 150 mph. Tide levels were reported at Upper Matecumbe
Key of 13.5 feet above MSL, at Plantation Key 10+ feet above MSL, and 8.9
feet above MSL in Key Largo. As of 1992 Hurricane Donna, a Category 4
th
storm is listed as the 6 most intense hurricane in the US.
Hurricane Betsy, 1965 (August 26-Septmber 12) Hurricane Betsy passed
over Marathon while moving westward into the Gulf of Mexico. The lowest
central pressure was measured in Tavernier at 28.12 inches and wind speeds
were estimated to be 120 mph. Tide levels in Tavernier were 7.7 feet above
MSL and Key Largo had tide levels of around 9 feet above MSL. Betsy was
th
a Category 3 storm and is ranked 25 in intensity.
-2 tornado
touchdowns resulting from severe thunderstorms characterized by dangerous
cells with high, cold cloud tops affecting the Florida Keys. Areas most
affected were primarily in the Middle Keys including Grassy Key and
Valhalla Beach in the vicinity of Duck Key. Several buildings were
damaged. Also significant problems occurred from the displacement of
lobster traps that contributed to seaborne debris and navigational problems;
the fishing industry suffered considerable loss of income.
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Severe thunderstorms (July 4, 1998). Severe thunderstorms with lightning
and high winds came up quickly in the Middle Keys. The Weather Service
Office in Key West recorded wind speeds up to 70 mph sustained. Because it
th,
was July 4 many boats were offshore celebrating and waiting for the
fireworks. Although, this event did not warrant a presidential disaster
declaration, it did result in loss of life.
Hurricane Georges, 1998 (September 25, 1998), a Category 2 when made
landfall in the Lower Keys, affecting the entire county to some extent.
Damage estimates approached $300 million, including insured and uninsured
damage and infrastructure loss. Maximum sustained winds at the Naval Air
Station (Boca Chica) near Key West were 92 mph; gusts up to 110 mph were
reported by the Emergency Operations Center in Marathon. According to the
Key West Weather Service, precipitation levels in the Lower Keys were as
8.65 inches on the south side of Sugarloaf Key, 8.38 inches at Key West
International Airport, and 8.20 inches on Cudjoe Key. Tavernier in the Upper
Keys recorded 8.41 inches. In Key Colony Beach storm surge flooding
exceeded six feet over normal high tide. All city streets and many buildings
were flooded, with approximately 125 damaged ground level dwelling units.
Tropical Storm Mitch, 1998 (November 4 and 5). Feeder bands from Mitch
containing dangerous super cells spawned several damaging tornadoes in the
Upper Keys. Sections with mobile homes were especially hard hit.
Islamorada experienced an F-1 tornado; Rock Harbor and Key Largo were hit
by F-2 tornadoes. According to the Department of Community Affairs,
damages were estimated at $11 million.
Hurricane Irene, October 1999. Hurricane Irene hit the Florida Keys and
Southeastern Florida. This Category 1 Hurricane dumped 10 to 20 inches of
rain resulting in severe flooding in the Florida Keys and Southeastern Florida
causing total damage estimated at $800 million
Tropical Storm Gabrielle, September 2001. Although it did not reach
hurricane strength, this storm hit the southwest coast of Florida and caused
flooding problems; Marathon did see some effects from the storm.
In 2005, the city was affected by Tropical Storm Dennis, Hurricane Katrina,
and Hurricane Rita, each caused minor property damage, flooding, coastal
erosion, and generated debris (largely landscaping materials).
Hurricane Isaac, August 2012. The City of Key Colony Beach suffered minor
property damage from coastal flooding and beach erosion.
Some Costs of Recent Hurricane Disasters
Damage from Hurricane Georges is represent
tropical cyclones:
Debris removal costs exceeded $300,000
Repair of city street signage and parks cost $7,900
Waterway cleanup, including buoy replacement, cost $8,300
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Manning the EOC, search and rescue, and emergency labor and supplies cost
$8,600
Contract for structural engineering support was $16,300
Repairs to the wastewater treatment system cost $31,400
Repairs to the storm water system cost $36,000
Damage sustained on private property included:
Wind and flood damage was estimated at $4.4 million
Approximately 10% of all residences were damaged, notably those that
Approximately 5% of fiberglass roof singles and concrete tile roofs were
damaged
4% of all structures sustained significant flood, wave and wind damage
All businesses were closed or severely restricted due to structural damage and
power outages
Tourist-based businesses were most affected
Damage from Hurricane Isaac
The City of Key Colony Beach suffered minor property damage from coastal flooding and
beach erosion.
Hurricane Flooding as Predicted by SLOSH Modeling
Surges from Hurricanes), estimates surges associated with different characteristics of
tropical cyclones (track, forward speed, wind speed, etc.). Table 10-2 is carried forward
from the 2010 Plan as it provide more site-specific potential surge impacts and is to be used
in conjunction with the Hazus results from Chapter 5. The results can be combined with
topographic mapping to delineate inland areas subject to flooding (with a margin of error of
+/- 20%). The closest available predications are made for Marathon Mile-Marker 50 and
Duck Key Mile-Marker 61 (Table 10-2). Although storm surge flooding cannot be
predicted simply at any given location, these charts can be used to approximate surge
flooding in Key Colony Beach.
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Table 10-2. SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths (ft. above MSL)
Ocean Side Mile-Marker 50 Ocean Side Mile Marker 61
Storm Categories Storm Categories
Track Track
Direction 1 2 3 4 5 Direction 1 2 3 4 5
WSW 4 5 6 7 8 WSW 4 5 6 7 8
W 4 5 7 8 9 W 4 5 7 8 9
WNW 4 6 7 8 9 WNW 4 6 7 9 10
WN 4 6 7 8 9 NW 4 5 7 8 10
NNW 4 5 7 8 9 NNW 4 5 7 8 9
N 4 5 7 8 9 N 4 5 6 8 9
NNE 4 5 6 7 9 NNE 4 5 6 8 9
NE 4 5 6 7 8 NE 4 5 6 7 9
ENE 3 5 6 7 8 ENE 3 5 6 7 8
E 3 4 5 6 7 E 3 4 5 6 8
Floodplain Management & Compliance with the NFIP
The City entered the National Flood Insurance Program in 1971 by adoption of an ordinance
that complies with the requirements of the program. The City reviews all development
proposals in special flood hazard areas and enforces the requirements of the ordinance. To
ensure continued compliance with the NFIP, the City will continue to:
Enforce the adopted floodplain management
____________________________
ordinance, including inspection of permitted
development and unpermitted activities;
NFIP Flood Insurance Policies
in Key Colony Beach: 1,150
Maintain records pertaining to floodplain
development, including flood maps and Letters of
Map Change, which shall be available for public
Claims paid since 1978: 166
inspection;
https://www.fema.gov/policy-claim-
Notify the public when there are proposed changes to
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-
the ordinance or Flood Insurance Rate Maps;
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-13
(as of March 31, 2015)
____________________________
Community Rating System; and
Promote the purchase of NFIP flood insurance policies as financial
protection.
NFIP Floodplain Mapping
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) prepared a Flood Insurance Rate Map for
Monroe County and incorporated municipalities (current effective map is dated February 18,
2005). The FIRM delineates areas that have been determined to be subject to flooding by
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
-percent-annual chance of flooding in any given year
(commonly called the 100-year flood).
The entire City is located in areas designated as VE Zones (coastal flood with velocity
hazard wave action) and AE Zones. With land elevations averaging 4-7 feet, water depths
associated with the 1%-annual chance flood can be expected to range from 4 to 9 feet. As
indicated by the predicted storm surge flood depths, even deeper flooding will occur during
more severe hurricanes. As such, all new development in the City is subject to the
opment Regulations.
FEMA initiated a coastal study to revise the FIRM, expected to be completed in 3 to 4 years.
NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties
Data provided by the Florida Division of Emergency Management identifies properties that
are or have been insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that have received
two or more claims of at least $1,000. In 2005, 9 properties met the definition. As of March
2015, 14 individual properties have received 39 claims, totaling $1.8 million (average
payment of $46,150). Of these 14 properties, 10 are residential and 4 are non-residential.
Figure 10-1 shows property locations of those records that were able to be plotted.
Figure 10-1. Key Colony Beach Repetitive Loss Properties (2015).
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Stormwater Management & Rainfall/Ponding Flooding
areas of localized flooding and specific engineered construction plans to minimize local
flooding that includes closed drainage systems, open swales, retention ponds, covered
trenches, and injection wells. Projects to address the problems are approximately 75%
completed construction as of early 2015.
Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Water Spouts and High Winds (Other than Hurricane)
Key Colony Beach, like the rest of the Keys, has low-lying terrain. Section 6.2 characterizes
the entire area encompassed by Monroe County and the cities as having equal distribution of
winds. The risk of severe storms, tornadoes, water spouts and high winds in Key Colony
Beach does not vary from the rest of the planning area. All new buildings, replacement
wind load requirements.
Drought Hazards
Drought hazards for the planning area are described in Section
risk due to drought is comparable to the drought risk throughout the area.
Wildland Fire Hazards
The Florida Forestry Department indicates that in the Key Colony Beach area, Grassy Key
(including Geiger and Boca Chica) is the area most prone to wildland/brush fires. Based on
data provided by Monroe County Property Appraiser, Grassy Key includes a total of 9,391
parcels of land of which 6,498 are improved. The total assessed value of improvements is
$1,562,786,704. It is important to note that this summary is not to imply that all properties
would be vulnerable in any given wildfire outbreak. Future development on Grassy Key is
influenced by property owner choices; all new construction must comply with
environmental restrictions.
The -3 are shown in Figure 2-3.
Table 10-3. Important and Critical Facilities in Key Colony Beach
Critical/Essential Facilities: Other Public Facilities :
City Hall-Police/Auditorium/Post Office Public Golf Courses
Complex
Public Tennis Courts
Wastewater Treatment Plant and System
City Parks and Playground
Stormwater System
Public Works Building
Hazardous Materials Sites (302 Facilities): Marinas:
Wastewater Treatment Plant (chlorine and The Boat House (MM 53.5, Ocean side)
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Table 10-3. Important and Critical Facilities in Key Colony Beach
sulfuric acid)
Key Colony Beach Marina (MM53.7, Ocean
side)
10.4 Damage Reduction Activities
On-Going Activities
Comprehensive Plan objectives and policies address the need to hold down
densities so as not to increase hurricane evacuation times. A stated objective
-out
hurricane evacuation traffic entering on U.S. 1 will not increase. Concurrent
Plan policies advocate no City expenditures for infrastructure in the V zone
that would encourage increased private development.
The City of Key Colony Beach Disaster Preparedness Committee, composed
of residents and City representatives, coordinates with the County on
emergency management activities such as planning, response, recovery, and
mitigation. It provides its own public information program, disaster
command center, and emergency supplies.
Post-disaster redevelopment is addressed in the Coastal Management Element
of the Comprehensive Plan, recognizing that redevelopment may require
greater building setbacks and elevations, and installation of dunes rather than
seawalls.
The Building Code requires buildings to be designed to withstand the forces
of 180 mph winds (assumed in any direction and without regard to the effects
of shielding of other structures).
Post-disaster assessments are required by the Building Department to
determine whether demolition versus repairs are appropriate given the level
of damage; buildings damaged more than 50% must be rebuilt to current
codes, including elevation requirements for construction in the floodplain.
The Land Development Code requires that all existing mangroves be
maintained to state requirements; use of seawalls is restricted; new oceanfront
development shall include dune planting plans.
Key Colony Beach participates in the Community Rating System (CRS) of the National
Flood Insurance Program. The CRS recognizes actions that exceed the minimum
duction in the cost of
NFIP flood insurance. Actions undertaken by the City include:
Maintains elevation certificates
Makes NFIP map determinations
Sends annual NFIP mailings to all local lenders, realtors, and insurance
companies
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Keeps library of NFIP materials in City Hall
Constructs stormwater facilities
Warns citizens of impending flooding
Recent Projects
Since Hurricane Georges, the City has replaced its causeway bridge to
improve its ability to withstand storm surge.
The City has its own sewage collection and treatment system, which is
operated by the Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator. The sewage treatment
plant is subject to storm surge flooding but has been recently retrofitted and
operating at 2016 requirements. A generating system has been added for
emergency operation and all of our effluent is converted to potable irrigation
through our reverse osmosis and storage system. All lift stations and lines are
continually being retrofitted and monitored for infiltration.
The entire City Hall/Post Office complex has been retrofitted and
floodproofed to current requirements.
Several properties were purchased by the City and converted to open space.
n
ponds, and deep injection wells which were designed, installed, and
monitored by the South Florida Water Management District, FL Department
of Environmental Protection, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
As of early 2015, the citywide project is approximately 75% complete.
All utilities along the 0.8 mile-long entry causeway have been installed
underground.
A new 1.1 million gallon reverse osmosis building and plant were built in
2014.
Initiated a Repetitive Loss Area Analysis, as part of the 2015 LMS Update;
the document must be completed, property owner outreach conducted, and
adopted by Council, at which time it can be submitted for CRS recognition.
10.5 2015 Updates
The City reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more significant changes
include:
Section 10.1 and 10.4: Updated the status of construction of storm water
projects.
Section 10.2: Added permit data.
Section 10.3: Noted minor damage from Hurricane Isaac; added text related
to compliance with the NFIP; updated information on repetitive loss
properties and added figure to show location of those properties.
Section 10.4: Added to list of recent projects.
0RQURH/06 8SGDWH
Chapter 11 Islamorada, Village of Islands
11.1 Overview of Islamorada
Early settlers came to the islands from the Bahamas and New England. These people raised
and shipped thousands of pineapples to northern markets. One of these ships was named the
Spanish language.
County, was incorporated as a municipality on December 31, 1997. House Bill No. 1265
created the Village and also gave the Mayor authority to sign and execute documents.
Geography
The Village is located in the 822-island archipelago known as the Florida Keys, surrounded
by the Atlantic Ocean and the estuarine waters of Florida Bay. The adjacent marine
environments support rich biological communities possessing extensive conservation,
recreational, commercial, ecological, historical, research, educational, and aesthetic values
that give this area special national significance.
municipal boundaries extend
from Mile Marker 90.939 to Mile Marker 72.658 (along U.S. Highway 1), and consists of
four islands: Plantation Key, Windley Key, Upper Matecumbe Key and Lower Matecumbe
Key. The Village is approximately 18 linear miles long and no more approximately one half
of a mile (1/2) wide, encompassing 11,748 acres.
Population
The Southeast Florida Regional Planning Council, using US Census data, estimates
Islamorada has a permanent resident population of approximately 6,212 in 2014. Tourism
sometimes doubles the population in the area.
development and population growth to promote small-town ambiance, improve quality of
life for residents, enhance and protect natural resources and environmental quality unique to
the Florida Keys, comply with adopted level of service standards for public facilities,
effectively time public infrastructure and services according to the availability of public
funds and support safe and timely evacuation prior to a hurricane.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-1
Land Use & Economy
A significant portion of the waters adjacent to the islands have been designated as
Outstanding Florida Waters, and includes the 2,800-nautical square mile Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary, the second largest in the United States. The extraordinary
natural resources support the two primary industries of the Villagetourism and
commercial fishing. Many residents earn their living through the fishing and diving
industries and the tropical island atmosphere generates tourism from around the world. As a
result, the health and welfare of the community are largely dependent upon the health of the
surrounding environment. Therefore, the Village has a responsibility to protect and preserve
its unique natural resources, which will in turn protect and foster its community character,
maintaining the health safety and welfare of its citizenry.
Much of the Village is developed with a mix of single family residences, multi-family
dwellings, tourist lodging (hotels, motels, inns), commercial retail, professional offices,
marine uses including commercial fishing, tourist-oriented recreational uses, and
government uses.
Three sites are listed by the Historic Florida Keys Foundation, Inc., or are listed on the
National Register of Historic Places: Windley Key Fossil Reef State Geological Site;
Hurricane Monument (MM 81.5); and LeBranch Fishing Camp (Upper Matecumbe) Indian
Key.
11.2 Capability Assessment: Village Organization
and Agencies
Appointed by the Village Council, the Village Manager (also Village Attorney) is
responsible for the management of the Village, and reports directly to the Village Council.
The governing body of the Village is the Village Council of Islamorada, Village of Islands.
The Village Council is composed of five members, including the Mayor who is appointed by
the Village Council body annually. Immediately after the initial election, the first Village
Council went to work quickly and composed the following Vision:
To Plan for enhancing the Village character
To Preserve our community resources . . . people, natural resources, pride and
To Provide basic service to support our quality of life.
The Village is a rural municipality, with 94 employees delivering basic services of
government including:
Fire protection, emergency management and emergency medical services;
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-2
Planning and zoning;
Building and Code Compliance (permitting, inspection and code
enforcement);
Public works;
Waste collection;
Parks and conservation lands; and
Recreation services
Office. Solid waste services are also delivered contractually resulting from competitive bids
and contract negotiations.
The departments with primary responsibility for identifying natural and manmade hazards
are fire/rescue, planning, building and public works. These departments also take an active
role in addressing mitigation of identified hazards and the protection of public facilities and
infrastructure.
Table 11-1. Islamorada: Permits Issued (2012, 2013, 2014).
CY 2012 CY 2013 CY 2014
New single-family, detached 26 21 27
New single-family, attached 0 0 0
Multi-family (2 or more) 1 18 0
Non-residential buildings (all types) 209 241 215
Residential (additions, alterations, repairs) 246 273 278
Non-residential (additions, substantial) 25 37 46
Demolition 18 16 18
Relocation 0 0 0
Mobile home (permanent/temporary) 1 1 0
Total Permits Issued 526 607 584
Total Inspections Conducted 3,796 4,909 4,695
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-3
The Village Comprehensive Plan was updated in 2014. Several objectives and policies
address hazards and support hazard mitigation:
OBJECTIVE 5-1.6: MINIMIZE COASTAL HAZARDS
Policy 5-1.6.1: Coastal High Hazard Areas Defined
Policy 5-1.6.2: Manage Coastal Hazards and Coordinate Update of the Hazard
Mitigation Plan
Policy 5-1.6.3: Maintain a Local Hazard Mitigation and Post Disaster
Redevelopment Program
Policy 5-1.6.5: Identify Areas Particularly Susceptible to Damage within the CHHA
Policy 5-1.6.6: Limit Redevelopment in CHHA
Policy 5-1.6.7: Restore or Enhance Disturbed or Degraded Natural Resources
Policy 5-1.6.8: Implement General Hazard Mitigation by Restricting the
Density/Intensity of Development
Policy 5-1.6.9: Identify the Erosion and Sedimentation Problem Areas
Policy 5-1.6.10: Identify Shorelines with Serious Erosion Problems
OBJECTIVE 5-1.8: LIMIT PUBLIC SUBSIDY OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE
COASTAL HIGH-HAZARD AREA
Policy 5-1.8.1: Inventory Existing Infrastructure in the Coastal High-Hazard Area
Policy 5-1.8.2: Restrict Future Infrastructure in the Coastal High-Hazard Area
Policy 5-1.8.3: Limit Public Expenditures in the CHHA
OBJECTIVE 5-1.9: AVOID POPULATION CONCENTRATIONS IN THE
COASTAL HIGH-HAZARD AREA
Policy 5-1.9.1: Restrict Development in Coastal High-Hazard Areas
Policy 5-1.9.2: The CHHA shall include FEMA Velocity Zones
OBJECTIVE 5-1.10: COORDINATE HURRICANE EVACUATION
Policy 5-1.10.1: Provide Hurricane Evacuation Logistical Support
Policy 5-1.10.2: Coordinate With the County in Emergency Preparedness
Policy 5-1.10.3: Ensure Village Hurricane Preparedness
Policy 5-1.10.4: Designate U.S. 1 the Primary Evacuation Route
Policy 5-1.10.5: Ensure a Quick Re-Entry Into the Village Following an Evacuation
OBJECTIVE 5-1.11: FACILITATE POST-DISASTER REDEVELOPMENT
Policy 5-1.11.1: Recovery Operations
Policy 5-1.11.2 Conduct Post-Hurricane Assessments
Policy 5-1.11.3: Coordinate Repair and Clean Up
Policy 5-1.11.4: Propose Hazard Mitigation and Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Policy 5-1.11.5: Manage Redevelopment Activities
Policy 5-1.11.6: Review Post Disaster Management Alternatives
Policy 5-1.11.7: Maintain a Contingency Fund for Disaster Assistance
Policy 5-1.11.8: Regulate Redevelopment of Non-Conforming Structures
OBJECTIVE 5-1.14: IDENTIFY PUBLIC FACILITY LEVEL OF SERVICE
STANDARDS IN THE COASTAL AREA
Policy 5-1.14.1: Ensure Available Infrastructure and Coordinate Timing and Staging of Public
Facilities with Private Development
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-4
The Village regularly approves ordinances that amend the Comprehensive Plan or the
Building Permit Allocation System (BPAS). A list of Village ordinances by year is available
at http://www.islamorada.fl.us/Ordinances.asp. The most recent ordinance relevant to hazard
mitigation amended the coastal management element of the comprehensive plan by
amending policy 5-it construction of new bulkheads, seawalls or other
-
-
consistency with state law, administrative code and adopted regional policies and providing
for internal consistency and clarification.
Moving Mitigation Forward
The Village Council of Islamorada adopted a resolution on December 18, 2014 declaring
that it is considering amending the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations
pertaining to the development and redevelopment of nonresidential structures greater than
10,000 square feet.
The Village has existing contracts to clear debris throughout the Village, these are updated
on an annual basis to ensure service in the case of a catastrophic event. Many of
System (NIMS) and participates in an annual drill to practice the implementation of the
skills should a catastrophic event occur. The Village staff has been trained with NIMS and
new staff is being trained currently in preparation for the 2015 Hurricane season.
11.3 Hazards and Risk in Islamorada
In the recent past, the Florida Keys has suffered from natural disasters of varying degrees.
In September 25, 1998, Hurricane Georges inundated the Keys. Following this, on
November 4-5, 1998, the Florida Keys suffered another blow from Tropical Storm Mitch.
The tropical storm was more severe than originally anticipated and spawned several
tornadoes. The Upper Keys, including the Village sustained serious amounts of damage.
The two-year period of 2004-2005 included eight hurricanes that had varying degrees of
impacts on the Village. Hurricane Wilma, (October 2005) had the most significant impact on
the Village.
The Indian Key Fills located between Upper and Lower Matecumbe are particularly
vulnerable to storm surge and flood events. In the event of overtopping there is a high
likelihood of the road being washed out. This is of special concern because it is the only
route south to the rest of the Florida Keys during a storm; if the passage is compromised,
recovery supplies would not be able to reach past the Indian Keys Fills.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-5
Historic Storms
made landfall at Islamorada. It is remains one of the most intense category 5 and deadliest
hurricanes. Winds were estimated at 160 mph with gusts from 190-210 mph. Tide levels
ranged from 14 feet above MSL in Key Largo to 18 feet above MSL in Lower Matecumbe
Key. Despite its ferocity, it was a small storm causing water levels at Key West to rise only
two feet above MSL and sustained winds of less than 40 mph.
Florida has been devastated by several flood-related events over the years, caused by heavy
rainfall, tropical depressions and hurricanes. Between 1992 and 1994, the State of Florida
received six Presidential Disaster Declarations for natural disaster events, four of which
were flood related. Each year, there is a potential that Florida will suffer from tropical
storms, severe rain events or hurricanes.
Other significant storms:
Hurricane Donna (August 29-September 19, 1960). A Category 4
hurricane, this storm is listed among the most intense in U.S. history. It
curved northwestward over the Middle Keys before turning north towards
the mainland at Naples and Fort Myers. Wind speeds of 128 mph and
central pressure of 28.44 inches were measures. Tide levels ranged from
13.5 feet above MSL ocean side at Islamorada (MM 80-83), +10 feet MSL
ocean side Upper Matecumbe Key (MM 83-84) and 9-10 feet MSL Bay
side.
Hurricane Betsy (August 26-September 12, 1965). A Category 3 hurricane,
Betsy passed over Marathon moving westward into the Gulf of Mexico.
At Tavernier, central pressure was recorded at 18.12 inches and wind
speeds were estimated at 120 mph. Flood levels were measures at 9 feet
MSL in Key Largo.
Hurricane Georges (September 25, 1998). Near Islamorada at Mile-Marker
76.8, water rose to 4.5 feet above MSL and 6.1 feet at Mile-Marker 77.8.
Near Mile-Marker 84, the highway was affected by flooding, downed trees
and damage to road signs. Some beach erosion occurred.
Effect of Past Hurricane Disasters
Debris Removal: $2.5 million
Emergency Labor and Supplies: $12,000
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-6
Manning of EOC and Search and Rescue: $8,000
Waste Water Treatment System Repairs: $10,000
Storm Water Systems Repair: $10,000
Private property damage totaled approximately $5 million due to the effects of high winds,
driven rain, and flooding. The following is an account of damage in Islamorada as reported
in a special edition of the Miami Herald, September 27, 1998:
Lower Matecumbe Key Storm surge cut across U.S. 1 highway covering
it with sand, chunks of concrete, seaweed, and wood pilings. Bulldozers
have cleared a pathway for emergency vehicles. Water rose more than a
foot high in some homes.
Windley Key Holiday Isle Marina undamaged, but oceanside docks and
tiki huts were mostly destroyed. Rooftop air conditioning unit at the Dive
and Swim Center was damaged.
Islamorada Shoreline Motel lost 50-foot section of aluminum facing from
the roof. An oceanside cottage at Cheeca Lodge (MM 82) lost some
roofing. At Island Christian School, a large ficus toppled and crushed a
chain link fence.
Plantation Key Many mobile homes flooded at Ocean San Pedro Trailer
Park.
Despite Hurricane Georges only being a Category 2 hurricane, all businesses were closed or
severely restricted from operating due to structural damage and power outages. Businesses
related to tourism and fishing and marine activities were most affected by Georges.
Damage from Hurricane Wilma
Hurricane Wilma produced bayside flooding that had significant impacts on several marinas
Founders Park. The flooding forced Village Hall into temporary accommodations for a
period of four years. Flooding was the primary impact although there was minimal wind-
damage to structures and vegetation. The secondary impact was associated with the entire
season of hurricanes (the most named storms in history) that destroyed or damaged hundreds
of docks in the Village.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-7
Damage from Hurricane Isaac
Hurricane Isaac caused no significant damage in the Village.
Hurricane Flooding as Predicted by SLOSH Modeling
land
Surges from Hurricanes), estimates surges associated with different characteristics of
tropical cyclones (track, forward speed, wind speed, etc.). This information is carried
forward from the 2010 Plan as it provide more site-specific potential surge impacts and is to
be used in conjunction with the Hazus results from Chapter 5. The results can be combined
with topographic mapping to delineate inland areas subject to flooding (with a margin of
error of +/- 20%). Table 11-2 shows the storm surge predications for four locations in
Islamorada (Islamorada MM82, Islamorada MM 83.5, Plantation Key MM 88.5, and
Plantation Key MM 90).
Table 11-2. SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths (ft above MSL)
Islamorada Mile-Marker 82 Ocean Side Islamorada Mile-Marker 82 Bay Side
Track Storm Categories Track Storm Categories
Direction Direction
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
WSW 4 5 7 8 9 WSW 4 5 7 8 9
W 4 6 7 9 10 W 4 5 7 8 9
WNW 4 6 7 9 10 WNW 4 5 6 7 8
WN 4 6 7 9 10 NW 3 4 6 7 7
NNW 4 5 7 8 9 NNW 3 4 6 7 8
N 4 5 7 8 9 N 3 4 6 7 8
NNE 4 5 6 8 9 NNE 3 5 6 7 8
NE 4 5 6 7 8 NE 4 5 7 8 9
ENE 3 5 6 7 8 ENE 4 7 9 10 11
E 3 4 6 7 8 E 5 8 10 10 11
Plantation Key Mile-Marker 88.5 Bay Side Plantation Key Mile-Marker 90 Ocean Side
Track Storm Categories Track Storm Categories
Direction Direction
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
WSW 4 6 8 9 10 WSW 4 5 7 8 10
W 4 5 7 8 9 W 4 6 8 9 11
WNW 3 5 7 7 8 WNW 4 6 8 9 11
WN 3 5 6 7 8 NW 3 4 6 7 7
NNW 3 5 6 7 9 NNW 4 6 7 9 10
N 3 5 7 8 9 N 4 5 7 8 9
NNE 3 5 7 8 9 NNE 4 5 7 8 10
NE 4 6 8 9 10 NE 4 5 6 8 9
ENE 5 8 10 12 13 ENE 4 5 6 8 9
E 6 10 11 12 13 E 3 5 6 7 8
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-8
Floodplain Management & Compliance with the NFIP
The Village entered the National Flood Insurance Program when it incorporated in 1997 by
adoption of an ordinance that complies with the requirements of the program. The Village
reviews all development proposals in special flood hazard areas and enforces the
requirements of the ordinance. To ensure continued compliance with the NFIP, the Village
will continue to:
Enforce the adopted floodplain management ordinance, including
inspection of permitted development and
____________________________
unpermitted activities;
NFIP Flood Insurance Policies
in Islamorada 3,114
Maintain records pertaining to floodplain
development, including flood maps and Letters
Claims paid since 1978: 168*
of Map Change, which shall be available for
public inspection;
https://www.fema.gov/policy-claim-
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-13
Notify the public when there are proposed
(as of March 31, 2015)
changes to the ordinance or Flood Insurance
*records prior to incorporation included in
claims for Monroe County
Rate Maps; and
____________________________
Promote the purchase of NFIP flood insurance policies as financial
protection.
NFIP Floodplain Mapping
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) prepared a Flood Insurance Rate Map for the
Monroe County and incorporated municipalities
Flood Insurance Rate Map dated February 18, 2005). The FIRM delineates areas that have
-percent-
annual chance of flooding in any given year (commonly called the 100-year flood). The
majority of land in Islamorada is subject to flooding. Areas noted as VE Zone, subject to
high velocity wave action, are shown with flood levels ranging from 10 to 14 feet above
MSL. Areas noted as AE Zone, where waves are expected to be less than 3-feet in height,
flood levels are predicted to range from 6 to 10 feet above MSL.
The area along U.S. Route 1 and commercial properties that front on the highway, plus
Plantation Key, Windley Key, and Upper Matecumbe Key, have some areas with ground
elevations higher than the predicted 100-year flood elevation. Sections around Coral Shores
High School are also shown as outside of the mapped floodplain. FEMA initiated a coastal
study to revise the FIRM, expected to be completed in 3 to 4 years.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-9
NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties
Data provided by the Florida Division of Emergency Management identifies properties that
are or have been insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that have received
two or more claims of at least $1,000. In 2005, only three properties met the definition. As
of March 2015, 16 individual properties have received 47 claims totaling approximately
$1.2 million (average payment of approximately $25,500). Of these 16 properties, 14 are
residential and 2 are non-residential. Figures 11-1a, 1b, and 1c show property locations of
those records that were able to be plotted (end of chapter).
One property in Islamorada is designated as a Severe
Repetitive Loss Property, having received 6 claims totaling $64,600. A Severe Repetitive
Loss Property is defined as a residential property that is covered by an NFIP flood insurance
policy and (a) that has at least four claim payments (including building and contents) over
$5,000 each, and the cumulative amount of such claims exceeding $20,000; or (b) for which
at least two separate claim payments (building only) have been made with the cumulative
amount exceeding the market value of the building. For both (a) and (b), at least two of the
qualifying claims must have occurred within any 10-year period.
Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Water Spouts and High Winds (Other than Hurricane)
Islamorada, like the rest of the Keys, has low-lying terrain. Section 6.2 characterizes the
entire area encompassed by Monroe County and the cities as having equal distribution of
winds. The risk of severe storms, tornadoes, water spouts and high winds in Layton does
not vary from the rest of the planning area. All new buildings, replacement buildings, and
requirements.
Rainfall/Ponding Flooding
Islamorada does not have any identified areas where rainfall/ponding flooding is so severe
or prolonged as to cause access problems or damage to buildings.
Drought Hazards
drought is comparable to the drought risk throughout the area.
Wildland Fire Hazards
The Florida Forestry Department has not indicated that areas in Islamorada are likely to
experience significant risk of wildland or brush fires.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-10
Table 11-3 -3.
Table 11-3. Important and Critical Facilities in Islamorada
Critical/Essential Facilities: Other Facilities:
Village of Islands Administration Center U.S. Coast Guard Station
& Public Safety Headquarters
Florida Keys Electric Cooperative Sub-Station
M-Station (Roth Building)
Island Christian School
Founders Park
Treasure Village Montessori SchoolFlorida Keys
Islamorada Fire- Rescue HQ Station #20/EOC
Islamorada Fire Station #19 Comcast Cable
Islamorada Fire Station #21 Bell South
Coral Shores High School (County) Cingular Cell
Plantation Key Elementary School (County) Theater of the Sea
Plantation Key Jail Wastewater Treatment Plants at various
nonresidential properties
Monroe County Gov./Courthouse
Amerigas Liquid Propane Yard
Monroe County Health Department
Monroe County Public Works Yard
Plantation Key Government Center (County)
Marinas: Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks:
Abels Marina Coral Bay Trailer Court
Harris Ocean Park Estates, 1 st Addition
MM 80.8 Key Lantern Travel MH Park
Caribee Boat Sales and Marina Peaceful Palms Mobile Homes (Windley Key)
Caloosa Cove Marina Windley Key Trailer Park
Coconut Cove Resort and Marina Sea Breeze Trailer/RV Park (Plantation Key)
Coral Bay Marina San Pedro Trailer Park (Plantation Key)
FWC Marina Plantation Tropical Park (Plantation Key)
Postcard Inn Resorts and Marina Village Mobile Park
Islamorada Boat Center
Islamorada Yacht Basin/Lorelei
La Siesta Marina
Mr. Lobster (Lower Matecumbe)
Watermark Marina (Matecumbe Yacht Club)
Plantation Yacht Harbor Marina
Robbies Marina
Smugglers, Snake Creek
Snake Creek Marina
Tavernier Creek Marina
Treasure Harbor Marina
Whale Harbor Marina
World Wide Sportsmen Marina
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-11
Table 11-3. Important and Critical Facilities in Islamorada
Hazardous Materials Sites (302 Facilities):
Bell South Telecommunications Facility
Monroe County Plantation Key Public Works
Plantation Key Colony Water Treatment Plant
North Plantation Key Master Pump Station
Mid-Plantation Key Wastewater Pump Station
South Plantation Key Wastewater Pump Station
Upper Matecumbe Key Wastewater Pump Station
Lower Matecumbe Key Wastewater Pump Station
11.4 Damage Reduction Activities
On-Going Activities
Continue the inspection of enclosures below elevated lowest floors, as
required by FEMA.
Continue to identify and implement hazard mitigation projects for critical
infrastructure.
Projects Completed Before 2005
Completed renovations to Islamorada Fire Station #20 which included an
emergency operations center.
Completed the Lower Matecumbe Stormwater Improvement Project which
provided drainage infrastructure for flood mitigation and protection of a
section of the island that experiences heavy flooding during mild storm
events.
Completed the Upper Matecumbe Stormwater Improvement Project which
provided drainage infrastructure for flood mitigation and protection of a
section of the island that experiences heavy flooding during mild storm
events.
Projects Completed 2005-2014
Completed the new Village Hall and the new Fire Station #21 and
Completed North Plantation Key Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-12
Lower Matecumbe Key Fire Station #19.
The Tollgate Shores Stormwater Improvement Project provides drainage
infrastructure for flood mitigation and protection for households in a
section of the Lower Matecumbe Key Island that experiences heavy
flooding during mild storm events.
Completed a study to mitigate the exposure and vulnerability of U.S. 1
located at Sea Oats Beach from the effects of a hurricane. This area will
always be inundated by storm surge from any category hurricane and
suffer significant damage resulting in segmentation of the Keys. This
study resulted in some remedial action including the placement of artificial
substrate and vegetation along the entire length of Sea Oats Beach to
mitigate erosion.
Permanently installed emergency generators in Coral Shores High School.
The Village adopted a staged evacuation plan and coordinates
implementation with Monroe County and other municipalities. The staged
evacuation plan contains several strategies for facilitating evacuation,
including two northbound lanes where possible, traffic control markers
and revised timing for signals along U.S. 1.
Completed acquisition of computer weather equipment to provide access
for weather-related product such as hurricane tracking.
Projects Planned or Under Way
Provide a new LIDAR Mapping of the Village to update the flood base and
storm surge vulnerability information. This should be a countywide
project in c This is an
on-going project with the goal of establishing a more accurate SLOSH
model for the Village and Monroe County.
Provide permanently installed emergency generators in Island Christian
School (a primary shelter).
The Village of Islamorada will conclude an effort in 2015 to identify
vulnerable infrastructure, assets and habitat based on four sea level rise
water, wastewater, Village facilities and roads will be mapped indicating
varying degrees of vulnerability from these scenarios for future
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-13
inundation. The overall Islamorada Matters Plan will make
recommendation on near and mid-term strategies and mechanisms for
implementation to address these vulnerabilities. These recommendations
and mechanisms for implementation could include policy, program and/or
comprehensive plan or code revisions. Data from the effort can also be
used for future design and planning purposes or land management and
acquisition priorities.
11.5 2015 Updates
The Village reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more significant
changes include:
Section 11.2: Added list of objectives and policies from the
Comprehensive Plan; expanded text about Emergency Management Plan;
added notes on moving mitigation forward
Section 11.3: Updated critical facilities list.
Section 11.4: Updated projects completed 2005-2014 and added description
of an ongoing activity related to sea level rise.
Reference: Islamorada: The Village That Reclaimed the Keys,
Comprehensive Plan, February 3, 2014
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-14
This page blank.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 11-18
Chapter 12. City of Marathon
The City of Marathon, incorporated in November 1999, is located in the Middle Keys and
consists generally of previously unincorporated areas of Monroe County known as
Marathon, Marathon Shores, and Grassy Key. The corporate boundaries of the city are as
follows:
end of the Tom's Harbor Bridge (approximately Mile Marker 60), including, but not limited
to, the entire islands of Knight Key; Hog Key; Vaca Key; Stirrup Key; Boot Key; Crawl
Key; East Sister's Island; West Sister's Island; Fat Deer Key; Long Point Key; Deer Key;
Little Deer Key; Little Crawl Key; Grassy Key; the unincorporated areas of Monroe County
commonly known as Marathon and Coco Plum; all land filled in between the islands,
including all islands connected by U.S. 1, Overseas Highway and roadways connecting
thereto; and all adjacent islands not connected by roadways within the boundaries of Monroe
County between Mile Marker 47 and Mile Marker 60, specifically excluding all areas within
the boundaries of the City of Key Colony Beach, all of the above being within the
12.1 Overview of Marathon
Geography
Marathon is located between the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean. Marathon is
approximately 8,320 acres consisting of a number of islands. Elevations in Marathon range
from approximately 2 feet above mean sea level to approximately 7 feet above mean sea
level.
Several keys make up the City and they vary greatly in size. Marathon is essentially a string
of low coral islands with flat terrain. The long and narrow configuration creates a risk for
storm surge from both sides of the island chain.
Marathon has no inland areas; all locations are equally vulnerable to high wind effects. The
the Keys.
Population
The Southeast Florida Regional Planning Council, using US Census data, estimates the City
of Marathon has a permanent resident population of approximately 8,425 in 2014. The
seasonal population increases by as much as 50%..
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-1
In 2009, the Monroe County Social Services registered 2 people as having special needs for
hurricane evacuation assistance within the City of Marathon.
Land Use & Economy
lodgings (hotels, motels, and destination resorts), tourist-oriented uses (museums, research
center, attractions), marine-related and recreational uses, commercial uses (restaurants, retail
sales, banks, Realtors), medical facilities and offices, and government uses.
Future growth is limited through the Rate of Growth Ordinance (ROGO) adopted by
Monroe County in 1992 to implement portions of its Comprehensive Plan. Within the City
of Marathon, this is now known as the Building Permit Allocation System (BPAS). BPAS
establishes a building permit allocation system for residential construction. The purpose is to
encourage in-fill of platted lots served by existing infrastructure and to limit growth to
enable safe and timely hurricane evacuation. Pursuant to the BPAS Ordinance and an
agreement between the City, County and the department of Community Affairs, the annual
allocation for Marathon is thirty (30) permits per year for residential dwelling units.
All new construction, reconstruction, and improvements to existing buildings must comply
with the current building code requirements.
The City joined the National Flood Insurance Program in October 2000 and administers a
floodplain management ordinance that meets or exceeds the minimum federal requirements.
Comprehensive Plan
The City of Marathon adopted its Comprehensive Plan in March 2005. The plan includes
nine elements pertaining to the future growth and development the City. Throughout the
plan are numerous goals, objectives and policies that acknowledge hurricane risks,
especially related to evacuation, growth, ensuring safety, providing adequate facilities,
managing stormwater, working with providers of water supply and wastewater services, and
requirement compliance with codes. The Infrastructure Element and the Conservation and
Coastal Element contain specific policies relevant to mitigation of future risk and damage:
The Infrastructure Element includes such mitigation policies as:
Completing a detailed engineering study of drainage and implement priority
storm water projects.
On-site wastewater disposal facilities to minimize potential environmental
impacts.
Establish and coordinate acquisition programs.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-2
The Conservation and Coastal Element of the Comprehensive Plan includes such mitigation
policies as:
New development encroaching into the 100-year floodplain shall incorporate
elevation and flood protection measures sufficient to protect against the 100-
year flood.
The City shall maintain consistency with program policies of the National
Flood Insurance Program.
The City shall monitor new cost effective programs for minimizing flood
damage.
Such programs may include modifications to construction setback
requirements or other site design techniques, as well as upgraded building and
construction techniques. The City discourages development in the High
Velocity Area and regulates redevelopment of structures non-conforming to
the required base flood elevation.
12.2 Capability Assessment - City Organization
and Agencies
City of Marathon is a Council Form of Government. The City Council is composed of 5
members, including the Mayor who is selected by the Council to that office. The City
Council sets government policy and adopts guidance documents, such as the Comprehensive
Plan, the Land Development Regulation and ordinances establishing various codes and
standards.
Marathon is organized into several departments, each with authorized responsibilities that,
as described below, have bearing on how natural hazards are recognized and addressed.
City Manager.
The City Manager of Marathon implements the policies of the Council and
administers the overall operations of the City. With regards to the floodplain management,
the City Manager has a FEMA Coordinator appointed to administer and implement the
provisions consistent with the requirements of the National Flood Insurance Program.
Marathon Planning Department.
The Marathon Planning Department is responsible for
Development Regulations. Department personnel (Director, Planners, Planning Technician,
Biologist) serve as staff to the Ci
following activities related to hazard mitigation:
Ensures that mitigation related items in the Comprehensive Plan, such as
floodplain management and natural resource management, are followed and
reflected i
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-3
Participates in post-disaster appraisals and may formulate additional mitigation
measures for use in the Comprehensive Plan.
Works closely with the Building, Code Compliance, and Fire Department to
ensure coordination of actions related to disaster planning, recovery, and
mitigation.
Reviews construction plans for compliance to the NFIP regulations.
Responsible for enforcing planning and zoning standards.
Marathon Building Department.
The Building Department is responsible for regulations
of building construction pertaining to life safety, health, and environmental land use zoning
regulations. The department is staff by the Building Official, a Building Inspector, and
Permit Clerks. Related to mitigation of hazards, the department is responsible for the
following:
Review of construction plans and issuing building permits.
Inspection and enforcement during construction.
Designated as coordinator for the National Flood Insurance Program.
Assist the public in identifying and implementing flood damage prevention
measures.
Participate in post-disaster appraisals.
Work closely with the Planning, Fire, and Code Compliance Department to
ensure coordination of actions related to disaster planning, recovery, and
mitigation.
Table 12-1. Permits Issued in 2012, 2013, 2014
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
2012 2013 2014
New single-family (Market Rate &
4 23 23
Affordable)
Transient Residential Use 0 65 35
Building Permits 276 312 270
Electric Permits 349 368 298
Plumbing Permits 185 202 139
Mechanical Permits 208 343 274
Marathon Code Compliance Department.
The Code Compliance Department oversees
after-the-fact code compliance issues pertaining to safety, health, and environmental land
use and zoning regulations. The department is staffed by a Code Compliance Supervisor,
Code Officers, and an Administrative Assistant. Related to mitigation of hazards, the
department is responsible for: working closely with the Building, Planning, and Fire
departments to ensure coordination of actions related to disaster planning, recovery, and
mitigation; and participating in post-disaster appraisals.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-4
Marathon Finance Department.
The Finance Department (contracted) is responsible for
overseeing the day-to-day financial requirements of the City, including establishment of
purchasing procedures for all agencies. To expedite preparation for, response to, and
recovery from disasters, the Finance Department may implement special emergency
procedures to expedite necessary purchase and payment before, during, and after a disaster.
Marathon Community Services.
The Community Services Department has a Director, a
Community Services Coordinator, Grants Coordinator and houses the Parks and recreation
Department. It provides technical assistance for City projects which require design,
construction, and operation of economical and efficient structures, equipment, and systems.
Marathon Public Works Department.
The Public Works Department works under the
direction of the Public Works Director and is responsible for overseeing the maintenance of
all city facilities, including buildings, roads, and bridges. The Department also operates and
maintains City vehicles, with the exception of Fire Department vehicles.
Public Works is responsible for coordination and provision of emergency public works,
initial evaluation of infrastructure damage and preparation of documentation required for
federal reimbursement (including identification of mitigation components to be incorporated
during recovery), and coordination of emergency debris clearing.
In executing its disaster recovery responsibilities, Public Works coordinates with the Florida
Department of Transportation, Monroe County Department of Public Works, Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority, and Florida Keys Electric Co-op. The department plans, coordinates
and initiates restoration of the serviceability of transportation routes, bridges, and assurance
as to the safety of affected public and private dwellings and structures.
Marathon Utilities Department, Stormwater Utility.
In 2002 the City adopted the Master
Service Assessment Ordinance allowing the City to collect assessments as necessary for
infrastructure purposes. In 2004 the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP) designated the City Of Marathon as a regulated municipality under Phase II of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). One requirement of the MS4
designation is establishment of a stormwater utility and commencement of a five year
program to prohibit stormwater from running into Florida Outstanding Waters, as well as
other requirements. On May 10, 2005, the City adopted Ordinance 2005-10 creating a
stormwater utility and adopted an initial rate of $60 per Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU)
for a single family home and 1 ERU for every 4,769 sf of impervious area for commercial
properties (includes vacant properties) These funds are collected through non-ad valorem
taxes annually. The first year of collection was 2005.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-5
The creation of a Stormwater Utility and the imposition of a Stormwater Service Assessment
to pay for the design, construction, operation and maintenance of the Stormwater Utility's
facilities, programs, and collection and treatment services is an equitable and efficient
method of allocating and apportioning costs to address stormwater requirements among all
parcels of assessable property located in the City.
is responsible for overall law enforcement and protection of residents and visitors in the City
of Marathon. The department plays a key role in planning and response during emergencies
to include but not limited to: coordination with Florida Highway Patrol to promote speedy
and safe evacuation, communicates with base operations, field personnel, and emergency
shelters.
Marathon Fire Department.
The Fire Department is responsible for all life safety in
connection with duties that include fire control, fire prevention, emergency medical services,
emergency public education, and emergency management. Within the Department is the
Emergency Management Division. It plays the lead role in planning and response for all
emergencies. During a declared State of Local Emergency, the Emergency Management
Director serves in the capacity of the Incident Manager under the direct control of the City
Manager. This holds true for all four phases of emergency management: Preparedness,
response, recovery and mitigation. Additionally, the Emergency Management Director is
responsible for the year round program management as well as development and
maintenance of all emergency and/or disaster related plans and procedures, including this
document.
12.3 Hazards and Risk in Marathon
Historic Storms that have affected the Marathon Area:
1929 Hurricane (September 22 to October 4) The hurricane crossed over
Key Largo on a northerly course. Key Largo reported winds estimated at over
100 mph, a central barometric pressure of 28 inches, and tide levels of 8-9 feet
above MSL. Key West experienced tide levels of 5-6 feet above MSL and
winds of 66 mph.
1935, Hurricane (August 29-September 10) - The small, extremely violent,
Category 5 hurricane crossed the Florida Keys on a northwesterly track. The
Tavernier-Islamorada area reported sustained winds estimated at 120 mph with
gusts from 190-210 mph. Tide levels in the Florida Keys ranged from 14 feet
above MSL in Key Largo to 18 feet above MSL in Lower Matecumbe Key.
The storm was so intense and tightly wrapped that Key West had tide levels of
only 2 feet above MSL and average sustained winds of less than 40 mph. One
of the most tragic aspects of the 1935 storm was the unfortunate death of many
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-6
eas
Railroad.
Hurricane Donna, 1960 (August 29-September 19) Hurricane Donna curved
northwestward over the Middle Keys near Long Key/Layton and then traveled
northward toward the Gulf Coast towns of Naples and Fort Myers. Areas in
the vicinity of the storm experienced winds speed of 128 mph and a central
pressure of 28.44 inches. The storm affected the Everglades with estimated
winds of 150 mph. Tide levels were reported at Upper Matecumbe Key of
13.5 feet above MSL, at Plantation Key 10+ feet above MSL, and 8.9 feet
above MSL in Key Largo. As of 1992 Hurricane Donna, a Category 4 storm is
th
listed as the 6 most intense hurricane in the US.
Hurricane Betsy, 1965 (August 26-Septmber 12) Hurricane Betsy passed
over Marathon while moving westward into the Gulf of Mexico. The lowest
central pressure was measured in Tavernier at 28.12 inches and wind speeds
were estimated to be 120 mph. Tide levels in Tavernier were 7.7 feet above
MSL and Key Largo had tide levels of around 9 feet above MSL. Betsy was a
th
Category 3 storm and is ranked 25 in intensity.
-2 tornado
touchdowns resulting from a severe thunderstorms characterized by dangerous
cells with high, cold cloud tops affected the Florida Keys. Areas most affected
were primarily in the Middle Keys including Grassy Key and Valhalla Beach
in the vicinity of Duck Key. Several buildings were damaged. Also
significant problems occurred from the displacement of lobster traps which
contributed to seaborne debris and navigational problems; the fishing industry
suffered considerable loss of income.
Severe thunderstorms (July 4, 1998). Severe thunderstorms with lightning and
high winds came up quickly in the Middle Keys. The Weather Service Office
in Key West recorded wind speeds up to 70 mph sustained. Because it was
th,
July 4 many boats were offshore celebrating and waiting for the fireworks.
Although, this event did not warrant a presidential disaster declaration, it did
result in loss of life.
Hurricane Georges, 1998 (September 25, 1998), a Category 2 when made
landfall in the Lower Keys, affecting the entire county to some extent.
Damage estimates approached $300 million, including insured and uninsured
damage and infrastructure loss. Maximum sustained winds at the Naval Air
Station (Boca Chica) near Key West were 92 mph; gusts up to 110 mph were
reported by the Emergency Operations Center in Marathon. According to the
Key West Weather Service, precipitation levels in the Lower Keys were as
8.65 inches on the south side of Sugarloaf Key, 8.38 inches at Key West
International Airport, and 8.20 inches on Cudjoe Key. Tavernier in the Upper
Keys recorded 8.41 inches.
Tropical Storm Mitch, 1998 (November 4 and 5). Feeder bands from Mitch
containing dangerous super cells spawned several damaging tornadoes in the
Upper Keys. Sections with mobile homes were especially hard hit.
Islamorada experienced an F-1 tornado; Rock Harbor and Key Largo were hit
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-7
by F-2 tornadoes. According to the Department of Community Affairs,
damages were estimated at $11 million.
Hurricane Irene, October 1999. Hurricane Irene hit the Florida Keys and
Southeastern Florida. This Category 1 Hurricane dumped 10 to 20 inches of
rain resulting in severe flooding in the Florida Keys and Southeastern Florida
causing total damage estimated at $800 million
Tropical Storm Gabrielle, September 2001. Although it did not reach
hurricane strength, this storm hit the southwest coast of Florida and caused
flooding problems; Marathon did see some effects from the storm.
Hurricane Wilma, October 2005.During the night of October 23 to 24,
Hurricane Wilma visited Monroe County, resulting in at least 2 injuries and at
least $33 million in damage countywide. Over the Upper Keys from Craig Key
to Ocean Reef, maximum winds were measured at 65 knots with gusts to 79
knots. Overall, average winds across the inhabited Lower Keys were estimated
at 70 to 80 mph with gusts up to 90 mph with general Category 1 Saffir-
Simpson Damage noted. Wilma primarily produced one storm tide along the
bayside of the Upper Keys, ranging from 4 to 5 feet above sea level with the
worst in Lower Matecumbe Key. U.S. Route 1 north of Key Largo was
temporarily flooded at least 3 inches at maximum surge during the afternoon
hours on October 24.
Hurricane Flooding as Predicted by SLOSH Modeling
Surges from Hurricanes), estimates surges associated with different characteristics of
tropical cyclones (track, forward speed, wind speed, etc.). This information is carried
forward from the 2010 Plan as it provide more site-specific potential surge impacts and is to
be used in conjunction with the Hazus results from Chapter 5. The results can be combined
with topographic mapping to delineate inland areas subject to flooding (with a margin of
error of +/- 20%). The predicted storm surges that may affect the Marathon area for various
storm categories and tracks are shown in Table 12-2.
Table 12-2. SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths (ft above MSL)
Ocean Side Mile-Marker 50 Ocean Side Mile Marker 61
Storm Categories Storm Categories
Track Track
Direction 1 2 3 4 5 Direction 1 2 3 4 5
WSW 4 5 6 7 8 WSW 4 5 6 7 8
W 4 5 7 8 9 W 4 5 7 8 9
WNW 4 6 7 8 9 WNW 4 6 7 9 10
WN 4 6 7 8 9 NW 4 5 7 8 10
NNW 4 5 7 8 9 NNW 4 5 7 8 9
N 4 5 7 8 9 N 4 5 6 8 9
NNE 4 5 6 7 9 NNE 4 5 6 8 9
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-8
Table 12-2. SLOSH Maximum Predicted Water Depths (ft above MSL)
Ocean Side Mile-Marker 50 Ocean Side Mile Marker 61
Storm Categories Storm Categories
Track Track
Direction 1 2 3 4 5 Direction 1 2 3 4 5
NE 4 5 6 7 8 NE 4 5 6 7 9
ENE 3 5 6 7 8 ENE 3 5 6 7 8
E 3 4 5 6 7 E 3 4 5 6 8
Floodplain Management & Compliance with the NFIP
The City entered the National Flood Insurance Program when it incorporated in 2000 by
adoption of an ordinance that complies with the requirements of the program. The City
reviews all development proposals in special flood hazard areas and enforces the
requirements of the ordinance. To ensure continued
____________________________
compliance with the NFIP, the City will continue to:
NFIP Flood Insurance Policies
Enforce the adopted floodplain management
in Marathon: 2,948
ordinance, including inspection of permitted
Claims paid since 1978: 806*
development and unpermitted activities;
https://www.fema.gov/policy-claim-
Maintain records pertaining to floodplain
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-
development, including flood maps and Letters of
statistics-flood-insurance/policy-claim-13
Map Change, which shall be available for public
(as of March 31, 2015)
inspection;
*records prior to incorporation included
in claims for Monroe County
Notify the public when there are proposed changes to
____________________________
the ordinance or Flood Insurance Rate Maps; and
Promote the purchase of NFIP flood insurance policies as financial protection.
For several years the City participated in the Community Inspection Pilot Program required
by FEMA as resolution of long-standing problems with conversion of enclosures below
elevated buildings to non-permitted uses. FEMA suspended the program in July of 2013.
However, the concept of compliance inspections remains a viable tool for the real estate
market and the City continues inspections on a volunteer basis.
NFIP Floodplain Mapping
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) prepared a Flood Insurance Rate Map for
Monroe County and incorporated municipalities (current effective map is dated February 18,
2005). The FIRM delineates areas that have been determined to be subject to flooding by
-percent-annual chance of flooding in any given year
(commonly called the 100-year flood).
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-9
The entire City is located in areas designated as VE Zones (coastal flood with velocity
hazard wave action) and AE Zones (areas subject to flooding but waves are predicted to be
less than 3-feet in height). As such, all new development in the City is subject to the
FEMA initiated a coastal study to revise the FIRM, expected to be completed in 3 to 4 years.
NFIP Repetitive Loss Properties
Data provided by the Florida Division of Emergency Management identifies properties that
are (or have been) insured by the National Flood Insurance Program and that have received
two or more claims of at least $1,000. As of March 2015, 34 individual properties have
received 74 claims, totally approximately $4.1 million (average payment of $55,405). Of
these 34 properties, 33 are residential and 1 is non-residential. Figure 12-1(end of chapter)
shows property locations of those records that were able to be plotted. Some of the
repetitive loss properties that are listed for Monroe County may fall within Marathon;
because the data cannot be geocoded based on the addressing, the actual number is
unknown.
Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Water Spouts and High Winds (Other than Hurricane)
Marathon, like the rest of the Keys, has low-lying terrain. Section 6.2 characterizes the
entire area encompassed by Monroe County and the cities as having equal distribution of
winds. The risk of severe storms, tornadoes, water spouts and high winds in Marathon does
not vary from the rest of the planning area. All new buildings, replacement buildings, and
requirements.
Rainfall/Ponding Flooding
Unlike most areas in Monroe County and the other cities, Marathon has areas that are
subject to rainfall or ponding flooding. This type of flooding results from longer duration
storms, which occur almost annually. As a result, residents experience access problems and
water has damaged some older, non-elevated, buildings. The area with the most significant
thth
problem is 107 Street to 109 Street. Access to about 200 buildings is limited during
heavy and prolonged storms. While many of the buildings are elevated, about 50 older
buildings are built on-grade and have experienced flooding. In Hurricane Georges, water up
to one-foot deep caused damage.
localized flooding and a generalized overview of suggested methods to minimize local
flooding such as closed drainage systems, exfiltration/slab covered trenches, and injection
th
wells. The priority areas identified include 39 Street and Sombrero Boulevard.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-10
Because all of Marathon is mapped as Special Flood Hazard Area, all new buildings and
replacement buildings must comply with the floodplain management ordinance and be
elevated or floodproofed (nonresidential only). Therefore, this type of flood damage is
unlikely to affect buildings built in the future.
and improved storm drainage facilities to hand the 25-year frequency rainfall.
Drought Hazards
drought is comparable the drought risk throughout the area.
Wildland Fire Hazards
The Florida Forestry Department indicates that in Marathon, Grassy Key is the area that is
most prone to wildland/brush fires.
The Florida Forestry Department indicates that in Marathon, Grassy Key is the area that is
most prone to wildland /brush fires. Based on data provided by Monroe County Property
Appraiser in 2005, Grassy Key includes a total of 9,391 parcels of land of which 6,498 are
improved. The total assessed value of improvements is $1,562,786,704. It is important to
note that this summary is not to imply that all properties would be vulnerable in any given
wildfire outbreak. All new construction must comply with environmental restrictions.
T-3 are plotted in Figure 2-3.
Table 12-3. Critical and Important Facilities in Marathon
Critical/Essential Facilities: Marinas: (from the draft Marine Siting Plan)
City Hall 7 Mile Grill
Abaco Sails & Marine
Florida Keys Electric Co-op Banana Bay Marina
Schools (Stanley Switlick, Marathon Middle, and Blackfin Resort and Marina
Marathon High)
The Boat House
Marathon Airport
Bonefish Bay Motel
City Marina
Bonefish Yacht Club and Marina
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
Boot Key Harbor City Marina
Crawl Key Sewer Treatment Plant (future)
Border Patrol
Fire Station #14 and #15 (completed 2008)
Burdines Water Front
33 rd Street Fire Station (future)
Cannon Marine & Harbor Point
Monroe County Operation Center
Little Venice Sewer Treatment Plant
Captains Three Fisheries
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-11
Table 12-3. Critical and Important Facilities in Marathon
Hazardous Materials Sites (302 Facilities):
Coco Plum Marina & Storage, Inc.
Monroe County Mosquito Control
Coconut Cay Resort & Marina
Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority
Coconut Palmas, Inc.
Coral Island Yachts
Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks:
Crystal Bay Resort & Marina
Aloha Trailer Park
D & D Seafood
Farnsworth Trailer Park
Driftwood Marina & Storage
Galway Bay RV and Mobile Home Park
Faro Blanco Resort Gulfside
Jolly Roger Travel Park
Faro Blanco Resort Oceanside
Key RV Park
Galway Bay Trailer Park and Marina
Knights Key Campground
Grassy Key Marina of Marathon
Hidden Harbor
Ocean 25 Company, Inc.
Holiday Inn
Ocean Breeze Park West
Jolly Roger RV Park
Ocean Breeze Trailer Park
Keys Boat Works, Inc.
Old Towne Village
Keys Fisheries Market & Marina
Palms Subdivision Trailer
Pelican Motel & Trailer Park
Kingsail Resort Motel
Sundance
Terra Marine Park
Trailer Ranch by the Sea
Marathon Marina & Boat Yard
Trailerama Park
Marathon Yacht Club
Whispering Pines
Trailers by the Sea
Ocean Breeze RV Park & Marina
Oceanside Marine Service, Inc.
Outta The Blue Marina
Pelican Resort
Rainbow Bend Resort & Marina
Royal Hawaiian Motel/Botel
Sea Cove Motel
Seascape Resort
Seven Mile Marina
Shelter Bay Marine
Sombrero Marina & Dockside
Sombrero Resort Lighthouse Marina
Vaca Key Marina
Valhalla Beach
Yardarm Motel
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-12
12.4 Damage Reduction Activities
On-Going Activities
Participate in public awareness activities, including distribution of the
Administer the stormwater utility that was implemented as part of construction
in six wastewater management service areas. Tax revenues received by the
utility have been utilized to construct a stormwater management system for all
streets within the City. This system was installed simultaneously with the
wastewater management system.
On-Going Stormwater and Wastewater Initiatives
In July 2005 the City of Marathon entered into an agreement with Weiler Engineering for
The proposed project provides an
affordable, long-
Weiler examined various technologies and service areas within the City of Marathon and
determined that no single type of system was best for the entire City. Instead, the
recommendations addressed the most practical and cost effective system for various
neighborhoods. As a result, projects will be implemented in seven separate Service Areas.
Service Area 1:
Service Area 2: Boot Key (Entire Island)
Service Area 3: Vaca Key West (11th St to 39th St)
Service Area 4: Vaca Key Central (39th St to 60th St)
Service Area 5: Vaca Key East (60th St to Vaca Cut)
Service Area 6: Fat Deer Key WestCoco Plum (Vaca Cut to Coco Plum)
Service Area 7: Grassy Key (Fat Deer Key East through Grassy Key)
stormwater management facilities and repaving City roads in these seven areas. A water re-
use component is included for large users.
Past and Recent Projects
These projects are intended to reduce rainfall/ponding flooding and improve overall
drainage and water quality of stormwater runoff:
injection well in the parking lot. (Completed September 2004)
th
39 Street Drainage Improvements: was designed to improve existing
thnd
drainage conditions at the location of 39 Street (2 Ave), which will provide
a means for discharge through two drainage wells and thereby allow bleed-
down of the ponding areas. Because the wells will serve as a source for
discharge during storm events, the proposed system will help to alleviate the
extent of ponding. Runoff will be collected through a series of inter-connected
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-13
swales, ditches and bubble up structures and converged to two drainage wells.
(Completed March 2005)
th
20 Street Gulf (Boot Key Road): designed to improve existing drainage
th
conditions on 20 Street Gulf. The work included grading shoulders, grading
the drainage swales at north end of the project, place drainage structures on
both sides of the road and 100 linear feet of French Drain. (Completed March
2005)
th
4 Ave Gulf Drainage: designed to improve existing drainage conditions on
th
4 Ave Gulf. The work included installing a catch basin at the low point of
th
(Completed March 2005)
thth
46 Street Gulf: designed to improve existing drainage conditions on 46
Street Gulf. The work included installing a catch basin and 150 linear foot
French drain at the low point of the road. (Completed March 2005)
ndnd
42 Street Gulf: designed to improve existing drainage conditions on 42
Street Gulf. The work included installing a catch basin and 150 linear foot
French drain. (Completed March 2005)
Ave D Drainage: designed to improve existing drainage conditions on Ave D.
Baffle Box. (Completed March 2005)
thth
107 to 109 Street Stormwater Improvement Project: includes the
installation of drainage and retention structures to minimize the impacts from
rainfall/flood events with a 25-year frequency. (Completed 2006/07)
thth
West 105 to 116 Street Stormwater Improvement Project: includes the
installation of drainage and retention structures to minimize the water quality
impacts from rainfall/flood events with a 25-year frequency. (Completed
2006/07)
12.5 2015 Updates
The City reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more significant changes
include:
Section 12.2: Reported number of issued permits; added description of
utilities department
Section 12.3: Added text and figure for repetitive loss properties.
References:
City of Marathon, Comprehensive Plan (2005).
City of Marathon, Stormwater Management Master Plan (October 2002).
City of Marathon Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (June 2008)
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-14
This page blank.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 12-16
Chapter 13. Mitigation Initiatives
13.1 LMS Goals and Priority Hazards
Earlier chapters describe Monroe County and its incorporated municipalities, identify
hazards and characterize risk, summarize how the local governments address hazards in their
development processes and other functions, and re-affirmed existing mitigation goals:
Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy Goals
1.Preservation of sustainability of life, health, safety and welfare.
2.Preservation of infrastructure, including power, water, sewer and
communications.
3.Maintenance and protection of roads and bridges, including
traffic signals and street signs.
4.Protection of critical facilities, including public schools and
public buildings.
5.Preservation of property and assets.
6.Preservation of economy during and after disaster, including
business viability.
7.
Preservation and protection of the environment, including natural
and historic resources.
Hurricanes and their associated hazards (high wind and surge flooding) are described in
Chapter 5 and other hazards are overviewed in Chapter 6 (strong storms, tornadoes and
water spouts; rainfall/fresh water flooding; drought; wildland fire; coastal erosion; and
climate change and sea level rise). For the purposes of actively pursuing damage reduction
activities, the Monroe County LMS Work Group focuses on initiatives that address one or
more of the mitigation goals and that address the hazards that have relative vulnerability
-1, which is identical to Table 6-15).
Table 13-1. Hazards: Relative Vulnerability
Hazard Vulnerability Impact Frequency Distribution
Moderate
Hurricane/Tropical Storm High 1-2 per year Countywide
to Severe
Moderate Continuously Coastal and
Sea Level Rise Moderate
to Severe increasing low-lying
areas
6-12 times
Flooding (rainfall ponding) High (locally) Moderate Key West
each year
Strong Storms/ Moderate Moderate 1-2 per year Countywide
Tornado/Lightning
Wildfire Low Low Less than 1 Selected
per year areas
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-1
Table 13-1. Hazards: Relative Vulnerability
Hazard Vulnerability Impact Frequency Distribution
Drought Low Low 1-2 per Countywide
decade
Coastal Erosion Low Low 1-2 per year Limited
(with coastal selected
storms) areas
13.2 Range of Mitigation Initiatives
Six general categories or approaches to mitigation, outlined in the 2013 CRS Coordinators
Manual, to mitigation are described in Table 13-2. The list is not intended to be exhaustive;
other activities may meet the intent but not be listed. The members of the Monroe County
LMS Working Group consider these categories when identifying initiatives within their
jurisdictions. Each participating local government undertakes a number of these activities
on an ongoing basis.
Table 13-2. Categories of Mitigation Initiatives.
PREVENTIVE MEASURES
keep problems from getting started or getting worse.
When hazards are known and can be factored in to development decisions early in the
process, risks are reduced and future property damage is minimized. Building, zoning,
planning, and/or code enforcement officials usually administer these activities:
Planning and zoning
Open space preservation
Building codes and enforcement
Infrastructure design requirements
Coastal setback/erosion requirements
Floodplain regulations
Stormwater management, including injection wells, and drainage system maintenance
Clear defensible space for wildfire
PROPERTY PROTECTION
measures are actions that go directly to permanently
reducing risks that are present due to development that pre-dates current codes and
regulations and include:
Property acquisition in floodplains
Relocation out of hazard-prone areas
Elevation of structures in floodplains
Demolition and reconstruction of structures in floodplains
Retrofit of structures in high wind zones and/or floodplains
Safe rooms and shelter hardening
Sewer backup protection
Insurance
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-2
Table 13-2. Categories of Mitigation Initiatives.
EMERGENCY SERVICES MEASURES
are taken immediately before or during a
hazard event to minimize impacts. These measures are the responsibility of city or
county emergency management staff, operators of major and critical facilities, and other
local emergency service organizations and include:
Alert warning systems
Hazard/weather monitoring systems
Emergency response planning and operations
Evacuation
Critical facilities protection
Preservation of health and safety
Post-disaster mitigation actions
STRUCTURAL PROJECTS
are usually designed by engineers and managed and
maintained by public entities. They are designed to reduce or redirect the impact of
natural disasters (especially floods) away from at-risk population areas:
Levees, floodwalls, dunes and berms
Drainage diversions
Storm drain improvements
Channel modifications
Shoreline protection against erosion
NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION
projects preserve or restore natural areas or
their natural functions. Park and recreation organizations, conservation agencies or
wildlife groups may implement such measures:
Wetland protection or restoration
Natural area preservation and restoration
Water quality improvements
Coastal barrier protection
Beach and dune protection
Erosion and sediment control
Environmental corridors
Natural functions protection
PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAMS
advise property owners, potential property
owners, and others of prevalent hazards and ways to protect people and property. A
public information office usually implements these activities, often with private partner
support:
Flood maps and data
Public information, brochures, and outreach projects
Library
Technical assistance for property owners
Real estate disclosure information
Environmental education programs
13.3 Mitigation Initiatives
Elements of the Monroe County LMS Goals highlight the importance of reducing potential
damage to critical facilities such as public schools and public buildings, infrastructure
(power, water, sewer, communications, roads and bridges), and the economy, including
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-3
damage to privately owned homes and businesses. Progress is made toward those goals
through implementation of ongoing actions and responsibilities of local governments as well
as through initiatives undertaken explicitly to reduce future impacts.
It is important to recognize and acknowledge that Monroe County and the municipalities all
have on-going programs and activities that contribute to disaster resistance even if those
actions were not initiated in response to the Local Mitigation Strategy process. Examples
include:
Every jurisdiction issues building permits and administers a floodplain
management ordinance. New buildings and infrastructure must comply with
the Florida Building Code and other regulations; those regulations are deemed
to be sufficient to minimize future damage to due hurricanes, high winds and
flooding.
Every jurisdiction maintains its roads, which reduces the likelihood of washout
damage.
Every jurisdiction cooperates with water suppliers during periods of drought
and issues notices about water restrictions.
Key West and other communities pursue projects to improve poor drainage in
areas subject to rainfall flooding.
Monroe County and the municipalities participate in public information and outreach,
encouraging residents and visitors to be aware of the potential for hurricanes and actions to
take both to reduce property damage and to facilitate safe evacuation.
Similarly, the utilities have on-going
responsibilities intended to reduce the impacts
of natural hazards. The Florida Keys Aqueduct
Authority has contingencies for drought. The
Florida Keys Electric Cooperative, the Keys
Energy System, and Florida Power and Light
take steps to minimize damage to their
infrastructure and distribution systems to be
able to recover as quickly as possible after
hurricanes.
13.4 Property Owner Initiatives
Many residents of Monroe County and
incorporated municipalities have taken their
Wind protection measures observed during 2015 site visit.
own steps to protect their property from natural
hazards. For example, property owners have
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-4
converted sliding glass doors to in-fill walls with windows, to protect against flooding.
Many owners install hurricane shutters or are prepared to mount window coverings when
hurricanes are predicted to impact the area.
13.5 Initiatives for Working Group as a Whole
13.5.1 Working Group Initiatives: 2015
At the March 5, 2015
discussed and accepted and two initiatives were discussed and added during the June 23,
2015 conference call (see Table 13-3). The value of for developing new initiatives and
projects to address risk was discussed at both the January and March meetings. Several of
the primary initiatives to address flood risk are participation or advancement in CRS
program and addressing increase future risk caused by sea level rise. CRS is a priority
because it is an established program that provides incentives to take multiple approaches to
address flood risk and it provides flood policy holders with discounts once thresholds are
met. Several Working Group and community-specific initiatives are geared toward CRS
participation.
The basis for the additional initiatives and projects listed in this section and Appendix F are
to address areas of greatest risk and hazards with greatest impacts. As a chain of islands,
Monroe County is dependent on critical infrastructure along the Overseas Highway right-of-
way which if damaged, would have a devastating impact to most residents and businesses.
For this reason, evaluating protection of critical infrastructure is a top priority.
Table 13-3. 2015 High Priority Mitigation Initiatives: Working Group
Initiative 2015-001 Establish a Monroe County
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County and municipalities
Description Establish for both current
participating jurisdictions, for efforts to improve their ratings,
and the other four communities that are looking to join the
program. This group initiative supports several of the
community specific initiatives. Currently, Layton participates in
the Miami- due to
distance.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time and external support as needed
Estimated Time Frame 2016
Initiative 2015-002 Repetitive Loss Areas (Flood)
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County and municipalities
Verify Repetitive Loss Property Data
Description
Monroe County and municipalities that decide to participate in
the CRS or that already participate in the CRS will verity the
repetitive loss property data obtained from FEMA. The NFIP
maintains records of past flood insurance claims and tracks
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-5
Table 13-3. 2015 High Priority Mitigation Initiatives: Working Group
properties that have received multiple claims. These
properties and similarly situated buildings present likely
opportunities for mitigation. Verifying the data serves two
purposes: it helps the NFIP improve its records, and it helps
identify Repetitive Loss Areas.
Prepare Repetitive Loss Area Maps
Monroe County and municipalities that prepare Repetitive
Loss Area Analyses will identify repetitive loss areas within
their jurisdiction using the methods described in FEMA/CRS
guidance. The County Growth Management Department will
use the identifications, along with the address list of repetitive
loss properties provided by the municipalities, to prepare
Repetitive Loss Area Maps. Key Colony Beach is preparing its
Repetitive Loss Area map in 2015 and a county-sponsored
workshop was held on 03/05/15 to help other communities.
Identification of Repetitive Loss Areas helps identify property
owners who may be interested in reducing their exposure and
working with the communities to seek mitigation funds.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Data verification (annually for CRS communities)
Repetitive Loss Area Maps (upon request)
Initiative 2015-003
Support efforts in Monroe County to address the
potential negative impacts related to climate change
including sea level rise
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County and municipalities
Description Monroe County is the most vulnerable partner that participates
in the SE FL Compact with respect to climate change induced
sea level increases. Critical resources like the primary source
of drinking water as well as homes, businesses and
infrastructure are directly at risk. The LMS should actively
support its own Climate Change actions plans (Monroe
County and Key West) and support the implementation of a
Regional Collaborative Climate Action Plan with the
neighboring counties through the Southeast Florida Regional
Climate Compact to address the impacts of sea level rise and
other related climate change impacts.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
Initiative 2015-004 Promote hurricane and flood awareness to residents
and businesses.
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County and municipalities
Description Once residents and businesses become more aware of their
risk, they are more likely to take steps to mitigate their
property and support community efforts to mitigate. Risk
awareness can be challenging in most parts of Florida with
long intervals between events and with new residents moving
from other parts of the country. The LMS Working Group
should actively seek effective risk communication information
and opportunities to promote steps businesses and residents
can take to reduce their flood and hurricane risk.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-6
Table 13-3. 2015 High Priority Mitigation Initiatives: Working Group
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
Initiative 2015-005
As a group, the LMS should coordinate with agencies
and utility providers responsible for critical
infrastructure to express the need to incorporate flood,
wind, sea level rise and coastal erosion protection into
infrastructure maintenance, upgrades, and new
construction.
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County and municipalities
When infrastructure maintenance and upgrade projects are
Description
planned by agencies and utility providers such as Florida DOT
or the Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority (e.g., repaving or
elevating a road), the Working Group should express an
opinion, as appropriate, that mitigation should be considered
with the proposed project. These infrastructure investments
represent an opportunity to add in a mitigation component like
a drainage upgrade during a road project for an incremental
cost.
Examples for consideration include for energy infrastructure:
harden facilities and service lines, conjunction boxes, and
weather heads to reduce vulnerability. Monroe County should
consider mitigation efforts toward raising the wastewater
treatment system to an elevation which will escape future sea
level tidal increases. This may include an enhanced pump-out
capability with redundancies and backups. This initiative
supports recommendations from the 2012 Miami-Fort
Lauderdale Urban Areas Security Initiative Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).
Strong Storms/Lightning/Tornado, Flooding,
Hazards
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise, Coastal Erosion
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
13.5.2 Status of Working Group Initiatives 2010
In 2010, the Monroe County LMS Work Group identified three initiatives for the Work
Group as a whole. The status on these initiatives was discussed in the March 5, 2015
Working Group meeting. Table 13-4 describes those initiatives and reports on their status as
of early 2015.
Table 13-4. 2010 High Priority Mitigation Initiatives: Work Group
Status as of 2015: Completed
Initiative 2010-001: Establish LMS Working Group
Procedures
The Working Group will review how at least two other
LMS Working Groups manage their regular business
(e.g., written procedures / by-laws), determine if it is
appropriate for the Monroe LMS Working Group to
develop operating procedures, and if determined
appropriate, develop such procedures. Operating
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-7
procedures might address such items as posting public
notices of meetings, basis for not holding a required
quarterly meeting, basis for determining when a meeting
may be held by conference call, location and scheduling
of meetings, composition of the project ranking
subcommittee, submission of updates to the LMS
coordinator to compile for the State-required annual
report, etc. Concurrently, review how other LMS WG
handle requests from private property owners. The
Working Group will talk with DEM and other counties to
determine how they prioritize and process many
requests. Monroe County has a checklist that
homeowners use to gather building-specific information;
this checklist will be reviewed and modified if
appropriate.
Status as of 2015: Mostly completed.
Initiative 2010-002: Evaluate Hazard Identification
and Risk Assessment Tools
For the 2015 LMS update, results and
The Working Group will evaluate the Hazard
explanations of Hazus runs from the up-
Identification and Risk Assessments that were prepared
to-date versions (at the time) were
for at least two other counties and determine whether
completed by FDEM and were included
nd
in the draft and presented at the 2 LMS
significantly improve the outcomes reflected in the 2010
meeting for the 2015 update. The City of
Update. The anticipated update of the Sea, Lake, and
Key West has several innovative ways
Overland Surge from Hurricanes (SLOSH) projections
for analyzing repetitive loss properties
may also influence future updates of the HIRA.
and the Working Group identified the
Repetitive Loss Maps a 2015 WG
Initiative. The County and municipalities
are also awaiting updates to future flood
maps which is in process as of early
2015 (South Florida Coastal Study).
Initiative 2010-003: Continue to Verify and Status as of 2015: See Initiative 2015-
Improve Repetitive Flood Loss Data 002
The National Flood Insurance Program maintains
This is a continual activity. Action from
records of past flood insurance claims and tracks
2010-2014:
properties that have received multiple claims (referred to
Key West has evaluated GIS data
and made changes, particularly for
likely opportunities for mitigation, such as elevation-in-
manufactured home parks that were
place, and FEMA funding may be available to support
defaulting to the City Hall location.
cost-effective measures. The NFIP records date to the
Improvements there have resulted in
mid-70s and are known to contain inconsistencies.
most locations to be mapped. This
Verifying the data serves two purposes: it helps the
initiative is an on-going need and will
NFIP improve its records, and it results in an accurate list
be carried forward to the 2015
-prone properties. Owners of
these properties may be interested in reducing their
Update and augmented with
exposure and working with the communities to seek
preparing Repetitive Loss Area
mitigation funds.
maps (see Initiative 2015-002).
Layton has no repetitive loss
properties
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-8
13.6 Community-Specific Initiatives
13.6.1 Community-Specific Initiatives: 2015
In 2015, the County and municipalities identified community-specific
initiatives described in Table 13-5, in addition to the site-specific initiatives (see Section
13.7).
Table 13-5. Community-Specific Initiatives
Seek Participation in CRS
Islamorada Initiative
2015-001
Jurisdiction/Entity Islamorada
Islamorada, Village of Islands, will examine its activities to
Description
determine eligibility for CRS activity points and determine what
it needs to do to enter the program. As of March 2015, it had
been cleared by FEMA to seek participation. The Village has
16 Repetitive Loss Properties and will need to prepare a
Repetitive Loss Area map. City staff will seek advice from the
Florida Division of Emergency Management, the ISO CRS
Specialist, and other CRS communities in Monroe County.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame 2016
Key West Initiative 2015-Seek Participation in CRS
001
Jurisdiction/Entity Key West
Description The City of Key West will examine its activities to determine
eligibility for CRS activity points and determine whether it is
feasible to qualify. The City has more than 220 repetitive loss
properties and 8 Severe Repetitive Loss properties. City staff
have begun to prepare a repetitive loss area map. City staff
will seek advice from the Florida Division of Emergency
Management, the ISO CRS Specialist, and other CRS
communities in Monroe County.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame 2016
Seek Participation in CRS
Monroe County Initiative
2015-001
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County
Monroe County will examine its activities to determine
Description
eligibility for CRS activity points and determine whether it is
feasible to qualify. City staff will seek advice from the Florida
Division of Emergency Management, the ISO CRS Specialist,
and other CRS communities in Monroe County. As of March
2015, Growth Management has brought in external support to
evaluate the steps necessary to meet FEMA compliance
requirements before preparing a formal application.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame 2017
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-9
Table 13-5. Community-Specific Initiatives
City of Marathon Initiative Seek Participation in CRS
2015-001
Jurisdiction/Entity Marathon
The City of Marathon will examine its activities to determine
Description
eligibility for CRS activity points and determine whether it is
feasible to qualify. City staff will seek advice from the Florida
Division of Emergency Management, the ISO CRS Specialist,
and other CRS communities in Monroe County.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame 2016
Integrated Flood Risk Reduction Approach
Monroe County Initiative
2015-002
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County
Monroe County will examine the various department
Description
responsibilities and activities that address flooding and seek
ways to develop a more integrated approach. The
departments that should be involved include Emergency
Management, Growth Management, etc. Some integration
options include coordination with recovery plan preparations,
review and commenting on comprehensive plan updates, and
evaluating capital improvement budgeting programs.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame 2017
Key Colony Beach Improve CRS Class
Initiative 2015-001
Jurisdiction/Entity Key Colony Beach
Description Key Colony Beach is a CRS Class 8 community. The City will
examine its activities currently receiving CRS activity points
and determine if that are other activities that can be included
in the next submission. City staff will complete actions
necessary to finalize the Repetitive Loss Area Analysis and
present it to Council for adoption as an addendum to the 2015
Monroe County LMS.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame 2016
Layton Initiative 2015-001 Improve CRS Class
Jurisdiction/Entity Layton
Description Layton is a CRS Class 8 community and is approximately 140
points from becoming a Class 7. The City will examine its
activities currently receiving CRS activity points and determine
if that are other activities that can be included in the next
submission.
Hazards Flooding, Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame November 2015
Monroe County Initiative Evaluate existing and proposed infrastructure and
2015-003
facilities to identify recommendations to increase
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-10
Table 13-5. Community-Specific Initiatives
resilience and account for dynamic hazards including
flood, wind, sea level rise, coastal erosion and strong
storms.
Jurisdiction/Entity Monroe County
Infrastructure and facilities provide services the whole
Description
community depends on for basic functioning. Monroe County
will review new projects for recommendations to increase
resiliency prior to inclusion in the Capital Improvements
Element of the Comprehensive Plan and evaluate options for
protecting infrastructure in vulnerable areas. Infrastructure
includes new, renovated and replacement public facilities such
as streets and bridges, water and wastewater treatment
plants, police stations and fire stations, and any other public
buildings and facilities. Options may include hardening,
elevating, relocating, or not building new infrastructure in the
areas with highest risk associated with flooding, sea level rise,
and erosion. This initiative supports the objectives in the
proposed 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the
recommendations from the 2012 Miami-Fort Lauderdale
Urban Areas Security Initiative Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).
Strong Storms/Lightning/Tornado, Flooding,
Hazards
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise, Coastal Erosion
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
Key West Initiative 2015-Evaluate protective measures for critical infrastructure
002 and facilities to protect against dynamic hazards
including flood, wind, sea level rise, coastal erosion
and strong storms.
Jurisdiction/Entity Key West
Description Critical infrastructure and facilities provides services that the
whole community depends on for basic functioning. Key West
will evaluate the need for protecting its critical facilities and
infrastructure including energy infrastructure,
water/wastewater infrastructure, port facilities, emergency
services, and healthcare facilities. This includes hardening,
elevating and potential relocation. This initiative supports
recommendations from the 2012 Miami-Fort Lauderdale
Urban Areas Security Initiative Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).
Strong Storms/Lightning/Tornado, Flooding,
Hazards
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise, Coastal Erosion
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
Marathon Initiative 2015-Evaluate protective measures for critical infrastructure
002 and facilities to protect against dynamic hazards
including flood, wind, sea level rise, and strong
storms.
Jurisdiction/Entity Marathon
Critical infrastructure and facilities provides services that the
Description
whole community depends on for basic functioning. Marathon
will evaluate the need for protecting its critical facilities and
infrastructure including energy infrastructure,
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-11
Table 13-5. Community-Specific Initiatives
water/wastewater infrastructure, port facilities, emergency
services, and healthcare facilities. This includes hardening,
elevating and potential relocation. This initiative supports
recommendations from the 2012 Miami-Fort Lauderdale
Urban Areas Security Initiative Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).
Specific options for consideration include for energy
infrastructure: harden facilities and service lines, conjunction
boxes, and weather heads to reduce vulnerability. Marathon
will consider mitigation efforts toward raising the wastewater
treatment system to an elevation above anticipated future sea
level tidal increases. This may include an enhanced pump-out
capability with redundancies and backups. Consider code
revisions requiring additional elevation of first floor residential
dwellings, commercial buildings, facilities deemed of critical
facility importance, to build new, or reconstruct older facilities,
at a higher elevation. This would include airports (runways),
hospitals, etc.
Strong Storms/Lightning/Tornado, Flooding,
Hazards
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise, Coastal Erosion
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
Islamorada Initiative Evaluate protective measures for critical infrastructure
2015-002 and facilities to protect against dynamic hazards
including flood, wind, sea level rise, and strong
storms.
Jurisdiction/Entity Islamorada
Critical infrastructure and facilities provides services that the
Description
whole community depends on for basic functioning.
Islamorada will evaluate the need for protecting its critical
facilities and infrastructure including energy infrastructure,
water/wastewater infrastructure, port facilities, emergency
services, and healthcare facilities. This includes hardening,
elevating and potential relocation. This initiative supports
recommendations from the 2012 Miami-Fort Lauderdale
Urban Areas Security Initiative Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).
Strong Storms/Lightning/Tornado, Flooding,
Hazards
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise, Coastal Erosion
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
Key Colony Beach Evaluate protective measures for critical infrastructure
Initiative 2015-002 and facilities to protect against dynamic hazards
including flood, wind, sea level rise, and strong
storms.
Jurisdiction/Entity Key Colony Beach
Critical infrastructure and facilities provides services that the
Description
whole community depends on for basic functioning. Key
Colony Beach will evaluate the need for protecting its critical
facilities and infrastructure including energy infrastructure,
water/wastewater infrastructure, port facilities, emergency
services, and healthcare facilities. This includes hardening,
elevating and potential relocation. This initiative supports
recommendations from the 2012 Miami-Fort Lauderdale
Urban Areas Security Initiative Threat and Hazard
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-12
Table 13-5. Community-Specific Initiatives
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).
Hazards Strong Storms/Lightning/Tornado, Flooding,
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise, Coastal Erosion
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
Layton Initiative 2015-002 Evaluate protective measures for critical infrastructure
and facilities to protect against dynamic hazards
including flood, wind, sea level rise, and strong
storms.
Jurisdiction/Entity Layton
Description Critical infrastructure and facilities provides services that the
whole community depends on for basic functioning. Layton
will evaluate the need for protecting its critical facilities and
infrastructure including energy infrastructure,
water/wastewater infrastructure, port facilities, emergency
services, and healthcare facilities. This includes hardening,
elevating and potential relocation. This initiative supports
recommendations from the 2012 Miami-Fort Lauderdale
Urban Areas Security Initiative Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA).
Hazards Strong Storms/Lightning/Tornado, Flooding,
Hurricane/Tropical Storm, Sea Level Rise, Coastal Erosion
Potential Funding Sources Staff time
Estimated Time Frame Ongoing
13.6.2 Status of Community-Specific Initiatives 2010
In 2010, the County and municipalities did not identify any community-specific
are not already listed.
13.7 Site-Specific Initiatives
Mitigation projects or initiatives are actions that focus on specific locations such as public
buildings, public infrastructure, or privately-owned property. Examples of project initiatives
that have been or are likely to be implemented in Monroe County and the municipalities
include, but are not limited to:
Wind retrofit of public buildings and facilities.
Wind retrofit of private non-profit buildings and low income homes.
Installation of storm drainage improvements.
Floodproofing or mitigation reconstruction of public buildings and facilities.
Elevation, mitigation reconstruction, or acquisition of private homes in
floodplains.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-13
Site-specific structural projects, such as levees and reservoirs are not appropriate for the
island environment. Large scale floodwalls around multiple properties are similarly
unlikely.
The Monroe County LMS Work Group maintains an evolving list of project initiatives that
includes many site-specific initiatives (Appendix F, as of mid-2015). This list may be
modified periodically. The list has three distinct that result from distinct steps in the
process (illustrated below and described in more detail in Section 13.8):
Step One: Preliminary Identified Mitigation Initiatives Notice of Intent
(initiatives may be placed on the list with a minimum amount of information).
Step Two: Prioritized Mitigation Initiatives
(when an entity is prepared to
seek funding and has sufficient detail, the Characterization Form is completed
and the LMS Ranking Subcommittee develops the prioritization ranking).
Step Three: Completed/Removed/Unconfirmed Mitigation Initiatives
(
initiatives that have been completed, with or without external funding, or
which have been removed/dropped, or for which the entity has not provided
sufficient information to keep it on one of the other lists).
Quarterly
LMS WG Coordinator updates spreadsheet (Tab One)
Post-Disaster or When NOFA Issued
to the prioritized list submit Characterization Forms
Ranking Subcommittee reviews Characterization Forms and
completes Prioritization Form
LMS WG Coordinator updates Prioritized list (Tab Two)
Annually
Step Three: Entities asked to review lists (Tab One and Tab
Two) to identify projects that are completed, to be removed,
or to be retained
LMS WG Coordinator updates spreadsheet (all tabs)
LMS WG Coordinator reports to DEM (9G-22)
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-14
13.8 Prioritizing Mitigation Initiatives
Florida Administrative Code 27P-22 delegates to the LMS Work Group the authority to set
priorities and identify projects. The Florida Division of Emergency Management
encourages Work Groups not only to pre-identify projects, but to gather initial
data to facilitate the priority setting process in part to help with more rapid consideration in
the post-disaster period. As indicated in Step One (NOI), detailed cost estimates and
engineering are not necessary in order to bank potential projects because long periods of
time may elapse between initial identification of an initiative and actual application for
funds (Step Two). Initiative proponents are responsible for providing information on which
the prioritizations are based.
The Monroe LMS does not outline how each jurisdiction or non-profit organization decides
to prioritize its own projects. It is expected that initiatives will be identified based on
available hazard information, past hazard events, the number of people and types of property
exposed to those hazards, and the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of the measure.
Initiatives are expected to be consistent with current policies and regulations, technically
feasible, likely to have high political and social acceptance, and be achievable using existing
authorities and staff.
The Work Group adopted the phased process described here for identification and
prioritization of mitigation initiatives. The process results in the evolving list of initiatives in
Appendix F, which also includes the forms. This list is maintained by Monroe County
Emergency Management on behalf of the Work Group.
Step One: Preliminary Identified Mitigation Initiatives (Notices of Intent)
Initiatives may be placed on the list by any eligible entity that provides minimum
information. The Work Group anticipates allowing submission on at least a quarterly basis
so that eligible entities are not constrained by an annual opportunity to identify and pursue
projects and funding. Initiative proponents are encouraged to bank initiatives by submission
of notices of intent. The NOI form (Appendix F) requires the following minimum
information:
Name of owner/entity;
Name of the initiative/project;
Brief description of initiative/project, project type, and any special
considerations;
Identification of the mitigation goal(s) and the hazards addressed.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-15
Step Two: Prioritized Mitigation Initiatives (Characterization Form)
Implementation of site-specific mitigation initiative usually is dependent upon the
availability of funding (see Section 13.9 for sources of funding). A project that is on the
Step One (NOI) list is moved to the Step Two (Prioritized) list when the owner/entity
anticipates developing and submitting the formal application to DEMA and FEMA, and
when the Work Group is charged with prioritizing projects for available funding. Notices of
Funding Availability (NOFA) may be issued annually (
Assistance Program or the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program) or after disasters that yield
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) funds, in which case NOFAs usually are issued
within 90 days. Whether on an annual basis or post-disaster, the Work Group members
would be notified and eligible entities would then decide whether they are prepared to
formalize initiatives that are on the Step One (NOI) list.
Pursuant to State requirements (Chapter 27P-22.006) the LMS Work Group is charged with
developing a prioritized list of initiatives. At any given time, priorities may change due to
various factors such as recent damage, availability of non-federal cost share, or changes in
priorities of the funding agency.
When a NOFA is anticipated or received, the LMS Coordinator will notify entities that have
initiatives in the Step One (NOI) list. In order to have an initiative forwarded to the funding
agency, detailed data specified in the Characterization Form (Appendix F) are required so
that the Work Group can process and determine priorities (Step
Two list). The following minimum information will be required:
Name of owner/entity and the point of contact responsible for providing the
detailed information;
Initiative/project title, description of the project, whether it benefits a critical
facility; and whether the applicant has the legal authority to undertake the
project;
Estimate of how quickly the project could be started and how long it would
take to complete;
The LMS goals addressed a(scope of work) and need, and the hazard(s) and
problem(s) it would address;
Identification of the mitigation goal(s) and the hazards addressed;
Description of general benefits, including number of people impacted,
economic benefits, social benefits, environmental benefits, and whether
historic resources are affected;
Estimated total project costs and whether a formal Benefit-Cost Analysis has
been prepared or if the estimated benefits are based on the worksheet to
approximate a Benefit-to-Cost Ratio;
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-16
Statements regarding feasibility; consistency with other plans, policies, codes
and ordinances; permits and approvals necessary; level of effort to implement;
and likely reception by the community (i.e., the public);
Identification of potential funding sources; and
An attachment to approximate benefits and costs.
Step Three: Completed/Removed/Unconfirmed Mitigation Initiatives
In order to maintain records that demonstrate progress towards the Mitigation Goals, the
Work Group recognizes that it is important to track completed initiatives, as well as
initiatives that are completed or removed from the list, including those for which sufficient
information was not provided in order to retain on one of the other lists. At least once a year
entities that have undertaken mitigation initiatives (regardless of source of funding) will
report to the Work Group. At any time, entities may request that an initiative be removed
from the Step One (NOI) list or the Step Two (Prioritized) list, in which case it is moved to
the Step Three list.
13.9 Potential Funding for Selected Initiatives
Funding to support mitigation initiatives may be available from several sources, each with
its own timing and requirements. The list in Table 13-6 is not intended to be exhaustive, but
to characterize the variety of funding. The State Hazard Mitigation Plan includes a more
detailed list of potential funding sources. The LMS Work Group will endeavor to maintain
familiarity with funding sources and availability. The Florida Division of Emergency
Management is the primary contact for notifications and processing of federal funds,
especially those that derive from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (FEMA).
FEMA publishes annual guidance for its programs. The guidance summarizes
programmatic changes and limitations which may vary from year to year.
Table 13-6. Primary Potential Funding for Mitigation
Program Fund Source Contact
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)
Source: FEMA
To prevent future losses of lives and property due to disasters; to implement
State or local hazard mitigation plans; to enable mitigation measures to be
Contact: Florida Division of
implemented during immediate recovery from a disaster; and to provide
Emergency Management (DEM)
funding for previously identified mitigation measures to benefit the disaster
area. Eligible projects include but are not limited to:
Property acquisition or relocation
Structural and non-structural retrofitting (e.g. elevation, storm shutters and
hurricane clips)
Minor structural hazard control (e.g. culverts, floodgates, retention basins)
Localized flood control projects that are designed to protect critical facilities and
are not part of a larger flood control system
Other feasible and cost-effective measures
Post-disaster code enforcement
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-17
Table 13-6. Primary Potential Funding for Mitigation
Program Fund Source Contact
Ineligible activities include:
Major flood control projects
Engineering designs not integral to a proposed project
Feasibility and drainage studies that are not integral to a proposed project
Flood studies that are not mapping
Response and communication equipment (e.g., warning systems, generators
that are not integral to a proposed project)
Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Competitive Grants
Source: FEMA
The PDM program was authorized by Section §203 of the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), as amended by
Contact: DEM
Section §102 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, to assist communities to
implement hazard mitigation programs designed to reduce overall risk to the
population and structures before the next disaster occurs. Annual guidance is
issued and may include national priorities. See HMGP for eligible activities.
Flood Mitigation Assistance Program
Source: FEMA
To fund cost effective measures implemented by States and communities to
reduce or eliminate the long term risk of flood damage to buildings,
Contact: DEM
manufactured homes, and other structures uninsurable by the National Flood
Insurance Program. See flood-related activities under PDM. Only property
owners with flood insurance are eligible under FMA. The Severe Repetitive
Loss Program and the Repetitive Flood Claims Program have now been rolled
into the FMA. SRL properties can get up to 100% federal funding and RL-
eligible properties up to 90%.
Residential Construction Mitigation Program (RCMP)
Source/Contact: DEM
Funds from the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe State to harden homes and tie-
down mobile homes.
Community Development Block Grant
Source: HUD
The Community Development Block Grants Disaster Recovery program
(CDBG-DR) provide for long-term needs, such as acquisition, rehabilitation or
Contact: Florida Department of
reconstruction of damaged properties and facilities and redevelopment of
Economic Opportunity t
disaster-affected areas. Funds may also be used for emergency response
activities, such as debris clearance and demolition, extraordinary increases in
the level of necessary public services. Eligible projects include:
Voluntary acquisition or if appropriate, elevation of storm damaged structures
(can be used as match for FEMA mitigation projects in low income areas)
Relocation payments for displaced people and businesses
Rehabilitation or reconstruction of residential and commercial buildings
Assistance to help people buy homes, including down payment assistance and
interest rate subsidies
Improvement to public sewer and water facilities
Community Facilities Loan Program (10.423)
Source/Contact: Florida Rural
Economic and Community
To construct, enlarge, extend, or otherwise improve community facilities
Development
providing essential services to rural residents.
Conservation and Recreation Lands (CARL)
Source/Contact: Florida
Department of Environmental
This grant program is intended to conserve environmentally endangered lands
Protection, Division of State Lands
and provide resource conservation measures for other lands.
Florida Communities Trust (FCT)
Source/Contact: Florida
Department of Environmental
Facilitates the purchase of lands for conservation and/or recreation purposes
Protection, Communities Trust
by local governments; helps to implement conservation, recreation, open
space, and coastal elements of local comprehensive plans. The Board of
Florida Communities Trust has latitude to consider innovative financing
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-18
Table 13-6. Primary Potential Funding for Mitigation
Program Fund Source Contact
for land acquisition. Land acquisition projects in which matching funds are
available will receive more favorable consideration, although a portion of
available funds may be awarded as outright grants.
Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants
Source: HUD
To develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a
suitable living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities,
Contact: Office of Block Grant
principally for low to moderate income individuals.
Assistance
Community Development Block Grants/State Program
Source: HUD
To develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a
suitable living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities,
Contact: Small Cities Division,
principally for low to moderate income individuals.
Office of Block Grant Assistance
Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDL)
Source: SBA
To assist business concerns suffering economic injury as a result of certain
presidential, Secretary of Agriculture, and/or Small Business Administration
Contact: Office of Disaster
declared disasters.
Assistance
Emergency Solutions Grants Program (ESG)
Source/Contact: Florida
Department of Children and
To provide financial assistance to renovate or convert buildings for use as
Families
emergency shelters for the homeless. Grant funds may also be used to
operate the shelter (excluding staff) and pay for certain support services.
SBA Physical Disaster Loans (Businesses and Homeowners)
Source: SBA
To provide loans to businesses and homeowners affected by declared
physical type disasters for uninsured losses; may include costs to mitigate
Contact: Office of Disaster
future damage.
Assistance
Post-Disaster Public Assistance Program
Source: FEMA
To provide supplemental assistance to States, local governments, and certain
private non-profit organizations to alleviate suffering and hardship resulting
Contact: FDEM
from major disasters or emergencies declared by the President. Costs for
feasible and cost-effective mitigation can be included under Section 406.
Flood Plain Management Services
Source: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
To promote appropriate recognition of flood hazards in land and water use
planning and development through the provision of flood and flood plain
related data, technical services (such as floodproofing evaluations of public
Contact: Jacksonville District COE
buildings), and guidance.
13.10 LMS Actions to Support Grant Applications
Table 13-7 illustrates that certain mitigation grant programs require that projects
conformance withor be hazard
mitigation plans (regulations cited below the table). Specific actions are required when
post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funds become available and if an eligible
-Disaster Mitigation grant
program.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-19
Table 13-7. LMS Actions to Support Grant Applications
Program State Requirement Federal Requirement
Hazard Mitigation Grant
LMS WG to prioritize Subapplicant to provide
Program (FEMA)
projects [27P-22.006(1)(a)] evidence of consistency with
LMS [§ 206.435]
LMS WG to provide
endorsement letter [27P-
22.007(4)]
Pre-Disaster Mitigation
None LMS WG coordinator to
(FEMA)
provide endorsement letter
with ranking [HMA Guidance]
Flood Mitigation
FDEM has prepared a Subapplicant to provide
Assistance (FEMA)
Severe Repetitive Loss evidence of consistency with
Outreach Strategy as part of LMS [§ 79.6 and HMG
its current approved State Guidance]
Hazard Mitigation Plan
(Section 6.0); which is a
prerequisite for greater than
75% federal cost shares
(90% RFC/ 100% SRL)
Residential
None Not applicable (State
Construction Mitigation
program)
Program (State)
State Regulations:
27P-22.006 County Allocations and Project Funding.
(1)(a) Eligible and submitted projects for each county included in the relevant presidential
disaster declaration will be funded in order of priority as outlined in the LMS until the
allocated funds are exhausted, or all eligible projects are funded, whichever occurs first.
27P-22.007 Application.
(4) A letter shall accompany each application from the Chairperson or Vice-Chairperson of
the LMS Working Group endorsing the project. The endorsement shall verify that the
proposed project does appear in the current LMS and state its priority in relation to other
submitted projects. Applications without this letter of endorsement will not be considered.
Federal Regulations & Guidance:
HMGP: § 206.435 Project identification and selection criteria.
mitigation projects. All funded projects must be consistent with the State Mitigation Plan.
Hazard Mitigation projects shall be identified and prioritized through the State, Indian tribal,
and local planning process.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-20
FMA & SRL: § 79.6 Eligibility.
(d) Minimum project criteria. In addition to being an eligible project type, mitigation grant
projects must also:
(1) Be in conformance with mitigation plans approved under part 201 of this chapter for
the State and community where the project is located;
HMA Guidance (FY2014): D.5.2 Conformance with Hazard Mitigation Plans
Projects submitted for consideration for HMA funding must be consistent with the goals and
objectives identified in the current, FEMA-approved State or Tribal (Standard or Enhanced)
Hazard Mitigation Plan and local or Tribal hazard mitigation plan for the jurisdiction in
which the activity is located.
13.11 2015 Updates
Section 13.1: Added sea level rise to Table 13-1.
Section 13.2: Modified Table 13.2 to expand categories of mitigation
initiatives to be considered.
Section 13.4: Added new section to describe actions some private property
owners have taken to mitigate future damage.
Section 13.5: Added three new initiatives for the Working Group as a whole.
Section 13.6: Added several new community-specific initiatives.
Section 13.9: Modified description of FMA and deleted previously separate
programs for Severe Repetitive Loss and Repetitive Flood Claims; made
additional revisions to update grant agencies.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-21
This page blank.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 13-22
Chapter 14. Evaluation, Updates & Revisions
14.1 Distribution
Upon adoption, the LMS 2015 Update will be posted on the Monroe County Emergency
Management Department
federal and state agencies that were notified and the organizations, agencies, and elected
officials who received notices of public meetings.
14.2 Annual Evaluation & Updates (Monitoring)
As required by State statute (Chapter 27P-22) and to ensure the Local Mitigation Strategy is
current and continues to serve the interests of residents and visitors, the LMS Working
Group will perform an evaluation by comparing the text of the LMS to actual events and
status of ongoing or completed mitigation initiatives listed in Chapter 13 and, as applicable,
If appropriate, annotations will be prepared every year. Minor
revisions may be handled by addenda. If significant revisions are prepared before the 2020
Update, they are to be submitted to the Florida Division of Emergency Management no later
than the last workday of each January.
The Monroe County Emergency Management Department, the LMS Coordinator, will
monitor hazard events, reports of damage, and progress on implementation of projects that
Working Group members report are undertaken. The LMS Coordinator will coordinate the
annual review and preparation of revisions that may be identified. The participating
Working Group members are responsible for recommending revisions pertinent to their
jurisdiction or organization. Revisions may be appropriate due to:
Hazard events that have occurred that prompt a change in the characterization of
risk or warrant consideration of additional initiatives.
Significant changes to the critical facilities list (addition or deletion of
facilities).
for this purpose).
Changes in knowledge and understanding of the people and property that are at
risk which may be reflected in hazard maps.
Changes to the list of mitigation initiatives (addition of new initiatives, deletion
or completion of previously-listed initiatives).
Changes in department organization, regulations, comprehensive plans, and the
like.
Changes necessary to comply with State and federal program requirements.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 14-1
), the LMS Working
Group will follow this monitoring schedule (subject to changes as a function of hazard
events):
On a quarterly basis the Working Group will report on the status of active
initiatives in order to maintain currency of the list, including instances where the
Working Group made recommendations to include mitigation in a utility or
infrastructure construction/reconstruction project, the number of buildings and
assets protected or mitigated over the previous year, and the number of critical
facilities protected over the previous year.
On a quarterly basis the Working Group will accept new initiatives to be placed
on the list of Preliminary Identified Mitigation Initiatives.
On a quarterly basis the Working Group members will be asked to identify any
community plans that are in the process of being updated (e.g., comprehensive
plan) and will determine if suggested input from the LMS Working Group, or
individual LMS Working Group members, is appropriate.
By the end September of each year, the LMS Coordinator will notify Working
Group members of the need to review the LMS and identify revisions; Working
Group members will submit proposed revisions to Emergency Management
which will be discussed at a Working Group meeting. Emergency Management
will compile the proposed revisions and, with Working Group approval, will
forward the revisions to the Department of Community Affairs by the last
working weekday of January.
In the event of a major hazard event such as a hurricane or tropical storm, the LMS Working
Group will convene after the event to discuss its impacts and initiate a discussion on how the
Working Group can influence mitigation in the recovery process. Whether shortly after an
event or in response to receiving notice from FDEM that mitigation funds are available, the
Working Group will consider which projects and initiatives could be elevated in importance
and whether communities may develop and submit new initiatives (see procedure outlined in
Section 13.7).
Between 2010 and 2015, the Monroe County LMS Working Group coordinator submitted
annual reports. A few facilities were added to the list of critical facilities and progress was
noted on some grant-funded projects to mitigate repetitive loss properties.
14.3 Five-Year Revision
The LMS Working Group will conduct a comprehensive review of and revisions to the LMS
on a five-year cycle. In part, this revision will be to incorporate the material collected for
the previous four annual updates. Because the LMS is adopted in 2015, it will enter the next
evaluation and review cycle sometime in 2019, with adoption and publication anticipated in
2020.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 14-2
Based on the mitigation planning process outlined in Section 3.2, the LMS Working Group
anticipates the following activities will be undertaken as part of the 2020 Update:
The LMS Coordinator will notify the LMS Working Group and all interested
parties on the e-mail listserve when the five-year revision cycle is initiated and
when each subsequent meeting or conference call is scheduled.
For communities that may apply to join CRS and have to prepare a Repetitive
Loss Area map, inclusion of that map and status of application.
Reflect any changes to State or federal grant or planning requirements.
Review any changes to community plans, such as comprehensive plans or
climate change action plans.
An initial meeting to review the update process, State and federal requirements,
All members will contribute
and the major steps, assignments, and schedule.
to updating hazard information and events.
Each local government member
responsible for ensuring that their chapters are reviewed and reflect
will be
current organization and procedures.
The mitigation initiatives lists will be reviewed and revised (if not already
accomplished in the annual reports and updates).
The Working Group will review all changes and concur with making the Public
Review Draft available for public review. The LMS will be made available for
public review and citizens will be encouraged to comment. A public meeting
will be held.
The Working Group will review and address public comments and comments
received from DEM and FEMA review.
Each local jurisdiction will formally adopt the LMS Update.
14.4 Incorporating Mitigation Plan Requirements
into Other Local Planning Mechanisms
The effects of high winds and storm surge flooding associated with hurricanes are
recognized by everyone in Monroe County as significant hazards. All local governments
acknowledge those risks in all local plans. Chapters 7 through 12 describe how Monroe
County and the cities of Key West, Marathon, Key Colony Beach, Layton, and Islamorada
address hazards as part of their current planning mechanisms and processes, including
comprehensive plans, land development, infrastructure design, and public outreach. The
2015 Update of the LMS did not reveal any significant gaps in how hazards are addressed in
existing planning mechanisms and processes.
To assure continued incorporation of the goals of the LMS, the LMS Working Group
members from the local jurisdictions will participate in the internal processes that each
jurisdiction will follow to review and revise its comprehensive plan, comprehensive
emergency management plans, and wildfire protection plans. Information from the LMS can
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 14-3
be used to inform these other plans and vice versa. The 2015 LMS incorporates information
from three climate change/sea level rise plans. Several LMS Working Group members from
the local jurisdictions are also coordinating with their respective floodplain management
programs to strive toward CRS participation.
Many mitigation initiatives are capital projects. Implementation of site-specific projects
usually is dependent upon the availability of funding (see Section 13.7 for sources of
funding). When those initiatives are prioritized and funding is sought, each jurisdiction will
comply with its existing rules regarding inclusion of projects in its Capital Improvement
Plan or other budget and planning document or process.
14.5 Continued Public Participation in Plan
Maintenance
Monroe County will continue to ensure public access to the LMS by posting the LMS
Update, information on meetings, and other relevant LMS
Emergency Management website. The LMS Working Group meetings will continue to be
open to the public and the Working Group roster will continue to maintain members from
the general public. As instructed on the Emergency Management website, the public is
invited to Working Group meetings and may contact Monroe County Emergency
Management about the LMS at any time. Public comments on the LMS will be considered
in future revisions.
14.6 2015 Update
The LMS Working Group reviewed and updated the pertinent sections. Some of the more
significant changes include:
Section 14.2: Addition to monitoring schedule.
Section 14.3: Additions to the update process.
Section 14.4: Made a few revisions to describe how information from
other plans is incorporated into the LMS and to recognize emphasis on
CRS participation.
Section 14.5: Added new section to describe how public involvement
will continue in the future.
Monroe LMS (2015 Update) 14-4
APPENDIX A1:2015 LMS Update Process (notices,
agendas, notes)
From:Tezanos-Jose
To:Toner-Irene
Cc:Tezanos-Jose;Rebecca Quinn;Frank, Lawrence;Shrivastava, Shubha
Subject:First Local Mitigation Strategy Plan review and update meeting
Date:Monday, December 29, 2014 9:20:11 AM
Good morning LMS Workgroup,
It is the Monroe County Emergency Management Department hope that everyone
had a pleasant Christmas Holiday weekend.
The State of Florida and FEMA require that the multi-jurisdictional LMS be
updated every five years in order to maintain continued eligibility for mitigation
grant funding and certain post-disaster assistance. The current LMS was
approved in December 2010, which means we must have the 2015 update
approved by December 2015. The Division of Emergency Management expects
us to submit the draft LMS by June, in order to ensure enough time for review.
The Monroe County and Incorporated Municipalities LMS is available online:
http://www.monroecountyem.com/DocumentCenter/View/102
As in years past, we’ll be working with consultants to prepare the update. Rebecca
Quinn, who worked with us on the 2005 and 2010 updates, and Lawrence Frank
and Shuba Shrivastava of URS Corporation, will provide guidance and support.
We will meet on January 22, 2015 at 1:00 pm until at least 3:00 pm at the City of
Marathon Fire Station #14 in the Councilmen Meeting Room, located at 8900
Overseas Highway, Marathon, Florida 33050. The agenda will be distributed
later.
PLEASE NOTE! We are on an extremely tight schedule, in part due to
constraints associated with the funding we’re using. Our goal is to have the LMS
update essentially complete by the middle of March. In order to do that, we will
need everyone to participate and respond in a timely manner. I encourage
everyone to read the LMS and make notes to have available when you’re asked to
provide input. If you write up your notes, please identify the section and page
number – or you may scan marked-up pages. Please hold your notes until you’re
contacted.
ALSO NOTE! The content of the LMS is our responsibility – our consultants
can only work with what we provide them. Individual members representing
communities and representatives of regional agencies and organizations will be
contacted by Lawrence or Shuba to start revision of their specific chapters. This
nd
.
likely will happen before the meeting on the 22
Thank you for making the time and participation in the Local Mitigation Strategy
Plan review and update process. Feel free to contact us if you have any questions.
Wishing you all the best in 2015.
Jose Tezanos
Monroe County Emergency Management Senior Planner
Office: 305-289-6325
Cell: 305-747-0690
Fax: 305-289-6333
Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm – Winston Churchill
http://data.ba-bamail.com/Images/2013/11/4/278d6459-2995-466d-bdf3-c4d11862e7ae.jpg
Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy(LMS)2015 Update
Working Group Meeting #1
Meeting Notes
Date: January 22, 2015
nd
Time: 1:00 pm – 4:00 pm
Location: City of Marathon Councilmen Meeting Room
8900 Overseas Highway, Marathon, Florida
Attendees:
Jose Tezanos Monroe County Emergency Management
John Scott Monroe County Emergency Management
Laura Deloach-HartleMonroe County Board of County Commissioners
Cyna WrightMonroe County Department of Health
Edward A. BorysiewiczCity of Key Colony Beach
John P. CastroCity of Key West
Jim BouquetCity of Key West
Skip HaringCity of Layton
Mimi YoungCity of Layton
Terry AbelVillage of Islamorada
Patrick DotyVillage of Islamorada
Jesse ScottHomeowner
Lawrence FrankAECOM
Shubha ShrivastavaAECOM
Introductions – Jose Tezanos, Senior Planner from Monroe County Emergency
Management started the meeting with his introduction as the Chair of the Local
Mitigation Strategy Work Group (LMS WG), and the consultantspresent,
Lawrence and Shubha. Then the other representatives from the County (John,
andLaura), representative from the county health department Cyna,and
representatives from municipalities of Layton (Skip, Mimi), Islamorada (Terry,
Patrick), Key West (John, Jim), and Key Colony Beach (Ed) introduced
themselves. One homeowner (Jesse) was also in attendance.Skip Haring from
City of Layton is the Vice Chair of the LMS WG.
The purpose of the meetingwas to discuss the 2015 LMS update.The consultants
presented a PowerPoint and facilitated the discussion ofwhat the update will
include in terms of the planning process (how municipalities will participate), as
well as changes to the plan document. Updates will be under the following
categories:
Changes to the 2015 Update based on FEMA Mitigation Plan Review and
Community Rating System (CRS) Manual changes
Hazard Identification/Risk Assessment (HIRA) Update
Community Capability Assessment Chapter Updates
WG representatives received the chapters on 1/20/2015 and arerequired
to sendthe local jurisdiction’s revisions to Lawrence by 1/30/2015.
Mitigation Strategy Update
The group discussed hazard events that have occurred in the last five years. The
consultants asked everyone to provide written accounts of damages to the
respective municipalities in the Community chapters they have received. There
weren’t any notable events, except Isaac.
The 2010Florida Building Code has some updated wind and flood standards for
Monroe County and these will be capture in the update.
The attendees discussed and reconfirmed the Goals from the 2010 LMS. It was
agreed that these goals represented the appropriate focus for the group. The
consultants led a discussion on currentand potential mitigation actionsand
presented a detailed overview of types of mitigation actions to reduce impact of
major natural hazards in Monroe County.The LMS Chair stressed that for the
municipalities to update their project list, especially projects from 1999, and to
begin preparing their Notices of Intent (NOIs) for the update.
The County and municipalities are interestedin the Community Rating System
(CRS). The consultants provided information on how the LMS process can be
utilized for acquiring CRS credit points. The consultants explained information
on CRS, and shared materials like the flood hazard mitigation activities from the
2013 CRS manual and the State Plan Review Tool at the meeting. This
information was sent to them after the meeting.
Representatives from the City of Layton asked questions about whether certain
recent activities (State’s new building code) and current activities (like how
floodplain management awareness and outreach at local festival) would count.
The consultants described the type of outreach activities that could receive credit.
The County also mentioned that they do hazard mitigation awareness activities,
like a “hardening workshop” for homeowners, and other outreach through Home
Depot. The consultants recommended that this type ofinformation should be
included in the LMS for potential CRS credit.
Representatives from theCity of Key Westwere new to the process andasked
questions about the current plan and what their role would be in the update.
Lawrence explained their role, and clarified that another representative already
received the Capability Assessment Chapter. The consultantslater emailed the
two Key West representatives in attendancethe Capability Assessment chapter.
The County is fundingan additional task – the preparation of a Repetitive Loss
Area Analysisfor Key Colony Beach for the benefit of all Monroe County
jurisdictions. The consultants conductedfield work inKey Colony Beach on
January 23, 2015,and will present the process as a Workshop at the next meeting
so other municipalities could replicate the analysis and score additional CRS
credits.
The next meetingis tentatively scheduled for the first week in March 2015to
take place after several critical local activities like preparation for an REP exercise
in the County and FEMA doing floodplain community compliance auditsin Key
West. The date, place, and time of the next, and future, LMS WG meetings, will
be placed, not only on the Monroe County Emergency Management Website as a
Public Notice, but also, in the local print media.
After the draft plan is completed in March, it will be sent to the State and FEMA
for review. Once the review comments are addressed and the plan achieves
“Approvable Pending Adoption” it will need to be formally adopted by all the
municipalities. The general timeframe for adoption seems to be July to December
2015.
The County stressed the importance of LMS WG participation and contribution
in various forms; attend the meetings, review and provide input Capability
Assessment sections, provide mitigation actions through the Notice of Intent
process, review and provide input on the draft plan, and finally to formally adopt
the plan.
There were no Notices of Intent presented
From:Tezanos-Jose
To:Alan Averette; Alison Higgins (ahiggins@cityofkeywest-fl.gov); "Annalise Mannix (amannix@aol.com)"; "Ara
Nahapetian"; "ariana.lawson@islamorada.fl.us"; Ballard-Jennifer; "Barbara Edgar (barb1201@bellsouth.net)";
"Bob Eadie (Robert_Eadie@doh.state.fl.us)"; Boswell-Gary; Callahan-James; "Carlos Solis
(solisc@ci.marathon.fl.us)"; Carolyn Sheldon (csheldon@cityofkeywest-fl.gov); "Cheryl Cioffari
(cheryl.cioffari@islamorada.fl.us)"; "Cheryl Sargent"; "Chief John A. Johnson (johnsonj@ci.marathon.fl.us)";
chief@keycolonybeach.net; "Chris Bergh"; Clarke-Judith; Corcoran-Brian; Cyna Wright M.S.; "Dana Cohen
(Dana_Cohen@fws.gov)"; "David Ritz (Dritz@fkaa.com)"; Davisson-Bryan; DeloachHartle-Laura; "Diana
Flenard"; "Diane Silvia (Hfkf@bellsouth.net)"; Ron Sutton; "Francine Orlando (Forlando@islandchristian.org)";
"Freda Vaughn (freda_vaughn@doh.state.fl.us)"; G Garrett; "Gerri Sidoti (Gsidoti@kwahs.org)";
"goodmanpl@aol.com"; Haring-Skip; Harvey-Mitch; Hurley-Christine; James Bouquet; "Jeff Barrow
(Jeff.barrow@keysschools.com)"; "Jesse Scott (jessescott@bellsouth.net)"; "Jim Roper
(Jroper@islandchristian.org)"; "Joan Manges (JD0715@aol.com)"; John Paul Castro; "Keith Douglas
(Keith.Douglass@scouting.org)"; "Kevin Beede (kbeede@gmail.com)"; Kevin Bond; Wilson-Kevin; Laura Hite;
"Lee Skillington (flshal@comcast.net)"; Leto-Beth; Luttazi-Alary; "Marilyn Tempest
(mmtempest@comcast.net)"; Mark Moss; "Pete Tyson (Ptyson@fkaa.com)"; pfiester-holly; Pierce-Dent; "Randi
Cohen Brown"; "Rev. Braddock (Frbraddock@cs.com)"; "Rev. Tony Hammon (Hammon@bellsouth.net)"; "Roy
Coley (Rcoley@fkaa.com)"; Santamaria-Mayte; Scott Fraser ; "Scott Newberry (Scott.newberry@fkec.com)";
Scott-John; Slavik-Maria; Snider-Tamara; "Susan Brown (Notsue2@aol.com)"; Tennyson-Lisa; terry abel; "Tom
Morgan (Tmorgan@fkaa.com)"; Walters-Jo; White-Laura; Wingate-Mary; Toner-Irene; "Frank, Lawrence";
"Shrivastava, Shubha"; Rebecca Quinn; Tezanos-Jose
Subject:2015 Local Mitigation Strategy Update and Review Meeting #2
Start:Thursday, March 05, 2015 10:00:00 AM
End:Thursday, March 05, 2015 4:00:00 PM
Location:Marathon Government Center 2nd Floor BOCC Meeting room 2897 Overseas Highway, Marathon, Florida 33050
Good afternoon Colleagues,
You are all invited to the 2015 Local Mitigation Strategy Review and Update Meeting #2. To be held at the above location. There will
be two sessions to this meeting. The morning session will cover flood mitigation, and vulnerability assessment. The afternoon session
will cover the much anticipated Repetitive Loss Area Analysis.
If you have any questions feel free to reach any of us. Lawrence will follow up with an agenda by February 17th, 2015.
Please save the date!
Sincerely,
Jose Tezanos
Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy(LMS)2015 Update
Working Group Meeting #2
Meeting Notes
Date: March 5, 2015
th
Time: 10:00 am – 11:30 am
Location: Marathon Government Center; 2FloorBOCC Meeting Room
nd
8798Overseas Highway; Marathon, Florida
Attendees:
Jose Tezanos Monroe County Emergency Management
Jennifer BallardMonroe County Growth Management(Floodplain
Management)
Mary WingateMonroe County Growth Management(Floodplain
Management)
Lori LehrMonroe County Growth Management
Laura Deloach-HartleMonroe County Board of County Commissioners
Cyna WrightMonroe County Department of Health
Edward A. BorysiewiczCity of Key Colony Beach
Scott FrasorCity of Key West
Carolyn SheldonCity of Key West
George GarrettCity of Marathon
John JohnsonCity of Marathon
Skip HaringCity of Layton
Mimi YoungCity of Layton
Lawrence FrankAECOM
Introductions – Jose Tezanos, Senior Planner from Monroe County Emergency
Management started the meeting with his introduction as the Chair of the Local
Mitigation Strategy Work Group (LMS WG), with Lawrence Frank from AECOM
present. Then the other representatives from the County (Jennifer, Mary, Laura,
and Cyna) and representatives from municipalities of Layton (Skip, Mimi), Key
West (Scott, Carolyn), Marathon (John, George) and Key Colony Beach (Ed)
introduced themselves. In addition, the County has brought on Lori Lehr to assist
with National Flood Insurance Program activities, including CRS, and she
introduced herself and her background. Skip Haring from City of Layton is the
Vice Chair of the LMS WG.
The purpose of the meetingwas tocontinuediscussions ofthe 2015 LMS Update
including:
The progress made to date and results of additional revised draft sections
like the Hazard Identification/Risk Assessment (HIRA) Update
Input needed from the jurisdictions on overall community vulnerability
and comments on the draft Risk Assessment
LMS Notice of Intent (NOI) due date for 2015 projects
Mitigation Strategy Updateincluding proposed Working Group and
Community-specific initiatives
Next steps to complete the 2015 Update
AECOMpresented the results of the 2015 Risk Assessment. Each of the identified
hazards was presented with a summary of updated information. The focus was
on the most severe hazard (hurricane wind and storm surge) and the new hazard
that has been addedto the LMS(sea level rise and climate change). The results of
the State-run Hazus analysis for 100-year wind events anda simulatedHurricane
Betsy track for combined storm surge and wind impacts was presented in more
detail. There were questions about the results of the damage to essential facilities
and AECOMwill follow up onthese inquiries. The group was reminded that any
comments or revisions to the Risk Assessment would need to completed and
submitted to the LMS Chair/AECOMby March 13, 2015.
The communities were given time to confirm or revise the proposed 2015
Community Vulnerability summarywhich wasprovided in a handout. Three
communities revised their vulnerability to one of thehazards and these results
are attached to the meeting notes. Thesechanges have also been made to the
draft Risk Assessment.
The LMS Chair discussed the need for each of the jurisdictions to submit their
updated and reviewed unprotected Monroe MASTER 2014 list ofLMS projects.
A date of end of business April 5, 2015 was established as a deadline for
communities to submitupdated list.
AECOMpresented the 2010 Working Group Initiatives for the WG to comment
on their status. The WG agreed that 2010-001 had been completed, 2010-002
was mostly completedpending the revision of flood maps,and that 2010-003 is
an ongoing need for which progress has been made. 2010-003will carry over to
the 2015 Update
The proposed 2015 WG initiatives,both for the whole group and community-
specific, were then presented. The LMS group was very supportive of2015-001
which proposed forminga CRS Users’ Group. Several communities are looking to
join the program. Forthe two that are in CRS, they must go to Miami-Dade
County to participate in a CRS support group. The 2015-002 WG Initiativeis to
continueverification ofRep Loss data in each community (except Layton which
has no Rep Loss properties)and preparation ofRepetitiveLoss Area maps.
Preparing the map is a pre-requisiteto join CRS and will positionthe four
jurisdictions looking to join the program. Participation in the CRS is a
community-specific initiative for these four jurisdictions. The third WG initiative
is supporting climate change/sea level rise adaptation efforts in the County.
Other community-specific initiatives include improving CRS levels for Layton
and Key Colony Beach. Monroe County is looking to better integrate itsflood risk
reduction approach as a community-specific initiative. The other community-
specific initiative under consideration is adopting the State’s Model Flood
Ordinance. Some communities like Key West have already done so with some
modifications.
After the draft plan is completed in late March/early April, it will be sent to
Working Group for a final internalreview. Once theWG’s comments are
incorporated, it will be provided for public review. By June/July 2015, it will be
ready to submit to the State and FEMA forreview. Once State/FEMA comments
are addressed, it will achieve “Approvable Pending Adoption” status and will
need to be formally adopted by all the municipalities. The general timeframe for
adoption seems to be August to December2015.
Afterthe meeting and prior to the Workshop, the Islamorada representative was
brought up to speed on what occurred in the LMS Working Group Meeting. The
Village rep was provided with the Relative Vulnerability, Community
Vulnerability, Working Group Initiatives, and Community-Specific Initiatives for
2015. The Village rep reviewed the handouts and confirmed the vulnerabilities of
Islamorada as presented on the handout. He also confirmed that Islamorada is
seeking CRS participation and confirmed that the CRS User’s Group is a
beneficial initiative.
Monroe County Local Mitigation Strategy(LMS)
Repetitive Loss Area Analysis Workshop
Meeting Notes
Date: March 5, 2015
th
Time: 1:00 pm– 3:30 pm
Location: Marathon Government Center; 2FloorBOCC Meeting Room
nd
8798Overseas Highway; Marathon, Florida
Attendees:
Jose Tezanos Monroe County Emergency Management
Jennifer BallardMonroe County Growth Management(Floodplain
Management)
Mary WingateMonroe County Growth Management(Floodplain
Management)
Lori Lehr Monroe County Growth Management
Cyna WrightMonroe County Department of Health
Scott FrasorCity of Key West
Patrick DotyVillage of Islamorada
Lawrence FrankAECOM
The purpose of this workshop was to provide training to the County and
municipalities on how to prepare a Repetitive Loss Area Analysis as well as a
detailed background on Repetitive Loss properties, CRS program prerequisites
related to repetitive lossproperties, and other ways that CRS provides credit
points for mitigating repetitive loss properties.
The participants in the workshop were engaged and several in-depth discussions
about repetitive loss properties and CRS ensued. Many of the communities
looking to join CRS will have to prepare Repetitive Loss Area maps and this topic
wascovered in the workshop. The participants enjoyed the challengeofa
hypothetical determination of aRepetitive Loss Area map for Key West, which
was a breakout session. The participants provided beneficialinput on the
workshop materials and AECOM will make some minor modifications to address
these suggestions. The RLAA PowerPoint and instructor notes will be modified
based on the comments received in the workshop and will later be distributed to
the Working Group for future use.
APPENDIX A2:LMS Working Group Annual Meeting
Notes (2011 –2014)
MINUTES
Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Meeting
LOCATION: Marathon Fire Station
Departmental Meeting Room
8900 Overseas Highway
Marathon
DATE: May 30, 2012
TIME: 10:00AM - NOON
Working Group Discussion consisted of the following:
Introduction of new members
Acceptance of June 15, 2011 Minutes
Discussion of new, “under construction,” Emergency Services Website
Opened floor for acceptance/discussion of existing or new LMS Project Submittals.
Village of Islamorada representatives, Arian Lawson and Cheryl Cioffari, discussed a proposed
initiative put forward by their Village Council regarding the placement of existing power lines
underground. It was noted by Jerry O’Cathey and Jose Tezanos, County LMS representatives, that,
to date, there has been no such Notice of Funding Availability made available regarding the
eligibility of such an infrastructure project. In this context, the availability of Pre-disaster Mitigation
Grants was discussed along with the fact that PDM Grant is offered annually and is extremely
competitive (only 5 projects from Florida are submitted by the State and, of those, at least one
project is funded).
The location of future LMSWG Meetings will remain, until otherwise changed by the working
group, in Marathon due to its central location in the island chain.
Introduction of Mr. C.J. Geotis as Monroe County’s new Emergency Management, Emergency
Support Function (ESF) #18 Liaison for “Business and Industry.” C.J. briefly discussed the “major
takeaways” of the recently attended “2012 State of Florida Public-Private Sector Disaster
Preparedness Summit.” It was noted that there will be an ESF 18 – specific meeting held, in
Marathon, in the forthcoming months.
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 11:15 AM.
MINUTES
Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Meeting
LOCATION: Monroe County Government Center
Second Floor, BOCC Meeting Room
2798 Overseas Hwy., Bayside
Marathon
DATE: March 25, 2013
TIME: 10:00AM - NOON
Working Group Discussion consisted of the following
Introduction of new members
Acceptance of March 25, 2012 Minutes
Request for new initiatives (none), discussion of any new NOFA’s.
Opened floor for Alison Kearns presentation which consisted of;
Status of new LMS Plan / differences from 2010 plan
-
Incorporation of Sea Level Rise funding / mitigation
-
Status of Monroe LMS
-
Explanation of HMGP, TS Debby and Hurricane Isaac updates
-
National Flood Mitigation Funds
-
Benefit/Cost Analysis explanation / importance
-
Upcoming outreach and Learning opportunities (webinars, Gov. Hurricane Conf.)
-
Sea Level Rise Presentation by Chris Bergh, South Florida Conservation Director, The Nature
Conservancy
M
onroe 490 63rdStreet
Ocean Suite 150
C
ounty
Marathon, FL 33050
E
mergency
M
anagement
Bus: (305) 289-6018
Fax: (305) 289-6333
D
epartment
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 30, 2014
TO: LMSWG
FROM: Jose Tezanos
SUBJECT: Selection Committee Meeting Minutes
The selection committee for Request for Proposal for2015 Local Mitigation Strategy Plan Review and
Update Consulting Services met on Tuesday, September 30, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. at the Marathon
rd
Government Annex, 490 63 Street, Marathon, Florida. The following members were present: Alary
Luttazi, Monroe County Emergency Management; John Scott, Monroe County Emergency Management;
Mary Wingate, Monroe County Growth Management Flood plain; Mike Elias, Monroe County Fire Rescue;
and Jose Tezanos, Monroe County Emergency Management. No members of the public were in
attendance.
The selection committee reviewed the proposed projects, the score sheet and the licensing
requirements. The selection committee then reviewed and discussed the responses. After discussion,
each committee member, working independently, scored each of the three responses. Final ranking
was determined by averaging each respondent's scores. The final ranking was: 1. RC Quinn Consulting,
Inc.; 2. Integrated Solutions Consulting Services; 3. AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.
recommended to
The selection committee unanimously agreed that RC Quinn Consulting, Inc. should be
the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners as the selected contractor for this project.
Additionally, the selection committee agreed that if a contract could not be negotiated with RC Quinn
Consulting, Inc. then the County should pursue a contract with the next highest ranked respondent,
Integrated Solutions Consulting Services.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:16 am.
Minutes prepared by: Jose Tezanos
Monroe County Senior Planner
1
APPENDIX B: PUBLIC NOTICES
APPENDIX C: RESOLUTIONS OF ADOPTIONS
Monroe County(adopted __________, 2015)
Islamorada Village of Islands (adopted __________, 2015)
Key Colony Beach (adopted __________, 2015)
Key West (adopted __________, 2015)
Layton (adopted __________, 2015)
Marathon (adopted __________, 2015)
APPENDIX D: NWS Hurricane Wilma in the Florida
Keys
Strategic Beach Management Plan
Florida KeysRegion
Division of Water Resource Management
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
June2015
Smathers Beach in Florida Keys, FDEP photo 2007.
2600 Blair Stone Rd., MS 3590
Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000
www.dep.state.fl.us
Table of Contents
FLORIDA KEYS REGION ........................................................................................................................ 1
Strategies for Inlets and Critically Eroded Beaches ............................................................................... 2
Middle Keys Subregion .......................................................................................................................... 2
Sea Oats Beach, Lower Matecumbe Key, Monroe County ................................................................ 2
Long Key State Park, Monroe County ................................................................................................ 2
Curry Hammock State Park, Little Crawl Key, Monroe County ........................................................ 2
West Coco Plum Beach, Marathon, Monroe County ......................................................................... 3
Key Colony Beach, Monroe County ................................................................................................... 4
West Key Colony Beach, Monroe County ......................................................................................... 4
Sombrero Beach, Vaca Key, Monroe County .................................................................................... 4
Lower Keys Subregion ........................................................................................................................... 5
Little Duck Key, Monroe County ....................................................................................................... 5
Bahia Honda State Park, Monroe County ........................................................................................... 5
Boca Chica Key, Monroe County ....................................................................................................... 6
Smathers Beach, Rest Beach, Higgs Beach, and South Beach, Key West, Monroe County.............. 7
Simonton Beach, Monroe County....................................................................................................... 8
Fort Zachary Taylor Historic State Park, Key West, Monroe County................................................ 9
Regional Strategies for Beach and Inlet Management ............................................................................ 9
Sponsors and Funding ......................................................................................................................... 9
Project Coordination ......................................................................................................................... 10
Environmental Protection ................................................................................................................. 10
SandSources ..................................................................................................................................... 10
Additional Information ..................................................................................................................... 11
References ............................................................................................................................................. 13
June2015, Page i of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
FLORIDA KEYS REGION
Florida Keys
There are 36.3miles of beaches in the region, which extends from Soldier Key, just south
of Key Biscayne in Dade County, to the Dry Tortugas in Monroe County as shown on Figure 1.There
are a total of 10.2 miles of critically eroded beaches in this region, of which 1.4 mileshave been restored
and maintained.
Upper Keys
The subregion extends from Soldier Key to Tavernier Creek. No natural beaches exist in
the Upper Keys subregion.
Middle Keys
The subregion extends from Tavernier Creek to Pigeon Key. There are 3.5miles of
critically eroded beaches in this subregion.
Lower Keys
The subregion extends from Pigeon Key to Key West. There are 6.7miles of critically
eroded beaches in this subregion.
Distal Sand Keys
The subregion extends west of Key West and includes Woman Key, Boca Grande
Key, the Marquesas Keys, and the Tortuga Keys. This subregion has beach erosion conditions that have
not been adequately studied for inclusion in this plan.
Florida Keys Region
Erosion in the is attributed to tropical storms and hurricanes, and to natural
geomorphic changes caused by the pattern of littoral transport of sediments in this area. However,
natural shoreline fluctuations are exaggerated by interaction with coastal protection structures, such as
seawalls and revetments, which are located at the ends of many small pocket beaches in this region.The
most erosive storms in recent years were Hurricane Andrew (1992; Upper Keys), Hurricane Georges
(1998), which caused extensive property damage throughout the Keys and significant beach erosion at
many locations, Hurricane Irene (1999; Middle and Lower Keys), Hurricanes Rita (2005), Wilma
(2005), Tropical Storm Fay (2008) and Isaac (2012).
Monitoring of the beaches along the Florida Keys is accomplished through vertically controlled aerial
photography. There are no range or reference (R) survey monuments along the beaches of Monroe
County.
June2015, Page 1 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
SICEB
TRATEGIES FOR NLETS AND RITICALLY RODED EACHES
MKS
IDDLE EYS UBREGION
OB,LMK,MC
S
EAATS EACHOWER ATECUMBE EYONROE OUNTY
This is a 0.7 mile segment of critically eroded beach along Lower Matecumbe Key in the City of
Islamorada. Erosion threatens recreational interests and U.S. Highway 1 along Sea Oats Beach.
Hurricanes Rita and Wilma (2005) caused moderate beach and dune erosion and flooding in this
segment. The Florida Department of Transportation constructed a road shoulder stabilization project in
2008 that included a sloping mattress, sand fill and sea oats.
Strategy:
Initiate a feasibility study to determine environmentally acceptable erosion control
alternatives and monitor.
LKSP,MC
ONGEY TATEARKONROE OUNTY
This is a 1.0 mile segment of critically eroded beachat Long Key State Park. Parkofficials have
estimated shoreline recession to be as much as three feet per year since the park was opened in 1970. A
rock revetment was constructed along a limited segment of shoreline in 1976; however, erosion end
effects are most apparent adjacent to the structure. The park was severely impacted by Hurricanes
Georges and Irene in 1998 and 1999. Beach and dune restoration was considered necessary after these
storms, and a feasibility study was initiated by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(FDEP). In 2005, Hurricanes Rita and Wilma combined to severely impact the park and destroyed all
the waterfrontcampsites and infrastructure. A beach restoration project has been designedtorestore the
beach width and to protect campsites. To be consistent with the carbonate sand composition of the
native beach, the project is proposing to use calcium carbonate sand imported from the Bahamas and
permitting efforts are ongoing.
Strategy:
Construct a beach restoration project that provides acceptable mitigation for sea grass beds
and monitor.
CHSP,LCK,MC
URRYAMMOCKTATE ARKITTLE RAWL EYONROE OUNTY
This is a 0.1 mile segment of critically eroded beach at CurryHammockState Park, where recreational
interests are threatened. In 2005, Hurricanes Rita and Wilma combined to severely impact the park. In
June2015, Page 2 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
2005, a feasibility study was completed to investigate sand sources for state parks in the Keys, including
Curry Hammock State Park Beach NourishmentProject
CurryHammockState Park.The was
constructed via truck haul with removal of inappropriate fill and the placement of 14,450 cubic yards
(cy) of sand in April 2008. An additional 600 cy of sand were added to the dune in 2011 to repair the
dune system from subsequent storm damages.
Strategy:
Maintain the project through nourishment and monitor.
WCPB,M,MC
EST OCO LUMEACHARATHONONROE OUNTY
Thisis a 0.3 mile segment of beach created by dredge and fill development in the 1950’s. Located
outside of the critically eroded beach, most of the eastern end of Coco Plum Beach is a City of Marathon
public park. The beach sustained moderate erosion during Hurricane Georges in 1998. Following
Hurricane Irene in 1999, this segment of beach was designated critically eroded where upland private
development is threatened. This segment has two rock groins on the western end. Net sediment
transport along this segment is to the southwest. During Hurricane Rita (2005), minor beach and dune
erosion prevailed with significant overwash observed landward of the beach, and rock revetments were
destroyed. Hurricane Wilma (2005) inflicted moderate beach and dune erosion and additional
overwash, and also damaged major structures. In 2006, a dune restoration project was completed using
approximately 4,100 cy of sand (Table 1). A beach management plan was developed in 2008 using
hurricane recovery funds to assist in documenting future storm damage. To repair damages sustained
during Tropical Storm Isaac, a FEMA dune nourishment using 1,117 cy of sand was completed in April,
2013 (Table 1). Dunes were re-vegetated at that time.
Table 1.
Project history of West Coco Plum Beach.
DATEVOLUME(CY)SOURCELOCATIONLENGTH(Mi.)
20064,100UplandV364.4-V365.40.3
20131,117UplandV364.4-V365.40.3
Strategy:
Maintain beach projectconsisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites, placed
in an alongshore berm configurationabove mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation; monitor.
June2015, Page 3 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
KCB,MC
EY OLONYEACHONROE OUNTY
This is a 0.9 mile segment of critically eroded beach fronting on the Straits of Florida in the City of Key
Colony Beach, west of Coco Plum Beach. Key Colony Beach is the western of two dredge and fill
developments east of Marathon and is stabilized by 15 limerock groins, which were constructed in 1958.
The 4,550-foot long private beach sustained minor to moderate beach erosion during Hurricane Georges
(1998) and additional erosion during Hurricane Irene (1999). The upland development sustained
substantial flooding and structural damage; however, little post-storm recovery was undertaken except
some minor groin repair and the return of overwash sediments. Hurricanes Rita and Wilma combined to
cause minor to moderate beach and dune erosion in 2005.
Strategy:
Maintain beach project consisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites, placed
in an alongshore berm configuration above mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation; monitor.
WKCB,MC
EST EY OLONY EACHONROEOUNTY
This is a 0.2 mile segment of critically eroded beach along the western shoreline of the City of Key
Colony Beach, northwest of Sandy Point and includes the city’s public beach, Sunset Beach. Hurricane
Rita (2005) inflicted minor beach and dune erosion and destroyed the rock revetment at Sunset Beach.
Hurricane Wilma (2005) caused major beach and dune erosion of this segment and greater structural
damages. This segment was designated ascritically eroded in April 2006, wherepublic recreational
interests at Sunset Beachare threatened.
Strategy:
Maintain dune project with truck haul beach nourishment and dune vegetation; monitor.
SB,VK,MC
OMBRERO EACHACAEYONROE OUNTY
This is a 0.3 mile segment of critically eroded beach at the southwestern tip of Vaca Key. Sombrero
Beachis a City of Marathon public park. The beach is sheltered from east and southeast wave activity.
This results in the net sediment transport along the beach to be easterly into an adjacent canal on Tingler
Island. The park facilities sustained major damage from storm tide flooding and landward sediment
transport during Hurricane Georges (1998). Hurricanes Rita and Wilma combined to cause minor to
moderate beach and dune erosion in 2005. Hurricane Wilma also damaged much of the park’s
infrastructure. Significant sand losses have occurred as a result of overwash and sediment transport into
June2015, Page 4 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
canals on Tingler Island. Private interests on Tingler Island have constructed impermeable docks and
groins, which should partially mitigate the loss of material into adjacent canals from Sombrero Beach.A
beach management plan was developed in 2008 using hurricane recovery funds. A feasibility study was
also initiated but was never completed. To repair damages sustained during Tropical Storm Isaac, a
FEMA dune nourishment using 1,064 cy of sand was completed in March, 2014. Dunes were also re-
vegetated at that time.
Strategy:
Maintain beach project consisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites, placed
in an alongshore berm configuration above mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation; monitor.
LKS
OWER EYS UBREGION
LDK,MC
ITTLE UCK EYONROE OUNTY
This is a 0.2 mile segment of critically eroded beach and is the site of Veteran’s Memorial Park, a
Monroe County park. Hurricane Wilma (2005) caused moderate beach and dune erosion and destroyed
all the park facilities. In April 2006, this segment was designated as critically eroded threatening
recreational interests at the county park.
Strategy:
Maintain beach project consisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites, placed
in an alongshore berm configuration above mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation; monitor.
BHSP,MC
AHIA ONDA TATE ARKONROE OUNTY
Bahia Honda Key has three erosional areas. Within Bahia Honda State Park, Calusa Beach (between the
bridges), Loggerhead Beach (a western segment) fronting on the Straits of Florida, and a stretch of
Sandspur Beach at the east end have 2.0 miles of critically eroded beaches. The most significant
carbonate beaches and dunes of the Lower Keys are on Bahia Honda Key, which is part of Bahia Honda
State Park. The island has 11,900 feet of beach, south of U.S. Highway 1, fronting on the Straits of
Florida and another 800 feet of beach north of the highway fronting on the Gulf of Mexico. Coastal
Tech (1987) estimated a southwesterly longshore sediment transport rate of 2,050 cy/yr; however,
observations over time suggest that the actual rate along the beach and nearshore is minimal. Sediment
June2015, Page 5 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
transport has been observed to occur primarily during storm events, with most of the material either
being transported onshore or offshore.
Several attempts have been made to armor, build groins, and fill the eroding areas since the early 1970's.
In 1989, a 100-foot long groin and restoration was constructed at Caloosa Beach, the 600 ft long
recreation beach between the Flagler Bridge and the U.S. Highway 1 Bridge. The western 3,500 feet of
Loggerhead Beach fronting the Straitsof Florida, also designated critically eroded, receded about five
feet between 1971 and 1986. Erosion control efforts have included the placement of concrete bridge
piles near the west end, riprap along the 400 to 500 feet of threatened roadway in the early 1970’s, the
1988/89 construction of a 1,200-foot long limerock revetment, and substantial sea oats planting during
the 1980’s and 1990’s.
Hurricane Georges (1998) caused major beach and dune erosion and severely damaged the park
facilities, roadway and bridge. Hurricane Rita (2005) inflicted minor beach and dune erosion at Calusa
Beach and Sandspur Beach, and minor to moderate beach and dune erosion at Loggerhead Beach.
Hurricane Wilma (2005) caused moderate to major beach and dune erosion at Calusa Beach and
Loggerhead Beach, and minor dune erosion with beach accretion within the critically eroded portion of
Sandspur Beach.Wilma also caused severe damage to the park’s recreation facilities at the public
beaches. A project was designed in April 2005 for Calusa Beach, but was never constructed. During
post-storm recovery operations though, overwash sediments were returned to the beaches. In 2005, a
feasibility study was completed to investigate sand sources for State Parks in the Florida Keys, including
Bahia Honda State Park.
Strategy:
Maintain beach project consisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites, placed
in an alongshore berm configuration above mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation; monitor.
BCK,MC
OCA HICA EYONROE OUNTY
This is a 1.3 mile segment of critically eroded beach and a Monroe County park. Hurricanes Georges
(1998) and Irene (1999) caused moderate to major beach and dune erosion and road damage in this area.
In 2005, Hurricane Rita caused minor beach and dune erosion and Hurricane Wilma caused moderate to
major beach and dune erosion. Rita caused overwash deposits onto Boca Chica Beach Road and Wilma
destroyed much of the road. The county has abandoned much of the road and beach destroyed by the
2005 hurricanes.
June2015, Page 6 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
Strategy:
Maintain beach project consisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites, placed
in an alongshore berm configuration above mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation; monitor.
SB,RB,HB,SB,KW,
MATHERS EACHEST EACHIGGS EACHAND OUTH EACHEY EST
MC
ONROE OUNTY
This is a 2.8 mile segment of criticallyeroded beach fronting on the Straits of Florida. The U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and others have studied this segment of shoreline since 1951. The net annual
longshore sediment transport is to the west; however, the eastern end of the shoreline along South
Roosevelt Boulevard is hardened with a seawall providing little material for transport.
In 1998, Hurricane Georges damaged the South Roosevelt seawall and private property to the west of
Smathers Beach. Rest Beach and South Beach sustained substantial damage. Hurricane Irene damaged
the seawall again and caused additional erosion in 1999. Hurricane Rita caused minor beach erosion to
Smathers Beach, Higgs Beach, South Beach and the private beaches, and minor beach and dune erosion
to Rest Beach in 2005. Hurricane Wilma caused minor beach and dune erosion to Smathers Beach,
moderate to major beach and dune erosion to Berg and Kitsos Beaches, major beach and dune erosion to
Rest Beach, and minor beach erosion to Higgs Beach, South Beach, and Truman Annex beaches.
Wilma substantially destroyed the entire park infrastructure at Rest Beach as well as many major
structures along the southeastern shoreline of Key West.
Smathers Beach, an approximately 3,300-foot long beach, has been nourished sincethe 1960’swith
sand screened from crushed limerock and also with oolitic aragonite imported from the Bahamas (Table
2). A total of 0.6 miles of shoreline at Smathers Beach was nourished in 2000 using 23,600 cy of quartz
sand from an upland sand source. In 2001, an additional 4,600 cy of quartz sandwere added and four
groins were constructed to retain sand within the beach limits. Two-thirds of Smathers was nourished
via truck haul again in 2011 with 12,800 cy of material from an upland sand source. The nourishment of
the remaining one-third of Smathers wasconstructed in 2013 using 5,000 cy of material from the same
source.
Table 2.
Smathers Beach Nourishment Project History.
DATEVOLUME SOURCELOCATIONLENGTH(Mi.)
(CY)
200023,600UplandV412-V412.50.6
June2015, Page 7 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
DATEVOLUME SOURCELOCATIONLENGTH(Mi.)
(CY)
20014,600UplandV412-V412.50.6
201112,800UplandV412-V412.50.6
20135,000UplandV412-V412.50.6
Rest Beach was restored in 1995 with 7,800cy of sand from an upland mine, removal of invasive exotic
plants, construction of a protective berm planted with desired dune vegetation,and public access
improvements. Due to storm activity in 1995, Hurricane Georges (1998),Hurricane Irene (1999) and the
2005 hurricane season, Rest Beach was nourishedwith upland sand (Table 3). To repair storm damage,
the City of Key West conducted emergency nourishment of the berm at Rest Beach in 2009 using 455 cy
of upland sand (Table 3). Storm damage again prompted the City to conducted emergency nourishment
of the dune system using 200 cyof upland sandin early 2012 (Table 3). A full nourishment using 3,800
cy of material from the same source is planned for 2015
.
Table 3.
Rest Beach Nourishment Project History.
DATEVOLUME (CY)SOURCELOCATIONLENGTH(Mi.)
19952,600UplandV4130.12
1995 (post H Opal)699UplandV4130.12
19981,188UplandV4130.12
1999646UplandV4130.12
2006484UplandV4130.12
2009505UplandV4130.12
2012200UplandV4130.12
Strategy:
Maintain the projects at Smathers and Rest Beachesthrough nourishment using sand from
approved sources; assistedrecovery of storm erosion impacts to city and county public beaches above
mean high water consisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites; monitor.
SB,MC
IMONTON EACHONROE OUNTY
This is a 0.1mile segment of critically eroded beachlocated on the south shoreline of Key West fronting
the Gulfof Mexico. The City of Key West’s sole public beach on the Gulf of Mexicowaseroded by
Hurricane Wilma (2005), threatening recreational interests.FDEP designated this segment as critically
eroded in April 2006.
Strategy:
Maintain beach project consisting of sand trucked from approved upland borrow sites, placed
in an alongshore berm configuration above mean high water, and stabilized with plantings of native
vegetation; monitor.
June2015, Page 8 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
FZTHSP,KW,MC
ORT ACHARY AYLOR ISTORIC TATE ARKEY ESTONROE OUNTY
This is a 0.3mile segment of critically eroded beach on the southwest tip of Key West.The site includes
the 150-year old fort. Erosion undermined a revetment built by the U.S. Navy in 1964. A terminal
groin and breakwater project was constructed including approximately 10,000 cyof sandin 1989. In
1998, Hurricane Georges caused major beach and dune erosion along this area leaving an eight to nine-
foot vertical escarpment along the dune line between the west breakwater and the terminal groin.
Hurricane Irene caused additional erosion and damaged the west shore revetmentin 1999. Hurricane
Rita caused minor to moderate beach and dune erosion along the park’s beach, and Hurricane Wilma
caused additional minor beach and dune erosion along the beach, and moderate upland bank erosion
behind the west shore revetmentin 2005. Also during Wilma, one of the four detached breakwaters
sustained major damage, and the west shore revetment sustained minor damage.
Asand source investigation was concludedin October 2005,recommending the use ofsilicate sands
from an upland sand source rather than the carbonate sands originally proposed. The restoration, via
truck haul, was completed in December 2008 using 3,600 cy of sand from an upland mine.
Rehabilitation of the offshore breakwaters and terminal groinwere permitted in 2011. Rehabilitation is
planned to be coupled with a moderate truck haul to restore the beach to the 2008 design template.
Strategy:
Maintain project above mean high water line; repair the west shore revetment to prevent
breaching of the terminal groinand rehabilitate the breakwaters; monitor.
RSBIM
EGIONAL TRATEGIES FOR EACH AND NLET ANAGEMENT
SF
PONSORS AND UNDING
The Middle Keys subregion includes the communities of Plantation, Islamorada, the City of Key Colony
Beach, Marathon Shores, and the City of Marathon. The Lower Keys subregion includes the City of Key
West. These communities as well as Monroe County andthe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USACE)
are eligible governmental entities under the beach erosion control assistance program. Monroe County
and the City of Key West have participated with the FDEPas the local sponsors of beach management
projects. In addition, the FDEP’sDivision of Recreation and Parksmanages state parks on Long Key,
Little Crawl Key, Indian Key, Lignumvitae Key, Bahia Honda, and Key West. This area is located
within the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary program. Project cost estimates and schedules may
be found in FDEP’s Beach Management Funding Assistance Program - Long Range Budget Plan.
June2015, Page 9 of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
PC
ROJECT OORDINATION
Regionalization is the funding and coordination of multiple nourishment and inlet management activities
to take advantage of identifiable cost savings through economies of scale, reduced equipment
mobilization and demobilization costs, and elimination of duplicative administrative tasks.
Opportunities in this subregion include:
1.Regional opportunities for beach management activities have not been studied at the critically
eroded beaches, but would include combining management activities at several sites to reduce
costs through economies of scale.A coordination of efforts between local, county, state and
Division of Recreation and Parks could prove beneficial.
2.Placing beach quality sand from navigational dredging on beaches in critical need.
EP
NVIRONMENTAL ROTECTION
The protection of marine turtles, shorebirds,mangrove wetlands, seagrass beds and hardbottomand
coral reef communitiesand their habitats are primary environmental concerns within this sub-region.
The timing of construction activities has not been restricted during the marine turtle nesting season of
May 1 through October 31. Project design and method of construction are restricted to avoid or
minimize adverse environmental impacts to natural resources, listed species and their habitat.The Keys
are located within the limits of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuaryand include the
Lignumvitae Key Aquatic Preserve and Coupon Bight Aquatic Preserve. Offshore of Monroe County is
prime habitat for the endangered small-tooth sawfish. Projects located within and near the aquatic
preserve boundaries require additional protection, including more stringent water quality standards than
in non-aquatic preserve waters, during permitting and construction to ensure preservation of the existing
conditions.
SS
AND OURCES
Adequate sand sources have not been identified for this region. Sufficient upland sand supplies for
Curry Hammock State Park and Fort Zachary Taylor State Historic Park have been identified. Sand has
been trucked in from upland sites in Dade County for small nourishments. Maintenance dredging of
navigation channels in this region is conducted infrequently. Oolitic aragonite sand from the western
Bahamas Islands has been used to nourish Smathers Beach in Key West. Although foreign sand sources
June2015, Page 10of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
have not been permitted since the 1990’s, the FDEP’s Division of Recreation and Parks continues its
permitting efforts to use oolitic aragonite sand from the Bahamas for restoration of Long Key State Park,
which still maintains its native carbonate composition. The Northwest Channel at Key West has been
identified by the USACEas a sand source forbeach nourishment. A comprehensive investigation of
upland sand sources has been performed to locate and characterize all beach compatible sand within
economic distance of the critically eroded beaches. For additional information on sand sources, FDEP
manages a database named the Regional Offshore Sand Source Inventory (ROSSI).
AI
DDITIONAL NFORMATION
The introduction at the beginning of the state’s Strategic Beach Management Plan provides additional
information including overviews of:
The principals followed to help guide the state’s management strategies
The miles of critically eroded beaches under active management
Statewide sand source studies
Statewide monitoring programs
Innovative technologies examined
Basic suggestions for emergency response plans
June2015, Page 11of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
Figure 1.
Map of the Florida Keys subregions.
June2015, Page 12of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
R
EFERENCES
Clark, R.R. (1990) The Carbonate Beaches of Florida: an Inventory of Monroe County Beaches,
Beaches and Shores Technical and Design Memorandum 90-1, Florida Department of Natural
Resources, 63 p.
Clark, R.R. (1998) The Impact of Hurricane Georges on the Carbonate Beaches of the Florida Keys,
Florida Department of Environmental Protection Poststorm Report, 19 p.
Clark, R.R. (2000) The Impact of Hurricane Floyd and Hurricane Irene on the Florida East Coast,
Department of Environmental Protection Report No. BCS-00-01, 42 p.
Clark, R.R., LaGrone, J.W., and Koch, J.L, 2005. 2005 Hurricane Season Impacts: Dade & Monroe
Counties, Florida –Post-Storm Beach Conditions and Coastal Impact Report, Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, 85 p.
Clark, R.R., LaGrone, J.W., and Koch, J.L, 2006. Hurricane Wilma: Post-Storm Beach Conditions and
Coastal Impact Report, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Beaches and
Coastal Systems, 98 p.
Coastal Systems International, Inc., 2002. Shoreline Condition Overview for Curry Hammock, Long
Key, Bahia Honda, & Zachary Taylor State Park, 68 p.
Coastal Systems International, Inc., 2005. Sand Source Review for the Proposed Truck Haul Beach
Nourishment Project at Bahia Honda State Park and Fort Zachary Taylor State Historic Park,
Monroe County, Florida, 76p.
Coastal Technology Corporation, 1987. Shoreline and Marina Channel Renovation Alternatives at
Bahia Honda State Recreation Area, Monroe County, Florida.
Coastal Technology Corporation, 1987. Shoreline Renovation Alternatives at Fort Zachary Taylor State
Historic Site, Key West, Florida.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2004 Hurricane Recovery Plan for Florida’s Beach
and Dune System, 65 p.
June2015, Page 13of 14
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Strategic Beach Management Plan – Florida KeysRegion
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2015.Critically Eroded Beaches in Florida,Division
of Water Resource Management, 80p.
PPB Environmental Laboratories, Inc. and Water & Air Research, Inc. 2004. Key West Harbor Area
Background Turbidity Monitoring, October 2003, Final Report, 15 p.
Schmidt, D.V., Taplin, K.A., and Clark, R.R., 1993. Hurricane Andrew Storm Summary and Impacts on
the Beaches of Florida, Special Report, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District,
and Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Beaches and Shores, 103 p.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1957. Beach Erosion Control Report on Cooperative Study of Key West,
Florida, Jacksonville District.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1983. Feasibility Report for Beach Erosion Control with accompanying
environmental impact statement for Monroe County, Florida, Jacksonville District, February
1982 (revised April 1983).
June2015, Page 14of 14
Step One: Preliminary Identified Initiative (Notice of Intent)
Step Two: Characterization Form
LMS Project Prioritization Form
2015 Update: Initiative Tracking Spreadsheets
Notices of Intent
Characterized Projects
Completed/Deleted Projects
MONROE COUNTY 2015 LMS
STEP ONE: PRELIMINARY IDENTIFIED INITIATIVE
(NOTICE OF INTENT)
Name of Entity: Date Submitted:
Phone:
ContactName:
E-mail:
Initiative/project title:
Initiative/project description:
Type of Project
Acquisition Elevation Relocation Drainage
ReconstructionRetrofit(wind)Retrofit (flood)
Other:
Special Consideration:
V Zone Special Needs Population
Other:
Best Estimate of Total Project Cost: $
2010Mitigation Goals addressed by the initiative:
WIPIGXEPPXLEXETTP]
1.Preservation of sustainability of life, health, safety and welfare.
2.Preservation of infrastructure, including power, water, sewer and communications.
3.Maintenance and protection of roads and bridges, including traffic signals and street signs.
4.Protection of critical facilities, including public schools and public buildings.
5.Preservation of property and assets.
6.Preservation of economy during and after disaster, including business viability.
7.Preservation and protection of theenvironment, including natural and historic resources.
1
Hazards addressed by the initiative :
WIPIGXEPPXLEXETTP]
Natural HazardsTechnological HazardsSocietal Hazards
Hurricane/tropical storm Hazardous materialsTransportation
(winds & surge flooding)
Flooding (rainfall ponding)Utility outage or disruptionTerrorism/civil disturbance
Severe Storm/tornado- Loss of electric serviceEconomic crisis
Wildfire- Loss of water serviceMilitary conflict
Drought- Loss of wastewater Mass immigration
service
Coastal erosion- CommunicationsEpidemiological emergency
Oil spill
Radiological accident
Received By:Date:
2
MONROE COUNTY 2015 LMS
STEP TWO: CHARACTERIZATION FORM
This form is used to submit information necessary for the LMS Work Group to score and prioritize an
initiative relative to other initiatives and projects. It is to be completed by the entity or owner who is
responsible for the projectwhen that entity or owner is prepared to move a project forward and seek
funding.
When the Florida Division of Emergency Managementissues a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA)
for Hazard Mitigation (HMGP) andPre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) funds, the LMS Work Group’s
Ranking Subcommittee is charged with developing a list of prioritized initiativesusing the LMS Project
Prioritization Form. The more complete the information, the better the basis for ranking this initiative
relative to other initiatives.
Name of Entity: Date Submitted:
Phone:
ContactName:
E-mail:
Is the initiative/project on the Step One (NOI) list? Yes No
Initiative/project title:
Initiative/project description:
Does the initiative/project benefit a “critical facility”? Yes No
Location map is attached? Yes No
Does the applicant have the legal authority to under take the project? Yes No
If no, describe coordination necessary in order for the project to move forward
How quickly could the initiative be startedafter award?
Six months or less Six months to one year One to two years
How long after award would it take to completethe initiative?
Less than two years Two to three years More than three years
Describe the problem the Initiative/project will solve and the direct and indirect impact on the facility,
system, or community if a“worst case” hazard scenario occurs.
Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 1 of 7
2010Mitigation Goals addressed by the initiative:
WIPIGXEPPXLEXETTP]
1.Preservation of sustainability of life, health, safety and welfare.
2.Preservation of infrastructure, including power, water, sewer and communications.
3.Maintenance and protection of roads and bridges, including traffic signals and street signs.
4.Protection of critical facilities, including public schools and public buildings.
5.Preservation of property and assets.
6.Preservation of economy during and after disaster, including business viability.
7.Preservation and protection of the environment, including natural and historic resources.
Hazards addressed by the initiative:
WIPIGXEPPXLEXETTP]
Natural HazardsTechnological HazardsSocietal Hazards
Hurricane/tropical storm Hazardous materialsTransportation
(winds & surge flooding)
Flooding (rainfall ponding)Utility outage or disruptionTerrorism/civil disturbance
Severe Storm/tornado- Loss of electric serviceEconomic crisis
Wildfire- Loss of water serviceMilitary conflict
Drought- Loss of wastewater serviceMass immigration
Coastal erosion- CommunicationsEpidemiological emergency
Oil spill
Radiological accident
GENERAL BENEFITS
9WIXLMWWIGXMSRXSTVSZMHIEwFMKTMGXYVIxHIWGVMTXMSRSJXLIFIRIJMXWSJXLIMRMXMEXMZI8LIWIKIRIVEP
FIRIJMXWEVIRSXXLIWEQIUYERXMJMEFPIFIRIJMXWXLEXEVIHIXIVQMRIHYWMRK*)1%vWJSVQEP&IRIJMXXS
'SWX%REP]WMWXSSPW
How many people might be injured, sickened or killed in the “worst case” scenario without this
initiative? injured sickened killed don’t know not applicable
What percentage of the jurisdiction’s permanent population is served by the Initiative/project?
Up to 10% 26 to 40% 66 to 80%
11 to 25% 41 to 65% 81 to 100%
Describe the economic benefits of the project.
Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 2 of 7
Describe the social benefits of the project.
Describe whether the project protects cultural or historic resources.
Describe the environmental benefits of the project.
COMPARISON OF BENEFITS TO COSTS
8LI[SVOWLIIXMR%XXEGLQIRX%QE]FIYWIHXSETTVS\MQEXIE&IRIJMXXS'SWX6EXMSJSVXLITYVTSWIW
SJQSZMRKETVSNIGXXSXLI4VMSVMXM^IH0MWX8LI[SVOWLIIXGEREPWSFIYWIHXSGLEVEGXIVM^IXLIFIRIJMXW
ERHGSWXWSJMRMXMEXMZIWXLEXEVIRSXXVEHMXMSREPw*)1%IPMKMFPIxTVSNIGXW
IKWXVYGXYVIIPIZEXMSRJEGMPMX]
VIXVSJMXHVEMREKIMQTVSZIQIRX
-14368%28238) %RMRMXMEXMZIXLEXMWI\TIGXIHXSFIWYFQMXXIHJSV*)1%JYRHMRKGERFITYXSR
XLI4VMSVMXM^IH0MWXFEWIHSRERETTVS\MQEXI&IRIJMXXS'SWX6EXMS,S[IZIVEWTEVXSJEJSVQEP
ETTPMGEXMSRETTPMGERXWJSVXVEHMXMSREPw*)1%IPMKMFPIxTVSNIGXW[MPPFIVIUYMVIHXSWEXMWJ]EPPETTPMGEXMSR
VIUYMVIQIRXWMRGPYHMRKHIZIPSTQIRXSJE&IRIJMXXS'SWX6EXMSYWMRK*)1%vW&IRIJMX'SWX%REP]WMW
XSSPW
Estimate the total cost to implement (e.g., including design, construction, construction management,
purchase of equipment, etc.). $
Has a formal Benefit-Cost Analysis been prepared? Yes No
If yes, what is the computed Benefit-to-Cost Ratio?
If no, use the worksheet in Attachment A and insert the Approximate Benefit-to-Cost Ratio:
FEASIBILITY
Check the statement that most applies to this project regarding its consistency with other
applicable plans, programs, policies, ordinances and codesof the jurisdiction or proposing
entity.
The proposal is highly consistent (e.g., listed in multiple other documents)
The proposal is consistent (e.g., listed in at least one other document)
The proposal is not listed in other documents, but is consistent with intent
The proposal conflicts with other documents or policies
The proposal may be in conflict, needs more analysis
Permits and approvals likely to be needed for implementation.
Zoningapproval/change
Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 3 of 7
Concurrence/budget approval by local jurisdiction
Building permit
State permits(list)
Federal permits(list)
None required
Other (list)
Check the statement that most accurately describes technical feasibility.
No engineering is necessary to document technical feasibility (e.g., buyouts)
An engineer has preliminarily determined that the project is technically feasible (e.g.,
based on similarity with similar projects)
An engineering analysis will have to prepared to documenttechnical feasibility
Checkthe statement that most accurately describes implementation effort.
The proposal would be relatively easy to accomplish
The proposal is not anticipated to be difficult to accomplish
The proposalwill be somewhat difficult to accomplish
The proposal will be difficult to accomplish
The proposal will be very difficult to accomplish
Check the statement that most accurately describes how the community would likely react to
implementation.
The proposal is likely to be endorsed by the entire community
The proposal would benefit those directly affected; minimal adverse reaction from others
The proposal wouldbe somewhat controversial
The proposal would be strongly opposed by some
The proposal would be strongly opposed by most
If the proposal is expected to be generally acceptable, are there special interest groups or
stakeholders that would likely oppose the initiative?
Yes No
FUNDING SOURCE(S)
Check the statement that most accurately defines the funding situation:
No potential funding source (federal or non-federal) has been identified
The only source of funding is federal mitigation grant programs
Partial funding could be accomplished with local matching funds (budget or grants)
Federal/State Mitigation Grant SourceNon-Federal Source
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)Local government funds
Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)Non-profit funds
Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 4 of 7
Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)Private owner funds
Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL)CDBG
Repetitive Flood Claim (RFC)Other:
Residential Construction Mitigation (RCMP)
Other:Other:
Other:
Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 5 of 7
ATTACHMENT A – APPROXIMATION OF BENEFITS AND COSTS
(SRSXYWIXLMW[SVOWLIIXMJEJSVQEP&IRIJMXXS'SWX6EXMSLEWFIIRHIZIPSTIH
8LMWWMQTPMJMIHQIXLSHXSETTVS\MQEXIFIRIJMXWERHGSWXWMWMRXIRHIHXSFIYWIHMJEJSVQEP&IRIJMXXS
'SWX%REP]WMWLEWRSXFIIRTVITEVIHERHJSVMRMXMEXMZIWSXLIVXLERXVEHMXMSREP*)1%IPMKMFPITVSNIGXW
8LIVIWYPXSJXLMWETTVS\MQEXMSRGERLIPTIRXMXMIWHIXIVQMRI[LIXLIVXSTYVWYIKVERXJYRHMRK8LI
VIWYPXGERFIYWIHF]XLI0176EROMRK7YFGSQQMXXIIXSTVMSVMXM^IMRMXMEXMZIWMR7XIT8[S
XSTYX
MRMXMEXMZIWSRXLIw4VMSVMXM^IHxPMWX
%GGITXERGIF]XLI0176EROMRK'SQQMXXIIHSIWRSXMRHMGEXI
EGGITXERGIF]*)1%ERHXLMWETTVS\MQEXMSRHSIWWYFWXMXYXIJSVEJSVQEPEREP]WMW
COSTS
*SV*)1%IPMKMFPITVSNIGXWWII*)1%vW,E^EVH1MXMKEXMSR+YMHERGI
TYFPMWLIHIZIV]]IEV
JSV
KYMHERGISRTVSNIGXGSWXWERHIPMKMFMPMX]-RXLIXSXEPGSWXXSMQTPIQIRXETVSNIGXMRGPYHIEPP
VIEWSREFP]ERXMGMTEXIHGSWXW*SVI\EQTPIVIXVSJMXXMRKEJEGMPMX]GERVIEWSREFP]FII\TIGXIHXSLEZI
GSWXWEWWSGMEXIH[MXLHIWMKR
EVGLMXIGXIRKMRIIV
TIVQMXWGSRWXVYGXMSRERHQEXIVMEPWERHHITIRHMRK
SRXLIWM^ISJXLITVSNIGXGSRWXVYGXMSRQEREKIQIRX*)1%vWKYMHERGIMRHMGEXIWX]TMGEPwYWIJYPPMJIx
JSVQER]X]TIWSJTVSNIGXW6IGMTMIRXWSJJIHIVEPKVERXWEVII\TIGXIHXSQEMRXEMRKVERXJYRHIH
TVSNIGXW8LIwERRYEPGSWXXSQEMRXEMRXLITVSNIGXxEVIXLSWIGSWXWRIGIWWEV]XSIRWYVIXLITVSNIGX
JYRGXMSRWEWMRXIRHIH8LYWGSWXWXSQEMRXEMREVIXVSJMXXIHJEGMPMX]QMKLXMRGPYHIXLIERRYEPGLIGOSJ
[MRHS[WWLYXXIVWERGLSVIHVSSJQSYRXIHIUYMTQIRXERHVSSJMRK
Estimate the total cost to implementthe initiative/project.$
What is the anticipated useful life of the project (see FEMA guidance) years
What is the anticipated annual cost to maintain the project. $
Multiple the useful life (in years) by the annual cost to maintain(to estimate the total cost to maintain
the project). $
Add the total cost to implement and the total cost to maintain the project. $ Use this number as
the “Total Project Cost” in the section below, COMPARISON OF BENEFITS TO COSTS
BENEFITS
*SV*)1%IPMKMFPITVSNIGXWWII*)1%vW,E^EVH1MXMKEXMSR+YMHERGI
TYFPMWLIHIZIV]]IEV
JSV
KYMHERGISRTVSNIGXFIRIJMXW8LIQSWXFEWMGFIRIJMXWSJERMRMXMEXMZITVSNIGXWEVIEZSMHIHHEQEKI
MJ
HEQEKIMWEZSMHIHXLIRVITEMVGSWXWEVIEZSMHIHHMWVYTXMSRSJJEGMPMX]YWIMWEZSMHIHIXG
3RI[E]
XSIWXMQEXIEZSMHIHHMVIGXPSWW
TL]WMGEPHEQEKI
MWXSMQEKMRIEw[SVWXGEWIxIZIRXERHIWXMQEXI
LS[QYGLHEQEKI[SYPHSGGYV
[LIVIXLIEQSYRXSJHEQEKIMWQIEWYVIHMRXIVQWSJLS[QYGLMX
[SYPHGSWXXSVITEMV
7MQMPEVP]GSRWMHIVXLIPIWWXERKMFPIIJJIGXWSJEw[SVWXGEWIxIZIRXXSGSQIYT
[MXLERIWXMQEXISJMRHMVIGXPSWWIW
Describe the total direct loss(physical damage) to the facility, system, or community if a “worst case”
hazard scenario occurs and estimate the dollar value of that loss.
What is the estimated the dollar value of thattotal direct loss$
Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 6 of 7
Describe the total indirect loss(other costs associated with damage, e.g., cost to rent replacement
facility, lost services, loss of jobs, etc.) if a “worst case” hazard scenario occurs.
What is the estimated dollar value of thattotal indirect loss$
Combine the total direct lossand thetotal indirect loss$Unless modified by the next question,
use this number as the “Total Project Benefits” in the section below, APPROXIMATING THE BENEFIT-
TO-COST RATIO.
Will the initiative avoid or prevent all of the direct and indirect losses?Yes No
If yes, the combined total direct lossand the total indirect lossis the estimate of total benefits.
If no, describe anticipated losses that will be avoided:
Based on the description ofanticipated losses that will be avoided, estimate what percentage
of all direct and indirect losses would be avoided:
Multiply the percentage of losses that would be avoided by thecombined total direct lossand
the total indirect loss: $Use this number as the “Total Project Benefits” in the section
below, APPROXIMATING THE BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIO.
APPROXIMATING THE BENEFIT-TO-COST RATIO
What are the “Total Project Benefits” from above? $
What is the “Total Project Cost” from above? $
Divide the benefits by the costs to get the “Approximate Benefit-to-Cost Ratio”Use this
number as the “Approximate Benefit-to-Cost Ratio” in the main section, COMPARISON OF
BENEFITS TO COSTS.
Monroe County: LMS Characterization Form (2010) Page 7 of 7
LMS PROJECT PRIORITIZATION FORM
(2015)
PointsAward
9WIHF]XLI0176EROMRK7YFGSQQMXXIIXSVIZMI['LEVEGXIVM^EXMSR*SVQWXSVERO
MRMXMEXMZIWJSVTPEGIQIRXSRXLI8EF8[Sw4VMSVMXM^IHxPMWX
A. Meeting LMS Goals and Objectives
50
1.Preservation & Sustainability of Life Health, Safety & Welfare
30
2.Preservation of infrastructurefrom hazard-related damage
30
3.Minimize damage & maintain roads & bridges during a disaster
10
4.Protection of critical facilities from hazard-related damage
10
5.Preservation of property & assets from future losses
10
6.Preservation of economy during times of disaster
10
7.Preservation and protection of the environment
B. Percentage of permanent population served by the project:
20
1.Up to 10%
40
2.11 to 25%
60
3.26 to 40%
80
4.41 TO 65%
100
5.66 to 80%
130
6.81 to 100%
C. Type and number of hazards addressed:
20
1.Hurricanes and other severe weather
15
2.Utility outagesor disruption
10
3.Transportation disruption
10
4.Economic Emergencies
10
5.Communications disruption
10
6.Mass immigration
5
7.Hazardous materials incidents
5
8.Coastal oil spills
5
9.Radiological emergencies
5
10.Epidemiological emergencies
5
11.Drought
5
12.Wildland fires
5
13.Terrorism/Civil disturbance
5
14.Military conflict
D. Cost effectiveness based on Cost/Benefit Analysis:
10
1.Ratio of 1 to 1
20
2.Ratio of 1 to 2
30
3.Ratio of 1 to 3
40
4.Ratio of 1 to 4 etc.
E. Economic Benefits
30
1.If economic benefit demonstrated
F.Social Benefits
20
1.If social benefit is demonstrated
G. Environmental Benefits
20
1.If environmental benefit demonstrated
H. Time Frame
20
1.Six (6) months or less
10
2.Six (6) months to one year
5
3.One to two years
I. Financially feasible? YESNO
J. Technically feasible? YESNO
K. Funding Available? YESNO
L. Have legal authority: YESNO
M. Consistency with Plans, Codes, Ordinances, Policies, etc.YESNO
TOTAL (Possible) POINTS 900
BLANK
BLANK
BLANK
BLANK
BLANK
BLANK
BLANK
BLANK