#8th Amendment 02/20/2013AMY HEA VILIN, CPA
CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
DATE: February 28, 2013
TO: Christine Hurley, Director
Growth Management Division
ATTN.• Mayra Tezanos
Executive Assistant
FROM: Pamela G. Hanc cv C.
At the February 26, 2013, Board of County Commissioner's meeting, the Board granted
approval and authorized execution Item D2 granting approval of the Eighth (8th) Amendment to
the agreement for professional services with Keith and Schnars (K&S), P.A., for additional
services to evaluate the Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS) Comprehensive Plan policies
and Land Development Code regulations as recommended by staff.
Enclosed is a duplicate original of the above -mentioned for your handling. Should you
have any questions, please feel free to contact our office.
cc: County Attorney
Finance
File
EIGHTH AMENDMENT
to
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
with
KEITH AND SCHNARS, P.A.
This Eighth Amendment (Amendment) to the Contract for Professional Services dated
December 16, 2009 between Monroe County (County) and Keith and Schnars, P.A.
(Consultant) is made and entered into this 26` day of February, 2013.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Consultant was retained to update the County's Comprehensive Plan
Technical Document (Phase 1), complete an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of
the Comprehensive Plan (Phase II) , complete Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments
(Phase III) and EAR based Land Development Code amendments (Phase IV) over a
four year period; and
WHEREAS, the County has requested an amendment to the Contract to determine
whether the County's existing Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS) policies add
any additional protection to land over and above those policies and code provisions.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree that:
Section 1. The scope of services relevant to Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS)
listed on Exhibit D: "Additional Services" of the contract shall be established and
incorporated into this Amendment.
• Under PHASE II — EVALUATION AND APPRAISAL REPORT, add a new
task:
TASK 13, COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCE SYSTEM (CBRS) ANALYSIS —
K &S will perform the tasks agreed to by both parties in Exhibit D to the
Contract. Evidence of both parties' agreement to have K &S perform a
particular task is the presence of initials by both K &S and the County
Mayor in the appropriate designated section of the table contained in
Exhibit D.
Consultants Fee for this task will be as outlined on Exhibit D of the Contract. Only
those items that are initialed by both the County and Keith and Schnars, P.A. will
be considered to be valid portions of the Eighth Amendment to the Contract. The
fees for each item initialed by both the County and Keith and Schnars, P.A is
contained on a line item basis in Exhibit D and those fees are expressly agreed
to and accepted by both parties upon both initialing Exhibit D and executing this
Eighth Amendment to the Contract for Professional Services.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Eighth Amendment.
ATTEST:
AMY HEAVILIN, CLERK
a�
Clerk of the Court
Witness
Witness
CD
U
1
C
O
Li
G
L.L1
Li
r
Q7 _
N`
W W G
J �
O
o
cv
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLO
� 5
Mayor George Neugent
KEITH AND SCHNARS, P.A.
ichael L. Davis, Vice President
Z� 3
Dat
MO ROE COUNTY ATTORNEY
A P OED AS FORM:
STEVEN T. WILLIAMS
ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY
Date 2 -�22 -/
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
EXHIBIT D
Eighth Amendment
To Contract for professional services
With Keith and Schnars, P.A.
TASK 13, COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCE SYSTEM (CBRS) ANALYSIS
COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCE SYSTEM (CBRS) ANALYSIS
BOCC K &S
Task 13 Original tasks Request Approval Agreement
Pricing
Source
(initial (initial
required) required)
13.1
K &S will evaluate the percentage of land and number of
Requested by
parcels within the Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS)
BOCC on
units that are designated Tier I or other Tiers such as: Il, III,
12/12/12
O P
or IIIA;
$16,760
13.2
Using existing tier criteria, determine whether extension of
Requested by
infrastructure to outlying neighborhoods or other platted
BOCC on
for tasks
areas increases a parcel's likelihood of obtaining change in
12/12/12
13.1,
tier classification from Tier I to Tier II, III, or IIIA; and
13.2, and
13.3
13.3
Review the existing Comprehensive Plan policies and /or
Requested by
Land Development Code provisions related to CBRS units
BOCC on
combined
and determine whether the existing CBRS policies add any
12/12/12
additional protection to land over and above those policies
and code provisions that govern Tier 1 land.
Additional tasks requested at 1116113 BOCC Meeting by
Request
Public Speakers, and subsequent public input
Source
Pricing
13.4
How many lots and how much undeveloped acreage is
Deb Curlee
$6,720
within the CBRS areas
2/8/13
Review and determine any potential impacts of referencing
Beth Ramsay -
the original 2010 Comp Plan Technical Document Table
Vickrey 2/4/13
3.21 as it relates to "undeveloped" CBRS units. Review and
provide a list of the current "undeveloped" areas within each
of the unincorporated County CBRS units, utilizing the term
"undeveloped" as defined within the Federal legislation for
CBRS units. Compare and contrast with original 2010
Comp Plan Technical Document Table 3.21 and provide a
summary.
13.5
Comprehensive accounting of parcels and acreage located
Last Stand
$2,400
in CBRS units in Monroe County (including areas that would
require new infrastructure to pass through a CBRS unit). To
2/8/13 Naja
Data to be
1 ,
include: CBRS Unit #, Parcel RE #, size of parcel, Tier,
Girard
provided
FLUM, district, location within Monroe County, publicly or
by County
privately owned, vacant or developed, description of
existing development (single family, multi - family,
commercial, etc), type of infrastructure presently available
(electricity, water, sewer, telephone, cable) including date
the infrastructure was brought to the area.
1of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.6
An analysis of how the establishment of full infrastructure in
Last Stand
$0.
an area (under current laws) could affect the assigning of
2/8/13 Naja
Included
points in the ROGO and NROGO system and how it could
Girard
in 13.2
affect the Tier designation for properties in Monroe County.
13.7
How are the numerous CBRS Goals, Objectives and
Policies of the Comp Plan being implemented today?
Solar
Community of
$0.
Included
1J�
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.3
13.8
Are there any disincentives to build in an area without
Solar
$0.
/17
utilities beyond the designation /classification of Tier 1
Community of
Included
lands?
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.3
13.9
Is there any variation of protection of the CBRS units within
Solar
$0.
the Tier System without the CBRS Overlay ordinance?
Community of
Included
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.3
13.10
How would CBRS lands be protected if the CBRS Goals
Solar
$0.
Objectives and Policies in the Year 2010 Comprehensive
Community of
Included
Land Use Plan were to be weakened or removed?
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.3
13.11
How would CBRS lands be protected if the CBRS Overlay
Solar
$0.
Ordinance in the Monroe County Code were to be
Community of
Included
weakened or removed?
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.3
13.12
How can Monroe County remove CBRS Goals Objectives
Solar
$0.
and Policies from the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and
Community of
Included
^�
weaken or remove the prohibition in the Overlay Ordinance,
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.3
and continue to provide the same level of protection we
have had for CBRS units throughout Monroe County?
13.13
How are CBRS properties treated differently from other Tier
Joyce Newman
$0.�
1 lands in the County?
2/8/13
Included
in 13.3
13.14
Does the Tier System provide for different levels of
Joyce Newman
$0.
protection for lands targeted for acquisition?
2/8/13
Included��
in 13.3
13.15
Does the Tier System adequately implement the intent of
the Comp Plan with regard to lands within CBRS units?
Joyce Newman
2/8/13
$0.
Included
r
in 13.3
13.16
What protections currently exist for CBRS areas in the
Deb Curlee
$0.
Comp Plan and LDRs
2/8/13
Included
in 13.3
13.17
How protections for CBRS areas would change if those
Deb Curlee
$0.G
r
lands were subject only to the Tier System
2/8/13
Included
in 13.3
2of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.18
Review and determine any potential impacts if all CBRS
Overlay policies and corresponding LDR language be
stricken entirely.
Beth Ramsay-
Vickrey 2/4/13
$0.
Included
in 13.3
13.19
What mechanisms are in place that discriminate between
Solar
$3,180
and accommodate variations in the level of environmental
Community of
sensitivity of Tier 1 lands? (i.e. ACCC,
NNK 2/8/13
threatened /endangered species, infrastructure availability,
platted infill bonuses, CBRS, acquisition areas, etc.) In
other words:
How are CBRS properties treated differently from all other
Tier 1 lands in the County?
• How are lands targeted for acquisition treated differently
from all other Tier 1 lands in the County?
• How are off -grid areas treated differently within the Tier 1
system?
• Were the protections offered by the historic PAS lost with
the adoption of the Tier System?
13.20
Review and determine any potential impacts of adding the
Beth Ramsay-
$0.
0�
term "undeveloped CBRS areas" to the Comp Plan and
Vickrey 2/4113
Included
Code.
Example of suggested change: Add the word
in 13.3
UNDEVELOPED as so noted (highlighted) below: In
general, future development in the County should be
directed to the maximum extent possible away from the
UNDEVELOPED Coastal Barrier Resources System
(CBRS) units. This should be accomplished through land
use policies of the Comprehensive Plan and its
implementing LDRs. Other actions which the County should
take to discourage further private investment in
UNDEVELOPED CBRS units include
(1) no new bridges, causeways, paved roads or commercial
marinas should be permitted to or on UNDEVELOPED
CBRS units;
(2) shoreline hardening structures should not be permitted
along shorelines of UNDEVELOPED CBRS units;
(3) public expenditures on UNDEVELOPED CBRS units
should be limited to property acquisition, restoration and
passive recreation facilities;
(4) privately -owned undeveloped land located within the
CBRS units should be considered for acquisition by the
County; and
(5) the County should coordinate with the Florida Keys
Aqueduct Authority (FKAA) and private providers of
electricity and telephone service to assess measures
which could be taken to discourage extension of
facilities and services to UNDEVELOPED CBRS units.
3of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.21
Review and determine any potential impacts associated
Beth Ramsay-
$0.
with the suggestion to: Add the following (below highlighted)
Vickrey 2/4/13
Included
--
CBRS Executive Summary statement, and direction (not to
in 13.3
harm existing communities), to all sections of the Comp
Plan which reference the CBRS Act so there is no future
confusion as to the exact Federal Intent of the Act
(undeveloped status was the underpinning of the law), and
the Federal direction regarding what actions the County
should NOT take (harming of existing communities).
SEE: The CBRS Executive Summary, Page 1,
Introduction
http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/TaxpayerSavingsf
romCBRA.pdf
" The undeveloped status of System lands was an
important underpinning of the law The idea was to help
steer new construction away from risky, environmentally
sensitive places where development was not yet found,
not to hurt existing communities where serious
commitments of time and money had already been
made "
13.22
Review and determine any potential impacts associated
Beth Ramsay-
$0.��
with the suggestion to: Add the following (below highlighted)
Vickrey 2/4/13
Included
statement, again from the CBRS executive Summary, Page
in 13.3
1, Introduction so as to further clarify the Federal intent of
the Act for the reader of the Comp Plan.
SEE: The CBRS Executive Summary, Page 1,
Introduction
http: / /www.fws. gov / habitatconservation /TaxpayerSavingsf
romCBRA.pdf
The Act is the essence of free - market natural resource
conservation; it in no way regulates how people can
develop their land but transfers the full cost from Federal
taxpayers to the individuals who choose to build.
13.23
The Comp Plan Update references the establishment of the
Beth Ramsay-
$0.
./
CBRS Act in 1982, and does not to reference the
Vickrey 2/4/13
Included
Reauthorization of the Act in 2000 which codified the criteria
in 13.3
t 1
for determining the developed (or "undeveloped ") status of
an area for purposes of inclusion under the Act.
4of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.24
Review and determine any potential impacts associated
Beth Ramsay-
$0.
Q P
with the suggestion to: ADD the (following) legal definition
Vickrey 2/4/13
Included
of "developed" for purposes of application of the CBRS Act
in 13.3
` 1
and any local overlay, as is so noted in the CBRS ACT
�V
reauthorization of 2000, page 18, reference 6.
http:// www. fws .gov /habitatconservation /CBRA Digital Map
ping Pilot Proiect.pdf
"47 FR 35708 'A density threshold of roughly one structure
per five acres of fastland is used for categorizing a coastal
barrier as developed All or part of a coastal barrier will be
considered developed, even when there is less than one
structure per five acres of fastland, if there is a full
complement of infrastructure in place ... A full complement
of infrastructure requires that there be vehicle access to
each lot or building site plus reasonable availability of a
water supply, a waste water disposal system, and electrical
service to each lot or building site. "
"50 FR 8700 states 'A man -made structure is defined as a
walled and roofed building constructed in conformance with
Federal, State, or local legal requirements, with a projected
ground area exceeding two hundred square feet." This
criterion is codified in P.L. 106 -514 Sec. 2 where a
structure is defined as "a walled and roofed building, other
than a gas or liquid storage tank, which is principally above
ground and affixed to a permanent foundation; and covers
an area of at least 200 square feet."
13.25
Precedent:
Sheila Mullins
$0.
-�
We need to keep in mind that any additional permitted
218/13
Included
ed
in
development or intensification of a current use on coastal
barrier islands will set a precedent that may prove to be
costly and indefensible in court should it appear that there
was "spot zoning" or other irregularities.
13.26
Review infrastructure expansion in areas designated as a
Alicia Putney
$22,280
CBRS unit and evaluate whether allowing infrastructure
representing
expansion would change the community character in any of
Solar
the areas that are designated CBRS units or where
Community @
infrastructure would run through other areas to a CBRS
BOCC meeting
units.
13.27
What non -CBRS policies in the Comp Plan will help protect
Kandy Kimble
$0. Seed`
�1
No Name Key's community character as an off —grid island
2/8/13
Item
c `
if the CBRS policies in the Comp Plan are removed?
13.29
below.
5of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.28
What non -CBRS ordinances in the Monroe County Code
Kandy Kimble
$0. See
will protect No Name Key's community character as off -grid
2/8/13
Item
if the CBRS overlay ordinance is weakened or removed?
13.29
below.
13.29
List the aspects of community character that could change
Putney/ Kimble
$2,400
on No Name Key if the island were to be brought onto the
comments
electric grid (visual effects, noise, etc). Qualitatively
reworded by
K &S 2/22/13
identify whether these aspects would likely have a
positive, negative, or neutral effect on community
character.
13.30
Historically, how have the LDRs and the development
Solar
$0.
review process enhanced community character of low
Community of
included
energy consumption residences and off -grid residences in
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.26
low- density natural areas within the Florida Keys? (i.e.
energy conservation elements in design, acquisition areas,
etc.)
13.31
Historically, how have the LDRs and the development
Solar
$0.
review process protected the natural resources of CBRS
Community of
included
units? (i.e. Areas of Critical County Concern (ACCC),
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.26
threatened /endangered species, infrastructure availability,
platted infill bonuses, CBRS, acquisition areas, off -grid,
energy consumption elements, etc.)
13.32
How is the Year 2010 Comprehensive Land Use Plan land
Solar
$6,320
use determinant "enhancement of community character"
Community of
being implemented today?
NNK 2/8/13
13.33
What data and analysis was used to justify the various
changes in the ROGO and NROGO, which served to
Solar
Community of
$6,040
weaken the Code regarding the existing level of protection
NNK 2/8/13
of Community Character and Coastal Barrier Resources
System units within the County, with the adoption of the Tier
System in 2007?
13.34
What data and analysis could be used to justify changing
Solar
$0.
the Comp Plan or the Code regarding the current level of
Community of
included
protection of Community Character and Coastal Barrier
NNK 2/8/13
in 13.26
Resources System units within the County?
13.35
Protect Community Character: The No Name Key Solar
Sheila Mullins
$0.
Community and its unique character need to be nurtured
2/8/13
Included
and protected. This community is living an ideal to which we
in 13.26
can all aspire, the reduction of our carbon footprint.
6of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.36
Carrying Capacity: In 1998 or 1999 the Army Corps of
Engineers did an exhaustive Carrying Capacity Study. 1
think this study should be referenced in any decision
making process because in the time that has elapsed since
the study, things have gotten worse, not better, from a
development standpoint.
Sheila Mullins
2/8/13
$0.
Included
in 13.26
13.37
1 see many consequences to the environment if any
Anne Press
$0.
additional changes are made.
2/4/13
Included
The concerns I have are as follows:
in 13.26
1. The Florida Keys has developed quickly over the last
century and trends are to encourage further development
without responsible consideration to study the impacts to
our native plants, wildlife and people's additional
construction development over this time period.
2. The build environment impacts the natural habitat for
plants and animals by effecting their fragile ecosystems.
These changes cause plants to be destroyed and animals
to loss their food supply. Often times our fragile natural
water supply systems is changed forever because of water
runoff and tidal currents which carry sedimentation and
pollution out to sea.
3. Additional human construction causes additional traffic ,
safety concerns because of limited road availability to
include hurricane evacuation. The death toll for our
protected species would go up along with humans and our
native plants would be compromised.
4. The Federal programs that are in place as of 2012 would
be compromised because the county is making decisions
without all governmental departments working with the
process for additional direction to new modifications on the
Land comprehensive plan and the LDR polices regarding
the CBRS plan now in place.
5. Any building construction effects water quality. Our
bridges and roads and buildings create the ground to
becoming impervious. The water is running back into the
ocean without the natural filtering effect of the land. The
results are long lasting and degrading to water quality.
In conclusion, do not change what is in place regarding the
land comprehensive plan other Governmental agencies
need to be involved and plan studying on cause and effect
for years to adjust our present plan. Making this land
comprehensive change can jeopardize the future of the
Florida Keys.
7of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.38
1 have had my home on No Name Key for 20 years. In that
Anthony
$0.
time the Comp Plan has helped protect the nature of No
Harlacher 218/13
Included
Name Key. The character of No Name is very special. We
in 13.26
are only here for a moment in time, so why change the
character forever? Solar can provide all the power any of
us need without adding to global warming or our rising sea
levels. The mistake of some who bought on No Name Key,
knowing that there was no power, should not be corrected
by changing the Comp Plan.
13.39
Determine whether the availability of infrastructure
Naja Girard
$5,680
increases potential of development desirability in an area
representing
O�
that current does not have infrastructure.
Last Stand @
BOCC meeting
13.40
Evaluate the definition of "development" and determine
Bart Smith @
$2,840
whether it includes infrastructure (water, sewer, roads,
BOCC meeting
electric, cable, telephone), thereby being an improvement
requiring County permitting or compliance with County
Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Policy
13.41
Review and determine any potential impacts associated
Beth Ramsay-
$1,640
with the suggestion to: Remove all references to utility
Vickrey 2/4113
companies, or utilities as being development, in the CBRS
sections of the Comp Plan and LDR's.
13.42
Determine whether the FWS issued coordination letter with
Alicia Putney
$1,640
the Electric Company indicates no further review under
representing
County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code
Solar
is necessary relative to environmental impacts of extension
Community @
of utilities to or through CBRS areas.
BOCC meeting.
13.43
Determine whether Chapter 163.3194 Florida Statutes "(b)
Joyce Newman
$6,240
All land development regulations enacted or amended shall
@ BOCC
be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan.....
meeting
During the interim period when the provisions of the most
recently adopted comprehensive plan, or element or portion
thereof, and the land development regulations are
inconsistent, the provisions of the most recently adopted
comprehensive plan, or element or portion thereof, shall
govern any action taken in regard to an application for a
development order." voids the County portion of the Land
Development Regulations which "prohibits" utility extension
"to or through" CBRS units, when the County
Comprehensive Plan "discourages" utility companies from
expanding infrastructure in CBRS areas.
8of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.44
What is the basis, both legal and non - legal, for amending
Kandy Kimble
$1,640
the CBRS policies and the CBRS Overlay ordinance now?
2/8/13
What is the justification for a change now?
13.45
What are the advantages of modifying the existing policies
Kandy Kimble
$1,200
and regulations regarding CBRS units in Monroe County?
2/8/13
What will be gained by a change now?
13.46
What has changed since 1996 that would justify a
Kandy Kimble
$1,200
modification of the CBRS policies in the Monroe County
2/8/13
Comprehensive Land Use Plan?
13.47
What has changed since 2001 that would justify a
Kandy Kimble
$1,200
modification of the CBRS Overlay ordinance in the Monroe
2/8/13
County Code?
13.48
History of CBRS federal legislation including the date of
Last Stand
$1,640
enactment and a description of the justification for the Act,
2/8/13 Naja
and a summary of data and analysis leading to the Act
Girard
(human life, property damage, environment) as well as how
the Act is implemented to affect development of properties
within CBRS units.
13.49
Comprehensive history of Monroe County legislation
Last Stand
$4,480
pertaining specifically to CBRS units. Include date of
2/8/13 Naja
enactment and description of each particular Comp Plan
Girardj�
provision and LDR. Include a description and history of how
�✓�
CBRS properties have been treated by the County in the
ROGO point system, NROGO point system and the Tier
System, including all pertinent changes to those laws from
the version in place at the time of enactment to the current
version and how each of those laws was implemented to
have an effect on development of properties within CBRS
units.
13.50
Comprehensive accounting showing history of the number
Last Stand
$26,600
and type of development permits issued annually to
2/8/13 Naja
properties within CBRS units (including those which would
Girard
require infrastructure to pass through a CBRS unit). Begin
three to five years prior to the date that the federal Act was
adopted (November 16, 1992) and continue to present.
Show data indexed by CBRS unit number and indicate the
year when each type of infrastructure became available, if
infrastructure is present for each CBRS Unit number
9of10
Feb. 26, 2013 Special BOCC meeting
13.51
Resource Protection
Sheila Mullins
$26,160
2/8113
Study what regulations and definitions regarding the
Coastal Barrier Resource System need to be in place to
maintain or increase the protection which the barrier islands
provide to the Keys in the face of climate change, rising
water levels, and storm surge.
The Comp Plan should PROHIBIT rather than
DISCOURAGE any development on coastal barrier islands.
It would be in our interest to compare our regulations with
those which other coastal communities are now considering
since the advent of Hurricane Sandy.
Our mangroves and barrier islands need increased
protection and not to be compromised by any further
development.
10 of 10