Loading...
Item M5 � M.5 � � �, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS County of Monroe � ��r�i �r � s�� Mayor Heather Carruthers,District 3 The Florida.Keys � � � ������]�j Mayor Pro Tem Michelle Coldiron,District 2 Craig Cates,District 1 David Rice,District 4 Sylvia J.Murphy,District 5 County Commission Meeting June 17, 2020 Agenda Item Number: M.5 Agenda Item Summary #6980 BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Sustainability TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Rhonda Haag (305) 453-8774 11:30 A.M. AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Discussion and direction of the preferred alternative and its options, including input from the municipalities, for the Tentatively Selected Plan developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under the partnership agreement with USACE for investigating coastal storm risk vulnerability for the Florida Keys. ITEM BACKGROUND: This item is to provide updated information to be discussed on Acquisitions, currently valued at $390 Million and tentatively mandatory, which are included in the Non-Structural Measures section of the Draft Feasibility Report. The update will include feedback from municipality's staff gathered on June lst, 2020. Public presentations with each municipality are being scheduled during the next 30-45 days. However, the Draft Feasibility Report is scheduled to be released soon, and input from the BOCC is requested before the release. Options for moving forward with the Draft Feasibility Report: 1) An option USACE suggests is that the USACE move forward with release of the Draft Feasibility Report, but that Monroe consider including additional language in the draft Report that specifies that Monroe County will only be willing to move forward with acquisition as a nonstructural measure if the implementation is voluntary. Monroe County has submitted a waiver request to USACE to pursue voluntary, rather than mandatory, acquisition. That request is under consideration by the USACE. The report would state clearly that the current recommendation would only move forward to a Chiefs Report if that policy waiver were granted. If the waiver is not granted, USACE and Monroe County would then re-visit the recommendation to determine the best path forward, which could potentially be a Locally Preferred Plan. 2) A second option is to request that the USACE delay release of the Monroe County Draft Feasibility Report until the USACE makes a determination on Monroe County's request to allow the acquisitions to be voluntary. The USACE is not recommending this option as a delay in the issuance of the Report will extend the project past the original 3-year schedule, and funding for additional time is not guaranteed, putting the completion of the project in potential jeopardy. Packet Pg. 2350 M.5 3) A third option is to remove the acquisitions at this time, ask that they be transferred to elevations to the extent possible, and that the Plan continue to move forward under a Locally Preferred Option. The public meetings with the municipalities have not yet occurred and therefore feedback is not yet available on their preference to leave them in or not. The following measures currently make up the suite of alternatives, subject to change as the USACE obtains additional information: City Acquisition Elevate Floodproofing Total Islamorada 1 542 288 831 Key Colony 56 253 48 357 Beach Key West 95 2,324 1,883 4,302 Layton 2 31 18 51 Marathon 84 1,003 611 1,698 Monroe 48 2,971 1,004 4,023 Grand Total 286 7,124 3,852 11,262 FEASIBILITY REPORT: The end product of the Feasibility Study will consist of a final Feasibility Report to include National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) documentation, which may authorize new Federal projects for construction focused on protecting the Keys. If funds are appropriated in the future, the federal government would finance 65% of approved projects. The County and the municipalities would be responsible for 35%, which could come from local or State funds. Projects are currently included in each of the municipalities, and Interlocal Agreements will be needed to formalize their participation should the County and municipalities choose to keep the projects in the TSP. If a project other than the project recommended by USACE as being within the Federal Interest is selected, a"Locally Preferred Plan" option can move forward. NEXT STEPS CURRENT SCHEDULE: Date Task May 2020 Briefing to Monroe BOCC for approval (Today) Late May 2020 Draft Feasibility Report and integrated EIS release (slightly delayed) June 2020 u lic meetings held in several locations-throw hour the Keys. Packet Pg. 2351 M.5 (Dote: virtual public meetings are a requirement for-the USACE in moving forward until otherwise notified.) May July 2020 45-day review: public and agency, internal USAGE technical and policy review, Independent External peer Review (contract) September 2020 Agency Decision Milestone Spring 2021 USACE update back to Monroe BOCC Spring 2021 Final Feasibility Report and Integrated EIS release September 2021 Chief of Engineer's Report Beyond 2021 Congressional authorization for construction; request for project appropriations; agreements with non-federal entities necessary for construction PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: 09/19/18: Approval to enter into a Study Agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to initiate a study partnership to investigate storm and sea level rise vulnerability for the U.S. 1 corridor in Monroe County, funded up to $3 Million by the USACE; also, ratification of the Letter of Intent submitted by the County Administrator; request for Chief Financial Officer to sign the Self- Certification of Financial Capability; and authority for the County Attorney and the Mayor to sign related documents. 05/22/19: Presentation update on the partnership agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for investigating storm and sea level rise vulnerability for the Florida Keys to provide the recommended list of alternatives for moving forward. 02/06/20: Presentation under the partnership agreement with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for investigating coastal storm risk vulnerability for the Florida Keys, to present and discuss the list of alternatives under the details of the recommendation for the Tentatively Selected Plan for Monroe County as developed by the USACE. 05/20/20: Approval of preferred alternative and its options for the Tentatively Selected Plan developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) under the partnership agreement with USACE for investigating coastal storm risk vulnerability for the Florida Keys. (BOCC did not vote on the Plan but instead directed staff and USACE to conduct public briefings for the municipalities during their council meetings). Packet Pg. 2352 M.5 CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DOCUMENTATION: FINANCIAL IMPACT: Effective Date of Study Agreement: September 19, 2018 — September 18, 2021 Expiration Date: 3 years after the Effective Date Total Dollar Value of Contract: Please see below. Current estimate of the Project to be constructed is not to exceed $3.8 Billion Total Cost to County: 35% cost share A prior phase included a Study. The terms of the study would be that the County would pay anything above $3 million for study costs. However, the study costs do not exceed $3 million Current Year Portion: $0 Budgeted: No Source of Funds: TBD CPI: N/A Indirect Costs: N/A Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: 35% local cost share Revenue Producing: If yes, amount: Grant: Yes County Match: 35% future match Insurance Required: No. Additional Details: If the County selects an Alternative under the Tentatively Selected Plan, the County will be responsible for 35% of the project costs in the future, which may be shared by other sources and the municipalities (for work in the incorporated areas), if and when the Project moves forward. At this time the project cost is estimated not to exceed $3.8 Billion, leaving a local 35% cost share requirement of$1.33 Billion and the 65% federal cost share at$2.47 Billion. REVIEWED BY: Rhonda Haag Completed 05/31/2020 1:31 PM Pedro Mercado Completed 06/01/2020 8:43 AM Purchasing Completed 06/01/2020 8:48 AM Budget and Finance Completed 06/01/2020 8:54 AM Maria Slavik Completed 06/01/2020 8:59 AM Kathy Peters Completed 06/01/2020 3:48 PM Packet Pg. 2353 M.5 Board of County Commissioners Pending 06/17/2020 9:00 AM Packet Pg. 2354 W � � W N O Z LLJW LLI > J W Q a w Q r_ o i O N Q J S N O a a ,c E W Z I O Uo W 0 O a Z O g i I im _ Q � A y '3 U A= u> -- E'a,o Q Lru- o M O Z �. 9 o — cu � � � °� � a✓ � a� a✓ cu , Cc a °� o o 5, v a✓ a) cu 14-E o > o Z cu in i �_ cu � 'W O L Cc O — N H LL I i i a �. 9 •� N N O > O •O .' O •O O •> O }' 3.0 f6 V f6 V a a � 4-0 O N a s f6 4-0 O N f6 f6 C6 a-•+ ( i > +.+ i > cc cc i i Q .� 0 0 O O J � f6 � � � � i f6 4- � CC � i to O O N O N O Q E +.+ O Cc Q a.., .� N 4-0to . a) ccU E 0 t01) f6 U U 0 f6 f6 O O O O O O I e l 4 a �ll . 9 •V —_ O O .v b OA N — N U O O +.+ O •� U V N O V f6 Vj to N O +-+ O C c6 N O_ O_ f6 TA }' TA v •� f6 f6 f6 f6 r-I - a cr 0 bA bA bA E 4-0 c6 c6 O cc N N 0 f6 N +�.+ O O +�.+ _ N f� M - 7 cc f6 cc f6 U O cc O O> U m ° O N E E CC a� to ' i i O O N �O 0 N U a) a bOA V N +ID �.+ f6 >% > cc —_ J O `S O O > O O 1 i l 4 a �ll . 9 a..' 4— i M c'CS }, cu N � >, �+ o� y � M o � 0 s W U c� > U 70 .0 4— f6 O r U) vi - N N U > :3 cu a a N O N N 0 N U — cc r- (n � •Cc a Z . o o a� s cU U0 a) 0 o a cis o ' .— a a) _ 4-, cCS f6 4— }, +� = •m O N 4 0 0- o 4 cn a J) E cn a--+ I e 4 d . 9 r � i cc cc o LO CL }' +r O M 70 N N O N LO fCs J 0 N O > r 757 O cc O +r ``_ ♦, N N cc 4— cr Q .� " V > N H O cc N � .� a) U CL A E f6 OV N >, O O .� cc Q p •� � N � fCs N � � 4— 5 U N O .c� � 'N N > 4 Y y 1 1 r j . 9 cc o cc W N W N O 1> � , N +r U � N cn cc cc fB c>i N N U N N N �, �p O N � fB >, N U 4+ O cc N fB '0 0 m G cc Q N O i a0. �+iO O QQ ) O O O `~O cNM O 0 fCU iU cn O > U N V N cn O >, N Q D N � UO WCU N O W Co 0 Q m N W Li � O N fi N i Q a A t/1 5 O O cc CDBOA N TA N N O }' O O N O N IH TA N TA N O M M O O M N (U N Q O N N E N +. bA iGA CD N N O 4- cu O OU +1 O N U) O N U) to U) m i 4 1 i �ll . 9 Y i •W el 4� +-' i O Z N t W d W V v �, i cc , E +_+ N E _ 14— \ O cn O �:. -I-J •� h, 'i CU •— c cccc N +•+ CC 14— O cc LL +, U N cc ' c O H � � Y � I i a �. 9 Tm, 3 O N m � U f0 i^,i t: O /�/W/�� N cn � N ce C) N wQ N /w� N Cl)/ 2 U W ° k m m N O Q N o c r— y y 0 o Gi c O c Q2 N U 06 _ � z O � < F- y �}r zJJ m N V w = Z N H � �y QO > � .� LL y (nto � N ~ ~ _ Lo LL od LU Q r { Q z L Z Z H az < OQW o' � aC co V O M LLrn o 00 C) o 0 o O CD CD cfl CD CD CD o o cc O o M L a--+ C a o O t cn � •— C� o a� � � N � p i � � II •0 a.:� � _� N ■ ■ 0 0 Q O p cn CZ cc * 00 `~ +•+ •i O •i y M 'Qo cc O O N O cc _ _ > cc Cc Lo Cl)cc 'v V M CZ C i UAL W _ ca a--+ o �aA Ln cz a) GL . . � — o }, O � � o ca ca o > Cn i CL LLI > o 'c CL i� O o� o� > N cr lO LO Q N Q N cc = W � Q O a--+ C4 M Z � OcnO Q cz E cc Z LL m WLL, N a0 0 0 WO 00 4 I i 4 1 1 I �. 9 N N (6 cc cc Q� �O O > to N fCs N cc O E O Uo N cu cn U 'N j 'N O N N N Lfi p � � O N � O N o o +.+ O r-I 00 O N Q ~ 6c). U Q { U a--+ {� � CU i 0 0 O O to O O to '� O � i cU ( O N U � U N U N (c O � U W N U a� p Q � r-I Q � 00 Q +� 00 +� Cc Q H I` H M Q H N :0A M M o H ❑ ❑ ❑ a� H N 9Y � k I� 4 a 4 1 r �. 9 / / e » / e \ \ \ / � ® \ \ ? ? / \ \ / o t ® � f o 3 y k > / ro/ / \ CD \ \ \ Ln ~ LU \ \ @ 00 3 '\ f f ~ 7 \ 2\22 u .. < ƒ I 2 < LU < ¥ < / / 2 >- 2 O / \ \ i L O O \ / \ \ 2 / \ Lu L < 5 O 2 / 3 2 2 \ > _ > O � } | \ . ! � ! � � [ \ \ � J j \ { \ . . � � [ .