Item G8 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: August 20, 2014 Division: Growth Manaaern
Bulk Item: Yes X No — Department: Building
Staff Contact Person/Phone#: Christine Hurley 289-2519
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Approval of a resolution amending Exhibit 1, to Resolution 440-2011 —"2014
Implementation Plan for the Monroe County Flood Inspection and Compliance Program" to eliminate the
Federal Flood Insurance Inspection Program after the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ended
the program and approving the 2014 Implementation Plan.
ITEM BACKGROUND: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ended the Pilot Insurance
Inspection Procedure on July 1, 2013. It was eliminated from the Code of Federal Register and the County no
longer participates in this pilot program. With the elimination of this program and the passage by the State of
Florida legislature of House Bill 407, which was effective July 1, 2012, the County now has five (5) primary
regulatory programs under its flood plain program:
I. Inspection on Transfer of Ownership (Sale)
2. Limited Square Footage Below Base Flood Elevation(Maximum of 299 square feet)
3. Chapter 122 Land Development Code Floodplain Regulations, as may be amended from time to time to
maintain consistency with FEMA Federal Regulations and State of Florida Building Code Regulations
4. Certificate of Compliance Program
5. Inadvertent observation of illegal structures below base flood elevation in accordance with Florida
Statute 553.79 Section '17(a)
This resolution documents the five (5) programs and will be rendered to FEMA as part of the FEMA
Community Assistance Visits(CAVs)findings responses as a result of the CAVs conducted on:
2/25-26/13 (letters on 5/23/13 and 6/13/13)
8/5/13 (letter on 11/22/13)
2/24-25/14 (no formal letter to date).
Remaining CAV issues are being addressed.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
12-11-11 BOCC adoption of Resolution 440-2011 Implementation Plan for Monroe County Flood Insurance
Inspection and Compliance Program
11-16-11 BOCC review of FEMA response related to Certificate of Compliance Program
6-15-11 BOCC directed staff to develop alternative to inspection on permit process and obtain FEMA guidance
prior to developing ordinance amending floodplain program
BOCC adopted a floodplain ordinance in 1975, which as been modified and amended several times during the
intervening years,
February 17, 2010 the Board adopted Resolution 026-2010, calling on FEMA to end the Pilot Inspection
Program codified at 44 CFR 59.30
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: n/a
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Approval
TOTAL COST: N/A INDIRECT COST: N/A BUDGETED: Yes No
DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE:
COST TO COUNTY:--.- SOURCE OF FUNDS: N/A
REVENUE PRODUCING: N/A AMOUNT PER MONTH Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty ) OMB/Purchasing Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included x Not Required
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM 9
RESOLUTION -2014
A RESOLUTION AMENDING EXHIBIT I OF RESOLUTION NO. 440-2011
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY
APPROVING A 201.4 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE FLOOD
INSPECTION AND COMPLIANCE PROGRAM FOR SUBMITTAL TO THE
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners ("BOCC") adopted Resolution No.
440-2011 on December 14, 2011, approving a revised remedial plan for submittal to the Federal,
Emergency Management Administration (FEMA), to address a change made by the State of
Florida Legislature, adopted in house Bill 407; and,
WHEREAS,the "2011 Revised Implementation Plan for Monroe County Flood
Insurance Inspection and Compliance Program"was subsequently approved by FEMA; and,
WHEREAS, On May 23, 2013 FEMA notified the County of its findings from a
Community Assistance Visit(CAV) performed in late February, 2013; and,
WHEREAS, those findings indicated the Federal Pilot Inspection Procedure had
accomplished the submittal of 5,686 structures for inspection. Inspections were conducted on
2,888 downstairs enclosures of which 2,645 downstairs enclosures were found to be in
compliance and 469 downstairs enclosures were found to be not in compliance. Of the non-
compliant structures 40 were given a 1316 declaration letter, effectively terminating flood
insurance on those properties. There are 2,798 structures that still need to be inspected; of those
41 structures are currently scheduled for inspection. The County has been requested to identify
how the 2,798 structures that did not seek an inspection would be shifted to another program;
and
WHEREAS, On June 4, 2013 County staff met with FEMA officials in Washington DC
and FEMA and the County staff discussed and agreed to maintain the following 5 primary
programs under the Remedial Plan including:
1. Inspection on Transfer of Ownership (sale) Program — sellers are required to obtain
inspections prior to selling their homes so buyers are aware of any illegal
improvements;
2. Maximum of 299 square feet storage enclosure below base flood elevation will be
pen-nitted for new construction (originally implemented by the county in 2004);
3. Certificate of Compliance Program—whereby a compliant structure car► be awarded a
certificate demonstrating it is compliant based on the floodplain regulations in place
at the time it was constructed which is recorded in the County Land records to
indicate the structural improvements that are permitted at the site;
4. Existing floodplain Regulations in Chapter 122 of the Monroe County code will be
maintained or amended in the future to be compliant with Federal Regulations.
5. Inadvertent observation of illegal structures below base flood elevation in accordance
with Florida Statute 553.79 Section 17 (a).
WHEREAS, On June 13, 2013 FEMA notified the County that the Pilot Inspection
Procedure (Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 59.30) for Monroe County
would conclude on July 1, 201.3 and correspondingly requested the County continue to use all
existing compliance and code enforcement options available to them through the adopted flood
damage prevention ordinance (Chapter 122 of the Land Development Code) and the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) regulations and those permitted in Florida Statutes Chapter
553.79 Section 17 (a) that limited local enforcement agencies from requiring an inspection of
any portion of a building, structure, or real property that is not directly impacted by the
construction being proposed, except and unless the proposed construction is:
1. A substantial improvement as defined in Florida Statutes Chapter 161.54 or as
defined in the Florida Building Code;
2. A change of occupancy as defined in the Florida Building Code;
3. A conversation from residential to nonresidential or mixed use pursuant to Florida
Statutes Chapter 553.507 (2) or as defined in the Florida Building Code;
4. An historic building as defined in the Florida Building Code; and
5. Any violation that is inadvertently observed in plain view during the ordinary course
of an inspection conducted in accordance with the prohibition in Florida Statutes
Chapter 553.79 Section 17a.
NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA:
Section 1. The BOCC hereby adopts Exhibit 1 attached hereto "2014 Implementation
Plan for Monroe County Flood Insurance Inspection and Compliance Program".
Section 2. The County Administrator is directed to expeditiously transmit this Resolution
and attached exhibit to the Region IV Office of FEMA.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe County,
Florida, at a regular meeting held on the day of 2014.
Mayor Sylvia Murphy
Mayor Pro Tern Danny Kolhage
Commissioner Heather Carruthers
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner David Rice
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
Mayor Sylvia Murphy
(SEAL)
ATTEST: Amy Heavilin, Clerk EE COU ATTORNEY
n D 0 FO
Deputy Clerk
U 11 Wr R
'S
SAA ORA GER
AWST
F/F
EXHIBIT 1
2014 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE MONROE COUNTY
FLOOD INSPECTION AND COMPLIANCE PROGRAM
Flood Insurance Inspection Program
Monroe County has 5 Flood Inspection Programs including:
1. Inspection on Transfer of Ownership (Sale)
2. Limited Square Footage Below Base Flood Elevation (Maximum of 299 square feet)
3. Chapter 122 Land Development Code Floodplain Regulations, as may be amended from time to time to maintain
consistency with FEMA Federal Regulations and State of Florida Building Code Regulations
4. Certificate of Compliance Program
S. Inadvertent observation of illegal structures below base flood elevation in accordance with Florida Statute 553.79
Section 17(ai)
Actions to Ensure No New Additional Illegal Structures
The County through its County Growth Management Division will implement the following actions, consistent with the
Florida Statutes, to ensure that any new conflicts between the way structures were originally permitted and with the
flooidplain regulations are resolved timely:
1) Inspection on Transf_qr of OwnershilR Program, Maintain the existing floodplain regulations and appropriate
sections of the County Code to require that any residential structure having a downstairs enclosure with an opaque
wall covering have a County compliance inspection prior to transfer of property (sale); and to provide that such
inspections required prior to the transfer of property can be conducted, at the discretion of the property owner, by
either the County staff or a registered architect or professional engineer. [The requirement for an inspection prior to
the transfer of property does not also require that the property be brought into compliance prior to transfer or,
subsequent to transfer. The sole intent of this Inspection is to provide information for recording and monitoring
improvements to downstairs enclosures subject to the County's floodplain regulations. This inspection is not intended
to be used to identify or prosecute any other unpermitted Improvements that are not subject to the floodplain
regulations.]
2) Limited Square Footage Below Base Flood Elevation (Maximum of 299 square feet) — implemented in
2004. The County floodplain regulations and appropriate sections of the County Code require that any construction
that occurred after the implementation date in 2004, within unincorporated Monroe County, limit the amount of
square footage that can be used for storage to 299 square feet below base flood elevation.
3) Chapter 122 Land Development Code Floodplain Regulations, as may be amended from time to time to
maintain consistency with FEMA Federal Regulations and State of Florida Building Regulations. Maintain
the existing floodplain regulations to allow the expansion or structural alteration of the elevated portion of any
residential structure non-conforming with the floodplain regulations contingent upon the following conditions as
appropriate: a) the improvement is not substantial as defined under the floodplain regulations; b) a pre-permitting
Inspection is completed by the County to document the extent of the non-conformity; and, c) if within a"V"zone, the
submittal of a professional engineer's or registered architect's sealed certification that the non-conforming
improvements to the downstairs enclosure do not subject the elevated portion of the structure to increases structural
damage.
4) Certificate of_-Compliance Program. This program has been established to provide a proactive approach to
recognizing compliant structures within the County to assist buyers in real estate transactions. The process for the
program is found below:
a. Obtaining data from the Monroe County Property Appraiser which will identify all single family residences
which contain enclosures that are identified as living area on the ground floor. Once this data is captured,
technical staff will deduct all the parcels that have already received inspections via the pilot program, transfer
of ownership program, or the previously applicable inspection on building permit program, and been made
compliant.
b. The remaining property owners will be notified via mail that an inspection is required in order to verify
compliance with the Monroe County Floodplain Ordinance.
Page 1 of 2
c. Once the owners obtain this inspection, and are compliant, they will receive a Certificate of Compliance. This
is a proactive opportunity for property owners to receive evidence that they have a compliant structure which
will create a positive market condition. If an owner has a non-compliant structure, they will be notified of all
the required corrections to the enclosure to become compliant with the permit authorizing the construction,
OR the violation will be forwarded to the Code Compliance Department for prosecution.
d. Once a property is compliant, the County will provide a non-conversion agreement (with a corresponding
drawing attached) to be signed by the property owner and recorded by the county in the County land records
so buyers of properties understand what has been approved for areas below base flood elevation.
e. This non-conversion agreement will provide protection to future buyers through title work. Every two years
an updated potential ground floor enclosure list will be reviewed, and any changes to the Property Record that
Indicate illegal construction below base flood elevation will go through the inspection process outlined above
again.
f. The County may also consider obtaining a list of all properties that have transferred ownership and any such
property that failed to obtain the required inspection will be contacted for inspection.
g. New construction that contains any type of below base flood elevation enclosure, will be required to record a
"Notice of Non-Conversion"to the property, which should alleviate this problem in the future.
h. Conduct required inspections of downstairs enclosures as stipulated in Actions #1 - #3 above.
I. Continue to vigorously pursue code enforcement action for violation of the County floodplain regulations, for
properties developed after the Flood Insurance Rate Maps were implemented, through code enforcement and
the normal permitting process, including prosecution of owners of structures, where property tax records
and/or evidence from inspections provide probable cause of a violation.
j. Request that FEMA provide the County with a "Submit to Rate" for any applications for new flood insurance
policies on previously uninsured properties with a possible violation, so that the County may pursue
compliance under code enforcement proceedings, or through a Section 1316 declaration.
k. Maintain existing floodplain regulations to only allow enclosing with opaque materials of downstairs enclosures
of 299 square feet or less in area.
I. Request the Monroe County Appraiser to provide the County Growth Management Division with an annual
update by residential property owner from the County property tax records of the changes in the habitable
floor area of downstairs enclosures, if feasible and practical.
m. Identify and compile for Monroe County's flood insurance Inspection and compliance program a list of all
structures that fail to come into compliance and submit a quarterly progress report to FEMA beginning July,
2003.1
n. Evaluate Monroe County's Flood Insurance Inspections and Compliance Program by July 1, 2012, and if
necessary, develop and implement further remedial actions with FEMA's approval, to ensure enforcement of
the County's floodplain regulations.
5) Inadvertent observation of illegal structures below base flood elevation - Florida Statute 553.79 Section 17
(a) that limited local enforcement agencies from requiring an inspection of any portion of a building, structure, or real
property that is not directly impacted by the construction being proposed, except and unless the proposed
construction is:
1. A substantial improvement as defined in Florida Statute 161.54 or as defined in the Florida Building Code;
2. A change of occupancy as defined in the Florida Building Code;
3. A conversion from residential to nonresidential or mixed use pursuant to Florida Statute 553.507 (2) or as
defined in the Florida Building Code;
4. An historic building as dlefined in the Florida Building Code.
Any violation that is inadvertently observed in plain view during the ordinary course of an inspection conducted in
accordance with the prohibition in Section 17 of F.S. 553.79 may be issued a notice of violation for an illegal
improvement.
The County Growth Management Division staff has the sufficient resources to implement the above program.
Page 2 of 2
U.&Department of Homeland,Semuiry
Mg1on IV
3003 Ch=b1eeTbd=Road
Adwa,Ga 30341
FEMA
May 23,2013
Mr. Roman Gastesi Jr.
Monroe County Administrator
I 100 Simonton Street, Suite 205
Key West,Florida 33040
Reference: National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP)Community Assistance Visit(CAV)
Report of Findings
Dear W. Gastesi:
This is to provide you with the findings of the CAV that the Department of Homeland Security's
Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)conducted in late February 2013. The
purpose of this visit was to evaluate the effectiveness of floodplain management and other
programs under the participatory requirements of the NFIP and to verify implementation of the
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives(RDAs)related to requisite consultation under the
Endangered Species Act,as well as the Pilot Inspection Procedure.
We appreciate the cooperation, assistance,and hospitality extended by Mr. Jerry Smith,Monroe
County Chief Building Official;Ms. Mary Wingate and Mr. Brian Corcoran,both Senior
Moodplain Coordinators;Mr.Michael Roberts, Senior Administrator, Environmental Resources;
and Dr. Laurie MeHargue,Environmental Scientist during this visit-
We commend you for adopting on April 4,2004,a higher regulatory floodplain management
standard to limit the size of the floodprone enclosures below the lowest floor in A-Zones,and
those below the lowest horizontal structural member of the lowest floor in V-Zones to 299
square feet. Implementation of this standard perhaps was instrumental in discouraging property
owners from the conversion of these enclosures into noncompliant,habitable areas.
We reviewed the following as apart of this visit:
holementation of the RPAs
As apart of the development permit referral(to the US]Fish and Wildlife Service)process,dated
July 30,2012,Monroe County is using the Species Focus Area Assessment Form to identify
species potentially aff-ected by the proposed development activities in areas of special flood
hazard. The species listed on this form include Eastern Indigo Snake,Key Deer,Key Largo
Woodrat and Cotton Mouse,Key Tree Cactus, Lower Kays Marsh Rabbit,Schaus Swallowtail
Butterfly, Silver Rice Rat, Silver Rice Rat in Critical habitat,and Stock Island Tree Snail.
wwwAma.gov
Nft.Roman Gastesi Jr.
Page 2
This permit referral process included detailed internal review procedures and a flowchart,
starting from the permit intake to issuing notice-to-proceed. Monroe County is using the
CommunityPlus software,which contains triggers for hold on the permit to allow for the
biologist's review of the proposed development. The process also includes checks to determine
if a deed restriction to prohibit free roaming cats is required.The County staff also is providing a
free roaming cat brochure as a part of the written procedures for implementing the RPAs. We
have determined that Monroe County's implementation of the RPAs is adequate.
Status of the Mot bmection Procedure
As of the date of this visit,the status of the pilot inspection procedure was provided with the
following-,
Description Number of
structures
Total number submitted to the NFIP for inspection 52686
Total number the County inspected 2,888
Number found in compliance(either inspected and are brought
into compliance OR submitted in error(they were compliant 2,645
prior to inspection-above BFE or unenclosed)
Number inspected and NOT yet in compliance(one year period, 469
1316A or under Code Enforcement)
Number currently under 1316 deli tion 40
Number that still need Ipslection 2z798
Number awaiting inspection 41
We reviewed three structures that are undergoing the inspection process:
1. 248 Spanish Main Drive, Cudjoe Key:Inspection took place on January 3,2013; owners
have until January 3,2014,to bring the structure into compliance with the County's
ordinance requirements,
2. 232 Upper Matocumbe Road,Key Largo: Impection took place on January 10,2013;
owners have until January 10,2014,to bring the structure into compliance with the
County's ordinance requirements.
3. 8 Sapphire Drive,Big Coppitt Key. Inspection took place on January 15,2013;owners
have until January 15,2014,to bring the structure into compliance with the County's
ordinance requirements.
The County staff indicated that the number of inspections significantly dropped over the last
year,probably because of the property owners shopping for other insurance agents or dropping
the NFIP flood insurance policy altogether.However,these results indicate 2,798 structures
originally identified for inspection under this pilot procedure still remain to be inspected. We are
proposing to shift these approximately 2,798 structures from the pilot inspection procedure to the
normal complia=process under the NFIP. This is predicated,on the assumption that the Pilot
Inspection Procedure will be terminated on June 28,2013, as we previously communicated to
Monroe County Mayor Rice on December 29,2011. Please provide us with a remedial plan of
action for these structures to be brought into compliance,to the maximum extent practicable,
Mr.Roman Gastesi Jr.
Page 3
with the County's floodplain management ordinances,as well as the NFIP requirements by June
17,2013.
Elevation Certificates (ECs)
We reviewed 25 ECs and our review findings are included in,Enclosure I (Elevation Certificates
Review). Only one,for the structure located at 26 South Andros Road,was completed
accurately and in full. Considering this,we conducted a training session for both Monroe
County Communities'representatives and licensed surveyors in Marathon on March 29,2013.
Mr. Clint Ansenault and Mr. Steve Sullivan of Monroe County were in attendance. This
provided an excellent opportunity to have the surveyors and reviewers in the same room to
discuss issues and come to an agreement on proper way the for surveyors to accurately complete
the EC.We provide you with the following general guidelines for reviewing the ECs for accurate
completion by the certifier and review by Monroe County staff:
I• The new EC becomes mandatory and the previous version becomes obsolete on August
1,2013. The expiration date for the new EC is July 31, 1015.
• The longitude coordinate for Monroe County communities is West or negative. Latitude
and longitude coordinates may be documented in degrees only with four decimal places
or in degrees,minutes and seconds with one decimal for seconds'pad.
• The certifier needs to seal, sign and date in the box shown in Section D,in accordance
with Florida licensing regulations.
• An enclosure used for parking of vehicles directly underneath an elevated building is not
considered an attached garage;it is considered to be an enclosure. Section AS of the EC
applies;not Section A9.
• The elevations documented in Section C2 must be consistent with the building diagram
number in A7,and the building diagram number must be representative of the structure.
• For maintaining records as a part of participation in the NFIP,we review the finished-
construction EC;not the one based on building under-construction, or that based on
building construction drawings (Section CI).
• If flood openings are not applicable,certifier needs to document'not applicable' or N/A;
not by showing-them as zero.
• Engineered flood openings require professional certification to be attached to the EC.
• The EC may be only a part of compliance documentation;it may include,but are not
limited to,Floodproofing Certificate,and V-Zone Certifleate and their corresponding
designs,certifications for engineered flood openings,and State,Federal and other
permitslapprovals.
• A certified EC or any other such document may not be altered even by what may seem
like insignificant change(e.g.hand correction of building diagram number).
• All elevations need to be documented to only one decimal place.
• Attach other certifications and maintain their corresponding designs in records.
Please provide us with the revised,newly-prepared elevation certificates for the structures listed
in Enclosure 1 by June 28,2013.
Mr.Roman Crastesi Jr.
Page 4
Flood Proofine Certfficates ff CA and cormma&&desim.and operation and
ma. tenance iplans for nonresidential structures In A-Zones
We reviewed 14 Ks and our review findings are included in Enclosure 2(Floodproofing
Certificates keview).
Only one PC was provided with the required design;however,the elevations shown on the PC
are not consistent with those shown on the EC. The remaining 13 did not provide any design or
the operation and maintenance plan to assure,continued viability of the floodproofing measures.
Please provide us with the revised,new floodproofing certificates with corresponding design and
operation and maintenance plans by June 28,2013.
Alternative desiggs for flood openInO for elevated structures in A-Zones.,if different from
the NFIP criteria,since March 2008
When flood openings other than those meeting the NFIP mininiuni design and performance
requirements,they must be certified by a Florida-licensed Professional Engineer or an Architect
as provided for by the State licensing regulations. This certification must be attached to the EC.
V-Zone certifications for structures in coastal high hazard areas since March 2008
We reviewed three V-Zone Certificates(VCs)for the structures located at:
1. 144 Blue Harbor Drive,
2. 806 Narragansett Lane, and
3. 16 Hazel Street.
Our review findings are included in Enclosure 3 (V-Zone Certificates Review). None contained
the required design for pile/column foundation design and anchoring,as well as breakaway wall
design. One of-them was constructed with masonry walls with mortar and reinforcement as
breakaway walls,which is a violation of the fi-ce-of-obstruction requirements of the coastal high
hazard areas. Please provide us with the revised,new V-Zone certificates, along with their
corresponding designs by June 17,2013.
Variance actions,both zrarated and denied,since March 2008
We reviewed four variances among which the Board of County Commissioners granted on two,
denied one and one is in litigation. Our review findings are included in Enclosure 4(Variance
Review).
The BOCC granted the variance,with a restrictive covenant for the structure at 23048 Sailfish
Lane(Brown family),despite,staff recommendation for denial,on September 15,2010,to allow
for converting the enclosure that is approximately five feet below the base flood elevation from a
recreational use to a one-bedroom suite, including storage and laundry areas. Upon request by
Monroe County staff,our office advised that this variance was not justified. This is also
inconsistent with the NFIP requirements that were specifically listed in its letter of October 29,
1987,to Mayor Hernandez after a finding that Monroe County had established a patters of
Mr.Roman Gastesi Jr.
Page 5
issuing unjustified variances. While a single,elevation variance for one structure may not result
in FEMA imposing sanctions for lack of compliance,any additional such variance or other form
of noncompliance may. NFIP sanctions include probation and subsequent suspension in
accoi:dance with Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 59.24.
I- The BOCC denied a variance for the structure located at 9 Aquamarine Drive on Big
Coppitt Key The owners requested this variance for converting an unpermitted lower
level enclosure to a habitable area based on their physical limitations. The BOCC denied
the request on November 27,2012,
2. The structure located at 629 Island drive in Key Largo. As of the date of this visit,we
understand that this was in litigation. Please let us know of its final disposition-
3. The structure located at 212 Anchor Drive(Racquet Club at Ocean Reef,Inc.)in Key
Largo. The BOCC granted the variance to allow 600 square-foot enclosure, more than
twice the size allowed by the County ordinance,below the lowest floor.
Procedures for reAew and determination of"substantial damallell and associated
structures
A total of 8,015 NFIP claims were made by Monroe County policyholders for paid flood losses
of$169,810,315. Among these, 1,081 were categorized as substantial damage claims.
Enclosure 5 lists only 46 of these claims that equaled or exceeded$200,000. By June 28,2013,
please evaluate these structures'permit records,and provide us with the County's determination
of whether or not these damages constituted substantial damage and their corresponding Ecs,
FCs,or V-Zone cer0cations.
Manufactured homes
As of the date of this visit, since Match 2008 Monroe County issued 36 manufactured home
permits(Enclosure 6)and 24 modular home(Enclosure 7)permits. Please provide us with the
ECs,FCs,and Ws,as appropriate,for-these structures by June 28,2013.
SlhMi_t-for-Rate Structures
Submit-for-Rate structures are those for which the lowest floor was determined to be two or
more feet below the base flood elevation through flood insurance rating process. Enclosures 8
and 9 provide details of such structured identified in Monroe County;enclosure 8 contains
historical data,whereas enclosure 9 is specifically for 2010 and 2011.
We request that you the County review the permit files to investigate these structures and
determine the cause—if an elevation variance was,granted,potential error on the part of the
insurance mechanism,or it is a violation of Monroe County ordinances. Please forward to us
your action plan for remedying the violations by June 28,2013.
Mr.Roman Gastcsi Jr,
Page 6
Maintenance of fleodylain management record
We reviewed a sample of Monroe County records through its development permit files for both
residential and nonresidential structures in A-and V-Zones,including some regarding the
implementation of the RPAs for requisite consultation under the Endangered-Species Act, as
amended. We have found that the County's records maintenance was at its best regarding the
implementation of the RPAs. However, floodplain management records for the nonresidential
structures that were floodproofed in.A-Zones did not contain the design details required under
Section 122-4(b)2 of the County's floodplain management ordinance. Similarly,the records for
the V-Zone structures did not contain the design details required-under Section 122-4(b)5 of the
County's floodplain management ordinance. We strongly recommend that Monroe County
maintain these designs that form the basis for the certifications by the licensed professional
engineers or architects.
Tour of the Special Flood Hazard Areas
We conducted,a tour of the areas of special flood hazard. This included some structures that
were categorized as submit-for-rate structures along Ocean Shores Drive,Bostwick Drive,and
Adams Drive,in Key Largo. All of them were found to have validated previously identified
violations through the insurance mechanism.
We also reviewed two structures along Adams Drive—1042 Adams Drive and 1016 Adams
Drive:
1. The structure located at 1042 Adams Drive is a new VE-Zone structure-under
construction that included more than 6-inch thick floor slab,nonbreakaway walls,and
stubbing for the utilities below the base flood elevation. This structure violates
provisions of Section 122-4(b)5 ofthe County's floodplain management ordinance and
must be brought into compliance.
2. The structure is located at 1016 Adams Drive. This structure included two floodprone
apartments below the lowest floor. The NFIP restricts the use of the floodprone
enclosures solely to parking of vehicles, storage and building access. (Monroe County
floodplain,management ordinance, Sections 122.3 (Lowest Floor), 122.4(Standards for
issuance of building permits in areas of special flood hazard)). This structure violates
Sections 122.3 and 122.4 of the County's floodplain management ordinance and must be
brought into compliance.
The outside examination of the structures along Ocean Shores Drive, Corrine Place,Lore Lane
Place, and Ocean Bay Drive in Key Largo revealed many structures in V-Zone to contain
noncompliant enclosures,below the lowest horizontal structural member of the lowest floor,that
are not solely used for parking of vehicles, storage and building access. These are in violation of
the Monroe County floodplain,management ordinance, Section 122.4(b)5 as well as those of the
NFIP requirements,from Title 44 of the Code ofF ederal Regulations,Section 60.3 (e). Please
forward to us your action plan for remedying the violations by June 28,2013.
We appreciate your diligence in providing us with the remedial action plan by June 28,2013.
This plan will need to clearly identify specific milestones,target dates,and entities responsible
for achieving them.
Mr.Roman Gastesi Jr.
Page 7
We stand ready to offer any assistance you may require in achieving compliance with NFIP
regulations and more restrictive Monroe County floodplain management ordinance requirements.
Compliance with the NFIP requirements is a prerequisite to initiate participation in the
Community Rating System Program.
Ifyou or your staff have any questions or require additionO information,please call Prasad
Inmula at(770)220-8841 or he may be contacted by e-mail at prasad.inmula@fema.dhs.gov.
Sincerely,
Susan W.Wilson, CFM,Chief
Floodplain Management&Insurance Branch
Mitigation Division
U.S.DqWftftft of Hamehod Securfty
WaMapm.DC "41n
FEMA
JUN 13 2013
The Honorable David Rice
Mayor,Monroe County JUN 2013
Board of County Whitehead Street Commissioners V014fJOL'coup ATTOM Y
530
Key West,Florida 33040
Dear Mayor Rice:
In our letter dated December 29,2011,we informed you that the Pilot Inspection Procedure(Title 44
of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 59.30)for Monroe County was extended until June 28,
2013. This letter is to inform you that the Pilot Inspection Procedure will conclude efhcdve July 1,
2013.
We commend you for adopting a higher regulatory standard in the County's floodplain management
ordinance that limits the size of the floodprom enclosures to 299 square feet. We expect that this
has discouraged property owners from converting these enclosures into habitable areas.
It is imperative that the County continue to use all existing compliance and code enforcement
options available to them through the adopted flood damage prevention ordinance,and other
ordinawAs,to ensure that development in the County remains compliant with the County's
ordinances as well as the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP)regulations. While Monroe
County has fulfilled a majority of its obligations under 44 CFR§59.30,approximately 2,500
structures located in areas of special flood hazard still remain to be inspected.
The amended Florida Statute 553.79 Section 17(a)limited local enforcement agencies,building code
administrators,inspectors or other official or entity from requiring the inspection of any portion of a
building,structure,or real property that is not directly impacted by the construction,erection,
alteration,modification,repair,or demolition of the building,structure,or real property as a
condition of issuance of a one-or two-fiunily residential building permit. Section 17(b)limits the
applicability of section 17(a)as follows:
1. A substantial improvement as defined in Florida Statute 161.54 or as defined in the Florida
Building Code.
2. A change of occupancy as defined in the Florida Building Code.
3. A conversion from residential to nonresidential or mixed use pursuant to Florida statute
553.507(2)or as defined in the Florida Building Code.
4. An historic building as defined in the Florida Building Code.
Further,this subsection did not prohibit(Section 17(c) 1.)a local enforcing agency,or any local
building code administrator, inspector,or other official or entity, from citing any violation
inadvertently observed in plain view during the ordinary course of an inspection conducted in
accordance with the prohibition in Section 17(a). Section 17(c)provides for additional situations of
WWW ramlov
2
JUN 13 2M
inspection also. This suggests that the Monroe County code enforcement officials do have adequate
avenues to inspect potential violations of its flood damage prevention ordinance even in the case of
one-to two-family residential buildings.
FEMA,will closely monitor NFIP/Endangered Species Act compliance through the semiannual
Community Assistance Visits" It is our intention not to resurrect the Inspection Procedure ifthere
are future compliance issues. Instead,we will impose the NFIP"s traditional sanctions—probation
and suspension—in accordance with 44 CFR§59.24, should the degree of noncompliance warrant.
We appreciate your diligence in implementing and enforcing the County's floodplain management
and other ordinances to prevent noncompliance for the development activities,including new
construction and substantial improvements as defined in 44 CFR§59.1, that are located in area of
special flood hazard. We continue to stand ready to offer any assistance your staffmay need in
achieving compliant floodplain development.
If your staff has any questions,please continue to contact Dr.Prasad Inmula by telephone at(770)
220-8841 or by email at prasad.jnMu mLghg. y
_L ego . We look forward to working with you.
I@L _
Sincerely,
David L.Miller
Associate Administrator
Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration
cc: Bob Shillinger,Monroe County Attorney
Jerry Smith,Monroe County Building Official
Joy Duperault, Florida NFIP Coordinator
U.S.Department of Homeland Security
Region IV
3003 Chamblee Tucker Road
Mania,Georgia 30341
FEMA
November 22,2013
Mr. Roman Gastesi Jr.
Monroe County Administrator
1100 Simonton Street,Suite 205
Key West, Florida 33040
Reference: National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP)Community Assistance Visit(CAV)
Report of Findings
Dear Mr.Gastesi:
This is to provide you with the findings of the CAV that the Department of Homeland Security's
Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA)conducted August 5-6, 2013. The purpose of
this visit was to evaluate the effectiveness of floodplain management and other programs under
the participatory requirements of the NFIP and to verify implementation of the Reasonable and
Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)related to requisite consultation under the Endangered Species Act,
as well as the Pilot Inspection Procedure.
We appreciate the cooperation, assistance, and hospitality extended by Mr. Jerry Smith,Monroe
County Chief Building Official;Ms. Mary Wingate and Mr. Brian Corcoran,both Senior
Floodplain Coordinators; Mr. Michael Roberts,Senior Administrator, Environmental Resources;
and Dr.Laurie McHargue, Environmental Scientist,during this visit.
We commend you for adopting on April 4, 2004, a higher regulatory floodplain management
standard to limit the size of the floodprone enclosures below the lowest floor in A-Zones,and
those below the lowest horizontal structural member of the lowest floor in V-Zones to 299
square feet.Implementation of this standard perhaps was instrumental in discouraging property
owners from the conversion of these enclosures into noncompliant,habitable areas.
We reviewed the following as a part of this visit:
Implementation of the RPAs
FEMA recently requested reinitiation of formal consultation on the Biological Opinion,dated
April 30, 2010,under Endangered Species Act(ESA)Section 7. This request is intended to
address the NFIP's effect on newly listed,proposed, and candidate species in Monroe County,
that are under U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(Service)jurisdiction.
As provided in 50 CFR§402.16,reinitiation of formal consultation is required where
discretionary FEMA involvement or control over the action has been retained(or is authorized
by law) and if one or more of the requirements have been met in the Reinitiation Notice in the
Biological Opinion, The particular requirement that has been met in the Reinitiation Notice is
Mr.Rosman Gastesi Jr.
Pace 2
item(4), a new species is listed or critical habitat designated that may be affected by the action.
FEMA also requested initiation of a Conference Report as part of the reinitiation of the
Biological Opinion, in accordance with ESA Section 7(a)(4),on the proposed and candidate
species. According to the Service, if a species is listed that is covered under a Conference
Opinion,the Conference Opinion may be adopted as the final Biological Opinion through a
streamlined confirmation process.
The species included in this new consultation identified as endangered,proposed, or candidate
species are: Miami blue butterfly (Cyclargus 1homasifloridalis); Florida semaphore
cactus (Consolea corallicola), Cape Sable thoroughwort (Chrom olaelia frig strata),
Bartram's scrub hairstreak (Siryinon acis bartrami), Florida leafwing (Anaea troglodyte
floridalis); Big Pine partridge pea (Chaynaecrista Uneata var. keyensis), Blodgett's
silverbush (Argythamnia blodgetiff), Sand flax (Linum arenicola), and Wedge spurge
(Chaniaesyce deltoidea subsp. Serpyllum).
FEMA also recognizes that as part of the reinitiation, the Service intends to evaluate and
issue an amendment to the Biological Opinion that provides take coverage for
individuals conducting relocations of threatened Stock Island tree snails (Orthalicus
roses roses) within authorized project footprints to minimize incidental take of species.
Since the previous CAV of February 25-26, 2013, Monroe County sent 53 "may affect"
determinations to the Service for consultation.We are also receiving copies of the determination
letters from the Service.We visited the environmental mitigation site,along with Dr.McHargue,
in the Sands Subdivision on the Big Pine Key. We have determined that Monroe County's
implementation of the RPAs is adequate.
Status of the Pilot Inspgction Procedure
FEMA terminated the pilot inspection procedure on June 28, 2013. Monroe County provided us
with the status(as of November 19, 2013) as following:
Number of
Description structures
Total number submitted to the NFIP for insEection 5,686
Total number the Count ins cted 2,914
Number found in compliance(either inspected and are brought
into compliance OR submitted in error(they were compliant 2,727
prior to inspection - above BFE or unenclosed)
Number inspected and NOT yet in compliance (one year period, 413
1316d, or under Code Enforcement)
Number currently under 1316 designation 39
Number that never asked for an inspection 2,772
Number awaiting inspection(no longer needed due to
termination of the Pilot Inspection Procedure on June 28,2013) T 41
Mr.➢Zomaan Gastesi Jr.
Page 3
Monroe County indicated 2,727 structures out of 5,686 originally identified for inspection under
this pilot procedure were brought into compliance. We are proposing to shift the remaining 2,959
structures from the pilot inspection procedure to the normal compliance process under the NFIP.
We received the County's remedial plan,dated August 23,2013.
Even though the amended Florida statute 553.79 relating to residential buildings placed
limitations,through section 17 (a),on local enforcement agencies,it did not prohibit (Section 17
(c) 1.) a local enforcing agency,or any local building code administrator, inspector, or other
official or entity, from citing any violation inadvertently observed in plain view during the
ordinary course of an inspection conducted in accordance with the prohibition in Section 17 (a).
Section 17 (c)provides for additional situations of inspection also, which suggests that the
Monroe County code enforcement officials do have adequate avenues to inspect potential
violations of its flood damage prevention ordinance even in the case of one-to two-family
residential buildings.
Elevation Certificates (ECs)
We evaluated your response for the 25 ECs we reviewed during the February 25-26, 2013 CAW
and our review findings are included in Enclosure I (Elevation Certificates Review(Table 1)).
We reviewed 49 ECs as a part of this CAV and our review findings are included in Enclosure 2
(Elevation Certificates Review(Table 2)). We commend your staff's diligence in reviewing the
ECs as one-half of the ECs were completed accurately.
We again provide you with the following general guidelines for reviewing the ECs for accurate
completion by the certifier and review by Monroe County staff-
• The new EC became mandatory and the previous version obsolete on August 1, 2013.
The expiration date for the new EC is July 31,2015.
• The longitude coordinate for Monroe County communities is West or negative. Latitude
and longitude coordinates may be documented in degrees only with four decimal places
or in degrees, minutes and seconds format with one decimal for seconds' part.
• The certifier needs to seat, sign and date in the box shown in Section D, in accordance
with Florida licensing regulations.
• An enclosure used for parking of vehicles is directly underneath an elevated building is
not considered an attached garage; it is considered to be an enclosure. Section A8 of the
EC applies; not Section A9.
• The elevations documented in Section C2 must be consistent with the building diagram
number in A7,and the building diagram number must be representative of the structure.
• For maintaining records as a part of participation in the NFIP, we review the finished-
construction EC;not the one based on building under-construction, or that based on
building construction drawings(Section C I).
• If flood openings are not applicable, certifier needs to document 'not applicable' or N/A;
not by showing them as zero.
• Engineered flood openings require professional certification to be attached to the EC.
• The EC may be only a part of compliance documentation;it may include,but are not
limited to,Floodproofing Certificate, and V-Zone Certificate and their corresponding
Mr.Roman Guslesi Jr�
Page 4
designs, certifications for engineered flood openings, and State,Federal and other
permits/approvals.
• A certified EC or any other such document may not be altered even by what may seem
like an insignificant change (e.g.hand correction of building diagram number).
• All elevations may be documented to only one decimal place.
• Attach other certifications and maintain their corresponding designs in records.
Please provide us with the revised, newly-prepared elevation certificates that demonstrate
compliance with the County requirements for the structures listed in Enclosures I and 2 by
January 10,2014.
Floodproofing Certificates CFCs) and corresponding design, and operation and maintenance
plans for nonresidential structures in A-Zones
No nonresidential structures were permitted to allow floodproofing since the February 2013
CAV. We received your response to previously reviewed 14 FCs during the previous CAV and
our review findings are included in Enclosure 3 (Floodproofing Certificates Review).
Only one FC was provided with the required design for hydrostatic load(structure located at 500
Burton Drive). However, the design did not include hydrodynamic and buoyant loads and the
elevations shown on the FC are not consistent with those shown on the EC.The remaining 13 did
not provide requisite design loads.A majority of the 13 included only the location where the
floodproofing panels are stored and who is in-charge in their operation and maintenance plans to
assure continued viability of the floodproofing measures.Critical elements of floodproofing are
the evacuation of the premises and installation of all floodproofing measures (e.g. panels,gates,
gaskets,sealants)well before the arrival of the impending event.Please provide us with the
revised, new floodproofing certificates with corresponding designs and operation and
maintenance plans by January 10, 2014.
Alternative desions for flood openings for elevated structures in A-Zones,if different fro ra the
NFIP criteria
When flood openings other than those meeting the NFIP minimum design and performance
requirements,they must be certified by a Florida-licensed Professional Engineer or an Architect
as provided for by the State licensing regulations.This certification must be attached to the EC.
V-Zone certifications for structures in coastal high hazard areas
We reviewed three V-Zone Certificates (VCs) for the structures located at:
1. 144 Blue Harbor Drive,
Design detail for the breakaway concrete block wall appears to include reinforcement,which will
prevent the wall from breaking away under lesser magnitude than those loads expected under the
base flood condition.Also, there appears to be a one-inch thick Styrofoam bond breaker at top
and sides of wall but not on the bottom.The V-Zone certification by Mr. Robert Barnes, RAA,
includes only the foundation design and anchoring. It must also include the certification for the
Mr.Roman Gastesi Jr.
Page 5
breakaway wall design. It should be required that the at-grade slab in V-Zones must not contain
any reinforcement and should breakaway into smaller pieces (e.g. Yx 3')under lesser magnitude
loads than those expected during the base flood conditions and not cause any damage to the
principal and adjacent structures. Please provide us with the revised,new V-Zone certification
for both aspects of design and a summary of design loads that form the basis for certification by
January 10,2014.
2. 8016 Narragansett Lane
Design detail for the breakaway concrete block wall appears to include reinforcement,which will
prevent the wall from breaking away under lesser magnitude than those loads expected under the
base flood condition. Also,there appears to be a one-inch thick Styrofoam bond breaker at both
and bottom of the breakaway walls.The V-Zone certification by Mr. Orlando Perez,Jr.,
Architect, includes only the foundation design and anchoring. It must also include the
certification for the breakaway wall design. The at-grade slab appears to contain reinforcement,
which will prevent it from breakaway; it should be required that the at-grade slab in V-Zones
must not contain any reinforcement and should breakaway into smaller pieces (e.g. Yx T) under
lesser magnitude loads than those expected during the base flood conditions and not cause any
damage to the principal and adjacent structures. Please provide us with the revised, new V-Zone
certification for both aspects of design and a summary of design loads that form the basis for
certification by January 10, 2014.
3. 16 Hazel Street.
Design detail for the breakaway concrete block wall appears to include reinforcement,which will
prevent the wall from breaking away under lesser magnitude than those loads expected under the
base flood condition. Also, there appears to be a one-inch thick Styrofoarri bond breaker at top
and sides of wall but not on the bottom.The V-Zone certification by Mr. Robert Barnes,RAA,
includes only the breakaway wall design; it must also include foundation design and anchoring.
It should be required that the at-grade slab in V-Zones must not contain any reinforcement and
should breakaway into smaller pieces(e.g. Yx 3')under lesser magnitude loads than those
expected during the base flood conditions and not cause any damage to the principal and
adjacent structures. Please provide us with the revised, new V-Zone certification for both aspects
of design and summary of design loads that form the basis for certification by January 10,
2014.
Please provide us with the revised, new V-Zone certifications for both foundation design and
anchoring and breakaway walls,along with their corresponding summaries of design loads that
demonstrate compliance with the Monroe County ordinances by January 10,2014.
Variance actions both ranted and denied)
Monroe County indicated that no variances were granted since the February 2013 CAV, as a part
of which we reviewed four variances among which the Board of County Commissioners granted
two,denied one and one was in litigation.Granting of these variances is inconsistent with the
NFIP requirements that FEMA specifically listed in its letter of October 29, 1987,to Mayor
Hernandez after a finding that Monroe County had established a pattern of issuing unjustified
Mr.Roman Gastesi Jr.
Page 6
variances.While a single elevation variance for one structure may not result in FEMA imposing
sanctions for lack of compliance,any additional such variance or other form of noncompliance
may. NFIP sanctions include probation and subsequent suspension in accordance with Title 44
of the Code of Federal Regulations,Section 59.24.
Procedures far review and determination of"sp-bstantial damage' and asgqciated structures
We reviewed the County response to the 46 of the flood insurance claims that equaled or
exceeded $200,000. We thank you for directing us to the correct participating community in
Monroe County for 20 of these structures.
Monroe County indicated for a significant majority of the remaining structures that there were no
permit applications for damage repair. This suggests to us that the County does not yet have
mechanisms in place for evaluating damaged buildings,regardless of the source,for potential
substantial damage determinations. This is a required element for participation in the NFIR By
January 10,2014,please forward to us the procedures the County will implement to evaluate
such building damage and determine potential substantial damage. When it is determined that the
structure sustained substantial damage, the repairs and reconstruction must meet the
requirements for new construction regardless of the extent of repair. Please develop and adopt
mechanisms(e.g.policy, procedure,resolution,ordinance) to include inspection and evaluation
of damaged floodprone buildings to determine potential substantial damage by January 10, 2014,
and forward a copy of it to FEMA.
Manufactured homes
As of the date of this visit,since March 2008,Monroe County issued 36 manufactured home
permits(Enclosure 4) and 44 modular home(Enclosure 5) permits.We reviewed the ECS and V-
Zone certifications for the 36 manufactured homes that the County provided us with and our
review findings are outlined in Enclosure 4(Monroe County Manufactured Homes' Elevation
Certificates review). Similarly, Enclosure 5 contains our review of the certifications for 44
modular homes. Please provide us with the ECs,FCs,and VCs,as appropriate,for these
manufactured and modular homes by January 10,2014.
Submit-for-Rate Structures
Submit-for-Rate structures are those for which the lowest floor was determined to be two or
more feet below the base flood elevation through flood insurance rating process. We previously
requested Monroe County to investigate these for potential violations.Enclosures 8 and 9 that
were part of the February 2013 CAV report of findings provided details of such structures
identified in Monroe County;enclosure 8 contained historical data, 'whereas enclosure 9 is
specifically for 2010 and 2011.However,we received no response.
We request that the County review the permit files to investigate these structures and determine
the cause-if an elevation variance was granted, potential error on the part of the insurance
mechanism, or it is indeed a violation of Monroe County ordinances. Please forward to us your
action plan for remedying the potential violations by January 10, 2014.
W Roman Gasliesi Jr.
Page 7
Maintenance of flP.P-dplain-management records
We strongly recommend that Monroe County maintain, at a minimum, the following
documentation:
• Permit applications;
• Copies of Federal, State,and other permits and/or approvals;
• Elevation Certificates for finished-construction and professional certification of
engineered flood openings,when such flood openings are used, and their corresponding
designs;
• Floodproofing,Certificates along with their designs (to withstand hydrostatic,
hydrodynamic, and buoyant loads associated with the base flood that form the basis for
the certifications by the licensed professionals) and operation and maintenance plans to
assure continued viability of the floodproofing measures;
• V-Zone certifications and corresponding designs ((I)the pile or column foundation and
structure attached thereto is anchored to resist flotation,collapse and lateral movement
due to the effects of wind and water loads acting simultaneously on all building
components, and (2) the breakaway walls' collapse occurs under a water load less than
that which would occur during the base flood) that form the basis for the certifications by
the licensed professionals);
• Damage(from any source) inspection reports for potential substantial damage
determinations, with detailed cost breakdowns for restoration to pre-damaged condition;
• Permit applications that include improvements,especially potential substantial
improvements,with detailed cost breakdowns for proposed improvements and market
values with the City's evaluation; and
• Applications for variances,both granted and denied,along with the County's evaluation
and written notification to the applicant.
Tour of the Special Flood Hazard Areas
We conducted a tour of the areas of special flood hazard during the February 2013 CAV.This
included some structures that we're categorized as submit-for-rate structures along Ocean Shores
Drive,Bostwick Drive, and Adams Drive, in Key Largo. All of them were found to have
validated previously identified violations through the insurance mechanism.However, we
received no response from the County.
We also reviewed two structures along Adams Drive— 1042 Adams Drive and 1016 Adams
Drive:
1. The structure located at 1042 Adams Drive is a new VE-Zone structure under
construction that included more than 6-inch thick floor slab, nonbreakaway was,and
stubbing for the utilities below the base flood elevation.This structure violates provisions
of Section 122-4(b)5 of the County's floodplain management ordinance and must be
brought into compliance.
Mr.Roman Gaslusi Jr.
Page 8
2. The structure is located at 1016 Adams Drive.This structure included two floodprone
apartments below the lowest floor.The NFIP restricts the use of the floodprone
enclosures solely to parking of vehicles, storage and building access. (Monroe County
floodplain management ordinance, Sections 122.3 (Lowest Floor), 122.4(Standards for
issuance of building permits in areas of special flood hazard)).This structure violates
Sections 122.3 and 122.4 of the County's floodplain management ordinance and must be
brought into compliance.
The outside examination of the structures along Ocean Shores Drive,Corrine Place, Lore Lane
Place,and Ocean Bay Drive in Key Largo revealed many structures in V-?one to contain
noncompliant enclosures,below the lowest horizontal structural member of the lowest floor,that
are not solely used for parking of vehicles,storage and building access.These are in violation of
the Monroe County floodplain management ordinance,Section 122.4(b)5 as well as those of the
NFIP requirements, from Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations,Section 60.3(e). Please
forward to us your action plan for remedying the violations by January 10, 2014.
We appreciate your diligence in providing us with the remedial action plan by January W,2014.
This plan will need to clearly identify specific milestones, target dates, and entities responsible
for achieving them.
We stand ready to offer any assistance you may require in achieving compliance with NFIP
regulations and more restrictive Monroe County floodplain management ordinance requirements.
Please be advised that compliance with the NFIP requirements is a prerequisite to initiate
participation in the Community Rating System Program.
If you or your staff have any questions or require additional information,please call Prasad
Inmula at(770) 220-884 t or he may be reached by e-mail at prasad.inmula@fema.dhs.gov.
Sincerely,
Susan W ;'Chief'
F �p a=nMa=agem`ent&Ensurance Branch
Mitigation Division