Item N08 N.8
County of Monroe P W
;� w 1rJ� BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
r,�� Mayor Craig Cates,District 1
The Florida Keys Mayor Pro Tem Holly Merrill Raschein,District 5
y Michelle Lincoln,District 2
James K.Scholl,District 3
Ij David Rice,District 4
County Commission Meeting
February 15, 2023
Agenda Item Number: N.8
Agenda Item Summary #11641
BULK ITEM: No DEPARTMENT: Sustainability
TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Rhonda Haag (305)453-8774
11:00 A.M.
AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Update, presentation and discussion of the $2.7 Billion FL Keys
Coastal Storm Risk Management Project developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE)
and approved by the U.S. Congress for reducing coastal storm risk vulnerability in the Florida Keys.
ITEM BACKGROUND: On December 26, 2022, after passing through the U.S. Congress and
federal lawmakers, President Biden signed into law authorization of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USAGE) $2.7 billion FL Keys Coastal Storm Risk Management Project for resiliency.
On December 30, 2022, an initial appropriation of nearly $1 million was approved in the federal
omnibus spending bill to fund the planning, engineering, and design of six U.S. 1 stabilization
projects in the FL Keys Coastal Storm Risk Management Project, the first phase of the Project.
Further appropriations for the Project will require separate, annual approvals by Congress. The U.S.
1 portion of the Project includes 5,500 feet of the roadway shoreline at mile markers 34.5, 37, 67, 70,
70.9, and 79.5, identified in the plan as vulnerable to coastal erosion and wave energy. Estimates for
the completion of the construction phase of the U.S. 1 stabilization project are $16 million.
Staff worked with USACE and local stakeholders for the past four years to move the project
forward, including numerous public meetings to discuss the project. They then worked with the
County's legislative team and elected officials to move the project authorization and appropriation
through Congressional approval.
Based on the results of the three-year USACE Coastal Storm Risk Management Feasibility Study,
the approved Project now plans for the economic, environmental, and social effects of coastal storms
and sea-level rise. The Project includes:
• Hardening of 6 areas along the shoreline of U.S. 1
• Dry flood proofing of up to 43 (governmental-owned) critical infrastructure and 1052
commercial buildings, and
• Elevating up to 4,698 residential residences.
Future appropriations will allow for the voluntary elevations of the vulnerable residential homes and
Packet Pg. 2336
N.8
dry flood proofing of the commercial and governmental critical infrastructure buildings susceptible
to storm surge damage throughout the Florida Keys. Dry flood proofing not only protects from
flooding but also allows essential services to resume more quickly after a storm surge event.
The total project estimate is $2.7 billion, split 65% federal ($1.7 billion) and 35% non-federal ($955
million). The following can provide the non-federal share of funds:
• State
• County
• Municipalities
• Residents and Business Owners, and
• Other non-federal entities.
The County is coordinating with the Florida Department of Transportation for the non-federal match
for the U.S. 1 stabilization phase of the project. The County will be executing a Project Partnership
Agreement(PPA) with the USAGE, and intends to sign sub-agreements with the five municipalities
to authorize and fund work performed within the cities. The PPA is the cost share agreement that
defines the responsibilities of the non-federal sponsor and federal government for project
implementation. Numerous PPA's are anticipated as funding from Congress is anticipated to be
piecemeal over the course of several years.
History:
On September 24, 2021, Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon of the Department of the Army
signed the Chief of Engineers Report for the Florida Keys Coastal Storm Risk Management Project,
formally authorizing the Project. (Attachment included). The report was subsequently submitted to
Congress. The Chief of Engineer's Report serves as the basis for the authorization of the
Recommended Plan by Congress. Once the Recommended Plan is authorized and funds are
appropriated, the federal government finances 65% of the total project cost. The County and the
municipalities would be responsible for 35%.
The County submitted a preliminary assessment of priorities in a letter dated January 22, 2021.
(Attachment included). The Plan included measures located in each of the five municipalities, and
Interlocal Agreements will be required to formalize participation under the County's PPA's with the
USACE.
Total Project Cost(65/35 cost share): $2,730,201,000
■ 65% federal funding of project= $1,774,631,000
■ 35%non-federal funding of project= $ 955,570,000
The presentation previously provided to the BOCC is included as an Attachment to this item, and
specifies the number, types and costs of the structural and nonstructural measures.
STEPS:
a , 1
xl
1.
September 2021 Chief of Engineer's Report and study complete
December 2022 Congressional authorization for construction
Packet Pg. 2337
N.8
January 2023 Project appropriation for U.S. l revetments for Planning,
Engineering and Design (PED) work
2023 Project Partnership Agreement with Monroe County/USACE
Sub agreement with Florida Department of Transportation/Monroe
County
2024 + Seek annual appropriation for U.S. 1 construction portion, home
elevations and flood proofing.
Interlocal Agreements with the municipalities/Monroe County for
participation.
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 USAGE; 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
(USAGE) 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 USAGE.
05/20/20: Approval of preferred alternative and its options for the Tentatively Selected Plan
developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) under the partnership agreement with
USACE for investigating coastal storm risk vulnerability for the Florida Keys.
06/17/20: 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 (USAGE) under the partnership agreement with USACE for investigating coastal storm
risk vulnerability for the Florida Keys.
10/21/20: Discussion and presentation of the newly revised $5.5 Billion preferred alternative
developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) and the option for the County to select a
Locally Preferred Plan under the partnership agreement with USACE for investigating coastal storm
risk vulnerability for the Florida Keys.
02/17/21: Discussion and direction of the final revised $2.6 Billion preferred alternative developed
by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) for reducing coastal storm risk vulnerability for the
Florida Keys; and approval of the Letter of Support and Financial Certification that are required in
Packet Pg. 2338
N.8
order to complete the feasibility study, authorizing Ms. Boan to sign the Financial Certification and
Mr. Gastesi to sign the Letter of Support.
11/17/21: Presentation and discussion of the next steps of the $2.772 Billion Plan developed by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) for reducing coastal storm risk vulnerability for the Florida
Keys.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval to move forward to next steps.
DOCUMENTATION:
TAB 01 - SIGNED Chief s Report Florida Keys CSRM_20210924
USACE Briefing MAY 2021
Monroe's Letter for Priorities 01-22-21
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Effective Date of contract: N/A Expiration Date: N/A
Total Dollar Value of Project: $2.7 Billion Total Cost to County: TBD
Current Year Portion: $0 Budgeted: No
Source of Funds: N/A CPI: N/A
Indirect Costs: N/A
Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: $161,000 O&M annually
Revenue Producing: No If yes, amount:
Grant: N/A
Local Match: 35% - Can include municipalities, State, residents and other sources
Insurance Required: No
Additional Details: The County is responsible for 35% of the $2,772,359,000 in project costs,
which will be shared by other sources and the municipalities.
REVIEWED BY:
Rhonda Haag Completed 01/23/2023 5:00 PM
Cynthia Hall Completed 01/23/2023 5:12 PM
Purchasing Completed 01/24/2023 9:33 AM
Budget and Finance Completed 01/27/2023 11:24 AM
Brian Bradley Completed 01/27/2023 11:27 AM
Lindsey Ballard Completed 01/27/2023 2:03 PM
Board of County Commissioners Pending 02/15/2023 9:00 AM
Packet Pg. 2339
N.8.a
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
�. CHIEF OF ENGINEERS
2600 ARMY PENTAGON
WASHINGTON,Q.C. 20310-2600
DAEN
SEP 2 4 2�21
SUBJECT: Florida Keys, Monroe County, Florida Coastal Storm Risk Management CL
THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY
n
1. 1 submit for transmission to Congress my report on coastal storm risk management
for the Florida Keys, Monroe County, Florida. It is accompanied by the report of the
Norfolk District Commander. This report is an interim response to the study authority c0
contained in Public Law 84-71, dated 15 June 1955, which authorizes an examination
and survey of the coastal and tidal areas of the eastern and southern United States,
with particular reference to areas where severe damages have occurred from W
hurricanes. Preconstruction, engineering, and design (PED) activities, if funded, would
be continued under the authority cited above.
2. The National Economic Development (NED) plan resulting from this study includes
the following elements:
i
a. Dry floodproofing 53 critical infrastructure buildings that were identified at risk to
damage from coastal storms. Dry floodproofing will reduce the damage caused by storm
surge during coastal storm events so that emergency and critical services can resume
more quickly after a coastal storm event.
b. Nonstructural measures to reduce coastal storm damage to 4,698 residential and
1,052 nonresidential structures at risk throughout the Florida Keys. The nonstructural
measures in the recommended plan include elevation of residential structures and dry
CL
floodproofing of nonresidential structures.
3. In addition, stabilization of U.S. Route 1 (Overseas Highway) is critical to allowing
evacuation and re-entry to and from the Florida Keys before and after major storm U
events. Maintaining this access would minimize risks to life safety and would reduce
delays to post-storm recovery while increasing total project costs by less than one
percent. In July 2021, the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) approved
a request to include the stabilization of U.S. Route 1 as part of the recommended
project. Shoreline stabilization would be constructed at six locations along U.S. Route 1
that were identified as having risk of damage due to erosion and/or wave energy during
a coastal storm event. These six rock revetment structures range in height from +4 feet
North Atlantic Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) to +10 feet NAVD88 and were
designed to reduce damage to a total of approximately 5,500 feet of roadway by
stabilizing the shoreline and reducing the risk of washout.
Packet Pg. 2340
N.8.a
DAEN
SUBJECT: Florida Keys, Monroe County, Florida Coastal Storm Risk Management
4. Monroe County, Florida is the non-federal cost-sharing sponsor for all features.
Project costs for the recommended project are based on October 2020 (fiscal year
2021) price levels.
a. Project First Cost. The estimated first cost of the recommended project is
$2,103,462,000. This estimate includes $1,451,001,000 for construction; $50,305,000
for lands, easements, rights-of-ways, relocations, and dredged or excavated material
disposal areas (LERRDs) including federal administrative costs; $230,781,000 for PED;
and $230,781,000 for construction management.
b. Estimated Federal and Non-Federal Share. In accordance with the cost sharing c0
provisions of Section 103 of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1986,
as amended (33 U.S. Code 2213), the federal share of the project first cost is estimated
to be $1,367,250,000 and the non-federal share is estimated to be $736,212,000, which
equates to 65 percent federal and 35 percent non-federal. The non-federal costs include U
the value of LERRDs.
c. The non-federal sponsor is responsible for the annual operation, maintenance,
repair, replacement, and rehabilitation (OMRR&R) of the project after construction,
estimated at$161,000 per year. CNI
a
5. Based on a 2.50 percent discount rate and a 50-year period of analysis, the total
equivalent average annual costs of the project are estimated to be $85,557,000. All
project costs are allocated to the authorized purpose of coastal storm risk management.
The equivalent average annual benefits are estimated to be $131,603,000 with net
average annual benefits of$46,046,000. The benefit to cost ratio is approximately
1.5 to 1. The project will reduce coastal storm damage to critical infrastructure, _
residential and coastal structures, and U.S. Route 1, the singular evacuation route and �
connection to mainland Florida.
JA
6. Risk and uncertainty factored into the economic analysis through the use of
statistical risk-based models. The Generation 11 Coastal Risk Model (G2CRM) was used U
to evaluate the suite of alternatives within the study area. G2CRM is a desktop
computer model that implements an object-oriented probabilistic life cycle analysis
using event-driven Monte Carlo simulation, asset (structure) inventory, and damage
relationship functions to compute equivalent annual damage (with and without project).
This allows for incorporation of time-dependent and stochastic event-dependent
behaviors such as sea level change, tide, and structure raising and removal. The project
is intended to address structure damage caused by storm surge inundation and manage
coastal storm risk.
7. In accordance with Engineering Regulation 1100-2-8162, Incorporating Sea Level
Change in Civil Works Programs, the study's analysis evaluated the effects of different
rates of sea level change in the with- and without-project conditions. Analysis showed
2
Packet Pg. 2341
N.8.a
DAEN
SUBJECT: Florida Keys, Monroe County, Florida Coastal Storm Risk Management
that the historic sea level rise recorded for the study area tracks with our U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) high rate of sea level change and the most likely future
scenario would be consistent with the high rate of sea level change. Therefore, the
recommended project was formulated and evaluated using the high rate of sea level
change. To address uncertainty, project performance was also assessed at the low and
intermediate rates of sea level change.
2
8. In accordance with USACE policy on review of decision documents, all technical,
engineering, and scientific work underwent an open, dynamic, and rigorous review
process to ensure technical quality. This included district quality control, agency
technical review, independent external peer review, and a headquarters policy and legal c0
review. All comments from these reviews have been addressed and incorporated into U)
the final documents.
9. Washington level review indicates that the project recommended by the reporting U
officers complies with all essential elements of the 1983 U.S. Water Resources
Council's Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Land
Related Resources Implementation studies and complies with other administrative and
legislative policies and guidelines. Also, the views of interested parties, including
federal, state, and local agencies have been considered. CNI
10. 1 concur with the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the reporting
officers. Accordingly, I recommend that the plan to manage coastal storm risk to the
Florida Keys be authorized in accordance with the report officers' recommended plan at
an estimated project first cost of$2,103,462,000 with such modifications as in the
discretion of the Chief of Engineers may be advisable. My recommendation is subject to
cost sharing, financing, and other applicable requirements of federal and state laws and
policies, including Section 103 of WRDA 1986, as amended. The non-federal sponsor 0
would provide the non-federal share of project costs and all LERRDs. Further, the non-
federal sponsor would be responsible for all 4MRR&R. Federal implementation of the
JA
project for coastal risk management includes, but is not limited to, the following required
items of local cooperation to be undertaken by the non-federal sponsor in accordance U
with applicable federal laws, regulations, and policies:
a. Provide 35 percent of construction costs, as further specified below:
i. Provide, during design, 35 percent of design costs in accordance with the
terms of a design agreement entered into prior to commencement of design work for the
project;
E
ii. Provide all real property interests, including placement area improvements,
and perform all relocations determined by the Federal Government to be required for
the project; and
3
Packet Pg. 2342
N.8.a
DAEN
SUBJECT: Florida Keys, Monroe County, Florida Coastal Storm Risk Management
iii. Provide, during construction, any additional contribution necessary to make
its total contribution equal to at least 35 percent of construction costs.
b. Prevent obstructions or encroachments on the project (including prescribing and
enforcing regulations to prevent such obstructions or encroachments) that might reduce
the level of coastal storm risk reduction the project affords, hinder operation and
maintenance of the project, or interfere with the project's proper function;
n
c. Inform affected interests, at least yearly, of the extent of risk reduction afforded
by the project; participate in and comply with applicable federal floodplain management
and flood insurance programs; prepare a floodplain management plan for the project to 0
be implemented not later than one year after completion of construction of the project;
and publicize floodplain information in the area concerned and provide this information
to zoning and other regulatory agencies for their use in adopting regulations, or taking
other actions, to prevent unwise future development and to ensure compatibility with the U
project;
d. Operate, maintain, repair, rehabilitate, and replace the project or functional
portion thereof at no cost to the Federal Government, in a manner compatible with the N
project's authorized purposes and in accordance with applicable federal laws and CNI
regulations and any specific directions prescribed by the Federal Government;
e. Give the Federal Government a right to enter, at reasonable times and in a U)
reasonable manner, upon property that the non-federal sponsor owns or controls for
access to the project to inspect the project, and, if necessary, to undertake work
necessary to the proper functioning of the project for its authorized purpose;
f. Hold and save the Federal Government free from all damages arising from t
design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of0.
the project, except for damages due to the fault or negligence of the Federal
JA
Government or its contractors;
U
g. Perform, or ensure performance of, any investigations for hazardous, toxic, and
radioactive wastes (HTRW) that are determined necessary to identify the existence and
extent of any HTRW regulated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675, and any other
applicable law, that may exist in, on, or under real property interests that the Federal
Government determines to be necessary for construction, operation and maintenance of
the project;
h. Agree, as between the Federal Government and the non-federal sponsor, to be
solely responsible for the performance and costs of cleanup and response of any
HTRW regulated under applicable law that are located in, on, or under real property
interests required for construction, operation, and maintenance of the project, including
4
Packet Pg. 2343
N.8.a
DAEN
SUBJECT: Florida Keys, Monroe County, Florida Coastal Storm Risk Management
the costs of any studies and investigations necessary to determine an appropriate
response to the contamination, without reimbursement or credit by the Federal
Government;
i. Agree, as between the Federal Government and the non-federal sponsor, that
the non-federal sponsor shall be considered the owner and operator of the project for
the purpose of CERCLA liability or other applicable law, and to the maximum extent
practicable shall carry out its responsibilities in a manner that will not cause HTRW
liability to arise under applicable law; and
j. Comply with the applicable provisions of the Uniform Relocation Assistance
and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, Public Law 91-646, as amended, U
(42 U.S.C. 4630 and 4655) and the Uniform Regulations contained in 49 C.F.R Part 24,
in acquiring real property interests necessary for construction, operation, and
maintenance of the project including those necessary for relocations, and placement U
area improvements; and inform all affected persons of applicable benefits, policies, and
procedures in connection with said Act.
N
11. The recommendations contained herein reflect the information available at this time
and current departmental policies governing formulation of individual projects. These Q
recommendations do not reflect program and budgeting priorities inherent in the '
formulation of the national civil works program nor the perspective of higher review
levels within the Executive Branch. Consequently, the recommendations may be U
modified before they are transmitted to the Congress as proposals for authorization and
implementation funding. However, prior to transmittal to the Congress, the non-federal
sponsor, the state, interested federal agencies, and other parties will be advised of any
modifications and will be afforded an opportunity to comment further.
0
CL
T
SC TT A. SPELL ON
Lieutenant General, USA a
Chief of Engineers
5
Packet Pg. 2344
L`�I
a
IUI
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
ImIII�IIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIV�
��IIII"Illlllmmmilllllllll��iiiiiili IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU���I
UUI� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
�'� (IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII UU��u �Ir �I
UI IIUUI IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIII� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII UI
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
UI p IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
(IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ���mmml ��IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
��� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
��� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �VIIIIIIIII ��� IIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �I� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII�IIIIII�IIIII�II �I ���I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII UU�ulllu �I� �I
��� (IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �����������
IIIIII �I UU IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ��� (III
IIIIII �I
w(III
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII mmm�°°�
Ix
IS
III I mmml ��IIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII (IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ��IIII"(IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII m�°m
✓•/ P9Pif tm is n f������� rR i� � ��,I
��II IV16��YYYYYdi��hHl�( uI�I�11IV1lP�Y�iI����� i I � �1
YY
k I �
y ilj
n'-
i
Wm
1
i
� II�I
L`�I
a
O
L •—
Co LEE
(L
O O .O
illinv
/j
I , di
1, ti
I
l� /
Pm
IN
1
o �1rj III iWM a,
�j
Y.
f
IIII
4
co LEE
//\ ■� % jm
M�
LOM
O ■_ coLEE
? tl01
._ o
Sa
co
co
O
I
Co
/� /� L..
�We�I
6 1/1
fy /
i,
� III
i
1 I.
I /%f
f
l
I
1
I Y�I
III
I
� cif If i'
I.
I I
e
iYl
W COD W. 0) 0 a
E E cr. 3 CO
CO 00 EE
° -400
o 0 c6 °� � CD
c6 -0 -W
TA U) cc Q
— _ cc
SC
AWO
m CM '� c M
O >, >, ._ E 4 c6
V v O O -
L E
�+ —
Cc
'um coo0 Cc Cc }'
LL O > co
+ O to •— to O o o co
O M O O '� O v v '>
cooH .� H Q W
Y Hi i
y /
J G
Y
li
�f i ip i I
III u
�I
Ili fr�,,,J}i VII,III���I�
4 �
VGI
a
uV
o
la
04
04
CD
CO
qzr
04
IT
T mo
m (D co
y
�i�iiiiiif O fA
04
i
O
m Cm �+
cum
Q:g
J r a
Cq
cn
CO 04
� 2
c y w04
.I >
~ ~
i r
c
OZO
ZZF-
0 co
cl) a cl)
04
.� p 0 a
ate-+ O p ,to ay-+ O p 0
O C6 }' i N O CD N CD ca �, O M
E a-=+ `D . cq CD
� O O M CO C�
CD LO p O ..
O a) �, M N 0) cn
L +� V .goo 00 II rl
W L � m00000 r^ l� 4„,
CD Ca +�-+ �"� vier -ea V . .
O O
Q N L L (2) C6CDto }, CD
o
600000 N cc V O
C � +'' C� oo n O O CD
L y C� 4-j IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII V m
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Ca N i cc Cc CD
'gin a C.) •� O C6
4-j Cc CD
b�A O
Cc
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
CL
O O QCc
CD0 O V i
_co
moi HIMuooNN' N CD
� 0 {� o �.// Cc W1J
CR
i�lu0000io i � .� W � � O mo moor E MLO O cc Lo
E CD
`� y v - ti LO LO
W Q cn
n�,��� , • C6 ._ ■ ■ ■ O ��qq to M '
CD
11
� C6 Z i L.L �I"�I�II�m' � N� � m
����� ���11�III
. 0010
Illll000000000�
,4"' rrru IF
i l
i r
i
` ilf
q i,
OF
1
{
i
e�
m
� Illilillllllllllllllllll ���II �; � a
to — cc
I i �II
�I
+.+ N >,
o a� ci 1 1
�aA
ECc
cc
o O N 00 O 'v v v N v i N
� Oza- Cfl O N a= C) C�
O 0
O
C.) to N � • O O � � • •
� � � W N LL C) O •-
•i ❑ ❑
OEM
�.
H%I
/j
III
�i
r%
ly F
7,
r a
0000000016000000000l�ll �� �I�"
I�
I
1,
IIIIpp
U
"�l�k" onou- malti
N rq LA 01 M
r-I r-I Ln
'I^I\1111V� mY ��fi110v
��uw muw
�111111����� IN&m116111�
wu�ma
N
00 C1 N 4* 00
M N M
ii
mutiti
muti4
mao�u
00 cn 00
u„ p N rq to M 0 01
M 0.N M N
r r r
U U U
ma4v ,roe»„ ai�l m,»It ,muau: i",.,»q "mutir maon
1\ N
,un�ma
111 ,0 \IIII�ma4u ), mao�u W,
���� �11111111�111�\�11\111�1111U �111111�1111�1`�111111111\11111 (\\11111�1U�111\11�\1U\1U\11\111� �111111�1111�1`\1U\1U\1U\� 111\11111111111�1\111�IUU\\\I1\11�111�1111111 IU1U1�11�1\\ \11\\1\\1\11\� ' '
ry /:
r
,H�I
/j
'Q
r
l; t
v f
�1 I �
�➢ ilf
�4
ayrvyj� I N,
I
e
w n 00 r- n 00 O
^ eno 'm M 00 Cl LA ri
�oiui^ �oiui rl W\ LA r- M G Ln
� M 00
Sao ri LA E� � '� cu —
.N. LA .N. W w ru
„muo :k11611
ro
�11111�111
00
w O LA Or-I
ri M I� M r-I M O N
M Ln 00 n ate-+
00 N LA O O
M rl E
Sv N M Ln
00 M G 00
Ln
O N U
010101111 N N
O M 00 LA I� N
u^ N 00 N LA N O N
Ir lG I- LA
M M LMA Leff O M Ln V
00 M M O 00 � i
G r11f-I 000 O en
Ln
° o
U
4 n,o5 m q„•i '.. m �,,
p�111111111w1��1� ��111111111 4�BI111111 1111\41\
igS: di69p .mn�oti 4°or
muo muuo �
'Q
�j
i
a,
'1
i
e
x O
O �� a
N
N v a N N O
ca a 'o C� O p U
O _ v O +.+ % 0 4ma
O O vi N +� }+ }? v)
N a — 0 }' N
O _N > N O v N N
CN
o
N N O
N U O 0 = Q
O O N N = rl
p •C� N �, c C� N
+�•+ a.:+ to 1ptA N LO O .� N N
M c� O N
V ._ O N a..+ N c
O O 0 O ) 0 U N
N — W 0 0
O O O O N%-. N •N
O p +.+ N = N
Jkl
gasp
/j
t
r,li
nnn
1 r „
I p
j
('
v
r
„a
p
r✓
I
Y IIllllluil jlll d '�
LL
4- � - - _ p _0
U C: U =3 N
—0 � C6 C N —0
U M C E E
N o
N +-+ E •cn L •C6 N LU U
N Q
O LL N NOO 4- O O� O OU Q LL Ln
a +Q + v
LU LU a�-+
U
f6 N f6 ate-+ N +-j p U a--+
N N
� cn O cn
cn O — X U
m a� a� c� a� E Q N o
O
LL LU cn U u U a- -0 a- Q
r-I rl
N
•Q O O 0 N
N
N O
a E (V
i r-I Q ) ate., m L n L n
N � Q p[ N N N M
U- O J J (/') O O O O
f �
rf, r
I ,s
C IIII'41�U,Y, YY
f I I I
1U �i�i it ui �
i
T
f
ji
I! Ih
d
�a
i
t
e"
0
���� �I� W� VIIWu v'< �✓`,akw� "� all
r, I
/,
fl i'
i
�r r
f
"
/
L
H I
` III
I
r, s
r r
to
y
j I � "
i
I`
1
�I
V@i;,
N.8.c
m BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
County of Monroe ��� ��� �� Mayor Michelle Coldiron,District 2
The Florida Keys Mayor Pro Tem David Rice,District 4
Craig Cates,District l
Eddie Martinez,District 3
Mike Forster,District 5
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners
Office of the County Administrator
CL
The Historic Gato Cigar Factory
1100 Simonton Street, Suite 205 _
Key West, FL 33040 c
(305)292-4441 —Phone
(305)292-4544 —Fax
January 22, 2020
Ashton Burgin
Project Manager c
U
USACE Norfolk District U
a�
RE: Florida Keys Coastal Risk Management Study Element Sequencing tJ
Dear Ms. Burgin:
cN
Thank you for the briefing on Thursday,January 14,2021 regarding the status of the Florida Keys Coastal CN
Storm Risk Management Study (FKCSRMS or"project"). We appreciate the opportunity to discuss the
proj ect's next steps. As reported by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers(USACE), a signed Chief s Report
for the FKCSRMS is anticipated in September of 2021. This correspondence responds to the request from
c
the Jacksonville District as they draft a budget package for design of the first FKCSRMS elements to be c
,c
constructed (FY 23).
0
Currently,the USACE is seeking input from Monroe County (as the Non-Federal Sponsor)regarding the
initial preference, or sequencing, of the project's elements for funding and implementation. The goal of
this discussion is to align priorities for upcoming authorization and budget cycles for both the County and
USACE under a 35/65% cost share. The scope of this request for sequencing includes funds for design 0
(not construction) of these elements. The elements of the project include: 0
2
• 6 Revetments along the shoreline of US Highway 1
• Residential home elevations
• Commercial property floodproofing
• Critical infrastructure floodproofing
At this time,please note the County's preference for sequencing is the following:
1. Design of the six revetments along US 1. Given that US1 is the County's only hurricane
evacuation route, the opportunity to improve the resiliency of the road leads in importance. Per
information from the USAGE,the revetments are estimated at $16 Million in construction costs with$1.6
Million in engineering design costs. We understand that only engineering fees would be requested for this
request. The federal cost share for the engineering is $1,040,000 in federal funds (65%) and $560,000 as
the local cost share (35%). Monroe County intends to reach out to FDOT to participate in this cost share.
Packet Pg. 2357
N.8.c
2. Design of the critical infrastructure floodproofing projects (48 at this time). The priority of these
projects should be based on the most vulnerable structures first, or potentially County-owned structures.
Per information from the USAGE, the critical infrastructure floodproofing of all 48 structures has a
construction cost estimated at$10.8 Million with $1,080,000 in engineering design costs. The cost share
for the engineering is $702,000 in federal funds (65%) and $378,000 in local cost share (35%).
The County is conducting its own sea level rise vulnerability assessment update (to be completed by July
2021) and we believe that we will have more information to offer the Corps for consideration of which
critical infrastructure projects should be undertaken first. This will be one more analysis that can help
better prioritize which of the 48 critical infrastructure projects planned in the project overall should be
sequenced first. We understand that we do not need that level of granularity for individual structure
priorities at this point,but we wanted to inform the Corps of forthcoming analysis that may be helpful for
additional project planning.
c
We continue to remain supportive of our partnership with USACE and thank you for the opportunity to
provide this response to you. For any further information on this correspondence, please do not hesitate
to reach out to Rhonda Haag, our Chief Resilience Officer. °'
Thank you,
0
U
Roman Gastesi
County Administrator N
N
U)
c
0
0
0
c�
Packet Pg. 2358
r;, 00
N r
Sol
/�/,r,r/
mONROE COUNTTILOR
�,)J
I�toolGvi iu�ctt�««�N�IllNhuwuivaaNi�msr�uolllttluti�ol»»>uHm r� !� Jyl�yyyyyyyyyyyll!� � ��➢XQ ,,,,, U l // � �� ;�, � :.,� ��' ,'6,, riiiii� ��i�r
�� rr„ ; � � �r, /� �/ /�� �%/ ��sr�//%/// �. /r riiii, '� �r r, �Q'f%//i✓rrr, „.,., rr///, ': ., -r
I� I
r
�M
'i II
I
,
E�
f
4
dd
;
V
1 d
r1
r u I V io u
1
t�
I
I
1 �
to
I I �iiM VPIVIIII411 I
r
irr rr/
pgine
6r
e P,
u'-N;rca�rl�fiw yrrri '
///�i,✓/rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr///rr/ //���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///���///��//, M
PROJECT AUTHORITY & FUNDINGMONROECOU RIBA KEYS
�� llOE llu
/
r rrrrrr / ��
/ o /,,,,e,,,o i it r, iii c, e�, ✓, i /ii r���������iiiiir i, /ii / i / i // r
/
i
/
/
/ /
/
/
i 1 /
f /
/1
l
/ f
l
t
i
/
/
ff , /
f
/ o ,
/ I /
/ /
/
� f
/
/
../i,�////„✓////�//ir„ l/�,/r//�,,.,.//,,......�,/r... _. / /,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,i..//////%//...„ /ii/. /fir,,, ,..,,,,,.. ,.,�i/�/�/ ........ /....... / ,,i//// .... ,..,.,
MONROE COUNR RORIBA
(10 3
KEYS, MONIROE M
THE AUTHORIZED PLANIlu
it r / / / it /o r aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaai
r r r r r ri 1 l r � l ,rrrr
/rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
a
r rr
r
rrrrrrrrrrrrr i r
r r rrr�f/ � ,rrr iiiiii
r r r
r �r r
rr
/ r r ii rr
r
r ! /i
r/rr r � i i
ir
r / /
/ rrrr rr,
i
/
, r
ri r r rr��i r
i
r
/ r
r ri
r
a
i
f
r �
i
f
r
r r
i , r
r
/ r err�r ii r
1
/ / r
r � r
r
rr a, r
rr o i
r
r �
l
f
_1
r
� 1
l �
C
� � n r rc�*w�nti^neh
dk
I � Jy/1 � l ! i// l � i it M • i /U r/
r
+l
t
r;
/
r
/ rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr r r r r od r /irr i r r r , r
,,rrrr r r r i
rrrrrr „ rrrr /r rr rrrrrr r r of r / r o/ r o r r ,/
rr,iiii,,,✓iiiioiii /rr.. /i,.r r/iiiii,,,.i ri,,..... ,,rr_ / f_ / /i i,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,�..r l�ii/�i ////%///% ri/////,r,,,,,,//////rrairri,ii,c,r%//,,,,%%//„rr,/////%//,.,,,,0/O/����r///%//, r,
MONROE COUNR RORIBA
(10 4
KEYS, MONIROE M
THE AUTHORIZED PLANIlu
/ f / ��rrrrrrrrrrr
/ r /
r r /
rr i
r i i rr
i/ r �
r
i
r
i
/ r
r
r,
ii ,rrrr
r / r
rrr f
/
r �
r r .
/
r
. r
r
i�� o rrrrr/
it rrr r ,
i
r � /iiiii//%%%/ �rrrrrrrrrrrrr
r �r�i
/ r
/r
/
rr r
r
it it r f i
,r
1
,r
J
l
I
r
rr,, ��,,,✓i J/Jir /�r.. /,.,ri„ i,.,;, ,i,,.... ,,ram_ ;,�..r ., /r/r / �i�/loll,.,,,,, // r,i , ,
MONROE COUNR HORIDA
(10 5
KEYS, MONIROE M
THE AUTHORIZED PLANIlu
i
Recommended Plan Economic Summary Total //,;//,i
Total Project Cost $2,772,359,
Total Average Annual Cost $85 557 000
Average Annual Benefits $131 ,603,000
Benefit to Cost Ratio 2.5% 1 .5 J %
1 Total Annual Net Benefits 46 046 000
o
(1) Discount rate. 2.5/o, October 2020 Price Level
(2) Estimates rounded
ME
Federal (65%) Non-Federal Total
35%
Total Project Cost $1 ,802,033,000 $970,326,000 $2,772,359,000
LERRD Credit $0 $58,925,000 $58,925,000
Cash Contribution $1 ,802,033,000 $911 ,401 ,000 $2,713,434,000
IN
11 �i
MONROE COUNR HORIDA
(10 6
KEYS, M
THE AUTHORIZED PLAN
u
as /
1 f
,,, l „/,,, ,1,,,,,, ...✓. ��,<. .„„„, � ,,.. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,�- � � � of// uiiii/ � � �%
i
i
i
i
i
l ..
ter/
i
i
i
i
i
r�
Grand Total U.S. Route 1 Shoreline Stabilization $24,8141000
1 . West Summerland Key Alignment $2,509,000
2. Bahia Honda Key Alignment $5,803,000 �
3. Long Ke AI i n ment $4,557,000
Federal Non-Federal
4. Fiesta Key West Ali nment $5,041 ,000 65% 350/0
5. Fiesta Key East Alignment $3,452,000 0 $16,129,000 $8,685,000 loll,
6. Indian Kev Fill Ali nment $3,452,000
ONROECOU RIDA KEYS (10 7
/����i,✓/�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����//�����/����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//����//���//, M
P R E T TIMELI N E PATH FORWARD
WE ARE HERE �� Il ,COUllu
OJ C &
PROJECT TIMELINE u
IM1010iMININ
* DATES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONS OF FUNDS
• Dates shown here area best-case scenarios.
• The Six (6) Part U.S. HWY 1 (Overseas Highway)Revetment is estimated to take Five (5) months for each section.
• The construction period for each structure contained in the non-structural component(elevation or floodproofing)would be no
more than three (3) months.
r �,r
I Il 1111/1 �l III >1� ��� � I
JJ1
t 11
t �
t
1
/
f
r //r. .riiirr/... ����,�,./ .,,/i„/../�,,, ,,,, /� ,, -,,1/ ,,,,,/y� ,/„ ///,,,,,,rla,�o///,i,,...,,///,, ,,�.ra./////�../✓/, /�,./ii,,,///�///�/L//ooir////,,,i/////iif�,.//1,/� ,irr,,,,iri/i/oi/i// „�iri/.,,r� ,,,,,,,,, ,,,/a,.rrr,.,,,,�C�"..
ll,,�
r r
1 Br�IDfrl�llrll/»J111U1111%%f, /
I
rir,i. i0000iiflil
✓ is
f.
1
r '.1 /r r �I
r.,
w
I,
{ �Y
I Vi'
„
�Ur�rr
/
mg
...........
MEN
rill %„
„