Resolution 083-1991
/"
/'
,/
1.
i~ ,-:.1 1 C 0
i ,I i ,-I .J
MAYOR HARVEY
RESOLUTION NO. _Q..83.=l.29.l
; i(,FL,A.
A RESOLUTION COMMITTING MONROE COUNTY
TO BE THE LOCAL SPONSOR FOR THE KEY WEST
(SMATHERS BEACH) BEACH RESTORATION
PROJECT,
WHEREAS, the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers is developing the General Design Memorandu m and Plans and
Specifications for the Smathers Beach Restoration Project; and
WHEREAS, the County of Monroe has applied for
Federal and State funds to be used toward construction of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board
of County Commissioners of the County of Monroe, Florida, as follows:
That the Board of County Commissioners of the
County of Monroe supports the proposed beach nourishment project
and commits to be the lead applicant and non-federal sponsor of the
project to be recommended for Smathers Beach by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers in the General Design Memorandum, and is willing to cost
share in pre-construction engineering and design and construction, as
agreed to in a Local Cooperation Agreement, to be prepared prior to
construction,
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting of said
Board held on the hL_ day of ~11j___. A.d.. 1991.
Mayor Harvey
Mayor Prop T em London
Commissioner Cheal
Commissioner Jones
Com missioner Stormont
-~e..s__
-Y-e~--
-Y.-eS-_-
-y~~--
~-e.S_-
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMI SSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY
BY:~~~~~~~.~
r.'L\
(SEAL)
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE,CLERK
BY: ~~_______
DEPUli CLERK
By
rl!E~
I ~ AL 'FFICIENCY.
AttorneY. Oft>>
~A t/ iCr'li
1
v
Date
-...~
O,~~!: ~R~~,~..~E
(305) 2944641
April 2, 1991
Richard E. Bonner, P.E.
Deputy District Engineer for Project Management
Jacksonville District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 4970
Jacksonville, FL 32232-0019
Dear Mr. Bonner:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MAYOR, Wilhelmina Harvey, District 1
Mayor Pro Tern, Jack London, District ~
Douglas Jones, District 3
A. Earl Cheal, District 4
John Stormont, District 5
I am enclosing a copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners of Monroe County indicating the County's support for the shore
protection project that was authorized for Key West by the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986, and the County's willingness to share in the cost of post-
construction engineering and design for this project. I trust that you will find this
information adequate for your purpose.
Weare pleased that the Design Memorandum will be completed within the cost of
the allotted funds as is indicated in your February 11, 1991 letter. It is hoped that
this part of the work can be accomplished within the current calendar year. Weare
looking forward to receiving your schedule for completion of the Design
Memorandum and plans and specifications. When developing your schedule of
work, it is requested that you consider our concerns as listed on Enclosure 2. Also,
when available, please send us the cost estimate for preparing plans and
specifications. It is our desire to secure these funds at the earliest possible date.
We will have our Project Coordinator, Dr. Elliott Tyler, contact Mr. Stevens, Project
Engineer, once a month to obtain an update on the progress of the work.
Sincerely,
l0 ~AtL~~~
Wilhelmina Harvey, Mayor,
Chairman, Board of County Commissioners
~-&. ..
~
enclosures (2)
1. Resolution
2, Items of Concern to the County
ENCLOSURE 2
ITEMS OF CONCERN TO THE COUNfY
(1) SAND SOURCE: There have been considerable
funds spent in the search for a local sand source. If these previous
studies have not strongly indicated a possible sand source. we
believe no further funds should be used in this effort. The source of
sand for the project would then be as indicated in the feasibility
report and aragonite from the Bahamas. It should be noted that the
"Buy American Act" does not now apply to aragonite as it did at the
time of the feasibility report, Also I the small volume of material
required for the project is an important consideration,
(2) PROJECf LENGTH: What will be the losses
which normally are associated with short beach fills or, more
specifically, would the losses associated with only "Smathers
Beach" be higher than would be expected from the entire project?
(3) STORM DAMAGE BENEFITS: We understand that the
amount of Federal funding for the project is greatly dependent on the
amount of "storm damage benefits". We also believe that these
benefits were underestimated in the feasibility report.