The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 02/04/2014D) � (� �- 0 T-T PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2014 THE CLAM BAY COMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION WILL MEET TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 4 AT 1:00 PM AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER AT PELICAN BAY, 8960 HAMMOCK OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FL. AGENDA The agenda includes, but is not limited: 1. Roll call 2. Agenda approval 3. Audience comments 4. Approval of January 7 meeting minutes 5. Discussion of engineering - related components of Management Plan 6. Discussion of current condition of Clam Pass 7. Update on Idle speed /No wake signs 8. Set meeting dates for March 4 & 18 9. Other 10. Adjourn ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO ONE (1) MINUTE PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO, AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239) 597 -1749. VISIT US AT HTTP:H PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. 1/30/2014 1:58:32 PM CLAM BAY COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, JANUARY 7, 2014 The Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division met Tuesday, January 7, 2014 at 1:00 PM at the Community Center at Pelican Bay located at 8960 Hammock Oak Drive, Naples, Florida, 34108. The following Committee members attended: Clam Bay Committee Susan O'Brien, Chairman Joe Chicurel Tom Cravens Pelican Bay Services Division Board Pelican Bay Services Division Staff Neil Dorrill, Administrator Kyle Lukasz, Operations Manager Moderator Tim Hall, Turrell -Hall and Associates John Domeme Mike Levy Scott Streckenbein Mary McCaughtry, Operations Analyst Lisa Resnick, Recording Secretary Clam Bay Stakeholders and Public Speakers Marcia Cravens Ted Raia Diane Lustig Linda Roth Mary Johnson Kathy Worley AGENDA Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division January 7, 2014 Meeting Minutes AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ms. Diane Lustig observed many mollusks spawning. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 3 MEETING MINUTES Mr. Cravens motioned, Mr. Domenie seconded to approve the December 3 meeting minutes as amended [p. 44 correct scriveners error]. The motion carried unanimously- DISCUSSION OF SUGGESTED CHANGES TO DEC 3 DRAFT MANAGEMENT PLAN CHAPTER 6 GOALS & OBJECTIVES The Committee discussed Chapter 6 Goals and Objectives and consensus was that the goals were not presented in order of priority; all goals were equally important. The Committee also agreed that the term "conditions for dredging" should be used in lieu of "triggers for dredging ". The Committee discussed what surveys to include in the management plan and suggested using volunteers to administer these surveys. Mr. Hall explained that the only surveys currently required by the plan were to monitor the plots of mangroves and transient seagrasses. Mr. Dorrill cautioned that additional surveys would expand the scope of services of the management plan and have budgetary implications. Mr. Hall would provide a list of the types of optional surveys and estimated costs for his firm to cant' out these surveys at the next Committee meeting. Mr. Dorrill explained that the the Pelican Bay beach nourishment project was delayed by about 70 days and every day that it was delayed cost the Services Division about $1,200 per day minimum to pay the contractor to come back in and remobilize for a total of $84,000. The Services Division is responsible for half of these remobilization costs through no fa The people who delayed the project may not have had real standing but were given result of an error by the regulatory staff. Mr. Dorrill cautioned that from a fatal flaw perspective, complaints i management plan process or its contents, whether valid or not, may be strut regulatory agencies. Optional tasks included in the management plan might resulting in increased scrutiny by detractors and regulatory agencies, notices permitting delays. 47 the violations, or a Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division January 7, 2014 Meeting Minutes Consensus was to include Ordinance 96 — 16 in the management plan. Signage in Clam Bay, proposed 1998 permit modification, and canoe trail markers were also discussed. CHAPTERS 1 -5 Suggestions to Chapters 1 -5 were discussed. Consensus was that comments should be submitted in writing to Mr. Hall. LATEST DRAFT ON PASSIVE RECREATION The latest draft on passive recreation was discussed. Mr. Hall recommended removing information regarding personal motorized watercraft and rental equipment because this was not in the goals or objectives of the plan and not preventable nor enforceable by the Services Division. UPDATE ON REPAIRS TO CLAM BAY CANOE TRAIL MARKERS Mr. Dom 11 explained that Coastal Zone Management and Purchasing were investigating the warranty, pursuing a claim against the contractor, and responsible for repairs to the canoe trail markers installed less than two years ago. UPDATE ON NO. & LOCATION OF CLAM BAY IDLE SPEED/NO WAKE SIGNS As the tidal gauges are scheduled for readings next week, Mr. Lukasz plans to take inventory at the same time. UPDATE ON DISCUSSIONS REGARDING CULVERTS AT SEAGATE DRIVE A letter was sent to the city of Naples to acknowledge Pelican Bay Services Division's position to this proposed project. No response has been received and the Board has not given staff further direction. UPCOMING COMMITTEE MEETINGS meeting. .• Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division January 7, 2014 Meeting Minutes ADJOURN Mr. Cravens motioned, Mr. Domenie seconded to adjourn. The motion carried unanimous) and the meeting adjourned at 3:20 PM. Susan O'Brien, Chairman .• Minutes by LR 1/27/2014 9:25:29 AM Existing Conditions__ mmm___ Existing Conditions -kit CLAM PASS ANNUAL RESTORATION & MANAGEMENT PLAN TIDAL ANALYSIS ELEMENT REPORT NO. 14 Submitted to: Pelican Bay Services Division Prepared by: Humiston & Moore Engineers H &M File No. 13 -078 January 2014 HUMISTOIV Main office : M(X)RE 5679 Strand Court ENGINEERS Naples, 94 2 Phone 2339 9 5 594 2021 COASTAL III ENGINEERING DESIGN Fax 239 594 2025 AND PERMITTING CLAM PASS ANNUAL RESTORATION & MANAGEMENT PLAN TIDAL ANALYSIS ELEMENT REPORT NO. 14 HUMISTON & MOORE ENGINEERS H&M FILE No. 13 -078 January 2014 Table of Contents# 1. Introduction ................................................................................................... ..............................1 2. History ........................................................................................................... ..............................1 3. Background ................................................................................................... ..............................3 4. Inlet Closure and Re- opening ....................................................................... ..............................5 5. Tide Phase Lag ............................................................................................. ..............................6 6. Tide Range .................................................................................................. .............................11 7. Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................... .............................11 A. Channel Entrance Width .............................................................................. .............................11 B. Recommendations for Ongoing Monitoring ................................................. .............................18 8. References .................................................................................................. .............................18 List of Fiaures Figure 1: Clam Pass Location Map ............................................................................ ..............................1 Figure 2: Area Showing Clam Pass & Surrounding Areas ...................................... ............................... 2 Figure3: Tide Gauge Locations ................................................................................. ..............................4 Figure 4: Storm Tracks for T.S. Debby & Isaac ........................................................ ............................... 5 Figure5: Low Tide Phase Lag .................................................................................. ............................... 7 Figure 6: NOAA Wave Watch III Data From 2013 .................................................... ..............................8 Figure 7: May 7, 2013 Aerial Photographs ................................................................ ..............................9 Figure 8: June 21, 2013 Aerial Photograph .............................................................. .............................10 Figure9: High Tide Phase Lag ......................................................................... .............................12 Figure 10: Long Term Low Tide Phase Lag Averages ..................................... .............................13 Figure 11: Long Term High Tide Phase Lag Averages ..................................... .............................14 Figure12: Clam Bay Tidal Ranges ................................................................... .............................15 Figure 13: Clam Bay Tidal Ranges Annual Averages ....................................... .............................16 1. INTRODUCTION This report by Humiston & Moore Engineers (H &M) presents the analysis of tidal data that was collected since the previous monitoring report, dated November 2012. In 2009 there was a change in County policy and since then the tidal analysis is provided as a separate report from the inlet bathymetric and beach monitoring. For a history of the comprehensive bathymetric, beach, and tidal monitoring, see "Clam Pass Restoration and Management Plan Bathymetric Monitoring, Reports" #1 through #9, 2000 through 2008, prepared for the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) by H &M. This is the fifth monitoring report that is limited to the tidal analysis only. For information on bathymetric monitoring refer to the separate County reports. Clam Pass is located between Doctors Pass and Wiggins Pass, on the Gulf of Mexico, in Collier County, Florida as shown in Figure 1. Clam Pass is the primary outlet for three interconnected bays: Outer Clam Bay, Inner Clam Bay, and Upper Clam Bay. The southernmost i;;LAM bay, Outer Clam Bay, is also connected by PASS culverts to Moorings Bay at Seagate Drive which provides a small amount of tidal ;zz '" exchange at the south end of the Bay. In N 1995 & 1996 a significant mangrove die off occurred in the Clam Pass estuary NAPLES� W � system. The stress on mangroves was partly attributed to inadequacy of the tidal S flushing of the system. This was in part attributed to the fact that Clam Pass was subject to frequent closures, often during stormy winter months. To improve flushing of the Clam Bay system and the surrounding 570 acre mangrove preserve, the Clam Bay Restoration and Management Plan was implemented in Fig. 1. Clam Pass location within Collier County 1999. A part of the Management Plan was between Doctors and Wiggins Pass. to dredge portions of the flood tidal shoal and some of the interior waterways to improve the hydraulic efficiency of the inlet and increase the tidal prism, which is the volume of water exchanged through the inlet on each half tidal cycle. The improved tidal prism means more water goes in and out of Clam Pass on each tidal cycle, and this larger volume of water generates stronger currents in the inlet. Those stronger tidal currents are capable of maintaining the inlet channel open and the flushing improvements for longer intervals between the requirement for maintenance dredging. 2. HISTORY Project history is described as listed in the Draft Clam Pass Natural Resource Protection Area (NRPA) Management Plan below although, there is anecdotal information indicating that there may have been additional mechanical dredging events, potentially re- opening of inlet closures prior to 1999. After 1999 it is certain that the dredging records are accurate and complete. Prior 1950's. Clam Pass and the surrounding bay system were interconnected by waterways extending from Doctors Pass to Lee County. 1950's Vanderbilt Beach Road and Seagate Drive were constructed blocking access to northern and southern waterways except for a small culvert at Vanderbilt Beach Road. 1976 Culverts were constructed under Seagate Drive connecting Outer Clam Bay with Venetian Bay to improve water quality. 1976 Clam Pass was mechanically dredged to re -open the entrance; no construction records of quantities or dredging limits are available. 1980's. Vanderbilt Beach Road culvert was blocked by roadway and community construction eliminating any flow exchange with Vanderbilt lagoon. 1981 Clam Pass was mechanically dredged to re -open; no construction records of quantities or dredging limits are available. 1988 Clam Pass closed following Tropical Storm Keith. 1989 Clam Pass was mechanically dredged to re -open. Approximately 700 cubic yards were removed from the mouth of the inlet and at the south bend of the channel. Material was placed south of the pass. Multiple closures of the inlet occurred during the construction process. 1992 Initial reports of small mangrove dieoff areas. 1995 Clam Pass closed following a winter storm event. A subsequent mechanical dredging event was carried out removing over 5,000 cubic yards of material from the entrance of the pass. 1995 & 1996 A significant mangrove dieoff area occurred, approximately 50 acres, mostly contained north of the mouth of Inner Clam Bay. 1996 Clam Pass closed following a winter storm event and a subsequent mechanical dredging event was carried out at the entrance of the pass. DEP Permit No. 112859039 1997 Clam Pass was on the verge of closing again following a winter storm event. A subsequent mechanical maintenance dredging event was carried out. Interior portions of the flood shoal were dredged to station 6 +10. DEP Permit No. 112859039 Mod 1998 Clam Pass was on the verge of closing again following a winter storm event. A subsequent 2 mechanical maintenance dredging event was carried out. Interior portions of the flood shoal were dredged to station 6 +10. DEP Permit No. 112859039 Mod 1999. The 1999 Clam Pass Restoration plan was implemented and the first hydraulic dredging of Clam Pass Cuts 1, 2, 3, and 4, were carried out under DEP permit No. 0128463- 001 -JC. A 30' entrance cut was dredged though a larger 80' cut was permitted. 2000. Hurricane Gordon impacted the area with no inlet closure. 2002 Under DEP Permit No. 0128463- 001 -JC, hydraulic maintenance dredging was conducted but limited to only the flood shoals of the pass between Stations 3 +10 and 18 +00; the entrance of the pass was not dredged during this event. 2006 Hurricane Wilma impacted the area with no inlet closure. 2007 Under DEP Permit No. 0128463- 001 -JC, hydraulic maintenance dredging was conducted between Stations 0 +00 and 18 +00; the entrance of the pass was dredged at 80' width during this event. 2013 Clam Pass closed following cumulative shoaling over a 6 year period and impacts from tropical systems in 2012 including Debby and Isaac, along with numerous winter storm fronts. A subsequent mechanical dredging event was carried out under DEP Permit No. 0296087- 001 -JC, with an entrance cut width of 45'. 3. BACKGROUND Prior to the commencement of the March 1999 dredging, water level recording gauges were installed at selected locations within the Clam Bay estuarine system and Gulf of Mexico to measure tidal ranges. Tides along the southwest Florida coast are mixed, meaning that they exhibit either diurnal (one tide per day) or semidiurnal (two tides per day) characteristics at different times during each month, primarily dependant on the phase of the lunar cycle. There are seasonal variations as well. Pre - construction tidal data were collected for a full month to obtain average values representative of the general tidal characteristics for Clam Bay, and to establish baseline conditions against which post construction monitoring data could be measured to quantify improvements to tidal flow. The locations of the gauges are illustrated in Figure 31. This tidal monitoring program has been implemented through a cooperative effort with tidal data collection by PBSD, and data analysis and report preparation provided by H &M. Considering the mixed tide characteristics of this area is important for the tidal data analysis, because during the neap tide part of the month when tidal currents are not particularly strong, the inlet may take on wave dominant characteristics and appear to be shoaling near the entrance, particularly if the neap tide coincides with high wave energy events. During the ensuing spring tide roughly two weeks later, however, tidal currents become considerably stronger and may efficiently scour out shoals that formed during the neap tide interval. Short term channel shoaling and scouring that occurs in this manner causes short term variations in phase lag and tidal range data. This process therefore explains much of what appears as scatter in the phase lag and tide range data. When shoals are scoured out of the inlet channel, some of that sand is deposited on the ebb shoal, seaward of the beaches, restoring it to the littoral system. ' The tide gauge at the north end of Outer Clam Bay is located on the boardwalk between the Waldorf Astoria Hotel and Clam Pass Beach Park. This was referred to as the Registry gauge in previous reports, and that convention is maintained in this report for consistency. HUMISTON CLAM PASS &ilb MORE TIDE GAUGE LOCATIONS 5679 STRAND COURT ENGINEERS FOR: PBSD NAPLES, FL 34110 FAX: (239) 594 -2025 [IH COAS rAL DATE: 1/08/ 14 FILE: SITEPLAN SCALE: 1"=1200' PHONE: (239) 594 -2021 INGINU INC. Ulf G V AM FEP.MMING JOB: 13078 DATUM: NONE FIGURE- 3 www.humistonandmoore.com This is part of the sand supply for adjacent beaches; however, some of that sand scoured from the inlet channel becomes redistributed as net accumulation onto the broader interior flood shoals. It is this net accumulation on the flood shoals, usually over a period of several years, that eventually leads to the need for maintenance dredging. The purpose of the monitoring program is to evaluate inlet characteristics on a comprehensive long term basis, with less emphasis on day to day, week to week changes, or even month to month and seasonal changes. Because of the dynamics of this system, the findings of this report provide a comprehensive evaluation of project performance which, at times, may not seem consistent with visual observation of inlet conditions over relatively short time intervals, particularly conditions that may be observed during or immediately after a storm. 4. INLET CLOSURE AND RE- OPENING The previous monitoring report indicated a reduction in the tidal exchange efficiency throughout the system, and this trend continued into the present monitoring period to a point where tidal exchange was so restricted that it resulted in inlet closure by the end of 2012. This monitoring period included the passage of tropical storm systems Debby and Isaac. The tracks of these storms are shown in Figure 4. The closure of the pass is attributed to the combination of interior flood shoals having accumulated sand during the interval since the previous maintenance dredging, plus being overwhelmed with sand as the result of wave induced transport from the passing storms, and the diminished tidal currents to self scour the pass due to accumulation of sand in the interior shoals. During the closure of the pass the tidal data showed that the tidal exchange was severely limited and the only flushing that was occurring was through the Seagate culverts. Data showed that, as expected, while the inlet was closed, the tide phase lag was greatly increased and the tide range was minimal. After opening of the pass the tide data indicated the flushing of the system was restored to pre - closure levels but was not quite up to the levels of efficiency compared to previous dredging events. One reason for this minor reduction in efficiency is because the 2013 maintenance dredging event only dredged Sections A, B and a small portion of C. The reason all of Section C was not dredged is because the dredging was done mechanically and disposal was limited to specific areas upland of Mean High Water. Although mechanical dredging was the most economical, it required first building an access road to the areas that needed to be dredged. Figure 4. Storm Tracks for Tropical Storms Debby and Isaac 2012083018 ' S 5. TIDE PHASE LAG One of the parameters monitored during the tidal study is tidal phase lag. This is the time difference between the high or low tide in the Gulf of Mexico and the corresponding high or low tide in the bay. The magnitude of this phase lag is an important indicator of inlet dynamics, because shoaling in an inlet that obstructs tidal flow will cause the phase lag to increase. Figures 5 and 9 show a comparison of the tidal phase lag at high and locations within the bay system. The figures show a comparison following; 1998 Preconstruction Dredging Improvement' 1999 Post Construction Dredging Improvement' • 02 -21 -2013 to 03 -14 -2013 Pre Dredging (Inlet Closed) • 04 -06 -2013 to 04 -22 -2013 Recent Monitoring Interval • 04 -30 -2013 to 05 -27 -2013 Recent Monitoring Interval 06 -13 -2013 to 07 -17 -2013 Recent Monitoring Interval • 07 -17 -2013 to 08 -27 -2013 Recent Monitoring Interval 08 -28 -2013 to 10 -01 -2013 Recent Monitoring Interval • 10 -14 -2013 to 11 -22 -2013 Recent Monitoring Interval low tide at three tide gauge of tidal phase lags for the Notes: 1) For the purpose of evaluating project performance, only the pre and post construction data from the original 1999 dredging are included for comparison to the most recently collected data. All of the tide data collected during the life of this project can be referenced through Clam Pass Restoration and Management Plan Bathymetric Monitoring Reports #1 thru # 12. Figure 5 indicates the tide phase lag significantly increased during February -March of 2013, when the pass was closed but after the opening of the pass in spring of 2013 the phase lag returned to a normal level. The one exception is the interval between 4 -30 -2013 and 5 -27 -2013 which showed an increase in phase lag. This appears to have been the result of a weather system during the early part of May that temporarily shoaled the entrance of the pass reducing the amount of the flow through the system. This warrants further discussion as further investigation shows that what might at first appear to be an anomalous data point actually demonstrates that the project design is working effectively. Figure 6 shows the 2013 NOAA Wave Watch III (WWIII) wave record, which shows that there was a significant wave event during the first part of May, with waves of more than a half -meter in height out of a WNW direction that persisted for several days. This is the kind of event that would create sand transport to the south across the inlet entrance. Figure 7 is a photograph from May 7, 2013, which shows the effect on the inlet from the waves during that event. Strong southward transport caused a sand spit to grow from the north side of the inlet which pushed the inlet entrance to the south, that may have cause some added resistance to tidal flow. This is the kind of short term event that would be expected to affect tidal flow with shoaling in Section A of the channel, significant enough to show up in the tidal record as the increase in phase lag for the May 2013 data interval. However, this would likely be too short of an event to cause significant shoaling in Sections B and C to have long term effects on the tidal hydrodynamics so soon after maintenance dredging, because the following tidal flow should be strong enough to scour some sand out of the channel once the weather event passed. This appears to be what happened as indicated by phase lag data of Figures 5 and 9 for data intervals after May 2013. The photograph in Figure 8 shows that the inlet entrance recovered by tidal flow and channel scour by June 21St. Furthermore, the 4:00:00 161 11 7 0 2:00:00 1XVIglill 0:00:00 CLAM PASS MONITORING Low Tide Phase Lag td 1998 Pre - Dredge W 1999 Post - Dredge A 02 -21 -13 to 03 -14 -13 (Pre- Dredge) 04 -06 -13 to 4 -22 -13 (Post Dredge) 4 4 -30 -13 to 5 -27 -13 W 06 -13 -13 to 07 -17 -13 W 07 -17 -13 to 8 -27 -13 08 -28 -13 to 10 -01 -13 W 10 -14 -13 to 11 -22 -13 Post Dredge Registry South North vauge Location Figure 5 1 WWII Data Lat :26.225,Long:- 81.65,Year:2013 N 0.5 :.. ................... ...... . .... ......... ..: .. ............. ............ k 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 10 Q5 F ...... ............. ............... ..... ....... 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 200 �'� N+� r►♦ M wL r<' 4* ♦ ♦ + • » +♦♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ #► � _ �� fir'' _ g] i IV y ♦ + .. 0 +�f Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 15 E 10 :...................:......................:..................................... .......:....................:.. .................. :.. ................... .................. :.. .................. 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr Ma Y1 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov m 300 •0 200 ' �. ♦......' ... .. ,.. +.... ♦...•i..!�♦ . ♦. M .� ...!+ '♦.t♦ .... 'y7►► ..... . r#te .. **.dm i� ^ O ...t . ..... ...............I. ...�R...... ......... 1. ... ..s.. +. • ....':y ..... ..... .. ... j. ,, t.....a .... ♦..... K 100 0 ....... .... ,.. ;. Jan Feb Mar Apr I Mayl Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Date , Figure 6: NOAA Wave Watch III data from 2013. 1 8 • F F W a _ '` rt AR ^ "•\' <« e- Hwy... , Figure 7: May 7, 2013 aerial photographs courtesy of Naples Daily News. Pelican Bay rf= Figure 8: May 22, 2013 aerial photograph. 10 astronomical tide range was small during the early May high energy wave event, which undoubtedly contributed to the conditions resulting in the increased phase lag for the May 2013 monitoring period. Figure 9 shows that the succeeding monitoring interval 6 -13 -13 to 7 -17 -13 the phase lag dropped again indicating that the inlet channel cross - section may have been restored by tidal flow, once again reducing the tidal phase lag. Overall the phase lag is substantially lower than the 1998 pre dredge and 02 -21 -13 to 03 -14 -13 dredge levels, indicating that flushing is much more efficient and at a level where self correcting by scouring can occur. The monitoring events after 7 -17 -13 to 8 -27- 13 show a gradual increase in phase lag that would be expected after a dredging event, as the interior shoals begin to accumulate sand. The purpose of the monitoring is to keep track of this accumulation and how it affects tidal flow. Figures 10 & 11 compare long term low and high tide phase lags from 2008 to 2013, to the 1998 Pre - Dredge and 1999 Post - Dredge phase lags. From 2008 to 2012 there is a general increase in phase lags for both high and low tides. The 2012 phase lag was close to or longer than the 1998 Pre - Dredge phase lag for all gauges. This indicated that the inlet was closed or very restricted. After the 2013 dredging, which was completed in early April, the average phase lag returned to near 1999 Post - Dredge conditions. The average phase lag for 2013 does not include the data from when the inlet was closed. 6. TIDE RANGE Tide range is another indicator of when maintenance dredging may be needed. Tide range decreases in the bay due to inlet and bay shoaling. The data presented in Figure 12 compares the 1998 Pre - Dredge and 1999 Post - Dredge tidal ranges with the 2013 Pre - Dredge and 2013 Post - Dredge tidal ranges. When the inlet closes no water is allowed to exchange between the Gulf of Mexico and the back bays of Clam Pass through the inlet. This causes the tide range in the bay to be relatively small as is seen in the 02 -13 -13 to 03 -13 -13 tide range data. After the conclusion of dredging in the throat and flood shoals of the inlet, the tidal ranges began to return to normal over the next several months and then plateau as the inlet begins to equilibrate. Tidal ranges in Figure 12 for North, or North Beach Facility Boardwalk, show a tidal range post 2013 dredging that is similar to the 1999 - Post - Dredge Range. Differences at this time do not appear to be significant. Figure 13 is a chart of tidal range averages, in feet, for 2008 through 2013 compared to 1998 Pre - Dredge and 1999 Post - Dredge tidal ranges. The 2013 data does not include the months when the inlet was closed. 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. CHANNEL ENTRANCE WIDTH There has been much discussion about the optimum width of the entrance channel cut across the beach. In general, the inlet width is an equivalent calculated by dividing the cross sectional area of flow by the design depth, and the cross sectional area of flow is determined by the volume of water that flows through the inlet on a rising or falling tide. There is, therefore, a theoretical equilibrium width for a given design depth that can be supported by the tidal flow volume, referred to as the tidal prism, of a bay system. The tidal prism of an inlet is determined by the size of the bay and the tide range. An approximation of the tidal prism may be obtained simply by multiplying the bay area by the tide range. This approximation may be reasonable for bay systems that have a relatively constant tide range, and have a shoreline that consists primarily of vertical seawalls so that the bay area is if L 0 4:00:00 3:00:00 0$111 1 1, 1:00:00 11111 CLAM PASS MONITORING High Tide Phase Lag Gi 1998 Pre - Dredge ®1999 Post - Dredge U 04 -06 -13 to 4 -22 -13 (Post Dredge) U 4 -30 -13 to 5 -27 -13 U 02 -21 -13 to 03 -14 -13 (Pre- Dredge) 1W 06 -13 -13 to 07 -17 -13 Registry South North Gauge Location Figure 9 12 * 1998 Pre - Dredge W 1999 Post - Dredge CLAM PASS MONITORING W Average 2008 A Average 2009 *Average 2010 4 Average 2011 Long Term Low Tide Phase Lag Averages LJ Average 2012 4 Average 2013 -Post 0 x 3:00:00 l'i11111 1:00:00 Registry South North e Figure 10 13 W1998Pre- Dredge 01999 Post- Dredge WAverage2008 CLAM PASS MONITORING W Average 2009 W Average 2010 O Average 2011 U Average 2012 � Average 2013 -Post L 7 O 2 11 11 2:00:00 W01,Iglilj 0:00:00 Long Term High Tide Phase Lag Averages Registry South Gauge Location Figure 11 14 North 2.50 9112 1.50 A v m c oc 1.00 t 0.50 0.00 CLAM BAY TIDAL RANGES ge nge -Range (Pre-Dredge) -Range (Post Dredge) 3 -Range -Range -Range -Range -Range GULF REGISTRY SOUTH Gauge Location Figure 12 15 2.50 2.00 1.50 i- LL W 0 Z Q 1.00 W 0.50 m CLAM BAY TIDAL RANGES ANNUAL AVERAGES GULF REGISTRY SOUTH NORTH GAUGE LOCATION Figure 13 16 UPPER nearly the same at high and low tide. However, neither of these assumptions holds for Clam Bay, which has a mixed tide, meaning that part of the month the tide is semidiurnal and part of the month it is diurnal, and the astronomical tide range varies from approximately 1.5 feet to 3.5 feet during a lunar cycle as well. Furthermore, due to the shallow depths in the bay and the relatively flat topography of the surrounding intertidal mangrove forest, the size of the bay is much larger at high tide than at low tide, and the bay area also varies significantly during the lunar cycle. Due to the number of variables that determine the equilibrium width of an inlet for a given design depth, and the fact that in the case of Clam Pass those variables fluctuate over a wide range during a monthly lunar cycle, there is no single width that can be considered the equilibrium width for Clam Pass for the purpose of specifying a dredging width for maintenance dredging purposes. Clam Pass is very dynamic, and the natural width lies within a range that varies with the tidal range over the astronomical tidal cycle. Furthermore, the dredging cross - section as a practical matter is a trapezoidal shape which is only an approximation of the equilibrium shape which is parabolic.The success of previous dredging, without impact to adjacent shorelines, as well as the apparent equilibrium cross section from previous monitoring between dredging events, are therefore, the best way to evaluate an appropriate width of cut. Furthermore, cutting the entrance to a width near the wider end of the apparent equilibrium range would be preferable over cutting it too small. This is because if the cut is too small, tidal currents will scour it to a larger section and some of that sand that is scoured from the entrance will be carried into the inner shoals on flood tide, hastening the need for the next dredging event. It is probably appropriate to continue dredging the cut to a similar width that has been completed in the past, as long as monitoring shows it does not impact adjacent beaches. Dredging the cut to a wider dimension will result in relatively slower tidal currents, because they are limited by the size of the bay. Slower tidal currents promote shoaling, and the shoaling will occur by the trapping of sand from the beach, until the inlet cross section is reduced to its equilibrium sectional area. Since the sectional area is almost always changing, it makes sense to cut it to a size that lies within the upper part of the apparent equilibrium range, and allow the inlet to adjust, as it invariably will after each dredging event. The dredging which was done to re -open the inlet in March of 2013 had a bottom width of 45 feet, a depth of 6.3 feet to the NAVD datum (equivalent to approximately -5.0 feet NGVD), and nominal side slopes of 1:1. The design cross sectional area of flow was approximately 336 square feet (below the MHW datum). Keeping in mind that this was more than routine maintenance in that it was re- opening of a closed inlet, and therefore significant post dredging readjustment might be expected, the one -month post dredging survey average cross section area for stations 0 +50 through 3 +30 was 231 square feet, indicating that shoaling had occurred in the entrance channel. However, four months after dredging the entrance channel had scoured out to slightly over design average cross section at 340 square feet, and seven months post dredging it was 376 square feet. This indicates that following the initial readjustment after re- opening of a closed inlet, the cross sectional area remained fairly consistently at or above the design cross sectional area of flow. On each survey the smallest cross section, which is the location of the strongest current, was at a different location. This further demonstrates the dynamic nature of the inlet, and the limitations that exist in predicting in detail how this inlet will respond to a precisely specified dredging width. It is therefore recommended that the monitoring data collected for this report, as well as monitoring data to be collected for future reports, along with hydrographic monitoring, be considered in recommendations for future dredging events. Based on information available at this time, it appears as if the channel specifications for the 2013 dredging are appropriate for the ongoing maintenance dredging, and that if possible the next maintenance dredging should be done hydraulically so that sections A, B, and C can be dredged, with beach compatible material being placed on the beach in a similar manner to what has been done in the past. 17 B. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ONGOING MONITORING Any proposed increase in the scope of dredging at Clam Pass should include a comprehensive monitoring plan to continue to evaluate effects on adjacent beaches. Tidal monitoring should continue as it has been demonstrated to provide a hydraulic efficiency indicator as to when tidal circulation is affected by inlet shoaling, and when maintenance dredging should be considered to maintain flushing of the Clam Bay system. The tidal data should continue to be used in conjunction with the bathymetric data in evaluating the need for dredging. As discussed in this report, the tide phase lag and tide range data show how the dynamic system adjusts to varying weather and tide conditions. It is not recommended that either a specific threshold value for the tidal data, or critical inlet cross sectional area of flow be chosen to trigger dredging, but rather that it be recognized that when those parameters reach what in the past have been shown to indicate impaired flow in the inlet, that a comprehensive evaluation of both sets of data should be considered in making the discretionary decision as to when the appropriate time is to schedule the next maintenance dredging event. Furthermore, the possibility of the need for dredging in the aftermath of storms should also be considered, and intermediate surveys as well as analysis of tidal data should be done if there is evidence that storm impacts include deposition of sufficient quantities of sand in Clam Pass and the interior shoals to impair tidal flow through the inlet. 8. REFERENCES 1.) Humiston and Moore Engineers, Clam Pass Restoration and Management Plan Bathymetric Monitoring Reports 1 through 10, 2000 — 2009. 2.) Pelican Bay Services Division, Tide Data, 1998 — 2013. 3.) Florida Department of Environmental Protection Joint Coastal Permit No. 0128463- 001 -JC. 4.) NOAA Station 8725110 — Naples Pier - Naples, FL, Tide Gauge Data, 1998 — 2012. 5.) Turrell, Hall & Associates, Clam Pass NRPA Management Plan for Pelican Bay Services Division, January 2014. 18 CLAM PASS 6- MONTHS POST DREDGING MONITORING UPDATE Prepared for Pelican Bay Services Division Prepared by Humiston & Moore Engineers January 2014 Background This summary report provides the 6- months post dredging monitoring update for Clam Pass. This update is the second monitoring report following the 2013 maintenance dredging of Clam Pass following the pass closure by the end of 2012. The inlet reopening was completed in April 2013 and tidal exchange between the bay and the Gulf of Mexico was restored to near design levels. The complete closure of the inlet in late 2012 resulted in the collapse of its ebb shoal onto the beach with a relatively large volume of sand being pushed by waves onshore. The collapse of the ebb shoal and presence of large volumes of sand at the adjacent shoreline provided additional challenges for Clam Pass hydraulic stability. A stable inlet system requires the ebb shoal features which support the inlet channel from rapid shoaling at the inlet mouth. The Clam Pass reopening design was limited to the previously authorized maintenance dredging template authorized by the Nationwide permit from the Corps of Engineers. The design was based on minimal dredging to connect the Gulf waters with bay system to protect the valuable environmental resources in the bay by restoring flushing and to allow natural evolution of the inlet morphological features. Given the critical nature of Clam Pass as a small tidal inlet and its vulnerability to rapid shoaling during storms, an interim monitoring plan was prepared. The plan proposed monthly aerial photography, 3- month, 6 month, and 12 month hydrographic survey of inlet bathymetry to observe the natural evolution of the inlet features and be prepared for any necessary maintenance to avoid detrimental shoaling of the inlet. Current measurements at the pass are also collected to document the flow rates in the pass. Monitoring Data This report documents the physical conditions of the inlet based on the monitoring data collected for the 3 -month post dredging. Aerial Photos: Perspective aerial views are taken on monthly basis and provided to document the channel alignment and the overall condition of the inlet. The aerial photos are included in Appendix A. Hydrographic and Beach Survey: A hydrographic and beach survey for the 6 month post dredging monitoring was completed on November 13, 2013 following the same monitoring scope used for the previous survey completed on August 4, 2013. The scope of the survey and comparative profile plots with previous survey data are included in Appendix B. Contour maps of Clam Pass and adjacent beach areas were prepared based on the collected data and compared to previous data sets. Figure 1 shows the inlet morphology for pre dredging conditions of January 2013 and post dredging conditions of April 2013. The figure also shows the elevation change due to the dredging and initial adjustments immediately post construction. Figure 2 shows the inlet morphology for post dredging conditions of April 2013 and monitoring data of August 2013. Figure 3 shows the inlet morphology for post dredging conditions of August 2013 and monitoring data of November 2013. Figures 2 and 3 also show the evolution change due to the natural adjustments and response to tidal flow and wave events over the 4 and 7 month periods post construction. The data shows the inlet and beach response and the inlet morphology adjustment to the re- established interaction between tidal flow and prevailing wave conditions over the 4 and 7 month periods post dredging. During this time the prevailing wind and wave conditions were primarily from SW and WSW direction. This resulted in sand moving toward the inlet from the south creating beach build up on the south side while the north beach shoreline retreated landward. The monitoring data also indicate the formation of the nearshore features for the inlet ebb shoal and some shoaling within the flood shoal area. However, the shoaling rates inside the pass represent natural adjustment post dredging as the cross section areas of the flow remained within the design range. Flow measurements: The monitoring data were used to update the Clam Pass model to evaluate the hydraulic efficiency of the inlet. Field current measurements were collected on Nov 8, 2013 at maximum ebb tide conditions and compared to model simulations. The field current measurement for peak flow at ebb tide reached or exceeded 4 feet per second. The field measurements were consistent with model results and current measurement of peak ebb tide velocities during the July 2013 field measurements. Figure 4 shows the model results for maximum flood and ebb tide conditions. The Figure also shows the approximate location where current velocities were measured in August and November of 2013. The magnitude of the measured velocities corresponded with the model simulation results which provide validation to the numerical model capability to simulate the existing conditions of Clam Pass. The measured and calculated velocities were within the design velocity range needed to sustain the inlet flow under peak tide conditions. It is important to note that the measurement and model simulations were done for a period of time of peak tide with no significant wind or wave conditions. Summary and Recommendations: The monitoring data collected in November 2013 as part of the 6 month post dredging monitoring program indicate that the Clam Pass system seems relatively stable after 7 months of post construction adjustment. The bathymetric survey, current measurements, and aerial photos taken indicate that the tidal flow was adequate to maintain the inlet open under prevailing weather conditions over the spring and summer months of 2013 following the reopening of the pass in early April 2013. The channel entrance is dynamic in nature and seems to shift within the ebb shoal delta in response to seasonal wave, climate, and tidal conditions. Clam Pass remains a wave dominated, small tidal inlet which can be subject to rapid shoaling following sustained wind and wave events or sequence of events. The inlet becomes more vulnerable when the sustained winds and waves move higher levels of sand toward the inlet entrance during neap tide conditions where tidal flow is at a minimum. The large volume of sand that has accumulated in the nearshore when the inlet closed last year continues to increase the level of vulnerability to shoaling following sustained storms. It is recommend to continue the interim monitoring program as proposed and develop dredging contingencies in order to be able to respond to any future large shoaling events that may be detrimental to inlet stability. Clam Pass morphology Pre dredging Conditions (January 2013) 2 - t{ IS Re o� _e A {�I •1{ 6 .S 2' -2S �{ C ae y 62 � es w d UR dR 2 •2A J J Clam Pass morphology Post dredging Conditions (April 2013) Clam Pass morphology change (January -April 2013) Figure 1. Clam Pass morphology for pre dredging and post dredging conditions (January 2013 -April 2013). e o.e 0 ae o .z .ie c u ¢a " +.e sz � a e� e.e -a .z a.e a Clam Pass morphology Post dredging Conditions (April 2013) Clam Pass morphology Post dredging Conditions (Aug 2013) Clam Pass morphology change (April 2013 - August 2013) Figure2. Clam Pass morphology for post dredging conditions and 4 -month change (April 2013 - August 2013). Clam Pass morphology 4 months Post dredging Conditions (Aug 2013) Clam Pass morphology 7 months Post dredging Conditions (Nov 2013) Clam Pass morphology change (August 2013 -Nov 2013) Figure 3. Clam Pass morphology for post dredging conditions and 4 to 7 month change (Aug 2013 -Nov 2013). Figure 4. Clam Pass model results for maximum flood and ebb tide conditions for July 23, 2013 7 APPENDIX A. AERIAL PHOTOS DSC7260 _DSC7263 DSC7266 Clam Pass Sep, 2013 _DSC7261 _DSC7264 _DSC7267 DSC7262 DSC7265 DSC7268 Clam Pass Oct 21, 2013 OSCO299.jpg _DSC0300.jpg DSC0301.jpg _DSC0303.jpg _DSC0304.jpg DSC0305.jpg DSC0306.jpg DSC0307,jpg _DSC0308.jpg 10 DSC0309.jpg _DSC0310.jpg _DSC031l .jpg _DSC0909 _DSC0912 _DSC0917 Clam Pass Nov 22, 2013 _DSC0910 _DSC0913 _DSC0918 DSC0911 _DSC0916 _DSC0921 APPENDIX B. SURVEY PROFILES AND COMPARISON TO PREVIOUS SURVEYS 12 op HLWM)N & MOORE ENGINEER; COASTAL ENGINEEFING DESIGN AND PEP.MITTING ELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 6/23/13 FILE: SCOPE SCALE: 1" =200' 3078 DATUM: NAD83 FIGURE: I 5679 STRAND COURT NAPLES, FL 34110 FAX: (239) 594 -2025 PHONE: (239) 594 -2021 www.humisionandmoore.com j_ op HLWM)N & MOORE ENGINEER; COASTAL ENGINEEFING DESIGN AND PEP.MITTING ELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 6/23/13 FILE: SCOPE SCALE: 1" =200' 3078 DATUM: NAD83 FIGURE: I 5679 STRAND COURT NAPLES, FL 34110 FAX: (239) 594 -2025 PHONE: (239) 594 -2021 www.humisionandmoore.com Faa t /13/2013 STA -4+00 MRW MLw - — NORTH SOOTH 1 -400 -150 - -100 -1 -100 DISTANCE FROM Ronme (MT) -- - -PK 1/1212013 STA -1+00 4�— Mtw11_13' ---------------------- E-4 i -1 NORM SOLITH _1 00 _ _ _ -1 -100 DISTANCE FROM WsELI E (FEET) ` — FN[ 1/12/2013 STA -2 +50 t Mww (wss> y- MLw (-mn . F— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — --- — — — _1 NORM SOUM -i -400 - _ - 400 -170 -100 — FM 1/12/2013 STA -1 +50 — roar 2/4/3013 Q —par 103 /ml] MMw (w.n'1 -- -i NORTH 100TH 12 - no -ISO - - - -tw -too - DISTANCE FROM DAMNE (PKET) — FRS 1 /12/=13 STA -1+00 —pm 4/33/2013 —1— 2/4/ =13 Q — roar 11/13/2013 �y 3 Nxw (w.33*) • — — L — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �- w`11 = °- - -- — - — — — — — — — — — -t NORM som _1 -400 -im - -AD - -1 -t0O DISTANCE FROM SASCJNK (FEET) DISTANCE FROM RASnINE (FELT) — HR 1/12/3013 STA -3+50 —rost a /bmta 2 roar a /u / =13 z MITw (40.n7 -- MLw ( -1_132_ — ---- — — — — — — - - - - -- -- - - - - -- L — -- -1 NORM SOWN NORM SouM 11 - - - - -t 46. A. -- - -PK 1/1212013 STA -1+00 4�— Mtw11_13' ---------------------- E-4 i -1 NORM SOLITH _1 00 _ _ _ -1 -100 DISTANCE FROM WsELI E (FEET) ` — FN[ 1/12/2013 STA -2 +50 t Mww (wss> y- MLw (-mn . F— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — --- — — — _1 NORM SOUM -i -400 - _ - 400 -170 -100 — FM 1/12/2013 STA -1 +50 — roar 2/4/3013 Q —par 103 /ml] MMw (w.n'1 -- -i NORTH 100TH 12 - no -ISO - - - -tw -too - DISTANCE FROM DAMNE (PKET) — FRS 1 /12/=13 STA -1+00 —pm 4/33/2013 —1— 2/4/ =13 Q — roar 11/13/2013 �y 3 Nxw (w.33*) • — — L — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �- w`11 = °- - -- — - — — — — — — — — — -t NORM som _1 -400 -im - -AD - -1 -t0O DISTANCE FROM SASCJNK (FEET) DISTANCE FROM RASnINE (FELT) 9@TANGE FROM 043UME tFM) DISTANCE FROM RASEIIE (FEM S NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). g 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. { 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOLI, BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. IS 5. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. II H UN M UM 1STT ENCINQEIt'. ioxsnl — FRI 1/11/2013 STA -0+50 — FMr 4 /ri /mt] — roar I /4/3013 MMw (w.n•1 — — y -- - - - - -- — - - - - -- _1 Nom(( 7 —u — — — — — —tw —too — mum[ FROM RASOJK (mm 5679 STRAND COURT NAPLES, FL 34110 FAX: 239) 594 -2025 '. N (239) 594 -2021 .humI, nOndmoor2.com — PIC 1/13/2212 STA -2400 —rost a /bmta Q roar a /u / =13 2 1A1w (w.a3'1 MLw1-12132_------ ------ --------- L — -- —1 NORM SOWN 9@TANGE FROM 043UME tFM) DISTANCE FROM RASEIIE (FEM S NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). g 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. { 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOLI, BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. IS 5. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. II H UN M UM 1STT ENCINQEIt'. ioxsnl — FRI 1/11/2013 STA -0+50 — FMr 4 /ri /mt] — roar I /4/3013 MMw (w.n•1 — — y -- - - - - -- — - - - - -- _1 Nom(( 7 —u — — — — — —tw —too — mum[ FROM RASOJK (mm 5679 STRAND COURT NAPLES, FL 34110 FAX: 239) 594 -2025 '. N (239) 594 -2021 .humI, nOndmoor2.com —ML t/t /iota STA 0+00 —rot a/u /3013 — MST 4/33/2013 — rot 1/4/2013 Prot ,1/13/2013 t Nxw +0339 - -' NORTH SaSOUTH —1. —A. , — —,so —Too — DISTANCE "" BASELINE (FEET) SG 0+23 -- -POST 3/16/1013 POST yv /2313 —POST 2/4/mIs 4 Prot u/n /ems _, NORM SOUTH DISTANCE FROM MSELJNE (FEET) —M1 t /,/iota STA 0+30 -__- —rot 3/11/3013 —rot a/u 120,3 —rot 1/4/2013 moron 11/13/2013 �. €- - _ - ---- --- -- --- ' -' NORTH SOUTH -uO - 6 -, -too - pox 1/12/2013 STA 0+75 Pot 3/13 /x13 —MST 4/33/2013 —rot /4 /zo13 n/n /7013 � MN!Li — - - -- .- ww( -,_nom - - - -- _ NORTH Sow _, DISTANCE mu BASELLNE (FEET) STA 1+00 — row s /,1/v13 roar 4/23/v1 a —rot 1q/ n roar n/u ,a 2. _, M" SOUTH _, i a c DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (MM --.— PM , /,/2013 STA 1 +25 — rot 3/13 /sets —roar 4/u/20u POET 1/4/301 wpm 11/13 /2013 — — — — — — — — — NL!Iw_4i - 1 — — — — — — — — — -f — — — — — — -t NORTH SOUTH ., SO - -200 430 400 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEM DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) _ NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). s 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOU, BARBER, & BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. 5. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. °- -171 1/12/m13 STA 1 +30 — ron a/u/3013 FM 4/33 /2012 >—ron 1A/ ..� rot ,1/1 3 � �� -' NORM SOUTH —, DISTANCE FROM RASKUK (MM - -- lK 1/12/2013 STA 1 +75 -- FM 3/13 /2013 —Pon s /v /v13 — POST /4 _rot 11 /2013 — i MLw -,.N9 -- — — — — — - - - - -- J NORM SOUTH -4. - - - -,SO -Too z L DISTANCE MOM MSEUNE (FIST) —M1 1/12/2013 STA 2+00 ---- rot 3/1e/n S —roar �1/ 7 - ----+ - -- � MLw1 1_2 - - - - - -- — '— - - - -- , NORTH SOUTH - -450 1 - - 40) 430 400 DISTANCE FROM RaSELINE (FELT) �rZt C go -'-- ML 1/11/1013 STA 2 +25 — Fmr a /1a /alu - POST 4/37/2013 -PmT 1 /s /m �Pp3T 11/13/2013 �. YNW (+0- ]7Z - - - -� — -- - -- ----- / NORTH 5011TH _ w Jo. -ISO _100 - -4 DISTANCE FROM 6AMNE (FELT) DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FRT) —ML 1/12/1013 STA 2 +75 — POST 3 /M /mt3 — PW 4/23/2013 — MST 2/4/2013 �Im tl /13/20 �- X l-L 2- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- �_ _1 NORTH SOUTH _ _ _ _ _1. -1. —ME 1/11/1013 STA 3+00 S —POST 3 /la /2013 —POST 4/13/3017 4-. —FDST 1/4 /2013 _7 NORRI SOUTH -1 -400 -360 - -P06T S /ta /2013 SEA 2 +50 -Pon Vu /20u —M[ 1/13/3013 - -- -MST 7 /la /2013 is 4 — POST 1/4/3013 AMR 11/13/20 — POST 4/33/3013 Sj 4 \ — p > 11 /I3/3013 y- m(-1_wL- ------ - -- -- - - - -- �_ YNW (i0.33D -------- - - - -\ -1 �- - - -- ------- - - - - -- -- — - - - -- NORTH -1 _1 -12 - so11Tx - - - -1. DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FRT) —ML 1/12/1013 STA 2 +75 — POST 3 /M /mt3 — PW 4/23/2013 — MST 2/4/2013 �Im tl /13/20 �- X l-L 2- --- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- �_ _1 NORTH SOUTH _ _ _ _ _1. -1. —ME 1/11/1013 STA 3+00 S —POST 3 /la /2013 —POST 4/13/3017 4-. —FDST 1/4 /2013 _7 NORRI SOUTH -1 -400 -360 2 C c — ME 1 /12/20li STA 3+64.5 -M8 7/16 /2013 -MT) 4 /i]/mla 4 -Pm =1 /a /mu -FOSr a /u /mta - (w.a7y - -T - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _6 1 NORTH 7 13 - - - -IM -toe - DISTANCE FROM EASEEIK (FEET) DISTANCE FROM RASEUNE (FRT) i NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. t 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOU. BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. I S. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. — MIT ,/,2/70,3 --- 1.0ST 3/ta/20+3 DISTANCE FROM RASEUNE (FEET) — FOST //t /1015 —M[ 1/13/3013 - -- -MST 7 /la /2013 STA 3 +30 MST 11/13/2013 — POST 4/33/3013 Sj 4 —MST 1/4/013 p > 11 /I3/3013 -- / "" — - - - - - -- r" YNW (i0.33D -------- - - - -\ -1 �- - - -- ------- - - - - -- -- — - - - -- �4 -1 _1 -12 - NORTH SOUTH - - -150 4DO ISO -100 40 6 SO owro" IRON RASt<!NE (FEET) 2 C c — ME 1 /12/20li STA 3+64.5 -M8 7/16 /2013 -MT) 4 /i]/mla 4 -Pm =1 /a /mu -FOSr a /u /mta - (w.a7y - -T - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _6 1 NORTH 7 13 - - - -IM -toe - DISTANCE FROM EASEEIK (FEET) DISTANCE FROM RASEUNE (FRT) i NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. t 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOU. BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. I S. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. DISTANCE FROM BASELRE (FEET) — MIT ,/,2/70,3 --- 1.0ST 3/ta/20+3 STA 4+10 — FOST //t /1015 2 MST 11/13/2013 Sj �M]T Il/f3/ml3 ( -I.w) -- — - - - - - -- -to- NORTH -1 SOUTH - Nom SOUTH _1 -200 -130 -100 DISTANCE FROM BASELRE (FEET) DISTANCE FROM EASEIM (Ffi) --- 11 1/12/2013 STA 5+10 ---- POST 3/14/2016 — MST 1/4/2013 MST 11/13/2013 YNw- jtF_s3Z - - - � _1 NORTH SOUTH -i -too - J. t DISTANCE FROM SASELI E (rM* STA 4+60 - -- PMT 7/I/ /2015 -- MST 1/4/017 Sj �M]T Il/f3/ml3 -to- NORTH -12 SOUTH - -1 -too - , t 2 DISTANCE FROM EASEIM (Ffi) --- 11 1/12/2013 STA 5+10 ---- POST 3/14/2016 — MST 1/4/2013 MST 11/13/2013 YNw- jtF_s3Z - - - � _1 NORTH SOUTH -i -too - J. t DISTANCE FROM SASELI E (rM* S ;g i i 3 STA 8+30 4. — 308 a /u /mu wpm 11/13/2013 W1W 40.33 NORM SOUTH _, _ Do _, _700 —&0 6 do lao 1 DISTANCE FROM msmm (rim Pon 1st 3/10/3013 STA 9+10 -- VINT 3/4/3013 _IOst 11 /fl / =13 — — — — NORIN SOUTH — —170 —100 —io a do lao 1 DISTANCE FROM SASltJNE (FEET) -_ - - -- pK 1/12/2013 STA 73.10 — ro8 3 /a /s0s <� _POST 11/13/2013 v 2 rtil_332 - -------=--------- _2- KW (- 1_032 _- - - - - -- -To- . Way EAST _, 00 450 —100 40 90 160 lao 1 DISTANCE FROM RAsnme (r3ET) — 3K '3133 =13 STA "SO -- rost S /IO /2015 1 — rosy 0/4/3013 Q -post 11/13/20" 2 WIN W3i' -- - - - - -- rp-� 13w14o_Sa2 - --------._.p------- --------- a 1`1'_"2- - -- Aci- 1 WEST 1, _7 _ NORM SOUTH _7 —130 —100 — 1 i -_ - - -- pK 1/12/2013 STA 73.10 — ro8 3 /a /s0s <� _POST 11/13/2013 v 2 rtil_332 - -------=--------- _2- KW (- 1_032 _- - - - - -- -To- . Way EAST _, 00 450 —100 40 90 160 lao 1 DISTANCE FROM RAsnme (r3ET) C s z F DISTANCE mm wsnm (FEET) —PK 1/13/3013 STA 7 +50 -- rost S /IO /2015 1 — rosy 0/4/3013 _ pw 11/13/2013 2 wr"Sw_"2- — -- - - - - -- rp-� 13w14o_Sa2 - --------._.p------- - - - - -- - - - - -- 0. �_ 1`1'_"2- - -- - - - -- - - - - -- � WEST 1, _7 _ —730 —700 —&a 6 ab 1 0 lbo _7 war EAST -12 WEST. -6 a k AD AD 2K C s z F DISTANCE mm wsnm (FEET) DISTANCE FROM mSEIRt (FELT) DISTANCE FROM EASGRt (rEET) g S NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). s 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOIJ, BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. 27 S SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. " —PK 7/12/=13 STA Ei00 _ _._ _ POST 3/10/ =13 1 - ro8 3/4/2013 -POR 103/ =,S 2 wr"Sw_"2- — -- - - - - -- rp-� '31"1w —" ----- - - - - -- - - - - -- f�- .7 WEST EAST _7 _ —730 —700 —&a 6 ab 1 0 lbo DISTANCE FROM mSEIRt (FELT) DISTANCE FROM EASGRt (rEET) g S NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). s 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOIJ, BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. 27 S SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. " DISTANCE FROM MSO.It (SPIT) P113 1/12/20'3 STA 9+00 -- Post 3/10/2013 POST 3/4/2013 a Brost 11/13/W13 w«1.oaaj __ - - - -- - - -- WEST mST _'m —6 h 0 1 O AD 260 DISTANCE FROM usnm (FEET) — PK 1/12/2013 STA 9+50 3053 3 /14 / =13 Q —POST 17/13 /3013 ell- 512------- - - - - -- - - -- WEST GST —12 —1 —100 — 1 1 DISTANCE FROM RASOlt (FEET) STA "SO — ro8 1/13/ 113 _r118 t /13 / =1J wr"Sw_"2- — -- - - - - -- rp-� - - - -- f�- WEST. EAST —3 00 —i —100 40 6 ab 1 AD 260 DISTANCE FROM MSO.It (SPIT) P113 1/12/20'3 STA 9+00 -- Post 3/10/2013 POST 3/4/2013 a Brost 11/13/W13 w«1.oaaj __ - - - -- - - -- WEST mST _'m —6 h 0 1 O AD 260 DISTANCE FROM usnm (FEET) — PK 1/12/2013 STA 9+50 3053 3 /14 / =13 Q —POST 17/13 /3013 ell- 512------- - - - - -- - - -- WEST GST —12 —1 —100 — 1 1 DISTANCE FROM RASOlt (FEET) -- -PRI 1/17/1013 STA 10+00 Q — POST 8/4/1013 > —POSE 11/13/3013 IaTW (M.]l� - ------------ - - - - -- - -- �- xW ( -ua9 —1 WEST LAST —1 — 00 —130 400 —40 A ISO 1 0 2 DISTANCE FROM RASOME (PITT) PIT[ t/t2/20ts STA 10+19 —For 3/4/2013 — MST 11/13/2013 NNW (w -132 — � - - - - -- -1 NORTH SOUTH -12 - 00 -150 400 _hO 6 I 160 2 DISTANCE HION BASELINE (TEST) — P9c 1 /13/2013 STA 10+50 MST 8/4/2013 ` — MST 11/13/2013 r et -3_332 — _ _ y taw -- ---- - — — — — — — — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — — _ 0. -1 NOUN SOUTH -tY Do 430 -100 I& Ito DISTANCE FROM RASELME (MM —PK 1/17/2013 STA I1 +00 i — POST 8 /4/1017 1 —POST i, /13 /7013 - NM'110.]3'^Z----------------- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — '� __ NLW_it— N.Z - - -- _________ — ----- - - - - -- q2_ i —1 mom -I NORTH SOUTH -12 (IO -150 -100 - A 140 V6 2 - )o -130 -100 do 160 1 2 DISTANCE FROM RASELME (MM DISTANCE PITON BASELINES (PUT) P9[ 1/17/2013 STA 13 +DO i — POST 8 /4/2013 — POST 11/13/2013 � 1 Nlnv Ho_u2. — —2 NORTH SOUTH _1 —150 400 _k 160 1 1 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (PUT) DISTANCE FROM RASKIM (PUT) NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOLI, BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11. 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. r 5. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. " —PK 1/17/2013 STA 11 +50 i — POST $/4/2013 —POST 11/13/2013 1 —POW 11/17/3013 - N10Y1+0_]]2 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — '� __ NLW_it— N.Z - - -- _________ — ----- - - - - -- q2_ i _1 mom -I NORTH SOUTH -11 - (IO -150 -100 - A 140 V6 2 DISTANCE PITON BASELINES (PUT) P9[ 1/17/2013 STA 13 +DO i — POST 8 /4/2013 — POST 11/13/2013 � 1 Nlnv Ho_u2. — —2 NORTH SOUTH _1 —150 400 _k 160 1 1 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (PUT) DISTANCE FROM RASKIM (PUT) NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOLI, BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11. 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. r 5. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. " DISTANCE PROP RASn" (PUT) —PIQ 7/13/2073 STA 13+30 — ro3T ././2013 N""- (w- 3JL - - - -- - - - - -- iq_ i -to- mom SOUTH 12. -130 400 0 6 in 1&0 IAO 1 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (TUT) W. -- -- ---- M 1/12/7017 STA 13+00 - POST ./4/2013 -POST 11/13/2013 > ` V —POW 11/17/3013 N1W1+o_132 _ _ — — 1P�. P1_ __ NLW_it— N.Z - - -- _________ — ----- - - - - -- 1— —1 mom -I Nom SOUTH - _,9 1 1 1 DISTANCE PROP RASn" (PUT) —PIQ 7/13/2073 STA 13+30 — ro3T ././2013 N""- (w- 3JL - - - -- - - - - -- iq_ i -to- mom SOUTH 12. -130 400 0 6 in 1&0 IAO 1 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (TUT) W. — PaB t /,7/2013 STA 14+00 — POST 8/4/7013 i —POW 11/17/3013 — — — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — -to- mom -11 SOUTH 6 1 -1 SO 160 AD 1 DISTANCE FROM U34ME (PUT) - 111E 1/12/3013 STA 14 +50 MST 6/4/2013 ro3T 103/2013 2 uxw ( +6.337------------ - - - - -- �_2 "�1 =u- - - - - -- - - - - - -- qi i _1 N01(T11 SOUTH -11 -100 -150 -100 - 0 1 1 2 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) RRE 1/12/2013 STA 15+00 — p3T 6/4/]013 p3T it /IS /101] a I6M w.nry _1 EAST ww —u -100 -130 -100 0 6 1 1 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) —1'6[ 1/12/3613 STA 15 +50 103E 6/4/2013 st _1'06T 103/2613 S 361w ( « -3SryZ — _i EASE WEST -1 .._ IRE 1/11/2013 STA 16+00 p 4, roR 6/4/2013 > � PM I1 /13 /1015 — �_ G -1 FAST WEST -11 DO -ISO -100 -ka 6 50 I& A. DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) IRE 1/13/1013 STA 16+50 —MST 6/ +/2013 —ro3T 1 Vu /:611 % 1 wNw (was? _ _ _ y kw L6Y) yI _1 EAST WEST -11 -tm _i. 6 so 1& 140 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) 211[ 1 /t2 /3013 STA 17+00 —__... — p3F 6/4/3013 �ro3T tt /t3 /2013 [ 1 — — •� — — — — — _y - -- _t FAST WEST -11 -2m -150 -1D0 _ i I 3 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) 3 NOTES: 1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). p 2. DISTANCES SHOWN IN FEET. 3. PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY CONDUCTED BY AGNOLI, BARBER, k BRUNDAGE, INC. (ABB) FROM JANUARY 3 TO 11, 2013. 4. POST CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS DATED 3/16/2013 AND 4/23/2013 CONDUCTED BY DIVERSIFIED SURVEYING INC. r 5. MONITORING SURVEY DATED 8/4/2013 AND 11/13/13 CONDUCTED BY ABB. " t� C i 2 6 IRE 1/12/3013 STA 17 +50 6 -- nV 6/4/2013 E — POST 11/13/2013 + YNW ( +0.337 - -- _ -- - - - - -- -i [AST WEST _7 -200 -ISO -100 - 1 1 0 G DISTANCE FROM YSELNE (FEET) IRE 1/12/1013 STA 18 +00 4 — POST 6/4/1013 HMV 11/11/2011 -- -�- ----------------- EAST WEST u _2m _156 _Im _k. 1&0 t DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FELT) IRE I/11/10is STA 16 +26 a 4—MST • 1/13/2013 uww (w.ssry i _I EAST WEST -t1 -100 '-150-100 - 0 1 1 10 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) ,H&M- 09- 00019068a- C3amPass 12013- MonitoringlDwM2013 -11 Monitoring\Monitoring Rmons 2013- 11- 13.6wg Print Dec 04, 2013 10 �rrAnc��ir�nr nrrAn 5 0 0 —5 z u —10 w —15 —20 —25 —50 0 200 400 600 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) BEACH PROFILE: R -38 SURVEY LEGEND 2013 -01 -12 PRE CONSTRUCTION ABB 2013 -04 MONITORING M &E (ATKINS) — — 2013 -08 -04 MONITORING ABB 2013 -11 -13 MONITORING ABB 10 — — -- — -- -- -- ---I 0 5 SEE DETAIL ABOVE Z0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —5 —10 w —15 J w —20 —25 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) - - - - - -- 0' NAVD 1400 1600 1800 2000 F: \H &M- 09-000\9068a -Clam ? ass12013 - Monitoring \Dwg120'13 -11 Monitoring\Monhoring Rmons 2013.11- 13.owg Print Dec 04, 2013 SURVEY LEGEND BEACH PROFILE: R -39 2013 -01 -12 PRE CONSTRUCTION ABB 2013 -04 MONITORING M&E (ATKINS) 2013 -08 -04 MONITORING ABB 10 NEARSHORE DETAIL 2013 -11 -13 MONITORING ABB s 0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0' NAVD 0 a —3 z L —10 W —15 —20 —25 —30 0 10 — — c z —5 —10 —15 W —20 —25 0 200 400 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) SEE DETAIL ABOVE — — — — — — — — — — — — — 600 — — — — — — — — — — — — — 0' NAVD 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) F:1H &M -09. 000\ 9088a- ClamPass 12013- Monl *.oringOwg12013 -i t MonitoringWonitoring Rmons 2013.11- 13.dwg P Int Dec 04 , 2013 10-1 NEARSHORE DETAIL 5 0-f ------- - - - - -- 0 -5 z tz L -10 w -15 -25 -1 -50 0 BEACH PROFILE: R -40 SURVEY LEGEND - -- - 2013 -01 -12 PRE CONSTRUCTION ABB 2013 -04 MONITORING M &E (ATKINS) 2013 -08 -04 MONITORING ABB 2013 -11 -13 MONITORING ABB — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- 0' NAVD — — 200 400 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) 600 10 -------- - - ---� 5 SEE DETAIL ABOVE 0 a z 0' NAVD 0-- - - - - - - -- —5 > >> —10 —15 —20 -25 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) F:1 H &M- 09- 000\9068a- ClamPass12013- Monitoring \D,.vM 2013 -11 Monitoring;Monitoring Rmons 2013.11- 13.dwg Print Dec 04,20-13 BEACH PROFILE: R -41 10-1 NEARSHORE DETAIL 5 04- - - - - -- �a -5 z E -10 W —15 —20 SURVEY LEGEND 2013 -01 -12 PRE CONSTRUCTION ABB 2013 -04 MONITORING M&E (ATKINS) 2013 -08 -04 MONITORING ABB 2013 -11 -13 MONITORING ABB 0' NAVD -25 -50 0 200 400 600 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) 10 ------- - - - --I o 5 SEE DETAIL ABOVE z 0 - -- - - - - -- 0' NAVD — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1 -10 ?i 15 - W -20 -25 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) HUMISTON CLAM PASS MONITORING & MOORE BEACH PROFILE 5679 STRAND COURT ENGINEER FOR: PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION NAPLES, FL 34110 FAX: (239) 594 -2025 COASTAL DATE: 11 13 1 FILE: SECTION SCALE: SHOWN PHONE: (239) 594 -2021 I LKGINLERING DLS: GN AND PERMITTING JOB: J4078 DATUM: NAVD FIGURE: WWw.humistonandmoore.com F:1H &M- 09- 00019068a- ClamPass 2013- Monitoring\Dwg\ 2013 -11 Monitoring\MonVoring Rmons 2013- 11- 13.dwg Print Dec 04, 2013 BEACH PROFILE: R -42 10-1 NEARSHORE DETAIL 5 SURVEY LEGEND — 2013 -01 -12 PRE CONSTRUCTION ABB 2013 -04 MONITORING M&E (ATKINS) 2013 -08 -04 MONITORING ABB 2013 -11 -13 MONITORING ABB O I ------- - - -"�(� -------------- - - - - -- 0' NAVD 0 z —10 W —15 —20 NOTES: AZIMUTH 270' IN 2005 do 2006; 265' IN 2010 & 2011 —25 � —50 0 200 400 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) 10 --------- - --- -� 0 5 SEE DETAIL ABOVE Z0 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- —5 —10 W —15 W —20 —25 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) 600 0' NAVD 1400 1600 1800 2000 F: \H&M -09- 000\ 9068a- ClamPass12013- Moniioring \Dwg12013 -11 MonitoringlMonitoring Rmons 2013- 11- 13.dxg Print Dec 04, 2013 10 NEARSHORE DETAIL s 0 — — — — — — 0 z —5 —10 W —15 —20 —25 —50 0 SURVEY LEGEND BEACH PROFILE' R -43 --2013-01-12 PRE CONSTRUCTION ABB 2013 -04 MONITORING M &E (ATKINS) 2013 -08 -04 MONITORING ABB 2013 -11 -13 MONITORING ABB --------------- - - - - -- 0' NAVD 200 400 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) 10 ------- - - - --- � 0 5 SEE DETAIL ABOVE i0 — -- - - - - -- -- _5 � — _10— —15 W —20 —25 600 — — — — — — — — — — 0' NAVD 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) H& M- 09- 0001 9068x- ClamPass120 '13- Monitorin,gO1vg12013 -11 Monitoring%Monitoring Rmons 2013- 11- 13.dwg Prink Dec 04, 2013 10 k I r A n[ II^nr- MrTAII 5 0 a —5 z —10 W —15 —20 —25 —50 0 200 400 600 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) BEACH PROFILE: R -44 SURVEY LEGEND 2013 -01 -12 PRE CONSTRUCTION ABB 2013 -04 MONITORING M &E (ATKINS) -- - 2013 -08 -04 MONITORING ABB 2013 -11 -13 MONITORING ABB 10 — — — — — — — — — — — 0 5 SEE DETAIL ABOVE Z0 — — — — — — — — — — — —5 —10 w —15 W —20 —25 0 200 400 600 --------------- - - - - -- 0' NAVD 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) APPENDIX C. CURRENT MEASUREMENTS November 8, 2013 28 NOV. 8, 2013 CLAM PASS CURRENT VELOCITIES STATION # DEPTH FT VELOCITY FPS TIDE 1 2 3.8 EBB 2 2.5 3.8 EBB 3 3 4.0 EBB 4 1 3.9 EBB 4B 1 3.6 EBB 513 2 4.3 EBB 613 1.5 4.2 EBB 7B 1.5 3.6 EBB 8C 1 3.5 EBB 9D 3 2.2 EBB 101) 4 3.2 EBB 11D 3 3.1 EBB 12B 4 2.0 EBB 13B 1.7 EBB 14B 2.5 2.1 EBB VELOCITY READINGS WERE TAKEN FROM 9:30AM TO 10:30AM 29 Ir 9:37 10:17 10:30 February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee All Committee members were present Susan O'Brien, Chairman Joe Chicurel Tom Cravens John Domenie Mike Levy Scott Streckenbein Neil Dorrill Kyle Lukasz Mary McCaughtry Lisa Jacob Mohamed Dabees Tim Hall Kathy Worley — submitted flow -charts for the record In Audience Marcia Cravens Mary Johnson Diane Lustig Linda Roth Two others Mohamed gave presentation of condition of Clam Pass More concerned about Section B than the Channel of Pass Ebb shoal (no control over, not in template) and flood shoal (need to included design criteria in the Management Plan) Design criteria development deals with the following 1. Flow cross section area 2. Volume of sand within template 3. Channel length 4. Ebb shoal size and shape 0 _ s 5q •' �E ~�W kY b z { �J a: PF em pp t T r* i T>F a - .». (�� }��\ �\ / I .i- -- i", i Design Criteria Development Flow Cross Section Area Volume of sand within template Channel Length Ebb Shoal Size and Shape awl - 8- b- North 4- a W 0- W -2- Z . -4 W 24 -10- -400 - SO - Do -250 -200 -150 - DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) South 8- North �2 W W Z W J W -12 -440 - 50 - 00 -280 -204 -154 -1 00 0 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) South i X70 i IIORTH -12 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) SOUTH S —P11E 1/13/20TS STA 0 +50 - f WT 3ryf/20I. Pwr A/23/2013 -fax ■/A/3013 S —M41F 11!13 /2013 y _ID7 NORTH SOUTH -1 sD -100 - DISTANCE FROM SkSEUNE (FEET) —NINE 02/m13 STA Ii00 roST 3/tfry.tIT a /y/2RI3 par 10 *Is fast ya /2013 $ YEr'Ft.u7 — — — — — — — — — — ' NORTH SOUTH -, - 06 - SD - DO -150 -100 - 5 - - DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FELT) _ �11�1■■3 STA 1 +23 -.. — fast 4ry3/2012 roeT S/. /2g f '�fO3f 11/13/A13 j kw(11_M7-- - - - -.— -- -1 NORTH SOUTH -' -350 -9DO -AD 400 -130 -too - D So DIiTAHCE PROM BASELINE (FELT) 4 - -neE 1/ISM1f STA 0+00 __... .. _ wsi its /uss V,. STA 6 +75 froaR2 � �f.er ah3/201s _ `i4 --fax ./1./2013 —fast /201 s —� -- 1 - - -- -- -- — aufws r_ —fax a/25/3e17 -""f-i O � =MST f/. /2013 -- -- -- -' SOUTH i NORTH i -3So _ D0 -250 -200 -150 -IOC - -1 Som NORTH -1 -dta - w -500 -230 -200 -150 -100 -50 SO w (1- INORTH - - — - - - - - 5 -' SOUTH SOUTH -i NORTH -300 -250 -300 -130 -100 -50 30 -I -400 -350 -�O -100 _ -100 -50 0 50 -ABO -570 DISTANCE FROM BASELNE (FEET) DISTANCE PROMBASEl1N[1(ILET) i IIORTH -12 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) SOUTH S —P11E 1/13/20TS STA 0 +50 - f WT 3ryf/20I. Pwr A/23/2013 -fax ■/A/3013 S —M41F 11!13 /2013 y _ID7 NORTH SOUTH -1 sD -100 - DISTANCE FROM SkSEUNE (FEET) —NINE 02/m13 STA Ii00 roST 3/tfry.tIT a /y/2RI3 par 10 *Is fast ya /2013 $ YEr'Ft.u7 — — — — — — — — — — ' NORTH SOUTH -, - 06 - SD - DO -150 -100 - 5 - - DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FELT) _ �11�1■■3 STA 1 +23 -.. — fast 4ry3/2012 roeT S/. /2g f '�fO3f 11/13/A13 j kw(11_M7-- - - - -.— -- -1 NORTH SOUTH -' -350 -9DO -AD 400 -130 -too - D So DIiTAHCE PROM BASELINE (FELT) 4 —FRE 1112/2013 STA 0125 — NOW 3/10/2013 is - _..... MST — rosr .ry2/2013 froaR2 � �f.er ah3/201s _ `i4 rosr —� -- 1 - - -- -- -- — aufws r_ - - - - -- --- -""f-i -2 i IIORTH -12 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) SOUTH S —P11E 1/13/20TS STA 0 +50 - f WT 3ryf/20I. Pwr A/23/2013 -fax ■/A/3013 S —M41F 11!13 /2013 y _ID7 NORTH SOUTH -1 sD -100 - DISTANCE FROM SkSEUNE (FEET) —NINE 02/m13 STA Ii00 roST 3/tfry.tIT a /y/2RI3 par 10 *Is fast ya /2013 $ YEr'Ft.u7 — — — — — — — — — — ' NORTH SOUTH -, - 06 - SD - DO -150 -100 - 5 - - DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FELT) _ �11�1■■3 STA 1 +23 -.. — fast 4ry3/2012 roeT S/. /2g f '�fO3f 11/13/A13 j kw(11_M7-- - - - -.— -- -1 NORTH SOUTH -' -350 -9DO -AD 400 -130 -too - D So DIiTAHCE PROM BASELINE (FELT) 4 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) — m 1/13/3013 STA 1+73 — MST 3/1./2013 MST .rya /mu im fax ■/. /20)F_ ■ �fOfT 11/13/3011 _ _ --- -- y us(-LNL— 2� W ' wDRTH SOUTH -12 - 00 -230 -200 -150 -106 - 0 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) —, /1:/3.13 STA 1 +50 a - _..... MST — rosr .ry2/2013 rosr —� -- 1 - - -- -- -- — aufws r_ - - - - -- --- -""f-i -2 -- -- -- -' SOUTH i NORTH i -3So _ D0 -250 -200 -150 -IOC - -1 Som NORTH -1 -dta - w -500 -230 -200 -150 -100 -50 SO DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) — m 1/13/3013 STA 1+73 — MST 3/1./2013 MST .rya /mu im fax ■/. /20)F_ ■ �fOfT 11/13/3011 _ _ --- -- y us(-LNL— 2� W ' wDRTH SOUTH -12 - 00 -230 -200 -150 -106 - 0 DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) — HR 1/12/2.13 STA 2 +00 -- fair 3/11/2013 — pm ./23/2013 MT 11/11/2013 YYM (.x237 _ - — - -- r_ —_— - -' SOUTH NORTH -1 _l0D -3So _ D0 -250 -200 -150 -IOC - DISTANCE FROM BASELINE (FEET) �.. c....i:.�r� 0%4: Cl^'kA# Area _ Si-clinn A — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Date --7 -2013 Average Cross- sectic 2013 Design Cross - sectior 2008 Average 400 350 300 jg 250 x 3 200 0 ar m A 150 100 u` 50 O 12/7/2012 �.. c....i:.�r� 0%4: Cl^'kA# Area _ Si-clinn A — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Date --7 -2013 Average Cross- sectic 2013 Design Cross - sectior 2008 Average 350 250 3 200 x a 0 d m 150 A ai 4 ¢ 100 d N O f� 50 Cross Section of Flow Area - Section A O 12/7/2012 1/26/2013 3/17/2013 tYi i 'I --�Ir— 2013 Minimum Cross - section 2013 Design Cross - section 2008 Minimum 5/6/2013 b /25 /ZU1 -5 a /14/LV1J - - -- Date 2014 o. 4000 ba -0 3000 ai 9 2000 Ln 0 12/7/2012 1/26/2013 3/17/2013 5/6/2013 blz7ILU1z> Volume in Dredge Template - Section A Date '2014 PROM ..D. F sr 500 3 x 400 d m d ¢` 300 c 0 a d N 200 0 .. O -i — 12/7/2012 U Cross Section of Flow Area - Section B 1/26/2013 3/17/2013 5/6/2013 i —0 -2013 Average Cross- secton 2013 Design Cross - section 2008 Average 6/25/2013 8/14/2013 1u /i /LU1s 11 /LL /4V1. 'J I Date '2014 7m ... s- 3 400 x a 0 a m 300 m d !; 200 S IX, Cross Section of Flow Area - Section B O 12/7/2012 1/26/2013 3/17/2013 5/6/2013 6/25/2013 Date 2013 Minimum Cross - section 2013 Design Cross - section — — 2008 Minimum 8/14/2013 10/3/2013 11/22/2013 1/11/2014 .... 4000 ar m c E 3000 a v c = 2000 d E v ai N Volume in Dredge Template - Section B ___ ____A__________ ----- ,11-� -__- _________ O 12/7/2012 1/26/2013 --p-- 2013 — — 2008 3/17/2013 5/6/2013 6/25/2013 8/14/2013 10/3/2013 11/22/2013 1/11/2014 Date WE KO—If 500 400 ai 300 15 5: 200 100 0 4--- 12/7/2012 Cross Section of Flow Area - Section C --<D— 2013 Average Cross-sect 2013 Design Cross-sectic 200S Ave rage 1/26/2013 3/17/2013 5/6/2013 6/25/2013 8/14/2013 10/3/2013 11/22/2013 Date 7" Cross Section of Flow Area - Section C 600 500 400 s 300 0 a� m m d d c 200 a d N N N O 100 O 12/7/2012 1/26/2013 3/17/2013 5/6/2013 - 2013 Minimum Cross - section 2013 Design Cross - section 2008 Minimum 6/2.5/2013 8/14/2013 10/3/2013 11/22/2013 1/11/2014 Date ------- 4------- - - - - -- Date F IF 1� l6a, --p- -2013 — — 2008 M y 500 r m E •?C O Q. 400 r N d a c 300 m d e e m c� 200 m L 1/14/2004 Approximate Channel Length Dredged April 2007 Dredged April 2013 ... , , n r9 I MI I R /1a/ 013 12/27 /2014 5/28/2005 10/10/2006 2/22/2008 7 /6 /ZWy 11/ lad wlv -1 �i � � -• - • - Date T - -Mr- dia la I iM 0 R t a t 1 � w s � t ` h Y i i a IL fSy. February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division (Submitted by Kathy Worley, 2/4/2014) Page 1 of 7 GOAL The goal of the Clam Bay management plan is to maintain, restore and protect the native floral and faunal communities thereby ensuring natural resource protection and long -term sustainability by incorporating, evaluating and prioritizing all relevant information about the estuary into a cohesive management strategy, that allows for recreational activities within its boundaries, while protecting the long -term health of the ecosystem and its natural and historical resources. Objective 1 Objective 3 Ensure recreational activities Maintain, restore and protect the native are environmentally floral and faunal communities within compatible within the Clam the Clam Bay NRPA 1. Bay NRPA 3 See Objective 4 :and ee Objective 2 2 page 5 Hydrology: Ensure the estuary has es 2 Protect archaeological sites adequate tidal and freshwater flows 3 within the Clam Bay NRPA to maintain ecological health within the Clam Bat NRPA. See Adaptive Management page 4 Compile and analyze all data See and reports holistically and page 6 adjust strategies accordingly to achieve the Goal. Objective 5 To restore, enhance and maintain the water quality5 within the Clam Bay NRPA. 'Assess the Clam Bay NRPA holistically using biological elements along with physical, chemical and pollution factors present in the system to determine estuarine health. ' Sites identified by the Florida Division of Historical Resources Master Site File ' While public use is important, the conservation of natural resources within the NRPA is the primary management concern °To the greatest extent possible, restore natural flow -ways, tidal circulation and freshwater hydroperiod to assure the correct quality, quantity and timing of fresh and salt water is entering and exiting the Clam Bay estuary. Vater quality refers to the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the waters, including ground waters, to protect public health, to safeguard fish and aquatic life and scenic and ecological values, and to enhance the domestic, recreational, and other uses of water. See page 7 A. Maintain healthy native floral and faunal populations Reassess Monitoring Strategy — Adaptive Management February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division (Submitted by Kathy Worley, 2/412014) Page 2 of 7 OBJECTIVE 1 Maintain, restore and protect the native floral and faunal communities within the Clam Bay NRPA' Page 1 of 2 Compile a review of historical studies and determine if any studies can serve a a baseline What baselines are missing or incomplete? What baseline studies are needed to achieve Objective 1? Reports: monitoring results; data assessment; comparison to baseline; implications to management. Ebaseline op and Nment Objective 1 restore maintained? stem to ions (if \ le). YES B. Protect Listed Species Identify flora & faunal resources to monitor, establish methods and implement schedule. YES System restored? Identify and determine status of listed floral & faunal species and associated habitat types. Identify vulnerable resources located in sensitive or recreational areas or where destructive management activities (i.e. dredging, exotic removal, etc). Identify rookery or nesting areas, roosting vegetation, burrows, etc. Develop, initiate and enact a "Species Management Plan" that provides management recommendations (utilizing monitoring data) to ensure the long- term survival and health of listed species within the NRPA. Compile listed species data, their current and historical status (if known), population trends (if known), any potential threats to the population, and number of reported incidents of wildlife harassment or habitat destruction. Report: listed species assessment, potential risks to listed species, types of injury (i.e. NO bird entanglement), harassment and damage, etc. — any associated trends and implications to management. Assess the Clam Bay NRPA holistically using biological elements along with physical, chemical and pollution factors present in the system to determine estuarine health. Develop and YES implement plan to minimize or Adverse eliminate impacts to adverse effect species? NO NO Adverse effect minimized or YES eliminated? February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division (Submitted by Kathy Worley, 2/4/2014) Page 3 of 7 OBJECTIVE I Maintain, restore and protect the native floral and faunal communities' Page 2 of 2 C. Remove Exotic Conduct periodic floral and faunal D. Develop an integrated and Nuisance Flora surveys of non - native and nuisance resource management strategy to and Fauna interpret research results and species. configure modeling tools for sses Monitoring Report: Status of exotics and nuisance implementing a conservation tteg — Adaptive species, acres removed, track changes strategy. (Secondary Strategy) Ma gement in type and extent. Remove Category 1 & II invasive exotic plant species and nuisance Assess reports of exotic faunal species and determine if any action is species (if appropriate). necessary at this time. NO Develop and Problem implement options Report ecosystem model eliminated results and begin the process to control exotic or g p P' invaders. of model verification from Exotic faunal alleviated? actual data species control necessary? YES �-- YES Assess the Clam Bay NRPA holistically using biological elements along with physical, chemical and pollution factors present in the system to determine estuarine health. Develop suite of Indicators to detect changes in the ecosystem and response(s) to that change. Develop an ecosystem model that incorporates all system drivers Synopsis of biological and physical characterizations of the estuary, identify missing components and plan future research to till gaps W. Model Use model as one verified of the tools to YES achieve the Goal Compile a review of historical reports (on record with DHR or interviews with historic archeological investigators, if possible) to serve as a baseline for comparison. Monitor the condition of cultural resources using photo stations every 5 years. Record signs of degradation and identify the source of the degradation (if possible). Track the number of instances of vandalism. Reports (5 yr interval): Comparison of current sites to baseline conditions to determine if the site(s) have deteriorated. Submit report to update the DHR Master Site Files every 5 years. Report to DHR if serious damage occurs to any of the cultural resource sites. Signs of site � NO deterioration? YES 'Sites identified by the Florida Division of Historical Resources Master Site File,' i February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division (Submitted by Kathy Worley, 2/4!2014) Page 4 of 7 OBJECTIVE 2 Protect archaeological sitest within the Clam Bay NRPA Page 1 of I A. Develop an effective management approach to maintain and conserve known archaeological sites and their associated artifact assemblage from vandalism, exotic vegetation, erosion and other forms of degradation. YES Objective NO 2 achieved? Develop and implement management tools to protect cultural resources. I) In the event that a site has been invaded by exotic vegetation, eradication of exotic vegetation will be initiated, (if appropriate).. 2) Methods to discourage vandalism and /or other disturbances will be explored, if warranted. 3) If a site is ever decimated by a natural event or is likely in danger of erosion (such as sea level rise) appropriate entities with a vested interest in cultural resource management will be notified in effort to seek solutions to preserve the site(s). Visiting scientists, in cooperation with the Florida Division of Historical Resources (DHR), will be permitted to study the archeological sites. If such studies ever occur, results will be made available to educate the public. Results also will be submitted to DHR to update the Master Site Files. In the event that research yields new tools that are applicable to the management of the resources they will be implemented to the greatest extent possible. A. Enable the public to make informed decisions when recreating by increasing their ability to act responsibly when enjoying this coastal community ecosystem. Repair or replace damaged signage. Track trends in law enforcement citations and incompatible use incidents. February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division (Submitted by Kathy Worley, 2/4/2014) Page 5 of 7 OBJECTIVE 3 Ensure recreational activities are environmentally compatible within the Clam Bay NRPA' Page I of 1 Inspect and maintain current and future permitted signage', publications3 and interpretive exhibits that educate the public about best stewardship Coordinate with outside regulatory agencies to enforce regulatory "Idle Speed/No Wake" restrictions. Enforce regulations prohibiting trash and landscape debris dumping in or near the NRPA. Track trends where public use results in resource harm. B. Increase active stewardship by promoting the value of coastal resources Develop and maintain site signage & handouts to educate visitors on local flora and fauna. Include general information on how to help preserve the resource. Utilize trained volunteers to disseminate public information (i.e. CSWF boardwalk walking tours). Plan and perform volunteer clean-up efforts. While public use is important, the conservation of natural resources within the NRPA is the primary management concern. Z Including, but not limited to, eadstingard futum infamk6onalard reguhoty signage relating to the c ncetrail, and hooky and swunmenmgeWithin dveClam Bay NRPA (Collier County Ortihmw:????'I % ' Develop and provide map of canoe trail for paddlers IC. Maintain opportunities I for low impact public use. Develop an operational and maintenance plan defining upkeep responsibilities with the County. Inspect and maintain public access points (i.e. boardwalk, canoe /kayak trails). / Public complaints concerning access will be reviewed annually to determine if problems concerning access are addressed in a timely manner. Develop methods to NO Promote and encourage traditional, discourage vandalism & low- impact recreational uses. resource disturbance. Monitor and evaluate Violations Establish and enact methods to NO resource damage caused b Trend g y YES and /or monitor and quantify public -use YES increasing. watercraft. complaints activities and any associated damage Produce informational increasing'? to natural resources. brochures and distribute in Use public access as points of rainproof box on site. education and interpretative opportunities - "Leave No Trace ". While public use is important, the conservation of natural resources within the NRPA is the primary management concern. Z Including, but not limited to, eadstingard futum infamk6onalard reguhoty signage relating to the c ncetrail, and hooky and swunmenmgeWithin dveClam Bay NRPA (Collier County Ortihmw:????'I % ' Develop and provide map of canoe trail for paddlers IC. Maintain opportunities I for low impact public use. Develop an operational and maintenance plan defining upkeep responsibilities with the County. Inspect and maintain public access points (i.e. boardwalk, canoe /kayak trails). / Public complaints concerning access will be reviewed annually to determine if problems concerning access are addressed in a timely manner. February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division (Submitted by Kathy Worley, 2/4/2014) Page 6 of 7 OBJECTIVE 4 Hydrology: Ensure the estuary has adequate tidal and freshwater flows to maintain ecological health within the Clam Bat NRPA' Page 1 of 1 A. Identify the minimum tidal flow necessary to ensure a healthy ecosystem. Provide sufficient tidal exchange to maximize benefits while minimizing negative environmental impacts. Report detailing bathymetry, tidal phase lag, etc. (ADD H &M. Assess reports in conjunction with biological data to determine if any action is necessary at this time. NO Is dredging necessary to prevent ecological damage to the estuary? Does recent hydrologic surveys indicate significant shoaling? Is there a high probability that the situation can D_L)J naturally rectify itselt? Establish adequate long -term key hydrological- biological benchmarks to sustain ecosystem health. Establish conditions that further investigation into whether or not Clam Pass should be dredgedZ. Address the need for a 10 year dredging permit through stakeholder meetings Revise after H & M Monitor the Pass and internal waterways. Bathymetric surveys of cross - sectional areas of the Pass, tide gauge data, and biological data will be used to indicate if dredging is needed Design and develop / dredging template. Get authorization by YES Agencies to Proceed YES _/ Seagrass located within Dredging Template B. Insure appropriate freshwater inputs and drainage Identify and determine adequate freshwater inputs, (quantity & quality) and timing necessary for long -term conservation of the natural biodiversity within Clam Bay NRPA Conduct annual monitoring of the hand dug channels and assess areas where flow is constricted. Prioritize maintenance needs and clean out blocked channels as budget allows. Assess watershed flow and compare to historical flow prior to development. Report: Status of hand -dug channels and areas of water impoundment (if any). Dredge Complete report on watershed flow and historical comparison. ace Develop and implement to the best ability a planned response to the above reports in conjunction with results of Objective 5. 'To the greatest extent possible, restore natural flow -ways, tidal circulation and freshwater hydroperiod to insure correct quality, quantity and timing of fresh and salt water to support estuarine species in the Clam Ila% NRPA. `Dredging is a tool used for environmental purposes only and not to improve navigation or for beach renourishment. 'This permit will be based on no more than a 45' wide cut at the inlet and a design template that has the least environmental damage to the estuary and species which use the estuary. Stakeholder meetings (similar to the Wiggins Pass subcommittee — where all stakeholders had a seat at the table for discussions) will be conducted pre, during and at all stages of permit development prior to submittal to the County and the Permit Agencies for approval February 4, 2014 Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division (Submitted by Kathy Worley, 2/4/2014) Page 7 of 7 OBJECTIVE 5 To restore, enhance and maintain the water quality' within the Clam Bay NRPA. Page 1 of 1 A. Develop a long -term water quality program that assesses physical, chemical and biological processes to ensure a sustainable healthy environment for all users. Complete quarterly reports detailing water quality data, assessment of results and comparison to historical levels. Assess reports in conjunction with biological data to determine if any levels are outside of tolerances. Water quality deteriorating? NonCompliant with FDEP? Reassess Monitoring Strategy NO — Adaptive Management Objective 4 Establish a water quality monitoring program that incorporates historical data to assess water quality overtime, complies with FDEP guidelines and standards, addresses the Site Specific Criteria previously approved by the State, and complies with Objectives 4 & 5. Continue monthly water quality sampling in accordance with FDEP SOPY . Develop and implement a plan to track the quality of estuarine inputs within the watershed. Explore partnership opportunities to address water quality concerns. 7 YES Determine probable cause(s) of deterioration. Develop and enact solutions to restore healthy water quality. Monitor and assess outcomes. Problem \ NO corrected'? B. Promote comprehensive programs for controlling water pollution from point and ponpoint sources Determine how and to what degree water quality within the Clam Bay NRPA is influenced by land use, including hydrologic restoration. Reduce pollutants entering the estuary through best management practices geared at reducing stormwater pollutant loads and monitor results through water quality analysis. Eliminate and/or reduce the usage of Copper Sulfate to treat algal blooms in freshwater stormwater lakes whose water ends up within the Clam Bay estuary. ' Water quality refers to the chemical, physical and biological integrity ofthe waters, including ground water, to protect public health, to safeguard fish and aquatic life and scenic and ecological values, and to enhance the domestic, recreational, and other uses of water. 2 Standard Operating Procedures. YES Continue to monitor Develop new strategies to achieve reduction of pollutants and compliance with FDEP standards Report: Water quality analysis detailing whether there is a measured reduction in nutrient and /or pollution laden Pollutant loads freshwater inputs. Evaluate the best management reduced? Copper practices and track residential units who have initiated Sulfate levels and and maintained stormwater best manasement practices. water quality parameters within State standards? YES Continue to monitor Develop new strategies to achieve reduction of pollutants and compliance with FDEP standards