Loading...
EAC Agenda 07/03/2012AGENDA COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL WILL MEET AT 9:00 A.M., TUESDAY, JULY 3, 2012 IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ROOM, ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, 3299 TAMIAMI TRAIL EAST, NAPLES, FLORIDA NOTE THE CHANGE FROM THE USUAL WEDNESDAY TO TUESDAY FOR THIS MEETING I. Call to Order II. Roll Call III. Approval of Agenda IV. Approval of June 6, 2012 meeting minutes V. Upcoming Environmental Advisory Council Absences VI. Land Use Petitions A. Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project Special Treatment Permit (ST- PL20120000168) Sections 8, 17 & 20, Township 48 South, Range 25 East VII. New Business None VIII. Old Business A. Approval of memo to BCC regarding fertilizer ordinance B. Update members on projects IX. Council Member Comments A. Subcommittee Report X. Staff Comments XI. Public Comments XII. Adjournment Council Members: Please notify Stephen Lenberger (252 -2915) no later than 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, June 28, 2012 if you cannot attend this meeting or if you have a conflict and will abstain from voting on a petition. General Public: Any person who decides to appeal a decision of this Board will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto; and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. June 6, 2012 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL Naples, Florida, June 6, 2012 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 A.M. in REGULAR SESSION at Administrative Building "F," 3rd Floor, Collier County Government Complex Naples, Florida with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Dr. Judith Hushon VICE CHAIRMAN: Andrew Dickman (Excused) Michael V. Sorrell David Bishof (Excused) Gina Downs Gary McNally ALSO PRESENT: Steve Williams, Assistant County Attorney Stephen Lenberger, Sr. Environmental Specialist Jerry Kurtz, Stormwater and Environmental Planning Manager Chris Curry, Executive Director, Collier County Airport Auth. Bob Tweeter, Airport Manager, Marco Is. Executive Airport Steve Preston, Sr. Project Manager Rhonda Watkins, Collier County Pollution Control I June 6, 2012 Speaker Nicole Johnson, Conservancy of Southwest Florida reported the Conservation Easement has been drafted with the County recommending changes. Conservancy representatives will be in contact with the County to address any changes. A site visit will be held with representatives of the County, Audubon Society, and the Conservancy before the Conservation Easement and Vegetation Management Program is finalized. The Council requested Staff to notify them when all items have been completed in a satisfactory manner. B. Fertilizer Ordinance Update — Steve Preston Steve Preston submitted a memo to the Council dated May 23, 2012 — "Subject: Collier County's Florida - Friendly Fertilizer Ordinance activities update" for information purposes. He outlined the memo which identified the education program being undertaken by the County including a website, email notification to homeowner associations and landscape contractors, a brochure, a video, educational classes and bulk mailings to landowners. The Council recommended signage be placed at strategic locations notifying the public of the Ordinance and the Golden Gate Civic Association be contacted. Speakers Amber Crooks, Conservancy of Southwest Florida commended the education program and recommends it be continued. She noted at the time the Ordinance was adopted, the County was informed by Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services they should adopt the Model Ordinance as legislation was going to restrict local jurisdictions from adopting stricter standards. Subsequent to this, no legislation was enacted prohibiting the adoption of more stringent requirements. She recommended the County consider adopting more stringent standards to protect water quality in the area. Katie Parrish, Sierra Club reported other Counties have adopted Ordinances with more stringent requirements and supports the County adopting a more stringent Ordinance. Recent studies indicate more stringent requirements including prohibitions of applications of fertilizers during the rainy season lead to improve water quality. Discussion occurred on the Council's previous recommendations for a more stringent Ordinance including requiring slow release fertilizers, a rainy season prohibition period for applications of fertilizers, etc. Mr. Sorrell noted a greater concern is to address the issue at a statewide level as many of the commercial applicators are subject to State requirements, and not the more stringent, local requirements. Item VI.A ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT MEETING OF JULY 3, 2012 I. NAME OF PETITIONER/PROJECT Petition No.: ST- PL20120000168 Petition Name: Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project Applicant/Developer: Collier County Coastal Zone Management Department Engineering/Environmental Consultant: Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. II. LOCATION Wiggins Pass is located at the Gulf of Mexico between Delnor- Wiggins State Recreation Area and Barefoot Beach State Preserve, in Sections 17 & 20, Township 48 South, Range 25 East, Collier County, Florida. In addition, the Pass is located 5 miles north of Clam Pass and 5.9 miles south of Big Hickory Pass, and is a natural inlet which provides access to the Gulf of Mexico for a number of embayments and rivers along three main interior channels. The eastern channel connects to the Cocohatchee River. The southern channel connects to Water Turkey Bay and Vanderbilt Lagoon, and the northern channel connects to the lagoon between Little Hickory Island and the mainland. This northern lagoon consists of a number of embayments including May Flower, Palm Vines, Little Hickory Bays, and eventually connects to Big Hickory Pass. There is no interior waterway connection south to Clam Pass. Wiggins Pass is bounded by public lands which extend 7,950 linear feet to the north and 6,010 linear feet to the south. Barefoot Beach Preserve lies to the north and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park is to the south. III. DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ZONING DESCRIPTION N - CON -ST Barefoot Beach State Preserve S- CON -ST Delnor- Wiggins State Recreation Area EAC Meeting Page 2 of 15 E - A -ST Tidal Waters/Wetlands Cocohatchee River W - N/A Gulf of Mexico IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project is a non - structural solution designed to improve navigation and to address the critical erosion issue at Barefoot Beach. This project will not involve removal of any native vegetation or wetlands, and avoidance measures will be incorporated during dredging to avoid impacts to seagrass resources. The proposed project will re- establish a historic location of the flood channel: the new flood channel will be relocated to the where the flood channel was located in the last 60 -80 years. Overall, the proposed project consists of an initial dredging, major maintenance dredging every 4 years, and minor maintenance dredging in between, for a total volume of approximately 214,000 cubic yards over a ten -year period. The existing project requires dredging at least 50,000 cubic yards every 2 years, for a total cumulative volume of at least 300,000 cubic yards every decade. The proposed dredging plan will require approximately 86,000 cubic yards less material to be dredged over a ten -year period, over the existing plan. V. GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY A. Future Land Use Element The proposed dredging area is located within the Conservation designated area on the countywide Future Land Use map, and within the Coastal High Hazard Area. The Future Land Use Element does not specifically address dredging. However, the proposed dredging is intended to restore and stabilize eroded shorelines, protect native vegetation and wildlife, improve inlet navigation, improve estuary flushing, improve water quality, and enhance recreational opportunities. These functions are generally promoted and supported in certain Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Future Land Use Element (and Recreation and Open Space Element and Conservation and Coastal Management Element) of the Growth Management Plan and allowed by the Conservation designation. Therefore, the Comprehensive Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed project does not conflict with the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Future Land Use Element. B. Conservation & Coastal Management Element Staff finds the project to be consistent with the relevant Objectives and Policies of the CCME. A Collier County Special Treatment (ST) Permit and Coastal EAC Meeting Page 3 of 15 Construction Setback Line Permit will be required prior to the start of construction, for consistency with the County Land Development Code. The project is consistent with Policy 1.3.1 of the CCME which outlines the purpose for Natural Resource Protection Areas. These designated areas are meant to protect, maintain and restore ecological functions, which this project is designed to do. Policy 6.1.8 of the CCME requires appropriate environmental data to be submitted for proposed development, site alteration or projects, to protect, conserve and enhance environmental quality and resources. Appropriate environmental data has been submitted for review of the Special Treatment Permit. Policy 7.2.1 of the CCME requires the County to apply the marina siting criteria contained in the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan in order to direct increased boat traffic away from sensitive manatee habitats. The marina siting criteria contained in the Manatee Protection Plan is applicable to all multi -slip docking facilities with ten slips or more and all marina facilities. Since the proposed project is not in conjunction with a marina or multi -slip docking facility, the Manatee Protection Plan does not apply. Goal 10 of the CCME restricts construction of all structures seaward of the Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL), as established by the Florida Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1985. The CCCL included in the Collier County Growth Management Plan is that which was established in 1974; is referred to as the Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) by Collier County. Staff's review of the subject property found the project as proposed to be seaward of the CCSL. A Coastal Construction Setback Line Permit will be required prior to dredging, for consistency with the Land Development Code. Objective 10.3 of the CCME, states that "Undeveloped coastal barriers shall be maintained predominantly in their natural state and their natural function shall be protected, maintained and enhanced." Objective 10.5 and its associated Policies encourage opportunities for recreational, educational, scientific and esthetic enjoyment of coastal resources, and also require that construction activities not interfere with sea turtle nesting, maintain the natural beach profile and minimize interference with the natural beach dynamics and function. Consistence with Objectives 10.3, 10.5 and their associated Policies, the project provides a non - structural alternative to improve inlet navigation, restore and stabilize adjacent eroded shorelines, protect native vegetation and wildlife, EAC Meeting Page 4 of 15 improve flushing of the estuary, and encourage recreation opportunities for enjoyment of the coastal resources. VI. MAJOR ISSUES A. Stormwater Management N/A B. Environmental (Information obtained from the environmental data submitted for the project) 1. Proiect History. Goals and Analysis Wiggins Pass is currently dredged at regular intervals of approximately 2 years to maintain navigation for boats with up to a 3 foot draft. The pass provides boat access to the Gulf from inland waterways and lagoons at Vanderbilt Beach, the Cocohatchee River, Wiggins Pass Marina, and several other private and public marinas and ramps. The dredged channel extends from the inlet throat to about 1,200 feet offshore. Periodic dredging has occurred at the intersection of the interior channels. Disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R11.4 to R14.2 (FDEP R- Monument Markers) and south of the inlet between R18 and R20.5. The inlet has been dredged since 1984 under two previous permits. Details of the history of Wiggins Pass, management of the inlet and analysis thereof are provided in the engineering study, in Appendix 3 of the Environmental Data. The goals for the Wiggins Pass navigation improvement study as developed by Collier County and the Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Committee are: 1. To provide a safe channel for boating 2. To address erosion at Barefoot Beach 3. To lengthen the dredge cycle, accomplished with the least impact on the environment 4. To provide a solution that is economically effective A non - structural alternative is an objective for the inlet design in order to improve navigation. The committee, which formulated the main goals for Wiggins Pass, represented a broad range of local stake holders appointed by Collier County. The current and historic inlet and shoreline conditions were evaluated in order to develop an improved inlet management strategy. A complete coastal study was performed in conjunction with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) process. This study included an engineering report and two modeling reports. The 2012 engineering report contains a refined modeling report that was based upon the initial 2009 modeling study. The 2009 report also contains minutes and details from the special committee of the Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC). EAC Meeting Page 5 of 15 The project recommended in the 2009 modeling study and refined based on comments generated by the 2010 permit application is summarized below. Refinements were developed during the last year based on new field investigations and further consultation with agencies. The plan addresses concerns expressed by FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (BBCS) and Park Service, and other local interest groups. It addresses not only navigation, but also improved sand bypassing, modifications to channel dredging, improved locations for sand disposal, and an updated inlet management study. It accomplishes improved navigation and sediment management by a combination of straightening the channel, major and small maintenance dredging, and new sand disposal practices. The proposed design modifies and improves upon the County- approved 1995 Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan. This project includes channel realignment which will be accomplished by straightening the inlet channel layout and infilling and blocking the northern flood shoal meander. The east, north, and south interior channel entrances are identified for maintenance dredging, should sand shoal within their respective boundaries. The designated dredge disposal locations and distribution will be modified and relocated based on shoreline monitoring results, with preference given to areas with greatest need. Incorporating the ability to modify disposal locations will increase management flexibility, reduce sediment loss to the system, and minimize impacts to Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park shoreline. Nearshore and beach (onshore) disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R -12 to R -15.5 and south of the inlet between R -18 and R -20. As Barefoot Beach recovers towards its traditional shoreline location, its disposal area will need to move west in order to account for the increased shoreline width. An ebb shoal disposal area has also been designated to assist in stabilizing the Barefoot Beach shoreline. A separate offshore disposal area (Borrow Area 6 from the 1996 Beach Nourishment Project) has been designated as an acceptable location to place unsuitable fill dredged from the channel. The project also includes scarp repair along southern Barefoot Beach to restore the beach to historic conditions. A dynamic design will be incorporated into the maintenance plan for the inlet so that long -term dredging can be reduced. Impacts to natural resources will be avoided or minimized. EAC Meeting Page 6 of 15 YU1k""3MUNk 01--­ ,1­1Y Figure 1: Project Component Map The beach -fill and scarp repair (upland disposal) element at Barefoot Beach is contingent based upon clarification of land use and management plans. Beach fill can either be placed onshore or nearshore at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Both have received preliminary support from Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). In order to minimize project dredging, some natural migration of the channel will be allowed. The ebb channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north and south, except at the gap in the hard substrate. The flood channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north. Dredging centered on the current channel location, to the maximum extent practical, will reduce dredging volumes. Intermediate ebb channel dredging (small scale dredging) may be needed to clear the channel at the bar (sand bypassing bar). Material from the small scale dredgings would be placed to an area approximately 300 -1000 feet north of the cm i MEL C35 ' FLOOD SHOAL `'- DISPOSAL AREA I BAREFOOT BEACH ( c33 PRESERVE I DELNOR- WIGGINS ( PASS STATE PARK . n C3 - +n ` - - - - -- - - -- J-N SCARP REPAIR – – DREDGE PRIMARY (NORTH) AND BEACH ' AREA / DISPOSAL A DISPOSAL AREA � SECONDARY (SOUTH) J NEARSHORE AND BEACH EBB SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA / DISPOSAL AREA / GULF �•.�� —i5wn / OF MEXICO YU1k""3MUNk 01--­ ,1­1Y Figure 1: Project Component Map The beach -fill and scarp repair (upland disposal) element at Barefoot Beach is contingent based upon clarification of land use and management plans. Beach fill can either be placed onshore or nearshore at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Both have received preliminary support from Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). In order to minimize project dredging, some natural migration of the channel will be allowed. The ebb channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north and south, except at the gap in the hard substrate. The flood channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north. Dredging centered on the current channel location, to the maximum extent practical, will reduce dredging volumes. Intermediate ebb channel dredging (small scale dredging) may be needed to clear the channel at the bar (sand bypassing bar). Material from the small scale dredgings would be placed to an area approximately 300 -1000 feet north of the EAC Meeting Page 7 of 15 inlet (ebb shoal disposal area). Two of the main purposes for placement of this fill in the ebb shoal disposal area are to feed the re- growth of the ebb shoal and to allow for clearing of the ebb channel. If dredging could be conducted using smaller equipment during the calmer times of the year, it would also be very economical. Each of the tasks described above supports improved navigation and inlet management. The engineering report has identified the reasons why the 1995 inlet plan did not perform well. The sediment transport direction is not predominately southerly. The disposal location and a 50:50 split of bypassed sand to adjacent beaches was imbalanced. The sand needs to be disposed of closer to the inlet and approximately two- thirds needs to go to the north. This imbalanced disposal since 1984 needs short term supplemental sand to address past practices. The new plan addresses the imbalance, recovery of the north ebb shoal, the Barefoot Beach hot spot (area of high erosion) south of R -14, and improving navigation. The solution addresses the importance of both natural and manmade forces underappreciated in previous studies and incorporates the controlling geology into the plan. Insufficient sand bypassing to the north and the natural migration of the flood channel to the north are the two major causes of the current problems, which are addressed by the design. Inlets in other communities have also been relocated in order to alleviate erosion and illustrate the benefits of using non - structural options to address inlet channel migration related problems. Examples of these projects are included in Section V, the Navigation and Public Safety section of the engineering study. 2. Project Permittine Collier County submitted a Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) application to FDEP and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) on February 17, 2010. A copy of this complete JCP application and all supporting attachments is provided as Appendix 1, on the CD provided in the Environmental Data for the project. The FDEP and USACE issued RAI's on March 24, 2010 and March 19, 2010, respectively. These RAI's and their corresponding responses are provided as Appendix 2; only relevant environmental attachments are provided as hard copies, but all attachments are included on the CD. At the request of FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (BBCS) staff, Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) prepared the engineering study, which was submitted to FDEP with the RAI No. 1 Response. Collier County has also applied for a Special Treatment (ST) permit; the application of which has been included as Appendix 4. The County will also apply for a Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) permit and a Vehicle on the Beach (VOB) permit, at the time of construction. EAC Meeting Page 8 of 15 3. Native Habitats Natural resources of the project area are comprised of three major resource classifications: the beach/dune/coastal strand system; estuarine resources; and near -shore Gulf of Mexico. The marine and estuarine environments surrounding Wiggins Pass are directly influenced by the pass, which allows for the mixing of Gulf and estuarine waters. Temperature and salinity regimes are predominantly controlled by the tide. The pass provides access for a variety of estuarine - marine migratory species, including snook and mullet. The following descriptions of the natural resources are based on available references and on -site investigations. Detailed descriptions of the habitats found north and south of Wiggins Pass can be found in the Barefoot Beach Land Management Plan (Appendix 5 (pp. 5 -11; Appendix E; Appendix n) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan (Appendix 6 (pp. 9 -20)). Figure 4 shows the location of natural resources in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass. Estuarine wetlands within the Wiggins Pass project area include the tidal wetlands and submerged habitats within and adjacent to the pass. East of the pass, several forger canals and a connecting channel have been dredged for boat access from adjacent marinas and developed areas. With the exception of periodic dredging through the navigational channels, the remaining tidal and submerged wetlands within the project area are primarily undeveloped and retain their natural characteristics. These shallow estuarine waters and the adjacent tidal areas support productive mangrove forests and beds of seagrass, algae, and oyster. These tidal and submerged wetlands serve as important breeding, feeding and nursery grounds for numerous fish and invertebrates such as crabs and shrimp. Birds, such as egrets, terns, and herons, forage on small invertebrates and fish found in the tidal flats and within the pass. Common infauna, include ghost crabs, mole crabs, coquina clams, and various polychaetes, amphipods and isopods. Like many of the intertidal animals found in this zone, coquina clams and mole crabs are preyed upon by shorebirds and fish, thus providing a vital trophic link within this community. Additionally, the sandy shoal areas within the project area, primarily along the north end of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, are important to horseshoe crabs (Limulus polyphemus), which spawn along the wet beaches of the project area (Robert Steiger, pers. comm., 2011). The eggs of the horseshoe crab are, in turn, an important food source for foraging red knots (Calidris canutus), a species that winters in Florida. Due to overfishing, horseshoe crab populations have declined over recent years; as a result, red knot numbers have also dropped dramatically. EAC Meeting Page 9 of 15 5� yc 0 1,000 2,000 Feet 1 inch = 2,000 feet LEGEND: PROPOSED DISPOSAL AREA 2011 PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT 2000 -2011 PERMITTED DREDGE TEMPLATE SEPTEMBER 9.2010 HARDBOTTOM OBSERVATION AUGUST 2009 SSS HARDBOTTOM EDGE 1994 SSS POTENTIAL HARDBOTTOM 0 2009 OYSTER BEDS 2009 EDGE OF MANGROVE • 2011 SURVEYED SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTII) E32009 SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTIO 2009 SEAGRASS (HALOPHILA DECIP/ENS) 2008 SURVEYED SEAGRASS REPORTED ROCK SUBSTRATE (CEC 1990, CPE 1995) 2009 GOPHER TORTOISE BURROW SURVEY VERY ACTI VE ACTIVE INACTIVE ABANDONED OUTSTANDING FLORIDA WATERS 01 OTHER (62- 302.700 (9) (c) and (f), FA.C.) JSPECIAL (62- 302.700 (9) (i). F.A.C.) ;G .4 ,J A r4-4w-Z'7 1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY COLLIER COUNTY, DATE FLOWN 2009. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED BY CPE ON DECEMBER 10, 2008 JULY 13 &14, 2009 AND SEPTEMBER 29, 2011. 3. LOCATION OF ROCK LEDGE TAKEN FROM 1995 INLET MANAGMENT PLAN (CPE 1995), BUT WAS ORIGINALLY IDENTIFIED BY CEC IN 1990. Figure 4: Natural resources in the vicinity Of Wiggins Pass Extensive mangrove forests, including red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove (Avicennia germinans) and white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa), fringe the waterways, while small red mangrove isl'.ands dot the estuary. Red and black mangroves dominate those areas which are frequently inundated by normal tidal action while white mangroves and buttonwoods (Conocarpus erectus) are EAC Meeting Page 10 of 15 usually found at slightly higher elevations where tidal inundation is less frequent. These forests provide both habitat and foraging areas for various species of birds, crabs and other invertebrates, and the subtidal mangrove roots serve as nursery grounds for fish species such as snook (Centropomus undecimalis), mullet (Mugil cephalus) and sea trout (Cynoscion nebulosus). Several field investigations over the years conducted by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) and others have revealed scattered seagrass beds throughout the project area, found in sparse to moderate density. Three species have been observed in the area, including Cuban shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum), and paddle grass (Halophila decipiens), although shoal grass is overwhelmingly the most common species observed. These beds are typically found along the shallow shelf lining the main navigational channel, and within the shallow protected areas fringing the small mangrove islands. No seagrass was observed within the main channel and all known seagrasses are being avoided with the planned alignment. Copies of recent seagrass surveys and an observation report summarizing a September 29, 2011, site visit with Mark Sramek — NWS Habitat Conservation Department, are provided as Appendix 7 of the Environmental Data. Scattered clusters of oysters (Crassostrea virginica) are also common along the fringing mangroves and surrounding the mangrove islands deep within the inlet. The nearshore Gulf of Mexico classification includes the littoral (intertidal) zone and the sublittoral (offshore) zone. The littoral zone is inhabited by organisms such as polychaete worms, crustaceans, and bivalves. Organisms common to the sublittoral zone include annelid worms, crustaceans, echinoderms, pelecypod and gastropod mollusks, and various species of crabs and shrimp. In addition, the coastal waters contain a variety of commercial and sport fishes including snook (Centropomus undecimalis), pompano (Trachinotus carolinus), spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), groupers (Epinephelus and Mycteroperca spp.), snappers (Lutjanus spp.), redfish (Sciaenops ocellatus) and flounders. The nearshore Gulf floor consists of a mosaic of carbonate sand, small areas of low -relief exposed hardbottom, and thin layers of carbonate sand over hardbottom. Low relief hardbottom habitat is located offshore of the project area, ranging from 300 to 500 feet from shore. Adjacent to Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, the hardbottom is as close as 150 -200 feet from shore. In general, the sand - silt substrate supports a low- diversity, low density soft bottom assemblage. Organisms frequently associated with the soft bottom include pen shells (Atrina rigida), tube worms (Chaetopterus variopedatus), fighting conch (Strombus alatus) and various echinoderms (Lytechinus variegatus, Mellita quinquiesperforata, Astropecten sp., and Luidia senegalensis). Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) has conducted detailed mapping of nearshore hardbottom north and south of Wiggins Pass. EAC Meeting Page 11 of 15 Hardbottom mapping has been conducted in the nearshore region of Wiggins Pass. Exposed hardbottom is not known to be present within or near the channels of Wiggins Pass. A rock substrate has been verified to be located under the sand of the ebb shoal. The ledge shown in Figure 4 was the report location from the 1990's, but recent investigations show it extended across the ebb shoal. The ebb channel is generally located between two massive hard substrates within the intervening gap. The natural, existing, and proposed ebb channels are located in this gap. The most extensive reach of hardbottom is located south of Wiggins Pass, extending south of FDEP monument R -18; the location of this hardbottom has been verified by remote sensing and dives by CPE between 2003 and 2009. Exposed hardbottom is located as close as 600 feet from the shoreline between R- 20 and R -21 and over 1,000 feet offshore at R -18. There are also potential hardbottom resources located north of Wiggins Pass, between R -9.5 and R -11. The closest potential hardbottom detected during a CPE 1994 side scan survey was approximately 900 ft from R -11. These resources were ground - truthed by Collier County divers in September 2010 (Appendix 8); divers found hardbottom north of the R -11 transect, and no hardbottom south of the R -11.5 transect. South from R -11.5, the bottom was predominately mud. CPE has conducted multiple assessments of the biotic community found on the hardbottom south of Wiggins Pass. Dominant epibiota include macroalgae and sponges, with some octocorals and scleractinian corals. Common macroalgae genera include Caulerpa, Botryolcladia, Gracilaria, Hypnea and Sargassum. Bioeroding sponges are also common, including Pione lampa and Cliona celata. Although soft corals can be locally abundant, diversity is low, with Leptogorgia virgulata and L. hebes most commonly observed. Stony coral species include Solenastrea hyades, S. bournoni, Siderastrea siderea, S. radians, Oculina robusta, Cladocora arbuscula and Phyllangia americana (CPE, 2009). 4. Preservation Reauirements N/A 5. Listed Species A list of threatened and endangered species and species of special concern with the potential to occur in the project area is presented in Table 2 (Townsend and Olson, 2007; FDEP, 2009) in the Environmental Data. Complete lists of wildlife and plants which have been observed north and south of Wiggins Pass can be found in the Barefoot Beach Land Management Plan (Appendix 5 (species list pp. 5 -10; listed species pp. 10 -11; natural resource inventory Appendix E; Appendix 1)) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan (Appendix 6 (imperiled species pp. 16 -19; complete species lists Addendum 4)). The following are listed species documented from the project area. EAC Meeting Page 12 of 15 According to the 2010 Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Report (Kraus et al., 2010), staff documented 422 loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) nests during the 2010 season, a moderate increase from 297 nests in 2009. Twenty nests were documented on the 1.2 mile (1.9 km) beach along Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, and 87 nests were documented on the 3.1 -mile (5 -km) Barefoot Beach survey area. During the 2010 nesting season, 3.5% (14) of the documented nests were disoriented. Seven percent (3 1) of the nests were depredated, which is an increase from four percent last year. A total of 27,142 hatchlings were estimated to have reached the Gulf of Mexico. The number of successfully emerged hatchlings represents an increase compared to 19,869 hatchlings that reached the Gulf of Mexico in 2009. The number of strandings in Collier County was 47 in 2010. This was a slight increase from 40 in 2009. Data from Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Reports, 2005 -2010, are presented in Tables 3 and 4 (below). Table 3 presents sea turtle nesting data from Barefoot Beach (R -1 to R -16) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (R -17 to R -22) between 2005 and 2010; all nests were laid by loggerheads. Nesting data for the immediate project vicinity around Wiggins Pass (the south end of Barefoot Beach (R -13 to R -16) and the north end of Delnor- Wiggins (R -17 to R -19)) from 2005 -2010 is provided in Table 4. Table 3: Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park sea turtle nesting, 2005 -2010 20051 2006 1 2007 1 2008 1 2009 2010 BAREFOOT BEACH Total Nests 72 56 40 75 59 87 Total False Crawls 67 55 33 85 50 90 DELNOR- WIGGINS Total Nests 15 10 18 17 22 20 Total False Crawls 46 12 20 33 36 20 Total Emer ences 61 22 38 50 58 40 EAC Meeting Page 13 of 15 Table 4: Sea turtle nesting adjacent to Wiggins Pass, 2005 -2010 Habitat for the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a State - listed species of special concern, exists throughout the beach dune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock of Barefoot Beach Preserve. Barefoot Beach is one of the remaining few natural barrier islands along the southwest coast of Florida and is important habitat for the gopher tortoise: a total of 712 burrows were recorded from June 13 through September 7 of 2009; 186 were recorded as Very Active; 277 were recorded as Active; 76 were recorded as Inactive; 173 were abandoned (Table 5, Figure 4). According to Sally Braem, there are about 30-40 active gopher tortoise burrows in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (pers. comm., 2011). Table 5: Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 (data obtained from Margie Hamilton, gopher tortoise biologist for Barefoot Beach) Size Class: 20051 2006 1 2007 L 2008 2009 2010 BAREFOOT BEACH (R13 -R16) Total 34 13 Juvenile 6 9 1 Nests 13 5 3 16 14 24 Total False 12 8 8 15 12 17 Crawls DELNOR- WIGGINS (R17 -1119) Total Nests 9 1 8 6 5 13 Total False 19 2 7 18 19 11 Crawls Habitat for the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a State - listed species of special concern, exists throughout the beach dune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock of Barefoot Beach Preserve. Barefoot Beach is one of the remaining few natural barrier islands along the southwest coast of Florida and is important habitat for the gopher tortoise: a total of 712 burrows were recorded from June 13 through September 7 of 2009; 186 were recorded as Very Active; 277 were recorded as Active; 76 were recorded as Inactive; 173 were abandoned (Table 5, Figure 4). According to Sally Braem, there are about 30-40 active gopher tortoise burrows in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (pers. comm., 2011). Table 5: Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 (data obtained from Margie Hamilton, gopher tortoise biologist for Barefoot Beach) Size Class: Very Active Active Inactive Adult 173 233 62 Sub Adult 6 34 13 Juvenile 6 9 1 Hatchling 1 1 0 Subtotals: Abandoned: Total Burrows: 186 277 76 173 712 The Barefoot Beach shoreline provides important habitat for several bird species, including overwintering habitat for piping plovers (Townsend and Olson, 2007). Shorebird surveys within Delnor- Wiggins have shown that many species of birds utilize the shoreline for feeding or roosting, but no shorebirds have nested within Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park since least tern nest sites were last documented in 1986 and 1987 (FDEP, 2009; Sally Braem, pers. comm., 2011). No piping plovers EAC Meeting Page 14 of 15 have been observed during shorebird surveys in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (Carolyn Shaw, pers. comm., 2011). Manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris) and bottle -nosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are common in the area, and have been observed within Wiggins Pass. 6. Conservation Measures Construction will comply with all permit requirements that will result from coordination with FDEP, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), USACE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Construction activities will be kept under surveillance, management, and control to minimize interference with, disturbance of, or damage to wildlife resources, particularly threatened and endangered species, within the project area. This project will also adhere to LDC section 3.04.02, which contains protection measures for listed species. Sea Turtles and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction will adhere to the NMFS "Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions" during construction of this project. All attempts will be made to place fill on the beach outside of nesting season. Gopher Tortoises Project construction will be in accordance with LDC subsection 3.04.02.A. Manatees Construction operations will comply with FWC's "2011 Standard Manatee Conditions for In -Water Work" during construction of this project. Birds Shorebirds may be disturbed by construction activities and find quieter areas of the beach to roost. Shorebird monitoring in and near the project area will be conducted as required by the FWC. Seagrass and Oyster Beds Whenever feasible, turbidity curtains will be utilized to protect seagrass and oyster beds in the work area from turbidity and sedimentation during construction. Hardbottom Resources Hardbottom monitoring will be conducted as required by FDEP. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of ST- PL20120000168 "Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project ". EAC Meeting Page 15 of 15 PREPARED BY: STEPHEN LENBERGER SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT STORMWATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING SECTION REVIEWED BY: (/i,2 2u12 DATE .ZAA-4 G G Z JERRY KURTZ, P.E. DATE LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT MANAGER, STORMWATER AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING SECTION UG WILLIAM D. LO Z, Jr., DATE DIRECTOR LAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVEN T. WILLIAMS DATE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY OFFICE OF THE COLLIER COUNTY ATTORNEY APPROVED BY: NICK CA AL GU`I A DATE ADMINISTRATOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION CPE COASTAL PLANNING& ENGINEERING., ���GINEE¢1� WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL DATA Prepared for: Collier County Submitted: February 2012 Revised: April 2012 CAr County 2481 N.W. Boca Raton Blvd. • Boca Raton, FL 33431 • Phone (561)391 -8102 • Fax (561)39 cm WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL DATA COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared for: Collier County Prepared by: Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. 2481 N.W. Boca Raton Blvd. Boca Raton, Florida 33431 February 2012 Revised April 2012 WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ENVIRONMENTAL DATA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY According to Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) 10.02.02.A, environmental data must be submitted to ensure that the proposed project meets the land development standards contained within the LDC. Environmental data must be prepared in support of a Special Treatment Permit approval. Special Treatment (ST) Overlays (LDC 02.03.07) are areas within the County which, "because of their unique assemblages of flora and/or fauna, their aesthetic appeal, historic or archeological significance, rarity in the County, or their contribution to their own and adjacent ecosystems, make them worthy of special regulations." Such areas include mangrove and freshwater swamps, barrier islands, hardwood hammocks, and coastal beaches, all of which fall within the vicinity of Wiggins Pass. The purpose of the ST designation is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these resources. The areas adjacent to Wiggins Pass (Barefoot Beach to the north and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park to the south) are zoned as Conservation — Special Treatment Areas; therefore, special attention must be paid to ensure that the project preserves and maintains these areas. This environmental data is also submitted in support of Collier County's Growth Management Plan (GMP); specifically, the Conservation & Coastal Management Element (CCME) Goal 10, which states that "the County shall protect, conserve, manage, and appropriately use its coastal barriers including shorelines, beaches and dunes and will plan for, and where appropriate, will restrict activities where such activities will damage or destroy coastal resources." This Environmental Data Submittal includes the information required in LDC 10.02.02.A, where applicable to the Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project. This environmental data includes information on natural communities, vegetation, and listed species within and adjacent to the project area, including both terrestrial and marine habitats; however, construction of this project will occur almost entirely in the marine environment. The Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project is a non - structural solution designed to improve navigation and to address the critical erosion issue at Barefoot Beach. This project will not involve the removal of any native vegetation or wetlands, and avoidance measures will be incorporated during dredging to avoid impacts to seagrass resources. The proposed project will re- establish a historic location of the flood channel: the new flood channel will be relocated to the where the flood channel was located in the last 60 -80 years. Overall, the proposed project consists of an initial dredging, major maintenance dredging every 4 years, and minor maintenance dredging in between, for a total volume of approximately 214,000 cubic yards over a ten -year period. The existing project requires dredging at least 50,000 cubic yards every 2 years, for a total cumulative volume of at least 300,000 cubic yards every decade. The proposed dredging plan is a distinct improvement, dredging approximately 86,000 cubic yards less than the existing project over a ten -year period. 1 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ENVIRONMENTAL DATA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... ..............................1 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................... ............................... 1 1.2 PROJECT PERMITTING ................................................ ............................... 4 2.0. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ..................................................... ..............................5 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................... ............................... 5 2.2 SPECIAL TREATMENT OVERLAYS ........................... ............................... 6 2.3 NATURAL COMMUNITIES .......................................... ............................... 7 2.3.1 Beach and Dune System, and Upland Areas ........ ............................... 8 2.3.2 Estuarine Resources .............................................. ............................... 9 2.3.3 Nearshore Gulf of Mexico .................................. ............................... 10 3.0 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ....................... .............................13 4.0 CONSERVATION MEASURES ................................................... .............................17 5.0 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................... .............................17 6.0 DOCUMENT PREPARERS .......................................................... .............................18 LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. 1 Project component map ................................................................... ..............................2 2 Project location map ........................................................................ ..............................5 3 Zoning districts and Special Treatment (ST) overlays adjacent to Wiggins Pass ......... 7 4 Natural resources in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass .......................... .............................12 LIST OF TABLES Table No. 1 Wiggins Pass channel dimensions ................................................... ..............................3 2 Listed species with the potential to occur in project area ............... .............................14 3 Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park sea turtle nesting, 2005- 2010..15 4 Sea turtle nesting adjacent to Wiggins Pass, 2005- 2010 ................ .............................16 5 Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 .......................... 16 ii _;•w COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ENVIRONMENTAL DATA LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1 Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) Application, Submitted February, 17, 2010 (on CD) 2 FDEP and USACE RAI's and Responses and Attachments (relevant attachments provided as hard copies; all attachments included on CD) 3 Abridged Engineering Report (Full Report on CD) 4 Special Treatment (ST) Permit Application 5 Barefoot Beach Land Management Plan (on CD) 6 Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan (on CD) 7 Benthic Resource (Seagrass) Surveys 8 Collier County Dive Investigations — September 8, 2010 9 Statement of Consistency with the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) iii COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA ENVIRONMENTAL DATA 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The goals for the Wiggins Pass navigation improvement study as developed by Collier County and the Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Committee are: 1. To provide a safe channel for boating 2. To address erosion at Barefoot Beach 3. To lengthen the dredge cycle, accomplished with the least impact on the environment 4. To provide a solution that is economically effective A non - structural alternative is an objective for the inlet design in order to improve navigation. The committee, which formulated the main goals for Wiggins Pass, represented a broad range of local stake holders appointed by the County government. The current and historic inlet and shoreline conditions were evaluated in order to develop an improved inlet management strategy. A complete coastal study was performed in conjunction with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) process. This study included an engineering report and two modeling reports. The 2012 engineering report contains a refined modeling report that was based upon the initial 2009 modeling study. The 2009 report also contains minutes and details from the special committee of the Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC). The project recommended in the 2009 modeling study and refined based on comments generated by the 2010 permit application is summarized below. Refinements were developed during the last year based on a new field investigations and further consultation with agencies. The plan addresses concerns expressed by FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (BBCS) and Park Service, and other local interest groups. It addresses not only navigation, but also improved sand bypassing, modifications to channel dredging, ,improved locations for sand disposal, and an updated inlet management study. It accomplishes improved navigation and sediment management by a combination of straightening the channel, major and small maintenance dredging, and new sand disposal practices. The proposed design modifies and improves upon the County- approved 1995 Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan. This project includes channel realignment which will be accomplished by straightening the inlet channel layout and infilling and blocking the northern flood shoal meander (Figure 1). The east, north, and south interior channel entrances are identified for maintenance dredging, should sand shoal within their respective boundaries. The designated dredge disposal locations and distribution will be modified and relocated based on shoreline monitoring results, 1 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. with preference given to areas with greatest need. Incorporating the ability to modify disposal locations will increase management flexibility, reduce sediment loss to the system, and minimize impacts to Barefoot Beach and Delnor - Wiggins Pass State Park shoreline. Nearshore and beach (onshore) disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R -12 to R -15.5 and south of the inlet between R -18 and R -20 (Figure 1). As Barefoot Beach recovers towards its traditional shoreline location, its disposal area will need to move west in order to account for the increased shoreline with. An ebb shoal disposal area has also been designated to assist in stabilizing the Barefoot Beach shoreline (Figure 1). A separate offshore disposal area (Borrow Area 6 from the 1996 Beach Nourishment Project) has been designated as an acceptable location to place unsuitable fill dredged from the channel. The project also includes scarp repair along southern Barefoot Beach to restore the beach to historic conditions. A dynamic design will be incorporated into the maintenance plan for the inlet so that long -term dredging can be reduced. Impacts to natural resources will be avoided or minimized. FLOOD SHOAL - I DISPOSAL AREA BAREFOOTBEACH PRESERVE ( I I DELNOR- WIGGIN5 PASS STATE PARK .-,. / I ------ - - - - -- SCARP REPAIR DREDGE AREA / ^ — _ PRIMARY (NORTH) - - -- NEARSHORE AND REACH SECONDARY (SOUTH) DISPOSAL AREA NEARSHORE AND BEACH e EBB SHOAL DISPC SAL AREA d� DISPOSAL AREA �;�`` 1'.)o GULF - OF MEXICO Figure 1: Project Component Map The beach fill and scarp repair (upland disposal) element at Barefoot Beach is contingent based upon clarification of land use and management plans. Beach fill can either be placed onshore or nearshore at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Both have received preliminary support from Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The method for determining the size and location of bypassing operations between the north and south beaches is proposed based on equalizing the volumetric change rates for an equal distance 2 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. north and south of the inlet based on the 2001 surveyed profiles. Only volumes dredged in the ebb shoal will count, since flood shoal dredge and fill operations are a zero sum operation. Volume placed by an independent nourishment project would be factored out of these calculations, since non - maintenance dredging sources may be needed to restore the beach and ebb shoal north of the inlet, where similar impacts do not exist south of the inlet. Priority for dredge material is for rebuilding the north flood shoal, and then bypassing to adjacent beaches. In order to minimize project dredging, some natural migration of the channel will be allowed. The ebb channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north and south, except at the gap in the hard substrate. The flood channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north. Dredging centered on the current channel location, to the maximum extent practical, will reduce dredging volumes. The size of the new channel is summarized in the table below. Table 1. Wiezins Pass Channel Dimensions Station Location Bottom Width ft Depth ft, NAVD Overdredge ft 15+00 Ebb Shoal 240 -12.0 1.0 0 +00 Ebb Shoal 160 -12.0 1.0 C6 Throat 160 -7.7 1.0 CIO Flood Shoal 130 -7.7 1.0 C15 Flood Shoal 130 -7.7 1.0 C26 East Channel 82 -7.0 1.0 C31 South Channel 123 -7.2 1.0 C35 I North Channel 1 70 1 -7.0 1 1.0 Almost every element of the project contributes to both navigation and inlet management, and further refinements to this plan are expected. It also addresses balancing inlet bypassing based on FDEP inlet management principles. A 10 -year plan is proposed in order to achieve the project goals, with details listed below. 1) Initial construction of straightened channel i) Dredge compatible sand from ebb channel — 41,000 cy (Range of 24,000 to 58,000 c.y.) ii) Dredge flood channel — 36,400 c.y. iii) Dredge incompatible material — 7,500 c.y. iv) Build beach, nearshore, ebb shoal and scour repair with compatible sand — 38,200 c.y. v) Fill meander with compatible sand — 39,200 c.y. vi) Offshore borrow pit disposal of unsuitable sand - 7,500 c.y. 2) Major maintenance dredging — 50,000 c.y. every 4 years with disposal balanced to favor adjacent Gulf shoreline with greatest need based on equalizing volumetric changes. i) Place beach compatible sand in beach, nearshore or ebb shoal. 3) Intermediate ebb channel dredging as needed 3 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. i) Excavate and clear ebb channel at the bar and laterally place about 8,000 to 10,000 c.y. in the north ebb shoal to promote regrowth. 4) Create contingency, monitoring, and inlet management plans i) No direct mitigation expected 5) Nourish critically eroded area on Barefoot Beach and rebuild ebb shoal as supplemental bypassing when feasible until the shoreline and shoal recovers (this is part of a separate permit and project). Intermediate ebb channel dredging (small scale dredging) may be needed to clear the channel at the bar. Material from the small scale dredgings would be placed to an area approximately 300- 1000 feet north of the inlet (ebb shoal disposal area). Two of the main purposes for placement of this fill in the ebb shoal disposal area are to feed the re- growth of the ebb shoal and to allow for clearing of the ebb channel. If dredging could be conducted using smaller equipment during the calmer times of the year, it would also be very economical. Each of the tasks described above supports improved navigation and inlet management. The engineering report has identified three reasons why the 1995 inlet plan did not perform well. First, the sediment transport direction is not predominately southerly. The disposal location and a 50:50 split of bypassed sand to adjacent beaches was imbalanced. The sand needs to be disposed of closer to the inlet and approximately two- thirds needs to go to the north. This imbalanced disposal since 1984 needs short term supplemental sand to address past practices. The new plan addresses the imbalance, recovery of the north ebb shoal, the Barefoot Beach hot spot south of R -14, and improving navigation. A structural solution using a jetty, breakwater or T -groin has been suggested as an economical alternative, but is not supported by FDEP BBCS, the Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Committee, and local policy and plans. Given the local coastal processes, a simple but workable structure that accomplishes the above goals would be difficult. 1.2 PROJECT PERMITTING Collier County submitted a Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) application to FDEP and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) on February 17, 2010. A copy of this complete JCP application and all supporting attachments is provided as Appendix 1 on the enclosed CD. The FDEP and USACE issued RAI's on March 24, 2010 and March 19, 2010, respectively. These RAI's and their corresponding responses are provided as Appendix 2; only relevant environmental attachments are provided as hard copies, but all attachments are included on the enclosed CD. At the request of FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (BBCS) staff, Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) prepared an engineering study, which was submitted to FDEP with the RAI No. 1 Response. This engineering study is provided as Appendix 3. Collier County is also applying for a Special Treatment (ST) permit; the ST permit application is provided as Appendix 4. The County will also apply for a Coastal Construction Setback Line (CCSL) permit and Vehicle on the Beach (VOB) permit at the appropriate time. 4 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION Collier County is located on the Gulf of Mexico in Southwest Florida, approximately 115 miles south of the entrance of Tampa Bay (Figure 1). The Everglades lie to the southeast. Collier County has 35 miles of accessible coastline, consisting of a series of barrier islands and mainland extensions sub - divided by lagoons, rivers, and inlets. Collier County has six inlets north of the Ten Thousand Islands, with Wiggins Pass being the farthest north. Figure 2. Project location map. Wiggins Pass is located 5 miles north of Clam Pass and 5.9 miles south of Big Hickory Pass. Wiggins Pass is a natural inlet which provides access to the Gulf of Mexico for a number of embayments and rivers along three main interior channels. The eastern channel connects to the Cocohatchee River. The southern channel connects to Water Turkey Bay and Vanderbilt Lagoon, and the northern channel connects to the lagoon between Little Hickory Island and the mainland. This northern lagoon consists of a number of embayments including May Flower, Palm Vines, Little Hickory Bays, and eventually connects to Big Hickory Pass. There is no interior waterway connection south to Clam Pass. Population centers near the pass include Vanderbilt Beach and Naples Park to the south and Bonita Shores to the north. Wiggins Pass is bounded by public lands which extend 7,950 linear feet to the north and 6,010 linear feet to the south. Barefoot Beach Preserve lies to the north and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park is to the south. 5 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. u Wiggins Pass is currently dredged at regular intervals of approximately 2 years to maintain navigation for boats with up to a 3 foot draft. The pass provides boat access to the Gulf from inland waterways and lagoons at Vanderbilt Beach, the Cocohatchee River, Wiggins Pass Marina, and several other private and public marinas and ramps. The dredged channel extends from the inlet throat to about 1,200 feet offshore. Periodic dredging has occurred at the intersection of the interior channels. Disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R11.4 to R14.2 and south of the inlet between R18 and R20.5. The inlet has been dredged since 1984 under two previous permits. The history of Wiggins Pass inlet management is included in the engineering study, provided here as Appendix 3. 2.2 SPECIAL TREATEMENT OVERLAYS Special Treatment (ST) overlays (LDC 02.03.07) are areas within the County which, "because of their unique assemblages of flora and/or fauna, their aesthetic appeal, historic or archeological significance, rarity in the County, or their contribution to their own and adjacent ecosystems, make them worthy of special regulations." Such areas include mangrove and freshwater swamps, barrier islands, hardwood hammocks, and coastal beaches, all of which fall within the Wiggins Pass project vicinity (Figure 3). The purpose of the ST is to assure the preservation and maintenance of these resources. Further information regarding ST districts can be found in Collier County's Land Development Code (LDC), sections 2.03.07.1), 3.03.023, 4.02.12.E -H, and 10.02.06.D. The Special Treatment (ST) permit application is provided as Appendix 4. 6 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 3. Zoning districts and Special Treatment (ST) overlays adjacent to Wiggins Pass. (CON = Conservation Zoning District, A = Agricultural Zoning District) 2.3 NATURAL COMMUNITY Wiggins Pass is a relatively large area of mangrove swamp, with a series of shallow coastal bays connecting the Cocohatchee River to the Gulf of Mexico. The pass is bordered to the north by Barefoot Beach Preserve and to the south by Delnor- Wiggins State Park. The natural resources of the project area are comprised of three major resource classifications including: the beach and dune system, and upland areas; estuarine resources; and the nearshore Gulf of Mexico. The marine and estuarine environments surrounding Wiggins Pass are directly influenced by the pass, which allows for the mixing of Gulf and estuarine waters. Temperature and salinity regimes are predominantly controlled by the tide. The pass provides access for a variety of .estuarine - marine migratory species, including snook and mullet. The following 7 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. descriptions of the natural resources are based on available references and on -site investigations. Detailed descriptions of the habitats found north and south of Wiggins Pass can be found in the Barefoot Beach Land Management Plan (Appendix 5 (pp. 5 -11; Appendix E; Appendix I)) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan (Appendix 6 (pp. 9 -20)). 2.3.1 Beach and Dune System, and Upland Areas Beaches The sandy beaches surrounding Wiggins Pass are characteristic of low energy shorelines, having a relatively gentle, shallow offshore slope. These beaches, as well as inshore and offshore sandbars, provide a resting and foraging habitat for shorebirds and wading birds. Species commonly observed in these areas include pelicans, herons, egrets, gulls, terns, plovers, sandpipers and small passerine species (Townsend and Olson, 2007). The beaches also provide foraging habitat for a few terrestrial mammals, such as raccoons and squirrels. Other organisms inhabiting the beach zone include amphipods, isopods, coquina clams (Donax variabilis), polychaete worms, and various crabs such as mole crabs (Emerita talpoida) and the common ghost crab (Ocypode sp.). The beaches provide nesting habitat for sea turtles; primarily the loggerhead sea turtle ( Caretta caretta). Nesting data for the years 2005- 2010 are provided below in Section 3.0. Dune System and Upland Areas Wiggins Pass is bounded on the north by Barefoot Beach Preserve and on the south by Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Both of these natural areas support coastal dune /upland habitat. The habitat can be divided into four west - east zones or parallel bands of vegetation, including the pioneer zone, foredune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock (Townsend and Olson, 2007). The upper beach, or pioneer zone, is sparsely populated with salt- tolerant vines and grasses such as sea oats (Uniola paniculata). This band of vegetation extends the length of the beach and provides natural erosion protection to the beach dune. This zone is periodically disturbed by storm waves or high tides and is subsequently recolonized by pioneer species. Landward of the pioneer zone is the foredune, colonized by low bush species such as inkberry (Scaevola plumieri) and bay cedar (Suriana maritima). The native foredune vegetation has been replaced by the exotic Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia) in some places. This habitat zone is utilized by the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a state - listed species of special concern and a candidate species for federal listing (see Section 3.0). The coastal strand is a transitional zone between the foredune and maritime hammock. In addition to sea oats and bay cedar, the coastal strand supports small trees and shrubs such as seagrape (Cocoloba uvifera), necklace pod (Sophora tomentosa), and saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). Both Australian pines and the exotic Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) can shade out native vegetation in this zone. The coastal strand also provides valuable gopher tortoise habitat. Landward of the coastal strand is a stable backdune community called the maritime hammock. The western portion of this habitat is composed primarily of cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) 8 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. stands with large open areas in between. Small hardwood trees grow interspersed within the cabbage palms. Vines are common, as well as low shrub and ground cover such as beach lantana (Lantana involucrata), Spanish needles (Bidens alba) and blue porterweed (Stachytarpheta jamaicensis). The maritime hammock includes a diverse plant community and serves as prime gopher tortoise habitat. 2.3.2 Estuarine Resources Estuarine wetlands within the Wiggins Pass project area include the tidal wetlands and submerged habitats within and adjacent to the pass. East of the pass, several finger canals and a connecting channel have been dredged for boat access from adjacent marinas and developed areas. With the exception of periodic dredging through the navigational channels, the remaining tidal and submerged wetlands within the project area are primarily undeveloped and retain their natural characteristics. These shallow estuarine waters and the adjacent tidal areas support productive mangrove forests, and seagrass, algal, and oyster beds. These tidal and submerged wetlands serve as important breeding, feeding and nursery grounds for numerous fish and invertebrates such as crabs and shrimp. Birds, such as egrets, terns, and herons, forage on small invertebrates and fish found in the tidal flats and within the pass. Common infauna include ghost crabs, mole crabs, coquina clams, and various polychaetes, amphipods and isopods. Like many of the intertidal animals found in this zone, coquina clams and mole crabs are preyed upon by shorebirds and fish, thus providing a vital trophic link within this community. Additionally, the sandy shoal areas within the project area, primarily along the north end of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, are important to horseshoe crabs (Limulus polyphemus), which spawn along the wet beaches of the project area (Robert Steiger, pers. comm., 2011). The eggs of the horseshoe crab are, in turn, an important food source for foraging red knots (Calidris canutus), a species that winters in Florida. Due to overfishing, horseshoe crab populations have declined over recent years; as a result, red knot numbers have also dropped dramatically. Manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris) and bottle -nosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are also common in the area, and have been observed within Wiggins Pass. Mangroves Extensive mangrove forests, including red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove (Avicennia germinans) and white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa), fringe the waterways, while small red mangrove islands dot the estuary. Red and black mangroves dominate those areas which are frequently inundated by normal tidal action while white mangroves and buttonwoods (Conocarpus erectus) are usually found at slightly higher elevations where tidal inundation is less frequent. These forests provide both habitat and foraging areas for various species of birds, crabs and other invertebrates, and the subtidal mangrove roots serve as nursery grounds for fish species such as snook (Centropomus undecimalis), mullet (Mugil cephalus) and sea trout (Cynoscion nebulosus). 9 ~" COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Seagrass Several field investigations over the years conducted by CPE and others have revealed scattered seagrass beds throughout the project area, found in sparse to moderate density (Figure 4). Three species have been observed in the area, including Cuban shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum), and paddle grass (Halophila decipiens), although shoal grass is overwhelmingly the most common species observed. These beds are typically found along the shallow shelf lining the main navigational channel, and within the shallow protected areas fringing the small mangrove islands. No seagrass was observed within the main channel. Copies of recent seagrass surveys and an observation report summarizing a September 29, 2011, site visit with Mark Sramek — NMFS Habitat Conservation Department, are provided as Appendix 7. Oyster Beds Scattered clusters of oysters (Crassostrea virginica) are also common along the fringing mangroves and surrounding the mangrove islands deep within the inlet (Figure 4). 2.3.3 Nearshore Gulf of Mexico The nearshore Gulf of Mexico classification includes the littoral (intertidal) zone and the sublittoral (offshore) zone. The littoral zone is inhabited by organisms such as polychaete worms, crustaceans, and bivalves. Organisms common to the sublittoral zone include annelid worms, crustaceans, echinoderms, pelecypod and gastropod mollusks, and various species of crabs and shrimp. In addition, the coastal waters contain a variety of commercial and sport fishes including snook (Centropomus undecimalis), pompano (Trachinotus carolinus), spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), groupers (Epinephelus and Mycteroperca spp.), snappers (Lu Janus spp.), redfish (Sciaenops ocellatus) and flounders. The nearshore Gulf floor consists of a mosaic of carbonate sand, small areas of low- relief exposed hardbottom, and thin layers of carbonate sand over hardbottom. Low relief hardbottom habitat is located offshore of the project area, ranging from 300 to 500 feet from shore. Adjacent to Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, the hardbottom is as close as 150 -200 feet from shore. In general, the sand -silt substrate supports a low- diversity, low density soft bottom assemblage. Organisms frequently associated with the soft bottom include pen shells (Atrina rigida), tube worms (Chaetopterus variopedatus), fighting conch (Strombus alatus) and various echinoderms (Lytechinus variegatus, Mellita quinquiesperforata, Astropecten sp., and Luidia senegalensis). Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) has conducted detailed mapping of nearshore hardbottom north and south of Wiggins Pass (Figure 4). Hardbottom Resources Hardbottom mapping has been conducted in the nearshore region of Wiggins Pass. Exposed hardbottom is not known to be present within or near the channels of Wiggins Pass. A rock substrate has been verified to be located under the sand of the ebb shoal. Data collected since 1979 has shown a rock substrate or ledge exists in the Wiggins Pass ebb shoal. The ledge shown in Figure 4 was the report location from the 1990's, but recent investigations show it extended across the ebb shoal. 10 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. The most extensive reach of hardbottom is located south of Wiggins Pass, extending south of a FDEP monument R -18; the location of this hardbottom has been verified by remote sensing and dives by CPE between 2003 and 2009 (Figure 4). Exposed hardbottom is located as close as 600 feet from the shoreline between R -20 and R -21 and over 1,000 feet offshore at R -18. There are also potential hardbottom resources located north of Wiggins Pass, between R -9.5 and R -11. The closest potential hardbottom detected during a CPE 1994 side scan survey was approximately 900 ft from R -11. These resources were ground - truthed by Collier County divers in September 2010 (Appendix 8); divers found hardbottom north of the R -11 transect, and no hardbottom south of the R -11.5 transect. South from R -11.5, the bottom was predominately mud. CPE has conducted multiple assessments of the biotic community found on the hardbottom south of Wiggins Pass. Dominant epibiota include macroalgae and sponges, with some octocorals and scleractinian corals. Common macroalgae genera include Caulerpa, Botryolcladia, Gracilaria, Hypnea and Sargassum. Bioeroding sponges are also common, including Pione Tampa and Cliona celata. Although soft corals can be locally abundant, diversity is low, with Leptogorgia virgulata and L. hebes most commonly observed. Stony coral species include Solenastrea hyades, S. bournoni, Siderastrea siderea, S. radians, Oculina robusta, Cladocora arbuscula and Phyllangia americana (CPE, 2009). 11 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 0 1,000 2,000 Feet 1 inch = 2.000 feet mo, '' a NAN LEGEND: --- PROPOSED DISPOSAL AREA • "�: t° ,Q- . . ,. 2011 PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT '• %� d; 2000 -2011 PERMITTED DREDGE TEMPLATE A. • — SEPT EMBER 9. 2010 HARDBOTTOM OBSERVATION ++- AUGLST 2009 SSS HARDBOTTOM EDGE i *� 1994 SSS POTENTIAL HARDBOTTOM Q 2009 OYSTER BEDS • ^— 2009 EDGE OF MANGROVE • 2011 SURVEYED SEAGRASS (HALODULE WR/GHT11) ':32009 SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTII) • 2009 SEAGRASS (HALOPHILA DECIPIENS) � i 2008 SURVEYED SEAGRASS } a REPCRTED ROCK SUBSTRATE (CEC 1990, CPE 1995) 2009 GOPHER TORTOISE BURROW SURVEY VERYACTIVE ACTIVE a INACTIVE • ABANDONED�•1 OUTSTANDING FLORIDA WATERS t� j QOTHER (62- 302 -700 (9) (c) and (f). F.A.C.) I'�ISPECIAL (62- 302.700 (9) (i). F.A C.) 111 '+• r *} NOTES: 1 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY COLLIER COUNTY, DATE FLOWN 2009. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED BY CPE ON DECEMBER 10, 2008 JULY 13 &14 2009 AND SEPTEMBER 29. 2011 3. LOCAT ON OF ROCK LEDGE TAKEN FROM 1995 INLET MANAGMENT PLAN (CPE 1995), BUT WAS ORIGINALLY IDENTIFIED BY CEC IN 1990 Figure 4. Natural resources in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass. 12 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. E 3.0 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES A list of threatened and endangered species and species of special concern with the potential to occur in the project area is presented in Table 2 (Townsend and Olson, 2007; FDEP, 2009). Complete lists of wildlife and plants which have been observed north and south of Wiggins Pass can be found in the Barefoot Beach Land Management Plan (Appendix 5 (species list pp. 5 -10; listed species pp. 10 -11; natural resource inventory Appendix E; Appendix I)) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan (Appendix 6 (imperiled species pp. 16 -19; complete species lists Addendum 4)). 13 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 2. U%ted renpriP.R with the nntPnti61i to arenr in nrniarf aroa Scientific Name Common Name State Listin '.2 Federal Listin ;•1 INVERTEBRATES Liguusfasciatus Florida Tree Snail SSC FISH Aci enser oxyrinchus desotoi Gulf Sturgeon SSC T Pristis pectinata Smalltooth sawfish E Rivulus marmoratus Mangrove rivulus SSC Alligator mississippiensis American alligator SSC T S/A REPTILES Caretta caretta caretta Atlantic loggerhead turtle T T Chelonia m das m das Atlantic green turtle E E Crocod lus acutus American crocodile E E Dermochel s coriacea Leatherback turtle E E Drymarchon corais cou eri Eastern indigo snake T T Eretmochel s imbricate Hawksbill turtle E E Go herus polyphemus Gopher tortoise SSC Le idochel s kem ii Kem 's Ridley Turtle E E Rana ca ito Gopher frog SSC BIRDS A •aia a •a •a Roseate s oonbi I I SSC Aramus gauarauna Lim kin SSC Charadrius alexandrinus tenuirostris Southeastern snowy lover T Charadrius melodus _Eiping plover T T Egretta caendea Little blue heron SSC Egretta ru escens Reddish egret SSC Egretta thula Sno a ret SSC E retta tricolor Tricolored heron SSC Eudocimus albus White ibis SSC Haemato us palliates American oystercatcher SSC Haliaeetus leucoce halus Bald eagle T T M cteria americana Wood stork E E Pelecanus occidentalis Brown pelican SSC Rostrhamus sociabilis Snail kite E E R ncho s ni er Black skimmer SSC Sterna antillarum Least tern T Sterna dou allii Roseate tern T I T MAMMALS. Eumo s glaucinus floridanus Florida mastiff bat E Mustela vison Everglades mink T Sciurus ni er avicennia Mangrove fox squirrel T Dichechus manatus latirostris Florida manatee E E Ursus americanus oridanus Florida black bear T 14 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. E = Endangered; T = Threatened; T(S /A) = Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (list published in Section 39- 27.03 -05, Florida Administrative Code and online at z hnp: // endangered .fws.gov /wildlife.htmi); Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI), Collier County Endangered and 3 Threatened species list for Collier County - htip:/ /www.fnai.orgJfieldguide/search 002.cftn. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (list published in List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants, 50 CFR 17.11- 4 12); National Marine Fisheries Service under National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration list of endangered and threatened species and critical habitats under the jurisdiction of the NOAA Fisheries Service, Florida- Atlantic region - hgp:Hsero.nmfs.noaa. og_v/pr /pdf/ Species %20List /Florida %2OAtlantic.pdf Sea Turtles Collier County is responsible for the daily survey of 23.7 miles (38.1 km) of beach for sea turtle activities during sea turtle nesting season (May through October). The Collier County Parks and Recreation Department surveys 16.9 miles (27.2 km) of beach including Barefoot, Vanderbilt, Park Shore, and Marco Island. According to the 2010 Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Report (Kraus et al., 2010), staff documented 422 loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) nests during the 2010 season, a moderate increase from 297 nests in 2009. Twenty nests were documented on the 1.2 mile (1.9 km) beach along Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, and 87 nests were documented on the 3.1 -mile (5 -km) Barefoot Beach survey area. During the 2010 nesting season, 3.5% (14) of the documented nests were disoriented. Seven percent (31) of the nests were depredated, which is an increase from four percent last year. A total of 27,142 hatchlings were estimated to have reached the Gulf of Mexico. The number of successfully emerged hatchlings represents an increase compared to 19,869 hatchlings that reached the Gulf of Mexico in 2009. The number of strandings in Collier County was 47 in 2010. This was a slight increase from 40 in 2009. Data from Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Reports, 2005- 2010, are presented in Tables 3 and 4. Table 3 presents sea turtle nesting data from Barefoot Beach (R -1 to R -16) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (R -17 to R -22) between 2005 and 2010; all nests were laid by loggerheads. Nesting data for the immediate project vicinity around Wiggins Pass (the south end of Barefoot Beach (R -13 to R -16) and the north end of Delnor- Wiggins (R -17 to R -19)) from 2005 -2010 is provided in Table 4. Table 3. Barefoot Beach and Delnor -Wiggins Pass State Park sea turtle nesting, 2005 -2010. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 1 2010 BAREFOOT BEACH Total Nests 72 56 40 75 59 87 Total False Crawls 67 55 33 85 50 90 DELNOR- WIGGINS Total Nests 15 10 18 17 22 20 Total False Crawls 46 1 12 20 33 36 20 Total Emergences 61 22 38 50 58 40 15 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 4. Sea turtle nesting adjacent to Wiggins Pass 2005 -2010. Gopher Tortoises Habitat for the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a State- listed species of special concern, exists throughout the beach dune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock of Barefoot Beach Preserve. Barefoot Beach is one of the remaining few natural barrier islands along the southwest coast of Florida and is important habitat for the gopher tortoise: a total of 712 burrows were recorded from June 13 through September 7 of 2009; 186 were recorded as Very Active; 277 were recorded as Active; 76 were recorded as Inactive; 173 were abandoned (Table 5, Figure 4). According to Sally Braem, there are about 30 -40 active gopher tortoise burrows in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (pers. comm., 2011). Table 5. Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 data obtained from Margie Hamilton gopher tortoise biologist for Barefoot Beach). Size Class: 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 BAREFOOT BEACH (R13 -R16) Total Nests 13 5 3 16 14 24 Total False Crawls 12 8 8 15 12 17 DELNOR- WIGGINS (1117 -R19) Total Nests 9 1 8 6 5 13 Total False Crawls 19 2 7 18 19 11 Gopher Tortoises Habitat for the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a State- listed species of special concern, exists throughout the beach dune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock of Barefoot Beach Preserve. Barefoot Beach is one of the remaining few natural barrier islands along the southwest coast of Florida and is important habitat for the gopher tortoise: a total of 712 burrows were recorded from June 13 through September 7 of 2009; 186 were recorded as Very Active; 277 were recorded as Active; 76 were recorded as Inactive; 173 were abandoned (Table 5, Figure 4). According to Sally Braem, there are about 30 -40 active gopher tortoise burrows in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (pers. comm., 2011). Table 5. Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 data obtained from Margie Hamilton gopher tortoise biologist for Barefoot Beach). Size Class: Very Active Active Inactive Adult 173 233 62 Sub Adult 6 34 13 Juvenile 6 9 1 Hatchling 1 1 0 Subtotals: Abandoned: Total Burrows: 186 277 76 173 712 Birds The Barefoot Beach shoreline provides important habitat for several bird species, including overwintering habitat for piping plovers (Townsend and Olson, 2007). Shorebird surveys within Delnor- Wiggins have shown that many species of birds utilize the shoreline for feeding or roosting, but no shorebirds have nested within Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park since least tern nest sites were last documented in 1986 and 1987 (FDEP, 2009; Sally Braem, pers. comm., 2011). No piping plovers have been observed during shorebird surveys in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (Carolyn Shaw, pers. comm., 2011). 16 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 4.0 CONSERVATION MEASURES Construction will comply with all permit requirements that will result from coordination with FDEP, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), USACE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Construction activities will be kept under surveillance, management, and control to minimize interference with, disturbance of, or damage to wildlife resources, particularly threatened and endangered species, within the project area. This project will also adhere to LDC 3.04.02, which contains protection measures for listed species. Sea Turtles and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction will adhere to the NMFS "Sea Conditions" during construction of this project. beach outside of nesting season. Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction All attempts will be made to place fill on the Gopher Tortoises Project construction will be in accordance with LDC 3.04.02.A. Manatees Construction operations will comply with FWC's "2011 Standard Manatee Conditions for In- Water Work" during construction of this project. Birds Shorebirds may be disturbed by construction activities and find quieter areas of the beach to roost. Shorebird monitoring in and near the project area will be conducted as required by the FWC. Seagrass and Oyster Beds Whenever feasible, turbidity curtains will be utilized to protect seagrass and oyster beds in the work area from turbidity and sedimentation during construction. Hardbottom Resources Hardbottom monitoring will be conducted as required by FDEP. 5.0 LITERATURE CITED CPE (Coastal Planning, & Engineering), 2009. Collier County, Florida, Beach Renourishment Project: Two Year (2008) Post - Construction Biological Monitoring Report. Prepared for Collier County, Florida and Florida Department of Environmental Protection. February, 2009. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), 2009. Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan. FDEP Division of Recreation and Parks, October 9, 2009. 17 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Kraus, M.C., M.K. Toro, M. Hennig and S. Gonzales, 2010. Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Report — 2010. Publication Series PR- 10 -01. Collier County Parks and Recreation Department, March 2011. Townsend, A. and N. Olson, 2007. Barefoot Beach Preserve Park Land Management Plan. Submitted to Collier County Board of County Commissioners, December 2007. 6.0 DOCUMENT PREPARERS This environmental data submittal was prepared by Stephen Keehn, P.E., and Lauren Floyd, M.S., in compliance with LDC10.02.02.A.2. Mr. Keehn is a Senior Coastal Engineer with Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) and has worked as project engineer for the Collier County beach nourishment projects for the last decade. Ms. Floyd is a Senior Marine Biologist with Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. with over ten years of experience in biological monitoring in the State of Florida and over six years of environmental permitting experience. Mr. Keehn's and Ms. Floyd's resumes are provided below. 18 ' COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. STEPHEN KEEHN, P.E. ( SENIOR COASTAL ENGINEER COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. PROJECT ASSIGNMENT Senior Coastal Engineer EDUCATION Master of Engineering, Coastal & Hydraulic Eng., UC, Berkeley (1982) B.S., Engineering, US Military Academy at West Point (1972) Certificate- Hazardous Material Management, UC, Santa Cruz (1991) REGISTRATIONS Professional Engineer: Florida (1984), California (1991), New Jersey (1994) 1991/PADI Certified Advanced Open Water Scuba Diver AFFILIATIONS American Society of Civil Engineers Association of Coastal Engineers American Shore and Beach Preservation Association Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association Society of American Military Engineers Project Manager /Senior Engineer for four recipients of the ASBPA Top Restored Beach Award EXPERIENCE Stephen Keehn, P.E. is a Senior Coastal Engineer with CPE and received his Masters in Coastal Engineering from UC Berkeley in 1982. He then served with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District in planning, engineering, and construction assignments on beach and navigation projects. His major projects included feasibility and design reports for Sarasota (Venice), Duval and Dade (Miami Beach) Counties, and the construction of a joint navigation and beach renourishment project for St. Johns River Entrance and Jacksonville Beach, FL. Since 1992 he has served as a CPE Project Manager and Senior Coastal Engineer on numerous beach and inlet projects, including four ASBPA Top Restored Beaches. He has worked on over a dozen inlet management plans in Florida, in addition to planning, design and permitting of numerous inlet structures and dredging projects, including 7 inlets on the southwest Florida Coast. He planned and coordinated a beneficial use of dredged sand project for Panama City Beach using sand from the Panama City Harbor dredging project. Knowledgeable in all aspects of coastal projects, including coastal engineering, geology, hydrographic and Lidar survey, Federal and State permitting and funding, marine habitats, lands and easements needed to implement a successful project. He was awarded the Per Brunn Distinguished Service Award by the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association in 1999. A summary of project experience is listed below: BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS Collier County, FL (Naples) Beach Renourishment Project Project Manager for Collier County's 2006 renourishment project. Work began with preparation of a comprehensive engineering report to identify alternatives, natural resources and scope for the project. Tasks included field inspections, survey data analysis, volumetric and shoreline change calculations, sand search, as well as preparation and presentation of annual monitoring reports. Analysis also included STEPHEN KEEHN, P.E. I SENIOR COASTAL ENGINEER COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. n inspection and evaluation of the existing outfall and groin structures along the project area as well as trends related to the sediment budget and inlet effects. The design incorporated techniques to avoid nearshore habitat impacts and construction of a 1.09 acre artificial reef in Naples, FL. Integrated FEMA storm loss replacement into projects. Senior project manager for post- construction and annual physical and biological monitoring task through 2009. Senior engineer for 2011 emergency fill project for hotspots that developed within the 2005 -2006 project area due to changes in inlet management practices. Prepared the Collier County 2013 -14 Preliminary Renourishment Study, which will serve as the foundation for the next County project. Captiva and Sanibel Islands Renourishment Project, Lee County, FL Project Manager for the 2005 -06 Captiva and Sanibel Islands Renourishment Project. Designed the project, managed onsite engineer and assisted the Corps of Engineers in implementing the emergency project. Managed design and construction of the terminal groin rehabilitation at Redfish Pass. Researched and reviewed monitoring performance of the Captiva and Sanibel Islands beaches in support of the Joint Coastal Permit from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Project Engineer for development of Renourishment Design Memorandum required to qualify the 1996 Captiva Island renourishment project for Federal funding. Utilized monitoring study surveys to develop a detailed littoral budget to refine maintenance fill requirements. Prepared monitoring, engineering and permitting documents in support of 2nd renourishment. Developed an engineering design report with benefits analysis in support of the 2012 -13 nourishment project. Assisted the County in public education leading to a successful referendum for funding the next project. Panama City Beaches Nourishment and Renourishment Projects Design Engineer and Project Manager for the 2011, 2005 -06 and beneficial sand projects in support of Corps Construction for the Bay County Tourist Development Council. Provided project management, storm loss analysis, sand search and borrow area development, engineering design, managed numerical modeling simulations, plans and specification preparation, and permitting assistance for the 17.5 mile beach restoration project. Developed design for the two nourishment projects that were later used as the basis for the Corps final design. Assisted in obtaining FEMA and Corps of Engineers funding approval for the 2005/2006 and 2011 beach renourishment projects in partnership with the Corps of Engineers. Developed and managed the Panama City Beach 2003 Beneficial Sand Project to use Corps channel dredged sand for Bay County Tourist Development Council. Developed new sand sources, engineering design and modeling necessary to support a new long term permit for the Panama City Beaches program. Over seven million cubic yards of beach compatible sand was identified to support nourishment over the 10 -15 year life of the new permit. This investigation provided new sand sources to support the Corps of Engineers' 2011 nourishment project. Fire Island, New York Beach Renourishment Project Project manager for design, permitting and construction management of an 11 community renourishment project on the North Atlantic coast. The 1.8 million cubic yard project was constructed during the winter to meet permit requirements, and permitting was required from three agencies, the Corps of Engineers, the National Park Service and the State of New York. This project qualified for FEMA ,;,_, STEPHEN KEEHN, P.E. I SENIOR COASTAL ENGINEER COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. funding as an engineered beach based on a post -storm report prepared by CPE. Project manager for design, permitting, sand search and construction management of a multi - community 2003 -2004 renourishment project on the North Atlantic coast of Long Island, NY. Project needed new sand sources and required permits from two Federal agencies. Dade County, FL Alternate Sand Source Investigation Senior project engineer responsible for research and report preparation. Inventoried, located, and evaluated upland and overseas sand sources for future Miami Beach renourishment projects. Developed a sand specification for bidding a renourishment project from sources with diverse sand characteristics and recognition for the beach fill advantage of coarser materials. Lovers Key and Fort Myers Beach Restoration Project Project Manager in charge of design, sand search, engineering, permitting, surveys and inspection of a locally constructed Federal project constructed in 2011. Aided in design of a terminal groin and preparation of permit documents for the Estero Island (Ft Myers beach) and Lovers Key beach restoration projects. Senior Engineer for construction management of Lovers Key segment during Hurricane Charlie in 2004. Updated the design for Estero Island project construction in 2011. 1995 -6 Captiva Island, Florida Renourishment Project Project Engineer for development of Renourishment Design Memorandum required to qualify the project for Federal funding. Utilized monitoring study surveys to develop a detailed littoral budget to refine maintenance fill requirements. Prepared monitoring, engineering and permitting documents in support of 2 "d renourishment Port Monmouth, NJ Feasibility Study. Project Engineer responsible for littoral budget development, inlet impact analysis (Pews and Comptons Creek) design template development and development of potential sand sources in the Lower Bay. Prepared the coastal engineering appendix for the report. South Shore of Staten Island Reconnaissance Study Project Engineer who developed historical, existing and improved conditions and sediment budgets for 11 miles of shoreline for Corps of Engineers reconnaissance report. Longboat Key 1995 Comprehensive Plan, Florida Beach Renourishment Project Project Engineer who analyzed sediment budgets from adjacent inlets, borrow area, beach sand sizes, and beach monitoring results to develop a comprehensive sediment budget and beach sand standard for a comprehensive beach renourishment design. Established the importance of grain size in the future renourishment of the island and proposed a design strategy to use available sand sizes for future projects. INLET DESIGN AND SAND BY- PASSING STUDIES Project Engineer /major contributor on a dozen inlet studies and management plans. Inlet management plans identify the cause of inlet induced erosion and analyze the shoaling patterns at the inlet in order to improve navigation and develop erosion control or mitigation measures to solve the problem. Plans included: STEPHEN KEEHN, P.E. I SENIOR COASTAL ENGINEER COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Wiggins Pass, Florida Inlet Management Plan Project Manager for the development of an Inlet Navigation and Maintenance Modification Plan for Wiggins Pass. Project Manager for the development of a sand bypassing plan and navigation channel design to minimize channel shoaling, increase the maintenance dredging interval and reduce impacts to adjacent shorelines in support of the County and Parks planning objectives. Integrated modeling and analysis of physical monitoring data into an engineering report to develop a comprehensive 10 -year plan for permitting. Doctors Pass and Wiggins Pass 2009 Maintenance Dredging Conducted a monitoring survey and analysis for the performance of the two inlets, and integrated the results into a joint dredging project to achieve economy of scale for the County. Coastal engineer responsible for the completion of the 2009 Doctors and Wiggins Passes post- dredge report. This included survey data QA /QC, volumetric calculations, and presentation of results. Responsible for the annual monitoring survey performed in 2010. Provided the engineering calculations and aided in the permitting of the 2011 Emergency Maintenance dredging for Wiggins Pass. Terminal Maritimo de Belmonte Bahia, Brazil Harbor Performance and Shoaling Evaluation Study Evaluated the design and performance of a major breakwater harbor. Developed a dredging and sand bypassing strategy to maintain adequate harbor depths, reduced impact to the adjacent shorelines and provide QA /QC methods to improved dredging contractor performance. Redfish Pass and Blind Pass Inlet Management Plans Determined the impact of these two inlets on Captiva and Sanibel Islands, and developed mitigation measures acceptable to State and local governments. Integrated the plans into the renourishment program for the Islands. Venice Inlet Management Plan Project Engineer to determine the impact of jetties and the intracoastal waterway on sand by- passing at the inlet. Developed a phased long -range plan which used economical sand sources in the short run and the future development of a continuous by- passing plan when sand costs rise. Fort Pierce Inlet, Florida Management Plan Project Manager to evaluate the impact of a Federal navigation channel and jetties on the adjacent beaches and the development of a long -term sand management plan. Measured tides and currents, conducted dye study, calculated tidal prism and inlet stability. Bakers Haulover Inlet Management Plan Project Engineer to evaluate the inlets impact on the Miami Beach Restoration Project and identified cost effective solutions to address the sediment deficit caused by the inlet. Conducted a field measurement program (tides and currents) and identified an ebb shoal sand source. OTHER COASTAL AND NAVIGATION PROJECTS WITH CPE: COASTAL STUDIES • Boca Raton Inlet Management Plan (1993) • Hillsboro Inlet Management Plan (1992) • Blind Pass (Pinellas Co., Florida) Inlet Management Plan (1994) • Combine Big Sarasota and New Passes Inlet Management Plan STEPHEN KEEHN, P.E. I SENIOR COASTAL ENGINEER COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. • Blind Pass Bidding and Construction Management 2002 -3. • 1997 Fire Island Pines, NY Nourishment Project Design and Construction Management. • 1994 Saltaire, FI Nourishment Project Construction Observation and annual monitoring reports. • Post Storm Report preparation qualifying for FEMA or Corps FCCE funding: • Captiva Island 2004 and 2005 storms • Panama City Beach 2004 and 2005 storms, • Collier County (Naples) beaches 2004 and 2008 storms • Fire Island, NY 2007 and 2009 storms COASTAL STRUCTURES Developed feasibility level designs or higher design for: • Bakers Haulover Inlet North Jetty Replacement, Miami, FL • Redfish Pass Terminal Groin Rehabilitation, Captiva Island, FL • North Sanibel Island Road Revetment I • Longboat Key, FL Road Revetment • Naples, FL Artificial Reef • Ft. Myers Beach, FL Terminal Groin • Smathers Beach Groins, Key West, FL AWARDS Awarded the Per Brunn Distinguished Service Award by the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association in 1999. mss- LAUREN S. FLOYD I SENIOR MARINE BIOLOGIST COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. PROJECT ASSIGNMENT Senior Marine Biologist EDUCATION M.S., Marine Biology and Coastal Zone Management, Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (2007) B.A., Biology and Environmental Science, Middlebury College (1997) CERTIFICATIONS 2008/ PADI Divemaster 2007/ PADI Dry Suit Specialty Diver 2007/ BOEM Protected Species Observer 2002/ PADI Rescue Diver 2002/ PADI Enriched Air Nitrox Diver 2002/ PADI Advanced Diver 2002/ Emergency First Responder (CPR /1st Aid /AED) 2002/ DAN 02 Administration 1999/ AAUS Scientific Diver 1997/ PADI Open Water Diver 1997/ Divers Alert Network (DAN) Member AFFILIATIONS American Shore and Beach Preservation Association (ASBPA) Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association (FSBPA) National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP) Florida Association of Environmental Professionals (FAEP) American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS) EXPERIENCE Lauren Floyd, M.S. is a Senior Marine Biologist with Coastal Planning & Engineering, with over ten years of experience in biological monitoring in Florida and over six years permitting experience. Ms. Floyd has conducted numerous coastal and marine resource investigations and has designed several monitoring and mitigation plans for nearshore reef, artificial reef and seagrass habitats. Ms. Floyd coordinates and develops environmental documents required in order to obtain State and federal permits for coastal projects. She is experienced in NEPA documentation, including preparation of Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Statements. She routinely prepares Biological Assessments in support of ESA Section 7 Consultation and Essential Fish Habitat assessments in support of the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Ms. Floyd manages several biological monitoring projects and is responsible for overseeing all environmental permitting, biological monitoring and production of final report deliverables. PROFESSIONAL TRAINING • NEPA documentation training through Duke University Environmental Leadership Program • Basic Wetland Identification and Delineation training under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Protocol ,�F LAUREN S. FLOYD I SENIOR MARINE BIOLOGIST COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. • Professional training with Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary on coral rescue and relocation protocol • Training and Experience in Uniform Mitigation Assessment Methodology (UMAM) PROJECT MANAGEMENT & DESIGN Includes research, development of monitoring plan, coordination and implementation of field activities, data analysis and report preparation: • Anna Maria Island Beach Nourishment Projects, FL (2006 - Present) • Coquina Beach and City of Anna Maria Beach Nourishment Project, FL (2009 - Present) • Bogue Banks, NC Shore Protection Project — Hardbottom Resource Confirmation and Characterization Study (2008 - 2009) • Surf City /North Topsail Beach, NC Shore Protection Project — Hardbottom Resource Confirmation and Characterization Study (2007 - 2008) PROJECT PERMITTING & NEPA COMPLIANCE • Environmental Assessment, Broward County Segment II Shore Protection Project, FL (2012) • State and federal permit application support, Upham Beach Permanent Groins, Pinellas County, FL (2011 -2012) • State and federal permit application support, Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project, Collier County, FL (2010 - 2012) • Biological Assessment and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment, Town of Dauphin Island Beach and Barrier Island Restoration Project (West End and East End Projects), Dauphin Island, Alabama (2011) • Biological Assessment and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment, Panama City Beach Erosion Control and Storm Damage Reduction Project, Bay County, FL (2011) • Environmental Assessment, Town of Longboat Key Beach Renourishment Project, FL (2010- 2011) • Biological Assessment and Essential Fish Habitat Assessment, City of Delray Beach Fifth Periodic Beach Renourishment Project, FL (2010 - 2011) • Biological Assessment, Anna Maria Island Beach Nourishment Project, Manatee County, FL (2009) • State and federal permit application support, Lido Key Beach Nourishment Project, Sarasota County, FL (2006 - 2009) • Biological Assessment, Breakers T -groin Reconditioning Project, Town of Palm Beach, FL (2008) • Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Topsail Beach Interim Beach Fill Project, Topsail Beach, NC (2007) • Cumulative Effects Analysis, Topsail Beach Interim Beach Fill Project, Topsail Beach, NC (2007) • Biological Assessment, Topsail Beach Interim Beach Fill Project, Topsail Beach, NC (2006 -2007) • Essential Fish Habitat Assessment, Topsail Beach Interim Beach Fill Project, Topsail Beach, NC (2006 - 2007) • Draft Environmental Impact Statement, North Topsail Beach Shoreline Protection Project, North Topsail Beach, NC (2006) • Biological Assessment, North Topsail Beach Shoreline Protection Project, North Topsail Beach, NC (2006) LAUREN S. FLOYD I SENIOR MARINE BIOLOGIST COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. -• BIOLOGICAL MONITORING/ASSESSMENTS Biological assessments /monitoring of natural hardbottom and artificial reef habitats including in situ identification and abundance of flora and fauna: • Coquina Beach, Beach Nourishment Project, FL (2011- Present) • Anna Maria Island Beach Nourishment Project, FL (2006 - Present) • Town of Longboat Key Beach Renourishment Project, FL (2006 - Present) • Broward County, Segment III Shore Protection Project, FL (2004 - Present) • Broward County, Segment II Shore Protection Project, FL (2010 - Present) • Siesta Key Beach Restoration Project, FL (2006 - 2008) • Pinellas County, Sand Key Beach Renourishment Project, FL (2007) • Town of Longboat Key Seagrass Mitigation Project, FL (2006 - 2007) • Collier County Beach Renourishment Project, FL (2006 - 2008) • Ocean Ridge Shore Protection Project, FL (2006 - 2008) • Town of Palm Beach, Mid -Town Beach Renourishment and Expansion Project, FL (2006 - 2008) • Town of Palm Beach, Reach 7 Phipps Ocean Park Beach Restoration Project, FL (2006 - 2008) • Sconset Beach Nourishment Project, MA (2006) • Southeast Florida Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project (SECREMP) (2003 — 2006) • National Coral Reef Institute - Principal Investigator for shallow -water gorgonian survey of Southeast Florida (2003 - 2006) • Bahamas, National Science Foundation and University of Buffalo, Caribbean gorgonian monitoring (2004 - 2006) DAMAGE ASSESSMENT AND CORAL RESTORATION (TRANSPLANTATION): Restored or relocated coral colonies following damage events to natural hardbottom communities or as mitigation for coastal project impacts: • Founders Park Marina Restoration Project, FL (2008) • Siesta Key Beach Nourishment Project, FL (2007 -2009) • Broward County Beach Renourishment Project, FL (2005 -2006) • Hillsboro Inlet Dredging Project, FL (2002 -2005) SEA TURTLE ENUMERATION SURVEYS: • Broward County, Segment III Shore Protection Project, FL (2004- Present) • Broward County, Segment II Shore Protection Project, FL (2010 - Present) PUBLICATIONS, SCIENTIFIC MEETING PRESENTATIONS AND POSTERS Floyd. L.S. and L. Aylesworth. Challenges in Determining Impacts and Appropriate Mitigation from Beach Nourishment. FSBPA National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology, Stuart, Florida, 8- 10 February 2012. Floyd. L.S. Proactive Protection: Working with Environmental Agencies on the 2011 Anna Maria Island Beach Nourishment Project. ASBPA National Coastal Conference, New Orleans, Louisiana, 18 - 21 October 2011. Hannes, A.R. and L.S. Floyd. Coral Recruitment and Community Development: the Broward County Artificial Reef Compared to Adjacent Hardbottom Areas, Five Years Post - Deployment. LAUREN S. FLOYD I SENIOR MARINE BIOLOGIST COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Proceedings of the 11th Annual International Coral Reef Symposium, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, 7 -11 July 2008. Floyd, L.S and A. Carter. Benthic Infauna Recovery Following Channel Dredging in the Vicinity of Bogue Inlet, North Carolina. FSBPA 21St Annual National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology, Sarasota, Florida, 30 January -1 February 2008. Floyd, L. S., et al. Techniques for Restoring Gorgonians to Coral Reef Injury Areas. National Conference on Ecosystem Restoration (NCER), Orlando, Florida, 6 -10 December 2004. Co- author: Gilliam, D.S et al. Coral Transplantation Effectiveness for Reef Restoration and Impact Mitigation off Southeast Florida, USA. 32nd Scientific Meeting of the Association of Marine Laboratories of the Caribbean. Curacao, 13 -17 June 2005. Co- author: Gilliam, D.S. et al. Coral Reef Ecosystem Restoration off Southeast Florida. National Conference on Ecosystem Restoration (NCER), Orlando, Florida, 6 -10 December 2004. Appendix No. 1 JCP Application and Attachments (February 2010) Provided on CD Appendix No. 2 FDEP and USACE RAI Responses and Relevant Attachments (Complete Attachments Provided on CD) OM FDEP RAI No. 1, Additional Comments, Responses and Relevant Updated Attachments (Complete Updated Attachments Provided on CD) A A March 24, 2010 Collier County 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Florida Department of Charlie Grist Governor Environmental Protection Jeff Kottkamp Lt. Governor Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Michael W. Sole Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3000 Secretary c/o Stephen Keene Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc. 2481 NW Boca Raton Blvd. Boca Raton, FL 33431 QUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI #1) JCP File Number: 0142538- 008 -JC, Collier County Applicant Name: Collier County Project Name: Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Dear Mr. Keene: This letter is to acknowledge receipt of your application for a Joint Coastal Permit, pursuant to Chapter 161 and Part IV of Chapter 373, Florida Statutes; and authorization to use state -owned submerged lands, pursuant to Chapter 253 and 258, Florida Statutes. Preliminary evaluation of your proposed project leads Bureau staff to the conclusion that the placement options for the non -beach compatible material to be dredged from the channel expansion cannot be recommended for approval. Specifically, the placement of clay and peat into the existing inlet channel meander and /or the nearshore waters of the Gulf. Special handling is required for disposal of this material in an appropriate upland location outside the coastal zone. Also, this does not imply that the staff will recommend approval of the excavation of the clay and peat substrata. The consolidated material beneath the inlet bottom acts to maintain the inlet at this historical location along the coast and its removal could lead to inlet migration and erosion of the adjacent Park lands. Additional information is requested below regarding this potential adverse impact. In any case, the staff does not anticipate a recommendation for approval of a permit that includes disposal of the clay /peat in the coastal zone. While this is by no means final agency action or notice of intent thereof, it does represent the staff review of your application and considerable experience in permitting matters. We "Adore Protection, Less Process' www.dep.statefl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI # 1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging n Page 2 of 23 are sending you these comments at this early stage of the processing to allow you to assess fully the further commitment of financial resources for design dependent on permit issuance. Please be advised that your permit application is considered to be incomplete as provided for by Chapter 120.60, Florida Statutes, and Rule 62B -49, Florida Administrative Code. Receipt of information listed below is required. The items of information are numbered to correspond with the item numbers on the application form. When replying to this Request for Additional Information (RAI), please address your response to my attention (the undersigned permit processor). Please keep your RAI response separate from Scope of Work (SOW) submittals to the Project Manager in the Bureau's Beach Erosion Control Program. Misdirecting your response or combining your response with SOW matters will delay the review of your application. Please feel free to courtesy copy any other individuals with your response, but only responses addressed to the permit processor will be reviewed as part of your permit application. Please submit three (3) hard copies of your response. Also, please prepare and submit one (1) electronic copy of your response (response document text, all attachments, and drawings) and submit it on a CD in Adobe Acrobat Reader® (.pdf) format. S. Describe in general terms the proposed activity including any phasing. Total estimated volume to be dredge is 80,000 cy. Please provide estimates of the dredge volumes to be placed in each of the material placement areas stated above. The dredge depths noted on the cross - section vary from the table in Attachment 5. Please clarify the maximum dredge depths for the entire channel, noting the maximum dredge depths on a drawing for each subarea of the channel. Of the 80,000 cy proposed to be dredged from the channel, what volume will be placed in the existing channel meander, the beach disposal sites, and nearshore disposal sites? What portion of the total volume is expected to be unsuitable material? Of that unsuitable material volume, what is the volume of the rock, peat, organic clay, and silty sands? What portion of the total volume is expected to be beach quality sands? 7. Describe the purpose and need of the proposed activity including any public benefits. Please provide information to justify the navigational need for straight interior channel as opposed to the recreational boating access that has been provided by the natural interior channel. Information may include a record of reported accidents and navigation advisories. ";lore Protection. less Process www. dep.state, fl. ass Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 3 of 23 11. Have you obtained approval from the Department of State, Division of Historical Resources? If yes, provide a copy of the letter of approval. We have requested this information on your behalf but it has not yet been received. No further action is required of you at this time, however, you application will remain incomplete until the information is received. 13. A copy of the Division of State Lands title determination. If you do not have title determination, department staff will request that the Division of State Lands conduct a title check. The title information check on your project reveals two existing easements (No. 30353 (5165- 11)) and 29908 (5265 -11)) and two existing leases (No. 3869 to Collier County for Barefoot Beach State Recreation Center, and No. 2514 to DEP Division of Parks and Recreation for Delnor Wiggins State Recreation Area) in the project area - as well as state owned submerged lands. There is a concern that the new channel template may encroach onto Park land. Your project will require a "letter of no objection' from the other easement/lease holders, and the applicant is required to obtain and submit those letters to FDEP. See also Item 14 below. 14. Satisfactory evidence demonstrating that the applicant has sufficient control and interest in the riparian upland property, as described in Subsection 18- 21.004 (3)(b), Florida Administrative Code. Governmental entities that qualify for the waiver or deferral outlined in this rule must provide supporting documentation in order to be eligible. If the applicant is not the property owner, then authorization from the property owner for such use must be provided. It is unclear from your response (attachment 14) if you are invoking the governmental waiver of this requirement. If you are, please submit evidence to show you qualify for the waiver. If you are not requesting the waiver your response it not satisfactory in response to this Item — please provide the required information. 17. A legal property description and acreage of any sovereign submerged land that would be encompassed by the requested lease or easement, plus two (2) prints of a survey prepared, signed and sealed by a person properly licensed by the Florida State Board of Land Surveyors. Once the design has been finalized and the easement area has been determined we will required your sketches to be submitted and official notice of the proposed easement to be sent to all affected property owners within the 1000 foot (500 foot radius) of the easement area. The official notice template is attached. Noticing can occur after the permit has been issued, however, the easement package cannot be processed by the Department and the Division of State Lands until the permit is issued and the green cards (or attempted delivery notices) have been submitted. Construction may not begin until the easement has been recorded Please ensure your Hone Protection, Less Process www. dep.state. fl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 4 of 23 sketches meet the required 10 year public easement survey standards of the Division of State Lands. Your application will remain incomplete pending receipt of the required survey sketches 19. Written evidence, provided by the appropriate governmental agency having jurisdiction over the activity, that the proposed activity, as submitted to the Department, is consistent with the state - approved Local Comprehensive Plan. Please provide this information when it is available. Your application will remain incomplete pending your response. 23. Complete sets of construction plans and specification for the proposed activity, certified by an engineer duly registered pursuant to Chapter 471, Florida Statutes. The plans shall clearly distinguish between existing and proposed structures and grades, and shall include the following: a. Plan view of the proposed activity depicting the mean high -water line, any easement boundary and the erosion control line (if applicable) within the area of influence of the proposed activity. Identify the boundaries of significant geographical features (e.g., channels, shoals) and natural communities (e.g., submerged grass beds, hardbottom or mangroves) within the area of influence of the activity. Include a north arrow and a scale bar on each drawing. Show the mixing zone and OFW limits on the plan view drawings (please make sure they are shown together, along with the resources, on at least one plan view drawing). b. A sufficient number of cross - section views of the proposed activity depicting the slopes, the mean high -water line, any easement boundary and the erosion control line (if applicable) within the area of influence of the proposed activity. Identify the boundaries of significant geographical features and natural communities in the area of influence of the proposed activity. Elevations indicated on the cross - sections shall be referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NA VD 88). Please provide any missing cross section views (03 +00, C -4, etc). Please provide longitudinal cross sections of the channel for all areas (C26 to 12 +00, C33 to C29 and CN35 to C29). On sheet 30, why are there two colors shown on the fill cross - section of the scarp repair area— does this just delineate the MHWL elevation? Or does it have more meaning? What is the plan for stabilizing the areas above MHW in this cross section? Why is construction to this elevation ( +3.7 feet) necessary? How was this elevation chosen? Is it only temporary as a result of the containment dike construction? See also Item 28. ";More Protection, Less Process www. dep.state fl. ais Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 5 of 23 c. Details of construction, including materials and general construction procedures and equipment to be used (e.g., construction access, dredging method, dredged material containment, pipeline location). The Construction Document (Attachment 23c) should identify those reaches and placement options such that triggers are set to change the placement option as necessary. This is particularly important to address the dredging of organic clay, peat, silty, and rocky layers that have been identified through the geotechnical investigation and provide the Department with reasonable assurance that non -beach compatible material will not be placed on the beach, in the nearshore, or in the channel meander, and potentially impact resources both during construction and in the near future. (This is important for areas such as the organic clay layer seen in vibracore WPVC -09 -06 and those materials from the flood shoal and tributaries currently proposed for placement in the channel meander.) Please clarify what is meant on page 5 of Attachment 5 where it states: "In keeping with a small project, the material can be disposed by sidecasting to the area 1,000 feet north of the inlet. There is no hardbottom north of the inlet and the nearest hardbottom is approximately 1,200 feet south of the inlet. Since this is a short term solution to lengthen navigation, sand returning quickly to the channel is not the major concern." This is also mentioned again in Attachment 23c. This narrative (attachment 5) also states: "Full periodic and intermediate maintenance dredging will be target for the low wave season during the late spring to early summer (during sea turtle nesting season), but with no on beach disposal or construction activity. Construction requiring beach placement of sand will take place outside sea turtle nesting season." What is the fate of material dredged during the periodic and intermediate maintenance dredging? Do you also intend to limit the placement of dredged material in the nearshore to between November 1 and April 30? The narrative under Attachment 23c states: "Turbidity will be addressed similar to existing requirements." Please elaborate on these methods as this is an insufficient explanation to provide reasonable assurance that state water quality standards will be met during and after construction (see also Item 33d). The placement of silty/organic material in the existing channel, even if `capped' by coarser material will potentially lead to chronic turbidity problems (and the associated natural resource concerns) if the filled existing channel eroded again in the future (see also Items 27 and 33b). Pay particular attention to describing how you will meet the OFW turbidity standards of 0 NTU's above background at the edge of the mixing zone during construction in some parts of the project area and particularly where constructing the proposed dikes and associated inflling of the channel and the Delnor Wiggins beach and nearshore placement areas (see also Item 33d below). "Afore Protection, Less Process www.dep.state fl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 6 of 23 Please elaborate on the project design and construction details for the `scarp repair area' shown in Figure A of Attachment 5 and the same area of Barefoot Beach called out as `South Point Restoration' shown on sheets 3 and 5 of the plan view drawings and cross sections C -5, C -8 and sheet 30. Pay particular attention to describing how you will meet the OFW turbidity standards of 0 NTU's above background at the edge of your mixing zone (see also Item 33d below). What are the details of your plan to install new, or revise the locations of the existing, Aids to Navigation in the affected area? How will you update the appropriate Agencies navigational maps, Notice to Mariners, etc.? Have you coordinated with the US Coast Guard on your planned activities? If not, please do so. 24. In addition to the full -size drawings requested above, the information required under Paragraphs (20), (22) and (23) above shall be provided on 81/2 -inch by 11 -inch paper, certified by an engineer duly registered pursuant to Chapter 471, Florida Statutes. Each drawing shall include an accurate scale or dimensions, and all information shown on the drawing shall be clearly legible. Please provide a fully annotated plot of the longitudinal cross - section of the proposed design of the channel cut, superimposed with the current bottom profile of the channel at Wiggins Pass and depicting the upper horizon of the limestone /peat/clay substrata. See also Item 23 above. 25. An aerial photograph or map with a scale of 1 " = 200', showing: the project boundaries, DNR Reference Monument locations, major county landmarks, boundaries of significant natural communities (e.g., submerged aquatic vegetation, hardbottom or mangroves) and special aquatic or terrestrial sites (parks, sanctuaries, refuges, Outstanding Florida Waters, aquatic preserves, etc.) within the project boundary and a minimum of 1, 000 feet in both shore parallel directions of the project boundary. This aerial does not meet the size requirement specified for this item; please submit expanded and updated resource maps for the dredge and fill regions that meet the proper scale requirements. Show the OFW boundaries and hardbottom resources on the map(s). Show the project area plus 1000 ft. in either direction on the map(s). See also Item 28 below regarding the identification of natural resources on this graphic that differ from the resource locations shown in Passarella — Exhibit 1 (2007). 26 A proposed construction schedule. The current maintenance dredging application is expired and the construction schedule you propose is ambitious, particularly in light of the proposed channel straightening. Has avoidance of snook spawning season been accounted for during the construction schedule, as with previous "Tore Protection, Less Process " www. dep.statefl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging ;,. Page 7 of 23 maintenance dredging events? If not please discuss this in an updated schedule. This item is complete, but provide an updated construction schedule after the final project design is achieved. 27. Permit applications for excavation or fill activities shall include the following detailed information concerning the material to be excavated and the existing or native material at the beach fill site: a. Site plans showing the location of all core borings and the boundaries of the area to be excavated. Please provide a figure with the showing maximum dredge depths for each subarea of the channel with the locations of the vibracores and jet probes superimposed. Please provide a drawing(s) of the best estimate of the extent of the rock and organic clay layer that underlie the ebb shoal and current channel mouth. Both the rock and the organic clay layer (as seen in WPVC- 09 -06) are noted in Attachment 27, but no figure is provided other than the extent of the rock ledge noted previously by CEC. On Figure 1 in Attachment 27, the locations of four possible peat areas (labeled 2009 Possible Peat Areas) are noted on the map. How were these located? Is this something observed in the field? Was the areal and/or vertical extent mapped? How much of the material to be dredged do these peat locations represent? b. Core boring logs of all cores taken throughout the area to be excavated and surrounding area. Logs should extend at least two feet below the proposed bottom elevation. The depth of each visible horizon in the log should be reported relative to NA VD (88) and the material in each stratum classified according to grain size. Please provide the jet probe logs and other supporting geotechnical information gained from the collection of the jet probes. (Were samples collected? Field notes made that may help define the extent of rock and/or the organic clay layer underlying the ebb shoal? A brief discussion was provided in the geotechnical report with the application, but the supporting documentation is being requested.) f A sediment QA /QC plan that will ensure that the sediment to be used for beach restoration or nourishment will meet the standards set forth in paragraph 62B- 41.007(2)0), F.A.C. Please provide a sediment QA/QC plan required in Chapter 62B- 41.008(1)(k)4.b. The template Sediment QA/QC plan and guidance document for offshore borrow areas is available for guidance for this project on the Bureau's website (http: / /www.dep. state.fl.us/beaches /publications /tech - rpt.htm #Geotechnical - Table). -1 lore Pr oleetion, Less Process www. dep.state fl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 8 of 23 Please submit a Word version of the plan so that changes from the template document can be easily seen and comments can be sent back to you (as necessary) using Track Changes feature in Word. 28. Using an established natural community classification system, describe each natural community within the area of influence of the proposed activity and include: a. Acreage. b. Identification of the flora and fauna to the lowest taxon practicable. c. Characterization of dominant and important flora and fauna and estimates of percent biotic cover. d. Sampling locations, date of sampling or measurements and methods used for sampling. Appendix 28 -1 was missing Figure 2 and the map of the numbered resource Areas listed in Table 1 — and some of the appendices referenced in this report. Please provide at least an electronic version of the complete report. The black and white resource map by Passarella — Exhibit 1 submitted in the narrative under attachment 28 -1B (page 6), based on natural resource surveys performed in 2007 seems to indicate more resources and in different areas than shown on the aerial submitted in Attachment 25. Since this is black and white it is difficult to read - please provide a color version of this figure and at a larger scale. Discuss the sometimes dramatic differences in resources and locations identified in the project area in just a year. Are you confident that the recently performed CPE field survey visited all the areas identified in this map and confirmed those resources do not exist today? As a result of this discrepancy between the statements in the narrative under Attachment 33d and 28 -1B we must inquire for clarification on direct impacts. Please also elaborate on indirect and cumulative impacts, including potential sloughing of channel walls, which may impact the adjacent seagrass beds. What type, by species, and acreage(s) of benthic natural resources (seagrass, hardbottom, and oyster reefs) will be directly and indirectly impacted by filling in the old existing channel? By dredging the new alignment to the channel? By disposing of the material in the nearshore off Denlor Wiggins and Barefoot Beach? What acreage of new intertidal habitat suitable for colonization of these resources will be created? Do you intend to transplant seagrasses into the newly created intertidal habitat where the channel is infilled? Will you maintain the diked areas that may be supratidal for some time period to ensure that no exotic invasive plant species colonize them? Hardbottom exists directly south of the inlet and this edge was mapped during the Collier County nourishment project. A pre - construction update (baseline survey for this project) will be required. The project description states there is no hardbottom north of the pass (off Barefoot Beach "disposal" area which is suggested as the priority of the two placement areas). Is this "More Protection, Less Process" www. dep.stute f. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 9 of 23 based upon a prior survey? If so, provide the data from this survey in support of Item 28. The hardbottom south of the pass was mapped; the volumes of placement, equilibration of the toe of fill of the beach and nearshore placement material, etc. should be discussed in your response in relation to the existing hardbottom resources here. Biological monitoring will be required at all hardbottom locations (either ephemeral or persistent) adjacent to the Pass. A recent baseline natural resource survey, conducted during the summer months, and a draft biological monitoring plan are required to be submitted as a completeness items (we acknowledge the 2009 survey, but normally our requirement is that the survey must be less than 1 year old. This is open to negotiation). Differentiate between ephemeral (less than 30cm of sand depth coverage) and persistently exposed nearshore hardbottom in these surveys. The applicant/agent is advised to contact Dr. Kosmynin about the current requirements of the post - construction biological monitoring plan and the baseline survey prior to conducting this survey in the field. The previous Collier County project can be used as a basis for developing a similar protocol even if the specific transect and quadrat locations will differ. 30. Results of available wildlife surveys that have been conducted on the site, and any comments pertaining to the proposed activity from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. In accordance with Florida Statute 379.2431 (1), the following additional information is required for FWC to complete their review of this project. a. Please provide a detailed map showing the location of all gopher tortoise burrows within 25 feet of the area that is proposed to have scarp repair at the southern end of Barefoot Beach. These gopher tortoise burrows may need to be relocated prior to construction. Please check with your regional gopher tortoise conservation biologist. b. We are concerned about the ratio of sea turtle false crawls to nests in the proposed fill area on Delnor- Wiggins State Park (R17 -R19) for the 2008 and 2009 sea turtle nesting seasons. Can you please explain the high ratio of sea turtle false crawls to nests for the past two nesting seasons in the proposed fill area? C. The table depicting the marine turtle nesting data shows the number of nests and false crawls for Barefoot Beach between R13 and R16. Does the nesting data include the area south of R -16 and the proposed South Point Restoration area? If not, please provide the marine turtle nesting data that has occurred south of the R- 16 marker on Barefoot Beach. d. Although your application states there are none, please identify all derelict structures that will be removed prior to beneficial beach disposal (restoration) of "llore Protection. Less Process www. dep.statefl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 10 of 23 dredged material — or re- confirm there are no derelict structures, outfalls or mangrove stumps to be removed along these shorelines. e. It has been noted that piping plovers have been observed on Barefoot Beach. Are winter shorebird surveys being conducted on Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins State Park for piping plovers and other shorebirds? If so, how often? It has been noted that no shorebirds have nested within Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park since the 1980's. Are nesting shorebird surveys being conducted on Delnor- Wiggins State Park and Barefoot Beach each year? f. Creation of an elevated beach berm can expose marine turtle hatchlings to lights that were not visible prior to the beach project. Under existing state requirements, marine turtle nests cannot be relocated due to lighting. Prior to construction, the local government should ensure that appropriate measures are in place, such as a lighting ordinance, within the project area. We acknowledge a copy of the lighting ordinance for Collier County which includes Barefoot Beach has been provided. Is Delnor - Wiggins State Park under the same lighting ordinance? If it is different, please provide a copy of the lighting ordinance for Delnor - Wiggins State Park. Please contact Eric Seckinger at (850) 922 -4330 or via e-mail at Eric. SeckingerAmyfwc.com if you have questions or clarifications about this Item. 31. A current Biological Opinion from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service, when the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission has determined that the proposed project will result in a take of marine turtles, which could not be authorized without an incidental take determination under federal law. Please provide the USFWS and NMFS (if applicable, as essential [snook] fish habitat) Biological Opinion(s) for this project when they are available. Ensure your consultations cover the range of dredging equipment you propose to use under Attachment 23c and that all the federally listed fish, birds, reptiles /amphibians and mammals that may be impacted by the project are covered in your BO(s). Your application will remain incomplete until they are received. 33. Analysis of the expected effect of the proposed activity on the coastal system including but not limited to: a. Analysis of the expected physical effect of the proposed activity on the existing coastal conditions and natural shore and inlet processes. The analysis should include a quantitative description of the existing coastal system, the performance objectives of the proposed activity, the design parameters and assumptions, relevant computations, validation of the results and the data used in the analysis. "Afore Protection, Less Process" www. dep.state. fl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 11 of 23 After a review of the information submitted in the application, the Bureau engineering staff considers the engineering data and analysis to be incomplete to adequately demonstrate the expected effect of the navigation channel expansion on the inlet and adjacent beaches. Coastal engineering data and analyses necessary to complete the application are requested under Item 33a and Item 33c below. In addition to other information contained in the application and the Bureau files, engineering staff has reviewed Attachment 33a to the application titled "Engineering Report for a Maintenance Dredging, Navigation Improvement and Erosion Reduction Project for Wiggins Pass, Florida ", February 2010, prepared by CP &E (35 pages). The engineering staff also reviewed: the "draft Numerical Modeling of Wave Propagation, Currents and Morphology Changes, Phase 11: Numerical Modeling of Alternatives Report ", January 2009, also prepared by CP &E (89 pages); the "Wiggins Pass Study, Hydrodynamic and Sand Transport Modeling ", August 2007, prepared by Humiston and Moore; and the "Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan" report dated August 1995, prepared by CP &E. Coastal Engineering Analyses and Reporting Please provide a revised report including the information requested below. The report shall be certified by a professional engineer registered in the State of Florida. The data and analysis should include but not be limited to the following specific items below. Provide engineering data and analysis that demonstrates with reasonable assurance the proposed activity will maintain lateral stability within the historic alongshore location of the Wiggins Pass. The engineering and modeling reports do not provide adequate data and analysis of geologic control on the alongshore location of the inlet that is provided by the limestone, peat and clay substrata. More importantly, information does not demonstrate that dredging and removal of this stabilizing geologic feature will not cause the inlet to migrate and erode the adjacent Park lands. The ebb shoal provides hydraulic stability both in maintaining the lateral location along the shoreline and shoaling rates and patterns. The modeling analysis predicts the deflation and eventual loss of the ebb shoal feature after navigation channel expansion and continuing maintenance dredging. The reports do not provide adequate data and analysis on the lateral stability of the inlet or shoaling rates and patterns under these conditions. Please provide engineering data and analysis that demonstrates with reasonable assurance the expected effects of the proposed activity on the inlet system and adjacent beaches. The data and analysis should include but not be limited to the following specific items below. The engineering report references the historical loss of ebb shoal volume attributed to channel maintenance dredging and associated with increased erosion rates on the adjacent "Hore Protection, Less Process' www dep.state fl.us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging ...o: Page 12 of 23 beaches. As noted above, the modeling analysis indicates the deflation and perhaps eventual loss of the ebb shoal feature after navigation channel expansion and continuing maintenance dredging. The reports do not demonstrate that the placement of maintenance dredge material will be sufficient to offset increased erosion associated with long -term maintenance dredging activities in conjunction with continued deflation of the ebb shoal. The applicant has relied extensively upon numerical modeling to predict the expected effects of the proposed activity. Specific information is requested further below regarding the numerical modeling analysis; however, the Bureau engineering staff cannot recommend approval based numerical modeling without corroborating coastal data and analysis using generally accepted empirically- and theoretically based analytic solutions. Please include but not limit such an analysis to the following information: Inlets constricted by man -made or natural features may exhibit an actual throat section that is smaller than a stable cross - section in sedimentary equilibrium as determined from its tidal prism. The removal of constrictions can reduce the channel frictional resistance and thereby allow an increased flow that could cause increased sediment transport with unexpected results on channel shoaling and lateral stability. Removing the constriction(s), such as the peat and clay substrata within Wiggins Pass, could result in unexpected inlet cross - section enlargement. Empirical data may provide insight into this potential. An understanding of the general hydraulic characteristics has not been provided, notwithstanding the development of a fluvio - hydrodynamic model of the inlet. To assist in addressing the potential impacts of dredging Wiggins Pass, please provide the following hydraulic characteristics for both the predominantly diurnal tides and the predominantly semi - diurnal tides — Gulf tide range — 2ao Bay tide range — 2ab Ratio of ranges — ab ao Maximum ebb velocity — VMAXE Average max. ebb velocity — V MAX E Duration of ebb — AT, Lag of slack after low tide — Ate Phase lag, ebb — se Maximum flood velocity — VMAXF Average max. flood velocity — VMAXF Duration of flood — ATf Lag of slack after high tide — Atf Phase lag, flood — Ef Existing cross - sectional area of the inlet throat — Aexisting ( or Ac ) "Hore Protection, Less Process www. dep.state. fl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 13 of 23 Critical cross - sectional area of the inlet throat — Acritical ( or A, *) [ reference: O'Brien, M.P., and Dean, R.G., 1972. Hydraulics and Sedimentary Stability of Coastal Inlets, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Coastal Engineering, Chapter 41, pp. 761 -780.] Hydraulic tidal prism for flood and ebb — PH Keulegan coefficient of repletion — K [ reference: Keulegan, G.H., 1967. Tidal Flows in Entrances: Water Level Fluctuations of Basins in Communication with Seas, Technical Bulletin No. 14, Committee on Tidal Hydraulics, Waterways Experiment Station, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.] Impedance — F _ 2aog sin s 2 (Vmax) [ reference: O'Brien, M.P., and Clark, R.R., 1974. Hydraulic Constants of Tidal Entrances, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Coastal Engineering, Chapter 90, pp. 1546- 1565.] Numerical Modeling Analyses and Reporting Please provide a revised report including the information requested below. The report shall be certified by a professional engineer registered in the State of Florida. The draft numerical modeling report does not contain information necessary for a complete Bureau engineering staff review and basis for recommending approval or denial of the permit. The long term morphology modeling simulation (4 years) needs to consider changes that would occur in the sediment characteristics at Wiggins Pass and the surrounding area, including adjacent beaches, after the construction of the proposed project. Wide variations in sediment size distribution can affect the sediment transport potential at Wiggins Pass and the adjacent beaches. For assurances that the long term morphology modeling simulation results are accurate, such as Figure 40 on page 41 of the report, the changes in the median sediment size distribution need to be well represented in the model. Considering a constant value of 0.35mm for the median sediment size for all the grids for the entire simulation period is not adequate for analyzing the coastal processes at Wiggins Pass. In addition, please provide information on the sediment size distribution based on measured data assigned to the grid values in and about Wiggins Pass. (Also, provide the expected sediment size distribution after the 4 year morphology modeling simulation (equilibration).) As previously noted, the engineering and modeling reports indicate the deflation of the ebb shoal with historical and future maintenance dredging. However, the numerical modeling is limited to predicted effects on the coastal system through an initial four -year post - construction period following navigation channel expansion dredging. Please ";More Protection. Less Process " www. dep.state fl. trs Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 14 of 23 demonstrate how the modeling results lead to the long -term management of the improved navigation inlet considering the continuing changes to the inlet ebb shoal. The numerical modeling is used to assess sediment transport patterns, which significantly revise the results of the 1995 sediment budget developed by CP &E. Please provide a detailed explanation of how the modeling results were used develop the sediment budget. Please demonstrate that the revisions are not the result of changes in predominate wave direction that may occur during the record periods. The Bureau engineering staff has observed such changes in other areas of southwest Florida, although not within Collier County. Please include an explanation of Figure 40 of the report that appears to indicate the inlet is not a sediment sink, but is losing sediment to the adjacent coastal system north and south of the inlet. The reliability of the sediment budget is critical to inlet management activities; a sediment budget based upon coastal monitoring data is requested in Item #33c to validate the numerical modeling results. Please provide additional detail from the simulation results, such as the channel stability computation methods used and the numerical values for each of the alternative, besides the classification provided in the tables. Please provide larger plots of the initial and final graphs with the borders of the channel designs of the 8 alternative cases drawn. In general, please provide larger plots than provided of key figures, such as of Figures 31 -37 for visual analysis. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Subarna Malakar Coastal Engineer, at 850- 413 -7847. Looking at the cross - sections for profile lines C -12, and C -13, there is an interesting shape to the cut bank wall of the existing meander channel. In C -11 and C -14, the cut bank wall is nearly vertical. In C -12 and C -13, a small `ledge' is seen in the wall. Is there some geologic control, such as a layer of organic or peat material, or is this a function of the flow regime within the channel? What types of sediment exist on the cut bank wall of the existing meander? Within the existing meander channel, the channel deepens near profiles C -13 through C- 15. Is this a function of a geologic control forcing the flow to erode the channel down (deepen the channel) rather than out (into the cut back) into the mangroves? Is there peat or organic clay at the channel bottom in the areas seaward of profile C -13? The analysis provided does not adequately assess the geologic control of the existing meander positioning. Please provide additional data and analysis to determine what geologic controls (as noted in the two comments above) exist. "Tore Protection, Less Process " www. dep.statefl. its Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 15 of 23 Please respond to the issues raised in the attached letter from DEP Parks and Recreation (see also Items 33 d below). b. Analysis of the compatibility of the fill material with respect to the native sediment at the placement site. The analysis should include all relevant computations, the overfill ratios, and superimposed graphs of the cumulative grain -size distribution and the frequency distribution of the fill material over the data for the existing or native sediment at the placement site. Provide computations of borrow area volume and composite fill material characteristics (mean grain size and sorting, percent carbonate content) in an electronic spreadsheet The Bureau staff cannot recommend the current placement options for the non -beach compatible material to be dredged from the channel. The proposed disposal of non - beach compatible material in the existing channel meander does not provide the Bureau with reasonable assurance that the unsuitable material will not re -enter the system as the channel migrates and cause impacts to resources in the near future. Please assess alternative disposal options that have less potential to impact resources based on the potential risks associated with the non -beach compatible material identified in the areas to be dredged. The discussion of alternatives should address utilizing an upland containment disposal facility. The data currently available to the Department is inadequate to effectively delineate the non -beach compatible material identified in the proposed channel. Additional data and analysis is necessary to delineate this material. Special handling instructions are necessary to provide the Department with reasonable assurance that this material (both the identified non -beach compatible material and the unexpected material that may be encountered during dredging) will be handled correctly to minimize and avoid impacts to resources during construction and as the channel adjusts in the near future. Special handling instructions should be added to the construction document (Attachment 23c to the permit application) or as an appendix to the Sediment QA/QC plan. Regardless of possible changes to the dredge template, special handling instructions are still required to address the dredging of unexpected non -beach compatible material that will likely be encountered during dredging. c. Demonstration of consistency with the Department's strategic beach management plan or an inlet management plan in accordance with Rule 62B- 41.005(15), F.A. C. If the proposed project is not included in an inlet management plan the applicant will provide the information specified in Rule 62B- 41.008(1)(m), P.A.C. "Afore Protection, Less Process " www. dep.state, fl. its Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 16 of 23 The proposed navigation channel expansion is not a recommended inlet management strategy as adopted in the Department's Strategic Beach Management Plan (2008). The 1995 study of inlet management plan alternatives was used to support the County's application for environmental permits to construct the navigation and sediment management improvements that were constructed in 2000. The proposed 2010 channel expansion is greater than all the channel designs considered in the 1995 study. The application will require submittal of the information specified in Rule 62B- 41.008(1)(m), F.A.C., as listed below. The application stated that Attachment 33a Engineering Report provides an update to the inlet management plan. The staff cannot recommend the Department adopt an updated inlet management plan for Wiggins Pass based upon the information provided in the Engineering Report. Although the information in the Engineering Report does improve the understanding of the coastal littoral processes at this location it does not provided all the information required for an update of the Department's inlet management plan. The engineering and modeling reports do contain much of the required information; however, these documents do not constitute an update to the inlet management plan in their present form or content. Please provide a comprehensive document that incorporates both the engineering and modeling reports as revised by your response to the information requested in Application Items 33, 37, and 38. 1. A description of the physical characteristics of the inlet. 2. A sediment budget for the inlet. Please provide detailed coastal monitoring data, computations and analysis to supplement and validate the sediment budget about Wiggins Pass. This annotation to the sediment budget schematic provided in the engineering report is not adequate. 3. An analysis of the stability and hydraulic characteristics of the inlet including current velocities, tidal prism and current patterns of the flood and ebb tides. 4. A description of the wind and wave climate in the area of inlet influence. 5. A description of the sediment characteristics of the inlet and its related shoals. 6. The influence of existing manmade structures. 7. The current and historic shoreline erosion and accretion trends. 8. A statement of performance objectives and an analysis of the expected ";More Protection, Less Process " www. dep.state fl. as Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 17 of 23 affect of proposed coastal construction on the coastal system and marine turtles within the inlet area of influence. 9. An analysis of available alternatives to the proposed coastal construction, including the no action alternative, on meeting the stated performance objective and any related affects on the coastal system or marine turtles. 10. A demonstration of the anticipated public benefits of the coastal construction. Pursuant to 62B- 41.005(15), F.A.C., the plan shall provide for continued bypassing of the sand in sufficient quantity to insure that net long term erosion or accretion rates on both sides of the inlet remain equal except in cases where unequal erosion and accretion rates can be shown to be a result of natural processes and not caused by human activities. In all cases, mitigation shall be provided for any erosion effects to the adjacent coastal system attributable to alteration of the inlet. The mitigation shall include the placement of supplemental beach compatible material as needed. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Robert Brantly, Coastal Engineer, at 850 -413 -7803. d. Analysis of how water quality and natural communities would be affected by the proposed project. Provide graphic representation (depiction) of the area of direct and secondary influence of the proposed activity and delineate the natural communities within that area. All required surveys shall be representative of conditions existing at the time of submittal. Surveys of submerged aquatic vegetation (SA V) shall be conducted in the field during the growing season for a given climatic region such that they capture the full areal extent and biomass of the SAV community. Species composition and spatial distribution shall also be addressed by the survey. Estimate the affected acreage of each impacted community. Please respond to the issues raised in the attached letter from DEP Parks and Recreation. What evidence do you have to support the statement in Attachment 5 and 28 -1B (page9) that this project design will enhance snook habitat, as opposed to allowing the natural inlet migration processes to occur, or by planting mangroves to restore the 0.3 acres lost since the 1970's? Did snook experts assist you in designing this `scarp repair' aspect of the project? if so, please elaborate on the inclusion of this beneficial design element on the overall health of this ecosystem following construction. Compare and contrast this potentially beneficial element with the adverse impacts to Itore Protection, Less Process www. dep.state f. us Request for Additional Information (RAI # 1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 18 of 23 natural resources stemming from the straightening of the navigation channel following construction, or allowing the natural channel migration processes to occur. Water Quality: Some project areas (both Parks) are designated Outstanding Florida Waters, and will be subject to 0 NTU turbidity above background conditions at the edge of the mixing zone during all construction activities within their boundary. Post - construction turbidity and the general effect of the project on water quality within the project area is of concern to the Department for meeting the permitting and water quality standards. Please discuss the during- and post - construction turbidity expected from the project, paying particular attention the need for a mixing zone variance. Will salinity and dissolved oxygen increase or change with the new channel flow / alignment? How will these parameters affect the surrounding resources? Note: If a mixing zone is proposed, provide a narrative description and graphic representation of the mixing zone. Identify any areas within the proposed mixing zone that contain significant submerged resources. Explain why the size of the proposed mixing zone is the minimum necessary to meet water quality standards and provide justification for that size. Mixing Zone: What will be the size of the mixing zone for this project? The applicant must justify the size of any mixing zone citing your project specific conditions, whether or not a variance is required. Provide justification for that mixing zone size (in both the offshore and downcurrent directions) even if it is less than the 150 meters size that the Department is authorized to issue without a variance. If you do request a mixing zone variance please address the variance application requirements of Rule 62- 110.104 FAC. Your application should: • provide documentation as to why "There is no practicable means known or available for the adequate control of the pollution involved." • provide justification for the requested size; • demonstrate why that size is the minimum necessary to meet the turbidity standard; • list the turbidity control measures that will be used to minimize turbidity; • show the hardbottom resources that would be encompassed within the mixing zone; • provide a graphic representation of the requested mixing zone. • identify any areas within the proposed mixing zone that contain significant submerged resources. • discuss how the elevated turbidity within the mixing zone would affect the encompassed hardbottom communities; and • include the additional variance fee "More Protection, Less Process" www. dep.state fl. its Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 19 of 23 e. Reasonable assurances that a regulated activity will not cause unacceptable cumulative impacts pursuant to Rules 40X- 4.302(l)(b) and 62B- 41.002(19)((b), P.A. C. Attachment 33e begins; "The proposed channel realignment has been designed to avoid cumulative impacts to seagrass and mangrove resources." Please explain this statement in light of the questions posed in, and information gathered in response to Items 23c, 28 and 33d in this RAI. Perhaps this is more substantiated for mangroves, but based upon the Engineering report and historical inlet information and the past resource surveys, it does not appear that the newly proposed channel, nor the infilling of the existing channel takes into account the location of natural resources, such as oyster reefs or seagrass beds, as they have historically existed in this area. Cumulative impact avoidance would also include avoidance or minimization of sedimentation and light reduction (chronic turbidity) to seagrasses in the pass and nearshore hardbottom off the beaches, which is missing from the explanation provided in this response. This item will remain incomplete pending your response to the other items listed in this RAI. 34. Describe the location and details of the erosion, sediment and turbidity control measures to be implemented during each phase of construction and all other measures used to minimize adverse effects to water quality. Note the turbidity monitoring standards you propose may not be sufficient to meet the OFW requirements in all project areas. If a mixing zone is required, intermediate turbidity sampling stations will be necessary in addition to the point of discharge and limits of mixing zone. There is particular concern about during construction and post - construction (chronic) turbidity that may adversely affect seagrasses, bivalves and nearshore hardbottom within the project area. What are the distances of these natural resources from the limits of channel dredging and/or beneficial disposal areas? What level of turbidity (specify maximum and average NTU's) can be expected in each of these areas during construction? After construction? Will seagrass and/or oyster beds adjacent to the channel dredge footprint be subjected to increased erosion or subsidence with the new alignment? How about after the channel sloughs and erodes? Please describe in detail the analytical method or modeling you used to arrive at your answers to these questions. 35. Describe any methods proposed to protect threatened or endangered species. This item is complete and we acknowledge your response. Be advised that updated manatee, turtle and shorebird conditions are very likely to be required as a condition of any permit issued for this project. 37. A narrative description of any proposed mitigation plans, pursuant to Rule 62 -345, F.A.C., including purpose, a comparison between the functions of the impact site to the ",Clore Protection, Less Process' www. dep.state fl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI # 1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 20 of 23 mitigation site, maintenance, monitoring, estimated cost, construction sequence and techniques. For proposed artificial reefs, indicate the water depth, depth of sand overlying bedrock, proposed relief and materials (type, size and shape). Physical Monitoring and Mitigation Plan: Pursuant to 62B- 41.005(16) and (17), F.A.C., physical monitoring and mitigation of the project is required through acquisition of project - specific data to include, at a minimum, topographic/bathymetric surveys and engineering analysis of the inlet system and adjacent beaches and offshore zone. The monitoring data is necessary in order for both the Permittee and the Department to regularly observe and assess, with quantitative measurements, the performance of the project, any adverse effects which have occurred, and the need for any adjustments, modifications, or mitigative response to the project. The plan shall specify the circumstances that are deemed an adverse impact to the coastal system and specify the mitigation activities that will be required by the Permittee to offset the adverse impact should the monitoring indicate the occurrence of the specific circumstances. Pursuant to section 161.041(4), F.S., provide financial or other assurances acceptable to the Department as may be necessary to assure performance with the monitoring and mitigation plan, which shall be a condition for granting a permit under this section should a permit be approved by the Department. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Robert Brantly, Coastal Engineer, at 850 -413- 7803. You have not provided reasonable assurance that natural resource impacts (either direct or indirect) will not occur from the project, as currently designed — or that impacts have been minimized to the fullest extent possible. This item will remain incomplete pending your response to other items listed in this RAI (Items 23, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33a, d, and e, 34, and 38). 38. An analysis of available alternatives to the proposed coastal construction, pursuant to Rules 62B - 41.005(17) and 40X- 4.301(3), F.A.C. (where "X" represents "C ", "D " or "E "for the corresponding Water Management District), that would minimize adverse impacts to the coastal system. Discuss any related effects on the coastal system. The modeling report contains the evaluation of alternative channel designs that provide a safe channel for boating, address erosion to Barefoot Beach, and is economically cost - effective. The evaluation is based upon an understanding of the coastal processes that may not be complete and for which additional information is requested. As indicated in Item 33, the proposed activity has the potential for specific changes to inlet hydraulics that may result in adverse impacts to the coastal system. In accordance with Rule 62B- 41.005(17), F.A.C, for the Department to determine that all practical revision have been made, the applicant must considered these alternatives that avoid or minimize potential for adverse impact. Specific alternatives not included in the application that require evaluation are channel designs that: avoid excavation of ;ltore Protection, Less Process" www. dep.state, fl. acs Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 21 of 23 the limestone /peat/clay substrata; avoid deflation of the ebb shoal; and avoid loss of shorebird habitat on Wiggins Pass State Park. Please submit an evaluation of each of these alternatives with the supporting data and analyses. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Robert Brantly, Coastal Engineer, at 850 -413- 7803. 39. A fee, as set forth in Rule 62B- 49.006, F.A. C. The sum of the fees required by Chapters 62 -4, 62B -41, and 18 -21, Florida Administrative Code, has been calculated as $12,189. Please submit this amount by check made out to the Department of Environmental Protection, with the DEP File No. 142538- 008 -JC clearly indicated on the face of the check. A breakdown of the fees is as follows: Rule 62- 4.050(4)(h)l.b. requires $9,120 for the total area of 14.6 acres of wetlands or surface waters directly affected by construction, Rule 62B- 41.0085(3)(c) requires $2,500 for the 80,000 cy designated for offshore disposal and Rule 18 -21. 01 l(1)(b) requires $569 for the processing of the 10 year public easement. Please note that the fee calculated above must be sent to the Department within 45 days of submittal of your response (or partial response) to this RAI, or the application shall be denied (without prejudice) according to Rule 62B- 49.006, F.A.C. If you believe that there is an error in the fee calculation, please contact Bureau staff BEFORE submitting your response to this RAI. Please publish the enclosed Notice of Application. Pursuant to Section 403.815, Florida Statutes and Rule 62- 110.106, Florida Administrative Code, you (the applicant) are required to publish at your own expense the enclosed Notice of Application. This notice shall be published one time only within 14 days, in the legal ad section of a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected. For the purpose of this rule, "publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected" means publication in a newspaper meeting the requirements of Sections 50.011 and 50.031, Florida Statutes, in the county where the activity is to take place. The applicant shall provide proof of publication to the Department within seven (7) days of publication. If the applicant fails to provide all information required to complete the application within six (6) months after a request for additional information has been sent, the staff will close the permit application file after written notice to the applicant, except that a request for an extension of time for a period agreeable to the Department, but not to exceed one year, shall be granted upon demonstration by the applicant that the delay in completion of the application has been caused by matters beyond the control of the applicant. Application files closed under these procedures shall be closed without prejudice and a new application, accompanied by the appropriate fee, shall be required to renew the application. If the processing of the application is prolonged, or if a storm event is known to have altered the shoreline such that the staff determines that the topographic and bathymetric survey data is no "I fore Protection, Less Process www.dep.state fl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI # 1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 22 of 23 longer adequate to complete its analysis, then an updated survey shall be required as specified in Item No. 20 above. In the event that an updated survey is required, the application shall be treated as an amended application. "Alore Protection, Less Process www. dep.statefl. us Request for Additional Information (RAI # 1) Permit No. 142538- 008 -JC Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 23 of 23 Sincerely,,,. -� Merrie Beth Neely, Ph.D. Processor, Environmental Specialist III Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems Enclosure(s): Notice of Application Public Easement Notice Template DEP Parks and Recreation Letter (3- 24 -10) cc: Gary McAlpin, Collier County Lucy Blair, DEP, South District Jeff Raley, DRP Parks Small, DRP Subarna Malakar, BBCS Mike Barnett, BBCS Vladimir Kosmynin, BBCS Bob Brandy, BBCS Jenn Koch, BBCS Lainie Edwards, BBCS Vince George, BBCS Paden Woodruff, BBCS Alex Reed, BBCS Roxane Dow, BBCS JCP Compliance, BBCS Stephen Fleming USACE Marcia Cravens Afore Protection, Less Process, " www. dep.statefl. its 8500.83 January 30, 2012 Lainie Edwards, Ph.D. Environmental Manager Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems Mail Station 300 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399 -3000 Re: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (RAI No. 1) JCP File Number: 0142538- 008 -JC, Collier County Applicant Name: Collier County Project Name: Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging & Navigation Improvement Project Dear Lainie: This letter is in response to the Department's March 24, 2010 first Request for Additional Information (RAI No. 1) for the referenced project. Enclosed please fmd three (3) hardcopies and one (1) electronic copy of our response. Please note that our responses and supporting attachments have been numbered to correspond with the numbers of the questions contained in the RAI. This RAI response addresses comments made from FDEP, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), and Florida Park Service (FPS). We closed this file at the request of BBCS, and we are requesting that the file be re- opened with submittal of this response. We have had numerous coordination meetings with the BBCS since March 2010 and have discussed the issues with the Florida Park Service. We met in the field with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (DWSP) personnel on September 29, 2011. We have conducted a geological field investigation (Attachment No. 27) that isolated the geological control and better defined the inlet's processes. We used the results of these meetings and new data to expand the engineering report (Attachment No. 33a). In addition, coordination by the County has led to FDEP providing qualified support to the straightened channel alternative in their May 13, 2011 letter by Michael Barnett. In general, the inlet is controlled by two hard substrates in the ebb shoal, with the channel stabilized in the gap. As the interior flood channel migrated to the north, pushed by sediment infilling the inlet from the south, it pushed the ebb channel to the south. The S- shaped inlet will get more extreme as this migration continues. A set of maps and historic aerials in the engineering report illustrate that there have been other historic Gulf openings for the Cocohatchee River, and the apex of today's meander may be at the location of a historic waterway that connected to the Gulf through Little Hickory Pass in geological history. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 2 Many of the comments from the March 24, 2010 RAI appear to be largely in response to the concerns of the FPS and regarding the methods of disposal of dredge material, both of which have been addressed in the interim meetings and discussions. I believe we show that the FPS concerns, while important, are not as severe as their letters imply. The fact that the northern shoreline of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park has migrated at least 200 feet north in the last 100 years and 100 feet since the 1970s, while the inlet mouth migration was much smaller, is an indicator that any impacts are small and pre -date dredging. This causes the rotation of the channel about the stabilizing point, leading to impacts to the Barefoot Beach mangroves and the northwest point of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park was erosional prior to 1992 and has been accretional during the period of inlet maintenance when too much sand bypassing went south. We believe that centering the channel will decrease cumulative impacts to both Barefoot Beach Preserve and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park compared to the existing situation. The ebb channel rotation against DWSP is the source of most complaints, and a centered channel would decrease this nuisance. In consultation with BBCS, we will place all unsuitable material to the south of the project in the existing pit associated with Borrow Area 6. Based on the results of the geology field investigation, the channel was realigned, to minimize clay, peat and rock removal, but it could not be completely avoided. We have included a conceptual sediment QA/QC plan and ask for your comments before we finalize the cuts, alignment, and disposal plan. FDEP Comment A - Preliminary evaluation of your proposed project leads Bureau staff to the conclusion that the placement options for the non -beach compatible material to be dredged from the channel expansion cannot be recommended for approval. Specifically, the placement of clay and peat into the existing inlet channel meander and /or the nearshore waters of the Gulf. Special handling is required for disposal of this material in an appropriate upland location outside the coastal zone. CPE Response to FDEP Comment A — Based upon discussions with the FDEP, unsuitable materials will be properly disposed in an offshore borrow pit at the Borrow Area 6 location. This location was previously permitted. FDEP Comment B - Also, this does not imply that the staff will recommend approval of the excavation of the clay and peat substrata. The consolidated material beneath the inlet bottom acts to maintain the inlet at this historical location along the coast and its removal could lead to inlet migration and erosion of the adjacent Park lands. Additional information is requested below regarding this potential adverse impact. In any case, the staff does not anticipate a recommendation for approval of a permit that includes disposal of the clay /peat in the coastal zone. While this is by no means final agency action or notice of intent thereof, it does represent the staff review of your application and considerable experience in permitting matters. We are sending you these comments at this early stage of the processing to allow you to assess fully the further commitment of financial resources for design dependent on permit issuance. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Em Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 3 CPE Response to FDEP Comment B — Based upon additional geotechnical investigations, it has been found that there is no layer of consolidated material acting to maintain the inlet in its current configuration. A review of the vibracore and seismic data indicates that the Wiggins Pass ebb shoal, flood shoal and tributaries are predominantly fine - grained sand with pockets of shelly sediment (shelly sand or shell hash), organic clay and rock fragments. The seismic and vibracore data indicate that these sediment types do not occur in continuous layers, which is consistent with reworked sediments associated with inlets. With the exception of a single core (WPVC- 11 -04) there is no evidence of a peat deposit. Since this is the only core that had peat (a 0.5 ft. thick layer), it is likely an isolated occurrence in Wiggins Pass. Additionally, no continuous rock layer was found within the inlet flood shoal, whose channel is free to migrate north. The inlet ebb channel is located in a gap between two hard substrate locations, which is stabilizing the inlet location. FDEP Comment No. 5. - Describe in general terms the proposed activity including any phasing. Total estimated volume to be dredge is 80,000 cy. Please provide estimates of the dredge volumes to be placed in each of the material placement areas stated above. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 5 -1 — Please refer to the Project Description (Attachment No. 5) and the updated engineering report included in Attachment No. 33a for volume estimates. The amount of initial construction volume is described below. The ebb shoal volume can vary between 24,000 cy and 58,000 cy depending on the timing of the project start. Dredge Template: Ebb shoal Channel: 41,000 cy Flood shoal Channel: 36,400 cy Transition (incompatible): 7,500 cy Disposal Areas Fill: New Meander (flood channel) fill: 39,200 cy North nearshore & Ebb shoal disposal area: 38,200 cy South (DWSP) nearshore disposal area: None initially Offshore (BA 6) disposal area: 7,500 cy The dredge depths noted on the cross - section vary from the table in Attachment S. Please clarify the maximum dredge depths for the entire channel, noting the maximum dredge depths on a drawing for each subarea of the channel. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 5 -2 - Please refer to the Project Description (Attachment No. 5) and the updated engineering report included in Attachment No. 33a for the updated table of dredge depths and the new permit sketches (Attachment No. 24). Of the 80,000 cy proposed to be dredged from the channel, what volume will be placed in the existing channel meander, the beach disposal sites, and nearshore disposal sites? What 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 4 portion of the total volume is expected to be unsuitable material? Of that unsuitable material volume, what is the volume of the rock, peat, organic clay, and silty sands? What portion of the total volume is expected to be beach quality sands? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 5 -3 - Please refer to the above response to FDEP Comment 5- 1, the Project Description (Attachment No. 5) and the updated engineering report included in Attachment No. 33a for volume estimates. A conceptual QA/QC plan is provided as Attachment No. 27f for your review as a prerequisite to final design. Only 7,500 cy of the initial quantity of 85,000 cy is expected to be unsuitable. We will make final cuts and volume estimates based on mutually agreeable disposal criteria and alignment. FDEP Comment No. 7. - Describe the purpose and need of the proposed activity including any public benefits. Please provide information to juste the navigational need for straight interior channel as opposed to the recreational boating access that has been provided by the natural interior channeb Information may include a record of reported accidents and navigation advisories. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 7 — The requested information is provided in Attachment No. 7. Navigability and a reduction of 10 year dredging quantity from over 300,000 cy to 214,000 cy are two main accomplishments expected of the new project. Recently, boaters have complained about hitting bottom on the south channel and at the Gulf entrance of the channel. The latest USCG Notice to Mariners for the week of January 24, 2012 is as follows: Extensive shoaling has been reported in Wiggins Pass Inlet in between Wiggins Pass 11427 2510 DBN 1 (LLNR 17780) and Wiggins Pass DBN 2 (LLNR 17785). Severe shoaling has been reported in and around Wiggins Pass. This notice was issued less than a year since the latest maintenance dredging. FDEP Comment No. 11. - Have you obtained approval from the Department of State, Division of Historical Resources? If yes, provide a copy of the letter of approval. We have requested this information on your behalf but it has not yet been received. No further action is required of you at this time, however, you application will remain incomplete until the information is received CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 11 — Yes, the Department of State, Division of Historical Resources provided a letter of approval dated August 26, 2010 for the 2011 dredging permit, which should be applicable to this project. This letter is provided as Attachment No. 11. No historical resources have been identified in the project area. The closest historic site at Barefoot Beach is Half Shell Site (8CR871), but it is located away from the project area. Two other archaeological sites (8CR970 and 8CR218) are also located outside the project area (Attachment No. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 5 11). The permit sketches (Attachment No. 24) show the outline of the channel template in comparison to Barefoot Beach Preserve and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. FDEP Comment No. 13. - A copy of the Division of State Lands title determination. If you do not have title determination, department staff will request that the Division of State Lands conduct a title check. The title information check on your project reveals two existing easements (No. 30353 (5165- 11)) and 29908 (5265 -11)) and two existing leases (No. 3869 to Collier County for Barefoot Beach State Recreation Center, and No. 2514 to DEP Division of Parks and Recreation for Delnor Wiggins State Recreation Area) in, the project area - as well as state owned submerged lands There is a concern that the new channel template may encroach onto Park land. Your project will require a "letter of no objection" from the other easement/lease holders, and the applicant is required to obtain and submit those letters to FDEP. See also Item 14 below. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 13 — All lands are State lands, with Barefoot Beach Preserve being managed by the County. The two fill areas at Barefoot Beach are contingent upon land use clarification from the County managed park. Since the County is the lease holder at Barefoot Beach, clarification on land use issues is underway with the County. The trimming of a sand spit (wave) that has accreted in the last 6 years south of Wiggins Pass at Delnor - Wiggins Pass State Park is also above MHW. The County will request a letter of no objection from FDEP. Nearshore disposal has been previously permitted offshore of both parks. A title restriction on structures exists on DWSP, but it pertains to lands south of the vegetation line based on a map provided by Lainie Edwards last year. The proposed project is located outside of this area and will have no impact on this area. FDEP Comment No. 14. - Satisfactory evidence demonstrating that the applicant has sufficient control and interest in the riparian upland property, as described in Subsection 18- 21.004 (3)(b), Florida Administrative Code. Governmental entities that qualify for the waiver or deferral outlined in this rule must provide supporting documentation in order to be eligible. If the applicant is not the property owner, then authorization from the property owner for such use must be provided. It is unclear from your response (attachment 14) if you are invoking the governmental waiver of this requirement. If you are, please submit evidence to show you qualify for the waiver. If you are not requesting the waiver your response it not satisfactory in response to this Item — please provide the required information. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 14 — All dredging and fill operations will be below MHW except for the placement of fill at Barefoot Beach and the cut of a sand spit at DWSP (see response to 13 above). Both properties are owned by State Lands, and a waiver is requested. The County is a qualifying government. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 6 The advantage to relocating the channel is the protection it provides to the mangroves at Barefoot Beach and the northwest corner of DWSP. The likely geological fate of an unchanged system will continue severe impacts at Barefoot Beach. Net impacts to State Lands on both sides of the inlet will be positive from the proposed project. FDEP Comment No. 17. - A legal property description and acreage of any sovereign submerged land that would be encompassed by the requested lease or easement, plus two (2) prints of a survey prepared, signed and sealed by a person properly licensed by the Florida State Board of Land Surveyors. Once the design has been finalized and the easement area has been determined we will required your sketches to be submitted and official notice of the proposed easement to be sent to all affected property owners within the 1000 foot (500 foot radius) of the easement area. The official notice template is attached. Noticing can occur after the permit has been issued, however, the easement package cannot be processed by the Department and the Division of State Lands until the permit is issued and the green cards (or attempted delivery notices) have been submitted. Construction may not begin until the easement has been recorded Please ensure your sketches meet the required 10 year public easement survey standards of the Division of State Lands. Your application will remain incomplete pending receipt of the required survey sketches CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 17 — The legal property description and survey will. be provided once the channel alignment is accepted. The estimated amount of acreage that will be encompassed by the requested project is as follows: Dredge Template: Existing and new channels- 15.8 acres (687,728.2 SF) Disposal Areas (total): 67.4 acres (2,936,000 SF) New meander (flood channel) fill- 4.5 acres (196,000 SF) New & existing Barefoot Beach nearshore disposal area -23.7 acres — (1,032,400 SF) New ebb shoal disposal area- 6.9 acres (300,600 SF) Existing south (DWSP) nearshore disposal area- 11.3 acres (492,200 SF) Offshore (BA 6) disposal area- 21.0 acres (915,000 SF) FDEP Comment No. 19. - Written evidence, provided by the appropriate governmental agency having jurisdiction over the activity, that the proposed activity, as submitted to the Department, is consistent with the state - approved Local Comprehensive Plan. Please provide this information when it is available. Your application will remain incomplete pending your response. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 7 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 19 — Coordination is currently underway with Collier County to secure a letter of consistency through the County's environmental process. FDEP Comment No. 23. - Complete sets of construction plans and specification for the proposed activity, certified by an engineer duly registered pursuant to Chapter 471, Florida Statutes. The plans shall clearly distinguish between existing and proposed structures and grades, and shall include the following: a. Plan view of the proposed activity depicting the mean high -water line, any easement boundary and the erosion control line (if applicable) within the area of influence of the proposed activity. Identify the boundaries of significant geographical features (e.g., channels, shoals) and natural communities (e.g., submerged grass beds, hardbottom or mangroves) within the area of influence of the activity. Include a north arrow and a scale bar on each drawing. Show the mixing zone and OFW limits on the plan view drawings (please make sure they are shown together, along with the resources, on at least one plan view drawing). CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23a — The mixing zone and OFW borders are shown along with natural resources in Attachment No. 33d, in support of the mixing zone variance request. The permit sketches (Attachment No. 24) also include OFW limits (Sheet 8). Construction plans will be provided as a Notice to Proceed item. b. A sufficient number of cross - section views of the proposed activity depicting the slopes, the mean high -water line, any easement boundary and the erosion control line (if applicable) within the area of influence of the proposed activity. Identify the boundaries of significant geographical features and natural communities in the area of influence of the proposed activity. Elevations indicated on the cross - sections shall be referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88). Please provide any missing cross section views (03 +00, C -4, etc). Please provide longitudinal cross sections of the channel for all areas (C26 to 12 +00, C33 to C29 and CN35 to C29). CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23b -1 — Acknowledged. All cross - sections are provided in Attachment No. 24 as permit sketches. Construction plans will be provided as a Notice to Proceed item. On sheet 30, why are there two colors shown on the fill cross - section of the scarp repair area— does this just delineate the MHWL elevation? Or does it have more meaning? What is the plan for stabilizing the areas above MHW in this cross section? Why is construction to this elevation ( +3.7 feet) necessary? How was this elevation chosen? Is it only temporary as a result of the containment dike construction? See also Item 28. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 8 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23b -2 — For the question on Sheet 30, please refer to the updated permit sketches in Attachment No. 24. The two colors on the previous Sheet 30 represented the scarp repair ( +3.7' to -2.0'), which then tied into the meander fill (gray shaded area) which was filled up to a depth of -2.8' at the time of the previous permit submittal. Note that in this submittal, the meander fill has been shifted to correspond to the MLLW elevation of -2.28 ft. NAVD, mimicking natural shoals. The containment dike will be flattened to this elevation at the end of construction. For the scarp repair component of the project, the elevation of +3.7 NAVD (5' NAVD) was chosen since it is the approximate elevation of the natural berm within the project area. This component is permanent in order to repair the severe scarp present at southern Barefoot Beach. The scarp repair and meander fill are designed to blend together as a system, parallel to the new channel. c. Details of construction, including materials and general construction procedures and equipment to be used (e.g., construction access, dredging method, dredged material containment, pipeline location). The Construction Document (Attachment 23c) should identify those reaches and placement options such that triggers are set to change the placement option as necessary. This is particularly important to address the dredging of organic clay, peat, silty, and rocky layers that have been identified through the geotechnical investigation and provide the Department with reasonable assurance that non -beach compatible material will not be placed on the beach, in the nearshore, or in the channel meander, and potentially impact resources both during construction and in the near future. (This is important for areas such as the organic clay layer seen in vibracore WPVC -09 -06 and those materials from the flood shoal and tributaries currently proposed for placement in the channel meander.) CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23c -1 — A conceptual sediment QA/QC plan is attached in Attachment No. 27f. It proposes a plan similar to that used for Blind Pass in Lee County. We will finalize cut depths and alignment once accepted. Please clarify what is meant on page 5 of Attachment 5 where it states: "In keeping with a small project, the material can be disposed by side casting to the area 1,000 feet north of the inlet. There is no hardbottom north of the inlet and the nearest hardbottom is approximately 1,200 feet south of the inlet. Since this is a short term solution to lengthen navigation, sand returning quickly to the channel is not the major concern. " This is also mentioned again in Attachment 23c. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23c -2 — Please refer to the updated construction description in Attachment No. 5 and in Attachment No. 23c for clarification. Side casting or pumping was discussed with BBCS staff recently and was favorably received. Side cast dredging has been practiced successfully in North Carolina for maintaining shallow inlets with dredge depths of as shallow as -6 feet. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 9 Also, note that in light of recent findings, there is hardbottom to the north of Wiggins Pass. Refer to response to Comment No. 28 for further detail. However, the hardbottom is sufficiently north of the side casting \ebb shoal disposal area that it will not be affected by the project. The offshore project area was sidescanned in 1994 and diver investigated recently. This narrative (attachment 5) also states: "Full periodic and intermediate maintenance dredging will be target for the low wave season during the late spring to early summer (during sea turtle nesting season), but with no on beach disposal or construction activity. Construction requiring beach placement of sand will take place outside sea turtle nesting season." What is the fate of material dredged during the periodic and intermediate maintenance dredging? Do you also intend to limit the placement of dredged material in the nearshore to between November I and April 30? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23c -3 — The fate of material dredged during the periodic and intermediate maintenance dredging will become part of the active nearshore profile or beach, or provide material for reforming the ebb shoal. The placement of dredged material in the nearshore profile will occur outside of nesting season. See Attachment 23c for an updated construction schedule. The narrative under Attachment 23c states: "Turbidity will be addressed similar to existing requirements." Please elaborate on these methods as this is an insufficient explanation to provide reasonable assurance that state water quality standards will be met during and after construction (see also Item 33d). The placement of silty/organic material in the existing channel, even if "capped" by coarser material will potentially lead to chronic turbidity problems (and the associated natural resource concerns) if the filled existing channel eroded again in the future (see also Items 27 and 33b). Pay particular attention to describing how you will meet the OFW turbidity standards of 0 NTU's above background at the edge of the mixing zone during construction in some parts of the project area and particularly where constructing the proposed dikes and associated infilling of the channel and the Delnor Wiggins beach and nearshore placement areas (see also Item 33d below). CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23c -4 — Refer to new turbidity plan included in the request for a temporary mixing zone variance in Attachment No. 33d. This is similar to what was permitted for the 2011 maintenance dredging. Please elaborate on the project design and construction details for the "scarp repair area" shown in Figure A of Attachment 5 and the same area of Barefoot Beach called out as "South Point Restoration" shown on sheets 3 and 5 of the plan view drawings and cross sections C -5, C -8 and sheet 30. Pay particular attention to describing how you will meet the OFW turbidity standards of 0 NTU's above background at the edge of your mixing zone (see also Item 33d below). 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 10 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23c -5 — The design has been updated and is provided in Attachment No. 24. The beach near the inlet has scarps many feet high, and we propose to restore a beach berm with natural elevations and slope in the scarp repair region to restore accessibility and recreational qualities to an otherwise inaccessible shoreline area. A variance request similar to the one approved last year is contained in Attachment No. 33d. What are the details of your plan to install new, or revise the locations of the existing, Aids to Navigation in the affected area? How will you update the appropriate Agencies navigational maps, Notice to Mariners, etc.? Have you coordinated with the US Coast Guard on your planned activities? If not, please do so. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 23c -6 — Collier County Coastal Zone Management has a dedicated staff that works in conjunction with local groups that handle navigation aid related manners. The County moves navigation aids as needed. Coordination between the County and agencies is presently done on a reoccurring basis. FDEP Comment No. 24. - In addition to the full -size drawings requested above, the information required under Paragraphs (20), (22) and (23) above shall be provided on 8 1/2 -inch by 11 -inch paper, certified by an engineer duly registered pursuant to Chapter 471, Florida Statutes. Each drawing shall include an accurate scale or dimensions, and all information shown on the drawing shall be clearly legible. Please provide a fully annotated plot of the longitudinal cross - section of the proposed design of the channel cut, superimposed with the current bottom profile of the channel at Wiggins Pass and depicting the upper horizon of the limestone /peat/clay substrata. See also Item 23 above. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 24 — Refer to Attachment No. 24 for updated permit sketches with a longitudinal profile of the proposed channel. FDEP Comment No. 25. - An aerial photograph or map with a scale of 1" = 200', showing: the project boundaries, DNR Reference Monument locations, major county landmarks, boundaries of significant natural communities (e.g., submerged aquatic vegetation, hardbottom or mangroves) and special aquatic or terrestrial sites (parks, sanctuaries, refuges, Outstanding Florida Waters, aquatic preserves, etc.) within the project boundary and a minimum of 1,000 feet in both shore parallel directions of the project boundary. This aerial does not meet the size requirement specified for this item; please submit expanded and updated resource maps for the dredge and fill regions that meet the proper scale requirements. Show the OFW boundaries and hardbottom resources on the map(s). Show the project area plus 1000 ft. in either direction on the map(s). See also Item 28 below regarding 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 11 the identification of natural resources on this graphic that differ from the resource locations shown in Passarella — Exhibit 1 (2007). CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 25 — The aerials have been modified to meet these size and scale requirements, and they have been updated to include additional natural resource data. The revised aerials are provided in Attachment No. 25. FDEP Comment No. 26. - A proposed construction schedule. The current maintenance dredging application is expired and the construction schedule you propose is ambitious, particularly in light of the proposed channel straightening. Has avoidance of snook spawning season been accounted for during the construction schedule, as with previous maintenance dredging events? If not please discuss this in an updated schedule. This item is complete, but provides an updated construction schedule after the final project design is achieved. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 26 — An updated construction schedule is provided in Attachment No. 23c. Snook spawning season coincides with summer sea turtle nesting season; the project will be scheduled to avoid sea turtle nesting season. FDEP Comment No. 27. - Permit applications for excavation or fill activities shall include the following detailed information concerning the material to be excavated and the existing or native material at the beach fill site: a. Site plans showing the location of all core borings and the boundaries of the area to be excavated. Please provide a figure with the showing maximum dredge depths for each subarea of the channel with the locations of the vibracores and jet probes superimposed. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27a -1- See figures in Attachment Nos. 24 and 27. Please provide a drawing(s) of the best estimate of the extent of the rock and organic clay layer that underlie the ebb shoal and current channel mouth. Both the rock and the organic clay layer (as seen in WPVC- 09 -06) are noted in Attachment 27, but no figure is provided other than the extent of the rock ledge noted previously by CEC. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27a -2 - A hard copy of the abridged revised report is included as Attachment No. 27, and a complete electronic version is provided on the enclosed CD. Figure 5 in the revised report is a sediment characterization map. On Figure 1 in Attachment 27, the locations of four possible peat areas (labeled 2009 Possible Peat Areas) are noted on the map. How were these located? Is this something 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 12 observed in the field? Was the areal and/or vertical extent mapped? How much of the material to be dredged do these peat locations represent? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27a -3 — The original identification was visual by non - geologist divers. The 2011 investigation better defines the types and locations of various materials by geological classification (Attachment No. 27). An electronic version of the revised and complete geotechnical report is included on the enclosed CD as Attachment No. 27. Although a dark surface seen by divers during a 2009 investigation was initially thought to be peat, subsequent work indicates that there is no uniform peat layer. Peat is sparse. b. Core boring logs of all cores taken throughout the area to be excavated and surrounding area. Logs should extend at least two feet below the proposed bottom elevation. The depth of each visible horizon in the log should be reported relative to NAVD (88) and the material in each stratum classified according to grain size. Please provide the jet probe logs and other supporting geotechnical information gained from the collection of the jet probes. (Were samples collected? Field notes made that may help define the extent of rock and/or the organic clay layer underlying the ebb shoal? A brief discussion was provided in the geotechnical report with the application, but the supporting documentation is being requested.) CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27b — The revised geotechnical report is included as Attachment No. 27 and on the enclosed CD as Attachment No. 27 -1. This report includes a discussion of the 2009 jetprobe investigation and the more recent geophysical and geotechnical (vibracore) investigations. Jetprobes provide limited geotechnical information. The 2009 jetprobe investigation was conducted to provide information on the elevation at which refusal occurred. As such, samples were not collected. C A sediment QA/QC plan that will ensure that the sediment to be used for beach restoration or nourishment will meet the standards set forth in paragraph 62B- 41.007(2)0), F.A.C. Please provide a sediment QA/QC plan required in Chapter 62B- 41.008(1)(k)4.b. The template Sediment QA/QC plan and guidance document for offshore borrow areas is available for guidance for this project on the Bureau's website(http.11www. dep.state.fl. us/ beaches / publications /tech- rpt.htm #Geotechnical- Table . Please submit a Word version of the plan so that changes from the template document can be easily seen and comments can be sent back to you (as necessary) using Track Changes feature in Word. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 13 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27f — A conceptual sediment QA/QC plan is provided (Attachment No. 27f) based on the Blind Pass, Lee County plan. Detailed cut depths will be provided when the new alignment is accepted and a disposal classification is accepted. The FDEP template language will be incorporated. FDEP Comment No. 28. - Using an established natural community classification system, describe each natural community within the area of influence of the proposed activity and include: a. Acreage. b. Identification of the flora and fauna to the lowest taxon practicable. c. Characterization of dominant and important flora and fauna and estimates of percent biotic cover. d. Sampling locations, date of sampling or measurements and methods used for sampling. Appendix 28 -1 was missing Figure 2 and the map of the numbered resource Areas listed in Table I — and some of the appendices referenced in this report. Please provide at least an electronic version of the complete report. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 28 -1 - An electronic version of the complete report is included on the enclosed CD as Attachment No. 28 -1. Figure 2 contains the resource areas from Table 1. The black and white resource map by Passarella — Exhibit I submitted in the narrative under attachment 28 -IB (page 6), based on natural resource surveys performed in 2007 seems to indicate more resources and in different areas than shown on the aerial submitted in Attachment 25. Since this is black and white it is difficult to read — please provide a color version of this figure and at a larger scale. Discuss the sometimes dramatic differences in resources and locations identified in the project area in just a year. Are you confident that the recently performed CPE field survey visited all the areas identified in this map and confirmed those resources do not exist today? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 28 -2 - Although some small patches of seagrass reported by Passarella in 2007 (provided in color as Appendix B to Attachment No. 28 -1; we do not have original data from Passarella, and so cannot change the scale) were not observed by CPE in 2009, more seagrass was actually surveyed by CPE during the 2009 survey than what was reported in the Passarella report. A 2006 seagrass map provided by Humiston & Moore (included in Appendix B to Attachment No. 28 -1) also showed very little seagrass when compared to the 2009 CPE survey. These previous surveys and seagrass maps were used in planning and conducting the 2008 and 2009 CPE surveys. The CPE 2009 survey visited all areas where seagrass had been observed in the past, and was conducted near the end of the growing season when the grasses were likely at their widest distribution and greatest cover for the season. A CPE biologist conducted an additional site visit on September 29, 2011 with Mark Sramek of NMFS — Habitat Conservation Division (observation report provided in Attachment No. 28 -2). Shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) was observed in similar distribution to previous surveys. However, two small 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC mow„ Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 14 patches were observed during this visit which was not observed during the 2009 site visit (CPE), but which had been observed in 2007 (Passarella & Assoc.). These 2011 seagrass observations have been added to the natural resource data presented in Attachment No. 25. No paddle grass (Halophila decipiens) was observed during this site visit; it was acknowledged by Mr. Sramek that this species is highly ephemeral and so is not expected to be observed during all surveys. CPE biologists are experienced in surveying both H. wrightii and H. decipiens. The distribution of both species can be somewhat ephemeral, especially H. decipiens, whose distribution and cover can change frequently, even within the same survey season. As such, no two surveys of the area are likely to be exactly alike; instead, similarities reflect more stable beds. CPE's 2009 survey differed even from their 2008 survey, illustrating the changing nature of these areas. Seasonality can also play a factor. Any differences between surveys may be attributable to some of the factors described above. As a result of this discrepancy between the statements in the narrative under Attachment 33d and 28 -IB we must inquire for clarification on direct impacts. Please also elaborate on indirect and cumulative impacts, including potential sloughing of channel walls, which may impact the adjacent seagrass beds. What type, by species, and acreage(s) of benthic natural resources (seagrass, hardbottom, and oyster reefs) will be directly and indirectly impacted by filling in the old existing channel? By dredging the new alignment to the channel? By disposing of the material in the nearshore off Delnor Wiggins and Barefoot Beach? What acreage of new intertidal habitat suitable for colonization of these resources will be created? Do you intend to transplant seagrasses into the newly created intertidal habitat where the channel is infilled? Will you maintain the diked areas that may be supratidal for some time period to ensure that no exotic invasive plant species colonize them? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 28 -3 — No benthic natural resources (seagrass, hardbottom, and oyster reefs) will be directly impacted by dredging or filling in the old existing channel. Placement of fill will occur on unconsolidated sandy substrate with some shell hash and will avoid the seagrass located on the northern side of the Pass (Attachment No. 25). Indirect impacts to this seagrass will be minimized through use of turbidity curtains during construction. Dredge and fill operations have occurred within the project area in the past without known impacts, and this should be an indication that future impacts will be insignificant. Dredging is not anticipated to cause direct impacts to seagrass or oyster beds; the new alignment portion of the proposed dredge template consists of unconsolidated sandy substrate. Where seagrass and oyster beds have been found closest to the channel wall (at the east end of the project area), the proposed east and south dredge template is the same as the previously permitted template (Attachment No. 25). Multiple dredgings have already been conducted here. The east end, north and south channels are proposed for maintenance dredging at near existing depths; the channel sides will not be dredged. The goal for these channels is to remove sediment recently shoaled in these areas, and not to dredge new channels. Turbidity curtains may be utilized during construction to minimize indirect impacts from 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 15 elevated turbidity to seagrass and oyster beds in areas adjacent to dredge areas. As there are no anticipated direct impacts to seagrass, there is no plan to transplant seagrass. Disposal of material in the nearshore environment off of Delnor- Wiggins and Barefoot Beach will not impact benthic natural resources (seagrass, hardbottom, or oyster reefs). No seagrass or oyster reefs are located in this environment. The most extensive reach of hardbottom is located south of Wiggins Pass, extending south of FDEP monument R -18; the location of this hardbottom has been verified by remote sensing and dives by CPE between 1993 and 2009 (Attachment No. 25; Attachment No. 28 -3). There are also potential hardbottom resources located north of Wiggins Pass, between R -9.5 and R -11 (Attachment No. 25; Attachment No. 28 -3). These resources were ground - truthed by Collier County divers in September 2010; divers found hardbottom north of the R -11 transect, and no hardbottom south of the R -11.5 transect. The bottom was predominately mud south of R -11.5. The nearest hardbottom is estimated to be approximately 240 ft. west of the Delnor- Wiggins disposal area, which was previously permitted and used. North of the Pass, the nearest hardbottom is approximately 530 ft. west of the Barefoot Beach disposal area. The ebb shoal disposal area is located north of the inlet, far from hardbottom (Attachment No. 25). Fill at Barefoot Beach will be placed south of R -12 to avoid the potential hardbottom offshore of R -10, as permitted in 2011. Sand placement areas in the flood meander channel are proposed to be subtidal. As such, invasives such as Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) will not colonize these areas. The new shoal will act as similar bird habitat to the shoal being dredged in the proposed realignment area. The habitat created on the north side of the pass will be similar to the total area being dredged on the south side of the pass. Additionally, the placement of fill will prevent further erosion of the mangrove shoreline at Barefoot Beach. Over time, mangroves may encroach onto the newly stabilized area. Hardbottom exists directly south of the inlet and this edge was mapped during the Collier County nourishment project. A pre- construction update (baseline survey for this project) will be required. The project description states there is no hardbottom north of the pass (off Barefoot Beach "disposal' area which is suggested as the priority of the two placement areas). Is this based upon a prior survey? If so, provide the data from this survey in support of Item 28. The hardbottom south of the pass was mapped; the volumes of placement, equilibration of the toe of fill of the beach and nearshore placement material, etc. should be discussed in your response in relation to the existing hardbottom resources here. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 28 -4 — A 1994 sidescan sonar survey conducted by CPE revealed a nearshore potential hardbottom formation between R -10 and just south of R -11 (Attachment No. 28 -3). In September of 2010, Collier County biologists conducted an in -situ diver investigation of the area. A smaller area of hardbottom was found by the biologists than what was surveyed in 1994, with a large portion of the area covered in a benthic mud. Results of that investigation are included in the figure provided as Attachment No. 25. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 16 The nearest hardbottom is estimated to be approximately 240 ft. west of the Delnor- Wiggins disposal area. North of the Pass, the nearest hardbottom is approximately 530 ft. west of the Barefoot Beach disposal area. The ebb shoal disposal area is located north of the inlet channel far from hardbottom (Attachment No. 25). The material dredged from the pass will be placed within the same permitted template offshore of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park and a similar template south of R -12 at Barefoot Beach as permitted in 2011. Monitoring of hardbottom has not identified any impact. During meetings, FDEP has concurred with incorporating any environmental hardbottom monitoring into the larger Collier County beach program. In addition, FDEP is considering how to proceed with future hardbottom monitoring, which the County will incorporate into their program. Biological monitoring will be required at all hardbottom locations (either ephemeral or persistent) adjacent to the Pass. A recent baseline natural resource survey, conducted during the summer months, and a draft biological monitoring plan are required to be submitted as a completeness items (we acknowledge the 2009 survey, but normally our requirement is that the survey must be less than I year old. This is open to negotiation). Differentiate between ephemeral (less than 30cm of sand depth coverage) and persistently exposed nearshore hardbottom in these surveys. The applicant/agent is advised to contact Dr. Kosmynin about the current requirements of the post - construction biological monitoring plan and the baseline survey prior to conducting this survey in the field. The previous Collier County project can be used as a basis for developing a similar protocol even if the specific transect and quadrat locations will differ. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 28 -5 — Collier County will coordinate a biological monitoring plan with Dr. Kosmynin and the FDEP staff. Collier County intends to integrate any biological monitoring required for this project into the existing Collier County hardbottom biological monitoring program as part of the next beach nourishment project. FDEP Comment No. 30. - Results of available wildlife surveys that have been conducted on the site, and any comments pertaining to the proposed activity from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. In accordance with Florida Statute 379.2431 (1), the following additional information is required for FWC to complete their review of this project. a. Please provide a detailed map showing the location of all gopher tortoise burrows within 25 feet of the area that is proposed to have scarp repair at the southern end of Barefoot Beach. These gopher tortoise burrows may need to be relocated prior to construction. Please check with your regional gopher tortoise conservation biologist. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 17 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 30a - A close -up map including the location of gopher tortoise burrows (2009 data) at the southern end of Barefoot Beach is provided in Attachment No. 25. No impact to gopher tortoises is expected, since active nests are unlikely on a scarp. No sand will be placed landward of the scarp edge. b. We are concerned about the ratio of sea turtle false crawls to nests in the proposed fill area on Delnor- Wiggins State Park (R17 - -R19) for the 2008 and 2009 sea turtle nesting seasons. Can you please explain the high ratio of sea turtle false crawls to nests for the past two nesting seasons in the proposed fill area? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 301b — According to biologists with Collier County who are responsible for collecting sea turtle data, the sand on Delnor- Wiggins beach in 2008 and 2009 was described as being compact with a high shell concentration which may account for the high false crawl numbers in the area (M. Hennig, Collier County, pers. comm., 2011). However, nesting success increased in 2010, with 20 observed nests compared to 17 false crawls. c. The table depicting the marine turtle nesting data shows the number of nests and false crawls for Barefoot Beach between R13 and R16 Does the nesting data include the area south of R -16 and the proposed South Point Restoration area? If not, please provide the marine turtle nesting data that has occurred south of the R -16 marker on Barefoot Beach. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 30c - No nests have been recorded south of R16 over the past few years due to beach erosion and scarping south of the monument (M. Hennig, Collier County, pers. comm., 2011). This area has steep scarps. d. Although your application states there are none, please identify all derelict structures that will be removed prior to beneficial beach disposal (restoration) of dredged material — or re- confirm there are no derelict structures, outfalls or mangrove stumps to be removed along these shorelines. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 30d — There are no derelict structures or outfalls present at or near Wiggins Pass. There are no plans to remove mangrove stumps along the shoreline. Stump removal could destabilize the steep channel side up against the mangrove area. e. It has been noted that piping plovers have been observed on Barefoot Beach. Are winter shorebird surveys being conducted on Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins State Park for piping plovers and other shorebirds? If so, how often? It has been noted that no shorebirds have nested within Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park since the 1980's. Are nesting shorebird surveys being conducted on Delnor - Wiggins State Park and Barefoot Beach each year? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 30e - The Barefoot Beach shoreline provides important habitat for several bird species, including overwintering habitat for piping plovers (Townsend and Olson, 2007). 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 18 Shorebird surveys within Delnor- Wiggins have shown that many species of birds utilize the shoreline for feeding or roosting, but no shorebirds have nested within Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park since least tern nest sites were last documented in 1986 and 1987 (FDEP, 2009; Sally Braem, pers. comm., 2011). No piping plovers have been observed during shorebird surveys in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (Carolyn Shaw, pers. comm., 2011). Barefoot Beach does not conduct any regular formal shorebird monitoring (Nancy Olsen, pers. comm., 2012). Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park rangers and volunteers conduct informal shore bird counts. These counts include winter surveys to document migratory birds (Carolyn Shaw, pers. comm., 2011). Snowy plover surveys are conducted three times a year, and a survey is also completed at the beginning of the season to observe any colonial nesters (in hopes that the tern colony may return) (Sally Braem, pers. comm., 2012). f. Creation of an elevated beach berm can expose marine turtle hatchlings to lights that were not visible prior to the beach project. Under existing state requirements, marine turtle nests cannot be relocated due to lighting. Prior to construction, the local government should ensure that appropriate measures are in place, such as a lighting ordinance, within the project area. We acknowledge a copy of the lighting ordinance for Collier County which includes Barefoot Beach has been provided. Is Delnor- Wiggins State Park under the same lighting ordinance? If it is different, please provide a copy of the lighting ordinance for Delnor- Wiggins State Park. Please contact Eric Seckinger at (850) 922 -4330 or via e-mail at Eric.Seckinger*myfwc.com if you have questions or clarifications about this Item CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 30f - Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park does not have a separate lighting ordinance. The Park follows state guidelines (6213-55, F.A.C.). Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park has a light on a boardwalk by the pass which is shut off during sea turtle season. They do not have any lights on the buildings that are visible from the beach (Robert Steiger, pers. comm, 2012). FDEP Comment No. 31. - A current Biological Opinion from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service, when the Florida Wildlife Conservation Commission has determined that the proposed project will result in a take of marine turtles, which could not be authorized without an incidental take determination under federal law. Please provide the USFWS and NMFS (f applicable, as essential (snook/ fish habitat) Biological Opinion(s) for this project when they are available. Ensure your consultations cover the range of dredging equipment you propose to use under Attachment 23c and that all the federally listed fish, birds, reptiles/amphibians and mammals that may be impacted by the project are covered in your BO(s). Your application will remain incomplete until they are received. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY k_. Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 19 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 31 — A site visit was conducted with Mark Sramek (NMFS — Habitat Conservation Division) on September 29, 2011. Mr. Sramek indicated that he would need to evaluate the offshore sand placement template with regards to the nearshore hardbottom south of the inlet, but otherwise had no objections with the project. Any required Biological Opinions from USFWS and/or NMFS will be provided when they are available. A USFWS BO was not required for the 2011 maintenance dredging permit and the USFWS Programmatic Statewide BO addresses maintenance dredging and nourishment. FDEP Comment No. 33. - Analysis of the expected effect of the proposed activity on the coastal system including but not limited to: a. Analysis of the expected physical effect of the proposed activity on the existing coastal conditions and natural shore and inlet processes. The analysis should include a quantitative description of the existing coastal system, the performance objectives of the proposed activity, the design parameters and assumptions, relevant computations, validation of the results and the data used in the analysis. FDEP Comment No. 33a -1: After a review of the information submitted in the application, the Bureau engineering staff considers the engineering data and analysis to be incomplete to adequately demonstrate the expected effect of the navigation channel expansion on the inlet and adjacent beaches. Coastal engineering data and analyses necessary to complete the application are requested under Item 33a and Item 33c below. In addition to other information contained in the application and the Bureau files, engineering staff has reviewed Attachment 33a to the application titled "Engineering Report for a Maintenance Dredging, Navigation Improvement and Erosion Reduction Project for Wiggins Pass, Florida'; February 2010, prepared by CP &E (35 pages). The engineering staff also reviewed: the "draft Numerical Modeling of Wave Propagation, Currents and Morphology Changes, Phase IL• Numerical Modeling of Alternatives Report ", January 2009, also prepared by CP &E (89 pages); the "Wiggins Pass Study, Hydrodynamic and Sand Transport Modeling ". August 2007, prepared by Humiston and Moore, and the "Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan" report dated August 1995, prepared by CP &E. Coastal Engineering Analyses and Reporting Please provide a revised report including the information requested below. The report shall be certified by a professional engineer registered in the State of Florida. The data and analysis should include but not be limited to the following specific items below. Provide engineering data and analysis that demonstrates with reasonable assurance the proposed activity will maintain lateral stability within the historic alongshore location of the Wiggins Pass 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 20 The engineering and modeling reports do not provide adequate data and analysis of geologic control on the alongshore location of the inlet that is provided by the limestone, peat and clay substrata. More importantly, information does not demonstrate that dredging and removal of this stabilizing geologic feature will not cause the inlet to migrate and erode the adjacent Park lands. The ebb shoal provides hydraulic stability both in maintaining the lateral location along the shoreline and shoaling rates and patterns. The modeling analysis predicts the deflation and eventual loss of the ebb shoal feature after navigation channel expansion and continuing maintenance dredging. The reports do not provide adequate data and analysis on the lateral stability of the inlet or shoaling rates and patterns under these conditions. Please provide engineering data and analysis that demonstrates with reasonable assurance the expected effects of the proposed activity on the inlet system and adjacent beaches. The data and analysis should include but not be limited to the following specific items below. The engineering report references the historical loss of ebb shoal volume attributed to channel maintenance dredging and associated with increased erosion rates on the adjacent beaches. As noted above, the modeling analysis indicates the deflation and perhaps eventual loss of the ebb shoal feature after navigation channel expansion and continuing maintenance dredging. The reports do not demonstrate that the placement of maintenance dredge material will be sufficient to offset increased erosion associated with long -term maintenance dredging activities in conjunction with continued deflation of the ebb shoal. The applicant has relied extensively upon numerical modeling to predict the expected effects of the proposed activity. Specific information is requested further below regarding the numerical modeling analysis; however, the Bureau engineering staff cannot recommend approval based numerical modeling without corroborating coastal data and analysis using generally accepted empirically- and theoretically based analytic solutions. Please include but not limit such an analysis to the following information: Inlets constricted by man -made or natural features may exhibit an actual throat section that is smaller than a stable cross - section in sedimentary equilibrium as determined from its tidal prism. The removal of constrictions can reduce the channel frictional resistance and thereby allow an increased flow that could cause increased sediment transport with unexpected results on channel shoaling and lateral stability. Removing the constriction(s), such as the peat and clay substrata within Wiggins Pass, could result in unexpected inlet cross - section enlargement. Empirical data may provide insight into this potential. An understanding of the general hydraulic characteristics 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 21 has not been provided, notwithstanding the development of a fluvio- hydrodynamic model of the inlet. To assist in addressing the potential impacts of dredging Wiggins Pass, please provide the following hydraulic characteristics for both the predominantly diurnal tides and the predominantly semi - diurnal tides Gulf tide range — 2ao Bay tide range — 2ab Ratio of ranges — abao Maximum ebb velocity — V,HAxE Average max. ebb velocity — VmAxE Duration of ebb — ATe Lag of slack after low tide — Ate Phase lag, ebb — Ee Maximum flood velocity — VMAxF Average max. flood velocity — V,rrAxF- Duration of flood —A Tf Lag of slack after high tide — Atf Phase lag, flood — Ef Existing cross - sectional area of the inlet throat — Aewsr,,,g (or Ac) Critical cross - sectional area of the inlet throat — Acritical ( or Ac *) [ reference: O'Brien, M.P., and Dean, R. G., 1972. Hydraulics and Sedimentary Stability of Coastal Inlets, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Coastal Engineering, Chapter 41, pp. 761 -780.1 Hydraulic tidal prism for flood and ebb — PH Keulegan coefficient of repletion — K [ reference: Keulegan, G.H., 1967. Tidal Flows in Entrances: Water Level Fluctuations of Basins in Communication with Seas, Technical Bulletin No. 14, Committee on Tidal Hydraulics, Waterways Experiment Station, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.] Impedance — F = 2aogsine/V. [reference: 0 "Brien, M.P., and Clark, R.R., 1974. Hydraulic Constants of Tidal Entrances, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Coastal Engineering, Chapter 90, pp. 1546 - 1565.1 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -1: The engineering report has been updated and is contained in Attachment No. 33a. The geological control is described in Attachment Nos. 33a and 27. The coastal processes analysis based upon physical data was developed largely separately from the modeling report, and their results complement each other in covering different aspects of the same analysis. For example, the modeling was used to find the optimal channel alignment and size, but was unable to completely solve the ebb shoal deflation, although modeling shows some growth occurs to the north. The ebb shoal is addressed with direct placement of sand on the ebb shoal and south of R14.5 at Barefoot Beach as supplemental nourishment. Both the model and analysis of historic survey data showed that there was a nodal point just north of Wiggins Pass that prevented sand from accumulating 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 22 in the ebb shoal and adjacent to the inlet. An analysis of volumetric changes over the last 30 years showed that insufficient sand was being placed north of the inlet. The ebb shoal will be nourished during the initial 10 year period with direct placement of sand dredged from the inlet and a separate nourishment project incorporated into the large County nourishment program. This larger nourishment is a new feature that was not modeled fully. The solution developed is based on both empirical coastal processes analysis and modeling, which are largely separate and complementary. The engineering report serves as the basis for an inlet management study. A hydraulic summary is provided in the modeling reports and incorporated into the engineering report (Attachment No. 33a). Lateral stability for the inlet channel is provided by a gap in the hard substrate which holds the ebb channel in place. The new plan builds the ebb shoal and adjacent shoreline very slowly (see February 2010 modeling report), which is why a supplemental nourishment is planned. Rebuilding the ebb shoal fast may be risky, but waiting for the new inlet management to reach substantial recovery could be years. Lateral stability provided by the ebb shoal is secondary at Wiggins Pass, but stability of the shoreline south of R -14.5 is the primary purpose of regrowing the ebb shoal. Throat constriction or expansion may be temporary after initial construction, but the inlet is expected to reach equilibrium quickly, especially with the help of the Cocohatchee River during peak flow season. The stability curve has not changed significantly since the 1995 inlet study. The straight channel should have a moderately larger tidal prism due to less friction in a shorter and straight channel, since the throat should equilibrate quickly. The straightening plan is a channel similar to flows about 80 years ago. Vibracores show a layer of white sand over darker sand, which is about the depth of the proposed cut. The new channel location is not drastically new. Flood shoal relocation has been done successfully at Bogue Inlet in North Carolina (Shore and Beach, 2011) and many other locations. The traditional calculation of stability curves and velocities is not as helpful as modeling. Modeling replaces laborious calculations and allows for running many alternatives efficiently. The engineering report provides the basic calculation for the existing conditions. The County is proceeding with plans for a quicker recovery of the ebb shoal and shoreline at Barefoot Beach, even though this has some risk for fast filling of the inlet channel. Initial model results show Barefoot Beach and adjacent ebb shoal recovery would be slower but more controlled using sand from maintenance dredging alone. FDEP Comment No. 33a -2: Numerical Modeling Analyses and Reporting Please provide a revised report including the information requested below. The report shall be certified by a professional engineer registered in the State of Florida. The draft numerical modeling report does not contain information necessary for a complete Bureau engineering staff review and basis for recommending approval or denial of the permit. The long term morphology modeling simulation (4 years) needs to consider changes that would occur in the sediment characteristics at Wiggins Pass and the surrounding area, including adjacent beaches, after the construction of the proposed project. Wide variations in sediment size distribution can affect the sediment transport potential at Wiggins Pass and the adjacent beaches. For assurances that the long term morphology 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 23 modeling simulation results are accurate, such as Figure 40 on page 41 of the report, the changes in the median sediment size distribution need to be well represented in the model. Considering a constant value of 0.35mm for the median sediment size for all the grids for the entire simulation period is not adequate for analyzing the coastal processes at Wiggins Pass. In addition, please provide information on the sediment size distribution based on measured data assigned to the grid values in and about Wiggins Pass. (Also, provide the expected sediment size distribution after the 4 year morphology modeling simulation (equilibration).) As previously noted, the engineering and modeling reports indicate the deflation of the ebb shoal with historical and future maintenance dredging. However, the numerical modeling is limited to predict effects on the coastal system through an initial four year post- construction period following navigation channel expansion dredging. Please demonstrate how the modeling results lead to the long -term management of the improved navigation inlet considering the continuing changes to the inlet ebb shoal. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -2: In combination with the May 14, 2011 letter and FDEP review of the Scope of Work for this work, no new modeling was approved or required. The purpose of the modeling was to analyze a number of alternatives and find the one that performed best as a navigation channel. The result of the modeling found the straightened channel performed better than the existing S- shaped configuration. The new alignment will shoal 33% less and maintain a navigation depth 2 -3 feet deeper across the bar than the existing situation. The models were calibrated using hydraulics (wave height, tides and currents) and geomorphology (infill rate). During modeling, the importance of grain size became obvious, and we mapped the inlet with coarser grain sizes than the surrounding beaches and nearshore areas. We examined the sensitivity of this difference, and found it essential for calibrating the modeling for realistic flood channel depths. Our Scope of Work and the needs of Collier County did not call for extensive analysis of the fate of sand sizes in the inlet to select the best performing alternative. The data required to set up the horizontal and vertical sand size distribution and calibrate it after accounting for hydraulics and geomorphology adds a layer of complexity not needed to achieve the County's goal, and it is an unwanted extra expense for the County. The use of homogeneous sediment grain size distributions is one of the simplifications considered in Delft3D and other morphodynamic models. In addition, Delft3D and other morphodynamic models rely on a number of other assumptions, which are incorporated into the model's formulations and hydrodynamic forcing inputs. It is known that in coastal inlets and other coastal systems, the grain sizes vary both in horizontal and vertical axes. In Delft3D, the user may specify the bottom sediment characteristics using either a single, uniform sediment fraction or a small number of sediment fraction (2 -5). In the case of multiple sediment fractions, each sediment fractions is specified in terms of its median grain size, the erodible sediment depth, and/or an optional percentage of that sediment fraction within the erodible sediment depth. The erodible sediment depth and the percentages of each sediment 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 24 fraction given as inputs are allowed to vary. Providing a spatially variable set of sediment fractions in this manner could add reliability to Wiggins Pass model by allowing for a more detailed representation of the erosion and sedimentation processes. However, one must remember that final model results are also influenced by the model forcing conditions, by other model parameters such as the "BED" and "SUS" factors, the governing equations, and the numerical solution scheme. Such limitations regarding forcing, modeling coefficients, and the governing equations are intrinsic to any numerical model. For these reasons, a more detailed description of the bottom sediment will not necessarily produce results that are closer to the observed, historical erosion and sedimentation patterns. For the modeling of Wiggins Pass, fine and coarse sands were mapped in the model. In other words, the real world is much more complex than any model is able to handle. We have chosen to use Delft3D, which is one of the most comprehensive, state -of -art, models of coastal processes that exist. Simple models, for example, a shoreline change model such as GENESIS or DNRBS, can `calibrate' perfectly to past shorelines by adjusting model sinks and source terms. However, that "perfect" calibration does not mean that the model is reproducing the process that controlled the shoreline change well, or that it will continue to do so if one changes the system with an engineering intervention such as a beach fill, groin field or dredged channel. We do not recommend treating model results as an absolute forecast of the future conditions, nor do we advocate forcing a perfect calibration by tricks. Instead, we seek to focus on understanding the processes and evolution of the coastal system, and we use models that produced realistic results as a tool for decision making. The numerical modeling studies are a tool in the toolbox of the engineer and should be treated as such —A tool to better understand the evolution of a complex system and compare the effects of various design alternatives on that system. Its results should be interpreted and supported by field observations and coastal processes knowledge, providing insights to the long -term management of the improved navigation inlet. In that context, we believe that the Wiggins Pass model, as presently calibrated, is a robust tool and has provided great insight for our engineering recommendation of non - structural inlet improvements, especially since we are comparing alternative performance side by side. The sediment size distribution in the project area is provided in the engineering report (Attachment No. 33a) and the geological field investigation report (Attachment No. 27). Given the slow recovery of the shoreline and ebb shoal in the model, we plan direct nourishment of the two areas, which has not been modeled. The latest modeling report (February 2010) is provided in Appendix D of the engineering report (33a). FDEP Comment No. 33a -3: The numerical modeling is used to assess sediment transport patterns, which significantly revise the results of the 1995 sediment budget developed by CP &E. Please provide a detailed explanation of how the modeling results were used develop the sediment budget. Please demonstrate that the revisions are not the result of changes in predominate wave direction that may occur during the record periods. The Bureau engineering staff has observed such changes in other areas of southwest Florida, although not within Collier County. Please include an explanation of Figure 40 of the report that appears to indicate the inlet is not a sediment sink, but is losing sediment to the adjacent coastal system north and south of the inlet. The reliability of the sediment budget is critical to inlet 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 25 management activities, a sediment budget based upon coastal monitoring data is requested in Item #33c to validate the numerical modeling results. Please provide additional detail from the simulation results, such as the channel stability computation methods used and the numerical values for each of the alternative, besides the classification provided in the tables. Please provide larger plots of the initial and final graphs with the borders of the channel designs of the 8 alternative cases drawn. In general, please provide larger plots than provided of key figures, such as of Figures 31 -37 for visual analysis. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Subarna Malakar Coastal Engineer, at 850- 413 -7847. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -3 — Refer to the updated engineering report in Attachment No. 33a along with the accompanying modeling report (Appendix D). The updated sediment budget is Figure 7 in the engineering report, and the sediment budget from the 1995 report is shown in the appendices. Figure 40 in the 2009 modeling report is not a sediment budget, but a net sediment transport output from the model. It does not show the transport due to inlet dredging nor other features of a sediment budget. The sediment budget was based largely on analysis of volumetric change data from surveys and dredging records. We used profile, cross - sections and bathymetric survey data to calculate changes in littoral cells defined for the project. The results of modeling helped in identifying the location and magnitude of alongshore sediment transport at various locations in the project area, especially nodal points. These were used to determine the direction and magnitude of sediment transport in the sediment budget and to adjust the final sediment budget results. I would suggest that larger plots are possible using the Acrobat files and enlarging them on the computer screen. Please call me if you cannot enlarge the Acrobat files drawings sufficiently on your computer screen, and I will send you larger plots. The stability curves for the existing condition is provided in the engineering report, and little variation is expected with the new proposal, since the controlling cross - section are similar. The development of the curves is described in the engineering report (Attachment No. 33a). The calculations which are embedded in the numerical model are not easily extracted. The stability evaluation was largely subjective, based on the change in channel alignment during the model time period. No additional modeling was approved since March 2010. We calculated the wave distribution using WIS, WWIII and hypercube, both with this inlet study and the adjacent beach study (2011) in the County. They all show a distinctive nodal region around the inlet and a northward net sediment transport. This is consistent with the shadow effect from Sanibel Island and the measured volume change around the inlet. There is a variation year to year in the strength of the transport, but the general trend is the reason the 1995 plan needs to be modified, to address the imbalance caused by conventional wisdom in the day. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 26 FDEP Comment No. 33a -4: Looking at the cross - sections for profile lines C -12, and C -13, there is an interesting shape to the cut bank wall of the existing meander channel. In C -11 and C -14, the cut bank wall is nearly vertical. In C -12 and C -13, a small "ledge" is seen in the wall. Is there some geologic control, such as a layer of organic or peat material, or is this a function of the flow regime within the channel? What types of sediment exist on the cut bank wall of the existing meander? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -4 — The steep bank is a feature of the meander, which scours deep and has a steep outside slope located immediately upon the mangrove shoreline. It represents an overly eroded shoreline within this area. The mangroves appear to be providing some stability to the top of the slope, but given that 0.3 acres of mangroves have been eroded since the 1970, there is no reason to expect this recession into the mangroves to stop. There is no evidence that a stabilizing geology exists within this region. In fact, the remnants of a waterway stretch north from this region at cross - section C -12, suggesting a historic connection to a Gulf outlet such as Little Hickory Pass. The long term process could be switching Gulf outlets between the current location and an outlet further north similar to the condition in the 1880s (see old chart in engineering report). Please refer to data presented in CPE's response to Comment No. 27 for sediment data within the area. The cut bank could indicate a number of natural processes, to include a step in sloughing of the bank or the stabilizing influence of the mangroves or other vegetation. FDEP Comment No. 33a -5: Within the existing meander channel, the channel deepens near profiles C -13 through C -15. Is this a function of a geologic control forcing the flow to erode the channel down (deepen the channel) rather than out (into the cut back) into the mangroves? Is there peat or organic clay at the channel bottom in the areas seaward of profile G13? CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -5 — The deepening of the channel observed in C -13 to C- 15 is not due to any geological control since none was found controlling the lateral position of the inlet within the flood shoal. As meanders become tighter loops, the depth of the meander gets deeper. Please refer to data presented in CPE's response to Comment No. 27 for further information on the geological control and sediment data. FDEP Comment No. 33a -6: The analysis provided does not adequately assess the geologic control of the existing meander positioning. Please provide additional data and analysis to determine what geologic controls (as noted in the two comments above) exist. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -6 — Please refer to the provided information in CPE's response to Attachment No. 27 for further information on geological control. Further information can also be found in the updated engineering report in Attachment No. 33a. FDEP Comment No. 33a -7: Please respond to the issues raised in the attached letter from DEP Parks and Recreation (see also Items 33 d below). 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 27 CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -7 — Issues presented in the DEP Parks and Recreation letter have been addressed in our responses throughout this RAI. We have contacted DEP Parks and have received only rudimentary backup information supporting their concerns. Their issues are summarized below and discussed earlier in this response, since they make up the basis of many of the FDEP comments. The County is willing to work with the Park Service for an economical bypassing plan that benefits both parties, and we are proposing to bypass sand to their beach based on equalizing erosion north and south of the inlet based on a 2001 shoreline line adjusted for the stand alone nourishment project for Barefoot Beach. The bypassed sand will be placed in the nearshore zone. We doubt beach placement within DWSP would be feasible based on environmental, regulatory and aesthetic concerns from DWSP past preferences. In addition, the County will not support an expensive nourishment project with an alternate sand source for the park without benefit to both parties. There are figures, maps, aerials and tables in the engineering report (33a) that illustrate the growth of the park beaches and vegetation in the last few decades. Below is a summary of DWSP concerns from letters and comments at meetings and a short response to each: 1. DWSP wants only beach quality sediment on Park Lands, which does not come from the inlet — This may be an expensive and unacceptable position for the County. 2. Delineate MHW line on recent aerial — This was done in 2009 and 2011 and is part of the future physical monitoring plan. 3. Make post - construction projections of shorelines — This is not realistic or helpful since changes are slow enough to be addressed at the next maintenance dredging. 4. Could have unforeseen consequences on park managed lands — The park's erosion is manageable and predominately natural. The shoreline and vegetation lines have advanced in the last 30 years. 5. Northwest corner erosion caused by channel dredging (100 feet lost Jan 2006 aerial) — This area has accreted or remained stable since initial dredging in the 1980s and 1990s, and varies with wave and current climate. Current variability is caused in part by ebb channel rotation into DWSP beaches, a largely natural process. 6. FPS needs to consent by formal use agreement — The County will prepare a letter. 7. Legal boundary extends 300 feet offshore — This is the extent of the OFW border. 8. Right to refusal of proposed dredge material from Pass — If it is compatible, it should be acceptable for inlet bypassing. The County can accept limiting it to sand from future maintenance dredging of the ebb shoal, but beach nourishment from an alternate sand source is not an acceptable cost. 9. Minimize impacts to habitat — Concerns deal with seagrass and dune vegetation. Dune vegetation has grown and been planted seaward in the last few decades. Vegetation has grown or was planted in an area 40 feet wider in the south reaches of DWSP, and the area is wider along the pass shoreline. Seagrasses closest to DWSP have persisted for years next to dredge channels. In addition, scars on the flood shoal looked like grass, but have not been confirmed as seagrass. 10. Shorebird habitat — The FDEP BBCS May 13, 2011 letter states the status. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 28 11. Loss of beach and dune habitat and visitor use of sections of DWSP. Permit conditions to protect property, resources, and recreation at DWSP - There are small variations in the shoreline which are natural to the Gulf and Inlet shorelines. Both the shoreline and vegetation line have grown in the last 30 years. The State Park shoreline has grown since 1992, due to favorable bypassing operations. It was erosional before 1979. 12. Imperiled species such brown pelican, piping plover, least tern, white ibis, reddish and snowy egret, have lost foraging and resting areas due to erosion —Loss of habitat south of the pass will be balanced by creation of the flood shoal north of the new pass, which will provide a basis for future natural development. The much wider beach today on the park's north shoreline contributes to potential bird habitat. 13. Gopher tortoise currently existing near the boardwalk — No details are available from DWSP. 14. Maintain shallower design cut further west — The design is shallower by 1 foot. 15. Include conditions that require mitigation using a berm of sand with native vegetation which is compatible with the park's beaches — There is no average erosion trend, although troughs appear based on sand wave migration and the ebb channels swing to the south. The County will consider altering the priority for bypassing, if the Park needs to address an immediate problem. The County is hesitant to agree to a mitigation or contingency plan similar to Stump Pass. Since a threshold based on current conditions would be too low and the cost expensive. 16. Erosion monitoring — This has already been included in monitoring plan. FDEP Comment No. 33b - Analysis of the compatibility of the fill material with respect to the native sediment at the placement site. The analysis should include all relevant computations, the overfill ratios, and superimposed graphs of the cumulative grain -size distribution and the frequency distribution of the fill material over the data for the existing or native sediment at the placement site. Provide computations of borrow area volume and composite fill material characteristics (mean grain size and sorting, percent carbonate content) in an electronic spreadsheet. The Bureau staff cannot recommend the current placement options for the non -beach compatible material to be dredged from the channel. The proposed disposal of non- beach compatible material in the existing channel meander does not provide the Bureau with reasonable assurance that the unsuitable material will not re -enter the system as the channel migrates and cause impacts to resources in the near future. Please assess alternative disposal options that have less potential to impact resources based on the potential risks associated with the non -beach compatible material identified in the areas to be dredged. The discussion of alternatives should address utilizing an upland containment disposal facility. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 29 The data currently available to the Department is inadequate to effectively delineate the non -beach compatible material identified in the proposed channel. Additional data and analysis is necessary to delineate this material. Special handling instructions are necessary to provide the Department with reasonable assurance that this material (both the identified non -beach compatible material and the unexpected material that may be encountered during dredging) will be handled correctly to minimize and avoid impacts to resources during construction and as the channel adjusts in the near future. Special handling instructions should be added to the construction document (Attachment 23c to the permit application) or as an appendix to the Sediment QAIQC plan. Regardless of possible changes to the dredge template, special handling instructions are still required to address the dredging of unexpected non -beach compatible material that will likely be encountered during dredging. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33b - Additional data and analysis is provided in the revised geotechnical report, which is included on the enclosed CD as Attachment No. 27 -1. This report includes a discussion of the most recent geophysical and geotechnical (vibracore) investigations. The amount of peat, clay and rock was much lower than expected. We propose to use 62B- 41.007 (2) k as the standard for disposal of dredged material, exactly like the QA/QC plan for Blind Pass, Lee County. We propose to place material with 10 % -20% silt in the nearshore zone or ebb shoal disposal area and the shelly sand from the flood shoal into the meander fill area, regardless of the size above the #4 sieve. Shelly sand is compatible with the flood shoal. Peat, clay and rock will be placed in an offshore disposal area. If we need to submit a deviation request for this action per 62B - 41.007 (3), please call me and I will put the letter together. A conceptual QA/QC sediment plan is provided as Attachment No. 27f. FDEP Comment No. 33c - Demonstration of consistency with the Department's strategic beach management plan or an inlet management plan in accordance with Rule 62B- 41.005(15), F.A.C. If the proposed project is not included in an inlet management plan the applicant will provide the information specified in Rule 62B- 41.008(1)(m), F.A.C. The proposed navigation channel expansion is not a recommended inlet management strategy as adopted in the Department's Strategic Beach Management Plan (2008). The 1995 study of inlet management plan alternatives was used to support the County's application for environmental permits to construct the navigation and sediment management improvements that were constructed in 2000. The proposed 2010 channel expansion is greater than all the channel designs considered in the 1995 study. The application will require submittal of the information specified in Rule 62B- 41.008(1)(m), F.A.C., as listed below. The application stated that Attachment 33a Engineering Report provides an update to the inlet management plan. The staff cannot recommend the Department adopt an updated inlet management plan for Wiggins Pass 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 30 based upon the information provided in the Engineering Report. Although the information in the Engineering Report does improve the understanding of the coastal littoral processes at this location it does not provided all the information required for an update of the Department's inlet management plan. The engineering and modeling reports do contain much of the required information; however, these documents do not constitute an update to the inlet management plan in their present form or content. Please provide a comprehensive document that incorporates both the engineering and modeling reports as revised by your response to the information requested in Application Items 33, 37, and 38. 1. A description of the physical characteristics of the inlet. 2. A sediment budget for the inlet. Please provide detailed coastal monitoring data, computations and analysis to supplement and validate the sediment budget about Wiggins Pass. This annotation to the sediment budget schematic provided in the engineering report is not adequate. 3. An analysis of the stability and hydraulic characteristics of the inlet including current velocities, tidal prism and current patterns of the flood and ebb tides. 4. A description of the wind and wave climate in the area of inlet influence. 5. A description of the sediment characteristics of the inlet and its related shoals. 6. The influence of existing manmade structures. 7. The current and historic shoreline erosion and accretion trends. 8. A statement of performance objectives and an analysis of the expected effect of proposed coastal construction on the coastal system and marine turtles within the inlet area of influence. 9. An analysis of available alternatives to the proposed coastal construction, including the no action alternative, on meeting the stated performance objective and any related effects on the coastal system or marine turtles. 10. A demonstration of the anticipated public benefits of the coastal construction. Pursuant to 62B- 41.005(15), F.A.C., the plan shall provide for continued bypassing of the sand in sufficient quantity to insure that net long term erosion or accretion rates on both sides of the inlet remain equal except in cases where unequal erosion and accretion rates can be shown to be a result of natural processes and not caused by human activities. In all cases, mitigation shall be provided for any erosion effects to the adjacent coastal system attributable to alteration of the inlet. The mitigation shall include the placement of supplemental beach compatible material as needed. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Robert Brantly, Coastal Engineer, at 850 - 413 -7803. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33c — Please refer to the updated engineering report in Attachment No. 33a for information to answer statements 1 through 10 listed above. The inlet 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 31 management study was not included with the original scope of work and permit application based on a pre - application meeting with FDEP. Please consider Attachment Nos. 33a and 27 along with the two modeling reports (January 2009 (provided on CD in "Miscellaneous Reports) and February 2010 (Appendix D to Attachment 33a)) as the inlet management study. This is the first draft of the inlet management study for your review and comments. d. Analysis of how water quality and natural communities would be affected by the proposed project. Provide graphic representation (depiction) of the area of direct and secondary influence of the proposed activity and delineate the natural communities within that area. All required surveys shall be representative of conditions existing at the time of submittal. Surveys of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) shall be conducted in the field during the growing season for a given climatic region such that they capture the full areal extent and biomass of the SAV community. Species composition and spatial distribution shall also be addressed by the survey. Estimate the affected acreage of each impacted community. FDEP Comment No. 33d -1: Please respond to the issues raised in the attached letter from DEP Parks and Recreation. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33d -1 — Please refer to CPE response to FDEP Comment No. 33a -7. FDEP Comment No. 33d -2: What evidence do you have to support the statement in Attachment S and 28 -1B (page 9) that this project design will enhance snook habitat, as opposed to allowing the natural inlet migration processes to occur, or by planting mangroves to restore the 0.3 acres lost since the 1970's? Did snook experts assist you in designing this `scarp repair' aspect of the project? If so, please elaborate on the inclusion of this beneficial design element on the overall health of this ecosystem following construction. Compare and contrast this potentially beneficial element with the adverse impacts to natural resources stemming from the straightening of the navigation channel following construction, or allowing the natural channel migration processes to occur. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33d -2 - A snook expert did not assist in the design of this project; however literature shows that small juvenile snook prefer low- energy, shallow water often near overhanging mangroves (Muller, 2000). The statement in Attachment Nos. 5 and 28 -1B was intended to indicate that by filling the old channel, the project will halt the excessive erosion of the mangrove shoreline and snook habitat in that area. Allowing the natural inlet process to continue would lead to additional erosion on the north side of Wiggins Pass, and the additional loss of mangroves along the shoreline. No shoreline currently exists in this area to even consider planting mangroves without sand placement first. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 32 Muller, R.G., 2000. The 2000 Stock Assessment Update of Common Snook, Centropomus undecimalis. Report for the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Marine Research Institute, July 12, 2000, 17 pp. FDEP Comment No. 33d -3: Water Oualitv: Some project areas (both Parks) are designated Outstanding Florida Waters, and will be subject to 0 NTU turbidity above background conditions at the edge of the mixing zone during all construction activities within their boundary. Post - construction turbidity and the general effect of the project on water quality within the project area is of concern to the Department for meeting the permitting and water quality standards. Please discuss the during - and post - construction turbidity expected from the project, paying particular attention the need for a mixing zone variance. Will salinity and dissolved oxygen increase or change with the new channel flow / alignment? How will these parameters affect the surrounding resources? Note: If a mixing zone is proposed, provide a narrative description and graphic representation of the mixing zone. Identify any areas within the proposed mixing zone that contain significant submerged resources. Explain why the size of the proposed mixing zone is the minimum necessary to meet water quality standards and provide justification for that size. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33d -3 — Refer to Attachment No. 33d for updated turbidity plan and request for variance within the OFW. A turbidity plan was approved to the 2011 Maintenance Dredging of Wiggins Pass and serves as the basis for the new plan. FDEP Comment No. 33d -4: Mixing Zone: What will be the size of the mixing zone for this project? The applicant must justify the size of any mixing zone citing your project specific conditions, whether or not a variance is required. Provide justification for that mixing zone size (in both the offshore and downcurrent directions) even if it is less than the 150 meters size that the Department is authorized to issue without a variance. If you do request a mixing zone variance please address the variance application requirements of Rule 62- 110.104 FAC. Your application should: • provide documentation as to why "There is no practicable means known or available for the adequate control of the pollution involved." • provide justification for the requested size; • demonstrate why that size is the minimum necessary to meet the turbidity standard; • list the turbidity control measures that will be used to minimize turbidity; • show the hardbottom resources that would be encompassed within the mixing zone; • provide a graphic representation of the requested mixing zone. • identify any areas within the proposed mixing zone that contain significant submerged resources. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 33 discuss how the elevated turbidity within the mixing zone would affect the encompassed hardbottom communities; and include the additional variance fee CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33d -4 — Refer to the request for a temporary mixing zone request, provided as Attachment No. 33d. FDEP Comment No. 33e - Reasonable assurances that a regulated activity will not cause unacceptable cumulative impacts pursuant to Rules 40X- 4.302(l)(b) and 62B- 41.002(19)((b), F.A.C. Attachment 33e begins, "The proposed channel realignment has been designed to avoid cumulative impacts to seagrass and mangrove resources." Please explain this statement in light of the questions posed in, and information gathered in response to Items 23c, 28 and 33d in this RAL Perhaps this is more substantiated for mangroves, but based upon the Engineering report and historical inlet information and the past resource surveys, it does not appear that the newly proposed channel, nor the infilling of the existing channel takes into account the location of natural resources, such as oyster reefs or seagrass beds, as they have historically existed in this area. Cumulative impact avoidance would also include avoidance or minimization of sedimentation and light reduction (chronic turbidity) to seagrasses in the pass and nearshore hardbottom off the beaches, which is missing from the explanation provided in this response. This item will remain incomplete pending your response to the other items listed in this RAL CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33e — This project will avoid impacts to natural resources in the project area, including seagrass, oyster beds, hardbottom and mangroves. See responses to Items 23c, 28 and 33d. The proposed south and east tributary channels were designed to retain their previously permitted alignments and depths. Over 10 years, the estimated dredging will decrease by approximately one -third compared to the existing conditions. FDEP Comment No. 34. - Describe the location and details of the erosion, sediment and turbidity control measures to be implemented during each phase of construction and all other measures used to minimize adverse effects to water quality. Note the turbidity monitoring standards you propose may not be sufficient to meet the OFW requirements in all project areas. If a mixing zone is required, intermediate turbidity sampling stations will be necessary in addition to the point of discharge and limits of mixing zone. There is particular concern about during construction and post- construction (chronic) turbidity that may adversely affect seagrasses, bivalves and nearshore hardbottom within the project area. What are the distances of these natural resources from the limits of channel dredging and/or beneficial disposal areas? What level of turbidity (specify maximum and average NTU"s) can be expected in each of these areas during construction? After construction? Will seagrass and/or oyster beds adjacent to the channel dredge footprint be subjected to increased erosion 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 34 or subsidence with the new alignment? How about after the channel sloughs and erodes? Please describe in detail the analytical method or modeling you used to arrive at your answers to these questions. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 34 — Refer to the request for a temporary mixing zone request, provided in Attachment No. 33d. FDEP Comment No. 35. - Describe any methods proposed to protect threatened or endangered species. This item is complete and we acknowledge your response. Be advised that updated manatee, turtle and shorebird conditions are very likely to be required as a condition of any permit issued for this project. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 35 — Acknowledged. Collier County will comply with all required permit conditions. FDEP Comment No. 37. - A narrative description of any proposed mitigation plans, pursuant to Rule 62 -345, F.A.C., including purpose, a comparison between the functions of the impact site to the mitigation site, maintenance, monitoring, estimated cost, construction sequence and techniques. For proposed artificial reefs, indicate the water depth, depth of sand overlying bedrock, proposed relief and materials (type, size and shape). Physical Monitoring and Mitigation Plan: Pursuant to 62B- 41.005(16) and (17), F.A.C., physical monitoring and mitigation of the project is required through acquisition of project - specific data to include, at a minimum, topographic/bathymetric surveys and engineering analysis of the inlet system and adjacent beaches and offshore zone. The monitoring data is necessary in order for both the Permittee and the Department to regularly observe and assess, with quantitative measurements, the performance of the project, any adverse effects which have occurred, and the need for any adjustments, modifications, or mitigative response to the project. The plan shall sped the circumstances that are deemed an adverse impact to the coastal system and specify the mitigation activities that will be required by the Permittee to offset the adverse impact should the monitoring indicate the occurrence of the specific circumstances. Pursuant to section 161.041(4), F.S., provide financial or other assurances acceptable to the Department as may be necessary to assure performance with the monitoring and mitigation plan, which shall be a condition for granting a permit under this section should a permit be approved by the Department. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Robert Brantly, Coastal Engineer, at 850 -413- 7803. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 35 You have not provided reasonable assurance that natural resource impacts (either direct or indirect) will not occur from the project, as currently designed — or that impacts have been minimized to the fullest extent possible. This item will remain incomplete pending your response to other items listed in this RAI (Items 23, 27, 28, 30, 31, 33a, d, and e, 34, and 38). CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 37 — Refer to the updated physical monitoring plan (Attachment No. 37). The need for mitigation or a contingency plan is not anticipated and will be addressed as part of the environmental monitoring plan, based on guidance provided by FDEP. DWSP desires a mitigation or contingency plan, but their shoreline and dune vegetation have grown over the last few decades of inlet maintenance dredging, due in part to the imbalance in sediment bypassing and sand transport north from Vanderbilt Beach. Given the historical conditions at DWSP, the inlet management plan should be able to address sediment distribution in a fair and balanced fashion between the two parks without a special plan. The local conditions do not approach Stump Pass and do not warrant burdening the County with a potentially expensive mitigation plan. FDEP Comment No. 38. - An analysis of available alternatives to the proposed coastal construction, pursuant to Rules 62B- 41.005(17) and 40X- 4.301(3), F.A.C. (where "X" represents "C", "D" or "E" for the corresponding Water Management District), that would minimize adverse impacts to the coastal system. Discuss any related effects on the coastal system. The modeling report contains the evaluation of alternative channel designs that provide a safe channel for boating, address erosion to Barefoot Beach, and is economically cost - effective. The evaluation is based upon an understanding of the coastal processes that may not be complete and for which additional information is requested. As indicated in Item 33, the proposed activity has the potential for specific changes to inlet hydraulics that may result in adverse impacts to the coastal system. In accordance with Rule 62B - 41.005(17), FAX, for the Department to determine that all practical revision have been made, the applicant must considered these alternatives that avoid or minimize potential for adverse impact. Specific alternatives not included in the application that require evaluation are channel designs that: avoid excavation of the limestone/peat/clay substrata, avoid deflation of the ebb shoal, and avoid loss of shorebird habitat on Wiggins Pass State Park. Please submit an evaluation of each of these alternatives with the supporting data and analyses. If the applicant or the applicant's consultant has any questions about the comments or information requested above, please contact Robert Brantly, Coastal Engineer, at 850 -413- 7803. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 38 — Refer to the engineering report (Attachment No. 33a) for a discussion of alternatives. The proposed design alternative avoids deflation of the ebb shoal, loss of habitat, and minimized excavation of the limestone layer. A supplemental beach nourishment project is planned to support beach and ebb shoal rebuilding at Barefoot Beach. The bird habitat was addressed in the May 13, 2011 letter from Michael Barnett. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 36 FDEP Comment No. 39. - A fee, as set forth in Rule 6213- 49.006, F.A.C. The sum of the fees required by Chapters 62 -4, 62B -41, and 18 -21, Florida Administrative Code, has been calculated as $12,189. Please submit this amount by check made out to the Department of Environmental Protection, with the DEP File No. 142538- 008 -JC clearly indicated on the face of the check. A breakdown of the fees is as follows: Rule 62- 4.050(4)(h)1.b. requires $9,120 for the total area of 14.6 acres of wetlands or surface waters directly affected by construction, Rule 62B- 41.0085(3)(c) requires $2,500 for the 80,000 cy designated for offshore disposal and Rule 18 -21. 01](1)(b) requires $569 for the processing of the 10 year public easement. Please note that the fee calculated above must be sent to the Department within 45 days of submittal of your response (or partial response) to this RAI, or the application shall be denied (without prejudice) according to Rule 62B - 49.006, F.A.C. If you believe that there is an error in the fee calculation, please contact Bureau staff BEFORE submitting your response to this RAL CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 39 — The County will provide a check for $12,189 and publish the notice at the time this letter is sent. If you should have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, CO PLANNING & GINEERING, INC. Steph K elm, P.E. —� Senior astal Engineer cc: Gary McAlpin, Collier County, w /enclosure Tunis McElwain, USAGE, w /enclosure on CD Nicole Sharp, CPE Lauren Floyd, CPE Additional Enclosures Provided on CD: 2010 JCP application with attachments USACE RAI No. 1 Response with attachments Miscellaneous Reports 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY March 2, 2012 Collier County 3301 E. Tamiami Trail Naples, FL 34112 Florida Department of iGov Scott Governor Environmental Protection Jetillifer Carroll Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building �.t. Governor 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399 -3000 Herschel .V e d, jr >r?cre cretary c/o Stephen Keehn Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc. 2481 NW Boca Raton Blvd. Boca Raton, FL 33431 Comments on Partial Response to RAI #1 DEP File Number: 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV, Collier County Applicant Name: DEP Division of Recreation and Parks and Pinellas County Project Name: Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Dear Mr. Keehn: This letter is to acknowledge receipt of your partial response to the First Request for Additional Information for the Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging. Please note that items 17, 19, 31, and 39 were notprovided in the response and will remain incomplete pending receipt of the information. Comments on the responses that were submitted are listed below. The items of information are numbered to correspond with the item numbers on the application form. The responses provided for items 7, 11, 14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, 34, 33a and c, 28, 35, and 38 (already received), were satisfactory and the Department has no comments on these items. Regarding the Department's previous analysis of the proposed project: In the Department's Request for Additional Information (RAI #1), dated March 24, 2010, Bureau staff provided comments on its preliminary evaluation of the proposed activities. The Bureau staff concerns were more fully explained in the letter to Mr. Gary McAlpin, dated May 13, 2011, from Mr. Michael Barnett, Bureau Chief. The conceptual draft of the Sediment QA/QC Plan submitted to the Department on February 1, 2012, addresses the staff concerns regarding disposal of clay and peat into the coastal zone. The proposal to place this material along with any rock encountered during construction into the used Borrow Area #6 dredge pit can be favorably recommended by the staff. However, as noted under Item #27.f. below, the proposed activity is new www.dep.statefl.us Comments on Partial Response to RAI ( #1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 2 of 9 construction, not maintenance dredging, and therefore, any dredged material containing greater than 5% silt or clay, must be disposed of in the used dredge pit, as required by Rule 62B -41, F.A.C. The expansion and alignment of the navigation channel, as depicted in the revised permit drawings dated January 13, 2012, adequately address the Bureau staff concerns regarding minimizing the dredging of consolidated or cohesive material within the sedimentary strata underlying and bounding the gulf entrance to Wiggins Pass. Upon completion of your application, the Bureau staff anticipates a recommendation of approval of the straightened channel alignment. Describe in general terms the proposed activity including any phasing.. The Bureau staff has received a courtesy copy of a letter to Ms. Erma Slager, FDEP Deputy Secretary for Land and Recreation, dated February 16, 2012, from Mr. Gary McAlpin, Collier County CZMDirector. The letter includes a request to the Florida Park Service, as the designated trustee of the state owned uplands adjacent to Wiggins Pass, to approve placement of sand from inlet dredging onto the beaches above the mean - high -water contour. Since the project description and permit drawings submitted to the Department on February 1, 2011, do not include placement of dredged sand on Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, please be advised that these application information items must be revised and resubmitted should you obtain approval from the Park Service. This is being requested pursuant to 62B41.008(1)(1), F.A.C. and 62B - 49.004(3)0, F.A.C. 13. A copy of the Division of State Lands title determination. If you do not have title determination, department staff will request that the division of State Lands conduct a title check. Thank you for your response. The title information check on your project reveals two existing easements (No. 30353 (5165 -I1)) and 29908 (5265 -11)) and two existing leases (No. 3869 to Collier County for Barefoot Beach State Recreation Center, and No. 2514 to DEP Division of Parks and Recreation for Delnor Wiggins State Recreation Area) in the project area - as well as state owned submerged lands. We have received the letter of no objection from Collier County for the proposed proiect. There is a concern that the new channel template may encroach onto Park land Your project will require a "letter of no objection "from the other easement4ease holders, and the applicant is required to obtain and submit those letters to FDEP. Division of Recreation and Parks would like to coordinate a Use Agreement to involve Parks in the scheduling and maintenance of the area with the County. This is required according to Rule 62B- 41.008(5) F.A. C. www.dep.stateft. us Comments on Partial Response to RAI (#1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 3 of 9 27. Permit applications for excavation or fill activities shall include the following detailed information concerning the material to be excavated and the existing or native material at the beach fill site: f. A sediment QA/QC plan that will ensure that the sediment to be used for beach restoration or nourishment will meet the standards set forth in paragraph 62B- 41.007(2)0), F.A.C. Bureau staff recognizes that the Sediment QAIQCplan is a conceptual draft and additional information will be submitted However, Table 3 continues to specify compliance values of silt in the placement criteria for the initial construction activity that are not consistent with Rule. To reiterate comments provided in RAI #1, preliminary evaluation of your proposed project leads Bureau staff to the conclusion that the placement options for the non -beach compatible material must be denied The work proposed to be done under this permit is the expansion and realignment of a channel, which is new work. This is not maintenance activity. Therefore, the material to be dredged and disposed of will be reviewed in accordance with Rule 62B- 41.007(2)0), F.A.C., not Rule 62B- 41.007(2)(k), F.A.C. The Bureau staff recommends that as a condition of the permit, a Maintenance Dredging - Sediment QAIQC Plan be submitted with the final construction plans and specification for subsequent maintenance dredging activities, that include compliance values that are consistent with Rule 62B- 41.007(2)(k), F.A.C. A complete review will be done when the Department receives the final draft of the document. Preliminary comments on the draft information are supplied below to aid in making the final draft Sediment QA/QC Plan. • In the final Sediment QAIQC plan for the initial construction to expand and realign the navigation channel, please revise the placement options, construction methods, dredge elevations, and material specification such that they reflect the criteria for beach compatible fill according to Rule 62B- 41.007(2)(j), F.A.C. and its enumeratedparameters, not Rule 62B- 41.007(2)(k), F.A.C. It was noted in the Applicant's response that the detailed cut depths and threshold elevations will be provided once the new alignment and disposal classification is accepted These threshold elevations are the dredge elevations at which there is a separation in disposal location within a specific subarea of a channel cut based on sediment quality. Please include in the final Sediment QA/QC Plan a plan view drawing showing maximum dredge depths and threshold elevations for each subarea of the channel with the locations of the vibracores and jet probes superimposed www. dep.statefl. us Comments on Partial Response to RAI ( #1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 4 of 9 • In the construction portion of the document, Table 1 includes the location and dredge depths for the channel as currently designed This table should be updated to include the subareas and their threshold elevations, as appropriate, in addition to the dredge depth. This table should also include the volume to be dredged and the disposal location for each subarea Please revise accordingly. • Please add all the provisions in the sediment QAIQC plan as required by Rule 62B- 41.008(1)(k)4.b., F.A.C. As stated in your transmittal letter dated January 30, 2012, the FDEP template language will be incorporated 33. Analysis of the expected effect of the proposed activity on the coastal system including but not limited to: b. Analysis of the compatibility of the fill material with respect to the native sediment at the placement site. The analysis should include all relevant computations, the overfill ratios, and superimposed graphs of the cumulative grain -size distribution and the frequency distribution of the fill material over the data for the existing or native sediment at the placement site. Provide computations of borrow area volume and composite fill material characteristics (mean grain size and sorting, percent carbonate content) in an electronic spreadsheet. Please provide an updated compatibility analysis, including composites and the excel spreadsheet used to create the composites, based on the final channel design with the subareas and threshold elevations. This should include information for each subarea so that placement options can be reviewed against the material in the placement location and the criteria set forth in Rule 62B-41.007(2)OF), F.A.C. d. Analysis of how water quality and natural communities would be affected by the proposed project. Provide graphic representation (depiction) of the area of direct and secondary influence of the proposed activity and delineate the natural communities within that area. All required surveys shall be representative of conditions existing at the time of submittal. Surveys of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) shall be conducted in the field during the growing season for a given climatic region such that they capture the full areal extent and biomass of the SAV community. Species composition and spatial distribution shall also be addressed by the survey. Estimate the affected acreage of each impacted community. It is noted that turbidity minimization measures such as use of turbidity curtains, potentially dredging on outgoing tides, and monitoring hardbottoms within the mixing zone area may be utilized for areas inside the Outstanding Florida Waters (OF99. In reviewing the previous data from maintenance dredging, it is acknowledged that background measurements do fluctuate by as much as 10 www.dep.statefl. us Comments on Partial Response to RAI ( #1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 5 of 9 NTUs, and a 10 NTU allowance may be allowable for an antidegradation amount. However, the previous data is based on a 150 meter mixing zone, not an expanded 450 meters, as requested If you wish to pursue the request for a 450 -meter expanded mixing zone, we will need additional information justifying why this is needed for this project, when not necessary for the previous maintenance dredging event. This is being requested pursuant to 373.414(1), F.S., and 62B41.008(f), F.A.C. 37. A narrative description of any proposed mitigation plans, pursuant to Rule 62 -345, F.A.C., including purpose, a comparison between the functions of the impact site to the mitigation site, maintenance, monitoring, estimated cost, construction sequence and techniques. For proposed artificial reefs, indicate the water depth, depth of sand overlying bedrock, proposed relief and materials (type, size and shape). Biological information regarding hardbottom to the north and south of the Pass was submitted in item 28. The last response indicated that the County will proceed to develop a monitoring plan for the hardbottom areas adjacent to the inlet, in coordination with the Department. It is noted that this plan can ultimately be incorporated into the County wide monitoring. The biological monitoring plan is a completeness item for the permit, and is required pursuant to 62B- 41.005(16), F.A.C. The description of the work and deliverables as written in the physical monitoring plan submitted by the Applicant on February 1, 2012 are inadequate for a complete review by the Bureau staff. To assist you in completing your application, provided below are annotated draft physical monitoring requirements that the Bureau staff anticipates will be a condition of approval of the permit. Also, the staff recommends a drawing be included in the physical monitoring plan depicting all the beach - offshore survey profiles and inlet bathymetric survey lines. PHYSICAL MONITORING REQUIRED: Pursuant to 62B- 41.005(16), F.A.C., physical monitoring of the project is required through acquisition of project- specific data to include, at a minimum, topographic and bathymetric surveys of the beach, offshore, and borrow site areas, and engineering analysis. The monitoring data is necessary in order for both the project sponsor and the Department to regularly observe and assess, with quantitative measurements, the performance of the project, any adverse effects which have occurred, and the need for any adjustments, modifications, or mitigative response to the project. The scientific monitoring process also provides the project sponsor and the Department information necessary to plan, design, and optimize subsequent follow -up projects, potentially reducing the need for and costs of unnecessary work, as well as potentially reducing any environmental impacts that may have occurred or be expected. �n www.dep.statefl.us Comments on Partial Response to RAI (#1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 6 of 9 The Permittee submitted a detailed Physical Monitoring Plan dated XXX, 2012 for review and approval by the Department, which is hereby incorporated by reference. The approved Monitoring Plan can be revised at any later time by written request of the permittee and with the written approval of the Department. If subsequent to approval of the Monitoring Plan there is a request for modification of the permit, the Department may require revised or additional monitoring requirements as a condition of approval of the permit modification. As guidance for obtaining Department approval, the plan shall generally contain the following items: a. Topographic and bathymetric profile surveys of the beach and offshore shall be conducted within 90 days prior to commencement of construction, and within 60 days following completion of construction of the project. Thereafter, monitoring surveys shall be conducted annually until the next maintenance dredging event. The monitoring surveys shall be conducted as close as practicable during that same month of the year. [Since this is not beach nourishment, the staff can recommend this revision to allow the County more flexibility in scheduling the annual survey at any month during the year, although the County could still contract the survey in conjunction with other county projects as it sees fit.] If the time period between the immediate post - construction survey and the first annual monitoring survey is less than six months, then the permittee may request a postponement of the first monitoring survey until the following spring/summer. The request should be submitted as part of the cover letter for the post - construction report. A prior design or monitoring survey of the beach and offshore may be submitted for the pre - construction survey if consistent with the other requirements of this condition. The permittee may request a waiver of conducting an annual monitoring survey urvey after previous monitoring surveys demonstrate inlet and shoreline stability, and navigation reports and site inspections indicate no significant channel shoaling or shoreline erosion since the previous monitoring survey. [Stability may not occur until after the first maintenance dredging, but given the relatively small transport rates, there may not be a need for monitoring every year it order to assess inlet impacts or manage /operate the navigation project.] The monitoring area shall include profile surveys at each of the Department of Environmental Protection's DNR reference monuments from R -10 through R -21. Also, additional profile lines shall be surveyed at intermediate locations approximately midway between reference monuments to accurately identify patterns and volumes of erosion and accretion within this subarea. A survey of the mean -high -water contour will extend from R -17 to approximately 1,500 feet north and east along the sandy shore. [The additional profile lines are needed to assess inlet impacts and the mhw survey was proposed by the applicant to address Park Service concerns.] All work activities and deliverables shall be conducted in accordance with the latest update of the Bureau of Beaches and www.dep.statefl.us Comments on Partial Response to RAI ( #1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538 - 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 7 of 9 Coastal Systems (BBCS) Monitoring Standards for Beach Erosion Control Projects, Sections 01000 and 01100. b. Bathymetric surveys of the inlet channels and tidal inlet shoals shall be conducted within 90 days prior to commencement of construction, and within 60 days following completion of construction of the project concurrently with the beach and offshore surveys as required above. To provide sufficient detail for accurate volumetric calculations, the survey grid lines shall be spaced to at Stations -2 +00 to +15+00 and C -3 to C -35 and shall extend a minimum of 100 feet beyond the boundaries of the entire ebb shoal complex, as depicted on the drawing included in the physical monitoring plan. [The survey lines depicted on the permit drawings do NOT extend a sufficient distance south to capture the entire ebb shoal and attachment bar.] In all other aspects, work activities and deliverables shall be consistent with the BBCS Monitoring Standards for Beach Erosion Control Projects, Section 01200. C. Aerial photography of the beach shall be take acquired from the public domain concurrently with the post - construction survey and each annual and biennial monitoring survey required above, as close to the date of the beach profile surveys as possible. The limits of the photography shall include the surveyed monitoring area as described above. The Permittee is not required to contract a special purpose flight to obtain aerial photography of the monitoring area, but shall make every effort to acquire the photo rg_ acv from available sources, such as the Florida Department of Transportation, Department of Revenue, or other state and local government entities. All • ork ,.e fivities and delivefables shall be eaft"eted in aeeafdanee with the latest update of the BB afea, then aefial phetegmphy shall be een"eted ift aeeefdanee with the latest update 0 d. A survey of the currents and tides using an ADCP type instrument in Wiggins Pass will be performed at the time of the one -year post - construction monitoring survey. urvey. Measurements will be taken over the span of two weeks within the main channel and north, south and east tributary channels. The measurements shall be taken at survey, cross sections. These cross - sections may be in addition to those depicted on the permit drawings. [The Bureau engineering staff concurs the Applicant's proposal to collect hydrographic data, and would favorable consider additional hydrographic data collection to assess the effects of the inlet dredging activities as a permit condition.] e. The permittee shall submit an engineering report and the monitoring data to the BBCS within 90 days following completion of the post - construction survey and each annual monitoring survey. www. d ep.state. fI. us Comments on Partial Response to RAI ( #1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 8 of 9 The report shall summarize and discuss the data, the performance of the project, and identify erosion and accretion patterns within the monitored area. In addition, the report shall include a comparative review of project performance to performance expectations and identification of adverse impacts attributable to the project. Also, specific attention will be raid to assessing the WiQ2ins Pass and eulf shoreline north of R -17 using the mean high water contour survey, and recent and historical aerial photography. [As proposed by Applicant in the plan submitted February 1, 2012.1 Appendices shall include plots of survey profiles and graphical representations of volumetric and shoreline position changes for the monitoring area. Results shall be analyzed for patterns, trends, or changes between annual surveys and cumulatively since project construction. f. Two paper copies and one electronic copy of the monitoring report, and one electronic copy of the survey data shall be submitted to the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems in Tallahassee. Failure to submit reports and data in a timely manner constitutes grounds for revocation of the permit. When submitting any monitoring information to the Bureau, please include a transmittal cover letter clearly labeled with the following at the top of each page: "This monitoring information is submitted in accordance with Item No. [XX] of the approved Monitoring Plan for Permit No. [XX] for the monitoring period [XX]. If the applicant fails to provide all information required to complete the application within six (6) months after a request for additional information has been sent, the staff will close the permit application file after written notice to the applicant. Application files closed under these procedures shall be closed without prejudice and a new application, accompanied by the appropriate fee, shall be required to renew the application. If the processing of the application is prolonged, or if a storm event is known to have altered the shoreline such that the staff determines that the topographic and bathymetric survey data is no longer adequate to complete its analysis, then an updated survey shall be required as specified in Item No. 20 above. In the event that an updated survey is required, the application shall be treated as an amended application. If I may be of any further assistance, please contact me at the letterhead address (add Mail Station 300), by e -mail at Elizabeth. Yongue(,dep. state. Mus or by telephone at (850) 414 -7798. www. dep.sta tef 1. us Comments on Partial Response to RAI ( #1) File No. 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BV Wiggins Pass Navigation Channel Expansion and Maintenance Dredging Page 9 of 9 Sincerely, 444) LI',j,. 4 - -� -- Liz Yongue Environmental Specialist II Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems cc: Gary McAlpin, Collier County Lucy Blair, DEP, South District Danielle Fondren, BBCS Jeff Raley, DRP Parks Small, DRP Subarna Malakar, BBCS Vladimir Kosmynin, BBCS Bob Brantly, BBCS Marcia Cravens Jennifer Koch, BBCS Lainie Edwards, BBCS Vince George, BBCS Paden Woodruff, BBCS Alex Reed, BBCS Roxane Dow, BBCS JCP Compliance, BBCS Stephen Fleming, USACE BBCS Permit File www. dep.statef ]. us 8500.83 June 7, 2012 Elizabeth Yongue Environmental Specialist II Florida Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems Mail Station 300 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399 -3000 Re: COMMENTS ON PARTIAL RESPONSE TO RAI No. 1 DEP File Number: 0142538- 008 -JC and 0142538- 013 -BY, Collier County Applicant Name: Collier County Project Name: Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging & Navigation Improvement Project Dear Liz: This letter is in response to the Department's March 2, 2012 Comments on Partial Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI) No. t for the referenced project. Enclosed please find three (3) hardcopies and one (1) electronic copy of our response. Please note that our responses and supporting attachments have been numbered to correspond with the numbers of the questions contained in the RAI, Since the submittal of RAI No. 1, a meeting has occurred with the Park Service to discuss fill placement options at Delnor Wiggins Pass State Park and other issues. During this teleconference, concerns and issues were discussed by all parties, and a common plan was agreed upon, which is described in the Project Description (Attachment No. 5). Coordination is currently underway to obtain a Use Agreement from the Division of Recreation and Parks. Updated permit sketches are provided as Attachment No. 24. CPE Comments on Incomplete Items The legal property description (Item No. 17) will be provided once it's clear and a final plan is agreed upon by all parties involved. Coordination is still underway with Collier County Government in order to receive a letter of consistency with the Local Comprehensive Plan for the area (Item No. 19). All required information has been submitted to the County, but the letter is not likely to be completed until the end of the summer. This letter will be provided as soon as the County provides it. The biological monitoring plan (Item No. 37) will be prepared jointly with the Doctors Pass and Collier County Beach Nourishment permits. The draft plan will be prepared in the near future, and will likely be submitted before receipt of the County's letter of consistency. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC,, A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 June 7, 2012 Page 2 The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) sent coordination letters to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on April 12, 2012. They requested consultation with USFWS for nesting sea turtles and the West Indian manatee, and requested that USFWS confirm that the project can be included under the Statewide Programmatic Biological Opinion (SPBO) for nesting sea turtles. USACE requested that NMFS concur with a "may affect not likely to adversely affect" determination for swimming sea turtles and smalltooth sawfish. To date, USACE has not received any response from USFWS or NMFS, but copies of any Biological Opinions (Item No. 31) and/or concurrence letters will be provided when they are available. The amount of potential acreage that will be encompassed by the proposed project is described in Attachment No. 39. We request that FDEP recalculate the fee based upon this acreage. FDEP Comment No. 5. - Describe in general terms the proposed activity including any phasing. The Bureau staff has received a courtesy copy of a letter to M.s. Erma Stager, FDEP Deputy Secretary for Land and Recreation, dated February 16, 2012, from Mr. Gary McAlpin, Collier County CZM Director. The letter includes a request to the Florida Park Service, as the designated trustee of the state owned uplands adjacent to Wiggins Pass, to approve placement of sand from inlet dredging onto the beaches above the mean -high -water contour. Since the project description and permit drawings submitted to the Department on February .1, 2011, do not include placement of dredged sand on Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, please be advised that these application information items must be revised and resubmitted should you obtain approval from the Park Service. This is being requested pursuant to 62B- 41.008(1)(9, F.A.C. and 62B - 49.004(3)0, F.A.C. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 5 — Please refer to the project description in Attachment No. 5 for updates to the beach fill placement area at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Onshore beach fill was elected along with a nearshore beach fill option by the Parks Service during a March 28, 2012 teleconference. The permit drawings have also been updated to represent this change (Attachment No. 24). FDEP Comment No. 13. - A copy of the Division of State Lands title determination. If you do not have title determination, department staff will request that the Division of State Lands conduct a title check. Thank you for your response. The title information check on your project reveals two existing easements (No. 30353 (5165 -11)) and 29908 (5265 -11)) and two existing leases (No. 3869 to Collier County for Barefoot Beach State Recreation Center, and No. 2514 to DEP Division of Parks and Recreation for Delnor Wiggins State Recreation Area) in the project area - as well as state owned submerged lands. We have received the letter of no objection from Collier County for the proposed project. There is a concern that the new channel template may encroach onto Park land. Your project will require a "letter of no objection" from the other 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 June 7, 2012 Page 3 easemesrt/lease !solders, aiad the applvealst /s reyrl /red to ohta /is erred szihac/t those letters to t4DpP. IJiv/sio/s ofRecreat /on aadParks would! /ke to coordinate a f1ve4greemel1t to /involve Parks Ili the sehedal /ng alyd 11ngA1te.,ranee of the area with the Coulity. This /s - eemmed accord/ieg to Rmle 618- /i 008Kfj F.A. C. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 13 — Coordination is currently underway to receive a Use Agreement from the Division of Recreation and Parks based on the March 28, 2012 telephone conference. FDEP Comment No. 27. - Permit applications for excavation or fill activities shall include the following detailed information concerning the material to be excavated and the existing or native material at the beach fill site: C A sediment QA/QC plan that will ensure that the sediment to be used for beach restoration or nourishment will meet the standards set forth in paragraph 62B- 41.007(2)(j), F.A.C. Bureau staff recognizes that the Sediment QA/QC plan is a conceptual draft and additional information will be submitted. However, Table 3 continues to specify compliance values of silt in the placement criteria for the initial construction activity that are not consistent with Rule. To reiterate comments provided in RAI #1, preliminary evaluation of your proposed project leads Bureau staff to the conclusion that the placement options for the non -beach compatible material must be denied The work proposed to be done under this permit is the expansion and realignment of a channel, which is new work This is not maintenance activity. Therefore, the material to be dredged and disposed of will be reviewed in accordance with Rule 62B- 41.007(2)(f), F.A.C., not Rule 62B- 41.007(2)(k), F.A.C. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27f -1 — Please refer to the updated Sediment QA /QC plan for the initial dredging event (Attachment No. 27). Table 3 has been updated to correspond to fill placement for new work. The Bureau staff recommends that as a condition of the permit, a Maintenance Dredging - Sediment QA/QC Plan be submitted with the final construction plans and specification for subsequent maintenance drerleinQ activities, that include compliance values that are consistent with Rule 62B41.007(2)(k), F.A.C. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27f -2 — A specific sediment QA /QC plan will be provided with the plans for the first maintenance dredge project. The QA /QC for initial dredging is provided as Attachment No. 27. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 June 7, 2012 Page 4 ,4 coiaplele review will he done whew the Departtttetrt receives the fi�eal draft of the doewmeirt. Preliiiilllary couitttetrls otr the draft irrforniatioll are supplied helow to aid is a/akitrg lhefirald raflSedit1retrtQfl/QCPlaw • In the final Sediment QAIQC plan for the initial construction to expand and realign the navigation channel, please revise the placement options, construction methods, dredge elevations, and material specification such that they reflect the criteria for beach compatible fill according to Rule 62B -4L 007(2)6), EA. C. and its enumerated parameters, not Rule 62B- 41.007(2)(k), F.A.C. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27f -3 — Beach placement options have been updated to correspond with the criteria for beach compatible fill. It was noted in the Applicant's response that the detailed cut depths and threshold elevations will be provided once the new alignment and disposal classification is accepted These threshold elevations are the dredge elevations at which there is a .separation in disposal location within a specific subarea of a channel cut based on .sediment quality. Please include in the final Sediment Q"C Plan a plan view drawing showing maximum dredge depths and threshold elevations for each subarea of the channel with the locations of the vibracores and jet probes superimposed. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27f -4 — A planview drawing containing threshold elevations, locations of the vibracores, and the corresponding dredge areas is included as part of the QA/QC plan. • In the construction portion of the document, Table I includes the location and dredge depths for the channel as currently designed This table should be updated to include the subareas and their threshold elevations, as appropriate, in addition to the dredge depth. This table should also include the volume to be dredged and the disposal location for each subarea. Please revise accordingly. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27f -5 - Please refer to Table 2 which has been updated in the Sediment QA /QC plan. • Please add all the provisions in the sediment QAIQC plan as required by Rule 62B- 41.008(1)(k)4.b., EA. C. As stated in your transmittal letter dated January 30, 2012, the FDEP template language will be incorporated CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 27f -6 — Refer to Appendix A of the Sediment QA /QC plan. FDEP Comment No. 33. - Analysis of the expected effect of the proposed activity on the coastal system including but not limited to: 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538 - 008 -JC .,, Request for Additional Information No. l June 7, 2012 Page 5 b. Analysis of the compatibility of the fill material with respect to the native sediment at the placement site. The analysis should include all relevant computations, the overfill ratios, and superimposed graphs of the cumulative grain -size distribution and the frequency distribution of the fill material over the data for the existing or native sediment at the placement site. Provide computations of borrow area volume and composite fill material characteristics (mean grain size and sorting, percent carbonate content) in an electronic spreadsheet. Please provide an updated compatibility analysis, including composites and the excel spreadsheet used to create the composites, based on the final channel design with the subareas and threshold elevations. This should include information for each subarea so that placement options can be reviewed against the material in the placement location and the criteria setforth in Rule 62B- 41.007(2)6), F.A.C. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33b — Please refer to the Sediment QA/QC Plan (Attachment No. 27) Table 2 along with Attachment No. 33b for the composites. In Attachment No. 33b, only vibracores with layers of potential unsuitable material were composited with their surrounding layers to where the composite silt content could be brought to suitable levels. Otherwise, all material above threshold or to cut depth is suitable, as illustrated in the geotechnical report submitted in January 2012. The sand is compatible with the adjacent beaches for nearshore or onshore disposal. The sand dredged from the pass has been placed on the neighboring shorelines for approximately 20 years. It is anticipated that less than 7,500 c.y. of material will be unsuitable for beach or nearshore placement, and that sand will be placed offshore at Borrow Area 6. All substantive layers of unsuitable material have a threshold elevation. A description of beach sand characteristics can be found below in Table 1. TABLE 1 WIGGINS PASS BEACH CHARACTERISTICS Note: 2003 beach samples collected from Beret b111"W. NITL.. NILW, -3 ft, Trough, Bar. •9 ft NGN-D. These samples represent the beach between the 1996 and 2006 nourislunents. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY MEAN GRAIN SIZE MM Phi SORTING % SILT MUNSELL COLOR VALUE WET DRY Wiggins Pass Ebb Shoal 0.36 1.48 1.85 2.57 5.0 6.5 Wiggins Pass Flood Shoal 0.52 0.93 2.12 1.69 6.6 71 Wiggins Pass Tributary 0.21 2.26 1.36 3.00 6.0 7.0 Vanderbilt Heath (R -27) 2003 0.22 2.17 1.57 4.65 NA NA Note: 2003 beach samples collected from Beret b111"W. NITL.. NILW, -3 ft, Trough, Bar. •9 ft NGN-D. These samples represent the beach between the 1996 and 2006 nourislunents. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 - COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 June 7, 2012 Page 6 Most vibracores within the channel limits are beach or nearshore compatible and are identified for disposal in the flood meander channel, nearshore and beach (refer to Table 2 within Sediment QA/QC plan). Four vibracore locations (WP- 09 -05, WP- 11 -05, WP- 11 -07, and WP- 11 -14) composite to a beach quality silt content less than 5% to the overdredge depth (Attachment No. 33b). One vibracore (WP- 11 -02) composites to a nearshore disposal quality at cut depth. WP -09 -06 composites to beach quality sand up to the threshold depth above a clay layer. The dredged sand is beach compatible based on its silt content and a lack of non - compatible material. The non - compatible material will be disposed of in an offshore disposal area. d. Analysis of how water quality and natural communities would be affected by the proposed project. Provide graphic representation (depiction) of the area of direct and secondary influence of the proposed activity and delineate the natural communities within that area. All required surveys shall be representative of conditions existing at the time of submittal. Surveys of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) shall be conducted in the field during the growing season for a given climatic region such that they capture the full areal extent and biomass of the SAV community. Species composition and spatial distribution shall also be addressed by the survey. Estimate the affected acreage of each impacted community. It is noted that turbidity minimization measures such as use of turbidity curtains, potentially dredging on outgoing tides, and monitoring hardbottoms within the mixing zone area may be utilized for areas inside the Outstanding Florida Waters (OFW). In reviewing the previous data from maintenance dredging, it is acknowledged that background measurements do fluctuate by as much as 10 NTUs, and a 10 NTU allowance may be allowable for an antidegradation amount. However, the previous data is based on a 150 meter mixing zone, not an expanded 450 meters, as requested If you wish to pursue the request for a 450 -meter expanded mixing zone, we will need additional information justifying why this is needed for this project, when not necessary for the previous maintenance dredging event This is being requested pursuant to 373.414(1), F.S., and 62B- 41.0080, F.A. C CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 33d — We acknowledge that the previous measurements showed turbidity up to 10 NTU based on a 150 meter mixing zone. These measurements were largely in the open Gulf of Mexico for both the dredge and fill areas (seaward of Sta. 0 +00), and we can accept these standards in the Gulf of Mexico. The proposed project differs from previous dredgings in that it will be confined to waters less than 150 meters wide landward of Sta. 0 +00. The deepest parts of the interior channels (thalweg) are 100 -150 feet wide (30 -45 meters). The wetted channel width is approximately 400 feet (120 meters) wide. The confinement of the dredging activity within this narrow channel will concentrate any potential turbidity in a small area smaller than the mixing zone by a factor of 1.2 to 5, depending on the tide range. We would appreciate your consideration of an increased mixing zone distance for the dredge and fill operation to at least 300 meters for operations within the channel landward of Sta. 0 +00. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538 - 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 June 7, 2012 Page 7 FDEP Comment No. 37. - A narrative description of any proposed mitigation plans, pursuant to Rule 62 -345, F.A.C., including purpose, a comparison between the functions of the impact site to the mitigation site, maintenance, monitoring, estimated cost, construction sequence and techniques. For proposed artificial reefs, indicate the water depth, depth of sand overlying bedrock, proposed relief and materials (type, size and shape). Biological information regarding hardbottom to the north and south of the Pass was submitted in item 28. The last response indicated that the County will proceed to develop a monitoring plan for the hardbottom areas adjacent to the inlet, in coordination with the Department. It is noted that this plan can ultimately be incorporated into the County wide monitoring. The biological monitoring plan is a completeness item for the permit, and is required pursuant to 62B4].005(16), F.A.C. The description of the work and deliverables as written in ti :e physical monitoring plan submitted by the Applicant on February 1, 2012 are inadequate for a complete review by the Bureau staff. To assist you in completing your application, provided below are annotated draft physical monitoring requirements that the Bureau staff anticipates will be a condition of approval of the permit. Also, the staff recommends a drawing be included in the physical monitoring plan depicting all the beach - offshore survey profiles and inlet batiymetric survey lines. CPE Response to FDEP Comment No. 37 — The biological monitoring plan will be developed in coordination with FDEP as part of the planning and permitting process for the next Collier County beach nourishment project. This plan already covers Doctors Pass, and it will now cover Wiggins Pass. This plan will be provided once it has been completed. We will likely submit this monitoring plan before the County has completed their letter of consistency, which is not expected until the end of the summer. An updated physical monitoring plan is provided as Attachment No. 37. If you should have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. ESte en K ehn, F.E. Senior Coastal Engineer 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561,391.8102 - FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC„ A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County, JCP File Number 0142538- 008 -JC Request for Additional Information No. 1 June 7, 2012 Page 8 cc: Lainie Edwards, Ph.D., FDEP BBCS Gary McAlpin, Collier County, w /enclosure Monika Dey, USACE, w /enclosure on CD Lauren Floyd, CPE Nicole Sharp, CPE 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Attachment No. 5 Project Description Revised June 2012 Attachment No. 5 Project Description June 2012 The goals for the Wiggins Pass navigation improvement study as developed by Collier County and the Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Committee are: 1. To provide a safe channel for boating 2. To address erosion at Barefoot Beach 3. To lengthen the dredge cycle, accomplished with the least impact on the environment 4. To provide a solution that is economically effective A non - structural alternative is an objective for the inlet design in order to improve navigation. The committee, which formulated the main goals for Wiggins Pass, represented a broad range of local stake holders appointed by the County government. The current and historic inlet and shoreline conditions were evaluated in order to develop an improved inlet management strategy. A complete coastal study was performed in conjunction with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) process. This study included an engineering report and two modeling reports. The 2012 engineering report contains a refined modeling report that was based upon the initial 2009 modeling study. The 2009 report also contains minutes and details from the special committee of the Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC). The project recommended in the 2009 modeling study and refined based on comments generated by the 2010 permit application is summarized below. Refinements were developed during the last year based on a new field investigations and further consultation with agencies. The plan addresses concerns expressed by FDEP BBCS and Park Service, and other local interest groups. It addresses not only navigation, but also improved sand bypassing, modifications to channel dredging, improved locations for sand disposal, and an updated inlet management study. It accomplishes improved navigation and sediment management by a combination of straightening the channel, major and small maintenance dredging, and new sand disposal practices. The plan rotates the channel south to minimize dredging of the hard substrate. The proposed design modifies and improves upon the County- approved 1995 Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan. This project includes channel realignment which will be accomplished by straightening the inlet channel layout and infilling and blocking the northern flood shoal meander (Figure 1). Fill in the meander will be constructed with a 0.5 foot upper tolerance to account for settlement and consolidation of the material after placement. The east, north, and south interior channel entrances are identified for maintenance dredging, should sand shoal within their respective boundaries. The designated dredge disposal locations and distribution will be modified and relocated based on shoreline monitoring results, with preference given to areas with greatest need. Incorporating the ability to modify disposal locations will increase management flexibility, reduce sediment loss to the system, and minimize impacts to Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park shoreline. Nearshore and beach (onshore) disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R -12 to R -15.5 and south of the inlet between R -18 CW and R -20 (Figure 1). As Barefoot Beach recovers towards its traditional shoreline location, its disposal area will need to move west in order to account for the increased shoreline width. An ebb shoal disposal area has also been designated to assist in stabilizing the Barefoot Beach shoreline (Figure 1). A separate offshore disposal area (Borrow Area 6 from the 1996 Beach Nourishment Project) has been designated as an acceptable location to place unsuitable fill dredged from the channel. The project also includes scarp repair along southern Barefoot Beach to restore the beach to historic conditions. A dynamic design will be incorporated into the maintenance plan for the inlet so that long -term dredging can be reduced. Impacts to natural resources are avoided. 0 BAREFOOT BEACH PRESERVE NORTH ONSHORE DISPOSAL AREA i m� NORTH NEARSHORE DISPOSAL AREA GULF OF MEXICO `WIGGINS PASS /- iB SHOAI DREDGE ARA // iPOSALAREA / 15.00 ;►:� -_ -_ , SOUTH NEARSHORE J — _ j DISPOSAL AREA TWORKAREA(WILL c/ NOT ENCROACH ON Figure 1: Project Component Map S LEI The beach fill and scarp repair (upland disposal) element at Barefoot Beach is contingent based upon clarification of land use and management plans. Beach fill can either be placed onshore or nearshore at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Both have received preliminary support from FDEP. The method for determining the size and location of bypassing operations between the north and south beaches is proposed based on equalizing the volumetric change rates for an equal distance north and south of the inlet based on the 2001 surveyed profiles. Only volumes dredged in the ebb shoal will count, since flood shoal dredge and fill operations are a zero sum operation. Volume placed by an independent nourishment project would be factored out of these calculations, since non - maintenance dredging sources may be needed to restore the beach and ebb shoal north of the inlet, where similar impacts do not exist south of the inlet. SOUTH ONSHORE DISPOSAL AREA i C33 DELNOR - WIGGINS PASS STATE PARK €� X 71 R -18 �R-18 &R-20 R A7 - =ate - -- - -�, `WIGGINS PASS /- iB SHOAI DREDGE ARA // iPOSALAREA / 15.00 ;►:� -_ -_ , SOUTH NEARSHORE J — _ j DISPOSAL AREA TWORKAREA(WILL c/ NOT ENCROACH ON Figure 1: Project Component Map S LEI The beach fill and scarp repair (upland disposal) element at Barefoot Beach is contingent based upon clarification of land use and management plans. Beach fill can either be placed onshore or nearshore at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Both have received preliminary support from FDEP. The method for determining the size and location of bypassing operations between the north and south beaches is proposed based on equalizing the volumetric change rates for an equal distance north and south of the inlet based on the 2001 surveyed profiles. Only volumes dredged in the ebb shoal will count, since flood shoal dredge and fill operations are a zero sum operation. Volume placed by an independent nourishment project would be factored out of these calculations, since non - maintenance dredging sources may be needed to restore the beach and ebb shoal north of the inlet, where similar impacts do not exist south of the inlet. In order to minimize project dredging, some natural migration of the channel will be allowed. The ebb channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north and south, except at the gap in the hard substrate. The flood channel will be allowed to migrate up to 50 feet north. Dredging centered on the current channel location, to the maximum extent practical, will reduce dredging volumes. The size of the new channel is summarized in the table below. Wiggins Pass Channel Dimensions Station Location Bottom Width ft Depth ft, NAVD Overdredge ft 15 +00 Ebb Shoal 240 -12.0 1.0 0 +00 Ebb Shoal 160 -12.0 1.0 C6 Throat 160 -7.7 1.0 CIO Flood Shoal 130 -7.7 1.0 C15 Flood Shoal 130 -7.7 1.0 C26 East Channel 82 -7.0 1.0 C31 South Channel 123 -7.2 1.0 C35 I North Channel 1 70 1 -7.0 1.0 Almost every element of the project contributes to both navigation and inlet management, and further refinements to this plan are expected. It also addresses balancing inlet bypassing based on FDEP inlet management principles. A 10 -year plan is proposed in order to achieve the project goals, with details listed below. 1) Initial construction of straightened channel i) Dredge compatible sand from ebb channel — 41,000 cy (Range of 24,000 to 58,000 c.y.) ii) Dredge flood channel — 36,400 c.y. ill) Dredge incompatible material — 7,500 c.y. iv) Build beach, nearshore, ebb shoal and scour repair with compatible sand — 38,200 c.y. v) Fill meander with compatible sand — 39,200 c.y. vi) Offshore borrow pit disposal of unsuitable sand - 7,500 c.y. 2) Major maintenance dredging — 50,000 c.y. every 4 years with disposal balanced to favor adjacent Gulf shoreline with greatest need based on equalizing volumetric changes. i) Place beach compatible sand in beach, nearshore or ebb shoal. 3) Intermediate ebb channel dredging as needed i) Excavate and clear ebb channel at the bar and laterally place about 8,000 to 10,000 c.y. in the north ebb shoal to promote regrowth. 4) Create contingency, monitoring, and inlet management plans i) No direct mitigation expected 5) Nourish critically eroded area on Barefoot Beach and rebuild ebb shoal every 10 years with 100,000 c.y. to supplement bypassing until the shoreline and shoal recovers (this is part of a separate permit and project). Intermediate ebb channel dredging (small scale dredging) may be needed to clear the channel at the bar. Material from the small scale dredgings would be pumped to an area approximately 300- 1000 feet north of the inlet (ebb shoal disposal area). Two of the main purposes for placement of this fill in the ebb shoal disposal area are to feed the re- growth of the ebb shoal and to allow for economic clearing of the ebb channel. If dredging could be conducted using smaller equipment during the calmer times of the year, it would also be very economical. Each of the tasks described above supports improved navigation and inlet management. The engineering report has identified three reasons why the 1995 inlet plan did not perform well. First, the sediment transport direction is not predominately southerly. The disposal location and a 50:50 split of bypassed sand to adjacent beaches was imbalanced. The sand needs to be disposed of closer to the inlet and approximately two- thirds needs to go to the north. This imbalanced disposal since 1984 needs short term supplemental sand to address past practices. The new plan addresses the imbalance, recovery of the north ebb shoal, the Barefoot Beach hot spot south of R -14, and improving navigation. A structural solution using a jetty, breakwater or T -groin has been suggested as an economical alternative, but is not supported by FDEP BBCS, the Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Committee, and local policy and plans. Given the local coastal processes, a simple but workable structure that accomplishes the above goals would be difficult. Attachment No. 23c Construction Description Attachment No. 23c Construction Description January 2012 The initial construction will be a sequenced in three (3) phases to achieve a shift in alignment while filling in the old channel. This will be achieved by dredging a pilot channel through the south side of the new flood shoal channel and depositing the material in a temporary stock pile, most likely on the flood shoal between the new and old flood channel locations (Figure 1). A portion of the north half of the new channel can be used as a temporary stockpile. The use of sheet piles to block off the old channel once the pilot channel is complete may be a method selected by the contractor. Barges can also be used to hold the stockpile. The initial dredging will be from the coarsest layer in the flood shoal. Once a significant pilot channel is completed, the stockpiled sand will be moved into the existing flood channel forming a dike with coarse sand. A dike will be constructed at two locations in the shallowest crossings in the old flood channel, at the east and west sides. The dike will be built higher than the high water level initially, to prevent overtopping and the early degradation of the dikes. Once the dike is formed, the remaining interior flood channel will be dredged, the material used to fill up the old channel between the dikes. Some subaqueous grading will be required at the end of dredging to level the dikes and rough grade the new flood shoal. The new flood shoal elevation will be -2.28 feet NAVD (MLLW), to mimic the existing shoal. It is expected that the dredged sand will occupy a larger volume when placed in the flood shoal channel, but is expected to settle with time, which can be addressed with future dredged material. Material dredged from the ebb shoal will be used to finish filling this template. Turbidity curtains may be used to protect the small seagrass patch and mangroves adjacent to this area. The ebb shoal dredge and fill operations will be similar to current practices. Some rubble or rocks will be dredged from the ebb shoal, but from between the two major hard (rock or rubble) substrate layers (Attachment No. 27). The rock and rubble substrate that exists on either side of the proposed channel will remain untouched and continue to provide the historic lateral stability. This will maintain the channel stability by fixing the channel between the major rock substrates, which occurs already. Turbidity will be addressed similar to latest permit requirements (Attachment No. 33d). Any unsuitable material will be disposed in an offshore borrow pit (1996 Borrow Area 6). This may include rock, rubble and silty or organic soil. Only beach compatible sand will be placed for beach disposal, and sand meeting navigation project criteria will be disposed of nearshore as described in a QA/QC plan. Most unsuitable material is located in the transition between the ebb and flood shoals. Fill will also be distributed in the ebb shoal disposal area to mimic the historic ebb shoal, with material concentrated in the offshore portion. The QA/QC plan will identify the distribution of sediments by four broad categories along with their approved disposal areas. The four broad categories and disposal areas k 11 are old flood channel, beach disposal, nearshore and ebb shoal disposal, and disposal of unsuitable material upland or in an offshore dredge pit. Borrow Area 6 from the 1996 beach nourishment will be used for offshore disposal. N C'V36 C 21- C r%9 CAS CA I FLOOD SHOAL OAS DISPOSAL AREA CA5 '14 BAREFOOT BEACH "J ' PRESERVE C,2 2 CA I I- CID CS Cb 01 CS 015.5 .1 Q+rjo 2.00 4-00 5-00 6.00 $40 9.uu — 50.00 AA.00 12.00 15,00 14.00 '6.uo FLOOD SHOAL HOLDING AREA DELNOR-WIGGINS PASS STATE PARK nR_l A-17 KISTING ALIGNMENT 2010 CHANNEL ALIGNMENT 2011 PRELIMINARY CHANNEL ALIGNMENT Figure 1: Inlet cross-section, channel, holding area and flood shoal disposal locations. Sediments will naturally redistributed within the inlet during this type of dredge operations, and therefore cleanup dredging will be the last step in initial construction. Based on a survey by the contractor, high spots will be identified and dredged. Some material is expected to shoal in the south, east, and north channel entrance areas and may require dredging. Intermediate (supplemental) dredging is proposed for those times when the bypassing bar needs to be dredged for navigation, but full dredging in not warranted. This will be done using a small hydraulic dredge or mechanical dredge such as a backhoe or clam shell barge mounted. Dredged material will be side cast or pumped within 1,000 feet north of the channel. This will lengthen the major dredging interval without large dredge volumes and contribute to ebb shoal regrowth. Periodic maintenance dredging will occur as needed or approximately once every four years. It will predominately occur in the ebb shoal with disposal on or near adjacent beaches. Interior dredging should be small or infrequent, similar to past history, once the new channel equilibrates. Equipment A backhoe dredge, clam shell dredge, or a cutterhead dredge greater than 14" will be used for major dredging of the pass. A booster pump and a spill barge will be utilized to manage dredged material until disposal or placement. A flexible PCP pipeline will be used within the work area designated on the permit sketches and all will remain seaward of the MHW, except during beach disposal. Smaller dredges could be considered only if the County determines the risk to be manageable and time loss potential acceptable. Barges will be used to ship material to the offshore disposal site and provide temporary storage of dredged material. Barge overflow and drainage will be controlled to comply with the turbidity standards in the OFW. Construction Schedule Dredging of Wiggins Pass jointly with Doctors Pass is a cost effective option that will be considered with each dredging event. The non -sea turtle nesting season schedule for Wiggins Pass for initial construction will be: October 1 -30 Mobilization November 1 -15 Dredge pilot channel and stockpile sand on flood shoal. November 16 -30 Build temporary dikes (coarse sand or sheet pile); complete dredging flood channel and inlet throat and back fill old channel. December 1 -20 Dredge ebb channel and disposed sand on beach or nearshore of Barefoot Beach. Repair scarps on south point of Barefoot Beach. Complete filling of old channel to approved template as a priority. December 20 -31 Demobilization January 1- February 28 Contingency for late start and winter weather Attachment No. 24 Permit Sketches Updated June 6, 2012 F, 1 2 3 4 5 -6 7 8 9 10 11 -16 17 -28 29 -30 31 -32 33 -34 35 -36 37 38 NOT FOR N.T.S. WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA 1114 003 GULF OF MEXICO 1 - a STEPHEN 611- N[ HENDRY CO. AMPA C L -.- --- - - - - -- - C Oz PROJECT �(�ti��'Q LOCATION- r I_ MONROE CO. w ig AR10 SHEETINDEX COVER SHEET CONTROL DATA PROJECT LOCATION MAP NORTH DISPOSAL AREA PLAN VIEW NAVIGATION CHANNEL PLAN VIEW SOUTH DISPOSAL AREA PLAN VIEW 2009 BATHYMETRY AND HISTORIC SHORELINES HISTORIC DATA LONGITUDINAL PROFILE OF CHANNEL EBB SHOAL CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS FLOOD SHOAL CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS NORTH NEARSHORE BEACH FILL CROSS SECTIONS NORTH ONSHORE BEACH FILL CROSS SECTIONS SOUTH NEARSHORE BEACH FILL CROSS SECTIONS SOUTH ONSHORE BEACH FILL CRO v"(bN6 0, OF`10 &VO�ACIAREA / BORROW AREA � QO�1S 1►L�A1E1L/ BORROW AREA PL VI W •:•'li a • NSTRUC - N - �011111111�� �- DATE KSONVILLE \ATLANTIC Q OCEAN MIAMI e R -11 A R -12 R -13 A R -14 A A R -15 e5�-18 A AR-17 A R -18 A R -19 R -20 A ® -21 ,R-22 w O a z w 2 w O cc IL 2 z a ~w a�= zN D� � w 13 o 3zu O z 0 w O W zV Z w H z Q i Li vv w w z S� s33� 3 �S ' ? DATE: J 1/13/12 n Y: GK 8500.83 r 0 u 0 W 0 7 0 0 0 4� 4t 4J 41 4J 1� LL) lLLtt u u 4t 4t u 41 I& I 4t I& I 4� u I 4t I&) ! u I 4J I&! 4 �{ I 4J Qa u I 4i u5 u 4� rt•� It! 4t R� M! 41 �t� u LLt1ll �1� U! i() u 4J Q� U! LL1 q•i U! 41 Kr' lt) 1L1 t 111 LLt 1(1 llJ IL1 1 1t1 I 1[1 o M of O ri M O a r r Z lu! r .- p S pp O 8888 pp O op O p S pp O p S r r r r r CO 'J Z ti(p ri l(i �fl Opi of V � fNt�- O) t� r lt) M t� T CO h t�o�D O) (17 h p� t0 ((t�YY t�pp to ti V r <t M M N N N tD ,- O M O 1� 01 r O) td~/ f W a0 fV tf'i tD n t7U c°� O 1.. z CV XN d' t[j V W � 0 �tQit�{�{�t�gi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �gt�t9i 0 0 0 C. �i o00 �_ �Ofpp ttO�t� � � N tV � O � �p M M M M M M � �' � � � N W M W oo _V 1•-' tU � pp 47 � 't C� fA �O nt�r= t� tC(� r0- o t� C� LA �p Q) p 7 (� ry p tJ �j W p 4i t� P. h M � p tD p 1•- � lCt � W. �ry t`l .n- .n- .M- � .n• -c-� M t0 h M 2 w m Q _ m 7 � l nl [ " m ?'L m m "L Ai l ni to 4i l p O r p to V` +- [�l y r � LL h V� �` r •f V u •�` u QI N r o O to O OO CA � to ��WC (D d��� h- •Q va fV O t7i tlp a (O N 1(i N 0 0 C�7i rW (p�� nom{ Iti N r 1l�lr (�-�- O) �-' N Cl [ts +�� tC��j� tn� t � ['j t'�� N M M r N r N r N Q C�� nl nl pp. t+l nl �cnp M C9. � � t�l f�'! P7 f�l CVO Ol C4A1 M t�l t'�l pGrQ� M Ctl�) M � l+l n"t (�l � ni (+i M co M a n n- r� n Z O X W Z ZO O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 � 0 W � � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0++ z t Z F CV � t O rT 1C� tC� ICS (C/ Tl � 1�- � COIJ W � t1) fi') � h A M-- .M�- i*l f'rl t�i1 � � fnl.1 (ni] CnA O o � InOQ C� •- (i to ) try � 1n - �� t� ¢� � � � cn [�l •t �r •t V (�) u f� 1-- c-i ri ri ri ri •t ci o) qj N h u) h F- Q Q _ ��r ;tr.,t.,�,iF1F FiF1t.,1.,1�.,t�tsti(,�,a.- NNM ado O 1-- t�- t- f- F F ►- I - F t - -- 1-- f I- 1 I-- 1 t i- i- !- t h- 1-- t•- F• t -� h- P- I 1� t f h I h t� f� J Za °a c�z� o — o_ y u� n .- tTl n) r •t u� •- v (� cn M rNty( t: �F1f •J 'lt,it•1�,�iZZZ u �J� 1= ca z H c ;' U U U Q ccOp Q V r t'•J n1 V �� n � 1 co C) z O D 0 w � Z � O w U z t— Q W z w J Z z U a nU N (L Li pN_ to N c Z ci V g5 R i4 V 3 o = 3X <e a a F�3 2 N U W a4 w ~ Z 4 31 3 ix w iE a a c a u 10 CC do r7 '► .: No. 3gg57 •11 DATE: .. 1/13/12 n � NOT FC�bt QNS N .' GK FOR R IQI IEVs- C�KI OMM N0. c •• ••••••• \ ( 5 8500.83 � -2 ____ ? EET: n STEPHEN EE C /00i 0497" DATE 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N tV CV N N N CJ N N N N N N N N N N Z 88 .- p S pp O 8888 pp O op O p S pp O p S r r r r r 'J Z ti(p ri l(i �fl Opi of V � fNt�- O) t� r lt) M t� T CO h t�o�D O) (17 h p� t0 ((t�YY t�pp to ti V r <t M M N N N tD ,- O M O 1� 01 r O) td~/ f W a0 fV tf'i tD n t7U c°� O CV tM d' t[j V W � 0 �tQit�{�{�t�gi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �gt�t9i 0 0 0 C. �i o00 �_ �Ofpp ttO�t� � � N tV � O � �p M M M M M M � �' � � � N W M pp oo N Mop M pp pp�� ttpp P tp l0 cp tt1 �O nt�r= .nnn -nh oaoo hhhh C. h W Ih [7 M M M M t7 f•) M th M M t7 OQ m zzTizZZ2z2 m m m m m m m m m m ?'L m m "L to (O cr to M O O O o0 to tp c0 N M m � M tp N O .- to OO r �aw to N (D h- •Q va fV O t7i tlp a (O N M N 0 0 tr t` (U tD cV �A Ip cn Iti N r O) �-' N M N M N N N N N N N (� N N N (y N N N r N r N r N r N r N r N N O O � n. � n� � n. h t� r. � �►�- r; n n- r� n Z O X W Z ZO O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 � 0 W � � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0++ t t Z F CV � t O ++ r N ++ M V + tt) ++ tD t� t+ tb O 0 r N M t V W N o y u� n .- tTl n) r •t u� •- v (� cn M rNty( t: �F1f •J 'lt,it•1�,�iZZZ u �J� 1= c ;' U U U Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N tV CV N N N CJ N N N N N N N N N N Z 88 .- p S pp O 8888 pp O op O p S pp O p S r r r r r 'J Z ti(p ri l(i �fl Opi of V � fNt�- O) t� r lt) M t� T CO h t�o�D O) (17 h p� t0 ((t�YY t�pp to ti V r <t M M N N N tD ,- O M O 1� 01 r O) td~/ f W a0 fV tf'i tD n t7U c°� O CV tM d' t[j V W � 0 �tQit�{�{�t�gi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �gt�t9i 0 0 0 C. �i o00 �_ �Ofpp ttO�t� � � N tV � O � �p M M M M M M � �' � � � N W M pp oo N Mop M pp pp�� ttpp P tp l0 cp tt1 �O nt�r= .nnn -nh oaoo hhhh C. h W Ih [7 M M M M t7 f•) M th M M t7 OQ m zzTizZZ2z2 m m m m m m m m m m ?'L m m "L to (O cr to M O O O o0 to tp c0 N M m � M tp N O .- to OO r �aw to N (D h- •Q va fV O t7i tlp a (O N M N 0 0 tr t` (U tD cV �A Ip cn Iti N r O) �-' N M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N tV CV N (V CV N fV N N N N Z r .- r �-- r r r r r r r �•- r r r r r r QO M W (O .- r O (17 h p� t0 M t0 t�pp to ti V r <t M M N N N tD ,- O M O 1� 01 r O) � a0 fV tf'i tD n t7U to O CV tM d' t[j (O � h 00 � N F r �r(ppa.yyo 0MO N co 0ppo rn o00 ti �Ofpp ttO�t� � c0+) N tV � O � M W M M M M M M M C7 C�0 M M ap M M tb M M� M M CO M N W M N M M N W M N Mop M N M N op M t0 M N tp M M M 190) to ut V rt OD to (O cr to M O O O o0 to tp c0 N M m � M tp N O .- to OO r � to N (D h- •Q .•= M fV O t7i tlp ti (O 7 M N 0 0 tr t` (U tD cV �A Ip cn Iti N r O) �-' N M N M N N N N N N N (� N N N (y N N N r N r N r N r N r N r N N O O � n. � n� � n. h t� r. � �►�- r; n n- r� n Z O X W Z ZO O Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 � 0 W � � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0++ t t Z F CV � t O ++ r N ++ M V + tt) ++ tD t� t+ tb O 0 r N M t V W N W a Z 2 ~ Zr` r- r- co N 0 V 0 ONi N — a0 N r` h � r= O (O N — O N O O r7 N O n w W o W r� e LL f ZO Z I 0 0 Q .o 0- 1 2 � 0 JQ / w r; N Z O c= 0 0 i m m I U 0 o m 0 J O n o� r� N O N r r- t0 Z Z > N LL Q i I t2 M oo / (� IL Z Of �� C'41 I! m m m m J (D _O 04 w UQ) m m m m Q N N w Q S2 J F- z ;I Z a Q 00 ^ Q z 0 m W M M M 0 0 0 M M 0 H ,oz 0 j c) Le Q Z ffi$ dd C u uu 0 Q OJ 0W w w W Z LL Z� O avi W Z Z O V Q¢� �X} aw -'w Z _ zs p J �Q Q.Z god F Z W O L a Wo° =0 e=a cai>QHa O QWQ ul0 ca ? DwQw01i w¢ � U 0�H Um w 0 >- L i Q' DATE: OUv)NOOU 0 1/13/12 Y: GK .- cli vi nccro�onrw Z_ OO a U 0 O Q m U 0 W LL 0 2 O U 0 ,r. �+ii6r+iir N N U I U W mw W Ow LL W W CL Q m co U 44 to I 60-940 N ' O O 1 ui U Q (Y. 0 _Z C9 a UQ) I Q Z �.� W o W r� e LL f ZO Z I 0 0 Q .o 0- 1 2 � 0 JQ / co U 44 to I 60-940 N ' O O 1 ui U Q N Z 0 w UQ) I Q Z W ` U J Z < 2 d Z °o Q o Ur Zz. W p 1 2 JQ / w r; U ' J O 6 OJ 0o OQ OQLL w 0< +.� I t i 0 IV) ,• �t`Q z a NOT FOR CONSTT1 FOR REGULATOR`C ASTEPHEN KE N P.E. N No. 34857 W ON&Y STATE OF �•�ORI •�•.• ♦ I O O I U Q N Z F w W I Q Z O U a Z a o Ur Z W 2 JQ / r; N Z O c= 0 0 i m m I U 0 o m 0 w c / U � W / 0 0 w Q a X U w - U Z Q O 5 Z w 0 o � I _ ZV > N LL Q i I of °x� 'J O J � / (� IL Z Of �� C'41 I! w z < 000---Q J i is H O / w CL co Z Q W w o w Q S2 F- z ;I Z a 8500.83 DATE - 3 O O N Z F w W Z 0 ° vUi ° O U a a o Ur Z W 2 W N Z O 0 O k m Z� U 0 o m 0 MO_Z Apo w 0 < a z= U ac9Q W 0 y�U 0 w Q a X U w - U Z Q O 5 Z w 0 o � J _ ZV > N (n Q i U ZW � i (� IL Z Of �� I w W 4 I W I I J U Z Q W w w Q S2 F- z Z a Q 00 ^ Q z 0 00 W w o ? ac>w w ,oz 0 j c) Le Q Z ffi$ dd C u uu 0 Q OJ 0W w w W Z LL Z� O avi W Z Z O V Q¢� �X} aw -'w Z _ zs p Woa LL Z� �Q Q.Z god F Z W O L a Wo° =0 e=a cai>QHa QWQ ul0 ca ? DwQw01i w¢ � U 0�H Um w 0 >- L i LL Z -3 DATE: OUv)NOOU 0 1/13/12 Y: GK .- cli vi nccro�onrw 8500.83 DATE - 3 m r M r i r r i I OQ� i j r 1 o =� 00w W ( 0_ m W i � r r i N D00 LL N ) ®. y •d r r ' ` w NOT FOR CONS rOR REGU LATO STEPHEf KEEH� P.E. 9 193H 3NIIHO1bW N � � M W W J lL 3!0 0 F- % VON • 54857 VIEW OW-Y t STATE OF S• Gt ti�� .4RID•.•�� ;. -'0 NAL Er'��•• H LU No V O = 0 Z W 0 LL o co J oLL 2 mQ of<0 �a Om o W w 0 q Q W Q _ co itO CL CL Z0 (-, 6-/2- DATE O U- (3 v W 7 w IL H z W i 0w az �g z (000. N�� a�� a zaa 000 3<0 00 z 0 f- 0� z 0 w V z a z W .i r r r M co 0 wg ao wZ Q i r r z a ' r 1 PP I � I O r . r i i i v a n ui i' r�r ri m r M r i r r i I OQ� i j r 1 o =� 00w W ( 0_ m W i � r r i N D00 LL N ) ®. y •d r r ' ` w NOT FOR CONS rOR REGU LATO STEPHEf KEEH� P.E. 9 193H 3NIIHO1bW N � � M W W J lL 3!0 0 F- % VON • 54857 VIEW OW-Y t STATE OF S• Gt ti�� .4RID•.•�� ;. -'0 NAL Er'��•• H LU No V O = 0 Z W 0 LL o co J oLL 2 mQ of<0 �a Om o W w 0 q Q W Q _ co itO CL CL Z0 (-, 6-/2- DATE O U- (3 v W 7 w IL H z W i 0w az �g z (000. N�� a�� a zaa 000 3<0 00 z 0 f- 0� z 0 w V z a z W GK 8500.83 4 M co 0 wg ao wZ Q LLI a � a z a w PP o wqS O i O 4 a n ui U, uj Fes- W �W ZO Z -i O z Z Fw Z Q LU Lil W Z U yF .6 = W Z O LL z O =� m� 0009,6 N z 2 Z= J W v> = a Z goy �oL 'LL'� g ri Z Z 0pU� Z J �o z W �F- Q� SOU 0LL Q G)� W 0 U oo ww d0 V 72 w N N Z Z = i o6aog Qa d Z�� j W K c/jOOQo W OOZNQDATE: o O ® Of J I Z cv 1/13/12 GK 8500.83 4 6k* t .� fu� . -U) u z w LU 0 C) a. 04 F- w z to 0 CL U) 0 > -i CL Lij z 0 w a. > 2z 7: it- w 0 '009 14 -- -- I r—_ t f Z j (n 0 (L LLJ < °m F- (L ooel , 4 < w CL 0 Z W�Lli -i a: 0� w IL IL -T w < w U) F- > 0 Sw z U) z z 0 < a. 3"!E z Zmz u o of Z Q 0 w C, z z w 0 (D w z L) 0 T 0 T Lu Z 0 D o 0 z ZM 0 0 C) coo LU 0 U)<w W 0. w W� m z a o LL w U) vul W (1) LL3 10 (Q 0 w 0:: 0 a L) c,4 cj o § (1 LL LL ) 0 ui z ol: 0 1, '7 C4 �z OD W10 cli L) F L L L R &�i Zo NOI FOR ui �;i rL o U- 9 -0 ' '009 14 Ix I w -T w < w U) F- > 0 Sw P - 2 0 o of Z Q 0 w w z L) 0 0 T 0 0 0 C) coo LU LL w U) vul W (1) LL3 10 L L L R &�i Zo NOI FOR ui �;i rL o U- 9 -0 ' '009 14 Ix I 8 Z:5 ,j - -T w < w 11% FOR S%4fTRUCTtQN ON VN� 91 STEPHEN kEHN 4' CL s DATE 7" W u Z z LU Z lu yl Z w IL 314 1/13/12 ly: CK ,OMM NO.: 8500.83 SHEET: 5 lu yl Z w IL 314 1/13/12 ly: CK ,OMM NO.: 8500.83 SHEET: 5 i L 133HS 3NIIH01bW Q0 u 1-0-0 * 2 N to j to W j O fY Z► cj) a Q cq z C7 a - A I Q 0 w I � ; O0*0 W d - °< z N W a '' I I I 00a 0. p a0z I ri I I( I I I to�z a azz 013 u I I I I I i l X40 I I "� I► I I I I I I I Ir za IIII I I I � W 0 c� t I I I I I °oeI ►f N W 3 a z z I I I 1 1 1 1 1 ( I I I I I I= az -I I I I z� =Zz 0, w �v. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- ! -- �- - -� - -� - -±- i l l II I 0_� p° °- of a z I- z w Q 2 w I I I i'4Ip I( I Ij , I ( I I► i li I I I I 0 C) a- ~ 1 1 I U N� z ci U '� h �I i I I i I I ' i I 1 LL U N N U W 0 "' W I I rl ► I I i► l l �� ti i, ¢ z + Wo U` 40}}� p p OtI� N Z + l 1 i I 1 Z 71 �o p a0 °i N 0 W C a uu U a w i W W 2 a 0Q I �� O z Q 0U 2 LO OU I (n fn ILL = oW�? °� W 0 3 0 W W J U) p r tY 2 W .D �w 00 i ;' z �� mE IQQ V aoQ �W =� g� (nor IS zQ �O� } 22 = i om c=i)w �p J�� LLoO a� 508 a U I z Wzco�a LU ' O� 0D) U' Zguioc�Q ►a- o a E > I z0 �a0z�� a u m Q N W N W<U)m 0 i o w < InL �LL I ` 0 o ZQ�O�y r W f 1rrrrr� tt r0 �Ow�Q!- n. 0 w rn z Q 1 tP4.r�< W a, W OUON�NOU DATE: ' `• E�4S•�• — ~O 1/13/12 F$.•1733HS 3N13H0iVV4 z N Y: RFMSIOP NOT FOR CONSTWPOTPON * DATE BY DESCRIPTION GK FOR REGULATORr 'VIEW Ogty 4/9/12 SK RAI #1 RESPONSE COMM NO. STgTE OF J* ;• 8500.83 • • 61 �� SHEET: a STEPHEN �KEEHN P.E. N6! '••••••'`• : ` DATE s fill 1111 / "00 0 M Z Q �a �w � Q 0 c J W Q Od kc I_ 1 I 1 I I I 1 ' I I i i li 1 li i do i O a � I a N � N � * �• � 9 � IAIiIHO1tJW Alh 149 REIASIONS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTfPIV : ; * DATE BY DESCI ^OR ATORY E%Ea ON[44 4/9/12 SK RAI 1 RESPONS • STEPHEN KE N P. E. NO. 34 / •••• "••� • �' DATE a ,il1j1111111��� 1/13/12 3Y: GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 7 ,o z� o 0 LL g� W v ? a� H w Q ¢Q W CD 0 0 F ) �R Z 0 N U Q 2 O 0 a _ a RQ w H o ZO -j 00 w W?, OZ ow 0 w m� LL �> opZ�pL N D = w _ � Q Z g O w LLw �� yDa W a) W W 0- Q a W N Q }�O� NU' Q LL (n(n� =n. <J wwOa< QaZa� Z �0c; w 000 0 OJ I o 3Z O. QUA �1L z D! d 00•-rn0 00LLo U' O > 0 o W 0 0 0 N d Z 2 ❑ F- M ►?� z N w0 � Q � w U Z Opp804 N Z w H Z Q f to W 3 RS i k cn� -1 0 J4� i 0 m OpgBp� N w W � � tL' z .6 O u� 0z =� Z� 1— 0 F- 0 = $R 0 `) 5 IL -1 Ui0 J 9 �o 3� do i O a � I a N � N � * �• � 9 � IAIiIHO1tJW Alh 149 REIASIONS NOT FOR CONSTRUCTfPIV : ; * DATE BY DESCI ^OR ATORY E%Ea ON[44 4/9/12 SK RAI 1 RESPONS • STEPHEN KE N P. E. NO. 34 / •••• "••� • �' DATE a ,il1j1111111��� 1/13/12 3Y: GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 7 a C; <�.� Q 1 (nom � 16L f Z �w �H OoOOI� O ct j Z (/) -J i W Q '00 j a. N Cr +iF N `V W LLI Q' d Co �l i i i 1 I i � 1 1 4 f 1 M�� l � ! I ♦� I I 1 ,I IV at 9 No NOT FOR CO NSTRn N FOR REGULATOR EW PAC OF aw 4Q STEPHEN KEEHN P.E. N& :%, . jNN //III111111t���� N Q N • Q -6 DATE 7t m W U. Ip j • fn, • 8500.83 8 o N F z W 7 w Q Z S N a WW a 2? >W x a. Z w MOM N 3 opo oa ° a�x z� a= zQo z c~w <U- ¢ Z Iwo =Oa,?w_z Oa 9ZR' : i3: Q!� z O LL -O WOQOQO� U' W U���vHip� ?2 a w 0) O LL O O N 2 W Q ! I I M_ I V N Z Q W a I Z w I Z w LL O EL z Of a w ao U 0 x �i w a Q a o N U = C, z _ o g Z O Q O z o, ER z w V W . u OF J O F- U W t LL W z O w m O O Z U w W a g W ao 2 w >oow b i� a� 00 QLLN }= = �- LL W w� a�a gs nog I ZW w }- g >OX< j i QUZOj JU SYo ? t ww wj QU aa`" ° u F- F -MNQ�Q JO Z = W Q Q 9 ZC)0<W ro !- Q U� W Lo w00c)ww oowQZoa rna DATE: wUU .LW >000C -4< Q 1/13/12 Z— N M -4 GK nccroton70 8500.83 8 I•� J 250 5 0 in GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT r 5 R. C41 `V CV FLOOD SHOAL CHANN' • / -7.7' NAVD CUT DEPTH DELNOR — WIGGINS PASS STATE 1 PARK AR -17 e— TRANSITION -12.0' TO -7.7' NAVD CUT DEPTH WIGGINS PASS EBB SHOAL CHANNEL -12.0' NAVD CUT DEPTH DREDGE GULF AREA e o OF 2 MEXICO 2 NOTES: LEGEND. v 1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON AR-17 FDEP MONUMENT 2011 CPE VIBRACORES d FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE 2008 CPE MANGROVES 0 2009 CPE VIBRACORES SYSTEM, EAST ZONE, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83). 2009 CPE EDGE OF 2009 CPE JET PROBES 2. VIBRACORE NUMBERS PROVIDED IN , • ATTACHMENT 27. ' ' MANGROVE 2009 CPE SEAGRASS 2006 HUMISTON & MOORE r 0 3. 2009, AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH �ro �1 r� h FIELD POINTS VIBRACORES • i COLLIER COUNTY PROPEY•P/� 2011 CPE SEAGRASS 0 FLOOD SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA L OFFICE. �: S''•. ;• Z FIELD POINTS SEAGRASS AREA [� EBB SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA ' 4 DEPTHS SHOWN HERRGDGBELOWa�I 3485 NOT FOR CONSTRLST(U * DATE BY D C IPnON FOR REGULATORY L�►W i pF + 9 �� AI 1 RESPONSE _ L STEPHEN KEEHN P.E. N0. N N a` DATE I........ �� U W I O a z w w O Ix a 2 z yOQ ado ?QOC oz0 �7 C) 3Q= U /z V 0 w oc 0 w U Q z w z 'a u g' z� 23 g-4 a �3 W W z a W IL i� 1/13/12 iY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 MEET: 9 0 M0138 338 3NIIHOIVN i1333•C]n`dN) NOIldn313 O N CO O N M O O 33 J� U t~ T V T U U U c U w �n J V � O to 2 ci a (7 m U 0 rn Q U (� O J N U N U MmN MEN I .I I� I JI i I t I / Ir r w 31 r I O rl i sg I i 'i U� oz r — W °z i1 1 ma W 1 I t ITIM Q m IMIM I I � N � O I r m24lml= LL 1 mmim I 1 1 I 1 I I l I � I I AEI - I 1 w 2 O ow s i w rz O z (- =•I o �- w I O V > 1 rn I I 33 J� U t~ T V T U U U c U w �n J V � O to 2 ci a (7 m U 0 rn Q U (� O J N U N U CS O G N 3A08b 33S 3NIIHOIVN W- U � 0 M n v g M J N w O z O z r Qr O O U C LL z to O $O Qw 4 LL o F- Q 0� tea w (7 J J Q +a �z n- o D 0 z g 0 �a cn U o J N g °a � r + Z Div W U ztn� ',W 6� O r o Z rL 0�,,t Z M w N ZNQLLU1?y?Q U W O O o r _j W E w U O O U OW-uJ W LLI�ZQ Wm QLo N o to (133�-GAVN) NOIJLVA313 z NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR REGULATORY REVIEI a� STEPHEN KEEHHO P.E. N0. 34857 z W ! � J 9 16a t 0 U sY H E N `�� z w v IZ '' ° ~ o w0 ° U O + �t �� • LIC[ry }� :�� ra- o " - 00 Z ^ DATE: * No 2 0C. =a (L n.ow00 w J 1/13/12 34857 Q� w w ro ' • n; J Y: L O ' ST ATE F : ti COMM OAI N0. rim Cis •:�Rit�PN�`�� 8500.53 A L >>� DATE 10 MmN MEN ITIM IMIM IMN m24lml= mmim IMMINSIM s CS O G N 3A08b 33S 3NIIHOIVN W- U � 0 M n v g M J N w O z O z r Qr O O U C LL z to O $O Qw 4 LL o F- Q 0� tea w (7 J J Q +a �z n- o D 0 z g 0 �a cn U o J N g °a � r + Z Div W U ztn� ',W 6� O r o Z rL 0�,,t Z M w N ZNQLLU1?y?Q U W O O o r _j W E w U O O U OW-uJ W LLI�ZQ Wm QLo N o to (133�-GAVN) NOIJLVA313 z NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR REGULATORY REVIEI a� STEPHEN KEEHHO P.E. N0. 34857 z W ! � J 9 16a t 0 U sY H E N `�� z w v IZ '' ° ~ o w0 ° U O + �t �� • LIC[ry }� :�� ra- o " - 00 Z ^ DATE: * No 2 0C. =a (L n.ow00 w J 1/13/12 34857 Q� w w ro ' • n; J Y: L O ' ST ATE F : ti COMM OAI N0. rim Cis •:�Rit�PN�`�� 8500.53 A L >>� DATE 10 M O Z iL w Z 0 < -2 w -j w 1 O 0 Z w LLJ -10 Z 0 F- < -20 w -j w -30 PROFILE -2+00 SCARP REPAIR M,HW EL. - O.ALFT —MLLniz1.. =-1. b*-t-L - — — — — — — --MMw EV. —=2.2RT -8.4'NAVD . .................... ............ APRIL 2011 PROFILE SLOPE 4HAV MV 0 VERDR EDG E 0 200 400 600 t$UU DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE -1+00 1000 APRIL 2011 PROFILE MHWEL. = 0L33FT M L L W EL. = - 2.28 FT ...-10.2' NAY4 SLOPE 4H:1V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c 2 l'OVERDREDGE 200 400 uuu 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 0+00 10- APRIL 2011 PROFILE O MHVV EL. 033 FT o Z 0— F- MLLW EL = -2.28 FT w w -10— . . . . . . . . z 0 SLOPE 4H:1V + -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E w -30 200 400 800 WIIJTANQE (FEET) ........... ti SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' 34857 VERT. 1 20' t NQ NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SrA TIF OF FOR RE TORY EW ONa STEPHEN IkEFIN)P.E. NO. 34857 t ,_,%\\ "DATE I vuu 1200 AVD' 1000 1200 VOVERDREDGE W 0 ac (L z ILI 0 � U) 2(L Z 0 : P Z U U) 0 w 0) F to < (D (n 0 IL M wz azu In z < 0 z co co OW W O uj 0 z 4 z w j z z -a 0 � z z IL 1/13/12 ly.. GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 MEET: 11 PROFILE 1+00 � -2 / APRIL 2011 PROFILE � � � cc / | �' � mo m SCALE: HOR[I1^=2OO VERT 1^=2J NOT FOR CONSTRUCT! STEPHEN KENN P)z—. NO. 34857 9! wm ` Al Illiallit0" DATE ILW LU azu o � � � ~ � U) m m m d gr z � 1/1l^2 m GK ;Omm NO. 1 \ /mm 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) \— rovsnonsoas PROFILE 2+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE APRIL 2011 PROFILE LLI III LU 200 4vu 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) l'OVEROREDGE PROFILE 3+00 LLI 00 � -2 / APRIL 2011 PROFILE � � � cc / | �' � mo m SCALE: HOR[I1^=2OO VERT 1^=2J NOT FOR CONSTRUCT! STEPHEN KENN P)z—. NO. 34857 9! wm ` Al Illiallit0" DATE ILW LU azu o � � � ~ � U) m m m d gr z � 1/1l^2 m GK ;Omm NO. 200 wm am mm \ /mm 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) \— rovsnonsoas PROFILE 2+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE LU 200 4vu 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) l'OVEROREDGE PROFILE 3+00 � -2 / APRIL 2011 PROFILE � � � cc / | �' � mo m SCALE: HOR[I1^=2OO VERT 1^=2J NOT FOR CONSTRUCT! STEPHEN KENN P)z—. NO. 34857 9! wm ` Al Illiallit0" DATE ILW LU azu o � � � ~ � U) m m m d gr z � 1/1l^2 m GK ;Omm NO. F( I z F- w w LL z 0 F- -2 w -i w 10 O 0 Z w w -10 z 0 F- "C > -20 LLJ -j w -30 PROFILE 4+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE AfHW EL. 0.33 FT -WL—Lw -2.28 F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;l 2.0- NAVD . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4H:1 V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . cc C I'OVERDREDGE 2 1 400 600 800 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 5+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 FT -WL—Lw U7;72.2M -12.V NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4H: IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . co 0 — z I'OVERDREDGE 1200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 DISTANCE (FEET) 10 PROFILE 6+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE MHW EL. 0.33 FT 0— z MLLW L. -2 2 LLJ w !17, -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '-12.0- NAVD O z SLOPE 4HAV > -20 W -j 6 I'OVERDREDGE w z -30 400 600 ,Aod IODO 1200 &4178ET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' No. 34857 VERT. 1" = 20' REMMM NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 7r.- -10 FATE OF 4z DATE By FOR R E �G�R Y �RW� �WO ONLY �Y-�- 10. (So' OR I D STEPHEN KE HN E. NO. 34857 1400 U 0 z uj 0 IX w (L 0 Z � 2 r- u U) 0 ill wpm 0 (n < < U) (L Z 0) 5: 0 < 0: r3 Z U 13 -1 z < < 0 ON ca pW m LU w 0 UJI U z z ul 1-- z_ R 2 uQ z A ou 1/13/12 ly. GK 13 10 O 0 -10 0 -20 -30 PROFILE 7+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE I WAN EL. = 0.33 FT I aff TUW Eu-i-Zlm- -'12.0'NAVI) . . . . . . . . . . . - . \- , SL'OP'E 4H;IV SLOPE 4H;IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I'OVERDREDGE z 400 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 8+00 1n00 10 APRIL 2011 PROFILE O APRIL 2011 PROFILE O a— WAV EL. - 0.33 FT I — — — — — — — — — I RIM EL. 0.33 FT -,CI—LLw E—L= -2 2gFf 0 &1 E MET LLJ -10— Lij . . . . -12.,0'NAVI) . . . . . z -10— 0 _12.0' NAVOr 0 SLOPE 41-I:lV < .20— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I'OVERDREDGE Z + SLOPE 414: IV < > .20— ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 14 00 800 '0 � 00 - `(FEET) No. 3 X857 SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' VERT. 1"= 20' c7 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION L7 I'OVERDREDGE REVISI&%R11 z By z FOR REUU ORY R EIN ONLY 6) 4ORILjf\ ts, * ......... *1 0 /V AL -30 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 STEPHEN K*HN .E. NO. 34857 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 9+00 ILI (L z uj 2 uj 0 W. U) IL Z 20 r- Z u U) 0 w U) p U) 4 < (A 0. 0 (n ZU) 0 0� azu UOQ z <0 0 I (n Z (a 0 Ill a w uj re- 0 w 0 z 4 z uj l'- z R yi L; t:!! z ji ;; ts ig z x z 1/13/12 ly: GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 MEET: 14 APRIL 2011 PROFILE O a— WAV EL. - 0.33 FT I — — — — — — — — — I — -,CI—LLw E—L= -2 2gFf LLJ -10— . . . . -12.,0'NAVI) . . . . . z 0 SLOPE 41-I:lV < .20— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I'OVERDREDGE Z Lr -30 1 1 600 12 14 00 800 '0 � 00 - `(FEET) No. 3 X857 SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' VERT. 1"= 20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION .7. "A OF w IZ 0.0" . * *-. 'c' REVISI&%R11 By FOR REUU ORY R EIN ONLY 6) 4ORILjf\ ts, * ......... *1 0 /V AL STEPHEN K*HN .E. NO. 34857 DATE ILI (L z uj 2 uj 0 W. U) IL Z 20 r- Z u U) 0 w U) p U) 4 < (A 0. 0 (n ZU) 0 0� azu UOQ z <0 0 I (n Z (a 0 Ill a w uj re- 0 w 0 z 4 z uj l'- z R yi L; t:!! z ji ;; ts ig z x z 1/13/12 ly: GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 MEET: 14 5 10 Q Z F- W W -10 Z 0 H > -20 W J W -30 O Q Z F- W W -1 Z 0 F- < -2 W J W PROFILE 10 +00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE h1HW EL. =0.33 FT — — MLLW EL. = -2.2M— — -12.0' NAVD' J- — SLOPE4H:1V 1'OVERDREDGE 400 600 800 1000 1YUU DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 11 +00 1400 400 600 800 1000 11W +W DISTANCE (FEET) APRIL 2011 PROFILE o NHW_ EL. =0.33 FT 10 -1. — LW X2.2 FT — p . . . . . . • NAVD' = -1. _ — SLOPE 41-1: 1V W LL-10 V 0VERDREDGE z i . O W 3 co, SLOPE 4HAV Q -20 E w 1'OVERDREDGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -J z 3 �►1IIIII � -30 v400 600 400 600 800 1000 11W +W DISTANCE (FEET) o PROFILE 12 +00 10 APRIL 2011 PROFILE p - -- o Q O = -1. _ — LLW K- 22FT— W LL-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . O W 3 co, SLOPE 4HAV Q -20 E w 1'OVERDREDGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -J z a �►1IIIII � -30 v400 600 H N h 106E 1200 1400 ••+ u No. 34857 •- SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' * n VERT. 1" = 20' 0 ST G NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION _ ATE � FOR REGU Y REYO ONLY '�� �'S,''��p�?IDI:••'����/ �' �Q •. .••��`1 NA _ J ,1111 oil �!I STEPHEN KEE N P E. NO. 34857 DATE U W O a F- 2 W 2 W �Z 2- Z~ U) 0 u1 w co QQtn 2 >W (3 Z V °Q �QO O1 Zm 3 to a w O W U 2 Q Z w F- Z a Z ;;9 u x�= Z W Z z 2 W � gg =z Z IL J E c �Ja u ?¢ 1/13/12 IY.- GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 MET: 15 Z 1-- w uj -I Z 0 w PROFILE 13+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33FT )—AMQL—= I§kfj — — — WLW BL7W--2.28 FT SLOPE 4H- IV . . . . . . . . . . . ..12.0' NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . + N I'OVERDREDGE b z D 1600 0 800 low I zuu 1•fuu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 14+00 10– > MHW EL. = 0.33V-T < O—W z cn x _WL—LW =—.2.28-Vf- 0 w — APRIL 2011 PROFILE w 9 -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In In z < < -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > w E w -30 600 800 1200 1400 1600 %% SCALE: HORIZ. 1 = 200' NO-34857 VERT. 1" = 20' -n Ttr Ar NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 -rA rLc OF DATE BY • FOR REGULA-TO Y 4 W ONLY -STEPHEN TEFHN .E. NO. 34857 W 0 ce a. 1-- z W 2 W 0 0: U) CL Z 20 Z mow w z ca � 0 0! Z U °a z _j 0 1 Lo 0m 13 w W O U z z LU Z 2 W LU Z ; IL .8 Of . i 1/13/12 ly: GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 16 10— 0— Z MHW EL. = 0.33 FT -MLW- F L—' " -60-Fj F- -W–LLW EC.77-2.28—FT APRIL 2011 PROFILE w w / -10– . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z – ---------------- 0 -20– . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w LLI 30 T- 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 DISTANCE (FEET) o PROFILE 15+00 10– > MHW EL. = 0.33V-T < O—W z cn x _WL—LW =—.2.28-Vf- 0 w — APRIL 2011 PROFILE w 9 -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In In z < < -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > w E w -30 600 800 1200 1400 1600 %% SCALE: HORIZ. 1 = 200' NO-34857 VERT. 1" = 20' -n Ttr Ar NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 -rA rLc OF DATE BY • FOR REGULA-TO Y 4 W ONLY -STEPHEN TEFHN .E. NO. 34857 W 0 ce a. 1-- z W 2 W 0 0: U) CL Z 20 Z mow w z ca � 0 0! Z U °a z _j 0 1 Lo 0m 13 w W O U z z LU Z 2 W LU Z ; IL .8 Of . i 1/13/12 ly: GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 16 0 10 0 z w W -10 z 0 > -20 w _j W -30 P—M 91 W W 1L -I z 0 F_ § -2 w _j PROFILE C-3 SCARP REPAIR DISTANCE (FEET) JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. 0 0.33FT MLLMy tzL. WF 10 7.7' NAVD SLOPE 4HAV -7.;" NAVD 'I'OVERD'REDGE O_ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z z I— w N ' -7.7 -7.7' NAVD n� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -200 0 200 400 boo DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-4 SCARP REPAIR 800 �O DISTANCE (FEET) MLLMy tzL. WF 10 IRTW nT��72.28FFT SCARP REPAIR -7.;" NAVD O_ _ MHWEL.=0.33FT z SLOPE 4H: .IV IV I— w N ' -7.7 -7.7' NAVD -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . JULY 2009 PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1J 0 z I'OVERDREDGE -30— 0 200 I 800 1000 z % VNOE ic 200' No. -0 48S7 I'OVERDREDGE as VERT. 1"=20' AT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION RF—VIEW ONLY OF i ...40f? DATE BY UPSM 9M 400 600 800 10 �O W 0 rt a. I­ z Lu m Lu 0 U) Z 0 i- 0 Z uj U) 0 ca U) CL 0 0 0 z _j cc �zo < x C7 to c go 0 0 a _j w U. O U z z ui z 4 2 t; ar AA J W Lu z W °u8 1/13/12 lTri GK ,OMM NO, 8500.83 5HEET; 17 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-5 10 SCARP REPAIR O O_ _ MHWEL.=0.33FT z ___M_LLWEC_=-2.2 Ef I— w N ' -7.7 -7.7' NAVD -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 SLOPE 4H:IV co JULY 2009 PROFILE F- < -20 . . . . . . . . . . . M m + . . . . 0 d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1J z I'OVERDREDGE -30— 0 200 I 800 1000 % VNOE ic 200' No. -0 48S7 SCALE: HORIZ. 1 as VERT. 1"=20' AT NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION RF—VIEW ONLY OF i ...40f? DATE BY UPSM FOR REGULATORY (p "I'll I I I%V;TE 0 _? STEPHEN KHN NO. 34857 �A W 0 rt a. I­ z Lu m Lu 0 U) Z 0 i- 0 Z uj U) 0 ca U) CL 0 0 0 z _j cc �zo < x C7 to c go 0 0 a _j w U. O U z z ui z 4 2 t; ar AA J W Lu z W °u8 1/13/12 lTri GK ,OMM NO, 8500.83 5HEET; 17 ELI 10 < 0 Z F- w w -io Z 0 F- > -20 w -j w -30 0 Z I- uj ul -10 Z 0 F- * -20 w —1 uj -30 0 PROFILE C-6 SCARP REPAIR MHW EL.= 0.33 FT LLW— == - —WL-LW U7"ti--2.2ATT -7.7'NAVD ......... ...... .. .... ..... SLOPE 4H:IV �q JULY 2009 PROFILE cn . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 , , , , * , , , , , * * , , , * . . . Z —I'OVERDREDGE ULAJ 1000 200 400 bUU DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-7 SCARP REPAIR r JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. 0.33 FT ---MaW EF ---2.2ffr -7.7'NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4H:IV cli SLOPE 4H:IV cl) z w Wl'OVERDREDGE 800 1000 200 40U ouu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-8 0 200 4 - P H E /\P5 800 SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' 0 'V0- 348,5 7 VERT. 1"= 20' -0 ;,. -11 •11c OF �z NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - O� X, -NKTr .0- 4 FOR REGU TORY E W ONLY I., -.0RIDp, .,.•'C4 -C, 10 STEPHEN KE N .E. NO. 34857 ATE 1000 0 ac IL l'- z III 00 w 0 Z 0. Z W 0 Q) U) 0 0 OUz u on o �z <:r oIn n z 60 0 ILI U. w Z 4 Z ILI 1-- z z W z ul z -s 0 1/13/12 Iy. GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 illfft 18 10 JULY 2009 SCARP REPAIR PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 FT z w -7.7'NAVD w !L -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z FLOOD SHOAL 0 DISPOSAL AREA 10 SLOPE 4HAV c*-j N + > < -20— . . . . . . . . . . . w VOVERDREDGE —j UJ -30— 0 200 4 - P H E /\P5 800 SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' 0 'V0- 348,5 7 VERT. 1"= 20' -0 ;,. -11 •11c OF �z NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION - O� X, -NKTr .0- 4 FOR REGU TORY E W ONLY I., -.0RIDp, .,.•'C4 -C, 10 STEPHEN KE N .E. NO. 34857 ATE 1000 0 ac IL l'- z III 00 w 0 Z 0. Z W 0 Q) U) 0 0 OUz u on o �z <:r oIn n z 60 0 ILI U. w Z 4 Z ILI 1-- z z W z ul z -s 0 1/13/12 Iy. GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 illfft 18 10 O Q 0 Z w w V- -10 Z O t-- j -20 w w -30 10 Q Z O F- w W -10 Z O F- > -20 W J w -30 N 10 D Z co w o w LL -10 Z O w W � Q < -20 w E w -30 Z 0,ti1111 // /� 200 %.��QNEN .•'; CENS'•.. SCALE: 17,r• 1" = 200' F 2 AlEF{ 4 -. N0 S7 '. a • N • JOT FCM:XQNS A TION t b� FOR R W .�Y a STEPHEN KEE t( /p f� PROFILE C -9 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA MHW EL. - 0.33 FT — — — — — — — — — — — — — — _MLLW EL. =•1.6 MLLW EL. _ -2.28 FT -7.7' NAVD SLOPE 4H:1V c + SLOPE 4H:1V b..�. V OVERDREDGE 0 200 400 600 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -10 1000 FLOOD SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 FT — — _ — — _ — _ _MLLW EL• =_1.6 T MLLW EL.= -2.28 FT 7.7' NAVD SLOPE 4H:1 V SLOPE 4HAV o 0 00 + c z z w W l'OVERDREDGE 0 200 400 600 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -11 1000 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 DISPOSAL AREA PROFILE MHW EL. 0.33 FT MLLW L =•1.69 FT =17LLW EL. = -2.26--FT M -7.7' NAVD �. . z rl- SLOPE '777 :.u') VERDREDGE 400 600 800 DISTANCE (FEET) DATE 1000 H U W 0 a z Wy �z W OO 0U aW �N cn zy y00 ~U Z >Z 0Z t� 13 3zU QQ 00 Z= fN 0 w0 00 W LL U z Q z W H z_ Q ua 2 X y=y i �u V W W z 0 2 W za z� 5 Ra us8 1/13/12 GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 19 k 10 Q Z 0 E- w W -10 Z O Q > -20 w J W -30 10 0 Q Z 0 F— w w -10 Z O H > -20 W J W -30 0 PROFILE C -12 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA _ MHW EL. = 0.33 FT _MLLW EL. = -1.6 T MLLW EL-77--2.29'—FT -7.7' NAVD SLOPE 4H:1V Co SLOPE 4H:1V M Lo ............Z Z. 1'OVERDREDGE 200 400 boo tsuu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -13 1000 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA MHW EL. =0.33 FT _ MLL E„_ -.68 FT MLLW EL _ 2.28 FT -7.7' NAVD SLOPE 4H:1V 7 Z z Of Of 1'OVERDREDGE 0 200 400 buu t5uu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -14 10 FLOOD SHOAL J JULY 2009 Q D DISPOSAL AREA P PROFILE O MHW EL 0.33 F1 MLLW M E b O M 1000 1000 F- U W 0 w a z Wy 2z W OO w (L W �N .y zN v�00 to f.. U a<� N�z LU t,zz Q cox 3zu QQ 00 Z= C7 N � 0 W0 00 W LL U z Q z W F- z_ Q 94 3i z i� o0 W W z 0 z W .e z g FE Ga a s V 1/13/12 3Y: GK 'OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 20 3 1 1 D Q Z I- w W -1 Z O Q > -2 w J w 10 O Q Z 0 F- w W -10 Z O 1- > -20 w w -30 PROFILE C -15 FLOOD SHOAL - JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA M.HW EL =0.33 FT MLLW rL7 _ •2.28 F T -7.7' NAVD ................. SLOPE 4H: IV SLOPE 4H:1V M + c ozc 1'OVERDREDGE 1000 200 400 600 SOU DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -16 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL REA MW% L.= 0.33FT - - -2. _ n MLLW EL.=-2.28 FT -7.6' NAVD SLOPE 4H:iV V OVERDREDGE g+�' � .................... z 0 200 400 GOD a0u DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -17 10 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 0 DISPOSAL AREA PROFILE Q 0 MHW EL. =0.33 F1 Z = -M 4 =.t. MLLW l:L =_ •2.261 w -7.6' NAVD W LL-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z O ^ SLOPE 4H:1V 1- 1' OVERDREDGE u�i -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � . . . . . . . . . . . . . w -30 0 200 ` Voovi 1111 /1l'- 600 800 F SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' NO 348,57 VERT. 1" = 20' -u NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ,, :• STATE OF Q DATE BY FOR R &io Y IEW ONLY . t STEPHEN K EHN .E. N0. 34857 DATE 1000 1000 U W O w a Z W 2 W ON IX Z CL Zw 000 a00 > Z U _Q C7zJ (9 aO 3Qs C7 N Z0 O 00 W LL O W U z a z w z a 2 2 ,S �R z AX w w z U z w 16 L7 0 z; z �- 5 Asga F H� °u it 1/13/12 iY: GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 THEE T: 21 10 J Q 0 z w W -10 z O > -20 w w -30 10 0 0 Q z H W W -10 z O H -20 w J w -30 10 Q 0 z f— w w -10 z O Q � -20 w J w -30 PROFILE C -18 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA MHW EL. = 0.33 FT 7,u.,w .6 FT M LL W EL. _ -2.28 FT- -7.5' AVD ..........�. ........ U) S c*., 1' OVERDREDGE 0 200 400 600 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -19 1000 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA MH EL_0.33 FT - - - - - - - - - W M.LLWE� =1.6 MLCW X2.2 F -7.5' NAVD SLOPE 4HAV SLOPE 4H:1V in N '7 . . . . . . . . .. . . . .� . . . . . . . . . z z 1'OVERDREDGE 0 200 400 600 8U0 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -20 1000 v 0 ��(;p 400 600 C EN ` // DISTANCE (FEET) .•�XCEAlq tit; SCALE: HORIZ.,� _ (30� ••. LI VERTU * 220' No. 34857 ; JOT FOR Crm C ION `;� oI FOR REGUINE@ILY ; LOR l STEPHEN KEEHN P.E. Nd . DATE /i ...... •� 800 1000 f— U W 7 O a z 111 Wz OO x aW �N —U) z to tn00 QpU N %Z z 0 Z cox 3zv a� a Z0 Zx Uy u WO GO W LL U z Q z LL1 Z Q ci e Z R ^^ C R ,3 W W 2 z W co � e _% 5 g uu ?x 1/13/12 3y: GK 'OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 22 JULY 2009 PROFILE - MHW EL. =0.33 FT ----- - - - - -- _- - _MLLWEL. -1.6 FT MLLW EL. = -2.28 FT -7.4' NAVD VOVERDREDGE (TYP.) + ± SLOPE 4H: IV (TYP.) . . . . . . . .� . . N . . + .. . . . . . . . . v 0 ��(;p 400 600 C EN ` // DISTANCE (FEET) .•�XCEAlq tit; SCALE: HORIZ.,� _ (30� ••. LI VERTU * 220' No. 34857 ; JOT FOR Crm C ION `;� oI FOR REGUINE@ILY ; LOR l STEPHEN KEEHN P.E. Nd . DATE /i ...... •� 800 1000 f— U W 7 O a z 111 Wz OO x aW �N —U) z to tn00 QpU N %Z z 0 Z cox 3zv a� a Z0 Zx Uy u WO GO W LL U z Q z LL1 Z Q ci e Z R ^^ C R ,3 W W 2 z W co � e _% 5 g uu ?x 1/13/12 3y: GK 'OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 22 11 31 • 10 O < 0 Z Lu !L, -10 Z 0 F- * -20 w -j w 10 O 0 Z uJ ui -10 Z 0 > -20 uj -i Lu -.30 PROFILE C-21 F JULY 2009 PROFILE HW EL,= OMFT MLLW E-L-- -2.2AFr -7.3'NAVO ....... ...... SLOPE 4HAV SLOPE 4H: IV a0 v . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z z cr cc l'OVERDREDGE 200 400 600 800 10 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-22 JULY 2009 PROFILE MWL.=0.NFT MLLW 9—L. =--12UT -7.3'NAVE) SLOPE 4HAV 71L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l'OVERDREDGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z ,x 0 200 400 bOU tsuo DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-23 )0 1000 11.4 1 1 0 200 %X PHE/V f-46 800 I06 SCALE: HORIZ. 1"= 200' No- 348$7 • '% VERT. I"=20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION i 7h Fe OF ir FOR REGULATORY REV OEW ONLY A STEPHEN KEjHN E. NO. 34857 1111111INTE 0 0� a. z W 0 U) W 0 z CL Z LLI U) 0 U) U) a. a 0 W z 0 z -j 000 z 0 30 0 uj LL O z z W z z k; !! I; Z W W z 0 z za-a z z 0 0 1/13/12 ly. CK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 WEET; 23 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 FT z 16ILLW ff-L---•2.267 LLI -7.2'N"D Lu SLOPE 4H: IV !L -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 0 I'OVERDREDGE <> -20— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w z cr -30 )0 1000 11.4 1 1 0 200 %X PHE/V f-46 800 I06 SCALE: HORIZ. 1"= 200' No- 348$7 • '% VERT. I"=20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION i 7h Fe OF ir FOR REGULATORY REV OEW ONLY A STEPHEN KEjHN E. NO. 34857 1111111INTE 0 0� a. z W 0 U) W 0 z CL Z LLI U) 0 U) U) a. a 0 W z 0 z -j 000 z 0 30 0 uj LL O z z W z z k; !! I; Z W W z 0 z za-a z z 0 0 1/13/12 ly. CK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 WEET; 23 � 1: � � - - I -2 ` PROFILE C-24 / JULY 2009 PROFILE all7 l'OVERDREDGE SLOPE 4HAV 400 600 800 10 m m o III '30 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHWEL.= SLOPE 4HAV 0 200 SCALE: HORIZ.1^=2OU VERT 1^=2J NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR REGULATORY REVIEl , mm /mm Lu o � ��o F. w � � * 1113112 m CK ;OMM NC 8500.m AL DATE z^ DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-25 JULY 2009 PROFILE ul SLOPE 4H: IV z a 00 0 200 4uu 600 800 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-26 m o III '30 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHWEL.= SLOPE 4HAV 0 200 SCALE: HORIZ.1^=2OU VERT 1^=2J NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR REGULATORY REVIEl , mm /mm Lu o � ��o F. w � � * 1113112 m CK ;OMM NC 8500.m AL DATE z^ I / La O w 97, z 0 ui PROFILE C-27 10 qO 0 ul -10 0 I- > .20 ai 0 200 400 600 Boo 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-28 JULY 2009 PROFILE kttq E L z D. FT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 400 600 800 10 00 0 ow W z a. 0 Z w w 0 U) QQtA V) iL 0 0 ZU) � w 0 0 z -1 000 4 0 X 0 z 0 0 uJ U. cc O uJ 0 z z Lu Z V 2� z 4i .i5l La W z z .j % 0111 ol 1/13/12 ly.. GK ,OMM NO. 8500.83 iHEET: 25 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-29 10 JULY 2009 PROFILE w0 -- — — — — — — - ---- AWh� 1�4 0 3_3 FE_ X KILLW7177-2-2-8iff -7.B'NAVQ -10- Z SLOPE 4H;IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4HAV 0 + C) > •20 . . . . . . . . . . 0 z . . 6 z . . . . Lij l'OVERDREDGE -30 -200 0 400 600 800 FEET) ' SCALE: HORIZ. I"= 200 , A'o 34857 VERT. 1"=20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION S7-A7-6 of cr DATE BY EczSlc9uL Fkmm I FOR REGULATORY REM, ONU* STEPHEN KEE P. . NO. 34857 DATE 0 ow W z a. 0 Z w w 0 U) QQtA V) iL 0 0 ZU) � w 0 0 z -1 000 4 0 X 0 z 0 0 uJ U. cc O uJ 0 z z Lu Z V 2� z 4i .i5l La W z z .j % 0111 ol 1/13/12 ly.. GK ,OMM NO. 8500.83 iHEET: 25 I 10 PROFILE C -30 _ JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 Fl z 0 MLiY EL.-1• F— _ MLLW €- -2.2a1 W -7.4' NAVD W -10 ........... z SLOPE 4H: IV O 1'OVERDREDGE 2 F— -20 (j ................... W Z J Ix w 10 Q z 0 H W W ! 10 z 0 j -20 w J w -20C 0 200 400 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -31 800 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. =0.33 FT _— MLLW r[77-2.28 FT -7.2' NAVD V OVERDREDGE �, SLOPE 4H:1V o! I . ?nn n gnn 4W 800 M b -200 0 .`2�D' �,, 400 600 800 i4YANC (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' • . VERT. 1" = 20' 17 : No' 34857 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 i• STATE OF FOR REGULATORY VIEW ONa 47 ON STEPHEN KEE N P.E. NO. 34857 I L ����� DATE F- U W O a z W W a0 �H ZW cl)0w IL 0_0 z<U _Q on 00 3Qx (9W ZO O wO O W V a z w z 'a z ;� 0 aF 3 Rya W W 2 2 W d U' o z Z_ 5 �a Q ySS V �S 1/13/12 IY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 WEET: 26 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -32 10 JULY 2009 PROFILE Q Q MHW EL. = 0.33 F' z MT F— MLIW -gI=- -. 2.28 w w v-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z 0 1- -20 ..... ....................•..... .. w J W -30 b -200 0 .`2�D' �,, 400 600 800 i4YANC (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' • . VERT. 1" = 20' 17 : No' 34857 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 i• STATE OF FOR REGULATORY VIEW ONa 47 ON STEPHEN KEE N P.E. NO. 34857 I L ����� DATE F- U W O a z W W a0 �H ZW cl)0w IL 0_0 z<U _Q on 00 3Qx (9W ZO O wO O W V a z w z 'a z ;� 0 aF 3 Rya W W 2 2 W d U' o z Z_ 5 �a Q ySS V �S 1/13/12 IY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 WEET: 26 1 1 I z F- w w -1 z O > -2 w J w I0 Q z 0 F- w w -10 z O F- > -20 w J w to Q 0 z F- w w -10 z O F- j -20 w J w -30 PROFILE C -33 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 FT — WLlWEL.- 4.28FT ... ................. -200 0 200 400 buu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -34 800 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.39 FT - — --Tr LlWTL77-2.z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . inn n inn 4n0 600 80C DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE CN -35 JULY 2009 PROFILE _ MHW EL = 0.93 FT - -MLLNL =- MLLW E-L -- 2.28FT o 1'OVERDREDGE z SLOPE 4H:1 V V 0 200 ,y1/!!� 600 600 M§� AKMG FEET) o W SCALE: HORIZ.1" =200' �}:• SF•';y2 "- VERT. 1"=20' NQ• 34857 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DATE B, FOR REG RY RE W Ot�L. ,) • STATE OF ; •��,, j cs 'c�ORIDP.•' \��1 'I STEPHEN KE HN E. NO. 34857 �/ .'NA L V- ',� DATE a 1000 F- U w 0 m a z w 2 w oN Z M 0 f H ZW 0) 0 u) a00 z�U _Q 0Z j 00 fax ON z0 O �0 W U. W 0 z Q z W F- z_ Q = Qh ae t 7 3 W W z u z W 14 3 Y� u 1/13/12 iY: GK .OMM NO. 8500.83 iHEET: 21 ri z I— w w z 0 w PROFILE CN-36 10 0 z w w -10 z 0 F- * -20 w —i w -30 -200 0 200 400 600 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE CN-37 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHYVEL,=0.33FT I -MLLW EL. --.2.21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -200 0 200 400 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1"= 200' t40- 34857 VERT. 1" = 20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION':: 0 . srgrs OF FOR R TOR E )14 - 4u 10 N STEPHEN KEEN P.E. NO. 34857 %%% % DATE GOD 800 L) w 0 0� CL z Lu m ui 0 co 0 O� z (L z NON in - 0 x-00 z 0 0 z -i Z 0 0 N z 0 5 0 a J III U. z <c z w 1-- z 2 g ? lu W z z Z9 J 0 1/13/12 ly: GK :omm llo,� 8500.83 MEET. 28 �i PROFILE R -12 30 20 0 Q z10 w w LL Z 0 O Q U j10 J w -20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' J E 20 8 n 10 w w LL K Z 0 O J F- n Q X10 u w i '- -20 E 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE:,%j,;-.A I" T k6a - \,10EN �1 co , No. 34857 NOT FOR CON TIOt, r OR ATO R O ASR' Y • 4912 SK R I� ((/ STEPHEN . KEE HN P.E. NLL,a L DATE il! C� Z Z_ g tjj a w w J_ L.L. a Qz Zz Q O ir� >w O z O a vi zQ f Oa, OU ZV _LL tn0J 0 f J o g CL Z U O ZQUQ (9Z� �a0 (7 = Zy 0w agw W w a 0 z0 az z w F- LU Z W M Z� d J9� j 3 1/13/12 )Y: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 29 L. a 30 20 Q z 10 w w LL Z 0 O §10 J w -20 PROFILE R -14 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE EL. = -1.68 FT. M NAVD 0 M v MHW EL. = 0.33 FT �5 - MLLW EL = -2.28 F 1 0o 2 r- + 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1 " = 200' VERT. 1" = 20' 3 20 Q X10 w w LL Z 0 O 1= Q X10 J w -20 PROFILE R -15 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EL. = -1.68 FT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NAVD . . . . 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) oewxl 5 20' No. 34857 • NOT RM NSTRUSIUON FOR _:,R ' T�fbyf' W•QNtY STEPHEN KEE16_ O.ANQ A OS ��1111111�1 6 -- -Iz DATE 0 z g 2 oa d w w J_ 0 lx IL UZ ZZ mZ �O Lu w� >w 0 z 0 m O a ui Oa, OU_ ZV _LL w0_j Z0 oQ.Qu. U Z_aQ 0 Z W VQ aam 3zw aQ a' 00 Z= 0 oC w w w c= w� z0 QZ z w 1- z 'a z a?t i d W 2 43 W .e z �S 1/13/12 1Y: GK ,omm N0. 8500.83 WEET: 30 cri MHVV LL. = U.J3 1- 1 15 MLLW EL. _ -2.28 F �1 Z.. + z rn v 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) oewxl 5 20' No. 34857 • NOT RM NSTRUSIUON FOR _:,R ' T�fbyf' W•QNtY STEPHEN KEE16_ O.ANQ A OS ��1111111�1 6 -- -Iz DATE 0 z g 2 oa d w w J_ 0 lx IL UZ ZZ mZ �O Lu w� >w 0 z 0 m O a ui Oa, OU_ ZV _LL w0_j Z0 oQ.Qu. U Z_aQ 0 Z W VQ aam 3zw aQ a' 00 Z= 0 oC w w w c= w� z0 QZ z w 1- z 'a z a?t i d W 2 43 W .e z �S 1/13/12 1Y: GK ,omm N0. 8500.83 WEET: 30 0 o '20 PRQFILE R-12 MA�/J LILY 2009 —DESIGN TEMPLATE 4.7 FT. NAVD CN 3.7 FT. NAVD n SCALE: HORIZ.1^=2UO 30 m W � = o '20 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE R-13 n DISTANCE (FEET) NOT FOR-MIRUCIllm-4 FOR MR. WA\(W�y 4-yz ON 4u STEPHEN' KEL� DATE Iffifil", CL 00 0 IL Lu Lu Z 44 IL 1/13/1u 3y. GK MARMULY 2009 -DESIGN TEMPLATE 4.7 FT. NAVD 3.7 FT. NAVQ MHW EL. 0.33 FT n DISTANCE (FEET) NOT FOR-MIRUCIllm-4 FOR MR. WA\(W�y 4-yz ON 4u STEPHEN' KEL� DATE Iffifil", CL 00 0 IL Lu Lu Z 44 IL 1/13/1u 3y. GK 30 X10 w w ZO 0 w -20 PROFILE R-14 0 100 200 SCALE: HORIZ. 1 = 200' VERT. 1" = 20' 30 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE R-15 MAR/JULY 2009 MAR/JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE —DESIGN TEMPLATE . . . . . . . . . 4,7 FT. NAVD 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z Z:� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w kL— 3.7 FT. NAVD — I . . . . -- — — — — — MWL EL. = 0.33 FT— co MLLW EL. -2.28 FT co 0 . . . . . . . . c!) 3.7 FT. NAVD z 0 15 z MHW EL. = 0.33 FT 0 100 200 SCALE: HORIZ. 1 = 200' VERT. 1" = 20' 30 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE R-15 0- w w Zo- o F- w -20 0 DISTANCE (FEET) SC4ALE. HORIZ. 1" = 200' o -�VFHWR_ , 1" = 20' tVo- g' NOT FOFEOMSTRUCIPON W V ZJ O 17 -OR R W O LY � - 0. DATE d STEP7N KE� ,oil 110 0 Z zg oa W Z w Lu _j � a w Ix Q IL Q z < Z Z w W o CE 0 Ul I— OZ =O 0. U) 2 U) z < 09 z 0 lz 2: LL V1 0 U � 0 IL LL Z 0 3;k u 0 z 14 0ow 3zm w 0: 00 Z= 0 U) oz w 0 Lu u 0 z z Z W z wq 1/13/12 M. GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 i IEET: 32 MAR/JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE .............................. 4.7 FT. NAVD 04 b. . . . . . . . . . Z 3.7 FT. NAVD 15 MHW EL. = 0.33 FT MLLW EL_ = -2.28 FT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 0- w w Zo- o F- w -20 0 DISTANCE (FEET) SC4ALE. HORIZ. 1" = 200' o -�VFHWR_ , 1" = 20' tVo- g' NOT FOFEOMSTRUCIPON W V ZJ O 17 -OR R W O LY � - 0. DATE d STEP7N KE� ,oil 110 0 Z zg oa W Z w Lu _j � a w Ix Q IL Q z < Z Z w W o CE 0 Ul I— OZ =O 0. U) 2 U) z < 09 z 0 lz 2: LL V1 0 U � 0 IL LL Z 0 3;k u 0 z 14 0ow 3zm w 0: 00 Z= 0 U) oz w 0 Lu u 0 z z Z W z wq 1/13/12 M. GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 i IEET: 32 30 20 Q z 10 w w LL Z 0 0 1- Q X10 J W -20 0 PROFILE R -18 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE _— MLLW EL = -2.28 F 1 +I. . . . . . . . . . . . N SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' 30 20 Q H10 W W LL Z 0 0 F- Q J10 J W -20 0 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE R -19 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MtiWtL.= UL- -J4FI c+� 15 MLLW EL. _ -2.28 F a0 11 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z RNG.4 +00 - -- - -- DISTANCE (FEET) SQAL'E:'NOR4Z 1" = 200' I�L�RT,I 1" = 20' LICE• ' y No . c • NOT FOIE_ STRUC FOR RE L TOR /IEW W-1 Op N l s /,� /llllW,%,, (D Z Z_ as d Z V J 11.1 w J �0 w IL ¢Z Q z O wO >N Oz 0 a It U) zQ ?0 OU zL) =LL O J U. Z U O ZQU (�z� §zw O= ZN 0 0t w w w ax w I- �O to z w z a ti 3:! _ W z b e z 1/13/12 3Y: GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 ;HEET: 33 30 20 0 Q F_10 w w LL Z 0 O H Q ul10 J w -20 PROFILE R -20 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE .............................. _MHW EL. = 0.33 FT _ 15 1 MLLW EL. _ -2.28 F 0 G Z RNG.4 +13 Q 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' A� Na- e NOT FOR C IFU . "OR REGUL '% MPO NV. Q; STEPHEN REEHN P.E.�f4o.. - 8 ...�� DATE 800 C9 Z _Z g 0 d d W W J �(9 w =Q IL co) Z E' Z Q O EO >U w rn O z 0 w zQ ?0 O U_ z V = LL NOj aQ�` OU Z>VQ ozw oom §zw zZ ZN 3 0: G4 w az c= w t- U� z0 QN z w H z Q 2 z ;� z ai a �? W W Z 13 Z W Z a� 1/13/12 3Y: GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 34 30 20 0 c Z 10 w w w Z o 0 Q X10 J w -20 PROFILE R -18.2 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' PROFILE R -19 30 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE 20 . . . . . . e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q z 10 w w L.L. Z 0 _O Q X10 J w 20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) v a SCALE: EIORIZ. 1 = 200' �1 20' 1 No 3 : Z c NOT FOR CONS VC11ON * FOR �REGULA-S! t. V7AEWFSNLY s r -- � STEPHEN JEE P.E2� 7**" DATE (D Z Zg oa az v �w �0 w a aQ ZZ w2 w0 CE > v 0z ON U) aN OU �0 zw 1: LL m00 0 IL U. a 0,36 §zm 00 Z= 0 N a w0 lz _ 01- w UO zm Q z w I- z_ Q u a= Z W W Z t7 W b z Z 1/13/12 3Y: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 35 30 20 ❑ Q X10 w w LL Z 0 O Q X10 J w -20 PROFILE R -20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' E 0 m_ M 0 Q ' ePHE4 w 1 • s No.es� Z c NOT FOR= MU N =OR REG �Y� R ihl OOL* • / �I RIbR ••' . ia— • STEPHEN K H P.ter Ao. 3 DATE 0 Z_ Q ❑ J D w W _J 0 w Q a Q Q =Z w W O w O W 0_ H > U O Z Oa, to =O a N zQ -0 00 zw = w_ U) O J 0O VQQJ CL U. F3z4 00m 3z aW �w z0 Oz w 0= H WD 00 z0 Q z w z 'a 2 z ii j z E W W t� z W zg 6 �tx�t V �a 1/13/12 3Y: GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 36 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE N 0 EL. = 4.7' NAVD 15 �1 MHW EL. = 0.33 FT N — — — MLLW EL. _ -2.28 F oo �........... ............ RNG.3 +85.8 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' E 0 m_ M 0 Q ' ePHE4 w 1 • s No.es� Z c NOT FOR= MU N =OR REG �Y� R ihl OOL* • / �I RIbR ••' . ia— • STEPHEN K H P.ter Ao. 3 DATE 0 Z_ Q ❑ J D w W _J 0 w Q a Q Q =Z w W O w O W 0_ H > U O Z Oa, to =O a N zQ -0 00 zw = w_ U) O J 0O VQQJ CL U. F3z4 00m 3z aW �w z0 Oz w 0= H WD 00 z0 Q z w z 'a 2 z ii j z E W W t� z W zg 6 �tx�t V �a 1/13/12 3Y: GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 36 oo� WIGGINS PASS �C ~ v - -� Z Wa —���.S o a N 710000 I � N 710000 d � LANDWARD LIMIT OF Z 2009 HARD BOTTOM z O (SIDE SCAN SONAR) I I � 0 W~ v 1 0 2000 4000 ui OJ I I 4 tD I I o o GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT a Q II �x za I I VANDERBI APPROXIMATE LOCATION I I BEACH d OF ACCESS CORRIDOR O II P (3 Zm N 700000 II N 700000 0 II ° �QQ J I I } NAPLE OM APPROXIMATE Ill IL I I SHORELINE L 0 d' N GULF E OF II MEX/CO I I z zo I I U. it o zo of LI. � 7L N II PELICAN AY 3 N 690000 II N 690000 = 44 II - 0 11 a o I� I� 0 R40 z OFFSHORE DISPOSAL II CLAM PASS W AREA / BORROW AREA 6 I I i w II ) l V �p � o ��1 {11111 /11 NOTES: v�� HEN '�. II PARKS ORE 1. COORDINATES f� 36Q• 0 N 6900 0 s 8 ON FLORIDA ' ATE ,%N%k- l NS • . a COORDINAT�SYI�TL'1N, EAST ZONE� ; 2 m m DATE: y NORTH AME$1CAN•bATUIf<M0F3V#l�Z : w R o • 7t �^ �+ 1/13/12 a (NAD83). = "o : * °o 0 0 Y: dk* a REV �SI NOT FOR U 'P(DNOF CC Y oES ,P GK FOR REGUL y W Oi�t COMM N0. s ••••• \ 8500.83 L .� I EET: =� STEPHEN K HN .E. N'(7 8486A 37 OFFSHORE DISPOSAL AREA / BORROW AREA 6 -zo E 382T92 N 679953 1 i/ CD (21-) \ J TARGET DISPOSAL✓ WITHIN THIS REGION I E 382192 N 679528 E 382092 N 679528 I N 679500 a 0 I I E 382092 N 679128 E 382192_/ I N 679128 i21 N 679000 Ll E 382192 N 678828 i w 35 0 364 NOTES: 1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, EAST ZONE, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83). 2. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM ,l �if�l/ ?,Q). 3. POST CONSTRUC 'IYY'•�. (�/ ATA WAS PROVIDED BY COASTAL ENGI )NC. NAPLES, FLORIDA DATED 1996. w%' �•• .•• lCE ••• • LEGEND: 11M ;• • ��� sF W ; LIMtR ©F INF►LP~AIlE y6 NOT FOR RU ION FOR REGU R a' Y 1�WFONL•Y c- E 382617 N 678928 E 382617 N 678828 0 100 200 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT ;c 1v •" C"� STEPHEN KEE N P�fr �B .�' DATE X1 E 382942 N 679953 E 382942 N 679678 E 383042 �N 679678 w �3 N 68000 a Wg La w > �o 0: IL Z� dao NQjm PO 3ZQ 4 N 67950 Z 0 Oa tuo ow vo aN ZLL W u' I. O Z /13/12 Y: GK 38 E 383042 N 679028 u e•- N 67900 Z j4 a #� E 382942 W W N 679028 = E 382942 uZi N 678928 ds -21 i 6 TARGET DISPOSAL WITHIN THIS REGION e�3 /13/12 Y: GK 38 Attachment No. 25 Resource Map �ilG � f jl I 0 E m 0 ° 1 inch = 1,400 feet z 0 700 1,4Q0 g eet 0 sz Legend: L. A. FDEP Monuments Q Sheet Index c c Notes: 1. Coordinates are in feet based on the i Florida State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone, North American Datum of ' 1983 (NAD 83). 2. Aerial photography provided by Collier County, date flown 2009. a � r O u � 7 Icy l` i, i� i \ ,'16837 a 0 CL LL � c m 0 � o 3U o 7 0 O �U L N C R d o. m to 712837 W 710837 c7 ° zr 9a Z wa 00 aX 2 U LL Way .p � a C9 0 w zUm Q 0, 5; IL y �" 70898 H m $ O za U 4u vo ,yy DATE' 09/30/11 706837 By. HMV COMM NO.. ' 8500.83 SHEEI M 00 f►,w�};;,.. 1 I _T co 00 0* O j N A 00 U rlj f U U I 716837 714837 \ 712837 �ilG � f jl I 0 E m 0 ° 1 inch = 1,400 feet z 0 700 1,4Q0 g eet 0 sz Legend: L. A. FDEP Monuments Q Sheet Index c c Notes: 1. Coordinates are in feet based on the i Florida State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone, North American Datum of ' 1983 (NAD 83). 2. Aerial photography provided by Collier County, date flown 2009. a � r O u � 7 Icy l` i, i� i \ ,'16837 a 0 CL LL � c m 0 � o 3U o 7 0 O �U L N C R d o. m to 712837 W 710837 c7 ° zr 9a Z wa 00 aX 2 U LL Way .p � a C9 0 w zUm Q 0, 5; IL y �" 70898 H m $ O za U 4u vo ,yy DATE' 09/30/11 706837 By. HMV COMM NO.. ' 8500.83 SHEEI M 00 f►,w�};;,.. 1 r T -381957 0 �Y 4. O w 0 r r 381457 co N n 1 41 o LL 1 o � N w ' O N L O 11 ' O LL O L _ !� a 4 O ` U O L N ,d LS6L8£ -� O 4) ' +S+ N _ d R � !I� I 'r O Iz co \ a 1Om- O 2 U m Lu a. a x '�O I JLL 2 m, Z z� U z 3: ° 2 d y a U) J E Q Q m n O N ; N y N O o U A Z CD U TO t (D dj N U) C 6 C a E LL O M U) 3 <n U) i E O C N CO _° O @ a p +� '> 3 C O n fn 3 o O w Z U -O 0 o a -o T _0 a O t 'o c L @ = Co _ UEi — O @ N m° >,O ° °-' U UUi HMV 0 o 0 o`m 1uia a a� (1) U a a� > T_ NO N N Z LV 0 W p `m a 0> (n .? U Q a� i o � Q _ O .? U m� ., m O � Q • Cn -0 E 9 o- U) 1 o E d Z) U o CQ d w o w J N N a -2 U co N n 1 41 o LL 1 o � N w ' O N L O 11 ' O LL O L _ !� a 4 O ` U O L N ,d LS6L8£ -� O 4) ' +S+ N _ d R � !I� I 'r Iz W. \ a 1Om- O 2 U m Lu a. a x '�O I JLL 2 m, Z z� z 3: ° 2 d y a J E Q Q m n O N ; N y N O o U O Z CD TO t (D dj N U) C 6 C a E LL O M U) 3 <n U) i C N CO _° O @ a p +� '> 3 C O n DATE: o O w Z U T _0 a 09/29/11 'o c L UEi — O @ N BY: >,O ° °-' U UUi HMV o 0 o`m 1uia a a� (1) U a a� > T_ @ '9 — o s N @ U) 72 Y c COMM NO.: Co °o�C mC5 ° T E 8500.83 = U E o N a -2 r O C U> > O 20- O 2 E O O N >, C SHEET: O UwQUUS�w Z N M 1a 1 „4 F. r `L Ik4 e a r y (5 doll w 1EJ: p 1- 382299 y� ' 66ZZ8£ -I � BIZ 1 CIO LL Z 'o s W U W -�O� �• O O m 1 � Izc;o.- w CL 1 00�� z0:„ z3oa J=.n ay4� 1 Q a 'o, a) O0 O L 1-381799 N o U c v z � °0 3 o t 1 d E o N w cNM,3 O C 0 O L DATE: -0 0 M; 'o -0 m Q o L 6 d o 0 2 a W? CL M Z5, .s 09/29/11 Lai .2 c6 mca O (0 m l0 U7 N w a0 c6 L '� C) w a 0 3 N c >— 0)E n'Em BY: I.; O '� O E c � p O= pQ O HMV 04 � o 0 c a) ° 0 11 -0 o - N ` 5 ) O N COMM NO.: L) O d Q a) V = L N N N L 8500.83 a a rn U a o Q n LL Hl -2 1 Qf a> E- �o � CD o OM �a: EOO CD • O • SHEET: 3 p UFQUU�Ucq r J 1 N a Z N co 1 b 1 1 co y,t cu co 1 3 0 Ei n a) co I Q '^ w s r- �-0 o f +f� oag , _O LL V) m 3 as a) �a `o) p ° o� 9+ I E c C� p a) p -0 c O °� E 3� L @ m n O "p �0. .> U C LL O oo (D U a �= C U O) E i,..? S r.•`"• V ` a) O 0 N _ @ O a) I L I� O_ ° L Q• L ._ a� 5 m -0 -a L L 0 �dZco TU , N — o ® O UU)N UURN < x N ,,;gI m N ,, ., I c }•, �IR u m;° ~ 'I I' z ' z = yo IUJ .Iw a <� ?fo° 11zUom i W C. a x slo �&o�a IZ(Dmmo 2 a U . z 3o� a -la� a. aama ' r Q= O 1- 382536 9£9z8E V r I - O + V DATE: O 09/29/11 O LL BY: � 0 o HMV _ o O COMM NO.: Is L V 8500.83 Rf O c N SHEET: � � 1c f LL x, t L _ - V (o L N rev K AAA I X281 4liZ �4 Z o e— Zaa � � U y O m W Q m i OOJ�a i RIz�omo i Z o a ' 1y IJ = ae I QQoa m N � O z 1-382781 3 g co T C !� > U_ Lu C C 0 o o> DATE: a) O ti. 7 O E b _U `° 3 °� �. E T E m o 09/29111 0 C'4 w ai m l4 V) O a) L —O N BY: U) a) c 2 co n cn °o ° y o c� o� �N HMV -o Z3 o n o L o ` c o E 0 @ co .? c O as U Q (n 6) E COMM NO.: > Ol c n r i .? o C a`) 0 m _cz o^ m ° a m n 8500.83 o G o 0� o a 0 LLJ EFLZ00 TU �Ucn CD c D O> Q_s� Q c O cn LL N ° a) ai 0 m .o O m C Q O= 0 0),= 3: 3 SHEET: o • '. J 1 N 0 Z N M 1d - - - - - -- ------------------------ aui�— I CD N 4? • \ O • m o � I N •� ,I • ! O III• y. r� Ors " �N * I CL . m I� C ULM- t to I, V- 00000�I C1 \ A Iw M / = IE: 1.383282 \ \ Z8ZS8S' I<j k I , / \ I Z \ W Z a m > N C N u7 � \ �I W a Q 0 Q = >, \ \ 41 2 I o C m Q U) .a ?, ZUo ca U) 0 �_ C_ Lv U \ it pars o -p p -o n a� \ # Zaos< (6 cm -0 O O p C \ \ =1 Z 3 o � w c LL U ch 0 m p n m w � B d \ \ Ia�y o') C) L mco _'mo 0 U N d N � � a co LL d. 0 Z CS \ \ Z8LZ8S l I l U j c-> >,, C. E o 00 O a CLQ " \ m °oo�a� \ \\ 1 > LL c E m \ 4. Cl) O w Q O t O \ IDATE: o o c ) .°_' \ \ 1 09/30/11 m N m d 0 C \ C BY: y c Q .m m° t HMV .. D m m o G � m m" ma mo \ \ I p O N — — U O O Z U C \ _ ► —— C COMM NO i Q N > m m C m G d E t U N m C a (4 E 06 8500.83 c o Q Q 1 7 N O U) 0) m > >, (SHEET: J N Z -- N ch _ le • r. • 14*1 w 0 q LL C:, 0 E (n C) C: C) CO < 0 CN °o < 00 C:j- Q) 70 >1 0 C14 0 0 C�, U) Q) C, < I I W m , 0 0 0 -C m z 43) —�5 W co E co ) cu 00 C) Q) 0 c 0 U) E 0) >, �- M O) 0 -0 (D 0 m CD- a) — 0) CD ) 0 (D CL CD m C C) 0 0 o -0 (1) � < C) (1) N= cli d C14 U) E _0 co _0 C: LO 0 m (D 'C C:) C: o J_- 0 (D C) — 0 C, LL m C14 L) C: E 0 E co (D m C) < 0 U) 0 0 > Q) cn Q) U) (D C: Z Cl 0 (1) q-_ > M & 76 0 - (z 0 (1) c (D (14 _0 iii 'a co U) N cu co V) - cu U) 0 (n -0 E 0 0) i E ?- -0 m m E� w cl (u o E W U) U) 4 - 0) tr) 0) a 0 > 0 M M CC) C) C) CD 0 >, >>E U) < wc Qc) C:) CD C:) C:) CN C\J C14 C14 0 0 Z CN (-i r �SXI;l HMV 8500.83 if 6 z z 4 LU 1 L ZfoM Uoh CL 0 0 Z ;; zl� z , 0 CL g 2i HMV 8500.83 if • �11 IM �W +� I a LL .I s W IOC Hl WL£g£ -I 0 V r N I 0 am N a !I Iw J I� Mcg£.I 1 "I I? z >° w I04 aa� (7Z o M 0o m; IZ0 w dax -a7wLL I 0 0' Z�=° ° 1 -j d y a •� lQQm` � �scas£I O O) W E O O U y @ L d � 3 � c � N a E ------ - I m o ch m 3 N o C N O u. � N m O W 4) C, N LL ° Q a Orn(n LL Z N Q �I r 8500.83 ti I C V O' ISHEET. O �W +� I a LL .I s W IOC Hl WL£g£ -I 0 V r N I 0 am N a !I Iw J I� Mcg£.I 1 "I I? z >° w I04 aa� (7Z o M 0o m; IZ0 w dax -a7wLL I 0 0' Z�=° ° 1 -j d y a •� lQQm` � �scas£I Ef C C O O N w t6 C U) E >+ C E '�:)O y C C mQ N U O O to O - P O N E �La ca ' �-° m E caa aMO m oa OL ca dZQ N f6 f/i m NZ0_ V C ------ - I m o ch m 3 N '2 00 N—O N o rnQ a) 4) O ULLw o�m -o ° Z N �W +� I a LL .I s W IOC Hl WL£g£ -I 0 V r N I 0 am N a !I Iw J I� Mcg£.I 1 "I I? z >° w I04 aa� (7Z o M 0o m; IZ0 w dax -a7wLL I 0 0' Z�=° ° 1 -j d y a •� lQQm` � �scas£I 11 DATE: OW29/11 lev: o LL I HMV ------ - N N L 0 4) COMM NO N =1 Q �I r 8500.83 ti C V ISHEET. O I o 1g Cm a �n ti r. I IZ 'Z LL z = I z IWZ�o Wa � m� Z V ° �^ -- --✓ ' w a ' LL � e°o� O O 0 N N O LL O N w O O N 00 II L U O I 1 6o ? m z3�? X Ts arn� fI�Q Q m N 3 rI0 z sssa9c —�"— 09/29/11 T- IBY: = I muv 218SM93 I 1h N c 0 OC LU E U) w S C CO j ° N N 0 0 0 5-o c`6 E 0 (6 O N C p) Q N _ .. Q U 0 O cn 0.— N d to U L on a c �Q m m E O N 0 •� ] (D rOD M On - (6 a 0 N -p C c to d mZQ mfn CU,,) O. c N 0 W C O M C 0 'a o r a O 0 'o p n1 � p� � 'o Q d to UL oo _rn Q uJ w U IL o m -@ W o i I 1 O, Z N O O 0 N N O LL O N w O O N 00 II L U O I 1 6o ? m z3�? X Ts arn� fI�Q Q m N 3 rI0 z sssa9c —�"— 09/29/11 T- IBY: = I muv 218SM93 I 1h :r�vp sic c.,,5 �'F +rT� •t 0 CL U. cc Ig= Iry O ` I (0) 80£ti8£ -i O vU IAN Ida m v, ' Lii J I� UI 8 la IZ � 10 P. IWZ�a W d � 100 Izu.i W 11< o!f 'Iz�om (9m. Iz; z J Q rc IQQ0. m F m U) 3 IO i nnnnnw: l V w a) 109/29/11 C U 30 c 'O W E U) w m6 c0� - O O a) @ m1 a) 0O 15 -50 `° Eo 'BV: mp N to C c) Q N O N U) L Q CI HMV N -p D U 0 O mn C N 0 d m M (n � to aoiU �t � N U) o � a) c c< m of CL m v_ E �6raMO CID `v)°? N n 00 u0i �ZQ m ca U) � g ��61 3. 'a 0 a c a`) o a ll.l �� 0m U) o � L a) ° a 0 m6 C 'o- 6N�.��� = Q d O cn L N o' . Q o ma 0) _ U�w o��a I N J I O�,Z CL U. cc Ig= Iry O ` I (0) 80£ti8£ -i O vU IAN Ida m v, ' Lii J I� UI 8 la IZ � 10 P. IWZ�a W d � 100 Izu.i W 11< o!f 'Iz�om (9m. Iz; z J Q rc IQQ0. m F m U) 3 IO i nnnnnw: l V w 109/29/11 - - 'BV: N w CI HMV 0 N c i 8500.83 ISHEET: CD ►- 1 i � O i LU 7 O 0 0@ Q O o _ EC7 _ .0 C O) Q N m _0 ca O - N N 2 .� O a � U `-°mc Ica o 0 0 p 0Z0 N mcn N LL g 6 Z a. U 0 7 W U C 0 n O N 00 � o L n m C 0 o N °° '_ a� ° Q O cn LL L' w y 00 0@ LM Q co w r Uww o��� J 10 z N Ln o CD c� �L O CL Cm G � Q1 � V 0 L U � L O 0 t9s 0 v s vi c m ma c CD am w J H F- 6 Z z 2 } o W Z m W d a 2 V OM 00. �� ZUoh^ W d a x otf � w LL - t9�0 2�.TC Z z ;L Z 3 O n aya� J F Q m n Q 0 v ti9£E8£ = 09129/11 3Y: HMV :OMM NO 8500.83 SHEET: 1j Attachment No. 28 -2 Site Visit Observation Report - September 29, 2011 SITE VISIT FOR WIGGINS PASS DREDGING PROJECT FIELD OBSERVATION REPORT Date of Assessment: September 29, 2011 Project: Wiggins Pass Dredging Project Location: Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL CPE Commission No.: 143561 Representatives: Jessica Craft (CPE), Mark Sramek (NMFS), Pamela Keyes (Collier County), Lauren Diaz ( USACE), Bob Steiger (Delnor- Wiggins State Park) CPE representative Jessica Craft, Pamela Keyes (Collier County) and Mark Sramek (NMFS) conducted a site visit in Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL. The purpose of the site visit was to observe any resources within Wiggins Pass (Figure 1) and discuss with agencies any project concerns. The tide was coming in and the current within the pass was particularly strong; therefore, the three attendees began a snorkel just outside the mouth of the inlet and drifted inward along the north shoreline to observe any benthic resources. Shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) was observed in similar distribution to previous surveys. However, two patches were observed during this visit which were not observed during the 2009 site visit (CPE), but which had been observed in 2007 (Passarella & Assoc.); the approximate locations of these seagrass patches are designated with red X's on Figure 1. These seagrass observations will be added to benthic resource figures for the project area and submitted in support of the permit application. One particular spot was a small patch (approx.. 3 ft X 4 ft) of H. wrightii on the shallow littoral shelf approximately 50 ft NW of Channel Marker 5. The second small patch (approx.. 3 ft X 6 ft) of H. wrightii was located deeper into the inlet near the mangroves, on shallow sandy substrate among clumps of oysters. Sand placement activities in these areas will take into consideration the location of these seagrass resources. No paddle grass (Halophila decipiens) was observed during this site visit; it was acknowledged by Mr. Sramek that this species is highly ephemeral and so is not expected to be observed during all surveys. At the end of the swim, Mr. Sramek indicated that he would need to evaluate the offshore sand placement template with regards to the nearshore hardbottom south of the inlet, but otherwise had no objections with the project. After the swim was completed, the three attendees visited Delnor- Wiggins State Park and met with Lauren Diaz ( USACE) and Bob Steiger (Delnor- Wiggins State Park). The attendees first sat and discussed the project while reviewing figures. Mrs. Diaz indicated that the permit for the interim dredging conducted over the winter of 2011 was never signed. She requested this be resolved and that a report detailing the work conducted be submitted. At this point Mr. Sramek departed and the rest of the group walked the beach at the northern end of the park along the inlet. Ms. Diaz indicated that the USACE would like the application resubmitted and to make sure all drawings are 8 %Z x 11 in and in black and white. She also indicted that they would need to see alternatives analyses. Mr. Steiger indicated he would like to see sand placed at the northern end of the park, and at a point slightly south that is experiencing erosion. After the site meeting, Mrs. Craft visited Carolyn Shaw, a park employee who had previously provided shorebird data to CPE. Mrs. Shaw indicated that the bird data collection effort was sporadic prior to 2010 and that it is now more structured with set data entry sheets. They conduct the surveys simultaneously with sea turtle nest surveys during the summer months. She requested input on designing their bird surveys. No shorebirds have been observed nesting in some years. A single snowy plover was observed recently on the beach by Park employees. 2 FS Figure 1. Location map. Attachment No. 28 -4 Collier County Dive Investigation — September 9, 2010 MEMORANDUM To: Valdimir Kosmynin, Ph.D., FDEP Comm No.: 8500.73 From: Pamela Keyes, Environmental Specialist, Collier County Date: September 9, 2010 Re: Wiggins Pass Hardbottom Mapping Below is a summary from the hardbottom investigation dive performed on September 8, 2010. Attached is map of the transect lines as well as the corresponding GPS points. We dove R- 10 +500, R -11, R -11 +500, and R -12. The transects were all 600' long and located 400' feet offshore. The visibility was in the one foot range so we were not able to get any video. R -10 +500 — From the "out" point to 100' before the "mid" point hardbottom was found. Immediately following the hardbottom approximately 4 inch thick mud was found for the rest of the transect. R -11 — Hardbottom was found from the "out" point to 75' past the "mid" point. This included one foot of relief. Immediately following the hardbottom mud approximately 4" thick was found throughout the rest of the transect. R -11 +500 — No hardbottom was found and most of the transect was covered in mud. R -12 — No hardbottom was found and most of the transect was covered in mud. El Hardbottom Investigation Points Attachment No. 33d Request for Temporary Mixing Zone and Degradation Variance for the Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging Project Temporary Mixing Zone Variance Collier County: Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging JCP 0142538 -009 Mixing Zone Variance Request This is to request a mixing zone and degradation variance from the provisions of Rule 62- 4.244(5)(c), F.A.C. to be granted for the Collier County Wiggins Pass Dredging Project. We request a temporary mixing zone of 450 meters offshore and 450 meters down - current from the disposal and dredge area into the Gulf of Mexico and Wiggins Pass with an allowable turbidity of 29 NTUs outside of OFW and 10 NTUs within OFW or at hardbottom or vegetation sites. This variance is being requested for a duration of 150 days during initial construction and 45 days for maintenance dredging. The period is requested to account for anticipated construction time and operational and weather delays. The enclosed figure shows the 450 in mixing zone as well as benthic resources located in the project vicinity. Mixing? Zone Variance Justification The primary justification for the mixing zone variance request is that there is no practical means of maintaining project related turbidity within the standard 150 meter mixing zone, especially in an open body of water such as the Gulf of Mexico where patches of OFW are at the shoreline. Depending on wave and current conditions, a major sediment dredging project such as a maintenance dredging, with sediment placement, requires a larger mixing zone then the standard 150 meter mixing zone. At times, conditions may exist that cause localized turbidity at the Gulf of Mexico disposal site to temporarily exceed water quality standards beyond the standard 150 meter zone. For example, wave activity during project construction may retain fine sediment in suspension and establish longshore currents, resulting in turbidity spread along the coastline beyond the standard 150 meter mixing zone. Standard measures such as turbidity curtains will not properly function in an open coastal setting. The ebb shoal dredge area is below the State limit for silt and clay content (-1 %). The majority of the proposed flood shoal dredge area has a silt and clay content well below the State (FDEP) limit of 10% defined for beach and nearshore fill projects. There are smaller areas with fines between 10% and 20% and clay. However, it is anticipated that the dredging activities may introduce sufficient material volume to exceed the standard mixing zone and be above the 0 NTU requirement for OFW, especially given the scattered patches of OFW wet regions. Water quality monitoring conducted for construction of this project, most recently from February to March 2009 and February to March 2011, has shown slightly elevated turbidity at the edge of the mixing zone. Data in 2009 have shown that turbidity at the edge of the mixing zone by the disposal area was, on average, 8.0 NTU above background levels with a standard deviation of 1.3, and a maximum of 11.0 NTU above background levels. Turbidity at the edge of the mixing zone around the dredge area was, on average, 8.5 NTU above background levels with a standard deviation of 1.0, and a maximum of 10.6 NTU above background levels. During the 2011 project, the maximum turbidity was about the same at 10.3 NTU, while the average reduced to 3.8 NTU. This information is listed below in Tables 1 and 2. In addition, patches of OFW exist seaward of Barefoot Beach Park and Delnor- Wiggins State Park, and they are within the mixing zone distance where historical turbidity measures of 11.0 NTU were taken (see below). Table 1 :009 Historic Turbidity Difference Measurement; Date Dig Mid Bottom Disposal Mid Bottom 12 -Feb 7.7 6.4 5.8 6.8 13 -Feb 7.2 7.7 2.5 7.2 13 -Feb 8.3 10.1 6.6 7.6 14 -Feb 8.3 10.6 7.9 7.4 14 -Feb 6.3 8.2 6.3 6.7 15 -Feb 8.5 8 15 -Feb 6.8 8.8 6.8 8.2 16 -Feb 7.8 7.7 7.5 7.8 16 -Feb 7.3 6.7 9 8.5 17 -Feb 7.8 8.3 7.5 7.1 17 -Feb 9.2 8.5 8.6 8.3 18 -Feb 6.2 6 22 -Feb 6.2 7.3 7.1 8.6 22 -Feb 9.3 8.6 8.7 8.8 23 -Feb 7.7 7.6 8.4 8.5 23 -Feb 7.2 7.3 7.9 7.5 24 -Feb 8.8 9.3 7.8 8.2 24 -Feb 8.8 9 8.1 9.1 25 -Feb 8.4 8.4 7.7 9.5 25 -Feb 9.3 9.5 8.4 9.6 26 -Feb 8.7 10.1 7.7 9 26 -Feb 9 9.9 7.7 10.7 27 -Feb 8.2 8.6 8.7 9.3 27 -Feb 9.3 10.2 9 9.7 5 -Mar 8.8 9.5 9.2 8.6 5 -Mar 8.4 9.2 7.5 9.9 6 -Mar 8.2 9.2 7.9 11 6 -Mar 9.3 10.4 8.2 9.9 7 -Mar 8.1 9.7 7 9.1 7 -Mar 9.4 9 7.1 8.8 8 -Mar 9.8 8.3 Max 10.6 Max 11 Avg. 8.503333 Avg. 8.037931 Std. 1.036285 Std. 1.336246 Table 2 2011 Turbidity Difference Measurements Cm Dredge Disposal Date Surface Mid Depth Surface Mid Depth 0.85 0.86 1.84 2.06 2.54 2.54 1.03 1.02 2/25/2011 2.4 2.5 1.71 1.73 0.8 0.7 1.7 1.6 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.7 2.9 2.8 3.9 3.9 2/26/2011 1.62 1.58 1.61 1.55 2/27/2011 3 3.5 1 1.4 2/28/2011 0.7 0.7 1.2 1.4 1.1 1.2 0.8 0.9 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.2 3/1/2011 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.4 1.4 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 0.8 1 1.4 1.5 0.9 0.8 1.7 1.6 3/3/2011 4.4 4.5 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.3 4.4 4.4 3 2.8 3.3 3.5 3/4/2011 2.9 3.2 3.6 3.4 4.8 4.6 5.6 5.7 1.6 1.6 3.6 3.7 3/5/2011 5.2 5.1 0.9 0.7 2.2 2.3 3.9 3.8 2.2 2.1 4.7 4.8 2.5 2.4 8.2 8 1.2 1_4 9.6 9.5 3/6/2011 3.1 3.1 8 7.7 2.3 2.2 5.2 5.2 9.7 10.3 7 7.1 3/8/2011 8.1 8.6 6.4 6.3 7.1 7.3 9.6 9.6 6.7 7.1 8.9 8.2 3/9/2011 3.9 3.9 5.5 5.3 8.9 8.8 8.5 8.6 3/12/2011 0.9 0.8 6.2 6.2 4.4 4.4 6.8 6.7 3/13/2011 3.9 4 63 6.3 7.8 7.7 4.4 4.1 2.6 3 3.1 3 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.2 3.4 3.6 2.1 1.8 3/14/2011 2.9 2.8 8.8 9.2 8.1 8.1 2.7 2.6 3.6 3.5 7.3 7.2 3.3 3.3 4.2 4.7 9.9 9.9 3.9 3.8 3/15/2011 4.2 4.4 2.2 2.4 3.3 3.2 2.2 2.4 5.1 5.1 2.2 2 Max. 10.3 Max. 9.6 Avg. 3.4629 Avg. 3.9505 Std. 2.5102385 Std. 2.6682705 Cm As an additional precaution, turbidity curtains are proposed in two areas. These areas should have low currents, since they are at the sides of channels protecting habitat. If currents prove too strong, the curtains will be removed. The curtains will be used when dredge and fill operations occur adjacent to the area and are marked by a "T" on the enclosed figure. A secondary precaution may be dredging only on the outgoing tide, if the turbidity standards cannot be maintained inside the inlet. This may not be effective since some areas in the inlet are more than 450 in from the Gulf. The 2009 and 2011 turbidity results were based upon Gulf of Mexico measurements. The proposed project will have both open Gulf readings and readings within the interior channels. Turbidity in the interior channels can be intensified by confinement between the adjacent shorelines, which supports either higher NTU differences or a longer compliance distance. This request includes a greater compliance distance to compensate for the confinement inside the inlet. Summary Collier County requests the granting of a mixing zone variance of 450 meters offshore and 450 meters down - current from the dredge and disposal areas into the Gulf of Mexico for a duration of 45 days from the start of excavation, or until the permitted construction period ends (prior to the start of sea turtle nesting) for maintenance dredging and 150 days for initial construction. The requested turbidity requirements for these areas are �. proposed to be 29 NTUs outside of OFW and 10 NTUs within OFW. Additionally, the nearest hardbottom point and patch of seagrass will be monitored when within 450 meters of dredging. USACE RAI No. 1 Response and Relevant Attachments (Complete Attachments Provided on CD) M A � F •TTATF.S O. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1520 ROYAL PALM SQUARE BOULEVARD, SUITE 310 FORT MYERS, FLORIDA 33919 MAR Y 9 2010 South Permits Branch /Fort Myers Section SAJ- 1987 -1080 (IP -SJF) Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. c/o Stephen Keehn, P.E. 2481 NW Boca Raton Boulevard Boca Raton, FL 33610 Attention Stephen Keehn, P.E.: RECEIVED MAR $ 2 2010 BY: Reference is made to the permit application, submitted on behalf of the Collier County Coastal Zone Management requesting authorization from the Department of the Army (DA) to conduct maintenance dredging of 80,000 cubic yards from the Wiggins Pass channels and disposal of the dredged material on Barefoot Beach and Delnor Wiggins State park Beach to restore the eroding shorelines. The proposed work area is located within the Wiggins Pass channel and Gulf of Mexico, in Naples, Section(s) 17 & 20, Township 48S, Range 25E, Collier County, Florida. Your application to the Corps of Engineers has been assigned application number SAJ- 2004 -7621 and is being evaluated by Stephen J. Fleming at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Regulatory Office. Please refer to this application number in all future correspondence with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding this project. In order for your application to be considered complete, please provide the following: 1) Please clarify the purpose of the proposed work (navigation, beach re- nourishment, restoration, etc.). Has any dredging or beach re- nourishment occurred under the previously issued permit. 2) Please clarify if the proposed channel alignment is new or a re- establishment of a previously permitted channel. 3) Please provide the Corps with copies of pre- and post- construction survey of the most recent dredging projects as required by FDEP. 4) Please provide the project permit drawings (sheet 1 through 39) on 8.5" x 11" black and white. Please do not submit colored drawings or highlighted plans. SAJ- 2004 -7621 (IP -SJF) Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredge 5) Please clarify the proposed maintenance dredge interval. Is this to be a one -time event or is the applicant requesting a 10 -year permit, with maintenance events every 2 to 4 years. 6) The initial event involves excavation of 80,000 cubic yards of material. Based on historic information, what is the anticipated frequency of future events. What is the estimated cubic yards of excavation for subsequent maintenance dredge events during the entire 10 -year period. Please indicate the total estimated volume to be removed during the entire 10 -year period. 7) Please provide an exhibit on 8.5" x 11" with fill template areas showing the total cubic yards of dredged material to be placed; in the primary disposal site, the secondary disposal site and flood shoal disposal area. Provide an impact plan view and indicate the disposal and excavation areas with volumes noted. The plan should describe the size of the area proposed to be filled, in acres and the approximate volume of fill in cubic yards. 8) It appears the project involves dredging of the ebb shoal from station -2 +00 to 12 +00 to approximately -13.0 feet NAVD, and dredging of the flood shoal C -5 to C- 15 to -8.7 feet NAVD. Please indicate the historic target depth (in NAVD) of any previous maintenance dredging within the ebb shoal and flood shoal channels. 9) The flood shoal disposal area is an area of special concern. Please depict the MLW and MHW on cross sections C7 — C17. Please make a statement concerning any adverse impacts to the existing mangroves. 10) Please indicate the compatibility of the dredged material and the designated disposal area. If there is an excess of dredged material or if material is deemed incompatible, please indicate the method and location of disposal for that material. 11) As points of information, please be aware that: a) any planned upland disposal site "cannot support or is incapable of supporting" the scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) or Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais coupen). 12) Please provide a construction methodology for the proposed work including the type of dredge to be used, length of anticipated construction, the proposed time (i.e., daylight hours only) and location of staging of equipment. Please provide details with respect to the planned disposition of dredged materials including: a) transport via HDPE piping and proposed location of the transport pipe; b) transport process(s) via barge to ultimate disposal site (specify distance via barge to offload area and distance via truck to disposal site); c) state barge draft when fully - loaded. 2 SAJ -2004 -7621 (IP -SJF) Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredge 13) Please complete /submit: a) Manatee Biological Evaluation form; and b) ESA Checklist for Section 7 /ESA (attached). All drawings should be submitted on 8.5" by 11" paper, be black and white, and reproduce well. Also be advised that requests for additional information may be forthcoming pending your response to this letter. Please submit the requested information to Stephen J. Fleming at the letterhead address. No further action will be taken until the additional information has been received. We request that you provide this information within 30 days. If no response is received, we will assume you have no further interest in obtaining a U.S. Department of the Army permit. You are cautioned that commencement of the proposed work prior to U.S. Department of the Army authorization may constitute a violation of Federal laws and subject you to possible enforcement action. Receipt of a permit from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection does not obviate the requirement for obtaining a Department of the Army permit. If you have any questions regarding this letter or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulatory program, please contact Mr. Stephen J. Fleming at 239 - 334 -1975, Ext. 22. Attachments Copy: applicant Sincerely, Stephen J. Flemin E. Project Manager MANATEE BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION October 2008 The Corps has determined that your project has the potential to affect the endangered West Indian manatee. Therefore, pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, the Corps is required to seek consultation from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the proposed project. In order to assist us in making our final effect determination, we need you to provide us with information for items 4 -8 below: 1. Description of the action considered: The proposed project consists of 2. Description of the specific areas that may be affected by the action (scope of analysis): a. The proposed "action area"' is determined to be all or a portion of reach(es) , based on the overall project purpose which is b. The project site is located within which regional management unit of the West Indian manatee? (circle response) (1) Atlantic (east coast of Florida from St. Mary's River south to Cape Sable in Monroe County, and the lower St. Johns River from its mouth south to Rice Creek in Putnam County) (2) Upper St. Johns River (Rice Creek in Putnam County south to State Road 528 in Orange and Brevard Counties) (3) Southwest Florida (west coast of Florida from Pasco County south to Cape Sable in Monroe County) (4) Northwest Florida (west coast of Florida from Hernando County north and west to the Perdido River in Escambia County) 3. Description of any designated critical habitat that may be affected by the action. The action may affect the endangered West Indian manatee, but not affect its critical habitat. 4. Description of the manner in which the action may affect the manatee or its critical habitat: a. Habitat. Check those that would apply to within 1 -mile of the project site and a brief description. The "action area" is defined as the area to be affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action. Direct effects are those effects that are caused by or will result from the proposed action. Indirect effects are those effects that are later in time. (1) Source of warm water input to the area? (2) Source of fresh water input to the area? (3) Does submerged or emergent aquatic vegetation or mangrove or algae occur within the footprint of the project and in the area of ingress- egress to the project site? If mangrove or emergent vegetation is present, provide a description, including type and location. For submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), a survey during the growing season is highly recommended. For SAV, excluding Johnson's seagrass, the growing season extends from June 1 to September 30. The growing season for Johnson's seagrass is from April 1 to August 31. For freshwater SAV, such as Vallisneria, the growing season varies by location. (4) Are existing depths greater than -3 feet mean low water or ordinary high water in the footprint of the project and the surrounding area? b. Proposed Facility (if existing facility, show proposed change). (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Length of shoreline associated with the proposed or existing facility Number of proposed slips (wet and dry) Number of existing (previously authorized wet and dry) slips Launching facilities: ramp , travel lift , other Number of parking spaces for launching facility Number of estimated launches per day c. Project Influence on Vessel Use Patterns. The project's facilities may affect vessel use patterns in the area by attracting transient traffic or causing modification of existing vessel navigation patterns. (1) Are there existing studies or reports that describe boating activities, vessel traffic, or compliance with speed zones in the action area? If yes, provide references as appropriate. (2) The proposed facility will provide the following services: (a) Permanent moorings (leased on an annual or monthly basis) for: commercial use (including fishing vessels, charter boats, rental boats, etc.). Number of slips non - commercial use (including privately -owned recreational boats). Number of slips (b) CM Transient moorings (leased or used on a daily basis) for: Temporary berths: Number of slips Type of use: Fuel Pump -out Other October 2008 (3) What is the estimated number of slips used for the following? (a) Used primarily for day trips (b) Used primarily for longer trips (c) Used primarily for dockside entertainment d. Speed Zones. It is important to consider the presence and effectiveness of on- going enforcement activities within the action area. Is the project in a State - established manatee speed zone or Federal manatee refuge? (If not, how close is the nearest speed zone? miles) 5. Relevant reports, including any environmental impact statement, environmental assessment, or biological assessment prepared. Provide any relevant reports prepared for this project. 6. Any other relevant information available on the action, the manatee and its critical habitat. Provide any other information available that would assist in our review of the effects your proposal may have on the manatee or its critical habitat, including specific actions you may propose to eliminate or minimize potential effects on the manatee and its critical habitat. 7. A Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) Manatee Impact Review. Provide a copy of the review, if applicable or available. Notify the Corps if the project is exempt from State permitting, regulatory review or authorized under a Noticed General Permit. 8. Additionally, for projects within counties having a State - approved Manatee Protection Plan (MPP), a determination of project consistency with the MPP is needed. The FWC typically makes the determination and includes it in its Manatee Impact Review. The following counties have State - approved MPPs: Brevard, Broward, Citrus, Clay, Collier, Duval, Indian River, Lee, Martin, Miami -Dade, Palm Beach, St. Lucie; Sarasota and Volusia. All State - approved MPPs are available for download at: www.myfwc.com. a. If there is a FWC Manatee Impact Review available at the time of your application submission, include a copy of the review. b. If the FWC review is not available at the time of application submission, you may attempt your own consistency determination and submit it with your application. If you do this, provide the supporting information and MPP reference which you believe makes your project consistent with the MPP for your county. In some cases, the supporting information may include a county MPP consistency letter. If so, submit it as part of your determination. October 2008 Checklist of Information Needed to Complete Section 7 Consultations for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Division Applications Project Specifications: *Project or name of applicant, Action ID number *Describe the location of the project site (address and latitude /longitude information). Location data must be given datum (e.g., NAD83) and lat/long format using decimal - degrees (not minutes and seconds): e.g., 27.71622N, 80.25174W. On -Iine conversion: http:// www. fcc. gov/ mb/ audio ibickel /DDDMMSS- decimal.html •In which body of water is the project located? If on a river or estuary, state the approximate navigable distance from the bay, ocean, or gulf). Site Description: aDescribe any existing structures and their use - for instance, acreage of overwater structures, if it's an existing marina, how many boat slips are present and what is their size. •Is the project location within designated critical habitat? •If moiect occurs in critical habitat, are PCEs present? Print Form *What are the baseline conditions within the project area, including substrate type? *Are seagrasses present in the project area? Include percent coverage estimates by species and the relative location of seagrass in relation to proposed structures. Was a seagrass or benthic habitat survey completed? If so, please submit. * •Are mangroves present in or near the project area? Which species (red, black, white) and how much? *Are corals present in or near the project area? Include density or percent coverage estimates by species and describe proximity of corals to proposed structures. •Was a benthic survey conducted within Johnson's seagrass growing season (April 1 - August 31)? Yes No Construction Methods/ Project Description: *Construction methods, including description of any demolition of existing structures or removal of debris. Will the work be done from a barge or uplands? •For docks, what type of decking will be used? If grated, provide manufacturer's name/ address /grating type, and percent light transmittance ( %LT) of the grating design used? If wooden planks, what is the proposed spacing between the deckboards (' /z- inch,' /4 -inch, I -inch, other ?). Has the applicant been advised that COE- NWSproject review is significantly simplified and expedited for dock designs incorporating >43% LT grated decking, or 1 -inch deckboard- and walkway- spacing, over Johnson's seagrass areas? Proposed height of dock? Orientation of the dock (N, S, etc.)? •Piling construction methodology. Are pile driving methods adequately described and are potential impacts to species adequately addressed? Will submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) be impacted by pile installation? If necessary, will the applicant's contractor adjust the spacing between piles to avoid driving piles onto Johnson's seagrass? Avoiding all pil ing impacts to JSG will significantly simplify and expedite the COE -NWS project review process. *Number of new slips and size of slips, if applicable. If new construction includes High - and -Dry boat storage, what is the High -and -Dry vessel storage capacity? *How big are the boats that are planned to be moored at the dock (either in the water or on a boatlift), if known? *For all projects not involving docks or marinas (i.e., seawalls, jetties, etc.), please provide project description. *Dredging? If yes, describe depth of cut, dredge type used, how many cubic yards, and what will be done with the spoil. Describe bottom sediments. Describe area hydrodynamics, i.e., average current speed and direction. *Blasting? If yes, describe explosive weights, blasting plan, etc. •What is the intended construction schedule (how many days, weeks, or months for in- water work)? Potential Effects on Species /Critical Habitat: *Please explain any impacts /effects to the critical habitat's primary constituent elements - PCEs)? Please identify which critical habitat unit(s) is being affected (e.g., Gulf sturgeon have 14 units, seven under NMFS jurisdiction and seven under FWS jurisdiction). oWhat will the effects be, if any, to each PCE? *Square footage to be affected by project? •Will mangroves be impacted? Explain and quantify impacts. *How will the habitat be changed/altered as a result of the action? Could or will the alteration affect listed species? How? •Listed species within the project area: Sea turtles Smalltooth sawfish Elkhorn coral Johnson's seagrass Staghorn coral Gulf sturgeon •Explain potential effects to each species checked above: *Shading impacts from construction. Shortnose sturgeon North Atlantic right whales Other whales *What is the estimated shadow effect of the boat (sq ft of shaded area beneath)? *Discuss potential anchoring impacts to seagrass and corals. Discuss available water depth under the keel/propeller at Mean Low Water and the potential for prop dredging or blowouts. Discuss potential prop - scarring impacts to corals and seagrasses. *Describe increased boat traffic impacts, if any. Are there posted speed zones in the area? •Describe Noise Impacts (this section not applicable to single - family, multi - family, and marina dock projects where piles driven are 12 inches or less in diameter). *Source level of noise exceeds 120 dB re luPa RMS for continuous noise Yes No *Source level exceeds 160 dB re 1 uPa RMS for impulsive noise Yes No •Source level exceeds 180 dB re 1 uPa zero to peak Yes No Effects Determination: *For executing the action (i.e., construction activities) No Effect NLAA May Affect *For the result of the action (i.e., new dock) No Effect NLAA May Affect •If "No Effect" is determined for all species and critical habitat, please note your findings in a memorandum to your project file; no consultation/concurrence with/from NMFS is required. Memo made N/A Mitigation/Protective Measures: •Will the applicant follow the August 2001 Dock Construction Guidelines? Yes No •Will the applicant follow the October 2002 Johnson's Seagrass Key? Yes No •Will the Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions, dated March 23, 2006, be followed? Yes No •If not following any of the above, please explain: *Turbidity controls? If yes, description of type used. *What are the proposed avoidance, minimization, and compensatory measures? Each consultation letter should address the impacts listed in the checklist and their associated effects on listed species and their critical habitat. An explanation of how the impacts occur, their effects, and any mitigative measures that will be implemented to reduce the projects effects on listed species and their critical habitat should be included in the consultation letter. * If Johnson's seagrass is present, please consult the following: •Dock Construction Guidelines in Florida for Docks or Other Minor Structures Constructed in or over Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, Marsh or Mangrove Habitat - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers /National Marine Fisheries Service, dated August 2001 •Key for Construction Conditions for Docks or Other Minor Structures Constructed in or Over Johnson's Seagrass (Halophila johnsonii)National Marine Fisheries Service/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, dated October 2002 Updated: August 2008 is 8500.83 January 30, 2012 Tunis McElwain Section Chief U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Section/South Permits Branch 1520 Royal Palm Square Blvd., Suite 310 Ft. Myers, FL 33919 Re: Collier County, Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project, Application No. SAJ- 2004 -7621 Dear Mr. McElwain: This letter is in response to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) March 1, 2010 first Request for Additional Information (RAI #1) for the referenced project. Enclosed please find one hardcopy and one (1) electronic copy of our response. Please note that our responses and supporting appendices have been numbered to correspond with the numbers of the questions contained in the RAI. This RAI response includes the results of a site visit with Lauren Diaz (USACE) and Mark Sramek (National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)). In coordination with Stephen Fleming, the permit file was closed last year, and we request that it be reopened with this response. Once the file has been reactivated and a new Project Manager assigned, please let us know if you would like to conduct a meeting (conference call or in person) where we can provide an overview of the modifications and updates to the proposed project since original submittal of the permit application. In addition to the information the Corps has requested, the enclosed CD also contains the entire initial 2010 permit application, the complete FDEP RAI No. 1 response and attachments, and relevant 2011 maintenance dredging project submittals. USACE Comment No. 1 — Please clarify the purpose of the proposed work (navigation, beach renourishment, restoration, etc.). Has any dredging or beach renourishment occurred under the previously issued permit? CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 1 — Refer to the updated project description provided as Appendix No. 1 -a. The last dredging of Wiggins Pass occurred in winter 2011. No beach nourishment has occurred within the vicinity of the Pass except as sand from dredging the inlet placed on adjacent beaches and nearshore. The updated engineering report describes the history of the project area (the abridged version is provided as Appendix No. 1 -b; the complete report is provided on CD as FDEP RAI Attachment No. 33a). USACE Comment No. 2 — Please clarify if the proposed channel alignment is new or a re- establishment of a previously permitted channel. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County Wiggins Pass SAJ- 2004 -7621 RAI No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 2 CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 2 — The proposed channel alignment contains portions of previously permitted channel locations and newly, never permitted areas of the channel. Within the last 60 to 85 years, all portions of the proposed flood channel were free flowing. FDEP Appendix No. 1 -a (on CD) illustrates the new channel and the outline of the previously permitted channel dredge area. USACE Comment No. 3 — Please provide the Corps with copies of pre- and post - construction survey of the most recent dredging projects as required by FDEP. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 3 — The post - construction engineering report for the 2011 maintenance dredging project was previously provided to the Corps; an electronic copy is enclosed on CD with this response as "2011 Maintenance Dredging Project Submittals ". USACE Comment No. 4 — Please provide the project permit drawings (sheet 1 through 39) on 8.5" x 11" black and white. Please do not submit colored drawings or highlighted plans. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 4 — Updated black and white permit sketches are provided as Appendix No. 4. USACE Comment No. 5 — Please clarify the proposed maintenance dredge interval. Is this to be a one- time event or is the applicant requesting a 10 -year permit, with maintenance events every 2 to 4 years. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 5 — A 10 year permit is desired. The requested project contains one initial major dredging (84,900 cubic yards) in order to realign the channel along with smaller maintenance dredging events every 2 to 4 years as described in Appendix No. 1 -a. USACE Comment No. 6 — The initial event involves excavation of 80,000 cubic yards of material. Based on historic information, what is the anticipated frequency of future events? What is the estimated cubic yards of excavation for subsequent maintenance dredge events during the entire 10 -year period. Please indicate the total estimated volume to be removed during the entire 10 -year period. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 6 — The project description in Appendix No. 1 -a lists the 10 year dredge cycle. In general, it consists of an initial dredging, major maintenance dredging every 4 years, and minor maintenance dredging in between, for a 10 year total of approximately 214,000 cubic yards. The existing project requires dredging at most every 2 years for a volume of at least 50,000 cubic yards. This is a cumulative volume of at least 300,000 cubic yards every decade. The proposed dredging plan is a distinct improvement. USACE Comment No. 7 — Please provide an exhibit on 8.5" x 11" with fill template areas showing the total cubic yards of dredged material to be placed; in the primary disposal site, the secondary disposal site and flood shoal disposal area. Provide an impact plan view and indicate the disposal and excavation areas with volumes noted. The plan should describe the size of the area proposed to be filled, in acres and the approximate volume of fill in cubic yards. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County Wiggins Pass SAJ- 2004 -7621 RAI No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 3 CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 7 — The yardage is summarized in Appendix No. 1 -a with an accompanying project figure (see below), and the acreage of each dredge and fill area is listed below. Dredge Template: Existing and new channels- 15.8 acres (687,728.2 SF) Disposal Areas (total): 67.4 acres (2,936,000 SF) New meander (flood channel) fill- 4.5 acres (196,000 SF) New & existing North Barefoot Beach nearshore disposal area- 23.7 acres (1,032,400 SF) New ebb shoal disposal area- 6.9 acres (300,600 SF) Existing south (DWSP) nearshore disposal area- 11.3 acres (492,200 SF) Offshore (1996 BA 6) disposal area- 21.0 acres (915,000 SF) a -- - 1 C26 C35 I "BAREFOOT BEACH FLOOD SHOAL - 1 PRESERVE DISPOSAL AREA C33 DELNOR- WIGGINS I PASS STATE PARK .R -13 aR -14 •RAS R -16 015.5 / R -17 \ & .R -16 SCARP REPAIR ` DREDGE AREA PRIMARY (NORTH) — — — — NEARSHORE AND BEACN SECONDARY (S / DISPOSAL AREA OUTH) / NEARSHORE / EBB SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA DISPOSAL AREA GULF MEXICO _ ` "� t NOTE: ONSHORE DISPOSAL. IS FUTURE PLAN Figure 1: Project Component Map The amount of initial construction volume is provided below. The ebb shoal volume can vary between 24,000 cy and 58,000 cy depending on timing: 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County Wiggins Pass SAJ- 2004 -7621 RAI No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 4 Dredge Template: Ebb shoal channel - Flood shoal channel- Transition (incompatible)- Disposal Areas Fill: New meander (flood channel) fill - North nearshore & ebb shoal disposal area - South (DWSP) nearshore disposal area - Offshore (1996 BA 6) disposal area- 41,000 cy 36,400 cy 7,500 cy 39,200 cy 38,200 cy None initially 7,500 cy USACE Comment No. 8 — It appears the project involves dredging of the ebb shoal from station -2 +00 to 12 +00 to approximately -13.0 feet NAVD, and dredging of the flood shoal C -5 to C -15 to -8.7 feet NAVD. Please indicate the historic target depth (in NAVD) of any previous maintenance dredging within the ebb shoal and flood shoal channels. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 8 — The table below summarizes historic dredge channel dimensions (planned and dredged) versus those proposed with this project. USACE Comment No. 9 — The flood shoal disposal area is an area of special concern. Please depict the MLW and MHW on cross sections C7 — C 17. Please make a statement concerning any adverse impacts to the existing mangroves. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 9 — Refer to updated permit sketches in Appendix No. 4. No adverse impacts to the mangroves are anticipated from the dredging or by the constructed project. Relocation of flood meander to the south will relieve erosion pressures from the channel against the mangroves and adjacent Barefoot Beach shoreline occurring now. The mangroves have lost 0.3 acres in the last 30 years. Turbidity curtains will be used to protect mangroves and an adjacent ephemeral seagrass patch located next to dredge and fill operations. The elevation of the flood disposal area is MLLW (- 2.28" NAVD), which is lower than the roots of the mangroves. • 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY c Collier County Wiggins Pass SAJ- 2004 -7621 RAI No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 5 USACE Comment No. 10 — Please indicate the compatibility of the dredged material and the designated disposal area. If there is an excess of dredged material or if material is deemed incompatible, please indicate the method and location of disposal for that material. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 10 — Please refer to an abridged version of the updated geological report, provided as Appendix. No. 10 (the complete report is provided on the enclosed CD as FDEP RAI Attachment No. 27). All compatible dredged material will be used to fill the meander, beach, nearshore, and ebb shoal disposal area. Unsuitable material will be placed in an offshore disposal area. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Bottom Depth Station Location Width (ft.) Over-dredge Depth (ft.) (ft) NAVD Corps 1980 Ebb Channel 150 +100 -13.3 1.0 Throat * +50 -150 -10.3 1.0 Flood Side Channel 50 -9.3 1.0 2000 -07 Permit Ebb Channel 250 -13.3 1.0 Throat 150 -8.8 1.0 Flood Side Channel 125 -6 0.0 Ebb Shoal -13.0 2011 Dredge (170,) 1.0 Throat 150 -8.7 1.0 Proposed 2010 Permit Ebb Channel * 240-160 -12.0 1.0 Throat 160 -12.0 1.0 Flood Channel 130 -7.7 1.0 USACE Comment No. 10 — Please indicate the compatibility of the dredged material and the designated disposal area. If there is an excess of dredged material or if material is deemed incompatible, please indicate the method and location of disposal for that material. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 10 — Please refer to an abridged version of the updated geological report, provided as Appendix. No. 10 (the complete report is provided on the enclosed CD as FDEP RAI Attachment No. 27). All compatible dredged material will be used to fill the meander, beach, nearshore, and ebb shoal disposal area. Unsuitable material will be placed in an offshore disposal area. 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY • Collier County Wiggins Pass SAJ- 2004 -7621 RAI No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 6 USACE Comment No. 11 — As points of information, please be aware that: a) any planned upland disposal site "cannot support or is incapable of supporting" the scrub jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens) or Eastern indigo snake (Drymarchon corais couperi). CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 11 — Non - compatible material will be placed in an offshore borrow pit (BA -6), which has been previously permitted, as shown in the permit sketches in Appendix No. 4. No upland disposal site is currently proposed. USACE Comment No. 12 — Please provide a construction methodology for the proposed work including the type of dredge to be used, length of anticipated construction, the proposed time (i.e. daylight hours only) and location of staging of equipment. Please provide details with respect to the planned disposition of dredged materials including: a) transport via HDPE piping and proposed location of the transport pipe; b) transport processes(s) via barge to ultimate disposal site (specify distance via barge to offload area and distance via truck to disposal site) c) state barge draft when fully loaded. CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 12 — Refer to updated project description in Appendix No. 1 -a and a construction description provided in Appendix No. 12. The size of barge will be determined by the contractor, but they must fit in the inlet, not block boat traffic, and not be a threat to manatees. Given the controlling inlet depth is at the bar, depths should not be a threat to manatees inside the inlet since interior depths are greater. USACE Comment No. 13 — Please complete /submit: a) Manatee Biological Evaluation form; and b) ESA Checklist for Section 7 /ESA (attached). CPE Response to USACE Comment No. 13 — The completed Manatee Biological Evaluation form and ESA Checklist are provided as Appendices 13 -a and 13 -b, respectively. If you should have any questions, please call me or Lauren Floyd, our marine biologist. Sincerely, COAS PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Steph n K ehn, P.E. Senior stal Engineer cc: Gary McAlpin, Collier County, w /enclosure Lainie Edwards, FDEP BBCS, w /enclosure on CD Lauren Floyd, CPE Nicole Sharp, CPE 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Collier County Wiggins Pass SAJ- 2004 -7621 RAI No. 1 January 30, 2012 Page 7 Additional Enclosures Provided on CD: 2010 JCP application with attachments FDEP RAI No. 1 Response with attachments 2011 Maintenance Dredging Project Submittals L*] 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 561.391.8102 • FAX 561.391.9116 • COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY Appendix No. 13 -a Manatee Biological Evaluation Om Appendix No. 13 -a Manatee Biological Evaluation The Corps has determined that your project has the potential to affect the endangered West Indian manatee. Therefore, pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, the Corps is required to seek consultation from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the proposed project. In order to assist us in making our final effect determination, we need you to provide us with information for items 4 -7 below: 4. Description of the manner in which the action may affect the manatee or its critical habitat: a) Habitat. Check those that would apply to within 1 -mile of the project site and a brief description. 1) Source of warm water input to the area? No. 2) Source of fresh water input to the area? Yes. Wiggins Pass is a relatively large area of mangrove swamp with a series of coastal bays connecting the Cocohatchee River to the Gulf of Mexico. The project area includes marine%stuarine environments within Wiggins Pass. 3) Does submerged or emergent aquatic vegetation or mangrove or algae occur within the footprint of the project and in the area of ingress- egress to the project site? If mangrove or emergent vegetation is present, provide a description, including type and location. For submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), a survey during the growing season is highly recommended. For estuarine /marine submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), excluding Johnson's seagrass, the growing season extends from June 1, to September 30. The growing season for Johnson's seagrass is from April 1 to August 31. For freshwater SAV, such as Pallisnaria, the growing season varies by location. Check with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for the dates applicable to the area of your project. No submerged or emergent aquatic vegetation, algae or mangroves occur within the footprint of the project area or in the area of ingress- egress to the project site. However, outside the project footprint, the shallow estuarine waters and the adjacent tidal areas within and adjacent to Wiggins Pass support productive mangrove forests and seagrass beds. Mangrove forests, including red (Rhizophora mangle), black (Avicennia germinans) and white (Laguncularia racemosa), fringe the waterways, while small red mangrove islands dot the estuary. Red and black mangroves dominate those areas which are frequently inundated by normal tidal action while white mangroves and buttonwoods (Conocarpus erectus) are usually found at slightly higher elevations where tidal inundation is less frequent. The mangroves are not located within the project footprint or within the area of ingress - egress to the project site (Figure 1). Several field investigations over the years conducted by CPE and others (during the seagrass growing season) have revealed scattered seagrass beds within the vicinity of the project area (see Figure 1). The beds are found in sparse to moderate density. Three species have been observed in the area, including Cuban shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum), and paddle grass (Halophila decipiens), although shoal grass is overwhelmingly the most common species observed. These beds are typically found along the shallow shelf lining the main navigational channel, and within the shallow protected areas fringing the small mangrove islands. The seagrass beds are not located within the project footprint or within the area of ingress- egress to the project site. 4) Are existing depths greater than -3 feet mean low water in the footprint of project and the surrounding area? Yes. b) Proposed Facility (if existing facility, show proposed change). N /A. This project does not include construction of any facility. c) Project Influence on Vessel Use Patterns. The project's facilities may affect vessel use patterns in the area by attracting transient traffic or causing modification of existing vessel navigation patterns. N /A. This project does not include construction of any facility. d) Enforcement Activities. It is important to consider the presence and effectiveness of ongoing enforcement activities within the action area. 1) Is the project in a State - established manatee speed zone or Federal manatee refuge? (If not, how close is the nearest speed zone? miles). The project is located in a State - established manatee speed zone which limits boats to slow speed year -round (68C-22.023, F.A.C.). 2) Describe existing enforcement activities regulating speed zones within the action area. Several local and Federal law enforcement agencies can enforce regulatory speed zones in Collier County, including City of Naples Police, Collier County Sheriff's Office, U.S. Coast Guard and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) (Collier County Recreational Boat Traffic Study, April 2010). 5. Relevant reports, including any environmental impact statement, environmental assessment, or biological assessment prepared. Provide any relevant reports prepared for this project. In October 2010 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) concurred with the Corps' determination that the Wiggins Pass maintenance dredging project related activities "may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect" the West Indian manatee, providing the project complies with the "Standard Manatee Conditions for In -Water Work" (SAJ-1 98 7-01080 (IP- SJF)). The USFWS also concurred with the "no affect" determination for nesting sea turtles. A draft of the October 14, 2010 USFWS concurrence letter is provided as Appendix 13 -a -1. This is relevant to the proposed project, as the proposed Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project is an expanded and modified version of the 2011 maintenance dredging project, with the exception that it may eventually also include placement of some compatible fill on beach habitat pending coordination with the State and County on land use issues. 6. Any other relevant information available on the action, the manatee and its critical habitat. Provide any other information available that would assist in our review of the effects your proposal may have on the manatee or its critical habitat, including specific actions you may propose to minimize or eliminate potential effects on the manatee and its critical habitat. Manatees have the potential to occur in Wiggins Pass; however, there is no manatee critical habitat located within the project vicinity. During construction of the proposed project, Collier County will require that the contractor adhere to the "2011 Standard Manatee Conditions for In -Water Work': 7. A Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) Manatee Impact Review. Provide a copy of the review, if applicable or available. There is no FWC Manatee Impact Review available for this project. L--q t� 1 t ti I I ! / t clf�/ { • LEGEND: PROPOSED DISPOSAL AREA 2011 PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT — AUGUST 2009 SSS HARDBOTTOM EDGE Q 2009 OYSTEP, BEDS ' ^^ 2009 EDGE OF MANGROVE t 2011 SURVEYED SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTII) t 2009 SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTII) s t HALOPHILA DECIPIENS t _ 2008 SURVEYED SEAGRASS t 2000 -2007 PERMITTED DREDGE TEMPLATE 1 Vr REPORTED ROCK SUBSTRATE (CEC 1990. CPE 1995) t OUTSTANDING FLORIDA WATERS 0 325 650 O OTHER Feet SPECIAL 1 inch = 650 feet 1 2009 GOPHER TORTOISE BURROW SURVEY Ca t m VERY ACTIVE 1 ACTIVE 1 INACTIVE Q t • ABANDONED S NOTES: T.–CMMINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, EAST ZONE, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD 83). 2. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY FOVIN BY AERIAL CARTOGRPAHICS OF AMERICA, INC., DATE FLOWN SEPTEMBER 25, 2009. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED BY CPE ON DECEMBER 10, 2008 JULY 13 &14,2009 AND SEPTEMBER 29.2011. 4. LOCATION OF ROCK LEDGE TAKEN FROM 1995 INLET MANAGMENT PLAN (CPE 1995). BUT WAS ORGINALLY IDENTIFIED BY CEC IN 1990. Figure 1. Natural resources located in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass. Attachment No. 13 -a -1 USFWS October 14, 2010 Concurrence Letter for previous Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging (SAJ- 1987 -01080 (IP -SJF)) October 14, 2010 Donnie Kinard U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Fort Myers Regulatory Office 1520 Royal Palm Square Boulevard, Suite 310 Fort Myers, Florida 33919 Service Federal Activity Code: 41420 -2010- CPA -0516 Service Consultation Code: 41420- 2010 -I -0389 Corps Application No Date Received Applicant: Project: County: Dear Mr. Kinard: SAJ- 1987 -01080 (1P -SJF) September 13, 2010 Collier County Coastal Zone Management Department Maintenance Dredging Collier The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the letter, Public Notice, and supplemental documents submitted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for the project referenced above. This letter represents the Service's review of the proposed project in accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958, as amended (48 Stat. 401; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq. ). PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Collier County Coastal Zone Management Department (Applicant) proposes to dredge approximately 49,990 cubic yards of accreted sand, shell, and sediment from Wiggins Pass channel. The project is located within Wiggins Pass and nearshore waters adjacent to Barefoot Beach, Collier County, Florida at latitude 26.2896 and longitude - 81.8288 (Figure 1). The purpose of the dredging action is to improve inlet navigation conditions within the Wiggins Pass channel by restoring navigation depth and removing existing hazards to commercial and recreational vessel operations. The project area lies within Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA) Unit FL -65P, Wiggins Pass. This unit is part of the Coastal Barrier Resources System (System) which supports suitable habitat for species listed under the Act. The purposes of CBRA are to minimize the loss of human life, wasteful expenditure of Federal revenues, and damage to fish, wildlife, and other 0 Donnie Kinard Page 2 natural resources associated with units of the System. Because there is no Federal funding allocated for the proposed project, there are no CBRA- related restrictions. Dredging and Sand Placement The Applicant proposes to conduct maintenance dredging of Wiggins Pass channel to a depth of -14.2 feet North American Vertical Datum with a 1 -foot allowable overdredge depth. The dredge template will be approximately 150 feet to 250 feet wide by 1,300 feet long. A hydraulic dredge equipped with a 16 -inch cutter head will remove the material from the channel and dispose of it in nearshore waters by way of a floating spill barge. The dredge will be attached to the spill barge by a floating or submerged pipeline. All dredge material will be placed in a nearshore spoil area (17.72 acres) adjacent to Barefoot Beach located between Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) reference monuments R -11.4 and R -14.2. No dredge material will be placed above mean low water (MLW). The project will be conducted entirely from the water with no construction or equipment on the adjacent beaches. Dredging is scheduled to commence as soon all regulatory authorizations are in place. The Applicant anticipates that the project including mobilization and demobilization will take approximately 2 months to complete. Dredging and nearshore sand placement activities will take place on a 24 hour per day, 7 days per week schedule, and will not be conducted during the peak sea turtle nesting season (May 1 through October 31). 0 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES West Indian manatee The Service has reviewed information included with the Corps' letter, Public Notice, supplemental documents, as well as our Geographic Information System database, for recorded locations of federally listed threatened and endangered species, and designated critical habitat on or adjacent to the project area. Our review determined that critical habitat for the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) has not been designated in or adjacent to the project area. To reduce direct construction related effects to the manatee, the Corps will incorporate the Standard Manatee Conditions for In -water Work (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 2010) as a condition for carrying out the proposed project. Indirect effects of the project to the manatee are ameliorated by enforcement of the boating safety zones by Federal and local law enforcement agencies. Based on implementation of the above stated conditions, the Service concurs with the Corps' determination that project related activities "may affect, but are not likely to adversely affect" the West Indian manatee. The Service does not anticipate the proposed action will result in the incidental take of manatees. Furthermore, the Service is not including an incidental take authorization for marine mammals at this time because the incidental take of marine mammals is not expected to occur and has not been authorized under section 101(a)(5) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as Donnie Kinard Page 3 amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.). Following issuance of such regulations or authorizations, the Service may reinitiate consultation to include an incidental take statement for marine mammals, if deemed appropriate. Sea Turtles In the Corps' letter dated September 10, 2010, the Corps determined the proposed channel dredging project will have "no affect" on the threatened loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), the endangered leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), the endangered green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), the endangered hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricate), and the endangered Kemp's ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii), and requested concurrence with this determination. Of the 36.8 miles of coastline in Collier County, the County is responsible for the daily survey of 23.7 miles of shoreline for sea turtle activities during the nesting season (May I through October 31). In 2009, 297 loggerhead sea turtle nests were recorded along the 36.8 miles of shoreline, with emergences recorded from May 9 through August 6, 2009. Fifty -nine nests were documented on the 3.1 -mile of shoreline along Barefoot Beach, and 22 nests recorded along 1.2 miles of beach at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Between 2004 and 2009, a mean of 64.3 and 60.5 loggerhead sea turtle nests and false crawls were recorded along Barefoot Beach. During this same time period, a mean of 15.5 nests and 30.8 false crawls were documented along Delnor- Wiggins State Park. In order to minimize potential impacts to sea turtles, the following precautionary measures will be implemented. 1. Construction activities will adhere to the Sea Turtle and Sinalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions (NOAA Fisheries 2006). 2. From May 1 through October 31, direct lighting of the beach and nearshore waters must be limited to the immediate construction area and must comply with the safety requirements. Lighting on offshore equipment must be minimized through reduction, shielding, lowering, and appropriate placement of lights to avoid excessive illumination of the waters surface and nesting beach while meeting all U.S. Coast Guard, EM 385 -1 -1, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements. Shielded low pressure sodium vapor lights are recommended for lights on offshore equipment that cannot be eliminated, and for illumination of the nesting beach and nearshore waters. Construction light intensity must be reduced to the minimum standard required by OSHA for General Construction areas, in order not to misdirect sea turtles. Shields must be affixed to the light housing and be large enough to block light from all lamps from being transmitted outside the construction area. Based on implementation of the above stated precautionary measures, the low number of sea turtle nests, and the fact that dredge material will not be placed above MLW, the Service concurs with the Corps' determination of "no affect" concerning nesting sea turtles. The National f Donnie Kinard Page 4 Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) should be consulted concerning potential impacts to foraging and swimming sea turtles within the project area. This letter fulfills the requirements of section 7 of the Act regarding the West Indian manatee and nesting sea turtles and no further action is required. If modifications are made to the project, if additional information involving potential effects to listed species becomes available, or if a new species is listed, reinitiation of consultation may be necessary. FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES No direct impacts to benthic resources including seagrasses, nearshore hardbottom reef habitat, mangroves, or other vegetated wetlands will occur as a result of project activities. No seagrasses or nearshore hardbottom reef habitat has been identified in the channel dredge template or nearshore spoil area. Hardbottom reef habitat mapping has been conducted in the nearshore region of Wiggins Pass. The most extensive area of hardbottom habitat is located south of Wiggins Pass offshore of Vanderbilt Beach between DEP reference monument R -18 and R -33. The location of this hardbottom habitat has been verified by remote sensing and surveys conducted by Coastal Planning and Engineering between 2003 and 2009. Hardbottom habitat is as close as 200 feet from the shoreline between DEP reference monument R -20 and R -21, and over 1,000 feet offshore at R -18. In addition the offshore area north of Wiggins Pass has been investigated for hardbottom reef habitat, and no exposed hardbottom habitat has been documented. The Service believes impacts to fish and wildlife resources resulting from this project will not be significant. Based on the information provided, the Service does not object to the proposed action as it relates to fish and wildlife resources. We recommend the Corps consult with the NOAA Fisheries concerning potential impacts to nearshore hardbottom reef habitat and seagrasses associated with the proposed dredge template, spoil area, and nearshore waters downdrift and updrift of the project area. Thank you for your cooperation and effort in protecting fish and wildlife resources. If you have any questions regarding this project, please contact Jeff Howe at 772 -562 -3909, extension 283. Sincerely yours, Paul Souza Field Supervisor South Florida Ecological Services Office • Donnie Kinard cc: electronic only Corps, Fort Myers, Florida (Stephen Fleming) DEP, West Palm Beach, Florida (Jennifer Smith) EPA, West Palm Beach, Florida (Ron Miedema) FWC, Imperiled Species Management Section, Tallahassee, Florida (Kellie Youmans and Robbin Trindell) NOAA Fisheries, St. Petersburg, Florida (Mark Sramek) Service, Jacksonville, Florida (Jim Valade) Service, St. Petersburg, Florida (Anne Marie Lauritsen) v 11 Page 5 Donnie Kinard Page 6 LITERATURE CITED Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 2010. Standard Manatee Conditions for In -water Work [Internet]. [cited January 6, 2010]. Available from: http://myfwc.com/docs/WildlifeHabitats/Manatee—StdCondIn- waterWork.pdf. National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries). 2006. Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions [Internet]. [cited October 13, 2010]. Available from: www.dep. state .fl.us /... /SPGP_IV_Attachment 14- Sawfish_SeaTurtlesConstCond.pdf. D u V Donnie Kinard aw� •aNwv «�e «� q aNINNVId T1e10'J - -- — -- - _ "� ny��'� ai°� Y # e N I, 1 v Z v W 0 Q W iii W O I ._.. QUp oz�.. x say_ a �8 85Efifi5�3; 8 zZ o �._ x. z'^ vi W SS n Z ��� He�gi 7� Q 0 m -- Z 5, )' Page 7 Figure 1. Location of the proposed channel dredging project and spoil area adjacent to Wiggins Pass, Collier County, Florida. Attachment No. 13 -b -2 Benthic Resource Surveys (Provided on CD and as Appendix No. 7 to Environmental Data Submittal) C • Appendix No. 3 Abridged Engineering Report (Complete Report Provided on CD) u Engineering Report of an Inlet Management Study in Support of Maintenance Dredging, Navigation Improvement and Erosion Reduction Project For Wiggins Pass, Florida Prepared for: Collier County Coastal Zone Management Prepared By: Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. 2481 N.W. Boca Raton Blvd Boca Raton, FL 33431 January 2012 Engineering Report of an Inlet Management Study in Support of Maintenance Dredging, " Navigation Improvement and Erosion Reduction Project For Wiggins Pass, Florida Table of Contents Introduction.......................................................................................................... ..............................1 Project location map ........................................................................... ..............................2 Physical Inlet Characteristics ................................................................................ .............................10 MHW Shorelines ................................................................................ ..............................7 Geology and Sediment Characteristics ................................................................. .............................38 MHW Shoreline Changes about Wiggins Pass .................................... .............................13 NaturalResources ................................................................................................. .............................42 4 Navigation and Public Safety ................................................................................ .............................49 5 Modeling............................................................................................................. ............................... 57 Inlet Maintenance and Alternatives ...................................................................... .............................63 7 Comprehensive Management Plan ....................................................................... .............................68 8 Conclusions and Recommendations ..................................................................... .............................78 9 References............................................................................................................. .............................85 10 List of Figures Figure No. 1 Project location map ........................................................................... ..............................2 2 MHW Shorelines ................................................................................ ..............................7 3 MHW Shoreline Changes about Wiggins Pass .................................... .............................13 4 Wet/Dry Vegetation Line ..................................................................... .............................14 5 Ebb Shoal Delta Plot ............................................................................ .............................19 6 Wiggins Pass Delta Plot with Alignment ............................................. .............................22 7 Wiggins Pass Sediment Budget — 1992 to 2009 .................................. .............................25 8 Wave Roses based on USACE WIS and WaveWatch 3 data .............. .............................29 9 Measured water level at Wiggins Pass ................................................. .............................31 10 Measured tidal currents, depth averaged ............................................. .............................31 11 Wiggins Pass Inlet Stability Curve from 1995 IMP ............................ .............................34 12 Inlet Stability Curve ............................................................................. .............................35 13 Instantaneous Discharge over one tidal cycle ...................................... .............................35 14 Historic Cocohatchee Flow Curve ....................................................... .............................36 15 Daily Flow Volume .............................................................................. .............................37 16 Cocohatchee Discharge at Weir ........................................................... .............................37 17 Hardbottom and Natural Resource Locations near Wiggins Pass ....... .............................39 18 Seismic Reflector /Contours ................................................................. .............................41 19 Deepest Channel and Spots Depths at Wiggins Pass January 16, 2010 ...........................51 20a -b Pre - Dredge (12 -2010) and Depth Soundings at Wiggins Pass (7- 2011) .......................... 52 2la -c Reported Boating Accidents 2007, 2008, 2009 ................................... .............................53 22 Bogue Inlet Channel Relocation Plan .................................................. .............................56 23 Oblique aerial photo of Bogue Inlet ..................................................... .............................57 24 Four Year Modeling Results ................................................................ .............................60 25 Model bathymetry 4 -years after dredging for the final alternative ...... .............................62 26 Relative change of new alternative compared to existing conditions .. .............................62 Engineering Report of an Inlet Management Study in Support of Maintenance Dredging, Navigation Improvement and Erosion Reduction Project For Wiggins Pass, Florida Table of Contents cont'd List of Figures Fi urg e No. 27 Rock Substrate at Station 1+ 00 ............................................................ .............................63 28 Project Component Map ...................................................................... .............................69 29 Wiggins Pass Channel Realignment .................................................... .............................80 30 Example Ebb Shoal Design Cross - Section .......................................... .............................81 31 Example Flood Shoal Design Cross - Section ....................................... .............................81 List of Tables Table No. 1 Boat Slips: Numbers and Values ....................................................... ..............................4 2 Wiggins Pass Dredging History .......................................................... ..............................9 3 Historic Shoreline Changes .................................................................. .............................12 4 Barefoot Beach Vegetation Loss ......................................................... .............................13 5 Historic Volumetric Changes ............................................................... .............................18 6 Wiggins Pass Ebb Shoal Volumetric Changes .................................... .............................20 7 Disposal Ratios .................................................................................... .............................24 8 Summary of Inlet Hydraulics ............................................................... .............................33 9 Geotechnical Statistics ......................................................................... .............................38 10 Listed Species with the Potential to Occur in Project Area ................. .............................46 11 Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Sea Turtle Nesting Data ...............47 12 Sea Turtle Nesting Adjacent to Wiggins Pass 2005- 2010 ................... .............................48 13 Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 .. .............................48 14 Modeling Result Matrix ....................................................................... .............................61 15 Dredge Widths and Depths .................................................................. .............................63 16 Alternative Matrix ................................................................................ .............................68 17 10 Year Volume Dredge Plan .............................................................. .............................70 18 Dredge Widths and Depths .................................................................. .............................71 19 Historic Dredge Widths and Depths .................................................... .............................71 20 Wiggins Pass Straightening Project Initial Construction Cost Estimate ..........................77 21 10 Year Dredge Plan Cost Comparison ............................................... .............................79 Engineering Report of an Inlet Management Study in Support of Maintenance Dredging, Navigation Improvement and Erosion Reduction Project For Wiggins Pass, Florida Table of Contents cont'd List of Appendices Appendix No. A Comparative Beach Profiles and Inlet Cross- Sections February 2007 to July 2009 B Historic Wiggins Pass Sediment Budget C Historic Aerials D February 2010 Modeling Report E 2011 Geotechnical Report Engineering Report for an Inlet Management Study in Support of Maintenance Dredging, Navigation Improvement and Erosion Reduction Project For Wiggins Pass, Florida I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose and Goals The purpose of this report is to describe the technical information used to improve the navigation design at Wiggins Pass, analyze the performance of the 1995 Inlet Management Plan implementation, and propose new inlet management objectives. The basic background information needed to improve the inlet bypassing is described below. The main objectives of the original Inlet Management and the current Strategic Management Plan are not changed, but the methods of achieving them need to be modified to incorporate lessons learned in physical monitoring since the early 1990's. Reducing the severe erosion on Barefoot Beach is a primary goal. A complementary modeling report (January 2009) with accompanied minutes from the Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Work Group is available and on the following web site: hqp:// www. colliergov.net/Index.aspx ?paize =2390 The goals for the Wiggins Pass improvement study as developed by Collier County and the Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Work Group are: 1. To provide a safe channel for boating 2. To address erosion at Barefoot Beach 3. To lengthen the dredge cycle and accomplish it with the least effect on the environment 4. To provide a solution that is economically effective This will be accomplished by straightening the inlet channel layout and infilling and blocking the northern flood meander. The east, north, and south interior channel entrances will be identified for maintenance dredging, should sand shoal within their respective boundaries. The designated dredge disposal locations and distribution will be modified and relocated to increase management flexibility, reduce sediment loss to the system, and minimize impacts to Barefoot Beach shoreline. A dynamic design will be incorporated into the maintenance plan for the inlet so that long -term dredging can be reduced. Impacts to natural resources will be avoided or minimized. The solution addresses the importance of both natural and manmade forces underappreciated in previous studies and incorporates the controlling geology into the plan. Insufficient sand bypassing to the north and the natural migration of the flood channel to the north are the two major causes of the current problems, which are addressed by the design. There are six game changing facts recognized since the current inlet management plan for Wiggins Pass was formulated in the 1990s: 1. The flood channel is migrating north significantly — from both natural and manmade causes. 2. Net alongshore transport is to the north. COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. 11 U 3. Insufficient bypassing is occurring to the north. 4. The inlet is also infilling from the south by a reoccurring sand wave. 5. The rock ledge and controlling /substrate extends along both sides of the proposed channel, with gaps where the existing and proposed channels are positioned. 6. Historically, the channel was straight approximately 70 to 80 years ago. These facts are the basis for the new design proposed in this report. Since these goals were set, the State Park to the south of the inlet has expressed additional concerns over the proposed plan. Those concerns are being addressed within this inlet management study and during the JCP application process, balanced with other project needs described above. This plan includes results from a February 2010 modeling report, a 2011 geological field investigation, and a summary of hydraulics of the inlet. B. Project Area Collier County is located on the Gulf of Mexico in Southwest Florida, approximately 115 miles south of the entrance of Tampa Bay and about 120 miles directly west of Fort Lauderdale, Florida (Figure 1). The Everglades lie to the southeast. Collier County has 35 miles of accessible coastline, which consists of a series of barrier islands and mainland extensions sub - divided by lagoons, rivers, and inlets. North of the Ten Thousand Islands, Collier County has 6 inlets, Wiggins Pass being the farthest north Figure 1. Project location map 2 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Wiggins Pass is located 5 miles north of Clam Pass and 5.9 miles south of Big Hickory Pass. Wiggins Pass is a natural inlet which provides access to the Gulf of Mexico for a number of embayments and rivers along three main interior channels. The eastern channel connects to the Cocohatchee River. The southern channel connects to Water Turkey Bay and Vanderbilt Lagoon, and the northern channel connects to the lagoon between Little Hickory Island and the mainland. This northern lagoon consists of a number of embayments including May Flower, Palm Vines, Little Hickory Bays, and eventually connects to Big Hickory Pass. There is no interior waterway connection south to Clam Pass. Population centers near the pass include Vanderbilt Beach and Naples Park to the south and Bonita Shores to the north. Wiggins Pass is bounded by public lands which extend 7,950 linear feet to the north and 6,010 linear feet to the south. Barefoot Beach Park and Lely Barefoot Beach lie to the north and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Recreation Area is to the south. Wiggins Pass is currently dredged at regular intervals of approximately 2 years to maintain navigable depths for recreational boaters. The pass provides boat access to the Gulf from inland waterways and lagoons at Vanderbilt Beach, the Cocohatchee River, Wiggins Pass Marina, and several other private and public marinas and ramps. The dredged channel extends from the inlet throat to about 1,200 feet offshore. Periodic dredging has occurred at the intersection of the interior channels. Disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R -11.4 to R -14.2 and south of the inlet between R -18 and R -20.5. The inlet has been dredged since 1984 under two previous permits. C. Scope This report contains the physical processes and natural resources of Wiggins Pass and the surrounding areas of influence. The extent to which the inlet causes beach erosion is also analyzed in detail. The study includes a historical review of inlet changes and beach erosion and accretion patterns adjacent to the inlet. D. Public Interest and Use Wiggins Pass is used primarily by recreational boaters. In the mid- 1990's, seven hundred sixty- three (763) boats were berthed in the inlet basin, of which 31 were commercial. The number of slips has increased to 1,700 in 2010. The commercial boats use the Pass for charter, rental, or tours, and at least 67 jobs are dependent on a navigable Wiggins Pass Basin (CPE 1995). Access is limited to adjacent passes because of shallow depths in interior lagoons to the north and no interior waterway to the south. Therefore, Wiggins Pass is the only local access to the Gulf of Mexico. In August 2009, an updated boating survey entitled "A Recreational Boating Characterization of Collier County, FL" was completed. This studied surveyed two marinas within the Wiggins Pass area, Pelican Isle Yacht Club and Barefoot Boat Club. Pelican Isle Yacht Club has a capacity of 190 for wet slips only. Barefoot Boat Club has a capacity of 24 wet slips and 90 dry slips. Pelican Isle Yacht Club had an occupancy of 105 spots, while Barefoot Boat Club had an occupancy of 91 slips during the peak season. The study found that the average boat draft in the 3 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. wet slips to be approximately 3 feet. No other marinas or docking areas were surveyed near the pass within the 2009 study. Boaters also have access to two boat ramps in the close vicinity of Wiggins Pass: Cocohatchee River Park ramp and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park ramp. On average per weekend, Cocohatchee documented 20 uses while Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park documented an average of 4. Eleven percent of all boat routes in the County went through Wiggins Pass, which ranks it as the 5th busiest pass in the County. The study also noted that fishing ranked as the leading activity of survey respondents. Nature viewing, cruising, beach picknicking, sightseeing, socializing, restaurant visitation, and swimming also ranked within the top 7 in the study. Recently, the Estuary Conservation Association (ECA) prepared a study examining the value of a navigable Wiggins Pass in December of 2010. The purpose of this study was to provide basic information of the financial impact of a navigable channel at Wiggins Pass. The study found that 3,001 properties are directly affected by the Pass, which had an assessed property value of $1,498,144,681 (note that the market value would be higher than this figure). These directly affected properties accounted for $20,652,730 in taxes in 2010. In addition to those properties directly affected by the pass, it was found that an additional 6,406 properties were indirectly related. The total property assessment on these properties was $2,289,757,460. These indirectly affected properties accounted for $27,573,916 in taxes in 2010. Combining both direct and indirectly affected properties, the net worth around the pass is $3,910,401,141. A slip analysis estimated the value of 1,700 boat slips directly affected by the pass. The analysis is described in detail below: Table 1 Boat Slips: Numbers and Values Of these slips described above, most examined within this study pay submerged lease fees to the State of Florida. The total number of slips have paid approximately $122,500,000 in fees to the state (Moreland, 2011 personal communication). Wiggins Pass provides tidal flushing for a number of embayments, naturally exchanging estuarine water with water of the Gulf. The water quality of the inland basins is dependent on this daily tidal exchange with the Gulf of Mexico. This water circulation promotes the growth of a host of marine organisms that depend on the estuarine waters of the embayments for protection, spawning grounds, and other critical physiological factors. These organisms, in return, help support the abundant fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico. Wiggins Pass provides Gulf access for the outflow of the Cocohatchee River. 4 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. No. of Slips Estimated Value Total Value 700 $25,000 $17,500,000 300 $50,000 $15,000,000 300 $100,000 $30,000,000 400 $150,000 $60,000,000 Total 1 1,700 1 $325,000 1 $122,500,000 Of these slips described above, most examined within this study pay submerged lease fees to the State of Florida. The total number of slips have paid approximately $122,500,000 in fees to the state (Moreland, 2011 personal communication). Wiggins Pass provides tidal flushing for a number of embayments, naturally exchanging estuarine water with water of the Gulf. The water quality of the inland basins is dependent on this daily tidal exchange with the Gulf of Mexico. This water circulation promotes the growth of a host of marine organisms that depend on the estuarine waters of the embayments for protection, spawning grounds, and other critical physiological factors. These organisms, in return, help support the abundant fisheries of the Gulf of Mexico. Wiggins Pass provides Gulf access for the outflow of the Cocohatchee River. 4 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. E. History of Wiggins Pass Wiggins Pass is a natural inlet and has been open since at least 1885 (USACE, 1972). From 1885 to 1927, the opening of the pass migrated 250 feet north (USACE, 1980) and has remained relatively stable in its present location ever since (CEC, 1987). Prior to 1952, the inlet was subject to periodic closures (Collier County, 1991). Prior to the 1950's, Collier County was relatively undeveloped, due to the availability of land for development in other parts of Florida. Large scale development did not begin until the 1960's and 1970's. In 1952, a south channel was dredged connecting Wiggins Pass through Water Turkey Bay to Vanderbilt Lagoon (Collier County, 1991). This dredging increased the tidal prism of Wiggins Pass by approximately 50% (Hine et al., 1986) and has been cited as the cause of significant changes around Wiggins Pass. A review of available aerial photographs show what appears to be a channel dredged from Wiggins Pass basin north to Little Hickory Bay. The date of this dredging is unknown, but it probably happened within a decade of 1950. The dredging of the north channel would have also contributed to the growth of tidal prism at Wiggins Pass. In the late 1950's, a small unstable inlet north of Wiggins Pass closed. On earlier charts, this pass was known as Little Hickory Pass and was located about two miles north of Wiggins Pass. The closure of this pass has been cited as contributing to erosion trends within its vicinity (CEC, 1988). The north channel dredging may have contributed to Little Hickory Pass closure. Other changes to the Wiggins Pass embayment system have taken place. The remnants of a second north channel can be seen further west, which still has an intermittent water connection at the apex of the meander. Since the 1950's, as waterfront property and marina development increased in the interior of Wiggins Pass, the need for more reliable navigation increased. In order to address that, the Corps of Engineers, at the request of Collier County, prepared a feasibility study on navigation improvements (USACE, 1980). An illustration of the inlet evolution from 1885 to present is presented with aerial photographs of Wiggins Pass in Appendix C. Historic shoreline positions from Wiggins Pass are provided in Figure 2. The photographs in Appendix C from 1885 to the mid 1950's provide a view of the pre - development Wiggins Pass area. Many of the pre - development physical features shown in these photographs should be noted for comparison to more recent photographs. These features include the absence of a dredged south channel from the inlet to Water Turkey Bay and Vanderbilt Lagoon. 5 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. The photograph from 1885 illustrates a very different Wiggins Pass inlet system than what is present today. Little Hickory Pass was still an open natural inlet, which most likely aided in diverting flow from Wiggins Pass. The photographs from the 1940's and the 1929 chart illustrate a straighter Wiggins Pass channel configuration. The large northward flood channel meander that is currently present at the inlet is largely absent in these aerial photos. The photographs from the 1950's show a visible flood shoal at the pass. In the 1951 aerial, the inlet channel meanders through the shoals, ending with a distinct northwest alignment in the ebb shoal. The inlet configuration is characteristic of a wave dominant inlet. From the 1953 to 1958, the formation of a more westerly channel alignment is apparent when compared to the 1951 aerial. This timeframe corresponds to the closing of Little Hickory Pass, which closed in the mid to late 1950's. Also, in the 1953 aerial, the dredged channel to Vanderbilt Lagoon is apparent. Up until 1953, a small island is visible in the south side of the flood shoal. The 1962 aerial photograph illustrates the westerly inlet channel configuration, with relatively sparse development in the Wiggins Pass area. The photographs from the 1970's show a significant increase in development. In particular, note the development directly east of Wiggins Pass, including evidence of dredge and fill activities near the marinas, a bridge and road system. The channel between Water Turkey Bay and Vanderbilt Lagoon was widened since the 1960's photographs. The ebb shoal is now well defined and the offset that is apparent in the 1962 aerial between adjacent Gulf shorelines is gone. By 1976, the barrier beach at Vanderbilt Beach appears wider than compared to earlier photographs, probably a byproduct of development. Also between 1976 and 1978, the inlet ebb channel has migrated further to the south. The photographs from the mid 1980's were taken close to the time of the first dredging of Wiggins Pass. The inlet channel through the ebb shoal has a northwest alignment. The formation of a distinct downdrift offset is apparent. The flood shoal within these photographs is less evident than earlier years. Also, the extent of public parks north and south of the inlet is evident by the lack of beach front development. The aerial photograph from 1995 illustrates the westerly inlet configuration along with the continued distinct downdrift offset noted in the aerials from the 1980's. The 2002 aerial illustrates the westerly inlet configuration present during the 1990's with a slightly southern rotation in the channel. One dramatic change from the 1995 to 2002 aerial is the loss of sandy beach at Barefoot Beach. There is also a sand slug moving along the interior of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park shoreline compared to the 1995 aerial. In the aerials ranging from 2004 to 2009, northern channel meander can be seen to become more severe, which has created the prominent "S" curve channel configuration that is present today. Barefoot Beach has also continued to lose most of its southern shoreline width compared to the early aerials, while Delnor - Wiggins Pass State Park maintained and grew its sandy shoreline to 6 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. the south. A sand wave that was present in the 2002 aerial can also be seen migrating through the inlet in the 2004 to 2009 aerials. This sand wave has been fed through natural and manmade events (see Appendix C for six consecutive aerials). Inlet bypassing to Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park and nourishment at Vanderbilt Beach has aided in supplying sand to this process, which was occurring naturally. The flood channel has migrated north since 1885, and its progress through the mid- 1950's can be tracked in comparison to the small island in the south flood shoal area. By the position shown in the 1929 navigational chart and the early 1940's aerial photography (Appendix C), the flood channel was straight from the Cocohatchee to Gulf entrance. After 1950, this island became part of the northern portion of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Between the 1920's and 1970's, this shoreline migrated 150 feet north, and has since added another 150 feet at the center of this reach. Since the 1920's the flood channel has migrated approximately 400 to 600 feet north, with the last 100 feet occurring since the 1970's. The importance of this history is that it proves the flood channel was straight approximately 70 to 80 years ago, and the proposed location of a straighter channel is in a previous flood channel location. In Figure 2, historic shorelines show the inlet entrance has migrated approximately 150 feet north since the 1800's and is relatively stable, while the flood channel has moved almost 600 feet. F. Inlet Management History The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) initiated a study of improvements for small boat navigation at Wiggins Pass Inlet in 1978, which was completed in 1980. The study described the existing conditions at the pass as a hazard to navigation of small boats due to shallow waters and shifting banks and recommended dredging for improvement of navigation safety. The recommended interior navigation channels would connect the Wiggins Pass Marina and Vanderbilt Lagoon areas to the Gulf of Mexico. Recommended interior channel dimension were a 50 foot wide by 7 ft -NGVD east channel and a 50 foot wide by 6 ft -NGVD south channel. The exterior channels through the ebb shoal were recommended at 1,300 foot long by 150 foot wide by 9 ft -NGVD deep set with an alignment of about 256 °. The exterior channel recommended by the Corps of Engineers included a 100 ft wide deposition basin north of the exterior channel. The plan called for dredging in both the Gulf and interior lagoons. The plan was never implemented because the Corps of Engineers and the local sponsor could not resolve differences in project scopes. In 1982, Coastal Engineering Consultants (CEC) performed a hydraulic study and applied for a permit to dredge the pass in a configuration that reassembled the USACE recommended plan. The USACE recommended plan consisted of a 150 ft wide channel with a 100 foot maintenance extension with 8 ft deep MLW (9.68 ft NAVD) on the Gulf side and a eastern interior channel with 5 ft MLW (6.68 NAVD) depth with a width of 50 ft at its easternmost part after a transition from the Gulf channel. Over dredge and advanced maintenance allowance provided another 4 feet in the Gulf channel. The dredging history of Wiggins Pass is summarized in detail by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE 1995) and Humiston and Moore (H &M 2007), and a brief summary is presented in Table 2. The disposal history is nearly even between the north and south beach, but 4V 8 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. with a trend towards more disposal using the north beach recently. The average annual dredging rate has been 19,466 cy /yr, not counting the 2009 volumes. Wiggins Pass was first dredged to the specifications described above in 1984 following the study of CEC (1982). The dredged material was placed on Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. CEC (1989) reported on the results of Wiggins Pass after the initial dredging. Their findings indicated that the sand that was placed south of the Inlet at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park migrated towards the inlet, forming a spit that interrupted portions of the navigation channel. After this event, the channel was dredged at periodic intervals between 1 to 4 years. Table 2 Wiggins Pass Dredging History Year Amount Dredge Location North South Spoil Location 1984 52,400 Ebb Shoal 52,400 1990 33,000 Ebb Shoal 33,000 R13 -R14 1991 34,000 Ebb Shoal 34,000 R13 -250 to R15 1993 34,000 Ebb Shoal 34,000 1995 33,000 Ebb Shoal 16,500 16,500 1998 11,980 Ebb Shoal 11,980 R12.5 -R13.5 2000 26,460 Ebb Shoal 26,460 R12 -R15 2000 16,960 Ebb Shoal 16,960 R18 -1121 2002 57,080 Ebb Shoal 57,080 R17.5 -1120.5 2003 46,635 Ebb Shoal 46,635 RI I -R14 2005 46,635 Ebb Shoal 46,635 810.5 -R13.5 2007 48,400 Ebb Shoal 48,400 R18 -R19.5 2007 6,800 Interior Channel 6,800 R12 2009 51,300 Ebb Shoal 38,927 12,373 RI 1.5 -14 & R18 -20.5 Before 2001 241,800 121,940 119,860 Since 2001 256,850 138,997 117,853 TOTAL 498,650 260,937 237,713 CPE (1995) developed an inlet management plan where several alternatives for navigation and channel maintenance improvement were evaluated. CPE (1995) recommended channel modifications that included increased channel depth to -12 feet MLW (13.68 NAVD) to provide an additional 4 feet of advanced maintenance dredging and an extra 50 feet channel width in the Gulfside to serve as a deposition basin in order to increase the interval between dredging events to maintain an operational channel with 8 feet MLW. CPE (1995) also recommended placing the disposal material to the south and north of Wiggins Pass to mitigate for erosion of shorelines depending on monitored conditions with an emphasis towards the south which had the larger erosion rates. H &M (2004) conducted a feasibility study to evaluate channel dredging practices and erosion at Barefoot Beach. This study recommended adjustment of the dredging template to smaller dimensions similar to the dimensions recommended by the USACE (1980). They also recommended further study of the use of erosion control structures at Barefoot Beach to mitigate 9 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Gulf shoreline erosion and flood shoal dredging to mitigate for erosion of Barefoot Beach interior shoreline. H &M (2007) conducted a hydrodynamic study utilizing two flow models: a tidal- induced flow model (ADCIRC) and wave -tide flow model (CMS). H &M recommended the installation of coastal protection structures (segmented breakwaters, t- groins or jetty) on Barefoot Beach to contain local erosion and a readjustment of the channel dimensions to shallower depths and narrower widths. It was also suggested that the channel be realigned towards the southwest, and in order to enhance hydraulic efficiency and reduce dredging requirements, the channel should be extended by dredging across the flood shoal. CPE completed a modeling report in January 2009 to evaluate the effects of various channel configurations on dredging requirements and controlling depths for navigation and erosion of adjacent shorelines. Channel configurations evaluated by CPE included channel realignment, modification of depth and width, interior dredging through the flood shoal, north and south connections, and interior sand dikes. Disposal strategies were also evaluated. A separate modeling report supporting the refined dredging design was completed in February 2010. Wiggins Pass was dredged recently in February 2011, with the removal of 52,500 cubic yards, which was placed nearshore at Barefoot Beach between R -12 and R -14.2 (CPE, 2011). The ebb channel was dredged to a width and depth of 171 feet and 13.2 feet NAVD, respectively, with a narrowing towards shore. This was a start on the new inlet configuration proposed in this plan. II. PHYSICAL INLET CHARACTERISTICS A. General Wiggins Pass is influenced by many natural processes. Man -made alterations to the Wiggins Pass area have also contributed to the present condition of the inlet. This section will outline and discuss the factors influencing the inlet. Sand moving along the coast by wave action is captured by Wiggins Pass. Longshore sediment transport occurs within the surf zone and is defined as the movement of sand in a direction parallel to the beach. The longshore transport depends primarily on the incident wave height and wave angle. In the vicinity of tidal inlets, longshore sediment transport is combined with transport of sediment due to tidal currents. Sand which makes up the longshore transport may move into the inlet or deposit on the ebb shoal directly outside the inlet. Like many Florida west coast inlets, Wiggins Pass contains both an ebb and flood shoal. The adjacent embayments have been altered by dredging and natural processes over the years. Wiggins Pass has been dredged multiple times to improve navigation, predominately the ebb shoal. Each time, the inlet rapidly shoaled, which has hindered navigation. B. Inlet Influence Inlet influence is typically categorized as erosion or accretion occurring within the vicinity of an inlet that would not normally exist along uninterrupted coastlines. While straight, parallel 4W 10 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. contours can normally be assumed within the nearshore zone, the presence of an inlet system directly impacts the offshore bathymetry adjacent to an inlet. Ultimately, these bathymetric changes can modify the local wave climate and affect longshore currents which transfer sand parallel to the coastline. These changes, which can be directly linked to the presence of an inlet, will increase or decrease the erosional tendencies along the adjacent shorelines. Inlet influence north and south of Wiggins Pass was initially investigated in 1986 (Hine, et al). By examining the offshore contours in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass, the authors concluded that the length of influence along the updrift beach (north) was approximately 3,300 feet. It is at this distance north of the inlet that the offshore contours become parallel to one another. The authors also found that the corresponding inlet effects downdrift (south) of Wiggins Pass extended approximately 2,040 feet. Updated studies of Wiggins Pass have brought more insight into the Pass's influence upon the surrounding shoreline area. Nodal points have been found at locations north and south of the inlet. Nodal points are defined as the region where net longshore transport reverses. These nodal points have been found near R -14 and R -22. At R -22, net transport becomes north to south. North of R -14, net sediment transport is to the north. South of R -14 sediment is moving toward Wiggins Pass. This is supported by modeling results (CPE 2009 and 2011). Shoreline and volumetric changes in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass are also an indication of the inlet's influence. The results from these analyses are presented in Section II C and D below. Inlet impacts are also analyzed in this study through and even odd analysis and a sediment budget. These results follow the volumetric changes section. C. Shoreline Change The Mean High Water (MHW) elevation measured at each profile is used to represent the typical shoreline location. In Collier County, the MHW elevation is +0.33 ft NAVD 88. The MHW shoreline is approximated by the high -tide mark on the beach. The MHW shoreline changes were calculated using historic beach profiles and historic shoreline data from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Collier County's monitoring of the inlet and adjacent beach, and from profile and cross - section surveys performed by CPE in 2009. The north shoreline (R -11 to R -16) and the south shoreline (R -17 to R -21) of Wiggins Pass were evaluated in order to analyze shoreline changes. Table 3 presents shoreline changes from 1957 through 2009 as well as during selected periods which coincide with milestone events in the development of Wiggins Pass. These changes are shown on Figure 2. It can be seen that in the timeframe before dredging (1957 - 1979), the shorelines surrounding Wiggins Pass were relatively stable with an average erosion of —2.3 feet. The northern shoreline was accretional before dredging activity took place, while the southern shoreline exhibited some erosion with an average loss of 19 feet. This was one of the deciding facts supporting a predominately southern bypassing for previous maintenance dredging. Since maintenance 11 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. dredging began in 1984, it can be seen that overall erosion has increased along with the magnitude of erosion experienced at beaches to the north. The shorelines near Wiggins Pass have been eroding at an accelerated rate since 1992, which directly affects the amount of habitat and recreational area available to the public. Since 1992, the shoreline north of the inlet at Barefoot Beach has retreated on average approximately 87 feet (Figure 3 and Table 3). The worst area of erosion is occurring at R -16, where, since 1992, it has lost approximately 437 feet of shoreline. R -14 and R -15 also have high rates of erosion since 1992. The relative shoreline change to the 1992 position is illustrated in Figure 3. The higher losses that have occurred since 1992 can be attributed to the northern migration of the channel meander and inlet management practices, which allowed for an approximate even disposal of dredged material on the north and south shorelines. From analysis, it appears that in order to alleviate the erosion to the north, approximately 2.65 times more dredged material needs to be placed on the shorelines to the north than the south. Table 3 Historic Shoreline Changes Profile MHW Shoreline Changes 00 1957 1973 1979 1984 1988 1992 1 2001 1 1957 1979 1992 1973 1979 1984 1988 1992 2001 2009 1979 1992 1 2009 R -11 23 15 12 7.0 15.8 38 -20.0 22.8 R -12 27 21 -14 -9 -4 29.7 56.3 48 -22.0 85.9 R -13 -53 15 19 9.9 29.8 -38 18.0 39.7 R -14 -96 43 114 -83.5 -9.9 -53 93.0 -93.4 R -15 -59 60 -26 -57 63 -70.9 -71.0 1 -13.0 -141.9 R -16 3 70 185 -264.1 -173.0 73 -1.0 -437.0 Wiggins Pass R -17 -5 22 -106 -20.4 30.8 17 -77.0 10.5 R -18 -41 45 98 -54 -40 -17.4 23.2 4 9.0 5.8 R -19 -64 26 -14 38.2 -20.6 -38 -18.0 17.6 R -20 -38 23 10 37.1 -21.8 -15 -22.0 15.3 R -21 1 -88 26 -19 1 -20 12 13.8 1 2.5 -62 1 -22.0 16.3 N. TOTAL -25.8 37.3 -20.0 - 33.0 64.8 -62.0 -25.3 11.5 9.2 -87.3 S. TOTAL -47.2 28.4 39.5 -37.0 -27.6 10.3 2.8 -18.8 -26.0 13.1 TOTAL 1 -35.5 1 33.3 9.8 1 -35.0 1 22.8 -29.1 1 -12.5 1 -2.3 1 -6.8 1 -41.7 ® 12 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. MHW Shoreline Changes (ft) 200 2002 to 2009 - 1968 - 2001 R16 100 a 3 -loo -- -zoo – -- — -300 - - -- – 400 -- -500 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 FDFP R -Mmum at Figure 3. MHW Shoreline Changes about Wiggins Pass from 1992 The greatest loss of Barefoot Beach shoreline since dredging began was during the 1992 -2001 period, where the shoreline loss was 62 feet (Table 3). During the next period 2001 -09, the loss declined to 25.3 feet. The pattern was similar, but accretional south of the inlet, advancing an average of 10 feet between 1992 and 2001, and then 3 feet in the next 7 years. The change in disposal distribution may have contributed to these decreases since 2002. Table 4 Barefoot Beach Vegetation Loss (feet) Location 1973 to 2002 2002 to 2009 1973 to 2009 R16 71 123 194 Location 1 Location 2 70 0 70 Mangroves 39 13 52 Location 3 The erosion has impacted the vegetation at Barefoot Beach, which is being pushed by the northward migration of the flood channel, which has moved approximately 100 feet since the 1970's. The mangroves (Figure 4, Location 3) have retreated a total of 52 feet since 1973 and 13 feet since 2002, which is a loss of about 0.3 acres. This retreat is due to the northern migration of Wiggins Pass. On the Gulf, the vegetation has retreated 194 feet at Location 1 since 1973, 13 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. G.\ Enterpnse \Collier\143561_ Wiggins _Pass Channel Straightening\ MXD \Historical Vegetation.mxd (T A W N Z m w m� zz O h OO >Drnp m �: N N w w o No zm�Z " 381500 °o 00 00 00 0 OOSlB£ DZj��SZD mmzczoo-i D� m � r 0� 0 n W ;-20c> MO cn:�G? <O Om mm:�m9 m2 omNOO -<—T cuZmm m (0 m {(n0� —r°wpm <D n >m0� OCOOOZDD 382000 MX�z„ ocn D��IOOowO 0omcnmK(O• O ZDvm= z zm?. m r n r- Z°� O mo< X Kim m o O CQ D O U) m N 1 -1 Do0 � > z m < m O = m v D Z o = m D= m O = O o O A • D w C/) O o z D o xJ > 3 • n O > m • m m � � - O � z W D m U) o m O D • z r= ; N O -- m 383500 z O JkL l r r m m o o o v o o -1 O O O O m \\ • • v o D ° go N O 4� z m m \ cn K • ' -" p z • m z 0 0 N O • • O A O • .p O • (D O • • 9 O r- -4 m m m W > C) 0 x = "' > { az 2 Z Vi A < D ,7 � D 0 = < r ��?a Z O ♦♦DA� VI T N W a D F) D N A0z WZ z DZn p Z ��0 z 0 0go xmr C) -q 0 co W Z 0 z n O ,. m XrC - m u Z Z t z N (D z o 0 C7 IM and 123 feet in the last 8 years. In Figure 4, both shoreline and vegetation losses are illustrated. Overall, the increased erosion north of the inlet on the Gulf beaches has caused approximately 10 acres of vegetation to be lost from the Gulf beaches since 1992, with 3.2 acres of that loss occurring since 2002. The shoreline recession on South Barefoot Beach has caused vegetation, such as mangroves to be lost, and it has also created a dangerous scarp along the shoreline that is hazardous to park users. Along with the loss of vegetation, walking paths that were present in 1973 at Barefoot Beach have been eroded away and are no longer present in several areas to the west and south. This affect's the public's accessibility to the County Park and enjoyment of nature along the former loop path. Photographs la and lb. Examples of erosion at Barefoot Beach Just the opposite has occurred at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, where both the shoreline and vegetation have grown as illustrated in Figure 4, except at one small hot spot vicinity of R -17. The state park has claimed impacts to dunes and vegetation, but most of the southern shoreline has experienced gains, and the shoreline reduction claims in comparison to the vegetation line are due to planted dune vegetation which has extended the vegetation line seaward and has caused the illusion of less shoreline. An aerial timeline illustrated the vegetation and shoreline growth mentioned above is shown in Photographs 2a through 2f. The marker line denoting the 2010 vegetation line is shown in yellow in the photographs. In the 1994 photograph, the edge of this line is located in the channel, indicating that the current shoreline and vegetation line has increased quite dramatically since the mid 1990's. The migratory sand wave along with its progression in and out of the inlet can also be seen in the various aerials. 15 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. v L Photographs 2a and 2b. 1994 aerial (left) and 1999 aerial (right) comparing the 2010 vegetation line along Wiggins Pass entrance. Photographs 2c and 2d. 2003 aerial (left) and 2005 aerial (right) comparing the 2010 vegetation line along Wiggins Pass entrance. 16 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. � 11 Photographs 2e and 2f. 2007 aerial (left) and 2010 aerial (right) comparing the 2010 vegetation line along Wiggins Pass entrance. In Photograph 2f, a sand spit has formed which is in the path of the proposed channel. If built in 2005, the proposed channel would not net to cut land above MHW. D. Volumetric Changes The volumetric changes in this report represent the difference in the quantity of sand measured along the beach between surveys. All volumetric changes are given in cubic yards. Volumetric changes were calculated between the dunes (upland) and the approximate depth of closure using the average end area method for all profiles since 1973. Before 1973, the volumetric changes were estimated by measuring shoreline changes and using a conversion factor of 0.67 cubic yards per foot of shoreline change (CPE 1995). These volumes were based on typical berm heights of 4.7 feet NAVD and a depth of closure of -13.3 feet NAVD. Since then, a depth of closure of -11.3 ft NAVD has been used. In comparison to the shoreline changes, the volumetric changes also indicate that the shoreline north of Wiggins Pass is becoming highly erosional. From 1885 to 1979, the shoreline north of Wiggins Pass was overall accreational for approximately 100 years. After 1979 to present, the shoreline shifted and is now in a state of erosion. The worst of the erosion is seen at R -16 where approximately 201,000 cubic yards have been lost. This erosion has caused the southern tip of South Barefoot Beach to nearly shear off which in return has lost valuable recreational area and habitat within the park. If no corrective action is planned, it is anticipated that the erosion north of Wiggins Pass will continue resulting in more loss of county park recreational area and habitat. From 1957 to 1979, before maintenance dredging began, the area immediately north of Wiggins Pass from R -15 to R -16 was accretional. After 1979, the area reversed from this trend and became erosional, with 308,926 cubic yards lost. The area immediately south of Wiggins Pass from R -17 to R -18 was accretional during the time period prior to maintenance dredging (1957 to 1979), and it remained accretional through 2009. Disposal south of the inlet contributes to accretion and may be one of the sources for sand infilling the inlet. Nourishment of Vanderbilt Beach in 1996 and 2006 may have contributed to accretion south of the inlet. fir 17 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 3 IM Overall, it appears that the current maintenance dredging practices are not properly addressing the northern losses at Wiggins Pass. Historic reports indicated that sediment transport was from north to south, and erosion was higher south of the inlet between 1957 and 1979. However, the recent volumetric data presented in Table 5 contrasts with that belief. From 1979 to 2009, the area north of Wiggins Pass (R -11 to R -16) eroded 252,926 cubic yards, while the area south of the inlet has accreted 49,603 cubic yards. Between 1957 and 1979, before maintenance dredging, the erosion accretion pattern was reversed, with the north accretional while the state park lost 48,000 cubic yards during this period. Using these values along with the historic shoreline changes, it appears that more sand needs to be disposed of at the north during maintenance dredging to reduce erosion on Barefoot Beach. Table 5 Historic Volumetric Changes Profile Length ( Volumetric Chao 1957 1973 1979 1988 1992 1973 1979 1988 1992 2001 es (cy) 2001 1957 1979 1992 2009 1979 2009 2009 R -11 501 7,700 5,020 - 12,428 -1,413 -1,314 11,238 12,720 -3,917 9,924 R -12 987 17,867 13,854 - 15,192 - 11,275 5,046 52,660 31,722 31,239 57,706 R -13 971 - 34,501 9,748 -3,918 478 966 37,697 - 24,753 35,222 38,663 R -14 997 - 64,135 28,767 - 18,029 31,821 4,415 - 24,752 - 35,368 -6,545 - 20,337 R -15 1032 - 40,763 41,459 - 57,366 12,726 - 32,854 - 30,107 696 - 107,601 - 62,961 R -16 537 1,063 25,202 - 68,693 21,586 - 81,447 - 72,771 26,265 - 201,325 - 154,218 Wiggins Pass R -17 523 -1,743 7,687 8,083 - 23,693 17,832 18,090 5,943 20,311 35,922 R -18 1006 - 27,677 30,327 29,640 - 38,179 - 14,538 55,841 2,650 32,764 41,303 R -19 1020 143,784 17,769 -6,872 -3,829 18,208 10,721 - 26,015 18,228 28,929 R -20 1010 - 25,691 15,591 - 25,005 2,353 12,289 414 - 10,100 -9,948 12,703 R -21 504 - 29,704 1 8,765 -13,148 1 -6,282 690 6,987 1 - 20,939 - 11,753 1 7,677 N. TOTAL 5,025 - 112,768 124,050 - 175,627 53,924 - 105,188 - 26,035 11,282 - 252,926 - 131,223 S. TOTAL 4,063 - 128,601 80,139 -7,302 -69,629 34,481 92,053 - 48,461 49,603 126,534 TOTAL 1 9,088 1 - 241,369 204,189 - 182,928 -15706 1 - 70707 66,019 - 37,180 - 203,323 4,689 E. Ebb and Flood Shoal The ebb and flood channel have changed quite dramatically since early monitoring and have a major influence on coastal processes around the inlet. Due to inlet management practices over the past few decades, more fill than needed has been placed in the south than compared to the north. During this study, it was found that approximately 2.65 times more fill is needed to the north of the pass than the south in order to alleviate erosional trends to the north and balance the resultant erosion rate. Figure 5 illustrates the changes in the ebb shoal from 1970 to 2011 and from 2009 to 2011. It is important to note than the 1970 data used in Figure 5 is MLLW adjusted to NAVD88. There appears to be a vertical bust of about a foot or two between the two data sets based on the offshore accretion. This bust would cause higher accretion and lower erosion values for the 1970 to 2011 18 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. N] quantification. However, keeping in mind this 1 to 2 foot vertical discrepancy, general trends around Wiggins Pass are still apparent from 1970 to 2011. Figure 5 illustrates that the northern ebb shoal has experienced a large amount of erosion, while the area to the south accreted. Figure 5. Ebb Shoal Delta Plot The 2009 to 2011 delta plot illustrates a rebuilding of the north ebb shoal over the past two years. This change from erosional to accretional is most likely due to more fill being placed at the northern disposal site at Barefoot Beach for recent maintenance dredgings with a disposal area extending farther south towards the channel in 2011. Table 6 illustrates the magnitude of changes that have occurred at the pass from 1970 to present. The net volumetric changes from 1970 to 2011 indicate that the ebb shoal area to the north has (W 19 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. s 5 713000 t; 713000 R -16 Lene^ —d' 712000 ,.' - DELTA 712000 FEET R -17 711000 10-12 MOM- 1970-2011 8-10 R-1 8 6-8 710000 4-6 710000 g- e�% n it it X 0.5-2 r a m a w 45 gag s -0.5 -0.5 8 8 a 8 8 8 -2 - -0.5 8 713000 t -4--2 713000 -6-4 R -16 -8--6 712000 712000 -10--8 R -17 711000 . 711000 2009-2011 R -18 710000 - 710000 s m x m x Notes: 1. Coordinates are in feet based on the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone, North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). 2. 1970 data were MLLW adjusted to NAVD88. There appears to be a 1 to 2 vertical bust between the two data sets based on the offshore accretion. This bust would cause higher accretion and lower erosion numbers for the 1970 to 2011 quantification. Figure 5. Ebb Shoal Delta Plot The 2009 to 2011 delta plot illustrates a rebuilding of the north ebb shoal over the past two years. This change from erosional to accretional is most likely due to more fill being placed at the northern disposal site at Barefoot Beach for recent maintenance dredgings with a disposal area extending farther south towards the channel in 2011. Table 6 illustrates the magnitude of changes that have occurred at the pass from 1970 to present. The net volumetric changes from 1970 to 2011 indicate that the ebb shoal area to the north has (W 19 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. been eroding, while the shoal to the south has accreted. The net volumetric changes from 2009 to 2011 show how altering fill placement to the north has aided in preventing the ebb shoal from eroding like it has done historically. Since 2009, both the northern and southern ebb shoal has been accretional. By placing fill where it is most needed based upon a historical analysis, it should prove to be more beneficial. The net north and south ebb shoal change since 1970 has been - 66,000 cubic yards and +218,000 cubic yards, respectively. In the last two years the measured accretion has been nearly equal. If we focus on just the core north ebb shoal erosion, the loss has been 150,000 cubic yards. This is approximately what it will take to rebuild the north ebb shoal to historic dimensions. The south ebb shoal needs no special attention. Table 6 Wiggins Pass Ebb Shoal Volumetric Changes NET CHANGE Section 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 yd yd yd yd Yd3 /Yd 2 Yd3 /Yd 2 North - 66,133 11,368 327,247 327,036 -0.20 0.03 Channel - 30,828 -7,192 51,672 51,672 -0.60 -0.14 South 218,367 16,885 251,225 248,231 0.87 0.07 ACCRETION Section 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 yd yd yd yd Yd3 /yd 2 Yd3 /Yd 2 North 84,243 31,731 148,956 138,628 0.57 0.23 Channel 16,314 10,938 18,883 17,217 0.86 0.64 South 229,957 39,303 219,139 138,931 1.05 0.28 EROSION Section 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 1970- 2011 2009 -2011 1970 -2011 2009 -2011 yds yd Yd2 yd yd3 /Yd 2 yd3 /yd 2 North - 150,375 - 20,363 178,292 188,408 -0.84 -0.11 Channel 47,142 - 18,130 32,789 34,456 -1.44 -0.53 South - 11,591 - 22,419 32,086 109,300 -0.36 -0.21 Flood Channel Characteristic The project goal is to straighten the flood channel location to relieve erosional stress on Barefoot Beach Park. The new flood channel needs to be constructed with a cross - sectional area larger than what is required for navigation alone. It must be approximately the equilibrium size to minimize unexpected enlargement. Initial modeling tried a cross - section largely sized for navigation only. This proved to be too small, and the model channel scoured out to its equilibrium cross - section. This scour included channel expansions toward Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park to the south, especially within the narrower channel ranges towards the east. The region where the channel is 160 feet wide was increased in length and an overdredging buffer of 1.0 foot was established. 20 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. An analysis of the 2008 and 2009 surveyed cross - sections in the flood channel showed the following characteristics between cross - sections C -3 and C -12. The cross - sectional area and side slopes of the inlet gorge measured from the 10 foot depth had a cross - sectional area and side slope range of 1,350 -1,425 square feet (NAVD) and 6.5 to 7.6 horizontal to 1.0 vertical to the top of the gorge, respectively. This is larger than the initial model size. The side slope is important as an indication of the standoff needed from important natural resources. The proposed flood channel will have minimum dimensions of 130 foot bottom width at elevation -7.7 feet NAVD, with a one foot over dredge. Using the flattest slope, the distance to MHW (0.33 ft NAVD) would be under 70 feet. The cross - section area for this channel size is towards the lower natural range. The positioning of the new flood channel was based on the above characteristics. Since the migrating sand wave on the inlet's interior shoreline is transitory, the channel offset was based on the shoreline without the sand wave. The 2009 and 1970 shorelines and vegetation lines (see Figure 4) were used for this purpose, and the new channel alignment was positioned with a minimum 100 foot offset. The historic northward trend of the flood shoal channel will provide additional safety margin. If an additional safety factor is needed, the channel should be widened further. This analysis supplements the latest modeling results. An enlarged delta plot comparing 1970's vs. 2009 conditions is provided in Figure 6. It shows both the ebb and flood shoal changes in relation to the 2000 channel template and the 2010 proposed channel alignment. The most striking feature is the migration of the flood channel. Figure 6 illustrates the 100 foot northward migration of the flood channel between 1970 and 2009 near the location of the mangroves at Barefoot Beach. The figure also illustrates the northward and eastward growth of the flood shoal, with some accretion visible in the south channel. The 1970 and 2009 shorelines are also compared on this map. F. Inlet Channel Shoaling and Alignment The success of the Wiggins Pass navigation channel is dependent upon the performance of the design. Sufficient data has been collected on Wiggins Pass to improve the navigation channel from its current design. This section will summarize recent channel shoaling trends and alignment analysis. From recent maintenance dredgings, the rate of shoaling can be determined. On a bi- annual basis, approximately 50,000 cubic yards are removed from the ebb shoal channel, which equates to approximately 25,000 cubic yards per year. The interior (low numbered) ebb shoal stations shoal much quicker than the exterior ebb shoal station located farther to the west. By looking at comparative cross - section plots, general trends for the source of shoaling become apparent. Sand is infilling the pass both from the north and south. The sand from the south appears to migrate from Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, and enter the pass and move back and forth between the ebb and flood shoals. The sand from Barefoot Beach migrates south near the nodal point at R -14 and infills the pass. 21 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. a ± e mV-8 1 % =8= % > Q % a mm >z > o ® Iz #1#o 0 < g®§ � cn .. e <=® ®° ma o m >=$*tete=ar m \m-n -\G m % D zo °MZKOO> )_ / °fj6i> $)f>T> 7 o zz$ T Z rm= z � (m =>m &§ zzz�zq -n #�eo m=om } §7(R� -4 C /m0 >m �@ e2n,r, >0 z �: > Cf) o»=Rem\$f em@m > <4�> . .� ¥p_=wm=aa mmi�:5c4_mm g <= >E@zKo S > % / -G >q-< gay \$ / =o mzm=- oPo o =�§a£ =2$ < �zz yam k\/ | | 1 co omxr- P% / \ c r- . X z \ � � gip§\\ / z ? / \G-u \ \ © co /m2 $V $ a m [.. o -z >�f\/ ? \ m #2500 § \ / \ k 6 & & a u a w / , / R ° $ ^ / ( m CD / / \ 00 ' m 6 t 6 ° ° > § 9 / > % - \ k z m 2 / 0 % » 0 � E 2 m CD / \ m < #ma o / n ( | | C) m G —383500 R R G B G 3 = a 8 ) 2 m $ 2 § 0 \ / > > Z 7 > \ c \ k z T 7 9 a cn > # ° $ $ 0 r184OOC > m \ i � § . \ m .. rl: ° \ ��§ CD CD > o \§ 002 e Q0 0 In 0 .�2 } 0 m,N No IJ mV-8 1 »�© \ Zm e % D )_ 7 \ \\\� » z \ f7} §cn } §7(R� -4 C �@ e2n,r, o Cl) ; ~(0z . .� . . S 0 < �zz ° | | 1 . X z \ � � © co P po m [.. : m z R 6 & & a u a w / , / R ° C) m CD / / \ 00 ' m 6 t 6 ° ° 0 6 % 2 - \ k 0 � E 2 m CD m o n m,N No IJ I¥ #£2 KKa mV-8 1 »�© 0 Zm e 0 z )_ I¥ #£2 KKa One method of determining the process by which the existing channel infills is to look at the controlling depth and gradient (slope) of the bottom at each ebb shoal cross - section in January 2009, (see Appendix A) just before the last maintenance dredging. Stations -2 +00 and -1 +00 are in the inlet throat and are largely stable. Stations 1 +00 to 2 +00 are located immediately offshore, with a controlling depth of 6 -7 ft. NAVD. The slope of the sand surface is high to the north and slopes downward to the south side of the design channel, indicating likely infilling from the north. Stations 4 +00 to 6 +00 have controlling depths below 5 ft NAVD, with the gradient sloping down from the south. The stations from 7 +00 outward have controlling depths greater than 5 ft NAVD with a south -north sloping surface. This indicates that the inlet is infilling from the north in the low number stations and from the south from Stations 4 +00 to 9 +00. The area infilling from the south has the shallowest controlling depths, below -5 ft NAVD between Stations 4 +00 to 6 +00. The infilling tendency can be decreased by moving the channel away from Delnor- Wiggins shoreline at these mid - stations and reducing the fill placed offshore of the Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, both of which are components of the proposed plan. Straightening the channel accomplishes this goal. The natural alignment of Wiggins Pass has varied quite significantly, which can be seen in Appendix C. A navigation channel will be most stable if it can be designed to assume the natural alignment. Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. found the channel alignment to vary from 2250 to 297° (CEC 1982). As part of this study, the alignment of Wiggins Pass was further analyzed using historic photographs shown in Appendix C. Alignment refers to the direction of the seaward end of the main ebb channel. The analysis shows that the alignment of Wiggins Pass has varied between an azimuth of approximately 235° to 3200. The variation in alignment suggests that Wiggins Pass experiences both wave and tide dominations. Tide domination appears to be characterized by an alignment of about 250 °, where the ebb shoal is aligned with interior channels. Wave dominated inlet configuration is characterized by alignments of approximately 310° (refer to 1951 aerial in Appendix Q. Recently, the channel has swung strongly to the southwest, in line with the northward migrating flood channel. In 1994, this channel alignment was closer to perpendicular to the shoreline. A straightened ebb and flood channel will moderate these swings. G. Sediment Disposal Balance The amount of dredge disposal north and south of the inlet has been nearly equal since dredging began in 1984. Lately, the trend is towards north disposal since 2001. An analysis was made to calculate the disposal balance needed to make each area have an equal erosion rate. As an example, the areas south of the inlet (R -17 to R -21) showed a gain of almost 50,000 cubic yards since 1979, while the area north of the inlet (R- 11 -R -16) lost 253,000 cubic yards. To equalize the rate of volumetric change in these areas since 1979, disposal volumes should have been 2.7 times greater to the north (Barefoot Beach Park) than the south ( Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park). Four periods were analyzed with the following ratios of north to south disposal, which are listed in Table 7. 23 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 7 Disposal Ratios Period Disposal Ratio 1979 -2009 2.7 1988 -2009 2.4 1992 -2009 5.3 2001 -2009 2.9 If we exclude the differing 1992 -2009 time period, the rate of disposal north of the inlet should be larger by approximately 2.65 times, with a range of 2.4 to 2.9. This is a major shift over past practices. Ultimately, this bypassing ratio should eventually stabilize the shoreline just north of the inlet on Barefoot Beach, but it will be a long term effect. This calculation should be updated before each dredging event to rebalance the ratio based on the latest conditions. H. Sediment Budget This section contains an estimate of the littoral drift and volumetric changes at Wiggins Pass which is responsible for the transport of sediment. A historic sediment budget for Wiggins Pass (1973 -1988) is presented in Appendix B, and the recent sediment budget is presented within this section for further insight into transport into and around the inlet. Longshore transport is defined as the movement of sand within the surfzone in a direction parallel to the beach. The longshore transport depends primarily on the incident wave height and wave angle. Two of the most popular methods of evaluating this transport are by either comparing measured beach volumes or through computer models. Because sediment transport is directly dependent on the local wave climate, there tends to be seasonal variations in this transport, whether it be a change in magnitude, a shift in direction, or a combination of both. Sanibel Island, northwest of Wiggins Pass, shelters the study area from larger northwest waves. Recent modeling studies (CPE, 2009 and 2011) indicate that the northern waves are significantly refracted and dissipated before they reach Wiggins Pass due to shallow offshore bathymetric features. Seasonal net drift reversals are common on most Florida coastlines. Annual net drift reversals are less common. Wiggins Pass appears to have more frequent annual net drift reversals. This leads to long periods where net drift is north, counter to the average south trend in the rest of the County. An updated sediment budget was developed for Wiggins Pass and adjacent shorelines to identify and quantify the sand entering and leaving the Wiggins Pass littoral system. The updated sediment budget was performed for the period from 1992 to 2009 (Figure 7) and covers a region about 1 mile north and south of the inlet. This period was selected due to the consistent inlet maintenance activity that occurred during the time frame. 24 COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 7. Wiggins Pass Sediment Budget —1992 to 2009 25 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Overall, the general pattern exhibited by the inlet is sediment transport moving north from Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park and its disposal area. The sediment continues north until it encounters the inlet where is it swept into the interior channel and shoals. While within the inlet, the sediment appears to move between the flood and ebb shoals, which create an illusion of more sediment encroaching from the north. North of Wiggins Pass at South Barefoot Beach, the sediment is entering into the pass. Between North and South Barefoot Beach, a nodal point creates a reversal in sediment transport direction. After the nodal point, the sediment is exiting the system to the north. It appears that the inlet is being refilled after dredging at least equally from the north and south, if not more of the latter. The erosion on Barefoot Beach is partially caused by sand lost to the inlet after dredging, but the major cause is a lack of sand bypassing. There is some uncertainty in the magnitude of alongshore transport, but the analysis described next support primary infill from the south. Periodic dredging is one of the driving forces, leading to high sediment transport toward the inlet. I. Inlet Impact Analysis - Odd -Even Analysis Another method of determining the effects of a natural or manmade feature, such as an inlet or a coastal structure that impacts the alongshore sediment transport, is called the even -odd analysis. Its purpose is to separate out those shoreline changes that are symmetrical about a point on the coastline (and probably not attributable to the structure /inlet) and those that are due to the presence of the coastal structure /inlet. The procedure separates shoreline or volumetric changes into an even and an odd function about the origin of an alongshore coordinate system; this origin is placed at the feature being examined. In the simplest case, the even function can be interpreted as the natural (background) shoreline changes that are ongoing in the absence of the structure /inlet. The odd function then depicts those changes that are due to the structure /inlet alone (Dean and Dalrymple, 2003). The results of the odd -even analysis (R -12 to R -21) are based on shoreline and volumetric changes taken from the tables shown earlier in this report. Based on shoreline changes, the even and odd component for the pre - dredge period of 1957 -1979 is —0.17 feet/year and +0.69 feet/year, respectively. This means that the background erosion without the inlet would be -0.17 feet/year, while the impact north of the inlet is positive by 0.69 feet/year. In the dredging period of 1992 -2009, the even and odd component is -2.88 feet/year and -2.95 feet/year, respectively. This means that the shoreline north of the inlet is impacted by maintenance dredging of the inlet. For the period 1957 -1979, the even -odd components of the volumetric change is -1,340 cy /yr and +1,069 cy /yr, respectively. This means that there is background erosion and that the impact is south of the inlet by approximately 1,069 cy /yr. Once dredging begins with an even distribution of dredged sand north and south of the inlet, this impact shifts. For the period 1992 -2009, the even -odd component of the volumetric change is -430 cy /yr and -7,870 cy /yr, respectively. The background erosion rate is still small, but the impact north of the inlet is now 7,870 cy /yr. Mitigation for these impacts implies placing up to this amount on an average annual basis north of the inlet compared to the south. If dredging averages is 20,000 cy /yr, then approximately 14,000 should be placed north of the inlet and 6,000 south of the inlet, which is a ratio of 2.33. This would equalize the impact for a mile north and south of the inlet. ,, 26 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. The impact would be different for any other dredge alternative, shoreline length or time period selected, therefore the long term distribution between disposal north and south of the inlet should be based on periodic monitoring, but appears the north should be favored by approximately 2.65 times the south or 8,000 cy /yr. This is based solely on ebb channel dredging and beach or nearshore disposal. Even with this change in disposal, not all the erosion will be mitigated. Inlet impacts are also described about in the MHW and volumetric change sections. Please refer to the modeling reports for wave refraction analysis. J. Sand Sources Implementation of the inlet management plan may require more than one sand source in order to mitigate for erosion at Wiggins Pass. Sand source investigations have previously been done extensively for Collier County. Sources which have been investigated and previously permitted include offshore borrow areas, upland sand sources, and the inlet shoals. Sand from Immokalee Mine has recently been used in Collier County for two emergency beach nourishment projects. This material is coarse - grained with low silt content and would be suitable for beach fill along Barefoot Beach. Since the inlet management plan proposed to incorporate Barefoot Beach into the major Collier County Beach Renourishment Project, sand from Borrow Area T1 is also suitable for placement along the eroded beach areas to moderate the erosion that has occurred over the years. Sand from Borrow Area TI was used for the 2005/06 project and is proposed for use again for the 2013 -14 project. This sand can be used to help Barefoot Beach catch up on their losses since 1984. Beach compatible sand will also be dredged from the shoals and used for the inlet management project. All unsuitable material will be disposed of properly and not be placed within the project area. K. Structures Wiggins Pass is a dredged inlet which is otherwise natural with few improvements. No coastal structures or outfalls have been built within its immediate vicinity. Wiggins Pass is bounded by public parks, where structures are not desired and may actual be restricted by various land management rules, plans or titles. Direct development of Wiggins Pass and its tributaries has been limited to dredging to improve navigation. The only means of improvement that has occurred on the adjacent shorelines to Wiggins Pass is the placement of dredged material on northern and southern shorelines and nearshore area surrounding the pass. The fill received from maintenance dredging has aided in stability of the south shorelines, but has deprived the north of needed sand bypassing. In a recent analysis of historic fill placement, it was determined that the northern shorelines need approximately 2.65 times the amount of the southern shorelines to remain stable. 27 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. L. Wave Climate To understand the physical processes that affect (drive /control) sediment dynamics in the coastal zone, it is helpful to know the characteristics of the local wind and wave climate. The data source that was used previously was the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wave Information System (WIS, 1989). The Wave Information Study (WIS) produced wind and wave climate information for the Atlantic, Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, and the Great Lakes for the years 1956 to 1975. The wave information was generated by numerical hindcasting models which created wind fields from historical meteorological records and calculated wind wave growth and propagation. The numerical hindcasting programs assume spectral transformation of the sea and swell waves, no additional wind effects, and straight, parallel bottom contours. Since wave information is ordinarily needed for specific application at nearshore points, the WIS wave data is transformed from deepwater to a nearshore point. Station 43 is located to the southwest of Wiggins Pass at location 26 °N 82 °W. This wave climate represents a twenty-year deepwater wave data set at a nearshore point. For the equivalent shallow water wave data set, this wave climate was transformed by refraction and shoaling to a nearshore depth. The WIS data indicated that a larger percentage of winds were found to be blowing offshore. This compares well with what is known to occur throughout the southwest coast of Florida (Figure 8). From the analysis, a large percentage of waves were found to approach from the northwest and west, aiding in the transport of sediment in a southward direction. This transport potential is diminished by the sheltering provided by Sanibel Island. However, waves approaching from the southwest are significant as well. Though their persistence is high, the size of these southwest waves are not as great. They do transport sand leading to a high monthly and frequently annual variability in longshore sediment transport magnitude and direction. The mean significant wave height and period is 2.6 feet and 4.3 seconds, respectively. Because the standard deviation of the wave heights is small (0.2 meters), this indicates that similar wave heights are encountered throughout the year. The largest significant wave height and wave period is 7.5 feet and 9.1 seconds, respectively. The Wave Watch 3 data was reduced to better illustrate the waves for the south, which have a significant impact on coastal processes in the Collier County area. Note that Wave Watch data has a significant spike to the south each and less wave to the east compared the WIS data set, along with similar distribution to the northwest. This difference is central to the north direction of alongshore transport at Wiggins Pass. The WIS wave climate at Station 43 does not contain waves generated from tropical storms. In WIS Report #19 (USACE, 1989), hurricane wave statistics were calculated for the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts for the period of 1956 to 1975 based on a hindcast of storms. Statistics were not calculated for Station 43, but statistics for two nearby stations, 41 and 44, are representative of the Wiggins Pass area. A ten -year return wave for the Wiggins Pass area would range between 17.4 and 22.6 feet (CPE, 1995). A more detailed discussion of wave climate is 28 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. found in the CPE 2009 modeling report of Wiggins Pass and the CPE 2011 Collier County Conceptual Engineering and Modeling report and WWIII wave rose from 2011 report. Wiggins Pass Wave Rose - WIS data WEST EAST 571 0 >3 t C°6 .2.5.3 '2 -25 t5% ® 15.2 w i -is 005.1 SOUTH Figure 8. Wave Roses based on USACE Wave Information Study (top) and WaveWatch 3 data (bottom). 29 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. M. Wind Climate For Wiggins Pass, the wind conditions from the Gulf of Mexico that generate onshore winds are of importance for the study area. From May to August, the primary onshore winds are from the southwest, and between November and February, the predominant winds are from the southwest. The most frequent winds near Wiggins Pass are from the southwest; however, the magnitudes of the northwestern winds during the winter are much larger than their southwest counterpart. N. Tides and Currents The tide in the study area is a mixed type dominated by a semi - diurnal constituent, with a mean and spring tide range of 2.1 feet and 2.8 feet, respectively. The mean tide level is 1.6 feet above mean low water. Currents are directly responsible for changing the configuration of the beach, the navigation channel shoals and local areas of scouring. This is because currents move sediment in their direction of travel proportionally to current velocity. Nearshore currents stem from three sources: offshore currents, wave action, and tidal flow. The first mechanism has the most remote effect on the beach while wave action and tidal flow are the most important movers of sand. In 2008, CPE deployed two ADCPs (Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler) at the study area to analyze tides and currents components within the study area. The inlet ADCP was placed near the inlet throat at cross section C6. The results from the field study indicated that the tides fluctuated between -2.62 feet and 1.64 feet. Measured water levels for Wiggins Pass are shown in Figure 9. The measured currents are illustrated in Figure 10. During the ebb tide, measurements indicate that currents reach speeds of up to 5.0 ft/s. This speed occurred during a period of low tide measurements in the inlet compared to offshore. This velocity is significantly above the 3.3 ft/s threshold, which is referred to as the "equilibrium velocity" for tidal inlets. The maximum flood tide approaches this value. Normally, an inlet throat with such strong currents would either scour deeper, or become wider; however, this is not observed at Wiggins Pass possibly due to obstructions to scouring such as rock layers in the ebb shoal or very coarse sediments. Another explanation is discharges from the Cocohatchee River, which is consistent with the imbalance between the ebb and flood currents. Differences in ebb and flood flows may also indicate the influence of weather conditions such as wind or an exchange of flow with adjacent inlets or other water bodies. 30 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. E m J m yW ADCP Measured Tide Time (days), start 13h - 511312008, end: 11h - 6/1912008 Figure 9. Measured water level at Wiggins Pass Tidal flow is unique at each inlet and is governed by tidal range and embayment size. Tidal currents dictate the stability of an inlet and are examined in the hydraulic analysis. Wiggins Pass, unlike most Gulf inlets in southwest Florida, experiences mostly semi - diurnal tides. Semi - diurnal tides are characterized by two high and two low tides daily. Tidal prism is the volume of water flowing into and out of an inlet over one tide cycle. The prism is controlled by the size of the inland bays being flushed by the inlet and is responsible for the size and stability of the inlet. The tidal prism is described in the hydraulic characteristic section below. 31 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. O. Stability and Hydraulic Characteristics of Inlet Wiggins Pass has been a stable inlet since the late 1950's when local development increased the tidal prism. In its present state, shoaling in the interior channels is moderate, while the main channel through the ebb shoal is subject to frequent shoaling and migration. The controlling depth in the ebb shoal is between -3 and -4 ft -NAVD. Stability analysis suggests that the natural inlet cross - section is slightly constricted and subject to scour, while the dredged configuration is depositional. Inlet dredging occurred between 1984 and 2011, and has removed almost 550,000 cubic yards from the inlet. Each time the channel is dredged, the ebb shoal has rapidly filled. The stability of Wiggins Pass has been previously analyzed. In 1980, the Corps of Engineers did a study of Wiggins Pass that used physical data collected in 1978 to analyze the stability of the pass. Two days of tide and current data were collected in June 1979. The mean tidal prism was calculated to be 3.0 x 10 7 CF. A Keulegan type hydraulic analysis was conducted and the inlet was found to be stable. The cross - sectional area of the inlet throat in 1978 was found to be 660 ft2 (MLW), which was greater than the calculated critical throat cross - sectional area of 200 ft2 calculated by the Keulegan method (USACE 1980). In 1982, Coastal Engineering Consultants performed another Keulegan type hydraulic analysis on Wiggins Pass based on physical data collected in 1982. They collected 3 weeks of tide and current data in the Wiggins Pass area, which provided the basis for their analysis. The throat cross - sectional area measured by CEC was 980 ft2 (MLW) or approximately 1200 ft2 NAVD. The maximum and average tidal prism was determined to be 68,800,000 and 45,350,000 cubic feet. Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc. (1982) made three conclusions from their analysis. Based on a comparison of throat cross - sectional area to tidal prism, the inlet was concluded to be near its equilibrium size. Based on the calculation of Mehta's dimensionless stability coefficient, which equal 0.41, the inlet was found to be in a region of intermediate stability. An analysis of the stability coefficient showed the inlet would achieve increased stability if the cross - sectional area was increased by dredging. Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (1995) conducted three hydraulic analyses of the Wiggins Pass area. The first was a qualitative analysis developed by Bruun (1978), which examines the navigational stability of the inlet. The second two are quantitative equilibrium velocity theories which, when combine, indicate the sedimentation trends and hydraulic stability of the inlet channel. CPE recently updated the hydraulic analysis at Wiggins Pass and a summary of past and recent findings are listed in Table 8. The throat cross - sectional area found from the 2008 bathymetric survey, which corresponded to the tidal and current measurements used, was found to be approximately 1300 square feet. The maximum and average ebb tidal prism was determined to be 111,000,000 and 68,800,000 cubic feet respectively. When comparing the two CPE analyses, note that the difference between NGVD and NAVD is approximately 100 sq. ft. 32 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. Table 8 Summary of Inlet Hydraulics Item USACE 1978 CEC 1982 CPE 1992/3 CPE 2011 Throat Cross - Sectional Area, Ac (ft2) 660 MLW 980 (MLW) 1350 GVD) 1300 AVD) Critical Cross - Sectional Area, Acrit 112 200 LW) 260 GVD) 270 AVD Equilibrium Cross-Sectional Area (ft2) 1830 GVD) 1780 AVD) P ebb MAX ft' 6.88 x 10^7 1.11 X10^8 P flood MAX (ft') 6.88 x 1017 6.88 x 101'7 P ebb MEAN ft') 2.5 x 10^7 4.96 x 10^7 3.7 x 1017 P flood MEAN RI 3.4 x 1017 4.11 x 10^7 2.95 x 10^7 V ebb MAX ft /s) 2.90 3.61 5.16 • flood MAX ft/s 2.60 3.61 3.20 V avg EBB (ft/s) 2.16 1.72 • avg FLOOD (ft/s) 2.60 1.37 ao MAX 1.40 2.43 1.79 ab MAX 1.01 1.64 1.57 ao MEAN 1.02 1.00 0.95 ab MEAN 0.80 0.79 0.97 ab /ao (MEAN) 0.78 0.79 1.01 Mehta dimensionless stability coeff. 0.41 FINDING Inlet Stable; higherthan Acrit Intermediate stability, but near equilibrium cross - sectional size. Stable. Natural dredged size straddle equilibrium size. Stable. Ac is smallerthan equilibrium size Bruun's qualitative theory was primarily concerned with the navigation utility of the inlet and results are descriptive (CPE, 1995).. Bruun proposed the ratio of tidal prism to gross annual littoral transport as a prediction of inlet stability and shoaling tendency. After investigating many inlets, he classified them according to this ratio. The mean ebb and flood tidal prism for Wiggins Pass is 49,600,000 and 41,100,000 cubic feet, respectively, for an average of 45,350,000 cubic feet (CEC 1982). The gross littoral drift is 306,500 cubic yards per year (CEC 1991) based on WIS data. The ratio of tidal prism to gross annual transport is 5.5. Bruun's qualitative theory rates Wiggins Pass stability as poor for navigation. Based on the lower alongshore transport rates calculated today, this rating would improve. The two quantitative theories used to analyze Wiggins Pass stability were developed by Escoffier (1977) and O'Brien (1966) and are based on Keulegan's inlet velocity theory. The models are equilibrium velocity theories which require the modeling of the inlet with a hydraulically equivalent channel. The model for these analyses was based on 1982 inlet survey data. The 1982 throat cross - sectional area was 1350 ft2 (NGVD). Results from the 1995 analysis showed that in its natural state, the inlet is stable with a tendency to scour and grow. In its dredged configuration, the inlet was shown to be near equilibrium size and also stable. Figure 11 illustrates results from this study. 1 33 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 7 (-� S � ` — - i UNSTABLE REGION Aai[ STABLE REGION --4 4 3 I1 l 10 CROSS SECTIONAL AREA (SF -NGVD) 10000 -. - PRE - DREDGE CONDITION t POST - DREDGE COa 7DMON 1 OBRIEN CURVE TIDE MEASUREMENT FROM NOVEMBER 1982 Figure 11. Wiggins Pass Inlet Stability Curve from 1995 Inlet Management Plan An updated study using inlet conditions surveyed in June 2008 along with corresponding tide and current measurements was performed for the updated inlet management study. The June 2008 conditions represent the one -year post dredge conditions. The cross - sectional throat area used within the study was 1300 square feet (NAVD). Results from the updated analysis show that the inlet is stable, but the cross - sectional area is smaller than the equilibrium size. This indicated that the inlet should tend to scour until the equilibrium cross - sectional area is reached. The rock substrate located within the ebb channel may be limited the channel's ability to achieve this area. The equilibrium cross - sectional area was found to be 1780 square feet, which is similar to the results found in CPE's 1995 study. The peak in the curve represents the critical cross - sectional area, which was found to be 270 square feet. This value divides the graph into the stable and unstable regions. The stability curve is shown in Figure 12. The maximum tidal prism is larger in 2008, but the means are smaller compared to 1995. Other characteristics, such as the Keulegan coefficient of repletion (K) and Impedance, were calculated as a function in order to produce the stability curve in Figure 12. The approximate duration of the flood tide was found to be 6.3 hours, and the approximate duration of the ebb tide is 6.1 hours. From the measurements, the lag of slack after low and high tide is only minutes. The approximate phase lag for flood tide is 29 minutes, and the approximate phase lag for ebb tide is 20 minutes. The proposed channel will not change the cross - sectional area significantly and it will change the effective length from the straightening by a small amount. The controlling cross - sectional area (Ac) does not change significantly, but does move further into the inlet. Based on model calculations through one full tide cycle, the contribution from the north, east and south channels were determined. The flow from the north, east and south channels contributes approximately 29 %, 44% and 23 %, respectively. Some flow may occur outside these channels. Figure 13 illustrates the flow in each respective channel. 34 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 6.00 5.60 5.2D 4.80 4.40 .� 4.00 - 00 .. 00 0001< Acrit =270 sq.R. __. --_.. ..__. __ _. _..._ 3.60 3.:0 i ..80 L L_ :.00 L 1.60 0.80 0.40 0.00 ._.._ Ac- — Atq=175B y 1 sq.tr _ m m L 10 100 1,000 10.000 CROSS SECTIONAL AREA (S.F. NAVV) x :008 CO:V'DI7IONS O'BRIE\VEL OCRY CURVE 200,00 100,000 50,000 I� -0.000 _100,000 - lsoaoo - 200,000 Figure 12. Inlet Stability Curve Figure 13. Instantaneous Discharge over one tidal cycle 35 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Cocohatchee River Discharge Wiggins Pass receives freshwater inflow from the Cocohatchee River. The river is controlled by a weir, and the predominant flow occurs in the fall and winter. The flow at the weir does not represent all the upland discharges that eventually enter the pass. Other sources may add another 10 %. The pass has an average monthly flow rate between a low of 3.7 CFS in May to 136 CFS in September (Figure 14). The August to October period has the highest flow. The standard deviation is almost equal to the average, meaning the flow is considerably higher in peak months. Daily discharge and flow volume are shown in Figures 15 and 16, respectively. The flow contribution from the Cocohatchee River is approximately 10% of the overall tidal prism measured at Wiggins Pass. Although the measurement is significant, it does not significantly change the results of the stability analysis above. Since the flow is naturally larger in the fall- winter season, it can provide an additional stabilizing flow during this season. 160 — Average Monthly Flow Rate 140 — Standard Deviation 120 — — -- 100 — S S0 w — 60 -- -— 40 20 _ 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Nbnth (1994 to 2010) Figure 14. Historic Cocohatchee Flow Curve 36 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. x 1.20E -07 1006+07 &006+06 aaoPm s 4008+06 2006+06 0.00E -00 1993 1995 1997 im 2001 2003 3005 3007 :Olt Year i ! �, ��' �+ �lar��l��il+l7�lii� ■����'��y,i vpa!�lpl ®!11���11 4''���A;'���11�.�1�.� �� 111Y'.�r� I►� •� , ,, �r i � it I �1 �� MI�I,rll;����INI'��y t Figure 16. Cocohatchee Discharge at Wier 37 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. III. GEOLOGY AND SEDIMENT CHARACTERISTICS The sediment characteristics in the Wiggins Pass area have been well defined. Starting with the Corps of Engineers feasibility reports from 1972 and 1980, the geology has been slowly defined by field investigations, concluding with the 2011 vibracoring and seismic surveying operations. Pertinent results are provided in Appendix E. The geology of the offshore study area is underlain by marl, lime mud, and limestone. The top of the marl, lime mud, and limestone forms an undulating surface. This surface forms troughs which have filled with sediment over geological time. In addition, shoals abandoned during sea level rise can also be found. Some of this sediment is beach quality sand, but may be layered with unsuitable material. The coastline consists of a series of sandy barrier bars separated from the mainland by marshy areas (CPE, 1995). Sediment sizes and characteristic are summarized extensively in Appendix E, and data taken from reports developed in the last two decades is shown in Table 9. Generally, the sand dredged from the navigation channel is compatible with the adjacent beaches, especially considering the fact that inlet dredging with adjacent beach disposal has occurred since 1984. Table 9 Geotechnical Statistics Hardbottom mapping has been conducted in the nearshore region of Wiggins Pass. The most extensive reach of hardbottom is located south of Wiggins Pass offshore of Vanderbilt Beach, south of FDEP R- monument R -18. The location of this hardbottom has been verified by remote sensing and dives by CPE between 2003 and 2009. The hardbottom extent is shown in Figure 13. Exposed hardbottom is as close as 600 feet from the shoreline between R -20 and R -21 and over 1,000 feet offshore at R -18. There are also hardbottom resources located north of Wiggins Pass between R -9.5 and R -11. The closest potential hardbottom detected during a CPE 1994 side scan survey was 900 ft from R -11. These resources were ground - truthed by Collier County divers again in August 2009. Divers found hardbottom north of the R -11 transect, and no hardbottom south of the R -11.5 transect. South from R -11.5, the bottom was predominately mud. This generally confirms the 1994 survey. The exposed hardbottom edge generally begins at depths greater than approximately -12 ft NAVD, and may be related to the hard substrate around the inlet. 38 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Mean Grain Size mm Phi Sorting % Silt Munsell Color Value Wet Dry Wiggins Pass Ebb Shoal 0.36 1.48 1.85 2.57 5.0 6.5 Wiggins Pass Flood Shoal 0.52 0.93 2.12 1.69 6.6 7.1 Wiggins Pass Tributary 0.21 2.26 1.36 3.00 6.0 7.0 Vanderbilt Beach (R -27) - 2003 0.22 2.17 1.57 4.65 NA NA Hardbottom mapping has been conducted in the nearshore region of Wiggins Pass. The most extensive reach of hardbottom is located south of Wiggins Pass offshore of Vanderbilt Beach, south of FDEP R- monument R -18. The location of this hardbottom has been verified by remote sensing and dives by CPE between 2003 and 2009. The hardbottom extent is shown in Figure 13. Exposed hardbottom is as close as 600 feet from the shoreline between R -20 and R -21 and over 1,000 feet offshore at R -18. There are also hardbottom resources located north of Wiggins Pass between R -9.5 and R -11. The closest potential hardbottom detected during a CPE 1994 side scan survey was 900 ft from R -11. These resources were ground - truthed by Collier County divers again in August 2009. Divers found hardbottom north of the R -11 transect, and no hardbottom south of the R -11.5 transect. South from R -11.5, the bottom was predominately mud. This generally confirms the 1994 survey. The exposed hardbottom edge generally begins at depths greater than approximately -12 ft NAVD, and may be related to the hard substrate around the inlet. 38 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 17. Hardbottom and Natural Resource Locations near Wiggins Pass 39 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING INC. ( 1 ` 1 0 1.000 2,000 • t 1 Feet 1 inch = 2.000 feet 1 1 LEGEND: — PROPOSED DISPOSAL AREA 2011 PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT "��� 2000 -2011 PERMITTED DREDGE TEMPLATE • — SEPTEMBER 9, 2010 HARDBOTTOM OBSERVATION `'` • ^— AUGUST 2009 SSS HARDBOTTOM EDGE 1994 SSS POTENTIAL HARDBOTTOM 0 2009 OYSTER BEDS 1 •t • .. �- 2009 EDGE OF MANGROVE 1 • 2011 SURVEYED SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTII) 8 2009 SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTII) 1 • 2009 SEAGRASS (HALOPHILA DECIPIENS) 1 • 2008 SURVEYED SEAGRASS± ■ REPORTED ROCK SUBSTRATE (CEC 1990, CPE 1995) 2009 GOPHER TORTOISE BURROW SURVEY VERY ACTIVE ACTIVE INACTIVE • ABANDONED ;- OUTSTANDING FLORIDA WATERS r 0OTHER SPECIAL ! NOTES: 1. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY COLLIER COUNTY, DATE FLOWN 2009. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED BY CPE ON DECEMBER 10, 2008 JULY 13 &14.2009 AND SEPTEMBER 29, 2011. 3. LOCATION OF ROCK LEDGE TAKEN FROM 1995 INLET MANAGMENT PLAN (CPE 1995). BUT WAS ORIGINALLY IDENTIFIED BY CEC IN 1990. Figure 17. Hardbottom and Natural Resource Locations near Wiggins Pass 39 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING INC. Exposed hardbottom is not known to be present within or near the channels of Wiggins Pass. A rock substrate has been verified to be located under the sand of the ebb shoal (CPE 2009 and 2011). Data collected since 1979 has shown a rock substrate or ledge exists in the Wiggins Pass ebb shoal. The ledge shown in Figure 17 was the report location from the 1990's, but recent investigations show it extended across the ebb shoal. Dredgers have encountered the rock substrate between Stations 0 +00 and 1 +00. Ten jet probes were conducted by CPE in 2009 to investigate the extent of the rock substrate identified by CEC in 1990. Eight were conducted within the ebb shoal and two were conducted within the flood shoal. Seven of the ebb shoal jet probes encountered rock refusal at elevations ranging from -8.2 to -14.1 ft -NAVD. The remaining one had no refusal at -23.7 ft -NAVD. Of the two jet probes conducted in the flood shoal, one encountered refusal at -21.7 ft. and the other had no refusal at -23.1 ft. The jet probes conducted by CPE indicate the presence of a rock substrate that extends across the mouth of Wiggins Pass, except in the center of the proposed new channel alignment (see Figure 18). The nearshore hardbottom and rock substrate influence coastal processes at Wiggins Pass. One of the jet probes (WPJP- 09 -01) corresponds to the rock ledge identified by CEC in 1990 (Figure 17). This probe encountered refusal at -10.2 ft. NAVD88, which is in close agreement with the elevation of the CEC rock ledge ( -8.3 to -11.3 ft. NAVD). Following the 2009 work, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (BBCS) requested an analysis of the geologic control on the inlet that is provided by limestone, peat and/or clay substrata (Request for Additional Information (RAI) dated March 24, 2010). In 2011, CPE collected geophysical (seismic reflection profiling and bathymetric) and geotechnical (vibracore) data within the Wiggins Pass flood and ebb shoals as a basis for addressing the substrate concerns raised by the FDEP. The investigation plan was developed in coordination with CPE, the FDEP BBCS and Collier County. The geophysical and geotechnical data that was collected in 2011 is shown in Figure 18. After interpreting the seismic data collected within Wiggins Pass in 2011, several acoustic reflectors of interest were identified. An unknown reflector was identified in the outer ebb shoal. This reflector is shown in Figure 18, which reference a preliminary channel alignment. The acoustic signature of this reflector is indicative of a coarse material, possibly shell hash or rock rubble. However, since no cores were collected in the outer ebb shoal, the nature of this reflector cannot be verified. Reflector elevations range from —6 ft. NAVD88 at the channel margins to -27 ft. NAVD88 in the outer ebb shoal (within the existing dredge template). There appears to be a topographic high just north of WPJP- 09 -10, where the elevation of the reflector rises to -7 ft. NAVD88. The adjacent jet probes (WPJP -09 -09 and 10) met refusal at -14 and -12.5 ft. NAVD88, respectively. This indicates that this "hill' may represent an area where coarse material dredged from the existing dredge template has been disposed. The edge of the channel was set based on these physical measurements using jet probes. The second reflector was in the flood shoal showing the bottom of the sand substrate. In addition to the two (2) reflectors identified and shown in Appendix E, the seismic data indicates the presence of large volumes of coarse shell -hash and shelly sands throughout the flood shoal deposit. The seismic and vibracores show a fairly distinct delineation between light colored shelly and sandy upper layers, progressing to darker layers with progressively more silt and clay. 40 40 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. En V.\CIIICIF,IIWC \I.,UI11Cl \193001 wlggms_rass unannel btral ntenln \ MYU\HOCK Retlector Ma .mxd A W N Z K- OOKm -n00 O� o ° o O N �DO��y (o °° m ° ° - - - - - °aa [5Pi o n _� C O n r CO C O .. ) - zp�XD=zZZ ZrncnOOD�Di = — mAOnmOC)mcmn m O D m G) v A DZzm0O� mm ___ - -- D m N o z T 382600 �S _ __ -- - -_� 00928£ � >- U) - Dm - Ob Kz0K -u q ° cn �* co m 's co _ K Co -< fZn m0 cum — D m W X� X O z __--- - - - --_ u <0C)�ND �2 u �_ - /// • 00 m p X m O - - - _ ---_ -- -- - = 0 O xx m m G) n o -- -27 6' Z X D z - is f • X O S DD �6 -- = z (nn c m 382800 _,- _.._ - 008z8£ a e ? cn b z( m j ��Doo - - - - -- _ _ m 0 9 D D C) < o 0 0 — —� cn � C) � � m � � m x O p x 0 o m m m C z z W m z x ` < < z 0 co O 00 r D D D W S Z j 0 ccnn = X c W O O 383000 _ __ MOCK- r- m m C m m m m r _ �� 000£8£ m O r = __q �' cn cn - wti - - -` cn cn O W D D cn M D zm m o - ea ° D383200�< _ ®,1 I `` �- I OOZ£8£ O O m y CO �? -m - r z cn z m 8 9 t P �p D 1 A r t - D r Z '9 O m m o L m _ - Z = - - -- m -10 m 383400 , __q __�- - -_ OOb£8£ �„ I �- st ru 0/ � �I 3 r `?. to o O v m r = P S m O U1 =r I I o o O ° 0 D 0 N W N D � C CD v CD Dr - CD WZ T�1� C D 0 }�� N 0 O �I K = O D �'i� ->D Z it z O v m r = P S m c°o G r =.to o 0 D 0 N W N D � C CD v Dr - () WZ T�1� >z 0 }�� N 0 O �I K = O D �'i� ->D Z it z V z O -op ; ? - O C 90 rt fli � 00 „o mWo z vm 0 O, o ; N p w c ! O O Z T -n N co w m gZ � m m � :� N /��� /=h /��D� m iY _n �i) z iii p C: CD 7 0 t ?O !9 r -4 a. vcJ w o S 009£8£A O n z m O O p p 0 0 O O O C 7 m D z0 7C z0 7C z0 C m 77 m M D C C C C C cn C C C rr7i C p" �cncn cn a� 7cr cn "IC4Im rr> >ryr�>rc�crDz t ?O !9 r -4 a. vcJ w o S 009£8£A The division between these layers varies between about -7 and -17 feet NAVD, with deeper depths towards the south and west in the shoal. The divide is illustrated in the core Photograph 3 below, and is one of the best indictors for the depth of the historic flood channels. Photograph 3. This core sample (W PN'C- 11 -12) is located at station C -13.5 within the proposed channel south side. The light -dark divide is at elevation 8.0' NAVD (4.4 ft from top of core), with dark sand with trace clay and wood, clay pockets and silt content of 2.6 %. The cumulative results of the field investigations provide a good picture of the pass's geology. Most importantly, it indicates that the ebb channel is generally located between two massive hard substrates within the intervening gap. The natural, existing, and proposed ebb channels are located in this gap. Establishment of a new channel alignment will not require removal of the large hard substrate, although some rock on the edges needs to be removed for a hydraulically efficient channel. The majority of the remaining sands are beach or nearshore compatible based on the criteria of paragraph K of 62B- 41.007. Very little peat, or organic clay were found. IV. NATURAL RESOURCES A. General Wiggins Pass is a relatively large area of mangrove swamp, with a series of shallow coastal bays connecting the Cocohatchee River to the Gulf of Mexico. The pass is bordered to the north by Barefoot Beach Preserve and to the south by Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. The marine and estuarine environments surrounding Wiggins Pass are directly influenced by the pass, which allows for the mixing of Gulf and estuarine waters. Temperature and salinity regimes are predominantly controlled by the tide. The pass provides access for a variety of estuarine- marine migratory species, including snook and mullet. The natural resources of the project area are comprised of three major resource classifications including: the beach and dune system, and 42 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. upland areas; the estuarine wetlands; and the nearshore Gulf of Mexico. The following descriptions of the natural resources are based on available references and on -site investigations. B. Beach and Dune System, and Upland Areas Beaches The sandy beaches surrounding Wiggins Pass are characteristic of low energy shorelines, having a relatively gentle, shallow offshore slope. These beaches, as well as inshore and offshore sandbars, provide a resting and foraging habitat for shorebirds and wading birds. Species commonly observed in these areas include pelicans, herons, egrets, gulls, terns, plovers, sandpipers and small passerine species (Townsend and Olson, 2007). The beaches also provide foraging habitat for a few terrestrial mammals, such as raccoons and squirrels. Other organisms inhabiting the beach zone include amphipods, isopods, coquina clams (Donax variabilis), polychaete worms, and various crabs such as mole crabs (Emerita talpoida) and the common ghost crab (Ocypode sp.). The beaches provide nesting habitat for sea turtles, primarily the loggerhead sea turtle ( Caretta caretta). Nesting data for the years 2005 -2010 are provided below in Section E. Dune System and Upland Areas Wiggins Pass is bounded on the north by Barefoot Beach Preserve and on the south by Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Both of these natural areas support coastal dune /upland habitat. The habitat can be divided into four west - east zones or parallel bands of vegetation, including the pioneer zone, foredune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock (Townsend and Olson, 2007). The upper beach, or pioneer zone, is sparsely populated with salt - tolerant vines and grasses such as sea oats (Uniola paniculata). This band of vegetation extends the length of the beach and provides natural erosion protection to the beach dune. This zone is periodically disturbed by storm waves or high tides and is subsequently recolonized by pioneer species. Landward of the pioneer zone is the foredune, colonized by low bush species such as inkberry (Scaevola plumieri) and bay cedar (Suriana maritima). The native foredune vegetation has been replaced by the exotic Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia) in some places. This habitat zone is utilized by the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a state - listed species of special concern and a candidate species for federal listing (see Table 10). The coastal strand is a transitional zone between the foredune and maritime hammock. In addition to sea oats and bay cedar, the coastal strand supports small trees and shrubs such as seagrape (Cocoloba uvifera), necklace pod (Sophora tomentosa), and saw palmetto (Serenoa repens). Both Australian pines and the exotic Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) can shade out native vegetation in this zone. The coastal strand also provides valuable gopher tortoise habitat. Landward of the coastal strand is a stable backdune community called the maritime hammock. The western portion of this habitat is composed primarily of cabbage palm (Sabal palmetto) stands with large open areas in between. Small hardwood trees grow interspersed within the cabbage palms. Vines are common, as well as low shrub and ground cover such as beach lantana (Lantana involucrata), Spanish needles (Bidens alba) and blue porterweed (Stachytarpheta 43 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. jamaicensis). The maritime hammock includes a diverse plant community and serves as prime gopher tortoise habitat. C. Estuarine Wetlands Estuarine wetlands within the Wiggins Pass project area include the tidal wetlands and submerged habitats within and adjacent to the pass. East of the pass, several finger canals and a connecting channel have been dredged for boat access from adjacent marinas and developed areas. With the exception of periodic dredging through the navigational channels, the remaining tidal and submerged wetlands within the project area are primarily undeveloped and retain their natural characteristics. These shallow estuarine waters and the adjacent tidal areas support productive mangrove forests, and seagrass, algal, and oyster beds. Extensive mangrove forests, including red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), black mangrove (Avicennia germinans) and white mangrove (Laguncularia racemosa), fringe the waterways, while small red mangrove islands dot the estuary. Red and black mangroves dominate those areas which are frequently inundated by normal tidal action while white mangroves and buttonwoods (Conocarpus erectus) are usually found at slightly higher elevations where tidal inundation is less frequent. These forests provide both habitat and foraging areas for various species of birds, crabs and other invertebrates, and the subtidal mangrove roots serve as nursery grounds for fish species such as snook (Centropomus undecimalis), mullet (Mugil cephalus) and sea trout (Cynoscion nebulosus). Several field investigations over the years conducted by CPE and others have revealed scattered seagrass beds throughout the project area, found in sparse to moderate density (Figure 17). Three species have been observed in the area, including Cuban shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum), and paddle grass (Halophila decipiens), although shoal grass is overwhelmingly the most common species observed. These beds are typically found along the shallow shelf lining the main navigational channel, and within the shallow protected areas fringing the small mangrove islands. No seagrasses were observed within the main channel. Scattered oyster clumps are also common along the fringing mangroves and surrounding the mangrove islands (Figure 17). These tidal and submerged wetlands serve as important breeding, feeding and nursery grounds for numerous fish and invertebrates such as crabs and shrimp. Birds, such as egrets, terns, and herons, forage on small invertebrates and fish found in the tidal flats and within the pass. Common infauna include ghost crabs, mole crabs, coquina clams, and various polychaetes, amphipods and isopods. Like many of the intertidal animals found in this zone, coquina clams and mole crabs are preyed upon by shorebirds and fish, thus providing a vital trophic link within this community. Additionally, the sandy shoal areas within the project area, primarily along the north end of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, are important to horseshoe crabs (Limulus polyphemus), which spawn along the wet beaches of the project area. The eggs of the horseshoe crab are, in turn, an important food source for foraging red knots (Calidris canutus), a species that winters in Florida (Robert Steiger, pers. comm.). Due to overfishing, horseshoe crab populations have declined over recent years; as a result, red knot numbers have also dropped dramatically. 44 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Manatees (Trichechus manatus latirostris) and bottle -nosed dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) are also common in the area, and have been observed within Wiggins Pass. D. Nearshore Gulf of Mexico The nearshore Gulf of Mexico classification includes the littoral (intertidal) zone and the sublittoral (offshore) zone. The littoral zone is inhabited by organisms such as polychaete worms, crustaceans, and bivalves. Organisms common to the sublittoral zone include annelid worms, crustaceans, echinoderms, pelecypod and gastropod mollusks, and various species of crabs and shrimp. In addition, the coastal waters contain a variety of commercial and sport fishes including snook (Centropomus undecimalis), pompano (Trachinotus carolinus), spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), groupers (Epinephelus and Mycteroperca spp.), snappers (Lu Janus spp.), redfish (Sciaenops ocellatus) and flounders. The nearshore Gulf floor consists of a mosaic of carbonate sand, small areas of low- relief exposed hardbottom, and thin layers of carbonate sand over hardbottom (CSA, 1989). Low relief hardbottom habitat is located offshore of the project area. Adjacent to Delnor- Wiggins State Park, the hardbottom is as close as 600 feet from shore. Hardbottom is also located north of Wiggins Pass (Figure 13). In general, the sand -silt substrate supports a low- diversity, low density soft bottom assemblage. Organisms frequently associated with the soft bottom include pen shells (Atrina rigida), tube worms (Chaetopterus variopedatus), fighting conch (Strombus alatus) and various echinoderms (Lytechinus variegatus, Mellita quinquiesperforata, Astropecten sp., and Luidia senegalensis). Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) has conducted detailed mapping of nearshore hardbottom north and south of Wiggins Pass (Figure 17). CPE has conducted multiple assessments of the biotic community found on the hardbottom south of Wiggins Pass. Dominant epibiota include macroalgae and sponges, with some octocorals and scleractinian corals. Common macroalgae genera include Caulerpa, Botryolcladia, Gracilaria, Hypnea and Sargassum. Bioeroding sponges are also common, including Pione lampa and Cliona celata. Although soft corals can be locally abundant, diversity is low, with Leptogorgia virgulata and L. hebes most commonly observed. Stony coral species include Solenastrea hyades, S. bournoni, Siderastrea siderea, S. radians, Oculina robusta, Cladocora arbuscula and Phyllangia americana (CPE, 2009a). E. Threatened and Endangered Species A list of threatened and endangered species and species of special concern with the potential to occur in the project area is presented in Table 8 (Townsend and Olson, 2007; FDEP, 2009). 45 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 10 Listed Species With the Potential to Occur in Project Area Scientific Name Common Name State Listing ''Z Federal Listin 3,4 INVERTEBRATES Liguusfasciatus Florida Tree Snail SSC FISH Aci enser oxyrinchus desotoi Gulf Sturgeon SSC T Pristis pectinata Smalltooth sawfish E Rivulus marmoratus Mangrove rivulus SSC Alligator mississi iensis American alligator SSC T S/A REPTILES Caretta caretta caretta Atlantic loggerhead turtle T T Chelonia m das m das Atlantic gree n turtle E E Crocod lus acutus American crocodile E E Dermochel s coriacea Leatherback turtle E E Drymarchon corals cou eri Eastern indigo snake T T Eretmochel s imbricate Hawksbill turtle E E Go herus polyphemus Gopher tortoise SSC Le idochel s kem ii Kem 's Ridle Turtle E E Rana ca ito Gopher frog SSC BIRDS A'aia a'a'a Roseate s oonbill SSC Aramus guarauna Lim kin SSC Charadrius alexandrinus tenuirostris Southeastern snowy lover T Charadrius melodus ....Piping plover T T Egretta caerulea Little blue heron SSC E retta ru escens Reddish egret SSC E retta thula Snowy egret SSC Egretta tricolor Tricolored heron SSC Eudocimus albus White ibis SSC Haemato us palliates American oystercatcher SSC Haliaeetus leucoce halus Bald eagle T T M cteria americana Wood stork E E Pelecanus occidentalis Brown pelican SSC Rostrhamus sociabilis Snail kite E E R ncho s ni er Black skimmer SSC Sterna antillarum Least tern T Sterna dou allii Roseate tern T T MAMMALS Eumo s laucinus oridanus Florida mastiff bat E Mustela vison Everglades mink T Sciurus ni er avicennia Mangrove fox squirrel T Trichechus manatus latirostris Florida manatee E E Ursus americanus oridanus Florida black bear T 1< 46 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. E = Endangered; T = Threatened; T(S /A) = Threatened Due to Similarity of Appearance; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (list published in Section 39- 27.03 -05, Florida Administrative Code and online at 2 hgp:H endangered .fws.gov /wildlife.html); Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI), Collier County Endangered and 3 Threatened species list for Collier County - hqp:/ /www.fnai.org/fieldguide/search 002.cfm: United States Fish and Wildlife Service (list published in List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants, 50 CFR 17.11- 4 12); National Marine Fisheries Service under National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration list of endangered and threatened species and critical habitats under the jurisdiction of the NOAA Fisheries Service, Florida - Atlantic region - http : / /sero.nmfs.noaa.goy /pr /ndf/ Species %20List /Florida %2OAtlantic pdf Sea Turtles Collier County is responsible for the daily survey of 23.7 miles (38.1 km) of beach for sea turtle activities during sea turtle nesting season (May through October). The Collier County Parks and Recreation Department surveys 16.9 miles (27.2 km) of beach including Barefoot, Vanderbilt, Park Shore, and Marco Island. According to the 2010 Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Report (Kraus et al, 2010), staff documented 422 loggerhead sea turtle ( Caretta caretta) nests during the 2010 season, a moderate increase from 297 nests in 2009. Twenty nests were documented on the 1.2 mile (1.9 km) beach along Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, and 87 nests were documented on the 3.1 -mile (5 -km) Barefoot Beach survey area. During the 2010 nesting season, 3.5% (14) of the documented nests were disoriented. Seven percent (3 1) of the nests were depredated, which is an increase from four percent last year. A total of 27,142 hatchlings were estimated to have reached the Gulf of Mexico. The number of successfully emerged hatchlings represents an increase compared to 19,869 hatchlings that reached the Gulf of Mexico in 2009. The number of strandings in Collier County was 47 for 2010. This was a slight increase from the forty in 2009. Data from Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Reports, 2005 -2010, are presented in Tables 11 and 12. Table 11 presents loggerhead nesting data from Barefoot Beach (R -1 to R -16) and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (R -17 to R -22) between 2005 and 2010. Nesting data for the immediate project vicinity around Wiggins Pass (the south end of Barefoot Beach (R -13 to R -16) and the north end of Delnor- Wiggins (R -17 to R -19)) from 2005- 20 10 is provided in Table 12. Table 11 Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Sea Turtle Nesting Data, 2005 -2010 47 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 BAREFOOT BEACH Total Nests 72 56 40 75 59 87 Total False Crawls 67 55 33 85 50 90 DELNOR - WIGGINS Total Nests 15 10 18 17 22 20 Total False Crawls 46 12 20 33 36 20 Total Emergences 61 22 38 50 58 40 47 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 12 Sea Turtle Nesting Adjacent to Wiggins Pass, 2005 -2010 Gopher Tortoises Habitat for the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a state- listed species of special concern, exists throughout the beach dune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock of Barefoot Beach Preserve. Barefoot Beach is one of the remaining few natural barrier islands along the southwest coast of Florida and is important habitat for the gopher tortoise: a total of 712 burrows were recorded from June 13 through September 7 of 2009; 186 were recorded as Very Active; 277 were recorded as Active; 76 were recorded as Inactive; 173 were abandoned (Table 13, Figure 17). According to Sally Braem, there are about 30 -40 active gopher tortoise burrows in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (pers. comm., 2011). Table 13 Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 (data obtained from Margie Hamilton o her tortoise biologist for Barefoot Beach ). Size Class: 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 BAREFOOT BEACH (R13 -R16) Total Nests 13 5 3 16 14 24 Total False Crawls 12 8 8 15 12 17 DELNOR- WIGGINS (1117 -1119) Total Nests 9 1 8 6 5 13 Total False Crawls 19 2 7 18 19 11 Gopher Tortoises Habitat for the gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus), a state- listed species of special concern, exists throughout the beach dune, coastal strand, and maritime hammock of Barefoot Beach Preserve. Barefoot Beach is one of the remaining few natural barrier islands along the southwest coast of Florida and is important habitat for the gopher tortoise: a total of 712 burrows were recorded from June 13 through September 7 of 2009; 186 were recorded as Very Active; 277 were recorded as Active; 76 were recorded as Inactive; 173 were abandoned (Table 13, Figure 17). According to Sally Braem, there are about 30 -40 active gopher tortoise burrows in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (pers. comm., 2011). Table 13 Summary of gopher tortoise burrow observations for summer 2009 (data obtained from Margie Hamilton o her tortoise biologist for Barefoot Beach ). Size Class: Very Active Active Inactive Adult 173 233 62 Sub Adult 6 34 13 Juvenile 6 9 1 Hatchlin 1 1 0 Subtotals: Abandoned: Total Burrows: 186 277 76 173 712 Shorebirds The Barefoot Beach shoreline provides important habitat for several bird species, including overwintering habitat for piping plovers (Townsend and Olson, 2007). Shorebird surveys within Delnor- Wiggins have shown that many species of birds utilize the shoreline for feeding or roosting, but no shorebirds have nested within Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park since least tern nest sites were last documented in 1986 and 1987 (FDEP, 2009; Sally Braem, pers. comm., 2011). No piping plovers have been observed during shorebird surveys in Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park (Carolyn Shaw, pers. comm., 2011). 48 COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. V. NAVIGATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY A. General The current inlet management practices have been used to maintain Wiggins Pass since the mid - 1980s. The Corps of Engineers published a report on Improvements for Small Boat Navigation for Wiggins Pass in 1980. The recommended plan by the Corps was not adopted due to environmental concerns. The County dredged the inlet for the first time in 1984. The dredging template was increased in both width and depth in 2000 in order to achieve a two year interval between dredging events. In 2008, the County began to hold meetings with navigation, park, environmental, and other community groups in order to better the current navigation and erosional conditions at Wiggins Pass. This group, which represented broad interest within the County, collectively decided upon four goals for the updated inlet management plan. These goals are: 1. To provide a safe channel for boating 2. To address erosion at Barefoot Beach 3. To lengthen the dredge cycle and accomplish it with the least effect on the environment 4. To provide a solution that is economically effective B. Need The need for the updated management plan is two -fold, and it aims to address both navigation and erosion that is occurring at the pass. The navigation channel alignment and dredge disposal practices must be modified to improve navigation performance and reduce impacts to adjacent shorelines. Impacts have been caused by both natural and anthropogenic processes. Maintaining a navigation channel through Wiggins Pass is a high priority for the County. Not only is a navigable channel of importance to the coastal community for recreational purposes, it also serves to support commercial boating within the area. The existing meander or S -curve in the channel is detrimental to safe navigation and causes impacts to the adjacent shoreline. A detailed discussion of both recreational and commercial usage can be found in the original inlet management plan and is summarized below. Navigation becomes difficult for boats with less than 3 foot draft in less than two years with the current dredging plan. The highest navigation need in the Wiggins Pass basin is the Gulf channel, extending into the interior of the pass. Boat counts performed by the Wiggins Pass Conservancy in 1993 found that from 1978 to 1993, the number of boats using the Wiggins Pass basin nearly doubled. The study only included the number of moored boats within the Wiggins Pass Basin. The number of boats counted in the Wiggins Pass Basin in 1978 was 393, and in 1993, that count had increased to 763 boats. Today there are 1,700 slips in the pass region (see discussion earlier in this report). The majority of the boats were small. Boats with drafts of less than three feet accounted for 96% of the total boat population, with most being less than 40 feet in length. 49 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Commercial boating activity in the Wiggins Pass Basin mainly supports recreational boating. There are 31 commercial boats available for charter, rental or tours, and at least 67 jobs depend on a navigable Wiggins Pass Basin. Some commercial fishing does occur out of the basin. The Wiggins Pass Conservancy estimates that at least 30,000 passages occur through Wiggins Pass annually. An updated recreational boating study was completed in August 2009 and has been submitted to the FDEP in 2011. Safe navigation in a boat with a draft of three feet requires sustained water depth that exceeds what is maintained under the current plan. As noted on the map, the majority of soundings taken inside and outside of the pass show significant shallow water depths in the serpentine route out of the pass into open water. Navigation becomes difficult for boats with less than 3 foot draft in less than two years with the current dredging plan, especially since the deepest channel depths are hard to find. Figures 18 and 19a -b illustrate depth soundings at Wiggins Pass. Figure 19 is from January 2010 and represents the one -year post- dredge conditions. Figure 20a is from December 2010 and it represents pre- dredging conditions. Figure 20b represents conditions six months after dredging in July 2011. Comparing the photographs, the depths illustrated on the shoal of the 2010 and 2011 are quite drastic, and it can be seen why navigation is dangerous in the channel when the inlet is shoaled. The navigation problem at Wiggins Pass is not related to depth alone. Local waters are turbid most of the time, which makes seeing the deepest channel through the ebb shoal difficult. If boaters can find the channel consistently, then depth can be less important. A straight channel would achieve this human engineering goal, making the channel easier to find. Safety of boaters utilizing the Wiggins Pass basin is a priority for the study. From reviewing the FWC's Annual Boating Accidents Statistical Reports from 2007 to 2010, it was found that five accidents have occurred in the Wiggins Pass area over those four years. Of those five accidents, three were accidents which resulted in an injury and two were accidents without injury (FWC 2007 - 2010). Figures 2 1 a to 2 1 c below illustrate the location of these accidents. In a personal communication with Joe Moreland, he stated that the ECA has received reports from boaters running aground at the spit and hitting bottom at the south channel at the Pass (2012). 50 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 19. Deepest Channel (Red) and Spot Depths at Wiggins Pass January 16, 2010. This shows a comparison of the existing S- shaped and proposed straight (blue) channel. The orange arrows show principal sediment pathways that fill the channel. 51 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 20a. 2011 Pre - dredge Depth Soundings (December 2010) Figure 20b. Depth Soundings at Wiggins Pass (July 2011) 52 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. LEE NENDR`r Immokalee c O Golden Gate Oo Naples O 00 O O o Gulf of Mexico MONROE Known Locations of Accidents in Collier County during 2007 Le end o Fatal Accident (1) o Accident with Injury (8) O Accident without Injury (8) City Road COUNTY BOUNDARY IiyvirogrtVhic Feruure Files 0 3.75 7.5 i5 ear Locational information N atop dea by W�E the D 89 ivision of Law Enforcement. R Figure 21a. 2007 Reported Boating Acciden�in Collier County. 53 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. LEE • Immokalee 0 O Golden Gate A O 0 Naples 2?a 00 O O 00 0 81 o 00 0 G u i f o f I M e x i C o 0 Known Locations of Accidents in Collier County during 2008 Legend o Fatal Accident (2) o Accident with Injury (15) o Accident without Injury (13) A City Road Hydrographic Feature County Border E�fa4'fYr ^ iJes 0 Locational information N provided by the Division of Law Enforcement - pr E S Figure 21b. 2008 Reported Boating Accidents in Collier County. 54 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Known Locations of Accidents in Collier County during 2009 Legend O Fatal Accident (0) Accident with Injury (11) Accident without Intury (11) County Border Figure 21c. 2009 Reported Boating Accidents in Collier County. 55 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. ,. S w.s asap aas re *r Nerrt4l li! 0 25 5 10 Mc LEE at$ Figure 21c. 2009 Reported Boating Accidents in Collier County. 55 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. C. Recommendation The needs for Wiggins Pass can be addressed and managed by altering the current inlet management practices and by realigning the channel. The recommended plan for Wiggins Pass is to straighten the meander, infill the existing flood channel, and increase sand bypassing to the north. Dredge disposal practices have placed approximately half of the dredge volume north and south of the inlet since 1984, but long term monitoring indicates that the north should receive approximately 2.6 times as much disposed sand as the south. It is recommended that disposal practices be altered to this ratio of sediment placement in order to achieve a balance around the inlet. This ratio is based on equalizing volumetric changes for an equal distance north and south of the inlet based on a comparison to the 2001 survey. D. Examples of Channel Relocations Several other inlets have been relocated in order to alleviate erosion and illustrate the benefits of using non - structural options to address inlet channel migration related problems. A recent example of a successful channel relocation is Bogue Inlet, North Carolina. In 2005, the Town of Emerald Isle, North Carolina, located on the western end of Bogue Banks, moved the main ebb channel of Bogue Inlet 3,500 feet to the west to address channel related erosion problems that were threatening homes and the town's infrastructure on the western tip of the island (Figure 22). A sand dike was used to assist the channel relocation. The Town also used a portion of the sand removed to relocate the channel to nourish 4.5 miles of its ocean shoreline situated east of the inlet. Five years after relocating the inlet channel, the threat of channel related erosion to development on the west end of the island remains abated as a new sand spit has formed off the end of the island, and the channel has not returned to its pre - project location (Shore & Beach, 2011). Figure 22. Bogue Inlet Channel Relocation Plan 56 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 23. Oblique aerial photo of Bogue Inlet taken after completion of the channel relocation project (photo courtesy of Rudi Rudolph, Carteret County Shore Protection Office). One of the first relocated inlets, located in Florida, was conducted at St. Augustine Inlet along the northeast coast. The inlet was moved approximately 1,200 feet north from its 1940's position. A similar move to straighten and shorten the inlet channel occurred at Panama City in the 1930's and 1940's. Other examples of channel relocation occurred at Mason Inlet, NC. In 2002, New Hanover County relocated Mason Inlet in order to preserve upland structures at the north end of Wrightsville Beach. The inlet was moved 3,000 feet north of its January 2002 position. The project resulted in the closure of the old inlet and nourishment of nearly 2 miles of beachfront. Ellisville Inlet located in Plymouth, MA is another example of a relocated inlet. In 2003, the inlet was relocated to its pre -1991 position to prevent erosion to 100 -year old cedar trees and substantial losses to the neighboring shoreline which had created a substantial scarp. The Philadelphia District Corps of Engineers is working on a plan to alleviate erosion at a Coast Guard facility at Indian River, Delaware by centering the channel in the flood shoal. VI. MODELING A comprehensive numerical modeling study was conducted to evaluate potential solutions to improve inlet navigation conditions and reduce erosion on adjacent beaches at Wiggins Pass. The numerical model, Delft3D, developed by Deltares, with its sub - modules for simulation of waves, currents, sediment transport, and coastal morphology change was used in this study. ® 57 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. The study consisted of the analysis of different inlet channel dredging designs (non - structural alternatives) to evaluate the effectiveness of each design in achieving the main project goals of improved navigation and erosion migration. The numerical modeling activities were divided into three main phases: (1) Field measurements of waves and currents using ADCPs and bathymetry measurements; (2) Numerical model calibration of waves, flows, and morphology; and (3) Numerical model production runs. The modeling indicates that improvement of navigation conditions and mitigation of erosion of Wiggins Pass can be achieved by redesigning the navigation channel and modifying the placement location of the dredged material. Eight channel designs were selected for the initial model runs, with the most effective design being selected and refined in final modeling runs. The initial eight model runs were: Alternative M1: Current permit plan based on 2007 port- dredge survey — Gulf channel is 250 ft wide, with deepest section at about 4.3 in MSL (14.7 ft NAVD or 13 ft MLW) deep. Alternative M2: Current permit plan with a cut across the existing flood shoal. The flood shoal cut is 30 in (100 ft) wide by 2.14 in MSL (7.7 ft NAVD or 6 ft MLW according to USACE recommendations) deep. Alternative M3: Current permit plan with a cut across the flood shoal (similar to Alternative #2), a cut to Cocohathee Channel, a small cut connecting to the south and temporary sand dikes blocking flows to the old channel meanders. The temporary (training) sand dikes were implemented in the model to an elevation of 1 in MSL (2.33 ft NAVD), which corresponds to 0.6 in (2 ft) above MHW. The flood shoal cut and other interior channel cuts are 30 m (100 ft) wide by 2.14 in MSL (7.7 ft NAVD or 6 ft MLW according to USACE recommendations) deep. Alternative M4: Gulf channel re- aligned to the southwest with 46 in (150 ft) wide and 3.7 in MSL (12.6 ft NAVD or 11 ft MLW) deep. Alternative M5: Gulf channel re- aligned to the southwest (same channel as Alternative 4) with a cut across the existing flood shoal. 2.14 in MSL (7.7 ft NAVD or 6 ft MLW according to USACE recommendations) deep. Alternative M6: Gulf channel re- aligned to the southwest with flood shoal cut (same as Alternative 5) with cuts to Cocohathee Channel, a small cut connecting to the south and temporary sand dikes blocking flows to the old channel meanders. The temporary sand dikes were implemented in the model to an elevation of 1 in MSL (2.33 ft NAVD), which corresponds to 0.6 in (2 ft) above MHW. The flood shoal cut and other interior channel cuts are 30 in (100 ft) wide by 2.14 in MSL (7.7 ft NAVD or 6 ft MLW according to USACE recommendations) deep. Alternative M7: Gulf channel straightened and elongated extending to the channel throat with 61 in (200 ft) wide and 3.7 in MSL (12.6 ft NAVD or 11 ft MLW) deep. 58 COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. Alternative M8: Gulf channel similar to Alternative 7 with a cut across the flood shoal (similar to Alternative 2), a cut to Cocohathee Channel, a small cut connecting to the south and temporary sand dikes blocking flows to the old channel meanders. The temporary sand dikes were implemented in the model to an elevation of 1 in MSL (2.33 ft NAVD), which corresponds to 0.6 in (2 ft) above MHW. The flood shoal cut and other interior channel cuts are 30 in (100 ft) wide by 2.14 in MSL (7.7 ft NAVD or 6 ft MLW according to USACE recommendations) deep. Scenarios M4 and M5 resulted in a treacherous channel with shallow controlling depths similar to the current dredging template and negative shoreline effects. It appears that channel realignment to the southwest exacerbated the effects of the swash (flood) channel adjacent to Barefoot Beach, and more of the southern end of Barefoot Beach was eroded in relation to the current dredging plan. There was an improvement in the efficiency of the current channel dredging design when a cut across the flood shoal was included (Alternative M2). The smaller channel realigned to the southwest also performed better than the current plan (Alternative M 1) when combined with the flood shoal cut and interior sand dikes (Alternative M6). Due to the smaller channel dimensions associated with this alternative and consequently smaller quantity of capital dredging, this alternative led to one of the smallest amounts of channel shoaling. Alternative M7, which consisted of a longer straight channel with smaller cross - sectional dimensions than the current dredging plan, showed improved channel efficiency and no adjacent shoreline impacts. The channel template of Alternative M7 was combined with the cut across the flood shoal and temporary sand dikes to develop Alternative M8. This alternative, together with Alternative M3, were the best alternatives in terms of channel efficiency (maintenance of deeper controlling depths and a straight channel configuration). Both caused positive impacts on Barefoot Beach and no negative impacts to the shoreline of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Because Alternative M8 achieved similar results as Alternative M3, with smaller cross - sectional dimensions in the Gulf channel, it was selected as the best alternative during the phase of the study. A comparison of the modeling results for the existing 2009 and 2010 selected alternatives after a 4 year run is shown in Figure 24. 59 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 04 0 4 t lt3 J � IS 44 ♦25 Figure 24. Four Year Modeling Results The results show a clean advantage in the ebb shoal for the straighter channel, with up to 0.75 meter (2.5 feet) depth advantage 1/3 reduction in infill rate after 4 years. The results of the final four alternatives considered in modeling are compared in the matrix in Table 14 (CPE 2009). The final models considered the existing conditions versus a straightened channel versus a modification of existing conditions with a southwest ebb channel orientation. The selected alternative has clearly the lowest infill rate and maintains the best channel depth and stability. Modeling suggests that a straight channel will shoal at one third the rate of the existing configuration. 60 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 14 Modeling Result Matrix Alternative Outer Channel Outer Channel Channel North Shoreline South Limestone No. Alternative Description Controlling Depth Infill Rate Shoreline (ft, NAVD) (CY /yr) Stability (R15 R16) (1116-11I8) Removal 1 Pen fitted Channel 3-5 12,800 Poor Frosional Stable No 2 New Straigh Channel + 4-7 8,600 Good Slight Stable Some Hydraulic Connections Accretion 3 Pertritted Channel + 47 12,800 Good Slight Stable No Hydraulic Connections Accretion 4 Re- aligned Channel 4-7 14,400 Interrrediate � Stable Yes ErHigh The plan presented in this report was modified based on additional modeling from the January 2009 study. The modeling performed for the February 2010 modeling report refined the disposal location, channel dimensions, and reviewed sand size sensitivity in the inlet. The February 2010 supplemental modeling report is included in Appendix D. The findings were as follows: Three disposal options were modeled; the existing nearshore disposal plan, beach disposal in the same region (R -11.4 to R- 14.2), and beach disposal closer to the inlet (R -12.5 to R- 15.5). The most effective disposal option from the three is achieved with beach disposal near the inlet. The offshore disposal is more defused and less immediate in its benefits. Beach disposal will provide the greatest immediate benefit. The dimensions of the channels were modified, and it was found the original model layout (Feb. 2010) was very close to the final selected alternative. The greatest finding was the need for the dredged channel to reach further into the inlet throat in order to be effective, and the need for restoring the south point of Barefoot Beach as a feeder beach to repair the highly eroded beaches of Barefoot Beach Park. In addition, the flood shoal properly mapped with coarser sand and a more robust cross - section creates less threat to the shoreline of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. The modeling alternative that was selected modeled the straightened channel, the meander fill was redesigned and a scarp repair (set at 4.3 ft NAVD) was added to block the flood channel, and the shape of the 50,000 cubic yards beach fill, placed between R -12.5 and R -15.5, was redesigned. The final run provided a controlling depth of 6 to 7 feet NAVD after 4 years, as illustrated in Figure 25 below. The modeling indicates that, in comparison with the existing condition, the new alternative is able to improve conditions at Barefoot Beach and keep the channel deeper after 4 years (Figure 26). Although sand from bypassing does account for some accretion on the ebb shoal and along Barefoot Beach, it will not provide for quick recovery of this area. A stand alone nourishment project is being considered to supplement inlet bypassing. 61 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 25. Model bathymetry 4 -years after dredging for the final alternative (CPE 2010). Vigure 26. relative change of new alternative compared to existing conditions (4 years) (CPE 2010). 62 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. VII. INLET MAINTENANCE AND ALTERNATIVES A. Coastal Process Summary Wiggins Pass is influenced by a number of natural processes. Man -made alterations to the inlet along with long term natural coastal processes have contributed to the current condition of the inlet. The coastal processes at Wiggins Pass are better understood today than during the 1980's and 1990's when the current inlet management practices were implemented. Conventional wisdom assumed that net alongshore transport was from north to south, requiring a net southern bypassing for navigational dredging. The pre -1979 pattern of erosion supported this belief. It recognized that there would be periods of annual reversals where some fill would need to be bypassed to the north. The current project plans are also based on physical features that were either transitory or not fully evaluated. These included the sand spit (similar to Figure 4 conditions in 1973) protruding off of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park's beach and the rock ledge substrate located nearby (Figures 18 and 27). These two features contributed to shaping the earlier inlet management plans. Figure 27. Rock Substrate at Station 1 +00 Coastal processes at Wiggins Pass are dominated by both natural and manmade processes. The area is sheltered from larger northwest waves by Sanibel Island. The discharge through the inlet is tidal, upland from the Cocohatchee River and from Vanderbilt Lagoon, which is a man made connection. River discharges can increase ebb flow in the inlet by up to 80% during peak rainy season (USAGE 1972). Based on recent flow data, this may be closer to 15% over a tidal cycle. 63 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 0 I -5 I S -10 I / / Hard Substrate - Known \ \\ Gap In Hard Substrate \ \ 2010 Proposed Channel ... -_ � Ezistmg Charnel IS \ I \ / ----• ° Sandy Bottom \\ j � 2011 Proposed Channel -20 -25 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 • South Distance From South Edge of 2010 Channel North --� Figure 27. Rock Substrate at Station 1 +00 Coastal processes at Wiggins Pass are dominated by both natural and manmade processes. The area is sheltered from larger northwest waves by Sanibel Island. The discharge through the inlet is tidal, upland from the Cocohatchee River and from Vanderbilt Lagoon, which is a man made connection. River discharges can increase ebb flow in the inlet by up to 80% during peak rainy season (USAGE 1972). Based on recent flow data, this may be closer to 15% over a tidal cycle. 63 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. I I I / / Hard Substrate - Known \ \\ Gap In Hard Substrate \ \ 2010 Proposed Channel ... -_ � Ezistmg Charnel \ I \ / ----• ° Sandy Bottom \\ j � 2011 Proposed Channel Figure 27. Rock Substrate at Station 1 +00 Coastal processes at Wiggins Pass are dominated by both natural and manmade processes. The area is sheltered from larger northwest waves by Sanibel Island. The discharge through the inlet is tidal, upland from the Cocohatchee River and from Vanderbilt Lagoon, which is a man made connection. River discharges can increase ebb flow in the inlet by up to 80% during peak rainy season (USAGE 1972). Based on recent flow data, this may be closer to 15% over a tidal cycle. 63 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Recent subsurface investigations show that there is not a lone rock substrate ledge controlling the inlet location, but the rock or rubble substrate stretches hundreds of feet on either side of the existing ebb channel (Figure 18), which contributes to the throat stability. The natural and permitted channel is centered on the gap in large expanse of hard substrate. The dominating feature of the inlet is the northern meander of the flood channel around the expanding flood shoal which contributes to the instability and southern swing of the ebb channel, causing navigation problems. The ebb channel is not able to maintain a navigable cross - section for at least 2 years in either its natural or dredged configuration, although there are periods when navigation is feasible for 3 foot draft boats. The problem is due to both channel depth and straightness through the ebb shoal. It is difficult to navigate an S- shaped channel in turbid waters common to the Collier County area. The process creating this situation has a natural basis as illustrated in the maps and aerials in Appendix C. Northward sand transport along Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park becomes a sand wave as it approaches the inlet. This sand wave often causes a protrusion in the shoreline at the inlet entrance, similar to the one that caused special design considerations in the early 1990's and visible on the 1976 aerial photograph (Figure 10 in Appendix Q. The latest sand wave movement is shown in six annual aerial photographs from 2004 to 2009 (Figure 16 in Appendix Q. The sand transported by this means is deposited in the flood shoal. Since the 1970's, this sand transport has increased the extent of the flood shoal to the north and east as illustrated in the delta change chart comparing the 2009 bathymetries to the 1970's (Figure 6). The chart also indicates that this flood shoal growth has pushed the flood meander approximately 100 feet to the north, while the inlet throat position has remained more stable. The flood shoal volume has increased by approximately 61,500 cubic yards since the 1970's. The flood channel was straight 60 to 80 years ago. The flood shoal growth has created the meander and is based on processes visible in the sequence of charts and figures in Appendix C. The process described above is responsible for creating the current flood shoal. A small bay was formerly located south of the present flood shoal. The small bay is still accessible, but from the south channel to Water Turkey Bay. The 1885 and 1927 historic shoreline maps (Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix C) indicate this small bay was part of the "flood" bay prior to the 1950's. The geomorphic change map of Wiggins Pass between 1927 and 1973 created by Harvey in 1984 (CPE 1995) illustrates the infill of the small bay between 1927 and 1952. An aerial photograph for the 1950's (CPE 1995) indicates the direct connections covered by recently deposited sand wave. The sand wave filled the connection to the baylet before building the flood shoal that is present today. The sand that has been pushed into the inlet that does not stay in the flood shoal has migrated to the entrance of the tributary channels, some of which have needed periodic dredging. The south channel gets most of this sand. Sand is also pushed to the ebb channel for transport into the ebb shoal or adjacent shorelines. This coastal process has created a larger swing in the main inlet channel. Currently there is a northern swing in the flood channel which shifts into a southern swing in the ebb channel, which is not conducive to safe navigation. The southern swing impacts Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. 64 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. The shift in the meander to the north has undermined the mangroves and vegetation on the north shoreline of Barefoot Beach and has created a steep scarp. The Gulf shoreline of Barefoot Beach has lost over 400 feet of shoreline within 500 feet of the inlet since 1992. The interior and exterior erosion may be exacerbated by higher storm discharges from the Cocohatchee and current dredging practices. Ultimately, continued natural and man induced processes can lead to the complete removal of the southern point of Barefoot Beach. Current channel dredging and disposal practices are contributing to the problem. Since dredging began in the 1980's, about 50% of the dredge volume has been placed north or south of the inlet. This has contributed to a deficit of sand at Barefoot Beach. Based on monitoring information and historic volumetric and shoreline changes, approximately 2.65 times as much dredged sand should be disposed of north versus south of the inlet. Sand bypassing to the north must increase. A decrease in disposal offshore of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park in conjunction with a straightening of the ebb channel, should decrease the accretion at the point (R -17), reducing infill into the ebb channel Reconfiguring the flood shoal and modifying dredge disposal practices will relieve most erosional stresses from Barefoot Beach. The reconfiguration will not stop the northward trend of the inlet, but it can turn back the clock to a period where erosion was a smaller problem. B. Sediment Management Plan One consideration that has been featured in all of the alternatives that will be discussed below is an updated sediment management plan. This plan will take into account the sediment imbalance that has occurred at the pass and will also consider placement of fill in new areas, such as onshore at Barefoot Beach. The Barefoot Beach shoreline has recently been declared as critically eroded by the FDEP. In order to fully restore the shoreline, onshore placement of beach quality sand is proposed for this area. Onshore placement of sand will be the most effective way to restore the shoreline as compared to the nearshore placement of sand that has been done in the past. If fill were to be placed above the MHW line, it is more likely to benefit Barefoot Beach than placing the dredged material within the nearshore zone. The onshore fill has a greater potential to remain on the dry beach, which is especially critical within 2,000 feet of the inlet. With onshore fill, the scarp that is present near R -16 would also be able to be repaired, which would create a safer shoreline for recreational users. The plan also calls for improved sand bypassing at Wiggins Pass. This will be incorporated by placing beach compatible sand in nearshore or ebb disposal areas to rebuild ebb shoal, build Gulf beach and scour repair with compatible sand, and using a disposal balanced to favor adjacent Gulf shoreline with greatest need. Intermediate ebb channel dredging will be done as needed to excavate and surgically clear ebb channel and laterally place sand in the north ebb shoal to promote its regrowth. The plan will also be supplement with nourishing the critically eroded area on Barefoot Beach and re -build the ebb shoal every 10 years with 100,000 cubic yards to supplement bypassing until the shoreline and shoal recovers. ;r 65 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. C. Alternative Analysis Five sets of alternatives were analyzed for this study, most of which are described within the modeling section and the modeling report. All the alternatives were designed in order to minimize excavation of the limestone /clay /peat layers, avoid deflation of the ebb shoal, and to avoid loss of habitat. The alternatives also include the updated sediment management program described above. These alternatives were: . i. No Action ii. Alternative 1 — Existing Channel Configuration iii. Alternative 2 — Straight Channel Configuration iv. Alternative 3 — Intermediate Channel Configuration V. Alternative 4 — Groin With option one, or no action, the project area would eventually become hazardous to navigation due to shoaling and channel meander. This alternative discontinues the historical maintenance dredging of Wiggins Pass, with no further maintenance or stabilization of the shorelines. Neighboring shoreline areas to the north in Barefoot Beach would continue to be erosional, resulting in continued vegetation loss. The southern tip of Barefoot Beach would likely continue to erode, resulting in the continued loss of sea turtle nesting habitat, gopher tortoise habitat, and vegetation. It would take decades for the ebb shoal to fully recover. Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park would return to its natural erosional state on the Gulfside and accretion on the inlet shoreline, and the flood channel would continue to migrate to the north. This alternative contradicts the county's goals; therefore, the no- action plan was not considered. The no action alternative also could prove perilous to the northern beaches at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. With no action, the ebb shoal channel would be encroaching close upon the southern shoreline, and put its Gulfside sandy beaches at risk. This alternative is not desired by the County since it will not improve the current state of erosion or navigation. This alternative is also unlikely, since Wiggins Pass is a heavily used inlet within the northern county. However, it provides the basis for evaluating the impacts and benefits of the other alternatives. Alternative 1, which has been done historically, is to maintain the same dredge template that has been permitted. This design would provide a two year or less design life, which means relatively frequent disruption to the environment during construction. This design does not improve the navigation situation at Wiggins Pass, which has been perilous at times with this configuration. This alternative only contains an ebb shoal dredging component. The flood shoal would still be allowed to meander farther north against Barefoot Beach, continuing the erosional loss of vegetation along the interior shoreline. The southern tip of Barefoot Beach would likely continue to erode, resulting in more loss of sea turtle nesting habitat, gopher tortoise habitat and vegetation. This alternative is not desired by the County. The primary disadvantages of this alternative are the short design life, which requires maintenance dredging every two years, continued erosion of adjacent shorelines, and navigation hazards due to shoaling. Alternative 2, which is desired by the County, proposes to straighten the Wiggins Pass channel both through the ebb and flood shoals. This channel alignment is completely straight and contains only a slight bend. This design is intended to give the pass a four year design life, 66 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. which means less frequent disturbance to the surrounding environment. This design requires dredging a straight channel through both the flood and ebb shoal, and permitting a dredge template within the tributary interior channels of the pass. The proposed channel has been shifted south to avoid a high point in the rock substrate. There are no plans to dredge these channels initially, unless they need to be dredged during the cleanup phase. These channels will be dredged as needed periodically. Alternative 2 will also infill the current channel meander that cuts next to Barefoot Beach with coarse material to redirect the channel along the newly dredged path. Fill placement in this interior channel adjacent to Barefoot Beach would stabilize the shoreline and stop the erosional loss of mangrove habitat. Though this project design will involve removal of some of the shoal from the south side of Wiggins Pass, the similar intertidal habitat will be added to the north side, continuing to provide important shorebird habitat in the Pass. This design also includes the placement of beach compatible fill to the south end of Barefoot Beach, which would stabilize the shoreline, create sea turtle and gopher tortoise habitat, and repair scarps. Alternative 3 proposes a channel alignment with a larger bend in the channel to move the channel away from the Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park and Barefoot Beach interior shorelines. The design is anticipated to give the pass a three year design life and about the same dredge volume. This channel will be less hydraulically efficient, shoal at a higher rate, and have some of the same navigability problem as the existing channel. Some impacts caused by the south swing of the ebb channel should be expected to Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. It will not significantly decrease the initial dredge volume. The last alternative (4) includes structures, but this option is not desired by the County, FDEP, other local and park interests, and their associated regulatory plans. A structural solution using a jetty, breakwater, or T -groin has been suggested as an economical alternative, but is not as efficient as first appears, since substantial dredging is still required. Traditionally, coastal structures (jetties, groins, and breakwaters) are used to solve this type of shorelines erosion and navigation problems, in a way similar to Doctors Pass to the south. The use of a soft engineering solution to mitigate this coastal impact is more compatible with current practices and policies at Wiggins Pass. A structure on the north side of the inlet would not address all the project goals. It would have a positive impact only on a portion of the Barefoot Beach Gulf shoreline and could partially improve navigation. The impact to the inlet interior shoreline and the south points of Barefoot Beach would not be lessened. Since the predominant alongshore transport direction is north, structures on Barefoot Beach alone are not very effective, without other changes. A two jetty system with re- alignment of the inlet can be effective, reducing maintenance requirements for navigation to conditions similar to that at Doctors Pass. A single sided jetty on Barefoot Beach would perform similar to the Blind Pass groin in Lee County; somewhat beneficial, but not totally effective. D. Comparison of Alternatives In Table 16 the matrix is used to compare the five alternatives discussed. The " + +" represents much improved conditions, the " +" represents improved conditions, "0" represents neutral /no 67 COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. change, and " -" indicates worse conditions. Alternative 2 best meets the County's objectives, including costs described later. Table 16 Alternative Matrix Alternative Northern Shoreline Impacts Southern Shoreline Impacts Navigation No Action Alt. 1 - _ 0 Aft. 2 ++ + ++ Aft. 3 ++ + ++ Aft. 4 + 0 + VIII. COMPREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN The purpose of this section is to present a detailed description of the recommended plan for the management of Wiggins Pass and adjacent shorelines. The plan is divided into multiple elements. These elements consist of erosion control, mitigation and sand bypassing, monitoring, natural resources and permitting, and navigation/public safety. The desired plan is depicted in Figure 28. This section also presents other key elements for the scheduling and funding needed to implement the new inlet management plan. A. Management Plan The plan presented in this section is the best combination of alternatives able to achieve an environmentally and cost effective inlet management plan. The recommended plan mitigates for the impact of Wiggins Pass on adjacent shorelines and improves the navigability of the inlet. The major components of the plan are described in Section G below. B. Mitigation and Sand Bypassing The navigation project for Wiggins Pass will require an initial dredging of 84,000 cubic yards with an estimated 50,000 every four years thereafter. This amounts to an annual average of 12,500 cubic yards per year. Modeling suggests that this number may be smaller. 68 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. I— C26 NOTE ONSHORE DISPOSAL ISFOTORE PLATT Figure 28. Project Component Map The placement of fill to the north will help to mitigate for inlet effects and will rebalance the historic sediment bypassing ratio that has favored the south. Preliminary estimates show a bypassing ratio of 2:1 favoring the north is the proper mitigation. The amount bypassed should be based on equalizing volumetric change rates for an equal distance north and south of the inlet based on using the 2001 survey profiles as a baseline. The base should be measured between R- 12 to R -16 and R -17 and R -21. The calculation should factor out the influence of independent nourishment projects, since they provide catch up for Barefoot Beach. Table 17 summarizes the volumetric dredging and placement schedule for the first 10 years of the project. The initial bypassing calculation only includes the Gulf volume, since the flood volumes are a zero sum operation. 69 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. FLOOD SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA f i BAREFOOT BEACH G33 PRESERVE (( j 1 a � DELNOR- WIGGINS �\ f PASS STATE PARK �n -�WVOOI SCARP REPAIR - DREDGE -" -_- — AREA — — _ — — — PRIMARY (NORTH) �— NEARSHORE AND BEACH SECONDARY (SOUTH) DISPOSAL AREA NEARSHORE / EBB SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA // _ DISPOSAL AREA 15-00 1 GULF OF MEXICO NOTE ONSHORE DISPOSAL ISFOTORE PLATT Figure 28. Project Component Map The placement of fill to the north will help to mitigate for inlet effects and will rebalance the historic sediment bypassing ratio that has favored the south. Preliminary estimates show a bypassing ratio of 2:1 favoring the north is the proper mitigation. The amount bypassed should be based on equalizing volumetric change rates for an equal distance north and south of the inlet based on using the 2001 survey profiles as a baseline. The base should be measured between R- 12 to R -16 and R -17 and R -21. The calculation should factor out the influence of independent nourishment projects, since they provide catch up for Barefoot Beach. Table 17 summarizes the volumetric dredging and placement schedule for the first 10 years of the project. The initial bypassing calculation only includes the Gulf volume, since the flood volumes are a zero sum operation. 69 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 17 10 Year Volume Dredge Plan Volume Wiggins Pass Florida YEAR ITEM DREDGE DISPOSE FLOOD EBB CHANNEL UPLAND or BORROW PIT NORTH EBB SHOAL BEAD NEARSHORE SOUTH BEACH OR NEARSHORE 1 Project hWlementation 36,400 40,950 39,200 7,500 30,650 2 Nourishment 50,000 50,000 3 Interim Dredging 8,000 8,000 4 5 Major Maintenance Dredging 50,000 5,000 E 0 45,000 6 7 Interim Dredging 8,000 0 8,000 8 9 Major Maintenance Dredging 50,000 50,000 0 10 Eligible By -Pass Distribution Total 193,350 156,950 1 1 51,700 1 I 88,650 53,000 Notes: Ebb Dredge quantity estimate ranges from 31,500 to 65,400 including appro)mnately 7,000 cy of unsuitable material Based on a 2/3rd to 1 13rd distribution ofnorth to south disposal volume. C. Erosion Control The natural and improved Wiggins Pass has caused erosion on the adjacent Gulf shorelines of Collier County. The erosion control elements of this plan and other actions planned by the County will provide for erosion control. The first part of the erosion control plan is sediment bypassing to reduce erosion rates on the beaches adjacent to the inlet favoring the north by a 2:1 ratio, re- establishing the north lobe of the ebb shoal, which is important to re- stabilizing the Barefoot Beach shoreline south of R -14.5. In order to compensate for past sediment deficits, a supplemental independent renourishment at Barefoot Beach will occur concurrently with the Countywide beach nourishment. Approximately 100,000 cubic yards will be placed at the southern portion of Barefoot Beach or in the adjacent ebb shoal to mitigate for the severe erosion which has occurred and kick started the ebb shoal regrowth. D. Navigation and Public Safety/Human Engineering The inlet management plan recommends a dredging plan that improves the navigability of Wiggins Pass and boater safety. The plan was designed to achieve a four year dredging interval. A straightened channel will be easier to navigate at all depths, provide hydraulic forces capable of reducing shoreline losses by 1/3, and maintain a deeper channel after 4 years compared to existing conditions. Table 18 below highlights key widths and depths for the proposed project and the next table summarize historic planning and dredge depths (Table 19). 70 COASTAL PLANNING 8r ENGINEERING, INC. Table 18 Dredge Widths and Depths Station Location Bottom W idth (ft) Depth (ft, NAVD) Overdredge (ft) 15+00 Ebb Shoal 240 -12.0 1.0 0+00 Ebb Shoal 160 -12.0 1.0 C6 Throat 160 -7.7 1.0 C10 Flood Shoal 130 -7.7 1.0 C15 Flood Shoal 130 -7.7 1.0 C26 East Channel 82 -7.0 1.0 C31 South Channel 123 -7.2 1.0 C35 North Channel 70 1 -7.0 1 1.0 Table 19 Historic Dredge Widths and Depths Station Location Bottom Depth (ft) Overdredge Width (ft) NAVD Depth (ft) Corps 1980 Ebb Channel 150 +100 -13.3 1.0 Throat * +50 -150 -10.3 1.0 Flood Side Channel 50 -9.3 1.0 2000 -7 Permit Ebb Channel 250 -13.3 1.0 Throat 150 -8.8 1.0 Flood Side Channel 125 -6 0.0 2011 Dredge Ebb Shoal 200 (170') -13.0 1.0 Throat 150 -8.7 1.0 Proposed 2010 Permit Ebb Channel * 240-160 -12.0 1.0 Throat 160 -12.0 1.0 Flood Channel 130 -7.7 1.0 E. Environmental Element Implementation of the recommended inlet management plan will have several positive effects on the natural resources surrounding Wiggins Pass. One positive effect will be that the plan will help maintain or increase the available dry beach both north and south of the pass. The placement of sand on the beaches and nearshore would help mitigate for the erosive effects of the pass, thereby helping to protect the adjacent dune and upland habitats from erosion induced losses. The beach monitoring plan suggested in the inlet management plan would help ensure 71 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. that the sand would be placed north and south of the inlet in the most appropriate proportions. The placement of beach quality sand on these beaches will help maintain or increase the amount of available sea turtle habitat and gopher tortoises. Another positive effect of the recommended plan involves the shifting of the inlet channel away from Barefoot Beach mangroves and the DWSP north Gulf shoreline. Maintaining the existing mangroves is important for snook habitat. Re- establishing the flood shoal in the old flood channel location will provide a substrate for recovery of the lost mangrove habitat. The periodic dredging of the inlet channel will help maintain the flushing of the estuarine waters within and adjacent to Wiggins Bay. This flushing will be beneficial to both the mangroves within the pass and other species. In addition to these positive impacts, the implementation phase of the recommended inlet management plan will have some temporary negative effects. Nevertheless, these adverse effects are expected to only be temporary and minimal, and the plan has minimized them by incorporating special precautions into the plan. For example, all known seagrasses are being avoided with the planned alignment. One area where adverse impacts are expected is at the dredging site. Dredging of the channel will result in the loss of the benthic infauna within the dredge area. However, since the infauna tend to quickly recolonize within the disturbed areas, the loss of benthic infauna is expected to be temporary. Dredging of the new channel will also result in some increased turbidity and sedimentation within the project area. Due to the coarseness of the sand in the inlet channel and from previous dredgings' turbidity monitoring, any resulting turbidity is expected to quickly dissipate. However, precautions will be taken (i.e. turbidity monitoring, time of the dredging with tides, turbidity curtains) in order to minimize turbidity impacts during the interior channel dredging when some fine materials is dredged. The neashore disposal area may also experience temporary impacts from the dredging. The nearshore placement of beach compatible dredged material is expected to bury the existing infauna. The infauna, however, will quickly recolonize the affected areas. Little or no -long term impacts to the beach infaunal community would be expected from the project. No direct impacts to the nearshore hardbottom are anticipated from the project. Proper turbidity regulations will be in place in the nearshore zone, and all non -beach compatible fill will be disposed of properly an offshore disposal area or in an upland location. The fill template is designed to avoid coverage to hardbottom. Under the recommended inlet management plan, the beach disposal areas have been specifically located and designed so as to avoid the direct burial of the identified exposed hardbottom to the north and south. 72 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. F. Monitoring The monitoring element of the Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan is an important component. The major components of the monitoring plan will be dictated by regulatory agencies during the permitting process. The required monitoring for the inlet management plan will have both physical and environmental components. The primary element of the physical monitoring plan will be the pre and post dredging surveys and subsequent monitoring surveys of the navigation channel and adjacent beaches. Both the profiles and MHW will be surveyed on the adjacent beaches. These surveys will help to determine the timing and quantity of major dredgings and indicate if a minor surgical dredging is necessary. The surveys will also determine the impacts of channel dredging on adjacent beaches. The surveys will also serve as a means to provide information for making minor channel adjustments and changes in beach disposal design. This surveys will also be useful to provide information to boaters, and most of all, meet permit requirements. Environmental monitoring may be required pre, during, and post - construction. The environmental monitoring plan will consist of hardbottom monitoring accomplished in conjunction with the beach nourishment program. The during construction phase of environmental monitoring will consist of a turbidity monitoring, and if done during sea turtle nesting season, monitoring of sea turtles. A post - construction hardbottom survey may be required in order to show that there were no direct impacts due to the construction of the project. Permitting agencies have also expressed interest in monitoring currents within the interior channels of Wiggins Pass to determine the distribution of flow among the three tributary channels. These measurements should be taken as required by permitting agencies at the same time as surveys to be cost effective. Tributaries leading to the main interior channel will also be monitored. G. Project Descriptions Summary The goals for the Wiggins Pass navigation improvement study as developed by Collier County and a Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Committee are: 1. To Provide a safe channel for boating 2. To address erosion at Barefoot Beach 3. To lengthen the dredge cycle, accomplished with the least impact on the environment 4. To provide a solution that is economically effective A non - structural alternative is an objective for the inlet design in order to improve navigation. The committee, which formulated the main goals for Wiggins Pass, represented a broad range of local stake holders appointed by the County government. The project recommended in the 2009 modeling study and based on comments generated by the 2010 permit application is summarized below. Refinements were developed during the last year based on a new field investigations and further consultation with agencies. It addresses not only 73 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. navigation, but also improved sand bypassing, modifications to channel dredging, improved locations for sand disposal and an updated inlet management study. It accomplishes improved navigation and sediment management by a combination of straightening the channel, major and small maintenance dredging and new sand disposal practices, as illustrated in Figure 28 above. Almost every task listed below contributes to both navigation and inlet management, and further refinements to this plan are expected. It also addresses balancing inlet bypassing based on FDEP inlet management principles. A 10 -year plan is proposed to achieve the project goals. 1) Initial construction of straightened channel i) Dredge compatible sand from ebb channel — 41,000 c.y. (Range 24,000 to 58,000 c.y.) ii) Dredge flood channel — 36,400 c.y. ill) Dredge incompatible material — 7,500 c.y. iv) Build beach, nearshore, ebb shoal and scour repair with compatible sand — 38,200 c.y. v) Fill meander with compatible sand — 39,200 c.y. vi) Upland or offshore borrow pit disposal of unsuitable sand — 7,500 c.y. 2) Major maintenance dredging — 50,000 c.y. every 4 years with disposal balanced to favor adjacent Gulf shoreline with greatest need based on equalizing volumetric changes. i) Place beach compatible sand in beach, nearshore or ebb shoal. 3) Intermediate ebb channel dredging as needed i) Excavate and clear ebb channel at the bar and laterally place about 8- 10,000 c.y. in the north ebb shoal to promote regrowth. 4) Create contingency, monitoring, and inlet management plans i) No direct mitigation expected 5) Nourish critically eroded area on Barefoot Beach and rebuild ebb shoal every 10 years with 100,000 c.y. to supplement bypassing until the shoreline and shoal recovers (this is part of a separate permit and project). The plan addresses concerns expressed by FDEP BBCS and Park Service, and other local interest groups. Dredge volumes can be further decreased by allowing for the dynamics of channels centering dredging on the existing channels when their locations have not moved far. A 50 foot horizontal tolerance in the ebb and flood channel should be tolerated, where it reduces volumes. A structural solution using a jetty, breakwater or T -groin has been suggested as an economical alternative, but is not supported by FDEP BBCS, and local policy and plans. Given the local coastal processes, a simple but workable structure would be difficult. Intermediate and small scale dredging to clear the channel at the bar and pumping dredge material to an area approximately 300 -1000 feet north of the inlet would serve three purposes. Clearing the channel with a small operation and feeding the re- growth of the ebb shoal are two of 74 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. these purposes. If dredging could be conducted using smaller equipment during the calmer times of the year, it would also be very economical, and delay major maintenance dredgings. The method for determining the size and location of bypassing operations between the north and south beaches will be based on equalizing the volumetric change rate for an equal distance north and south of the inlet based on the 2001 surveyed profiles. Only volumes dredged in the ebb shoal will count, since flood shoal dredge and fill operations are a zero sum operation. Independent nourishment would be factored out of the calculation. Each of the 5 tasks above supports improved navigation and inlet management. The engineering report has identified three reasons why the 1995 inlet plan did not perform. First, the sediment transport direction is not predominately southerly. The disposal location and a 50:50 split of bypassed sand to adjacent beaches was imbalanced. The sand needs to be disposed of closer to the inlet and approximately 2/3 needs to go to the north. This imbalance disposal since 1984 needs short term supplemental sand to address past practices. The new plan addresses the imbalance, recovery of the north ebb shoal, the Barefoot Beach hot spot south of R -14 and improving navigation. The size of the new channel is summarized in the Table 18. H. Project Construction Method The initial construction will be a sequenced in phases to achieve a shift in alignment while filling in the old channel. This will be achieved by dredging a pilot channel through the south side of the new flood shoal channel and depositing the material in a temporary stock pile, most likely on the flood shoal between the new and old flood channel locations. The north half of the new channel can be used. The use of sheet piles to block off the old channel once the pilot channel is complete may be a method selected by the contractor to add further control of dredged material. Barges can also be used to hold the stockpile. The initial dredging will be from the coarsest layer in the flood shoal. Once a significant pilot channel is completed, the stockpiled sand will be moved into the existing flood channel forming a dike with coarse sand. The main dike will be constructed at two locations in the shallowest crossings in the old flood channel. The dike will be built higher than the high water level initially, to prevent overtopping and the early degradation of the dikes. Once the dike is formed, the remaining interior flood channel will be dredged, the material used to fill up the old channel between the dikes. Some subaqueous grading will be required at the end of dredging to level the dikes, rough grade the new flood shoal and create appropriate shoal features such as swales. The new flood shoal elevation will be -2.28 feet NAVD (MLLW), to mimic the existing shoal. It is expected that the dredged sand will occupy a larger volume when placed in the flood shoal channel, but to compact with time, which can be addressed with future dredge material. Material dredged from the ebb shoal will be used to finish filling this template. The ebb shoal dredge and fill operations will be similar to current practices. Some rubble or rocks will be dredged from the ebb shoal, but from between the two major hard (rock or rubble) substrate layers. The rock and rubble substrate that exists on either side of the proposed channel will remain untouched and continue to provide the historic lateral stability. This will maintain the 75 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. channel stability by fixing the channel between the major rock substrates, which occurs already. Turbidity will be addressed similar to latest permit requirements. Any unsuitable material will be disposed in an offshore borrow pit. This may include rock, rubble, silty or organic soil. Only beach compatible sand will be placed for beach disposal, and sand meeting navigation project criteria will be disposed of nearshore as described in a QA/QC plan. Most unsuitable material is located in the transition between the ebb and flood shoals. The QA/QC plan will identify the distribution of sediments by four broad categories along with their approved disposal areas. The four broad categories and disposal areas are old flood channel, beach disposal, nearshore and ebb shoal disposal, and disposal of unsuitable material upland or in an offshore dredge pit. Use of an offshore dredge pit was approved with a previous permit modification. Sediments will be redistributed by currents within the inlet during this type of dredge operations, and therefore cleanup dredging will be the last step in initial construction. Based on survey by the contractor, high spots will be identified and dredged. Some material is expected to shoal in the south, east, and north channel areas and may require dredging. Intermediate (supplemental) dredging is proposed for those times when the bypassing bar needs to be dredged for navigation, but full dredging in not warranted. This will be done using a small hydraulic dredge or mechanical dredge such as a backhoe or clam shell barge mounted. Dredged material will be side cast or pumped within 1,000 feet north of the channel in areas without nearshore rock. This will lengthen the major dredging interval without large dredge volumes and contribute to ebb shoal regrowth. Periodic maintenance dredging will occur as needed or approximately once every four years. It will predominately occur in the ebb shoal with disposal on or near adjacent beaches. Interior dredging should be small or infrequent. Equipment A backhoe dredge, clam shell dredge, or a cutterhead dredge greater than 14" in size will be used for major dredging of the pass. A booster pump and a spill barge will be utilized to manage dredged material until disposal or placement. A flexible PCP pipeline will be used within the work area designated on the permit sketches and all will remain seaward of the MHW, except during beach disposal. Smaller dredges could be considered only if the County determines the risk to be manageable and time loss potential acceptable. Construction Schedule Dredging of Wiggins Pass jointly with Doctors Pass is a cost effective option that will be considered with each dredging event. The non -sea turtle nesting season schedule for Wiggins Pass for initial construction will be: 76 COASTAL PLANNING He ENGINEERING, INC. October 1 -30 Mobilization November 1 -15 Dredge pilot channel and stockpile sand on flood shoal. November 16 -30 Build temporary dikes (coarse sand or sheet pile, complete dredging flood channel and inlet throat and back fill old channel. Dredge and transport incompatible material). December 1 -20 Dredge ebb channel and dispose sand on beach or nearshore of Barefoot Beach. Repair scarps on south point of Barefoot Beach. Complete filling of old channel to approved template as a priority. Dredge and transport incompatible material. December 20 -31 Demobilization January 1 — February 28 Contingency for weather and equipment problems I. Cost A project cost estimate based on 2011 prices is provided in the two tables listed below. Table 20 shows an estimate for initial construction. The prices are based on recent bid for the 2011 Wiggins Pass and 2009 Blind Pass maintenance dredging events. The cost for dredge and fill of 84,000 cy is approximately $1.7 million. Some cost savings strategies may be required to secure this price. Table 20 Wiauinc Pace Strniahtenina Prniert — Initial f anetrnrtinn ("net Fetimata 77 COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. Contract Item Description Unit Quantity Unit Price Total 1 Mobilization/Demobilization Lump Sum 1 $410,000.00 $410,000.00 2 Ebb Dredge & Disposal C.Y. 41,000 $7.50 $307,500.00 3 Flood Dredge & Disposal C.Y. 36,400 $9.00 $327,600.00 4 Temporary Sheet Pile LF 225 $1,000.00 $225,000.00 5 Unsuitable Material Dispose in Borrow Pit C.Y. 7,500 $15.00 $112,500.00 6 Wiggins Pass Turbidity Monitoring Lump Sum 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 7 Construction Survey - Wiggins Pass Lump Sum 1 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 8 Clean Up Dredging C.Y. 5,000 $10.00 $50,000.00 9 Ebb Shoal Contingency C.Y. 17,000 $8.25 $140,250.00 Total $1,647,850.00 Contingency 5% $82,392.50 Grand total $1,730,242.50 77 COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. A cost comparison of the four alternative 10 year plans is shown in Table 21. The dredging cost are based on the same two maintenance dredging projects. The jetty cost are based on recent cost experience for construction of the Ft. Myers Beach and Redfish Pass terminal groins. It is expected that two 350 foot long jetties would need to be sized between these two Lee County structures. IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The recommended course of action in order to renew the State and Federal maintenance dredging permits for another 10 years, improve inlet navigation conditions, and reduce erosion on adjacent beaches at Wiggins Pass is to straighten the meander, infill the existing flood channel (Alternative 2), and increase sand bypassing to the north (Figure 29). 78 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. N r� y i, C� 0 i. y H z O Q F O U d �06o V W A a Q w 0 A W I�1 z ,C7 H 3 N O z I Z FR w w Z UI Z w 06 Z Z Z g (L J U) Q O U 1 1 1 69, fA n 49 M j 00. C, 0 OO lam: IA; O 7 � O U V, 00 Q � > U 'n' O; �: In: 0Op; M (� M � 000 0, � ; W : 7 � 000 0 O cc: 69, N� 69, 00, 69, N� 69, 0, 00 7 U ti 69 O, O, O; O, O OO l— O, O, S O U N n1 �; �' n O �' 7 0o r � �; vi a� N � , o; o: o; o o, o, o Ic U �' 00' C 00, °�' O N i � 00' 00' U 0, 00, Ol _ti K U �0, : , 00�: 00 , M � W s�005� V�9. s�ni U sA O: O' O o, o, o, o, o, o, o, o; o, o o of o, s-y U In In 1 In .n N O Q '> a b� yr ,bO.0 mop O: y: ba C y, �i W N' M' �' �' �' r 00' O,' O N O z I Z FR w w Z UI Z w 06 Z Z Z g (L J U) Q O U I] a 1 u G27 C25 y C24 G 5 \ \ 22 /1 1 G21 CN36 C20 `� �`\ C1 C3p Cat G32 C3 G34 G,0 FLOOD SHOAL FLOOD SHOAL G,d \ HOLDING AREA DISPOSAL AREA n 11 BAREFOOT BEACH G13 \\ DELNOR- WIGGINS PASS STATE PARK PRESERVE Ceti \ \ C10 \ \ Cy \ \ / \ Ca \ G7 4 GC3 zR -17 Cb 015.5 .2 \ 1 k :� � .1,00 \ EXISTING ALIGNMENT GUL F OF MEX ICO A-1 2010 CHANNEL ALIGNMENT 6,00 2011 PRELIMINARY 7 +00 \ \ CHANNEL ALIGNMENT 941) 1 10.00 1 12+00 — 13.00 �— 14`p0 ' 15,00 Figure 29. Wiggins Pass channel realignment • 80 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. M NO Ebb Shoal Example Cross - Section Sta. 2 +00 2 o------------------------------------ ---- -------- ---- ------ ---- -- --= -2 g-6 9 ■ -8 -10 .. -12 — Apr -II - -- MHW -14 MLLW Cut Template Overdredge -16 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 North Distance (ft) ----------i South Figure 30. Example Ebb Shoal Design Cross - section Flood Shoal Example Cross - Section Sta. C13 2 0 -2 9 ■ -8 W -10 Jul -09 - -- MHW — MLLW - — Cut Template -14 .. — Overdredge — Flood Shoal 16 Fill 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 North 4-- DiStanCe (ft) 1 South Figure 31. Example Flood Shoal Design Cross - section 81 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. The previous modeling studies (see references) indicate that improved navigation conditions and mitigation of erosion on adjacent beaches can be achieved by redesigning the navigation channel and modifying the placement location and quantity of the dredged material. A straight navigation channel with smaller dimensions than the current dredge template that extends directly across the flood shoal is the optimal unstructured channel configuration. This new channel location will be trained by temporary sand dikes blocking the existing channel meander and swash (marginal) channels that wrap around the end of Barefoot Beach. This configuration will improve channel hydraulics by directing the flows to a single channel entrance and reducing sand lost from Barefoot Beach to the swash (marginal) channel. Also, placement of a portion of fill closer to the tip of Barefoot Beach, between R -14 and R -15.5, is proposed as a means of mitigating erosion problems at this location. Past disposal practices placed dredged material in a quantity that lead to a sediment deficit within a % mile north of the inlet. Straightening the channel will stop the flood meanders pressure against Barefoot Beach, preventing future mangrove and other beach vegetation losses. Most importantly, sand bypassing to the north should be increased by approximately 2.65 times the south, decreasing the sediment deficit at Barefoot Beach, which is the major contributor of the Gulf erosion problem. This ratio would have made the volumetric change north and south of the inlet equal during the last 25 years. After implementation of the new disposal plan, it may take a few years for the benefits to be readily apparent after a period of equilibration, which is why near term direct beach placement of sand is recommended. The straightening of the channel will be accompanied by infill of the old channel meander with the dredged sand. This will lead to a location swap between the flood shoal and channel for no net change in morphology. The inlet has been migrating north since the 1880's, with the flood channel meander moving about 100 feet since the 1970's. The channel has eroded the shoreline along Barefoot Beach, creating a steep slope under the mangroves and vegetation. It will also stop the loss of mangrove habitat, which benefits fish such as snook. The back filling of the channel will create a milder slope adjacent to the mangroves, which is more suitable for snook habitat. This northward movement is a direct result of the sand wave migrating along the south interior flood shoal at Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. These sand waves build the flood shoal, pushing the flood channel northward. The gorge and total cross - section at the inlet throat (C -6) is 1560 SF and 2000 SF, respectively. It is expected that the northward channel trend will not cease once the channel is moved, it will just be reset at a more southern point. A slow northward migration is manageable and desirable for avoiding impacts to the shoreline along Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. The total initial cut volume estimate is 85,000 cubic yards, and it will provide a prolonged maintenance interval. The channel dimensions, depths, and transition areas are shown in Table 18. The new flood channel dimensions need to be larger than navigation alone requires. A larger cross - section in the gorge is needed for a stable cross - section of approximately 1560 ft which is similar to the existing meander channel cross - section, and larger if the risk of channel migration needs to be reduced further. A stable cross - section should avoid south bank migration towards the State Park, but without increasing access by larger boats. Larger boats will still be restricted by depth in the inlet throat and ebb shoal, which are based on 3 foot boat navigation 82 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. requirements. If a greater safety factor is need against migration towards Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, then the flood channel can be widened. The Corps recommended plan consisted of a 150 ft wide channel with a 100 foot maintenance extension and 8 ft deep MLW (9.68 ft NAVD) on the Gulf side, with an additional depth of 4 feet for overdredge and advanced maintenance allowance, bringing the total depth to 13.7 ft NAVD. The interior channel had a 5 ft MLW (6.68 NAVD) depth and 50 foot navigation channel. The fill placed on or adjacent to Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins will come from the ebb shoal channel, while the interior dredge material will be used to infill the north flood channel and build dikes supplemented with ebb shoal material. The dikes will be built using the coarse sand from the top layer of the flood shoal to the extent practical. The dikes will be built in the shallowest practical portion of the flood shoal channel. Any unsuitable material dredged from the ebb or flood shoals or inlet throat will be disposed at an appropriate upland or offshore disposal site. Both nearshore and beach disposal are proposed as part of the plan for Barefoot Beach, but only nearshore disposal is currently proposed adjacent to Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. The south tip of Barefoot Beach will be partially restored using sand from both sources directly placed on the beach, along with incorporating sand from the western dike. The level of restoration will be determined during final design and be based on the availability of sand dredged from this project. Scarp repair and meander fill will be a priority. The south tip will also benefit from sand placed in the new Barefoot Beach disposal areas. Increased bypassing will contribute to long term recovery in this area. Sand dredged for future maintenance dredging will be considered for continuing the Barefoot Beach restoration subject to the limit allowed by the County growth management and land development codes. To decrease long term dredging and accommodate moderate natural channel fluctuations, dynamic channel limits are proposed. North and south channel migration limits will be established so that the dredge template can accommodate natural and moderate channel trends. This will promote minimization of dredging where sufficient cross - sectional area already existing at an acceptable channel alignment. This plan will achieve improved navigation conditions and beach performance at the south end of Barefoot Beach, and avoid significant impacts to the shoreline of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, except for the transitory sand wave, a small portion of which needs to be dredged. Dredging a small portion of this sand wave will allow positioning of the flood channel where it will not be a near term threat to Barefoot Beach interior shoreline, mangroves, and habitat. It will also reduce long term impacts based on average annual dredge quantities and avoid direct impact to known mangroves or sea grasses. Interior channels will be designed to duplicate the natural cross - sections found in the flood channel today, but on the new alignment. The magnitude of erosion on Barefoot Beach will decrease compared to the experience with the existing permit alignment and disposal practice. The ebb channel controlling depths at the end of a four year model run was approximately 6.6 to 83 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. 8.2 ft NAVD with a straight channel orientation, which will be easier to navigate. A channel depth of 6.6 ft NAVD is equivalent to a depth of 4.32 ft during MLLW (low spring tide). A change in dredge disposal practices is also recommended in order to alleviate the sand deficit on the beaches north of Wiggins Pass. From volumetric analysis, 2.65 times the amount of fill should be placed to the north than the south, or about 8,000 cy /yr based on current practices. This should help to balance the sand deficit that is occurring. Along with changing the amount of fill placed at specific locations, it is also recommended to place fill onto the dry beach at Barefoot Beach. Sediment within the onshore profile has a higher probability of remaining longer than fill placed within the nearshore zone. The greatest benefit to restoring the southern 2,000 feet of Barefoot Beach is placing beach disposal between R -12.5 to R -15.5. Nearshore disposal results were more defused and slow to materialize on the beach. If fill is desired to be place upon the dry beach, a change in park policy may be required. The selected alternative illustrated in Figure 29, with representative cross - sections in Figures 30- 31, and summarized in Table 21 shows the best navigation performance along with the least impact to the adjacent Parks' shorelines, based on coastal process and modeling results describe in this report. During the 10 -year permit period, maintenance dredging will occur a number of times, and dredge disposal favor the north to address the historic and natural imbalance from inlet bypassing. The proposed project will decrease cumulative dredging impacts from 300,000+ cy to 214,000 cy over the 10 year period. 84 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. X. REFERENCES CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering), 1995. Coastal Planning & Engineering (CPE) 1995 Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Boca Raton, FL, 191 pp. CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering), February 2009. Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL Numerical Modeling of Wave Propagation, Currents and Morphology Changes Phase II: Numerical Modeling of Alternatives Report. Report prepared for Collier County Wiggins Pass Modeling Evaluation Working Group and Coastal Zone Management Department, Collier County, FL by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Boca Raton, FL, 89 pp. CPE (Coastal Planning, & Engineering), 2009. Wiggins and Doctors Passes Maintenance Dredging Post - Construction Report. July 2009. CPE (Coastal Planning, & Engineering), 2009a. Collier County, Florida, Beach Renourishment Project: Two Year (2008) Post - Construction Biological Monitoring Report. Prepared for Collier County, Florida and Florida Department of Environmental Protection. February, 2009. CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering), Wiggins Pass, Florida. Numerical Modeling and Morphology Changes of the Refined Design. February 2010. CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering), Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging 2011 Post - Construction Report, June 2011. CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering), Collier County Conceptual Renourishment Project Analysis, May 2011, revised September 2011. CEC (Coastal Engineering Consultants), 1982. Wiggins Pass Navigational Dredging and Beach Nourishment Project: Inlet Hydraulics Report. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Coastal Engineering Consultants, Naples, FL. 17 pp. CEC (Coastal Engineering Consultants), 1987. The Collier County Beach Renourishment Study and Report. CEC (Coastal Engineering Consultants), 1989. Wiggins Pass Channel Design Evaluation. Navigational Dredging and Beach Nourishment Project: Inlet Hydraulics Report. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Coastal Engineering Consultants, Naples, FL, 14 pp. CEC (Coastal Engineering Consultants), 1990. Plans for Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging, February 1990. Collier County Natural Resources Department, 1991. "Coastal Zone Management Plan (Draft) for Collier County, FL. 85 COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. Dean, Robert G. and Paul A. Work, "Interaction of Navigation Entrances with adjacent Shorelines," Journal of Coastal Research, Fall 1993a. Dean, Robert and Robert Dalrymple, Coastal Processes with Engineering Applications, 2002. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), 2009. Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan. FDEP Division of Recreation and Parks, October 9, 2009. Hine, A.C., et al., 1986. Impact of Florida's Gulf Coast Inlets on the Coastal Sand Budget, University of South Florida. H &M (Humiston & Moore Engineers), 2004. Wiggins Pass Feasibility Phase, Alternatives for Modifying the Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging Permit to Address Erosion of Barefoot Beach. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Humiston & Moore, Naples, FL, 4 pp. H &M (Humiston & Moore Engineers), Wiggins Pass Inlet Maintenance Dredging Construction Plans, November 13, 2006. H &M (Humiston & Moore Engineers), 2007. Wiggins Pass Study, Hydraulic and Sand Transport Modeling. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Humiston & Moore, Naples, FL, 47 pp. Jarrett, T., Rush, F., and Rudolph, G., "Performance of the Bogue Inlet Channel Erosion Response Project ", Shore & Beach, Volume 79 No. 3, Summer 2011 p. 40 -46 Kraus, M.C., M.K. Toro, M. Hennig and S. Gonzales, 2010. Collier County Sea Turtle Protection Plan Annual Report — 2010. Publication Series PR- 10 -01. Collier County Parks and Recreation Department, March 2011. Moreland, Joe. Personal Communication, January 18, 2012 Sidman, Charles, Fik, T., Swett, R., Sargent, B., Farm, S., and Farm, D. A Recreational Boating Characterization of Collier County, Florida, August 2009. Townsend, A. and N. Olson, 2007. Barefoot Beach Preserve Park Land Management Plan. Submitted to Collier County Board of County Commissioners, December 2007. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1980. Improvements for Small Boat Navigation: Detailed Project Report, Wiggins Pass, FL., 43 pp. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 1972. Beach Erosion Control Study, Collier County, Florida," Jacksonville District. 86 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. APPENDIX A COMPARATIVE BEACH PROFILES AND INLET CROSS SECTIONS FEBRUARY 2007 TO JULY 2009 (Appendix available on CD as FDEP RAI Attachment No. 33a) COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. APPENDIX B HISTORIC WIGGINS PASS SEDIMENT BUDGET COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. This historic sediment budget contains data spanning from 1973 to 1988, which accounts for 4 years of modern inlet maintenance (CPE 1995). The sediment budget begins at profile R -1 at the north end of Collier County and ends at R -32 near Vanderbilt Beach. The shoreline north and south of Wiggins Pass was divided into four one -mile segments, each approximately 4,000 feet long. Figure 1 presents the results of the sediment budget analysis, but it shows the estimated alongshore transport rates characteristic based on present knowledge. A net southerly littoral drift rate of 46,500 cubic yards per year was initially used at the southern border for the 1995 report, which was the littoral drift estimate developed for Vanderbilt Beach at that time. Based on comparisons of the 1978 and 1990 ebb shoal surveys, the ebb shoal gained 2,000 cubic yards per year in the Figure 5 sediment budget. The flood shoal change was assumed to be zero for the sediment budget. Any measured change in the flood shoal was assumed to represent shifts in volume within the shoal and not a net gain. Only a small portion of the shoal was measured. The combined shoals gained 2,000 cubic yards per year. The annual average gain was assumed to be representative of shoal changes for the period of analysis (1973- 1988). An estimated 42,000 cubic yards per year was found to move into the Wiggins Pass littoral system across the north county line, based on the 1995 report. During the 15 year time span, the area north of Wiggins Pass lost 2,000 cubic yards per year. A calculated 44,000 cubic yards per year moved from the Barefoot Beach into Wiggins Pass annually. Between 1973 and 1988, an average of 3,500 cubic yards per year were dredged from the Wiggins Pass navigation channel and placed south of the inlet. No material was placed north of the inlet during this period. The Wiggins Pass shoals were found to have gained an average of 2,000 cubic yards per year, and therefore, 38,500 cubic yards moved from the shoals into the south beaches. During the 15 years of the sediment budget, the beaches south of the inlet lost 4,500 cubic yards per year. Without the addition of spoil material from the inlet dredging, the annual loss south of the inlet would have been 8,000 cubic yards per year. The sediment budget summarized in the above paragraphs assumed a southward littoral drift, based on historic reports. Today we realize it should be in the opposite direction, largely influenced by the sheltering provided by Sanibel Island (CPE Modeling Report 2009). If we assume that the longshore transport is reduced by 43,000 cy /yr, the 1973 -88 sediment budget shows more realistic alongshore transport conditions as we understand it today, which are about a tenth of 1995 findings. These are the rates shown in Figure 1. The volumetric change in each cell remains the same. COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Figure 1. 1973 to 1988 sediment budget, Wiggins Pass, FL, modified in red to reflect the current understanding of alongshore transport rats and directions. COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERINGI INC. ov +1.9 Little Hicko Bay GULF —2.3 7 U 0 m A W N.T.S. ti OF .Z7 +0.2 MEXICO WIGGINS PASS RD 1.0 00, +2.0 s ate m p 4.5 +1.8 urke ay 3.5 111TH AVE —1.3 G O Naples Park —4.4 0 LEGEND LITTORAL DRIFT QUANTITY — .6 DREDGED QUANTITY CONTROL BOUNDARY 3.5 Note: All quantities in CU. YDS. /YR. x 1000. Quantities in bold type are total changes. Figure 1. 1973 to 1988 sediment budget, Wiggins Pass, FL, modified in red to reflect the current understanding of alongshore transport rats and directions. COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERINGI INC. APPENDIX C HISTORIC AERIALS 1885 to Present COASTAL PLANNING $ ENGINEERING, INC. 1�� t �l\ t t_ nod r�rBfR ii °G S: !%aC✓. 1►l; tb to iU tx T W I V"O c y to 1 000 0000 O wo 0 r OSM J5W 0100 Figure 1. Wiggins Pass, 1885 (Humiston & Moore, 2007) 0X0 200 0 0'00 t• w A0, F� �/p°« S {: _ a ' ` Figure 2. Wiggins Pass, 1929 Figure 4. Wiggins Pass, 1944 Figure 5. Wiggins Pass, 1951 Figure 6. Wiggins Pass, 1953 Figure 7. Wiggins Pass, 1958 Figure 8. Wiggins Pass, 1962 Figure 9. Wiggins Pass, 1975 Figure 10. Wiggins Pass, 1976 Figure 11. Wiggins Pass, 1978 Figure 12. Wiggins Pass, 1984 4'= 3: t Figure 13. Wiggins Pass, Figure 14. Wiggins Pass, 1995. DE Figure 15. Wiggins Pass, 2002 x U T -0 W N n X =o- ° y ichi W o0 Dr ?D N W > D W z z W Z o G) 91 m z 6) z m m X z C) z n CD D D rr r r DD mm DD rr �(n SD Ox im O -1 G) O ;7 Dn UD 2 r- < M �m �x O n <m 6-0 m� om WO <x D -n mm DC rD n� D� T1 N -i O Oo G7 A cn;L D 2 n O D m x n D Z n m n co S O u o m 0 O CD rn o o -n Co 5 N --I O O r- ,A m N O O CD 0 D O m r ;o r m�� n ^0 2 Y/ O —O '^ � P1 �D ^X o 2 E5 0 D 0 D cn O z 1 z. 0 ^C 06 rl it 00 N LO U fV CJ U� LO 0 0 9 7 Lf) E x 0. a W O O 4! - O r .c � .. CL . \o CD (COD CD N kc) a 0° � �_ co Z� co ig o o o 1") ( N N N N N N O O u O C4l.r � O O ui O O u� O O C• O O 00 D r O O O O O O n .-- O 00 N N N N N N 1 z. 0 ^C 06 rl it 00 APPENDIX D FEBRUARY 2010 MODELING REPORT (Appendix available on CD as FDEP RAI Attachment No. 33a) COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. APPENDIX E 2011 GEOTECHNICAL REPORT (Refer to FDEP RAI# 1 Attachment 27 electronic submittal for full geotechnical report) COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Appendix No. 4 Special Treatment (ST) Permit Application COLLIER COUNTY GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT WWW.COLLIERGOV.NET 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE NAPLES, FLORIDA 34104 (239) 252 -2505 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PETITION FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT: DESIGNATED LAND PETITION NO (AR) PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER DATE PROCESSED /DUE DATE For Staff Use Only ASSIGNED PLANNER On Site Inspection By: Comments: ABOVE TO BE COMPLETED BY STAFF APPLICANT INFORMATION NAME OF APPLICANT GARY MCALPIN, COLLIER COUNTY COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT MAILING ADDRESS COLLIER COUNTY, 3301 E. TAMIAMI TRAIL TELEPHONE # (239) 530 -5342 FAX # (239) 252 -2950 E -MAIL ADDRESS: GARYMCALPIN @COLLIERGOV.NET NAME OF OWNER(S) COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AND TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND (TIITF) OF FLORIDA MAILING ADDRESS SEE ATTACHED TELEPHONE # FAX # E -MAIL ADDRESS: PERMIT INFORMATION General location: Wiggins Pass, Collier County Legal Description of Property: The Applicant is seeking approval from State Lands to conduct this project on approx. 83.2 acres of sovereign submerged land. The legal property description will be provided once the channel alignment is accepted. Nature of Petition: Collier County proposes to conduct dredging activities and placement of fill in the nearshore marine environment within Wiggins Pass and vicinity, which include Special Treatment overlays. We are addressing dredging in OFW with FDEP as part of the State permitting process; it appears that the OFW and ST overlays are similar, if not the same. f, 7- 1.2, O r /Applicant Date SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS NOTE: THIS PETITION MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A PLOT PLAN AND ANY OTHER APPLICABLE INFORMATION AND DATE REQUIRED BY THE DIRECTOR. ► Non - Refundable application fee of $400 for 5 acres or less, plus $50 per acre over 5 acres; $5,000 maximum fee (Make Check payable to Collier County Board of Commissioners) — to be provided by Collier County Coastal Zone Management ► Proof of Ownership (Last tax statement or warranty deed) — All submerged and dry lands are owned by the State; the northern park (Barefoot Beach) is managed by the County. We are seeking appropriate State Lands permission as part of the State permitting process. > Complete application signed by the owner- attached ► Owner /Agent authorization if petitioner is different from the owner — Coastal Zone Management will provide appropriate authorization for Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. to act as Agent for Petitioner. ► Map of Site location — see attached permit sketches and list of riparian property owners ► Site Plan including all proposed impacts and non - pervious calculations — see attached permit sketches 1 Approved jurisdictional wetland lines (if applicable) - NA ► Return completed application package to: Community Development & Environmental Services Intake Planner 2800 N Horseshoe Drive Naples, FL 34104 Attachment No. 16 Riparian Property Owners 0 m a o m �o c o O N M a O .i E O O D N P N d A N A P Oo N A oo N i7 N Z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C O 0 0 0 0 0 N„ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m O ,Oy m m m m m r r m m m m m m m O m H v v v v v v v v v v x s v v v v v v v v v v v v v m v v a v o o a o V1 Vi In N N d d N N f/ Vl V] !n V w VJ � v a a M m -� O m W m ^j m a m r0 D r m= a ctrl r0 ^mn 0 0 o H a 2 0 z � m n �C D D D a m m m w w m a O f Z z a> > a m w m n x z z x w z ti " °o °o °o 00 n 3 x m C r H H H N H D 'rrl �OaDmm m >m m O K' m w n n n tHct n O M D 0� d x x x x R° mr >Nn 5 x m < m 0 a a z a 0 o a o v 0 0 n O c r � v n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 �^ m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > N> y� f m w a **:E5 a m N a a a a> a a 3 0 y H H�� H y y y A � m m C a cHi1 x x x x F -r-1 x x x r _3H H wwwwmwwwm n v v v v o v v x>ra^ra-> vvzv m m y m z r r r r z a ca ->> r r r z a f1 'a D D D D D D D O z r O m 0 C7 x > N x N N >>> N .� mmm mmm m m m m m m m m H m A N lyi N w w A i ni w N A N A A d � ti U A P N A O P P O Obi VPi J U tPii J J J O a O .i E H Vi- O O O Ln 41 CD C, ID CY) C) -4 C) CD Cl C) O ID CD CZ> ck, - ft A =%—', N) co N) C) 00 Cl --4 CD Cl C) C) C? CD In 4� ID C) CD C) I CD C, C, C) 2 Ln 0) N) C) (D C) N ti CD C> O ul 0) Un m Q co C) O 00 O C) CD CD CD Attachment No. 24 Permit Sketches Updated June 6, 2012 WIGGINS PAS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND w NAVIGATION IMPROVEME T PROJECT COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA Z w ACKSONVILLE W * ALLAHAS Q D: a z ORLAND W z HENDRY CO. TAMPA to 2 W N.T.S. — . �_. _- __ -- n ATLANTIC D. o< x LEE CO. I - - -- _ _ `l1 OCEAN z w C � �3 PROJECT MIAMI 3 Q jm LOCATI 4 ON - ✓ z GULF - ' OF w MEXICO MONROE CO. w ° w Io u r z • �; z W, z R -12 a R -13 N. • SHEETINDEX R -14 1 COVER SHEET • z ;v g 2 CONTROL DATA — 3� 3 PROJECT LOCATION MAP Z, 4 NORTH DISPOSAL AREA PLAN VIEW ®R -15 I a as 5 -6 NAVIGATION CHANNEL PLAN VIEW 7 SOUTH DISPOSAL AREA PLAN VIEW GULF 0 R -18 _ 8 2009 BATHYMETRY AND HISTORIC OF m SHORELINES 9 HISTORIC DATA MEXICO :.A 10 LONGITUDINAL PROFILE OF CHANNEL � ®R -17 1116 EBB SHOAL CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS r 17-28 FLOOD SHOAL CHANNEL CROSS SECTIONS y 29-30 NORTH NEARSHORE BEACH FILL v CROSS SECTIONS R -18 g 31 -32 NORTH ONSHORE BEACH FILL 9 CROSS SECTIONS 33 -34 SOUTH NEARSHORE BEACH FILL R -19 CROSS SECTIONS 35 -36 SOUTH ONSHORE BEACH FILL q CRO O*NVI(V MW o if 37 0 IE$'�OebhREA / BORROW AREA 1•W�.. F� �' R -21 38 �I 0E'�Q.�gL gisr/ BORROW AREA 0 1250 2500 • ' { DATE: "F PL 2 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT •R -� F; Y 13/12 NSTR GK FOR TO 1 4 12 K --RAF ji RESPONS Comm 70. 8500.83 �I •• •` SHEET. STEPHEN ���NU�•� �� DATE 1 ��ofill it%��` v w It I O a' a z w w > a f 4 ado J zQo (j z f. C9oz Qv Q z O o W Z w O u U z F- 4 W z J W Z z „ � 4 U) pN IA C N 7VJ Vrn R i V Y :5 =X7�o a W ZO W Q N U W M t 3 w S d a� E c) ►- 4 � F .4 a u 5x c i ♦ • DATE: No. 34857 • t * 1/13/12 �. c NOT FCM QNS N , OK FOR R �`QR VIIEVjt• Y oMU NO.: 8500.83 9t SHEET: o STEPHEN EE tfIN(Di04A 7 DATE 2 0 0 4 4J W 4 J J J 4J J J J J J 4J 4J 4 1 4 4 J 4J � u, r�, n. �� n, ni ui �, �i a, 4n; � CO o c� N ���3��F '�F��Si��:�F3���?��i��sPu [�r�M _ �pU UAf ui n} r�Ji LLLLq (( [4'�4 �4D� ni 1�f rni rci fVu` 1OG ! V *p- gYp�tt r' iW1 �u)) n N Cp�� oWf pW� �� � �a�p� [ Y CN+r►Gtp� a4�}y, t�a4p)hpr- o�Cl � fW') +�- p�r�J [�4+�� cV]t cLL�[ 4�i f p �wq t[�n nf�ji t�]� cu,�� LL�I LL J N M M W M nl M nl M M� [+) tai nS C. M M (�l [t+) M [+7 M�� nl M (ill n i M M M � to � � � � �, ICl �1 �, 4-1 � 1"° 1•.- !ia t!f � � (n f) � C1 •A- •n-- •O•- N [`! [�1 � CMd W N CJa f�Ll N O O O (�i qi p� _• f n� q, y q� •- 1[) •" (� [�� 1' t^- [�) P � ri ri ri ci t7 n_ [y h h �! 4 LL � V n 1 N � � _ tv"S'41 [, ; ►1T TT, -NNM O r= r= r - r r r =- t -- t° t =- t-- t-- r° w- r�- r- ly t•- i° r� r=- r =- r�- r - r•- r=- r-• r=- r=_ r r =- r r- - O_ IA CL 0 I~ n 0 [� � � O O O O N N CJ N N N CJ N N N N N N p p p pp p pp pp pp pp vt000Mmgvv o ,nm rn � 00 mM m CO n N N r N M O ZN�pp �N�pp �N�pp M[pp �M�pp pMppp pMppp �yMp � r` p�O}pl y LLLLLLLLLLQWQJJJJJ O O O O O O O O O O O O O tp�p tQi �' pNp�� p� p�p On) ���pp pOp�� p�ppp lD ,() u��pp U) t� � O 6/ t0 � � �A � r O O O O O �nnr�nnr= ter -nr-nn 1� W M M M M M M M M M M M M M Z Z 7_ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ZO Ob tOrO' �.- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N N N [V [V N N N N N N N N N Z T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T a t7 �[OCO��)[MV[�v�c`i[°D�l�`D Sornrn� CO (V tfj /D t` [JD � O � CV ['7 � to (O ti n OD tT F" Z COMED CO 00 CppO O O tT �Op t[�A O Q1 P mO) O N � M M M M� N N N N N N� OD tb N to N tb M N tp N N N M c�0 N N O � M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Cl) fn ut '� cj t70 [n tD d [l) M O r N O OO O t0 to [n M m Z d O M h O lI) N — Lo N to r [() N N t0 1� tD [V Oi U') oD d O h [M tT WNW aD � d M O qp t� t0 d M N 0 N f� tp to M N r O M M N (\I N � � T N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N T r T O Or�1�r�r•r�r- r�nr- r.tir•r� i-nntin Z X O W Z Z O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O -� � N � O v+- N M d' �A (D r� � � O r N M d rn Z Q N 0 p 0 0 0o p --q- p0p 0 p0o 5 51 p p0 p p0 - � [•! �� v u, n. I �� u) _ .- r .- .- � rJ �{ j [4� }�J � �,1 [� ti [� n ; c� � ci M Z U M Z U M Z U H U Q CL 0 I~ n 0 [� � � O O O O N N CJ N N N CJ N N N N N N p p p pp p pp pp pp pp vt000Mmgvv o ,nm rn � 00 mM m CO n N N r N M O ZN�pp �N�pp �N�pp M[pp �M�pp pMppp pMppp �yMp � r` p�O}pl y LLLLLLLLLLQWQJJJJJ O O O O O O O O O O O O O tp�p tQi �' pNp�� p� p�p On) ���pp pOp�� p�ppp lD ,() u��pp U) t� � O 6/ t0 � � �A � r O O O O O �nnr�nnr= ter -nr-nn 1� W M M M M M M M M M M M M M Z Z 7_ Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ZO Ob tOrO' �.- N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N N N [V [V N N N N N N N N N Z T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T a t7 �[OCO��)[MV[�v�c`i[°D�l�`D Sornrn� CO (V tfj /D t` [JD � O � CV ['7 � to (O ti n OD tT F" Z COMED CO 00 CppO O O tT �Op t[�A O Q1 P mO) O N � M M M M� N N N N N N� OD tb N to N tb M N tp N N N M c�0 N N O � M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Cl) fn ut '� cj t70 [n tD d [l) M O r N O OO O t0 to [n M m Z d O M h O lI) N — Lo N to r [() N N t0 1� tD [V Oi U') oD d O h [M tT WNW aD � d M O qp t� t0 d M N 0 N f� tp to M N r O M M N (\I N � � T N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N T r T O Or�1�r�r•r�r- r�nr- r.tir•r� i-nntin Z X O W Z Z O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O -� � N � O v+- N M d' �A (D r� � � O r N M d rn Z Q N 0 p 0 0 0o p --q- p0p 0 p0o 5 51 p p0 p p0 - N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N NNN N N N N [V [V N N N N N N N N N Z T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T a t7 �[OCO��)[MV[�v�c`i[°D�l�`D Sornrn� CO (V tfj /D t` [JD � O � CV ['7 � to (O ti n OD tT F" Z COMED CO 00 CppO O O tT �Op t[�A O Q1 P mO) O N � M M M M� N N N N N N� OD tb N to N tb M N tp N N N M c�0 N N O � M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M Cl) fn ut '� cj t70 [n tD d [l) M O r N O OO O t0 to [n M m Z d O M h O lI) N — Lo N to r [() N N t0 1� tD [V Oi U') oD d O h [M tT WNW aD � d M O qp t� t0 d M N 0 N f� tp to M N r O M M N (\I N � � T N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N T r T O Or�1�r�r•r�r- r�nr- r.tir•r� i-nntin Z X O W Z Z O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O -� � N � O v+- N M d' �A (D r� � � O r N M d rn Z Q N w Zr- 2 h- 0 Z c0 N � N iA ONi N N a0 N N I� 0N0 m O .�- W O O t2 O � r7 w �o U O O U � � H a a H H o w w LLJH w Cl) 0 0 O N P, h (0 Z Z to N N NCO C) M aka m o f fit — OI O M w O oo w f0 O w f/QQ) to 0 LO to to 0 N to to J I W W w C C l I D: J u M m W M M 0 Cl) M O m Cl) Q W w w w SQ z Q Z Qq Z Q ^Q Z Z J Wow Z Z d M M (K w w O w00a a a w O < Of Z ° 0 a U J O Q [O U Cl W u. CD = z O w Q (1) Q O< =O ~ a- 0 a Ln N.4 cc 0a I I ' LLJ cc O LL ` ' �� i, GO W 0(l) Zf� J Cl) Z Q U) oa ID Q Q� ov_ u ` Q co Z W Flo �� 1 0 (� + N co M z Q n co U �� JO 0019e, Z LO LL- _ J I Q U 1• I < Z F- c� o c; W Y w w i �F-O O z > Q LO r, w LtJ CC) (� 02 J • 1 1 OOS <<<< NM - 4u, w m> 00 OQ / w O _ Q F-W -j _ I wQ / OOOS14 O w • I. W 0 / N w I' CD I, U w0 jO� Q Q Q NI'i / 000 sl ti ui i, Z Q cn¢ / F-O t- Z J y .` - LO j _ I z 0 g ' 00 F- O 0 Of Z C) GE Lj Ar6 NOT FOR CONS FOR REGULATOR`C P.E. ON No. .34857 VIEW OMY . ,cr STATE OF �C1 ;1i1"'O N A i�f -``• O N Z_ w ( (� �o U O O U � � = a a a H H o w w w Cl) 0 0 N co M z Q n co U �� JO 0019e, Z LO LL- _ J I Q U 1• I < Z F- c� o c; W Y w w i �F-O O z > Q LO r, w LtJ CC) (� 02 J • 1 1 OOS <<<< NM - 4u, w m> 00 OQ / w O _ Q F-W -j _ I wQ / OOOS14 O w • I. W 0 / N w I' CD I, U w0 jO� Q Q Q NI'i / 000 sl ti ui i, Z Q cn¢ / F-O t- Z J y .` - LO j _ I z 0 g ' 00 F- O 0 Of Z C) GE Lj Ar6 NOT FOR CONS FOR REGULATOR`C P.E. ON No. .34857 VIEW OMY . ,cr STATE OF �C1 ;1i1"'O N A i�f -``• _0 5 0 2 W a uu ~Q W w W z wZJ ('Z Z O V 0 Q W uwi2of Zz z Q W zz FF-} J W j g LLz� az g Zw wZ0 in to a Boa 0o u w u) _ Quam~ wQ U W C)Ou �NaU=�Q W 0 >-00LLZ-3 DATE: Up tNOOU O Z 1/13/12 nceroionrvd GK 850T. EET: DATE 3 O N Z_ w ( (� �o U O O U � � = a a a H H o w w w Cl) 0 0 O a a IL U Z Z� z m N N N NCO <a a aka Z W = o o f fit — Y U U U U U' Z J w O oo w w LL N ( (n Z Q "Wl U Z Z W IL I W W w C C l I D: J u u Z Q W w w w SQ z Q Z Qq Z Q ^Q Z Z Wow Z Z d M M (K w w w00a a a w O < 850T. EET: DATE 3 F a N Fj 00091, V a z Q U �I O d c 9 133H 3N[IHOIVIN 0 0 0 0 a � I � � W � a � LL w 0 off Z� gJ E. HEN 4$' Z. c NOT FOR CONS ON • 34857 c*OR IREGULATO EW OMLY • O STATE OF a STEPHE KEEN P.E. .ORID,.�'� \ a LLJ Of w 0 +Y co v O= 0 Zw 0 LL Om w J 0 L ¢U Q W w m w < oco 0 Z !n CL 00 w w O� x 6 Q Z Q xN 1Z _U) Z0 O J 0 C7 U w 0 w a z w 2 w wS az �g za SOW IL o Q zQQ ADO 3aN 00 Z = 0 0 Z W U z Q z W H (l I 11 I M CD z { I 1�I I s i I O i; it M � i i �pzs1 � i j i Q =j,11 > j 1 1 � OUP= uj i ` I m w m 1 1 i I j a N Fj 00091, V a z Q U �I O d c 9 133H 3N[IHOIVIN 0 0 0 0 a � I � � W � a � LL w 0 off Z� gJ E. HEN 4$' Z. c NOT FOR CONS ON • 34857 c*OR IREGULATO EW OMLY • O STATE OF a STEPHE KEEN P.E. .ORID,.�'� \ a LLJ Of w 0 +Y co v O= 0 Zw 0 LL Om w J 0 L ¢U Q W w m w < oco 0 Z !n CL 00 w w O� x 6 Q Z Q xN 1Z _U) Z0 O J 0 C7 U w 0 w a z w 2 w wS az �g za SOW IL o Q zQQ ADO 3aN 00 Z = 0 0 Z W U z Q z W H 8500.83 4 M CD z T Q O LLJ Z � W ao a w Z a. FQ ci U U) X Z Z Q z O = w W 12 LL W J J O z Z Q Lu �w O Z W Z V W O co O LL ig iN -00 =� opp9j- N w g Z 0 a O u�= w g g Z H �Z u Z� � a E E 0a wF uJ 0Z { a ? 0.va ¢r OUL a Q W w 0� LL U N N U) U) =w d 0 0 V n o � H w N N Z Z W U I o af w.0 Q Qa 000-a OOO 0 o w Q r O! w W DU?1 DAM : J I I O Z ci 1/13/12 Y: GK ntc ov nccro n 8500.83 4 S z W U 2 N to U o X w 0 o w LX w rxC-Z0 UF) < I `) Z ZO�Z U U O zm f'sw rL O d z WZ� O EE _ Ewa = r a L) ppQ�� =Q8 O wob 0 J J IL UNN N u LL �I z ui J co I I i 'j I i I { I I I i I I Nsc•F12y W/ I h w I LL! y�5 Y a `>h ~ "t �' L' we*' a '0. ' «* • ._ i>> U- .F 8 ~.i ; t L 133HS 3NIIHOidW C) z i b i zs ! Ion � (�W p a I Isi I ( j � C) CD II IIII I I I I I I IIII I I I I I . I I I I I I I I ( I j C) g o g o p° o ppppl i I r + u- 1- OQ Q0 w mtiQQl 0' V -i w D' O zg 0L) wE LL <Q xV CO W z Q Z 0 0 W Om Zww F-0 i z 0 w 0Q oQ I I I I I ( I I I I I m U U (•►h w ry =� N 0 a.0 i Q. < U 00 i t I i L T Q U ' Q' W W E m ca > I c W o c 0 W i 1 11'- w s LUa I ! (m NOT FOR CONST FOR R_ EGULATOR STEPHEN E N P.E. ,,IIII, •' ', •� A A�rT )N - . * . IEW OAY STATE OF CC 'fIIIIAL, t%t 3NIIHO1dW 6 6 —� � DATE wm GK 8500.83 6 f` V w a z w ° ° tz > z w O a> o � Zg N U) Z m0a. a QQW ° C z'Q OZZ 00u §QZ O Lu z0 Q z W �> �01, Fw = J z aiQ Z �z<c? 2 z o, W z x= W J 0z0 - U 0 =�6V O z z zWN < W Q z M OV UV) o z Lu W W m d � C) D NNU w an LL JO U w oiU;I�I /�( 401 u I z J x of W W ul 2 LLj z < J U z 2 0 w W O LL w w �O 18 W, < W m 'I- z � z w = to woo a� = S 5aa g n� IF zwzao�< 0 w g z¢ 0� R a z w a It a W<U)rn O F J <U) LLQd < 0O � W z �a w0 _j }Q 8 0 DATE: ~O 0 u.tn0 t,4 0 1/13/12 z r N My. GK 8500.83 6 aw K w N a N ( °a 1 Z Q ? 7! a ui ow J � Ul oa- D U) W w U J 0� LL 3:O 0 F- Z c gGJ O z w Q °o U N � U o O U z w D _ Z� � U a w 0) 0 � N Z d w (D w J wg Z :, g� �g w° v QQ W <� O U d �a Oo W ~ J W Oz O m W W z > m O LL W d> w� _� �Z z �W Nog O- wi- QQw aN�o� a�Q , U1 >J W WO < ¢QZ! Z_ Wzy � (tw §Zp rnQd d OO —o0 00 LL00w QU) U' p w 000Q)0. Z= Z - N S � w0 cN �i W U Z 000804 N Z W H p Z_ Q 2 01, I �g o �L zW CL o O m rrJ^^O� V w D O w� Q u� Z i, f , 0O Q I-O ' a. p to � o S � �i i p # 9 �3Ni 5t4llH0lb'W NOT FOR CONSTRUCWIV : DAIE BY DESCI FOR rATORY E�q�I:ONI T,4 - 4,/9/12 sK RAI 1 s Z. STEPHEN KE N P.E. N0. 34 / " "''• , •���', DATE 411111110 J s= z; �' LL a x W W z 0* Z IL W Z z 5 J �O U► i � 1/13/12 3Y: GK ;OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 7 1' v o H lu u: li _.._.J 1)' �i U d in Y 1. °, 0 p 2 0 f- Z a I f L M z W ' � i o 4 Wz 1 0 w a Lu W �' 0 it w �` a x 0p0 01 1 Q co i t N cl) f I, z V C Al J i, w 0 MM P: Qa �00 + g �� QUO z� p a. AN Qa Jo= yQx z o i 1 z W���� c,zQ OLL �WU wZaO 00 1L z 0pQt a0 UQ W O 0 rc 1¢ )1 a E in ° •- �l 1 0 00?���ox ox _ LL N —j LL J0N W l— ?l� N W o f M I I V o zN W 4 z j w I ( F- N 1 \ N J z_ R m to � ° U) •\ +. a• W O 1. LL lL N `' V1 O'psZi� z g U d w W ! :5 o 1 t a W LL a OOOSI� �� W Lij m o z O C/) 0 g 0 Q = O O Q z {a W W 3 °zQ ( a' I h Q OJ H 0 1- U w t I LL W J `•` 0 U W o o z J W z �o2mp w>�o� z mN OLL Z Z 1 I N LLW WOO'a�a g oa m 1 ? 1!II WJ W- O1 QSui rn a " 1 � 44• HHM�OlrQJ0 N 7 zz0pJw(�1r Q W "rr I Q N t ! e�� ........ ,' C� � (n p p00 J W Q z o d DATE: I 4i .• ��G� W 00 W >M0NQ h� �`. i s H 1/13/12 c l r eu +* OOS� f1 = 1 1 z fV M v NOT FOR CONSTPJJ I N ; ATE BY DESCRIPTION GK FOR REGULATORY.-*, EW • 4/9/12 SK RAI 1 RESPONSE oMM N0. CJ :•• E OF �; ���: - 8500.83 EET: STEPHEN EEH P.E. N0� �-ft 'vAL '--I - DATE 8 BAREFOOT BEACH PRESERVE AR -15 R- � , 250 500 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT 0 FLOOD SHOAL CHANNIR3e ' -7.7' NAVD CUT DEPTH 0 DELNOR - WIGGINS PASS STATE PARK AR -17 TRANSITION -12.0' TO -7.7' NAVD CUT DEPTH WIGGINS PASS EBB SHOAL CHANNEL -12.0' NAVD CUT DEPTH DREDGE GULF AREA o OF ° 2 MEXICO z NOTES: LEGEND: 1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON AR-17 FDEP MONUMENT -;> 2011 CPE VIBRACORES v FLORIDA STATE PLANE COORDINATE 2008 CPE MANGROVES 0 2009 CPE VIBRACORES SYSTEM, EAST ZONE, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83). 2009 CPE EDGE OF A 2009 CPE JET PROBES 2. i VIBRACORE NUMBERS PROVIDED IN , , ATTACHMENT 27. MANGROVE 2009 CPE SEAGRASS a 2006 HUMISTON & MOORE 0 3. 2009, AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH aFh4j . C_ ' nr FIELD POINTS VIBRACORES r COLLIER COUNTY PROPEYS9P r •i�1S' 2011 CPE SEAGRASS 0 FLOOD SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA 4. OFFICE. : THERE IS A 1' OVERDR0GFB!LOWgE •i • �r Z FIELD POINTS SEAGRASS AREA ) EBB SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA ` DEPTHS SHOWN HERS -,., 34857 NOT FOR CONSTRIS N * DA Y LYIJI N FOR REGULATORY E;W OF (r 4 9 12 AI Y1 RR S�— STEPHEN ikEEHI4 P.E. NO. 3P/VA I DATE H v w w a z w 2 w O w a 2 z m0� (L d Nju oQO 3Q= c� z 0 w 0 w u a z w z -a u n' W W Z 0 W d z� SRI I 1/13/12 IY: GK F 831 M0138 2138 3NIIHOIVV`l (13:3A-C3AVN) NOUVAT19 o CD CD 0 C) CD C? Cl? C) I? a te=a q C) 0 0 C) 01- x E—i _j ww R 0 0 W 0 0 C) I to C� C? E6ww>6< �: - f 0 - A I— (-L3nA-CIAVN) N011VAT13 as < z IEN a- 2 0 2 0 0 0 %% 0 % �z , �U-o 0 C, LLI 6CCNs�-. !� DAM (n ot,-Ujo z 1� > t z 1- _ U- No. 348,;, 0 a. x 0- CL CL U3 LLI 0 C) 1/13/12 W CL _u • C\i J 3y: 4S I'I NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 STA rE 0. cr DAIL By DESCRIPTION GK MMM NO. FOR REGU TORY MEW 015�t% 411 8500.53 ......•• SHEET. STEPHEN kEEH P.E. NO. 34857 DATE 10 Ld i LLI aC w w + + Ly + -1 C'j 5. w w w 0 Ld z C3 z z 0 C C) V) 0 80 L LLI LLJ C NINE 20 MINE z rj) I I l 9-0 + n- Co c) -ME li? 0 z z LLJ 1 13 0 MINE U_ + + 0 U) IL z z C9 0 C%i 0 C�o CD. MINE C) 8 8 + C) F CD C) C C? CD o 6 33S nNl-lH0_LVV4 Ln WUtrn� r- C C3 ri L L Z I U Cl) Z IN M** a te=a q C) 0 0 C) 01- x E—i _j ww R 0 0 W 0 0 C) I to C� C? E6ww>6< �: - f 0 - A I— (-L3nA-CIAVN) N011VAT13 as < z IEN a- 2 0 2 0 0 0 %% 0 % �z , �U-o 0 C, LLI 6CCNs�-. !� DAM (n ot,-Ujo z 1� > t z 1- _ U- No. 348,;, 0 a. x 0- CL CL U3 LLI 0 C) 1/13/12 W CL _u • C\i J 3y: 4S I'I NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 STA rE 0. cr DAIL By DESCRIPTION GK MMM NO. FOR REGU TORY MEW 015�t% 411 8500.53 ......•• SHEET. STEPHEN kEEH P.E. NO. 34857 DATE 10 Ld LLI aC w w + + Ly + -1 C'j 5. w w w 0 Ld z C3 z z 0 C C) V) 0 80 L LLI LLJ C + — 20 8 + LL_ 0 z z rj) I I l l + + n- Co c) li? 0 z z LLJ 1 13 0 U_ + + 0 U) IL z z C9 0 C%i 0 C�o CD. C) 8 8 + C) F CD C) C C? CD o 6 33S nNl-lH0_LVV4 Ln WUtrn� r- C C3 ri L L Z I U Cl) Z q C) 0 0 C) 01- x E—i _j ww R 0 0 W 0 0 C) I to C� C? E6ww>6< �: - f 0 - A I— (-L3nA-CIAVN) N011VAT13 as < z IEN a- 2 0 2 0 0 0 %% 0 % �z , �U-o 0 C, LLI 6CCNs�-. !� DAM (n ot,-Ujo z 1� > t z 1- _ U- No. 348,;, 0 a. x 0- CL CL U3 LLI 0 C) 1/13/12 W CL _u • C\i J 3y: 4S I'I NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 0 STA rE 0. cr DAIL By DESCRIPTION GK MMM NO. FOR REGU TORY MEW 015�t% 411 8500.53 ......•• SHEET. STEPHEN kEEH P.E. NO. 34857 DATE 10 PROFILE -2+00 SCARP REPAIR LU MHW EL. - 0.33 FT 0 W IRUW FC. —=-2.29;T 0 Z a. ul w -8.4'NAVD z t✓ -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z APRIL 2011 PROFILE 0 SLOPE 4H: IV . . . . . . . > 0 lz "'C > -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 0. 0 2 w z w l'OVERDREDGE u NOW -30— 0 'A 0 200 400 600 BOO 1000 IL to DISTANCE (FEET) (A 0 Z � m j5 U Z PROFILE -1+00 _j a z < 10- 0 APRIL 2011 PROFILE O U) MHW EL. - 0.33 FT 0 m MLW-FL,-Z--Lm= 0- Z a LU III It -10 . . . . . . -10.2 ' N D . . . . . . . . . . . . w z Lr U z 0 SLOPE 4H:IV v + Lr, . . z LU -20 . . . . . . . I . . . . . . z w l'OVERDREDGE 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) z PROFILE 0+00 10 APRIL 2011 PROFILE > Z< 0 - MHW EL 0.33FT x LL -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . =12.0'NAVD, 43 3-. Z 0 lu SLOPE 4HAV + + -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E w u -30 200 400 %06m 800 1000 1200 MI&ANPF I -ET) I'OVERDREDGE x, DATE: SCALE: HORIZ. 1" =200' '10 34857 1/13/12 n VERT. 1 20' -0 Ty-. NOT FOR 99 CONSTRUCTION 0 STATE OF RFN4SIONS GK QMKIPBON OMM NO. 8500.8 R RE FOR RE To E ONa*"\ y EW ONa "'N 41 KET: C�' STEPHEN EHN, NA L .E. NO. 34857 DATE tt QMHW PROFILE 1 +00 EL.s 0.33 FT 10 Z NLIWEI =- 2.26 F T APRIL 2011 PROFILE W D > 04W EL. =0.33FI -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 12'.0''NAVD . Z F- M -LW EL s - 2.28 -f— _ - —__ J W O W wo -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12.0' NAVD' 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . -� -� SLOPE 41-11V . 0 W J 20 0 W _._._._ 1' OVERDREDGE W a0 rn J 0 0 W 600 800 Zz z DISTANCE (FEET) -30 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) 1' OVERDREDGE PROFILE 2 +00 to APRIL 2011 PROFILE -\ QMHW EL.s 0.33 FT Z NLIWEI =- 2.26 F T W W -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 12'.0''NAVD . Z _ - —__ J O SLOPE 4H:1 V o M 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . OD . W J W _._._._ 1' OVERDREDGE 0 -30 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) 1' OVERDREDGE PROFILE 3 +00 10 Q 0 Z W W -10 Z 0 j -20 W J W APRIL 2011 PROFILE MHW LL. = V.JJ r 1 _ L W EL. _ -2.28 -Ftr _ . . . . . . . . . .12.0• NAVD . M.......... z 1'OVERDREDGE z 200 400 (FEET) x:`14 t� ••'�ICEh•y�•.•. Z ,-. SCALE: HORIZ. 1 "= 200' NO-34857 VERT. 1" = 20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION �•�. ArE OF lz FOR RE Y =ONre al P'•N�����r EPHEN KE N P =. N0. 34857 �� /1�(�Ii� DATE ST -- U w O w a H 2 W W ON 0Z �0 Z~ wow to t N < co Z > C1 Zit U OOQ 3Q0 C7 v=i Z pD 0 m WW O W U Z Q Z W 1- Z zs� z i 2 1? 3 W Z Z W � gg = 7 Z L CL CL V IUW 1LUV i DATE: 1/13/12 Y: By RF\nSIONS 1 GK OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 12 1 O Q z w III `L -t z O 1— -2 w J W 1 O Q z F- W W -1 Z O F- > -2 Lq W PROFILE 4 +00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE NHW EL. = 0.33FT _ =.1. afj - MLLW 1f- 2.28-i -- — . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .:12.0' NAVD . SLOPE 4HAV tr oc + . . . . . . . . . . oc i'OVERDREDGE 400 600 800 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 5 +00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE MHW EL. =0.33 FT LLw EL. - 2sfFi—' _ . . . . . . . . ..12.0' NAVD SLOPE 4HAV . ............ ......_..... . a z 1'OVERDREDGE ) 400 10 Q z 0 W W -10 0 > -20 W J W 600 800 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 6 +00 1260 1200 1400 APRIL 2011 PROFILE MHW EL. -0.33 FT _ MLLW ff L. - 2.29"- — . ' /'-12.0' NAVD SLOPE 4HaV / 0 0o 0 V OVERDREDGE Z K 400 600 •.add ........ r i000 '� 9+ 6EA ET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' ; No 34e57 •� VERT. 1" = 20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION T'; ATE OF •; 4z FOR RE RY R W ONLY �` '•. A' <v o I OA •: NA . STEPHEN KE HN E. N0. 34857 "/1111114lo; ATE 1200 1400 F- V W 0 a z w g w Z 20 ZF- 10w n Npw QQfA Z >� azu °Q 3Q0 0� Zm C1 m WW O W U z Q z w F- _z Q a w W 2 a 2 W z; S a� � 8 u H 1/13/12 iY: GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 13 to 2 0 I— w W •10 Z O Q > •20 W J w 30 PP 1I:II F 7 +nn WW FT APRIL 2011 PROFILE ,= i. -qE — - w EC. = 'Z28F7 — — APRIL 2011 PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . .•12.6' NAVD . . . . . O SLOPE 4H; IV SLOPE 4H:iV _ --- - -- � - - - - ................ .63.......x........... 1' OVERDREDGE •' 41LLW EL. =,2.28 FT U � 535 W y g W v t0 400 600 800 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 8 +00 10 Oa Z 0 r W v -10 Z 0 Q •20 W J W 12pp 1400 APRIL 2011 PROFILE 61FMV E L. = 0.33 FT w Et.-� z6FT— . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._12.0' NAVU' 69 8 SLOPE 41+W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c7 t9 1' OVERDREDGE z z ann ann lnnn 1200 1400 1E DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 9+00 90 U W O W a F- z W 2 W ON 2F z UF0) CL 0 Q Q !A 2 4 00' F3ZU 2 Q �Qx ON zm 0m WW 0 W U Z Q z W Z z {s IM i xa W Z G! 2 ° ag p U a 13/12 GK IM NO. 00.83 ET: 14 lo— ,- APRIL 2011 PROFILE ' O k9 W EL. • 0.33 FT O - -1 --- _ --- - -- � - - - - qX $ 41LLW EL. =,2.28 FT 535 W y g W v t0 -12:0' NAVO w °s z O SLOPE 4H:1V Q 7 -20 + J t' OVERDREDGE z w z -30 600 800 ��` t�l t�t E 1400 1600 ©� kEET) • ��•. No.34857 8 ° SCALE: HORIZ. 1" =200' c VERT. 1"=20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION :, of '• W FOR REGU ORY R EW ONLY ��� ss •. <US I o p, •,: ��'. STEPHEN K HN .E. NO. 34857 _ DATE U W O W a F- z W 2 W ON 2F z UF0) CL 0 Q Q !A 2 4 00' F3ZU 2 Q �Qx ON zm 0m WW 0 W U Z Q z W Z z {s IM i xa W Z G! 2 ° ag p U a 13/12 GK IM NO. 00.83 ET: 14 10 0 Q 0 z F- W W -10 z 0 H j -20 w J W -30 APRIL 2011 PROFILE - MHW EL. =0.39 FT El. = -� — LW 917. — ZiUT :12.0 NAVD SLOPE 4HAV 1'OVERDREDGE c7 400 600 800 1000 12W DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 12 +00 1400 10 PROFILE 10 +00 to APRIL 2011 PROFILE APRIL 2011 PROFILE D Q O M MMW EL. =0.33 FT_ QMMWEL.= 0.33FT — MLLW EL. __ •2.2b�1~ W W -10 . . . . . . =12.0' NAVD' Z O SLOPE4H:1V > -20 . . . . . . . . . . LLu 1'OVERDREDGE W OC -30 400 600 800 1000 1200 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 11+00 10 0 Q 0 z F- W W -10 z 0 H j -20 w J W -30 APRIL 2011 PROFILE - MHW EL. =0.39 FT El. = -� — LW 917. — ZiUT :12.0 NAVD SLOPE 4HAV 1'OVERDREDGE c7 400 600 800 1000 12W DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 12 +00 1400 10 APRIL 2011 PROFILE QS A Q O M MMW EL. =0.33 FT_ z 1400 1400 F u W 0 a H z W W WZ 20 Z~ tn0w fnF..N a. z OR' c�z� 3Q0 0I Zm 0 m WW ° W U Z Q Z W F- Z Q i Z rya i 2 L7 2 W .t 9 °u H 1/13/12 GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 iHEET: 15 p al FM Z 0 > -2 W I W F1 MHW EL. = 0.33 FT 9-L-LW 2.2CF—T- APRIL 2011 PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ) --A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * , , , , * I M 800 1000 1 zuu I luu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 15+00 1600 io- > MHW EL. = 0.33 FT < Z 0- — — — — — — — < OLM U7�z--2.26 FT APRIL 2011 PROFILE U.1 o U- - -10- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z 0 I- -20- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W -30 600 uuu 1200 1400 1600 C SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' 34857 VERT. 1"=20' -n c REVISI%ji NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ) *- STATE OF iz DATE BY -AA FOR REGUL Y W ONLY,- 01 ,� STEPHEN KE(HN .E. NO. 341357 %&TE 0 z uj 0 W. 0) CL Z 20 P Z L) 0) 0 w to (4 < to U) 0 z 0: U Z 0 20 < J Z 0 1 U) z m 3 m 0 w LLJ O u z z ILI z d 2!! Z LU W Z .4 0 1/13/12 ly: GK ,OMM NO. MET: 16 PROFILE 13+00 APRIL 2011 PROFILE O MHW EL. = 0.33FT — z F- WLWEL—.--2.2FF—T SLOPE 4H: 1V -10 . . . . . . . . . . . ..12.0' NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z ------------------------------------------------ -- 0 > w l'OVERDREDGE z -30 fauu 800 1000 1200 1400 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 14+00 p al FM Z 0 > -2 W I W F1 MHW EL. = 0.33 FT 9-L-LW 2.2CF—T- APRIL 2011 PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ) --A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . * , , , , * I M 800 1000 1 zuu I luu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE 15+00 1600 io- > MHW EL. = 0.33 FT < Z 0- — — — — — — — < OLM U7�z--2.26 FT APRIL 2011 PROFILE U.1 o U- - -10- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z 0 I- -20- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W -30 600 uuu 1200 1400 1600 C SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' 34857 VERT. 1"=20' -n c REVISI%ji NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION ) *- STATE OF iz DATE BY -AA FOR REGUL Y W ONLY,- 01 ,� STEPHEN KE(HN .E. NO. 341357 %&TE 0 z uj 0 W. 0) CL Z 20 P Z L) 0) 0 w to (4 < to U) 0 z 0: U Z 0 20 < J Z 0 1 U) z m 3 m 0 w LLJ O u z z ILI z d 2!! Z LU W Z .4 0 1/13/12 ly: GK ,OMM NO. MET: 16 I 0 z F- w w -10 z 0 -20 w -30 1 0 z F- w LIJ �L -10 z 0 F- * -20 w -j LIJ -30 PROFILE C-3 SCARP REPAIR 400 600 Ow 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) JULY 2009 PROFILE PROFILE C-5 MHW EL. - 0.33FT SCARP REPAIR O EL. 0.33 FT 7-�73' �NAVD —leLW&r----2.2bfT z F- -7.7'NAV':D;. 9 I—L -10 . SLOPE 4H: 1V . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 i z Ic 0 SLOPE 41HAV co JULY 2009 PROFILE V7 F- -20 . . . . . . . . . . . + M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Z l'OVERDREDGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -30 0 200 z % . c • 1 200' -200 0 200 400 L VERT. 1"= 20' 600 80 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION R VIEW ONLY O�NLY DISTANCE (FEET) '%Rl PROFILE C-4 SCARP REPAIR FOR REGULATORY 0 0 *-.. plop, MHW EL. 0.33 FT /0Al NILLYY E MLEW 6C----2.2§TT -7.7' NAVID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4H_JV AV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ATE JULY 2009 PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z l'OVERDREDGE 0 40u 400 600 Ow 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-5 SCARP REPAIR O EL. 0.33 FT 7-�73' �NAVD —leLW&r----2.2bfT z F- III W 9 I—L -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 i z Ic 0 SLOPE 41HAV co JULY 2009 PROFILE V7 F- -20 . . . . . . . . . . . + M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Z W l'OVERDREDGE -30 0 200 %% 4 P H L Py I 6OA, auu 1000 % . c • 1 200' 4- -0 NO. 34887 SCALE: HORIZ. L VERT. 1"= 20' 0 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION R VIEW ONLY O�NLY (, OF IZ �NA '. (, 4& 0 '%Rl By FOR REGULATORY 0 0 *-.. plop, /0Al - 11,8111 (% 4 STEPHEN K HN F. NO. 34857 ATE N, 0 z Lu 0 U) 0: z (L 0 Z uj NON Lo (n a00 u Z -j 00 §ZO 3: 0 (a 0 z 0 0 -j W LL Of O U Z z Lu 1-- z ku Lu z Lu -a zg z 0 1/1-3/12 GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 MET. 17 O 0- z F- w LLI -10— Z 0 > -20— LLI —i uJ in ON , ml z w w Z 0 F- < -2 w —i w PROF11 F r-6 SCARP REPAIR MHW EL.-0.33FT 200 400 buu buu _PALLWEL,=--j.6U-L DISTANCE (FEET) -7.7'NAVD 10— SLOPE 4H.jAV JULY 2009 SCARP REPAIR J 2009 PROFILE PROFILE . z . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z w w -10 . -7.71 N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l'OVERDREDGI-.- FLOOD SHOAL 0 200 400 600 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-7 I sou 1000 SCARP REPAIR JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. - 0.33 FT MaW F[,-;--2.2RT 7.7' NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4HAV cli SLOPE 4H:1V cl) z 0: fflOVERDREDGE 0 200 400 buu buu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-8 10— JULY 2009 SCARP REPAIR PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 F Z 0 - FVUW EU ---2.26 w w -10 . -7.71 N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 0 FLOOD SHOAL SLOP84HAV DISPOSAL AREA N -20— . . .. . .. > ui I'OVERDRE-- z 30 v 200 41 800 No ;• Z SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' VERT. 1"= 29 0 -N, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION iz DATE By I FOR R�E�GU �RY �EW �ONLY� 44/ It STEPHEN KELkQN .E. NO. 34857 11 ATE '14 1000 1000 u Lu 0 z W 2 W 00) 0� 0 Z 0. 2 Z UJ 0 U) co x000 M;z w z - u 3 -1 000 3z < X 0 cn 0 Z 0 00 cl -i W ILL w 0 Ill U Z 4 Z w 16- Z W O z 0 2 1/13/12 GK ;OMM NO. 8500.83 iHEET: 18 PROFILE C-9 m FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA LIJ !:!:, -10 '30 0 200 400 600 am 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-10 10 o LIJ LIJ '30 '30 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA SLOPE 4H:IV SLOPE 4H:lV J 0 200 400 mm mm DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-11 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 DISPOSAL AREA PROFILE to -7.7'NAVD In VOVERDREDGE p,«x4^^^,,^,~ uoo xCEfv o FOR R 9 V Aw STEPHEN KEEWrf-'p'�Y.NAl-2tNS%f wm mm DISTANCE (FEET) 1000 800 1000 0. cn IL oj LLI it 0 uj d Z � 1/1x/1u � DATE GK I z o '10 -20 El LIJ '30 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA SLOPE 4H:IV SLOPE 4H:lV J 0 200 400 mm mm DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-11 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 DISPOSAL AREA PROFILE to -7.7'NAVD In VOVERDREDGE p,«x4^^^,,^,~ uoo xCEfv o FOR R 9 V Aw STEPHEN KEEWrf-'p'�Y.NAl-2tNS%f wm mm DISTANCE (FEET) 1000 800 1000 0. cn IL oj LLI it 0 uj d Z � 1/1x/1u � DATE GK 10 O Q 0 Z F- w W -10 Z O H j -20 w J W -30 E C a PROFILE C -12 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA L _ MHW EL. = 0.33 FT _ _MLLW El„ = -1.6 T MLLW EL. _ -2.28 -7.7 NA SLOPE 41V ti o H: SLOPE 4H:iV M ul . . . . . . . . . . . . . z z. tr Ir 1'OVERDREDGE 800 1000 200 400 buu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -13 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA _ MHW EL. =0.33 FT -MLL)8LEL=j.6aET MLLW I:L. =-2.28 -7.T 14AVD rn SLOPE4HAV SLOP V Z Z � tY 1'OVERDREDGE 0 200 400 6U0 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -14 800 1000 10 0 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 Q Z 0 I— w w Z 0 -10 Z O I- o W j -20 v w J w �I -30 E C a PROFILE C -12 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA L _ MHW EL. = 0.33 FT _ _MLLW El„ = -1.6 T MLLW EL. _ -2.28 -7.7 NA SLOPE 41V ti o H: SLOPE 4H:iV M ul . . . . . . . . . . . . . z z. tr Ir 1'OVERDREDGE 800 1000 200 400 buu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -13 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA _ MHW EL. =0.33 FT -MLL)8LEL=j.6aET MLLW I:L. =-2.28 -7.T 14AVD rn SLOPE4HAV SLOP V Z Z � tY 1'OVERDREDGE 0 200 400 6U0 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -14 800 1000 �ttttii,. 200 ♦`% c; ?HEN kfi y SCALEZ -10* 1. 1 "pQb2 JOT F I L N 1t �) FOR R ]0 Y R E, 4 -Y d tIL 'i STEPHEN KILiEH WWQ dfA V 400 600 DISTANCE (FEET) 10 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 DISPOSAL AREA PROFILE Q MHW EL. 0.33 FT Z 0 MLLW EL =_1.68 T F- VLLW X2.28-FT o W -7.7'N VD _10 .. ............. Z e O '� tO SLOPE 4H:1V u SLOPE 4H:1V m v -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z z . . . . . . . . J w J tr ry, w 1'OVERDREDGE 30 �ttttii,. 200 ♦`% c; ?HEN kfi y SCALEZ -10* 1. 1 "pQb2 JOT F I L N 1t �) FOR R ]0 Y R E, 4 -Y d tIL 'i STEPHEN KILiEH WWQ dfA V 400 600 DISTANCE (FEET) 800 1000 H U W n 0 It M Z Wy 2Z W OO wU (L W 2cn — fn Z tn00 ~U (L ZQZ QZQ 001 �a-j Q 00 Z= �y OD WO W WLL U Z Q Z W Z Q ci e" q4 SC _ Y5 qq w W Z Q Z W i� z �y- Z 33 € a ULL 4 H m0 0 s v 1/13/12 IY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 ;HEET: 20 DATE 800 1000 H U W n 0 It M Z Wy 2Z W OO wU (L W 2cn — fn Z tn00 ~U (L ZQZ QZQ 001 �a-j Q 00 Z= �y OD WO W WLL U Z Q Z W Z Q ci e" q4 SC _ Y5 qq w W Z Q Z W i� z �y- Z 33 € a ULL 4 H m0 0 s v 1/13/12 IY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 ;HEET: 20 10 0 Z H W W -10 Z 0 > -20 W -30 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL IREA W5L.=0.33FT 7w-2.26 MLLW EL —FT 7.6! NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4H:1V l'OVERDREDGE + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z tr 0 200 10 FLOOD SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA 0— 400 600 uuu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-17 FJULY 2009 PROFILE z MLLW rL—.= -2.261 l'- -7.6' NAVD -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 0 SLOPE 4H:IV l'OVERDREDGE + > -20 . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 1d 9 . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . w z w -i -30 0 200 600 800 o**vIcElliF. SCALE: HORIZ. V* = 200' VERT. I" = 20' NO 348%5;, KE VISR, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SrA TE OF I DAIL I UY I ul FOR R7!� =ORYIEW ONLY ........ 1:2 STEPHEN K EHN)P.E. NO. 34857 DATE KlEf 1000 0 w z ILI 0 U) 0: Z CL 0 2P 0 III 000) P 0 o �z 0 z cc §Zo 0U) 0 z 0 30 13 -1 W LL lY W U z 4 z Z_ d z ul z u z W SOOT -6 z A 0 1/13/12 Iy* GK 'OMM NO. SHEET: 21 PROFILE C-15 FLOOD SHOAL JULY Zoo PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA EL, =0.33 F Z 0- MLLW EL-77-2.29-ff F- W -7.r NAVD W !L, -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 0 cn 'o 2 SLOPE 4kIV F- SLOPE 4 AV + + - . > 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . d Ci ' . . . . . . . . z z W VOVERDREDGE -30— 0 200 400 600 800 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-16 10 0 Z H W W -10 Z 0 > -20 W -30 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL IREA W5L.=0.33FT 7w-2.26 MLLW EL —FT 7.6! NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4H:1V l'OVERDREDGE + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z tr 0 200 10 FLOOD SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA 0— 400 600 uuu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-17 FJULY 2009 PROFILE z MLLW rL—.= -2.261 l'- -7.6' NAVD -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z 0 SLOPE 4H:IV l'OVERDREDGE + > -20 . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 1d 9 . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . w z w -i -30 0 200 600 800 o**vIcElliF. SCALE: HORIZ. V* = 200' VERT. I" = 20' NO 348%5;, KE VISR, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SrA TE OF I DAIL I UY I ul FOR R7!� =ORYIEW ONLY ........ 1:2 STEPHEN K EHN)P.E. NO. 34857 DATE KlEf 1000 0 w z ILI 0 U) 0: Z CL 0 2P 0 III 000) P 0 o �z 0 z cc §Zo 0U) 0 z 0 30 13 -1 W LL lY W U z 4 z Z_ d z ul z u z W SOOT -6 z A 0 1/13/12 Iy* GK 'OMM NO. SHEET: 21 10 Q 0 z I— w W -10 z O Q > -20 w J W -30 10 > Q 0 z H W W -10 z O H -20 W J W -30 10 > Q 0 z I— W W -10 z 0 Q > -20 W J W -30 PROFILE C -18 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA MHW EL. = 0.33 FT — -- � MLLW EL. _ -2.28 FT -7.5' AVD Lo SLOPE 4H:1V M 1' OVERDREDGE Z. ............... Ir 0 200 400 600 800 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -19 1000 FLOOD SHOAL JULY 2009 PROFILE DISPOSAL AREA Z _ I _MLLWEL. = -1.6 MLLW X2.2 -7.5' NAVD SLOPE 4H:1V O rn SLOPE 4H:1V 00 N �f 0� Z Z 1'OVERDREDGE 1000 0 200 400 600 8uu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C -20 JULY 2009 PROFILE 0 , ��CyJ� 400 600 °NEN ��,,� DISTANCE (FEET) �.••�%cENSF•.�'S,L y SCALE: HORIZ.�? - • N VERTU 20'Pb. 34857 k s JOT FOR C C ION FOR REGU VAIE ONLY •j- 4,j / STEPHEN KkEHN P.EN F. 8 DATE �tt11i1111 800 1000 H V W O Ix CL I- Z Wy WZ OO w a. III EN _N ZN U) 00 Q ~U IL Z %Z LIJ QZ4 oa x �ZU QQ 00 Z= Q w Q 0 000 W LL U Z Q Z W I-' Z a f d e= z�� C Vo W W z_ z W t� o z: 5 ou I E 1/13/12 1Y: GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 22 _ MHW LL. -U.33 YI — — - - — — —MLLW EL_ =-1.6 - MLLW EL. _ -2.28 FT -7.4' NAVD 1'OVERDREDGE (TYP.) + + SLOPE 4H: IV (TYP.) . . . N . . M . . . .� . . Z Z Z Z 0 , ��CyJ� 400 600 °NEN ��,,� DISTANCE (FEET) �.••�%cENSF•.�'S,L y SCALE: HORIZ.�? - • N VERTU 20'Pb. 34857 k s JOT FOR C C ION FOR REGU VAIE ONLY •j- 4,j / STEPHEN KkEHN P.EN F. 8 DATE �tt11i1111 800 1000 H V W O Ix CL I- Z Wy WZ OO w a. III EN _N ZN U) 00 Q ~U IL Z %Z LIJ QZ4 oa x �ZU QQ 00 Z= Q w Q 0 000 W LL U Z Q Z W I-' Z a f d e= z�� C Vo W W z_ z W t� o z: 5 ou I E 1/13/12 1Y: GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 SHEET: 22 5i 7f cc PROFILE C-21 to JULY 2009 OFILE u ui 0 z 0- w MLLW EL 0. —= -2.26TT LLI -7.3'NAVD z W w -10- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z 0 SLOPE 4H:iV 00 F- SLOPE 4H: IV + + w Z I < -20- . . . . . . . . . . . . a. 0 > (6 0 ....... w z z U uJ I' zw OVERDREDGE Wom -30 U) p U) < < (a 0 200 400 600 800 1000 (L a o DISTANCE (FEET) z x u 0 Z to 0 j3 PROFILE C-22 Z 0 JULY 2009 PROFILE a U) cl o z 0 0.33 F 1 50 0— fML2TL6- -6ML z LWE�,=- --WLW FL7=---2.26-ff w U. F- w w -73 NAYD a w SLOPE 4H:lV 7 -10- . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . w . . . u Z z I'OVERDREDGE < 0 l'- + z < -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > w z z -j < W -.30 0 200 400 bvu 800 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-23 JULY 2009 z !1 54 PROFILE ii i? W Lu MHW EL. = 0.33 FT z Z "LLYY hL, = - AM a z F- —?.ILLW EL. = -2.2 W 7= w SLOPE 4H:1V -10- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z z ' IOVERDREDGE + C6 < -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > fSa w z -i w Ix 0 iS -30 ........ 0 200 pHE/V ,,f 4a,/ 800 1000 e sF ♦ DATE: 0.348S.7 1/13/12 SCALE: HORIZ. 1" 209 = "D : VERT. 1" = 20' 3y. NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION REVISIUAJMIPTION CK DATE BY FOR REGULATORY REV W ONLY ' 40 COMM NO I D 0 STEPHEN KE(HN E. NO. 34857 11111WNTE 23 I r z z 0 -2 w -j W F09 Or z I- LLJ Lu -I z 0 1-- * -2 Lu -j LLj PROFILE C-24 JULY 2009 PROFILE JULY MHW EL. = 0.33 FT MILE NAVQ . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4HAV OVERDREDGE +11 cn V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11OVERDREDGE 800. low zoo 4uu uuu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-25 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. - 0.33FT 'LLYY hL, =. -t$a 1- 1 ---NUW EC --.2.2ATr -7XNAM L SLOPE 4H:1 V o 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 z z l'OVERDREDGE 800 1000 0 200 400 buu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-26 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 FT —V-LLW nTE 2.28 -7-O'NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4HAV + l'OVERDREDGE . . . . . . . . . . . M . . . . . . . . . . 0 z 800 1000 10 200 r I t- ry .600 Z 0 N VERT. 1" = 20' n NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION w FOR REGUL A19RY REVI ONLY tp -10 z 0 L 1 CDATE STEPHEN KEEH� P. . NO._ 34857 -20 E & w n -30 zoo 4uu uuu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-25 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. - 0.33FT 'LLYY hL, =. -t$a 1- 1 ---NUW EC --.2.2ATr -7XNAM L SLOPE 4H:1 V o 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 z z l'OVERDREDGE 800 1000 0 200 400 buu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-26 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33 FT —V-LLW nTE 2.28 -7-O'NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SLOPE 4HAV + l'OVERDREDGE . . . . . . . . . . . M . . . . . . . . . . 0 z 800 1000 0 z W 00 MZ (L 0 u z uj U) 0 0 cn (L 0 o U) It K5; <U 0 z -i ❑zo < X 0 cl go 0 0 a j ILI U. IY ILI U z z III F- z a z ax Z z 1113112 I Y., GK NO. 8500.83 ;HEET-. 24 0 200 r I t- ry .600 SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' N VERT. 1" = 20' n NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION t OF 44/ FOR REGUL A19RY REVI ONLY tp -5\N�-Zr( 10� % O/vA E�2 10�1,e L 1 CDATE STEPHEN KEEH� P. . NO._ 34857 0 z W 00 MZ (L 0 u z uj U) 0 0 cn (L 0 o U) It K5; <U 0 z -i ❑zo < X 0 cl go 0 0 a j ILI U. IY ILI U z z III F- z a z ax Z z 1113112 I Y., GK NO. 8500.83 ;HEET-. 24 i .E PROFILE C-27 10 JULY 2009 PROFILE I n—=4.26-Fr Lij -10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 F- § -20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lil —i Ld .30 0 200 400 600 Boo 1000 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-28 10 aO 0 L; ui -10 0 > .20 w —j LLj -30 JULY 2009 PROFILE iffw = 5, ......... . .. 0 200 400 tjuu tsuu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-29 JULY 2009 O PROFILE 4WV L 013 F] 281 uj .10 . . . . . -7.6'NAVQ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z SLOPE 4H:1V SLOPE 4H:IV 0 A < -20 . > . . . . . . + . . 0 . Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LLJ —j z W. z CC. LLI OVERDREDGE -30-- 1 1 -200 lilo, 0 400 600 lhXNq FEET) • % SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' Alo. 3485;, VERT. 1"=20' NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION = :, 8TArE OF DATE BY I Dr FOR REGULATORY REMFW,ONL$ *..,o 0 lot 0 t%%"" DATE STEPHEN KEEkN P. . NO. 34857 1000 IL z ul 2 ui OZ 0� CL 0 z u III (j) 0 W 0.00 in U) 5: p: 34U 0z-1 000 4 0 m U) (20 0 0 Uj LL. uj Q z z Lu Z Z? 03 W zZ Z 3 as J g8 800 V DATE: 1/13/12 BY: GK .COMM NO, 8500 .83 EET: ��E��r2T5 I o .2m LIJ ~ PROFILE C-30 JULY 2009 PROFILE F71'OVERDREDGE -26C u om wm mm mm DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-31 JULY 2009 PROFILE SLOPE 4H: IV 9nn 400 600 t5uu DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-32 10— JULY 2009 PROFILE LLJ -200 0 400 600 800 co SCALE: HORIZ. 1 200' UE FOR REGULATORYR�VIEW ONa- `0 a. uj ILI o �z� -m W LL ul � � us tu w Vu/12 GK 26 i % 0- z w w -10- z 0 F- > -20- w -j w O z Lu Z 0 > -2 Lu -j Lu 1 z F- w z 0 -2 w -j w PR()Fll F r-ll JULY 2009 PROFILE MHVV EL.= 0.03 FT .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -200 0 200 400 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE C-34 I I 600 800 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHWEL.=0.33FT — r =741T MLLWTL7--2.2Yff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I 0 200 400 600 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE CN-35 800 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. = 0.33FT - MLL10L MLLW El-.=--2.2�-FT l'OVERDREDGE Z .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . z ;SLOPE 4H:1V 0 200 two j 1, 600 BOO V�AKMffEET) 0CEN 6 SCALE: HORIZ. V'= 200' # � % VERT. I"=20' NO. 34857 -n NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION FOR fREG R Y RE W 0 iL STATE OF iz 0 P x STEPHEN KEkHN E. NO. 34857 ',lt,,LNAL � \�'DATE 1000 U 0 z w 00 M Z 0-0 w U) 0 0 U) < ILOO 0 z -i 000 on go 00 93 -1 w U. w cl w V z Z W Z R 2 Z 2 W w z a z z °u 3 1/13/12 GK 'O,MM NO. 8500.83 iHEET: 27 10 D Q z 0 w w -10 z 0 > -20 w J w -200 10 Q z 0 H w w -10 z O F- -20 w J w -30 PROFILE CN -36 JULY 2009 PROFILE MHW EL. =0.33 FT -- - — —_ M-LW —_ -- ML W E L. = -2.2 0 200 400 DISTANCE (FEET) PROFILE CN -37 60D 800 DISTANCE (FEET) �?0EN SCALE: HORIZ. 1"= 200' 00-34857 •. VERT. 1"= 20' .a NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION :O STATIE OF Cr FOR R TORY R IEWZJIY, '' tS' '• �ORIQP.• / O• E EN `�� STEPHEN KEEN P.E. N0. 34857 / / /1111 0% DATE K) H U w O a z w w a0 zw 000 CL 00 HU (D z ..1 (900 3Qx M rn 30 O-i W 4. K 0 W U z Q z w z R 2 i a rc l� o W W 2 0 z W d 2 � 2 8� IL u 3Y 1/13/12 IY: GK :OMM NO. 8500.83 ;HEET: 28 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' 30 PROFILE PROFILE R -12 30 DESIGN TEMPLATE m20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MAR /JULY 2009 `0 N DESIGN TEMPLATE 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 o w to Qr W z w MHW EL. = 0.33 FT _ NLLW EL. _ -2.28 n W 7 Q EL. = -1.68 FT. NAVD W LL . . . . . . . . 1 J MHW EL. =0.33 FT Z 0-- u W L - - -_— O 20 MLLW EL = -2.28 F QN E 0 100 200 300 400 500 8 700 800 J 10 DISTANCE (FEET) . w d z -20 ry 0 100 200 300 400 500 6 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' 30 PROFILE v Y L NOT FOR STEPHEN SCALE:, 4,{ j!'N 260' ` �� •' �T1'CEtv** y . No. 3485 7 Ns&adTlo ,,�q TO Ryl W '(fwR' • �4 4✓ '� S ••• •... P �x P.E. NY-'U� L 1 %%%� r7' �1 f—! j'T�1 / - t, / 0 zg oa aw w J_ LL W at a = Q rn 2 O Z Z Q wF- >w N O O a vi 0 OU z =u- m0j 0p j O g IL Z U U) ZD W 3Q0 it 0 = ZN w w 0! z ax UA z0 Qz z w H z_ Q i W E n W b = 7 qd 1 1/13/12 IY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 ;MEET: 29 MAR /JULY 2009 a DESIGN TEMPLATE m20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a `0 N o Q 10 � o w to EL. _ -1.68 FT. NAVD W z w MHW EL. = 0.33 FT _ NLLW EL. _ -2.28 n + 7 Q 1 j10 . . . . . . . . 1 J . . . Z u W L 20 E 0 100 200 300 400 500 8 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) v Y L NOT FOR STEPHEN SCALE:, 4,{ j!'N 260' ` �� •' �T1'CEtv** y . No. 3485 7 Ns&adTlo ,,�q TO Ryl W '(fwR' • �4 4✓ '� S ••• •... P �x P.E. NY-'U� L 1 %%%� r7' �1 f—! j'T�1 / - t, / 0 zg oa aw w J_ LL W at a = Q rn 2 O Z Z Q wF- >w N O O a vi 0 OU z =u- m0j 0p j O g IL Z U U) ZD W 3Q0 it 0 = ZN w w 0! z ax UA z0 Qz z w H z_ Q i W E n W b = 7 qd 1 1/13/12 IY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 ;MEET: 29 � : , 8 20 ^- m LLJ Lij u n ao o 100 200 300 wm mm 600 nm mm DISTANCE (FEET) co p MAR�JULY 2009 - DESIGN TEMPLATE 8CALE:HOR1Z. 1^=20O VERT. 1^= 20' � 20 cl m LL o LLri o '20 PROFILE R-15 o 100 om 300 wm am 60 nm 800 DISTANCE (FEET) %��WAIIII "R,* bWQF"MFW 9*NtY. `,"vv,` LLJ z 10 of 0 IL Lu ILI � � w IL 1/13/1u e GK MAR/JULY 2009 -DESIGN TEMPLATE o 100 om 300 wm am 60 nm 800 DISTANCE (FEET) %��WAIIII "R,* bWQF"MFW 9*NtY. `,"vv,` LLJ z 10 of 0 IL Lu ILI � � w IL 1/13/1u e GK SC4L.12- ORIZ,1" = 200' ' DATE: a 7F : SF •'•• L 1/13/12 a i • NO. 34 •; Y. c i NOT FOR gTRUCTION cK DATE BY D"CRIPTION FOR MR aF ONVYQ 4/9/12 SK RAI 1 RE PO OMM N0. ;• ,�. 4o / � ;� 8500.83 4O (�� L" SHEET. a STEPHEN KE N 8 DATE 31 C7 Z _Z oa ° w w PROFILE R -12 J J W O 30 MAk /JULY 2009 u' 0 w DESIGN TEMPLATE U Z a' N Z 20 ............................ w2 co w0 > M w0 >V Q 210 4.7 FT. NAVD N Z O N 20 - W _ 3.7 FT. NAVD O U Q Z d' MHW EL. = 0.33 FT O - MLLW EL. _ -2.28 FT ~ Q ~J Q N Z 0 u 0 0.. . . . . . `° . . . . . . . . . U) i Z %_ w w O z z �cl W m 3zw Q -20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 8000 z Q DISTANCE (FEET) N oz w SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' o VERT. 1" = 20' w O z Q z w z_ PR FILE R -13 Q 30 MARMULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 =aigg 2;0 4.7 FT. NAVD . . . . . . . . . . . s s� z W w o �_ 3.7 FT. NAVD uai s 15 EL. = 0.33 FT a Z 0 _ — — _MHW W 0 o MLLW EL. = -2.28 FT H Q N + -�' _ g Z 7 �10 . . . . . . . 0 . . . . . . . . .T . . . . . . . J z w z d 6 -20 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) 0 �� SC4L.12- ORIZ,1" = 200' ' DATE: a 7F : SF •'•• L 1/13/12 a i • NO. 34 •; Y. c i NOT FOR gTRUCTION cK DATE BY D"CRIPTION FOR MR aF ONVYQ 4/9/12 SK RAI 1 RE PO OMM N0. ;• ,�. 4o / � ;� 8500.83 4O (�� L" SHEET. a STEPHEN KE N 8 DATE 31 NOT OR 30 20 2;0 w w ZO 0 w -20 PROFILE R-14 MAR/JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r- 4.7 FT. NAVD + N ( j 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z 3.7 FT. NAVD MHW EL. = 0.33 FT MY 00 MLLW EL. = 2.28 FT 00 . . . . . . . . cp b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z z 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1 = 200' VERT. 1" = 20' 30 -20 O 7-10 w w LL Z�O 0 Ao w -20 PROFILE R -15 MAR/JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.7 FT. NAVD CN 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z7---. - - w 3.7 FT. NAVD 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE` HORIZ. 1" = 200' 1" 20' Ain ,;--0061STRUCIPON • OOLY 4W F Vl� . MAW, 349W'.-' L- - , /I11111110 ' o", DATE 700 800 0 Z Z_ W Z w ui 2 W X It z HN < < Z Z w 2— o uj m 2 w 0 > UJ F- 0 ul 0 z =O U) (L 0 Z < 0 ou z w 2: D- I-- to 0 0 It QaJ 00U 0 3: oz< a 0 a LU §zm < 00 z= ow a z w0 w 00 z z z w or lu rc 4- 1/13/12 GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 iHEET- 32 MHW EL. = 0.33 FT rn L- MLLW EL- = -2.28 FT T z co z 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE` HORIZ. 1" = 200' 1" 20' Ain ,;--0061STRUCIPON • OOLY 4W F Vl� . MAW, 349W'.-' L- - , /I11111110 ' o", DATE 700 800 0 Z Z_ W Z w ui 2 W X It z HN < < Z Z w 2— o uj m 2 w 0 > UJ F- 0 ul 0 z =O U) (L 0 Z < 0 ou z w 2: D- I-- to 0 0 It QaJ 00U 0 3: oz< a 0 a LU §zm < 00 z= ow a z w0 w 00 z z z w or lu rc 4- 1/13/12 GK 'OMM NO. 8500.83 iHEET- 32 30 20 0 Q z 10 w w LL Z 0 O Q 110 J w -20 PROFILE R -18 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' 30 20 Q �to w w LL Z 0 O F- Q L 110 J w -20 PROFILE R -19 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE ......... + .................... N Z MHW EL. = 0.33 FT r� 15 MLLW EL. _ -2.28 F z. RNG. 4 +00 - .— ._ - - - -- 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SQAt'E:' HOR1Z 1" = 200' 1" = 20' co •........ ~ �. W ��� ••• 1.1C� cr . No Z c� NOT F0 NSTRUC FOR FORL RE LTVR/� IEW OPAL` OF Q . JL 1. 6 - 6--12, UZ Zg �a au w FL a UZ ZZ Q O w0 >W rn T- O a U) zQ ?0 OU ZV _L N0J z ZaVQQ OZW oam 3Qo 0= Z_N (7 O �Z o= Lu z QN Z W tsH Z a I W t C! b i i 1/13/12 GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 33 MHW MLLW EL = -2.28 F N lh Z w 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1"=20' 30 20 Q �to w w LL Z 0 O F- Q L 110 J w -20 PROFILE R -19 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE ......... + .................... N Z MHW EL. = 0.33 FT r� 15 MLLW EL. _ -2.28 F z. RNG. 4 +00 - .— ._ - - - -- 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SQAt'E:' HOR1Z 1" = 200' 1" = 20' co •........ ~ �. W ��� ••• 1.1C� cr . No Z c� NOT F0 NSTRUC FOR FORL RE LTVR/� IEW OPAL` OF Q . JL 1. 6 - 6--12, UZ Zg �a au w FL a UZ ZZ Q O w0 >W rn T- O a U) zQ ?0 OU ZV _L N0J z ZaVQQ OZW oam 3Qo 0= Z_N (7 O �Z o= Lu z QN Z W tsH Z a I W t C! b i i 1/13/12 GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 33 NOT FOR .-OR REG oI c-.�— STEPHEN k 30 20 O Q Z 10 F- W W LL Z 0 O Q X10 J W -20 V �l1 0 m z RNG.4 +13 z a: PROFILE R -20 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE MHVV LL. = U.JJ t 1 MLLW EL. = -2.28 FT 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DISTANCE (FEET) SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. I"= 20' Z. A(O. •: Z 7 ;..Il IAEWFONV Q I DA •• \ P. E. DATE U'Z z oa °J w w J L� 0 w a UZ ZZ Q O E� >w N O O 0w. N U) < 1 0 OU 2U =LL fAOJ OU a�u Z>() oZu oom §Q Ow O= ZN (7 ac O� W a' Z a w t- z0 W F- Z_ Q i F F Z ;i ss O y€ Z - < W W Z b Z W •1 Z IL 1/13/12 iY: GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 SHEET: 34 a SCALE: I-IORIZ. '1'"' =,Z00' ' � fi; = "a" ='20' `� 5 �,•••'IG••., ~, DAIS: • .� *�� ` �hSF•1 y 1/13/12 a • Np Z Y: Fl NOT FOR COLAi NS V(; LION # ,� A Y I GK FOR REGU j E%$I14' IE SNLY 4/9/12 SK RAI 1 S OMM No. 8500.83 T.. �j m :�i •.• -� -� �' EE STEPHEN EE � P.E. 7 DATE 35 ���1111111��� Z_ � Or W PROFILE R -18.2 g 0 30 MAR /JULY 2009 W C9 4. DESIGN TEMPLATE = U Z F- U1 QQ Z 20 . . . . . . .d . . . . . . . . . . . . L6 . . . . . . . . m �O + ; t d SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1" = 20' ,,%1 I +I,,, % 5 NO. NOT FOR %: STRU N OR REG •Y�, R V Of�Lk- x RIbA � . STEPHEN DISTANCE (FEET) DATE UZ Zg oa Z v J w Lu J_ w w w TZ IL aQ Z w W0 m 2 f� wO >V OZ ON =O IL 0) m0 OU_ Z1Z = LL- U) 0 v ofd QaJ o a0rL oz< 0pm uj 3zW Qw 00 z= eta a w0 D F. w3 00 z U1 Q z w z 'a Z a, jj u J W W z O Z W z� I d � J it oil 11 1/13/12 3Y: GK ,OMM N0. 8500.83 iHEET: 36 PROFILE R -20 30 MAR /JULY 2009 DESIGN TEMPLATE 20 d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q X10z...................... w EL. = 4.7' NAVD 151 MHW EL. = 0.33 FT Z __ O — — — — MLLW EL - -2.28 F OD X10. °. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W RNG.3 +85.8 -20 0 100 200 300 400 500 6001 700 800 SCALE: HORIZ. 1" = 200' VERT. 1" = 20' ,,%1 I +I,,, % 5 NO. NOT FOR %: STRU N OR REG •Y�, R V Of�Lk- x RIbA � . STEPHEN DISTANCE (FEET) DATE UZ Zg oa Z v J w Lu J_ w w w TZ IL aQ Z w W0 m 2 f� wO >V OZ ON =O IL 0) m0 OU_ Z1Z = LL- U) 0 v ofd QaJ o a0rL oz< 0pm uj 3zW Qw 00 z= eta a w0 D F. w3 00 z U1 Q z w z 'a Z a, jj u J W W z O Z W z� I d � J it oil 11 1/13/12 3Y: GK ,OMM N0. 8500.83 iHEET: 36 v °, to ° O O ° WIGGINS PASS v Z W I N 710000 11� J N 710000 d Z LANDWARD LIMIT OF 1 H O_ 2009 HARD BOTTOM 0 W H (SIDE SCAN SONAR) I I 0 2 V IIII � 4 0� 200200 —tai 0 w 0 I I ° GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT a rL II �� za I I VANDERBI N ° o APPROXIMATE LOCATION I I BEACH d OF ACCESS CORRIDOR I I M O IIII (9 Z� < W N 700000 III N 700000 a Q III NAPLE 00 APPROXIMATE Q & II SHORELINE v to GULF I I w w c E OF O UlFx1co I I z = 1I Ill LL II zo I 1 I I El N II Q PELICAN AY N 690000 IIII N 690000 0 o gu II W o I I A R40 J CI � OFFSHORE DISPOSAL IIII CLAM PASS 6) AREA / BORROW AREA 6 I I m W II dq NOTES: ��`HEN �, II PARKS ORE P e 1. COORDINATES i �EDk 0 N 6900 0 8 ON FLORIDA ' kTE40l -Np&! SN S� . COORDINATQS*T0M, EAST ZONE, m DATE: t NORTH AMEVCANbATU&AF3WM7 * o �} R ��" 113 12 Y. N NOT FOR U *w0F Q , GK FOR REGUL WPOyt`tvW,' DMM NO. t7 � •.� )� �.�� 8500.83 EET- `_'1 STEPHEN K EHN P.E. Nf7.�134861a 37 m m w m i O N OFFSHORE DISPOSAL AREA / BORROW AREA 6 CIO) -21 � � j -20 �( NB8o000 o E 382132 N 679953 o � � TARGET DISPOSAL WITHIN THIS REGION E 382942 N 679953 W Y 0 2! It W 8000 CL H wg IL 21 IL 2 z3 aa0 lz 05M ol-g �ZQ aJ 7950 Z O �a 0 LLIo ow Lu Z � o Z E 382942 N 679678 E 383042 TN 679678 E 382192 I a N 679528 E 382092 I _ .�;— - -2o N 679528 I - - - - - -- ;�._ N 679500 d 33 N I I 35 / E 382092 N 679128 S E 382192 _/ 1 N N 679128 E1� N N 679000 Ll ' °¢ E 382192 n N 678828 P NOTES: 1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON FLORIDA STATE PLANE E COORDINATE SYSTEM, EAST ZONE, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83). 2. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON NATIONAL GEODETIC m VERTICAL DATUM OF 1 ). 3. POST CONSTRUI(1ri� i /gATA WAS PROVIDED BY r COASTAL ENGI �NC. NAPLES, FLORIDA DATED 1996.1% 5•••.•�`CE�•C�yi y LEGEND: * F'• : 2 i �J LAIN CiF INF#9B&WoW AREA 6 N NOT FOR U I p FOR REGU RY WFONI.h' E 38261 N\\\A N 6789 8 E 382617 N 678828 0 100 200 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT opi 6 o STEPHEN EE N P�p' , . A4B � DATE i� E 383042 ° JJJ N 679028 i ;6 N 67900 z i a � #� E 382942 W N 679028 = i� E 382942 N 678928 b 21 z _ �J TARGET DISPOSAL WITHIN THIS REGION �Sa 1/13/121 GK :OMM N0. 8500.83 MEET: 38 s9tso 2 U O R {Wmay = O 0 O m w i 2 Co ZZ _ jkl O N W N z $ n F U z tlR� z rci Z N SI �og v � � c d a�8 c bxW.'J„IW„ w..be. .o.or.n xac-sb eae �. -m -.� Sosl -11 t w-xoo u -ee -ma w -n -x1 xi b0 ]pi Wt1 -L1 I b -OL -1 0, web oz -ce�n b.b -v-c b exs -cb 1n m -16-ro ce -b -u 9 e -Od Lb-t -11 9 n01- eb It�b -M lebl -ri S 901 -16 91-16 - . 16 -01 -L1 t 99-16 9-Ib'tl 69M1 t � 531OM ObIbOZ sao,nosa9 oi6oloao4odo m ouols!4 6u!lou6!sop ao9nos dlunoo __________ ________ ,op!l�o a4l ajo sdoV4 Rl!l!gogojd oo16oioao4Djv /o!�ls!H a41 2OH10 �NINOZ = NOIS1�3�1 1Sd� O W 2 g ti w W W 9 Z \ o U " N W W Z F- N �$ O sao,nosa9 oi6oloao4odo m ouols!4 6u!lou6!sop ao9nos dlunoo __________ ________ ,op!l�o a4l ajo sdoV4 Rl!l!gogojd oo16oioao4Djv /o!�ls!H a41 2OH10 �NINOZ = NOIS1�3�1 1Sd� Appendix No. 5 Barefoot Beach Land Management Plan is Provided on CD Appendix No. 6 Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park Unit Management Plan is Provided on CD Appendix No. 7 Benthic Resource (Seagrass) Surveys n 4-1 SITE VISIT FOR WIGGINS PASS DREDGING PROJECT FIELD OBSERVATION REPORT Date of Assessment: September 29, 2011 Project: Wiggins Pass Dredging Project Location: Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL CPE Commission No.: 143561 Representatives: Jessica Craft (CPE), Mark Sramek (NMFS), Pamela Keyes (Collier County), Lauren Diaz ( USACE), Bob Steiger (Delnor- Wiggins State Park) CPE representative Jessica Craft, Pamela Keyes (Collier County) and Mark Sramek (NMFS) conducted a site visit in Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL. The purpose of the site visit was to observe any resources within Wiggins Pass (Figure 1) and discuss with agencies any project concerns. The tide was coming in and the current within the pass was particularly strong; therefore, the three attendees began a snorkel just outside the mouth of the inlet and drifted inward along the north shoreline to observe any benthic resources. Shoal grass (Halodule wrightii) was observed in similar distribution to previous surveys. However, two patches were observed during this visit which were not observed during the 2009 site visit (CPE), but which had been observed in 2007 (Passarella & Assoc.); the approximate locations of these seagrass patches are designated with red X's on Figure 1. These seagrass observations will be added to benthic resource figures for the project area and submitted in support of the permit application. One particular spot was a small patch (approx.. 3 ft X 4 ft) of H. wrightii on the shallow littoral shelf approximately 50 ft NW of Channel Marker 5. The second small patch (approx.. 3 ft X 6 ft) of H. wrightii was located deeper into the inlet near the mangroves, on shallow sandy substrate among clumps of oysters. Sand placement activities in these areas will take into consideration the location of these seagrass resources. No paddle grass (Halophila decipiens) was observed during this site visit; it was acknowledged by Mr. Sramek that this species is highly ephemeral and so is not expected to be observed during all surveys. At the end of the swim, Mr. Sramek indicated that he would need to evaluate the offshore sand placement template with regards to the nearshore hardbottom south of the inlet, but otherwise had no objections with the project. After the swim was completed, the three attendees visited Delnor- Wiggins State Park and met with Lauren Diaz ( USACE) and Bob Steiger (Delnor- Wiggins State Park). The attendees first sat and discussed the project while reviewing figures. Mrs. Diaz indicated that the permit for the interim dredging conducted over the winter of 2011 was never signed. She requested this be resolved and that a report detailing the work conducted be submitted. At this point Mr. Sramek departed and the rest of the group walked the beach at the northern end of the park along the inlet. Ms. Diaz indicated that the USACE would like the application resubmitted and to make sure all drawings are 8 '/z x 11 in and in black and white. She also indicted that they would need to see alternatives analyses. Mr. Steiger indicated he would like to see sand placed at the northern end of the park, and at a point slightly south that is experiencing erosion. After the site meeting, Mrs. Craft visited Carolyn Shaw, a park employee who had previously provided shorebird data to CPE. Mrs. Shaw indicated that the bird data collection effort was sporadic prior to 2010 and that it is now more structured with set data entry sheets. They conduct the surveys simultaneously with sea turtle nest surveys during the summer months. She requested input on designing their bird surveys. No shorebirds have been observed nesting in some years. A single snowy plover was observed recently on the beach by Park employees. 2 Figure 1. Location map. BENTHIC RESOURCES SURVEY FOR WIGGINS PASS DREDGING PROJECT FIELD OBSERVATION REPORT Date of Assessment: July 13 -14, 2009 Project: Wiggins Pass Dredging Project Location: Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL CPE Commission No.: 8500.63 CPE Representatives: Jessica Craft (Principal Biologist.), Jared Lambert (Surveyor), Steve Miller (Dive Assistance), Wilson Foster (Survey Intern) 1.0 INTRODUCTION This resource investigation report was prepared in support of the JCP permit application submitted on behalf of Collier County for the proposed reconfiguration of Wiggins Pass, located near the northern County line on the Gulf of Mexico (Figure 1). The primary objective was to survey for the presence and extent of seagrass in the project area during the growing season. Project Setting The pass is bounded by Barefoot Beach Preserve County Park to the north and by Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park to the south. The existing channel meanders to the north and follows the shoreline along Barefoot Beach, which is currently experiencing severe erosion problems. A steep scarp is present along the southern gulf portion of the beach within the park, and wraps around the southern point into the mouth of the pass. A wide sandy shoal is present on the south side of the channel adjacent to the Delnor- Wiggins Pass beach, and is frequented by various shorebirds including pelicans (Pelicanus occidentalis), and various species of gulls and terns (Photograph 1). The gulf- adjacent portion of the shoreline on the south side of the channel is characterized by a dune vegetation community including sea oats (Uniola paniculata), seaside purslane (Sesuvium portulacastrum), sea blite (Sueda linearis) and other seaside herbs and grasses. Landward of the foredune, the vegetation transitions into coastal strand community consisting of small trees and shrubs, such as buttonwoods (Conocarpus erectus) and seagrapes (Cocoloba uvifera); this vegetative community then gives way to a narrow fringe of maritime hammock with cabbage palms (Sabal palmetto) as the predominant tree species. These upland species are separated from the estuarine waters to the east by white (Laguncularia racemosa), black (Avicennia germinans), and red mangroves (Rhizophora mangle). Dune vegetation is scarce along the north side of the channel due to the steep scarping occurring there. Cabbage palms and other hardwoods occupy the top of the scarp. Red mangroves line the pass along all interior shorelines (Photograph 2). P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 1 IM Photograph 1. View of the shoreline on south side of Wiggins Pass. Dune vegetation including sea oats (Uniola paniculata) can be seen adjacent to the shoreline, with hardwood trees and shrubs in the background, followed by mangroves. The sandy shoal seen in the foreground is frequented by various shorebirds. Photograph 2. Dense red mangroves (Rhizophora wangle) bordering the shoreline along the north side of Wiggins Pass. is P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 3 Habitat The estuarine system found at Wiggins Pass is an important aquatic habitat, providing shelter for the developmental stages of juvenile fish as well as feedings grounds for various marine and estuarine species. Common snook (Centropomus undecimalis) is a species commonly found in estuaries and adjacent rivers, and small juvenile snook prefer low- energy, shallow waters near seagrass beds and overhanging vegetation, such as mangroves (Muller, 2000). Although not listed as threatened or endangered, various agencies and local stakeholder group have expressed concern over the snook, since the pass provides important habitat to the species, which can be found in most life stages in the estuaries of the Naples area. Due to the importance of seagrass and mangrove habitat of the type found in Wiggins Pass, a benthic resource survey is required in support of the permit application for the project activities described below. A preliminary seagrass survey was conducted by CPE in December 2008. However, this survey occurred outside the growing season and thus the most recent survey was conducted in July, near the peak of the seagrass growing season, to determine the full extent of seagrass growth within the project area. Project History The County currently holds a 10 -year permit issued by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (No. 0142538- 001 -JC) on January 12, 2000, to widen and deepen Wiggins Pass, with subsequent maintenance dredging every two years to maintain navigable water depths for recreational boaters. Dredging operations were subsequently completed in September 2000, November 2002, December 2004, November 2006, and March 2009. However, a hydrodynamic study of Wiggins Pass conducted by Humiston & Moore (2007) recommended the reestablishment of the inlet in a more naturally occurring configuration that existed 30 years ago, and that coastal protection structures be installed on Barefoot Beach to contain local erosion. Furthermore, a recent numerical modeling study conducted by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE, 2009) indicated that improvements of navigation conditions and mitigation of erosion of Wiggins Pass could be achieved by redesigning the navigation channel and modifying the placement location of the dredged material; the study determined that a straight navigation channel with smaller dimensions than the current dredge template would be optimal. Dredging through the flood shoal is required for this alternative, as well as the construction of temporary sand dikes to block the existing channel meander and marginal swash channels that wrap around the end of Barefoot Beach. Fill placement on Barefoot Beach closer to the inlet is also recommended as a means of mitigating erosion problems in this area. See Figure 2 for the proposed dredge and fill template. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements'UCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28 -1 \seagrass Survey_081709.docx 4 H m 2.0 METHODS Benthic Substrate Investigation The geology and bottom type of Wiggins Pass have been described previously by others (Athena Technologies, 2006; CEC, 1990; USACE, 1980), primarily through the results of various substrate cores and borings. Two areas near the opening of the pass have been of particular concern: one area near the mouth of the inlet originally identified as a limestone platform; and a second area further up the pass and suspected to be a hardbottom outcropping (Figure 2). These areas were investigated during the 2009 survey conducted by CPE. The first site was verified in situ as dense shell hash; a biologist using snorkel employed the use of a metal meter -stick to probe the sediment and penetrated down to 25 cm depth (the investigating biologist could not force the ruler farther into the sediment, due to the dense shell material). No ledge of any kind was found at the second site during the initial in situ investigation; however, an area of sand with scattered mound -like formations covered by turf algae was observed from the drop- camera system (method described below under Seagrass Mapping). A subsequent diver - investigation took place on August 12. Results are described below. Jet - probes around each site were also conducted, and revealed a hard layer approximately 3 ft below the sediment surface at the first site; no hard substrate was found at the second site until nearly 12 ft below the sediment surface. Further results of the jet -probe investigations are included in the permit application for the project, which show the hard substrate extending across the mouth of the inlet from north to south. Mangrove Delineation To determine the bottom topography within Wiggins Pass and locate the edge of vegetation, primarily mangroves, CPE surveyors conducted bathymetric and topographic surveys which included locating the edge -of- vegetation using Trimble Real -Time Kinematics Global Positioning System (RTK GPS). These results may be used to delineate the vertical and horizontal extent of mangrove vegetation within the project area and determine any benefits or impacts to the mangroves as a result of the project. The surveyed location of the edge -of- vegetation is shown in Figure 2. A certified topographic and hydrographic survey is presented under separate cover (2009 Wiggins Pass Annual Monitoring Topographic and Hydrographic Survey Report). Seagrass Mapping Due to strong currents, poor visibility and high boat traffic within the channel itself, an underwater drop- camera was deployed and towed behind the vessel, rather than placing a diver in the water under these hazardous conditions. The drop- camera, a SeaViewer integrated underwater video system, is equipped to display and record real -time coordinates when connected to DGPS, so that the location of any benthic resource observed can be recorded and plotted later in GIS. This camera system was towed for the length of the main channel and side channels within the project area. In addition to the coordinates recorded on the camera, any resource observed was also recorded in HYPACK® navigational software and plotted on the project map (Figure 2). Once the navigational channels were surveyed using the drop- camera system, a qualified marine biologist using snorkel surveyed the shallow areas between the channels and the mangrove edges P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 5 within the proposed project area for seagrasses and other benthic resources (i.e. shellfish beds, hardbottom, etc.), using a meandering /roving swim method. The biologist was accompanied by a trained survey technician. The location of any seagrasses identified by the biologist was marked by the technician using RTK GPS. Small patches ( <10 ft. in diameter), were marked on- center and the area visually estimated. Moderately -sized patches were delineated in their entirety. In the interest of expediency, large beds, such as that in the area near the southeast corner of mangroves where the southern side channel turns off from the main channel (see Figure 2), were delineated along their waterward edge and the landward extent visually estimated by a biologist. Each species of seagrass present was identified, and quadrats (1 /2m) were haphazardly tossed within a sampling of areas to roughly estimate the density of seagrass observed. Areas of oysters were also documented. Representative underwater photographs of resources were taken, where visibility allowed. 3.0 RESULTS No exposed hardbottom was found at any location within the project area during the in situ investigation; however, loose mound -like material covered in turf algae was observed on the towed drop- camera near the entrance to the channel (see Figure 2; Photographs 3 -4; additional still shots frame - grabbed from the integrated video system can be found in Appendix A). A subsequent diver investigation was conducted approximately one month later by a CPE geologist. Immediately upon descending large dark outcrops in the sand were observed throughout the area. These dark outcrops were firm to the touch and appeared to be an organic matrix material. These outcrops were covered in widespread, dark - colored turf algae and is appeared to have been uncovered for some time. Approximately 5 ft from the original drop point, the outcrops gave way to a ledge formation, nearly parallel with the channel alignment, with an approximate 5 -ft elevation change. The material was firm and appeared to be stabilizing the substrate. Sand and shell hash was observed in between the outcrops throughout the area. A representative sample of the material was taken and analyzed as a soft organic clay, with little peat content, trace shell hash, and of black coloration (2.5Y- 2.5/1; OL); this material has been observed elsewhere in the region, including Doctor's Pass (south of Wiggins Pass in Collier County), and the nearshore of Big Hickory Island in Lee County. Photographs 3 -4. Macroalgae- covered organic clay substrate observed with the drop- camera system near the mouth of Wiggins Pass. is P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass ImprovementsVCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 6 No seagrass was observed within the main or side channels of Wiggins Pass. The channel bottom ranged from a mucky substrate, to fine sand, to coarse shell hash. Occasional clumps of oysters and macroalgae were observed. No seagrass was observed on the shallow shelf along the north side of the main channel, either (Photograph 5); however, most of the shallow protected areas fringing the channel and mangrove islands were found to support seagrass, primarily shoal grass (Halodule wrightd), in sparse to moderate density (Figure 2; Photograph 6). One small patch of paddle grass (Halophila decipiens) was found at the northeast corner of Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park. Results of the 2009 investigation reflect the results of previous resource surveys conducted by others (Appendix 28 -1 -B). The investigation conducted by CPE in 2008 also found similar patterns of seagrass growth, although the density was much lower due to winter senescence during the time of the survey. In addition to seagrasses, the Eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica was also found, sometimes in dense beds, around the shallow mangrove islands at the eastern end of the main channel (Photograph 7). Table 1 below gives the approximate density of each seagrass species observed at each location. Although the entire project area was surveyed for resources, the areas containing seagrasses and/or oysters are labeled Areas 1 -6, for ease of reference. Photograph 5. Turf and macroalgae (Cauterpa prolifera) growing on sandy shelf along north side of Wiggins Pass main channel. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 7 u Photograph 6. Shoal grass (Halodule wrightit) observed throughout the project area. Photograph 7. Eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica) observed throughout the project area. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass ImprovementsVCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 8 Table 1. Summary of resources found at each area, and aimroximate densitv of each Area 1 contained a long seagrass bed of H. wrightii in sparse -to- moderate density (10 % -40% cover) along the shallow shelf waterward of the mangroves there. The eastern oyster was (C. virginica) was found in sparse density near the mangrove roots. Area 2 contained little seagrass with the exception of one small and one moderate -sized patch of H. wrightii, both in sparse -to- moderate density (10 % -30% cover). Oysters were found in small, dense clumps in the shallow water surrounding most of the mangrove islands in this area. Area 3 supported one moderate - sized patch of H. wrightii in its interior. Oysters were found in relatively dense concentration along the interior mangrove line, and one large, densely packed area near the channel edge. Area 4 contained H. wrightii in very sparse, but consistent distribution along the shallow shelf between the mangroves and channel boundary, with some scattered oysters around the mangrove roots. A large area of H. wrightii of varying density and cover was found in Area 5, which consists of a shallow, wide embayment into the mangroves. The seagrass became sparser toward the back (landward side) of the embayment, where the sediment became muckier and where large clumps of floating macroalgae were found. As in the previously described areas, oysters were present in varying densities along the mangrove roots to either side of the embayment. Area 6 consisted of a very narrow shelf adjacent to the mangroves located along the western boundary of the southern side channel. H. wrightii was found in very sparse density in this area. Occasional live oysters were found near the mangrove roots, although most were empty shells scattered in the sediment. A single small patch of Halophila decipiens was observed adjacent to the northeast comer of the mangroves where the southern side channel connects to the main channel. The locations of seagrass and oyster resources are found in Figure 2. Additional wildlife observed during the investigation is presented in Table 2 below. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 9 AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3 AREA 4 AREA 5 AREA 6 Halodule Halodule Halodule Halodule Halodule Species wrightii wrightii wrightii wrightii Halodule wrightii wrightii Sparse- Sparse- Sparse- Very Very Density Moderate Moderate Moderate Sparse Very Sparse- Moderate Sparse Percent Cover 10 % -40% 10 % -30% 10 % -20% <10% 1 <10 % -20% <10% Crassostrea Crassostrea Crassostrea Crassostrea virginica Halophila Species virginica virginica virginica decipiens Moderate- Very Density Sparse Dense Dense Sparse: scattered underneath mangrove roots Sparse Percent 'Area 5 also contained dense clumps of Cover N/A N/A N/A N/A floating macroal ae in the back cove area <10% Area 1 contained a long seagrass bed of H. wrightii in sparse -to- moderate density (10 % -40% cover) along the shallow shelf waterward of the mangroves there. The eastern oyster was (C. virginica) was found in sparse density near the mangrove roots. Area 2 contained little seagrass with the exception of one small and one moderate -sized patch of H. wrightii, both in sparse -to- moderate density (10 % -30% cover). Oysters were found in small, dense clumps in the shallow water surrounding most of the mangrove islands in this area. Area 3 supported one moderate - sized patch of H. wrightii in its interior. Oysters were found in relatively dense concentration along the interior mangrove line, and one large, densely packed area near the channel edge. Area 4 contained H. wrightii in very sparse, but consistent distribution along the shallow shelf between the mangroves and channel boundary, with some scattered oysters around the mangrove roots. A large area of H. wrightii of varying density and cover was found in Area 5, which consists of a shallow, wide embayment into the mangroves. The seagrass became sparser toward the back (landward side) of the embayment, where the sediment became muckier and where large clumps of floating macroalgae were found. As in the previously described areas, oysters were present in varying densities along the mangrove roots to either side of the embayment. Area 6 consisted of a very narrow shelf adjacent to the mangroves located along the western boundary of the southern side channel. H. wrightii was found in very sparse density in this area. Occasional live oysters were found near the mangrove roots, although most were empty shells scattered in the sediment. A single small patch of Halophila decipiens was observed adjacent to the northeast comer of the mangroves where the southern side channel connects to the main channel. The locations of seagrass and oyster resources are found in Figure 2. Additional wildlife observed during the investigation is presented in Table 2 below. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 9 Table 2. Observed wildlife within the project area during the time of the investigation. 4.0 DISCUSSION Comparison of past resource surveys shows that the distribution, density, and species of seagrass present in the project area varies from year to year, and shows distinct seasonality (denser growth during the summer months). Although three species of seagrass have been found in the past (Halodule wrightii, Halophila decipiens, and Thalassia testudinum), only H. wrightii and H. decipiens were found during the July 2009 investigation conducted by CPE. It was also evident during this survey that H. wrightii is currently the predominant species of seagrass present within the project area, although other species may fluctuate in density and cover with time. It should be noted that the proposed dredge template shown in Figure 2 is an approximation of the actual dredge cut. The final template has yet to be designed; the location of biological resources including seagrasses, mangroves, and oysters will be taken into consideration during the final design process in effort to avoid these resources to the extent practicable. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Fes, Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 10 COMMON NAME SPECIES FISH Redfish Sciaenops ocellatus Grey Snapper Lutjanus griseus Sheepshead Archosargus probatocephalus Spadefish Chaetodipterus faber Searobin Ouv.) Prionotus sp. Mojarra Eucinostomus spp. Various baitfish Clupeidae, Engraulidae, Atherinidae Stingray Das atus s . INVERTEBRATES Nine -armed Sea Star Luidia senegalensis Crown Conch Melongena corona Swimming Crab Portunidae Lightning Whelk Busycon contrarium Cerith Snail Cerithiidae MAMMALS Florida Manatee Trichechus manatus latirostrus Bottlenose Dolphin Tursio sis truncatus BIRDS Brown Pelican Pelicanus occidentalis Great Egret Ardea alba Tricolored Heron Egretta tricolor Snowy Egret Egretta thula Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Little Green Heron Butorides striatus Various Gulls and Terns Laridae 4.0 DISCUSSION Comparison of past resource surveys shows that the distribution, density, and species of seagrass present in the project area varies from year to year, and shows distinct seasonality (denser growth during the summer months). Although three species of seagrass have been found in the past (Halodule wrightii, Halophila decipiens, and Thalassia testudinum), only H. wrightii and H. decipiens were found during the July 2009 investigation conducted by CPE. It was also evident during this survey that H. wrightii is currently the predominant species of seagrass present within the project area, although other species may fluctuate in density and cover with time. It should be noted that the proposed dredge template shown in Figure 2 is an approximation of the actual dredge cut. The final template has yet to be designed; the location of biological resources including seagrasses, mangroves, and oysters will be taken into consideration during the final design process in effort to avoid these resources to the extent practicable. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass Improvements\JCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural Fes, Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 10 REFERENCES CPE (Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc.), .2009. Wiggins Pass, Collier County, FL, Numerical Modeling and Wave Propagation, Currents and Morphology Changes, Phase II: Numerical Modeling of Alternatives. Prepared for Collier County, FL, by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, 89 pp. H &M ( Humiston & Moore Engineers), 2007. Wiggins Pass Study, Hydraulic and Sand Transport Modeling. Report prepared for Board of County Commissioners, Collier County, FL by Humiston & Moore, Naples, FL, 47 pp. Muller, R.G., 2000. The 2000 Stock Assessment Update of the Common Snook, Centropomus undecimalis. A report to the Florida Marine Research Institute, July 12, 2000. 19 pp. P: \Collier \850063 Design and Permitting for Wiggins Pass ImprovementsUCP Form\ATTACHMENT 28 - Natural u Community\APPENDIX 28- 1 \Seagrass Survey_081709.docx 11 APPENDIX 28 -1 -A STILL FRAMES GRABBED FROM INTEGRATED VIDEO Macroalgae- covered rubble on top of sand substrate in channel rw R Shell-hash substrate typical near the Ew. mouth of Wiggins Pass } r: LM 3, =1110C -1 73, '011 11,11310 alon- F 0 l Organic clay formation inside thle channel Close -up view of turf algae covering organic clay ledge within channel CI • Green macroalgae Caulerpa prolifera growing on sediment in channel APPENDIX 28 -1 -B PAST RESOURCE STUDIES I sEi w Zi .x%x, tk*rA--:y 0 AY I !CUR-:7 '>,"I HABrrATS AWACENT TO WIGGINS PASS F?I�t4F_jMK;i. JW.', - ROCA RATMO�AIWO1 k'VK"1NW-U Resource map from Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan, prepared by CPE, 1995. =CONfIRW-0 ARM M Sf-'AnTRE) SJ�AOI?ASaF-A I TT =SCAFRFO AUSTPA14N INNIL SO MING(f fYiE-5 9 14 EMUMAND VVOEMIOIN Www%AjT4C kAuwx.K % VX1 I/D%NE ?401E , tjWT,',9,CMDW ARIA*; i_rjcATFI) qrl'ADi R-22) AND R-11 y&RU ktAPKV W (PASTA; r"GN EERW., INC WjING SIDE $CAN SONAR ON 'UNE '904 CULF OF M]"'Xif"o I sEi w Zi .x%x, tk*rA--:y 0 AY I !CUR-:7 '>,"I HABrrATS AWACENT TO WIGGINS PASS F?I�t4F_jMK;i. JW.', - ROCA RATMO�AIWO1 k'VK"1NW-U Resource map from Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan, prepared by CPE, 1995. 34' AT LLJ Oy • lL E 0 CN . O Z M 0 -J, E (A 7 C6 P% 0 ca < :r ul Z L... CL 46 Go ia • • C4 PASSARELLA 9 & ASSOCIATES X July 18, 2007 Mr. Kenneth K. Humiston Humiston & Moore Engineers 5679 Strand Court Naples, Florida 34110 RE: Wiggins Pass Project No. 06HME1550 Dear Ken: Per your request, Passarella & Associates, Inc. conducted a seagrass survey near Wiggins Pass on July 12,'2007 from approximately 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Two to three ecologists conducted snorkeling transects in the survey area Due to boat traffic within the survey area, deeper areas of the channel were "spot checked" and not transected. An aerial with seagrass locations and photographs of seagrass at selected locations IS' attached as Exhibit 1. Underwater visibility during the survey period varied from two feet to less than a, foot. Three species of seagrass were identified within or immediately adjacent to the survey aiea: shoal grass (Halodule wrightic), turtle grass (Tlralassia testudinum), and paddle grass (Halophila deciplens) (Exhibit 1). Live oyster (Crassostrea virginica) and algal beds were also identified within and adjacent to the survey area and are depicted on Exhibit 1. Green algae (Caulerpa mexicana and C. prolifera) was found in scattered locations throughout the survey area and associated within the seagrass. Turtle grass was identified in one location and by only a single individual plant. The identified grass beds appeared to be very localized (typically limited to an area of less than two square meters) and limited to the areas depicted on Exhibit 1. The single largest grass bed identified within the survey area was composed of paddlegrass. The substrate was primarily composed of sand and broken shells. Living organisms observed in the survey area include common snook (Centropomus undecimalis), redfish (Sciaenops ocellatus), mangrove snapper (Ls amm griseus), sheepshead (Archosargas probatocephalus), scaled sardines' (Harengula jaguana), mullet (Mugd sp.), bottlenose dolphin (Turstops truncatus), Southern stingray (Dasyatis americana), lightning whelk (Busycon contrarium), Florida fighting conch (Strombus alatus), and sea hate (Suborder Anaspidea). 9110 College Pointe Court . Fort Myers, Florida 33919 • Phone: (239) 274 -0067 • Fax: (239) 274 -0069 www passarella.net Mr. Kenneth K. Humiston July 18, 2007 Page 2 Should you have any ,questions regarding this information, please do not 4esitate to contact Mt. Sincerely, PASSARELLA & ASSOCIATES, INC. a&4, Andrew Woodruff Vice President AW /pz Enclosure Appendix No. 8 Collier County Dive Investigations — September 8, 2010 MEMORANDUM To: Valdimir Kosmynin, Ph.D., FDEP Comm No.: 8500.73 From: Pamela Keyes, Environmental Specialist, Collier County Date: September 9, 2010 Re: Wiggins Pass Hardbottom Mapping Below is a summary from the hardbottom investigation dive performed on September 8, 2010. Attached is map of the transect lines as well as the corresponding GPS points. We dove R- 10 +500, R -11, R -11 +500, and R -12. The transects were all 600' long and located 400' feet offshore. The visibility was in the one foot range so we were not able to get any video. R -10 +500 — From the "out" point to 100' before the "mid" point hardbottom was found. Immediately following the hardbottom approximately 4 inch thick mud was found for the rest of the transect. R -11 — Hardbottom was found from the "out" point to 75' past the "mid" point. This included one foot of relief. Immediately following the hardbottom mud approximately 4" thick was found throughout the rest of the transect. R -11 +500 — No hardbottom was found and most of the transect was covered in mud. R -12 — No hardbottom was found and most of the transect was covered in mud. Hardbottom Investigation Points • Appendix No. 9 Statement of Consistency with the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP) STATEMENT OF CONISTENCY WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY GROWTH MANGEMENT PLAN WIGGINS PASS MAINTENANCE DREDGING AND NAVIGATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (ST- PL20120000168) . I. INTRODUCTION Overall GMP Consistency This Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project is consistent with the Collier County Growth Management Plan (GMP), specifically with the goals and objectives of both the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) and the Future Land Use Element (FLUE). This project is consistent with several of the stated goals of the CCME, including: protection of natural resources; protection of surface and estuarine water resources; protection of native vegetation and wildlife habitat; protection of fisheries and wildlife; and protection of coastal resources. This project will restore eroded shorelines, creating and stabilizing habitats which can be colonized by vegetation and utilized by wildlife such as shorebirds and nesting sea turtles. The straightening of the channel will increase flushing through the estuary, improving water quality. The project is also consistent with the Conservation Designation contained within the FLUE. The overall purpose of the Conservation Designation is to conserve and maintain the natural resources of Collier County and their associated environmental, and recreational and economic benefits. The Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project will not destroy or unacceptably degrade the inherent functional values in Wiggins Pass or along the adjacent shorelines. The project is designed to improve and restore the functional value of this area, and to conserve and maintain the natural resources located within and adjacent to Wiggins Pass. Details on how this project is consistent with the CCME and FLUE are provided below in Sections II and III, respectively. These sections have been prepared under guidance provided by Stephen Lenberger and Michele R. Mosca, AICP, of the Collier County Land Development Services Department. Project Description The Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project is a non- structural alternative designed with the following goals: 1. To provide a safe channel for boating 2. To address erosion at Barefoot Beach 3. To lengthen the dredge cycle, accomplished with the least impact on the environment 4. To provide a solution that is economically effective =nor Wiggins Pass is currently dredged at regular intervals of approximately 2 years to maintain navigable depths for recreational boaters. The pass provides boat access to the Gulf from inland waterways and lagoons at Vanderbilt Beach, the Cocohatchee River, Wiggins Pass Marina, and several other private and public marinas and ramps. The dredged channel extends from the inlet throat to about 1,200 feet offshore. Periodic dredging has occurred at the intersection of the interior channels. Historic disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R -11.4 to R -14.2 and south of the inlet between R -18 and R -20.5. The inlet has been dredged for navigation since 1984 under two previous permits. The plan will improve current inlet management practices and reduce cumulative maintenance dredging impacts. The current and historic inlet and shoreline conditions were evaluated in order to develop an improved inlet management strategy. A complete coastal study was performed in conjunction with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) process. This study included an engineering report and two modeling reports. The 2012 engineering report contains a refined modeling report that was based upon the initial 2009 modeling study. The 2009 report also contains minutes and details from the special sub- committee of the Coastal Advisory Committee (CAC) formed to representative a broad range of interests within Collier County. This committee was appointed by the Board of County Commissioners. This proposed Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project design modifies and improves upon the County approved 1995 Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan. This project includes channel realignment which will be accomplished by straightening the inlet channel layout and infilling and blocking the northern flood shoal meander (Figure 1). The east, north, and south interior channel entrances will be identified for maintenance dredging, should sand shoal within their respective boundaries. The designated dredge disposal locations and distribution will be modified and relocated based on shoreline monitoring results, with preference given to areas with greatest need. Incorporating the flexibility to modify disposal locations will increase management flexibility, reduce sediment loss to the system, and minimize impacts to Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park shoreline. Nearshore and beach (onshore) disposal areas are located north of the inlet between R -12 to R -15.5 and south of the inlet between R -18 and R -20 (Figure 1). Placement of sand on the Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park shoreline will be determined by the State in an updated Inlet Management Plan. An ebb shoal disposal area has also been designated to assist in restoring the northern ebb shoal and stabilizing the Barefoot Beach shoreline (Figure 1). A separate offshore disposal area has been designated as an acceptable location to place unsuitable fill dredged from the channel. Scarp repair is proposed along southern Barefoot Beach to restore the beach to historic conditions. A dynamic channel design will be incorporated into the maintenance plan for the inlet so that long- term dredging can be reduced. Impacts to natural resources will be avoided or minimized. C26 c= I I F LOOD SHOAL DISPOSAL AREA I BAREFOOT BEACH /� C33 I PRESERVE D_L NOR -W IGGINS \ PASS STATE PARK �— SCARP REPAIR DREDGE - PRIMARY (NORTH) AREA .- - -- / - - NEARSHORE AND BEACH SECONDARY (SOUTH) If DISPOSAL AREA NEARSHORE AND BEACH / EBB SHOAL DISPCSAL AREA / / - � ` DISPOSAL AREA GULF .�15_)__ OF i! MEX ICO r NOTE:0KS"ORE DEPOW FiUM£ aJ�. Figure 1. Project Component Map IL CONSERVATION AND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT (CCME) GOAL 10: THE COUNTY SHALL PROTECT, CONSERVE, MANAGE, AND APPROPRIATELY USE ITS COASTAL BARRIERS INCLUDING SHORELINES, BEACHES AND DUNES AND WILL PLAN FOR, AND WHERE APPROPRIATE, WILL RESTRICT ACTIVITIES WHERE SUCH ACTIVITIES WILL DAMAGE OR DESTROY COASTAL RESOURCES. OBJECTIVE 10.3: Undeveloped coastal barriers shall be maintained predominantly in their natural state and their natural function shall be protected, maintained and enhanced. Project Consistency with CCME Objective 10.3: This project implements a non- structural alternative to protect and maintain Barefoot Beach Preserve and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park shorelines. One of the main goals of the project is to reduce erosion due to the inlet's migration. By reducing erosion at areas adjacent to the pass, the beaches at Barefoot Beach Preserve can be restored to their natural conditions. Barefoot Beach is currently designated as critically eroded, and the proposed beach fill activities will help restore the shoreline to its natural state. Since 1992, the shoreline north of the inlet at Barefoot Beach has retreated on average approximately 87 feet. The area between R -14 and R -16 has experienced high rates of erosion, with the worst area of erosion occurring at R -16, where it has lost approximately 437 feet of shoreline since 1992. The higher losses that have occurred since 1992 can be attributed to the northern migration of the channel meander and past inlet management practices, which allowed for an approximate even disposal of dredged material to the north and south shorelines. Based on further analysis, it appears that in order to alleviate the erosion to the north, approximately 2.65 times more dredged material needs to be placed on the shorelines to the north than the south. The erosion has impacted the vegetation at Barefoot Beach, which is being lost due to the northward migration of Wiggins Pass, which has moved approximately 100 feet since the 1970's. Overall, the increased erosion on the Gulf beaches north of the inlet has caused approximately 10 acres of vegetation to be lost since 1992, with 3.2 acres of that loss occurring since 2002. The shoreline recession on South Barefoot Beach has caused vegetation loss, primarily mangroves, and it has also created a dangerous scarp along the shoreline that is hazardous to park users. Along with the loss of vegetation, walking paths that were present in 1973 at Barefoot Beach have been eroded away and are no longer present in several areas to the west and south. This affect's the public's accessibility to the County Park and enjoyment of nature along the former loop path. The proposed project will aid in reducing the erosional stresses on the Barefoot Beach shoreline, which will reduce shoreline and vegetation impacts due to the meander. Approximately 0.3 acres of mangroves have been lost in the last 3 -4 decades. The shoreline along Delnor- Wiggins State Park has not encountered the same erosional stress found on Barefoot Beach; however, the proposed project includes the flexibility to address any potential future erosion south of the inlet with nearshore and/or onshore sediment disposal along Delnor- Wiggins State Park shoreline as needed. Straightening the channel will relieve erosion stresses on the mangroves at Barefoot Beach interior shoreline and the northwest point at Delnor- Wiggins State Park. A straightened channel will mimic natural conditions from 60 -80 years ago. The improved bypassing plan and ratio will reduce and mitigate the high erosion at Barefoot Beach. Policy 10.3.2: Any development activities on an undeveloped coastal barrier must be compatible with protection of the natural form and function of the coastal barrier system. Project Consistency with Policy 10.3.2: This project includes placement of beach compatible fill on the undeveloped coastal barrier islands, which will aid in restoring, protecting and increasing the natural form and functions of the coastal barrier system. Policy 10.3.4: Public expenditures within Collier County's undeveloped coastal barrier system shall be limited to acquisition for purposes of public safety, education, restoration, and removal of exotic vegetation, recreational use, and/or research facilities. Such uses will be allowed only if the establishment of such use would not substantially alter the natural characteristics and natural functions of the undeveloped coastal barrier system. Project Consistency with Policy 10.3.4: This project aims to increase public safety (commercial and recreational boating safety in the Pass and safety of visitors to Barefoot Beach Preserve), to restore eroding shoreline habitat and to protect the shoreline of Barefoot Beach for recreational use. The existing navigation channel alignment and dredge disposal practices must be modified to improve navigation performance and reduce impacts to adjacent shorelines. Repairing the erosion and scarps along Barefoot Beach shoreline will also increase the safety for visitors who visit the park for recreational purposes. This project will not substantially alter the natural characteristics and natural functions of the undeveloped coastal barrier system. Maintaining a safe navigation channel through Wiggins Pass is a high priority for the County. Not only is a navigable channel of importance to the coastal community for recreational purposes, it also serves to support commercial boating within the area. The existing meander (S -curve) in the channel is detrimental to safe navigation and causes impacts to the adjacent shoreline. Under the current dredging plan, boats with less than 3 foot draft will have trouble navigating the Pass within the next two years, worsened by the fact that the deepest channel depths are difficult to locate. Safety of boaters utilizing the Wiggins Pass basin is a priority for this project. According to the FWC's Annual Boating Accidents Statistical Reports, five accidents have occurred in the Wiggins Pass area from 2007 to 2010, three of which resulted in injury. The proposed channel realignment would result in a straight channel, which is easier to navigate than the current S -curve. The proposed fill activities at Barefoot Beach will aid in restoring a shoreline that has been designated as critically eroded by the State. The fill activities will increase beach width of the southern portion of Barefoot Beach and restore the shoreline to its original state. The Barefoot Beach scarp repair will address public safety concerns which have resulted from the high erosion experienced along the southern shoreline. The added beach from restoration activities at Barefoot Beach Preserve and Delnor- Wiggins State Park will also provide more shoreline for recreational uses for park goers. Policy 10.3.9: Native vegetation on undeveloped coastal barriers should be preserved. To the extent that native vegetation is lost during land development activities and the remaining native vegetation can be supplemented without damaging or degrading its natural function, any native vegetation lost during construction shall be replaced by supplementing with compatible native vegetation on site. All exotic vegetation shall be removed and replaced with native vegetation where appropriate. Project Consistency with Policy 10.3.9: This project does not include the removal of any vegetation, and will actually preserve vegetation by stabilizing and restoring areas of Barefoot Beach shoreline where erosion has resulted in the loss of vegetation. Erosion has impacted the vegetation at Barefoot Beach where the northward migration of the flood channel has moved approximately 100 feet since the 1970's. The mangroves have retreated a total of 52 feet since 1973 and 13 feet since 2002, accounting for a loss of approximately 0.3 acres. On the Gulf, the vegetation has retreated 194 feet at some locations since 1973, and 123 feet in the last 8 years. Overall, the increased erosion north of the inlet on the Gulf beaches has caused approximately 10 acres of vegetation to be lost since 1992, with 3.2 acres of that loss occurring since 2002. The shoreline recession on South Barefoot Beach has caused vegetation, such as mangroves, to be lost and it has also created a dangerous scarp along the shoreline that is hazardous to park users. One of the project's goals is to reduce the erosion at Barefoot Beach Preserve, which is causing the loss of vegetation described above. No vegetation will be removed or damaged during construction. As the beach recovers, the County will plant dune vegetation as part of their ongoing dune vegetation program. Policy 10.3.10: No new bridges, causeways, paved roads or commercial marinas shall be permitted to or on undeveloped barrier systems. Project Consistency with Policy 10.3.10: No new bridges, causeways, paved roads, commercial marinas or coastal structures (groins, jetties or breakwaters) are being proposed with this project. The County's desire is to provide a non - structural alternative for the inlet design in order to improve navigation and reduce erosion. (VI) Policy 10.3.13: Substantial alteration of the natural grade on undeveloped coastal barriers, through filling or excavation shall be prohibited except as part of an approved dune and/or beach restoration program, or as part of an approved public development plan for one or more of the uses allowed by Policy 10.3.4, above. Project Consistency with Policy 10.3.13: No substantial alterations to the natural grade on the coastal barrier are proposed. The objective of the plan is to improve the navigation channel and restore the shoreline to its natural conditions using the dredged material. The proposed project includes modifications designed to improve the existing County approved Inlet Management Plan (1995). The main objectives of the original Inlet Management Plan and the current Strategic Management Plan have not changed, but the methods of achieving them have been modified to incorporate lessons learned from physical monitoring that has been conducted since the early 1990's. The proposed updated Inlet Management Plan has tentative approval from the FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, along with the Park Service and State Lands. Approval is currently underway from the County. The proposed project is in compliance with Policy 10.3.4. (VI) Policy 10.3.15: All new development proposed on undeveloped coastal barrier systems shall be reviewed through the County's existing "Special Treatment" ( "ST ") zoning overlay district. Objective 10.3 and its accompanying policies shall serve as criteria for such review. Project Consistency with Policy 10.3.15: This project proposes restoration of the eroding shoreline located within "Special Treatment" overlays (designated Conservation and Agricultural Zoning Districts). The proposed fill activities will aid in protecting the natural resources within these areas from continued erosion. The dredging activity will create a safe navigation channel, which when straightened, will reduce erosional stresses on the adjacent shorelines. An "ST" permit is currently being sought for the project and environmental reviews are in progress. OBJECTIVE 10.5: For undeveloped shorelines, provide improved opportunities for recreational, educational, scientific, and esthetic enjoyment of coastal resources by protecting beaches and dunes and by utilizing or where necessary establishing construction standards, which will minimize the impact of manmade structures on the beach and dune systems. Project Consistency with CCME Objective 10.5: By placing beach fill on Barefoot Beach Preserve and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park, opportunities for recreational use of the shoreline will be enhanced. Wider beaches will allow more users to enjoy the natural resource. Also, esthetic enjoyment of the shoreline will be achieved by repairing the scarps and overly eroded conditions presently found at Barefoot Beach. The beach fill placed from the maintenance dredging will aid in protecting the upland dune system and natural resources from erosion. Construction standards will be in place to minimize impacts to the natural resources within the project area. No permanent structures will be built within the project area which would impact the beach and dune system. Policy 10.5.3: Prohibit activities which would result in man induced shoreline erosion beyond the natural beach erosion cycle or that would deteriorate the beach dune system. Project Consistency with Policy 10.5.3: This project will not cause increased shoreline erosion and it will not deteriorate the beach dune system. On the contrary, one of the four primary goals of the Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project is to reduce the current rate of erosion at Barefoot Beach. An extensive coastal study was performed within the project area in order to determine potential impacts from the project. The study included numerical modeling using Delft 3D, analysis of historic and current monitoring results, and analysis of coastal trends. The previous modeling studies indicate that improved navigation conditions and mitigation of erosion on adjacent beaches can be achieved by redesigning the navigation channel and modifying the placement location and quantity of the dredged material. A change in dredge disposal practices is recommended in order to alleviate the sand deficit on the beaches north of Wiggins Pass. From volumetric analysis, 2.65 times the amount of fill should be placed to the north than the south, or about 8,000 cubic yards per year based on current practices. The sediment deficit to the north is the major contributor to the erosion problem; this will aid to balance the sand deficit that is occurring. The new channel alignment will also reduce erosional stress along Barefoot Beach's interior shoreline of the pass. The realignment will infill the current channel meander with coarse material to redirect the channel along the newly dredged path. Fill placement in this interior channel adjacent to Barefoot Beach would stabilize the shoreline and stop the erosional loss of mangrove habitat. Implementation of the recommended Inlet Management Plan will have several positive ,may effects on the natural resources surrounding Wiggins Pass. One positive effect will be that the plan will help maintain or increase the available dry beach north of the pass. The placement of sand on the beaches and nearshore would help mitigate for the erosive effects of the pass, thereby helping to protect the adjacent dune and upland habitats from erosion induced losses. The placement of beach quality sand on these beaches will help maintain or increase the amount of available sea turtle, shorebird and gopher tortoise habitat. The project will avoid direct impact to mangroves or seagrass resources. The proposed project will also reduce long term impacts based on average annual dredge quantities. The proposed project will decrease cumulative dredging impacts from 300,000+ cubic yards to 214,000 cubic yards over the first ten year period. Modeling suggests that a straight channel will shoal at one third the rate of the existing configuration. (VI) Policy 10.5.4: Prohibit construction of any structure seaward of the Coastal Construction Setback Line. Exception shall be for passive recreational structures, access crossovers, and where enforcement would not allow any reasonable economic utilization of such property. In the latter event, require construction that minimizes interference with natural function of such beaches and dunes. Project Consistency with Policy 10.5.4: No structures are proposed with this project. Policy 10.5.8: Prohibit shoreline armoring processes and encourage non - structural methods for stabilizing beaches and dunes. Project Consistency with Policy 10.5.8: No permanent shoreline armoring processes are proposed for the project. This project uses a non - structural alternative to help improve navigation and beach fill activities to stabilize the shoreline. (VI) Policy 10.5.9: Prohibit construction seaward of the Coastal Construction Setback Line except as follows: a. Construction will be allowed for public access; b. For protection and restoration of beach resources; C. In cases of demonstrated land use related hardship or safety concerns as specified in The 1985 Florida Coastal Zone Protection Act, there shall be no shore armoring allowed except in cases of public safety. Project Consistency with Policy 10.5.9: Only beach fill activities are proposed seaward of the Coastal Construction Setback Line. The added beach from the beach fill activities will be accessible to the public for use and will aid in restoring the shoreline and protecting the upland dune system. Policy 10.5.10: Construction activities shall not interfere with the sea turtle nesting, shall preserve or replace any native vegetation on the site, and shall maintain the natural beach profile and minimize interference with the natural beach dynamics and function. Project Consistency with Policy 10.5.10: The initial construction schedule that has been proposed for Wiggins Pass is planned to avoid sea turtle nesting season. The proposed schedule is as follows: October 1 -30 Mobilization November 1 -15 Dredge pilot channel and stockpile sand on flood shoal. November 16 -30 Build temporary dikes (coarse sand or sheet pile, complete dredging flood channel and inlet throat and back fill old channel. Dredge and transport incompatible material). December 1 -20 Dredge ebb channel and dispose of sand on beach or nearshore of Barefoot Beach. Repair scarps on south point of Barefoot Beach. Complete filling of old channel to approved template as a priority. Dredge and transport incompatible material to a separate offshore disposal area. December 20 -31 Demobilization January 1 — February 28 Contingency for weather and equipment problems. This project will also act to preserve vegetation along the southern portion of Barefoot Beach. Severe erosion has impacted the vegetation at Barefoot Beach where the northward migration of the flood channel has moved approximately 100 feet since the 1970's. The mangroves have retreated a total of 52 feet since 1973 and 13 feet since 2002, accounting for a loss of approximately 0.3 acres. On the Gulf, the vegetation has retreated 194 feet at some locations since 1973, and 123 feet in the last 8 years. Overall, the increased erosion north of the inlet on the Gulf beaches has caused approximately 10 acres of vegetation to be lost since 1992, with 3.2 acres of that loss occurring since 2002. The shoreline recession on South Barefoot Beach has caused vegetation, such as mangroves, to be lost and it has also created a dangerous scarp along the shoreline that is hazardous to park users. The project's goal is to reduce the erosion at Barefoot Beach Preserve, which is causing the loss of vegetation described above. Fill placement in the interior channel adjacent to Barefoot Beach would stabilize the shoreline and stop the erosional loss of mangrove habitat. No vegetation will be removed or damaged during construction. The proposed project's intent is to restore and maintain the shorelines at Barefoot Beach Preserve and Delnor- Wiggins State Park at to their natural state. The Barefoot Beach shoreline is currently in a state of critical erosion, which has resulted in steep slopes that have reduced the area's recreational and natural value. The project straightens the current S- curve, which will shift the inlet channel away from Barefoot Beach mangroves and away from the Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park northwest Gulf shoreline. Restoration will increase habitat along with providing increased beach width for park goers. The straightening and periodic dredging of the inlet channel will also help maintain the flushing of the estuarine waters within and adjacent to Wiggins Bay, improving water quality in the area. III. FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT CONSERVATION DESIGNATION The overall purpose of the Conservation Designation is to conserve and maintain the natural resources of Collier County and their associated environmental, and recreational and economic benefits. All native habitats possess ecological and physical characteristics that justify attempts to maintain these important natural resources. Barrier Islands, coastal bays, wetlands, and habitat for listed species deserve particular attention because of their ecological value and their sensitivity to perturbation. It is because of this that all proposals for development in the Conservation Designation must be subject to rigorous review to ensure that the impacts of the development do not destroy or unacceptably degrade the inherent functional values. Please address the following in your consistency response: • Explain how the proposed project will conserve and /or maintain the county's natural resources (example: beach maintenance, improved flushing of waterway, etc.) Response: Implementation of the Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project will have several positive effects on the natural resources surrounding Wiggins Pass. This project will help maintain or increase the available dry beach north of the pass. The placement of sand on the beaches and nearshore would help mitigate for the erosive effects of the pass, thereby helping to protect the adjacent dune and upland habitats from erosion induced losses. The beach monitoring plan recommended in the Inlet Management Plan will help ensure that the sand will be placed north and south of the inlet in the most appropriate proportions; based on monitoring results, sand will be placed on the areas with the greatest need. The placement of beach quality sand on these beaches will help maintain or increase the amount of available sea turtle, shorebird and gopher tortoise habitat. Another positive effect of the recommended plan involves the shifting of the inlet channel away from Barefoot Beach mangroves and the Delnor- Wiggins State Park northwest Gulf shoreline. Re- establishing a flood shoal in the old flood channel location will provide a substrate for recovery of the lost mangrove habitat. The straightening and periodic dredging of the inlet channel will help maintain the flushing of the estuarine waters within and adjacent to Wiggins Bay, improving overall water quality. • Describe adverse impacts, if any, to the environment and describe proposed mitigation Response: In addition to the many positive impacts; this project will have some negative effects. However, these adverse effects will be temporary and minimal, and the project has incorporated precautions to avoid and minimize impacts as much as possible. No benthic natural resources (seagrass, hardbottom, and oyster reefs) will be directly impacted by dredging or filling in the old existing channel. The new alignment port ion of the proposed dredge template consists of unconsolidated sandy substrate. Where seagrass and oyster beds have been found closest to the channel wall (at the east end of the project area) (Figure 2), the proposed east and south dredge template is the same as the previously permitted template. This template has been dredged multiple times. Turbidity curtains may be utilized during construction to minimize indirect impacts from elevated turbidity to seagrass and oyster beds in areas adjacent to dredge areas. Dredging of the channel will result in the temporary loss of the benthic infauna within the dredge area. However, studies have shown that infauna typically recolonize the disturbed areas within one year of dredging (NRC, 1995; Greene, 2002; Blake et al., 1996). The dredge plan also includes cutting through a sand spit on the south side of the pass at the north end of Delnor- Wiggins State Park. This sand spit potential provides foraging habitat for shorebirds. However, the new shoal that will be created on the north side of the pass will act as similar bird habitat to the shoal being dredged in the proposed realignment area. The habitat created on the north side of the pass will be similar to the total area being dredged on the south side of the pass. Additionally, the placement of fill will prevent further erosion of the mangrove shoreline at Barefoot Beach. Over time, mangroves may encroach onto the newly stabilized area. Dredging of the new channel will also result in some increased turbidity and sedimentation within the project area. Due to the coarseness of the sand in the inlet channel and based on results from turbidity monitoring associated with previous dredging projects, any resulting turbidity is expected to dissipate quickly. However, precautions will be taken (i.e. turbidity monitoring, timing the dredging with tides, turbidity curtains) in order to minimize turbidity impacts during the interior channel dredging when some fine material is dredged. Placement of fill will occur on unconsolidated sandy substrate with some shell hash and will avoid the seagrass located on the northern side of the Pass (Figure 2). Indirect impacts to this seagrass will be minimized through use of turbidity curtains during construction. Dredge and fill operations have occurred within the project area in the past without known impacts, and this should be an indication that future impacts will be insignificant. Disposal of material in the nearshore environment off of Barefoot Beach and Delnor- Wiggins will not impact benthic natural resources (seagrass, hardbottom, or oyster reefs). No seagrass or oyster reefs are located in this environment. No direct impacts to the nearshore hardbottom are anticipated from the project. Proper turbidity regulations will be in place in the nearshore zone, and all non -beach compatible fill will be disposed of properly an offshore disposal area or in an upland location. The fill template is designed to avoid coverage to hardbottom. Under the recommended inlet management plan, the beach disposal areas have been specifically located and designed so as to avoid the direct burial of the identified exposed hardbottom to the north and south. Figure 2. Natural resources in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass LEGEND: T --- PROPOSED DISPOSAL AREA 2011 PRELIMINARY ALIGNMENT 2000 -2011 PERMITTED DREDGE TEMPLATE � • — SEPTEMBER 9, 2010 HARDBOTTOM OBSERVATION *€', • AUGLST 2009 SSS HARDBOTTOM EDGE 1994 SSS POTENTIAL HARDBOTTOM Q 2009 OYSTER BEDS .�• • • 2009 EDGE OF MANGROVE •' • 2011 SURVEYED SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTY) 2009 SEAGRASS (HALODULE WRIGHTII) 2009 SEAGRASS (HALOPHILADECIPIENS) 2008 SURVEYED SEAGRASS REPCRTED ROCK SUBSTRATE (CEC 1990, CPE 1995) 2009 GOPHER TORTOISE BURROW SURVEY L VERYACTIVE ACTIVE INACTIVE r • ABANDONED OUTSTANDING FLORIDA WATERS OTHER (62- 302.700 (9) (c) and (f). F.A.C.) AnySPECIAL (62- 302.700 (9) (i), F.A.C.) NOTES: 1 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY COLLIER COUNTY, DATE FLOWN 2009. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FIELD INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED BY CPE ON DECEMBER 10. 2008 JULY 13 814 2009 AND SEPTEMBER 29, 2D11. 3 LOCATION OF ROCK LEDGE TAKEN FROM 1995 INLET MANAGMENT PLAN (CPE 1995), BUT WAS ORIGINALLY IDENTIFIED BY CEC IN 1990 Figure 2. Natural resources in the vicinity of Wiggins Pass The most extensive reach of hardbottom is located south of Wiggins Pass, extending south of FDEP monument R -18; the location of this hardbottom has been verified by remote sensing and dives by CPE between 1993 and 2009 (Figure 2). There are also potential hardbottom resources located north of Wiggins Pass, between R -9.5 and R -11. These resources were ground - truthed by Collier County divers in September 2010; divers found hardbottom north of the R -I1 transect, and no hardbottom south of the R -11.5 transect. The bottom was predominately mud south of R- 11.5. The nearest hardbottom is estimated to be approximately 240 ft. west of the Delnor- Wiggins disposal area, which was previously permitted and used. North of the Pass, the nearest hardbottom is approximately 530 ft. west of the Barefoot Beach disposal area. The ebb shoal disposal area is located north of the inlet, far from hardbottom (Figure 2). Fill at Barefoot Beach will be placed south of R -12 to avoid the potential hardbottom offshore of R -10, as permitted in 2011. The nearshore disposal area may experience temporary impacts to infauna. The nearshore placement of beach compatible dredged material is expected to bury the existing infauna. The infauna, however, is expected to quickly recolonize the affected areas. No long term impacts to the beach infaunal community are expected from the project. As there are no anticipated project impacts to benthic natural resources (seagrass, hardbottom, and oyster reefs) no mitigation is proposed. • Explain the proposed project's environmental, recreational and economic benefits Implementation of the Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project will have several positive effects on the natural resources surrounding Wiggins Pass. This project will help maintain or increase the available dry beach north south of the pass. The placement of sand on the beaches and nearshore would help mitigate for the erosive effects of the pass, thereby helping to protect the adjacent dune and upland habitats from erosion induced losses. The beach monitoring plan recommended in the Inlet Management Plan will help ensure that the sand will be placed north and south of the inlet in the most appropriate proportions; based on monitoring results, sand will be placed on the areas with the greatest need. The placement of beach quality sand on these beaches will help maintain or increase the amount of available sea turtle, shorebird and gopher tortoise habitat. Another positive effect of the recommended plan involves the shifting of the inlet channel away from Barefoot Beach mangroves and the Delnor- Wiggins State Park north Gulf shoreline. Re- establishing the flood shoal in the old flood channel location will provide a substrate for recovery of the lost mangrove habitat. The straightening and periodic dredging of the inlet channel will help maintain the flushing of the estuarine waters within and adjacent to Wiggins Bay, improving overall water quality. Wiggins Pass is used primarily by recreational boaters. In the mid- 1990's, 763 boats were berthed in the inlet basin, including 31 commercial vessels. The number of slips had increased to 1,700 by 2010. The commercial boats use the Pass for charter, rental, or tours, and at least 67 , jobs are dependent on a navigable Wiggins Pass Basin (CPE, 1995). Access is limited to adjacent passes because of shallow depths in interior lagoons to the north and no interior waterway to the south. Therefore, Wiggins Pass is the only local access to the Gulf of Mexico. In August 2009, an updated boating survey entitled "A Recreational Boating Characterization of Collier County, FL" was completed. This studied surveyed two marinas within the Wiggins Pass area: Pelican Isle Yacht Club and Barefoot Boat Club. Pelican Isle Yacht Club has a capacity of 190 for wet slips only. Barefoot Boat Club has a capacity of 24 wet slips and 90 dry slips. Pelican Isle Yacht Club had an occupancy of 105 spots, while Barefoot Boat Club had an occupancy of 91 slips during the peak season. The study found that the average boat draft in the wet slips to be approximately 3 feet. No other marinas or docking areas were surveyed near the pass within the 2009 study. Boaters also have access to two boat ramps in the close vicinity of Wiggins Pass: Cocohatchee River Park ramp and Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park ramp. On average per weekend, Cocohatchee documented 20 uses while Delnor- Wiggins Pass State Park documented an average of four. Eleven percent of all boat routes in the County went through Wiggins Pass, which ranks it as the 5a' busiest pass in the County. The study also noted that fishing ranked as the leading activity of survey respondents. Nature viewing, cruising, beach picknicking, sightseeing, socializing, restaurant visitation, and swimming also ranked within the top 7 in the study. Recently, the Estuary Conservation Association (ECA) prepared a study examining the value of a navigable Wiggins Pass in December of 2010. The purpose of this study was to provide basic information of the financial impact of a navigable channel at Wiggins Pass. The study found that 3,001 properties are directly affected by the Pass, which had an assessed property value of $1,498,144,681 (note that the market value would be higher than this figure). These directly affected properties accounted for $20,652,730 in taxes in 2010. In addition to those properties directly affected by the pass, it was found that an additional 6,406 properties were indirectly related. The total property assessment on these properties was $2,289,757,460. These indirectly affected properties accounted for $27,573,916 in taxes in 2010. Combining both direct and indirectly affected properties, the net worth around the pass is $3,910,401,141. A slip analysis estimated the value of 1,700 boat slips directly affected by the pass. The analysis is described in detail below: Table 1. Boat Slips: Numbers and Values Of the slips listed above, most examined within this study pay submerged lease fees to the State of Florida. The total number of slips have paid approximately $122,500,000 in fees to the state (Moreland, 2011 personal communication). No. of Slips Estimated Value Total Value 700 $25,000 $17,500,000 300 $50,000 $15,000,000 300 $100,000 $30,000,000 400 $150,000 $60,000,000 Total 1,700 $325,000 $122,500,000 Of the slips listed above, most examined within this study pay submerged lease fees to the State of Florida. The total number of slips have paid approximately $122,500,000 in fees to the state (Moreland, 2011 personal communication). TO: Collier County Board of Commissioners FROM: The Environmental Advisory Council SUBJECT: Improving Collier County's Fertilizer Ordinance DATE: July 3, 2012 Just about a year ago,the EAC and the CCPC recommended to the BCC the adoption of a Fertilizer Ordinance that was overall consistent with those in the surrounding jurisdictions and more stringent than that recommended by the state. In a letter, FDACS raised concerns to the specification of lower levels of Nitrogen and Phosphorous and a maximum application rate and suggested that the BCC defer approval of a fertilizer ordinance until this issue of legislative interpretation was resolved. As a result of their concerns, however, the BCC decided to just adopt•the recommended state model language. At that time, FDACS said they expected legislative action to clarify this situation during the 2012 State Assembly, but that did not happen. We are therefore asking you to revisit this Ordinance with the objective of strengthening it. Interestingly enough, Martin County adopted their morestrict Fertilizer Ordinance on the same day last summer that you did not, and they have heard nothing negative subsequently from the state or any industry interests. Recently the EAC received draft copies of a scientific article documenting statistically significant improvement in water quality in nine stormwater ponds in Lee County subsequent to adoption of a strict Fertilizer Ordinance in 2008. They found that Phosphate was reduced by 49%, Chlorophyll a by 44% and Total Nitrogen by 14%. We in Collier County have a number of water bodies with nutrient overloads resulting in a reduction in water quality. We should therefore move to protect our local resources. The EAC is asking you to reconsider adopting the original ordinance that mirrors that of adjacent jurisdictions. But if you are unwilling to do that, we at least recommend strengthening the present ordinance by adding the following provisions that were not questioned by FDACS: • No application of fertilizer within 10 feet of a waterbody to provide sufficient buffering to protect water quality, even with a deflector • No application of fertilizer during the wet season,June 1 through October 1 Attached to this memo are the following: the current ordinance,the originally proposed ordinance, and the draft scientific paper on the reduction of nutrient pollution in the Lee County ponds. natural and constructed stormwater conveyances, rivers, creeks, canals, springs, lakes, estuaries and other water bodies. Water bodies are an asset critical to the environmental, recreational, cultural and economic well-being of Collier County residents and the health of the public. Overgrowth of algae and vegetation hinder the effectiveness of flood attenuation provided by natural and constructed stormwater conveyances. Regulation of nutrients, including both phosphorus and nitrogen contained in fertilizer, will help improve and maintain water and habitat quality. SECTION THREE: DEFINITIONS For this Article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth in this section unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. "Administrator" means the County Manager, or an administrative official of county government designated by the County Manager to administer and enforce the provisions of this Article. "Application" or"Apply" means the actual physical deposit of fertilizer to turf or landscape plants. "Applicator" means any Person who applies fertilizer on turf and/or landscape plants in Collier County. "Board or Governing Board"means the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. "Best Management Practices" means turf and landscape practices or combination of practices based on research, field-testing, and expert review, determined to be the most effective and practicable on- location means, including economic and technological considerations, for improving water quality, conserving water supplies and protecting natural resources. "Code Enforcement Officer, Official, or Inspector" means any designated employee or agent of Collier County whose duty it is to enforce codes and ordinances enacted by Collier County. "Commercial Fertilizer Applicator", except as provided in 482.1562(9) F.S., means any person who applies fertilizer for payment or other consideration to property not owned by the person or firm applying the fertilizer or the employer of the applicator. "Fertilize," "Fertilizing," or "Fertilization" means the act of applying fertilizer to turf, specialized turf, or landscape plants. "Fertilizer" means any substance or mixture of substances that contains one or more recognized plant nutrients and promotes plant growth, or controls soil acidity or alkalinity, or provides other soil enrichment,or provides other corrective measures to the soil. "Guaranteed Analysis" means the percentage of plant nutrients or measures of neutralizing capability claimed to be present in a fertilizer. Page 2 of 9 "Institutional Applicator" means any person, other than a private, non-commercial or a Commercial Applicator (unless such definitions also apply under the circumstances), that applies fertilizer for the purpose of maintaining turf and/or landscape plants. Institutional Applicators shall include, but shall not be limited to, owners, managers or employees of public lands, schools, parks, religious institutions, utilities, industrial or business sites and any residential properties maintained in condominium and/or common ownership. "Landscape Plant"means any native or exotic tree, shrub, or groundcover(excluding turf). "Low Maintenance Zone" means an area a minimum of ten (10) feet wide adjacent to water courses which is planted and managed in order to minimize the need for fertilization, watering, mowing, etc. "Person" means any natural person, business, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, limited partnership, association, club, organization, and/or any group of people acting as an organized entity. "Prohibited Application Period" means the time period during which a Flood Watch or Warning, or a Tropical Storm Watch or Warning, or a Hurricane Watch or Warning is in effect for any portion of Collier County, issued by the National Weather Service, or if heavy' rain is likely. "Collier County Approved Best Management Practices Training Program" means a training program approved per 403.9338 F.S., or any more stringent requirements set forth in this Article that includes the most current version of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries, 2008, " as revised,and approved by the County Manager or his designee. "Saturated soil" means a soil in which the voids are filled with water. Saturation does not require flow. For the purposes of this ordinance, soils shall be considered saturated if standing water is present or the pressure of a person standing on the soil causes the release of free water. "Slow Release," "Controlled Release," "Timed Release," "Slowly Available," or "Water Insoluble Nitrogen" means nitrogen in a form which delays its availability for plant uptake and use after application, or which extends its availability to the plant longer than a reference rapid or quick release product. "Specialized Turf Managers" means landscape manager of non agricultural land planted exclusively for golf course, parks, or athletic fields. "Turf," "Sod," or"Lawn" means a piece of grass-covered soil held together by the roots of the grass. "Urban landscape" means pervious areas on residential,commercial, industrial, institutional, highway rights-of-way, or other nonagricultural lands that are planted with turf or horticultural plants. For the purposes of this section,agriculture has the same meaning as in Florida Statute 570.02. World Meteorological Organization definition of heavy rain:Rainfall greater than or cyual to 50 mm!2 inches)in a 24 hour period. http://severe.worldwcathcrorg/rain/,and forecast keyword"likely" http://www.wrh.m guv/:eew/MediaGuide/1'crmsOutluoks_\C'atches_\C'arnings.pdf. Page 3 of 9 SECTION FOUR: APPLICABILITY This Ordinance shall be applicable to and shall regulate any and all applicators of fertilizer and areas of application of fertilizer within the area of Collier County unless such applicator is specifically exempted by the terms of this Ordinance from the regulatory provisions of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be prospective only,and shall not impair any existing contracts for a period of one year from the effective date of the ordinance. SECTION FIVE: TIMING OF FERTILIZER APPLICATION No applicator shall apply fertilizers containing nitrogen and/or phosphorus to turf and/or landscape plants during the Prohibited Application Period, or to saturated soils. SECTION SIX: FERTILIZER FREE ZONES Fertilizer shall not be applied within ten (10) feet of any pond, stream, watercourse, lake, canal, or wetland as defined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Chapter 62-340, Florida Administrative Code) or from the top of a seawall, unless a deflector shield,drop spreader, or liquid applicator with a visible and sharply defined edge, is used, in which case a minimum of 3 feet shall be maintained. Newly planted turf and/or landscape plants may be fertilized in this Zone only for a sixty (60) day period beginning 30 days after planting if needed to allow the plants to become well established. Fertilizer shall not be applied to native vegetated buffers required by Collier County Land Development Code section 3.05.07F.3.f. Caution shall be used to prevent direct deposition of fertilizer into the water. SECTION SEVEN: LOW MAINTENANCE ZONES A voluntary ten (10) foot low maintenance zone is strongly recommended, but not mandated, from any pond, stream, water course, lake, wetland or from the top of a seawall. A swale/berm system is recommended for installation at the landward edge of this low maintenance zone to capture Page 4 of 9 and filter runoff. If more stringent Collier County Code regulations apply, this provision does not relieve the requirement to adhere to the more stringent regulations. No mowed or cut vegetative material may be deposited or left remaining in this zone or deposited in the water. Care should be taken to prevent the over-spray of aquatic weed products in this zone. SECTION EIGHT: FERTILIZER CONTENT AND APPLICATION RATES (a) Fertilizers applied to turf and/or landscape plants within Collier County shall be formulated and applied in accordance with requirements and directions provided by Rule 5E-1.003(2), Florida Administrative Code, Labeling Requirements For Urban Turf Fertilizers. (b) Fertilizer containing nitrogen or phosphorus shall not be applied before seeding or sodding a site, and shall not be applied for the first 30 days after seeding or sodding, except when hydro-seeding for temporary or permanent erosion control in an emergency situation (wildfire, etc.), or in accordance with the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for that site. (c) Nitrogen or phosphorus fertilizer shall not be applied to turf or landscape plants except as provided in (a) above for turf, or in UF/IFAS recommendations for landscape plants, vegetable gardens, and fruit trees and shrubs, unless a soil or tissue deficiency has been verified by an approved test. SECTION NINE: APPLICATION PRACTICES (a) Spreader deflector shields are required when fertilizing via rotary (broadcast) spreaders. Deflectors must be positioned such that fertilizer granules are deflected away from all impervious surfaces, fertilizer-free zones and water bodies, including wetlands. (b) Fertilizer shall not be applied, spilled,or otherwise deposited on any impervious surfaces. (c) Any fertilizer applied, spilled, or deposited, either intentionally or accidentally, on any impervious surface shall be immediately and completely removed to the greatest extent practicable. Page 5 of 9 (d) Fertilizer released on an impervious surface must be immediately contained and either legally applied to turf or any other legal site, or returned to the original or other appropriate container. (e)In no case shall fertilizer be washed, swept, or blown off impervious surfaces into stormwater drains, ditches, conveyances,or water bodies. SECTION TEN: MANAGEMENT OF GRASS CLIPPINGS AND VEGETABLE MATTER In no case shall grass clippings, vegetative material, and/or vegetative debris be washed, swept, or blown off into stormwater drains, ditches, conveyances, water bodies, wetlands, or sidewalks or roadways. Any material that is accidentally so deposited shall be immediately removed to the maximum extent practicable. SECTION ELEVEN: EXEMPTIONS The provisions set forth above in this Ordinance shall not apply to: (a) bona fide farm operations as defined in the Florida Right to Farm Act, Section 823.14 Florida Statutes; (b) other properties not subject to or covered under the Florida Right to Farm Act that have pastures used for grazing livestock; (c) any lands used for bona fide scientific research, including, but not limited to, research on the effects of fertilizer use on urban stormwater, water quality, agronomics, or horticulture; (d) all golf courses provided that landscaping is done within the provisions of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection document, "Best Management Practices for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, 2007"(Florida Golf Course BMPs), as updated. Florida Golf Course BMPs shall be followed when performing landscaping on golf course practice and play areas. If Florida Golf Course BMPs are not adhered to, Collier County may take enforcement action in accordance with Section 14 of this Ordinance; Page 6 of 9 (e) all Specialized Turf Managers provided that fertilization is based on the provisions of RULE 5E-1.003(2)(d), F.A.C. and OF/IFAS Publication #SL 191 , while maintaining the health and function of their Specialized Turf areas. SECTION TWELVE: TRAINING (a) All commercial and institutional applicators of fertilizer within the (un)incorporated area of Collier County shall abide by and successfully complete the six-hour training program in the "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries"offered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection through the University of Florida Extension"Florida-Friendly Landscapes" program, or an approved equivalent. (b) Private, non-commercial applicators are encouraged to follow the recommendations of the University of Florida IFAS Florida Yards and Neighborhoods program when applying fertilizers. SECTION THIRTEEN: LICENSING OF COMMERCIAL APPLICATORS (a) Prior to I January 2014, all commercial applicators of fertilizer within the (un)incorporated area of Collier County shall abide by and successfully complete training and continuing education requirements in the "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries", offered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection through the University of Florida IFAS "Florida-10 friendly Landscapes" program, or an approved equivalent program, prior to obtaining a Collier County Local Business Tax Certificate for any category of occupation which may apply any fertilizer to turf and/or landscape plants. Commercial Fertilizer Applicators shall provide proof of completion of the program to the County Tax Collector's office within 180 days of the effective date of this ordinance. (b) After 31 December, 2013,all commercial applicators of fertilizer within the(un)incorporated area of Collier County shall have and carry in their possession at all times when applying fertilizer. Page 7 of 9 evidence of certification by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services as a Commercial Fertilizer Applicator per 5E-14.117(18) F.A.C. (c) All businesses applying fertilizer to turf and/or landscape plants (including but not limited to residential lawns, golf courses, commercial properties, and multi-family and condominium properties) must ensure that at least one employee has a "Florida-friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries" training certificate prior to the business owner obtaining a Local Business Tax Certificate. Owners for any category of occupation which may apply any fertilizer to Turf and/or Landscape Plants shall provide proof of completion of the program to the County Tax Collector's Office. SECTION FOURTEEN: ENFORCEMENT Funds generated by penalties imposed under this section shall be used by Collier County for the administration and enforcement of section 403.9337, Florida Statutes, and the corresponding sections of this ordinance, and to further water conservation and nonpoint pollution prevention activities. SECTION FIFTEEN: PENALTIES Enforcement of the terms of this Ordinance shall be pursuant to the Consolidated Code Enforcement Ordinance (Ordinance 2010-04, as it may be amended). To any degree that the Code Enforcement Ordinance requires or mandates that an opportunity to cure or cure period be granted, said cure opportunity or period shall not apply to this Fertilizer Ordinance. Enforcement proceedings, absent the cure, may be initiated upon the discovery of the violation. SECTION SIXTEEN: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. Page 8 of 9 PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 2.4.44A.day of 11)`■A , 2011. `'.. .. 0,4% ATTEir:• '; • '. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWI1HT2E.$ROtAC.; f ERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA By: , Deputy lerk FRED W. COYLE, CHAI N AtLe$t bi to Ch !Midst $ 41Qfnature oo, Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attorney This r_rdir.ance fi!•:d with the 5c'-retcry r f St-te's Office the `rt`'d .Jy of U , ZO t/ and acl-ru+w'a:semen cif, ihet fiiirr received t!-is I day of GL. • ,aaln •►� - ( Deputy Clerk Page 9 of 9 STATE OF FLORIDA) COUNTY OF COLLIER) I, DWIGHT E. BROCK, Clerk of Courts in and for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Collier County, Florida, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of : ORDINANCE 2011-24 Which was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners on the 26th day of July, 2011, during Regular Session. WITNESS my hand and the official seal of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida, this 2nd day of August, 2011 . DWIGHT E. BROCK Clerk of Courts ar14 Clerk Ex-officio to B©a.do.fs'^�:'. County Commiss3.onwrs - t ' -.W / N.! '4`'k By: Teresa Poly ].,S Deputy Clerk..'" • • ORDINANCE NO. 11- AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, ADOPTING AN ORDINANCE FOR FLORIDA- FRIENDLY USE OF FERTILIZER ON URBAN LANDSCAPES; AND BY PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature, via the passage of Senate Bill 494 in 2009 and the creation of Florida Statute Section 403.9337, mandate the establishment of a Model Ordinance in Collier County concerning the use of fertilizer on urban landscapes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA,that: SECTION ONE: FINDINGS As a result of impairment to COLLIER COUNTY'S surface waters caused by excessive nutrients, or, as a result of increasing levels of nitrogen in the surface and/or ground water within the aquifers or springs within the boundaries of the county, the governing body of Collier County has determined that the use of fertilizers on lands within the county creates a risk to contributing to adverse effects on surface and/or ground water. Accordingly, the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County finds that management measures contained in the most recent edition of the"Florida- friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries, 2008,"may be required by this ordinance. SECTION TWO: PURPOSE AND INTENT This Ordinance regulates the proper use of fertilizers by any applicator; requires proper training of Commercial and Institutional Fertilizer Applicators; establishes training and licensing requirements; establishes a Prohibited Application Period; specifies allowable fertilizer application rates and methods, fertilizer-free zones, low maintenance zones, and exemptions. The Ordinance Page 1 of 9 requires the use of Best Management Practices which provide specific management guidelines to minimize negative secondary and cumulative environmental effects associated with the misuse of fertilizers. These secondary and cumulative effects have been observed in and on Collier County's natural and constructed stormwater conveyances, rivers, creeks, canals, springs, lakes, estuaries and other water bodies. Collectively, these water bodies are an asset critical to the environmental, recreational, cultural and economic well-being of Collier County residents and the health of the public. Overgrowth of algae and vegetation hinder the effectiveness of flood attenuation provided by natural and constructed stormwater conveyances. Regulation of nutrients, including both phosphorus and nitrogen contained in fertilizer,will help improve and maintain water and habitat quality. SECTION THREE: DEFINITIONS For this Article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth in this section unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. "Administrator" means the County Manager, or an administrative official of county government designated by the County Manager to administer and enforce the provisions of this Article. "Application"or"Apply" means the actual physical deposit of fertilizer to turf or landscape plants. "Applicator" means any Person who applies fertilizer on turf and/or landscape plants in Collier County. "Board or Governing Board"means the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida. "Best Management Practices" means turf and landscape practices or combination of practices based on research, field-testing, and expert review, determined to be the most effective and practicable on- location means, including economic and technological considerations, for improving water quality, conserving water supplies and protecting natural resources. "Code Enforcement Officer, Official, or Inspector" means any designated employee or agent of Collier County whose duty it is to enforce codes and ordinances enacted by Collier County. "Commercial Fertilizer Applicator", except as provided in 482.1562(9) F.S., means any person who applies fertilizer for payment or other consideration to property not owned by the person or firm applying the fertilizer or the employer of the applicator. "Fertilize," "Fertilizing," or "Fertilization" means the act of applying fertilizer to turf, specialized turf, or landscape plants. Page 2 of 9 "Fertilizer"means any substance or mixture of substances that contains one or more recognized plant nutrients and promotes plant growth, or controls soil acidity or alkalinity, or provides other soil enrichment,or provides other corrective measures to the soil. "Guaranteed Analysis" means the percentage of plant nutrients or measures of neutralizing capability claimed to be present in a fertilizer. "Institutional Applicator" means any person, other than a private, non-commercial or a Commercial Applicator (unless such definitions also apply under the circumstances), that applies fertilizer for the purpose of maintaining turf and/or landscape plants. Institutional Applicators shall include, but shall not be limited to, owners, managers or employees of public lands, schools, parks, religious institutions, utilities, industrial or business sites and any residential properties maintained in condominium and/or common ownership. "Landscape Plant" means any native or exotic tree, shrub, or groundcover(excluding turf). "Low Maintenance Zone" means an area a minimum of ten (10) feet wide adjacent to water courses which is planted and managed in order to minimize the need for fertilization,watering,mowing,etc. "Person" means any natural person, business, corporation, limited liability company, partnership, limited partnership, association, club, organization, and/or any group of people acting as an organized entity. "Prohibited Application Period" means August 1 through September 30 and the time period during which a Flood Watch or Warning, or a Tropical Storm Watch or Warning, or a Hurricane Watch or Warning is in effect for any portion of Collier County, issued by the National Weather Service, or if heavy rain' is likely. "Collier County Approved Best Management Practices Training Program" means a training program approved per 403.9338 F.S., or any more stringent requirements set forth in this Article that includes the most current version of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries, 2008," as revised, and approved by the County Manager or his designee. "Saturated soil" means a soil in which the voids are filled with water. Saturation does not require flow. For the purposes of this ordinance, soils shall be considered saturated if standing water is present or the pressure of a person standing on the soil causes the release of free water. "Slow Release," "Controlled Release," "Timed Release," "Slowly Available," or "Water Insoluble Nitrogen" means nitrogen in a form which delays its availability for plant uptake and use after application, or which extends its availability to the plant longer than a reference rapid or quick release product. "Specialized Turf Managers" means landscape manager of non agricultural land planted exclusively for golf course,parks, or athletic fields. World Meteorological Organization definition of heavy rain:Rainfall greater than or equal to 50 mm(2 inches)in a 24 hour period. http://severe.worldweather.org/rain/,and forecast keyword"likely", http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/sew/Mediae uide/TermsOutlooks_Watches_Warnings.pdf. Page 3 of 9 "Turf,""Sod,"or"Lawn"means a piece of grass-covered soil held together by the roots of the grass. "Urban landscape" means pervious areas on residential,commercial, industrial, institutional,highway rights-of-way, or other nonagricultural lands that are planted with turf or horticultural plants. For the purposes of this section,agriculture has the same meaning as in Florida Statute 570.02 SECTION FOUR: APPLICABILITY This Ordinance shall be applicable to and shall regulate any and all applicators of fertilizer and areas of application of fertilizer within the area of Collier County unless such applicator is specifically exempted by the terms of this Ordinance from the regulatory provisions of this Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be prospective only, and shall not impair any existing contracts. SECTION FIVE: TIMING OF FERTILIZER APPLICATION No applicator shall apply fertilizers containing nitrogen and/or phosphorus to turf and/or landscape plants during the Prohibited Application Period,or to saturated soils. SECTION SIX: FERTILIZER FREE ZONES Fertilizer shall not be applied within ten (10) feet of any pond, stream, watercourse, lake, canal, or wetland as defined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Chapter 62- i 340, Florida Administrative Code) or from the top of a seawall. Newly planted turf and/or landscape plants may be fertilized in this Zone only for a sixty (60) day period beginning 30 days after planting if needed to allow the plants to become well established. Fertilizer shall not be applied to native vegetated buffers required by Collier County Land Development Code section 3.05.07F.3.f. Caution shall be used to prevent direct deposition of fertilizer into the water. SECTION SEVEN: LOW MAINTENACE ZONES A voluntary ten (10) foot low maintenance zone is strongly recommended, but not mandated, from any pond, stream, water course, lake, wetland or from the top of a seawall. A swale/berm system is recommended for installation at the landward edge of this low maintenance zone to capture and filter runoff. If more stringent Collier County Code regulations apply, this provision does not Page 4 of 9 relieve the requirement to adhere to the more stringent regulations. No mowed or cut vegetative material may be deposited or left remaining in this zone or deposited in the water. Care should be taken to prevent the over-spray of aquatic weed products in this zone. SECTION EIGHT: FERTILIZER CONTENT AND APPLICATION RATES (a) Fertilizers applied to turf and/or landscape plants within Collier County shall be formulated and applied in accordance with requirements and directions provided by Rule 5E-1.003(2), Florida Administrative Code, Labeling Requirements For Urban Turf Fertilizers with the following exceptions: i. No fertilizer shall be applied to turf or landscape plants that contain more than two percent phosphate or other compounds containing phosphorus. No individual application shall exceed 0.25 pounds phosphate per 1000 square feet and the annual phosphate amount shall not exceed 0.5 pounds phosphate per 1000 square feet. ii. The annual turf and landscape plant maximum allowable nitrogen amount shall be 4 pounds per 1000 square feet. No individual application shall exceed 0.5 lbs of soluble or readily available nitrogen and no more than 1 pound total nitrogen per 1000 square feet. iii. No nitrogen fertilizer shall be applied to turf or landscape plants that contains less than 50 percent slow release nitrogen. (b) Fertilizer containing nitrogen or phosphorus shall not be applied before seeding or sodding a site, and shall not be applied for the first 30 days after seeding or sodding, except when hydro-seeding for temporary or permanent erosion control in an emergency situation (wildfire, etc.), or in accordance with the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for that site. (c) Nitrogen or phosphorus fertilizer shall not be applied to turf or landscape plants except as provided in (a) above for turf, or in OF/IFAS recommendations for landscape plants, vegetable gardens, and fruit trees and shrubs, unless a soil or tissue deficiency has been verified by an approved test. Page 5 of 9 SECTION NINE: APPLICATION PRACTICES (a) Spreader deflector shields are required when fertilizing via rotary (broadcast) spreaders. Deflectors must be positioned such that fertilizer granules are deflected away from all impervious surfaces, fertilizer-free zones and water bodies, including wetlands. (b)Fertilizer shall not be applied,spilled,or otherwise deposited on any impervious surfaces. (c) Any fertilizer applied, spilled, or deposited, either intentionally or accidentally, on any impervious surface shall be immediately and completely removed to the greatest extent practicable. (d) Fertilizer released on an impervious surface must be immediately contained and either legally applied to turf or any other legal site,or returned to the original or other appropriate container. (e) In no case shall fertilizer be washed, swept, or blown off impervious surfaces into stormwater drains,ditches,conveyances, or water bodies. SECTION TEN: MANAGEMENT OF GRASS CLIPPINGS AND VEGETABLE MATTER In no case shall grass clippings, vegetative material, and/or vegetative debris be washed, swept, or blown off into stormwater drains, ditches, conveyances, water bodies, wetlands, or sidewalks or roadways. Any material that is accidentally so deposited shall be immediately removed to the maximum extent practicable. SECTION ELEVEN: EXEMPTIONS The provisions set forth above in this Ordinance shall not apply to: (a) bona fide farm operations as defined in the Florida Right to Farm Act, Section 823.14 Florida Statutes; (b) other properties not subject to or covered under the Florida Right to Farm Act that have pastures used for grazing livestock; (c) any lands used for bona fide scientific research, including, but not limited to, research on the effects of fertilizer use on urban stormwater, water quality, agronomics, or horticulture; Page 6 of 9 (d) all golf courses provided that landscaping is done within the provisions of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection document, "Best Management Practices for the Enhancement of Environmental Quality on Florida Golf Courses, 2007" (Florida Golf Course BMPs), as updated. Florida Golf Course BMPs shall be followed when performing landscaping on golf course practice and play areas. If Florida Golf Course BMPs are not adhered to, Collier County may take enforcement action in accordance with Section 14 of this Ordinance; or (e) all Specialized Turf Managers provided that fertilization is based on the provisions of RULE 5E-1.003(2)(d), F.A.C. and UF/IFAS Publication #SL 191 , while maintaining the health and function of their Specialized Turf areas. SECTION TWELVE: TRAINING (a) All commercial and institutional applicators of fertilizer within the (un)incorporated area of Collier County shall abide by and successfully complete the six-hour training program in the "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries"offered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection through the University of Florida Extension"Florida-Friendly Landscapes" program, or an approved equivalent. (b) Private, non-commercial applicators are encouraged to follow the recommendations of the University of Florida IFAS Florida Yards and Neighborhoods program when applying fertilizers. SECTION THIRTEEN: LICENSING OF COMMERCIAL APPLICATORS (a) Prior to 1 January 2014, all commercial applicators of fertilizer within the (un)incorporated area of Collier County shall abide by and successfully complete training and continuing education requirements in the "Florida friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries", offered by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection through the University of Florida IFAS "Florida-Friendly Landscapes" program, or an approved equivalent program, prior to obtaining a Collier County Local Business Tax Certificate for any category of occupation which may apply any fertilizer to turf and/or landscape plants. Commercial Fertilizer Page 7 of 9 Applicators shall provide proof of completion of the program to the County Tax Collector's office within 180 days of the effective date of this ordinance. (b) After 31 December, 2013,all commercial applicators of fertilizer within the(un)incorporated area of Collier County shall have and carry in their possession at all times when applying fertilizer, evidence of certification by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services as a Commercial Fertilizer Applicator per 5E-14.117(18)F.A.C. (c) All businesses applying fertilizer to turf and/or landscape plants (including but not limited to residential lawns, golf courses, commercial properties, and multi-family and condominium properties) must ensure that at least one employee has a "Florida-friendly Best Management Practices for Protection of Water Resources by the Green Industries" training certificate prior to the business owner obtaining a Local Business Tax Certificate. Owners for any category of occupation which may apply any fertilizer to Turf and/or Landscape Plants shall provide proof of completion of the program to the County Tax Collector's Office. SECTION FOURTEEN: ENFORCEMENT Funds generated by penalties imposed under this section shall be used by Collier County for the administration and enforcement of section 403.9337, Florida Statutes, and the corresponding sections of this ordinance, and to further water conservation and nonpoint pollution prevention activities. SECTION FIFTEEN: PENALTIES Enforcement of the terms of this Ordinance shall be pursuant to the Consolidated Code Enforcement Ordinance (Ordinance 2010-04, as it may be amended). To any degree that the Code Enforcement Ordinance requires or mandates that an opportunity to cure or cure period be granted, said cure opportunity or period shall not apply to this Fertilizer Ordinance. Enforcement proceedings, absent the cure,may be initiated upon the discovery of the violation. Page 8 of 9 SECTION SIXTEEN: EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall become effective upon filing with the Department of State. PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by super-majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners of Collier County, Florida,this day of ,2011. ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DWIGHT E. BROCK, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY,FLORIDA By: By: , Deputy Clerk FRED W. COYLE, CHAIRMAN Approved as to form and legal sufficiency: it • Steven T. Williams Assistant County Attorney Page9of9 I From: amber crooks[mailto:amberc @conservancy.org] Sent: Wednesday,June 06, 2012 5:41 PM To: HushonJudith; SorrellMichael; DownsGina; DickmanAndrew; McNallyGary; BishofDavid Cc: LenbergerSteve Subject: Lee County Stringent Ordinance Reduced Nutrients- Study Attached Dear members of the EAC, As presented at today's meeting, please see the attached study(including appendices) conducted by the Lee County Pond Watch Program/Lee County Hyacinth Control District. It is currently in draft form but appears ready to be submitted for review and publication. This is a promising result that shows how important a stringent and protective fertilizer ordinance can be in reducing pollution in our waterways. The Lee County ordinance, adopted in 2008, is very similar to the ordinance in place in City of Naples and considered by the Collier County BCC last summer(as you know, the BCC ultimately implemented the less stringent State Model for the interim). The Lee County ordinance contains the 50%slow release, rainy season ban from June through September, and 10 foot fertilizer free buffer, and maximum yearly application of 4lbs nitrogen. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Amber Crooks,Natural Resources Specialist Conservancy of Southwest Florida 1450 Merrihue Dr. Naples, FL 34102 (239)262-0304 ext.286 www.conservancy.org Forwarded message From: Lisa Beever<lbeever @swfrpc.org> Date: Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:20 AM Subject: FW: Draft of Paper of Nutrients and Ordinance Dear Policy Committee and Management Committee members, Lee County Pond Watch used their volunteer-collected data to assess the impacts of the Lee County Urban Fertilizer Ordinance. I attached the study and copied the conclusions below. Conclusions The Lee County Ordinance forbidding the application of N and P in fertilizer during June through September came into effect in May of 2009. The Pond Watch Program of the Lee County Hyacinth Control District has collected data in storm water ponds from summer of 2004 to the present for Total Phosphorus, TKN and Chlorophyll A. Rainfall has been demonstrated to be different between the wet months of June through September as compared to the dry months of October through May. Thus the comparison of"pre-ordinance" and "post-ordinance" reflects only the wet months. Total phosphorus (TP) was reduced 48.8% and Chlorophyll-A was reduced 44.1 %, where as Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) was reduced 13.8 %. These statistical significant values show that the reduction was considerable, but clearly the magnitude for TKN is small. Five out of nine storm water ponds demonstrated an overall decrease for the nutrient levels as well as the decrease on the effect associated in the concentration of Chlorophyll A. Lisa B. Beever, PhD, AICP Director Charlotte Harbor NEP 1926 Victoria Avenue Fort Myers, FL 33901 239-338-2556, ext 235 Toll-free 866-835-5785 Fx 239-338-2560 www.CHNEP.org Revised 05-25-12 Analytical Results of Nutrients and Chlorophyll Relative to the 2008 Fertilizer Ordinance in Lee County By Jim Ryan (ryanjimjmr1 gmail.com) and Ernesto Lasso de la Vega (IassodelavegaCa Ichcd.orq) Pond Watch Program - Lee County Hyacinth Control District Fort Myers, Florida Introduction During the summer months in southwest Florida, storm water ponds exhibit from time to time frequent algae blooms. It is thought that a major contributor to these algae blooms was the increased amount of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) contained in the fertilizer that enters the ponds, via washed off lawns, storm water runoff from impervious surfaces and water that percolates through predominant sandy soils. In 2008, Lee County Board of Commissioners enacted a fertilizer ordinance (Ref 1) which became mandatory during the wet months of 2009. Among many best management practices, the ordinance prohibits the application of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) (from fertilizers) during the 4 wet summer months (June through September) with the stated objective of lessening loads (and concentrations) of nutrients in storm water ponds and other waters that runs into major bodies of water. Lee County Hyacinth Control District has the program Pond Watch, which has been in existence since the early 90s. The program is a citizen volunteer monitoring initiative that involves numerous storm water ponds which are sampled and analyzed monthly to help understand and manage the ponds. This paper examines the Pond Watch data to compare the amount of nitrogen, phosphorus and chlorophyll A regarding the implementation of the fertilizer ordinance. The specific question addressed by this paper is whether it has been a difference in the amount of nutrients present in the water of storm water ponds in the summer months of 2009, 2010, and 2011 when compared to the prior years, 2004 through 2008. Data and Methodology Rain Data Data was gathered from the Lee County, Natural Resources, Hydrological Monitoring Group website (Ref 3). The averages of 16 sites were tabulated to determine differences between summer rainy months (June through September) and the dry months (October through May). These averages were determined by calculating the cumulative daily average rain for each of the four summer months and the eight dry months in every year between 1992 through 2011. 1 Water Quality Data and Analysis Pond Watch receives water samples for analysis every month, from about 20 community ponds in Lee County. In the interest of having an appropriate set of ponds for comparison, we selected ponds with the following basic characteristics. Ponds range in surface area between 0.5 to 18 acres and a maximum depth of 12 ft. Ponds were surrounded by housing facilities, lawns maintained by private contractors, and sampling data available since 2004 to the present. There were 9 ponds that meet the criteria. These ponds are shown in Table 1. Pond Watch ID Location Acres Longitude Latitude 1 1 Stone Bridge 1 -81.896515 26.506573 Peppertree 2 4 5.3 -81.949689 26.519921 Pointe 3 14 South Pointe 5 -81.909797 26.547372 South 4 35 Corkscrew 18.5 -81.777317 26.424099 Woodland 5 37 Wellington 6.4 -81.900010 26.502472 6 42 Wyidewood 0.5 -81.888100 26.562310 Lakes 7 47 South Wind 7,8 -81.897330 26.485810 Candlewood 8 54 Lake 15.5 -81.966610 26.509190 9 57 Calosa Creek 10 -81.969470 26.513330 Table 1. Nine ponds selected from the Pond Watch Program to evaluate nutrient contents. The data used for the comparison was the average of nutrients in the rainy months, because the fertilizer ordinance restricts the application of fertilizers in the months between June and September. Chemical analyses of the pond water were conducted at the Water Quality Laboratory of the Lee County Hyacinth Control District (DOH Certification # E25945, Florida USEPA ID. FL01214). Total phosphorus (TP) was determined using the ascorbic acid method (Standard Method 4500PE). Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) was determined using the block digestion procedure (Standard Method 4500ND) followed by the phenolic method of ammonia determination (Standard Method 4500NH3F). Chlorophyll A (Chl A) analyses were determined by acetone extraction with fluorometric analysis (EPA Method 446.0 and 445.0). The data 'pre' ordinance years were from 2004 through 2008 because TKN analysis was introduced in 2004. 'Post' ordinance years were from 2009 through 2011. Statistical analysis 2 The comparison of the data was done by grouping parameters independently (Total Phosphorus, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, and Chlorophyll A) for the wet months (June, July, August, and September) in the years before (pre) the ordinance went into effect with the same wet months the years after (post) the ordinance was in effect. The consolidated tabulation for all 9 ponds and their parameters were performed using MS-Excel (version 2007). The parametric statistic technique used for the comparison was t test since the 2 groups of data (pre and post) are independent and have a normal distribution. Results and Discussion Rain Data Analysis Certainly, rainfall is much greater in the 4 wet months of summer, June through September, compared to the other dry months. The cumulative distribution of average rain for each of the 12 months of the last 20 years (1992 to 2011) is plotted in Fig. 2. The 4 wet months (June through September) have an average monthly rainfall of 9.8 inches. The 8 'other' months have an average of 2.6 inches. 1dn : t 50 CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE B0 0 I A''ET=J MONTHS jt 60 7----T Jun.JJI,Aug,Sep I 50 I i 1 *RWNFALL = 40 AVERAGE r/ I INCHES. 30 A IERAGE :'R D DASH; 20 10 -a• II.CHES .. 0 V 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 # Fig. 2 Cumulative distribution of average rain from 1991 to 2011 in Southwest Florida We have gathered data on the amount of rainfall in the summer months. When we first 3 compiled the results for 2009, we received a comment that the rainfall had been unusually low for this year. We plotted the total rainfall for the summer months per year to show the cumulative distribution (Fig.3). The smooth red line shows the normal distribution based on the average and standard deviation for the data. Utilizing the one-tail comparison for 19 points of data (degree of freedom, n-1), the 2009 summer value was at the 10% probability and the 2010 summer was at 15 % probability. It is true that the rainfall was on the low side, but not the extreme of 2 sigma or more, meaning that there were no significant difference (p<.10) between the amount of rain on 2009, 2010 and 2011, vs. the years 1992 through 2011. 0.9 r' CUMULATIVE PROBABILITY 0.8 //� CUMIULATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF 0,7 THE TOTAL RAIN IN JUNE THRU SEPT N%. POINTS IN BLUE ARE THE DATA 1 / FROM 1591 THRU 2011 40.5 �" RED LINE IS THE STATISTICAL VALUE / J OF THE DISTRIBUTION BASED ON THE 0 5 AVERAGE AND STD DEV OF THE DATA r r 0 0.3 —2011 e p * 2010 ;' 0.1 2 809 TOTAL RAINFM L.INCHES 'ITA: FOR 4 SUMME 3 MONTHS 0 • • - - . . . . 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 Fig. 3 Cumulative distribution of total rain in wet months from 1991 to 2011 in SW Florida Analysis of all Parameters All monthly data for the 9 ponds are presented in tables in Appendix A. The tables have been grouped as Total Phosphorus (TP), Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) and Chlorophyll A (ChIA) per pond, presenting the average for the 'pre' and 'post' ordinance years. All concentrations for TP and TKN are in mg/L, and concentrations for ChIA are expressed in ug/L. An example for TP for Pond 1 is presented in Table 2 bellow. 4 TABLE P-1 I PHOSPHORUS(total DATA FOR 9 PONDS, MONTHLY AND YEARLY (mo) seq nbr 1 Pond 1 Stone Bridge pre post pre post postipre TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) mglL years pre ordinance < gears post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 ,gt(04 to 08) 1 11155 9.022 9.4.43 Dm 9.089 9„439 •Q.04$ 0 076 0.065 0.051 mo 1 to 5' mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 g.Q9Q 9.019 0.064 OA72 1085 0.057 D,QBQ 1117.1 0.071 0.069 0.079 0.059 -25.5 3 0 097 Q,125 LOW; 4,1261 L432 9.49] 1(054 0066 0.097 0.067 4 0 067 0.177 9109 .JQQ Q,Q�,q L33.4 gisko 5.062 0.100 0.060 all drg mo all dr8 mo all drg mo 5 0.055 g,QQ1 nazi Q,Q J 0 07Q g,g Q,g},g 0"0;7 0.064 0.048 0.072 0.055 -23.8 E; 9.aQ i125z 11,53 last lastu .0.1!15', Q.94) 004 016 U.831 7 8201 0124 Q.33,4 011'?' 0 054 11058 0216 0.048 wet mo wet mo wet mo 8 .417.2 0.077 '1683 9.Q13 .0.146 0 04 , 9. 2 .0.452 00.106 0 050 0.118 0.056 52.3 9 8 97:? 0 0:<9 11064 um 1 844 3}06 Q]21 0 869 0.054 0.095 10 11419 0.065 11.076 g,Q}g 0.040 g,Qu 0 06>1 0.061 0.050 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 I 11 0.064 0.060 9012 0 434 9.948 0.06Q 0.047 0.047 0.057 0.048 -15.9 12 .0 4.0 9.989 9.0.51 9.45.4 9.049 9.Q41 0.059 0.045 :all dry,avg 0.072 0.083 0.072 0.059 0.076 0.050 0.053 0.061 0.072 0.055 ail w?t,avc 0125 0.124 0.122 0.086, 0.149 0.040 0.060 0.053 0.118 0.056 i wet gt dr 74.4 50.2 69.4 45.9 94.8 -5.3 28.3 -13.2 63.1 2.2 Table 2. Example of ExcelTM spreadsheet presenting Total Phosphorus data for Pond 1. Items underlined are data from monthly Pond Watch reports of analysis. Calculated results, such as averages, are not underlined. Data in color red indicate information for the wet months (June through September). Two different averages have been calculated: 1. in columns, the averages (all dry avg) for the amount of nutrients present in the water column in the 'dry months' (October to May, color black) and the average (all wet avg) of the 'wet months' (June to September, color red) per year; 2. in rows, the average of the amount of nutrients present in the 'pre' vs. `post' ordinance years per month, and grouped by all dry and wet months. In the bottom of the table, the averages for the dry and wet months are compared by calculating the percent ratio per year for all wet average months vs. all dry average months. In addition, the comparison of the averages for the pre and post years is presented on the bottom line far right cells. In the right side of the table, averages are calculated for data per month, pre (2004 to 2008) and post (2009 to 2011). The results are further grouped and summarized in average of all dry months ('all dry mo') and all wet month ('wet mo'). Finally, at the extreme right column of the table, the percent change between pre and post averages is calculated to describe the reduction (a negative value) or an increase (a positive value) of nutrients. Statistical Analysis In order to determine the significance for each average generated per pond and per parameter between pre and post fertilizer ordinance, one tail t-test was done independently with a probability of 90%. Appendix B presents tables with individual tables of the results. These analyses were performed for all 9 ponds to determine if there was a significant difference (Probability less than 90%) between the values pre and post ordinance. 5 The groups of tables bellow (Table 3) present examples of statistical analyses of the three parameters for Pond 1. Phosphorus Nitrogen Chlorophyll-A seq nbr 1 Pond 1 Stone Bridge seq nbr 1Pond 1 Stone Bridge seq nbr 1Pond 1 Stone Bridge t wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 3 1,N 19 12 31 1,N 20 12 32 1, N 19 12 31 3 1,mean 0.1180 0.05631 1,mean 1.577 1.468 1,mean 27.84 16.53 i 1,ss 0.1453 0.009881 1,ss 5.638 2.377 1,ss 4116. 455.8 2,s^2 0.005350 2.s^2 0.2672 2,s^2 157.7 i 3,sd 0.02697 3,sd 0.1887 3,sd 4.630 7 4,diff -0.06164 4,diff -0.1088 4,dill -11.31 3 4, t -2.286 4, t -0.5765 4, t -2.443 t 5,signf? yes 5,signf? no 5,signf? yes Table 3. Example of tables presenting statistical (t-test) analysis for 3 parameters for Pond 1. In this case, Pond 1 - Phosphorus, is showing that all 31 averages (19 for the pre years and 12 for the post years) present a negative value for the difference (diff: -0.061) indicating that there was a reduction on the concentration of phosphorus present in the water, and this difference is significant (tcalc= -2.286) when compared to the t critical value (tuft= -1.320). The comparison of the change in values between pre and post ordinance were summarized in Table 4. The values presented in the column labeled TP %Change, TKN %Change and Chl A % Change, are the percentage difference of the concentrations of the post values parameters relative to the pre values. These values were calculated with the following formula: Change = f(avg 04-08) - (avg 09-11)] x 100 (avg 04-08) TP TP TP°r° TKN TKN TKN Chl A Chl A Chl A pd PW avg 2004 avg 2009 %change avg 2004avg 200c °!o change avg 2004avg 2005 °)change id id to 2008 to 2011 to 2008 to 2011 to 2008 to 2011 1 1 wet mo 0.118 0.056 -52.3 1.577 1.468 -6.9 27.84 16.53 -40.6 2 4 wet mo 0.193 0.099 -48.5 1.289 1.169 -9.3 33.60 26.58 -20.9 4 35 wet mo 0.046 0.022 -52.6 1.013 0.7449 -26.5 18.54 15.45 -16.7 5 37 wet mo 0.140 0.144 2 5 1.489 1.511 1.5 26.11 20.27 -22.4 6 42 wet mo 0.160 0.154 -3.5 1.338 1.504 12.3 34.86 19.72 -43.4 7 47 wet mo 0.093 0.051 -45.8 1.058 1.020 -3.7 11.43 4.654 -59.3 8 54 wet mo 0.112 0.069 -38.4 2.522 2.174 -13.8 40.26 28.02 -30.4 9 57 wet mo 0.160 0.113 -29.5 1.693 1.416 -16.4 32.38 10.21 -68.5 avg of 8 0.128 0.088 -33.5 1.497 1.376 -7.8 28.130 17.679 -37.8 avg of si nficant values(bold) -48.8 -13.8 -44.1 3 14 wet mo I 0.223 0.2885 29 7_ 1.227 0.7364 -40.0 24.34 6.866 -71.8 Table 4. TP, TKN, ChIA averages concentrations"post" relative to "pre" in percentage. Values in red represent an increase (positive values) in the amount of the parameter after the ordinance was put in effect. The values in bold are statistically significant based on a ltail t-test at 90% probability level. The values for Pond 14, listed separate from the group, were eliminated from the overall computation because there were fewer samples for the periods of 2004 to 2008 compared to all the 6 other ponds. In addition, this pond was treated with a special dye (AQUASHADETM) to minimize light penetration to control underwater submerged plants. This dye increases the amount of phosphorus present in the water therefore a bias could be added by including this pond. Two averages are presented, the average for 8 ponds and the average of significant values (in bold). In all accounts, a reduction on the amount of the parameters has been established for all ponds (except Pond 14, previously explained); however, significant results were manifested in 3 out of 9 ponds for Phosphorus, 2 out of 9 for TKN, and 7 out of 9 for Chl A. The overall analysis is presented in Table 5. Every pond is listed and the decrease (in black) or increase (in red) change has been assigned per parameter. If the change was statistically significant, the font is in bold lettering. A column labeled "Overall" is presented to explain whether the overall condition is"OK", meaning that the decrease was determined, or"Treat with caution" meaning that the condition is uncertain due to other circumstances. a Location Overall TP TKN Chl-A Comment 1 1 Stone Bridge OK Decrease Decrease Decrease 2 4 Peppertree Pointe OK Decrease Decrease Decrease 3 14 South Pointe S Treat with ir.cresu Decrease Decrease Only pre-ord data are 4 points, caution interf.with treatment 4 35 Corkscrew OK Decrease Decrease Decrease 5 37 Wellington Treat with lrcre,.;r 1,,;,;,ea; Decrease small not sig.increase caution 6 42 Wyldewood Lakes Treat with Decrease Incre se Decrease small not sig.increase caution 7 47 South Wind OK Decrease Decrease Decrease 8 54 Candlewood Lake OK Decrease Decrease Decrease 9 57 Caloosa Creek Treat with Decrease Decrease Decrease Only since Aug 2007 caution Table 5. Summary of the effect of the Fertilizer Ordinance per pond. Conclusions The Lee County Ordinance forbidding the application of N and P in fertilizer during June through September came into effect in May of 2009. The Pond Watch Program of the Lee County Hyacinth Control District has collected data in storm water ponds from summer of 2004 to the present for Total Phosphorus, TKN and Chlorophyll A. Rainfall has been demonstrated to be different between the wet months of June through September as compared to the dry months of October through May. Thus the comparison of"pre-ordinance" and "post-ordinance" reflects only the wet months. Total phosphorus (TP) was reduced 48.8% and Chlorophyll-A was reduced 44.1 %, where as Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) was reduced 13.8 %. These statistical significant values show that the reduction was considerable, but clearly the magnitude for TKN is small. 7 Five out of nine storm water ponds demonstrated an overall decrease for the nutrient levels as well as the decrease on the effect associated in the concentration of Chlorophyll A. We are pleased to inform in this study that the Ordinance has had a positive effect in some of the urban ponds that serve as nutrient filtering and holding units for the improvement of water quality discharges to larger bodies of water. About the authors Dr. lames Ryan is a retired chemical engineer, having specialized in industrial membrane separations, CO2 separation and recovery from CO2 FOR oilfields, gas processing plant technology and refining processes. He is a graduate of MIT and U of Michigan. Presently he is a volunteer with the Pond Watch Program involved with storm water ponds and erosion. Dr. Ernesto Lasso de la Vega is a biologist working at the Lee County Hyacinth Control District in Fort Myers, FL. He is the Pond Watch Coordinator and water quality analyst of the Water Quality Laboratory of the District. References 1 Lee country Ordinance 08-08 http://www.leegov.com/gov/dept/NaturalResources/WaterQuality/Documents/Ordinance%20No %20%2008-08.pdf 2 Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. Eds. Clesceri, Greenberg, and Eaton. 20th Edition. 3 Lee County, Natural Resources, Hydrological Monitoring Group website http://www.lee county.com/gov/dept/NaturalResources/HvdrologicalMonitoring/Pages/RainfallData.aspx 4 Concepts and Applications of Inferential Statistics, Chapter 11, Richard Lowry, http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/webtext.html 8 Appendix A. Data for TP,TKN,and Chl A Per Pond TABLE P-1 I PHOSPHORUS (total P) DATA FOR 9 PONDS, MONTHLY AND YEARLY (mo) seq nbr]Pond 1 Stone Bridge pre post pre post post/pre TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 14(09 to 11) mg/1 years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to OS) 1 0.055 Q,Q22 0.043 0.065 0.089 0.030 0,048 0,076 0.065 0,051 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.085 0.048 0.064 0.072 0,085 0.057 0.080 0.071 0.071 0.069 0.079 0.059 -25.5 3 0.097 0.135 0.098 0.061 0.092 0.081 0.054 0.066 0.097 0.067 4 0.067 0.177 0.109 0.100 0.099 0.058 0.060 0.062 0.100 0.060 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.055 0.091 0.071 0.031 0.07Q 12Q52 0.044 0.047 0.064 0.048 0.072 0.055 -23.8 6 >t.Sta2 1252 ',lit? 010 0 055 7.170.010 .04,1 0.043 0.116 0.011 7 01.9§. 0 12 0:0718 194 01, 5:1: 0.rd 56 f 2.16'. 0.046 wet mo wet ma wet mo 8 y 1.1..2 Q.,4.%1 1 08Y 1:._5,33 .:.105 0/0.4 ,.,.5.. ;>2. 0.100 0050 0,118 0.056 -52.3 s.4 a „ 38 84 �4 . `) e3 E, 4? 0 u_l>%u Lill 0...�:3 (.�r+4, 0.095 10 0,059 0.065 0.076 0,048 0,040 0.041. 0,068 0.061 0.050 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 0,064 0.060 0,017 0,034 0,048 0,060 0,047 0,047 0.057 0.0481 -15,9 12 0.065 0.068 0,051 0.054 0,040 0.041 0.059 0.045 all dry,avg 0.072 0.083 0.072, 0.059 0.076 0.050 0.053 0.061 0.072 0.055 all wet.av_, ry 125 ,.124 0122. 0.086. 0.149 0 048 0 060. ii 0 0.11,9 0.05.. %wet gt dry 74.4 50.2 69.4 45.9 94.8 -5.3 28.3 -13,2 63.1 2.2 TABLE N-1 NITROGEN (total Kjeldahl N) DATA FOR 9 PONDS, MONTHLY AND YEARLY (ma) seq nbr]Pond 1 Stone Bridge pre post pre post post/pre TKN 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 91(04 to 08) 1 2.880 0,484 0.566, 1.159 1.561 1,279 1,151 1.107 1.330 1.161 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 ma 1 to 5 2 1.440' 1.176 1.324 0,379 1.956 1.295 1,273 1.161 1.255 1.243 1.377 1.200 -12.9 3 1.510' 1.589 1,140 1.608 1.794 0.594 0.611 1.373 1.528 0.859 4 0,000', 1.993 1,573 2,067 1.102 1.240 1.357 1.557 1.347 1.385 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.759, 1.162 1.826 1,471 1.903 1.562 0.961 1.533 1.424 1.352 1.368 1.236 -9.6 6 1.0. 0 0 849. 7199 :L..cal 2,998 1995.2 1..118 1,21.15 2.1701 1.265 . .ti.,.a1 2219'. 2,39:'. ;i<,.:_L.M. 1,40 1:13f2 1282. 1 .,t ' 123,.. 1 051 wet rno...... ..wet ttm...... wet t»o.... 8 1..:40j ..-.._L;7. _,481'. L..,:',..,42:/. 3 92 3. .114', ,s,84Q 2.2:11� 1.474'. ?.,80:; 1..577 1.,448 -6,9 9 LA 3,7.. 12190 0:92.6. 2.: : 1..999. .1...4.9 .1...2.0.1. 2181.... :.310, 1.754 10 1.657 1.310 1.711 1.138 1.566 1.384 1.075 1,454 1.342 mo 10 to limo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.185. 1.588': 1,658 0,864 1.569 1.177 1.477 1.203 1.349 1.305 -3.2 12 0.494 1.776' 1.314 1.503 1.614 1.197 1.147 1.403 dry,avg 1.318 1.217 1.275 1.421 1.565 1.193 1.240 1.370 1.236 wet,acg 1.6 71 1.44 5 1 828 1,511 1.669 1.114 1.140 1.571 1,468 %wet>dry 26.8 18.7 43.3 6.3 6.6 -6.6 15.1 18.8 TABLE C-1 CHLOROPHYLL-A DATA FOR 9 PONDS, MONTHLY AND YEARLY (mo) seq nbr]Pond 1 Stone Bridge pre post pre post post/pre Chl A 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug/l years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to OS) 1 43.850 79.779 2,931 26.396 28.072 13.392 12.954 24.220 26.206 16.855 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 ma 1 to 5 2 52.890 20.083 19.752 24.732 23.292 17.296 17.822 70,060 28.150 18.393 31.020 18.348 -40.8 3 38,600: 49,720 23,208 13,996 73,140 21480, 9.012 20.080 29.733 19,191 4 47.79Q 60.69Q 27.052 30.784 31.376 27.620 21.600 13.230 39.538 20.817 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 40.969', 32.750 29,872 21.440 37.336 13.972 16.878 18.608 31.472 16.486 28.292 16.975 -40.0 6 4_8442 1:1-119::01 4.7.71 1.3..1604 :'.;:9:3:04 9:...96 ,G 18 :12 429 32.211 12.976 7 .122 1J Uc,a... .,i 280 1 r' 12 370 3111. 26.960 22 180 i'>.783 20 505 wet me wet rno.........wet mo 1111.. 56:.!...2.80 .4 6,1,0 21 >97 2,,i.67 15.024 10 606 17 828. 1.,.74£1 ':'2.476 1.4-081 27.841 .1.6.531. 40,5 4 49 9.0 .189840. 1..8 t4'. 1.4..7.1:14 2_..,0 h.._60 1b,?22). 20 t;Q_0_.. 118 .5 18.560 1111.. �. �'. ......... �>d88 18.5. 10 11.752 29 2c.2 21.444 20.832 20.68Q 12.174 10.310 18.749 14.388 mo 10 to limo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 23.252 19.748 22.668 11.996 18.258 24.600 21.889 18.284 22.092 14.399 -34.8 12 28.828 28,188 26,144 19.197 9.672 7.506 25.588 8.589 dry,'avg 44.818 32.107 20.263 23.450 25.463 19.062' 14,796 27,666 16.975 wet,avq___..4,,1152)01.3 21.305 22.255 23.2291 10.260 22.0.9* 21.440 16 531 ..... %wet>dry 0.6 -31.4 34.8 -5.1 -8.5 -46.2 -0.8 -2.6 (mo) seq nbr 2 Pond 4 Peppertree Pt I pre post pre post post/pre TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) mg/L years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0,070 0.152 0,139 0.126 0.024 0,093 0.094 0.122 0.058 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.173 0.089 0.107 0.106 0.106 0.275 0.111 0.119 0.191 0.124 0.124 0.3 3 0.146 0.135 0.143 0.104 0.084 0,117 0.194 0.095 0.122 0.156 4 0.178 0497; 0.155 0,0¢7 0.233 0.083 0.127 0.233 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0,097 0.120 0.093 0.246 0.085 0.138 0.106 0.068 0.128 0.122 0.139 0.118 -14.7 6 0 0 012. 4Q22.9 0.1001 0.060 9.083 0.069 0.164 0.070 7 1.9x, 0,,j5,5 0...1"2,2 0.437 QZ,17.4 Q...;0.32. O.i3P4;1 0 282 0.083 wet mo wet mo wet mo 8 0.291 .169 0.247 0.129 02.22% 07.5 0098 0.104 0,194 0.087 0.193 0,099 -48.5 9 15254 0.096 0.159. .8 2088 0.092 5.:2 30 .151 1 0.1 4 3 0.161 10 0.126 0.170 0.196 0.198 0.071 0.116 0.164 0.135 mo 10 to Imo 10 to:mo 10 to 12 11 0.372 0.141. 0.099 0.080 0.133 0.257 0.088 0.187 0.109 -41.8 12 0.178 0.124 0.066 0,108 0.151 0.066 all dry,avg 0.122 0.169 0.133 0.150 0.112 0.113 0.140 0.149 0.127 at wet,avg 0.173 0.219 0.227' 0.114 0,237 0.075 0.125 0.195 0.100 %wet gt dry 42.7 29.8 70.6 -24.1 130.2 -33.5 31.8 (mo) seq nbr 2'Pond 4 Peppertree Pt I pre post pre post post/pre TKN 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 2.000 1.592 0.503 1.168 1.581 1.131 1.327 1.316 1.347 mo i to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 1.250 1.696 1.763 9.660 1.015 1.736 1.102 1.342 1.284 1.375 1.418 3.1 3 1.540 1.297 1.145 1.326 1.486 1.773 1.982 1.503 1.359 1.753 4 1.375 1.637 1.748 0.700 0.829 1.283 1.365 1.056 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 1.017 1.810, 1.991 1•1.77 1.440 1.619 1,408 1.567 1.475 1.530 1386 1.299 -6.2 b >.,Gt.2.K. 1,73.5. 1:222 1:07„3 A,x.50 1959 1 537. 1 1.320.... 1 1..... . f).c;c;l 1.211 1.371. 0 n2r.;... 1 '.; 1 119 wet nw wet mn.... wX-�.t.mo.. $` 1;./µ,, 1,40...... 1:..3,10 :"ft. 1..(13.(4 :1......2.4' 9.H.<:> 1 42.:3 1. 4:, 1 20).'......... 1,289 1,169 .9.�1 9 1,19,5 f`. 2.. ..3( 1..215,•3 1..1'14 (1,761: 1' 4:35 1.239 1.01S ,:.8213.... 10 1,056 1.235 1243 0.622 1.309 0.754 1.411 0.895 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.256 1.998 1.079 1.312 0.896 1.627 1.096 1.419 1.092 -23,0 12 0.804 1.639 1.643 1077 1.222 1.383 dry,avg 1.451 1.361 1.587 1.072 1.207 1.282 1.425 1,390 1,299 wet,awe 1.189 1.3 4... 1.337 1.4 1.2`11. ....1.241 0.972 1111.... 1 302 1.169_.. 1111..... 1111..... 1111..... %wet>dry 9.5 -25.5 -15.7 39.2', 3.6 -3.2: -6.3 -10.0 (mo) seq nbr 2 Pond 4 Peppertree Pt I pre post pre post post/pre ChiA 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug/L years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 '. 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 30.770 42.159 48.480 75.917 21,740 18,484 36,640 36.735 25.621 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 64.240 34.159 43.409 29.676 19.504 74,020 65.200 42.869 52.908 36.551 31.610 -13.5 3 49,680 38.800 25.768 19.976 13.088 22.909 25.660 31.540 29.462 26.700 4 55,130: 11.116. 42.940 12.044 21.180 70.940 35.308 21.060 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 43.73Q 60,940: 13.756, 45.440. 13.792 71.600'.. 45.280 17,648 39.432 28,243 39.238 29.108 -25.8 r: : >.. ;>y1...)', 21.,4) 2.1:1.23:14 117:20:. 21_1'?.11 23.: y 00 72,187 - 18 81;) Ei ,4311 { 4 ,i1:_:t, .,1 21.0.2 1 f.0+1, 2 s • ,, . ,•.e. .....! z 8 339 wet mo WPY me wet mo c i01..3. 7.9 3.3' 39352 36 469 3.5,1M .:_318 06.04.3.0 i9.80 r 30.11; 38.499 33.604 26.58.1 -20.9 I 0 - .3 S'.:.2C 17.272 16:84 ? 780 16 42.382 27 670; 10 28.620 68.794 65.960 20.140. 23.520 75.200 54.260 22.953 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 37.380 40.720 17.670 30.569 26.380 39.050 24.870 47.686 24,729 -48,1 12 47,120 45.809 27.720 29&4.4 46.460 27.180 _ dry,avg 47.105 43.038', 42.826 37.302. 26.083 20.626', 33.303 40.447 29.108 wet.sve 5.8 783 26.020 ._r it3u 31 000 2'7£371. 18.680 2.9.537 33.222_ 2 .�1 %wet>dry 24.8 -39.5 -53.7 -16.9 6.9 -9.4'. -17.9 -8.7 (mo) seq nbr 3 Pond 14 South Point S I pm post pre post post/pre TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) mg/L years pre ordinance - < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.269 0,045 0.220 0.173 0.269 0.133 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.302 0.170 0.217 0.146 0.302 0.193 0.225 0.195 -13.1 3 0.216 0.182 0.196 0.166 0.216 0.189 4 0.190 0,268 0.192 0.220 0.190 0.230 an dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.146 0.26Q 0.205 0.268 0.146 0.233 0.206 0.200 -3.2 6 .072.9 .":20 !..,,R48 Q,2t?4 0.11.25 0:41i3 7 0 360 0.269 0.297 0.275 0.360 0.253 wet mo wet:mo wet mo 8 0.179 0.200 0.307 0.288 0.179 0,254 0.223 0.288 29.2 9 0.229 0.21.5 Q22.0 0 0,240 0.229 0.243 10 0.163 0.207 0.225 0.279 0.197 0.185 0.227 mo 10 to Imo 10 to ,mo 10 to 12 11 0.178 0.198 0.218 0.227 0.174 0.188 0.223 0.191 0.208 8.9 12 0.240 0.158 0.186 0.204 0.199 0.186 all dry,avg 0.194 0.211 0.196 0.209 0.212 0.202 al we avg 0 22:7 0.319 is 2`30 0.2713 0 299 %wet gt dry 5.9 63.0 5.3 (mo) seq nbr 3.Pond 14 South Point S I pre post pre post post/pre TKM 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 1.448 0.962 0.970 0.173 1.448 0.702 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 2.128 1.340 0.872 0.146 2.128 0.786 1.508 0.707 -53.1 3 1.445 1.447 0.695 0.166 1.445 0.770 4 1.163 1.610 0.556 0.220 1.163 0.795 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 1.354 1.175 0.009 0.268 1.354 0.484 1.367 0.671 -50.9 0.942 1 412 1.048 13,264 0.442. 0.908 7 0:222 ::5.:15 0.45.4 0.17.5 0,922 0.782 wet mo wet me wet mo `_054 0 923 0,811 3 9,2198 1 054 0-676 1.,227' 0.736 -40.0 9 I-3929 0,215 .0.5.05 0,2.40 1.989 0.580 10 1.199', 1.185 0.797 0.922 0.197 1.192 0.639 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.373 1.122 99.33 0.940 0.174 1.248 0.682 1.250 0.604 -51.7 12 1.382 1.239 0.667 0.204 1.310 0.436 dry,avg 1.386 1.181 0.704 1.411! 0.671 v .a,.i.ivg 1.22, 1.216 0.727 1 r<: 1,7,3 ,2: , 1, %wet>dry -11.5 3.0 -13.1 9.7 (mo) seq nbr 3 Pond 14 South Point S I pre post pre post post/pre Chl A 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug1L years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 42.800 9.490 3.512 9,632 42.800 4.515 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 44,444 28.460 7.806 0.435 ee5 a 10.567 71.299 18.604 -73.9 3 71.558 43.500 3.536 0.782 21.556, 15.939 4 7.700 48444 2,574 0.882 7.700 57.899 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 57.440 6.624 4.698 0.977 52.440 4.100 46.665 13.253 -71.6 6 7.„404 .21,1„(..:,: a,x SJ:.`:}9!f; 7.41)4 10.559 11L80.0 5_,941 1.:".:M.4.!' 4.94..2: 10.810 9.911 wet mo wet mo wet.mo 8 11,368 6.7_17.7 3. ,,,2,6 10.596 14.163. 3=.475 24.343 6.856 -71..8 .j y4.,.8 v. 4.7S6 4.,llI 1..:16.1. 61 830 3.515 10 19.704 36.632 .3.860 4.762. 1.667 28.168! 3.430 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 16136 77.868 7.682 4.006 0,949 19.502 4.213 26.137 3.221 -87.7 12 48.880 12.604 1.983 0.857 30.742 1.420 dry,avg 28.240 53.575 38.538 3.485. 54.364. 13.253 wet ,;v0 24,343 10.498 9 075 24.242 86 6........ . %wet>dry -54.6 -72.8 -55.2', -48.2 (mo) seq nbr 4 Pond 35 Corkscrew I pre post pre post post/pre TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) mg/1_ years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.024 0.028 0.020 0.022 0.033 0,027 0.025 0.027 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.015 0.030 0.025 0.031 0.044 0.025 0.044 0.034 0.034 0.1 3 0.138 0.032 0.053 0.025 0.032 0.034 0.056 0.034 4 0.021. 0.019 0.039 0 095 1035 0.040 0.034 0.040 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.038 0.033 0.035 0.002 0.037 0.026 0.029 0.026 0.034 0.032 -5.4 5 0.01.6. 0.056 0 03 0.037 0 01 0.010 "..'!...01.8. 0.037 0.014 00 0.321: 0.02.0 0.040 0-3.12 0.022 4i:0.:7.. 0.087 0.027 wet ma wet m0 wet.ma 8 0,01,1 .Q.:22.3. O 026 0,060 2,023 ... ,052 0,033 417:V. P 0.046 0.022 52.6 9 1-� 3-i_s �02.' 2-,'1 0.€21 0.025 10 0.025 0.023 0.042 0.026 0,029 0.029 0.029 mo 10 to Imo 10 to:mo 10 to 12 11 0.049 0.027 0.002 0.022 0.026 0.022 0.032 0.028 -14.2 12 0.054 0.011 0.033 0.043 0.032 0.040 0.032 all dry,avg 0.055 0.034 0.031 0.023 0.034 0.035 0.030 0.033 0.033 all wet,a8;{ 0.019 0.030 0.001 0.038 0.134 0.019 0.025 0.044 0.022 %wet gt dry -65.2 -14.0, -1.1 64.8 295.8 -46.0 34.1 (mo) seq nbr 4 Pond 35 Corkscrew I pre post pre post post/pre TKN 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 1.010 1.235 0.659 0.767 1.294 0.934 0.993 0.934 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.086 1.231 0.912 1.124 1.119 0.838 1.119 0.936 0.847 -9.5 3 0.036 1.126 0.838 0.928 1.391 0.584 0.864 0.584 4 0.000 0.917 1.346 1.122 0.856 0.981 0.848 0.981 aN dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.854 0.919 2.026 0.934 0.855 0.615 1.118 0.615 1.005 0.919 -8.6 5 1:0 Q .1 1.9 2.2.53. 11 .1 18)30. .....10 3 2. ...4 11 2.',..... 475 ...0.868 _.. 7 0,€00 0,900 00,35 0 843 0.977 0 624 0.585 0.751 0.404 wet ma wet ma wet mu 01.1.9. 0 7 0. 0.44$, 1:1;:i 5... 4 1 013 P DIV1 0! 1.013 0.745 -26.5 9 0,623 0.050 1.005 1,:372 0 779-. ....0 742 ....0-779 10 1.660 1.471 1.291 0.919 1.349 1.336 1.340 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.235 1.736 1.238 0.645 1.403 0.645 1.155 1.039 -10.1 12 0.001 0.710 0.773 1.672 1131 0.789 1.131 dry,avg 0.475 0.897 1.289 0.996 1.159 0.915 0.921 1.024 0.919 wet,avg 0 778 0.067 1..454. 1.104 1 188 0 884• 0.536 1.000 0.745 %wet>dry 63.8 -25.6 12.7 13.9 2.5 -3.4 -2.3 -18.9_ (mo) seq nbr 4 Pond 35 Corkscrew I pre post pre post post/Pre Chl A 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Iavg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug/1 years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 20.230 19.880 8.764 30.908 12.096 8.614 14.376 8.614 mo i to 5 mo Ito S mo i to 5 2 10.401. 13.036 10.612 11.084 18.626 11.288 18.626 14.845 14.176 -4.5 3 17.150', 20.480' 15.100 9.520 12.844 6,644 15.019 6.644 4 71.490 15.280 19.968 12.412 12.360 21.852 16.302 21.852 all dry mo all dry mo aN dry mo 5 19.210', 13.100 28.184 11.486 10.672 15.146', 16.531', 15.146 15.168 13.852 -8.7 e 15 Q. 2..1:.2..1.0 1 t:7SI.. 19..504 11.:D f, 1 r2125. 9,294 16703 11..420 ;r1 _ .09,0 7 2339323 11,51.8 M 900 17.837 11.249 wet ma wet no wet mo a 20.1340 131.6330 7$,000 2€1.764 18,:3:30 20.1134 18.543 133.445 -14.7 9 al t C'. .19 194 20:.051. 1.:.,.13)3'.. .1.9...U.6 19 i 13 10.888 10 10.298 13.280 16.852', 19.932 19.852', 15.091 19.852 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 29.016 15.416 10.016 10.506 18.149 10.506 15.871 13.311 -16.1 12 13.900 10.546 11.520 71.808 9.574 14.944, 9.574 dry.avg 19.520 16.544 16.800 11.669 14.685 16.995 11.966 15.212 13.852 we. ,,a-y 1 93. 19 1;5 lb 1.76 19.487 18`,75 1:1.884 17 7(3 i?.572 15.4:15 wet>dry -17.0. 17.6.. 8.2 67.0. 28.5 -18.3 22.1'.. 11.5 seq nbr S Pond 37 Wellington TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011�avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) mg/L < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.037 0.109 0.094 0.081 0.106 0.010 0.059 0.092 0.058 0.085 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0,152 0.052 0,095 0.075 0.068 0.109 0.069 0.082 0.088 0.089 0.083 0.077 -6.8 3 0.078 0.144 0.116 0.089 0.044 0,217 0.069 0.069 0.131 0.094 4 0,033 0.112 0,096 0.091 0.078 0,054 0.080 0.064 0.066 0.082 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0,040 0.085 0.097 0.052', 0.048_ 0,069 0.039 0.059 0.065 0.089 0.089 0.2 6 0.011. 3.232 0.098 0.069 0.035 0.014 0.040 0.039 0.026 0.094• 0.091 0.151 C t.5.1 0.905 0.038 Q,, 9SA4 0 502 0.317 wet tiro wet mo wet mo 8 1118 0.0139 0.117 0 62 043 0.011 0.055 0.904 0.047 0.086 0,140 0,1.44 2.5 0 1.55 0.1 04 0_1 9 t. 59 C 0 7 2 0 065 04256 0 089 0 100 10 0.119 0.106 0.068 0.075 0.215 0.051. 0.074 0.145 0.092 ma 10 to Imo 10 to 1 ma 10 to 12 11 0.225 0.101 0,041. 0.126 0.216 0.126 0.123 0.105 0,114 8.3 12 0.192 0.069 0.052 0.073 0.041 0.052 0.078 dry,avg 0.068 0.106 0.102 0.071 0.067 0.114 0.063 0.091 0.088 we,t,avg 0.099 0.144 0.108 0.053 0.'80 0.042 0,089 0,161 _.149 %wet>dry 44.9 36.0 5.6 -11.7' 316.2 -63.2 -63.2 ,68.4 seq nbr 5 Pond 37 Wellington I I TKN 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 _ 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 2.130 0.941 1.201 1.058' 1.426 1.435 1.523 1.522 1.351 1.493 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 1.110 0.667 1.441 1.231 1.352 2.111. 1.498 0.618 1.160 1.409 1.246 1.522 22.2 3 0.856 1,596 0.857 1.214 1.547 2.292 1.733 1.618 1.234 1.881 4 0.000 1.488 1.506 1.495 1.264 1.444 1.603 7.029 1,150 1.692 all dry mo all dry ma all dry mo 5 0.816 1.427 1.693 1.416 1.309 1.719 0.159 1.332 0.939 1.285 1.547 20.4 `• 2.52t 0,93.5 '.,i1..' 1.341: 1.591 .33.1 �,n.i 4,4. .817 1.59 7 3 237 1.4=0 1.153 1._898 1.585 3_494 1.085 1.930 1.389 wet mo mo wet mo 8 G-84} 1:.2 0 1:111 3":47.. 1.&21 ...:.56 1.131 1.5:6 1 343 1.434 1.489 1.511. 1.5 9 LOS 2.910. 0.951 1.:44 1.598 1.457 1.897 1.155.. . .16 . 10 1.306 1.630 1.579 1.384 1.341' 1 836 7.04]. 1.475 1.740 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.199 1.370 1.892 1.764. 1.357 1.470 1.561 1.375 1.597 16.1 12 0.000, 1.539 1.056 2222 1.927 0.912 1.204 1.420 dry,avg 0.982 1.078 1.309 1.367 1.515 1.730 1.468 1.297 1.547 :4,avg 2.04 i 0.911 1.595 .1.428 1..690 ..157 1.648. _ 1"511 1,511 %wet>dry 107.7 -15.5 2 1.9 4.4! 11.5 -15.7 16.5 -2.3 seq nbr 5 Pond 37Weington I '.. ChlA 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ugh years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 3Q.410 55.925 15.096 29.020 18.804 9.608 32.560 29.851 21.084 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 23.400 30.159 52.040 23.468 26.520 44.620 48.08Q 26.060 31.117 39.587 28.239 25.246 -10.6 3 18.640 45.940 21.036 18.008 25.052 26.324 31.709 19.332 25.735 25.785 4 18.240 39.600 24,328. 18.816 33.996 30.569 79.080 14.787 26.996 24.641 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 23.280 47.590 77.417', 19.072 20.132 11.618 4.376 27.497 7.996 26.449 45.980 73.8 8 13520. 1.L171.Q 21.14.8..'.. 21.67:2 121123 .135 774 2L-4.29 125649 29..232' 17.247 �' ,K i. ,i _=84. 27.0.35 7LQj5 :,.'420 19310 1r...`.3' 16 1.8 wet mo wet mo wet mo ,, 3333,, ` 27. 4i. 7r ,'. 7'.. r ._...1n2 '3...5 b 15,357. 8..a�'10 16:2 7'. 27 271,_.70 439...........26,114 20.272 -22.4 9 .11.2,15.Q .4 ?- 17.:U2 2 .r,.'2 1.....499 ,:a.119 29,v.I:.Q. 27 450 89 10 13.074 22,54Q' 28.284 48.440 91.160 76.709' 95.100 28.110 70.987 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 7.961 30.900 20.952 98.900 30.090 762.809 17.971 a###e 22.381 79.672 256.0 12 0.000 26.672, 77.004 11.168 17.092 15.624 19.961 16.358 dry,avg 22.794 29.294 26.388 22.453' 29.159 44.584 27.449 25.905 45.980 wet,avg 30,710 27.435. 24.952 19.520 29.484 18.975. 4.`_';2i 25.764. 20,272 wet>dry 34.7 -6.3. -5.4 -13.1 1.1 -57.5. -0.5', -55.9 seq nbr 6 Pond 42 Wyldewood Lakes TP 2004 2005, 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 .%(09 to 11) mg/L < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.143 0.177 0.041. 0.082 0.160 0.061 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.117 0.074 0.117 0.190 0.107 0.124 #01V/01 0.205 0.165 -19.4 3 0,1 1 1 0.102 0.254 0.402 0.314 0.217 0.314 4 0.435 0,167 0.312 0 217 0.138 0.169 0.254 #DIV/01 all dry mo all dry mo an dry mo 5 0.333 0.131 0.283 0.198 0.256 0.188 0.236 0.222 0.172 0.146 -15.1 r 0.201, 0,347 0.701 0,157 0.Q70 0054 0.175 e`IV;7. Q dlrs Q:'2.1,5 4 r, n 7.?' E:95 0.213 0 121 wet ma wet ma wet ma K1,14.1 D.1,';;& 0.1 .j 3..1;14 1114 oi.Q;a 0,139 tt DI"710 0.160, 0,154 -3,5 9 1105. ,1.15 9,114 11.Q2 1269. 9:.199 0.128 269 10 0.118' 0.128 0.152 0.110 0.179 0.176 0.127 0.179 mo 10 to Imo 10 to 1 mo 10 to 12 11 0.099 0.130 0.051 0.077 0.061 0.131 0.048 0.089 0.096 0.115 0.119 3.8 , 12 0.110 0.108 0.179 0.132 #DIV/01 dry,avg 0.293 0.123 0.188 0.186 0A48 0.168 0.145 0.168 0.157 wet,ar;r 0 179 0.203 0.143 0 146 0.111 0 77 0.233 0.164 155 %wet>dry -38.8 64.9 -23.8 -21.9 -25.4 -54.3 -2.3 -1.2 seq nbr 6 Pond 42 Wyklewood Lakes TKN 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.965' 1.313 1.354 1.298 1.139 1.326 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 1,344 1,087 1.435 2.504 1.040 1.592 1.040 1.546 1.565 1.2 3 1.21Q 1.335 1.430 2.700 1.839 1.544 1.839 4 0.000 1.291. 3.232 7.144 1.034 1.933 1.540 1.933 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 1.134 1.350 3.096', 1.269 2.454 1.037 1.712 1.745 1.546 1.455 -5.9 6 ;1.010 0.949 1.,654 1.324 1..469 1.091 1.801 1.091 .:.aE 1 ,,,2r,1 1. 1..1.00 0.9..1 1.1''17 1.311 wet me wet ma wet ma ..:... ...5 1 289 1 9t.'5 1,.'.,1 R 1.504 12..3 E: C�i ' rC 3 i '9C �Ey5 1.ap5 9 1.224. 0.195 0.794', ..27 223. 2.237 0.935 1.766 10 1.718 1.655 2..QQ1 1.059 1.377 1.565 1.608 1.471 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.350 1.92Q 1.723 0.956 1287 1.397 0.882 1.487 1.189 1.546 1.302 -15.8 12 1.574 1.113. 1.440 1.543 #DIV/01 dry,avg 0.781 1.366 1.888 1.907 1.356 1.733 1.277 1.521 1.455 wet:aoq 1,6.4.4 0 904 1 450. 1.261 1 63 1.893'. 1.200. 1.303 1.504 %wet>dry 110.4 -33.8 -23.2', -33.9 20.4 9.2', -14.3 3.3 seq nbr 6 Pond 42 Wyklewood Lakes ChI A 2004 2005. 2006 2007 2008 2009. 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug/L years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 69.360 41.520 35.124 8.394 55,440 21.759 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 67.749 33.320 26.274 §8000 29.600 48.836 29.600 40.931 26.282 35.8 3 31.710 35.230 42.720 20.178 32.528 37.459 32.528 4 77.420 30.120, 54.160 32432 14.32Q 21.600 31.290 21.600 an dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 47.980 13.560 79.320 29.316 4Z220 9.010 41.294 28.365 34.858 24.412 -30.0 0 :1:3:320 ..10:: 91 :.1.432' 2.2.:1.12 3.2:.304 0.9.35 26.802 6'978 .2„6.80 ;3.;.6°:r 4_220 :1159 18,526 23 497 1 .685 wet ma wet ma wet ma 8 :11622 27.780 28.802 3-1 .920 - 25.314. - 140 26.696 19.719 -26.1 .1:1:.1. 1:.;..., , 3O.686' 22.430 M ...1n...-.:.... 1.;=.:.:._�9. :::.144 2:x.:.,+.20 24:1116 10 12.344 )0.516 53.200 76.848 23420 26.700 28.227 25.050 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 70.668' 18.252 32.688 19.748 8.220 28.320, 22,320 22.837 19.622 24.369 21.793 10.6 12 24.644 11.244 27.917 21.267.#0N/01 dry,avg 40.703 34.209 39.751 31.779 33.292 30.900 17.281 35.831 24.412 wet.a4.:i D8.010 .27.280 17.51S 23.760 11.18', 0 850 15423 26.576 1...19.719.. %wet>dry -6.6 -20.3 -55.9', -27.1 -36.1 -71.4', -25.8', -19.2 seq nbr 7 Pond 47 South Wind TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) mq/L < yearspost ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.032 0.056 0.044 0.044 0.085 mo 1 to 5 mo i to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.120 9.033 0.027 0.059 0.060 0.046 0.060 0.089 0.045', 0.050 12.2 3 0.116 0.022 0.035 0.050 0.061 0.049 0.058 0.094 4 0.024 0.041 0.033 0.082 ai dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.037 0.001 0.038 0.037 0.025 0.065 0.070 0.051 -26.7 6 0.03,8 13.32. 0892g 0,0.13 0.033 0.094 0)), c.,.:.0.9.9 01022 Q f c 3 0.112 9.312 wet mo wet me wet mo 8 0.119 0.107. 0.049 0.099 0.052 0.093 0.086 0,0936 0.051 -45.8 9...224 ..1.:,1_l.......2.9!'3 r b '` Q..,.1..22 0.11Ci 9.100 10 1,4Z 0.087, 0.037 0.095 0.106 0.092 mo 10 to Imo 10 to mo 10 to 12 11 0,238 0.056 0.003 0.085 0.052 0.055 0.096 0.123 0.099 0.053 -45.8 12 0.205 0.047 0.030 0.092 0.078 dry,avg 0.217 0.077 0.025 0.056 0.054 0.052 0.064 0.088 ,. 1.avg 0.143.....0.078 0.041......0.088 0.040.. ..0.072 0.090.. .0.149 %wet>dry -15.7 1.4 64.9 57.4 -26.1 39.4 68.4 seg nbr 7 Pond 47South Wind I TKN 2004 2005', 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004' avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.724 0.910 1.219 0.817 1.219 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1to5 2 1.013 0.411. 0.861 1.266 1.116 0.601 0.762 0.994 0.736, 0.935 27.1 3 0.648! 0.802 0.841 0.858 1.209 1.207 0.764 1.089 4 0.899 0.676 0.787 #DIV/01 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.560 0.678 0.539 0.012 0.593 0.012 0.897, 0.923 2.8 5 :.092'. 2.092' L090 Q,.02'!.. 0,997 0.527 1-_r-.0 IJ?;r 9:..lo 1.2:31 1.188 4.1;120: wet inn wet mo wet ma. 1. 1_119 0.1994 4 o...L41 1 31.) 1:m,, 0,)=z.: 0.989 1.058 1.020 3.7 9 1.092: 0.869. 8.91:3 :1 :94 1 511 1.012 1 067.. 1.284 10 1.955 1.084' 0.950 1.208 1.300 #DIV/03 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.228 0.942 1.000 1.345 0.592 1.157 1.129 0.872 1.089 0.872 -19.9 12 0.575 0.877 0.811. _ 0.755#DIV/01 dry,avg 1.253 0.859 0.757 0.951 0.905 0.941 0.863 0.923 ,vet,ave.: 1.027. 1 03 0 740 1..2.37 1 019 1 057 1 055'. 1.020 %wet>dry 6.0 21.0 -2.2 30.1_ 12.5 22.2 10.5 seq nbr 7 Pond 47 South Wind I C61A 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 - avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug/L years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 8.336 9.070 : 11.804 8.678 11.804 me 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 20.336 18.072 7.900 17.492 6,386 ,3.154 15.436 8.981 10.589 8.020 -24.3 3 13.470 8.706 4.040 10.468 11.052 2.632 8.723 8.117 4 18.084 8.016 13.050 a01V/0i all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 12.340 4.348 5.032 1.056 7.240 1.056 11.339! 7.005 -38.2 '. ..51. 0351 4 0 :2,.5.94 5.245 5.604 `, 51 17.21; 5,,,r81. 14,._,r. `f 851 -;:0:11 %1 wet tun wet run wet mo 8 19.238 1.3.0.64 6.:)2V 26.;144 ,,`,5 ..655 1,997 ..... .1'1.428- 4.654 -59.:3 c 33.4010 8.564 8.072 11.192 9.12 5.112. 15,407 S.512 10 7.816 7.784 7.946 14.544 9.523 #DIV/0! mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 11.748 15,008 8.648 16.716 4.31Q 1.589 13.030 2.949 12.227 2.949 -75.9 12 16.548 20.448 7.284 14.760 #081/03 dry,avg 12.037 13.648 8.920 9.542 10.727'. 6.378 11.305 7.005 ::-e' av; 22.723 6..806. 6.410 12.158 5.758 5.112 11.'312 4.15-1 14 wet>dry 88.8 -50.1, -28.1 27.4 -46.3 -2.3 -33.6 seq nbr 8 Pond S4Candlewood e TP 2004 2005 2006 2007' 2008 2009 2010Lak' 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 toil) mg/L < years(lost ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.038 0.134 0.015 0.057 0.071 0.086 0.036 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.049 0.056 0.087 0.063 0.072 0.052 0.075 0.062 0.069 11.7 3 0.062 0.056 0.143 0.081 0.076 0.059 0.112 4 0.069 0.061 0.061 0.067 0.061 0.065 0.064 all dry mo aN dry mo all dry mo 5 0.023 0,071 0.059 0.053 0.067 0.047 0.056 0.056 0.063 11.4 0,;?4£} 0.092,92 0.009 0 0::2 0 0II7 0.070 0_020 7 0.051 0 4 t4 0.029 0.0:.4 0.079 0.257 0.032 wet mo wet mo wet ma 8 0.066 Q..0..4 0..0.11 ,0 026 G:Q5`. 0.076 0..3.8 0,112 0.069 -38.4 "s E A2.h2 0:.:14.§ ._t.__.4 x'4.......0:_0-ro G.t)4ti 0.212 10 0.Q44, 0.055 0.046, 0.040 0.049 0.0,39 0.048 0.044 mo 10 to Imo 10 to,mo 10 to 12 11 0.094 0.033 0.048 0.049 0.051 0.058 0.049 0.050 0.049 -2.4 12 0.040 0.050 0.042 0.06? 0.049 0.044 0.062 dry,avg 0.069 0.047 0.064 0.068 0.060 0.057 0.064 •',VEi;avg 0.052 0.171. 0.110 0.64'.. .,..`:...12. 0.075 %wet>dry 11.3. 167.3 61.9 95.0 seq nbr 8 Pond 54 Candlewood Lake TKN 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 1.229 2.313 2.386 2.36 1.491 1.771 2.012 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 1222 2.136 2,736 2.17? 1.438 1.683 2.116 1.821 2.029 11.4 3 1.722 2.26 2.586 1.635 1.899 1.991 2.040 4 2.238 1.743 2.075 1.317 1.637 1.990 1.676 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 1.593 1.746 2.511 2.007, 2.381 1.670 2.300 1.925 2.017 4.8 .. , ..1 `' 2.625 m.1.,;4 1..)E2 2,568 2.':;80 1.502 2 048 2,4I C9 1.'77.'x; 1.('t4,7 2 v=;€). 2,254 2.1D9 wet mu wet ma wet mu 2,W6 :,Q.51 2.,Ah2 i FS7 1 .;.' 2.714 1 82 2.522. 2.174 -13.8 2_801, 2 020 1.878 ___7 78 3.090 .2.741 2.2.32 10 7.147 2.173 1.745 1.662 2.170', 2.525 2.022 2.069 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.290 2.532 2.223 1.186' 1.893 2.039 1.639 2.041, 1.991 -2.4 12 1.611 1.842', 2.739 2.169 2.285 2.064 2.227 dry,avg 1.721 1.828 2.113 2.326 1.877 1.904 2.017 w'r:,-a,:1 2.401 2.641... 2.5.1.0 1.755 I`:22 2 114 %wet>dry 31.5. 25.0 7.9. 32.5 7.8 sec nbr 8 Pond 54 Candlewood Lake Chl A 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug/L years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 31.797 37.020 47.360 24.810 31.200 34,406 32.790 mo 1 to 5 rno 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 36.316 38.172 42.74Q 27.360 47.980 37.244 37.693 35.112 33.678 -4.1 3 40.040 44.760 44.400 34.640 31.060 42.400 36.700 4 37.308 33.124 50,000 33.660 15.594 35.216 33.085 aN dry mo all dry nmo all dry mo 5 25.664 26.924 28.500 16.730 39.140 26.294 28.123 35.672 31.122 -12.8 6 i2:.-...,120;.b:0.,42 20.27 2.x,...2.,.`1 >;7.7,/7 29.2N. .r':.0 81 2).x;32 7 `l.6...f.. 213.0. ,1,,,.1.5 :_ii,;.:Z5Q 48 840 25.059 wet mu wet mu wet ma 4' 8 1)-95.2 _,_7,b4Q. iF..h4.} '.Ri,.:,_y7 �h-,S„2Q 38.706 29.891 40.264 28.021 -30.4 9 11.:4,00 4:12G, 2.781 30 4.5.Q20 4'.1'.34 0: .7 503 10 30.656 45.600 37.868 77.120 30,130' 41.920 38.041 31.390 mo 10 to 12 ma 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 38.566 36.312 37.316 27.990, 22.760 37.399 25.375 36.294 25.643 -29.3 12 12.404 51.040 36.880 10.039 24.540 33.441 17.290 dry,avg _ 34.612 38.009 36.508 38.353 25.045 35.555 31.122 wet,Bv:E 39.158 41.370 24,946 21.738'. 40 264 28.021 wet>dry 3.0 13.3 -35.0 I 13.2 -10.0 seq nbr 9 Pond 57Calusa Creek I TP 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) mg/L < yearspost ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 0.049 0.025, 0,142 0.049 0.025 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0.066 0.114, 0.128 0.066 0.114 0.059 0.149 154.0 3 0.082 0.437 0.078 0.213 0.082 0.257 4 0.061 0.056 0.121 0,120 0.061 0.088 aN dry mo aN dry mo aN dry mo 5 0.036 0.047 0.118 0.345 0.036 0.082 0.077 0.146 91.1 6 0,075 0St2.1 0.013 0.273 0.075 0.082 0 40 0.,,4`1 0.117 9.162 0 45'.3 0.0531 wet met .wet mo wet mo 8 82.088 0J132. Q.1t12 Q.055. 0,144 0.125 0.048 0.160. 0.113 -29,5 9 Q..10s2 0 032 0.o;t2 Q17":2 Q.J1.2. 0 085 0.122 10 0.100 0.122 0.099 0.161 0.118 0.111 0.130 mo 10 to Imo 10 to mo 10 to 12 11 0.026 0.096 0.116 0.158 0.161 0.061 0.137 0.091 0.141 54.4 12 0.074 0.129 0.136 0.179 0.102 0.136 dry,avg 0.067 0.080 0.130 0.126 0.071 0.128 wet,evn 0 097 0 102 0..05? .0.104 0.187 0.083 %wet>dry ' 45.3 139.3 -52.0 164.0 seq nbr 9 Pond 57 Calusa Creek I TKN 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 avg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11)^ ppm years pre ordinance < years post ord to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&1.1 gt(04 to 08) 1 0,726 1.535 0.937 0.726 1.236 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 0,768 1.044 0.574 0.768 0.809 0.917 1.143 24.7 3 4.255 1.172 1.026 1.585 0.955 1.245 4 1.163 0.799 0.931 0.680 1.163 0,804 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 0.977 1058 1.510 2.056 0.972 1.541 1.104 1.222 10.7 , 1A1? n-,5315 .,..'n.::.. �4:', 255 , 1....55.5 . 32.. .1....9.1..0 X04 1 ::65 1 25 wet urn wet me wet mo 6 1.;3.11' 2.,j94 1...:117S. 1. '90. tj'1. 2 257'. 1..38.`1 1.693 1..416 -164 9 1.;8o32 1 3nR 2.2:.,9h i 315 'el' 525'. 1.740! 10 1.187' 1.106 0.785 1344 2.052 1.146 1.394 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 1.509 0.970 1.351 1.037 1.473 1.239 1.287 1.250 1.351 7.2 12 0.820 1.971 1.110 1.657 1.395', 1.384 dry,avg 1.172 1.079 1.108 1.143 1.046 1.222 ..E.t,a:,q - 1.591 1.693 1.361 1.113 1.643- 1.416 %wet>dry 44.3 57.0 22.8 57.2'' 15.8 seq nbr 9 Pond 57Calusa Creek I ChlA 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 vg 2004 avg 09 avg 2004 avg 09 %(09 to 11) ug{L years pre ordinance < years post ord- to 2008 10&11 to 2008 10&11 gt(04 to 08) 1 7.836 11.688 2.318 7.836 7.003 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 mo 1 to 5 2 1242 9.745 3.484 5.292 2.115 9.910 9.066 -8.5 3 13.884 27.812 0.794 21.920 13.884 16.675 4 10.648 24.164 3.228 3.710 10.648 10.367 all dry mo all dry mo all dry mo 5 11.892 5330 5.038. 7.524 11.892', 6.164 11.259 8.274 -26.5 15:28.8. 6,.825 Z..:94 18..041) 45.240 13.108' 33.::7:16 4.2 21 8 731' 7 54 1 6,236 5.282€,:2 wet mo '.wet mu wet mu p .3_1.77 81.200 5.`_3>$ 3,34.1 11.884 46.53:' 6.:86 32.383 1.0.207 -318.5 1.7..,..:';10. 4% 7 cab 78 4.0..3.1.Q. 24.57;: 15.676 . ...1.,._ .2 �,,8.,, ut_ 8 10 13.788 13.840 3.868 3.056 20.560 13.814 9.161 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 mo 10 to 12 11 9.512 7.008 1.616 2.742 15.677 8.260 6.660 12.383 6.989 -43,6 12 9.776 2432.2 3.558 6.886 15.074 4.222 dry,avg 10.859 11.409 12.513 2.380 10.838 8.274 wet,ave.) ".5.0 6 41.0.37 4.843 4.503 330.722 10 207 wet>dry 38.8 259.7 -61.3 183.5 23.4 Appendix B Tables of statistical evaluation of the 3 nutrients in the 9 ponds Phosphorus Nitrogen Chlorophyll-A seq nbr 1 Pond 1 Stone Bridge seq nbr 1 Pond 1 Stone Bridge sect nbr 1 Pond 1 Stone Bridge wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 19 12 31 1,N 20 12 32 1,N 19 12 31 1,mean 0.1180 0.05631 1,mean 1.577 1.468 1,mean 27.84 16.53 1,ss 0.1453 0.009881 1,ss 5.638 2.377 1,ss 4116 455.8 2,s^2 0.005350 2,s^2 0.2672 2,s"2 157.7 3,sd 0.02697 3,sd 0.1887 3,sd 4.630 4,diff -0.06164 4,diff -0.1088 4,cliff -11.31 • 4,t -2.286 4,t -0.5765 4,t -2.443 5,signf? yes 5,signf? no 5,signf? yes 0.001 0.001 seq nbr 2 Pond 4 Peppertree Pt seq nbr 2 Pond 4 Peppertree Pt seq nbr 2 Pond 4 Peppertree Pt wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 18 12 30 1,N 18 12 30 1,N 18 11 29 1,mean 0.1929 0.09933 1,mean 1.289 1.169 1,mean 33.60 26.58 1,ss 0.2349 0.024828 1,ss 3.902 1.319 1,ss 8555 1442.8 2,s^2 0.009277 2,s^2 0.1865 2,s^2 370.3 3,sd 0.03590 3,sd 0.1609 3,sd 7.365 4,cliff -0.09352 4,diff -0.1194 4,diff -7.02 4,t -2.605 4,t -0.7422 4,t -0.954 5,signf? yes 5,signf? no 5,signf? no 0.001 seq nbr 3 Pond 14 South Point S seq nbr 3•Pond 14 South Point S ss seq nbr 3 Pond 14 South Point S wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 4 12 16 1,N 4 12 16 1,N 4 12 16 1,mean 0.2233 0.28846 1,mean 1.227 0.736 1,mean 24.34 6.87 1,ss 0.0304 0.110245 1,ss 0.786 2.383 1,ss 2207 523.2 2,s^2 0.010048 2,s^2 0.2264 2,s^2 195.0 3,sd 0.05787 3,sd 0.2747 3,sd 8.062 4,diff 0.06512 4,diff -0.4903 4,diff -17.48 4,t 1.125 4,t • -1.7848 4,t -2.168 5,signf? yes 5,signf? yes 5,signf? yes 0.100 0.06 0.02 seq nbr 4 Pond 35 Corkscrew sea nbr 4 Pond 35 Corkscrew seq nbr 4 Pond 35 Corkscrew wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 19 5 24 1,N 19 5 24 1,N 19 5 24 1,mean 0.0456 0.02163 1,mean 1.013 0.745 1,mean 18.54 15.45 1,ss 0.0775 0.000269 1,ss 5.217 0.363 1,ss 500 217.8 2,s^2 0.003537 2,s^2 0.2537 2,s^2 32.6 3,sd 0.02989 3,sd 0.2531 3,sd 2.870 4,diff -0.02396 4,diff -0.2679 4,cliff -3.10 4,t -0.802 4,t -1.0585 4,t -1.079 5,signf? no 5,signf? s no 5,signf? no seq nbr 5 Pond 37'Wellington seq nbr 5 Pond 37 Wellington seq nbr 5 Pond 37 Wellington wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 19 11 30 1,N 19 11 30 1,N 19- 11 30 1,mean 0.1402 0.14373 1,mean 1.489 1.511 1,mean 26.11 20.27 1,ss 0.7605 0.703114 1,ss 7.922 0.661 1,ss 1801 420.5 2,s"2 0.052271 2,s^2 0.3065 2,s"2 79.3 3,sd 0.08662 3,sd 0.2098 3,sd 3.375 4,Jiff 0.00356 4,diff 0.0220 4,Jiff 5.84 4,1 0.041 4,t 0.1050 4,1 -1.731 5, no 5,signf? no 5,signf? yes 0.06 seq nbr 6 Pond 42 Wyldewood Lakes seq nbr 6 Pond 42 Wyldewood Lakesi seq nbr 6 Pond 42 Wyldewood Lakes• wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 17 7 24 1,N 17 7 24 1,N 17 7 24 1,mean 0.1599 0.15433 1,mean 1.338 1.504 1,mean 26.70 19.72 1,ss 0.0650 0.037801 1,ss 7.914 1.597 1,ss 1717 521.2 2,s"2 0.004675 2,s"2 0.4323 2,s"2 101.7 3,sd 0.03071 3,sd 0.2953 3,sd 4.530 4,diff -0.00554 4,diff 0.1653 4,diff -6.98 4,t -0.181 4,1 0.5597 4,t -1.540 5,signf? no 5,signf? no 5,signf? _ yes 0.07 seq nbr 7 Pond 47 South Wind seq nbr 7 Pond 47 South Wind seq nbr 7 Pond 47 South Wind wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 15 4 19 1,N 15 4 19 1,N 15 4 19 1,mean 0.0934 0.05066 1,mean 1.058 1.020 1,mean 11.43. 4.65 1,ss 0.0538 0.001606 1,ss 1.475 0.486 1,ss 856 9.8 2,s^y 0.003261 2,s^2 0.1154 2,s"2 50.9 3,sd 0.03214 3,sd 0.1911 3,sd 4.016 4,diff -0,04278 4,diff -0.0387 4,diff -6.77 4,t -1.331 4,t -0.2024 4,t -1.687 5,signf? yes 5,signf? no 5,signf? yes 0.1 0.05 seq nbr 8 Pond 54 Candlewood Lake seq nbr 8 Pond 54 Candlewood Lake seq nbr 8 Pond 54',Candlewood Lake wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 8 12 20 1,N 8 12 20 1,N 8 12 20 1,mean 0.1118 0.06885 1,mean 2.522 2.174 1,mean 40.26. 1,ss 0.1438 0.095916 1,ss 1.400 3.630 1,ss 479 1045.2 2.s"2 0.013318 2,s^2 0.2795 2,s"2 84.7 3,sd 0.05267 3,sd 0.2413 3,sd 4.200 4,duff -0.04299 4,diff -0.3483 4,diff -12.24 4,t -0.816 4,1 -1.4433 4,t -2.915 5,signf? no 5,algal? yes 5,signf? _ yes 0.08 0.004 sec nbr 9 Pond 57 Calusa Creek seq nbr 9 Pond 57 Calusa Creek seq nbr 9 Pond 57'Calusa Creek wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all wet mo pre post all 1,N 6 12 18 1,N 6 12 18 1,N 6 12 18 1,mean 0.1602 0.11299 1,mean 1.693 1.416 1,mean 32.38 10.21 1,ss 0.1168 0.049262 1,ss 0.674 2.484 1,ss 3846 1630.5 2,s^2 0.010377 2,s"2 0.1974 2,s^2 342.3 3,sd 0.05093 3,sd 0.2221 3,sd 9.250 4,diff 0.04722 4,diff -0.2768 4,diff -22.18 4,t -0.927 4,t -1.2463 4,t -2.397 5,signf? no 5,signf? no 5,signf? yes, 0.015