PART III: EVALUATION CRITERIA

PART III: EVALUATION CRITERIA 1. Project Name (as listed in the Strategic Beach Management Plan): South Marco Island Beach Renourishment 2. Project Description: (Include county, location with reference to range monuments, brief project history and description of proposed activities.): The South Marco Island Beach Renourishment Project is located on the southwest Florida coastline of Collier County between Florida Department of Environmental Protection monuments from reference monument R-144 to R-148+600 (G-4). This project has a design beach width of 100 ft. from the baseline and is nourished on a 6-year interval. The project’s borrow area is the Caxambas Pass Borrow Area with upland sand sources serving as supplemental borrow areas. This project includes yearly physical beach monitoring, beach tilling, turtle and shorebird monitoring. All the monitoring activities are required by the FDEP and USACE permits. Collier County placed approximately 77,800 cubic yards of beach compatible material in 2013 to restore approximately 2,300 feet along South Marco Island (400 feet south of R-146 to G-4). The beach fill was within the 2005 permitted project limits. The main goals of the project were to restore storm protection, natural resource habitats, and recreational beach areas to offset the storm damage caused by Tropical Storm Fay in 2008. Additionally, the structural repair of five existing erosion control structures was completed in 2013/14. The South Marco Island Beach Renourishment Project was nourished through truckhaul in November of 2016 with approximately 13,200 cubic yards of beach compatible material to offset storm damage caused by Tropical Storm Debby. 3. Use of Requested Program Funds: Funds for post-construction physical monitoring for years 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, construction funds for the 2016 storm repair nourishment and funds for the design and permitting for the 2016 project are included in Agreement 16CO1. This request covers the engineering, design and permitting task to prepare for the future nourishment scheduled for 2019-2020. 4. Mapping: Prepare and attach a map or maps of the project area formatted at a minimum of 1" = 200' scale. (Maps must be provided as attachments to this application). The requested maps are included with this application. 5. Length of Project Boundary in Feet (Total restored project length in the critically eroded area): 4,423’ feet. 6. Eligibility: Public Beach Access and Public Lodging Establishments: The eligibility table must be completed for all beach projects. The table can be copied from a current grant agreement if the public access locations have not changed since last agreement execution.

Location/Name Address R- Mon

Type of Access

Width of Access/

Frontage (ft)

Total units

No. units available to Public

Eligible shoreline

(ft)

Swallow Avenue Cape Marco Drive

R-148 Secondary Access

20 72 72 1880

Hilton Marco Island Beach Resort Hotel

and Spa (Englewood Beach

Park)

560 S Collier Blvd

R-144 Lodging 510 287 287 510

Marriott Crystal Shores

(Beachcomber Lane)

600 S Collier Blvd

R-144.2 Lodging 350 219 219 350

Cost Sharing Summary

Reach

Project Distance (ft) Total Eligible Shoreline Length (ft) Within the Critically

Eroded Area South Marco R-144 to R-148 +600 (G-4)

4,423 2,740

Sub Total 2,740

Total Project Length 4,423 ft Eligible Shoreline 61.95 % State Cost Share % 30.97%

Location/Name DBPR License

Swallow Avenue Beach Access Hilton Marco Island Beach Resort

Hotel and Spa (Englewood Beach Park) https://www.myfloridalicense.com/LicenseDetail.asp?SID=&id=488C11

4245D7F52516AA05FAD517FF46 Marriott Crystal Shores

(Beachcomber Lane) https://www.myfloridalicense.com/LicenseDetail.asp?SID=&id=0C53F4

69FA707AE7B5FA401B4C3EEFF5

https://www.myfloridalicense.com/LicenseDetail.asp?SID=&id=488C114245D7F52516AA05FAD517FF46

https://www.myfloridalicense.com/LicenseDetail.asp?SID=&id=488C114245D7F52516AA05FAD517FF46

https://www.myfloridalicense.com/LicenseDetail.asp?SID=&id=0C53F469FA707AE7B5FA401B4C3EEFF5

https://www.myfloridalicense.com/LicenseDetail.asp?SID=&id=0C53F469FA707AE7B5FA401B4C3EEFF5

7. Schedule and Budget: (Include estimated phases for 10 years and estimated project costs for 5 years.)

Year Proposed Method Description

Total Estimated

Cost

Federal Cost

Share

State Cost

Share

Local Cost

Share

2018/ 2019

Design P&S and Pre-Con $50,000 $0 $12,165 $37,835

Monitoring Phys, Turtle, Shorebird $97,000 $0 $23,600 $73,400

2019/ 2020

Construction Nourishment and Construction Services $2,300,000 $0 $559,590 $1,740,410

Monitoring Physical, Turtle, Shorebird, Tilling $98,940 $0 $24,072 $74,868

2020/ 2021 Monitoring Physical, Turtle,

Shorebird, Tilling $100,918.80 $0 $24,554 $76,365


Shorebird, Tilling $102,937 $0 $25,045 $77,893


Shorebird $94,996 $0 $23,113 $71,883

2023/2024 Monitoring Physical, Turtle, Shorebird

2024/2025 Monitoring Physical, Turtle,

Shorebird

Design Engineering Design, P&S and Pre-Con

2025/2026 Construction Renourishment



8. Severity of erosion: Criterion will be calculated by the Department. Additional information may be provided for consideration. The project area’s shoreline has been designated by FDEP as critically eroded shoreline. The Department has previously calculated the average rate of erosion for the project shoreline. Based on historical MHW data from 1972 to 1990 between monuments R-146 and R-148 to be -2.1 ft/yr. 9. Threat to Upland Structures: Criterion will be calculated by the Department. Additional information may be provided for consideration. We request that the Department calculate this information and forward a discussion of the calculations to the applicant. 10. Recreational and Economic Benefit: Provide the percentage of linear footage of properties within the project boundaries zoned commercial, recreational or Public Lodging Establishment (hotel, motel or vacation rental condo) as zoned in current local government land use maps. 880 feet commercial, recreational and public zoning / 4423 feet total project length. = 20%

11. Availability of Federal Funds: Is the project Federally authorized by WRDA (Y/N)? No AUTHORIZATION DATE: EXPIRATION DATE: Does the project have a Project Cooperative Agreement or other Federal funding agreement (Y/N)? No If so, attach a copy of the document. What is the federal cost share percentage provided for this project? 75% Is this project funded through FEMA for storm repairs (Y/N)? Yes for 2016 project If so, attach a copy of the signed Project Worksheet. Marco Island Beach has FEMA Category G funds due to damage as a result of Tropical Storm Debby. The project was built in 2016. 12. Local Sponsor Financial and Administrative Commitment: Is funding for the project in the local sponsor’s 10-year comprehensive financial plan (Y/N)? Y Attach a copy or provide web link to the plan. A copy of the 25 year planning schedule is attached. Is funding provided through a source established by referendum (Y/N)? Y Attach a copy or provide web link to the referendum. The referendum has been previously provided to the Department. Is funding provided by a third party other than the federal government (Y/N)? N What is the percentage of total project costs provided by the third party? NA Attach a copy of the interlocal agreement or cost sharing agreement. Quarterly Report Compliance – For projects that are currently funded through the program or have historically been funded, the Local Sponsor may give the dates quarterly progress reports were submitted within the last fiscal year per terms of the agreement (for consideration of additional ranking points):

Quarter Due Date Report Remit Compliant (yes/no) July-September October 30 10-4-16 Yes October-December January 31 1-11-17 Yes January-March April 30 4-19-17 Yes March-June July 31 7-17-17 Yes

Active Permits Is there an active state permit for the project (Y/N)? Y Permit #: FDEP 0235209-008-JM AUTHORIZATION DATE: 9/27/2016 EXPIRATION DATE: 10/11/2027 Is there an active federal permit for the project (Y/N)? Y Permit #: SAJ-2005-2726 (IP-MN) & mod USACE Permit No. SAJ-1996-02789. Issued March 9, 2016. Expires March 9, 2026. Have local funds been secured for the project (Y/N)? Y Explain: Collier County has dedicated the majority of the Tourist Development Taxes to beach maintenance, including funding projects within Marco Island. The funding was approved by referendum.

http://www.colliergov.net/home/showdocument?id=69057

Has a copy of the resolution been drafted and attached to this application (Y/N)? Pending A draft resolution must be provided with the application. The signed resolution must be received by September 30. A draft resolution is included with this submittal and a signed resolution will be forwarded to the Department by the September 30th deadline. 13. Previous State Commitment: Has the Department previously reviewed, approved and cost-shared on a feasibility or design phase for this project (Y/N)? Yes Provide previous phase and state cost share percentage: Based on FDEP Agreement 16CO1, the Department stated that the percentage eligible for State funding is 48.68% and the State Cost Share is 24.34%. Will this project enhance or increase the longevity of a previously-constructed project (Y/N)? Y Explain: Five erosion control structures were recently refurbished. This will increase the future nourishment interval along the South Marco Project area and enhance the longevity of the project. The structures will support greater retention of fill material in the project areas. Will this project nourish a previously restored shoreline (Y/N)? Y (Full beach nourishment only. Dune maintenance projects do not apply) Has a previously approved appropriation for this project phase been released in its entirety by the local sponsor due to delays in the project timelines (Y/N)? N 14. Project Performance: What is the nourishment interval (in years)? 6 years (2013 to 2019) 15. Mitigation of Inlet Effects: Criterion is calculated by the Department. Additional information may be provided for consideration. The Marco Island project is nourished in synergy with maintaining Caxambas Pass for navigation. This practice meets the objective of the Strategic Beach Management Plan and returns sand eroded from the beach back to the beach for a high level of sustainability. In 2013, approximately 78,000 cy was dredged from the pass for nourishment of the beach. The nourishment from the pass was supplemental in 2016 by 13,228 cy from an upland sand source to restore the beach. 16. Use of Innovative Applications of existing technologies: Does the project address erosion in a method that is economically competitive with nourishment, that will not adversely affect the conservation of fish and wildlife, including endangered or threatened species, or their habitats, and that is designed to demonstrate an innovative application of existing technologies (Y/N)? Y Explain: Improvements to the combined breakwater and groin system at the south end of the project area were conducted to control sand being lost off the south end of the island. The reconstruction of

these erosion control structures, in conjunction with the 2016 FEMA supplemental project, will increase project life. Has the project been documented to be effective and demonstrated technologies previously untried in the state (Y/N)? N Explain: 17. Regionalization: Is this project being planned or constructed in cooperation with another local government to reduce contracting costs (Y/N)? Y Explain and attach a signed copy of the interlocal agreement. The 2016 truckhaul storm restoration project was combined with the North County renourishment project constructed at the same time. One contractor was hired for both renourishment projects. Collier County has dedicated the majority of the Tourist Development Taxes to beach maintenance, including funding projects within Marco Island. The funding was approved by referendum which acts as the interlocal agreement. 18. Significance: What is the volume of advanced nourishment lost since the last sand placement event of a beach restoration or nourishment project as measured landward of the Mean High Water Line? (Information should be consistent with annual post-construction monitoring reports) The 2013 beach renourishment project placed approximately 80,000 cubic yards of sand dredged from the Caxambas Pass Borrow Area on Marco Island Beach from 400 feet south of DEP reference monument R-146 to monitoring monument G-4. In November 2016, approximately 13,200 cubic yards of sand from an upland source were placed from R-144 to G-2 to offset impacts from Tropical Storm Debby. In February 2017, and shoreline and volume change were analyzed for beach profiles R-139 on Marco Island south to K-2 on Kice Island. Since the 2013 pre-construction survey the shoreline within the 2013 project area (R-144 to G-4) has lost approximately 35,410 cubic yards above the depth of closure shoreward of the MHW. The project retains 61% of the fill placed between 2013 and 2017. Has the project eroded into the design template (Y/N)? Y If so, provide the eroded segments by listing the R-monuments. Based on the 2017 monitoring surveys and report, the February 2017 MHW has eroded landward of the 100 ft beach width at profiles G-2 to G-4 within the 2013 project area (from R-147 to G-4). For construction projects, what is the proposed sand placement volume? The proposed South Marco Island project will place approximately 104,000 cubic yards of beach compatible fill (per nourishment event).

25 Year Planning Schedule

Yr 1-FY18 Yr 2-FY19 Yr 3-FY20 Yr 4-FY21 Yr 5-FY22 Yr 6-FY23 Yr 7-FY24 Yr 8-FY25 Yr 9-FY26 Yr 10-FY27 Yr 11-FY28 Yr 12-FY29 Yr 13-FY30 Yr 14-FY31 Yr 15-FY32 Yr 16-FY33 Yr 17-FY34 Yr 18-FY35 Yr 19-FY36 Yr 20-FY37 Yr 21-FY38 Yr 22-FY39 Yr 23-FY40 Yr 24-FY41 Yr 25-FY42 Yr 1-5 Yr 6-10 Yr 11-15 Yr 15-20 Yr 21-25 Total

$8,122,300 $8,203,500 $8,285,500 $8,368,400 $8,452,100 $8,536,600 $8,622,000 $8,708,200 $8,795,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300 $8,883,300

$41,431,800 $43,545,400 $44,416,500 $44,416,500 $44,416,500 $218,226,700

$2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000$12,500,000 $12,500,000 $12,500,000 $12,500,000 $12,500,000 $62,500,000

$38,000,000

$38,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,000,000$10,622,300 $10,703,500 $48,785,500 $10,868,400 $10,952,100 $11,036,600 $11,122,000 $11,208,200 $11,295,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $11,383,300 $91,931,800 $56,045,400 $56,916,500 $56,916,500 $56,916,500 $318,726,700

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$20,000 $20,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $20,000$500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000

$100,000$100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000

$38,000,000$38,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,000,000

$1,000,000 $1,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000

$29,640,000$0 $29,640,000 $0 $0 $0 $29,640,000

$25,600,000$0 $0 $0 $25,600,000 $0 $25,600,000

$24,140,000$0 $0 $0 $0 $24,140,000 $24,140,000

$2,000,000 $2,000,000$2,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000

$2,300,000 $2,500,000 $2,750,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000

$2,300,000 $2,500,000 $2,750,000 $3,000,000 $3,500,000 $14,050,000

$3,500,000 $7,500,000$3,500,000 $7,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $11,000,000

$50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $85,000 $90,000 $90,000$300,000 $380,000 $400,000 $420,000 $435,000 $1,935,000

$170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $850,000 $865,000 $925,000 $985,000 $1,000,000 $4,625,000Annual Shorebird Monitoring $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $35,000 $125,000 $130,000 $150,000 $170,000 $175,000 $750,000

$170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $170,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $850,000 $865,000 $925,000 $985,000 $1,000,000 $4,625,000$165,000 $165,000 $165,000 $165,000 $165,000 $165,000 $165,000 $165,000 $165,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $180,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $825,000 $840,000 $900,000 $980,000 $1,000,000 $4,545,000

$30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $750,000$340,000 $340,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $350,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $1,730,000 $1,775,000 $1,875,000 $1,975,000 $2,000,000 $9,355,000

Local Government Funding Requests to FDEP $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $125,000 $625,000Naples Pier Maintenance (Category D) $0 $0 $135,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $535,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $4,535,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$500,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000

$150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $750,000 $0 $0 $0 $900,000$2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $0 $12,500,000 $12,500,000 $2,500,000 $0 $27,500,000

$100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $0 $400,000 $500,000 $200,000 $0 $1,100,000$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Wiggins Pass $25,000 $150,000 $25,000 $850,000 $25,000 $150,000 $25,000 $850,000 $35,000 $250,000 $35,000 $900,000 $35,000 $250,000 $35,000 $900,000 $35,000 $250,000 $35,000 $900,000 $35,000 $250,000 $35,000 $900,000 $35,000 $1,075,000 $1,310,000 $1,255,000 $2,120,000 $1,255,000 $7,015,000Doctors Pass $600,000 $650,000 $700,000 $700,000 $700,000 $750,000 $600,000 $650,000 $700,000 $1,400,000 $750,000 $4,100,000Clam Pass $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $3,500,000Gordon Pass $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $4,000,000 $2,000,000 $10,000,000Collier Creek $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $3,000,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$212,446 $214,070 $975,710 $217,368 $219,042 $220,732 $222,440 $224,164 $225,906 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $227,666 $1,838,636 $1,120,908 $1,138,330 $1,138,330 $1,138,330 $6,374,534$500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $1,500,000 $11,500,000

$5,500,000 $5,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,500,000$800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $800,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $20,000,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Personnel, equipment and supplies $865,000 $865,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $900,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $950,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $4,430,000 $4,650,000 $4,750,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $23,830,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$150,000 $150,000 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $0 $300,000

$100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $0 $200,000 $300,000 $0 $0 $500,000$500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $500,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $2,500,000 $500,000 $4,000,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$150,000 $150,000 $0 $0 $300,000 $0 $0 $300,000

$250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $0 $0 $500,000 $1,000,000 $0 $1,500,000$750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $750,000 $0 $0 $0 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $6,000,000

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$4,397,446 $6,404,070 $48,820,710 $8,077,368 $7,804,042 $13,930,732 $8,907,440 $12,584,164 $7,220,906 $36,507,666 $6,502,666 $13,317,666 $7,152,666 $7,517,666 $7,152,666 $11,267,666 $34,637,666 $5,652,666 $5,437,666 $9,252,666 $5,687,666 $8,402,666 $4,687,666 $32,447,666 $3,942,666$75,503,636 $79,150,908 $41,643,330 $66,248,330 $55,168,330 $317,714,534

$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

$6,224,854 $4,299,430 -$35,210 $2,791,032 $3,148,058 -$2,894,132 $2,214,560 -$1,375,964 $4,074,394 -$25,124,366 $4,880,634 -$1,934,366 $4,230,634 $3,865,634 $4,230,634 $115,634 -$23,254,366 $5,730,634 $5,945,634 $2,130,634 $5,695,634 $2,980,634 $6,695,634 -$21,064,366 $7,440,634 $1,012,166 $16,428,164 -$23,105,508 $15,273,170 -$9,331,830 $1,748,170 $1,012,166$0

Activity

Study, modeling and Peer ReviewPermitting, Engineering and DesignConstruction

Other ExpensesTax Collector ExpensesCatastrophe ReserveRepayment Fund 183 - FY20 Operational Contingency ($800K per year)

Phase 3 - Private/Public partnerships to protect coastal Infrastructure for non-critically eroded or private beaches.

Study, modeling and Peer Review

ConstructionResults monitoring

Phase 4 - Bayside Activities Bayside storm roll over on the back of the beach can be a significant issue that must be addressed in a comprehensive manner with storm surge.

FY41 Maintenance Renourishment (6 year design life, 400K CY's, 2% yearly escalation) History on decreasing quantity.

County wide Dune Plantings Annual Maintenance/Exotic Removals

Florida Department of Environmental Protection Strategic Beach Management Plan Identifies 20.6 miles of beaches in the Naples Sub-Region. This includes 8.9 miles of critically eroded beach and 5.8 miles of previously restored Beaches. The southern Islands which includes Marco Island has 10 miles of beaches which includes 5.6 miles of critically eroded beaches and 1.7 miles of restored beaches.

Beach Cleaning - Collier, Naples and Marco Island

Two engineered mitigation reef to offset potential Hardbottom coverage. (Design, Permit, Construct each reef one Acre)

Marco South Beach Renourishment (R145 to G-2) -100,000 CY's, $500K mob, $18/CY Includes Caxambas Pass Dredging.

Dune shaping/plantings Marco Island beaches R136 to R148/G2 - approximately 10,000 feet beach ($3.5M) , 50 Walkover and Boardwalks @$150K each

Annual Pass and Physical Beach Monitoring

Annual Turtle MonitoringAnnual Biological Monitoring

Revenue - Current TDC revenue allocation is $8,122,300 per year with $2,500,000 set aside for beach renourishment. An additional $2,500,000 set aside for strictly beach renourishment will increase the yearly set aside for renourishment to $5,000,000 and increase the yearly revenue to $10,622,300 to fund all program activities.

Current Projected Revenue - Revenue increases as per the 10 year plan for the next 10 years with no increase after that.

Incremental TDC revenue set aside for Beach Renourishment

Total Revenues

Expenses

One time adjustment for Unrestricted 195 monies ($12M), Catastrophe reserves ($8.5M), FDEM Reserve reimbursement ($7M), Reserves from Fund 183 ($5.5M) and $5M for FY18 and FY19 incremental TDC revenues.

Yearly Difference - Revenue (+) Vs. Expenses (-)

Permitting, Engineering and Design

Study, modeling and Peer ReviewPermitting, Engineering and DesignConstruction

Results monitoring

Collier County Coastal Resiliency Plan/Projections

Results monitoring

Inlets

CZM Program Management

Total Program Expense - Program Costs with Phase 1 and Phase 2 of Resiliency Program included

Areas downdrift of inlets, Park Shore beach, Clam Pass Park beach, Older beach structures too close to water and beaches with significant hardbottom outcroppings too close to shore are examples of areas that will require hard structural solutions. Examples of solutions could be Permeable Adjustable Groins, Concrete seawalls encased inside sand dunes, selected new seawalls, Raising the height of existing private seawalls and submerged breakwaters.

Annual Beach Tilling

Beach widening permit feasibility study and cost verification

Regulatory Permits, Studies, Design and NTP

Phase 1 - Critically Eroded Beaches in the Naples and Marco Island Sub-Region that previously been renourished.

Study to determine the optimum balance between storm level protection (30 yr, 50 yr or 100 yr storm protection) verses costs verses attainable results.

Phase 2 - Hard Structural Solutions where beach widening with sand on previously renourished critically eroded beaches is not feasible. 15% of beach length requires Hard Resiliency measures.

Initial Renourishment 1.1MCY's ( 1M CY's resiliency plus and 100K CY's Naples 2017), 50 ft. wider dry beach, 1 ft. higher with dune, $5M mob, $30/CY)

Dune Plantings (Based on 2006 Plantings)FY27 Maintenance Renourishment (6 year design life, 700K CY's, 2% yearly escalation) History on decreasing quantity.FY34 Maintenance Renourishment (6 year design life, 500K CY's, 2% yearly escalation) History on decreasing quantity.

Draft Resolution

[09.0031/1184261/1] 1

RESOLUTION NO. 17 - _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA SUPPORTING THE COUNTY'S “FLORIDA BEACH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 2018/2019 FUNDING REQUESTS” TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR LONG RANGE FUNDING REQUESTS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2018/2019, AGREEING TO SERVE AS THE LOCAL SPONSOR, SUPPORT PROPOSED PROJECT ACTIVITIES AND COMMITTED TO PROVIDING THE REQUIRED LOCAL COST SHARE.

WHEREAS, Collier County’s Coastal Zone Management, acting on behalf of the Collier

County Board of County Commissioners, has prepared Florida Beach Management Program

2018/2019 Funding Requests to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) for

long range grant funding for Fiscal Years 2018-2019; and

WHEREAS, the funding requests are to fund the following three Collier County projects:

1. Collier County Nourishmenta. FY 18/19 Physical, biological, turtle, and shorebird monitoring, and tilling for the

Collier County beach renourishment project;b. FY 17/18 feasibility study for coastal resiliency;c. Engineering and construction of the 2017 Naples Nourishment using the Doctors Pass

borrow area.d. FY 18/19 engineering, design and permitting for the 2020 Collier County beach

construction;e. FY 18/19 rehabilitation of the south jetty of Doctors Pass to restore the structure to its

original design specifications;f. FY 18/19 engineering and construction of a spur groin off the south jetty of Doctors

Pass and an emergent breakwater with a detached groin. The project will alsorehabilitate an existing rock groin;

2. Marco Island Nourishmenta. FY 18/19 engineering, design and permitting tasks for the 2019-2020 South Marco

beach nourishment project and monitoring for the 2013 and 2016 BeachNourishments.

3. Wiggins Pass Dredginga. Reimbursement of FY 16/17 funds for monitoring, engineering, permitting and

Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan;b. Reimbursement of FY 17/18 funds engineering, monitoring and construction of the

2017 dredging of Wiggins Pass.

[09.0031/1184261/1] 2

WHEREAS, the timely maintenance and restoration of these high quality and readily

accessible public recreational beaches is critical to preserve their value and viability, and to

provide a boost to both the environment and the economy of Collier County tourism, including

hotels, restaurants and related commercial activities; and

WHEREAS, the role of the County government in maintaining and restoring beaches is

appropriate and crucial; and

WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners supports these three funding requests

and requests approval from the FDEP for each funding request for Fiscal Years 2018-2019; and

WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners agrees to serve as the Local Sponsor;

and

WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is able and committed to providing the

required Local Cost Share; and

WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners agrees to support proposed project

activities; and

WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners supports funding contained in previously

approved funding contracts, and

WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners has enacted the Tourist Development

Tax Ordinance No. 92-60, as amended, which commits funding to beach renourishment, beach

maintenance and beach park facilities.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY

COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Board supports the Florida

Beach Management Program 2018/2019 Funding Requests prepared for submittal to the Florida

[09.0031/1184261/1] 3

Department of Environmental Protection for long range funding for Fiscal Years 2018/2019 and

requests approval from the FDEP for each funding request.

1. The Board of County Commissioners is willing to serve as the Local Sponsor and

support the maintenance and renourishment projects. The Collier County’s Coastal Zone

Management has the staff dedicated to provide Project Management and Administrative support.

2. The Board of County Commissioners is committed to providing the required

Local Cost Share. The required funds have been committed through the Tourist Development

Tax Ordinance No. 92-60, as amended.

PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier

County, Florida, this _____ day of _______________, 2017.

ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -----------, CLERK COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA

_____________________________ By:________________________________ , Deputy Clerk Penny Taylor, Chairman

Approved as to form and legality:

_____________________________ Colleen M. Greene Assistant County Attorney

http://www.colliergov.net/your-government/divisions-a-e/board-of-county-commissioners/penny-taylor

[09.0031/1184261/1] 4

Referendum

Project Worksheet

PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0) P

Applicant Name: Application Title: COLLIER (COUNTY) CCGGS13 - South Marco BeachPeriod of Performance Start: Period of Performance End: 07-03-2012 01-03-2014

Subgrant Application - Entire Application

Application Title: CCGGS13 - South Marco Beach Application Number: PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0)Application Type: Subgrant Application (PW)

Preparer InformationPrefix Mr. First Name GREGORY Middle InitialLast Name SLATTON Title Beach Specialist Agency/Organization Name FEMA PA TAC Address 1 FEMA JFO Address 2 1940 N. Monroe Street, Ste 79 City Tallahassee State FL Zip 32303 Email [email protected]

Is the application preparer the Point of Contact? No

Point of Contact InformationPrefix Mr. First Name LenMiddle InitialLast Name PriceTitle Administrator - Administrative Services DivisionAgency/Organization Collier (County)Address 1 3299 East Tamiami TrailAddress 2 Suite 601City NaplesState FL

Page 1 of 15Federal Emergency Management Agency E-Grants

07/31/2013https://isource.fema.net/emmie/dispatchDestination.do?menuTile=&topTile=dsHeader&b...

ZIP 34112 - 5749 Phone 239-252-8908 Fax 239-252-8720Email [email protected]

Alternate Point of Contact InformationPrefix Mr. First Name SteveMiddle InitialLast Name HyattTitle Deputy PAOAgency/Organization Florida Division of Emergency ManagementAddress 1 2555 Shummard Oak Blvd.Address 2City TallahasseeState FLZIP 32399 Phone 850-487-1660 FaxEmail [email protected]

Project DescriptionDisaster Number: 4068Pre-Application Number: PA-04-FL-4068-RPA-0063

Applicant ID: 021-99021-00Applicant Name: COLLIER (COUNTY)Subdivision:Project Number: CCGGS13 Standard Project Number/Title: 799 - Recreational or Other Please Indicate the Project Type: Neither Alternate nor Improved Application Title: CCGGS13 - South Marco BeachCategory: G.RECREATIONAL OR OTHERPercentage Work Completed? 0.0 % As of Date: 11-29-2012

Comments Applicant may request an Improved Project to incorporate repairs decribed in this PW with a planned renourishment project. 11/30/12 - As described in 44 CFR 13.43, applicant must maintain all work-related records for a period of three (3) years from applicant closure (final payment), all records relative this project worksheet are subject to examination and audit by the State, FEMA and the Comptroller General of the United States and must reflect work related to disaster specific costs. Attachments

Damage Facilities (Part 1 of 2)



Facility Number Facility Name Address County City State ZIP

Site Previously Damaged?

Action

1 South Marco Beach South Marco Island Collier Naples FL 34112 Yes

Comments

Attachments

User Date Document Type DescriptionHard Copy

File Reference

File Name Action

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012

Additional Information

DR1785 Marco Beach PW and

docs

DR1785 PW and docs.pdf(9.17 Mb) View

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012Drawings/Sketches FDEP approved

plans2005 Permit%20Drawings%20(12-22-05).pdf(1.62 Mb) View

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012


FDEP Permit Modification adding north

beach

2006 Permit Mod(12-27-06).pdf(2.42 Mb) View

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012


FDEP Beach Management Plan excerpt

FDEP Beach Management Plan - S. Marco excerpt.pdf

(28.88 kb) View

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012Map Location Map Location Map.pdf(898.71 kb) View

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012Photos Site Visit Photos Photo Sheet.pdf(287.75 kb) View

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012Drawings/Sketches Marco Beach

PlansSMarcoFinalDrawings.pdf

(841.82 kb) View

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-

2012


Volume Change Table

Marco Volume Change Table.pdf(39.27 kb) View

Facility Name: South Marco BeachAddress 1: South Marco Island Address 2:County: Collier City: Naples State: FL ZIP: 34112 Was this site previously damaged? Yes

PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0): South Marco Island, FL



Location:

Damage Description and Dimensions:

PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0): DAMAGE DESCRIPTION As a result of high winds and surf associated with Tropical Storm (TS) Debby , the applicant-maintained public beach lying between FDEP R-monuments R139 and G-5 in Collier County sustained significant beach erosion. Applicant's estimated erosion along 9,594 linear feet (LF) of shoreline is based upon a pre-storm survey (December 2011) and post-storm survey (August 2012) by applicant's coastal engineer, Atkins. The attached Collier County Tropical Storm Debby Post-Storm Report, October 2012, describes survey methodology and details volume change locations in Table 16. Table 16 details losses along the full profile width of engineered beach between R139 to G-5, and shows that a total of 16,959 CY eroded during the 8-month period December 2011 – August 2012.

Scope of Work:

PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0): ****SCOPE OF WORK**** WORK TO BE COMPLETED As an engineered, nourished, and regularly-maintained beach, South Marco Beach is eligible under Category G for PA funding to restore it to its pre-disaster condition. Applicant requests FEMA PA reimbursement of costs to replace sand erosion attributable to T.S. Debby. Debby-related sand loss is the volume lost between the applicant’s pre-and-post storm surveys minus normally-occurring background losses during that 8-month interval. The engineering report does not detail the background losses, but states that the project area lost 5,595 CY between December 2010 and December 2011, a monthly rate of 466 CY. The Debby-caused loss was 16,959 CY – 466 CY/mo x 8 months = 13,228 CY. The attached Volume Change Table details the changes over the improved beach. Applicant plans to replace the Debby-related losses as an integral part of his next scheduled beach renourishment project along with the replacement of 76,728 CY of T.S. Fay loss previously approved in Improved Project DR1785-PW 561. Applicant will include this PW's sand volume as a separate contract line item. No work has been done to date. The cost estimate for this PW is based on estimated costs for DR1785 PW 561. No additional costs for mobilization/demobilization, environmental monitoring, or a geotechnical study are included since those costs were estimated and included in the DR1785 PW. Estimated costs are comparable to historical costs experienced by other applicants for similar work in the area and are deemed reasonable. Upon completion, this site will be returned to its pre-disaster design, function and capacity within the original footprint. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all local, state and/or federal permits as they may apply to this project. ************ Notes: To be eligible under Category G the beach must meet the following criteria (ref. PA Guide, FEMA -322, June 2007, pgs 86,87): A beach is considered eligible for permanent repair if it is an improvedbeach and has been routinely maintained prior to the disaster. A beach is considered to be an “improved beach” if the following criteria apply: the beach was constructed by the placement of sand to a designed elevation, width, grain size, and slope; and the beach have been maintained in accordance with a maintenance program involving the



periodic re-nourishment of sand. By accepting this grant, applicant certifies that all work will done on property for which he is legally responsible and is accessible to the general public. Documentation maintained by the Applicant must typically include: a) Design documents including engineering specifications and grain size analysis b) "As-built" plans of the project c) Documentation of regular renourishment of the beach d) Pre-storm cross-sections of the beach e) Post-storm cross-sections of the beach. The project specialist has reviewed design plans, FDEP permits, and other documentation provided by the applicant and is satisfied that the facility meets FEMA’s criteria for an improved beach. An excerpt from the FDEP FL Beach Management Plan is attached and ststes that the beach has been filled and imprroved in various ways since 1991. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are directly chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is related to administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44 CFR 13.22. These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as direct costs in all federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not included in any approved indirect cost rates.******* 12/2/2012 - As described in 44 CFR 13.43, applicant must maintain all work-related records for a period of three (3) years from applicant closure (final payment), all records relative this project worksheet are subject to examination and audit by the State, FEMA and the Comptroller General of the United States and must reflect work related to disaster specific costs

GIS Coordinates

Project Location Latitude LongitudeR144 25.92148 -81.7293R148 26.91094 -81.72893

Special Considerations1. Does the damaged facility or item of work have insurance coverage and/or is it an insurable

risk (e.g., buildings, equipment, vehicles, etc)? No

2. Is the damaged facility located within a floodplain or coastal high hazard area and/or does it have an impact on a floodplain or wetland? Yes

If you would like to make any comments, please enter them below.(maximum 4000 characters) FIRM 12021C0836H Zone VE 3. Is the damaged facility or item of work located within or adjacent to a Coastal Barrier

Resource System Unit or an Otherwise Protected Area? No

4. Will the proposed facility repairs/reconstruction change the pre-disaster conditions (e.g., footprint, material, location, capacity, use of function)? No

5. Does the applicant have a hazard mitigation proposal or would the applicant like technical assistance for a hazard mitigation proposal? No

6. Is the damaged facility on the National Register of Historic Places or the state historic listing? Is it older than 50 years? Are there more, similar buildings near the site? No

7. Are there any pristine or undisturbed areas on, or near, the project site? Are there large No



tracts of forestland? 8. Are there any hazardous materials at or adjacent to the damaged facility and/or item of

work? No

9. Are there any other environmental or controversial issues associated with the damagedfacility and/or item of work? No

Attachments

User Date Document Type Description Hard Copy File

Reference File Name Action

GREGORY SLATTON

12-02-2012 Map FIRM FM12021C0836H.pdf(9.44

Mb) View

For Category C, D, E, F, and G Projects only Is effective mitigation feasible on this project? NoIf you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is requiredWill mitigation be performed on any sites in this project?If you answered Yes to the above question, the next question is required Do you wish to attach a Hazard Mitigation Proposal? If you answered Yes to the above question, the next two questions are required Please provide the Scope of Work for the estimate: Would you like to add the Hazard Mitigation Proposal as a cost line item to the project cost?

Comments Applicant requested mitigation on DR1785 PW 561 Attachments

Cost Estimate

Is this Project Worksheet for Cost Estimate Format

(Preferred) Repair

Sequence Code Material and/orDescription

Unit Quantity

Unit ofMeasure Unit Price Subgrant

Budget ClassCost

Estimate Action

1 9000 CEF Cost Estimate (See Attached Spreadsheet)

1 LS $ 161,194.00 CONSTRUCTION $ 161,194.00

Total Cost: $ 161,194.00

Insurance Adjustments (Deductibles, Proceeds and Settlements)

Sequence Code Material and/or Description

Unit Quantity

Unit ofMeasure Unit Price Subgrant

Budget ClassCost

Estimate Action

1 9999 Direct AdministrativeCosts 1 LS $ 0.00 PERSONNEL $ 0.00

Total Cost: $ 0.00

Total Cost Estimate: $ 161,194.00



(Preferred Estimate Type + Insurance Adjustments) Awarded cost line items: $ 161,194.00 Remaining cost line items: $ 0.00

Comments

Attachments

User Date Document Type Description Hard Copy File

Reference File Name Action

GREGORY SLATTON

12-09-2012

Calculation Sheet

CEF Estimate

CEF CCGGS13 South Marco Island.pdf(115.93 kb) View

Existing Insurance Information

Insurance Type Policy No. Bldg/Property Amount

Content Amount

Insurance Amount

Deductible Amount

Years Required

Comments

Attachments

Comments and Attachments Name of Section Comment Attachment

Project Description

Applicant may request an Improved Project to incorporate repairs decribed in this PW with a planned renourishment project. 11/30/12 - As described in 44 CFR 13.43, applicant must maintain all work-related records for a period of three (3) years from applicant closure (final payment), all records relative this project worksheet are subject to examination and audit by the State, FEMA and the Comptroller General of the United States and must reflect work related to disaster specific costs.

Damage Facilities

DR1785 PW and docs.pdf 2005 Permit%20Drawings%20(12-22-05).pdf 2006 Permit Mod(12-27-06).pdf FDEP Beach Management Plan - S. Marco excerpt.pdf Location Map.pdf Photo Sheet.pdf SMarcoFinalDrawings.pdf Marco Volume Change Table.pdf

Special Considerations FM12021C0836H.pdf Mitigation Applicant requested mitigation on DR1785 PW 561

Cost Estimate CEF CCGGS13 South Marco Island.pdf

Application Level

CCGGS13 - Signed Application_Part1.pdf CCGGS13 - Signed Application_Part2.pdf CCGGS13 - Signed



Subgrant Application - FEMA Form 90-91

Note: The Effective Cost Share for this application is 75%

Application_Part3.pdf CCGGS13 - Signed Application_Part4.pdf

Bundle Reference # (Amendment #) Date Awarded PA-04-FL-4068-State-0045(44) 07-29-2013

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY PROJECT WORKSHEET

DISASTER PROJECT NO. CCGGS13

PA ID NO. 021-99021-00

DATE 12-14-2012

CATEGORY G

FEMA 4068 - DR -FL

APPLICANT: COLLIER (COUNTY) WORK COMPLETE AS OF: 11-29-2012 : 0 %

Site 1 of 1

DAMAGED FACILITY:

South Marco BeachCOUNTY: Collier

LOCATION:

PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0):

South Marco Island, FL

LATITUDE: 26.91094 25.92148

LONGITUDE: -81.72893 -81.7293

DAMAGE DESCRIPTION AND DIMENSIONS:

PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0):

DAMAGE DESCRIPTION As a result of high winds and surf associated with Tropical Storm (TS) Debby , the applicant-maintained public beach lying between FDEP R-monuments R139 and G-5 in Collier County sustained significant beach erosion. Applicant's estimated erosion along 9,594 linear feet (LF) of shoreline is based upon a pre-storm survey (December 2011) and post-storm survey (August 2012) by applicant's coastal engineer, Atkins. The attached Collier County Tropical Storm Debby Post-Storm Report, October 2012, describes survey methodology and details volume change locations in Table 16. Table 16 details losses along the full profile width of engineered beach between R139 to G-5, and shows that a total of 16,959 CY eroded during the 8-month period December 2011 – August 2012.

SCOPE OF WORK:

PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079(0):

****SCOPE OF WORK**** WORK TO BE COMPLETED As an engineered, nourished, and regularly-maintained beach, South Marco Beach is eligible under Category G for PA funding to restore it to its pre-disaster condition. Applicant requests FEMA PA reimbursement of costs to replace sand erosion attributable to T.S. Debby. Debby-related sand loss is the volume lost between the applicant’s pre-and-post storm surveys minus normally-occurring background losses during that 8-month interval. The engineering report does not detail the background losses, but states that the project area lost 5,595 CY between December 2010 and December 2011, a monthly rate of 466 CY. The Debby-caused loss was 16,959 CY – 466 CY/mo x 8 months = 13,228 CY. The attached Volume Change Table details the changes over the improved beach. Applicant plans to replace the Debby-related losses as an integral part of his next scheduled beach renourishment project along with the replacement of 76,728 CY of T.S. Fay loss previously approved in Improved Project DR1785-PW 561. Applicant will include this PW's sand volume as a separate contract line item. No work has been done to date. The cost estimate for this PW is based on estimated costs for DR1785 PW 561. No additional costs for mobilization/demobilization, environmental monitoring, or a geotechnical study are included since those costs were estimated and included in the DR1785 PW. Estimated costs are comparable to historical costs experienced by other applicants for similar work in the area and are deemed reasonable. Upon completion, this site will be returned to its pre-disaster design, function and capacity within the original footprint. The applicant is responsible for obtaining all local, state and/or federal permits as they may apply to this project. ************ Notes: To be eligible under Category G the beach must meet the following criteria (ref.



PA Guide, FEMA -322, June 2007, pgs 86,87): A beach is considered eligible for permanent repair if it is an improvedbeach and has been routinely maintained prior to the disaster. A beach is considered to be an “improved beach” if the following criteria apply: the beach was constructed by the placement of sand to a designed elevation, width, grain size, and slope; and the beach have been maintained in accordance with a maintenance program involving the periodic re-nourishment of sand. By accepting this grant, applicant certifies that all work will done on property for which he is legally responsible and is accessible to the general public. Documentation maintained by the Applicant must typically include: a) Design documents including engineering specifications and grain size analysis b) "As-built" plans of the project c) Documentation of regular renourishment of the beach d) Pre-storm cross-sections of the beach e) Post-storm cross-sections of the beach. The project specialist has reviewed design plans, FDEP permits, and other documentation provided by the applicant and is satisfied that the facility meets FEMA’s criteria for an improved beach. An excerpt from the FDEP FL Beach Management Plan is attached and ststes that the beach has been filled and imprroved in various ways since 1991. The subgrantee is requesting direct administrative costs that are directly chargeable to this specific project. Associated eligible work is related to administration of the PA project only and in accordance with 44 CFR 13.22. These costs are treated consistently and uniformly as direct costs in all federal awards and other subgrantee activities and are not included in any approved indirect cost rates.******* 12/2/2012 - As described in 44 CFR 13.43, applicant must maintain all work-related records for a period of three (3) years from applicant closure (final payment), all records relative this project worksheet are subject to examination and audit by the State, FEMA and the Comptroller General of the United States and must reflect work related to disaster specific costs

Does the Scope of Work change the pre-

disaster conditions at the site? Yes

No

Special Considerations included? Yes No

Hazard Mitigation proposal included?

Yes No Is there insurance coverage on this facility? Yes No

PROJECT COST

ITEM CODE NARRATIVE QUANTITY/UNIT UNIT PRICE COST

1 9000CEF Cost Estimate

(See Attached Spreadsheet)

1/LS $ 161,194.00 $ 161,194.00

2 0000 Insurance Adjustments 0/LS $ 0.00 $ 0.00

3 9999 Direct Administrative Costs 1/LS $ 0.00 $ 0.00

TOTAL COST

$ 161,194.00

PREPARED BY GREGORY SLATTON TITLE Beach Specialist SIGNATURE

APPLICANT REP. Len Price TITLE Administrator - Administrative Services Division SIGNATURE

COLLIER (COUNTY) : PA-04-FL-4068-PW-01079

Conditions Information

Review Name Condition Type Condition Name Description Monitored Status

Final Review Other (EHP) Clean Water Act (CWA)

CWA CONDITION: The subgrantee is responsible for coordinating with and obtaining any required section 401 and 404 permit(s) from FDEP Beaches and Coastal Management Division to obtain a Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) permit prior to initiating work. The subgrantee shall comply with all conditions of the required permit. All coordination pertaining to these activities

No Approved



should be documented and compliance maintained in their permanent files. Failure to comply with these conditions may jeopardize FEMA funding; verification of compliance will be required at project closeout.

Final Review Other (EHP) Standard Condition #3

If ground disturbing activities occur during construction, applicant will monitor ground disturbance and if any potential archeological resources are discovered, will immediately cease construction in that area and notify the State and FEMA.

No Approved


This review does not address all federal, state and local requirements. Acceptance of federal funding requires recipient to comply with all federal, state and local laws. Failure to obtain all appropriate federal, state and local environmental permits and clearances may jeopardize federal funding.

No Approved


Any change to the approved scope of work will require re-evaluation for compliance with NEPA and other Laws and Executive Orders.

No Approved

Final Review Other (EHP) National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

NHPA: Prior to conducting repairs, applicant must identify the source and location of sand material. If the sand souce is privately owned, or is located on previously undisturbed land, FEMA consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer will be required. Failure to comply with this condition may jeopardize FEMA funding; verification of compliance will be required at project closeout.

No Approved

Final Review Other (EHP) Executive Order 11988 - Floodplains

No Approved

ESA CONDITIONS: Per the Statewide Programmatic Biological Opinion (SPBO; Service August 22,2011), the subgrantee must adhere to the following: Sea Turtle



Final Review Other (EHP) Endangered Species Act (ESA)

Reasonable and Prudent Measures, the Standard Manatee Conditions for In-Water Work shall be implemented, commitments outlined in the SPBO regarding piping plovers must be implemented, FWC standard guidelines for the protection of nesting shorebirds must be implemented for work between February 15 to August 31, surveys shall be conducted daily throughout the construction period. All of these conditions are included in the USACE permit and consultation with USFWS. Verification that these project conditions have been met will be required as part of project closeout. Non-compliance with EHP project conditions may jeopardize federal funding.

No Approved

Final Review Other (EHP) Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)

CZMA CONDITION: The subgrantee is responsible for obtaining any required FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems permits/waivers. Compliance with FDEP requirements constitutes compliance with Florida CZM. Failure to comply with these conditions may jeopardize FEMA funding; verification of compliance will be required at project closeout.

No Approved

Final Review ReportingRequirements

Close out cost submission

At close out this project is subject to actual cost recalculation. Applicant is required to submit at close out, line item cost that can be aligned with the CEF format used to estimate the costs for this project and the DR 1785 pw 561 project. At close out this worksheet is subject to recalculation to comply with FEMA second appeal, Collier County, DR 1393, May 14, 2012. Cory Spaulding TAC.

Yes Approved

EHP Review Other (EHP) Standard Condition #3

If ground disturbing activities occur during construction, applicant will monitor ground disturbance and if any potential archeological resources are discovered, will

No Recommended



immediately cease construction in that area and notify the State and FEMA.


This review does not address all federal, state and local requirements. Acceptance of federal funding requires recipient to comply with all federal, state and local laws. Failure to obtain all appropriate federal, state and local environmental permits and clearances may jeopardize federal funding.

No Recommended


Any change to the approved scope of work will require re-evaluation for compliance with NEPA and other Laws and Executive Orders.

No Recommended

EHP Review Other (EHP) National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)

NHPA: Prior to conducting repairs, applicant must identify the source and location of sand material. If the sand souce is privately owned, or is located on previously undisturbed land, FEMA consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer will be required. Failure to comply with this condition may jeopardize FEMA funding; verification of compliance will be required at project closeout.

No Recommended

EHP Review Other (EHP) Executive Order 11988 - Floodplains

No Recommended

EHP Review Other (EHP) Endangered Species Act (ESA)

ESA CONDITIONS: Per the Statewide Programmatic Biological Opinion (SPBO; Service August 22,2011), the subgrantee must adhere to the following: Sea Turtle Reasonable and Prudent Measures, the Standard Manatee Conditions for In-Water Work shall be implemented, commitments outlined in the SPBO regarding piping plovers must be implemented, FWC standard guidelines for the protection of nesting shorebirds must be implemented for work between February 15 to August 31, surveys shall be conducted daily throughout the

No Recommended



construction period. All of these conditions are included in the USACE permit and consultation with USFWS. Verification that these project conditions have been met will be required as part of project closeout. Non-compliance with EHP project conditions may jeopardize federal funding.

EHP Review Other (EHP) Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)

CZMA CONDITION: The subgrantee is responsible for obtaining any required FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems permits/waivers. Compliance with FDEP requirements constitutes compliance with Florida CZM. Failure to comply with these conditions may jeopardize FEMA funding; verification of compliance will be required at project closeout.

No Recommended

EHP Review Other (EHP) Clean Water Act (CWA)

CWA CONDITION: The subgrantee is responsible for coordinating with and obtaining any required section 401 and 404 permit(s) from FDEP Beaches and Coastal Management Division to obtain a Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) permit prior to initiating work. The subgrantee shall comply with all conditions of the required permit. All coordination pertaining to these activities should be documented and compliance maintained in their permanent files. Failure to comply with these conditions may jeopardize FEMA funding; verification of compliance will be required at project closeout.

No Recommended

Internal Comments

No. Queue User Date/Time Reviewer Comments

7 AwardReview SYSTEM

07-29-2013 02:48 PM GMT

ACCEPTED

Reviewed project, storm related sand quantities are calculated with normal background erosion subtracted based upon applicant supplied data. Worksheet sand quantities were calculated in compliance with May 14, 2012 second appeal for this applicant, FEMA DR 1393. Repairs for sand lost in this



6 Final Review TAYLOR MOODY KAREN

07-02-2013 08:47 PM GMT

disaster are to be done in conjunction with the applicant’s regular beach nourishment and sand loss from DR 1785 PW 561. Project is subject to close out recalculation of actual costs. Present costs are based upon estimates. At close out the two FEMA projects from different disaster will be recalculated based upon actual costs as well as to pro rate the fixed costs proportionally as is detailed in the second appeal which describes the method of calculating FEMA eligible costs when FEMA projects are combined together and or combined with the applicants regular beach nourishment cycle. Cory Spaulding TAC

5 Final Review JOHNSONSR DAVID

06-25-2013 12:02 PM GMT

6-25-2013 PW need to have a Final Review Completed

4 Final Review JOHNSONSR DAVID

06-25-2013 12:01 PM GMT

6-25-2013 PW need to have a Final Review Completed

3 Final Review SPAULDINGCORY

06-14-2013 03:48 PM GMT

Reviewed project, storm related sand quantities are calculated with normal background erosion subtracted based upon applicant supplied data. Worksheet sand quantities were calculated in compliance with May 14, 2012 second appeal for this applicant, FEMA DR 1393. Repairs for sand lost in this disaster are to be done in conjunction with the applicant’s regular beach nourishment and sand loss from DR 1785 PW 561. Project is subject to close out recalculation of actual costs. Present costs are based upon estimates. At close out the two FEMA projects from different disaster will be recalculated based upon actual costs as well as to pro rate the fixed costs proportionally as is detailed in the second appeal which describes the method of calculating FEMA eligible costs when FEMA projects are combined together and or combined with the applicants regular beach nourishment cycle. Cory Spaulding TAC

2 EHP Review COLLINSDAWN

05-31-2013 01:44 PM GMT

SOW: Collier County (25.92148, -81.7293), CAT G - Applicant made repairs to South Marco Beach, consisting of placing 13,228 CY of beach-quality sand on 9,594 LF of damaged beach surface, between monuments R139 and G5. Beach returned to predisaster condition. - ssander5 - 02/06/2013 18:26:33 GMT CWA: See condition. - ssander5 - 02/06/2013 18:15:00 GMT CZMA: See condition. - ssander5 - 02/06/2013 18:16:19 GMT EO 11990: Not in wetlands per review of USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapper, accessed 02/06/2013. - ssander5 - 02/06/2013 18:22:08 GMT ESA: Per USFWS concurrence letter dated April 24, 2013 (attached). SEE CONDITIONS. - dcollin3 - 05/31/2013 13:41:45 GMT EO 11988: The project is located in Zone AE per Collier County FIRM Panel # 12021C0836H, dated 05/16/2012. Floodplain avoidance by relocating the facility or abandoning its use is not a practicable alternative and the no-action alternative would adversely impact social or economic resources for the community. See FIRM attached in EMMIE. - ssander5 - 02/06/2013 18:19:14 GMT NHPA: See condition. - ssander5 - 02/06/2013 18:14:30 GMT

1Quality Assurance / Quality

ROCQUE RAYMOND 01-11-2013

02:28 PM

Sub grantee application has been reviewed appears to be correct with required information attached.



Control GMT



#0

#0

S Collier BLVD

Spruce AVE

Fieldstone DR

Sycamore CT

Montego CTW

ells Sawyer W

AY

Java CT

R-143

R-142

415000

4150

00

416000

4160

00

417000

4170

00

579000 579000

580000 580000

Collier County BeachLong Range Beach PlanSouth Marco Segment

Date: 06/27/17 By: HMV COMM NO: 631226141

TITLE:Legend:Parcels Marco Island Zoning:

Commercial

PUD

Residential Tourist

Single Family

Critical Erosion Area

#0 FDEP Monuments

G:\ENTERPRISE\COLLIER\631226141\MXD\SOUTH_MARCO_SEGMENT_LRPB_MAP_1.MXD

FIGURE 4a

Notes:

Gulf of Mexico

£NTS

Viewport

Gulf of Mexico

Matchline Figure 4b

1. Coordinates are in feet based on the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone, North American Datum of 1983. (NAD83). 2. 2016 aerial imagery provided by Collier County Property Appraisers Office, flown February 12, 2016.3. Publicly-Owned Property and Public Lodging based on the 2017 parcel data.

1 inch = 200 feet

μ0 100 200

Feet

Marco Beach Ocean Resort

2481 NW BOCA RATON BLVD.BOCA RATON, FL 33431

PH. (561) 391-8102FAX.(561) 391-9116

CB&IEnvironmental &

Infrastructure, Inc.

#0

Hilton Marco Island

Beach Resort Hotel and Spa

182'Hotel 100%

Marriott'sCrystalShores

350'Hotel 100%

S Collier BLVD

Mus

p a W

AY

Winterberry DR

Wells Sawyer WAY

Lido CT

R-144

415000

4150

00

416000

4160

00

417000

4170

00

578000 578000




Commercial

Residential Tourist

Single Family

Public Lodging


#0 FDEP Monuments


FIGURE 4b

Gulf of Mexico

£NTS

Viewport

Gulf of Mexico

Matchline Figure 4c

Matchline Figure 4a


PH. (561) 391-8102FAX.(561) 391-9116

CB&IEnvironmental &


Notes:1. Coordinates are in feet based on the Florida State Plane Coordinate System, East Zone, North American Datum of 1983. (NAD83). 2. 2016 aerial imagery provided by Collier County Property Appraisers Office, flown February 12, 2016.3. Publicly-Owned Property and Public Lodging based on the 2017 parcel data.

1 inch = 200 feet

μ0 100 200

Feet

Proj

ect A

rea

#0

#0

S Co

ll ier

BLV

D

Seag

rape

DR

Valley AVE

Mus

pa W

AY

R-146

R-145

415000

4150

00

416000

4160

00

417000

4170

00

576000 576000

577000 577000




Commercial

Residential Tourist

Single Family


#0 FDEP Monuments


£NTS

FIGURE 4c

Viewport

Matchline Figure 4d

Gulf of Mexico

Gulf of Mexico

Matchline Figure 4b

1 inch = 200 feet

μ0 100 200

Feet



PH. (561) 391-8102FAX.(561) 391-9116

CB&IEnvironmental &


Proj

ect A

rea

#0

#0

72Parking Spaces

S Co

llier

BLV

D

Seag

rape

DR

Swallow AVE

Swan DR

R-148

R-147

415000

4150

00

416000

4160

00

417000

4170

00574000 574000

575000 575000



TITLE:Legend:Public Beach Access & Parking

Parcels

Marco Island Zoning:

Multi-Family

PUD

Residential Tourist

Single Family

Public Lodging


#0 FDEP Monuments


FIGURE 4d

Gulf of Mexico

£NTS

ViewportGulf of Mexico

Matchline Figure 4e

Matchline Figure 4c

Veracruz at Cape Marco

Proj

ect A

rea


1 inch = 200 feet

μ0 100 200

Feet2481 NW BOCA RATON BLVD.

BOCA RATON, FL 33431PH. (561) 391-8102FAX.(561) 391-9116

CB&IEnvironmental &


Tampico at Cape Marco

Beach Club of Marco

400'Vacation Rental-

Condo 0%

#0

#0

#0

#0G-5

G-4

G-3

G-2

415000

4150

00

416000

4160

00

417000

4170

00

573000 573000


Date: 06/28/17 By: HMV COMM NO: 6312261411 inch = 200 feet


Multi-Family

PUD


#0 FDEP Monuments

μ0 100 200

Feet


FIGURE 4e

Gulf of Mexico

£NTS

Viewport

Gulf of Mexico

Matchline Figure 4d

Cozumel at Cape MarcoPr

ojec

t Are

a



PH. (561) 391-8102FAX.(561) 391-9116

CB&IEnvironmental &


Belize at Cape Marco

Monterrey at Cape Marco

Merida at Cape Marco

Documents

PART III: EVALUATION CRITERIA