The URL can be used to link to this page

Item R5M C ounty of f Monroe ELj » °o � BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS /� � Mayor David Rice, District 4 Th e Florida Keys Mayor Pro Tem Sylvia J. Murphy, District 5 Danny L. Kolhage, District 1 George Neugent, District 2 Heather Carruthers, District 3 County Commission Meeting January 17, 2018 Agenda Item Number: R.5 Agenda Item Summary #3821 BULK ITEM: Yes DEPARTMENT: County Administrator TIME APPROXIMATE: STAFF CONTACT: Lisa Tennyson (305) 292 -4444 N/A AGENDA ITEM WORDING: Notice of release of the Gulf Consortium's draft Florida State Expenditure Plan related to the RESTORE Act. ITEM BACKGROUND: The Gulf Consortium has completed its work on the development of the State Expenditure Plan (SEP). This is the document required to begin to be able to draw down the funds in the RESTORE Act Pot 3 (the State -level pot.) The draft is expected to be officially released by the Consortium on January 11, 2018. The draft SEP is attached. It describes how each of the 23 member counties of the Consortium (those on the Gulf Coast) will use its portion of the Pot 3 funds. Monroe's project for the use of these funds is canal restoration. Please note, the draft SEP is not a Monroe County document. This item is on the agenda to provide additional public notice that the draft plan has been released and that there is an opportunity for the public to review and comment. Each of the Consortium counties will share the Pot 3 funds (approximately $285M) equally, with each County receiving about $12AM for their environmental projects. These funds are subject to a 15 year structured payout by BP, so the plan proposes to phase counties' allocations over time, with the flexibility that it may draw down multiple years' funding in the first year of each phase (essentially, if project -ready a County could draw down $4m in the first year of every 4 -5 year phase.) The SEP is still a draft, until it completes a 45 -day public review and comment period and revisions are made. The SEP will then be transmitted to the Governor's office and the Federal Council; both entities must officially approve the plan. After final approvals are obtained, funds may begin to be drawn down. SEP completion /approval and funding timeline: • Draft final SEP released: January 11, 2018 • Agency and Public Review /Comment period for 45 days • Revisions to SEP: March 2018 • Revised Final SEP released to Counties: April 2018 • Consortium special meeting to transmit Final SEP to Governor and Council: April 2018 • Council review of SEP: April/May 2018 • Council approval of Final SEP: May 31, 2018 • Funding will be available after all final approvals and subsequent grant applications are submitted: 3 rd or 4 quarter of 2018 The Gulf Consortium is hosting webinar public reviews on February 8 and 15, 2018. To register for these webinars and for more go to: www.gglfconsortium.org/ PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: November 2016: Resolution 276 -2016 approving the allocation of Pot 1 and Pot 3 funds to Canal Water Quality Restoration projects. CONTRACT /AGREEMENT CHANGES: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval DOCUMENTATION: Gulf Consortium's draft Florida State Expenditure Plan related to the RESTORE Act (web link) FL SEP Draft 12.22.17 FINANCIAL IMPACT: Effective Date: Expiration Date: Total Dollar Value of Contract: Total Cost to County: N/A Current Year Portion: Budgeted: Source of Funds: CPI: Indirect Costs: Estimated Ongoing Costs Not Included in above dollar amounts: Revenue Producing: If yes, amount: Grant: County Match: Insurance Required: Additional Details: N/A REVIEWED BY: Bob Shillinger Kathy Peters Board of County Commissioners Completed Completed Pending 01/09/2018 4:52 PM 01/09/2018 4:53 PM 01/17/2018 9:00 AM G U LF-U, 6 4 C 0 N S 0 R T1 U M i as CL x LU Cf) —j LL E 0 0 L) as as w 4- 0 0 z I- 7 04 C i 04 CL LU U) —j U— E Prepared by the Gulf Consortium for the State of Florida With assistance from Environmental Science Associates, Brown and Caldwell, Research Planning, Inc,, and Langton Consulting =BnA I m RPI Le row C C W1 aldwelL Langton i as CL x LU Cf) —j LL E 0 0 L) as as w 4- 0 0 z I- 7 04 C i 04 CL LU U) —j U— E x: x: x�x STATE EXPENDITURE PLAN Submitted Pursuant to the Spill Impa Compone of the RESTORE Act I R.5.b Q m L O r I.I. C a w L Q x w 4) it M C J LL sC L D E r L O 0) C O U C7 O m N O N V r O Z r N N N T " r w L 0 a w J LL r C N E t CJ cC r.+ Q Packet Pg. 3405 State of Honda State Expenditure Plan Table of Contents Glossaryof ACTOnYMS ........................................................... .......... ....... ............................ ................................... vi ExecutiveSu ............................................ . ................. ......... ....... ................................................................. ! Section I. State Certification of RESTORE Act Compliance ................................................. 1 A, Designated State Agency —The Gulf Consortium 8, State Certification C. Compliance with the 25 Percent Infrastructure Limitation Section 11. Public Participation Statement . . ....... .. ....... ......... ............................................................ 6 A. Public Participation Statement B. Process for Selecting Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities C. Public Involvement Section Ill. Financial Integrity ......................... ....... . ....... ......... .............................. ..................................... 18 A. Implementing Authority S. Financial Integrity C. Conflict of Interest D. Legal Compliance Section IV. Overall Consistency with the Goals Section VI. Implementation ................................ . ......... ................ ...................................................... 452 A. Unique Challenges of Implementing the Florida State Expenditure Pan B. Project Sequencing C. Project Leveraging SectionVII. Appendices .................................. ............... .......... ........................................................................ 470 A Memorandum of Understand,ing Between the State of Florida & Gulf Consortium P. Interlocal Agreement Between the Counties of the Gulf Consort um C. Letter from Counc I Confirm ng Implementing Authority D. Leveraging Booklet E. Summary of Pubi c Comments Race ved on Draft Florida SFP 'If Glossary of Acronyms AFS, air force base BBSAP Big Bond State Aquatic Preserve BMAP Basin Management Action P,an EIMP best management practice BOCC Board of County Commissioners BSAIP Bob Sikes Airport Industrial Park CARL Conservation and Reamer an Land DEEP Choctawhatchee Bay Estuary CY Program CCCWIP Collier County Comprehensive EMMA Watershed Improvement Program CCMP Comprehensive Conserver on and DWH Management P an CCUD Char otte County Ual ties Department CDBG Community Development Block RES Grant CFBC Cross Florida Barge Cane' CHEC Charlotte Harbor Env Fortmental HEITS Center, Inc CURER Charlotte Harbor National Estuary FAD Program DIP Cap.tal mprovements Program CKOA Cedar Key Oysterman Associat:on CLAMP Canal Management Master Play CRAAC Community Redevelopment Area FDEP Advisory Committee CVVSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund CY cubic yards DLPZ Dearmaint Lake Protection Zone EMMA dredged material management area DOI Department of the Interior DWH Deep Ater Horizon ECUA Emerald Coast Ut it es Authority EDC Economic Deve opment Council RES Sea Grant Marine Extension DIPS Programs ELAPP Environmental Lands Acquisition and HEITS Protect an Program EOC emergency operations center EPA Environmental Protection Agency EWD Englewood Water District FAC Florida Administrative Code FAD fish aggregating devices FAU Florida Atlantic Univers ty Florida Department of Agricu total FDACS and Consumer Services Florida Department of Environmental FDEP Protection FISCH Florida Department of Has th FDOT Florida Department of Transportat,on FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FKNMS Florida Keys Nat one I Marine Sanctuary FKRAD F lor us Keys Reasonable Assurance Document FWC Florida Fein and VAN ife Conservat on Commission GEBF Gulf Env ronmental Barrel t Fund GEMS Gulf of Mexico Ecological Management GGC Golden Gate Canal CIS geographic information system Spa gallornsi per day DIPS Global Pos.tioning System GS! Gulf Shellfish Inst-tute. lr--. HEITS Holley by the Sea HNWS Holley Navarre Water System I inflow and infiltration 1-10 interstate 10 I RAS Insinute of Food and Agricultural Scier--es L 'WrISI In poundis) LMI low- and moderate-income - RIGHT? LPS low-pressure, sewer LSSP Lansing Smith Steam Plant LSWMP Lake Seminole Watershed Management Plan mg nallignersia mgd ne-lion gallons per day huge million gallons per day MHP mobile home park MERU Man cipa I Swvice Benefit Unit NACWA North American Wetlands Conservation Act NBWWTF Navarre Beach Wastewater Treatment Facility NECTR North East Caloccoaratchee Tubular as Restoration KERN National Estuarine Research Reserve Pd National Fish and W, Idl fe Foundation NGO non-government organization NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Aden n stration n- 7 Cu w ! Cu al CL LU U) _j U- E vi State of Florida State Expenditure Plan NPSM Gunpoint Source Maragament SWFAdVID Southwest Florida Water Program Management District NRDA Natural Resource Damage SWIM Surface Water Improvement and Assessment Management NW Mfg Northwest Florida Water TED to be determined Management District TEEP Tampa Bay Estuary Program OCVVS Clkaluo es County Water & Sewer TIG Trustee Implementation Group OFW Outstanding Florida Water TMDL total maximum daily load OSTIDS co -site sewage treatment and TN Total Nitrogen disposal system U.S. 331 U S. Highway 331 PAN polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers PBS &J PBS &J International, Inc PCB polychlorinated biphenyls USDA United States Department of Agriculture PCIVIRS Pasco County Paster Reuse System U.S Environmental Protection PCP pentachlorophenol LISEPA Agency PCUSB Pasco County Utilities Services USFWS US Fish and Wildlife Service Bran WBID Water Body identification number PCARP Programmatic Damage Assessment Water Infrastructure Finance and and Restoration Plan WIFIA Innovat on Act PSSF Picayune Strand State Forest WQpP Water Quality Protection Program RAP Reasonable Assurance Plan WRF Water Reclamation Facility RCPP Regional Conservation Partnership WRF Wastewater Reclamation Facility Program P water treatment plant Resources and Ecosystems Sustain RESTORE ability, Tourist Opportunities, and WWS Week - Wachee Spring Act Revived Economies of theGulf Coast WWTF wastewater treatment fac lity States Act of 2412 dTP Wastewatr§rTreatment Plant RIB rapid -rate infiltration basin yr year {s} RIVER Reg one Initiative Valuing 015N stable isotopes of nitrogen Environmental Resources RTC real -time kirematic RV recreational vehicle SBER Sarasota Bay Estuary Program SEARCH Special Evaluation Assistance for Rural Communities and Households SEP State Expenditure Plan SERCAP Southeast Rural Community Assistance Project, Inc. SFWMD Southwest Florida Water Management District SR -5E State Route SB SRL severe repetitive puss SRWMD uwanmea River Water Management [district SSO Sanitary sewer overflow SGO sanitary sewer overflown SSRU South Santa Rosa Uflity SWFRERP Southwest Regional Ecosystem Restoration Plan vi r i WL fAA # r IL t ,' rr � Ell State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Executive Summary (To Be Provided in Draft SEP] IV PF 771- : 1 u 4 I I I I- T7 04 C i 04 CL LU U) -j U- E 4L q ' -k. _ �n t i . � F Oj ` a+ � { F � � rd lzr C 0 M cr mm C F 5 Ca C. SECTION L State Certification of RESTORE Act Compliance A. Designated State Agency — The Gulf Consortium GUL C 0 N S 0 R T I U M The Consortium is a public entity created in October 2012 through an Interlocal Agreement between Florida's 23 Gulf Coast counties to meet the requirements of www,gulfconserfium.org the RESTORE Act. The Florida Guif Coast extends from Escarnb',a County in the western panhandle bordering the state of Alabama, to Monroe County, including the Everglades and the Florida Keys on the southern tip of Florda, The Interlocal Agreement establishing the Gulf Consortium is provided in Appendix. The Consort urn's Board of Directors consists of one representative from each of the 23 county governments and six persons appointed by the Governor, for a total of 29 Board members. Since its inception, the Consortium has met more or less every other month and has held numerous Executive Committee meetings to stand up the organization, conduct business, and guide the development and implementation of the SEP Pursuant to the RESTORE Act, Governor Rick Scott is Florida's appointed lead on the G.If Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council (Council). To formalize the role of the Corsiortium, the Governor and the Conscrt'um entered into a Me•lorandurn of Understanding Ili OU) on June 12, 2013, to establish the Consortium's responsibilities in the development of the SEP and in coordinating with the Governor's office, The MOU between the Consortium and the State of Florida is provided in Appendix A. • A review for consistency w th the applicable laws and rues • Prioritocition based on cater a established by the Consortium • Consideration of public comments • Approval by an affirmative vote of at least a majorty of the Consortium Directors present at a duty noticed public meeting of the Consortium Upon final review and approval by the Consort-um, the Governor is respons'ble for the formal transmittal of the Florida SEP to the Council. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan JEFFERSON TAYLOR ESCAMBIA I WALTON SANTA ROSA BAY GULF FRANKLIN DIXIE LEVY CITRUS HERNANDO - PASca -- The Florida GUlf Coast extends from Escambia County in the western panhandle bordering the State of Alabama, to Monroe County, inducting the Everglades and the Florida Keys on the sow hern tip of Florida, B. State Certification In addition to the above minimum requirements set forth i- the MOU, the RESToRE Act, 33 United States Code (U.S,C-) Sect on 1321 (t)(3)(B), lists the requirements that each SEP must meet for the disbursement of Oil Spill mortar Mocation Funds, in accordance with t: formula developed under Section 1321 (t)(3)(A), These requirements include j SECTION 1: State Certification of RESTORE Act Compliance In accordance W,th Section 5-2.2 of the Council's SEP Guidel.1nes, the State of Florida hereby certifies the following: A'I projects, programs, and act.vities included in the Florida SEP are eligible activities as der ned by the RESTORE Act a All projects, programs, and activities included in the Florida SEP contribute to the overall economic and/or ecolog cal recovery of the Gulf Coast, - The Florida SEP is consistent with the goals and objectives of the current Comprehensive Plan adopted by the Council. Issues crossing Gulf State boundaries have been evaluated to ensure that a comprehensive, col aborat-ve ecology cal and econom'c recovery :s furthered by the Florida SEP All projects, programs, and activities included in the SEP are based on and/or informed by the Best Available Science as defined in the RESTORE Act. A wry �. .'dMBMIFMMPkM 4 I @- - WOO T . 7-m - & : M '•3'+ . v �{{yy 'r J _4 P.?rr' �'��s Yti.7 f_�J. - •. ZI FM G.�;'-�.��'�� *�,} `� +Sf'` " „'•� r. . i1 �� f � . ' �i Lti -'!`, _ .f= �°:'r. 9 r�".��rt- r a °` °'i - °� ;AS* '{ ", ' ' .,i �,,'�'e �� } • , .- r �SfC�.,'S'� } [. • +t %':fj f �i ' 'e'- yFT�- :?''�6 3.�' }..^ ' ��'T '` ' n _ ''} ..° ��`"#�•° ' y W " Public Participation Statement % 1 A N " . 4 '� t � k � ' '`t {•, %, dal �e � ?' � { �%^4 4 , 111 .'`:ru Y Q (_ ';I :' '�.� - �. � �(}►, .�;',�s}�;�r, � ��- -�ro` i 41 r- -L C C a' n O C a m C En d n� cn YA' 4 1 State of Florida Stale Expend lure Plan B. Process for Selecting Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities In November 2014, the Gulf Consort'um se'ected the Environmental Science Associates (ESA) consultant team to prepare the Florida SER The ESA consultant team proposed a scope of work divided into four phases: M Prcilec.t N These phases and their respective tasks are described below. PHASE I — FUNDING AND GOAL SETTING Task 2 — Conduct Consortium Goal Setting Workshop Fir or to this vote, the ESA consultant team had been working under the scope of work contained in the original Request for Proposal JRFP) and Request for Best and Final Offer (RBAFO) and addressed in ESWi final RBAFO response. This original scope of work essentially defined a process whereby the selected consultant team would review the universe of pro,ects contained in the Deepwater Horizon (DWH) project portal developed by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection IFDEP), conduct a benefit/cost analysis of those projects, and then select SECTION 11: Public Participation Statement The revised ESA scope of work is dep cted graphically in the flow chart below. Sol Is the four phases remained the same, the task structure was modified to accommodate the County-driven process. The follow ng text descr'..bes Phases 11 through IV and their respective tasks. Florida State Expenditure Plan Development Process Flow Chart A TASK I - Prepare PSEP and Administrat've Grant Application TASK 2 - Conduct Consortium Coal Setting Workshop TASK 3 - Compile Preliminary Project List TASK 4 - Screen, Attribute, and Map the Preliminary Project List TASK 5 Perform Gaps, Overlaps, and Opportunities Analysis TASK 6- Develop Draft Project List and Spatial Database Councl I exclave and Approval 91 COnglortfUre Board of Directors Review and Approval of ConsiA Itant Work Products TASK 7 - Develop Project Evaluation Criteria 10 Slate of F'orida State Expenditure Plan Environmental and economic projects identified as part of County Direct Component act'vities through coordination with local Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2012 (RESTORE Act) citizen and stakeholder committees Environmental projects identified in existing coastal resource and watershed management plans (e.g., National Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plans; Water Management Distract Surface Water Improvement and Management Plans, etc) Applicable County projects identified in Capital Improvement Programs or other County environmental and economic development initiatives Task 4 — Screen, Attribute, and Map the Preliminary Project LW 7 W- 4. ale6 my tr T C7 C a' n o� F . iie y { W ' , x+ dL l' ' 1x• \ i �•. ,�' rV x~ YF` -- y" ri M1I��ILi��I�`� ��* uV }i {f � C7 Hills borough'Coun'ty.' Y'r ' :�'r k Fi4`' „y�y.- 4 �.4�1 '"S _4� -i �,• f' - #�- ' AM a-jn� - � -I.. g ion - � on ro eCo u nƒ y tea= L . 0 M n Dixie County SECTION If: Public Participation Statement Task 13 — Stakeholder Outreach and Public Involvernent transmittal to the Council. C. Public Involvement As described underTask 13, the ESA consultant team developed and implemented a Stakeholder Outreach and Public Involvement program to facilitate stakeholder review and to so'icit public comments. This program was tailored to meet the specific requirements of the Consortium and the MOU, Public comments on the Draft Florida SEA' were solicited through the following a Facilitation of two advertised pub to welainars open to a wide variety of stakeholder and citizen groups a Facilitation of two advertised public meetings, one in Bay County and one in Hillsborough County * Deveropment and maintenance of an online website and portal for the submittal and documentation of pub is comments received, as well as responses to those comments - Implementation of a coordinated State agency review process involving: — Florida Department of Environmental Protection — Florida F'sh and Wi!dI ife Conservation Commission Department of Economic Opportunity Florida Department of Transportation Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Florcla Water Management Districts with applicable jurisd ction - Comments received dur ng the public and coordinated State agency review, and responses to those comments, are catalogued in Appendix D. I G State of Florida State Expend ture P an COUNTY PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES Although RESTORE Act funds are divided among the five Gulf Coast states, Florida is unique in that the Gulf Coast Counties are the lead entities for two of the five RESTORE Act component the Direct Component and the Spill Impact Component, For Direct Component funds, each of the 23 Counties is responsible for developing their own Multi-Year Implementation Plan (MYIP), based on processes and projects developed locally, and through coordination with the Department of Treasury. For Spill Impact Component funds, all 23 counties have worked together as the Gulf Consortium to develop the Florida SEP but pursuant to the process described above, each county acted more or less independently in nominating and selecting their own projects for inclusion in the SEP Some counties followed similar processes, but each county was slightly unique in their approach. For example, 20 of the 23 member counties formed local RESTORE Act advisory committees to recommend projects to their respective County Commissions, Others secured planning grants and relied on staff and/or hired consultants to identify needs and candidate projects. While still others used a combination of these approaches. As a result, there was little consistency and each county had to learn to navigate the various RESTORE Act processes independently. To reduce redundancy and streamline efficiency so that more RESTORE Act funds could be spent on projects rather than learning to navigate new administrative processes, in April 2016, the National Wildlife Federation hosted a workshop of Florida's Gulf Coast counties so they could share information and experiences related to implementing the RESTORE Act. The counties 'n attendance found the exchange productive and useful. As a result, the County RESTORE Act Coordinator (RAC) meetings have continued to be held several times a year, in conjunction with Gulf Consortium meetings (to maximize attendance a nce many County representatives also attend Consort um meetings). The RAC meetings differ from the Gulf Consortium meetings in that they involve lead County staff who are responsible for writing planning grants, prepay ng MYl Ps, writing 'implementation grants, ma napng projects, and monitoring programs. In addition, the primary focus of the RAC meet:'ngs is on Direct Component (Pot 1) funds, whereas the Consortium focuses exclusive y on Spill impact Component funds. However, in recent months, more Counties have been pursuing synergies and leveraging opportunities across the two County-directed funding streams, as well as considering comparab e and compatible projects with neighboring counties, development of the Florida SEP b \► .�- . f . v I LJ �� ►�.3 r'�.a Financial Integrity State of Florida State Expend ture Plan 19 mom II w ME �� t � � � ..� ' � T• r . kid �. � l r .� 4� ' � .. F Am I P :Je fiersori • _.r': _ _ CD v .. 4A L T. Escambia' County SECTION III: Financial Integrity FINANCIAL CONTROLS Control environment Within the Consort UM, Tesponsibiiity for implementing internal controls begins with the chairman of the Board of Directors and extends to all contracto•s in staffing capacity.The Consortium's manager has the primary leadership ro'e. duties, and safeguarding of assets. 22 State of Florida State Expendsture Plan ACCOUNTABILITY 2' L - = Levy -oun Y CD w n n O � C C C➢ ro m Z = �!,"� +, ,¢do-. •F�� M $ �AV.PQflt��N'1 " i i"'?r•'wi i'F , I� .. i_ �. •,C�'. sue' �J 0 m 7 " CD cn Overall Consistency with the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan t4 f4 t k SF z� 4� ro w -C 4 SECTION IV Overall Consistency with the Goals and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan A. Florida-Specific Goals and Objectives The Gulf Consortium convened its Goal Setting Workshop on August 26.2015, early in the F.or'da SEP development process, In the workshop, the ESA consu;1ant team presented the Council's goals and object ves, as described in the Initial Comprehensive Ran, and led a discuss,on on vem,age and nterpretat'.On of each goo'. and ob.ective, In addition, examples of the types of projects consistent with each goal and objective were presented. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan B. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan 2� -:• '� Y4 7'�0. #• :* 7kt� `d r,. Y ,~ � }�, a{ r �..� f t Y Y y v°. e •m. fB y •.� r tty � � , �} - _f' YlR. l� r 1�+e5 !pk �� r F .�I,� .'�� •�r'`i7�:,a�} 4 'la '',� �`qe'.. { �' J ,r . L .� h1� 'y 2�` f fz`�, _ # „+' ., t e - .'►�,t y, � t- ;•� .. �q46` � ",,; ; ` •�`4�•� Y ... f •I Lf ��' :-� •�, ��i� Y ��;•.�n,r, �' 4 �`�r�i .:�,"ls 4 .�. 'ri �y •' '.; . .. u {�.'�;�!`;uea�r 7 � i I `' "4ti11� , •1`yJ ,� ' r *�i ry'• ,�' �'; 7 '`',' `�� r, r �', r' �'+ e,� r•+ ��,�_� .ir.' .� 4i � {- },� r d -5 •L W .} P FYI ' w .Yq _ r'' #_ "'- r [( i y k 3 y �+ �[;•:. ,'� ��lt� 4 ry • '� � Irk i r� �� j'�f• "� �t8 {,i ` s } : : f S �� ; " ±i4��' a a:: g�'~ y _:- -o •'a Fj Oil '�}��, k' �, 4 q.,�'y � .',+ :? l:� � {# �`�� p "5�� ;�1' '�� i�� d q "� + S ,a� }PO �� ,�:';•t�i '!i. p. '� ry �.7 '�' � ( ��TMT�`tc *�_r } � T '_.- y�'��. i {' � 7 + �_• a', .�' � 4i" "(, ” - f.. �/n r 1 5 + • I' J � , r � � F .� J � - _ . i � ��`� r' � � + � 6 .f a _. �- n _- - t M _ - -. -� .. -r.. ;�. 1 �� : .. r I t7 �I:.„ ti - •tea " W O r - - "rf - - ; �r - �-'.'+,`_' .•rye T � y '� - _ ' - t• - � � yam _ }='�+ '� - i �� : �. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities V, IP Im W5� ar CD 0 0 SECTION V, Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities A. Overview of Projects, Programs, and Activities Ear y in the SEP development process, the Gulf Consortium held a one-day goal setting workshop to deliberate on %rida-specific goals, objectives, and go d ng principles for the Florida SEP In addition, this workshop addressed two • Should there be a pre-determined geographic alsication of funds? • Shen d there be a pre-determined allocation of funds for environmental vs. economic projects? As the debate of the geographic d stribution of funds advanced, a strong consensus began to evolve amongst the Gu.f Consortium that each county should have the ability to sponsor projects and participate in Gulf restorat on through the imp'ementation of the SEP and that there should be no pre-determined allocation of funds for environmental vs. economic projects At its November 18, 2015 meeting, the Gulf Consort um formally voted to approve an "even-steven" distribut:on a' Plor.clae Spill Impact Component allocation amongst the 23 member counties. That is, each member county would receive an equal amount of the allocation, without consideration of factors such as miles of shoreline, distance from the spill, population, etc, The Consortium considered several alternative approaches to geograph-cally distributing the funds for projects along the Florida Gulf coast, but it was determined that the most equitable so,ution was to divide the available Spill Impact Component funds equally so that each county cou'd equally participate in Gulf restoration, and self-determine their own projects. Once this decision was made, the consu.tant team was requested to revise their scope of work to implement a "county-driven" process to project nomination and evaluation whereby they would work closely with each county to ;dentify and refine their proposed pro.ects for inclus on in the Florida SEP Initially, representatives of the State agencies invo-verb with the administration of beep ter Horizon funding streams expressed concerns about this county-driven process, and whether it worn d generate projects that were in the best merest of the majority of Florida Go'[ coast stakeho'ders. However, those concerns were received when the consultant team presented a summary of the initial SEP project Lst to representatives from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the Florida Fish &Wildlife Conservation Commission, and the Florida Governor's representative on the Restoration Council on January 26, 2017 These representat'ves expressed strong support for the initial SEP project Isic, and stated that there was great potential to use funds from other DWH funding streams to leverage many of the SEP projects during implementation. Slate of Florida State Expenditure Plan • Individual county Spi I Impact Component allocat on ($12,661 M) • Any or a I of the county's Direct Component al section • Other secured grants or co-funding * Other committed county funding The consultation process with each of the counties was iterative, and each county approached these challenges in d fferent ways. The resulting list of proposed projects, programs, and activities included herein reflects the "county- driven" process in that the unique priorities of each county are represented. A total of 69 projects, programs, and activities are proposed in this Florida SEP What follows are narrative descriptions for each project and program (Section's aj" and a tabular and graphical summary of all projects and programs described herein (Section VC,), Project Description Template PROJECT NUMBER Projects are numbered sequentla ly by County, starting with Escambia County (1) and ending with Monroe County (23), For count-es that have multiple projects, the projects are listed in order of decreasing priority. Example Pinellas County's th;rd priority project is listed as Pro,ect 16-3. PROJECT TITLE Short project t tie. The term "program" is used if the project has multip:e similar components. SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities PROJECT DESCRIPTION Overview and Location One to three sentences that succ nctly describes the project or program. A G'S local on map is included for each project. Need and Justification One to three paragraphs describing the historical trends, proleems, or issues that the project addresses (e.g., water quality degradation in Charlotte Harbor), and how the project will improve the situation. Pro'.ect-spec.fic graph cs are included as appropriate Purpose and Objectives One c a r t wo paragraphs describ ng the specific ecological and/or econom;C objectives of the project (e.g., restore lost oyster reefs in Apalachicola Bay). ELIGIBILITY AND STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS The most applicab'e RESTORE Act eligible activities are listed. If more than one activ ty is applicable, then the or many eligible activity is identifiod. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The most applicable Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives are listed. if more than one goal and/or objective are appi cable, then the primary goal and/or objective are Went-fied, IMPLEMENTING ENTITIES One or two sentences describing who the grant sub-recipient thrill be, and who wi 11 be p r.mari y reaps no b Is for project implementation. RISKS AND UNCERTAINTIES One paragraph describing the risks and uncertainties (e.g , addit canal technical .nformat on needs, property availability, funding shortfalls, etc.). SUCCESS CRITERIA AND MONITORING One paragraph describing the anticipated project benefits, and specific criteria/metr cs that will be measured to determine success. Proposed monitoring criteria are listed as bullets. 34 State of Her da State Expenditure Plan MILESTONES AND SCHEDULE One introductory paragraph that defines the estimated time horizon of the project, from planning through implementation, includ ng the estimated start year and end year for the entire project. In addition, a Gantt chart ,s prow ded showing high -eve milestones for the project, and anticipated start and end dates for each in years from SEP approval, Milestone 1 Milestone 2 Milestone 3 BUDGET AND FUNDING SOURCES One paragraph that describes the total project cost estimate and how it was derived, and summarizes the various sources of secured funding, any budget shortfall, and potential sources of leveraged funding. In addition, a budget table is provided show ng the following: Plann-ng Components Plann ng Subtotal Implementation Componorns Implementation Subtotal Monitoring Total Cost Spill Impact Component Other Grants or Co-Funding Other County Funds Total Secured Funding Budget Shortfall Leveraged Fund ng Source I Leveraged Fund up Source 2 Leveraged Fund ng Source 3 As defined by the Counc "planning" activit es include: early planning, conceptual design and feasibility studies, engineering design and permitting, while "implementation" act cities include project construction or execution. Monitoring ncludes baseline and post-project man for ng to assess and quantify project benefits. PART IN E IRS H I PS/COLLABO RATIO N One paragraph that describes any project partners and co-sponsors, as wel as a list of agencies and NGO's that have or are expected to participate - n project planning or funding. 25 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities . . . . . . . . . . 71" -. I- T7 04 C i 04 BtS CL LU U) -J U- E 30 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan B. Individual Project Descriptions The following pages include a narrative description for each project and program. Escambia (p 38) — Bayou Chico Contaminated Sediment Remediation Project Santa Rosa IF 46) — Santa Rosa Sound Water Quality Improvement Program 01falcossa IF 54) — Stormwater Retrofit Program — Offshore Fish Aggregating Devices — Choctowhatchoo Bay Estuary Program — Shoat River Headwaters Protection Program — Veterans Park Living Shoreline Project Walton de 84) — Chriciewhatchery flay Water Quality Improvement Program Bay de 911 — North Bay Septic to Sewer Conversion and Water Quality Program — St, Andrew Bay Water Quality Program Gulf (p iosil — Water Quality Improvement Program — Coastal Access Program — Coastal Erosion Control Project Franklin far 121) — Emergency Operations Center — Apalachicola Bay Oyster Restoration Project — Cooperative Dredging Program Dixie da 182) — Horseshoe Beach Working Waterfront Rehabilitation — Sheed Island County Park Beach Rencurishment and Living Shoreline — Horseshoe Cove Oyster Restoration Proect — Coastal Public Access Program — Coastal Wastewater System improvement Program Hernando (p 254) — Artificial Reef Program — Coastal Habitat Enhancement Program — Waterway/Gulf Access Program —Water Quality Improvement Program: District A Phases I and 2 —Water Quality Improvement Program: Hernando Beach Commercial Area Star ter (Calumet Street) MEMMMM mmmm Levy (P 2111 woo.ratearria River and A;qui, than Suwannee Saund/Cedar Key Oyster S-- 51oration Project We, frowner System :mprovement Program Citrus Its 230) — Not Quadrant Sewer For -a Main Project — Barge Canal Boat Damp — Anific at Reef Program — Stiongshed Storm water1matmcant Program ON SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description A {J kyy eo. ow A NEED AND JUSTIFICATION Bayou Chico is a small urban bayou w-th a 'Ong history of industrial po'lution, it is generally considered to be the most polluted of the three urban bayous in the - Pensacola area. Bayou Chico has functioned as a working waterfront s'nce the early 1 800s. During the response to the Deepwater Horizon cri I spill, the bayou served as a stag ing/decontaminat location for the Vessels of Cipportun:ty in this time, point and non-point discharges to the bayou have resulted in high accumulated levels Figure MA, Project location in Escambia County, of sediment contaminants, including trace metals, polycycl in aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), pentach a- rophenol (PCP), dice ns/furans and polychlorinated laphenyls (PCBs). The bayou is also adjacent to the American Creosote Works site, which is a federal National Priorities List IN PL) hazardous materials site that may still be affecting the bayou. Sao went qual;ty in Bayou Chico has been degraded by an assortment of pollutants (summarized by Mohrherr at al,, 2006), In the 1970s, organic on Intents were found to be many times the typical values for coastal sediments. PCBs and dioxins were first studied in the 1990s and detected at high levels. A recent University of West Florida study 310 eG /.7 c = 7 / 7 » CL cn SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to remed ate the contaminated sediments in Baycu Chico-The project is ant-cipated to meet the fo'lowing cbtectives: (1) improve sediment and water qual-ty, Q!) restore benthiC invertebrate habitat and 13) enhance the economic and recreational opportunities along the workir-.g waterfront. work and staging areas, 413 Figure 11-11C. Sediment Mapping Survey, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan 41 Figure 11-11D, Bayou Chico Jphoto credit. MollieTaylor). SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf quality are also expected to benefit the greater Pensacola Ray fishery. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project -a consistent with and addresses the following RESTORE Act al g;ble activities: • Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wi!d.ife habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of the Gu;f Coast region porimary) • Eligible Activity 2: Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, ano natural resources Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th's project is consistent with and addresses the following Comprehensive Plan Goals • Goal 2: Restore Water Qual,ty and Quant-ty (primary) • Goal 3. Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This pro is consistent with and addresses the following Comprehensive Plan Object-ves, * Objective 2 Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources ip. imarld ■ Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Mar no Resources Implementing Entities Escamb'a County will be the implementing entity and sole grant sub-recipient responsible for the eng;neering des;gn, permitting, mplementation, and monitoring of free program. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Studies or. the conditions in Bayou Chico have been researched by state and local agencies as well as local academic institutions for the last 40 years, Key documents that make up the basis for th's project are cited be'ow Bayou Chico Basin Management Action Plan (BMAR August 201 Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, February 2008. Fecal Coliforrin TMDL for Bayou Chico Watershed, WBIDS 846, 846A 846B, 846CB, and 8480,4. - Gleason e, Armstrong J, et al., 1977 Bayou Chico Restoration Study. Florida Department of Environmental wz� .42 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan - MohrherrC, LiebensJ, Rao K_ August 2006 Sediment and water pollution in Bayou Chico, Pensacola, FL. University of West Florida a Pensacola say: Community Based Watershed Plan, December 2014. The Nature Conservancy. v Pensacola Bay Surface Water Improvement Management Plan Draft, August 2017 Northwest Florida Water Management District- - Pensacola Bay Water Management Plan, 2005. Bay Area Resource Council. As d scussed above, the need and Justificattru for the project are well established, however, the feasibility of the project must be further addressed by the - nuplementation of a comprehensive conceptual design and feasibility study, The permitting complexity and construction feasibility of the project w;Il depend largely on contarn nant concentrations and the phys cal handling characteristics of the sediments fe g., grain size and percent of organics) Risks and Uncertainties At this time the volume, contaminant concentrations, distribution of contaminants, and physical characteristics of the sediments to be removed are largely „nknown, thus, viable remedration alternatives have not yet been defined. Consequently, the rate project budget cannot be accurately determined prior to the completion of a comprehensive conceptua' design and feasibility study. There are several upland areas nearby that are adequate for implementation staging, but the timing for use of these areas will need to be further addressed in the conceptual design and feasibility study. Currently, the Florida Department of Transports I on is using both existing staging sites in Bayou Chico for the construction of the new Pensacola Bay Bridge, and discuss ons are under way to reserve the use of these staging sites for the proposed remedration project. Success Criteria and Monitoring 5scambia County will perform post-remediation surveys to ensure compliance with the project plans and speefi cations, Successful implementation of this project is anticipated to result in the follow ng ecological goals (1) improve sediment and water quality and 12) restore benthic invertebrate communities Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and described in the project grant request. It is ant;cipated that quantitative success criteria w be developed for • Changes in water quality such as dissolved oxygen, nutrients, bacteria concentrations, and total suspended so!ids from existing conditions in Bayou Chico • Changes in the abundance and distribution of benthic invertebrates and oysters from existing conditions in Bayou Chico Changes in the abundance and distribution of emergent and submerged vegetative communities In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program des gn wi I be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria, Escambra County is committed to conducting the success monitoring necessary to quantify project benefits. 43 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of th:s project is approximately 8 years. It a expected to start in 2018 and end in 2025. Implementation of this project has been broken down into four milestones as shown in the chart below, The first phase of the project is a conceptual despm and feasibility study. Conceptual design and feasibility study Final design and permitting Construct:on Monitoring Budget and Funding Sources A total cost estimate has been developed by Escambia County based on the best available information and a number of assumptions. This preliminary cost estimate is shown in the budget table below. The comp:et'on of the conceptual design and feasib0ty study a expected to result in a detailed cost estimate. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table behAv. Conceptual design and feasibil ty study $300,000 $300000 Planning Subtotal $300,000 $300,000 Final des an and permitting S800,000 $800.000 Construction $21,200,000 $11,260,000 Implementation Subtotal $22,000,000 $12,060,000 Monitoring $300,000 S300,000 Total Cost $22,600,000 $12,660,000 SECURED FUNDING SOURCES Spill Impact Component $12,660,000 Other grants or co-f unding MCERC — POT 2) $335,510 City of Pensacola $800,000 Total Secured Funding $13,795,510 Budget Shortfall $8,804,490 POTENTIAL LEVERAGED FUNDING SOURCES Direct Component Counc.l. Selected Restoration Component Gulf Env ronmental Reinert Fund Natural Rm ource Damage Assessment Triumph Fad crocus! and Marine Habitat Pastoral on Grants 0 42 Shell Marne Habrust Program S 25 Innovative Nutrarrit and Sediment Reduction and Conservation Pilot Project Prognim S 50 Water Projects Pr.crities Database 44 State of Florida State Expenditure Ran Escambla County is seeking other funding opportunities to leverage Spill Impact Component funds to make up the overall project budget shortfall. However, the project will be phased in a manner that veil allow for comp etion of portions of the project based on the amount of funding available. Partnershi ps/Col la boration The Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council (GCERC) has funded a portion of the planning, design, and Perm tong of the Bayou Chico Contam noted Sed'ment Removal Project. Other stakeholders include: • City of Pensacola • Bayou Chico Association • Bay Area Resource Council in conjunction with West Florida Regional Plann'ng Council • Emerald Coast Ud Itties Authority ,% Escambia County Health Department - Florida Department of Health • Florida Department of Environmental Protection • Northwest Florida Water Management District • University of West Florida • U.S. Environments Protection Agency 4F) SECTION A. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description s! F A 40 4- , It 9D N t 20 �' � � .rte * ¢�..._ � � � .. Figure 2-11A. Location of Santa Rosa Sound Water Quafity Improvement Program components in Santa Rosa County 16 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan L T Ij T Figure 2- 1 B, Sou ndside septic to sewer conversion area - Son ndside B is the easternmost sections. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this program is to reduce pollutant load;ngs to Santa Rosa Sound from known sources. The objectives of the program are to: 11) improve water quality in Santa Rosa Sound; and (2) restore marine habitats and I;ving resources in the sound that may have been degraded by poor water quality. PROJECT COMPONENTS The Santa Rosa Sound Water Quality Improvement Program comprises three components, which are summarized below, Soundside Drive B Septic to Sewer The Soundside residential community does not currently have a centralized sewer system and uses Septic systems for wastewater treatment and disposal, This proposed program component wdi expand Santa Rosa County's existing sewer system into the Sounds de B area (see Figure 2-18) and allow for the conversion of approximately 163 septic systems to a low-pressure sewer system. The system design is in the beginning stages Holley by the Sea Septic to Sewer The HEITS residential community currently has centralized sewer service in only some areas (see Figure 2-11C). The proposed program component includes expanding the existing sewer system, allowing for the abandonment of 595 existing septic systems.The program component is currently being studied to dentify the most suitable sewer system for the area (low-pressure system or gravity system). a? ltct !!44�L tl State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This program w'Il also contribute to economic growth in Santa Rosa County, espec-olly tourism and fishing industr'es. The sewer expansion will increase property values for the pare a it will ultimately serve, and sewer availabil ty va I encourage development on currently unimproved parcels in the area. This will, in turn, grow Santa Rosa County's tax base. The proposed project will a'so increase workforce development and job creation in both the public and private sectors. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This prolectut consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing RESTORE Act e:igib'e activity: & Eligible Act-vity 1. Restoration and protect on of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife hab'tats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast reg-on Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goa!s • Goa 2. Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goa 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goa' 3: Replenish and Protect Liv'.ng Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives • Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities z; "I SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Significant work has been done to assess and characterize water quality in Santa Rosa Sound and to implement water quality; mproveme to and protection programs. In add,tion, the Same Rosa SoundWater Quality Improvement Program is consistent with numerous coastal resource management plans. Recent appl:cab'e citations include the follow'ng, Lewis, M. J. at al., 2016. Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System - A Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation. United States Environmental Protection Agency a Northwest Florida Water Management District, 2017 Draft Pensacola Bay System Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan. The program components described above are considered to be feasilaft based on the available information and best professional judgement. A preliminary design report has been completed for the NBWWTF component. Risks and Uncertainties No significant risks or uncerta,nties have been identified during a review of the available inFormat on for this program. It is, however, possible that risks and uncertaint as will be identified during the preliminary design phase. Success Criteria and Monitoring This program will affect water quality in an estuarine system. Specific success criteria will be developed n the program grant request. !t is anticipated that quant-tat ve success Criteria will be developed for the following: • Number of scot c systems taker off -line • Changes in ambent water quality (nutrient and hector a concentrations) in Santa Rosa Sound • Changes in nutrient and bacterial loads to Santa Rosa Sound from wastewater sources • Changes in seagrass distribution in Santa Rosa Sound In the program grant request, a detailed monitoring program design vo I be described that addresses data col action and assessment methods ogies for the aboved isted criteria. Santa Rosa County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring ant ties to quantify project penal ts- �.j State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Milestones and Schedule F,1 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Budget and Funding Sources Sounpaide Drive B Septic to Sewer Retain lity study $45,465 $45,465 Preliminary design $45,465 $45,465 Planning Subtotal $90,930 $90,930 Final design $324,070 $324,070 Construction $2,595,000 $2,595,000 Implementation Subtotal $2,919,070 $2,919,070 Total $3,010,000 $3,010,000 He TS Septic to Sewer Fossils fity study $190,000 $190,000 Prel minartr design $190,000 $190,000 Planning Subtotal $380,000 $380,000 Final design $1,175,000 $1,175,000 Construction $11,000,000 $2,407500 Implementation Subtotal $12,175,000 $3,582,500 Total $12,555,000 $3,962,500 NBWWTF Effluent Relocation and Reuse Preliminary Design $903.000 $903,000 Planning Subtotal $903.000 $903,000 Final Design $2,197000 $2.197000 Construction $27.000,000 $2,407500 Implementation Subtotal $29,197000 $4,604,500 Total $30,100,000 $5,507500 Monitoring $160,000 Si B0,000 Total $180,000 $180,000 Total Cost $45,754,070 $12,660,000 Soil: Impact Component $12,660,000 Direct Component Other County funds Total Secured Funding $12,660,000 Budget Shortfall $33,296,930 52 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Pa rtnersh ips/Col la bo ration The eliminat on of the Septic systems on the Fairpoint Peninsula will requ're col-aboration with HNWS and SSRU to identify priority areas. Both utility systems have expressed interest in a partnership with Santa Rosa County. There are opportunities for cost sharing, and specif a budgets will be identified during the planning phase of this project. The relocat!on of the NBWVVTF effluent outfall is proposed to ir.clude partner ng with the other wastewater utilit'es within the region because of their need for reliable, long-term eff uent d sposal option, and a source of reuse water for irr-gation. Although Santa Rosa County has been 'n discussions with local ut Isties for many years regarding partnering opportunities, the extent of the utilities' interest and f nanciat commitment rema-ris to be determined, -3 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description The general location of the proposed stormovater management improvements is shown in Figure 3-11A so : r A - 55 Figure 3-1A. Genarall I ocation of proposed slarrnwater management improvernents in Okaloosa County, 4L* O (1) 0 n 0 � 2 R C ro E/3 SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fall owing Comprehensive Plan Goals: Th's project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives Implementing Entities Okaloosa County wi I be the sole imcnementing entity and grar-t sub-recipient responsible for the design, perm read, construction, and success monitoring of the program. Okaloosa County Zvi I earn nister the project by h.ring design professionals, contractors to nstall the improvements, and environmental consultants to monitor and quantify the improvements. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Some of the preliminary stAes on these projeck areas have been cooperatively funded by the NWFWMD, and this program is consistent with the folowing nature. resource management plan. NWRAIDID, 2017 Choctawhatchee River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan, Program Development Series 17-05. e� Figure 34C, 1,ocations of priority stormwater management system retrofits and upgrades, State of Florida State Expend lure Plan There have been many storm water retrof t projects successful'y completed :n north Florida to provide both precedent and lessons learned. This project is considered to be feasible with respect to the ability to it) obtain necessary permits; 12) construct the project within the proposed budget, and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of th a program, no s gnificant risks have been -dentified that wo-ild preclude implementation. There is some risk seagress or oysters may have colonized the fringes of the sed:ment deltas, therefore, buffers may need to be observed when removing sed merit de tea near some outfalls. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project wrl affect storrowater management system improvements, as well as water quality, habitat quality, and marine living resources in the receiving waters of the affected cuffalls. Therefore, a range of appropriate success criteria will be developed in the project grant request. It ;s anticipated that quantitative success criteria to 11 be developed for, * Number of outfalls retrofitted • Linear feet of pipe replaced • Acres of new'mpervious surface treated by storm water system BMPs • Changes in ambient surface water qua ity (e.g., turb'd ty) at the affected outfalls • Changes in oyster and seagress distributions at the affected outfalls In the project grant request, a deto'led monitoring program w'll be designed that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above listed criteria. Okaloosa County -a committed to implementing the necessary monitor ng program and coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total est:mated time horizon of this program is approximately 7 years. The program is expected to begin in 201 B and end in 2024. Implementation of this program has been divided into several milestones, as shown in the chart below. 6? SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Budget and Funding Sources OKalooss County has estimated at total pro cost of $6,460,000 based upon the best availab a information and is committed to allocating $4,700,000 of its share of the Pence Spill Impact Component to the project. Addit;onal county funding will add another $300,000 as in-kind design services, and Olvaloosa County will also be seeking other . averaged funding sources to supplement these monies. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the tab'e be:ow. Wasibi'sly study $96.000 $66,00 Preliminary design $378.000 $354,00 Planning Subtotal $474,000 $420,00 F:nal design and permitt-ng $316.000 $280,00 Construction $4,670,000 $3.570,00 Impleffinentation Subtotal $4,986,000 $3,850.00 SuL;cess monitoring $1,000,000 S430,00 Total Cost $6,460,000 $4,700,00 SECURED FUNDING SOURCES Spill Impact Comporent S4.700,00 Direct Component $ Other grants or co-funding $ Other County funds — (-n-kind. in-house engineering design) $300,00 Total Secured Funding $5 ' 000 00 Budget Shortfall $1,460,00i POTENTIAL LEVERAGED FUNDING SOURCES Natural Resource Damage Assessment Tr.,irriph S.18 C:ean Water State Revolving Fund CWISRF) S.50 Water Projects Front as Database Partnerships/Collaboration Okaloosa County will cone nue to partner w th the Choctawhatchee Bay Alliance and the Northwest Florida Water Management District in the development of this program, � C, State of Florida State Expend lure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION NEED AND JUSTIFICATION From an ecological standpoint, hard substrate and vertical structure are limited habitats in the Gulf of Mexico (Fikes, 2013), and the FAD structures, like artificial reefs, provide (1) hard substrate to support encrusting and colonial organisms; Q) niche space for small marine invertebrates, and (3) shelter for larval and juvenile fishes, The project is justified by the demonstrated economic benefits of saltwater fishing in coastal communities, E5 plants 3-2A. General location of proposed FADs off the coast of Okaloosa County, ` / \ \ /��.:z2�o�w�:2 > _ = �z��. � .� �&� ��,« � . 2 ��yw \� 6 _ _ � - - � � � �. �. \.�. _ \ � : \- � � �� \/ �� ~ �\ ��22= . -.� _ _�� z� �� , . �. �� . \�� _ . � �� * � ® ` � - % .�f� � a , y - . � �d�� . � 2 . z � ! \ � �� / z � � � � ,� �.' .2�. y � «�� / �� -� \ƒ � __� , 2/ §�= � . ..,�.� . \ \. � ¥� � `� � \ � .� � �, � �� . / � ; State of Florida Stale Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with and addresses the following RESTORE Act eligible activity. * Eligible Activity 10: Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast region, including recreational fishing (or mary) Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th's project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing Comprehensive Plan Goals • Goa 5: Restore and Revital ze the Gulf Economy Jprimary) • Goa 3: Replen and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol-owing Comprehensive Plan Objectives Objective 8 (Consortium Objective) Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Econorluc and Environmental Restoration Projects (pr'mary) a Objective I Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities 0kaloose County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the des gn, permitting, construction, and success monitoring of the program, The Development Councils from Gulf County to Escambut County have helped to fund an economic impact study for the pro.ect Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment FAD (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 2005-2017 Ash Aggregating Device (FAD) Technology Fact Sheets. Text by I Pradic, In: FAD Fishenes and Artuaculture, Rome http,lAvww has orgir fisheryletfusipmenfialoon, a NGAA, Accessed 24 August 2017 Fish Aggregating Devices (F ood): Fishing Gear and Risks to Protected Species, http,•lAvwwnmfs-noaa.govlprlt'nteractionslgearlfads.htm. * NO AA Fisheries, 2011, Fisheries Economics of the United States 2011. * Sharp, M. 2017, Economic Benefits of Fish Aggregaung Devices in the South Pacific. mals,11fada:2011, sciencescork tog/13071document ri SECTION A. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Wang, X, Chen, Y, Truesdell, S, Xu, L, Can, J., & Guan, W (2014L The Large-Scale Deployment of Fish Aggregation Devices Alters Environmentally-Based Migratory Behavior of Skippock Tuna in the Western Pacific Ocean. PLOT ONE, 915). This project is considered to be feasible with respect to the ability to: (1) obtain necessary permits; (2} construct the project within the proposed budget and 13) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long-term. Risks and Uncertainties No significant risks or wicertainties were identified during the evaluation of this pro that would preclude project implementation. eyes will be designed to best ace lable uschno ogy guidelines to limit damage from tropics' storms as well as adverse impacts to nuar:ne spec es. Regular monitoring and maintenance a'ong with publ c information on the proper use of the FADS will minim ze any adverse impacts, Success Criteria and Monitoring The proposed project includes Is ace-nent structures to support recreational and commercial demand for offshore fish-ig opportunities. Appropriate success criteria wiLl be developed and described in the mplementation grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: Number of FADa deployed Metrics an the recru Iment of encrust-ng organisms and densities fish 9 Increase in recreational use and fishing trips In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies 'or the above-) start criteria. Okaloosa County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximate'y 6 years- It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2023. The pro milestones and schedule are shown in the chart below. r2 Stale of F onda State Expenditure Plan Budget and Funding Sources Okalooso County has estimated the total cost of th a project to be approximately $500,000, and is committed to allocating $500,000 of its share of the Florida Sol I Impact Component to the project, Other county funds (Tourist Development Tax) vvii I be used for continu'ng ma'ntenance of the FAD network, A summary of the project budget and funding sources is prov'ded in the table below. Feasibility study $25,000 $25,000 Preliminary design $25,000 $25,000 Planning Subtotal 550,000 $50,000 Final design and permitting $25,000 $25,000 Construction $275,000 $275,000 Implementation Subtotal $300,000 $300,000 Monitoring $150,000 $150,000 Total Cost $500,000 $500,000 Spill Impact Component $500,000 Direct Component $0 Other grants or cc-funding $0 Other County funds — Tourist Development Tax $80,000 Total secured Funding 1580 Budget Shortfall Se Nature Resource Damage Assessment Triumph 019 FrshAmerica, Foundation S 27 Nonpoint Source Management Program (NPSM) - Section 319 S.34 TMDL Water Quality Resloral on Grants S.49 Sport Fish Restoration Program Partnerships/Collaboration Okaloosa County has established a regional partnership for the development of FAD networks with: 6- SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities TheTburist Development Councils o' these Counties have funded an economic impact study for the project- Other potent al project partners include: • Uriversity of West Florida • University of F lor dell nstitute of Food and Agricu Itura I So -ences • Florida State University • Florida Fish and Wildiife Conserver on Commission • The Nature Conservancy Coord nation with the following agent as is anticipated: • Florida Department of Agr'culture & Consumer Services • Florida Fish and W'Idlife Conservation Comm scion • Florida Department of Environmental Protection • Northwest Florida Water Management District • Nations' Marine Fisheries Sery ce • U,S. Army Corps of Engineers • U.S_ Fish and Wildlife Service od State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description NEED AND JUSTIFICATION adjacent beaches are listed as impaired for nutr'ents and/ Figure 3-3A. Choctawhatchee Bay Estuary Program Location or bacteria by the Florida Department of Environmental Map. Protection (FoEF) under section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act, These impairments negatively impact the health of the Bay's seagrasses and limit its recreational value. It is for these reasons that the residents of Okaloosa County, Walton County, Holmes County, Washington County, Eglin Air Force Base, and the surrounding munic pa Was have banded together to coordinate efforts in support of establish'ng the DEEP to protect this valuable natural resource. H SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to establish the OBER an alliance of federal, state, regional, and local partners and stakeho;ders mode'ed after the National Estuary Program. The objectives of the project are to U) use planning grant funds to "stand up" the GEER organization; 12) develop the CCMP for Choctawhatchee Bay, {3} identify long-term funding sources to maintain the program. (4) implement the CCMP; and (5) improve tie coordinated restoration and management of Choctawhatchee Bay. PROJECT COMPONENTS The CBEP will be a non-regulatory resource management program that w'II work to improve the waters, hab-tats, living resources, and economy of the Choctawhatchee Bay watershed. Okaloosa, Walton, Ho'mes, and Washington Counties, through an interlocal agreement, have established the Choctawhatchee Bay Estuary Coalition- In addit-on, neighboring municipalities, Eglin Air Force Base, and the Choctawatchee Bay All have also partnered with these counties to establish the critical mass and collaboration needed to establish GEER The planning grant funds w 11 be used to stand up the CRIER including tyie following activities: • Fund a planning conference • Hire a director and staff • Establish a program budget • Set up grantslauditing protocols • Commiss on a CCMP report The CCMP will Nentify critical-need projects throughout the estuary and begin funding coordination on those projects, which could include septic system abatement, stormwater treatment, hab'tat restorat an initiat-ves, gravity sanitary sewer rehabilitation, and dirt road pav ng among r-thers The CCMP will also identify long-term funding alternatives to sustain the program. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf The Choctawhatchee Bay Estuary Program will establish a coordinated effort to restore and protect the watershed's and estuary's water qua-ity and habitat. Reducing bacteria and nutrients to concentrations that meet state and federal water quality standards will decrease the frequency and magnitude of algal b come in the water co'umn, thereby increasing water clarity and the amount of suni But that reaches seagrass on the seafloor. Increased water clarity will improve seagrass health. Preserving the emerald green waters the region has become known for will a::m contribute to economic growth in Okaloosa County and adjacent areas, espec ally its fishery and ecotourism economies, The proposed CBEP will increase workforce deveiopment and job creation in both public and private sectors Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and add•esses the following RESTORE Ac. eligib!o act.vit as: • Eligible Activ'ty 8 Planning assistance 1primery) • EiNible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, r-anne and wild ife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region • Eligible Activity 3. Implementation of a federally approved mar;ne, coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan, ricluding fishe monitoring 56 State of Florida State Expend tore Plan Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This pro.ect is consistent w th, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 2 Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3: Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities The Choctowhatchee Bay Estuary Coal Lion will be the lead entity and sub-rec.p-ents responsible for standing up the CBEP and developing the COMP. Other partners may be identified in the future as sub-recipients of project grants for COMP implementation. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Th'.s project is consistent with the following natural resource management plans: a Northwest Florida Water Management District flV1wFVNND), 2017 Choctawhandrate River and Bay System Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan The CBEP will be modeled after the 28 Nat Estuary Programs across the country, which have been in ex stance for over 25 years. This program is considered to be feasible with respect to the ability to (1) stand up the CBEP organization; and (2) prepare the COMP Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this project, no risks or uncertainties were identified with respect to the ability to (1) stand up the CBEP organization and (2) prepare the CCMP Ckalcosa County has garnered substantial stakeholder support for this project. There is some risk in the securing of future long-term funding sources to ensure the full implementation of the COMP and ousts nate ity of the CBEP Success Criteria and Monitoring Specific success criteria will be developed in the planning grant request, It'-s ant cipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for. • Standing up the CBEP organizat'on and administrative infrastructure • Development of the COMP a identification of long-term funding sources to implement the COMP and sustain the CBEP E-7 SECTION rf� Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities In .he planning grant request, a data led monitoring program des;gr. will be described that addresses assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria Okaloosa County is committed to imp ement.ng the program and quantifying pro.ect benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time ho-izon of this program for POT 3 funding is approximately 7 years. The program is expected to begin in 2018 and end in 2024. Implementation of this program has been divided into five milestones, as shown in the chart below.The Estuary Program plans to continue to operate indefinitely after 2024, on other funding sources_ Budget and Funding Sources Okaloosa County has estimated a total project cost of $3,800,000, including implementat:on of CCMP early action projects. Cka:oosa County is committed to allocat ng $1,000,000 of -ts share of the Flor'da Spill ',mpact Component and $1,250,000 of its Direct Component to the project Ckaloosa County will also be seeking other leveraged funding sources to supplement these monies- A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below Implement initial COMP p•ojecls So 11 ;mpact Component (POT 3) Direct Component (Port) Other orants or co-fund no r..Fi Total Secured Funding $2,250,000 Budget Shortfall $1,550,000 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan F47 Estuary Habitat Restoration Program F52 North American Wetlands Conservation Act MAWCAI - Smal Grants F53 North American Wetlands Conservation Act iNAWCA) - Standard Grant F54 Southeast Region Coastal Program 0 42 Shell Marine Habitat Program Partnerships/Collaboration The Choctawhatchee Bay Estuary Program project will be col'aborative effort between: SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description NEED AND JUSTIFICATION Northern Okaloosa County is a rural area with high growth rates over the past 10 years, especial y to the east of Crestview and around the Bob Sikes Airport Industrial Park (BSAIP), with the potent al to impact the Protection Program components. sensitive Shoal River ecosystem. The rural areas outside of Crestview ;ack centralized wastewater infrastructure, and unpaved dirt roads are common . Von la impairments do not ex at now, as the area grows and more traffic d sturlas the dirt roadbeds, the potential for local impairments due to nutrients hector a, and sediment will inc•ease significantly. In add Lion, increased groundwater withdrawals for potable water use associated with the development of this area have the potential to reduce local groundwater leve a and aquifer recharge to shal ow groundwater lenses that feed local streams in the Shoal River system. Figure 3-41A. General location of the Shoal River Headwaters ƒI�l:. � � � -� � � Z-� X� , w � � � f 7 tn i � on � 2 .� � R §.3 0 0 9 2 / im g @ SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent w'th, and addresses, the fo.lowing Comprehensive Plan Goa • Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary} • Goa 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 5; Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehens ve Plan Objectives: • Object-ve 2: Restore, Improve, end Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objechve I Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Consortium Objective 8 Restora, D.versify, and Revita'ize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restorat'on Protects Implementing Entities OCWS and the Okaloosa County Roads D vision will be the implementing entities and grant sub-recipients responsible for the design, permitt ng, construction, operation and ma'.ntenance, and monitoring of this program- OCWS has coordinated wnh numerous othr-r agencies in the development of these projects, and may collaborate w.th other entities in the.mplementatiDn of the projects through leveraging and other cooperative funding ag•eements. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment This project is consistent with the fol'owing natural resource management and restoration pans: a Northwest Florida Water Management District (NOWHeVoi, 2017 Draft Pensacola Bay System Surface Water Improvement and Management clVifies Plan. - FDEP2017 Yellow River Marsh Aquatic Preserve Management Plan The WRF Effluent Disposal Expansion portion sperm trod and ready for construction. The BSAIP WRF is considered to be feasible with respect to the ablity to. (1) obtain necessary permits; (2) construct this project w.th n the proposed budget and (3) effectively operate and maintain this project over the long term. The other program components appear to be feas'b'e; however, a full feasibility assessment cannot be made until prelim*nary design is completed for each program component Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluat on of this program, no s:gr.if cant r sks or uncertainties were identif-ed.The final des gn and permitting of the BSAIP WRF has been completed, and this protect is ready for imp ementation The other projects of the Program are in the planning phases. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will affect water quality in adjacent freshwater, Spec'fic success criteria will be developed 'n the program grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for the follow ng: • Maintenance of ambient water quality {nutrient and bacterial concentrations} in the unimpaired segments of the Shoal River, Tid Creek, and their tributaries • Changes in water clarity and sedimentation in Pond Creek and the Shoal River In the program grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria, Okaloosa County currently implements a water quality monitoring program and is committed to conducting the necessary monitoring and coordinating with other reg:onal water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this program is approximately 7 years It is expected to start in 2026 and end in 2032. Implementation of this program has been divided into the four project components, as shown in the milestone chart below, Success monitoring will last 2 years beyond the end of construction of all component projects, MOMENEM SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Budget and Funding Sources The overall cost of the program has been estimated by Obakdoca County to be $6,820,000. Oki oosa County intends to construct these projects us no a corno'nation of in-house construct on forces and contractors. Oka'oosa County requested $300,000 for water qua-gy monitoring for a 7-year period. Ckaloosis County will prow cle $350,000 for BSAIP project Phase 11, $620,000 for the Highway 90 East Sewer Expansion, and $300,000 for the Dorcas Road component. A breakdown of the cost per project is shown in the table below. Okaloosa County will also be seeking other leveraged funding sources to supplement these monies, and several sources of leveraged funds have been identified, including State of Florida Were Project funding (appropriation) and State Revolving Fund grants.The BSAIP WRF Effluent Disposal Expans'on project and the Highway 90 East work has been submitted f or Tr: umph Gulf Coast funding. BS41P Phase I Final design and permitting $100,000 $100,000 Construct on $1,400,000 $11,400.000 implementation Subtotal $1,500,000 $1,500,000 SSAIP Phase Illetall $1,500,000 $1,500,000 BSAIw Puma: If Feasibil ty study $15,004 $15,000 Prelim -nary design $15,000 $15,000 Planning Subtotal $30,000 $30,000 Fine cles-Im and perm tfinq $120,000 $120,000 Construction $1,050,000 $700,000 Implementation Subtotal $1,170.000 $820.000 USAIP Phase lillmal $1,200,000 $850.000 Htghway,90 East Sewer Expansion Feasib Inf study $15,000 $15.000 Prelminaw design $15,000 $15,000 Planning Subtotal $30,000 $30,000 Final design arid permitting $50,000 $50,00D Construcl,on $1,240,000 $620.00D Implementation Subtotal $1,290.000 $670 Highway 90 Eastlletal $1 $700 Dorcas Road ort rp FLyvg Feasibility study $0 $o Preliminary design $60,000 $60,000 Planning Subtotal $60,000 $60,000 Fmai des an and perm sting $140,000 $140,000 Construction $2,300,000 $2,000.000 Implementation Subtotal $2,440,000 $2,140,000 Domas'llartal $2,500,000 $2.200,000 Success monitoring $300,000 $300,000 Total cost $6,820,000 $5,550,000 -F Stale of Florida Stale Expenditure Plan Pa rtnershi ps/Col la boration These projects are endorsed by the 0kalcosa County Board of County Commissioners and supported by the Okaloosa County Economic Development Council, The Economic Development Council is regularly soliciting economic opportunities for the properties east of Croats ew, especially in the Shoal River Ranch area and a future land use-designated industrial park. Other partnerships include Walton County and Northwest Florida Water Management District for the Dorcas Road project. 77 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description r :J LI OT f J Figure 3-5A, Location of the Veterans Park living shoreHne project in Okaloosa County, 7.9 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan i �7��_ Figure 3-513, Photograph of eroded shoreline on the east side of Veterans Park. 7 f yy x, 0: u . x f JW 2 J TAYLC Figure 3-5C. Conceptual plan for the Veterans Park living shoreline project. There will be gaps in the oyster reef to maintain tidal circulation and flushing, and the locat on of the breakwaters will avoid existing nearby seagrass beds, however, the close proximity to exist!ng seagrass beds will a'd in natural recruitment of seagrass seed source or rhizomes. Upon camp etion of the 'iv shoreline project, other park amenities will be constructed, including a kayak launch, improved boat ramp access and staging, and a f -xed fishing pier. 7.3 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Th-s project will contr-b to to the ecological recovery of the Gulf by it) stabilizing an eroding shoreline to protect sjbtics', intertida, and upland habitats and public property. of restoring seagrasses ir. the nearshore subtida' areas; ch providing benthic and intertidal hard substrate habitat for encrusting marine organisms (e.g., oysters), (4) providing wildlife hab.tat for shorebirds and wading bids; and (5) improving aesthetics for park via tars. This project will also support existing, and augment future, public access and recreational uses of the coasts zone, as well as provide opportunities for public environmental eclucat'on through cit:zen partic;pation iri, sail marsh plank ngs and monitoring. The pro is also expected to provide economic benefits to Okaloosa County n the form of increased ecoticurism. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activity: a El Bible Actin ry 1: Restoratior. and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisher es, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fo'lowing Comprehensive Plan Goals * Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat (primary) * Goal 3: Replenish and Probes loving Coastal and Marine Resources * Goal 4. Enhance Community Resilience This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plar, Objectives • Objective 4 Restore and Enhance Nature: Processes and Shorelines {primary) • Objective I Restore, Enhance, and Protect Hab-tats • Objective 3. Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marne Resources • Objective 5: Promote Community Resilience Implementing Entities Oka.00sa County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the design, permitt.ng, construction, and success monitoring of the program_ Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Living shoreline design and construction, as well as oyster reef restorat on, have been well stud:ed, and a range of best sit ng practices and successful construction methods have been developed. Th a program has been informed by key literature in this f-eld, including the following references: * National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NO AA), 2016 Guidance for Considering the Use of Living Shorelines. Final report prepared by the NC WA Living Shoreline Workgroup. !0 State of Flonda State Expenditure Plan Bassett, L.R EP Powers, R. Brumbaugh, L.D. Coen, B. DeAngelis, J Greene, B, Hancock, and S, Morkick. 2014. Oyster Habitat Restoration Monitoring and Assessment Handbook. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, USA 96do. Nordstrom, K. F, 2014. Living with Shore Protection Structures: A Review Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 150:11-23 This project is also consistent with: - Northwest Florida Water Management District, 2017 Choctawhatchee River and Say Surface Water Improvement and Management ISWIM) Plan Program Development Series 1705. There are several completed living shore ine projects -n north Florida to provide both precedent and lessons learned. This project is considered to be feas-ble with respect to the ability w ( 1) obtain necessary perm is, (2) construct the project within the proposed budget, and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this program, no significant risks have been identified that would preclude implementat:on. There is some risk that constructed Wing shorelines could be damaged during tropica'storm events; however, potential damage from storm surge and high waves will be factored into the siting and construction methods. In addition, the final design will cons'der and accommodate current sea-level rise predictions for Choctawhatchee Bay. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project w'll affect habitat qual'to marine living resources, and water quality in the vicinity of Veterans Park. Therefore, a range of approfirsite success criteria veil be developed in the project grant request It is anticipated that quarintat ve success criteria will be developed for • Linear feet of living shoreline constructed • Linear feet of shoreline stabilized • Changes in percent cover of seagrass and salt marsh species • Changes in ambient surface water quality (e.g,, turbidity) • Changes in observed viribilife utilization In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be designed that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Okaloosa County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits. 91 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The tota' est.mated time horizon of this program is approximate y 4 years. The program is expected to begin in 2030 and end in 2033. Implementation of th a program has been divided into several milestones, as shown in the chart below. Final design ar-.d permitting Construction Phase 1 - Oyster Reef breakwaters Construction Phase 2 - vegetation Construction Phase 3 - park amenities Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Oka'oosa Coirity has estimated at rate' project cost of $4,000,000 based upon the best available mormation, and is committed to arocating $910,000 of its share of the Florida Spill impact Component to the project. Add:t.onal cou—.y funding will add another $150,000, and Oka'oosa County wi I also be seeking other leveraged fund.ng sources to supplement these monies, A sum-nary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below, Gulf Env:ronmental Benefit Fund K, Store of Florida State Expenditure Plan Pa rtnersh ips/Col la boration Ckaloosa County will continue to partner with the Choctawhatchee Bay Alliance and the Northwest Florida Water Management District for development and implementation of this prefect, M SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description NEED AND JUSTIFICATION IMPrOVernent Program, water qual ty issues. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection JFDEP) verified that the primary sources of nutrient loading to the estuary are the Choctewhatchee River and secondary inf ows from smaller tributaries and bayous.The two primary non-point soirees of nutrients to the bay are storm water runoff and sept-c systems.The eastern portion of Chociawhatchee Bay is listed by FDEP as impaired for bacteria, nutrients, and nutrient response variables under Section 303(d) of the orders, Clean Water Act_ _l Figure 4-11A. Location of Choctawhatchea HayWater Quality Slate of Florida State Expenditure Plan allowable state limits.There are Figure 4-118. NWFWMD assessment of septic systems in the Choctawhatchee Bay 655 septic systems in the study watershed- area, with an additional 284 possible as existing parcels are built out. The draft update of the Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan for Choctawhatchee Bay prepared by the Northwest Florida Water Management District (NWFWMD) includes "needs and opportun ties for improved wastewater collection and treatment' as a watershed priority, specifically septic system abatement. Figure 4-113 indicates the high concentrations of septic systems in this project area a ong the bay's northeastern shore This program wil: directly address issues related to nutr'.ent and bacteria loadings to Choctawhatchee Bay, PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this program is to reduce pollutant loadings to Choctawhatchee Say from coastal septic systems. The object ves of the program are to fl) improve water quality in Choctawhatchee Bay, and (2) restore marine habitats and living resources in the bay that may have been degraded by poor water quality. a Phase 1: Uft stations and off -site improvements to the Freeport Wastewater Treatment Faculty (WWTF) Phase 11: Sewer col ection and conveyance Improvements from Choctawhatchee Bay to the Riverwalk Subdivision (Segments I-IV) a Rho as ill: Expansion of sense r to Areas I through 4 K SECTION A. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the folvoeng RESTORE Act el g'b'e activities a El.gib Is Antic ty 1: Restorer on and protection of the natural resources, ecosyste rn, f isherres, marine and wiidl,fe habitats, beaches, and coasts wetlands of the Gulf Coast region ab Figure 4-1Q US, 331 corridor project areas. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehens via Plan Goals: • Goal 2 Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3. Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources • Goal 5: Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive P an Objectives * Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources • Consortium Objective 8: Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restoration Projects Implementing Entities Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Significant work has been done to mon for and characterize water quality -n the Choctawhatchee Bay watershed and to implement water qua'ity improvement and protection programs. In addition, this program is consistent with the goals of the following natural resources management plan: a NWEVane, 2017 Draft Chocorwharchee River and Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan. The program components described above are considered to be fees ble based on the available information and best professionti'ludgement. A conceptual study has been completed for the force ma'n expansion, which dove oped project alternatives. identified program components, and assessed improvements to the City of Freeport WVVTF Risks and Uncertainties No significant r sks or uncertainties have been identified during a review of the available information for the; program, It is, however, possible that r-sks and uncertainties will be dent-fied during the preliminary design phase. 8-1 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Success Criteria and Monitoring To a program will improve water quality in an estuarine system, Specific success criteria will be developed in the program grantrequest. It is antis pated that quantitat ve success criteria will be developed for the fol'ovving • Number of septic systems taken off-line • Changes in ambient water quality (nup ant and bacterial concentrations) in Choctawhatchee Bay • Changes in nutrient and bacterial loads to Choctawhatchee Bay from wastewater sources • Changes in seagrass diso'bution in Choctawhatchee Bay .n the program grant request, a detailed monitoring program design vVII be described that addresses data co'lection and assessment methodologies for the above-:isted criteria. Wa-ton County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating w,th other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify 11111111111111MM Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon for Phases I and I I of this project is approximately 7 years, These programs wi I be conducted concurrently, and are expected to begin in 2018 and end n 2024. The time horizon of Phase III is approximately 6 years, and is expected to begin in 2027 and end in 2032, The project phases and respective m.lesiones are shown in the chart below This protect is ready to begin engineering design and permitting. a8 State of Florida State Expend ture Plan Budget and Funding Sources The preliminary budget is indicated in the table below. The total project cost is estimated by Walton County to be $143 million, Water quality monitoring is estimated to be $20,000 per year for 6 years, for a total of $120,000, and is included in the implementation costs. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below. Phases 1-11 Final design and permitting $1,528,117 $1,528,117 Construction. Lift stations and off site $2,099,666 $2.099,666 improvements Constructiorr: Segments I-IV $4,025,646 $4,025,646 Phase I & In'blail $7,653,429 $7653,429 Phase HI Final design and permitting $857128 $857128 Construction $5,742,3138 $4,149,443 Phase III Total $6,599,496 $5,006,571 Total Cost $14,252,925 $12,660,000 Spill Impact Component $12,660,000 Direct Component $0 Other grants or co-funding $o Other County funds $0 Total Secured Funding $12,660,000 Budget Shortfall $1,592,925 POTENTIAL LEVERAGED FUNDING SOURCES TIF funds (local) Be SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities S '5 Small Cities C BOG Section 108 Loan Guarantees S 38 Clean Water Slate Revolving Fund (CVVSRF) S.27 Nonpoint Source Management Program (NPSM): Sectic-i 319 S.36 Water Propels S.50 Water Prolects Priorities Database Triumpn Matching funds are expected to be a combination of Pot I funds, State Revolving Funds (FDEP), and possibly iransportat'on infrastructure Funds (TIF) funds for the U.S. 33� segment. Another potent'ally available funding source identified by Walton County s the FDEP 319 Grant Program to unproved water quality in Choctawhatchee Bay Pa rtnerships/Col la boration The primary partnership for this project :a between Walton County and the City of Freeport. Additional collaborations wi I be w-th the Choctawhatchee Basin Alliance for water quality monitor,ng before and after project completion. EIG State of Florida Store Expenditure Plan Project Description NEED AND JUSTIFICATION into North Bay. The St. Andrew Bay estuary is ecolog:cal Y Figure 5-11A. North Bay project area, and economically important and the quality of water going into St Andrew Bay is extremely important to the sensidve balance of this system. North Bay is current y listed by the Florrda Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) as an impa!red waterbody for nutrients and nutrient response variables under Section 303(d) of the federal C can Water Act North Bay and St, Andrew Bay are listed as impaired for fecal col-form bacteria and bacteria in shellfish. �. I SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities NONINNIN Figure 5-1B, Raw Water Line and LSSP CooEingWater Project- capacity of reuse cooling water to LSSP until a cuff cient volume of treated eff 1-jent is available (see Figure 5-10). wou'd occur in two phases. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES PROJECT COMPONENTS This program -.as the fo'lowing two primary components 1. Build a raw water pipeline from Econfina Creek near People Beach Road (upstream of Deerpoird Lake) to NIOMATF The We would transm,t raw water to NBOANTF to supplement NB Fs effluent Supplementing NByVWTF's effluent with raw water is required to provide the capacity or reuse cooling water to LSSP to allow replacement of cooling water w thdrawals from North Bay 9-; State of Florida Stale Expenditure Ran Project Description 4. . Lffak li ar 10 j Rgure 11-4A. Location of priority coastal public access sites in Dixie County. The County is looking to bolster existing locations and partner with other agencies to expand the types of recreational amenit as offered. In the past, coastal access in the county has primarily focused on boat ramps; this program will further that work and will also include non-motorized vessel launch facilities and an observation tower for b!rd watching. 199 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities PROJECT COMPONENTS Components of this program include. (1) dentification and priontization of sites for public acquisition; {2) acq-jisition of pr;ority sites; (3) improvements- engineering design and permitti-g of a telniprOVe7rB=, munit formal conservation -ends acquis',tion program Therefore, Spi'l impact Component funds will be used to develop and implement such a program, with a focus on coasts' passive recreation sites, Dixie County has identified three potential sites for acqu'sition and/or improvement in the near term, including: ® a Rocky Creek boat ramp site improvements Freeman Tract acquisition arid recreations improvements Cow Creek site acquisition and recreational improvements if these project antes become unavai!ab e, other sites that meet the goals of this program will be substituted 200 Figure 11-40, Aerial photograph of the FreerminTract with proposed a � CD O n rn a ro CD a� s m n� m SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Risks and Uncertainties Coastal park and recreational amenities are at risk for damage by tropical storms and sea-level rise. However, the proposed recroa improvements w 11 factor coastal storm hazards and sea-'evel rise;nto the design, as appropriate, Dixie County has identified several priority properties and is ready to proceed with property acquis.tions and improvements. Success Criteria and Monitoring This program w 11 involve property acquisition and/or leas ng and the development of recreational amenit as. Specif c success criteria will be developed and described in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: Acres of coastal access properties acq-fired Increase in the number of pool c recreational users In the project grant request, a data led monitoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Dixie County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quantify project Uenefils. Project Milestones and Schedule i he total estimated time horizon of this project a approximately 5 years. It !a expected to start in 2021 and end in 2026. Impleme-itation of this project has been d video into five m lestarres, as shown in the chart below. Feackil ty study and preliminary des an Property acquisition Fins desigr. and permitting Construction (recreational amen it as) Success munnoring Budget/Funding and Leveraged Resources Dix a County is committed to allocating $1,460,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to th s program, but wi J also be seeking other leveraged funding sources to supplement these monies. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below. 2(J,-; State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Fees Is lay study and preliminary design 10=12= $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $20,000 $500,000 $500,000 $160,000 $160,000 $500,000 $500,000 $1,160,000 $1,160,000 $50,000 $50,000 $IA60,000 $1,460.000 Property acquisition and/or Leas ng Final design and permitting Construction (recreatrona ameniters) lmlzm�� Implementation Subtotal In =.,. Spill Impact Component Direct Component Other grants or co-fund!ng Other County funds Natural Resource Damage Assessment S.38 Small County Outreach Program S.30 Small County Road Assistance Program S. 45 Florida Boating Improvement Program (FBI P) S. 40 Sport Fish Restoration Program Pa rtnersh ips/Col [a boration Dixie County wil partner w-th the Florida Fish and Wild ife Conservatcm Commission and the Suwannee River Management District in the acquisition and improvement of the subject propert es. K.7i SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION a LL This program consists of the expansion of three existing or sewer systems to areas served by sept c systems and In the development of one new wastewater treatment E system in Dix a County. All four components will convert I a 5T T- ex sting septic systems to a centralized wastewater treatment system. Three components w, be located on 4 1 -A 4 0 (z the Gulf of Mexico coastline and the fourth (O'dTown) !".C. kr F.- will be located next to the Suwannee River near Fann-ng ir i Springs along U.S. Highway 19, as shown in 1� L (D Figure 11-5A , IV (D NEED AND JUSTIFICATION 4- 0 The entirety of Dixie County's coastline is part of the B'g X 31 4) Bend State Aquatic Preserve JBBSAP), which conta'ns some of the world's largest coastal salt marsh and 0 Z seagrass habitats and one of the most pristine coastal areas in Florida (FDEP 2014). Seagrass is an important d v, 7 04 nab tat for a large number of fish and invertebrate C C species, including any of commercial importance, Seagrasses are great y affected by poor vadler quality and water clarity, and seagrass declines in the B13SAP Figure 11-S A, Location of wastewater Improvement projects have been linked to increased stressors such as nutrient in Dixie County. Lu U) and turbidity inputs from adjacent coasts watersheds —J Protection of seagrasses in the BBSAP is a major focus of management activit'es, and identifying and e iminating LL negative water qua ity impacts from anthropogen:c sources is the highest priority act on. E Septic systems have been identified as a source of pollutants to coastal watersheds in Dixie County (FD .a ER 2008). a) This project wi I decrease nutrient and bacteria loads to the Suwannee R ver (and associated springs), Strunhatchee River, and Gulf of Mexico by expanding centralized wastewater infrastructure to areas currently served by septic 11� State of Florida State Expenditure Plan PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to eliminate septic systems through the expansion of sewer mains and construct on of one new wastewater treatment system. The objective of th;s project is to improve water quality in the Gulf of Mexico coastal waters, Steinhatchee R ver watershed, and Suwannee River watershed, including Fanning Springs and Manatee Springs, PROJECT COMPONENTS The project involves modifications to existing centralized sewer fac,l ties and the construction of new facilities to collect domestic wastewater from areas currently served by only ndiv dual septic systems.Thrs will include new collectors, force mains, and lift stations to accommodate increased flows from the septic system areas. Audit anal treatment capacity may also need to be added at existing wastewater treatment Plants. The program consists of the following four components: Jena Sewer Collection System: Sewer ma:n expansion from Steinhatchee inTay or County to theTown of Jena in Dixie County to facilitate abandonment of septic systems in Jena Old Town Sewer Collection System Sewer main expansion from the city of Fanning Springs in Gilchrist/Levy Counties to Old Town to facilitate abandonment of septic systems ;n OldTown - Suwannee Sewer Collection System Expansion of the existing wastewater collection system in the town of Suwannee to facilitate abandonment of septic systems in Suwannee Horseshoe Beach Sewer Collection and Treatment: Des:gn and constriction of wastewater Collection and treatment infrastructure in the town of Horseshoe Beach to facil late abandonment of septic systems in Horseshoe Beach Although problem areas have been identil"ed, feasibility studies and prelimlnary designs are needed for all four components to better define the extent and cost of the proposed im prove menL Once these studies are complete, the projects can proceed with engineering detugn, construction, and monitoring. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Preserving the pristine waters for which the region's known wil also contribute to economic growth in Dixie County's fishery and ecotounam industries, The expanded and new wastewater infrastructure will increase property values for the parcels it will ultimately serve, and sewer availabi'ity will encourage development on currently 205 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities unimproved parcels in the project area. This wi ll, in turn, grow Dixie County's tax base. The proposed project components will also increase workforce development and job creation in both the public and private sectors, Eligibility and Statutory Requirements Th's project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing RESTORE Act elm Is a act vity: Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife hab'.tats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast red on Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals" Goal 2 Restore Water Qua ity and Quantity 1pr'mary) Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat Goal 3: Replenish and Protect Liv.ng Coasts and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: Objective 2: Restore, Improver and Protect Water Resources (primary) Ob:ective 1 Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats Ob'ective 3 Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Dix a County will be the grant sub-recipient responsible for the leasib lity studies, design, permin ng, construction, operation and maintenance, and monitoring of t•-is project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Water quality issues related to nutrients in the Suwannee R,ver and associated Springs are described in the fo'lowing report, and references cited therein. FDEP 2008. Nutrient and Dissolved Oxygen TMOL for the Suwannee River Santa Fe River Manatee Springs (3422R), Fanning Springs (3422S), Branford S (3422J), Ruth Springs (34220, Troy Spring (3422T), Royal Spring (34221,.1), and Falmouth Spring (34224. This program is also consistent with the goals and objectives of the following natural resource management Diana Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FEDM, 2014. Big Bend Seagrasses Aquatic Preserve Management Plan & FDEP 2014. Big Bend Wagrassee Aquatic Preserve Management Plan @ Suwannee River Water Management District, 2017 Suwannee River Basin Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan. v Suwannee River Water Management District, 2017 Coastal Rivers Basin Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan, 2 17. --. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan The project components are only in the conceptual phase. The project cannot be fully evaluated for feasibility until preliminary clessn has been completed. Risks and Uncertainties As d scussed above, the program a in the conceptual phase at this time Program risks and uncertainties will be ident tied during feasibil ty and preli des gn p-aces. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project w1l affect localized water quality in adjacent freshwater and estuarine systems, Spec fic success criteria will be developed in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: Changes in ambient water quality (nutrient and bacterial concentrations, water c'arity, chlorophyll-a) in surface waters potential y affected by the program, including: the Steinhatchee River, the Suwannee River, Fanning Springs and Manatee Springs, and the nearshore Gulf of Mex cc near Horseshoe Beach In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design wil be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Dixie County is committed to implementing the necessary monitor na program and/or coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify protect benefits Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon for the Dixie County septic-to-sewer conversion project is approximately 6 years. It is expected to start in 2026 and end in 2031, with two additional years of success monitor ng extending to 2024, Implementation of each of the program components has been d video into the milestones, as shown in the chart below.The feasibi ity study through the firo'clesign is est mated to be 18 months and the construction 12 to 15 months for each project. Al four components may start concurrent y. 21J 7 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Horseshoe Beach Sewer Collection and Treatment Feasith'ily study Prel:minary design Final design and permin no Construction Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Jena Sewer Collection System Feasibility study $30,000 $30,000 Prel minary design $30,000 $30,000 Planning Subtotal $60,000 $60,000 Final design and permitt ng $160,000 $160,000 Construction $2,260,000 $1,060,000 Implementiltron Subtotal S2,420,000 $1,220,000 Total $2,480,000 $1,280,000 Old Town Sewer Collection System Fe:Lsibilrty study $30,000 $30,000 Prel minary design $30,000 $30,000 Planning Subtotal $60,000 $60,000 Final design and Fermin ng 5160,000 $160,000 Construction $2,260.000 $1,060,000 Implementation Subtotal $2,420,000 $1,220,000 Total $2, 0,000 $1,260,000 Suwannee Sewer Coffectoor Sys forn Feasibrily study $30,000 $30,000 Prel minary design $30.000 $30,000 Planning Subtotal $60,000 $60,000 Final design and permitting $'60.000 $160,000 Construction $2,260,000 $11,060=0 Implementation Subtotal $2,420,000 $1,220,000 Total $2,480,000 $1,230,000 2c.q State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Horseshoe Beach Se Collection and Treatment Feasibility study $30.000 $30,000 Preliminary design $30,000 $30,000 Planning Subtotal $60,000 $60,000 Final design and permitting $160,000 $160,000 Construct an $2,260,000 $1,060,000 Implementation Subtotal $2,420,000 $1,220,000 Total $2,480,000 $1,280,000 Success monitoring $80.000 $80,000 Total Cost $10,000,000 $5,200,000 Spill Impact Component 55,200,000 Direct Component Other grants or c0 -fund rag Other Dixie County funds Total Secured Funding $5,200,000 Budget Shortfall $4,800,000 2C ? SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Pa rtnershi ps/Col laboration pixie County w 11 work with the following partners to accompi an these goals: C.1y of Fanning Springs Town of Steinhatchee Town of Suwannee Horseshoe Beach In add-tion, D xie County will partner with the Suwannee River Water Management District w'th respect to water quality success monitoring State of Florida Stale Expenditure Plan Project Description dL 7�; 27 '�Iie NEED AND JUSTIFICATION The Waccasassa River is a one of the least disturbed rivers in the to the Gulf through z state, and connects the Waccasassa Bay Preserve State Park. The subject property is an existing privately owned f ish camp that is being cons da red f or residentia development. Acquiring this property will secure the land for conservation and public passive recreation. Currently, there is public access to the Waccasassa River via a boat ramp at a nearby parce'atWaccasassa Park. This acquisition w'11 ir add a pub is boat ramp and dock fac'llity and extend the publicly hold areas along the Waccasasss River corridor. Figure 12-1A. Location of thoWaccasassa River corridor Other conservation lands along the raver corridor include land acquisition, Bronson Blue Spring (Levy County), Devil's Hammock Wildlife Management Area (Florida Fish and Wi'dlife Conservation Commiss on), Wiscoasassia Park (Levy County), and the Waccasassa Bay Preserve State Park Por'da Park Serv'ce). Acquis-tion of the subject property will add to and close gaps in the existing publicly owned conservation lands along the Waccasassa River corridor. 211 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities PROJECT COMPONENTS Components of this project include a feasibi'ity study, property appraisal, des an and perm tune of park amenities, construct on, and monitaring. location would expand as well. 2'2 Rgure 12-19. Existing boat ramp and dock facility, Figure 12-11C. Existing property manager's facility. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is cons stent w th, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act ele his activity. • Elig ble Activ'ty 1; Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and vvrdl fe habitats, beaches, and coasta'wetiands of the Gulf Coast Region (piumary) • Elig ble Activ.ty 10 Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast reg on, ricluding recreational fish ng Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat (primary) Goal 5 Restore and Revital ze the Gulf Economy This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Hab lots (primary) • Objective 8 Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environments! Restoration Projects Implementing Entities Acquis'.1ion activities will be conducted either by Levy County as a sub-recipient to the Gulf Consortium or by a conservation lands non-government organization (NGO) on behalf of the Gulf Consortium, Improvement of the park faci ities will be conducted by Levy County as a sub-recipient. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment 2--_ SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluat-on of this program, no isgri-ficar-t risks have been identif-ed that would preclude implementation. There is some risk that a seller can leave prior to a firal contract due to a change of heart about the sale, another buyer being able to move quickly and offer above asking pr:ce, or appraisals not meeting a sel at's expectation of pr'ce Strategies to mitigate In a risk will be pursued, including the possib,lity of securing an applicable INIGO to serve as an interim buyer, and only submitting project grant appl;cat:ons for parcels w'.th executed sales contracts. Success Criteria and Monitoring This program addresses public land acquisition and the improvement of boater access to the Gulf. It is anticipated that quantitative success Criteria will be cleve aped for: • Acres acquired for conservation and public access • Recreational amenities completed • Public use stat:stics In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be described that addresses data collect on and assessment metnodolog'es for the above-listed criteria. Levy County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quantify project benefiL.S. Milestones and Schedule The total est mated time horizon of this project is approx mately 3 years due to the need to acquire the subject property before other potential buyers. It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2020. Implementation of this project has been divided into 6 milestones, as shown in the chart be'ow. State of Reuss State Expenditure Plan Budget and Funding our Levy County is committed to allocat'�ng $2,960,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to this project, but Wil also be seeking other leveraged funding sources to supplement these monies as needed. This budget allocation is based on the current estimated market value of the subject property. A summary of the pro budget a nd f unding sources is provided in the table below, Firandlably study 540,000 Property appraisal $40,000 S40,000 Planning Subtotal $80,000 $80,000 Property acquisition $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Final design and permitting - park am inrties $200,000 $200,000 Construction - park amenities $655,000 $655,000 Implementation Subtotal $2,85%000 $2,855,900 Success monaoring $25,000 $25,000 Total Cost $7,960,0M S2 Partnerships/Collaboration Levy County w!Il work with other non - profit and state organizations on management planning once the land is acquired. If 'averaged or co-funding opportunities are ava'lable, Levy County would apply those funds to simi at parcels for coastal public access and conservation, 215 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description : It 04 dL 11-M-irv, 210 3v+�an Q O [D O n Ln CD CL rp 3 m o� ID cm m CL n� CD En SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf 2 1 A- State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements The proposed project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activities: Eligible Activity 1 Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wi!dlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region (primary) Eligible Activity 2 Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, and natural resources Eligible Activity 4: Workforce development and job creation Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the foal owing Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 3: Replenish and Protect L-ving Coastal and Marine Resources (primary) • Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Flab tat Goal 4: Enhance Community Resilience Goal 5: Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy This protect is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehens Plan Object ves: • Objective 3: Protect and Restore L,ving Coastal and Marine Resources { primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Hab:ttus • Objective 5: Promote Commun'ty Resilience • Consortium Object've & Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Econom:c and Environmental Restoration Projects Implementing Entities Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment restored estuarine habitat is an estimated 1 the Big Bend (Freder!ck an al., 2015), 215) SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities The proposed project approach is consistent w-th Gulf-wide object-ves and restoration techniques outlined in the science-based Final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, as described earlier, which presents detailed information supporting the value at oyster reef restoration (NO AA, 2016►. Project imp ementation will be consistent with Best Management Practices, as out. ined by Florida Department of Agriculture & Consumer Sery ces {FDA S). restored reefs 38,334,400). Arnold, W and U Berrigan, 2002. A summary of the oyster (Classicstrea vinpriwa) fishery in Florida. A Report to the Division of Marine Fisheries, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FVVC), St Petersburg, Edwards, R. and E. Device, 2004 Ecological Characteristics and Forcing Functions of the Suwannee Rover Estuary In B. Katz and E Beebe (Ed.1 Suwannee River Basin and Estuary integrated Science Workshop Sponsored by US S, SRVVAVS Elope. Cedar Key, Florida. Frederick et al.. 2075. Restoring Resilient Oyster Reefs in Florida's Big Bend. Final Report to The Nature Conservancy and NC AA 49 pages. - Grabowski, JH. or al., 2072. Economic valuation of ecosystem services provided by oyster reefs, BioScrence 22 0 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Risks and Uncertainties Establish ng monitoring goals and success criteria are critical to reducing and managing risk and uncertis my for the proposed project. The proposed project will preclude oyster harvest from restored areas until oysters are of legal size and will reciiins continued coordination and combined efforts of oyster fishers and agencies in support of improved f shery management strategies, In addition, oyster populations are still expected to periodically decline in response to natura clecli-les in freshwater flows, although oyster reefs wil help to hold freshwater in the estuaries, The project will require cooperation with the PVVC because of the transplanting of natural, living oyster seed and juveniles from public reefs onto donor sites. A "Special Achy ty License to Gel ect and Release Juven'le Oysters" has been issued for similar projects and is anticipated for this restoration protect. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will restore oysters on areas where natural oyster reefs and populations have been degraded, Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in the project grant request. or !a anticipated that quantitative success criteria wrl be developed for: • Increases in areal extent of oyster reefs • Increases in average reef height • Increases in oyster density • Oyster size-frequency d strobution representative of a sustainad'e oyster population assessment and evaluation for these success criteria. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of th s project is sparse merely 8 years, It is expected to start in 2020 and end in 2028. Implementat on of this project has been broken down into five milestones, as shown in the chart below, This project is ready to begin the feasibility study. Feasibility study Preliminary design Final design and permitting Construction Success monitoring 2 21. SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Budget and Funding Sources Feasibility study $100,000 $100,000 Preliminary design $100,000 $100,000 Planning Subtotal $200,000 $200.U00 Faid design & Permitting $100,000 $100.000 Construction $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Implernentathen Subtotal $1,600,000 $1,600,000 Success mo-lilcring $200,000 $200,000 Total Cost $2,000,000 $2,000,000 SECURED FUNDING SOURCES Spy I Impact Component $2.000,000 Cirect Component $0 Othe grants and co-funding so Total Funding $2,000,000 Budget So 11 $0 POTENTIAL LEVERAGED FUNDIN G SO U FICES Counci' Se acted Restoration Component Natural Resource Damage Assessment Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund F32 F:shedes Finance Program F33 Sea Grant Nat onal Marine Aquaculture mit ative - Integrated Projects to Increase Aquaculture Production F34 Sea Grant Nat onal Morris Aquaculture Iretsitive - Addressing Impediments to Aquaculture Oppor 0 24 Gu!f of Mexico Oyster Aquaculture Small Grants 0 42 Shell Marine Habitat Program 222 State of Florida State Expend tare Plan Pa rtnersh ips/Col la boration Potential project partners include • Univers of Poridall nsthute of Food and Agricultural Sciences • Florida State Un • Florida Fish and Wild: ife Conservation • The Nature Conservancy Coordination w;th the fo. lowing agencies is anticipated 22--. SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION ocations of the two polect areas are shown in Figure 12-3A. NEED AND JUSTIFICATION Conversion projects. M Figure 12-3A. Location of the Levy County Septic to Sewer State of Florida State Expenditure P an future growth is anticipated in this area, especially in southern Levy County Improved wastewater infrastructure is needed to address legacy water pollution issues as well as prevent future water quality problems from inadequate infrastructure. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES PROJECT COMPONENTS KENT This program a only conceptual at this time. In the first phase of the project, Levy County proposes to conduct a study to evaluate the feasibility of the proposed septic -to -sewer conversion program. The study will identify and prioritize areas for conversion, suitable treatment methods, and effluent disposal sites and evaluate sewer system alternatives (gravity, love- pressure sewer, and vacuum). For other to ens ty areas in the county, the study wil also evaluate the suitability and treatment efficiency linclud ng nutrient removal) of advanced on -site treatment and disposal systems. As currently envisioned, the program consists of the following components: • Construct wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal infrastructure ;n southern Levy County near the towns of Inglis and Yankeeto n to al ow for the abandonment of septic systems in the area • Construct wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal in the Fowler's duff area on the Suwannee River to allow for the abandonment of septic systems .n the area Properties have been identified as a potential site for a new astewater treatment plant ( TP) and eff cent disposal area. Another passible septic -to -sewer convers on area is off County Road 320 east of the river. Property is available southeast of the area that may be suitable for a WWTP and effluent d appeal site, Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery the Gulf The provision of improved wastewater service in these areas w:l also prevent future water qua problems and increase property values for the parcels -t will ultimate:y serve. In addition, this project should encourage redevelopment of c.,rrently unimproved parcels in the project area. This will, in turn, revitalize the local economy and grow Levy County's tax base. The proposed project will also increase local workforce development and lob crest on_ 225 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Pro grain ir and Activities Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activit as a Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection o' the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and w;ldlife habitats, beaches, and coasta wetlands of the G Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This protect is consistent with, and addresses, the following Cornprehens've Plan Goals: • Goal 2: Restore Water duality and Quantity (pa-riand • Goal 3. Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Roasta! and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Levy Coun:pi wi I be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the feas'b lity studies, design, permitting, construction, operation and maintenance, and monitoring of this project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The relat onsh-p between old and fading septic systems and water quality prob ems in the Suwarriee R ver and the Withlacoochee River, and potential pollutant - oad reductions associated with septic-to-sewer convers-ons:n these areas, can be reasonably inferred. This program is consistent with the following natural resource management plans: & Suwannee River Water Management District CIRWMIO. 2017 Suwannee River Basin Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan. d POER 2014 Big Bend Seagrasses Aquatic Preserve Management Plan. Levy Coumy has not completed a feasibility study specific to this progra—, and very few engineer ng details are known. Requ-rements to attain feasibil ty (permitability, constructability, me roarnability, etc I vv II be identified in the feasibility and preliminary engineering phases Risks and Uncertainties This project is conceptial at this time as a feasibility study and alternatives analysis has not yet been conducted, However, this type of project can be engineered for the types of conditions present in this scale Final v right-of-way is availabIti for the new sanitary sewer system and Levy County owns, or can feasible acquire parcels of 'and that can be used for the WWTP Risks and uncerta:nces, will be identified do no the fees b lity and prep mir - ary deg gn phases, X26 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will affect water quality 'n adjacent freshwater and estuarine systems. Specific success criteria w 11 be cleve aped n the project grant request, It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria rill be developed for the following: • Number of septic systems taken off -line • Changes in ambient water quality (nutrient and bacterial concentrations) in the Suwannee River and Withiacturchee River • Changes in the frequency and/or duration of algal blooms (as measured by chlorophyl") in the Suwannee River and Withlacoochee River In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data cc lection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria, Levy County is committed to conducting the necessary on tor.og and coordinat ng with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantity project benef,ts. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time nor zon of this project is approximately 15 years. The program is expected to begin in 2018 and end in 2032. implementation of this program has been divided into two phases, as shown in the milestone chart below. Southern Levy County Wastewater Improvements Wasibillty study Preliminary design Final design and permitting Construction 2.21 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Budget and Funding Sources - he total program cosy is est mated by Levy County to be $30 million Levy County -a committed to allocat'rig $7.700,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to this project, and vy 1; also be seek.ng other leveraged funding sources to make up the budget shordal.. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below, South Levy Wastewater System Improvements Feasibility study $150,000 $150,000 Pre im nary design $150.000 $150,000 Planning Subtotal $300.000 $300,000 Land acquisition $500,000 $500.000 Final design and permitting $1,000,000 $1,000.000 Construction $17500,000 $1,500.000 Implementation Subtotal $18,500,000 $3,000,000 Success monitoring $200.000 S200,00I] Total $19,000,000 $3,500,000 Foodare Bluff Wastewater System improverrionts Fees bility study $100,000 $100,0013 Pre'an-roor design $100,000 $100,000 Planning Subtotal $200,000 $200,000 Land acqusition $500,000 $500,000 F na'design and permitting $1,000,000 $1,000,000 Construction $9,600.000 $2,300,000 Implementation Subtotal $10,600,000 $3,800,000 Success monitoring $200,000 $200.000 Total $11,000,000 $4,200,000 Total Cost $30,000,0010 57,710, 000 SpM Impact Component $7700,000 Direct Component so Other g•ints or co-funding $o Other Levy County 'rods $0 Total Secured Funding $7700,000 Budget Shortfall $22,300,000 POTENTIAL LEVERAGED FUNDING SOURCES Counci -Se:ected Restoration Camponent Natural Resource Damage Assessment F.02 flural Business Development Grants F03 Rural Community Development I nit ative Grants F06 SEARCH Special Evaluation Ass stance for Rural Communities and Households F07 Water and Waste D sposa'Systems for Rural Communities FOB Water and Waste Deposit Technical Assistance andTra n he Grants 22E State of Florida State Expenditure P an F11 Commun-ty Facilities Direct Loan and Grant Program in Florida Partnerships / l la boration Levy County will work and collaborate truth other agencies as needed to imp ement the program. In particular, Levy County anticipates coord,nating closely with the Suwannee River Water Management District on water goal ty monitoring activities 229 SECTION V- Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description 41 S9 4 i Figure 13-1A. Location of the NVV qUadrant sewer force amain in Citrus County, In recent decades, the Crystal River/K rigs Bay system has been impacted by reduced water clarity, an altered submerged aquat-c vegetation commun-ty, and elevated nutrients in the re'ated spring systems.The Florida Department of EnOonmental 2 3-0 State of Flor,da State Expenditure P an Protection (FDEP) determined that nutrients contribute to the degraded cond-tion of Kings Bay and some associated springs, and therefore set a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for nutrients, establishing a nutrient threshold to use as a restoration target (FRIES 2014). The EDER reported the following in their Crystal River/Kings Bay Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES PROJECT COMPONENTS This project is in the concept phase only, and a feasibility study is currently be ng conducted using other funding. The total number of Sept c systems to be taken off-line has not yet been fully assessed due to the need for the construction of additional lateral collectors. Construction of the force main is the first step in Kirov ding centralized sewer sery ce for the entire northwest quadrant of Citrus County. 23' IL - State of F once State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fri'lowing RESTORE Act eligible activity. a El gable Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wi!dl fe habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives — his project is cons'stent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: ■ Goal 2 Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) Goal 1 - .Restore and Conserve Habitat Goal 3: Rep'.enish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent w'.h, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect HaIn'tats • Objective 3 Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Citrus County will be the sole implementing ent ty and grant sub-rec-pient responsible for the feasibility study, design, permitting, construct operation and maintenance, and monnor-rig of this project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Water quality issues related to nutrients in the Crystal %vendings Bay and associated springs are described in the following reports (and references cited therein): FDEP 2014. Nutrient TMDL for Kings Say (water body identifier JWBIDJ 13411, Hunter Spring (HAND 1341 Q House Spring (ppes) 134110, layotl; Delight Spring (WBID 1341F1, Tarpon Spring fWBID 1341G1, and stock Spring (WGID 1341H1, FDEP 2074. Basin Management Action Plans (SOAR): Springs Coast Basin, Rainbow Springs, Kings Bay and Crystal River. FDEP 2017 Projects to Restore ArippIcy Weeki Warpeor Kings Bay, Crystal and Rainbow Springs Receive Funding from the Fighting for Florida's Future Budget. FDEP press release, August, 2017 This project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the following natural resource management plan: ■ SWFhNND 2015 Crystal River/ Kings Bay Surface Water Improvement (SWIM) Plan, A Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. Version 9,209, This project is cons dared to be feasible with respect to the ability to (1) obtain necessary permits, (2) construct the project within the proposed budget, and (3) effect'vely operate and maintain the project components over the bing term. It should be noted, however, that the final budget could change based on the results of the fees bility study. 233 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Risks and Uncertainties The projects in the conceptual phase. Project risks and uncerta nt as will be identified during the feasibility study, des an, and permitting phases. However, -n the evaluation of this project concept, no significant risks or uncertainties have been identified other than the total cost- Success Criteria and Monitoring Tmis project w 11 affect water quality in adjacent freshwater and estuarine systems. Specific success or tons will be developed in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria vv;II be developed for the fo lowing changes: • Number of septic systems taken off -I ne • Number of private package plants taken off -line • Estimated total nitrogen load reduct ons to the springshed In the program grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be descr bed that addresses data col ect;on and assessment methodologies for ti-,e above-listed cr-ter Citrus County is comm-ned to implement ng the necessary monitoring program and coord-nating with other red onal water quality monitoring ent-ties to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule — he total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 6 years The project is expected to begin in 2018 and end in 2023. Implementat on of this project has been divided into 3 milestones, as shown ;n the chart be ow. A. feasibility study is currently being conducted using other fund no. The project will be ready to beg n f nal design and permitting in 2018. Final design and pormin no Construction Success man tor.rig Budget and Funding Sources 2-.4 State of Florida State Expenditure Flan Final design and permitting Construction MEMEM Implementation Subtotal Spill Impact Component C rest Component FOEP/SWFWMD collaborative Springs funding Other grants or co-funding Other County funds S 14 Small Cities Community Development Sloe Grant (CSCIG) Program S 15 Small Cities CSDG Section 105 Moan Guarantees S 19 Clean Water State Revolving Fund 3CwSRF) S 21 CWSRF Small Community Wastewater Construct:on Grants i, Partnerships/Col laboration $570,000 $285,000 $5,930,000 $3,215,000 $6,500,000 $3,500,000 $0 $0 $6,500,000 $3,500,000 Citrus County w li cont-nue to work closely with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and Southwest Florida Water Management District to accornpl sh the goals of th;s project The County is also collaborating with the City of Crystal River. 23S, SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description Cf) OVERVIEW AND LOCATION 4AR11 LL _J This project involves the construction of a new public X, or boat ramp on the north side of the Cross Flat do Barge Canal (CFBC) in northern Citrus County, Figure 13-2A E shows the location of the proposed boat ramp NEED AND JUSTIFICATION • 0 0 The CFBC was authorized by Congress in 1942 . L) 4- as a national defense priciest to facilit-3to an Is and ?ilia s, NAL•N $ barge traffic across northern Florida. The project was 41 (D as or g nally designed with dams and locks to protect the A-Z4�F' 00 underground water supply. Support for the project from . Congress was sporadic, and funds were never a located 19 4- 0 to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers hJ SAC E) to actua 4) start construction. Planning was once again given the L) go-ahead in 1963 with support f rom Pres dent John F 0 Z Kennedy, who allocated $1 million to the project, and It hoped �� Z !—Ar, - ; 7 construct on was started in 1964 was that the F .. .. . .t - . 461 . Ve CFBC, along with the St. Johns-Indian River Barge Canal, 0i i�. cl C 14 would provide a quicker and safer route across Florida - A I ' ;j.� ' 4� r by 1971. Opponents subsequently campaigned against * xi L_ the canal on environmental grounds, and the project Figure 13-2A. Location of the proposed boat ramp on the CL CL was halted again in 1971 by President Richard Nixon's Cross Florida Barge Canal, LU U) sign no of an executive order. Approximately S74 million _J had been spent on the project up until the 1971 cessat on of act;vit as- It was off cially cancelled in 1991. In LL 4Z 1998, the right -of -way was turned over to the State of Florida and became the Marjorie Harns Carr Cross Florida Greenway, named in honor of Mar.orie Harris Carr, who had led opposition to the canal. The Greenway is E .a managed by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). L) xi 21]56 State of Florida State Expend ture Plan Since the closure of the project, the state and local governments have sought to use completed portions of the CF8C to provide recreational opportunities and improve public access to waterways The western portion of the CFBC was completed from the Gulf of Mexico to Lake Rousseau, This segment of the CFBC is dredged to an approximate depth of -10 feet Mean Low Water, providing safe, and high-volume, deep-water boating access to the Gulf. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to provide safe, and high-volume, deep ter boat ng access to the Gulf of Max cc for residents and visitors without incurring new environmental impacts. Project object ves include: (1) relieve boat traff c at existing public boat ramps facilities on the Homosassis and Crystal River and (2) reduce potential boating impacts on the local West Indian manatee population. PROJECT COMPONENTS Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf 237 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Figure 13-2B. Plan view of the proposed boat ramp facility. Figure 1 3-2C. Cross section of the proposed boot ramp facility. Zvs ---------- V F L INTI Bar / 4 IL J Figure 13-2B. Plan view of the proposed boat ramp facility. Figure 1 3-2C. Cross section of the proposed boot ramp facility. Zvs State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activities: * Elig ble Activity 6: Infrastructure projects berrefitting the economy or ecological resources, including port infrastructure ® Elo ble Activity 10 Promotion of Tourism in the Gulf Coast Region, includ ng recreational fishing (primary) Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives —, i s Projectnt cons stem with, and addresses, the Is lowing Comprehensive Plan Goals: Goa' 5: Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy (primary) Goa' 3: Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 8: Restore, Diversity, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restoration Projects (primary) • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Citrus County veil be the sole implementing ant ty and grant stns-rec'ident reopens ble for the design, construct'on, and success mon:toring of the program, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment C trus County has successfu:ly obtained permits from USACE and a letter of consent from the Southwest Florida Water Management D strict JSVVFWMD). As part of the USAGE permitting process, a biological Survey for listed species was completed in 2011. This protect is considered to be feasible with respect to the ability to: (1) obtain necessary permits; (2) effectively design and construct the project a ements, 13) operate and maintain the facility over the ong-term. Risks and Uncertainties Preliminary design and regulatory permitting activities have been completed. In the evaluation of this program, no significant risks or uncertainties have been identified that vvou preclude project construction. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project addresses improvement of boater access to the Gulf It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for • Recreational amen'ties completed • Pub';c recreat one use statistics In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Citrus County is committed to conduct ng the monitoring necessary to quantify project benefits. SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 7 years. The expected start date is 2019, and the end date is 2026. 1 Implementation of this project has been divided into} three milestones, as shown in the chart be ow Final design Conermcnon Su--cess monitor no Budget and Funding Sources Citrus County has developed a total cost estimate of $5,312,603 for the project, Citrus County is committed to allocating $3,9$8,000 of its share of the Flor-da Spil Impact Component to this program, but wil'also be seeking other leveraged funding sources to supplement these monies, A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below. Feasbiltrir study (comp'eted) $0 $0 Prelim -nary design (completed 1 $0 $0 Planning Subtotal $0 $0 Final design and permitt ng $1,328.151 $664,076 Total Secured Funding $5,312,603 Budget Shortfall $0 2 _117. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan art r hi ps/Col laboration Citrus County will partner with the F ends Fish and Wi!d its Conservation Commission through the Florida Boating Improvement Fund to acquire addit'onal grant funding for this project for up to 10 percent of the project cost. Other partners for the project include: 241 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description � JA /, V r' : V 4 0. , �% »`� ^ . \�. 'Vi.;� , 01. L le 3 V )rl State of Florida State Expenditure P an PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES 1. Enhance private recreational and charter fishing reef site, 242 Figure 13-313, Location of existing the Fish Haven #1 artifirial SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities ..................................... 4 4 4 L I T j - 4- Citrus County's Artificial Reef Fish Haven #1 Figure 13-3C. Detailed reef augmentation plan for Fish Haven #J, In adding material to artificial reef sites, the project also includes post-construction monitoring conducted to ensure the deployment of this material produced high-quality habitat trial supports important reef f an species (e.g., grouper, snapper). Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is co-sistent wirlt, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act el g b'e ac!ivity: • El gable Act-vity 10. Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast region, including recreational fish'ng (primary► • El gable Ativity 1: Restorer or and protection of the natural resources. ecosystems, f sheries, marine and wildl,fe nab lots, beaches, and coas wetiands of the Gulf roast Reg or Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the follow: no Comprehensive Plan Goals: ;41 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan • Goal 5: Restore and Revitalper the Gulf Economy (primary) • Goal 1: Restore IS Conserve Habitat • Goal 3 Replenish & Protect Living Coastal & Marine Resources This project !s consistent with, and addresses, the fo:lowing Comprehens ve Plan Objectives • Ob.ect ve 8 Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restoration Projects (primary) • Ob, act ve 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Ctfect ve 3: Protect and Restore Liv'ng Coastal and Maune Habitats Implementing Entities Citrus County will be the sole mplementing entity and grant sub-irecipient, responsible for the design, construction, and success monitoring of the program. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment - Adems, C., et q1., 2011. The &.ononrac beriefirs assisovited with Florchis artificial reefs. EDIS document FE 649 a Bortone, S.A, an N, 1994, Factors affecting fish assemblage development on a modular artificial reef in a northern Gulf of Mexico estuary. Bull. Mar. Sol, 55 (2-31, 319-332. & Fikes, R, 2013, Artificial Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico A Review of Gulf State Programs & Key considerations National dififall.-fe Federation. Lindberg. WJ., or al., 2014. Rationale and Evaluation of an Artificial Reef System Designed for Enhanced Growth and Survival of Juvenile Gag, surycoerrypercia miciviliedd. Proc. 66th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute November 4 - 8, Corpus Christi, Ty, Pages 320-325. This pro.ect is feasible with respect to the aUl ty to: (1) obtain necessary permits, (2) construct the pro with n the proposed budget and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term. Furthermore, ?45 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities this project is consistent with the National Arnfic al Reef Plan published in 1985 and the Florida Art,fic-al Reef Strategic Pion (FVVC, 2003). Risks and Uncertainties Success Criteria and Monitoring This and all artificial reef projects involve the placement of hard substrate to: (1) support recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba d ving opportunities and (2► enhance the abundance, distribution, and srructural d versity of hardbottom habitat in the affected waters. Therefore, a range of app:icable success cr.ter,a wi;l be developed and described in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for. * Increase m the areal extent of new artificial reef nab tat * Metrics on the recruitment of benthic encrusting organisms and fish * Increase in recreational usage The proposed project will be constructed consistent with the Gulf States Marine F-sheries Commiss on Guidelines for Art ficial Reel Materials (2004). In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodolog-es. Citrus County's Aquatic Division a ready has an operat anal plan that inc'udes the monitoring of their reefs; therefore, no additional funds for monitoring are required. Milestones and Schedule [he rate estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 4 years, The project will begin in June 2025 w-th preconstruction monitoring, final design, and per mitt ng.There are six sites secured for placement, and one site wIII be constructed during each phase. The first five phases of construcran will start in 2025 and the complet on of dep'oyment;s antic -gated in 2026, followed by 2 years of success monitoring through 2028, that will be completed by County staff. Implementatoin of this project has been divided into four milestones, as shown in the chart be'ow. Final design and permitting Construction — Phases 1-5 2 1.1 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Construction - Phase 6 Success Monitoring Budget and Funding Sources The total estimated cost of the proposed project is approximately $850,000. Citrus County is comm tied to a locating $850,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to this program but wit also be seeking other leveraged funding sources to supplement these monies. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is prov.ded in the table below. Final design and permit no $170,000 $170,000 Construction $680.000 $680,000 Implementation Subtotal $850,000 $850,000 Success monitoring $0 $0 Total Cost $850,000 $850,000 Spil'impact Component $860,000 Direct Component $o Other grants or co-funding $0 Other County funds $0 Total Secured Funding 5850 Budget Shortfall $0 Natural Resource Damage Assessment 0 18 FishAmerica Foundation $.41 Artif'cial Reef Conn tract on and Monitoring 8.49 Sport Fish Restoration Program Partnerships/Collaboration Citrus County will partner with the neighboring Counties of Hernando and Pasco to implement a cooperative regional artificial reef program to ensure coordination of mon design, and perm Ring efforts and better inform future reef projects Coordination with the following agencies is ant cipated: • Florida Fish and Wi d ife Conservation Commission • Florida Department of Environmental Protection • National Marine Fisheries Service • US, Army Corps of Engineers 247 SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description wvm HkLi! it z \i� X In recent decades, the Crystal River/Kings Bay system has been impacted by reduced water clarity, an altered submerged aquatic vegetation commun-ty, and elevated nutrients it the related spring systems The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) determined that nutrients contribute to the degraded conalit on of NEED AND JUSTIFICATION Crysta River/Kings Bay is the second-largest spr.ngs group in Florida, with more than 70 springs scattered In witra n the 00 acre bay. The son ngs are the headwaters M. 41 of Crystal River, which is a short, tidal river that flows 7 miles from the headspr,ngs to where it meets the Gulf of Mexico at Crystal Bay in Citrus County, Florida. The Crystal R'ver/Kings Bay springshed, which contr butes Figure 13-4A, General location of proposed regional groundwater from the Floridan aquifer to Crysta' River/ sharmwater treatment facilities in Citrus County, Kings Bay Springs, is approximately 250 square m lea of urbanized and agricultural lands, forested up ends, and wetlands. This springshed covers much of northwest and centra'Citrus County In recent decades, the Crystal River/Kings Bay system has been impacted by reduced water clarity, an altered submerged aquatic vegetation commun-ty, and elevated nutrients it the related spring systems The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) determined that nutrients contribute to the degraded conalit on of o ro o c cn c `p cn m Z3 0 Z3 m Z3 a n m SECTION v Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Eligibility and Statutory Requirements Th:s pro.ect is consistent with, and addresses, the fo!lowing RESTORE Act el gibe activity Eligible Act city 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife nab tats, beaches, and coasts' wet ends of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the 'allowing Comprehensive Ran Goals: * Goa 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) * Goa. 1: Restore and Conserve Has tat * Goal 3: Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 2 Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objecr,ve 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Object ve 3 Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Mar.ne Resources Implementing Entities Citrus County wi'l be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the design, construction, and success monitoring of the program, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Water quality issues related to nutrients in the Crystal River/ Kings Bay and assodated springs are described in the follow-rig reports (and references c;ted therein). PDEP 2014, Nutrient NpDL for Kings Bay (water body ofencherlINGICI 734 1), Hunter Spring (WBID 134 IQ House Spring (WBID 134 ID), Idiots Delight Spring ddRPD 1347R Tarpon Spring (WBID 1341G), and Black Spring (WBID 1.341 W PREP 2014, Basin Management, Action Plans USHAPI: Springs Coast Basin" Rainbow Springs; Kings Say and Crystal River. — his project is also consistent with the goals and object,ves of the following natural resource management plan: S FWMD, 2015. Crystal Rivevogings Bay Surface Water Improvement ISOM) Plan: A Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan Version 9.209. The type of regional stormwater treatment facilities proposed in this program are commonly permitted and implemented ir. Florida This project a considered to be leasilly a with respect to the ability to 0) obtain necessary permits, (2) construct the project within the proposed budget, and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over tne long term 2tj State of Florida Stale Expenditure Plan Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of th:s program, no s'gnificant risks or uncertainties have been identified, Success Criteria and Monitoring This project w I affect water quality in adjacent freshwater and estuarine systems, Specific success enter a will be developed in the project grant request. it is ant cipated that quantitative success or terra will be developed for the following changes Number of acres treated • Volume of runoff treated and recharged to the Flor:dan aquifer • Estimated total nitrogen load reductions to the springshed In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design would be described that addresses data collect-on and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Citrus County is committed to implementing the necessary man toting program and coord noting with other reg'onal water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits Milestones and Schedule The total estimated t me horizon of this program's approximately B years, It is expected to begin in 2026 and end in 2033. 1 mplementat on of this program has been divided into severe I milestones, as shown in the chart below, Feasibility study and preliminary des'gn Final design and permitting Construction - Site 1 Construction - Site 2 Construction - Ste 3 Construction - Ste 4 Construction - S 5 Construction - Site 6 Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources The program cost has been estimated at $4,352,000 based upon the best available information, and Citrus County is committed to allocating $4,352,000 of its share of the Florida Spi I Impact Component to cover its program costs. Additional funding will be sought from SWFWMD and the Florida Department of Transportation to potentially expand the extent of the program, A summary of the project budget and fund ng sources - a provided in the table below 2;t SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Feasibility study $652.800 $652,800 Preliminary design $870,400 $870,400 Planning Subtotal $1,523,200 $1,523.200 Final desigr, and permitting $870.400 $870.400 Constructorn $1.958.400 $1,956.400 Implementation Subtotal $2,828,800 $2,828,800 Success men rating $0 $0 Total Cost $41GS2.800 $4,352,000 Sell Impact Component $4,352,000 D root Component $0 Other grants or co-funding $0 Other County funds $0 Total Secured Funding $4,352,000 Budget Shortfall $0 Natural Resource Damage Assessment F03 Rural Community Development Init-ative Grants F06 SEARCH - Special Evaluation Assistance for Rural Communities and Households F07 Wal.er and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities F 11 Community Facilities Direct Loan and Grant Program in Florida F 12 Community Facilities Technical Assistance anal ning Grant F 15 Mural Economic Development Loan & Grant Program in Florida F 17 Grant Program to Establish a Fund for Financing Water and Wastewater Projects F21 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention 0 22 F ends Rural Water Association Loan Program 0 40 SERCAP Loan Fund Program 0143 Southeast Aquatics 0 46WaterAceistrewater Loans SGI Agricultural Nonpoint Sources Best Management Practices Imp ementation 5.13 Florida Job Growth Grant Fund S 13 Florida Job Growth Grant Fund S 14 Small Cities Community Development B ock Grant (CBDG) Program S 15 Small Cities Community Development B-ock Grants JCBDGf Section 108 Loan Guarantees S IS Clean Water State Revolving Fund ICWSRn S 21 CWSRF Small Commun tv Wastewater Construction Grants S 25 innovative Nutrient and Sediment Reduction and Conservation Pilot Project Program S 27 Ronne nt Source Management Program (NPSM) - Section 319 S 32 Springs Restoration S 36 Water Projects S 52 SVVFWMD Cooperative Fund no Initiative 2S2 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Pal rtnerships/Col laboration Citrus County will continue to or closely with Southwest Florida Water Management District and Flor:da Department of Transportation on the implementation and monitoring of these reg anal stormwater face it es. 2 E � SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs and Activities Project Description FL4 40h OVERVIEW AND LOCATION T-is project involves the installation of 10 art,ficial 1P"cL .7 reefs at selected locations to expand upon the existing offshore reefs- Additional nearshore artif cial reefs are ,.-LL Z perm-ned art ficial reefs in Hernando County's nearshore 12 diving, and mar ne ife view no opportunit as. NeaTshore and offshore waters Figure 14-IA shows the general r xN location of thsites offshore of Hernando County NEED AND JUSTIFICATION FL4 40h Hernando County first implemented its artificial reef 1P"cL .7 Or offshore reefs- Additional nearshore artif cial reefs are ,.-LL Z needed to meet the ncreasing demand for snorkel no, 12 diving, and mar ne ife view no opportunit as. NeaTshore r xN NEED AND JUSTIFICATION FL4 40h Hernando County first implemented its artificial reef 1P"cL program in 1977 and the program presently includes four Or offshore reefs- Additional nearshore artif cial reefs are ,.-LL Z needed to meet the ncreasing demand for snorkel no, 12 diving, and mar ne ife view no opportunit as. NeaTshore I—tic— —;11 k p � ;kl 11 k A 6 xN �y sma er oats an L UQ FL4 40h more residents and tourists In addit-on to enhancing 1P"cL recreahona opportunities and associated economic - I t benefits, artific al reefs can also provide ecological r ,.-LL Z benefits. Hard substrate and vertical structure are 4 12 lion led habitats -n the Gu f of Mexico (- 2{113), and artif-cial reef habitats provide: (1) hard substrate to support encrusting and colonial benthic organisms such A I , ") 1 o.L f. IL L 4 h , 4L as sponges an com a, % ni a space or smal Figure 14-1A, Location of artificial reef sites offshore of riverteldrates, and (3) shelter for larval and luven Is Hernando County, fishes. Tho. pro. ect a just. fied by the demonstrated benefits -of art fic al reefs, inducling increased erm activ.ty (Adams et al. 201 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to augment Hernando County's ex-sting permitted art-fic al reef network w;th clean concrete and other suitable materials, as well as manufactured artificial reef balls, The ob of the project are to 111 suppoit the increasing recreational demand for offshore reef f ish'ng and scuba diving opportune -es and (2) enhance the ab-inclance, distribut on, and structural diversity of hardbottom habitat -n the county's coastal waters. � 1 :, -1 4L as sponges an com a, % ni a space or smal Figure 14-1A, Location of artificial reef sites offshore of riverteldrates, and (3) shelter for larval and luven Is Hernando County, fishes. Tho. pro. ect a just. fied by the demonstrated benefits -of art fic al reefs, inducling increased erm activ.ty (Adams et al. 201 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to augment Hernando County's ex-sting permitted art-fic al reef network w;th clean concrete and other suitable materials, as well as manufactured artificial reef balls, The ob of the project are to 111 suppoit the increasing recreational demand for offshore reef f ish'ng and scuba diving opportune -es and (2) enhance the ab-inclance, distribut on, and structural diversity of hardbottom habitat -n the county's coastal waters. � 1 :, -1 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Objectives are consistent vath those outlined by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's (FVVC's) artificial reef program, listed below ' aw so Poo 'T Figure 14-18- Location Map of Existing Artificial Reefs and Planned Reefs within Hernando County PROJECT COMPONENTS A total of 10 artificial reefs will be deployed over 12 years (see Figure 14-IEg- Project components are listed below. • S to surveys and site select on for artif cial reef locations • Won sition and storage of reef structures and other appropriate material • Deployment of a rti � cia I reef materia by boats and barges at years 2-4 and 9-1 C. • Pre- and post- men toting and data co'lect'on Th a reef locat ons wi be ava. table f or public use for recreationa f ishing a no diving as part of a larger network of artific al reef programs along the Nature Coast to ensure residents and vurtors have access regardless of co,nty boundaries Post construction men toting will also be conducted to ensure that the deployment of this mater al produced In gh-quality had tat that supports - mportant reef fish species (e.g,, grouper, snapperli. Additional p ann-ng assistance will be required for permitt design, and implementation of the proposed project. 2E�5 Y.x " ri 'T Figure 14-18- Location Map of Existing Artificial Reefs and Planned Reefs within Hernando County PROJECT COMPONENTS A total of 10 artificial reefs will be deployed over 12 years (see Figure 14-IEg- Project components are listed below. • S to surveys and site select on for artif cial reef locations • Won sition and storage of reef structures and other appropriate material • Deployment of a rti � cia I reef materia by boats and barges at years 2-4 and 9-1 C. • Pre- and post- men toting and data co'lect'on Th a reef locat ons wi be ava. table f or public use for recreationa f ishing a no diving as part of a larger network of artific al reef programs along the Nature Coast to ensure residents and vurtors have access regardless of co,nty boundaries Post construction men toting will also be conducted to ensure that the deployment of this mater al produced In gh-quality had tat that supports - mportant reef fish species (e.g,, grouper, snapperli. Additional p ann-ng assistance will be required for permitt design, and implementation of the proposed project. 2E�5 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Hernando County has become a destination for ecotounsm focised on scuba div.ng and recreat onal fishing, This project will: (1) support the increasing recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba d wing opportunities by berh •asidents and tourists and (2) enhance the abundance, distribut on, and structural diversity of hardbottom habitat in coastal wate of Hernando County. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RES r - ORE Act eligible activity, • Eligible Activity 10 Promotion of tour am in the Gulf Coast region, including recreational fishing (primary) • Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife hati itats , beaches and coasts wet ends of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th a project is consistent w th, and addresses. the fo! owing Comprehensive Pan Goals • Goa. 5: Restore and Revitalize the Gu.f Economy (primary) • Goa' 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3: Replenish and protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with. and addresses, the following Cornprehens;ve Plan Objectives; C oniso r tik , rc Objective 8 Restore, Diversify, and Rev talize the Gulf Economy w.1h Economic and Environr neural Restorat on Protects (primary) Objective 1: Restore, Enhance. and Protect Habitats * Objective 3: Protect and Restore Liv.ng Coasts! and Marine Hap tats Implementing Entities Hernando County will be the main implementing entity and grant sub.recipient responsible for the permitting, construl,tion, and success monitoring of the program. SeaGrant, FWC, and the University of Florida could be additional sub-recipients as Hernando County looks to cooperatively pool resources for research and monitoring efforts Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment 1 YL State of Florida State Expenditure Plan (Swett at al., 2011; Adams at al,, 2011). In addition, research has produced best practices guidance on site selection, design features, and construction methods, criteria that are now part of the FDIC regulations for permitting. Key literature that forms the basis for the Hernando County Artif c al Reef Program are cited below @ Adams, C, at al., 2011, The economic benefits associated with Florida's artificial reefs. SNIS document FE649 a Borrone, SA,, at 4 1994. Factors affecting fish assemblage development on a modular artificial reef in a northern Gulf of Mexico estuary. Bull. Mar. Sci 55 (2-3), 379-332 a Fikes. R.. 2013. Artificial Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico. A Review of Gulf State Programs & Key Considerations. National Wildlife Federation Lindberg. lit J_ or al., 2074. Rationale and Evaluation of an Artificial Reef System Designed for Enhanced Growth and Survival of Juvenile Gag, Mycraropercat necrolepis. Price. Filth Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute Nowimber Corpus Christi, Ty Pages 320-325 This project is feasible with respect to the ability to: (1) obtain necessary perm ts; (2) construct the project with n the proposed budget; and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term, Furthermore, this project is cons scent with the Not:onal Artificial Reef Plan published in 1985 and the Florida Artificial Reef Strateg'c Plan ffwVC, 2003). Risks and Uncertainties No significant risks or uncertainties were identif-ed during the evaluation of this project that would preclude project implementation, Hernando County will ensure design to limit damage from tropical storms Controls for lionf an and other nuisancelexotic species may be required Regulatory constraints will address issues such as spatial boundaries for navigation, channels, marine habitat resources, historic areas, sand borrow areas, existing structures and leases, etc. Success monitoring .'s critical in a fisheries management context given that these reefs have not previously been used as fisheries management tools, Success Criteria and Monitoring This and all artificial reef projects ii'volve the placement of hard substrate -Lo support recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba diving opportunities and enhance the abundance, distribution, and structural diversity of hardbottom habitat in the off acted waters. Therefore, a range of success cri term will be developed and decor bed in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: • Increase in the areal extert of new artificial reef nab tat • Metrics on the recruitment of bench c encrusting organisms and fist • Increase in retreat anal usage The proposed project will be constructed consistent with the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission's Guidelines iffi Reef Materials (2004). 'n the project grant request, a cletai ad monitoring program design will be described that addresses data col ection and assessment methodo!ogies for the above-I sted triter a Hernando County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quantify project benefits, -157 SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximate'y 12 years. It is expected to start in 2018 and to end in 2029. Imp'ementation of this project has been divided i^.tci eight milestones as shown in the chart below. Budget and Funding Sources Hernando County has estimated the Iola! cost of this project to be approximately $2,350,000, and is committed to allocating $2,350,000 of its share of the Florida So 11 impact Component to this project. A summary of the project budget and fund ng sources is provided in the table below. Feasibdity study $100.000 Pro!- rrinary dos gn $100.000 Rawine data $450,000 Planning Subtotal $650,000 Frnal deogn, and pernutling $100,000 Spill 'mrsict: Component Direct Component Other grants or co-funding Other County funds $100,000 $100,000 5450,001 $650,000 $100.000 $400,000 $400,000 $450.000 $1,350,000 $350.000 $2,350,000 �r.e State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Natural Resource Damage Assessment P40 Coastal and Marine Han let Re-mration Grams 0.18 FishAmerica Foundation S.41 Artificial Reef Construct on and Monitoring S.49 Sport Fish Restoration Program Pa rtnershi ps/Col la boration SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs and Activities Project Description '_1 El D Figure 14-2A, Coa-5t Habitat Enhancement Sites, 0 WM n� m SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Both the oyster reef and living shoreline project componews will provide the unique opportunity to involve citizens through a she I recycling program and placement of oyster bags and/or oyster settlement sites, growing and planting marsh grass, and construct his and deploy-ng shallow water reef modules. At ieast one site wi'l be selected that will be eas-ly accessible by the public for use as an educat:onal amenity. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Fina:lo the construction and enhancement of nearshore oyster reefs and liv.ng srwrelines will provide a number of ecological benefits inclual no the provision of- 1) substrate for oyster spat settlement and new oyster larval production, and 2) m cro-benthic habitats for numerous small organisms such as amphipods, isopods, burrowing shrimp, crabs, oyster dwelling fish halennies and gob as. These orgarisms in turn support recreational important fish species includ ng redfish, snapper, sheepshead and black drum. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with and addresses the fol'awing RESTORE Act eligible activity - Eligible Act vity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, f sheries, marine and wi:dlife habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast Region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project a cons scent with, and addresses, the fo I owing Comprehensive Plan Goals: * Goal 3 Replerish and Protect Living Coastal and Mar ne Resources. (primary) * Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 3 Protect and Restore L Coasts. and Marire Resources (primary) • Objective 1 Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats Implementing Entities Hernando County wi;l be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the per .tong, construction, and success monitoring of the program Hernando County has coordinated extens-vely with the Flor do Sea Grant program in the planning, feasibility analysis, design, of the program components. '_162 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Oyster reef restoration and living shoreline construction have been well studied, and a range of best siting practices and successful construction methods have been developed. This program has been informed by key literature in this field including the following references. a Daggett, L. P, S, R Powers, R. Brumbaugh, L. D. Coen, B. DeAngelis, J Greene, 8 Hancock, and S. Morlock, 2014, Oyster Habitat Restoration Monitoring andAssessment Handbook. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, USA., Rapid. Barnes TK Widely AN Charrier K, Mazzorti Ff Rearvene L (2007) A habitat suitability index model for the eastern oyster lCiassestrea virgin a) a tool for restoration of the Caloccerha tHere Estuary, Florida. Journal of Shellfish Research 26 (4):949-959. son. 10.298310730-8000(2007)261949.ahsimf]2.0.co2. La Payre ad, Furlong J, Brown LA, Piazza BP Brown K (2014) Oyster reef restoration in the northern Gulf of Mexico: Extent, methods and outcomes, Ocean & Coastal Management 89:20-28 dw 10. 10161j. ocecoaman.2013,12,002, a Seavey JR, Pine WE, Frederick P Sturmer L, Bernivan M (2011) Decaidal changes in oyster reefs in the Big Bend of Florida o Gulf Coast. Ecosphare 2 (10). isso: 10. 1890les 11-00205. 1. a ScRehers SS Powers Do Heck KL, Byron D (2011) Oyster Reefs as Natural Breakwaters Margate Shoreline Loss and Facilitate Fisheries. Pies One 6 (8), dor 10, 13771joumal.pone.0022396 Allen thy, Ankersen T Panels E, Sanders S, and Baronet A OVID Hernando County Marine Area Plan Interim Report Levin College of Law small Nature Coast Biological Station, University of Florida. Gainesville, Florida This program is cons'dered to be feasible with respect to the ability to: 1) obtain necessary permits; 21 construct the project within the proposed budget; and 3) effectively operate and maintain the projoct components over the long term Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluat on of this program, no significant risks have been identifed that would preclude implementation. There is some risk that constructed oyster (sets and living shorelines could be damaged during tropical storm events', however, potentia' damage from storm surge and high waves will be factored into the siting and construction methods. Th a project is ready to begin design and permitting. Success Criteria and Monitoring The oyster reef and -irang shoreline sites will be monitored bi-annually as they are petalled, with a yearly monitoring report Pre and post construction monitoring will be completed of the oyster reefs and living shorelines to evaluate the ecological benefits and ecosystem sera ces gained from these projects, and to provide recommendations for future similar projects At each of eight (8) reef locations, and the three (3) living shorelines sites, b:-annual and quantitative sampling will be conducted along pre-determined transects with HD video for. • Fish /shellfish /crustacean populations • Invertebrates '16-i SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The rota estimated time horizon of this project, from design and permitting through success men toring, is approximately 6 years The expected start date -a 2018, and t-e expected end date is 2023 Permitting, implementation, and monitoring w 11 be completed for half the sites within the first three years, w-th the re ma n no a lea to be completed during the subsequent 3 years. Hernando County will utilize an adaptive ma--agement approach to project des on and imp ementation, us' no ongoing monitoring from constructed sites to inform the des gn of future implementation activities. Implementation of this protect has been broken down into nine milestones/phases, as shown in the milestone chart below. Budget and Funding Sources Oyster over Project Feasib lity Study & Preliminary Design Construction - Phase I Oyster Reef Construction - Phase 2 Oyster Reef V50.0001 $75,000 Planning Subtotal $150,000 $75,000 $110.000 $110,000 $110.000 $110,000 Implementation Subtotal $220,000 $220,000 5E10 $80.000 Total $450,000 $375,000 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Living Shoreline Project Feasibiloy Study & Pre'im nary Design $150.000 $75,000 Planning Subtotal $150,000 $75,000 Construction - Phase 1 Living Shore'rne $110,000 $110.000 Construction - Phase 2 Living Shoreline $110,000 $1 Implementation Subtotal $220,000 $220,000 Success Monitoring $80,000 $80,0130 Total $450,000 $375,000 Total Cost $900,000 $750,000 Spill Impact Component $750.000 Direct Component $0 Other Grants or Co-Funding $75.000 Other County Funds $75,000 Total Secured Funding $900,000 Budget Shortfall $0 If additional leveraged funds become available, they would be spot ed to the areal expansion of the oyster reef restoration and living shoreline construction projects. Partnerships/Collaboration ,65 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs and Activities Project Description 2C.0 . F-b T A Prffl- P( kw i8 41 Illy Figure 14-3A, Waterway and Gulf Access Project Locations ri I q . F-b T A Prffl- P( kw i8 41 Illy Figure 14-3A, Waterway and Gulf Access Project Locations r i 10 1( Patking Im IM.M. He—indoCou-ity a gy m LM U3 0 - i - . o q �n M - 11 (D tn SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities and oyster restorat on projects presenting the opportun,ty for outdoor classroom and loca'non-prof t organization sponsored events. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements T11!s project is cons-stent with and addresses the following RESTORE Act eligib:e activity. Eligible Activ-ty 10. Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast red on, including roweat onal fishing (pr-mary) Eligible Activ.ty 1. Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wi habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast Region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th's project is cons stern with and addresses the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: * Goal 5: Restore and Revitalize the Go ir Economy i h:s project is consistent with and addresses the following Comprehensive P!an Objectives * Ob:ective 8: Restore, Diversify, and Rev talee the GA Economy with Economic and Environments! Restoration Protects Implementing Entities Hernando County would be the so a implement no ent-ty and grant sub-recipient respo-sib'e for the design, perm-tung. construction, operation and maintenance, and monitoring of this project. The County has coordinated with numerous other agencies in the development of the program, and may collaborate with other entities in the implementation of the projec;. through levered no and other cooperative fund no agreements {SW MD, NFWF FDEP). Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Elements of this project were previous y des:gned and permitted. That h storical -mormat on will be incorporated into the basis for design, as well as prev ous studies that indicate sea level rise projections and Storm surge leve-s. This project is feasible with respect to the so I ty to: 1) obtain necessary permits, 2) construct the project w-thin the proposed budget. 3) effectively operate and ma-main the project components over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties No sign ficant risks or uncertainties were identified during the evaluation of this project that would preclude pro implementation. Hernando County it ensure design to limit damage from tropical storms Controls for honfish and other nuisance/exotic species may be reciiired. Regulatory constra me w 11 address issues such as spat al boundaries for navigat on, channels, marine habitat resources, himoric areas, sand borrow areas, existing structures and leases, etc. Success monitoring is cut cal in a fisheries management context given these reefs have not previously been used as fisheries management tools, 26� State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will affect County park visitor numbers and usage Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and described in the'ruplementation grant request. It is antic pated that criteria will be developed for. • Number of via tors, * Alleviation of park congestion In the implementation grant request a detailed monitoring will described to address data collections and assessment of the above list cuter a. Milestones and Schedule The onneframe for the proposed project is an estimated 13 years, beginning in 2021 and ending in 2033, as soft ned below Budget and Funding Sources Based on previous County projects, a preliminary op'n of probable construction engineering, permitting, construction, and monitoring costs for the project was developed, based an best available information for quantities and unit prices for the year 2016. The total pro cost was ast-mated to be $4,660,000. Project funding is summarized in the table below Feasibi try Study & Preliminary Design $80,000 $80,000 Planning Subtotal $80,000 $80,000 Final Design & Permitting $185,000 $85,000 Boat RamplPark Arnett es Construction $1,000,000 51,000.000 Channel Improvements Construction $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Paddl ng Trail Construction $260,000 $260000 Implementation Subtotal $4,445,000 S4,346,000 Success Monitor no 5135,000 $135.000 Total Cost $4,660,000 $4,560,000 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Pa rtnersh ips/Col la boration Hernando County has an exce.lent working relationship with Sea rant and the Southwest Florida Water Management District: • SeaGrant/IFAS • Southwest House Water Management D strict • F ofida Fish and Wildlife Conservat-on Commission — Florida Boater Improvement Fund • F-orida Department of Environmental Protection State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION 271 Figure 14-4A. District A location map SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Figure 1448. Nitrate Concentration in S, 1993 cuntr:bution. Hernando County plans to remove the septic systems nearest WWS to prevent them from d-scharging wastewater nutrients to the aquifer and remove an estimated 11,000 pounds per year (b/y of nitrogen from District A alone. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to remove the highest-dens.ty septic systems in the areas most likely to affect WWS Hernando County divided the contributing area most affecting WWS into 19 districts: District A is the highest priority for remediation, This project would be the first such remediat-or project of the overall progra-- PROJECT COMPONENTS .Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Water qual,ty improvements to the river and springs wouln beriefit the local ecotourism economy. The expansion of the sewer system would increase property values for the parcels it will ult mately serve, and sewer availability would State of Florida State Expenditure Plan AIM En C 2 UP Gi Ln Ln Figure 14-4C. Septic to Sewer Conversion Program Area, Districts A-S- Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This prefect is consistent with, and addresses, the foal owing RESTORE Act eligible activities: Eligible Activity 1 - Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and w'Idlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Oomprehens;ve Plan Goals: * Goa' 2' Restore Water Qua ity and Quantity (pr'mary) 2 73 SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities * Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat ■ Goal 3 Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources THE project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing Comprehens ve Plan Object ves: • Objective 2: Restore, Imp and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Hab,tats • Objective 3- Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities The Hernando County Public Util-fies Department would be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the des an, perm tiling, construction, operas on and me menance, and monitoring of this project, Hernando County Pub is Utilities Department has coordinated with FDEP and numerous other agenines in the development of the wastewater management plan, and may collaborate with other entities in the implementation of the project through leveraging and other cooperative funding agreements. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Hernando County completed a study to ident.fy the best options for septic-to-sewer conversions to reduce nitrogen loading to the Weeki Wachee springshed. Coastal Engineering Associates and Lagette Brashears & Graham, 2016. Septic to Sewer Conversion Study. Final report prepared for the Hernando County Uirday Department, This project is consistent w th the goals and objectives of the folowing nature- resource management plan SINYVens, 2017 Weeth Wwhee River Surface Water improvement and Management o3mi'vp Plan, A Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. Based on the County's master panning efforts, the project appears to be feasible. However, the project cannot be fully evaluated for cost feasibi'ity unt-I prelim nary design has beer. competed. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this program, it was determined Oat inmal plann ng and a sewer mas!er plan were completed. This is the first cindect assoc start w-th a much larger program. The project appears feasible but the risks and uncerl.a:nties would be evaluated after preliminary design has been completed. Hernando County has identified this as a high-priority program and is ready to proceed w-th imp ementat on. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project would affect water quality in adjacent freshwater and estuarine systems. Specific success criter!a would be developed in the imp'ementation grant request, It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria would be developed for she following changes: 27.1 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan • Changes in ambient water quality (nutrient and bacteria: concentrations) in WWS and the Week Wachee Rover • Changes in the frequency and/or duration of algal Is dome (as measured by chlorophylka) in the Weeld Wachee R iver e Changes in water clarity in the Weeks Warchee R-ver In the implementation grant request, a detailed monitoring program design would be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-I sted criteria Hernando County expects th's monitoring to be implemented by SWFWMD and would coordinate with SWFWMD and other reg anal water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule Design-build phase (Phase 1) Design criteria package (Phase 2) Design-build phase (Phase 2) Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Feasibil ty study {Completed 2016) Design criteria package lPhase 1) Design criteria package Whose 2) Design build phase 1- Design Build Design build phase 2-Design Build SLCCeSS monitoring Planning subtotal Implementation subtotal FRUMM $o $0 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $500,000 $500,000 $11,100,000 $925,000 $11,100,000 $925,000 $22,200,000 $1,850,000 $250,000 $250,000 523.050,000 $2,600,000 Spill Impact Component $2,600,000 Diiect Component Other Grants or Co-Funding Other Courts Funds Total Secured Funding $2,600,000 Budget shortfall $20.450,000 Natural Resource Damage Assessment F03 Rural Community Development Innotive Grant= F07 Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Care unites F05 Water and Waste Disposal Technical Assistance and Tra ning Grants F 11 Community Pas lits:!s Dir-Act Loan and Grant Program in Flor us F 13 Corr mu n ty Faci it ies Guararneed Loan Program F 17 Grant Program to Establish a Fund for F causing Water and Projects 0.22 Florida Rural Water Associal on Loan Program 0.40 Southeast Rural Commurity Assistance Project, Inc JSERCAP) . can Fund Program S 52 SW Cooperative Funding I nit ative Pa rtnersh i ps/Col la boratio n The sent c-to-se vver conversion study was developed w.th f inanc al assistance prov:ded by the Fish and W-Idlifis Foundation of Flof:da, Inc. through the Protect Roddis Springs program. 2 77, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description This project would address water quality degradation assoc'ated with a work ng commerci@l waterfront, from nutrient-, erosion-, and roadway-related pollutant loadings, by retrofitting the streetscape with appropr ate best management practices (BMPs), It would work in conjunction with other water quality treatment projects Hernando 277 a 3 I'L ry ° +* =4 4 r � •aLi '}Y + l ~ �x 'fit er y ,J ,a,- -A E+ � .1 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is cons'stent with, and addresses, the fo lowing RESTORE Act eligible activities a Elig his Activ'ty 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast reg on (primary) a Elig his Activity 7: Coastal flood protection and related n f restructure Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is cons stem with, and addresses, the fo'lowing Comprehensive P an Goals: 9 Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) ip Goal 3: Rep:enish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is cons-stent with, and addresses, the fo'lowrng Comprehensive P an Objectives: • Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protecty"Varter Resources (primary) • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Hernando County would be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-rec plant responsib'e for the permitting, construct on, and success monitoring of the program Hernando County has coordinated extensively with the Florida Sea Grant program in the planning, feasib'l'ty aria ys's, and design of the program components. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Storm water BMPs for roadways have been well studied and described n the fo!lowing report (and references cited vvithin) a Florida Department of Transportation (FOOO Drainage Handbook. Office of Design, Drainage Section, 2072, This pro.act -a considered to be feasible, although it is only n the concept phase and would require additional evaluat on and planning to fully evaluate feasibility. Risks and Uncertainties Preliminary des gn needs to be completed before risks can be assessed Success Criteria and Monitoring The project would affect water qua ity in the GL.lf of Mexico It is ant-cipated that quantitative success criteria would be developed for the following changes: * Changes in ambient water quality (nutrient, total suspended sed t. fld day, other roadway contaminants) after storm events downstream of the Calrenta Street project 2-9 SECTION V- Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of these protects from feasibility through construct on—:s approximate y 7 years The expected start date is 2018, and the expected end date is 2024. Implementation of these projects has been divided as shown in the rn lestone chart below. Feasbil ty study Pre iminary design Final design/permitt!ng Construction Monuor no Budget and Funding Sources This pro is in the conceptual design stage. so detailed cost estimates have not been corms eted. Hernando County provided a conceptual -level cost for the project, including planning, implementation, and monitoring Hernando County is also in discussions with the Flcucla Department of Environmental Protection (EDEN and Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFMVVM for additional funding to. the; project. Mocalt Iny study $75.000 $75,000 Prel urinary & sign $75.000 $75.000 Planning subtotal $150,000 $150,000 Final design & permitting 5250.000 $250,000 Con'truct L; - 1 $4,400.000 $1,900,000 Implementation subtotal $4,650,000 $2,150,000 Success monitoring $100,000 $100,000 Total Cost $4,900,000 $2,400,000 Spil mpact component $2,400,000 Is rect component Other grants or co4unclinq Other Hernando County funds Total secured funding $2,400,000 Budget shortfall $2,400,000 Natural Resource Damage Assessment F63 Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) S 27 Nonpoint Source Management Program (NPSM) Section 319 S 34 Total Maximum Daly Load rrMD Water Quality Restoration Grants S 50 Water Projects Priorities Database S 52 SW MD Cooperative Funding Initiative State of Florida Stale Expenditure Plan Partnerships /Coll ration Hernando County has partnered with SWFWMD in the past to complete similar storm water retrofit projects, Hernando County plans to submit a funding request through SWFWMD's cooperative funding program once the design plans are completed for this project. 281 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description 41, ' C*a a: t.a�a�n4s M1�P � 5 r i . I 7t-1 J, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan PROJECT COMPONENTS Proposed drainages infrastructure Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf sustainability of the Pasco County economy Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act el Bible activity. - El Bible Activity 7: Coastal flood protection and related infrastructure 2!32 HERNANDO-' P&GO rA INNELLAS : HILLSBORVU Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf sustainability of the Pasco County economy Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act el Bible activity. - El Bible Activity 7: Coastal flood protection and related infrastructure 2!32 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives T his pro is consistent wil, h, end addresses, the foltbwing Comprehensive Plan Goals: This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives * Objective 2: Restore, Improve and Protect Water Resou (primary) * Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats ® Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coasta'and Mar:ne Rescirces Implementing Entities Pasco County will be the sole implementing entity and gra^t sub-recipient responsible for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring of the project, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The polUant removal effect veness of various stcrmwater best ma"agement practices implemented in Florida, includ no wetland treatment systems, has been evaluated, and des Rod continue to be improved The design of the proposed strarmaciater improvements will consider the folcoving reference documents a Harper, H. and D Baker, 2007 Evaluation of Current ,Stour oviter Design Criteria Within the State of Florida. Final report prepared for the Fjo, Department of Environmental Protection (contract SO 7081 by Environment Resednor & Design. Inc, Orlando, FL. * Florida Department of Transportation (FOOD Drainage Handbook Office of Design, Drainage Section. 2012. Based on extensive precedents for watershed rehab litation in southwest Florida, th a project is considered to be feasible in terms of the ability to: (1) obtain necessary permits (2) construct t-le project within the proposed budget, and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term � e-4 Figure 15-11C, Schematic of weeland enhancement and slough restoration areas in ti is Part Richey watershed, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this project, no significant risks or uncertainties were olent fied. Created werland systems for the storage and treatment of urban stormweter runoff are frequently permitted and constructed In Flor'da, As part of the engineering des gn and permitting of this project, it :s likely that hydraulic modeling will be requ red to ca cu ate max union int ow velocities and to design the project to prevent scour ng and area on of the restored areas. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project w 11 reduce f doping and surface water pollutant loads from urban stormwater runoff, In addition, the project wi 11 also improve water quality and habitat cored tons in downstream receiving waters. Therefore, a range of success or terra will be developed in the project grant request. t is anticipated that quantitative success triter a wrl be developed for: • Reduction in the frequency and severity of f mad events • Change in hydrologic storage pre- and Post- restorat • Change in pollutant load ngs pre- and post-restorat!on • Linear feet of stream/slough restored In the project grant request, a data led monitoring program will be des Sued that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed ct-ter,a. Pasco County is committed to implement ng the necessary monitoring program and coord net ro with other reg onal water quality monitor ng entities to quantify project benefits, Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 6 years, inc uding 2 years for success monitoring. It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2023.1 ple entation of this project has been divided into five milestones, as shown in the chart below. Feasibility study (complete) Preliminary design Final design/permining Construction Success monitoring 2.3 5 SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Budget and Funding our This project is in the conceptual design stage, and Pearl] County has estimated the Iota' cost of this project to be approximately $10,600,000, Pasco County -a committed to allocating $5,000,000 of its share of the Florida Spill I model Component and $300,000 of its Sri rect Component funds to this project. Pasco County is n discussions so -th the SWFWM1D for dealt anal funding, and cooperative funding is antic-pated. A summary of the project budget and `unding sources is provided in the table below. Feasibility study lcomp are) $0 $0 Pri-Aim nary design $600.000 $300,001 Planning Subtotal $600,000 $300.900 Final design and Fermin egg $750,000 $750,000 Constructior $9.190,000 $3,890,000 Implementation Subtotal $%940.000 $4,640,000 Mon itonng $60,000 $60,000 Total cost $10,600,000 $5,000,000 Natural Resource Damage Assessment F03 Rural Community Deve'opment IniTiative, Grant F 12 Community Faci it as Techn cal Assistance and 1ra - niqg Grant F21 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevent.on S OE Hazard M itigne on Grant Program S 1:i Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) S 21 CWSRF Small Community Wastewater Coni:nru. tior. Grants S 25 Innovative Nutrient and Sediment Reduction and Conservation Pilot Protect Program S 27 Nonroam Source Management Program (\ PSM I Section 319 S 34 Tital Maximum Daily Load (TMDU WatFLr 0. is! ty Restoration Grants S 52 SVVFWMD Cooperative Fund no Initiative Partnerships/Collaboration Pasco County will continue to collaborate w,th Southwest Rorida Water Management Distr or n the design, permitting, and'implementatent of this project. 286 Slate of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description natural hydrolog c storage, and old and failing drainage infrastructure. In addition, water quality in the watershed has been degraded by untreated urban storm Ater runoff. Slormwater management infrastructure improvements are needed to address flooding and water cooky problems I• this watershed, as well as to improve habitat conditions in the receiving coastal waters. Figure 15-2A, Location of the Port Richey Watershed in Pasco - - r. A V IS mm'- 4 1� 1 ,9, State of Flor do State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with and addresses the following RESTORE Act eligible activity: a Elig his Activ'ty 7: Coastal I ood protection and related infrastrurt,ire Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is cons stem with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 2 Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3 Replenish and Protect Uving Coastal and Marine Resources This project is cons stem with, and addresses, the to[ owing Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 2: Restore, Improve and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1. Restore, Enhance, and Protect Had rate • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Pasco County will be the sole implementing errs ty and grant sub-rec:p;ent responsible for the permitting, construct on, and success men rating of the project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The pollutant remove' effectiveness of various storm water best management practices implemented in Florida, including wet and treatment systems, has been evaluated, and designs continue to be improved. The design of the proposed stornowater improvements will consider the fol:owing reference document: Harper H and D. Baker 2007 Evaluation of Current Stormusi ter Design Criteria Within the State of Florida. Final report prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (contract SO 108) by Environment Research & Design. Inc,, Orlando, FL. - Florida Department of Transportation (FDOG Drainage Handbook. Office of Design, Drainage Section. 2012 Based on extensive precedents for watershed rehabilitat-on in southwest Florida, this project is considered to be feasible in terms of the abllhvi to (1) obtain necessary permits; (2) constrict the project within the proposed budget, and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluator of th s project, no significant risks or uncertainties were -dentified. Created wetland systems for the storage and treatment of urban stormwater runoff are frequently permitted and constructed in Florida, As part of the engineering design and permitting of this pro.ect, it is likely that hydraulic modeling will be required to calculate maximum inflow velocit es and to design the project to prevent scouring and erosion of the restored areas. 2 E'�, SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Success Criteria and Monitoring The project w-11 reduce flood no and surface water pollutant loads from urban stormwater runoff, In addition, the project will also !mprove water quality and habita4 cond trans in downstream rece.ving waters. Therefore, a range of success criteria w'll be deve'oped in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria it be deve•oped for: • Reduction in the frequency and severity of fiend events • Change n hydrologic storage pre- and pest - restoration • Change in pollutant loadings pre -and pest - restoration • Linear f set of stream/slough restored In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring prograrn wi I be designed that addresses date collect on and assessment methodologies for the ahove-listed criter,a. Pasco County is committed to implementing the necessary monitor ng program and coo•dinat ng with other regional water qjality monitor-ng entities to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this pro is approximately 6 years, inc uding 2 years for success monitoring. It is expected to start in 2018 and expected to end in 2023, Jmplementation of this project has been div cled into five milestones, as shown in the chart below FeaSibAlty study "complete) Preliminary design Final des gryparmitting Construction Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources This project is in the conceptual des gn stage, and Pasco County has estimated the total cost of this project to be approximelely $3,650,000, Pasco County is committed to allocating $2,000,000 of its share of the F ends Sall; Impact Component, and $150,000 of its Direct Component funds to this project. Pasco County is in discussions with the SWFMWD for add.tional funding, and cooperative funding is ant A summary of the project budget and fund ng sources is provided n the table below. 21J0 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Feasib lity study (complete) $0 so Preliminary design $0 so Planning Subtotal in $0 Final design and permitting $300,000 $300,000 Construction $3,300,000 S1,650,000 Implementation Subtotal $3,600,000 $1,950,000 Monitoring $50,000 $50,000 Total Cost $3,650,000 $2.000,000 SECURED FUNDING souRcr:s Spill Impact Component $2,000,000 Direct Component $150,000 Other grants or co4unding Other Pasco County funds Total Secured Funding $2,150,000 Budget Shortfall $1,500,000 F03 Rural Community Development Initative Grants F12 Community Faci'iteisTcchnical Assistance and Training Grant F21 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevent-on S 08 Hazard Mit-gation Grant Program S.18 Clean Water State gave ving Fund (CWSRF) S.21 CWSRF Small Community Wastewater Construction Grants S 25 Innovative Nutrient and Sedimsint Reduction and Conservation Pilot Project Program S.27 Nonpoint Source Management Program (NPSM): Section 319 S,34Total Maximum Daily Load iTIVIDLf Water Duality Restoration Grants S,36 Water Projects; Natural Resource Damage Assessment S 52 SW MCA Cooperative Funding initiative Pa rtnersh ips/Col la boration Pasco County will continue to co'laborate with the Southwest Florida Water Management District in the des gn, permitting, and implement0on of this project, 241 SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description [Pq 04� ga l 4 ;V WU , J A ? ' � %,92 Four e 15-3A, Region artificial reef location map- PROJECT COMPONENTS This project involves the folynoing components (1) site assessments and bottom surveys to determ ne the best location and potential extent of the reef, (2) regulatory perm tt'ng of the reef, (3) preparation and staging of reef our ding materials and substrates; (4) reef installation and (5) monitoring and assessment. It is anticipated that r. CD w -+ n o Ej CD CD 0 cn VY CD 7 C13 m n� a� m n� m F F __ �J��'��• � t T1 r. CD w -+ n o Ej CD CD 0 cn VY CD 7 C13 m n� a� m n� m SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Implementing Entities Pasco County wi I be the sole 'mplementi ng entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the design, permitting, construction, and success monitoring of this project Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment T-iis project is somewhat of a hybr d between or. offshore a-t ficial reef and an inshore living shoreline.The objectives of the project are to create complex hardbottom habitat or mar ly to attract fish, but not necessarily to build natural oyster bars.Therefore, the project has more in common w-th offshore ar-,if vial reefs, and the Best Available Sceince assessment shoild be si-iilar to offshore artificial reef pro.ects. Key literatins citations applicable to this pro include_ This protect is considered to be feasible with respect to the abi!,ty to it) secure necessary property agreements and permits; (2) cons the proposed 1 lots, and (3) operate and maintain the improved recreat.onal area and habitats over the long term Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this project, no Sigr-if loam risks have been dentif,ed that would preclude implementation, There is some risk of damage to the artificial reef modules and the potent al for tl-ern to move during tropical storm events however, potentia damage from storm surge and high waves wi 'I be factored into the siting and construction methods There are also some uncertainties regard no the ability to core n permits to place fill material in and around seagrass; however, the proposed boating restriction zone should adequately offset any resource impact concerns. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project involves the placement of hard substrate to support recreat oral demand for offshore reef fishi-•g and scuba diving opportunities and to enhance the abundance, distribution, and structural d varsity of hardbottont habitat n the affected waters, Therefore, a range of success criteria wi-I be developed and described in the project grant request. It -a ant cipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for. • Increase in the coverage of new artificial reef habitat • Metrics on the recruitment of benthic encrusting organisms and fish • Increase in recreations, usage 29 4 State of Florida State Expenditure P an In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed or ter a. Pasco County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of th's project is approximately 5 years, It is expected to start in 2021 and to end n 2025. Implementation of this gro.ect has been divided into four milestones, as shown in the chart below Prell urinary design Final design and permitting Construction Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Pasco County has days aped a pre iminary total cost estimate of $600,000 for this project, based on experience with their offshore artificial reef program. Pasco County is committed to allocating $500,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component, and $100,000 of its Direct Component funds to this protect. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below. Preliminary design $50,000 $o Planning Subtotal $50,000 so Final design and permitting $50,000 $50,000 Construction $450,000 $450,000 Implementation Subtotal $500,000 $500,000 Monitoring $60,000 $0 Total Cost $600,000 $500,000 Spill Impact Component $500,000 Direct Component $100,000 Other Grants or car -fund no $0 Other County funds $0 Total Secured Funding $600,000 Budget Shortfall $0 0 18 FishAmerica Foundation SAI Atilt coil Reef Construction and Monitoring S.49 Sport Fish Restorat on Program ; H) SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Pa rtnersh i ps/Col la bo ration Pasco County will collaborate with the Flor da Artificial Reef Program managed by the Florida Fish and Wild ife Conservation Commission. This ctriaboration nc;udes representatives from near ;y all coastal counties in Florida and assists with material collection resources, technical construction assistance, artificial reef construction best practices, and outreach 296 Project Description State of Florida State Expenditure Plan 337 Figure IS A. Location of the proposed Coastal Environmental Research Network iCERN) facility at Werner SECTION A. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities and (3) ensure the long-term sustainability of coastal natural resources through enhanced public education. ff T Coastal Environmental Research Netwo& A future phase of the program (Tier 4) will inc nos the construction of a Pasco Institute for Env ronmental Resea-c~% and Ed-,ronicin research facility at Werner Boyce State Park. The long-term goal of the program is to establish an example for school boards in other Nor do Gulf coast counties to follow, thus establisning a network of sim lar resources. Efforts are under way to estate ish affiliated programs in the Florida Keys and the Florida panhand e. Figure 15-415 shows the potential Coastal Environmental Research Network along the Flor-cla Gulf Coast, Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf ;�-F State of Honda State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activities: * Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wi'dlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region 1primary) a E igible Activity 4: Workforce development and job creation Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goal: @ Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Han tat This pro.ect is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective B. Promote Natural Resource Stewardship and Environmental Education (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Halstats Implementing Entities The Pasco County School Board wrl be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsib'e for the des gn, permitting, construction, and success monitoring of the program. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment This is primarily an environmental education and facility improvement program; therefore, a Best Availab a Science analysis is not applicable. This program is cons'dered to be feasible with respect to the ability to: (1) secure necessary property agreements and Perm ts; (2) rehabilitate and construct the proposed facilities, and (3) operate and maintain the improved facilities over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties There are no risks or uncertainties associated with the proposed facility'rnprovements and enhanced public environmental education, as the program will be implemented by the Pasco County School Board, However, there s some uncertainty with regard to the ability to expand the Coastal Environments' Research Network to other Flor da Gulf Coast counties, and to maintain and grow In a network over time, No other Consortium member counties have proposed similar programs for inclusion in the State Expenditure Plan. Success Criteria and Monitoring This pro,ect wili improve public environmental education, engage students in local coastal monitoring and habitat restoration activities, and potentially create local jobs in various environmental fields. Therefore, a range of appropr'ate success criteria will be developed and described n the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for • Number of students annually enrolled in the program • Acres of habitats restored • Number of local environmental jobs created 299 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design evil be described that addresses data collection and assessment merhodologies for the above-listed criteria. Pasco County is comm had to conducting the monitoring necessary to quantify pro.ect benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of ti�is project is approximalely 4 years- It is expected to start in 2029 and to end in 2032. Implementation of this project has been div dad into 'our milestones, as shown in the chart below. Purchase pontoon research vessel EMC renovations Construct academy, Welcome center and research facil ty Success man toring Budget and Funding Sources Purchase pontoon research vessel EMC renovations Construct academy, welcome center and research faci sty Implementation Subtotal Monitoring Sp!ll !mpact Component Direct Component Other grants or cc- funding Other County funds $150,000 $150.000 $850,000 $850,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $2.000,000 $100,000 $100.000 $2,100,000 $2 00, TJ-D State of Honda State Expenditure Plan Pa rtnerships/Col la boration The Pasco County School Board proposes to partner and collaborate with a number of local and regions education institutions, including, but not limited to. • Pasco Hernando State College • St, Leo University • St. Petersburg College • Tallahassee Community College-Wakulla Environmental Institute • Florida State University Marine Lab atTurkey Point • University of South Florida•Florida Institute of Oceanography • University of West Florida in SECTION V1 Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION This project involves stockpiling clean concrete material and transport no it to existing permitted Pasco County artif-ctal reef site in coastal waters „The focus of this project is to re-permit and augment the Hudson Reef. The general location of the Pasco County artific al reefs is shown in Figure 15-BA, provide 11) hard substrate to support encrusting and Pasco County, colonial benthic organisms such as sponges and core a, {2} niche space for small marine invertebrates; and (3) shelter for larval and juvenile fishes The protect s justified by the demonstrated benefits of artificial reefs lkda s at al., 20111. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of th s project is to augment existing permitted Pasco County artif,ciai reef s tea with clean concrete and other suitable construction materia!s as well as sun <en vessels and manufactured artif cial reef balls.The objectives of the project are to. (1) support the increasing recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba Figure 1 5-5A, Location of the Hudson Reef sites offshore of J Y iae•]4 Erih �n , '�•� k � o m o n v� CD Q - o CD (D a n 7D 0 CD M n� CJ SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf T9is project will. (1) support the increasing recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba diving opportunities by both residents and twinste and (2) enhance the abundance, dist6bution, and structural diversity of hardbottom habitat in Pasco County offshore waters Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is cons .stmt with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activity: • El-g Actin ty 10. Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast reg on, including recreational fishing (primary) • Elig his Activity 1: Restoration and protect on of the natural resources. ecosystems, fisheries, mar ne and wildlife habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of vie Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th!s proleer is consistent w th, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: * Goal 5: Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy (primary) * Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat * Goal 3 Rep:enish and Protect Living Coastai and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol'ow Ccmprehensive Plan Ob.ectives: • Object ve 8 Restore, Diversify, and Rev talize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Env ronmentai Restoration Projects (primary) • Ob.:ect:ve 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats e Ob.ect-ve I Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Habitats Implementing Entities Pasco County will t:e the sole implementing entity and grant sub-ireciment responsible for the permitt-rig, construction, and success monitoring of the program. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment State of Flor-da State Expend lure Plan a Adams, C,, et at, 201 The economic benefits associated with Florida's artificial reefs. ELMS document FE649 a Surface, S.A,, Martin, T, Bundrick, CM. 1994, Factors affecting fish assemblage development on a modular artificial reef in a northern Gulf of Mexico estuary, Bull, Mar, Sci. 55 (2-3), 319-332 a Phase, R, 2013. Artificial Reefs of the Gulf of Me loco A Review of Gulf State Programs & Key Considerations. National Wildlife Federation. Lindberg, WJ., at at, 2074. Rationale and Evaluation of an Artificial Reef System Designed for Enhanced Growth and Survival of Juvenile Gag, Mycteroperca microlepis, Proc, 66th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute November 4-8. Corpus Christi, 7X Pages 320-325, # Swett et al., 2011. Economic Impacts of Artificial Reefs for Six Southwest Florida Counties Florida Sea Grant. This project is feasible with respect to the ability to: 111 obtain necessary permits; (2) construct the project w,th n the proposed budget and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term The permitting of Pasco County offshore artificial reef sites has been facilitated through Nationwide U.S, Army Corps of Engineers permits and through PWC: for shiespecific state criteria. Furthermore, this project is consistent with the Nat canal Artificial Reef Plan published in 1985, and the Florida Artificial Reef Strategic Plan (FINS, 2003). Risks and Uncertainties No significant risks or uncertainties were elentif ad during the evaluation of this project that wou it preclude project implementation. Pasco County will ensure design to 'innit damage from trop cal storms Controls for lionfish and other no sance/exotic species may be required Reign story constraints wi I address issues such as spatial bounder as for navigation, channels, marine habitat resources, historic areas, sand borrow areas, ex sting structures and leases, etc. Success monitoring is critical in a fisher-es management context given these reefs have not previously been used as f sheries management tools. Success Criteria and Monitoring This artificial reef project involves the placement of hard substrate to: support recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba diving opportunities, and enhance the abundance, distribution, and structural divers ly of hardbottom habitat in the affected waters Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and described in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative Success criteria will be developed for Increase in the coverage of new artificial reef habitat Metrics on the recruitment of benthic encrusting organisms and fish ■ Increase in recreational usage The proposed project will be constructed consistent with the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission's Guidelines for Artificial Reef Materials (2004), In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria, Pasco County is comm'tted to conducting the mon�toring necessary to quantify project benefits, ski: SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximate y 5 years. It is expected to start in 2025 and end in 2029. Implementation of this project has been divided into four mi eateries, as shown in the chart below. Hudson Reef permit renews CoPect, prepare. and stage reef materials Transport material to perm tied reef arras Success Man toring Budget and Funding Sources Pasco County has developed a preliminary Iota cost estimate of $150,000 for this pro.ect, based on experience with their offshore artificial reef program, Pasco County is committed to allocating $100,000 of its share of the Florida So 11 Impact Component, and $50,000 of its D reef Component funds to this project. A summary of the project budget and f unding sources is provided in the table below. Hudson Reef permit renewal $20,000 $0 Cal act, prepare, and stage reef malaria's $20,000 so Transport and p ace material at Farm tied saes $100.000 $100,000 Partnerships/Collaboration The Pasco County Artificial Reef Program routinely collaborates w In the Florida Artificial Reef Program managed by the Florida Fish andWildlife Conservation Commiss on This col-aboration includes representatives from nearly a.1 coastal counties in Florida and assists with mater-al collection resources, technical construction assistance, artif.cial reef construction best practices, and outreach �-Jkl State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION NEED AND JUSTIFICATION This project will alleviate the flooding by increasing stormwater pipe s'zos and will provide for enhanced water quality through installation of specific BMPs for proper treatment of urban runoff (see Figure 115-6B). III DARKIPURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to rehabilitate fin ing segments of an aging storm water management system in the city of New Port Richey.The objectives of the pro.ect include (1) reduce the frequency of flood events, - C..7 Figure 15-W, Location of Madison Street and Gulf Drive Stormwater project areas, . / /•�f fIt � 'f * v •'_, �b{i ,,: ;• PPP - 71 � . _ a. S _ *°�"'• Ili- Al�.•�'.�•+'h. "i - fi+"•�6 r r 1 - . r. _ •.� �- *lei' :'t"_�. State of F onda State Expenditure Plan Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th a project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: * Goal 2; Restore Water 0 uig ity and Quantity (primary) * Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat * Goal 3 Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 2: Restore, Improve and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Pasco County will be the project grant sub-recipient, and will pass through grant funds to the City of New Port Richey per an interlocal agreement The City wou d be the so a implement ng entity responsib!e for the permitting, construct on, and success monitor:ng of the project, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Roadway Grope have been well st,d-ed and described in the fo lowing Florida Department of Transportation report land references cited within), and the stormwater issues that this project wi I address have been addressed in a project-specific basin study. * Florida Department of Transportation d"•OD Drainage Handbook. Office of Design. Dra;nage Section, 2012. City of New Fort Richey River Basin Study. Review of Storrs ter Discharge to the Pitheichasookee River, prepared for the City of New Port Richey by OHS Environmental, LLC, May 2016. Conceptual design has been completed for this project. used on initial reviews this project is determined to be feasible and pennittable. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of th project, no a gnificant risks or uncertainties have been identified. Retrofits no of urban roadways for water quantity and quality improvements a feasible and these activ'ties are frequently implemented. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will reduce flood.ng and surface water pollutant loads from urban storm titer runoff. In addition, the project will also improve water quality and habitat condit'ons in downstream race ving waters. Therefore, a range of success cr'teria will be deve aped in the project grant request. It a ant:cipated that quantitative success criteria w!ll be developed for: ■ Reduction in the frequency and severity of flood events ■ Change in pollutant loadings pre- and post-construction "C-9 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be designed that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Pasco County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other regional water qual ty moniton-ig entities to quantify project benef -ts. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 5 years, including 2 years for success monitoring. It is expected to start in 2026 and to end :n 2030, :mplementation of this project has been divided into 5 milestones, as shown in the chart be ow. Feasits ity study (complete) Purl urinary des an Final des grypormitung JPhases I and I I Construction (Phases I and 111 Su--cess monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Prel minary des an Final dos:gii and permitting (Phases I is 111 Constru---tion (Phases I & I I 2MEEMEMM Implementation Subtotal Stall impact compone -it Direct component City of New Port Richey Other gra -its or co-f u riding Other Pasco County funds Total Secured Funding $1,321,600 $56.250 $56,250 $56,250 $56,250 $84,390 $84,390 $1,141,260 $884,760 $1.22s,fiso $969,150 $39,700 so 51,321,600 $1,025,400 M State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Pa rtn r i ps/Col l ration i Pasco County will continue to collaborate with the City of New Port Richey and Southwest Florida Water Management [District in the design and implementation of this project. .3tt SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description 4 4 99 A t L Figure 15-7A, Location of Crews Lake in Pasco County, 312 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan ti Wr__ 7 T' -" .. - , k - X� - V" T L I dA L 4 A- Figure 15-70, Aerial photograph showing the crawatered send tion of Crews Lake PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of th a project is to d-vert h ghly treated rec'aurned water from a County-owned regional wastewater treatment plant to Crews Lake. Project objectives include: (1) restoration of a more natural hydrology and aquatic ecology in Crews Lakes, and (2) augmentation of regional aquifer recharge in the headwaters of the Anclote River, which flows to the Gulf of Mex co. The wevand restoration area layo. t cons'sts of an application area constructed using existing onsite berms and adding two constructed berms- Figure 15-7C shows a schematic of the wetland rehydration engineering plan The appl capon area w:11 be created by constructing a re'sed berm (Berm 21 that starts from the existing western berm and extends around the western perimeter of the site, enclosing a total of 135 acres, An additional small berm (Berml) will be constructed with-n the application area to prevent short-circuiting from the inlet of the wetfand air SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities system direct y to the south. Within the applicat:on area, a 4-acre mitigation wetiand marsh will be created to account for the wetland impacts related to the construct of the !.we berms. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent w-th, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activity ■ Eligible Activity 1: Restorat:o-i and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, f sheries, marine and wi'dlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol!owing Comprehensive Plan Goals: * Goa 1: Restore and Conserve Flab tat * Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives • Objective T: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Flab tats • Objective 2 Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources {primary) 9M Figure 15-W, C"' rev,� Like P 3r State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Implementing Entities Pasco County will be the sole imp entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring of the project, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment A feasibility study has been conducted for th a project, including predictions of hydrologic, ecology cal, and water quality benefits, as c-ted below: # CH2M Hill, 2011. Crews Lake Natural Systems Restoration Facisprtlity Study, Final Report, Prepared for PCVSB, March 2071. 746 pp. 'rhis project is consistent with the goals and object ves of the follow ng natural resource management plan: Southwest Florida Management District (SN/FVNNW_2001, Springs Coast Comprehensive Watershed Management Plan This project is currently in the conceptual design stage and is being independent y reviewed for feasibility, perm-tab!lity, and cost estimates. used on initial reviews, this project is determ-ned to be feasible w-th respect to permhola Illy and ability to maintain the system over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of thus project, no signif.cant risks or uncerta'nties have been identified. The is scharge of treated wastewater effluent to augment wetland hydrology and to improve downstream water quality is al'owable under state rules. Risks related to an adjacent sinkhole are present, though geotechnical investigations and subsequent solutions are being incorporated into the design to mitigate those risks Success Criteria and Monitoring Specific success criteria will be developed in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for the fol owing * Welland restoration {acres restored) * Changes in water levels and flows in Crews Lake ■ Changes in concentrations of reclaimed-water-associated nutrient pollutants'n Crews Lake In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be des that addresses data collect;on and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria, Pasco County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other reg anal water quality monitoring entit'es to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 12 years, including 2 years for success monitoring. It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2029. Feasibility and preliminary des gn were started in 2016 and are undergoing peer review at this time. Implementation of th a project has been divided into five milestones, as show n in the chart below. v 15 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Fees lel-ty study llcomp'eil:0 Pridim nary design Final design /permitting Construction Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Feasibility study (complete) $0 $0 Preliminary design $246,000 $246,000 Planning Subtotal $246,000 $246,000 Final design and permitting (Phases I & 21 $790,720 $790,720 Construction (Phases 1 A 2) $7766,000 $363.280 ImpEementration Subtotal $8,556,720 $1,154,000 Success monitor no $120,000 so Total Cost $8,676,720 $1,400,000 SECURED FUNDING SOURCES Spill Impact Component $1, 400,000 0 rest Component Other grants or co-funding Other Pasco County funds Total Secured Funding $1,400,000 Budget Shortfall $7276,729 Natural Resource Damage Assessment F19 Conservation Technical Assistance F21 Watershed Protection and F:ood Prevent of F27 Regional Conservation Partrandt p Program (RCPPI F52 North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) Small [;rents F.53 NAWCA. Standard Grant Five Star and Urban Waters Restoration Grant Program 0 43 Southeast Aquatics 5 07 Flood IN it gation Assistance Program S 09 Pre. D seater Mitigation Program S 36 Water Projects S 52 SWFW1ND Cooperative Funding Initiative :i 1F: State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Pa irtnerships/Col laboration Pasco County will continue to collaborate w th Southwest Fonda Water Management District in the design and -mplementation of this project SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description L Q this area. There is an opportunity to Improve all of these conditions through the acquisit-on of parcels currently owned by the Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA), a private mil,ty, the conso illation of these 1 46 : 0 f 98 4 1121- -5 kL. - - ti - - c rce s w - a): st.ng see ounty—owned land, and Figure 15-8A, General location of the Ranch Road water the development of a new Pasco County —owned park quality improvernent project. served by upgraded county storm water and wastewater facilities. The project area and subject parcels are shown In Figure 15-813 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of ths project is to acqjire two parcels currently owned by a private utility, and to integrate these parcels into a new County-owned park served by upgraded county stormwater and wastewater facil,des. Project olsectives -nClLcIe- Of reduce local street and resident'.al flooding, (2) improve treatment of roadway runoff, .3 "L rim fl� ±6 dnftf a %E4'_ 95 tl . . . . . . ..... m 0 m en — M cn — a U CD _0 C CD Ln SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the feel owing RESTORE Act eligible activ ty. 0 Eligible Activity 7: Coastal flood protection and related infrastructure Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is cons stent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity 1primary) Goal 1 , Restore and Conserve Ran tat • Goal 3: Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources Th s project is consistent vv th and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Object-ves: • Objective 2. Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1= Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resource,-; Implementing Entities Pasco County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring of the project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Roadway best management practices have been well studied and described in the following Florida Department of Transportation report (arid references cited w-th:n), and the stormwater issues that this project w'I- address have bee addressed in a project-spec fic basin study- - Florida Department of Transportation (FDOO Drainage Handbook. Office of Design, Drainage Section, 2012. City of New Hart Richey River Bieun Studv- Review of Storm Per Discharge to the Pithlachascoree River, prepared for the City of New Port Richey by GHS Environmental, LLD, May 2016 Conceptual des an has been completed for th a project. Based on in teal reviews, this project is determined to be feasible and perm,ttable. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of th a project, no significant risks or -incertainties have been identif,ed. Retrof-o-ng of urban roadways for water quant ty and quality mprovements is feasible and these activities are frequently implemented, In addition, FGUA is a will:ng sel at of the subject properties 321f- State at Florida State Expenditure Plan Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will reduce flooding and surface water pollutant loads from urban storm water runoff, In addition, the project will also improve water quality in downstream receiving waters. Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in the project grant request, It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: • Redu or on in t -i a frequency and severity of f end events • Change in po Intent loadings pre- and post-construction In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be designed that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed cr'ler;a. Pasco County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other reg'onal water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of th a project is approximately 4 years. It is expected to start in 2029 and end in 2032. Implementation of this project has been broken down into five milestones, as shown in the chart below. Preliminary design Property assessment Property acquis lion Final design and Farm rung Construction Budget and Funding Sources This project is in the conceptual design stage, but Pasco County has days aped a prelmn nary cost eart mate of $2,710,000, including property acquisition Pasco County is committed to alrocat ng $278,000 of as share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to We project, and wil'be pursuing several other sources of leveraged funding. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided n the table below. Preliminary design $40,000 $40,000 Property assessments $40,000 $40,000 Planning Subtotal $80,000 $80,000 Property acquisition $2,000,000 $198,000 Final design and permits no $60,000 $0 Construction $550,000 $0 Inquent ant ation Subtotal $2,710,000 $0 Success monitor ng $20,000 $0 Total Cost $2,810,000 $278,000 321 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Spill Impact Component Direct Component Other gio -its or co-funding Other County funds IMBINIM20M S.36 Water Projects S, 52 SW MD Connotative Fund ng lnruativ,z Partnerships/Col laboration Pasco County ant-rapates collaborating with the Southwest Florida Water Management District in the design and implementat.on of this project. �2- State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION NEED AND JUSTIFICATION increased hydrologic residence time, and accumulation of organic sediments Beginning in the early 1990s, water quality degraded significantly, primarily becaise of frequent and severe blue-green algae blooms. In addimn. sport fish stocks declined and nuisance aquatic vegetation prof feraned, In partnership with state and regional agencies, Pinellas County developed and adopted the Lake Semino!e Watershed Management Plan (LSWMP) in 2004.The LSWMP` recommended six structural projects to restore ake water quality, habitats, and fish wildlife populatons. Most of these projects involved retrofitting advanced storm Ater treatment systems into older urban development, as well as the erad:cat on of evot c aquatic vegetation followed Rgurs 16-1A, Lake Seminole location map. i� :i� ' T R ip, � „fP NM 4 M • , *+ l F 9 +J1 t } r ' • A ��m w State of Florida State Expend lure Plan from Lake Seminole, and wi'l reduce current n trogen load ngs from Lake Sernincle to Boca Class Bay by approximately 56 percent. Boca Ciega Bay is nitrogen lint led, therefore, nitrogen load reductions are prod cted to improve water clarity and increase seegrass acreage in the bay. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fo:lowing RESTORE Act eligible activity. Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources. ecosystems, fisheries, mar ne and vin c1lif a habitats, beaches, and coastal wet ands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This protect is consistent with, and addresses, the fo!lowing Comprehens-ve Plan Goals. * Goal 1 Restore and Conserve Flab tat * Goal 2 Restore Water Oualhy and Quantity (primary) * Goal 3: Replenish and Protect Living Coasts and Marine Resources This protect is consistent with, and addresses, the fo lowing Comprehens ve Plan Objectives 4- Ottect ve 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Object ve 21 Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources 1primary) • Object ve 3 Protect and Restore Living Coasts and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Pinellas County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring of this project Pinellas County has coordinated extensively with the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWM D) in the planning, fees oil ity one lious, design, and permitting of the project, Feasibility Assessment and Best Available Science - AS4EC-BC1 2011. Lake Seminole Sediment Removal Project Preliminary Design Report, Final Report submitted to Pinellas County. '12t SECTION V- Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities In the approved bid for pro.ect construction, the contractor proposed mod,fications for handling of spa I material. and negotiated these modificawns with Pinellas County. Accordingly, the state and federal permits need .a be amended to reflect the mod -fled approach. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this project, no a gnificant r-sks or uncertainties have been identified that would preclude implementation. This project is ready to begin permit modification and construccon. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will affect water quality in a coastal lake, and water quality and submerged aquatic vegetation in an adjacent estuar system, Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and described in the project grant request It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for. In the project grant request, a deta!led monitoring program design wi I be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodo:ogies for ti ab:)ve- listed criteria. Pinellas County implements an ambient water qual ty monitoring program in county surface waters, and is committed to conducting the men rating necessary to quant-fy project benefits. Project Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project from permit modification through success monitoring is approximately 6 years It is expected to mart in 2018 and end in 2023 Implementation of this project has been divided into four phases, as shown in the milestone chart below, DMMA design Modification of permits Construction - dredging Success monitor-rig ': 23 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Budget/Funding and Leveraged Resources Pinellas County has committed to allocating $2,660,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to this project. The remaining $16,000,000 in project costs will be funded by Pine las County, and cooperative:y funded by the SWFWMD. A summary of the funding sources for this project is provided in the ;ab!e be'ow. DMMA design Perm ding modif cations, Construction - dredg-ng IHEMM� Implementation Subtotal Spill Impact Component Direct Component SWFWMD Cooperative funding Other County funds Partnerships/Collaboration $200,000 $200,000 $260,000 $260,000 18,200,000 $2.200,000 $18,660,000 $2.660,000 $200,000 so $18,860,000 $2,860,000 Pinellas County has partnered with the Southwest Florida Water Management District in the development of the Lake Seminole Wa Management Plan as well as the implementation of projects specified in that document. The Southwest Florida Water Management Draft ct has committed to co-funding the implementation of this pro'.ect QUA SECTION V- Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION 32e Figure 16-M. General location of the Pinellas County Wastewater Collection ystern improvements project, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan sewer corection system within certain resident-owned mobile home Parks, turning the improved systemba over to Pine'las County to own and operate. This project will improve water quality by reducing I&I, which is a source of SSOrs and increased flows to the South Cross Bayou Wastewater Reclamation Fac lity, and the removing these pollution sources ropacting Tampa Bay, PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to identify the sources of, and reduce, domestic wastewater I&I in the unincor- porated Lake Seminole and Lealman areas of the Pinellas County. The object ves of the project are to (1) improve water quality in nearby waterbodies, Lake Semino:e, and Sawgrass Lake and (2) reduce nutrient and bacterial loads discharged downstream to Long Bayou and Boca Ciega Say, a segment of theTempa Bay estuarine system. PROJECT COMPONENTS The project addresses failing wastewater infrastructure in some of the oldest deve'aped areas in unincorporated Pinellas County, Whi:e the general problem areas have been ode-itified, a comprehens ve feasibility and preliminary design study needs to be conducted. The project consists of the follow ng components: Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent w th, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act of g'ble activities: 9 Slut his Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildl fe habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the foal owing Comprehensive Plan Goals: 9 Goal 2: Restore Water Dual -ty and Quantity (primary) ■ Goal S. Replenish and Protect Living Coasts and Mar'ne Resources -3�9 SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing Comprehensive Plan Objectives: o Objective 2: Restore, improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) * Objective 3: Protect and Restore Div ng Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Pinellas County will be the sale imp ement ng entity and grant sub-recipient responsib a for the feasiblity studies, design, permitting, construct on, operation and maintenance, and monitor ng of this project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment This project is consistent with the goals of the following natural resource management plans: PBS J, 2001. The Lake Seminole Watershed Management Plan. Prepared for the Pinellas County Public Works Department. w PBS&J, 2007 The Lake Seminole Watershed Reasonable Assurance Plan. Prepared for Pinellas County. Tampa Bay Estuary Program, 2017 Charring the Course: The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CC1t4P) for Tampa Bay (August 2017 Reosiord The project appears to be fees his from a constructability standpoint In addition to replac ng private sewer pipes, several pipe rehabilitat-on methods to reduce I&I are widely used and accepted Once tne feasibi ity study has been completed, requ-naments to one n cost fees bility w 11 become apparent. At that time. Pinellas County can determine how best to proceed Risks and Uncertainties Pipe-las County has not completed a protect-specif c feasibility study for th a project and rehabilitation methods have not been selected Th.s, project is in the conceptua' phase no study or design work has been completed on this project. Risks w 11 be clentified during the feasibility and design phases- Success Criteria and Monitoring This project wd: affect water quality n adjacent freshwater and estuarine systems. Spec-fic success criteria w 11 be deve:oped in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria w-11 be developed for the following - Number of Sept c systems taken off-line and/or linear feet of leaking sewer pipes replaced - Changes - n amb ant water quality (nutrient and bacterial concentrations) in nearby surface waters, includ ng '"D State of Florida State Expend ture Plan Lake Seminole, Sawgrass Lake, and Joes Creek Changes in the frequency and/or duration of algal blooms (as measured by chlorophyll-a) in n nearby surface waters, including Lake Seminole, Sawgrass Lake, and Joss Creek In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodolog for the above-listed criteria. Pinellas County currently implements a comprehens ve water quality monitoring program throughout Fired as Co.nty and in portions of Tampa Bay, and is committed to conducting the necessary monitoring and coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits, Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this protect, from fees bility study through construction and subsequent success monitoring, is approximately 6 years It is expected to start in 2020 and end in 2025. Implementation of th a project has been divided into four phases, as shown n the milestone chart below. Feasibility and prelim nary des gn Fine design and perm fling Construction Budget and Funding Sources Feasibility study $75,000 $75,000 Preliminary design $50,000 $50,000 Planning Subtotal $125,000 $125,000 Final design and Perm rung $650,000 $650.000 Construction 517,100,000 $4,780,000 Implementation Subtotal $17750,000 $5.430,000 Success monitoring $125,000 $125,000 Total Cost $18,000,000 $5,680,000 Spill Impact Component $5,680,000 Direct Component so 33- SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Other grants or co- funding Other Poe'las County funds Natural resource Damage Assessment F 19 Conservation Techn cal Ass stance F21 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention F43 Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs) Ent Clement Grart5 Fdg CDBGs Entitlement Grants Sect on 108 Loan Guarantees FS9 Urban Maters Sma:I Grants F53 Water Infrastructure Finance and innovation Act. (WIFIA) 0 43 Southeast Actuators S to Community P.anningTechn cal Assistance Grants S.'.3 F'orida Jots Growth Grant Fund Pa rtnerships/ of I a boration 33 $a $6 Total Secutred Funding , o Budget So !i State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION ZMM39= NEED AND JUSTIFICATION generate pollutants from failing wastewater le-g-, septic tanks) and inadequate stounwater treatment infrastructure. The costs associated with remediating flood damage and maintaining the development on these SRL properties are not sustainable over the long term. 'n addition, the Brooker Creek, Cross Bayou, Smith Bayou, Stevenson's Creek, and Curlew Creek watersheds ail have documented water quality impa'rments Figure 116-M. Restoration property acquisition location map. SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES PROJECT COMPONENTS Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This program will improve coastai resi'iency in Pinellas County by el unsustainable residential and commercial SRL properties and convert ns them to publ c ownership for later restoration of native habitats and coastal f,00dplain storage, In addit on, the project is expected to improve ambient water quality in several impaired waterbodies by removing le I no wastewater and storm ter treatment infrastructure. Implementing Entities Pinellas County wit; be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-mr: plant resincrisible for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring of this project, St re 16-313, Example E property in the Cross Bayou State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements Th a project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act elgible activity: * Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protect on of the natural resources ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildl fe habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast reg:on Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives i his project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: e Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat a Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) This project is consistent with, and addresses, the to lowing Comprehensive Plan Objectives. a Objective 1 Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats - Objective 2 Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) - Objective 5: Promote Community Resilience. Feasibility Assessment and Best Available Science This program is considered to be feasible with respect to the ability to: (1) acquire prior ty properties, (2) cuts n necessary permits" (3) raze ex-sting :'nf restructure and restore native habitats and coastal floodplain storage, and (4) effectively maintain the restored natural systems in perpetuity, The program is also consistent with the following adopted natural resource management plan: Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plot] (CCMo for Clearwater Harbor and St, Joseph Sound Janicki Environmental et al., 2011. Final report prepared for the Pinellas County Department of Environmental and Infrastructure and the Southwest Florida Water Management District Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of in a program, no significant r sks or uncertainties have been identified that would preclude implementation. Pine Jas County has dent fled charity properties and is ready to proceed with property acquisit ons Success Criteria and Monitoring Th a program will invis ve property acquis, tion and restoration, and is also expected to improve adjacent water qual ty via the removal of existing pollutant sources. Specific success criteria will be developed and described n the implementation grant request. It a ant cipated that quantitative success criteria wi,l be developed for: -Ir. . SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities - Acres of SRIL propert as acquired * Acres of acqu red properties restored - Changes in ambient water quality in the affected watersheds and impaired segments In the implementation grant request, a data led monitoring program des an w;ll be clescribuid that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above listed criteria. Pinellas County implements an ambient water quality monitoring program in County surface waters, arv:1 is committed to conducting the man tearing necessary to quantify project benefits, Project Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this pro.ect—from permit modification through success moritoring—s approximately 7 years. It is expected to start in 2026 and end in 2032. Implemertation of this project has been divided into six milestones, as shown in the milestone chart below. Budget/Funding and Leveraged Resources Pinellas County has estimated the total cost to acquire dentif ied pr-onty SRI p•operties to be approximately $10,000,000- Pinellas County is proposing to use $3,000,000 of their Spill impact Component a' ocation for property acquisition, w-th the remainder of the project cost to made up with other P pal as County finds. A summary of the project budget and funding sources for this program is provided in the tab a below. Property acquisit an Final design and permitting Construct an Momlar ng $200,000 $0 $250,000 $0 Planning Subtotal $450,000 $0 $3.000,000 $3,000,000 $100,000 $0 $6.400,000 $0 Implementation Subtotal $9,500,000 $3,000,000 $50.000 $0 Total Cost $10,000,000 $3,000,000 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Spill Impact Component Direct Component Other County funds Total Secumd Funding Budget Shortfall 0.43 Southeast Aquatics S 07 Flood M tigation Assistance Program S.47 Florida's State Wipilho Grants Program (Florida's Wildlife Legacy In trative) S 52 SWFWMD Cooperative Funding lnitsitiva $3,()00,000 $0 $7,000,000 $10,000,000 $0 Should additions leveraged funds become available, they will be used to conduct habitat restoration on the acq. jrecll propert es. Fea rtnersh ips/Col la boration Pinellas County partnered with the Southwest Flor-da Water Management District in the development of the Clearwater Harbor and St, Joseph Sound Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, as well as the implementation of projects specified in the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan, It is anticipated that Southwest Florida Water Management District will provide co-funding for restorat on of the acquired properties in the future, SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description NEED AND JUSTIFICATION PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES - he purpose o' this program a to acquire priority waterfront saes to augment pub I c access to coasts. waterways within the county. The objectives of the program are to: (1) increase public access to coastal waters and (2) enhance coastal zone recreational opportunities for residents and visitors PROJECT COMPONENTS This program involves two components: (1) property acquisition of strategica ly located waterfront parcels that can provide pub is access to coastal wa and 12) the construct:on of recreational amenities and .nfrastructure- Depending on the sites involved, amenities could include. boat ramps, fishing piers transient 'Qu Figure 16-4A, PublicAoterways location map. State of Florida State Expend tore Plan docks, and kayak launches, as well as supporting infrastructure such as parking lots, bathroom face itres, fish cleaning areas, and interpretive public educational kiosks. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Implementing Entities Pinellas County w'.11 be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring of projects completed under this program. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements ' TWJ4 n • g o se rye 4 e Figure 16-48, Location of boat ramps and sensitive marine resources in central Pinellas County. This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act el gable act'vity: a Elsils e Activity 10: Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast reg on, ricluding recreational f-shing Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Ttfs project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol ow rig Comprehensive Plan Goat • Goal 5 Restore and Revital ze the Gulf Economy This project a consistent with, and addresses, the following Gulf Consortium Objective: Object ve 8 Restore, Diversify, and Revita'ize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restoration Projects Feasibility Assessment and Best Available Science This program is consistent w th other marine resource protection objectives, Pinellas County provides excellent gu dance material to the public with regard to the locations of available access points as well as 339 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities sons live Marine resources. Figure 16-48 a a map of coastal boat ramp locations in the central county area from the Pinellas County webtate. This program is considered to be feasible with respect to the so lily to: (1) acquire priority properties, (2) obtain necessary permits, (3) construct recreations' amenit as, and (4) effectively operate and maintain recreational amen it as in perpetuity, Risks and Uncertainties Coastal park and recreational amenities are at risk for damage by tropics! storms and sea-!evel rise. However, the proposed recreational improvements wi I factor coastal storm hazards and sea-level rise into the design, as appropriate, Pinel!as County has identiCed priority properties and is ready to proceed with property acqUisitions and improvements. Success Criteria and Monitoring This program will involve property acquisition and the development of recreational amenities. Spec-fic siccess criter a will be develcized and described in the implementat on grant request It is anticipated that quant tative success cater a will be developed for, ® Acres of coastal access properties acquired * Increase in the number of public recreational users In the imp'ementation grant rettiest, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data col action and assessment methodo'og-es for the above-listed criteria. Pinellas County is committed to conduct ng the monitor no necessary to quantity project benef;ts. Project Milestones and Schedule The Iota' estimated time horizon of this pro.ect is approximately 4 years, It is expected to start in 2025 and and !n 2028. The project milestone crart is shown below via State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Feasibil:ty study Properly assessments Properly acquisition Success monitoring BudgeVFunding and Leveraged Resources Pinellas County has eaft mated the total cost to acquire and , improve identified priority waterfront properties to be approximately $2,000,000. Rnellas County's proposing to use $1,000,000 of their Spill Impact Component al ocation to implement this program, A summary of the cost and funding sources for this program is provided in the table be'ow. Fees Is lity study Property assessments I Ift I I I. $o $0 $0 $1,000,000 SO $0 $1,000,000 Implementation Subtotal Spill Impact Component Direct Component Other Grants or co-funding Other County funds Total Secured Funding Budget Shortfall Partnerships/Collaboration Pinellas County may partner with incorporated C ties within the county, as appropriate at certain sites $1,000,000 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $0 � -, I SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION This project involves stockp I ng clean concrete material and transport rag it to existing permitted Pinellas County art ficial reef sites.The general locakion of the Pme.'las County artificial reefs is shown in Figure 16-SA NEED AND JUSTIFICATION fishes. The project is justified by the demonstrated berrefitsof artificial reefs, such as increased economc activity (e.g , expenditures, incomes, and jobs) (Adams at al., 2011). PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to augment existing permitted P nellas County artific-al reef sites with clean concrete and other suitable construction materials, as well as manufactured artificial reef mater als.The objectives of the projert are to (1) support the increasing recreat anal demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba diving opportunities Figure 16-5A. Artificial reef location map. State of Florida Slate Expend lure Plan and of enhance the abundance, d'stribution, and structural diversity of hardbottom habitat in the county's coastal waters. Objectives are consistent with those of the Florida Fish and W ld-ife Conservation Commission's (FVVCs) artificial reef program out;ined below. PROJECT COMPONENTS This project involves two primary components. The f rat Pinellas County currently manages seven permitted artif'cial reef sites, as shown in Figure 16-58, Material acquired through this project will be distributed on the following 5 of the 13 permitted ones Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Pinellas County is the most dense y populated county in Florida, and the beaches and aquatic resources of the county support an enormous tourism industry. This project will: (1) support the increasing recreational demand for �,.W V, 0,40 WW41 IM IV A1 . !Z L Z A Pinellas County currently manages seven permitted artif'cial reef sites, as shown in Figure 16-58, Material acquired through this project will be distributed on the following 5 of the 13 permitted ones Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Pinellas County is the most dense y populated county in Florida, and the beaches and aquatic resources of the county support an enormous tourism industry. This project will: (1) support the increasing recreational demand for SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities offshore reef fishing and scuba diving opportunities by both residents and tour sts and (2) enhance the abundance, distribut on, and structural divers-ty of hardbottom habitat in Pinellas County offshore waters. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This projects consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act al is tale act-vit as: • Eligib!e Activity 10: Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast reg-on, including recreational fishing (primary} • Eligible Activity 1: Restoratio- and protection of the natural •esowces, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wi'dlife habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is cons'stent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 5: Restore and Revitalize the G,lf Economy (primary) • Goa' 1: Restore & Conserve Habitat • Goa' 3: Replenish & Protect Living Coasts & Merino Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol'owing Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Objective 8 Restore, Diversify, and Rev'jolize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environments Restorat on Projects (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance a -d Protect Hab tats • Orijective 3: Protect and Restore I-wing Coastal and Marine Habitats Implementing Entities Pinel as County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the permitting, construction, and success mon,tor'ng of the program. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Adams, C, et al., 200 1. The economic benefirs associated w.-,h Floridas artificial reefs. EMS document EE649 (2071). 7-6. Bortone, SA, Martin. T, Bundrick, C. M.. 1994. Factors affecting fish assemblage development on a modular artificial reef in a northem Gulf of Mexico estuary. Bull. Mar Sio 55 (2-3), 319-332. State of Florida State Expenditure Pan a Dkes, R., 2013. Artificial Reefs of the Gulf of Maorb:ol A Review of Gulf State Programs & Key Considerations. National Wildlife Federation Lindberg WJ, et al, 2014 Rationale and Evaluation of an Artificial Reef System Designed for Enhanced Growth and Survival of Juvenile Gag, Suradcroperca microlefed. Proc.66th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute November 4-8. Corpus Christi, TX Pages 320-325, a Swett at al. 2011 Economic Impacts of Artificial Reefs for Six Southwest Florida Counties Florida Sea Grant. permitting, des an, and mplementat:on of the proposed project. Risks and Uncertainties Success Criteria and Monitoring This artificial reef projec involves the placement of hard substrate to support recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba diving opportunities and enhance the abundance, distribut on, and structural diversity of hardbottom habitat in t affected waters, Therefore, a range of success criteria w 11 be deve'oped and described in the implementation grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria veil be deveroped for. * Increase in the coverage of new artificial reef habitat * Metrics on the recruitment of benthic encrusting organisms and fish a Increase in recreational usage The proposed project w 11 be constructed consistent with the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Corrinnnonon's Guidelines for - Artificial Reef Materials (2004). In the implementat on grant request, a detailed monitoring program design wi I be -34� SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities described that addresses data collection and assessment methodolog'es for the above-listed criteria. Pinatas County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quant:fy project benef is. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 4 years It is expected to start in 2025 and end 'n 2028. The antic'.pated project milestones and schedule are shown in the chart be'ow. Transport material to permitted reef sites Success mon taring Budget and Funding Sources Pinellas County has est mated the total cost of this project to be approximately $430,000 The project budget and secured fund-ng sources are shown in the table below. $380,000 $0 $0 $380,000 I Natural Resource Damage Assessment 0 18 FishAmenca Foundation S 11 Competitive Florida Econorn c Development Project Grant S 12 Competitive Flor do Partnership Grant S 13 Florida job Growth Grant Fund S 41 Art!f vial Reef Construction and Mon torir.g S 49 Sport Fish Restoration Program Partnerships/Collaboration The Pinellas County Artificial Reef Program routinely collaborates w-th the Florida ATtific'al Reef Program managed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commiss on. This collaborat on includes - epresentatives from nearly a'l coastal counties in Florida and assists with material collection resources, techn cal construct on ass stance, arrif vial 3_-'13 reef construction best practices, and outreach State of Florida State Expenditure Plan *19 i as CL X LU do —j LL In E 0 0 C 0 L) as 0 at as 4- 0 0 z I- 7 04 04 04 CL LU U) —j u- E SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Progmrns, and Activities J � State of Florida State Expend tare Plan relatively high sulfide co-icentrations. Figure 17-18- Palm River Utilities service area to be converted to central sewer If the septic systems stay in place service, and new ones are added to the area because of a lack of sewer infrastructure, dr!nking water safety could be compromised at these wells, PROJECT COMPONENTS The Delaney Creek/Palm River Heights Septic to Sewer Convers-on project consists of the following three components, • Conduct a feasibility st,dy to determine how many units are involved, as well as var-ous sing neenng alternatives. • Extend Hillsborough County's existing wastewater infrastricture to the Delaney Creek/Palm River area to provide central-zed sanitary sewer serv!ce, ■ Provide connect one to the sewer system, including new lines and litt(purnping scat ons as needed. -�4g ET(( ; Proposed Projects, Programs, a nd Activities Wisborough County has an adequate wastewater co'lect:on and conveyance system, wastewater treatment, and effluent disposal capacity to provide service to the Palm River area at the Falkenburg Wastewater Treatmer t Plant MOIT!"), which has a 12- m;llon- gallon - per -day (mgd) annual average daily flow. The Falkenbuis WVVTP provides advanced wastewater treatment for its reclaimed water customers, and has a harm tted surface discharge to the Palm River to wet - weather effluent disposal, Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This project will improve water quality conditions in waterbod as that contribute to Tampa Bay, the largest estuary in Florida. Th-s protect will help to improve water ual-ty in Delaney Creek and the Palen River, as well as downstream in East Ray, by moving wastewater from ag rig septic systems to an advanced wastewater treatment facility, thereby reducing nutrient and bacteria loads to grourdwater and surface waters The extension of a centralized sewer system into this economically depressed area will a'so increase property va ues and encourage redevelopment o' currently unimpmved parcels in the project area. Th s will, in turn, revitalize the local economy and grow Hillsborough County's tax babe. The proposers project will also increase local workforce development and job creation Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and add the following RESTORE Act e.igible activity: Eligible Activity 1; Restoration and protection of the natural resources. ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wild;ife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals n Objectives This project is consistent with, and add the fol;owing Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goal 3: Rep:enish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the folic ing Comprehensive P:an Objectives' • Ob '.ective 2, Restore, Improve, and ProtectWater Resources (primary) • Objective 3: Protect and Restore L.ving Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entiti Hi Isborough County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub - recipient responsible for the feasibility studies, des on, permitting, constructor, operation and mairlenance, and monitoring of this project. Est Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The relationship between old and failing septic .systems and water qual:ty problems in Delaney Creek, and potential pollutant load reduct ons associated with septic -to -sewer conversions in this area, can be reasonably inferred. Nitrogen load reduction inTampa Ray is a major focus of theTampa Ray Estuary Program and its partners, and this project is consistent with the goals set forth in the following document: Tampa Bays Estuary Program, 2017 Charting the Course: The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan for Tampa - ,august 2012 Revision. 0 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Risks and Uncertainties This project is conceptus' at this time, as a feasibility study and alternatives analysis has not yet been conducted However, this type of project can be engineered for the types of conditions present in this locale. Finally, r ght-of-way is available for the new sanitary sewer system and H,Ilsborough County owns a parcel of land that can be used for a proposed sanitary sewer pumping (lift) station, Risks and uncertainties will be identified during the fees bility and preliminary design phases Success Criteria and Monitoring This pro,ect w 11 affect water quality in adjacent freshwater and estuarine systems. Specific success criteria will be developed in the project grant request It is anticipated that quantitat ve success criteria will be developed for the following • N tuber of septic systems taken off -line • Changes in ambient water qua ity (nutrient and bacterial concentrations) in Delaney Creek • Changes in the frequency and/or duration of algal booms (as measured by chlorophyll-a) in Delaney Creek in the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program deson will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Hillsborough County currently implements a comprehensive water quality monitoring program throughout Hillsborough County andTampa Bay, and is committed to conducting the necessary monitoring and coordinating w-th other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify pro:ec( benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total car mated time houzon of this project is appriwnrastely 9 years. It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2026. Implementation of this project has bee- divided into five phases, as shown in the milestone chart below. Fessilat'ity study Preliminary des:gn Final des on and permining Construction Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Feasibility study Prelim-nary design Final design and permilTing Construct on Moni Planning Subtotal Implementation Subtotal $50.000 $50,000 $$0,000 $50,000 $100,000 $100,000 $1,000.000 $1,000,000 $33,150,000 $5,750,000 $34,150,000 $6,850.000 $750,000 $750,000 S35 SO600,0110 So 11 Monet Component $7,600,000 Direct Component $0 Other grants or co-fund ng $0 Other County funds $0 Total Secured Funding $7600,000 Budget Shortfall $27,400,000 Natural Resource Damage Assessment F 19 Conservation Technics; Assistance F48 Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs) Entitlement Grants F49 CDBGs Entitlement Grants—Section 108 Loan Guarantees FS9 Urban Waters Small Grants F(ClWater Infrastructure Finance and nnovation Act (WiFlAi 0 43 Southeast Aquatics S 10 Community Planning Techn - cal Assistance Grants S 13 Florida Job Growth Grant Fund $113 Clean Water Slate Revolv us Fund (CWSRF) S.27 Noupoint Source Management Program (NPSM) Section 319 S.3SWater Polunon Control S.36 Water Projects S.52 SVVFVVMD Cooperative Funsfing; nit - alive Partnerships/Col laboratits n Hillsborough County has been a major partner wcrk in collaboration with the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, and Hilsborough County active y parts: pates in theTempa Bay Nitrogen Management Consortium This collaboration to improve water cital'ity in Tampa Bay ill cont nue. 3Ez State of Flor do State Expenditure Ran Project Description J 46 '7 elT J 92 7 4 - ir A "Water 7 K. Figure 17-2A, Location of the Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve onTampa Bay. 3 -,� f� r,, ��, .wry}~ s'4..,.r';. POW State at Florida State Expenditure Plan Figure 17-2C shows the Reeder Farms tract's location with n the boundaries of the Cockroach and P ney Point Creek Preserve, as wel as adjacent restored coastal uplands and created wetlands. From this figure, it can clearly be seen that the Reeder Farms tract is a critical central piece in the restoration of the preserve. Spill Impact Component funds are being requested to acqu re the Reeder Farms tract. Restoration design and construction costs will be shared between Hi-Isborough County and the SWONMD. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This project wil result in the restoration of native nab bits, hydrology, and water quality in a critical portion of Tampa Bay, The project builds upon the extensive public acquisition and restoration activ ties completed under Phase I of the Cockroach and Piney Point Creek Ecosystem Restorat on Pro.ect. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligib e activity: - Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystbms, fisheries, marine and wild ife nab tats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol,owing Comprehens ve Plan Goals * Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat (or mary) * Goal 2 Restore Water Quality and Quantity * Goal 3 Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives • Objective 1 Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats (primary) • Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources • Objective 3; Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Hillsborough County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for pool c acquisition of the Reeder Farms tract. Hillsborough County will coordinate extensively with the Sail MO in the design, permitting, construction, and monitoring of the restoration activities on the pares'. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment �S5 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Tampa Bay Estuary Program, 2012 Charting the Course: The Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan for Tampa —August 2017 Revision. Tampa Bay Estuary Program, 2070 Tampa Bay Estuary Program Habitat Master Plan Update. TBEP Technical Report #06-09. Final report prepared by PBSW Risks and Uncertainties Success Criteria and Monitoring This project involves the public acquisition of privately owned agr on lure, parcels, and habini4 restoration on the acqu red parse a Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and described in the imp'ementation grant request. It is anticipated that quanrtative success or ter:a will be developed for. • Acres of p-ivately-owned agriculture' lands acquired for conserver on and restorat'on • Acres of impacted agriculture. lands restored to funct!cnal native habitats • Changes in surface water qual-ty discharged to the Cockroach Bay Aquatic Preserve in the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design w 11 be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed or ratio Hil'sborough County is committed to coordinating the necessary monitoring to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total est,mated time horizon of this project is approximately 8 years, It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2026. The ant cipated project rn lestones and sched,le are shown in the chart be ow. Property appraisal Property acquisition F, riall design and perm tting Construction Success monitoring :S _3f:) State of F orida State Expend Lure Plan Budget and Funding Sources Nmmo-tE= Property acquisition Final design and permitting Construct on 11� Implementation Subtotal Spill Impact Component Direct Component Other grants or co-funding Other County funds Southwest F ends Water Management Denton F 19 Conserver on Technical Assistance 0 10 Climate Adaptation Fund Partnerships/Collaboration 6100,000 $100,000 $3,500,000 $150,000 $3,350,000 $6,900,000 $100,000 57,100, 0130 $100,000 $100,000 $3,500,000 $150,000 51,150,000 $4,800,000 $100,000 SSOD0,000 Hillsborcrugh County has collaborated with the Southwest F ends Water Management District an previous restoration activities conducted on the Cockroach and Piney Point Creek Preserve, where Southwest Florida Water Management District provided all fund us for the restoration design, permitting, and construction, The County will cone rare to work w'th Southwest Florida Water Management District to secure the necessary funding for all unfunded restoration elements associated with this project SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description agr cultural and urban deve!opmem, as well as changes in natural sal nary regimes due to watershed hydrolog c alterations The Manatee River was impounded in the mid-1960s to develop a reservoi r for public water supply. Since then, satin ty patterns in the Manatee River have been a tered from historic cond trons. n add Mori, oyster bars in the Manatee River were heavily dredged beginn no in the late loops to provide structural mater al for roads and buildings. Finally, urban and agricu-tural deve'cpmc!nt and associated point and nonp&t source pollut on resulted in water goal ty degradation, leading to the regulatory dusure of the Manatee River for shellfish harvest no- ' Figure 118-11A. Locagon of proposed oyster restoration in the Manatee River, l a � �� i � yy kR �� CD m -4 C? CD 0 7 - SL ED ED -u -Z3 CD n. Z:3 co cn SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities The proposed project is coris-stent with Gulf-wide obJecoves and restoration techniques outlined in the science-based Final Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, which presents detai ad information supporting the va us of oyster reef restoration MO AA, 2016). Project implementation will be consistent with Best Management Practices, as out ined by the Florida Department of Agricultural and Consumer Services (FDACS), Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf The proposed project will contribute to the recovery of the oyster reefs and the ecolog:cal sustainatal ity of the Manatee River and lowerTiampa Bay.The potentia: benef. of this and other oysier resto on projects are "Healthy, interconnected oyster populations form reefs that provide the hard sub. needed for oyster larvae to sett'e, grow, and sustain the population. In addition to prov-d'ng habitat for oysters, oyster reefs: (1) serve as habitat for a diversity of marine organisms, from small invertebrates to large recreationally and commercially mportant species such as stone crab, blue crab, red drum, and back drurm (21 provide structural nteguty that reduces shoreline erosion, and (3) improve water qua'ity and help recycle nutrients by f1tering large cluant ties of water" (Grabowski at al., 2012„ NKWA, 2016), The proposed project wrl serve as a us facto oyster sanctuary and nursery for future oyster recruitment because shellfish harvesting within the propose: project site is currently prohibited by FDAC due to water quality condit ons- Water quality lruproveme-.ts and reduced strand ne erosion may als-D be anticipated as beneficial consequences of the proposed Project, and w th other vewer cjua=rty improve-gents it is fees his to plan for the reopening of shellfish harvesting in the Manatee River Economically, oyster. set habitats, associated I ishe'ies, and ocean resources in general are also minortant to sustained tours m and the economic vitality of Manatee County. Tourism is the largest producing industry in the Manatee/Sarasota area, and the coastal zone of these two count es is responsible for more than 10 percent of the gross regional product from ocean resources along Florida's Gulf Coast (Florida Oceari Al ance, 2013), 331 Flavor 18-11C, A typical nearshore site for oyster restoration in the Manatee River. State of Honda State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements The proposed project is cons'stent with, and addresses, the follow ng RESTORE Act eligible activities • El gible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisher as, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wet'ands of the Gulf Coast region (primary) • Eligible Activity 2: Mit:gat'on of damage to fish, wildlife, and natural resources • E ig.'ble Activity 4 Workforce development and job creation Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This pro is consistent w-th, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal I Replenish and Protect L ving Coastal and Mar ne Resources (primary) • Goa 1. Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 4: Enhance Community Resilience • Goal 5: Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing Comprehensive Ran Objectives * Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources (primary) * Ob 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats * Objective 5: Promote Community Resil'ence ■ Consortium Objective 8: Restore, Divers fy, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restoration Projects Implementing Entities Manatee County will be the implementing ent'ty and grant sub-recipient responsible for the design, permitting, construction, operation and maintenance, and monitoring for the proposed project. Manatee County staff will coordinate with appropriate agencies during planning and implementation of th a project, and may co-laborate with agencies or other entities via leveraging and other funding agreements. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The proposed project approach is justif ed by the use of traditional cultching of degraded reefs as a management technique a ioW ng resource managers "to mitigate resource losses, increase oyster product on, and contribute direct -.C' 1 f'� { yr��tirn� • Yi 'r -✓r'.f .: ' l J "Y� -fvs ;Y: "F.8'` � - P L � - JL State of Florida State Expenditure Plan ■ lonely A K, et a[., 2009, Eastern oysters lCiessestrea virginice) as an indicator for restoration of everglades ecosystems. Ecological Indicators Se 5120- 5136 w so Ermoncom, R et at, 2013. Quantifying the Loss of a Marine Ecosystem Service Filtration by the Eastern Oyster in US Estuaries. Estuaries and Coasts (X)13126' 36. Risks and Uncertainties critical to managing project risks and uncertainties. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will restore oysters in areas where natural oyster reefs and populations have been degraded. Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in the project grant request It a ant-cipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for, * Increases in area' extent of oyster reefs * Increases in average reef height * Increases in oyster density * Oyster size-frequency distribution representative of a sustainable oyster population More specific quantitative criteria will be developed w0 planing and monitoring frameworks developed for oyster reef restoration or enhance mentin the Gulf (NO AA, 2016) Criteria for three environmental variables (water temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen) are also recommended (Baggett at al,, 2014). Well-defined goals and objectives. statistically suff orent monitoring designs, and project documentation are absent from any restoration projects (NAE, 20171 but are critical to the success of the proposed protect. The project grant request will include a detailed monitoring program design that addresses goals, objectives, data collection, and data assessment and evaluation for these success criteria. Monitoong data will be used to inform phased construction implemented using an adaptive management approach. Manatee County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits. SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule — he total es rotated time horizon of this project, from planning through success monitoring, is approximately 16 years. .t is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2033, Construction will be in two phases w-th comp'et-on with n 12 years following planning, design, and perm'tting, Monitoring is panned so inform and support this and future restoration projects and will continue for 2 years after each construction phase- Implementation of this project has been div-ded into four m lestones, as shown in the chart below Project design Permitting RestoratiorSbarge shelling Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Sol I Impact Component Dawl Co-r Other grants or co-funding Other County funds Total Cost $2,628,090 Total Secured Funding Budget Shortfall $2.628.090 $0 $0 $0 3i-A State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Natural Resource Damage Assessment F32 Fisheries Finance Program F33 Sea Grant National Marine Aqua-ulture Init save - Integrated Projects to Increase Aquaculture Production F34 Sea Grant National Marine Aquisculture Initiative - Addressing Impediments to Aquacullure Opportunities F.40 Coasts' and Mar ne Habitat Restorer on Grants E41 Habitat Conservation F64 Southeast Region Coasts Program leartners hip su"Col laboration Potentra project partners include: Coordination with the following agencies rs anticipated: SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description associated water quality treatment functions -n the park are justified to protect the estuarine receiving waters, '5t6 Figure 18-2A, Location of Portosuenc, Park in Manatee 5� CD L CO b n Ln n cn cA SECTION 'N Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistem w'th, and addresses, the fol-owing Comprehens ve Plan Goals: * Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat j1primarld * Goal 2: Restore Water Qua I ty and Quantity This project is consistent iwth, and addresses, the fol owing Comprehensive Plan Ob.ectives: a Objective 1 Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats (primary) - Objective 2: Restore, improve, and Protect Water Resources Implementing Entities Manatea County will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recip'ent responsible for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring of the project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The benefits of living shoreline app'ications along hardened urban shorelines are well documented, A key document used as the basis for this project -a c,ted be:ow a NO AA 2015, Guidance for Considering the Use of Living Shoreline. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Living Shorelines Workgroup. used on locai Precedents, this project is considered to be feasib'e i- terms of the so lity to 11 obtain necessary permits, (2) construct the project within the proposed budget. and 13) effective V operate and maintain the project components over the long term Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluat on of this project, no significant risks or uncertainties were ident-f ad, As part of the engineering design and permid-ing of this project, it is likely that hydraulic modeling will be requ'red to calculate maximum inflow velocities and to design the project to prevent scouring and erosion of tne restored areas. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will affect habitat quality, marine living resources, and were- quality. Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: • Change in percent cover of native interrida' species • Changes in ambient surface water quality within the park basin In the project grant request, a data led monitoring program wi'l be designed that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Maratee County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quant fy project benefits. 350 State of Ronda State Expenditure Plan Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 4 years. 't is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2021 Implementation of this project has been divided mo three ffilestones, as shown in the chart below. smoom $30,000 so $90,000 $1,180,000 $1,200,000 I 7 04 CN ! 04 or CL LU U) —J LL E .a L) or F� �j SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description project are shown in Figure 18-3A NEED AND JUSTIFICATION PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this project is to develop -iodated natural resource management plans for preservation lands owned and operated by Manatee County. Ti -a objectives of the protect are to restore and/or protect habitat quality and resource management in County-owned preserve lands in the headwaters of coastal tributaries. 3 7,-, Figure 118-21A� General locations of County-owned Preserves in Manatee County. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Preserve Management Plan Site Locations A"T d Rye Preserve Duarte Preserve Figure 18.313, Rye and Duarte Preserves. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This project will restore, preserve, and protect native habitats, fish and wildlife resources, and natural hydrology and water quality in the headwaters of coastal watersheds in Manatee County. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act el g ble activity'. Eligible Activity 1: Restoratior and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wi d-ife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives T project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 1. Restore and Conserve Habitat (or mary) • Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity This protect Is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Object ves: • Ob'.ective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect lab Tats (primary) • Ob,ective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Implementing Entities Manatee Co will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the implementation and success monitoring of this project, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment This project is considered to be feasib a in terms of the so lity to: it) complete the project components within the proposed budget and (2) execute the preserve management plans. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this project, no significant risks or uncertainties were identiked. Success Criteria and Monitoring Th a project w'll generate updated natural resources management plans which, upon Nan execution, are expected to improve or enhance ratura' resources in or only preserves. Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in trw project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria wi I be developed for. * Acres of County-owned preserve lands addressed by updated management plans ■ Acres of native habitats improved or enhanced by activities proposed in the preserve managemer-t plans In the project grant Tertuest, a detailed monitoring P-OgTarn it be designed t^at addresses data coPection and assessment methocki'tagies for the above-listed criteria Manatee County is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinat-ng with other reg:oral water qual-ty mon.tor no entities to cluant fy project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 13 years It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2030. Implementat on of this project has been divided into four milestones, as shown in the chart below. Complete resource assessments Stakeholder input Preparal:on of management plans Success monitoring State of Flat do State Expenditure P. an Budget and Funding Sources Manatee County has cleve'oped a preliminary total cost est mate of $280,000 for this project, and is committed to allocating $280,000 of its share of the Florida Sps I Impact Component to this project. A summary of the project budget and fund-ng sources is provided in the table below Resource assessments $100,000 $100,000 Planning Subtotal $100,000 $100,000 Stakeholder meetings $10,000 $10,000 Preparation of management came $150,000 $150,000 Implementation Subtotal $160,000 $160,000 Success monitoring $20,000 $20,000 Total Cost $280,000 $280,000 Spill Impact Component $280,000 Direct Component so Other grants or co-funding $o Other County funds $o Total Secured Funding $280,000 Budget Shortfall $0 F19 Conservation Technical Assistance 0 12 Conservation Partners Program S 10 Community Planning Technical Assistance Grants Partnerships/Collaboration Manatee County may partner with the Southwest Florida Water Management District for additional funding through the District's cooperative funding program. .3.73 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION This project involves the acqu sition, transport, and deployment of natural limestone boulders into an existing permitted Manatee County artificial reef s-te located approximately seven naut'cal m lea offshore (see Figure 18-4A). NEED AND JUSTIFICATION and Of shelter for larval and juvenile fishes. - -he project is justified by the demonstrated economic benefits of artif coal reefs (Adams et al., 20'1)- PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of th a project is to augment an existing perm'tted Manatee County artif icia reef site with natural limestone boulders. The objectives of the project are to (1) support the increasing recreational demand for offshore reef fish-ng and scuba dis ng opportun-ties and (2) enhance the abundance, distribution, and structural d versify of NX Figure 10-4A. Location of the Larry Borden Artificial Reef site off shore of Manatee County, State of R orida State Expenditure Plan MANATEE COUNTY PERMITTED REEF SITES L It F N ■ . 4wm, M Figure 18-461, Location of existing permitted artificial reef sites in Manatee County, Manatee County currently manages 11 permitted artif coat reef s'les, as shown in Figure 18-48 Material acquired through this project w:11 be distributed at the Borden Reef site, with its center point located at the latitudellongitude coordinates: 27.407883'1 -32.7 73B3=. Add:t oral planning assistance w 11 be requ red for permitting, design, and implementation of the proposed project. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Manatee County's beaches and coastal waters support an enormous tourism industry. Th's project wiN (1) support the increasing recreational demand for offshore reef f,shing and scuba diving opportunities by both residents and tourists and (2) enhance the abundance, distribution, and structural d.versity of hardbottom habitat in offshore waters of Manatee County. Wil SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol:owing RESTORE Act a igib!e activity: • Elio his Activity 10: Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast region, ircluding recreat;onal fish:ng (primary) • Eirg;ble Activity 1- Restoration and prL)te: on of the natural resources, ecosystems, f sheries, marine and wildl fe habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast reg'on Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals. • Goal 5: Restore and Rev to lize the Gulf Econo-ny (primary) • Goal 1: Restore and Conserve HaUtat • Goal 3: Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources I'h s project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives. * Objective 8: Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the GLI f Economy with Economic and Environmental Restorat-on Projects (primary) a Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats * Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Mar n-2 Habitats Implementing Entities Manatee County wi;l be the so a implemenhng entity and grant sub -rep p ant responsib!e for the permitting, construction, and success monitoring a' the prog am. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Research has produced best practices gu:dance on site selection, design features, and construction methods, cr-teria that are now part of the PVC permitting regulations. Key literature trat forms the bas's for the Manatee County Art facial Reef Program are cited below, e Adams. C., at al., 2011. The economic benefits associated with Florida's artificial reefs. EDIS document FE649 Carlene, SA., Martin, T, Bundrick, C.M. 1994. Factors affecting fish assemblage development on a modular artificial reef in a northern Gulf of Mexico estuary. Bull. Mar Soi. 55 (2-3), 379-33Z a 76 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan pikes, R,, 2013, Artificial Reefs of the Gulf of Mesiccr A Review of Gulf State Programs & Key Considerations, National Wildlife Federation, Lindberg, WJ, et at, 2014. Rationale and Evaluation of an Artificial Reef System Designed for Enhanced Grown and Survival of Juvenile Gag, Mycteroperca microgeos, Proc.66th Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute November 4 — R Corpus Christi, TX Pages 320-325, Swett of al., 2011. Economic Impacts of Artificial Reefs for Six Southwest Florida Counties, Florida This project is feasible with respect to the ability to: (1) use currently open permits (2) construct the project Figure 11184C, Manatee County artificial reef site hosurce Manatee County Artificial Reef Program). within the proposed budget; (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term The permitting of the offshore artificial reef sites has been facilitated through nationwide U.S. Army Corps of Eng!neers permits and through the FVVC for site-specific state criteria. Furthermore, this project is consistent with the National Artificial Reef Plan published in 1985, and the Florida Artificial Reef Strategic Plan (FVVC, 20030. Risks and Uncertainties No significant risks or unceria'nties were'dentif ad dur'ng the evaluation of this pro that would preclude project implementation. Manatee County will ensure des gn to limit damage from tropics storms. Controls for lionksh and other nuisarricedwonc species may be required. Regulatory constraints will address issues such as spatial boundaries for navigation, channe's, mar'ne habitat resources, historical areas, sand borrow areas, existing structures and leases, etc. Success mon, toring is critical in a fisher'es management context given that these reefs have not previously been used as fisheries management tools. Success Criteria and Monitoring This artificial reef project involves the placement of hard substrate to: support recreational demand for offshore reef fishing and scuba diving opportunities and enhance the abundance, distribution, and structural divers ty of hardbottom habitat in the affected waters Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and described in the project grant request. it is ant cipated that quantitative success criter a will be developed for. ■ Increase in the area, extent of new art ficial reef hab tat Morriss on the recruitment of berth c encrusting organisms and fisq Increase n recreat anal usage The proposed project will be constructed consistent with the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission's Guidelines mr Reef Materials 12004). In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria, Manatee County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quart fy project benefits. SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project is approximately 4 years, It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2021. Imp ementation of this project has been divided into three milestones, as shown in the chart below. Cal act, prepare, and stage reef malefia's Tran-5port Malawi to permitted reef s-tes Success man for net Budget and Funding Sources Manatee County has estimated the tota'cost of th a project to be approximate y $1,320,000, and is co mint tied to al-ocating S 1,320,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to this project. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below. Collect, prepare, and Stage reef materials $150,000 $150,000 Transport and place reef Meter 315 at permitted sites $1, $1,120,000 Implementation Subtotal $1,270,000 $1,270,000 Success monitoring $50.000 $50,000 Total Cost $1,320,000 $1,320,000 Spill impact Component 51,320,000 Direct Component $0 Other grants o co-funding $0 Other County funds $0 Total Secured Funding $1,320,000 Budget Shortfall $0 Natural Resource Damage Assessment 0 IS FishAmer ca Foundation S 41 Anif-cial Reef Construcrom and Monitoring 5 49 Sport Fish Restoration Program Partnerships/Collaboration The Manatee County Art-fic al Reef Program routinely collaborates w th the Florida Artif-cial Reef Program managed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission This collaboration includes representatives from nearly al coastal counties in Florida and assists with material collection resources, technical construct-on assistance, artif cia! reef construction best practices, and outreach. a7a State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of th a project is to replace the old concrete fir dge with a new wooden structure des geed specifically to serve as a public fishing pier, with supporting amen ties. The objective of the project is to reprove recreational fishmg opportunities on the Manatee River, 3 79 Figure 18-5A. Palmetto Greene Pier Location Map, n C ci i ��e FW4 Fisl-ingPim State of Flor us State Expenditure P an Implementing Entities Manatee County will be the sole imp'ementing ent-ty and grant sub-recipient responsible for the engineering design, permitting, construction, operation and maintenance, and success monitoring of this project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment Appropr ate Best Available Science criteria related to fishing per des gns will be addressed in the implementation grant request. This project is considered to be feasible with respect to the ability to (1) obtain necessary permits, of construct the pier within the proposed budget; and (3) effectively operate and maintain the pier over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of this project, no significant risks have been identified that would preclude implementation. The project design will consider sea-level rase and sustainability. This project is ready to begin p anning, design, and Success Criteria and Monitoring This project addresses improvement of fishermen access to the tidal Manatee River, It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: • Recreational amenities completed • Public recreational use statistics 19. Figure 118-5C. Ground level photogiaph of the existing concrete fishing pier SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities In the project grant request, a dette'ed mon-tor-ris program wi'l be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed cr-teria. Manatee County is committed to conducting the monitoring necessary to quantify project benefits- Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this project, Born planning through success on for ng, is approximately 6 years. It is expected to start in 2020 and end in 2025 Manatee County will operate and me ntain the facil:ty in perpetuity Implementation of this project has been divided mic five milestones, as shown in the milestone chart below, Plann no and conceptual design Engineering and permitting Derricritior. of the old bridge Construct on of the now fishing pier Monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Planning and conceptual design $200,000 $200,0 Planning Subtotal $200,000 $200,0 Engineering and permitting $300,000 $300,0 Derna'vion of aid bridge $1-400,000 $1,400,0 Construct on of new fishing p e $3,000000 $1,000,01 Implementation Subtotal $4,700,000 $2,700,01 Success monitoring $100,000 a 1 otrol Total Cost $5,000,000 $3,000,0 SECURED FUNDING SOURCES So 11 mpact Component $3,000.0 Direct Component Other are nts or co-f und ir g Other Con rity funds Total Secured Funding $30000 Budget Shortfall $2:000:01 State of Florida State Expend tare Plan Pa rtnerships/Col la boration It is anticipated that Manatee County will coordinate closely w th the Florida Department of Transportation, as well as the Cities of Pa mettic and Bradenton- In add tion, habitat enhancement components may be co-funded by the Southwest Florida Water Management District. rF- SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description County (see Figure 18-fiso. NEED AND JUSTIFICATION to Rubino (2008), if U.S, aquaculture production were aquaculture, doubled, 50,000 additional jobs and $1 bill on in add tional farm-gate revenue will be produced An added advantage of greater local product on ill be the knowledge of where and how seafood is being produced and processed, information that is often lacking for imported seafood products We will be able to ensure that locally grown seafood products are safe, fresh, and sustainatry produced Figure 18- GA, Location of approved sheff-sh harvesting areas in Manatee County that could he [eased for shellfish State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Increased funding for research can help the industry become more efficient. productive, and profitable. To date, however, federa fund'ng for aquaculture research since 1990 has lots so only $1 billion compared to the US. Department of Agriculture expenditure on research There are several factors that make expansion of the shellfish (clams, oysters, scallops) aquaculture industry in Florida desirable. For one thing, the advantage of grow ng shellfish instead of finfish is that nothing Is added to the water.They obtain their food (phytoplanklon) from the natural environment, Thus, the culture of shellfish is truly sustainable. In fact, their feeding activity actually helps clean the water by removing suspended particulate organs matter (phytoplankton, detritus) and making it available to the benthos (see Figure 1118-15B). 3J5 TIC ': Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities At present, however, Florida is only us ng a sma I proportion of available habitat. There are 280,000 acres of approved shellfish harvesting waters, but at present there are only 2,254 ac of Jea;ed bottom be'ng used for shellf an culture IS, Rocco, FDACS, Pars. Comm.), or less than I percent of available submerged land. From this standpoint alone. current shellfish aq-,jaculture productior could be increased one hundred-fold over current levels to he p meet local demand and reduce t-le domestic seafood trade deficit. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The purpose of this research program is to increase the production and av lability of ocally grown, sustainably produced shellfish for local markets.T�e object ves of the program include (1) increased aioulatelity of fresh, high-quality seafood, (2) improved local seafood-based economy, and f a healthier coastal environment These project objectives w'll be accomplished through appl ad research objectives that address current bottlenecks or limitat ores in the commercial product on cycle. These potontol;y include aspects of PROJECT COMPONENTS State of Fiords State Expenditure Plan Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf vegetation. Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This proposed program is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act el-g act vities , El Act-vity it: Promotion of the consumption of seafood harvested from the Gulf Coast reg on {primary} * Activ'ty 1: Workforce development and job creation Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th s program is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: * Goal 6: Restore and revitalize the Gulf economy (primary) * Goal 3: Replenish and protect living coastal marine resources Th a program is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Object ves: * Consortium Objective 8: Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restoration Projects (primary) & Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Manatee County will be the implementing entity, while GSI will be the sub-recipient responsible for the planning, des an, implementation, and delivery of the proposed research program. SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The importance of shellfish to both the economy and cables cal health of coastal regions has been w0 established, as summarized above. Key literature citations include the following Adams, C, L Sturmer and A. Hodges, 2014 Tracking the Economic Benefits Generated by the hard clam Aquaculture Industry in Florida. UpErUniversily of Florida EDIS Document No, FERRI. 6 Vp Bosch, D, N Kurnrnoff K Stephenson, A. Miller J. Pope and A. Harris. 2010. Evaluation of policy options for expanding oyster aquaculture in Virginia. Aquaculture Economics & Management 74. 145 -Rai * Doering, PH,, J. R. Kelly CA, avian and T Sewers, 1987 Effect of the hard clam Merconaria on benthic fluxes of inorganic nutrients and gases. Marine Biology 94 - 377-383, Love. D.C., 1. Gorski and J, R Fry 2017 An analysis of nearly one billion dollars of aquaculture grants made by the US federal government from 1990 to 2015. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society dot 70. 1111/ josts. 12425. a NMFS 2016, Fisheries of the United States 2015. A. Lowther and M. Linder (editors), National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Science and Technology, Silver Spring, MD. 135 Re. a Northam Economics, Inc., 2009. Valuation of Ecosystem Services from Shellfish Restoration, Enhance. ent This research program is considered to be fear ble Si G is an estals ished organza ton with a board of directors and proper financial controls_ Risks and Uncertainties 333 State of Florida State Expenditure Marti Success Criteria and Monitoring The success of this research program will be monitored and quantified as • The number of research projects mit ated • The amount of external funding scan reel • The ncresse n submerged land leased for shellfish farming • The wease -n shellfish farmers (lobs) • The -ncrease iri the value of shellf sh produced leconom c value) In the project grant request, a detai ed monitoring program design roil be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above - listed criteria, Milestones and Schedule The total estimated t me horieon of this project is approximate y 4 years it is expected to start in 2019 and end in 2022, lmple entat:on of this pro has been dtiv ded into five milestones, or phases, as shown in the milestone chart below. Determine research priorities Design experiments Collect and analyze data Technology transfer Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources The total cost for this research program is $400,000. Manatee County is commuted to allocating $300,000 of its share of the Florida Spil Impact Component and $100,000 of its Direct Component funds to this project. A summary of the project budget and fund ng sources is provided in the table below Planning and research or orities $100,000 $0 Planning Subtotal $100,000 $0 Design experiments $100,000 $100,000 Collect and analyze data $100,000 $100,000 Technology transfer $50,000 $50,000 Implementation Subtotal $150,000 $150,000 Success monitoring $50,000 $50,000 'fatal Cost $400,000 $800,000 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Spill Impact Component 5300,000 Direct Component $100,000 O'her grants or co-funding $0 Pa rtnersh i ps/Col la boratio n Manatee County and the Gulf Shellfish Inst-tute, Inc., will continue to work with the following agencies and partners in the -mp'ementation of this research program: Federal Agencies — Southeast Reg racial Aquacul ture Center (USDA) — NOAA COLtheast Regional Office �9u Project Description • Pence Preserve/Robinson Preserve ConnectorTrai • Ungarelli Preserve Boardwalks • Hidden Harbor PreserveTrails and Boardwalks Tice location of these preserves are shown -n Figure 18-7A above State of Florida State Expenditure Plan 313' Figure 18-7A, Location of Counly-owned coastal preserves. SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This project will enhance public access to the coasts' zone in existing Manatee County —owned preserves and promote ecotourism in Me notes County. In addition, the project w i l l protect lot ng coasts I marine resources and habitats from pedestr'.an impacts, Eligibility and Statutory Requirements Thi; project is consistent with, and addresses, the hallowing RESTORE Act e'igible act-vities: * Eligible Activity 6 Infrastructure projects benef it ng the economy or scolds cal resources, including port infrastructure ■ El gable Activity 10: Promotion of Tour-sun in the Gulf Coast region, including recreational fishing Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goa! 5: Restore and Revital ze the Gulf Economy (Primary) • Goa' 3 Replenish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objectives: • Object ve 8 Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gu;f Economy with Econom c and Env ronmentai Restoration Projects (primary) • Objective 3. Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marire Resources J1 2 Figure 18-78. Existing boardwalkin Robinson Preserve, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Implementing Entities Manatee County will be the side implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the permitting, construction, and success mon-toring of the project. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment This project wil be informed by guide:ines deve aped by the State of Florida for the des an and construction of elevated walkovers for dunes and other coastal habitats. Key literature citations include. - BeacmOune Walkover Guidelines, the Florida Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Revised January 7998. BeachlDurte Walkover Structures, SUSF-SG-76 by Todd L. Walton, Jr, and Thomas C Skinner Published by the Marine Advisory Program of the Florida Cooperative Extension Service and the Florida Sea Grant, March, 1983. Based on local precedents, th's project is considered to be feasible in terms of the ability to: (1) obtain necessary permits (2) construct the project within the proposed budget and (3) effectively operate and maintain the constructed faro ues over the long term. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluat-on of this project, no significant r sks or uncertainties were ident tied, Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will enhance public access to the coastal zone in existing Manatee County reed preserves and promote exanourism in Manatee County. Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in the project grant request It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be deve aped for • Linear feet of new trails and boardwalks constructed • Increases in public use of Manatee County coastal preserves In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program wil be designed that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Manatee County is committed to imp!ementing the necessary monitoring program and coordinating with other reajonal water quality men toring entities to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total est mated time horizon of this pro.ect is approximately 7 years It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2024. Project implementation wil be phased based on available funding Manatee County will operate and maintain the facilities in perpetu'ty. The estimated schedule for the project components have been pro cled into three milestones, as shown in the chart be ow 393 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Engineer no design and permitt-nis Construction Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources Manatee County has developed a preliminary total cost estimate of $2,000,000 for this project, based on ava lable unit costs for semi at projects in the area. Manatee County is committed to allocating $2,000,000 of its share of the Florida Spill! Impact Component to this project, but will also be seek ng other leveraged funding sources to supplement these monies. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below, MEMMEMM $60,000 $60.000 $60,000 $60 $100,000 $100,000 $1,800,000 $756,667 $1,900,000 $856,667 $40,000 $40,000 $2,000,000 $956,667 Final design and permitting Construction Implementation Subtotal Spill Impact Component Other Grants or Co-Funding Other County Funds Other County funds Partnerships/Collaboration Manatee County may partner w th the Southwest Florida Water Ma!-agernent District for addit anal funding through District's cooperat via funding program, as well as with theTampa Bay Estuary Program and Sarasota Bay Estuary Program. :;g-1 State of Flor do State Expenditure Plan Project Description shown in Figure 18-BA, NEED AND JUSTIFICATION support development of WNIPs in priority coastal watersheds. Priority watersheds identified by Manatee County all drain to receiv ng coastal waterbodies that are part of the Tampa Say Estuary Program and the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. 3 1� 1C:1 Figure 18-8A. General location of priority watersheds in Manatee County, �o cran+.r '!o�� ly 4F -wall- Ik i t L I r ,�• T � -- . ,� .tea. . " � _," Eli r State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project , s consistent w th, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goal: 9 Goal 2 Restore Water Qual-ty and Quantity This project is consistent w'ffy and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Objective a Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and ProtectWater Resources Implementing Entities Manatee Co, nty will be the sole implementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for conducing the WI M; ( n collaborat on with the SWFWMD) and monitoring the success of the program. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The pollutant removal effectiveness of various storm ter BMPs implemented in Florida has been eva mired, and designs continue to be improved through the watershed management planning process, The des an of the proposed stormwater improvements will consider the following reference document: - Harper H. and D. Baker, 2007 Evaluation of Current Suarnowater Design Criteria Within the State of Florida. Final report prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (contract SO7081 by Environment Research & Design, Inc., Orlando, FL. used on extensive precedents, this program a considered to be feasib:e in terms of the ability to (1) obtain matching funding from the SWFWDD and (2) comp ete VVIVIPs for priority waterbodies. Funding for the implementation of projects described in the WIN Pe ill come from other County funds. a nd SWFWM D co-operative fund ng. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of th a program, no s- gn if - cant r sks or uncerte miss were ident Pied „ The SWFWM D VVIVI P process is well established and has resu led in substant improvements in regional water resources. Success Criteria and Monitoring This program will affect surface water pollutant (e.g., nutrients, sed ment, metals) loads leaving the site as well as on•site water and habitat quality. Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for: * Number of priority watersheds with competed watershed management plans * Change in pollutant loadings pre- and post-project implementation In the program grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be designed that addresses data col action and assessment methodologies for the above-l:sted criteria, Manatee County Parks and Natural Resources Department is committed to implementing the necessary monitoring program using in-house staff and coordinating with other regional water quality monitoring entities to quantify project benefits. SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule The lots estimated time horizon of this program is approximately 15 years, It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2032, implementation of this program has been divided into four milestones, as shown in the chart below. WO data co'llectio-i Prepare WMPs Initial des an studies Success monilorirg Budget and Funding Sources Manatee County has developed a prel minary total cost estimate of $3,000,000 for In a program. The County ir, committed to allocating $1,275,243 0 its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to the program, and is anticipat ng a 50 percent match from SWFWMD. A summary of the p-ogram budget and funding sources is provided in the table below. Water qjal ty data col scion Prepare watershed management plan I r it al des:gn studio Success monitoring Implementation Subtotal Spiil Impaut Component Oxect Compenent Other grints or co funding Other County funds Partnerships/Collaboration $100.000 $100,000 $210.000 $210,000 $2,590.000 $865,243 $2,900,000 $1,175,243 $100.000 $100,000 $3,000,000 $1,275,243 Manatee County will partner with the Southwest Florida Water Management D str:ct for match funding through the District's cooperahve funding program. Fund up to the implementation of projects contained in the VVMPs will come from other County funds and co-operative funding. .3--K, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION The general location of the park is shown in Figure 18-9A, NEED AND JUSTIFICATION In addition, natural habitats were severely degraded. Major changes to the system Included the loss of nat've vegetation and dense infestations of nuisance and exotic species. This has led to decreased native va'd1ife use and an increase in nuisance "urban" species, For example, there have been issues with fecal coliform contamination of surface waters due to overuse of the area by Muscovy ducks. The site 's located in the West Cedar Hammock Mrs n Water Body identification number, which f-ows to Palma Solo Bay, wh ch is a des gnated 0,1standing Florida Water (OMW under the management purview of the Sarasota Bay National Estuary Program. Pursuant to Florida law, pollutant discharges that cause a degradation in water quality in an Figure 18-9A. Location of GT Bray Park In Manatee County, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan The first component will include regrading of drainage ditch slopes to shal cover grades to allow for wetland plantings, as well as the interconnection of minor driches/swales and isolated drainage ponds, and to create an integrated surface water management system. Native aquatic species will be planted along the regraded slopes. Finally, the nearby forested uplands that abut the ma-n drainage ditch to the north are infested with nuisance and exotic species, primarily Brazilian pepper (schents tereonthitiolia) As part of this pro.ect, nuisance and exotic species will be removed and replanted with native vegetat on, where feas'ble. Combined, the pro.ects wil improve the quality of water that reaches Palma Sole Bay, provide habitat for fish and wildlife within the park, reduce the nuisance and exotic seed source, and enhance a popular recreational amenity for the commi Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This project will restore a more natural hydrologic res me and surface water storage capacity an an urban park, and enhance water quality treatment of surface waters to reduce pollutant loads to Palma Sole Bay, In add Lion, the project avi'l restore native aquatic and upland vesetat-on commun-ties and wi dlife use of the site Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This pro,ect is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activity: * Eligib'e Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wild:ife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Tn* project 's consistent with, and addresses, the f0lowing Comprehens ve Plan Goals: • Goa: 2 Restore Water Qual-ty and Quantity (or mgry) • Goa! 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat This project a consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehemi've Plan Objectives: • Object've 2. Restore, I mprove, and Protect Water Resources tprima ry) • Ob:,ect've 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats Implementing Entities Manatee County w'I be the sole implementing entity and grant sub - recipient responsible for the Perm thing, construction, and success monitoring of the protect. 4 C�i SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The pe Intent removal effectiveness of various stormwater HIVIF's imp'amented in Flanda has been evaluated, and designs cant nue to be improved. The design of the proposed storm ter improvements wil; consider the 10owing reference document: Harper, H. and D. Baker, 2007 Evaluation of Current Shormonater Design Criteria Within the State of Florida. Final report prepared for the Elooda Department of Environmental Protection (contract 501081 by Environment Research is Design, Inc., Orlando, FL. Based on extensive precedents for watershed rehabilitation in southwest Florida, th a project is considered to be feasible in terms of the ability to: 0) core n necessary permits (2) construct the project within the proposed budget, and pd effectively operate and mainta n the project components over the long terra. Risks and Uncertainties In the evalual on of this project, no significant risks or uncertainties were identified. As part of the engineering des on and permitting of this project, it is like!y that hydraulic modeling vali be required to calculate maximum inflow velocities, and to design the project to prevent scouring and e•osion of the restored areas. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project wi'l affect surface water po'lutant (a g, nutr ents, sediment, metals) loads leaving the s,pi as well as on-site water and habitat quality Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed in the projez-1 grant request, It is anticipated that quant-tative success criteria will be developed for; • Change in po'lutant loadings pre- and post-restoration • Change is percent cover of nu!sance and exotic spec'es In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be designed that addresses data coliection and assessment methodo holes for the above-'isted criteria, Manatee County is committed to mple-nenting the necessary monitoring program and coordinat no with other regional water quality monitor ng entities to quantify project benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time hot son of this project is approximately 4 years. It is expected to start in 2026 and end in 2029, Implementation of this project has been divided into four milestones, as shown in the chart be ow Fees bility study and prel-minery design Final design and permitting Construction Success man tor no 4C2 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Budget and Funding Sources Manatee County has developed a prelim nary total cost estimate of $3,000,000 for this program. The County is committed to alyponing $1,600,000 of its share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to the program, and Is anticipating a $430,000 matching grant from SVVFWMD. A summary of the program budget and funding sources is provided in the table be!ow. Feasibility study and preliminary design ZZEM= Final des tin and permitting Construction Implementation Subtotal Spill Impact Component D rest Component Other grants or co-funding Other County funds Total Secured Funding $2,030,000 Budget Shortfall $0 SW MD Cooperative Fund ng Natural Resource Damage Assessment F21 Watershed Protect on and Rood Prevent cn S 10 Community Planning Tachn as' Assistance Grants S 18 Clean Water State Revidvxg Fund (CWSRF? S 25 Innovative Nutrient and Sad went Reduction and Car riervation Pilot Project Program S,27 Nonpoint Source Management Program (NPSM) - Section 319 S,34 TMDL Water Quality Restoration Grants S.52 SWPWIVID Cooperative Funding In tiative Partnerships/Collaboration Manatee County will continue to partner with the Southwest Florida Water Management District for additionai funding through District's cooperative fund ng program. $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $180,000 $180,000 $1,620,000 S',220,000 $2,900,000 $1,400,000 $30,000 $0 $2,030,000 $1,600,000 a.3 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description watershed from 15 square miles to approximately 75 square mi as. a 500 percent inc-oase in surface drainage area (see Figure 19-18), As a resuir of these hydrolog c: madificat cans, the amount of freshwater inflow to Dona Bay is far .n excess of what has occurred histor,cally. The excess Tres- ,water inflow has been accompan ad by an increase n nutrient loads to !evels far greater than the waters of Dona Bay can effectively assimilate. :n addicon, salary ty in Dona Bay -s lower and much more variable than it was historically. Nutrient loads to the bay are sufficiently elevated such that levels of dissolved oxygen in the bay are frequently lower than they were prior to the construction of the Cow Pen Canal Figure 19-11A. Dona Bay Location Map, State of Florida State Expenditure Plan � R. MAY PROJECT COMPONENTS The overall Dona Bay Hydrologic Restoration Program is described in the 2007 Dona Bay Watershed Management Plan (Kimley-Horn & Associates, 2007) co-funded by Sarasota County and the Southwest Florida Water WIWI U r�ry 1-; JI-0 L141 ; �, \� �� fe� 70 @ � � ° State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligils e act vity - El gable Activity 1: Restoration and protect on of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, mar ne and wild fe habitats, beaches, and coastal wetbinds of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals: • Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goal 1'. Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3: Rep'enish and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the to lowing Comprehens ve Plan objectives • Objective 2: Restore, improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objective 3 Protect and Restore Liv'ng Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Sarasota County will be the prime implement ng ent-ty and grant sub-rec pent responsible for the eng nearing design, permitting, construction, operation and maintenance, and success monitoring for this program Sarasota County has coordinated extens vely w'th the SWFVVMD and other agencies in the design and permitting for the program to date, and wi'l cent nue to do so n future phases, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment v Mate Marine Lab, 1975. The Ecological Status of Dona and Roberts Bays and its Relationship to Cow Pan Slough and Other Possible Perturbations, - Southwest Florida Water Management District, 2000. Charlotte Harbor Surface Water Improvement and Management fSWIM) Plan, a Kimley-glom & Associates, 2007 Dona Bay Watershed Management Plan. a Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program, 2008. Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan for the Greater Charlotte Harbor Watershed, 407 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities As part of these efforts, various flow diversion scenarios were proposed and modeled, and the conceptual designs of both Phase I and Phase 11 projects were conducted. In addit-on, the benefits and pass his impacts (to the Nlyakka River) of Phase ii project components have been reviewed by permitting agenc as, and perm is were received for Phase I I from the SWFWMD. This project is cons dared to be feasib-is with respect to the ab'lity to (1) obtain necessary permits, (2) construct the pro. ect vv' t hat the proposed budget and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long . term, Risks and Uncertainties No s-gnificant risks or uncertainties have been identified that would preclude pro.ect implementation. The issue of the impact of d;verted volumes to the royakka River on receiving water qua ity has been investigated and resolved to the satisfaction of the regulatory staff of the SWFWMD. Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will benef.t the Dona Bay estuary as well as watershed freshwater wetlands that have been excessively drained by the Cow Pen Carol. Success criteria will be developed and described in the project grant request, and it is anticipated that quantitative cater -a will be developed for: • Changes in salinity and water clarity in Dona Bay • Changes in the distribution and persistence of realthy oyster reefs in Dona Bay • Changes in the distribution and persistence of seegrass beds in Dona Bay • Changes in the distribution of native wetland species in restored watershed storage areas n the project grant request, a detailed mor-itoring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed criteria. Sarasota County is comm,tted to an adaptive management approach to the project, and to conducting the monitoring necessary to support th's approach and to quantify project bene'as. Milestones and Schedule As discussed above, Sarasota County has already completed implementation of Phase 1, and Phase I I construction is schedu ad to start in the summer of 2018. Bpi I Impact Component funds are being requested for future Phases III through Al. — he total estimated time horizon of th a project is approx mately 15 years. It is expected to start in 2018 and end m 2033. Implementation of this project has been divided into 13 milestones, as shown n the chart below. This project is ready to besn Phase III planning activ!ies, wh on include a feasib lity study and prof urinary design. -'OF State of Florida Slate Expenditure Plan Budget and Funding Sources As part of the Dona Bay Watershed Management Pan of the Dona Say Watershed Management Plan (Kimley-Horn & Associates, 2007), and follow-up analysis conducted by Sarasota County, preliminary cost estimates for the various phases and components of the project have been developed. The total project cost for the remaining phases is estimated to be $13,204,832. Sarasota County is committed to allocating its entire $12,660,000 share of the Florida Spill Impact Component to this project, Sarasota County has the financial capac'.ty to make up project funding shortfalls with other County funds, but will also be seeking other leveraged funding sources. Previous phases have received SWFWMD cooperative funding support, and it is anticipated that SWFWMD will continue to provide funding support going forward A summary of the project budget and funding sources 'a provided in the table below, 4 F. ,- SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Phase Is — Recharge. Storage & Use Fees Is thy study 5220.000 $0 Pre'iminary design $o $0 Planning Subtotal $220,000 $0 Final design and permitting $440.000 $440,000 Corstruction $6,220.000 $6.220,000 Implementation Subtotal S0A60 $6,660,000 Total $6,880,000 $6,880,000 Phase IV— Kinsegato Weir Peasibil-ty study $$5.000 $o Prelim nary design $$5.000 $o Planting Subtotal $110,000 $o Fine design and permitt ng $200,000 $200,000 Construction $1,800,000 $1,800,000 Implementation Subtotal $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Total $2,110,000 $2,110,000 Phase V— Erackborri Carla! Feasibil ty study $55,000 so Prelim-nary design $55.000 A Planning Subtotal $110.000 $0 Final design and pormiti nq $200.000 $200,000 Construction $1,800.000 $1.600,000 Implementation Subtotal $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Ilmol $2,110,000 $2,110,000 Phase 14' — Habitat Mortroring & Restoration Feasibility study $55.000 $55.000 Prel.minary design $55,000 $55,000 Planning Subtotal $110.000 $110,000 F not des an and permuting $200.000 $200,000 Construction $1.690.000 $1,690,000 Implementation Subtotal $1,990,000 $l Total $2,000,000 $2,000,000 Monitoring $104,632 $0 Total Coot $13,204,832 $12,660,000 Spi'l Impact Component $12,660,000 West Component $o Other grants or co-fund no $0 Other County funds $544,832 Total Secured Funding $13,204,832 Budget Shortfall $0 I 7 04 0 ! 04 as CL LU OR _J LL QS E .a L) as J 1 r- State of Fronda State Expenditure Plan Pa rtnersh ips/Col la boration Efforts to reduce the adverse impacts to Dona Bay from excessive freshwater inflows have included the original identification of the impacts of freshwater inflows and the development of conceptual restoration projects to address those impacts. These efforts have involved many local, reg onal, state, and federal agencies, including • Southwest Florida Water Management District • Florida Department of Environmental Protection • Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program • US, Environmental Protection Agency • Mote Marine Laboratory Sarasota County will continue to coordinate with these partners throughout the implementation of the project. IM SECTION V: Proposed Projects. Programs and Activities Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION NEED AND JUSTIFICATION Charlotte Harbor is the second-largest estuary in the Improvements sn Charrone County, state of Florida, with vital seagrass resources that em Figure 20-1A, General location ol proposed sewe., Overall Environmental Scoring rm _ M rs � � ■. �!� � . 4 . : ■M11111 � J §.7 C-3 En 7 _ § S 7 » 1 Five-year Intery a| �- .� .. �. e CD En SE CTION ° Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Figure 20-11C. Mid-County -year servic and related sewer improvements plan septic system areas lase Figure 20-10. Additional capac ty would be added at the East Port Wastewater Reclamation Facility { f1F) to accommodate the add tion3l flows from removal of the septic systems in the Mid-County area, C ontributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This program is a so part of an ongoing regions partnership effort to improve and protect water quality in Charlotte Harbor and addresses goals and objectives that are consistent w,th components of either complementary natural resource management plans, including • Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP) Comprehensive Conserver on and Management Plan (CHNEP 2013) • Southwest Florida Water Management District (S IF MM Charlotte Harbor Surface Water Improvement and Management fSWIM) Plan I W- - -WMD, 2C 00) The proposed extensive sanitary sewer expansion will involve labor-intens've construct on over many years. Therefore, th s program is also expected to contribute to growth of the loca' economy through increased local job creation These jobs will grove the tax base and foster development of new buy nesses and amp torment opportunities. HE r , r A Em Pon W41F R �n F x� 9; fth — f ;'.. — � u —F9 sc Figure 20-11C. Mid-County -year servic and related sewer improvements plan septic system areas lase Figure 20-10. Additional capac ty would be added at the East Port Wastewater Reclamation Facility { f1F) to accommodate the add tion3l flows from removal of the septic systems in the Mid-County area, C ontributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf This program is a so part of an ongoing regions partnership effort to improve and protect water quality in Charlotte Harbor and addresses goals and objectives that are consistent w,th components of either complementary natural resource management plans, including • Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP) Comprehensive Conserver on and Management Plan (CHNEP 2013) • Southwest Florida Water Management District (S IF MM Charlotte Harbor Surface Water Improvement and Management fSWIM) Plan I W- - -WMD, 2C 00) The proposed extensive sanitary sewer expansion will involve labor-intens've construct on over many years. Therefore, th s program is also expected to contribute to growth of the loca' economy through increased local job creation These jobs will grove the tax base and foster development of new buy nesses and amp torment opportunities. HE State of Flor do State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project a consistent w th, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act el:gible activity. a Eligible Activity 1 Restoration and protection of the nature' resources, ecosystems, fisher es, marine and wild ife habhets, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Tnis project is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Plan Goals • Goal 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3: Rep'en an and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This project is consistent with, and addresses, the folio wing Comprehensive Plan Objectives: Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) Objective I - Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats Objective 3. Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities The Charlotte County Utilities Department ICCLID) wi,l be the sole imic'ementing entity and grant sub-recip stir responsible for the design, perry ding, construction, operation and maintenance, and man toring of this project CCUD has coordinated with the FDEP and numerous other agencies in the development of the Charlotte County Sewer Master Plan, and may collaborate with other entities in the implementation of the pro.ect through leveraging and other cooperative funding agreements, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment The relationship between septic systems and water goal ty in Charlotte Harbor, and potential pollutant load reductions associated with septic to sewer conversions in this area, have been well studied Key references are c;ted below. LaPointe an at, 2016 Charlotte County Water cindery Assessment, Phase I Data Analysis and Recommen. dations for Long-Term Monitoring. Final resion prepared for the Charlotte County Board of County Commissioners. ■ Jones Edmunds Associates (JEA), 2017 Charlotte County Sewer Master Plan. Draft report prepared for the Charlotte County Utility Department, This project is cons'dered to be feasible with respect to the ability to: 1) obtain necessary permits, 2) construct the project within the proposed budget, and 3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term. .115 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Risks and Uncertainties In the development of the Charlotte County Sewer Master Plan, no signif cant risks or uncertainties have been identif ad that woutcl preclude implementation of the Mic-County project discussed above- Success Criteria and Monitoring This pro,ect will affect surface waters and living marine resources in nearshore Char'otte Harbor adjacent to the sewer improvement areas. Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and descrit:ed in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantitative success criteria wH be developed for. * N ember of septic systems taken off -line * Changes in amb ant water quality Irlitrient and bacterial concen'rations) * Changes in the frequency and/or duration of algal blooms (as measured by chlorophyll-a) • Changes in near ant !cads from the sewer improvement areas (as measured by groundwater concentrations) • Changes in seagrass coverage -n nearshore Charlotte Harbor adjacent to the sewer improvement areas In the project grant request, a detailed monitoring program will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-listed c-iteria. Charlotte County is committed to an adaptive management approach to the project, and to conducting the monitoring necessary to support this approach and to quantify project beref ts. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated t me horizon for the Mid-County septic-to-sewer convers!on project -a approximately 7 years, It is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2022, with an additions 2 years of success monitoring extending to 2024 Implementation of this project has been d vicred -nto five milestones, as shown n the chart below. Master planning is complete, and th:s project is ready to begin fees bil-ty study and pre/ inary des go. Feadjo:fty study Pr.Dl minary design Fir 11 des an and perm tting Constructio-i Success monitoring Budget and Funding Sources i he Mid-County project will connect 4,008 existing developed units out of 5.928 total parcels in the project area to a new central sewer collection. The annual project costs dur.ng the forecasted per:od is car mated at $178 million, for a 5 -year total cost of $89 million, or an average cost per parcel of $15,013. These estimated project costs include the remova'or decommissioning of existing septic systems on individual parcels W State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Final design and permitting Construction ZMEMMOMM Implementation Subtotal numm Spill Impact Component Direct Component Other grants or co4unding Other County funds (Utility CIP funds) Council-Selected Restoral'on Component Centers of Excel ence Research funding Natural Resource Damage Assessment $325,000 $325,000 $650,000 53,000, 000 $86,000,000 $89,000,000 $60,000 S89,710,000 Total Secured Funding Budget ShortNI F 19 Conservation Technical Assistance F49 Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs) Ent-tiennent Grant F49 CDSGs Entitymeni Grants—Section 108 Loan Guarantee-. F59 Urban Waters Small Grants F63 Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) S 10 Community Planning Technical Assistance Grants S 13 Florida Job Growth Grant Fund S 15 Clean Water State Revo'ving Fund (CWSRF) S 27 Nonpoint Source fvlanagument Program (NPSM) Section 319 S 34 Total Maximum Daily Load N`MDL) Water Qua ity Restorat on Grants S 35 Water Pollution Contra $325,000 $325,000 $650,000 $3,000,000 $8,950,000 $11,950,000 $60,000 512, 660,00 $12,660,000 $0 $0 $77050,000 $89,710,000 $0 S 36 Water Projects S 51 SFWMD Cooperative Funding Program S 52 SW MO Cooperat've Funding initiative SECTION V-1 Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Pa rtnersh I ps/Col la boration Th s program will bu-ld upor. other regional efforts to reduce pal Want loads to Charlotte Harbor and adjacent surface waters Charlotte County w;ll continue its ongoing partnerships with a wide range of federal, state, and regional agencies, universities, non-govemmenta; organ,zations, and related interest groups. Borne of the key partners a-e :isted below. 116 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description NEED AND JUSTIFICATION The hydrology and water quality of the tidal and Basin Management Action Plan (BMAP) have been Restoration Project Location Map, developed by the F ends Department of Env'. ronmental Protection (FDEP) to reduce nitrogen loads to the river (FDEP 2012). Lee County has taken a proactive role in conservation land acquisition and water quality. Approx mately 25,000 acres have been acquired through Lee County's Conservation 20/20 program since its nception. To date, Lee County has met its first phase obligation for the Tidal Caloosahatchee TOOL by reducing more than 45,000 pounds of TN per year, The NECTR project will continue those efforts with the restoration of natural wetland and upland habitats and the construction of surface water storage and treatment areas and recreational amenities on the Bob Janes Preserve Figure 211-11A. North East CaloosahatcheeTributaries SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities The primary restoration areas are bounded on the west by Oak Creek and on the east by the County Line Canal, A substantial amount of research has been conducted over the last two decades to analyze opportunit'es on public and pr vote lands including Babcock Ranch, County Line Dra nage District, Telegraph Creek Preserve, and the Bob Janes Preserve, Panning is under way to identify addit:onal!ands and projects that w help meet the next phase of TMDL, The NECTR pro.ect has the potential to a gnificantly contribute to this obligation as well as restore disturbed wetland and upland communities in the study area, Pr-or to its pub to acquisition, the Bob Janes Preserve was part of a 91,361-acre working ranch known as the Crescent B Ranch. In 2006„ the State of Florida acquired the ranch property, one of the single largest purchases of conservation land in Florida's history. During the property transaction, a port ori of the original Crescent IS Ranch acreage was reserved for private residentia' development (Babcock Ranch Community), wh Is the remaining 73,239 acres was sold to the State. The port on of the acquisition in Charlotte County was renamed as the Babcock Ranch Preserve (Babcock Ranch). This area is managed under the auspices of a unique publ c-pr-vate partnership that w:ll help sustain Babcock Ranch as a working ranch and a timbering and ecotourism operation. :n 2009, a contiguous 5,620-acre portion of the acquisition in Lee County was transferred to County ownership as a conservation area and renamed as the Bob Janes Preserve in recognition of Lee County Commissioner Bob Janes. Commiss-oner Janes, who passed away in 2010, was instrumental in Lee County's efforts to success�ully acquire the land for the preserve. ; , n I I F, y�� & 0 - FD 0 m ch cm C3 Z3 0 - a 0 CD In SECTION A. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities natural hydrology and flow patterns of the Preserve lands. The water storage areas would also be planted with natve wetland species in appropriate areas to provide water quality treatment (nutrient uptake) and fish and wildlife habitat functions. Later components of the project will include the construct,on of trails and recreational amenities. Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activity, & Eligible Activity 1, Restorinvir-, and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast Region Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Th a pro,ect is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Ran Goals • Gas 2: Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary} • Goa' 3: Replen-sh and Protect Living Coastal and Marine Resources This pro is cons stent with. and addresses, the fol'owing Comprehens:ve Ran Objectives: * Ob.ective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources { primary} * Otfactive 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Habitats Implementing Entities Lee County w'll be the primary implementing entity and sole grant sub.-recipient responsilee for the design, permin ng, construction, and success monhoring of the pro.ect. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment This project is consistent with the ecolog-cal and recreational management of adjacent Babcock Ranch Preserve to the north. In addition, the project will contribute to the implementat-on of the BMAP for the tidal Ca oosahatchee River Key references supporting this project are cted below: @ Babcock Ranch Preserve Recreation Master Plan. 2009. Final report prepared by the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission Final Basin Management Action Plan for the Implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads for Nutrients for the Caloosehadchee Estuary Basin, 2012. Final report prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection z-22 State of Florida State Expend lure Plan This project is considered to be feasible with respect to the ability to: (1) obtain necessary permits, (2) construct the project within the proposed budget; and (3) effectively operate and ma-main the project components over the ong term. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluat on of th a project, no significant risks or uncertainties were discovered that would preclude further planning and implementation of this project. Yet to be determined are: (1) the potent al volume of surface water that can be safely stored and released on the site, (2) the potential nutrient load reductions that can be expected, and (3) detailed implementation costs These uncertainties will be addressed in the planning stage of the project though the completion of a comprehensive conceptual design and fees bility study. Success Criteria and Monitoring The primary objectives of this project are to restore more natural hydrology and surface water flow patterns on the preserve, while also providing enhanced hydrologic storage and water quality treatment of discharges to the Caloosa- hatches River Therefore, a range of success criteria wi!l be deve oped and described n the implementation grant request. It a anticipated that quantitative success criteria will be developed for- - Changes in seasonal surface water flows from the preserve to the Caloosal River from ex sting ■ Reductions the nutrient loads discharged from the preserve to the Ca:oosahatchee River from ex sting conditions ■ Changes in wetland and stream habitat metucs on the preserve over existing conditions In the project grant request, a detai ad monitoring program design wili be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologi as for the above-listed criteria- Lee County is committed to conducting the success monitoring necessary to quantify pro,ect benefits. Milestones and Schedule The total estimated time horizon of this protect is approximately 15 years. The project is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2033. Implementation of th's project has been divided into six milestones, as shown in the chart below. This project is ready to begin a conceptua design and feasibility st-dy. -.1-3 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Budget and Funding Sources A total cost estimate has been developed by Lee County based on the best avai so a information and a number of assumptions. This preliminary cost estimated is shown in the budget table be' ow The completion of the comprehensive conceptual design and feasibil,ty study is expected to result in a detailed cost estimate. Lee County is committed to allocating al of its Direct Componer-t funds, approximate y $6,758,000, toward th 5 project to supplement its entire $12,660,000 share of the Florida Spill impact Component. Lee County has the financial copse ty to make up project funding shortfalls w'm other County funds, but will also be seeking other leveraged funding sources. A summary of t! protect budget and funding soirces is prow ded in the table be ow Cancerous' design and feasibility study Final design and permitting Construction Monrl,or n IMMEMMEM $500,000 $500,0043 $1.800,000 $15.200,000 $18,000,000 $500,000 $22,300,000 $500.000 $50o r ntra $1,500,000 $10.160,000 $12,160,009 5500,000 $12,660,00a Implementation Subtotal Total Cost Spill rnpact Corrisonent Direct Co-i-ponern Other grants or co-f u being Other County funds State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Ida rtnersh ips/Col I aboration SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Project Description the surface area of the Rookery Bay watershed by approximate y the same amount. Figure 22-1 B shows the current extents a' these watersheds in CoTer County. As a result of these drainage alterations, Naples Bay now receives a much greater volume of freshwater inflow while Rookery Bay now receives proport onately less freshwater -nflow than these estuaries d d historically. These hydrolog:c alterations have resulted in drastic disruptions to natural sal patterns in both Naples Bay and, to a lesser extent, Rookery Bay, as well as increased sediment and polk,nant loads to Naples Bay Consequently, the 4?h FIgure 22-11A. Project location in Collier County. State of f%rida State Expenditure Plan Save Our Everglades project were used to Figure 22-1 B. Current extent of the Ne plus Bay and Rookery Bay initiate the purchase of properties that later watersheds and location of the Belie Meade area Isource: Alkins, 2016). became the PSSF in 1996. These lands were purchased to help promote hydrologic and ecologic restoration and to encourage passive recreation in this area. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The CCCWIP was developed to address two primary objectives: (1) restore more natural freshwater inflows— both vo tune and timing —and salinity patterns in Naples Bay and Rookery Bay and (2) recover groundwater levels, freshwater vvel°ancls, and listed species populations in the Belle Meade area of the PSSF PROJECT COMPONENTS The CCCVVIP involves a series of linked surface water management modif cations designed to meet the project object ves.These surface water -aragement moddicat ons have been modeled and conceptua'ly designed to effect the desired changes to the hydrMogy of both the receiving water estuaries and the PSSF Figure 22-IC presents an overview of the project components that encompass the CCCWIR IlLarge"d [Nia - C - v 4 Do. i aTw ky UnN sal. 'I- w1# uw Save Our Everglades project were used to Figure 22-1 B. Current extent of the Ne plus Bay and Rookery Bay initiate the purchase of properties that later watersheds and location of the Belie Meade area Isource: Alkins, 2016). became the PSSF in 1996. These lands were purchased to help promote hydrologic and ecologic restoration and to encourage passive recreation in this area. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The CCCWIP was developed to address two primary objectives: (1) restore more natural freshwater inflows— both vo tune and timing —and salinity patterns in Naples Bay and Rookery Bay and (2) recover groundwater levels, freshwater vvel°ancls, and listed species populations in the Belle Meade area of the PSSF PROJECT COMPONENTS The CCCVVIP involves a series of linked surface water management modif cations designed to meet the project object ves.These surface water -aragement moddicat ons have been modeled and conceptua'ly designed to effect the desired changes to the hydrMogy of both the receiving water estuaries and the PSSF Figure 22-IC presents an overview of the project components that encompass the CCCWIR SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf State of Hor da State Expenditure Plan Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the fol owing RESTORE Act eligible activity. P Eligible Activity 1: Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gu'f Coast reguan Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives This pro.ect is consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Ivan Goals: • Goa! 2: Restore Water Quafty and Quantity (or mary) • Goal 1: Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3 Replenish and Protect Living Coasts and Marne Resources This pro,ect a consistent with, and addresses, the following Comprehensive Pian Objectives. • Object ve 2: Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources (primary) • Object've 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objecyve 3: Protect and Restore L'ving Coastal and Marine Resources Implementing Entities Collier County will be the sole imp'ementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the engineering design, permitting, construction, operation and maintenance, and success man taring of this project, Collier County has coordinated with numerous other agencies in the development of the CCCWlP and may collaborate with other entities in the imp'ementation of the project through leveraging and other cooperative funding agreements, Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment This project is the culm'nation of more than 30 years of study by numerous agencies, and in 2016 Collier County completed a conceptual design and feasibility study for the pro.ect, as cited below: Atkins, 2076. Collier County Comprehensive Watershed Improvement Plan Final Report prepared for Collier County and the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve. As part of this study, various flow-cliverruon scenarios were proposed and modeled, and conreptual designs of the Various pTo.ect components were conducted. In additi0n, initial permitting d scussions were held with federal and state regulatory and resource management agent es. Th a clociment also cites the relevant previous studies. This project is considered to be feasib!e with respect to the ability to: 11) obtain necessary permits, (2) construct the project within the proposed budget, and (3) effectively operate and maintain the project components over the long term a2.9 SECTION V. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Risks and Uncertainties In the ewil_iation of this project, no sign,ficant risks have been identified that will preclude implementation. There are some Lncerta;nties with regard to 11) a potential increase in nutrient loads to Rookery Bay and (2) hydro ogic alterations to the PSSF However, these uncertainties will be fully eva'uated during des;gn and perm-tang, Success Criteria and Monitoring This project will affect estuaries, freshwater wetlands, and terresir al systems, Therefore, a range of success criteria will be deve'oped and described in the project grant request. It is anticipated that quantilative success criteria will be developed for. Changes in the d stribution of salinity, oysters, and seagrass beds in Naples Bay and Rookery Bay from existing conditions 9 Changes in groundwater !evels, and the distr bution of vegetat on and listed species in the Belle Meade area of the Picayune Strand State Forest from existing condit tarts Milestones and Schedule The lots' estimated time hor-zon of this project !a approximately 16 year's. .t is expected to start in 2018 and end in 2033. Implementation of this project has been cl.vided into 11 milestones as shown in the chart below.This project is ready to begin engineering design and perm'tting 1-ic- State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Budget and Funding Sources As Part of the pro,ect feasibility study (Atkins, 20161, a preliminary so men of probable construction engineering, permitting, construct on, and monitoring costs for the project was developed, based on best avai'ab a information for quantities and on t prices for the year 2016. The total project cost was estimated to be 532,035,000. Collier County is committed to allocat ng all of its Direct Component funds, approx moody $5,400,000, toward this project to supicement its entire $12,660,000 share of the Florida Spit !mpact Component. Cowl iar County has the financial capacity to make up project funding shortfalls with other County funds, but wi'il also be seeking other leveraged funding sources. A summary of the project budget and funding sources is provided in the table below. - ty study (cumulated) $o $0 prelim nary des on and monitoring $1,155.500 $o 1,Iitigyt on design $ $0 North Belle Meade prel urinary eng net-ring S1,225,000 $0 Six Ls masterplan $1,225,000 $1,225.000 Planning Subtotal $4,726,000 $1,225,000 Final design and permitt:ng lall three phases} $3,500.000 $3.500.000 Construction Phase I (Golden Gate) $7,720.500 $7322,500 Construction Phase 2 (Six Ls) $7720,500 $0 Construction Phase 3 (Bel a Meade) $7.720,500 $G Implementation Subtotal $26,661,500 $10,822,500 Monitor ng $612,500 $612,500 Total Cost $32,000,000 $12,660,000 is Spill impact Component $12,660,000 D rest Component $5,400,000 Other grants or co-funding $0 Other County funds $13,940,000 Total Secured Funding $32.000,000 Budget Shortfall $0 F51 National Coastal Wetlands Grants F52 North Amer can Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) - Small Grants F53 North Amer can wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) - Standa•d Grant F54 Southeast Reg on Coastal Program 0 43 Southeast Armatri; SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities S 10 Community P-anningTechn!,al Assistance Grants S 36 Water Pro;ects S 51 SFWMD Cooperaii-ve Funding Program Collier County has requested cons deration from tie Florida Department of Environmental Protection 11FDEP) to apply leveraged funds from both the Natural Resource Damages portion of the State's settlement as well as Council Selected Component Wait 2) funds in col aboration with PREP as part of a future Funded Priority List If these and the other cited potentia° leveraged funding sources become available, they it be used to offset County exprencirtures. Partnershi ps/Co I laboration The deve:opment of the CCCVViP and completion of the conceptual design and feasibility study, was co- sponsored by the Rookery Bay N E R R, wh ch has been involved from the beginning of project development and has provided technical support. in add tion, Col! at County has worked oil Glent:y to gain the support and partnership of other interested local groupsycirganzations, includmg: * Conservancy of Southwest Florida 422 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Description OVERVIEW AND LOCATION NEED AND JUSTIFICATION To maximize the volume of fill material, many of the canals were dredged to depths of 10 to 20 feet, with some as deep as 40 feet Furthermore, most of the created canals are long, dead-end networks with little or no tidal flashing, These hydrograph'c alterations, combined with the add don of untreated residential stornmoster runoff and wastewater effluent from leaky septic tanks, fostered persistent toxic algae blooms, low dissolved oxygen, and poor water clarity. Accordingly, living resources - including seagrass, benthic invertebrates, and fish —cannot tolerate these conditions, and any cans a have become "dead zones." Figure 23-1 A shows a poorly flushed canal with excessive decaying vegetation a33 Figure 23-11A. Location of priority canal systems in the Florida Keys. SECTION V1 Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities nutr ents and dissolved oxygen impairments, The FKRAD was prepared as an alternative vegetation. to using an established total maximum dai-y load (TMDL), PROJECT COMPONENTS 4. 7 1- Figure 23-18, Poorly flushed canal with excessive decaying State of Florida State Expenditure Ran Subcommittee (Subcommittee'. on 2012 to provide scientific and ob'.ective oversight of the Canal Restoration Program and recommended the deve opment of a plan to prioritize canal restoration projects and identify fund ng sources for these projects. In response to this recommendation, Monroe County and its partners completed the CMMR in September 2013. The CM MP used a two-step process to develop an action plan: 1. Engineering and Science-Based Assessment and Evaluation 2. Outreach, Management, and Program Development A total of 502 residential canals, or canal segments, were identified, mapped, and assessed. Of those, 302 were determined to have poor or fair water qua ity-229 of which are located in unincorporated Monroe County. Those 229 canals were subsequently classified and ranked for priority restoration in the CydMR The canal restoration techn quers evaluated were those that or warily address qua ity degradation related to depleted dissolved oxygen and poor tidal flushing. Five pr mary technolog'es were evaluated, including: * Removal of accumulated organic sediments to canals * Installation of weed gates, air curta!ns, or other physical barriers to min rn ze external inputs of excess organic matter • Construction of culvert connections to facilitate tidal f ushing and circulation • Backfilling to prevent the oc of strat:fication and deep stagnant zones - Installation of water pumping systems to fac Mate Pushing when culvert connections are not feasible The CMMP describes a clear road map for canal restoration in Monroe County, and So 11 Impact Component funding will be used to implement priority canal restoration projects identified in the CMMR Contributions to the Overall Economic and Ecological Recovery of the Gulf The canal restoration program specified in the Monroe County CIVIMP will directly contribute to the improvement of water quality conditions in nearshore coastal waters. Clean coastal waters are absolutely essential to the economy and ecology of the Florida Keys The Florida Keys coral reef tract is the third largest barrier reef in the world, and the -135 SECTION A. Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Eligibility and Statutory Requirements This project is consistent with, and addresses, the following RESTORE Act eligible activities: Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives [his project a consistent with, and addresses, the foil owing Comprehens ve Plan Goals: • Goal 2- Restore Water Quality and Quantity (primary) • Goal 1 Restore and Conserve Habitat • Goal 3 Replenish and Protect Living Coastai and Mar ne Reso i r L;e3 • Goal 5: Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy Th a project is cons'stent with, and addresses, the foliowing Comprehens've Plan Objectives • Objective 2: Restore, Improve, and Protectokiter Resources (primary) • Objective 1: Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats • Objective 3: Protect and Restore Living Coastal and Marine Resources • Consortium Objective 8: Restore, Diversify, and Revitalize the Gulf Economy with Econo and 4 ? C. State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Environmental Restoration Projects Implementing Entities Monroe County will be the sole imprementing entity and grant sub-recipient responsible for the parmitt ng, construction, and success monitoring of all projects conducted under this program. Best Available Science and Feasibility Assessment AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc,, 2013, Monroe County Management Master Plan fCMM`M. Final report prepared for Monroe County, the US, Environmental Protection Agency, and the Water Quality Protection Program Steering and Advisory Committees, This document also describes the consistency and compliance of the CMMP with other federal and state management and regulatory documents. Risks and Uncertainties In the evaluation of th;s program, no significant risks or uncertaint as were identh ad that would preclude implementation of the MAUR Monroe County has identified priority projects and -s ready to proceed with design, perm ding, and construction. Success Criteria and Monitoring Projects implemented under this program w 11 primari.y affect water quality in the restored canals, Therefore, a range of success criteria will be developed and described in the implementation grant request. It is anticipated that quantitat ve success criteria will be developed for • Changes in water clarity and dissolved oxygen from existing conditions in the canals to be restored • Changes in the abundance and distribution of seagrass and benthic invertebrates from existing conditions in the canals to be restored In the project grant request, a detailed more taring program design will be described that addresses data collection and assessment methodologies for the above-'isted criteria Monroe County is committed to an adaptive management approach to the project, and to conducting the mon'.toring necessary to support this approach and to quantify project benefits. .1v7 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities Milestones and Schedule Because of the large number of projects in the MMP. as well as funding constris me, Monroe County it implement the CMIVIP program iricrementally ove the next 10 to 20 years. However, Monroe County has identified prior ty projects to be paid for using RESTORE Act funds and is ready to proceed with design, permat ng, construction, and monitoung of those pro total est mated t me horizon of these rinajects s approximately 8 years. The project is expected to start -n 2018 and end in 2026 F no des gn and permitting Construction Success monitor no Budget and Funding Sources The lots' estimated cost to implement restoration projects in all 229 impaired canals is $671,100,000, However, Monroe County is proposing to use its fu'l allocation of both Direct Component and Spill Impact Component funds to implement a select group of priority projects ident lied in the CMMP A summary of the project budget and funding sources is prov tied in the tab e below. F!nal des an and permitting $1,874,869 $1,874,869 Construction $16.873,821 $10,485.131 Implementation Subtotal $18,748,690 $12,360,000 Monitoring $300,000 $300,000 Total Cost $19,048,690 $12,660,000 Spill Impact Component $12,660,000 Direct Component $6,388,690 Other grants or co-fund no $0 Other County funds $0 Total Secured funding $19,0" Budget ho II $0 Counci'-Se'ected Rest�ratxvn Component Natural Resource Damage Assessment F43 Coastal Resil:ence Grants Program S 20 Coastal Partnership 'nitartive Florida Coastal Management Program S 36 Water Projects S 51 SFVVV D Cooperative Fund ng Program .130 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Pal rtnershi ps/Col la boration Monroe County has coordinated with a wide range of stakeholders in the development of CMMIR including 4 ,s 1.) SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities C. Summary of Projects, Programs, and Activities PROJECT SUMMARYTABLE !n Section B, a total of 69 project and programs are described using the temp'ate approved by the Council, 1he Pro.ect SummaryTable on the following pages provides a summary listing of all the projects and programs sorted by in the following fields:County Z.tD State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Project Surnmarylbble Legend (continued) 4al i as CL x LU Cf) —j LL E 0 0 L) as as w 4- 0 0 z I- 7 04 C i 04 CL LU U) —j U— E SECTION V Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities BENEFITS OFT HE COUNTY-DRIVEN PROCESS The county-driven project nom nation process resulted in a number of benefits that would not have been derived had the rental proposed approach been used.These benefits are listed and discussed below: • Bottom up vs. top down process • Even distribution of funding across the Florida Gulf coast • Projects address local and reg anal priorit es • High y diverse range of protects • Regions cc laboration. Even Distribution of Funding Local and Regional Priorities While the more ins:dious effects of the Deepwaler Horizon (DWH) oil spill on Flor-da's marine resources (e,g , long-term fishery population impacts) is stil under investigation, significant overt ecological damage was fairly 21.44 State of Flor-da State Expenditure Plan both offshore art f icia I reefs and nearshore oyster reefs. Finally, a common theme that all Corsiortium member count es have promoted is that Florida's economy is inextricably linked to the environmental qual ty of its coastal zone. The vast majority of Florida's economic activity 1-'5 SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities 0 0 r° • Land Aquisition 0 Water QualitylOuantity 0 Habitat Restoration 0 Living Resources 0 Community Resiliance 0 Recreation/Public Access 0 <$1,000,000 0 $1,000,000- $8,000,000 0 $8,000,000 - $16.000.000 0 $16,000,000 - 530,000,000 0 >$30,000,000 N A 0 50 100 mor — mor — momommom Miles 0 Figure'SC-1. Distribution by SEP projects and programs chundfied by FDEP project and dollars across the Florida Gulf Coast n- 7 ca ON ! 04 as LU U) —J U- C 4) E .0 0 as 44e State of Flor,da State Expenditure Plan Diversity of ProjectTypes Perhaps the greatest benef t of the cound- driven project nomination process is the diversity of projects proposed by the Consortium member counties As presented in Section Vc. above a total of 69 projects and programs have been proposed address ng a wide range of RESTORE ,pct eligible activities, COUnCil goals and objectives, and project types defined by the Florida Department of Environmental Protect ;on iFDEP }. The fol owing pre charts provide a summary of the proposed SEP project list Flgure VC-2 be ow shoves the project breakdown by primary RESTORE Act eligible activ,ty. The SEP project list represents four of the eleven RESTORE Act eligible activit;es; however, it should be noted that classifying projects into a single activity was in many cases cliff cult dire to mult pie and overlapping project benefits. Nonetheless, it is clear that the top activities represented include: r f 5B% 2G Restoration and Protection of the Natural Resources, Ecosystems, Fisheries, Marine 40 58% and Wildlife Habitats, Beaches and Coastal Wetlands of the Gulf Coast Region Promotion of Tourism In the Gulf Coast Region Including Recreational Fishing 18 26% Coastal Flood Protection and Related Infrastructure 4 6% Infrastructure Projects Sonefatting the Economy or Ecological Resources Including 4 6% Pert Infrastructure Promotion of the Consumptives of Seafood Harvested from the Gulf Coast Regions 1 1 % Planning Assistance 7. 3% Mitigation of Damage to Fish, Wildlife and Natural Resources a 6% Improvements to or on State Pa Located In Coastal Areas Affected by the a 0% Dequarater Horizon Oil Spill F €gore S- . Project breakdown by RESTORE Act Eli i.b e Activity, t -1' SECTION V. Proposed Projects Programs, and Activities FigumsV.C-3 and V.C-4 show the project breakdown by Council Goal and Ob;ective. Again, classifying projects into a single project ob.'ective was often difficult due to multiple and overlapis ng project benefits. The top goals and objectives represented include EM 2 �fa 10% 2% Enhance Community Resilience 1 2% Replenish and Protect Living 7 1a ':o Coastal and Marine Resources Restore and Conserve Habitat a 12% Restore and Revitalize the Gulf Economy 21 3056 Restore Water Quality and Quantity 32 46% Figure -3, Project breakdown by Council Goal. 3% 1% Improve Science-Based Decision-Making Processes 0 0% 7% j Promote Community Resilience 2 3% 4% Promote Natural Resource Stewardship 1 1% and Environmental Education Protect and Restore Using 5 7% Coastal and Marine Resources 48% Restore and Enhance Natural 3 4% Processes and Shorelines Restore, Diverriffic and Revitalize the 20 29% 29 Gulf Economy with Economic and Environmental Restoration Projects Restore, Enhance, and Protect Habitats 5 7% Restore, Improve, and Protect Water Resources 33 48% Figure V.C-4- Project breakdown by Council Objective, I T7 04 C i 04 or LU U) as _J LL. E or 4_L3 State of Florida State Expand tore Plan FigureV.C-5 shows the project breakdown by project type as defined by the Flor;da Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The FDEP project type classificat on is generally more Using this categorization scheme, the diversity of projects is more evident, however, Water Quality/Quantity is the most dominant project type at 40 percent. 7% 210 12% 17"a Land Acquistion 7 10% Water Quality/Quantity 29 429 Habitat Restoration 12 17% Living Resources 8 12% RecreartiontrPublic Access 8 12% Community Resilience 5 7% Figuni'viz-5. Project breakdown by FDEP pzviecl type. FigureV.C-6 below shows the project breakdown by FDEP project type dol ars Although the top three project types are the same as in Figure VC-4, projects that fall into the Water Quality/Quantity category account for 60'!:n of the total budget. To a is because wastewater and stormwater infrastructure projects tend to be very costly compared to other project types IM Land Acquistion $29,751,667 10% 7 Water QuallocrQuantity $175,733,393 60% 29 Habitat Restoration $35,818,090 12% 12 Living Resources $10,170,000 4% a 60% Recreation/Public Access $20,368,250 7% 8 Community Resilience $18,660,000 6% S Figure VC-6. Project breakdown by FOE P pe elect type dollar s. 10% -17 6% 10% SECTION V: Proposed Projects, Programs, and Activities W16 Figure V. C-7. Project breakdown by stage of readiness. During the project nomination process the ind vidual counties tended to focus on the r own local needs and priorities without much consideration of multi-county partic patron on reg projects. However, it should be noted that the Gulf Consortium ase f is the mechanism by which the 23 member counties collaborate and interact. 4�3 I n' ino,. State of Flor do State Expend tine Plan i (D CL X LU cr) —j LL E 0 0 L) (D 0 to .2 (D w 4- 0 QJ 0 z I- 7 04 C i 04 CL LU US —j U- E 4r. '- O-Pr 4P Implementation ■ CII v a� n co a n� to State of Florida State Expenditure P an As discussed in Section 111, the Gulf Consortium (Consortium) is the legal entity in Florida responsible for implementation of the Florida State Expenditure Plan (SEP) and will be the direct recipient of grant funds disbursed by the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restorat on Council lCouncil} to the State of Florida pursuant to the Sal I Impact Component of the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act of 2012 (RESTORE Act) A. Unique Challenges of Implementing the Florida State Expenditure Plan As discussed in previous sections of this document, the proposed projects, programs, and activities included in this Florida SEP were developed through a "county-driven" process whereby each of the 23 member counties of the Gulf Consortium independently determined how they would use their even-steven allocation of Florida's Spill Impact Component, This process resulted ;n a large number of projects (69) covering a wide range of RESTORE Act eloils e activities and project types, .IES SECTION VI: Implementation B. Project Sequencing readiness- in addition, the sequencing strategy should treat each county fairly, w thout bias, RESTORE ACT Payout Assumptions In developing an overall implementation strategy, mulap a alternatives for managing the accounting of Spill Impact Component funds amongst the 23 count as over the 15 -year payout schedule have been evaluated under the fol owing assumptions: sense as it al She with Florida Gubernatorial terms. W th the above-described guiding principle in mind, the ESA consultant team defined three overarching goals for project sequencing and the overall SEP implementation strategy, including: • Address urgent needs • Demonstrate early successes • Ensure that every county is making progress The first goal addresses the need to cap talize on issues of timeliness that a embodied in the Ust of SEP projects, For example, if the acquisition of a parcel of land is needed to conduct a proposed restoration project, and that parce' of land is available now from a vall-ng se'ler at an affordable price, then acquit-rig that pares; should be a high priority. Otherwise, the opportunity to conduct t - ne dependent restorat on activities on thal. parcel will be lost. .'. E n State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Development of Sequencing Models Given the large number of projects in the Flor da SEP their varying degrees of readiness, and the other complexities discussed above, the ESA consultant team developed and evaluated three "models" or approaches to sequencing the proposed SEP projects over the 15-year payout schedule. In addition to quantitative funding levels, three qualitative factors were identified for considerat on in the development of the project sequencing models: a Project Readiness, This factor addresses the stage of development of a particular project. Five levels of project readiness were identified: — Concept only — Initial planning completed — Conceptual design and feasibility analysis completed — Engineering design and permitting completed — Contractor bids completed – project is shovel-ready a Project Timeliness, This factor addresses external issues that could affect whether or not a project is ready of implementation, Examples include: — Does a parcel targeted for land acquisition have a willing seller and is it available at an affordable price? — Are co-funding grant opportunities or other leveraged funding sources available now that won't be available later? — Is the project waiting on the issuance of a per that has the potential to be denied? County Self-Prioutization, This factor addresses the county's self-determined prioritization and sequencing. In the process of nominating proposed project lists, the consultant team did request self -priorilization by the counties, though it was not mandatory, The three sequencing models developed by the consultant team are presented, compared, and contrasted below. 4 F 7 SECTION Vl Implementation Most equitable approach A ows each county to make progress during every year of th F. payout May allow some counties to bond using annual accruals as collateral May preclude the mail ty to address urgent needs Decreases the abi ity to implement J a r QF - .r. early act an projects Eliminates the col:ective apil-ty of the Consortium to leverage other DWH funds Penalizes rues' counties that do not have comparable access to other funding sources May penalize counties with fewer larger projects Figure VI-1 below shows the cumulative funds available to each county for each year in the remainder of the 15 -year payout period. Hypothetical o under Mode A, a county seeking to imicement a $6 on Ilion project with only its Spill Impact Component funds could not do so unt 12021, when adequate funds have been accrued in Its "account" $16,000,000 $14,000,000 $12,000,000 $10,000,000 $8.000,000 $6,000,000 $4,000,000 $2.000,000 Is MIUMM Figure yd-11. Cumulative dollars available to each county per payout year, .15u- State of Florida State Expenditure Plan For example, in the first 4-year work program, the Consort uno would have the discret on to sequence all projects using the aggregate projected 2021 accrual, but no county could spend more than their individua projected 2021 accrual during the 4-year cycle. However, under Model B some counties could potentially spend their entire pro 2021 accrual during the f rat year of the work program prior to actually accruing that amount, if the Consortium decided that their project should be accelerated to meet certain gas a Using Model B, a I three overarching sequenc ng goals can feasibly be met, and this model is essentially a hybrid between Model A and C The pros and cons of Mode IS are summarized in the table below. Supports ability to implement larger early-action projects while May require "incentives" for counties whose pro.:ects are keeping equity over 15 year payout sequ6nced later Allows each county to make progress during every year of the payout Supports the collective ability of the Gulf Consortium to leverage other DWH funds Figure VI-2 below shows the projected funds available to the Consortium for each work program period described above. Hypothetically, under Model IS a county seeking to implement a $6 million project with only its Spill Impact Component funds could do so in 2018 if the Consortium decided that their project should be accelerated to meet certain goals. no= $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $0 Figure VI -2, Dollars available to the Consortium for each work program, 45J Supports ability to address urgent needs Some countie . will benefit by receiving more of twir allocation before the others 2018-2021 2022-2025 2026-2029 2030-2031 SECTION VI: Implementation Using Model C, the three overarching sequencing goals can be met, and this is the most flexible of the three mosaic However, sorre cointres would clearly benefit by receiving more, or perhaps all, of their Spill Impact Component allocation before others, This would likely necessitate the development of "incentives" in the form of allocat an transfers, or the commitment of greater shares of 'averaged funding, to encourage counties to support this mode The pros and cons of Model C are summarized in the tab!e below. Supports abil ty to 'ul y -mplernent laiger, early aut on protests May require "incentives" for counties whose projects are sequenced later in the payout Allows each county to make progress during every year of the payout Supports the collective abil ty of the Gulf Consort um to leverage other DVVH funds FigureVI-3 be'ow shows the projected funds available to the Consort urn for each year in the remainder of the 1 5-year payout per ad. Hypothet ca'ly, under Model C, a county seeking to implement a $12 mill on project with only its Spill Impact Component funds could do so in 2018 if the Consortium des ded that the r project should be accelerated to meet certain goa:s. $350,000,000 $300,066,600 $256,006,000 $200,000,000 $150,000,000 $100,000,000 $5000,000 Iff FigureVO-3, Dollars available to the Consortium per payout year, .1 F10 Supports abil to to address urgent neeas Some counties w'll benefit by receiving more of the r allocation before the others 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Although the concept of a 4-year work program is discussed above with regard to Model B, it should be noted that projects could also be clustered and sequenced in 4-year work programs under both Models A and C. However, the total dollar amount allocated to each work program could never exceed what the Consort um has accrued by the last year of the work program, as shown in Figure VI-3, Z& i as CL x LU Cf) —j LL E 0 0 L) as as w 4- 0 0 z I- 7 04 C i 04 CL LU U) —j U— E ' 1A o I � a 3t io u = m m M a a M 3 3 a A 2L a a3 ly V m m m M M IV n m m D A 42 t - 9 1 1 -!� 19. v ai @ 3 1 3 Baaq3 33Za 33a 3333 a 3 3 P - lig it a a H an to w in I., V1 0 o o ce 07 w w m w 0 w tA w BPi I # �Io IV. o 4A. An I m �T ial lav 9 m wt �4 an to w 9;,w Z I W O E G tr S P C � a L 6 ift GA CA Z4 W C3 w w w w W S w 4A IW era CS 8 o 4 Ch -4 0 I pe w 0 w 14 W 0 M Ap' `X` A 1 ; AA gj w w 4� w cs v, 09 w na am w 89 am w C3 8 w o 4A Il'" an r. P rl rw M4 O m I fi er 4P :E - �E r , = — 2- Z, jc 3 3 dL' T 4 o CL m m v lb LT 2 g 2 o v x R 8 3 6 am x v E :0 0 m CL It m A FP . w ch o 8 8 iex 00 m Aft q; + 'N Aft 44 as I® 9 an 'A is T's s o pip g o W W ro tJ V rn 0 0 0 are in w w 0 0 0 46 1N-,M 44 o w ul P -P -W 4 8 01 - W I W W I a r. 0 8 F w re ka o o w w an as 8 as an iA 8 88 w w 0 wW 0 0 0 COP o. v atp W o 0 W M4 N o i. T C qn w a w w w I w o W w w C) w W 4A 4A 4� v P P p P 0 SECTION VI: Implementation C. Project Leveraging expand the scope, extent, magnitude, and positive impacts of many of the SEP projects. DEFINING VARI OUS FUNDING TYPES In the Indiv dual Project Descriptions o tl ned in Sect ear~ vC. of this SEP the budget table for each project shows a breakdown of the various "secured" funding sources proposed to complete the scope as described. For each project, the proposed sources of funding include (1) Spill Impact Component request; (2) Direct Component funds; (3) other grants and co4und ng, and (4) other county funds. These fund'ro sources are considered to be "secured" in that they represent actual committed funding that is available for project implementation at SEP approval. Aw- State of Florida State Expenditure Plan Money Awslable to Florida ManaginE; Agency Levaragoable Preheets GiDographic Limitations Funding Cycle Process to Link to FDEP and Fish and Wild.ife Conservation WWO rece ve projects through the DWH project pertaI on SEP FDEP's websote Selected projects will be submitted to Ceunc I for inclusion in future Aerations of the Funded Priority List and Comprehensive Ran dU5 SECTION VI: Implementation Projects are limited to the Gu I Coast region, Early restoration was focused in the Panhandle, future Geographic restoration efforts will be statewide. Exact geographic limitations have not been defined Projects Limitations for the Habitat on Federally Managed Lands restoration type vo I seek to address habitat injuries at Gulf Islands National Seashore and Si, Vincent National Wild its Refuge Money Ave lable to Of the $2,554 bi'lion allocated to GEBF $356 million is allocated for projects in FL As of FYI 7 Florida approximalfay $255.21A is still available for restoration activities in Florida Geographic Total restoration funding allocated is $8.1 billion, plus $700 mil ion for unknown conditions and Limitations adaptive management. Restoration funds are divided among Trustee Imp emernation Groups Money Available to iTiGs) for defined restoration areas, three of which may be leveraged with Florida's Spill Impact Florida Component projects: Regiorovice 1$350 million), Open Ocean j$l 24 billion) and Florida (S680 mill on), The Florida-specific TIG has spent $144 million thus far on restoration activities. The Florida TIC is the focus of this leveraging analysis, Process to Link to The Florida TIC has six member agencies: EDER C FW Nations Oceanic and Atmespher-c Acknrnis- Managing Agency tration (NOAAL Un'ted States Department of Agriculture (USDA), EPA, and DOI The Florida Tl G develops, se'ects, and implements restoration projects on a consensus basis to accormy ran the priorities of the Programmatic Damage Assessment and Restoration Plan (PDAR P) Leveragaiable The Florida TIG is specifically solic't'ng proposals for projects addressing Had tat Restoration on Projects Federally Managed Lands, Nutrient Reduction, Water Quality, and Provide and Enhance Recreat one Opportunities Projects are limited to the Gu I Coast region, Early restoration was focused in the Panhandle, future Geographic restoration efforts will be statewide. Exact geographic limitations have not been defined Projects Limitations for the Habitat on Federally Managed Lands restoration type vo I seek to address habitat injuries at Gulf Islands National Seashore and Si, Vincent National Wild its Refuge Money Ave lable to Of the $2,554 bi'lion allocated to GEBF $356 million is allocated for projects in FL As of FYI 7 Florida approximalfay $255.21A is still available for restoration activities in Florida Geographic The GEBF Restoration Strategy will concentrate projects in the Panhandle and Big Bend reg Limitations of Florida, stretch'ng from Escamb'a to Levy County, The rest of Florida's pen insular counties and offshore projects are restricted to migratory liv ng resources Funding Cycle -here 'a no deadline for submissions. Project proposals for each funding cycles are expected to be reviewed in the spring of each funding year Projects are f i rat submitted through the project portal, common to N R DA, Restore Pot 2 and OF BF Process to Link to on FIDEPs website, They are then screened by WVC and FDER Projects are considered for inclusion SEP in Florida's DEEP Restoration Strategy, which w11 be a planning tool for the remaining GEBF investments in Frorida, to be finalized in late 2017 Selected project proposals are recommended to NFWF who wil - then award grants to successful proposals i CL is as. to U.11 to CO —I LL or E 0 0 r- 0 Of is 0 to as as 4- 0 4) 0 0 Z n- 7 04 04 wi el CL LU be um as E 4 6 F Stale of F orida State Expend lure Plan It should be noted that each of these three funding sources have different :egal bases, adm'.nistrative processes, and funding cycles, mak ng it infeasible to determine set amounts of leveraged funds for each project at the time of SEP approval. MATCHMAKING OTHER FUNDING SOURCES WITH COUNTY PROJECTS dc'...' SECTION It Implementation goals and objectives of the RESTORE Act and are working in the Gulf Coast. A hard copy booklet of this information was presented to the Gulf Consortium Board of Directors at their September 28, 2017 meeting, and is inc:uded as a standalone Appendix D to this SEP &C'18 �.. � ,