Item Q5 1
ONROE COUNTY - INCLUDES MUNICIPALITIES - MILLION - 12/1 /13
Ne se note if -this apphcation is selected, con is located in 0 muonicip cities and unincorporated
Monroe County will be included -for potential restoration projects. The Canal Management Masterplan
will be used as a guiding document in the ev W tioon process -for selection of conk -for restoration
-from the 502 c on k evaluated under the M sterpla n throughout all muonicip hties and unincorporated
Monroe County.
APPLICATION COVER PAGE — 1 OF 2 (PROJECT BASIC CRITERIA)
Section 1: Application Cover Page; Basic Criteria Please use this page, or re-create as is.
1. PROJECT TYPE: (As mandated by the RESTORE Act,funds may only be used for one or more of the allowable
uses listed below, which the County cannot amend or change. Carefully review each criteria listed below and
determine if your project will achieve one or more of the allowable uses below. Projects that do not meet at
least one of the allowable uses below will not be considered for funding.
Check all that apply.)
frdyi % %11 X (Restoration and protection of natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine
� and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast IRcgion.
Mitigation of damage to fish,wildlife, and natural resources.
X (Implementation of a federally approved marine/coastal management plan,
including fisheries monitoring. (Implementation of the Canal Management
Master approved b the FKNMS Steering Committee
7 mn
p p Y g
X Workforce development and job creation.
Improvements to or on state parks in coastal areas affected by the Deepwater
oil spill.
X (Infrastructure (projects Ibenefittiing economy or ecological resources,
including (port infrastructure.
_ Coastal flood protection and related infrastructure.
— Planning assistance.
e� ravu��(i1VdP'IJ4146 r, " iip
Activities to promote tourism and seafood in the Gulf Coast region, for one or
f U4�P���n�f�oh Itl III
more
of the following:
Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Region, including recreational fishing.
Promotion of the consumption of seafood harvested from the Gulf Coast
u region.
2. CONTACT INFORMATION: (Include at least one name, phone number, email
y and organization anization name i a
j jiO is i, J Y g f applicable)
)
Organization: Monroe County
-246
Address: 102050 Overseas Highway, Ste. 2
City, State,Zip Code: Key Largo, FL 33037
Contact Person Name: Rhonda Haag
Title: Sustainability Manager
Phone: (350)453-8774
Email Address: Haag-Rhonda@monroecounty-fl.gov
2 1 1) a g e
APPLICATION COVER PAGE — 2 OF 2 (PROJECT SUMMARY)
Section 2. Application Cover Page; Project Summary Information.
Please utilize this sheet or re-create, but keep format as is.
Project Name: (Provide a short, succinct title for the project)
Monroe County Canal Water Quality improvements and Restoration—including Municipalities
4. Project Executive Summary: (Provide a concise summary or abstract in the space below; do not exceed the
space below.)
Monroe County proposes to construct and implement Federal and State mandated canal restoration
projects in the Florida Keys, as specified in the Monroe County Canal Management Master Plan (CMMP),
approved by the Ii=IKIMMS Steering Committee. Click Ihere for the link to the CMMP
iirrioiiriuiiroecouiirm�ty.cl�vlfcl�plllus.coiirrt/[)ocuiiryteiiriut�Ceiiriut.�eiir/VIfevv,/6301,.
The Water Quality Action Plan (WQAP) of the FKNMS identifies priorities for local entities to implement
solutions to restore healthy water quality in Sanctuary waters. Canal restoration is a critical item identified in
Strategy W.10, addressing Canal Water Quality, and Activities 1-7 describe the need to conduct pilot
restoration projects and implement technologies designed to improve canal water quality. This proposed
project would go far in implementing the WQAP of the Sanctuary. When completed, the project will result in
significantly improved water quality to the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, and compliance with
mandatory state water quality standards and relevant federal and state regulatory standards.
Range of Benefit: Does this project have a
X Local benefit?
X Keys-wide benefit?
X Regional benefit?
11 Gulf-wide benefit?
(Provide the location of the project and a brief description of the area that is benefiting; do not exceed the space
below.)
The project includes canals with impaired water quality located
throughout the entire Florida Keys, in Monroe County, Florida. The
cities of Key West, Marathon, Lay-ton, Village of Ilsllamorada, Key
Colony Beach and unincorporated Monroe County are included. A
list of the canals is included in this link http:Zlfl-
monroeco jinty.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/5312.
A map of the Keys is included in this link
monroecounty.civicplus.com/DocumentCenter/View/5306.
3 1 1) a g e
6. Project Cost: (Provide the actual/estimated project cost, the amount being requested with this submission, and
the amount of match committed to the project from any source. Please make clear the total project cost and the
amount you are requesting. There is an opportunity to provide detailed cost/request/match information in the
narrative section (see question 8.)
* Total Project Cost: .11.1. ,.�. .1000
• RESTORE Request Amount: $ a, .0.000 53%of project cost:
Secured Cash Match (committed funding): 5,000,000 44.2%of project cost
In-kind Match value: 10000 .1%of project cost
Funding Gap: 0 0%of project cost
Anticipated Cash Match (funding from other sources)*: S 300,000 2.7 %of project cost.
*These funds must be secured within 1 year of project award.
APPLICATION PROJECT BUDGET
Section 3. Project Budget
PROJECT BUDGET FUNDING
Activity/ Cost Anticipated Cash Match In-kind
Item RESTORE Match
Funding
Planning/Design/Permitting
1,101,000. $600,000 $500,000 $1,000
Administration*:
Planning Subtotal: 1,101,000.
Construction or Project Activity (ies)
9, 99,000. 5,375,000. $4,500,000 $7,000
Administration*:
Construction 9, 99,000.
Subtotal:
Monitoring
$327,000 $25,000 $300,000 $2,000
An EPA Grant of $300,000 dedicated to monitoring o
canal restoration is provided.
Administration*:
4111) a g e
Monitoring $327,000
Subtotal:
Project Cost
Total Administration*:
TOTALS: $11,310,000. $6,000,000. $5,300,000 $10,000
Year Estimate of Costs
Year 1 $2,000,000
Year 2 $7,110,000
Year 3 $2,000,000
Year 4 00,000
Year 5
Year 6
Notes: Only complete the sections of the budget that are applicable for your project. Please refer to question 8 to
provide further explanation of budget details. *The RESTORE Act places a total 3%cap on administrative expenses.
We are uncertain at this point how this will be applied, how "administration" will be defined or assigned, or
whether projects may even be able to include administration. We are waiting on further guidance from US
Treasury rules to define this. Please keep this in mind as you develop your budget. Administrative costs typically
include but may not be limited to overhead costs for basic operational functions (insurance, utilities), as well as
costs associated with admin staff such as accountants, legal, etc.
11
IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIII(I(i(i�lllll�
5 1 If°) a g e
APPLICATION QUESTIONS— DETAILED PROJECT INFORMATION
Section 4. Application Narrative; Detailed Project Information
Please respond clearly and specifically to each of the following questions. Use 12 pt. font, 1 inch margins,
and pagination, to aid in readability. There is no page limit, but please be as brief as possible. To complete
your submission, please attach your response to these questions to the application cover pages and the
budget page.
6. Project Description: (Describe all aspects of the project; what issue, need, concern or problem does the project
address? Why is the issue/need/concern/problem important? Is there an urgency or immediacy to the need?
Provide facts and data sources used to support the need for this project. What and/or who does the project
impact, benefit or affect; what will it accomplish when completed? Provide facts and data sources to support
the expected impacts. Proved any other relevant information needed to describe your project. Be sure you make
the connection between your project and the RESTORE Act criteria selected on first page. Provide citations for all
references quoted or used to support the need for and impacts of this project.)
Maximum 20 pts. How important is this project in terms of the need it meets and the goals it is seeking to
achieve? How critical is the need it addresses? Is the need supported by data/facts? Is this project likely to
meet its goals?Is the project approach organized and well thought out?
The County has already initiated the last of its wastewater
projects that will eliminate sewage releases into canal and near
shore waters. The completion of the wastewater projects will '/������ i
help clean up degraded near shore waters of the Florida Keys and
prevent against further degradation. However, the wastewater � >
projects won't eliminate the pollution already in the canal waters
and the organics and pollutants that have settled up to several
feet deep on the bottoms of many of the canals. Pollutants
become trapped at the canal bottoms due to poor canal flushing.
The County is proposing that canal restoration projects be
r
implemented that will remove the pollutants and organics from
the affected canals. Canal restorations will enhance flushing
which will remove some trapped pollutants in the water
column.
Construction of residential canals in the Florida Keys was initiated in the mid-20th century, before resource
managers fully understood their impacts on local water quality and broader coastal ecosystems. Many of the
502 canal systems currently present in the Keys were excavated to depths of 20 to 25 feet in order to
maximize production of fill material. Most canal systems were designed as long, multi-segmented, dead-end
networks which maximize waterfront property but provide little or no tidal flushing and accumulate nutrients
and decomposing organic material.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has determined that the water quality is
impaired in multiple water bodies (WBIDS) throughout the Florida Keys. The Florida Keys Reasonable
Assurance Documentation Update of 2011 (FKRAD Update) outlined extensive wastewater and stormwater
restoration activities to address the nutrient impairments from these sources. However, DEP recognizes that
even after the restoration and management activities detailed in the RAD are completed, water quality in
many canals will likely not achieve Class III marine standards, as required by State water quality regulations.
Canal restoration, including hydrological improvements, to improve tidal flow and reducing input of floating
6 I r:b g C,
sea weed, will Ilbe required in addition to reducing wastewater and stormwater nutrient Iloading. The poor
water circulation, weed wrack, organic sediments, and/or deep water depth, were the cited reasons. Since the
canals discharge directly to nearshore Outstanding Florida Waters in the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary (FKNMS), where DEP adopted a "zero-degradation" policy for marine waters, addressing on-going
canal water quality impairment is of utmost importance.
Water quality conditions within various canal size classifications were evaluated as part of the 200
Monroe County IResidential Canal (Inventory and Assessments During the evaluation period, canal water
quality was significantly poorer than the baseline reference for total nitrogen and total phosphorus for all
canal types except Jumbo which was not significantly different for total phosphorus and likely a result of small
sample size (refer to table below). Dissolved oxygen concentration within these canals is often less than 1.0
mg/I.
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY FOR ALL CANALS IN THE FLORIDA KEYS
(FROM MONROE COUNTY CANAL INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT 2003 REPORT)
CATEGORY WATER QUALITY WATER QUALITY MEDIAN MAX MIN
DESIGNATION
PARAMETER
JUMBO FIIIF..............................Temperature
..(®.0........................ m9. ............... .. ............. . .....
Very limited sampling, Salinity( ) 36.6S 37.2
especially in winter
Total Nitrogen ( ) 26.8 263.3 8.8
Total Phosphorus( ) 0.36 2.7 0.
Chlorophyll a ( g/I) 0.54 15.22 0
LARGE LOOP Temperature (® ) 29.9 41.5 15.0
Better representation Salinity( ) 3S.2 S0.3 8.8
of POOR water quality
Total Nitrogen ( ) 31.6 184.6S 8.33
Total Phosphorus( ) 0.39 10.09 0
Chlorophyll a ( g/I) 0.49 23.09 0
MEDIUM FAM Temperature (® ) 26.5 38.5 14
Salinity( p ) 36.7 S9.1 1 .
Total Nitrogen ( ) 29.39 14S.78 0.33
Total Phosphorus( ) 0.32 44.39 0
7 If age
CATEGORY WATER QUALITY WATER QUALITY MEDIAN MAX MIN
DESIGNATION
PARAMETER
SMALL FAIR TO GOOD Temperature (00 26.8 41.5 is
Nearshore Waters
Quality Monitoring
Note: 1.Values that are statistically different from the nearshore water baseline are shown in BOLD.
2. Definitions of the canal size categories is contained in the 2003 Monroe County Residential Canal
Monroe County proposes to implement canal restoration techniques that will improve the water quality in the
Florida Keys canals and thus in the near shore waters affected by canal outflow. A Monroe County Canal
Management MasterpUan has been completed, evaluating the conditions of the Keys canals, prioritizing the
need for water quality improvement, and identifying appropriate restoration options for each cana|. A
Phase | CMMPcomp|utud in June 2012 initiated the canal restoration process. The complete CMMP was
completed in August, 2013. The County is proposing that canal restoration projects be constructed and
implemented that will restore water quality in the canals and near shore waters that currently have impaired
waters. Funds are being sought to design and permit and implement the identified restoration technologies
for all top priority canals. It is estimated that at least 126 canals will be identified as requiring restoration.
To address the specific Class ||| water quality exceeclances (DO, nutrients) within the canals and
surrounding near shore waters, several technologies are being evaluated in the CMMP and are proposed to be
implemented as part of this grant including: (1) removal of organic accumulation, (I) minimization of further
organic accumulation via vvuud gates, and (3) circulation of water within canals via pumping systems and
culvert connections to facilitate water movement using natural tidal flow. These technologies will address the
"legacy" load and will enhance the wastewater treatment improvements already made or underway
within the watersheds as part of the RAID.
8 1Page
The proposed technologies will target water quality improvements using several strategies necessary for
ecosystem recovery.
1. I11ernovall of accumulated organic matter within the canals will prevent future release and cycling of
nutrients resulting from bacterial decomposition during oxic conditions as well as release of iron-complexed
phosphorus during anoxic conditions (e.g., Hupfer and Lewandowski, 2008).
2. Weed gates will provide a physical harrier to minimize additional accumulation of organics once the legacy
organics have been removed.
3. Pumping systems and culvert connections will facilitate oxygenation of otherwise stagnant water which is
expected to provide desirable fish habitat within the canals. The third strategy will be enhanced by
achievement of reduced biological oxygen demand as a result of the first two strategies.
The following table shows the number of canals proposed for restoration along with the identified
restoration technology. The Phase I CMMP report is attached which describes the CMMP process and
identified restoration technologies.
Estimated Number of Canal Restorations by Selected Technology
Weed Organics
Technology Wrack Pumping Culverts Totals
Gate Removal
Number of 62 24 20 20 126
Canals
Budget Narrative/Financial Feasibility/Cost-Effectiveness: (Be sure that your responses to this
question and dollar amounts used are consistent with those used in Application Project Budget, and those in
Question 6.
• Clearly indicate and describe the estimated or actual casts of the project.
• Clearly indicate and describe the amount and use of RESTORE Act funding request.
• Identify amount and sources for your secured cash match funding. ["Cash match"is defined as actual
cash contributions to project costs. "Secured cash match funding"is funding that has been committed
to your project.] Please demonstrate secured match funding with documentation such as commitment
letter(s)from the funder(s).
• Identify amount and sources for your anticipated cash
match. ["Anticipated cash match" is potential funding
you have sought or will seek but is not confirmed.]
Please note that an applicant must have its projects
anticipated cash match secured within one year of
award of RESTORE Act funding. Explain, if applicable,
how these RESTORE funds may be used to leverage
additional funding.
• If your project is also using in-kind match ("in-kind
9 g
match" is defined as contribution to project costs other than cash], please identify what the in-kind
match includes and how you calculated its value.
• Explain how the project is financially feasible fie, is there a plan to cover all costs?]
• Explain how the project is cost-effective fie, is this project a good value, is it economical in terms of the
tangible benefits produced by the money being spent?])
Maximum 15 pts. Several things will be evaluated with respect to the budget including match value,
financial feasibility and cost-effectiveness.
The estimated cost to implement the canal restorations proposed (for the estimated 126 canals only) is
$2 .5 million. The canal restoration costs are based upon the existing GIS data base and conceptual
designs developed during the Phase I CMMP. Preliminary assessment of canal conditions and assumptions
regarding design and construction costs were utilized to develop the estimates. This proposal focuses on
selecting and implementing the least expensive restoration technologies first. The tables below provide the
total estimated Monroe County Application project costs as well as cost per each technology. The Canal
Master Plan ranking process will allow the selection of the top priority canals for implementation of
restorations. As many canal restorations as possible will be completed with the available funds. It is
assumed that the long term operation and maintenance of the canal restorations will be paid for by the
local residents. Many homeowner associations have already stepped forward indicating their commitment
to contribute toward restoration costs including long term operation and maintenance.
Estimated Number of Canal Restorations by Selected Technology
Weed Organics
Technology Wrack Pumping Culverts Totals
Gate Removal
Number of 62 24 20 20 11.26
Canals
Likely Cost by Selected Technologies($M)
Number Weed Organics Effectiveness Total
of Canals Wrack Pumping Culverts Monitoring Cost
Gate Removal
126 $3 $11.6.5 $5 $2 $11. $27.5
Other funding:
Monroe County its providing $5 miillhon in Ilocal match to fund design and construction of a miiniimurn of '7
canal restoration projects (located within Monroe County. Total matching funds therefore equal $5 million in
local match for canal retrofits. Other match for canal retrofits include $300,000 in federal funds for
monitoring for a total of $5.3 miillhon total project match. (On August 22, 2013, at a WQPP Canal Advisory
Subcommittee meeting, the EPA announced $300,000 has been provided for pre and post monitoring of the
selected demonstration canals. The contract was awarded to FIU in September, 2013 for canal restoration
monitoring, and will last a minimum of 2 years.) lit its anticipated that the municipalities that will Ibe
participating will also offer some Ilevel of match funds for projects that may Ibe selected within their
municipal boundaries.
10 Il) ae
Other state and federal funding has been provided to assist with the planning efforts, as follows:
1. On March 21, 2012, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved a revenue-
producing grant agreement from the Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) that funded a$1.00,000
Task Order with AMEC Environment& Infrastructure for Phase.1 of the Monroe County Canal Management
Master Plan, which was active through June 30,2012.
2. On September 19, 2012, the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved a revenue-
producing grant agreement from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 00D03712 that funded a
$100,000 Fask Order with AMEC Environment & Infrastructure for Phase 2 of the Monroe County Canal
Management Master Plan, which was active through September 30, 2013, and can be viewed on the
attachment.
3. On February 20, 2013 the Monroe County BOCC approved a revenue-producing FL Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) Grant S0640 providing an additional $100,000 of funding to perform
batlhymetriic surveys for the canal restoration program, which was active through June 30, 2013. The BOCC
also approved a Task Order with AMEC Environment and Infrastructure to perform the bathymetric work.
4. On November 19, 2013 the Monroe County BOCC approved a revenue-producing FL Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) Grant S0679 providing an additional $100,000 of funding to perform
design and permitting of a flushing culvert restoration on Geiger IKey and also to provide additional
batlhymetriic work for the demonstration canals. It is active through June, 2014.
Technical Feasibility: (Explain how this project is technically feasible; i.e., how do you know that this is a
feasible project that can be implemented and that will result in success. Describe the technologies involved.
Describe relevant past experience or proven success with this type of technology and this type of project.
Describe why this project is likely to succeed?)
Maximum 5 pts. Is this approach likely to work?
The canal restoration technologies being proposed have
been identified in the CMMP and address two major water
quality issues: seaweed loading (both prevention of future
impacts and removal of existing accumulated organics) and
improvement in canal flushing to restore the natural tidal
flow and circulation via culverts or pumps that was
V
destroyed during the canal construction. These technologies
include:
1. Installation of weed wrack gates/air bubble
curtains
11 I IF,
2. Removal of accumulated organics from canal bottoms
3. Culvert installation to enhance tidal flow
4. Pumping to enhance circulation.
Each of these technologies has been implemented at one or more canal sites in the Keys.
: Severe water quality
problems in the Keys canals has resulted from excessive amounts of
weed wrack (floating suavvuud\ entering the canals, fouling the water,
and becoming trapped in the dead end suctions of the canals. The
orientation and prevailing winds at many canals do not allow the
weed wrack to float bock out of the canals, so it becomes trapped,
decoys and drops to the canal bottom, where it uses up dissolved
oxygen and emits hydrogen sulfide and methane gases. Photographs
are provided that show examples of this problem.
VVuud wrack gates in combination with air bubble curtains have been
shown to be the most effective method for preventing weed wrack
from entering the canals. The CMMP includes conceptual designs of this system. The design was based upon
numerous discussions with local homeowners concerning existing systems. The picture at left shows the Big
Pine Fish Camp weed reduction system, which is a combination weed gate/air bubble curtain system. This is
a good example of an operating weed wrack and air bubble curtain that is privately maintained.
: Even when suavvuud is prevented from entering a canal, the existing
accumulated organics are still on on-going source of water quality impairment. The removal of organics
from the canal bottoms through hydraulic dredging or other technique will remove this on-going source.
Under FDEP Grant# S0640, surveyors collected canal bathymutry data to determine the natural depth of the
canals and the amount ofaccumulated organics. The FDEP grant scope also included sampling the organic
material to determine the physical and chemical properties to assist in final design for removal, duvvaturing
and disposal options. Although each organic sediment removal project varies depending on specific
objectives, local conditions, and disposal options, similar projects have recently been completed in Florida
with positive water quality response. Two similarly-scaled projects have been designed and successfully
implemented by AMEC Environment & Infrastructure including the Lake Griffin Canal Restoration project
($72 million construction cost, completed I008), and the Lake Buaudair Aquatic Enhancement project
($10.I million construction cost, 90% comp|utu).
Culverts to Enhance Tidal Flow and Irn.p.!2M2............ : The
construction of homes in many parts of the Keys created long, multi-
segmented, dead-end canal networks which maximize waterfront
property but provide little ornotidal flushing and thus accumulate
nutrients and decomposing organic material. Now that nutrient
loading from septic tanks has been significantly reduced there are many
canal systems that still have water quality impairment due to lack of
natural flushing.
The Keys have a natural tidal flow that can be utilized to improve water
quality. Culverts, typically concrete box type, can be installed between
12 Page
canals or between canals and thin land strips to improve flushing. Jolly Roger Estates in Little Torch Key is an
example of an effective box culvert installation that has greatly improved water quality. An aerial photo
showing this canal system and location of culverts is shown to the right. The CMMP Phase 2 identifies the
most suitable locations for culvert installations in the Keys.
IEpl �pil g q,,,,,,,p_ „prpw , ilL if „tilp, ,: For canal systems that do not have an accessible area to install a culvert, a
pump can be installed to promote water circulation within a canal. Water can be pumped from a 'dead end'
canal to an enhanced mangrove water treatment area or water from a nearby near shore area can be pumped
into the canal to increase dissolved oxygen levels and assist with flushing. Pump installations will be designed
to prevent adverse secondary effects such as resuspension of sediments, bottom scouring, or negative
impacts to the near shore waters. The Phase I CMMP contains a conceptual design for a pumping system in
Marathon which was designed to pump in Florida Bay water to the dead end of the canal.
7. Readiness for Implementation/Permitting Considerations: (What steps are necessary and how long
will it take to implement this project? Describe the required design and permitting work required for
implementation. How far along is the design and permitting? Has it started? Is it complete? If required
permits have already been obtained, please attach copies. If the design has been completed, please attach
copy of the design work. If the design work has not yet begun, please tell us how long this will take. If
permits are required, but not yet obtained, please discuss
how you know your project will qualify for the required
permits and how long will this permit process take. In other
words, if your project is not shovel-ready, what is entailed
J � and how long will it take to before it becomes shovel-ready?
Identify the specific milestones and timeframe for each.)
ti ' Maximum 10 pts. Is the timeframe realistic. Is the permitting
^�l achievable?Is the timeframe acceptable?
t" The County is proceeding with the design and permitting for the
demonstration canals, and it is anticipated that will be completed by June, 2014. The Demonstration
Canal Selection Report includes restorations for 15 canals and includes conceptual designs for all the
CMMP technologies. The conceptual designs were developed for canal systems that include weed
wrack barriers/air curtains, organics removal and pumping to enhance flushing. The conceptual
designs provide a boilerplate for the designs in other canal systems. As discussed under the Technical
Feasibility Section, the proposed restoration technologies have been applied at canals throughout the
Keys, as well as Florida, and the design/permit packages are available.
Completion of final designs will take approximately 6 months. Permitting is anticipated to take about 6
months. Meeting with permitting agencies(FDEP, USACE, and FKNMS) have already been held to identify
permit requirements for each of the different restorations. The Water Quality Protection (Program Canal
Restoration Advisory Subcommittee is developing a dedicated permitting agency team to expedite the
canal restoration permitting process.
8. Project Completion Timetable: (Once the project can be implemented, what are the steps and how long
will it take to complete the project?Identify milestones and timeframe for each.)
13 I IF1 a g c,
Maximum 10 pts.
The estimated completion timetable for the$11,310,000 canal restoration project is:
Final Design and Permitting—6 months %����//////�j���
ff
Selection of Contractor(s)—4 months , „�`
Equipment Ordering/Mobilization—3 months
Restoration Implementation—24 months ;a
Final Inspections—4 weeks
Demobilization—1 week
TOTAL EST.TIME FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF RESTORATIONS: 3 years
Monitoring: Baseline (pre-restoration)and periodically for 3 Years
9. Environmental Benefits: (Describe the nature, magnitude, and timing of any environmental benefits
attributable to the project. Identify and quantify all environmental benefits expected. How will these benefits
be measured and evaluated? How long before benefits are realized? Are these benefits short-term? Long-
term? Identify the party responsible for the achievement of these benefits. Describe how your project is
sustainable. (In other words, how much or what percentage of the project's services and/or benefits will still
be delivered and maintained after the project is complete and/or funding has ended.) How will you monitor
and ensure sustainability after the funding has ended. Please address any potential environmental impacts
(ie, loss of habitat)associated with implementing or maintaining the project.)
Maximum 10 pts. Are the benefits impactful? Do the benefits address/correct/mitigate/advance a critical
need/issue? Likelihood of achieving these benefits? Acceptable timeframe for achieving the benefits? Does
the project have long-term sustainability?
Benefits to IMaturall Iitesources:
............................................................................................................................................................................................
This project will reduce nutrient and pollutant Iloading to the Ii=IKIMMS, improve water quality in the
Sanctuary, in support of the goals and objectives of the FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program, Florida
Keys Water Quality Improvements Act (FKWQIA) and the FKWQIP, and in compliance with relevant federal
and state regulatory requirements and mandates.
This project will improve water quality with benefits for seagrass beds and hardbottom communities
dominated by corals, sponges, and other invertebrates. This nearshore environment provides critical nursery
habitat for finfish and shellfish stocks including snapper, grouper, pink shrimp, and spiny lobster.
Recreationally targeted species such as bonefish, permit, and tarpon will also benefit. The project will help
federally listed species including sea turtles, small-toothed sawfish, staghorn coral, and other protected
species including manatee, brown pelican and many other bird species.
The near shore tidal waters of the Florida Keys are a fragile, extremely valuable and unique network of
interconnected ecosystems. Where the near shore seafloor is rocky, southern Florida and the Florida Keys
support the only living coral reef system in the continental United States. Areas where the seashore is sandy
or muddy play host to dense and extensive beds of turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum) and other seagrasses.
Both coral reef areas and seagrass beds provide critical nursery and feeding habitat for many commercially
valuable fish and shellfish species, including the snapper, grouper, red drum, stone crab, spiny lobster, and
queen conch. Both coral reef habitat and seagrass beds are considered Essential Fish Habitat in the Florida
Keys due to the critical importance that these habitats have, not only for commercially important fisheries
14 If age
species, but also for the West Indian manatee, many species of sea turtles, acroporid corals, small-toothed
sawfish, and other marine species listed for protection under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA).
This unique ecosystem provides unparalleled support to fisheries and essential habitats throughout Florida
and the Gulf of Mexico. According to NOAA's Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Revised Management
Plan (2007), it provides critical spawning habitats to over 520 species of recreational and commercial
migratory, endemic, coastal & pelagic finfish and shellfish. According to the US Army Corps' Florida Keys
Water Quality Improvement Program Management Plan (2006), the Keys' waters provides habitat for 80
percent of the fish species in the U.S., and most commercially valuable fish species depend on Monroe County
nearshore waters at some point during their development.
Coral reef and seagrass bed health is directly linked to near shore marine water quality. Both corals and
seagrasses thrive in areas where water is clear (low turbidity), low in nutrients, and high in dissolved oxygen
(DO). IHigh Ilevels of nutrients and Ilow DO have been directly Ilinked to extensive dice off in coral reefs in the
gppiiiiii11111111pppo�iii p� iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii000ioi o00000000000000000000000000000i coastal waters of Puerto Rico and Jamaica. Similarly, seagrasses
show die-back in areas where turbidity and nutrients are high,
favoring the growth of algae that can smother seagrasses.
Therefore, the quality of water flowing from canals into the near
shore waters of the Keys can have a direct effect — positive or
negative - on the health of these critical near shore resources.
The proposed canal water quality improvement activities would
greatly increase DO and water clarity. DO and turbidity can be
r easily measured within the canals as well as in marine waters
downstream of the canals to determine the effectiveness of
different canal water quality improvement measures.
The health of near shore essential fish habitat has been negatively affected by oil spills and other human
activity in the Gulf of Mexico, and low water quality output from the Keys canals represents a long-term
cumulative impact on these resources. Canal restoration measures will Ihelp to reverse this trend and Ibetter
protect nursery Ihabitat for species covered under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Reauthorization Act. In addition, improved canal water quality in the Florida Keys will directly
benefit Threatened and Endangered species that depend upon near shore seagrasses and coral reef
habitats. Improvements to near shore water quality resulting from improvements to the canal systems will
reduce stresses on these critically important marine communities. It is estimated that some water quality
improvements will be immediate upon completion of the restorations with potential continued water quality
improvement over 3-5 years. It is anticipated that water quality improvements will be sustained beyond that
time frame as the natural biodiversity of the canals is restored which will allow the natural processing of
organics and nutrients.
10. Economic Benefits: (Describe the economic benefits that will be achieved. Identify and quantify all
economic benefits expected. How will these benefits be measured and evaluated? When do you expect to see
the results? Are these benefits short-term? Long-term? How will you ensure the achievement of long-term
benefits? Identify the party responsible for the achievement of these benefits. Describe how your project is
sustainable. (In other words, how much or what percentage of the project's services and/or benefits will still
be delivered and maintained after the project is complete and/or funding has ended.) How will you monitor
and ensure sustainability after the funding has ended. If this is a workforce development project please
describe how the project will result in new, expanded or retained business development opportunities and job
creation. Please include detail about what types of jobs will be created? How many and when? What it the
15 1 IF1 a g c,
anticipated annual salary or hourly rate, are the jobs full time or part time, are benefits included, etc.?)
Maximum 10 pts. Level of benefits? Do they address/correct/mitigate/advance a critical need/issue?
Likelihood of achieving these benefits?Acceptable timeframe for achieving the benefits? Does the project
have long-term sustainability?
Economic: Monroe County is the only county in Florida, and Florida is the only state on the Gulf Coast, with
a barrier reef. The coral reef tract in the Florida Keys is the third largest in the world, and the only living reef
in the continental US. This reef environment generates more than 70,000 jobs and $6 billion dollars in
economic activity annually, according to a study Monroe County Application published in 2005 by the
University of Miami. (Towards Sustainable Multispecies Fisheries in the Florida, USA, Coral Reef Ecosystem,
Bulletin of Marine Science, 2005; Ault,Jerald, et al.)
Tourism:The quality of life for tourists in the Florida Keys relies on a healthy marine ecosystem and can be
negatively impacted by water quality degradation. Over two million individuals per year visit the Florida
Keys to enjoy its unique natural features. Water related activities, including snorkeling, diving, fishing, and
other activities support 70 percent of tourism in the Florida Keys, which generates over $2.3 billion per year
and supports over 33,000 jobs (NOAA, FKNMS Socioeconomics Factsheet).
From 2007 to 2008, more than 400,000 visitors and residents of the Florida Keys engaged in over 2M person-
days of recreational sports fishing.These recreational fishers spend $262M in Monroe County, approximately
$103M of which was directly spent on fishing items (NOAA, FKNMS Socioeconomics Factsheet).
Approximately 739,000 visitors and residents participated in 2.8 million days of diving in the Florida Keys
between 2007-2008; $51.7M was spent at diving/snorkeling operations. Moreover, divers spend a total of
$450M in Monroe County, Florida Keys, supporting more than 7,500 jobs. (NOAA, FKNMS Socioeconomics
Factsheet).
Recreational and Commercial Fishing: The Florida Keys ecosystem is
home to 520 fish species, including over 260 species of reef fish, as
well as spiny lobster and stone crabs that support valuable
r �iY,r commercial and recreational fishing economic activity. The Keys are roa Al V„
considered the 'fishing capital of the world', generating hundreds ofr
world records and billions of dollars of economic impact, in addition to
providing well-known habitats and spawning grounds for many of the
commercially and recreationally-harvested fish species that populate
the Gulf.
With the highest number of recognized International Game Fish
Association (IGFA) all tackle, saltwater line class, and saltwater fly rod
"World Record Game Fish" records, Monroe County is the global center of recreational and sport fishing. We
are home to the 13th most valuable port the nation and the 5th most valuable port in the Gulf of Mexico,
according to NOAA's Fisheries of the United States, 2011, dated August 2012. Monroe County is the only port
in the entire state of Florida to rank among the nation's top 50 ports in landings tonnage (14M pounds) or
landings value ($56M). A map of ports of major value,from the report follows:
16 f age
Commercial)Fishery Value at Major U.S.Ports 2011
Legend
Mihlions of dollars
14
25
50
�.
1.
100
3D0
Y
a
y
Environmental Justilce, Nearly 25 percent of the population within the Service Area is made up of
individuals regarded as either low income or over 65 years of age. Approximately 7.7 percent of the
population was living below the poverty level in 2008, and the portion of residents over the age of 65 is
estimated to be approximately the same as that of the county and state (14.7 percent and 17.6 percent,
respectively). This segment of the population often lives on fixed incomes and, while their income may not
be below the poverty level, they are affected by cost of living changes. These factors suggest that while the
majority of the residents within the Service Area are above poverty levels, there will be considerable impacts
to residents associated with the costs of the Canal Restoration.
The County estimates indicate that construction of the proposed canal restorations projects will create an
estimated 50 jobs in the short term. The project will also contribute to the local marine-based tourist
economy.
11. Community Economic and/or Environmental Resilience Benefits: (Describe if the project assists with
our community's ability to anticipate, withstand, or recover (environmentally and/or economically) from
hazards or threats, e.g. hurricane evacuation, flood mitigation and prevention, future oil spills, shoreline
protection, etc.)
Maximum 5 pts. Level of benefits? Do they address/correct/mitigate/advance a critical need/issue?
Likelihood of achieving these benefits?Acceptable timeframe for achieving the benefits?
Catastrophic events such as hurricanes and floods can mobilize IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
deteriorated canal waters that have been trapped in dead end finger
canals or deep stagnant zones, into nearshore waters with significant A
negative natural resource impacts. The canal restoration project will
Improve the water quality in these stagnant zones thus preventing
catastrophic degradation events to our nearshore waters that are
essential to fish spawning grounds and support harrier (reefs
Additionally, the canal restorations will assist in overall improvement in
the nearshore water quality that will allow the ecosystems to be resilient
to the negative impacts from storms.
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
17 I IF1 a g c,
The strength and stability of the local economy is integral to community resilience. The 3 million annual
visitors to the Florida Keys provide the basis of the tourism industry on which the economy relies. Tourism is
based on clean water and beaches as well as the abundant fish and wildlife that characterize this popular
vacation destination. Consequently, the potential positive econornic impacts of the proposed project must
be considered when evaluating community resilience.
12. Complements to Existing Efforts/Public Acceptance: (How does the project complement existing local,
regional or state efforts/plans/objectives or on-going efforts/activities. Explain why your project does not
interfere or conflict with any existing efforts, and why your project in not duplicative of any existing efforts.
Also, please explain whether your project is consistent with/included in a local government Comprehensive
plan, Capital plan, Mitigation Plan, Wastewater or Storm Water Master Plan, etc. If not part of an already
approved plan, please describe any known or potential public approval or opposition to the project. Explain
any efforts to determine public acceptance.)
5 pts. Does the project align with county and/or municipal priorities?Is there clear public support?
This project does not interfere with any current projects; it complements existing Monroe County, State of
Florida and Federal efforts/plans and objectives. These restoration projects are supporting the new Canal
Management Master Plan that was completed and accepted Iby the IFIKIMMS WQPIR Canal Restoration
Advisory Subcommittee in September, 2013. An overview of how this project complements other existing
state and federal efforts is described below.
Relationship to Existing IFederal/State IPlans: The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Reauthorization Act of 2006 provides for federal protection of commercial fisheries species and protection of
essential fish habitat,which are both present in the Florida Keys. Canal restoration retrofit measures will help
to reverse a declining fish population trend and better protect nursery habitats. The FKNMS was established
by Congress in 1990. Under its authority, NOAA and the FDEP manage all waters as well as natural and
cultural resources surrounding the Florida Keys. The Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection Program (WQPP)
was mandated by Congress and developed jointly by EPA, NOAA, the State of Florida, and Monroe County.
Centralized waste water system development has been a focal effort of the Sanctuary and its WQPP over the
last several years.
Now that these efforts are well underway, the WQPP recognizes that addressing the impaired water quality
in the canals is the next focus. In 2007, the FKNMS developed a canal water quality improvement strategy
that includes implementing improvement strategies in the canals. In 2012 the WQPP Steering Committee
convened a Water Quality Canal Restoration Subcommittee to manage and oversee the implementation of
canal water quality improvements. In February 2013 the Canal Subcommittee became an official Canal
Restoration Advisory Subcommittee of the WQPP. This proposed canal restoration project will be performed
under the oversight of this advisory committee.
The proposed Monroe County Comprehensive Plan Update, Section 3.2 Conservation and Coastal
Management, includes the goal (goal 202) to maintain and, where possible, improve, the environmental
quality of nearshore waters (which includes canals).
Public Acceptance(Describe any known or potential public approval or opposition to the project):
18 li) ae
The topics of nearslhore water degradation in the Florida Keys IMatiionall Marline Sanctuary and the need to
reduce nutrient Iloading and improve water quality in the nearslhore waters of the Keys its the Ihighest
priority of regulatory agencies and citizens alike, and the implementation of water quality
improvements is a strategy that is accepted and supported by the public.
The public has been involved, informed, and invited to participate throughout the development process of
each of the following:
• FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program, 1997
• Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan, approved in 2000
• Florida Keys Water Quality Improvement PETS, 2004
• Florida Keys Water Quality Improvement Program PMP, 2006
Since the County began efforts on the canal restoration program, public support has been very strong. The
staff person managing the Program has spoken publicly numerous times and provided several presentations
regarding the benefits of the program. Media articles from the Florida Specifier, KeysNet.com, and the News-
Barometer have been positive. Many interested residents have also written to the county to voice support
for the program, and hope that restoration efforts will grow and continue. In addition, numerous
meetings have been held with interested homeowners throughout the Keys (Monroe County), all of whom
have expressed great interest in the program due to the poor water quality they are experiencing in their canals
and the health concerns to their families and pets.
Presentations have been provided at the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners meetings, the
FKNMS WQPP Steering Committee meetings, and the FKNMS WQPP Canal Restoration Advisory
Subcommittee. To date, strong public support has Ibeen voiced.
p�i�Pl6ii III�II�IIIIIIII�IIIIII �l III I I II I ������II �� �I�II���Iq II II I Ili I��
Numerous public involvement efforts were implemented as part of theE,
Master Plan development process and are outlined below.
• Public meetings
• Preparation and distribution of project fact sheets on the County •��� ��
Website
Distribution of a Homeowner Questionnaire
• Media coordination J'
• Development of a canal project web site
Interested citizens and key stakeholders influenced the development of the °
decisions and evaluation process.
13. Compliance with Federal, State, and Local Regulations: (Describe how the project complies with all
regulations. Note:Additional restrictions and requirements may be applicable based on US Treasury guidance
to be established pursuant to the RESTORE Act.) No points awarded, since compliance with regulations is a
requirement.
The canal restorations will require permits from Monroe County, FDEP, U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and
FKNMS (and FDOT for roadway work.) To ob-tain the required permits,compliance with applicable federal,
state, Ilocal and tribal laws/regulations will Ibe ensured. Preliminary discussions with regulators have outlined the
permit requirements and critical issues which include avoidance of impact to seagrass beds during the installation
of piles for weed wrack barriers, manatee protection during construction, and sediment and erosion control
during construction. Impacts to natural resources can be avoided by careful designs and construction oversight.
19 1 If) a g e
For the canal restoration projects, organics removal will be considered maintenance dredging, will be exempted
from permitting, and will not be subject to State severance fees. No significant concerns or potential
conflicts have been identified.
The following is a chronological compilation of the local, state and federal laws and regulations to which
the canal improvements are pursuant:
• In 1990, in recognition of the importance of the Florida Keys ecosystem and the degradation of the
ecosystem due to direct and indirect physical impacts, Congress passed the Florida Keys National
Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act (PL 101-605) directing the US EPA and the state of Florida to
develop a Florida Keys National Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program. The Sanctuary is
administered by NOAA and is jointly managed with the State of Florida.
• In 1997, Monroe County developed its Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan mandates that nutrient
loadings to the marine ecosystem be reduced by the year 2010.
• In 1999, the Florida Legislature granted authority to adopt stricter permitting and enforcement
for areas in the state that have been designated as Areas of Critical State Concern (Florida Keys
designated in 1999, FS 380.0552), Outstanding Florida Waters (waters and canals of the Keys
designated in 1999, FAC 62-302.700), and Class II Shellfish Harvesting Waters (waters of the keys
so designated in 2000, FAC 62-302.400), all of which have been so designated for the Florida
Keys. (Through the mechanisms at its disposal, DEP has made water quality in the area of the Florida
Keys
an issue of utmost priority.)
• In 2001, with Public Law 106-554,The Florida Keys Water Quality Improvement Act, the U.S. Congress
authorized the Corp to provide technical and financial assistance to improve the water quality of the
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. This would be done through the Florida Keys Water Quality
Improvement Program.
o In 2004, the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by the Corps for the
proposed Florida Keys Water Quality Improvements Program (FKWQIP) and published in the Federal
Register. The PEIS provides a framework to address potential environmental impacts associated with
design and implementation of the FKWQIP. The PEIS was prepared in accordance with the NEPA, the
CEQ regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508), and FEMA regulations (44 CFR Part 10,
Environmental Considerations). These laws and regulations require the Corps to consider and address
issues when funding any federal action.
o In 2006, The Corps, in partnership with the local municipalities in Monroe County, developed and
completed the FKWQIP Final Program Management Plan, a comprehensive plan to develop and
implement wastewater and storm water improvements as the means for improving water quality in the
National Marine Sanctuary.
o Clean Water Act of 1972. All state water quality standards will be met. The project is in compliance with
this Act.
o Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981. Implementation of the proposed project would not impact
any prime or unique farmland. The proposed project is in compliance with the Act.
20 If) ae
• Wild and Scenic River Act of 1968. No designated wild and scenic river reaches would be affected
by project related activities.
• Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976. The proposed project has been coordinated with
the National Marine Fisheries Service and is in compliance with the Act.
• Submerged Lands Act of 1953. This Act is applicable. Any work being performed in State submerged
lands will be done in full compliance with the regulatory requirements.
• Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. The proposed work would not obstruct navigable waters of the
United States.The proposed project is in full compliance.
• Anadromous Fish Conservation Act. Anadromous fish species would not be affected.
The project will be coordinated with the National Marine Fisheries Service and will be in compliance
with the Act.
• Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. No substances regulated under this Act and related laws have
been identified in project lands. The project is in compliance.
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. No adverse effects to Essential Fish
Habitat (EFH) are anticipated by implementing the proposed project. The project is in full coordination
of the Act.
• E.O. 11988, Flood Plain Management. The project has been evaluated in accordance with this Executive
Order. This project is in compliance.
• E.O. 12898, Environmental Justice. Executive Order 12898 requires the Federal Government to achieve
environmental justice by identifying and addressing disproportionately high adverse effects of its activities
on minority or low-income populations, and by involving potentially affected minorities in the public
coordination process. Environmental justice is specifically addressed in Sections 3.13 and 4.13 of this
Draft EA. The project is in compliance with the Executive Order.
• E.O. 13089, Coral Reef Protection. This Executive Order applies to coastal projects that might directly or
indirectly impact coral reefs. The Executive Order refers to "those species, habitats, and other natural
resources associated with coral reefs." This project will not adversely impact coral reefs or coral reef
resources and may, in fact, benefit these resources by improved water quality of the nearshore waters
adjacent to the Service Area. The project complies with this Executive Order.
• E.O. 13112, Invasive Species. Construction equipment will use standard measures to avoid the spread
of invasive species. This project will not authorize, fund, or carry out any action that might spread or
introduce invasive species. Therefore, this project complies with the goals of this Executive Order
14. Project Management Capacity: (We expect that all funded projects will receive a high degree of scrutiny
from bath state and federal agencies throughout their duration bath programmatically and financially, and
will be required to comply with a rigorous standard for monitoring, reporting and auditing of bath results and
expenditures. Please also note that the framework far RESTORE Act project funding has not yet defined but
will likely draw significantly from federal grant guidelines, rules, regulations and requirements. Therefore,
2111)age
assuming the applicant entity will be responsible for implementing and administering its project according to
federal grant guidelines, concisely:
1. Describe the expertise, experience and prior success of the organization and persons to implement the
type and size project proposed here.
2. Describe the organization's experience with federal grant requirements, and with management of
government grant funded projects of this type and size, including financial and outcomes, monitoring,
reporting and auditing.
3. Describe your plan for programmatic and financial management, oversight and monitoring.
4. Describe the project management team, including the names, qualifications, experience and prior
success of those responsible for design, implementation, outcomes achievement, and financial
management.)
Maximum 10 pts. Does the organization or sponsor have the demonstrated ability and experience to
implement/administer this project,and deliver on the outcomes?
1. Monroe County is in the midst of implementing $5 million of demonstration canal projects. Ms. Haag
has many years of contract and project management experience.
2. Monroe County has managed several federal grants, most notably and recently the $2.6 million EECB
einergy grannt adrnuiiiiisteured tllliurougllli tlllie State of !Florida's eineirgy office. Ms. Haag was the grant manager,
and successfully coordinated and managed all 8 projects under the grant, and successfully submitted and
received 100% reimbursement from the State. The Ilocal and State audits performed on these projects
indicated compliance with the terms and conditions of the grant, and 100 monies were reiirrmlbursed to
the County by the State. She has also successfully administered $400,000 in state and federal grants
related to the canal restoration program and continues to receive grant funding for other County
programs.
3. Ms. Haag will provide the programmatic and financial oversight and monitoring of the canal restorations
projects,working closely with the County's Budget, Growth Management and Public Works divisions.
4. Management Team: Rhonda Haag — Project Manager, Kevin Wilson — Division Director of Public Works,
Rich Jones— Marine Resources. The FKNMS Water Quality Protection Program's Canal Subcommittee will be
consistently advised and used as an additional tool for management of the projects.
15. Additional Information: (Please include any maps, designs, drawings, photos, or background resources that
may assist in understanding the project. Please be mindful of the electronic file size of your application. We
will be forwarding this application to various reviewers/recipients electronically. Many servers do not accept
large file sizes. Also limit attachments to those measuring 8x11 that can reproduced with little or no expense
(limit color photos, blueprint type documents, etc.)
a) List of Keys Canals—http://fl-monroecounty.civicplus.com/ ocu entCenter/lfiew/ 12
b)Canal Management Master Plan(CMMP) Report
http:llfl- onroecounty.civic plus.co / ocu entCenter/View/6 01
c) Selection of Demonstration Canals Report—hardcopy available upon request. Electronic file too large for
servers.
221 If) a g e
23 1 If) a g e
24 1 If) a g e