Item I1 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: March 19, 2014 Division: Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes _ No X Department: Marine Resources Office
Staff Contact Person/Phone#: Richard Jones/289-2805
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
Presentation by Coastal Systems International, Inc. (CSI) on the January 2014 Draft Monroe County
Mooring Field Feasibility Study (Study) for potential mooring field development at anchorages at
Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound, and Boca Chica Basin, and direction from the Board on the
selection of a future mooring field site or sites, and direction to staff on the development of a Request
for Qualifications (RFQ) or Request for Proposals (RFP) for mooring field design/permit/build based
on the recommendations of the Study.
ITEM BACKGROUND:
At the September 21, 2012, BOCC meeting the Board discussed the use of $1.5 million in Boating
Improvement Fund reserves for repairs to six County boat ramps and development of a mooring field
or fields. The Board approved funding for repairs to the six boat ramps and considered funding the
development of a mooring field or fields. The Board discussed the potential for shoreside access and
services to a new mooring field through a public/private management arrangement, and gave direction
for staff to conduct further research on mooring field development potential and come back to the
Board with a recommendation on a new mooring field or fields. Staff subsequently drafted a scope of
services for a feasibility study to look at the feasibility for mooring field development at three existing
anchorages in the Keys (Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound and Boca Chica Basin). The Study,
conducted by CSI at a cost of$27,650, includes evaluations of the three potential mooring field sites,
identification of possible shoreside service providers (in consideration of a public/private management
arrangement for operation of a mooring field), evaluates environmental/permitting challenges, provides
preliminary mooring field designs, and includes recommendations for proceeding with implementation
based on a design/permit/build approach.
Preliminary findings of the feasibility study were presented by CSI to the Marine and Port Advisory
Committee (MPAC) on July 30, 2013. That presentation described Boca Chica Basin as having the
greatest boating impacts, but presents the greatest permitting challenges due to the shallow nature of
the area and presence of dense seagrass. The Jewfish Creek and Buttonwood Sound anchorages were
described as having greater permit feasibility, available shoreside facilities, and would result in
mooring fields located in the upper, middle and lower Keys (as mooring fields already exist in
Marathon and Key West). The MPAC unanimously agreed that Buttonwood Sound appears to be the
optimal site for a mooring field based on permit feasibility, projected use, available suitable shoreside
facilities, and the resulting distribution of mooring fields throughout the Keys.
CSI will present its findings and the draft Study at the March 19, 2014 BOCC meeting, and staff will
seek direction from the Board for: 1) selection of a mooring field site or sites, and 2) preparation of an
RFQ or RFP to select a vendor for the implementation of a mooring field(s) based on a
design/permit/build approach, including specifications for a public/private management agreement.
Based on the findings of the Study (p.61), CSI "has determined that the Buttonwood Sound area is the
optimal site for the County to pursue implementation of a managed mooring field, followed by Jewfish
Creek, and then Boca Chica Basin". The County currently has approximately $700,000 allocated in
Boating Improvement Funds for mooring field implementation. The Marine Resources Office has also
submitted RESTORE Act grant applications in the amounts of $1,000,000 at the local level, and
$4,500,000 at the state level (which includes shoreside property acquisition) to fund the
implementation of multiple mooring fields.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
September 2012- direction to staff to further research the potential for an additional mooring field(s)
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
n/a
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
n/a
TOTAL COST: n/a INDIRECT COST: _ BUDGETED: Yes No
DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE:
COST TO COUNTY: SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes No AMOUNT PER MONTH Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty OMB/Purchasing Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required_
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM#
IIII� I, I
Monroe County Mooring Field
Feasibility Study
i
Prepared for.
Monroe County Board of
County Commissioners
2798 Overseas Highway
Suite 420
Marathon, Florida 33050
Prepared by:
COASTAL
Coastal Systems International, Inc.
464 South Dixie Highway
V 'M Coral Gables, Florida 33146
UL
Ia8&WMAb®®64&
D
ituximnin
January 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LISTOF APPENDICES......................................................................................................V
APPENDIXDESCRIPTION...............................................................................................V
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................6
2.0 BACKGROUND......................................................................................................9
3.0 ANCHROAGE SITE EVALUATIONS...................................................................... 14
3.1 Jewish Creek.......................................................................................................... 14
3.2 Buttonwood Sound................................................................................................27
3.3 Boca Chica Basin...................................................................................................38
4.0 MOORING FIELD CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS.........................................................56
4.1 Jewfish Creek ........................................................................................................56
4.2 Buttonwood Sound................................................................................................57
4.3 Boca Chica Basin...................................................................................................58
4.4 Recommended Site................................................................................................61
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS.......................................62
5.1 Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan ...........................................................62
5.2 Monroe County Marina Siting Plan (MSP)..............................................................63
5.3 Managed Mooring Field Management Plan............................................................63
5.4 Proprietary Authorization - Submerged Lands Lease...............................................64
5.5 Avoidance/Minimization of Impacts to Marine Resources ......................................66
6.0 SUMMARY OF PERMITTING PROCEDURE BY AGENCY.....................................68
6.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps):...................................................................68
6.2 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP):......................................... 74
6.3 Monroe County Permits......................................................................................... 78
6.4 U.S. Coast Guard (USCG):.....................................................................................78
6.5 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC):...................................79
7.0 MITIGATION........................................................................................................80
8.0 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES................................................................................82
8.1 Current Funding....................................................................................................82
8.2 Grants...................................................................................................................82
9.0 POST CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS............................................................84
10.0 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR DESIGN/BUILD TEAM.................................86
Coartaffystems International,Inc.
I
11.0 RECOMMENDED ACTION ITEMS........................................................................89
12.0 CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................................92
13.0 REFERENCES.........................................................................................................93
Coastal Systems International,Inc.400,
1',I
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURES DESCRIPTION
Figure 1 Existing and Potential Mooring Field Sites in Monroe County.....................13
Figure 2 Jewfish Creek Location Map...................................................................15
Figure 3 Buttonwood Sound Location Map...........................................................29
Figure 4 Boca Chica Basin Location Map.............................................................38
Figure 5 Boca Chica Basin Anchoring and Navy Zones.........................................43
Coastal Systems International,Inc.400,
iii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE DESCRIPTION
1 Existing Mooring Fields in Monroe County..............................................12
2 Historical Boat Anchorage at Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound, and Boca
ChicaBasin...........................................................................................54
3 List of Services Provided by Upland Facilities...........................................55
4 Pros and Cons for the Three Anchorages.................................................60
lip
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
iv
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX DESCRIPTION
A Historical Aerials
B Field Observation Report
C Conceptual Designs
D Marine Resource and Bathymetry Maps
E Dock Construction Guidelines
F Submerged Lands Lease Fee Calculations
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
v
4
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Public waterfront access in Florida has been significantly reduced over the years, primarily
due to increasing waterfront real estate redevelopment and conversion. Along with
population growth and increasing waterfront real estate redevelopment, there has been an
ever growing number of unmanaged nearshore anchorages surfacing in coastal areas,
including Monroe County. With the expansion of nearshore anchorages come social and
environmental impacts in the form of crowding, crime, noise, trash, decreased water
quality, and damage to marine resources. The use of mooring fields is a proven strategy to
address the various environmental and social impacts that typically result from haphazard
anchoring. Mooring fields are recommended in the Monroe County Comprehensive Plan,
Monroe County Boating Management Plan, and the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary Management Plan. It is Monroe County's goal to identify an effective and
economical approach to provide managed mooring fields and associated shore-side access
and service facilities throughout the Keys.
In 2013 Monroe County commissioned Coastal Systems International (Coastal Systems) to
conduct a Feasibility Study to evaluate siting and development of a new mooring field (or
fields) in the Florida Keys. The purpose of this Study is to examine the existing unmanaged
anchorages at Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound, and Boca Chica Basin (considered by the
County to be priority sites for potential mooring fields), identify possible shoreside
facilities, create conceptual mooring field designs for all three sites, and determine the
optimal mooring field location. Information was obtained via (1) discussions with County
staff, (2) a background/literature review, and (3) cursory field assessments of water depths,
marine resources, site utilization, and potential shoreside access. The resulting information
served as input to the site selection analysis. The site selection analysis evaluated the
bathymetric surveys, marine resource surveys, and site visits, as well as conceptual design
and siting of a mooring field at all three locations, and identification of possible shore-side
providers. This information was utilized to rank the potential sites for the County to pursue
design, permitting, and construction of the mooring fields. The available environmental
6
Coastal Systems International,Inc 400,
data, pertinent regulations, existing infrastructure, and management potential were
considered in this recommendation. In addition, this Feasibility Report summarizes the
permitting process including site specific challenges of the potential mooring field,
identifies grant opportunities, provides recommendations for engineering/design schedule
and contracting, and presents recommended next steps.
Conceptual mooring field layouts of all three sites have been prepared for consideration by
the County in Appendix C. After an analysis of site conditions, shore-side access, and ease
of permitting Coastal Systems determined that the Buttonwood Sound area would be the
optimal site to design, permit, and construct Monroe County's next managed mooring
field, although all three sites would benefit from the implementation of a managed
mooring field.
Permitting challenges associated with the development of a managed mooring field in the
Keys include: development of a Managed Mooring Field Management Plan; securing
Proprietary Authorization from the State of Florida; and demonstrating avoidance,
minimization, and mitigation of ecological resource impacts. To facilitate the permitting
process, a Managed Mooring Field Management Plan should be developed that will
outline the rules and regulations for the managed mooring field, as well as the disaster
manuals and emergency evacuation procedures. This operational plan should be prepared
prior to application submittal to the regulatory agencies, in order to streamline the
permitting process. Development of a managed mooring field in any of the three locations
would occur over sovereign submerged lands and will therefore require a submerged lands
lease in accordance with 18-21.005(1)(d)(8) F.A.C. As the proposed Project is generally in
the public interest, it should qualify for issuance of a Sovereign Submerged Lands Lease
from the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund (BOT) for the State of
Florida. The overall permitting timeframe for a managed mooring field in Monroe County
is expected to be a minimum of 1 to 1.5 years from the time of application submittal.
While many issues can be resolved concurrently, negotiations regarding submerged lands
7
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
use and/or avoidance and minimization discussions can lengthen the overall permitting
process.
g
Coastal Systems Intenmational,Inc.400,
2.0 BACKGROUND
Public waterfront access in Florida has been reduced significantly over the years due to
increasing waterfront real estate redevelopment. Many marinas have been converted to
strictly private upland development or privatized facilities. Furthermore, many marinas
have been redeveloped to accommodate larger vessels and managed mooring facilities
often do not appeal to private operators due to the limited revenue generated, as opposed
to potential revenue from wet or dry slips.
An alternative to marinas is mooring fields, which are usually established in protected bays
or harbors and consist of a number of moorings, permanently affixed to the bottom, that
allow boats to securely tie off to the mooring rather than using traditional ground tackle.
Moorings are less expensive than dockage at a marina slip and mooring fields typically
provide shore-side access with various amenities like a designated place to come ashore
with your dinghy, showers, laundry, garbage drop off, pump out services, 24-Hour
security, and sometimes bicycle and vehicle parking. In order for a mooring facility to be
effective and meet the needs of all user groups, certain key amenities should be offered on
the uplands, adjacent to the proposed mooring fields. These amenities include, but are not
limited to, restrooms and showers, waste disposal, laundry facilities, telephone and mail
access, sewage disposal/pump-out, emergency medical access, parking, dinghy/courtesy
dock, and ice, food and convenience store within the vicinity. There are no minimum
requirements for the establishment of mooring fields and while not required, providing
certain amenities such as pump out service/dump stations, trash service, restrooms, and
laundry facilities provides justification that the facility will not have adverse cumulative
impacts to water quality.
Developing new marinas and/or mooring fields has become increasingly challenging in
Florida due to strict environmental regulatory constraints. There are few permitted
managed mooring fields in South Florida (Forth Myers Mooring Field in Fort Myers,
Rickenbacker Marina, Pelican Harbor, Crandon Park, and Dinner Key in Miami, John
9
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Pennekamp in Key Largo, Boot Key Harbor in Marathon and Garrison Bight in Key West),
despite mooring fields providing an economical approach to providing vessel access to the
waterfront and providing protection to marine resources that would otherwise be impacted
by haphazard anchoring, gray and black water discharges, and dumping. In addition,
there are minimal marine resource impacts associated with managed mooring fields, as
opposed to a traditional wet slip marina facility as there are less over water structures such
as docks and pilings in a mooring field that directly impact marine resources or shade
seagrass and vessels are moored to a buoy that allows rotation of the vessel minimizing
shading of any one area which allows seagrass growth beneath moored vessels.
Monroe County harbors a water-oriented lifestyle with its waters traditionally being used
by both liveaboard vessels (vessels used as primary residence or business such as
houseboats, sailboats, and some power boats for a period of more than 2 months) and
transient vessels (vessels that are transiting through, staying in an area for a short period of
time) residing in unmanaged anchoring areas (Monroe County, 2010). An increase in
vessels anchoring and the number of anchorages in the County have lead to derelict and
abandoned vessels, discharge of pollutants from derelict vessels, use of marine debris as
unpermitted mooring devices, unattended anchored vessels breaking free, marine debris
causing damage to other vessels and shore facilities, seagrass and coral damage through
scouring by haphazard anchoring, sunken and derelict vessels and marine debris, shading
of seagrass by vessels, and propeller dredging by vessels in shallow areas (Monroe County,
2010; Terraman, 2011, WM Barry Associates, 2013). Derelict vessels are vessels that are
left stored or abandoned in a wrecked, junked, or substantially dismantled condition upon
any public waters of the State or docked, grounded, or beached upon the property of
another without the owner's consent (Florida Statute 327.02). Other concerns with
unmanaged anchoring areas include overboard dumping of sewage, shoreside dumping of
waste, and impeded navigation (WM Barry Associates, 2013). The Monroe County
Comprehensive Plan addresses these issues by directing the County to identify liveaboard
anchorages and pursue the potential for development of mooring fields to manage vessels
(Monroe County, 2010).
10
Coastal Systems International,Inc. �;,,, 6
Management of currently unmanaged anchorages is necessary to deter further derelict and
abandoned vessels, provide secure moorings, protect marine resources, promote water
quality, and ensure appropriate public access to waters of the State. The Florida Keys
National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) established a Mooring Buoy Action Plan in 1996 to
protect marine resources by promoting the use of mooring buoys over haphazard
anchoring. In addition, the Monroe County Marine Resource Department provided a
proposal for a Keys-Wide Mooring Field System, consisting of a system of mooring fields
throughout the Keys that would provide safe, secure moorings, shore access, reduce
marine resource damage, eliminate discharge of sewage, and deter derelict and abandoned
vessels. The 2002 Keys-Wide Mooring Field System Study by Monroe County identified
and evaluated anchorages in the County and ranked priority sites in need of management.
The study also acknowledged that the development of managed mooring fields is a
strategy to address environmental concerns associated with anchorages. Since then, the
operation of mooring fields in Key West and Marathon have modified anchoring habits
and allowed for environmental recovery in these areas, as well as addressed the growing
environmental concern of derelict vessels. In 2010 the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC) and Florida Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) established a Pilot Program in 327.4105 F.S. to regulate anchoring of non-liveaboard
vessels outside of legally permitted mooring fields, which further promoted the
establishment of mooring fields to address environmental concerns. The goals of the Pilot
Program are to promote the public use of mooring fields, promote public access to state
waters, protect the marine environment and maritime infrastructure, enhance navigation
and deter improperly stored, abandoned, or derelict vessels. The Pilot Program is
authorized through the Monroe County Ordinance No. 036-2012 and an extension of this
program will be decided in 2014 by the Florida Legislature.
The existing mooring fields in Monroe County include Pennekamp State Park, Boot Key
Harbor in Marathon, Garrison Bight Mooring Field in Key West and a smaller system of
moorings in the Lignumvitae Key area (See Figure 1). Only two of these mooring fields,
11
Coastal Systems International,Inc.1000
Boot Key Harbor and Garrison Bight, are of an appreciable size. See Table 1 for
information related to the existing mooring fields in Monroe County.
Table 1. Existing Mooring Fields in Monroe County
of
Existing Mooring Field Location No. Size of Vessel Daily Rate -Weekly Rate Monthly Rate
Moorings
Pennekamp State Park Key Largo 11 45 foot vessels $21.80 NA NA
Lignumvitae Key Islamorada NA Free NA NA
Shell Key Islamorada 1 5-6 NA Free NA NA
Indian Key Islamorada NA Free NA NA
60feet(15
Boot Key Harbor Marathon 226 moorings)45 feet $22.00 $110.00 $300.00
(211 Moorings)
Garrison Bight I Key West 149 1 50feet 1 $18.08 1 NA 1 $318.45
To address the need for additional shoreside access, amenities for boaters, minimization of
environmental impacts, and reduction in the number of derelict and abandoned vessels,
new mooring fields are being planned in Monroe County in association with existing
mooring fields to comprise a Keys-Wide Mooring Field System. Three unmanaged
anchoring areas are being evaluated as potential mooring field locations: Jewfish Creek,
Buttonwood Sound, and Boca Chica Basin.
In 2013 Monroe County commissioned Coastal Systems International (Coastal Systems) to
conduct a Feasibility Study for siting and development of a new mooring field or fields in
the Florida Keys. The purpose of the Study is to examine the existing unmanaged
anchorages at Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound, and Boca Chica Basin (considered by the
County to be priority sites for potential mooring fields). The scope included site
evaluations, the identification of possible shoreside facilities, rankings of the mooring field
sites, recommendation of the optimal site, and creation of a conceptual designs for the
potential mooring fields. This study is based upon background research and site visits, as
well as cursory assessments of water depths, marine resources, site utilization, and
potential shoreside access in each location. In addition, this Feasibility Report summarizes
12
Coastal Systems International,Inc.4000,
the permitting process including site specific challenges of the proposed mooring field,
identifies grant opportunities, provides recommendations for engineering/design schedule
and contracting, and provides recommended next steps.
Figure 1. Map of existing and potential mooring fields in Monroe County
r r r r r
1
Coastal Systems International,Inc.400,
3.0 ANCHROAGE SITE EVALUATIONS
Three existing unmanaged anchorages including Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound, and
Boca Chica Basin, considered as priority sites for potential mooring fields by Monroe
County, were evaluated for potential development of a managed mooring field. A cursory
marine resource survey and bathymetric survey were conducted within all three areas (See
the Field Observation Report in Appendix B). In addition, Coastal Systems took an
inventory of the number and types of vessels anchored during the site visit and identified
possible shore-side facilities.
3.1 Jewish Creek
The Jewfish Creek anchorage site is located on the bayside of Key Largo, south of Overseas
Highway (MM 108) in Blackwater Sound at the mouth of Jewfish Creek (See Figure 2). The
area is protected from northeast winds by the adjacent uplands. The uplands consist of two
developed areas, one on either side of the Jewfish Creek Bridge: the Anchorage Resort and
Yacht Club (Photos 9-12) is located on the east side of the Jewfish Creek Bridge and
Gilbert's Resort and Marina (Photos 5-8) is located on the west side of Jewfish Creek
Bridge. Currently to access the uplands boaters are limited to docking at either the
Anchorage or Gilbert's Resort, under the Jewfish Creek Bridge (Photo 2) or in the
surrounding mangroves (Photo 4).
14
Coastal Systems international,Inc.
Figure 2.Jewfish Creek Location Map
i� 1 t�r)�i��'��lii'u � VII Il,hil llll�
it
it
151
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Further to the south along Overseas Highway, past Lake Surprise, there are other
restaurants, shopping centers, dive shops, a post office, the Mariners Hospital, the Key
Largo Visitor Center, and points of interest such as John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park,
a community pool, the Wild Bird Rehabilitation Center, and dolphin encounters. In order
to access this area to the south, however, boaters would need upland transportation in the
form of a vehicle or public transportation. Without a vehicle on the uplands, access to the
surrounding areas is difficult, making the Jewfish Creek area relatively isolated which may
be an important criteria for liveaboard vessels seeking upland amenities nearby such as
medical facilities, grocery stores etc.
Coastal Systems conducted a review of historical aerial photographs obtained from the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) dating back to 1959 and from Google Earth
dating back to 1994 for each of the three proposed mooring field sites, select aerials can
be found in Appendix A. The aerials show between 0 and 41 vessels anchored in the
Jewfish Creek area since 1959, with an average of 24 anchored vessels using the area since
2004 (See Table 2).
The anchorage near Jewfish Creek has been observed by Marine Resource Staff as one of
the fastest growing in Monroe County. Currently boaters anchor offshore of the mangrove
area along the shoreline on the east side of Jewfish Creek channel (Photos 1, 3 and 4). On
May 8, 2013 Coastal Systems conducted a site visit to determine the number and types of
the vessels anchoring in the area. The survey indicated that 16 vessels were anchored in
the Jewfish Creek anchorage (Photos 1-4) including 10 sailboats, three powerboats, one
houseboat, and two derelict vessels (Photo 4) (See Appendix B for the Field Observation
Report). Between 2008 and 2013 five derelict vessels were reported in the anchorage and
all five of them have since been removed.
16
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
The anchored vessels observed during the site inspection were primarily clustered in the
area adjacent to the eastern edge of the channel, south of the Anchorage Resort. Vessels
were also anchored under the Jewfish Creek Bridge, north of the Anchorage Resort (Photo
2). Since that time vessels under the Bridge have been required to move. During a site visit
on July 30, 2013, there were 15 vessels anchored east and west of the channel (2 of which
were derelict vessels). No boats were observed anchored under the Overseas Highway
Bridge during the July 30, 2013 site visit.
17
Coastal Systems International,Inc.400,
ery
Photo 1: Boats anchored in the Jewfish Creek anchorage.
II��IIIIIII iili�iiuuui �,r
YYVVI
Photo 2: Boats tied up under the Jewfish Creek Bridge on May 8, 2013.
18 Coastal Systems International,Ine �
Photo 3: Boats anchored in the Jewfish Creek anchorage.
1
flK
Photo 4: Derelict Vessel observed in the mangroves at Jewfish Creek.
19 Coastal Systems International,Inc. Po'"
Preliminary reconnaissance marine resource and bathymetric surveys were conducted at
Jewfish Creek on May 8, 2013. Dense turtle (Thalassia testudinum) and shoal seagrass
(Halodule beaudettei) were observed east and west of the Jewfish Creek channel. The area
immediately south of the Anchorage Resort, along the east side of the Jewfish Creek
channel, where approximately half the boats were anchored, consisted of sand. The
submerged lands south of the dense seagrass, west of the Jewfish Creek channel consisted
of patchy seagrass (T. testudinum) and sand (Figure 2 in Appendix B and Figure 2 in
Appendix D). Water depths range from 2.8 to 7.7 feet in the area surveyed, with mostly
adequate water depths (>4 feet) for moorings. The area that appears to be most suitable
for a mooring field, based upon the preliminary reconnaissance data, is the sandy area
south of the Anchorage Resort, adjacent to the channel, which is devoid of marine
resources and has water depths between 4.8 and 7.7 feet.
If the County decides to pursue a managed mooring field in this area, a public-private
partnership should be sought with one of the two existing adjacent upland facilities,
Gilbert's Resort or Anchorage Resort, to provide shore access, dinghy dockage, shore-side
pump-out, and other facilities. Gilbert's Resort is a motel, marina, restaurant complex and
could provide most of the shore-side amenities needed for a managed mooring field, as
they have the first fuel dock entering the Florida Keys and the last leaving the Islands,
existing docks with water, power, cable and Wi-Fi, boat ramp which can accommodate 40
foot vessels, vehicle parking (120 spaces at Gilberts), trash, water fountains, ice, laundry (4
washers/4 dryers), restroom facilities (8 for men and 8 for women), showers, and restaurant
(See Table 3 for a list of services provided and Photos 5-8). Coastal Systems spoke with
Reinhard Schautt from Gilberts Resort on October 7, 2013, about the possibility of
partnering with the County to provide shore-side services for a managed mooring field and
he indicated that he was very interested. Mr. Schautt stated that he currently owns
Gilbert's Resort, as well as Steamers Restaurant and Grill, located adjacent to the
Anchorage Resort. Mr. Schautt also owns the 12 acre property next to Steamers, which he
has turned into additional parking with lights, a security camera, and 24-hour security for
car parking and boat storage. This lot can accommodate 120 cars and Mr. Schautt plans to
20
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
construct an additional boat ramp in this area next to Steamers. Gilbert's Resort and
Marina does not currently have a shore-side pump-out facility, but Mr. Schautt indicated
he would install one if a mooring field is constructed.
21
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Photo 5: Gilberts Resort.
II
as 4
h
"y
1 ,
Photo 6: Dock at Gilberts Resort.
22 Coastal Systems International,Inc. �1
I'
Photo 7: Gilberts Resort Motel, Marina and Restaurant.
0
I
n;
Photo 8: Boat ramp at Gilberts Resort.
23 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
The Anchorage Resort and Yacht Club is a private resort and marina offering existing docks
with water, electric, cable and Wi-Fi, vehicle parking, trash, BBQ grills, and picnic tables
(See Table 3 for a list of services provided and Photos 9-12). Coastal Systems has reached
out to the Anchorage Resort and Yacht Club, but at the time of this report has yet to hear
back regarding interest in future partnership with the County to provide shore-side services
for a managed mooring field. Due to the Anchorage Resort being exclusive to members, it
does not appear to have a great potential for a shoreside facility.
Adjacent to the Anchorage is boat rentals at Pontunes which also does not appear to be a
potential shoreside facility as it is a business who's docks are already in use for their boat
rental business and they do not have the amenities needed to support a mooring field.
24
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
i
I
I(
l I)
Photo 9: The Anchorage Resort and Yacht Club.
1r
M1
it
N
r
OUIII10"
4
+ r
f J ,
Photo 10: Tennis courts and fish cleaning station at the Anchorage
Resort.
25 Coastal Systems International,Inc. 11
�l I
1
J 4,
i
1
Photo 11: Docks at the Anchorage Resort.
p,,✓ y ° Vt� rr ii�
i
1,
Photo 12: Picnic area and restrooms at the Anchorage Resort.
26 Coastal Systems International,Inc. °
3.2 Buttonwood Sound
The Buttonwood Sound anchorage site is on the bay side of Key Largo (MM 99), south of
Tarpon Basin, approximately 2 miles south of the Murray Nelson Government Center (See
Figure 3, Photo 13). The area is close to stores, restaurants, fast food, cafes, coffee shops,
grocery store, drug store, bars, liquor store, gas stations, banks, marine service and supply
store, bait and tackle shop, dive shops, hair salon, dentist, veterinarian, boat ramp, Baptist
church, and public transportation; however, there is currently no appropriate location for
upland public access to the commercial and recreational areas since the shoreline consists
of private residential and commercial properties. In 2002 the Keys-Wide Mooring Field
System Preliminary Planning Document indicated that approximately 25 vessels (power
and sailboats including liveaboards as well as storage boats) were anchored in the Sunset
Cove area near mm 100. Lack of shoreside facilities and upland access led boaters to
access land at Bayview Drive, while leaving bikes and mopeds at the end of Bay View
Drive for upland transportation. At the time the anchorage was used mostly by low-end
liveaboards, and neighbors complained about noise, vandalism, and drug use. The County
has since put up a fence to stop access to the uplands at this location and the negative
impacts associated with it.
27
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 6010
I
y
yv
G
Photo 13: Aerial view of Buttonwood Sound anchorage.
d � /
Photo 14: Anchored vessel in Buttonwood Sound.
28 Coastal Systems International,Inc. vl
Figure 3. Buttonwood Sound Location Map
6
g.
r
e
A
Currently vessels that anchor in Buttonwood Sound are scattered throughout the area, as
there is still no public upland access where dinghies can be tied up. As a result, dinghies
access the uplands at various locations including the ends of roads (e.g. Bayview Drive),
which is a point of contention among some of the local residents who are concerned about
trash accumulation on the uplands and crime. While the commercial areas would support
commerce for transient and liveaboard vessels, the current lack of access to the uplands
provides an impediment to use of the Buttonwood Sound anchorage by the boating
community. If a mooring field with appropriate upland access was implemented in this
area, boaters would be able to access the surrounding shops on foot, by bike, or by using
public transportation, in turn supporting the local economy.
29
Coastal Systems Intenrational,Inc.
Coastal Systems conducted a review of historical aerial photographs obtained from the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) dating back to 1959 and from Google Earth
dating back to 1994 for the Buttonwood Sound site; select aerials can be found in
Appendix A. The aerials show between 0 and 44 vessels anchored in the area since 1959,
with an average of 24 anchored vessels using the area since 2004 (See Table 2).
On May 7, 2013, Coastal Systems conducted a survey of the number and types of vessels
anchoring in the area and found that 22 vessels were anchored in Buttonwood Sound
including 20 sailboats (Photo 16), one powerboat, one houseboat (Photo 14), and zero
derelict vessels (see Appendix B Field Observation Report). Between 2008 and 2013,
fifteen derelict vessels were reported and 11 of them have been removed. Most of the
vessels were concentrated offshore of a residential area between the Point of View RV
Resort and Bayview Drive, a street end where some of the boaters reportedly access the
upland. Many sailboats were clustered in the area adjacent to the Upper Keys Sailing Club.
During a site visit on July 30, 2013 there were 6 vessels anchored in this area, none of
which were derelict vessels. The County indicated that they had recently removed
numerous derelict vessels from this area. During the survey, several boats were observed
using marine debris as anchors (barrels and concrete) and long chains were observed
scouring the seafloor (See Photo 15).
30
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Photo 15: Makeshift mooring in Buttonwood Sound.
Photo 16: Vessels anchored in Buttonwood Sound.
31 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Preliminary reconnaissance marine resource and bathymetric surveys were conducted on
May 7, 2013 (see Appendix B: Field Observation Report and Figure 1). The nearshore area
of Buttonwood Sound, within the first 500 feet of shore, consisted of dense turtle seagrass
(T. testudinum) (See Photo 18). Water depths in the nearshore area ranged from 2.1 ft to
5.2 ft. The offshore area, 500 feet or farther offshore, consisted of patchy seagrass (T.
testudinum), macroalgae, and sponges (See Photo 17). Water depths in the area with
patchy marine resources ranged from 4.1 to 6.5 feet, with adequate water depths (> 4
feet) for moorings (Figure 1 in Appendix B and Figure 1 in Appendix D). The area with
patchy resources and adequate water depths for moorings is very large and may allow
moorings to be sited so as to avoid emergent seagrass.
Buttonwood Sound appears to be an ideal location for a managed mooring field due to its
proximity to restaurants, dive shops, and convenience stores which will appeal to both
transient and liveaboards (many of which are assumed to work in the area), favorable
water depths (>4 feet) and lack of dense marine resources like seagrass and coral. If the
County decides to pursue a managed mooring field in this area, a public-private
partnership should be sought with one of the adjacent upland facilities to provide shore
access, dinghy dockage, shore-side pump-out, and other amenities. Despite the extensive
development in the area, there are only a few options for partnering with an existing
upland facility for shoreside access and amenities in Buttonwood Sound, as some of the
facilities are private or members only such as the Upper Keys Sailing Club, residential, or
restaurants with docks (Snook's Bayside and DiGiorgio's Cafe). The two upland facilities
that appear to be viable upland access locations are the Dream Bay Resort at MM 99.2 and
the Point of View RV Resort at MM 99.
32
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
� �dmu iioi I III
Photo 17: Patchy seagrass in Buttonwood Sound.
r � ,
Iln"�I
Photo 18: Dense seagrass was observed nearshore in Buttonwood
Sound.
...
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
i, Diu i
r �
r r�
w,
yN,
Photo 19: Beach and dock at the Dream Bay Resort.
»
Photo 20: Dock at the Dream Bay Resort.
3 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
The Dream Bay Resort is a small family owned resort consisting of 4 rental homes and a
marina (Photos 19-20). The Resort has a dock with 11 full slips and 7 dinghy dock slips,
fishing pier, Wi-Fi, 3 bathrooms and 2 showers, laundry (1 washer and 1 dryer), BBQ
grills, bike rack, private beach, and limited parking (See Table 3) for a list of services
provided). To provide desirable amenities, this facility could be expanded to include
additional washers and dryers, a shore-side pumpout facility, and a location for a harbor
master, if selected for collaboration. On October 10, 2013 Coastal Systems reached out to
Tanya Cullen with Dream Bay Resort, who indicated interest in future partnership with the
County to provide shore-side services for a managed mooring field.
Located just southwest of the Dream Bay Resort is the Point of View RV Resort, a luxury
waterfront RV Resort. The Point of View RV Resort could provide most of the shoreside
amenities needed for a managed mooring field, as they currently have available laundry
facilities (10 washers and 10 dryers), bathrooms (6 men and 6 women) and showers, Wi-Fi,
pool, private beach, boat ramp (can accommodate 30 foot vessels), 10 excess parking
spaces, 10 slip dinghy dock, 16 slip marina, bike rack, trash, water, and convenience store
(See Table 3 for a list of services provided and Photos 21-24). Coastal Systems spoke with
Jim Saunders from Point of View RV Resort on June 24, 2013 about the possibility of
partnering with the County to provide shore-side services for a managed mooring field and
he indicated that he was very interested. Mr. Saunders Point of View RV Resort does not
currently have a shore-side pump-out facility, although infrastructure is in place at the
docks. Mr. Saunders indicated that he would install a pump-out facility if a mooring field is
constructed.
35
Coastal Systems International,Inc.4010,
/r
Photo 21: One of the three docks at Point of View RV Resort.
w
r
r
,,,
J' pG
f
Photo 22: Beach and docks at Point of View RV Resort.
36 Coastal Systems International,Inc. ��
I, Yf�l �` ➢ 1 611 � V V V f IJ .Y � mW � 'A ',
I'
PF
i
Photo 23: Pool at Point of View RV Resort.
fib r,
i
Photo 24: Laundry Facility at Point of View RV Resort.
7 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
3.3 Boca Chica Basin
Boca Chica Basin contains a large anchorage located 5 miles east of Key West, between
Stock Island and Boca Chica Key, south of Overseas Highway, spanning from MM 5 to 6.5
(See Figure 4). The area is connected to the Atlantic Ocean via three navigable channels
funneling into the main channel and also provides limited access to the gulf side (restricted
by bridge height, precluding sailboats). The Boca Chica Basin anchorage includes two
distinct anchoring areas. The northern anchorage is an open expanse of shallow water over
dense seagrass and the southern anchorage, separated from the north by mangroves and
shallow flats, consists of shallow dense seagrass and hardbottom habitat with two
navigable channels running between. The west side of Boca Chica Key hosts the largest
U.S. Naval Air Station (NAS Key West), a marina and mooring field, which is exclusively
for use by active and retired military personnel. The Air Installations Compatible Use
Zones (AICUZ) run through the center of the Basin, overlapping portions of both
anchorage areas and the Navy Noise Zone encompasses the entire harbor.
Fi use 4. Boca Chica Basin Location Ma
s� U'
38
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Photo 25: Derelict vessels anchored at Boca Chica Basin.
f
Photo 26: Vessels anchored in Boca Chica Basin.
39 Coastal Sgstems International,Inc. o
Photo 27: Debris being used as a makeshift anchor in the Boca Chica
Basin.
ti
Photo 28: Large vessel anchored in one of the channels leading into
the Boca Chica Basin.
40 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
The majority of the vessels anchored in Boca Chica Basin are located in the northern
anchorage area. There is a public boat ramp, managed by the Florida Department of
Transportation (DOT), along Overseas Highway at MM 5.2, which is utilized for upland
access and provides trash receptacles (Photos 29-30). The public boat ramp is not
intended to service the unmanaged anchorage as an upland access point. The number of
liveaboards that utilize the public ramp for upland access, dumping of trash, bike and
dinghy storage has led to issues maintaining the site. Numerous dinghies are tied up along
mangroves near the boat ramp. Across the street from the boat ramp on the north side of
U.S. 1 at MM 5.3 there is a Shell gas station that provides fuel, restrooms, and a
convenience store. The north side of Stock Island is home to the Key West Colf Course,
Florida Keys Community College, and Monroe County Detention Center. The eastern
shoreline of Stock Island is home to numerous marinas, private trailer parks, and Boyd's
Campground. Several restaurants, churches, a grocery store, West Marine, and a boat
repair yard are also located on Stock Island. Most of the anchoring related problems
(derelict and abandoned vessels, seagrass scarring, crime, etc.) have been reported in the
northern anchoring area (Monroe County 2008).
Most vessels that anchor in the southern anchorage area can be found in deeper waters,
located in the two westernmost channels, and consist of larger cruising vessels (Photo 28).
Shoreside properties adjacent to this area include several fish houses and a large private
marina complex (open to members only).
In 2012 Monroe County's Anchoring Ordinance No. 036-2012 established a "No
Anchoring Buffer Zone" in the eastern portion of the Boca Chica Basin, which prohibits
anchoring or mooring of any kind (except for vessels within established public mooring
fields, commercial vessels engaged in marine related work, military operations, and vessels
anchored for the purpose of fishing or other recreational activities (not overnight) or in the
case of an emergency; Figure 5). The No Anchoring Buffer Zone was designated at the
request of the U.S. Navy which operates out of these waters. The waters on the west side
of the Basin, where the north and south anchorages are located, were classified through
41
Coastal Systems International,Inc.4001,
Ordinance No. 036-2012 as a managed anchoring zone, in which vessels exhibiting pre-
derelict conditions and derelict vessels are prohibited and proof of pump-out is required by
Monroe County.
The U.S. Navy, during the Pilot Program Ordinance development process, expressed its
opinion that the entire Boca Chica Basin should be designated as a no anchoring buffer
zone and that it is not appropriate to have liveaboards in either the AICUZ or Navy Noise
Zone, as they encroach on the security of the naval base (Monroe County, 2008). The
Navy has indicated issues with installing moorings anywhere in the Boca Chica Basin area,
especially mooring in marked channels (Monroe County, 2008; Lefere, 2012).
Additionally, significant portions of the basin bottom are owned by the Navy, including
the eastern and center channel. As authorization from the submerged lands owner is
considered during the permitting process, this would be an impediment to development of
a mooring field in the southern anchorage area, despite this area having deeper water
depths that are more appropriate for larger cruising vessels (Monroe County, 2008).
However, much of the northern anchorage area is outside of the AICUZ and is Soveriegn
Submerged Lands.
42
Coastal Systems International,Inc.loe
Figure 5. A Map of Boca Chica Basin showing the Managed Anchoring Zone, No
Anchoring Zone and the U.S. Navy areas
�0 Of
f 1��A M9Y
ei �AbX�qv�p
c
A&
A Vessel Mooring Study for Boca Chica Harbor, commissioned by Monroe County in
2010, describes the overcrowded conditions in the unmanaged anchorage and the
environmental impacts associated with the anchored vessels in the northern and southern
anchorages. The Vessel Mooring Study consisted of quarterly surveys in March, June,
September, and December 2010 and documented 73 to 83 vessels present during any one
survey. Powerboats, including commercial fishing vessels, liveaboards, and many vessels
stored on unpermitted moorings (Photos 26-27), were the most abundant vessel type
observed, followed by sailboats, houseboats, and floating platforms (platform equipped
with no motor or sail and is towed or moved manually). Liveaboards (47%) and stored
vessels (45%) were the most prevalent vessel use with transient vessels making up only 1%
and the remaining 7% being derelict vessels. The report also pointed out that the majority
of mooring devices used in the basin (89%) consisted of marine debris such as concrete
filled barrels, engine block, iron pipes driven into the seafloor, and sunken vessels.
43
10,
Coastal Systems Inten:ational,Inc.
Damage to marine resources was observed as a result of debris, moorings, and mooring
lines.
Coastal Systems conducted a review of historical aerial photographs obtained from the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) dating back to 1959 and from Google Earth
dating back to 1994 for the Boca Chica Basin site, select aerials can be found in Appendix
A. The aerials show between 0 and 138 vessels anchored in the area since 1959, with an
average of 82 anchored vessels using the area since 2004 (See Table 2).
The Boca Chica Basin area is currently heavily used as an ad-hoc anchoring area, with
numerous vessels anchoring in the three channels leading into the Basin and in the
northwest corner of the basin (Photos 25-28). The Boca Chica Basin site was the most
populated anchorage of those investigated during this Study (See Appendix B) or the Field
Observation Report and (Appendix A) for the Historical Aerials showing vessels anchored
in the area).
On May 6, 2013, Coastal Systems conducted a survey of the number and types of vessels
anchored in the Boca Chica Basin. Sixty-two vessels were anchored in the Boca Chica
Area including 19 sailboats, 25 powerboats, five houseboats, and 13 derelict vessels (7
near the boat ramp and 6 observed in other areas of the Basin) (see Appendix B: Field
Observation Report). Between 2008 and 2013, forty-two derelict vessels were reported
and thirty-six of them have been removed. Vessels that are anchored in the Boca Chica
area are scattered throughout the managed anchoring zone and the deeper channels that
lead into the Basin. It appears that more liveaboards and commercial fishing vessels are
anchored in the shallower managed anchoring zone to the north, while the larger, deeper
draft liveaboard and transient vessels are anchored in the channels closer to the Atlantic
Ocean. During the survey numerous vessels were observed anchored to concrete filled
barrels, pipes, rebar, concrete blocks, and marine debris.
44
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Preliminary reconnaissance marine resource and bathymetric surveys were conducted on
May 6, 2013 (see Appendix B: Field Observation Report and Figure 3). Most of the Boca
Chica Basin site consisted of dense seagrass (Figure 3 in Appendix B and Figure 3 in
Appendix D). The only area with patchy seagrass doesn't have adequate waters depths (>
4 feet) to support a mooring field. Water depths in this area range between 1.4 and 2.1
feet. The area to the west of this shallow site is also not conducive to a mooring field, as it
consists of mangrove islands, dense turtle seagrass (T. testudinum), and hardbottom. Water
depths in the northwest area of the Boca Chica Basin, currently used by anchored boats,
ranged from 1.2 to 6.9 feet, with shallower depths near the shoreline. The dredged
approach channel leading into Murray Marine provides water depths of up to 18.6 feet.
The middle of the site consisted of dense seagrass and hardbottom directly offshore, with
sparse seagrass and macroalgae further offshore, intermixed among the mangroves. Turtle
grass (T. testudinum) was the dominant seagrass species observed in these two areas and
water depths ranged from 1.4 to 8.5 feet. The shallow nature of most the Basin and the
presence of marine resources including dense seagrass, sponges, and corals, suggests that
this area would not be the most ideal location for a mooring field from permitting
perspective. Permitting agencies typically require moorings to be sited in areas devoid of
marine resources. Unfortunately, the area with suitable depth for establishment of a
mooring field (>4 feet) is located in dense seagrass beds. Since damage to seagrass beds
and hardbottom habitat supporting hard and soft corals is occurring in the basin,
establishment of moorings in more appropriate locations with less dense resources may
allow for recovery of these ecological resources.
45
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Photo 29: The public DOT boat ramp as seen from the Boca Chica
Basin.
Photo 30: Bikes are chained to the sign at the public DOT boat ramp.
46 Coastal Systems International,Inc. �
During the site visit Coastal Systems spoke with an anchored boater who expressed his
concern with the cluster of boats using the area and the volume of trash that the
population generates and disposes of improperly. He indicated that he believes some of
the trash is from the neighboring fish houses, campground, and washes in from storms.
The man stated there were 70 knot winds a week ago, which caused a few boats to run
aground and collide with each other. He also said that there are free dumpsters on land,
but no restroom or shower facilities available to anchored boaters. The private facilities
with restrooms and shower facilities available do not allow the boaters from the anchorage
to use these facilities. Another issue he complained about was crime; he stated that the
police have not helped recover stolen gear. The gentleman thought that charging fees to
use a managed mooring field would pose a financial challenge to many of the current
vessel owners and may force them to move to another unmanaged anchorage.
Properties adjacent to the north anchorage area with suitable depths (> 4 feet) for a
mooring field include several private residential trailer parks, Murray Marine marina and a
campground open to the public (Boyd's Campground). The most suitable upland
properties that could potentially provide shoreside amenities for the proposed mooring
field are Murray Marine and Boyd's Campground.
Murray Marine is a full service marina located in the northwest portion of the Boca Chica
site that offers boat slip rentals, dry dock services, a boat ramp, full mechanic shop, gas,
one restroom, fish cleaning station, bait, and a convenience store (See Table 3 for a list of
services provided and Photos 31-34). Murray Marine does not have a shore-side pump-out
station and indicated during a site visit on September 8, 2013 that they are not interested
in installing one. They also stated that they also do not have space for a dinghy dock and
they have limited vehicle parking. Further discussions with Murray Marine on October 9,
2013 indicate that they are not interested in partnering with the County to provide shore-
side access or services to mooring field patrons.
47
Coastal Systems International,Inc.640,
Y
rmu it i..
r /ii ii / i/�� it i ,'✓/rltrxr� � i ��, / � ii% /,�h
Photo 31: Murray Marine is a suitable upland support site.
I
r.
r .
i
! �� 4n nnnnnn
Photo 32: The restrooms at Murray Marine.
48 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
�r
r!
ONO
!//
ii�r of
Photo 33: The dock at Murray Marine.
F
�t
r/
I u�pwlri 1g�1� 'I it
e �
Photo 34: The dock at Murray Marine.
49 Coastal Systems International,Lrc. "
Boyd's Campground is located south of Murray Marine and could provide most of the
shoreside amenities needed for a managed mooring field including small finger piers and
marginal floating dock, boat ramp, adequate water depths (1.8 - 2.9 feet) for dinghy access,
fish cleaning station, 4 restroom and shower facilities, coin laundry, Wi-Fi, picnic pavilion
with grill, Tiki Hut with big screen TV, 24 hour security, convenience store, ATM, bicycle
rentals, and proximity to City bus service (See Table 3 for a list of services provided and
Photos 35-40). Across the street from Boyd's campground is a West Marine store, fish
market, and Tom Thumb convenience store. On November 26, 2013 Coastal Systems
talked to Boyd's Campground who indicated they did not have an interest in a future
partnership with the County to provide shore-side services for a managed mooring field.
No other facilities along the shoreline would be suitable due to lack of dockage,
appropriate water depths, presence of marine resources, as well as being a residential area
unsuitable for development into a public mooring field partner.
50
�'r��
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 4004
/f
r
f`f i
c„
Photo 35: The docks at Boyd's Campground.
ar ,
1
Photo 36: Additonal dockage at Boyd's Campground.
51 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
/r
Photo 37: The boat ramp at Boyd's Campground.
a
Photo 38: The laundry facility and bike rentals at Boyd's
Campground.
52 Coastal Systems International,Inc.
t
Photo 39: The pool at Boyd's Campground.
l ,l�l
Photo 40: The restrooms at Boyd's Campground.
53 Coastal Systems International,Inc. r"
If the County decides to pursue a managed mooring field in the northern anchorage area, a
public-private partnership should be sought with one of the adjacent upland facilities to
provide shore-side access, dinghy dockage, shore-side pump-out, and other amenities, or
as an alternative, if no partner can be obtained, land could be purchased by the County to
supply these amenities in addition to an office for a harbormaster. This option would
represent a costly commitment by the County.
Table 2. Historical Boat Anchorage at Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound,
and Boca Chica Basin
Number of Vessels
Date of Aerial* Jewfish Creek Buttonwood Sound Boca Chica Basin
1959 6 0 0
1971 5 NA NA
1985 5 6 26
1994 3 44 95
1/14/94 0 32 NA
11/25/95 NA NA 79
2/24/99 5 26 76
2/23/04 9 NA NA
12/30/04 12 23 138
2006 NA NA 44
2/27/06 13 26 98
2/8/06 14 25 NA
11/12/07 23 27 80
12/30/08 31 31 75
2009 41 2 NA
3/14/09 33 32 NA
12/30/09 33 35 74
12/23/10 30 26 NA
12/30/10 NA 28 NA
2012 27 16 NA
3/6/13 21 19 65
Range 0 to 41 0 to 44 0 to 138
Average 1 17 23 71
Avera a Since Year 2004 1 24 1 24 1 82
*Aerials acquired from MOT (year) & GOOGLE Earth (M/D/Y)
54
Coastal Systems International,Inc.400,
Table3: List of Services Provided by Suitable Upland facilities
SERVICE Jewfish Creek Buttonwood Sound Boca Chlca Basin
Gilberts Resort Anchorage Resort Point of View Dream Bay Resort 'Bo d's Campground.MurrayMarine
ATM X
BaitSupply X
Bar on-site or adjacent X X
Basketball X
BBQGrills I X X X
Beach Vol le ball
Bicycle Rentals X
Bike Rack X X X
Convenience Store X X X
Dishwashing Station X
Dive Shop within Smiles) X X X X X X
Dog Run/Walki ng Area X X
Drug Store(within 5 miles) X X X X
Existing Dinghy Dock X X X X
Fire Pit X X
Fish Cleaning Station X X X X
Fishing Pier X X
Fuel Dock X X
Gas Station(nearby) X X X X
Game Room X X
Gift Shop X X
Grocery Store within 5 miles X X X X X X
Highway Access X X X X X X
Hospital within 5 Miles X X
Hot Tub X
Ice X X X X
Kayak,Paddle Boat&Paddle
Board Rentals X X
Laundry Facilities X X X X
Uve Entertainment X
Mailbox X X
Marina X X X X X X
Mechanic Sho X
Motel/Room Rental X X X
Picnic Area X X X
Private Beach X X X X
Private Boat Ramp X X
Public Boat Ramp X X X
PublicTele hone X'
Public Transportation X X X X X X
Pum outstation
Restaurant on-site or adjacent X X X
Restrooms X X X X X
Showers X X X X
Shuffleboard X
Swimming Pool X X X X
Tennis Courts X
Tiki Bar X'
Tiki Huts X X X
Trash Receptacles X X X X X X.`
Vehicle Parking X X X X X _Umited
Water X X X X X X
Wi-Fi X X X X X
24 Hour Security X X X
Facility has Interest in Partering YES Unkown YES YES NO NO
Facility would Allow
Installation of Pum out Station YES Unkown YES YES NO NO
55
w '''%
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
4.0 MOORING FIELD CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS
Coastal Systems prepared one mooring field conceptual layout for each of the three
anchorage sites based on the preliminary reconnaissance information collected on water
depths, marine resource abundance and existing anchorage patterns. The initial mooring
design is a function of many design factors, including but not limited to, water depth,
marine resources, vessel size, current use of the area, and proximity to an upland facility
for shore-side support. The three conceptual designs were planned using a maximum
vessel length of 35 feet on a mooring swing circle of 120 feet. These conceptual designs
serve as initial concepts to assist with decision making and planning; however, refined
designs showing exact mooring anchor locations, mooring areas, fairways, and mooring
field marker buoys will need to be prepared prior to submittal of permit applications.
Refined mooring field designs should be developed after a detailed qualitative marine
resource survey identifies exact locations and accurate densities of submerged aquatic
resources and a bathymetric survey with a density sufficient to depict one foot depth
contours is conducted. The following sections describe site summaries and associated
conceptual mooring field designs.
4.1 Jewfish Creek
At the Jewfish Creek anchorage site, areas having water depths that were less than 4 feet
(MWL) and areas of dense seagrass were eliminated from further consideration as potential
areas to site a mooring field. Since most of the vessels currently anchored on-site are east
of the Jewfish Creek Channel and a section of this area was found to be devoid of marine
resources, moorings were located in areas where water depths were sufficient for mooring
(> 4 feet) and devoid of seagrass. The area devoid of marine resources can only
accommodate 9 moorings for vessels that are 35 foot in length. Since the average number
of vessels using this area is 17 and the maximum documented number of vessels is 41,
additional moorings were included in the conceptual design in an area with sufficient
water depths (>4 feet deep) and patchy resources, west of the Jewfish Creek Channel (See
Figure 2 in Appendix Q. Nineteen additional moorings were located west of the Jewfish
56
G,
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Creek Channel, in an area where a few vessels are currently anchored, providing a total of
28 moorings (See the Jewfish Creek Conceptual Design map located in Appendix C.
Although it may not be ideal to have the mooring field split into two separate areas divided
by a channel from a management perspective, the channel does provide for a navigable
fairway. From a regulatory standpoint, the Agencies typically require that moorings be
sited in areas without submerged aquatic recourses before they will consider permitting
moorings over patchy resources. Since there is a current and likely future need for more
than 9 moorings, the additional moorings located over patchy seagrasses can likely be
justified. Since only a cursory qualitative marine resource survey and bathymetric survey
was conducted and the survey was limited to the area shown on (Figure 2 in Appendix D),
it is possible that the conceptually designed mooring field could be expanded to the west
to accommodate more than the 19 moorings currently depicted.
4.2 Buttonwood Sound
At the Buttonwood Sound Anchorage, areas having water depths that were less than 4 feet
(MWQ and areas of dense seagrass were eliminated from further consideration as potential
areas to site a mooring field. The preliminary reconnaissance survey did not identify any
large areas of sandy bottom devoid of resources; therefore, the conceptual mooring field
was sited in an area supporting patchy seagrass. There is a large area with sufficient water
depths (>4 feet) and patchy resources where a mooring field could be sited (See Figure 1
in Appendix Q.
The conceptual mooring field for Buttonwood Sound is depicted offshore of the two
facilities, Point of View RV Resort and Dream Bay Resort and Marina, that were identified
as potential and receptive shore-side providers (See the Buttonwood Sound Conceptual
Design map located in Appendix Q. The conceptual design shows a total of 100 moorings
to accommodate 35 foot long vessels. Given that the moorings will be placed in an area
that supports submerged aquatic resources, the environmental regulatory agencies will
require justification of need to support the number or moorings ultimately proposed.
57
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Typically need is justified based on documented past use and anticipated future use. Since
the average number of vessels using this area is 23 and the maximum documented number
of vessels is 44 (See Table 2) it may be difficult to justify the need for a mooring field with
100 moorings in this location. It may be beneficial to start with a smaller number of
moorings and increase the number if demand increases since the Buttonwood Sound site
includes a very large area with adequate water depths (>4 feet) and patchy resources.
4.3 Boca Chica Basin
At the Boca Chica Basin Anchorage, areas having water depths less than 4 feet (MWL) and
areas of mangroves, shoals and hardbottom habitat were eliminated from further
consideration as potential areas to site a mooring field. No large areas of sandy bottom
devoid of resources were observed during the survey. Additionally, the only area observed
to have patchy seagrass was located in an area with insufficient water depths
(approximately 2 feet) to establish a mooring field. Therefore, the only areas available for
siting a mooring field were located over dense seagrass or in navigable channels. Since
most of the vessels currently anchored on-site are located in the north anchorage, the
conceptual design shows the mooring field sited in this area, despite it supporting dense
seagrass, because it has appropriate water depths (>4 feet). The area can accommodate 58
moorings for 35 foot vessels (See Figure 3 located in Appendix Q. This conceptual
mooring field would provide moorings for only a portion of the vessels currently using the
area, as the average number of vessels using this area is 71 and the maximum documented
number of vessels is 138.
Given that the moorings would all be located over dense seagrass beds, securing permits
from the environmental regulatory agencies would be extremely challenging. In addition
to the costs associated with permit processing, the regulatory agencies would likely require
compensatory mitigation for ecological impacts, and the permit applications may get
denied. The Navy may voice opposition to the construction of a mooring field at Boca
Chica Basin given some of their previous correspondence with the County on this topic.
The Corps of Engineers in particular will seriously consider the issues raised by the Navy
58
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 400
and other federal commenting agencies. The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and
the National Marine Fisheries Service will likely oppose the issuance of a Corps permit for
moorings located over dense seagrass resources, despite the obvious benefits that a
managed mooring field has over haphazard umanaged anchoring. At the State level, the
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission will have similar concerns to those
raised by the National Marine Fisheries Service related to authorization of moorings over
dense seagrass resources.
At the time of this report Coastal Systems could not identify an existing upland facility that
was willing to partner with Monroe County to manage a mooring field. Since an existing
shoreside facility willing to manage the mooring field could not be identified the County
may have to purchase land and build the needed upland support for a mooring field if the
Boca Chica site is selected. This option will increase the cost of building the mooring field.
Many of the vessels anchored in Boca Chica Basin are stored vessels and liveaboards of
locals presumably seeking affordable housing. If a mooring field is constructed in the Boca
Chica Basin, the County may want to consider subsidizing a portion or all of the moorings
offered for residents who currently use the area as affordable housing, otherwise some of
these current users may not take a mooring. If the moorings are not subsidized, the
mooring field may not be fully occupied and the mooring field occupants may simply
move to another safe harborage. Typically mooring field fees do not generate large
revenues; however they do cover the costs of buoy maintenance and operation. If the
County were to subsidize the mooring field then additional funds would need to be
identified for maintenance and operation.
Table 4, below, provides a list of the pros and cons for each of the three anchorages
evaluated herein. Coastal Systems took into account these pros and cons, the availability of
shoreside providers, their willingness to partner with the County to manage the proposed
mooring field, and the amenities they offered in this table. Additionally considered were
environmental concerns, whether the number of moorings that could be established would
59
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 000
suit the current and future needs of the boating public, ability to permit the mooring field
proposed in each conceptual design, and other available information. Table 4 ranks the
three sites for potential mooring fields in the recommended order for proceeding towards
design, permitting, and construction of a managed mooring field.
Table 4: Pros and Cons for the Three Anchorages
Buttonwood Sound 'Jewfish Creek Boca Chica Basin
Bay Access X X X(limited)
Commercial Area within Walking Distance X X
Highwa Access X X X
Need for slips in the Area X
Ocean Access X
PROS Patchy Sea grass X X
Protected Anchorage(Wind/Waves) X X X
Public Transportation(Bus,Taxis) X X X
Sandy Areas X
Sufficient Water Depths(24') X X
Upland Facility Available to Manage Mooring Field X X X
Upland Facility Interested in Managing Mooring Field X X
Dense Seagrass X X
Isolated X
CONS Potential to Take Business from Local Marinas X X
Shallow Water Depths X
No Existing Upland Facility Interested in Managing
Mooring Field X
Derelict Vessels 0 2 13
Vessels currently using the Area 22 14 49
NOTES Shoals Present
Other Issues Adjacent Naval Facility
Potential for Mooring Expansion High Medium Low
Potential for Securing Permits Medium Medium Low
RANKING 1 2 3
60
Coastal Systems brternational,Inc.400
4.4 Recommended Site
Coastal Systems has determined that the Buttonwood Sound area is the optimal site for the
County to pursue implementation of a managed mooring field, followed by Jewfish Creek,
and then Boca Chica Basin. The mooring field would consist of 100 moorings, in an area
approximately 42.3 acres. We conceptually designed this mooring field to accommodate
100 vessels because of the large area that is suitable for moorings in terms of bathymetry
and ecological resources. The pending legislation reducing the regulatory burden for
permitting mooring fields is limited to 100 moorings. The ultimate number of moorings
will be determined based upon a review of detailed bathymetric surveys, environmental
resource surveys, and anticipated usage/need. After a detailed qualitative marine resource
survey and detailed bathymetric survey is conducted, the conceptual design can be refined
to include refined number of moorings, proper siting of each mooring and including
moorings to accommodate various sized vessels (i.e. 35 foot, 45 foot, and 60 foot vessels),
as well as show mooring areas, fairways, and mooring field boundaries and marker buoys.
61
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS
The development and siting of a managed mooring field must be consistent with
applicable regulatory criteria. The following sections discuss the applicable rules and
regulations with respect to the strategy for developing a managed mooring field in Monroe
County.
5.1 Monroe County 2010 Comprehensive Plan
The 2010 Monroe County Comprehensive Plan (Plan) recognizes that there is a large
number of people in the County who reside (or live aboard) their vessels for part of the
year (Technical Document Section 2.2B, Monroe County, 2010). The Plan identified 70%
of liveaboard vessels were found at shoreside sites and 30% were anchored in nearshore
waters (Technical Document Section 3.20.2C, Monroe County, 2010). This community of
liveaboard vessels relies on a number of dockside services and commercial services. Those
services most sought out include showers, restrooms, pumpout facilities, recreation, and
dinghy dockage. The Plan also discusses conflicts that arise between the liveaboard vessels
and upland residents (Technical Document Section 3.20.2C, Monroe County, 2010).
Liveaboard vessel owners complain about restricted access to shore and the challenges
associated with disposal of sanitary and solid waste, while upland residents complain of
overcrowding, noise, abandonment of vessels, degradation to the environment, and crime
in the liveaboard community. The Plan acknowledges that there is a need to create
facilities to accommodate the growing boating community, as well as create criteria for the
future siting of additional marinas and mooring fields (Technical Document Section 3.20.2
& Policy Document 203.5.4, Monroe County, 2010). Although not a policy, the Plan
suggests that future "mooring sites, including those at docks are not permitted over
seagrass beds regardless of water depth" (Policy Document 3.8.2E, Monroe County, 2010).
However, the Evaluation and Approval Report (EAR) based comprehensive plan
amendments recently drafted by the County provide an exemption for public mooring
fields.
62
Coastal Systems International,Inc.400
5.2 Monroe County Marina Siting Plan (MSP)
Monroe County currently does not have an approved Marina Siting Plan (MSP). The
County is currently working to finalize their Draft MSP and associated marina siting
criteria, and anticipates processing the documents for approval in the summer of 2014,
with adoption of a final Marina Siting Criterea in late 2014/early 2015. In order for a site
to be found suitable for the development of a new marina, it would be necessary for a
specific proposal to be reviewed by the County. The County would make a determination
as to whether the proposal is consistent with its overall Comprehensive Plan, including
MSC policies, land development regulations, and the Marina Siting Criteria. In order for a
proposed project to move forward towards implementation, it would have to be found
consistent with the Marina Siting Criterea by the County.
5.3 Managed Mooring Field Management Plan
The operation of a managed mooring field is typically governed by County adoption of an
ordinance or resolution implementing a project specific Mooring Field Management Plan
(MFMP). The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) will require that
Monroe County, as manager of the proposed Project, draft and approve a MFMP. The
MFMP must outline the rules and regulations for the facility, such as detailing the length of
time a vessel may remain in the mooring field; identifying moorings available for transient
and liveaboard vessels; establishing minimum vessel requirements; establishing mooring
field fees; detailing vessel safety and insurance requirements; providing a dispute
resolution process; identifying operational hours for noise and machinery; regulating the
display of signs; establishing sanitation requirements; establishing policies for fishing,
swimming, and other recreational activities; and appropriately restricting the feeding of
wildlife, as well as providing all disaster manuals and emergency evacuation procedures
governing mooring field occupants.
63
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
In addition, the County should consider various strategies to encourage vessels to take a
mooring rather than haphazardly drop anchor adjacent to the proposed mooring field.
Dinner Key mooring field in the City of Miami started their mooring field with low rates to
encourage anchored vessels to take a mooring. The Dinner Key Mooring Field also offers a
free shuttle service to bring boaters ashore for those vessels without a dinghy. Since some
boaters will still decide to anchor outside of the mooring field rather than pay to take a
mooring within the mooring field, the County may want to provide a designated anchoring
area outside of the mooring field at no cost, as a strategy to encourage vessels to anchor in
an area with sufficient water depths and minimal marine resource coverage. This area
would be defined and incorporated into the submerged lands lease. Boot Key Harbor
Mooring Field in Marathon offers a designated anchoring area for those boaters unwilling
to pay for an anchorage. This strategy encourages boaters to anchor in an area devoid of
marine resources where they are offered a la carte shore-side services including proper
waste disposal and access to the uplands using the dinghy dock.
5.4 Proprietary Authorization -Submerged Lands Lease
The proposed mooring field will be located within the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary, which is a Class III, Outstanding Florida Water and therefore subject to more
stringent rules and regulations than other waters of the State. Chapter 18-21 of the Florida
Administrative Code requires that a Submerged Lands Lease be obtained from the BOT for
any commercial or revenue generating/income related docking facility on State owned
land. The County will need to demonstrate that the proposed Project has minimized
potential impacts to submerged aquatic resources by avoiding, to the extent practicable,
siting the proposed facility in areas with seagrass beds, hardbottom, or other submerged
aquatic resources. The County will also need to demonstrate that the proposed Project will
reduce current threats to submerged aquatic resources, by eliminating careless anchoring,
derelict vessels, overwater discharge of black water, etc., in order to meet the strict public
interest criteria required to secure a Submerged Lands Lease. Based upon the DEP initiative
to authorize additional mooring fields to help reduce anchoring pressure on important
ecological resources, it is anticipated that a Sovereign Submerged Lands Lease would be
64
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
granted for the Project at the recommended site. The Submerged Lands Lease issued by the
BOT will limit liveaboard vessels to 6 months stay however non-liveaboard vessels can
remain at the mooring field indefinitely (Chapter 327 Florida Statute).
Chapter 18-21.0041 F.A.C., Florida Keys Marina and Dock Siting Policies and Criteria,
presents specific criteria that any marine facility in Monroe County that is proposed over
State owned submerged lands must adhere to in order to receive proprietary authorization.
Adherence to the criteria within Chapter 18-21.0041 F.A.C. is used by the DEP in
developing recommendations to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the use of
State owned sovereignty submerged lands in Monroe County. In the case of a mooring
field proposed over State owned submerged lands, a Sovereign Submerged Lands Lease
(See Appendix E) is required. Specific Condition No. 1 states that "There shall be a
moratorium on the approval of all leases of state owned submerged lands for multi-slip
docking facilities from Tea Table Channel north to the Monroe County Line". The
moratorium is to remain in place until the revised Monroe County Comprehensive Plan
with Marina Siting Plan is adopted. Conversations with DEP personnel in association with
preparation of this Feasibility Study have confirmed that a mooring field would be
considered a marina for the purposes of this moratorium. Therefore, the County would be
unable to secure a Sovereign Submerged Land Lease in the Jewfish Creek and Buttonwood
Sound areas, which are both north of Tea Table Channel, until the County revises their
Comprehensive Plan to include marina siting policies. Marina siting criteria have been
developed through an Inter Local Agreement with the South Florida Regional Planning
Council and these criteria are expected to be adopted in late 2014/ early 2015. The
adoption of marina siting criteria will lift the County moratorium on new marinas in the
Keys and allow for a mooring field to be permitted between Tea Table Channel north to
the Monroe County Line.
Chapter 18-21.0041 F.A.C. also places particular consideration to potential impacts to rare,
threatened or endangered species, or species of special concern and their habitat.
Consideration is given to eliminating adverse impacts on submerged aquatic resources and
65
u i�"'
'00
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
benthic communities. Specific Condition 9 states that no application to lease State owned
sovereign submerged lands for the purpose of providing multi-slip docking facilities will be
approved unless there are no benthic communities present where the boat mooring area,
mooring piles or other structures are to be located. Although the proposed project will
clearly eliminate adverse impacts on these communities, it may not be possible to site the
proposed moorings in areas devoid of submerged aquatic resources. As a result, the BOT
may require proprietary mitigation, in addition to any regulatory mitigation, as a condition
of approval. Specific Condition No. 6 discusses various improvements, including restoring
wetland or submerged aquatic vegetation, installing sewage pump out facilities, improving
circulation, or marking navigational channels. Additionally, Specific Criteria No. 3 require
that a minimum water depth of 4 (minus four) feet mean low water be provided and
greater depths be provided for facilities designated for or capable of accommodating boats
having greater than a three foot draft, so that a minimum of one foot of clearance is
provided between the deepest draft of a vessel and the bottom. Refer to Appendix E for a
copy of 18.21.0041 and all the Specific Conditions. The conceptual mooring field design
will need to be refined after collection of detailed bathymetric and biological resource
data, to demonstrate mitigation of impacts and appropriately sited moorings based upon
proposed vessel sizes and bathymetric conditions.
In lieu of obtaining a submerged lands lease and avoiding any imposed restraints by the
Board of Trustees the County could propose to swap County owned bay bottom for the
submerged lands needed for the mooring field.
5.5 Avoidance/Minimization of Impacts to Marine Resources
The presence of seagrass, sponges, corals, mangroves, hardbottom, or other resources of
significance within the Project site will trigger increased scrutiny by the relevant resource
agencies and will require mitigation of potential direct and indirect impacts. Mitigation
must be demonstrated sequentially and includes avoidance of siting facilities directly over
resources, minimization of direct impacts to resources, and compensation for unavoidable
impacts to resources. Avoidance involves locating a proposed facility over an area devoid
66
WF
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
of resources. Minimization includes field locating buoy anchors in barren areas and
rotating vessels off buoys located over resources when buoys located over barren bottom
become available. Compensation involves restoring, enhancing, or creating comparable
marine resources to offset the lost aquatic functions and values that cannot otherwise be
avoided to implement the project.
Compensatory mitigation in the marine environment is typically very expensive. An
example of compensatory mitigation is restoring propeller scars by filling them to grade,
planting them with seagrass plugs, and providing fertilizer through the installation of bird
stakes. Compensatory mitigation projects for the restoration of seagrass impacts typically
costs on the order of $1 million per acre. Mitigation is quantified using a functional
assessment, typically the State Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM), pursuant
to 62-345 Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). Unfortunately, the marine resource and
regulatory agencies do not recognize managed mooring fields to be self mitigating, despite
a common understanding that haphazard anchoring and unmanaged mooring fields have
detrimental environmental effects.
On May 6-8, 2013, Coastal Systems performed preliminary reconnaissance assessments of
the submerged lands within the three proposed mooring field sites. Other than a small
barren area that would only accommodate a minimal number of moorings at Jewfish
Creek, all three mooring field locations would likely result in some level of impacts to
submerged aquatic resources. The County will need to clearly demonstrate that they have
avoided/ minimized and compensated for all direct/indirect impacts to submerged aquatic
resources resulting from the project.
67
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
6.0 SUMMARY OF PERMITTING PROCEDURE BY AGENCY
1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps):
a) Jurisdictional Authority: The Corps has jurisdiction over all construction in
navigable waters pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. This
activity would be reviewed pursuant to the County's submittal of a Dredge and Fill
Permit Application as part of the Joint Environmental Resource Permitting Process
(see Florida Department of Environmental Protection Section on Application and
Process).
b) General Permitting Procedures: A pre-application meeting with the Corps is
recommended prior to submittal of a formal application. The Corps permit would
be applied for jointly with the State using the Joint Statewide Environmental
Resource Permit Application form and would likely be reviewed by a project
manager in the Miami Regulatory Field Office, South Permits Branch, Jacksonville
District. The review would be in accordance with the procedures outlined in 33
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 320 and 325, as well as the Standard
Operating Procedures Manual.
The Corps SOP requires staff to issue permits that involve the least extensive and
time consuming review process, while still providing protection for the aquatic
environment. As the mooring field proposed herein does not qualify for any of the
expedited permit processes available, the Corps would process it as a Standard
Individual Permit (IP). This process requires issuance of a Public Notice soliciting
formal comments on the proposed activity from federal commenting agencies, such
as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS), and the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), State commenting
agencies, such as the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), as
well as the general public. This process results in input regarding impacts to the
aquatic environment, navigation, and the overall public interest. The Corps
68
",
Coastal Systems International,Inc.400,
considers this input during its evaluation of the proposed project. The comment
period is normally limited to 30 days; however, substantive comments received
after the 30 day comment period are usually evaluated by the Corps. The most
significant issues for this Project include direct and indirect impacts to seagrass and
other Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) and sufficient water depths.
If a new dinghy dock is proposed, the Corps will likely require adherence to the
"Dock Construction Guidelines in Florida for Docks or Other Minor Structures
Constructed in or over Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV), Marsh or Mangrove
Habitat, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/National Marine Fisheries Service, August
2001" (Dock Construction Guidelines) (Appendix E) to avoid and minimize
potential impacts to marine resources.
The Corps will also require a DEP Coastal Zone Management consistency
determination and a Section 401 water quality certification prior to issuance of the
IP. These State determinations are normally provided by issuance of the
Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) permit by DEP.
c) Important Considerations When Applying for a Corps Permit: Although the Corps
solicits coments from all applicable commenting agencies, including the FKNMS,
there are formal consultation procedures for the FWS and NMFS. The following
factors will be addressed during the Corps environmental permitting review of the
Project:
i) Fish & Wildlife Service: The FWS evaluates proposed impacts to fish and
wildlife species in general and species listed as threatened or endangered
under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which are under their purview. The
American crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) and West Indian manatee
(Trichechus manatus) are listed as an endangered species under the ESA.
Although this Project is not located in an area of heightened scrutiny for the
69
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 400,
West Indian Manatee, minor impacts to seagrass would likely result in a May
Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect determination by the Corps. The Corps
would request concurrence with this determination from the USFWS. The
FWS typically responds to Corps requests for concurrence (informal
consultation) on MANLAA determinations within 30 days.
The Buttonwood Sound is located within designated critical habitat for the
American crocodile and the Corps may make a determination that the
Project May Affect this species but Would Not adversely affect designated
critical habitat. A May Affect determination would trigger formal Section 7
consultation, requiring the FWS to prepare a Biological Opinion (BO). Upon
initiation of formal consultation, the FWS would determine if they have all of
the information they need to commence consultation. Once the FWS has
received all requested information, they will begin a 135 day review period.
The FWS BO will evaluate all of the impacts to the listed species and will
result in a determination of the likelihood of jeopardy to the continued
existence of the species. The determination would be that the activity is
either not likely to jeopardize the species or likely to jeopardize the species
and will also evaluate the potential effect on critical habitat.
If the BO is not finalized within 135 days, the Corps must still wait for
issuance of the BO before completing their evaluation of the pending permit
application. All impacts to species under their purview will be considered
and addressed during the FWS review; the Corps will impose the FWS
recommendations in most instances. Reduction of project impacts or
mitigation may be required to offset any potential impacts to the American
crocodile and/or manatee from the proposed Project. In either case, the FWS
will require that the Standard Manatee Construction Conditions be
incorporated into any permit issued for the Project and that permanent
manatee signs and an informational display be installed.
70
Coastal Systems Inteniational,Inc.400
i) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Protected Resources Division
(PRD): The NMFS PRD evaluates proposed impacts to species listed under
the ESA, which are under their purview. The species that could potentially
be affected by the Project include Acropora species, swimming marine
turtles, and the smalltooth sawfish. Although the Project does not appear to
propose any impacts to staghorn and elkhorn corals (Acropora spp.),
swimming turtles, or the smalltooth sawfish, due to the size of the proposed
project, the Corps will likely initiate informal consultation with PRD on
these species. At a minimum, NMFS PRD will recommend that any permit
issued by the Corps require adherence to the Sea Turtle and Smalltooth
Sawfish Construction Conditions to ensure protection of these species.
As with the FWS, if informal consultation is required, the NMFS PRD should
concur with the Corps MANLAA determination within 30 days. If the Corps
determines that the proposed project "may affect' any listed species under
NMFS PRD purview, the Corps must initiate formal consultation with NMFS
PRD. If formal consultation is required, the NMFS PRD should produce a BO
within 135 days of receiving all requested information. However, the NMFS
PRD has normally taken longer than the prescribed 135 day period to
provide a BO. If the Corps determines that the proposed Project "May
Affect" a threatened or endangered species, the Corps cannot issue a permit
until receipt of a BO from NMFS PRD. At the time of issuance of this Report,
it is taking four months for a file to be assigned to a NMFS PRD reviewer.
NMFS Habitat Conservation Division (HCD): The Corps will process an
application for a mooring field as an IP and will issue a Public Notice
soliciting comments on the proposed activity from NMFS HCD, FKNMS,
other federal and State agencies, as well as the general public. Comments
from NMFS HCD, as well as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
71
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
normally focus on whether the environmental impacts have been avoided,
minimized, and compensated to the greatest extent practicable. In response
to the Public Notice, the NMFS HCD will provide comments on potential
impacts to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), as required by the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The response from the NMFS
HCD should be commensurate with the proposed impacts to EFH and will
range from EFH Conservation Recommendations to a Section 404(q)
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) letter, which reserves NMFS right to
review additional information and precludes Corps issuance of a federal
permit without NMFS concurrence.
iv) Navigation: The Corps requires that projects proposed adjacent to federally
maintained channels (e.g., Intracoastal Waterway (ICW)), shall be located
outside of the federal right-of-way, unless substantial justification for the
proposed encroachment can be demonstrated. The proposed location of the
mooring field is not near any federally maintained channels and therefore
should not pose a federal navigational concern.
v) Public Interest Review: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based
on an evaluation of the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of
the proposed activity and its intended use on the public interest. This is
known as the "Public Interest Review". The Corps considers the following 21
public interest factors during their federal review: "conservation, economics,
aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historic properties,
fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use,
navigation, shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and
conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production,
mineral needs, considerations of property ownership and, in general, the
needs and welfare of the people" (33 CFR Part 320.4(a)). After the Corps
evaluation, the agency will make a determination whether the proposed
72
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 4000
activity will be contrary to the public interest. The Corps must determine that
the activity is not contrary to the public interest in order to issue a permit.
Mooring fields are typically found to be 'not contrary to the public interest',
as they provide environmentally friendly and safe locations for transient and
permanent boats to moor in designated locations.
v')l Alternatives Analysis: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), in order to avoid the need to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for a proposed project, it must be demonstrated through
preparation of an environmental assessment that the project will not result in
any significant impacts, after consideration of any proposed mitigation. The
alternatives analysis is the heart of a NEPA evaluation. The Corps must
determine that adverse environmental impacts have been avoided or
otherwise mitigated to non-significance. Mitigation includes avoidance,
minimization, and ecological functional compensation for any unavoidable
impacts.
Since this Feasibility Study includes an analysis of three potential areas and
the proposed Project will attempt to avoid direct impacts to high quality
resources and minimize impacts to lower quality resources, we believe that
this Feasibility Study should satisfy NEPA evaluation criteria. The installation
of permanent mooring buoys in an area where boaters haphazardly place
traditional ground tackle in areas supporting submerged aquatic resources
clearly reduces impacts to those resources. Mooring buoys will be located so
as to avoid direct impacts to resources to the extent possible, vessel shading
will be limited to the times vessels are using the moorings, and vessel
orientation will vary based upon predominant wind direction.
vii) Coastal Zone Management Act and Section 401 Water Quality Certification:
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) consistency and Water Quality
73
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
Certification (WQC) are issued by the DEP under the ERP evaluation process,
normally as part of the ERP. The Corps would require at least a CZMA
concurrence and potentially a WQC from the State prior to federal permit
issuance. The proposed Project appears to be consistent with the Florida
Coastal Zone Management Act and appears to meet State water quality
requirements, provided conditions for turbidity control are adhered to during
buoy anchor installation.
d) Processing Time: The time required for Corps processing of a submitted application
greatly depends on the time required to demonstrate adequate avoidance and
minimization of impacts to surrounding resources. Other factors influencing Corps
review time include objections and comments received during the Public Notice
period, lengthy endangered species consultation (American crocodile, swimming
turtles, smalltooth sawfish), and the heavy workload of Corps staff. Corps response
time is not limited by regulatory time clocks and is therefore difficult to predict.
The potential for impacts to federally listed species may result in a lengthy
permitting process of 1.5 to 2 years. The Corps permit processing time for an
Individual Permit can in some cases be more than 2 years.
6.2 Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP):
a) Jurisdictional Authority: Any activity proposed over sovereign submerged lands
requires authorization from the BOT. The proposed Project is located in a Class III,
Outstanding Florida Water (OFW) and is governed by State rules established in
Chapter 18-21 F.A.C. Since no submerged lands lease is currently in place for the
Project, such a lease will be required pursuant to Chapter 18-21.005(1)(d)(8). An
Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) will be required for the project from the DEP.
Projects that are proposed within a OFW must not lower existing ambient water
quality and must be 'clearly in the public interest', as opposed to 'not contrary to
the public interest'. Coastal Systems believes that the proposed Project is clearly in
74
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
the public interest and would qualify for issuance of a Sovereign Submerged Lands
Lease from the BOT. Project specific annual lease fees must be negotiated with the
BOT once a decision is made to issue such a lease; these fees are based upon the
area of submerged lands to be leased and anticipated revenues associated with the
project. Please see Appendix F for lease fee calculations.
As stated earlier in the Monroe County Marina Siting Plan Chapter 18-21.0041
F.A.C., Florida Keys Marina and Dock Siting Policies and Criteria, Specific
Condition No. 1 states that "There shall be a moratorium on the approval of all
leases of state owned submerged lands for multi-slip docking facilities from Tea
Table Channel north to the Monroe County Line". The moratorium is to remain in
place until the revised Monroe County Comprehensive Plan with Marina Siting
Criteria is adopted. Thus a mooring field will not be permitted by the State at the
Buttonwood Sound or Jewfish Creek sites until marina siting criteria have been
adopted, which is anticipated to occur in early 2014.
b) General Permitting Procedures: The permitting process with the State will involve
pre-application meetings with the DEP staff in Marathon and joint submittal of the
Statewide ERP application to both the DEP and the Corps. DEP permitting will
likely entail a series of "Request for Additional Information" (RAI) letters between
the County and agency staff in order to provide all information required for the DEP
to approve or deny the Project application. Upon submittal of an application to the
DEP, agency staff must issue a letter within 30 days, advising the applicant that
either additional information is required or the Project file is complete. As part of
the application process, the DEP will consult with the FWC, Bureau of Protected
Species Management, to evaluate direct and indirect impacts to manatees, as well
as other managed species. The DEP will also consult with the Division of State
Lands, as the Project is located over sovereign submerged lands. Once the DEP
receives all of the information necessary to make the application "complete" they
must make a decision within 60 days.
75
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
c) Important Considerations When Applying for an ERP: The following issues are
critical in fulfilling the State's environmental permitting requirements:
i) Coastal Zone Management Act Consistency: The Project must be deemed
consistent with the Florida Coastal Zone Management Act by the DEP prior
to State and federal permit issuance, as mandated by the Coastal Zone
Management Act (1972). The review is designed to determine if the
proposed Project is consistent with the goals and standards established by
the State of Florida for its coastal zones, including protection and use of the
environment, habitat, water quality, and marine resources.
ii) Proprietary Authorization for Sovereignty Submerged Lands: As previously
stated, the DEP will require a submerged lands lease for the proposed
mooring field. Additionally, evidence of ownership or legal entitlement of
the submerged lands must be demonstrated prior to permit issuance, for any
proposed work on or over State owned submerged lands. Chapter 18-
21.004(3)(b) states that "Satisfactory evidence of sufficient upland interest is
required for activities on sovereignty submerged lands riparian to uplands,
unless otherwise specified in this chapter." In order for Monroe County to
meet the criteria necessary to secure a submerged lands lease, an agreement
must be made between the selected upland facility and Monroe County for
use of the shoreline. Once this is accomplished, Monroe County will be able
to demonstrate that they have sufficient upland interest to secure a Lease for
the Project. If an agreement cannot be made between Monroe County and
an adjacent upland facility, other avenues may be pursued with DEP in order
for Monroe County to meet this criterion.
76
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
iii) Florida Department of Economic Opportunity: (formerly Florida Department of
Community Affairs) oversees Community Planning and Development. Their
Areas of Critical State Concern Program protects resources and public
facilities of major statewide significance. The City of Key West and the
Florida Keys (Monroe County) is listed as one of the four designated areas of
critical State concern. The Department reviews all local development
projects within the designated areas and may appeal to the Administration
Commission any local development orders that are inconsistent with State
guidelines.
d) Processing Time: Standard processing time for issuance of a DEP ERP with State
lands approval typically takes a minimum of 12 months. The timeframe for permit
issuance is greatly affected by the completeness of the file upon application
submittal, as well as the time required to respond to DEP RAIs. Efforts to obtain a
submerged lands lease on sovereign lands will also significantly extend the
permitting timeframe.
e) General Permit: Florida House Bill 999, effective July 1, 2013, states that the DEP
shall adopt a general permit for local governments to construct, operate, and
maintain public marina facilities and public mooring fields. Mooring fields
authorized under a general permit may not exceed 100 vessels and all facilities
permitted under this rule must be constructed, maintained, and operated in
perpetuity for the exclusive use of the general public. The Bill states that a general
permit shall be adopted that includes criteria necessary to include the general
permit in a state programmatic general permit issued by the Corps under 404 of the
Clean Water Act. A facility authorized under such general permit is exempt from
review as a development of regional impact if the facility complies with the
comprehensive plan of the applicable local government and obtains Clean Marina
Program status prior to opening for operation, and maintains that status for the life
of the facility. The DEP has yet to adopt by rule a general permit covering mooring
77
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
fields. The Bill was effective July 1, 2013 and the DEP was given 60 days from that
date (September 1, 2013) to initiate the rule making process. Qualifying for a
general permit from the DEP, and potentially the Corps, would simplify the
permitting process and could minimize the amount of effort involved with
obtaining a State permit. As of this time, however, there is no further information
regarding the proposed rule or criteria a project must meet to qualify for a DEP
general permit.
6.3 Monroe County Permits
Monroe County typically defers environmental permitting to the DEP, as there is not a
County process for the issuance of such permits. County zoning approval will likely be
required for the proposed Project location and County structural approval will likely be
required for the proposed mooring anchors. The Monroe County Planning &
Environmental Resource Department is responsible for the administration of the
adopted Monroe County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations and
will need to provide confirmation that the proposed Project is consistent with the
County Comprehensive Plan in order to secure the State ERP.
The proposed mooring field must be designed to adhere to the ordinances of Monroe
County, Chapter 26-Waterways, Article II Mooring Fields, which provides for the
installation of mooring fields and the authorization to manage those mooring fields as a
method of addressing boating impacts associated with the many overcrowded
anchorages in the Florida Keys.
78
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 400,
6.4 U.S. Coast Guard (USCG):
Written approval from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) to designate the mooring area as a
special anchorage area (approved mooring field) provides navigational and regulatory
benefits such as the mooring field being marked on nautical charts and eliminates the
need for vessels 65 feet or less to display anchor lights at night. Special anchorage area
designation may be sought for areas of Monroe County that are not in international
waters (above the COL REG demarcation line which runs through Long Key) therefore
designation could be applied for in Jewfish Creek and Buttonwood Sound but not in
Boca Chica. In addition to acquiring a special anchorage designation, a USCG Private
Aids to Navigation Permit (PATON) will be required for the markers delineating the
mooring field and for any markers within or surrounding the mooring field that are
lighted. The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) will require the applicant complete a PATON
application; provide a map and the coordinates of all buoys to be placed; provide a
detailed sketch of all buoys to be installed; provide copies of all local, state, and federal
permits required; and provide a copy of the MFMP.
6.5 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC):
The FWC Uniform Waterway Marker (UWM) Permit is required for any buoys that are
placed in accordance with Chapter 68D-23 F.A.C. The FWC will require the applicant
complete a UWM application; provide a map and the coordinates of all buoys to be
placed; provide copies of all local, state and federal permits required; and provide a
copy of the MFMP.
79
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 4000410
7.0 MITIGATION
Seagrass, sponges, coral, hardbottom, and/or macroalgae are likely present in the
Buttonwood Sound area. The Project is located within American Crocodile Critical Habitat
and Acropora sp. Critical Habitat, which provides an additional level of regulatory
scrutiny. The presence of ecologically valuable resources triggers Federal consultations
with the NMFS, which can involve extensive review periods. To reduce the extent of the
federal review, if a new dinghy dock is proposed to facilitate upland access, the dock
should be designed in strict accordance with the "Dock Construction Guidelines in Florida
for Docks or Other Minor Structures Constructed in or over Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
(SAV), Marsh or Mangrove Habitat, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/National Marine
Fisheries Service, August 2001" (Dock Construction Guidelines) (Appendix E). Designing
overwater structures to be consistent with this guidance is considered minimization of
impacts. However, as any overwater structure to accommodate dinghies needs to be
accessible by small vessels, strict adherence to these guidelines may not be ideal for
Project design. It may be possible, however, to adhere to portions of these guidelines to
demonstrate resource impact minimization.
Both the Corps and the DEP will require that the Applicant clearly demonstrate that
ecological impacts have been avoided and minimized to the greatest extent practicable
before considering compensatory mitigation to offset unavoidable ecological impacts. The
Corps can accept design accommodations to minimize impacts to submerged aquatic
resources, such as elevating, limiting width, and incorporating grated decking materials to
docking structures; and rotating vessels onto moorings that are not located over seagrass
when such moorings are vacated, as sufficient mitigation without the need to also require
compensatory mitigation. The DEP can also accept demonstrated avoidance and
minimization to offset direct and indirect ecological impacts. Each agency will
independently evaluate the need for compensatory mitigation and each agency will
calculate the compensatory mitigation required independently. If one agency requires
more compensatory mitigation than the other, the greater amount of mitigation must be
80
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
provided. As seagrass mitigation for direct impacts is typically risky and expensive, it is
strongly recommended that impacts are avoided and minimized as much as possible to
minimize the need, if any, for compensatory mitigation.
81
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
8.0 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
8.1 Current Funding
The Monroe County Board of County Commissioners has committed County funds to
provide for design/engineering/build of a mooring field in FY 2014/2015 based on the
scope of this Feasibility Study. The County has appropriated approximately $750,000 for
the planning, design, permitting, and construction of one proposed mooring field. In
addition, the County has applied for two grants: a State grant for 4.5 million dollars for the
implementation of three mooring fields through the State Resource and Ecosystems
Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act
of 2012 (RESTORE Act) and a local grant for 1 million dollars in Monroe County RESTORE
Act funds. RESTORE Act Funds are made available to meaningful efforts to revitalize Gulf
of Mexico waters and resources from the harmful effects of the Deepwater Horizon Oil
Spill.
8.2 G rants
Several other grants are potentially available to fund various aspects of permitting and
construction of a mooring field. The FWC Florida Boating Improvement Plan (FBIP)
provides grant funding for projects designed to serve the needs of boaters and boating
related activities on coastal and/or inland waters within the State, including the
construction of public mooring fields. Applicants must agree to provide a share of the total
project cost, which can take the form of in-kind services or cash expenditures. More points
are awarded to applicants who agree to cost share 50% or more of the total project cost
whether through cash, in-kind services, or other grant funding.
FWC announces the application period in the "Florida Administrative Weekly" before
February 1 of each year. Applications must be submitted within 60 days after the
announcement date or by the deadline in the announcement, whichever is later. Please
see the following website for further details: fr,tlLy//MyI-WC.coin/boaQairi boalun._&Lavid-
Erora.mfbap
82
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 600
The FWC Boating Infrastructure Grant Program (BIGP) provides grant funding for tie-up
facility projects for transient recreational boats 26 feet or longer (non-trailerable). The
Program is funded through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is used for projects such
as mooring buoys, day docks, and support facilities designated for transient recreational
boats such as restrooms, pump-out stations, dockside utilities, water supplies, recycling
and trash receptacles, and initial one-time only dredging, only to provide transient vessels
with safe channel depths to the transient facility. FWC announces the application period in
the "Florida Administrative Weekly". Please see the following website for further details:
tt( :/r°e,�ti � Wco ��ia. :.R.. .. gira�1:.�::��rcauu �lf:....
.I:�/
83
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 4000
9.0 POST CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS
Permits issued for the proposed Project will likely include conditions requiring water
quality testing and marine resource surveys. Water quality testing is typically required to
demonstrate that operation of the proposed facility is not degrading existing ambient water
quality. It is likely that implementation of the Project will improve water quality in the
area. However, there is an argument to be made that concentrating vessels in a relatively
small area could adversely affect the water quality in that area. Therefore, permits issued
for mooring fields typically require demonstration that water quality is not being degraded
through implementation of a water quality monitoring program. Periodic sampling is
typically required for specified parameters with testing conducted at a State certified
laboratory and results submitted to agency compliance sections for review.
Additionally, ecological resource surveys are often required to demonstrate that moorings
located over submerged aquatic vegetation are not causing adverse impacts to the density
of these resources. It is recognized that moorings eliminate anchor drag from haphazard
anchoring and that vessels on a mooring rotate on the mooring due to prevailing wind
direction. However, the agencies typically require demonstration that issuance of their
permit is not having an adverse impact on the resources in the area. Therefore, post
implementation submerged aquatic resource surveys are typically required to demonstrate
that the resources are not being adversely affected by facility occupation. The results of
these surveys must be submitted to agency compliance sections for review.
Additionally once moorings are installed, regular monitoring and maintenance of the
moorings will be required by the permitting agencies. All buoys must be maintained in
good condition at all times. Visual inspections of the mooring and regulatory buoys will
need to be performed by a qualified diving contractor, annually, as well as after major
storm events. All buoy and down line components must be inspected, including but not
limited to: shackles, hardware, ropes, underwater floats, and surface buoys. Any
component that is worn or at risk becoming dislodged, as determined by the contractor,
84
Coastal Systems International,Lrc.400,
will need to be replaced within a certain timeframe, typically specified in the Buoy
Monitoring and Maintenance Plan as 30 days. Inspection reports should be prepared by
the contractor and submitted to the County to document maintenance and repairs. Upon
documentation of damaged or missing buoy system components, the County must notify
the FWC Boating and Waterways Section by telephone and/or e-mail of the damaged
structures, pursuant to 68D-23.106(1)(d), FAC and the County must provide FWC with
documentation of repairs upon completion.
85
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
10.0 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR DESIGN/BUILD TEAM
The implementation of a managed mooring field requires specialized environmental
permitting, engineering, and construction capabilities. Mooring fields and related marine
construction can be procured through a design/build approach. This approach facilitates
the designer and contractor working together to optimize construction materials, means,
and methods, and deliver a "turn-key" mooring field project. The turn-key approach also
minimizes risk to the Owner (or public sector client); as there is a single entity that is
responsible for the project delivery as opposed to the Owner potentially mediating
between the engineer and contractor should issues arise during construction through a
conventional design-bid process.
For managed mooring fields, the design/build team (D/B Team) would consist of a
consultant with a demonstrated track record of planning, designing, and permitting
managed mooring fields of similar scope and size in Florida. The consultant would have
relevant experience in conducting field investigations, such as marine resource mapping
with qualified biologists, as well as hydrographic (bathymetric) surveys. These field
investigations will require operations in shallow water, with water depths being recorded
relative to the "top" of seagrass beds, as opposed to the actual seabed elevation. Biologists
would need relevant experience with marine resource mapping to identify resources in the
Florida Keys, such as seagrass, in accordance with industry-accepted protocols from federal
and State regulatory agencies. The consultant should also have experience in the field of
geotechnical evaluation of sub-surface conditions for the design and specification of
appropriate mooring anchor foundations, which may consist of helical anchors. Field
investigations may include geophysical surveys, sampling, jet probes, and/or SPT borings
with rock coring.
The consultant for the D/B Team would need demonstrated experience over a minimum of
five (5) years for the processing of environmental permits for managed mooring fields. This
experience would include the compilation of comprehensive Statewide ERP applications
86
Coastal Systems Intemational,Inc. 400
to be processed through the Corps and DEP to include securing submerged lands leases. In
addition, the consultant would need experience with processing of Uniform Waterway
Marker permits for any proposed regulatory/boundary buoys through the FWC with
approval of the U.S. Coast Guard for PATONs.
The D/B Team would require a competent engineering firm, appropriately licensed in the
State of Florida to practice engineering, with Professional Engineers that have experience
planning, designing, and managing construction of managed mooring fields. The
engineering firm would be in business for a minimum of five (5) years and the Engineer-of-
Record would need to have designed a minimum of three (3) managed mooring fields. The
engineer would need to have experience in the design and specification of underwater
foundations consisting of helical anchors, deadweight anchors, or stake piles for mooring
applications. The engineer should have experience in evaluating ' coastal processes
including winds, waves, currents, water levels, and storm surge (hurricane conditions) for
site-specific loads from vessels anchored in a managed mooring field. The engineer would
need demonstrated experience in the layout of swing circles, anchoring, and regulatory
buoy/signage for the design of a managed mooring field in accordance with marina design
standards. The engineer would need to compile construction documents and specifications
that would incorporate environmental permit conditions and these documents would be
reviewed by the County and utilized by the D/B Team to construct the project.
The D/B Team would be led by an appropriate general contractor, licensed and insured in
accordance with County requirements, with demonstrated marine construction experience
in Southeast Florida including the Florida Keys. The D/B Team would be lead by a project
manager that would manage the consultants, firms, and construction from start to finish on
behalf of the County to provide a turn-key project. This D/B Team would require
demonstrated design/build construction project experience and have been in business in
Florida for a minimum of five (5) years. The D/B team would require experience in the
specification and fabrication of mooring system components including helical anchors,
down lines, buoys, and pendants to provide a complete mooring assembly. The specified
87
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
systems shall have been in service at other managed mooring fields for a minimum of five
(5) years and shall have required normal annual maintenance with no major repairs or
replacement required.
The D/B Team will require a certified helical anchor installer with underwater construction
experience installing anchors of similar size in scope within sensitive marine environments
through precise positioning utilizing DGPS methods. The D/B team shall conduct
commercial diving operations with divers certified by ADCI and in accordance with OSHA
regulations for this type of underwater construction. The D/B team may be required to
install rock embedment anchors to a minimum depth of 10 feet, depending on the
geotechnical conditions, and the D/B team will be capable of testing the installed anchors
to the design pull-out loads that may approach 20 kips. After construction, the D/B Team
will provide appropriate as-built documentation, operations manuals, and will warranty
the installed mooring field for a minimum of two (2) years.
88
Coastal Systems Intemational,Inc. 4001
11.0 RECOMMENDED ACTION ITEMS
1. Bathymetric Survey: Conduct a comprehensive bathymetric survey to confirm water
depths within and adjacent to the recommended Project area in Buttonwood Sound.
Demonstration of sufficient water depths for the size of vessels the moorings will
accommodate, for ingress and egress from the mooring field, and to determine the
maximum length/draft of vessels that the site will permit, will be required. A formal
bathymetric survey is recommended to identify the depth contours within the Project
site, as well as the adjacent controlling water depths. The bathymetric survey should
depict one foot contours.
. Quantitative Marine Resource Survey: Conduct a detailed quantitative marine
resource survey. Efforts to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to submerged aquatic
resources will be required in order to secure permits. The survey must provide
sufficient detail to demonstrate that the selected mooring field limits provide the least
environmental impacts. Detailed marine resource information will also be necessary to
micro-site the proposed mooring anchors to areas that are devoid of resources.
Additionally, this information will be utilized to determine the best location for access
walkways associated with any proposed dinghy docks.
3. Refine Conceptual Mooring Field Design: Based on the comprehensive bathymetric
and marine resource surveys, the conceptual mooring field design will be refined and
engineered in order to provide sufficient water depths for the draft of vessels proposed,
avoid and minimize impacts to submerged aquatic resources, show the lengths of
vessels the site can accommodate and corresponding swing circles, and depict the
location of any navigational fairways.
89
Coastal Sytemt International,Inc. 400,
4. Develop Managed Mooring Field Management Plan: A Managed Mooring Field
Management Plan that will regulate activities within the managed mooring field will be
required to secure the permits. It is recommended that this comprehensive Plan be
developed prior to application preparation and referenced and included in the permit
applications upon submittal to streamline the permitting process.
5. Public Meetings: It is recommended that once a mooring field conceptual design is
refined, public meetings be held to disseminate the County's plan for the mooring field
and to solicit public input into the design and location of the proposed project. Public
support is critical for the success of this proposed project.
6. Pre-Application Meetings: The conceptual design should be presented at pre-
application consultation meetings with the Corps and DEP to present the Project
design, submerged aquatic resources impact avoidance/minimization/compensation
efforts, and the findings of this Feasibility Study to identify any site-specific information
the agencies recommend including within the permit applications. Inclusion of
information requested during pre-application meetings can help to streamline the
permitting process.
7. Prepare Permit Applications: Utilize the information assimilated to date and any
information identified during agency pre-application meetings to prepare
comprehensive permit applications that demonstrate Project purpose and need, impact
avoidance and minimization, facility design, best management practices for
construction, and upland riparian interest, as well as other permit specific criteria,
necessary for application review. Preparation of a complete permit application reduces
the number of agency RAls and therefore reduces permitting costs and permit
processing duration.
90
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
8. Prepare Draft Agreement between Monroe County and Upland Support Facility:
Prepare draft Professional Services Agreement between the County and the Upland
Support Facility that will manage the mooring field and provide upland amenities to
the mooring field patrons. Enter discussions with potential upland vendors to confirm
interest and prepare Request for Proposals in order to select an upland facility to
contract with, if necessary.
91
Coa tal ystems International,Inc. 400
12.0 CONCLUSIONS
The primary challenges associated with permitting the proposed Project will be securing
proprietary approval and demonstrating avoidance, minimization, and compensation of
ecological resource impacts. Monroe County will need to partner with an existing upland
facility or purchase an upland parcel, as required to demonstrate sufficient upland interest
to secure a submerged lands lease. Although the environmental regulatory and
commenting agencies are looking towards mooring fields to reduce impacts to submerged
aquatic resources, past experience dictates that these agencies are still opposed to
authorizing moorings over even sparse submerged aquatic resources.
All three anchorage sites Oewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound, and Boca Chica Basin)
warrant mooring fields based on current use and need. However, based on criteria
evaluated within this Feasibility Study, if the County decides to move forward with the
design, permitting, and construction of one managed mooring field at this time, Coastal
Systems recommends proceeding with the anchorage at Buttonwood Sound.
Overall, this Feasibility Report is meant to provide Monroe County with an overview of the
potential regulatory issues and procedural requirements of the local, county, State and
federal agencies. We believe that a mooring field in the Buttonwood Sound location, with
a design refined from the preliminary conceptual design provided in this Report based
upon detailed surveys, would likely meet the permit requirements of the DEP and Corps. If
the County decides to pursue a managed mooring field in this area, we recommend
initiating pre-application consultations to introduce the Project to these various agencies to
present the findings to date. In addition, we recommend that the County develop focus
groups consisting of potential mooring field user groups or conduct a charrette for the
purpose of developing a Managed Mooring Field Management Plan, which will be
required by the environmental permitting agencies.
92
Coastal Systems International,Inc.
13.0 REFERENCES
Ankersen, Thomas, Hamann, Richard and Flagg, Bryonn, 2011, Anchoring Away
Government Regulation and the Rights of Navigation in Florida.
Catanese Center for Urban and Environmental Solutions at Florida Atlantic University,
April 2007, Monroe County Marina Siting Plan -Second Draft for Review.
Florida, House Bill 999, Effective July 1, 2013.
.j:!p://W w..................................................fsenate.,. ov/ ssaou�,�i"�uN1/201.3/0 9
Florida Administrative Code, 18-21.0041 Florida Keys Marina and Dock Siting Policies and
Criteria. Effective February 25, 1985.
1,itt��s://www.flru (-�s.,a EF,/.92!c�2y/y
Florida Department of Transportation, Surveying and Mapping Office/ Aerial Photography
Archive/Get Aerials. httjj://www.do1.s1a. wflw�a s ,,,
Monroe County, 2010, Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan (Policy Document), Adopted by
the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners on April 15, 1993.
Monroe County, 2010, Year 2010 Comprehensive Plan (Technical Document), Adopted
by the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners on April 15, 1993.
Monroe County, 2012, Monroe County Ordinance No. 036-2012, Adopted November 16,
2012. httfL// rww. on000unt (I. ov/Oourir^nt .ontw/UonicA�/ioor/40.3
Monroe County Department of Marine Resources, 2002, Keys-Wide Mooring Field System
Preliminary Planning Document.
93
Coastal Systems International,Inc. 400
Monroe County, Florida, Chapter 26 — Waterways —/\rticle U. Mooring Fields.
!: ������ ���� n�/ �� ���� ��
Monroe County Growth Management Division Marine Resource Department, 1992,
Boating Impacts Management Plan — Final Report.
Monroe County Office of Marine Resources, 2008, Development of a Boating
Management Plan for the Boca Chica Harbor /\rea — Preliminary Review.
Lefere, P.A. Captain, U.S. Navy. Letter tmMonroe County Mayor and Commissioners. April
30, 2012.
South Florida Regional Planning Council and Center for Urban and Environmental
Solutions at Florida Atlantic University, 2005, Monroe County Marine Management
Strategic Plan.
VVM Barry Associates 8/ FlnridaKeys.cmrn, Key \A/eyt Harbor Mooring Field at Wisteria
Island. Web. hil. ��'� &� ) � � � � nJSepternber3O, 30l3.
Tenarnar Environmental Services, Inc., 3011, Vessel Mooring Study — Boca Chica Harbor
— Monroe County, Florida Final Project Report.
University ofFlorida College of Law and Boating and Waterway Management Program Sea
Grant, 2004, Community Guide to Creating a Managed Anchorage and Mooring Field.
94
Coastal Systems Internatiooal,Inc. ����~—
COASTAL SYSTEMS
Corponve )fficc� Rqqowd Office:
404 South Dbm:Highway 2047 Vista Parkway,Suite 101
CoH Gablus,H,33146 West Pilm Beach,H,33411
'I el:305-661-3655 - f qtx�305-061 1914 Tel:561-640-1033 - Fa�x:561-040-1009
www.coa%udsysternsint.corn infc)@coa.qt,,tl�,vstemsint.com
Appendix A
Historical Aerials
�\ f
i
G
LLD
y,
Ol
r
` N
U
s�
y7
cu
She
i
g
h,
Ln
00
� ,
Qj
r ti i
wia
I%
a
8
la,
g'•
I
'1
o�
t �
a)
22
P,f i r
0
7
/J
„
y„
0/001,
J/4"
i
. i
'
i
j
i; j
I ,
r
Jr�.f
i
F
�,f
I
I III
I
�I
ti!
III Mii
I
r
I
ct, i
V
'cl,
0
0
r*4
m
r14
0
ai
L-
u
r
N
I
U
;r
77,
/i7
;%// �
/
ririio
A
/ „
of////
�/FERI
i
I
/
j
%'/t
„rrr
XMi///
///����
%%/ g%�
Gi;I //ii/
/pp;,
/ a
/%/
,... rs; / r //�///yo
It
MIN
/�4/
s
I
� r
/r/r
/ rrrrrrr�
/
/
r � r
is �f /
r
A
"
Gn;
lMp
Al
oo
add
r
%ii/r
/ � /
/ rr,
�
JEi"
e
i
i A % 1
i
1r r
r
"I r
o
PIS
'/ 1 /
%
wall, r r
�,..
�j
Nx
r
i%
rrrr/ ,/rrrrrr
��.
\�z
«�
g�x
\�
. \&
«\�.
�m%^
} \
. /
°
� ^ |
« �
,
;r
i jvnn,tM
uulluuuuu <�� F�
rF�
r'
r rr'
J' 0
r'f
i
N
U
IIIIIIIIIIi
y:
u-
i
1
d'
r �u
✓�
C
r
�� ��p4�kw �ierrrg�rrr�r�� rrzi� i�P 7d�������
F uuu jjjjjrili� � i
�� ,<� iinnnnni,� nn�V nnnV nnnnnm\ � �j
i,, i� I
�'
�r
�!� fliiiiiiiiii i� � ,-
,.
i'" im
;„
i ,„ W�
��:
u
i
w
�„ ,.�;'
F '„
i ��,
°%'' �"�,
� �i;
� �%�<
�"° �w
r
,,
°r �.���`� � p'w
r �
�� ,, N
;�
�;� ,
��''" � �'�3 �
,�
� ��,
U
fir(I }
�n
c O
/ d
r r';
0
N
he
y.
N
w,
om
r�
0
p
w r1cn
If r
N
L
i
s
f`
ir.
r
r
r
,u
f r,,
r
r
M
he
L
R
n�
a
, uul
III l a
I
u ,
L,
r
ft,
a �
,I I
P
O
t
JJJ I, �q I`II
,F
r
r ,
� n
Ilrl �u
I I�
RGV 1 y ��ua
�D
2�\
���~ �\ � • � :
vw a
«
"I" %%
o�/r
j/
/
�/ /ii,,,, ,,,,.., ��/ %1 / /ill`%� �✓ /r//i / � /; I, ' 1�
%/, /r/rrrrrrrr � �r'��J/ r y/� ,a'/�� •
ia// /
pad
vu/
/ail
�j�///%/
iai
i
J
�,•4. M� l� Y
p /,
rp
l
%j
iP
r
�I
1
�I M;
I
� al
ryw
f
5W
o
i
a O
L O
i
j/
V)
F '
co
i
�j D
r �
� � a
n I
t
ii r � Sri �
r4
0
/Nr
v
O
„ 4—J
ca
F
i
� r
r i r
i
i
o rit
� � 0
U
h
�z
°r
r �
f
i
Nr
f
6
� � I
y; lr rn 4�
r O
r�
r�
0
y' ✓
/
R J N✓l
i
J
ar /,
1
/
o
Ln
4-+
ca
=c,
f
i
r
u
�U
� Sl
Ril
O
� r �
co
l
I
l/
<
v . .
< < /«
: ,< • r � »k � ^� � w a. < ,
Wo
Eln
I
c
r
i
1 �.e
r
N
a r
cc
All
n � e
N
"s N
a
n �
r
y�
j;
+fi
r�
y
it sv%;
W N
iiG +Y
I
I� I
y:
M
j
/l IIII
r. 0
N
jr l
11
U/
lr� /
J +F,
M .
q
I� I
*
C
M
O
rm � rV a
rid
�i
'r
4-,+
/ r
I I �a4N+4� Ir
x r;
i r
&y
i
h
oq , ,
cry
I
4
0
f
n /
r ,
O
4—+
F �
�r
i
illy
v
N
e
�i r
Y/ Jry�y�yi U�� w r iv G�
r , f ,� •� �, r` ,
� � i� v
l�
ml��✓'� ' yew ��/� � � a
'�"" � � ,l� 91�Ne �� /r a✓i/� jai / �,� vw
r
0
ti
%n
,r
4—+
y
r �
�p 1
r °e
i
iy�r w rb. v
i
�ry
r �
r
rr
N/
I
0
0
Ln
wx
�
< y \ �
m�
IV�
r
i
l.,iwt II �
1
I
I � F
"
nr1
r
,.
910
I
d
n
r
� I I
i
r
■ �
�< «
r�}
> � «
\/
d
. �
/ ^
» } �
>,? r�«
<
fir'/; r //
/f
r
AM
����%/�l�j %i'i //,,,ri %/ %////i/ i,,, �j�r���/////%/rr �/fi li 5�/ ,:/�, ��✓ rid/�
IT
02 AM,
In
rim
U « / /r f✓rcPf�% /ir '///%i///r r„ %////// /ir� ri6i f/fl f r�%� ,,,/ /
/, d i j1/�� �I�'" / li %/i�,+✓///P� llfl/I r%SJIn/
(
rHJ�/%1p r <.
�N(r/Nr�°",
did
E I�P�lJ�O
-
�'r
i!�,r, %��/��/��/����✓1//'l'// ///i /�'// r � d �11 /�%ii !1//l�%t �i/� � t �/` 'i �,; /
rr %"„��'/����;'"r��%r r�l �l�r/// �//ri r�ri�� r« ,✓,,,n %, � /�/ r��r//!��l��%��� j%//liiii���
!i//o /'�//��/Jr�/�/rimer o./i�ir �, �/ f//��/„ ail%;r,;,�i/�/�o/✓rl/Orr/rr/�r�f l �r
\ i
\
\/
1 � i
±®
�d\\
�,�; "",� f➢� ��(i �'��� ��������g'pp�"� j�%i,�� �%err„
P �
a
I„
'e 'f
f"
t
I
f
U
f"
d
� w„a
Fri ,s.
w
yam
r il
r
i�"
r / \
.\ |
ƒ �
�y
G,, III III
ire I re � g�i
�I
;J
4 �
t
I
I
d'
ffffffff
16,
y r
q lr
r
F w�
'y � /gyp
4.
!wf A q
r
It,
ood
u iuu�tiii�iuulul i i t" jaw
tl:
4
k �
� rl
i
N
cn
N � O
1h e
I
�l
y
l�
I
Qly �
P
\ � |
\ /\
\ y
. > . . ,
<
ry >fV�l
nn
r1„
i
i
O
1
(ri
R3
U_
tfJ� r
fa
U
i
u
r
r
�w�
i
i
�y
Y
y,
i
I
r
Ilil ,4I
IE t
%rf
r�1
r
6�
r �
�r
i
r
MY
Lu
1, cm
tu
CEO
i
I r �
r
f�
y:
�I
r
f,
' Y Y.
r,1
r s'
r
u �
r
i
P
r i
r !6 f
d�
i
rf
f, `rq
U
v
O
q t
6
F
s
14
1//
lldlDy r �i n (� " r rrdyr
/ 'i o� /1r �
f RIP ',✓� a ;� V nl,i I Ili/ " .
i
r
r�
' m,r
N
r �
l 1
Ww i"
re
wb
>t
�r.............� %fw, (vl � Pr/e VN /i�wl y i,�V� ,r,� J'w Vllwr wr r ^wa �w!i
rTWV i� a�
���� uu✓� w r , � !��o ii�/ray,;I �� o
r/ Big Ir.
f' a77,
WEEK
�r � i/ rd
lr ior��., J ,�
° » :
\ CIO
co
\ \
/\< . ! <
` "AIM
Appendix B
Field Observation Report
I
COASTAL
COASTAL SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL,INC.
2047 Vista Parkway,Suite 101 •West Palm Beach,FL 33411
Tel:561-640-1003•Fax:561-640-1009
www.coastalsystemsint.com
SYSTEMS ivE S
FIELD OBSERVATION REPORT
COMM: 320000 DATE: August 7,2013
INSPECTOR: Mr. Robert Baron,Coastal Systems International, Inc. (Coastal Systems)
Mr. Daniel Moretz, Coastal Systems
Mr. Aaron Boehning, Coastal Systems
RE: FIELD OBSERVATION REPORT FOR THE MOORING FIELD SITE VISITS
RELATIVE TO THE MONROE COUNTY PUBLIC/PRIVATE MOORING FIELD
PROJECT IN THE FLORIDA KEYS,MONROE COUNTY,FLORIDA
1. INTRODUCTION
On May 6-8, 2013 Coastal Systems International, Inc. (Coastal Systems)performed site visits at
the three proposed anchorage sites: Jewfish Creek, Buttonwood Sound, and Boca Chica basin, to
evaluate relative current need, potential, and permitability for mooring field implementation.
Hydrographic and marine resource data was collected to evaluate physical access to the sites,
extent of marine resource colonization, and regulatory permitting feasibility. Data collected
during the marine resource survey will be used to determine the best site for mooring field
implementation, as well as conceptual design and initial regulatory permitting feasibility
evaluation purposes. Additionally, an assessment of existing/potential upland support facilities
was completed during the site visits.
2. METHODOLOGY
Coastal Systems mobilized a survey team to collect data within the three potential managed
mooring field sites to document water depths and submerged aquatic resources at each of the
three sites. No existing structures (docks, pilings, derelict vessels, etc.) were mapped. The data
was collected with a hand-held echo sounder (fathometer) which was used to obtain depths and
DGPS equipment was used to obtain horizontal positioning.
In addition to the water depth data, Coastal Systems conducted qualitative biological assessments
to document the substrate characteristics and marine resources present within the three priority
sites for potential mooring fields to confirm the presence and general distribution of seagrass,
hardbottom, macroalgae, and other ecologically important marine/estuarine resources. The
survey methodology was limited to qualitative assessments of submerged aquatic resources and
did not include surveys of coastal wetlands above mean low water or detailed/quantitative
assessments.
k
Il�u� q gyp.
i"d' co sill: .I�x.y�uteriisjtiit..c vr)
n'V
320000
August 7, 2013
Page 2
During the site visits Coastal Systems also conducted a one time inventory of existing vessels at
the three priority sites for potential mooring fields. This inventory documented the number of
vessels observed and the general type of vessels at anchor. Coastal Systems interviewed
representative boaters to understand vessel migration patterns and average length of stay in the
anchorage. In addition, potential shore support facilities were evaluated for suitability.
Representative photographs were also obtained.
3.RESULTS
3.1 Buttonwood Sound
The dominant benthic functional group in the immediate nearshore area of Buttonwood Sound
consisted of dense seagrass (Attachment A, Figure 1). Turtle grass (Thallasia testudinum) was
the dominant species observed in the nearshore area (Photograph 1) and water depths ranged
from 2.1 ft to 5.2 ft. The offshore area primarily consisted of patchy seagrass, macroalgae, and
sponge. Sparse turtle grass (T. testudinum) was the dominant seagrass species observed in the
offshore area and water depths ranged from 4.1 ft to 6.5 ft.
On May 7, 2013, 22 vessels were moored in Buttonwood Sound including 20 sailboats
(Photograph 2), one powerboat, one houseboat (Photograph 3), and zero derelict vessels. The
sailboats were clustered in the area adjacent to the Upper Keys Sailing Club. The Upper Keys
Sailing Club was founded in 1973 and supports the competitive, educational, and social aspects
of sailing. A member of the club provided the following information:
• County recently removed derelict vessels.
• County provides a free weekly pump out service for anchored vessels.
• Club members and public are concerned that a managed mooring field will result in the
Sound filling up with boats.
In addition to the Upper Keys Sailing Club,nearby facilities/access include the following:
• Gas station(land based)
• Public transportation
• Bay access
• Point of View Key Largo RV Resort(possible upland support facility)
o Restroom/shower facilities
o Laundry Facilities
0 10 slip dinghy dock
0 16 slip marina
o Fish cleaning station
o Boat ramp
o Parking
o Wi-Fi
320000
August 7, 2013
Page 3
o Pool
o Private beach with volleyball
o Bike racks
o Gift shop
o Club house with game room
• Motel
• Restaurants, fast food&cafes
• Grocery stores
• Weekly pump out service(provided by Mobile Vessel Pump out USA)
• Highway access
• ASAP Urgent Care Medical Center(8 miles south)
• Dive shops (Diver's Direct and Scuba Fun)
• Barber shop and hair salon
• Banks
• Liquor store
• Drug stores
• Public Transportation
• Animal Hospital
• Bait&Tackle Shop
• Baptist Church
Photograph 1. Turtle grass (Thallasia testudinum) was the dominant species observed at the
Buttonwood Sound site.
r
tiW',
320000
August 7, 2013
Page 4
Photograph 2. Sailboat observed at the Buttonwood Sound site on May 7,2013.
I
Photograph 3. Houseboat observed at the Buttonwood Sound site on May 7,2013.
'40010190upo,w,
320000
August 7, 2013
Page 5
3.2 Jewfish Creek
The dominant benthic functional group in the immediate area adjacent to Jewfish Creek, on both
the east and west banks of the channel, consisted of dense seagrass (Attachment A, Figure 2).
Turtle grass (T. testudinum) was the dominant species observed intermixed with shoal grass
(Halodule beaudettei). Water depths ranged from 2.8 ft to 7.7 ft. The area west of the channel
also consisted of patchy seagrass(T. testudinum) and sand.
On May 8, 2013, 16 vessels were anchored in Jewfish Creek including 10 sailboats, three
powerboats, one houseboat, and two derelict vessels. The anchored vessels were primarily
clustered in the area adjacent to the eastern edge of the channel, south of the Anchorage Resort
(Photograph 4). Vessels were also anchored under the Overseas Highway Bridge, north of the
Anchorage Resort(Photograph 5).
Nearby facilities/access included the following:
• Anchorage Resort
o Laundry facilities
o Marina with water, electric, and cable
o Wi-Fi
o Parking
o Motel
o Timeshare resales
o Gift shop
o Onsite BBQ grills
o Heated swimming pool and hot tub
o Tennis courts, shuffleboard, and basketball
o Adjacent restaurant(Steamers)
o Boat rentals(Pontunes)
• Gilbert's Resort(potential upland facility)
o Boat ramp
o Parking
o Gas station/fuel dock
o Marina with water, electric, and cable
o Wi-Fi
o Laundry facilities
o Restrooms
o Private beach
o Pool and Tiki huts
o Restaurant/Tiki Bar with live entertainment
o Motel
• Bay access
• Highway access
320000
August 7,2013
Page 6
Photograph 4. Vessels observed at the Jewfish Creek site on May 8,2013.
1'
I � I
Photograph 5. Vessels anchored under the Overseas Highway Bridge,north of the Anchorage
Resort on May 8,2013.
40110o l F, �'7diur
320000
August 7,2013
Page 7
3.3 Boca Chica
The dominant benthic functional group in the northernmost area of the Boca Chica Site consisted
of dense seagrass (Attachment A, Figure 3). Turtle grass (T. testudinum) was the dominant
species observed in this area (Photograph 6) and water depths ranged from 1.2 ft to 8.9 ft
(excluding the channel where depths were up to 18.6 ft). The middle of the site consisted of
dense seagrass and hardbottom directly offshore, with sparse seagrass and macroalgae further
offshore intermixed among the mangroves. Turtle grass (T. testudinum) was the dominant
seagrass species observed in these two areas and water depths ranged from 1.4 ft to 8.5 ft.
On May 6, 2013, 62 vessels were moored in Boca Chica including 19 sailboats (Photograph 7),
25 powerboats, five houseboats (Photograph 8), and 13 derelict vessels (Photograph 9). The
moored vessels were primarily located in the northern portion of the site. An individual who
resides on a sailboat in the Boca Chica site provided the following information:
• County provides a free weekly pump out service for moored vessels.
• Trash is a big problem; some users do not take responsibility for their trash, some trash
comes from the fishing company located adjacent to the site, and some originates from
Boyd's Campground.
• Locals refer to the area as Key Haven Boat Ramp Area.
• Users don't have a problem paying to moor as long as it is feasible since it is currently
free.
• There are free dumpsters on shore.
• There is no public shower or laundry service available for use.
• Marinas do not cooperate with moored boaters.
• Boyd's Campground complains about trash problem.
• Users do not want more government oversight; they say it does not work.
• Police have not helped with crimes including stolen gear.
• Things could get better if they solved a few problems.
• Recent strong winds in excess of 70 knots caused a few of the boasts to run aground
and/or hit other boats.
Nearby facilities/access included the following:
• Gas station(land based)
• Bay access
• Robbie's Full Service Marina
• Oceanside Marina
• Hyatt Beach House Resort
• Days Inn Key West
• Restaurants/grocery stores
• Boat ramp
p '6101 I
320000
August 7, 2013
Page 8
• Highway access
• Ocean access
• Boyd's Campground
0 50 amp and 30 amp electricity
o Heated Swimming Pool
o Lounging Beach
0 24 hour security
o Free Wi-Fi
o Modem data port
o Marina
o Four Bathhouses
o City Bus Service
o Coin Laundry
o Picnic Pavilion with BBQ Grill
o ATM
o Dump Station and pump-out service
o LP gas (land based)
o Dishwashing Station
• Waste disposal/trash bins
• West Marine
• Murray Marine
• Weekly pump out service(provided by Mobile Vessel Pump out USA)
• M&M Small Engine
• Boat repair maintenance yard
• Waters Edge Colony Mobile Home
• Key West Baptist Temple
• Covenant Word Church
• Oily's Auto Repair
• Stock Island Lobster Co.
• Blue Planet Kayak Eco-Tours
• Coconut Mobile Home Park
• El Mar RV Resort
• Fishbusterz Retail Seafood Market
• Key West Engine Services Inc.
NI CIV edg,'pav":
320000
August 7, 2013
Page 9
��f r
Photograph 6. Turtle grass (Thallasia testudinum)was the dominant species observed at the
Boca Chica site.
Photograph 7. Sailboat observed at the Boca Chica site on May 6,2013.
° ^ i.c met. lsy icin wi t°mcoiik..
320000
August 7,2013
Page 10
Photograph 8. Houseboat observed at the Boca Chica site on May 6, 2013.
dVulu"uu iil
uuuuuuu uuu'' uu a uu ° I �k):
� II�III
"i
� Y
Photograph 9. Overturned derelict vessel observed at the Boca Chica site on May 6, 2013.
File.TRB,PC,RE.CAB
P\Project\320000\Feasibility Report\(13-08-07)FOR Mooring Field Survey May 2013.do
16411q(1��i"�pJl!w/i
3m3.�) a�.�w '«wil:�":11C1V'VI a 91tlY3!II:.�;:9:U�Si"vY i
r
d ,
d
F �?
�Y
i
f "
cn Z
■ ■ {f�LLJ
CD
■ r m �] H
r ■ m r ip �
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r W
r ■ r ■ r r ■ ...
■ r ■ ■■ ■ ■ r ■
■ ■ r m r r ■ • • ■
■ ■ r ■ r ■ r m ■ r ■ • ■ •
r ■ r ■ ■ ■ r ■ r ■ r r ■ ■
■ • ■ ■ v ■ ■ r ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r ;S,
r ■ m ■ r ■ ■ ■ rrrm ■ rr
■ r ■ r r r im ■ r ■ r ■ ■ '�
m ■ ■ m ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ m ■ ■
■■ ■ ■ ■ m r ■ r■ ■ ■ r ■ ■ ■ f �,.
ry
rvrrr ■ r ■ r ■r ■ rr ■ r ■ �°';
r■ ■v ■ ■ ■ ■ rrr■ ■ r ■ ■ ■
r ■■ ■rr • ■ ■ ■ ■ r ■ r ■ r
■ ■m ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ m ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r■
m ■ ■ ■ ■ r■ rr ■ rr ■ ■ a 4
r ■■ ■ r ■ ■ ■ ■ r ■rr r■ ■
■■ r ■ r rr r ■ ■■
■rr■ ■r ■ ■ rr ■mr ■ •r■
■ m ■ ■ ■ rmm€ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■
■■ rrrr ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■mr ■ rr
■ ■ ■r■ ■■■• rrr■
■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ rr■ r ■ ■ ■ •m
■ ■ •■ i■ri■ ■rr■rmrrrr ■
� r ■ ■rrr ■ r■ v s r ■ r
■ m■ ■r • ■ rrr ■•■ • r r i
■ rrr■ r ■ a r ■■ ■ ■ rrr r ,��,
r r■ ■■ ■r r r r• • r ■r r
■m ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ m
■■ ■r r ■■ ■ ■r r r ,>
■ ■ a r r ■ ■ r r r s r ,'�
m a ■ a m r ■ r v r r ■ ■r r ■ �' "
■ rrrr r ■■ • r rr E_
■ r r v m ■ rr r ■r ■■ a ■
v r ■ ■ m ■ r ■ r ■ a ■ r ■r ■ « "
m ■ • ■ ■ ■ a r ■ ■ or ■ sar
�f+8, ■ ■ ■ r ■ ra ■ ■ • a ■ e ■
■ ■ r rs ■ mr mmrrr ■ • ■ ■
rrrs ■ ■ rrr ■ ■ ■ rr r ■ ■ • rm ■
■ ■ ■ ■ r ■ ss ■ ■ ■ m ■ r
■ ■ ■ e r ■ r ■ s r ■ ■ r r r r • ■
■ ■ ■ vs rr ■ ■ r ■ ■ sr ■ ■
y+ r ■ ■ ■ m ■ r ■ s r ■ r ■ r ■ ■ ■
:� � • ■ ■r ■ • rrr ■ ■ r ■ ■ r r
ss ■ ■ mr ■ s ■ m rr
■ m ■■ ■ r ■
■■ m
■• m ■
® r
■ r
■
■
■
rvti,��rub i°�aa. .n,tt��—a��'auFdiiinuu��m,n�ru�,.,nii..d4rM1k"',��M.lt y+a���r,�s^ r
m IN p
mwm @@mmwmarwWm' N w Sn
pm@w@IN@p@@@Wm@II LI.1 � O M
m@@mm mwmwWw@m V W 0
wmm mpwm@wwm., �y C.J
Z
m m u @W mmmuu (J7
X
W
m m w w W k m w m p W w
w mmm pmwwuo lw
p lNmm mw wwlmwmw
W la m w W@ p w
pl u�WWumu mmmmm@@w,l;.
@ w@ m@ w w w W
wu€Wmm
@ w W uu @ @ @ m m
m@ W m w@ W w m W m a p ml
wmm @ m m w w W W@ m W
w
m p@ m W m p m@@ m w m W@ p W
w W a W m u w m m m@ w m@@ m@ @ p
W p@ m m W m W w w m w N m m p p w@ m p IN
w m m p m@@@ p m m W m m m
wm@ @w@wmWm
m m p @
m m
1
y' Y
m
Y�
ryt k
S a
LI.
5 in w
r� w
� I
1iraJ','�yryy4 ^I t v,;^')�;91 I{MI VIN III'\,;iJPi w`M.'7i&. I nl�lriVkAk�"er11 r�'1'IYw,i�;'1h,II
� I
{y� � ���� 11�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIl9111 i °d I n�u�
III
y
Elf
Lu
2 U O :�
t- m c>
�i v>
m x
w
liilq I y
li rl � �• :u III
r^
r
III
mm mm onK,uuu uml wm �� d � u,
�� &J IIIR 0� MreIX IIIIII � VUU � , r 'ti IU
ulw uuu a� uuu ww � oa out +➢� I� " � i'. /� � � �" r
mm � mm mm � u� wu � uuu � uuu uuu mm uw u� mtli � +
I � imlu nnn � uM10 mm mml �dll � mm uuw � M �
� uum nml wu �u mlol as �e d� w'n ;f
u� uw � moo r� r� � �":�,,✓l
i
w
i'
tl
�1Yr�%/�%/�rt�i�
+n
-1,,pq"'v`,1 : M Ou...N:;F A 1 M yJndl'1 4 N lY4�•,fi'up `f IJ 1CJ:h. r ria"V�,i
Appendix
Conceptual Mooring
Maps
LU
1:1 cn
r
A m a
10
r
c�
,a w
0
w
� d z
o
o
W
its rcl
coolO�
�j W
m
J Z
Z
—T Q
LW
6
O Q gig
_
CL C3 d'W Q
Cff aQ.. �ibd'
:`VIAO ,`,µRNWr W NI&1n1eFN",n 4Y;.: Dff]O:.l\A
r ««
V
M{
€A � L,JC
` 00
N
2
W
cm
LLJ
J
O
V�
�of
f
� .u� I��IIV �IIIIIII
I ml uuuuuuuulla rp
�g
m ..
L7 uJi x z
t
o zz
O ¢a
O E-= W
F �:mJ2w e
w12
JOda-iW CO u 6Su5
M:z W o
a=- �� y62
�'' Y W lctl„o;irtnl nil "v3,7i m[41MiP^{wra fl 19,1'1 YkN#L4tON oNlli+Ill lµ Yv.,'mk7
W �' N
Qoui
Ch
~v �
cn
w
ui
z
C.
l
p
1°
6 �
�d
m
r ,
Appendix D
Resource Maps
` ' I
o L,
Z z Z
F-
Lft
M
p•
✓ LLJ
..y
v ;
4 I
/ 1
�I
'cV, ��muuu iii I
wY
/
q
-V
f r
rrr„
j IX1 I
piYl. $p T� Y�y i• n
1�� 1
F �
Appendix E
Dock and Construction
Guidelines
Dock Construction Guidelines in Florida for Docks or Other Minor Structures
Constructed in or over Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV),Marsh or Mangrove Habitat
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/National Marine Fisheries Service
August 2001
Submerged Aquatic Vegetation:
1. Avoidance. The pier shall be aligned so as to minimize the size of the footprint over SAV beds.
2. The height of pier shall be a minimum of 5 feet above MHW/OHW as measured from the top surface of the decking.
3. The width of the pier is limited to a maximum of 4 feet. A turnaround area is allowed for piers greater than 200 feet
in length. The turnaround is limited to a section of the pier no more than 10 feet in length and no more than 6 feet in
width. The turnaround shall be located at the midpoint of the pier.
4. Over-SAV bed portions of the pier shall be oriented in a north-south orientation to the maximum extent that is
practicable.
5.a. If possible,terminal platforms shall be placed in deep water,waterward of SAV beds or in an area devoid of SAV
beds.
b. If a terminal platform is placed over SAV areas and constructed of grated decking,the total size of the platform shall
be limited to 160 square feet. The grated deck material shall conform to the specifications stipulated below. The
configuration of the platform shall be a maximum of 8 feet by 20 feet. A minimum of 5 feet by 20 feet shall conform to
the 5-foot height requirement;a 3 feet by 20 feet section may be placed 3 feet above MHW to facilitate boat access. The
long axis of the platform should be aligned in a north-south direction to the maximum extent that is practicable.
c. If the terminal platform is placed over SAV areas and constructed of planks,the total size of the platform shall be
limited to 120 square feet. The configuration of the platform shall be a maximum of 6 feet by 20 feet of which a
minimum 4-foot wide by 20-foot long section shall conform to the 5-foot height requirement. A section may be placed 3
feet above MHW to facilitate boat access. The 3 feet above MHW section shall be cantilevered. The long axis of the
platform should be aligned in a north-south direction to the maximum extent that is practicable. If the 3feet above MHW
section is constructed with grating material,it may be 3 feet wide.
6. One uncovered boat lift area is allowed. A narrow catwalk(2 feet wide if planks are used,3 feet wide if grating is
used)may be added to facilitate boat maintenance along the outboard side of the boat lift and a 4-foot wide walkway
may be added along the stern end of the boat lift,provided all such walkways are elevated 5 feet above MHW. The
catwalk shall be cantilevered from the outboard mooring pilings(spaced no closer than 10 feet apart).
7. Pilings shall be installed in a manner which will not result in the formation of sedimentary deposits("donuts" or
"halos")around the newly installed pilings. Pile driving is the preferred method of installation,but jetting with a low
pressure pump may be used.
8. The spacing of pilings through SAV beds shall be a minimum of 10 feet on center.
9. The gaps between deckboards shall be a minimum of/z inch.
Grid Specifications and Suppliers Section modified in October 2002 to add an additional vendor of materials.
Marsh:
1. The structure shall be aligned so as to have the smallest over-marsh footprint as practicable.
2. The over-marsh portion of the dock shall be elevated to at least 4 feet above the marsh floor.
3. The width of the dock is limited to a maximum of 4 feet. Any exceptions to the width must be accompanied by an
equal increase in height requirement.
Mangroves.
1. The width of the dock is limited to a maximum of 4 feet.
2. Mangrove clearing is restricted to the width of the pier.
3. The location and alignment of the pier should be through the narrowest area of the mangrove fringe.
Grid Specifications and Suppliers
The following information does not constitute a U.S.Army Corps of Engineers endorsement or advertisement for
any particular provider and is provided only as an example for those interested in obtaining these materials for dock
construction. A type of fiberglass grate panel is manufactured by SeaSafe(Lafayette,LA;phone: 1-800-326-8842).
Similar panels are also manufactured by ChemGrate(1-800-527-4043). Plastic grate panels are also available from
Southern Pine Lumber Company(Stuart,FL;phone: 772-692-2300). Panels are available in a variety of sizes and
thicknesses. For safety,the grate should contain an anti-slip texture which is integrally molded into the top surface.
The manufacturer or local distributor should be consulted to ensure that the load-bearing capacity of the selected
product is sufficient to support the intended purpose. Contact the manufacturer(s)for product specifications and a
list of regional distributors.
Grid Specifications and Suppliers Section modified in October 2002 to add an additional vendor of materials.
18-21.0041 Florida Keys Marina and Dock Siting Policies and Criteria.
(1)These policies and criteria shall be applied to all applications for leases, easements or consent to use sovereignty submerged
lands in Monroe County for multi-slip docking facilities. The following General Policies and Specific Criteria shall be used in
developing recommendations to approve, approve with conditions or deny the use of state owned sovereignty submerged lands for
multi-slip docking facilities.
(a)General Policies—special attention and consideration shall be given to the following:
1. The proximity to and potential adverse impacts on any rare, threatened or endangered species, or species of special concern,
or their habitat, or on any portion of the entire Florida Reef Tract and other corals, including but not limited to those in the John
Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park, Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary, Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary, and Everglades
National Park;and
2.Eliminating any adverse impacts on wetland or submerged vegetation or benthic communities;and
3.Requiring adequate tidal flushing and/or circulation;and
4.Maintaining or enhancing water quality at levels within or above State water quality standards;and
5.Requiring adequate water depths to avoid dredging and other bottom disturbance;and
6. Requiring consistency and conformity with local government land use plans, zoning, and other land use or development
regulations;and
7. Requiring consistency and conformity with Chapters 27F-8, 27F-9,27F-10,27F-11, 27F-12,27F-13, and 27F-15,F.A.C., as
amended,"Principles for Guiding Development in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern."Should any of these provisions
conflict with the Sovereignty Lands Management Rules,the Board shall advise staff which provision shall take precedence.
(b) Specific Criteria.
1. There shall be a moratorium on the approval of all leases of state owned submerged lands for multi-slip docking facilities
from Tea Table Channel north to the Monroe County Line. This moratorium shall be maintained until rules are adopted for the
currently proposed Florida Keys-Monroe County Aquatic Preserve or the revised Monroe County Comprehensive Plan with marina
siting policies is adopted,whichever occurs first.
2.No docking facilities shall be approved which require either dredging or filling to provide access by canal, channel,road,or
any other means. This restriction shall also apply to widening or deepening any existing canal or channel, but not to regular
maintenance dredging of existing canals, basins, or channels, providing such maintenance does not exceed currently acceptable
water depths.
3. Water depths requirements. Docking facilities shall only be approved in locations having adequate water depths in the boat
mooring,turning basin,access channels and other such areas to accommodate the proposed boat use.
a.A minimum water depth of-4(minus four)feet mean low water shall be required.
b. Greater depths shall be required for those facilities designed for,or capable of, accommodating boats having greater than a 3
(three)foot draft,so that a minimum of one foot of clearance is provided between the deepest draft of a vessel and the bottom.
c. These depth requirements shall also apply to the area between the proposed facility and any natural or other navigation
channel, inlet or deep water. Where necessary, marking of navigational channels shall be required. At the Board's discretion, the
conditions of the lease may stipulate the number,lengths,drafts and types of vessels to be moored in a facility.
4.Requirements for the size of the dock.
a. No dock shall be approved if its length exceeds 500 feet, unless the Board determines that it is not contrary to the public
interest.
b.No dock shall be approved if its length preempts in excess of 20%(percent)of the width of the affected waterbody.
c.No dock for the use of a private residence,which is not subject to obtaining a lease,shall exceed four(4)feet in width. Such a
dock may have a terminal platform the total area of which shall not exceed 160 feet, and the width of which shall not exceed eight
(8)feet.
5.A specific lease condition for any new or expanded docking facility for 10 or more boats will be that the lessee shall maintain
water quality standards as provided by Chapter 403,F.S.To assure compliance,the lessee shall maintain a water quality monitoring
program approved by the Department of Environmental Protection. Water quality data will be periodically reviewed by the
Department of Environmental Protection. In the event that water quality violations occur and water quality standards provided by
Chapter 403, F.S., are not maintained, the lessee will be given written notice to correct the problem. Such notice shall require any
problems or violations to be corrected within 120 days, or less in the case of severe violations, or demonstrate to the Board's
satisfaction that the violations are caused by other than the docking facility, or associated activities on the adjacent riparian uplands,
including stormwater runoff. If the lessee is the cause of the violations, and does not correct the problem within the specified time,
then the lease shall be subject to cancellation by the Board with the resultant removal of the docking facility and other structures
within the lease area.
6. In reviewing applications for new docking facilities or expansions to existing facilities,attention shall be given to identifying
ways to improve, mitigate or restore adverse environmental impacts caused by previous activities. This may include filling in over
dredged areas in order to make them a depth acceptable for propagation of benthic biota,restoring wetland or submerged vegetation,
improving circulation, installing sewage pump-out facilities, or marking navigational channels. Such mitigation or restoration may
be required as a condition of approval for new or expanded facilities. Marina development shall be encouraged to locate in already
developed or disturbed areas.
7. In addition to the threshold specified by paragraph 18-21.005(1)(b), F.A.C., all applicants proposing docking facilities
designed to moor 10(ten)or more boats shall be required to obtain a lease.
8. All applicants will be required to provide documentation to show that there is an economic demand for the number of boat
slips requested,if the number requested is not consistent with the Department's Projections of Marina Needs for Monroe County.
9. No application to lease state owned sovereignty submerged lands for the purpose of providing multi-slip docking facilities
shall be considered for approval unless there are no benthic communities present where the boat mooring area, turning basins,
mooring piles or other structures are to be located,excepting any main access docks required to cross benthic communities to reach
acceptable areas. This shall not preclude them from applying for consent to use state owned submerged lands for the purpose of
using the minimum amount necessary to obtain reasonable ingress and egress.
10.The Board may grant special consideration to the approval of leases or other consent to use state lands for projects which are
approved by the Department of Community Affairs which are for the purpose of furthering the commercial fishing village or
commercial fishing enterprise zone concept.
Specific Authority 253.03(7)FS Law Implemented 253.03 FS History—New 2-25-85,Formerly 16Q-21.041, 16Q-21.0041.
a
Appendix F
Submerged Lands Lease
Calculations
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
DIVISION T T
BUREAU OF PUBLIC LAND ADMINISTRATION
3900 COMMONWEALTH BLVD.,MS 130
TALLAHASSEE,FL 32399-3000
850-245-2720
Date: March 1,2012
To: Interested Persons
From: Susan Riggs, OMC Manager
Subject: CONSUMER PRICE INDEX for all items and impacts on the Submerged Land Lease Base Rates
The following chart reflects the rate per square foot at which leases have been computed,as well as the subsequent changes by the Board reflected
in rule and the annual fluctuation of the consumer price index pursuant to Section 18-21.011 1 b Florida Administrative Code.
FEE RATE CHART
Processing/Renewal/Assignment Aquatic Preserve with
and Modification Fees Non-A uatic Preserve Natural Shoreline
Private
Beginning Single Public or Minimum 2X Base
Effective Family All Other Private Annual Base Rate 2 Times Rate w/30% Reason for Rate
Year Date Facilities Facilities Easements Fee Base Rate W/30% Disc. Base Rate Disc. Chan e
10/18/70 $0.0200 RULE EFFECTIVE
12/20/78 $ 100.00 $0.0200 "
03/02/80 $150.00 $ 187.00 $0.0370
03/27/82 $200.00 $200.00
05/18/82 $ 225.00 $0.0450 "
08/01/83 $0.0650 $ 0.0455 $ 0.1300 $ 0.0910 "
84/85 03/01/84 $0.0704 $ 0.0493 $ 0.1408 $ 0.0986 C.P.I.ADJ.8.25%
85/86 03/01/85 $0.0757 $ 0.0530 $ 0.1514 $ 0.1060 C.P.I.ADJ.7.50%
85/86 10/20/85 $0.0700 $ 0.0490 $ 0.1400 $ 0.0980 BOARD ACTION
86/97 03/01/86 $0.0739 $ 0.0517 $ 0.1478 $ 0.1035 C.P.I.ADJ.5.50%
87/88 03/01/87 $0.0767 $ 0.0537 $ 0.1534 $ 0.1074 C.P.I.ADJ.3.81%
88/89 03/01/88 $0.0792 $ 0.0554 $ 0.1584 $ 0.1109 C.P.I.ADJ.3.32%
89/90 03/01/89 $0.0820 $ 0.0574 $ 0.1640 $ 0.1148 C.P.I.ADJ.3.51%
90/91 03/01/90 $0.0849 $ 0.0594 $ 0.1698 $ 0.1189 C.P.I.ADJ.3.60%
91/92 03/01/91 $0.0883 $ 0.0618 $ 0.1766 $ 0.1236 C.P.I.ADJ.3.98%
92/93 03/01/92 $0.0922 $ 0.0645 $ 0.1844 $ 0.1291 C.P.I.ADJ.4.45%
93/94 03/01/93 $0.0962 $ 0.0673 $ 0.1924 $ 0.1346 C.P.I.ADJ.4.31%
94/95 03/01/94 $0.1001 $ 0.0700 $ 0.2002 $ 0.1400 C.P.I.ADJ.4.08%
95/96 03/01/95 $0.1038 $ 0.0727 $ 0.2076 $ 0.1453 C.P.I.ADJ.3.65%
96/97 03/01/96 $0.1070 $ 0.0749 $ 0.2140 $ 0.1498 C.P.I.ADJ.3.08%
97/98 03/01/97 $0.1101 $ 0.0771 $ 0.2202 $ 0.1541 C.P.I.ADJ.2.88%
98/99 03/01/98 $0.1130 $ 0.0791 $ 0.2260 $ 0.1582 C.P.I.ADJ.2.62%
98/99 10/11/98 $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $ 339.00 11 " 1. RULE EFFECTIVE
99/00 03/01/99 $ 347.00 $0.1156 $ 0.0809 $ 0.2312 $ 0.1618 C.P.I.ADJ.2.34%
00/01 03/01/00 $ 355.19 $0.1183 $ 0.0828 $ 0.2366 $ 0.1656 C.P.I.ADJ.2.36%
01/02 03/01/01 $ 364.961 $0.1216 $ 0.0851 $ 0.2432 $ 0.1702 C.P.I.ADJ.2.75%
02/03 03/01/02 $ 373.94 $0.1246 $ 0.0872 $ 0.2492 $ 0.1744 C.P.I.ADJ.2.46%
03/04 03/01/03 $ 383.50 $0.1278 $ 0.0894 $ 0.2556 $ 0.1789 C.P.I.ADJ.2.55%
04/05 03/01/04 $ 392.70 $0.130867 $ 0.091607 $ 0.026173 $ 0.183214 C.P.I.ADJ.2.40%
05/06 03/01/05 $ 402.60 $0.134165 $ 0,093915 $ 0.268330 $ 0.187831 1 C.P.1 ADJ.2.52%
FEE RATE CHART
Processing enewal ssignment Aquatic reserve wit
and Modification Fees Non-A uatic Preserve Natural Shoreline
Private
Beginning Single Public or Minimum 2X Base
Effective Family All Other Private Annual Base Rate 2 Times Rate w/30% Reason for Rate
Year Date Facilities Facilities Easements Fee Base Rate W/30%Disc. Base Rate Disc. Change
05/06 08/10/05 $200.00 $500.00 $500.00 " " " " RULE EFFECTIVE
06/07 03/01/06 $205.00 $512.00 $512.00 $ 412.75 $0.137546 $ 0.096282 $ 0.275092 $ 0.192564 C.P.I.ADJ.2.52%
07/08 03/01/07 $210.00 $525.00 $525.00 $ 423.89 $0.141260 $ 0.098882 $ 0.282519 $ 0.197764 C.P.I.ADJ.2.70%
08/09 03/01/08 $216.00 $540.00 $540.00 $ 436.78 $0.145554 $ 0.101888 $ 0.291109 $ 0.203776 C.P.I.ADJ.3.04%
09/10 03/01/09 $222.00 $555.00 $555.00 $ 448.49 $0.149455 $ 0.104618 $ 0.298910 $ 0.209237 C.P.I.ADJ.2.68%
10/11 03/01/10 $227.00 $569.00 $569.00 $ 459.97 $0.153281 1 $ 0.107297 $ 0.306562 $ 0.214593 C.P.I.ADJ.2.56%
11/12 1 03/01/11 $232.00 $581.00 $581.00 $ 470.00 $0.156623 $ 0.109636 $ 0.313245 $ 0.219272 C.P.I.ADJ.2.18%
12/13 03/01/12 $237.00 $595.00 $595.00 $ 481.00 $0.160194 $ 0.112136 $ 0.320388 $ 0.224272 C.P.I.ADJ.2.28%
As noted above,the base fee is modified annually based on fluctuations of the Consumer Price Index(CPI)with a 10%cap on annual adjustments.
The CPI is averaged over a five year period and the resulting percentage of change is then applied to the previous annual base rate. There is a
qualified 30%discount from the annual base rate allowed for marinas in which no less than 90%of the slips are open to the public on a first come
first served rental basis. Additionally,the rate per square foot shall be doubled for leases located in certain qualified areas within aquatic preserves.
While this higher rate also allows a qualified 30%discount,the rate is dependent upon an existing natural condition of the ambient and subject
shoreline. If you receive a designation in the Clean Marina Program, remain in good standing with the terms of your lease and have no change in
use you are entitled to a 10%discount on the annual fee. Facilities with this designation will also have the extended term fee waived on extended
term leases that are open to the general public on a'first come,first served'basis.