HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-207 ioA & , 4
A> .
WORK ORDER NUMBER 3
BEACH PRESERVATION PLAN UPATE - 2014
This Work Order Number 3 is entered into as of this 22 day of October ,
2013 pursuant to that certain Continuing Contract Agreement for Professional Services
entered into as of March 19 , 2013 ("Agreement") , by and between Indian River County , a
political subdivision of the State of Florida (" COUNTY") and Coastal Planning &
Engineering , Inc . , A CB &I Company ( " CONSULTANT") .
The COUNTY has selected the Consultant to perform the professional services
set forth on Exhibit 1 , attached to tliis Work Order and made part hereof by this
reference . The professional services will be performed by the Consultant for the fee
schedule set forth in Exhibit 2 , attached to this Work Order and made a part hereof by
this reference . The Consultant will perform the professional services within the
timeframe more particularly set forth M I �' xlllhlt 2 , attached to this Work Order and made
a part hereof by this reference all in accordance with the terms and provisions set forth in
the Agreement . Pursuant to para (, !- � ; ph ' . o t ' )Ic I (I_ reement , nothing contained in any
Work Order shall conflict with the terms of the Agreement and the terms of the
Agreement shall be deemed to he Inco por , itcd 111 .dell individual Work Order as if fully
set forth herein .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF ,, th � � pa ; tics hcrcto have executed this Work Order as
of the date first written above .
CONSULTANT I ') 0 ;'. 1 ' . ) OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Coastal Planning & En ing eerie (.. . I ! , ; 1 . \ N RIVER COUNTY
By : By : _
Gordon Thomson , P . E . , D , CII. Flescher, Chairman
Title : Vice President Attest : Jeffrey R . Smith , Clerk of Court and
— -
f ( ) 111 : 11ler
Date : lo /) ) /) 3
o /) ) ! ) 3
p111SS10Al ( Seal ) Deputy Cterk
'SAGO %
%
'approved :
': 3aird , County Administrator
444 / • l .P���C � ' •'�� .
�``ZrZ �� ��„a
NVQ ,, , RIVERi
1 III lilt ,I II W1111 "
. � rm and legal sufficiency :
13v :
"- I� � � �, old, County Attorney
Coastal Planning & Engineering , Inc . , A CB& I
Vp Company
. EXHIBIT 1 2481 NW Boca Raton Blvd
Boca Raton , FL 33431
Tel : + 1 561 3918102
Fax: + 1 561 391 9116
www. C B I . com
August 29 , 2013
Rev September 13 , 2013
Rev October 9 , 2013
James Gray
Indian River County
Public Works - Coastal Engineering Division
1801 27th St , Building A
Vero Beach , FL 32960
Subject : Indian River County Beach Preservation Plan
2014 Update
Dear James :
Indian River County developed the first comprehensive Beach Preservation Plan in 1988 . The plan
was subsequently updated in 1998 and again in 2008 . The County has determined that an update to
the Beach Preservation Plan ( BPP) is appropriate at this time and this proposal outlines a scope
of
work for this effort.
Report Intent and Layout
The intent of the BPP is to assist the County in managing its beaches , which is one of its most valuable
assets . The report will outline strategies that adapt to the needs of various sections of the coast and
quantify the recreational and structural benefits to the community based on a scientific and engineering
based approach .
It is recognized that this document is being developed for the general public and that the audience will
be non-technical in nature . The main body of the report will be prepared with this consideration . Any
items that are technical in nature or background data that can be referenced will be included as
an
appendix.
Task 1 : Update of Beach Conditions
Shoreline and volumetric change conditions based on the latest available survey data from the County
will be updated in the BPP . The 2008 BPP analyzed shoreline and volumetric changes for time periods
( 1972 to 1986 and 1986 to 2005) . This analysis will be extended through to 2013 . The depth
of
closure will be evaluated on a line by line basis before developing an average depth of closure
by
sector. The impact of hardbottom on the depth of closure will be discussed . The erosion analysis shall
include all survey data from 2005 to the most recent data available , and report shoreline change (at Oft ,
5 ft, and 10 ft elevation ) and volumetric change (to an agreed upon depth ) . The report will include
a
tabular and graphic presentation of the data for each R- monument in the County .
CPE will also evaluate the impact of storms in 2005 and 2012 . We will examine recovery of the beach
with respect to the shoreline and various dune elevations to determine whether natural recovery can be
expected under future storm events .
CPE will document beach nourishment projects constructed , including the Sector 3 project constructed
from May 2010 through March 2012 .
CPE will develop a sediment budget and alongshore transport rate for the entire length of the County .
Net sediment transport rates at the north end of the County ( Sebastian Inlet) will be based
upon
literature . CPE will evaluate whether diffusion from beach nourishment projects will need to be
removed from the longshore transport analysis in order to determine longshore transport due to wave
driven transport . A comparison of the longshore transport rates determined from this analytic analysis
of volumetric changes will be compared to numerically modeled longshore transport , discussed later in
this scope .
CPE will incorporate environmental data from monitoring reports developed following the 2008 BPP .
This is expected to primarily include monitoring of the Sector 3 Beach and Dune Restoration project.
Task 2 : Public Meetings
Following an update of the beach conditions , CPE will hold a public meeting/ planning charette in Vero
Beach to explain the goals and objectives of update to the BPP and to solicit public input into potential
beach management strategies . A summary of public comments will be included in the BPP .
A second public meeting will be held following development of the beach management strategies and
completion of the strategy modeling .
Task 3 : Sector Boundaries and Beach Management Strategies
CPE will review the boundaries of the various Sectors ( 1 through 8) within the County . The delineation
of these sectors will be evaluated with respect to dominant coastal processes , historical shoreline
changes , projected bluff location in 30 years , upland development , and environmental resources . The
boundaries will be left as is for consistency purposes unless there is a significant need to change them ,
such as a different beach management strategy being employed within the sector .
Various beach management strategies will be evaluated for each sector. This may include but not be
limited to no action , beach restoration , dune restoration , coastal structures , and sand bypassing .
Regulatory and environmental constraints associated with the various strategies will be considered . A
generalized strategy will be recommended for each section .
While all sectors will be evaluated , it is anticipated that Sectors 3 , 5 and 7 will be the
areas that will
require greater focus with respect to management strategies , based on the previous Beach
Preservation Plan and a review of ongoing efforts . We will develop preliminary alternatives to assess a
given strategy , such as examining the dune or beach nourishment volume required to provide a given
level of protection and how that would affect nearshore hardbottom . We will also provide an initial
analysis of potential structural solutions , including groins , permeable adjustable groins , T- head groins ,
breakwaters , seawalls , revetments , submerged reefs and PEP reefs . During the scoping meeting for
the BPP , the effectiveness of the PEP reefs was discussed . Special consideration will be given to the
evaluation of the PEP reefs using the latest available data .
A conceptual layout will be based on analytic analyses and equilibrium shoreline locations . An initial
cost and annual cost for these potential structural solutions will be developed . A discussion of
permitting considerations including hardbottom coverage and potential downdrift impacts and expected
permitting effort will be included .
This more detailed discussion of potential structural solutions will be included as an appendix in the
BPP . A summary of the discussion on coastal structures will be included in the main body of the Plan .
The preferred alternatives will be carried forward into the coastal modeling effort .
Any beach fill strategies will require fill to execute the strategy . A discussion of upland and sources and
offshore borrow areas will be included in the BPP based on available literature and previous
field
investigations . No additional field work is proposed .
CPE will present the interim findings of the beach management strategy to the Indian River County
Beach Commission . Feedback from this meeting will be incorporated into the BPP .
Task 4 : Public Access Inventory
CPE will include an updated inventory of existing public beach access within the County . The public
access points will be described with respect to whether they are primary or secondary access points as
defined by the FDEP . The length of shoreline eligible for cost sharing by the State will also be updated .
CPE will coordinate with the County to determine whether there have been changes to the 2008 public
access inventory . No field verification of the number of parking spaces is proposed as part of this work .
If verification of the number of parking spaces is required , CPE will rely on the County to provide this
data . CPE will inform the County if a site visit is specifically required to document public
access
conditions .
An assessment of beach access improvements will be performed . Recommendations will be
developed based on the cost effectiveness of improving the beach access in order to obtain additional
State funding . These recommendations will partially be based on the recommended strategy for a
given beach sector.
Task 5 : Coastal Modeling - DeIft3D Alternatives Analysis
CPE will develop a three dimensional DeIft3D model that extends the length of Indian River County .
DeIft3D can model the complex interactions between offshore bathymetry , waves , tides , winds ,
currents , sediment transport, erosion and deposition . The model will be used to determine longshore
transport rates and if there are localized areas of wave focusing . As such , the model will assist in the
analysis of coastal processes and the development of specific beach management strategies .
Waves in DeIft3D are simulated using SWAN (Simulating Waves Nearshore) , an advanced wave
transformation model that incorporates most wave transformation processes , including breaking ,
shoaling , refraction , diffraction , and bottom friction . SWAN will transform waves from deepwater to
nearshore . Water levels , currents , sediment transport and bathymetric changes will be simulated using
DeIft31D- FLOW.
i . Model Grid Development
The model grid will extend from approximately 1 mile south of Sebastian Inlet to the southern boundary
of the County ( R- 119) . Sebastian Inlet has been excluded from this modeling effort due to the effort
that would be required to include inlet effects . The model would have to be expanded to include Indian
River Lagoon and significantly impact model setup and run time . The south County line has been
selected as the southern boundary of the model because no alternatives are expected to be evaluated
in this area . The beach at the south end of County (Sector 8) is stable to accretional based on previous
analyses , thus not requiring intervention . The updated shoreline and volumetric change analysis will
determine the validity of this assumption before finalizing the model domain .
Given the computational intensity required to model sediment transport within the entire model domain ,
nested grids will be created for three areas in which beach management strategies can be further
investigated . Three individual SWAN grids will be nested within the countywide SWAN grid to evaluate
wave transformation adjacent to coastal structures . Similarly , three DeIft3D - FLOW grids will be used
with domain decomposition in order to provide high level of detail of flows and morphology evolution in
the three project areas and maintain efficient simulation timescales . It is anticipated that these finer
grids will be focused in Sectors 3 , 5 , and 7 , where erosion is a chronic problem and fill and/or structural
solutions may be required . Sector 3 has historically suffered higher erosion rates though a beach and
dune restoration project was recently constructed and a repair to the project is in the permitting
process . Sector 1A has also experienced higher volumetric losses and shoreline retreat . However, this
erosional stress is recognized as being a function of the Sebastian Inlet and is being addressed by the
Sebastian Inlet District . No detailed evaluation is proposed in this area .
The bathymetric data sets will be utilized to depict the past and present bathymetry using the model
grids . Similarly , hardbottom surveys will be incorporated within the nested DeIft3D - FLOW grids .
Historic hardbottom will be imported through GIS maps provided by the County .
The model will be populated with available data . Nearshore bathymetric and topographic data will rely
upon the latest countywide survey . Offshore hardbottom will be modeled by including all available data
from previous County monitoring efforts to the 2013 hardbottom mapping effort in Sector 3 . Offshore
bathymetric data will be based on surveys conducted by NOAA or USGS . Wind , wave , and water level
measurements will be based on data collected by FIT , USACE and NOAA . No field work (hydrographic
surveying , wave and tide Gauge deployment) is proposed in support of the modeling effort . If it
is
determined that the available data is insufficient to develop an accurate model then collection of
additional data will be discussed with the County . The current assessment is that the available data
should be sufficient .
ii . Water Level & Current Calibration
The water level and current measurements collected will be utilized to calibrate the DeIft3DFLOW
model . Wave measurements and water levels previously collected will provide the offshore boundary
conditions for each calibration run . Water levels will provide the basis for evaluating the results of each
calibration run . Present bathymetries will be used as input, along with concurrent wind data from
NOAH . Delft3DFLOW and SWAN will be run simultaneously to resolve the influence of waves on the
a we
%&VAV
currents in the study area . The primary focus of the task will be the determination of the parameters
required to properly simulate the currents and water levels .
iii . Wave Transformation Calibration
Wave measurements and water levels will provide the offshore boundary conditions for each calibration
run . Available nearshore data will be used to calibrate the transformation of the waves . FIT collects
offshore data in 90 feet of water and closer in at 28 feet. This data will be used to calibrate the
wave
transformation . The purpose of this task will be the determination of the parameters required
to
properly estimate wave transformation .
iv . Calibration of Morphological Changes ( Erosion & Deposition )
Once the DeIft3DFLOW and SWAN models have been calibrated to simulate water levels , currents ,
and wave transformation , the Delft3DFLOW model will be calibrated to simulate morphological changes
(erosion & deposition) specific to this study . The basis for calibration will be the beach profile
and
bathymetric changes between at least one past condition and the present condition . The starting
bathymetry for each calibration run will be a past bathymetry . The present bathymetry or another past
bathymetry will provide the basis for evaluating the results . The model will be calibrated to match the
sediment budget developed through comparison of survey data .
Wave climate information will be utilized to determine the typical wave conditions during the
morphological change calibration period . The typical wave conditions will be schematized using
approximately 19 wave cases (CPE , 2009) combined with a representative tide to delineate the
offshore boundary conditions . A sufficient number of calibration runs will be performed to determine the
best combination of parameters to realistically simulate the beach profile changes in the entire study
area .
v . Modeling of Preliminary Alternatives
As discussed previously , a finer grid and the DELFT3D- FLOW module will be applied in Sectors 3 , 51
and 7 , where fill and structural solutions will likely be required to address chronic erosional problems .
The preliminary alternatives developed during the beach management strategy section will be
evaluated using the DeIft3D model . We will model two fill only scenarios and 4 structural solutions .
Each modeled alternative will be compared to a baseline condition in order to draw conclusions on the
expected result of implementing each scenario . Optimization of the structural layout is not proposed as
part of this effort . Instead , the concept will be evaluated to determine whether it is cost effective and
feasible , and estimate any downdrift or offshore impacts .
The alternatives analysis will incorporate up to 14 production runs . Each of the 7 alternatives
( no
action , 2 fill scenarios and 4 structural scenarios) , will be analyzed under a 10 -year storm event
and
then a 5-year simulation period .
vi . Model Results Reporting
A modeling report will be prepared as an appendix to the BPP . The report will document the data
collection , model setup , calibration , and specific results of the modeling effort. The information to be
included will be as follows :
• Model set- up and features .
• Grid development and characteristics .
• A summary of the bathymetric and wave data used in the modeling and analysis .
• An explanation of model calibration and application for the wave cases examined .
• The parameters and processes utilized in the DeIft3D modeling package .
The appendix will conform to FDEP' s guidelines for DeIft3D modeling studies .
Task 6 : Coastal Modeling = Vulnerability Analysis
CPE will perform a storm damage vulnerability analysis for Indian River County . The analysis will
utilize the Storm Induced Beach Change Model , SBEACH , developed by Larson and Kraus ( Larson
and Kraus , 1989) for the US Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE) . SBEACH simulates changes in the
beach profile that could result from coastal storms of varying intensity in terms of storm tide
levels ,
wave heights , wave periods , and storm duration . Information required as input to run the SBEACH
model includes the beach cross-section , the median sediment grain size , and the time histories of the
wave height , wave period , and water elevation . This information will be gathered from existing data
sources . No new collection of data is proposed . If it is determined that the available data is insufficient
to develop an accurate model then collection of additional data will be discussed with the County. The
current assessment is that the available data should be sufficient .
CPE will develop a suite of storms for 4 different return intervals ( 5 -years , 10-years , 20-years , and 30-
years) . Each return interval will have 6 distinct storms . Each of the storms will have one characteristic
(wave height , peak wave period , or storm stage) that matches the value of the return interval for that
characteristic . The other characteristics will be scaled in relation to the scaling of the characteristic
intended to match the return interval . For example , if the maximum offshore wave height for a 5-year
storm event is 20 feet , then we would take an actual storm event that had a maximum wave height of
16 feet and increase all the storm characteristics by 25 % .
The model will be run for all 119 profile lines within the County . With 24 storm events per profile , a total
of 2 , 856 model runs will be performed .
The pre and post-storm profiles will be compared for each storm event and the most landward
reduction in profile height by 0 . 5 feet and 1 . 0 feet identified . This will be translated
to a plan view
location within a GIS map . Thus an area of expected " land loss" and expected damage can
be
estimated for each return interval . CPE will calculate the expected land loss and the associated land
value along the length of the County . CPE will include the expected damage costs on a structure by
structure basis if the County can provide , in GIS format , structure values and locations . It is beyond the
scope of this work to digitize the outline of each structure and match its value from County Property
records . This additional effort would provide a more accurate assessment of projected damage but is
unlikely to alter the overall findings of the analysis . If this is required , CPE can provide an additional
cost to develop this data suitable for incorporation into the analysis .
Task 7 : Storm Damage Reduction Analysis
The analysis of potential storm damages will be followed by an evaluation of the size of a beach fill that
would be required to eliminate the potential damage identified with a particular storm return interval
.
For example , if 5 structures in a given shoreline reach are identified as possibly being impacted
by a
storm with a 10-year return interval , SBEACH would be re- run to determine the size of a beach fill that
would be needed to eliminate that potential threat . This process will be repeated for each storm and
each reach for which potential damages are indicated . The outcome of this analysis will be a list
of
beach fill dimensions needed in each reach to eliminate storm damage threats to structures for every
storm return interval deemed to pose a potential threat .
The results of this analysis can be used to formulate a beach nourishment strategy that would seek to
equalize the magnitude of the storm damage risk for the entire County or at least reduce the risk to an
acceptable level . The determination of what constitutes an acceptable level of risk would depend on
priorities established by the County . This would likely be driven primarily by the cost of implementing a
storm damage reduction project . To assist in this determination , CPE will include a range of possible
construction costs for beach fill projects that would theoretically eliminate the risk of storm damage in
each reach for all the return interval storms included in the analysis . CPE will prioritize higher
probability of permitting projects in an effort to minimize costs to the County .
Task 8 % Recreational Benefit Analysis
Information regarding the usage of the beach , and by whom , is a critical aspect of developing a beach
management plan . A recreational benefit analysis , combined with the storm damage reduction
analysis , will assist the County in determining the economic viability of the various beach management
strategies . The State of Florida is starting to incorporate these types of analyses when determining
funding for various projects and the Chamber of Commerce can also use these studies to determine
the benefit of beaches on the overall economy .
The recreational benefit analysis will determine the recreational value of the County' s beaches . It is
developed by determining the average value of a day at the beach multiplied by the number of days
spent on average at the beach . The analysis will also investigate whether the beach goers are tourists
or residents .
Recreational benefits are difficult to define as use of the beach is free . Thus , the recreational benefit
must be defined by asking beach users what they would be willing to pay to visit the beach . While
access to the beach is free , there are associated costs such as food , fuel , and lodging . These
also
contribute to the value of the beach .
CPE will assist the County in developing the questionnaires . It is expected that the County will conduct
the surveys , which will be one week long and take place once in a summer month and once in a winter
month . This will avoid the daily variability in beach usage by including the weekend as well as seasonal
variability in the perceived value of the beach visit (tourists may deem the beach more valuable
in
MWAP
January than in July) . CPE recommends that the County coordinate with the lifeguards and determine
if they have any additional data that could be useful to the analysis , such as daily usage rates .
The
survey will include questions such as where the beach goer lives , if from out of town how long were
they staying , how they travelled to the beach , what they enjoyed most about the beach , the length of
each beach visit, how often they visited the beach , number of people in their party, daily expenditures
associated with visiting the beach , and age and income demographics . CPE will coordinate with the
crew administering the survey .
Task 9 : Economic Analysis
The storm damage reduction benefit analysis , recreational benefit analysis and cost of the beach
proposed beach strategies will be compiled to provide an overall economic analysis of the benefit of
preserving the County' s beaches . This analysis will be projected over a 30-year horizon .
The economic analysis will also include whether annual maintenance due to storm events is adequately
addressed in the long term analysis . While average storm events will be included in the longer term
cost and benefit analysis and projects are designed to withstand these , events such as Hurricane
Sandy, may require the County to access contingency or reserve funds . Data supplied by the County
will be used to determine if annual maintenance within the long term plan is sufficient to address above
average storm seasons .
Task 10 : Funding Alternatives
CPE will assist the County in evaluating potential funding options . A discussion of potential funding
options will be included in the BPP , including local , State and Federal funding options . A brief
discussion of potential local funding options such as a Municipal Services Benefit Unit ( MSBU) ,
Municipal Services Taxing Unit ( MSTU ) , Erosion Prevention District ( EPD) , Independent or Dependent
Special Taxing Districts or parking fees will be included . A 10-year funding strategy will be included in
this section . This will include an estimate of proposed construction costs along with monitoring costs .
Task 11 : Implications of Sea Level Rise
Sea level rise is becoming a more prominent public concern . A section of the BPP will be dedicated to
discussing sea level rise as it relates to the management strategies and how the County can include
sea level rise in their planning efforts . This discussion will be restricted to the impacts of sea level rise
on the proposed beach management strategies . Impacts of sea level rise to infrastructure close to the
beach will be included in the vulnerability analysis . A broader discussion on how sea level rise could
affect drainage , water supply , etc . is beyond the scope of this effort .
Task 12 : Memorandum of Understanding with Sebastian Inlet District
Relative to future management strategies for Sectors 1 , 2 and 3 , County staff include the Memorandum
of Understanding ( MOU ) between the County and the Sebastian Inlet District in the updated Beach
Preservation Plan .
Task 13 : Plan Formulation and Deliverables
Based on the above tasks ( 1 - 12) , CPE will prepare a Draft Beach Preservation Plan for County staff
review. The Plan will be consistent with FDEP Erosion Control Program guidelines , and maximize
potential for State funding for erosion control projects . The Plan will include sections describing :
1 ) The locally preferred alternatives consistent with Florida statutes for addressing or
abatement of beach erosion in each sector,
2) The necessary restoration and maintenance activities over the next ten years ,
3) A 10-year funding strategy , including post storm recovery budget recommendations .
CPE will review the Draft Plan with the County and make appropriate revisions as may be identified by
the County . CPE will meet with the Beach Committee to present the results of the above tasks (as
described in Task 2) .
CPE will incorporate revisions to the Draft Plan as may be identified and directed by the County . CPE
will assist the County staff in presenting the results of the study to the Board of County Commissioners ,
Following Board review and appropriate action , CPE will provide three ( 3) hard copies and one
( 1 )
electronic copy ( MS Word and PDF) of the Final BPP update .
Timeline
A draft schedule of main work and deliverables is provided in Table 1 . The schedule is based on
a
Notice to Proceed Date in September. However, the schedule is still achievable , barring any
unforeseen circumstances , if this date slides . The critical path item is the summer beach survey and
incorporation of that data into the economic analysis and draft BPP report .
Table 1 . Anticipated Project Schedule
Description Start Date Anticipated Completion
Date
Notice to Proceed Oct- 13
Update of Beach Conditions Oct- 13 Nov- 13
Planning Charette Nov- 13
Delft3D Calibration Oct- 13 Feb- 14
Delft3D Production Runs Feb- 14 Mar- 14
Delft3D Draft Report Mar- 14 Apr- 14
Vulnerability Analysis Nov- 13 Feb- 14
Storm Damage Reduction Analysis Feb- 14 Max- 14
Recreational Benefit Analysis Oct- 13 Jun- 14
Economic Analysis Mar- 14 Jun- 14
Draft BPP Report Jul.44
Comment Period Jul- 14 Aug- 14
Final BPP Report Sep- 14
n&WAkU
Cost
The cost for development of the BPP is a lump sum cost of $ 199 , 953 . 00 . A breakdown of the hours
and expenses to develop these costs is attached . All work will be performed follow the provisions of
the Professional Coastal Engineering Services Agreement , dated March 19 , 2013 , between Indian
River County and Coastal Planning & Engineering , A CB& I company .
Summary
We appreciate the opportunity to work with Indian River County on this effort and recognize the
importance of the Beach Preservation Plan for the future of Indian River County' s beaches . It
is
proposed to complete this work within 1 year of issuance of a notice to proceed . The cost of the work is
a lump sum of $ 199 , 953 . 00 .
Sincerely
don Thomson
Vice President
Coastal Planning & Engineering , Inc .
Please Reply To : Gordon Thomson
Phone : 561 . 361 . 3147
& Mail Address : Gordon . ThomsoncaCBI . com
cc : Tom Campbell , CPE
David Swigler, CPE
Tom Pierro , CPE
Sheri Dindial , CPE
Ann Range , CB& I
F :\Marketing\_Proposals\Florida Counties\Indian River\2012 Indian River County\WO#3 - Beach Preservation Plan\Proposal - Gray -
Work Order #3 - Beach Preservation Plan - 10-9- 13.docx
COST ESTIMATE FOR
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BEACH PRESERVATION PLAN
WORK ORDER #3
August 27 , 2013
Rev October 9 , 2013
PO4
0
EXHIBIT 2
TABLE 2 - SUMMARY OF COSTS
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BEACH PRESERVATION PLAN
WORK ORDER #3
TASK DESCRIPTION Task Order Cost
1 UPDATE OF BEACH CONDITIONS $ 17 , 398
2 PUBLIC MEETINGS $8 , 516
3 SECTOR BOUNDARIES AND BEACH MGMT STRATEGIES $20 , 198
4 PUBLIC ACCESS INVENTORY $ 19583
5 COASTAL MODELING - DELFT31) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS $ 1027624
6 COASTAL MODELING = VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS $30 , 296
7 STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION ANALYSIS $81591
8 RECREATIONAL BENEFIT ANALYSIS $39314
9 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS $3 , 784
10 FUNDING ALTERANTIVES $2 , 568
11 IMPLICATIONS OF SEA LEVEL RISE $ 1 , 081
MAXIMUM WORK ORDER COST $ 199 , 953
Cost Breakdown - WO#3 - 8-27- 13 .xis