HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-044 V
0 3 , 0
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
BEACH PRESERVATION PLAN
ENGINEERING DESIGN & PERMITTING
AMENDMENT NO, 4 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
DIAL CORDY AND ASSOCIATES , INC. AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA .
This is an amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement (AGREEMENT)
dated January 30 , 2001 , between Dial Cordy and Associates , Inc . (CONSULTANT) and Indian River
County (COUNTY) . This amendment addresses changes in "Section III - Scope of Services" and
"Section V - Compensation " of the Agreement.
Amendment Description
This Amendment includes the following changes to "Section III - Scope of Services" and
"Section V — Compensation " of the Agreement :
SECTION III
The CONSULTANT shall complete the additional scope of service items in accordance with
tasks described in Exhibit "A" .
SECTION V is being revised in response to the Section III changes . The charges associated with the
change in project scope are in accordance with Exhibit "A" .
The section of the original AGREEMENT entitled "Section V — Compensation" shall be
revised to include compensation due the CONSULTANT as outlined in Exhibit "A" .
This AGREEMENT is hereby amended as specifically set forth herein . All other sections of
the AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect, and are incorporated herein .
This Amendment No . 4 to the AGREEMENT regardless of where executed, shall be
governed by and construed by the laws of the State of Florida.
C:\DOCUME- 1 \jason\L.00ALS- 1 \Temp\Dial Amendment 4 Agreement.doc
1
In witness whereof the parties have executed this Amendment this day of
2003 .
DIAL CORDY AND ASSOCIATES , INC . INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
490 OSCEOLA AVE . BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION
JACKSONVILLE BEACH, FLORIDA
By d B
Y
R. Steve Dial, President Kenneth R. Ma Chairman
rtness : Attest . �"� ,
Jeffery K. Barton, Clerk of Court
WITNES
o aFerin � February 1 8 , 2003
place of witnesses )
APPROVED : Indian River County Approved Date
1 _ Administration
C n Administrator Budget (/ 63
Legal
2y
Risk Management
Public Works ( J G
Coastal Eng.
L:\lobs-Jax\451 -500\01 -456\FromGorham\DialAmendment4Agreement2- 10-03 .doe
2
EXHIBIT "A"
Scope of Service and Project Costing
Amendment Number 1 to the Biological Monitoring Plan
Sectors 1 &2 Beach Restoration Project dated January 31 , 2003
AMENDMENT NUMBER 1
TO THE BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PLAN
SECTORS 1 &2 BEACH RESTORATION PROJECT
January 31 , 2003
This Amendment to the final Biological Monitoring Plan dated October 2002 for the Indian River County
Sectors 1 &2 beach restoration project (FDEP Permit #0166929-0014C) makes the following modifications
to the document:
Section 3 . 1 Nearshore Hardbottom Monitoring
1 . All tasks identified in this section will be conducted in the winter season prior to project construction
and semi-annually thereafter. Winter sampling will be conducted in the period from November
through February and summer sampling will be conducted in the period from June through August.
The monitoring data shall be collected as close as practical to the same dates each year. There will be
a total of six (6) monitoring events as follows:
Winter 2002-2003
Summer 2003
Winter 2003-2004
Summer 2004
Winter 2004-2005
Summer 2005
2. Three additional transects will be added to the six proposed in the Monitoring Plan, for a total of nine
transects. Anew transect will be established at R49, which in conjunction with the existing transect
at R-22 will be designated as downdrift transects. The existing transect at R-25 and two additional
transects at R33 and R-34 will be designated as control transects. The additional transects will be
sampled on the same schedule as the other transects, with the exception that the initial sampling of
these additional transects will occur concurrent with project construction.
Section 3 . 1 . 1 Sessile Reef Biota
3 . In conjunction with the qualitative videography to be collected along each of the transects, video
footage will be collected in a manner that will allow for quantitative measurement of percent cover of
reef biota. On each transect, two twenty-meter (20 m) segments in the vicinity of the photoquadrat
stations will be sampled by the following technique:
• The observer will swim at a constant elevation of 45 to 50 cm above the substrate and film
vertically while swimming at a very slow rate of forward progress along the full extent of the
20 m segment
• The resulting video images will be analyzed digitally to provide estimates of percent cover of
algae and total percent cover.
A revised Plan reflecting the above changes (which will include revisions to the report text, tables and
figures where appropriate) will be provided to the Bureau of Beaches and Wetland Resources on or before
Friday, February 14, 2003 .
Indian River County Sectors 1 -2 Biological Monitoring Amendment 1
2003 Summer 2003 Summer 2004 Summer 2005
Winter 2003/2004 Winter 2004/2005
Establishment of Biological Monitoring Biological Monitoring and Biological Monitoring and
Additional Transects at and Report Report Report
R- 191 R-331 R-34
Task 1 17,500 Task 1 17,500 Task 1 17 , 500
Task 2a14,000 Task 2a 39 ,000 Task 2a 39,000
Task 2b 21500 Task 2b 71000 Task 2b 71000
Task 2c 5,000 Task 2c 11 ,000 Task 2c 11 ,000
Task 3 51000 Task 3 51000 Task 3 51000
Totals 21 , 500 79,500 790500 221500
PROJECT TOTAL 203 ,000
2003 (Pre-Con) 2003 2004 2005
Task 1 . Additional Data Task 1 . Additional Data Task 1 . Additional Data
Collection and Analysis Collection and Analysis Collection and Analysis
Summer 2003 (Three Summer 2004 (Three Summer 2005 (Three
additional transects, and additional transects, and additional transects, and
additional video work) additional video work) additional video work)
Task 2a. Field Survey Task 2a. Field Survey Task 2a. Field Survey rr
Pre-Construction Survey Winter 2004 (fixed quadrat Winter 2005 (fixed quadrat
(install steel rods , select photography, fish census) photography, fish census)
stations/GPS , biological ,
Standing crop scraping (9 Standing crop scraping (27 Standing crop scraping (27
stations @ pre events) stations @ post events) stations @ post events)
Task 2b. Laboratory Analysis Task 2b. Laboratory Task 2b. Laboratory Analysis
(taxonomic identification and Analysis (taxonomic (taxonomic identification and
dry weight -pre) identification and dry weight dry weight -post)
Task 2c. Data and Task 2c. Data and Task 2c. Data and
Photographic Analysis - Pre Photographic Analysis Photographic Analysis
construction
Task 3 Additional report Task 3 Additional report Task 3 Additional report
Preparation Preparation Preparation
BIOLOGICAL MONITORING PLAN
INDIAN RIVER COUNTY
SECTORS 1&2 BEACH RESTORATION PROJECT
I
I
Prepared by:
Indian River County Public Works Department
Coastal Engineering Division
Vero Beach, Florida
I and
Applied Technology and Management, Inc.
West Palm Beach, Florida
IOctober 2002
Final
400 Australia Avenue, Suite 855
Applied Technology and Management, Inc . West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
561-659-0041
r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Indian River County has filed a Joint Coastal Permit application with the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U. S . Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) to construct a beach restoration project along 13 ,280 feet of County shoreline,
identified in project documents as Sectors 1 & 2 (Applied Technology and Management,
Inc . , 2001 ) . The Biological Monitoring Plan (Plan) includes provisions for monitoring
and impact assessment of the project on marine turtle nesting, marine turtle foraging, and
nearshore reef habitats . A section on physical monitoring of project impacts with the
potential to affect biological resources (i. e. , turbidity, sand compaction, and beach scarp
formation) is also included.
The Plan is divided into sections addressing Onshore, Nearshore, and Offshore
Monitoring. Onshore Monitoring includes marine turtle nesting surveys , sediment
compaction measurements, and escarpment formation monitoring. Included in Nearshore
Monitoring are assessments of the extent, condition and biota of nearshore hardbottom
reefs, studies of marine turtle foraging habitat utilization, and turbidity monitoring during
project construction. Offshore Monitoring consists of turbidity monitoring in the vicinity
of the borrow area background and compliance stations during active dredging associated
with the project construction.
The Plan includes a proposed reporting schedule, complete with a tabular summary of the
specific monitoring activity, frequency of occurrence, the number of stations, and
variables measured with each event. For transect monitoring, the orientation, length and
location of the transects are additionally provided in both tabular and graphic format.
Finally, the Plan references relevant literature utilized in the development of specific
elements of the Plan.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
■
EXECUTIVESUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
1 . 0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 . 0 ONSHORE MONITORING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
2 . 1 Sediment Compaction Monitoring" . , 000 6 " o . . . . . . I 10 a a 0 04
2 . 2 Escarpment Formation Monitoring " , , , , ,
2 . 3 Marine Turtle Nesting Morutoring. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 . 0 NEARSHORE MONITORING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3 . 1 Nearshore Hardbottom Monitoring. , ' . . . . . . . . . . , , , , , ,
3 . 1 . 1 Sessile Reef Biota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3 . 1 .2 Fish Population Censusing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 13
3 .2 Marine Turtle Foraging Habitat Monitonn . . . . 13
3 . 2 . 1 Netting Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3 .2 .2 Nearshore Transect Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 14
3 . 3 Nearshore Turbidity Monitoring , . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 18
3 .4 Other Nearshore Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3 . 4 . 1 Dredge Pipeline Corridor Monitoring . , ' . . . . . . , , , . " . . . . . . . .
3 . 4 . 2 Toe of Fill Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4 . 0 OFFSHORE MONITORING . . * * ,
5 . 0 REPORTING . . 1 4 1 1 IS * I * * * *
LITERATURECITED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
ii � .
' LIST OF FIGURES
' Figure 1 . Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 000 . 9 . . . . . . . . a a a 0 a a 0 0 0 a . . . . . . 2
Figure 2 . Sediment Compaction Monitoring Transect Locations . . . . .
' Figure 3 . Nearshore Hardbottom Monitoring Transect Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure 4 . Marine Turtle Nearshore Monitoring Transect Locations ( 1 of 3 ) , 0 1 1 6 v 0 1 0 9 a 6 0 00 D 6 0 a 0 0 15
Figure 4 . Marine Turtle Nearshore Monitoring Transect Locations (2 of 3 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Figure 4 . Marine Turtle Nearshore Monitoring Transect Locations (3 of 3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Figure 5 . Proposed Pipeline Corridor Location Map19
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 . FDEP Reference Monument Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
I Table 2 . Summary of Monitoring Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
I
i
1 . 0 INTRODUCTION
IIndian River County has filed a Joint Coastal Permit application with the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the U. S . Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) to construct a beach restoration project along 13 ,280 feet of County shoreline,
identified in project documents as Sectors 1 & 2 (Applied Technology and Management,
Inc . , 2001 )(Figure 1 ) . The Biological Monitoring Plan includes provisions for monitoring
and impact assessment of the project on marine turtle nesting, foraging, and nearshore
reef habitats . A section on physical monitoring of project impacts with the potential to
affect biological resources (i. e . , turbidity, sand compaction, and beach scarp formation) is
also included.
Elements in this plan include physical monitoring of sand compaction, scarp formation,
Iand turbidity. The plan also contains marine turtle monitoring, including both nesting and
hatching success and evaluations of foraging habitat utilization. Nearshore reef
monitoring will include assessments of both sessile reef fauna and fish communities.
Locations for monitoring activities proposed in this plan are referenced to FDEP
reference monuments, the locations of which are provided in Table 1 .
The plan is divided into sections on Onshore Monitoring, Nearshore Monitoring, and
Offshore Monitoring. Onshore monitoring includes marine turtle nesting surveys,
sediment compaction monitoring, and escarpment formation monitoring . Included in
Nearshore Monitoring are efforts to determine the extent, condition and biota of
nearshore hardbottom reefs, monitoring along the Toe of Fill (TOF) and pipeline
corridor(s), studies of marine turtle foraging habitat utilization, and turbidity monitoring
during project construction. Offshore monitoring consists of turbidity monitoring in the
vicinity of the borrow area during construction.
I
I
I
1
1
NBar soft (Cl
{ :7•�
Bfl�-K''a�
{}gt� �� y SeTwa�i'ax Inlet ATLANTIC
0 3000 RFs _ = � • OCEAN
Scale in Feet ,
- - - - - - - - flaIeTN�I�1 (`(r- - - - - - - YNs t �
R .
✓ . •7,
4 Ccconot Point ' d ?
!'7.
IF
E: ChcCls Doli
r Ra O5
look
� , .
Res ;� SECTORS 1 & 2
', .V `• D `
T Py%, �'•-, �� R4 � ,''r . PROJECT LIMITS `
1:L•.
, ?s RAOIF \ .
�'
` y,
Y$
V.
Y F.5l w "i4E
-- — — ..
,.'IF \`?4 t••+, _ s New- Cu `� wk:.
' \ I't
R-04 i " yam
O o
NIP
.. NT
00 \ R-76
r-y
31 S - ' hi�.i �op it 7Y
a T '"
✓✓, Y �•
w ` it ` `' ' ' \c �, S r� Black Point
_ ♦ n , \ `; ';^r .. a y � v slo Not•llffb>t +'•.
ViIF
C
,
,�'" Yy„> i.t•-.Yv+,, r,- Southt > Hole F> ,M.iw Island k .FSebastanxlr
_
Y ' T
U OtfCb k ni 6 ` y `I 4� �` tl . ' �'
_ Z.. ? t ! „ �o Uig R ,: Y . ' L1.." �.S�it -i1i 'e et i , '.L✓• } iY11,
Roseate Island.
SFor' i• \1 . o' i!!:I r 'S' CoRsfv Hok moi '"3• ��1 QL''°'
Vi / ' - �PII{na j^0 •Y �•v�;t; fw^y t ., ,. ,� ', y $�. ' �' •.-� 1
1 �!
pip =
0 -- - LEGEND - - --- - - - Fort (C)4 t 4 Rlr ij } ; i R•�
i r f R' x,f •. e y
, X90• Green Point { I ; ° ). ` , - '
R-1MONUMENT LOCATION ' ' "t ' ` , \ IF
SECTION: 21 , 28 , 33 r ' <, ^ " t ' 9
EL
TOWNSHIP 30 SOUTH
RANGE 39 EAST SvrattPoint _ III Imp
10 C ..
° SECTION : 3 a ,- v
TIF
OWNSHIP 31 SOUTH a Run (r) Egret Islands N.
/ , „ A Bird`s. Ary _ . \
J' RANGE 39 EAST , , .:; ): ! R• \ (3
)' I SOURCE USGS QUADRANGLE _ — - _ 'o Roosevelt �\ \ , �
ci 'SEBASTIAN, FLORIDAOFF
• Island , p MY
Figure 1
Indian River County Sectors 1 & 2 Biological Monitoring Plan
"
Location Mop ' `
Table 1 . FDEP Reference Monument Locations
Monument Northing Easting Elevation NGVD Profile Azimuth
NAD 27 (feet) NAD 27 (feet) (feet) (degrees)
R- 1 1281429 .96 678540 .39 6. 99 700
R- 1 . 5 1281018 .54 678842 .77 10. 77 700
R-2 1280559 .21 679013 .45 6.38 700
R-2 . 5 1280156.01 679318 .38 14 .08 700
R-3 1279687 .43 679444 .28 10.22 700
R-3 .5 1279266.28 679730.39 16. 99 700
R-4 1278781 .68 679839 .43 6 .55 700
R-4 . 5 1278380 .23 680144 . 51 14 . 34 700
R-5 1277911 . 55 680255 . 51 8 . 83 700
R-5 . 5 1277473 .23 680569 . 51 11 .96 700
R-6 1276994. 13 680769 . 86 9. 54 700
R-6 . 5 1276559 .49 680944 .58 4 .44 700
R-7 1276125 .45 681120 . 54 5 . 23 700
R-7 . 5 1275663 . 04 681431 .54 7. 87 700
R-8 1275157 .30 681621 . 93 5 .25 700
R-8 . 5 1274769.96 681901 .31 10.49 700
R-9 1274348 .66 682087 .77 6 . 81 700
R-9 . 5 1273864 . 78 682330 .47 8 . 72 700
R- 10 1273375 .51 682554 .84 8 .98 700
R- 10 . 6 1272800.28 682841 .08 15 .77 700
T- 11 1272378 .25 682980. 86 6.73 700
R- 11 . 5 1272023 .79 683179 . 80 7 .96 700
R- 12 1271669 .27 683379 . 88 9.33 700
T- 12 . 5 1271213 .28 683592 .39 12.79 700
T- 13 1270751 .32 683787 . 72 8 .08 700
R- 13 .5 1270317 . 19 684023 .26 13 . 11 700
R- 14 1269867 . 84 684217.36 7.35 700
R- 14 .5 1269423 .91 684418 .77 10. 17 700
R- 15 1268963 .22 684572 . 82 6.90 700
R- 15 . 5 1268542 . 51 684804 . 59 11 .03 700
T- 16 1268088 .59 684941 . 69 6. 53 700
R- 16 O/S 1268108 .98 684992 .56 12 . 17 700
R- 16 .5 1267630.79 685165 . 95 10.2570°
T- 17 1267173 .32 685390 .40 9 . 85 700
R- 17 .5 1266729 .39 685610.02 11 .60 700
R- 18 1266292. 11 685848 .60 10. 61 700
R- 18 .5 1265827.75 686075 . 83 11 .94 700
R- 19 1265346.52 686255 .90 9.84 700
R- 19 . 5 1264926.64 686496 .37 9.21 700
R-20 1264479.84 686661 .52 9 .97 700
R-20 . 5 1264018 .91 686839 .42 12 .76 700
R-21 1263558 . 01 687017.24 9 .49 700
R-21 . 5 1263109 .02 687265 . 84 12 .49 700
R-22 1262659.93 687514 . 41 9 .59 700
R-22 O/S 1262614 .72 687415 .41 13 .98 700
11-22 . 5 1262187 .06 687703 .49 11 .26 700
R-23 1261724 .37 687920 . 80 9.90 700
R-23 . 5 1261268 .35 688124 . 59 9. 63 700
R-24 1260812.52 688328 .58 13 .20 700
R-24 . 5 1260308 .78 688575 . 18 12 .02 700
11-25 1 1259803 .80 688815 . 67 11 .60 700
R-25 . 5 1259364.96 689009 . 63 12 .32 700
R-26 1258924.09 689204 . 33 10 . 35 700
3
' 2 . 0 ONSHORE MONITORING
Included in this section are plans for monitoring two physical attributes of the
renourished beach that affect marine turtle nesting, sediment compaction and escarpment
formation. Monitoring for compaction and escarpment formation will be conducted in
I accordance with the terms and conditions of the U. S . Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)
Biological Opinion, and will include three years of post-construction monitoring. Also
included are proposed provisions for monitoring and evaluating the effects of the
proposed project on marine turtle nesting levels and reproductive success .
2 . 1 Sediment Compaction Monitoring
Sediment compaction monitoring will be conducted in accordance with the conditions
contained in DEP permit No . 0166929-001 -JC and the USFWS Biological Opinion
issued for this project. Immediately following the completion of construction; the
contractor will be required to till the entire area of fill to a depth of 36 inches , avoiding
any sea turtle nests that may have been marked for avoidance . Prior to March 1 of the
Ifollowing two years, the protocol outlined below will be followed.
Sediment shearing resistance (compaction) [see Nelson, et al . ( 1987) for review] will be
Imeasured with a Florida Department of Transportation proving ring penetrometer fitted
with a 0 . 2 square inch cone. Compaction will be recorded as the force in pounds per
square inch (PSI) required to penetrate 15 cm of sediment with the application of a steady
pressure. The protocol for compaction monitoring shall be mutually agreeable to FDEP ,
USFWS , the Florida Fish and Wildlife . Conservation Commission (FWC) , and the
County. At a minimum, the protocol will include the following measures :
I Compaction sampling stations shall be located at 500-foot intervals along project
the ' ect
area. One station shall be at the seaward edge of the dune/bulkhead line (when material
' is placed in this area) and one station shall be midway between the dune line and the high
water line (normal wrack line) .
IAt each station, the cone penetrometer shall be pushed to a depth of 6 , 12 , and 18 inches
three times (three replicates) . Material may be removed from the hole if necessary to
I ensure accurate readings of successive levels of sediment. The penetrometer may need to
be reset between pushes , especially if sediment layering exists . Layers of highly compact
material may lay over less compact layers . Replicates shall be located as close to each
I other as possible, without interacting with the previous hole and/or disturbed sediments .
The three replicate compaction values for each depth shall be averaged to produce final
values for each depth at each station. Reports shall include all 18 values for each transect
line , and the final 6 averaged compaction values .
If mean sand compaction values at any depth exceed 500 PSI in two or more adjacent
stations in any project sector, tilling will be undertaken (outside the nesting season and
following consultation with regulatory agencies) to reduce compaction levels . If values
exceeding 500 psi are distributed throughout the project area but in no case do those
4
values exist at two adjacent stations at the same depth, then consultation with the FWC
shall be required to determine if tilling is required. If a few values exceeding 500 psi are
present randomly within the project area, tilling shall not be required .
A summary of all proposed monitoring efforts to be conducted, described above and in
further detail herein, is provided as Table 2 . The locations of the sediment compaction
monitoring transects are shown in Figure 2 .
5
Table 2 . Summary of Monitoring Efforts
ACTIVITY FREQUENCY TRANSECT TRANSECT TRANSECT # OF VARIABLE (S)
r ORIENTATION LENGTH LOCATIONS STATIONS MEASURED
Sediment Every 500 feet 2 per
Compaction Annual Shore Variable — R4 to R- 17 Transect, Compaction
Post- Dune Crest 3 Replicates
(Section 2 . 1 )
Monitoring Construction Perpendicular To MHW at 3 Depths (PSI)
p
er
Escarpment Annual Post- Scarp Height
1 Formation Construction, None None (Inches)
Weekl m(Section 2 .2) y (Continuous)
nestinLy season
Marine Turtle Project: Emergences,
Nesting Annual Post- None None R-5 to R- 17 Continuous Nests,
Monitoring Construction (Continuous) Control: Reproductive
Section 2 .3 R-22 to R-26 success
Sessile Reef Annual Pre- Project:
Biota Shore R418, 12116 3 per Species
(Section and Post- Perpendicular 2000 feet Control: transect richness,
3 . 1 . 1 Construction R-22125 Percent cover
Reef Annual Pre- Project:
Condition and Post- Shore 2000 feet R498, 12116 Continuous Qualitative
Video Construction Perpendicular Control: video
R-22,25
Fish Project:
Population Annual Pre- Shore R-B, 12, 16 3 per Species
Perpendicular Control: transect
I Censusing and Post- 2000 feet richness and
(Section Construction onroabundances
3 . 1 .2) R-22,25
Marine Turtle
Netting Annual Post- Species
Studies Construction None None R- 11 to R- 19 None composition,
(Section CpUE
3 .2 . 1
Marine Turtle
Nearshore Semi-Annual Shore Parallel R- 10 to R-20, Species
Transect pre- and Post- At 300, 600, and 3 Kilometers R-62 to R-72, Continuous Composition,
Construction 1200 feet R- 109 to R- Relative
(Section truction offshore 119 Abundance
3 .2 .2
Turbidity During
Monitoring Construction None None TBD TBD Turbidity
Section 3 .3 (NTS
Dredge
Pipeline Pre- and Post- Shore Length of Along Pipeline Continuous Qualitative
Corridor Construction Perpendicular Pipeline Corridor Video
Monitoring
6 ETOF To First R-5 6 7 8 9
IMonitoring Post- Shore Position of
(Section Construction Perpendicular Exposed 109 11 , 12, 132 At ETOF ETOF
3 .4 .2) Hardbottom 145 152 16, 17
6
IffAURWArAWN
1 � tl
F
en � t �RY.+d1.*•.
z '
bt YS J;
L .+'i15
F t 9 } 1
� ya'rf 3 ' '� A>� 1�+ is ' I I I I
d.
It Vk
It4 ✓frN 4
';XTV1 3It
14 It.
'?�',fMl 'L }� � a-• i k xi" t Y
5 tV. i
- yI,Im
fl
Ij
`.ht a a Tzn' "W-"5r •�e�L AL $r St T �
p
! 7h + t �a a e f is ..Y�`yt'" r map a
17 l ♦ Y . c 31 ri `kA 6 PSIy "• ' b 5 -y
52 i '.itn 5 i t r; 1+T 4f � t } MyI.
...R-c!
VV...
f r k PiVf h e r I ' J 'q V(� SeJYIi
� xL � ;1 ' i t 3 ) ._ e s w r • • • • -
s5� �O V. i45 'It��' t j tt }'' :
it
u`' 1 3
jl-
t Cr
yr t t t 3 � I h 4 LA:a
i�y�
3F
1 "
," ¢,
y1
. ' ..' 4�•^p {� v + + t ; } +hv uhr"x
IV
tF�
4t3
jiTgys" 2 >,a�
u 6 a k '+y > } . v
4 . 1
1h`
r
r Y !III
+ +
5 J
IhAS*{ �
�T •. t j J s r Yy";
1 '
k 5V A6F
It
It
M
8g � �
FigureIndian River County Sectors 1 & 2 Biological Monitoring Plan � V ► 1
APPLEn 7Ec►n+aoor MAuuao�arr5 r►c
2 .2 Escarpment Formation Monitoring
Escarpment (scarp) formation will be visually monitored post-construction only, in the
project area. Immediately following the completion of construction, . the contractor will be
required to level all scarps occurring in the project area. Subsequent to construction,
Surveys for escarpment formation will be conducted according to the following protocol :
Visual surveys for escarpments along the beach fill area shall be made immediately after
completion of the beach nourishment project and prior to March 1 for the following three
years if placed sand still remains on the beach. All scarps shall be leveled or the beach
profile shall be reconfigured to minimize scarp formation. In addition, weekly surveys of
the project area shall be conducted during the two nesting seasons following completion
of fill placement as follows .
The number of escarpments and their location relative to DNR-DEP reference
monuments shall be recorded during each weekly survey and reported relative to the
length of the beach surveyed (e. g. , 50% scarps) . Notations on the height of these
escarpments shall be included (0 to 2 feet, 2 to 4 feet, and 4 feet or higher) as well as the
maximum height of all escarpments .
Escarpments that interfere with sea turtle nesting or that exceed 18 inches in height for a
distance of 100 feet shall be leveled to the natural beach contour by April 15 . Any
escarpment removal shall be reported relative to R-monument.
If weekly surveys during the marine turtle nesting season document subsequent
reformation of escarpments that exceed 18 inches in height for a distance of 100 feet, the
FWC shall be contacted immediately to determine the appropriate action to be taken.
Upon notification, the permittee shall level escarpments in accordance with mechanical
methods prescribed by the FWC .
2 . 3 Marine Turtle Nesting Monitoring
In accordance with conditions contained in DEP permit No . 0166929-001 -JC, nesting
monitoring will be conducted. Nesting levels, nesting success, and reproductive success
will be measured.
Marine turtle nesting studies will be conducted for three years post-construction. An
unambiguous assessment of project effects on sea turtle nesting requires both pre- and
post-project data as well as treatment and control data. This approach allows for project
effects to be more easily distinguished from natural background variability.
The Sector 1 & 2 project area is included in the Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission (FWCC) Index Nesting Beach Survey (INBS) program, as are adjacent
beaches that will provide , suitable control data. Therefore, there is reliable data for use as
controls, both pre- and post-project in Sectors 1 & 2 and inside Sector 1 & 2 versus INBS
8
segments outside the project area. For this reason, pre-construction monitoring and
monitoring of a separate control area will not be necessary for an assessment of the
effects of the project on nesting levels and nesting success . There is also sufficient hatch
success data available for the area to establish a baseline against which to evaluate
potential project effects on hatching success.
Changes in emergence and nesting levels, and nesting success (the proportion of
emergences that culminate in nests) will be assessed by daily nesting surveys of project
area beaches . Survey areas will be patrolled every morning during the nesting season,
and all crawls will be counted, identified to species, and classified as a nesting or non-
nesting emergence (Schroeder and Murphy in Eckert et al. , 1999) . Project area beach
segments will be divided into 1000-foot long survey zones referenced to FDEP beach
monuments . Starting and ending dates for surveying will be established so as to allow
direct comparisons with existing nesting survey data in the County. Nesting levels (nests
per 1000 feet) and nesting success (nests/total emergences) will be calculated separately
for each 1000 foot survey zone. Mean nesting success and mean nesting levels will be
statistically compared between pre- and post-construction years in project and control
areas using ANOVA. Calculations will be performed separately for each species, with the
understanding that green turtle and leatherback data may not be sufficient for statistical
analysis .
Reproductive success will be evaluated by examining the nest contents of a representative
sample of in-situ nests. All nest excavation and handling and release of live hatchlings
shall be in accordance with FWCC guidelines. Expected nesting levels will be used to
design a random selection method resulting in a minimum of 50 nests selected for
hatching success evaluation. Effort will be made to insure that samples are representative
of the entire beach and the entire nesting season. In evaluating reproductive success, nest
contents will be assigned to one of the following categories : hatched egg, unhatched egg,
pipped egg (live hatchling), pipped egg (dead hatchling) , live hatchling, and dead
hatchling. Hatching success will be calculated as the percentage of eggs from a clutch
producing hatchlings that successfully freed themselves from the egg [(hatched eggs/total
clutch size) x 100%] . Emerging success is the percentage of the clutch producing
hatchlings that successfully emerged from the nest { [hatched eggs — (live + dead
hatchlings remaining in nest) / total clutch size] x 100% } . Reproductive success indices
will be statistically compared to available control data using ANOVA to detect
significant differences among means in sample groups in both project and control areas .
In conjunction with daily turtle nesting surveys, we would suggest that USFWS and
FWCC consider relocation of turtle nests laid in areas of the restored beach that are
highly susceptible to being lost to erosion. As restored beaches equilibrate in the first
year following construction, nests laid in the seaward portions of the beach berm are very
vulnerable to being washed out. A recent comprehensive study of a beach restoration
project in Martin County (Ecological Associates, Inc. 1999) identified such erosional
losses as a major and easily preventable impact. Relocation would be restricted to the
first nesting season following construction in the project area, and only nests deemed
highly vulnerable would be relocated. All relocations will be conducted in accordance
9
with FWCC guidelines. Nests would be located to a nearbynatural beach area and hatch
tch
success data calculated on all relocated nests . The applicant would be willing to
undertake such a program at the request of the agencies.
3 .0 NEARSHORE MONITORING
Included in this Section are plans for monitoring and assessing the effects of the proposed
project on the nearshore environment. Nearshore hardbottom reefs will be monitored for
changes in both sessile reef biota and fish populations . Monitoring for potential effects of
the proposed project on the utilization of nearshore foraging habitats by marine turtles is
Ialso included, as is a program to provide data on the distribution and seasonality of
marine turtles in the nearshore environment countywide. Also included in this Section are
plans for the monitoring of turbidity levels in the project area during construction, as
turbidity is the primary physical parameter expected to impact marine habitats .
Monitoring to evaluate the extent of the Toe of Fill (TOF) as compared to predictions is
also included in this Section.
3 . 1 Nearshore Hardbottom Monitoring
IA monitoring program will be undertaken to determine possible effects of the project on
the sessile plant and animal communities of nearshore reefs and also the fish populations
that inhabit the reefs . Sampling will include pre- and post-construction monitoring in the
project areas and concurrent sampling of control sites . Monitoring will be conducted in
the summer following project construction and for two subsequent years, for a total of
three years of post-construction monitoring
3 . 1 . 1 Sessile Reef Biota
lSessile reef biota will be censused along four shore perpendicular transects in the project
area and two similar transects in an appropriate control area. Each transect will extend
2000 feet seaward from a FDEP beach monument along the established profile azimuths,
or past the offshore extent of nearshore reef habitat, whichever is less . Proposed locations
for nearshore hardbottom monitoring transects are shown in Table 2 and Figure 3 .
Three stations will be located on each transect. Stations will be located in reef habitat in
the inner, middle, and outer thirds of each transect. Each station will consist of two
permanent 0 . 5 square meter photoquadrats . Two steel pins will be driven into the rock at
each quadrat to precisely locate the quadrat frame, and photoquadrat sites will be
benchmarked using GPS equipment with sub-meter accuracy. The inner station will be
located in the vicinity of the predicted position of the ETOF in the project area transects,
and at an equivalent position in the control area transects . At least one station on each
will be located in each of the reef habitat types identified in the Environmental
Assessment. Additional stations will be added to transects if needed to represent all reef
habitat types .
10
IIn order to minimize confounding variables, an effort will be made to collect data in the
same month of each monitoring year. Project effects will be separated from naturally
occurring variation by concurrent sampling along control transects as outlined below .
Sampling will be conducted annually, including a pre-construction sample, a sample in
the summer immediately following construction, and for two subsequent summers .
Invertebrate and algal abundance will be evaluated from digital photography of each
quadrat. Species will be identified to the lowest practical taxon and ranked in order of
abundance. Superimposing a grid over the digital image and counting bare and colonized
grid squares or the use of a random-dot technique will assess overall percent cover
(Bohnsack, 1979) . A total of 24 photoquadrats will thus be used to characterize reef
I biota in the project area (two photo-quadrats per station, three stations per transect, four
} transects) . Twelve photoquadrats will be used to evaluate the area downdrift of the
project area (two photoquadrats per station, three stations per transect, two transects) .
Species richness, total percent cover, and community structure (rank orders of species
abundance) will be compared in the project area pre- and post-construction and between
project and control reef areas .
Additionally, the standing crop biomass of algae and invertebrates will be assessed at
each photoquadrat station on the same schedule as the photoquadrat assessment above. At
each station, a 1 Ox l Ocm plot will be identified and all materiel (Invertebrates, algae, and
sediment) scraped from the surface. This may be accomplished in the field or by
collection of an appropriate sized sample . The resulting materiel will then be sorted to the
highest taxonomic level practical and dried to a constant weight.
Measuring the relief at each of the photoquadrat stations will assess changes in vertical
relief possibly caused by sand movement. Measurements will be taken with a weighted
flexible tape from a point one meter shoreward of the quadrat benchmark to the surface
of the water and from the top of the reef structure at the benchmark to the surface of the
water, with the difference being the relief. The mean of five such measurements will be
used to assess changes in relief. Changes in relief at the control reef photoquadrat stations
will be assessed by the same method.
Concurrent with each photoquadrat sampling, underwater video footage will be collected
along the length of each transect. This footage will provide a qualitative overview of
conditions in both construction and control areas .
. 11
f L
�tu 11 q
Ir�p
LL
It
r]
1 t
Lj
' `yY'�x �yAAAe
15 . t Slrsi
�d . (1 yt4Wb
ttiay,Ff� r1
fl'� .p
tdk >
r3r4 � (t11
it
e 4b : tzr
tY 1
1191,
4\ Yt, Y Y iib
rr ? 1 t �yilh
t 3
- I
LLLL
iky
APpLEn TECHNOLOGY 6 MANAGEMEMr. INC
3 . 1 . 2 Fish Population Censusing
Fish population censuses will also be collected annually for three years post-construction
in project and control areas and will also include at least one pre-construction census . The
point-count method (Bohnsack and Bannerot 1986) will be used for fish assessment. This
method has the advantage of gathering quantitative data in a relatively short time in a
very repeatable pattern that is relatively insensitive to differences in habitat structure.
Each census will have duration of 5 minutes and a radius (the distance from the stationary
observer) of 10 feet. Four point counts will be collected in the vicinity of the
photoquadrat stations at R- 8 , R42, and R- 16 . A complete fish census will thus consist of
36 five-minute counts in the project area and 24 in the control area. All counts may be
lumped together to compare fish populations overall between the project and control
areas, or data may be separated by position along the transects (inner, middle, and outer)
to determine the offshore extent (if any) of project effects . Data from these types of
censuses are rarely normally distributed, so the Wilcoxon Rank-Sum or a similar
nonparametric test will be used for significance testing.
3 .2 Marine Turtle Foraging Habitat Monitoring
The effects of beach restoration projects on marine turtle foraging habitat have never
before been addressed, although foraging turtles and their habitat are widely distributed
in the nearshore environment. This section of the proposed Plan will directly address the
effects of the proposed project in Sectors 1 and 2 on , the abundance of juvenile green
turtles in the nearshore foraging habitat. It is further proposed to initiate directed
research to determine the distribution and abundance of foraging turtles throughout the
nearshore environment of the County.
3 . 2 . 1 Netting Studies
To directly assess the potential effects of beach restoration activities on turtles in
nearshore reef foraging habitats, the applicant will utilize the data that has been collected
by turtle researchers at the University of Central Florida (UCF) . UCF researchers have
been conducting netting for over a decade in the nearshore directly offshore from the
proposed Sector 1 and 2 project area. The extensive Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) data
they have collected since 1989 can serve as a baseline from which project effects can be
assessed. The UCF effort, despite the valuable data collected, has never had dedicated
funding. Indian River County proposes to fully fund the nearshore reef netting effort in
the summer following construction and in two subsequent summers and to provide
funding for data analysis and report preparation on the effects of the project on foraging
turtle CPUE .
13
•
3 .2 . 2 Nearshore Transect Surveys
Y
' Directed research efforts associated with these proposed projects have the potential to
answer basic questions about how turtles use nearshore reef habitats . Vessel based
transect surveys in the nearshore foraging habitat are proposed to gather data to address
two important questions : whether turtles, particularly juvenile green turtles, use nearshore
habitats year round; and how the density of turtles varies with distance from shore and at
various points along the Indian River County coastline.
I
Aerial surveys have been used to obtain information on the abundance and distribution of
turtles over relatively large areas and are appropriate for documenting seasonal variations
in population levels (Henwood and Epperly in Eckert et al. , 1999) (Epperly et al . , 1995) ,
On the relatively limited geographic scale of Indian River County, it is felt that an
analogous vessel based approach is adequate . This monitoring effort will employ
observers who will count surfacing turtles from a small boat. A semi -quantitative index,
sightings per vesseUkm, will be calculated for each species and compared between
seasons and areas.
Surveys will be conducted twice a year, generally in the spring and fall, and will include
one pre-construction survey. Surveys will be conducted in the year following
construction and for two subsequent years, for a total of one pre-construction survey and
six post-construction surveys. Surveys will include areas offshore of the Sectors 1 & 2
project area as well as areas offshore of the proposed Sectors 5 and 7 project areas.
Surveys outside the Sectors 1 &2 project area will serve as controls for this monitoring
plan, and will also serve as baseline data for the other project sectors when and if they are
constructed.
Three 3 -kilometer long study sites will be established and located in the north, central,
and southern areas of the County (Table 2 and Figure 4). Three shore parallel transects
will be established in each study site at distances of 300, 600, and 1200 feet offshore.
GPS waypoints at the north and south ends of each transect will establish a base course
that the helmsman will follow. A constant vessel speed will be maintained for all
surveys, verified by GPS track log. The vessel will be equipped with a spotting tower
capable of supporting two observers . One observer will look to port and the other to
starboard. Observers will record and identify to species any turtle they spot surfacing in
each lkm segment of each transect. The resulting mean sightings per vessel km will be
statistically compared by ANOVA to determine if there are any significant differences in
turtle sighting levels among seasons or among different distances from shore . In the
summer of 2001 , this technique was tested in cooperation with FWCC and University of
Central Florida researchers, and was found to be practical and capable of collecting
useful data.
A4
I I y" ) Yi 'xj F l
t': Y ♦ Y YK�ayyytt,II
IL
.' i '♦ 111 1. 1 11 t t h 4vG
J 'iz x ii Yrr Y' l
i r0 �br - �t � ',tysTis .
ell
yc k � s '3
l
le
etl
it
} 3
I ell
I.-. r+ Ii Y ,9y
F IL _
N ! '
r , fi
.fI-
1.1 4 : Y 3 , r 2 i ♦3 r
' » t r T i r c • ••
t J .1 101
at +da atil t � tY rr S �Rti
ll I
°a + + r I
I i n "',
ek
.., u } �/ � -. S. ➢00
111 14 11
01.
s r .. {r C i,ler A f
ell I
�`�I,
?; '�k1 i $ ♦ ifda5
FI
r I Ier
ell
V +� �izpy
hwjf x
ad + � ' i .Y i ♦ �v �t
"teIto
h( r a i P" I ell _, a �,
f .
. Lee
n Yt 3
• + 'let,
r !` J'
e el �f r 13'Lee,
' +ii Ya + fr. le I
54ti'.. a 7
• �+ 5 v / rI,ree,I4 tsh * di
R'6y «�'r k � Cvl^hi f t t G.JdrnyCya' .+ 9qq�,,
ry yf� y ' if i t��nx 4jrr � fell ell.
��+
hL
tell
&Lee nM 'Ilj, �erRg.}•CJI
i + o-ss P�ii a a fsRSotfLr; fV ' .
70 d-
I
• of
Indian • County SectorsBiological Monitoring • , . .. � , . .. I ...
Marine - Nearshore Monitoring Transect. - • • • APPLIED TECHNOLOGY 6 MANAGEMENT, INC
pt�' wY< P'� FfFr'%£ �ry sl
`� Sa�pi�� � � �n ilE � •
�ar s ,fi%6
3 "� rliL�.rtk,+tlr'E '�E-•�frNt �!`
t
x' k�
Tib f nMtt zr rx,
L �^ y � 9 (�
�gy qt! } S 54t tr to �•
It
� iMr j ILt F fjr Hx, tl !r'y frYF
to h }.kfir I 4 k,, . n �<ry�• 'ora f�>
S .rfi t z � ffkyf Y.i� " r ��.,")�'rt,,�, �•��,.
��'1S.i7ji°rtil$��,,��
Ifl9tI M'4
�!r' r a •'�i !"�k s at
�cx'n" l31
z z ° l5. Y to l i L}S! ynt 1?
y
� r Si r ! Y u4xc1P�II ��i £
It
It
t
i 4 ot,�
di It Yn
pp
krf
11
1 d � ✓ tl } $�,G,C M y �P,y. ��a
,Fs it ASF'
I Fy
I
Figure . - -Indian River County Sectors 1 2 Biological Monitoring Plan U ►
Morin Turtle o _ Monitoring TransectLocations APPLIED TECHNOLOGY 6 MANAGEMENT, INC
,
14,
pp
l � • � � •l YT\ C }
s '
\ r
r kel qf�M�'i.r.
i J r F - r ♦ ti�� Ng�T ebiy x
1 ,
1' ♦ ` :,rte.:. [. '4vxL , k l
t : �. . rSOUTH STUDY AREA
, •' \ y11p
r' yytlg xj r � t
r- N gwf ' r A'
1�+1+ ' _ • }/ h T� iFr `• ' �� ' e \u � BpW u. y4,YL f '���iX jFk
g � � ` � 5 x '4 iH•"S 3� 'aY`� 5
1? r'�ir \ 1 i ♦
IIPI
i+ }
1? aVyL�a;It 9 it
}{i !
-
G
t4 � a F
If �r
a+ t ri
Id
... Lk J�J I J .,Y7 � • 'Ys � 4a'w
� v f
1 {
's ; i a + 'i � ' . t tl� ♦,ate.
dq
G
0 1500
N
Scale in Feet
N
0
N
z
Figure 4 ( Sheet 3 of 3 )
Indian River County Sectors 1 & 2 Biological Monitoring Plan
Marine Turtle Nearshore Monitoring Transect Survey Locations ' " `
3 . 3 Nearshore Turbidity Monitoring
Turbidity monitoring will be conducted in accordance with Specific Condition 13 of DEP
permit No . 0166929-001 -JC for this project. Turbidity at background and compliance
station's at the borrow and beach nourishment sites will be measured by a portable
nephelometer that meets Environmental Protection Agency standards . Turbidity will be
measured from a boat using DGPS to accurately determine the position of sample points
relative to the borrow area and beach nourishment sites. Samples will be collected every
six hours during dredging, with all samples collected at mid-depth, with the compliance
stations collected inside the specified mixing zones within the densest portion of any
visible turbidity plume. In the event that turbidity exceeds 29 Nephelometric Turbidity
Units (NTUs) above background levels in either the beach or borrow area compliance
sites, construction activities will immediately cease until corrective measures have been
taken, and the turbidity has returned to acceptance levels .
Turbidity monitoring reports and maps shall be submitted to the Bureau of Beaches and
Wetland Resources weekly during construction. Also reported are permit number, date
and time of calibration, sample collection and sample analysis; water depth; sample
depth; DGPS position; weather conditions ; tidal stage; current direction; and wind
direction and velocity. Sampling locations, current direction, plume configuration and
the location of the dredge and discharge point(s) are to be documented on a map that will
accompany the Turbidity Monitoring Report.
The turbidity monitoring program above will be tasked to the contractor via the contract
documents for the project, and will be supervised by County Staff and the County' s
engineering consultant.
3 .4 Other Nearshore Monitoring
Other nearshore monitoring activities shall include video monitoring along the pipeline
corridor and monitoring to determine the as-built extent of the Toe Of Fill (TOF) .
3 .4. 1 Dredge Pipeline Corridor Monitoring
Limited monitoring will be conducted along the proposed dredge pipeline corridors to
assess the extent of any impacts to hardbottom communities attributable to the presence
of the pipelines (see Figure 5 for the proposed location) . Monitoring will consist of three
video transect swims along the entire extent of the proposed pipeline corridors, with
Positioning information integrated onto the videotape. The first video transect will be
conducted prior to the establishment of the pipeline to document existing conditions . The
second video transect will be conducted along the corridors with the pipeline in place to
document and delineate any areas of hardbottom being impacted, and the final video
transect will be conducted following the project to assess any impacts . Results of the
pipeline corridor monitoring will be included in the first annual Biological Monitoring
Report .
18
1; x
A kli `;
d s y
-
1
i ifdo
t
tI
5
Ego r ,f � u , s
+ . e • r „
�+ F �Ff rroJSi3 ^a { JJ �Z1.
.�C ''�yy!C. �J ° v J � l 16 J �r t vt r � ✓�
•7 .:: .rf o- k i 4Tr F,; L y �' 14fkyi id" n`
p p L - x i i 4✓u
nF y;
SM
rI If
OOFv{ f i�it NF
r !•5,yg ti �� x : " t � � rYA� �(
rip10,11
44 �
F S1j1' t3<y'
f LI i r�- Yui i{
14 ) �
�1Px ilz l r a 5'ai kµ- Fi{ rl wrYq
ti P sr .. J ti,. 9r
qO
add
rt - a ✓r , r f . � re t r '1e )jx ��,
, rI" $d IF0,1, -
i 3r r
{,''Efy{1 ° I Sa r }xflV air i' it
Or
wy ry o
2 }� r41 r { rd Or
did
a +
4i �F� �1 V w yxc
N r t Y •S { t?ra
t 4 F h 4µ t s 'W
� i1 Yr {2 z tt )Y y 1Jjn
It
f it si : I �rt n} ? ri {fir xr i r � r Ip
-.P Y
i'Ld 1 ,} `t r+ �' V t r} fry
Or
i4
Yi ko br IT,
e
ifOrk
' .0 I, . a isr t rr t r '
Yz
f�
I4v ' i { x q i° r
\\ 4 ,
t
r rF { r � Yi zr r dy° iII.V,
p [ i p r � ... A
4 1 r
r It )( ft F4# ts,ti
t 4 r h{
rOr
r y r g'- r• `
If I6'Ir
-r iln,, r fr r r r 4s, ?.a
{ yyh i ' t r Y
4. 7� dr
{ i1 ra ffG� � i 7� ' tr �411 4 v
01 L
#ir9cOr'Q1 ri ; 4J t ro � a �l s +
't r a c r i :.,L
i1a 6�
5 4Ir
:x n[- ir�rd xtu SX
' krd vL v S 1f r rx. � r
\ a 154.
Or
dr
Off
dr
q ", � F �� Jtai � : i 4u 3fy Yti
r
yv rt` l4 es �, r r n r ryt dp, m'rF
rn aS its, Y° kn + rr S ; . 5 r i it �:r idL'3i
Y w �•
1' Y 4r TR Sl
r u M Y
Or, I.yrf Fy m { u 4rIt
IndianFigu
- Biological . . u
Proposed • - - Corridor Location • • APPLED TECHNOLOGY A 1AANAGOWW, NC
i