TOWN OF PALM BEACH Town Manager s Office

Transcription

1 TOWN OF PALM BEACH Town Manager s Office SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING TENTATIVE- SUBJECT TO REVISION AGENDA THURSDAY, MARCH 22, :00 AM TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 360 SOUTH COUNTY ROAD WELCOME! The progress of this meeting may be monitored by visiting the Town s website ( and selecting Live Meeting Audio under the Your Government tab. If you have questions regarding that feature, please contact the Office of Information Systems (561) The audio recording of the meeting will appear within 24 hours after the conclusion of the meeting under Agendas, Minutes, and Audio. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL E. Llwyd Ecclestone, Chair Bobbie Lindsay Buck, Vice Chair Kane Baker, Shore Protection Board Member J. Patterson Cooper, Shore Protection Board Member Gerald Frank, Shore Protection Board Member Lee David Goldstein, Shore Protection Board Member Lewis Katz, Shore Protection Board Member III. IV. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF AGENDA V. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 23, 2012, MEETING VI. VII. COMMUNICATIONS FROM SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEMBERS COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS - 3 MINUTE LIMIT PLEASE Post Office Box 2029 * 360 South County Road * Palm Beach, Florida Telephone (561) * Facsimile (561) * townmanager@townofpalmbeach.com 1

2 VIII. IX. STAFF REPORT REGARDING BEACH MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT PROCESS AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF LAKE WORTH INLET [Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager] ADVANCED DESIGN ALTERNATIVES FOR PHIPPS OCEAN PARK (REACH 7) BEACH RESTORATION & STABILIZATION PROJECT [Michael Walther, P.E., Principal, Coastal Technology Corporation] X. UPDATE ON REACH 8 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT [Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator] XI. XII. XIII. XIV. PROPOSAL FOR REVIEW OF GROIN REHABILITATION PLAN [H. Paul Brazil, Director of Public Works] FLORIDA STATUTES CONSULTANTS COMPETITIVE NEGOTIATIONS ACT (CCNA) SELECTION PROCESS FOR COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS [Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager] SHORELINE CONDITION ASSESSMENT [Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator] TOPICS FOR APRIL 26, 2012, SPB MEETING [Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager] Proposals for Annual Biological and Physical Monitoring Services Offshore Dredging Technologies Overview Any Unfinished Business Before the Summer Break XV. Note: ADJOURNMENT Disabled persons who need an accommodation in order to participate in the Town Council Meeting are requested to contact the Town Manager s Office at or through the Florida Relay Service by dialing for voice callers or for TDD callers, at least two (2) working days before this meeting. 3/22/12, Shore Protection Board 2

3 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, I. CALL TO ORDER II. The meeting of the Shore Protection Board was called to order on Thursday, February 23, 2012, at 8:30 a.m. in Town Council Chambers. ROLL CALL The following members were present: Chairman E. Llwyd Ecclestone, Vice Chair Bobbie Lindsay Buck, Mr. Kane Baker, Mr. Pat Cooper, Mr. Gerald Frank, Mr. Lewis Katz, and Mr. Lee David Goldstein. III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Ecclestone led the Pledge of Allegiance. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Motion to approve the agenda was made by Board Member Frank, seconded by Board Member Goldstein, and unanimously approved. V. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 26, 2012, MEETING Board Member Frank asked that lines on page 2 of the minutes regarding the Sand Transfer Plant be omitted as he believed it was a misunderstanding of the question. Motion to approve the minutes of the January 26, 2012, meeting with the removal of lines on page 2 was made by Board Member Frank, seconded by Board Member Goldstein, and unanimously approved. VI. RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING THE SCOPE, COST, AND FUNDING OF THE TOWN S COASTAL PROGRAM [Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager] Larry Goldberg, 3360 South Ocean Boulevard, addressed the Board regarding the beach restoration program saying that some of the line items needed for shore protection were eliminated leaving a plan that had no protection, minimal protection, or dunes only, which doesn t provide shore protection. Allen Wyett, 1145 North Lake Way, spoke about the errors made in the past and suggested the Task Force create an experimental area using Bahamian sand. 3

4 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, Town Manager Peter Elwell stated that the plan that was being presented was a reasonable and viable approach based on history, work with the Shore Protection Board, and input from the community including Ms. Erickson. He spoke about the successful projects over the past twenty years. He reported that the beach was in better shape than two decades ago, but it was an ongoing effort and the work would never be done. Board Member Goldstein asked that the article in the Palm Beach Daily News on February 20, 2012, by William Kelly be entered into the record. Local governments efforts to fight erosion on Florida s beaches are hampered by a flawed regulatory system, Jeff Atwater, the state s chief financial officer, said Monday. The system is designed for failure, Atwater told a Palm Beach Civic Association audience at the Flagler Museum. There are far too many partners who have to be persuaded to agree on sand grain size, offshore dredge sites, impacts to nesting sea turtles and other environmental consequences, he said. Tougher mitigation standards can force local governments to spend millions of dollars to compensate for lost marine habitat, Atwater said. Local governments are required to undergo costly and lengthy reviews before they can obtain state and federal environmental permits required to fill beaches or install stand-trapping devices. In 2008, environmental groups mounted a legal challenge that resulted in the Florida Department of Environmental Protection s denial of a permit the Town of Palm Beach sought to nourish Reach 8 and protect coastal properties south of the Lake Worth Pier. The now is seeking state and federal permission for a more modest fill at Reach 8. Palm Beach County Commissioners have been trying to determine for years how best to safeguard county beaches, especially Singer Island, from rapid erosion. Sand has been dumped on Singer Island eight times during the past 11 years, but that is only a temporary solution. Faced with concerns over environmental impacts, commissioners have killed proposals to build rock breakwaters and a rock jetty to protect Singer Island. I am now convinced that we should let one agency be accountable for regulating coastal projects, Atwater said. When you have 15 agencies that are accountable, you get nothing. That s where we re at. If the beaches disappear, there will be no sea turtle nests to protect, he said. The end result should not be a sea wall from St. Augustine to Key West, Atwater said. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 2 of 4

5 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, The Town of Palm Beach has estimated its coastal plan will cost about $6 million annually over the next 10 years. The county has said its program costs $14 million a year. Both the town and county have historically relied on state and federal aid to help fund projects. But in today s tight budget climate, Town Manager Peter Elwell has said the town should no longer rely on state or federal aid when planning nourishments or other beach work. Atwater said more local governments are competing for scarce beach aid dollars. Atwater, R-North Palm Beach, is a former state representative and state senator who represented parts of Palm Beach and Broward counties. He was Florida Senate president from 2008 to 2010, when he was elected chief financial officer. Paul Brazil, Director of Public Works, reviewed the ten year plan by line number. He explained that the numbers were not sequential because the original numbering system was still in place. He further explained that unencumbered funds were money from the original budget that had not been spent or were not tied up in a purchase order. He reminded the Board that the majority of the plan was a planning document but the first column would be a recommendation to the Town Council for funding for the FY13 budget. Line item #4, Groin Rehabilitation (Reaches 2-6) - Board Member Goldstein suggested a budget be established to rehabilitate the existing groins where needed. Chair Ecclestone proposed the unencumbered $200,000 be utilized to get hard figures on the cost for permitting to be later conducted by Isiminger & Stubbs Engineering, Inc. He asked staff to come back at the next meeting with a proposal. Town Manager Elwell summarized the recommendation saying that a portion of the $200,000 unexpended under line item 4 would be used to do a detailed plan prioritizing the order of the groins, create drawings, and move into a permit process. He advised that the Board would need to program into the Plan the cost for implementing the rehabilitation program. Chair Ecclestone said that he would like to put $200,000 in the Plan for plans and permitting of the groins in the north end and $500,000 a year for rehabilitation of the groins in a format to be agreed upon. Motion was made by Board Member Goldstein and seconded by Board Member Baker to put the $200,000 unencumbered funds from line 4 back into the Plan for a detailed plan prioritizing the order of the groins, to create drawings, and move into the permitting process. Additionally, $500,000 a year would be added for rehabilitation of the groins. Board Member Cooper spoke about the need to hold the sand longer, the cost of groins, and mitigation issues. He said it was a balancing act and he would like a full discussion about groins and how it would help arrest the movement of sand. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 3 of 5

6 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, Vice Chair Lindsay Buck agreed. She stated that her understanding was that rehabbing the old straight groins would result in no additional significant protection but would primarily be a recreational benefit. She proposed getting a second opinion on rehabilitating the groins and suggested using the $200,000 to study the issue further. She expressed concern with putting $5 million in the Plan without a better understanding of the benefits of the metal groins. The motion was amended to eliminate the $500,000 a year for the rehabilitation work but include the $200,000 for the drawings, plans, a second opinion on rehabilitating the groins, and to submit an application to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Town Manager Elwell stated that staff could provide the phases of the work including the analytical work before the Board makes a commitment on the design and permitting. Board Member Cooper asked about privately owned groins. Town Manager Elwell answered that the Town could pursue a program to rehabilitate private groins but easements would be required from the property owners. The motion as amended was approved unanimously. Lines 12-15, Sand Transfer Plant Vice Chair Lindsay Buck commented that the budget included no money for Reach 2, which was the only section of beach which had historically lost volumetric levels of sand over time. She stated that the Town was depending upon a positive settlement with the Federal government to fund Phase 2 of the Sand Transfer Plant. Motion was made by Board Member Goldstein and seconded by Vice Chair Lindsay Buck that if the settlement with the Federal government was not positive, that funding for phase 2 of the Sand Transfer Plant would be added to the budget. Town Manager Elwell agreed that it was essential to the success of the program that the sand from the Inlet be bypassed successfully but cautioned about making a commitment in the Plan to something that was not known. He suggested that if the Town does not receive everything it was seeking in the litigation with the Federal government, that the Board then revisit what should be done. Chair Ecclestone stated that it was a bondable cost. Town Manager Elwell advised that there may be elements that are not bondable. The motion was amended to state that the Shore Protection Board would revisit the scope and cost of the Town s efforts to improve the effectiveness of sand bypassing at Lake Worth Inlet to the degree that may necessary if the Federal government does not provide all the funding and assistance that the Town is seeking through the on-going litigation. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 4 of 6

7 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, In response to a question from Chair Ecclestone, Mr. Brazil reported that the Town was approved for the permitting effort that would lead to a set of plans and would come back to the Shore Protection Board and Town Council for approval of the funds. Town Manager Elwell added that if any significant changes occur in the permitting process, the design and parameters of the plan would be brought back to the Board before the project was sent out to bid. A discussion followed. The motion as amended was unanimously approved. Line 18, Maint Dredge Sand Permitting Placement Extension Mr. Brazil explained that the permit was to extend the placement area that the Corps used when placing sand on the dry beach. He further explained that the issue was if the placement could be extended further south or to other areas of the Town. He said that the Town was trying to modify the Corps permit for disposal. Town Manager Elwell advised that staff would come back to the Board with the scope of the work and engagement of a consultant to spend the funds. In response to a question from Board Member Cooper, Town Manager Elwell stated that the Town would have to pay some incremental cost for the next major dredging effort. Line 19, Biological Monitoring (0.8 acre reef) Mr. Brazil reported that Rob Weber, Coastal Coordinator, spoke with the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and they agreed to do a trial with coral transplant, and it was successful. He said it was much less expensive than the traditional work that had been done and may set a precedent for the future. The Board commended Mr. Weber. Lines 24, 25 & 26, Reach 2 Dune Restoration Permitting Effort Mr. Brazil advised that these items were dropped from the Plan due to money issues. He said it was originally for a dune project in Reach 2, possibly with a truck haul. Vice Chair Lindsay Buck stated that where the beach is narrow, which is most of Reach 2, the dune would be washed away. She further stated that later, when a more effective bypassing plan is put together, the Board could take another look at a project and as the beach builds up in front of the seawalls, it would be logical to build dunes. Line 29, Reach 3/4 (Mid-Town) Beach Renourishment Permitting Mr. Brazil stated that a small restoration project had been planned for Mid-Town in He explained the reason for the small project was that the schedule had been to build Mid-Town and Reach 7 in the same year which would have been a large spike in the anticipated budget. He further explained that because Mid-Town has been done repetitively, the proposal was to do a smaller project at Mid-Town ($3.3 million) to change the cycle. He reported that there is a groin field at Mid-Town now with a hot spot at the very south end which needs a small groin to stabilize the area because it erodes back to the seawall. He stated that the groin would be built as part of the smaller project. There was discussion on the project. There was discussion regarding feeder beaches. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 5 of 7

8 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, Board Member Katz asked if the work the State s FDOTdid to reinforce A1A in Reach 6 impacted the flow of sand especially north of Reach 7. Mr. Weber answered that the issue was being reviewed by Mike Walther in the advance design for Reach 7 including the influence of the monster groin in Reach 5, the influence of the revetment along Reach 6, and the other structures in Reach 6. He stated that the revetment as well other coastal structures and nearshore rock influence the area. Karyn Erickson of Erickson Consulting Engineers expressed concern with the cost figures in the Plan. She suggested the Board adopt the budget for FY2013 but wait on the FY14 budget to hear the true costs from the consultants in March and April. She said that a 20% contingency should be included on the bottom line for future projects. She spoke about Aragonite sand and the choice of sand affecting the costs. She explained that the heavier sand and steeper shape of the beach due to the coarseness of the sand would greatly impact sand volumes, which would also affect the mitigation. She advised that rather than put any on the Inlet dredging sand on Reach 4 or Reach 3, it should all be designated for Reaches 2 and 8 which have the most sensitive hardbottom. She suggested that the Town use an engineer with experience on how Aragonite shapes, moves and performs and take that analysis to the permitting agencies. She said she believed that more cores were needed from the offshore sand source and that rather than going with the minimum spacing required by DEP, take specific cores on the outer edge of the borrow site to locate the best quality of sand within the site. She stated that no sand nourishment or structures were funded in the Plan for Reach 8 and recommended that the March 22 Shore Protection Board meeting focus on what should be done rather than only a dune restoration project. She spoke about the need for structures. She suggested the Board hold off on approval of the Plan until the costs were received for future years but if the Board chose to not postpone approval of the Plan, she recommended money be added for structures for Reach 7 and Reach 8. Town Manager Elwell responded to Ms. Erickson s comments saying that the Town Council President had asked that the Board to send a Plan to the Town Council by March. He stated that the Plan would recommend what should be done in the first year with everything else more or less conceptual. He agreed that there were significant issues that the Board would be addressing in March and April and said that everything would be subject to adaptive management. Chair Ecclestone responded that the Board had delayed the Plan for several months and he believed a Plan should be submitted to the Town Council as they requested. Vice Chair Lindsay Buck asked if more cores should be taken. Dr. Michael Jenkins of Applied Technology Management (ATM) replied that the current data collected exceeded state standards. He noted that Coastal Technology Corporation (Coastal Tech) was working on a detailed bar area design and he would defer to them regarding if more data is needed. Town Manager Elwell stated that it was anticipated that the funds left from the sand search ($146,000) would be used for further examination of Aragonite, if that was the decision of the Board. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 6 of 8

9 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, Vice Chair Lindsay Buck agreed with the Ms. Erickson s point regarding the placement of the dredged sand in Reach 2 and Reach 8 before Mid-Town. Board Member Goldstein recommended the Board do a sample template in Reach 8 using Aragonite sand. He asked Ms. Erickson the cost. Ms. Erickson answered that a worthwhile test would be between 100, ,000 cubic yards. Richard Hunegs, 3360 South Ocean Boulevard, spoke on behalf of Save Our Shores and Northern Alliance of Palm Beach saying that a test area would be appropriate and necessary. He asked that the Board to look again at the amount of sand and size of particles. He said there is some possibility of success in Reach 7 but none in Reach 8. VII. SAND TRANSFER PLANT PHASE II WORKSHOP TIME CERTAIN 10:30 AM A. Introduction by Town Staff B. Presentation by Applied Technology & Management, Inc. C. Communications from Shore Protection Board Members D. Communications from Citizens E. Scheduling of Future Neighborhood Meetings Chair Ecclestone opened the public workshop on the Sand Transfer Plant, Phase II. Dr. Michael Jenkins of Applied Technology and Management, Inc. gave a Powerpoint presentation reviewing the issues with the Inlet and the lack of sand in Reach 2. He stated that the proposal was for a second discharge between R-78 and R-80 with a nearshore location on the sandbar. He reviewed alternatives: status quo, build a second discharge, or mechanically move the sand from Reach 1 to Reach 2. He showed pictures of the current discharge pipe and what the proposed discharge would look like off of the beach. Sanford Kuvin, 149 East Inlet Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposed second discharge regarding the origin of the proposed second pipe, the nodal point, the Town s response to the DEP and the Corps for additional information, the authenticity of the $4 million cost for the project, and if any of the monies would be reimbursed by the Federal government. He stated that the project was inefficient, not cost effective, had no coastal engineering support, as yet, and there were severe potential hazards. Dr. Jenkins responded that the Town was preparing the response to the regulatory agencies but was waiting until after the public workshop to submit it. Connie Gasque, 159 Root Trail, expressed concern with the impact on the hardbottom in Reach 2. She stated that it was an expensive experiment. Peter Pettie, 801 S. Olive, West Palm Beach, spoke about mitigation issues, the history of mitigation in Reaches 5, 7 and 8, and the change in the stated amount of hardbottom in Reach 2. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 7 of 9

10 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, David Leavitt, 1420 Via Manana, spoke in opposition to the discharge pipe saying that there was now a huge sand bar in the water. Larry Goldberg, 3360 South Ocean Boulevard, asked the yardage that would available to transfer, how much shore protection would residents get from the sand placed and would it would be real protection, would the sand bypass the hardbottom, and if there would be mitigation. He also why the hardbottom on Reach 2 could be covered but not the hardbottom on Reach 8. Bill Bryan, 1350 North Ocean Boulevard, expressed concern with the look of the current discharge pipe and stated that it would be more palatable with pipe in water. He asked about moving the sand that was dredged by barge to a location further south. Town Manager Elwell spoke about the efforts of the Town and Corps to get the permitted disposal area in Reach 1 moved further down into Reach 2. He stated that the engineers had informed the Town that creating the second discharge and moving the disposal area further south would be better for the shoreline and would provide a sand resource for the benefit of the entire Town. He stated that the Town could look further at the idea of moving the sand by barge. Mr. Brazil noted that the sand would have to be offloaded and shaped using heavy equipment. He said he didn t know if it would be as cost effective. Dr. Jenkins added that there were some technical constraints with barges regarding scheduling when to have a barge there to fill and issues with the nearshore hardbottom. Michael Small, 156 E. Inlet Drive, said he would oppose anything that would diminish the recreational traffic on the beach. He asked about the possibility of increasing the resource area. Mr. Brazil responded that the Town would like to create a bigger sand trap on the north side of the Inlet partnering with the Corps because it would minimize the number of times they had to dredge. Chair Ecclestone thanked everyone for their thoughts and suggestions. Town Manager Elwell advised that staff would meet with north end residents who are most affected by the second pipe and get additional input about alternatives that are being explored. Mr. Goldberg suggested a workshop on the Reach 7 and Reach 8 permitting process with diagrams would be very helpful. VI. RECOMMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL REGARDING THE SCOPE, COST, AND FUNDING OF THE TOWN S COASTAL PROGRAM [Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager] Mr. Brazil continued his review of the Coastal Program. Board Member Katz asked that an asterisk be placed in the Plan for Reach 7 to remind the Board that as the project gets closer to reality with better information on the design and cost, the Board would reevaluate it. Vice Chair Lindsay Buck commented that there was nothing in the budget for phase 2. She stated that all the numbers were estimates and the Town Council understood that the numbers would go up or down based on the actual project. Board Member Katz explained that Coastal Tech would present a project design 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 8 of 10

11 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, to the Board in March. He said that the addition of one or two structures could make a difference of $3 million. He asked that the Plan either include the best estimate for the work or an asterisk to put the Town Council on notice that there may be a change. Town Manager Elwell stated that the Board would be addressing significant substantive questions in the near term (next couple of months) that might significantly change the cost. He said he believed that the point was well taken that the degree of uncertainty that could run into several million dollars in a particular reach was enough to be worth a footnote. Motion was made by Board Member Goldstein and seconded by Board Member Katz to put asterisks on the Plan on Reach 7 and Reach 8 to note that there may be a change. The motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Goldstein stated that he was hoping to get groins in front of Sloan s Curve and Phipps Park in Reach 7 which would be extra money. Line 53, Reach 8, South of the Lake Worth Pier, Critical Beach Erosion Designation Mr. Brazil reported that staff would continue to pursue a critically eroded beach designation for the area but had been unsuccessful in the past. He explained that the DEP would send someone out physically to survey the area and if they deem the buildings in the area to be threatened, it could be deemed critically eroded. He reported that the sections of the beach north and south are critically eroded. In response to a question from Chair Ecclestone, he stated that the EIS would lay the groundwork for the project alternatives that were viable and would mostly help with shared reimbursement by the state and need issues. Line 58, Reach 8, South of the Lake Worth Pier, Structures Study (Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Mr. Brazil stated that the Town Council approved a budget of $.5 million to join Palm Beach County for a combined EIS project. He reported that the Town had received a letter confirming that it was pulling out of the project. He said he would report back in March about the ramifications and alternatives for the Town to move forward or stop work. He stated that the decision of the Board could drastically change the budget for Reach 8. In response to a question from Chair Ecclestone, Town Manager Elwell reminded the Board members that they had requested staff get numbers for the additional EIS work the Town needed as part of the beach nourishment permitting, either as a sand related EIS or as a structures related EIS. Chair Ecclestone stated he would like to look at both options. Town Manager Elwell reported that because the County had stopped the project, the Town would need to pick it up. Board Member Cooper noted that there should be unencumbered money in the line item. Town Manager Elwell responded that the money was currently encumbered but a lot had been unspent. He said that at the next meeting, he would inform the Board of the amount that was not spent. Mr. Brazil completed his review of the Plan stating that the raw totals for the ten-year Plan was $67,266,750 of which $12,200,000 was bondable which left the ten year total not bonded at $55,066,750. He reported that the bondable payback annual cost (debt 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 9 of 11

12 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, service) was $813,333 over 30 years and the average annual cost of the program without the bondables was $5.5 million. He further reported that the average annual cost including the bonding was $6,320,008. Motion was made by Board Member Goldstein and seconded by Board Member Katz to approve the FY2013 Proposed Coastal Management Program as presented with the noted amendments. Mr. Hunegs commented on the Plan. He asked why the Town did not get with the other beach communities and work together as a strong force. He addressed issues regarding dune restoration and permanent structures. Mr. Brazil responded that the Town had joined with Palm Beach County and all the communities south of the Town to look at a global project which included structures. He stated that County had pulled out of the project. There was discussion regarding the littoral movement of sand from Singer Island. Mr. Hunegs asked about protecting the north end beach with the Sand Transfer Plant extension. Town Manager Elwell explained that there would be two outfalls and when it was appropriate, sand would be pumped out of the second outfall to move sand more quickly into the littoral drift. He added that at times the first outfall would be used to stabilize the beach from eroding. Ms. Erickson asked for the CAD drawings and sand based design for Reach 8. Board Member Cooper asked about a project in Reach 6 to feed Reach 7. Town Manager Elwell replied that it would be desirable but he cautioned about doing it in isolation and putting more effort and money into a new project. He stated that there would be some consideration of the concept in the design work related to Reach 7 and how is it impacted by Reaches 5 and 6. Town Manager Elwell clarified that the Board would be recommending to the Town Council the approval of the FY13 column as a budgeted plan to be funded and pursued, and for FY14 and beyond, the Board would recommend the Ten-Year Coastal Protection Plan for consideration by the Town Council subject to further review and modifications. The motion to approve the FY2013 Proposed Coastal Management Program as amended was unanimously approved. IX. REVIEW OF BAHAMIAN SAND AS A POTENTIAL SOURCE FOR FUTURE TOWN BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS [Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator] Chair Ecclestone noted that the Bahamian sand memorandum was included in the back up material for the meeting. There were no questions regarding the memorandum. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 10 of 12

13 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, X. SHORELINE CONDITION ASSESSMENT [Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator] Mr. Weber gave a Powerpoint presentation on the shoreline condition. He reported that the beach at Phipps Ocean Park was in an eroded state and was a hot spot. He said that coastal engineering alternatives to address the hot spot would be presented to the Shore Protection Board in March. He stated that it was not indicative of the Town-wide situation. He reported that the southerly portion of Reach 4 had narrowed and he would monitor it. He said that he was encouraged that the revetment in Reach 2 was buried by sand. XI. COMMUNICATIONS FROM CITIZENS - 3 MINUTE LIMIT PLEASE Suzanne Wean, 2275 South Ocean Boulevard, addressed the Board stating that she lived at The Reef and could not access the beach. She asked what could be done. Mr. Brazil advised Ms. Wean to contact Mark Tatum, the local DEP representative. He explained that a field permit would be needed to reconstruct the stairs to the beach and a building permit from the Town of Palm Beach Planning, Zoning, and Building Department. He said there is no short-term solution for reconstructing the beach. He spoke about the issues at the beach. XII. COMMUNICATIONS FROM SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEMBERS Regarding the second discharge for the Sand Transfer Plant, Vice Chair Lindsay Buck asked if the 250 cubic yards per hour coming out of the pipe would be on dry beach or in the water. Dr. Jenkins answered that the volume would be the same on dry beach or water. Vice Chair Lindsay Buck asked if the mitigation would be more stringent for placing the pipe in the water than on the dry beach. Dr Jenkins answered he would have to consult with the DEP. Town Manager Elwell added that there was a concern that there might be more impacts and, therefore, more mitigation if the outfall is in the water than if on dry land and that impact would be assessed. Vice Chair Lindsay Buck asked for the smallest possible profile for the pipe. Dr. Jenkins responded that he would look into it but it would have to be an elevated pipe. Town Manager Elwell stated that staff had explored screening close to the pipe but it was not possible. He further stated there could be some screening in the dune area but the actual location could not be camouflaged. Chair Ecclestone asked about the effectiveness of getting the sand further south whether on the beach or offshore. Town Manager Elwell stated that there were three variables working against each other: cost, effectiveness and environmental impacts. Vice Chair Lindsay Buck asked if only one-third of the approximate 150,000 cubic yards that are bypassed each year would be moved down to Reach 2. She commented that it would take twenty years to get the same amount of sand on Reach 2 that was truck hauled to Reach 7. Mr. Brazil explained that it would be the same result if the sand was physically moved or if there was a second discharge. He said that it was a balancing act of recession versus positive gains and of effectiveness and mitigation impact. Vice Chair 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 11 of 13

14 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, Lindsay Buck said she believed that the community wanted a more fair and equitable sharing of the sand that is bypassed so that Reach 2, which is severely eroded, gets wider. She said it would be helpful if staff could quantify some of this information to clarify to residents how much would be coming across and if half of it was moved, what would it mean: would the beach be 10' wider or 20' wider and for how long. Mr. Brazil responded that the information was very technical, and he would try to distill it and bring the specific information back to the Board. Town Manager Elwell cautioned that the next report could be more technical but staff could not say that the beach would be 10' wider or 20' wider. Board Member Frank suggested that some of the sand dredged from the Inlet could be placed on Reach 1 which could compensate for the sand that would be discharged from the second outlet of the Sand Transfer Plant. He also suggested that rocks or limestone could be built around or close to the discharge pipe to help it look more natural. Board Member Kane stated that the main reason to keep beaches in good shape was to maintain the infrastructure of the Town. He commended the Board and staff for trying to use different methods and systems to cure the problems with the sand. He said there was no reason the Town could not work with sand in the system, in the littoral drift, to fix the problems. Board Member Katz said he was impressed with the relationship between Town staff and Ms. Erickson which resulted in the Coastal Protection Plan. XIII SPB MEETINGS [Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager] A. Topics for Future Meetings a. Recommendation to Town Council Regarding Reach 8: Short Term and Long Term Coastal Management Efforts b. Phipps Ocean Park/Reach 7 Advanced Design Results c. Recommendation to Town Council Regarding Reach 7 Permitting d. Florida Statutes Consultants Competitive Negotiations Act (CCNA) Pre-Qualifications Selection Process For Coastal Engineering Consultants e. FY 2013 Coastal Program Budget f. Offshore Dredging Technologies Overview B. Schedule a. March 22, 2012 b. April 26, 2012 Town Manager Elwell stated that the next meetings would be held on March 22 and April 26. He further stated that a proposal relating to the groin analysis and prioritization would be added to the list of future topics. 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 12 of 14

15 MINUTES OF THE SHORE PROTECTION BOARD MEETING HELD ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, XIV. ADJOURNMENT APPROVED: E. Llwyd Ecclestone Chairman 2/23/12, Shore Protection Board Meeting Page 13 of 15

16 TOWN OF PALM BEACH Information for Shore Protection Board Meeting on: March 22, 2012 To: Via: Shore Protection Board Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager From: Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator Re: Advanced Design Alternatives for Phipps Ocean Park (Reach 7) Beach Restoration & Stabilization Project Item IX. Date: March 16, 2012 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that the Shore Protection Board (SPB) defer any consideration of the Phipps Ocean Park Beach Restoration & Stabilization Project until the April 26, 2012, SPB meeting. GENERAL INFORMATION Coastal Tech has been retained to evaluate several alternative projects for the Reach 7 project area. We had anticipated receipt of a final report in time for presentation at this SPB meeting. The report is not complete at this time. Town staff anticipates that Coastal Tech s report will be received the first week of April In order to have a comprehensive discussion on April 26, Town staff will distribute the report to the SPB members and other interested parties in advance of the rest of the backup for the April SPB meeting. Distribution of the draft report during the first week of April will allow nearly three (3) weeks for comments to be properly prepared by Town staff and other parties prior to the April 26, 2012, SPB meeting. cc: H. Paul Brazil, Director of Public Works 16

17 TOWN OF PALM BEACH Information for Shore Protection Board Meeting on: March 22, 2012 To: Via: Shore Protection Board Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager From: Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator Re: Update on Reach 8 Environmental Impact Statement Item X. Date: March 13, 2012 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Shore Protection Board (SPB) review the following information and provide any additional direction deemed necessary. GENERAL INFORMATION On February 7, 2012, the Board of County Commissioners considered a report from County Environmental Resources Management (ERM) staff regarding the feasibility of constructing erosion-control low-profile shore-perpendicular groins along Singer Island. The board directed staff to continue sand placement in this section of beach on Singer Island and to stop pursuing structures on Singer Island and throughout Palm Beach County. The Towns of Palm Beach, South Palm Beach, and Lantana all have separate interlocal agreements with Palm Beach County to work together on applicable coastal projects, specifically the Central Palm Beach County Comprehensive Erosion Control Project (CPBCCECP). Due to the abrupt decision by the Board of County Commissioners, our neighboring communities have concerns that the actions were taken without proper notification to all the active financial participants. Requests are likely to be made in the coming weeks for the board to reconsider the position taken. Mayor Coniglio has been communicating with County Commissioners and officials in neighboring municipalities regarding these matters. If the County reaffirms its position not to complete the EIS study, the Town has been informed that South Palm Beach and Lantana wish to consider partnering with the Town of Palm Beach to complete the EIS study. 17

18 Some combination of the following options will be pursued by the Town in the weeks and months ahead: 1. Work together with our southerly neighboring communities, South Palm Beach and Lantana, in an effort to convince the Palm Beach County Commissioners to resume the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) study for the Central Palm Beach County Comprehensive Erosion Control Project (CPBCCECP). 2. Work as a lead partner with our southerly neighboring communities, South Palm Beach and Lantana, in an effort to continue the EIS study without County participation. 3. Work independently in an effort to pursue an EIS study within Reach 8, south of the Lake Worth Pier. Additionally, staff will need direction from the SPB and Town Council on considering the following scoping items: Potential use of aragonite as a sand source for beach fill material, and Potential expansion of the limits of the project area to include the segment of beach from a point approximately 2,000 feet north of the south Town limits, to the Lake Worth Pier. The addition of these items would require USACE approval as a modification to the approved scope of work. FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACTS Town Council previously authorized the expenditure of $500,000 to cost share the design and EIS of the CPBCCECP with Palm Beach County, of which approximately $416,000 remains unspent. The remaining authorized budget does not include EIS scoping alternatives for aragonite or an expanded project footprint to include all sections of Reach 8 south of the Lake Worth Pier. If the SPB recommends work beyond the present scope, staff will obtain proposals from Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) for the design and engineering tasks, and from Taylor Engineering, Inc. for EIS tasks. cc: H. Paul Brazil, Director of Public Works 18

19 TOWN OF PALM BEACH Information for Shore Protection Board Meeting on: March 22, 2012 To: Via: Shore Protection Board Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager From: H. Paul Brazil, Director of Public Works Re: Proposal for Review of Groin Rehabilitation Item XI. Date: March 15, 2012 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Shore Protection Board (SPB) review the attached proposal from Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., A Shaw Group Company, to review the Coastal Structures Plan by Coastal Technology Corporation, dated March 9, 2011, and recommend action to Town Council as deemed necessary. GENERAL INFORMATION Members of the Shore Protection Board (SPB), as well as the coalitions of Save of Shore (SOS) and Neighborhood Alliance of Palm Beach (NAPB), have expressed the desire for a second opinion regarding the potential improvements and Townwide benefits of groin rehabilitation. In order to fully evaluate the findings by Coastal Technology Corporation (Coastal Tech), the Town must utilize a coastal engineering firm with extensive modeling capabilities. Isiminger & Stubbs Engineering, Inc. (ISE) has detailed experience in the permitting of groins, but does not possess the necessary in-house capability of the theoretical modeling to predict performance. Charlie Isiminger has expressed strong interest in doing the design and permitting work for rehabilitating specific groins for the Town, but suggested the Town engage a larger full-service firm for this modeling project. Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) does have the necessary technical experience to conduct a thorough review of the priorities outlined in the Coastal Structures Plan by Coastal Tech. A proposal by CPE, in the amount of $37,396, has been provided for SPB consideration. The review, if recommended by the SPB and approved by Town Council, will take approximately 3 months to complete. 19

20 FUNDING/FISCAL IMPACTS Sufficient funds exist in the Coastal Management Fund for CPE to conduct a review of the potential groin rehabilitation plan. Should the SPB be supportive of a groin rehabilitation program, the FY 2013 SPB Recommended Coastal Management Budget and 10-Year Forecast will need to be reconsidered. An appropriation of $500,000 per year for a groin rehabilitation capital improvement program would have a 10-year cost of $5 million. However, groin work could be bonded which may influence the timing of the improvement construction. Attachments cc: Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator 20

21 21

22 22

23 23

24 TOWN OF PALM BEACH Information for Shore Protection Board Meeting on: March 22, 2012 To: Via: Shore Protection Board Peter B. Elwell, Town Manager From: Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator Re: Florida Statutes Consultants Competitive Negotiations Act (CCNA) Selection Process for Coastal Engineering Consultants Item XII. Date: March 13, 2012 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Shore Protection Board (SPB) review both the general information and attached supplemental information from the Town s current coastal engineering firms, and provide any direction deemed necessary. GENERAL INFORMATION This item is being resubmitted to the SPB. It was previously submitted as backup for the January 26, 2012, SPB meeting but was not presented due to time constraints. Coastal Engineering Firm Selection Process The Town has gone to great lengths to interview, short list, and then pre-qualify consultants for coastal engineering. The Town has a written procedure for selecting professional consultants including engineers, architects and surveyors on the basis of qualifications and a subsequent negotiation of fees. Procedure follows the Consultants' Competitive Negotiation Act (CCNA) in Florida Statutes. Prior to the consultant review process, staff recommends a committee to the Town Council that includes one Town Council member and one Shore Protection Board member. Our current list of eight (8) consultants was selected in this manner following the review by two (2) separate committees, one in 2008 and one in 2009, as approved by Council. In 2008, the Town advertised to firms nationwide. In 2009, following recommendation by the Shore Protection Board and authorization from Town Council, the Town advertised to firms worldwide. 24

25 While interviewing the firms, the committees noted that some firms have particular strengths in certain areas that could be extremely beneficial to the Town. Not all firms have the same strengths. The committees intentionally chose firms with experience in different areas based on our anticipated needs. By choosing multiple firms, we believe we will have more options to choose the best firm for a particular task. We also believe that the Town may want to use multiple firms on an individual project as means to peer review and value engineer the proposed work. Current Roster The following firms, listed alphabetically, have been pre-qualified to provide coastal engineering services to the Town. The Professional Services Agreement expiration for each of the current eight (8) firms under contract is January 1, (5 firms) Coastal Strategic Planning, Engineering, and Permitting Services Applied Technology & Management, Inc. (ATM) - Design and permitting, all phases Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE) - Design and permitting, all phases Coastal Systems International, Inc. (CSI) - Design and permitting, all phases Coastal Technology Corporation (Coastal Tech) - Design and permitting, all phases Taylor Engineering, Inc. - Design and permitting, all phases 2009 (4 firms) Coastal Engineering Services Deltares (Unable to meet Town's risk management criteria in order to execute a Professional Service Agreement. This firm is available as a sub-contractor to ATM or CPE. They are recognized internationally for specialties in coastal modeling.) Humiston & Moore Engineers - Design and permitting, all phases Isiminger & Stubbs Engineering, Inc. - Seawalls and groins Woods Hole Group - Peer review 2012 Review At the request of the Shore Protection Board, Town staff requested that each coastal engineering firm on our roster provide updated information from their 2008/2009 submittals. This was also done for the SPB in early Each of the eight (8) pre-qualified firms submitted supplemental information that is attached. Each of the firms have either maintained or further improved their capabilities to provide engineering services to the Town. New CCNA Selection Process of Coastal Engineering Firms Based on the expiration date of January 1, 2014, for each of the eight (8) coastal engineering contracts, and the demonstration by the consultants in the attached documents that the Town does have capable firms on the roster, the Town is not required to enter into another CCNA selection process for approximately months. 25

26 Specific to the Town s procedures, the CCNA selection process includes several elements which dictate the amount of time needed to effectuate new contracts. These elements include: Preparation and Document Development of Public Advertisement Public Advertisement Response Period Recommendation by SPB to Town Council for the Selection Committee Appointment Selection Committee Appointment by Town Council Independent Review of Proposals by Selection Committee Members Short Listing of Firms by Selection Committee Interviews of Short Listed Firms by Selection Committee Recommendation by Selection Committee to the SPB for Award of Contracts Recommendation by SPB to Town Council for Award of Contracts Award of Contracts by Town Council Execute Professional Service Agreements with Firms Attachments cc: H. Paul Brazil, Director of Public Works 26

27 27

28 2012 Coastal Qualifications Update Page 2 of 2 Other Florida Coastal Projects Support to Florida Coastal Communities remains a primary focus of ATM. Beyond direct efforts for the Town, the following similar services to other Florida Coastal Communities are notable: Comprehensive Coastal Engineering Services, Boca Raton - ATM currently serves as the City of Boca Raton s only Coastal Engineering Consultant and supports the engineering, permitting and administration of the City s Comprehensive Coastal Management Program. In addition to support for their three beach and one inlet projects, ATM is also advancing the rehabilitation of infrastructure and dune management within a number of the City s Beach Parks. Town of Jupiter Island - ATM is providing programmatic support to the Towns Coastal Management Program including their 2012 beach nourishment project and ongoing consultation regarding sand bypassing to the Town s beaches from St. Lucie inlet. Sebastian Inlet District - ATM is serving as the Engineer of Record for the 2012 dredging of the inlet navigation channel and sand trap and placement of the material on the downdrift beaches. This effort will be followed by an expansion of the sand trap capacity next year. Long Key State Park - ATM is currently supporting the permitting of a beach nourishment project for Long Key State Park in the Florida Keys. This effort is being conducted directly for the FDEP and will utilize a non-domestic sand source. Outside Florida In addition to Florida work, ATM remains engaged in a number of coastal engineering projects throughout the southeast United States and internationally. These efforts include significant support for coastal projects in North and South Carolina and international projects throughout Central America, the Caribbean and Middle East. Additional Capabilities I am currently serving as the only outside (consultant) team member on the FDEP s JCP Rapid Process Improvement (RPI) initiative. This effort is focused on identifying and implementing improvements to the FDEP s Joint Coastal Permitting process. Through this process I have gained an unprecedented understanding of the JCP program including proposed program improvements which can help to expedite the permitting of future Town projects. If you should have any additional questions or require any additional assistance, please feel free to contact me directly at your convenience. Sincerely, Applied Technology & Management Michael G. Jenkins, Ph.D., P.E. Coastal Engineering Team Leader Coastal, Environmental, Marine, and Water Resources Engineering 28

29 MEMORANDUM January 9, 2012 To: Rob Weber, Town of Palm Beach From: Michael Walther, Coastal Tech Re: Updates to 2008 SOQ Submittal At your request, we are submitting the following information to address changes at Coastal Tech, since we submitted our May 29, 2008 Statement of Qualifications. In general, we've added professional engineering staff, but otherwise no significant changes have taken place since our qualifications submittal in Coastal Tech is currently working on an Advanced Design for the Reach 7 beach project with the expected introduction of structures. Specifically, please note the following: 1. Professional Staff The Key staff listed in Section 3 of our 2008 "Statement of Qualifications" remain with the firm with the following changes: David Campbell, P.E. joined CTC staff in 2009; please see his resume on the following page. Dr. Dilip Barua is now an on-call part-time employee - located in Vancover, Canada. Tem Fontaine and Walker Dawson are now both licensed Professional Engineers. Leighann Budde is now Mrs. Leighann Brandt and is also now a licensed Professional Geologist. Jenna Vogt is now Mrs. Jenna Vogt-Phillips and is also now located in our Sarasota office. Parsons Brinkerhoff Key staff listed in Section 3 has changed, based on the closing of their West Palm Beach office as well as other staffing changes: Felix Vergara, P.E. will now be the Local Liaison, based in the Miami office of Parsons Brinkerhoff. Greg Butcher, Ramon Pereda and Shane Swingle are Senior Inspectors, based in Tampa. 2. Additional Relevant Project Experience Additional since 2008: TOPB - Townwide Groin Analysis and the engineering and conceptual design for Reach 7; Santa Rosa County Navarre Beach Restoration - preliminary design for the first renourishment; City of Venice Shore Protection planning for second renourishment; Indian River County Sector 3 - Design, permitting, construction & monitoring; St. Lucie County South County Beach Project - Design, permitting and Erosion District Zone to generate the local funding; Matagorda County, Texas Sargent Beach restoration, design & permitting; St. Augustine Inlet - expert witness in USACE litigation re: adverse inlet impacts; Bogue Banks North Carolina Master Beach Nourishment Plan - overall QA and geotechnical services to support Moffatt Nichol; Town of Dauphin Island Alabama Beach & Barrier Island Restoration - QA and Peer Review of all CPE work products; and Florida Department of Environmental Protection: o State-wide Habitat Conservation Plan o Hardbottom Study. 29

30 DAVID B. CAMPBELL, P.E. Senior Engineer Mr. Campbell joined Coastal Tech staff in Texas in 2009 as a Senior Engineer, after retiring from a career with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Galveston District. David has over 38 years experience with the Galveston District. Among his other titles, David was the former Chief of the Engineering Branch for the Galveston District. David s experience at the Galveston District includes coastal engineering design, geotechnical design and investigations, structural engineering, hydrology and hydraulics, general engineering, surveying, cost estimating, project engineering and A-E contracting. David is located in Galveston and is a registered Professional Engineer in Texas. EDUCATION B.S. - Civil Engineering with Honors, 1968 University of Texas at Austin M.S. - Civil Engineering, 1970 University of Texas at Austin PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Present: Senior Engineer Coastal Tech : Chief, Engineering Branch; Chief, General Engineering Section; Branch Chief, Geotechnical and Surveys Branch; Assistant Branch Chief, Foundations & Materials Branch; Chief, Coastal Engineering Section; Coastal Engineering Section U.S. Army Engineer District, Galveston PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Tau Beta Pi Chi Epsilon American Society of Civil Engineers PROJECT EXPERIENCE Port of Bay City Diversion Dam Cut (Bragg s Cut) Sargent Beach Nourishment & Dune Protection Construction oversight of 11 groins, Galveston, Texas. Design and construction oversight of breakwaters, Port Aransas, Texas. Design and construction oversight of weir jetty system, Mouth of Colorado River, Texas. Design and construction oversight of jetty repairs for Sabine-Neches, Matagorda, Corpus Christi and Brazos Island Harbor Ship Channels, Texas. Design and construction oversight of 1.4-mile beach nourishment project, North Beach, Corpus Christi, Texas. Design and construction oversight of 8-mile shoreline revetment, Gulf shoreline, Sargent Beach, Texas. Design and construction oversight of removal of existing jetty and new north jetty, Freeport, Texas. Fourteen years of oversight of all required geotechnical investigations for Galveston District projects, including levees/ floodwalls for hurricane protection, flood control channels, navigation channels and environmental restoration projects. 30

31 January 6, 2012 Robert Weber Coastal Coordinator Town of Palm Beach Public Works Department Post Office Box 2029 Palm Beach, FL Subject: Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., 2012 Coastal Services Update Dear Rob: The attached information is being provided at your request to serve as a supplemental update to the previous RFQ response submitted by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. (CPE). As you may know, CPE was acquired by The Shaw Group Inc. (Shaw) in March 2011, a Fortune 500 company with over 27,000 employees and more than 150 locations worldwide. Shaw is one of the world s leading vertically integrated providers of engineering, design, construction, technology, maintenance and emergency response. After Hurricane Kitrina devastated New Orleans, Shaw led the largest design-build civil works project ever awarded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal (IHNC) Surge Barrier Project. The two-mile long, 26-foot high wall with movable flood gate structures is the first of its kind and provides a 100-year-level of storm protection to the greater New Orleans area. As affiliates, CPE and Shaw have combined resources to bring expanded capabilities to our clients. Together, our design and construction management capabilities, emergency response experience, and ability to integrate sciences for coastal solutions, position us as the world s premier provider of coastal protection and restoration services. Furthermore, we have nearly 10-years of experience in the Town of Palm Beach and can offer a fresh perspective on the coastal management proposals brought forth in recent months. CPE is dedicated to delivering the Town of Palm Beach the best services and coastal solutions based on innovation and advanced science and technology. We strive to be the leading coastal consulting firm in the nation and work closely with our clients, communities and governmental agencies to develop projects that are feasible, economical and effective. We have greatly valued working with the Town of Palm Beach in the past and look forward to serving you in any capacity you need. Thank you for the opportunity to provide the attached update of services for your consideration. Sincerely, COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Thomas P. Pierro, P.E., D.CE Senior Coastal Engineer 2481 NW BOCA RATON BOULEVARD, BOCA RATON, FL FAX COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY

32 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY 2012 Coastal Services Update for the Town of Palm Beach CPE is one of the leading coastal engineering firms in the country having engineered over 65 beach nourishments, a number of coastal structures (groins, breakwaters, seawalls, revetments) and artificial reefs, and a series Inlet & Beach Management Plans since we were founded in Our firm specializes in comprehensive coastal management using a regional perspective to design sustainable and economically feasible projects. Our coastal engineers, biologists, geologists, modelers, oceanographers, surveyors and GIS specialists are committed to quality and project excellence. Advantages & Strengths Particular advantages to the Town of Palm Beach when working with CPE include: Full range of in-house coastal services including Coastal Engineering & Modeling, Marine Biology, Marine Geology and Hydrographic Surveying, which avoids the cost of subcontractors and saves money. Based in Boca Raton, Florida, our staff of approximately 50 professionals is close by and available on short notice, which represents a significant cost savings for field work and responsiveness. Branch offices in Tampa Bay, Florida, and other states (LA, NC, NJ) provide additional support in times of need. Branch office in Florianopolis, Brazil, is an unmatched hub of modeling expertise with over 25 staff members including several expert modelers trained by Deltares (Delft3D and UNIBEST model developers), whom have been advancing the science and assisting our engineers in designing cost-effective successful projects. CPE maintains a direct link with Deltares experts for consultation on complex coastal modeling analyses. Recent acquisition by The Shaw Group Inc. (Shaw) in March 2011 brings the experience and support of a Fortune 500 company with over 27,000 employees and more than 150 locations worldwide. As a Shaw Group Company, CPE and our affiliates provide a wealth of resources and personnel combined with expanded capabilities in ports, structures, program/construction management and emergency response. First coastal engineering firm in Florida to embrace the DELFT-3D and UNIBEST models, which has resulted in more experience and success with these advanced models than any of our peers. Extensive experience and knowledge of your coast and coastal program having worked with your staff for nearly 10 years on virtually every aspect of your program. Developed a Town-wide monitoring program and sediment transport analysis to track sand migration and assess the overall effectiveness of the Town s coastal program. This program has served as the basis and formulation for monitoring the Town s beaches for the past 3 years. Created a comprehensive GIS of your beach and offshore coastal environment that details all project areas, coastal structures, reef and rock outcrops, sand resource areas, aerial photography and a complete laser bathymetry of your entire offshore area. Specific project experience in the Town of Palm Beach includes: o Town-wide monitoring program and sediment budget o Post-storm assessments for FEMA funding o Artificial Reef Seismic Survey and Construction o Offshore Sand Resource and Hardbottom Mapping o Mid-Town Beach Renourishment o Reach 7 Beach Nourishment and Dune Restoration o Reach 8 Sand Search and Permitting o Palm Beach Inlet Management and Sand Transfer Improved Capabilities The capabilities of each of our departments are continually refined with the latest technologies, procedures and equipment. Listed here are the recent advances of each department: Coastal Engineering The combined experience of CPE s in-house engineers is unmatched in the field of coastal engineering. All of our coastal engineers possess Master of Science or higher level degrees. We currently have 8 Professional Engineers, 3 Professional Geologists and 3 Professional Surveyors on staff. Over the last few years we increased our coastal modeling capabilities with DELFT-3D and UNIBEST, the COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY 32

33 most advanced coastal models in the world. The combination of these two models provide the tools needed to assess the performance of beach nourishment projects and are critical for designing coastal structures. Marine Biology - We have an environmental staff that is highly experienced in environmental mapping and monitoring in southeast Florida. CPE developed the BEAMER method, which is the state preferred monitoring protocol for impact assessments of marginal reef habitats that are prevalent in the Town of Palm Beach. Our Biologists are certified Scientific Divers according to the standards of the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS). Marine Geology - We have the largest and most experienced marine geology staff in the country that specializes exclusively in offshore sand investigations and maintain our own certified lab. We own and operate the latest seismic and side scan equipment to map reefs and sand deposits. We have also helped the State develop the ROSS database which identifies every sand body within Florida waters. Hydrographic surveys - Our team of hydrographic surveyors perform beach and hydrographic surveys that exceed the State requirements and provide higher levels of accuracy. Using RTK both on the boat and land with a heave compensator, we integrate the land and sea measurements into a seamless profile for comparison and engineering analysis. GIS - Using our Enterprise geodatabase system, CPE GIS specialists integrate all disciplines for comprehensive analysis and data retention and retrieval. Our extensive experience in Palm Beach County has allowed us to continue to maintain our databases with available information. Recent Project Highlights Completed repair of the innovative geotextile tube T-groins at Upham Beach in Pinellas County and designed a modified structural layout for permanent rock groins that will improve the performance of the beach and save costs by reducing the number of structures from 5 to 4. This area is one of the fastest eroding beaches in Florida and the CPE design has received wide support from the City of St. Pete Beach, Pinellas County and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). Completed an extensive DELFT-3D modeling study for the Central Palm Beach County Comprehensive Erosion Control Project that included structural options for the south end of the Town of Palm Beach. Completed a comprehensive Inlet Management Study of East Pass for the City of Destin and FDEP utilizing the DELFT-3D model. The study was thoroughly vetted by a Technical Advisory Committee consisting of representatives of the FDEP, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Okaloosa County, City of Destin and Eglin Air force Base, and has been submitted to the State for consideration Lido Key Beach Renourishment Project was constructed with approximately 460,000 cubic yards of high quality sand from New Pass along a 1.54 mile segment of Lido Key in the City of Sarasota. This project was cost shared 90% by FEMA, 5% by the State of Florida and 5% by the City, and won FSBPA s Best Beach award. Project Management Thomas Pierro, P.E., D.CE, is the Project Manager and Senior Coastal Engineer for the Town of Palm Beach. Tom has broad experience in project management, planning, design and engineering, numerical modeling, plans & specifications, field investigation, construction oversight, permitting and studies of shore protection projects. He has both BS and MS degrees in Ocean Engineering from Florida Atlantic University and is a registered professional engineer in the State of Florida. Since 2001, Tom has worked for CPE on many feasibility, shore protection, beach nourishment and marine structure projects throughout Florida and the east coast of the US, including the Town of Palm Beach. He is supported directly by 3 staff engineers and the firm s multi-disciplinary personnel. Tom received Diplomate accreditation from the ASCE s Academy of Coastal, Ocean, Port & Navigation Engineers and was recently awarded the FSBPA 2011 Jim Purpura / T.Y. Chiu Engineering Award for excellence in coastal engineering. COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC., A SHAW GROUP COMPANY 33

34 January 6, 2012 Town of Palm Beach Supplement to Request for Qualifications Page 1 COASTAL SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL, INC. The firm maintains a diversified staff of professionals specializing in "Engineered Waterfront Environments." The team is dedicated to serving clients with a multi-disciplined approach, while ensuring personalized service. The firm remains small and individually-owned, and there are no plans for the firm to be acquired by larger corporate consulting firms that is prevalent in today s architecture/engineering industry. The Miami-based corporate office and the regional office in West Palm Beach provide convenient locations to serve the Town of Palm Beach (Town). The firm is uniquely organized with engineering and marine environmental/permitting teams to provide all of the technical elements required for project implementation for coastal engineering and environmental permitting projects. Staffing The West Palm Beach office of Coastal Systems International (CSI) has been open for over four years. Penny Cutt is the Regional Manager, and Ms. Cutt is the Project Manager for the Town. She regularly attends the Shore Board meetings to assist the Town staff and to understand the beach management issues and concerns in the Town. Coastal engineering contracts have facilitated growth of this office, and Robert Baron has been added to the team that is involved in Town projects. Mr. Baron brings a wealth of experience to the firm having worked on Town Projects from while employed by Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. including the Reach 8 Beach Restoration Project and The Mid-Town Renourishment and Expansion Project. From while employed by Coastal Eco-Group, Inc. (a sub-consultant to the Town through ATM) Mr. Baron worked on The Mid-Town and 0.8 Artificial Reef Project, The Mid- Town Beach Renourishment and Expansion Project, Staghorn coral Critical Habitat Evaluation and Recommendation Project, octocoral relocation and stabilization for the Breakers Reef Restoration Project, Reach 7 Phipps Ocean Park Beach Mitigative Artificial Reef, FDEP Hurricane Recovery Dune Restoration Project, and Palm Beach Harbor Maintenance Dredging Program for the Town. Ms. Cutt also manages two other biologists in the office, Ms. Christie Barrett and Mr. Dan Moretz (formerly with the Florida DEP). To support the West Palm Beach office, Mr. Tim Blankenship is Director of Engineering overseeing all coastal engineering projects for the firm. The coastal engineering team is led by Dr. Yong Chen, who has over 25 years of experience. Mr. Harvey Sasso is also a Principal coastal engineer with over 30 years experience in Florida. In the fall of 2011, CSI hired a graduate coastal engineer from the University of Florida, Mr. Mike Antinelli as the firm anticipates further growth in There are approximately 25 professional staff in the Miami office with engineers, biologists, project managers, surveyors, CAD/GIS technicians and administrative assistants. CSI is the consultant designing/permitting the South End Beach Restoration (Reach 8) Project. To optimize the design of this project, the firm has conducted extensive numerical modeling to optimize the beach fill design and to address the effects of Reach 7 sediment transport on Reach 8. The firm successfully calibrated the shoreline numerical model LITLINE for the southern Corporate Office: 464 South Dixie Highway Coral Gables, Florida Tel: Fax: Regional Office: 2047 Vista Parkway, Suite 101 West Palm Beach, Florida Tel: Fax: info@coastalsystemsint.com 34

35 January 6, 2012 Town of Palm Beach Supplement to Request for Qualifications Page 2 portion of the Town. The following figures are from the modeling results of the wave rose and LITLINE calibration: For the design of the mitigation reef, CSI modeled the waves in the area with the MIKE 21 SW model coupled with the MIKE 21 HD model to evaluate longshore currents. These models are calibrated, and can be applied to other projects within the Town. The following are figures from the models including the mesh bathymetry, wave simulation, and current simulation: Coastal Systems continues to design, permit and implement other beach management projects in Florida, with the Hollywood Truck Haul Beach construction scheduled for completion in February, Permits are also being obtained for the Hallandale Beach Truck Haul Project. Other Broward County beach management projects include Hillsboro/Deerfield Beach Renourishment, and CSI is performing physical and biological monitoring of this project constructed in Additional project marketing sheets and key staff resumes can be provided upon request, and the Town is encouraged to visit the firm s web site at F:\Project\275610\Correspondence\( ) RFQ Text.docx Corporate Office: 464 South Dixie Highway Coral Gables, Florida Tel: Fax: Regional Office: 2047 Vista Parkway, Suite 101 West Palm Beach, Florida Tel: Fax: info@coastalsystemsint.com 35

36 5679 STRAND COURT NAPLES, FLORIDA FAX: PHONE: January 9, 2012 Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator The Town of Palm Beach, Public Works Department Post Office Box 2029 Palm Beach, Florida Sent Via Re: RFQ NO ; Followup Dear Rob: This is in response to your of 12/29/11 requesting information to supplement our May 2009 RFQ response, which led to selection of Humiston & Moore (H&M) as one of the Town s consultants. We appreciate the opportunity to highlight our capabilities and continuing accomplishments, particularly with respect to recently expressed SPB concerns. Your 2009 RFQ stated the consultant must provide an understanding of and compassion for the environment and assist the Town with implementing responsible solutions. H&M s approach has always been Restoring Beaches as Natural Coastal Systems, because we believe that working with natural processes rather than opposing them usually provides the most effective and sustainable solutions, and garners grass roots support as well as support of environmental agencies. A number of examples of H&M projects specifically relate to recent discussions during a recent SPB meeting, as they illustrate H&M s effective application of this approach: 1. Beginning in 1995 H&M began working to develop a low profile rock erosion control structure design to solve the problem of downdrift impacts that have historically been associated with conventional structures. 2. This led to successful implementation of 7 projects in Florida, including the largest erosion control project ever permitted and constructed in Florida (Hideaway Beach). 3. These projects illustrate both recognition of the effectiveness of this innovative approach, as well as acceptance of H&M s innovative approach by regulatory agencies. This concept represents a paradigm shift in thinking about erosion control structures, specifically the prevailing belief Hideaway Project (completed 2010) that structures always cause downdrift impacts. They don t, and H&M has designed and completed projects which demonstrate this. Some of these successful projects have been in place for 15 years, and their success is well documented. Reiterating what is in our RFQ, H&M has a solid track record of planning, design, permitting, and project construction services with all areas of coastal engineering. In addition to the ground- 36

37 breaking structure design mentioned above, our focus on natural, sustainable solutions has been extremely successful in many areas, including beach, inlet, and marina design. 1. One time nourishment projects at Knight Island in 1995 and Sanibel Island in 1996 illustrate sustainable design; neither project has yet required renourishment. 2. Hydrodynamic design of Clam Pass for Collier County resulted in preventing annual inlet closure and achieving a maintenance interval of approximately 5 years without structures. This resolved mangrove die-off, water quality, and other important environmental issues. 3. H&M was selected by DEP s Division of Recreation and Parks to review design of a structure proposed for the Honeymoon Island Sate Beach Park, the most heavily used park in the State Parks system. DEP staff were concerned with the original technical design, and placement of a structure on a State Park Beach was in itself a significant challenge. H&M redesigned the project to achieve goals of Park staff, reduce costs and improve sustainability. H&M has been selected by the State to design a second project phase to address other problem areas within the park. H&M s recent success is largely due to our technical staff being on the cutting edge of technology. Additionally, as mentioned above, H&M s philosophy is Restoration and Maintenance of Beaches as Natural Coastal Systems. Ken Humiston, founding partner, has served on the Collier County Environmental Advisory Council and is currently a board member of the Collier County Audubon Society. Brett Moore, founding partner, was appointed by the Secretary of the DEP to serve on the DEP, USFWS, and FFWCC Habitat Conservation Plan Steering Committee, which is currently developing goals and objectives for the management of Florida s sandy beaches. H&M and our staff are all active in support of environmental responsibility with each of our projects, and are technically capable of meeting all of the Town s coastal engineering needs. Sincerely yours, HUMISTON & MOORE ENGINEERS Honeymoon IslandProject, Phase I (completed2007) Brett D. Moore, P.E. 37

38 38

39 39

40 40

41 41

42 Sent by Electronic Mail January 12, 2012 Town of Palm Beach Attn: Mr. Robert Weber, Coastal Coordinator Town of Palm Beach Public Works Department Post Office Box 2029 Palm Beach, FL Re: Updated Qualifications for Coastal Engineering Services Dear Mr. Weber, We understand the Shore Protection Board is seeking supplemental information from its pre-qualified roster of coastal engineers for review at the January 26 meeting. Enclosed you will find information on two recent projects: 1) development of a regional sediment budget in the Delaware Estuary; and 2) a regional dredged material management plan for the Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve. Woods Hole Group has been active with Regional Sediment Management (RSM) of late, which may be helpful to Palm Beach. Our focus has been on developing regional shore protection solutions and dredged material management plans. Our clients are faced with increasingly limited public (federal and local) budgets for shore protection and dredging programs, and we ve been helping communities prioritize and optimize projects to enhance value of a limited investment. Please let me know if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, The Woods Hole Group, Inc. Robert P. Hamilton, Jr. V.P., Business Development/Coastal Engineer 1 42

43 Delaware Estuary Regional Sediment Management: Fine-grained Sediment Budget Project Characteristics: Regional Sediment Management Literature review Quantitative time-series analysis Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis Shoreline change analysis Bathymetric change analysis of historical data Sediment budget Woods Hole Group is working for the USACE Philadelphia District to develop a fine-grained sediment budget, which is part of the Regional Sediment Management Plan for the Delaware Estuary. A sediment budget is a mass balance of sediment entering or exiting a coastal basin. Sediment budget analysis involves identifying and quantifying sediment sources and sinks for a control volume. Sediment budgets are frequently developed for estuaries to establish the time-averaged state of a sedimentary system, i.e., whether the basin is a net source or sink for sediment produced within or external to the basin this is the value to the USACE RSM Project. The work is being performed with teaming partner Dr. Christopher Sommerfield, University of Delaware. Previous sediment budgets have not utilized the advanced technologies now available for quantitative spatial analysis, and have remained out of balance. The extensive analyses performed for this project helps resolve the balance of sediment. This project evaluated and quantified the following areas significant to quantifying the sources and sinks of the modern sediment budget: 1. River Sediment Loads 2. Suspended Sediment Inventory 3. Dredging History 4. Bottom Sedimentology 5. Shoreline Change Analysis 6. Bathymetry Change Analysis 7. Tidal Marsh Sedimentation Results will be used to help plan future dredging activities in a manner that minimizes impacts on the estuary and wetlands. Location: Delaware River Estuary Client: US Army Corps of Engineers, Philadelphia District Wannamaker Building 100 Penn Square East, Philadelphia, PA Contact: J. Bailey Smith Telephone: (215) Delaware Estuary Sediment Budget 43

44 Dredged Material Management Planning: Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve Project Characteristics: Assessment of Current Dredging Conditions and Future Needs Inventory and Distribution Assessment of Contaminated Sediments Investigation of Opportunities for Improved Sediment Management Investigation of Beneficial Use Opportunities Recommendations to Facilitate Implementation Woods Hole Group worked during under contract to the New York State Department of State, Division of Coastal Resources to prepare components of a Dredged Material Management Plan for the Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve (SSER). The SSER was designated in 1993 by the New York State Legislature as a resource of unparalleled biological, economic, and social value. In 2001 a Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve Comprehensive Management Plan was adopted laying out actions to protect and manage the Reserve. As part of the Management Plan, a regional dredging and dredged material management plan was recommended to provide a strategy for ensuring future navigability within the SSER for commercial and recreational vessels. Information describing current and future dredging needs was developed through a study of navigation dependent facilities, as well as an extensive review of state and federal permit records issued for navigation related dredging projects. Spatial and attribute information for each dredging and placement site were cataloged in an ArcGIS geodatabase. Relevant information included project ID, applicant type and name, placement location, sediment type, permitted volume, dredge frequency, dredge methodology, as well as future planning level dredge estimates. Where available, data on environmental permits, time of year restrictions, and past dredging activity were also cataloged. A detailed summary of the environmental permitting process for dredging and placement projects in the SSER was generated, including requirements for sediment sampling and analytical testing as a function of placement alternatives. Data describing the physical and chemical properties of dredged sediments in LISSER were obtained and summarized to show potential areas of concern for future work. Opportunities for improved sediment management to reduce channel infilling were investigated, such as watershed erosion/runoff controls, shore protection structures, and optimized channel designs. A range of beneficial use opportunities for dredged material were identified, including beach and dune nourishment, landfill placement, site remediation, aggregate processing, and environmental enhancement. Parcel level data within the LISSER were also used to screen potential dredged material dewatering sites. Study findings were used to develop a series of recommendations for further investigations and steps necessary to prepare and implement a DMMP for the LISSER. Location: Long Island South Shore Client: New York State Department of State, Division of Coastal Resources Contact: Barry Pendergrass Telephone: _DMMP-LI-SS-EstuaryReserve 44