Attachment B Scope of Work Feasibility Study for Jetty - Pier Fishing Program

NC26-46

Request for Statements of Qualifications Feasibility Study for Jetty/Pier Fishing Platform Utah Lake, Utah

1. Introduction

The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources (UDWR) is requesting statements of qualification from qualified consulting firms to conduct a feasibility study identifying the most suitable locations for construction of a rock jetty or pier (e.g. permanent elevated platform and/or structure) to provide safe and convenient public fishing access at Utah Lake and enhance fisheries habitat.

Utah Lake is a shallow, wind-driven, turbid lake with significant recreational use, sensitive habitats, and complex shoreline conditions. A well-designed jetty or pier will provide improved angler access, increase fisheries habitat, promote safer conditions, and expand recreational opportunities.

The selected consultant will evaluate potential locations around Utah Lake and provide a ranked assessment of sites, including technical suitability, costs, environmental considerations, permitting constraints, and expected long-term performance. A review of existing jetties at Utah Lake State Park, Lindon Marina, Saratoga Springs Marina, etc may provide a template to build upon (though these are missing some very desirable features). This feasibility study is expected to start in July 2026 and to finish late fall of 2026. The actual building of the jetty or pier will be a separate project with plans to implement 2027.

2. Project Objectives The primary objectives of this study are to:

1. Identify, map, and assess feasible locations for a fishing centric rock jetty or pier on Utah Lake to enhance angling access to fishable water (5ft depth or more) during average summer lake levels.

2. Evaluate site-specific environmental (e.g., sheering forces during ice off), geotechnical, hydrological (e.g., forces associated with peak wave action) and recreational factors (e.g., adjacent depth and accessibility to fishing opportunities) that influence suitability, durability, and longevity.

3. Provide concept-level layouts, cost estimates, and feasibility rankings for a minimum of three recommended sites.

4. Support future funding, design, and permitting processes with defensible data, modified designs/drawings/specs, and analyses.

5. Scope of Work The consultant will conduct a comprehensive analysis that includes, but is not limited to, the following components:

A. Site Identification and Screening

· Identify potential shoreline locations utilizing existing or planned publicly accessible Utah Lake Access points owned by the State of Utah, local municipalities, and/or other public land agencies. Preliminary lists of access points have been compiled in UDWR and Utah Lake Authority management plans and are also available online at https://utahlake.gov/access-points/ .

· Evaluate compatibility of each site with public access, land ownership, sensitive habitat limitations, existing recreational use, proximity to population centers, etc (other metrics may need to be included based on the consultants expertise).

· A significant amount of relevant data (course bathymetry, lake levels, on Utah Lake is available in existing literature, resource management agencies reports/websites, etc. We anticipate the list of potential sites can be significantly narrowed through a "desk exercise" to preserve funding for site visits to high ranking sites.

B. Physical and Geotechnical Assessment Each candidate site shall be evaluated for:

· Water depth profiles at various seasons and lake water levels (i.e. determine fishing suitability based on "average" water levels and identify sites not compatible with high/low levels

· Nearshore and offshore slope characteristics.

· Substrate and soil composition, including bearing capacity for rock placement and pier foundations.

· Shoreline stability, erosion patterns, and long-term sediment movement.

· Estimated ice pressure on structures due to freeze/thaw, ice rafts, etc.

· Prominent wind/wave impacts, wind-driven fetch affecting structural durability.

· Lakebed obstructions, debris fields, or infrastructure interactions (pipelines, intake structures, utilities).

C. Environmental, Biological, and Historical Considerations

· Potential impacts to sensitive habitats such as June sucker spawning tributaries, wetlands, shorebird nesting habitat, etc.

· Water quality conditions, turbidity, and nutrient loading patterns that may affect construction or post-project use.

· Potential impacts to historical/archaeological sites

· Opportunities for habitat enhancement, such as rock features benefiting aquatic species.

CI. Recreational and Access Evaluation

· Existing public access points and/or publicly owned land (State of Utah, BLM, local municipalities, etc)

· Proximity and availability of parking and other preexisting amenities that can compliment the construction of a fishing pier/jetty.

· Access "deserts" where amenities are NOT available

· Expected angler pressure and opportunity for improved distribution of fishing effort.

· ADA access potential and compliance options.

· "Fishable" depth assessment.

· Assessment of accessibility at historical high and low lake elevations.

CII. Engineering Feasibility For each high-potential site, evaluate:

· Jetty/pier type suitability (rock jetty, earth-core jetty, pile-supported pier, hybrid structure).

· Required length, orientation, and construction methods.

· Required material size.

· Material sourcing and logistics.

· Cost ranges (planning-level estimates).

· Durability, expected lifespan, and maintenance needs.

· Constructability constraints (seasonal water levels, mobilization, access routes).

F. Jetty/Pier Feature Considerations Cost estimates and feasibility should incorporate the following features for each structure (more can be added based on consultants recommendations)

· ADA compliant walkway/path on top of jetty and wide enough to allow for fishing off both sides while still providing a central access path

· ADA compatible fishing nodes or "pull-out" areas with appropriate railing spacing/height, edge curbs, etc.

· Options for cantilever or pylon supported fishing platforms at properly spaced intervals

· Incorporation of fisheries habitat features such as boulder clusters, reef modules, culverts/arches, etc. attached to or adjacent to the structure

· Jetty should provide access to fishable water 3ft or greater during average summer

· conditions and not be inundated at high water elevations

· Made of durable, affordable materials that require minimal maintenance

· Permanently secured to the lake bottom (not floating or retractable)

· A review of existing jetties at Utah Lake State Park, Lindon Marina, Saratoga Springs Marina, etc. may provide a template to build upon (though these are missing some very desirable features)

· Adjacent parking for 24 parking spaces with at least 2 being ADA accessible.

G. Permitting & Regulatory Considerations The consultant shall identify all relevant permitting pathways, including but not limited to:

· U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404).

· Utah Division of State Lands (sovereign lands authorization).

· Utah Department of Environmental Quality (water quality certifications).

· Municipal approvals, planning/zoning, or shoreline management plans.

· Consultation requirements with tribes, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and other stakeholders.

Each site shall be evaluated for permit likelihood, potential biological surveys needed and expected timeline implications.

H. Deliverables The final deliverables shall include:

· GIS shapefiles and maps of all screened and evaluated sites.

· A technical report summarizing all analyses, with clear tables and figures.

· Comparative matrix ranking sites by suitability, cost, environmental impact, angler access benefit, and constructability.

· Concept-level engineering drawings or layouts for up to 3 feasible jetty/pier configurations at least three recommended sites.

· Planning-level cost estimates for recommended concepts.

· Presentation to UDWR staff and stakeholders (virtual or in-person).

image1.png image2.jpeg