Public Notice

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS 2833 NW 41ST ST. UNIT 130 GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32606

REPLY TO ATTENTION OF June 1, 2018 Regulatory Division West Branch Tampa Permits Section Gainesville Field Office

PUBLIC NOTICE

Permit Application No. SAJ-2011-02369 (SP-JED)

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Jacksonville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application for a Department of the Army permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1344) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. §403) as described below:

APPLICANT: Florida Department of Environmental Protection Attn: Marshall W. Flake 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399

WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the United States associated with the Gulf of Mexico. The project site is located at the .Honeymoon Island State Park, 1 Causeway Boulevard, in Sections 7, 8, 17, and 18, Township 28 South, Range 15 East, Dunedin, Pinellas County, Florida.

Directions to the site are as follows: From the intersection of US-19 and SR-586 (Curlew Rd.) in Pinellas County, proceed west along Curlew to Dunedin Causeway. Follow the causeway to Honeymoon Island State Park. Once inside the park, continue to the south beach parking lot to access the dredge area, or the north beach parking lot to access the fill area.

APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES: Latitude 28.057553° Longitude -82.825009°

PROJECT PURPOSE:

Basic: The basic project purpose is shoreline stabilization.

Overall: The overall project purpose is dredging to obtain suitable fill material to perform beach and dune renourishment to stabilize the of Honeymoon Island shoreline.

EXISTING CONDITIONS: Honeymoon Island contains 2.6 miles of Gulf of Mexico frontage and is accessible to the mainland by a causeway. It is largely undeveloped, with only a few acres of residential development on its southern tip. While some portions of the shoreline have receded more than 30 feet overall, some portions of the shoreline have advanced. On the northern portion of the island a sand spit and beach ridge have been growing and extending northward. However, erosion has occurred in the central and south central areas. The beach contains limestone cobbles which were dredged up by previous owners of the island in the early 1960s. The island was to be developed as a commercial and single-family development. The permits, however, were not renewed and the dredging ceased. The beach is a remnant of this development activity and consists of a thin veneer of sand that has accreted naturally over the cobbles. The sea floor within the area proposed for renourishment is comprised almost entirely of sand bottom with areas of large boulders and scattered rocks near the shoreline. No seagrass beds or hardbottom features are located in this area. On its southern extent, Honeymoon Island is separated from Caladesi Island by a channel known as Hurricane Pass. A sand spit is advancing into Hurricane Pass from the southern extent of the Honeymoon Island Beach. An area of seagrass has recruited and established on the leeward side of the sand spit.

PROJECT HISTORY: In 2008, the applicant completed a project known as “Honeymoon Island Beach Renourishment, Phase I”. This work was authorized by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) permit SAJ-2002-08266. Phase I included the installation of a single low-profile groin supplemented by approximately 150,000 cubic yards of sand hydraulically dredged from an ebb shoal area of nearby Hurricane Pass to provide erosion control for approximately 2,500 linear feet of shoreline. Phase I was intended as an interim project to provide an improved recreational beach area and protect the south parking lot. The applicant opted to install a single groin structure to evaluate its performance before proposing additional structures. Monitoring of Phase I has showed that the northern end of the project eroded rapidly, as expected.

On May 9, 2013, the Corps authorized the applicant to complete the work known as “Honeymoon Island Renourishment, Phase II”. The Corps authorized the following work with a 5-year work window:

The construction of three low profile T-groins supplemented by approximately 149,000 cubic yards of sand hydraulically dredged from an ebb shoal area of nearby Hurricane Pass to provide erosion control for approximately 3,200 linear feet of shoreline. The proposed groins were constructed of sheet pile and rock. The area of fill for the groins and additional sand is approximately 17.3 acres. The groin installation required removal of approximately 50 linear feet of an existing, submerged groin. Two warning markers were placed waterward of the new groin structures at the northern and southern limits of the work authorized Phase II. The Phase I temporary sandbag protection located along the west side of the north parking lot was removed and a portion of the existing parking lot was forfeited and integrated as part of the active beach and dune area. Dune vegetation was planted along the area where the portion of the parking lot was removed. The dredged area under Phase II consists of approximately 34 acres and constitutes an expansion of the dredge area for Phase I. The Phase II dredge area, in combination with that from Phase I of the project, has been designed to maintain flows through Hurricane Pass by creating a straighter channel. Maximum flow velocities will

be toward the west through the cut in the shoal and away from the Honeymoon Island State Park shoreline. The order of construction for Phase II was as follows: construction of the T-groins; removal of the parking area to be converted to beach use; followed by dredging and sand placement.

PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization with a 10-year work window to complete the following work:

Re-initiate the hydraulic dredging of 149,000 cubic yards of sand from the previously authorized 34 acre Hurricane Pass dredge area and discharge the material into the previously authorized 17.3 acre beach renourishment area behind the three previously constructed groins;

Dredge an additional 60,000 cubic yards of beach quality sand material from a 5.5 acre spit that has formed on the southern extent of the Honeymoon Island beach into Hurricane Pass to a design depth of -6 feet NAVD with an allowable over dredge to -7 feet NAVD; and

Discharge the 60,000 cubic yards of sand below the mean high water line of Honeymoon Beach in a 7.33 acre area between Florida Department of Environmental Protection Reference Monuments R-7.5 and R-9.5 to create a beach berm with a crest elevation of 4.15 NAVD.

AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION INFORMATION – The applicant has provided the following information in support of efforts to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the aquatic environment:

The applicant designed the proposed project to avoid direct dredge impacts to the seagrass area in the lee of the sand spit. Furthermore, the applicant proposes to leave the north east margin of the sand spit intact so that a natural break water would remain to shield the seagrass. Lastly, the applicant proposes to utilize floating turbidity barriers and proper erosion control measures to ensure that sediment and turbidity associated with the proposed work would not escape the authorized work area.

COMPENSATORY MITIGATION – The applicant has provided the following explanation why compensatory mitigation should not be required:

The applicant designed the proposed dredge area to avoid direct impacts to the seagrass in the vicinity of the proposed work area as well as leave a natural breakwater for the existing seagrass. In addition, the applicant proposes to utilize appropriate measures to ensure that turbidity, sedimentation, and erosion would not escape the authorized work area and cause indirect impacts to the aquatic environment and resources in the vicinity of the proposed work area. Thus, the applicant stated that compensatory mitigation is not warranted for the proposed project.

CULTURAL RESOURCES:

The Corps has determined the permit area where the dredging would occur has been created within the last 45 years. Thus, there is little likelihood of a dredge-related impact upon a historic property. Similarly, the proposed discharge area is located within a dynamic intertidal zone. Thus, the work associated with the fill discharge has little likelihood of a discharge related impact upon a historic property. Lastly, the Corps is not aware of any known historic properties within the permit area. By copy of this public notice, the Corps is providing information for review. Our final determination relative to historic resource impacts is subject to review by and coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer and those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area.

ENDANGERED SPECIES:

(a) Manatee: The Corps has determined that the proposed project in its entirety may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus). Since the proposal by the applicant is for in-water construction, potential impacts to the endangered West Indian manatee were evaluated using The Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, and the State of Florida Effect Determination Key for the Manatee in Florida, April 2013 (Key). Use of this Key resulted in the following sequential determination: ABCGNOP4/P5 may affect, not likely to adversely affect. The proposed project would not impact submerged aquatic vegetation. Also, the proposed project would not occur in Manatee designated critical habitat, or a Key-designated Important Manatee Area or Warm Water Aggregation Area. Furthermore, the applicant elects to adhere to the Standard Manatee Conditions for In- Water Work, 2011. Therefore, according to the key, a may affect but is not likely to adversely affect determination is appropriate. By letter dated 25 April 2013, the FWS stated that for proposed in-water activities analyzed with the April 2013 version of the Manatee Key in which the Corps reaches a may affect, not likely to adversely affect determination with respect to the manatee and/or its designated critical habitat, the FWS concurs with the Corps determination in accordance with 50 CFR 402.14(b)1 and no further consultation with the FWS is required.

(b) Wintering piping plover: The Corps has determined that the proposed project in its entirety may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect this species, or adversely modify its designated critical habitat.

First, the re-initiation of the work associated with Phase II may affect but is not likely to adversely affect wintering piping plover (Charadrius melodus). The Corps bases this initial effect determination on the following. On October 4, 2012 the Corps received a Biological Opinion from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in which the FWS concurred that the Phase II work is not likely to adversely affect this species in the event that the Corps would incorporate protection measures for the plover in the authorization of the work. Pursuant to FWS’ opinion, the Corps incorporated these measures into the authorization dated May 9, 2013. The Corps would incorporate the same measures in

any subsequent authorization it may provide for the applicant to re-initiate the Phase II work.

Second, The Corps has determined that the proposed discharge of an additional 60,000 cubic yards of material into 7.33 acres of the previously authorized discharge area to create the berm may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect this species. Any authorization the Corps may provide for this work would include the protection measures previously included in the May 9, 2013 authorization. Thus, the Corps determined that this effect determination is appropriate.

Third, the Corps has determined that the proposed dredging of the 5.5 acre sand spit may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect this species. The Corps based this determination on the fact that any authorization of this work would also require the applicant to adhere to the plover protection measures FWS provided to the Corps via the Biological Opinion dated October 4, 2012.

c. Gulf sturgeon, Smalltooth sawfish, and swimming sea turtles: The Corps has determined that the proposed project in its entirety may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect these species. The applicant elects to adhere to the National Marine Fisheries Service's “Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions” dated March 23, 2006. In addition, any authorization the Corps may provide for the proposed work would require the applicant to abide the conditions National Marine Fisheries Service Protected Resource Division (NMFS PRD) provided in its letter dated March 6, 2013 regarding the Phase II work. In light of these facts, the Corps determined that the proposed work may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect these species.

d. Nesting loggerhead sea turtles and green sea turtles: The Corps has determined that the proposed project in its entirety may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect these species based on the following. Any authorization that the Corps may provide for the proposed work would require the applicant to adhere to the protection measures FWS provided to the Corps via the Biological Opinion dated October 4, 2012.

The Corps will request U.S. Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Service Protected Resource Division concurrence with these determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.

ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH): This notice initiates consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service Habitat Conservation Division (NMFS HCD) on EFH as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1996. In total, the proposal would impact approximately 56.5 acres of EFH utilized by various life stages of Penaeid shrimp complex; red drum; stone crab; spiny lobster; and/or the snapper/grouper complex. The Corps’ overall initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or Federally managed fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico.

The Corps’ review of the work associated with Phase II included an EFH consultation with NMFS HCD. By letters dated September 28, 2012 NMFS HCD stated that they did not anticipate that any adverse impacts on EFH or associated fishery resources would result from the project. Thus, the Corps has initially determined that the proposed re- initiation of the hydraulic dredging of 149,000 cubic yards of sand from the previously authorized 34 acre Hurricane Pass dredge area and discharge the material into the previously authorized 17.3 acre beach renourishment area behind the three previously constructed groins would have no adverse impact on EFH based on NMFS HCD prior determination.

Similarly, the applicant’s proposal to discharge an additional 60,000 cubic yards of sand material within the 7.33 acre area between Florida Department of Environmental Protection Reference Monuments R-7.5 and R-9.5 would have no adverse effect on EFH. The Corps bases this initial determination on NMFS HCD September 28, 2012 final determination that the discharge of sand material into this area would have no adverse effect on EFH.

Lastly, the Corps has initially determined that the applicant’s proposal to dredge the 60,000 cubic yards of material from the 5.5 acre sand spit located adjacent to Hurricane Pass would have no adverse effect on EFH. The Corps based this determination on the applicant’s proposed avoidance and minimization measures. First, the applicant does not propose any dredging activity within the seagrass bed on the leeward side of the sand spit. Second, the applicant proposes to leave the north east margin of the sand spit intact so that a natural break water would remain to shield the seagrass. Lastly, the applicant proposes to utilize floating turbidity barriers and proper erosion control measures to ensure that sediment and turbidity associated with the proposed work would not escape the authorized work area. The Corps has determined that adverse impacts to EFH are unlikely with these measures in place.

Our final determination relative to project impacts on EFH and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

NOTE: This public notice is being issued based on information furnished by the applicant. This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program. The jurisdictional line has not been verified by Corps personnel.

AUTHORIZATION FROM OTHER AGENCIES: Water Quality Certification may be required from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and/or one of the state Water Management Districts.

COMMENTS regarding the potential authorization of the work proposed should be submitted in writing to the attention of the District Engineer through the Tampa Permits Section, Gainesville Field Office, 2833 NW 41st St. Unit 130, Gainesville, FL 32606, within 30 days from the date of this notice.

The decision whether to issue or deny this permit application will be based on the information received from this public notice and the evaluation of the probable impact to the associated wetlands. This is based on an analysis of the applicant's avoidance and minimization efforts for the project, as well as the compensatory mitigation proposed.

QUESTIONS concerning this application should be directed to the project manager, James “Bo” Davidson, in writing at the Tampa Permits Section, Gainesville Field Office, 2833 NW 41st St. Unit 130, Gainesville, FL 32606; by electronic mail at [email protected]; by facsimile transmission at (352)264-7733; or, by telephone at (352)264-7672.

IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Marine Fisheries Services, and other Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental groups, and concerned citizens generally yields pertinent environmental information that is instrumental in determining the impact the proposed action will have on the natural resources of the area.

EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefits, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including cumulative impacts thereof; among these are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historical properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food, and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act or the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. A permit will be granted unless its issuance is found to be contrary to the public interest.

The US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other Interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this determination, comments are used to assess impacts to endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity.

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY: In Florida, the State approval constitutes compliance with the approved Coastal Zone Management Plan. In Puerto Rico, a Coastal Zone Management Consistency Concurrence is required from the Puerto Rico Planning Board. In the Virgin Islands, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources permit constitutes compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Plan.

REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING: Any person may request a public hearing. The request must be submitted in writing to the District Engineer within the designated comment period of the notice and must state the specific reasons for requesting the public hearing.

OISTRJCT l HONEYMOON ISLAND STATE PARK D/STRJCT4 PINELLAS COUNTY

HONEYMOON ISLAND NORTH BEACH FILL PERMIT PLANS PROJECT# 6H401

APPLICABLE CODES AND DESfGN DA IA SCOPE OFPR OJECT INDEX OF DRAWINGS ~ BrACH FILL COWSlRUCllON 1 . COVER SHE.ET AND LOCA1101-! MAP Flt$i!!A k (i.Dfi!: CXlllE, i.iJUllll; (rile-") 21J1Q ta:m!ln 2. SfT£ PL.AN - 9EAC!i FILL f\O•DI BUllJNO "'111~ 11.<1. '-" ~~ l!Jl10 i;u;., 5. SITE PLAN - SORROW AREA A.Oii$~ ew.oHa- coot. 1i1tc~'4C'Jt ~-· 2010 ~n [°.79' +. BEACi-1 CROSS SECT IO N~ FLMial, llUllltlG COD£. PIMilC {flil-" 2'IO "'°"' M.H.W. 5. Bf.AC\.! CROSS SECTIONS F)..ORIOA 111u1ua-COi!C. n:sms B.UJIJ;G ~ 2010 Ulfion FLOiillll. 900.tlHC-CCU£. RESllloot.11. (fet-~ 2010 f.4~n I I NAVO 1988 6. BORROW AREA CROSS SECTIONS fl.QllW. nR£ FftM>ml!I ext-£ (f'Fi'C)_- 2'.lll Emln 1.111' l-IGVO 1929 ~ m:crRr.A. aJ~[ ~-70: 2!)11 &men ~------FUOr STA.litWil SJ!tClflOOIQlfS Rf? ~ 4 l!RL'CE" OONSt --"""' 6!1""' M.L.w. FOOT OCSl'Jll 5rNllAAllS:.. l*!t &!ilioJi 1n;p GfifE// CONT!'O ~ flciRf.I( AIXfSSfllJJY cmr '"'1 Uilji!.11 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NAVD 1988. /<(01/ 10 lo(. O.JTC l/ORTH/}lt; (FT) CAST/Ht; (FT) AZ Al. nrv. (FT) tDllill.il!ll 1-lGVO 1929 . MEAN HIGH VIATI:R. fl-I MAY/990 l>o:f196.ilQO 38652.:Z.200 526,0 ~.45 MEAN LOW WATIR, ( • 983- 2.00 J 1DtlJ. B 1119. IOO. Of AAJl\;JON; H-5 AUC/9$.J 1sno.soo.000 5650ti9.700 290.0 6 . .JS 11-6 ~ IJGJ9N 13595-17. 900 ;s1.JO.>.onn vs.a 2.-1.J... NOTES: 11-7 "UG l37-t 1358565• .J.00 Sl17375.200 Z4S,/J .J...'19 BREIT Q_ MOORE. PL ll-8 q/}G/97'1 1SS18S4.600 587921.000 240.0 5,/j!J 0/5$(Gftli!H !. AERIAL PHOTOGR'APH DATED FEBRUARY 2016 AIJG/97.> f $5'5957.-100 PROVIDED COURTESY OF FOEP. .S66SOl~ 700 225~0 AUCJ-974 25- 0 65 l. COORDINAlES SHOWN ARE IN FEET SASto ON 1355$2$.4()0 J6/J!Jii6,SOO .22S.O l HE NORTH AMERICAN DAruM OF 1983, WEST Al/t;f517+ f'i552"'9.100 359T.J1.,000 tffWW&'t ZOlJE (.l'!ADB3). 11-12 ~UCJ974 ~'"'f.!osJ.7.eoa llS.O 10/02/17 3. ELEVATIONS SJ.JOVIN ARE IN rn:r SAS.ED ON THE R-TJ MArt!J!JO ! 554366. 600 $9)668.490 ,;aso l.9.t NORTH AME~l CAJ-1 VERTICAL DATUM Of 1988 R- /.t (NAVD88). VAY/990 1 >5583.?.700 392561.700 305.o ;.so +. CONlROL TABLE OBTAINED FROM FDeP WtSSl'TE. A UC1!J7-' I 55S.J57.500 J9509!J,SOO 205,0 5. NOTE: THESE PERMIT ORA'l/INGS SHALL NOT BE 4UGl974 15520/10.JfJO $9.5!$8,800 sro.o CONSIDERED VALID Ui'JLESS SIGN.ED 1'ND SE~l.t:O. ------·c::::>TFi c::::~-C> F..c:::::> p ~ r <3 t:ic::>11 .::ss;. ____..A s= ._, r#!3 #9S> i g 11_.a r7c:I-<== c:> 11 ~t:r1_1 c-tic:> r._ MEAN HICH WATER BASED ON SURVEY COMPLETED BY PARK COASTAL SURVEYING, INC.

ON JUNE 23. 2017.

ELEVATIONS BASED 01< THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUMS OF 1988 (NAVD88}.

ELEVATIONS AND DIMENSION AR( SHOWN IN rEET.

STATE: PLAN COORDINATES BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83) ,

FLORIDA WEST.

AE'RIAL PHOTOGRAPH IS DATED fEBRUARY 2016 ANO COURTESY OF THE FDEP,

2 A 392073.58 1353450.23 B 392154.14 1353424.21 392356.39 1353384.55 392527.28 13532n.89 392003.31 13ffi00.50 392483A2 1352925.50 G 392358.23 1352915.36 H 392166.21 1352976.71 391995.71 1353084.41 391928.45 1353138.94

NOTE:S:

1. ME,t.N JUNE 23, 2017. R-6.5 R-7.5

10 t0- NO BU.CH fill AT TfllS PROFlkE 10- NO BEACH FILL AT THIS PROFIU: NO BEACH FILL AT THIS PROFILE 5 0 5- > ·D' NAVO 0 ;2 0 ~ -5- z t: t -s- ~ -s- -10 - l- -10 - -H> ----J i:i -15- > ...J _,~ -15 ~ -15- .... -20- LU w -20 -20- -u £AST WEST EAST -25 UST r ' -25 I I I ~m l 400 800 800 i 000 I I o 'f 200 400 600 800 400 600 800 1000 DISTANCE SEAWARD or MONUMENT (rT.) DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.) DISTMCE: SE:AWARD or MONUMENl (FT-)

10 - 10- •97··--. ,,r-H-15' NAVO lO-~s33·----I ,r-+•.15' NAVO - I _/ r---+0.79' MHW 5 - I _/ r---+0.79' lJHW 5- c 5- c '-,,_ "- •./ a· NAVO > ~ ~ 0 < o+------'-..::::....,~_:,'~,:.:"""'=-=.J~/---~o-'~N~AV~D~4 < 0 % ---~ - - 1.14' t.ILW z -....'---1-14' ~ LW z - 5- -5- t t -5 t . -10 - - -10- -15- -15- ~s~ _,c:i i....J m ::o m t.iJ - l0- f - D . 49.0 CV/FT "" -io EAST D 2e.1 cY/FT D 41.1 cv1rr -25 EAST WEST WEST WEST -25 ., I T il!I 0 200 400 600 600 BOO 1000 1200' D 200 400 1>00 DlSTANCE SEAWARD OF BJ.SEUNE {FT.) DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MOtWllENT (FT.} DISTANCE SEAWARD Of 6ASEllt>IE (FT.)

1 ° F 230·=-=' r +.c.1s· NAvo • 10- .;;os•-----, ,r-•4.15' NAVO NOTES: s- __J _/ .---+0.79 MHW I _/ ,---+0.79' MHW I. B•ACH PROrtU:S BASEO ON SURV£Y 0 1 5 - BY PARK COASTAL SURVEYING, INC. > o+--'------...... _.:::::,,~'-~~£-::===::_J:=--___ ~o~·~N~A~V~Dc_.._4 0 '-,,_ ~ _/ O' N.A.VO .., ~ 0 DATED JUN£ 23, 1017• :z v --.'---1.14' MLW z 2. S€AWARD SLOPE IS 1V: 1OH. -5- ! . £LEVATIOl ~~~ REFERENCE NAVDB8. - to - <. D!M(>lSIO~S AAE I~ fECT. ---- El(ISTING T-GROJN .,; .... - 1s- -'w D 16.9 CV/FT - 20- D >7.6 er/FT EAST WEST -25 T 600 BOO 1000 1200 DISTANCE SEAWARD OF MONUMENT (FT.)~~