Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Hex Final Decision 2023-35
HEX NO. 2023-35 HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DATE OF HEARING. October 12,2023 PETITION. Petition No.BDE-PL20220004574—33 Pelican Street West-Request for a 19-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width,to allow construction of a boat docking facility protruding a total of 39 feet into a waterway that is 682± feet wide. The subject property is located at 33 Pelican Street West and is legally described as Lot 78, Isles of Capri No. 1, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION. The petitioner requests to modify the existing dock facility by adding a triangular flair to the northeast portion of the L-shaped dock that would allow for the placement of a second boatlift to accommodate a new 34-foot vessel; the existing boatlift is to be occupied by a 12-foot vessel. STAFF RECOMMENDATION. Approval with conditions. FINDINGS. 1. The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction over this Petitioner pursuant to Sec. 2-87(4) of the Collier County of Ordinances, Sec. 8.10.00 of the Land Development Code, and Chapter 9 of the County Administrative Code. 2. The public hearing for this Petition was properly noticed and conducted in accordance with all County and state requirements. 3. The public hearing was conducted electronically and in-person in accordance with Emergency/Executive Order 2020-04. 4. The Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative executed the Hybrid Virtual Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing Waiver related to conducting the public hearing electronically and in-person. 5. There is a Companion Petition No. VA-PL20230007656,to reduce the minimum side/riparian setback from 15 feet to 4 feet on the east side and 11 feet on the west side for the boat dock facility and vessel combination. Page 1 of 7 6. The County Staff presented the Petition followed by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative, public comment and then rebuttal by the Petitioner and/or Petitioner's representative. There were no objections made at the public hearing. 7. The County's Land Development Section 5.03.06.H. lists the criteria for dock facility extensions. The Hearing Examiner may approve,approve with conditions, or deny a boat dock extension request if it is determined that at least four(4) of the five (5) primary criteria, and at least four(4) of the six(6) secondary criteria have been met.1 Primary Criteria: 1. Whether the number of dock facilities and/or boat slips proposed is appropriate in relation to the waterfront length, location, upland land use and zoning of the subject property. Consideration should be made of property on unbridged barrier islands, where vessels are the primary means of transportation to and from the property. (The number should be appropriate; typical single-family use should be no more than two slips; typical multi- family use should be one slip per dwelling unit; in the case of unbridged barrier island docks, additional slips may be appropriate.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The subject property is improved with a single-family residence within a Residential Single-Family-4 (RSF-4) Zoning District. The proposed private boat dock facility consists of a single dock with two boat lifts. 2. Whether the water depth at the proposed site is so shallow that a vessel of the general length,type and draft as that described in the petitioner's application is unable to launch or moor at mean low tide (MLT). (The petitioner's application and survey should establish that the water depth is too shallow to allow launching and mooring of the vessel(s) described without an extension.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET The proposed vessel (34'LOA) will likely have issues getting on and off its lift at low tide as there will only be approximately 1.7'to 2.0'of water depth available at the average low tide. However, the water depths at the site are such that the proposed configuration is the optimal design available for ingress, egress, and storage on a lift of the proposed vessel. Any other lift configuration within the applicant's riparian area poses even greater issues with water depths. The applicant acknowledges and understands this difficulty. 3. Whether the proposed dock facility may have an adverse impact on navigation within an adjacent marked or charted navigable channel. (The facility should not intrude into any marked or charted navigable channel thus impeding vessel traffic in the channel.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET There is no navigable channel at or adjacent to the proposed project 1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized. Page 2 of 7 location. Therefore, no marked or navigable channels will be affected by the proposed project. 4. Whether the proposed dock facility protrudes no more than 25 percent of the width of the waterway, and whether a minimum of 50 percent of the waterway width between dock facilities on either side is maintained for navigability. (The facility should maintain the required percentages.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET Measuring the waterway width at this site is somewhat problematic because both the subject property and the shore opposite the subject property both undulate substantially, meaning that the waterway width fluctuates depending on where the measurements are taken from and to. The survey provided describes the waterway width as 1,120 feet wide. Although this measurement is not specifically depicted on the survey, our interpretation is that this is a literal measurement taken at a right angle from the largest segment of the seawall at the subject property to a point on the opposite shore. If a perfect 90-degree angle is not utilized, and instead, we consider only the nearest point of shore opposite the property (regardless of angle of measurement), the waterway width could be approximately 682 feet. For the sake of a conservative measurement, we have elected to use the smaller of the two waterway widths (682) to address this criterion, though both can be seen depicted on exhibit sheet 09 of 09. The proposed dock facility will protrude a maximum of 39' from the face of the seawall or Mean-High-Water line, corresponding with the property line and the most restrictive point from which protrusion is measured. The proposed 39' would comprise approximately 6% of the 682' waterway width. Between the end of the proposed dock and the docks on the opposite side of the waterway is approximately 599'of open water, which equates to approximately 88%of the waterway being left for navigability. 5. Whether the proposed location and design of the dock facility is such that the facility would not interfere with the use of neighboring docks. (The facility should not interfere with the use of legally permitted neighboring docks.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The docking facility to the east is oriented so that ingress/egress occurs from the North(away from the subject property). This property should, therefore, not be affected by the project at all in terms of navigability. The property to the west has only about 2 feet of riparian water frontage available and is essentially non-buildable for dock construction. Therefore, we believe that no neighboring dock facilities nor public navigation will be affected by the proposed structures. Secondary Criteria: 1. Whether there are special conditions not involving water depth, related to the subject property or waterway,which justify the proposed dimensions and location of the proposed dock facility. (There must be at least one special condition related to the property; these may include type of shoreline reinforcement, shoreline configuration, mangrove growth, or seagrass beds.) Page 3 of 7 The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. This property has several unique characteristics aside from water depths that make dock construction design at this site difficult and essentially require the proposed configuration. The configuration of the neighboring lot and riparian lines and the accompanying riparian setbacks at this site create a pie-shaped riparian area, severely limiting buildable space for a dock and boat lifts. The pie-shaped buildable area would seem to be best utilized with a north-south ingress and egress path. However, water depths to the north will not allow travel by boat in this direction, even at higher tides. The area to the north is also covered in seagrasses, so using a northern ingress/egress path would not be feasible without damaging the grasses or running aground. An east-west navigation path is a more favorable navigation path for the sake of water depths and lack of seagrasses. The neighboring dock to the east, however, somewhat blocks this path. This dock is legally non-conforming with regard to state aquatic preserve restrictions (amount of decking) and county codes (side setbacks and protrusion). Rebuilding this dock differently in any way would mean bringing it into compliance with current codes. This would likely not be favorable, so it can be assumed that this dock will remain as-is for the foreseeable future.Any dock at the subject property should accordingly be designed so that navigation occurs around it. Despite the above-listed difficulties, the proposed dock configuration appears to be the only functioning design. 2. Whether the proposed dock facility would allow reasonable, safe access to the vessel for loading/unloading and routine maintenance, without the use of excessive deck area not directly related to these functions. (The facility should not use excessive deck area.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The proposed facility will utilize only about 243 square feet of decking. With the canopy over the existing boatlift, the total overwater structure will amount to approximately 588 square feet, which is still substantially smaller than many surrounding docks that exceed the 20'protrusion limit. The dock has already been authorized by the state (DEP) and federal government agencies (USACE). The decking proposed is not excessive. 3. For single-family dock facilities, whether the length of the vessel, or vessels in combination, described by the petitioner, exceeds 50 percent of the subject property's linear waterfront footage. (The applicable maximum percentage should be maintained.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS NOT BEEN MET The lengths of the proposed vessels are 34 feet and 12 feet for a combined total of 46 feet, whereas the subject shoreline is 77 feet; therefore, the vessels would occupy 59.74 percent of the waterfront area. 4. Whether the proposed facility would have a major impact on the waterfront view of neighboring property owners. (The facility should not have a major impact on the view of a neighboring property owner.) Page 4 of 7 The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The proposed dock re-configuration will be located in a corner of the waterway and is already surrounded by legally non-conforming docks on both sides. The use of the dock for private, single-family recreational purposes is not changing. Therefore, any change in views caused by the project will not be major. 5. Whether seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. (If seagrass beds are present, compliance with subsection 5.03.06.J of the LDC must be demonstrated.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. There are seagrass beds present within 200'of the property. Specifically, the grasses form what appears to be a continuous bed that traverses the northern portion of the riparian area of the subject property. These grasses are found north of the proposed structures and will not be affected by shading (regardless of time of day), or in-water structures associated with the proposed project. The proposed structures will be located (with the exception of 2 lift piles) entirely at a greater distance from the grasses than the required 10' buffer space per Chapter 5.03.063 J of Collier County's L.D.C. The two lift piles inside this buffer will be located no closer than 3'from the seagrasses. The remainder of the dock will also comply with the other requirements of Chapter 5.03.063 J, which include limiting the terminal platform to no more than 160 square feet, limiting the access walkways to 4' in width, and elevating the dock to at least 2.2' NA VD. The dock as proposed has already been authorized by the DEP and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and complies with restrictions associated with Rookery Bay Aquatic Preserve and Chapter 5.03.063 Jof Collier County's L.D.C. 6. Whether the proposed dock facility is subject to the manatee protection requirements of subsection 5.03.06(E)(11) of this Code. (If applicable, compliance with section 5.03.06(E)(11) must be demonstrated.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion is NOT APPLICABLE. The provisions of the Collier County Manatee Protection Plan do not apply to single-family dockfacilities except for those within the seawalled basin of Port of the Islands; the subject property is not located within Port of the Islands. ANALYSIS. Based on a review of the record including the Petition, application, exhibits, the County's staff report, and hearing comments and testimony from the Petitioner and/or the Petitioner's representative(s), County staff and any given by the public, the Hearing Examiner finds that there is enough competent, substantial evidence as applied to the criteria set forth in Section 5.03.06.H of the Land Development Code to approve/deny Petition. The Petition meets 5 out of 5 of the primary criteria and 4 out of 6 secondary criteria, with one criterion being not applicable. Page 5 of 7 DECISION. The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number BD-PL20220004574, filed by Nick Pearson of Bayshore Marine Consulting LLC representing Joseph Russo, with respect to the property described as Lot 78, Isles of Capri No. 1, in Section 31, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; together with that land lying North of said Lot 78,to the mean high tide line (150' MSL) in Government Lot 9 in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, for the following: • The Petitioner requests a 19-foot boat dock extension from the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet allowed by the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) for waterways greater than 100 feet in width to allow a boat docking facility protruding a total of 39 feet into a waterway that is 682± feet wide, for the benefit of the subject property. Said changes are fully described in the Dock Facility Plans attached as Exhibit "A" and the Map of Boundary Survey attached as Exhibit"B" and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below. ATTACHMENTS. Exhibit A—Dock Facility Plans Exhibit B —Map of Boundary Survey LEGAL DESCRIPTION. Lot 78, Isles of Capri No. 1, in Section 31, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida; together with that land lying North of said Lot 78, to the mean high tide line(150' MSL) in Government Lot 9 in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida CONDITIONS. 1. All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. 2. The dock shall be at least 2.2 feet NAVD. 3. The terminal platform area of the dock shall not exceed 160 square feet. 4. The access dock shall not exceed a width of 4 feet. 5. The access dock and terminal platform shall be sited to impact the smallest area of seagrass beds possible. Page 6of7 DISCLAIMER. Pursuant to Section 125.022(5)F.S., issuance of a development permit by a county does not in any way create any rights on the part of the applicant to obtain a permit from a state or federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the county for issuance of the permit if the applicant fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a state or federal agency or undertakes actions that result in a violation of state or federal law. APPEALS. This decision becomes effective on the date it is rendered. An appeal of this decision shall be done in accordance with applicable ordinances, codes and law. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND EXHIBITS: SEE CLERK OF COURT, MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. DECISIONS OF THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR VARIANCES, CONDITIONAL USES, AND BOAT DOCK EXTENSIONS SHALL BE NOTED ON THE ZONING MAP FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES. X.19#.#6,Z....t__,-.----- October 20, 2023 Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP Hearing Examiner Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT "A" b • I •le� N IR a ; r di• . "\ I. ' 0 g „' + a v `` �� a }i -...a ., tO sib I - ' a M—I i‘iiitiP • F 7. U L •• i z Y� , IC mac > I t - 7 { tt.g w U N ryuW nN N• ,'• I I0 lir 5 it % ` • ,R,' i (I)et) id Jw a1 Z Lmo _ 0� ww �� Q 7 Mo nri nJ Q� WW CO a CD n o L CCQ • N0D d� C,,D Z� �� z s • � OCA J w W0 o� 7 Zk � tUQQ wa jZ F6 z eOQ Q g w ry w Q „ 0 I o � W z O w �/ <Z n f Y X coaW EL .J / W z J �ZJ ao CO w ¢ .- � Z 11 Q g0 ,, ow CO z Awe w ¢ O <ad viw0 0 c,Q w oucv ." �, 2 ti FMZ E. �•� mow_ v. v Ov e, 4 Go W � c�U ri gl U O ts w tl 07 - rC4 e3 aN ceA„..... 2 U U kii i III 1.10.0501,14c II 'i F.--. ..<- R/f1-- 4 Ia 01,,. } '] Z U 1� I G a / 1 lR.) al ce Na W P:121203.00 Russo-33 Pelican St WiCADlPERMI 6COUN IYQ1203 PDF Jecouerdwg 1.00ATIOV MAP 5131.10023 ., 4 Iztitas -,- 41, _mi. : ... rT-.(„‘i. f . 1 diMillailliffr : 1 w . w 1::1;)111"1" 0 Q., ct 14''. 7.44 11-- t., ' . 4"/ d 41 me '< iu rn • ! ! !!• 1111111111 I- ..,,,a, „,„ , ....,„,._ .,,x ,., g' Milli �•• � „. a .t _ ` yNZyVr °$' W WJ 4Np • Mill? Q Y Q 1-=a« <6 . • o m o Q ZI. : : sto � � � c� O ila Z • H Q - • '� air" XE a wUm / i� le QU • •:a Q � W a app... 0 u) : Z F Z add -r=� CruCL wi � . — • 56l Z O : I: r Z ®• ,��: . .,?\N:2\ z ' 117.11... .#04-. � Q ' u. a lih!- r � � ga IW x zW Wm I� + Q� dig.. ter. ,I► _ �41 • f.Z C `L QW 2J . r i ` E. +' • Z QW ri. 1� • CO o V. te ❑ Q ~� CALL � ! ; ti wwa, • e C7 ❑ 1- F- ❑ N • itl . 4. "E o ZQO ❑ w � + lip � QOOt L a r y iLi L.'''11111 1 4111.i r z = � d ¢ o �C e� 0 Z , r -t Q ti U a-J •- . opill cre3..-= Z 4 1 li O d 2 * M 1 c�W a ,* ZQ O f4- i . wog � Or X e. ..a ► t AO f oho :'...'.‘...t "OH' II: 1.' 6 . w ;V, , W.,11111.: P.121203.00 Nusso-33 Pohcan St NACADiPEIiMITCOUNTY12 I203.8DE_rocovecowg E XISIING CONUII IONS 6114/2023 o 1 0 a u1i Liik' f 4 W P. z tea J W• ��� ��� �. opp i N W O5 r-,�.sXe•� z `0 o it w x ����0 r J ¢_ z 0 w NNW J grcg aN !IIIII •� ►- 2 Z 0 (� woo xc" as a ¢ w Y ►_ 0. -0_a awl .1� . ` pQ o- z 0 = a - agW� rt, '�_p. 111113 O - � J O W fA �./c>o �� � �x AMEN cl J m ¢ �ma pa-T a0. A MEN P co min . Nw'' ~NLL Q y N -p 0 1 a F -2 `� zo .o W,w oaw4j 11111 N N` u77�a aN�d o�� ill F FI ? N a3i af3 W co W off- s z Z a.< Q M \ /M r Q' CO X ^� Y F- Mai • O uN O Z i :: N„, � / \ ❑ ¢ p Z gi WOE � � LLJ ' • N #°**Il--- in 'I` cv MT X p U) ill ..... c2 7\c`! All. 0 0 i i. 41) . iv. , s 1.,,„ N. ,— _,. .,„ _, W 11 1:!. , Tf:$j ,' .fc.r:1r,..1.(e 6A pt, U-) I— I- 4`cLv - Z .4) 111 2)M N 4 ... 4. I: a. � ,., Ajz(9 ❑ � � � cu UMQ♦ ,�nj �! o Q .I Q p w N a0 oiE d �� wZm1 a2w � ¢ �w zOl- ' 0 x x a 6- Q W • ❑ - 0-_ Z . W W 0 0 2 !# lot OW * 416e E— n . • w e -J 2 PI ilk n P:121203.00 Russo-33 Pccfn St NACAD1P€RMIT-COUNTY17 1203-ROE recover.dwv,BA04ISC1 SITE 6,14/2023 :QO /v/ CC = jP _ / ww � o . u) I >/ i 11 :... , r g �' q /' o rc::: 2-- ---- - -- - - ; >' 0 asl \/-\/- \/\� \/ \% ..\\/\- " ; T. cWn /\i\///,tX//. ,i\ Q 4 s� /. /� : —= __ ELT o\. X b \' 0 (I) 1 co M?W IV HldJa 3O,8'6 ',\�' M U s z. J z — ldil ddO 1JSS9A HDNnd /\jt� a F Q I Ol a3Hlno Hld3a JO,£:�/\\� CO I ��%/// 'J I 1 S)INle Idfl HOd j\\\\,, C a3ulflb3f Hld3a JO rE'l //%. VI N p I Ii N w \ o � a X \/\/ 4) \LL cna = D \ •� '4 F _ w w n \ adw -- Z\ gu"1 Z < QQm\\/\ Ewa 0 /\` \\,�\\-�\\\�e / \ \/�i\/! �! P{21203,00 Rassr 33 Pelican SI IPACAOIPERAIIT-COUNT1121203-SOE racover.dwe CROSS SECTION AA 011412023 y//\j \,/,\ w O \ \�\! °0 or W Z Z \//\' Z cr o r , J //\,/ � rn 2 in I.v = a D CO 7/ p E 1. M o \\ - �� Co a. a' n• 0 O U W mt 9 1- a a W W _� , , 0 Cd a R, ___ ___ W ° W\ � ` O /: � 2F- �// z m I \/\ (n E J U),\ / '- O 2 9 W 2 co \/ �— //• _ H \�' � w2v� .\i O I \ 0 in ',e, Vt J a. W I \. Q m W :j, Q m. . / u) € s� / ------ Jr •I Iw III _ _._—.-_-----.-_ W H U \j\�j / 4 o \ \//\ \ �I o _ vco to El.' . .> �,.2 A / __ i x w P:121203.00 Russo-33 Pchcan St WCAOIPFRAIIT.C7UMV121203-BDE recover.ewy CROSS SECTION BB 611 412 0 2 3 4 .. Ur (----- --i*i.t. .. 0 . ::: -1141' 1111m; ID .'. 11111 . .- 41 .,.....„ ......"-1 o o co z N g ' f. ! 14 11111 Illor o JI › •• ..., < 0 X (I m , .... r. . F. • . • //A a- z •lik .. . T / w 1 0 1 / / / / ,4.. , IN-2m4k / / , . .• / / . 1 . e < 0 . i ' . .- • I I,:h 1.- > . to 0 rv..- T- 1 ..,....- . I U) 5 / / • - ' // , -• , - .4- rn Dr- / / / / / r,. / / / / / I% ....Ole LLI r• Et !: / / / / / / . • / 06 UJ i (1, / / / / / / ,00c, CY : / t •. .... a / / / / / 1..1 aj I / / / CD • / / / W 1 / / / / /// / / / / / , .., 2 t / • / / ..- 0.1 c13 ' / / / / ///// / - . ' - .4111014 1 ,40/ / / / / / , D U) # / , r. L., dr / / CO g fro t / / ' ./ ,e I , • / / / • l--/ ....•• • Jr •11:" rl'› II kc / 4 • __. 174 0 71-, n = L.. :14'kIF .;:„3 ‘•.,-- -2 .5 o •J - ,, • II. ••C.% _••••• _1 ezi w ;,,-- 3 • . l's ii....a: ‘.m......_. ='M 0 F• , , .,... .... Li - jq -: I.411114 Lyn g ' • -1 . ' 0 X'.44k- 1 Vi-- ' t • 1 -*, I: . ' • . . - •— v4cn, 2 uir .... % P.121203.00 Russo.33 Pelocan Sl VACADAPERMIT.COUNTY121203.ROF rot-am-Am;611.111802:11E0 RESOURCE SURVLY 6/14/2023 (.°F. �' 1 ,, o N . f a rf ----). - d 1:j. ' C:44 47:4.E t 11 34:::: 11' " cr — ,,,,,„,f3y 4*4, '*It,' . t : 0 11, , •. a. ---1 t e-- 1::-' * ...'" Millill < UJ '/ (4) _. , .1, ,„ INN c` t : :. i. mw cc 11 A li ' 2 9Z L uiaa rrn O I- a V� 4J Y !. . z . i IS9 . 4 0 r1 9 1 W § mil ill i t f' - `' I ° o , . CO c.,j b4 m M eI M . , :: F:r,: „ --1 T- i\,,,.\ , _ . ...it, . ..... , ,..,—A —1 .'' ,toil ,z,,3.g z ._ '-' * \Ill' N 7..c1 '6' r.;;:z ; ,— O. r 14,E'" '�', ao 1.2 'vie • . • .24 .4.' IT `4$ 14 -Y ' i 4 toliiill r„. o.i \\tot -::INS.:. 4/k. N • f,„ , 1 - \ dilo, .. i _ . ,.... )41' ...4 /4' / _ <, p cif e I ti. P:121203.00 Russo-33 PeI,crn SI MACA0IPERMI I-LOUN1 Y121203-HUE recover.dwu&d UIT DOCKS GI14/2023 I; ,\ rO , ' w �f• - • .A. 4 L rAktr4f., .tiF � N r 1IlIz IL } ,�,, se®©s® a CI cf › ...- : a 04 4 ,`b 0 oW N . . • .. , 4 . . _If 40 0 1 g z } s o ) iQw4 WO T + � • r , j ,; a V O 0 — f- i w JU3R� W # , .„,„/ . -.007." CL Om i t , \ /14. ,,''',. ' ..:°:(:•,,,; EA. 04) CI) Si i - . \ "V CJ 00 M�I • - • M • V r.w : �74 ffott y�. `• , y .Q C Li f/] . • a ; a � q )1 1, F-41t 04 ter ` -"' F •} I I -0 seilitA04 .' ''', ' k. 1,- ... P,V 1203.0Q Russn-33 Pelcan SI IMCAD1PERMIT.COIINTYI21203 ROE recover.Owq ST OVERLAY 611 412 0 2 3 4 —. IT'. AggteiN -ICY • e vt,..ra—ir '14,. - "7 . .,,, . .._ ,,-., (0 ,sitilla1. / ,. a <, c 1a1 z 1( . 40 C--------) :YN ci > �'l�i� _rfi :.'• ' ✓ , ..4 !_T'' fix' `, NR 111� sir ,t 1•'l� �' i . , 1 1 4r'ti•'fit. �' +' N ..,:,Jr., • I of*. 211111111111 g gilt . Z ' .-,),,..% -,' .':"r"--,..,..!. ,' .' , . ."'",... , — '"" - I el, /` 7 2 O ' °74r. \'..,4;$ }1' ' V .' 1 j4tL4.1tyF • ite iv, 1. t �. ,i0 o. _ - mow` • t.• -,4 1w 0- — ,y• 4,. � 1 :+. 14 is �� t , .ger 411,61 • • 4 r y • a., Q 1"..... ,,i�' 1`, F W , 4 1,101 ,) ,,,, Et Q 1,.. it 7? 0 111 0 U- 1 ;4 - • a .; , °�1� Fir m - W -,. <it .1 . 1�� _' CO 10 01 g �iey --. A U.)N ^I '_ , ,l,,r i. iI, I,I• ''„''''... , rya •,`... 0'. ..,. 4'\. - .:,, ,J. r 4• T 1 4 CC ) fniu.i-i1i..:,f,i,Nt Or ,' .. ,' r1...77..„..i._,,, sei.s ,i1 , 11.1f2, .. X\'4 tr. ...%)‘. i..7-6.-:- •idow . -\ A c� • rr � ozs 4 t •,,, : / ...e...is, 1" .. 4.1 > 3 ,• • Ci [ =03 •4 — ' :. . ...- •'if 'sc.' '''. , ;4? .g..i), „i-- . ,, ./,',• fr4...teili% ,,,,, 0„,t ,i, c,_ . .. j ,-, . , ..__. 0 ni en . . •1 i.4. liii$ ' 'le'''. ' It* ''b4444t-itt' ..,) lie: 1 - gal P;121203.00Russa-33 Pelican SI W\CAUIPLRMI1 COUN1Y\21203-1313E recover.clwa WIDTH 01 WATERWAY 6/142023 EXHIBIT " B " ■ '. a z o o v 111 -cc g i2 1•i °wa 1- U o o o o ..i ' a cn a 1.....2 CC W r �O¢ 1il =0aw ug ca B u� ^ C ig U4 lin ,,zw O N 0(tyo QWC Y O1 a�- g i §I d / �;+ o z i/ N �.O Z zrs'AO r g im.VP � Z i R N ■ bi v 2 Z F' ow Ow to O zNw z? z 6 y a o m W 0 * Y a E E20. '-°e F � &)W N € a o �/ , o -LL rQ o0,- p, .acez U q 6ymWwo -6 ce O (VCC ■ O� m p�Wt.jj �QQ0 @le 0 a m12 � V■ F.Do cwiN�m, w N -1 m • O~ v; te v Z W F E o 5 m W �F c) ;F� _ N LL CO m O1�o a E h�l (n y S��w osa�6 _ `o LL O 41 r m o Z O n J aWo8 7 •~zIu. IFz¢t, \.i w ,_ - o Z 8 M al 2561 y p Ozw ¢O z 0 z rW- n r� W w az a F(Fai6 o ( 0 0 0 rn rn X d gWooaoauu�� O c M `. ; CS13 0 ~ow Q gW A voagaozM �i i§g t (6- ibr; = o -.4 e• m ,wh. t 1 s2W ON N N »z to•rgj Q< ''1- 33 wZ0e LLg QNQ x0 LLO o LL175[, li �$ O U 7 cl ;Z O D 63 j� OZ4 ggiyltiiz m K ^2 E 0 yI, 1Z 1 a w W 13 N` . Xya6.0 EZOQE 4 3N 'Ora o 7mf �0 W N E O SSu(M2 h Le o$ yypty �LLLL �' go{Ud oZZdZZ Wf+gg/l��Wm {Z-7� & ulcoiwaw2Wru N g N NNZ0i00� d Nrt pdig.k? K QV 1 Rl',' Gwi .-t- 1u�1V on sg _w57NZ..,L O K N N ON N N FF O O mZ LL" 7�U W$ C) {$�1 z Ill (jw� S � w �W W $NVg� O 06 pW Pp QO VQ 111/-K Z m� WNc ZO 1 ' M LL �N o Q F $ O 3KC O�lil N F �NF E � K a 00 OU x Ny£� 1 Oo ¢ w o w oQ 3_ W iwxm "v_ Q0 16" pvo ce �1,' p N�i No ai-s od -1§ o o _4g zog? i w O WO pm x > y�F+ zQv�£Y�Ipu o zU Na7 NO K�Op�m � O a W� Z Y zoO '■� U ■ o W��yQ� xZOOm P4 r ui j aqy G ci 1Q3FZc°, 3ZW ;wlr LLw Z 0W32 iUWo c K 2 ru O °- OZO Q OFZJO Smq�gyQNl OO��)W N F" O kWO N !Jqt pq)m olgs m rot WJyQ Ol-� W UK o z O K ,- o < Wm" KO2 F;"-e g0 ~ � r G WQp��(7 WWQ pQp KWUWLL vyW�FE SO a0 zst a. � W RRLL" Q:, O U Y J 1;6hOgg-WWg WCO 4 aNQ u7 NZ "u' 0OilOSO.O^p 00 e� g1O3� d n zLL V drgQzz2,- gz a aoz 'I w v 0 z ° LLggc) N o ' Xo z0z z z0.u.,,a2 r ■i<<Oa0 ,NoZNO1 -o ooa MI �3m�l5zai �a OQQer4OQQLLia g6cUU8 0A19 SRIdV010 I ¢¢Q 6g, I :t ICI coft Z�a iiiiii !gip bNaze 0 O# gy § I9 e �� O90 E® r$ 3. ,YoN Wpffi (wln o cr I 3.96CC.09N W 4 g \\ ; # / ig liEt 5d i w I Vi I ' il 1 I v °'�� 11 ° l � � I e a N IMM01lLL (NO,9C.00 ® J / °1 ,00w -� M.0,1) 008 (d),a9'oe 1 U N�oo.�4�Q040�8 k0 3.OQLtio9N 1 J\ ;c l° Is. gI il i .! 11 9 �,� e 0