Loading...
HEX Final Decision 2024-32HEX NO. 2024-32 HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DATE OF HEARING. June 13, 2024 PETITION. Petition No. BD-PL20230002187 —159 Tahiti Street -Request for a boathouse and a 10-foot boat dock extension over the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width, to allow construction of a boat dock facility and boathouse protruding a total of 30 feet into a waterway that is 149 feet wide. The subject property is located at 159 Tahiti Street, also known as Lot 285, Isles of Capri No. 2, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION. The petitioner requests a boathouse and a 10-foot boat dock extension over the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width to allow the construction of a boat dock facility and boathouse protruding a total of 30 feet into a waterway that is 149 feet wide. 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 public hearing was conducted in the following manner: 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 to this item at the public hearing. Page 1 of 8 5. The Petitioner must satisfy the LDC criteria for both the dock facility and for the boathouse. 6. Regarding the dock facility: In accordance with LDC Section 5.03.06.H., the Collier County Hearing Examiner shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a dock facility extension request based on certain criteria. In order for the Hearing Examiner to approve this request, at least four of the five primary criteria and four of the six secondary criteria must be met.' 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.) TI7e record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The property is located within a residential single family zoning district; the proposed docking facility with a boathouse will have a single slip with a boat lift. 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 testimon,}> from the public hearing reflects that tlZe triter°ion HAS NOT BEENMET. The applicant's expert stated that the `proposed boat dock project is to basically replace the existing docking facility onsite but increase the overall boathouse size and associated finger piers to accommodate the applicant's vessel. There is riprap along the entire subject property shoreline except for within the boathouse slip, as indicated on the attached certified survey. Additionally, the survey has water depths which indicate that depths are sufficient on -site and therefore this criterion is not met. " 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. The applicant expert stated that the "proposed docking facility design is consistent ivith ivhat is there today and has been in place prior to 1985. The dock is consistent with numerous other docks along the subject and adjacent ivater•i)mys, as ivell as the overall protrusion. As proposed the dock and boathouse will not impact navigation 1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized. Page 2 of 8 as well as maintain the ingress/egress to both adjacent neighboring docks. There is no marked channel within this section of Tarpon Bay, and as a result, there will not be any impacts to the existing navigation as a result of 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.f°om the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The approximate waterway width at this location is 149 feet; therefore, the requested 30 foot protrusion would account for 20.13 percent of the waterway. As there is no dock facility on the opposite shore, 79.87 percent of the i-vaterway remains open for navigation. 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 criter•ion HAS BEEN MET. The proposed plans show no impact on the ingress/egress of neighboring dock facilities as the facility provides much greater than the minimum required side/riparian setbacks. Secondary Criteria: 1. Whether there are special conditions not involving water depth related to the subject property or waterway that 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.) The record evidence and testimony fi•om the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. Tlie applicant's expert stated that the "subject pr°operty shoreline consists of a concrete seawall with rip -rap along the entire 154 linear feet exceptfor the boathouse slip. The proposed dock is basically a reconstruction of what is there today, other than modernizing the boathouse and associated finger piers to accommodate the applicant's vessel. Additionally, the ividth of the waterway and the fact the entire wateri-vay is open for navigation allows for a dock to protrude out, which is consistent with ours within the subject waterway. " 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.) Page 3 of 8 The record evidence and testimony f rom the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The applicant's expert stated that the "The proposed docking facility has been filly minimized and still provides deck area for routine maintenance, safe access, and recreational activities like fishing. The total over -water square footage is 1,254 square feet, which is only an increase of 59 square feet from what is there today. " Given that no changes are proposed to what already exists for that portion of the dock that could be deemed excessive, County staff is inclined to concur. 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 r•ecor°d evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the cr°iterion HAS BEEN MET. This is a single -slip facility. The slip has been designed to accommodate a 26 foot vessel, and the shoreline is 134.4 feet; the vessel }-till, therefore, accommodate 19.35 percent of the property's linear water ftontage. 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.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The applicant's expert stated that "as proposed, the dock has been designed within the designated setbacks and is consistent with the existing docking facility that is there currently and has been there prior to 1985. There are no impacts to either adjacent properly owner cis their view will not change as the proposed overall facility) is consistent with what is there today. " County Planning Staff agreed with this as the provided side/riparian setbacks are much greater than the required 15 feet. Additionally, the facility's location is at the widest portion of the entry into a local canal. 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 f 4on2 the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The szrbmerged resources survey provided indicates that no seagrass beds exist within the footprint of the dock. No seagrass beds will be impacted by the proposed dock facility. 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 cind testimony ji•orn the public hearing reflects that the criterion is not applicable. The provisions of the Collier Count) Manatee Protection Plan do not apply to docks behind individual residences. 7. Regarding the boathouse: In accordance with LDC Section 5.03.06.F., the Collier County Hearing Examiner shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Boathouse request based on certain criteria. Boathouses, including any roofed structure built on a dock, shall be reviewed by the Hearing Examiner according to the following criteria, all of which must be met in order for the Hearing Examiner to approve the request Criteria• 1. Minimum side setback requirement: Fifteen Feet. The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. Per the submitted site plan, the boathouse will provide side/riparian setbacks greater than 15 feet. 2. Maximum protrusion into waterway: Twenty-five percent of canal width or 20 feet, whichever is less. The roof alone may overhang no more than 3 feet into the waterway beyond the maximum protrusion and/or side setbacks. The f•ecord evidence and testimony from t17e public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The subject boat dock is to allow foil a 30 foot protrusion. The subject roof overhang is 1.5 feet, which is less than the alloivable 3 feet; the maximum protrusion of the boathouse roof is 31.5 feet. 3. Maximum height: Fifteen feet as measured from the top of the seawall or bank, whichever is more restrictive, to the peak or highest elevation of the roof. The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The proposed height is I5 feet above the seawall. 4. Maximum number of boathouses or covered structures per site: One. The recoi°d evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. Only one boathouse is to be built on this property. 5. All boathouses and covered structures shall be completely open on all four sides. The record evidence and testimony fi•om the public hearing reflects that the cr•iter•ion HAS BEENMET. The boathouse ti-vill be open on all four sides. 6. Roofing material and roof color• shall be the same as materials and colors used on the principal structure or may be of a palm frond "chickee" style. Asingle-family z The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized. dwelling unit must be constructed on the subject lot prior to, or simultaneously with, the construction of any boathouse or covered dock structure. The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The roofing material and color will match that of the upland principal structure. 7. The boathouse or covered structure must be so located as to minimize the impact on the view of the adjacent neighbors to the greatest extent practical. The record evidence and testimony fi°orn the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEENMET. The boathouse is located within the required sideh°iparian setbacks and is consistent with other similar facilities along the subject shoreline. ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Environmental Planning Staff has reviewed this petition and has no objection to the granting of this request. The property is located adjacent to an ST overlay zone (Johnson Bay), which will require an ST permit for the proposed docking facilities prior to issuance of the building permits. The proposed docking facilities will be constructed waterward of the existing seawall and riprapped shoreline. The shoreline contains a mangrove fringe located along the north property boundary; any impacts to the mangroves will require a permit from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). The submerged resources survey provided by the applicant found no submerged resources in the area. Exhibit sheet page 8 of 10 provides an aerial with a note stating that no seagrasses were observed within 200 feet. This project does not require an Environmental Advisory Council Board (EAC) review because it did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Chapter 2, Articie VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. ANALYSIS. The Hearing Examiner concludes that there is enough competent, substantial evidence based on the review of the record that includes the Petition, application, exhibits, the County's staff report, and comments and testimony from the Petitioner and/or their representative(s), County staff and anyone from the public, to approve the Petition for the boat dock and boathouse. The boat dock petition meets 4 primary criteria and 5 secondary criteria out of 5 and 6 respectively, with one criterion being not applicable. The boathouse petition meets all of the criteria. The criteria are set forth in Section 5.03.06.I-1 and Section 5.03.06T of the Land Development Code. DECISION. The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number 13D-PL20230002187, filed by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc., representing Peter J. and Jacqueline A. Travisano, with respect to the property described as 159 Tahiti Street, also known as Lot 285, Isles of Capri No. 2, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East. Collier County, Florida, for the following: • To allow the construction of a boathouse pursuant to Land Development Code Section 5.03.06.F. and a 10-foot boat dock extension over the maximum permitted protrusion of 20 feet for waterways greater than 100 feet in width to allow the construction of a boat dock facility and boathouse protruding a total of 30 feet into a waterway that is 149 feet wide pursuant to LDC Section 5.03.06.E.1. Said changes are fully described in the Zoning Map attached as Exhibit "A", the Map of Specific Purpose Survey attached as Exhibit "B" and Dock and Boathouse Plans and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below. ATTACHMENTS. Exhibit A —Zoning Map Exhibit B — Map of Specific Purpose Survey Exhibit C — Dock and Boathouse Plans LEGAL DESCRIPTION. The subject property is located at 159 Tahiti Street, also known as Lot 285, Isles of Capri No. 2, 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. A Certificate of Completion camlot be obtained for the boathouse until after a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the principal structure; Permit No. PRFH2O2306258. 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 fiom 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. Page 7 of 8 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, July 12, 2024 Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP Hearing Examiner EA Z O W � N v J Q F� c'S C -I W � o. o Lm rq IoQ BD-PL20230002187 — 159 Tahiti St Page 2 of 8 May 24, 2024 a 0 N C W N > Atglass z zoo,w z M �2 MOW N W N V F N LL w Z�o�o y s c� o S a �o p¢ Jz H o L`� C z (/)z O wig Q W z LL a a ip o n ro W N z��o pN u� z UP ■ ui w O"OLL N zt� wzzJ z o y ik i IL ,/� W O OQxa-a O E$+ Z Y I �' W Ur w w (n F O N N a J �j -Oi LL C a wl 0. wawa oz w �¢ 6 WO W(69 yeas C) ■ = 0 m w p w (n Q ?�LpV WY o' i- �J � < § WEE Up' 4 avl rO {L KOpU = cWiQ cwiNFSZFF�zw wg rL# ■ 0E- F to c 0 O <(a WW H = Naga �hOm C�7 '�' w p�,m Qw,uo= ° vZJ H F2J N J iEiEOwwwoz OLL WnN R Eo^O BOOMF HJ J FO'iO ZOOZ = LL V Z U Y. � J M W O W zdww��9: W t O @i Mass W H Op K ow�a0�0 Z w w W v F�00 U O O m m d ~ W�,<w<�yycOcwss w 'C` u N VOTTa Juv2a V v NFF Z p z F W 2 Z !!-- a 0 F° Q W m WWOQK mo Z€3 w— Wm K LL O in W > � Z °z <MY TzTm� ay"k'°°€OMMM J-X0 �ZD000 Sww h � 3 9 pN¢mmc��iw vie � oom'w'¢$� 00N v�W;OLw Oz w!mEN �m W UWwwi-�' O O p mSW ().WO BOO y Oww �NWH m w>pki -006i o., �s mmXww LL mo i Tu agCmogm" Zow" o>OQou��o o on Fm mac°i Czz< q 3 20 M} W >'Z800a m�jzww x wm"wJ'��m a m m ° �O pp Sw OOZ yyyyyy///nK > LL.tl>> S W NiKW¢-{t¢mt¢A� vi w 4�f>W> N LLWr�(W <aZU Q a� ✓�.. O N OV Fi 0 Zzzr Ow z ZO uw�j Omz jczw�w2 Z K n j Smj a7??��FU- Ow hi a w 'US¢Q wm""FF''0 cFFi'~m' UWN N zm'iJa o N'_�� of rz€� O Zi =w�`a Ngmu_ w��m�� °k>ouoi �Z'Ow OPOO Z�Z �� eaw€5F IFyp° >>>>m$ airl-DLLw W> $ Jz W z $'m a<ioo 'Zw a o°m 0"���5uuuw WEaU' ¢� mpo z >KK¢OIL ZO wO K? aOa Zm W ww ww 2 E J w < Q ZU-'ZwGa c ti . O0� Jul W Zzm6m J Ow E w uS W coIg Ow Ky ZQU ZOZKOO Src iEuO *SU 0w0 Q�Np§'i w JO R. W a z Z MUM a i m* �FZ Ww2 Fo o Om F"'w Z GI a y W o u 0O>w Q Z< UZ 40w J Y pZ Z N m Om ¢ Ow W O'a Sp. ¢ <wm¢w 2 > OYYz2 u�Z<Z ° >> � 5wa m - ffrc Fw jzwp 'F.5 O iywZ & �FF ZZ y ZFt" m o�"�mQ ZZyya? J Q tJ-�p zW_F FUFW Z ti 0 K QaM2~wm WOmj Qoq< J) a 6j w° OK>O O r °O—a Q<2mW Smm WJw ZOFOS� K O U y O QZmWWOYl-O Ymm Fwmt 2rui .. iiz° wa m '3 w 5 gyai ciww¢F N°o oN -mwLL E u ¢ o '' Buz w mowu 25gz32 5 �F� -pi°moo �' ° i ug< Sgo O a > a z sa �z °w <z ZwF o 0 oaw of 'x 1 o MEM XWO0 orb you a mgu " rc �m Qxx o-w F - rc i ao- m: mrcw 3 o m �N- y mw 5 Jw w u F�0 �Zxuo z. u z w9� oy t K"�_zm 5yJ o w m o o p w w H 5 k' Z < o w 2=��ow Naa m uu. a- W w <>>{�� ea�rz�u a00T ~ FNU Zen 6'�WG y0 01- Fm WWw> Ow0NOLL m Ow m 5 ® N U 0 swag O zF,z u,w �¢ 0100 o t40w%%� vW822 a w a too ai "' mi€wow mwi Jw • • mu�rco ••�„ w Z -o<o Na mm . naaoao ozNo< mow z 00■o$OOLL aaaao"��$Qomi>mw�m �u ❑w wwzb } O a 8a <80�! � J m�pW w0ow fy ZZ w oo�8 W a� (' iL3sm a°Q wo§000Y kSz SONo OZ ono iF y. ...5 i� t,�a ° oa °N °�3w ' y sw u� a x O� \) w M o z << �r IV LL: a AlNO 3NI1-3LL w `o ¢ m °� a n 8 ma Nz mo m Z=` u Fo z CC�� o �N N w� F to K� \amoo. F--zo 05%�� A _ � � �O i ooQ� (V 2 O� �0 /ply < rc O O cc am N (W),bS't6 H 3.DO.SI,CON O z OHOHO J w llp Ug YOm grz o \ /6 O ¢ _ \0p W L r a A\J ow> / 3 _ Oww m�Z \� z5l zmF _ i uw W wQ F�/ W > OV J zoro o M �hy°�b.��P� \�Q. o P a OP U �l �r LL o � roi utDi = a v W W � 0 � � O b b O i 2 jF . W o 0 m W N o0 0 U w v v N � v Z jU�' U c 1: 0 J L 1 W 0 W 0 Z Q 00 UZ QS � F OF MEXICO � m a OUL Z U K W W 0 mp ma U m J co 0 Z cu O n w W 1n N 00 O Z Z O w O U ~ U j Z F Z O QOj WU LL v v Of p OLL U. p w 0 az cm U) LU ZZ �M �0 W I LL w O w AQw LU Iwo F z O N Q V V z v v Z N FN W W 2 2 N N � a K N Z 0 w 0 m N P:123004 Travisano - 159 Tahiti St1CAD1PERMIT-COUNTri23004-BDE.dwg LOCATION MAP I Jur t• W � W m a. DO ry d Ur J Z J 1— cn Q W0 f Tahiti St\CADIPERMIT-COUNTY123004-BDE.dwg 1985 W U) W O O m Q LL m J F- Q 00Oj _ cjm� Z Z X m m O W W Q r� XOJ Ll W :E a O y � 2 z 2 Q a � � 11.5Cb t� 1+ 1 J N ^,ss 3 �b£LV 2 S• �� M LL w CT) J LO Z J � J Q m Q Q W IJ = F- O LL O W J O LL = W Y O O 0 zZ Z U ¢ Z w J Z > 0 3� 0 0�� w _ w zzO fan z Ow F, a¢ GFwrc Ow' a?3 Iwo awx ow� �wxo.-WwQ wo3wwz3� °u F00 z2owFohzz �o >DaZoo33 F 1%ww�� a�❑< i-�¢¢N aw3F z m � W J X � L m O W Z � ciW m W F� J Z Z Q co a W W w u U V m Z w Q 0 ¢ a old OI P:\23004 haNsano - 159 Tahitl St\CADIPERMIT-COUNT1923004-BDE.dwg EXISTING CONDITIONS 3I1912024 0 �W U Op OW Q' �x LL �n X 0o N W w D O O �OM LL W ONI— W O iv I— O m a Y (+) Nm LL W W W _ u Z Q Q W Z � J � T T T T T Z W Q Z z m 0 Q' J Q ��O W X W W W J FF n� z ¢ z J W N N 0 3� N O ��N N K NO U' li> xm ZZZ O W F- d¢ a x'� w=O QKm r D: w rU � + Wd w OW DmK ZU� �0O w0 = f~ilOi O IW-W 0_oS fS/)w} ¢ ¢ w o 0 3 w w z 3 a n w aow¢m z zoo¢ �w 31 0)Doow< a�o3� 4�z2o>zo3Fbzowo C7 ¢ W>x >U> D o' m O O O a m Z a j m OFF W =W�n a-xx�o WOO r H¢¢m ¢W3F Z QN D a d Z W N _ O N N O� W J j U1 a w J a -j n w w a cn } Y u_ J O I- U O ~Q m m 00 = W i N 8 p , z WU 3 ii o N Z d rc tt N z �K 0 F N g o M rclo TraNsano - 159 Tahill SgCAD1PERMIT-COUNTY123004-eOE.dwo BR®Pa16ED DOCK -DIMENSIONS 3/19I2024 w Sim s. U) Lq EDo 'v Q 11 LL a O Z � J wQ O� O n rK Q n _ � Y � O p w n Ow �X LL Ln wcn o� w o� aOzo O I- n Q Om a�O m d Y oo Z W Q Z Q Ci 2 p Z � Z 0 3? W �y m 0 0�� rr ul N Oa d �UK� aLL ui zz� da aw z�Wm Wad aQa ^m??w two <� a U +' W 2 W N(w: ZU� �D� W K 2 U O 0 0 N ��LL ONE w�K �20..N W r F-�LL K ¢�z ¢pZ}ppF3 Wp0 wIW- Z�w zwxao3W¢..>>>3� 3zoo �'o3?�zaw0 poaOj�zoo=3woa V%IW W p KNay Q�� r�¢¢0 ¢uY13F a00 z U LL1 W 0_ m O D rK co wOVOOO �IIIIN I � � N LO d 3 0 S o m Z 0 d 0 U w s = uWi P:\23004 Travisano - 159 Tahiti St\CADIPERMIT-COUNTY\23004-BDEdv:q BR®4�ED DOCK -DEPTHS IN - § / a \ ILL / / a / }//.../ g E ) )//...I E _ ..! 0 lzww4w e �!\)\ } ! \ } / . l [ § / { . �\)\\ % oo= - //� - | oww / A3! S(].� » E n= §§§- % $��ƒ)� a< Ew$ — § %/|��) � � J} \) ƒ ( j) §/ $ƒ | $ m( / / \ j m , \ _ w§$ O[ e ®2o �( ILL /i2 U; / | ==mu _ \ \oa\ — � ±// \}\G | /ate/ ro 5®~® / 4 | | - \K G2s/ po$g c\ | | 88 \% co m 00 m //Kr \\ \� \� . �§ \|zi (0 zo � � ) j P:U3 aTravi _ us _St\C AD\P _IT-C OUN TY\23004 — _ CROSS SECm,< 3/19/2024 l' ^ ✓ O _+ N o m w �r o z N � N ML z w o Ur bq OF � Q 1 0 � ~ Z>O r t#'� �� 8� 0 m LLI o o m w w U) Q o S T W d. Q Q 0 �Qco ` aw wzwa� U 'e2 - X y a w z W W.. 0 0 0 N N O (7 Or \� : k f ,. tlieI z z ui Q� LL �T P923004 Travlsano - 1 N w r Q LLl cc I G v [\ M O v a� I w W �Q -<",o Q w Q23 -! z o O U) ag o � LL z z Fmm� v Ow M W W tea w Q I G Z F- Q III W v Lv Pam-, W W (D_� z F- w LL�) w000 (n (D LL a - QCD CD0 Q (y. z O � U) 0 Om-()� z0(a. osz AkW ♦� m W 0 l W� cn 0� r ti z Z za z > O m y 0 0� o z zo � D o U dZ O O K ¢ O mw yew Z Z w �o O Z Z W N I. N M �Inlml o <I�Ib lol Tah10 Q3004-©DE.dwa SUBMERGED RESOURCE SURVEY 3/19I2024 `FXld V Q W W z � ° w Z ❑ o � � 3 ° F j V / 1 o g O o I ry O Z r d U 3 W W p M LL � � t LU / E W � I¢ Q 2 N x Q S� O :E COD � o v rn Q cd U M Q� �C�`� W W w u �Q con� Q W o aC3 Z S •5 z ¢ o I- �— cdW � = O bA U) y� LL.. r U O Act W O W H Y � o (n Q r Z F— W W LLI C) Q W D O T.Z z Q w Y:l"13UU4 IfaVlsano-ley lanlfl Stl(:AU\YtKMII-UUUNIYt13VU4-t3UE.tlWp Y/IBk7U2�f� WAT EKWAY :i/7'J/LU14