Loading...
HEX Final Decision 2024-42HEX NO. 2024-42 HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DATE OF HEARING. August 229 2024 PETITION. Petition No. BD-PL20230017548 —156 Pago Pago Drive West -Request fora 29-foot boat dock extension, over the maximum 20 feet allowed by Section 5.03.06.E.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code for waterways 100 feet or greater in width, to construct a new dock facility that will protrude a total of 49 feet into a waterway that is 278± feet wide for the benefit of property located at 156 Pago Pago Drive West, also known as Lot 187, Isles A Capri No. 2, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. GENERAL PURPOSE FOR THE PETITION. The petitioner requests a 29-foot boat dock extension, over the maximum 20 feet allowed for waterways 100 feet or greater in width, to construct a new dock facility that will protrude a total of 49 feet into a waterway that is 2781 feet wide, for the benefit of the subject property. 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 at the public hearing. 5. 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.' Primary Criteria: 1. Whether the number %J 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 BEENMET. The subject property) is located within an RSF4 zoning district and supports a single-family dwelling for which. the LDC allows two boat slips. The proposed project consists of removing the existing dock and boathouse to allow for a new residential docking facility with two slips, each with a boatlift; one for a 45 foot vessel and the other being a 28 foot vessel. 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 applicant's expert states: "The boat dock extension is necessary to accommodate the owners' vessels as the existing on -site water depths are too shallow to aHow the owner's vessels to be moored within the allowed 20 feet. The large vessel is advertised cis having a 3-foot draft, and then with the boatlift's support beams being at least 12 inches, the overall depth of the water needed to float the vessel on and off the boatlift is at least 4 feet. Based on the owner's vessel and existing on -site water depths, the BDE is needed to reach sufficient depths, as shown in the attached BDE exhibits. " County staff has concurred.. 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 BEENMET. There is no marked channel �->>ithin this Bay; therefor•e, the entire �-vaterway provides safe navigation between the docking facilities, and no new impacts to any navigation i1i)ill result from the proposed project. As proposed, the dock and boatlifts will 1 The Hearing Examiner's findings are italicized. not impact navigation ivithin the subject tivatertimy, nor will they alter the existing ingress/egress to both adjacent neighboring docks and the associated slips. 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. The approximate waterway width is 278 feet. The requested total dock protrusion is 49 feet which is less than 18% of the width of the waterway. The clear distance between dock facilities is 225 feet or 80.94% of the wateri-vay; therefore, more than 50 percent of the waterway is openfor 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 ji°om the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The applicant's expert stated that: "The proposed docking facility design is consistent with the other neighboring docks on this bay, which also accommodates larger vessels. The subject property and proposed dock are all Within a boating community ivhich most neighboring properties have similar docking facilities. As proposed, the dock will be 1Vithin the allowed buildable area by providing the required setbacks, and therefore, the views into the subject waterway by the adjacent property owners will not be impacted nor their access to their docks. " Couno) staff has concurred that the nert) dock facility) will satisfy side setbacks and that the existing boathouse will be removed. 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.) The record evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The applicant's expert states that: "The subject property shoreline consists of a concrete seawall, an existing docking facility), and an associated boathouse. The one special existing on -site condition taken into consideration when designing the proposed dock is the fact that each adjacent neighboring property also has docks which limited our options to have a more shore parallel dock layout. A slightly angled slip l-vas also considered but it was determined to propose going perpendicular as currently proposed in order to keep the ingress/egress to the slips within the subject property's riparian lines. Additionally, the subject ivateri-vay ividth does alloiv the proposed dock to protrude out as Page 3 of 6 far as it is being proposed without any impacts to navigation or adjacent neighboring dock ingress/egress. " County staff has concurred. 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 fi°om the pztblic hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The applicant's expert stated that: "The proposed docking facility has been filly minimized to the fidlest extent possible and still provides deck area for routine maintenance, safe access as well as recreational activities like fishing plus storage for these activities the dock provides. The total over-i-Hater square footage is 1, 478 square feet. " County staff has concurred. 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 fi°orn the public hearing reflects tl�cct the criterion HAS NOT BEENMET. The proposed dock facility has been designed to moor a 45 foot vessel and a 28 foot vessel for a combined total of 73 feet. The total shoreline at this location is 70 feet; therefore, the vessels will exceed 50 percent. 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 evider�ce and testimony, from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. The applicant's expert stated that. "The existing on -site conditions consist of a grandfathered docking facility with a boathouse, so both adjacent neighboring property owners are used to having a dock along the subject property shoreline. As proposed, the dock has been designed within the designated setbacks and is consistent with the other existing boat docks within the subject waterway, tivhich are perpendicular to the shoreline in order to remain within the riparian area. Both adjacent properties have docking facilities as well, and it's our opinion that there are no neii) impacts to either adjacent property miner. Additionally, this is a boating community; therefore, docks are all part of the overall atmosphere in the community. " Absent evidence to the contrary, Couny) staff has concurred 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 reco14d evidence and testimony from the public hearing reflects that the criterion HAS BEEN MET. There are no seaagrass beds present on the propertJ� nor the neighboring properties within 200 feet of the existing dock structure, Page 4 of 6 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 recur°d 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 dock facilities except for those within the searvalled basin of Port of the Islands; the subject property is not located ivithin Port of the Islands. 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 (Snook Bay), which will require an ST-permit for the proposed docking facilities prior to the issuance of any building permits. The proposed docking facilities will be constructed waterward of the existing seawalled shoreline. The submerged resources survey provided by the applicant found no submerged resources in the area Exhibit sheet page 8 of 11 provides an aerial with a note stating that no seagrasses were observed within 200 feet. This project does not require an Envirorunental Advisory Council Board (EAC) review because it did not meet the EAC scope of land development project reviews as identified in Chapter 2, Article VIII, Division 23, Section 2-1193 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances. 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 5.03.06.14 of the Land Development Code to approve this Petition. The Petition meets 4 out of 5 of the primary criteria and 4 out of 6 secondary criteria, with one criterion being not applicable. DECISION. The Hearing Examiner hereby APPROVES Petition Number BD-PL20230017548, filed by Jeff Rogers of Turrell, Hali &Associates, Inc., representing Southbound LLC, with respect to the subject property described as located at 156 Pago Pago Drive West, also known as Lot 187, Isles of Capri No. 2, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida, for the following: • The petitioner requests a 29-foot boat dock extension, over the maximum 20 feet allowed by Section 5.03.06.E.1 of the Collier County Land Development Code (LDC) for waterways 100 feet or greater in width, to construct a new dock facility that will protrude a total of 49 feet into a waterway that is 278± feet wide, for the benefit of the subject property. Page 5 of 6 Said changes are fully described in the Zoning Map attached as Exhibit "A the Map of Specific Purpose Survey attached as Exhibit "B", and the Proposed Site and Dock Plans attached as Exhibit "C", and are subject to the condition(s) set forth below. ATTACHMENTS. Exhibit A —Zoning Map Exhibit B — Map of Specific Purpose Survey Exhibit C — Proposed Site and Dock Plans LEGAL DESCRIPTION. The subject property is located at 156 Pago Pago Drive West, also known as Lot 187, Isles of Capri No. 2, in Section 32, Township 51 South, Range 26 East, Collier County, Florida. CONDITIONS. • All other applicable state or federal permits must be obtained before commencement of the development. 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, September 4, 2024 Date Andrew Dickman, Esq., AICP Hearing Examiner Page 6 of 6 a ENE( rn zLLI MOSS 07av�- fi am 0 _ a d- ti O O m N O N J L E m C o O N +• o M � Q C Cd a O o MEMO MOO Cd U a J 00 0 O M N O rq P-+ Q W > � F w C c� w ww.�wn w E N a a N t~n woLLmo ? rn ° g o Q) C N yg�' N o n W �< OU ooK re BZ� Iu�o��2 $ ry8 u° �zv W O U) O �11 wQ OaLLQj q0 0 6 3j0 "`y� O e ,�° O w Z _z POK > WU <uOm mU O o �W U) zamo wo zOwrcZo z wevo 03 a N �Y� m �n ILO ~ �owmLL o aN Fa��y° H a$z�E�£�� o ■ 2o� o w OL 00 Cwo4w O w< a�Fmwo LuI Svo55_uaoON >, w � tlipmo O°i T l`(� Oc�UZ Q a� � wF¢a¢�Wri v U) # h m W Q i 1'�pus WYmp O 0.NQ wy�moFW W O~ m >W i3 a 0 O �ma� Q » Uma�¢ Noo O LL �. m �� o. w Eno v W a ww a �...� F�EHXWW 0 x y z °u n x , �w rowozoc�w p n H goo ��auw�ao�o z? w w v o n O¢ ¢ i m y m III U �~ FO Fmotzvo V) U cl O D M M In Uo�9^"$w G� ° z mg zw rcw o a z u a s 3� z N0 �o ow owo °� a WKwm ' _ g WW x O wZ rc w °� qz ¢oTTo omO �nz "o°w y x a K� z Zz 0 W aU.-6 Y >> �Z °Qa a 0. a�tcA¢I1ILLWw Km Z r onw �� m mN � z ZNCjm Qy W �WWOUZ g O O.. Wz $Z>> °O A wWW(�.'/� KKZ O ii °..mow...W t-w�ZnU 2 w bo NZ vp<0 FZZ¢LL O 3� �mQOiw K om i 2Xgg wo K WO¢w °-Wi W� �O v i �F o zw0 O0�mK > y0 °'xKUomv� > o Y izu �°-� u,� yam U " wma ' ��5w: wo w of m€ZZo_ U..1�Www zo OK �o�S" ,3n Z N o ?K'w am= �sz aKo a���w'�' `d woor W. F J m�ya rNZFa °u, >� <rWrw N Op r d m 8 °zoo�ao h°>omriwW z Od WO Z�Z " Yg1 ¢w �1¢ w-NFW °m_^ W i t~iK Aso (i �j ZY ? F p° mV pWCdO m e ° OOvwi °�w OQz 6 y2 > °o�Za Z�-� 9z ggOw µ N W> Z i rj� J F' O�OR�O off. Om°z W![G-aE Xamz �m mFm z >oo K w o ?m� Nzm >U W o won w zoo d �LE�a Zwa umm ° omN NumS�wu� Z W -° Y O O FwpK 1m '0K Q� Za_ O QQ N F- w . FNw K o � a F6WUw Om °>° yWmKO wRw�ZO Sn Za ¢�owi] Q' $$ z J° �° Z Z _ZZ ODUFX =Z LL ' Z tu1�J}J zg Zu 000 i wm K-LLz zw �00 OWy F- O K°OKwFZ pY,°¢WOWHW O> K Y `o pw O4 °°x�zm� o 3wLL o oEiSma °asz'w" AUo Ea �°LL 0 KU W o o�ui awo� �Yogzg u�LL_ z.. r o owo m ° Oosa zd `d MOW °mzw wU 001= p z o o x o Z;?MpwW �g . > �CPm z zwaa H V� w ���nz o°om� w oc°i�°�++ �°z°oo > w ^.¢ ° zo K z-o��a�o� �' {a" � ao K F oawFw 6U< zw �000Zd >'°s z_w fa _ >°wi"°- ai zui �- 0o¢N ux Q i S o f�UODU ws g aNOu �'KWOWE �KW °F KZ5 fD tL OC:�O O oi�a`2mKWU K WOK �N- mU-> ro Nm Fn.z� n w�wKUo xo rK < _ r� y _� ¢� oSJ, w �°dso Wm voiw.t apwy51> w Fw w �u p O �w w 9ak'oa ��'" C aO ozOwgm°a]c°i i€mom z Npz a "Oo�F� yr o> N1-W o€ i iFHo W w O m H ° m � � '.' K ¢ �" 3 � �•w^v . O F;z mLL N� wO O Nzzm� o Ka �No �2 Ho O F' . . °'�O °.a n w Z OQO 'ate C <<O2o � zwwo4 � am F °cimw°zm 0 Q 2�UK `.m iw mm�WMDMED o OOea$OOw€aac�°up�gm°w ° N W O r W LLI a zi Z ° w d of w �IL w ag zi z Oz �ca: w a 33 NF 0 �' n QIL 13 WO t o p m0 OD K 1 i M h Y %n �° 3 aZ a O LU m p Nt um sog m$a 0�0-' Zo J 3 w �LLL N0C4 { h wv w w 5 \Q \\ iz a N 3 S2 0� of 109' So� Q\ta�. � o g� o mo 0� 4qo yp ��� b Hal o co it �\ µo S�3�op lQ� F O °w N 4� F q° �zm �838? \ o & wwoo �\roo�N a�j N25 oto t4 od \Pl }ag Fx Q.Oy 1.0 s y Z � p�v�' �s °°°moo zZ� �J O >w O J Om8a J ae`9 o NW v�11 on gyo� N so _oot2Z"eN�OHwW yp p N v N N =L O 6 Zo 0 0Z¢r¢ ='vO Oa WZLW Z °N0 v zg tif aaynd' Lu $/% ?�o�0 O z no m o¢�a oO Ic s 0 pzm 0. < oE Oa a w¢w o Wyo��v TDo ViUvWIC Wo m �TaYx 0 a�>Wis�ro = ` Oa lOV OMUj a �§"oo PMM W Fz U wW pa O aomo o m oO�Do ON �,9o2 aaWm$.I y4FaoMaQFW� � 0 i =W F- 0 LZ W*�{L ��WW >O xaW0> zyooFp N OWaLLO F�y W MtnV to o 0 0 U�KOO�OW O N �N V% _ o a uw' Z . w L Ww p qq y��y��115W�� r W g T W= g a a o� o FF zOj So2R'!- S�� ohm %€ ¢WU.y�R'WW �VQ UO WW Z) WZp �0o me1. WWF W no '�i >ow FaofF-g 1111113 U,0z10am a3 oYW &rzw RzOz r Swjtta<l EEZZ W m lFO j o�z pools oN �� �wwoGw � o 0 o �w4 0�z-0 W a0:W�w 0 mm Fzz<t dam' 3 ymWO �w rc � � U_ �W0 . �0�0� w 8 �` �o o 0 o j3 0o SWOmm g o o> z 0°ti= g aF fl' Swrg� Z� zo 0 mo mom . N� ¢ xZWjz �� x WIN 19 a 0 0 ROmm_ o Wow d� u a (n o^ umoi �"WmJx o>w�. o g w E200F, 0 z io o oo� x Z g p & QLi WED iZ o rc w� W omxo F Fn0w awt-0 O po- N wSmO�z �ao�� �p0.9?5`Z zwv¢ Z�Z ow W only �pwp� ggOiWDOoW wy� -�W r$<Wow ZTWTW w r F o 2mmwwo�m; ¢o¢ o> F>w mo<z Qm y2 > ;No�oa Z~m=> GYM Kk� UOIJiNS� > w> Z 2 "' g ;rAUOOhjU LL OmVme fc Ur zg mg �m N0m z tioozd rc m0Wrco w ' Nm� - >0 U' _ �'z rc mzt WOKdF 6 n. oN a gLL�p o 0. Z2 �o < bm <�y��m Wy � E o o N 0�izwo w? � . m � �i owm� on 5wm Not�m¢ OagiN swi> �o$ oaoowu°. om oo rc ��++++ o u o¢"'coi mmw z zo n Oxx WT11 mz3�W wrci o�LLoo}za aarc$w iLLw oza ooCo-"' zags o W Z;z rzZWW z0� W Y`Mm m� i.LU -, g"'iu wa rcuia ammi wwi>mFi yoo woo FW�O�� a a w oo o a m�¢ooc`�gz aow N'"n�= z2. -w n 0 "awow. m� LL-o�cri oo¢ti nW oOm'`z"'i-'oxrc C x0 z z 'S goM006 w�G'c�i"cai'uw< a �_ 5 �Wm. m=0 oz �0 � o 00 h"0a swum, o "xw <°-F'w^ a�w wmwow0 z C z 0 z a�3aW ro a L okOW zmgxo w mu mz m=r m�a�wFY m>< �t" ° ttWYw wall" o y o w LL H '. �a ; LL w� 3 4 o mo ° �a3w ^,Su O NW N0x oa �mmm 4�0� €_� o s'n kLL' m m 0 m �z .¢ N zz� mo rca wW o uz�.`�> zoo . °'�o°n, u�w gg Z .-o ao a �rca o �aaoao a;z'Noz �o m xm ugozv, QQQ BO�OOLL gaaadou®� to �0woWa=5�i� g Q° N N N W X O n• 0 0? X W 0) N x t6 to x la T x C X r, x o x to to y m td to �° N N tvj' X �x X N x x tD x M Oq VT X N Cf) O N M M LO x X U� t? u qi X tq x W Mci X 0 W Fm x<q X u' Q Fm Y X o uMi t? m W o 0D X '? x X a (Ni `� viix 7 N r, X x to X "? rn a X x X x i- N M N X x ' 1 0 "� x `m N x O tp/ x x X to Y OD z w X N ,r,.-S< f O tN {r Q to �✓ }('"� L9 x to O I- vO s �' X O 1 �/� Z1� LL W 01 �? X �t 19 N x y/ v = ci \ to N x i�i x N 01 o0Q \\ \0) XW X x X 525 "� /X U) X S2,�o0 AlllMl E � / / N cco hix 19 in x x o �o o O. � o x a LL s� O• i 90 \ X to z O t� O M x o z W� p tf� X oes q Q r r vaf \ 0; X > co0 \ t 0? X X - M N J ~z ~ o X ` to X FM O ui O cn O \ <o M X W Jz� vN a Fw Z � 0� 4 O g w O p .nj� O � 0 � 2 25°21Q l0) o X NZy.o (\d um 0 W LQL rr VJ h R O U W ❑ M O4 co d J WOW ate(; Aaa—wl W Z J Z O W ui O U) aZ 0 a� O U FZ D U) Z W OU a �O oLL w ❑ W W Qw w c� ZZ �O Q Z �w wa mow❑ Q � Q z� N a N z 0 �w ¢� .� c7 cis 6i cd U <t M O n F QD r~ s w pago pago dr 150-156_PAGOPAGO-BOE.dvng LOCATION AIAP 5/28/2024 p:�22150.00 -152 8 156 pago pago dr vACAD1PERAIR-COUNTY�22150-156_PAGOPAGO-BDE.dwg 1952 AERIAL 5f28Y202J \ B \ »§@ (( )§} 2 �)j� }/�K..\�\ e � ��§©�\)§.&& [Ew®lo��&#2 (al:z� a!§#[\§/\(\\ (©2`2 :4m g} § m w Do , ) Lq Llot ` \ 2 _ z \\ / 2 « a �(, CO o \z§��\ !! m LU 7 2?R� Z co<wc 2\ wSFLJ 2. w ! \ \ w . (D 0 ; 2 � ( \S �! x ` wE �( m ! © ± 2 ! a O ) <�§\ ) �[ m O ! \ 2 r 0 O ! � U | 70 zo& kjj zz Cl) �2 } , 2§/ ±� kr /// �! % z \ k d®%e L� ~ �ƒ%» 3§/ C2»A ©; �§ // � w 2 a \ >\ � �®// a. w 0 K� 6 �@ _ p:u2 ,mr maws _rw__neeYW,mbb_H AUU _m=_LAI� ,_UUN = e,_N_tN�I _ _2UZ4 C7 v, rk Y cq X m X X XIq Op rj (V (V X XNX V XM X N X LC N � X x X ch q p 7 X N X XLci N X M m X M X XXY N XLci X� X C X v o X (q vi X X o M co X vi X X X Xo N X I to N X� X Lci X L N X N q X X X w X o CA X X o n X Y N � X to XM ^/ ram. � v � (V co X O Z O w r0 WZ Q wZ V W N Ny 4Wi Q� N Z 9 OWE wx X <0'� m �jWV a�E S� W Eat W F O t OOp Z�� Jp �ni K y G O N i 41 O=W W W<w U' 3 L W !M w p p WpQW]Uz=p�J W =�tZ13?NaNF-Q�i: F p O O�?aw a'u53F z u? fn W N X X X X W LL. v� M � � X X m M q( N N X X X X X 6 o X I M X N M qX 1 cn a "'XX� X X o X X� ? L6 ri X m X x °° v "' X O X X rk. 3 zw uj Q Z N X J � � X Q X N X a_ X X s - �a d x 0 N a p o F$ M Z 0 W Z f z z d U w LU 0 o u° m W 1. pago pago dr wlCAD1PERAIR-COUNTY�22150-156_PAGOPAG0.8DE.dwg EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH DEPTHS 5I2812024 Z•.: > �! y / LU O Q � h- CL LU � 0Q�LL Www"_-w O. cn 0. 0 0. o� 1� J W Z U w Ogo a a. a 0 0m a a i to a W \ aoZ s OQJ ax� .2a Q 0 aam �6 16 3 o � z w or: a w3 a Wz LL m� Z ';. o w �$N .-< NW � v QYH za4 N Owe NX aLL ul o- Fm' --Xa a03 CEM z a¢ x� xa wa �wu a¢�i?w �� w z Op= wHo ��' UK aO aow zut =tea QUO W¢m 0O 0 LL�O atrii K� K N a U .. N w Q a o (¢N7 O m w w 3 c n u it w N zo!wrco3w�..°��3W o°wHOrcaZoo=3 �U yoa Oa w =W3jvaNOO�s Of0 r� ¢u��F a0 0 Z H gvz amp a �- N 0 0 3 W i U 'o oLU 00= (J) r p122150.00 - 152 8 i66 pago pago � o L6 Lti' pIqKt CD X Ln< � X LO �. — X II v X X 0 N N X p 00 W (+) A a i QO� w Haj z N X M �• cq %I Nf CO xX �r X /� XW, Xcq Oo X o C? �r CO X r> N X X In co N X X o co N X X co Lfj w z J W IL O w a 000 00 OOP In X LO M ' LO X O ' �i X M LO X Ln o LO LO IX 3 o� Z W ° i w= ° z� Q W 2 u G d a O N WN Z N a �rco, XM a w QC� JaQ aNZ Z x<"wad ijw V am2 'i Da W wa d o w' u r0 +' K? d p00 wK2 NUS 0 �y¢O„��> wmLL NWa Q 2 om wwww <w 3 W 0 z�w °, WO =wwwooc)�WQ.00>3:D avow OU>o03�??w>¢ owr>DUK,o wOa WI=w30NDi- a ND moo a u�3F arr X CD X Ln z Y Ln Q ❑ U X ri `I' X aw �O'a _ Z X X LO J aO W M LO �X WO %< o a. w L'' a io XX LO OXH X u_ o L;i d�� m LD Y Lr) O X O Z t` U) X zoe) �+ •0 11 • s • X LO I X "' X I? X 0 M 11j X X J J I N r pago pago DOCK PLAN•DEPTHS 5Y18@024 c7 \\/V. w %\\/\\/\\/\\/ za //\\//\C)aw l\\//\\//\\//\\// ' a W%\/%\/%\/% LL wcWn/\\/\\o�\\\\\\ w \% 1n 0 CL o I� \'ca VA//VA//VA�VA//VA//VA o °s z p I1it i, i.oeN zx o F, y3�z� W x o = U) 0 Z I \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ z i I II II Z 2° O a / � _ �/ Cf) _ 0 w °am CL J \\/ I tz co 0 O COco \ \ \ \ FL � w I J O m j aX u ZoCXI (is -a { 00 0w w ccs W 404 > D:122150.00. 152 & 156 Dapo pago tlr vACAD1PERAIITCOUN1Y122150-156 PAGOPAGO-BDE.dwD CROSS SECTION 5/282024 y w wU` =f- z ~ W w 0 0 0 w w LL Q Q O Q U w w z d w (1) 0 00 ct z zOa \ UQ Lu Q 00_ 0OM amW N J i Ai 3 0 p122150.00. 152 8 156 pago pago dr w1CAD1PERAIRCOUNTY�22150-156_PAGOPAGO-BDE.dwg SUBMERGED RESOURCE r 4 ,' ' WOf Odd N J V. .. Q op Ll 1 tli ' ¢ w y v S 4NO.. Z 1411 Z w 0 O o con F w F— do r F— w 0 Z ,o J ZZIFIV Q °w 'm o mm 0 / dFm Lu �� 0) rot .f \/ IN Coo Ir old Oe 6 r c boom) Q "', W e Qz x" + old VIVA IN N � o oddl Odd. n r d_ . _ 0'. 'os O d' rn �i I U M v Odd IV� id ».%I- - { Can y ozo d Cz, �Az� �D5 yaw > odd It l<M H / h M O a ld l-..Id - • " e p:\22150.00 -152 8 156 pago pago dr vACAD1PERAIR-COUNTY,22150-t 58_PAGOPAGO-BDE.dwg ADJACENT DOCKS 5/2812024 0 } UQ W 0 MME) Z � O44 i 460 W Z i u x z 3 0 H N r � � O M 0 z F i w W o A N p:�22150.00 -152 6 156 pago pago dr w1CAD1PERAlIT-COUNTY�22I50-156_PAGOPAGO-BDE.dwg ST OVERLAY 5/28Y2024 Y'q: �f N y ..,•.,� ..a/' •GIs- � . +, F^ " IL y� } U Q � wz 0�.. il�O am: r >� �j .t' yJYjy�J ~y � 32� , 225 2�$ W IUJI — 0 O� w ¢w z= 0 uzi � Z Z LL of w OY W � O=zz ZF-¢ N W 0 z Ix d 3 0 o m o y z 0 3 W Z Z 0 D:122150.00. 152 d 156 paQo paQo tlr vACA01PERAl1T-COUNTY122150.158 PAGOPAG0.8DE.dwp WIDTH OF WATERWAY 51282024