Resolution 188-1976RESOLUTION #188 , 1976
WHEREAS, the. State of Florida Department of Transportation
proposes to construct a bridge and approaches at Lower Sugarloaf
Channel (S.R. 5) Monroe County, Florida, De-
partment of Transportation Project No. 90020-3523
. and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the Board of County Commissioners
of Monroe County, Florida, to approve said project, and
WHEREAS, the. Department of Transportation has provided the
Board with sketches describing the proposed construction, and
WHEREAS, the State of Florida Department of Transportation
has filed an application for a dredge -fill permit from the State
of Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, and
WHEREAS, a biological survey study has been made by the
Department of Environmental Regulation, and a copy of said report
has been read into the records and duly considered at a public
meeting of the Board, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County. Commissioners, Monroe County,
Florida, has determined that the issuance of a dredge -fill permit
will not be contrary to the public interest,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of County.
Commissioners, Monroe County, Florida, that the Board endorses
the State of Florida Department of Transportation proposal to
construct a bridge and approaches at Lower Sugarloaf Channel
(S.R. 5), Department of Transportation Project No. 90020-3523
-2-
as shown in the attached sketches, and has entered the biological
survey as shown in the attached report into the records of a public
meeting, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that certified copies of this Re-
solution be forwarded to the State of Florida Department of
Transportation and State of Florida Department of Environmental
Regulation.
ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissions of Monroe County,
Florida, this 26 day of October 1976
or.T 1 a i
ti
September 29, 1976
Board of County Commissioners
Monroe County
flonroe County Courthouse
Key West, Florida 33040
Gentlemen:
File tio. 44-37-3777, Monroe County
Ceparti.ient of Transportation, (Lower Sugarloaf)
Our staff has performed a biological survey for this project and offers
the following corr:ients :
The applicant proposes to construct a 1,21C3-ft. long by 47-ft. hide
bridge over Lower Sugarloaf Channel. The existing bridge is to
rem ain in place. Approaches at the Key ''test and lliar:,i end will be
lengthened and veidened and a shoulder will be created along; the
north side (Gulf side) of U.S. 1. This shoulder construction will
necessitate filling of submerged and transition zone areas. Submerged
lands total 52,390 cubic yards i:rrile transition zone areas total
25,306 cubic yards raking a grand total of 77,06 cubic yards.
Depending, on the alternatives, an additional 34,000 cubic yards
will be tomporarily placed on submerged lands or 14,000 cubic yards
will be re -loved from subr:Evrged lands. To reduce piling breakage,
36-inch diameter holes will be pre -drilled. An estirsated 160 cubic
yards will be unrecoverable from the drilling operation.
The general area around Lower Sugarloaf Channel Bridge is undeveloped
V.,Ith only marginal disturbance to adjacent transition zones and
"upland" areas. The "upland" areas located slightly above the mean
high water elevation are venetated primarily by red rMangroves.
Upland vec;etation alone disturbed areas consists of red, black and
Vrhite liiangroves and buttonwood. Subr o2rgent vegetation in the
general area consists of r,arine algae and sea grasses. The submersed
substrate is hard with a slight accumulation of marl.
The specific viorksite is located inn.",ediately north of the existing
Loser Sugarloaf Channel fi:'ridge. Poth approaches, Key :Vest tend and
tliar.i ens', are vecretate i Ly z mixture of red, white and black
saan rove aloe, wi t;h buttoritrood and halophytic succulents.
-fo J1_Y1 1oit'7Ss
Monroe County Cornissioners
Page Two
September 29. 1976
On undisturbed submerged bottoms, the substrate is generally solid,
composed of limestone with a thin layer of marl overlay. In the
disturbed area parallel and adjacent to the existing bridge, the
substrate varies only slightly. tiodium-fine to fine marl particles
mixed with unconsolidated organic debris have drifted into the
excavated area and have filled it nearly to the existing surrounding
contour. The original depth of the excavated area ranged from 24
feet below the bottom substrate to 7 feet. dater depth in the
irmiediate area averaged 4k. feet, reaching 7 feet in depressions in
the disturbed area.
Vegetation located in the project area is low in diversity but lush
in growth. Turtlegrass is the predominant grass growing in the
previously disturbed area adjacent to the bridge. Cuban shoalweed
was also noted in this area. Sparsely scattered through the grass
were several species of macroscopic marine algae. Marine algae are
found along all the piling and fill areas adjacent to both sides of
the existing bridge.
Marine algae are also located beneath the existing bridge. The
width of the disturbed section distinctly seen as the vegetated
grassy area varies. This area, of course, parallels the existing
bridge.
A variety of marine life was observed around and under the bridge
as well as in the grass flats: sponges, tunicates, coral and other
coelenterates, gastropods, spiny lobster, rays, grunt, snapper,
parrot fish, small riarire tropicals and numerous r*3acro-invertebrates,
Including various shrir9}p, crabs, polychaetes and araphipods.
Alternate "A" entails dredging in an area approximately 1,288 feet
long by 160 feet wide by -5 feet in depth. This will result in
approximately 14,000 cubic yards being rer.oved from the dredge
area. Alternate "B" entails tckrporary filling 34,000 cubic yards
adjacent to the existing bridge along the north side.
Both of these proposals are objectionable. Alternate "A" will
disrupt approximately 2'06,400 square feet of submerged bottom. The
botton discontinuity which will result frog: the excavation is
expected to entrap organic matter adversely effecting water duality
and under surge conditions possibly resuspending such unconsolidated
particles. Frog the information contained in the application, no
,provisions are r.;ade for restoration after the bridge is corinleted.
The excavation itself will eliminate the entire vegetative corrr?unity
which has re-established itself in the previously disturbed area.
This excavation will also resuspend all flocculent particles which
have settled and were stabilized by the vegetation cover. Vegetation
has been shown to stabilize substrates, increase the dissolved
oxygen to surroundinn water, increase nutrient recycling, and
provide attachr'ent and habitat for benthic orf,anistns 4;hich are an
excellent food source for huger organis►:,s.
The dredge alternate lacks data addressing the methodology of
dredging in an area of frequently exposed limcrock substrate (i.e.
blasting).
Monroe County commissioners
Page Three
September 29, 1976
Alternate "6" proposes to temporarily fill 34,000 cubic yards
adjacent to the existing bridge. Alternate "B" will eliminate the
same vegetated area that Alternate "A" will elit!-Anate by direct
filling. This condition is only temporary since the fill will be
removed down to the original contour. Vowever, it is my opinion
that none of the vegetation will regain after placing and then
rer.oving the fill. Removing the vegetation will result in the same
problems encountered in Alternate "A". One other problem to contend
with is that an unstable substrate will be allowed to interact with
state water providing the possibility of siltation and degradation
of water quality. The fill alternative lacks essential inforriation
addressing slope stabilization methods to control erosion and wash-
out, and duration estimates pertinent to flooding and seasonal tide
variances pertaining to the temporary fill area, necessary hydrographic
data is also r-Assing (i.e. volur.ie of flow, velocity of flow, etc.).
Specific data of this nature is essential to understanding the head
differential and tidal variables likely to result in relation to
the culvert sizing and frequency.
Another major problem is the filling to the north of U.S. 1 from
just west of caddlebunch VS to east of Sugarloaf Channel.- The
placement of over 300,000 cubic yards of riaterial will eliminate
transition and submerged vegetation over a 3.3 r4le length. Additionally,
over 2Ga,000 cubic yards of fill vtill be needed for this area alone
to bring the project arela up to spccifications along the "shoulder
area"/realignrnent of U.S. 1 which extends from Saddle►crunch #5 to
Loaner Sugarloaf Channel. Tito source of such large ar.;ounts of fill,
which has yet to be determined, t.ay create future environrlrental
��robler�s.
The Loafer Sugarloaf and Saddlebunch Keys areas should be considered
environr�.entally significant as an essential link in the rr;arine food
chain. This highly sensitive i.angrove ecosystetm, characterized by
relatively shallop tidal vraters, is utilized extensively as nursery
and feeding grounds for juvenile fish and wildlife. The tidal flow
at tt►o subject aridEed interfaces allows an essential exchange of
nutrients and migratory larva. Elevated volur;ies of floe at ih`se
Bay/Straits interfaces were produced by the original roadway construction
divertir.r the diurnal flooding and draining of vast areas. Alterations
to the tidal flow of such a shallow area could not only affect
nutrient exchange and migratory fauna patterns, but could expose
vast areas of habitat not adapted to such stress.
Examples of the integrity of the bridote construction and raintenance
E;iethods utilized in the past are evidenced by the randoim deposit of
structural concrete r-:erbers and rubble into the craters directly
below:. The subject applications involve extensive alterations to a
vast, significant and sensitive ecosystem. Pre -application planning
mieetings stressed the idea of coordinating the fill requiroi�,ents
(a pproxi'mately YO -t '),000 cubic yards per brie(le) in this area of
r�i;�ir.al uplands with caro:unity tree is (i.e. potential r;arina sites)
• Monroe County Commissioners
Page Four
September 29, 1976
so as to incur the waximum future use of these necessarily lame
borrow sites. Since proposed construction techniques will eliminate
a large area of valuable transition zone and submerged land habitat,
it is recommended that the project be modified to eliminate the
proposed shift nort}nrard of U.S. 1 which extends into the transition
zone and submerged land areas.
Pursuant to the requirement of Section 253.124(3), Florida Statutes, the
preceding comments should be duly considered by the cow�,ission and read
Into the minutes at which determination of local approval is made.
Sincerely,
0
A. dean Tolman
Section Administrator
Standard Permitting Section
AJT/pps
Enclosure
L cc:'Frsueddy Miller
Charles Schnepel
P,
or
KEYaATtLES Cp S 0.1 Qn tj
rl
SuGAR
0
Y,t'4
KEY
00
c
L
0
BLIst
4 &4 - VE
r
25
Qy Dou26
" 2
OE p
2
LA c
wjj.P
AIL
ptv
E-4
LA 36
KEYS
0
Y,
OQI
s&oll
TILIS.
f
1'''0� SOG
S A 5j)k 01�1
PRO 'ECT' LOCATION 10 ,
'SEGTI'ONS4=,
�;
\
I sLf T�7 �S 27 -;a �o
4—
r
ete
H
SLjCARLoA
- ,, V
t
vcNillefoo
1�4
_J
VICINITY MAP
FROM MONROE COUNTY HIGHWAY MAP
PROJECT NO. 90020-3523
PROPOSED FILL AND DREDGE IN LOWER SUGARLOAF CHANNEL S.R,,5 MONROE COUNTY
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ALTERNATE D-1
1976 qHFFT I OF 92
SHEET NO. 2 OF 22
N
tf)
M
W ,
00
Of N
ZO
00
2rn
0 50 100 1041-inear Ft. of Riprap
0 C_ Proposed Bridge
Scale(Ft.) Existing Bridge to remain 3
8 �-- F �-
in
To Key
West
Existing
Grade
20
—
i 0-=
a_
1
-10—
0 510
O
to Scale (Ft.)
oI
02'
G
.103 Linear Ft. of Riprap
-IN 1
c1
_�_____� ==_ =- ___ _�___-----
Existing Wall PLAN -(c Existing Wall To��,
To Remain L-->• F I'_ To
1;288* (Overall Bridge Length)
*2c11D; C r 1 Can Qhan*Oi .TPmn_ Fill Qren Flev.+r_
- See Sheet 21
For Dredge Details
Dredge Area Elev.-5.0�
ELEVATION See Sheet 22
For Temp. Fill Details
Mom- E I. + 1.04 M L.W. EI.
Minimum Vertical Clearance M.H.W. = 9.60//
Minimum Vertical Clearance M.L.W.=10.30,
Existing Vertical Clearance =5.4'±
Minimum Horizontal Clearance=78.00
Existing Horizontal Clearance = 15.0'±
Water Reference Datum N.0_A.A.
t0.34
36110± Hole for
Pile Driving
FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTION
METHOD
Revised 7/20/76
-- r0
0
--10
L0 50 100
Sca I e (Ft.)
To Miami ` 1
TYPICAL SECTION THRU
PROPOSED BRIDGE
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL AND DREDGE
IN LOWER SUGARLOAF CH.
BRIDGE NO. 900102 MAY 1976
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
SHEET No. 3 OF 22 1
ro
N
U)
ro
w
00
cr- N
0 0
z- rn
LEGEND
LIMIT OF TRANSITION ZONE
MHW
MLW
TOE OF SLOPE
FLOATING SILT BARRIER
PARCEL NUMBER
TEMP. FILL (SUBMERGED LAND)
• DREDGE AREA (SUBMERGED LAND)
FILL AREA ( SUBMERGED LAND
AND TRANSITION ZONE)
RUBBLE
0
TTTTTTTTTTTTTTJ
VVVVVVVVVVVVVV
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING I
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANS PORTt,TIG�J
TO KEY WEST
BEGIN PROJECT
STA. 317+00
A
Q. EXIST.
ROADWAY
M
N
M
w
00
cr Z CV
O
m rn
N
kL CONST.--,\
SHEET NO. 4 OF 22 1
324
SILT BARRIER
w
z
- -...................
A /
a•
R /W-
SCALE: I 100,
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO. 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
TO KEY WEST
325
330
SHEET NO. 5 OF 22 1
RJW LINE -//l/
- - -
SILT BARRIER (L CONST, I
Q -
E
Lo
w �
00
z 0
00
2 rn
(L EXIST.
ROADWAY
B
R/W LINE
SCALE: I "= 100'
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
0 W�
i
M
N
U)
w
00
cr- N
O p
X. 0)
C
TO KEY WEST
1122',�
335
Dredge Area Extends From
R/ W LINE
Sta.334+50± To Sto. 345+ 72 ±
--
TO MIAMI
340
SILT BARRIER
SHEET NO. 6 OF 22 1
VVV*�EGINVBRIDGE V V VVVVVV VVVVVVVVVVV I
VV. ' STA.334+19.93VVV VVVV VVVVVVVVVVVVV 10
IoVVVV VVVVi/VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV=
lw
� J
ALT. D- I =
»-- �_---- - --�_ ------ _ __--- ----- -- h
S I LT BARRIER
(L EXIST. ROADWAY
EXISTING BRIDGE
( TO REMAIN)
R/W LINE -
CONST. ALT. "A`
FOR ALT. "A" QUANTITIES SEE SHEET 14
SCALE: I 100'
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING I
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER S UGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
TO KEY WEST
SHEET NO. 7 OF 22
341 Dredge Area Extends From
,,�Sta. 334+50'17 To Sta.345+72t
R/W LINE---,,,.,, SILT BARRI
VVCL CONST'V
v V Vv � vV
,v vv v v v vv
Wivvvvvvvv
Q EXIST.
ROADWAY
M
N
0 0
ZN
O
Z 0)
112 '
345
TO M IAM I
348
—# D
V*v V V V V V V v V V v v END BRIDGE V V V V
STA. 347+07.9
IZ
vV VvvvvvvvvvvvvvvVV VV
VVVVVV VV V V VV VVvvVVVVv� _
-ALT. D-
SILT BARRIER
EXISTING BRIDGE
(TO REMAIN)
CONST. ALT. "A"
- t- - - = T- -1
- D I
R/W LINES
SCALE:1 "=100'
1 FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING I
PROPOSED FILL 81 DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO. 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
M
N
M
W
0 0
0 0
Z5 0)
m
w
z_
J
p-
C
TO KEY WEST
335 11221
R/ W LINE
EXISTING BRIDGE
TO REMAIN)
ISHEET NO.8 OF 22
TO MIAMI
Temp. Fill Area Extends 340
From Sta.334+50 To Sta.345+72.
Y
1 `
R/W LINE
CONST. ALT. 11B11
FOR ALT. " B " QUANTITIES SEE SHEET 15
SCALE: I 100'
I FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING I
PROPOSED FILL a DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
TO KEY WEST
SHEET NO. 9 OF 22
Temp. Fill Area Extends From Sta.
/ 334+ 501* To Sto. 345+ 72 t
r%'Flip . ... /-
oITTTT T TTT T T-
i'TTTTT TT TT
J
S
CL EXIST. -
ROADWAY
EXISTING BRIDGE
( TO REMAIN)
N •
LO
0 0 CONST. ALT.� "B"
cr N
Z
0 0
7! o)
►tJ
z_
J
--e- D
R/W LINES
SCALE: 1'1=100,
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO. 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTttTION
SKEET NO. 10 OF 22 [
ro
N
ul
K)
WI
00
Ir N
z 0
00
20)
350
R/ W LINE
TO MIAMI
355
C. CONST. SILT BARRIER
W_ .....�
J
W I
W
_ Z
U -
� J
=�- ..... _._ ......_........... _.._......... d
Q EXIST. ROADWAY
R/W LINE
SCALE: I "=100'
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING 1
PROPOSED FILL a DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
360
R/W LINES
d. CON ST.
I SHEET NO.11 OF 22
TO MIAMI
365
I
SILT BARRIER -
w_........
------------- -
ii-lom
Io
N
w
00
cr N
z0
00
20
(. EXIST. ROADWAY
E
----- ---- 1L
R/ W LINE
SCALE: I" = 100'
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL 81 DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.9OO1O2
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
c.x�noz.: +s�-r'+erx_a . n...,,;a n ., .: ,aa. c •.=.-c:. -o.
U
M
N
w
0
TCNJ
o
z 0
00
2 rn
367
R/ W LINE-- -_
SILT BARRIER
(L CONST.
370
STA . 369 + 00
(L EXIST. ROADWAY
R/W LINES
SCALE- I "=100'
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
SHEET NO. 13 OF22 i
IM
N
U)
ro
w '
Oo
Q: N
Z
O
2 rn
ADJACENT
Parcel No.
RIPARIAN
Owners
OWNERS
O THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND
8 2 nd. STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA. 94105
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO. 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
r SHEEET 14 22
ro
w
0
� o
z o
2 0)
QUANTITIES FOR
CONST. ALT. Aye
KEY WEST
MIAMI
TOTAL
END
END
,
EST.
FILL AREA SUBMERGED LAND
2.81
AC
1.80
1.70
AC
AC
4.61
2.53
AC
AC
EST. FILL AREA TRANSITION ZONE
0.83 AC
EST
FILL VOLUME SUBMERGED LAND
38,798
CY
13,592
CY'
52,390
CY I
EST.
FILL VOLUME TRANSITION ZONE
9,240
CY
16,066
CYO
25,306
t
CYO
EST.
DREDGE VOLUME SUBMERGED LAND
71000
CY
71 000
0
CY 14,`000
CYO 0
CY 4
cy I
EST. DREDGE VOLUME TRANSITION ZONE
0 CY
EST.
DREDGE AREA SUBMERGED LAND
2.13
AC
2.13
AC
4.26
AC
[-EST
DREDGE AREA TRANSITION ZONE
0
AC
0
AC
0
AC
0 EST. VOLUME INCLUDES RUBBLE
VOLUME INCLUDES DREDGE FOR PILES AND
DREDGE FOR BARGE ACCESS UNDER PROPOSED
BRIDGE. 1 FEDERAL AiD PARTi iPry:,T iid
DREDGE MATERIAL WILL BE UTILIZED IN THE PROPOSED
EMBANKMENT, SUBJECT TO THE DEPARTMENTS
EMBANKMENT UTILIZATION SPECIFICATIONS.
PROPOSED FILi_.I ,AtvD
DREDGING F0,R LOWER
SUGARLOAF CHAN. MAY 1976
Bl= iDGE N'0. 900102
FLORIDA DEPART,1ENT CF
T RA Ic -; T,;':;;
M
N
M
w
0
� o
z o
0 0
2 rn
QUANTITIES FOR
CONST. ALT. i9 B "
KEY WEST
END
MIAMI
END
1.80
--
AC
� TO TA
4.61
L-
AC
EST FILL AREA SUBMERGED LAND
2.81 AC
EST.
FILL
AREA
TRANSITION ZONE
0.83
AC
1.70
AC
2.53
AC
EST.
FILL
VOLUME SUBMERGED LAND
38,798
CY
13,592
CY
52,390
CY
EST.
FILL
VOLUME TRANSITION ZONE
9,240
17, 0 00
CY
CY
16,066
179000
CY
CYA
25,306
34,000
CY
L�
EST. TEMP FILL VOLUME SUBMERGED LAND
EST.
TEMP.
FILL
VOLUME TRANSITION ZONE
0
CY
0 CY
0
cl,y
EST.
TEMP
FILL
AREA SUBMERGED LAND
1.29
AC
1.29
AC
2.58
AC.
SST.
TEMP
FILL
AREA TRANSITION ZONE
0
AC
0
AC
0
AC
0 EST. VOLUME INCLUDES RUBBLE
EST. 160 C.Y. FOR DREDGE FOR PILES
I FEDERAL AID PART!CIPATI^nG �
PROPOSED FILL!,I:'°G �;^sD
DREDGING FOR LOWER
SUGARLOAF CHAN. MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPAF, .%lENT OF
�...! 1 � \-J RR,
i
SHEET NO. 16 OF 22
SECTION THRU ROADWAY AT STA. 317+00
PROPOSED 4:I _---- --__
SLOPE
' EXISTING SLOPE
IrMHW*1.04
---- MLW+0.34
0.
m
N
w
o '
: o
o
z `v
0 0
7! 0)
SCALE:I"- 5' VERT.
I = 20' HORIZ.
SEC. A- A
-------------
I FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE -
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
SHEET NO.17 OF22
SECTION THRU ROADWAY AT STA. 325+00
PROPOSED 4: 1 SLOPE
,"*--EXISTING
MHW+1.04
MLW+0.34 _ ✓'
Ll-
M
N
M
W
00
N
zo
00
x- rn
SCALE :I" =5' VERT.
I" =20' HORIZ.
SEC. B-B
SLOPE
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING I
PROPOSED FILL a DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE N0. 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
SHEET NO. 18 0F22
SECTION THRU ROADWAY AT STA.333+00
PROPOSED 4:1 SLOPE
MLW+0.34
C�
SCALE : I° = 5' VERT.
1" =20' HORIZ.
M
Lo
w
00
fr N
Z 0
00
7- rn
SEC. C- C
-
_ EXISTING SLOPE
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO. 900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
SHEET NO. 19 OF 22
SECTION THRU ROADWAY AT STA.348400
PROPOSE 4:1 SLO
SCALE : I" = 5' VERT.
i" = 20' HORIZ.
M
M
w�
00
N
z0
00
20)
10
/offft'—EXISTINP SLOPE
SEC. D-D
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING I
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
SECTION THRU ROADWAY AT STA . 365 +00
PROPOSED 4:1 SLOPE
}
�MLW+0.34 MHW+1.04
SCALE: 1 = S' VERT.
1 " = 20' HORI Z.
r1c)
N
w�
00
0: N
z0
00
2 0)
SEC. E-E
SHEET NO.2O 0F22
15
POSED. 4: 1 SLOPE
MHW + 1.04
MLW +0.3 4
_c
FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
PROPOSED FILL a DREDGE
FOR LOWER SUGARLOAF
CHANNEL MAY 1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
1
0
1
N
LO
0 0
0: N
z0
00
c
c
0
PLAN
0 10 20 Scale(Ft) Proposed
Bridge 20 —
100,
_
A
10 _
0 M.H.W.+ 1.04 M.L.W +0.34
-5
-10 2:1 Slope El.-5.0
Existing Bay Bottom
-15
SECTION F - F
DREDGE DETAI LS
MI n-
- -4- -- -Ili
Slope 2:1
SHEET NO. 21 OF 22
-I'-6"(Stone & Slurry)
Slope 2:1
M. H.W 7 i.04
M.L.W. +0.34
51ope HroleMon
SECTION THRU FOWARD SLOPE OF
PROPOSED BRIDGE
Limits of Proposed
Slope Protection
Edge of .Shoulder
ravemenr
M.H.NJ,+1.04
-6�� (Stone & Slurry) = M.LW.70.34 I
This slope to match._-C I
Roadway Fill Slope.
10
20 SECTION THRU SIDE SLOPES
10
RI PRAP DETAILS
0
-5 AID PARTICIPATING
I0[FEDERAL
PROPOSED FILL & DREDGE
-15 FOR LOWER SDGARLOA.F
CHANNEL MAY -1976
BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
40
ro
04
t�
w
o O
cr N
z o
0
0 1020 Scale (Ft.)
O
0
N
r
36Pipes To Be Placed At The & Of Each Recess
—Sand-cement Riprap
Temporary fill limits
C Proposed Bridge / �*k
Sand —cement
Ri ro
8'+ (Typical)
PLAN I
0 10 20 Scale (Ft.) 1
t Proposed Bridge
a
BO _ 38' _ 9'1
20
10
0 MHW+1.04
El. t 5.0¢
M LW +0.34
-10 2:1 SlopeExisting
j
Existing Bay Bottom
-15
SECTION G - G
TEMPORARY FILL DETAIL.
2.1 Slope
01
SHEET NO.22 OF 22
—.aaamiacsaem :Y
7G
I
LG
' CROWN ELEV. OF PIPE WILL BE
BEPNEEN EL.+1.04 TOE1.54.
FLOW LIFE WILL FIT NATURAL
GROUND OR BE EXCAVATED TO
MEET ABOVE CRITERIA.
9%,
10
0
=5 FEDERAL AID PARTICIPATING
-10 PROPOSED TEMPORARY FILLING
-15 AND DREDGING FOR LOWER
SUGARLOAF CHANNEL
MAY 1976 BRIDGE NO.900102
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION