My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3/28/1995
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1995
>
3/28/1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:05:10 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 2:21:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
03/28/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
coordinates of the -monument in <br />elevation of the.monument and <br />profile. This. information is <br />the proposed project. <br />B®®K 94 F. 706 <br />Florida State Plane Coordinates, <br />azimuth/bearing of each survey <br />necessary for an adequate review of <br />2.2.a. Two sets of the reduced drawings were received but they <br />were not signed and sealed as required by rule. Please provide <br />two new sets. -that have been signed and sealed by the engineer. <br />3. he <br />The Countyhas not provided 'a letter received fromsponse to Ms. AdeletClemenseas for <br />c <br />comments onnthe <br />result of the public notice. <br />G. The following.comments pertain to the numerical modelling: <br />There was no preliminary review of the Scope of work for the <br />numerical modelling by Department staff or any review of early <br />s <br />This has <br />drafts to assist the modeler as previously requested. ThiThisnha as <br />resulted in a document which does not address the re uiand the <br />previously outlined and agreed to by the Department <br />County. <br />English units are not_utilized.in the report,_ which is fine for <br />the modeler but not the County or regulatory agencies. This <br />would have been the desirelth a to use rEnglish preliminary which would <br />have identified <br />The description.of the proposed project on page 1 is incorrect. <br />There are numerous references and-discussions <br />ssions by the error in <br />reaction to the low or depression area <br />bethymetry. Thesro ussions and needare <br />toirrelevant <br />be deletedtfromethestex�nt <br />of the proposed p iect <br />Figure 1 shows the bathymetric error. This figure needs to be <br />replaced with a corrected figure. <br />There are two figures labeled as Figure I. <br />There are numerous typographical errors and incomplete sentences <br />which need correcting? <br />The model does nbt incorporate any reflection of wave energy from <br />the units, which based on observation at the Midtown project is <br />significant. whet would be necessary to incorporate a reflection <br />component? <br />In item 3.10 the circulation and sediment transport models use <br />the incorrect bethymetry. This needs to be corrected. The <br />design development report contained estimates of transport. why <br />weren't these -estimates used in the model? <br />General Comments <br />Much of the discussion <br />of the modeler and not <br />text are undecipherable <br />results of the model. <br />MARCH 28, 1995 <br />in the text is written <br />the user. Most of the <br />and are not helpful in <br />24 <br />from the viewpoint <br />figures within the <br />understanding the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.