Copyright
Nicholas C Kraus.

Coastal processes assessment for Brevard County, Florida, with special reference to test plaintiffs online

. (page 12 of 12)
Online LibraryNicholas C KrausCoastal processes assessment for Brevard County, Florida, with special reference to test plaintiffs → online text (page 12 of 12)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


F.6.1. Volume Analysis North of Canaveral Harbor

The pre-Harbor October 1951 survey was completed by the USACE just prior to the cut
through the barrier island for the first 10,500 ft of shore north of the Harbor. The October 1951
survey was compared with the May 1954, December 1958, March 1965 to January 1966,
February to April 1994, January 1996, May 1996, and May 1997 surveys to determine volume
changes. The computed volume changes are listed in Table F-9. The volume changes were
computed for the beach profile from the landward limit of the survey data seaward to the -17-ft
contour of the October 1951 survey. The 1994 through 1997 survey data were extended
landward to the limit of the October 1951 profile data in order to perform the volume
comparisons. Some of the available survey data (Table F-4) were not included in the volume
computations, such as the October 1956 and January, June, and October 1995 surveys, as there
were sufficient surveys for comparison purposes for these time frames. Other surveys (refer to
Tables F-3 and F-7) were excluded from the volume analysis because of their limited lineal
extent.

The May 1954 survey repeated and expanded the October 1951 survey. The May 1954
coverage extends from 210+00N to 343+98S. The Harbor impact was fairly limited in 1954 as
evidenced by volume changes to the -17-ft contour for 10,500 ft of shore north and south of the
Harbor of +286,800 and -148,600 cy, respectively (refer to Tables F-9 and F-12). Therefore, the
May 1954 survey is better suited as the baseline for pre-project conditions since its lineal extent
is twice as great north of the Harbor, and three times longer south of the Harbor as compared
with the October 1951 survey. Therefore, volume changes were also computed using the
May 1954 survey as a pre-Harbor survey. The May 1954 survey was compared with the
November 1958, March 1965 to January 1966, January 1996, May 1996, and May 1997 surveys
for the first 13,500 ft of shore north of the Harbor. The computed volume changes are listed in
Table F-10. The volume changes were computed for the beach profile from the landward limit of
the survey data seaward to the -17-ft contour of the May 1954 survey. The 1994 through 1997
survey data were extended landward at the berm elevation (+8.1 ft NGVD) to the limit of the
May 1954 profile data in order to perform the volume comparisons.

The May 1954 survey was compared with the November 1958 and the March 1965 to
January 1966 surveys for the first 21,000 ft of shore north of the Harbor. The computed volume
changes are listed in Table F-ll. The volume changes were computed for the beach profile from
the landward limit of the survey data seaward to the -17-ft contour of the May 1954 survey. The



p_34 Appendix F Brevard County Federal Projects and Surveys



1994 to 1997 survey data does not extend beyond 13,500 ft north of the Harbor, and, therefore,
could not be used to compute volumes beyond 13,500 ft.



Table F-9. Volume changes north of the north jetty 10,500 ft, seaward to the -17-ft contour.


Survey
Date


May-54


Nov-58


Mar-65 to
Jan-66


Feb-94 to
Apr-94


Jan-96


May-96


May-97


Oct-51


286,800


1,124,100


1,947,400


4,868,500


4,229,300


4,264,300


4,434,400


May-54




837,700


1,714,900


4,563,700


3,923,900


3,958,700


4,128,600


Nov-58






1,053,900


3,726,400


3,086,200


3,121,000


3,290,900


Mar-65 to
Jan-66








3,534,500


2,592,900


2,953,900


3,109,400


Feb-94 to
Apr-94










-639,500


-604,900


-434,700


Jan-96












35,000


205,100


May-96














170,100


Note: The 1965 data for the area north of the inlet are based on two profile lines. See Plates F-1, F-2, F-3, F-7, and F-8
for a graphical display of volume changes. The May 1954 MHW is depicted on the plates.



Table F-10. Volume changes north of the inlet 13,500 ft, seaward to the 1954 -17-ft
contour.


Survey
Date


Nov-58


Mar-65 to
Jan-66


Feb-94 to
Apr-94


Jan-96


May-96


May-97


May-54


759,900


1,445,100


6,053,400


5,468,800


5,510,300


5,732,100


Nov-58




863,200


4,689,900


4,104,000


4,145,600


4,371,800


Mar-65 to
Jan-66






4,666,600


4,117,100


4,151,700


4,359,000


Feb-94 to
Apr-94








-585,600


-545,100


-322,800


Jan-96










41,500


263,300


May-96












221,800



Table F-1 1 . Volume changes north of the inlet 21 ,000 ft, seaward to the
1954 -17-ft contour.


Survey Date


Nov-58


Mar-65 to Jan-66


May-54


1,312,900


2,594,700


Nov-58




1,549,900


Jan-66






Note: The 1 965 data for the area north of the inlet are based on three profile lines. See Plates F-1 to
F-9 for a graphical display of volume changes. The 1 954 MHW line is noted on the Plates.



Appendix F Brevard County Federal Projects and Surveys



F-35



F. 6.2. Volume Analysis South of Canaveral Harbor

The pre-Harbor, October 1951 survey was completed by the USACE just prior to the cut
through the barrier island for the first 10,500 ft of shore south of the Harbor. The October 1951
survey was compared with the May 1954, December 1958, March 1965 to January 1966,
May 1975, March and December 1979, August 1985 to May 1986, January 1994, January and
May 1996, and May 1997 surveys to determine volume changes. These volume changes were
computed for the beach profile from the landward limit of the survey data seaward to the -17-ft
contour of the October 1951 survey and are listed in Table F-12. Similarly, volume changes
were computed for the beach profile from the landward limit of the survey data seaward to the
October 1951 MHWL (Table F-13). Some of the available survey data (see Tables F-4, F-5 and
F-6) were not included in the volume computations (such as the October 1956 and the January,
June, and October 1995 surveys), as there were sufficient surveys for comparison purposes for
these time frames. Other surveys (refer to Tables F-3 and F-7) were excluded from the volume
analysis because of their limited lineal extent.

The May 1954 survey repeated and expanded the October 1951 survey. The May 1954
coverage extends from 210+00N to 343+98S. The Harbor impact was fairly limited in 1954 as
evidenced by volume changes to the -17-ft contour for 10,500 ft of shore north and south of the
Harbor of +286,800 and -148,600 cy, respectively (refer to Tables F-9 and F-12). Therefore, the
May 1954 survey is better suited as the baseline for pre-project conditions since its lineal extent
is twice as great north of the Harbor and three times longer south of the Harbor as compared with
the October 1951 survey and is more suitable as a pre-Harbor survey.

The May 1954 survey was compared with the December 1958, March 1965 to January 1966,
May 1975, March and December 1979, August 1985 to May 1986, January 1994, January and
May 1996, and May 1997 surveys for the shore 34,398 ft (6.5 miles) south of the Harbor.
Volume changes were computed for the beach profile from the landward limit of the survey data
seaward to the -17-ft contour of the May 1954 survey, (Table F-14). Similarly, volume changes
were computed from the landward limit of the survey data seaward to the May 1954 MHWL and
the results displayed in Table F-15 and shown on Plates F-l through F-8. Since the May 1975,
March and December 1979, January and May 1996, and May 1997 surveys only extend to 2.8
miles south of the Harbor, they could not be used to compute volumes for 6.5 miles of shore.



p.gg Appendix F Brevard County Federal Projects and Surveys



Table F-12. Volume changes south of the Inlet 2,500 to 10,500 ft, seaward to the -17-ft contour.




May-54


Nov-58


Mar-65 to
Jan-66


May-75


Mar-79


Dec-79


Aug-85 to
May-86


Jan-94


Jan-96


May-96


May-97


Oct-51


-148,600


-494,100


-999,100


1,140,300


793,100


126,800


-109,600


-808,700


-618,800


-581,000


-701,600


May-54




-345,500


-853,900


1,284,100


931,500


1,407,700


35,500


-632,800


-470,400


433,400


-553,300


Nov-58






-509,400


1,628,700


1,277,800


1,753,100


380,000


-325,800


-125,200


-88,600


-208,100


Mar-65 to
Jan-66








2,129,800


1,777,500


2,252,300


889,400


185,500


379,600


416,400


297,700


Sep-72
Nov-72










-


-


-


-




-'




May-75










-342,700


121,440


-1,252,300


-1,947,300


-1,751,100


-1,722,100


-1,845,300


Mar-79












465,700


-895,500


-1,597,800


-1,390,400


-1,363,800


-1,490,500


Dec-79














-1,372,500


-2,072,500


-1,872,200


-1,839,500


-1,966,900


Aug-85 to
Mav-86
















-703,160


-505,100


468,000


-589,200


Jan-94


















204,800


232,100


108,100


Jan-96




















34,500


-84,300


May-96






















-123,000


May-97
























Note: See Plates F-1 through F-7 for graphical display of volume changes. The May 1954 MHWL is noted on the Plates. The hydrographic
data for the 1972 FDEP survey were omitted in this analysis because of irregularities in the offshore portions of the data set.



Table F-13. Volume changes south of the inlet 2,500 to 10,500 ft, seaward to the 1951 MHW.




May-54


Nov-58


Mar-65 to
Jan-66


Sep-72 to
Nov-72


May-75


Mar-79


Dec-79


Aug-85 to
May-86


Jan-94


Jan-96


May-96


May-97


Oct-51


-19,900


-71,700


-190,200


-361,000


117,600


66,000


74,500


-163,600


-305,200


-332,900


-295,100


-261,600


May-54




-51,900


-170,700


-341,400


132,700


75,800


89,700


-144,100


-296,500


-313,100


-276,200


-241,900


Nov-58






-119,000


-290,300


183,700


128,500


141,400


-92,400


-245,000


-261,600


-224,900


-190,300


Mar-65 to
Jan-66








-171,700


298,300


240,800


256,300


26,600


-125,900


-143,000


-106,800


-71,700


Sep-72 to
Nov-72










479,400


411,500


432,300


197,681


48,200


29,900


68,700


100,500


May-75












46,300


-33,500


-281,400


420,900


442,700


413,600


-382,600


Mar-79














16,323


-220,300


-367,100


-377,400


-350,900


-323,500


Dec-79
















-234,900


-379,500


-396,900


-368,800


-337,600


Aug-85 to
May-86


















-147,700


-167,300


-130,300


-97,400


Jan-94




















12,900


13,900


44,400


Jan-96






















34,900


69,800


May-96
























31,100


May-97


























Note: See Plates F-1 through F-7 for graphical display of volume changes. The May 1954 MHWL is noted on the Plates. The hydrographic
data for the 1972 FDEP survey were omitted in this analysis because of irregularities in the offshore portions of the data set.



Appendix F Brevard County Federal Projects and Surveys



F-37



Table F-14. Volume changes south of the inlet from 2,500 to 34,400 ft, seaward to
the -17-ft contour.




Nov-58


Mar-65 to
Jan-66


Sep-72 to
Nov-72


Aug-85 to
May-86


Jan-94


May-54


-1,687,500


-1,497,700


-


-250,600


-1,304,400


Nov-58




190,100


-


1,437,300


386,400


Mar-65 to Jan-66






-


1,247,100


196,800


Sep-72 to Nov-72








-


-


Aug-85 to May-86










-1,050,300


Jan-94












Note: See Plates F-1 through F-7 for graphical display of volume changes. The May 1 954 MH W line is
noted on the Plates. The hydrographic data for the 1972 FDEP survey were omitted in this analysis
because of irregularities in the offshore portions of the data set.



Table F-1 5. Volume changes south of the inlet from 2,500 to 34,400 ft, seaward to
the 1954 MHW.




Nov-58


Mar-65 to
Jan-66


Sep-72 to
Nov-72


Aug-85 to
May-86


Jan-94


May-54


-574,000


-193,100


-932,800


-481,600


-496,600


Nov-58




381,200


-357,700


92,800


80,700


Mar-65 to Jan-66






-739,700


-288,500


-300,000


Sep-72 to Nov-72








451,100


438,700


Aug-85 to May-86










-11,500


Jan-94












Note: See Plates F-1 through F-7 for graphical display of volume changes. The May 1 954 MHW line is
noted on the Plates.



F.7. Plaintiffs' Claims of Volume Loss

A comparison has been made of the US ACE October 1951 Canaveral Harbor pre-
construction survey (D.O. File 11-20, 193; three sheets, a copy of which is in Plaintiffs'
possession) and the US ACE January 1994 beach-profile surveys (1996 Feasibility report). The
1951 survey coverage was limited to 10,500 ft south of the south jetty. The volume difference in
cubic yards was computed between the two surveys for the area bounded to the north by the inlet
to a point 10,500 ft south of the inlet, to the minimum landward extent of the surveys and
seaward to the October 1951 MHW shoreline (elevation +1.7 ft NGVD). The total volume
change for this shore was 305,200 cy of erosion from 1951 to 1994 above and landward of the
October 1951 MHW (see Table F-1 3).



F-38



Appendix F Brevard County Federal Projects and Surveys



F. 7.1. Plaintiffs ' First Claim of Volume Loss

36

In 1995, plaintiffs claimed total volumetric losses of 4.8 Mcy (claimed dune loss of 1.8 Mcy

37

and other volumetric loss of 3.0 Mcy ) for the first 10,500 ft south of the south jetty at Canaveral
Harbor for the period 1951 to 1995. These claims of volume loss, presumably above and
landward of the 1951 MHWL, are 16 times higher than those estimated from beach-profile
surveys for the period 1951-1994. It is important to note that within the first 10,500 ft south of
Canaveral Harbor, the Defendant estimates that 43 shorefront parcels owned by Plaintiffs sums
to 5,880 ft. Because Plaintiffs shorefront parcels are 5,880 ft of the first 10,500 ft, it could be
expected that erosion losses would be similarly reduced from a computed total.

Alleged volume losses from the Applegate property, which is located within the 10,500 ft

36

south of Canaveral Harbor, totaled 42,550 cy (21,340 cy of dune and bluff erosion, 21,210 cy

37

of other volumetric loss. Applegate's claim of volume losses in 1995 amounts to 13.9 % of
actual loss (305,200 cy), yet Applegate's property width of 100 ft is only 0.9 % of 10,500 ft.

F. 7.2. Plaintiffs ' Second Claim of Volume Loss

Plaintiffs provided the Defendant a second estimate of dune and bluff volume losses from the
time of purchase to 1995 on or about June 28, 1996. Summing the information provided by
Plaintiffs second submission for claims within 10,500 ft south of Canaveral Harbor yields
464,710 cy of alleged losses from time of purchase to 1995. This is 1.5 times the amount of
erosion from 1951 to 1994 (305,200 cy) above and landward of the 1951 MHW for the 10,500 ft
of shoreline south of Canaveral Harbor. It is important to note the following: (1) Defendant
estimates that Plaintiffs own 43 shorefront parcels totaling 5,880 ft within the first 10,500 ft
south of Canaveral Harbor. Since Plaintiffs' shorefront parcels are 5,880 ft of the first 10,500 ft,
it could be expected that erosion losses would be similarly reduced from a computed total; and
(2) Plaintiffs' claims are alleged to have been made from time of purchase, and yet they exceed
the estimate of loss based on survey data for the period 1951 to 1994.

The volumes losses from 1965 to 1995 have been estimated to be 125,900 cy above the 1951
MHW line for the area 10,500 ft south of Canaveral Harbor (see Table F-13). These
comparisons were made based on the US ACE October 1951 Canaveral Harbor pre-construction
survey, the USACE 1965 survey (D.O. File 24-29, 128; thirty-five sheets, a copy of which is in
Plaintiffs' possession) and the USACE January 1994 survey.



Based on information in Exhibit "A," November 16, 1995, Plaintiffs' Response to Defendant's Request for Information in
Accordance with Court Order Dated August 1 8, 1 995. Volume is summed for the first 62 Plaintiffs (to R1 0+850).

37

Based on information in table enclosed to 30 June 1995 Plaintiffs' Answer to Defendant's Interrogatory No. 10 and
Request for Production. Volume is summed for the first 62 Plaintiffs (to R1 0+850).



Appendix F Brevard County Federal Projects and Surveys F-39



Beside the City of Cape Canaveral (#176, 12 parcels totaling 465 ft), only two Plaintiffs
(Pittman, #131, 350 ft and Eberwein, #8, 230 ft) own parcels in the first 10,500 ft of shore, and
their claims of loss total 172,663 cy. Recognizing that an indefinable portion of this volume loss
occurred after 1965, an estimate of Plaintiffs' volume losses after 1965 within the first 10,500 ft
south of Canaveral Harbor was made by subtracting 172,663 cy from 464,710 cy. This yields
292,047 cy of alleged volume losses after 1965, which is 2.3 times the amount of erosion
(125,900 cy) computed from 1965 to 1994 surveys above and landward of the 1951 MHW.

F. 7.3. Other Issues Related to Plaintiffs ' Volume Claims

Names of plaintiffs and associated frontage (in ft) were provided to the Defendant in 1995.
Summing this frontage for the first 10,500 ft south of Canaveral Harbor yields a total of 1 1,845 ft
of ocean frontage (for Plaintiffs north of R10+850), a physical impossibility. Defendant
estimates that Plaintiffs own 43 shorefront parcels totaling only 5,880 ft of ocean frontage in the
first 10,500 ft south of Canaveral Harbor. This appears in large part to be duplication by
Plaintiffs for condominium properties. As an example, Canaveral Sands Condominium
Association (Plaintiff No. 5) claims 700 ft of frontage and 149,380 cy of dune and bluff loss, yet
three additional Plaintiffs (Nos. 242, 108, and 130) appear to be claiming the same frontage and a
portion of the dune and bluff loss claimed by Plaintiff No. 5. Similar discrepancies exist in
Plaintiffs' Answer to Defendant's Interrogatory No. 10 and Request for Production dated
June 30, 1995, and Plaintiffs' second estimate of dune and bluff volume losses dated June 28,
1996.



c_4Q Appendix F Brevard County Federal Projects and Surveys




PLATE F-9



Destroy this report when no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator




to

sm

Ills

o x m m
k|5Z

£2 33 o ^












1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12

Online LibraryNicholas C KrausCoastal processes assessment for Brevard County, Florida, with special reference to test plaintiffs → online text (page 12 of 12)