• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Study area
 1985 Hurricanes
 Hurricane damage
 Summary and conclusions
 References
 Detailed locations, photos and...






Group Title: Technical paper - Florida Sea Grant College Program ; no. 51
Title: Impact of hurricanes on Pinellas County, Florida, 1985
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076605/00001
 Material Information
Title: Impact of hurricanes on Pinellas County, Florida, 1985
Series Title: Technical paper Florida Sea Grant College
Physical Description: 53 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Davis, Richard A
Andronaco, Margaret
Florida Sea Grant College
Publisher: Sea Grant Extension Program, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainsville Fla
Publication Date: 1987
 Subjects
Subject: Hurricanes -- Florida -- Pinellas County   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Bibliography: p. 33.
Statement of Responsibility: Richard A. Davis, Jr. and Margaret Andronaco.
General Note: Grant NA85AA-D-00038.
Funding: This collection includes items related to Florida’s environments, ecosystems, and species. It includes the subcollections of Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit project documents, the Florida Sea Grant technical series, the Florida Geological Survey series, the Howard T. Odum Center for Wetland technical reports, and other entities devoted to the study and preservation of Florida's natural resources.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076605
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: oclc - 17785724

Table of Contents
    Cover
        Cover
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    Abstract
        Page 1
    Introduction
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Study area
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
    1985 Hurricanes
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Hurricane Elena
            Page 8
            Page 9
            Page 10
            Page 11
            Page 12
        Hurricane Juan
            Page 13
            Page 12
        Hurricane Kate
            Page 14
    Hurricane damage
        Page 14
        Hurricane Elena
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Hurricane Juan
            Page 24
            Page 25
            Page 23
        Hurricane Kate
            Page 26
            Page 25
            Page 27
            Page 28
            Page 29
    Summary and conclusions
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
    References
        Page 33
        Page 34
    Detailed locations, photos and profiles of nine beaches studied
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
Full Text

Technical Paper No. 51


impactt of Hurricanes on
Pinellas County, FRoria 198'5


Richard A. Davis, Jr.
Margaret Andronaco


FLORIDA SEA GRANT COLLEGE PUBLICATION













IMPACT OF HURRICANES ON
PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1985




Richard A. Davis, Jr. and Margaret Andronaco




Department of Geology
University of South Florida
Tampa, Florida 33620




Project No: IR-85-13
Grant No. NA85AA-D-00038



Technical Papers are duplicated in limited quantities for specialized audiences
requiring rapid access to information. They are published with limited editing
and without formal review by the Florida Sea Grant College Program. Content is
the sole responsibility of the author. This paper was developed by the Florida
Sea Grant College Program with support from NOAA Office of Sea Grant, U.S.
Department of Ccmnerce, grant number NA85AA-D-SG059. It was published by the
Sea Grant Extension Program which functions as a component of the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service, John T. Woeste, Dean, in conducting Cooperative
Extension work in Agriculture, Home Economics, and marine Sciences, State of
Florida, U.S. Department of Camnerce, and Boards of County Ccnmissioners,
cooperating. Printed and distributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of
May 8 and June 14, 1914. The Florida Sea Grant College is an Equal
Employment-Affirmative Action employer authorized to provide research,
educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions
that function without regard to race, color, sex, or national origin.


TECHNICAL PAPER NO. 51
May 1987
Price $3.00










IMPACT OF HURRICANES ON PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1985


Table of Contents

Page
Abstract............. ...................................... ....... 1
Introduction................. ................ ................ 2
Study Area..................................................... 3
Coastal Processes.......................................... 3
Weather........... ........................ .......... ... 3
Tides................. .................. .... .. ......... 6
Littoral Processes.................................... 7
1985 Hurricanes.................... .......................... 7
Hurricane Elena ........................................... 8
Hurricane Juan.. ........................ ........... .. .... 12
Hurricane Kate ............... ... ........................ 14
Hurricane Damage................................................ 14
Hurricane Elena.............. ............................... 14
Hurricane Juan.................................... ....... 23
Hurricane Kate ..................... ........................ 25
Beach Profile Changes........................................ 25
Pass-a-Grille (Loc.1)......................................... 26
Long Key (Loc.2)........................................... 26
Long Key-Wall (Loc.3)...................................... 27
Treasure Island (Loc.4).................. ................... 27
Redington Beach (Loc.5)..................................... 28
Indian Shores (Loc.6) .................. ............ ........ 28
Sand Key Wall (Loc.7).................................. 29
Sand Key (Loc.8).................................... .. .. 29
North Clearwater (Loc.9).................................... 30
Summary of Beach Profile Changes............................. 30
Summary and Conclusions........................................... 31
References............ ....... ..................... .............. 33
Appendix A Detailed locations, photos and profiles at each
of the nine beach locations studied........................... 35










IMPACT OF HURRICANES ON PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1985


ABSTRACT

Three hurricanes had impact on the west-central coast of Florida
during the fall of 1985; Elena, Juan and Kate. Although each caused
damage, Elena was by far the most significant. It caused considerable
damage to coastal structures, buildings and necessitated evacuation of
virtually the entire coastal community of Pinellas County. Preparation
and the modest energy from Elena limited the financial loss and injury
and prevented any deaths in this area.

Hurricane Elena developed in late August and passed to the west of
Pinellas County, stalled near Cedar Key and then moved to the northwest.
Hurricane Juan formed in late October far to the west of the Pinellas
coast and moved northward to the Mississippi Delta, then proceeded to the
east with landfall near Pensacola. The final hurricane, Kate, followed a
path similar to that of Kate but moved directly onshore near Tallahassee.

Considerable damage to various coastal structures and buildings was
caused by Elena with the Indian Rocks and northern Sand Key area parti-
cularly hard hit. Most of damage to these structures by subsequent
hurricanes was the result of exposure caused by damage during Elena or
damage to facilities under repair and reconstruction from Elena.

Washover was minor and local from Elena and one new tidal pass was
generated on the northern part of Caladesi Island. Beaches exhibited
much erosion during Elena but most of this sediment returned as the
result of Hurricane Juan. There was little beach change related to
Hurricane Kate.

Beaches in front of seawalls exhibited more apparent erosion than
adjacent natural beach profiles. These sites also experienced the most
rapid recovery with the net change being one of apparent accretion.

The Pinellas County coast was generally spared from disaster during
the 1985 hurricane season. The financial loss was modest considering the
potential and there was minimal direct impact on people. The preparation
and the generally distant nature of the storms both contributed to this
situation. The beaches suffered little net loss by the end of the
hurricane season and the winter season was mild thus helping to maintain
the beaches.










IMPACT OF HURRICANES ON PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1985


Introduction
The west-central coast of Florida is among the most developed coasts
on the Gulf of Mexico. Pinellas County in particular is the most
developed reach of coast along this major water body. This county has a
population of over 800,000 and includes the major metropolitan centers of
St. Petersburg and Clearwater along with numerous smaller incorporated
local governmental units. Although there is a rather broad spectrum of
industries and residential complexes, the largest single industry is
tourism.

The open coast includes several barrier islands with intervening
inlets. It is essentially a continuous barrier system throughout-except
for about 6 km near the northern end of the county. All of these
barriers are either completely developed or are various types of
recreational parks and sanctuaries. The central two-thirds of this coast
or a total of 35 km is developed in a complex of hotels, motels,
high-rise buildings and single family residential dwellings. Various
types of retail businesses, restaurants and other commercial
establishments that support the tourist industry are also present.

Virtually all of this development has taken place since the 1920s
when the first causeways were completed between the mainland and the
barrier islands. Coincidently, the last major hurricane to impact this
portion of the west peninsular coast of Florida was in 1921. A
tremendous explosion of development has taken place in this area since
about the late 1950s and is continuing. This means that virtually all of
the development and population on these barrier islands has come during a
period without any major impact from a hurricane. To be sure, there have
been hurricanes in tfe eastern Gulf of Mexico since 1921, but all have
either passed too far away from this area or have been of small enough
magnitude so as not to cause serious damage.

The hurricane season of 1985 was quite unusual in a variety of ways.
It produced not one but three hurricanes that had an impact on Pinellas
County. These had a variety of strengths and they developed over a
period of nearly three months. Additionally, the last one (Kate) was the
latest hurricane on record in this part of the world and the first
November hurricane in 50 years. Hurricane Elena impacted the
west-central Florida coast on Labor Day weekend, Hurricane Juan passed
rather far away from Pinellas County but caused some intense weather in
late October and Hurricane Kate passed to the west of Pinellas County on
November 20 with landfall two days later.

This report will document the nature and extent of the damage and
changes that took place along and adjacent to the beaches of Pinellas
County as the result of these three storms. The primary aim is to not
only show the changes and their distribution, but also to monitor the
beaches over several months to keep a record of their subsequent









recovery. The study was initiated immediately after the passage of
Hurricane Elena with data collection continuing for one year.

The primary objectives of the study were to document:

1) the distribution of beach changes including both erosion and
accretion with special attention given to development of intertidal
ridges.
2) locations of damage to coastal structures including seawalls,
groins, jetties and other shoreline stabilization structures.
3) damage to buildings as the result of the storms.
4) washover sites where significant quantities of beach and
nearshore sand had been transported landward onto the barrier island.
5) locations if any, where the barrier islands had been breeched and
new tidal passes formed.
6) relative effects of storm impact on natural beach profiles as
compared to those fronting seawalls or other hardened structures.
7) any other changes of note that could be related to the passage of
the storms.
Study Area

The Pinellas County coast extends for 65 km along the west-central
peninsula of Florida. This dominantly barrier island coast includes
Mullet Key, North and South Bunces Keys, Long Key, Treasure Island, Sand
Key, Clearwater Beach Island, Caladesi Island, Honeymoon Island and
Anclote Key from south to north. The four islands in the central area
are not only the longest but are also the ones where development is
essentially continuous. The barriers at both the south and north ends of
the county are parks and recreation areas with essentially no commercial
or residential development.

Several reconnaissance visits, both on the ground and by air, were
conducted throughout the study to all sections of the Pinellas coast.
Because of the nature of this project, the detailed surveying was
concentrated in the central portion of the county where development is
most extensive. Initially, nine beach profile sites (figure 1) were
established and surveyed at predetermined intervals in order to document
beach configuration and recovery after Hurricane Elena. In February,
1986,.two additional sites were added to the survey network. Additional
profiles were surveyed at Caladesi Island and Anclote Key at irregular
intervals.

Coastal Processes -

The west-central Florida coast is considered to be one of relatively
low energy, even within the Gulf Coast. Wave energy is low and weather
is dominated by the occasional hurricane and by the passage of regular
frontal systems during the winter months.

Weather The Florida peninsula occupies part of a subtropical climatic
belt with distinctly seasonal and bimodal weather patterns. During the
spring and summer months (March-September) this area is dominated by the
Bermuda high. This situation produces a counterclockwise atmospheric









recovery. The study was initiated immediately after the passage of
Hurricane Elena with data collection continuing for one year.

The primary objectives of the study were to document:

1) the distribution of beach changes including both erosion and
accretion with special attention given to development of intertidal
ridges.
2) locations of damage to coastal structures including seawalls,
groins, jetties and other shoreline stabilization structures.
3) damage to buildings as the result of the storms.
4) washover sites where significant quantities of beach and
nearshore sand had been transported landward onto the barrier island.
5) locations if any, where the barrier islands had been breeched and
new tidal passes formed.
6) relative effects of storm impact on natural beach profiles as
compared to those fronting seawalls or other hardened structures.
7) any other changes of note that could be related to the passage of
the storms.
Study Area

The Pinellas County coast extends for 65 km along the west-central
peninsula of Florida. This dominantly barrier island coast includes
Mullet Key, North and South Bunces Keys, Long Key, Treasure Island, Sand
Key, Clearwater Beach Island, Caladesi Island, Honeymoon Island and
Anclote Key from south to north. The four islands in the central area
are not only the longest but are also the ones where development is
essentially continuous. The barriers at both the south and north ends of
the county are parks and recreation areas with essentially no commercial
or residential development.

Several reconnaissance visits, both on the ground and by air, were
conducted throughout the study to all sections of the Pinellas coast.
Because of the nature of this project, the detailed surveying was
concentrated in the central portion of the county where development is
most extensive. Initially, nine beach profile sites (figure 1) were
established and surveyed at predetermined intervals in order to document
beach configuration and recovery after Hurricane Elena. In February,
1986,.two additional sites were added to the survey network. Additional
profiles were surveyed at Caladesi Island and Anclote Key at irregular
intervals.

Coastal Processes -

The west-central Florida coast is considered to be one of relatively
low energy, even within the Gulf Coast. Wave energy is low and weather
is dominated by the occasional hurricane and by the passage of regular
frontal systems during the winter months.

Weather The Florida peninsula occupies part of a subtropical climatic
belt with distinctly seasonal and bimodal weather patterns. During the
spring and summer months (March-September) this area is dominated by the
Bermuda high. This situation produces a counterclockwise atmospheric






































Figure 1 Location map showing the Pinellas County barrier coast and
the profile sites monitored in the beach study.

circulation with winds on the Pinellas coast being dominantly from the
southeast during this time of year. Such climatic conditions cause the
build-up of thermal convection cells over the peninsula with severe and
common thunderstorms during June to September (Jordan, 1973).

During the winter months, the northern Gulf of Mexico in general,
and the west coast of the Florida peninsula in particular, is subjected
to the passage of frontal systems that move onto the Gulf in Texas and
then proceed eastward over the Pinellas County coast. These cold fronts
commonly pass far enough to the south to affect this area from about late
October through February or early March.

Seasonal situations in weather produce a bimodal wind pattern for
Pinellas County with northerly winds being prevalent during the winter
and southerly winds most common during the summer (figure 2). This
pattern is also reflected in the strength of winds. The stronger and
dominant winds occur during winter and the weak winds are in the summer
(figure 3).















S\
230 I

20'
NORTHERLY WINDS
IO0
--- SOUTHERLY WINDS


J F M A M J J A SO N D J
Figure 2 Distribution of southerly and northerly winds by month and
duration for the Pinellas coast. (from Rosen, 1976.)


60




z
Cr.
a.


J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 J


Figure 3 Mean monthly distribution of strong winds ( 9 knots) and
weak winds ( 3 knots) for Pinellas County. (from Rosen, 1976)

Although hurricanes may have a profound effect on the west-central
Florida coast, they are relatively infrequent and certainly
unpredictable. The dominant weather systems impacting this coast on a
regualr basis are therefore the frontal systems that pass during the
winter. As these weather systems approach the Florida peninsula the wind
blows from the southwest with increasing speed as the front comes closer.
Almost immediately upon passage, the wind shifts to the north or even the
northeast, and is strong. This is the highest energy time of the passage
of the system. These weather fronts actually dominate the yearly weather
patterns in terms of intensity and therefore they impact severely on
coastal processes.









Hurricanes are relatively infrequent on the west peninsular part of
Florida because this is essentially in the shadow zone of the typical
path for tropical storms in the Gulf of Mexico. The two most common
avenues for hurricanes that move to the northwest through the Caribbean
Sea are to trend to the north along the eastern coast of the United
States or to move into the Gulf of Mexico between the southern tip of
Florida and the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico. Once in the Gulf, the
typical path for hurricanes is within a north to westerly quadrant. It
is not common for such storm to turn back toward the northeast and move
onto the west coast of the Florida peninsula. The most common path for
hurricanes that impact on the west coast of peninsular Florida is
essentially a northerly one, more or less parallel to the coast. Several
hurricanes have taken this course in recent years but will little
influence on the west-central coast of Florida. Examples are hurricanes
Alma in 1966, Eloise in 1975 and Frederick in 1979.
In 1960, Hurricane Donna actually did move toward the northeast and
directly impact the west-central coast with landfall near Ft. Myers. The
storm then moved diagonally across the peninsula and offshore near St.
Augustine. As it passed near the Pinellas County coast, Hurricane Donna
was producing strong offshore winds which produced a negative storm tide
or set down. Such phenomena do not result in major wave-generated damage
to the beach and related coastal environments.

During historical times, two major hurricanes have impacted the
Pinellas County coast. The first was in 1848 when storm tides of about 4
m above normal were produced and Johns Pass was cut. The actual location
of landfall for this storm is not known. The other hurricane was in 1921
and was probably the most devastating storm in recorded history as far as
the Pinellas County coast is concerned. Storm tides reached 3 m above
normal and Hurricane Pass was cut separating Caladesi and Honeymoon
Islands which were originally called Hog Island. This storm moved along
much of the west peninsular coast cutting Redfish Pass at the north end
of Captiva Island and another tidal inlet which was the ancestor to
Midnight Pass in Sarasota County. Landfall was near Tarpon Springs.

Tides The Pinellas County coast is within the microtidal range with
astronomical spring tidal range of 70-80 cm on the open coast. The tidal
patterns are mixed with semi-diurnal conditions of unequal heights during
most of the lunar month. The general configuration of the continental
shelf adjacent to the coast is one of a broad and gently sloping surface
with a gradient of less than 1:1200. Such a configuration facillitates
set up during storms and can lead to extreme storm tides if strong
onshore winds persist for long periods of time. Storm tides of 3-4 m as
mentioned above would provide a devastating impact on the Pinellas
barrier coast which has a natural profile with a maximum elevation of
only 4-6 m.

The tidal prism carried by the various inlets in Pinellas County
shows great variation due to the variety in the coastal bays that are
served by these inlets. Some, such as Dunedin Pass and Blind Pass are
distinctly wave-dominated due to the small prism that they carry. These
unstable inlets have prisms of about 1 x 106 m3. By contrast, Johns Pass
is quite stable and carries a large tidal prism of about 1.4 x 107 m3
(Mehta et al, 1976).









The large rainfall that commonly accompanies these storms is an
aspect of hurricane conditions that is commonly overlooked and that can
be a serious factor in producing flooding conditions. Amounts of tens of
centimeters can fall in a day or two. Especially in Florida, this
creates severe problems of runoff with streams required to carry
virtually all of it to the coast. But the onshore storm winds have
generated significant storm surge which tends to push water upstream in
the rivers emptying into the coastal areas. The result is that drainage
is severely impaired and flooding is widespread, not only along the coast
where storm surge occurs but along the floodplains of the streams near
the coast.

Littoral Processes The most dominant coastal processes along the
beaches of Pinellas County are the waves and wave-generated longshore
currents, both of which are driven by the weather. The bimodal wind
patterns described earlier result in a bimodal orientation of wave
approach and therefore in longshore current. As is typical of all
coasts, the longshore current and therefore littoral transport of
sediment, displays a bimodal pattern with sediment moving both up the
coast and down the coast during different weather and wave conditions.

The west peninsular coast experiences wave approach from the
southwest during most of the summer months with the result being a
northerly littoral drift. During times when winds are from the north,
sediment is transported to the south along the coast. The resultant is a
dominantly southerly drift of sand throughout. These are the general
trends for this entire reach of coast. Pinellas County has a somewhat
different patterns due largely to its coastal orientation. A glance at
the coast (figure 1) shows that there is a broad headland near the center
of the county with the shoreline trending to the NNE and SE away from it.
The result is that wave refraction produces longshore current patterns
that cause a net transport of sediment to the north and to the south away
from this headland. There are some local reversals of these trends that
are related to the sand bodies associated with some of the inlets.

Overall wave energy on this coast is quite low with mean annual wave
height being less than 30 cm (Tanner, 1960). In a time-series study on
Caladesi Island, Rosen (1976) measured breakers of 6-30 cm and periods of
2-4 sec during non-storm conditions. When the frontal systems pass
during the winter, wave heights of 50-60 cm and periods of 5 sec are
common. Open water wave measurements indicate that 65 % of waves are
less than 1 m during the winter and during summer this reaches 90 % (U.
S. Weather Command, 1975).
1985 Hurricanes

The hurricane season of 1985 was unusual for the west-central coast
of Florida because three storms has an effect on this coast including the
latest on record. Although Pinellas County was no closer than about 100
km from any of these storms, each had its effect on the area.









Hurricane Elena -

The storm that eventually became Hurricane Elena was formed in the
western Sahara Desert of Africa on August 23. It did not become a true
tropical cyclone until it approached Cuba on August 27 when it was named.
Elena became a hurricane on August 29 as it passed near the latitude of
Key West into the Gulf of Mexico (figure 4). Hurricane Elena continued


Figure 4 Map of the Gulf of
Elena, Juan and Kate.


Mexico showing general paths of Hurricanes


in a northwesterly path at a speed of about 8 knots until about noon on
August 30 when the storm changed to a northeasterly direction. It then
moved to an area about 80 km west of Cedar Key, Florida and stalled
somewhat for about 24 hrs. It was during this time, from noon on August
31 until the same time the next day, that the highest energy conditions
from the storm impacted Pinellas County. After stalling west of Cedar
Key, the storm moved toward the Louisiana coast on September 1 at a speed
of 9 knots.









Hurricane Elena -

The storm that eventually became Hurricane Elena was formed in the
western Sahara Desert of Africa on August 23. It did not become a true
tropical cyclone until it approached Cuba on August 27 when it was named.
Elena became a hurricane on August 29 as it passed near the latitude of
Key West into the Gulf of Mexico (figure 4). Hurricane Elena continued


Figure 4 Map of the Gulf of
Elena, Juan and Kate.


Mexico showing general paths of Hurricanes


in a northwesterly path at a speed of about 8 knots until about noon on
August 30 when the storm changed to a northeasterly direction. It then
moved to an area about 80 km west of Cedar Key, Florida and stalled
somewhat for about 24 hrs. It was during this time, from noon on August
31 until the same time the next day, that the highest energy conditions
from the storm impacted Pinellas County. After stalling west of Cedar
Key, the storm moved toward the Louisiana coast on September 1 at a speed
of 9 knots.








Elena had a minimum barometric pressure of 953 mb on September 2
with maximum winds of 110 knots at that time. This occurred about 2 hrs
prior to landfall on the east coast of Louisiana, well away from the
west-central coast of Florida.

Weather conditions in the Pinellas County area included a minimum
barometric pressure of 1003 mb and maximum winds of 24 knots at the
National Weather Station in Tampa (figure 5). The strongest winds in
this area were from the south and southwest, the directions of persistent
winds during passage of the storm.

ELENA
31- B 25
BP
WS ...--- -
w i -200
o\ I
S\z


I \ iA 10 W


e.5


AUG SEP
Figure 5 Plot of barometric pressure and wind speeds
Tampa airport during the passage of Hurricane Elena.


recorded at the


The onshore component of these winds caused a significant storm
surge and increase in wave energy over a several day period. These
persistent winds resulted in a maximum open water surge of 1.4 m at
Clearwater on August 31 (figure 6). This compares with surges of 2.5 m
at Franklin County in the panhandle (Balsillie, 1985). The storm tides
inside Tampa Bay during this period exceeded 2 m. Tide gauge records
from the mouth of the Anclote River show elevated water levels due to set
up for a period of at least two days (figure 7). These storm tide data
indicate that Hurricane Elena is only a 10 yr storm (figure 8); that is,
its recurring frequency is once in ten years. Its storm surge of 1.4 m
is well below the 100 yr amount of 4 m as established by federal flood
insurance studies.

Waves generated during the passage of Elena were nominal in terms of
size (figure 9). The maximum significant wave height recorded at the
wave gaging station offshore of Clearwater was 2.5 m with a period of 13
sec (Bodge and Kreibel, 1985) at 1400 hrs on August 31. Data from
throughout Florida show that largest waves were near Jacksonville where











4
3 -
iWi p, 2


i \ 1
\ !\ \ \

i ',\/\.J ,- ,'\ i \\

-2-

29 30 31 I 2
AUGUST 1985 SEPT

Figure 6 Storm surge data for Hurricane Elena showing comparison of
predicted tides with actual water levels. (from Bodge and Kreibel, 1985.)


,--ANCLOTE
---SHELL POINT


TIDAL STAGE ELENA
I,
f '
I t


AUG


SEPT


11.5


*0.5


Figure 7 Water levels during passage of Hurricane Elena as recorded by
tide gauges at the mouth of the Anclote River and at Shell Point in
Tampa Bay.









LU
0
W


Ow
cc
= a


-j


> LU
>
a,
u cr


cc
w
U4
I-
oz in

15 a0
Suz
.(o .J
I-Q) 0


I-
0.0
c0
C

L11
n M
h oJ
M CO


0 50 100


DISTANCE IN NAUTICAL MILES ALONG COAST

Figure 8 Storm recurrence curves for the northeastern Gulf Coast
including Pinellas County. Note that Hurricane Elena was only about a
once in 10 yr storm. (from Hine et al, 1986.)


29
AUG.


LU


10 to

z
R


SEPT.


Figure 9 Plot of wind speed and offshore wave height at Clearwater
during the passage of Hurricane Elena.





















26 & 28 2 30 31 I 2 3 4 .
z 0





26 7 22 29 330 31 1 2 3 43
AUGUSTAUGUST SE





and Gulf coasts of Florida. Note that highest values are at
Jacksonville. (From Bodge and Kreibel, 1985.)

the significant wave height was over 3 m (figure 10). The reasons for
this distribution of wave energy are the wind directions and fetch
relative to the eye of the storm and also the narrow and steep shelf on
the northeast coast of Florida.

Hurricane Juan -

The subtropical depression that eventually became Hurricane Juan
formed in the central Gulf of Mexico on October 25. It became a tropical
storm the next day and then on October 27 started a northeasterly path
which became northwesterly by afternoon when Juan achieved hurricane
strength. The storm made two counterclockwise loops during its movement,
one south of the Louisiana coast and the second just onshore. Juan moved
offshore and around the Mississippi Delta with landfall near Pensacola on
October 31 (figure 4).

Juan barely made hurricane levels with maximum sustained winds of 75
knots and a low pressure of 971 mb. Significant effects from Juan were
felt from the east Texas coast through the Florida panhandle with tides
from 1-2 m above normal. The Pinellas County coast received little
impact from this storm. Highest sustained winds were 15 knots near Tampa
with the minimum barometric pressure of 999.7 mb (figure 11).

Storm surge in the study area was from 0.3 to 0.9 m on the open
coast but tide gauge records from Shell Point in Tampa Bay show a
negative storm tide (figure 12). The offshore wave gage at Clearwater
was damaged during Hurricane Elena and was inoperative during Juan. Only
estimates are therefore available for wave heights. Data from other







JUAN


BP
WS ---------


OCT


-20'
I-


15Y



10 m


a-
0


Z


NOV


Figure 11 Plot of barometric pressure and wind speed from the Tampa
airport during the passage of Hurricane Juan.


---SHELL POINT


I
I
I
'I
I


TIDAL STAGE- JUAN


I \
'rIr I
I -
r: r
I \ I
/ '-' \
%



I I
' ,
I
II
IIl


1 ,1200
.'-


0000


OCT


1200


%


0000


*1
I
.I


___ ~ ~~ ~ 12_ __ _X 1_


S120(


NOV


Figure 12 Tide curve from Shell Point in Tampa Bay during Hurricane
Juan. The Anclote River gage was inoperable.


1.5



1.0

C,
0.5 r
W
I-


O
0



-0.5





















26 & 28 2 30 31 I 2 3 4 .
z 0





26 7 22 29 330 31 1 2 3 43
AUGUSTAUGUST SE





and Gulf coasts of Florida. Note that highest values are at
Jacksonville. (From Bodge and Kreibel, 1985.)

the significant wave height was over 3 m (figure 10). The reasons for
this distribution of wave energy are the wind directions and fetch
relative to the eye of the storm and also the narrow and steep shelf on
the northeast coast of Florida.

Hurricane Juan -

The subtropical depression that eventually became Hurricane Juan
formed in the central Gulf of Mexico on October 25. It became a tropical
storm the next day and then on October 27 started a northeasterly path
which became northwesterly by afternoon when Juan achieved hurricane
strength. The storm made two counterclockwise loops during its movement,
one south of the Louisiana coast and the second just onshore. Juan moved
offshore and around the Mississippi Delta with landfall near Pensacola on
October 31 (figure 4).

Juan barely made hurricane levels with maximum sustained winds of 75
knots and a low pressure of 971 mb. Significant effects from Juan were
felt from the east Texas coast through the Florida panhandle with tides
from 1-2 m above normal. The Pinellas County coast received little
impact from this storm. Highest sustained winds were 15 knots near Tampa
with the minimum barometric pressure of 999.7 mb (figure 11).

Storm surge in the study area was from 0.3 to 0.9 m on the open
coast but tide gauge records from Shell Point in Tampa Bay show a
negative storm tide (figure 12). The offshore wave gage at Clearwater
was damaged during Hurricane Elena and was inoperative during Juan. Only
estimates are therefore available for wave heights. Data from other









storms indicate that maximum significant wave heights of 1.0-1.4 m are
realistic.

Hurricane Kate -

The development of a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico in late
November came about due to unusual circumstances which produced weather
conditions that resembled late September rather than October. This storm
became organized near the Virgin Islands on November 13-14 and was named
a day later. Kate became a hurricane at 1800 hrs on November 16. The
storm passed southwest of Key West early on November 19 and headed in a
northwesterly direction until it was almost west of Pinellas County where
it turned toward the northeast (figure 4). Kate's path followed closely
that of Elena but Kate continued toward the panhandle with landfall south
of Tallahassee on November 22.

Minimum barometric pressure in the storm was 953 mb on November 20
during which time winds were 110 knots. Kate was about the same size and
intensity as Elena but because Kate move much faster, it had less effect
on the west-central Florida coast.

Highest sustained winds during Hurricane Kate at Tampa were 15 knots
with a barometric low of 1012.5 mb (figure 13). Tides on the open coast
were 0.3-0.6 m above normal for about two days however, those recorded in
Tampa Bay show unexpectedly high levels (figure 14). Maximum significant
wave height off Clearwater was 1.05 m (figure 15) with a period of 9 sec.

Hurricane Damage

The 1985 hurricane season was quite expensive for the Pinellas
County coast and west-central Florida in general. The dollar amount of
damage was among the highest for all years, the number of evacuees was
very high and several counties were declared disaster areas. Although
monetary losses were great, death and injuries were minimized as the
result of preparation and organization of local governmental authorities.

Hurricane Elena -

Elena was both the first and most damaging of the three 1985
hurricanes to impact Pinellas County. Considerable information has been
gathered on the losses resulting from Hurricane Elena, principally by the
Division of Beaches and Shores, Department of Natural Resources
(Balsillie, 1985) but also by others (Bodge and Kriebel, 1985; Hine et
al, 1986). The present study also included various aspects of damage
assessment with efforts concentrated on the beaches and adjacent
buildings.

Information from the National Hurricane Center in Miami indicates
that monetary losses incurred as the result of Elena approach one billion
dollars. Insurance claims exceeded 0.5 billion dollars making it the
fourth most expensive storm on record. Seven Gulf Coast counties were
declared Federal Disaster areas including Pinellas, Hillsborough and
Manatee on the west-central Florida coast.









storms indicate that maximum significant wave heights of 1.0-1.4 m are
realistic.

Hurricane Kate -

The development of a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico in late
November came about due to unusual circumstances which produced weather
conditions that resembled late September rather than October. This storm
became organized near the Virgin Islands on November 13-14 and was named
a day later. Kate became a hurricane at 1800 hrs on November 16. The
storm passed southwest of Key West early on November 19 and headed in a
northwesterly direction until it was almost west of Pinellas County where
it turned toward the northeast (figure 4). Kate's path followed closely
that of Elena but Kate continued toward the panhandle with landfall south
of Tallahassee on November 22.

Minimum barometric pressure in the storm was 953 mb on November 20
during which time winds were 110 knots. Kate was about the same size and
intensity as Elena but because Kate move much faster, it had less effect
on the west-central Florida coast.

Highest sustained winds during Hurricane Kate at Tampa were 15 knots
with a barometric low of 1012.5 mb (figure 13). Tides on the open coast
were 0.3-0.6 m above normal for about two days however, those recorded in
Tampa Bay show unexpectedly high levels (figure 14). Maximum significant
wave height off Clearwater was 1.05 m (figure 15) with a period of 9 sec.

Hurricane Damage

The 1985 hurricane season was quite expensive for the Pinellas
County coast and west-central Florida in general. The dollar amount of
damage was among the highest for all years, the number of evacuees was
very high and several counties were declared disaster areas. Although
monetary losses were great, death and injuries were minimized as the
result of preparation and organization of local governmental authorities.

Hurricane Elena -

Elena was both the first and most damaging of the three 1985
hurricanes to impact Pinellas County. Considerable information has been
gathered on the losses resulting from Hurricane Elena, principally by the
Division of Beaches and Shores, Department of Natural Resources
(Balsillie, 1985) but also by others (Bodge and Kriebel, 1985; Hine et
al, 1986). The present study also included various aspects of damage
assessment with efforts concentrated on the beaches and adjacent
buildings.

Information from the National Hurricane Center in Miami indicates
that monetary losses incurred as the result of Elena approach one billion
dollars. Insurance claims exceeded 0.5 billion dollars making it the
fourth most expensive storm on record. Seven Gulf Coast counties were
declared Federal Disaster areas including Pinellas, Hillsborough and
Manatee on the west-central Florida coast.








KATE


Figure 13 Barometric pressure and wind speed
Airport during the passage of Hurricane Kate.

TIDAL STAGE-
I t
ANCLOTE *
I \
6 ---SHELL POINT
'
I \
4

/2
U I \
LL


data from the Tampa


KATE

2.0

1.5

1.0 to

0.5
/ f 5


21
NOVEMBER


Figure 14 Tidal curves during the passage of Hurricane Kate for the
mouth of the Anclote River and Shell Point in Tampa Bay. The peak at
Shell Point is the result of high water in the Manatee River which is
adjacent to the tide gage.


BP


25


*20O
I-
0
Z
-15


'10 W

(0
*5 z


30


29


NOV









1AIL


1.5- T KATE
WS -------

-15 ~

\ I f
-1.0 /- "
, \ / 10
z \ \ v.
U i \ 0
>0.5. .




16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
NOVEMBER

Figure 15 Wind speed and offshore wave height at Clearwater during the
passage of Hurricane Kate.


Four lives were lost as the result of Hurricane Elena, all due to
falling trees, automobile accidents and heart attacks. None took place
in Pinellas County. There were 134 people reported as hospitalized with
98 of these as the direct result of the storm and the remainder due to
stress-related problems. Less than half of these were in Pinellas County
(Federal Hurricane Center, 1985a). Much of the credit for the absence of
deaths and the few injuries due to the storm is due to the orderly and
rather complete evacuation of the barrier islands of Pinellas County.
Nearly 250,000 people were removed well in advance of the storm and
although this created problems of overcrowding in shelters and
inconvenience for the people, it produced excellent results.

The property damage along the Pinellas coast can be placed into
three major categories; 1) beach erosion, 2) damage or destruction to
seawalls and other similar structures, and 3) damage or destruction to
buildings. No significant damage was incurred by any public roadways in
Pinellas County.

Erosion was essentially continuous throughout the Gulf beaches of
Pinellas although the severity ranged rather widely (figure 16).
Extensive development of ridge and runnel morphology was also associated
with the post-storm beach profiles (figure 17). The most extensive and
severe erosion took place on the southern two-thirds of Long Key and
Treasure Island, central and northern Sand Key, most of Anclote Key and
small reaches of Clearwater Beach Island, Caladesi Island and Mullet Key
(figure 16).

Unfortunately there are no pre-storm beach surveys available except
those from the Department of Natural Resources that were measured in
connection with the coastal control line of about 11 years prior to
Elena. The general absence of severe weather during this interim period







LONG KEY


E R

S kilon
3


R 1




EXPLANATION
B--damage to buildings S--seawall damage
1 e--minor beach erosion W--washover
eter (only on active beach) profile site
E--major beach erosion
(includes vegetated beach)
R--ridge and runnel


MULLET KEY


BUNCE'S .......
PASS .. e--------------e
wE



e..w e



Figure 16a-e Maps of the Pinellas County barrier islands showing beach changes and damage as the
result of Hurricane Elena.

a


-1--7









SAND KEY


-------- E e- -R
R


kilometer


EXPLANATION
B--damage to buildings S--seawall damage
e--minor beach erosion W--washover
(only on active beach)
profile site
E--major beach erosion
(includes vegetated beach)
R--ridge and runnel


TREASURE ISLAND


JOHN'S
PASS


Z- E


Figure 16 cont'd.

b









CLEARWATER
PASS







0 1
kilometer


SAND KEY


R- ---E -- -
R R------


SAND KEY


E s s---- ----s-----------
--E-----------


EXPLANATION


B-damage to buildings
e--minor beach erosion
(only on active beach)
E--major beach erosion
(includes vegetated beach)
R--ridge and runnel


S--seawall damage
W--washover


profile site


SAND KEY


E,R


Figure 16 cont'd.










CALADESI


ISLAND


ER- E
R- E


EXPLANATION
B--damage to buildings S--seawall damage
e--minor beach erosion W--washover
(only on active beach)
profile site
E--major beach erosion
(includes vegetated beach)
R--ridge and runnel


DUNEDIN
PASS


0 1
kilometer


CLEARWATER BEACH ISLAND


-0


Figure 16 cont'd.

d

























E, R-


----E,
-Wc

EXLAATO


kilometer


B--damage to buildings S--seawall damage
e--minor beach erosion W--washover
(only on active beach)
profile site
E--major beach erosion
(includes vegetated beach)

R--ridge and runnel 7


HONEYMOON ISLAND


Figure 16 cont'd.

e







































Figure 17a Large hiii relief ridge and runnel feature
result of Hurricane Elena on Sand Key near Location 8.


formed as the


_-S.,- -. '- .... ... o; .t i 5 I'"
-" --- -- s

: .~-i i _.i -. "
... .. -.- -'_-.
,-, _.- ---. .I
..- a --- -
. .. ....

.- ---.,= .L'" -' ..


5.,-~


I


Figure 17b Oblique aerial view of ridge and runnel feature on Sand Key.


~1


~
rc-
L;

*
1..
i5-

- '''
-F~ ~~

2. ---


--------


-- = -- --! --_ -- -^ -_


---
t
--
--- --- i
~- -


J -









and the presence of extensive seawalls in Pinellas County minimizes the
effect of the long interval between surveys.

It is apparent that even during storms conditions, while most
beaches experience erosion, some show accretion. Measurement of both is
necessary to assess the net changes along a coastal reach as the result
of storm activity. This type of analysis for Pinellas County shows that
the change attributed to Hurricane Elena is about 6 cubic yards of
erosion per linear foot of beach or 15 cubic meters per linear meter
(Balsillie, 1985). Assuming a replacement cost of $6 per cubic yard, the
damage assessment for beach erosion as the result of Hurricane Elena is
$1,240,000 for Pinellas County. This is almost 4 times the amount lost
from Manatee County beaches but is less than each of the panhandle
counties affected except for Gulf County.

Damage to seawalls or similar protection structures was extensive
but was confined to a rather small portion of the coast. The seawall on
southern Long Key at Pass-a-Grille was damaged to the point that it had
to be replaced (see Appendix A). The remainder of Long Key and all of
Treasure Island was essentially free from seawall damage. The most
extensive and severe damage to hardened shorelines was on Sand Key,
locally in the southern portion and continuously beginning at North
Redington Beach and continuing through Bellaire Beach on the north
(figure 16). Most of the seawall-type structures along this reach were
completely destroyed or were damaged to the point that major repair was
necessary. Very little seawall damage took place in the City of
Clearwater and to the north. Data from the DNR study (Balsillie, 1985)
show that although there was considerable damage to seawalls and other
protective structures, there was about 30 % less erosion at beaches that
were fronting such structures. This study showed that a total of 4.55 km
of vertical seawalls was destroyed or heavily damaged and another 3.46 km
sustained minor damage.

Damage and destruction of buildings was largely confined to the same
areas where seawall damage took place. A tennis court near the Don Cesar
Hotel on Long Key was the only significant structural damage of this type
south of the North Reddington Beach area. From there on to the north
there was considerable damage to buildings through Bellaire Beach with no
major damage of this type north of that area. The most severe damage to
buildings took place at Indian Rocks Beach and just to the north (figure
18). A complete listing of building damage can be found in table 1.

Hurricane Juan -

Hurricane Juan was a very damaging hurricane to the northern Gulf
coast but did relatively little damage to the Pinellas County coast. A
total of 12 lives were lost, 9 of which were related to the offshore oil
industry near the Mississippi Delta. These nine lives were lost as the
result of offshore rigs being toppled or boats that were lost at sea
transporting workers. The authorities reported 1,357 injuries; most of a
minor nature.









Table 1 Structural Damages for Buildings Hurricane Elena
(data from Balsillie, 1985)
---------------------------------------
44 single family dwellings destroyed
31 single family dwellings sustained major structural damage
3 condominium units destroyed
3 condominium units sustained major structural damage
2 townhours buildings sustained major structural damage
1 motel unit destroyed
5 motel structures sustained major damage
1 cabana-recreation unit sustained major damage
5 swimming pools destroyed
3 swimming pools sustained major damage
3 fishing piers destroyed
2 fishing piers sustained major damage








--
-. ; --. - -- -_ '1 .
..-. ----S --- '' -I -









Figure 18 Extensive damage to houses at Indian Rocks after passage of
Hurricane Elena.

Total monetary losses related to Hurricane Juan were nearly 1.5
billion dollars, most of which was also along the north-central Gulf
coast. A large portion of this was the result of very expensive offshore






oil rigs being damaged. Considerable flooding in southern Louisiana
causes damage to crops and livestock (Federal Hurricane Center, 1985b).

Pinellas County was essentially free from serious injuries as the
direct result of Juan. Monetary losses along this coast totaled about
2.5 million dollars; an insignificant sum compared to Hurricane Elena.
aeff~a3^^^.;S2^ ^ '--







Figure 18 Extensive damage to houses was inflicted on structures that were in the passage ofess
Hurrof being repaired from Elena. This total included $1,500,000 from Indian
STotal monetary losses relatersburgd to Hurricane Juan were nearly 1.5
Rbilinon dollars, most of which were has also along the north-entral Gulf
coast. A large portion of this was the result of very expensive offshore
oil rigs being damaged. Considerable flooding in southern Louisiana
causes damage to crops and livestock (Federal Hurricane Center, 1985b).

Pinellas County was essentially free from serious injuries as the
direct result of Juan. Monetary losses along this coast totaled about
2.5 million dollars; an insignificant sum compared to Hurricane Elena.
Much of the damage was inflicted on structures that were in the process
of being repaired from Elena. This total included $1,500,000 from Indian
Shores, $500,000 from St. Petersburg Beach and $265,000 from North
Redington Beach, all areas that were hard hit during Elena.









Beach erosion associated with Juan was nominal throughout Pinellas
County. Extremely low-lying areas experienced some washover due to the
modest storm surge. Most of the county beaches were still protected by
the large ridge system that developed during Hurricane Elena nearly two
months previously. This ridge served to protect most beaches from
erosion.

Hurricane Kate -

Monetary losses associated with Hurricane Kate are only $300
million; only a small fraction of that associated with either of the
previous hurricanes. Of this amount, the vast majority was inclurreI in
the panhandle of Florida in the vicinity of Appalachicola Bay where the
storm made landfall. Not included in this figure is the major loss of
the oyster crop in the bay and the related loss of employment (National
Hurricane Center, 1985c). The industry was essentially wiped out for a
year due to siltation and disruption of beds caused by the storm. There
were also 6 lives lost in Florida as the result of the storm. Numbers of
injuries are not available but are assumed to be modest.

Some minor damage was incurred to buildings and to seawalls,
primarily those still being repaired and rebuilt as the result of
Hurricane Elena. Monetary losses specific to Pinellas County and this
storm are not available.

Beach damage from Hurricane Kate was also nominal. Although there
was some removal of sediment it was primarily a small amount at the base
of the foreshore in the plunge step area. The typical profile change was
the production of a small step in this part of the profile. Local and
small areas of washover were also present. No calculations of sediment
loss were made due to the minor changes to the beach.

Beach Profile Changes

Shortly after passage of Hurricane Elena, a reconnaissance trip was
conducted along the entire Pinellas County coast in order to locate and
establish sites for beach profile surveying. The locations were chosen
in order to monitor that portion of the county where impact on human
development was severe and also to provide at least subequal coverage of
this coastal reach. A secondary factor was to locate proximal natural
and seawall-impacted profiles in order to assess the relative roles of
seawalls under essentially similar conditions as nearby natural profiles.

Nine profiles were established with initial surveys conducted on
September 10, 1985. The planned schedule for surveys was to be weekly
for the first month, biweekly for the next 3 months and monthly
thereafter for a total of one year. This produced a total of 18 surveys
at each of the locations. All profile locations, selected photographs of
the profiles and the surveyed profiles are in Appendix A.

Each of the profiles was surveyed from permanent monuments or other
permanent structures. Surveys were traversed essentially perpendicular
to the shore and included the entire beach out to a depth that could be
reached by wading. A Topcon AT-F4 autolevel and a metric stadia rod were









and the presence of extensive seawalls in Pinellas County minimizes the
effect of the long interval between surveys.

It is apparent that even during storms conditions, while most
beaches experience erosion, some show accretion. Measurement of both is
necessary to assess the net changes along a coastal reach as the result
of storm activity. This type of analysis for Pinellas County shows that
the change attributed to Hurricane Elena is about 6 cubic yards of
erosion per linear foot of beach or 15 cubic meters per linear meter
(Balsillie, 1985). Assuming a replacement cost of $6 per cubic yard, the
damage assessment for beach erosion as the result of Hurricane Elena is
$1,240,000 for Pinellas County. This is almost 4 times the amount lost
from Manatee County beaches but is less than each of the panhandle
counties affected except for Gulf County.

Damage to seawalls or similar protection structures was extensive
but was confined to a rather small portion of the coast. The seawall on
southern Long Key at Pass-a-Grille was damaged to the point that it had
to be replaced (see Appendix A). The remainder of Long Key and all of
Treasure Island was essentially free from seawall damage. The most
extensive and severe damage to hardened shorelines was on Sand Key,
locally in the southern portion and continuously beginning at North
Redington Beach and continuing through Bellaire Beach on the north
(figure 16). Most of the seawall-type structures along this reach were
completely destroyed or were damaged to the point that major repair was
necessary. Very little seawall damage took place in the City of
Clearwater and to the north. Data from the DNR study (Balsillie, 1985)
show that although there was considerable damage to seawalls and other
protective structures, there was about 30 % less erosion at beaches that
were fronting such structures. This study showed that a total of 4.55 km
of vertical seawalls was destroyed or heavily damaged and another 3.46 km
sustained minor damage.

Damage and destruction of buildings was largely confined to the same
areas where seawall damage took place. A tennis court near the Don Cesar
Hotel on Long Key was the only significant structural damage of this type
south of the North Reddington Beach area. From there on to the north
there was considerable damage to buildings through Bellaire Beach with no
major damage of this type north of that area. The most severe damage to
buildings took place at Indian Rocks Beach and just to the north (figure
18). A complete listing of building damage can be found in table 1.

Hurricane Juan -

Hurricane Juan was a very damaging hurricane to the northern Gulf
coast but did relatively little damage to the Pinellas County coast. A
total of 12 lives were lost, 9 of which were related to the offshore oil
industry near the Mississippi Delta. These nine lives were lost as the
result of offshore rigs being toppled or boats that were lost at sea
transporting workers. The authorities reported 1,357 injuries; most of a
minor nature.









employed for survey measurements. Elevations were recorded at 5 m
intervals or less if noticeable topographic changes were present. Sea
level was determined by measuring water depth at the end of each profile
and adjusting that value to predicted tides. Although there is surely
some error in this approach, it is probably only a few centimeters.

Field data were stored in Visi-Calc spread sheet files and adjusted
to the appropriate datum. Computations and plots of the profile surveys
were accomplished using the Harris H-800 minicomputer and a
Hewlett-Packard plotter.

Pass-a-Grille (Loc. 1) -

This profile is located approximately 125 m north of a concession
building on the public beach and it is just south of the intersection of
Gulf Ave. with 11th St. (Appendix A). The profile extends from the
seawall adjacent to the road across the entire beach. This seawall was
destroyed during Hurricane Elena and much sand washed over from the beach
to the road (Appendix A). It has subsequently been replaced. This
location contains a well-developed beach with most profiles extending
about 80 m.

The initial profile here showed a well-developed ridge high in the
profile. It had relief of near a meter and was located about 30 m from
the seawall (Appendix A). In 9 days time this ridge had migrated 5 m
landward maintaining the same relief. The ridge remained in this
position until the passage of Hurricane Juan about six weeks later. The
primary changes to the profile as the result of Juan were to migrate the
ridge landward to smooth the profile. Energy from Hurricane Kate in late
November was approximately equivalent to a winter frontal system. It did
little to the beach profile except for a small erosional step (Appendix
A).

There was little significant change to the profile at Pass-a-Grille
through April, 1986. Reconstruction of the seawall took place in late
April and had little effect on the beach profile except for bulldozing of
sand against the seawall (see May, 1986 profile). Little change took
place during the summer of 1986 although there are some indications of
decreasing profile width. This was alleviated as the result of a large
scale beach renourishment project to the north of Location 1.
Approximately 25 m of beach width was added by September, 1986 as the
result of this project.

Long Key (Loc. 21 -

The profile at Location 2 is located adjacent to the southwest
corner of the Colonial Gateway Motel on Gulf Blvd. just south of 64th St.
The profile is 60 m south of the seawall at the Silver Sands condominium.
This natural profile has a broad backbeach which extends 50-60 m landward
of the berm (Appendix A). The profile typically was 80-100 m wide.

This location experienced little change as the result of Hurricane
Elena. A small ridge and runnel was present during the initial survey
however it does not show on the plot due to poor location of survey









Beach erosion associated with Juan was nominal throughout Pinellas
County. Extremely low-lying areas experienced some washover due to the
modest storm surge. Most of the county beaches were still protected by
the large ridge system that developed during Hurricane Elena nearly two
months previously. This ridge served to protect most beaches from
erosion.

Hurricane Kate -

Monetary losses associated with Hurricane Kate are only $300
million; only a small fraction of that associated with either of the
previous hurricanes. Of this amount, the vast majority was inclurreI in
the panhandle of Florida in the vicinity of Appalachicola Bay where the
storm made landfall. Not included in this figure is the major loss of
the oyster crop in the bay and the related loss of employment (National
Hurricane Center, 1985c). The industry was essentially wiped out for a
year due to siltation and disruption of beds caused by the storm. There
were also 6 lives lost in Florida as the result of the storm. Numbers of
injuries are not available but are assumed to be modest.

Some minor damage was incurred to buildings and to seawalls,
primarily those still being repaired and rebuilt as the result of
Hurricane Elena. Monetary losses specific to Pinellas County and this
storm are not available.

Beach damage from Hurricane Kate was also nominal. Although there
was some removal of sediment it was primarily a small amount at the base
of the foreshore in the plunge step area. The typical profile change was
the production of a small step in this part of the profile. Local and
small areas of washover were also present. No calculations of sediment
loss were made due to the minor changes to the beach.

Beach Profile Changes

Shortly after passage of Hurricane Elena, a reconnaissance trip was
conducted along the entire Pinellas County coast in order to locate and
establish sites for beach profile surveying. The locations were chosen
in order to monitor that portion of the county where impact on human
development was severe and also to provide at least subequal coverage of
this coastal reach. A secondary factor was to locate proximal natural
and seawall-impacted profiles in order to assess the relative roles of
seawalls under essentially similar conditions as nearby natural profiles.

Nine profiles were established with initial surveys conducted on
September 10, 1985. The planned schedule for surveys was to be weekly
for the first month, biweekly for the next 3 months and monthly
thereafter for a total of one year. This produced a total of 18 surveys
at each of the locations. All profile locations, selected photographs of
the profiles and the surveyed profiles are in Appendix A.

Each of the profiles was surveyed from permanent monuments or other
permanent structures. Surveys were traversed essentially perpendicular
to the shore and included the entire beach out to a depth that could be
reached by wading. A Topcon AT-F4 autolevel and a metric stadia rod were









points. This ridge had a relief of about 0.3 m and persisted until
passage of Hurricane Juan in late October (Appendix A). There was some
change in profile of this ridge and modest landward movement.

A lower and broader ridge developed as the result of Hurricane Juan
(see Nov. 2, 1985 survey) which subsequently migrated landward. Juan
also caused the initial ridge to migrate up onto the berm area of the
foreshore. During the following two weeks this ridge steepened and
migrated on to the lower foreshore. Hurricane Kate planed off the ridge
and caused it to migrate about 5 m seaward.

No significant changes took place at this location from December,
1985 through the end of the study period. Its general profile was
maintained with small steps cut by minor wave action. Some grooming by
bulldozers took place on the backbeach but with little impact on the
general profile.

Long Key Wall (Loc. 3) -

The profile at Location 3 was established in front of the seawall
located adjacent to the Silver Sands condominiums which are at the Gulf
end of 64th St. (Appendix A). The seawall which serves as the monument
for the profile is fronted by boulder size rip-rap. The surveyed and
plotted portion of the profile begins just Gulfward of the rip-rap. This
profile was located here in order to provide comparative data with a
closely proximal natural profile (Loc. 2). This is a very narrow profile
with only a foreshore beach present.

The post-Elena profile shows no ridge and runnel development. The
general width and shape of the profile did not change until the passage
of Hurricane Juan in late October (Appendix A). After Juan the beach was
somewhat wider and less steep. The profile included a wide and
low-relief ridge which persisted throughout the winter and spring. There
was no noticeable change in the profile as the result of Hurricane Kate.

A major change in the profile took place in July, 1986 when a beach
nourishment project increased the level of the profile over a meter and
also increased the beach width (Appendix A). This project completely
covered the rip-rap and raised the level of the back portion of the beach
to that of the seawall (see photo in Appendix A).

Treasure Island (Loc. 4) -

Profile #4 is located adjacent to the wooden boardwalk just north
of the Island Inn condominium which is situated just to the north of
100th St. (Appendix A). The beach at this site is quite broad with a
gently landward sloping backbeach and a broad foreshore. Much of the
backbeach is artificially groomed so that only the portion of the profile
Gulfward of the berm is truly natural.

The post-Elena profile on September 10, 1985 showed a large and
well-developed ridge and runnel. The ridge has a relief of about 1 m and
was approximately 25 m seaward of the berm (Appendix A). This ridge
migrated landward over the following six weeks until passage of Hurricane








Juan in late October. After Juan the profile shows that at least some of
the ridge did migrate landward. A very subtle ridge was present during
early November but was not apparent after Hurricane Kate as shown on the
November 26 profile.

There was little change to the beach profile from late fall of 1985
until termination of the study in September, 1986. The only discernable
differences were small apparent accumulations of sediments on the
foreshore.

Redington Beach (Loc. 5) -

This profile is located adjacent to a seawall which is 125 m south
of the Redington Beach fishing pier, essentially opposite 175th Terrace
on Gulf Blvd. The sea wall was badly damaged as a consequence of
Hurricane Elena and was subsequently rebuilt. This construction had no
major effect on the natural beach profile.

After Hurricane Elena the profile was low, narrow and had a
pronounced ridge about 0.3 m high. A low relief and slightly subtidal
ephemeral bar Gulf ward of this ridge. Both of these features persisted
until Hurricane Juan in late October. (Appendix A). After Hurricane
Juan the profile changed remarkably. The ridge and the ephemeral bar
were no longer present and there had been considerable accretion
immediately in front of the seawall. More than 1 m of vertical accretion
had taken place as waves generated by Hurricane Juan caused the ridge and
ephemeral bar to move landward with the seawall acting as a barrier to
further migration. A small and low relief ridge was present after the
passage of Juan but was removed during Hurricane Kate (Appendix A).

This profile remained essentially the same throughout the remainder
of the study period. It was rather narrow throughout with no readily
discernable berm (Appendix A).

Indian Shores (Loc. 6) -

The profiles at Indian Shores is located adjacent to a seawall in
front of the Redwood Apartments on the south side of 199th Ave. (Appendix
A). This sea wall sustained damage during Hurricane Elena but was not
destroyed. This profile is in the area which experienced the most severe
damage as the result of this storm. The beach here is narrow and
generally resembles the one at Redington Shores (Loc. 5).

After Hurricane Elena this profile exhibited a ridge and runnel
topography with about 0.6 m of relief. Like the Redington Shores
location, this morphology persisted until passage of Hurricane Juan.
Juan cause landward migration of the ridge with eventual deposition of
considerable sediment against the seawall which prevented further
landward transport. After Juan the profile was rather narrow and steep
with a concave upward shape. More than a meter of sediment was accreted
to the landward portion of the beach. A rather well-developed ridge and
runnel system developed as the result of passage of winter frontal
systems during November. This configuration persisted through the
passage of Hurricane Kate.









During the winter and ensuing months of the study this profile was
rather stable but narrow and steep (Appendix A). There was no apparent
ridge and runnel nor was there erosion during the typically high energy
winter season.

Sand Key Wall (Loc. 7) -

The profile at Location 7 is situated adjacent to the northwest
corner of the seawall that surrounds the Dan's Island Condominium which
is near the southern boundary of the City of Clearwater. This profile is
paired with Loc. 8, a natural profile located a few hundred meters to the
north. The beach at this site is narrow and not unlike the two sites to
the south (Locs. 5 & 6).

The profile just after impact of Hurricane Elena showed a very large
ridge and runnel system. The ridge had a relief of 1.5 m with the crest
above high tide. This profile configuration remained unchanged for
several weeks afterward largely because the crest of the ridge was not
overtopped by tides and waves thereby causing landward migration
(Appendix A). After Hurricane Juan the profile showed marked change
which included nearly a meter of accretion immediately in front of the
seawall and a change in the shape and size of the ridge. The ridge
migrated landward and although apparently unaffected by Hurricane Kate,
it welded to the profile by early December.

The profile showed little change throughout the remainder of the
study period. It was steep and narrow with the large amount of accretion
in front of the seawall persisting throughout the duration of the study.
Slow removal of sediment was apparent during the spring and summer of 1986
(Appendix A). The beach was only about 15 m wide by September.

Sand Key (Loc. 8) -

This profile is located near the southwest corner of the property
surrounding the South Bay condominiums on Gulf Blvd. in the City of
Clearwater. It is a few hundred meters north of Dan's Island and is 63 m
south of the short fishing pier associated with the South Bay complex.
The profile is now a natural one however there is a buried seawall near
its landward end and some artificial plantings have been set in the area.
The profile has a noticeable berm and was at least 50 m wide throughout
the study. This profile is paired with Loc 7 to provide comparison of
natural and seawall profiles.

The initial profile after Hurricane Elena displayed a well developed
ridge and runnel but without the great relief displayed by Loc. 7 a few
hundred meters to the south. Although the relief on this ridge was near
1 m it did permit some overtopping during high tide conditions and
consequently there was a bit of lanward migration (Appendix A). The most
significant change to this profile took place as the result of Hurricane
Juan. The ridge that had persisted for the previous several weeks had
migrated onto the upper beach and a new but smaller ridge had developed
lower on the profile. The resulting profile showed considerable
accretion in the backbeach area. This ridge migrated onto the beach
quickly and after Hurricane Kate another small ridge was present. This
feature also welded onto the beach quickly.
29









From December, 1985 until the completion of the study in September
of the following year there was little natural change to the beach with
only minor changes in the foreshore due to passage of winter frontal
systems. In early summer a small man-made dune was constructed and
planted with grasses in an attempt to stabilize the back beach (Appendix
A).

North Clearwater (Loc. 9) -

The northernmost of the regularly surveyed profiles is located on
the northern part of Clearwater Beach Island opposite the Carlouel Yacht
Club on El Doraco Drive. The profile is just north of the end of a
boardwalk over the dunes (Appendix A). This is one of the widest beaches
in the study area and certainly is the one displaying the greatest
long-term accretion.

Immediately after Hurricane Elena there was a ridge and runnel as
well as a large ephemeral bar on this profile. Although its relief was
similar to that on profile #7 it was lower on the profile. Water covered
the bar during high tide conditions and caused a slight shoreward
migration. After Juan, this profile displayed a markedly different
appearance. The ridge had migrated up onto the beach and a new ridge and
runnel was present. This broad ridge showed some shoreward migration and
persisted through the passage of Hurricane Kate (Appendix A).

There has been little change to this beach since December, 1985.
Small ridge and runnel features along with minor erosional features were
present on the profile over the remainder of the study period. There was
a subtle but regular decrease in beach width from early 1986 through the
end of the study.

Summmary of Beach Profile Changes -

Generalizations about beach changes caused by the hurricanes of 1985
can be placed into two major categories; those that were geographic in
nature and those that occurred in association with a specific storm. A
secondary type of consideration is the comparison of changes associated
with natural profiles as compared to those adjacent to hardened shore
structures such as seawalls. In consideration of beach changes reported
here, it should be remembered that no pre-storm profile surveys are
available except for a few that the Dept. of Natural Resources measured
11 years prior to the 1985 hurricane season. Because of the time gap and
the lack of geographic match, these profiles are not considered in this
discussion.

Without question, Hurricane Elena had the greatest impact on
Pinellas County beaches of the 1985 storms. Much obvious change to the
profiles occurred in the form of erosion, washover and especially
development of large ridge and runnel features (Appendix A). Hurricane
Juan caused more accretion than erosion as the result of its facilitation
of shoreward migration of the ridge formed during Elena. There was
little change caused by Hurricane Kate except for some isolated
locations.









The southern beaches (Locs. 1-4) of Pinellas County experienced the
least change during Hurricane Elena although a large ridge and runnel
feature did form at Loc. 4 (see Appendix A). Erosion was prevalent from
Location 5-8 which was from Redington Beach to northern Sand Key. Little
erosion occurred at the northernmost site however this profile also
displayed a large ridge and runnel after Elena.

This pattern of beach change is largely to the combination of the
shoreline pattern of Pinellas County in combination with the dominantly
southwesterly wind and wave direction during Elena. Longshore transport
of sediment was undoubtedly to the north throughout the storm but at a
low rate in tie southern portion of the county as compared to the north.
This was due to the angle of wave approach and the lower gradient of the
inner shelf as well as protection from the Egmont Shoal in the southern
area. The broad headland area was relatively vulnerable to wave attack
and longshore transport from this area to the north was higher than the
southern part of the county. This produced erosion in the central
headland area and facilitated the development of the ridge and runnel
system which was most prominent in the central and northern part of the
county. The northernmost profile on an accreting spit of Clearwater
Beach Island showed little apparent erosion but did develop a very large
ridge and runnel morphology.

These general patterns suggest that there was a net northerly
transport of beach sediments with a net gain of sediments in the
northernmost part of this barrier system. Long term profiles, aerial
photographs and the results of the year-long profile study support this
pattern of shoreline sedimentation.

Although no quantitative data are available to assess the relative
erosion on the natural profiles as compared to those adjacent to
seawalls, there does seem to be more vertical erosion in front of the
seawalls. This may not be a greater volume of sand removal from the
profile because erosion did not occur landward of the structure in most
cases. There is no question however, that recovery took place more
rapidly in front of the seawalls than on natural profiles. This also may
have been somewhat exaggerated due to the circumstances mentioned above.

Summary and Conclusions

The storms of 1985 presented an unusual set of circumstances for the
Pinellas County coast; 1) there were three in one hurricane season, 2)
one was probably the most severe storm to impact the coast since
extensive development occurred, 3) the net change to the beaches of the
county was nominal, 4) considerable property loss was incurred however
there was no loss of life and injuries were few and 5) it was-the first
time there has been detailed studies associated with hurricanes on the
west-central Florida coast.

Erosion during Hurricane Elena was modest but was largely
ameliorated as the result of the second storm and the third did little
damage to beaches. The extremely large ridges produced by Elena were
generally above high tide and therefore persisted until the passage of
Juan. They protected the beach from further erosion and actually









migrated landward and welded onto the beach. The generally low energy
winter season that followed the hurricanes also fostered the recovery of
the beaches.

Data on seawall effects on the beach profiles are inconclusive.
Erosion in front of these structures was indeed great and scour was
apparent. On the other hand, the beaches at these sites recovered more
rapidly and completely in a shorter time than did the natural profiles.
It is very likely that the circumstances of the sucessive storms
contributed to this phenomenon.

Damage to property was quite high as the result of Hurricane Elena
but was comparatively nominal for the last two storms. Most of the
damage was to coastal protection structures and buildings and was due to
waves. Few buildings were completely destroyed. The damage to property
was largely confined to the central portion of the county on the headland
and just to the north of it. Much of the damage cuased by Hurricanes
Juan and Kate was incurred to protective structures under repair and
reconstruction after Elena or to buildings exposed by destruction of
protective structures as the result of Elena.

It is possible that the most serious aspect of'the hurricanes of
1985 may be psychological. Hurricane Elena was the first hurricane to
have a major impact on Pinellas County since major development has taken
place. The fact that even though there was substantial loss of property,
little else other than evacuation, caused serious inconvenience to
residents could result in false confidence.

Hurricane Elena did not come within 100 km of Pinellas County, winds
and waves generated along this coast were nominal-and the storm surge was
less than 2 m on the open coast. Too many people are now of the opinion
that because this area escaped major disaster from Elena it is a safe
coast. It is possible that Elena did not cause enough destruction to
teach us a lesson!









References


Balsillie, J. H., 1985, Post-storm report: Hurricane Elena of 29
August to 2 September, 1985. Fla. Dept. Nat. Resources,
Beaches and Shores Post-Storm Rept. No. 85-2, 66 p.

Bodge, K. R. and Kriebel, D. L., 1985, Storm surge and wave
damage along Florida's Gulf coast from Hurricane Elena. Dept.
Coastal & Ocean Engr., Univ. Florida, Gainesville, 20 p.

Federal Hurricane Center, 1985a, Preliminary report: Hurricane
Elena, 28 August 4 September, 1985. Miami, Fla., 4 p. +
tables and maps.

Federal Hurricane Center, 1985b, Preliminary report: Hurricane
Juan, 26 October 1 November, 1985. Miami, Fla., 4 p. +
tables and maps.

Federal Hurricane Center, 1985c, Preliminary report: Hurricane
Kate, 15-23 November, 1985. Miami, Fla., 4 p. + tables and
maps.

Hine, A. C., Evans, M. W., Mearns, D. L. and Belknap, D. F., 1986,
Effect of Hurricane Elena on Florida's marsh-dominated coast:
Pasco, Hernando, and Citrus Counties. Final Rept., Sea Grant
Proj. No. IR-85-14, 43 p.

Jordan, C. L., 1973, Climate, in Jones, J. I. (ed), A Summary of
Knowledge of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico. State Univ. Sys. of
Fla., Inst. of Oceanog., p. IIA-1 to 22.

Mehta, A. H., Jones, C. P., and Adams, W. D., 1976, Johns Pass and
Blind Pass. Glossary of Inlets, Rept. No. 18, Florida Sea
Grant Program, 66 p.

Rosen, D. S., 1976, Beach and nearshore sedimentation of Caladesi
Island State Park, Pinellas County, Florida. Unpubl. M.S.
thesis, Univ. South Florida, Tampa, 114 p.

Tanner, W. F., 1960, Florida coastal classification. Gulf Coast
Assoc. Geol. Societies Trans., v. 10, p. 259-266.

U. S. Weather Command, 1975, Summary of Synoptic Meteorological
Observations for North American Coastal Waters, v. 10.





























APPENDIX A


Location maps, aerial photographs, beach photographs and beach
profiles for each of the surveyed beach locations. See figure 1 for
general location of each profile.
















I = .






-; ~ -


0 100
meters


vn i)
4


GULF AVE.





1


r.
r '- _.





-A
... ..






?--


{,,
^S'-i .- ^' ;'*

*;^l^-


.~c--b -re. '



a- ---


- -- -Os- --
I-1-
-~ ~ **- r


7 September 10, 1985


K-


July 11, 1986


- a --- ---- --






PASS-A- GRILLE 1


1985
9-10 meters

9-19 1 L

9-26

10-3

10-17

11-2

11-19

11-26

12-15
1986
1-11

2-1

3-1

4-5

5-13

6-5

7-11

8-8

9-16




20 40 60 80 100 120
ETERS























L















I


.4


0 100

meters


_. .<71
^^ a '; ,, '-ll ._" -- .


"*- ^ ^- -- ..r ... .. .- --- rm-- .... .,-, .t- .
*-_-.-- -- ^- -^
,._ :r .


September 10, 1985


i -- -. -



r -", -






--;F-
-I I I" -. -- :_ <.
.--- -.o.."- ... ...-








t :""- "'"'-- 'F : a-
._ ... .. ... .... .






.'.-' .. -,


-a ." "' ';i" .l i,


September 16, 1986


" I


- ..--. --
--L





.....
*t-'- --r -


';e
''~'-
i-._- i
rC-= --

f~j
;---


-. ,r
I~1-~,_ "--


;
~Fr
i--i--~
----
-----

E .---
~I


P-- --- s~ b


.---
c


I

L-,
-- --
I-,
c..


-










1985
9-10

9-19

9-26

10-3

10-17

11-2

11-19

11-26

12-15
1986
1-11

2-1

3-1

4-5

5-13

6-5

7-11

8-8

9-16


40 60


3ET9
39


80


100


LONG KEY 2


meters


MSL 2
3


120











N


-- d

..-,i.4~- 4- -
.--4- -;


SILVER WLJ
CoNDoS
CONDOS



0 100
3 meters


October 3, 1985























September 16, 1986






LONG KEY 3



1985 meters
9-10 0-
MSL 1
9-19

9-26

10-3


10-17

11-2

11-19

11-26

12-15
1986
1-11

2-1

3-1

4-5

5-13

6-5
7-11
8-8
9-16




20 40 60 80 100 120

METERS











GULF BLVD


? I.
I


N1-


H


.-. meters
-_ me te r 0 100





1 4












--. -t m _e 1-198
--- ...- September 12, 1985


-.. *4


r_ 1
-i .L
s:'4=
-Y- -
ri4at_4j
419( I


-A
.* ;- ._ -. s .


* *i^N
'*~ ~ ~ .. -- l- *'; */- -.*' -
"* -- -...._- -
.. .... -. .
~- ... ,- -. .
,-'
.: :: .. -.i ''- f:.: i .-
".: ",. ..."--, .. : :


September 16, 1986


c
/:
~


~.
,
3'.
.. .r,.
r .








1985
9-10

9-19

9-26

10-3

10-17

11-2

11-19

11-26

12-15


2-1

3-1

4-5


7-11

8-8

9-16


60
METERS


100


120


80.


















''it


t.- c, I -- 11
r.Ft if. ';


N
tt"


0 100
meters


LIJU~iI. ii*i4 1

F-1 a'
bf



Jo
o-n


S-4W
-. .kr '1. ~~~-if


September 12, 1985


September 16, 1986


"-~'"~
"-
: ,~~:
r-r_
i
--
I~ t~
csi;
,
L S~,.,a.st7






REDINGTON BEACH 5



1985
9-10 meters
MSL
9-19

9-264

10-3

10-17
11-2

11-19
11-26





12-15
1986
1-11

2-1

3-1

4-5

5-13

6-5

7-11

8-8

9-16




20 40 60 80 100 120

METERS























1-
- .i ,

.S.
*" f^~:


I.rr~




-. -c
C ,










l ----
N.1
---. an. *1- ~
rj~ t ~ ~
S -- -



tI~r
- 1.


September 26, 1985


July 11, 1986


~-.,l~,,--~~..crl _..-----1-i-_;_.., .. ---. -,~ i







INDIAN SHORES 6



1985
9-10 meters
MSL

9-19

9-26 4

10-3

10-17
11-2

11-19

11-26

12-15
1986
1-11

2-1

3-1

4-5

5-13

6-5

7-11

8-8

9-16



20 40 60 80 100 120

ETERS












-- N


GULF BLVD
GULF B6LVD


DAN'S I---
ISLAND I H___ !
CONDOS


0 100
meters I
7


i II
(d I


*1 N
-" ,-

--- ---------* "* -- -- .-- 4 --"

.... .. ....; .


,, :- '- ,- .. -- -. "_ : --= : -
.:. -_.. _-- .. .. I . . -_
'f~ ,.
-_ _:_- -- -:: -- .-..._ -: __: : -..
-- _: -- ,T ".- . .. .- ;~
.M r~-. o ....... ._-: .. .. .


September 10, 1985


September 16, 1986


: o .. ,
-*_ .- r- ,

: -' -. ,-.. .- ., .




48





SAND KEY 7


40


60
cEoFl


MSL


meters
0
1
1
2
3
4


1985
9-10

9-19

9-26

10-3

10-17

11-2

11-19

11-26

12-15
1986
1-11
2-1

3-1
4-5

5-13
6-5

7-11

8-8

9-16


I I


100


120


-~-~-

----r\-,






~











~r



~______


20


I












GULF BLVD

SCUTAOS


r
-~~sB
-~L LrV

~r~ir, -~'

;ri -'"
~-t~
--: I
~L~i I
~-t_ ii,--
~:i~~T f+ -~-i-
,~;i;-


0 100
meters


September 10, 1985


r'.'
. .- *H... ,*




Ir -- -
r ._- -- _


-i- September 16, 1986

B g i ._ -_-o .

." -
HH^^^^ f~~w^S-. .. ; .... ;." --< ^n mpr 1i Qf

.-- ; i


; . .
.., .:: i;-- -.: "'





SAND KEY 8


i I I I


40


60
Ms


MSL -


meters
0O
1
2
3
4


1985
9-10

9-19
9-26
10-3
10-17
11-2
11-19
11-26
12-15
1986
1-11
2-1
3-1
4-5
5-13
6-5
7-11
8-8
9-16


- !


100


120


s~





1=-2~
-Z~Z~


fZ~
-Z~-Z_










-i~ ___










- CARLOUEL YACHT
CLUB


-,-




.-- -


-. I
--


* --- .- -- l rrais,_L-.
--- -
-, -~ -~) -7~~~ C~c--S-



-- -- -

t -.-


-. -- -_ .... -,
* .
rl . .. -
-_- r' C
9 ..


August 8, 1986


44~
-I 4
'4


: -. A L.-
-. -"--J ...-.--



+ -:,' ---'.r'< ".-,

"*~~~ ~~ -* -.* :/ ^ .'4


14~


0 100
meters


September 10, 1985


------


I~


Z






NORTH CLEARWATER 9


1985 meter
9-10
MSL n
9-19 2

9-26 4

10-3

10-17

11-2

11-19

11-26

12-15
1986
1-11

2-1

3-1

4-5

5-13

6-5

7-11

8-8

9-16



20 40 60 80 100 120

mETERS




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs