• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 List of Figures
 List of Tables
 Main
 Reference














Title: Midtown beach nourishment project in Palm Beach, Florida
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00091061/00004
 Material Information
Title: Midtown beach nourishment project in Palm Beach, Florida October 1995 to August 1996
Series Title: UFLCOEL-97001
Alternate Title: Monitoring report
Physical Description: v, 8, 48 leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Dean, Robert G ( Robert George ), 1930-
University of Florida -- Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering Dept
Publisher: Coastal & Oceanographic Engineering Dept., University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1997
 Subjects
Subject: Beach nourishment -- Florida -- Palm Beach   ( lcsh )
Shore protection -- Florida -- Palm Beach   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: prepared for town of Palm Beach ; prepared by Robert G. Dean.
General Note: "February 24, 1997."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00091061
Volume ID: VID00004
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 36846219

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Page i
    Table of Contents
        Page ii
    List of Figures
        Page iii
    List of Tables
        Page iv
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
    Reference
        Page 23
Full Text




UFL/COEL-97/015


MONITORING REPORT


MIDTOWN BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT IN
PALM BEACH, FLORIDA
October 1995 to August 1997





by




Robert G. Dean


December 12, 1997



Prepared for:

Town of Palm Beach
Post Office Box 2029
360 South County Road
Palm Beach, Florida 33480
















MONITORING REPORT


MIDTOWN BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT
IN PALM BEACH, FLORIDA

October 1995 to August 1997



December 12, 1997







Prepared For:

Town of Palm Beach
Post Office Box 2029
360 South County Road
Palm Beach, Florida 33480








Prepared by:

Robert G. Dean
Department of Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611








TABLE OF CONTENTS


LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................... iii

LIST OF TABLES ............................................. iv

INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1

RESULTS ................................................................3

Changes in Nourishment Area ................ ............................. 3
Beach Profiles ...................................... .................. 3
Longshore Distributions of Volume Densities and Plan Areas ..................... 5
Changes in Total Volumes and Plan Areas ................................... 5
Discussion of Results for the Nourishment Area .................................. 5

Changes Along the North Beaches ....................... ................... 8
Profiles ................................ .......................... 8
Sand Bypassing to the North Beach ................................... .15
Volume Changes ............................ ...... ... ........... 15
Shoreline Changes .................................. .............. 15
Changes in Excavated Borrow Area ............................... ... 15

Sand Characteristics ................................ .................... 15

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ....................................... 22

Midtown Nourishment Area .............................................. 22

North Beach Area ......................................................... 22

Sediment Sample Characteristics ................ ........................... 22

REFERENCES .......................................................... 23








LIST OF FIGURES


FIGURE PAGE

1 Location Map of Project Area Showing Borrow and Nourishment Areas. (Adapted
from ATM Drawing) .................................................. 2
2 Profiles at DNR Monument R-97D129 for Five Available Surveys ................. 4
3 Volume Changes Due to Nourishment Project ................................ 6
4 Shoreline Changes Due to Nourishment Project ............................... 7
5 Percentage Total Volume and Plan Area Remaining in Shoreline Segment Placed .... .. 9
6 Profiles at DNR Monument R-77 for Five Available Surveys .................... 10
7 Profiles at DNR Monument R-78 for Five Available Surveys .................... 11
8 Profiles at DNR Monument R-79 for Five Available Surveys .................... 12
9 Profiles at DNR Monument R-80 for Five Available Surveys .................... 13
10 Profiles at DNR Monument R-81 for Five Available Surveys .................... 14
11 Cumulative Volumes of Sand Added by Sand Bypassing Plant ................... 16
12 Volume Changes Due to Nourishment Project in the North Beach Area ............ 17
13 Shoreline Changes Due to Nourishment Project in the North Beach Area ........... 18
14 Profiles at DNR Monument R-79 Emphasizing Excavation Area for Five Available
Surveys ......................................................... 19
15 Profiles at DNR Monument R-80 Emphasizing Excavation Area for Five Available
Surveys .......... ... .. ..... ........... .... .... ...............20
16 Comparison of Pre- and Post Nourishment Sediment Characteristics .............. 21








LIST OF TABLES


TABLE PAGE
1 Dates of M monitoring Surveys ........................................... 3
2 Changes in Total Volumes and Plan Areas ................................... 5







MONITORING REPORT


MIDTOWN BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT
IN PALM BEACH, FLORIDA

October 1995 to August 1997

INTRODUCTION

During the period October 18, 1995 to December 10, 1995, approximately 880,000 cubic yards of
sand were dredged from a borrow area extending from approximately 2,000 feet south to 4,800 feet
south of the south jetty at Lake Worth Entrance and placed along portions of Midtown Beach section
in the Town of Palm Beach, Florida. The project specifications required placement of 800,000 cubic
yards; thus the excess 80,000 cubic yards is "overfill". As shown in Figure 1, the cross-shore
dimensions of the borrow area varied from 1,600 feet at its northern end to 2,500 feet at its southern
end. The original depths at the borrow area site varied from 25 to 35 feet and the maximum dredged
depths were approximately 40 feet. The dredged sand was placed along the Midtown Beach as
nourishment extending from via Bethesda at the north end to via Marina at the south end, a distance
of approximately 5,400 feet. To provide stability to the nourishment project, eleven groins were
constructed. The locations of these groins are shown in Figure 1 along with the borrow area and the
approximate planform of the nourished beach. Sea Systems, Inc has conducted a pre-nourishment
and four post-nourishment surveys to document the performance of the project. The purpose of this
report is to present the results of an analysis of these five surveys.

The dates of the surveys are presented in Table 1. As can be seen from this table, although the
placement of material was completed in December 1995, the first post-nourishment survey was not
completed until April 9, 1996 due to the activities related to groin construction. During the period
between completion of nourishment and the first post-nourishment survey, a significant northeaster
occurred (March 8-10, 1996) which undoubtedly caused the transport of some sand from the
nourished beach. Thus, since the first post-nourishment survey post-dated the March storm, the first
post-nourishment survey does not reflect the total amount of sand placed.

This report updates the monitoring results through the August 1997 survey. Previous monitoring
results are reported in Dean (1997a, 1997b). Additionally, this report also presents an analysis of the
shoreline and volume changes at the north end of the study area in the vicinity of the borrow area
and a comparison of the pre- and post-nourishment sediment size characteristics.






















Borrow Area
19







R -84
-


,-a86 ATLANTIC
a7 OCEAN I I
--aa 0 1.0
-89 Scale (Miles)
-90


-92

-9 -- Typical Groin, One of Eleven
S-, Numbered From S1 at the North tc
Sil at the Southern End
-95
S'Project Site





S-100



Figure 1. Location Map of Project Area Showing Borrow and Nourishment Areas.
(Adapted from ATM Drawing).







Table 1
Dates of Monitoring Surveys


Survey Number Type of Survey Dates

1 Pre-Nourishment October 13-21, 1995

2 Post-Nourishment April 1-9, 1996

3 Post-Nourishment August 12-25, 1996

4 Post-Nourishment March 31 to April 8, 1997

5 Post-Nourishment August 27-30, 1997

RESULTS

This section includes analysis of changes in the nourishment area, analysis of changes along the
North Beach in the vicinity of the borrow area and in the borrow area and a comparison of the pre-
and post-nourishment sand size characteristics. Because the previous reports have not presented an
analysis of the changes along the North Beach area and because the changes in the nourishment area
during the latest intersurvey period were small, more focus is provided for the North Beach area.

Changes in Nourishment Area

The results are presented in various forms, including examples of beach profiles, longshore
distribution of additional volumes as a function of time, longshore distribution of additional beach
width as a function of time and total additional areas and volumes as functions of time.

Beach Profiles Figure 2 present an example of the available beach profiles in the nourishment area.
Because the latest intersurvey period was one of relatively small change, detailed plots of all of the
profiles are not presented in this report. Figure 2 depicts the pre- and post-nourished profiles at
Monument R-97D 129 which is located at approximately mid-length of the nourishment project. This
is in an area where the shoreline revetment is located and prior to the nourishment, there was no
beach at mean tide as the water was at the revetment. After nourishment, there was approximately
150 feet of additional dry beach present. The presence of the natural offshore reef extending from
700 feet to 1,200 feet from the seawall is evident in Figure 2. Also evident from this plot is that
there was very little change from the April post-nourishment survey to the August post-nourishment
survey. The small changes are attributed to the relatively mild waves during this intersurvey period.
As will be evident later, the more substantial changes have occurred during the winter periods.







20

October 1995
3 10 ....................................................Ap ri 1996
S.......... April 1996
D ;........ August 1996
Z .... .................. ...... .......... ....... .. ..... April 1997
\ .:--- August 1997
a)
.> -10

S -20 ... .... .....
O -.
-30

a)
U -40
0 1000 2000 3000
Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)

Figure 2. Profiles at DNR Monument R-97D129

for Five Available Surveys







Longshore Distributions of Volume Densities and Plan Areas Figure 3 presents the longshore
distribution of additional volume density along the project area. It is seen that on average, an
additional 150 cubic yards per foot of beach front were present in April 1996. As noted for the
profile presented in Figure 2, most of the volumetric changes have occurred during the winter
months. The volume densities in Figure 3 represent the volumes to approximately 1,000 feet seaward
from the monument. As can be seen by referring to Figure 3, this distance extends out onto the
natural reef.

Figure 4 presents the longshore distribution of additional beach width within the project area in a
form similar to that presented for volume density. Substantial similarities exist between the volume
densities and additional beach widths. The changes between the April and August surveys are
relatively small as they are for the volume densities.

Changes in Total Volumes and Plan Areas Table 2 presents the total changes in volumes and plan
areas from the pre-nourishment survey to the four post-nourishment surveys. These results are
discussed in the following section.


Table 2
Changes in Total Volumes and Plan Areas

Period Change in Volume (yd3) Change in Plan Area (Acres)
October 1995 to April 1996 +794,900' (+759,900) +18.4* (+17.9)
October 1995 to August 1996 +790,400' (+754,800) +18.4' (+17.7)

October 1995 to April 1997 +684,100' (+648,200) +14.4' (+14.0)

October 1995 to August 1997 +672,400' (+640,100) +14.4' (+14.0)

*Notes: These changes are from Monument R-94I to R-100C, a longshore distance of 6,100 feet.
The numbers in parentheses represent the changes over the 5,400 feet constructed Project
length.

Discussion of Results For The Nourishment Area Based on the four post-nourishment surveys, the
Midtown Beach project has performed quite well, generally maintaining, within expectations, the
volume and plan area from the first post-nourishment survey to the second, third and fourth post-
nourishment surveys. The first five month post-nourishment period (April 1996 to August 1996)
is for a generally mild weather period whereas the second seven month post-nourishment period
(August 1996 to April 1997) is for a generally more energetic wave period. The latest intersurvey
period (April 1997 to August 1997) which is a focus of this report was again during the summer
period when smaller waves are expected. The area and volume changes reflect the wave energy
levels of these periods. Accepting the reported placement volume of 880,000 cubic yards, the







300


C. 2 0 .. ... ------- April 1997
20







o Project Limits
S100








0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Distance South of Monument R-94E (ft)
I Project Lin'its


-100.1
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

Distance South of Monument R-94E (ft)


Figure 3. Volume Changes Due to Nourishment Project








300


I I


1000


2000


. . ".. .


3000


4000


5000


6000


7000


Distance South of Monument R-94E (ft)

Figure 4. Shoreline Changes Due to Nourishment Project


I


200




100




0


(D



0)
C)

()




Cn


-100


8000


it


I


I I I 1 I
April 1996
.......... August 1996
...... April 1997
.. .. ....... . August 1997






U) U ...
I A I



Project Limits


I







volumetric loss from placement to August 1997 within the placement area is 27.3%. Moreover,
approximately one-half of this loss occurred during the period when the groins were not in place and
during which the intense March 1996 storm impacted the Palm Beach area. The losses during the
five month winter period, April 1997 to August 1997 within the placement area represent
approximately 1 % of the material placed. The total losses during the one year period August 1996
to August 1997 within the placement area may represent the losses to be expected during a typical
year after nourishment and amount to 13.0 %.The total losses within the 6,100 ft segment from R-
941 to R-100C during this one-year period are 13.4 %.

The area changes during and subsequent to nourishment parallel approximately the volumetric
changes. Although a survey was not conducted immediately after nourishment, it is estimated that
the initial plan area increase above NGVD (approximately Mean Sea Level) datum was
approximately 20.5 acres. Based on this value, the reduction in plan area within the nourished area
during the period in which the March 1996 storm occurred was 12.5%. The reduction in plan area
in the placement segment during the full year from August 1996 to August 1997 was 16.1%. Some
of this reduction in plan area was due to the sand moving from the steeper placement profiles toward
the milder equilibrium profiles. These changes in profile slope are evident in the individual profiles,
an example of which is presented in Figure 2.

Nourishment losses are expected to decrease as the effective length of the project becomes greater
due to spreading of sand from the nourishment area. Additionally, at the Midtown Project, the
stabilizing effects of the groins should start to occur soon. Two final points are relevant to evaluating
project performance: (1) The project performance to date reflects two winter seasons during which
the volumetric losses are expected to be greater and two summer seasons during which the
volumetric losses are usually less. These expectations are supported by the data. Very little changes
appear to occur during the summer months, and (2) Since permit conditions require renourishment
when 40% of the project volume has been transported from the placement area, this would occur
when the volume remaining is 480,000 cubic yards. Figure 5 presents a graph of the percentage
volume and plan area remaining along the project beach. These results are normalized by 880,000
cubic yards for initial volume and 20.5 acres for initial plan area.

Changes Along the North Beaches

Profiles There are five profiles along the North Beach Area extending from the south jetty at the
Port of Palm Beach Entrance to approximately 4,000 feet south of the jetty. Referring to Figure 1,
it is seen that these profiles span the borrow area and it will be shown that two of the profiles pass
through the excavated borrow area. These five profiles are presented in Figures 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. It
is seen that the profiles at Monuments R-79 and R-80 pass through the excavated borrow area;
however, the other three profiles along the North Beach do not. The following further sections
discuss the changes along the North Beach area.







100
100~........ ----------------------
90 .. ... ......... Volumes
807 Plan Areas
S80 ..__ ____..
......................... ...... ......... .. .. .... .. ...... ......... .I ....
7 0 ............. ..... ............ .......

)60

0") ) (
50 .
0 40 c..........
-* :C : C7
S 3 0 .. .. .. .. .. .. ....... .......... .... .... ... ............ .... ..... ............. ..... ... ....
; C : 0-


10 -
<.


1 0 .I I . .
0 5 10 15 20
Months After Completion of Nourishment

Figure 5. Percentage Total Volume and Plan Area
Remaining in Shoreline Segment Placed








20

10 ..... October 1995
0............................ ............................... ....... August 1996
Z April 1996
() 0 ~ ^*A ^ " .-.-.-_. August 1996

0 -10 ......- August 1977
a)
> -20 -.....*...

S -30 ... .. . . . .

.. -2 0 .................................
-4 0 ..................... ..... .................. ................... ......




S-60 ,
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)

Figure 6. Profiles at DNR Monument R-77

for Five Available Surveys








20

10...................................... ..... .......O
10 ...I--------------------October 1995-




0 -20
> 0. ............... ....... ................. ... ... .... ... ...... A p ri 1996
Augustp 1996
2 -April 1997
0 -1 0 ........... ..... .................. ........ .......... A ugust 1997





S 2-40 -
- . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . ... : ..

>-50

w -60
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)

Figure 7. Profiles at DNR Monument R-78

for Five Available Surveys



























1000


2000


3000


0




c)


a)


Co-
co

c-

LU


Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)

Figure 8. Profiles at DNR Monument R-79

for Five Available Surveys


20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60


................... .................. ............O c to b e i
.......... April 19
S............ ... .............. .. ........... ... . A u g u s t
- -- A p ril 1 9
..... ...... August






................... ........................ . . . . ..... ........ .... . ..

. . . .


r1995
96
1996
97
1997


4000


5000


i 1


. . . . . . . -







S' I f I |--



Z : : ....... April 1997
i -0 August 199



S-10 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
(D -30



>-50

W -60 1-'-
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)

Figure 9. Profiles at DNR Monument R-80
for Five Available Surveys







20

1 0 L. . . . . . . . . . .... . .... . . . . . .. ... .. . . . . . . . . . ... . . O c o b e r 1 9 95. .-
10 October 1995
SApril 1996

S 0-J .. ...I .... ...... !..................... . ...... ......... ...... .... . A ugust 19976
(DAugust 1996
S------ .April 1997
0 -1 0 ... .. .... .... ............ .. ...................... -A ugust 1997



-30

I -40 -
> -50


0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)

Figure 10. Profiles at DNR Monument R-81

for Five Available Surveys







Sand Bypassing to the North Beach Sand bypassing commenced to the North Beach area after
refurbishing of the sand transfer plant located on the north jetty of the Port of Palm Beach Entrance.
Figure 11 presents the cumulative bypassing after the initiation of dredging for the nourishment
project in October 1995. It is seen that a total of 327,900 cubic yards has been bypassed since the
sand transfer plant recommended operation in May 1996.

Volume Changes Figure 12 presents the longshore distribution of volume changes along the North
Beach monitored length in the same format as was presented for the nourished beach in Figure 3.
The effects of the sand placed in the bypassing operations is evident and has caused advancement
of the beaches along the entire 4,000 feet monitored length.

Shoreline Changes Figure 13 presents the longshore distribution of shoreline changes documented
by the North Beach profiles. This figure is in the same format as was presented for the nourished
area in Figure4 The similarities between the volume and shoreline changes (Figures 12 and 13) are
evident. Again the bypassing operations have caused accretion in this area.

Changes in Excavated Borrow Area Figures 14 and 15 present the available profiles through the
borrow area at the profiles from Monuments R-79 and R-80. These are the same profiles shown in
Figures 8 and 9, except in an expanded form to focus on the excavation area. Examining these
figures shows that there has been only a small amount of filling of the excavated area and this has
occurred from the landward side. This filling appears to be a result of profile adjustment with the
profile on the landward side of the excavation seeking a milder slope. The contours at depths smaller
than 20 feet appear to be unaffected.

Sand Characteristics

In 1993, sand samples were collected and analyzed in conjunction with the monitoring program of
the PEP Reef Project. Sand samples were also collected in early 1996 after construction of the beach
nourishment project. Many sand samples were collected in 1993 and extended from the top of the
berm to the twelve feet depth contour. On average, seven samples were collected at each longshore
position sampled. A total of six samples were collected in 1996 at three locations along the
nourishment project with one sample at the beach face and one at the six feet contour. Figure 16
presents a comparison of the average and range of sediment sizes before and after nourishment. It
is seen that the characteristics of the pre- and post nourishment sand are quite similar.







0.5
-O
>,
M-

O
: 0.4 -
0


- 00.3


H 0.2-




0.0

:30.0 -
o 0.0


0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4


1.6


1.8 2.0


Years After October 1995

Figure 11. Cumulative Volumes of Sand Added
by Sand Bypassing Plant







100

80 . April 1996
.......... August 1996
. 60 ......... . ...................... .......................... . p i1 9
CO 60.. April 1997
. .............. ------- August 1997

S2 0 : .. .......... .. .......... .. ......... ....
0

(. -.*.. . ,
S.-----------------...... .... .. .. .. .








-100
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0 ... . . .. . .. . . . . : . . . .
=_ 4 0 ..................... :...... .............. .... .............. .....







-100 .--------..-----.-...----..
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Distance South of Monument R-77 (ft)

Figure 12. Volume Changes Due to Nourishment Project
in The North Beach Area

















.. .


.. ... ..
o


4-
N,
N-
N-


N
* N


c,
0)

OC
t-
C)
a)

a)
-
0
C-


. . .






I I I I I


1000


2000


3000


4000


5000


Distance South of Monument R-77 (ft)


Figure 13. Shoreline Changes Due to Nourishment Project

in The North Beach Area


200


100






0


- 'S "-..


April 1996
....... August 1996
-.... April 1997
-August 1997


-100


'~>








-20 v1 -v..




Z . . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . .. .. .. . . . . . . . .




4> 0
:1) | .,|, -
0 -40 October 1995 ......
S ........ April 1996
O .-.-..0 August 1996
,------- April 1997
> August 1997

LU -50 I
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000
Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)

Figure 14. Profiles at DNR Monument R-79 Emphasizing
Excavation Area for Five Available Surveys







-20




3 0. . . . . . . . . .. .. ... ..: .. . . . .. .. .. .


C -4 0


oSd Ds...... August 1996Monu t
-------- ... April 1997
> August 1997
W -50

1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000
Seaward Distance from Monument (ft)
Figure 15. Profiles at DNR Monument R-80 Emphasizing

Excavation Area for Five Available Surveys


















1.00
1993 sampling (4 profiles)
0.80 1997 sampling (3 profiles)

E 0.60

S0.40

0.20 ---

0.00
10



05 o __________


-5




-15 -I II i i i i

0 100 200 300 400 500
Offshore Distance (ft)



Figure 16. Comparison of Pre- and Post Nourishment Sediment Characteristics.







SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


This report has presented an analysis of the changes occurring in the nourishment area, the North
Beach and borrow areas and also has presented a comparison of the sand characteristics in the
nourishment area before and after nourishment. Each of these three components is discussed below.

Midtown Nourishment Area

Based on the four post-nourishment surveys in the nourished area, the Midtown Beach project has
performed quite well, generally maintaining, within expectations, the volume and plan area from the
first post-nourishment survey to the second, third and fourth post-nourishment surveys.
Nourishment losses are expected to decrease as the effective length of the project becomes greater
due to spreading of sand from the nourishment area. At the Midtown Project, the stabilizing effects
of the groins should start to occur soon. Two final points are relevant to evaluating project
performance: (1) The project performance to date reflects two winter seasons during which the
volumetric losses are greater and two summer seasons during which the volumetric losses are usually
less. These expectations are supported by the data. Very little changes appear to occur during the
summer months, and (2) Since permit conditions require renourishment when 40% of the project
volume has been transported from the placement area, this would occur when the volume remaining
is 480,000 cubic yards. Figure 6 presents a graph of the percentage volume and plan area remaining
along the project beach.
North Beach Area

Five profiles are available to document changes occurring in the North Beach area. Two of these
profiles pass through the excavated borrow area. Bypassing of some 327,900 cubic yards to the
North Beach area via the sand bypassing plant located on the north jetty of the Port of Palm Beach
Entrance has caused general shoreline advancement and volume increases in this area. Some limited
filling of the excavated borrow area are evident in the latest surveys, but the filling is considered
minor.

Sediment Sample Characteristics

Comparison of the sediment sample characteristics before and after nourishment indicate that they
are reasonably compatible.







REFERENCES


Dean, R. G. (1997a) "Midtown Beach Nourishment Project in Palm Beach, Florida: October 1995
to August 1996", University of Florida, Department of Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering
Department, Report No. UFL/COEL-97/001.


Dean, R. G. (1997b) "Midtown Beach Nourishment Project in Palm Beach, Florida: October 1995
to April 1997", University of Florida, Department of Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering
Department, Report No. UFL/COEL-97/013.




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