Erosion, navigation and sedimentation imperatives at Jupiter Inlet, Florida: Recommendations for coastal engineering management
Average rating
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Star rating
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
Date
1992
Metadata
Show full item recordAlternative Title
Tidal inlet management at Jupiter Inlet: Final reportAbstract
In this final report on the investigation of the potentialities of improvedcoastal engineering management of Jupiter Inlet, Florida, three management-guidingissues were considered: better control of the erosion of the south beach, betternavigation access and safety, and better control (reduction) of sediment influx into theinlet channel and upstream points in the Loxahatchee River estuary. The first twoissues have been particularly outstanding, due to persistent concern for the inherentdeficiencies in the protocol for sand pumping and placement on the beach that tends toerode away rapidly, and the concern for conditions for navigation of vessels in theproximity of the inlet in open waters. With regard to the third issue, despite thereasonably successful ongoing program to pump sand out of the borrow areas within theinlet channel, other areas such as some of the marinas in the inlet area, as well as theregion of the Loxahatchee River west of the Florida East Coast Railroad bridge, havebeen experiencing slow but persistent sedimentation.Contingent upon a series of coastal and environmental engineering investigations,a range of engineering actions that could mitigate erosion, navigation and sedimentationproblems were considered. Based on the physical and ecological impacts that would becaused by these actions, two sets of action options that have net beneficial impacts dueto action implementation have been proposed. The first is a set of interdependentaction options that must be instituted inherently in a time-wise phased manner. Thesecond is a set of independent action options which can be instituted as and when desired. For determining the overall feasibility of any action option, it will benecessary to weigh the technical benefits against costs, which are provided. It shouldbe emphasized however that, considering the overwhelmingly observational nature ofcoastal science, the estimates of potential benefits are essentially and inherentlysubjective, and the costs very approximate, especially in cases where the desiredtechnology is in the "bench" stage. (Document has 231 pages)Issue/Article Nr
92/002Publisher or University
University of Florida. Department of Coastal and Oceanographic EngineeringSeries : Nr
UFL/COELCollections