-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
-
Hello all! We will be performing a website & forum update soon. You may get logged out so now is the time to make sure your email address in your account is correct - go to your account to check it and update it now. Send us a message with your username and/or email address if you need help.
Beach restoration update
- Thread starter Sally
- Start date
SHELLY
SoWal Insider
...and you are not getting post credit. The count is staying the same. I am sure it was a Realtor.
But....The post disappeared.....and I didn't even mention the "R?" word in the post ...I swear!!
Boy, I hope I'm not in a pickel. ;-)
Miss Kitty
Meow
But....The post disappeared.....and I didn't even mention the "R?" word in the post ...I swear!!
Well, repost it! Were you being bad SHELLY or funny SHELLY???
BPickelTDC
Beach Lover
:shock: It must be Halloween....my post disappeared!!
Actually, my post dissapeared first using a deleted button as I was not logged in as BPickelTDC but as someone else
To answer your earlier question and post the correct information, the loan rate was between 3.5 and 4%
As for the Blue Mountain question, I thought I had figured out who you were since it is a mystery, no malice intended.
SHELLY
SoWal Insider
Actually, my post dissapeared first using a deleted button as I was not logged in as BPickelTDC but as someone else
Yeah, I saw that ;-)
If that's the case, I calculate the annual payment on the loan should be @ $150,000+ more than the annual payment stated in the post above ($842,249.28)
As for the Blue Mountain question, I thought I had figured out who you were since it is a mystery, no malice intended.
Mystery?? :shock:
-----------------------
Thank you for being so forthcoming with the information
.
Last edited:
BeachSteelers
Beach Fanatic
$16.9 million dollars for 6500ft of beach? Plus $800,000+ per year in added debt. Seems like a lot of money for barely a mile of beach. Or am I missing something from what I read. Dredging up sand to put on a beach where the storms come in and take it back is a losing battle. And when this is complete and a Cat 3 comes and takes it all back, i suppose the County will once again jump through federal hoops to obtain more money to flush into a never ending cycle.
The Gulf will take what it wants whether it's sand,walls,tubes, or houses. By putting an additional foot or two of sand added to the existing beach,correcty me if I'm wrong, will undoubtable raise the impact of the water by the same amount. But hey who am I to question anything when uncontrolled and unaudited federal/local tax money is being spent.
And how can it cost the county $55,000 for a beach walkdown? $1,000 dollars wood + maybe a week of labor by 2 workers. Any chance of finding an audit on that dept.? I'll Take MisMangement for $2000, Alex.
The Gulf will take what it wants whether it's sand,walls,tubes, or houses. By putting an additional foot or two of sand added to the existing beach,correcty me if I'm wrong, will undoubtable raise the impact of the water by the same amount. But hey who am I to question anything when uncontrolled and unaudited federal/local tax money is being spent.
And how can it cost the county $55,000 for a beach walkdown? $1,000 dollars wood + maybe a week of labor by 2 workers. Any chance of finding an audit on that dept.? I'll Take MisMangement for $2000, Alex.
IN TODAY'S PAPER:
Beach restoration continues
Walton-Destin renourishment may be done in phases
By HEATHER CIVIL heatherc@nwfdailynews.com
SANTA ROSA BEACH ? Work could resume on a joint beach restoration project between Walton County and Destin by the end of this month.
The final 6,500 or so feet of the project in western Walton could be finished by year?s end, and work on the remaining two miles of beach in Destin will likely begin in the spring, said Brad Pickel, beach management director with the county?s Tourist Development Council.
City and county staffers met Wednesday afternoon to discuss how Destin and Walton can continue the restoration together.
The meeting was scheduled after the city expressed concern about restarting the project before the state Supreme Court rules on whether beach restoration violates private property rights.
The court will likely take several months to decide, and Walton does not want to wait until then to restart the work.
Walton considered terminating an agreement with the city to share costs on the project so the county would not have to wait.
However, it appears that there are alternatives that will give both the county and city what they need while keeping the agreement intact.
What will likely happen is that the project will be renegotiated with the contractor, Great Lakes Dredge and Dock, so that the final stretch in Walton and the restoration in Destin can be done in phases, Pickel said.
That means that Walton can begin restoration this month and Destin can start in the spring without having to end the agreement, he said.
?It gives the city of Destin a little more flexibility,? Pickel said.
It is now up to the Walton County Commission and Destin City Council to approve that plan, he said.
Destin will meet in executive session at 5 p.m. Monday to discuss the issue, said Mayor Craig Barker. Barker said the city wants to continue working with the county.
?This partnership with Walton County has been mutually beneficial for the entire area,? he said.
The Walton County Commission has not set a date to discuss the matter.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in May halted beach restoration as it neared completion in Walton after several endangered sea turtles died during the sand dredging process.
The Corps has since said that the project can resume.
The price tag for the restoration, which started in February, stands at almost $28 million.
The project is being paid for in part with state grant money and tourist bed tax revenue.
Project delays caused by sea turtle deaths have already cost the project an additional $4 million to $5 million.
Daily News Staff Writer Heather Civil can be reached at 267-8300.
Beach restoration continues
Walton-Destin renourishment may be done in phases
By HEATHER CIVIL heatherc@nwfdailynews.com
SANTA ROSA BEACH ? Work could resume on a joint beach restoration project between Walton County and Destin by the end of this month.
The final 6,500 or so feet of the project in western Walton could be finished by year?s end, and work on the remaining two miles of beach in Destin will likely begin in the spring, said Brad Pickel, beach management director with the county?s Tourist Development Council.
City and county staffers met Wednesday afternoon to discuss how Destin and Walton can continue the restoration together.
The meeting was scheduled after the city expressed concern about restarting the project before the state Supreme Court rules on whether beach restoration violates private property rights.
The court will likely take several months to decide, and Walton does not want to wait until then to restart the work.
Walton considered terminating an agreement with the city to share costs on the project so the county would not have to wait.
However, it appears that there are alternatives that will give both the county and city what they need while keeping the agreement intact.
What will likely happen is that the project will be renegotiated with the contractor, Great Lakes Dredge and Dock, so that the final stretch in Walton and the restoration in Destin can be done in phases, Pickel said.
That means that Walton can begin restoration this month and Destin can start in the spring without having to end the agreement, he said.
?It gives the city of Destin a little more flexibility,? Pickel said.
It is now up to the Walton County Commission and Destin City Council to approve that plan, he said.
Destin will meet in executive session at 5 p.m. Monday to discuss the issue, said Mayor Craig Barker. Barker said the city wants to continue working with the county.
?This partnership with Walton County has been mutually beneficial for the entire area,? he said.
The Walton County Commission has not set a date to discuss the matter.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in May halted beach restoration as it neared completion in Walton after several endangered sea turtles died during the sand dredging process.
The Corps has since said that the project can resume.
The price tag for the restoration, which started in February, stands at almost $28 million.
The project is being paid for in part with state grant money and tourist bed tax revenue.
Project delays caused by sea turtle deaths have already cost the project an additional $4 million to $5 million.
Daily News Staff Writer Heather Civil can be reached at 267-8300.
BPickelTDC
Beach Lover
No, the costs you are describing include the entire project as I discussed in Post 6 on this thread. The entire project is over 5 miles.
As for impacts from a Category 3 on a restored project, I would point you to Pensacola's project and a direct hit from Hurricane Ivan. The beach was surveyed after the impact of the storm and there was MORE sand in the beach and dune system AFTER the hurricane then there was BEFORE they did the project.
Raising the beach will not raise the water levels. The increase in water levels in a storm is caused by meteorological factors, primarily the fact that a tropical system is a low pressure system. The interaction of the low pressure with the associated winds is what "pushes" the water ahead and causes a storm surge. For example, I will describe two differences with the same storm, Tropical Storm Alberto from this year. In the restored beach area, the beach had been elevated up to approximately 7-8 feet and extended seaward by about 100 feet. The existing beach area was only about 3-4 feet in elevation. See these pictures of its impact.
Restored Beach
Non-restored beach
As you can clearly see elevating the beach did not lead to higher water levels, it only led to the water being kept further offshore. this is the primary benefit of beach restoration projects, storm damage reduction. By the way, here is a picture showing the relative beach elevation increase and as you can see it is not 1-2 feet at the water's edge
As for beach accesses, we at the TDC are continuously contacted regarding the quality of the systems we install. We have further researched technologies that will make these accesses more storm resistant, and these options cost more money then your regular family walkover. Also, we will not sacrifice safety for costs. Wood does not last as long as Trex, or other recycled composites, so we do not use it. Wood buckles, splinters, and they are difficult to keep maintained. When someone is injured on a boardwalk, we are sued. It has happened twice in the past 1.5 years. Therefore, we have chosen to build a better system up front to limit ongoing costs, and we are excited about the changes we have implemented to existing boardwalks and the experimental retractable/removable boardwalk we are installing this winter at Greenwood Avenue.:clap_1:
Finally, regarding audits and mismanagement, I will not take the bait
except to say this, the county's budget is overseen by a variety of people and the review process is open to all. We ARE audited and all of our FEMA projects and state grants require an even more intensive auditing process. The budget is reviewed by a variety of groups and agencies including the Walton County Tax Payers Association and any others that would like. To that end, I would personally invite you to meet with me at any time to address your concerns regarding the TDC's beach program. I will work to the best of my ability to answer your questions, and if I am unable I believe others would as well. Finally, one item is critically important and I know it is like beating a dead horse, but the local costs of beach projects that are overseen by the TDC including access development, are paid 100% through Tourist Occupancy Taxes. The costs are exported to our visitor, and we have not utilized any ad valoreum taxes for these projects.
I hope this helps to clarify and outline your concerns. As always, I welcome further questions and discussion, with or without personal attacks.
Brad Pickel
Director of Beach Management
Walton County TDC
SHELLY
SoWal Insider
With all due respects, Mr Pickel, I disagree with your above statement about Ivan's impact on Pensacola Beach.
In 2003 (pre-Ivan), Pensacola paid between $17-$20-million to restore erosion experienced over the past several years dating back to Opal/Erin and a few minor storms since then. Hurricane Ivan plowed ashore in Sep '04 and totally flattened the island, pushing the renourished beach across the island (through living rooms and parking garages) and dumping it into the sound. (I saw the destruction first-hand since I have a friend who lives on Pensacola Beach.) Then the string of 2005 hurricanes added to the beach erosion problem.
The government ponied up several more million dollars to re-renourish Pensacola beach earlier this year.
On a sidenote, Navarre Beach is now finishing up its first re-nourishment project. My friend and I paid a visit to the beach recently during the recent storms. The waves from the storm chewed the newly renourished beaches up a bit, but at least waves weren't passing under the houses as before. What I did notice was the quality of sand is awful--full of sharp, broken shells. I was at that same beach pre-Ivan and the sand was as white, soft and fluffy as the sand in SoWal--now I wouldn't walk on that beach or go swimming without shoes on.
All the kings and horses and all the kings men won't be able to put the beach back to how it was "then."
Last edited:
BPickelTDC
Beach Lover
Shelly:
Based on your reply, I called the coastal engineer who oversaw their project to make sure that I did not mis-speak, and I did not. My comment was that there was more sand in the beach dune system after Ivan then before they built the project.
Based on post-storm surveying within the project limits where the beach was built, only 70% of the project sand was lost, was that good.... NO, but that was the effect of Ivan 70% loss. That means that there was 30% of the beach project sand remaining when compared to the pre-storm beach. I think we would all agree that the pre-storm beach was better then the pre-construction beach. This is why we monitor projects is to learn about impacts. I know it may seem incorrect, but it has been quantified.
Last edited: