Seawalls

?It is the county position that it should be public from the CCL (Coastal Construction Line) to the water,? he said. ?However, we must wait to hear how the courts rule on it.?

Someone in the county gov't finally got a heaping helping of common sense and cojones!

I see some more business for surveyors in the future! ;-)

right, and it took only 9 months for them to figure it the letter from the State Attorney.

Someone in the county gov't finally got a heaping helping of common sense and cojones!

I see some more business for surveyors in the future! ;-)

right, and it took only 9 months for them to figure it the letter from the State Attorney.

If I read it right, it's the only person in the County who has the authority to tell the officers how to enforce the law- the Sheriff.

I read that article in The Sun yesterday, too. Let the games begin!

SJ,

Wouldn't your posting of Sean Boone's article be MUCH MORE appropriate in another thread that discusses "Remove It or Lose It" or either one of the multitude of Private vs Public Beach threads?

Does this article have anything to do with seawalls? At least Peter compared rushing water hitting a seawall to a hit and run situation at Seaside. I can stretch and see the association he made.

Surely an official Sowal Guru Moderator such as yourself can see this.

Humor me and try to keep the seawall discussion on track.

Why don't you re-post the article in an applicable thread and we'll have at it (again and again and again and again.....)?

The answer to your question most likely falls in line with the numbers here in SoWal that feel that ANY and ALL beach front property falls under the customary use doctrine and should be confiscated without reparation....same ole people with the same ole (socialistic and hypocritical) attitudes.

Sorry, I got confused with which thread I was in when I read your above comment about customary use. I will repost that article in the appropriate thread. (I'm not sure why you think it may belong in the move it or lose it thread.) Thanks. Since Kurt removed the thread titles from the top of each post, I find it too easy to forget which thread I'm in.

SJ,

Wouldn't your posting of Sean Boone's article be MUCH MORE appropriate in another thread that discusses "Remove It or Lose It" or either one of the multitude of Private vs Public Beach threads?

Does this article have anything to do with seawalls? At least Peter compared rushing water hitting a seawall to a hit and run situation at Seaside. I can stretch and see the association he made.

Surely an official Sowal Guru Moderator such as yourself can see this.

Humor me and try to keep the seawall discussion on track.

Why don't you re-post the article in an applicable thread and we'll have at it (again and again and again and again.....)?

...be careful what you ask for.

Sorry, I got confused with which thread I was in when I read your above comment about customary use. I will repost that article in the appropriate thread. (I'm not sure why you think it may belong in the move it or lose it thread.) Thanks. Since Kurt removed the thread titles from the top of each post, I find it too easy to forget which thread I'm in.

SJ, what's going on? I asked you to repost the article in another applicable thread and in your self proclaimed enthusiasm you see it fit as an OFFICIAL SOWAL GURU MODERATOR to post the exact same thing in

[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=14597"]Customary use of the beach[/ame]
[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=16797"]Public Vs Private Beaches and County Govt.[/ame]
[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=17579"]Beach Property Rights - public/private[/ame]
[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=13977"]Beach Ownership[/ame]
[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=20589"]Public vs Private Beach[/ame]
[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=22255"]My first experience with public/private beach issue[/ame]
[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=23633"]Customary Beach Use[/ame]
[ame="http://www.sowal.com/bb/showthread.php?t=14301"]Led away in Handcuffs[/ame]

That's 8 different threads.

Mr. Moderator, which one should I jump in? Make us proud.

...be careful what you ask for.

Hey, I simply asked him to keep the seawall thread on track and repost the article in "an applicable thread", not every applicable thread. BIG DIFFERENCE, don't you think?

But his actions and tactics never cease to surprise me.

Now you are getting off on a tangent. When I began searching for "customary," I found many threads about private/public beach issues. They varied from people being arrested, to people inquiring where they could use the beach, to the TDC's official statement telling people not to sit on the dry sand. I felt it necessary to post that new information in all of those threads as to be informative to the people who may search for something like "public beach," and read only one of the threads. If I didn't post it in a particular thread like the TDC's official answer, people might mistakingly think they didn't have the right to sunbath on the dry sandy beach. By the way, I didn't start all of those different threads.

If any of those threads were the inappropriate place to post the information, please let me know. Now, back to the Seawalls. (I cannot imagine why anyone would get sidetracked on here, reading your posts.)

To help get us back on track, what are your thoughts on the property owner in Dune Allen being told by the gov't to remove his allegedly illegal seawall?

There are times when government must step in and stop illegal activity or see that the laws of the Republic are followed. The state and federal government has had to step in several times when the local county commission refused to follow the law. I believe we were the last county to get a comprehensive land development plan in Florida.

Ididn't go to all 8 threads. It seems a little heavy to crosspost in all of them. Isnt that what tags are for?

BMBV, there is obviously a fine line(as yet unresolved) between beachfront and beach. The walls will fail, that is a given, and the walls will cause erosion, that too is a given. I understand that people who were sold a pile of sand to build on and built as close as possible to the water need them, instead of building a little further away, and having a nice lawn to waste water on. Caveat emptor.

When that person runs out of money, the house is hanging over the air, and that person resides in Wyoming someplace, who's responsibility will it become?

Again, I wish no one any losses, including the taxpaying base. I just wish we knew then what we know now.

I found the post applicable - if the beaches from the CCL to the water are public, obviously no private seawalls can be built on them!

Not that the fact that they were constructing a seawall on public beach stopped anyone lately.

perhaps the private/public beach threads should be merged.

The walls will fail, that is a given, and the walls will cause erosion, that too is a given.

Not picking on you JR, but as a coastal practitioner I wanted to clarify one thing I often read on sowal posts. The walls will fail IF Sowal is impacted by a storm of great enough size, speed, and duration that it exceeds the design criteria of the structure. This assumes that the walls are properly designed and constructed. There are numerous occasions around the world where seawalls were constructed that withstand extremely large wave forces with no damage to the wall or upland property. The impacts to the adjacent properties did occur however.

All this being said, I am not sure how many people paid the amount of money it would cost to construct the properly engineered structures that would survive some of the larger storms.

Bet those seawalls large and strong enough to withstand catastrophic disaster are attractive. The public will eventually be stuck with this bill. Current homeowners will have moved on - up, down or sideways. Commissioners who allowed this will also be long gone or collecting public retirement checks.

Not picking on you JR, but as a coastal practitioner I wanted to clarify one thing I often read on sowal posts. The walls will fail IF Sowal is impacted by a storm of great enough size, speed, and duration that it exceeds the design criteria of the structure. This assumes that the walls are properly designed and constructed. There are numerous occasions around the world where seawalls were constructed that withstand extremely large wave forces with no damage to the wall or upland property. The impacts to the adjacent properties did occur however.

All this being said, I am not sure how many people paid the amount of money it would cost to construct the properly engineered structures that would survive some of the larger storms.

B, not picking back, but the walls will eventually fail. The proper strength, direct hit, weak link, etc. everything is temporary. If I built a wall at my house, or your old house, it would be there a lot longer than the one in front of BMBV's house. Someone will pay.

Not picking on you JR, but as a coastal practitioner I wanted to clarify one thing I often read on sowal posts. The walls will fail IF Sowal is impacted by a storm of great enough size, speed, and duration that it exceeds the design criteria of the structure. This assumes that the walls are properly designed and constructed. There are numerous occasions around the world where seawalls were constructed that withstand extremely large wave forces with no damage to the wall or upland property. The impacts to the adjacent properties did occur however.

All this being said, I am not sure how many people paid the amount of money it would cost to construct the properly engineered structures that would survive some of the larger storms.

If the company erecting the seawalls didn't even take the time to put the walls on the right property, I cannot see them taking the time to construct the walls as they are designed to be constructed. I can show you examples of several points of potential failure of seawalls in SoWal. At the time they were being constructed, it was under rush, rush, rush circumstances.

BMBV, I think this topic should have a sticky so it always stays in the forefront of people's minds. It seems(to me) that you would have it just fade away, akin to whatever our persident doesn't want to discuss anymore, and move on. In my opinion it is still a relevant topic since it is still unresolved.

What's the news with the RFV beach access? Are they behaving themselves over there?

Did your friend BMBW ever resolve the Surfrider conspiracy?

The last one was a cheap dig, I know, but topics such as these affect us all and will be current as long as there's a difference of opinion.

B, not picking back, but the walls will eventually fail. The proper strength, direct hit, weak link, etc. everything is temporary. If I built a wall at my house, or your old house, it would be there a lot longer than the one in front of BMBV's house. Someone will pay.

I understand and I agree. I am just saying that ones that were designed by a qualified professional and constructed as designed should survive their design storm. However, like everything else they will have to maintained just like painting a house, replacing a roof, paving a road, etc. Not to mention when some people heard what a bigger wall would cost, often they allowed price to dictate which level of protection they sought.

If the company erecting the seawalls didn't even take the time to put the walls on the right property, I cannot see them taking the time to construct the walls as they are designed to be constructed. I can show you examples of several points of potential failure of seawalls in SoWal. At the time they were being constructed, it was under rush, rush, rush circumstances.

Actually, there were less than a handful that I am aware of that were designed and construction was overseen by a true coastal engineer. I will be watching those to see the difference in construction methods and quality if/when they are directly impacted.

pressure treated lumber will rot. I can show you photos of my dock, if you don't believe me. There are plenty of pressure treated wooden seawalls in SoWal. The County cannot even get the owners to cover the seawalls with sand as required, or keep the 2:1 slope, so I have no idea how the owners will pay money to upkeep the actual walls.

Dune erosion and seawall failure, Melbourne Shores, FL:
Melbourne Shores, FL (upper photo: post-Frances, 9/8/04; bottom: post-Jeanne, 9/29/04): The seawall on the right survived Hurricane Frances, but failed during Jeanne. Note the extreme dune erosion where the front face of the dune retreated landward to the pool. (U.S. Geological Survey photos.) [larger version]

In the before and after photos above, it is interesting to see that the properties without seawalls, didn't lose much land at all, where as the properties with seawalls lost much land, at great expense.

I found the post applicable - if the beaches from the CCL to the water are public, obviously no private seawalls can be built on them!

Not that the fact that they were constructing a seawall on public beach stopped anyone lately.

Scooterbug, I generally gloss over your posts because they are very predictable (and consistent - which is a good trait!).

BUT, I have to admit you have a good eye!!

You saw the "CCL" reference in the article where noone else made any mention of. It initially jumped out at me like a 15 foot alligator but I just waited to see if anyone else would say something about it.

Somebody's got things all screwed up....
1. Either Mr. David Sell from TDC meant to say ECL;
2. Mr. David Sell said ECL and Sean Boone transcribed it as CCL;
3. OR the bloody county has truly gone mad and it's time to give SJ all my property.

My bet is either 1 or 2.

So please rest well tonight knowing that the wall is entirely on my property.

You can't believe everything that's in print.

Probably this belongs in another thread, but the "CCL" from The Sun article is discussed here so I will post here. I think they must mean "ECL" - that is the line established for beach renourishment. In some places the CCL runs right through buildings or is across the street (inland) from the beach. They can't possibly mean CCL. But it raises a point that I keep harping on, and I wish the reporter had more clearly noted that the Costa del Sol sign is on a renourished beach, as is the Surfside private beach sign. Where is the ECL, anyway? Anyone know?? There is no physical marker that I know of. I find it fascinating that these Miramar owners are trying to claim a renourished beach as a private beach. It is as if they have gotten tired of waiting for the court decision and just decided, oh well, hey, let's just make our own ruling and claim it for ourselves. The county said they can't remove the Surfside sign because it references a state statute (bogus) so I wonder what will be their excuse for allowing the Costa del Sol sign to stay up?

I believe both of you are correct regarding in that the statement should have been the ECL, not the CCL. I've never heard of a CCL, but there is a CCCL.