Allow private seawall on a public beach?

[TooFarTampa]

I happen to be one of those bad gulf front property owners who had a retaining wall built to save my family's 30 year old home. We were at least 300 feet farther back then, maybe more. I had a choice - let the house fall into the gulf or try to save the place. What would you do?
The only real solution to the huge problem is for the beaches to be renourished. If they are not renourished then the future of South Walton is in jeopardy. Beach renourishment is the bottom line for us all.
Having property on the beach is no piece of cake - believe me. I rent the house during the season to meet expenses - which are huge.

Thanks for posting beacheart. I am very sorry about your situation and I agree that it is not an easy choice. I am curious about a couple of things and hope you will answer these questions.

If the structure is 30 years old, and there is a possibility of an increase in frequency of storms, then in your opinion what is the value in saving it? (other than sentimental) I have to assume that the new homes on pilings and built to strict hurricane codes are far superior to anything you have. Would it be impossible (ie too expensive) for you to rebuild in the event of a total loss? If you have lost that much back yard -- which seems mind-boggling -- how much depth do you have left on your property? Do you have enough to rebuild fairly far back if you had to?

I am asking these questions because I am truly curious about the beachscape along the more vulnerable areas like Blue Mountain and parts of Seagrove. I do wonder if many of these owners have had so much of their property eaten away by storms that they wouldn't have room to rebuild.

I agree with you that renourishment is a far superior choice to armoring. I'm not sure what I would do in your situation, though I believe that seawalls are going to create much bigger problems than they solve.

 

[beacheart]

We built a Northstar wall - only 16 feet from the front of the house and filled in with white sand. Also am doing dune restoration. It is too bad some of the contractors were so irresponsible but ours was very responsible and followed the rules.

 

[beacheart]

To answer the question about rebuilding. No I could not have torn down and rebuilt after Dennis. I now have more flood insurance and could rebuild because we have a deep lot.
I am on the other end of 30-a from Seagrove so I am not in the know about that end. I do know that alot of people won't be able to rebuild because they have so many houses behind them. Ft. Panic is a prime example.
This whole situation is a big mess. The "old" days are gone and this is what we have now. I hope everyone who loves So. Walton will try to unify and promote beach renourishment asap. I consider the beach belonging to everyone.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I agree that eventually all the seawalls will probably be removed by Mother Nature and I too am concerned about the mess that will be left.

However, most storms are not strong enough to destroy many of the walls but are mighty enough to reach the beach armor and scour away all the beach sand in front of them. If we have another Dennis type storm this is the likely result.

The most probable outcome is that the beaches will be eroded away in front of the walls years before the walls are washed away.

Ecopal,

Somehow, either way, I can't help believe this would make you happy by vendicating your staunch position on retaining walls.

Yes, they are technically still considered retaining walls (for now).



For the record
All the beach erosion problems started LONG before any retaining walls were erected. You may be right about one thing... that assuming the rate of erosion of the beaches continues on its current course, eventually the beach will disappear.
When we get to the point where the water meets the wall (not to be confused with where the rubber meets the road ), then we all have problems. The walls did not cause the problem, but are now part of the problem.

The posts before this one... beach renourshment. What a novel idea !!! No disrespect to the poster. But my point is, isn't that what just about everybody has suggested up to now as the only real choice we have at the moment? I 100% agree with beacheart and his assessments. But i guess I'm just a biased gulf front property owner.

In the meantime, it takes one storm to wipe out several homes that are now vulnerable - therefore the retaining walls go up. BUT it can take several years for beach renourishment to be executed. You act as if one is suppose to sit idly by and watch their property wash away in the meantime.

Ecopal, please tell us your position on possible future beach renourishment in our area.

What is your opinion of the renourishment project going on as we speak?

Have you ever acknowledged John R's response to a question I posed on another thread... What does DEP considers to be the significant cause of beach erosion? John R took the time to look it up (thanks John R). Can you comment on that?

Ecopal, try to reach way down deep and give me some GOOD NEWS !! My therapist is making a fortune off me!

BMBV

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Ecopal,

One other thing. I asked you in another thread, what you would do in regards to remedying the entire situation.

Care to take a stab (not at me ;-) ) ?

BMBV

 

[dbuck]

I happen to be one of those bad gulf front property owners who had a retaining wall built to save my family's 30 year old home. We were at least 300 feet farther back then, maybe more. I had a choice - let the house fall into the gulf or try to save the place. What would you do?
The only real solution to the huge problem is for the beaches to be renourished. If they are not renourished then the future of South Walton is in jeopardy. Beach renourishment is the bottom line for us all.
Having property on the beach is no piece of cake - believe me. I rent the house during the season to meet expenses - which are huge.

Beacheart, I'm truly sorry for your problem. I don't have a beach home, much less a beachfront home, BUT if I did, I would do everything that I could afford to do to keep my house from washing away including Seawalls, geotubes, maybe both. I wouldn't let people make me feel too guilty if I were you. We tourist and second home owners want oceanfront and great ocean view properties to rent and buy. Just think how many dunes have been wiped out in the process. I guess we are all guilty of ruining our beaches. One thing is for sure---Nature will have the last word. Just my 2 cents.

 

[secret squirrel]

All the beach erosion problems started LONG before any retaining walls were erected. You may be right about one thing... that assuming the rate of erosion of the beaches continues on its current course, eventually the beach will disappear.

Pardon me stepping in, but this is an uninformed response, or at the least only paints half the picture. The other side of erosion is called accretion, and the balance of the two have sustained beaches for millions of years. If one were to follow the logic of this poster, we should have no beaches at all, anywhere, as erosion has been happening forever, due to various artificial and natural means. Florida has been eroding all our lives, but the beaches have remained wherever flexibility of coastline was retained- even where there has been significant erosion- because accretion occurs on the backside of the process. The key to allowing accretion is to keep the shoreline free of hard structure. This can be accomplished by nourishment or by rebuilding further back from the dune line. At this point we are all in a state of panic and denial. Soon a critical mass of understanding will emerge to support this thinking. It's time to buck up and take the hit, and that goes across the board. Let's wake up. Thank you for letting me voice my opinion in this forum.

 

[pgurney]

Here's one that might help your therapist bills and make some others feel a little better. It has to do with what BMBV and John R have been discussing as the major source of coastal erosion in Florida.

If you read the state's entire report on the erosion, it is broken down into 7 sub-regions within the state. The three major sources in the report are tropical storms, hurricanes and dredged inlets. The dredged inlets inhibit natural beach renourishment since they prevent the sand from naturally moving past the inlet and settling on the downstream beaches - it settles out in the inlets instead. Without the inlets there would be more of a balance in the natural erosion/nourishment cycle in non-tropical storm/hurricane conditions. What this means is that the beach shouldn't disappear in front of a seawall (or retaining wall) placed in an area that is not affected by inlets during normal conditions. Repeat....normal conditions.

Here's the part to make some of us feel a little better: the 30-A (or thereabouts) section of Walton County is not affected by dredged inlets according to the state's report. We still have the tropical storms and hurricanes to deal with (which would erode the dunes further back anyway), but at least there's some good news here. :clap_1:

Go To Page 6 - Pleistocene Mainland

 

[TooFarTampa]

Here's one that might help your therapist bills and make some others feel a little better. It has to do with what BMBV and John R have been discussing as the major source of coastal erosion in Florida.

If you read the state's entire report on the erosion, it is broken down into 7 sub-regions within the state. The three major sources in the report are tropical storms, hurricanes and dredged inlets. The dredged inlets inhibit natural beach renourishment since they prevent the sand from naturally moving past the inlet and settling on the downstream beaches - it settles out in the inlets instead. Without the inlets there would be more of a balance in the natural erosion/nourishment cycle in non-tropical storm/hurricane conditions. What this means is that the beach shouldn't disappear in front of a seawall (or retaining wall) placed in an area that is not affected by inlets during normal conditions. Repeat....normal conditions.

Here's the part to make some of us feel a little better: the 30-A (or thereabouts) section of Walton County is not affected by dredged inlets according to the state's report. We still have the tropical storms and hurricanes to deal with (which would erode the dunes further back anyway), but at least there's some good news here. :clap_1:

Go To Page 6 - Pleistocene Mainland

Nice post. I read some report/study on the DEP's site from 1998 or so in which it appeared Walton County had no history of ongoing erosion issues. Meaning, without the heavy storm activity, the beaches don't need our help. Here's hoping that Bermuda High has shifted and sends much of the hurricane activity elsewhere for awhile. Hard not to be concerned about those Gulf temps though. :shock:

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I happen to be one of those bad gulf front property owners who had a retaining wall built to save my family's 30 year old home. We were at least 300 feet farther back then, maybe more. I had a choice - let the house fall into the gulf or try to save the place. What would you do?
The only real solution to the huge problem is for the beaches to be renourished. If they are not renourished then the future of South Walton is in jeopardy. Beach renourishment is the bottom line for us all.
Having property on the beach is no piece of cake - believe me. I rent the house during the season to meet expenses - which are huge.

beacheart,

Is there any possibility of you having some photos from 30 years ago and some from today that you could share with us?

I know that I personally would GREATLY appreciate seeing them.

Thanks in advance!!

BMBV