Longboat Key is entering into their second week of a beach renourishment project that is set to last until the end of September. For more than 50 years, government officials have been throwing dollars onto Florida beaches in an effort to redraw the receding shoreline. Sometimes $20 million in sand sticks around for a year or two, but occasionally it gets washed away in less time then it took to put it there.
Lots of water, sand and sun is the reason many people choose to visit or relocate to Florida. Wide sandy beaches are what most of those who visit expect to see when they arrive, and they are often the reason many of them stay. But what is the real cost for this persona of paradise, and who are the winners and losers?
The winners are those who collect revenue (property taxes, sales tax, tolls, hotels, restaurants, etc.). Such forces routinely claim that all of what is spent on renourishment is returned by many times the amount invested by economic activity and new jobs.
Undoubtedly, more restaurants, hotels and toll booths generate jobs; but the constant influx of more people inflates all costs of living for those already here, making it increasingly difficult for the many who live on a fixed income.
However, more is at stake here then the balance of dollar-for-dollar, or tit-for-tat. It appears there could be an unintended consequence–or perhaps even an intended one–that is far more disturbing than 20 million bucks being blown away in the next storm.
There is a distinct possibility the LBK renourishment project will destroy the beloved Cortez Bridge, which many residents see as a serious blow to the culture of this historical village. Unfortunately, the reason government officials say they are willing to take that risk is to secure a large beachfront for visitors who expect just that.
Longboat Key town manager Dave Bullock says the six month, $20 million renourishment project will move 200,000 cubic yards of sand onto three parts of Longboat Key. He says they will be hauling between 120 and 140 trucks a day until late September.
The substitute beach is coming from a sand mine in Immokalee, 120 miles from the project. The trucks only have two routes they plan to take: one travels through St. Armands Circle, and the other takes the trucks over the Cortez Bridge.
The Cortez Bridge is the backbone for the namesake 130-year old fishing village. Its condition has been at the center of a controversy that eventually led to a Project Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study proposed by Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) in early 2014, with hopes to resolve the issue.
On October 13, 2014, FDOT presented an outline of the bridge's decaying condition and offered five matrix alternatives that were within the scope of the needed bridge repair or replacement to the Sarasota-Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization and its Technical Advisory Committee.
FDOT discovered the bridge had deck deficiencies, concrete beam deficiencies/cracks, movable span steel rusting, beam supports (steel bearings) rusting, pilling cracks and seawall deficiencies.
FDOT photos
The five alternatives presented by FDOT to solve the issue were:
1. No Build (repair only), a $10 million, 10-year project that could possibly prolong the need for a new bridge until 2035.
2. Rehabilitation (major repair), a $36 million project that replaces some infrastructure and postpones the need for a new bridge to 2050.
3. Bridge Replacement of which there were three designs: new low level drawbridge (21-foot vertical clearance); mid-level drawbridge (45-foot vertical clearance); and a high-level fixed bridge (65-foot vertical clearance). Both new drawbridges have a life expediency of 75 years and are estimated to cost in the range of $90 million; the high level fixed bridge has the same 75-year expediency for the predicted cost of $61 million.
Manatee County officials say they hear Cortez residents when they say they don't want a new bridge, so the unofficial bridge de jour is the No Build (repair) option. Here is what FDOT had to say about that option:
"The FDOT is currently doing a short term repair project, which began in May 2014, to keep Cortez Bridge safe and operable for up to ten years, or until 2025. While no one can precisely predict how long repairs will last, the no-build/repair alternative includes continued repairs and routine maintenance of Cortez Bridge to keep it safe and operable for up to an additional ten years following the current ten-year repair project, or until 2035. After the 10-year repair, the bridge would need to be replaced. The no- build/repair alternative would not prevent the need to potentially restrict heavy vehicles meaning that heavy trucks such as commercial delivery or moving trucks could be restricted."
The Bridge is nowhere near the completion of the much-needed repairs that correct what was cited in the PD&E study. The Cortez bridge is nearing 60 years old. The expiration date has passed and the pictures clearly show that.
I asked Bullock at the last Manatee County Council of Governments meeting what they will do if the sand trucks take down the bridge. He answered, "I guess build a new bridge." But what local residents fear most is something happening to the bridge that takes its historical landscape out of the future picture.
Walking across the bridge is scary when a large truck is crossing. One can feel the bridge move with the truck. On all highways throughout the U.S. "heavy trucks" are limited to a gross weight of 80,000 pounds, according to the Florida Highway Patrol Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Manual.
The 6,250 truck loads (200,000 cubic ft of sand Ö 32 cubic ft per truck) each weigh in at twice the FDOT allotted amount. Each one of the loaded 745C CAT Dump Trucks being used on the LBK project weighs in at almost 160,000 lbs. That is equivalent to more than 50 automobiles (at 3,000 lbs each).
If after the No Build/Repair work is done, large moving trucks might be restricted. How would the currently impaired bridge handle what is being requested, which amounts to twice the size of what would be allowed once the repairs were fully completed.
Running 120 to 140 trucks a day could result in one, two or more of those trucks to be on the bridge at once; and if any of the empty trucks (80,000 lbs) are on their return trip as well, disaster could be lurking. One of the questions yet to be answered is: Will there be a team making sure two or more trucks aren't on the bridge simultaneously?
Two loaded trucks on one side (320,000 lbs), one return truck on the other (80,000 lbs), and 40 more cars concurrent (120,000 lbs) is a half-a-million pounds on the bridge; this bears reason to be concerned.
The six miles to a gallon the 511 horse power CAT 745C gets loaded, equates to a round trip fuel cost of just under $100 for each of the 6,250 loads; that's a lot of dough and a lot of pollution.
But LBK property owners want to stop their beach from shrinking, and understandably so. A temporary win, even in a losing game, gives a sigh of relief. In this round of beach renourishment, LBK residents are picking up almost 80 percent of the $20 million while county residents are supplying the rest of the cost.
We often calculate our way into disaster. Not that the math is wrong, it's just that the numbers we chose to use are. Nowhere do I see the further fracturing and possible destruction of the Cortez Bridge entered into the equation, nor do I see the route's road stress calculated or any mention to the anomalies that surface from using mined land-side sand to replace a living and breathing beach.
Bullock says they carefully selected the sand and found the right size and desired color, but the aesthetics come in a distant second when the question of compatibility is the issue.
In a 2012 article by Kate Spinner, for the Herald Tribune, titled: "Beach Renourishment May Harm Ecosystem," Spinner does a great job of addressing some of the unspoken consequences of beach renourishment.
"The phenomenon has been documented in research on North Carolina beaches and could be happening in Florida as well. But scientists cannot say for sure because there are no ongoing studies, said James Culter, a staff scientist at Mote Marine Laboratory who studies coastal ecology and fisheries."
Culter went on to say, "There's probably a lack of what I would call long-term analysis of beach restoration projects in terms of biological effects,"
More from Spinner's article:
"Few people study nourishment's ecological effects because it not a 'popular topic' and it is seen as necessary to protect coastal property, said Lisa Manning, a federal biologist who did research at the University of North Carolina with biology professor Charles Peterson, the author of some of the latest studies."
Spinner's piece says there is an 86 to 99 percent drop in coquinas and mole crabs and a 70 to 90 percent decline in shorebirds followed nourishment on beaches in North Carolina, according to Peterson's earlier research.
But those professional opinions don't stand alone. At Surfermag.com, "Is Florida's 'Beach Renourishment Killing The Beaches" is an indebted interview with SURFER Magazine's, Terry Gibson. Gibson says:
"First off, erosion isn’t a problem for beaches, just for buildings. And in most cases, the sediment they’re dredging up is clustered mud, and/or fossil fragments, not sand. Several of Florida’s top geologists are bothered that the Corps and the dredge lobby call this stuff "sand," much less these massive dredge-and-fill projects 'nourishments.' The geologists demonstrated how this stuff doesn’t behave anything like native beach sand once placed in the intertidal zone. This stuff has been sitting out there for 5,000 to 7,000 years in a low-energy environment while algae and microorganisms bored into the grains and hollowed them out. Plus, the slurry is full of fine sediments, and the shell fragments that are too light and fragile to stay on the beach or intact in the high-energy surf zone."
What remains undisputed is that dredging shipping channels and other dredge projects are the major culprit in beach erosion. Currently, there are over $50 million in dredge projects on the table in Manatee County.
Spending hundreds of millions of Florida dollars annually on renourishment projects seems to have a lot of counterproductive flavor to it. But if in the mix of cost for the LBK project is the damnation of the Cortez Bridge, get ready for all hell to break loose.
Comments
No comments on this item
Only paid subscribers can comment
Please log in to comment by clicking here.