BRADENTON BEACH – City officials do not support a barrier wall being included in the plans for a potential living shoreline/shoreline resiliency project along Bay Drive South.
On Thursday, Jan. 6, the city commission voted 5-0 in favor of accepting the revised 30% completed engineering plans presented by the Tampa-based Environmental Science Associates (ESA) firm.
The plans presented Thursday evening included revisions made as a result of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) discussion that took place the day before. During both meetings, the plans were presented during a videoconference with ESA representatives Brett Solomon, Bryan Flynn and Tom Ries.
The living shoreline/shoreline resiliency engineering plans are being funded by a $92,433 grant from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. The grant only covers engineering and design costs and does not include additional funds for the actual construction of a living shoreline/shoreline resiliency project, and no city or CRA funds are currently budgeted for such a project.
CRA discussion
The plans presented to the CRA members on Wednesday originally referenced a barrier wall to be installed along a portion of the project area that extends along the eastern side of Bay Drive South, from Bridge Street to Fifth Street South and including the area near the Bridge Street Pier and city-owned dinghy dock.
The engineering plans also propose the use of natural fill materials, mangroves and other plants, sloped earthen berms, concrete reef balls, oyster bags, bio logs and other onshore and offshore materials that could help make the Bay Drive South shoreline more resilient to future sea-level rise and rising tides.
The plans are based on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) projection that sea-level rise is expected to increase by approximately 4.5 feet by 2050.
Flynn said the southern portion of the Bay Drive South shoreline currently has a 2-3 foot ground elevation and the elevation increases to 5-6 feet toward the northern end of the street. He said the goal is to get consistent elevation of greater than 5 feet along that entire shoreline to combat sea-level rise and increase shoreline resiliency.
Flynn said off-shore reef balls and oyster domes or oyster bags would help dissipate wave energy before the waves reach the plants, berms and other onshore elements.
The seven-member CRA board that includes all five city commissioners and two non-commissioners made it clear they did not support a concrete wall being included in the project.
CRA Chair Ralph Cole said, “That has been such a natural beachline for such a long time and it has been beat down by erosion. When man gets in and makes walls and does a lot of stuff I don’t think it does as good as just helping out Mother Nature and maybe pushing some fill back in there and some natural grass or whatever.”
Cole also expressed concerns about the maintenance requirements associated with a concrete wall that may eventually require replacement.
CRA member David Bell lives in the Old Bridge Village condominiums located along the western side of Bay Drive South.
“I think there’s going to be a lot of resistance to the wall,” he said.
CRA member Jan Vosburgh agreed.
Bell also expressed concerns about a solid wall retaining rainwater on the landward side and preventing that water from dispersing into Sarasota Bay. He also questioned whether the offshore reef balls would be visible during low tides.
In addition to the aesthetics of a shoreline wall, the CRA members expressed concerns about obstructing property owners’ existing views and access to their private docks. CRA member Jake Spooner noted most of the shoreline property being discussed is privately owned. It was also noted that the Bay Drive South rights of way are owned and controlled by the city.
Solomon said ESA representatives could engage in on-site meetings with potentially impacted property owners. Those meetings are to be coordinated by the city clerk’s office.
In response to the wall concerns, Ries referenced an illustration that shows how an earthen berm can be used to disguise a concrete storm wall contained within, with the top of the wall serving as a raised sidewalk. He said such a berm would not need to be more than 3 feet above the existing ground elevation.
“Three feet high is not going to block your view. We want this to be as natural as possible, but in some locations we’re constrained by space. We are trying to get away from seawalls. We want something that truly has resiliency and will work with the nature we have,” Ries said.
As to whether to continue to engineering process, Cole said, “If it’s a grant, it’s free money to get it designed. We’re not obligated to carry that out.”
City Attorney Ricinda Perry noted additional project-related grants may be easier to obtain when associated with a pre-designed shovel-ready project.
CRA member John Chappie said the goal is to create a long-term plan that can be implanted in phases as funds becomes available.
“This is a long-term commitment to get to where we want to be five, 10, 15, 20, 30 years down the road,” Chappie said.
The CRA members unanimously supported moving forward with the engineering plans to be revised based on the input provided during Wednesday’s meeting.
Commission discussion
The revised design options presented to the city commission Thursday evening still reference earthen berms but no longer reference a shoreline wall.
In response to a question from Spooner, Flynn clarified that the offshore oyster bags would be comprised of discarded oyster shells and would not contain live oysters but would help create reef habitats for oysters and other marine life.
During public comment, Old Bridge Village resident and board of directors member Bruce Herard thanked the mayor and commission for pursuing the shoreline resiliency project.
Herard said during a tropical storm in 2020 he sat in his home watching the water rise and the waves wash over Bay Drive South.
“It was the waves that were really frightening in terms of what might ultimately happen to our property. The water came right up to the lip of my garage but didn’t enter. That causes you to understand that we have a real issue. I don’t want my view screwed up, but on the other hand I want my building to not be flooded,” Herard said.
The 60% completed engineering plans are due Feb. 8 and the 100% completed plans are due April 29.
