Corps project manager tells city engineer ‘sand placed to north will work its way down there’
In December 2025, the website of the City of Sarasota featured a map that showed the limits of the Lido Key Beach Renourishment Project planned to begin in late January of this year.
That map made it clear that the sand dredged from New Pass would be distributed just south of the Sarasota Sands Resort, whose address is 2150 Benjamin Franklin Drive. The plans did not call for the sand to reach the Gulf shoreline of Sarasota County’s Ted Sperling Park, as The Sarasota News Leader has reported.
Moreover, an engineering documents provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), which was posted on the city’s website, showed the line of construction continuing to Monument 43.5 on the beach. The federal agency uses the monument system — which does not include physical structures — to denote specific locations on shorelines.
That engineering drawing also makes it clear that Monument 43.5 is south of Sarasota Sands.
Yet, on April 15, the vice president of the condominium complex’s owners association, Nancy A. Loerch-Archer, emailed a letter to Sarasota Mayor Debbie Trice.
“We have recently learned — without any prior notice or formal communication — that the Lido Beach renourishment project has stopped short of Sarasota Sands and will not include our property. Owners first became aware of this development through informal conversations with on-site workers on Tuesday, April 14,” Loerch-Arch continued. “Following this,” she wrote, “I asked our property manager to contact our designated project liaison, who was similarly unaware of any change in plans.”
Loerch-Archer explained, “As recently as last Thursday, we were advised that equipment would be moving to our location, including specific instructions regarding pipe placement and the removal of cabanas and other items. However, the equipment never arrived.
“Instead,” she continued, “at approximately 11:00 a.m. on April 14, it was removed and redirected to another location without any communication or explanation to our association.
“This situation is deeply troubling,” Loerch-Archer wrote. “All prior communications, as well as publicly available project maps, clearly indicated that Sarasota Sands was included in the renourishment plan. At no point were we informed of any revisions that would exclude our property.
“Over the past several months,” she added, “we have invested considerable time, effort, and resources preparing our residents for this project. To now find ourselves among the only properties not included — without notice — is not only disappointing but raises serious concerns about the planning and communication surrounding this effort.
“As taxpayers within the City of Sarasota,” Loerch-Archer pointed out, “we believe it is reasonable to expect equitable inclusion in a publicly funded project of this nature, particularly when prior assurances indicated our participation. Sarasota Sands, like the rest of Lido Beach, has experienced significant erosion.”
Therefore, she added, “We respectfully request a prompt explanation for this decision and clarification on whether there are any plans to address the omission of Sarasota Sands before the project concludes.”
Yet, on April 20, indicating that she had heard nothing from Trice or city staff members in response to her letter, Loerch-Archer appeared before the commissioners during the initial Citizens Input session of their regular meeting that day.
She reprised details in the letter, stressing that Sarasota Sands residents were unsure why the new sand had not been spread in front of their property.
Loerch-Archer noted that she had “initiated some communication via an immediate voicemail to the mayor’s office last week,” which was followed up with her April 15 email and a letter sent to the commissioners by certified mail.
She acknowledged, “Not a lot of time to put this in front of you, but it’s critical. It’s very time-sensitive.” Just the prior day, Loerch-Archer pointed out, she had learned that the contractor was pulling its equipment from the beach, as the project was to be completed before the end of April, so as not to interfere with the sea turtle nesting season.
Loerch-Archer stressed to the commissioners, “We were communicated with a week ago [in regard to] where the pipes [to distribute the sand] would be placed on the property. We needed to get all the cabanas off the beach so they could do the work, and they just stopped the progress and moved the equipment, went back down to the [Ritz Carlton Beach Residences] to finish that up, and are now pulling all of the equipment.”
She had brought photos with her, Loerch-Archer continued, to show the commissioners the difference between the renourished areas and the beach in front of Sarasota Sands.
“I’m a bit at a loss,” she told the board members, “looking for clarity and how this is going to be remedied before the end of the month.”
Mayor Trice, as usual after speakers make remarks during the Citizens Inputperiods, thanked Loerch-Archer but offered no other response.
Near the conclusion of the meeting, however, Vice Mayor Kathy Kelley Ohlrich did ask whether any of the city staff members “have any comments about the Sarasota Sands [issue] that was shared this morning?”
Deputy City Manager Patrick Robinson replied that he had asked the chief city engineer, Sage Kamiya, to contact Sarasota Sands representatives “and see what the story actually is, because there was a cut-off point in the actual plan where the sand restoration stopped.”
Robinson added, “So they are going to do an assessment and get back with me as soon as possible.”
He did tell Ohlrich that Kamiya had spoken with Loerch-Archer before Loerch-Archer left the meeting.
‘Additional sand placement unnecessary at this time’
Through a public records request, the News Leader learned this week that Kamiya sent Loerch-Archer an email on April 20, writing, “First, I understand your frustration with not meeting expectations for more sand placement. The original template design while it did show sand to be placed there did not show a lot of sand to be placed between the groins. (Three groins were constructed on the beach as part of the previous renourishment project, with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) engineers asserting that the groins would help hold sand in place between subsequent renourishment initiatives.)
Kamiya continued, “The contractor likely planned on being there because of the design, hence why you were initially told they would be there …. Recent beach surveys conducted last week indicated there was very little sand to be placed by the design template between the groins, and no sand fill was required south of the southernmost groin. The ledge shown in the picture appears to be an escarpment that formed where no fill was placed, possibly by adjacent sand making its way around the beach. Escarpments are typically found where sand accumulates and adjusts to the surrounding beach.”
Kamiya added, “All that said, the Army Corps is going to ask the Contractor to check the escarpment and see if there are any actions required by permit. Also, they will reach out to the USACE design team and contracting officer to see if any further measures can be taken to place more sand. As you are aware the contractor is in the last week of dredging so any changes would need to be done soon. They were not able to commit to possible solutions, but did promise to review and let us know.”
Kamiya told her he would be back in touch with her after he heard more from the USACE.
Two days later, in an April 22 email he sent to Loerch-Archer at 6:41 p.m., Kamiya provided information that he had received from Andy Cummings, the USACE project engineer for the Lido initiative.
Cummings wrote, “Our coastal engineers feel that additional sand placement in the vicinity of both southern groins is unnecessary at this time for coastal protection. They are confident the sand placed to the north will work its way down there to satisfactorily fill the area in the future. I was there yesterday and I can see quite a bit of sand developing in the nearshore and shoreline around both groins. Placing more sand there now will likely cause it to move south of the groins sooner. It seems letting the area fill naturally will provide the most benefit.”
Kamiya noted in that April 22 email to Loerch-Archer, “I regret this is not what you were hoping to hear, but as I am not a coastal engineer, I trust in their expertise for sand placement.”
He also made it clear that the project was “much needed” and that it entails an expense of $12 million in federal funds.
As of the deadline for this issue of the News Leader, the publication had received no response to inquiries it sent to USACE staff at the Jacksonville District Office regarding the lack of sand placement in front of Sarasota Sands.
‘A fiduciary duty to fully and properly explain the project deviations’
In response to Kamiya’s email, the attorney for the Sarasota Sands Owners Association, David K. Oaks of Saluda, N.C., sent a letter to Cummings of the USACE on April 23, copying Kamiya and City Attorney Joe Polzak. (A representative of Sarasota Sands provided the News Leader a copy of Oaks’ letter.)
Referencing Cummings’ response to Kamiya about Cummings’ belief that sand would drift south to the Sarasota Sands shoreline, Oaks wrote, “Our client, the Board of Directors of Sarasota Sands, have a fiduciary duty to fully and properly explain the project deviations to their 1,700 owners.”
Oaks added, “Please provide any documentation that warrants the deviation from the plan and substantiates the modification. Please further advise as to the location that the contractor stopped the placement of sand.”
A representative of Sarasota Sands confirmed to the News Leader on April 30 that the USACE had not responded to Oaks’ letter.