On 4-1 vote, County Commission approves 760-foot-long seawall on Casey Key

Petitioners have paid more than $3.5 million since 2011 to keep minimum amount of sand required atop a different erosion control system

An aerial view shows the plans for the seawall on Casey Key. Image courtesy Sarasota County

On a 4-1 vote, the Sarasota County Commission has approved a Coastal Setback Variance that will permit the construction of a 760-foot-long seawall a maximum of 40 feet seaward of the Gulf Beach Setback Line (GBSL).

Commissioner Nancy Detert cast the “No” vote, reiterating her objection to seawalls, even though staff explained that the new structure will tie in to existing seawalls to the north and south.

The GBSL is the figurative line in the sand implemented decades ago in an effort to protect dunes and vegetation, which, in turn, will protect property landward of the GBSL in the event of major storms, staff has explained.

Five petitioners had requested the seawall, Howard Berna, manager of the county’s Environmental Permitting Division, told the commissioners. However, the owners of the homes at 2209, 2305 and 2309 Casey Key Road will be the primary beneficiaries of the structure, he said. The other petitioners own the parcels at 2207 and 2315 Casey Key Road, he noted. The area of the seawall will be almost midpoint between the Blackburn Point Road Bridge and the Albee Road Bridge, he added.

The seawall will replace a geotextile container system that the County Commission approved in the same area in 2009, Berna explained on May 7.

Another aerial map shows the location for the new seawall, between the purple arrows. Image courtesy Sarasota County

Representing the petitioners, Karyn Erickson, president of Erickson Consulting Engineers in Sarasota — the principal engineer for the project — and William Merrill III of the Icard Merrill law firm in Sarasota both talked of the expense the three affected property owners have had to incur since the geotextile container system was installed. The owners have had to pay a total of more than $3.5 million since 2011 — when that project was completed — because a stipulation with the 2009 county variance necessitated that a minimum of 3 feet of sand cover the structures in an effort to facilitate sea turtle nesting on the beach in front of the homes.

Erickson did point out that data kept about turtle nesting over the period of time the geotextile system has been in place — with a control area factored in — showed a 43% success rate for nests in front of the adjoining seawalls and a 39% success rate in front of the container system.

Since the system was constructed in 2011, Berna told the board, “There have been a number of successful sea turtles nesting here.” Through 2018, he said, documentation showed the total near the homes at 2209, 2305 and 2309 Casey Key Road was 192.

Sand was placed in significant quantities over the geotextile container system from 2012 through 2016, except for 2015 and 2017, Erickson pointed out. The owners also spent more than $400,000 putting in new vegetation each time they had to place more sand on the site, she continued.

“The continuous placement is costly, and it constantly takes the [coastal] system out of equilibrium,” she summed up the situation for the three primary petitioners.

This graphic shows details about erosion on the beach in front of the petitioners’ homes and some of their expenses related to the geotextile container system. Image from Icard Merrill via Sarasota County

Detert noted those comments as another reason for her “No” vote. “I think somebody slipped and revealed what was my suspicion anyway,” Detert said. Addressing the petitioners, she continued, “You just got tired of paying for the 3 feet of sand every year.”
However, considering the appearances of the applicants’ homes in the slides Berna had shown the board, Detert added, “I think you can continue to do that pretty comfortably without being driven out of your house.”

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) already has granted a variance for the seawall, Merrill told the commissioners; state staff was just awaiting the board’s decision before issuing the permit.

Reading from FDEP’s confirmation that it would grant the necessary state variance, Merrill said state officials agreed that the geotextile containers “no longer offer reasonable long-term protection to the upland structures from frequent storms or coastal erosion.”

Further, he noted, FDEP staff wrote that the seawall will “protect both the coastal system …”

Erickson also had pointed out that the area of the beach proposed for the seawall had lost about 10 feet of beach to erosion each of the past six years.

Further facts

This photo taken in January 2011 shows part of the geotextile container system in place on Casey Key. Image courtesy Sarasota County

During his presentation, Berna, the county’s environmental permitting manager, explained that the geotextile container system creates a dune core over which waves can roll. The sand naturally comes and goes.

With the seawall, Berna continued, “We’re basically connecting the dots between two walls.” The new structure will have the same elevation — 12.5 feet — as the neighboring seawalls, he pointed out.

In 2009, he noted, the geotextile container system was viewed as a better means of protecting the shoreline without damaging the coastal system. Berna told the commissioners that a vertical seawall “reflects a lot of wave energy and comes with some concerns about how it may adversely impact adjacent properties.”

In this situation, he noted, an offshore sandbar not only “is a source of sand that may be deposited on the beach,” but it also “softens” the wave action.

Easements were recorded with the system approved in 2009 to ensure continued lateral pedestrian access along the beach, Berna added. The easements will be modified to reflect the construction of the seawall, he said.

Can you hurry it up?

A 1974 aerial map shows the affected part of Casey Key. The red line represents the Gulf Beach Setback Line. Image courtesy Sarasota County
A 2007 aerial map shows the affected part of Casey Key. The red line represents the Gulf Beach Setback Line. Image courtesy Sarasota County
A 2018 aerial map shows the affected part of Casey Key. The red line represents the Gulf Beach Setback Line. Image courtesy Sarasota County

As Erickson, the project engineer, began her remarks, with slides, Chair Charles Hines told her, “I don’t have any speaker cards from the public on this item.”

After a few more minutes, Hines interrupted Erickson again. “This is staff’s presentation pretty much at this point,” he said, adding that he was curious about the reasons the petitioners wanted to replace the geotextile container system with the seawall.

After Erickson noted the expense of the constant placement of sand over the system, Commissioner Alan Maio addressed Erickson and attorney Merrill. “Let me sharpen the point. … We don’t have any speaker cards in opposition. … This is basically the same series of photos, same data points [as those Berna had presented.”

“So please,” Maio added, “take that into consideration. I think you know what I’m saying to you.”

“Tell us what we need to know that staff didn’t include,” Hines told Erickson and Merrill.

The previous week, Erickson replied, the homeowners had to pay about $200,000 for more sand to maintain the 3-foot minimum over the geotextile container system.

This graphic shows part of FDEP’s comments explaining the decision to issue the state variance, along with further details of the petitioners’ expenses related to the geotextile container system. Image from Icard Merrill via Sarasota County

Merrill quickly took over, pointing to the comments from FDEP. The proposed seawall, he said, “fills the gap between two existing seawalls.” He called it a “very uncommon occurrence” for FDEP to approve the variance the property owners had sought from that department.

Merrill also stressed that the rate of erosion on the beach is 4 to 10 feet a year. “In zero to five years, you could lose the homes,” he said, if the container system were removed and no protection put in its place.

Finally, Merrill told the board that the three most affected petitioners had offered to pay $50,000 each — for a total of $150,000 — to the county “to protect the public infrastructure on Casey Key,” especially in the area where the road and a county water line have been threatened by erosion.

County Attorney Frederick “Rick” Elbrecht cautioned the commissioners not to accept that offer because “it could be considered an unlawful exaction.”

“I understand exactly,” Merrill responded, noting he had discussed that with Elbrecht before the public hearing.

“We do not need to be offered money in the middle of a presentation like this,” Maio told Merrill.

Maio then made the motion to approve the Coastal Setback Variance, striking the petitioners’ offer of the $150,000.

“A credible case has been made [for the seawall],” he said.

The yellow line shows how the new seawall will connect to an existing seawall on adjoining property. Image courtesy Sarasota County

Commissioner Michael Moran seconded the motion, calling the seawall a commonsense measure that would fill the gap between the neighboring seawalls.

After the motion passed 4-1, Chair Hines told Merrill and Erickson that he hoped they both would participate in upcoming discussions about whether the board should amend the county code to allow more shoreline hardening.

“I don’t want to be on this commission when the next storm comes along and houses start falling in the water,” Hines said. “I don’t like seawalls. I don’t like rock revetments, but that’s the reality we live in today.”