Seawall won’t help small George Town beach resort
(CNS): The owners of Coral Sands resort in George Town have been warned that their application to build a seawall to help protect their beach will likely have the opposite effect because it is too close to the water. The small condo complex is asking for planning permission to build a near 5ft seawall close to the mean high water mark (MHWM).
But the Department of Environment has said that, given how close the wall will be to the sea, it could make their current beach erosion problem even worse.
The owners are making the application because the construction of the adjacent wall along the boundary with NCB’s hotel development prevents sand from being brought to the site for any future natural nourishment. The application for their own wall is an attempt to prevent wave activity removing sand from the beach.
The plans were revised after the initial review to build the wall four feet further back from the MHWM. However, the DoE said that while this new location is better than the original one, it still does not meet the minimum coastal setbacks and, like all hard structures on an active beach close to the water, it will cause rather than prevent the loss of sand.
“On beaches, the greater the distance that waves can travel up a beach profile before encountering a physical barrier, the more energy is dissipated,” the DoE experts explained in their submissions to planning about the application.
“The seawall would likely prevent this natural activity. Additionally, the seawall would prevent the nourishment of the beach after a significant storm event. This further inhibits the natural beach recovery process as perched beaches tend to gain sand during storms events unless artificially nourished. The presence of a seawall interacting with waves on a beach is a well-documented cause of long term beach erosion,” the department warned.
Placing the wall in the proposed location (the “armouring” of the coastline) would eventually lead to the exacerbation of coastal erosion, the DoE said.
The project also poses a threat to the marine environment there as it is a Protected Area. Pictures supplied by the DoE to the CPA of recent construction work on a seawall at Regal condos further along the coast, which had negatively affected the marine environment and polluted the ocean.
Coral Sands is one of many resorts now impacted by coastal erosion caused by a combination of factors, including other hard structures on the beaches that have had knock-on effects, creating a vicious cycle of erosion. The DoE has stated clearly that in order to save Seven Mile Beach in the long term, Cayman must now begin a managed retreat of existing beach structures.
However, despite the dire warnings and the clear evidence of serious erosion, so far the CPA has continued to grant planning permission to projects that are at the very limit of the high water mark and to allow pools, decks and walls to be built below the MHWM.
The application was due to be heard by the CPA today.
See the agenda in the CNS Library.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: development, Local News, Marine Environment, Science & Nature
If they planted mangroves a bit out in the shallow bay there. They’d have a natural sea wall. Will also prevent erosion of the beach.
Fin Cayman is remarkable because most of the beach had disappeared before construction was even finished.
A pile of sand on top of ironshore is not a beach.
Ya man, & dredging up sand from offshore is quite harmful to the marine environment.
The marine park will be damaged every time the artificial beach, at Fin, is washed into the sea. Did Michael Ryan even get permission to replenish the beach?
“The owners are making the application because the construction of the adjacent wall along the boundary with NCB’s hotel development prevents sand from being brought to the site for any future natural nourishment.”
– So, if this a newly permitted seawall that is impacting their existing property can they sue CIG for permitting it in the first place? Does a landowner not have a reasonable expectation that their property will be protected from bad development by the authority responsible for permitting such developments?
👍
Question. If the application was for a sea wall, because we all know that the sea is going to wash away the beach they do have (up to their existing retaining wall behind the deck chairs) given the bad seawalls adjoining them and they’d rather have a full width of sand beach before having to go down the seawall stairs into the sea, could that be approved?
A long time ago my grandmother told me that people were building too close to the ocean and that they would eventually pay the price for doing so. She also told me that I should always try to build on a piece of land that was as high as possible. Her warnings and recommendations did not mean that much to me at the time. However, when I did eventually purchase land I did take her advice into consideration. When hurricane Ivan hit I was high and dry and was never ever worried about water getting into my house.
I am actually surprised that anyone can get insurance on any property built next to the ocean.
If only someone had told those who allowed Marnie Turner’s wall to stay that at the time….
Why have we not looked into seawall alternatives yet, living shorelines are an alternative that can be done with mangroves or reefs. Yes I understand these are not immediate solutions as they will need to grow, but our current immediate solution is far from a long term solution.
Coco plum, sea grape and mangrove. Couple of silver thatch and a red birch. Done. As nature intended. Works every time! (Looks nice too).
Plant trees and a whole lot of beach sand to push back the high water mark and you may be able to remediate.
Good ideas.
Mr. Premier, tear down those walls; all seven miles of them…it does not make sense to spend 21 million to dump sand and then have it wash away within a few months. i guess that is was they meant when they termed “flushing it down the drain”.
Truth.
Agree
Don’t expect much from Wayne or Jon Jon. Well you know………….
Most comments are correct but, again, no one listens to DoE. Sadly.
No need to listen to DOE, just go look at the sand loss the Private residence seawall started . Laguna Del Mar and Marriott etc are now finishing the job.
Seawalls are the common link and cause of beach loss, it ain’t rocket science.
Let the sea do the job. The Planning Board has caused the destruction of the shoreline. As long as the development is proposed by people with deep pockets approvals flow. Any smart axx knows the walls are the problem on the beaches, because they allow developers to remove the buffer, which was coco- plum, Jennifer, lavender and grape trees.
Can developers go to other islands and make these demands? No money needs to be wasted on restoration/ sand banking. Those who build in the sea must enjoy the consequences. Remove the structures or let the wave action do justice.
That’s a result of leadership issues and god complexes within that organization
Cut your loses and move on!
Do they have no sense? That’s the worst idea and I hope it’s denied.
This won’t help.
Every “beach front” site along the western coast looks like a cheap shanty town with all the deck chairs and huts stacked down to the water. Cayman just can’t do classy.
The beach that was once the jewel of the Caribbean is being destroyed before our eyes. You’d think CIG and CITA might be induced to take action. But no.
Another hail mary attempt.
Another Regal Beach in the making.
Where will the sea wall game of dominos end?
Stay tuned.
Have you seen they’re trying you get over $3M for that regal beach oceanfront condo?!?! Comes with its own swimming pool – the ocean!! The sellers deserve every dollar if they can find someone to buy it!
DOE absolutely right.
A sea wall, particularly that close, WILL cause erosion…
Permission should definitely NOT be given for a sea wall there.
Do people choose to be ignorant?