1. What was the purpose of the Beach Renourishment Project Segment III?
The purpose of the project was to restore the sandy beaches along the shoreline of Hallandale Beach, Hollywood, Dania Beach and a portion of John U. Lloyd State Park. Restored beaches provide storm wave protection for shorefront properties and recreational opportunities for residents and visitors.
2. Where did the project start and end?
Beach construction began in Hallandale Beach and proceeded north through Hollywood and Dania Beach. At John U. Lloyd State Park, construction began roughly in the center of the Park and proceeded south to the end of fill and north to the south jetty of Port Everglades.
3. How much did it cost and who was paying for it?
The overall cost of the project, inclusive of engineering, design and physical and environmental monitoring, was estimated at about $48 million. Beach and groin construction costs were estimated at $28 million, and mitigation, which is completed, cost $6 million. The federal government was authorized to pay a total of about $28.3 million, the State share was approximately $11.5 million, and the County and cities paid the rest. Of the $8.6 million local share, the County paid $6.4 million and the cities together paid $2.1 million.
4. Before this project, when were beaches in Broward County last restored?
The following table illustrates the beach renourishment history in Broward County.
||Total Cost ($M)
||Federal Share ($M)
||State Share ($M)
||County Share ($M)
||City Share ($M) |
||John U. Lloyd S.P (Seg. III)
||Hollywood / Hallandale
||John U. Lloyd S.P.
||Hollywood / Hallandale
5. Will the beaches last?
The factors which cause the beach to erode will continue. In the absence of maintenance, the beach project would be expected to last for 10-15 years. Broward County, however, is committed to maintaining the design beach width by implementing one or more of several programs: Sand bypassing at Port Everglades; more frequent, small infusions of sand from a variety of sources; encouraging the vegetation of the beach and the creation of dunes. The goal is a sustainable beach.
6. Who was the prime contractor for the project?
The dredging contractor was Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company of Oak Brook, IL. Great Lakes is the largest dredging firm in the United States and has the most experience nationwide in beach renourishment projects.
7. Were coral reefs and turtles be affected?
The County took extraordinary measures to protect coral reefs and sea turtles.
Coral Reefs: The “borrow sites” designated as sources of sand for the project were located between and in proximity to coral reefs. The County instituted comprehensive monitoring programs designed to detect adverse impacts to corals before serious harm occurs. In addition, highly precise vessel navigation and logging systems were mandatory, stringent offshore operations procedures required, and specific dredge steaming corridors and operations areas were laid out such that reefs will be avoided as much as possible. In the nearshore, adjacent to the beach, narrow zones of sparsely populated hardbottom (much of which became exposed by erosion of the beach) were covered over time by the equilibration of the new beach. To compensate for the impacts to these nearshore hardbottoms, the County constructed 10.1 acres of new nearshore hardbottom using limestone boulders, and transplanted hundreds of hard corals from the impact zones to the mitigation substrate.
Sea Turtles: Sea turtle nests along the beaches of Hallandale Beach, Hollywood, and Dania Beach are routinely relocated to protected hatcheries each year during nesting season. This practice continued during the beach nourishment project. Additionally, a sea turtle monitor was on duty every night, all night, whenever and wherever beach construction activities took place at night. If a sea turtle came ashore to nest in the vicinity of construction, activities were stopped until the turtle returned to the ocean. Finally, a qualified endangered species monitor was on station on the dredge at all times to ensure that no sea turtles or marine mammals are harmed by the project. At John U. Lloyd State Park, beach nourishment was conducted outside of sea turtle nesting season.
8. What would happen if we didn’t restore the beaches?
Failure to rebuild eroded beaches would eventually result in the complete loss of many of these economically and environmentally valuable assets.
9. Was the beach closed while they are pumping sand onto the beach?
Yes. A stretch of beach approximately 500 feet long (250 feet on either side of the discharge end of the shorepipe) was closed to public use. Safety and flag personnel were present 24 hours a day to guide the public around the closed area. The closed area of beach, however, moved along the beach quite rapidly as construction progressed.
10. Were there inconveniences for the public?
There was noise in the vicinity of the discharge pipeline as sand was pumped out and while the material was spread with bulldozers to the design beach elevation and width. The bulldozers had back-up alarms for safety, and operated during and after the dredge pumped out its load of sand. At night the discharge was lighted, although permits restricted the extent of lighting due to sea turtle considerations. Also there were front-end loader/forklifts shuttling shorepipe up and down the beach. Flagmen and safety personnel were present at all times. Construction noise was temporary, however, and the area of noise moved along the beach as sections of beach are completed. Our experience was that the inconveniences were minor and temporary, and that the overall construction process was interesting to the public.
11. Were fishing or pleasure boats allowed near the dredging and pumping sites?
No. In the interest of safety, no fishing, diving, or pleasure boats were allowed in proximity to the dredge, tugs, survey or support vessels, pipelines or other construction infrastructure.
12. Did the project affect diving activities?
Again in the interest of safety, diving and snorkeling were prohibited in proximity to the dredge or around areas of offshore activity, including whichever “borrow site” was being dredged. It was expected that turbidity, or water cloudiness, would be elevated in the area of and somewhat down current of the dredging activities, reducing underwater visibility locally.
13. How did weather or rain affect the project?
Activities on the beach, such as spreading and grading the sand, continued in rain or reasonably high surf, but not with lightning. Dredging activities however were limited to generally benign wave conditions.
14. Could a hurricane affect a project?
In the event of a hurricane or severe storm, the dredge and support vessels would take shelter as appropriate. A tropical system or other high wave event could cause accelerated erosion of the new beach, which would be evaluated to see if immediate repair is warranted.
15. Was the project limited to daylight hours?
The project proceeded on a 24-hour, seven-day-a-week basis, excluding delays for weather or mechanical problems. Construction activities on the beach were episodic, however. As expected, discharge onto the beach occurred approximately every 4 to 6 hours, with about a three-hour period of discharge and bulldozer work each event.
16. Were shells and rocks pumped onto the beach along with the sand?
All shells, rock, and rubble over approximately 3/4 inch were screened out on the dredge and were not pumped to the beach. The beach fill was clean sand. The large shells, rocks, and rubble were placed offshore in approved disposal areas. Small shells, however, were part of the beach fill, and we have found that shelling is good during and after the project.
17. Did the pumping affect the water in any way?
At the beach discharge area, turbidity, or water cloudiness, were elevated. The effects of this turbidity were limited to the nearshore area, and did not extend far offshore.
18. How soon was the public allowed to use the restored beach?
As soon as a section of beach was completed, graded, and “groomed” (smoothed), it was opened for use. Where shorepipe extended along the completed portions of beach, sand ramps were constructed over the 30 inch diameter steel pipe at 250-foot intervals and at lifeguard stations.
19. Were buildings, condos and houses affected by the project?
No. As part of the project, the contractor employed vibration specialists to monitor vibration levels from the construction. The vibration monitors conducted a pre-construction inventory of all shorefront structures and infrastructure, continuously monitored for vibration during construction, and, at the end of the project, conducted a post-construction inventory. It was occasionally necessary to temporarily close particular beach accesses while construction occured in the area.
20. Were security procedures be in place for the project?
Security procedures were in place during project construction.
21. What was being built at John U. Lloyd State Park to lock in the sand?
At the northern end of John U. Lloyd State Park, the County constructed three boulder mound erosion control structures: A spur coming off the south jetty of Port Everglades and two T-head rock groins. These structures serve to stabilize the beach at that very dynamic location without adverse down drift impacts. These structures were constructed concurrently with the Hallandale Beach-Hollywood-Dania Beach nourishment effort.
22. Will beaches be restored in other parts of Broward County?
The next phase of the renourishment project will be Segment II of the County, including portions of Fort Lauderdale, Lauderdale-By-The-Sea, and Pompano Beach. However, regulatory agencies have mandated that construction of Segment II be postponed. The current nourishment effort (Segment III) project was monitored for a minimum of 18 months to ascertain whether the environmental permit conditions were adequate to protect the reefs and other resources. At the conclusion of the monitoring period, the County presented the findings to the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection. The State has yet to make a recommendation to the Governor and Cabinet as to the advisability of proceeding with Segment II.
23. Did the project affect July 4 th activities or other events along the beach?
Every effort was made to coordinate construction activities with planned events on the beach and offshore. However, halting the project in favor of a particular event was not a viable option due to the high cost of idling the dredging equipment.