Ocean Ridge Main Page
 
Location Map
 
Design Parameters
 
Shoreline Change Plots
 
Volume Change Plots
 
Hot Spots
 
Performance Table
 
Performance Summary
 
 
Project Index

Ocean Ridge Summary & Conclusions

 
From the Coastal Planning & Engineering 2001 Report (Reference)
  • Since the May 1998 post-construction survey, the project area has receded an average of 69 feet.  The remaining proportion of fill is 54% by width of the constructed beach.
  • The project area has eroded 180,000 c.y. above the 22 ft. depth contour since the May 1998 post-construction survey, with most of the volumetric loss occurring above 0 NGVD.
  • Compared to the design intent, offshore and longshore losses are higher than anticipated by 7.5% and 59%, respectively.
  • Despite higher than expected losses, on average, the remaining fill volume exceeds the designer's estimate because of extra fill placed during construction.  However, because of non-uniform erosion, the southern third of the project has become critically eroded.
  • The project shoreline is generally narrower than expected at the south end of the project where only 20-30 feet of added beach remain.
From the Palm Beach County Dept. of Environmental Resources Management 2002 Report (Reference)
  • Since the May 1998 post-construction survey, the project has receded an average of 62 feet.  The remaining fill is 58% of the constructed beach width.
  • Since the May 1998 post-construction survey, 298,249 cubic yards of fill above the -22 feet NGVD has been lost to the project with most of that volumetric loss occurring below NGVD.  About 265,000 cubic yards or 47% of the advanced nourishment remains.
  • The southern third of the project has experienced greater shoreline recession than the remainder of the project.  Derelict structures that remain in the southern end of the project may be contributing to this variation.
  • The groin field has stabilized the beach in the northern portion of the project.  The groins are in excellent condition and require no maintenance at this time.
Comments from BSRC
  • The volumes mentioned in the Palm Beach County Report are not consistent with the number addressed in table 3 of the Palm Beach County report as well as the BSRC calculations.

© 2003-2005 Beaches & Shores Resource Center
Florida State University