During the Margate Commission meeting of Dec 17, solicitor John Scott Abbott articulated a perspective shared by many along the Jersey Shore.
The state mandated Beach Replenishment Program could be a direct, contributing factor to the rapid silting of back-bay lagoons, which in turn necessitates expensive municipal dredging.
See video: Margate gets Army Corp permit for city-wide dredging:
The 50 year dredge deal affecting Margate and other NJ shore towns, managed by the Army Corp of Engineers, was a top down mandate from former NJ Gov, Chris Christie.
Sand Bypass Effect
Beach replenishment involves pumping sand onto the beachfront to create a protective berm and dune system. However, this sand doesn’t remain stationary. Natural currents move sand along coast.
Inlet Migration
As the beachfront erodes, sand is pulled around Absecon Island, into Margate back-bay waters. By adding massive volumes of sand to front beaches of Margate, State government inadvertently increased volume of sediment that settles in back channels and lagoons of Jerome and Amherst Ave.
Beach-fill material not a perfect match for our natural South Jersey beaches. It may contain finer silts and clays. When storms hit replenished beaches, these finer materials are washed into the water column.
Once this ‘turbid’ water enters calm, slow-moving lagoons behind Margate, velocity / speed of water drops. When water slows down, it can’t carry sediment. The new sand and silt drop to bottom causing “mud-front” conditions discussed by companies like Scarborough Marine Group.
Unfunded Mandate Logic
Solicitor Abbott’s concern could stem from legal and financial disparity. Since the beach project accelerates loss of navigable waterways in the back bay, federal or state govt should help mitigate damage by funding the dredging?
Without help, Margate is forced to create piggyback programs where residents and the municipality would foot the bill for a problem caused, allegedly, by the beach replenishment project.
Impact on Navigation and Property Value
By linking back-bay silting to beach replenishment, Abbott building a case—often echoed in Trenton and D.C.—that dredging should be viewed as ‘storm water management’ or ‘coastal maintenance’ rather than a local convenience.
Abbott emphasized loss of navigable water isn’t just a luxury for boaters, it’s a property value issue too.
After the 12/17 meeting, we asked City Hall to elaborate on the issue.
Margate Mayor Michael Collins was kind enough to quickly respond with the following:
Every dredging permit requires an approved disposal site. Scarborough Properties have an approved site available from an existing permit outside of Margate. They can use this site to move our dredge material via truckload once our permit is fully approved.
Margate has two disposal sites currently tied to our permit that will also require truckload disposal. We have the option to dredge our lagoons and other areas this way but the cost is significantly higher than it would be if Shelter Island were approved.
While we may begin process of dredging to one of the current disposal sites, our goal would be to use Shelter Island for the majority of the project. For that reason, we are pushing hard to get Shelter Island approved, to reduce the burden on the taxpayer.
Additionally, you are correct in stating that dredged area could ‘fill-in’ if adjacent areas are not cleared. The hope and goal are that all neighbors join together and get this done at or around the same time.
Ed Dennis and RVE Remington & Vernick Engineers plan a public outreach in order to educate the bayfront homeowners as well as all residents.
The 1940’s Channels cut behind Margate , by the Margate Bridge and the one behind Amherst ave are the major cause of the silting , The Island by Margate Bridge is now completely gone and the silt is all now in the lagoons and in front of The Log cabin and Swifts Marina , The island along amherst is slowly eroding as well and has filled in Vendome ave , Scotts Dock and Washington Ave Pier