View Single Post
Old 06-08-2007, 10:48 AM   #22
RIROCKHOUND
Also known as OAK
iTrader: (0)
 
RIROCKHOUND's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,408
Mistakes aside...

in RI, (not speaking for mass)
the set-back distance to build now is 30x the annual erosion rate + 25ft of set back. Alot of lots are unbuildable because of that.

Again, building a wall or other structure is a terrible idea. good for the house behind it, but it cuts off the sediment supply to areas down drift of the longshore sediment transport, and can increase local erosion due to edge effects where the structure ends... Not to mention you just put a hard line in the sand, where the shoreline can no longer migrate landward as it is supposed to. given some time/erosion, the front of a seawall that was once passable is now impassable, as it is underwater at low tide and high-tide... think about the revetment at the East end of S.K Town beach in Matunuck.

As much as your beltway of land is a great idea, it is unfortunetly unrealistic. Given the cost of land along the waterfront, conservation groups and governments have a hard-time outbidding private landowners, and dont want to get into the lawsuits that result from taking the property.

Bryan

Originally Posted by #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
RIROCKHOUND is offline   Reply With Quote