Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Beach Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Olsson consultant urges flexible 'minimum healthy beach' approach for Isle of Palms
Summary
A consultant from Footh Olson told the Ways and Means committee the city should not adopt a single "minimum healthy beach" number islandwide; preliminary alternatives analysis results will go to the beach committee in early July and a draft memo in August.
Zach, a consultant stepping in for Footh Olson, told the Isle of Palms Ways and Means committee that the firm’s alternatives analysis is well underway and that the council should take a flexible, reach-by-reach approach rather than adopting a single minimum‑beach metric for the entire island. He said the team has reviewed historical monitoring data, met with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Charleston District) and state regulators, and is preparing preliminary results for the beach committee’s first July meeting, with a draft memo expected in August.
Why it matters: the committee has debated whether to set a single numeric trigger for beach health — previously cited measures include a cross‑shore metric roughly equivalent to 380 cubic yards per linear foot and a 180–200 foot landward distance between upland structures and mean high water. Zach cautioned that those figures can be misleading where inlet dynamics or offshore shoals concentrate volume offshore rather than on the recreational (subaerial) beach.
Details from the presentation: Zach said the firm is "aiming to get the initial results of the analysis to the beach committee in the beginning of July" and described how Hilton Head Island’s monitoring and a 1997 baseline influenced earlier minimum‑condition work. He said, "roughly 380 cubic yards per foot had been previously identified" as a volumetric yardstick used in earlier studies, but added that that volumetric value can represent very different on‑shore conditions depending on where the sand sits in the profile.
Committee response: members pressed for practicality and speed. Council members repeatedly noted that "one number doesn't fit all" along the island and asked the consultants to proceed with the alternatives analysis while preserving the option to revisit a minimum‑condition line later. Staff said the consultants will include a reasonable starting line in the report so the alternatives analysis is not delayed and that any future council decision could change that baseline and be re‑run through the analysis.
Next steps: Footh Olson will deliver preliminary findings to the beach committee in early July and provide a draft memo in August; the council will decide whether to adopt a formal minimum healthy beach profile by reach after reviewing the analysis.
