Can a $7B Plan Save the Jersey Shore from Flood Disasters?

Read Time:4 Minute, 45 Second

(TNS) — Ross Kushner was strolling down the street in Sea Bright around 2017 when he saw a sign near the road.

It showed how high the water got when Hurricane Sandy struck New Jersey five years prior.

“It was over my head,” Kushner, the coordinator of a grassroots group called the New Jersey Coastal Alliance, said on the phone Friday. “That was from back bay flooding. You know, it could happen again. It could happen tomorrow.”

Fierce storm surge, with pounding waves and screaming winds, struck New Jersey during the superstorm and caused billions in damage. But while flooding and ample damage was tied to what was happening on the coast, it was back bay flooding that wreaked the most havoc for many families at the shore.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is working now on an extensive $7.6 billion plan to bolster Jersey’s back bays throughout nearly 3,400 miles of shoreline across 89 towns.

The help will be needed, considering how much New Jersey has continued to develop in some of the most at-risk areas — and how much scientists project climate change will exacerbate sea level rise and translate to stronger storms.

A 378-page report outlining the latest Back Bays assessment and plan was released in December and is under review now.

Federal planners, through a push from Congressional funds like they rely on for beach replenishments, would accomplish more back bay protections by elevating over 6,000 homes and reinforcing police and fire stations, as well as other vital infrastructure such as hospitals and nursing homes, the agency said.

A previous version of the plan — which in 2021 cost north of $16 billion — included the elevation of nearly 19,000 homes instead and the use of massive flood gates and internal waterway barriers. That proposal has been replaced by fewer elevations plus alternatives championed by some environmental groups such as efforts to restore salt marshes, which work to sponge up floodwaters amid storms and heavy rainfall.

Specifically, federal officials said the updated plan would call for “flood proofing” 279 critical infrastructure facilities and carry out nature-based solutions like using dredged material to “enhance” 217 acres of salt marsh habitat — known to be vulnerable to sea level change in 7 locations.

“I thought that the move to remove the flood gates was the correct move,” said Kushner, who was mindful about something else the plan decidedly does not say New Jersey will carry out en masse in future years.

“What they should be doing is buying out these buildings,” Kushner said of flood-prone sections of New Jersey. “Buy them out, like they do on an inland river, convert them to open space, and then the problem is gone … especially the ones that are subject to repeated flooding. And nobody wants to make that move, because you’ll be a political pariah if you say, ‘We got to do this.’ So then everybody keeps kicking the can down the road.”

Expanding on the strategy of “managed retreat,” considered a dirty phrase by some at the Jersey Shore, has been proposed by the nonprofit Surfrider Foundation in the past as well. However, advocates note that it’s much easier said then done and for most communities seems downright unthinkable.

Besides expressing his group’s thoughts on buyouts, Kushner said he reached out to the Army Corps this week for more clarity on how the total cost for the updated plan was determined, who will pay for the work and whether a cost-benefit-analysis was completed.

Asked about that last concern, Stephen Rochette, a Army Corps spokesperson for the Philadelphia District which includes the Jersey Shore, told NJ Advance Media that the agency will look to answer all submitted questions in the next study phase.

“For next steps, we will be reviewing all comments and working through 2025 and the early part of 2026 to finalize the feasibility report and environmental assessment,” Rochette said Friday. “The plan would then be submitted as a ‘Chief’s Report’ to Congress and could potentially get authorized by Congress.”

In the Army Corps’ 2024 updated plan, it lists managed coastal retreat as a measure not being carried forward.

“Managed coastal retreat is something that needs to be considered in more detail as we develop adaptive management plans in order to deal with climate coastal sea level change, high frequency flooding and repetitive losses,” an excerpt from the report says.

Kushner said retreating from the very areas where flooding is common won’t really be considered a viable option until more than half-a-century from now.

Absent of a storm protection plan, properties, infrastructure and vehicles in New Jersey’s back bays stand to be hit by $2.6 billion in damage each year due to flood-related issues between 2040 and 2090, projections from the Army Corps found.

Besides funds from Congress, the plan also requires Army Corps approval and for local governments to coordinate as well.

“If green lit, implementation could take up to 11 years, focusing on elevating homes, flood-proofing critical infrastructure, and restoring marshlands,” the American Littoral Society said after reviewing the plan.

To read the full federal proposal and study, visit www.nap.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-Works/New-Jersey-Back-Bays-Study/.