Comments up.
Manatee eating seagrassThere was intense discussion all over town and behind the scenes from those in power and their developer friends of wanting to build condos on this stretch known now as Snook Islands. Development was on the mind of many people then as we were at the start of the boom. Developers came into our City from everywhere. Their future dream was development but the main reason the City voted to go forward with the sand was to save the seawall. It amounted to 3 football lengths that Warren Newell needed to dump. It was cost effective for the County rather than shipping it out of state or to some farther location and the City didn’t have to spend a dime to save the sea wall. Win, win for all.
By tripling the amount of sand, they reduced the width of the IntraCoastal from west to east. It was attested by environmentalists that the pile driven sand would ruin the endangered Johnson sea grass along the west side and the last of that type of grass in the US. It was said that it would also endanger the Ecosystem.The IntraCoastal is polluted by the Palm Beach Canal C 51 which is owned by the SFWMD that takes all the sludge and trash from the sugar fields and other pollutants from the west. See the Treasure Coast’s Regional Planning Council Report.
Those who were concerned about the project were convinced that the addition of 80,000 Mangrove trees planted over 11 acres would not reduce the pollution but would help to build a bird sanctuary and bring back some good fishing.
The Mangroves are growing up and many people still say that they will eventually block the breeze from the ocean and the view of the IntraCoastal. Those fighting to actually save our environment back then also had research proving that it will be a breeding area for mosquitoes.
Regarding Snook Islands, Laurence McNamara, who lives on the golf course, says:
In the late nineties, The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers insensitively destroyed the view from Lake Worth Bridge of our magnificent Lagoon. It erected and installed concrete walls and railings on both sides blocking the view of passengers in vehicles crossing the Bridge.As we all know, the Snook Islands project, completed in 2005, restored about 100 acres of what is considered high quality wetland habitat and created 1.2 miles of natural shoreline along the Lagoon. All in all it is expected to improve water quality in the Lake Worth Lagoon, improve the habitat for birds as well as fish. It really is a magnificent achievement by our partners, Palm Beach County, DEP, Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Inland Navigation District and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
When I heard that they were involved in the Lagoon restoration project and that they wanted to dump 20 acres of spoil (dredged material from the bottom of Palm Beach Harbor) from Peanut Island, I was alarmed that they would destroy the magnificent expanse of our Lagoon, and also that the fill material would be toxic. I had read The Corps and The Shore which outlines the destruction of several waterways by ACE projects, and as a former resident of N.Y. State, was familiar with the carcinogenic effects of effluent in Love Canal.
When I requested the material be tested by DEP, it was found that there were unacceptably high levels of mercury in some of the samples. This was a divisive issue with the Lake Worth Commission but they eventually decreased the size of the project from 20 to 10 acres which leaves the grand expanse of the Lagoon unsullied and lessens the possibility of harmful effects of the toxic spoil.
Thanks to James McCauley for contributing to this story.
11 comments:
Can you go out on the golfcourse to fish or do you have to have a boat at Snook?
Jim Stafford made a comment that suggested you have no idea what you are talking about. He said
"Poor Lynn must have been a lousy stenographer. She can't even get a spoon fed story right.
No developer wanted to build on the Snook Island landfills, it was on the East side of the Intracoastal, just south of the bridge. But because it was a mature lease hold, being offered at an outrageous price--with easements and Deed Restrictions--no developer ever spent more than an hour on it. Heck, Exline spent more time trying to market it than anybody else.
Lynn left out the part where McCauley and McNamara led the charge against the conservation techniques that were used to create the new land and the mangroves in the Intracoastal. Something about the precious views being obstructed.
Lynn also left out the free make over of the trolly landfill into a park that the Macs raised such a stink about. It remains an unmaintained and blighted area on the Intracoastal. Thanks guys!
Wait till some developer finds out that he can get a vote from the citizens on the sale of the Public Golf Course---thanks to Larry McNamara's referendum. Yes, a Buyer only needs a majority of votes---not Commission votes, but citizen votes, to accept a bid for that plum of a property. What do we have--+/-75 acres on the Intracoastal. Think that in a recession led by Cara and JoAnn's crime and blight program that maybe the unthinkable will become thinkable---sale of our Golf Course?
What can we expect from somebody who got her reporting lessons from Wild Willy!"
He must be off his meds again. As usual, that guy cannot read nor can he analyze the written word. He is wrong usually 100% of the time and this time there is no exception. That's what happens when you stay home and change diapers; your brain turns to Jello. He needs to sit down and write an original article on anything rather than being Mr. Critic and sounding dumber than dumb.
There is a Reverter Clause--any use other than public, it would revert back to the original owner. I think this is on the entire parcel, not just half of it. But there is definitely that clause in the deed.
The Lagoon story is done quite well and is accurate.
JM
no one is talking about the Steinhardt property. This was about where the Snook Islands are now. How come that side twists everything around?
This is only an article based on a perspective of many people at the time, including the Walkers who were members of the Lagoon Alert Association. I did not live here then so it is all testimony from others who were deeply involved. There are always two sides to an issue and reasons why citizens get involved. I am happy that this Group stood up to protect the lagoon, their only purpose, and looking out for the rights of us all due to the potential damage to fish and other water life from toxic sand being shipped in.
As we can see now, it is a beautiful project and birds are coming back and vegetation is growing.
There's still talk about taking the south 9 holes and developing it for taxes. Wasn't it Burns who was always looking at tax base for everything she did? This is not just a figment of someone's imagination here. When developers and real estate people are lurking around you can bet they are figuring out ways to get a commission elected that might do something like this.
As long as C51 feeds into the Intra- Coastal it will always be polluted. Mangroves don't stop this. The fill at the time was not "pure." That is a big LIE.
Hi Lynn--
I was drawn to your article on Snook Islands because that was a project that I was deeply involved in, having been a long time environmental advocate, especially with regard to the LW Lagoon. Naturally, I recognize that history is written by the winners, but that version is not always correct. The Snook Islands projects was in fact a win-win for the county and the other agencies who put dredge spoils on Peanut Island as well as the citizens of Lake Worth.
I've attached an article that I co-wrote a couple of years ago for whatever interest it may be to you.
The following facts are not disputable:
1) the shoreline along the golf course was had been eroding for many years and there three options:
a. do nothing
b. build a seawall at an estimated cost to the city of $6MM
c. approve the Lagoon Restoration Project, now known as Snook Islands.
The project had been approved by the Ramiccio administration, which I strongly supported, but by the time I was elected, it had stalled due to opposition from a large majority of residents who lived on the golf course and virtually no one else. Those people are my neighbors and were my supporters for the 2001 election. It may even surprise you to know that Jim McCauley supported me back then. During the campaign I was asked my opinion on the project and said that I believed it was a good project. However, I also made a commitment to research the concerns of the neighbors and if I learned they were valid, I would oppose the project. At my request, the University of Miami did an extensive research paper (for free) and addressed every concern. My neighbors were still skeptical, but were pleased when they saw the curtain of invasive Australian Pines removed and their views improved immensely. Over the years, the UM study has been vindicated - no loss of view, no diminution of breezes, no odor, no West Nile virus.
In my opinion, it's a beautiful project, and an exemplary environmental illustration. Unfortunately, only boaters, golfers and those who live on the golf course can enjoy it and so I still hope that someday ALL the taxpayers and residents will have a boardwalk offshore (This was opposed most vehemently by Dee McNamara who did not want the foreigners from the west side of town looking from the boardwalk into her house--don't take my word for it, I put her very acerbic letter on the public record and you can read it for yourself in the City Clerk's Office).
As a now political outsider, I wonder if it would better for everyone of we tried to identify and debate issues important to the entire community instead of constantly engaging in the ad hominum attacks that have been prevalent on all sides (yes, including yours) is Lake Worth for lo these many years.
Anyway, good luck with your blog. I hope maybe it will encourage healthy debate rather than rancor.
R. Romano
There are true statements from Rodney but we also had studies that refuted the U of Miami. Check DR Yount. We were fighting the whole power system and they were tied together politically and financially. We fought the good fight and lost. I supported Rodney as did my neighbors; Walker, Tate, Smyth, Williams, Hoekstra, Snearer, Bailey, Yount, Young, McNamara, Underwood & Delaney but after the shabby treatment we received from Rodney/Newell on the lagoon and then the GOB, he did not get our support in the next election.
I see nothing more to be gained to continue the battle which began again because Annabeth says Laurence is not friendly to the environment. There are environmentalists on both sides of the issue and someone always wins and someone loses.
JM
Post a Comment