Councilman McCuthchon's Reply

Dicky,

I was hoping that this would not generate a huge amount of controversy. As you say, few people use that beach. Most congregate near the jetties or the piers, or else they go find an uninhabited stretch of beach. Those that do go to the seawall use the parking lot.

Regarding erosion, I have studied oceanography and ecology at the UT Marine Science Institute. I have studied these beaches by observation all my life. I understand and agree with your concerns. The seawall causes the erosion. Front stacking of seaweed against the dunes narrows beaches. I am addressing that. I’m pretty upset that we don’t have our new GLO permits for managing seaweed in place this season yet, but we will soon.

As for the “why pick a fight” question...consider the smart growth argument. Condos and private homes are going to be built. Right now, dunes are getting bulldozed for them just north of Zahn Road. Why not centralize them where the dunes have already been bulldozed, and where the habitat has already been destroyed? If no one really uses that stretch of beach, why fight the development there, only to have them bulldoze other areas? I think development should be attracted to the seawall area, unless we’re going to tear the seawall and the hotels down. Let’s leave that one to Mother Nature (or King Neptune).

It’s only a fight if you oppose it. I thought maybe enough people would see the logic in this. I know not everyone will agree.

Finally, please remember how this thing will happen. First, the ordinance will come to the council, who will either put it on the November ballot, or, if 5 of us don’t support it, it will die. If it doesn’t die, the public makes the decision. The council doesn’t. Isn’t that what was asked for in the first petition—that the public would make the decision?

I hope this helps.

Michael


Michael,
I appreciate your reply and I am glad to get your perspective on this.
I know you are right that development will go on, I just fear our beach areas turning into another South Padre. Some think that's desirable but for me that would destroy the character and appeal of our still unique area.
As for the stretch in front of the sea wall my biggest fear would be that other developments would take that as a cue to seek the closing of beaches in front of their properties to vehicular access.
I think it would be desirable to slow down development for a while to take time to develop a comprehensive development plan which could consider where and what type of development should take place. A plan which takes into account building density, height of buildings, water availability, infrastructure maintenance, environmental and wild life habitat considerations and other things that might be pertinent.
Obviously smart growth is desirable, it just might not be so easy to agree as to what constitutes 'smart growth!'
I too have been going to these beaches for a long time, since 1965, and the changes in that time have been dismaying because of what has appeared to me to be a free for all of development, including the giant shark!
I was aware that development was inevitable, I just hoped it would be in an attractive and well planned manner. Those hopes were soon dashed to say the least!
Thanks for your considering my thoughts and your courteous reply.
I know we both want what's best for our community, we just might not agree on some things, but everyone is certainly not going to agree on everything!
Thanks,
Dicky