Wild Dunes finally gets a dose of sand
Dredging project begins after long battle to save seaside properties
By Jessica Johnson
ISLE OF PALMS — Beach renourishment crews scooped up large sandbags, taking them away from the Wild Dunes homes they once protected.
Nearby, a welder fired up his torch, the air crackling as he connected sections of steel pipe to run for three miles in from the sea floor and end in a "Y" on the beach.
From the shore, City Administrator Linda Lovvorn Tucker thought she saw general contractor Weeks Marine's dredge approaching.
"It's like anticipating the first snow of the season," Tucker said.
The Post and Courier
Coastal physical scientist Steven Traynum with Coastal Science and Engineering watches a pipe pumping sand onto Wild Dunes as the beach-renourishment project begins Saturday.
The Wild Dunes beach is being pumped back to life, two years after owners began wrangling with regulators for permits and a year after tens of thousands of sandbags that shored up eight beach-front properties and the resort's prized Links course washed away in storm tides — littering the coast and marshes for miles.
Ironically, the project began Saturday just in time for Memorial Day weekend and Spoleto, when the resort, island and beach are "high traffic," in the words of one Isle of Palms official.
The $10 million dredging project has been controversial among some residents and others who objected to using $3 million of public funds to pay for a project in a private gated resort, on a strand of inlet beach subject to eroding.
The renourishment might not end the controversy.
A long-term beach management plan put together by the city, enabling its officials to apply for state and federal renourishment money, says continued beach nourishment is part of a long-term management strategy. In its upcoming, not-yet-approved budget, City Council would set aside $50,000 for ongoing monitoring of erosion and put $100,000 in reserve for future renourishment projects.
Mayor Mike Sottile called renourishment a work in progress. Erosion, he said, "is going to be ongoing. It's going to affect this city for a long time. We need to be prepared. We don't need to be caught short, as perhaps we were with this project."
Jim Smiley appealed a permit six years ago that would have allowed Wild Dunes to scrape sand from the beach to rebuild its sagging dunes. The island resident didn't want to see public beach lost to protect private property built near an inlet subject to erosion.
He called the start of dredging good news and a tribute to city officials who fast-tracked a project that could have taken four or five years to get under way.
"I'm glad we found a solution this time, and I'll be glad to see a dry, flat beach that I can ride my bike on at all tides," he said. But he admitted to mixed feeling about the city committing longterm to renourishment projects.
Sottile expected the 24-hour-a-day dredging operation to last eight weeks. Sand would be replenished beginning at 53rd Avenue north to the groin at Dewees Inlet, the pipeline extending with the project.
"We should have a renourished beach before you know it," he said.
Tucker teasingly called the start of the offshore dredging project one step in the relief process.
It was good news to brothers Jim and Ashby Taylor, who partially own three condominiums along the eroded beach.
Though the beach is slowly building back naturally, it remains inaccessible from the Seascape Villas, where Jim Taylor and his wife, Elaine, vacation each year. Instead, they lounged outside Ashby Taylor's unit at Shipwatch where some of the beach has begun to return.
"It's been building back up slowly, but not fast enough," Ashby Taylor said.
The Taylors watched last week as crews removed sandbags no longer affected by high tides, spilling their contents onto the beach and regrading compatible sand.
"If you're on the beach, the sand is always moving. You just have to react to it," Ashby said.
As part of the project, Weeks Marine will build an artificial dune in the area of the 18th hole of the resort's Links golf course.
Beach renourishment must stop by July 31, a condition of state and federal permits, in part to protect the endangered loggerhead turtle.
Nesting season ramps up at the end of May. The steel pipeline spewing sand could inhibit turtles as they come ashore to nest. The city employed monitors to walk the beach throughout the night. If a sea turtle is affected, monitors would signal the dredge to stop. At dawn, monitors report to the island's turtle team, headed up by Mary Pringle, notifying them of any nests.
"We are not thrilled it's happening during turtle-nesting season," Pringle said. "But we understand it took this long to get the whole operation under way."
A renourished beach could benefit the turtles. Historically, about 25 percent of the area's nesting turtles laid eggs in the erosion zone. But last year, there were none.
"They won't nest if there is no dry beach," Pringle said.
The project would be complete before the more-sensitive hatchlings emerge. If the project isn't finished by July 31, work can't begin until November after the hatchlings are gone, a condition of the permit.
"Monitoring is in place," Pringle said. "We are doing the best we can and the turtles will have to do the best they can."
Wild Dunes sandbag debacle timeline
JUNE 2007
Washed-away sandbags drift in the ocean offshore and float in the estuaries for miles in either direction, the ugly, dangerous debris from a three-year-old emergency erosion stopgap effort at the gated Wild Dunes resort. Beach-goers are horrified. Environmentalists are outraged. Regulators are flooded with complaints. S.C. Ocean and Coastal Resource Management cites property owners for violating an order to remove the smaller bags it ordered them to place. The violation could carry a $1,000-per-day fine. Property owners say they have been frustrated trying to win permits from the regulators for larger, more stable bags and for beach renourishment.
JULY 2007
Beach erosion at the resort breaks a waterline for a pool at a condominium complex; property owners scramble for permits for more sandbags to protect other lines. The break at Ocean Club comes about a month after debris swept by tides ruptured a sewer line at Port O' Call, a nearby condominium complex.
AUGUST 2007
More than 70 tiny baby turtles wriggle out of the sand, a heartening moment in the now six-month-long sandbag debacle. The eggs were laid in June by a loggerhead in a nest she dug at the foot of an eroding bank of sand around the 18th green of the resort's Links course.
OCTOBER 2007
Waves smash over the sandbags and into the pool at Seascape Condominiums, and rip away half the 18th green at the Links course. The tides push into the dunes and onto walkways for about a two-mile stretch.
NOVEMBER 2007
Property owners violate a November 30 deadline for removing sandbags that help protect six beach-front condominium complexes and two other properties from storm tides. The violation subjects them to more fines. The city of Isle of Palms begins to apply for permits for an offshore-dredging renourishment project.
DECEMBER 2007
Owners tell regulators to go ahead and levy fines, abruptly cutting short six months of negotiations to settle on the fine amounts. Their attorney warns regulators that forcing the owners to take the case to court as a property-rights dispute could result in rulings that weaken beach-front regulations.
FEBRUARY 2008
OCRM permits property owners to keep in place a wall of thousands of larger, more-stable sandbags, while agreeing to pay $1 million for part of a beach renourishment project. The owners pay a $34,000 civil penalty, a fraction of what could have been hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.
APRIL 2008
Owners agree to pay a total $18,000 in civil penalties for littering the coast and marshes with the smaller sandbags in 2007, after months of legal wrestling over a violation that could have cost property owners 10 times that amount.
MAY 2008
Pumps begin dredging sand from offshore to renourish the Wild Dunes beach.
Reach Jessica Johnson at 937-5921 or jjohnson@postand courier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
theronce (anonymous) says...
What else could anyone expect from the rich and powerful? They have money but no shame.
May 27, 2008 at 7:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Hobcaw (anonymous) says...
I agree - the road must be opened for public access to the beaches the taxpayers have paid to rebuild. Or ... pay back the $3M !
May 27, 2008 at 9:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Charles_Town (anonymous) says...
I do not understand how anyone can build right in the beach of a barrier island, and not expect the sand to erode. It is common sense people, the sand on barrier island beaches is constantly moved. It is part of nature, you cannot expect it to stay that way without large investments for constant re-nourishment. Once again people expect to be bailed out for their lack of foresight.
May 27, 2008 at 11:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
AHLeland (anonymous) says...
I agree Charles_Town. Now, I'm still waiting to hear about plans to have reserve funds in place for the next time this happens. Surely there is going to be some sort of an increase in regime fees to fund a reserve account. They can't expect the gov't to bail them out next time.
May 27, 2008 at 12:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
IslandLife4Me (anonymous) says...
People should understand at least some of the facts before passing judgements. Residents and owners in Wild Dunes pay IOP city taxes and Charleston County taxes -- it's nice to see actual progress with tax dollars. God knows our schools haven't improved any with the monies contributed. Also, Wild Dunes is a "resort" community and subject to payment of accommodation taxes to IOP -- I venture a guess that >90% of that income comes from this community. IOP used these funds to contribute to the beach project so it's basically a wash (no pun intended). Also, each Wild Dunes home and land owner was assessed a mandatory, substantial fee for this so everybody contributed not only in taxes but these additional funds as well. Not to mention how much the resort itself kicked in. This is not a free ride for anybody and certainly not those in Wild Dunes. Not to mention, if this work was not done, the rest of IOP and Sullivan's Island would be greatly impacted by this. So, for those in these areas griping about this, I would absolutely support the state, county, and city kicking in when and if it was needed in your community. Just be ready to get YOUR checkbook out to kick in additional money as well. I bet you'll be singing a different tune. As for those who do not live near the water, remember these same people pay for your roads, school, etc. as well with their tax dollars. I'm sure if your community needs the assistance from the state, county, and city, you won't turn down their contributions towards helping out. By the way, for people so opposed to this, why do you even want to go there so bad? If you live in a gated community of which their tax dollars pay for your roads, etc., that is certainly respected and they wouldn't want to intrude. There is nothing preventing people from walking on the beach. They just can't access the amenities that are part of the resort unless you're a guest or owner. By the way, that also requires a separate fee. So, what is the problem again?
May 27, 2008 at 12:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Clemsurf (anonymous) says...
My problem with the whole thing is this. They pay taxes like I do and can access my roads whenever they want. However my tax dollars are paying for this renourishment that I won't even be able to enjoy. This is a bunch of crap. If you're going to tax me for it, at least let me use it too. Let Wild Dunes fund the whole thing. The residents are rich and I'm sure they can scrape up a couple of millions off their coffee tables. And the resort area is over priced and the golf course costs alot to play. Pay for your own crap.....or let me in! I guess some of our lawmakers and councilmen have houses out there and that's why they decided to use taxes. Why weren't we all allowed to vote on this as taxpayers?
May 27, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Smart_Enough_2_Know_Better (anonymous) says...
Tax dollars should be spent on public projects, plain and simple. Say what you want about "public access" to those beaches, the only people who really care about the beaches behind the gates of Wild Dunes are Wild Dunes property owners- not the public.
Yes IslandLife4Me, we ALL pay taxes- and lots of them. That's kinda the point- we don't like our public taxes bailing your privately-benefiting asses out of the trouble that you got yourselves into. It will only lead to more taxes, especially since Mother Nature will have your private little community in her sights for all of eternity.
Now that precedence has been set to use public funds for their beaches, how much you wanna bet that Wild Dunes lawyers will argue for more and more funding, in greater and greater percentages, to continue the battle against the sea? I'm sorry, but some causes are not mine- or my tax dollars- and this was clearly one of them.
Enjoy your new beaches on us, IslandLife4Me- since we really can't.
May 27, 2008 at 2:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jsteph10 (anonymous) says...
Most of the homes behind the gates are second homes and those folks pay the higher assessment ratio. If they rent their property, they are taxed again. I would think that the taxes contributed by these owners would outweigh the cost to renourish the beach.
And Clemsurf, while there are some wealthy folks out there, many purchased homes many, many years ago when it was much less expensive. I have several friends that own there, and they are by no means 'rich'.
May 27, 2008 at 2:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UrGatorbait (anonymous) says...
Nice deflections island life. Get 'em going with a little gripping about the schools and try a little plain folk talk about how your taxes help pay for our roads. Blah blah and blah. You make substantially more than us i care to bet yet you are arrogant enough to imply we should renourish YOUR beach. (Can you say "Private"?) Can we come visit at our whim? probably not.
More Charleston county shenanigans.
May 27, 2008 at 3:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
Bottom line, this is not a one-time deal. The tide goes in, and it goes out...relentlessly. We have storms and near misses that raise the surf action. You knew that before you bought. You know that now. I, as a non-owner, will always have a beach. Whether that beach is in front of your house or two blocks behind where your house is now makes no difference to me. You cannot stop the erosion. I cannot access my beach from your community, so I do not want to contribute anything to it. You are robbing the public till for personal gain. It is corruption. You rationalize a stupid mistake and insist on pursuing a stupid course of action. I do not buy it.
May 27, 2008 at 3:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Smart_Enough_2_Know_Better (anonymous) says...
"Most of the homes behind the gates are second homes and those folks pay the higher assessment ratio. If they rent their property, they are taxed again. I would think that the taxes contributed by these owners would outweigh the cost to renourish the beach."
Yes, I pity the poor people "trapped" in the their second (or third, fourth, whatever) beach side property that have to pay 2% more in taxes to have an INCOME-producing rental source. You're so right, THAT income shouldn't be taxed- only my pay check. (Forget that all those renters use public services and came across the bridges and roads that my tax dollars funded so they can enjoy their vacation.)
And you're absolutely right, since these poor folks that are "stuck" with multiple properties pay a slightly higher tax rate, they should- at the very least- be able to take back all the taxes they paid in the form of using public funds to fix up their beach. It's only fair.
Forget Myanmar- clearly all the suffering is happening right there in Wild Dunes. I think I'll just make my next donation check out to the Wild Dunes Property Owners Association. Poor souls.
May 27, 2008 at 6:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jsteph10 (anonymous) says...
Bitter are we? Class envy is not attractive or becoming.
Emotion has led you to miss my point. I never implied that they should not pay higher property taxes or taxes on rental income, that is a whole other discussion.
What I said is that they do pay taxes.
Let the beaches deteriorate on IOP, Kiawah, etc. and watch the property values plummet. As values decrease, so does tax revenue.
Government will not take a dip in earnings. Think your taxes are too high now, just wait until they come looking for more revenue.
This is great headline material, but it is just the county and state protecting its tax base.
May 27, 2008 at 6:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wishinew (anonymous) says...
Most of the beach in front of Wild Dunes IS public access, you have to leave the ungated section of WD and cross Palm Blvd to get to the beach. Park on 43rd or higher and you will share the beach with WD residents. What the paper downplays is that WD residents paid $7M out of the $10M of the cost. The only reason public funds got into the picture is that somebody filed a lawsuit blocking a much lower cost solution that was to be funded directly by the condos that were getting washed away.
May 27, 2008 at 7:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jsteph10 (anonymous) says...
I have somehow fooled you, Harpo. I don't live in this gated community, or any gated community for that matter.
I agree that folks maybe should not build homes on shifting sands, but the fact is that they did. And our community has become accustomed to the millions upon millions of dollars that are generated from property taxes, tourists, etc. from IOP.
Coming to the beach, but all the sand is gone, now that would be a travesty of justice.
May 27, 2008 at 7:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jsteph10 (anonymous) says...
Oh, and by 'our community' I mean the Charleston area.
Didn't want you again to think I was hunkered down in 'my community' hiding from the unwashed masses.
May 27, 2008 at 7:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
realscientist (anonymous) says...
Ah, wealth envy is in full bloom. Why shouldn't public funds be used to restore a public beach? The WD owners certainly paid the bulk of the cost, anyway. IslandLife4Me, wishinew, and jsteph10 are spot on.
May 27, 2008 at 8:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Smart_Enough_2_Know_Better (anonymous) says...
Jsteph, let me try to work around your learning disability. The issue isn't how much money people have, whether or not they pay taxes, or even where they live. The point is that PUBLIC funding went to support a beach that directly- and almost wholly- benefits a PRIVATE community.
Some have made the argument that the beaches are publically accessible but let's be real- the VAST majority of people on the Wild Dunes beaches are FROM Wild Dunes. So enough with the claim that they are public beaches. While technically true, in practice they are not.
But even if they were public beaches, the only reason the efforts were made to try and stop the natural course of erosion was because a PRIVATE community made a mistake and built where they shouldn't. That's a public bailout- if even only partial- of a private community's stupidity. And THAT'S the problem.
May 27, 2008 at 10:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full Terms and Conditions.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Thank you for your interest in this story. The comment thread for this article has been closed.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Shared
- Upper King on rise: Hotels, apartments, restaurants changing face of downtown area
- UPDATE: Missing woman's fiance seen leaving scene of burned SUV, carrying a shovel
- Missing woman case gets murkier
- Magnolia Gardens offering free dream wedding to contest winner
- Body of missing woman's fiance was found near handgun
- Pinterest: Pinning hopes and dreams
- DAVID SLADE: S.C. offers hybrid car tax credit
- Black women today: Strong. Resilient. Ambitious.
- Ex-Boeing worker claims racism, retaliation in firing
- MCDERMOTT COLUMN: Golf business has risks, rewards
