Just relax, the beach is backVisitors, locals marvel at wide sands after $10M renourishment project rescues resort By Bo Petersen (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Mic Smith Susan Hillman of Atlanta reads and relaxes Tuesday on the newly renourished beach at the end of Wild Dunes on the Isle of Palms. 
Grace Beahm Waves crash against sandbags at Wild Dunes in October. Additional storiesWild Dunes aims to keep its sandbags published 12/21/07 Wild Dunes sandstorm settled published 02/13/08 Wild Dunes finally gets a dose of sand published 05/27/08 ISLE OF PALMS — The beach is so wide now the blue umbrellas look tiny. The Ocean Club condos are so far across the hot sand that barefoot young bathers hop like mad. Three months ago, high tides would swamp the sandbags girdling that Wild Dunes vacation resort and pour in among the pilings underneath. Waves broke below the balconies. The beach seemed nonexistent. "It doesn't look like the same place. It's beautiful," said Carl Harper, standing on a plaza of sand that once was the 18th hole of the resort's Links course. For months he had watched the surf eat away the rough, the fairway and then the green, creeping toward his condo on the inland side. "It was coming faster and faster. You could do the math." The controversial, $10 million Wild Dunes beach renourishment project has finished its dredging. The pipes and trucks are gone. The desperate pile of sandbags that staved off condemnation for six condominium complexes and two other houses is gone. Two-and-a-half miles of once "vanished" beach now rivals any in the Lowcountry. Acclaimed golf course designer Tom Fazio is reworking the vaunted, oceanfront 18th hole of the resort's luxury golf course to restore the 500-yard, doglegging par 5 he originally conceived — and likely will add a few new wrinkles for golfers who challenge its breezes. No one can say for sure until Fazio shows up with his hand-drawn plans. Work is scheduled to start in the fall; the now-par 3 hole should be a par 5 by late spring. Golf director Jeff Minton stood on the sand that will again be the green, hands on his hips like he was ready to pull the flag from the pin for a putt. "This is nice to see, isn't it?" he said. The long line of umbrellas down the beach marks the end of two years of legal arm-wrestling between owners and state regulators that led to tens of thousands of sandbags washed away in storm tides, littering the coast and marshes for miles. It may mark the beginning of a new round of controversy for the city of Isle of Palms. The project is being paid for largely by Wild Dunes — $7 million. Public money is paying the $3 million balance. But from the beginning, some have opposed using any public money to shore up the private resort — tax revenue or not. The city now must monitor the beach, repair "scarping" erosion hot spots and set sand fences to begin shaping dunes. That is included in the $10 million price tag. The city must also set aside money for an eventual second renourishment. The project, with a late start, was completed early. The island Turtle Watch group, charged with protecting loggerhead nests, had to move one nest from the project area. Watch volunteers found four "false crawls," where a turtle came ashore to lay eggs but turned and went back. "The turtles seem not to like that (dredged) sand," said Bev Ballow of the Turtle Watch group. "The project went as successfully as could be expected. There's now a beach for turtle nesting." The biggest interruption in the dredging came when a Civil War-era cannonball rolled banging through the pipe from the offshore bottom and fell with a plop about where the 18th green once stood. But even that was just a hiccup, said City Administrator Linda Lovvorn Tucker. "Everything's gone well," she said. She knows. She goes out every day, or at least every other day, just to see. "I do like my new beach."
Reach Bo Petersen at 745-5852 or bpetersen@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net 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 charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" 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. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 27 comment(s)
Posted by moonpie on July 23, 2008 at 6:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Only to do it again someday... The wise man built his house upon the rocks the foolish man built his house upon the sands and his house came tumbiling down...
Remember the song...?
Posted by CMLMADDOG on July 23, 2008 at 7:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Gee. If only I was allowed in the gates, I could see the pretty sand.
Posted by wpc3iop on July 23, 2008 at 7:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The people at Wild Dunes are happy...but I hate to see 7 million dollars of tax money spent because of poor planning. Oh well...the waste of my tax dollars never seems to stop!
Posted by Paul on July 23, 2008 at 7:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Where's the mention of the sand being paid for by our money and then not being allowed in their pearly gates
to enjoy OUR beach ?
Posted by Early on July 23, 2008 at 8 a.m. (Suggest removal)
OK, we helped once but from now on, your on your own.
Posted by Melek on July 23, 2008 at 8:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You don't need access to Wild Dunes to be able to see the results ... all you need to do is park and walk through one of the many beach access along Palm Boulevard ... anyone can walk the stretch ... while access to Wild Dunes may be restricted, the beach is public!!! BTW ... it looks great!
"Blessed are the flexible, for they shall not be bent out of shape."~ Anon
Posted by wpc3iop on July 23, 2008 at 8:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Paul: Just tell them you are going to play golf and they will let you in the gate...
Posted by bosframing on July 23, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I just wish that everybody would have the opportunity to use this wonderful new beach. Unfortunately, only the wealthy that bought these "waterfront" condo's can use it. Quite a shame. Just wish I could use part of what I paid for.
Posted by guidedbystewart on July 23, 2008 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is actually a waste of tax money that makes me fume. there is no way public money should have been used to replenish a private beach. Everyone know the erosion on SC beaches takes place on the North end of an island and then is deposited on the South end of an island.
They built the resort knowing this in the first place. We shouldn't have been responsible for bad planning.
Posted by mac0cm4 on July 23, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Lovely, public money WASTED on replenishing a public beach. Fraud, waste, and abuse. Typical of what I've noticed here in SC. Nothing will ever change.
Posted by STREETLAW on July 23, 2008 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You had to wonder how planning and zoning decisions are made regarding beach front property. Construction of buildings should be prohibited within 500 yards of the influence of high tide. And that at the minimum.
I guarantee coastline insurance rates would drop dramatically and situations experienced at Wild Dunes would be a very infrequent occurance.
The situation at Wild Dunes is a classic example of greed courting incompetence and birthing a bad idea. One the taxpayers have to pay to mitigate.
Posted by Cid95 on July 23, 2008 at 11:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
7mil was paid for by Wild Dunes. 3mil was public. It is a public beach which you can easily walk to, so I guess some public expenditure is warranted but still the ratio should have been more like 90% private / 10% public I think.
Posted by wjhamilton3 on July 23, 2008 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The tax money used to replenish the beach came from accomidations taxex collected on Wild Dunes properties. These properties won't rent without a beach. The government is simply investing tourism taxes to attract and get income from tourists. Without rentals, these properties are greatly reduced in value and the amount of taxes which can be charged on them will fall. If you are going to pump money out of tourists, your going to need to pump up some sand to make a beach.
Posted by Rebel_Yell on July 23, 2008 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
100% private $. I preferred the smaller beach with the condos falling in like that scene in Planet of the Apes with the statue of liberty. For all the crap they put in "our" ocean due to poor planning, I wish them the worst and constant struggles with their investments. Any buyers now -- notta.
Posted by jsteph10 on July 23, 2008 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Rebel, The government refuses to accept less in tax revenue. If those properties were to fall into the ocean, the properties values fall, taking with it tax dollars.
The government will come looking for more money, and you might be on that list.
Karma always comes around. Wishing financial hardship on another will surely come around to bite you in your wealth envied rear.
Posted by sailingrum on July 23, 2008 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Gee and what is a definition of a Barrier Island. "They provide protection to the mainland from the brunt of ocean waves and are considered dynamic environments, as they are constantly being shaped and reshaped, eroded and accreted."
Love that money is wasted on such a dyanmic environment. Why not put it to better use.
Posted by BigHurt on July 23, 2008 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Publc money wasted? I don't think so...ever heard of tourism dollars? Let's all pull our heads out of the sand. If they let the condos, houses and golf course fall into the ocean, then all the tourists and their much needed $$ would head to Myrtle Beach instead.
*I can't argue about poor planning prior to the beach erosion, though*
Posted by common_sense on July 23, 2008 at 2:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The beaches are open? Did all the folks from Ohio go home?
I'm just sayin...
Posted by yourmom on July 23, 2008 at 3:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wild Dunes is a dump, all those tacky tourists with their snotty children screaming because they aren't getting what they want and the crappy dads that give into them out of guilt because they never see them. Who would want to go there anyway, let them fall into the ocean
Posted by amicus_non_ego on July 23, 2008 at 3:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
STREETLAW -
"Construction of buildings should be prohibited within 500 yards of the influence of high tide. And that at the minimum."
I am pretty sure that would be a loss of hundreds of millions in real estate, millions in property taxes, and countless other intangible financial gains from beachfront property for the state. Clearly you forget that beachfront tourism drives SC's economy.
Hell, there are more than a few islands that aren't 500 yards wide. My fav - Pawley's Island - being one of them.
Posted by eatmorecollards on July 23, 2008 at 5:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It seems even the turtles know that sand may not last past the next storm.
Posted by Joker on July 23, 2008 at 6:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If some of the people posting negatively had the money to buy a "waterfront" home I am sure that they would have no problem with fixing the beach. But it seems the majority of the people on here would rather bash the rich who got a little extra education (which everyone can do) and put in a little more effort and hard work for their money which in turn can lead to a waterfront home. Everybody has the ability and opportunity to do whatever job they want in this country some just work a little harder. Because these people are rich doesn't mean that their home should fall into the ocean. What if these people weren't rich and this was simply a levee bust and the people effected were poor? Same situation people!! The government would take a whole lot more than 3 million tax dollars to fix that. Wild Dunes chipped in 7 million dollars and if this were public land this would have cost the tax payers the whole 10 mil (count your blessings). By the way all beaches are open to the public. All it takes is one to park their car at an access and get off their fanny and walk to the private part of the beach if they would like. Again put in a little effort and work, and good things happen, like the ability for waterfront homes or simply a walk on a new stretch of beach.
Posted by moonpie on July 23, 2008 at 9:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think the feds, state, city, realestate sales people, developer and county should have paid equaly. After all it started with zoning people approving the project being built, the city to issue the permits, realestate people to sell it, developer to build it, and guess what the OCRM to approve it initially. NOT THE OWNERS!
Posted by realscientist on July 23, 2008 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Moonpie has it right--there are plenty of folks dodging their earlier decisions. The real estate groups really should have ponied up; after all, their cash cow nearly died.
Posted by Cid95 on July 23, 2008 at 10:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Joker - have you ever been there? Hardly nice beachfront homes, it's just a condo tower perched precariously close to the sea (sometimes) on the north end of the IOP.
I've spent lots of time in Wild Dunes over the years, since the late 80's.
What I have noticed is that people, generally from Ohio for some reason, who own a 1BR/1BA apartment, or maybe even a share of one, all act like they have a 3 story front beach home on Sullivan's Island. From a financial standpoint, it's just not that big a deal.
Posted by farfallaspeaks on July 23, 2008 at 11:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I would never buy a water front home on a beach that is going to disappear one day, no matter how much money i had.
It should all be public land.
The sand at folly now hurts my feet. It's so course. It used to be really fine and soft.
Posted by Charleston_21 on July 24, 2008 at 11:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I hope that at some point I'll benefit from paying taxes. There HAS to be some way!
Granted I love the fact that they are paving the roads through crosstown... it'd be nice if they did something where as they just benefited the residents of the city instead of focusing SO much on tourists.
I know thats where alot of our business comes from and whatnot, they should do something special for us too!