Group redoubles resistance to Lido Beach project

Correction: An earlier version of this story had an incorrect last name for attorney Jane West.

SARASOTA — A community group staunchly opposed to the city's dredging of Big Pass to rebuild severely eroded Lido Beach will not end its fight to stop the project that it claims would harm Siesta Beach.

Save Our Siesta Sands 2 argues that permits issued to conduct the long-contested project violate several federal laws, and it has hired a lawyer to try to prove it. The group — which challenged the issuance of the permits in court, but ultimately lost — has hired St. Augustine-based land-use and environmental attorney Jane West to find flaws in the permitting process.

West believes the project violates several federal laws, including the Clean Water Act, she said Monday.

“There are numerous federal statutes that have potentially been violated as a result of the issuance of the permit for this dredging,” West said. “First and foremost would be the Federal Endangered Species Act … there was only an Environmental Assessment that was conducted, not a full blown Environmental Impact Statement.”

“We also have concerns with possible violations of the Clean Water Act and the Magnuson Stevens Act, which protects essential fish habitat,” West added, saying high turbidity levels caused by the future dredging would violate the Clean Water Act.

If the group challenges the project in federal court, it would have to file a 60-day notice of intent to alert the federal government the group is considering suing, West said, adding her office is still in the “due diligence” phase of a potential case.

“We’re looking at at least a couple of months before any action is taken in federal court,” West said.

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection last month granted the city a permit it needs to dredge up to 1.3 million cubic yards of sand from Big Pass to rebuild parts of disappearing Lido Beach shoreline. A final order from DEP Secretary Noah Valenstein followed recommendations issued in May by administrative law Judge Bram D.E. Canter, who ruled the city and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should be issued the necessary permits for the project. Both Canter and Valenstein dismissed claims by Siesta Key Association and Save Our Siesta Sands 2 that the project would negatively affect navigation and cause harmful erosion to Siesta Key.

“Siesta Key Beach generates major revenue for the county, and if that beach is impacted, that will obviously be a major problem,” Peter van Roekens, chairman of Save Our Siesta Sands 2, said, adding he fears properties on Siesta Beach could suffer the same kind of erosion-responsible damage Lido Beach is experiencing because of the project.

Van Roekens hopes to raise $50,000 to pay West, he said.

Concerned resident and business owner Michael Holderness, who owns and operates Siesta Key Beachside Villas, fears dredging Big Pass, which has acted as a natural barrier for Siesta Beach from the elements, could destroy the shoreline.

“It would be catastrophic on property values,” Holderness said of the potential damage. “Who’s going to want to buy a house on a beach that’s already in a critical erosion zone?”

According to a 2017 DEP report on critically eroded beaches in the state, stretches of shoreline on Siesta Key have been designated as critically eroded beach areas that threaten private development.

The city plans to start the contested renourishment project by spring and complete it by next hurricane season, which begins June 1, 2019. The initial renourishment would take 950,000 cubic yards of sand from Big Pass, and subsequent restoration projects would occur every five years, dredging about 500,000 cubic yards each time. The projected cost is $20 million to $22 million. The federal government will pay 62 percent of the cost; the state will cover 19 percent, and the city is responsible for 19 percent. The Corps last month allocated $13.5 million for the project in its fiscal year 2018 work plan.

Sarasota City Manager Tom Barwin insists the project abides by the law.

“In 35 years of public administration, I haven’t been a part of any initiative that has received this much review, scrutiny, public input, adjustments and now even a full-blown court case,” Barwin said.

The city has committed to adjusting the project’s course if Siesta Beach experiences damage as a result of the dredging and has set aside $2.5 million to mitigate project effects, Barwin said.

It’s unclear if any federal challenge would ultimately delay the project, Barwin said, adding “time is of the essence” for Lido Beach, which lost more than 15 feet of shoreline form Hurricane Irma in September and Subtropical Storm Alberto in May.

“Folks have got to start exercising some judgment and try to be reasonable,” Barwin said. “Let’s not get caught up in what really is, I think, a reflection of our times when some prefer conflict over collaboration.”

Retrieving sand from a farther area or offshore, as Save Our Siesta Sands 2 suggested, would cost the city potentially triple the current pricetag, Barwin added.

Barwin in late May declared a state of emergency for Lido Beach. The order will stay in place through hurricane season, Barwin said.

To hold the beach over until the larger project gets underway, the city is undertaking an emergency renourishment project to rebuild parts of the vanishing shoreline.