Sarasota News Leader


Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 59 of 115

replied, "I don't see anything at this point. … Hopefully, we'll get this in here in the next few weeks and share it with everybody." COUNTY REACTION After learning of the new timeline from the Lido Key Residents Association, county com- missioners asked their staff whether the scheduled June 10 presentation on the proj- ect still would be appropriate. Dianne Robertson, assistant to County A d m i n i s t r a t o r To m H a r m e r, s e n t t h e board members a May 14 email from Matt Osterhoudt, acting director of the county's Natural Resources Department. Based on the information from DavisShaw, he wrote, "Rescheduling to a later date will allow time for the report to be submitted, be reviewed by staff, and better position us to prepare a more complete report for the Commission to consider." Because the board's agendas are fully booked before its summer recess begins in July and immediately after it returns in August, Robertson pointed out, "Staff has scheduled a discussion item for your workshop on Sept. 19." CARLTON FIELDS LETTER In his May 14 letter to the Army Corps of Engineers, Donald E. Hemke of Carlton Fields Jorden Burt in Tampa referenced the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act and the Water Resources Development Act of 1999 in ques- tioning whether the Corps of Engineers has complied with all necessary federal policy in its approach to the renourishment plan. F o r e x a m p l e , h e s a y s t h e N a t i o n a l Environmental Policy Act "requires that an agency critically examine the environmen- tal impacts of and alternatives to any federal action 'significantly affecting the quality of the human environment' and to study, develop and describe appropriate alternatives to rec- ommended courses of action in any proposal which involves unresolved conflicts concern- ing alternative uses of available resources." Hemke requested not only "written discussion of the [Army Corps' of Engineers'] analysis of all reasonable alternatives" to dredging Big Pass but also the preparation of an environ- mental impact statement on obtaining sand from Big Pass. In his conclusion, Hemke wrote, "It appears that there is a lack of cooperation and under- standing between and amongst the various agencies, stakeholders and the public con- cerning the project purpose, scope, potential impacts and alternatives. In light of the sig- nificant concerns and questions raised in this letter we believe that a thorough evaluation of this costly project is required, with adequate public and agency input, particularly ana- lyzing those alternatives which would avoid obtaining renourishment sand from Big Pass." Therefore, Hemke continued, "we ask the Corps to hold a formal public hearing on this matter …." % Sarasota News Leader May 16, 2014 Page 60

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Sarasota News Leader - 05/16/2014