Life and property...
The potential for a real disaster is not a dune fire or a tree blowing down, IT IS FLOODING.
We are seeing more and more winter storms bringing hazardous waves further up on the beaches. Scientists are now predicting our local sea levels will increase three feet. The ever growing dunes offer protection from the higher waves.
We have a number of vulnerable areas subject to breaching. They are the outfalls from the canal and Seabreeze Lake. Some dunes have been modified for ocean views by beach front property owners in violation of County ordinances. The Oysterville beach approach road also provides an entrance for damaging flood waters.
I personally witnessed high waves at the Seabreeze outfall that came within inches of breaching the outlet dune. It could easily eroded and sent water cascading down to G Street in the area of the chipping site. We have also witnessed ocean waves extending far up the Oysterville Road. The entire area from I Street to G Street is a high risk area for flooding.
Pacific County Proposal:
In an effort to reduce maintenance costs and control flooding, several years ago, Pacific County presented to the Board a second option for flood control of the canal and Seabreeze Lake. The proposal would eliminate both present day outfalls with an under ground pipe connecting Seabreeze to the canal. A new and larger outfall pipe would be installed from the canal just North of 315th (office bridge) starting on County owned property, with a pipe extending under G Street and extending to the ocean under association owned property. The County asked only for a verbal agreement from Surfside so that they could begin engineering drawings and plans. Under the leadership of President Flood, he formed a committee to work with the County. Nothing happened.
Their first option was to extend the existing outfall pipes to the ocean edge of the dunes.
Both options would eliminate County costs of removing sand from the outfalls and save many thousands of dollars and help to control the water levels in the canal and lake. The dunes would fill back in and provide protection from high waves. The outlets act much like a funnel and intensify the waves entering the outlet.
Opposition:
Why would there be any opposition to proposed plans that save money, control flooding and offer added protection from high waves?
You probably guessed it...VIEWS.
Those members who have homes by the outfall cuts have a view onto the beach. Numerous members have also reduced the dune height for a view. The County has also been threatened by a lawyer who owns property by an outfall. Jim Flood also has a view at the canal outfall cut.
Why Should We All Care?
Why should I or you who live on the ridge or on the East side care?
The first reason is because they are fellow members that we care about.
The second reason is that a flooding disaster would spell the end of our association. The cost to recover would just be to great.
What Can Be Done?
One or two voices are difficult to be heard, but a group effort gets attention.
Emergency Management Committee:
We have a committee that is part of Surfside and that gives them some degree of influence, especially if supported by the members and the Board. They need to make this issue a priority. I do know that they have addressed this in the past and were shot down. They need to keep attention on this and keep trying until they get results.
Federal, State and County:
Unending pressure needs to be made for these governing bodies to act. Who knows what might be available to assist us.
Final Note:
You will notice that this was not a discussion about a tidal wave, but it could apply if it was a smaller one. It is more likely that we will have storm surges than the "big one".
We are isolated up on the North end of the peninsula, but we can have more protection from storm surges than most of the peninsula.
As with some issues we have, we can't let selfish interests rule. It's about our safety and way of life, not for just a few, but all of us.
19 comments:
Sorry, George...Not my monkey, not my fight.
The regulations regarding the height of the dunes needs to be revised in order to protect and preserve any gains that would serve to give the peninsula a chance of survival in the event of the rising ocean levels and more turbulent storms. The county should proceed with any measures that cut costs while providing the best drainage and flood protections. This is definitely an issue that is a matter of the welfare and the survival of the majority over the self serving interests of the few.
Wasn't the County Shoreline Planning Committee supposed to be dealing with this issue to prevent flooding?
Sounds to me that doing nothing kills two birds with one stone. Punish those that are stopping it, and a way to dissolve SHOA.
DISSOLVE SHOA!
The major breach in the dunes that was bulldozed is on the north side of the HOA property they want to lay the outfall under. I believe that the County wanted to run the pipe pretty far out onto the beach, which would be an eyesore. It wouldn't really be visible from individual homes, but would be a constant part of the beach scenery.
I read that sea levels are expected to rise about 14" in the Puget Sound area, and the Coast would rise only about 4" in that time frame. (I don't recall the specifics - 20 yrs. ?) That is due to it being a plate that is slipping over the adjacent plate to the west, and tipping down to the eastside of the plate, in the Sound.
Unfortunately the prediction is, that should a major quake take place in this offshore zone, the westside of the plate, where Surfside is, would fall significantly, slipping under the fault where it is now on top.
So this would be a double-whammy for the Surfside spit and peninsula.
This issue has been on here before so I guess it was due again. Not that it matters, but a couple facts.
The Oysterville Road approach isn't going anywhere. Same with all the others. Remember the footage during the extreme high tides of the wave going up the Ocean Park approach? I haven't heard any talk from officials about closing it off, have you?
I'm sorry George, but your statement about scientist saying that our sea levels will increase by three feet isn't accurate. They have just released a study that says it is expected to be less than a ft. In fact, which I did find surprising, Seattle is expected to have a higher rise than the coastline due to the fact that they are sinking while the coastline land is actually rising. This is all projected without any type of earthquake. Needless to say if a quake were to happen things will be different.
The approach roads to the beach can be raised to the height of the dunes. Plenty of room for a gentle approach.
Earth day started because of global cooling, then had acid rain, then we all gunna roast to death, now it’s called climate change cause they dont know. Scientist findings only as good as who’s paying for them. Pffft
The county's plan sounded great to me. I attended a board meeting a couple of years ago and Frank Wolfe laid out what the county had in mind. This was a county project and would cost Surfside nothing. I know a lot of the canal and lake lots have erosion problems from the constantly changing water levels caused by the plugged outfalls. This plan would help a lot. James Flood informed Mr. Wolfe that Surfside was not interested in the plan. Then I find out Mr. Flood's property sits very near an outfall that the county has to maintain and provides Flood's property a view. Really? If our current President had a since of fairness he should put to a vote for the board to support the county in getting this project completed as soon as possible.
I am afraid you will be disappointed. Blatant self interest is the only way this Board works.
There has been no "global cooling" recorded in the last 50 years, and establishing "Earth Day" came out of a growing awareness of environmental issues, concerns about documented degradation of the environment, and growing understanding of the interconnectedness of all such things. Native cultures have long understood this, and interest in native cultures grew at the same time.
Acid rain is not a theory, but a reality, and has been for over 50 years. Regions with runaway pollution from smelters in areas like N.E. Minnesota saw forests dying and fish die-offs in the Great Lakes, Minnesota and Wisconsin, and many other areas of the U.S. and Europe. It didn't go away, and wasn't a hoax - but restrictions placed on industries and their pollution of the air has diminished its' affects.
Only government mandated restrictions have reduced the impact of industrial air pollution, and reduced the incidence of acid rain. Scientific evidence has not been shown to be lacking, rather, it has been consistent with continued research validating that human activities of many kinds, some obvious and some less so, greatly contribute to the increased damage to our environment.
Lately, it has been popular to tout that such wisdom gleaned from scientific research is "fake", but in fact it is only "fake" in the small minds of big businessmen who stand to profit greater from lack of restrictions on industry, and a lack of conscience for future generations.
While it is difficult to grasp for many of us, scientists have warned that a consistent warming of the planet by 2 degrees is likely to have very extensive negative effects on weather all over the planet. We are seeing many of the long predicted outcomes of the scientific community play out, such as vast forest regions devastated by fires, great increases in the frequency of severe storms, alternating drought and flooding conditions, and extensive loss and damage of property at great expense.
You can create your own little fantasy world where everything is beautiful, and there's no need to understand the natural world - but nature cannot be controlled, and it can't be ignored. Big people understand that. Children may not.
1:44 I found your input quite interesting and in line with some of the thinking about global warming,etc and shows ou have an interest in the subject. Too bad you ended the input with a childish statement as it casts doubt over your motives.
I wouldn't let the message be deflected here. It's proven by science, and we would be stupid to ignore it, considering where we live.
8:04 perhaps you could use a little less objectionable term than “stupid” to make your point. I find that a great number of persons on this blog lose the effect of their thoughts by reverting to name calling.
Try to focus on the message, not the delivery. With a massive scientific data out there, those who choose to ignore it do so at their peril.
There are three parts to any message. They are 1. the transmitter, 2. the transmission and 3. The receptor. If any one of these three are faulty, such as calling people "stupid", the message is lost. That is why I focus on how you a re trying to communicate as well as what your message is. Thanks for cleaning it up. Please see 9:17 under "we are what we are".
It is just laughable that anyone should dismiss the research and data on climate change. It is known that pollution from human activities damage the protective layers in our atmosphere, and it is known that there is a huge whole in our atmosphere. Data demonstrates that the planet is warming, and the seas have reached a point of being consistently warmer by 2 degrees, a point scientists have focused on as a point of no return.
Predictions have been made decades ago that this point of change will result in increased severity and frequency of terrible storms, extensive drought in parts of the world, alternating patterns of drought and flooding in other regions, and massive forest fires in forested regions. It has all come to pass.
Whether or not human activity is THE cause of this is of no significance really. We know that auto and industrial pollution is a serious contributing factor, and that the polar icecaps are melting at a furious rate. Glaciers on our State's mountain peaks are also melting, and beautiful high mountain meadows are shrinking as forests take over. These are facts that cannot be disputed.
One comment stated that "WE would be stupid to ignore it (climate change)". You are ridiculous for taking offense, in that you misconstrue the meaning. The comment says "WE".
Sorry Steve, but for every point u made, I can cite many studies etc, that don’t support your statement. Why else did they have to change the term to “climate change”. But at the same time I can have a discussion without denigrating someone else. That’s the real problem now a days.
Post a Comment