Building Resorts on Offshore Cays
Article from the St. Thomas Source
CZM Approves Thatch Cay Development
by Pamela Reid Bussard
May 15, 2008 -- In a landmark decision Tuesday evening, the Coastal Zone Management Committee approved residential development for Thatch Cay.
The development will provide for slightly more than 100 dwelling units, and includes infrastructure for water, power, waste disposal and other utilities and amenities.
[Here's an aerial picture of Thatch Cay, taken within the past couple of weeks -- St. Thomas in the background.
"The applicant's objective, as described in the environmental-assessment report, is to develop ... a world-class residential community on Thatch Cay," the recommendation noted.
While most of the staff findings recommended approval without raising any objections, the recommendation did limit the developer only to the dock proposed for this development.
"Staff finds that it will be necessary to minimize any further alteration of the seabed surrounding Thatch Cay," the report said. "As such, no additional docks will be permitted for any future development."
The CZM made mention of its own limited ability to provide on-site monitoring of the development, and proposed a special condition requiring the developer to pay for an independent monitor that CZM will hire.
In its report, the staff recommended that the independent monitor "coordinate with CZM's resource ecologist and all other pertinent DPNR staff."
Local environmental advocates expressed a sense that this approval clears the way for the development of other outlying islands and cays.
"Unfortunately, this was the first time that a cay was approved for development," said Jason Budsan of the Environment Association of St. Thomas-St. John, in an interview after the meeting. "It was good that the CZM board members put special conditions on the future development, but it is almost as if Pandora's Box has been opened for future development of these extremely fragile remaining islands."
While disappointed in the outcome, Budsan lauded the way the developers approached the community for comment and input.
"It would be a nice change to have the developers approach community groups for input prior to their submitting their Environmental Assessment Report for review by CZM so that the public at large will have a greater sense of input for future development," Budsan said.
Without commenting before the creation of the EAR, public input in the application process is not part of the application's record. Staff review is what generates stipulations and conditions like those set forth in this application.
For the CZM staff to be able to consider public input, it has to be submitted while the staff is still considering the developer's submission, Budsan noted.
The developers went to considerable lengths to mitigate objections of community groups, including moving the dock at the suggestion of DPNR's Fish and Wildlife Division.
While the application was approved, the 23 conditions placed on the development will require not only that the CZM make sure those conditions are met, but also that the public pay close attention.
The conditions include:
-- The developer will have to develop a plan with the U.S. and V.I. Departments of Agriculture, as well as with the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service, to remove the feral goats on the cay. In addition, the developer must work with these same groups to develop a plan that addresses the introduction of domestic animals to the cay.
-- The CZM will hire an independent monitor of the development at the applicant's expense. The monitor will be guided by a monitoring plan.
-- The applicant is responsible for payment of submerged land fees. These fees amount to $35,000 per year. No adjustments for inflation or other increases were noted in the staff recommendation.
-- To minimize road traffic on St. Thomas, Crown Bay Dock -- not Red Hook -- will be the primary staging area for construction materials for the development, and constructions workers are to be shuttled to and from the cay from the Thatch Cay-owned Red Hook Marina.
-- No topsoil will be transported to the cay for landscaping.
-- The developer will incur all costs associated with solid-waste disposal, and the waste will go to the Bovoni Landfill. However, other than noting that waste would have to be removed by vessel, there was no mention of how the solid waste would be transported to the Bovoni Landfill, nor was there recommendation for after the landfill's scheduled close.
-- Mitigation measures to accommodate the tree boa snake will be coordinated with Fish and Wildlife.
-- The applicant will maintain public access to the cay, specifying the manner and means of public access to it. A minimum of five public moorings will be installed.
The approval of the application sets forth a number of thresholds for the CZM and developers who wish to build on outlying islands and cays in the territory.
"Whether it is good or bad, you have set a precedent for future development of cays in the Virgin Islands," Budsan said.
CZM Approves Thatch Cay Development
by Pamela Reid Bussard
May 15, 2008 -- In a landmark decision Tuesday evening, the Coastal Zone Management Committee approved residential development for Thatch Cay.
The development will provide for slightly more than 100 dwelling units, and includes infrastructure for water, power, waste disposal and other utilities and amenities.
[Here's an aerial picture of Thatch Cay, taken within the past couple of weeks -- St. Thomas in the background.
"The applicant's objective, as described in the environmental-assessment report, is to develop ... a world-class residential community on Thatch Cay," the recommendation noted.
While most of the staff findings recommended approval without raising any objections, the recommendation did limit the developer only to the dock proposed for this development.
"Staff finds that it will be necessary to minimize any further alteration of the seabed surrounding Thatch Cay," the report said. "As such, no additional docks will be permitted for any future development."
The CZM made mention of its own limited ability to provide on-site monitoring of the development, and proposed a special condition requiring the developer to pay for an independent monitor that CZM will hire.
In its report, the staff recommended that the independent monitor "coordinate with CZM's resource ecologist and all other pertinent DPNR staff."
Local environmental advocates expressed a sense that this approval clears the way for the development of other outlying islands and cays.
"Unfortunately, this was the first time that a cay was approved for development," said Jason Budsan of the Environment Association of St. Thomas-St. John, in an interview after the meeting. "It was good that the CZM board members put special conditions on the future development, but it is almost as if Pandora's Box has been opened for future development of these extremely fragile remaining islands."
While disappointed in the outcome, Budsan lauded the way the developers approached the community for comment and input.
"It would be a nice change to have the developers approach community groups for input prior to their submitting their Environmental Assessment Report for review by CZM so that the public at large will have a greater sense of input for future development," Budsan said.
Without commenting before the creation of the EAR, public input in the application process is not part of the application's record. Staff review is what generates stipulations and conditions like those set forth in this application.
For the CZM staff to be able to consider public input, it has to be submitted while the staff is still considering the developer's submission, Budsan noted.
The developers went to considerable lengths to mitigate objections of community groups, including moving the dock at the suggestion of DPNR's Fish and Wildlife Division.
While the application was approved, the 23 conditions placed on the development will require not only that the CZM make sure those conditions are met, but also that the public pay close attention.
The conditions include:
-- The developer will have to develop a plan with the U.S. and V.I. Departments of Agriculture, as well as with the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife Service, to remove the feral goats on the cay. In addition, the developer must work with these same groups to develop a plan that addresses the introduction of domestic animals to the cay.
-- The CZM will hire an independent monitor of the development at the applicant's expense. The monitor will be guided by a monitoring plan.
-- The applicant is responsible for payment of submerged land fees. These fees amount to $35,000 per year. No adjustments for inflation or other increases were noted in the staff recommendation.
-- To minimize road traffic on St. Thomas, Crown Bay Dock -- not Red Hook -- will be the primary staging area for construction materials for the development, and constructions workers are to be shuttled to and from the cay from the Thatch Cay-owned Red Hook Marina.
-- No topsoil will be transported to the cay for landscaping.
-- The developer will incur all costs associated with solid-waste disposal, and the waste will go to the Bovoni Landfill. However, other than noting that waste would have to be removed by vessel, there was no mention of how the solid waste would be transported to the Bovoni Landfill, nor was there recommendation for after the landfill's scheduled close.
-- Mitigation measures to accommodate the tree boa snake will be coordinated with Fish and Wildlife.
-- The applicant will maintain public access to the cay, specifying the manner and means of public access to it. A minimum of five public moorings will be installed.
The approval of the application sets forth a number of thresholds for the CZM and developers who wish to build on outlying islands and cays in the territory.
"Whether it is good or bad, you have set a precedent for future development of cays in the Virgin Islands," Budsan said.
Tags: caribbean, czm, eco-tourism, eia, offshore cay, stt
8 Comments
-
Comment by charles-Baptiste Gerard on May 17, 2008 at 6:09am - Very interesting project indeed. If you have more information about it, I'll be happy to read it.
-
Comment by Bruce Potter on May 17, 2008 at 11:33pm
-
So this from "a friend" in the US Virgin Islands:
this CZM approval (of 100 villas on Thatch Cay) is devastating. right now there are three major developments being proposed and going before CZM for the privately owned cays, Great St. James and two on Inner Brass. Mandahl Bay on the north coast of St. Thomas is up for marina development (to service Hans Lollick, another offshore cay ). A house construction was just approved for Inner Brass WITHOUT any review from any of the divisions in the Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources, because, as a single private residence, it was a "minor" permit.
We can kiss our offshore reserves and reefs goodbye. the inshore ones are already gone.
and then there was this note from our friend Jules in Barbados about the potential development of Culpepper Island, described in a blog, ASKING FOR YOUR INPUT, by Damon Copie at .
And if you want some more, there's the new development (a "Balinese village") proposed for Mosquito Island in Virgin Gorda Sound by Sir Richard Branson, who also owns another island in Virgin Gorda (Necker Cay) plus yet another "Balinese village" being proposed for yet ANOTHER island in AUSTRALIA, and the big Beef Island project (about 600 units, as I recall) currently in abeyance because the British Virgin Island courts want to know why permits were issued in spite of protected areas status of some of the development property.
I think maybe big investors should stick with yachts?
-
- Sorry -- the previous post makes it look like Sir Richard Branson owns a proposed development on Beef Island in the British Virgin Islands --- that one he does not own --- not real sure these days who does own the Beef Island development which originally was proposed by a Hong Kong-based investor, but he may no longer be a major shareholder in the project, which has had a series of partners and development management companies.
-
Comment by Erle Frayne Argonza on May 18, 2008 at 4:52am
- Interesting project! The regulalory standards seem really to be getting stricter by the year. But as you reported, there are still some loopholes, like some houses getting be built without approval. Hmmm we still get this kind of controversial loopholes here in the Philippines too (recently there was the building that a Korean firm built inside a restricted forest area in Subic Bay). It pays to be vigilant indeed to ensure quality standards in these kinds of development be met with high marks.
-
-
I disagree with the thrust of Erle Frayne Argonza's post: the problem is NOT loopholes. I think that stricter standards are almost useless to control development because the governments and other authorities in charge are not able to adequately:
o assess proposals;
o set conditions on development proposals that satisfy the laws themselves;
o monitor the implementation and operation of the permitted development over sustained periods of construction and day-to-day operation;
o properly oversee the transfer of development constraints when properties are sold from one developer to a successor group; AND
o actually execute meaningful sanctions on developers and owners who DO violate development conditions.
In fact, my speculative belief these days is that the unforeseen consequence of more complex regulation in high pressure development zones (especially in small islands where my Foundation focuses) may favor large or rich developers. Regardless of the proximate or indirect causes, these failures of the ability to manage development are as common in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, as they are in the out islands of the Bahamas or Palau. One developer in Maryland for example built a 1200-square-meter house and faux lighthouse on a small island he owned in the Magothy river, and it seems the only sanction he suffered was a $5,000 fine and his legal costs. He probably would not have had that much opposition, except that the his island is very near Gibson Island, one of those places for the very old-rich in Maryland. We have an e-mail group that addresses some of these issues that you can join at -- it's free and spam free.
-
Comment by Susan Parten, P.E. on May 18, 2008 at 11:39am -
Hello group. I've just joined this on-line forum this morning. As one of the engineers working on the Thatch Cay project, I thought I'd just quickly comment on the portion of the planning for which I've been responsible: the clustered wastewater systems. There is no precedent in the eastern Caribbean region for the type of system being proposed. Historically, and currently, what is typically proposed and used for projects (ranging in size from single family to larger developments) where "conventional onsite wastewater systems" cannot be used is some type of activated sludge treatment system (operating in one of several "modes", including extended aeration, SBR, MBR, etc.). My company just completed a 2-year nationwide study on the performance of large decentralized (small community scale) wastewater systems for the Water Environment Research Foundation (research arm of Water Environment Federation). The findings in that study were consistent with my experience and observations of treatment methods used for small scale wastewater systems. Not only do activated sludge system tend to be much more operationally and maintenance intensive than the process proposed for Thatch, and subject to much greater operational vulnerabilities, but the energy consumption is MUCH greater. Sludge production and handling requirements are also much greater for activated sludge processes by comparison. And as we all know, there is only a limited amount of landfill or sludge processing space available on these tropical islands.
Further, in most cases, planners propose and use surface application of wastewater effluent, which I believe is folly in these islands. There's no shortage of power outages, and intense rainfall. Discharging effluent on the ground surface to mix with rainfall run-off to sensitive watersheds is just not a good idea. And, the incorporate enough storage capacity to endure those periods would likely be cost-prohibitive to projects.
My goal in working on projects in the VI and elsewhere in the region is to plan and implement projects that are truly sustainable, and best serve the interests of my clients in the long term.... not just the cheapest front end solution that might pass "muster" with the permitting authorities. Many product/system vendors find the Caribbean region a perfect setting to sell their wares. There just aren't enough well-informed persons in my area of engineering practice to keep the "snake oil salesperson" at bay. Along those same lines, sometimes things that may be considered "green" are not good ideas either for use in this tropical settings. So little by little, and project by project, I hope that inroads can be made in the use of good and long-term sustainable practices.
If anyone in the group with like to receive the "environmental profile" used for the Thatch Cay systems, I'll be happy to send it. Such profiles are used for LEED ratings/credits.
Kind regards,
Susan
-
Comment by Susan Parten, P.E. on May 18, 2008 at 12:06pm
-
I have to say I agree with much of what Bruce has said about development patterns and processes. By my experience over the years, the one element that has ever served to help projects stay on responsible tracks is an owner/development who either knows and cares enough to make sure things are done right, or is willing to listen to persons (like myself) who insist on doing things properly despite sometimes higher costs.
I'm glad to see many "earth friendly" concepts make their way to the general populace, because at the end of the day, it will be the public's insistence on certain things that create positive change. e.g..... they will prefer to purchase "green building" properties in favor of irresponsible ones. So, if for none other than marketing reasons, developers will hopefully more and more listen to those calls.
SMP
-
- Copy Partner! The 'failure of ability to manage' indicates the problem is situated on a broader context. Similar to 'failure of intelligence' problematic. Nice exchange of thoughts, Partner, let's keep it up!
Add a Comment
Sign in
Member Search
Latest Activity
44 minutes ago 
3 hours ago 
4 hours ago 
6 hours ago 
12 hours ago 
13 hours ago 
14 hours ago
14 hours ago
© 2008 Created by Development Crossing
You need to be a member of Development Crossing to add comments!
Join this network