Dear Source:
I am extremely surprised to learn that "Springline Architects welcomes public participation in the design and development phases" of its Port of Mandahl project to build a marina, other commercial enterprises, housing, and related facilities in the area of Mandahl Bay and salt pond. My surprise is because realtors have been distributing brochures about this project since 2006 when Springline first submitted its application to CZM. It seems to me that much of the development and design was done prior to that submission. And certainly the design and development was close to final by May 2008 when CZM conditionally accepted the developer's application as complete although additional information was still required.
Springline did make a presentation to the Friends of Mandahl in late November of 2008 and the project was presented to the Mandahl neighborhood at the end of January 2009. The meetings with neighbors felt more like sales presentations and recitations of the developer's rights than an honest desire for community input.
Neighborhood meetings two years after an application was submitted! Neighborhood meetings six months after the application was conditionally accepted as complete! Where was the time for public participation? Neighborhood meetings more than two years after meetings with realtors! Exactly whose input did the developer really want?
With regard to the "rumors, speculation and outright falsehoods" that Springline believes are circulating in the community, the public statements I have heard are based on government documents and the developer's application and most recent Environmental Assessment Report which was prepared by Springline on November 12, 2008.
Section 7.04 Social Impacts (page 69) of that document reads: "Fisherman located in the basin will be impacted. The first impact will be the need for relocation during the dredging and construction activity in the basin. This will take approximately one year. At the end of that year, the developer is offer [sic] 12 mooring areas to these boats with the stipulation that they must pay the same fee that would be charge [sic] by DPNR for a mooring, that the boats be operational (no boat repair will be conducted in the Marina), and that they have the same insurance as required of the boats in the slips."
Perhaps the developer has heard the public hue and cry and has revised its dredging plan, but the environmental damage to the pond will still be disastrous.
Helene Smollett
St. Thomas
Editor's note: We welcome and encourage readers to keep the dialogue going by responding to Source commentary. Letters should be e-mailed with name and place of residence to visource@gmail.com.
