The beach-destroying mega-projecti

If developers get their way, a 110-unit apartment complex will be build in the green area to the left in this KAP photo of Shacks Beach.

So much to write about and so little time. I can't believe I went 11 days between posts. I think that's a new record - not one I want to repeat. Sorry about that.

I could go into a sob story about our internet access being down (it was for a couple of days) or brown-outs (we've been having them because of a bad wire coming into the house - that's fixed now we think). But the truth is one thing has taken up a huge amount of time - fighting a beach-destroying mega development project.

Some local developers want to build a 110-unit apartment complex right on the beach here at Shacks. If they get the go-ahead, they will build in the green area on the left in the photo above.

There are just so many things wrong with this project. First, it just just doesn't fit the Shacks area. Just about everything about it is questionable (and is being questioned) legally. There were enough irregularities in the original process of granting permits for the project that the Planning Board (Junta de Planificacion) called for new public hearings. At the public hearing last Monday, we were treated to a two hour presentation by a phalanx of lawyers and "experts" about how this project won't hurt the environment, won't cause more flooding, blah blah blah blah. People opposed to the project had to wait their turn. When they finally were allowed to speak, the guy running the hearing for the planning board allowed the developers' lawyers to harass and intimidate them.

The developers have asked for variances and zoning exceptions to: 1) build ten meters into the protected Maritime Zone (established by law specifically to protect this kind of property from development); 2) increase the height of the buildings from the three stories allowed by law to five stories (nothing else in the Shacks area is more than two stories); 3) allow buildings to be built closer together than allowed so they can get more apartment buildings in a smaller space (this will make this one 8.5 acre parcel 90 times more densely populated than the rest of Shacks). And they want to built the broadest face of the tallest buildings parallel to the coast, which if not illegal, is at least against public policy and current practice. This, by the way, WILL change the winds at Shacks for kite surfers and wind surfers.

The developers lobbied hard to get the community to support this monstrosity. They're a bit like GW Bush - they tolerate no dissent or even discussion. It's their way and that's it. They talk about the project like the buildings are all there will be. "This project won't harm the environment. This project won't damage the beach. This project won't kill the coral." What they absolutely refuse to accept any responsibility for or even acknowledge is the damage the 400 or so people living in their project will do to the road and the air and the beach and the coral. "Oh we can't control how many people go to the beach." (That's a direct quote.) Ya don't have to invite 4o0 people and 22o cars (that's how many parking places they'll have) right on to the beach.

When lobbying and promises of "more business" didn't entice everybody in the neighborhood to support the idea, the developers resorted to threats. Nothing overt, mind you. Just "warnings about what could happen to your business," not delivered directly but by "messengers," intermediaries. And we weren't the only ones who were threatened. In our case the threat was "Those people at Ola Lola's are really blowing it. They shouldn't be talking about flooding. If their business floods, one call to the health department and they won't have a business."According to an attorney it's just smoke, another attempt to scare and intimidate us. But it makes me wonder why they would even bother threatening us. I mean, how much of a threat to their plans are we? And why is it so important that the project be built this way and no other?

The developers are very rich, very powerful and very well connected. They have a brilliant opportunity to be true leaders, to take Puerto Rico in a totally new, progressive, environmentally sensitive direction. Instead they choose to be "me toos," doing the "same ol' same ol,'" battling against and most likely destroying the environment instead of working with it and working to preserve it.

It's an on-going saga. We have more letters to write - quickly! And there are other legal avenues being pursued. You can learn more about this on the MySpace site No Shacks Resort (www.myspace.com/noshacksresort). And of course we'll keep you updated here.