GALVESTON — A leading Texas geologist might think Galveston is caught in a squeeze play between rising sea levels and retreating beaches, but city officials don’t seem to share his concern.
After spending almost two months mulling over the geohazards study presented to city council in March, city staffers have decided to shelve the findings.
In his bi-weekly report to council, City Manager Steve LeBlanc said his staff recommended using the study as an informational tool and a guide, rather than as springboard to adopt new policies to govern development.
Jim Gibeaut, from the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas, said he was surprised at the apparent outcome.
“My impression was that they were going to actively develop some rules or zoning or protocol based on the map,” he said. “My understanding was that the mayor charged staff with going back and drawing up plans. She seemed quite enthusiastic.”
After Gibeaut presented his findings to council March 8, Mayor Lyda Ann Thomas told staff to consider policy changes and directed the Planning Commission to carefully consider each new development project.
She even seemed to anticipate grumbles from developers about possible new restrictions, noting they should support anything that helped prevent their investments from washing away.
But after meetings to discuss possible policy changes, LeBlanc said staff members decided they could not do much better than they already were doing.
“We have been working for decades to help protect and rebuild the island’s beaches,” he said. “We are not taking a retreatist position by any means.”
In making his recommendation to council, LeBlanc told members the city’s existing erosion mitigation efforts, including rules against excavation, were sufficient protection.
“The important thing to remember is that this council has taken a position of holding ground against erosion on the beach and bayside by participating in the erosion task force,” he said. “The (geohazard) study is good but does not consider efforts we’re making to hold our ground.”
Gibeaut acknowledged the study did not take future mitigation efforts into account but said his analysis did factor in past beach-building efforts.
While LeBlanc described the ongoing efforts to build Galveston’s beaches as something that would allow the island to hold its ground against geological changes, Gibeaut said no mitigation would be completely effective.
“There is nothing that we have identified that can reasonably be done that will completely halt the changes the island is facing,” he said.
Council commissioned Gibeaut to do the geohazards study three years ago, paying him $50,000 for the work.
The resulting map identified areas on the island that were most at risk from continuous battery of the wind, waves and tides.
Gibeaut warned council the island would be more vulnerable to future storms if future development were allowed to progress without any additional restrictions. He suggested the city consider buffer zones and protective areas to shield three important geological features — beach foredunes, wetlands and a unique natural protective ridge that runs along the island’s West End.
LeBlanc said even without resulting in any policy changes, the study had been worthwhile.
“Those that are investing on the island’s West End need to be aware of the risk that they’re taking,” he said. “This study does a good job of highlighting that risk. If they want to live on the edge and risk losing it all, that’s their decision.”
