Login | Contact Us | Feedback | Customer Service | Site Map | Archives | RSS | Subscribe to the paper

Home › Island News › Local News

Combination of heavy rain, high tide caused extreme flooding on Marco on Wednesday

By LIAM DILLON (Contact)
Originally published 01:33 p.m., July 16, 2008
Updated 09:38 p.m., July 16, 2008

Please download the latest version of Adobe Flash Player, or enable JavaScript for your browser to view the video player.

Your Photos: Marco flood

It was a rainy afternoon during a rainy week of vacation for Heather Schuett, who was housesitting her uncle’s home on the main thoroughfare of Marco Island, Collier Boulevard. Deep into an Amy Tan book, she took notice of her overflowing pool, but had no idea how deep she was in it until the phone rang.

On the line was Heather’s husband, Randy, returning from a trip down the road to McDonald’s.

Heather, he asked, can I get home?

She went to her door and saw water nearly touching her mailbox and cresting up her driveway.

“I was just sitting here,” said Heather Schuett, 44. “Can you imagine?”

Whiplashed by an estimated six inches of rainfall and high tide, a great flood struck Marco Island Wednesday afternoon with water levels along some roadways in the island’s northern sections reaching at least two feet. The flood temporarily closed the island’s primary access point, the Judge S.S. Jolley Bridge, blocked sections of seven roads, left more than 1,200 households without power and gushed about three inches of water into at least three residences.

And it produced this ominous 1:09 p.m. e-mail missive from City Hall: “Unless necessary, residents should remain indoors.”

But Randy Schuett, 43, wasn’t quite there yet when he called his wife. He decided to park the GMC Denali SUV he was driving — the water had reached the floorboards — and wade a half-mile back to their home at 1250 N. Collier Blvd.

In the meantime, Heather was watching the show outside her door. The water had conquered some cars, which were then blocking the road.

“There were little bitty Porsches driving down here thinking they were getting out,” she said.

One island towing company estimated it pulled 35-40 cars out from the flooded roadways.

More serious were the water levels that threatened a low-lying home and two duplexes along 6th Avenue behind St. Mark’s Episcopal Church.

Don Westcott, of 626 6th Avenue, had to wet vacuum two- to-three inches of water from his apartment. It left a line around his baseboards. Later on, other residents of the street were out in their driveways using buckets and towels to clear water from their cars.

“We had towels in front of the door,” Westcott said. “Every time a truck came by the waves would lift the towels. We just gave up at that point.”

Three major culprits of the flooding were palm fronds, coconuts and plastic bags, according to Mike Daniel, a city construction manager. Daniel and city utility crews, shin deep in water on Collier Boulevard, were pulling off storm drains and clearing debris.

Daniel estimated they picked up 100 coconuts.

“Plastic trash bags are tough, Daniel said. “They’re so small and thin, but they can take us out.”

When the crews finished clearing a drain, the water would whirlpool down it.

Off of Marco, the problem was getting onto Marco. The city closed the Jolley Bridge for a little less than two hours, diverting traffic to the Goodland Bridge.

Justin Hanna, the owner of an island insurance agency, was taking refuge at Erin’s Isle Restaurant and Irish Pub on Collier Boulevard east of the bridge.

“It’s a problem if you can’t get to where your business is,” said Hanna, who’s lived on the island since 1990. “I couldn’t go to work today ... I’ve never seen it this bad, this flooded, without a real event happening.”

By 6 p.m., most of the work to drain the island was complete, with roads re-opened and residents again milling about outdoors.

Heather Schuett, on the island for a month-long vacation before she and her family returned to North Carolina, was hoping next week’s weather would be better than this one.

“We could use a little sunshine,” she said.

Staff writers Kelly Farrell and Sara Gottwalles contributed to this report.

Comments

This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below — responsibility lies with the relevant reader alone. Read our privacy policy & user agreement.


LCEC is right on top of this,doing what they do best. where is rony,wayne and john?

#1 Posted by dc5799 on July 16, 2008 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You guys are so mixed up on this issue it isn't even funny. After the study is performed, did you ever consider that LCEC might lower our rates, since we are their "Cash Cow" ?? Or, did you ever consider that FP&L could be our personal contractor to run our utility, based on Marco Island ?? No, I'm certain you never gave these ideas a thought. And yet I'll bet if I review the blogs over the last years, I will find you both complaining about spending and taxes, etc.
Ed Issler

#2 Posted by lauralbi1 on July 17, 2008 at 8:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Transformers...undergrounding...flooding...electricity...not a good scenario. This was not a major storm. Just accumulated rain. Storm water?
One thing that has been on my mind for a while is that even if LCEC would raise our electric bill $30 a month, it would take over 55 years for me to pay $20,000 like we are for the STRP. A few of you "gentlemen" would not be around.

#3 Posted by NtJstUrMarco on July 17, 2008 at 10:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Didn't Ronny just spend 27 million solving the drainage problem on Collier? This was the drainage effort that Gibson was so proud of when he ran for office. The promise of reduced rates is what drove the takeover of Florida Water. Reduced rates for the resorts and big increases for the residents. History will repeat itself if we are dumb enough to let them do it again with LCEC.

#4 Posted by marcoobserver on July 17, 2008 at 11:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Marcoobserver: I see your postings a lot, but never see any facts or figures to back up your statements. I will help if you desire to do a study (informal) as to what rates were before, what they are now, what comparable cities pay for water, etc. I do not believe any of us that post here are qualified to project what rates would have been if we had not taken the utility over. Dr. Biles chaired a County Commission that oversaw some aspects of all this, maybe she could let us know why the Treatment Plant got into such disrepair while the owners took their money to Minnesota or someplace. The history would be interesting to learn and probably is documented someplace. But it is important to know as part of any statement like you made above.
Oh, by the way, Rony did not spend anything. The City Of Marco Island spent the money with the blessing of the Council elected by a majority of the voters.
Oh, and a reminder, Mr. Gibson was elected by close to 70% of that majority.
Ed Issler

#5 Posted by lauralbi1 on July 17, 2008 at 2:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Issler, you state that “…Mr. Gibson was elected by close to 70% of that majority.” I don’t know if that calculation is an example of your math ability and analytical skills, or of your basic dishonesty. Regardless, either should disqualify you from the City of Marco Island Electric Municipalization Committee.

If one goes to the Collier County Election website, the results of the January 2008 election can be found here:

http://www.colliervotes.com/results.a...

Extracting Marco’s results:

Candidates Votes % of Votes
Joe Batte 3625 10.63%
Andrew Guidry 3231 9.47%
Roger Hall 3333 9.77%
Butch Neylon 3322 9.74%
Subtotal 13511 39.61%

Jerry Gibson 5062 14.84%
Frank Recker 5352 15.69%
Bill Trotter 5176 15.17%
Wayne Waldack 5008 14.68%
Subtotal 20598 60.38%

So Mr. Gibson received 14.8% of the vote. Or one can say the group of elected councilors polled 60.38% of the vote, compared to the 39.61% of the vote by the other candidates.

Not too many 5th graders would round up 60.38% to 70%--just Issler!

#6 Posted by Avenger on July 17, 2008 at 5:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Avenger,
No one can tell Ed anything. He and only he has all the correct facts and figures. Everytime he post's his figure's someone shoot's it down with a link to the subject. He just keep's on ticking with the wrong info
He still believes Tucker would have won by a landslide had he been allowed to run. Last time he ran they had to have a recount it was that close

#7 Posted by dc5799 on July 17, 2008 at 6:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

dc5799,

Oh, yes--I remember the recount. Just for grins, here are the 2004 results, sorted by number of votes:

....Candidate.........Votes......Percent

Terri DiSCIULLO.......2951..... .17.18%
Mike MINOZZI..........2682.......15.62%
Bill TROTTER...........2443.......14.23%
E. Glenn TUCKER......2300.......13.39%
Paula CAMPOSANO-.....2215.......12.90%
ROBINSON
Heyward E. BOYCE.......2101.......12.24%
Steve STEFANIDES......1495........8.71%
William MARKIE..........985........5.74%

#8 Posted by Avenger on July 18, 2008 at 12:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)



Post your comment
(Requires free registration.)

Username:

Password:
(Forgotten your password?)

Your Turn: