These are the most common questions raised about navigational safety on the New River, answered directly and without evasion. The positions here are based on navigational physics, federal law, and procedural safety, not opinion.
Click any question to expand the full response and the strategic context behind it.
The Coalition for New River Preservation (CNRP) is a coordinated maritime leadership group composed of upriver shipyard executives (including Bradford Marine), commercial towboat operators, marine industry leaders (MIASF), and licensed captains who navigate the river daily.
The Coalition's mission is to ensure that the New River remains accessible and safely navigable for the vessels that transit it today, without compromising its future as a vital working waterway, while also addressing environmental and water quality challenges on the North Fork.
On October 1, 2026, the City of Fort Lauderdale Marine Advisory Board (MAB) officially voted and approved a formal Communication to the City Commission recommending that the City Manager:
"Engage appropriate City staff (Marine Facilities, Police Marine Unit, Transportation & Mobility, and Planning & Zoning) in coordination with maritime stakeholders (including the Marine Industries Association of South Florida, commercial tow operators, and Florida Power & Light) to evaluate operational solutions to New River navigation congestion."
This official advisory action formalizes the multi-year technical research (USACE bathymetry, City GIS property line mapping, vessel maneuvering models) and establishes a collaborative path between municipal departments, utility providers, commercial operators, and residents.
The issue is cumulative impact. Local code is based on property lines. Safe navigation is based on maneuvering width. When both sides of the river build to the maximum allowed, the remaining channel technically complies on paper but functionally becomes unsafe for larger vessels and critical infrastructure barges.
A parcel can be fully compliant with the City's ULDR and still contribute to a collective navigational hazard. The regulatory framework was designed around property rights, not navigational physics. These are two different measurement systems.
Commercial operators and licensed tug captains report recurring near-misses, transit cancellations, and mandatory holding delays at critical choke points during unfavorable tides and wind. While catastrophic collisions with fixed structures or infrastructure have been avoided through extraordinary maneuvering by skilled captains, the physical margin for error has dropped to zero.
Under current conditions, any single mechanical failure, steering loss, or cross-current displacement immediately results in direct contact with berthed vessels or shore facilities. In professional maritime safety, near-misses and forced transit delays are operational failures. Waiting for an inevitable catastrophic incident before aligning channel geometry with federal and state standards is unacceptable policy.
This affects more than yachts. It affects infrastructure barges for Florida Power & Light servicing the Dania Power Plant, seawall repair barges required for climate resilience upgrades, emergency response vessels, and the commercial marine supply chain that defines Fort Lauderdale as the Boating Capital of the World.
The New River is a working waterway, not a recreational corridor. The marine industry dependent on river access represents billions of dollars in annual economic activity and thousands of jobs.
Waterfront property rights are fully respected here. This is not about eliminating dock access. It is about defining predictable navigation corridors so that everyone understands the functional limits of a shared public waterway.
Clear navigation standards actually protect waterfront homeowners. Without defined corridors, the first serious incident will force this entire discussion into a courtroom. At that point, the outcome is determined by a judge, not by a community planning process. Proactive standards give homeowners certainty. Litigation gives them neither certainty nor control.
This is not sudden. It has been incremental. What we are seeing now is the cumulative effect of individual approvals made over time, each reasonable in isolation, that collectively produce an outcome no single approval intended. The longer this continues, the more difficult and contentious any correction becomes.
Addressing this now, while the channel is constrained but still functional, is significantly less disruptive than addressing it after a major incident or after the geometry has passed the point of operational viability.
They have the authority to enforce obstruction under state and federal law, and they understand the problem. However, both the USCG and the FWC have indicated that they prefer the City of Fort Lauderdale to provide direction on how it would like to proceed. Without locally defined navigation corridors, enforcement becomes reactive, potentially adversarial, and politically complicated.
The City is best positioned to set the channel geometry standard. Once the standard is defined, USCG and FWC enforcement is aligned, coordinated, and defensible. The City must lead.
If we do nothing, continued incremental encroachment will eventually make large vessel transit and infrastructure access operationally constrained or impossible. The first serious incident, such as a denied transit, a collision in a narrowed bend, or a delayed emergency response, will trigger agency involvement or litigation.
At that point, decisions about channel width and dock setbacks are made under emergency pressure rather than measured planning. The outcome benefits no one, including the waterfront homeowners who built within code and who will face scrutiny regardless.
This is not about any individual owner. Every property in question may have obtained all required permits and complied fully with applicable local code. The issue is cumulative density and channel width, not individual conduct.
The solution must be structural and policy-based. Special Navigation Section designations apply to the geometry of the waterway, not to the character of any individual property owner. This distinction is essential and must be maintained in every discussion.
If a known navigational constraint contributes to a serious incident, and if it can be demonstrated that the geometric restriction was foreseeable based on the City's permitting record, legal exposure risk increases materially. The City's own GIS modeling and this public discussion create a documented record of awareness.
Proactively defining and protecting navigation corridors through Special Navigation Section designations and dock code amendments demonstrates responsible governance and significantly reduces that exposure.