Feinstein goes to bat for beach project
By: DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer | ∞
NORTH COUNTY ---- U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., sent letters to a pair of federal agencies last week in a bid to jump-start a stalled $4.5 million study examining options for fortifying three miles of battered North County coastline.
Feinstein last week wrote top administrators with the National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and urged them to resolve differences in the next 60 days over steps that need to be taken to soften the project's harm to the environment.
The project aims to restore "the historic sandy coastlines in the cities of Solana Beach and Encinitas, whose coastal beaches are among the most severely eroded in California," Feinstein wrote in both of the letters.
Feinstein said the study was authorized in 1999 and has dragged on for more than seven years, despite initial expectations of finishing in three.
She wrote that $2.3 million of federal money has been committed to the project, with the rest coming from state and local sources.
"The high bluffs along the shoreline have failed dozens of times since 2000, resulting in injuries and one death," the senator wrote said. "In addition to the dangers posed by falling debris, there are approximately 500 residences located on top of the 70-foot bluffs that are at risk."
Feinstein said erosion also threatens Highway 101, a key north-south corridor.
In the project's early stages, the Army Corps of Engineers considered options ranging from building sea walls to installing artificial reefs to protect the fragile bluffs and prevent sand from washing out to sea.
In late 2005, the agency announced it had come up with a plan to fill notches, or holes, in the base of bluffs with "erodable" concrete and to pile more than 1 million cubic yards on three miles of beaches in the communities every five years.
The specially designed concrete is supposed to erode at roughly the same rate as the bluff face. As for the new sand, it is half as much as the San Diego Association of Governments spread on many more beaches from Oceanside to Imperial Beach during a regional project to replenish sand, in 2001.
Bob Hoffman, assistant regional administrator for habitat conservation with the National Marine Fisheries Service in Long Beach, said that as a result, the targeted beaches in Encinitas and Solana Beach would receive two to three times as much as they did in 2001.
That is problematic, he said, because the extra sand likely would harm up to 20 percent of the near-shore marine environment, covering rocky reefs that support kelp and surf grass and serve as habitat for juvenile lobsters.
"Quite frankly, that's just a level of impact that we're not willing to allow," Hoffman said.
The senator suggested that the agency had been ignoring vital information uncovered by the association during the earlier project.
Hoffman said that is not the case. He said the 2001 effort showed how much sand is acceptable and how much is not. If the Encinitas-Solana Beach project were to place roughly the same amount on the beach as in 2001, and even a little more, that would be acceptable, he said.
And it's not like a larger project would stop the cobble from reappearing, as it did soon after 2001, he said.
"There is no permanent fix when you're talking about sand," Hoffman said. "No matter how much you put on the beach, it will eventually all go away."
Solana Beach Councilman Joe Kellejian, who was in the nation's capital Thursday for an American Shore and Beach Association conference, said the senator's letters should help expedite a solution.
"It is a very positive step that a U.S. senator has taken a personal interest in this issue and gotten involved," Kellejian said. "We do need to move this forward."
Kellejian said he took Feinstein's Southern California regional director, James Peterson, on a tour of the project area earlier this month.
"He was amazed at the erosion," said Kellejian. "He saw that there was no sand and only cobble in certain areas."
In one of the letters, Feinstein asked the National Marine Fisheries Service to meet with Peterson to help mediate a solution, if one is not found within 60 days.
Contact staff writer Dave Downey at (760) 740-5442 or ddowney@nctimes.com.
More Stories
Advertisement
Coastal bluffs and erosion wrote on Mar 24, 2007 11:11 PM:Coastal blufs will continue to erode away with the natural course of retreat. Nature will be the deciding factor and money has no value. Please listen.
Randy wrote on Mar 25, 2007 5:27 AM:Oceanside should buy more sand using Redevelopment Agency dollars. It's a much better use of city funds than simply giving money to developers for nothing!
Bob wrote on Mar 25, 2007 5:58 AM:Feinstein has never been a friend of the Environment. The Army Corp of Engineers has never been ecologically motivated. And Joe Killijian is not a geologist or a marine biologist. It's time government got out of the way, stopped wasting tax payer money, and let nature take it's course. Only fools would try to hold back the ocean.
surfer wrote on Mar 25, 2007 6:57 AM:Cobbles? Web search for "leucadia we're back to cobbles" to see if you think we are back to cobbles.
lol wrote on Mar 25, 2007 7:08 AM:What about building rock piles such as the ones in Newport Beach?
She is sucking up to the powerful wrote on Mar 25, 2007 8:53 AM:But the bottom line is that the scientific evidence has proven that the beaches are going to erode. EVeryone is on notice, the best bet is just to offer property owners a buyout and let nature take its path. Why should the beach front property owners get bailed out for a situation that they knowingly bought into, this is no "act of god" (in the classic sense). Ifthey don't want a discounted buyut then they can be content to watch their homes drop into the ocean, and then be assessed for cleaning up the mess.
Poor in Escondido wrote on Mar 25, 2007 8:59 AM:Perhaps another tax is called for. Since the only people who can possibly afford to live on a bluff top overlooking the ocean are millionares and billionares, perhaps one less Mercedes will help pay for the costs associated with fighting Mother Nature.
It's her price... wrote on Mar 25, 2007 9:01 AM:when the vote goes to cut off funding for the war.
leucadia blogger wrote on Mar 25, 2007 9:03 AM:I was just at Beacon's Beach in Leucadia 10 minutes ago. There is a good 100 yards of sand from the bluff to the waterline. It is important to note that the new recovering kelp beds in Leucadia are much closer to the shoreline than in other areas of north county. The 2001 sand project smothered these kelp beds. There has been no kelp in Leucadia until late 2006 and early 2007. The sand is at a good level right now and we even have more sand this week than last week thanks to the early south swells we are now getting. I am deeply concerned about another massive sand project, it will destroy our kelp and ruin the quality of our surf spots which are used by thousands of surfers across north county daily. North county surfing is an economic engine and needs to be considered. It sounds like the politicians have drank the "no-sand-all-cobbles" kool-aid; a quick trip to the beach would reveal a different reality. The NCT's coverage of this story borders propaganda in favor of the sand project. I want the 500 bluff dwellers to feel secure but we don't need to go overboard on this. Please be mindful of the kelp, lobster, fish, surf spots and tax dollars. Thanks.
Ask wrote on Mar 25, 2007 10:17 AM:The 500 residences at the top of the bluff. that is why they pay INSURANCE!!! Let them fall into the ocean. Thats what they do in malibu!
Why doesn't Feinstein wrote on Mar 25, 2007 10:22 AM:worry about IMPORTANT things like our porous border?
Heady wrote on Mar 25, 2007 12:15 PM:Send the money to ICE for beach control!
Amazed wrote on Mar 25, 2007 1:08 PM:There oughth to be a rule that only people who know what they are talking about can use this comment system. The same goes for the "Leucadia blog." Let nature take its course? Gimmee a break. Where should we start - 1880? Once the homes fall in, do we just let the erosion take out 101 too? I'm sure the dreamers who wish things could be "natural" live and/or work in the coastal zone and are, therefore, contributing to the region's beach erosion problem. It's nice to take the easy way out and let nature "take its course." That way, no one is responsible.
anotherview wrote on Mar 25, 2007 5:06 PM:On TV years ago, a commercial used to run showing an irked Mother Nature saying, "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature." Here, the action of depositing sand on shorelines to replace eroded material will affect the wave motion in relation to the changed shoreline. In turn, nearby shorelines will experience known (and maybe unknown) effects from these altered wave motions. Other shoreline erosion-reduction practices do exist, yet all carry a price. Perhaps the environmental studies should look at the alternative of doing nothing to restore shorelines -- letting the Pacific Ocean have its way. Then, the state along with the federal government could offer the sensible long-term solution, already articulated in the earlier comments: (1) buy out the affected homeowners; and (2) realign Highway 101. Learning and then fitting ourselves to our place in the natural order befits an adult consciousness.
JP wrote on Mar 25, 2007 8:24 PM:I guess nobody here likes to eat local lobster like I do.
Hold on there Senator: wrote on Mar 25, 2007 9:13 PM: Relax Feinstein and let nature take its course. The people who bought, built, and play around those bluffs knew that nature would take its course and that the bluffs would be coming down. Now you want the tax payers to pay for a few more years of their playing. They need to move farther inland or to the east coast. As long as the moon continues to rise in the east and sets in the west those bluffs and anything put up to over come nature are going to come down. Twenty years from now someone like you will be begging for whatever is put up to be reinforced at tax payer expense. Did you know that as the west coast falls into the ocean the east coast is being expanded. We have enough real troubles as it is. Go to work on something worthwhile and stop trying to help nitwits who make the wrong real estate decisions, and that includes the State of CA. It was foolish to build highway 101 where it could be ruined by the ocean. You need to think things out before speaking.
surfer wrote on Mar 26, 2007 11:27 AM:everyone is an expert. Hey I wrote a research paper in college on coastal dynamics, should I explain it all to you. the hotels want sand for the tourists. the surfers want reefs for the waves with just a little sand on the beach. the homeowners on the bluff want to stop the inevitable collapse so more sand on the beach helps (and an end to the coastal commision would be their dream come true). the inlanders want the rich coastal homeowners to pay their own way. the locals on the coast want the inlanders to stay inland. the city councils want $ to play with. the lobster wants to stay out of JP's tortilla. I will surf the waves and if they put too much sand on the beaches I will suffer through another bunch of closeouts and greasy dirty sand until the first big winter swell washes it all away.
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement