City outlines waterfront adaptation plan proposing raised paths, targeted protections as sea levels rise
Loading...
Summary
City staff presented a mid-project update on a two‑and‑a‑half‑year waterfront adaptation plan that models local sea‑level rise and weighs combinations of hard and nature‑based solutions — including raised walking/biking paths, revetments, and sand nourishment — while emphasizing phased design, Coastal Commission permitting, and near‑term community outreach.
Timmy Bolton, the city’s senior climate adaptation analyst and project manager, told the Parks and Recreation Commission on March 25 that the waterfront adaptation plan is a two‑and‑a‑half‑year effort funded by the California Coastal Commission, the California Coastal Conservancy and the city to prepare for flooding, erosion and sea‑level rise.
"Our guiding light and vision for this work effort is develop solutions for coastal flooding and coastal erosion for the next 30 years while enhancing what makes the waterfront special," Bolton said, summarizing the project scope and the team’s emphasis on both hazard protection and public access.
The presentation combined historical analysis and future scenarios. Staff reported East Beach has experienced erosion in places of up to about 5 feet per year since 2000, and showed model scenarios that include roughly 0.8 feet of local sea‑level rise by 2050, about 1.6 feet by 2065 and about 2.5 feet by 2075. Bolton warned that, without action, some sections could erode inland to Cabrillo Boulevard by mid‑ to late‑century.
To respond, the project team assembled a "toolbox" of measures ranging from near‑term, low‑cost fixes to major core projects and longer‑term options. Near‑term "quick wins" include restriping parking lots to create separated walking and biking lanes and temporary deployable flood proofing at vulnerable facilities. Core measures — intended to provide 30 years of protection — include an elevated, ADA‑compliant walking and biking path that could double as an inland backstop during storms, plus strategic relocation of vulnerable assets. Future options considered for mid‑century or later include groins, headlands or offshore reefs and larger reconfiguration of the harbor edge.
Bolton noted trade‑offs for each approach. "Seawalls can do a great job of protecting what’s directly behind them, but they can also narrow the beaches in front of them," he said. He added that raised structures can produce unintended erosion if sited too close to the surf and that permitting constraints — particularly review and amendment of the local coastal program by the California Coastal Commission — will be a fundamental part of feasibility work.
Commissioners asked detailed operational and design questions. They pressed staff on whether tide gates or large‑scale tidal control were being considered, what constraints the Coastal Commission would likely impose, how the project would affect parking and views, and whether the city or partner agencies control dredge pipes and other harbor infrastructure. Melissa Hetrick, the adaptation and resilience program manager, said the team is coordinating regularly with the Coastal Commission and that a local coastal program amendment will be required for many options.
Bolton said the plan seeks multi‑benefit designs: for example, a raised walking and biking path could simultaneously provide safe circulation and serve as a structural backstop to reduce inland flooding. He described staged implementation: quick wins to buy time, core measures that would move forward after plan adoption and future options reserved for mid‑century needs.
The presentation included an economic framing: staff estimated the waterfront generates substantial recreational and regional economic value and that single storm cleanup can be expensive — the 2023 storm cleanup cost cited in the presentation was roughly $3 million. Bolton said the team will carry five to seven candidate solutions into a summer technical analysis to test timing, feasibility, costs and impacts; the goal is a draft recommended plan in early 2027 and return to City Council with a final recommendation about a year after that.
The commission endorsed continued community engagement. Staff announced an outreach schedule that includes a mid‑April online survey, a roadshow to 10 boards and commissions, several pop‑up events and three public open houses (two in person and one online) this spring. Bolton encouraged commissioners and the public to review project materials on the project website and sign up for updates.
Next steps: staff will refine options through technical analysis this summer, continue permitting discussions with the Coastal Commission, and return with a draft recommended plan in early 2027 for broader public review and Council consideration.
