| Tweet |
Custom Search
|
|
|
||
 City of Solana Beach
Section 3
Shoreline and Coastal Bluff Management Strategies Draft MEIR
Environmental Impact Analyses
accurately convey the true nature of the consequences of Alternative 1. Because the City
would not be taking any action, the City would not be subject to the CEQA statutory mandate
requiring that the approval of a project with significant effects necessitates the approval of any
"feasible" mitigation measures addressing such impacts. (See Pub. Resources Code, 21002.)
The City would therefore have unfettered discretion to decide whether to undertake, either on its
own or in tandem with other agencies, any "mitigation measures" recommended in this MEIR.
The City Council might choose to pursue some of the measures listed below, but cannot be
compelled to do so even if it were shown that they are "feasible" within the meaning of CEQA.
Long-term Loss of Beach Width. This can be mitigated using artificial beach replenishment
provided the program is properly designed to maintain a protective beach width in front of the
structures.
Reduction in Sediment Contribution to the Littoral Zone. This can be mitigated in a similar
fashion as the loss of beach by using artificial beach replenishment.
Beach Encroachment/Placement of the Protective Structure. This can be mitigated by locating
the protective structure as close as possible to the base of the seacliff. The dynamic effect can
be mitigated in a similar fashion as above, by artificial beach replenishment. The City's
Shoreline and Coastal Bluff Protection Ordinance currently contains a finding that any approved
structure be placed at the "most feasible landward location [(SBMC 17.62.080(A) (6) (d)].
Effect of Discontinuous Protection. Since long-term conditions will likely result in complete,
continuous coastal armoring, there will be no significant adverse effects of discontinuous
protection.
apparent that if the coastline were armored along the total length of beach, end scour (within the
City limits) would not be significant and, thus, no mitigation would be necessary. End scour
would be likely at the downcoast end of the wall, however. End scour would most likely be
mitigated by construction of an additional protective seawall downcoast, the construction of a
riprap revetment at the end of the subject seawall, or by a combination of sand replenishment
and/or a groin system.
Alternative 2 Repeal of the Shoreline and Coastal Bluff Protection Ordinance
The effects of seawalls, seacave plugs and fills, revetments, and cobble berms would be similar
to those listed under Alternative 1 above. However, this alternative would result in higher short-
term impacts, as the repeal of the City's Shoreline and Coastal Bluff Protection Ordinance could
result in a higher rate of bluff erosion and cliff failures because shoreline and bluff protection
devices would no longer be reviewed and permitted by the City of Solana Beach, which takes a
more proactive approach than the Coastal Commission has traditionally employed in reducing
shoreline and bluff erosion. Under the California Coastal Act (Pub. Resources Code, 30235),
property owners have to demonstrate that the home is threatened before the Coastal
Project No. 323530000
Page 3-24
|
 
|
|
|
||
