Without Urgent Action, State’s Sea Level Rise is a Threat to Housing & the Economy, Report Says

State of CA may need 100,000 new homes to mitigate the effects of lost Property Tax Revenue from coastal homes lost due to coastal erosion, to continue to fund local coastal governments and schools. However, the local coastal communities are not responding fast enough to prepare for the sea level rise and potential destruction to coastal properties (public & private).

Dire Consequences if Immediate Action isn’t Taken, State says

With sea level rise of 3 feet to 6 feet, “up to two-thirds of Southern California beaches may become completely eroded by the year 2100,” says the state report, citing research by the United States Geological Survey. The same research says that by 2100, 6 feet of sea level rise combined with storms “could impact over 480,000 California residents and $119 billion in property value in 2010 dollars,”the report says.

California Legislative Analysis Office Report – Preparing for Sea Level Rise

According to CA LAO Report, local coastal communities must start now to plan for the effects of potential sea level rise and address Residential Adaptation – Managed Retreat. The report sites a USGA study indicating sea level is expected to rise by 6-7 inches in 10 years by 2030, 2 feet by 2050, and as much as 7 feet by 2100. Read this 48 page report for more information.

Pajaro Dunes HOA letter to the Board of Supervisors

We believe Santa Cruz County
has more leverage with the CCC than you might appreciate right now. Much of the foundation for this LCP has never
been tested either practically or legally, thus putting Santa Cruz County in a position to be subject to historic, ongoing
litigation. As the Coastal Commission says in its letter of Monday, December 9, the county’s first‐to‐go status will provide
a template “that can also serve as a model statewide for other cities and counties to emulate in addressing complicated
sea level rise adaption issues.” In other words, both the county and its coastal citizens/property owners would be the
legal guinea pigs for testing how far many of the terms of the Coastal Act can be stretched. In that regard, the
commission needs you to be a successful example as much as you are dependent upon them to approve your LCP. That
provides the opening for you to continue to push for common sense, practical, workable and environmentally
considerate solutions for guiding future response to sea level rise. We know the planning staff has been trying to thread
that needle and believe strongly that you should continue to press your opportunity.

Coastal Commission’s Response letter to the Board of Supervisors re the final LCP

The California Coastal Commission has submitted a letter to the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors regarding the proposed final LCP. CCC wants the definition of > 50% change to major structural components to be calculated singularly (> 50% change to foundation, or > 50% to framing/exterior walls, or > 50% change to roof framing) instead of collectively. Second, they want the County to be aggressive in forcing the removal of all rip rap (revetment) rocks for new or redevelopment in favor of modern vertical seawalls, which meet CCC standards. Third, they want the concept of manged retreat to be addressed more clearly.

CPOA Letter to the County Board of Supervisors 12-8-19 regarding final changes to the LCP

Given the magnitude of the changes in the latest draft of the LCP, the inadequate timeframe provided for review, the adverse consequences to coastal property owners and the increasing possibility that Santa Cruz County will be open to undesirable litigation, we can no longer support the proposed LCP and ask that the Board of Supervisors postpone adoption of this proposed LCP such that a proper review can be conducted and a better resolution developed among the interested parties.

Steve Forer
President, CPOA-SC

Urgent Call to Action – Attend the Board of Supervisors Mtg 12/10/19

We have not had sufficient time to complete a thorough review of the 6.4 Public Safety Element Amendments and Chapter 16.10 Ordinance Code Amendments Regarding Geologic Hazards. There have been substantial changes from prior draft approved by the Planning Commissioners, there are apparent discrepancies between the LCP and Code Amendments, and a number of issues still require further clarification. Therefore CPOA-SC can no longer support the LCP until we have completed our review of these documents and obtained an outside legal opinion on how these changes may affect the rights of property owners. We urge you to attend this important Board of Supervisor’s meeting on December 10, 2019 @ 10:45 a.m..