CPOA urges the Board of Supervisors to direct staff to re-issue RFP, ensure it reaches the appropriate contact people at each of the major Coastal Consulting firms, and to extend the deadline by 30 days.
CPOA urges the County Board of Supervisors to direct staff to re-issue Request for Proposal (RFP) #23P3-011 Santa Cruz County Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment and Local Coastal Program Amendment, and ensure that the RFP reaches the appropriate contact people at each of the major Coastal Consulting firms and extend the deadline to respond to the RFP by 30 days.
County staff had recommended Integral Consulting be awarded a grant in the amount of $692,608 to complete a vulnerability assessment of the Santa Cruz County Coastline and to recommend changes to the Local Coastal Plan (Land Use & Implementation Plan) to address coastal erosion and loss of public beaches due to sea level rise for the next 50 – 100 years. We are very concerned that Integral Consulting may have strong ties to the Coastal Commission and would not necessarily best represent the interests of the County and the Coastal Property Owners. CPOA Members are urged to Contact Supervisors Koenig, McPhearson, and Friend to get them to vote on February 13th to put the Vulnerability Assessment and recommended LCP changes for Santa Cruz County back out to bid. We do not want Integral Consulting to get the award!
CPOA endorses Manu Koenig (District 1) and Kim De Serpa (District 2) who have committed to supporting “the rights of coastal property owners” to protect their structures and properties from coastal erosion, and to guarantee that CPOA will have a “seat at the table” in every step from the Vulnerability Study to the proposed revisions of the Local Coastal Plan – Safety Hazards for Coastal Beaches and Bluffs (Land Use and Implementation Plan). Please contribute to their campaigns.
COA is investigating the feasibility of establishing a Political Action Committee and other funding alternatives to allow CPOA to raise funds and contribute to our chosen candidates for the County Board of Supervisors in our next election.
The County Board of Supervisor’s just approved the submission of a grant application to the Coastal Commission to fund $733,000 to fund a sea level rise vulnerability assessment and preparation of related Local Coastal Program General Plan, which is expected to be awarded by CCC this summer. Then the County will select a Coastal Engineering Consultant to complete the Vulnerability Study and begin work on revising the LCP this fall.
BOS item 57 (13633) on 12/6/22, to defer and set a Public Hearing for 12/12/2023 on the new proposed amendments to the Amendments to the LCP Safety Element 6.4 (Land Use Plan) for Coastal Beaches and Bluffs, and the Geological Hazards sections (Implementation Plan chapter 16.10). On October 14, 2022 the Coastal Commission denied a portion of the amendments addressing development on coastal bluffs and beaches. The
timeline for these updates is estimated to include most of 2023. Therefore, staff is
recommending this item be deferred to December 12, 2023.
The Commissioners voted (9:0) to reject the Santa Cruz County’s proposed LCP Amendments, and sided with the Surfriders, and recommendations on the CCC Staff Report. The CCC Staff report asserted that the LCP Amendments were poorly written, with many internal inconsistencies, were not consistent with the Coastal Act (1977), which generally prohibits any new shoreline armoring, and most existing armoring may need to be removed to allow managed retreat to preserve the public beaches as sea level rises.
The County staff is committed to pursuing the clearest and quickest route to getting an LCP amendment certified by the Coastal Commission which is reasonable and feasible for the County to implement to address sea level rise, and to continue to meet with CCC staff and major stakeholders to reach consensus where possible. It is imperative that the LCP amendment effort which has taken over 6 years to get to this point, not be abandoned.
CPOA’s letter to CCC outlines our position on the following topics as part of the County’s Proposed LCP Amendments, scheduled for a CCC Hearing on 10/14/22.
Major Differences between CCC’s Position vs. County Proposed LCP: CPOA’s Response to:
A. CCC’s definition of “existing structures” being those structures which were present prior to the Coastal Act (January 1, 1977).
B. No new armoring for existing structures or redevelopment in coastal hazard zones.
C. Existing Armoring (Revetment Rocks) along East Cliff Dr. between the Harbor and Soquel Point may need to be removed as the public beaches shrink due to sea level rise.
D. The requirement for all property owners with existing shoreline protection (seawalls or revetment rocks) to file a “Monitoring, Maintenance, and Repair Plan (MMRP)” and to routinely inspect, maintain, and repair the shoreline structures and prevent any seaward migration.
E. When necessary, managed retreat to move structures inland to preserve public access and beaches.
F. Shoreline Protection Exception Area (SPEA). The County had proposed a “Shoreline Protection Exception Area, extending approximately 1.4 miles from Soquel Point (APN # 028-304-72) to the Capitola City border.