The California Coastal Commission’s staff has recommended
approval of the proposal to install permeable pilings next to Goleta Beach Pier
in an effort to protect the park and minimize erosion and destruction caused by
winter storms.
Goleta resident Ed de la Torre, a member of the Goleta
Beach Working Group that proposed the permeable pilings solution to the county
in 2004, is very pleased that the Coastal Commission has recommended approval,
and is happy the project is finally on the commission’s agenda.
“This expansion of a recreational pier is the best
possible solution to the problems that have plagued Goleta Beach for decades,”
said de la Torre.
The Goleta Beach Working Group has been at odds with
environmental groups who prefer “managed retreat,” which means Mother Nature be
left alone, take her course and that no intervention be made to save the beach
from erosion.
The approved project’s several rows of pilings would be
covered in a widening of the existing pier, once optimum piling placement is
determined.
The proposal also includes adding 500,000 cubic yards of
sand along both sides of the pier in an effort to avoid downcoast
erosion when the pilings slow the movement of sand away from the beach park.
The Beach and Sand Stabilization Project is on the commission’s agenda when it meets July 8 in San
Luis Obispo. The County of Santa Barbara filed an application with the
commission, detailing the proposal, in January of 2008.
“I am really glad we’re at the Coastal Commission with
the proposal and that their staff has recommended going forward with the
process,” said Janet Wolf, the county’s 2nd District Supervisor. Goleta Beach
Park is in the 2nd District. “County staff has worked hard reviewing the
project, done a very thorough job with the proposal and responding to concerns
from the Coastal Commission’s staff.”
Wolf will be attending the hearing next week and speaking
during public comment.
Darlene Chirman, a member of
the county’s Park Commission, said she was pleased with what the commission’s
staff recommended, including the
conditions attached for approval.
“I feel the commission was prudent in addressing concerns
and requesting more modeling, in incremental steps.
“When this came to the Park Commission, I actually voted
to approve moving it forward. Neither managed retreat nor the county proposal
seemed to be the answer, but the permeable pilings seemed preferable.”
The Surfrider Foundation’s
local chapter and the Environmental Defense Center have opposed the plan,
citing the fact that the proposal is experimental and would interfere with
natural cycles at the beach and coastal areas south of the beach park, among
other reasons.
The Coastal Commission’s staff agreed with the
“experimental” label in its staff report that recommended approval.
Other objections included the prediction that the project
“may induce downcoast erosion,” the pollution that
would be created during the construction process, and the contention that a
long enough window of time was not studied.
The two organizations submitted a “park reconfiguration
alternative” to the Coastal Commission last November. This alternative
criticized the methods and conclusions in the county’s proposal and suggested
what they consider a preferable plan for dealing with erosion and destruction
at the park.
That plan proposed relocating utilities and amenities as
needed with changing conditions and removing the park ranger’s residence to accommodate
relocation of some parking spaces.
The Coastal Commission wants additional modeling of the
county’s concept, a management and monitoring plan including frequent
monitoring of the process once pilings are in place, removal of existing rock
revetments concurrent with or prior to the construction, biological monitoring
before and during construction, and restoration plans for the region following
construction.
The Coastal Commission meeting will take place in the
chambers of the Board of Supervisors in San Luis Obispo beginning at 10 a.m.
July 8.