ON THE BEACH II: PACIFICA'S SEAWALL DILEMMA

Bob Boles op-ed

Comments

[John Keener]

Any attempt to increase property taxes to pay for all or part of a seawall rebuild would be in the form of a bond, which would have to be approved by the voters.

[Jay Bird]

Every taxpayer should note: The city will try to pay for this and other similar projects by raising property taxes. Given new extreme weather patterns and concomitant disasters, what would be left to pay for another City Hall disaster?

[Sharon]

Recently came across this system. Wondering if this could be utilized/helpful in our situation: https://www.sandsaver.com/about-sandsaver.htm

[Carl May]

I'm always surprised that the previous, and eventually failed, repairs to the seawall in Sharp Park are never mentioned in current discussions. That eight-foot seawall, too, will only be temporary, no match for the long-term physical forces of the natural world.

In any case, recent local history, facts concerning bluff retreat or loss of beaches with coastal armoring, and reasonable projections accounting for sea-level rise and the greater volatility and severity of weather on top of that rise will continue to be suppressed as long as a crapstorm of real estate and developer money, most from outside Pacifica, can successfully buy elections.

[Christine Boles]

I am a bit prejudiced of course, but great writing, Bob, and good questions. The way Pacifica allows coastal armoring in the form of seawalls and boulders at the base of cliffs actually causes loss of our precious sand and beaches. This is an important issue for all of Pacifica to consider, not just the residents of Sharp Park.

Tune in to tonight’s public hearing if you’re able.
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/depts/pw/engr/current_projects/beach_boulevard_infrastructure_resiliency_project/default.asp