Shoreline use and protection

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

1VT
Coastal Zone
Information 7.,
A@
Center
W.

Zen, FN

M
21 M -

.021

tw@
W,

r-49

lid

(f o Me PX j-@E f4 '13
Sfv

TC
QAVAM
224
.C2
S56 AREA PLAN
1972
--"'U:S-E,-,- AN R- OTECTI 0, ILL

This appendix has been prepared as a contribution to the X61ifornia
Comprehensive Ocean Area Plan (COAP)o
The subject matter herein has been developed following discussions with
COAP staff, however the content remains the responsibility of the
contributing agencies

DEPARTMENT OFNA VIGATIONAND OCEAN DEVELOPMENT

,VSHORELINE USE AND PROTECTION

Prepared For The

COMPREHENSIVE OCEAN AREA PLAN

BEACH EROSION CONTROL PROGRAM

Prepared By

DEPARTMENT OF NAVIGATION AND OCEAN DEVELOPMENT

1,1ARCH 1971

1@
PART II

ROAD TRANSPORTATION

Prepared By

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
NI MARCH 1972

U - S - DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
(Z!, -s
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON , SC 29405-2413

PrOPOrtY Of CSC Libraz7

THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT WAS FINANCED IN PART
THROUGH AN URBAN PLANNING GRANT FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, UNDER
THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 701 OF THE HOUSING ACT OF
1968, AS AMENDED.

CONTENTS

PART I. SHORELINE PROTECTION
Page
I. Introduction
Objective 2
Scope of Investigation 2

Ii. Natural Shoreline Processes 4

III. Technology of Shoreline Protection
Beaches 7
Cliffs and Bluffs 10
Non-Structural Measures 10

IV. Governmental Programs for Protection
Federal Programs 12
State Programs 15

V. Critical Areas of Erosion in California 20

Vi. Economics of Shoreline Protection 47

Costs and Benefits
Costs of Inaction
Financial Aspects

Vii. Means to Satisfy Needs for Protection
Planning 51
Framework Study 53
National Shoreline Study 55
Conservation of Sand 58
Structural Measures 60
Development of New Technology
Coordination with Other Interests 61

VIII. Summary and Conclusions 62

Ix. Recommendations 67
Legislative Action 68
Administrative Action 69

Bibliography 72

PART Il. Road Transportation

Page

I. Past and Emerging Approaches to Transportation Issues 75

II. Existing Road Systems

A. Administration 75

B. Classification as to Purpose or Function 77

III. The Planning Process

A. General 78,

B. Cooperative, Comprehensive, Continuous Transportation
Planning

1. Organization 79
2. Process 80

C. Adjusting Policy 82

1. The Transportation Corridor Policy 82

D. Procedures in Freeway Route Planning Studies 86

E. Specific Design Phase 88

IV. Major State Laws Authorizing Road Transportation 89
in the Coastal Zone

V. Existing and Emerging Goals for Transportation 91

A. Needs and Goals in Road Transportation 92

B. More Comprehensive Participation in Highway Projects 94

C. Community and Environmental Factors in the Highway 95
Planning and Development Process

D. Three Laws on Environmental Concerns 97

E. Reduction of Traffic-Generated Noise -- A Policy 98
and Approach

VI. The Coastal Zone Policy of the State in Transportation 100

RT I
I

0
PAX

-V

INTRODUCTION

The State of California has over 1,100 miles of coastline comprising wide.,

sandy beaches, scenic bluff areas, and spectacular rocky headlands that meet

the sea. This shoreline environment provides many opportunities for a variety

of uses. -Recreation, residential, commercial, agricultural, industrial, and

I
military facilities., also compete for this prime land. California, probably

more than any other state., recognizes just how important this shoreline is to

the economy, the livelihood, and the well-being of its more than 20 million

citizens.

The entire coastline is exposed to continuous ,,rave action causing a wearing

away of the State's valuable land resources. This erosion can be extremely

rapid during storms. In areas of extensive land use and urbanization., the

erosion causes serious problems of loss of badly needed recreation areas,

restricted use, and eventual damage to property and improvements.

Our beaches have always been subjected to erosion, but there existed, during

earlier days, a compensating- element for natural beach replenishment by virtue

of stream-borne sediment transported to the shoreline from the many rivers

and creeks draining,- the coastal watersheds. Today this natural replenishment

process has been upset by both nature and' ran through drought conditions,

water development, flood control development, and harbor and marina construction.,

resulting in an imbalance in the stability of the shoreline.

To date, much of the work in planning for beach erosion control has been of a

defensive nature. Emphasis has been placed on correcting the damage after it is

done and protecting the shoreline from further erosion. In the futureo

California cannot be satisfied with maintaining the status quo; but must look

toward the future in order to achieve a rational balance between the economic

development and conservation needs associated with beach and shoreline resources.

The concepts presented in this chapter are just a beginning. It has taken the

people of the State a long time to discover that the coastal zone, especially

its shores and beaches, is a unique area which should be studied with a vieni

towards arriving at solutions to the many varied complex problems. An expanded

program is encouraged by the State to devise permanent solutions to the

protection and enhancement of our beaches and shoreline areas to meet the

recreational and other social needs of our generation and those of the future.

ObJectives

The objectives of this chapter are threefold: 1) identify the natural processes

of erosion and the role of man in contributing to and combating its deleterious

effects; 2) identify areas of the coastline subject to rapid rates of erosion;

and 3) conclusions i-rM be drawn leading to recommendations concerning the

role and conduct of shore protection programs in the future.

ScoDe of Investigation

This chapter has been developed from the review and analysis of existing data.

No new data were collected nor were field investigations or measurements made

specifically for the purposes of this chapter.

Sources of infornation include reports., investigations,, and other written

information from Federal,, State and local government agencies and the personal

-2-

observations and opinions of the author and his working associates in the

shoreline protection field.

Those sources of written information referred to in the report and those which

play an important role in shoreline protection are listed in the Bibliography.

NATURAL SHORELINE PROCESSES

There are two general shore types: the hard-rock type and the soft

unconsolidated sandy type. The latter is subject to rapid change in

appearance and configuration and, consequently,, is the most important

for economic and recreational reasons.

Sandy beaches have formed along much of California's coastline. On the

rocky northern and central coasts., relatively short beaches kno;\rn as

pocket beaches are found. In much of the southern part of the State,

sandy beaches ray be found fronting bluffs or plains which slope gradually

to the sea. Such beaches are usually long and continuous.

The major sources of-beach-building material are the natural processes of

weathering and the transport of sediment by streams draining to the ocean.

The natural sand supply from drainage basins is dependent on the rate of

upland erosion and on the ability of streams to transport material. Many

factors affect the sand supply; for instance, cyclical dry spells result in

insufficient runoff to carry material to the ocean. Urbanization has an

adverse effect on the natural sand supply through reducing the areas subject

to erosion and trapping sediment in storm drains, flood-control channels,

debris basins., and dams.

Once beach-building material has reached the littoral zone,, it is acted upon

by wave action and is sorted and formed into a beach. Beach sand is moved

onshore or offshore., usually seasonally, by the uprush and backviash of the

waves; and can also be moved along parallel to shore by the littoral current.

-4-

The littoral current results when ocean waves strike the shoreline at an

angle. The impinging-vraves have an energy and wave notion component parallel

to the shoreline. This motion, the littoral current, is responsible for the

movement of beach sand (littoral drift) along the coast. The littoral current

nay change seasonally from upcoast to downcoast, as waves approach from

different directions. When more naterial is moved downcoast than upcoast

during a year, the direction of net littoral transport is said to be dawncoast.

Another source of beach-building material results from the erosion of coastal

formations (bluffs and cliffs) by the sea. This source is comparatively

unimportant, because coastal formations contain varying proportions of beach-

building material and frequently are composed mostly of material too fine

to remain on the beach.

The three rain natural sources of material to any specific beach segment are:
(1) material moving into the area by littoral transport from adjacent beach

areas; (2) contributions by streams; and (3) contributions through erosion of

coastal formations other than beaches exposed to wave attack. Considering

coasts as a whole, maintenance of beaches by natural processes must be attained

at the expense of erosion of the land mass.

Losses of beach material from a specific area result primarily from: (1) move-

ment of material laterally out of the area; (2) movement of material offshore

into water so deep that the material is lost to the littoral supply; (3) loss

of material into submarine canyons; and (4) loss of material by deflation

(e.g., i.,rind blm-m). Loss of material by abrasion of sand has been found of

-5-

slight importance. In areas with relatively low, narrow barrier beaches,

significant wnounts of littoral material may be washed over the dunes during

storms and deposited on the backshore or in the lagoon.

Along a given stretch of beach, one of three conditions exists: (1) the supply

of sediments to the beach from all sources is in excess of that removed by

natural forces, and the beach is aggrading; (2) losses exceed the material

supplied and the beach is eroding; or (3) the shoreline is stable and neither

erosion nor accretion predoninates. In normal circumstances, only the second

condition is of importance because it is this condition that leads to the

disappearance of natural protective beaches and the possible destruction of

property.

For any individual segment of beach, the largest source of material moving

into the area is generally littoral drift eroded from the adjoining updrift

segment; unless some major sediment-bearing strewn enters the segment in

question, or cliff or dune erosion is sufficiently rapid to provide appreciable

supply. The various procedures for beach stabilization or construction require

consideration of the littoral currents and frequently include structures to

modify the currents' transporting capability. Any intrusion into the littoral

current-will cause some degree of interruption of the down-current sand

movement, as well as decreasing the local eroding ability of the ocean irave

energy.

TECHNOLOGY OF SHORIMIIM- PROTECTION

Beaches: The term "beach" can be applied to any shoreline formation of sorted

rock fragments. These fragments ray be boulders, cobbles, gravels, sands.,

silts or clays. The slope of the beach foreshore and the erodibility of the

beach are functions of the type of material comprising the beach. Boulders

will stand on a steeper slope than sand and will, therefore, require greater

wave energy to be displaced.

The sandy beaches have received most of the attention because they represent

the most-used recreational beaches and because they are most vulnerable to erosion.

Beach areas can be maintained by continuing the supply or by ndnudzing the loss

of sand. I.,Jhen the supply is deficient, it can be augmented by artificial Means.

This replenishment can be accomplished by depositing sand either directly on the

area of interest or into the littoral stream and allowing it to be naturally

transnorted to the area. The source of sand can be an upland excavation, ail

offshore undex-aater deposit, coastal sand dunes, or accretions formed by a

littoral barrier such as a brealoaater. The process of moving littoral accretion

around a barrier and back into the littoral stream. is termed bypassing. Shore-

line improvements that include structures such as harbor breaI,-waters will

normally require provisions for sand bypassing at rep ranEing
,ular intervals,

from one to several years, depending on the quantity of accretion and the
I -

severity of downdrift erosion.

As long as there is an adequate beach to dissipate the wave energy, the upland

areas and ir.-provements are protected, and space for recreation is available

-7-

on the beach. In areas where replenishment is not feasible, structures must

be used to retain the beach. The problem then becomes one of design., where.,

through analysis of the wave forces in the littoral zone and the littoral

transport characteristics,, the proper type and configuration of structures

can be selected.

The two major methods of dealing with beach erosion problems are stabilizing

beaches with groins and periodic replenishment of beach material. A groin is

a barrier-type structure designed to trap or retard passing littoral drift.
Groins are usually built perpendicular to the shore., and extend from a point

landward of possible shoreline recession into the water a sufficient distance

to stabilize the shoreline. Depending on the desired results and the existing

conditions, the length of the groin can be from less than 100 feet long to

over 700 feet long. As material accumulates on the updrift side of the groin.,

supply to the downdrift shore is reduced and the downdrift shore recedes.

Periodic replenishment involved adding new sand to the beach to replace material

lost by erosive processes. The new sand may be brought from inland sources or

from. offshore sources. Inland sources may be sand deposits with suitable

characteristics or dune fields; however, dune fields presently or prospectively

providing secondary defense against overtopping by storm waves should not be

considered a source of replenishment material. Offshore sources are deposits

of beach material lying in depths of water that permit dredging of the material.

Another localized source of material is littoral material accidently or intention-

ally trapped by harbor structures. Some small craft harbors have incorporated

"sand traps" to deliberately collect littoral drift before it shoals the

navigation channels. The material collected in the sand trap can be pumped

-8-

to the downdrift beaches for nourishment. The offshore breakwaters used to

form these sand traps are probably the most effective means of completely

intercepting the littoral material and are usually positioned in water

significantly deeper than the seaward ends of groins. This makes it possible

for them to control a wider zone of littoral transport than structures tied

to the shore. Because littoral transport is the direct result of wave action,

the extent to which the breakwater intercepts the littoral drift is directly

proportional to the extent of wave interception by the breakwater. As the

wave energy is dissipated on the breaktiater, sand is deposited on the shore

in a convex seaward formation. This then acts as a natural groin which

further impounds the littoral drift.

Some economic considerations affecting the selection of shore protection

structures warrant discussion. 1,-1hen large quantities of sand are available

within an economically practical distance from the eroding beach, replenishment

is a desirable structural measure. At present, sand deposits in up to 70 feet

of water can be dredged econoracally. In 1968, an offshore borrow area was

used as a source for 1,,400,000 cubic yards of sand to replenish Redondo Beach.

The material was dredged fro-a a depth of 40 to 70 feet, and was pwnped a

distance of one-half mile to the project beach through a pipeline.

In general, the cost per cubic yard of beach m-terial varies inversely with the

quantity and directly with the distance and the difficulty of the work. Future

economic linits will probably chan,-e as new technology for offshore dredainr'
0

develo-os and as the need for beach riaterial increases.

-9-

When sand is not available nearby, more reliance must be placed on

stabilization through construction of groins. In California., groins are

most generally constructed of rock, because rock is relatively cheap,

durable, and is easier to work with than alternative materials. For these

reasons, rock is also used for most revetments while seawalls are, generally,,

rather uncommonly used in California. The size of the rock varies from

5 pounds to 25 tons and has an average price of about $9.00 a ton in place.

The economic life of groins and revetments are usually taken at 50 years,

although rock groins, if properly constructed and maintained,,idU last

indefinitely.

Cliffs and Bluffs,: Most of California's coastline consists of high cliffs

and mountains or la;\r lying bluffs in the process of being cut by vrave erosion.

In most of these areas., erosion is so slati and development so sparse that the

natural process results in no adverse effect upon nan. However, in developed

areas where man has built houses., roads,, and etc., erosion does adversely

affect man. Either these areas must be protected or improvements r.Mst be

abandoned.

When it is determined to be econorucally feasible or socially desirable to

protect land or improvements, the usual means is.to construct rock structures

such as dikes or revetments. Seawalls and bulkheads can also be constructed

in some circumstances.

Non-Structural 11'easures: The use of structural measures to control erosion

everytihere that it occurs is neither feasible nor desirable. The scenery

-10-

of the shoreline is often created by erosion and,, as previously discussed,

this erosion is one source of beach material. Erosion control structures

are not the only measures that nay be taken to mitigate damages. Dune

stabilization and sand conservation measures are also available. The open

lands in the shoreline zone nay be controlled through regulatory and manage-

ment programs to minimize develoments adversely affected by erosion damage.

Such non-structural measures reduce erosion damages to the shoreline and

structures and contribute to preservation of the scenic beauty of the sboreline

environment.

GOVEMMT PROGWIS FOR PROTECTION

Beach and shore erosion is one of California's pressing problems. The number

of people using the shoreline is steadily increasing. Unrelenting pressures,

generated by this growing population., have created a demand for shoreline land

for homes, industries, transportation terminals, recreation and marine food

resulting in concern for the protection and restoration of beaches and shoreline

areas. At the federal level, this interest and concern has led to increasing

involvement in shore protection. The increasing federal interest has been

paralleled by expanding interest on the part of the coastal states.

Federal Programs

By various legislative actions, the Congress has authorized the U. S. Corps of

Engineers to carry out the policies and programs established to protect and

restore the Nation's shorelines.

Under these legislative authorities, the Corps of Engineers researches the

causes of beach erosion; investigates and studies specific beach erosion problems;

and constructs - or, in certain cases, reimburses local and state governments

for constructing - shore protection and beach restoration projects. These

authorities are contained in Title 33, United States Codes.

Shore protection and beach restoration projects are initiated by requests by

local governmental agencies. Eroded publicly-m.;ned shores and shores eroded

because of federal navigation i-iorks are eligible for federal assistance;

privately-,awned shores nay be eligible for federal assistance if there is public

-12-

benefit such as that arising from public use.

Beach erosion studies for the regular project program must be individually

authorized by the Congress. The study authorization is granted by a resolution

approved by the Public ',,Iorks Cormattee of either the Senate or the House of

Representatives, or is included in a River and Harbor Act adopted by the Congress

and approved by the President. The District or Division Engineer will begin the

study as soon as the necessary authorization and funds are provided.

The investigation and study are intended to determine whether a federal project

is justified and, if so, whether its construction is feasible.

If comparisons of the costs of construction and the benefits resulting from the

construction show the project to be a sound and prudent investment, and if the

local sponsoring agency affirms willingness and ability to provide the required

cooperation, the report on the study recommends adoption of the project. Before

the report is submitted to the Congress, it is revie@i-ed by the Board of --,?ngineers

for Rivers and Harbors., the Chief of Engineers, the Governors of affected states,

and all interested federal departments.

1.1hen funds are provided, the responsible District Engineer carries out the

detailed engineering work essential to construction and prerWes construction

drawings and specifications, and supervises construction. Upon completion.,

the Drotective works are turned over to the sponsoring local interests for

operation and maintenance in accordance with the authorizing legislation.

Under the provisions of Section 103 of the River and Harbor Act of 19621, the

Corps of Engineers may construct certain srall beach erosion control projects

-13-

without specific authorization by Congress. These projects are subject to

the same requirements of feasibility and economic justification as projects

requiring congressional authorization and must be coordinated with the local

interests concerned. However., the number of small beach erosion control

projects is limited by the availability of funds, which are provided annually

by Congress on a lump-sum, nationwide basis. The total allotment for small
beach erosion control projects may not exceed $10,000,000 for any one year,

and not more than $500.,000 may be allotted for the construction of a project

at any single locality. Each small beach erosion control project must be

complete in itself and not commit the Federal Government to additional improve-

ment to insure effective operation.

The legislation establishing the federal shore protection and beach restoration

programs declares it to be "the policy of the United States to assist in the

construction, but not the maintenance, of works for the improvement and

protection against erosion by waves and currents of the shores of the United

States, its territories and possessions". In its present form, the legislation

spells out the conditions for, and the extent of, federal participation.

Basically, it relates federal participation to public benefit and requires

the active participation of the sponsoring local interests. Under this concept,

federal participation is greatest where the protected shore areas are publicly

oi-med and appropriate facilities to encourage full public use are provided. As

much as 70 percent of the construction cost can be borne by the Federal

Government in such cases. At the opposite end of the scale, where the pro-

tected shore area is privately owned and there is no public use, no federal

-14-

funds can be provided. The remaining costs are borne by the sponsoring local

interests. Additionally, local interests are normally required to provide all

necessary lands, easements, and rights-of-way; hold and save the United States

free from claims and damages; prevent water pollution which would affect the

health of bathers, maintain the completed works, and assure continued public

use of the protected area. Other legislation provides that the Federal

Goverment bear the entire cost of protecting federally owned shore areas and

of mitigating or preventing shore damages attributable to federal navigation

works.

Other federal agencies which have an interest in beach erosion are the Geological

Survey, the Atomic Energy Commission, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the

Coast and Geodetic Survey. The U. S. Geological Survey is interested in the

geology and topography of the shoreline and the composition of the materials

on the beaches; the Atomic Energy Commission has some littoral drift studies

underway using radioactive sands; Fish and Wildlife's interest lies with the

living resources along the coast; and the U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey in

the mapping of the shoreline. The federal agencies cooperate well among

themselves and will assist the State in joint ventures when requested and

authorized.

State Programs

The State's authorities in beach erosion control are contained in the Harbors

and Navigation Code and are administered by the Department of Navigation and

Ocean Development.

-15-

The objectives of the State program are too independently or in cooperation with

any person or governmental agency, study and report upon problems of beach erosion

and means for the stabilization of beaches and shoreline areas., prepare plans and

specifications, and construct such works as its studies and investigations indicate

to be necessary. The State may act in an advisory capacity on beach erosion

control when requested by any public agency.

In July 1946, the State signed an agreement with the Corps of Engineers calling

for a cooperative study of the problems of beach erosion and shore protection

along the coast of California. The agreement called for the State and Federal

Governments to each contribute 50% of the cost of the study. The original

agreement and appendices thereto have been pursued on an annual basis since 1946

and have resulted in a number of Congressional authorizations of greatly needed

beach erosion control projects.

The most important authority the State has with regard to its beach erosion

control activities is the provision that the State financially aid local

governmental agencies participating in federal projects. Section 65.5 of the

Harbors and Navigation Code states in part, 11 ... it shall be the policy of the

State to bear one-half the costs of local participation required by the authorizing

federal legislation...

Since July 1959, the State has participated in federally sponsored beach erosion

control projects in the following areas: Imperial Beach, San Diego, Oceanside,

La Jolla, Seal Beach, Doheny Beach, Newport Beach, Surfside-Sunset Beaches,

Redondo Beach, Ventura-Pierpont Beach and the City of Santa Cruz. The

-16-

Department of Water Resources and the Department of Parks and Recreation,

when acting as local sponsor, contributed approximately $3,400,000 to these

projects during the time period. The total first cost of the projects during

the period for Federal, State and local governmental agencies was approximately

$12,500,,000. It is estimated that more than $50,000,000 worth of benefits

will be derived from these projects.

In addition, the State spent nearly $1,000,000 contributing to cooperative

research and investigations pursuant to the original agreement drafted in 1946,

pursuing its own investigations, and administering the funds contributed by the

State for the federal projects. Investigations consist mainly of the collection

of data required for the evaluation and design of beach erosion control measures.

In addition to research and data collection, the State has participated in the

research and development by the Corps of Engineers of a program designed to use

radioactive isotopes in tracing the movement of sand along the shoreline. The

research phase of the Radioisotopic Sand Tracer Study (RIST) will have been

substantially completed at the end of the 1970-71 Fiscal Year and will have

reached-the operational stage with the capacity of determining the volumes of

material transported in the littoral zone.

In 1965, the State undertook a study of beach nourishment along the Southern

California coastline with a view towards determining the amount of beach

building material transported annually to the beaches and towards formulation

of a plan of beach nourishment and shoreline protection. An interim progress

report.,dated July 1969, concluded the following:

-17-

1. There is a relationship between sediment production and watershed

development for the small coastal watersheds with areas of 160 square miles

and less.

2. Abundant inland sand sources that could provide an economical source of

material for artificial beach nourishment have been identified.

3. With future development, many of the inland sand source s may not be

available for beach nourishment and emphasis may change to developing offshore

sites.

In light of conclusion No. 3 above, the State should explore the possibility of

the Corps of Engineers' expanding its Sand Inventory Program to include

California's offshore areas. The program, now operating exclusively on the

East Coast seeks to find and delineate offshore deposits of sand suitable for

beach restoration and stabilization.

The Division of State Lands, which owns most of the submerged lands of the

State., becomes involved in beach erosion when State lands may be affected by

coastal structures to be constructed on its property. In a number of instances,

the only way of preventing beach erosion problems from occurring from man-made

structures has been to deny a State Lands permit to construct a project. State

Lands does not have the staff capability to handle all the technical questions

which arise and, therefore., relies upon other agencies for analysis.

The University of California,, particularly at the Berkeley campus, does research

in coastal engineering and offers a Masters Degree in the subject. The Berkeley

campus has a good laboratory for wave and model studies. A number of research

-18-

projects are financed by the Corps of Engineers. The program has varied from

year to year so that at times its full capabilities are not realized.

The State of California owns 200 miles of coastline, consisting of

many valuable beaches. The Department of Parks and Recreation is

probably more directly affected financially than any other State

agency when a beach erosion problem arises.

The Boating Facilities Program of the Department of Navigation and Ocean

Development also has a vital interest in beach erosion problems and their

relation to harbors. Many harbor entrance structures upset the natural shore-

line balance and affect the adjacent coastline; therefore, harbor design must

give full consideration to these aspects. Although boating facilities projects

are usually not directly related to State beaches, its staff has endeavored to

follow the progress of studies and projects relating to State beaches and beach

erosion in order to keep abreast of techniques and results.

The Department of Fish and Game is, of course, concerned with the Living

resources of the coastline and any modifications to the coastline affect the

marine life.

CRITICAL AREAS OF EROSION IN CALIMRNIA

This chapter consists of narrative descriptions of the more critically eroding

areas of the State. Critically eroding areas are those which are having or

will have in the foreseeable future a significantly adverse effect on man by

resulting in damage to public and private improvements.

San Diego County

Imperial Beach: The shoreline at Imperial Beach consists of a sandy beach

varying from 0 to 150 feet which is backed by highly erodible bluffs and rock

and rubble revetments protecting private improvements shoreward of the beach.

The upland area adjacent to the beach is primarily in private ownership with

street ends and vacant lots presently used for access to the public beach. A

number of two-story apartment houses and single family dwellings have been built

on the low-lying bluff areas adjacent to the beach. Because of the erodibility

of the native material, many of the private property owners have constructed

revetments at their own cost to protect their property and improvements. Lots

which have not been protected continue to erode and, in some cases, erosion on

unprotected property outflanks protective revetments constructed on adjacent

property.

Pursuant to federal authorization, two groins were constructed near the upcoast

Limits of Imperial Beach in 1959 and 1961. The Corps and other observers

expected the compartments created by the groins to fill during the ensuing years;

however they never did fill as anticipated. The Corps of Engineers has an

-20-

authorized investigation which it has been unable to begin because of lack of

funding and uncertainties with regard to the construction of jetties and the

placement of fills with regard to the Tijuana River Flood Control Project., the

second entrance to San Diego Bay, and a proposed marina development within the

City of Imperial Beach. There is a definite need for widening the beach to

provide increased recreational facilities and protection of public and private

property adjacent to the beach.

Sunset Cliffs, City of San Diego: The Sunset Cliffs area of the City of San

Diego lies in the area north of the Point Loma peninsula and south of the San

Diego River. The shoreline in this area consists of erodible bluffs which

in some areas erode up to three feet per year. In the area south of Adair Street,

Sunset Cliffs Boulevard traverses the top of the cliffs. The City of San Diego

has been forced to dump rubble and other material adjacent to the road in order

to protect it and, in some areas, has been forced to relocate the road. In the

area north of Adair Street, the cliffs are primarily in private ownership with

same street ends providing access. A number of the private owners in the area

have been forced to dump rock and rubble in order to reduce damage to their

homes and further loss of property. There is a definite need to provide pro-

tection to public and private property in the area and to restore and provide

public beach areas. An authorized federal project calls for the construction

of revetments, dikes, and cave closures in the area south of Osprey Street. This

area of the project is referred to as Segment B. In addition, the authorization

calls for the creation of a public beach north of Osprey Street beyond the

present high tide line. Segment B construction was completed in early 1971 at

-21-

a cost of $320,000. Funds have not as yet been appropriated for Segment A

primarily because the City of San Diego is faced with substantial local

opposition to the project from those people whose homes are adjacent to the

shoreline but are not endangered. These people object to the creation of a

public beach seaward of the present high tide line. Additional opposition

comes from people whose property is not adjacent to the shoreline and object to

being assessed.

La Jolla, Vicinity of Bird Rock: The shoreline in this area is composed of

highly erodible bluffs. Most of the area adjacent to the shoreline is in

private ownership with occasional street ends and very limited access. At

high tide, there is essentially no beach in the area and waves are constantly

working on the toe of the bluffs. In 1966, the Corps of Engineers placed

revetments along a one-half mile segment up and downcoast from Bird Rock. This

provided substantial incidental benefits to private properties in the area.

Although there is a need for further protection in the area, the Corps of

Engineers is precluded from participating because of the extent of private

ownership adjacent to the beach. There is presently no authorized federal

investigation for this area.

Oceanside: The erosion problem in the Oceanside-Carlsbad area has been

aggravated by the construction of jetties associated with the Del Mar Boat

Basin., Oceanside Small Craft Harbor, and a flood control jetty on the north

side of San Luis Rey River. The beach is quite wide in the area between the

south harbor jetty and the flood control jetty to the south. South of the

-22-

river, however, the beach is presently composed almost entirely of cobbles.

When the Oceanside area was constructed in 1963, dredged spoil material from

the harbor was placed on the beach. It was discovered a number of years later

that the material contained a very large percentage of cobbles. The littoral

drift which is predominantly southward has carried the sand and other erodible

material downcoast leaving the cobbles. There is a need to reestablish the

recreational beaches in the area to meet the demand for recreation. The Corps

of Engineers is conducting a joint beach erosion--navigation investigation

which is scheduled to be completed in 1974.

-23-

Orange County

Capistrano and San Clemente Beaches: Erosion is occurring along the shoreline

of nearly the entire area. Much of the upland area is in private ownership;

however, except for only small portions, the beaches are in public use and are

quite accessible.

As a result of the overall erosion of the beaches,, protective measures are

required. The Corps of Engineers studied the area pursuant to the Orange

County, California, Appendix V Phase I, Beach Erosion Control Study,, which was

authorized in 1960. At that time, local interests expressed a desire to maintain

the shoreline approximately as established by a survey in 1949. Some of the

owners of privately owned beaches in this segment expressed reluctance to assume

the financial burden in participating in any shore protection project and, in

general,, indicated their belief that rebuilding their beaches would interfere

with existing recreational use. However, local interests indicate a desire for

shore protection measures at publicly owned beaches in the segment. Because

of the predominance of privately-owned shoreline and the reluctance of private

interests to participate in the costs, the Corps of Engineers was unable at

that time to participate in the construction of a project.

Doheny State Beach: Doheny State Beach is located at the mouth of San Juan

Creek. The condition of the beach is dependent upon the amount of material

transported down the creek. The beach is presently in good condition because

the flood of January-February 1969 formed a delta containing approximately

1.5 million cubic yards at the mouth of San Juan Creek.

-24-

The Corps of Engineers completed a project in 1966 consisting of the

construction of a groin and a placement of sand fill. The project plan calls

for periodic artificial nourishment at an annual rate of 23,000 cubic yards

per year. Artificial replenishment has been unnecessary in recent years

because of the large amount of sediment discharged in San Juan Creek.

San Gabriel River to Newport Beach: This segment of shoreline consists

entirely of wide sandy beaches most of which are in public use or ownership

and are backed by private beach front housing. Beaches included in this reach

of shoreline include those of Surfside Colony, Sunset Beach., Bolsa Chica State

Beach., Huntington City Beach, Huntington State Beach, and Newport Beach. The

beaches of the entire segment are in excellent condition and provide one of

the most highly used recreational beach areas of the State. Because upstream

developments on the lbs Angeles, San Gabriel., and Santa Ana Rivers have

greatly reduced the flow of sediment to the area and flood control and harbor

jetties north of the segment have cut off littoral movement from the north,

the area requires almost constant artificial placement of sand. To this end,

five stages of construction have been completed pursuant to the federal

authorization in 1962. Stage I consisted of the placement of sand fill at

Surfside-Sunset Beaches in 1964. Because of predominant littoral movement to

the south, sand placed at the Surfside-Sunset area feeds the beaches downcoast.

Stages II and III consisted of the construction of groins and the placement of

sand fill at Newport Beach in 1968-69. Stage IV consisted of the replacement

of sand fill at the Surfside area and the construction of more groins and the

placement of more fill in Newport Beach. This work was completed in 1971.

-25"

Stage V presently under construction will complete the construction of groins

in the Newport Beach area which should result in a high degree of stabilization

of the beaches.

-26-

Los Angeles C

Royal Palms State Beach: This beach, located near the most southerly area

of the Palos Verdes Peninsula, is rocky and is backed by high erodible cliffs.

The City of los Angeles, responsible for the operation of the beach, has

requested that the Corps of Engineers investigate the possibilities of

creating a sand beach in this area. Rock and rubble revetments have been

constructed mainly for the purpose of maintaining parking and picnic areas

at the foot of the cliffs. The Corps is investigating the possibility of

creating a surfing reef offshore for the purpose of enhancing the surfing

of the area. It is questionable from an environmental standpoint whether a

sand beach should be created in this area. It is extremely beautiful and

unique by virtue of the ruggedness of the area.

Ias Tunas State Beach: This beach lies in the reach of coastline between

Sunset Boulevard and Malibu and is operated by the County. It has suffered

erosion to an extent that it is now only usable by a small number of people

at one time. The narrow beach is backed by the Highway I road embankment

which is -also in a state of erosion at times. The beach is readily accessible;

however., there are inadequate parking facilities in the area. A badly deteriorated

groin system exists which is completely ineffective in compartmentalizing sand.

The County of Los Angeles requested the Corps of Engineers to investigate the

beach erosion control problem with a view towards a small project authorization.

The Corps' tentative plan of improvement includes the construction of two rubble-

mound groins and the installation of sand fill. It is anticipated that

construction of this project will be completed in Fiscal Year 1971-72.

-Z7-

Point Mugu to San Pedro Breakwater: This area includes some of the most

highly used recreational beach areas in the State. Specific beaches included

in the area are: Leo Carillo State Beach, Point Dume State Park, Corral Beach,,

Las Tunas State Beach, Will Rogers State Beach, Santa Monica State Beach,,
Venice Beach, Dockweiler State Beach, El Porto Beach, Manhattan State Beach,

Hermosa Beach, and Redondo State Beach.

The Corps of Engineers is conducting an investigation of specific areas within

this reach of coastline. Present plans of the Corps call for limiting the scope

of its survey report to the lesser reach between Sequit Point on the north and

Flat Rock on the south. The entire shoreline in the reach is subject to

seasonal change and to temporary shoreline recessions caused by storm action.

These recessions hold a great potential for damage to existing beaches and

public and private improvements.

Following is a description of the beaches, associated problems, and tentative

solutions. The Corps' study is scheduled for completion in July 1972.

Point Dume Beach State Park - It is desired that the beach be widened

to acc odate new park facilities and to provide additional area for recreation

and protection for landside facilities. As proposed by the County, this would

be accomplished by constructing a groin at the downcoast end of the beach and

placing approximately 310,000 cubic yards of suitable material. This would

result in widening the beach an average of 100 feet. This amount is considered

sufficient to make the desired width of beach and allow the normal rate of

littoral drift to continue.

-28-

Corral Beach - Much of the narrower portion of this beach is unusable

at high tide and the Pacific Coast Highway is being endangered by continued

erosion. The beach should be widened to provide protection for the highway

as well as to give the public a usable recreation area. The solution proposed

by the County is to construct groins at the downcoast end and at the approximate

midpoint of the beach and to fill the groin compartments with approximately

442,000 cubic yards of material. Average additional beach width would be 100

feet. Two existing storm drains at Solstice and Corral Canyons would be

extended through the new fill.

Las Tunas State Beach - Prior to February 1970, Las Tunas State Beach was

being considered for improvement as a part of the main Point Mugu to San Pedro

Study. It is now being studied separately as a small beach erosion control

project at the request of Los Angeles County. The problem is mainly one of

improving and protecting a beach area that has suffered erosion to the extent

that it is now barely usable by a small number of people at one time. Six

existing sheet steel pile groins are greatly deteriorated and relatively

ineffective for retaining the beach. The proposed solution is to construct

one or two groins and place approximately 200,000 cubic yards of sand fill.

Two of the existing groins would be removed prior to this operation. The

remaining groins will be buried within the new rock groins or covered by the sand

fil I .

Will Rogers State Beach - This beach is f airly stable due to a system

of 13 groins of 100 to 175 feet in length. Though no serious erosion problems

exist at this time, seasonal and storm encroachments are beginning to endanger

-29-

some of the existing parking areas and at certain points, the Pacific Coast

Highway. The State and the City of Los Angeles wwt this section studied to

obtain information on beach stability,, wave action and possible improvements

or protective features.

Santa Monica Beach State Park - From 1933 through 1948., this beach

was accreting at a rate estimated at 200,,000 to 260,,000 cubic yards per

year. Accretion is caused by a 2000-foot long detached breakwater constructed

by the City of Santa Monica in 1933. The original intent of the breakwater

was to provide protected waters for a small craft harbor. It has effectively

acted as a sand trap that has resulted in a seaward advance of the shoreline

amounting to 850 feet behind the breakwater and as much as 2DO feet,, 1.5 miles

upcoast. Deterioration of the breakwater has greatly reduced its effectiveness

to provide protected water for small craft, but it still functions as a partial

littoral barrier. Increasing wave action behind the deteriorating breakwater

has lessened the rate of accretionj, and the beach is now approaching equilibrium.

It is requested by the State and the City that rehabilitation of the breakwater

be investigated in this study.

Venice Beach - The area of beach south of the groin at 26th Street,

approximately 4,000 feet to Mast Street, has been experiencing accelerating

erosion. Prior to the construction of the Marina del Rey entrance jetties

and breakwater., some material was returned to the beach during the seasonal

reversal of the littoral currents. This material is now blocked from its

upcoast travel.

-30-

The predominant downcoast littoral drift accretes against the northerly

entrance jetty to the marina and results in interruption of supply to the

more southerly beaches.

The City of Los Angeles proposes that a groin be built in the area of Mast

Street to stabilize the beach northerly thereof, and that a method of sand

bypassing be instigated to transport the accretion north of the Marina del Rey

entrance to Dockweiler Beach to the south.

The stretch of beach southerly of the Marina del Rey entrance to Redondo

Beach Harbor (King Harbor), includes Dockweiler Beach State Park, El Porto

Beach., Manhattan Beach State Park, and Hermosa Beach. This reach is a 8.1 mile

littoral compartment between complete littoral barriers. In 1958 and 1961, a

total of 5,500.,000 cubic yards of sand were deposited on the upper end of

Dockweiler Beach. Since that time, under the effect of the predominant down-

coast currents, this reach has been rotating with erosion at the northerly end

and accretion at the southerly end against the King Harbor breakwater. Seasonal

reversal of the littoral current and waves refracted by the Marina del Rey

breakwat& causes some upcoast drifting. The City of Los Angeles suggests the

construction of a groin south of Ballona Creek to stop this upcoast drift.

South of King Harbor are Redondo Beach State Park, Clifton Beach, and

Torrance County Beach, which compose a 2.4 mile littoral compartment between

the south jetty of King Harbor and the Palos Verdes headland. As a result of

previous studies 1.4 million cubic yards of sand were deposited on the 1.5 mile

portion of this stretch of beach from Topaz Street toward Malaga Cove. A

-31-

stabilizing groin at Topaz Street was completed in September 1970. This

groin is to stop the northerly movement of sand into the harbor and the loss

of sand into the Redondo marine canyon. This project was sponsored by the

Los Angeles County Department of Parks and Recreation.

-32-

Ventura Count

The shoreline of Ventura County consists of two distinct types. North of

the Ventura River, the beaches are quite narrow and rocky. South of the

Ventura River, for the most part, the shoreline consists of wide sandy

beaches which have been in especially.good condition since the floods of

1969.

Rincon Point Area: Immediately downcoast of Rincon Point, there is about one

mile of highway revetment with about five to ten feet of beach at the toe

of the revetment in the surf zone. The only source of sand for the area

appears to be Rincon Creek which empties near Rincon Point. This beach

probably could be developed but, in addition to the importing of sand, would

require the construction of parking facilities which would be quite expensive.

Punta Gorda: The County has plans to develop this very rocky beach in the

future.

Hoffman Park: This County park is in a badly eroded state. The surf zone

consists entirely of exposed rocks and is completely unsuitable for bathing.

However, the park is to be taken by the Division of Highways for the Highway 1

Freeway,and development of the area cannot be considered until after the

Division of Highways has completed the freeway.

Hobson Park: This beach is also degraded and has a completely rocky surf zone.

The County plans on refurbishing it in the future, but it is not of a very high

priority.

-33-

Hobson Park to Faria Park: In this reach of shoreline., the County plans to

develop a large park when the State abandons the present highway after the

freeway is constructed. It has historically been in relatively good shape

and experiences seasonal onshore-offshore movement of sand.

Faria Park: Faria Park is similar to most of the beaches in Ventura County

north of the Ventura River. It has a rocky surf zone and is badly degraded.

The County Parks Department had originally planned the refurbishment and

development of this park in 1970-71. However., the County Executive's Office

vetoed the proposal, and it is presently being planned for inclusion in the

County's 1971-72 budget. The development would consist of a parking area

supported by a seawall and a sand beach.

Ema Wood State Beach: This is a relatively undeveloped State beach with no

shower facilities or water and has only chemical toilets and undeveloped parking

areas. The beach is rocky in most places but does have some stretches of

sandy beach.

San Buenaventura State Beach: The high flows of early 1969 in the Ventura

River resulted in the filling of the compartments of the Pierpont Bay beach

erosion control project between the Ventura pier and the north breakwater of

Ventura Harbor. The beach is relatively wide and, except for the presence of

small cobbles in the surf zone, is in excellent shape.

Ventura County Fairgrounds: The fairgrounds lie immediately downcoast of and

adjacent to the mouth of the Ventura River. The fairgrounds have not been
developed out towards the beach, and the area is extremely unsightly and in a

-34-

bad state of disrepair.

Ventura City Beach: This beach lies on both sides of the entrance to the

Ventura Marina between the State beach to the north and the Santa Clara River

to the south. The beach is in excellent shape at this time but is undeveloped.

McGrath State Beach: This beach is in good shape with the camping area basically

protected by a ridge of sand dunes along its entire reach.

Oxnard Shores (Mandalay Beach): This beach, owned by the City of Oxnard, has

been recently developed into a residential area. The houses have been built

out to the surf zone. Annual onshore-offshore movement of sand has resulted

in some damage to the homes adjacent to the beach. When the developer leveled

the sand dunes, he eliminated the natural protection of the areas further away

from the surf zone.

Hollywood Beach: This beach, immediately upcoast of the north jetty of Channel

Islands Harbor, is in very good shape and is well maintained by the County.

The houses in this area are built back a considerable distance from the

shoreline resulting in much less of a problem than the Oxnard shores area.

Silver Strand Beach: This beach, immediately downcoast of the south jetty of

Channel Islands Harbor., is in very good shape and is experiencing no problems.

Port Hueneme Beach: This beach., south of the Port Hueneme Harbor entrance, is

wide and well maintained and is experiencing no problems at this time.

-35-

Ormond Beach and Adjacent Area: This beach., owned by the City of Oxnard., is

essentially a continuation of Port Hueneme Beach. It is moderately wide and

almost completely undeveloped. At the present time,, there is very limited

access to it except along the beach from Port Hueneme. There is a Southern

California Edison Company Stemn Plant being constructed in the area. Because

of the construction of this steam plant, access is presently limited. However,

upon the completion of the plant, it is anticipated the area will develop and

that the access will improve.

Point Mugu State Beach: This beach in southern Ventura County is undeveloped,

relatively secluded, and has a rocky surf zone.

The Corps of Engineers has an authorized investigation which has been funded

for a start in Fiscal Year 1971-72. Although the study was earmarked

specifically for the Point Mugu-Oxnard area, it is anticipated that the Corps

will investigate the entire Ventura County area.

-36-

Santa Barbara Count

Rincon Point: The County has a proposal for the development of a park

immediately upcoast of Rincon Point. The area consists of steep cliffs about

150 feet high with a sand beach about 30-50 feet wide. Future plans are to

widen the beach but current plans are only to develop the area for recreational

use.

Carpinteria State Beach: This beach is moderately sloping and about 200 feet

wide. It is clean and well maintained and experiences some onshore-offshore

seasonal movement.

Sandy Land Cove District: This is an area where private homes must be protected

fror the surf. A local home owners association has recently constructed a

revetment and seawall. The County does not contribute funds for the construction

or maintenance of the area but has contributed engineering and other advisory

services to the association.

The Santa Claus Area: Along this reach of coastline, the railroad comes quite

close to the shore, and there is a rock revetment protecting it with essentially

no beach.

Upper Sandy Land Cove (Padero Lane) and Beach Club Road Area: In this vicinity,

the homes along the beach are protected by rock revetnent with the beach about

20 feet wide. The beach disappears completely during the winter and at high

tide. There is essentially no public access in the area.

-37-

Summerland (Lookout Beach Park): This is an area of cliffs 100-150 feet

high with a beach below it which averages 75-150 feet in width. The beach

is in fairly good condition with some scattered cobbles in the surf zone.

Montecito (Miramar Beach): This is an area of private homes built right down

onto the beach. The beach varies from 50-200 feet depending on the time of the

year. There is little or no public access.

Montecito - Biltmore Hotel Area: This is an area of public beach which varies

between 150-300 feet wide. There is a concrete seawall shoreward of the beach

which protects this area along Channel Drive.

East Beach (City of Santa Barbara): This beach is up to 400 feet in width in

places and is well maintained by the City.

Cabrillo Beach (City of Santa Barbara): This beach is approximately 200 feet

wide and is also well maintained by the City. It is immediately downcoast from

the Santa Barbara Harbor and is nourished by the dredging of the harbor.

Leadbetter Beach: This beach, immediately upcoast of the harbor breakwater, is

in very good shape, is quite well developed, and is well maintained by the City.

Shoreline Park to Goleta Slough: This is an area of high cliffs with many

pocket beaches. The area has not been developed by the City partly because of

the limited stability of the cliffs and limited public access.

Royal Burro Beach State Park: This beach, at the mouth of a small creek, is

about 100 feet at its widest point. During the winter, the beach almost

-38-

completely disappears.

Goleta Beach State Park: This beach, seaward of Goleta Slough, is in excellent

shape and is well maintained by the County.

University of California at Santa Barbara: The area along the shore of the

University consists almost entirely of high cliffs with essentially no beach

development.

Isle Vista County Beach: This is basically an area of low cliffs approximately

30-50 feet high with a small frontage beach at the toe of the cliffs. The

beach varies up to 20 feet in width in places. It is relatively undeveloped at

the present time.

The Corps of Engineers has just begun an investigation for the Santa Barbara

coastline south of the north boundary of the City of Santa Barbara.

-39-

Santa Cruz Count

City of Santa Cruz: Except for the beach area at the mouth of the San Lorenzo

River, the coastline of the City of Santa Cruz consists entirely of highly

erodible cliffs. A major roadway adjacent to the cliffs (East Cliff Drive and
West Cliff Drive) had to be abandoned in some locations and required extensive

maintenance in others. In 1964, the Corps of Engineers constructed a series

of rock revetments in the most serious areas to retard the erosion. The project

is highly successful, although there are still some areas adjacent to the roadway

which require continual maintenance by the City.

City of Capitola: Capitola Beach lies at the mouth of Soquel Creek. Prior to

1970, the beach was in a severe state of erosion. The State Department of Parks

and Recreation, in cooperation with the City of Capitola, constructed a rubble-

mound groin and installed a sand fill in order to provide an adequate

recreational beach for the area. The Corps of Engineers cmpleted a small

project investigation for the area in June 1971. The results of that study

were that

-40-

San Mateo Count

Half Moon Bay and Vicinity: In the Half Moon Bay area, shoreline and beach

erosion has occurred at El Granada, Vallejo, and Miramar Beaches. The beaches

are located just north of the City of Half Moon Bay immediately west of the

Village of El Granada and downcoast from Half Moon Bay Harbor. The historical

rate of shore erosion was about four feet per year during the years 1914 through

1959. This rapid rate of erosion will continue until the beaches reach a state

of equilibrim which is compatible with wave action and the availability of

material for beach nourishment. This area has been subjected to shoreline and

beach erosion from wave action for many years. The construction of the Half

Moon Bay Harbor about nine years ago has contributed to the erosion because of

the breakwater acting as a groin and resulting in reduction of replenishment

sand to the beach.

-Possible Solutions - The beach erosion problems in the vicinity of Half Moon

Bay have been investigated by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, and several

alternative plans for improvement of the shoreline erosion have been developed

and were presented to the County Board of Supervisors at a public meeting on

September 16, 1970. To date, the County Board of Supervisors and the various

San Mateo County agencies and groups directly affected by the beach erosion in

this area have not selected any of the alternatives presented.

Pacifica and Vicinity: Bluff and beach erosion has occurred on the shoreline

in the areas of the City of Pacifica between Mussel Rock and Devil's Slide.

The beach is backed by bluffs 30 to 40 feet high at the north end and gradually

-41-

decreases i@ height to 10 to 15 feet at the southern end. Major bluff erosion

has taken place along the shoreline in the Pacific Manor and Sharp Park portions

of the coastline. This erosive action has accelerated during the past seven to

eight years. Sand from these beaches apparently is moving downcoast and no

replenishment is occurring. The loss of sand on the foreshore has allowed

heavy seas and extremely high wind driven tides to erode the backshore portion

of the beach as well as the low bluffs and terraces along the shoreline.

Possible Solutions - The entire northern shoreline of the City of Pacifica

has suffered beach and bluff erosion. There are two districts within the City

which are in need of immediate relieffrom bluff erosion,, Pacific Manor and

Sharp Park. The north-south coastline within these two areas comprises

approximately 9,000 feet of narrow beach backed by 40-60 foot high bluffs

along the northern portion and a wider beach and lower bluffs at the southerly

end. The coastal end within this stretch is highly developed with single-family

homes and apartments which back up to the edge of the bluffs. The progressive

undercutting of the bluffs and subsequent loss of large pieces of the entire

bluff face have endangered numerous homes and apartments. To date, no major

damage has occurred; but, if the natural erosion is not abated in the near

future.. several homes will be lost and numerous others will be structurally

damaged.

Construction of rubble-mound seawalls along the toe of the eroding bluffs in

the Pacific Manor and Sharp Park districts would prevent many of the bluff

failures. A project to construct remedial works to stabilize the bluff face

is engineeringly feasible. Along much of the bluff area, erosion has progressed

-42-

across public property to privately-owned bluff areas landward of the beach

which would necessitate protective works for private property. Federal funds

cannot be used to construct protective works for private property until the

part of the beach front property needed for construction is obtained by the

County or City in fee or by a deeded easement from the private property owners.

Thus, only about 2,400 feet of publicly-owned property located at the southerl-y-

end of this stretch of coastline could receive a federal contribution for seawall

construction. The Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, has completed a

survey report for this portion of the Sharp Park district and has estimated a

capital expenditure of $1,500,000 for construction along the publicly-owned

property which starts at Paloma Avenue and runs downcoast to Claredon Road.

The final report will be submitted to the County Board of Supervisors during

February 1971. Construction costs for the remainder of the Edgemar, Pacific

Manor, and Sharp Park districts of Pacifica not included in the federal project

have been estimated to be approximately $4,000,000. These costs would include

a rubble-mound seawall and imported sand fill material to the areas where the

bluff has receded further landward than the proposed alignment of the seawall.

-43-

San Francisco Co

Ocean Beach: Ocean Beach is located approximately between the Cliff House

on the north and the San Mateo County boundary on the south. It consists of

a long rather narrow beach backed by erodible bluffs in the southern area and

a massive concrete seawall on the north. The bluffs in the southern portion are

subject to erosion, and the City has dumped concrete and other rubble in the

worst areas. In addition, accumulation of beach sand along the ocean side of

the Great Highway causes sand to drift across the highway.

Lands End and Fort Funston Areas: Land slides are causing the loss of material

from these very rugged and rocky areas of coastline.

James Phelan State Beach: This beach located just west of the Golden Gate

Bridge has been eroding in recent years. There is a need for the development

and protection of greater sand areas for the beach.

The U. S. Corps of Engineers is studying all of these areas pursuant to an

authorized investigation. The study began during the 1971-72 Fiscal Year.

-44-

Alameda County

Alameda Memorial State Beach: This beach, adjacent to Shoreline Drive in the

City of Alameda, has undergone considerable erosion in recent Years. The

easterly end of the south shore has eroded so as to endanger houses along the

shore and to remove usable recreational beaches. The U. S. Corps of Engineers

is in the process of conducting a small beach erosion control investigation for

this area. Consideration is being given to the restoration of the eroded beach

area on the east side of the lagoon and the construction of a rubble-mound

groin extending in a north-western direction from the southern end of the lagoon

to protect the restored beach. Measures are also being considered to protect

and restore that portion of the beach adjacent to Shoreline Drive.

-45-

Marin County

Bolinas Cliffs Area: This area of the coastline consists of high erodible

bluffs which are constantly subjected to erosion from waves., ground water

seepage, and surface water drainage. Waves are eroding the toe of the cliffs

to the extent that roadways and homes at the top are endangered. The Corps of

Engineers originally studied this area under its small project authority and

formulated a project costing about $4.5 million which would consist of a groin

field and beach replenishment program for a 1.3 mile stretch of shoreline.

Since local authorities could not fund the $4 million local participation

required, the Corps has since received-authority to study the area under its

major project authorities.

Further narrative descriptions of the shoreline are available in other parts

of this report, the Shoreline Protection and Development Appendix of the

Framework Study., and the California Regional Inventory of the National Shoreline

Study.

-46-

BCONOMICS OF SHOREMM PROTECTION

Because of the general erosive condition of the shoreline in California, the

State must expect the need for beach and shore protection to continue

indefinitely. Since the late 1940's, governments at all levels have caused

milli of yards of sand to be placed on the Southern California beaches for

the purposes of shoreline protection and public recreation. At a number of

sites, beaches must be replenished periodically because of the loss of sand

through natural processes. As long as it is considered desirable to maintain

beaches for public recreational use, the State is committed to the periodic

artificial replenishment of those beaches and the costs associated therewith.

In addition to beach erosion, many of the cliff areas along the coast are

subject to continuing erosion. In a number of places, especially in Southern

California, public and private improvements have been constructed adjacent to

the edge of the cliffs primarily because of the desirable view provided by the

cliffs. Some of these areas have eroded to the extent that public facilities

and private improvements are endangered. There is an extremely high cost

associated with protecting these cliff areas.

Map-nitude of Expenditures for Beach and Shoreline Protection: Between Fiscal

Year 1959-60 and 1970-71, Federal, State and local governmental entities spent

approximately 13.3 million dollars on the construction of beach and shoreline

protection projects. This averages 1.1 million dollars over the 12-year period.

In addition, funds were spent by the several levels of goverment for planning,

-47-

research and data collection, operation and maintenance, purchase of beach

land for the State Park System, and administration. The magnitude of the funds

expended for these purposes is not known.

The Framework Study estimates that between the period 1965 and 2020, $187 million

will be required for structural and non-structural means of protecting property

and improvements and purchasing land for recreation and scenic shoreline

purposes. Of the $187 million, $145 million is estimated to be required for

structural measures. The National Shoreline Study has estimated that for the

period 1970 through 2020, $140 million will be required for structural measures.

Both of these studies assume an increasing rate of development to meet the

needs for an increasing population and some sort of coastal zone management

program limiting development immediately adjacent to the shoreline. On an annual

basis., both studies estimate that the cost for structural measures will be about
2-1 times what they have been during the 12-year period 1959-6o and 1970-71 and,
2

if non-structural alternatives are considered, the ratio could increase to as

high as three times the present expenditure rate.

Economic Justification: Federal legislation requires that beach and shore

protection projects participated in by the Corps of Engineers must be economically

justified. This means that the benefits derived from the project must exceed

the cost associated with its design, construction,, operation and maintenance.

It is relatively easy to economically justify projects for the restoration of

recreational beaches because of the high use associated with beaches and the

high value assigned beach use by economists. Conversely., it is generally difficult

to economically justify the construction of projects designed to protect cliff

-48-

areas. Usually, the only benefits derived from this type of project are those

associated with the protection of land and improvements.

Govermental Financing: In order for the Federal Goverment to participate in

a beach or shore protection project, the local cooperating governmental agency

(usually the city or county) must agree to fund one-half of the costs of the

project. With the State contributing one-half of the local goverment's share,

this reduces the local share to 25% in a normal project. In spite of this, it is

becoming increasingly more difficult for local governmental agencies to fund

their share of projects. This is du e.. in part, to the increasing lack of

availability of funds to all levels of goverment. Beach and shore protection

works are by their very nature extremely expensive and, except in emergency

situations, are of a relatively law priority to local governmental agencies.

In addition to the local goverment's decreasing financial ability, funds at

the Federal and State levels especially in the public works field have been

severely cut back and are at times not expended even when appropriated as fiscal

devises to combat inflation.

The Protection of Private Propert : Federal law prohibits the Corps of Engineers

from protecting land which is not in public ownership or in public use. Although

there is no statutory policy with regard to the protection of private property

on the part of the State, the State has in the past generally followed the

federal policy of only protecting property which is in public use or ownership.

The result of this policy has, in a number of cases, led to a general degradation

of shoreline areas because of the private owners' inability to finance shoreline

protection. This makes a good case for precluding the construction of private

-49-

development immediately adjacent to the shoreline. Any development, public

or private, constructed adjacent to the shoreline creates a liability for

future maintenance. Because of the high costs associated with the maintenance

of the shoreline, either land is protected at very high cost or it is not

protected at all. The result to the people of the State is one of either higher

tax bills or a degraded coastal environment.

-50-

The Littoral Environment Observation Program described earlier in this

chapter was substantially reduced in scope by the State Department of Parks

and Recreation on January 1, 1971. Many people in the coastal engineering

field feel that the program should be continued at a greater level than it

now is. However, with the reduction of staff for the operation and maintenance

of the State Parks System, it will be difficult to restore the program to its

original level.

Since 1966, the State in cooperation with the U. S. Geological Survey

collected data on the transport of sediment in coastal draining streams.

State funds for this program were also terminated on July 1, 1971. It would

be desirable if funds for at least a partial funding of this program could be

restored in the future.

Project Planning: The Corps of Engineers is continuing to conduct

investigations at a number of sites along the coastline with a view towards

eventually constructing physical works to retard shoreline erosion. These

investigations are funded totally by the Federal Government. Local governments

are encouraged to make requests for investigations by the Corps as soon as

it appears that a beach erosion problem is beginning to occur. The earlier a

request is made, the greater the chance of avoiding serious damage to property

and improvements.

The State does not participate in project planning although it has the authority

to do so. Funds for State sponsored projects have seldom been approved by the

Legislature and the Governor. The State should adopt a policy of funding

-52-

small beach erosion control projects in areas in which the Corps of Engineers

cannot respond on a timely basis.

Critical Areas of Erosion in California

Comprehensive Planning: There are a number of studies and investigations

available in which an attempt has been made to identify areas of the coastline

subjected to varying degrees of erosion. The most comprehensive of these are

the Shoreline Protection and Development Appendix of the Framework Studys

prepared under the direction of the Water Resources Council and the California

Regional Inventory of the National Shoreline Study, prepared by the Corps of

Engineers.

Framework Study: Appendix XVI, Shoreline Protection and Development,

of the Comprehensive Framework Study concerning the California region was

prepared by the California Region Framework Study Committee for the Pacific

Southwest Interagency Committee of the Water Resources Council. The Appendix

concerns itself with the needs for protection and development of the shoreline

zone. For the purposes of the study, the shoreline zone is considered to

include the area subject to erosion from sea action and the closely adjoining

landward area. It comprises a strip generally not exceeding 500 feet in width.

The California region is divided into four subregions: North Coastal, San

Francisco Bay, Central Coastal, and South Coastal. For the region and each

subregion, the following types of information are presented: description of

the region or subregion; existing conditions in the shoreline zone; future needs

in the shorelihezone; and means to satisfy future needs in the shoreline zone.

-53-

The shoreline is classified into three categories of erosion: Non-erodible

shoreline comprises shoreline composed of resistant rock or that which is

protected by harbor structures., beach erosion control improvements,, or is

stable or accreting; Non-critical shoreline erosion includes uninhabited areas

except where the loss of recreational swimming beaches is involved; Critical

shoreline comprises erosion that threatens shoreline resources and urban or

public facilities and requires structural or non-structural measures for

protection.

For the region and each subregion, the basic information and findings are

presented in four tables. Table I presents in miles by time-frame and county

the number of miles of beach stabilization, seawalls, beach replenishment, and

beach development required. Table II presents information by county and time-

frame of the estimated average annual shoreline erosion damages and damage

reduction resulting from the recownended program. Table III also by county

and time-frame tabulates the required swimming beach, non-swimming beach, and

scenic shoreline in miles. Table IV gives the estimated cost of the shoreline

protection program in terms of first and annual costs and structural and

non-structural measures by county and time-frame.

The report concludes that if measures are not taken to reduce property damage
due to erosion, erosion damage will increase from approximately $10,000,000
per year in 1965 to approximately $50,000,000.per year in 2020. The structural

and non-structural measures set forth in the report would reduce erosion

damages from $50,000,000 to $4.5 million per year by 2020. The report also

concludes that the estimated cost for the structural and non-structural

-54-

measures amount to approximately $187,,000,,000 including the costs of

protecting 95 miles of shoreline through the construction of 54 miles of

beach stabilization, 23 miles of seawall, and 18 miles of beach replenishment.

The costs also include construction of 30 miles of new beach and the

preservation of 330 miles of scenic shoreline.

California Regional Inventory, National Shoreline Study: This

report was prepared pursuant to Section 106 of Public Law 90-483. It authorizes

the Corps of Engineers to: (1) determine areas along the coastline where

significant erosion occurs; (2) identify areas where erosion presents a

serious problem because of a high rate.of erosion; (3) describe the most

suitable type of remedial action; (4) estimate costs for the remedial action;

(5) recommend priorities among serious problem areas; (6) provide information
to State and local authorities concerning shoreline erosion problems; (7) develop
guidelines for land use regulation; (8) identify coastal areas where title

uncertainty exists.

The Corps of Engineers, in determining areas along the coast "where erosion

presents a serious problem because the rate of erosion, considered in conjunction

with economic, industrial, recreational, agricultural, navigational, demographic,

ecological, and other relevant factors," indicated that action to halt such

erosion may be justified, initially considered that each mile of the shoreline

of the California coast would be evaluated with reference to all the factors

given above. However, discussions with State and other Federal agencies

indicated that insufficient data were available on many important.factors to

quantify this decision, and that major studies which would be beyond the scope

-55-

of the National Shoreline Study authority would be required if definitive

answers were to be obtained.

It was determined that the coastline would be categorized into three basic

classes of historical shore changes: (1) critical erosion; (2) non-critical

erosion; (3) areas of stability or accretion.

In evaluating these terms, the Corps of Engineers found that no definite rules

or quantifiable planning matrix could be developed. Existing critical

conditions were determined from requests for shoreline protection investigations

by local goverrmental agencies, direct communication with concerned citizens,

and examination of aerial photographs. The bulk of this information and the

information on historical shoreline changes was obtained from review of

existing Corps of Engineers reports and materials on file in the Los Angeles

and San Francisco Districts of the Corps of Engineers, generally developed in

conjunction with project investigations. The coastal aerial photographs used

had been previously obtained largely through cooperative beach erosion studies

of the State of California and the Corps of Engineers.

The study also indicates the areas that may be critical in the year 2020. For

this determination., the population projections furnished by the Department of

Water Resources entitled "California State-Federal Interagency Group, Type I

Framework Studies, 2020 Population Projection of California Counties and

Hydrologic Study Area," dated April 24, 1968, were used as a general index of

development of the coastal counties. Areas which would be similar to areas

considered critical in 1970 were thus selected for identification under the

-56-

table of critical erosion.

In this report,, non-structural alternatives have not been quantified in the

actual cost simmaries. Conceptually, however, management, zoning,, or

acquisition of a federal easement along the coastline not already in public

ownership appear to the Corps of Engineers to provide a practicable solution.

As a concensus regarding the width of this easement or on the indirect costs and

desirability of zoning or management could be obtained, no costs could be fixed

for these alternatives. However, the study states that non-structural

alternatives should be given further study at the earliest practicable date,

as they appear to be a logical means of protecting the coastline from future

generation of critical areas. The report presents a series of plates showing
the entire coastline of California.
The following types of information are depicted on these plates:

A. Ownership: federal, non-federal, private, uncertain;

B. Land.Use: public recreational, private recreational, non-recreational

development, undeveloped;

C. Historical Shore Changes: critical erosion, non-critical erosion,

non-eroding;

D. Effective Beach (Type of Beach): sand, gravel and cobbles, silt and clay;

E. Without Effective Beach (Areas Other Than Beaches): rock, marsh, other;

F. Backshore (Upland Physical Characteristics): dunes, cliffs, swamps, etc.A

other;

G. Parks: federal, state, county, city
H. Existing Protection: seawalls, levees,. groins and/or beach fill, other;

-57-

I. Suitable Protection: seawalls, levees, groins and/or beach fill,,

non-structural, other.

In addition to the plates, all of the above information is presented in

tabular form. The report also presents a cost summary of conceptual plans for

the entire time period 1970 through 2020. The information is presented by

county and indicates the miles of suitable protection required and the

associated cost. The report estimates that the total cost of all the con-

ceptual plans through 2020 will be $11+0,200,000 and will provide protection

for 70.2 miles of coastline. The report also discusses shoreline areas

recommended for further study and segragates them into the following

categories: (1) areas of erosion under study or authorized for study for
the Corps of Engineers; (2) areas needing study of erosion problems; (3) areas

needing study to determine the suitability of creating or enlarging recreational 4

beaches to accommodate the increased use from the growing population by the

year 2020.

Conservation of Sand: Sand, in dunes, beaches and nearshore areas,

is the principal material nature has provided to protect our seacoasts. Where

sand is available in abundant quantities, protective measures are greatly

simplified and reduced in cost. When dunes and broad, gently sloping beaches

can no longer be provided, it is necessary to resort to massive structures;

and the recreational attraction of the seashore is lost or greatly diminished.

Sand is a rapidly diminishing natural resource. Once carried to our shores in

abundant supply by streams, rivers and glaciers, geological processes have

-58-

progressed to a stage where large areas of our coast receive no supply from

this source. All development by man in inland areas tends to further reduce

erosion of the upland, resulting in a reduction of the sand supply to the shore.

It thus becomes apparent that consideration must be given to conservation of

sand to the utmost practicable extent. This does not mean local hoarding of

beach sand at the expense of adjoining areas, but rather the eli-mine ion of

wasteful practices and the prevention of losses whenever feasible.

Mechanical bypassing of sand at coastal inlets is one means of conservation

which will come into increasing practice. Removal of beach sand for building

purposes, formerly a common procedurej is rapidly being reduced as coastal

communities learn the need for regulating this practice. Modern hopper dredges,

used for channel maintenance in coastal inlets., are being equipped with pump-out

capability so that their loads can be discharged on the shore instead of being

dumped at sea; and it is expected that this source of loss will ultimately

be eliminated. On the California coast, where large volumes of sand are lost

into deep submarine canyons near the shore, facilities are being provided to

trap the sand before it reaches the canyon and transport it mechanically to a
point where it can resume normal beach transport. Dune planting with appropriate

grasses and shrubs reduces windborne losses landward and aids in dune preservation.

The Sand Inventory Program of the Corps of Engineers, now operating on the East

Coast of the United States, has identified substantial volumes of sand lying

offshore out of the littoral stream which could be used for conruercial purposes.

It appears desirable that a similar program be initiated very soon along the

California coastline.

-59-

Structural Measures

The protection of developed beach and cliff areas by structural measures has

been the traditional method of counteracting erosion. Although structural

measures are not necessarily required in undeveloped areas, they will nearly

.always be necessary for the protection of landi, private improvements,, and

public facilities in developed areas. In undeveloped areas, regulation of

land use through zoning and other means will probably be the most effective

means of "protection". Basically,, the physical means of protection have been

developed and are available for use by public agencies and private individuals.

However., in many cases., they are prohibitive because of their excessive costs.

Because of the costs and for environmental reasons, structural measures will

probably be relied upon less and less in the future. The maintenance of beach

erosion control projects constructed by the Federal Government is and will continue

to be a local responsibility. Local governments must consider the responsibility

and.the need for maintenance when they agree to participate in a federal

project.

Coordination with Other Interests

Beach protection interests should coordinate their planning, design., construction,

and maintenance activities with the following other interests: harbors and

navigation, flood control, and water conservation and recreation. These interests

have an effect upon the amount of sand available for beach building purposes.

When a harbor is constructed., many times the,material dredged out from the

harbor can be placed on adjacent beaches. Flood control and water conservation
pr.ojects tend to reduce the total amount of beach building material available

to an area. However., when floods do occur., deltas can be formed at the mouths

-60-

of the rivers and, in some cases, the rivers themselves are filled with

material which can be used on the beach. When planning for a beach erosion

control project for the purpose of protection of land and improvements, the

recreation purpose can in some cases be added to the project helping to

provide economic justification for the project.

ReAmlation of Permits

A number of agencies have a considerable amount of control over development

in the coastal zone through permit powers: specifically, the Corps of

Engineers,, State Lands Commission,, Water Resources Control Board,, the Coastal

Zone Authority, local planning commissions, city councils, and boards of

supervisors. Systems of coordination between these various entities must be

developed and implemented in order to reduce the time required for gaining

approval to construct beach erosion control and other environmentally desirable

projects.

SUKKARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Natural Processes

The shoreline of the State is in a constant condition of erosion both in the

areas composed of Cliffs and those made up of sand and rock beaches. The

primary source of sand supplied to the beaches consists of sediment discharged

by coastal draining streams and the erosion of coastal cliffs and bluffs. The

littoral forces from waves result in an overall movement of sand southerly

along the California coastline with seasonal variations in the direction and

a few exceptions in specific areas. Ro cky headlands at various locations along

the coastline tend to compartmentalize sand and prevent or retard its movement.

A considerable amount of sand especially in the Southern California area is

lost into submarine canyons and cannot be recovered. Southern California is

experiencing a dry weather cycle which results in less flooding and a reduction

in beach building materials transported to the coast. Large winter waves tend

to pull sand offshore away from the beaches resulting in a narrowing of beaches

and,, at times., a complete elimination of protective beaches which front cliff

areas in many parts of the State. The smaller summer waves tend to push the

sand back shoreward thus recreating the beaches previously lost. However,

these processes result in a net loss of sand to the beaches over a period of

years.

Technical Considerations

The Coastal Engineering Research Center of the U. S. Corps of Engineers has a

number of continuing programs of basic research and data collection of coastal

-62-

phenomena. The research and data collection programs conducted over the

years provide the basic source material which has led to the shore protection

planning and design policy carried on by the Corps of Engineers. A number of

physical means of protecting the coastline have been developed over the years

including the construction of protective beaches and groins and seawalls, dikes,

revetments, bulkheads, and other structures designed to withstand the force of

waves.

The Effects of Urban Develo-pment

Urban development in the coastal zone has resulted in a need for protection of

cliff and beach areas against erosion. Since the shoreline will continue to

erode in the future, decisions will have to be made to either protect or abandon

land and improvements threatened by erosion. Future developments in the

coastal zone will create the need for protective works in the future. Because

of the desirability of beach oriented recreation, society has already committed

itself to the continuous artificial replenishment and constant maintenance of

beach areas. There is a duel benefit derived from limiting urban development

and the building of structures in erodible portions of the coast; those being:
a) the foregoing of future maintenance and protection costs; and b) reserving

the areas for recreational uses. Urbanization of the coastal flood plains has

greatly reduced the amount of beach building material which is transported to

the coast.

Economic Considerations

In order for Federal and State Governments to participate in beach and shoreline

erosion control projects, there must be a showing that the benefits derived

-63-

from the project exceed the cost thereof. There usually is no problem in

justifying the creation of recreational beaches from an economic standpoint

because of the high economic value attributable to recreation. However, it

is extremely difficult to economically justify the protection of cliff and

bluff areas solely on benefits derived from the protection of land and

improvements. Many times, the protective works themselves cost more than the

value of the land and improvements to be protected. Since governmental agencies

cannot participate in projects which costs exceed benefits, the burden of

protection remains with the local property owner who usually cannot afford

the cost involved. Because of the limited resources available to local

governmental agencies adjacent to the coastline, many times the prospective

cooperating agency is unable to fund its share of a federal project which

is usually 25% of the costs of construction when the State also participates.

Because of the federal and State requirements for local sharing in shoreline

protection projects, some projects which might be desirable cannot be built.

This leaves local governmental agencies and private property owners with the

remaining option which is to allow the land to continue to erode and eventually

require the rebuilding, relocation, condemnation.. or abandonment of improvements.

Local and Administrative Restraints

Under present federal statutes, the Corps of Engineers may not provide protection

to private property unless it is subject to public use or protection of the

private property would be-only incidental to the protection of adjacent public

property. Legislation introduced during the 92nd Congress proposes that this

policy be changed so that private property could be protected. If such

-64-

legislation were passed, it would be possible under present State authorities

for a group of private property owners to obtain State and federal assistance

up to 75c,*'C' of the costs of the beach or shoreline protection project with no

obligation on their part to allow the public to use the protected or restored

area. The Corps of Engineers is authorized only to restore beach and shoreline

areas to previous conditions but is precluded from creating new beaches either

for the purpose of protection or recreation. Federal administrative processes

are extremely slaw. The average response time between an initial request of

the Federal Goverment to comence an investigation and the first stage of

construction has been approximately 12 years. Current Resources Agency policy

precludes the State from constructing beach and shore protection projects unless

the Federal Government also participates.

The 111elationship Between Shoreline Protection and Other Interests

,Harbors and Navigation: "@,Then dredging harbors initially during construction

or during periodic maintenance operations, suitable dredging spoils should

always be made available for use on adjacent beaches. The construction of

harbor jetties and offshore breakwaters stop or reduce movement of sand in the

littoral strear.. In the past, this has resulted in the erosion of downcoast

beaches. At harbor facilities where bypassing is provided, navigation channels

can be maintained while downcoast beaches are protected.

Reservoirs: Reservoirs constructed for,the purposes of flood control,
I

water conservation, recreation, power production, and other purposes tend to

impound sediment and reduce dormnstream flows and velocitie5 both of which prevent

-65-

beach building material from being transported to the coastline.

Urban Development: Development of the flood plains also reduces the

amount of beach building material transported to the coastline.

Sand and Gravel Mining: The mining of material for construction purposes

in streams, sand dunes, or beach areas reduces the overall amount of sand

available in littoral streams.

Environmental Considerations

Recent legislation at the State and federal levels regarding the environmental

impacts of projects will also have an effect upon beach and shore protection.

In.the past, it has been assumed that if a project is engineeringly, econorIcally,

and financially feasible, it should be built. However, effects on the

ecology and the esthetics of a given area are now also to be considered. This

will-probably lead towards a greater use of non-structural means of dealing

with the problems of coastal erosion. These non-structural measures will

probably include the following: land management, building permits, land use

control through zoning, and acquisition by public agencies. Another environmental

consideration is determination of the most desirable type of structural protection

for a given area. For example, seawall and revetments, although effective in

combating wave forces, are not very esthetic. Sand fill projects, although

more desirable in most cases, are extremely expensive because of the need for

stabilizing groins or long-term maintenance required for replenishment of sand.

Environmental effects of such structural measures as offshore breakwaters.,

surfing reefs, and perched beaches are complex and provide no easy answers.

-66-

RBCOMMMATIONS

Federal Goverment Action

1. The federal statutes should be amended to allow the Corps of Engineers to

participate in the development of new recreational beaches.

2. The Corps of Engineers should have emergency funds at its disposal for the

use of beach and shoreline protection and restoration when emergency conditions

arise.

3. Reevaluation of the extent of federal participation in beach and shore

protection projects should be initiated with a view towards increasing the

allowable federal contribution.

4. The Corps of Engineers should be authorized and encouraged to give greater

consideration to envirom-ental values and non-structural measures in the

development of beach and shoreline protection projects.

5. Studies should be initiated with a view towards finding a means for the

Corps of Engineers to react to requests for local projects on a more timely

basis. The average time period between the initial request and the ccMpletion

of the first stage of construction of nine major projects in California was

12 years.

6. The Corps of Engineers should continue and, if possible, expand its present

efforts of research into surfing reefs, perched beaches, and submarine canyons.

-67-

In addition, consideration should be given to commencing a sand inventory

along the coast of California, similar to the one being conducted on the East

Coast.

7. Provision should be made for the construction or purchase of sand bypassing

facilities upon the completion of construction of new harbor facilities to

prevent problems in the future with regard.to coastal erosion such as accompanied

the construction of Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara Harbors.

State Goverment Action

1. Legislation should be prepared to allow the Department of Navigation and

Ocean Development to control any modification of the coast or shoreline below

the ordinary high water line. Such modifications should include jetties;

breakwaters; sand traps, groins; fills; the dumping of rubble for cliff, bluff

and eipbankment protection; and sandand gravel extraction operations.

2. The State should have emergency funds at its disposal for the purposes of

beach and shoreline protection and restoration when emergency conditions arise.

3. The State should reestablish the funding for cooperative research and basic

data collection with the Corps of Engineers and the U. S. Geological Survey.

4. The State should initiate a program of joint State-local funding of small

beach erosion control projects so that coastline erosion problems can be

responded to on a more timely basis than occurs now.

-68-

5. Provision should be made for the construction or purchase of sand bypassing

facilities upon the completion of construction of new harbor facilities to

prevent problems in the future with regard to coastal erosion such as accompanied

the construction of Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara Harbors.

6. The State should consider the possibility of funding non-structural

alternatives to beach erosion control projects including the purchase of

recreational land in lieu of structural measures.

7. State personnel involved in shoreline protection should continue to

familiarize themselves with emerging methods of coastal construction especially

the more modern techniques presently being used in Europe and other parts of

the world.

8. The State's Beach Erosion Control Program budget should include funds for

out-of-state travel and specialized training.

Local Government Agency Actions

1. Local agencies should encourage the public use and ensure public access to

the shoreline.

2. Local agencies should discourage the construction of improvements to land

which will probably require protection in the foreseeable future.

3. If new developments adjacent to the coastline must be built, the coastline

should be fronted by a road, parking lot, green area, or some other type of

open public improvement. This would tend to decrease the ultimate cost of

-69-

protection and also allow federal and State participation.

4. Local governmental agencies should take the necessary steps to secure

agreements with private landowners which provide for the public use or ownership

of shoreline areas which are in need of protection. This would then allow the

State and Federal Governments to aid financially in the protection of those

areas.

5. Because of the prohibitive costs associated with the protection of the

shoreline from erosion, local governmental agencies should consider adopting

policies that prohibit the construction of subdivisions in areas which are

subject to erosion in the foreseeable future and encourage uses such as

recreation and agriculture which rely more on the use of open space than on

the use of structures.

6. Local governmental agencies should support joint State-local funding of

beach erosion control projects.

7. Non-structural alternatives such as zoning, building permits, and purchase

of land should be exercised whenever possible in lieu of structural measures.

8. Give full support to flood plain policies and proposals that would promote

rather than inhibit river sand replenishment of the shoreline.

9. Local agencies should be required to contribute financially to research

and basic data collection progrsms conducted in their area of jurisdiction

by federal and State agencies.

-70-

Private Interests

1. Private interests should be encouraged to deed easements for public use

on land lying between private improvements and the high tide line so that

governmental entities can participate in the protection of the property and

more effectively control land use.

2. Private interests should be encouraged to form shoreline protection districts

so that the design and construction of protective works can be coordinated among

all parties in a given area.

3. Land developers should be required*to deed a public easement between the

high tide line and private properties in order that public access can be

maintained and State and federal agencies can participate in the protection

of the shoreline area if required.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Comprehensive Framework Study, California Region, Appendix XVI
Shoreline Protection and Development, California Region Framework
Study Committee, November 1970

Interim Report on Study of Beach Nourishment Along the Southern
California Coastline, Department of Water Resources, July 1969

Land Against the Sea, U. S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center,
May 1964

National Shoreline Study,,_California Regional Inventory, U. S. Army
Corps of Engineers, South Pacific Division, AU9-@ust 770

Progress Report on StudZ of Beach Nourishment Along the Southern
California Coastline, Department of Water Resources, June 1967

State Harbors and Navigation Code, Section 65 through 67.3

Shore Protection Program, Department of the Army, Office of Chief of
Engineers, July 1970

Study of Beach Erosion Problems, San Mateo County, Department of
Navigation and Ocean Development and Department of Public Works,
January 1971

Title 33 of the U. S. Codes (Navigation and Navigable Waters), Section 426

)IID- A R 2

THE CALIFORNIA COMPREHENSIVE OCEAN AREA PLAN
ROAD TRANSPORTATION

Past and Emerging Approaches to Transportation Issues

In the past, transportation facilities were developed
primarily to serve the traveler's desire to move from
one place to another in a fast, safe, convenient,
comfortable and economical manner. While this desire
still remains an important goal in transportation
planning, to it has been added the ever increasing
desire that these facilities enhance and conserve
environmental qualities and complement community
planning. Urban growth and complexity and the
tremendous Increase in individual mobility, brought
about today by the almost universal availability of
the motor vehicle, has compounded the problems involved
in planning transportation systems that will provide
mobility and reflect rapidly changing community values.

To meet the demands of the rapidly changing values,
the Department of Public Works encourages extensive
local involvement to provide an active partnership
in planning that affects land use development and
total transportation needs. An example is the
Department's policy on highway transportation in the
coastal zone which has special conservation and develop-
ment significance. This policy endeavors to provide
coastal zone transportation service consistent with
local and regional total planning with the objective
of conserving the natural coastal resource.

The future role of transportation systems in such areas
will, to a large extent, be shaped by the level of
success achieved by these State/local planning
parternships.

Existing Road Systems

A. Administration

There are approximately 164,000 miles of public
highways, roads, and streets in California.
Various levels of government are concerned with
development and administration of these facilities.
The Department of Public Works, Division of Highways,
is responsible for a system of highways which
amounts to nine percent of the total highway,
road, and street mileage and has 51 percent of
the total travel. The Federal Government retains

-75-

administrative responsibility for those roads in
National Forests, National Parks, and military.
establishments which amount to 21 percent of the
total mileage and have 0.5 percent of the total
travel.

City and county governments are responsible for
the remainder of the public highway, roads, and
streets within their respective jurisdictions.

The Federal-Aid Systems are composed of portions
of the facilities under jurisdiction of the State
and of county and city governments. The facilities
on these systems are designated by the Federal
Government in cooperation with the State and local
jurisdiction involved.

The area of responsibility for the given level of
government includes planning, design, right-of-way
acquisition, construction, maintenance, and
operation. Such work by the State, counties, and
cities is financed primarily with funds from the
State Highway Users' Tax Fund plus Federal-aid
apportionments for facilities on the Federal-Aid
Systems from the National Highway Trust Fund.
These funds are apportioned for use by the counties
and cities and for financing the State Highway
System by State law. In addition, counties and
cities obtain some financing for facilities under
their jurisdiction from local tax sources. Resi-
dential streets and some local streets are primarily
initially developed by residential and commercial
developers to standards set by cities and counties.

In addition to these public road systems, there
exists some private and institutional road systems
which are under the jurisdiction of the particular
land owner or institution. Integration of these
private systems with the public road systems is,
for the most part, accomplished by local traffic
engineering and planning agencies. This is done
by responsible governmental agencies through
cooperative planning and development, land use
restrictions, taxation, etc.

-76-

B. Classification As to Purpose or Function

Transportation exists to permit the social and
economic activities of people, and almost every
human activity requires a transportation element.
As living becomes more complicated, so must our
transportation facilities. Comprehensive trans-
portation planning involves providing a trans-
portation system of all modes to serve the activi-
ties of people. Through this planning process.,
it is determined what part of the total movement
of people and goods should be carried on streets
and highways, and what part of those streets and
highways should be a State, city, or county
responsibility.

Individual roads do not serve travel independently
in any major way. Travel involves movement through
a network of roads. Functional classification is
a way of describing the purpose of each road or
street in the network in accommodating travel.
The predominant purpose or function of highways,
streets, and roads must include such considerations
as connecting major population and economic centers
of the State, providing the continuity of travel
into or through and around urban areas, providing
areawide service along major traffic corridors
within urban areas, and serving major recreation
areas,

The Department of Public Works, in cooperation with
the cities and counties of this State, have com-
pleted a functional classification study of all
highways, streets, and roads. The total system was
divided into functional levels in accordance with
their degree of mobility or land access.

Roads act in varying degrees as arterials, collectors,
or local roads. Arterials on the one end emphasize
a high degree of mobility for through movement.
A freeway is an example of a road which exists
primarily to provide mobility. Local roads are
at the other end and emphasize a high degree of
land access. A residential subdivision street
is an example of a road which exists primarily
for the purpose of providing access to abutting
property. The collector roads in the middle offer

-77-

a balance between land access and mobility. These
classifications were also divided into rural and
urban groups, because travel characteristics in
rural and urban areas are quite different.

This comprehensive analysis of all highways, roads,
and streets has been made, using a common and uniform
criteria, regardless of present jurisdiction. It
is a cooperatively developed plan as seen by State
and local governments and represents today_ls_best
estimate of the highway, road, and street system,
which would be responsive to the desires of the
people of California for the next 20 years. This
plan cannot be static, valid only at one point in
time. In order to provide a flexible and current
plan, responsive to and reflecting important changes
in land use and travel and new developments in
transportation, functional classification is being
conducted on a continuous basis in California.

The Planning Process

A. General

Planning for road systems within the California
Ocean Area Plan zone is carried on by various
private, institutional, and governmental juris-
dictions. Two types of planning activities can
be distinguished: (1) That type of activity which
can be considered under the category of single
element planning, such as route or transportation
corridor planning; and (2) That planning activity
which can be grouped or classified under compre-
hensive or area planning. Ideally, in a fully
integrated planning situation, single element
planning would be done within the framework of
comprehensive planning which would include broad
transportation planning. By including route
planning within the scope of comprehensive trans-
portation planning, the road network can be
developed in accordance with broader transportation
needs serving not only the'immediate needs of road
traffic but the needs of community development and
regional growth. Historically, route planning and
the development of the road network has been a most
effective approach to providing for the transporta-
tion needs of the coastal zone. However, with the

-78-

advent of California's changing needs, specifi-
cally the changing of life styles, greater dis-
posable incomes, and the flexibility and mobility
provided by availability of the automobile, the
need for comprehensive planning and development
has become evident.

B. CooDerative, Comprehensive, Continuing Transportation
Planning

1. Organization

To meet the transportation planning needs of
California, and to comply with the 1962 Federal-
Aid Highway Act, the planning process was estab-
lished in each of the urbanized areas over 50,000
population. In contrast to earlier practice,
overall guidance ,of these efforts was vested
in policy committees of elected officials.
Technical committees continued in a subordinate
role to oversee the technical aspects of the
work.

The typical study is generally organized under
a cooperative agreement between the State Business
and Transportation Agency and either the regional
voluntary planning agency or the constituent
local governments signing individually. Policy
direction is given by a planning policy committee
consisting of elected local officials and a
reDresentative of the State. Technical studies
and recommendations to the policy group are by
one or more committees of the planning and
engineering staffs of the participating organi-
zations. Representation on the Technical
Coordinating Committee by local public trans-
portation, airport, and port facilities is urged.

In the coastal zone, continuing studies are
presently under way in the San Diego metropolitan
area, Los Angeles regional area, Santa Barbara
urbanized area, the Salinas-Monterey area, and
the San Francisco Bay area nine-county region.
A similar study is also under way in the Sacramento
regional area at the upper end of the Sacramento
River Delta.

-79-

Transportation planning in urban areas of less
than 50,000 population is carried on in similar
fashion. The Eureka area has had a transporta-
tion study which is currently being reevaluated
in connection with studies of Highway 101; and
Santa Cruz County is presently formulating a
proposal for a cooperative transportation
planning study.

The local agencies are generally responsible
for providing the base-year inventories of
transportation and terminal facilities, land
use, population, and economic resources, as
well as the projections of these factors to
the future study years. The State's partici-
pation is through the Division of Highways
which collects travel data, provides computer
services, and performs analyses of travel
characteristics, transportation facilities,
and land use which serve as a basis for pre-
dicting future travel demands.

The continuing process provides data essential
to the planning of the statewide highway system,
establishing highway routes, and determining
project design. Local governments benefit
similarly from the process, with planning data
for present and future development of the local
street and public transportation systems.

2. Process

The planning process includes the operational
procedures and working arrangements by which
highway and transportation plans are soundly
conceived and developed, and continuously evalu-
ated in a manner that will:

a. Assist governing bodies and official agencies
in determining courses of action and in
formulating attainable capital improvement
programs in anticipation of community needs.

_80-

b. Guide private individuals and groups in
their planning decisions which can be
important factors in the pattern of future
development.

Transportation planning is concerned with all
facilities used for the movement of persons and
goods, including terminal facilities and traffic
control systems. The process is based on the
collection, analysis, and interpretation of
pertinent data concerning existing conditions
and historical growth; the establishment of
community goals and objectives; and the fore-
casting of future urban development and future
travel demands. It includes not only the initial
preparation and evaluation of a transportation
plan through an appraisal of practicable alter-
natives, but also continuing review and modifi-
cation to meet changing conditions. In addition.,
it includes the preparation and dissemination
of information needed by official agencies in
their consideration of planning proposals and
improvement programs, and information suitable
for the encouragement of public understanding
and support. The planning process also includes
the preparation of recommendations concerning
scheduling and financing of highway improvements,
coordination with other urban development pro-
grams, revision of ordinances and regulations,
and additional legislation, if necessary.

The planning process provides a basis for policy
making and program management and is organized
with the objectives of achieving agreement on
interrelated action programs founded on factual
information.

Basic elements for which inventories and analyses
are required are as follows:

a. Economic factors affecting development

b. Population

C. Land use

d. Transportation facilities, including
those for mass transportation

-81-

e. Travel patterns

f. Terminal and transfer facilities

9. Traffic control features

h. Zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations,
building codes, etc.

i. Financial resources

J. Social and community-value factors

The scope of the inventories and the extent to
which the various analyses need to be carried
will, of course, vary depending upon such
factors as city size, age, and growth potential.

Given the broad and complex conservational, and
developmental requirements in the coastal zone,
these continuing processes should make it
easier to adjust transportation to environmental
demands.

C. Adjusting Policy

Within the State Government framework, a series
of policies have been derived to take into con-
sideration the impact of freeways and highways
on the overall-environment of communities, including
community development and goals, land use planning,
and the desire for mobility. Among other things,
such policies provide the opportunity for local
and State agencies to formally participate together
in freeway route planning studies. The following
is one such recent policy which articulates this
intent.

The Transportation Corridor Policy
(Departmental Directive 71-20)

1tPurpose:

."The purpose is to revise and update the
Department's policy for conducting freeway
route planning studies.

-82-

IThilosciphy:

"Because of the importance of State freeways to
the overall environment of communities including
their development goals, land use planning, and
the mobility of people and goods, the planning
of such freeways should be based on a process
that:

provides the opportunity for local and State
agencies to formally participate in such a
process,

includes provision for evaluating the need
for a freeway as the appropriate solution to
a transportation problem,

Includes environmental studies as established
in Departmental Directive No. 71-10, dated
February 11, 1971, as an integral part of the
route or corridor study process.

"Policy:

"Route planning for all freeways will be conducted
within the framework of the California Highway
Commission's procedural resolution.

"Freeway routes will be planned on the basis of
a formal cooperative agreement with the affected
local governmental agencies and, if appropriate,
regional planning agencies and transportation
districts. Such cooperative agreements shall
provide for either a freeway route study or a
transportation corridor study. In general
"freeway route studies" will be conducted in
rural areas and "transportation corridor studies"
will be conducted in urban areas.

"In transportation corridor studies, the Department's
primary responsibility wi'11 be to address the
issues of whether a State highway facility would
be an appropriate part of the solution to a trans-
portation corridor problem, and if so, what that
facility should be, where it might be located,
and how it should fit in with other transportation

-83-

"and community facilities and overall environmental
concerns. Others will be expected to address the
Issues of local or regional development and environ-
mental goals., land use planning, and local or
regional transportation facilities including how
a transportation need should be met if a State
highway facility is not appropriate or is a partial
solution only.

"The result of a cooperative freeway route or trans-
portation corridor study could be that no trans-
portation improvement is justified; or it could
be a transportation plan involving a freeway,
conventional roads or streets, transit,or combina-
tions of these. The results of these studies will
be reflected in subsequent Section 256 reports
recommending additions and deletions to the State
Highway System and the Freeway and Expressway
System. Local agencies will be encouraged to
update the transportation element of their general
plans to reflect the results of these cooperative
studies.

"Each agreement will, wherever possible, use the
organizational structure of the ongoing cooperative
urban transportation planning study, and will treat
the freeway route or transportation corridor study
as a subregion of the overall.study. Flexibility
will be exer-cised in the negotiations of cooperative
agreements to fit the circumstances of each freeway
route or transportation corridor study. Subjects
that will be considered when negotiating such
agreements include: scope, schedule, techniques,
study organization including policy, technical
and advisory committees, responsibilities and
contribution of each agency, use of consultants,
and conduct of public hearings.
txceptions to the above noted cooperative agree-
ment procedures may be made by the Director for
Routes of Statewide Signif 'icance or in other
unusual cases and will be considered on an
individual basis."

-84-

The ramification of the overall policy is expected
to be substantial to the transportation and environ-
mental concerns. Objectives of such a policy would
aid in strengthening State-local governmental relation-
ships by creating a partnership role in local areas
in orderly freeway and route development. Further,
the policy is expected to provide a means of reacting
to a growing awareness of individuals and communities
of the need to@broaden transportation planning approaches
to social problems and to broaden the frame of ref-
erence to solutions. More specifically, to continue
to solve transportation problems by including "no
development" as an alternative. If a State highway
Y-acility is not the "total solution" to a transporta-
tion problem, then the issue of what facilities are
and where they should be located can be considered.

Thus, such a requirement would bring forth issues of
the overall planning and development of an area and
would provide incentives to constant reevaluation
of the developmental goals and objectives of a
particular area. Finally, the intent of the policy
is to meet and improve the freeway planning process
by broadening the options available to those involved
in the process at the State and local levels. Such
an approach may well provide a tool that is useful
In resolving major controversies by allowing highway
planners to step back from the traditional posture
of "a freeway is the answer, the question is where
should we put it" to a new philosophy of "let us see
if a freeway is appropriate here. If not, we would
like to help determine how else this transportation
need might be met".

Cooperative studies serve to standardize various
aspects of the transportation planning processes
by providing for better anticipation of emerging
issues and problems in respective areas by involved
agencies. Better identification of emerging issues
and problems in the social environment will tend
to generate more applicable and stable plans,
programs with fewer revisions, and projects that
would not be stopped by action of special groups.

Nearly all types of studies will require cooperative
agreements. Cities and counties have for many years
contributed to the freeway route studies by furnishing
land use data plus information regarding parks,

-85-

schools and other facilities. With the evolving
comple'xity of California's social system, there
has been an increasing need for local agencies to
define their environmental and developmental goals.
Such freeway route or transportation corridor studies
appear to provide the opportunity of presenting the
community with an active set of planning issues and
the need to make a decision. The formal agreement
policy allows the community to look to its local
governing body as a tool for more meaningful partici-
pation and a way to influence its own quality of
life.

D. Procedures in Freeway Route Planning Studies

Statutes enacted by the Legislature describe the
content of the State Highway System by prescribing
general termini of each route and, where applicable,
the general corridor through which the route is
to pass by specifying that the route will pass
near or via cities, towns, or other geographical
locations. Likewise, the Legislature, through
enactment of specifid statutes, prescribes the
State highway routes, or portions of routes, which
comprise the California Freeway and Expressway
System. Determination of the specific location
of each State highway route, including freeways,
is delegated to the California Highway Commission.

The California Highway Commission is authorized
to adopt specific locations for all State highways
to declare specific routes, or portions of routes,
to be freeways, and to allocate money for State
highway purposes in accordance with certain
legislative formulae. The Director of the State
Department of Public Works and the State Highway
Engineer make recommendations to the Commission
on these subjects.

Future route location studies in urban areas will
generally be initiated as a result of a need deter-
mined through the transportation corridor studies
described in the previous subsection. In rural
areas, highway needs will generally lead directly
to route location studies.

-86-

When route location studies are initiated, the
Division of Highways publicly announces the start
of these studies. A publicized meeting with affected
governmental bodies (cities and counties) and their
technical and planning staffs is required prior to
the formal initiation of studies. The purpose of
the meeting is to discuss and receive the recom-
mendations of the local governing bodies on time
schedules, study limits, and whether an advisory
committee should be appointed to work with the
Division of Highways in developing the studies.
This meeting will also be used to define study
objectives to be included in the cooperative study
agreement. Following the meeting, official notice
of the start of studies is published and individual
letters are sent to a distribution list of about
sixty agencies that may be affected.

During the course of the study, often over a time
span of two years or more, the study team is in
continuous contact with the appropriate units of
local government and members of the public at large.
A study involves gathering of engineering, economic,
social,, and environmental data and other special
information that may be considered significant for
the study. This information is evaluated and
assembled for presentation to the local governing
bodies and to the public. As a part of the study,
a draft environmental statement is prepared in
consultation with other agencies that have environ-
mental responsibilities in the study area. This
draft is circulated for review by the affected
agencies prior to public hearings.

Various types of publicity are used to inform the
public of the meetings and for formal public hearings.
Letters are sent to all concerned county supervisors,
city councilmen, State assemblymen and senators,
and to a distribution list of some 60 local,, regional,
State,and Federal agencies, private groups and
individuals depending on the location and type of
the project. News releases are sent to all local
newspapers. In the case of formal public hearings,
paid notices are published in all local newspapers.
Such notices include a map showing the alternate
routes to be discussed.

-87-

At all formal public hearings, major effort is
made to permit the expression of opinion so,, in
effect, public hearings become an important vehicle
for assessing the opinion of groups and individuals,
and the overall climate of these opinions. Opinions
and evidence are solicited from *both expert and
nonexpert members of the public. Those who are
unable to attend and wish to make written state-
ments may do to for up to a period of 30 days for
a location hearing and 10 days for a design hearing.
A copy of these statements and other relevant
material are included in the hearing transcript
which is available for public review.

Many local., regional, State,and Federal agencies
are notified of the studies. Included are the
following members of the Interagency Council for
Ocean Resources: Department of Agriculture,,
Air Resources Board, Department of Conservation,
Department of Fish and Game, Department of
Navigation and Ocean Development, Department of
Parks and Recreation, State Lands Commission, and
the Department of Water Resources.

After the public hearing record Is complete, the
State Highway Engineer makes a routing recommendation
to the Director of Public Works. The Director, in
turn, furnishes that recommendation to various
State and local agencies for comments prior to
making his recommendation to the California Highway
Commission. Upon receiving the Director's recom-
mendation, the Commission considers the entire
project record and makes a decision on the final
route location.

E. Specific Design Phase

After a route has been selected by the California
Highway Commission, the Division of Highways continues
to work cooperatively with the local agencies to
designate the special features of the highway within
the adopted route. At this stage, city and county
streets and highways master plans are consulted
for detailed location of interchanges and circula-
tion features.

_88-

When the basic major design features, as well as
appropriate alternate features have been determined,
a route is ready for a design hearing. The Division
of Highways advertises the scheduling of the local
hearing in local newspapers and in addition to the
advertisement, government agencies are also given
notices as well as many other local groups.

At the design,hearing, members of the public have
the opportunity to comment upon such features as
the type of facility; number of lanes; right-of-way.
general grade line (whether at grade, elevated, or
depressed); streets to be closed, separated, or
connected; local streets to be substantially altered.
pedestrian and railroad separations; frontage roads."
and any other pertinent features. Prior to the
hearing., an environmental report will have been
prepared. This will also be brought to the public's
attention and offered for discussion. The cost to
citizens who must relocate is explained as well as
governmental regulations providing financial assis-
tance for the relocation of homeowners, renters,
and businesses. Further, timetables of right-of-
way appraisal and purchase of property are shown
and explained.

A design report, based on the information developed
at the design hearing is prepared for the project
and appropriate design features are selected. For
projects on one of the Federal-aid systems, a
request is made to the U. S. Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administrationfor
design approval. Upon approval,detailed design
begins.

IV. Major State Laws Authorizing Road Transportation in the
Coastal Zone

The Constitution of California vests in the State the
power to establish, construct, and maintain the State
Highway System, to enact necessary legislation to affect
this and to aid in the construction and maintenance of
county highways. Various portions of the Streets and
Highways Code establish the organizational responsibility
and authority for accomplishing the objective of the
law. Other portions create various special funds for
distribution of Highway Users' Taxes to local govern-
ments and for direct development of State highways and
freeways.

_89-

At the State level, the Business and Transportation
Agency, including the Department of Public Works and
its Division of Highways, have general planning and
management responsibility for the State highways.

Various responsibilities are assigned to cities and
counties regarding State highways. Agreements with
city councils or boards of supervisors are required
to close local streets, to improve streets leading
to State highways, to develop roadside parks along
State highways, etc. Cities and counties are involved
in advance planning for highways through mapped
h1ghways procedure. In such a procedure, maps of
proposed highways are sent to county planning commis-
sions which review them and adopt plans controlling
development in rights-of-way and provide suggestions
for development to the Division.

In the development of local roads systems, responsibility
resides with the particular local,jurisdiction. Specifi-
cally, authority for the location and development of
county highways is vested within the given county board
of supervisors. The particular board of supervisors
is given,, by law, the powers of planning, management
and control of county highways. The Streets and Highways
Code also gives the cities authority for developing
streets and imposes the duties on cities of exercising
more general powers. As an example, the pedestrian mall
act provides authority and financial procedures through
a special assessment to enable communities to close
streets to traffic and to develop pedestrian malls.
This opportunity for downtown center development remains
open for urban areas in the coastal zone and provides
the oppoltunity for local governing bodies to more
properly integrate their commercial centers with their
conservation zones.

The State Scenic Highway System it designated in the Streets
and Highways Code. The Code provides for developing
a program of scenic corridors including the defining,
identification, and acquisition necessary for developing
rights-of-way by the given proper agency. Parkways
have also been authorized by the Legislature since 1965.
In that year, the Legislature approved the establishment
of such a system of roads which were to be designed for
pleasure travel, rest and turnouts, pedestrian, eques-
trian, and other leisure travel. The concept of the
parkway has traditionally been the matching of mobility

_90-

and pleasure. The parkway may be considered as a
park for pleasure and leisure driving. The parkway
may be distinguished. from the scenic highway in that
the scenic highway may be considered as a transportation
channel within a corridor of aesthetic and visual value,
which is intended to be preserved.

V. 'Existing and Emerging Goals for Transportation

In its most simple form, transportation planning is
the development of transportation goals and deriving
the processes and means to reach these goals. Goals
can be discussed in the perspective of problems and
needs. Unfortunately, no comprehensive statement on
transportation needs for the coastal zone has ever
been made in the State of California. Thus, no explicit
direction is presently set for the development of
transportation in the coastal zone. Nevertheless,
there has developed in the last few years certain
implicit guidelines for transportation planning, develop-
ment,and management. For one thing, needs for trans-
portation in coastal areas must be identified by con-
sidering,as much as possible,the total development and
conservation objectives for the coastal zone,insofar
as these are capable of being analyzed, understood,
and described. The derivation of transportation needs
within the coastal zone will continue to come about
through the interaction of diverse groups in the private
and public sectors.

At the present time, measurement of need is against an
acceptable or tolerable condition rather than a utopian
or completely adequate condition. The cost of correcting
the deficiencies once a project has been judged to be
deficient is, however, based on a geometric standard
which would generally provide an adequate facility for
approximately 20 years beyond the date of construction.
Needs can be classified, generally, into those types
of deficiencies resulting from traffic demand (including
elimination of congestion where traffic service has
dropped below a minimum tolerable level, increasing
safety, providing new routes in corridors where there
are no existing State facilities, etc.) and those needs
dealing with minimum acceptable geometric and structural
levels. Other factors, such as continuity of travel,
community desires, and effect of the proposed develop-
ment on the surrounding area play an important part in
the determination of transportation needs.

_91-

A. V6eds 'and 'Goals 'in Road Tra*risportat ion

A statement of transportation needs implies necessity
of a comprehensive statement of goals and objectives
for transportation planning in the State. In recent
years, the policy of the Business and Transportation
Agency has been to expand the base upon which trans-
portation needs are determined. The process for
determining needs from broader and more comprehensive
bases., must,of necessityinclude nontransportation
considerations, such as might be obtained through
inputs from other agencies in State government,
county and local areas, community groups,.institu-
tions, and a variety of other groups within the
State. In fact, the Federal Government itself has
a major role to play in the determination of state-
wide transportation.

The State has been moving toward expanding the
field of consideration by which needs are determined.
For example, in a statement to the Assembly Committee
on Transportation during a hearing on October 1,
1969, an Agency representive said, in speaking
about public transportation, "it is our opinion
that needs for public transportation in urban areas
should be defined to include consideration of the
total urban environment". This statement about
public transportation appears to be basically sound
for all types of transportation,

At the present time, three sections of the law
require studies which develop.perspectives on needs.
Section 188.8 of the Streets and Highways Code requires
preparation every four years of an estimate of existing
highway construction needs. This is to be used in
determining percentages for computing minimum expendi-
tures for each State Highway District. The estimate
of existing construction needs is a result of the
study of all State highway routes on a project-by-
project basis.,and represents the combined efforts
of the several Highway Districts and Headquarters
Office of the Division of Highways.

Section 256 of the Code requires the Department to
review the California Freeway and Expressway System
and the entire State Highway System and to report
to the Legislature periodically, usually every four

-92-

years. This report is to include progress made
in developing the systems and revisions that should
be made in the systems. Such studies are to be
made without regard to whether particular routes
are included in either system. In past studies,
criteria were developed and recommended to the
Legislature for defining the State Highway System
and for use in making revisions to the System.
Legislation, however, was not enacted to implement
these recommendations.

In a recent study conducted in response to Section
256 of the Streets and Highways Code and in con-
junction with the functional classification studies,
criteria based on the classification of the facility
were developed for defining the State Highway System.
Legislative endorsement of these criteria is being
recommended in the current Section 256 Study report.

Section 2156 of the Streets and Highways Code requires
that, at four-year intervals, each city and county
transmita report to the Department of Public Works,
setting forth what progress it has made on the
improvement of its road and street system and its
estimate of road or street needs or deficiencies
for the next five and ten years. The report must
be in the detail required by the Department of
Public Works,, and the Department of Public Works
Is instructed to review, audit, and combine the
information and estimates, and submit the combined
report to the Legislature through such interim
committee or committees as may be designated by
the Legislature. Further, relative to defining
road systems, the Department has undertaken a
functional classification study in conjunction with
the National Transportation Planning Study (to be
reported to Congress in 1972), and as directed by
SR 49 (1969 Legislative Session).

This Functional Classification Study has two basic
objectives: to provide Congress with the facts to
help them determine the size and character of future
Federal-aid systems and programs, and to provide
the Legislature with the facts that will assist
in the determination of criteria for defining the
role of the State Highway System.

-93-

The considerations and eventual determinations
which may be made by the California Legislature,
based on California's continuing functional classi-
fication studies, will have impact on all coastal
road systems in the State. The study is considering,
for the first timesthe function and needs of all
roads regardless of jurisdiction. The intent is
that the study will be helpful as a tool in future
transportation planning.

B. More Comprehensive Participation in Highway Projects

The recognition of the interlocking relationship
of transportation and land use has brought about
attempts by the Federal Government to develop
procedures that maximize the cooperation of all
agencies involved in road planning and in urban
development. In conformance to the Model Cities
Act, certain highway projects must be submitted
for review by the Department of Public Works to
the designated areawide agencies. The Department
of Public Works has established the policy that the
following types of highway projects should be sub-
mitted by the Districts to the appropriate areawide
review agency: (1) Major freeways, including
addition of lanes to existing freeways if additional
right-of-way is required; (2) the conventional
highways on any new locations; (3) the widening
of conventional streets and highways which result
in an increased number of lanes or would require
additional right-of-way; (4) any additional inter-
changes or major revisions to existing interchanges
involving additional right-of-way; and (5) the
acquisition of scenic areas.

In general, maintenance, landscape, and safety
improvement type projects need not be submitted
for review, but those projects that somehow require
changing major traffic patterns and acquiring of
additional right-of-way would be submitted for
review. The procedure affects those coastal areas
which fall under the jurisdiction of the areawide
review agency and guarantees that such agencies,
if properly staffed and represented, shall have
substantial influence in the planning and develop-
ment of the Federal-Aid Road System, which, inci-
dentally, applies to the major portion of the
overall highway system.

-94-

C. Community and'Environmerital Factors in the Highway
Planning and Development Process

A primary goal of the State Highway Program is to
provide highway facilities which,in their location
and design as well as in their transportation
functions, reflect or support the environmental
values in community planning objectives of the areas
through which they are.proposed. These planning
considerations are being weighed increasingly more
heavily by the State Highway Commission in its
route selection decisions, by the Federal Government,
and its review of project proposals, and by the
general public in its appraisal of the agencies,
departments, and divisions planning the highway
program. Thus, the accurate assessment of the
community and environmental implications of prODosed
highways and improvements is the major responsibility
for the Department.

Community environmental factors encompass the con-
siderations underlying the Streets and Highways
Code reference to community values. Simply expressed,
community and environmental factors are the social,
political, economic, aesthetic, conservational,
and natural resource values of the environment
through which a highway improvement is proposed
and which may be sensitive to the location and
design of a highway project. The emphasis on
values in this definition is intended to stress
the fact that environmental features or facilities
are to be examined not only as to their existing
or apparent utility, but also in terms of their
relationship to the plans and prospects of the
larger community of which they are a part. These
relationships may be political, e.g., in terms of
conservation and development policies at various
levels of government, or they may be economic,
e.g., in terms of industrial structure of commercial
patterns, or sociological, e.g., in terms of a
neighborhood organization or cultural continuity.

The emphasis on sensitivities is intended to stress
potentially positive as well as negative effects
of a proposed highway. Sensitivities might include
the possibility of detrimental effects to ecology,

_95-

to natural or historical resources, or to the
social atructure. But sensitivity also suggests
opportunities for development or redevelopment
potential, or commercial recreational benefits
Or the desirability of special situations for
utilizing such planning tools as relocation housing
development, multiple use of rights-of-way, and
Joint development. Such terminology is intended
to reflect the view that comprehensive consideration
of community and environmental factors includes
not only avoiding problem areas but also seeking
opportunities to make positive, extra transportation
contributions to local environments.

In recognition of the importance of such considera-
tions in the highway planning process, there has
been created within the Department (Division of
Highways) the Community Environmental Factors Unit
(CEFU). Its primary mission has been to develop
activities which will promote the comprehensive
consideration of community and environmental factors
in highway planning.

In order to more correctly describe the overall
approach to Community Environmental Studies, it is
helpful at this point to explain the role of CEFU.

The Headquarters CEFU has been created to assist
in the development and expansion of highway planning
activities, which relate to the community function
and influences of highway improvements. The basic
objective of the Unit is to expand the contribution
of potential social, e-conomic,, and environmental
analysis to the highway planning process. It does
this by performing contracting for basic research,
by developing study methodologies and standards,
by developing planning tools*especially with interest
in joint development and multiple use and reloca-
tion assistance, and by promoting earlier and wider
application of techniques and knowledge which are
developed.

Another objective is to provide expertise in social,
economic, and environmental disciplines to assist
the Districts to expand their capability for evalu-
ating community environmental factors. Still another

-96-

objective is to promote a greater awarenesssamong
other governmental bodies and the general public,
of the Department's concern with community and
environmental factors.

D. Three Laws on Environmental Concern

The State Environmental Quality Act of 1970, which
beca effective November 23, 1970, requires that
all State agencies,, boards,,and commissions include
a detailed environmental statement in any report
on any project which could have a significant effect
on the environment of the State. It provides that
no State agency, board, or commission is to request
funds or authorize such funds for expenditure for
any proj-ect.except for planning purposes,which
would have a significant effect on the environment,
unless each request or authorization is accompanied
by a detailed statement setting forth the following:
(a) the environmental impact of the proposed action,
(b) any adverse environmental effects which cannot
be avoided if the proposal is implemented, (c) miti-
gation measures proposed to minimize the impact,
(d) alternatives to the proposed action, (e) the
relationship between local short-term uses of man's
environment and the maintenance and enhancement of
long-term productivity, (f) any irreversible environ-
mental changes which would be involved in the proposed
action.

Section 102.2(c) of the National Environmental
P-olicy Act requires that all agencies in the Federal
Government shall include a similar statement in
every recommendation report on proposals for
legislation and other major Federal actions signifi-
cantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

Section 4(f) of the U. S. Department of Transportation
Act directs that "the Secretary shall not approve
any program or project which requires the use of any
publicly owned land from the public park, recreation
area.,.or wildlife or waterfowl refuge of national,
State, or local significance as determined by Federal,
State, and local officials having jurisdiction
thereof; or of any land from a historic site of
national, State, or local significance as so deter-
mined by such officials unless (1) there is no

-97-

feasible alternative to the use of such land, and
(2) such programming uses all possible planning
to minimize requirement of such parks, recreational
area, wildlife and waterfowl refuge or historical
site resulting from such use". To meet the require-
ments of this act, either an environmental statement
or an evaluation that a project has no significant
impact are required of all projects unless regular
right-of-way funds or construction funds were bud-
geted prior to Novemger 23, 1970. Major projects,
that is projects on new location or major recon-
struction projects on a definite route, that have
advanced beyond the regular right-of-way funding
stage may be reviewed to determine if the proposed
design minimizes adverse environmental consequences
and to examine the highway planning to insure that
these environmental consequences have been thoroughly
considered. The law requires that these projects be
modified, to the extent practical, to include addi-
tional elements or features identified and considered
necessary to minimize environmental effects.

It is expected that the above laws will continue
to grow in importance respective to natural and
wildlife areas. In the coastal zone area, their
importance appears substantial.

E. The Reduction of Traffic-Generated Noise - A Policy
Yn-dApproach

Another area of environmental concern, where interest
has been mounting recently, is noise reduction.

The California Environmental Quality Study Council
and the Federal Council on Environmental Quality
have identified noise pollution created by motor
vehicles as part of the range of environmental
concerns to which public agencies must be responsive.
Steps necessary to alleviate present noise problems
and reduce adverse impacts from future construction
are in order to protect and enhance California's
environment.

Even though it is clear that no State liability exists
in this field, the Department feels responsibility
for involvement. Extensive noise research has been
carried out by the Division of Highways and additional

-98-

studies are under way. Noise impacts on the com-
munity.are considered explicitly in highway
location and design studies. Means of' resolving
noise problems are proposed in the environmental
impact reports prepared for each project with noise
barriers and other methods of noise reduction being
incorporated into new construction projects as
appropriate.

A systemic approach -- attacking the noise problem
with its interrelated aspects from several direc-
tions -- is being developed by the Department.
The Department is concentrating on three aspects
of the problem:

a. Reducing noise at the source -- the motor vehicle.

b. Encouraging the location of compatible land
uses and appropriate building standards adjacent
to freeways within the area affected by traffic
noise.

c. Decreasing the traffic noise reaching adjacent
areas through freeway design techniques.

The concern of the Directive is primarily related
to noise problems associated with freeway traffic.
This is not to imply that serious noise problems
are not found along conventional (nonfreeway)
highways, including State, county, and city facili-
ties. It is recognized that nois -e is as much a
problem along heavily-traveled conventional road-
ways, with stop-and-go traffic, as near freeways.

The most practical approach to alleviating the
noise problem seriously affecting many homes,
schools, and other noise sensitive uses adjacent
to conventional highways is to reduce the noise
from the source. This further emphasizes the need
for the Department to give high priority to efforts
aimed at quieting vehicles..

_99-

VI. The Coastal Zdne' 'Policy" of 'the' StAt'e' ih Transportation

One of the most recent and significant advances in con-
sidering transportation as an integral part of the
social and physical environment became manifest in the
articulation of the "Coastal Zone Policy" by the
Department of Public Works,in respect to transportation.
The policy is as follows:

A. Philosophy

The California coastal zone is a unique and irre-
placeable natural resource with a limited capacity
for use and development. The permanent protection
of-the natural and scenic resources of the California
coastal zone is of paramount concern to present
and future residents of the State and Nation.

B. Zone Definition

The coastal zone is defined, for transportation
planning purposes, as an area of variable width
abutting the Pacific Ocean and extending inland
to the highest elevation of the nearest coastal
mountain range. Where coastal plains lie adjacent
to the ocean, thezone generally will be considered
as one-half mile in*width.

C. Policy

It is the policy of the Department of Public Works
to help provide the coastal zone with optimal trans-
portation service consistent with local and regional
total planning and with the objective of conserving
the coastal resource. Various modes of transporta-
tion, means of access and levels of service will be
considered in balance with coastal capacities to
preserve and enhance the coastal resource.

D. Planning Concepts

1. Significant portions of the coastal zone may
not be suitable as the location of a major
north-south transportation corridor. Considera-
tion will be given to linking coastal destina-
tion points by lower standard highway facilities,
by alternative routings, or recommending other
modes of transportation, if appropriate.

_100-

Understanding that both business and recrea-
tional drivers have a legitimate interest in
access to the coastal zone, creative approaches
to serving these interestswill be encouraged
within the framework of this policy.

2. Traffic which is not specifically oriented
toward use of the coastal zone will be encouraged
to use other nearby traffic corridors.

3. Coastal highways will generally function as
arterials,providing variable levels of service
with mixed operating conditions, and furnishing
appropriate land access.
4. Transportation facilities within the zone will
be planned in cooperation with local and regional
agencies to:

a. Encourage and support human uses which are
dependent on the coastal zone's natural
resources.

b. Enhance and conserve environmental qualities
or amenities while minimizing disruption
to stable ecological systems and harmonizing,
as nearly as possible, with natural land
forms.

c. Maintain the widest number of options
possible for future generations.

d. Assist in preserving unique scientific,
educational, and recreational opportunities.

e. Emphasize safe business and recreational
driver enjoyment of the coastal resource
rather than speed of vehicular movement.

When the State and local agencies agree that,
for compelling reasons,.freeways or broad
arterials are necessary in the coastal zone,,
special planning and design criteria within
the context of this policy will be utilized.

-101-

It is the intent of the policy that the State under-
take only minimal freeway construction along what has
been designated in the policy as a "coastal zone".
The policy's definition of the coastal zone is essen-
tially the same as COAP's, but may vary slightly with
other definitions. Any variations reflect divergence
in the missions and responsibilities of different
agencies.

In recent years, it has become clear that certain areas
of the State have a limited absorptive capacity for
people and their activities., and it would appear that
in many of these portions of the State, the growth of
the population is challenging the resources which
can support a healthful existence. Further, It has
become-clear that certain areas of the State are of
such interest to all of the people of the State that
they demand special consideration by development of
specific policies, criteria, and legal safeguards.
Such areas include the coastline and certain mountain,
forest, desert, and prime agricultural zones, as well
as specific segments of the State's urbanized areas.
The coastal zone, then, becomes the first area of
emphatic conservational concern in State transportation
@pl anning.

On a continuous basis., the planning process for trans-
portation corridors will recognize that the California
shoreline and its beaches are a priceless resource
to the people of the entire State., and, of course,
the Nation. The transportation planning process will
recognize that the coastal-marine zone exists as an
interdependent, physical, and biological system in
delicate ecological balance. Although the shoreline
and its beaches can be used by the residents of the
State for a variety of purposes., the beaches, estuaries,
marshlands., and other integral parts of the coastal
life zone are especially susceptible to disruption
and destruction by man. Thus, the intent of the policy
is that transportation shall encourage human activity
that is compatible with nonhuman processes. Therefore,
transportation planning and development will vary
between coastal areas. Where it might be completely
feasible to suggest a form of rail mass transit in a
highly congested area, such a mode would not be con-
sidered in a sparsely populated area that might best

-102-

be served by a two-lane conventional highway. On the
other hand, where transportation can obviously not
accommodate development plans, then local agencies
will have the opportunity,through their local planning
efforts,of reassessing anticipated densities of
population.

The State and local areas have been involved in com-
prehensive transportation planning in various portions
of the coastal zone for several years and the antici-
pated effect of the new policy will be to make such
transportation planning more conducive to the best
interests of the people of the State. For example,
there will be some modifications in procedures pre-
viously followed in highway planning. In the past,
because of traffic demand, it was almost a foregone
conclusion that any planning study would result in a
recommendation for freeway construction. Now, insofar
as the coastal zone is concerned, the highway planners
will have to first establish not only the overriding
need for such construction before it will be considered,
but also the project's compatibility with the goal of
conserving the coastal environment. On the other hand,
the policy does not place excessive restrictions on
planning and development possibilities in the coastal
zone. It encourages planning on a broader scope.
It could curtail some planning and development by making
it clear that a particular freeway'or highway will not
be built close to the coast, but as with transportation
planning, other possibilities may be opened up in a
given situation.

_103-

!N'i' I'l U H C E 17- E R

-3- 6-668 00001 8178-,